|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Divestment of fossil fuel investments
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Have you heard of this initiative? Examples: King's College London, McGill University Montreal, University of British Columbia, various campuses of the University of California USA are all debating getting rid of fossil fuel investments. (I didn't identify any Australian universities.) More info: gofossilfree.org
We have had news items that say we must leave most of the remaining oil in the ground to have the least chance of moderating the global warming we're causing.
What can and should be done? Do you think universities and individuals should tell their bankers, retirement fund managers, educational institutions etc that they want to have fossil free investments?
Does it even matter? Would taking out your investments from fossil fuel industries make a difference? Is it a moral issue, like I am hearing?
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
You can add University of Glasgow to the list. For the university as a whole, such a move is largely symbolic and unlikely to make much difference to the finances of the university. It could be very costly to some departments - geosciences in particular receive considerable funding from the oil industry (although, in recent months that has almost totally evaporated anyway).
The argument is that if people don't invest in companies engaged in fossil fuel extraction then that affect their share price, reducing the value of the company. That then means they have less value to use as collateral for bank loans. That would reduce investment in exploration. I've not seen any evidence of that effect, either for oil companies (which, admittedly, are only just facing such actions) or for tobacco companies (which have faced such disinvestment action for several decades). It mainly seems to be symbolic, and given the relatively low levels of publicity given to these actions, an invisible symbol at that.
Linking such a move to reductions in fossil fuel use are essential. Divestment has very little direct effect, boycotts of the products of companies that are acting unethically (eg: fashion companies using child labour) have a bigger effect on the bottom line of the companies concerned.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
Is it a moral issue, like I am hearing?
Well, if you think that fossil fuel extraction is morally wrong, you shouldn't derive income from fossil fuel extraction. That's pretty straightforward.
Whether the reality of climate change means that drilling for oil is immoral is a different question. I suspect that from a pragmatic point of view, an investment in R&D for renewable energy is far more worthwhile than any amount of oil company avoidance.
Ultimately, economics will drive the large-scale uptake of renewables. It's going to be easier to price out deep bores under Alaska than it is to price out the Saudis.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
For reasons not entirely disinterested I would like to see more investment in carbon capture technology. If people are going to pull fossil fuels out of the ground, and they probably are, it's probably best to see if we can mitigate the effects.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
itsarumdo
Shipmate
# 18174
|
Posted
There should be more investment in fuel cell technology and hydrogen cycle tecnology and most definitely looking at natural energy cycle analogues (such as chlorophyll) - if we're talking research. The problem is that most energy "solutions" are not sexy. Energy reduction, basic insulation, etc are not. Architecture to reduce heating and air condictioning, local CHP schemes - all small scale and not really a good share model.
--------------------
"Iti sapis potanda tinone" Lycophron
Posts: 994 | From: Planet Zog | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
itsarumdo
Shipmate
# 18174
|
Posted
Basically, if you;re talking ethics, the big company share system is shot full of problems - mainly that the shareholders tend to insist on profit taking precedence, and keeping ethics in the picture doesn't have to be a problem, but it often is. That's up to the senior manaement and board. Their ethical values permeate down. Which we're seeing in a negative way at the moment in the education system
I don't see how any non-sustainable resource exploitation can be ethical in the current economic system which places no economic value on the fact that the natural world is permanently altered and the resources are irreplacable.
--------------------
"Iti sapis potanda tinone" Lycophron
Posts: 994 | From: Planet Zog | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by itsarumdo:
... Their ethical values permeate down. Which we're seeing in a negative way at the moment in the education system. ...
Tangent alert
How exactly? I can see quite a lot wrong with our education system, but where does this particular one fit in?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
I have money in a supposedly ethical ISA. OK, it doesn't invest in guns or tobacco, but it does have BP, & two versions of Shell (and Rio Tinto and Diageo), which I have been worrying about for a while. I had somewhere lined up to move to, but found that that building society specialisd in buy-to-let, which I am also unhappy about.
I was thinking about burying my money under the water tank in the garden, but the rats have bagged that, so no use.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
itsarumdo
Shipmate
# 18174
|
Posted
Under the bed seems to work pretty well
--------------------
"Iti sapis potanda tinone" Lycophron
Posts: 994 | From: Planet Zog | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
I was at my bank late in the day yesterday. That was part of the reason to have started the thread. 2015 retirement investment discussion. Yes there ethical funds. They do what the unethical funds do, at a worse rate of return becausr it takes millions in fund management fees to simply leave out oil companies it seems. Half of my investments have been simply in an index fund which buys shares in all stocks making up theTSX which means all of the Toronto Stock Exchange. Which means neglible management fees. Why would it cost 2% to leave out oil?
The ethics of this are difficult. The 1 year rate of return difference on $100k is possibly $1000 to $4000. Do I decide to sacrifice, say, 20 years of $3000 per 100k? For the sake of argument and to demonstrate the scale, people like me without pension plans are told we need $1-2 million in retirement and other savings to fund ourselves. We also cannot give as much to charities and the church. The total difference is staggering. It could be half a million or more.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
monkeylizard
Ship's scurvy
# 952
|
Posted
When you buy stock (or funds which invest in those stocks) the company doesn't get any of that money*. The person/entity selling the stock to you gets the money. You are making (or losing) money based on the company's financial performance, but they get nothing from you. It's like buying a used car. Ford doesn't get more money when you buy a used Fiesta.
So the question comes back to the point LC posted in post#3. quote:
if you think that fossil fuel extraction is morally wrong, you shouldn't derive income from fossil fuel extraction.
Personally, I like buying low and selling high. From an investment perspective, Deep Water Horizon was a great opportunity to buy BP stock. I didn't "help" BP by buying when their stock price tumbled. I took easy pickings from panicked investors. Same as Bank of America stock when they stupidly bought Countrywide Home Mortgage, or Ford when they got drug down along with GM and Chrysler even though their financials were solid and their product line was set to be awesome.
*If the company has a new issuance of stock or sells their treasury stock, yeah, they get the cash as they are the actual seller. Those actions are rare, making nearly all stock trades happen on the secondary market.
[ 26. February 2015, 13:32: Message edited by: monkeylizard ]
--------------------
The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. ~ Herbert Spencer (1820 - 1903)
Posts: 2201 | From: Music City, USA | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
That's a rationalization. The company's stock price allows them to approach investors, particularly, these days banks-cum-governments and do their next drilling project. Companies may also pay dividends based on profits. If you own shares you are an integral part of their operation.
I've tried to rationalize my own investment behaviour by not directly owning oil stocks, which are a bust just now, with gravest concerns about the irresponsibility re tar sands and arctic drilling. I'd certainly prefer that gasoline and oil cost their true cost to the environment (would 10 to 20 times current prices be enough?), and we probably would have to factor in all of the current and recent war costs to.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
itsarumdo
Shipmate
# 18174
|
Posted
it would be better if shares were not tradeable at intervals of less than say 1 year. Then the stockholders would have more interest in the day to day running of the company.
--------------------
"Iti sapis potanda tinone" Lycophron
Posts: 994 | From: Planet Zog | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
itsarumdo: it would be better if shares were not tradeable at intervals of less than say 1 year. Then the stockholders would have more interest in the day to day running of the company.
I read somewhere that 90% of all shares are traded again within 11 seconds? Or something like that.
The idea that the secondary market doesn't support the company is false. It is there that the value of the company is determined, which influences its access to further financial sources.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
Leorning Cniht quote:
Well, if you think that fossil fuel extraction is morally wrong, you shouldn't derive income from fossil fuel extraction. That's pretty straightforward.
If you think fossil fuel extraction is morally wrong, by all means divest. You probably should also be walking or riding a bike. Exclusively. Oh, yeah, and do not utilize or consume any product made from petroleum products including pharmaceuticals. Only herbs and natural medicines in glass bottles. Only cottons, woolens, linen, and leather should touch your skin. Exceptions might be made for products using entirely recycled plastics. (And try not to be inordinately unhappy that all the ethical products you do allow yourself are hauled by diesel trucks.)
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Lyda*Rose: If you think fossil fuel extraction is morally wrong, by all means divest. You probably should also be walking or riding a bike. Exclusively. Oh, yeah, and do not utilize or consume any product made from petroleum products including pharmaceuticals. Only herbs and natural medicines in glass bottles. Only cottons, woolens, linen, and leather should touch your skin. Exceptions might be made for products using entirely recycled plastics. (And try not to be inordinately unhappy that all the ethical products you do allow yourself are hauled by diesel trucks.)
It is possible to make a moral / ethical statement without being completely consistent.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
Or even nearly consistent.
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
moonlitdoor
Shipmate
# 11707
|
Posted
quote:
originally posted by leRoc
I read somewhere that 90% of all shares are traded again within 11 seconds? Or something like that.
That doesn't seem very plausible. On a typical day 1% of Apple's shares are traded, as you can see in the link by comparing average daily volume and total shares outstanding. Apple stock statistics
--------------------
We've evolved to being strange monkeys, but in the next life he'll help us be something more worthwhile - Gwai
Posts: 2210 | From: london | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
moonlitdoor: That doesn't seem very plausible. On a typical day 1% of Apple's shares are traded, as you can see in the link by comparing average daily volume and total shares outstanding. Apple stock statistics
Maybe it is something like in 90% of transactions, shares are traded within 11 seconds again.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eigon
Shipmate
# 4917
|
Posted
Penny S - that ethical fund doesn't sound all that ethical to me. Have you considered Triodos bank, which supports green and alternative energy projects?
--------------------
Laugh hard. Run fast. Be kind.
Posts: 3710 | From: Hay-on-Wye, town of books | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eigon:
Penny S - that ethical fund doesn't sound all that ethical to me. Have you considered Triodos bank, which supports green and alternative energy projects?
Yes - one of my nieces did some work for them, so they are on the list.
The supposed ethical fund is managed by a teachers' setup, and I think I really ought to write to them to ask if they have reviewed their definitions since they originally set things up. Rather like the American teachers' funds invested in the company which was going to evict tenants from an estate set up for poorer working families in London, they may have lost the plot a bit.
I haven't actually made much from the unit trusts concerned, though. Money in- 2007. Guess what happened?
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
If you think fossil fuel extraction is morally wrong, by all means divest. You probably should also be walking or riding a bike. Exclusively. Oh, yeah, and do not utilize or consume any product made from petroleum products including pharmaceuticals. Only herbs and natural medicines in glass bottles. Only cottons, woolens, linen, and leather should touch your skin. Exceptions might be made for products using entirely recycled plastics. (And try not to be inordinately unhappy that all the ethical products you do allow yourself are hauled by diesel trucks.)
I've heard nonsense like this before.
All of us live in societies that we did not create, that contain things that we do not control. You would have us simply say oh well and accept that we can do nothing. It is rhetorically ridiculous that because we live in places where it is impossible to avoid fossil fuels that you 'okay then, then don't use any of it'. That's bogus.
So yes, I live in a city which depends on cars. Everything is designed around oil. I have limited choice on how products are made and how products and people are transported. To say that someone who is concerned about or against a fossil fuel economy mustn't use fossil fuel based technology at all is simply not possible when the system is totally based on fossil fuels. But we can try to change it and try to behave ethically within it.
Well, you didn't direct your nonsensical post directly at me, but it makes me very annoyed indeed. I will tell you how I do what I can. I have ridden in a car exactly 9 times since Dec 2013 (I started to keep track). I ride a bicycle everywhere, which is not trivial on a day like today (-29°C) and when I'm pushing 60 years old. We heat with natural gas which is the best alternative with the most efficient furnace possible; the alternative is coal fired electricity. Our windows have triple panes. We buy nearly no packaged foods, and make everything ourselves. Wheat, barley, oats, lentils, field peas and beans are local and we source them locally as available. We can do this with some cheese and meats. Probably we should hunt our own meat, but the better alternative is to not eat very much of it. Vegetables are simply not possible in this climate. It's a hell of thing to stop to shop in a bicycle at temps like today and freeze the stuff bought simply because the bike ride is 40 minutes. I cannot avoid vehicular transport of the basic raw materials we consume for food. I didn't design the city and province, we do the best that we can.
So please don't give crap nonsense like this any more. And tell us how you put your behaviour where your ideas are please.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
no prophet's flag is set so: quote:
Well, you didn't direct your nonsensical post directly at me, but it makes me very annoyed indeed. I will tell you how I do what I can. I have ridden in a car exactly 9 times since Dec 2013 (I started to keep track). I ride a bicycle everywhere, which is not trivial on a day like today (-29°C) and when I'm pushing 60 years old. We heat with natural gas which is the best alternative with the most efficient furnace possible; the alternative is coal fired electricity. Our windows have triple panes. We buy nearly no packaged foods, and make everything ourselves. Wheat, barley, oats, lentils, field peas and beans are local and we source them locally as available. We can do this with some cheese and meats. Probably we should hunt our own meat, but the better alternative is to not eat very much of it. Vegetables are simply not possible in this climate. It's a hell of thing to stop to shop in a bicycle at temps like today and freeze the stuff bought simply because the bike ride is 40 minutes. I cannot avoid vehicular transport of the basic raw materials we consume for food. I didn't design the city and province, we do the best that we can.
I do applaud your efforts. Seriously. Much better than mine. I just don't see divesting as particularly helpful in isolation from other efforts, as it often is, when changing how people consume and use our resources is even higher in priority. It just seems smug; it ticks a box in the social issues column. If an institution is divesting in concert with encouraging efforts such as you are making, I'm totally happy with it. It is like the war on drugs: we have to work on our own addiction to fossil fuels even more than we need to smack the corporate pushers around.
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
itsarumdo
Shipmate
# 18174
|
Posted
Putting the genie back in the bottle has always been difficult. We have to start where we are, and that is with an economy, agricultural system, industrial system, housing arrangement, culture etc etc based on easily available fossil fuel energy.
Think about it biologically. Here is a colony of bacteria. They have found a sandwich left in a sealed box, and have massively increased their numbers to take advantage of this wonderful event. The atmosphere in the box is changing because the bacteria are incapable of realising what they are doing or regulating their response to conserve the sandwich for future generations of bacteria. At a certain point, the historical bacterial feeding frenzy starts to make the box a hostile environment, and so the bacteria are forced to gradually reduce their rate of sandwich consumption, because they cannot breathe. How does the story end? In the bacterial world, an anaerobic bacterial cell hiding in one corner starts to take over and just eats the aerobic bacteria as they gas themselves to death. Hopefully someone will come and throw the contents away and clean the box so that something can start again. The one sure thing is that the bacteria cannot survive long term in a sandwich box with a genetic programming that requires them to eat and multiply according to what is in front of their nose at any one time.
--------------------
"Iti sapis potanda tinone" Lycophron
Posts: 994 | From: Planet Zog | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
How does a social movement start? You go on marches. You put your ideals into practical behaviour. Yes, divestment is only symbolic and apparently token, but what alternative suggestions do have? The crucifixion was also a symbolic gesture.
I have an history of being in marches and movements, being part of my socialization as a teen and young adult. The fruit of it shows: we now have gay equality in legislation, we have a health centre in the worst neighbourhood in town, we didn't get a uranium processing plant next to the city, a casino was not put downtown, it went 20 miles out in the country. Among a few other things.
Beware of mice with ideas.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
Given that the Harper government has already identified environmental groups, particularly those which campaign against anything fossil-fuel, as "terrorist", the new bill C51 has the potential to make, for instance, the National Council (don't remember the proper name) of the United Church of Canada a "terrorist" organisation. I don't know if that would mean imprisoning everyone at the meeting or just the leadership.
I believe that the Anglicans have had some discussion about divestment as well, so the delegates to General Synod may expect the heavy knock on the door.
Given the example of the US, it won't matter much if we do have a Constitution, since the present gov't won't pay attention to it. They've already campaigned on the platform that the Justices of the Supreme Court don't actually know how to read the laws!
--------------------
It's Not That Simple
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
I guess I am asking about whether there is actually a social movement. And whether we have one beginning. I am of two minds: one that perhaps it cannot change and we should not bother trying, and two, that these things take time.
As for the terrorism, it has be defined as having a violent component. The marches and sign holding etc is merely educative. All marches I've ever taken part in have had good communication with the authorities, and on the most recent climate march, the local police were only on bicycles, taking part in their own way we thought. There are no enemies with this stuff, there's only people who don't know yet. Never, ever violence. You change nothing that way.
I recall former MP Father Bob Ogle telling me in an anti-uranium march that we only do this so people who might not know, might then learn and become involved. Or at least discuss the issues. The real change comes because we change minds and hearts, and usually, though not 100% of the time, from progressive within-institutional change. Had I not believed this, I would have never decided to get over-educated and then agreed to advise about policy. Change from within.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tukai
Shipmate
# 12960
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
I didn't identify any Australian universities.) More info: gofossilfree.org
Try the Australian National University. Their [partial] divestment of fossil fuel shares was greeted by roars of protest from the Murdoch Press and even from Prime Minister Abbott (whose stated energy policy is "coal is good for humanity" - a soul mate of Mr Harper!.)
--------------------
A government that panders to the worst instincts of its people degrades the whole country for years to come.
Posts: 594 | From: Oz | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
