29/10/2016

The Carbon Bubble: Why Investors Can No Longer Ignore Climate Risks

The Guardian - Carol J Clouse

The financial risks posed by climate change and bad investments could make an ugly dent in your retirement savings, a new report warns
Due to the ubiquity of climate risk, investors can’t simply diversify away from it; instead they must focus on managing it. Photograph: Lucas Jackson/Reuters 
When Sandy Emerson sat down in her portfolio manager’s office two years ago and announced she wanted to divest from fossil fuels, the latter furrowed her brow and said: “Why would you want to do that?” Emerson, a 68-year-old Berkeley, California resident, explained her unease about owning shares in companies that contribute to climate change and began selling her stock.
As a result, Emerson has been paying closer attention to the ups and downs in the oil industry and the growing public discussions about the future of fossil fuel use. “I’ve become aware of the financial implications it has for me,” she says.
Emerson is among a growing number of investors who see global warming not only as a looming environmental problem but also an investment risk. Some fund managers are ringing alarm bells as well. BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager with almost $5tn in assets, issued a report last month recommending investors include climate risks in their decisions.
“Investors can no longer ignore climate change. Some may question the science behind it, but all are faced with a swelling tide of climate-related regulations and technological disruption,” the 16-page report said.
Even before BlackRock’s report, evidence was mounting that investing in companies with a low carbon footprint pays off. The MSCI Low Carbon Target Index, for example, has modestly outperformed its traditional counterpart since 2010, data from the index provider shows. Earlier this year, Morningstar issued a rating system to help investors evaluate the environmental, social and governance factors of funds.
The bottom line: the financial risks posed by climate change could make an ugly dent in your retirement savings if you don’t pay attention.
For middle-class investors, the office worker in Illinois with a company 401k or the teacher in Oklahoma with a state-sponsored pension, the risk could be particularly acute because they don’t oversee their own investments. And attitudes and expertise regarding climate risk vary widely among those charged with investing average folks’ money.
In a survey of portfolio managers and analysts done by the London-based CFA Institute last year, 73% said they consider environmental, social and governance (ESG) risk factors in their analysis – but only 40% of those regarded climate change as important. Moreover, only half of those who consider ESG risks said their firm provided training in this area, with most of that training done via miscellaneous sources such as research papers and conferences.
Efforts have begun to create industry-specific standards for companies to disclose climate change risks, most notably by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), a nonprofit group chaired by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. The board estimates that significant climate risks – things like how severe weather events can impact businesses, regulations imposing a cost on carbon and economic development that is less reliant on fossil fuels – exist for most of the companies it tracks, which represent $27.5tn, or 93%, of US stocks as measured by market value.
“Due to the ubiquity of climate risk, investors can’t simply diversify away from it; instead they must focus on managing it – and on encouraging portfolio companies to manage it – in all its forms,” the SASB writes.
The future of fossil fuel companies is at risk as more investors move their money elsewhere. By some estimates, the industry could face a “carbon bubble” that will leave it stuck with trillions of dollars in stranded assets – unburnable oil, coal and gas reserves – as nations move to limit the planet’s warming trend to 2C, the target of the Paris climate agreement, which takes effect 4 November.
But climate risk doesn’t only affect the big oil. Industries ranging from automobiles to agriculture to steel to utilities could also face climate-related challenges such as sea level rise and drought, tightening emissions standards, changing consumer preferences and the growing divestment movement, the BlackRock report notes.
New technology that emerges as a response to climate change could also force changes within industries with a heavy carbon footprint, the report says. For example, advancements and falling prices in lithium batteries are poised to impact both the oil and gas and automotive industries because they are making electric vehicles and battery storage for solar or wind energy more practical and affordable. Earlier this year, Bloomberg New Energy Finance reported that battery prices have declined by 65% since 2010, with 35% of that in 2015. The market research firm projects another 35% decline for 2016, a spokeswoman says.
“You can lose a lot of money by having exposure to losing strategies, losses that could be hard to make up,” says Ewen Watt, senior director of the BlackRock Investment Institute. “If you’re saving money for your long term future, the risk for you is there won’t be enough money when you retire to meet your retirement needs.”
While the financial industry is recognizing climate risks, its actions sometimes don’t reflect that. Banks have continued to fund the dirtiest fossil fuel projects and big fund managers have voted against shareholder proposals forcing companies to disclose their climate risks.
BlackRock, along with peers Invesco, BNY Mellon and Vanguard, voted against such shareholder proposals at Exxon Mobile and Chevron earlier this year. BlackRock argues that global warming has yet to harm these oil companies, so it prefers to continue putting money in them and pushing for change from within rather than getting involved in a confrontation. Sandy Emerson’s wealth management firm also advocated this strategy.
The federal government has taken conflicting approaches to hold oil companies accountable for disclosing climate risks. Earlier this summer, the House of Representatives passed legislation that would block the Securities and Exchange Commission from implementing climate disclosure guidance. Proposed by Representative Bill Posey, a Republican from Florida, the measure now awaits a vote by the Senate.
Regular folks might end up being the biggest losers in this fight among regulators, fund managers and fossil fuel companies over their roles in addressing global warming. Consumers who depend on investment professionals to protect their retirement savings may not entrust their hard-earned money with the right people.
“If what you read about stranded assets is true, it’s a potentially serious problem for regular, middle-class people who aren’t necessarily paying attention,” says Cari Rudd, a Washington DC-based communications consultant, who does social media work for Divest-Invest and sits on the board of As You Sow, an Oakland, California-based nonprofit that promotes environmental and social corporate responsibility through shareholder advocacy.
“Now that I have become involved, I’m much more concerned about Joe in Cleveland who has a little 401k and how he’s already been screwed on a lot of fronts,” Rudd says.
The emergence of divestment advocacy groups is providing more information to help individuals navigate what can be a daunting process of moving their investments to, say, environmentally friendly technology such as renewable energy. Some investment companies offer fossil-free mutual funds.
For example, As You Sow’s Fossil Free Funds, which uses data from Morningstar, is a free online tool that allows investors to type in the name or ticker of a fund and see what percentage is invested in fossil fuels. Earlier this month, the organization expanded Fossil Free Funds to include a feature that shows each fund’s carbon footprint and which companies are the main contributors. For 401k participants who don’t have direct control of selecting the funds offered in their retirement plan, As You Sow also provides advice on how to speak to their employers about expanding their company’s plan to include low-carbon options.
Looking ahead, Sandy Emerson says she’s been impressed with the handful of largely European oil producers developing small renewable energy divisions.
“I’m watching the oil companies that are starting to make moves in renewables and I’m thinking that they’re pretty smart,” she says.

Links

We Don't Have To Choose Between Jobs And Clean Energy

Huffington Post - Kelly O’Shanassy | Ged Kearney

"Australia can create a million extra jobs by 2040 by pursuing credible, enduring policies on climate change." Getty Images
With the imminent closure of Hazelwood in the Latrobe Valley and the shutdown of the Port Augusta power station in South Australia earlier this year -- both citing old, heavily polluting infrastructure and outdated technology -- it is becoming clear many of Australia's fired power stations will be replaced with renewable alternatives in the coming decades.
This will need to occur with the least disruption to workers' lives and to the communities in which they live. However, it's not only about the lifespan of the facilities.
Serious investment in clean energy, public transport, energy efficiency and battery storage is urgently needed to ensure a transition that cuts pollution and provides meaningful jobs for Australian workers. The earlier a planned transition starts, the less disruption communities and workers will be subject to.
The Australian Conservation Foundation and the Australian Council of Trade Unions have joined forces to produce Jobs in a clean energy future -- because it is important to remember Australians should not have to choose between jobs and cutting pollution.
This report shows the idea that Australia has to pick between jobs and cutting pollution is a false and destructive choice. We can make positive economic decisions that support life and community in Australia. The evidence is clear that action on climate change can be directed in a way that is beneficial for the Australian economy. We can grow the economy and make Australia a cleaner and healthier place to live.
The report finds Australia can create a million extra jobs by 2040 by pursuing credible, enduring policies on climate change and energy. This can happen through direct government investment and encouraging private investment in clean energy and battery storage, energy efficiency, public transport, electric vehicle and other mechanisms.
The technology and investment is leaping ahead. Since 2010 -- the last time ACTU and ACF collaborated on a research report -- the cost of clean energy technology has dramatically fallen. For example, the cost of solar cells has dropped by 75 percent. Hundreds of billions in private investment is being mobilised in the global transition.
The Australian government made a commitment in Paris with 174 other countries. The Paris commitment means the way Australia produces and uses energy is going to have to change. This transition will require government and private investment.
The Federal Government has an important role to play by directly investing and creating policies that encourage private investment in infrastructure. This is vital in order to meet the commitments Australia and many other countries signed onto in Paris in December – and that come into effect next week when the Paris climate Agreement takes effect.
A 'just transition' will see communities and workers in areas such as Victoria's Latrobe Valley empowered well ahead of time to determine the future direction for their communities before coal fired power stations begin closing.
This needs the support of all levels of government to help workers retrain and build up existing industries and attract new industries.
The alternative is what we have currently: Australia failing to reduce its emissions while coal fired power stations close on short notice with workers and communities left in the lurch and unsure about what their future holds.
Just look at what happened in South Australia earlier this year when 400 people lost their jobs when the Northern Power Station closed after less than a year's notice. Currently residents of Victoria's Latrobe Valley are in a tense state of waiting to hear news from Europe confirming the closure of the Hazelwood Power Station.
Unions and environmentalists are not alone in calling for a planned transition. Energy companies, policy analysts, economists and industry groups are all also calling for better planning. Our report maps out a better future for Australia -- one with a cleaner environment and more jobs.
With government leadership through policy, investment and planning, Australia's cities, towns and regions can be more liveable, smarter and healthier places to live.

Links

Million New Jobs In Prospect By 2040 Even As Emissions Dive, Study Finds

Fairfax - Peter Hannam

Cutting carbon emissions in line with the Paris climate goals could generate more than 1 million extra jobs by 2040 as Australia transforms its energy and other sectors provided policy settings are right, a new study has found.
The Jobs in a Clean Energy Future report, using modelling by the National Institute of Economic and Industry Research, found the policies needed to reduce 2005 levels of carbon pollution by 80 per cent by 2040 would generate far more jobs than were lost.
The study, funded by the Australian Conservation Foundation and the Australian Council of Trade Unions, estimated the cost across the economy would be $20 billion annually for 20 years. That sum, though, included investments that would have to be spent anyway to replace aging coal-fired power plants.
The "strong action" path would see the current renewable energy target of supplying 33 terawatt-hours (TWh) of clean power by 2020 raised to 120 TWh by 2040. A carbon price rising to the equivalent to $US44 ($58) per tonne by 2040 is also assumed.The result would still see net employment rise by 442,400 jobs by 2030 and 1.057 millon a decade later.
Leading growth areas include the electricity, gas and water sector — adding 171,900 jobs by 2040 — and construction 190,000 jobs. (See chart below.)

The "medium action" scenario would involve a carbon dioxide abatement budget of $10 billion a year funded by "a modest carbon price". Emissions by 2040 would be 63 per cent below 2005 levels under this plan.
Victoria's Hazelwood power station may close by next year - but what will fill the gap? Photo: Jason South
Driving the jobs growth would be the massive outlay required to replace combustion-engine vehicles with electric ones, and all the infrastructure such as charging stations required to power them, the report said.
ACF chief executive Kelly O'Shanassy, said falling technology costs particularly for batteries would spur the change, as would Australia's international commitment to curb emissions and keep global warming to between 1.5-2 degrees above pre-industrial levels agreed last December in Paris.
Renewable energy's share of the power sector is expected to continue to rise. Photo: Bloomberg
"This transition's underway, there's no way we can stop it," Ms O'Shanassy said.
"By signing the Paris agreement, we actually have to get pollution out of our economy by mid-century, or earlier, and as this report is showing, that will create jobs."
The expected surge in electric cars will create new jobs. Photo: Tore Meek, via AP
The International Energy Agency on Tuesday underscored the momentum of renewables, predicting solar PV costs would drop by a quarter between 2015 and 2021, and those for onshore wind energy 15 per cent.
The IEA also lifted its clean energy growth forecast for the period by 13 per cent, noting that the world in 2015 added solar panels at the rate of half a million per day. China alone built a new wind turbine every half hour.

Blackout lesson
The recent blackout in South Australia, in which both wind farms and gas-fired power plants failed to respond as expected to transmission faults, showed the potential risks if governments don't take the lead.
'It's either a future that can be quite positive and prosperous, if we plan for it," Ms O'Shanassy said. "Or a future that's very chaotic, if we let it plan us."
As Fairfax Media reported last month, Victoria's Hazelwood brown coal-fired power station could close by early next year, triggering large local job losses and higher electricity prices in the short term at least.
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has cautioned states such as Victoria setting ambitious renewable energy targets before 2020 when the current targets ends.
On Tuesday, he also backed coal's future, telling ABC radio in Brisbane: "[C]oal is going to be an important part of our energy mix, there's no question about that for many, many, many decades to come, on any view."
Louisa de Vries, whose electric bus project was featured in the ACF/ACTU future jobs report, said clean energy jobs offered opportunities to industries such as car making that were facing demise in Australia.
The project, based at Swinburne University of Technology, is helping Gold Coast-based Bustech start building fully electric buses by the middle of next year.
"It's important for our auto parts suppliers — a number of which are hanging in there," said Ms de Vries, a research engineer who worked for 18 years in the auto industry, including Holden. "If they can diversify, they can have a long-term future in Australia."
Ms de Vries said nations such as Norway were offering aid to speed the take-up of electric vehicles, and Australia provided little if any support.

Links