Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Financial Post)   The largest ESG (environmental, social, and governance) fund in the US doesn't actually have any direct renewable holdings   (financialpost.com) divider line
    More: Fail, Fossil fuel, Greenhouse gas, Investment, Dot-com bubble, Carbon dioxide, Renewable energy, Market capitalization, Wind power  
•       •       •

336 clicks; posted to Business » on 03 Mar 2021 at 8:43 PM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



5 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-03-03 8:24:14 PM  
Not sure if that is in its mission statement, but that seems odd.
Michael Moore exaggerates here and there, but I find that his core points are often timely AND timeless.

He made a documentary recently that has been skewered, but it makes a point that can't be dodged. There are a lot of "green" NGOs and NPOs that are doing things and underwriting things that are not very green at all. Often they work hand in glove with "the bad guys" and can be bought off by various interests. I am not surprised, but it seems to be pretty pervasive.

My personal feeling is that far too many "moderate" actors get maligned these days while the really bad guys buy their way into people's good graces by paying lawyers and PR firms to spin things better. Just for instance, everyone seems to hate Toyota, which has been building and selling hybrids for decades, while embracing Volkswagen, which fudged diesel data for decades, simply because VW is building a few battery cars. BP and Shell and more and more, Total, are oil companies, but they have been ramping up renewables for decades. Fracking is "horrible", but it has led to huge cuts in US carbon emissions, etc.

The bigger picture is that a lot of capital is going to be necessary for an energy transition. And a lot of it is controlled by energy companies and the powers that be. Good? Bad? It just is.
 
2021-03-03 11:16:00 PM  
I believe the term is "greenwashing".

Perception is everything; blow with the winds of the day, but do what you always did under the covers.

And it's damned easy to promise something by 2050 or even 2040... it accomplishes the above goals with something few will remember and none will ever hold you to.
 
2021-03-03 11:26:23 PM  

2fardownthread: Not sure if that is in its mission statement, but that seems odd.
Michael Moore exaggerates here and there, but I find that his core points are often timely AND timeless.

He made a documentary recently that has been skewered, but it makes a point that can't be dodged. There are a lot of "green" NGOs and NPOs that are doing things and underwriting things that are not very green at all. Often they work hand in glove with "the bad guys" and can be bought off by various interests. I am not surprised, but it seems to be pretty pervasive.

My personal feeling is that far too many "moderate" actors get maligned these days while the really bad guys buy their way into people's good graces by paying lawyers and PR firms to spin things better. Just for instance, everyone seems to hate Toyota, which has been building and selling hybrids for decades, while embracing Volkswagen, which fudged diesel data for decades, simply because VW is building a few battery cars. BP and Shell and more and more, Total, are oil companies, but they have been ramping up renewables for decades. Fracking is "horrible", but it has led to huge cuts in US carbon emissions, etc.

The bigger picture is that a lot of capital is going to be necessary for an energy transition. And a lot of it is controlled by energy companies and the powers that be. Good? Bad? It just is.


Fracking done wrong can be very bad, but fracking is not inherently horrible. There are places where it's a very bad idea, but our formations here start about a mile underground. A properly sleeved casing and a responsible operator have ensured very few problems on the 15,000+ wells here in the Bakken&Three Forks shale formations.

Of course, I could be somewhat biased
 
2021-03-04 12:01:15 AM  
Does this really surprise anyone?
 
2021-03-04 6:20:31 AM  
One approach would be to invest in companies that wouldn't otherwise make sustainable efforts and use shareholder leverage to push them to do so.

In this case investing in already green companies would go against the strategy.
 
Displayed 5 of 5 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.