A number of universities, local governments, pension funds and organizations have withdrawn their financial investments in coal and other fossil fuel enterprises. It's a matter of heavy debate at others (Harvard for instance.) In total some $50 billion has already been withdrawn. And there's legislation in the California senate to divest two huge state pension funds from coal. If successful, it would be the mightiest blow yet.
This Friday-Saturday has been named as Global Divestment Day by 350 and Greenpeace, with a range of activities scheduled around the world. According to the Guardian, the event has the fossil fuel fossils worried:
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you,” said Mahatma Gandhi. The climate change campaign to divest from fossil fuels seems to be moving through those stages at express speed, with a sudden barrage of attacks from the coal and oil lobbies ahead of its global divestment day on Valentine’s day.
The speed is appropriate given that the campaign, which argues the fossil fuel industry is a danger to both the climate and investors’ capital, is the fastest growing divestment campaign yet seen, moving quicker than those against tobacco and apartheid. It’s moving fast in the financial world too, with one finance executive calling it “one of the fastest-moving debates I think I’ve seen in my 30 years in markets”.
Divestment is not just negative in this instance. California is among those considering investing that money in clean energy. This is not the throw your money away on a do-gooder gesture it once might have been, nor is it even that risky. What's risky long-term, as even conservative investors know, is staying with coal. What with the climate crisis coming on as well as other factors, coal is a future loser.
An interview in Grist with Naomi Klein describes the history of divestment and this particular divestment campaign, as well as its rationale.
No comments:
Post a Comment