Senate bill
to force two state pensions funds – largest in US – to ditch coal is part of
effort to generate 50% of power from wind and solar and halve gasoline use
The Guardian, Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent, 10 February 2015
 |
| Trucks and cars pass non-polluting windmills along the freeway on near Banning, California. The state aims to promote renewables and decrease reliance on fossil fuels. Photograph: David McNew/Getty Images |
America’s
biggest state pension funds came under rising pressure on Tuesday to dump coal
companies from their combined $500bn portfolio, in a major escalation of the
fossil fuel divestment campaign.
The
California senate leader, Kevin de Leon, said he was introducing a bill on
Tuesday calling on the two state funds – CalPERS, the public employees’ pension
fund, and CalSTRS, the teachers’ pension funds, drop all coal holdings.
The bill is
part of a larger package of climate measures – endorsed by Governor Jerry Brown
– aimed at gearing up California’s efforts to fight climate change.
The former
US vice-president and climate champion Al Gore spoke to the CalSTRS board in
Sacramento last Friday. Gore has long argued that fossil fuels are a risky
proposition as a long-term investment.
“Our
state’s largest pension funds also need to keep their eyes on the future,” De
Leon, a Democrat, said in an email. “With coal power in retreat, and the value
of coal dropping, we should be moving our massive state portfolios to lower
carbon investments and focus on the growing clean-energy economy.”
The two
state funds are the biggest targets so far of a divestment movement that has
moved from college campuses towards mainstream financial conversation.
CalPERS
manages about $300bn in assets, including 30 coalmining companies valued at
about $167m, according to a fact sheet prepared by De Leon’s office.
CalSTRS
with assets of about $190bn has about $132m in coal assets.
But the
divestment movement is showing momentum. The Rockefeller Brothers Fund – the
legacy of a business empire founded on oil – shed all fossil fuel holdings last
September. Stanford University also committed to divesting from coal companies.
Meanwhile,
Harvard University is being taken to court by students for refusing to divest.
In a
separate initiative, fossil fuel activists are pushing the University of
California to eliminate its $90bn in fossil fuel holdings.
De Leon’s
proposal calls on managers of both state funds to withdraw from all coal
companies, and make no new investments in coal within 18 months after the bill
becomes law.
It further
calls on the two funds to explore the feasibility of expanding its divestment,
by divesting entirely from fossil fuels – including natural gas – and report
back to the state legislature by 2017.
CalPERS
refused to respond directly to the divestment call until it had seen the
proposals. “There have been no discussions or decisions on this topic,” a
spokesman said in an email.
But the
fund told reporters in a statement last month: “We are a founding member of the
Investor Network on Climate Change and most recently we partnered with more
than 100 global institutional investors, representing more than $13tn, to call
on governments and policy makers to take action on carbon pricing, to provide
regulatory support for energy efficiency and renewable energy, and to fully
support innovation and deployment of new low-carbon technologies by the end of
2015.”
CalSTRS
said it would work with the legislature. “We are not saying ‘no’. We are going
to work with the legislature to come up with a solution that is amenable to all
within our overall strategy, which is to double our investment in clean energy
and technology over the last five years,” said Michael Sicilia, a spokesman for
CalSTRS.
“We are
very concerned about global climate change and the impact it has on our
portfolio.”
Managers of
the two funds balked when De Leon first unveiled his divestment proposals.
But
divestment activists said the two funds had been amenable to shareholder
pressure in the past, and that they were hopeful of negotiating a withdrawal
from coal.
The
divestment call was bundled with a suite of measures intended to solidify
California’s efforts to fight climate change.
The
proposals would commit California to generating half of its electricity from
wind and solar power by 2050 – up from the current target of 33%. They also
call for a 50% reduction in the use of gasoline for fuel by 2030, through a
combination of fuel efficiency measures and investments in public transport.
Existing buildings would be required to cut their energy use by 50%.
Brown
embraced a number of those goals in his inaugural address last month.
But the
measures are in for a fight from oil and electricity companies and even some
Democrats, the Los Angeles Times reported.
In
introducing his proposal, De Leon said he was taking his cue from the growing
momentum of a divestment movement which has now spread to 300 college campuses.
“We need to
listen to the values of the next generation and make sure our investment
strategy reflects their priorities,” he said.
Related Articles:
 |
One of the wealthiest men in the U.S., Warren Buffett said Monday
that he would double his renewable energy investments. Video screenshot: Georgetown University/YouTube |
"Recalibration of Free Choice"– Mar 3, 2012 (Kryon Channelling by Lee Caroll) - (Subjects: (Old) Souls, Midpoint on 21-12-2012, Shift of Human Consciousness, Black & White vs. Color, 1 - Spirituality (Religions) shifting, Loose a Pope “soon”, 2 - Humans will change react to drama, 3 - Civilizations/Population on Earth, 4 - Alternate energy sources (Geothermal, Tidal (Paddle wheels), Wind), 5 – Financials Institutes/concepts will change (Integrity – Ethical) , 6 - News/Media/TV to change, 7 – Big Pharmaceutical company will collapse “soon”, (Keep people sick), (Integrity – Ethical) 8 – Wars will be over on Earth, Global Unity, … etc.) - (Text version)
“… 4 - Energy (again)
The natural resources of the planet are finite and will not support the continuation of what you've been doing. We've been saying this for a decade. Watch for increased science and increased funding for alternate ways of creating electricity (finally). Watch for the very companies who have the most to lose being the ones who fund it. It is the beginning of a full realization that a change of thinking is at hand. You can take things from Gaia that are energy, instead of physical resources. We speak yet again about geothermal, about tidal, about wind. Again, we plead with you not to over-engineer this. For one of the things that Human Beings do in a technological age is to over-engineer simple things. Look at nuclear - the most over-engineered and expensive steam engine in existence!
Your current ideas of capturing energy from tidal and wave motion don't have to be technical marvels. Think paddle wheel on a pier with waves, which will create energy in both directions [waves coming and going] tied to a generator that can power dozens of neighborhoods, not full cities. Think simple and decentralize the idea of utilities. The same goes for wind and geothermal. Think of utilities for groups of homes in a cluster. You won't have a grid failure if there is no grid. This is the way of the future, and you'll be more inclined to have it sooner than later if you do this, and it won't cost as much.
Water
We've told you that one of the greatest natural resources of the planet, which is going to shift and change and be mysterious to you, is fresh water. It's going to be the next gold, dear ones. So, we have also given you some hints and examples and again we plead: Even before the potentials of running out of it, learn how to desalinate water in real time without heat. It's there, it's doable, and some already have it in the lab. This will create inexpensive fresh water for the planet.
There is a change of attitude that is starting to occur. Slowly you're starting to see it and the only thing getting in the way of it are those companies with the big money who currently have the old system. That's starting to change as well. For the big money always wants to invest in what it knows is coming next, but it wants to create what is coming next within the framework of what it has "on the shelf." What is on the shelf is oil, coal, dams, and non-renewable resource usage. It hasn't changed much in the last 100 years, has it? Now you will see a change of free choice. You're going to see decisions made in the boardrooms that would have curled the toes of those two generations ago. Now "the worst thing they could do" might become "the best thing they could do." That, dear ones, is a change of free choice concept. When the thinkers of tomorrow see options that were never options before, that is a shift. That was number four. ….”
Your current ideas of capturing energy from tidal and wave motion don't have to be technical marvels. Think paddle wheel on a pier with waves, which will create energy in both directions [waves coming and going] tied to a generator that can power dozens of neighborhoods, not full cities. Think simple and decentralize the idea of utilities. The same goes for wind and geothermal. Think of utilities for groups of homes in a cluster. You won't have a grid failure if there is no grid. This is the way of the future, and you'll be more inclined to have it sooner than later if you do this, and it won't cost as much.
Water
We've told you that one of the greatest natural resources of the planet, which is going to shift and change and be mysterious to you, is fresh water. It's going to be the next gold, dear ones. So, we have also given you some hints and examples and again we plead: Even before the potentials of running out of it, learn how to desalinate water in real time without heat. It's there, it's doable, and some already have it in the lab. This will create inexpensive fresh water for the planet.
There is a change of attitude that is starting to occur. Slowly you're starting to see it and the only thing getting in the way of it are those companies with the big money who currently have the old system. That's starting to change as well. For the big money always wants to invest in what it knows is coming next, but it wants to create what is coming next within the framework of what it has "on the shelf." What is on the shelf is oil, coal, dams, and non-renewable resource usage. It hasn't changed much in the last 100 years, has it? Now you will see a change of free choice. You're going to see decisions made in the boardrooms that would have curled the toes of those two generations ago. Now "the worst thing they could do" might become "the best thing they could do." That, dear ones, is a change of free choice concept. When the thinkers of tomorrow see options that were never options before, that is a shift. That was number four. ….”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.