Fossil fuel divestment gold fossil fuel divestment and investment in climate solutions is the removal of assets from stocks, bonds, and investment funds from companies involved in extracting fossil fuels, in an attempt to reduce climate change by tackling its ultimate causes. Numerous groups advocate fossil fuel divestment, which in 2015 was reportedly the fastest growing divestment movement in history. Beginning on campuses in the United States in 2010 with students urging their administrations to turn into the fossil fuel industry into the world of energy and the most impacted by climate change, the movement soon spread across the globe. By December 2016, a total of 688 institutions and over 58,000 individuals representing $ 5.5 trillion in assets worldwide divested from fossil fuels.
Fossil fuel divestment aims to reduce carbon emissions by accelerating the adoption of renewable energy through the stigmatization of fossil fuel companies. This group of companies is currently involved in fossil fuel extraction to invest in renewable energy. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is expected to be less than 1,000 gigatonnes to provide a 66% chance of avoiding dangerous climate change; this figure includes all sources of carbon emissions. To avoid dangerous climate change, only 33% of known extractable fossil fuel of known reserves can be used; This carbon budget can also be increased by other sources of deforestation and cement production. It is requested that, if other carbon emissions increase significantly, then only 10% of the fossil fuel reserves can be used. In addition, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency, its average temperature has risen by 1.4 ° F over the past century, and is predicted to rise another 2 ° to 11.5 ° over the next hundred years with continued carbon emission rates. This rise in temperature would have gone beyond the limits of the age of death.
The Toronto Principle is a fossil fuel divestment strategy, which puts it into action at the Paris Accord in 2015. It was first coined by Benjamin A. Franta, article in the Harvard Crimson, as a reference to the University of Toronto’s fossil fuel divestment process. After 350.org submitted a petition for divestment on 6 March 2014, President Gertler established an ad hoc Advisory Committee on Divestment from Fossil Fuels. In December of 2015, the Committee released a report with several recommendations. Foremost, they argue that “targeted and principled divestment of companies in the fossil fuels industry that meet certain criteria … should be an important part of the University of Toronto’s response to the challenges of climate change.” However, the report went further, and allied itself with the Paris Agreement. It is recommended that the universities of the world should be aware of the above-mentioned global warming. Celsius above pre-industrial averages by 2050 … These are fossil fuels companies whose actions “Principle, which, as he argues,” aligns rhetoric and action. It suggests that it is all the institutions’ responsibility to give life to the Paris agreement. Harvard could adopt this Toronto principle, too, and the world would be better for it. ” and, in the case of non-stationary or aggressive fossil fuel development (such as oil from the Arctic or tar sands), and also At present, these activities are incompatible with the agreement in Paris. “In adhering to the Toronto Principle, Franta argues that leading institutions can use their status and power to respond to the challenge of climate change, and Paris Agreement.
Stranded assets, which are known in the world to fossil fuel companies, and when the fossil fuel reserves are deemed unsustainable and unspecified. Currently the price of fossil fuels companies ‘shares are calculated under the assumption that all of the companies’ fossil fuel reserves will be consumed, and so the true costs of carbon dioxide in global warming is not taken into account in a company’s stock market valuation . In 2013, HSBC found that between 40% and 60% of the market value of BP, Royal Dutch Shell and other European fossil fuel companies could be affected by carbon emission regulation. Bank of England governor Mark Carney, speaking at the 2015 World Bank seminar, has stated: ”
A 2015 report studied 20 fossil fuel companies and found that, while highly profitable, the hidden economic cost to society was also large. The report spans the period 2008-2012 and notes that: “For all companies and all the years, the economic cost of their emissions is greater than their after-tax profit, with the single exception of ExxonMobil in 2008.” Pure coal companies fare even worse: “the economic cost to society out total income (employment, taxes, supply purchases, and indirect employment) in all years, with this cost varies between $ 2 and nearly $ 9 per $ 1 of revenue.” The paper suggests: This hidden or outsourced cost is an implicit subsidy and represents a risk to those companies. There is a reasonable chance that society will be able to reduce this burden by regulating against fossil fuels. Similarly, in 2014, financial analyst firm Kepler Cheuvreux projected $ 28 trillion in lost value for fossil fuel companies under a regulatory scenario that targets 450 shares per million of atmospheric.
Fuels from renewable energy sources can lead to the loss of value of fossil fuel companies due to their inability to compete commercially with the renewable energy sources. In some cases this has already happened. Deutsche Bank predicts that 80% of the global electricity market will reach grid parity for the end of 2017. In 2012, 67% of the world’s electricity generation was produced by fossil fuels. Stanwell Corporation, an electricity generator owned by the Government of Queensland, made a loss in 2013 from its 4,000 MW of coal and gas fired generation capacity. The company is contributing to the expansion of electricity generation; it was almost zero (usually AUD $ 40-50 / MWh).
Unstable fossil fuel has been made in fossil fuel extraction a more risky investment opportunity. West Texas Intermediate crude oil fell in value from $ 107 per barrel in June 2014 to $ 50 per barrel in January 2015. Goldman Sachs stated in January 2015 that, if oil were to stabilize at $ 70 per barrel, $ 1 trillion of planned oilfield investments would not be profitable.
A study by the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment at the University of Oxford found that the stigmatization of fossil fuel companies can lead to “materially increasing the uncertainty surrounding the future cash flow of fossil-fuel companies.” That, in turn, “can lead to a permanent compression in the multiple trading – eg, the share price to earnings (P / E) ratio of a target company.”
According to a 2007 study by the Aperio Group, the economic risks of fossil fuel companies in the Russell 3000 Index are “statistically irrelevant”.
In November 2014, a group of seven undergraduate, graduate, and law students filed a lawsuit at the Suffolk County Superior Court against the president and fellows of Harvard College and others for “mismanagement of charitable funds” and “intentional investment in abnormally dangerous activities” in relation to Harvard’s fossil-fuel companies. In March 2015, the superior court awarded Harvard’s motion to dismiss. The superior judge wrote: “Plaintiffs have brought their advocacy, fervent and articulate and admirable as it is, to a forum that can not grant the relief they seek.”
In October 2014, Exxon Mobil stated that the fossil fuel has been “out of step with reality” and that “it is not possible to use fossil fuels. In March 2014, John Felmy, the chief economist of the American Petroleum Institute, said that the fossil fuel companies are “truly disgusting” and that they are misinformed, uninformed or liars. Felmy particularly criticized the environmentalist and author Bill McKibben. The World Coal Association has pointed out that fossil fuels are more important than fossil fuels.
From half a dozen college campuses in 2011, calling on their administrations to divest endowments from coal and other fossil fuels and invest in clean energy and “just transition” strategies to empower those most affected by environmental degradation and climate change An estimated 50 campuses in spring 2012. By September 2014, 181 institutions and 656 individuals had committed to divest over $ 50 billion. One year later, by September 2015, the numbers had grown to 436 institutions and 2,040 individuals across 43 countries, representing $ 2.6 trillion in assets, of which 56% were based on pension funds and 37% of private companies. By April 2016, we have 515 institutions, 27% faith-based groups, 24% foundations, 13% governmental organizations,
The divestment campaign at the Australian National University is one of the longest running fossil fuel divestments, it has had substantial wins, most notably in 2011 and 2014. Fossil Free ANU formed out of the ANU Environment Collective (EC), a consensus-based and non-hierarchical group of students affiliated with the Australian Student Environment Network, when students were notified in 2011 by Northern Rivers, NSW that ANU was the 12th largest coalition in the coal seam gas company Metgasco. Following student protests, including an event called ‘ANU Gets Fracked’ that saw students erect a mock gas rig in Union Court, the ANU Council announced in October 2013 that it would divest from Metgasco, citing student and the fact that the Australian Ethical Investments did not approve of them. Tom Stayner, an activist from the EC, stated in the ANU student paper Woroni that: “He took some convincing, but the Vice Chancellor is showing leadership on this urgent issue.” However, student concerns were again raised in 2012 when it was revealed that the ANU had only reduced its holding in Metgasco from over 4 million shares in 2011 to 2.5 million in 2012. In 2013, Tom Swann filed a request to the ANU requesting all “documents created during 2012, which refers to the University of the United States of America, purchase of oil, coal, gas, or uranium.” These documents revealed that ANU had substantial holdings in fossil fuel companies and had been buying shares in Santos while selling shares in Metgasco. Students lobbying and lobbying the UNU Council to implement a Socially Responsible Investment Policy (SRI) in late 2013 modeled on Stanford University, which aims to “avoid investment opportunities considered to be able to cause substantial social injury.” In 2014, students from Fossil Free ANU organized the first student-initiated referendum at the ANU and in elections more than 82 percent of students voted in favor of the ANU divesting from fossil fuels in what was the highest turnout in a student election at the university in more than a decade. In October 2014, the ANU Council announced that it would be divided between seven companies, two of which, Santos and Oil Search, performed poorly in an independent review by the Center for Australian Ethical Research. This decision provoked a month-long controversy with the Australian Financial Review publishing over 53 stories criticizing the decision including 12 front pages attacking the ANU, with its editor-in-chief, Michael Stutchbury, prouncing the decision to be as “disingenuous” as banning the burqa. These attacks, which The Canberra Times editorial describes as “verging on hysterical” was joined by the Abbott Government, with the Treasurer Joe Hockey stating that the ANU Council is “removed from the reality of what is Australian economy and create more employment, “Education Minister Christopher Pyne calling it” weird ” and Prime Minister Tony Abbott calling it “stupid.” In response, Louis Klee, an activist from Fossil Free ANU, wrote in The Age that the reaction demonstrated just “the complicity of state power with the mining industry,” but also that the citizens of this country are powerful voices in the debate over climate justice. It demonstrates that they are, ultimately, speaking with growing eloquence, urgency and authority for one thing: action to address global climate change. Vice-Chancellor of ANU Ian Young standing by the decision, stating: “We are in the right place and we have played a major role in a movement which now seems unstoppable. Meeting with students in the wake of the furore of the decision, Ian Young told activists from Fossil that they were “sideshow,” the reaction of the mining companies revealed that “were right all along.” ANU still has holdings in fossil fuel companies and Fossil Free ANU continues to campaign for ANU to ‘Divest the Rest’.
350.org is an international environmental organization encouraging citizens to increase their carbon footprint by 400 parts per million to 350 parts per million. As part of its global policy, 350.org launched their Go Fossil Free: Divest from Fossil Fuels! campaign in 2012, which campaign calls for colleges and universities, and institutions pensions, and pension funds to withdraw their investments from fossil fuel companies.
Divest-Invest Philanthropy is an international platform for institutions committed to fossil fuel divestment.
In March 2015, The Guardian launched the ‘Keep it in the ground’ campaign encouraging the Wellcome Trust and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to divest from fossil fuel companies in which the foundation has a minimum of $ 1.4 billion invested. The Wellcome Trust has £ 450m of Shell Investments, BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto and BP. The petition had received over 140,000 signatures by the end of March 2015.
Divest Harvard is an organization at Harvard University that seeks to earn a living from fossil fuel companies. The group was founded in 2012 by Harvard College students. In November 2012, a referendum was divested at Harvard College with 72% support, followed by a similar referendum at the Harvard Law School in May 2013, which passed with 67% support. During this time, representatives from Harvard University’s Harvard University’s governing body, the Harvard Corporation, but the meetings were described as unproductive. In October 2013, the Harvard Corporation formally announced that the university would not consider a policy of divestment. Following this, the Harvard Divest is a self-organized, teach-ins, and debates on divestment. In March 2014, Students from Divest Harvard recorded an exchanging exchange with Harvard President Drew Gilpin Faust, in which Faust appeared to claim that fossil fuel companies do not block efforts to counteract climate change. The video has since become a source of controversy. In April 2014, a group of nearly 100 Harvard faculty released an open letter to the Harvard Corporation arguing for divestment. This was followed by a 30-hour blockade of the Harvard president’s office by the president’s protesting the president’s refusal to engage in a public discussion of divestment; the Harvard administration terminated the blockade by arresting one of the student protesters. Following the protest, Faust said it would not be open to students and would have asked for it and would not engage with students from Divest Harvard. In May 2014, a group of Harvard alumni interrupted an alumni reunion event with Faust present by standing and holding a pro-divestment banner; the alumni were removed from the event and banned from Harvard’s campus. In September 2014, Harvard faculty re-open their calls for an open forum and continue to argue for divestment publicly. In October 2014, Divest Harvard organized a three-day fast and public outreach event to call attention to the harms of climate change. In November 2014, the Harvard Climate Justice Coalition published a Harvard Climate Justice Coalition, a Harvard Corporation, and a Harvard Corporation. The lawsuit was dismissed by a Massachusetts Superior Court judge, who wrote that “Plaintiffs have brought their advocacy, This is followed by a group of prominent Harvard alumni urging the university to divest. In April 2015, Harvard Divest and Harvard alumni took out an announced week-long protest called Harvard Heat Week, which included rallies, marches, public outreach, and a continuous civil disobedience blockade of administrative buildings on campus. The Harvard administration is involved with the protest. Following Heat Week, Harvard’s Divest carried out an unannounced one-day civil disobedience blockade of the Harvard president’s office in protest of continued lack of action by the Harvard administration. marches, public outreach, and a continuous civil disobedience blockade of administrative buildings on campus. The Harvard administration is involved with the protest. Following Heat Week, Harvard’s Divest carried out an unannounced one-day civil disobedience blockade of the Harvard president’s office in protest of continued lack of action by the Harvard administration. marches, public outreach, and a continuous civil disobedience blockade of administrative buildings on campus. The Harvard administration is involved with the protest. Following Heat Week, Harvard’s Divest carried out an unannounced one-day civil disobedience blockade of the Harvard president’s office in protest of continued lack of action by the Harvard administration.
Fossil Free MIT (FFMIT) is a student organization at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology made up of MIT undergrads, graduate students, post-docs, faculty, staff and alumni. The group was formed in Fall 2012 by six MIT students following a visit to Boston by Bill McKibben of 350.org on his “Do the Math” tour. The group has collected over 3,500 signatures in a petition calling for MIT to (1) immediately in the fossil fuel companies, and (2) divest within five years of these companies. Following discussions with FFMIT, the university administration initiated a “campus-wide conversation” on climate change to take place from November 2014 to May 2015, which included the formation of the MIT Climate Change Conversation Committee. The committee, composed of 13 faculty, staff, and students, was involved with the MIT community to determine how to deal with climate change. The conversation included solicitation of ideas and opinions of MIT community members, as well as a number of public events. The largest event was a fossil fuel divestment debate among six prominent voices on climate change. The committee released a report in June 2015, recommending a number of initiatives to be undertaken by the university. In regards to fossil fuel divestment, the committee “rejected the idea of blanket of all fossil fuel companies”; although there was ” including the rejection of divestment. Over 100 people have taken part in the sit-in, including the Boston Globe, Boston Magazine, and the Daily Caller. The sit-in, which lasted 116 days, officially opened with an agreement with Vice President for Research Maria Zuber following negotiations on how to improve the Plan. The agreement did not include a decision, but succeeded in establishing a climate advisory committee and a climate ethics forum. In addition, the administration agrees to strengthen the university’s carbon mitigation commitments, striving for carbon neutrality “as soon as possible.” and the Daily Caller. The sit-in, which lasted 116 days, officially opened with an agreement with Vice President for Research Maria Zuber following negotiations on how to improve the Plan. The agreement did not include a decision, but succeeded in establishing a climate advisory committee and a climate ethics forum. In addition, the administration agrees to strengthen the university’s carbon mitigation commitments, striving for carbon neutrality “as soon as possible.” and the Daily Caller. The sit-in, which lasted 116 days, officially opened with an agreement with Vice President for Research Maria Zuber following negotiations on how to improve the Plan. The agreement did not include a decision, but succeeded in establishing a climate advisory committee and a climate ethics forum. In addition, the administration agrees to strengthen the university’s carbon mitigation commitments, striving for carbon neutrality “as soon as possible.”
A number of individuals and organizations for fossil fuel fuel divestment: Desmond Tutu In 2015, the London Assembly Passed a motion calling on the Mayor of London to urgently divest pension funds from fossil fuel companies
A prominent speaker at the 5th annual World Pensions & Investments Forum Held in December 2015, Earth Institute Director Jeffrey Sachs voiced for institutional investors to take their fiduciary responsibility in reducing the risk of losses via fossil fuel divestment.
In February 2015 alumni of Harvard University including Natalie Portman, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Darren Aronofsky and Susan Faludi wrote a letter to Harvard University asking that it be $ 35.9 billion endowment of coal, gas, and oil companies. Harvard’s decision not to be explained in a letter from the University President, Drew Faust:
The University of Glasgow has become the first university in Europe to agree to divest from fossil fuels. The NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden commented:
For list of fossil fuel companies that divestment campaigns target, see List of oil exploration and production companies.
Governments and pension funds in the United States of America, United States of America, United States of America:
Colleges and Universities alphabetically):
In September the Rockefeller Brothers Fund announced it would be divesting its fossil fuel investments totalling $ 60 million. “We are quite convinced that we are alive today, as an astute businessman looking out to the future, he would be moving out of fossil fuels and investing in clean, renewable energy.”
The 2013 General Synod of the United Church of Christ (UCC) passed to a resolution of the United States of America (UCC). Under the resolution, a plan for divestment will be developed by June 2018. The original proposal is considered by the general synod for a five-year plan to divestment; UCC’s investment arm, United Church Funds. United Church Funds also established a fossil-free fund, which was almost $ 16 million from UCC congregations, conferences, and other groups by late September 2014. In June 2014, The trustees of Union Theological Seminary in New York City unanimously voted to begin divesting fossil fuels from the seminary’s $ 108.4 million endowment. On 30April 2015, the Church of England agreed to divest 12million from its tar sands oil and thermal coal holdings. The church has a £ 9billion investment fund.
* Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Divestment and Stranded Assets in the Low-carbon Transition, 2015.
* A podcast series recording the process of the Guardian newspaper organizing its divestment campaign ‘Keep it in the ground’.