Green investment makes sound sense
As Emma wrote a week ago, investing in a sustainable green collar economy makes sense.
But its not just environmentalists who are making the claims. A senior executive at the United Nations Environment Programme this week pointed out that current political efforts to curb pollution are simply not working. His solution was for governments to adopt a “Green New Deal” akin to Roosevelt’s “New Deal” to tackle the Great Depression. This thinking was reportedly endorsed by the British Environment Minister.
Interestingly Deutsche Bank have just released a report titled “Investing in Climate Change 2009 — Necessity and Opportunity in Turbulent Times”. Their Global Head of Climate Change Investment Research says “The current crisis is making the necessity of tackling climate change an opportunity to stimulate growth through investment opportunities.”
This is the type of thinking we are seemingly lacking in Australia. Emma outlined some of the ways a $10 billion stimulation package could have served both economic and environmental outcomes. Rolling out solar hot water systems and insulation to low-income families across the country would have provided economic stimulus, but also stimulated employment in those industries, and reduced energy usage, and hence bills, for the most needy in this country.
In May of this year, Greenpeace campaigned for the Rudd government to reverse the Howard legacy of funding the fossil fuel industry to the tune of $28 for ever $1 the renewable industry received. Unfortunately our logic didn’t prevail. Additionally the Rudd government also stopped subsidising solar PV for ‘wealthy families’ earning a combined income over $100,000 - a move that has crippled the emerging PV industry.
Today Greenpeace is highlighting another proposal of the Rudd government, namely to dismiss Professor Garnaut’s advice, and compensate coal-power generators for the imposition of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. We’ve released a cheeky, satirical video, to highlight the ridiculousness of the situation.
The logic is that imposing a cost on carbon was such a surprise to the industry, that unless they’re compensated, offshore investors will not invest in Australia due to our supposedly volatile regulators.
Errm, I suppose they missed that in 1992 the Australian Government ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, committing us to action to reduce greenhouse emissions.
For sixteen years, the coal-powered generation industry have had the opportunity to incorporate a future price on carbon into investment decisions. When governments in the past have legislated in the public interest, they have not sought to compensate the affected industries. Coal-power generation should be no different.
The solution is actually quite easy. Divert government spending, and focus, away from fossil fuels towards existing technologies that will provide safe energy, green jobs and insulation from rising energy costs.
Technical solutions to meet the drastic greenhouse cuts that we must make already exist. We just need the major political parties to be bold enough to do what is required.
October 25th, 2008 at 1:25 am
Since you’re interested in promoting green investing, I have one of the most popular sites on the web on the subject. It also covers the latest related global news and research too. It’s at http://investingforthesoul.com/
Best wishes, Ron Robins