Sentences with phrase «fossil fuel assets»

Owners of fossil fuel assets That is why the deal is like a gigantic take - back scheme.

The markets today are in a carbon bubble, because they ignore future stranded fossil fuel assets.

But having divested most of the family's fossil fuel assets in the late 1990s to set up private conglomerate Coril Holdings Ltd., Ron may not have been feeling the same pain as those in the audience.

With the energy sector showing signs of profound, disruptive change, and with the former chairman of Duke Energy arguing that a price on carbon is inevitable, investors are rightly spooked by the prospect of a carbon bubble — whereby fossil fuel assets become stranded because they either can't be exploited due to climate concerns, or clean energy alternatives simply squeeze them out of the marketplace.

In total, the organization will be selling fossil fuel assets worth $ 5.9 million and, crucially, reinvesting those assets in clean energy companies instead.

The United Church of Canada voted to sell off fossil fuel assets worth $ 5.9 million and instead pump funds into renewable energy co-operatives in a landmark decision on Aug. 11.

Fourth, divest fossil fuel assets.

In light of Carbon Tracker's «Wasted capital and stranded assets» analysis and the scale of unburnable fossil fuel assets it revealed, there is a clear need for markets to become more «climate literate».

Those clinging to the old ways may find themselves stranded, just like fossil fuel assets.

This hedging strategy will buffer the impact an extreme carbon risk event might have on a portfolio while potentially capturing the upside of the transition away from fossil fuel assets.

The assertion of a carbon bubble in fossil fuel assets ultimately depends on investor ignorance of climate - response risks, presumably because companies haven't quantified those risks for them.

For example, the UK has as much Australian coal listed on it as the ASX and recently pressure has been rising on the Financial Policy Committee to mitigate the risk these «sub-prime» fossil fuel assets pose to economic stability.

Scientists say the world is already behind the needed trajectory of emissions reduction to meet the Paris goal, and investments in more fossil fuel assets — scheduled to be in service for up to 40 years — could commit the world to see the most catastrophic consequences of climate change if they are not retired early.

It states, simply: «[M] itigation policy could devalue fossil fuel assets, and reduce revenues for fossil fuel exporters.»

Oil and gas industry expresses concern in a letter to Ed Davey about his comments on fossil fuel assets becoming unburnable to stop dangerous climate change

He endorsed research by Carbon Tracker showing that US$ 2 trillion worth of fossil fuel assets are unburnable as governments aim to hold global warming to 2C.

For a start, the Exxon Mobil and Chevron Climate Reports assume that governments won't succeed in meeting their Paris Agreement commitments, resulting in financial outlooks that leave them free to sell all their fossil fuel assets.

The results add weight to warnings from analysts that fossil fuel assets are at risk of losing their value and becoming «stranded» as the world transitions to cleaner energy sources.

Marking the divestment movement's «undeniable success,» a new report shows the value of funds controlled by individuals and institutions who have vowed to dump their fossil fuels assets now surpasses $ 5 trillion.

This means it is willing to admit that some of its fossil fuel assets — possibly including the spanking $ 13 billion Kearl tar sands project in Northern Alberta — could be wiped off its books if governments start taking action on climate change.»

If we can't or don't use them, at some point these fossil fuel assets become known as «stranded».

In the event that politicians start to act with serious risk management against increasingly devastating climate impacts, the fossil fuel assets then

Potentially stranded fossil fuel assets are largely why responsible climate risk management is being opposed today by fossil fuel companies and libertarian right - wing forces.

In the event that politicians start to act with serious risk management against increasingly devastating climate impacts, the fossil fuel assets then stranded will produce a large loss of wealth for fossil fuel companies.

He announced that in 2015 the Bank of England's Finance Policy Committee would investigate whether risks to the value of «unburnable» fossil fuels assets could undermine financial stability in the way that sub-prime mortgages crashed the global economy in 2008.

A fast - spreading movement to persuade universities to rid their endowments of fossil fuel assets is now taking root in America's churches.

This sentiment has been ratified, sanctified and tallied by the political, moral and financial bellwethers of our time from Paris (195 countries committing to phase out fossil fuels this century) to the Vatican (the Pope's moral invocations to drastically reduce use of fossil fuels), to the Bank of England (governor Mark Carney's prudent warnings not to get stuck holding a bag of stranded fossil fuel assets).

The jump, according to the report, is partially driven by the following trends: ``... the write - down of fossil fuel assets; the inevitable wave of nuclear plants due to be retired; the exposing of hypothetical forecasts of 100 years of shale gas; and the decline of large, centralized electricity generation.»

A number of factors determine the level of exposure of fossil fuel assets to weakening demand, including carbon - intensity, level of substitution risk etc..

Shell has previously dismissed those, such as Bank of England governor Mark Carney, who have warned that fossil fuel assets could become stranded and worthless in the face of climate action.

One of the most frequent arguments against sustainable investing is that it won't yield as much money as investing in fossil fuel assets, high - carbon companies or weapons manufacturers.

A former ExxonMobil executive recently criticized the reports for «assum [ing] that governments won't succeed in meeting their Paris Agreement commitments, resulting in financial outlooks that leave them free to sell all their fossil fuel assets.»

California's two biggest pension funds lost more than $ 5 billion (U.S.) since June 2014 because of the declining value of their fossil fuel holdings, while Norway's massive sovereign fund, which has already divested many of its fossil fuel assets, still lost $ 40 billion between July and August, partly because of falling oil prices.

But we also know that large volumes of finance continue to undermine the climate change agenda, such as ongoing investments in fossil fuel assets.

One thing about the «Carbon Bubble» analysis is that it seems to focus almost entirely on the * DIRECT * investment exposure to fossil fuel assets.

Any move by the Norwegian wealth fund to offload its fossil fuel assets would send shockwaves around global markets, given that the fund, itself built on the country's offshore oil and gas revenues, holds an estimated 1.3 per cent of global market capitalisation.

FSB Chairman Mark Carney stated that investors face «huge» climate change losses and that lower demand could leave some fossil fuel assets «stranded».

As Carbon Tracker demonstrated with its seminal unburnable carbon and stranded assets reports, the smaller the carbon budget then the greater the scale of fossil fuel assets that must stay in the ground.

As of December of 2016, investment funds worth more than $ 5 trillion have now committed to divesting their fossil fuel assets.

The world's financial markets could be creating a «carbon bubble» by over valuing the fossil fuel assets of large companies say MPs.

On the East Coast, the City of New York announced plans to divest its pension fund of fossil fuel assets, making it among the largest of investors to divest.

James Leaton, research director at think tank Carbon Tracker, which has led the analysis of stranded fossil fuel assets, said: «It is disappointing that Oil and Gas UK seems confused about how to rationalise tackling climate change and developing more oil and gas.

On the risk side, divesting is about not getting stuck holding stranded fossil fuel assets that can not be burnt if the world is to adhere to a given carbon budget, a topic on which Mark Carney, governor of the Bank of England, has expressed concerns in a landmark speech to global insurer Lloyd's of London.

This sentiment has been ratified, sanctified, and tallied by the political, moral, and financial bellwethers of our time, from the Paris climate talks (195 countries committed to phase out fossil fuels this century) to the vatican (Pope Francis has made moral invocations to drastically reduce use of fossil fuels in the encyclical Laudato Si») to the Bank of England (the bank's governor Mark Carney has warned not to get stuck holding a bag of stranded fossil fuel assets).

Webb wrote to Davey a few days later: «[Newspaper] articles reported you backing moves that would encourage investors to think about moving their money out of «risky» fossil fuel assets, suggesting global emissions limits could make hydrocarbon reserves unburnable, therefore stranding assets and rendering them worthless.»