Showing posts sorted by relevance for query ETHICAL INVESTMENTS. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query ETHICAL INVESTMENTS. Sort by date Show all posts

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

How Ethical Are Ethical Funds? (Opinion)

"Conscientious" investments and the tar sands connection 

by Larry Powell

I doubt that many investors with a social conscience would assume that the ethical funds they hold would be helping pay for such projects as the Alberta oil sands.

I certainly didn't - turns out, I was wrong!



All five of Canada's major banks lend money to tar sands operators. And all five are actually included in the portfolios of the many ethical investment funds in this country. As if that isn't enough, so too is at least one major corporation, Suncor Energy, which actually extracts the tar from the sands!

Ethical Funds lists Scotiabank, the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) and Suncor Energy among its top ten holdings. The investment company adds, RBC, for one, "provides significant capital to the oil and gas and other smokestack industries."


Suncor describes itself as a "pioneer" and one of the biggest players in the development and upgrading of the Alberta oil sands. So far this year, the company has been producing, on average, more than a-quarter-of-a-million barrels of oil per day. 


Last spring, a US-based environmental group, Rainforest Action Network, (RAN), listed the five major Canadian banks; RBC, Toronto Dominion (TD), Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC), Scotiabank and Bank of Montreal (BMO) as investors. At that time, RAN reported that investment totalled almost $50 billion (correct).

In a letter to RAN about a year ago, RBC confirmed it was "a financier of oil sands activity, although, at almost $17 billion, (correct) not currently the largest."

So just what is the concern here?

For years, critics have been pointing out the profound impact which development of the sands is having on the environment and the health of people, both regionally and globally. Some even describe it as the "dirtiest project on earth!" 

The Alberta-based Pembina Institute says, of all the provinces, Alberta was responsible for over half of the increase in all greenhouse gas emissions between 1990 and 2008 - about 52%! (The tar sands, of course, were operating, full-bore, during that period.) Pembina predicts that, given the projected growth of the sands, their already substantial emissions will nearly triple by 2020! The 25 year-old Institute researches and advocates for "sustainable energy solutions that will protect the earth's living systems - air, land and water."


Meanwhile, millions of hectares of pristine boreal forest are being bulldozed to make way for more and more tar sands plants. According to Greenpeace, this could soon amount to an area twice the size of New Brunswick!


 The National Academy of Sciences in the US reports that oil sands development has been contaminating  the Athabasca River watershed, downstream of the sands, to a greater degree than earlier thought. It warned that oil sands development was elevating levels of poisons in the Athabasca River and its tributaries that were "likely toxic to fish embryos."

Fish with large lesion caught in the Athabasca watershed.
Meanwhile, people living downstream of the oil sands, in the community of Fort Chipewyan, have been reporting high rates of cancer and other illness. George Poitras, a member of Mikisew Cree indigenous First Nation says, "My people are dying," and blames oil sands development.

What does the ethical investment community have to say?

I contacted Robert Walker, Vice President of ESG Services of Vancouver, to comment on this story. His firm manages several "sustainable" or "social investment" companies, including Ethical Funds.

As he puts it, "Every major bank in Canada has exposure to oil sands."


Ethical Funds lists "respect for the environment" and a pledge that "disadvantaged communities should not bear the brunt of adverse environmental impacts" among its "core values."

So just how does it justify this state of affairs?

In Walker's words, "Note that we do not describe the companies in our Funds as ‘ethical’. This is not our claim."

Walker recognizes that the companies in question have a chequered reputation in managing their social and environmental responsibilities. But he says his industry is constantly "engaging" and "pressuring" them to do better. It even hands out and publishes report cards on their performances in this regard. All this, he believes, will gradually help convince them to change their ways.

Walker believes banks like RBC can play "a pivotal role in encouraging their clients to tackle climate change."


He concludes, "We are at least partially responsible for progress that banks like RBC are making in this space." 

Despite these reassurances, it's not clear just what "progress" Walker can point to; whether his industry is, in fact convincing the banks to become better corporate citizens; or why, as he suggests, it would not be logical for the average investor to conclude - if these companies are embraced within ethical funds' portfolios - that they are, in fact, ethical!

In its defense, RBC does sponsor the "Blue Water Project," through which it promises millions of dollars to help protect watersheds and ensure access to clean drinking water. It's doubtful, however, any of that money has gone toward protecting the Athabasca watershed, the deterioration of which the bank has surely played a part, albeit indirect. 

So is the Blue Water Project an example of the bank's good intentions? Or hypocrisy?

If tar sands investment can be considered "ethical," I find it rather hard to imagine what would not!

If you believe, as I do, that our investment money should be going to less harmful and less polluting ventures than this, I'd urge you to do something about it, also. 

As a result of all of this, I have chosen to shift my modest investments away from those involving the tar sands and, into less harmful ventures.

I'd invite you to consider something similar!
         ======
Please also read: "Is Fracking Appropriate for Ethical Investing?"

Sunday, December 9, 2018

Private research funders court controversy with billions in secretive investments


Science Magazine

Cruise ships often burn bunker fuel, the very kind warned about in this story.
A Wikimedia image.
A few years ago, scientists funded by the Wellcome Trust, one of the world's wealthiest private philanthropies, published sobering findings about the deadly effects of air pollution. In a long-term study of elderly residents of Hong Kong, China, those exposed to higher levels of smog—especially tiny particles of soot produced by burning fossil fuels—were more likely to die of cancer than people who breathed cleaner air. Details here.

RELATED: Please read my blog-story, 

Conscientious investments and the tar sands connection" 
l.p.




by Larry Powell

Monday, April 30, 2012

The Big Secrets of Canada's Big Banks

                                   Cdn Centre for Policy Alternatives - Apr 30 '12 David MacDonald
 Estimating government support for Canadian banks during the financial crisis. Read full story here.

PLT: Please also read: "How Ethical are Canada's Ethical Funds? Conscientious Investments and the Tar Sands Connection." 

Friday, November 19, 2010

Are Hypocrites and Opportunists Taking Over Our Lives?



Dear Editor,

 When a hollow man like Jim Prentice can don a phony cloak of "green," take on a sacred trust as this nation's "Minister of the Environment," then hightail it off to a cushy job with "CIBC" (which is helping to bankroll the Alberta tar sands, the world's dirtiest energy project), be afraid. Be very afraid. 
Jim Prentice, Climate Criminal
  
Dead ducks in an Albrta tar pit. (Vancouver Sun photo)
As Prentice skulks off into the night with visions of money bags dancing in his head, he gets a pat on the back from Stephen Harper and a free pass from a polite media.
Fish caught near tarpits - Jason Franson CP
Preoccupied with political "process," "strategy" and "positioning," news outlets obviously no longer believe they have any duty to actually hold the ethical behaviour of our leaders up to any kind of public scrutiny. That would just be wrong! Instead, they pontificate on how the balance in the cabinet might now be affected or, if Prentice might now be positioning himself to become Prime Minister!

(Remember my reference to "hypocrites and opportunists? I rest my case.) 

One newspaper fit for fish-wrap actually referred to this traitor as the "epitome of public service" and a "capable" leader! Yet this is the same climate criminal who, while in office, did squat on the carbon file, the most important if the climate change genie is to be put back in the bottle. Squat. Nothing. 
What can be done?

Before the story of Prentice's departure broke, it hadn't really occurred to me that companies involved directly in tar sands extraction, along with big banks who lend money to them, would even qualify as "ethical" fund investments. (And who would?)


The Don of Canada's Climate Criminals
Upon checking my own, I discovered, with dismay, that they included both!

So I have now personally set the wheels in motion to divest myself of any financial holdings I may have in the development of that despicable project known euphemistically as "the oil sands."   
If you want to be remembered as a friend of Mother Earth, rather than one who stood by while the Harpers and Prentices of the world acted as accomplices in her demise, I hope you'll do likewise.

Larry Powell is a blogger and activist near Roblin, in western Manitoba. 

=======
 


A couple more climate crooks. Sen. Duffy (l.) & Sen. Wallin (r.).



Also conveniently neglected by Prentice/Harper et al in this scenario are the indigenouse people living downstream from this incredibly destructive project. Here is an excerpt from a submission by the Indigenous Environmental Network. l.p.


"Fort Chipewyan, which is located on the shore of Lake Athabasca and downstream from numerous tar sands mines, has been described as ‘ground zero’ for the devastation caused by Alberta’s oil boom. A local doctor has raised concerns over alarmingly high rates of what should be very rare bile duct cancers in the town, as well as reported abnormal rates of immune-system related conditions. A study commissioned by the Alberta Health Services confirmed in 2009 that there were indeed elevated cancer rates in the community.
"High levels of dangerous toxins in the Athabasca River have been found in areas downstream from tar sands developments. A study in 2007 commissioned by the local health authority of Fort Chipewyan revealed high levels
of arsenic, aluminium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, phosphorous, selenium, titanium, and phenols in the water. It found high levels of arsenic, cadmium, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and resin acids in the sediment, as well as high levels of mercury in tested fish."

=======
COMMENTS:
Larry - I read your letter. This is a shameful act. And replacing the environment Minister, we have none other than Mr. Baird. Now that is a joke.


JOHN FEFCHAK
Virden, MB



Sunday, June 6, 2021

Takin’ it to the bank

The National Observer

Trouble’s brewing for RBC. Canada’s climate movement is converging on the bank as its common target for pressure campaigns. Details here.

RELATED:

How Ethical are Ethical Funds? "Conscientious" investments & the tar sands connection.

CLIMATE MORONS

By Larry Powell   In a sane world, the American people would be holding Trump's feet to the (wild) fire for doing absolutely nothing, or...