DOCSLIB.ORG

Rockefeller Family Tried and Failed to Get Exxonmobil to Accept Climate Change

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rockefeller Family Tried and Failed to Get Exxonmobil to Accept Climate Change home › env ironment › climate change w ildlife energy pollution UKall election Climate change scepticism Keep it in the ground Rockefeller family tried and failed to get ExxonMobil to accept climate change Founding family of the US oil empire Exxon, begged the company to giv e up climate denial and reform their w ay s a decade ago – but attempts at engagement failed Peter O’Neill, chair o f the Ro ckefeller Family co mmittee (C) sits with Neva Ro ckefeller Go o dwin, eco no mist, and g reat-g randdaug hter o f Jo hn D Ro ckefeller and Stephen B Heintz, president, Ro ckefeller Bro thers Fund during a news co nference in which Ro ckefeller family members vo iced co ncern abo ut the directio n o f the o il co mpany Exxo nMo bil in April 2008 in New Yo rk. Pho to g raph: Spencer Platt/Getty Imag es Suzanne Goldenberg in New York @s uzyji Friday 27 March 2015 12.59 GMT Co mments 37 Members of the Rockefeller family tried to g et ExxonMobil to acknowledg e the dang ers of climate chang e a decade ag o – but failed in their efforts to reform the oil g iant. Advertisement In letters, lunch meeting s, and shareholder resolutions, the descendants of John D Rockefeller, founder of the oil empire that eventually became Exxon, soug ht repeatedly to persuade the company to abandon climate denial and beg in shifting their business towards clean energ y. Advertisement “We were really beg g ing the company to look harder at what they were doing . They were still into climate denial and funding deniers and really ag ainst any positive steps,” said Neva Rockefeller Goodwin, a co-director of the Global Development and Environment Institute at Tufts University, who helped lead the reform effort. The outreach effort, led mainly by Rockefeller’s g reat g randchildren, beg an with a lunch meeting in 2004 with Exxon’s then head of investor relations. “This was the family trying to g et into a friendly conversation with ExxonMobil, feeling we have a strong historical connection with that company,” said Goodwin. “We wanted to start talking with the company about their view of the future and how they could be a constructive player as well as part of the problem.” The company was blindsided. David Henry, then head of investor relations, was “stunned” at the family’s concern about climate chang e, according to Goodwin’s recollection of events. “The head of investor relations was really surprised to find we didn’t love Exxon as it was but thoug ht chang es mig ht be a g ood idea,” she said. Over the next few years, Goodwin and about a dozen other Rockefellers launched three separate shareholder resolutions pressing Exxon to recog nise climate chang e and invest in renewable energ y. The cousins also soug ht an independent chairman, believing it would make the company more responsive. At the time the oil company was the main funder of dozens of front g roups and researchers rubbishing any link between the burning of fossil fuels and climate chang e – or denying climate chang e was occurring at all. Among the recipients was Willie Soon, the Harvard-Smithsonian researcher who received more than $1m (£0.7m) from industry, according to documents obtained by Greenpeace throug h freedom of information filing s. In a report released on the eve of their 2008 annual g eneral meeting , the oil company pledg ed to stop funding g roups that promote climate denial. However, the company continued funding Soon for three more years. The documents show that Exxon g ave Soon an additional $76,106 from 2008 to 2010, despite claiming to have stopped. The shareholder resolutions were easily defeated. Steam rises fro m to wers at an Exxo n Mo bil refinery in Bayto wn, Texas. Pho to g raph: Pat Sullivan/AP The US environmentalist Bill McKibben says the failure of the family’s efforts is telling and sig nals the limits of shareholder eng ag ement with some fossil fuel companies. “It makes a very clear point that eng ag ing with fossil fuel companies to somehow g et them to chang e their ways is unlikely to work if the family of the founder can’t g et Exxon to shift.” The Rockefeller heirs also tried private and public pressure. Nearly 100 direct descendants also sig ned a letter expressing concern as investors and beg g ing the company to stop funding climate deniers, Goodwin said. In 2006, another cousin, Senator Jay Rockefeller, a West Virg inia Democrat, and Senator Olympia Snowe, a Maine Republican, wrote a letter to the incoming Exxon chief executive Rex Tillerson, urg ing the company to stop funding climate deniers. “ExxonMobil’s long standing support of a small cadre of g lobal climate chang e sceptics, and those sceptics’ access to and influence on g overnment policymakers, have made it increasing ly difficult for the United States to demonstrate the moral clarity it needs across all facets of its diplomacy,” the letter said. “It is our hope that under your leadership, ExxonMobil would end its dang erous support of the ‘deniers’.” Most of the Rockefellers’ personal fortunes are held in trusts set up in the 1930s. The family retains only a tiny fraction of shares in Exxon. But the stand taken by the Rockefellers – at a time when Exxon was under attack from campaig n g roups for its support of climate denial – rankled company executives who had expected family members to be allies, Goodwin said. “They were shocked to find this family that had a strong link with them, and that they expect to find a g reat friend and admirer ... had such a neg ative view.” But even with the weig ht of that historical connection Exxon was still not persuaded to chang e. “I was pretty discourag ed. Exxon has an extremely strong culture of believing that they are rig ht and know what they are doing and really don’t need to listen to anybody else,” Goodwin went on. “It was clear that we didn’t have an ability to make more of a dent in that.” When the Guardian asked for a comment on the Neva Go o dwin. Rockefellers’ attempts to eng ag e with the company it Pho to g raph: issued this statement. “ExxonMobil will not respond to GDAE/Tufts University Guardian inquiries because of its lack of objectivity on climate chang e reporting demonstrated by its campaig n ag ainst companies that provide energ y necessary for modern life, including newspapers.” Ken Cohen, ExxonMobil’s vice president for public and g overnment affairs has previously been dismissive of the concept of fossil fuel divestment, saying that it is “out of step with reality”. “There are no scalable alternative fuels or technolog ies available today capable of taking the place of fossil fuels and offering society what those energ y sources provide,” he wrote in a blog in October. Join us in asking the Gates Foundation and Wellcome Trust to commit now to divesting from the top 200 fossil fuel companies within five years and to immediately freeze any new investments in those companies. In partnership with Name Email City Country Country ZIP/Postal Code Keep me up to date with Guardian environment coverage, including campaign updates Get updates from 350.org’s global climate divestment campaigns Sign my name More ne ws Topics Climate change s ce pticis m Oil (Environme nt) Fos s il f ue l dive s tme nt Climate change Ene rgy More … keep it in the ground Sign the Guardian petition to k eep fossil Podcast: The biggest story in the w orld fuels in the ground Behind the scenes at the Guardian, the edito r-in- Jo in us and mo re than 18 0,000 in urg ing the wo rld's chief Alan Rusbridg er and his team reveal a two big g est charitable funds to mo ve their mo ney newspaper's missio n to save the wo rld fro m climate o ut o f fo ssil fuels. chang e. Re ad more Re ad more comments (37) This discussion is closed for comments. Order by Oldest Threads Co llapsed 1 2 Matthew2012 15 27 Mar 2015 13:11 But it is alrig ht the Wellcome Trust are on the case with their shares - I am sure that'll do the job. On the current political trajectory of the world we will see the leg ally questionable step of blaming those most responsible and this will make quotes like the following extremely costly for Exxon board members: Exxon Mobil will not respond to Guardian inquiries because of its lack of objectivity on climate change reporting demonstrated by its campaign against companies that provide energy necessary f or modern lif e... The oil companies have an easy path to continue until they are stopped but to actively deny action is needed is a clear mistake and could lead to consequences that they cannot afford reg ardless of current leg islation. The quote is more accurately interpreted as: Exxon Mobil will not respond to Guardian inquiries because of its [Exxon Mobil's] lack of objectivity on climate change... Re po rt SageRad 7 27 Mar 2015 13:53 We need a serious carbon fee and rebate. We need to cut into the profits of all fossil fuel companies. No other way around it. Let's not waste any more time.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Divestment May Burst the Carbon Bubble If Investors' Beliefs Tip To
    Divestment may burst the carbon bubble if investors’ beliefs tip to anticipating strong future climate policy Birte Ewers,1;2;∗ Jonathan F. Donges,1;3;∗;# Jobst Heitzig1, Sonja Peterson4 1Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Member of the Leibniz Association, P.O. Box 60 12 03, 14412 Potsdam, Germany 2Department of Economics, University of Kiel, Olshausenstraße 40, 24098 Kiel, Germany 3Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Kraftriket¨ 2B, 114 19 Stockholm, Sweden 4Kiel Institute for the World Economy, Kiellinie 66, 24105 Kiel, Germany ∗The first two authors share the lead authorship. #To whom correspondence should be addressed; E-mail: [email protected] February 21, 2019 To achieve the ambitious aims of the Paris climate agreement, the majority of fossil-fuel reserves needs to remain underground. As current national govern- ment commitments to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions are insufficient by far, actors such as institutional and private investors and the social movement on divestment from fossil fuels could play an important role in putting pressure on national governments on the road to decarbonization. Using a stochastic arXiv:1902.07481v1 [q-fin.GN] 20 Feb 2019 agent-based model of co-evolving financial market and investors’ beliefs about future climate policy on an adaptive social network, here we find that the dy- namics of divestment from fossil fuels shows potential for social tipping away from a fossil-fuel based economy. Our results further suggest that socially responsible investors have leverage: a small share of 10–20 % of such moral investors is sufficient to initiate the burst of the carbon bubble, consistent with 1 the Pareto Principle.
    [Show full text]
  • $1.5 Billion Lost on Tar Sands and Fracking Holdings
    $1.5 billion lost on tar sands and fracking holdings New York State Common Retirement Fund has lost more than $1.5 billion on just 16 fossil fuel companies in the last year Highlights: ● $1.5 billion loss on 16 companies since March 31, 2019 ● 60% drop in value ● Value of tar sands holdings has dropped by 57% from $2 billion to $850 million ● Value of major fracking holdings down 84% ● Exxon investment has dropped below base cost - a loss of over $500 million in 1 year ● S&P 500 Energy companies have consistently underperformed the rest of the market over 1, 3 and 5 year time horizons ● Market value were down double digits even before the oil crash 60% drop in value of holdings in just a year The New York State Common Retirement Fund (Fund) has lost more than $1.5 billion on just 16 oil and gas stocks over the last year as the energy sector faces increasing volatility and declining prospects, according to a new analysis by 350.org1. New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli, the sole custodian of the Fund, has so far refused to divest from fossil fuels. The Fund serves as the retirement fund for more than 1 million New Yorkers and its oil and gas holdings have left it overexposed to the precipitous drop in energy stocks over both the past month and year. At the end of March 2019, the Fund had more than $13 billion invested in fossil fuel companies. While government stimulus may trigger a slight rebound in the coming days, most analysts agree the overall outlook for the sector is dim.
    [Show full text]
  • $1.2 Million Conflict of Interest Plagues Climate Change Denial Research
    $1.2 Million Conflict of Interest Plagues Climate Change Denial Research... http://natmonitor.com/2015/02/22/1-2-million-conflict-of-interest-plague... $1.2 Million Conflict of Interest Plagues Climate Change Denial Research By James Paladino, National Monitor | February 22, 2015 A recently uncovered document shows that Wei-Hok Soon, a well-known aerospace engineer, was granted over $1.2 million from fossil-fuel companies for climate research and failed to disclose a conflict of interest in his peer-reviewed publications. In Washington, climate change deniers are fighting a fierce battle to stave off energy policy reform. The latest casualty of this war of ideas is Wei-Hock Soon, a part-time employee of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. Resilient to the scientific consensus that human carbon emissions are fueling gradual warming, the aerospace engineer has served as a beacon for conservative legislators. A recently uncovered document shows that Soon was granted over $1.2 million from fossil-fuel companies and failed to disclose a conflict of interest in his peer-reviewed publications. Since the Smithsonian is part of the federal government, former Greenpeace member Kert Davies legally obtained the Soon’s grant agreements through the Freedom of Information Act. Contributors include the American Petroleum Institute, the Koch brothers, Exxon Mobil and Southern Company. Several scientific papers and a congressional testimonial were termed as “deliverables,” reports The New York Times. “These proposals and contracts show debatable interventions in science literally on behalf of the Southern Company and the Kochs,” said Davies. “What it shows is the continuation of a long-term campaign by specific fossil-fuel companies and interests to undermine the scientific consensus on climate change.” These recent revelations have drawn fire from members of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center and NASA, among others.
    [Show full text]
  • Ad Hoc Committee on Fossil Fuel Divestment Report
    TO: Tilak Lal, Chair, Joint Committee on Investments; Vice Chair, Rutgers University Board of Trustees J. Michael Gower, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Rutgers University FROM: Ad Hoc Committee on Fossil Fuel Divestment SUBJECT: Divestment of the Rutgers University Endowment from Fossil Fuel Investments DATE: February 22, 2021 Introduction In spring 2020, the Joint Committee on Investments, which sets overall policy for the investment of the Rutgers University endowment, received a request from a student group called the Endowment Justice Collective to divest from fossil fuels. The chair of the Joint Committee on Investments and the university’s chief financial officer made a preliminary determination that the students’ request appeared to meet the standards outlined in the Advisory Statement on Divestment within the university’s Investment Policy. As prescribed by this policy, an ad hoc committee composed of faculty, students, and staff was charged to consider the divestment request based on university policy and to make recommendations based on its review.1 Fossil Fuels in the Rutgers University Endowment The Ad Hoc Committee defined fossil fuel investments as investments in any company or fund whose primary business is the exploration or extraction of fossil fuels, including coal, oil, and natural gas, or whose primary business supports this sector with infrastructure and other services. This definition is consistent with the nature of the divestment request received in spring 2020. Currently, approximately 5% of the university’s $1.5 billion endowment consists of fossil fuel investments. Sixty percent of these investments are in private funds, with the remainder in public equity or fixed income funds.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change: Active Stewardship Vs. Divestment
    HNW_NRG_B_Inset_Mask Climate change: Active Stewardship vs. Divestment At RBC Global Asset Management (RBC GAM)1, we believe that climate change is a material and systemic risk that has the potential to impact the global economy, markets and society as a whole. As an asset manager and fiduciary of our clients’ assets, we have an important responsibility to consider all material factors that may impact the performance of our investments. In 2020, we took steps to formalize the actions we are taking to address climate change with the launch of Our approach to climate change. A cornerstone of this approach is active stewardship as an effective mechanism to motivate companies to build strategies that enable climate mitigation* and adaptation**. Some investors who are concerned about the impact of in extreme cases, the filing of lawsuits. As global investors climate change and are seeking to align their investment continue to integrate climate change into their investment strategies with these views have chosen a divestment decisions, active managers use both engagement and proxy approach. While RBC GAM does offer divestment solutions, voting as a means of better understanding and influencing we believe that the best approach to support the transition the activities or behaviour of issuers. to a low-carbon economy is through active stewardship. Engagement Active stewardship Engagement involves meeting with the boards and Active stewardship refers to the suite of actions investors management of issuers, typically corporations, and learning can take to better understand and influence the activities or about how they are approaching strategic opportunities and behaviour of issuers. It can be thought of as a conversation material risks in their business.
    [Show full text]
  • ASI Position Statement – Fossil Fuels April 2021
    ASI Position Statement – Fossil Fuels April 2021 “ At ASI, consideration of climate-change risks and opportunities is an integral part of our investment process across all asset classes and sectors. We carefully consider fossil fuel related risks and the ability to transition to alternatives in our investment decisions.” 02 ASI Position Statement Fossil Fuels – Our Approach for Investments Financial risks related to fossil fuels are becoming more material the transition from more carbon-intensive fuels to gas where as pressure to decarbonise the global economy is growing. alternatives are limited. However, we also consider the risk of gas Aberdeen Standard Investments (ASI) fully acknowledges the role utilities and infrastructure becoming stranded in the medium to of fossil fuels in causing and further exacerbating climate change. long term. Transitioning directly to low-carbon energy sources We support the goals of the Paris Agreement, are members of the such as renewables is our preference and we strongly Net Zero Asset Manager initiative and believe that urgent action is encourage it. required to limit global warming to 1.5°C. This means aiming for a global net-zero emissions economy by 2050, in which fossil fuels Pounds of CO2 emitted per million Btu of energy will only play a minor role. On the path to that world, we need to transition to a low-carbon Natua as economy, in which fossil fuels are phased out and replaced with Gasoine cost effective and reliable alternatives. This needs to be a ‘just’ (witot ethano) transition where effects on communities, workers and energy Diese ue and security are carefully considered.
    [Show full text]
  • Open PDF File, 8.71 MB, for February 01, 2017 Appendix In
    Case 4:16-cv-00469-K Document 175 Filed 02/01/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID 5923 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION, § § Plaintiff, § v. § No. 4:16-CV-469-K § ERIC TRADD SCHNEIDERMAN, § Attorney General of New York, in his § official capacity, and MAURA TRACY § HEALEY, Attorney General of § Massachusetts, in her official capacity, § § Defendants. § APPENDIX IN SUPPORT OF EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION’S BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF THIS COURT’S PERSONAL JURISDICTION OVER THE DEFENDANTS Exhibit Description Page(s) N/A Declaration of Justin Anderson (Feb. 1, 2017) v – ix A Transcript of the AGs United for Clean Power App. 1 –App. 21 Press Conference, held on March 29, 2016, which was prepared by counsel based on a video recording of the event. The video recording is available at http://www.ag.ny.gov/press- release/ag-schneiderman-former-vice-president- al-gore-and-coalition-attorneys-general-across B E-mail from Wendy Morgan, Chief of Public App. 22 – App. 32 Protection, Office of the Vermont Attorney General to Michael Meade, Director, Intergovernmental Affairs Bureau, Office of the New York Attorney General (Mar. 18, 2016, 6:06 PM) C Union of Concerned Scientists, Peter Frumhoff, App. 33 – App. 37 http://www.ucsusa.org/about/staff/staff/peter- frumhoff.html#.WI-OaVMrLcs (last visited Jan. 20, 2017, 2:05 PM) Case 4:16-cv-00469-K Document 175 Filed 02/01/17 Page 2 of 10 PageID 5924 Exhibit Description Page(s) D Union of Concerned Scientists, Smoke, Mirrors & App.
    [Show full text]
  • Fossil Fuels Divestment
    Fossil Fuels Divestment ww3.haverford.edu /fossilfuelsdivestment/ Dear Friends, Over the past year, many colleges and universities have investigated divestment of endowment from firms that have investments in fossil fuels as a way of applying financial leverage against the use of carbon- based energy while promoting alternative sources. Here at Haverford, the dialogue was initiated in the summer of 2012 by a number of thoughtful students who, consistent with a national campaign, specifically asked the College to freeze all endowment investments in 200 companies identified as having the greatest proven reserves of coal, oil, and natural gas and to unwind all existing investments in these companies over a five-year period. The matter was referred to our Board’s Committee on Investments and Social Responsibility (CISR), which includes Investment Committee representation, in order to explore what such a move could mean for Haverford. The students who initiated this conversation expressed profound concern about the effects of climate change arising from the burning of fossil fuels, and they have challenged the College to engage thoughtfully on how we as an institution and as a community can act within our sphere to mitigate this global threat. As an institution committed to values of ethical concern and social responsibility, the College commends these students for initiating this important conversation. The dialogue has been serious, positive, and informed by the understanding that we must balance needs with ambitions. The CISR’s deliberations on this matter included meetings with the concerned students as well as an open forum with the broader College community, and were supported by research conducted by the College’s investment office.
    [Show full text]
  • Extracting Fossil Fuels from Your Portfoliosm
    EXTRACTING FOSSIL FUELS FROM YOUR PORTFOLIOSM: An UPDATED Guide to Personal Divestment and Reinvestment ABOUT THE AUTHORS 350.org is a global network inspiring the world to rise to 100% of Green Century’s profits earned for managing the challenge of the climate crisis. Since its inception in the Green Century Funds belong to the founding group 2008, their online campaigns, grassroots organizing, and of environmental non-profit organizations, the Public mass public actions have been led from the bottom up Interest Research Groups (PIRGs), that started Green by people in 188 countries. Century in 1991. 350 means climate safety. To preserve our planet, Since 2005, Green Century’s Balanced Fund has been scientists tell us we must reduce the amount of CO2 in 100% fossil fuel free; it is an actively managed fund the atmosphere from its current levels of 400 parts per made up of the stocks and bonds of well-managed million to below 350 ppm. 350 is more than a number — companies. The Balanced Fund is almost 50% less it’s a symbol of where we need to head as a planet. carbon intensive than the S&P 500® Index as measured by the international data and analysis firm Trucost.1 The 350 works in a new way — everywhere at once using Green Century Equity Fund, which is also fossil fuel free, online tools to facilitate strategic offline action — under invests in the longest running sustainability index minus the belief that if a global grassroots movement holds the fossil fuel companies in that index. our leaders accountable to the realities of science and principles of justice, we can realize the solutions that For more information, click here or visit www.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Risk and the Fossil Fuel Industry: Two Feet High and Rising
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by IssueLab Working Paper Climate Risk and the Fossil Fuel Industry: Two Feet High and Rising Jim Krane, Ph.D. Wallace S. Wilson Fellow in Energy Studies, Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy © 2016 by the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy of Rice University This material may be quoted or reproduced without prior permission, provided appropriate credit is given to the author and the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy. Wherever feasible, papers are reviewed by outside experts before they are released. However, the research and views expressed in this paper are those of the individual researcher(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy. This paper is a work in progress and has not been submitted for editorial review. Climate Risk and the Fossil Fuel Industry Keywords Climate change risk, fossil fuel, stranded assets, unburnable carbon, carbon bubble, carbon budget, divestment, carbon price, carbon tax, cap-and-trade, INDCs, COP 21, shareholder risk, leave it in the ground, greenhouse gas, GHG, decarbonization Introduction Burning coal, oil and natural gas is responsible for two-thirds of the world’s emissions of greenhouse gases. These same fuels also represent the economic mainstay of resource-rich countries and the world’s largest firms. Any steps humanity takes to reduce climate- warming emissions will damage commercial opportunities. Relief for the climate means danger for the fossil fuel business. Given the stakes, it bears asking: What, exactly, are the risks? How are they manifested and distributed? Luminaries such as the US president and the governor of the Bank of England have called for leaving large portions of oil, gas, and coal reserves in the ground.
    [Show full text]
  • Deeper Ties to Corporate Cash for Doubtful Climate Research
    Deeper Ties to Corporate Cash for Doubtful Climate Research... http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/us/ties-to-corporate-cash... http://nyti.ms/1DIYhU3 SCIENCE Deeper Ties to Corporate Cash for Doubtful Climate Researcher By JUSTIN GILLIS and JOHN SCHWARTZ FEB. 21, 2015 For years, politicians wanting to block legislation on climate change have bolstered their arguments by pointing to the work of a handful of scientists who claim that greenhouse gases pose little risk to humanity. One of the names they invoke most often is Wei-Hock Soon, known as Willie, a scientist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics who claims that variations in the sun’s energy can largely explain recent global warming. He has often appeared on conservative news programs, testified before Congress and in state capitals, and starred at conferences of people who deny the risks of global warming. But newly released documents show the extent to which Dr. Soon’s work has been tied to funding he received from corporate interests. He has accepted more than $1.2 million in money from the fossil-fuel industry over the last decade while failing to disclose that conflict of interest in most of his scientific papers. At least 11 papers he has published since 2008 omitted such a disclosure, and in at least eight of those cases, he appears to have violated ethical guidelines of the journals that published his work. The documents show that Dr. Soon, in correspondence with his corporate funders, described many of his scientific papers as “deliverables” that he completed in exchange for their money.
    [Show full text]
  • The Facts About Fossil Fuel Divestment
    The Facts about Fossil Fuel Divestment Divestment is one of the most powerful statements that an institution can make with its money. It helps remove the social license that allows the fossil fuel industry to continue to emit dangerous pollutants into the atmosphere at low cost. The fossil fuel industry’s business model depends on its ability to burn all of the carbon in its reserves. To stay below 2 degrees Celsius of warming, scientists and economists say we must leave 80 percent of the current coal, oil and gas reserves in the ground. Simply put, to avoid the most catastrophic effects of climate change we can only burn less than 500 gigatons of carbon, while the fossil fuel industry currently holds 2,860 gigatons in its reserves. Our generation has a moral imperative to address climate change in a manner that is consistent with the urgency and severity of the crisis. Colleges and universities, for example, exist to educate new generations of young people. Pension funds exist to support the long­term health of their pension holders. The following facts, used in conversations with college administrators, pension trustees, finance professionals and other thought leaders we encounter in the divestment effort, can be helpful in debunking common misperceptions about fossil fuel divestment: 1. Fiduciary duty demands fossil fuel divestment Fiduciary responsibility, or fiduciary duty, is a legal term meaning that trustees must act in the best interest of the institution. For many institutional investors, this is interpreted to mean maximizing short­term returns at the expense of all other factors.
    [Show full text]