Green taliban co-leader James Shaw attempts to scare investors out of fossil fuels

" Don't shoot "

Green Party co-leader James Shaw said Finance Minister Bill English needed to open his eyes to climate change or risk being hit by the “perfect financial storm”.

The Greens are calling on the government to require all public fund managers to disclose their exposure to climate risks, following Dr [Jan] Wright’s report.

“Publicly managed funds in New Zealand have significant investments in the fossil fuel industry, in assets that could lose value rapidly as major economies like China and the EU shift to cleaner energy,” Mr Shaw said.

“New Zealanders, who have money tied up in these funds, should be aware of how much of their savings are exposed if the value of the fossil fuel industry declines.”

I don’t even know where to start.

The clean non-oil energy storm has been predicted for nearly half a century now.   Any change is hardly going to be rapid, and investors are hardly going to get caught overnight.

Secondly, as the price of oil drops due to a drop in demand, it becomes cheaper again, and the economics of going for alternative energy will be less favourable.

Shaw thinks that industry will change the way it works based on idealogical values instead of bottom line drivers.  Sure, there are some that do, but industries and countries as a whole will generally only go “green” when the numbers are more or less the same, or, if there is trough full of subsidies to be had.

Take a look at electric vehicles.  They simply do not provide a cleaner, greener and more acceptable alternative.  One day they might, but it’s a process where the scale of manufacturing and external factors are going to be major influencers, and while we’re still being highly efficient at creating petrol and petrol driven vehicles, the revolution that Shaw dreams about is probably still another half century off.

Electric vehicles may not directly run on oil for a fuel, but they still contain plastics, polymers and rubbers.  All the metals need to be mined from the earth, especially those that go into the huge battery banks.  Batteries that don’t last that long and need replacement.  And, of course, the electricity they run on is still partially generated by coal and gas, if not nuclear.

I think it is a safe bet not to take investment advice from the leader of the Green Party about any impending green energy driven market crash.  Fund managers will divest away from those industries well ahead of time.

 

– NZN via Newshub

 

 

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • quantummechanics66

    Stupid boy as Capn Mannering would say. There is fossil fuels galore out there to exploit until science comes up with real alternatives. By then the world will be in a mini ice age.

    • And that’s before you ask the question “are fossil fuels really as bad as the greenies say they are?”

    • Chinaman

      The news coming out of the States is of the big solar power companies going bankrupt due to the low cost of fossil fuels..just to show that the greens won`t let a few inconvenient facts get in the way of religious dogma!

  • Muzman349

    If there is a marked increase in electric vehicle use is that not going to really cause an electricity supply problem long term that will have the effect of raising prices?

  • Ross15

    Has Shaw decided it is time to raise his profile? He seems to taking lessons from Little on how not to do it.

  • Charlie

    ” Don’t know where to start?”. Simple answer is that the “Greens have had an economics idea”. Don’t need to go any further!

  • Pita

    It amazes me how many eco loons believe that the greedy industrialist should be made to bear any increase in cost, they seem to be willfully blind to the notion that costs will be passed on to the consumer.

  • JLS

    Every time I see him I can’t get past him looking like an innocent and vacantly wide eyed forest creature off the likes of Madagascar. He seems to have about as much intelligence as one as well. But for modern western tolerance, natural evolution would have cast his him aside as totally ill-equipped for survival. Reconcile that one!

  • Keanne Lawrence

    Seems any claim by Shaw that he possessed some degree of commercial savvy were completely fictitious as he is only able to view this from the wrong end of the telescope. From that perspective he is totally confused about the image so is left resorting the same old argument that has yet to gain attention or any degree of accuracy.

  • shykiwibloke

    Given the Greens spend breathtaking amounts on travel by air and car – they will be leading by example? After all – using such transport methods is supporting such investments in the first place.

    • Second time around

      carbon emissions offset by planting trees in the arctic, no doubt.

  • Second time around

    I would be far more concerned if my Kiwisaver scheme did not have a good serving of energy stocks. For those of us planning to retire after 2130, Shaw may be giving good advice, but for the rest of us, oil will only get more expensive, and will be a good future proof investment.

  • andrewo

    I was hoping Shaw would at least try to drag the Greens closer to practicality and reason, but it seems this is not to be.

  • JC

    Just been reading an article on WUWT..

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/26/of-pancho-villa-global-warming-the-end-of-the-world-and-other-tall-tales/

    One little gem.. there are 10,000 coal fires burning around the world right now producing the equivalent of 20% of the US CO2 emissions.. nobody or very few have ever heard about that and no-one is concerned about controlling them. presumably they don’t fit a narrative.

    There are some compelling little stories there on noting the bleeding obvious.. like for all the thousands of stories on the end of the world how come the climate scare is the only one that would be right? Or would 97% of scientists really produce a consensus on anything?

    The whole climate thing is a theater of the absurd and this little article gives some useful information on how laughable it all is.

    JC

    • BR

      Some of those underground coal fires have been burning for centuries. One would have thought that the carbon zealots would be campaigning for some of the funds they have looted through their scams would be set aside for putting some of them out.

      It is just further evidence that climate “concern” is really only lust for political power.

      Bill.

  • Kapow!

    Too bad the electric cars are not made from hypocrisy – there is an endless supply of that from the greens

    • Rob

      Especially as they had the highest air travel expenses per MP and NO electorate seats.

  • Chris Fleming

    Remember this is ” Our Last Chance to Save the Planet”

  • Fuglybud

    The green theologians are barking mad. To replace fossil fuels the alternative must be plentiful, scalable, reliable and cheap. The only thing that will meet this is nuclear with all the rest not at the starting gates yet. The downside of fossil fuels are insignificant compared to the benefits they bring. Why does the world have about 2500 more coal fired power plants being built, even after the Paris group therapy talks.

  • Simo

    This has been lifted from Earth Day 1970 courtesy of David Farrar on Kiwi blog…. its hilarious and shows up the green wacko’s for what they are. I will let the article do the talking, remember its 1970 that this perspective is taken:

    1. Harvard biologist George Wald estimated that “civilization will end
    within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing
    mankind.”

    2. “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of
    this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” wrote
    Washington University biologist Barry Commoner in the Earth Day issue of the
    scholarly journal Environment.

    3. The day after the first Earth Day, the New York Times editorial page
    warned, “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to
    enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and
    possible extinction.”

    4. “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small
    increases in food supplies we make,” Paul Ehrlich confidently declared in the
    April 1970 Mademoiselle. “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200
    million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”

    5. “Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in
    the history of man have already been born,” wrote Paul Ehrlich in a 1969 essay
    titled “Eco-Catastrophe! “By…[1975] some experts feel that food shortages will
    have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of
    unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate
    food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.”

    6. Ehrlich sketched out his most alarmist scenario for the 1970 Earth
    Day issue of The Progressive, assuring readers that between 1980 and 1989, some
    4 billion people, including 65 million Americans, would perish in the “Great
    Die-Off.”

    7. “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” declared Denis
    Hayes, the chief organizer for Earth Day, in the Spring 1970 issue of The
    Living Wilderness.

    8. Peter Gunter, a North Texas State University professor, wrote in
    1970, “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable:
    by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include
    all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or
    conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine
    conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the
    exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”

    9. In January 1970, Life reported, “Scientists have solid experimental
    and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade,
    urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air
    pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one
    half….”

    10. Ecologist Kenneth Watt told Time that, “At the present rate of
    nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out
    of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”

    The sad thing is that many of those who made the predictions are still
    around pushing their hysteria

    • InnerCityDweller

      Ha, what a hoot. Mind you, in their defence, the way their were polluting in those days, had mankind continued along that same path, things wouldn’t be anywhere near as good as they are today.

    • OT Richter

      The Earth has proven to be more resilient than originally thought. The tipping point may come, then there will be a faster decline in the environment. Knowing if and when is the hard part, but people will take the easy path until they have no choice. It is human nature, and will need more than a bunch of academics and fringe political parties to change it.

  • Warren

    Would love to see Shaws financial portfolio, it would be as good as Angry Andy’s. And these financial wizards want to run the country. God help us.

52%