Your weekly guide to Sustainable Investment

---

"You know what I love about corporate speak? It's like watching a serial killer describe their hobby as 'people management.' And we all nod along like it makes perfect sense."

The Cathedral of Capitalism

Picture Steven Bradford, adjusting his $600 Tom Ford tie in a conference room that looks like an expensive coffin—all brushed steel and muted grays. This is where humanity comes to die in ergonomic chairs while someone explains why your community needs to be "optimized" out of existence.

"Gentlemen, ladies," Bradford announces, "today we're discussing 'operational efficiency enhancements' for our Midwest division."

Translation: We're firing 4,000 people in Ohio. But we can't say that because it sounds mean.

How We Built Our Monsters

The Dutch East India Company, circa 1602, was our first prototype. We created Frankenstein, except instead of body parts, we used legal documents and accounting principles. These early corporations didn't just trade spices—they colonized nations and operated private armies of 10,000 soldiers.

Fast forward to the 19th century, when American courts decided corporations deserved personhood rights. We created immortal legal entities with superhuman powers, human rights, and completely inhuman objectives.

What could possibly go wrong?

Limited Liability: Civilization's Greatest Scam

Limited liability allows collective irresponsibility to masquerade as collective action. Poison a river? Exploit workers? Your maximum loss is your initial investment. Everything else becomes an "externalized cost."

December 3, 1984: Union Carbide's Bhopal disaster killed 3,800 people immediately, affecting over 500,000 long-term. Ultimate penalty? $470 million—roughly $900 per victim. Less than a decent laptop.

The corporation survived. The community did not.

Anatomizing the Corporate Psychopath

If corporations were actual people, we'd lock them up immediately. They display every clinical characteristic of psychopathy:

Grandiose Sense of Self-Worth: "We're disrupting the entire concept of transportation!" (Translation: We're putting taxi drivers out of business while avoiding the regulations that protect workers and consumers)

Pathological Lying: "We care deeply about your privacy." (While selling your personal data to anyone with a credit card and a marketing budget)

Cunning and Manipulative Behavior: "Our revolutionary product will change your life!" (It's the same product with a new coating and double the price)

Lack of Remorse: "We regret the impact these layoffs will have on our valued employees." (But we'll do it again next quarter if it boosts the stock price by half a percent)

Shallow Affect: "Our thoughts and prayers go out to the victims." (Now back to our regularly scheduled profit extraction)

Parasitic Lifestyle: Extracting wealth from communities while minimizing tax contributions and externalizing environmental costs

Poor Behavioral Controls: Recurring scandals, followed by "We must do better" speeches, followed by identical scandals six months later

Lack of Realistic Long-Term Goals: Quarterly profit targets that systematically destroy long-term viability

We wouldn't let a human psychopath run a kindergarten class. But corporations? We let them run the entire world.

The Myth of Corporate Social Responsibility

"But corporations can change!" cry the optimists. "They're becoming more socially responsible! They care about ESG now!"

Right. And the scorpion promised not to sting the frog.

Corporate Social Responsibility is the equivalent of a serial killer donating to the police benevolent fund. "Look at me! I'm one of the good ones!" Meanwhile, the basement is still full of bodies.

ESG initiatives are corporate virtue signaling with spreadsheets. They exist not to change the fundamental nature of the corporation but to create the aesthetic of change while maintaining the substance of exploitation.

Exxon runs commercials about their investments in algae biofuels while spending millions lobbying against climate legislation. Amazon trumpets its climate pledge while crushing unionization efforts and burning through warehouse workers like they're disposable batteries. Facebook establishes an "oversight board" while its algorithms continue pushing extremism for engagement.

It's not social responsibility; it's reputation management. It's not change; it's camouflage.

Corporate Personhood: Rights Without Responsibilities

Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens once wrote, "Corporations have no consciences, no beliefs, no feelings, no thoughts, no desires... They are not themselves members of 'We the People' by whom and for whom our Constitution was established."

And yet, legally, they increasingly are treated exactly like people—except better, because they have all the rights of people plus supernatural powers.

The Citizens United Supreme Court decision didn't just give corporations political speech rights; it gave them a megaphone in a room where most humans can barely whisper. When a corporation spends millions on political influence, it's not exercising free speech—it's drowning out speech.

Read full article 

The companies that are succeeding with in-house AI, however, have seen revenue jump from zero to $20 million in a year.

Companies are pouring billions of dollars into corporate AI projects, but most have yet to see any measurable returns.

A recent MIT report, titled "The GenAI Divide: State of AI in Business 2025," reveals that while U.S. businesses have collectively invested between $35 billion and $40 billion in AI initiatives, almost all of them (95%) are seeing zero return on their investments or no measurable impact on profits. Only 5% are seeing "value" from AI.

The research, which was based on 150 interviews with AI leaders, an examination of 300 AI applications, and a survey of 350 employees at various companies, found that most AI pilot programs fail to hit targets because of "brittle workflows, lack of contextual learning, and misalignment with day-to-day operations." In other words, the AI tools do not fit into accepted corporate workflows. Generic tools like ChatGPT "stall" and provide "little to no measurable impact" on profit and loss because they don't adapt to a company's established way of doing things, the authors found.

Another key issue is that companies were using AI for the wrong assignments. The research shows that AI works best with back-office tasks with a high return-on-investment (ROI), like administrative and repetitive functions, which many companies outsource. However, more than half of the funds spent on AI projects tried to use the technology for sales and marketing, two areas that the researchers say still need human involvement and have a lower ROI.

The 5% of programs that do succeed in deploying AI seem to focus on one issue. Aditya Challapally, the MIT researcher who led the study, told Fortune that some large companies and younger startups are "excelling" with AI because "they pick one pain point, execute well, and partner smartly with companies who use their tools." Startups led by young founders have seen revenue "jump from zero to $20 million in a year" following this blueprint, Challapally said.

Additionally, companies that buy AI tools from third-party vendors like OpenAI and Perplexity have an advantage over firms that develop in-house AI tools. The MIT study says that two out of three AI tools from third-party vendors are successful, compared to one-third of in-house tools.

When it comes to AI replacing jobs, the study notes that while there haven't been AI-related layoffs yet, companies aren't as quick to replace staff members who leave, especially in customer support and administrative roles. The study states that AI will probably not lead to job loss in the next few years, "until AI systems achieve contextual adaptation and autonomous operation."

Other AI leaders have had more dire predictions about AI causing job loss. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei predicted in May that AI could wipe out half of all entry-level, white-collar positions within the next five years.

Source

The UK has just switched on its most extensive battery energy storage system, now delivering electricity across London and the South East. Known as Thurrock Storage and developed by Statera Energy, the project brings 300MW of storage capacity, equal to 600MWh. In practical terms, that is enough to power around 680,000 homes for more than two hours.

 

The site has been connected to National Grid’s transmission network through the Tilbury substation in Essex. To prepare for the additional demand, the substation has been upgraded with new protection and control systems, ensuring it can safely handle the heavy battery load.

 

Statera Energy CEO and founder, Tom Vernon, said: “We are delighted that Thurrock Storage is now energised, following its successful connection to the grid by National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET).

 

“Increasing BESS capacity is essential for supporting the grid when renewable generation, such as solar and wind, is low or changes quickly. It ensures that energy can be stored efficiently and returned to the grid whenever it’s needed.”

 

John Twomey, director of customer and network development at NGET, said: “Battery storage plays a vital role in Britain’s clean energy transition. Connecting Thurrock Storage, the UK’s biggest battery, to our transmission network marks a significant step on that journey.

 

“Our Tilbury substation once served a coal plant, and with battery connections like this, it’s today helping to power a more sustainable future for the region and the country.”

 

Sitting alongside Thurrock Storage is another vital project, Thurrock Flexible Generation. This is a 450MW plant that provides backup electricity whenever renewable energy output falls short for an extended period. Remarkably, the battery system can reach full capacity in under ten minutes and continue supplying power to the grid for as long as needed.

 

Funding for these projects has been substantial. In 2024, Statera Energy raised £251 million to support construction, following a £144 million investment secured in late 2023. Currently, Statera has delivered or is building more than 2.1 GW of projects across the UK. The pipeline is even larger, with over 16GW in development or already approved. To date, the company has secured billions in committed investment and expects this figure to climb to as much as £7 billion by 2030.

 

This week also saw another milestone in Britain’s energy storage sector. Field, a fast-growing developer, launched its largest battery site yet in Scotland. The 50MW facility, located near Auchteraw, carries a storage capacity of 100MWh. Positioned just north of the heavily constrained B4 transmission boundary across the Scottish Central Belt, it could supply power to as many as 150,000 homes for two hours.

 

Field now operates four sites across Great Britain, with a development pipeline that stretches to 4.5GWh of projects.

Source

The community had big plans for the facility site, until the Trump administration ordered it to stay open, a move it extended this week.

Donald Trump has made several unusual moves to elongate the era of coal, such as giving the industry exemptions from pollution rules. But the gambit to keep one Michigan coal-fired power station running has been extraordinary — by forcing it to remain open even against the wishes of its operator.

The hulking JH Campbell power plant, which since 1962 has sat a few hundred yards from the sand dunes at the edge of Lake Michigan, was just eight days away from a long-planned closure in May when Trump’s Department of Energy issued an emergency order that it remain open for a further 90 days.

On Wednesday, the administration intervened again to extend this order even further, prolonging the lifetime of the coal plant another 90 days, meaning it will keep running until November — six months after it was due to close.

The move, taken under emergency powers more normally used during wartime or in the wake of disaster, has stunned local residents and the plant’s operator, Consumers Energy. “My family had a countdown for it closing, we couldn’t wait,” said Mark Oppenhuizen, who has lived in the shadow of the plant for 30 years and suspects its pollution worsened his wife’s lung disease.

“I was flabbergasted when the administration said they had stopped it shutting down,” he said. “Why are they inserting themselves into a decision a company has made? Just because politically you don’t like it? It’s all so dumb.”

The May 23 order and the latest edict, by the U.S. energy secretary, Chris Wright, both warn that the regional grid would be strained by the closure of JH Campbell with local homes and businesses at risk of “curtailments or outages, presenting a risk to public health and safety” without it.

“This order will help ensure millions of Americans can continue to access affordable, reliable, and secure baseload power regardless of whether the wind is blowing or the sun is shining,” Wright said in a statement on Thursday.

But Miso, the grid operator for Michigan and 14 other states, has stressed it has had “adequate resources to meet peak demand this summer” without JH Campbell and Consumers Energy had already set about making plans for life after its last remaining coal plant.

“What’s remarkable is that this is the first time the energy secretary has used these powers without being asked to do so by the market operator or power plant operator,” said Timothy Fox, an energy analyst at ClearView. “It shows the Trump administration is prepared to take muscular actions to keep its preferred power sources online.”

Wright — whose department has bizarrely taken to tweeting pictures of lumps of coal with the words “She’s an icon. She’s a legend” — has said the U.S. “has got to stop closing coal plants” to help boost electricity generation to meet demand that is escalating due to the growth of artificial intelligence.

The administration has also issued a separate emergency declaration to keep open a gas plant in Pennsylvania, although it has sought to kill off wind and solar projects, which Trump has called “ugly” and “disgusting.”

The president, who solicited and received major donations from coal, oil, and gas interests during his election campaign, has signed an executive order aimed at reviving what he calls “beautiful, clean coal” and took the remarkable step of asking fossil fuel companies to email requests to be exempt from pollution laws, again under emergency powers.

So far, 71 coal plants, along with dozens of other chemical, copper smelting, and other polluting facilities, have received “pollution passes” from the Trump administration according to a tally by the Environmental Defense Fund, allowing greater emissions of airborne toxins linked to an array of health problems. Coal is, despite Trump’s claims, the dirtiest of all fossil fuels and the leading source of planet-heating pollution.

Read full article 

Report finds regenerative approach could yield economic benefits while helping to meet environmental targets

 

The degradation of nature in the UK will lop nearly 5% off the country’s GDP if the private sector does not make a greater effort to halt the decline, experts have warned.

Conversely, investing in nature can produce economic returns for companies in a range of sectors, from manufacturing and construction to food, according to a report from the Green Finance Institute (GFI) and WWF.

But many businesses are failing to reform or are unaware of the impact of their actions on nature and the climate. The WWF economist Vassilis Gkoumas said: “A real plan to save UK nature must bring the private sector with it. Many businesses want greater clarity around how they can contribute to the transition. Now we need more to come forward.”

One solution is for companies to develop so-called nature-positive transition pathways (NPPs) under which they agree to meet certain targets on environmental improvement, with government help. The report found that these could play a big role in helping the UK reach its net zero targets, and national targets on nature and the environment, such as halting the decline of species abundance by 2030.

Steve Reed, the environment secretary, said getting private sector companies to invest in improving nature was an essential part of the government’s programme for economic growth. He said a new national plan for nature and the environment, expected to be published this autumn, would set out how NPPs and other measures could achieve economic growth, as well as improving health and wellbeing.

“Thriving nature is the foundation of everything this government wants to achieve,” he said. “We are working with industry leaders to drive private investment, including through the development of NPPs. These will enable UK businesses to harness the economic opportunities that come from restoring and protecting our natural environment to deliver strong and sustained economic growth, which is this government’s number one mission.”

The GFI and WWF report, titled “Business investment in nature: supporting UK economic resilience and growth”, found 40 examples of where NPPs have worked and 28 companies that have signed up to using them.

Wates Group, a construction and property development company, is attempting to increase wildlife on its sites and developments by 20%, and is examining its supply chain to find ways of improving environmental protections while stipulating that environmental impacts must be considered in commercial decisions.

Cressida Curtis, the group sustainability director at Wates, said: “The built environment has a huge impact on nature – both through construction sites and the supply chain, which extracts around half the world’s natural materials. That means that if we shift how we operate to adopt regenerative practices, we can make a huge positive difference.”

Soil degradation alone costs about £1.4bn annually to the UK economy, the report found. Velcourt, one of the UK’s largest farm management companies, has begun using high-resolution soil mapping combined with satellite imagery and weather data, to improve its yields.

Food production is also under threat – one in 20 dairy farms stopped production in 2023, largely owing to the impact of inflation. But investing in nature-positive practices can stem the decline: the report found that First Milk, a cooperative of 700 regenerative dairy farmers, provided a price premium to farmers implementing regenerative practices, amounting to about £5,200 for each member in 2023, or about 7% of the average income of a dairy farm. These practices reduced water consumption by 5.5% and energy consumption by 6%, while sales increased by 38% to £456m.

The report’s authors found dozens of other private sector examples of how NPPs and practices that conserve natural resources could yield economic benefits as well as meet government targets.

Charlie Dixon, an associate director at the GFI, an advisory and commercial group part-funded by government, said ministers should now provide clearer guidelines to encourage more companies to follow suit. “The empirical evidence is clear that business investment in nature is a powerful engine for economic growth,” he said. “UK businesses are keen to contribute to the delivery of the UK’s nature targets, but need better guidance and coordination in order to do so.”

The report, which forecast that the degradation of nature would knock 4.7% off UK GDP within the current decade, builds on previous findings by the GFI that the degradation of nature would result in losses of 12% of GDP in the 2030s.

Source