Your weekly guide to Sustainable Investment
Upcoming TBLI Events
Wealth & Society Summit 2024
Powered by TBLI Group.
Sept, 26-27 Vienna, Austria
Would you like to watch a recording of a past TBLI Talk event? Visit this page
TBLI Radical Truth Podcast
C Suite Business Leader creating global community of trust
Eva-Lotta Sjöstedt founded KUNO Leadership Community to build a global sense of trust for the next generation of leaders. Sjöstedt is passionate about connecting and inspiring people to develop strong, meaningful businesses through purposeful leadership.
After more than 30 years’ experience as a global business leader and CEO, she has led thousands of people in organisations worldwide. KUNO Leadership Community is composed of leaders who share our philosophy. Their fundamental beliefs, values and ideas act as guiding principles for purposeful leadership. Their philosophy encompasses our way of thinking about the world, business, leadership, sustainability, technology and globalisation and the connection between them.
As a purposeful leader you cannot separate economic growth from a positive impact on the world. You must consider your impact on all stakeholders. This is essential for long-term success. “It’s time to transform the value proposition. It’s time for a new leadership framework."
Listen to the full podcast
Ambitions vs. reality: EU’s 2030 net-zero targets out of reach as clean tech investments fall behind US and China
The European Union (EU) is set to fall far behind its ambitious energy transition targets for renewable energy, clean technology capacity and domestic supply chain investments, according to Rystad Energy research and modeling. The bloc’s capital investments (capex) in clean technologies – including renewables, carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS), hydrogen, batteries and nuclear – totaled $125 billion in 2023, dwarfed by China’s spending of $390 billion in the same sectors. The US is currently behind the EU in annual clean-tech spending, investing $86 billion in 2023, but the Inflation Reduction Act is set to spur investments while the EU’s spending will plateau in the years to come. The US will all but match the EU in total clean energy spending in 2030, and accelerate past the bloc in the ensuing years.
The Net-Zero Industry Act (NZIA) was passed by the EU earlier this year as a roadmap for the Union to meet its lofty goal of cutting emissions by 92% compared to 1990 levels by 2040 and reaching net zero by 2050. As a direct response to the US’ landmark Inflation Reduction Act, the EU has set ambitious targets through the NZIA to support nascent industries, homeshore supply chains and position the bloc as an attractive investment location through supplier incentives. However, the cleantech investment landscape in the EU is a contrasting story of ambition versus reality, and another dose of reality could be coming soon.
The EU elections are right around the corner, and the results are likely to have sweeping impacts on the bloc’s policy landscape. Many predict a political shift to the right following similar recent results in national elections, which could usher in a period of heightened Euroscepticism and decreased appetite to tackle climate change and the energy transition from a continental perspective. Next year is a pivotal one for the EU’s climate change progress, with reevaluations of its nationally determined contributions (NDC) and emissions goals expected, so significant political upheaval could have a long-lasting impact.
The NZIA sets forth ambitious targets and provisions to boost the production and deployment of key clean technologies, including batteries, CCUS and hydrogen electrolyzers, as part of the EU's broader emissions reduction and energy security goals. The Act outlines production targets and regulatory frameworks to accelerate the development and commercialization of these technologies, but only the battery sector is showing genuine promise. Yet despite the favorable outlook, as with solar manufacturers, some European battery manufacturing companies are favoring the greener pastures across the pond, emphasizing the need for competitive developer conditions. For instance, FREYR Battery, originally based in Norway, has relocated its headquarters to the United States and is setting up a gigafactory in Georgia to benefit from the Inflation Reduction Act's tax incentives. Similarly, Volkswagen, after its initial heavy investment in Northvolt, is now exploring opportunities in Canada to align with the IRA and maximize tax credits, illustrating a broader trend of shifting manufacturing to capitalize on favorable policy environments and sending a clear signal to policymakers. In addition, the Chinese manufacturers are doubling down in the EU, with EVE Energy targeting BWM offtake most recently with their announced Hungary manufacturing plant.
For CCUS, the NZIA focuses on enhancing injection capacity, a critical step for the permanent sequestration of carbon dioxide (CO2) and lowering atmospheric CO2 levels. While capture technologies at emission sources have matured, the development of injection and storage infrastructure is not advancing at the same pace. The growth in injection capacity, essential for realizing the full potential of CCUS, has been hampered by a slower-than-expected development of storage sites, which remains a significant bottleneck. Recent data indicates the projected CO2 injection capacity will fall short of the NZIA target by about 63% by 2030, reflecting a widening gap between ambitious decarbonization goals and the current pace of infrastructure development.
Read full article
The History of Carbon Dioxide Emissions
By Leandro Vigna, Johannes Friedrich and Thomas DamassaCarbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from human activities are now higher than at any point in our history. In fact, recent data reveals that global CO2 emissions were 182 times higher in 2022 than they were in 1850, around the time the industrial revolution was underway.1
How did we arrive at such an unprecedented and precarious state? To answer this and other key questions, we analyzed the latest emissions data from WRI's Climate Watch platform. In addition to countries' historical emissions trends, we looked at major drivers of increasing emissions, such as population growth, economic development and energy use.
For context, the United Kingdom was the world's largest CO2 emitter in 1850, the first year of available data. Its emissions were nearly six times those of the United States, the second-ranked country at the time. France, Germany and Belgium completed the list of the top five emitters.
As of 2022 — the latest data available — China ranked as the world's largest CO2 emitter, followed by the United States, India, Russia and Japan. However, among the top 10 CO2 emitters, the United States has the highest emission per person. Per capita emissions in the U.S. are double those of China and 8 times those of India.
From 1850 to the mid-20th century, the world experienced near-constant growth in emissions. This was due largely to industrialization and population growth in the United States and Europe. The U.S. became the top CO2 emitter in 1887 and saw the greatest acceleration in emissions over the next nine decades, followed by the United Kingdom and Germany.
This trend was occasionally interrupted by historic events, like the Great Depression in the 1930s and the end of World War II in 1945. But the resulting emissions reductions were only temporary. Countries in North America and Europe continued to dominate global emissions through the first half of the century. As a result, the U.S. and EU remain the largest cumulative emitters to date, bearing responsibility for most CO2 in the atmosphere.
From the 1950s to 1980s, Russia also experienced rapid emissions growth. However, its emissions dropped off significantly with the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
For comparison, the U.K., once the world’s highest emitter, stabilized its total CO2 emissions around 1970.
While the United States kept its place as the top CO2 emitter throughout the 20th century, Asian countries began to emerge onto the scene, led by China.
Since then, China’s economy has continued to expand rapidly — along with its consumption of fossil fuels. China surpassed the U.S. as the world's top CO2 emitter in 2005.
A similar picture emerges when looking at emissions by region. East Asia and the Pacific became the top regional emitter in 2004. By 2022, it was contributing 44% of global CO2 emissions. Europe and Central Asia and North America, the next-highest emitting regions, accounted for 17% and 15% respectively. However, this only represents total annual emissions.
When it comes to per capita emissions, North America, remains the highest by far, followed by Europe and Central Asia. However, East Asia and the Pacific is very close to becoming the second largest per-person emitter.
COVID-19 Caused a Sharp Decrease in Emissions, but It Was Short Lived
The COVID-19 pandemic had a drastic effect on global economies, resulting in the largest annual drop in CO2 emissions in recorded history. In 2020, global emissions fell by 1.5 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide (GtCO2) — an amount roughly equivalent to Japan's CO2 emissions that year. This was twice the size of the 1992 drop following the dissolution of the Soviet Union (the second largest emissions drop in recorded history). Nonetheless, it was temporary. Emissions bounced back quickly as countries resumed their economic activities, with 2021 surpassing 2019 levels.
Debt payments by countries most vulnerable to climate crisis soar
Exclusive: level at highest in more than 30 years, say campaigners, who want ‘rapid and effective’ relief scheme
Debt payments by the 50 countries most vulnerable to the climate crisis have doubled since the start of the coronavirus pandemic and now stand at their highest level in more than three decades, campaigners have warned.
The Debt Justice charity said countries at the highest risk of being affected by global heating were paying 15.5% of government revenues to external creditors – up from less than 8% before Covid-19 and 4% at their lowest recent point in 2010.
Using data from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, the charity said its new report showed the urgent need for comprehensive debt relief so that poor countries could invest in measures to tackle the climate crisis.
“Record levels of debt are crushing the ability of the most vulnerable countries to tackle the climate emergency,” said Heidi Chow, the executive director of Debt Justice.
“We need a rapid and effective debt relief scheme to cancel debts down to a sustainable level. The UK can play its part by legislating to ensure private lenders take part in international debt relief agreements.”
For the 50 countries covered in the report, 38% of their external interest payments are to private lenders, 35% to multilateral institutions, 14% to China and 13% to other governments.
Two rounds of comprehensive debt relief in the late 1990s and mid-2000s resulted in a sharp fall in the debt burdens of poor countries but repayments rose steadily in the 2010s before soaring from 2020 onwards.
Debt Justice cited several reasons for the new debt crisis. One is that the debt suspension scheme agreed by creditors at the start of the pandemic has ended, and the suspended debts are now due to be repaid.
Borrowers have also been hit by a rise in global interest rates from the rock-bottom levels of the 2010s. Also, the strong value of the US dollar has increased the relative size of external debt payments (which are mainly owed in dollars).
A 10-day conference focusing on countries’ ability to finance climate action, including through climate finance and unsustainable debt levels, begins in Bonn on Monday, and Debt Justice said the example of drought-afflicted Zambia underlined the need for action.
After three and a half years of negotiations, the Zambian government has recently sealed a debt restructuring deal with some – but not all – of its private lenders.
Zambia’s debt deal allows for large increases in debt payments if the economy does better than expected, but there is no equivalent clause to reduce payments in the event of a shock, such as a drought. Under the terms of the debt deal, Zambia will have to pay bondholders $450m (£353m) this year.
Tim Jones, the head of policy at Debt Justice, said: “It is outrageous that Zambia’s creditors have demanded a deal where they get huge increases in debt payments if things go well, but no losses if Zambia is hit by disasters such as droughts. The $450m going to bondholders this year is money which could have been used to respond to the national disaster.
“As well as debt cancellation, rich countries urgently need to pay their climate debt by delivering grant-based, adequate climate finance.''
Source
Impact investing is alive and well, say Millennials and Gen Z
Almost 73% of Millennials and Generation Z demand that their investment portfolios include Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria, says a new global study conducted by one of the world’s largest independent financial and asset management organizations.
In the deVere Group poll of more than 800 clients around the world, 72.8% said it was a clear preference in portfolio allocation.
The study shows financial advisors need to adapt their strategies to meet the evolving preferences of younger clients, incorporating ESG criteria into their offerings; investment firms must develop and promote ESG-compliant investment products to attract and retain the growing base of younger investors; regulators need to recognize the importance of ESG investments and ensure that regulations support and encourage sustainable investing practices; and companies need to up their ESG credentials if they want to grow in the long-term.
Millennials and Gen Z’s mindsets have been shaped by significant social and environmental challenges, such as climate change and social inequality. Consequently, they are more inclined to seek investments that reflect their values. The deVere Group’s findings underscore this trend, showing a strong preference for ESG-oriented investments among younger investors.
Clear demand for impact investment products
This shift not only highlights the importance of incorporating ESG criteria into investment strategies but also signals a broader transformation in the financial landscape. Despite the clear demand for ESG investments, there has been a notable backlash, especially in the United States.
Critics argue that impact investing can compromise financial returns by prioritizing social and environmental goals over profitability. Some have labelled ESG initiatives as ‘woke capitalism,’ suggesting that they impose ideological agendas on businesses at the expense of shareholder value.
This backlash has been fuelled by concerns about the subjectivity and inconsistency of ESG metrics. Critics point out that measuring and comparing ESG performance can be challenging, leading to scepticism about the real impact of these initiatives. Additionally, there are fears that ESG investing could lead to overregulation and reduced corporate profitability, ultimately harming investors.
However, the deVere Group’s study suggests that these criticisms are not deterring younger investors.
ESG-conscious companies perform better over the longer term
“The high demand for ESG-oriented portfolios among Millennials and Gen Z indicates a growing recognition that financial performance and ethical considerations are not mutually exclusive,” says Green. “As younger generations seem to appreciate, the argument against ESG investing overlooks a growing body of evidence that suggests companies with strong ESG practices tend to perform better over the long term.”
Numerous studies have shown that sustainable and responsible business practices can lead to improved financial performance, reduced risks, and enhanced corporate reputation. Companies that prioritize ESG factors are often better-positioned to manage risks and capitalize on opportunities related to environmental and social changes.
For example, businesses that implement sustainable practices may reduce operational costs, improve resource efficiency, and enhance resilience against regulatory changes and environmental disruptions.
In addition, ESG criteria help identify and mitigate risks that could impact financial performance. Companies with robust governance practices are less likely to face legal and reputational issues, while those addressing social and environmental concerns can avoid controversies and regulatory penalties.
Read full article
Republican governors gather to attack Biden’s climate agenda
By: Dharna Noor
Governors say president has ‘done nothing but attack American energy’ and urge end to US fossil-fuel rules and regulations
