House votes to block 'woke' Biden plan pushing retirement planners to invest in ESG in 401ks
The House voted Tuesday to quash a Biden administration rule that allows private retirement funds to consider environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors in investment decisions.
A resolution of disapproval passed 216 to 204, with one Democrat, Rep. Jared Golden of Maine, voting with Republicans to block the rule.
The resolution was put forth by Rep. Andy Barr, R-Ky., and a similar Senate bill is being brought forth by Sen. Mike Braun, R-Ind., and has the approval of at least one Senate Democrat - Joe Manchin.
Under the Congressional Review Act Braun and Barr could force a vote on their resolution to nullify the DOL rule. The resolution only requires a simple majority to pass and be sent to the president, but he can then veto it.
If the resolution makes it to President Biden's desk, he would be expected to use his first veto of the presidency on it.
The Department of Labor unveiled the rule in November that allowed retirement managers to consider ESG factors, replacing a rule that stipulated these managers focus on getting the best returns for the 152 million Americans who invest with the ERISA retirement plan.
The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 defines a strict fiduciary responsibility almost all pension plan professionals have long adhered to.
ERISA covers most employer-sponsored retirement plans, managing $11.7 trillion in assets.
The White House has said that the rule, which would put back in place a provision that Trump rolled back in favor of order money managers to focus strictly on returns, is 'not a mandate.'
'It does not require any fiduciary to make investment decisions based solely on ESG factors,' the White House Office of Management and Budget said. 'The rule simply makes sure that retirement plan fiduciaries must engage in a risk and return analysis of their investment decisions and recognizes that these factors can be relevant to that analysis.'
Democrats argue that the rule frees up retirement managers to make investment decisions that might be less profitable in the short term but more profitable in the long term as clean energy and sustainability projects become more lucrative.
As of this writing, the S&P 500 ESG index is down 9.5 percent over the past year but up 10.5 percent over 10 years. The S&P 500 Energy index is up 24.1 percent over one year but only up 1.2 percent over 10 years.
A number of ESG ratings firms are in charge of deeming the good and the bad, and some critics say that without proper measurement the practice can amount to a 'marketing scheme.'
For example, Sustainalytics' ESG risk rating gives Vital Farms, a pasture-raised egg and butter company that preaches its commitment to 'conscious capitalism' and 'ethically produced food from family farms', a worse score (42.8)than four defense contractors - Northrup Grumman, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, and Boeing (28.4 to 35).
******************************************************
Exploding the Cheap Offshore Wind Fantasy
The energy industry lobbyists are out with their begging bowls demanding more subsidies to deliver more “investment” in renewables in general and offshore wind in particular. It looks like the developers cannot deliver the wind farms they promised at “record low” strike prices of £37.35/MWh and claims of wind being nine times cheaper than gas were just so much hot air.
The Government’s predictions of decreasing costs of offshore wind were based on continued low commodity prices, the availability of cheap money and unrealistic assumptions about improved operational performance. It’s not looking likely that any of their operational improvement targets will be met.
In addition, the costs of raw materials and energy have gone up dramatically and interest rates have risen sharply pushing up the costs of capital. These factors have had a dramatic effect on the price of offshore wind.
Who would have guessed that a highly mineral intensive and capital intensive source of energy would be very susceptible to commodity and energy price inflation and rising interest rates?
The work of Professor Simon Michaux has shown that the prices of critical minerals are going to continue to rise as demand increases and ore grades for new discoveries fall leading to higher processing costs.
It is beginning to look like the offshore wind power bubble has burst and the fantasy of ever cheaper renewables has come to an end.
https://davidturver.substack.com/p/exploding-the-cheap-offshore-wind-power-fantasy
*****************************************************The iron triangle of energy realism
Possibly the most powerful argument against the quest for Net Zero can be briefly stated using the Iron Triangle of Power Supply, bearing in mind the logic of testing (or falsification, as Karl Popper called it).
The three aspects of the triangle are:
Continuous input of power to the grid. Adequate input is required all the time, not just most of the time or almost all the time.
Wind droughts and especially windless nights break the continuity of input from wind power when there is no solar.
There is effectively no storage to bridge the gaps (despite all the talk about batteries and pumped hydro).
Consequently, the proposition that the grid can run on wind and solar power is falsified (ruled out) and there is no justification for the decision to contaminate the grid with subsidised and mandated intermittent input from environmentally ruinous wind and solar facilities.
In defiance of the Iron Triangle, the official position is that we just need more installed wind and solar facilities, and more storage. That is stated by the Prime Minister, the Climate and Energy Minister, and the CEO of the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO). It is dutifully repeated by all the usual suspects in the ABC and the mainstream media, although over a hundred leading journalists have received the briefing notes from the Energy Realists of Australia over the last three years.
The briefing notes were compiled by an elite squad of almost-dead white males and Ben Beattie, recruited to work with The Energy Realists of Australia – joking, of course.
What is the point of more wind and solar capacity?
Wind and solar can displace coal (to a point that we have almost reached), but they can’t replace it.
The rate of exit from coal is not accelerated by increasing penetration on good wind and solar days, it is limited by the lowest level of output on nights with little or no wind, as a convoy travels at the speed of the slowest vessel, the water penetrates the levee at the lowest point, a chain is only as strong as the weakest link and stock get out of the yard through gaps in the fence even if the rest of the fence is built to the sky.
What storage?
Batteries can be dismissed very quickly by comparing the capacity of the biggest batteries in the world with the amount of power required to get through a windless night. Journalists don’t help by reporting the capacity of batteries in MW instead of MWh (megawatt hours). Scribes who report MW instead of MWh should be promptly escorted from the building with their personal effects thrown into the street after them.
More words are required to describe the inadequacy of pumped hydro because there are many large schemes around the world, and there are some small ones in Australia already. However, I am not aware of any large scheme that runs on wind and solar alone. The largest facility at Bath, Philadelphia (US), runs entirely on coal and nuclear power to enable those plants to run continuously at their optimum output.
Conclusion
We need to keep enough conventional power, mostly coal power, to meet the highest levels of demand at dinner times in high summer and deep winter, until we have nuclear power on deck.
A note on the logic of testing that was mentioned at the start of this piece. It has gone missing in science (on walkabout?) since it became generally accepted in the 1960s that Thomas Kuhn’s paradigm theory (science by consensus) had superseded Karl Popper’s critical approach (forming a preference after rigorous testing and comparison of rival theories.) That is an important topic for another day.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/02/the-iron-triangle-of-energy-realism/
*******************************************************One in two Australian companies found to overstate green credentials in regulator review
More than one in two companies surveyed by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission were found to have overstated their clean or green credentials in a move which may expose them to legal action.
The ACCC said it was concerned at the level of greenwashing identified in a blitz of the advertising and packaging of 247 businesses.
The regulator found 57 per cent of the companies reviewed made inflated or wrong claims about their environmental impact, with the cosmetics, clothing, footwear, and food and drink industries the worst offenders.
ACCC deputy chair Catriona Lowe said these companies may find themselves the target of legal action or infringement notices to correct their statements or face fines.
Ms Lowe said the regulator would not tolerate greenwashing that wrongly gave the impression a product was more environmentally sensitive than it was.
“We’re seeing businesses not providing evidence of the claims they’re making,” she said.
“We are increasingly seeing consumers making their purchasing decision on the basis of the green credentials for their goods and services.”
Ms Lowe said the ACCC would not just stop at claims made on products, but would seek to scrutinise claims made by businesses around offsetting emissions or announcing environmental targets “without clear plans of how they’re going to achieve those goals”.
“It is possible of course that some of the claims that are being made are able to be verified but of course we’re standing in the shoes of the consumer,” she said.
The ACCC’s planned crackdown comes days after the Australian Securities and Investments Commission handed out court action against superannuation giant Mercer, over its green claims.
Australia's best business newsletter. Get the edge with AM and PM briefings, plus breaking news alerts in your inbox.
Ms Lowe said the ACCC would take a firm line on companies that misled or deceived consumers around their green credentials, warning fines could be levied into the millions.
“We will certainly be undertaking our assessment and thinking carefully about the impact on consumers and the gain that may have been obtained by making the false claims relative to the investment required to make the claim true,” she said.
A report by the ACCC notes the regulator will conduct further analysis of these issues and is planning to produce and release “economy-wide guidance material, as well as targeted guidance for specific sectors” outlining expectations around green claims.
Ms Lowe said the regulator was concerned about companies making claims packaging could be recycled when those products could not be accepted by most recyclers.
An ACCC spokeswoman said the regulator was engaging with “relevant industry participants” in a bid to ensure clarity and transparency about handling soft plastics recycling after the REDcycle scheme collapsed.
The NSW Supreme Court ordered on Monday to wind up the REDcycle company after finding it was hopelessly insolvent and failed to pay fees for storing thousands of tonnes of soft plastics around the country.
“The ACCC is conscious of the significant financial and environmental impacts if food and grocery suppliers were to dispose of existing packaging containing the REDcycle logo and Australasian Recycling Label (ARL) ‘return to store’ labelling in landfill,” the spokeswoman said.
“We have engaged with industry participants about taking all reasonable alternative steps to ensure that representations to consumers are accurate. For example, this could be achieved through information provided in their other advertising and marketing.”
***************************************
My other blogs. Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM )
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*****************************************
Jim Hansen and his twin
No comments:
Post a Comment