Books Every Fresher Should Read
Arts
38 views
38 views

Books Every Fresher Should Read

Anonymous - September 19, 2018
France in Fine Fettle
Sports
50 views
50 views

France in Fine Fettle

Anonymous - September 17, 2018
Dive into Brightonian Culture
Arts
50 views
50 views

Dive into Brightonian Culture

Anonymous - September 17, 2018
Oh, baby, baby, did you see Britney at Pride?
Arts
84 views
84 views

Oh, baby, baby, did you see Britney at Pride?

Anastasia Konstantinidou - September 15, 2018
Students’ Union Apologises for ‘Sexist’ Beermats
News
25 views
25 views

Students’ Union Apologises for ‘Sexist’ Beermats

Jessica Hubbard - September 20, 2018
398 Views
3 Comments

The Big Debate: Should Sussex University divest from fossil fuels?

Yes

The University of Sussex is renowned as a progressive institution, however it continues to invest in fossil fuel exploration in direct contradiction with UN and international climate change agreements.

This totals about 5% of its £9.07 million investment fund going towards fossil fuel exploration companies such as Shell, BP and Rio Tinto.

This investment is out of step with the rest of its ethical investment portfolio, which avoids investment in arms and tobacco. This contradiction is found by simply considering the share value of the fossil fuel companies in which Sussex invests.

It is widely acknowledged that for the UN goal of just a 2˚ C increase in global temperatures to be met, at least two thirds of known fossil fuels must stay ‘in the ground’, yet the high value of energy companies share price is based upon the belief that they will, in the future, extract these two thirds of fossil fuels in direct conflict with international agreement.

By investing in fossil fuels, our university is relying on these international aims not being met. To put it simply, if the UN targets on climate change are met, Sussex will lose money on these investments. This is clearly an unethical position for any institution to take.

This decision by our university is clearly wrong from an ethical perspective, but also from a pragmatic, financial one. Even before the drop in the oil price, analysts have warned against investing in companies whose value stems from reserves that cannot be used.

The governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney said in 2014 that ‘the vast majority of fossil fuel reserves are unburnable’; this is referred to as the ‘carbon bubble’.

The Sussex University 2013-14 financial statement read that one of the University’s primary targets is ‘maintaining financial sustainability over the planning period 2013-18’. It is clear that investment in fossil fuels directly contradicts this aim.

Furthermore, it is evident that Sussex could divest without damaging short-term returns. Fossil fuel investment as a proportion of its endowment at 5% is relatively small, so they could be divested easily without damaging overall returns.

In fact, recent analysis by MSCI, the world’s leading stock market index company, indicated that portfolios free of fossil fuel investments outperformed those with assets in fossil fuel companies over the last five years.

Over time, higher and safer returns could be achieved by investing in areas that have genuine opportunity for growth and are not directly causing the climate change crisis.

If the financial arguments for divestment are strong, the ethical case continues to be profound.

The last generation saw the biggest moral issue in the world as apartheid in South Africa; institutions of the West cut their economic ties with companies that propped up the apartheid regime. Today, progressive world leaders including Archbishop Desmond Tutu see divestment from fossil fuels in the same light.

A 2009 UCL study found that, ‘climate change was the biggest global-health threat of the 21st century.’ It is morally wrong for Sussex to continue investing in industries which are contributing to this global health threat.

It is incredibly hypocritical for Sussex to portray itself as a green institution, while continuing to invest in companies that are directly causing climate change.

Finally, it is worth noting that the aim of divestment is not, and cannot be, to bankrupt the fossil fuel industry financially, but instead to cause ‘ethical and political damage’.

Research by Oxford University highlighted that that the damage to the fossil fuel industry will not be felt financially but rather, in terms of reputation.

Some have argued that owning shares allowed institutions to engage with fossil fuel companies, however with regard to the precedent of the 21st century so far, it is clear that this has failed. Unfortunately in an industry worth trillions of pounds, opportunity for engagement does not exist.

Unless there is political pressure, nothing will change. Sussex must join the 400 organisations and institutions, such as the universities of Stanford, Oxford, and California, as well as the world’s biggest sovereign wealth fund and the Rockefeller foundation, that have pulled a combined $2.6 trillion dollars of investments from fossil fuel companies. Sussex must make the right financial and ethical decision, and divest from fossil fuel exploration.

 

Robert O’Leary


 

No

There are two arguments for divestment from fossil fuels, one practical and the other moral. Both fall apart under the weight of basic economics.

The practical argument asserts that, if the University and other institutional investors sell Shell, BP and Rio Tinto stocks, fossil fuel exploration companies will be less able to raise the capital they require.

This needs some explaining. Firms issue stocks, which represent a share in the company’s profits, in order to raise money to sustain and expand their operations. This is known as “equity financing”.

How much money they can get for each share depends on the market price. Therefore, if institutions like the University of Sussex cut their demand, the argument goes, the price should fall. Then, BP et al. will find they have to sell more shares to raise the same amount of capital—this is bad news because it dilutes the ownership of the original shareholders, whose interests the company is supposed to serve.

A pretty solid argument, right? Wrong. Stock prices are impervious to trendy campaigns, because they ultimately depend on “fundamental values,” which investors work out by estimating a company’s future dividends. If stock prices fall at all because of divestment dumping, then unscrupulous speculators will swoop on the undervalued stocks, bidding their prices back up until they are once again in line with the discounted value of future dividends. To summarise, divestment has no influence on a company’s ability to raise capital.

Note also that, as a matter of definition, you cannot sell anything without a buyer. If the University were to divest itself of its dirty holdings, the stocks would not simply disappear into Paul Brunton’s ‘The Void’; no, those stocks would be transferred onto the portfolios of investors with less of an interest in the environment. This matters because shareholders grasp the reigns of power: it is they who elect the Board of Directors. As the World Coal Association points out, divestment will simply cause environmentally conscious investors to lose influence over the fossil fuel industry.

Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest divestment harms the divesting institution. One study by Daniel Fischer, an emeritus professor at the University of Chicago Law School, estimates a portfolio that excludes fossil fuels generates 0.7 percent less return annually. To put this into perspective, given that the University’s portfolio is worth £8 million, and that according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change we can keep using fossil fuels until 2100, the University would lose out on just under £6.5 million if it divested tomorrow. Truly, divestment is all pain and no gain.

What of the moral argument? Proponents might counter by saying that, regardless of whether or not divestment is effective, it is wrong to profit from the activities of the fossil fuel industry. Given that the University of Sussex deliberately excludes arms manufacturers and tobacco companies from its portfolio, this seems a strong argument.

But it is not. As an economist from the Institute for Energy Research argues, “using fossil fuels isn’t immoral in the same way that, say, taking a guy’s wallet would be.” He says: “even the computer models selected by the Obama administration to measure the social cost of carbon don’t say that fossil fuel use should stop—instead they simply conclude that humans ought to cut back on the margin to make the benefits and costs come into synch.”

That is, the problem of fossil fuels is that we are currently using them in excess, so that the benefits they provide are being outweighed by the costs they incur in terms of future global warming. The solution, therefore, is to cut back on our use—but not to stop altogether. Thus, it is by no means a black-and-white issue of morality: while no amount of murder is ok, some amount of fossil fuel burning is.

In short, divestment’s advocates fundamentally misunderstand the nature of the global warming problem. It is not a moral problem but a technical issue of cost-benefit analysis. Furthermore, divestment has no effect on the fossil fuel industry, but does inflict real losses on the portfolios of divesting institutions.

 

Mark Tovey

Image: Wikimedia Commons

Get the best viral stories straight into your inbox!

Don't worry, we don't spam
Books Every Fresher Should Read
Arts
38 views
38 views

Books Every Fresher Should Read

Anonymous - September 19, 2018
France in Fine Fettle
Sports
50 views
50 views

France in Fine Fettle

Anonymous - September 17, 2018
Dive into Brightonian Culture
Arts
50 views
50 views

Dive into Brightonian Culture

Anonymous - September 17, 2018
Oh, baby, baby, did you see Britney at Pride?
Arts
84 views
84 views

Oh, baby, baby, did you see Britney at Pride?

Anastasia Konstantinidou - September 15, 2018
Students’ Union Apologises for ‘Sexist’ Beermats
News
25 views
25 views

Students’ Union Apologises for ‘Sexist’ Beermats

Jessica Hubbard - September 20, 2018

3 Comments

  1. Mark Tovey is right. Disinvestment from fossil fuels is just a rather foolish attempt to occupy a mythical moral high ground. For a start, Sussex University’s investment is rather small in an industry where a typical capital cost for a project will cost £billions; to drill one North Sea oil well costs of the order $50million. This disinvestment therefore is rather useless political posturing. It also ignores the fact that technologies for replacing fossil fuels are either immature or imperfect. Nuclear power may not produce CO2 but it does produce quantities of radioactive waste and the risk of Fukushima type incidents. Renewable energy is promising but requires subsidy to make it competitive – wind and solar power requires gas-fired power stations to supply power when the weather is not right. The disinvestment argument also ignores the role for CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage), an emerging technology that captures CO2 from fossil fuel power plants and stores it underground.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Join the Badger Team

Apply today!

Latest Posts

Books Every Fresher Should Read
Arts
38 views
Arts
38 views

Books Every Fresher Should Read

Anonymous - September 19, 2018

Starting university comes with both exciting but potentially daunting changes, with both moving away from home and studying at degree level posing to be two new challenges.…

INCREDIBLES 2: The Sequel with a Feminist Twist
Film & Theatre
43 views
Film & Theatre
43 views

INCREDIBLES 2: The Sequel with a Feminist Twist

Anonymous - September 18, 2018

One key film in the development of anyone who grew up in the early 2000s was The Incredibles (2004). It’s comedy, vibrancy, and general sense of fun…

France in Fine Fettle
Sports
50 views
Sports
50 views

France in Fine Fettle

Anonymous - September 17, 2018

Prior to the start of the quadrennial tournament this summer, football fans across the world grew sceptical over Russia’s credentials and ability to host the most prestigious…

Dive into Brightonian Culture
Arts
50 views
Arts
50 views

Dive into Brightonian Culture

Anonymous - September 17, 2018

Boredom is impossible when you throw yourself into everything this weird and wonderful city has to offer. The specific and unique cultural wonders of Brighton are indeed…

Oh, baby, baby, did you see Britney at Pride?
Arts
84 views
Arts
84 views

Oh, baby, baby, did you see Britney at Pride?

Anastasia Konstantinidou - September 15, 2018

During this year’s Pride Festival, Brighton had the honour of welcoming international pop star and voice of the early 2000s, Britney Spears, to the main stage. Undoubtedly,…

Union obliterates the debate – unwritten requirement used to shut down free speech debate
Campus News
1140 views1
Campus News
1140 views1

Union obliterates the debate – unwritten requirement used to shut down free speech debate

Jordan Wright - April 27, 2018

Student society Liberate the Debate’s most recent event was cancelled over a lack of compliance with the Students' Union's (USSU) requirement for a neutral chair - a…

Students’ Union Apologises for ‘Sexist’ Beermats
News
25 views
News
25 views

Students’ Union Apologises for ‘Sexist’ Beermats

Jessica Hubbard - September 20, 2018

The University of Sussex Students' Union (USSU) has apologised after 'sexist' beermats were found in Dig-In Boxes in Freshers' Welcome Bags. The beermats were provided by Brush…

Sussex Lecturer Accused of Making Transphobic Comments Ahead of Brighton Trans Pride 2018
News
88 views1
News
88 views1

Sussex Lecturer Accused of Making Transphobic Comments Ahead of Brighton Trans Pride 2018

Jessica Hubbard - September 15, 2018

Kathleen Stock, a philosophy Lecturer at Sussex, was accused of making transphobic comments in July 2018. This followed various interviews and blog posts by Stock. Stock told…

Welcome 2018 Freshers!
Campus News
91 views
Campus News
91 views

Welcome 2018 Freshers!

Billie-Jean Johnson - September 15, 2018

Ah, Freshers. You’ve no idea the amazing year you have ahead of you! As you read this now, you’ve probably met your flatmates and maybe even met…

A conversation with Kathleen Stock on Transgender Identity
Opinion
86 views
Opinion
86 views

A conversation with Kathleen Stock on Transgender Identity

Jessica Hubbard - September 15, 2018

Kathleen Stock, a philosophy lecturer at Sussex University, met with controversy after criticising the government’s reform of the Gender Recognition Act (2004). The amendment would ‘de-medicalise’ the…

Verve Couture – Musicality, kitsch & ignition: the beginning of a series
Arts
397 views
Arts
397 views

Verve Couture – Musicality, kitsch & ignition: the beginning of a series

Ricardo Reverón Blanco - June 17, 2018

Pictured: Zac Black At Proud Cabaret audiences were spellbound as if at night at the circus, yet this was not like Angela Carter’s magical realist novel; Verve…

Fleabag on stage at The Old Market – review
Arts
399 views
Arts
399 views

Fleabag on stage at The Old Market – review

Florence Dutton - June 11, 2018

[caption id="attachment_35513" align="alignnone" width="2400"] Fleabag at Soho Theatre[/caption] Last Monday at 8pm at Brighton’s The Old Market, I sat myself down in my theatre seat eagerly awaiting…

Fleabag preview
Arts
374 views
Arts
374 views

Fleabag preview

Florence Dutton - June 2, 2018

[caption id="attachment_35513" align="alignnone" width="2400"] Fleabag at Soho Theatre[/caption] Following the mass success of the Bafta award-winning BBC Series, DryWrite and Soho Theatre are about to hit the…

Brighton Festival: Ezra Furman at the Dome
Arts
433 views
Arts
433 views

Brighton Festival: Ezra Furman at the Dome

Georgia Grace - June 1, 2018

Having completed my final semester of university with modules on punk history and queer arts, it was fitting that I rounded off my end-of-assessment celebrations by attending…

Arts
449 views

The Tempest review

Georgia Grace - May 30, 2018

As the sun begins to set over Hove Green, tinnies of Red Stripe are cracked open, tartan blankets are strewn, and families tuck into their picnic hampers.…

A Glass Half Empty review
Arts
390 views
Arts
390 views

A Glass Half Empty review

Georgia Grace - May 27, 2018

For those of us coming to the end of another year of university study, the prospect of careers, marriages and babies may seem a long way off.…

DollyWould at The Old Market review
Arts
366 views
Arts
366 views

DollyWould at The Old Market review

Alex Hutson - May 27, 2018

Sh!t Theatre’s DollyWould is a hilarious, thoughtful and experimental performance piece. The award winning show has the Sh!t Theatre duo integrating comedy, storytelling, personal experience and music.…

UCU Launch Petition to End the ‘Hostile Environment’ at Sussex
Campus News
560 views
Campus News
560 views

UCU Launch Petition to End the ‘Hostile Environment’ at Sussex

Billie-Jean Johnson - May 26, 2018

The Sussex branch of the University and College Union (UCU) has launched a petition calling for Vice-Chancellor Adam Tickell to end the 'hostile environment' at Sussex. The…

Arts
315 views

Shakespeare in the sun – The Tempest preview

Georgia Grace - May 24, 2018

In a world of dystopian King Lears and female Hamlets, Shakespeare’s classics are constantly being reimagined for the modern day. There’s something oddly refreshing then about the…

Review: Nick Cave Double Bill at The Old Market (TOM’s Film Club)
Arts
923 views
Arts
923 views

Review: Nick Cave Double Bill at The Old Market (TOM’s Film Club)

Sophie Coppenhall - May 23, 2018

What a phenomenal contrast these two films present when watched side-by-side. In essence, together they are capable of tracing inner and outer metamorphoses of their subjects. The…

Dollywould at The Old Market preview
Arts
375 views
Arts
375 views

Dollywould at The Old Market preview

Alex Hutson - May 22, 2018

From the 22nd May - 25th May 2018 DollyWould will be showing at The Old Market. An exciting new show, presented by Sh!t Theatre, who won the…