The Great Reset, Climate Blueprint, ESG, Building Back Better, Green New Deal, Net-zero Emissions or the Circular Economy—Pick One!

As the Covid-19 pandemic closes in on its zenith with the forthcoming vaccine(s) to immunize us, most are hoping it will allow a return to a normal life but don’t count on it!  It seems when we read an MSM article about the pandemic they frequently mention the next major upcoming global pandemic is the “climate change crisis”.  If we don’t reduce our emissions the planet will die and mankind will be doomed!  The hope, we are told by many, is to choose one of the plans proposed by those ENGO surviving with the tax dollars they receive or the philanthropy of billionaires like the Bloomberg’s, Bezos’s or George Soros’s of the world.

It is becoming evident the influences of the billionaires and the cash they hand out to ENGO pushing their agenda is gaining much traction with not only politicians but financial institutions such as Canada’s largest bank; the RBC. The RBC recently launched their “Climate Blueprint” (3 pages) and on October 7, 2020 put out a YouTube video to tell the world they will “Increase our sourcing of electricity from renewable and non-emitting sources to 100% by 2025”.  One wonders; will they put solar panels on their 1209 branches and install batteries to back them up?  Supplying ATMs with renewable energy will also be tricky and expensive and those additional costs will result in an increase in bank fees.  Will Brinks be required to use EV trucks to deliver cash to their branches and ATMS?

RBC’s three page “Climate Blueprint” includes a message from their CEO, David McKay promising: “$100 billion in sustainable financing by 2025.” The “$100 billion” would represent approximately 16% of their total loan portfolio as of October 31, 2019 and 51% of their wholesale loan portfolio. The “Blueprint” highlights nine (9) organizations RBC “partner with” which are: UNEP Finance Initiative, the PRI (Principles for Responsible Investment), The Green Bond Principles, TCFD (Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures) CDP (a not-for-profit charity), CPLC (Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition), Smart Prosperity, the Business Renewable Centre and the Climate Bonds Initiative (CBI).

It appears the CPLC was created at the COP 21 Paris Accord in 2015 and a picture on their website indicates a strong Canadian presence with at least four Premiers, the Federal Minister of the Environment and Climate Change and Glen Murray, then Ontario’s Minister of the Environment and Climate Change in the picture. 

The Climate Bond Initiative’s (CBI) purpose is summed up as “a hugely ambitious agenda to mobilize bond markets for climate change solutions.” The CBI was a UK creation and has a large Advisory Panel from many countries but only one is from Canada. That individual is Cynthia Williams the Osler Chair in Business Law, Osgoode Hall Law School for the Canada Climate Law Initiative. The latter is out of the University of British Columbia and York University.  Williams authored and in September 2020 released a report titled: “Troubling Incrementalism’: Is the Canadian Pension Plan Fund Doing Enough to Advance the Transition to a Low-carbon Economy?“. 

Williams report is sprinkled with words we continue to hear from other lawyers such as Stewart Elgie of Smart Prosperity including; “Building Back Better, ESG, zero emissions by 2050, circular economy as well as wind and solar energy”!  Needless to say, MS. Williams is critical of CPP stating; “CPP Investment’s actions could have the effect of contributing to Canada’s failure to meet its international and domestic commitments to transition to a low-carbon economy.” After itemizing some of CPPI’s investment of approximately $10/12 billion (about 3% of total assets) made in the oil and gas sector Williams states the following in a Summary: “There is much of concern in this pattern of investments from a climate change perspective. These are all investments in expanding fossil fuel technologies and producing more oil and gas at a time when every scientifically credible analysis shows the world needs to be transitioning away from oil and gas.”

It seems in the minds of someone with a law degree and operating in the public sector, they are also blessed with talents in both science and economics but fail to examine opposing scientific analysis. As a lawyer one would assume Williams is mindful, in a court of law there are both the plaintiff and the defendant!  Her opinion is judgmental suggesting we defendants have no “scientifically credible analysis”!

Williams was paid $171,501 by York University in 2019. She presumably has an indexed government pension plan that will reward her nicely when she retires.  To top that off her pension is taxpayer guaranteed in the event her plan is unable to meet its commitments! Despite her presumably knowing that, she thinks CPP investments, whose maximum payout to millions of Canadians is $14,110 annually should only be invested in zero emission companies in a “circular economy”! The hypocrisy of those pushing the net-zero emissions economy is mind blowing and indicates they truly believe they are the “elites” of our society!

Author: parkergallantenergyperspectivesblog

Retired international banker.

7 thoughts on “The Great Reset, Climate Blueprint, ESG, Building Back Better, Green New Deal, Net-zero Emissions or the Circular Economy—Pick One!”

  1. I want to rescind my bi-weekly CPP contributions and invest on my own free will. One thing’s for sure, my money would stay in Canada and certainly not be invested in a Globalist green fund meant to usurp Western wealth and well being. #GreatReset #GreenNewDeal #Agenda2030 #GreatLeapForward!!!

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Steve, I share your concern. How many other Canadians would weigh in on this issue if they were well informed?
      Here’s an article written with a focus on Ontario, where the CPPIB has invested 6.1 billion(U.S.) of Ontario workers’ money. (See the FP article below for details)

      Will these industrial scale wind projects in Ontario become ‘stranded assets’ before their long term contracts run out? In the case of the largest project in Ontario, there’s another 15 years of subsidies, losses, and potential liability for residents being harmed.
      “On the Ontario grid you drive up emissions by installing wind unless you curtail it or export the power at low prices. That effectively makes wind turbines a stranded asset and makes the economic case for wind suspect.”
      How Canadian pension’s US$6.1 billion bet on Pattern Energy fits with ‘energy transition’ investing


  2. All of these initiatives, while harmful to Canada’s resource economy and costly to Canadian consumers, amount to “pushing on a rope” at the global level. The continuing growth in the world population and economy in the period to 2019 was relentlessly driving up demand for fossil fuels and the related emissions. The coronavirus, however welcome to the climate radicals, will be temporary in its effects. I note that the green lobby is filling the news with predictions that the global economy will not only be on a lower track of growth for years, but also will reach a “peak” in oil and gas demand within a decade. This is nonsense. There is an immense amount of pent up demand and oil and gas prices are low. That adds up to a resumption of rapid growth. The only way to avoid that is for governments to “engineer” a permanent recession that will harm the livelihoods and prospects of billions of people. There is a single index that one can watch to show how fruitless the environmentalists’ goals are at the global level- the “motorization rate” – the number of new cars sold per thousand people – in the developing countries and especially in Asia. New personal car sales increased from 45 million to 64 million globally from 2005 to 2019, and all of that growth was in Asia. With the resumption of economic activity, personal vehicle sales will skyrocket and they won’t be EVs! The growth in commercial vehicle sales will be even faster. Canada’s banks are shooting themselves and us in the foot, to no effect in terms of global emissions growth.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Well said Parker. Why do these people “think” we have to fix the clouds? I can only guess.

    Cynthia Williams is yet another of our elites suffering from groupthink. They have a completely exaggerated and questionable view of the risk “climate change” poses. If a dinosaur killer asteroid is coming our way, nothing matters except preventing the collision. It seems Cynthia Williams and her ilk feel the same about man-made global warming (climate change), properly described as Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).

    The carbon dioxide (CO2) warming effect is demonstrated in simple, static, homogeneous systems such as Tyndall’s bottles of glass, but in a complex, heterogeneous, dynamic system like the real world’s climate they have yet to determine its significance. Although there are thousands of academic studies supporting AGW’s existence there is yet one confirming its magnitude. AGW attribution studies are not evidence…all they do is suggest the possibility that the longwave infrared resonance of the CO2 molecule perhaps influences the planet’s surface temperature.

    CO2 is a radiatively active molecule, it resonates at an amplitude centered on 15 microns of the electromagnetic scale. As a result the planet’s atmospheric energy balance is influenced by the additional CO2 of fossil fuel combustion…common knowledge. How much? To what effect? There is no evidence. Out of thousands of papers regarding AGW’s influence there is yet one confirming its magnitude. There is no experimental support.

    The mean temperature significance of fossil fuel CO2 is likely close to zero, which is why so little work has been done to elucidate the conditions that give rise to a damage threshold and how little empirical information has been generated about its magnitude.

    Lately “extreme” weather is used by mainstream media to sell the fossil fuel combustion greenhouse gas “scare”. If extreme events are more frequent as claimed, it’s likely due to our super abundance and residing in areas where we are more exposed….flood plains, tornado prone areas that used to be farmland and residential suburban development within fire prone temperate, boreal and mountain forests.

    Along with Cynthia Williams our academic, governing, corporate and media elites all perceive Al Gore’s fictional documentary “An Inconvenient Truth” as scientific fact. Marshall McLuhan said the medium is the message. Noam Chomsky says the media manufactures consent. It’s hard not to agree. The acceptance of the Catastrophic AGW concept has been headline driven. A certain amount of energy is kept in the climate system by the man-made GHG’s, other than projections from experimental numerical models there is no evidence of this energy’s contribution (the human fingerprint) to climate change.

    A computer simulation of the climate, as defined (a coupled, non-linear chaotic system), is virtually impossible. That the observed fluctuations in weather activity, temperature, sea level and ice volume are within the boundaries of natural variability is scientifically acceptable. The correlation between rising CO2 levels and the mean temperature increase of plus/minus 1 degree Celsius during the last 150 years is not evidence of human activity as the cause, to say so, is conjecture and a claim beyond what the data allows.

    However, they argue I’m not a climate scientist and appeal to “authority”. This would be a small group of very influential and funded academics who find it necessary to infer large climate change from an effect estimated in tenths of a degree.

    What a fascinating mess.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: