Category: Climate Risk (Page 2 of 3)

WCM image of the week for September 21, 2021

Climate change imposes an indiscriminate tax on everyone. Increasing fire, flood, tornadoes, hurricanes, and coastal inundation are destroying private property and public infrastructure at an ever-increasing rate. But, there is no “they” to pay for it. We are they. And, it is not just the damage to places and things. There is a human cost in terms of lives and livelihoods, but also in the labor of countless emergency service workers, utility workers, etc. who go to work when a blaze needs to be battled or families need to be rescued from the roofs of their homes. People who do the brave work do not come cost-free. Even if they are volunteers they need resources to do their jobs. Looking locally, capital is being consumed in the tens, perhaps hundreds of billions of dollars here in the US not to create the next bridge, highway, dam or sewer, but to repair or replace what was already there. The cost of adaptation and resilience to climate change will accelerate away from us as well if the trajectory of change continues as it has. There is no path to higher global temperatures that does not include a tremendous economic burden falling on the backs of the global citizenry. We can pay the tax when the bill comes due, or we can seek out more capital-efficient ways to mitigate climate change and climate risk before it gets worse, including pricing that risk properly in the capital markets.

WCM Chart of the Week for August 18, 2021

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released the Working Group I contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report which will arrive fully in 2022. Among the reaffirmed findings in the report is that we are already most of the way to the 1.5 degree Celsius threshold over pre-industrial global temperatures where climate-related damage becomes more widespread and harder to turn back. We wanted to examine what that means in practical human terms. According to NOAA (R. Lindsey, Jan. 25, 2021), we have seen 8 – 9 inches of sea level rise since 1880, and in some ocean basins nearly that much just since the beginning of the satellite record. Taking the IPCC findings into account and with NOAA’s own models, sea level could rise another foot over 2000 levels by the end of the century. The two images provided are from NOAA’s Sea Level Rise Viewer. The first is a view of the heart of the Northeast Corridor from Long Island Sound down to the Chesapeake at the current “Mean Higher High Water”. The principal shading illustrates the population vulnerability to sea level rise. The second is the same view under a 1 foot MHHW scenario. Note the amount of coastal inundation, particularly around high density and vulnerable populations. The amount of property and population at risk in human and dollar terms is staggering in this relatively concentrated area, and has implications for municipalities, commercial real estate, infrastructure, corporations, maritime interests, tourism, and residential neighborhoods, and all the supply chains and institutions elsewhere like banks and insurance companies that are exposed to that risk. Smart investing requires thinking about mitigation, resiliency, and adaptation, hallmarks of ESG investing and increasingly becoming part of mainstream investing.

WCM ESG Week — Theme 5: Climate Justice

Climate change has pervasive and profound consequences for our planet, economies, and cultures. The systems of climate do not discriminate across racial lines, income levels, or geographical locations, nor abide by governmental policies and regulations. But it is important to draw a distinction between the worsening storms, sea level rise, drought, fire, ice loss and mass extinctions that occur on a planetary level, and the injustice of more prosperous businesses, communities, and nations driving that climate change and imperiling already marginalized communities at home and abroad. We lay witness to social, economic, public health, and environmental effects disproportionately impacting vulnerable and underprivileged populations. We acknowledge these inequalities of influence, largely on minority and low-income communities, as climate or environmental (in)justice.

Continued increases in global warming contribute to already existing challenges in eradicating poverty, reducing inequalities, and ensuring healthy individuals and ecosystems due to higher food insecurity and reduced water supply, community income losses, lost livelihood opportunities, adverse health impacts and population displacements, and increased competition for arable land. Poverty and disadvantage are projected to rise in some populations due to increased global warming. Some of the most severe impacts of climate change and a lack of climate resiliency are expected to be felt among agricultural and coastal dependent regions, indigenous people, children and the elderly, poor laborers and urban dwellers in African cities, and people and ecosystems in the Arctic and Small Island Developing States (SIDS), dryland regions, and least developed countries (IPCC, 2018).

For example, land degradation refers to the deterioration of soil quality due to both natural and anthropic impacts, accelerated during the 20th and 21st centuries as a result of increasing agricultural and livestock production, urbanization, deforestation, and extreme weather events such as droughts and coastal surges. Land degradation occurs over 25 percent of the Earth’s ice-free land area, affecting 1.3 to 3.2 billion people, the majority of whom are living in poverty in developing countries (IPCC). Land degradation and climate change, both independently and in conjunction, have severe consequences for natural resource-based regions including higher threats of malnutrition, increased risk of water and food borne diseases resulting from poor hygiene and lack of clean water, increased respiratory diseases due to atmospheric dust from wind erosion and air pollutants, and spread of infectious diseases as communities experience lack of food production and are forced to migrate to more hospitable regions (WHO, 2020).

Furthermore, increasing global warming intensifies the exposure of small islands, low-lying coastal areas, and deltas to the hazards related to rising sea levels including increased saltwater intrusion, flooding and damage to infrastructure, loss of coastal resources, and a reduction in the productivity of fisheries and aquaculture. One global fishery model projected a decrease in global annual catch for marine fisheries of about 1.5 million tonnes for 1.5°C of global warming, with a loss of more than 3 million tonnes for 2°C of global warming. The risk of irreversible loss of many marine and coastal ecosystems escalates with global warming, specifically coral reefs which are projected to decline by a further 70–90% at 1.5°C and larger losses (>99%) at 2°C warming. Furthermore, changing ocean biochemistry due to increased acidification adversely affects marine species’ physiology, survivorship, habitat, reproduction, and disease incidence, and increases the risk of invasive species. Risks from vector-borne diseases, such as malaria and dengue fever, are projected to increase with warming in addition to potential shifts in their geographic range (IPCC, 2018).

In addition to global warming and changing ecosystems, global industries also contribute to environmental injustice. Oil exploration and drilling fields have produced severe impacts on indigenous peoples and vulnerable communities around the world who depend on healthy ecosystems to survive. Oil drilling in the Amazon basin spurs deforestation of the land, introduces toxic pollutants impacting indigenous peoples’ health and wellness, and allows for hazardous working conditions for local employees. Incursions into indigenous lands are frequent and have been recorded in more than 20 communities in at least 10 countries including the United States, Australia, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, and Peru (UN, 2021).

Closer to home, labor groups in Louisiana have reported dangerous working conditions in oil refineries, as they emit numerous types of toxic chemicals including benzene, formaldehyde, hydrogen sulfide, sulfur dioxide, and sulfuric acid. Oil production companies, although permitted to release these chemicals to the environment in designated amounts, are plagued with accidental spills and leaks often exceeding the allowable volumes. This toxic contamination puts nearby communities at high risk of environmental health problems. Additionally, in regions where fracking is used as a method to extract shale gas, such as Pennsylvania, surface and well waters are continually contaminated with the toxic chemicals used in fracking fluids and petrochemical run-off including salts, heavy metals, and radioactive chemicals. Oil pollution contaminates both drinking and agricultural water supplies for livestock and irrigation, which has been found to be particularly detrimental in the Melut Basin of South Sudan in Africa (UN, 2021).

Oil refineries and other chemical releasing facilities are predominantly surrounded by minority populations. Communities located in close proximity to such facilities, coined “fenceline communities”, are exposed to various kinds of toxic pollution, and in the U.S. are disproportionately composed of African Americans, Latinos, and low-income groups. The highest concentration of U.S. oil refineries is located in the Gulf of Mexico, with one of the most notable fenceline communities residing outside Houston, Texas. Three quarters of the city’s residents live within three miles of the 191 hazardous chemical facilities and are known to be at higher risk for heart disease, cancer, and respiratory problems related to poor air quality, such as asthma and emphysema. The combination of lack of access to healthy food, high poverty rates, and increased exposure to deadly contaminants makes for a serious problem in fenceline vulnerable communities, especially African Americans. Fenceline communities are found in many states across the U.S. as well as globally (UN, 2021).

We have also observed a trebling effect with fenceline and other economically disadvantaged communities when climate change and environmental pollution collide. Storm surge, inundation, flood, and wind often cause this pollution to breach containment and further toxify neighborhoods and cities, waterways and water supplies, and farmable land as with Hurricane Katrina in 2005in Louisiana and Harvey and Imelda in 2017 and 2019 in Houston, TX. These types of climate-related disruptions cause communities to fracture as vulnerable people move to seek cleaner, safer, healthier, more sustaining situations. This destabilization can lead to diasporas, conflict and even war, as well as the disintegration of cultures and art. From port cities to open grasslands to the frozen tundra, the ability to be resilient and adaptive in the face of these environmental and climate forces requires access to capital and opportunity. Even better, developed economies taking their collective foot off the literal and figurative gas pedal will help to manage down the risk and give these at-risk communities a shot at better outcomes. Climate justice involves doing both. Less extractive and more regenerative. Systems that work on a global level for the benefit and welfare of all.

Climate justice gives us the words and concepts to frame and then address countless intertwined challenges that affect access to nutrition, access to clean water, access to education, access to economic opportunity, an expectation of peace and prosperity, and the ability and in fact the right to care for our collective legacy and culture and gift it to the generations that come after. Our final discussion for ESG Week is with Professor Warren Senders of the New England Conservatory of Music. We explore the interconnectedness of climate science, indigenous wisdom, and world art and culture, and our collective responsibility to care for the planet we have, and to care equitably and justly for the people on it.

https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/climate-change-land-degradation-and-desertification

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2019/06/SR15_Full_Report_High_Res.pdf

https://wedocs.unep.org/xmlui/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/35417/EJIPP.pdf

WCM ESG Week — Theme 1: Regenerative Agriculture

Between 21–37% of all greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are attributable to our global food system, from agriculture and land use, storage, transport, packaging, processing, retail, and consumption. As increased GHG levels further accelerate climate change, warming over land is occurring at a rate faster than the global average, with observable impacts on the land system. Traditional agricultural practices and arable land misuse have contributed to the degradation of roughly 75% of the Earth’s land area.

In addition to land degradation, the European Commission Joint Research Centre estimates 36 billion tons of soil is lost every year (Moyer, 2020). Depletion of soil nutrients, due to various natural and anthropogenic activities, affects people and ecosystems throughout the planet, and is both influenced by climate change and contributes to it. Warmer temperatures and changing precipitation patterns alter the beginning and end of growing seasons, contribute to regional crop yield reductions, reduce freshwater availability, and push biodiversity toward an unforgiving cliff (IPCC, 2019).

Recent studies indicate we are facing a biodiversity catastrophe, with 1,000,000 species at significant risk of extinction due to the climate crisis and habitat loss (Moyer, 2020). The frequency and intensity of extreme weather and climate events have also increased due to global warming and will continue to increase under medium and high emission scenarios (IPCC, 2019).

That is not to say that all hope is lost. Amid an abundance of dismal facts and figures, our species maintains both the responsibility and the capacity to discontinue extractive and degrading land use practices and implement large scale restorative and sustainable processes. Regenerative agriculture is a systems approach to farming that builds soil health by supporting biodiversity to return carbon and nutrients back to the soil. It is a holistic land use practice that can involve diversifying crop rotations, planting cover crops, green manures and perennials, retaining crop residues, using natural sources of fertilizer such as compost, employing highly managed grazing and/or integrating crops and livestock, reducing tillage frequency and depth, and eliminating synthetic chemicals (Moyer, 2020). Agro-ecology systems (systems that incorporate natural ecological processes with agricultural production) have many rewards to society, including increases in local income and nutrition, as well as a drawdown of CO₂ back into the soil (Chainlink, 2021). Regenerative agriculture focuses not only on reducing the carbon footprint and ensuring sustainability, but also on going beyond conventional practices to reverse the effects and progression of climate change. Indigenous and local ecological knowledge often contribute to the development of restorative agricultural practices and can enhance resilience against climate change and reduce land misuse (Moyer, 2020).

Tune into our Wilde Capital Management ESG Week podcast: Day 1 – Regenerative Agriculture to learn more. In this interview with Marc Ian Barasch, author and filmmaker, we discuss the ideas behind applying regenerative principles to the business of agriculture, providing for greater abundance for a population of nearly 8 billion people, caring for climate, water, and other systems that are failing as we speak.

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/4/2020/07/03_Technical-Summary-TS_V2.pdf

https://rodaleinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/Rodale-Soil-Carbon-White-Paper_v11-compressed.pdf

https://blog.chain.link/reversing-climate-change-how-hybrid-smart-contracts-incentivize-regenerative-agriculture/

The clock is ticking. What does that mean for investors?

Another trip around the sun leading to another Earth Day, our second of the pandemic. Amid all the trauma, last year we got a brief glimpse of what hitting the pause button on our use and overuse of the planet would yield. Fresher air, cleaner water, wildlife in the canals and in the streets. We conducted an unintended (and unwanted), all-in global experiment, and graphically demonstrated that the environment does have the capacity to respond to behavioral change on the part of humans.

Stopping everything isn’t the answer. But changing everything could be. This planetary test case provided strong evidence against the argument that global systems are too vast and too complex, and changing human patterns wouldn’t result in any sort of improvement. A change from extractive to regenerative processes in food, energy, materials, housing, and transportation among others not only can help address the challenge of sufficiency but also manage our footprint so we live with rather than just on Earth. There is still time to stop and possibly even partially reverse the mounting damage to atmospheric, oceanic, littoral, arborial and other global systems. The risk of not taking those steps is existential for humanity, and it is also bad capitalism. Wildfire, inundation, desertification, loss of pollinators, extreme weather, even glacial collapse have real economic consequences from interrupting supply chains to destroying value in the billions and trillions of dollars.

Moving to more regenerative businesses and communities will mitigate or even prevent some of these risks from manifesting, and will be more equitable and inclusive and result in more financial opportunity for individuals and entire markets. The best possible investment is one that both reduces risk and catalyzes growth at the same time. Caring for the planet we live with is also the best possible free option to get on that trade.

#TurtleIsland

WCM Chart of the Week for February 8, 2021

What does a pledge from China of carbon neutrality by the year 2060 actually mean, and how do we measure progress? There are various global targets for climate change mitigation that attempt to quantify what needs to be done so that the global system does not exceed the point of no return, generally seen as a rise of 1.5 – 2.0 degrees Celsius. Under the Paris climate accord, a number of nations committed to carbon neutrality in the next 30 years. China said 40, but as the largest economy on Earth how do we measure their progress? This week’s chart from the US Energy Information Administration country analysis of China (Sept. 2020) is just one hint at the structural challenges China faces in achieving the target. On a per-capita basis China’s carbon footprint is still smaller than the developed West, but their total footprint is more than a quarter of the world’s total output, and their energy mix is just 15% non-carbon and more than half coal. After the pandemic interruption that marked the period around the Lunar New Year, China’s carbon output returned to or even exceeded pre-pandemic levels. We are looking for the steps China will take now to level out carbon growth so that it can begin reversing the trend after 2030, and wonder, even worry whether another 10 years of increasing output takes us past the global point of no return.

Pine beetles and self-reinforcing climate consequences

Beetle Kill in Colorado (c) 2020 J. Sorgi

By September of this past year, both California and Colorado had experienced record-breaking wildfires, exceeding previous history for the largest wildfires in their respective states. According to the National Interagency Fire Center, more than 7.5 million acres had burned across the United States by Fall 2020, surpassing the approximate 6.1 million acre 10-year annual average (NIFC, 2020). Why have we seen increasingly disastrous wildfires in recent years?

Enter stage right the mountain pine beetle. Approximately 5 mm in length with an average life span of one year, the mountain pine beetle may not seem like a formidable opponent, but like all ecosystems, each member is densely interconnected (USDA FS, 2011). An imbalance of one species always equates to consequences for another.

One of 17 species of bark beetles native to North America, the mountain pine is a wood-boring insect that has shaped the forest landscapes from Canada to Mexico for thousands of years (NPS, 2018). From July to August, adult pine beetles colonize forests in search of larger trees (typically no less than 3 inches in diameter). Affected pine species include Lodgepole, Ponderosa, Western White, Whitebark, Jack, and Limber pine. Once a suitable host has been identified, female beetles excrete a pheromone signaling other beetles to follow (Katz, 2017). Females then begin eating tunnels called galleries into the inner bark of the tree, extending up to 30 inches or more from the attack site. The eggs hatch and beetle larvae continue burrowing and feeding until winter freezing temperatures trigger dormancy. By June or early July, larvae pupate and emerge from the tree in search of new hosts to repeat the cycle. Within one year of invasion, infested trees can fade from green to red-brown and die (USDA FS, 2011).

Continue reading

WCM Chart of the Week for February 2, 2021

It is not surprising that China’s carbon emissions are growing given relatively strong economic activity compared to the developed world. Or perhaps it is given China’s pledge of carbon neutrality by the year 2060. China’s contribution to carbon in our atmosphere is approaching 10 billion tons annually, an amount that is greater than the US and Europe combined. To place that in context, according to the World Bank, as of 2019 the Chinese economy is only 38.6% of US and EU economic output. It is important to note that carbon output in the US and Europe has been steady and even declining as their economies are expanding. Another startling fact is the Chinese economy represents 16.3% of Global GDP (also World Bank data) and yet contributes nearly 29% of the 34.2 billion tons of carbon emissions, according to the British Petroleum Statistical Review. In our view, China has a great deal to do to meet its 2060 carbon neutrality pledge on its way to becoming the world’s largest economy, starting with action on its COP21 Paris commitments including reducing its dependence on coal.  [chart courtesy British Petroleum Statistical Review, © 2021]

WCM Chart of the Week for October 19, 2020

Wildfire has had profound implications both for and because of climate change, for ecosystems, for communities, and for public health and safety. Wildfire has also had major economic consequences. Loss of housing, loss of commercial space, loss of public infrastructure, loss of crops, and loss of tourist revenue all add up to tens of billions of dollars a year just in the United States. The risk of wildfire conspiring with a lack of adequate governance and safety practices led to devastating financial losses and convictions on 84 counts of manslaughter for one of the largest utilities in the country. This week’s chart is from Munich Re and NatCatSERVICE by way of the Insurance Information Institute showing wildfire losses over the last decade (expressed in millions). Note that the spike in 2017 was so significant that the data from prior years is swamped by scale. While 2019 appears to have been a more modest loss year on par with earlier in the decade, according to the National Interagency Fire Center (nifc.gov) as of October 19th this year nearly twice as many acres have burned as by the 19th of last year, on pace with 2018 and 2019. The tale has yet to be written but that would suggest another likely spike in insured and uninsured losses. Economic loss is as much about the incidence of wildfire as it is the private encroachment on wild spaces. People increasingly work, farm and live in vulnerable forested and grassed spaces based on a history of relative fire scarcity that no longer exists. Without addressing both the climate systems issues to mitigate fire risk, and the resiliency of communities and businesses in the face of more frequent and prevalent fire, economic losses will continue to climb.

WCM Chart(s) of the Week for October 12, 2020

The popular, if you can call it that, view of rising carbon levels in the atmosphere is that the carbon problem is primarily an industrial problem. Oil, coal, and gas extraction and refining, power generation, factories, automobiles, chemicals, concrete, do all contribute to atmospheric CO2, and the trajectory of climate consequences tracks well with the Industrial Revolution. But what is far less well understood, but may be of much greater consequence, is global soil health. Modern agriculture, driven by feed lots, monocultures, tilling, chemical pesticides, and off-season bare soil has been systematically eliminating healthy soil as a global carbon sink. From an economic perspective what is really stunning is that these practices actually don’t result in more profit and productivity per acre for farmers. This week’s images are from Kiss the Ground, an initiative to help the world transition (back) to regenerative agriculture, which is better for both planet and profit. Become a soil advocate at www.kisstheground.com, and check out the documentary now streaming on Netflix. #kissthegroundmovie

« Older posts Newer posts »