US climate change issues are forcing investors to go it alone in the absence of action by President Trump. This is largely because shareholders in large energy companies are pressing them to take action on rising global temperatures. They fear that an increase in environmental temperature could have an effect on their businesses.
Scott Pruitt, Donald Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency’s administrator has a background education of baseball and political science. He has stated that he does not believe that carbon dioxide contributes to global warming. This is despite scientific evidence to the contrary.
However, there has still been no action regarding the US leaving the Paris Agreement. Consequently it could be that Donald Trump is listening to other world leaders. You don’t get where he is now by not listening! Maybe he is listening to the New York and California state pension funds and other investors regarding this issue. In saying that, however, the Trump administration appears to be making plans to target some regulations.
A leaked administration document appears to suggest that some EPA activities will suffer severe budget cuts. It is rumored that EPA funding to tackle environmental issues in the Great Lakes and Chesapeake Bay is to be cut to zero! The same is to happen to budgets for the reporting of greenhouse gas emissions, controlling indoor air pollution and cleaning up lead pollution.
Apparently, any environment regulations or budgets that hold back industry in any way are at risk of being targeted. The Trump administration says that the EPA budget cuts would help pay for a 10% increase in military spending. This is a $54 billion increase at the expense of environmental control. Because or in spite of this, some say that climate change issues will not figure in the EPA budget for next year.
It is a fact that US climate change issues cannot be ignored. Because of that, some investors who feel that way are taking action to manage the risk themselves. Activists are requesting companies to provide details of monies spent on environmental issues. Big investors can no longer rely on governmental action on environmental risks. They now realize they may have to do this themselves.
By forcing companies to publish their plans for dealing with the costs of climate change and switching to cleaner fuels. Some energy companies have tried to avert such shareholder action by insisting they already take climate change seriously.
If regulations changed, investors would be looking for a planned transition to cleaner fuels so businesses avoid sudden high expenditure involved. This may be the case if the USA was the only developed country to ignore the Treaty of Paris. Not only will the US fail to reduce carbon emissions, but American businesses might also face the high costs associated with ultimately having to take the necessary action all at once.
US climate change issues are no different to those faced by other countries. However, a period of inactivity, or even of going backwards by cutting EPS budget, will result in excessive one-off expenditure. Many believe the global warming risk to be a real one.
Pvt. Ltd.
