Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Investing Prophet Jeremy Grantham Takes Aim at Climate Change

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 103 posts

Re: Investing Prophet Jeremy Grantham Takes Aim at Climate Change

#51

Post by neolefty »

patrickg_zill wrote: post #22
Bucephalus355 wrote: post #17

Going to get downvoted harshly for this, and I deserve some of it. But let me say, is anyone else just slightly suspicious (don’t have to change your minds though and I agree with the science here) that investing billionaires, people who give truth to the saying “behind every great fortune is a great crime”, would actually be interested in the best possible thing for the world? Doesn’t that sound a little bit suspici…

"While giving away $1 billion, Grantham’s planning to make even more money, and he’s hoping climate change offers the opportunity. " I think that you might be on to something...

I got the impression from the article that this was more about framing it to appeal to investors. "We'll use your money to support green tech, and you'll also make a profit."

Grantham seems pretty personally committed to environmental sustainability for its own sake.

Re: Investing Prophet Jeremy Grantham Takes Aim at Climate Change

#52

Post by neolefty »

rhn_mk1 wrote: post #31
patrickg_zill wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"While giving away $1 billion, Grantham’s planning to make even more money, and he’s hoping climate change offers the opportunity. " I think that you might be on to something...

Bad/neutral people can still do good things if they take action on things that reward good deeds (with money). That's why non-profits hire people to help reach their goals.

It's in Grantham's interest to encourage regulation that minimizes carbon emissions (because of his investment company's "Climate Change Fund").

Is it good or bad to set yourself up to profit from that?

Re: Investing Prophet Jeremy Grantham Takes Aim at Climate Change

#53

Post by leaky_valve »

Bucephalus355 wrote: post #17

Going to get downvoted harshly for this, and I deserve some of it. But let me say, is anyone else just slightly suspicious (don’t have to change your minds though and I agree with the science here) that investing billionaires, people who give truth to the saying “behind every great fortune is a great crime”, would actually be interested in the best possible thing for the world? Doesn’t that sound a little bit suspici…

Everybody had "predicted" 2000 and 2008 in the financial industry. That statement means nothing at this point.

Re: Investing Prophet Jeremy Grantham Takes Aim at Climate Change

#54

Post by sigmaprimus »

viivaux wrote: post #13
darkpuma wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Generating three centimeters of top soil takes 1,000 years," Such a vague assertion leaves me with more questions than it resolved. Topsoil should properly be measured in volume, not distance. Presumably they mean a given area will gain three centimeters in 1,000 years, but what area and under what conditions? There are some environments with zero topsoil and some environments with quite a lot of topsoil, so is th…

> Topsoil should properly be measured in volume, not distance Should it though? And regardless of how clear or unclear that is, I gotta say I dislike seeing when the sum of a multitude of reports is expressed in a headline, only for people to nitpick through it without even attempting to check the actual methodology for themselves. 1 cm/year is 33 times faster than 3 cm/100 years, not a few hundred times faster. AFAI…

You are both right, farmers measure rainfall in inches, (which translates to inch acres) so it is both a mesurement of distance (inches) and acres (how many they own) think of centimeters per year the same way. Yes topsoil can be made much faster than these numbers given but there are consiquesnces, methane is released from the process of composting which is 19 times the greenhouse gas than the CO2 released from burning. Also the volume is affected by soil compaction and the production potential is affected by increased salinity from unused fertilizer, the outlook is scary but humans always adapt.

Re: Investing Prophet Jeremy Grantham Takes Aim at Climate Change

#55

Post by tw1010 »

sigmaprimus wrote: post #49

Just as vast fortunes were made during the financial crisis of 2008 by selling the markets short ( see the film "The Big Short") I would expect there are people betting on climate change continuing down its current tragectory, and these people now have a vested interest in making this happen. I don't know how many other billionaires are putting their money on the pro climate change side but wouldn't a smart investor…

You're supposed to diversify your portfolio by betting on uncorrelated things. Betting both that something will go up and down is like placing money on both red and black, it doesn't make you any richer.

Re: Investing Prophet Jeremy Grantham Takes Aim at Climate Change

#56

Post by sigmaprimus »

tw1010 wrote: post #55
sigmaprimus wrote: post #49

Just as vast fortunes were made during the financial crisis of 2008 by selling the markets short ( see the film "The Big Short") I would expect there are people betting on climate change continuing down its current tragectory, and these people now have a vested interest in making this happen. I don't know how many other billionaires are putting their money on the pro climate change side but wouldn't a smart investor…

You're supposed to diversify your portfolio by betting on uncorrelated things. Betting both that something will go up and down is like placing money on both red and black, it doesn't make you any richer.

Doesn't make you any poorer either, if your rich you want to protect your wealth. I believe it is called arbitrage.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/arbitrage.asp

It doesn't seem intuitive but there it is.

Re: Investing Prophet Jeremy Grantham Takes Aim at Climate Change

#57

Post by joshu »

sigmaprimus wrote: post #56
tw1010 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're supposed to diversify your portfolio by betting on uncorrelated things. Betting both that something will go up and down is like placing money on both red and black, it doesn't make you any richer.

Doesn't make you any poorer either, if your rich you want to protect your wealth. I believe it is called arbitrage. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/arbitrage.asp It doesn't seem intuitive but there it is.

Incorrect. Arbitrage is risklessly taking advantage of contemporaneous price differences by buying in one place and selling in another at the same time.

Re: Investing Prophet Jeremy Grantham Takes Aim at Climate Change

#58

Post by sigmaprimus »

joshu wrote: post #57
sigmaprimus wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't make you any poorer either, if your rich you want to protect your wealth. I believe it is called arbitrage. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/arbitrage.asp It doesn't seem intuitive but there it is.

Incorrect. Arbitrage is risklessly taking advantage of contemporaneous price differences by buying in one place and selling in another at the same time.

OK, but I still stand behind my premise. Bookies make money regardless by which team wins. Casinos show profits betting on red and black simultaneously because of the zeros. And it happens all the time in much more complex way in markets.

Also the financial term I was thinking of I believe is called "Futures" and it is used to protect against large swings in currency values between countries. Inverters exploit this through arbitrage.

Re: Investing Prophet Jeremy Grantham Takes Aim at Climate Change

#59

Post by buboard »

sigmaprimus wrote: post #49

Just as vast fortunes were made during the financial crisis of 2008 by selling the markets short ( see the film "The Big Short") I would expect there are people betting on climate change continuing down its current tragectory, and these people now have a vested interest in making this happen. I don't know how many other billionaires are putting their money on the pro climate change side but wouldn't a smart investor…

Even shorters need to make their gains from someone else. You are assuming that there are many people betting that climate change will not happen ? I think it’s safe to assume that climate change has been priced into the market.

Re: Investing Prophet Jeremy Grantham Takes Aim at Climate Change

#60

Post by tw1010 »

sigmaprimus wrote: post #58
joshu wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incorrect. Arbitrage is risklessly taking advantage of contemporaneous price differences by buying in one place and selling in another at the same time.

OK, but I still stand behind my premise. Bookies make money regardless by which team wins. Casinos show profits betting on red and black simultaneously because of the zeros. And it happens all the time in much more complex way in markets. Also the financial term I was thinking of I believe is called "Futures" and it is used to protect against large swings in currency values between countries. Inverters exploit this t…

I think this is wishful thinking. It'd be neat if there was incentive on both sides of the debate, to bet both against and for the idea that climate change will happen. Unfortunately that's not how it is: the real direction of the change in climate will be the most profitable option, and that's where investors will flood. And yeah, that might cause a self-fulfilling prophecy (incentivizing and accelerating climate change), but that's just how it is, that's where we are. Maybe we can try to spread false ideas like yours to make investors think it's good to invest on both sides, but I don't have much faith in its potency to make real impact.
Post reply on HN