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

ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–189 of 189 posts

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#181

Post by hunterb123 »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #166
hunterb123 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now do BP

BP also has a net zero plan for 2050: https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/sustainability/gettin... They also keep raising the ambitions of their goals over time. Basically, big corporations don't want to be the only one doing this, because their competitors would screw them. But if they all do it, then it's in everyone's benefit, you just need some system to make sure that the other corporations aren't cheating.

Oh a 2050 plan, wonderful. How many more oil spills until then?

Do you think that BP deserves the same rating as an EV company?

Do you really think that Tesla deserves an average rating in the automobile industry?

The same score or lower than the automobile companies who were cheating on emissions tests!

Turns out you can just say you have a plan 30 years in the future and be good.

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#182

Post by abirch »

adament wrote: post #146
abirch wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He believes in climate change: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/30/billionaire-ray-dalio-on-why... You can see how he quantifies carbon emissions. https://www.bridgewater.com/research-and-insights/sustainabl... If he was only concerned with making money, you'd think he'd have jumped into digital currencies.

He has or at least Bridgewater has been pushing an allocation to Bitcoin in some of their Daily Observations in the last 1 or 2 years.

Their allocation is no more than. Not a minimum.

He stated here that he wouldn't put in more money than he's comfortable in losing 80% in: https://www.bridgewater.com/research-and-insights/our-though...

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#183

Post by [deleted] »

dang wrote: post #180
qweqwerwerwerwr wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Hey, can you please not create accounts to break HN's guidelines with? We ban accounts that post like this, and I've banned this one. If you don't want it to be banned, you're welcome to email us at hn@ycombinator.com. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. You're welcome here, but we need you to parti…

[deleted]

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#184

Post by [deleted] »

dang wrote: post #180
qweqwerwerwerwr wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Hey, can you please not create accounts to break HN's guidelines with? We ban accounts that post like this, and I've banned this one. If you don't want it to be banned, you're welcome to email us at hn@ycombinator.com. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. You're welcome here, but we need you to parti…

[deleted]

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#185

Post by shawn-butler »

credit_guy wrote: post #164
tracker1 wrote: post #96

Pay-walled, so only got the summary... but even "emissions" isn't a simple calculation... do you include the electricity generation you get your power from? What about emissions on what went into something you buy? The mining, processing, shipping, refining, manufacturing and distribution of the final product, and many component hierarchies in play? Depending on how you look at something, getting an electric car is a…

> but even "emissions" isn't a simple calculation It actually can be. A molecule of oil does not burn twice. If you tax all the fossil fuels at the source (i.e. when they are extracted), then you tax all the emissions. The companies that extract the fossil fuels will pass some of the tax to those who buy from them, who will pass some of their purchasing costs to some who buy for them, etc. You can take that tax reven…

more like 80 million acres, just to update your fact regurgitation

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#186

Post by credit_guy »

shawn-butler wrote: post #185
credit_guy wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but even "emissions" isn't a simple calculation It actually can be. A molecule of oil does not burn twice. If you tax all the fossil fuels at the source (i.e. when they are extracted), then you tax all the emissions. The companies that extract the fossil fuels will pass some of the tax to those who buy from them, who will pass some of their purchasing costs to some who buy for them, etc. You can take that tax reven…

more like 80 million acres, just to update your fact regurgitation

No.

As per the latest USDA report [1]:

  - total area planted with corn: 90.7 million acres
  - total production 14.1 billion bushels
  - out of which 5.0 billion bushels used for ethanol
The don't give the exact area used for ethanol production, but making the reasonable assumption that the yield per acre is constant (it's probably not, but it's also probably not that far off), you get 5.0/ 14.1 x 90.7 = 32.2 million acres.

[1] https://www.usda.gov/oce/commodity/wasde/wasde0722.pdf

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#187

Post by adament »

abirch wrote: post #182
adament wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He has or at least Bridgewater has been pushing an allocation to Bitcoin in some of their Daily Observations in the last 1 or 2 years.

Their allocation is no more than. Not a minimum. He stated here that he wouldn't put in more money than he's comfortable in losing 80% in: https://www.bridgewater.com/research-and-insights/our-though...

I am sorry but I cannot parse your first paragraph, so I do not understand your point. Thus I have written a general reply to your link.

I do not read any clear recommendation for or against Bitcoin in the link you have given (maybe I did not read it carefully enough).

It might be my understanding of Bridgewater that is wrong, but I think of them as mainly targeting institutional investors and high net-worth clients. So when Mr. Dalio writes “Bitcoin looks like a long-duration option on a highly unknown future that I could put an amount of money in that I wouldn’t mind losing about 80% of.” I do not think of that as dissuading an allocation to bitcoin at all, he is merely warning about the size of the allocation, in contrast in the same letter he talks about Bitcoins gold like properties and he has generally been quite vocal about the benefits of an allocation to gold, so I take that as a positive overall impression.

Though I think the daily observations from 2022-01-14 is much clearer as a recommendation for bitcoin. In it they write about how Bitcoin and Ether are now large and liquid enough for them to be worth the time of institutional investors to look into. And they write that they think institutional adoption is likely to pick up in coming years.

I might be reading too much into it, but when I read the piece I got the clear impression that it was a recommendation to make a small allocation to bitcoin. After all who does not want to get in before the big institutional investors?

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#188

Post by whywhywhywhy »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #169
whywhywhywhy wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> tax Not sure how making the government profit from it is gonna solve anything.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigovian_tax

As soon as you add a tax to something that money goes somewhere and politicians (or more often then not their offspring) will be profiting off it and then where is the impetus to prevent it when it brings money in?

Smoking could be completely phased out but it wont because it's just too profitable for the government.

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#189

Post by mullingitover »

FabHK wrote: post #100
Quenty wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to comment on the rest of the comment, but apparently the Economist is not right leaning? Do you have a source for that? https://www.allsides.com/news-source/economist

I find that The Economist being right-wing is an old prejudice. FWIW, they have endorsed the Democrat candidate in 6 of the last 8 US presidential elections. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economist_editorial_stance...

I said right-leaning, and centrist mainstream democrats in the United States would fit the bill there. The republicans, especially in the last decade, have gone fully right-wing and driven nearly all centrists from their party.
Post reply on HN