Y2Kyoto: The Smart Money

Climate Cult 38 Comments

Bloomberg

The smartest money in global warming stocks may be scurrying to the exit just when the enthusiasm for alternative-energy companies is at an all-time high.
While SunPower Corp. and Theolia SA are among more than 180 companies whose shares have surged as much as 240 percent this year — buoyed by efforts to curtail the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans –the market’s nimblest investors already are hedging their bets.
D.E. Shaw & Co., Tudor Investment Corp., Citadel Investment Group LLC, Caxton Associates LLC, SAC Capital Advisors LLC and Pequot Capital Management Inc. reduced their stakes in solar- power and ethanol producers in the fourth quarter, according to filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The hedge funds manage about $86 billion.
“As an investment play,” global warming is “a bubble” and “social short-term craze,” said Ken Fisher, who oversees $35 billion as chairman of Fisher Investments Inc. in Woodside, California.
Anyone looking for corroboration of that assessment may find it in the so-called short selling of U.S. alternative-energy stocks last month, which climbed 45 times faster than the average for Standard & Poor’s 500 Index members.
By itself, I don’t know that global warming is a viable investment theme,” said Malcolm Polley, who oversees $1 billion at Stewart Capital Advisors LLC in Indiana, Pennsylvania. “It’s largely Wall Street’s answer of trying to create something where there really isn’t anything that exists.

(h/t B. Hoax Aware in the comments)

38 Replies to “Y2Kyoto: The Smart Money”

  1. Yup……..the most important thing to Canadians is the enviroment………
    Poll Result
    What would you most like to see in Monday’s budget?
    Income splitting
    656 votes (35 %)
    Working income tax benefit
    890 votes (47 %)
    More money for the environment
    329 votes (18 %)

  3. hedge fund.
    ya, thats where papa bet the farm on environmental technology which tanked and we had to rip out all ma’s ‘hedges’ and use them for kindling.
    hedge fund.

  7. Reminds me of ethical funds a few years back this stuff is the cash cow that just keeps giving. No barrier to entry, no infrastructure, no reality, just hot are. Money loves this stuff,hype the story then drop the bomb. The classic pump and dump.

  9. The Red-Green Kyoto Made-in-Canada Scam: Indulgences, included, free. …-
    Making Emitters Pay: Dion Announces Plan to Balance Large Industrial Emitters’ Carbon Budget and Boost Green Investment

  10. Nuclear is the answer for large scale clean energy. That’s part of the reason France and Japan were able to sign Kyoto. Even McGuinty now understands that nuclear is the answer. Of course Greenpeace and the wing nuts are all dead set against that because then we’d solve the problem and their alarmist funding would dry up
    Cameco in northern Saskatchewan is up 600% over the last 5 years, although flat over the past year. I visited that Cigar Lake a couple of decades ago; I never would have guessed it would take this long for the world to gain some sanity on this source of energy. But an analyst report summarizes :
    “At long last, uranium is getting recognized for what it always has been: the cleanest, most efficient energy source available. For too many years the idea of building a new nuclear plant was anathema to much of the public, afraid of another Chernobyl. Now new reactors are on the drawing board, both here and abroad. They will take a decade to open. But already the price of uranium has risen from $56 per pound last year to $75.
    Canada’s Cameco (nyse: CCJ ) , the world’s largest producer of uranium, suffered a collapse of fourth-quarter earnings after a rock-fall-triggered flood last October at its Cigar Lake uranium project in Saskatchewan. Most likely Cameco will open Cigar Lake in 2011 or 2012. Well before then investors will anticipate the resulting income stream and push up the stock price.”

  12. Nomdenet. Agree completely on nuclear as macro energy technology. We still have to develop the micro; but, not to get off CO2, to get off carbon fuels. This will relieve some Islamists of hard cash, and help prevent an environmental catastrophe resulting from China, India and others from burning fossil fuels. That is, if we can develop the necessary technology without being derailed by the Kyoto cultists. As for Dion’s enviro announcement, the devil will surely be in the details. I believe all parties support some sort of carbon trading, provided it actually delivers results, and the money stays in Canada. I don’t care to help Russia and China nail their citizens.

  13. For anyone interested in the BBC documentary that completely blows holes in every single aspect of the Kyoto model, please see attached.
    Key findings:
    1) C02 levels naturally rise after global warming (about 800 years after), not before.
    2) If GHG’s were responsible for global warming you’d see greater temperature increases in the troposphere where GHG’s gather, than at the surface….which is the opposite of what we’re seeing.
    3) There is a direct causal relationship between sun activity and global temperature that cannot be denied because it’s actually created a predictive model that WORKS (as opposed to the GHG models which don’t).
    In any case, if you want to become an expert very quickly, see the attached (and send it to your friends and colleagues).
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4520665474899458831&q=the+great+global+warming+swindle
    Cheers all, Matthew – London, Ontario.

  14. Regardless of how you feel about solar energy, the even smarter money should rush to 3M who have patents on new materials and processes that will make a solar cell double it’s current electrical output and miniturize the size of the cell so they can vastly increase the cell density( and total current output) on flat materials.
    The tech is now available to make highly efficient “sheets” of solar cell material that can be applied like siding or roofing and exponetially increase the electrial output per square meter of the current technology……mass production tech will bring the cost of this electrical producing “siding” within the neighborhood of regular siding products…the end result is the ability to suppliment your commercial current draw off the grid and reduce your use/billing by a substantial amount of up to 70% depending on the surface area covered.
    Seems like user friendly solar tech that makes sense to me…anything you can do to make your home less reliant on heavily taxed utilities the better off you’ll be. You don’t have to be a green moonbat to see the advantages.
    Regardless of where this smart money is “exiting” I’ll wager it isn’t leaving 3M….at least their numbers don’t seem to bear that out.

  15. So far most alternative energy plans are covering only niche areas and thus will not be major plays for anybody. There needs to be real big breakthroughs which can happen provided the status quo wants them or seeks them but I’m not holding my breath on this.

  16. Nuclear is clean but so is hydro (where feasable/ available)…And hydro is a better smoke too! 😉

  17. cal2, CO2 became a pollution the moment humans created a global atmospheric surplus of CO2.
    Matthew, The Great Global Warming Swindle has already been debunked why continue beating a dead horse?

  18. Matthew: that’s Britain’s Channel 4, not BBC4! BBC would swallow their own tongues before running something called the Great Global Warming Swindle.
    Albatros: debunked, my eye. I’ve heard objection to one chart, from one interviewee, and seen it pointed out that the filmmaker has a dodgy resumé. That leaves roughly an hour and twenty-five minutes worth of really compelling data you’re going to have to eat raw.
    I’ve long said I’d believe the general public believes in global warming — really and truly believes in it — when waterfront real estate takes a nosedive in value.

  19. albatros39a,
    I would like to know what is defined as a surplus of CO2. What is the baseline for CO2 amount and what epoch did that baseline come into being? If we are to look at some historical concentrations of CO2, we may be helping the Earth get out of our CO2 deficit.
    I don’t recall the The Great global Warming Swindle being debunked.
    Can you provide us with some further info about the science being challenged and not what one of the contributors may or may not have meant/thought/said?
    The truth, it seems, is very inconvenient.

  20. Newman had MP Mcquinty on trying to explain Dions latest announcement. He said transportation has very little affect on co2 emmissions. But, the oil and gas will be hit hard. NEP2 is on the way if liberals get elected. Trying to explain how a company could/would put money into the fund if over production takes place and take money out of fund if underproduction occurs. Sounds a lot like a farm program of years ago that didn’t work. Liberals still want to send our money to other countries.

  21. My money is on nuclear as a responsible alternative. Ethanol is a big pork barrel deal for Midwest farmers. By the time you add in the irrigation and ng to power the pumping systems, fertilizers, and processing where is the cost effectiveness? Maybe I’m missing something, but, I think it’s a mistake. Bush is foolish to pander to this option.
    Wall Street is smarter than most politicians and sheeple with their cause du jour, they discount the garbage as good capitalists should. Lefty socialists never put their money(yours they take) where their mouths are. That’s why they want perpetual subsidies for themselves, their kids and their grandmothers.

  22. S. Weasel ask yourself this question: how did Canada get suckered into targets so extreme that even the dimmest amongst us knew would be impossible to reach? Chretien provided the pathetic “they will count our trees for credit” excuse and many people bought it. Our European friends, having signed on to achievable targets for themselves must have been laughing at us. Why then sign on at these levels? Let us follow the money.
    Steve the scientists, the environmental crusaders, the fund raisers, and the hangers on are just part of the “jobs for the boys” patronage group and the dollars involved are but chump change. There is nothing new here. No the monster is in the hot air credits to be paid to developing nations. Mo Strong, the man who created both CIDA and Kyoto and who has been residing in China since his involvement with the oil for food scandal popped up, has his finger prints all over this one. Here is the scam. The Liberals were about to allocate ten billion dollars for the Kyoto agreement commitments, which the Conservatives have cancelled by the way. Next the money is funneled into CIDA (Canadian International Development Agency) like independent agency which up until the Federal Accountability Act was beyond the oversight of the Auditor General. Contracts are then awarded to loyal Canadian corporations in a fair competition ( OK…..you are buying this so far, right?) to build windmills in the Gobi dessert to offset our domestic CO2 emissions. It doesn’t matter if anyone even sees the windmills let alone demonstrate that they are functional but the money has been paid to the higher purpose and all Canadians will “feel warm” for meeting our Kyoto targets. Folks this is a win win for everyone. Other than the bribes needed to pay off foreign officials the bulk of the money stays right here in Canada, with Liberal friendly firms, and Canadians get to appear holier than though on the international stage.

  23. First, let me say that correlation does not equal causation and that consensus is not science. What I see is a lot of effort in proving correlation between CO2 and warming, but frankly I don’t follow the mechanism.
    This is what I have heard. CO2 is a greenhouse gas.
    So, why is it a “greenhouse” gas and not just some run of the mill gas (like Nitrogen). Here is the argument.
    Some of the infrared radiation passing through the atmosphere is absorbed and re-emitted by greenhouse gas molecules of which the big 2 are di-hydrogen monoxide and carbon dioxide. (Notice the “some”… most heating comes from direct warming of the surface).
    95% of the “greenhouse” effect comes from the vapors of di-hydrogen monoxide, and the remainder of the effect comes from carbon dioxide and methane. Of the remaining 5% carbon dioxide makes up most of the effect.
    Di-hydrogen monoxide has around 40,000 ppm per volume of air, while CO2 makes up 370 ppm.
    So here’s thing. If I selectively warm up the carbon dioxide (without warming up the other gases) where does the heat go? Think of the atmosphere as a massive solution of all these gases. The heat is mostly absorbed by the water vapor. But, water has around twice the specific heat of carbon dioxide (this means it takes twice as much energy to raise a unit volume of water one degree as carbon dioxide). So I would have to raise the temperature of my carbon dioxide an awful lot in order to see any change in overall air temperature.
    So to my mind, there is no mechanism within the ranges of concentrations we are talking about. No mechanism = no causation.
    Does this make sense? Any chemists in the house?

  24. Every news program is talking about how we as an individual can pay back mother nature for our carbon footprint, and buy carbon credits. Some are trying to explain what credits are and what they do. Newman asked a guy, you mean give a company the right to pollute by buying from a non polluting company overseas. (paraphrased a bit) Idiots are actually writing cheques to companies who promise to invest in some green project somewhere. The main point is, pay back mother nature. Think I will change my name to Mother Nature and demand all that money. Hope those cheque writers look at where the cheque is deposited and who signs it, when it is returned by the bank. The fact that many people do not get their cheques returned is another reason to be suspect. I might write a cheque just to see where it goes. Who will leave a large footprint by actually going to some country and see where their money went.

  25. Since dion is going to make it mandatory for companies to get involved in his scam, how long before he would make it mandatory for all cdn residents. Don’t vote liberal.

  26. The portion of atmospheric CO2 vapor that is produced by humans is about 3% or 0.03. The portion of green-house gasses that is CO2 is about 1% or 0.01. Thus, the portion of green-house gasses that is human produced CO2 is about 0.03% or 0.0003. The heat trapping effectiveness of CO2 compared to the average of green-house gasses is about 10% or 0.10. Thus, the portion of the green-house gas effect caused by human CO2 is about 0.003% or 0.00003 or 30 millionths. The portion of human-produced CO2 vapor that comes from Canada is about 2% or 0.02. Thus, the portion of green-house gas effects caused by Canadian-produced CO2 is about 0.00006% or 0.0000006 or 0.6 millionths.
    So, even if (contrary to the evidence that suggests that changes in CO2 concentrations are caused by significant temperature changes) we assume that changes in CO2 concentrations cause significant temperature changes, and even if we assume (contrary to the evidence that suggests a slightly warmer planet would be a good thing) that an increase of a few degrees in temperature will cause terrible things, then even if Canadians stop producing any atmospheric CO2 at all, the reduction in terrible things will be less than 1 millionth; 999,999 millionths of it will still happen.

  27. darwin didnt get it quite right, its survival of the luckiest, not the fittest.
    the ones lucky enough to be born when there isnt a drought going on, not the runt that gets mugged to death or the big boy that gets caught in the birth canal and suffocates, or unlucky to be born with a deformed bill due to pesticides.
    etc etc.
    darwinism is a fantastic replacement of the religionists view of the middle ages that you were crippled, blind, or ill because God was punishing you for your sins.
    with darwin it is the sin of not being lucky to be born at the right place and time. silver spoon syndrome etc.
    survival of the LUCKIEST.

  29. Re Global Warming Swindle “That leaves roughly an hour and twenty-five minutes worth of really compelling data you’re going to have to eat raw.”
    That you find it compelling is your perogative. But calling it data is a bit of stretch, it’s a simple polemic. I rolled my eyes ever time they laid in with straw man claptrap such as “climatologists will have us believe that every time there’s a nasty storm it’s because of global warming”. The producers of that program didn’t credit their audience with much intelligence but I suppose they didn’t need to.

  30. Vitruvius: ” … the reduction in terrible things will be less than 1 millionth”
    Your obviously being paid off by big oil. Have you ever been VP of the the US? Have taxpayers ever paid you to wank off on CBC?

  31. albatros39a,
    I have been to that web site a few times and have concluded that there is no consensus with regards to AGW. The reason I think that sites like this and like minded people have an issue with AGM is that for the most part, the media and environmentalists have decided that the science is proven. Swindle was the first shot across the bow to get the debate going and I for one hope it never stops. When one side or another claims the science is done and starts branding the other side as heretics then I believe the enlightenment of modern science is dealt a disservice.
    Plate tectonic shift and evolution are still theories and are studied everyday and although there is a “consensus” that they are true, it is not law.
    Like someone said above,” I will believe it when the price of Ocean front property nosedives.”
    Like the reverse CO2 vs T discussed at length on that web-site, I have my own reasons to be skeptical. Reversed that is, like there. I’ll try and explain:
    Kyoto is a completely useless agreement that if fully implemented will have no results on AGM.
    So, if all of the best minds and scientists in the easy 90’s could only come up with this, then they must not really think there is a threat. If you will:
    Mr Gore, Suzuki and all of the other enviro-celebraties would do actual personal CO2 reductions and not sleep well knowing that the bought carbon offsets.
    Why did it take six years for a Liberal majority to ratify Kyoto and then do nothing about it ? If the Liberal government would have come back from Kyoto ad legislated 80 km/h speed limits and outlawed the tar sand development I might have said,” This must be serious.”. It didn’t happen and now they want to tax those same operations and buy foreign credits.
    If I had all that power and truly, truly believed what I was saying, that the Earth will come to an end, I would have done much, much more.
    Alas, they don’t believe it or Ted Kennedy would be selling his Ocean front house and it would eat Suzuki alive to drive around in a big bus from one end of Canada to another. If you believe, then its easy to make the hard calls.
    Churchill destroyed the British economy fighting the Nazis instead of appeasing , but he believed it was the right thing to do. And his people paid dearly to do the right thing.

  32. “Environmentalism as Religion”
    by Michael Crichton
    Commonwealth Club
    San Francisco, CA
    September 15, 2003
    I have been asked to talk about what I consider the most important challenge facing mankind, and I have a fundamental answer.
    The greatest challenge facing mankind is the challenge of distinguishing reality from fantasy, truth from propaganda. Perceiving the truth has always been a challenge to mankind, but in the information age (or as I think of it, the disinformation age) it takes on a special urgency and importance.
    Today, one of the most powerful religions in the Western World is environmentalism.
    Environmentalism seems to be the religion of choice for urban atheists. Why do I say it’s a religion? Well, just look at the beliefs. If you look carefully, you see that environmentalism is in fact a perfect 21st century remapping of traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs and myths.
    There’s an initial Eden, a paradise, a state of grace and unity with nature, there’s a fall from grace into a state of pollution as a result of eating from the tree of knowledge, and as a result of our actions there is a judgment day coming for us all.
    We are all energy sinners, doomed to die, unless we seek salvation, which is now called sustainability. Sustainability is salvation in the church of the environment. Just as organic food is its communion, that pesticide-free wafer that the right people with the right beliefs, imbibe…
    http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/speeches_quote05.html

  33. think uranium, clean energy. Saskatchewan has lots of it. it’s not sexy, definitely not PC but it’s there and it’s profitable. this is an investment hint

  34. Lorraine :
    Environmentalism seems to be the religion of choice for urban atheists. Why do I say it’s a religion? Well, just look at the beliefs. If you look carefully, you see that environmentalism is in fact a perfect 21st century remapping of traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs and myths.
    Great Post! You got their (enviro-nuts) whole enchalada plot in this one.

  35. Uranium? A plodding investment with huge overhead..
    NiMH is the power of choice for the blooming EV market.
    Follow the logic..
    No poisons, recyleable, clean, but which firm?
    Easy, check GMs supplier. . .
    Cobasys .. [google]
    Easy money. = TG

  36. I read Michael Crichton’s essay. Now I know why the Goracle and Fuitfly won’t debate him. I see Dion has his marxism on full display. Let’s make the “man” (corporation) pay for dirtying up the air with CO2. What marxists never understood is that the “man” simply produces goods and services that society wants. Conrad Black the publisher is nothing unless the great unwashed actually read his newspapers. By the same token, if we tell oil producers they must “clean up” their emission, and they will be taxed, two things will happen; they will pass on the costs to their consumers, and consider the carbon tax a cost of business, weighed against the cost of compliance. Note they will not “clean up,” because the means to reduce the way Kyotoists want, is presently cost prohibitive. We have to develop proper technologies that that are hybrid and/or bridges to non-carbon fuels. The Kyoto marxists don’t get this because they want to stick it to the “man.” In other words, us. Dion still lives in the fantasy backpack world where Canadians are ready to make huge sacrifices to “clean up.” They aren’t. Furthermore, they are concerned about other issues too. Furthermore, Dion has moved not only left of the LPC, but left of his previous policy positions, fighting it out with the NDP, Green and Bloc for the urban left vote. Canada cannot realistically expected to shut down it’s northern, resource-based (our birthright BTW), to pray at the altar of Kyoto, while the rest of the world happily uses oil, gas and coal. You can be sure the Tories will highlight the full cost, ideology and cynicism of the Dion “plan.” Once again, his goose is cooked; the basting (election) is all that’s left.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation