Clean-energy stocks rally hinges on Democrats retaining Senate

October 27, 2022

windmills at dusk — Source: milehightraveler / iStock via Getty Images

(Mark Hulbert, an author and longtime investment columnist, is the founder of the Hulbert Financial Digest; his Hulbert Ratings audits investment newsletter returns.)

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. (Callaway Climate Insights) — Investors in green-energy stocks have a lot riding on whether the Democrats retain control of the U.S. Senate after the upcoming midterms.

That’s the conclusion I reached upon analyzing the relationship between these stocks and the odds that the electronic betting markets place on the Democrats retaining control. I found a strong correlation…

Subscribe to Callaway Climate Insights to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.

By David Callaway

How Abnormal the World’s Temperature Was Every Year Since 1950

Douglas McIntyre

October 26, 2022

Kansas summer heat — Source: milehightraveler / iStock via Getty Images

The debate over global warming has evolved over the decades, from initial abject denial by industries, and politicians funded by those industries, to a more widespread public acceptance of the scientific consensus that the Earth is warming and the cause is largely human activity. Humans release 43 billion tons of CO2 every year — in addition to the release of methane, nitrous oxide, and other greenhouse gasses.

The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reports that Earth’s temperature has risen by an average of 0.14 degrees Fahrenheit every decade since 1880, when humans began accelerating industrial activities. Since 1981, however, that rate has more than doubled to an increase of 0.32 F in average temperatures every decade. (Earth’s CO2 level rose every year since climate change became a national issue.)

The 20th century average of the combined global land and ocean temperatures was 57 F, nearly 2 degrees Fahrenheit higher than pre-industrial levels.

These incremental rises in temperature may not seem like much if you judge it by the air temperature outside today, but they have profound effects on ecological systems and the climate, causing more frequent and powerful weather events.

The warming of air and water temperatures due to human activity in turn leads to natural carbon emissions from the Arctic sea-floor and melting permafrost, putting the accelerator pedal down on global warming. Climate experts warn we can expect more floods, droughts, and wildfires, which have already become common in the modern news cycle.

To identify the temperature the year you were born, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed data on the combined land surface air and sea surface water temperature for 1950 through 2021 from NASA’s Global Land-Ocean Temperature Index. We also added the anomaly – the temperature compared to a base period. NASA used 57 degrees Fahrenheit, which is the average global temperature from 1951-1980, as the base. The hottest month each year also came from the report.

From 1950 to 2021, the global average of combined land-sea temperatures has been below 57 degrees Fahrenheit — the base period temperature average — in only 15 years. The last time was in 1976. This means anyone under the age of 45 has lived their entire lives in a warmer world with increasingly damaging climate effects.

Furthermore, anyone born since 2018 has lived with a global land-air temperature average of 58.5 F or higher. People born into the coming years will almost surely live with this average temperature above 59 F.

The anomalies compared to the base period have increased as well. While in 1976 the average temperature was 0.18 degrees below the base period average temperature of 57 F, by 2021 the average temperature was 1.51 F above it. In 2020, temperature was 1.84 degrees above the 1951-1980 global average. (Here are the worst states driving the climate crisis.)

Here is how abnormal the world’s temperature was every year since 1950.

Why the spurt in climate protests is happening, and will it help or hurt?

David Callaway

October 26, 2022

In today’s issue:

— Will the spurt in dramatic climate protests derail global progress or restart it?

— Rishi Sunak is no Boris Johnson. Can he revive Britain’s climate efforts?

— As oil majors look at renewable energy, one form of it looks increasingly attractive

— New supply chain hurdle: lack of transformers threatens U.S. grid

— EPA about to become world’s biggest climate bank

Climate protests are back, and more dramatic, making even the most enthusiastic ESG supporters nervous. Attacks on paintings in the UK and Germany, the spraying of orange paint on Harrods in London, and the smearing of chocolate cake on the wax figure of King Charles III at Madame Tussauds recently are sweeping the headlines.

Protesters are daring critics to argue that pieces of art are more important than the loss of the planet. Critics argue that these types of stunts risk public support at a time when it is more needed than ever.

And there’s the rub. The timing is no coincidence. The world has been backsliding on global warming almost since last year’s COP26 in Glasgow. Certainly, since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Next month’s COP27 is expected to be an abject failure, with poor attendance and little chance of a climate funding deal. The idea of environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing is under attack in the U.S. and elsewhere. The world is pumping more oil than ever before.

Protesters, the young, are standing up and holding our feet to the fire. If we won’t notice when reports say 70% of global species are set to be wiped out by 2050, then maybe some mashed potatoes on your Monet will get your attention. The climate crisis is going to cost so much that people can’t get their heads around it. Bringing the impact down to a single valuable object helps focus minds.

We can expect more of these in coming days and weeks, and they will be more dramatic, especially during the Egypt summit in two weeks. When there is no momentum, the extremists step up.

More insights below . . . .

Subscribe to Callaway Climate Insights to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.

By David Callaway

15 Politicians Who Have Disputed the Severity of Climate Change

Douglas McIntyre

October 25, 2022

Senator Mitch McConnell — Source: Alex Wong / Getty Images News via Getty Images

Driven by the burning of fossil fuels, such as coal and oil, global carbon dioxide emissions have climbed by 66.5% over the last three decades. Greenhouse gasses, like carbon dioxide, trap heat in the Earth’s atmosphere – and as greenhouse gas emissions have climbed, so have temperatures. According to the World Meteorological Organization, the last seven years have been the warmest on record.

Should global temperatures continue to rise, the consequences could be catastrophic, as existing patterns such as sea level rise, heat waves, flooding, drought, and wildfires, will only likely intensify. While there is broad consensus in the scientific community that human activity – particularly the burning of fossil fuels – are largely to blame for climate change, such consensus cannot be found among the political leadership in the United States. (Here is a look at the worst states driving the climate crisis.)

Many elected officials in the highest levels of government have taken no action beyond questioning or outright denying the scientific evidence of human-made climate change.

According to a recent report from the public policy research and advocacy group, Center for American Progress, there are 139 sitting members of the U.S. Congress who have cast doubt on the existence of human-induced climate change or minimized the need to act on it. Many of these Congress members have also received significant campaign contributions from fossil fuel companies with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.

24/7 Wall St. reviewed the CAP report Climate Deniers in the 117th Congress to identify the sitting members of the U.S. House and Senate who have called climate change into question or downplayed the urgency of the problem. We listed each of the 16 Congress members listed in the report who have received over $1 million in political contributions from the oil and gas industry.

Combating climate change will require a shift to clean energy and an overhaul of the U.S. energy sector. While campaign contributions from fossil fuel companies do not necessarily buy political influence, they do call into question the potential for a conflict of interests – especially as a failure in leadership has left the United States trailing behind dozens of other developed countries in the fight against climate change.

Many of the politicians on this list represent states and districts that have been most impacted by weather events linked to climate change. Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, for example, ranks on this list and has represented the state of Texas since 2013. Over his nearly nine years in the U.S. Senate, Texas has suffered through 74 climate-related disasters that caused at least $1 billion in damage. Those disasters – which include severe storms, droughts, floods, and wildfires – racked up a total of at least $200 billion in damage, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (Here is a look at the worst cities to live in as climate change gets worse.)

Click here to see 15 politicians who have disputed the severity of climate change.

Click here to read our detailed methodology.