Netherlands’ largest pension fund to boost sustainable investment, divest coal by 2030

first_img FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailPrint分享Reuters:The Netherlands’ biggest pension fund, ABP, said on Monday it aims to reduce the carbon footprint of its asset portfolio by 40% from 2015 levels by 2025.ABP, which already set a target to cut the carbon footprint of its assets by 25% from 2015 levels by this year, follows moves by other leading funds – notably Norway’s $1.1 trillion sovereign wealth fund – to divest heavy polluting energy companies from its portfolio.ABP manages 465 billion euros ($515 billion) in assets for civil servants. Under its new target, it said it aims to invest $5 billion in “sustainable and affordable energy” companies over the next five years, adding to $10 billion already invested in such companies.It plans to exit coal and tar sands investments, with some exceptions, by 2030, it said.Peter Branner, chief investment officer at APG, the fund’s pension manager, puts companies into three ethical categories: those that it excludes completely from its portfolio – such as nuclear weapons makers and tobacco companies; those that make a positive contribution to society, which it seeks to own more of; and a third category he termed “laggards” that have room to improve and which include the Netherlands’ biggest company Royal Dutch Shell.He said Shell’s recent profit performance had been disappointing compared to that of Denmark’s Ørsted, which has become the world’s largest offshore wind energy producer over the past decade.[Anthony Deutsch and Toby Sterling]More: Netherlands’ $515 billion pension fund to accelerate cuts to fossil fuel investments Netherlands’ largest pension fund to boost sustainable investment, divest coal by 2030last_img read more

PECO: Blackouts being used as black propaganda

first_img“To cut a long story short, all thethings that MEPC were accusing us of were untrue,” Cacho stressed. /PN Cacho lamented that MEPC madestatements not based on actual facts. “First of all, we must clarify thatPECO is a power distributor, not a power generator,” Cacho said in a statement.“We only distribute the power that is transmitted to us from the generators.” According to PECO head of PublicEngagement and Government Affairs Marcelo Cacho, the blackouts on Oct. 29 and30 were not of PECO’s making. Cacho said at around 5:23 p.m. of Oct.29, NGPC had an “issue” that caused the coal plants to shut down. The cause of the blackout was still beingdetermined by the National Grid Corp. of the Philippines (NGCP) which earliersaid there was disturbance in its transmission lines. Cacho stressed that contrary to whatwas published in the papers, NGPC did not restore power after 30 minutes. “They also made issue of the fact thatof the four feeders which did not experience load dropping, feeder 13 where ourresidence is connected is included. But they conveniently withheld theinformation that feeder 13 covers one of the biggest residential areas, whichis particularly half of Jaro, Iloilo,” Cacho said. “When the system detects a problem,the coal plants automatically shut down for safety reasons. It then takes fiveto six hours to restart the coal plants,” said Cacho. “On this first day,contrary to what MEPC reported, it took only around six hours for power to be fullyrestored — the exact time needed to restart the coal plants,” Cacho added. ILOILO City – Panay Electric Co.(PECO) has accused MORE Electric and Power Corp. (MPEC) of using the recent twosuccessive days of power interruption as black propaganda against the former. On Oct. 30, there was again anotherpower outage at 8 a.m. when the submarine cable between Negros to Panay islandstripped, causing destabilization in the grid thereby forcing power plants inPanay to shut down. “In fact, we were checking for updatesfrom the NGPC, but nothing came. They only advised us that we can alreadyrestore power 11 hours after the power outage started. It was NGCP and not oursupplier who held back the clearance to restore because they had to stabilizethe supply of the grid,” said Cacho. Even then, Cacho added, they alreadystarted to implement rotating brownouts early on, contrary to what MEPCclaimed, but prioritized the residential areas that did not have generatorsets.last_img read more