Let’s begin by admitting - and causing our legislators to admit - that transferring production to China and SE Asia is not global reduction of carbon footprint. On the contrary it creates sustainability issues, energy and supply chain dependence and political chains with bad actors.
The tribulations of Germany is evidence enough.
Independent sustainability requires a cost that we must bear and we must ibis its our investment institutions carry the load with our capital. Done properly the initial high entry cost will deliver low annual charges and local supplies of pretty well all we need.
Think of it as 19th Century independence in a tough 21st Century world. Malfeasant actors will be swiftly made visible and the good guys will not continue to shoulder the Climate Change burden for the obvious delinquents.
Rewilding can thrive only where vertical agriculture has been accepted as a need not a luxury. Let’s source from 10 not 1000km away and savour seasonal crops not the world’s bounty at too high a climate cost.
The capital exists to deliver the funds. In every developed country the Longevity managers in our financial centres share the same problem to a matter of degree: at the 30+ year point they face known negative cash liabilities simply because populations continue to extend life expectancy.
Properly perfected long -dated bonds can be issued which main purpose is at core green/ESG matters organised to deliver a combination of ecotech and socially positive programmnes whilst meeting the relatively modest coupon required at the long end ( c 250 -300 bps per annum).
To meet the vital redemption of principal the Bond Issuer ( national or corporate) creates a collateral fund with say 25% of each bond proceeds and appoints the respected manager of choice to manage the fund. Each fund is advised by actuaries ( known to me) that specialise in asset liability management algos and are dedicated to returning 100%+ at redemption.
You would not be surprised to discover the level of needs this process could satisfy whilst delivering AUM and fee flow to the finance professionals whilst taking care of nagative cash liabilities in the first world.
Thx Patrick. Agree that something along these lines should be doable. But we need leaders to seize the initiative, get more ambitious, take some risks, set bold targets etc. That's where I think we are stuck. That's why I ask readers to push the leaders of their respective orgs.
It needs to be a more precise exhortation. Don't let your local or national government talk about recession and back slide into climate damage for want of nerve or ignorance. The Longevity issue is non-correlated and good tech will eventually save money and the planet. Public Private Partnerships are just as written - get informed and get vocal. Go Big Go Green or Go Home!
Let’s begin by admitting - and causing our legislators to admit - that transferring production to China and SE Asia is not global reduction of carbon footprint. On the contrary it creates sustainability issues, energy and supply chain dependence and political chains with bad actors.
The tribulations of Germany is evidence enough.
Independent sustainability requires a cost that we must bear and we must ibis its our investment institutions carry the load with our capital. Done properly the initial high entry cost will deliver low annual charges and local supplies of pretty well all we need.
Think of it as 19th Century independence in a tough 21st Century world. Malfeasant actors will be swiftly made visible and the good guys will not continue to shoulder the Climate Change burden for the obvious delinquents.
Rewilding can thrive only where vertical agriculture has been accepted as a need not a luxury. Let’s source from 10 not 1000km away and savour seasonal crops not the world’s bounty at too high a climate cost.
Thanks Patrick for your thoughtful comments. What do you recommend people do to make your suggestions happen sooner at at big scale?
Mark,
The capital exists to deliver the funds. In every developed country the Longevity managers in our financial centres share the same problem to a matter of degree: at the 30+ year point they face known negative cash liabilities simply because populations continue to extend life expectancy.
Properly perfected long -dated bonds can be issued which main purpose is at core green/ESG matters organised to deliver a combination of ecotech and socially positive programmnes whilst meeting the relatively modest coupon required at the long end ( c 250 -300 bps per annum).
To meet the vital redemption of principal the Bond Issuer ( national or corporate) creates a collateral fund with say 25% of each bond proceeds and appoints the respected manager of choice to manage the fund. Each fund is advised by actuaries ( known to me) that specialise in asset liability management algos and are dedicated to returning 100%+ at redemption.
You would not be surprised to discover the level of needs this process could satisfy whilst delivering AUM and fee flow to the finance professionals whilst taking care of nagative cash liabilities in the first world.
You did ask !
Patrick
Thx Patrick. Agree that something along these lines should be doable. But we need leaders to seize the initiative, get more ambitious, take some risks, set bold targets etc. That's where I think we are stuck. That's why I ask readers to push the leaders of their respective orgs.
Mark
It needs to be a more precise exhortation. Don't let your local or national government talk about recession and back slide into climate damage for want of nerve or ignorance. The Longevity issue is non-correlated and good tech will eventually save money and the planet. Public Private Partnerships are just as written - get informed and get vocal. Go Big Go Green or Go Home!