U-M Board of Regents votes against investing $50 million into fossil fuel companies
Apparently the students protesting here and at Harvard-Yale game are putting a lot of schools on notice about this issue. Good to see, especially if you're a donor, as I certainly wouldn't want my money going to those stupid companies!
December 6th, 2019 at 3:42 PM ^
The $50 Million to be invested in Wolf Cola instead
December 6th, 2019 at 5:04 PM ^
Boko Haram approves
December 6th, 2019 at 5:19 PM ^
We will destroy The West! Our fuel is Wolf Cola!
December 6th, 2019 at 7:01 PM ^
The Jews in Boca Raton love it! I hear they are slurping it up like candy!
December 6th, 2019 at 3:46 PM ^
Hooray for sanctimoniousness!
December 6th, 2019 at 5:21 PM ^
Yes, those "stupid companies" and the millions of jobs and families that depend on those jobs are really dumb. As is the power that they supply that 99% of the world depends upon for modern life. The fact that there is today, NO substitute available to change this for 99% of us doesn't really matter because "energy companies bad." You know, now that I think about it, all of those poor people in India and Africa that actually die every year from having no power are actually better off dying because if they lived they'd contribute to climate change.
The OP post is truly one of the dumbest things I've ever seen written.
December 6th, 2019 at 5:46 PM ^
You might want to read up on the cost of various electricity generating technologies. The cost of non-fossil electricity is pretty darn competitive.
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/lcoe2019
December 6th, 2019 at 9:57 PM ^
Yes it's getting much better, and I'm glad when i see people converting to it. That does not change the fact that it's not ready to supply more than 2% of existing power needs.
December 6th, 2019 at 11:24 PM ^
Non-fossil was actually about a third in 2018. In your defense, maybe you thought that non-fossil was wind and solar. That was about 8%.
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3
Wind capacity 46% and solar capacity 18% were the 1st and 3rd largest new type of generation by capacity in 2019, so those numbers are likely to continue to grow.
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=37952
December 6th, 2019 at 5:50 PM ^
Ah the "humanist" technique. As if the fact that some people might lose their jobs trumps the fact that trillions of organisms would lose their lives. Great approach, not dumb at all
December 6th, 2019 at 6:22 PM ^
In the end, we are not efficient as a population with regards to any type of consumption. And I'm glad to be putting money (hopefully) into something more proactive and efficient.
December 6th, 2019 at 9:55 PM ^
There is, and this is objective fact, no science whatsoever from any reputable scientific group on this planet, that supports mass extinction. None, definitive statement of truth.
Climate change is a true problem and we should amp up research and do many other measures to combat it, but the extinction narrative is pure and utter bullshit
December 6th, 2019 at 7:03 PM ^
Actually there are plenty of alternatives that don’t pollute and destroy our planet. Expand it and there would be millions of jobs for all people who work in fossil fuel. People who bury their heads in the sand and avoid this are really the idiots
December 6th, 2019 at 9:26 PM ^
Unfortunately, the best alternative to fossil fuels (nuclear energy) is actively opposed by the very people who do stuff like protest the regents to not invest in fossil fuel companies. So ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
December 7th, 2019 at 12:15 AM ^
you would need to provide some data to back up that assertion
December 7th, 2019 at 4:10 PM ^
I found this interesting:
This guy worked in the Obama Admin on climate change and came to the conclusion that nuclear is the way. It has some interesting research in it if you really are curious.
December 6th, 2019 at 7:35 PM ^
Then they should die and decrease the surface population
December 6th, 2019 at 7:58 PM ^
Doesn't Scrooge actually say decrease the surplus population? Inquiring minds want to know!
December 6th, 2019 at 10:22 PM ^
Yes, it's surplus.
December 6th, 2019 at 8:51 PM ^
Hey, if we keep going, maybe we'll all lose our jobs because the coasts will flood and there will be massive international competition for clean water and a veritable refugee crisis featuring some 143 million people displaced. For these 1 million "jobs."
Not like other energy industries don't employ nearly as many people, or anything.
December 7th, 2019 at 3:21 PM ^
I acknowledge those things and am appreciative of what the fossil fuel industry has given us, while also recognizing it’s a “stupid” way forward for humanity at this point. I’m pretty convinced that, like we now judge those who owned slaves and condoned slavery, we will be judged by our descendants for knowing about climate change yet continuing to do things like drive cars and cling to the sacredness of our economic comfort above all else.
And if this is the stupidest thing you’ve ever read in your life then I’m presuming you haven’t been on this board during, say, an overtime game against an opponent we were supposed to beat by 40.
December 6th, 2019 at 3:47 PM ^
A public University receiving taxpayer dollars with billions in endowments investing in companies... What's wrong with this picture?
December 6th, 2019 at 3:50 PM ^
Lots...also I'm a proud owner of Exxon stock...hasn't done that great in a bit but still a excellent company
December 6th, 2019 at 5:17 PM ^
What makes it an excellent company, in your eyes?
December 6th, 2019 at 5:53 PM ^
It's at the forefront of finding new technology to replace fossil fuels so it can stay in business and thrive. Yeah, I sure don't want to invest in a company like that.
December 6th, 2019 at 6:05 PM ^
what technologies to replace fossil energy have they found so far that they are actually market leaders in?
December 6th, 2019 at 7:56 PM ^
In the forefront of doing what? Hiding their own research? Because they did that...
December 6th, 2019 at 6:44 PM ^
"Excellent company" is a bit much for a company that knew about climate change as early as 1977 and suppressed and misinformed about it.
December 6th, 2019 at 3:50 PM ^
How the hell should I know? Ask that guy
December 6th, 2019 at 4:01 PM ^
Well, public universities normally receive taxpayer dollars (hence, "public"). But state appropriations do not even cover 10% of U-M's annual budget. From a financial standpoint, it's practically private at this point.
December 6th, 2019 at 5:15 PM ^
The reason tuition is skyrocketing is because anyone can get a student loan.....thanks to Sallie Mae. Federal support of the system is what keeps it in place. If I were the Feds, I would immediately remove that support as at $70k a year, these schools don't need help getting students.
December 6th, 2019 at 5:34 PM ^
You know that would crash enrollment at every school in the country, right?
Maybe the schools should hire half as many administrators instead. Although I do agree the student loan system needs reform, but it should be incremental.
December 6th, 2019 at 6:44 PM ^
Indeed....and maybe then the universities would lower their costs (i.e. let go of bloated admin) and spend money smartly instead of installing lazy rivers: https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/education/article_d493697a-e40e-11e7-978d-eb7f43e822bf.html
Out of state tuition at UofM for my nephew is more than double what it cost me twenty years ago despite having roughly the same number of students. UofM spends $9b educating 46,000 students....and apparently needs a 3/1 Admin to Academic staff ratio (19k to 6k) to do it!!
WTF!
Let it burn to the ground and start this shit over....Universities have lost sight of the educational aspect of their mission and have focused exclusively on the "experience" to the detriment of everyone's wallet.
December 6th, 2019 at 4:01 PM ^
The endowment is the money that is being invested. All of the endowment is invested in stocks, bonds, hedge funds etc.
December 6th, 2019 at 4:19 PM ^
exactly. they have to put it somewhere and try to maximize a return.
December 6th, 2019 at 4:49 PM ^
So the purpose of avoiding fossil fuel companies is to maximize return?
December 6th, 2019 at 5:20 PM ^
If you have a problem with huge corporations or carnivorous hedge funds then mega Universities, like UM, may not be your thing. Michigan has a HUGE endowment. It is invested all over the place and I'm sure we can find lots to dislike about investments they have made directly or through some fund.
Like it or not the University believes it is their responsibility to grow the endowment through "prudent" investments. Hoard it, in other words. As opposed to say spending it to defray the staggering cost of getting a degree.
December 6th, 2019 at 9:19 PM ^
I tend to think a university can both be prudent and invest in a way that reflects the values of an institution and its constituents (to a degree - nothing is going to make everyone happy).
Still plenty of ways to diversify and make money if you want to stay away from industries like oil, opiods, payday lending, tobacco, etc.
January 3rd, 2020 at 10:43 AM ^
You clearly don’t understand how endowments work. But that’s consistent with your posting history.
December 6th, 2019 at 3:51 PM ^
Virtue signalled... for now.
December 6th, 2019 at 3:51 PM ^
Please invest it in things that really matter. Like 5 star recruits.
December 6th, 2019 at 3:53 PM ^
x1000
December 6th, 2019 at 4:18 PM ^
You've come around.
December 6th, 2019 at 6:29 PM ^
Or ball lifters
December 6th, 2019 at 3:54 PM ^
Good. Invest that money in nuclear energy. Don’t waste a penny on electric vehicles. Sorry for the rant but my POS Model 3 was a total lemon
December 6th, 2019 at 3:58 PM ^
nah... the greenies hate nuclear more than total earth destruction by climate change
which makes you wonder how much they really believe in this stuff.
December 6th, 2019 at 4:07 PM ^
Nuclear is the only reasonable pathway to weaning off of fossil fuels. The new tech we have now would make nuclear energy far more efficient and safe than ever before.
These old, aging facilities are the true hazards that these green hippies fail to recognize.
That being said, I don’t see much wrong with this gesture. That’s all this is really. Let the students be students. All the complaining fools probably thought they were changing the world in the 60s on college campuses.
December 6th, 2019 at 4:20 PM ^
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/
The US consumed more of everything (renewable wind, solar) oil, ngas, etc. Not sure this is anything more than wishful thinking over physics.
December 6th, 2019 at 4:24 PM ^
I agree with you. I have toured both coal and nuclear plants and the difference is night and day. The industry calls coal plants dirt burners, and it pretty much looks/smells/feels like it. They are pretty disgusting. They are dirty, dusty, smelly, and pretty gross. Whereas the nuke plants are pristine. Think hospital. If the plant is that gross you can imagine what it is putting off in the air. As long as nuke plants follow proper 2019 safety protocols I think it's the way to go.
December 6th, 2019 at 6:11 PM ^
The problem with nuclear is that whenever anybody tries to build a plant, it wnds up with huge cost over runs and huge delays.
https://www.powermag.com/plagued-by-grim-challenges-vogtle-nuclear-expansion-lags-behind-schedule-says-oversight-consultant/