Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
One of the most important aspects of the Divestment movement is the opportunity it presents for us to engage our community in discussion about climate change. This document is meant to help you communicate the purpose of the divestment movement and to make a compelling case for Harvard to divest. Please continue to add to this document as you engage in conversation.
Effectiveness Arguments
fuel companies, Harvard is sponsoring climate change, and that is morally impermissible. o Divestment draws attention to the importance of addressing climate change NOW by Building power: Divestment campaigns have already spread to more than 300 campuses across the country. Pension funds, cities, state government, and individuals are also working to divest. Unity and Hampshire Colleges have already divested from fossil fuels, and the mayor of Seattle has announced that the city is divesting. Sparking discussion: Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island mentioned the movement on the oor of Congress. Divestment has been heavily featured in the press with special mention of our efforts at Harvard. There have been articles in the New York Times, Boston Globe, Guardian, and Time Magazine, and news outlets such as NPR and Al Jazeera have also covered divestment. Even though divestment is primarily a moral and social strategy, there are important economic impacts for fossil fuel companies and clean energy development. The top 500 or so college and university endowments hold nearly $400 billion, with Harvard holding $3.7 billion of that. Getting all of that money out of coal, oil, and gas is signicant. Add in the big state pension funds, and church, synagogue, and mosque investments, and were well on our way to making the fossil fuel industry worry. Divestment starts to raise uncertainty about the viability of the fossil fuel industrys business model. In order to keep warming below 2C, which most governments have agreed to, the fossil fuel industry will need to refrain from burning about 80% of their reserves of coal, oil, and gas. Even though these fossil fuels are still below ground, they are calculated as part of the companies assets and have a value of about $20 trillion. By divesting, we create the potential for these reserves to become stranded assets. Divestment starts to build momentum for moving money into clean energy, community development, and other more sustainable investments. If this campaign succeeds in moving just 1% of the $400 billion that is in college endowments towards sustainable alternatives, thats roughly $4 billion worth of new investments in things like solar bonds, revolving loan funds, and advancedenergy industries. When other investors (individuals, pension funds, and so on) see the nations leading universities begin to move away from fossil fuels, theyll also look into
divestment.
Economic Arguments
Tactical Arguments
business as usual will work in the future. We must get at the root of the problem the business model of the fossil fuel companiesor else all of Harvards good research and education will be, quite literally, wiped out.
Justice Arguments
The fossil fuel industry is a major employer. Are you trying to leave
people jobless?!?
Production of renewable energy tends to be more labor-intensive than that of fossil fuels, which relies on expensive production equipment. A transition toward renewables will create jobs. Automation and corporate consolidation are cutting jobs in the fossil fuel industry even as production increases. Fossil fuel companies could still make a prot and provide jobs as energy companies if they transitioned their massive wealth and expertise to renewables, but they will make such a move only if forced to by government regulation or changes in the market.
groups spend 20 times more on lobbying and get 6 times more in federal subsidies. By making huge contributions to candidates, the fossil fuel industry exerts a huge amount of inuence on national policy. These companies work endlessly to block carbon controls in Congress and continue to raise skepticism about the validity of climate change, something about which scientists are in near unanimous agreement. o For example, when the House was voting on matters related to the Keystone Pipeline, the 234 representatives who voted in favor of the pipeline had received $42 million in campaign contributions from the fossilfuel industry. The 193 representatives who voted against the pipeline had received only $8 million. We are not advocating a world without energy. Fossil fuels have powered the modern world and led to incredible advances. We want a modern world, just not one that is unsustainable and abusive. Divestment is about making this a fair ght, so that alternatives to fossil fuels can ourish and consumers can choose renewable energy.