Frack Check WV » financial risk

Bankers Becoming Aware of Financial Risks of Climate Change World Wide

Duane Nichols — Sun, 17 Nov 2019 08:05:35 +0000

The future is in the hands of bankers

World’s Largest Public Bank Ditches Oil and Coal in Victory for the Climate Movement

From an Article by Eoin Higgins, Common Dreams, November 15, 2019

Climate activists celebrated Thursday the decision of the European Investment Bank (EIB) to stop funding most oil and coal projects by 2021, part of a bid to be the world’s first “climate bank.”

The bank’s board made the decision at a meeting on Thursday, CNBC reported. “Truly amazing win,” tweeted environmentalist Bill McKibben.

In a statement following the news, Friends of the Earth Europe fossil free campaigner Colin Roche said the bank’s decision was a big one. “Today’s decision is a significant victory for the climate movement,” said Roche. “Finally, the world’s largest public bank has bowed to public pressure and recognised that funding for all fossil fuels must end—and now all other banks, public and private must follow their lead.”

Nonetheless, Roche cautioned against complacency. “But 2021 is still too late if we are to avoid the worst effects of climate breakdown, the EIB needs to reject any fossil fuel projects and close its loopholes for gas, and not wait till 2021,” Roche said.

As Common Dreams reported, a previous commitment from the bank would have ended fossil fuel projects by the end of 2020.

According to Reuters, the new policy does not outright ban all fossil fuel projects, but makes most of them impossible under the new parameters:

Under the new policy, energy projects applying for EIB funding will need to show they can produce one kilowatt hour of energy while emitting less than 250 grams of carbon dioxide, a move which bans traditional gas-burning power plants.

Gas projects are still possible, but would have to be based on what the bank called “new technologies,” such as carbon capture and storage, combining heat and power generation or mixing in renewable gases with the fossil natural gas.

“This is an important first step, this is not the last step,” EIB vice-president for energy Andrew McDowell told the BBC.

The news was welcomed by climate advocacy group 350 Action. In a statement, the group’s Germany campaigner Kate Cahoon called the decision “the beginning of the end of climate-wrecking fossil fuel finance” but warned there was still work to do.

“The gas lobby has unfortunately managed to get Germany and the European Commission to insert some loopholes into the policy, which leave the door open for funding of dangerous fossil gas projects,” said Cahoon. “They had better take note of the growing list of pipelines, terminals, and fracking wells that are scrapped thanks to local opposition and the unprecedented masses of people mobilizing for climate justice.”

The bank’s move was seen by 350′s France campaigner Clémence Dubois as an example for other financial institutions across the globe.

“This is a clear signal to financial institutions in Europe and around the world that they must take rapid, transformative action to change their financial models, keep fossil fuels in the ground, and support a just transition to sustainable forms of energy for all,” said Dubois.

NOTE: Click on the graph above to display the traces.

Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) Now Represents “Risk Upon Risk”

Diana Gooding — Fri, 29 Mar 2019 01:22:55 +0000

ACP faces many issues of financing, federal regulations and state laws

New Study Details the Increasing Risks of the ACP

“The ACP is facing a triple threat,” so concludes a new study released March 25 by Oil Change International and Friends of the Earth.

“Atlantic Coast Pipeline – Risk Upon Risk” cites three principal threats to the viability of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline:

1) extensive legal and regulatory challenges that are delaying construction and raising costs;

2) fundamental challenges to its financial viability in the face of lack of growth in domestic demand for methane gas and increased affordability of renewable energy options; and

3) an unprecedented citizen initiative positioned to ensure strict compliance with environmental laws and regulations.

Some further highlights from the six-page study:

• “The ACP is a climate, environmental and human rights boondoggle.”

• “The ACP is facing an onslaught of legal challenges and loss¬es. Seven federal permits have been stayed, suspended or vacated; in fact, all construction on the pipeline is currently stopped. When — or if — construction will start up again is unknown. Environmental groups, Indigenous Peoples and others have brought at least nine court challenges to ACP permits and certifications, most of which are ongoing.”

• “In Dominion’s 2018 long-term Integrated Resource Plan (IRP), four out of five modeled scenarios showed no in¬crease in methane gas consumption for power generation from 2019 through 2033.9 However, in December 2018, this IRP was rejected by Virginia state regulators, in part for overstating projections of future electricity demand.”

• “The most recent IRPs of Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Carolinas also revealed that previously planned methane gas plants have been delayed by at least five years beyond the original proposal, and none have been approved by the state regulator.”

• “Over the next decade, it is likely that the demand for methZane gas in Virginia and North Carolina will decrease further as renewable energy and storage technologies continue to rapidly decline in price and undercut the cost of running methane gas-fired power plants.”

• “If construction proceeds, an unprecedented, highly coordinated science and technology-based Pipeline Compliance Surveillance Initiative (CSI) is positioned to make sure environmental laws and regulations are strictly applied and enforced during construction. It is spearheaded by the Allegheny-Blue Ridge Alliance and member organizations.”

These challenges and the accompanying risk are likely to further delay construction and raise the project’s price tag even higher. If completed, state utility regulators in North Carolina and Virginia are unlikely to justify passing the full cost of methane gas transportation contracts onto ratepayers.

It would be prudent for investors in Dominion, Duke, and Southern to question whether pursuing the ACP further is a good use of capital. As the transition to clean energy gathers pace, the risks and growing costs of this major methane gas pipeline project look increasingly unwise to ratepayers, regulators and investors alike.

Briefing: Atlantic Coast Pipeline – Risk Upon Risk – Lorne Stockman, Oil Change International

———————————————————————

Fracking’s Controversial Image Is Your Investment Risk

Duane Nichols — Tue, 06 Aug 2013 15:36:35 +0000

: Motley Fool Advisors

RE: Range Resources & Cabot Oil & Gas

From the THE MOTLEY FOOL, August 5, 2013

Is fracked natural gas sustainable? Do its public relation risks hinder sound, long-term investing? Companies such as Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation and Range Resources Corp. are raking in profits from plays in the Marcellus Shale, but before making a long-term investment, I suggest you consider possible changes in states’ public policies. The potential for boom and bust in fracked natural gas is similar to public policy’s effect on the coal industry.

Companies with large holdings that require fracking (slang for hydraulic fracturing, whereby injected fluid forces open cracks in rock formations), especially in the Marcellus Shale, are paying out for investors. In the last quarter, Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation reported revenue was $373.3 million, with GAAP reported sales that were 37% above the prior-year quarter at $272.1 million. Range Resources Corp., likewise, had revenue of $398.2 million, up 30% from the prior-year quarter’s $322.2 million. Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation and Range Resources Corp. are the top two operators in Pennsylvania, one of the states most open to fracking, where 74 companies operate gas wells. For all intents and purposes, the fracking industry seems like it’s at the precipice of a continuing gold rush.

Range Resources Corp. is credited with starting the Marcellus Shale boom, and in 2011 sold all its North Texas Barnett Shale holdings to ramp up Marcellus production. The company’s strategy magnifies the importance of public policy for its future, now that it’s staked its future on the play. Its well count in the Marcellus is over 500 now, and the company expects production growth averaging 20% to 25% each year for the near future. Analysts believe that Range could reach 1.6 billion cubic feet of gas in about three years, and doubling that over time, 3 billion in six years, to surpass the U.S. record for a single year’s output. Be wary of those figures, as they’re based on assumptions about present production.

Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation too is heavily involved in the Marcellus; the company operates 226 wells in the formation and is starting a sixth rig in 2014. Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation CEO and President Dan O. Dinges expects capital spending to approximate cash flow this year. Cash flow at Range Resources Corp., meanwhile, is expected to outpace capital spending.

Both companies have seen huge jumps in earnings: in the third quarter, Range Resources Corp. saw revenue increase by 50% to $673.4 million, while Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation reported a 40% increase in net income, up to $89.1 million from $35.9 million.

But let’s hit the brakes for a second and consider the public relations crisis in the industry right now, and its effect on public opinion and policy.

Industry image problems

Coal saw its boom, and then as those supplies waned, companies invented Mountaintop Removal, a destructive practice meant to mine thin seams of coal. With fracking, we have a practice that’s as lambasted, but much more widespread, so any negative PR also covers more ground. MTR was regional, fracking is national. The public relations problems surrounding fracking originate in both secrecy and in tactics used to save money at the expense of image. Let’s talk tactics first. The gas rights grab means less-reputable gas landmen may lie to save money. Recent news headlines include one about an Ohio Amish family, who sold their gas rights and received much lower prices per acre than neighbors. They can’t sue due to religious beliefs, a fact lawyers in the case say is relied on by some companies. The same article mentions an Amish lawsuit involving leasing rights, against Columbia Gas Transmission.

Why should we worry about the isolated cases in this article? With time, they build up and create a synergy corruption effect. Suddenly, Chesapeake, Cabot and Columbia all mire into one big tangled ball in the public’s minds. As for secrecy, gas companies have been remiss in publicly stating the chemical makeup of fracking fluid. Kansas has forwarded legislation to force a limited disclosure of those chemicals. Pennsylvania and 10 other states require that companies list their fracking liquid ingredients on FracFocus, but a Harvard study just found serious flaws in that database. Some other folks have been pretty upset about fracking too, for a while now.

Did you really think I would leave out Josh Fox and Gasland, and now Gasland 2? I’ve watched both movies, and like many others, I have concerns about polluting the water supply. Gasland 2 has shown on HBO, and they have about 114 million subscribers worldwide. That’s viewing potential. Add the watch parties held nationwide and that’s more potential for message distribution. At the Pittsburgh premiere alone, 1,700 people showed up. Whatever your view on the movies, the message has reached a general viewing audience.

Public policy problems

The reaction to fracking has varied drastically among states. In New York, a moratorium on fracking that started in 2008 is still in effect, with no foreseeable change. North Carolina just extended its own moratorium on onshore fracking, as many other states continue allowing the practice with no restrictions other than counting violations. The biggest unknown for fracking is the federal Environmental Protection Agency study that concludes in 2014. The EPA is studying potential impacts on human health, drinking water, and what happens to chemicals used in fracking, including processing and disposal. The preliminary report issued in 2012 is available here, but lacks any preliminary results. New EPA head Gina McCarthy has said states should regulate fracking practices, but we can assume the EPA study results will impact or change some states’ policies. Early findings suggest that some well water in Dimock, Pa., is unsafe for drinking, as a direct result of fracking, according to an internal EPA staff report just obtained by the media. The report directly conflicts with statements made by Cabot Oil & Gas.

Investing that considers risk

Natural gas prices are trending downward, for reasons of weather and market saturation, but the industry is still a smart investment. I suggest completing a thorough study of company reputation before making a long-term investment. First, where are the company’s holdings, not just the formation, but also the state? What track record does the company have with both environmental violations and with landowners leasing to it? And don’t forget to consider liquidity versus assets. For instance, Chesapeake Energy Corporation just sold $1 billion worth of interests in gas lands to improve company liquidity and is veering toward more oil production. Chesapeake Energy has sold off a total $3.6 billion of interests, with plans for more asset sales totaling $2 billion to $4 billion. The company has already sold some of its Marcellus Shale holdings and, surprisingly, some oil holdings, while capital expenditures are down 43% this year. The company is focusing on those properties that provide the highest ROI, and emerging policies and gas prices could dictate if its next asset divestiture is in oil or gas lands.

Gretchen Stone has no position in any stocks mentioned. Gretchen is a member of The Motley Fool Blog Network — entries represent the personal opinion of the blogger and are not formally edited. The article Fracking’s Controversial Image Is Your Risk originally appeared on Fool.com as written by Gretchen Stone.