EU ‘Climate Change Risk’ Pension Fund Rules Make Brexit more Urgent than Ever

The European Union has issued a directive requiring all EU-based pension funds to assess for “climate change risk”.

That means that the greenies have effectively captured 3 trillion euros worth of investment assets under management. Naturally, they are crowing about this victory:

Under the new law, the potential negative effects of climate change or political factors on retirement funds will get the same level of attention as liquidity, operational or asset risks.

“This is a big success for the promotion of investments in sustainable products,” German Greens lawmaker Sven Giegold said, adding that the law “paves the way for the introduction of fossil divestment by European pension funds.”

What’s good news for a Green politician is, almost by definition, bad news for investors.

And so it is in this case, as Eric Worrall notes at Watts Up With That?

Given the disastrous track record of renewables giants like Solyndra and the giant Spanish renewables business Abengoa, I would say banks and pension fund managers have good reasons to steer clear of renewables.

Coercing banks and pension funds into tossing depositors cash into subprime green energy projects in my opinion is unlikely to improve European pension fund performance.

Precisely. Renewables are an exceedingly risky investment, especially since the election of Donald Trump, because their business model is so heavily dependent on government subsidy. Fossil fuels, on the other hand, are likely to perform well in the post-Trump era. So what we have here, not for the first time, is a case of the European Union’s politically correct values undermining the interests of the people it represents.

Worrall adds:

It is also worth noting that until Britain invokes Article 50 and leaves the European Union, the City of London is subject to this new European climate directive, as are any EU based pension funds managed by US banks.

For the City of London – and the UK economy – this is indeed the crux of the matter. The economic case for enacting Brexit grows stronger by the day. Theresa May’s government needs to make a decision – and quickly: does it wish to be dragged down by the sinking ship of an increasingly over-regulated and domineering European Union; or does it want to become one-half of a thriving trans-Atlantic alliance with the freebooting, lightly regulated economy of Donald Trump’s America?