More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Janet Ritz

Janet Ritz

Posted: July 26, 2010 02:09 PM

Jeremy Grantham, Chairman of the Board of Grantham Mayo Van Otterloo (GMO), a Boston-based asset management firm that is one of the largest funds in the world, has written in his quarterly letter:

Conspiracy theorists claim to believe that global warming is a carefully constructed hoax driven by scientists desperate for ... what? Being needled by nonscientific newspaper reports, by blogs, and by right-wing politicians and think tanks? Most hard scientists hate themselves or their colleagues for being in the news. Being a climate scientist spokesman has already become a hindrance to an academic career, including tenure. I have a much simpler but plausible "conspiracy theory": that fossil energy companies, driven by the need to protect hundreds of billions of dollars of profits, encourage obfuscation of the inconvenient scientific results.

Grantham's asset management fund controls over 170 billion dollars. He is the investor and fund manager who predicted the failure of the bubble style of economics, postulating that economies had a tendency to "return to the mean." The quarterly report by Grantham gives his view on the direction of the economy and the trends therein. He has included a section (on page seven), entitled: "Everything You Need to Know About Global Warming in 5 Minutes" and recommends investment that will reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.

A summary of his points are as follows ( full report here - PDF):

• Rising C02 in the atmosphere is a fact with a 40% increase since the advent of the Industrial Revolution.

• The greenhouse effect of rising C02 is proven by physics.

• Changes in solar output cannot account for the rise in temperature over the last 50 years.

• "A warmer atmosphere melts glaciers and ice sheets, and causes global sea levels to rise. A warmer atmosphere also contains more energy and holds more water, changing the global occurrences of storms, floods, and other extreme weather events."

• Grantham refutes skeptics who argue that money should not be spent because of uncertainty. He posits that "since the penalties can rise at an accelerating rate at the tail, a wider range implies a greater risk (and a greater expected value of the costs)."

• He brings up Pacal's question: What is the expected value of a very small chance of an infinite loss? Pascal's answer, "Infinite." Grantham expounds on Pascal here:

The benefits, even with no warming, include: energy independence from the Middle East; more jobs, since wind and solar power and increased efficiency are more labor-intensive than another coal-fired power plant; less pollution of streams and air; and an early leadership role for the U.S. in industries that will inevitably become important. Conversely, what are the costs of not acting on prevention when the results turn out to be serious: costs that may dwarf those for prevention; and probable political destabilization from droughts, famine, mass migrations, and even war. And, to Pascal's real point, what might be the cost at the very extreme end of the distribution: definitely life changing, possibly life threatening.

• The biggest cost of global warming will be the lack of biodiversity, which he reminds his readers is priceless.

• He has a message to his own group that he labels as "die-hard contrarians"

Dear fellow contrarians, I know the majority is usually wrong in the behavioral jungle of the stock market. And Heaven knows I have seen the soft scientists who lead finance theory attempt to bully their way to a uniform acceptance of the bankrupt theory of rational expectations and market efficiency. But climate warming involves hard science.
• He warns that fossil fuel corporations are using denialists and conspiracy theorists to obfuscate the truth that warming is happening in an attempt to preserve their profits.

• Grantham asks why we are even arguing the issue. He points out the pattern of behavior from the tobacco industry and warns that many of the same operatives responsible for the delays in the truth about the dangers of smoking are now working to do the same with climate change.

The obfuscators' simple and direct motivation -- making money in the near term, which anyone can relate to -- combined with their resources and, as it turns out, propaganda talents, have meant that we are arguing the science long after it has been nailed down. I, for one, admire them for their P.R. skills, while wondering, as always: "Have they no grandchildren?"
Grantham's last two points stand best without editorialization:
"Almost no one wants to change. The long-established status quo is very comfortable, and we are used to its deficiencies. But for this problem we must change. This is never easy."

"Almost everyone wants to hear good news. They want to believe that dangerous global warming is a hoax. They, therefore, desperately want to believe the skeptics. This is a problem for all of us."

Investors, take note. One of your own has weighed in on the fact of climate change and has recommended that you buy it. His buy order: The benefits, even with no warming, are too profitable to pass up. The risks, at the very least, are too great to ignore.

Grantham's entire report is available at this link (PDF).

More on this topic at THE ENVIRONMENTALIST

 

Follow Janet Ritz on Twitter: www.twitter.com/janetritz

Jeremy Grantham, Chairman of the Board of Grantham Mayo Van Otterloo (GMO), a Boston-based asset management firm that is one of the largest funds in the world, has written in his quarterly letter: C...
Jeremy Grantham, Chairman of the Board of Grantham Mayo Van Otterloo (GMO), a Boston-based asset management firm that is one of the largest funds in the world, has written in his quarterly letter: C...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 6
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
05:07 PM on 07/27/2010
Global warming is real- Science doesn't work in hard consensus, its a healthy discussion where people search for more and more facts. The majority has given up arguing if its happening and are looking for more specific facts.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cleanerman
09:53 AM on 07/27/2010
This is a very good article. I live in an oil-producing and oil-business state. Every one of the Congressmen from this state deny global warming (or even, polluted environment). This behavior by the Congressmen is the same with the taxes in this country. Nobody wants to be inconvenienced in any form in the "here and now". We want our cake and eat it, too, no matter. The same with taxes. We hate taxes but want the benefits of government such as social security, medicare, farm subsidies, military industrial complex, etc. So fiscal deficits continue and nothing is done about huge consumption of oil--be it domestic or imported from the most radical part of the world. I say over and over, Americans love magic and "pray" that magic will continue. It cannot for much longer.
12:05 AM on 07/27/2010
Carbon credits are now 10 cents per metric ton according to CCX. Now that really sounds like a great investment opportunity unless you're among the poor schmucks who bought in a 7$ in 2008....
07:40 PM on 07/26/2010
While I am for alternative energy and am a professional working in that field - I would caution investors to look critically at the cost of current alternative energy technology - especially on biofuels all which will require petro chemical fertilizers to make significant contributions to our energy problem. Economics are the weakest part of the alternative energy rational - and the most limiting. Life cycle analysis on most alternative technologies are either conspicuously lacking or hyped on unrealistic best case scenarios. Until we get past this super hype phase of alternative energy and start serious economic analyzes, alternative energy will literally be a black hole for investment dollars.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cleanerman
09:58 AM on 07/27/2010
Also, a good point, Masonx. One of the best ways to go forward very soon, is too embrace efficiency. I see all the massive vehicles on our roads (while, most of the time, one person is zooming around in it) and it makes me sick to my stomach. Same goes for the huge homes so many of us live in. Downsize! Lots of things, little and small, could happen to change things, while creating jobs at the same time. Continue R and D for the alternatives. Doing nothing should not be an option.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Overtone
See bio on the Aesop Institute website
03:34 PM on 07/26/2010
He and others of like mind may open a door to an urgently needed, far better Senate Bill, that truly addresses the problem.

See http://www.aesopinstitute.org for a 5 Point Program.