Russia (bbabo.net), - If we now ban the use of oil, gas and coal in energy, industry and transport, then there will be nothing to pay for the climate agenda and "green" projects. This largely explains why the active fight against fossil energy sources is carried out not through the closure of hazardous industries, but through rising prices for resources and creating artificial barriers to investment in traditional energy.
In the US, three major league banks - Wells Fao & Co., Citigroup and Moan Stanley - have been caught lending to fossil fuel companies since 2017. The total amount is 74 billion dollars. This will entail an adjustment to their ESG (Environmental, Social and Corporate Responsibility) rating. For comparison, in 2020, only 303 billion dollars were invested in projects related to renewable energy sources (RES), which in 2021 showed their complete failure as the main type of generation.
The most popular instrument of pressure on investors is ESG ratings, according to Valery Andrianov, Associate Professor at the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation. Companies investing in supposedly "dirty" industries, including the oil and gas complex, risk downgrading their rating and thereby worsening not only their image, but also the conditions for attracting funds.
Investors want to make a profit from investments, and one of the most promising areas for this is still considered the traditional energy and gas industry. Their attractiveness can only be reduced artificially, for example, through ESG ratings, which is being done successfully now.
According to the head of the National Energy Security Fund, Konstantin Simonov, on the one hand, this is beneficial for the "greens", since it reduces the attractiveness of hydrocarbons as a reliable and cheap raw material. On the other hand, it impedes the development of the oil and gas industry. Thirdly, it frees up a huge array of funds that need to be invested somewhere. But "green" projects themselves are economically unattractive, so they have to be supported through government programs and subsidies, which is a guarantee for investors to return the money, the expert explains.
But here the question arises: where does this huge amount of money for investments, programs and subsidies come from? Their sources are economic growth, which was provided by cheap and affordable traditional energy resources, as well as taxes, including rising carbon footprint fees. By themselves, RES without subsidies and regulation of the market does not bring income and is not competitive. And now, when problems have arisen with economic growth due to the cost of energy carriers, fees and taxes from traditional energy are multiplying.
In fact, hydrocarbons are invited to dig their own grave, Simonov notes. Due to them, the competitiveness of "green" energy and its development is ensured. But in the end, such a policy is increasingly hitting the end consumers of energy. For now, it's just price increases. But in the future, as the shortage of hydrocarbons increases and they are forced out of the market, we will talk about restrictions on access to energy, the expert believes.
Investments in oil and gas are falling, and prices are rising along with it
The "green" agenda is being promoted most actively in Europe, where there are almost no hydrocarbon reserves. And it is relayed, among other things, to our country, which is one of the world leaders in the extraction and export of oil, gas and coal, and the Russian economy is highly dependent on them.
The economically unjustified forcing of the energy transition (the abandonment of oil, gas and coal in favor of renewable energy sources) will lead to a deepening of the stratification between the richest and poorest countries, Andrianov notes. The latter, which do not have the necessary technological and financial resources for the development of new energy, will be declared "dirty" a priori. In fact, we are talking about a new form of colonialism, but under the "green sauce".
In addition, the development of "new energy" implies huge investments, including government ones. Experts from the international consulting company McKinsey have calculated that the world will need $275 trillion for a global energy transition. The entire global GDP in 2021 was $94 trillion.
There are many who want to share this financial pie, Andrianov believes. And against this background, investments in oil and gas are falling. In 2011-2015 leading companies annually invested an average of $16 billion in exploration. In 2020, this figure was only 5 billion. As a result, the level of replenishment of oil and gas reserves is decreasing, there is a risk of their shortage and a rapid increase in energy prices, which, in fact, we are already seeing. Aggressive "green" policy gives rise to the risks of energy starvation, which we may face in the medium term, the expert emphasizes.
bbabo.Net