adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Investment

How ‘Climate Investment Traps’ Create A Vicious Cycle For African Nations – Forbes

Published

 on


The high cost of accessing sustainable investment is preventing developing countries from decarbonizing their economies, but levelling the finance playing field could help accelerate poorer nations’ climate readiness by a decade, new research has shown.

In the race against time to cut emissions and prepare for the effects of global warming, nations are seeking to decarbonize their economies in ways that bring multiple benefits to their people. But the report, from University College London (UCL) and published in the journal Nature Communications, finds that developing countries could be caught in “climate investment traps,” whereby the higher cost of capital in those countries combines with increasingly extreme climate impacts to make credit even less accessible. The effect of these traps will be felt most acutely in the poorest African nations such as Madagascar, which is currently undergoing a catastrophic, climate-driven famine (link may be paywalled).

The scenario exemplifies the phenomenon of climate injustice: simply put, the nations that have done the least to cause climate change are those that will suffer most from its effects, as highlighted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

300x250x1

But the UCL report reveals that making adjustments to the way big financial institutions provide money to these nations could break this cycle, accelerating a green transition in the developing world by a decade.

Lead author Nadia Ameli, principal research fellow at UCL’s Institute for Sustainable Resources, told me that while some observers have predicted the developing world—in particular Africa—could become a “renewables powerhouse” owing to an abundant supply of renewable resources, financial realities had often not been taken into consideration.

“There is a belief that, with the dramatic decline in the cost of renewables and the abundance of natural resources such as the sun, it will be much easier for the developing world to decarbonize,” Ameli said. “However, one of the biggest challenges in sustainable energy transitions is likely to be precisely in developing countries, given the difficulties that many of these countries have in accessing and securing capital on the same terms.”

It’s now widely accepted that investing in a low-carbon future can bring huge rewards, both environmentally and financially, for any nation willing and able to upgrade. 

But Ameli and her colleagues note that the cost of capital is far higher in poor countries than it is in the West, owing to huge differences in everything from macroeconomic conditions to business confidence and legal infrastructure. 

“This is why, in order to invest in risky contexts, investors will demand higher premiums and interest rates and developing countries will find it very difficult to secure and access capital,” Ameli explained.

To arrive at their conclusions, Ameli’s team modelled the effects of changes to what’s known as the weighted average cost of capital, or WACC, which indicates variations in the costs of investment in different regions.

In some African nations, such as Congo, Madagascar and Zimbabwe, the cost of capital can reach 30%, while in wealthy countries such as Germany and Japan, the cost can be as low as just 3%.

“The geographical distribution of low-carbon finance, defined as capital flows directed towards low-carbon interventions with direct greenhouse gas mitigation benefits, is highly unequal,” the authors write. Developed countries are “by far the largest recipients” of climate investment money, while African nations and central American countries like Mexico receive only a small proportion.

The scenarios modelled show that reducing the WACC by 2050 “would lead to an almost 50% increase in low-carbon electricity generation by this time,” and further “would also allow Africa to reach net-zero emissions roughly 10 years earlier.”

In discussing their findings, the authors consider what should be done to lower the cost of investment and break the cycle. They note that the sustainability performance of companies tends to lower the cost of capital, “which would prefigure a virtuous loop with the cost of capital gradually dropping as firms become increasingly present in low-carbon energy.” Yet the EU’s Sustainable Finance Action Plan, described as the most ambitious sustainable investment plan available, “overlooks the impact of financing and investment outside Europe and towards developing economies in general.” China’s own answer to the plan goes somewhat further, “defining how Chinese financial institutions may foster low-carbon finance overseas through green bonds, South-South cooperation and the Belt and Road Initiative.” But none of the plans currently in place specifically target developing economies.

The UCL researchers recommend the development of local green bond markets in developing countries, supported both by governments and the big international development banks.

They also suggest that wealthy countries and multilateral development banks should coordinate their efforts more closely to focus on “large-scale low-carbon investments instead of multiplying small projects not achieving transformational impact.”

Lastly, they say, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) should play “a core role in facilitating developing countries’ access to low-carbon finance,” highlighting other studies that suggest the IMF should take steps to include climate risk analysis in its monitoring activities, and specifically support climate-vulnerable countries suffering debt sustainability problems.

“We don’t believe it is fair that regions where people are already losing their lives and livelihoods because of the severe impacts of climate change also have to pay a high cost of finance to switch to renewables,” Ameli said. “Radical changes in finance frameworks are needed to better allocate capital to the regions that most need it.”

Such finance was a hot-button issue at the recent G7 meeting of rich nations. But by the end of the summit, the member states had conspicuously failed to reach an arrangement on how and when they would deliver on a 12-year-old promise of $100 billion per year in sustainable finance to the developing world.

The UCL paper can be viewed here.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Investment

BWXT announces $80M investment for plant in Cambridge – CityNews Kitchener

Published

 on

By


BWX Technologies (BWXT) in Cambridge is investing $80-million to expand their nuclear manufacturing plant in Cambridge.

Minister of Energy, Todd Smith, was in the city on Friday to join the company in the announcement.

The investment will create over 200 new skilled and unionized jobs. This is part of the province’s plan to expand affordable and clean nuclear energy to power the economy.

300x250x1

“With shovels in the ground today on new nuclear generation, including the first small modular reactor in the G7, I’m so pleased to see global nuclear manufacturers like BWXT expanding their operations in Cambridge and hiring more Ontario workers,” Smith said. “The benefits of Ontario’s nuclear industry reaches far beyond the stations at Darlington, Pickering and Bruce, and this $80 million investment shows how all communities can help meet Ontario’s growing demand for clean energy, while also securing local investments and creating even more good-paying jobs.”

The added jobs will support BWXT’s existing operations across the province as well as help the sector’s ongoing operations of existing nuclear stations at Darlington, Bruce and Pickering.

“Our expansion comes at a time when we’re supporting our customers in the successful execution of some of the largest clean nuclear energy projects in the world,” John MacQuarrie, President of Commercial Operations at BWXT, said.

“At the same time, the global nuclear industry is increasingly being called upon to mitigate the impacts of climate change and increase energy security and independence. By investing significantly in our Cambridge manufacturing facility, BWXT is further positioning our business to serve our customers to produce more safe, clean and reliable electricity in Canada and abroad.”

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Investment

AI investments will help chip sector to recover: Analyst – Yahoo Finance

Published

 on

By


The semiconductor sector is undergoing a correction as interest rate cut expectations dwindle, prompting concerns about the impact on these high-growth, technology-driven stocks. Wedbush Enterprise Hardware Analyst Matt Bryson joins Yahoo Finance to discuss the dynamics shaping the chip industry.

Bryson acknowledges that the rise of generative AI has been a significant driving force behind the recent success of chip stocks. While he believes that AI is shifting “the way technology works,” he notes it will take time. Due to this, Bryson highlights that “significant investment” will continue to occur in the chip market, fueled by the growth of generative AI applications.

However, Bryson cautions that as interest rates remain elevated, it could “weigh on consumer spending.” Nevertheless, he expresses confidence that the AI revolution “changing the landscape for tech” will likely insulate the sector from the effect of high interest rates, as investors are unwilling to miss out on the “next technology” breakthrough.

300x250x1

For more expert insight and the latest market action, click here to watch this full episode of Yahoo Finance.

This post was written by Angel Smith

Video Transcript

BRAD SMITH: As rate cut bets shift, so have moves in one sector, in particular. Shares of AMD and Intel, both down over 15% in the last 30 days. The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index, also known as Sox, dropping over 10% from recent highs, despite a higher rate environment.

Our next guest is still bullish on the sector. Matt Bryson, Wedbush Enterprise Hardware analyst, joins us now. Matt, thanks so much for taking the time here. Walk us through your thesis here, especially, given some of the pullback that we’ve seen recently.

MATT BRYSON: So I think what we’ve seen over the last year or so is that the growth of generative AI has fueled the chip stocks. And the expectation that AI is going to shift everything in the way that technology works.

And I think that at the end of the day, that that thesis will prove out. I think the question is really timing. But the investments that we’ve seen that have lifted NVIDIA, that have lifted AMD, that have lifted the chip stock and sector, in general, the large cloud service providers, building out data centers. I don’t think anything has changed there in the near term.

So when I speak to OEMs, who are making AI servers, when I speak to cloud service providers, there is still significant investment going on in that space. That investment is slated to continue certainly into 2025. And I think, as long as there is this substantial investment, that we will see chip names report strong numbers and guide for strong growth.

SEANA SMITH: Matt, when it comes to the fact that we are in this macroeconomic environment right now, likelihood that rates will be higher for longer here, at least, when you take a look at the expectations, especially following some of the commentary that we got from Fed officials this week, what does that signal more broadly for the AI trade, meaning, is there a reason to be a bit more cautious in this higher for longer rate environment, at least, in the near term?

MATT BRYSON: Yeah. I think certainly from a market perspective, high interest rates weight on the market. Eventually, they weigh on consumer spending. Certainly, for a lot of the chip names, they’re high multiple stocks.

When you think about where there can be more of a reaction or a negative reaction to high interest rates, certainly, it has some impact on those names. But in terms of, again, AI changing the fundamental landscape for tech, I don’t think that high interest rates or low interest rates will change that.

So when you think about Microsoft, Amazon, all of those large data center operators looking at AI, potentially, changing the landscape forever and wanting to make a bet on AI to make sure that they don’t miss that change, I don’t think whether interest rates are low or high are going to really affect their investment.

I think they’re going to go ahead and invest because no one wants to be the guy that missed the next technology wave.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Investment

If pension funds can't see the case for investing in Canada, why should you? – The Globe and Mail

Published

 on

By


It’s time to ask a rude question: Is Canada still worth investing in?

Before you rush to deliver an appropriately patriotic response, think about the issue for a moment.

A good place to begin is with the federal government’s announcement this week that it is forming a task force under former Bank of Canada governor Stephen Poloz. The task force’s job will be to find ways to encourage Canadian pension funds to invest more of their assets in Canada.

300x250x1

Wooing pension funds has become a high-priority matter for Ottawa because, at the moment, these big institutional investors don’t invest all that much in Canada. The Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, for instance, had a mere 14 per cent of its massive $570-billion portfolio in Canadian assets at the end of its last fiscal year.

Other major Canadian pension plans have similar allocations, especially if you look beyond their holdings of government bonds and consider only their investments in stocks, infrastructure and real assets. When it comes to such risky assets, these big, sophisticated players often see more potential for good returns outside of Canada than at home.

This leads to a simple question: If the CPPIB and other sophisticated investors aren’t overwhelmed by Canada’s investment appeal, why should you and I be?

It’s not as if Canadian stocks have a record of outstanding success. Over the past decade, they have lagged far behind the juicy returns of the U.S.-based S&P 500.

To be fair, other countries have also fallen short of Wall Street’s glorious run. Still, Canadian stocks have only a middling record over the past 10 years even when measured against other non-U.S. peers. They have trailed French and Japanese stocks and achieved much the same results as their Australian counterparts. There is no obvious Canadian edge.

There are also no obvious reasons to think this middle-of-the-pack record will suddenly improve.

A generation of mismanagement by both major Canadian political parties has spawned a housing crisis and kneecapped productivity growth. It has driven household debt burdens to scary levels.

Policy makers appear unwilling to take bold action on many long-standing problems. Interprovincial trade barriers remain scandalously high, supply-managed agriculture continues to coddle inefficient small producers, and tax policy still pushes people to invest in homes rather than in productive enterprises.

From an investor’s perspective, the situation is not that appetizing. A handful of big banks, a cluster of energy producers and a pair of railways dominate Canada’s stock market. They are solid businesses, yes, but they are also mature industries, with less than thrilling growth prospects.

What is largely missing from the Canadian stock scene are big companies with the potential to expand and innovate around the globe. Shopify Inc. SHOP-T and Brookfield Corp. BN-T qualify. After that, the pickings get scarce, especially in areas such as health care, technology and retailing.

So why hold Canadian stocks at all? Four rationales come to mind:

  • Canadian stocks have lower political risk than U.S. stocks, especially in the run-up to this year’s U.S. presidential election. They also are far away from the front lines of any potential European or Asian conflict.
  • They are cheaper than U.S. stocks on many metrics, including price-to-earnings ratios, price-to-book ratios and dividend yields. Scored in terms of these standard market metrics, they are valued more or less in line with European and Japanese stocks, according to Citigroup calculations.
  • Canadian dividends carry some tax advantages and holding reliable Canadian dividend payers means you don’t have to worry about exchange-rate fluctuations.
  • Despite what you may think, Canada’s fiscal situation actually looks relatively benign. Many countries have seen an explosion of debt since the pandemic hit, but our projected deficits are nowhere near as worrisome as those in the United States, China, Italy or Britain, according to International Monetary Fund figures.

How compelling you find these rationales will depend upon your personal circumstances. Based strictly on the numbers, Canadian stocks look like ho-hum investments – they’re reasonable enough places to put your money, but they fail to stand out compared with what is available globally.

Canadians, though, have always displayed a striking fondness for homebrew. Canadian stocks make up only a smidgen of the global market – about 3 per cent, to be precise – but Canadians typically pour more than half of their total stock market investments into Canadian stocks, according to the International Monetary Fund. This home market bias is hard to justify on any rational basis.

What is more reasonable? Vanguard Canada crunched the historical data in a report last year and concluded that Canadian investors could achieve the best balance between risk and reward by devoting only about 30 per cent of their equity holdings to Canadian stocks.

This seems to be more or less in line with what many Canadian pension funds currently do. They have about half their portfolio in equities, so devoting 30 per cent of that half to domestic stocks works out to holding about 15 per cent of their total portfolio in Canadian equities.

That modest allocation to Canadian stocks is a useful model for Canadian investors of all sizes. And if Ottawa doesn’t like it? Perhaps it could do more to make Canada an attractive investment destination.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending