The Climate Wrecking Industry, Part Deux: Blame the Banks for Climate Change

Guest ridicule by David Middleton, proud member of the Climate Wrecking Industry since 1981

Another gem from Real Clear Energy.

I couldn’t make this schist up if I tried…

Blame your bank for climate change – and demand fossil free finance

Chris Saltmarsh | 4th September 2018

Banks are just as much to blame for the climate crisis as fossil fuel companies and corrupt governments. Campaigning for fossil free finance must be the climate movement’s next step, writes CHRIS SALTMARSH

Shell, BP, ExxonMobil, Gazprom, Total, Chevron. A familiar list? More recently the likes of Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau have joined the ranks of well known climate villains.

This is the first our new fossil free finance series.

These are the companies imposing fossil fuel extraction on – disproportionately poor and Indigenous – communities worldwide and profiting from the root cause of climate crisis, and the politicians that support them. There is, however, another faction within global capitalism equally responsible for accelerating climate breakdown: banks.

Even as climate change campaigners in recent years redirect their blame away from the nebulous “consumer” and towards those who stand to profit from continued climate breakdown, banks have largely been let off the hook.


Ecologist, Setting the Environmental Agenda Since 1970

Amazingly, I think Chris Saltmarsh is his real name.  I found a Chris Saltmarsh on LinkedIn who was the Fossil Free Campaigns Coordinator for People & Planet…

People & Planet is the UK’s largest student campaigning organisation campaigning to end world poverty, defend human rights and protect the environment.

Mr. Saltmarsh has a BS in Politics & Philosophy and a brief résumé of social justice warrior-ing.

I guess the nature of banking and business in general probably wasn’t at the core of a Politics & Philosophy curriculum.

What do banks do?

What is a ‘Bank’
A bank is a financial institution licensed to receive deposits and make loans. Banks may also provide financial services, such as wealth management, currency exchange and safe deposit boxes. There are two types of banks: commercial/retail banks and investment banks. In most countries, banks are regulated by the national government or central bank.

Read more: Bank
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook

Banks that don’t make loans to qualified borrowers, tend to go out of business.

The banks most relevant to the Climate Wrecking Industry are “investment banks”…

What is an ‘Investment Bank (IB)’
An investment bank (IB) is a financial intermediary that performs a variety of services. Investment banks specialize in large and complex financial transactions, such as underwriting, acting as an intermediary between a securities issuer and the investing public, facilitating mergers and other corporate reorganizations, and acting as a broker and/or financial advisor for institutional clients. Major investment banks include Barclays, BofA Merrill Lynch, Rothschild , Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, UBS, Credit Suisse, Citibank and Lazard. Some investment banks specialize in particular industry sectors. Many investment banks also have retail operations that serve small, individual customers.

Read more: Investment Bank (IB)
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook

The Climate Wrecking Industry, like most businesses, relies on investment banks for lines of credit and the underwriting of equity offerings.  Investment banks assess the qualifications of the Climate Wrecking Industry the same way they do for other businesses: Do they have adequate assets and cash flow to pay back loans and justify the underwriting of equity offerings?  If the answer is yes, investment banks, also being businesses, have a fiduciary obligation to their owners to finance the Climate Wrecking Industry just like any other businesses.

In addition to wrecking the climate, the Climate Wrecking Industry provides the following services to the human race:

Feeds nearly half the of humans on Earth.

About “25% of bulk chemical natural gas consumption is used for feedstocks in agricultural chemicals (i.e., fertilizer) and methanol production”.  The Haber-Bosch process, which manufactures synthetic fertilizer from natural gas and atmospheric nitrogen, feeds nearly half of the world population.

Trends in human population and nitrogen use throughout the twentieth century. Of the total world population (solid line), an estimate is made of the number of people that could be sustained without reactive nitrogen from the Haber–Bosch process (long dashed line), also expressed as a percentage of the global population (short dashed line). The recorded increase in average fertilizer use per hectare of agricultural land (blue symbols) and the increase in per capita meat production (green symbols) is also shown. Erisman et al., 2008

Even if one ignores the multitude of other benefits of fossil fuels, the ability to feed 48% of 7.6 billion people means that at least 3,648,000,000 people stand to gain from our continued “addiction” to fossil fuels.  While the Haber-Bosch process doesn’t “burn” much natural gas, it accounts for about 3% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

Provides 85% of the world’s primary energy.

“In 2017, petroleum products accounted for about 92% of the total U.S. transportation sector energy use.”

63% of the electricity in these United States was generated by fossil fuel-fired power plants in 2017.

Fossil fuels are the largest sources of energy for electricity generation

Natural gas was the largest source—about 32%—of U.S. electricity generation in 2017. Natural gas is used in steam turbines and gas turbines to generate electricity.

Coal was the second-largest energy source for U.S. electricity generation in 2017—about 30%. Nearly all coal-fired power plants use steam turbines. A few coal-fired power plants convert coal to a gas for use in a gas turbine to generate electricity.

Petroleum was the source of less than 1% of U.S. electricity generation in 2017. Residual fuel oil and petroleum coke are used in steam turbines. Distillate—or diesel—fuel oil is used in diesel-engine generators. Residual fuel oil and distillates can also be burned in gas turbines.



It has been estimated that if these United States were deprived of electricity, 90% of our population would be dead within two years.

Why banks will continue to be banks despite the nattering of social justice warriors

  1. Banks are in business to make money – That’s why they are called businesses.
  2. Banks make money by financing the Climate Wrecking Industry.
  3. The Climate Wrecking Industry keeps at least half of the humans on Earth alive.
  4. Banks also rely on humans outside the Climate Wrecking Industry to be customers.  Wiping out half of humanity would be bad for business.


BP. Statistical Review of World Energy. June 2018.

Erisman, J. W., Sutton, M. A., Galloway, J., Klimont, Z. & Winiwarter, W. How a century of ammonia synthesis changed the world. Nat. Geosci.1,636–639 (2008)

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Curious George
September 5, 2018 7:38 am

Mr. Saltmarsh has a BS? Mr. Saltmarsh IS a BS.

Reply to  Curious George
September 5, 2018 7:42 am

BS in. BS out.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Curious George
September 5, 2018 8:15 am

I expect that’s some kind of sciencey degree thingamebob, BS?

Reply to  Curious George
September 5, 2018 8:21 am

It reads “Mr. Saltmarsh has a BS in Politics & Philosophy”.

BS means Bachelor of Science or Bull Sh!t.

Since Politics and Philosophy are clearly NOT Sciences, it cannot be a Bachelor of Science, ergo…

Alan the Brit
September 5, 2018 9:40 am

That’s is why here in the UK, we refere to science/engineering degrees as BSc, so as to avoid such an embarrassing confusion! 😉

Reply to  Alan the Brit
September 5, 2018 10:23 am

Sadly however….. i just paid about 60 k for my son to do an MSc in…….. Global Business Management at the LSE . Get your head around that one! Skulduggery is now a science!

Richard of NZ
Reply to  Alan the Brit
September 5, 2018 1:08 pm

A BS in the U.K. is a Bachelor of Surgery, one of the two degrees a medical practitioner acquires, the other being an MB.

I doubt that this advocate is a surgeon.

Reply to  Alan the Brit
September 5, 2018 3:02 pm

Alan the Brit

In some of Canada’s older universities, like Queen’s, B.Sc. (Bachelor of Science) is an engineering degree, also called a Bachelor of Applied Science.

Degrees in the “lesser sciences” like Physics, Chemistry, Biology etc are called B.A. degrees (Bachelors of Arts).

Degrees in English, History, Political Science, Gender Studies and Witchcraft are called B.D.A. degrees (Bachelor of the Dark Arts). 🙂

September 6, 2018 4:17 am

Doesn’t work like that here in the UK. Every degree from Cambridge is a BA for example, even mine in Medical Sciences.

Reply to  Phoenix44
September 6, 2018 7:58 pm

B.D.A. in Medicine – the four humors, bleeding with leeches, treatments with hot cups and all.

Agents of Metabolism
The Four Humors are the metabolic agents of the Four Elements in the human body. The right balance and purity of them is essential to maintaining health. The Four Humors and the elements they serve are as follows:
All four of these humors, or vital fluids, are present in the bloodstream in varying quantities:
Blood, or the Sanguine humor, is the red, hemoglobin-rich portion.
Phlegm, or the Phlegmatic humor, is present as the clear plasma portion.
Yellow Bile, or the Choleric humor, is present as a slight residue or bilirubin, imparting a slight yellowish tint.
Black Bile, or the Melancholic humor, is present as a brownish grey sediment with platelets and clotting factors.

September 5, 2018 7:45 am

Social media makes it easy to go after individuals. I know a pet store owner whose life has been made an absolute hell. He’s an ethical guy and doesn’t deal with puppy mills but that doesn’t matter.

It’s hard to make much of a dent on the banks with social media … but we’ll see. It’s hard to boycott banks.

This morning we have the specter of people burning their running shoes to protest an advertising campaign. I think we’re approaching the time when every company will make at least half the population hate it. It’s impossible to satisfy the radicals and they can be relentless in their persecution of supposed offenders. Lots of sheeple will follow the radicals. It’s bad.

Dale S
Reply to  commieBob
September 5, 2018 8:10 am

I don’t think it’s the radicals who are burning their running shoes.

Dale S
Reply to  David Middleton
September 5, 2018 10:06 am

Burning Nike shoes doesn’t hurt Nike — but failing to buy Nike shoes does hurt Nike, and buying other manufacturers’ brands to replace the burnt Nike shoes will decrease Nike’s market share and depress their stock.

Using Kaepernick as a pitchman may attract a certain sort of customer and alienate another sort of customer. We’ll see how it shakes out, but it’s quite a change from using Michael Jordan as a pitchman.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Dale S
September 5, 2018 12:36 pm

I live about five miles from Nike – and I haven’t owned a pair of Nikes since grade school. They are the classic example of how a progressive town, which tax gauges the majority of its citizens and businesses, give preferential treatment to financial ‘whales’, in order to keep them in the state. I won’t even bring up their hypocritical posturing and business practices. But frankly, it would tickle me to death if they took a big financial hit.

Personally, I wouldn’t burn my own shoes (if I had Nikes), and spite myself – what I’d do is send them back to the factory, demanding my money back.

If everyone did THAT, it might be a little more meaningful.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  David Middleton
September 5, 2018 6:59 pm

That’s the Nike ad everyone is in a tiz about? I don’t see what the issue is?

John Endicott
Reply to  Patrick MJD
September 6, 2018 7:56 am

the tiz isn’t about the content of the ad, it’s about the person they chose for the ad. Kaepernick is very polarizing due to having started the whole taking a knee during the anthem thing. Deliberately picking someone who will piss off half your customer base to be the face of your advertising campaign generally isn’t a wise business move.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  John Endicott
September 6, 2018 7:32 pm

Ah OK, I didn’t know that. I don’t pay much attention of American sports it’s lost on me.

Reply to  David Middleton
September 6, 2018 4:19 am

What slave labour? Never ceases to amaze me that intelligent people cannot udnerstand that even foreigners simply choose the least worst thing to do. People work for low wages in Asia factories because the alternative is worse. Force factories to go elsewhere, and the people have to do the worse thing. That’s caring is it?

John Endicott
Reply to  David Middleton
September 6, 2018 8:01 am

burning the shoes is a largely symbolic act. Following that up with not buying anymore Nike’s shoes/apparel and instead buying Nike’s competitor’s shoes/apparel is what will actually hurt Nike. If you burn the shoes then turn around and buy more Nike shoes, then you’d actually be helping Nike (and I don’t doubt that some, hopefully very small percentage, of the shoe burners are stupid enough to do just that. You just can’t account for stupid).

Reply to  Dale S
September 5, 2018 8:27 am

True. That doesn’t stop the left from claiming that the alt-right is going after Nike.

Nike has been losing market share even before this debacle. link Nike made an ‘interesting’ marketing decision. We’ll see how that works out for them.

Reply to  David Middleton
September 5, 2018 10:40 am

Their stock was down yesterday, haven’t looked today since I don’t and will not own any.

John Endicott
Reply to  JimG1
September 6, 2018 8:14 am

Currently down for today, after a brief bump up in the early morning, but basically it’s price has been hovering around where is was since the initial drop in the wake of ad deal becoming public knowledge

John Endicott
Reply to  David Middleton
September 6, 2018 8:06 am

Not much of a win for Nike if it ends up hurting their business in the long run. Remains to be seen how effective the “boycott” will be. If it’s just momentary anger reflected by shoe burning that is quickly forgotten, then yes, it will be a “win” of sorts (as in it will not have had much impact on their business). But if the angry boycotters don’t forget and stick to their boycott and aren’t replaced by an equal or greater number of SJWs who approve of this move by Nike, then it will not be any kind of “win”.

Reply to  commieBob
September 5, 2018 10:28 am

The bigger issue is that he writes himself an idiot….. yes I did intend to say that. Why waste a nanosecond on a fool who insists on demonstrating it in public?

John Garrett
September 5, 2018 7:48 am

If Russia really wants to wreck the U.S. economy, all they have to do is fund Greenpeace, Sierra Club, NPR, PBS, Natural Resources Defense Counsel, CNN, Wilderness Society, Audubon Society, Union of Concerned Scientists, et al.

Reply to  John Garrett
September 5, 2018 8:04 am

I’m pretty sure they already do…

Reply to  John Garrett
September 5, 2018 8:17 am

Russia probably IS funding the (red) green machine.

Patrick Moore, a co-founder of Greenpeace, provides a history of the rise of eco-extremism, below. Moore says that the far-left political movement effectively annexed the green movement after the fall of the Berlin Wall, when pro-Soviet groups were discredited and needed to find a new power base for their far-left political agenda.

The Rise of Eco-Extremism
by Patrick Moore (1994)

Alan the Brit
Reply to  John Garrett
September 5, 2018 8:17 am

Ironically, they have the reddies to do it with all that cash they’re making from oil & gas!

Reply to  John Garrett
September 5, 2018 8:59 am

1986 Wackersdorf, Germany was likely Soviet- Green rioting, or rather terrorism . After 1990 bankrupt Russia had other problems. So far Mueller has not accused Trump et al of green terrorism, being so friendly with Putin an’ all. Even MI6 Christopher Steel’s dirty dossier avoided that.
Hmmm … maybe Mr. Moore should give Halper a call at Cambridge to prod the FBI again?

Reply to  John Garrett
September 5, 2018 10:33 am

Not just the US and not just GangsterPutinckik. Go back to the Frankfurt School in the 1930’s and Critical Theory and then listen to the “left” speak. They spout marxism all the time and are too ignorant and lazy to care

mark from the midwest
September 5, 2018 7:52 am

It’s odd that every time I see an article that blames an industry for AGW the stocks in that sector go up … go figure

Gordon Dressler
Reply to  mark from the midwest
September 5, 2018 8:28 am

“I don’t care what the newspapers say about me as long as they spell my name right.”
— variously attributed to:
Mae West,
P.T. Barnum,
George M. Cohan,
Will Rogers,
W.C. Fields,
Mark Twain, or
Oscar Wilde.

Walt D.
September 5, 2018 8:11 am

Subsidies stifle innovation.
If some thing is uneconomic it is uneconomic.
Look at the ethanol subsidy.

Alan the Brit
September 5, 2018 8:14 am

“within global capitalism”. I see this likely wet behind the ears intellectual is fully qualified to comment on Climate Change Wrecking Industries, among other things! Don’t they realise how easily they give themselves away as to their globul Socialist agenda! AND as as said above, Fossil Fuels feed around half the world’s population, but of course their mass murdering colleagues in the Population Control brigade won’t like that one jot, will they! As I’ve said before, to achieve their intended Population Reduction Scheme, the dilema they will face, kill us all via Conventional Natural Gas or Fracked Natural Gas!

Gordon Dressler
September 5, 2018 8:21 am

The on-line bio for “Chris Saltmarsh”, the student organizer operating in the UK who graduated from The University of Sheffield with Bachelor’s Degree in Politics & Philosophy, indicates he was born in 2000 +/- 1 year.

Thus, he’s probably less than 19 years old. Thus, his ignorance and naiveté of how the real world works, especially business and economy within a given nation. Thus, he would not understand 99% of this rebuttal article.

Reply to  Gordon Dressler
September 5, 2018 8:43 am

He’s got to be pretty smart to have graduated Univeristy at 18 +/- 1.

Reply to  Gordon Dressler
September 5, 2018 9:10 am

From his Linkedin profile he did his GCSEs in 2012 which would indicated him being 16 then (normal age for GCSEs in UK) So he was born in 1996 and is now 22. Has just graduated from Sheffield University ranked 75th in the QS World University Rankings. His high school was a ‘touchy feely’ international college, UWC Atlantic College, which would indicate he came from well off background so well sheltered from the real world

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Edwin
September 5, 2018 9:47 am

They’re the best experts!

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Edwin
September 5, 2018 1:21 pm

Just another Peter Pan Leftist who opted out on maturity.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Gordon Dressler
September 5, 2018 9:46 am

If memory serves, Sheffield has always been a hotbed of Socialism, with many aleft-wing politician having studied their!

Steve O
September 5, 2018 8:38 am

“These are the companies imposing fossil fuel extraction on – disproportionately poor and Indigenous – communities worldwide and profiting from the root cause of climate crisis, and the politicians that support them. There is, however, another faction within global capitalism equally responsible for accelerating climate breakdown: banks.”

— The writer is either very stupid, or is simply an anti-Capitalist. Actually, I guess it’s a combination of both. Perhaps climate scientists don’t care that some in their camp see climate activism as a convenient cover to bash capitalism and to implement socialism.

Reply to  Steve O
September 6, 2018 4:21 am

How does he know they are “imposing extraction”?

September 5, 2018 8:38 am

The Wall Street Journal, 4 September 2018


The climate-change movement is stuck, even after a scorching summer elevated the issue across much of the Northern Hemisphere. It is powerful enough to command lip service from politicians, but too weak to impose the policies it says are needed to prevent catastrophic change.

Many environmentalists fail to grasp that the real problem isn’t skepticism that the climate is changing, or even that human activity is a leading cause of the change. Millions worry about climate change and believe human activity is in large part responsible. But they do not believe that the climate movement has the answers for the problems it describes. Green policy blunders, like support for ethanol in the U.S. and knee-jerk opposition to nuclear power, erode confidence that environmental activists—who too often have an anticapitalist, Malthusian and technophobic view of the world—can be trusted, to as they often say, to “save the planet.”

[end of excerpt]

Good so far as you go, Walter Russell Mead, but you don’t go far enough.

The mainstream debate between global warming alarmists and skeptics is about ONE parameter – the sensitivity of climate to increasing atmospheric CO2.

Global warming alarmists have consistently used highly inflated values of climate sensitivity to promote their very-scary and very-false story – that we’re all going to suffer from runaway global warming, caused by increasing atmospheric CO2.

There is NO evidence that climate sensitivity is high enough to cause catastrophic global warming, and ample evidence that increased atmospheric CO2 is hugely beneficial to plant and crop growth, and any CO2-driven warming and will be mild and net-beneficial to humanity and the environment.

Global warming alarmism is a false crisis, in fact it is the greatest scam, in dollar terms, in the history of humanity.

Joel O'Bryan
September 5, 2018 1:25 pm

Mead’s article was essentially the James Hansen party line. That is, that climate alarmism over CO2 emissions is justified, but if the environmentalists were serious about it they’d embrace nuclear power.

He of course is right for the wrong reason. We need to adopt much more pro-nuclear energy strategies, not because of fossil fuel CO2 emissions, but simply because those fuel sources are finite and will one day be exhausted.

September 5, 2018 8:47 am

The little detail about two types of banks above is explosive.
Up to 1999 they were strictly seperated by FDR 1934 Glass-Steagall Act. That meant no rescue from FDIC tax funds for the investment types. Since 2000 we have bailouts which makes the “universal” banks the greatest danger to civilization no matter what they “invest” in. Just Deutsche Bank alone could flatten the entire German GDP . The climate BS both hides this bomb and flailingly tries to rescue these zombies with green funding.
Expect much more madness from cratering transatlantic finance. Sheer desperation when faced with Trump doing a Glass-Steagall as promised (even Bernie did too).

Reply to  bonbon
September 5, 2018 10:06 am

Money is based on faith. The central banks will not hesitate to step in and provide money. The key is does the population have faith in its money. Venezuelans have little faith.

John Tillman
Reply to  bonbon
September 5, 2018 10:34 am

Trashing Glass-Steagall, while probably ill-advised, wouldn’t by itself have crashed world economies in 2008-9. That took the other part of the 1998 package, insisted upon by Clinton, Rubin, Dodd and Frank in order to go along with dumping G-S, ie the subprime slime, supposedly to help the deserving poor afford to own a house. Rubin promptly left the administration to run Citi, taking advantage of the loosened underwriting scheme he had helped concoct.

Tossing time-tested mortgage lending standards, when combined with allowing investment banks to create mortgage-backed securities, bundling bad loans and selling them as investment instruments, was doomed to cause disaster within a decade. Wise heads at the time warned of what could and did happen, with housing markets going boom amid liar’s loans and home flipping, then bust when the bubble burst.

Naturally Bush was blamed for the credit crisis created by Clinton. His first Treasury Secretary tried to rein in Fannie and Freddie, but [democrat Congressman Barney] Frank’s live-in boyfriend ran Fannie, so that was a non-starter.

Bush’s contribution to the crunch was shifting 500 FBI bank fraud investigators to counter-terror duty, without Congress funding replacements. And his then Treasury Secretary let Lehman file for BK [bankruptcy], unlike the Fed loan which supported the failed Bear Stearns until J. P. Morgan could buy it. Some have suggested that Soros suckered Sec. Paulson into letting Lehman drown in debt, leading to the financial crisis and TARP bail out of “too big to fail” banks.

Greg Woods
September 5, 2018 8:47 am

‘Mr. Saltmarsh has a BS in Politics & Philosophy and a brief résumé of social justice warrior-ing.’

= How does one get a BS in social studies?

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Greg Woods
September 5, 2018 9:50 am

Ah, but it’s a “science” don’t you know?

Peta of Newark
September 5, 2018 9:01 am

I used to be sweet and innocent like that.
Really. I did.

Until it dawned on me what the story of Cinderella is actually about.
About what REALLY makes the world go round.
Although in fact, it doesn’t really matter whether or not ‘The World’ does rotate or not or if it’s flat, spherical or even hyperbolic.

What matters is that there is someone there to witness the rotation, or the flatness or the otherwise…..
Hence why Cinders chose The Prince rather than some bonehead dimwit off Skid Row

And make NO mistake, SHE chose him.

D. Anderson
September 5, 2018 9:01 am

I wouldn’t take this threat too lightly. Big business is going nuts – eg. Nike, Levis, anti-gun banks.

Reply to  D. Anderson
September 5, 2018 2:45 pm

It’s an attack on the implicit social contrat that very big businesses don’t do politics. (Hollywood broke the contract long ago.)

Joel O’Bryan
September 5, 2018 9:17 am

Saltmarsh’s P&P likely gets most of its funding from Putin’s disinformation machine.

Coeur de Lion
September 5, 2018 9:22 am

The Synod of the Church of England has recently decide to ‘disinvest’ their pension fund from ‘fossil fuels’ unless the companies do things to ensure we come in under the ‘2 degrees’ mantra. Ludicrous. How do the prelates imagine this can be computed? Reduce CO2 level in coal and oil? Eh? Reduce production and let in Saudi Arabia? Terrific. The whole exercise is riven with ignorant futility and will only affect the poor pensioners – retired parish priests and the like.
I have written lengthily to the Bishop of Salisbury who ‘leads’ for this caper, including a photo I took a coupla years ago of a Hmong tribal boy cooking the family lunch on twigs and dung, doing his best to join the 3 million lung disease deaths annually. A consortium of Thai and Chinese banks is investing in Laotian coal fired electrical generation so things may get better. Meanwhile, are these proud prelates, suckered by their ignorance and brainwashed by the Left, walking home barefoot to their unheated palaces? Not on your sweet life. Should I go on contributing to the local church food bank? Of course I should.
No Reply Yet!

Reply to  Coeur de Lion
September 5, 2018 9:35 am

Disappointing, for sure, the synod’s reaction.
But typical.

Are they boycotting Nyke?
Are they boycotting Archer Daniels Midland?
Are they boycotting the Bank of England?

Just asking.

Walter Sobchak
September 5, 2018 9:39 am

Overall, you wrote an excellent article. I do have one quibble however:

“About 25% of US natural gas production is used as a feedstock for fertilizer production, fossil fuels contribute to the value added to our economy by farming.”

I went to the page you linked. Here is what I found:

“the U.S. industrial sector [consumed] 9.8 quadrillion British thermal units [of natural gas] in 2017”

A quadrillion British thermal units is often referred to as a “Quad” and is 10e15 (quadrillion) BTU. A BTU is 1055 Joules. So a Quad is 1.055*10e18 J a/k/a 1.055 Exajoules [EJ].

“As the largest natural gas consumer in the industrial sector, the bulk chemicals industry consumed 3.1 quadrillion Btu of natural gas in 2017, or the equivalent of about 3.0 trillion cubic feet. The bulk chemicals industry includes production of organic chemicals (including petrochemicals), inorganic chemicals, resins, and agricultural chemicals.”

Therefore the entire bulk chemical industry, which is more than just fertilizers, consumed a little bit less than a third of total natural gas production. 3.1Q/9.87Q=0.3163265306

“Most natural gas in the bulk chemicals industry is used for heat or power applications, but about 25% of bulk chemical natural gas consumption is used for feedstocks in agricultural chemicals (i.e., fertilizer) and methanol production.”


Note that the eia page linked does not breakdown between methanol and fertilizer. So the correct number is less than 8%.

September 5, 2018 9:41 am

I will just come right out and put the blame squarely where it belongs, on the Climate! Can’t make up its mind, hot or cold, wet or dry, sweet bleeding Jebus, pick one and move on!(do I actually have to put a sarc tag on this?)

The environwackjobs have always been against capitalism, attacking banks has been one of their favorite pastimes since they came out of the closet, this is nothing new. They blew their wad with the Occupy stupidity, had to let it lie in the dark for awhile, now they are trotting it back out all shined up and dusted off. Perhaps banks should list all these watermelons and stop doing business with them. They keep publicly declaring themselves, write those names down and blacklist them. Its what leftards want to do to anyone who does not accept their stupidity. Fair is fair.

Bruce Cobb
September 5, 2018 9:42 am

It’s actually Brain Free Finance. But, two out of three ain’t bad.

John Tillman
September 5, 2018 9:42 am

Much of the so-called “Green Revolution” in agriculture, which has so boosted crop yields that the world can now feed over 7.5 billion people, whereas famine was common with half that global population fifty years ago, is thanks to fossil fuels and hydrocarbon feed stocks for fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides. New varieties are adapted to work with such inputs derived from fossil fuels.

September 5, 2018 10:10 am

“I guess the nature of banking and business in general probably wasn’t at the core of a Politics & Philosophy curriculum.”

Neither it seems was maths, physics and chemistry!

Coeur de Lion
September 5, 2018 10:13 am

The best

September 5, 2018 10:38 am

A very transparent plan, go after those servicing the industry you are trying to ruin, the leftist, commie, progressives are doing the same thing with the gun industry. The Alinsky art of the lie just keeps on ticking. You can see some of these fanatics being dragged out of the Senate hearings today on tv. My hope is that there are still enough non idiots left in our country to absorb the fact of who and what these people really are.

September 5, 2018 10:48 am

Here’s my go at it:

Shell, BP, ExxonMobil, Gazprom, Total, Chevron. A familiar list? More recently the likes of Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau have joined the ranks of well known climate villains.

This “familiar list” provides all the comforts and capabilities for a BS in Politics & Philosophy to practice his hypocrisy. How, then, does he not fit his own definition? The only climate villain that I have ever known about was Mr. Freeze, and he was a comic-book character. I guess the author’s BS comes in handy for writing comic book stories, which is what he appears to be doing here.

This is the first our new fossil free finance series.

I guess all the fossil-free energy required to manufacture the computers on which the series is composed, and all the fossil-fuel energy required to power the infrastructure supporting writing the series does not count.

These are the companies imposing fossil fuel extraction on – disproportionately poor and Indigenous – communities worldwide and profiting from the root cause of climate crisis, and the politicians that support them.

He is really applying his BS well here. See previous response. What does “imposing fossil fuel extraction on” even mean? — you mean like making fossil-fuel AVAILABLE? — maybe creating jobs for the “poor and indigenous”? — “profiting” like other businesses customarily do, when providing products and services NECESSARY FOR SURVIVAL ? And a minor correction — the “root cause of the climate crisis” is the proliferation of climaniacs like the writer of the above-quoted spew.

There is, however, another faction within global capitalism equally responsible for accelerating climate breakdown: banks.

He appears to conflate his personal beef with capitalism and his falsely exaggerated view of climate change to arrive at an absurd accusation here. Are we sure he doesn’t have a PhD ?

Even as climate change campaigners in recent years redirect their blame away from the nebulous “consumer” and towards those who stand to profit from continued climate breakdown, banks have largely been let off the hook.

By “climate change campaigners”, is he referring to climate alarmists? And how are consumers “nebulous”, where blame for using fossil fuels is concerned, since THEY are the END USERS who DEMAND the benefits of their use? And why deflect “blame” from the END USERS who DEMAND these benefits to those who PAY for the PROVISION of these benefits that the “nebulous” consumers manically DEMAND? Idiot !

John Endicott
Reply to  Robert Kernodle
September 5, 2018 12:19 pm

The only climate villain that I have ever known about was Mr. Freeze, and he was a comic-book character

I was going to suggest Weather Wizard (another comic book character), but his schtick is weather not climate 😉

Reply to  John Endicott
September 5, 2018 2:54 pm

Mr. Freeze would be quite capable of changing long-term weather patterns. (~_~)

September 5, 2018 11:27 am

Shell, BP, ExxonMobil, Gazprom, Total, Chevron. A familiar list? More recently the likes of Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau have joined the ranks of well known climate villains.

They just don’t “get it”. The “Death by Hell on Earth unless you ‘Convert'” just hasn’t worked. It died back in Copenhagen.

The more the ’cause’ is seen for what it is, the more desperate it becomes.

Every weather event is now ‘proof’ of Global Warming. Cold is ‘weather’, warm is CC.

Once they broke their own rules, 30 years is change, today is weather, they exposed it all for the power play that it has always been.

Johann Wundersamer
September 6, 2018 9:19 pm
%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights