SoylentNews

takyon [soylentnews.org] writes:

The Guardian, a proponent of fossil fuel divestment [theguardian.com], reports on an analysis by Corporate Knights [theguardian.com]:

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation would have had $1.9bn (£1.3bn) more to spend on its lifesaving health projects if it had divested from fossil fuels and instead invested in greener companies, according to a new analysis [corporateknights.com].

The Canadian research company Corporate Knights [corporateknights.com] examined the stock holdings of 14 funds, worth a combined $1tn, and calculated how they would have performed if they had dumped shares in oil, coal and gas companies three years ago.

Overall, the funds would have been $23bn better off with fossil fuel divestment. The Wellcome Trust, which is the world's biggest health charity after the Gates Foundation, would have been $353m better off. The huge Dutch pension fund ABP [www.abp.nl] would have had $9bn in higher returns, while Canada's CPP [cppib.com] would have had $7bn more.

Original Submission