As oft-noted here, Evans-Pritchard is often amusingly contrarian with an interesting point to make; and equally often just plain bonkers. His latest DTel offering - fresh from his triumphant insistence that Labour should stick to its £28 billion pledge, hoho - straddles both characterisations.
This is the year the world’s green juggernaut becomes unstoppable - the greatest economic growth story since the industrial revolution has crossed a critical threshold
Well, we read what he writes and we know what he means: but caveats need to be entered.
1. 2024 isn't the year: it was 2018-19, as explained here several times. This was the window in time through which shone the dazzling light of expenditure on adaptation / resilience to climate change being classified by the UN as "green", & therefore qualifying for government subsidy / underwriting etc. At this point, every traditional steel-n-concrete industry and their bankers realised this Green thing really had something in it for them - road repairs, sea defences, flood protection measures, reservoirs etc etc. At which point - and that's 5 years ago now, Ambrose - the switch was thrown.
(Not all Greens are big fans of this development. For one thing, dosh for adaptation diverts funds away from what they'd prefer to be spending money on; and for another, it can be portrayed as having given up on outright prevention of climate change, which many of them still cling to.)
2. There's a renewal in oil & gas, too. More than one thing can be true at once, in this complicated world of ours. The big O&G companies - and not just the Aramcos, ADNOCs & Petronas's of this world; it's Exxon, Shell, Total, BP and Equinor, too - have tracked the spending on renewables, modelled its impact, and noticed that the green trajectory lauded by AEP isn't going to eliminate the need for oil & gas for a very long time yet to come - the tobacco industry phenomenon I've written about before. It might have been just the NOCs, the Chinese, and the piratical energy traders who benefitted: but now the IOCs have started to reorient.
So, quietly at first (except Total**: their buccaneering CEO is made of stronger stuff), they've started on strategies that will allow them to carry on with their traditional businesses, while maintaining at least some kind of green front. An ostentatious readiness to get stuck into the 'S' bit of CCS is one such wheeze; a bit of renewable investment of their own is also in the mix (except for Exxon, which started thinking that maybe it didn't need to change after all, a couple of years ahead of the others).
I'm not sure how the stock markets will handle this, or the pension funds. But be in no doubt, however the spoils are shared and the shares are held, there's a long-term viable business still there.
ND
______________________
** This may have awkward consequences for Total, because it has been identified as #1 Bad Guy by the greens who are willing to go violent, and they plan to target it.
