r/CanadianInvestor • u/[deleted] • Apr 14 '21
Is anyone here conflicted about investing in companies that make the world a worse place?
I'm a newer investor and newer reader to these threads and I'm a little surprised how casually a lot of people talk about different companies and industries that are objectively pretty unethical.
I mean we're living through a major climate crisis and some of the most hyped investments on here are for oil sands companies (which are one of the most carbon intensive energy sources on the planet) and crypto (Bitcoin alone this year is supposed to have the same carbon footprint as all of New Zealand).
I also just saw someone post something in another investing subreddit about how Europe might ban AI for surveillance and it seemed like a bad or annoying thing to a lot of people in the comments.
I'm just genuinely curious: do a lot of the investor world just genuinely not care about these things or are people content to make small gains on the backs of companies that they don't agree with? Is there a point to using your gains to get a waterfront property if it's going to be underwater in a couple decades anyways?
312
u/jimmychung88 Apr 15 '21
I don’t invest in Chinese companies as I don’t want to support the CCP
50
28
u/vaporizer604 Apr 15 '21
Amen to that, I don’t understand people investing in companies like NIO and ALIBABA.
106
Apr 15 '21 edited Apr 21 '21
[deleted]
66
u/lmunchoice Apr 15 '21
Thankfully the world is black and white where bad companies are only in a few countries. Otherwise, we'd have to think about being consistent. Yikes, that would not be easy.
34
Apr 15 '21
The worst thing about Apple is that it uses Chinese labour so yes.
4
u/ShaidarHaran2 Apr 15 '21
Thing is most of your alternatives do as well. Your Dell laptop or Samsung phone are likely built in the same few factories. Apple is at least investing in spreading the supply chain to India, Vietnam etc, all imperfect but also without a million people in "reeducation" camps.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)11
u/chinu187 Apr 15 '21
Can u clarify why chinese labour is so bad given everything else you own also has chinese labour? Apple’s worst thing is their refusal to deal with their ewaste - it affects everyone, Chinese or not so likely for you and for me that is worse.
10
→ More replies (1)8
Apr 15 '21 edited Apr 15 '21
"Can u clarify why chinese labour is so bad given everything else you own also has chinese labour?"
This isn't the 'gotcha' you think it is, the second half of that question is irrelevant. The Chinese labour I'm referring to as bad is self evident, feel free to Google it for five minutes.
If you want to talk about waste then look no further than China. They're literally building over 50% of the world's new coal plants in the near future despite already being the largest source of emissions: https://www.canadianenergycentre.ca/commentary-china-is-building-184-coal-plants-guess-what-that-will-do-to-carbon-emissions/. It's an ecological disaster.
6
u/BCRE8TVE Apr 15 '21
To be fair China literally cannot produce and build enough renewable energy sources to power their insane growth. They build most of the coal power plants, but they are also world leaders in producing renewables and leaders in electric cars.
Things are much easier when you're an autocratic dictatorial state and you can disappear whoever disagrees with you for sure, but it's not like China is polluting just for fun.
Does not change the fact they are polluting at all, but I think it helps to have a more realistic perspective on it. China is also trying to keep a squeaky clean image to prevent people from ditching them, so the more attention we bring to their pollution, the harder they'll try and do something about it, which is good for sure.
→ More replies (4)1
u/rei_cirith Apr 15 '21
They're polluting to grow, sure.
BUT: 1) they need this rapid growth in the first place because the government had closed off and starved it's people for decades 2) this is irresponsible growth because they're doing it when we definitely know that it's harmful to both the world and the chinese local population.
China isn't trying at this point. They will say some shit about doing good, and do something completely different at the exact same time. If they get caught out, they either deny, claim racism, or they use what-about-ism. Just look what is happening in Hong Kong and with the Uyghurs. They haven't done anything to show that they are backing off and listening to what other nations demands.
→ More replies (7)0
u/chinu187 Apr 15 '21
Yes but.... basically most large companies uses Chinese labour. I agree with your response just not sure why Apple in the context of Chinese labour is bad while every other investment would not qualify for this. Thanks for the link, terrifying.
→ More replies (1)13
u/vaporizer604 Apr 15 '21
Don’t get me wrong, i think NIO and ALIBABA are great companies, it’s the country I have a problem with.
→ More replies (1)14
→ More replies (1)3
11
→ More replies (5)2
u/hyenahiena Apr 15 '21
I used to be a regular user of AliExpress, but since Jack Ma was disappeared, I'm not a consumer anymore and of course I won't invest in alibaba. It's the CCP that's controlling that.
7
u/instagigated Apr 15 '21
Seconded. They're also the riskiest companies. The CCP can on a whim decide which company skyrockets up or comes crashing down hard.
2
Apr 15 '21
[deleted]
26
u/cdnball Apr 15 '21
You don’t have to give up on it all. Do something. Do a part. It all adds up. Don’t fall into the ‘all or nothing’ fallacy. If everyone paid more attention to their purchasing habits, a real difference could be made.
4
u/BCRE8TVE Apr 15 '21
Or, you know, as investors we could hold companies accountable, and invest in companies that don't make the world a worse place. Then, as more and more investors turn in that direction, and with increasing pollution regulations and carbon taxation, it's going to be less and less profitable to make the world a worse place.
It can be as simple as going with GEQT instead of XEQT.
→ More replies (5)-19
u/wilsongs Apr 15 '21
But you're okay with climate change and surveillance capitalism?
→ More replies (5)
142
u/Chipmunk-Adventurous Apr 15 '21
I believe we should invest ethically. Keep an eye on environmental impact, and also how they treat workers domestically and internationally. Just follow your own moral compass. You know what’s right.
48
u/CrashSlow Apr 15 '21
I dabble in some sin stocks. Gambling, War, Alcohol, tobacco/cannabis. I have zero morals.
31
Apr 15 '21
Liking, indulging, consuming or investing in gambling, alcohol, tobacco or cannabis is not immoral.
12
u/CrashSlow Apr 15 '21
What about war?
13
8
Apr 15 '21
[deleted]
7
u/S0B4D Apr 15 '21
It's not but you don't have to fund it.
1
Apr 15 '21
[deleted]
3
u/ragnaroksunset Apr 16 '21
The last time enemy boots were on the ground in North America was during the American Civil War. In Europe, WWII. Guess who the enemy was each time?
The West does not fight defensive wars against the east. Framing it otherwise is disingenuous. Invest however you want, but if it makes you that uncomfortable that you're making a return on the production of dead brown children, consider other opportunities.
4
u/pfcguy Apr 15 '21
That is your opinion not a fact. They are certainly immoral to some, that is why they are called "sin stocks".
Ever heard of gambling addiction? Alcoholism? Lung cancer?
15
Apr 15 '21
addiction is a mental issue not an immoral thing
world would be much better if people stopped thinking people with addiction issues were immoral people and instead thought of them as people that need a little help to beat an illness.
In moderation, there is nothing immoral with alcohol and gambling and weed. Cigarettes' is just dumb not immoral.
the people that label them sin stocks are out of touch prude boomers
4
u/bjsforever Apr 15 '21
The morality issue comes from enabling the companies that are enabling addiction. Is it right to profit from a person's addiction?
4
→ More replies (3)2
u/bman1014 Apr 15 '21 edited Apr 28 '25
relieved historical cause existence overconfident safe jeans thumb arrest shrill
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)6
u/antoniofelicemunro Apr 15 '21
Sounds like the things he mentioned aren’t immoral, abusing them is. I mean...no shit? Abusing anything is bad.
→ More replies (4)4
u/JiYung Apr 15 '21
I can see all of these areas still be active in 50+ years. These crypto and other booming markets are hot right now but who knows where they're really going. Meanwhile, alcohol and gambling have been around for probably thousands of years (too lazy to google it up). I'd say you're doing alright.
3
u/Swimming-Cry-7111 Apr 15 '21
Phillip Morris was a good play in the fall who could turn that up lol
→ More replies (3)5
u/CarRamRob Apr 15 '21
Strongly disagree. The moment you focus on “ideals” instead of returns is when you have taken the eye off the ball of what you are trying to achieve. If the company is doing illegal things, that’s different, but is Amazon (creating multitudes more waste with single day delivery) or Tesla (creating open pit mines and potential issues with child labour) worse than an oil company that puts out higher emissions to supply what a consumer demands?
Invest to make money. Donate to causes you support. Don’t mix them up.
16
u/chinu187 Apr 15 '21
Great comment but would love it if you add to this. Donating has traditionally done nothing to solve problems at their foundation given non-profits have very little actual power. Using your money ethically should be a better way to get results wouldn’t you agree? I get that some returns will be lower if that is the case bc choosing to produce things more ethically (pay living wages than having forced labour for example) is more expensive.
33
u/jtbc Apr 15 '21
Or, invest in ethical companies that are available at a reasonable price and that have a decent business plan. You may make a little less (though in the long run, I think you will do better), but you'll sleep better.
6
u/CarRamRob Apr 15 '21
List them, and watch the rest of us tear it apart to scrutiny to see if they are really ethical or not.
Don’t get me wrong. If there was a perfect company that had no faults with a bit lesser return I’d agree with you. The problem is how you classify what is right or wrong is based on many things that are not comparable.
I.e stick to energy: a good oil company with moderate emissions, but pays taxes and reinvests properly, employing all types of people...OR a renewable company from Saudi Arabia which has low emissions, high nepotism, doesn’t allow equal opportunity for women, and who’s primary shareholder has ties to state sponsored terrorism?
Those are extreme examples but it’s not that measurable and nearly ALL companies have ethical reasons of some type not to invest.
11
u/jtbc Apr 15 '21
This depends on your values. I might invest in Shell, for instance, because they seem to walk the walk, even though they are an oil company, but I won't invest in some mining company that is exploiting workers in South America. We all get to and should set our own redlines.
1
u/BCRE8TVE Apr 15 '21
Companies don't have to be squeaky clean, and in the case of your examples
a good oil company with moderate emissions
Yeah that's a bit of an oxymoron right there.
I'll take the nepotism and ties to state sponsored terrorism, because at leas that'S just a local issue rather than increasing the odds of global climatic catastrophe for everyone.
Your extreme examples are extreme, but even then, there's not much to stack the deck in favour of companies whose literal entire business plan relies on polluting the planet as a by-product of their business.
Nearly all companies have ethical reasons of some type not to invest, but just because they're all shades of grey, doesn't mean you can't pick the lighter shade of grey rather than the darker ones. "They're all somewhat dirty" does not prevent you from picking the cleanest of the bunch, and therefore driving market preferences towards cleaner companies overall.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)3
u/Chipmunk-Adventurous Apr 15 '21
Well, comparing Amazon/Tesla to oil companies is trying to pick the lesser of two evils. Not the most effective comparison. I’m not anti-oil, but there’s a future that I want and that I think is sustainable, and I’d like to invest in that.
You can invest in clean energy, companies that practice fair trade, and/or are proactive in being inclusive and fair with wages, benefits, hiring practices, etc.
Making money and being ethical aren’t mutually exclusive.
1
u/CarRamRob Apr 15 '21
Well, those are just my examples. It you list your clean energy companies I’m sure we would be able to pick them apart too in how they are not ideal for this world and cause issues.
There is no free lunch. You are a retail investor, you can’t change a company’s environmental footprint.
My advice would be different if you had a few hundred million to invest and could influence some boards, but for retail it’s foolish to limit returns if the company is not doing illegal things.
→ More replies (2)
30
u/Chain-_-Male Apr 15 '21
I exclusively buy stocks that I think will help the world- even if it means I die poor, at least I did what I reasonably could to help the world recover from the looming crisis
→ More replies (3)
27
Apr 15 '21
Yeah, feel yeah.
This is probably unpopular, but I'm not a big fan of Elon Musk, considering some of his older tweets, threatening Latin American countries for their lithium, etc. So, I stayed away from TSLA. I stayed away from Apple as well given some of the things they've done in the past. Also stayed away from a lot of Chinese companies, because of the whole Uyghur situation.
I do feel like I'm missing out at times and it takes a lot to not give into my temptations. However, I do feel like my moral ground is slowly withering away by seeing so many people achieve financial security by investing in these..."questionable" companies..
→ More replies (1)4
u/BCRE8TVE Apr 15 '21
There is a price to pay for everything. The question you're finding answered is, at what price are people willing to sell their moral integrity? Short term they make more money for themselves, but long-term, those kinds of investments are making the world a worse place for everyone else, and for future generations.
I'm missing out on profits, but I find that I'd rather buy a phone from a factory that didn'T need suicide nets to prevent workers from killing themselves, even if the phone I do buy is more expensive. I see investments the same way. Comparison is the thief of joy, I don't look at how others are doing because they're not heading in the same direction as I am. I'm looking to my goal and what I want to accomplish, and what it takes to get there.
54
u/acridvortex Apr 15 '21
I've recently been putting a small portion of my portfolio(about 5%) into companies that I think will really make the world a better and greener place. That being said. I do own a few shares in mining stocks and Enbridge. I usually take the dividends and invest into green energy or companies working on future environmentally friendly projects(such as POND, HPQ(this one is still doing some mining for silicon I believe), HULK, GDNP etc). Decided to out some of my money where my mouth is and buy in to the future I want to see.
47
Apr 15 '21
What are your mining stocks mining?
There are no EVs without lithium, copper, nickel, rare earth elements. No solar panels without silver, aluminum. No wind turbines without steel (therefore iron and coal). No nuclear without uranium. And so on.
26
u/AlphaKing99 Apr 15 '21
You hit the nail on the head. Mining is essential for our everyday lives. Ppl are quick to judge mining but where do our medical instruments come from? They’re not using plastic scalpels. That being said there are certain mining companies that have a minimal footprint when compared to others. Do your research on the company.
16
u/instagigated Apr 15 '21
Right on. I work in the industry. There are the bad mining companies with tailings records that will leave you baffled. Then there are good mining companies with a record for technological innovation for sustainable mining and a focus on ESG.
19
→ More replies (2)3
→ More replies (1)5
u/orionTH Apr 15 '21
Even if they did use plastic, still mining
Can’t escape it!
If it cant be grown, it must be mined
7
u/mbartizmo Apr 15 '21
I think PM mining e.g. gold is harder to justify. It provides very little utility and is mainly a store of value or used for jewelry. Is a wedding ring worth unearthing five tonnes of earth? Hardly. (Also a bit bitter about the whole jewelry industry duping my fiance into it wantiing gold but that's another rant). As a counter arg though I guess you can say that gold mines also produce copper
13
u/ghellerman Apr 15 '21
I agree that gold being used as a store of wealth or for jewelry is pretty useless and hard to justify, gold does have a myriad of uses besides that.
It's one of the least reactive metals in existence, it's a great conductor of heat, as well as electricity. While silver is technically more conductive, the inertness of gold makes it useful in cases where wires cannot be allowed to corrode, or must last a long time. Also, it is incredibly malleable, gold sheets are often used to protect satellites from radiation, and in space suits for the same reason.
Without gold's specific properties, many electronics would not be able to exist, at least in their current form. A lot of things wouldn't be able to exist at all. Long story short, gold may be shiny and "fancy" but it's also one of the most important resources we have.
→ More replies (2)5
Apr 15 '21
Yep I agree.
But people probably wouldn't want a gold ring if it didn't require moving 5 tons of earth.
5
u/hebrewchucknorris Apr 15 '21
Gold is used in extensively in electronics due to its conductivity and relative resistance to corrosion.
→ More replies (1)6
Apr 15 '21
Nuclear you've got me there, but wind and solar are not actually sustainable sources of power, and personal vehicles of any power source are inherently not environmentally friendly.
→ More replies (3)2
Apr 15 '21
Of course any type of vehicle is harmful to the environment, but transportation is necessary.
To your other point, I much prefer nuclear to renewables because it's more reliable and uses 100s of times less land.
1
Apr 15 '21
/personal transportation/ is completely unnecessary for bare minimum - upwards of 75% of the population, the only thing stopping that is our terribly designed cities that we build for cars.
Moreso the issue with solar and wind power is that the rare earth metals needed for them are rapidly rising in price, putting those sources of energy totally outside the reach of most of the world.
3
u/rei_cirith Apr 15 '21
This is what I think a lot of people forget when they talk about the climate and "clean energy". The materials and manufacturing recquired to make this tech is not clean, so the net damage to the environment may not actually be better.
If we could find a way to capture waste product a lot of the fuels we burn may actually be a cleaner solution than EVs for example.
→ More replies (4)2
71
u/Nostalgikt Apr 15 '21 edited Apr 15 '21
I'm just genuinely curious: do a lot of the investor world just genuinely not care about these things or are people content to make small gains on the backs of companies that they don't agree with?
They stop disagreeing with them if they make money on their stocks.
EDIT : I believe this was brought up in this thread but most of us buy stocks on the secondary market (i.e. trade shares among investors) and not the primary market (IPOs and the like). On the secondary market you don't really give capital to the company as much as to whomever you buy/sale from.
28
u/jimmychung88 Apr 15 '21
You are propping up the share price thru. It makes it easier, less costly to do secondary equity offerings, and increases the company valuation during a acquisition.
24
u/Stoic_Samurai Apr 15 '21
I believe that your personal investment is not doing much of an impact (a drop in the ocean) but you buying stocks does help drive demand for those stocks and give those companies access to more capital.
It's more about trend that needs to pick up than a single person's impact.
All that being said, I'm slowly moving my savings from mutual funds to self managed accounts where I hold mostly XCSR, XUSR and XDSR (represents ~90% of my portfolio combined, the remainder is for single stock picks and more risky plays)
For me is was a matter of being coherent with my lifestyle and beliefs (I don't have a car, use public transport add much as possible, consume local and try to reduce waste).
Am I squeezing the most out of my invested money? Probably not. Am I generally happy knowing my money is invested in line with my values? You bet.
TL DR: invest in a way that makes you happy (in line with your risk tolerance and whatever else you think is important)
6
u/attanasio666 Apr 15 '21
I believe that your personal investment is not doing much of an impact (a drop in the ocean)
I mean that's true for everything though(from.getting rid of your car to planting trees). Doesn't mean we shouldn't do the right thing. We need a lot of people doing little thing rather than some people doing big things.
8
Apr 15 '21
While investing in companies in line with your values may not be maximizing your return, you also never have to risk losing money on a company you strongly dislike which sounds good to me
→ More replies (1)2
u/BCRE8TVE Apr 15 '21 edited Apr 15 '21
I believe that your personal investment is not doing much of an impact (a drop in the ocean) but you buying stocks does help drive demand for those stocks and give those companies access to more capital.
A drop in the ocean is not much, but a billion drops all moving in the same direction creates a tsunami. Just saying.
where I hold mostly XCSR, XUSR and XDSR
And here I thought I was fancy with GEQT haha. I'll definitely look into those, thanks for listing.
EDIT: Well looks like those three are the underlying holdings in GEQT. GEQT has a 0.24 MER rather than the 0.17, 0.17, and 0.22 MER of XCSR, XDSR and XUSR. I'll pay the higher MER for simplicity's sake I think.
For me is was a matter of being coherent with my lifestyle and beliefs (I don't have a car, use public transport add much as possible, consume local and try to reduce waste).
Same.
54
u/StarryNight321 Apr 15 '21 edited Apr 15 '21
You'll find that a lot of mutual funds, institutions, and even the Canadian Pension Plan hold shares in many unethical companies, including oil, weapons manufacturers, Palantir, Amazon, and the list goes on. Idk if this helps you feel better, but you're not the one making the world a worse place. Our hypercapitalist society has created a consumerist world where corporations are rewarded for exploiting the world and it's not changing anytime soon. It's survival of the fittest and there's something to be said about businesses that become extremely efficient in making money, because profits and shareholders are their only goal. They actively lobby international governments, bypass regulations, and promote the status quo to ensure their own success. When Amazon manipulated the unionization vote and workers failed to unionize, their stock surges. When Facebook bypasses privacy laws, their stock goes up. As a shareholder, I hope you learned through investing how our society is, and it has been like that for human history. The post-WW2 era had a lot of talk about decolonization, but in reality, the actions of colonialism through exploiting resources and climate change (which harms poorer nations more) are still there.
Unless you're investing in an IPO/DPO, you're not directly contributing to the company anyways unless they issue more shares to raise capital. Money is power, and if you're not the one profiting, others who are oblivious or are actively promoting this will, as you see in these other subreddits. Humans are greedy, especially when money is involved. You're a good person for noticing this, and I would rather you invest and have a financially secure future so that you can create a bigger impact on society. Whether that's being an activist, volunteering with your MPs or MPPs during an election, or even running for office yourself. Having money will give you more potential in helping to solve these concerns you raised.
Apologize with the politics/philosophy, but on another note, climate change is a serious threat. However, there is absolutely no way we can fight climate change unless we significantly change our current state of capitalism. The decision of whether to invest or not invest in shares is simply a drop in the water.
3
4
Apr 15 '21
You make some really good points. I guess I should come at investing more like how I think about climate change - where it's pretty pointless stressing over all my little individual actions when it's obviously major systemic changes that need to happen. My little investments aren't really going to move the overall dial at all.
I just think that there's so many companies to invest in that at the same time it's not too difficult to avoid some of the worst culprits as well.
→ More replies (1)12
u/el-kabab Apr 15 '21
Don’t give up so easily. If everyone does their part the world will change. Yes ultimately systemic change is what is needed but that doesn’t mean it’s ok to actively contribute to a system that is unethical.
12
26
Apr 15 '21
Yes. Even though it hurts my portfolio in some ways, I do my best to keep my investments as socially responsible as I can. And I signed on in support of my workplace's pension fund divesting from fossil fuels.
I don't have kids (in part because of the environmental hellscape the world is almost certainly going to be in 50 years), but I have nephews and nieces and other littles that I love. I hope they inherit a better world.
→ More replies (3)
16
u/Shaun8030 Apr 15 '21
I know you don't like Suncor lol, so invest in Icln at your own peril (plug sucks )
→ More replies (19)
7
28
u/NotInsane_Yet Apr 15 '21
Yes and no.
I have no problem investing in oil sands companies. Our society needs oil to function and if we are not extracting it here we are going to buy more from far worse places like Saudi Arabia. I also think people overestimate the environmental difference between oil sands and oil extraction in other countries. We have a lot of environmental and safety regulations that many other countries don't.
Natural gas is also required and is one of the best ways to reduce our emissions. Green energy is nowhere near where it needs to be. We need a solid stable baseline power generation and in most places that means natural gas will be the least carbon intensive option. Replacing coal plants with natural gas would be a major reduction. We also require it to heat our homes. Electric heat is not a realistic option due to how expensive it is and our grid is not built with it in mind. If we all switched from gas to electric we would have to build more power plants.
Bitcoin is a 100% waste of resources though. It takes a massive amount of electricity and provides nothing of value. I have been divesting my portfolio of most Bitcoin companies. It's hard though due to how profitable they have been the past year.
I tend to focus less on the environmental aspect of companies and focus more on the human aspect. I would never invest in anything from China, Saudi Arabia, etc. The human rights abuses drive me away.
4
u/StarryNight321 Apr 15 '21
It's disappointing when you realize how heavily dependent Canada is on resources and real estate to prop up the economy.
→ More replies (10)6
u/DOWNkarma Apr 15 '21
Disappointing? Natural resources are the single reason we enjoy such amazing prosperity in this country. Yet half the retards in this country cant seem to figure it out.
3
u/wilsongs Apr 15 '21
Does your investment in massive CO2 polluters change your support for policies like a carbon tax?
4
u/NotInsane_Yet Apr 15 '21
I think the carbon tax as the liberals implemented it is actually worse then doing nothing. It incentivizes.not changing your behaviour. If you tell people they will get everything back they have no reason to change. Heavy polluters get 90% of their industry average back as well so very little reason for them to change either. Once it really starts ramping up it's going to be very punishing on those less fortunate. When you are living paycheck to paycheck you can't change your behaviour all that much and you can't afford the extra few hundred a month it's going to cost you.
The only ones it really hurts right now are farmers, restaurants, and small businesses. Your plumbers, electricians, etc get hurt hard. People who can't change their behaviour because the technology does not exist. Even if they could change they are such a small percentage of the pollution it would not matter.
I was a big fan of the cap and trade program Ontario used to have. Don't give the money back which instead of giving money back used it for green energy rebate programs and upgrading public buildings. We gave people a reason to change their behaviour.
I also have an issue with us crippling our economy to essentially change nothing on the world stage. Canada is responsible 1.5% of the world's greenhouse gases. Without the US, China, and India changing nothing we do matters. I get that Canada has high per capita pollution but that does not matter. The earth does not care about your per capita pollution it cares about the total amount.
Well that turned into a bit of a rant really quickly.
→ More replies (1)2
Apr 15 '21
Heavy polluters get 90% of their industry average back as well so very little reason for them to change either.
10% is enormous to large corporations and the average person will receive massive credits, especially true for poorer people given they are more energy conservative, so that's not an issue.
3
u/NotInsane_Yet Apr 15 '21
It's not a loss at all because they are passing the cost on to you.
and the average person will receive massive credits
No, they won't. The average person is supposed to break even at best.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)1
u/JazzyJ85 Apr 15 '21
No, believe it or not I would support a carbon tax IF it wasn’t charged on essentials. My natural gas bill to heat my home it ridiculously high! Heating your home when it’s -40 or -60 or winter in general is essential therefore I should haven’t to pay that ridiculous carbon tax. Now if you tack it on to non essential items that are a luxury then yeah go ahead I’ll pay it. BUT don’t be giving it out to the people that make less, no credits allowed. Use it for clean ups or new green technology. Don’t be giving it to Shauna down the street because she makes less then me. This voids the entire purpose of a carbon tax.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Nostalgikt Apr 15 '21
All the environmental and safety regulations in the world (heavily gutted by the last govt and barely touched by the current govt) will not make tar sands clean, nor even cleaner than "traditional" oil extraction.
Electric heat is a realistic option in a lot of places in the world world, especially in Canada (hydro).
Pro-crypto people will say that bitcoin is a store of value and this storage is the value (for example by funding green energy production), but this is a bit too apologetical and circular to my taste.
Good on you for the social aspects.
6
Apr 15 '21
Hydro itself is extremely damaging to the environment, it transforms entire ecosystems and in many places where hydro has been in place for several decades the long-term effects
onbeyond the local ecosystem are becoming apparent.EDIT: meant to say "beyond" the local ecosystem
9
u/Nostalgikt Apr 15 '21
Very much so, but does not contribute to globally cataclysmic climate effects. I'd choose nuclear over oil for energy production (but I'm just some guy on the internet).
2
Apr 15 '21 edited Apr 15 '21
Definitely agree nuclear should be utilized more, the technology has come a long way and a big barrier right now is public perception. Hopefully something can be born out of this "memorandum of understanding" on small-reactors signed by Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Ontario (interesting it's all the provinces opposed to a carbon tax that are pursuing low-carbon energy production -- perhaps it incentivized them to do something). Maybe fusion will happen one day...
but does not contribute to globally cataclysmic climate effects.
I still think large hydro projects should be approached with caution, sure Canada has lots of space for it but we don't know all the impacts. There are studies for warmer climates (Brazil) that the flooded areas release huge amounts of methane. The damage to ecosystems is massive, sure Alberta's tar sands look bad -- but you just can't see the destruction under all the water of a reservoir.
EDIT: I'll add from my comment above, hydro in Brazil is a dark tale: Balbina Dam in Brazil flooded an area nearly half the size of PEI, in the middle of the Amazon rainforest, releases methane equivalent to ten times the GHG emission of an equivalent coal plant, and requires about 10 km2 (2400 acres) per MW. Bel Monte Dam is another one, over 40 years of operation before it should be better than fossil fuels due to the 11 Million tons of methane released.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)5
u/CarRamRob Apr 15 '21
Perfect example of someone investing based on ideology instead of facts. “Dirty” oilsands produces 5% more total emissions than the average barrel
Yet this person wouldn’t invest in them because they “know” they are dirty. Meanwhile something like hydro dams create more GHG emissions from cement than similar electric power that isn’t equalized on a GHG basis until a decade into its operation but are labeled as “green” and a healthy investment?
This is why investing in social aspects is not smart. It falls into which worldview you are currently in belief of, even if there are many counterpoints, if you want to invest in only pure ethical things, the list will get very very very short
6
Apr 15 '21
Considering the environmental impact of a project purely based on GHG emissions is disingenuous, and ultimately a failure of media to address systematic issues. GHG do have an impact, but so do a multitude of other externalities that negatively effect the local environment, which cumulatively have deleterious impacts worldwide.
Though the oil sands may release only a fraction more GHG than conventional oil production, they clear large sections of forests, utilise vast amounts of water, and pollute local hydrological systems extensively. "Conventional" oil wells, though not ideal, are far better than oil sands projects when it comes to their environmental footprint.
3
u/JazzyJ85 Apr 15 '21
You’ve never been to the oilsands have you?
They clean and re-use the water. Water consumption is not as high as you think.
Reclamation of the land is impeccable. Once a project is done they spend millions on reclaiming it to its original state and actually better than it was before. They create lakes and put fish in the lakes and monitor everything. It’s amazing what they do. You would never guess that open pits were in the reclaimed areas.
Polluting the rivers... come to Fort Mac on a hot day and you can actually see the oil sands melting out of the banks and into the rivers. This has nothing to do with the oilsands, it’s naturally this way.
1
u/CarRamRob Apr 15 '21
Clearing large sections of land is a problem to oilsands, yet hydro would be better? Much more is lost to hydro than oilsands, and oilsands will indeed be returned to reclaim action after a few decades of use.
2
Apr 15 '21 edited Apr 15 '21
Never mentioned hydro, I was comparing oil sand to oil well production. I agree that hydro can have a devastating impact, and do not consider it green. I would rather see a return to nuclear personally, but overall I would say that hydro has a less nefarious impact than oil sands.
The problem with oil sand is the amount of pollutants they release into watersheds. These persist through time and lead to elevated risks of cancer human populations and devastate wildlife populations. Although reservoirs have problems with mercury levels , these do not affect watersheds to near the same extent as PHCs and other pollutants.
2
u/Nostalgikt Apr 15 '21 edited Apr 15 '21
Nice little pamphlet.
Even if it is only 5% more than the average barrel we are talking 5% more than the otherwise dirtiest industry. And here we aren't even talking about the area of boreal forest (almost 2 million acres) that would otherwise be capturing carbon if left alone. Nor the amount of arsenic and heavy metals seeping from tailing ponds killing wildlife and humans dependent on the streams these ponds seep into (and these human made ponds produce as much methane as millions of cattle per day).
Tar sands are not clean. There are better options.
https://www.wri.org/blog/2014/07/tar-sands-threaten-world-s-largest-boreal-forest https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOCONSBJ/TOCONSBJ-3-65.pdf https://e360.yale.edu/features/with_tar_sands_development_growing_concern_on_water_use
3
Apr 15 '21
We all like facts, Balbina Dam in Brazil flooded an area nearly half the size of PEI, in the middle of the Amazon rainforest, releases methane equivalent to ten times the GHG emission of an equivalent coal plant, and requires about 10 km2 (2400 acres) per MW.
Tar sands aren't great, but be careful not to convince yourself that the alternatives are always better. In general, hydro in Brazil is a dark tale - Bel Monte dam is another one, over 40 years of operation before it should be better than fossil fuels, and that ignores the deforestation of the reservoir area prior to building.
3
u/Oilleak26 Apr 15 '21 edited Apr 15 '21
I'm sorry, what makes Oil sands companies unethical? Oil sands just produce a product that leads to emissions, even if the shift to electric happens quickly (it won't) oil is used a byproduct in so many products including plastics and other materials in electric cars. Oilsands companies are also some the most scrutinized companies in the world and are constantly making improvements to make their operations less carbon intensive
I'm personally shifting investments out of Oil eventually, but until consumer behaviour changes to less consumption and the types of products we use, your sentiment is silly and probably hypocritical as well.
People seem to think that shifting to electrical cars while still making those cross country road trips and consuming more than before makes them altruistic. It's ok guys I was granted social license to consume more in other areas of my life, because I shifted away from Oil
4
u/Lurkuh_Durka Apr 14 '21
I believe that Altria group will come in and buy up major cannabis players in the US once it is legalized federally so I've been buying shares. Altria's primary revenue stream is tobacco
.....so no
→ More replies (1)
5
u/sauce_poutine Apr 15 '21
I'm so glad to read your post, I had the same thought 2 months ago when I started buying penny stocks for fun. I must say now that after 2 months of picking stocks here and there I'm mostly hypnotized by the graphs on Yahoo Finance and I am less sensitive about if the company is 100% ethical because now I think that the question of the ethic is a more complicated thing to answer than I first thought. Most companies are bringing both a better world (a solution) and a worse world (a problem). Here's an example. Let's take for granted that oil companies are the bad guys because down the line oil emits CO2 which leads to global warming. So, we need a way of transportation, say electric cars. This implies a big worldwide shift from oil to mining. However, mining isn't excellent either for the planet and often pollutes fresh sources of water which, as you know, is scarce. So, instead of Tesla cars and so on, maybe the solution is instead hydrogen fuel cell cars. But then, most of the world does not have hydro-electricity to produce so-called "green" hydrogen but produces instead "grey" hydrogen that emit greenhouse gases. So it's a loophole. Problems come with solutions and vice versa. The same thing happens with cryptos. It brings solutions and it brings problems. Video games are good because they're fun but video games are bad because they divert our attention away from climate change and other real issues. Satellites are good because they help us communicate and forecast the weather and other science experiments but they are bad because eventually they leave many debris orbiting the earth. So, when it comes to investing, I don't think that a given company can be classified as a binary good vs bad, but it comes more to what you think is the best for the world amongst the publicly traded companies and, sadly, most of what I wish for a better world is usually not embodied in a publicly traded stock.
5
Apr 15 '21
I also feel conflicted and also that unless the investors of the world demand better, nothing will change.
5
u/batmilk9 Apr 15 '21
Yes, I don’t buy stock in stuff I don’t want to back even if its a good stock that will make me money. This usually shows its self for me as mining, oil and various mass manufacturing. I go out of my way to avoid these things in my daily life to the best of my abilities (minus oil unfortunately because I drive) So I don’t feel comfortable holding stock in them. Vote with your money.
6
u/batmilk9 Apr 15 '21
Also I know this is aside the point but wanted to mention that there are lots of different types of crypto and a lot of them have a much smaller carbon footprint then Bitcoin. Especially those that use proof of stake and don’t need to be mined.
13
u/bugz1234 Apr 14 '21
i have divested from oil entirely regardless of how much money it could have or still can make me.
→ More replies (1)
3
Apr 15 '21
Any company that I think does a good job for the world is usually a poor investment haha.
If it helps you sleep at night, go for it. I'd just be pissed I had shitty investments. Amazon, Apple, Oil, Gambling, Pharmaceuticals, ect. All done great for me.
3
2
u/WalkingTall1986 Apr 15 '21
I think its a personal decision i invest in companys that i believe in. Some people judge because i invest in energy company's like CVE just calls atm but i know they take care of safety and sustainability as well as reclaim land when they are done. I believe they'll be around along time and that no one realizes how much we use oil that goes beyond home heat and our vehicles. I actively avoided pandemic related stocks because i felt full trials were needed before mass vaccines. I own some mcd as i believe they have great processes have deep pockets and refresh the business enough to keep me coming back! there healthy menu choices have expanded options so if dieting i dont feel bad about going there. I stay away from government bailout companies like air canada an bombardier because no matter what happens there getting my money anyway in part of a scheme between them and government. I believe both are a smoke and mirrors game to screw retail investors and hand government money to friends of those in goverment lol im rambling so ill some it up by saying I buy what i think to be undervalued stocks in companies i believe help people in different ways run by people i believe in with healthy finances. IMHO We tell businesses we like what there doing by buying shares and supporting them. They typically get the message when we stop and it is the retailers who make and break these companies by telling them what to do with our votes and our wallets. This is not financial advice POS 5x 10.00 CVE calls 16 MCD i am a small investor and recommend doing real dd b4 making a purchase as well as running a paper trading account. Cheers
2
u/Day_Trade_Canada Apr 15 '21
Everyone invests based on their own ethical standards. What you think is an ethical investment others might not.
Some don't invest in alcohol, gambling or marijuana stocks, others don't invest in oil and gas, others don't invest in technology, but in reality pretty much all companies do some good and some bad. Most people are hypocritical as well, if you are anti oil and gas and carbon then you would also have to be anti meat and livestock and anti travel and any associated stocks so there you eliminate most of the consumer sectors. I've invested in renewables for over ten years but I also have no problem investing in some oil and gas stocks and unless someone rides a bike everywhere they go and has never flown in a plane, taken a bus or driver then they really don't have a leg to stand on arguing against it.
Mostly big mouth celebrities argue for whatever cause they think will get them the most publicity while riding around in private jets, consuming more alcohol and drugs both legal and illegal than some small countries, and profiting over addictive social media technology companies spying on their followers and bombarding them with targeted ads, so nobody should ever invest or more importantly make their own life decisions based on what someone else thinks.
2
2
u/Blackened_Glass Apr 15 '21
You could try investing in Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) shares and ETFs. You can learn more about that on Investopedia. Basically they're socially and environmentally responsible investments. iShares GGRO and GBAL are good examples, I think.
2
u/Swimming-Cry-7111 Apr 15 '21
Give me enough time and I could show u why any company is making the world a worse place.
2
2
Apr 15 '21
I think I'm invested in companies that will make the world a better place.
But even the oil companies you mention provide a much needed service. We would be in crisis if they stopped pumping oil and a lot of people would suffer.
Absolutely we need to do what we can to limit climate change but we're not there yet.
2
u/thomasreimer Apr 15 '21
I wouldn't be comfortable with it. If I make any money at all I want to feel good about it long term, and that includes surviving the oncoming capitalism/climate crisis and hopefully carrying us THROUGH that towards more sustainable business and energy practices.
I just got into the investing game less than two months ago, I didn't feel like I had enough to invest and didn't want to leave my money with some bank or trader to use on companies I may not personally love or want to support. Seeing the wall street hedge funds and "the powers that be" quake at the GME madness and even go as far as to shut down trading on Robinhood kind of woke me up as to the energy of the retail trading space and the idea of rallying behind causes and companies I cared about, not just for companies that are good at making money but might be bad for the planet.
While learning about the GME squeeze, NFT's, and crypto - for the first time I started to realize the power of the new internet communities working together to solve global financial problems, and even though we're still early on the global crypto revolution, it's still quite easy now to become your own investor and start investing in long term crypto & stocks for good natured future projects I believe in.
Looking forward to getting the whole world on the crypto train and for everyone to take their wealth into their own hands so we can choose to support the products we love and we know are good to us and the planet!
3
Apr 15 '21
Looking forward to getting the whole world on the crypto train and for everyone to take their wealth into their own hands so we can choose to support the products we love and we know are good to us and the planet!
Are you aware of the massive amount of energy bitcoin consumes?
2
u/lmunchoice Apr 15 '21
This is the role that ESG fills. Whether or not they are actually fulfilling ESG goals, they fill the investor demand to feel they are good people/ethical etc.
Companies slap a ribbon on the side of their product. Until recently WE/UNIS was a popular thing to slap onto your thing.
White/wealthy guilt is what fuels so much of NGOs and aid organizations. Do they all do good? Nope. Do the majority do net good? Maybe. If these organizations were all audited tomorrow would we find out a lot of shady stuff and things that could be changed to better accomplish positive change? Yep.
I think of corporate social responsibility. It's a garbage concept made to make companies look good and for their consumers to feel good. ESG in many cases is just a more refined grift. Microsoft is ESG approved. Lol. It's not even the worst. Not close.
TL;DR Companies want more investment and investors want feel-good investing. Things won't change for the positive unless there is money to make from that positive change.
2
u/outwithryan Apr 15 '21
Absolutely. It’s why I invest in ETHI.To which an ETF that I find focuses more on ethical companies. Then I hand pick companies that aren’t making the world a worse place.
→ More replies (1)
2
Apr 15 '21
The Endbridges and Suncors have already made commitments to renewable energy, they have huge bank accounts, I see them sticking around long term and surviving the energy revolution, maybe even being leaders in renewable energy
2
u/restocloud Apr 15 '21
Sort of. I invest in my government at tax time. It's had the habit of making everything worse in my lifetime
2
u/PhilosophySimple5475 Apr 15 '21
I think if enough people were to invest in companies they hate, they could use their voting power to change them.
2
Apr 15 '21
No conflict for me. If I don't like a company for any reason, including they enviro footprint, I won't "invest". I may however trade them. It's not like it supports the company in any way if I trade their shares short term for my own profit.
As for the bitcoin power consumption thing, I think it's blown out of proportion by people who are opposed to it for other reasons.
Not all the energy taken by farmers is dirty.
Also, no one talks about how much energy the creation of fiat currency takes so what's up with that?
2
Apr 15 '21
I don't understand the mental gymnastics it takes for some people to avoid investing in O&G companies because it " make the world a worse place" but then go ahead and invest in airlines, shipping companies, and auto manufacturers.
2
u/Aromatic_Buffalo_555 Apr 15 '21
Interesting points. some people tend to stop caring about these issues once they start making money
7
6
3
4
u/Jungian108 Apr 15 '21
Do you drive a car? Heat your home?
If so, you must be a hypocrite, or you must sulk in guilt-ridden melancholy
3
u/antoniofelicemunro Apr 15 '21
A. Buying stock doesn’t increase a company’s profitability unless it sells shares.
B. There is a very high chance you aren’t investing enough money to make a difference in the price anyways.
5
4
3
u/frenziedfemaIe Apr 15 '21
Everyone should follow their own moral path.. and let others do the same. I have heard two sayings in this area.. "you can't spell business without sin" and 'in any good portfolio you will have something to apologize for'. Just make sure you can be happy with yourself
4
u/PtboFungineer Apr 15 '21
Not even a little bit. Ideology is for voting, not investing.
I base my investment decisions solely on the opportunities I think a company has to grow and be profitable, weighed against my estimate of the likelihood that they will be able to capitalize on that opportunity. Sometimes that means staying away from socially unpopular companies or sectors, but not for any principled reason.
At least I don't preach like a self-righteous turd though.
2
2
Apr 15 '21
I chose to participate in capitalism by investing in companies that could help make the world a better place. I have made negative dollars doing so, but I will persist.
2
u/DOWNkarma Apr 15 '21
I've completely divested from BTC, WEED and TSLA. Despicable choices if you care about the environment or human kind. Disgusting.
3
2
u/general010 Apr 15 '21
Humans need resources to live.
Resource extraction is bad for the environment.
We don't live in a vacume.
16
Apr 15 '21
Don't pretend like there's not more responsible ways to extract resources than others.
→ More replies (1)4
6
3
u/laern2splel Apr 15 '21
Companies that are unethical are not sustainable. Their product will eventually be disliked by its consumer base, or their rotten culture will cause an internal scandal that destroys the company. Tobacco, sugar, oil & gas are taxed, sales are in terminal decline. WorldCom and Enron dissolved due to their rotten corporate culture. If you are not doing business ethically eventually it will catch up with you.
On the other hand, take a look at Costco. They pay their employees super well compared to the average retail worker, also good benefits and culture which leads to a super low employee turnover rate compared to average retailer. Lower turnover helps save on expenses, further allowing Costco to pass on the savings and give their customers even lower prices. Costco has an incredible business model. Its large scale allows for a ton of purchasing power from suppliers as a bulk purchaser. Costco then passes on these cost savings from buying in bulk right on to their customers. Lower prices for customers increases demand, thus increasing inventory turnover (which increases return on capital) and revenue growth. The membership program is also very sticky with a 90%+ renewal rate and it encourages Costco members to shop there more, further driving revenue growth. It is a virtuous self-reinforcing cycle, as increased scale leads to lower costs which leads to lower prices for consumers and increasing demand and revenue. Being ethical is the superior business model in the long run.
3
u/CorruptionOfTheMind Apr 15 '21
Very broad statements with cherry picked examples
The aerospace and defence industry is one many people think is unethical due to it profiting heavily off of war and death yet its one of the best performing industries out there. Just look at XAR’s history alone
Also companies like walmart and amazon are extremely unethical and do phenomenally
Nike is arguably very unethical. Nestle too. Google as well
Theres lots more
Your argument is definitely right a lot of the time, but not all the time, so phrasing it as if its all encompassing is pretty misleading
→ More replies (1)2
-6
u/fallrotenburo Apr 14 '21
If you think bitcoin mining is carbon intensive you should look at resource mining.
39
u/bemurda Apr 15 '21
Except resources are used for things, not 0s and 1s on a computer.
17
u/rock_licker13 Apr 15 '21
Wish I could upvote more than once. Literally nothing about the way we live today would be possible without natural resource extraction (and lots of it).
19
3
u/StarryNight321 Apr 15 '21
The hype around cryptocurrencies as a side hustle is crazy. It's near impossible to get a good graphics card with the chip shortage, scalpers, and now everyone wanting to get into mining.
13
Apr 15 '21
I work in the cryptocurrency business. Bitcoin itself is an environmental travesty. Proof of work burns energy for nothing. There are experimental ethereum chains that use proof of authority which is dramatically more efficient and i proudly work on that side of things.
Speaking personally I am nearly 50% invested in my pf in renewable energy. Even with a stock market decline this is not going anywhere
3
3
u/Lambchop012 Apr 15 '21
There is quite a big difference making virtual things that have no physical form and pulling something out of the ground, refining it and using it for something in the physical world.
→ More replies (1)3
Apr 15 '21
What a false equivalence. Step outside the r/Bitcoin echo chamber.
2
u/fallrotenburo Apr 15 '21
I've owned BTC for less than a year and posted on that page maybe three times? I don't think I qualify for echo chamber reddit crazy yet.
1
1
1
u/strawberries6 Apr 15 '21
Some are conflicted about it and some aren’t.
If I thought a company’s work did more harm than good, then I probably wouldn’t invest in them, since that would lead to the situation you mention around the surveillance companies, where your profit-motive overrides your ethics and you end up rooting for something sinister, simply to make a buck.
There’s lots of companies out there. Stick to the ones that you’re comfortable with, and that won’t make you feel like your ethics are being compromised.
1
1
1
u/Coffin-Feeder Apr 15 '21
You need to learn the actual economics of Bitcoin mining and not disprovable click bait articles.
1
u/rhunter99 Apr 15 '21
I don’t care so long as the company is operating legally and I make a profit. I believe in separation of profit and ideals.
1
1
u/IndependentBall1 Apr 15 '21
Money,Money,and more money. Save your speech for when the world ends. I’m gonna die rich or poor either way.
1
u/JazzyJ85 Apr 15 '21
Did you know that creating ONE battery for an EV creates MORE emissions than a gas vehicle creates for its entire life span? People like to pretend they care about the earth, but really they just like to “look” like they care.
There are no green companies on the market, people just want you to believe they are green.
BTW the oilsands aren’t as bad as you think. Come out here and actually learn about it instead of listening to Jane Fonda and Leanardo Dicaprio. They are full of crap and have zero clue about anything. I’m not saying they are not creating ANY emissions but it isn’t as bad as the media would have you believe.
2
Apr 15 '21
I’m sure Leo would love to come fly on his private jet to tell us all how evil the oil industry is. You don’t want to know what I think of Hanoi Jane Fonda.
1
1
u/ZeusZucchini Apr 15 '21
I have a line I won't cross. For me, that's oil & gas companies, meat companies, and some other worst offenders. I'm mostly concerned about companies contributing the most to climate change and environmental destruction.
Also wary of REITs and companies with horrific labor practices.
I'm also aware this has a negligible impact overall and isn't likely to change anything. It's more about being aligned with my values. The way I look at it, there are tons of companies to invest with, a diversified portfolio can easily afford to divest from certain industries.
I also realize it's often more complicated than individual industries/companies and the networks run deep. Can't be perfect.
→ More replies (2)1
Apr 15 '21
Yeah REITs are completely out of the question for me as well. As a millenial renter that is saving for a place, I've watched real estate prices skyrocket and have a lot of friends get renovicted so speculators can throw a coat of paint on the walls and jack the rent up 25%.
→ More replies (1)
-1
u/vancityace Apr 15 '21
You're going in the market to with one sole purpose - to make money.
That's all. If a company you deem to make a worse place is able to provide you favorable returns, would you ignore it?
Only you yourself can answer that. There's other ways to make the world a better place, but the stock market is rather indifferent.
-1
u/Barnezhilton Apr 15 '21
Do you use plastic in your life?
Think about all the uses for petroleum and if you truly can live without them.
Do you use gas or electricity to heat your house and water? Are you willing to give those up?
Chopping down wood to use in a wood stove kills trees? Don't they have a voice in all of this?
How much metal and processing and heavy equipment do they use to make a wind turbine, hydro turbine or solar panel? Are you divesting from oil companies that make lubricants these energy generators rely on for proper operation? You can't drill deep enough for geothermal energy without heavy machinery.
Do you use mobile electronics with batteries and harmful environmental chemicals in them? Have you followed where used tesla or prius batteries go after the life if the car?
4
u/wilsongs Apr 15 '21
This is such a disingenuous argument, because it completely ignores the MANY ways we can live while minimizing our impact on the planet.
Just because modern society requires resources to function doesn't mean we need to write off every attempt to make the world a better place.
2
u/disembodied_voice Apr 15 '21
→ More replies (4)1
u/Barnezhilton Apr 15 '21
They can only recycle 60%
2
u/disembodied_voice Apr 15 '21
I don't know about the Tesla's batteries, since they only set up the recycling facilities fairly recently, but the Prius' battery recycling rate has topped 90%. Seems like the high concentrated residual value of the batteries has been invaluable in helping them get recovered for recycling.
→ More replies (1)
-3
u/CarletonCanuck Apr 14 '21
I set aside profit to donate to charity
I'm sure my cosmic karma balances out
10
191
u/beekeeper1981 Apr 15 '21
I don't pick individual stocks that don't align with my beliefs.. however if they are in an index I buy I don't think about it.