Financial Markets

Even China can’t help us avoid a Climate Emergency

CLimateEmergency.png

Here are the numbers. This is the contribution of many of the Pacific Island Summit attendees’ CO2 emissions as a % of the global atmosphere. Why do the media guffaw at the ridiculous when looking at the numbers? Do the political class honestly think that spending billions on renewables will make the slightest difference? Scott Morrison absolutely right to soften the language in the draft agreement at the summit. Honestly, he should push to have it removed in its entirety. Even China’s CO2 emissions are 0.000352% of the world’s atmosphere. China can’t even save us.

So to the Pacific Island leaders – go ahead and buy more Maseratis. The Italian economy needs an economic boost because they’re sinking, unlike your islands.

Buhahahahaha

In 1999, CM was told by the pro-EV lobby that electric cars would be 10% or the market by 2010. In 2019 EVs are struggling to nudge 1.3%. If EV’s have managed to achieve much more than 10-12% by 2035 it will be a miracle.

10 reasons it will be highly unlikely:

1) Australia sold just over 1.15m cars in 2018. In 2008, SUVs comprised 19% of total sales. Today 43%. So much for the unbridled panic about catastrophic climate change if consumption patterns are a guide.

2) Australian fuel excise generates 5% of total tax revenue. It is forecast to grow from $19bn today to $24bn by 2021. If government plans to subsidize then it’ll likely to add to the deficit, especially if it lobs $5,000 per car subsidies on 577,000 cars (50% of 2018 unit sales in Australia).

CM has always argued that governments will eventually realize that moving to full EV policy will mean losing juicy ‘fuel excise’. Point 16 on page 19 for those interested.

Cash strapped Illinois has proposed the introduction of a $1,000 annual registration fee (up from $17.50) to account for the fact EVs don’t pay such fuel taxes. Note Illinois has the lowest investment grade among any other American state and has to allocate 40% of its budget just to pay outstanding bills. It is also home to one of the largest state pension unfunded deficits per capita in the country.

3) cash for clunkers? If the idea is to phase out fossil fueled powered cars, surely the resale/trade in values will plummet to such a degree that trading it on a new EV makes no sense at all. False economy trade where fossil fuel owners will hold onto existing cars for longer.

4) Global EV production is 2.1m units. Looking at existing production plans by 2030, it is likely to be around 12mn tops on a conservative basis. Australia would need want 5% of world EV supply when were only 1.2% of global car sales. Many auto makers are committed to selling 50% of EV capacity into China. So Shorten will be fighting for the remaining pie. No car makers will export 10% of all EV production to Australia without substantial incentives to do so.

Don’t forget Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez also intends to get every fossil fueled powered car off the road in a decade. The US has 270 million registered vehicles, the overwhelming majority being petrol powered. The US sells 16-17mn cars a year (sadly slowing). Therefore in the US, 16 years would be required to achieve that target.

5) Ethics of EVs. To save the planet, the majority of cobalt to go into making the batteries comes from African mines which use child slave laborers. There is a moral scruple to keep a virtue signaling activist awake at night!

Not to worry, Glencore has just announced last week it is closing its cobalt capacity in DR Congo which will flip the market from surplus to deficit (at 1.2% global market share). Oops.

6) EV makers aren’t happy. In Europe there are over 200 cities with EV programs but none are alike. In the quest to outdo each other on the virtue signaling front, car makers are struggling to meet such diverse requirements meaning roll outs will be slow because there is no movement to standardize.

7) EV suppliers aren’t convinced. Because of the above, many EV suppliers are reluctant to go too hard in committing to new capacity because global car markets are slowing in China, US, Europe and Australia. High fixed cost businesses hate slowdowns. Writing down the existing capacity would be punitive to say the least. New capacity takes a minimum of 2 years to come on line from conception.

8) The grid! In the UK, National Grid stated that to hit the UK targets for EVs by 2030, an entirely new 8GW nuclear plant would be required to meet the demands of EV charging. Australia can barely meet its energy needs with the current policies and doubling down on the same failed renewables strategy that has already proved to fall well short of current demand ex any EVs added to the grid.

9) in 1999 automotive experts hailed that EVs would make up 10% of all vehicle sales by 2010. In 2019 EVs make up around 2.5%. So 9 extra years and 75% below the target. The capacity isn’t there much less consumers aren’t fully convinced as range anxiety is a big problem.

10) charging infrastructure is woefully inadequate. Await another taxpayer dollar waste-fest. Think NBN Mark II on rolling EV chargers out nationwide. The question then becomes one of fast charger units which cost 5x more than slower systems. If the base-load power capacity is already at breaking point across many states (Vic & SA the worst) throwing more EVs onto a grid will compound the problem and drive prices up and potentially force rationing although people look to Norway.

Norway is a poor example to benchmark against. It is 5% of our land mass, 1/5th our population and new car sales around 12% of Australia. According to BITRE, Australia has 877,561km of road network which is 9x larger than Norway.

Norway has around 8,000 chargers countrywide. Installation of fast chargers runs around A$60,000 per unit on top of the $100,000 preparation of each station for the high load 480V transformer setup to cope with the increased loads.

Norway state enterprise, Enova, said it would install fast chargers every 50km of 7,500km worth of main road/highway.

Australia has 234,820km of highways/main roads. Fast chargers at every 50km like the Norwegians would require a minimum of 4,700 charging stations across Australia. Norway commits to a minimum of 2 fast chargers and 2 standard chargers per station.

The problem is our plan for 570,000 cars per annum is 10x the number of EVs sold in Norway, requiring 10x the infrastructure.

While it is safe to assume that Norway’s stock of electric cars grows, our cumulative sales on achieving plan would require far greater numbers. So let’s do the maths (note this doesn’t take into account the infrastructure issues of rural areas):

14,700 stations x $100,000 per station to = $1,470,000,000

4,700 stations x 20 fast chargers @ A$60,000 = $5,640,000,000 (rural)

4,700 stations x 20 slow chargers @ A$9,000 = $846,000,000 (rural)

10,000 stations x 5 fast chargers @ A$60,000 = $3,000,000,000 (urban)

570,000 home charging stations @ $5,500 per set = $3,135,000,000 (this is just for 2035)

Grand Total: A$14,091,000,000

You’ll never guess how we can Save the Planet

Here is a credit card business model bound to fail. Johan Pihl, one of the founders of Doconomy, is launching a new credit card in collaboration with the UN Climate Change Secretariat and Mastercard. It cuts your ability to spend when you’ve hit your “carbon” limit, not your financial one. Now we will be able to stop our rampant plastic use with, you guessed it, plastic!  Although Doconomy claims the card will be made from bio-sourced material. Sadly the silicon chip will require high energy intensity to make. At least air pollution is good for something as it will be the main source of the ink.

Pihl said, “we realized that putting a limit that blocks your ability to complete the transaction is radical…but it’s the clearest way to illustrate the severity of the situation we’re in...Imagine if the consumer would pick up our app and actually look at their footprint and that’s the basis for whether they buy something or not,”

Perhaps we should ask all UN staffers to use it as their business credit card. If Doconomy lived up to its promises, most would have their carbon limit triggered when paying for flights to the next COP summit halfway around the globe. That would be a plus!

It uses the Åland Index to identify the CO2 of every transaction. CM encourages everyone to have a play with the carbon calculator.

For instance, if one spends 100 euro in a supermarket, the carbon footprint is almost the same as spending 100 euro in a department store. So regardless of whether one buys 100 euro of fruit or 100 euro of plastic-packaged flash-fried instant noodles, the impact of 4,902g of CO2 footprint is the same. Buy a 100 euro bottle of perfume or 100 euro of cuff links at a department store, the impact is still 4,293g. What you probably didn’t know is that smoking has a lower carbon footprint than buying groceries on a euro for euro basis. If smokers ever wanted an excuse to repeal these oppressively high taxes on tobacco, surely we should be getting Extinction Rebellion to add it to the list of demands because of the lower carbon footprint that can be achieved.

Whatever you do, don’t buy your loved one flowers! 100 euros of flowers has a 4,696g impact. That 200 euro Valentine’s dinner will add 15,928g. However, will the app calculate the 200 euro bottle of wine to celebrate an anniversary at 2x the 100 euro bottle? Yes it will.

If you do online gambling, 100 euro will cost 38,066g. You guessed it, if you spent 1,000 euro (exactly the same transaction time and keystrokes) it will cost 380,660g. Just shows how woefully inaccurate these carbon calculators are. To save the planet, instead of fuelling a gambling addiction,  you can cut your impact on the social fabric of society and save 90% by filling your car (118,600g of CO2) with 100 euro of fuel and enjoy a spiritual country drive to avoid regular attendance at Gamblers Anonymous.

Hotels – same thing. 100 euro on a hotel has 1/4 the emissions of a 400 euro hotel. Presumably if one is a master of Trivago or Hotels Combined website one can cut the emissions on exactly the same hotel room by the level of the discount. Who knew being environmental was so simple?

Doconomy states,

With DO, you get actual refunds from connected DO stores, based on the carbon impact of your purchase. We call it DO credits…The refunds can be used to compensate for the carbon footprint of your purchase. You can direct it to UN-certified carbon offset projects, or invest in sustainable funds. If you choose to invest in a fund, you must add the same amount as the value of your DO credit. You choose.”

Damn. How much will one have to spend to get enough DO credits to make an impact on a sustainable investment fund?

What a joke. As soon as the UN is involved in any such project we can absolutely guarantee the outcome will be a farce.

The evil plastic industry?

Sadly a post from a former competitor spoke of how no plastic is ‘guilt free’. CM simply replied “all plastic CM uses is 100% guilt free”. Worse, there was an absurd assertion that the plastic industry was going out of its way to keep polluting the world. Is it?

Basically she’s going to have to give everything up. Her credit cards are plastic. No doubt most of her car interior, toys and utensils for her young child contain a lot of plastic. Same for the toothbrush, iPhone,iPad, laptop, desktop and TV.

The article from The Intercept showed the reality of plastic. When the Chinese stopped recycling the world’s plastic waste in 2017 it only proved how far down the cost curve plastic has become.

Think about it. Plastic is one of the most versatile, practical, strong and flexible materials that can be produced at really low cost. The reason why China doesn’t recycle the world’s waste is that it’s not cost effective. If it was they’d still do it. The Chinese didn’t stop it because they felt pangs of “guilt”.

Speaking of guilt. No sooner had the virtue signaling at Coles & Woolworths supermarkets started, both launched plastic toy series to encourage kids to collect the full set.how many plastic bags in one mini shop or ooshie? While shopping the other day. A kindergarten was doing trip to the super market in hi-vis jackets. The store manager handed all the kids a plastic bag full of goodies. Great PR. Hopefully the teachers won’t confuse the kids while teaching the alphabet that plastic is evil and they must feel guilty.

In 2006 the UK Environment Agency did a study on the effectiveness of alternative packaging solutions to HDPE (conventional plastic bags) in terms of lowering environmental impact. It said,

The paper, LDPE, non-woven PP and cotton bags should be reused at least 3, 4, 11 and 131 times respectively to ensure that they have lower [impact] than conventional HDPE carrier bags that are not reused.”

So if conventional biodegradable plastic shopping bags are used to throw out garbage that means 6, 8, 22 and 262 days.

The plastic industry isn’t fighting to pollute the world. Laziness in its disposal is the problem.

60% of mismanaged plastic waste was from East Asia (i.e. China), 11% from South Asia; 9% from sub-Saharan Africa; 8% from MENA; 7% from LatAm; 3% from Europe and 0.9% from North America. Australia doesn’t even get a mention. Our impact is zero.

If all else fails, Canadian PM Justin Trudeau has the answers on plastic use.

Job opening: Activism & Impact Manager

Activism

This is actually a job. Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream is hiring an ‘Activism and Impact Manager‘. Lucky for them, its parent Unilever is also a woke corporation. The job spec is simple:

Do you have at least three years’ experience working in campaigning within the NGO, charity or grassroots movement-building space? Have you got a passion for the idea that business can be used to drive positive change in the world? Do issues of social and environmental justice drive you to take action and are you able to persuade others to join you?

Values-led ice cream company Ben & Jerry’s is recruiting an Activism and Impact Manager to lead social and environmental justice campaigns in Australia and New Zealand with our team in Sydney.

CM guesses that milk shaking conservatives is a new thing of the left so there are some definite synergies to be had by “Ben & Jerrying” them. Hopefully, the Chief “Woke” Officer (CWO) can offset any losses to Unilever’s bottom line by encouraging activists to only use social and environmental just milk-based products from Ben & Jerry’s to ensure that the lost business from one side is made up through willful waste on the other.

When will businesses learn that telling their customers how to behave is not required? Yet another business to swipe from the list – Nike, Gillette, Ben & Jerry’s, Colgate, Starbucks…

Parker Hannifin slowing (still) in 4Q

Parker Hannifin.png

Parker Hannifin (PH), the world’s industrial giant hardware store reported the following orders for the quarter ending June 30, 2019, compared with the same quarter a year ago:

  • Orders decreased 3% for total Parker (-4% in 3Q)
  • Orders decreased 4% in the Diversified Industrial North America businesses (-6% in 3Q)
  • Orders decreased 8% in the Diversified Industrial International businesses (-4% in 3Q)
  • Orders increased 10% in the Aerospace Systems Segment on a rolling 12-month average basis (+2% in 3Q)

PH is such a good read across on global activity. It supplies the likes of Caterpillar, Boeing, Cummins, Freightliner etc etc. in seals, pumps, hoses, connectors, filters, actuators etc etc. it supplies food companies with linear systems and pharmaceuticals with clean systems/pumps.

No wonder US Fed Governor Jerome Powell just cut rates. The world’s industrial powerhouses aren’t expanding and PH’s order book reflects the underlying weakness. No wonder Trump tweeted that Powell should make more cuts.

For the FY2020 outlook, PH is forecasting flat to down 3%. North American industrial flat to -2.8%, International Industrial -3.2% to -6.2% and Aerospace holding things up at +3.0% to +5.6%.

Typical US management bluster in the conference call. What else is new?

PG slices another $8bn off Gillette in 4Q

P&G reported stronger earnings overnight but wrote off another $8bn in 4Q on top of the $6bn in 3Q on the Gillette brand in terms of goodwill and intangibles. Of course management brushed this off as significant devaluations over a decade, lower shaving frequency and new entrants at prices lower than the average. Nothing to do with the toxic masculinity campaign 6 months ago? Get real.

Under grooming, most of the results performance came through the sale of real estate in Boston. Other than that the company reported unfavorable channel mix, volume declines, brand communication investments and currency headwinds. The CFO Jon Moeller said with respect to Gillette,

You’ve got here a business with a very broad global footprint, and particularly with the year that we have just been through, that impacts that value assessment,”

Sorry, what does that even mean? No surprises that grooming was the worst performing division in P&G’s quiver.

Get woke, go broke.