(Mark Hulbert, an author and longtime investment columnist, is the founder of the Hulbert Financial Digest; his Hulbert Ratings audits investment newsletter returns.)

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. (Callaway Climate Insights) — It may be going too far to say that President Donald Trump has been a blessing to the renewable energy industry. But it’s an ill wind that blows no good, and it’s recently become clear that the industry has benefitted in several significant ways from his policies.

Take the Iran war. It showed countries around the world that they couldn’t count on a regular flow of fossil fuels from the Middle East, or count on the U.S. to be a reliable ally in protecting access to energy supplies. The urgency of this realization has proven to be far more persuasive than any statistical forecasts about long-term climate trends. Necessity is the mother of invention, and she is birthing a critical push toward renewables.

Spain stands out as a case study on how a major push towards renewables can pay handsome dividends — and not just many decades in the future but within a few short years.

Read more

— Lucid, down 92% in the past three years, nearing limits of shareholder patience

— New era begins for power generation and transmission in the American West

— After bipartisan backlash, White House backs off plan to dismantle ocean monitoring

— Beavers called in to solve complex London flooding issues

— ‘The system feeding the human jawbone is the most destructive force on the planet’

Even the Saudis have limits on how much money they’re willing to lose. Lucid Motors is finding that out.

For years, the maker of those snazzy, high-end electric vehicles enjoyed protection from the turmoil surrounding other standalone electric vehicle companies such as Rivian , or the now-bankrupt Fisker or Lordstown Motors because it was more than half owned by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF). The Saudis even increased their holdings a few years ago to more than 58%.

But a difficult sales environment and the high cost of building the vehicles and the production and distribution deals, even with help from a contract for robotaxis from Uber , has pulled the stock down 92% over the past three years and more than 50% this year alone.

Earlier this month, the company brought on a new CEO. Silvio Napoli, who promptly fired the interim CEO, eliminated the COO position, and this week laid off 18% of the workforce, or close to 1,200 people. That followed a layoff of 12% earlier in the year.

Most of the other Lucid shareholders are large institutions such as BlackRock or Vanguard or State Street but none of them hold more than 3% or 4% of the shares, which means the Saudis hold the cards. While Saudi ownership used to convey a long-term approach and willingness to spend to buy market share, even they have limits. Just ask the folks at LIV Golf.

With Lucid continuing to lose more money than it makes in sales, this can’t go on forever. Napoli’s arrival means a next stage is likely in the cards.

If you have ideas or suggestions for us, contact me directly at dcallaway@callawayclimateinsights.com.

Subscribe now

Tuesday’s subscriber insights

Largest U.S. wind power project comes online after almost two decades

Read more

Climate Week was always New York’s event to lose and indeed it has over the past few years as White House hostility to some forms of renewable energy and climate mitigation efforts have led to London taking the lead as a fighter of global warming.

This year, though, the focus in London will be less on the intense heatwave outside and more on the political intrigue surrounding Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s resignation this morning, and what it means for the Labour government’s commitment to fighting climate change.

Read more

It’s been almost three years since investors soured on the marketing term ESG to describe green stocks and companies committed to good governance and diversity, yet the stocks behind the movement have kept their promise.

While the term ESG (environmental, social, governance) is dead, the market value of renewable energy and other green companies has soared and this spring topped $10 trillion in value, according to a new report by the London Stock Exchange Group, cited by Bloomberg.

Driving the growth in stock prices are revenue gains, which have climbed to more than $5.5 trillion, the report said. Mergers and acquisitions in the green energy space have also pushed stocks higher, with the S&P Global Clean Energy Transition Index rising 80% in the past 18 months, twice the gains of the S&P 500.

The gains have come despite concentrated efforts in the U.S. in particular to hobble the climate finance movement and push the economic needle back toward oil and gas. The International Energy Agency said earlier this year, however, that of the $3 trillion in growth in energy investment in 2024, more than two-thirds were renewables.

For investors, it’s a reminder that when it comes to markets, revenue is what matters, not politics. While governments can and will impact revenue with their policies, good companies with good ideas can often find a way to keep growing. In the middle of an oil war and rough year for climate policies, globally, that is good to remember.

Don’t forget to contact me directly if you have suggestions or ideas at dcallaway@callawayclimateinsights.com.

Follow us . . . .

Twitter | LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram

Subscribe now

Zeus: Trump running out of time on energy prices

. . . . Less than 48 hours after the Iranian ceasefire this week that was supposed to be final, President Donald Trump was already talking about bombing again, reflecting a timeline toward the midterm elections in November that is increasingly running out, writes David Callaway. With energy prices still high only four-and-a-half months before the elections and the Strait of Hormuz only marginally open, and with interest rates threatening to rise under Trump’s hand-picked Fed chairman, the White House is in danger of needing to rewrite its elections playbook. Voter anger against data centers is rising and gasoline will still be higher through the end of the year. Redistricting hasn’t worked. Callaway analyzes what the White House might try next and what it means for investors.

Read the full Zeus column

Thursday’s subscriber insights

Anthropic lends its AI halo to carbon removal

. . . . The nascent industry to remove harmful carbon from the atmosphere, shocked to its core earlier this spring by Microsoft’s announcement it would pause all deals for the time being, was thrown a lifeline this week when the carbon removal collective Frontier said that AI giant Anthropic would join a new round of financing that would double its buying power to $1.8 billion.

Anthropic is the first of the AI giants to make a move on climate change, joining Google and others in the four-year-old Frontier to fund projects to remove carbon in exchange for carbon credits that can be used against their pollution. Projects include sucking the carbon out of the air or crushing rocks to leverage their own natural carbon-sucking abilities. So far Frontier has spent about $700 million on about four dozen projects, according to reports.

The addition of Anthropic caught the eye of carbon removal advocates because the company has developed a reputation among the AI crowd as sort of a white hat that uses its developing technology for good. Its well-publicized spat with the Trump administration over its proposed use of AI in war has only enhanced that halo.

Any involvement among the big AI companies in fighting climate change is welcome. AI is always billed as a potential savior on complex issues, and global warming certainly qualifies. But for our money, it might be more useful for Anthropic, as well as OpenAI and Elon Musk’s SpaceX to spend their funds on using clean energy in their data centers.

Anthropic mostly contracts its data centers from companies such as Google and Amazon Web Services, so it is at the mercy of the energy they use; mostly a mix of natural gas with a smattering of energy from green sources such as geothermal or nuclear. Buying renewable energy directly would move the needle more.

For carbon removal enthusiasts, however, this week marks a turning point in what was rapidly becoming a very bad year.

Editor’s picks: LNG tax credits probe; plus, climate risk for data centers

Watch the video: Inside Climate News Senior Editor Corey Mitchell, reporter Phil McKenna and data journalist Peter Aldhous discuss a new Senate probe over tax credits to the country’s largest exporter of liquefied natural gas. Liquefied natural gas vessels are fueled by their cargo — they’re built specifically to make use of the gas boiling off from their tanks. But Cheniere Energy, the largest U.S. exporter of LNG, requested “alternative fuel” tax credits for that. The claim baffled shipping experts, because what Cheniere Energy is doing isn’t, in any real sense, an alternative. It also provides little climate benefit over fueling the vessels with diesel and uses the credit in a way that tax specialists say was never intended.

Many AI data centers have high climate risk

Nearly 80% of new data center capacity around the world is at high risk from extreme climate hazards such as flooding, damaging storms and wildfires. So says a new report from climate risk analytics firm First Street. Such weather events could disrupt operations, increase downtime and increase insurance and repair costs at the 97 global data center markets in the report. CNBC, citing the report, notes that data centers are typically expected to be in operation for 20 to 30 years, and investors may not be weighing long-term conditions affected by climate. “Most underwriting for real assets still uses historical data, but the climate is no longer behaving the way the historical record would predict,” First Street CEO Matthew Eby said in a news release. “As heat, drought, and water stress increase, outdated models simply don’t offer a complete view of risk anymore.”

Latest findings: New research, studies and projects

Northeast states study offshore HVDC transmission

A group of nine states in the northeast and the District of Columbia are planning an offshore transmission network to bolster wind energy development, Utility Dive reports. The project, called the Northeast States Collaborative on Interregional Transmission, earlier this week published a trio of reports around technical standards and policy recommendations to advance a high-voltage direct current network. While the Trump administration has been opposed to wind development, Utility Dive notes this comes as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit granted a U.S. Department of Interior request to drop its defense of a ban on wind projects. Attorneys general from 17 states and Washington, D.C. challenged an executive order attempting to block wind power development in the U.S.

Words to live by . . . .

“I’m glad people are connecting the dots. I think, at the moment, if you pursue better climate policy, the benefits to households, for the country as a whole, would exceed the costs.” — Kimberly Clausing, UCLA law professor, speaking about new research that shows Americans across political parties agree that global warming is raising the cost of living.

Subscribe now

Ah, the Sunday night Iranian ceasefire deal. Like clockwork over the past few months, the end of the weekend comes around and President Donald Trump announces a deal of sorts, ensuring a spike in U.S. stock prices the following morning.

This week’s episode didn’t disappoint investors as stocks soared on Monday. But 48 hours later the activity in the Strait of Hormuz is still limited and Trump is already talking about bombing again. Time is running out.

With only four-and-a-half months before the U.S. midterm elections, the potential for a meaningful reduction in energy prices is fading by the day. Oil remains stubbornly high. Reserves are low. Analysts said even if Hormuz did open completely today it would be months before shipments began to arrive and calm prices.

Democrats, meanwhile, have seized on the data center issue in a big way. Protests are developing across the country and legislators such as Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren are demanding disclosures from Wall Street’s biggest banks about their financing of tech and electrical infrastructure projects.

At long last water is becoming the issue it has always deserved to be.

Read more

— BP’s bumpy shift back to oil and gas is attracting attention from rival oil giants

— Wall Street banks funding record fossil fuel financing as climate commitments fade

— Dancing against climate change? Group limbos to raise awareness

— Severe storms to hit U.S. for second straight week

— Battery storage deployments rising as world embraces renewables

BP’s shift away from green energy after two decades has been anything but elegant. The oil giant has lurched from scandal to scandal as it seeks to sell renewable assets. It has a new CEO. It’s lost top executives. Shareholder activists are circling. It fired its chairman of the board. But through all that, year-to-date, its shares are up 20%.

That much criticized about-face has now started to attract the attention of rival oil giants, who are questioning why they want to spend so much on renewable energy during a war about oil that has made all energy prices more expensive.

Shell this week said it hopes to sell its wind farm business for as much as $1 billion next year and focus on what it considers higher margin profits in oil and gas production. Norway’s Equinor said this morning it would slash capital expenditures on renewable energy production over the next decade from a planned 50% to about 10%.

The trend is startling because the surge in energy prices in the past few years, and particularly since the Iran war started four months ago, is causing governments and customers to re-evaluate their reliance on oil and gas because of the constant geo-political risks to supplies.

It’s also a major step back for the theory that the oil and gas giants would ultimately become all-purpose energy giants with wind, solar and nuclear. What it portends, instead, is an energy arms race between fossil fuel companies and big tech and other energy firms competing to power a rapidly warming world.

Still, margins are margins, and at least the short-term benefits can be seen in BP’s share price. The question for the oil giant leaders now is who are they going to sell all these green assets to? Starting to look like a buyer’s market.

Tuesday’s subscriber insights

Ten years after Paris, oil finance boom as strong as ever

Read more

(Bill Sternberg is a veteran Washington journalist and former editorial page editor of USA Today.)

PORT ST. LUCIE, Fla. (Callaway Climate Insights) — Backing my golf cart out of the garage recently, I heard a sickening CRUNCH sound. I had stupidly run into my car, which was parked in the driveway.

The car was unscathed aside from a few scratches, but the Evolution Maverick’s plastic fender flare shattered into many pieces. When I stopped cursing, my first thought was: Will I be able to get the replacement part?

A year or two ago, that would not have been an issue. But U.S. trade sanctions imposed on Evolutions and other vehicles of Chinese origin have significantly disrupted global supply chains, making it harder and more costly to buy certain carts and parts.

Read more

. . . . Welcome back to Green Lights. Here’s our roundup of the best of Callaway Climate Insights. This week, David Callaway writes that climate change is threatening to permanently alter the beautiful game. Plus, Mark Hulbert explains why investors should beware the climate polluters who brag the most about their emission reduction. Have a good weekend and please subscribe to support our climate finance reporting.

Subscribe now

. . . . Elon Musk-led SpaceX (SPCX) opened trading Friday at $150 after the biggest initial public offering ever. Just after shares opened, the stock topped $160, pushing the company above a $2 trillion market cap. David Callaway spotlights the red flags on this deal for investors, including the lack of transparency around how the company’s AI and space data centers mission will play out to the unprecedented amount of voting control Musk will retain over shareholders. If SpaceX launches successfully, investors will then turn to AI giants Anthropic and OpenAI later this year for more excitement when they go public.

Why buyers should beware

. . . . The heat is on. Climate change is threatening to permanently alter the beautiful game, as concerns for the health of players has forced these hydro breaks over the past few years despite the objections of purists who disdain any sort of breaks in the two 45-minute halves. Like the fake snow at the Winter Olympics, changing climate conditions are forcing themselves on the world’s great sporting events.

Read more here

. . . . Beware the climate polluters who brag about their emission reductions the most, writes Mark Hulbert. The companies that boast the most about their climate programs actually do the least, according to a study of the earnings calls and regulatory filings of the largest polluters. The results set up the theory, which Hulbert wrote about last month, that the real climate adaptation and emission reduction work is being done by those who have their heads down and stay out of the political crossfire. Those who are bragging about their progress in many cases are just blowing more hot air.

What investors need to know

. . . . Does it feel like AI has sucked all the oxygen out of the room on Wall Street this summer? Still, writes David Callaway, the demand from big tech companies for power to fuel their AI ambitions has left room for even more speculation. FOMO for the next big tech revolution has investors buying whatever they can that’s attached to the AI story. Energy companies of all sorts, including wind, solar, and gas have seen investors flock to their shares as the need for more power to drive AI becomes clear. And don’t forget fusion.

Power on

. . . . The popular Watch Duty wildfire app has added flood warnings to its fire alert system. David Callaway writes that in addition to developing an efficient public service that goes beyond traditional police and fire department online warnings, founder John Clarke Mills has created a new form of media; climate disaster media if you will. It’s a refreshing evolution in media at a time when much of the traditional media is in tatters.

Where there's smoke...

. . . . On World Ocean Day, the $32 trillion blue economy needs reframing, writes our guest columnist Douglas Woodring, founder and managing director of Ocean Recovery Alliance. Woodring explains how the insurance industry must become a bridge between ecology and capital markets.

Dive in here

More greenery . . . .

• We knew that: Wild animals officially recognized as solutions to climate change (Oceanographic Magazine)

• What, again? Yes.: NOAA issues yet another El Niño advisory, today (New York Times)

• Not your imagination: Climate Change is Making Your Life More Expensive (Time Magazine)

• Billion$ at stake: The campaign to discredit a key climate science report (Politico)

• Move back: Once-rare coastal flooding is becoming more likely (The Associated Press)

Subscribe now

I attended the final warmup for this month’s World Cup tournament in Chicago last weekend, featuring Germany vs. the U.S. team, a brief rainstorm and troubling heat on the city’s aging Soldier Field. Like in many big soccer tournaments recently, extreme heat was met with a plan to let players take a hydration break in between halves, kind of like if the game were actually divided into four quarters.

Indeed, climate change is threatening to permanently alter the beautiful game, as concerns for the health of players has forced these hydro breaks over the past few years despite the objections of purists who disdain any sort of breaks in the two 45-minute halves. Like the fake snow at the Winter Olympics, changing climate conditions are forcing themselves on the world’s great sporting events.

A study of the match venues conducted by non-profit researcher Climate Central and ClimateCrisis247, a sister publication of Callaway Climate Insights, found that many of the sites expected to be most affected by extreme heat, which it defined as over 82.4°F, are in Mexico. But among the most vulnerable sites in the U.S. to extreme heat in the next month are the ones in Miami, Kansas City and Philadelphia, according to the study. Some of the hottest cities, such as Atlanta and Houston, can enclose their stadiums and use air conditioning.

What’s certain to happen is that all the games will feature hydration breaks, which started as a reaction to extreme heat, and are now slowly becoming accepted by the teams and coaches because of the opportunity for strategy discussions and changes. While still a long way off from being formally instituted as part of the games — which would generate enormous controversy — the extreme heat that has plagued Europe, Asia and now the U.S. in recent years is making the change a lot more acceptable.

While professional soccer players are used to playing matches in drenching downpours, thunderstorms common on hot summer days in the U.S. also provide a threat in terms of delaying games and even forcing fans to take shelter inside stadiums. And while hydration breaks are designed to protect the players, there are no plans to protect the thousands of fans who in some ways are even more vulnerable as the heat or storms bear down.

None of this will detract from the fact that four fans of football, or soccer, or whatever one calls it, this next month is as big as it gets. Like many of you, we will be watching as many matches as possible and even attending a few. There will be plenty of excitement, hopefully more on the pitches then around them. We like the Netherlands to win it all.

Don’t forget to contact me directly if you have suggestions or ideas at dcallaway@callawayclimateinsights.com.

Follow us . . . .

Twitter | LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram

Subscribe now

Caught by satellite - the pollution reduction lie

. . . . Beware the climate polluters who brag about their emission reductions the most, writes Mark Hulbert. The companies that boast the most about their climate programs actually do the least, according to a study of the earnings calls and regulatory filings of the largest polluters. The results set up the theory, which Hulbert wrote about last month, that the real climate adaptation and emission reduction work is being done by those who have their heads down and stay out of the political crossfire. Those who are bragging about their progress in many cases are just blowing more hot air. What this means for investors is that it establishes an even more pressing need for regulatory climate transparency so that companies are made to put their money where their mouths are.

Read the full column

Thursday’s subscriber insight

Pyramids in the sky: the age of the public AI giants

. . . . Wall Street’s main event of the week — indeed of the year — will take place Friday when Elon Musk’s SpaceX opens for trading on the Nasdaq Stock Market sometime before midday Eastern time.

The shares are set to be priced at $135 each but heavy orders at the outset will likely prevent the market from announcing the opening price for a few hours after the open. At $135 the funds invested will raise up to $75 billion for the company, making it the largest initial public offering of all time and valuing the company at $1.78 trillion.

The red flags on this deal for investors are many, from the lack of transparency around how the company’s AI and space data centers mission will play out to the unprecedented amount of voting control Musk will retain over shareholders. Yet according to the latest reports, the deal is more than four times oversubscribed.

If SpaceX launches successfully, investors will then turn to AI giants Anthropic and OpenAI later this year for more excitement when they go public, as planned.

As for SpaceX, much of the thinking is that Musk will use the proceeds of the IPO to eventually (sooner rather than later) buy Tesla , which has stagnated lately. The offer would bail out longtime Tesla fans and Musk loyalists while shifting the risk to new shareholders of SPCX. There is a term for this type of maneuver, and it begins with a P.

Indeed, the strategy seems emblematic of the entire Wall Street plan for dumping the AI speculative frenzy on an unsuspecting public as early investors and Silicon Valley insiders take the profits.

This is not to question the unparalleled potential of AI to build something new, but the hype built around it is a different monument indeed. Let the buyers beware.

Editor’s picks: Is this weather normal? Plus, hot matches

Watch this video: Data where you live. The Reuters Climate Monitor provides a real-time window into a changing planet, giving users the chance to compare today’s temperatures — anywhere in the world — with a historical baseline from 1961-1990.

World Cup schedule? Check the TV listings. And the weather.

Despite the clear evidence of the impact of higher daytime temperatures on players and fans, why does FIFA insist on afternoon matches in full sunlight? The answer, a report in Yale Climate Connections says, is not found on the playing fields but in television contracts. 3 p.m. Eastern Time in the United States is 8 p.m. in London and 9 p.m. in Paris and Berlin, or European primetime, where the most lucrative markets are. Sports Media Watch documented that FIFA deliberately assigned the highest-profile matches — those featuring European teams — to afternoon windows to align with that schedule. Add to that: For the 2026 World Cup, only 31 of the 104 matches will be played under a roof with air conditioning. While the problem of hot weather and of players objecting to playing through extreme temps is not new, a new analysis from Climate Central shows:

• Climate change is boosting the likelihood of performance-impairing heat during most scheduled World Cup matches (97 of 104).

• Nearly half of the matches (49) have at least a 50% likelihood of experiencing heat that can impair performance. In 26 of those matches, climate change increases the likelihood by at least 10 percentage points.

• Among all matches, climate change boosts the odds of performance-impairing heat most during the June 26 match in Guadalajara between Uruguay and Spain. The 70% chance of such heat during that match is 37 percentage points higher due to climate change.

Words to live by . . . .

“Deep summer is when laziness finds respectability.” — Sam Keen.

Subscribe now

(Mark Hulbert, an author and longtime investment columnist, is the founder of the Hulbert Financial Digest; his Hulbert Ratings audits investment newsletter returns.)

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. (Callaway Climate Insights) — You should be suspicious of a company that goes out of its way to brag about how much it is doing to reduce its carbon footprint.

That’s according to a new study that provides more evidence for what I discussed in my column two weeks ago. I reported then that approximately one-quarter of firms are engaged in “greenhushing” — the deliberate downplaying of their environmental efforts. The researchers who discovered this surprising pattern speculated that “greenhushers” are motivated by the desire to avoid the backlash that is all too common in the current political environment.

This new study focuses on firms at the other end of the “pat themselves on the back” spectrum, who go out of their way to boast about their climate-related achievements. The source of these companies’ behavior is deceptively simple, according to this new study’s authors: It’s cheaper for companies to lie about their greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions than expend the considerable expenditures required to actually reduce them — so long, of course, that there’s no external data that can be used to catch them in their lies.

Read more

— As Wall Street awaits the mammoth SpaceX IPO this week, a tiny nuclear fusion company just tripled its value

— Watch Duty: After the fire comes the flood (advisories)

— A damaging El Nino weather pattern could begin as soon as this month

— The EU is planning a regulatory framework to slash taxes on renewable power

— How each one of us generates an average of five pounds of trash a day

Given the big SpaceX IPO later this week and the coming public debut of AI giants Anthropic and OpenAI, it might seem like AI has sucked all the oxygen out of the room on Wall Street this summer. But the demand from big tech companies for power to fuel their AI ambitions has left room for even more speculation.

Helion Energy, a nuclear fusion company that claims to be furthest along toward developing the nascent energy source on a commercial basis, raised $465 million late last week in a Series G funding round to develop a commercial fusion power plant to supply energy to Microsoft .

The deal values the Washington-based company at more than $15 billion, more than triple its valuation during its last funding round just a year ago. Investors include Thrive Capital, which led the round, Softbank, and Ford Executive Chairman Bill Ford.

The deal is a further example of how the AI investment frenzy has captured the imaginations on Wall Street, despite its increasingly controversial status surrounding data centers across the country. Fusion energy, which combines atoms rather than splits them in traditional nuclear fission, is still largely unproven and nobody is sure it can yet scale to commercial development.

Still, the fear of missing out on the next big tech revolution has investors buying whatever they can that’s attached to the AI story. Energy companies of all sorts, including wind, solar, and gas have seen investors flock to their shares as the need for more power to drive AI becomes clear.

Helion itself is a private company, with no plans to go public at least until it can demonstrate commercial viability. But one of its investors is Nucor , a public steel company which has seen its shares increase more than 50% year to date. Most of that was based on improvements in its steel business but those hoping to gain some proxy exposure to the Helion speculation might also be in on the gains.

If you have ideas or suggestions for us, contact me directly at dcallaway@callawayclimateinsights.com.

Subscribe now

Tuesday’s subscriber insight

Flooding the zone at Watch Duty

Read more

By Douglas Woodring, founder and managing director of Ocean Recovery Alliance

HONG KONG (Callaway Climate Insights) — World Ocean Day, observed each year on June 8, is a reminder that the ocean is far more than a scenic backdrop to our lives. It is the beating heart of the planet’s climate system, a primary source of food for billions, and the foundation of a global blue economy valued at more than $32 trillion, with over $3 trillion in annual output.

More than three billion people depend directly on marine biodiversity for their livelihoods, and over 100 million jobs are tied to ocean-related industries such as fishing, tourism, and shipping.

Despite this immense ecological and economic importance, the ocean is under unprecedented strain. Pollution, over-exploitation, weak regulation, and underinvestment in restoration are pushing marine ecosystems toward dangerous tipping points.

As we honor World Ocean Day, we must confront both the scale of the challenge and the transformative opportunities available to those willing to rethink how we value and finance environmental stewardship.

Scaling these solutions requires more than ingenuity. It demands financing at a level commensurate with the problem.

Traditional NGO and philanthropic funding operates in the hundreds of billions of dollars globally, while impact investing and capital markets operate in the trillions. Environmental restoration and climate adaptation require multitrillion-dollar annual capital flows, yet ocean restoration remains dramatically underfunded.

Impact investing, which is designed to generate measurable environmental and social benefits alongside financial returns offers promise, but many marine restoration projects struggle to demonstrate the predictable cash flows required by conventional finance.

Ecosystems generate enormous value through storm protection, carbon sequestration, biodiversity support, fisheries productivity, and tourism spillovers, but these benefits are diffuse, long-term, and often treated as public goods. As a result, nature remains economically invisible within traditional financial models.

The blue economy

A blue economy focused on environmentally sound projects, programs and regeneration can help to correct this imbalance by promoting a sustainably managed oceanic system which enables economic use without degrading natural capital.

Decades of overfishing, habitat destruction, pollution, and climate change have already eroded marine resilience. In parts of Asia, approximately 35% of coastal wetlands have been lost since the 1970s. Approximately 80% of large fish stocks are overfished, and only about 9% of the ocean is currently protected.

These trends threaten not only biodiversity, but also the long-term viability of industries that depend on healthy ecosystems. Restoration must precede expansion. Without thriving reefs, mangroves, seagrass meadows, and fisheries, the blue economy cannot sustain itself.

Large-scale ocean investment

One of the most promising avenues for unlocking large-scale ocean investment lies in reframing how we value ecosystems — particularly through the lens of risk reduction.

The insurance industry, which already prices hurricane exposure, flood risk, and coastal vulnerability, is uniquely positioned to translate ecological benefits into financial metrics. Healthy mangroves can reduce storm surge damage. Coral reefs can diminish wave energy. Wetlands can mitigate flooding.

When these protective services are measured and verified, insurers can adjust premiums, offer resilience-linked products, and underwrite restoration-backed policies. In doing so, they convert ecological performance into quantifiable economic signals. Once risk is priced, banks can model it, investors can underwrite it, and governments can justify resilience payments. Insurance effectively becomes a bridge between ecology and capital markets.

Blue bonds and innovative investments

Innovative financial structures are beginning to emerge to address the estimated $700 billion annual global finance gap for nature restoration and conservation. Blue bonds, debt-for-nature swaps, blue carbon credits, biodiversity credits, and ocean impact funds are expanding the toolkit available to policymakers and investors.

Public-private partnerships can blend philanthropic capital with commercial investment to de-risk early-stage projects. Concepts such as an Ocean Appreciation Fund propose modest usage-based contributions, such as small levies per-containers that cross the ocean, just as we would pay for tunnel or bridge tolls, could generate billions annually for restoration. Compared to the volatility of global freight rates, such contributions would represent a marginal cost with potentially transformative impact.

Helping the ocean is enlightened self-interest

World Ocean Day challenges us to move beyond incremental thinking. The scale of the crisis means that small, isolated efforts, while meaningful, are insufficient on their own. We should aim to redesign systems of production and consumption, strengthen policy frameworks, mobilize blended finance, and align capital markets with ecological resilience.

Importantly, investments in developing countries often deliver restoration outcomes at significantly lower costs, offering high-impact opportunities for global investors. First movers in nature-positive finance stand to gain structural advantages as regulatory frameworks and market expectations evolve.

Ultimately, helping the ocean is not charity, it is enlightened self-interest. The ocean regulates climate, feeds populations, supports jobs, and stabilizes economies. Treating it as a free dumping ground is akin to drawing down a bank account without ever replenishing it.

Restoration, circularity, and innovative finance offer a path forward, and one in which environmental stewardship and economic growth are not opposing forces but mutually reinforcing goals. Today, let us recommit to recognizing the ocean as a shared global asset whose protection and regeneration are essential to our collective future.

About the author: Douglas Woodring was awarded the Prince’s Prize for Innovative Philanthropy in Monaco. He is a UN Climate Hero, Google Earth Hero and, in November 2023, he was asked to speak at the UN Plastic Treaty negotiations.

About Ocean Recovery Alliance: Ocean Recovery Alliance was established in 2010 and is one of the early NGOs to focus on plastic pollution with global solutions in mind. The group is based in Hong Kong and California. It creates innovative solutions and collaborations to improve the health of the ocean and the world’s waters. Its network of organizations, entrepreneurs and innovators, particularly related to plastic sustainability and circularity, but also dedicated to broad ocean governance and new thought leadership, and helps to create engaged and active dialogue where gaps often occur due to between entities that often do not have a history of working with one another.

Subscribe now

. . . . Welcome back to Green Lights. Here’s our roundup of the best of Callaway Climate Insights. This week, David Callaway says that if things hold the way they are in California’s as-yet undecided gubernatorial primary, there will be no climate interests in the governor’s mansion come November. Plus, Michael Molinski looks at what Bayer is doing while it waits for the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on its Roundup weedkiller. Have a good weekend and please subscribe to support our climate finance reporting.

Subscribe now

. . . . This week’s California primary for governor was about as bad as it could be for those hoping for a new leader to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom in fighting climate change, writes David Callaway. With the Democratic vote split between a political insider and a progressive outsider, Republican Steve Hilton was running second with millions of mail-in votes still to be counted. If things hold the way they are there will be no climate interests in the governor’s mansion come November. Just more environmental inaction from America’s most populous — and one of its most vulnerable — states.

Read the full Zeus column

. . . . To nobody’s surprise, the SEC this week formally proposed repealing a rule five years in the making that required companies to tell investors about their climate risks. David Callaway says the idea that the top enforcer of financial markets activity would advocate for less information for investors is crazy enough. The fact that it wants to do it to save money for companies it regulates in the face of a growing risk defies rational explanation.

Read more here

. . . . The cancer controversy over Roundup isn’t going anywhere as its market expands, writes Michael Molinkski. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule as early as this month on a landmark case against Bayer’s weedkiller. But in the meantime, Bayer and rival Chinese-owned Syngenta have found a more lucrative region of the world to market glyphosate, where it doesn’t face as many judicial or government obstacles — Latin America.

Read more here

. . . . Americans are increasingly pessimistic about avoiding the worst effects of climate change, and Democrats are much more likely than Republicans to perceive harms from climate change. So says a new study from Pew Research Center. About six in 10 Americans say countries around the world, including the U.S., will not do enough to avoid the worst effects of climate change.

Read more here

. . . . Next week, we’ll likely see the first trillion-dollar IPO when Elon Musk’s SpaceX (SPCX) goes off at an estimated valuation of $1.75 trillion. Later this year, AI giants Anthropic and OpenAI will go public to much hype as well. Clean energy IPOs and merger activity will also cause spikes in value as the AI giants demand more and more electricity to power their data centers, writes David Callaway. But once valuations get too high, and we may be nearing a peak with this AI frenzy, there will be a reckoning of sorts. Despite the common bull market refrain, it’s not different this time.

Read more here

More greenery . . . .

• The heat is on: High temps could hurt performance at almost every World Cup match (Climate Central)

• Samurai horses!: Japan keeps traditional summer festival alive by adapting to heat (France 24)

• Mysterious ‘cold blob’: Cooling patch of ocean may signal the conveyor belt in the Atlantic is slowing (New Scientist)

• Power on: How Nuclear Science Is Helping Build a More Sustainable Future (IAEA.org)

• Weather outlook: The swirling Central American Gyre spawns storms (Yale Climate Connection)

Subscribe now

Peter Lynch, arguably the most successful fund manager of all time, retired from Fidelity Investments in 1990 at the age of 46. His Magellan Fund (FMAG) had achieved an average annual return of 29% over 13 years and was wildly popular with small investors, boasting more than $14 billion in assets.

At the same time, an index fund tied to the S&P 500 by Vanguard also was starting to make a run as American investors put about 15% of their household wealth into stocks. Today we collectively have more than a third of our wealth in stocks and Vanguard holds two funds and now an ETF (VOO) with more than $1 trillion in assets each.

In between, the country has gone through four official recessions and one global financial crisis (which we caused), but stocks keep roaring.

Next week, we will likely see the first trillion-dollar IPO when Elon Musk’s SpaceX (SPCX) goes off at an estimated valuation of $1.75 trillion. Later this year, AI giants Anthropic and OpenAI will go public to much hype as well.

Clean energy IPOs and merger activity will also cause spikes in value as the AI giants demand more and more electricity to power their data centers.

But once valuations get too high, and we may be nearing a peak with this AI frenzy, there will be a reckoning of sorts. Despite the common bull market refrain, it’s not different this time.

The lesson here is that while valuations may change and more of us are risking our wealth in the stock market, the dynamic remains the same. We will see corrections and crashes, maybe sooner than we think, but the changing nature of technology and innovation in the economy will always favor equities in the long run.

Like Peter Lynch’s Magellan fund, someday even a $1 trillion valuation will seem quaint.

Don’t forget to contact me directly if you have suggestions or ideas at dcallaway@callawayclimateinsights.com.

Follow us . . . .

Twitter | LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram

Subscribe now

Zeus: California takes giant step back on climate

. . . . This week’s California primary for governor was about as bad as it could be for those hoping for a new leader to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom in fighting climate change, writes David Callaway. With the Democratic vote split between a political insider and a progressive outsider, Republican Steve Hilton was running second with millions of mail-in votes still to be counted. If things hold the way they are there will be no climate interests in the governor’s mansion come November. Just more environmental inaction from America’s most populous — and one of its most vulnerable — states.

Read the full Zeus column

Thursday’s subscriber insights

Sustainable fund flows on the rebound

. . . . What a difference an oil crisis makes. Sustainable fund flows rebounded in the first quarter after a rough 2025, led by European funds, as investors rethought the potential for green energy.

A net $3.5 billion of inflows were recorded last quarter, rebounding somewhat from outflows of $27 billion in the fourth quarter last year, according to a report by Morningstar Sustainalytics and ESG Today.

Outflows were still reported in the U.S., likely as the markets were weak in March following the start of the Iran war. The report also found that total assets in the sector fell by 10% to $$3.5 trillion.

Passive equity funds and bond funds were the big winners, as investors likely just shifted index assets once the first month of the war was over and oil had somewhat stabilized at higher prices.

Renewable equity prices were among the first to take off after the war started so it’s only natural that investor fund flows followed. The question now is whether the latest Middle East violence will last long enough to generate a sustained shift. So far, it’s looking that way.

Editor’s picks: Weather extremes intensify; plus, El Niño is coming

Watch the video: From stronger hurricanes to longer droughts and heavier rainfall, a warming planet is intensifying weather extremes and making them more frequent. Watch this report from the Associated Press.

WMO warns in El Niño update

The World Meteorological Organization this week joined the chorus of voices warning the world to be ready for extreme weather as soon as in the coming month, due to the El Niño phenomenon. A new WMO El Niño/La Niña update indicates an 80% likelihood of an El Niño event from June to August 2026. Probabilities for this to continue until at least November are near or above 90%. Although some uncertainty remains about El Niño peak strength and timing, most forecast models suggest it will be at least moderate — and possibly strong. “The science is clear: El Niño is arriving on our doorstep in the coming months with 90% certainty. The world must treat it as the urgent climate warning it is. El Niño conditions will pour fuel on the fire of a warming world. Impacts will hit even harder, travel even farther, and cross borders with devastating speed. The only effective response is climate action equal to the crisis — ending the addiction to fossil fuels, accelerating the shift to renewables, protecting the most vulnerable, and delivering early warning systems for all.” said UN Secretary-General António Guterres. The El Niño climate pattern is characterized by the warming of sea surface temperatures in the central and eastern Pacific Ocean. It can cause extreme shifts in weather patterns and result in floods, prolonged drought and heatwaves.

Latest findings: New research, studies and projects

Critical ocean-floor observation network to be dismantled

The Trump administration is dismantling a $370 million ocean-floor observatory network installed a decade ago to collect critical climate data on coastal environments, marine ecosystems and powerful global ocean currents. Oceanographic magazine reports the closure of this climate data network follows policy blueprints laid out by the Heritage Foundation. The shutdown was recommended in their Project 2025 “Mandate for Leadership” document. In 2024, Project 2025’s authors explicitly targeted the network, claiming the Ocean Observatories Initiative was “the source of much of NOAA’s climate alarmism” and advising that “the preponderance of its climate-change research should be disbanded,” according to the report. The NSF said it will begin removing more than 900 deep-sea instruments this month. Monitoring hardware will be pulled from the waters of Oregon, Washington State, Alaska, North Carolina and a critical region between Greenland and Iceland known as the Irminger Sea. Jim Edson, a marine meteorologist who led the initiative, tells Oceanographic that the network was “the world’s most advanced continuously operating ocean observing systems.”

Words to live by . . . .

“As your governor, I will protect our air and water, defend California’s nation-leading climate leadership, and hold polluters accountable — because the future of our children depends on it.” — Xavier Becerra, California gubernatorial candidate and leader in Tuesday’s primary.

Subscribe now

I remember when Arnold Schwarzenegger was elected governor of California. It was a triumph of celebrity populism over democratic technocracy as The Terminator won office after the ouster of Gov. Gray Davis in a recall vote in 2003.

It was also a victory for smart political calculus as Schwarzenegger moved to the center to win over disaffected Democrats who overwhelmingly command the state’s polls.

That isn’t happening 23 years later as Californians, unhappy but unwilling to change, split the extremest vote in this week’s “jungle primary” between a rich climate progressive and a hard-core MAGA Republican to leave a clean path for another dull-eyed technocrat to drive up the middle and win come November.

Read more

— California primary a dead heat — for second place

— Trump’s SEC to finally kill climate disclosure rule

— The hidden pollution behind the AI boom revealed

— Americans more pessimistic about the worst effects of climate change

— How hail and heat in Europe this summer threaten economic growth

California politics never fails to disappoint when it comes to crazy elections and today’s primary vote for governor is no different. It’s a dead heat for second place. Who gets that makes a huge difference.

The last-minute polls show long time Democratic politician Xavier Becerra with a comfortable lead over a slate of an astonishing 61 other candidates of all shapes and sizes. The second spot, which would ensure a runoff with Becerra in November, is a close race between Republican talk show host Steve Hilton and Democratic climate billionaire and former presidential candidate Tom Steyer.

If Hilton wins, the race threatens to become a coronation for Becerra in the Democratic state, though never discount the fact that Hilton is backed by President Donald Trump.

But if Steyer manages to overcome Hilton in the last few hours, the race becomes more interesting, as you’ll have a battle between two Democrats — an insider and an outsider.

Much will depend on how well Steyer’s campaign, largely tied to fighting high energy prices and the state’s electric power monopoly, can steal votes from Becerra with a series of last-minute negative ads.

Steyer’s background as a climate investor lends more toward some action in California’s climate battle, vs. more of the same from Becerra. Hilton would likely do little, following Trump’s orders.

That’s why for investors as well as the 60 million people living under wildfire threat in California, the real vote comes today.

If you have ideas or suggestions for us, contact me directly at dcallaway@callawayclimateinsights.com.

Subscribe now

Tuesday’s investor insights

An SEC victory for less information

Read more

(Michael Molinski is a senior economist at Trendline Economics. He’s worked for Fidelity, Charles Schwab and Wells Fargo, and previously as a foreign correspondent and editor for Bloomberg News and MarketWatch.)

NEW YORK (Callaway Climate Insights) — The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule next month on the landmark case against Bayer’s weedkiller Roundup, which could either double the amount of lawsuits it faces or lead to the dismissal of tens of thousands of lawsuits claiming it causes cancer.

But in the meantime, German-based Bayer and rival Chinese-owned Syngenta have found a more lucrative region of the world to market glyphosate which doesn’t face as many judicial or government obstacles — Latin America.

Read more

. . . . Welcome back to Green Lights. Here’s our roundup of the best of Callaway Climate Insights. David Callaway finds the real story behind the IEA’s 2026 Energy Investment report. Oh, and the electric Ferrari, of course. Plus, Mark Hulbert finds that companies that brag about their environmental practices don’t do as well as the companies that stay mum. Have a good weekend and please subscribe to support our climate finance reporting.

Subscribe now

. . . . Behind the headlines of the International Energy Agency’s 2026 World Energy Investment report released Thursday, the numbers and quotes tell a different story. It portends a generational, permanent shift in how the world views the future of oil. Saying frankly that “we are in the midst of the largest energy crisis the world has ever faced,” IEA Executive Director Faith Birol introduces a set of numbers that makes it difficult to see a way for oil investment to ever recover.

The end of oil?

. . . . Five years after companies bragging about their environmental practices led to a controversy around “greenwashing,” some of the most active companies in fighting climate change are going the opposite way, not talking about their actions, writes Mark Hulbert. It’s called “greenhushing” and while it might be harder for investors to track down, the practice is associated with better performance by the stocks of companies who engage in it, according to a new study that Hulbert analyzes. So, it’s not how much you promote your climate actions that benefit your stock, but how much you actually walk the walk.

Read the full column

. . . . At a time when most car companies are slashing the prices of their electric vehicles to stimulate demand, the idea of a $640,000 EV might on the face of it seem like a bad idea, even if it is a Ferrari and it’s designed by legendary Apple designer Jony Ive. David Callaway writes that just the fact that it exists is enough to make even the most hardened gearhead take a second look at the vast potential of the new technology. And maybe by comparison the $64,000 Tesla doesn’t seem so bad after all.

Take it for a spin?

. . . . The rally in stocks this spring, and particularly green stocks tied to energy other than oil, hasn’t spread to the bond markets, which have been ominously weak since the war on Iran started. But one group has defied the odds. Green bonds, issued by companies that plan to use the money on climate projects, are on the rise.

Read more here

. . . . While it’s tempting to speculate that the sudden removal this week of BP Chairman Albert Manifold was simply a targeted kneecapping by new CEO Meg O’Neill to remove an obstructive board leader, the background of Manifold’s role in pushing the oil giant away from the green goals of its recent past deserve scrutiny. No doubt his removal was prompted by a combination of things, some of which we still may not be aware of. But in the end, David Callaway writes, the ouster represents just the latest scandal at a company that can’t seem to avoid controversy long enough to show results, confounding shareholders for more than 20 years now.

Read more here

. . . . The 2026 hurricane season begins next week on June 1. NOAA’s National Weather Service is predicting a below-normal hurricane season for the Atlantic basin this year, with only three or fewer major hurricanes. When one does develop, however, meteorologists will know what to call it: Arthur, you’re up. Read more about how hurricanes are named and what happens when the World Meteorological Organization decides it needs to retire a name from the lists.

What's in a name?

More greenery . . . .

• ‘It’s insane’: How climate change is having an impact at the French Open (CNN)

• Why?: Scientists Retired the Dire Climate Scenario Used for Over a Decade (NYT)

• Fires and floods: Climate change is creating uninsurable areas across Europe (The Conversation)

• Wildfire recovery: LA faces challenges ahead of 2028 Olympics (Clean Energy Wire)

  Subscribe now

Bureaucracies are masters in obscuring what they’re trying to say behind legal and vague jargon, and none are better than French bureaucracies. Which is why at first glance the headline on the International Energy Agency’s 2026 World Energy Investment report released Thursday might seem so obvious. And boring.

Claiming the Middle East conflict this year will “reshape investment plans,” the Paris-based IEA seems to simply be rehashing what most energy analysts and journalists have been saying for months; that the Iran war disrupting the world’s oil supply chains will cause a shift to renewable energy such as solar and wind, and nuclear.

But down in the guts of the release the numbers and quotes tell a different story, one that portends a generational, permanent shift in how the world views the future of oil. Saying frankly that “we are in the midst of the largest energy crisis the world has ever faced,” IEA Executive Director Faith Birol introduces a set of numbers that make it difficult to see a way for oil investment to ever recover.

Of the $3.4 trillion the group projects will be spent on energy this year, only about a third will go to fossil fuels such as oil and gas and coal, while the rest will be spent on electric grids, renewable energy and clean fuels.

More specifically, oil investments will decline for a third year despite higher oil prices, falling below $500 million. Renewable energy investments will be more than $665 billion this year, with more than half of that ($365 billion) in solar alone, the IEA said. Meanwhile, nuclear continues to grow while the only fossil fuel showing any sort of gains is natural gas, because of its attraction to data center builders.

Even if the Iran war ends soon, the example it set of how critical supply chains can easily be choked off will linger long enough to prevent energy companies from shifting back to putting in the years and dollars it takes to develop new oil fields when there are other more profitable ways to generate electricity and meet the surging demand that energy security requires.

Most major financial crises and shifts in perception only become clear in hindsight, such as the change to energy supplies during the oil shock of the 1970s. What the IEA is trying to say here in this report is that this is one of those times. And it’s laying out the numbers to prove it. Investors just have to look.

Don’t forget to contact me directly if you have suggestions or ideas at dcallaway@callawayclimateinsights.com.

Follow us . . . .

Twitter | LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram

Subscribe now

Sounds of silence: Greenhushing now marks the most ambitious climate fighters

. . . . Five years after companies bragging about their environmental practices led to a controversy around “greenwashing,” some of the most active companies in fighting climate change are going the opposite way, not talking about their actions, writes Mark Hulbert. It’s called “greenhushing” and while it might be harder for investors to track down, the practice is associated with better performance by the stocks of companies who engage in it, according to a new study that Hulbert analyzes. There are several reasons companies are choosing not to promote their environmental accomplishments, including a hostile atmosphere toward climate change coming from the White House and negative press around greenwashing itself. According to Hulbert’s analysis of the study, it’s not how much you promote your climate actions that benefit your stock, but how much you actually walk the walk.

Read the full column

Thursday’s subscriber insights

How BP’s latest boardroom scandal inexorably leads back to climate

. . . . While it’s tempting to speculate that the sudden removal this week of BP Chairman Albert Manifold was simply a targeted kneecapping by new CEO Meg O’Neill to remove an obstructive board leader, the background of Manifold’s role in pushing the oil giant away from the green goals of its recent past deserve scrutiny.

Manifold said Wednesday that he would dispute the characterization by the company that he had committed grave corporate governance offenses. Former employees told journalists he was an abrasive leader given to tantrums and bullying of subordinates. While this is repulsive, it’s fairly common in corporate life. Some of the famous CEOs in history in the UK and elsewhere fit that mold.

BP investors went a bit deeper, noting that Manifold was brought in only nine months ago to help with its shift back to traditional oil and gas from the renewable goals of previous leadership. His tactics were divisive, in particular when he managed to shelve attempts by shareholders this spring to include a resolution on climate for vote at the company’s annual general meeting, saying it had not been filed correctly. As a result, as much as 20% of shareholders voted against his election to the board at the meeting.

No doubt his removal was prompted by a combination of things, some of which we still may not be aware of. Perhaps O’Neill, who comes from an energy background, will have a better understanding of where BP fits within the giants of the oil and gas industry and the impending challenges of an energy crisis and climate change.

Either way, the ouster represents just the latest scandal at a company that can’t seem to avoid controversy long enough to show results, confounding shareholders for more than 20 years now.

Editor’s picks: Europe’s deadly heat dome; plus, new turbines, more hydropower

Watch the video: France and the United Kingdom are currently being roasted by a heat dome, driving up temperatures in western Europe. Although the phenomenon is common, it is now being exacerbated by climate change. It’s the same mechanism that has been affecting India for weeks, with temperatures exceeding 113°F in some places, and led to wildfires in Canada in 2021.

Hoover Dam to get new turbines

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation will provide $52 million to replace three old turbines at Hoover Dam amid worries about cuts to hydropower for water users in Nevada, California and Arizona. The Las Vegas Review-Journal reports the agency previously warned extremely low reservoir levels could cause a 40% reduction in hydropower. Forecasters said water levels in Lake Mead levels could plunge to historic lows over the next two years. Older turbines cannot generate power below 1,035 feet in elevation at the reservoir, and hydropower levels would have dropped from 1,302 megawatts to 382 megawatts, the agency said. The three new, wide-head turbines could restore at least 160 megawatts of hydropower capacity, according to a news release.

Latest findings: New research, studies and projects

Climate change and salmonella threats

Climate change is linked to rising antibiotic resistance in salmonella, one of the world’s most common bacterial diseases. A new study, led by researchers from the UK, France, Australia, Switzerland and China and published recently in The Lancet, says “warming and shifting precipitation patterns are associated with rising antimicrobial resistance gene (ARG) abundance and are projected to further exacerbate antimicrobial resistance (AMR) risks under high-emission scenarios.” Antibiotic resistance is one of the fastest-growing threats to global health. The Guardian reports. It can affect people of any age in any country and already kills more than 1 million people a year, according to estimates. According to the report, the main drivers of antibiotic resistance are the misuse and overuse of antibiotics. The research signals the problem is being worsened by climate change. “The accumulated evidence suggests that climate change is an accelerating force behind the global spread of antimicrobial resistance,” the authors write.

Words to live by . . . .

“We are all children of one great mother, Nature.” ― Charles Dickens.

Subscribe now

(Mark Hulbert, an author and longtime investment columnist, is the founder of the Hulbert Financial Digest; his Hulbert Ratings audits investment newsletter returns.)

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. (Callaway Climate Insights) — As you search for companies that are doing the most to mitigate climate change, silence sometimes speaks the loudest.

That’s because many companies are choosing to underreport their climate efforts. In contrast to overselling those efforts, also known as greenwashing, this alternate approach is known as “greenhushing.”

The study that documents this phenomenon is titled “Value of Silence: Determinants and Consequences of Greenhushing.” It was conducted by Sonam Singh of the University of South Florida; Ashwin Malshe of the University of Texas at San Antonio; Yakov Bart of Northeastern University; Anatoli Colicev of the University of Liverpool and Serguei Netessine of the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.

The researchers found that up to one-quarter of firms engage in greenhushing, defined as “the strategic downplay or deliberate silence surrounding firms’ environmental efforts, whereby companies undertake substantive environmental improvements but choose not to communicate them.”

Read more