Behind Ukraine peace plan lies unfathomable energy corruption
Welcome to Callaway Climate Insights, your daily guide to global climate finance. Was this newsletter sent to you? Please enjoy and subscribe.
Today’s edition of Callaway Climate Insights is free for all our readers. We really want to bring you the best and latest in climate finance from around the world. Please subscribe now.
Over the past few months, seasoned Ukraine hands scoffed when we raised the theory that any Ukraine peace plan would be followed by a mad international scrum for any and all of the country’s minerals and energy assets. Now, as peace talks between Russia and the U.S. heat up, it’s becoming more and more clear what’s at stake.
It’s easy to tell the main sticking point driving Ukrainian and European officials crazy is the future of the territory in and around the Donbass region, but what are the points that negotiators agree on? The Wall Street Journal shined a partial light on them last week with a piece that said they are essentially a Russian wish list to share rebuilding contracts with various U.S. business leaders close to President Donald Trump.
We reported three years ago that plans to rebuild Ukraine were begun almost the day after the invasion. It’s rich in rare earth minerals the world needs for the electric power and data center revolution, and its four nuclear reactors generate almost half of the country’s electricity. This scramble has only become more intense with the Trump administration in office and Russia is aware of the opportunities.
Making the background even murkier is the separate investigation inside Ukraine into kickbacks paid to the state’s nuclear power company, Energoatom, from various suppliers, amounting to some $100 million, according to reports. That investigation last week brought down President Volodymyr Zelensky’s right hand man, Andriy Yermak, who until he was ousted was responsible for conducting the international peace negotiations.
In the middle, as always, is Zelensky, who may or may not have used Yermak as a fall guy. But whatever the case, he is now left without a chief negotiator just as the talks begin to zero in on the main sticking points.
It may be that these talks, like so many of them before, go nowhere. But at some point — even years away — there will be a fragile peace. That’s when the carving up process, like after any war, begins in earnest. The frantic positioning of energy players here makes it clear that it will be a power asset grab like none other before. To say nothing of the purveyors of some of the most sophisticated drone technology out there.
Lost in the shuffle will be the courage and sacrifice of the Ukrainian people who gave so much to save their country. They will be told they will share in the new riches of the rebuilding. Just like all the times before.
Don’t forget to contact me directly if you have suggestions or ideas at dcallaway@callawayclimateinsights.com.
Follow us . . . .
Twitter | LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram
Why insider trades may be a key to measuring corporate climate risk
. . . . Astute investors have always watched the trading of senior executives of the stocks they own for clues to what management is doing, but a new study illustrates how useful this monitoring can be in measuring corporate climate risk, writes Mark Hulbert. The study looked at the trading activity of corporate insiders in the periods following a climate disaster in the area of their operations and found some unique insights into how the executives reacted versus the general market. In particular, those who bought shares in their companies following a disaster tended to do even better in performance than the rest of the market over a defined period, Hulbert writes. As federal regulations on climate reporting ease or get wiped out under the Trump administration, investors have fewer ways to decipher exactly what type of risk each company faces. Hulbert says this one could help shine some much needed light.
Thursday’s subscriber insights
New fuel standards a costly and dirty diversion for auto buyers
. . . . The fact that large auto stocks such as Ford F 0.00%↑ and General Motors GM 0.00%↑ barely moved on the Trump administration’s plan this week to lower fuel efficiency standards to allow them to keep making gas guzzlers should show that investors realize nothing in Washington is permanent.
While the auto industry — or any industry for that matter — needs consistency in regulations to thrive, the Trump plan to rollback Biden efficiency standards was seen as simply as a time-consuming diversion, one that could cost consumers in more fuel expenses and local economies in more pollution in the next several years.
Even Mary Barra, CEO of GM, said that while she welcomes the change in policy to one national standard, her company will continue trying to improve the efficiency of its vehicles. She added in an interview with the New York Times’ Andrew Sorkin that GM also intends to continue rolling out electric vehicles, citing a surge in popularity for them in Asia and Europe. She said GM will continue to try to make them less expensive to help stir a dormant U.S. market.
The Trump plan rolled back requirements on fuel efficiency to 34.5 miles per gallon by 2031, from 50 mpg under the Biden administration. Years of legal fighting will now ensue and will likely not be concluded before the next Democratic administration returns to power and raises them back.
For consumers, as always, cost will play an important role in buying decisions, but so will performance and aesthetics. The only big loser here is the climate, as gas powered vehicles remain responsible for about a third of all carbon emissions in the U.S.
Editor’s picks: Something bigger than Yellowstone; plus, weather in Arab region worsening
Watch the video: If Yellowstone erupted again, the consequences for the U.S. and the world would be devastating. But there’s something far bigger than Yellowstone. Something so powerful it’s been linked to nearly every mass extinction in Earth’s history. And astonishingly, most people have never heard of it. PBS Terra reports on the true giants of Earth’s volcanic past: the Large Igneous Provinces.
Extreme weather becoming more severe in Arab region: WMO
2024 was the hottest year on record for the Arab region, where temperatures are rising at twice the global average, the World Meteorological Organization reports in its first State of the Climate in the Arab Region. According to the report, droughts are becoming more frequent and severe, threatening water availability and agriculture. Extreme events in 2024, including heatwaves and floods, caused over 300 reported deaths, with actual human and economic losses likely higher. Nearly 60% of Arab countries now operate multi-hazard early warning systems, says the WMO. That’s above the global average but still insufficient given the scale of risks. The report emphasizes water security as a top regional priority, as 15 of the world’s 20 most water-scarce countries are located in the Arab region.
Latest findings: New research, studies and projects
Major climate study predicting severe economic damage is retracted
A widely cited study that predicted serious economic damage from climate change was retracted Wednesday following criticism from peers, according to published reports. The research, titled The economic commitment of climate change, was published in April of last year in the journal Nature. It predicted that global economic output would decline 62% by 2100 under a high-carbon emissions scenario. The estimate was much more severe than other forecasts, prompting scrutiny of the underlying data, the Wall Street Journal reported. “We broadly agree with the issues raised, and have made corrections to the underlying economic data and to our methodology to address them,” said study author Leonie Wenz, from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany. “These changes are too substantial for a correction of the original article in Nature.” The research was based on historical data from 1,600 regions around the world over the past four decades to project how changes in temperature and precipitation would affect economic growth, including factors like agricultural yields, labor productivity and infrastructure. But after the study was published, other researchers said economic data from Uzbekistan between 1995 and 1999 skewed the results. Without Uzbekistan, the 2100 damage forecast fell to 23%, not 62%. The researchers published their critique in Nature in August.
Words to live by . . . .
“One kind word can warm three winter months.” — Japanese proverb.