Last week’s poll: The Rockefeller conundrum

As the Rockefeller Foundation annnounces that it is to disinvest from its fossil fuel holdings and sink its $860milion funds into renewables, how safe are hydrocarbon-based businesses as an investment for wealthy funds?

Rockefeller Centre
Prometheus stole fire from the Gods, but ended up cahined to a rock having his liver pecked out by an eagle for eternity. Are fossil fuels also heading for their doom?

We recieved a wide spread of opinion on our poll on the Rockefeller Brothers’ Fund’s decision to disinvest from hydrocarbons. Of the 220 respondents, the largest group, still only 28 per cent, didn’t think thatt renewables had reached a point where they represented a safer investment than hydrocarbons, and 24 per cent thought that decklining reserves maent that it was sensible for funds to look for alternative investments. Another 19 per cent thought that hydrocarbons would always be a sensible investment — it would be interesting to find what readers thpught would represent the point where this is no longer true. The political instability of many hydrocarbon-rich countries was the primary concern of 12 per cent, while 9 per cent worried about the rising cost of extraction and its effect on profitability. Just 8 per cent declined to pick an option.


As Jon Excell pointed out in his opinion piece on this subject, the Brothers’ Fund is only one of several Rockefeller charitable funds, and the others have not indicated any desire to get out of hydrocarbons. Please continue to let us know your opinion on this subject.