SEC Climate Scam Rules Set To Create Big Economic Issues

I mentioned the SEC trotting out a rule on companies reporting their carbon chain so “investors”, meaning a bunch of Warmists who do not actually own stock in the companies but think they’re allowed to have their say, can make wise decisions or something. Most actual investors only care about the return on their investment. Now, Real Clear Investigations takes deep dive

The Green U.S. Supply-Chain Rules Set to Unspool and Rattle the Global Economy

Making a box of Cocoa Puffs is a complicated global affair. It could start with cocoa farms in Africa, corn fields in the U.S. or sugar plantations in Latin America. Then thousands of processors, transporters, packagers, distributors, office workers and retailers join the supply chain before a kid in Minnesota, where General Mills is based, pours the cereal into a bowl.

Now imagine the challenge that General Mills faces in counting the greenhouse gas emissions from all of these people, machines, vehicles, buildings and other products involved in this Cocoa Puff supply chain – then multiply that by the 100-plus brands belonging to the food giant.

Thousands of public companies may soon have such a daunting task to comply with a new set of climate rules proposed by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Hailed by prominent environmental groups as a long sought victory, the sweeping plan released in late March would force companies to grapple with the unpredictable impact of climate change by disclosing reams of new information to investors. What are your company’s climate risks, such as severe weather, and the possible financial impacts? How have the threats affected your business strategies and what’s the plan to avoid the dangers? The most consequential and controversial piece of the SEC’s proposed regulations would require corporations to calculate their total greenhouse gas footprint, including from the supply chain.

And, of course the companies wouldn’t even consider passing on the extra costs to consumers, right?

While many companies like Walmart and business groups like the Chamber of Commerce generally support the idea of required climate disclosures, they object to what they see as the SEC’s heavy-handedness in standardizing rules across the economy. The Chamber is calling for flexibility so companies can customize their climate disclosures based on what’s relevant to their businesses and investors.

They never learn. The minute you give a little agreement on the climate cult’s agenda, they will demand and take a mile from your inch.

The biggest beef from companies is the rule that would require them to calculate and disclose supply chain emissions, called Scope 3.

Big companies have thousands of suppliers operating in hundreds of countries, making the task of coming up with a reasonable accounting enormously complicated. First of all, many suppliers of products and services are private companies not under the control of the SEC. They may refuse to cooperate in a count because of the costs and the implications that they might have to change their business practices to reduce emissions, said Professor Gerald Patchell, who has analyzed the problems of supply chain reporting.

Another obstacle is that many smaller suppliers, like General Mills’ cocoa farmers in Africa, don’t have the capacity to measure the emissions from their own fertilizers, tractors and farming practices. So companies will have to rely on broad country or industry averages that likely don’t reflect the actual emissions created by the suppliers, according to researchers.

And, if they make it up, fudge it, the SEC will come down on these companies hard.

The upshot is that regulations meant to bring clarity to investors on climate risk may end up providing highly unreliable emissions disclosures, leaving them “worse off,” wrote SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce, a Trump appointee who voted against the 500-page proposal. It “forces investors to view companies through the eyes of a vocal set of stakeholders, for whom a company’s climate reputation is of equal or greater importance than a company’s financial performance.”

How many of the vocals are actually stakeholders? Some are probably very, very minor shareholders. Should Apple or Amazon listen to someone who has like 20 shares? No. Most investors want to see money. Period.

Anyhow, it’s a long, long piece, which really starts to delve into how hard it is to comply, and how it will mess up chains.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

3 Responses to “SEC Climate Scam Rules Set To Create Big Economic Issues”

  1. drowningpuppies says:

    Brandon mal-administration is doing its damndest to bring on an economic depression, insuring a red tidal wave come November.

    Bwaha! Lolgf

  2. Doom and Gloom says:

    If the US government just fired everyone except those working for the Military and social security and transferred everything else to the states.

    They would eliminate all the risks posed by Climate Change.

    If they Federal government just gave power to Trump and he could set up a dictatorship with a line of succession that included his family for the next 100 years, the US would become a power once again.

    IF Disney officially moved to China all would be well with the world. If most of our major corporations moved to China we could start over.

    If all democrats moved to California and the state seceded from the Union the world would be a Much better place. Then perhaps King Trump could get blacks and hispanics and poor white people off the reservation, give them hope and a meaningful life that is not bound to their next welfare payment by democrats to buy their votes.

    Then………There is no need for the stock market, cause they are all in China being butt reamed by the COMMUNISTS who run half of them now anyways.

    • Doom and Gloom says:

      Chris Pine. Captain Kirk of Star Trek Fame was commenting the other day that he WANTS STAR TREK FOUR to be filmed in Los Angeles to support HOllYWOOD.

      He says and he is correct that Hollywood is dying. Every actor now is from another country. Hemsworth, Australia etc. I mean if anyone has ever listened to these hollywood types on a talk show they all have foreign accents.


      In the UK they can be as woke as they want. They are paying for cheap actors to be in their film rather than paying Scarlet Johansen 50 million, they can get the equivalent for 5 million from the UK.

      Now I am not picking on Scarlet. I adore her and wish her the best but the WOKE HOLLYWOOD CROWD has done this to themselves. They have forced the Walking Dead to move to the UK to film after being in Georgia for years. As a result almost all the newest actors are from the UK and hell…most of the old ones are too!!

      Hollywood is dying. That is why WILL SMITH PUNCHED the dude on stage. RATINGS. RELEVANCE etc…etc. It was staged and now all of hollywood is talking about it and Hollywood is in the news for something other than defending a transgender, black, one armed, midget from persecution.

      Hollywood and California are synonymous with each other. Lunatics. All.

Pirate's Cove