submitted april 6th, 2017

Fossil Free Guelph SPECIAL ACTION POLICY SUBMISSION

Submitted April 6th, 2017

2017 Fossil Free Guelph Proposal for Special Action

Expression of Concern:

Under the University of Guelph Special Action Policy for the Endowment Portfolio, Fossil Free

Guelph, a University of Guelph (U of G) stakeholder group consisting of current undergraduate

and graduate students, is filing an expression of concern with the support of over 300 students,

faculty, staff, and alumni regarding divestment from 55 companies in which the U of G is

currently invested. These include:

Adaro Energy TBK IDRl 00

Anadarko Petroleum Corp

Apache Corp.

BASF

BP PLC ORD USD0.25

Cabot Corp

Cenovus

Centrica

Chesapeake Energy Corp.

Chevron

Cimarex Energy Co

Conoco Phillips

CONSOL Energy

Consol Energy INC

Denbury Resources

Devon Energy Corp

Ecopetrol SA NPV

Energen Corp

ENIEUR

EOG Resources Inc

EQT Corp.

Exxon-Mobil Corp

Freeport-McMoran INC

Gazprom

Hess Corp

Imperial Oil Ltd

Inner Mongolia Yitai Coal CO

JX Holdings

Kinder Morgan Inc.

Linn Energy

Lukoil

Marathon Oil Corp

Murphy Oil

Newfield Exploration Co

Noble Corp PLC

Noble Energy Inc.

Occidental Petroleum Corp.

Oil India Ltd

PetroChina

Peyto

Pioneer Natural Resources

PTT

QEP Resources Inc

Range Resources

Repsol SA

Royal Dutch Shell

Sasol

Sasol Nvp

Shougang Fushan Resources

Southwestern Energy Co

Statoil ASA NOK2.50

Sumitomo Mitsui GR NPV

Sun cor Energy Inc

Tatneft-Sponsored ADR

Total SA EUR 2.5

Tourmaline Oil Corp

Any other fossil fuel cotnpanies not included in the above list that the university has invested in

should also be considered as part of this submission for divesttnent.

Based on this expression of concern, we urge the University of Guelph to freeze all investments

in the aforementioned companies. In addition we ask that the University fully divest over the

next five years and reinvest in ethical alternatives that are tnore in line with the University of

Guelph's purported values.

' .


Contributions to social injury

"Social Injury - the injurious impact which the activities of a company are found to have on

consumers, employees, or other persons, particularly including activities which violate, or

frustrate the enforcement of, rules of domestic or international law intended to protect

individuals against deprivation of health, safety, or basic freedoms ." 1

#1. Climate Change: As confirmed by the recent Intergovernmental Report on Climate Change

(IPCC) report, the last three decades have been the warmest once since 1850 2• This has caused

severe envirorunental changes including the significant heating of the earth's surfaces and

oceans, the shrinkage of polar ice caps, and rising sea levels across the globe. The effects of

climate change have not only disrupted the integrity of various ecosyste1ns, but have had

significant impacts on human life through food crises, drought and flooding resulting in

substantial displace1nent experienced disproportionately by countries in the Global South,

low-income populations, Indigenous peoples, and People of Colour3. The IPCC has further

confirmed that a growth in anthropogenic greenhouse gas e1nissions, driven primarily by the

combustion of fossil fuels, is "extremely likely to have been the dominant cause of the observed

warming since .the mid-20th Century. "4 Based on these facts, it is clear that any efforts to

mitigate global climate change must be founded in ending dependence on fossil fuels. Climate

scientists, environmental organizations and even notable mainstremn financial experts, have

asserted that the majority of the world's fossil fuel reserves must stay in the ground in order to

prevent catastrophic, life-threatening climate change.

The 55 companies listed in our expression of concern belong to a list of the world's top 200

public coal, oil and gas companies, ranked by the potential carbon emissions content of their

proven reserves. 5 Global fossil fuel reserves total roughly 2800 gigatons (Gt) of potential C02 emissions. According to the IPCC, this amount is almost five times more than can be

burned for the world to have an 80°/o chance of limiting global temperature rise to 2°C

(3.6° F) above pre-industriallevels.6 The scientific community agrees that if the rise in global

temperatures surpasses 2°C, catastrophic climate change will ensue. 7 It is for this reason that

parties of the 2015 United Nations Framework Convention on Clilnate Change Paris Agreement

1 Yale University as cited by U of G (2016). Retrieved from https://www.uoguelph.ca/finance/policies-procedures/general-policies/special-action-policy 2 IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report. Retreived from

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/arS/syr/SYR_ARS_LONGERREPORT.pdf 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid (4) . 5 Fossil Free Indexes (2016). The Carbon Underground 200. Retrieved from http://fossilfreeindexes.com/research/the-carbon-underground/

· 6 IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report. Retreived from

http://www. ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/arS/syr /SYR_ARS _LONG ERR E PORT. pdf 7 Ibid.


agreed to pursue efforts to keep the global temperature rise well below 2 degrees Celsius above

pre-industrial levels.

By investing its endowtnent funds in the world's largest fossil fuel companies, the University of

Guelph is directly impeding progress on the international goals outlined in the Paris Clitnate

Agreement, and contributing to "social injury" through the perpetuation of global clin1ate

change.

#2 Human Rights and The Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Beyond the implications for global climate change, the fossil fuel industry has a long and

egregious history of human rights violations. For this reason our request to divest from these 55

of the world's top 200 fossil fuel companies is born out ofboth environtnental and social

concern. See Appendix A for a list of cases which exhibit social injury committed by these 55

cotnpanies in which the University of Guelph is invested.

#3 Inconsistencies with goals and values of the university

Investments in the fossil fuel industry contradict several of the University of Guelph's publicly

stated goals and values. The Green Gryphon Initiative website claims that the U of G has a

"Strong commitment to environmental stewardship" and a desire to reduce the University's

greenhouse gas emissions8. To quote the University of Guelph's sustainability office web page

"The University of Guelph prides itself in being an institute for sustainability"9. These claitns

and goals are at blatant odds with the University's investn1ent choices which supports some of

the biggest perpetrators of global climate change.

Better Planet Project: The U of G facilitates the Better Planet Project (BPP), a "$200-million fundraising catnpaign to

help accelerate solutions to global challenges in areas where the University of Guelph excels:

Food, Environment, Health, and Con1munities." 10 According to the 2014 BPP report, "The

University of Guelph's expertise in environmental science is critical to protecting resources and

preserving the earth's biodiversity. The Better Planet Project has supported vital research that

continues to improve the quality of water, soil, air, and the ecosystems they support." 11

Contradictory to the purported environmental goals of the Better Planet Project, the University of

Guelph directly perpetuates climate change and environtnental destruction through its

investments in the fossil fuel industry. Furthermore the fossil fuel industry, in which the

8 Green Gryphon Initiative-About the Project. Retrieved from http://www.greengryphon.ca/Home/About 9 Sustainability Office retrieved from https: //www.uoguelph.ca/sustainabilitv/education 10 http://www.thebetterplanetproject.ca/impacU 11 1bid .


University invests, directly negatively impacts the quality of water, soil, air and ecosystems that

projects like the BPP claim to support. This harm is evident in the various cases of

environmental infractions committed by companies in which the University of Guelph invests,

see Appendix B.

Appendix A

ADARO ENERGY TBK IDRlOO

Adaro is involved in a controversial $4 billion thennal power plant project in Indonesia which is

being scrutinized because of human rights violations in the land acquisition process. PT Makmur

Sejahtera Wisesa, a company with 100% shares indirectly owned by PT Adaro Energy Tbk

(ADRO), is being sued in Singapore arbitration. This was mentioned by Adaro Energy Corporate

Secretary Mahardika Putranto. Makmur Sejahtera Wisesa has received a letter of notification

about the lawsuit filed by PT Punj Llyod Indonesia and Punj Lloyd Pte. Ltd. on September 3,

2014. They are seeking for arbitration process against the company.

Resources:

http://www. j apantimes. co. jp/news/20 16/01/09 /national/indonesian -rights-commission-tells-japan

-review-power-project/#. WBX6guErJE4

http:/!english.klp.no/about-klp/press-room/31-new-companies-excluded-1.29215

http:/ /www.dnb. co .id/news/ adaro-energy -subsidiary-faces-lawsuit

BP PLC ORD

BP has been charged with 62 human rights, environmental, labour, safety and false claims

offenses in the US alone. Numerous civil clai1ns have been made against BP arising from the

April 20, 2010 Macon do well blowout and the massive oil spill that followed in the Gulf of

Mexico. BP also violated the Clean Water Act under the Oil Pollution Act, as well as causing

economic damage to the five Gulf states and local governments. Additionally, Colombian trade

unionist Gilberta Torres claims BP funded paramilitaries who abducted and planned to murder

him and has filed a lawsuit. Also, in 2011, the UK government ruled that a BP-led consortium

was breaking international rules governing the human rights responsibilities of multinational

companies in its operations on the controversial Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline.

http:/ /www.corp-research. org/B P

http:/ /via lationtracker. goodj obsfirst. org/parent/bp

http://www.thecomerhouse.org.uk/resource/bp-violating-human-rights-rules-says-uk-govemment


CHEVRON CORP

Soldiers working for Chevron have been accused of 1nurder and forcing locals to do unpaid

physical labour surrounding a pipeline which is a joint venture between Chevron, Total, a Thai

energy company, and the Burmese state. In 2005, the now defunct Unocal oil company, which

Chevron bought the same year, paid an undisclosed sum of money to Burmese plaintiffs after

fighting a nine-year legal battle in a California court over hu1nan-rights abuses around the

company's pipeline.

Resources:

http:/ I content. time. con1/tin1e/world/ article/0. 8 5 99.2001962.00 .html

PETROCHINA

As the pri1nary source of revenue for the Sudan government, China Petro has been indirectly

funding the Darfur Genocide since it began in 2003. According to the University of Yale

Advisory Committee on Investor Responsibility:

"Sudan contains oil fields, which PetroChina and Sinopec, among other oil companies have

taken interest in. The oil companies pay the Sudanese government for oil concessions, the right

to explore and develop oil fields found in areas of Sudan. As the Sudanese government receives

money frotn the various oil companies, they benefit because they can use that money to finance

and supply the Janjaweed, who go to villages in Darfur to kill, rape and torture the Sudanese

people, and in tum gain control of that land. That land can then be used to explore for oil and sell

to huge oil companies. The oil companies are basically funding the genocide in Darfur, and need

to be stopped. By divesting from those con1panies directly, and the fin11s which invest in those

oil companies, you are helping to end the genocide."

Many institutions have divested frotn Petro China on claims of social injury, including the

University of Harvard and the University of Stanford.

The company has also been implicated in human rights abuses in Bunna.

Resources:

http:/ /acir.yale.edu/pdf/ ACIRReport.pdf

https://www.ft.con11content/2c20 1 bec-927f-11 e3-80 18-00 144feab7de

https://www.earthrights.org/press/release/chinese-oil-company-linked-human-rights-abuses-bur

ma-tnyanmar

http://violationtracker.goodjobsfirst.org/prog.php?parent=bp

https :/ /www. theguardian.con11 environtnent/20 15/may/22/ colombian-takes-bp-to-court-in-uk -aile

ged-complicity-kidnap-and-torture


http://www.thecomerhouse.org.uk/resource/bp-violating-human-rights-rules-says-uk-govemment

http://www. corp-research. org/BP

CONOCOPHILLIPS

ConocoPhillips is the third largest oil company in the United States. The Phillips part of the

co1npany was long notorious for the abysmal safety record of its operations in Texas, where a

series of accidents resulted in more than two dozen worker deaths and scores of injuries. The

co1npany has engaged in nu1nerous environ1nental~ health, safety and human rights offenses. In

2012, a lawsuit was filed by 30 fishermen which blames ConocoPhillips for the spills around

offshore production platforms which the U.S. c01npany operates in north China's Bohai Bay.

Resources:

http:/ /vi o lationtracker. goodi o bsfirst. org/pro g.php ?parent=conocophillips

http://www.wsj.coln!articles/SB10001424052702303684004577506351421473174

http://www. corp-research. org/ conocophillips

EXXON MOBIL CORP

Exxon Mobil has been charged with 70 human rights, enviromnental, labour, and safety offenses

in the US alone. In 2001, eleven Indonesian villagers filed suit against ExxonMobil in US federal

court alleging that the company was complicit in human rights abuses committed by Indonesian

security forces in the province of Aceh. The plaintiffs maintain that ExxonMobil hired the

security forces, who were 1ne1nbers of the Indonesian military, to protect the natural gas

extraction facility and pipeline which ExxonMobil was operating. The plaintiffs further claim

that ExxonMobil knew or should have known about the Indonesian military's hu1nan rights

violations against the people of Aceh. The plaintiffs allege that they suffered human rights

violations, such as murder, torture and rape, at the hands of these security forces. In Septe1nber

2014, a US federal court held that Indonesian villagers from the Aceh province can proceed with

their clain1s against ExxonMobil. In a decision issued in July 2015, a US federal court ruled that

the plaintiffs' claims sufficiently "touch and concern" the United States and may proceed in US

court. In addition to hun1an rights abuses, Exxon Mobil has been cited as intentionally funding

climate change denial since the early 1980's.

Resources:

htq,://violationtracker.goodjobsfirst.org/prog.php?parent=exxon-mobil

http:/ /www.corp-research. org/ exxonmobil

https://business-humanrights.org/en/exxonmobil-lawsuit-re-aceh

https:/ /www.theguardian.com/environment/20 15/jul/08/exxon-climate-change-1981-climate-deni

er-funding


ROYAL DUTCH SHELL PLC Shell has been charged with 88 human rights, environmental, labour, safety and corruption

offenses in the US alone. In 2013, Shell was charged with violating the US Clean Air Act at a

large refinery and chemical plant in Deer Park, Texas due to harmful air pollution from industrial

flares and other processes. Additionally, Shell has been charged and criticized for its practices in

Nigeria and repeated contamination, leaks, explosions and other toxic events at many of its

operations around the world.

Resources:

http:/ /vio lationtracker. goodj o bsfirst. org/prog.php ?parent=royal-dutch-shell

http://www. corp-research. org/royal-dutch -shell

SHOUGANG FUSHAN RESOURCES Shougang produces and sells coking coal products in China. It is principally engaged in mining

of coking coal and production and sales of raw and clean coking coal. Coal is the 1nost

environ1nentally compromising fossil fuel resource. Coal is directly responsible for a wide range

of serious health impacts and it is a leading driver of clitnate change. These in1pacts have been

borne by individuals and communities through increased suffering, disease, and health care costs.

The financial market forces are working entirely against coal to the point where, financially, coal

is simply the wrong choice for investors. Coal divestment offers a moral response to caring for

the most vulnerable among us as well as to paving a pathway towards greater sustainability for

future generations.

Health effects:

• Reduction in life expectancy (particulates, sulfur dioxide, ozone, heavy metals,

benzene, radionuclides, etc.)

• Respiratory hospital admissions (particulates, ozone, sulfur dioxide)

• Black lung from coal dust

• Congestive heart failure (particulates and carbon monoxide)

• Non-fatal cancer, osteroporosia, ataxia, renal dysfunction (benzene, radionuclides,

heavy metals, etc.)

• Chronic bronchitis, asthma attacks, etc. (particulates, ozone)

• Loss of IQ from air and water pollution and nervous syste1n damage (mercury)

• Degradation and soiling of buildings that can effect human health (sulfur dioxide,

acid deposition, particulates)

• Global warming (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide)


• Ecosystem loss and degradation, with negative effects on health and quality of life.

Resources:

http://www. climateadvisers.com/wp-content/uploads/20 14/01/2011-1 0-The-Social-Cost-of-Coal.

pdf http:/ /www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Health effects of coal

TOTAL ENERGY SERVICES INC Total Energy services has been accused of various human rights abuses in Burma. Soldiers

working for Chevron and Total Energy Services have been accused of murder and forcing locals

to do unpaid physical labour in Burma surrounding the Yadana pipeline which is a joint venture

between Chevron, Total, a Thai energy company, and the Burmese state. In 2005, the now

defunct Unocal oil company, which Chevron bought the same year, paid an undisclosed sum of

money to Burmese plaintiffs after fighting a nine-year legal battle in a California court over

human-rights abuses around the company's pipeline.

Resources

http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2001962,00.html

Appendix B

CHEVRON:

In 2011, Chevron Puerto Rico LLC was found guilty of committing approximately 100

violations under the Resource Conservation Recovery Act. In particular, the company failed to

provide release detection for tanks and piping, provide adequate overfill protection equipment,

perform annual tests of automatic line leak detector systems and maintain adequate records of

release detection for tanks and piping for its underground storage tank facilities in Puerto Rico.

Resource:

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chevron-puerto-rico-llc-agrees-improve-leak-detection-puerto-ric

o-gas-stations

CONSOL ENERGY INC

In 2016, the Department of Justice, the EPA and the state of Pennsylvania announced that Consol

Energy Inc., CNX Coal Resources and Consol Pennsylvania Coal Co. LLC would have to pay $3

million in civil penalties for Clean Water Act violations for the discharge of mining wastewater

from the Bailey Mine Complex in Greene and Washington Counties, Pennsylvania, to the Ohio

River and its tributaries.


Resources:

http://violationtracker.goodjobsfirst.org/violation-tracker/-consol-energy-inc

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/settlement-us-and-pennsylvania-requires-consol-energy-impleme

nt-water-management-upgrades

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/consol-energy-pay-55-million-penalty-and-install-wastewater-trea

tment-plant-settle-clean

http://violationtracker.goodjobsfirst.org/violation-tracker/wv-consol-energy-inc

DUKE ENERGY CORP NEW COM

In 2015, Duke Energy Corporation settled a plea agreement for 9 criminal violations of the Clean

Water Act and was forced to pay penalties totalling $102,000,000. Four of these violations were

due to a massive coal ash spill in 2014 that contaminated the Dan River in North Carolina.

"Three subsidiaries of North Carolina-based Duke Energy Corporation, the largest utility in the

United States, pleaded guilty today to nine criminal violations of the Clean Water Act , totalling

$100, 000, 000, at several of its North Carolina facilities. Four of the charges are the direct result

of the n1assive coal ash spill frmn the Dan River stemn station into the Dan River near Eden,

North Carolina, in February 2014. The remaining violations were discovered as the scope of the

investigation broadened based on allegations of historical violations at the con1pany's other

facilities."

"Over two hundred sixteen million Atnericans rely on surface water as their source of drinking

water," said Assistant Adn1inistrator Cynthia Giles for EPA's Office of Enforcement and

Compliance Assurance. "Duke Energy put that precious resource at risk in North Carolina as the

result of their negligence."

In the same year, the cotnpany also settled under the Clean Air Act in relation to excessive

pollution at five coal plants across the United States. At the time the suit was filed in 2000, total

etnissions from thirteen units at these five plants were greater than 51 000 tons. Duke Energy

Corporation signed a consent decree in 2015 for $975,000 in civil penalties and $4.4 million in

environtnentaltnitigation projects.

Health effects of the pollutants involved in the Duke Energy Corporation Clean Air Act

settlement:

• Sulfur dioxide -High concentrations of S02 affect breathing and may aggravate existing

respiratory and cardiovascular disease. Sensitive populations include asthmatics,


individuals with bronchitis or emphysema, children, and the elderly. Sulfur dioxide is

also a prilnary contributor to acid deposition, or acid rain.

• Particulate matter - Short term exposure to particulate matter can aggravate lung disease,

cause asthma attacks and acute bronchitis, may increase susceptibility to respiratory

infections and has been linked to heart attacks.

• Nitrogen oxides- Nitrogen oxides can cause ground-level ozone, acid rain, particulate

matter, global warming, water quality deterioration, and visual impairment.

Nitrogen oxides play a major role, with volatile organic chemicals, in the atlnospheric

reactions that produce ozone. Children, people with lung diseases such as asthma, and

people who work or exercise outside are susceptible to adverse effects such as damage to

lung tissue and reduction in lung function.

Resources:

http://violationtracker.goodjobsfirst.org/violation-tracker/nc-duke-energy-corporation

https :/ /www. justice. gov I opa/pr/ duke-energy -subsidiaries-plead-guilty -and-sentenced -pay -1 02-lni

llion-clean-water-act-crimes

https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/duke-energy-corporation-clean-air-act-caa-settlement

INNER MONGOLIA YITAI COAL CO

Mongolia Yitai is the seventh largest reserve of coal in the world measured by potential carbon

emissions. Coal is the most environmentally compromising fossil fuel resource. Coal is directly

responsible for a wide range of serious health impacts and it is a leading driver of climate

change. These impacts have been born by individuals and communities through increased

suffering, disease, and health care costs. The financial market forces are working entirely against

coal to the point where, financially, coal is simply the wrong choice for investors. Coal

divestment offers a moral response to caring for the most vulnerable among us as well as to

paving a pathway towards greater sustainability for future generations.

Health effects:

• Reduction in life expectancy (particulates, sulfur dioxide, ozone, heavy metals,

benzene, radionuclides, etc.)

• Respiratory hospital admissions (particulates, ozone, sulfur dioxide)

• Black lung from coal dust

• Congestive heart failure (particulates and carbon monoxide)

• Non-fatal cancer, osteroporosia, ataxia, renal dysfunction (benzene, radionuclides,

heavy metals, etc.)

• Chronic bronchitis, asthma attacks, etc. (particulates, ozone)


• Loss of IQ frmn air and water pollution and nervous system damage (mercury)

• Degradation and soiling of buildings that can effect human health (sulfur dioxide,

acid deposition, particulates)

• Global warming (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide)

• Ecosystem loss and degradation, with negative effects on health and quality of life.

Resources:

http://www.climateadvisers.com/wp-content/uploads/20 14/01/2011-10-The-Social-Cost-of-Coal.

12M http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Health effects of coal

submitted april 6th, 2017

Documents