Search

Responsible investing columnist

Tim Nash’s sustainable stock showdown: Kimberly-Clark vs. Cascades

If you don't want to blow your nose (or your investments) on the Boreal forest, what are your options?

They say there are only two sure things in life: death and taxes. But if there’s another thing we all share in common, it’s our reliance on, well, disposable paper products. This week we look at two companies in this sector: Kimberly-Clark (KMB.NYSE) and Cascades (CAS.TO).

Kimberly-Clark is an American consumer products company that makes personal care products like diapers, tissues, and yes, toilet paper. Some of its brands include Huggies, Kleenex, Kotex and Cottonelle. I was quite skeptical of Kimberly-Clark going into my research. The forestry sector, in general, has a chequered past with impacts on biodiversity loss, climate change, and indigenous rights.  As far back as 2005, Greenpeace vocally accused Kleenex of blowing our noses on the Boreal forest.

Continue Reading...

Tim Nash’s sustainable stock showdown on ditching Exxon for greener oil

As Exxon shareholders turning up heat over climate risks, one oil company is proving itself as renewables powerhouse

As a sustainable investment advisor, I’ve had the uncomfortable job of sitting with climate activist clients as we open up their portfolio to find Exxon shares front and centre. Exxon Mobil Corporation (XOM) is one of the biggest companies in the world and so it tends to have a prominent place in the top ten holdings of most standard funds.  It’s a bitter pill to swallow for the climate conscious, since Exxon has one of the largest carbon footprints on the planet.

Environmental advocates have had good reason to scorn Exxon at least as far back as 1989, when the Exxon Valdez spilled roughly 11 million gallons of oil into Alaska’s Prince William Sound. More recently, a 2015 investigative report from Inside Climate News revealed that Exxon scientists knew about the climate impacts of fossil fuel use back in the 1980s and undertook a massive lobbying and advertising campaign to sow seeds of doubt and uncertainty around the science of climate change.

Continue Reading...

Tim Nash’s sustainable stock showdown takes on Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway

Investing legend's tepid approach to climate risks may leave you high and dry. So which insurance company wins our showdown?

Berkshire Hathaway is the fifth largest publicly traded company on the planet. But while many Canadians have never heard of the conglomerate, there’s a good chance you know the name of its chair and CEO, Warren Buffett. Buffett is certainly an investing legend. Some would consider him an investing god. Every year, thousands of people flock to Omaha, Nebraska for the Berkshire Hathaway annual shareholders meeting, as they did earlier this month. So, is the Oracle of Omaha betting on a sustainable future?

Continue Reading...

Tim Nash’s sustainable stock showdown: Uber vs. Lyft

With driver strikes and bumpy IPOs, is one app more ethical than another and is either stock a sustainable investment?

Not owning a car is one of the best financial decisions I’ve ever made. Car payments, insurance, parking, repairs, etc. would add about a thousand dollars to my monthly budget. I’m fortunate to live in a big city, so it’s way easier for me to bike, take transit, and use ride-hailing apps like Uber and Lyft  to get around town (especially in nasty weather). But not everyone sees ride-hailing in a rosy light.  Ahead of Uber and Lyft’s IPO launches, drivers in the U.S. and the U.K. have been holding strikes to draw attention to their declining wages. Is one app more ethical than another and is either stock a sustainable investment?

Continue Reading...

Tim Nash’s sustainable stock showdown: Johnson & Johnson vs. Unilever

With thousands of J&J cancer lawsuits pending, you might want to freshen up your portfolio with a cleaner company

For decades, when people thought of Johnson & Johnson, benign images of baby shampoo and baby powder came to mind. Now, the century-old brand is soiled with lawsuits.

Last month, a California jury awarded a $29 million settlement to a woman who charged that her ovarian cancer was caused by the frequent use of J&J baby powder in the 1960s and ‘70s. Back in December, the company lost its bid to reverse a jury verdict that awarded a whopping US$4.69 billion to 22 women for similar reasons.

Continue Reading...