Coal gets a black mark from super holders
The survey, conducted by Market Forces, found that only 43 per cent of the 1125 respondents would leave their holdings unchanged if their fund did make such investments.
The highest opposition to altering investments based on links to coal or coal seam gas was in the top income bracket of those earning more than $150,000, the report found, with 51 per cent against.
Australians hold almost $1 trillion in super - excluding self-funded superannuants - so the willingness of many to avoid coal and coal seam gas should be "a massive wake-up call" for the industry, Market Forces campaigner Julien Vincent said.
The Australia Institute and Market Forces have sent copies of the survey to every super fund in the country and included a questionnaire on how much each fund has invested in coal or unconventional gas extraction.
"We hope that by clarifying which companies are in and out of coal and coal seam gas, super fund members can make decisions about where they want to put their money," Mr Vincent said.
The report concedes most people are "disengaged" from their super. While the assumption is that providing more information about financial performance will improve perceptions, as will greater disclosure about a fund's stance on ethical or environmental issues.
A recent report by Deutsche Bank suggests super funds might want to avoid coal investments for financial reasons too. The bank's chief economist Jun Ma said China's dire pollution will accelerate the country's shift away from the carbon-intensive fuel.
By 2030, coal will constitute 32 per cent of China's energy supply, down from 68 per cent now - much less than the previous prediction of 41 per cent by the end of the next decade.
Frequently Asked Questions about this Article…
Research commissioned by The Australia Institute and conducted by Market Forces found that up to one in four superannuation holders said they would move their holdings if their fund invested in coal or coal seam gas extraction.
The survey had 1,125 respondents, and only 43% of those said they would leave their holdings unchanged if their super fund did invest in coal or coal seam gas.
The report found the highest opposition to altering investments was among people earning more than $150,000 a year — 51% of that top income bracket were against changing investments on the basis of links to coal or coal seam gas.
Australians hold almost $1 trillion in super (excluding self-funded retirees), so a significant portion of members being willing to avoid coal and coal seam gas investments is important — it could influence how super funds allocate capital and how they respond to member preferences on environmental issues.
They have sent copies of the survey and a questionnaire about how much each fund has invested in coal or unconventional gas extraction to every super fund in the country, aiming to clarify which companies and funds are exposed to these industries so members can make informed decisions.
Yes. The article cites a Deutsche Bank report and its chief economist Jun Ma, who suggested China’s severe pollution will accelerate a shift away from carbon‑intensive fuels, implying super funds might avoid coal for financial as well as ethical reasons.
Deutsche Bank estimated that by 2030 coal would make up about 32% of China’s energy supply, down from about 68% now — a much larger decline than previously forecast — which matters for investors because reduced demand in a major market can affect the long‑term value of coal assets.
The report acknowledges most people are 'disengaged' from their super. It argues that providing clearer information about financial performance and greater disclosure on a fund’s ethical or environmental stance could improve perceptions and help members make choices about where to put their money.
Call 1300 880 160
Start a chat
Schedule a call
