Unlikely. This divestment movement is pushed by the same cretins...

Unlikely.

This divestment movement is pushed by the same cretins who somehow managed to achieve less than nothing, in raising emissions by going after nuclear. It's a bunch of feelgood nonsense designed so a subsection of the most polluting individuals in the world (westerners) can feel better about the future without needing to change their own lifestyle, whilst they condemn the developing world to eternal poverty.

It's one thing to pick an easy target like thermal coal to win brownie points from the screeching hoard, where national interests and those based in reality will front the investment regardless, but once you start expanding targets where does it end? Because if you take that line of thinking to its conclusion, energy and resources are but the tip of the iceberg.

Should they divest from transport, including EVs, because the invention of the internet makes most travel redundant? Maybe tech, because hypocrites twitting garbage on their brand new iPhone are needlessly wasting resources? Or perhaps health care, because after all, keeping people alive isn't going to bring emissions down, is it?

Meanwhile the rest of us will get superior returns from not signing up for the 'smugness tax'.