Is the Oregon Treasury Really Serious about “Decarbonization?”

February 4, 2023

Just two and half months after Treasurer Read announced that the Oregon State Treasury (OST) was committed to “decarbonizing OST’s portfolio, consistent with our fiduciary duty…to responsibly respond to emerging climate-related risks,” Read's Chief Financial Officer, Rex Kim, reported the private equity ventures in which Treasury invested in the past month. Treasurer Read admitted that two of them “have oil and gas exposure.” We think that they are the following funds, totalling over half a billion dollars:


  • $200 Million will go to the EnCap Flatrock Midstream Fund V, a private equity venture to invest in developers of oil and gas infrastructure such as pipelines, storage terminals, and natural gas processing units.
  • $350 million will go to the Global Infrastructures Partners Fund V. While there is no public information about this fund, GIP has a history of investing in gas and oil infrastructure as well as in transport and water systems.


These are not short-term investments. While details were not provided either about the nature of the investments or of OPERF’s contractual commitments, such private equity investment contracts are typically long term, lasting 10 to 12 years. 


How does this fit with Read’s commitment to decarbonization? He felt compelled to explain at the Jan 25 meeting of the Oregon Investment Council:


“I want to be clear, that does not signal any weakening in my commitment to produce a plan for a net zero pathway and a portfolio that is aligned with climate risk. In fact, for me, it underscores a need for a comprehensive approach - one that makes all of that real. And makes real and tangible progress towards decarbonizing our portfolio but still meets our obligations and our fiduciary responsibilities to current and future retirees.” (from OIC audio recording)

It is definitely not clear how it makes sense to lock the Treasury into an additional half billion dollars of high carbon investments over the next decade -- exactly the time considered critical to meet Paris 1.5C targets. Nor is it clear why Treasury would make such a decision particularly before it comes up with a detailed plan for dealing with the high carbon investments it already has. Nor is it clear why it is taking so long for Treasury to respond to climate risk. 


A year ago, in February 2022, Treasury received a “Climate Risk Modelling Report” it had commissioned from ORTEC, an international consulting firm. The report underlined the urgency of addressing climate risk in the Treasury’s PERS portfolio (OPEF), which holds the majority of funds ($90 Billion). Just focusing on public equity investments, and assuming the world climate response remains “disorderly,” ORETC projected that the retirement fund’s fossil fuel investments would lose 16.5% of their value against a baseline of investing as usual without climate change. If those investments were replaced with “climate aligned” investments, the annual loss would be limited to 2%. The report further outlined clear risks across the OPERF portfolio’s longer term contractual investments.

Ten months after receiving the report, Treasurer Read proposed to create a decarbonization plan… and to present it to the OIC within another 14 months,  by February 2024. Why should it take two years after receiving data outlining urgent risks to the OPERF portfolio to just create “a plan?" Is this “fiduciary responsibility?” This report only came to light in January 2023 through a Divest Oregon public records request that was being sent to mediation. There is no record of it being publicly shared with the Oregon Investment Council. 


Is Treasury really serious about “decarbonization” and the climate risks to PERS beneficiaries and State investments?  If so, why are they still making high carbon investments? If so, why don’t we already have detailed plan of action to respond to climate risk?

Divest Oregon conversation with Coast Range Radio: Why is Oregon’s Treasury Addicted to Fossil Fuels
June 13, 2025
“The statewide coalition Divest Oregon has been calling out the Treasury’s dirty investments for several years now, and they have also put out policy proposals, research, and legisl ation to shift our investments to help foster a clean energy economy.” — M Gaskill, Oregon Coast Radio Specifically, the conversation covers: The Pause Act (SB 681) which focused on new private fund investments in fossil fuel infrastructure like pipelines and LNG export terminals The Treasurer’s legislation ( HB 2081A ) on some movement toward net zero, a just transition, and reporting to the legislature and public The Climate Risk Report on the need for a paradigm shift in the Treasury’s thinking as to the financial impact of the climate, especially on public employees now in their 20’s, and the need to act together with other pension funds to direct the 11 trillion they manage toward mitigating future climate impact The addition of a fossil fuel free fund as an investment choice under the 529 College Education Plan - sign the Green529.org petition Divest Oregon’s inside/outside strategy This half-hour conversation is a terrific snapshot of Divest Oregon’s work. Find it on almost any podcast app - here are a couple: Spotify Apple Podcasts
May 27, 2025
Pension fund managers are confronting a tumultuous financial landscape. What is creating uncertainty? Inflation, tariffs, artificial intelligence, the energy transition, an oversupply of liquid natural gas, the rise of private equity and private credit… and the unique risk of climate change, which is the mother of all risks. Why is climate change an overriding risk to financial portfolios? Divest Oregon’s Rick Pope explains why in the Divest Oregon 2025 Climate Risk Review: No Place to Hide , a deep dive into current climate, economic and investment research. It stresses a core theme: The portfolio of retirement funds cannot be diversified to offset the risk of unabated climate change. There is nowhere for fund managers to hide from the fact that the entire portfolio of investments will be affected by climate catastrophe. Why is this important? Public pension funds in the US control nearly $11 trillion in assets of nearly 36 million state and local beneficiaries who depend on their funds to support their retirement. How fund managers invest the funds in their care can influence the market and influence public policy. Praise for the report from Treasurers, academics, and climate activists provides insight into the report’s impact. As the report documents, acting now to offset climate change will cost far less and harm asset values far less than accelerating climate change. Acting together, fiduciaries can move the market by investing in climate solutions, rather than financing climate destruction. How does the Climate Risk Report fit into the rest of Divest Oregon’s current work to pressure the Treasury to stop investing in fossil fuels? Divest Oregon submitted testimony in support of the current Treasurer's bill to reduce emission-creating investments in the portfolio. Oregon’s Treasurer is the first in the country to put forward a legislative mandate to consider climate risk and just transition in its investment decisions as it moves toward a low-carbon economy ( HB 2081 ). The Treasurer’s proposed legislation ( HB 2081 ) requires a just transition to clean investments. Divest Oregon and allies are working to articulate steps to implementation of this provision by the Treasury. The legislation has a reporting requirement. Transparency is an issue since approximately half of the PERS retirement fund has been invested in private investments, generally called private equity, which are currently secret. Reporting is a key tool in measuring progress toward reducing climate risk to the portfolio – and to all of us. A major part of our ongoing work is to pressure the Treasury to create a comprehensive and rigorous plan to stop the portfolio from contributing to climate degradation. Divest Oregon has a new campaign to encourage the Treasury to add a fossil fuel free option to the Oregon 529 Funds . The release of the 2025 Climate Risk Review clearly and unequivocally puts the Oregon Investment Council and the Treasury on notice that they must act to protect PERS assets from the risk of depressed values from climate change. As fiduciaries who must protect the financial well-being of their beneficiaries, their mandate is to assess risk – and climate change is an overriding risk – and factor it into their investment and resource allocation decisions. Confronting the impact of climate is the essence of their job.
April 5, 2025
Divest Oregon introduced The Pause Act ( SB 681 ), with Chief Sponsor Oregon Senator Jeff Golden’s support, to enact a five-year moratorium on new or renewed Treasury investment in private fossil-fuel funds. Why The Pause Act? For the past 50 years, the finance sector has dangerously re-written the rules of the global economy, including here in Oregon. Wealth has been extracted from our communities while our greenhouse emissions skyrocket. At the leading edge of this transformation has been the aggressive expansion of the private investment sector, generally referred to as private equity, which has over a trillion dollars in fossil fuel investments. The Oregon PERS portfolio is heavily weighted to private investments, which make up approximately half of the fund. The Pause Act is based on a key provision in past Treasurer Read’s net zero plan – which recognizes that portfolio emissions cannot be meaningfully reduced without ending new investment in long-term private funds holding fossil fuels. In the year since Treasurer Read announced his plan, to the public’s knowledge there has been no constraint on new private fund investments in fossil fuels. The Pause Act introduces transparency by requiring reporting to the public on progress under the bill. Current Treasurer Steiner has made a commitment to emission reduction of the portfolio. The Pause Act highlights the need for urgency, reflecting the impact of the climate crisis on all Oregonians and on the PERS portfolio. Why The Pause Act has no path forward When Divest Oregon asked for amendment discussions on The Pause Act with Treasurer Steiner, she said she would focus only on the Treasury’s HB 2200. That bill proposes a goal of limited emission reduction and reporting, with no mention of private investments. The Chair of the Committee hearing SB 681 offered to work with all stakeholders toward a bill acceptable to all parties. Instead, the Treasury crafted two statements in opposition to The Pause Act, and so the bill died in committee despite an outpouring of public support. This support was captured in the article from Oregon Capitol Chronicle (March 20, 2025). What did the Treasury argue in opposition to the Pause Act… and what is the Divest Oregon response? The Treasury sent written opposition to The Pause Act to key legislators and union representatives that are on the Treasurer’s Beneficiary Advisory Committee. The pre-committee hearing Treasury statement and the Divest Oregon response was distributed to the Treasury and to the recipients of the opposition statements. In a filed statement of opposition , the Treasury put forward arguments that are problematic. Divest Oregon has expressed these concerns to the Treasury as follows: While Treasury argues that SB 681 would limit diversification, SB 681 does not stop Treasury from having a diversified strategy. There is nothing in the bill that says Treasury should stop investing in private equity, real estate, or real assets – which are the major components of their private investments. Private investments are not always providing strong returns. Treasury’s testimony on returns compared private equity with public equity returns. That comparison was a selective misdirection. The Real Assets asset class, which are private investments, produces double the emissions intensity to the PERS portfolio than the Private Equity class, and yet those returns weren’t reported in their testimony. The Real Assets class actually has lower 5 & 10-year returns than Public Equity. (For more details, see the Divest Oregon full response to their testimony.)
February 7, 2025
In December 2024, the Oregon Treasury published their Oregon Net Zero Plan 2024 Annual Report . Kudos to Treasurer Read for creating a Net Zero Plan and publishing the 2024 annual report before leaving office. Treasurer Read’s strong statement that climate risk is financial risk is essential context for the report. Divest Oregon published this analysis of the 2024 annual report including the following sections: Transition Readiness Framework/Carbon Intensive Review Manager Activity/Private Investments ESG Integration/Forming Alliances and Engagement Investing in climate-focused funds Proxy Voting Stewardship and Universal Ownership Divest Oregon strongly recommends the following: The Treasury's report should be sent to all PERS beneficiaries and prominently displayed on the Treasury website. Stakeholder input should be solicited during the formulation of Treasury action in this sphere and before the publication of the next plan report.
Oregon waterfall
January 14, 2025
“First-in-the-nation” Pause Act will protect Oregon retirees from private equity’s overexposure to fossil fuels
January 14, 2025
Few public pension fund trustees have adopted a plan to address the risk of climate change to their portfolio. Oregon should be applauded as one of them, yet how does Oregon’s proposed plan compare to the major net zero plans of other US public pension plans? Divest Oregon has just released a comprehensive and detailed Comparison of US Pension Funds' Net Zero Plans Report . It allows the Oregon Treasurer and the Oregon Investment Council (OIC) to see what other fiduciaries are planning, to adopt best practices, and to change OIC policy as needed. Climate change is moving fast, and the report should be used by Oregon PERS and all fiduciaries to move faster in implementing a strong plan.
November 13, 2024
The newly released 2024 Private Equity Climate Risks Scorecard & Report by our allies, Private Equity Stakeholder Project, Global Energy Monitor, and Americans for Financial Reform Education Fund, gives us new insight into private equity firms and OST investments in these secret funds. Twenty-one major private equity firms manage $6 trillion in assets – and two-thirds of the energy companies in their portfolios are invested in fossil fuels. Oregon state employees’ pension plan (PERS) invests in 11 of these 21 funds.
September 26, 2024
Above: Natural coastal area of the proposed Rio Grande LNG terminal. Credit: Dylan Baddour/ Inside Climate News Below: Artist Rendering of the Rio Grande LNG project (Photo: Business Wire , 11/21/2019)
August 19, 2024
A recent article in Chief Investment Officer reported that the University of California had solid returns mostly stemming from a fund that excludes tobacco and fossil fuel investments: The University of California’s endowment and pension fund each returned more than 12% for the fiscal year ending June 30, boosting the total asset value of the university’s investment portfolio by $16 billion to $180 billion. Some $1.3 billion of that $16 billion gain came from a single S&P 500 index fund—one which excludes tobacco and fossil fuel investments—that provided the portfolio with its single biggest investment gain. We assume the OIC and Treasury would be thrilled by these types of returns, given the drag that private investments are causing to the portfolio returns, and the continuing liquidity problems of private funds. UC invests where they have a strong conviction while fulfilling their fiduciary duty. The two are not mutually exclusive: “This past fiscal year was about investing only in what we fully understand and taking full advantage of low-fee index funds guided by what we call the UC Investments Way,” said UC CIO Jagdeep Singh Bachher in a statement. “It’s about simplicity and leveraging our scale to concentrate on areas where we have strong conviction.” Bachher added that he believes the U.S. and “its resilient economy and thriving innovation ecosystem … is the best place to invest,” and the UC system has backed that up by allocating approximately 75% of its portfolio to domestic investments. We look forward to seeing the OST swiftly shift a significant portion of OPERF to index funds that exclude fossil fuels and to end any consideration of new investments in private funds that are laden with fossil fuel assets, as described in the Treasurer’s Net-Zero Plan. Collectively the country has moved past climate denial. The Oregon Treasury and the Oregon Investment Council should not get mired in solution denial . The solutions for a healthier pension and planet are available now!
August 6, 2024
A recent Bloomberg article explains that Oregon PERS made critical energy flow to the Putin regime possible, by enabling an LNG terminal. How? A $500 million financial commitment made in 2020 with $209.3 million is still available for investment, even after Treasurer Read said he would “Stand with Ukraine” and OIC agreed to end all Russian investments. This long-term, locked-in commitment of funds is one of reasons Divest Oregon continues to question private investments – especially since they are often laden with risky fossil fuel companies. Private investments comprise over half of the PERS portfolio . Background: The Oregon Treasury committed $500 million to the Stonepeak Infrastructure Fund IV in 2020 . In fact, the Treasury has been investing in Stonepeak Infrastructure Funds since 2012 . The commitment to a private fund is a long-term one. Once that commitment is made, the Treasury can only exit that fund at a steep loss, and once the commitment is made, the Treasury had no say in specific investments by the fund managers. Bloomberg reported that pension funds, including Oregon, enable the largest Russian LNG export terminal to function. Stonepeak invested in Seapeak LLC, which provides ice-class carriers specifically designed to carry Russian LNG from the Arctic. The carriers are only used for this purpose and are essential to the gas terminal. The investment by pension funds enables critical revenue flow to the Putin regime. The Bloomberg article states: The California Public Employees’ Retirement System, known as CalPERS, is one of the investors in Stonepeak’s fund and it said in response to a Bloomberg query that it had already raised concerns with the general partner. ‘We believe that Russian investments pose a material risk to our long-term investment success and have taken actions, consistent with our fiduciary duty, to remove these assets from our portfolio,’ John Myers, chief of Calpers’ office of public affairs, said in a statement. ‘We will continue monitoring events to ensure our partners’ actions are consistent with our investment beliefs.’ The Washington State Investment Board, Oregon Public Employees Retirement Fund, New York State Common Retirement Fund and the Teachers’ Retirement System of the State of Illinois declined to comment. Divest Oregon asked the Oregon Investment Council in one of our many emails to them: Is this a responsible investment, or a material risk? There were no sanctions violated, but does this uphold the pledge to “Stand with Ukraine” made by Treasurer Read and backed by the Council? We also asked: Do the long term risks justify continued new investments in predominantly fossil fuel private funds? We request that the OIC insure that there are NO NEW investments in fossil fuel investments especially in the private investment or bonds/credit markets. Digging the hole deeper makes no sense when you are already over target allocations in these private investments. Image: A Russian ice-breaking LNG Carrier. Source: VCG/Visual China Group/Getty Images
More Posts