Al Gore speech, 9 September 2005

Spread the love

The following is a transcript of a speech given by former Vice President Al Gore at the National Sierra Club Convention in San Francisco on September 9, 2005 addressing the challenges and moral imperatives posed by Hurricane Katrina and global warming. For you to draw your own conclusions …

Al Gore. Image: JD Lasica from Pleasanton, CA, US  licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.
Al Gore. Image: JD Lasica from Pleasanton, CA, US licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.

I know that you are deeply concerned, as I am, about the direction in which our country has been moving. About the erosion of social capital. About the lack of respect for a very basic principle, and that is that we, as Americans, have to put ourselves and our ability to seek out the truth because we know it will make us free. And then on the basis of truth, as we share it to the best of our abilities with one another, we act to try to form a more perfect union and provide for the general welfare and make this country worthy of the principles upon which it was founded.

My heart is heavy for another reason today, and many have mentioned this, but I want to tell you personally that my heart is heavy because of the suffering that the people of the gulf coast have been enduring. The losses that they’ve suffered in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, New Orleans in particular, but other cities as well, and rural areas. We are here thinking of them, thinking as well of the many brave men and women who have exceeded the limits of exhaustion as they do their duty in responding to this crisis, to the families of those responders and the families of the victims.

When I received the invitation that you generously extended for me to come and speak to you, I did not at first accept, because I was trying to resolve a scheduling conflict. The Fifty State Insurance Commissioners were meeting in New Orleans, and asked me to speak about global warming and hurricanes.

I was supposed to be there today and tomorrow morning. And of course as we all watch this tragedy unfold, we had a lot of different thoughts and feelings. But then all those feelings were mixed in with puzzlement at why there was no immediate response, why there was not an adequate plan in place. We are now told that this is not a time to point fingers, even as some of those saying “don’t point fingers” are themselves pointing fingers at the victims of the tragedy, who did not – many of whom could not – evacuate the city of New Orleans, because they didn’t have automobiles, and they did not have adequate public transportation.

We’re told this is not a time to hold our national government accountable because there are more important matters that confront us. This is not an either/or choice. They are linked together. As our nation belatedly finds effective ways to help those who have been so hard hit by Hurricane Katrina, it is important that we learn the right lessons of what has happened, lest we are spoon-fed the wrong lessons from what happened. If we do not absorb the right lessons, we are, in the historian’s phrase, doomed to repeat the mistakes that have already been made. All of us know that our nation – all of us, the United States of America – failed the people of New Orleans and the gulf coast when this hurricane was approaching them, and when it struck. When the corpses of American citizens are floating in toxic floodwaters five days after a hurricane strikes, it is time not only to respond directly to the victims of the catastrophe but to hold the processes of our nation accountable, and the leaders of our nation accountable, for the failures that have taken place. [applause]

The Bible in which I believe, in my own faith tradition, says, “Where there is no vision, the people perish.”

Four years ago in August of 2001, President Bush received a dire warning: “Al Qaeda determined to attack inside the US.” No meetings were called, no alarms were sounded, no one was brought together to say, “What else do we know about this imminent threat? What can we do to prepare our nation for what we have been warned is about to take place?” If there had been preparations, they would have found a lot of information collected by the FBI, and CIA and NSA – including the names of most of the terrorists who flew those planes into the WTC and the Pentagon and the field in Pennsylvania. The warnings of FBI field offices that there were suspicious characters getting flight training without expressing any curiosity about the part of the training that has to do with landing. They would have found directors of FBI field offices in a state of agitation about the fact that there was no plan in place and no effective response. Instead, it was vacation time, not a time for preparation. Or protecting the American people.

Four years later, there were dire warnings, three days before Hurricane Katrina hit NOLA, that if it followed the path it was then on, the levees would break, and the city of New Orleans would drown, and thousands of people would be at risk. It was once again vacation time. And the preparations were not made, the plans were not laid, the response then was not forthcoming.

In the early days of the unfolding catastrophe, the President compared our ongoing efforts in Iraq to World War Two and victory over Japan. Let me cite one difference between those two historical events: When imperial Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor, Franklin Roosevelt did not invade Indonesia. [applause]

I personally believe that the very fact that there has been no accountability for the horrendous misjudgments and outright falsehoods that laid the basis for this horrible tragedy that we have ongoing in Iraq, the fact that there was no accountability for those mistakes, misjudgments and dissembling, is one of the principal reasons why there was no fear of being held accountable for a cavalier, lackluster, mistaken, inadequate response to the onrushing tragedy that was clearly visible – for those who were watching television, for those who were reading the news – what happened was not only knowable, it was known in advance, in great and painstaking detail. They did tabletop planning exercises, they identified exactly what the scientific evidence showed would take place. Where there is no vision, the people perish.

It’s not only that there is no vision; it’s that there has been a misguided vision. One of the principle philosophical guides for this administration has been the man who said famously that he wants to render the government of the United States so weak and helpless that you can drown it in a bathtub. There were warnings three years ago from the last director in the Clinton-Gore Administration of FEMA that FEMA was being rendered weak and helpless, unable to respond in the event of a catastrophe. The budget was cut, the resources sent elsewhere.

Carl [Pope] said he was embarrassed. The word is a tricky word. What did you feel after the invasion of Iraq when you saw American soldiers holding dog leashes attached to helpless prisoners, 99% of whom, by the way, were innocent of any connection to violence against our troops, much less terrorism – innocent prisoners who were being tortured in our name – what did you feel? I don’t know the words. I don’t know the words but I want you to draw a line connecting the feelings you had when you saw the visual images providing evidence that our soldiers, acting in our name, with our authority, were torturing helpless people and that it was a matter of policy – now, they pointed fingers at the privates and corporals that were in charge – but I want you to draw a line between the emotions that you felt when you absorbed that news, and the emotions that you felt over the last ten days when you saw those corpses in the water, when you saw people without food, water, medicine – our fellow citizens left helpless. And of course in both cases the story is complex and many factors are involved, but I want you draw a line connecting the feelings that you had then and now. And I want you to draw another line, connecting those responsible for both of those unbelievable tragedies that embarrassed our nation in the eyes of the world.

There are scientific warnings now of another onrushing catastrophe. We were warned of an imminent attack by Al Qaeda; we didn’t respond. We were warned the levees would break in New Orleans; we didn’t respond. Now, the scientific community is warning us that the average hurricane will continue to get stronger because of global warming. A scientist at MIT has published a study well before this tragedy showing that since the 1970s, hurricanes in both the Atlantic and the Pacific have increased in duration, and in intensity, by about 50 %. The newscasters told us after Hurricane Katrina went over the southern tip of Florida that there was a particular danger for the Gulf Coast of the hurricanes becoming much stronger because it was passing over unusually warm waters in the gulf. The waters in the gulf have been unusually warm. The oceans generally have been getting warmer. And the pattern is exactly consistent with what scientists have predicted for twenty years. Two thousand scientists, in a hundred countries, engaged in the most elaborate, well organized scientific collaboration in the history of humankind, have produced long-since a consensus that we will face a string of terrible catastrophes unless we act to prepare ourselves and deal with the underlying causes of global warming. [applause] It is important to learn the lessons of what happens when scientific evidence and clear authoritative warnings are ignored in order to induce our leaders not to do it again and not to ignore the scientists again and not to leave us unprotected in the face of those threats that are facing us right now. [applause]

The president says that he is not sure that global warming is a real threat. He says that he is not ready to do anything meaningful to prepare us for a threat that he’s not certain is real. He tells us that he believes the science of global warming is in dispute. This is the same president who said last week, “Nobody could have predicted that the levees would break.” It’s important to establish accountability in order to make our democracy work. And the uncertainty and lack of resolution, the willful misunderstanding of what the scientific community is saying, the preference for what a few supporters in the coal and oil industry – far from all, but a few – want him to do: ignore the science. That is a serious problem. The President talked about the analogies to World War II – let me give another analogy to World War II.

Winston Churchill, when the storm was gathering on continental Europe, provided warnings of what was at stake. And he said this about the government then in power in England – which wasn’t sure that the threat was real, he said, “They go on in strange paradox, decided only to be undecided, resolved to be irresolute, adamant for drift, solid for fluidity, all powerful to be impotent.” He continued, “The era of procrastination, of half measures, of soothing and baffling expedience of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences.”

Ladies and gentlemen, the warnings about global warming have been extremely clear for a long time. We are facing a global climate crisis. It is deepening. We are entering a period of consequences. Churchill also said this, and he directed it at the people of his country who were looking for any way to avoid having to really confront the threat that he was warning of and asking them to prepare for. He said that he understood why there was a natural desire to deny the reality of the situation and to search for vain hope that it wasn’t really as serious as some claimed it was. He said they should know the truth. And after the appeasement by Neville Chamberlain, he sad, “This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This only the first sip, the first foretaste, of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year – unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigor, we rise again and take our stand for freedom.”

It is time now for us to recover our moral health in America and stand again to rise for freedom, demand accountability for poor decisions, missed judgments, lack of planning, lack of preparation, and willful denial of the obvious truth about serious and imminent threats that are facing the American people. [applause]

Abraham Lincoln said, “The occasion is piled high with difficulty and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, we must think anew and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves and then we shall save our country.”

We must disenthrall ourselves with the sound-and-light show that has diverted the attentions of our great democracy from the important issues and challenges of our day. We must disenthrall ourselves from the Michael Jackson trial and the Aruba search and the latest sequential obsession with celebrity trials or whatever relative triviality dominates the conversation of democracy instead of making room for us as free American citizens to talk with one another about our true situation, and then save our country. We must resist those wrong lessons.

Some are now saying, including in the current administration, that the pitiful response by government proves that we cannot ever rely on the government. They have in the past proposed more unilateral power for themselves as the solution for a catastrophe of their own creation, and we should not acquiesce in allowing them to investigate themselves and giving them more power to abuse and misuse, the way they have so recently done. The fact that an administration can’t manage its own way out of a horse show doesn’t mean that all government programs should be abolished. FEMA worked extremely well during the previous administration.

A hundred years ago, Upton Sinclair wrote, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon him not understanding.” Here’s what I think we here understand about Hurricane Katrina and global warming. Yes, it is true that no single hurricane can be blamed on global warming. Hurricanes have come for a long time, and will continue to come in the future. Yes, it is true that the science does not definitively tell us that global warming increases the frequency of hurricanes – because yes, it is true there is a multi-decadal cycle, twenty to forty years that profoundly affects the number of hurricanes that come in any single hurricane season. But it is also true that the science is extremely clear now, that warmer oceans make the average hurricane stronger, not only makes the winds stronger, but dramatically increases the moisture from the oceans evaporating into the storm – thus magnifying its destructive power – makes the duration, as well as the intensity of the hurricane, stronger.

Last year we had a lot of hurricanes. Last year, Japan set an all-time record for typhoons: ten, the previous record was seven. Last year the science textbooks had to be re-written. They said, “It’s impossible to have a hurricane in the south Atlantic.” We had the first one last year, in Brazil. We had an all-time record last year for tornadoes in the United States, 1,717 – largely because hurricanes spawned tornadoes. Last year we had record temperatures in many cities. This year 200 cities in the Western United States broke all-time records. Reno, 39 days consecutively above 100 degrees.

The scientists are telling us that what the science tells them is that this – unless we act quickly and dramatically – that Tucson tied its all-time record for consecutive days above 100 degrees. this, in Churchill’s phrase, is only the first sip of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year until there is a supreme recover of moral health. We have to rise with this occasion. We have to connect the dots. When the Superfund sites aren’t cleaned up, we get a toxic gumbo in a flood. When there is not adequate public transportation for the poor, it is difficult to evacuate a city. When there is no ability to give medical care to poor people, its difficult to get hospital to take refugees in the middle of a crisis. When the wetlands are turned over to the developers then the storm surges from the ocean threaten the coastal cities more. When there is no effort to restrain the global warming pollution gasses then global warming gets worse, with all of the consequences that the scientific community has warned us about.

My friends, the truth is that our circumstances are not only new; they are completely different than they have ever been in all of human history. The relationship between humankind and the earth had been utterly transformed in the last hundred years. We have quadrupled the population of our planet. The population in many ways is a success story. The demographic transition has been occurring more quickly than was hoped for, but the reality of our new relationship with the planet brings with it a moral responsibility to accept our new circumstances and to deal with the consequences of the relationship we have with this planet. And it’s not just population. By any means, the power of the technologies now at our disposal vastly magnifies the average impact that individuals can have on the natural world. Multiply that by six and a half billion people, and then stir into that toxic mixture a mindset and an attitude that says its okay to ignore scientific evidence – that we don’t have to take responsibility for the future consequences of present actions – and you get a collision between our civilization and the earth. The refugees that we have seen – I don’t like that word when applied to American citizens in our own country, but the refugees that we have seen could well be the first sip of that bitter cup because sea-level rise in countries around the world will mobilize millions of environmental refugees. The other problems are known to you, but here is what I want to close with:

This is a moral moment. This is not ultimately about any scientific debate or political dialogue. Ultimately it is about who we are as human beings. It is about our capacity to transcend our own limitations. To rise to this new occasion. To see with our hearts, as well as our heads, the unprecedented response that is now called for. To disenthrall ourselves, to shed the illusions that have been our accomplices in ignoring the warnings that were clearly given, and hearing the ones that are clearly given now.

Where there is no vision, the people perish. And Lincoln said at another moment of supreme challenge that the question facing the people of the United States of America ultimately was whether or not this government, conceived in liberty, dedicated to freedom, of the people, by the people, and for the people – or any government so conceived – would perish from this earth.

There is another side to this moral challenge. Where there is vision, the people prosper and flourish, and the natural world recovers, and our communities recover. The good news is we know what to do. The good news is, we have everything we need now to respond to the challenge of global warming. We have all the technologies we need, more are being developed, and as they become available and become more affordable when produced in scale, they will make it easier to respond. But we should not wait, we cannot wait, we must not wait, we have every thing we need – save perhaps political will. And in our democracy, political will is a renewable resource. [sustained applause]

I know that you are debating as an organization and talking among yourselves about your own priorities. I would urge you to make global warming your priority. I would urge you to focus on a unified theme. I would urge you to work with other groups in ways that have not been done in the past, even though there have been Herculean efforts on your part and the part of others. I would urge you to make this a moral moment. To make this a moral cause.

There are those who would say that the problem is too big and we can’t solve it. There are many people who go from denial to despair without pausing on the intermediate step of actually solving the problem. To those who say it’s too big for us, I say that we have accepted and successfully met such challenges in the past. We declared our liberty, and then won it. We designed a country that respected and safeguarded the freedom of individuals. We freed the slaves. We gave women the right to vote. We took on Jim Crow and segregation. We cured great diseases, we have landed on the moon, we have won two wars in the Pacific and the Atlantic simultaneously. We brought down communism, we brought down apartheid, we have even solved a global environmental crisis before – the hole in the stratospheric ozone layer – because we had leadership and because we had vision and because people who exercise moral authority in their local communities empowered our nation’s government “of the people by the people and for the people” to take ethical actions even thought they were difficult. This is another such time. This is your moment. This is the time for those who see and understand and care and are willing to work to say this time the warnings will not be ignored. This time we will prepare. This time we will rise to the occasion. And we will prevail. Thank you. Good luck to you, God bless you.

Continue ReadingAl Gore speech, 9 September 2005

Campaigners take to Westminster Bridge to block Rosebank

Spread the love
Fossil Free London set off flares and dropped a 15-metre banner Image: Fossil Free London
Fossil Free London set off flares and dropped a 15-metre banner Image: Fossil Free London

ENVIORNMENTAL activists have demanded MPs block a “reckless and absurd” climate time-bomb.

MPs returning to Parliament today were welcomed by Fossil Free London, who set off flares and dropped a 15-metre banner from the nearby bridge demanding development of the Rosebank oil field be dropped.

The decision to develop the field has been repeatedly delayed but, if granted, the licence could see oil giant Equinor benefit to the tune of £3.7 billion in tax breaks as the Tory tax giveaway to big oil — costing £10.6bn so far — continues apace.

Fossil Free London’s Joanna Warrington said: “Rishi Sunak wants to give billions of pounds of public money to a giant oil company in exchange for the climate time-bomb, which will do absolutely nothing to lower our energy bills.

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/b/campaigners-take-westminster-bridge-block-rosebank

First Minister Humza Yousaf ‘not convinced’ by Rosebank

In a conversation with the Daily Record, Scotland’s first minister said: “My starting position on Rosebank is I’m not convinced it should go ahead and I’ve said as much publicly, for a number of reasons.

“First and foremost, for example, the majority of Rosebank is oil as opposed to gas – that oil, of course, then gets exported.

“Any suggestion that helps us in terms of our domestic energy security, I think, doesn’t quite stack up.”

Humza Yousaf added: “Unlimited oil and gas extraction is not Scotland’s future,” when asked about the controversial Rosebank oil field.

Continue ReadingCampaigners take to Westminster Bridge to block Rosebank

‘This Is Absurd’: Major Banks Continue to Fund Climate Chaos in Global South

Spread the love

Original article by OLIVIA ROSANE republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

ActionAid found that since the Paris agreement, banks have funded the largest Big Ag companies doing business in the Global South to the tune of $370 billion and the fossil fuel sector to the tune of $3.2 trillion.

Since the international community promised to limit global heating to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels, the world’s major banks have funneled 20 times more money to climate-polluting industries in the Global South than Global North governments have given those same countries to address the climate emergency.

That’s just one of the findings of How the Finance Flows: The Banks Fueling the Climate Crisis, an ActionAid report released Monday.

“This report names the biggest offenders in the banking world and calls on them to see that they are destroying the planet, while harming the present and future for their children,” Ugandan climate activist Vanessa Nakate wrote in the foreword. “It’s time to hold financial institutions to account, and demand that they end their funding of destructive activity.”

The report focuses on the financing of two major climate-heating industries in the 134 nations of the Global South: fossil fuels and industrial agriculture.

“People generally know that fossil fuels are the number one cause of greenhouse gas emissions. But what is less understood is that industrial agriculture is actually the second biggest cause of climate emissions,” Teresa Anderson, the global lead on climate justice at ActionAid International, said during a press briefing ahead of the report’s release.

This is because of the sector’s link to deforestation, as well as the emissions required to produce industrial fertilizers, she added.

In total, since the 2015 Paris agreement, banks have funded the largest Big Ag companies doing business in the Global South to the tune of $370 billion and the oil, gas, and coal sectors to the tune of $3.2 trillion.

“Global banks often make public declarations that they are addressing climate change, but the scale of their continued support of fossil fuels and industrial agriculture is simply staggering.”

The top three banks that invested the most in these sectors were the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China at $154.3 billion, China CITIC Bank at $134.7 billion, and the Bank of China at $125.9 billion. Citigroup came in fourth at $104.5 billion, followed by HSBC at $80.8 billion.

While China features prominently in the report as the world’s largest economy, Anderson noted that much of what it produces ends up purchased by consumers in the Global North.

The top three banks in the Americas funding big agriculture and fossil fuels were Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, and Bank of America. While Citigroup was the leading regional funder of fossil fuels, JP Morgan Chase gave the most to industrial agriculture.

In Europe, the top funders after HSBC were BNP Paribas, Société Générale, and Barclays, while Mitsubishi UFJ Financial rounded out the top Asian funders.

Where is all that money going? When it comes to agriculture, the leading recipient was Bayer, which bought out Monsanto in 2018. Banks have given it $20.6 billion to do business in the Global South since 2016.

Much of the fossil fuel money went to China’s State Power Investment Corporation and other Chinese companies; commodities trader Trafigura; and the usual fossil fuel suspects like ExxonMobil, BP, Shell, Saudi Aramco, and Petrobras.

“This is absurd,” Anderson said of the findings. “Global banks often make public declarations that they are addressing climate change, but the scale of their continued support of fossil fuels and industrial agriculture is simply staggering.”

ActionAid called the report the “flagship” document of its Fund Our Future campaign to redirect global money from climate crisis causes to climate solutions. The report calls on banks to make good on their climate promises and stop funding fossil fuels and deforestation, as well as to put additional safeguards in place to protect the rights of local communities, raise the ambition of their goals to reach “real zero” emissions, and improve transparency and other measures to make sure the projects they fund are behaving ethically.

“This can be stopped,” Farah Kabir, the country director of ActionAid Bangladesh, said during the press briefing. “The banks cannot continue to fund fossil fuel industries and industrial agriculture.”

In addition, the report offers recommendations to Global North governments to ensure a just transition to a sustainable future for everyone. These included setting stricter regulations for the banking, fossil fuel, and agricultural industries as well as ending public subsidies for these sectors and channeling the money to positive solutions like renewable energy and agroecology.

However, the form that funds take when sent to the Global South makes a big difference, said ActionAid USA executive director Niranjali Amerasinghe. Instead of coming in the form of private loans, it needs to be in the form of public money.

“Providing more loans to countries that are already in significant debt distress is not going to support their transition to a climate-compatible future,” she said.

One reason that loans are counterproductive is that nations that accept them are forced to provide a return on investment, and currently the main industries that offer this are in fact fossil fuels and industrial agriculture.

In addition to public funds, debt forgiveness or restructuring and new taxes could also help these countries with their green transition. If companies like Exxon or Bayer doing business in the Global South “were taxed in an equitable way, that would allow those governments to raise public revenue that can then be used to support climate action,” Amerasinghe said.

In particular, the report emphasizes agroecology as a climate solution that should be funded in Global South countries.

“Climate change is real in Zambia.”

Mary Sakala, a frontline smallholder farmer from Zambia, spoke at the press briefing about how the climate crisis and current agricultural policy put a strain on her community.

“Climate change is real in Zambia,” she said, adding that it had brought flooding, droughts, pests, and diseases that meant that “families currently, as I’m speaking right now, sleep on an empty stomach.”

Sakala saw hope in agroecology, which would help with food security and resilience, and make farmers less dependent on the government and large companies.

“We need policies to allow [us] to conserve our environment in a cultural way, to help us eat our food,” Sakala said. “We want… every seed to be utilized and saved and shared in solidarity.”

And she said that the companies and governments of the Global North have a duty to help them get there.

“Those people who are continuing to pollute and let the climate change increase, those people need to pay us, because we are suffering from the things that others are doing,” she said.

Original article by OLIVIA ROSANE republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Continue Reading‘This Is Absurd’: Major Banks Continue to Fund Climate Chaos in Global South

Rich Nations Have Delivered Mere ‘Pittance’ to Help East Africa Tackle Climate Crisis: Oxfam

Spread the love

Original article by JAKE JOHNSON republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

“We have an abundance of clean, renewable energy,” said one African activist. “But to unlock it, Africa needs funding from countries that have got rich off our suffering.”

As the first-ever Africa Climate Summit kicked off in Nairobi, Kenya on Monday, an analysis by the humanitarian group Oxfam found that rich nations have delivered just a small fraction of the aid that East African nations say they need each year to meet their climate goals.

Unlike rich countries that account for a disproportionate share of planet-warming greenhouse gas pollution, East Africa has contributed “almost nothing” to global carbon emissions that are driving record-shattering heat worldwide, Oxfam’s new report notes. In 2021, according to one recent estimate, the average North American emitted 11 times more carbon dioxide than the average African.

The World Meteorological Organization pointed out Monday that Africa is responsible for less than 10% of global carbon emissions.

Yet “East Africa is one of the world’s worst-hit regions by climate change and is now experiencing its worst climate-induced extreme weather, fueling an alarming hunger crisis,” Oxfam’s report states. “Over 31.5 million people are currently facing acute hunger across Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, and South Sudan.”

Those countries, which suffer billions of dollars worth of climate-related damage each year, have said they will need at least $53.3 billion annually to meet critical targets under the Paris Climate Agreement. According to Oxfam, wealthy countries provided just $2.4 billion in aid to East African nations in 2021.

More broadly, Oxfam noted, high-income countries pledged that they would provide $100 billion a year by 2020 to help lower-income countries fight climate chaos.

“Oxfam estimates that in 2020 the real value of financial support specifically aimed at climate action was only around $21 billion to $24.5 billion—much less than officially reported figures suggest,” the group’s report states.

Fati N’Zi-Hassane, Oxfam’s Africa director, said Monday that “even by their own generous accounts, polluting nations have delivered only pittance to help East Africa scale up their mitigation and adaptation efforts.”

“Nearly half the funds (45%) they did give were loans, plunging the region further into more debt,” N’Zi-Hassane added.

Climate finance is expected to be a major topic of discussion at the Nairobi summit, which comes after months of scorching heat on the continent.

“Africa is seen as a sunny and hot continent,” Amadou Thierno Gaye, a research scientist and professor at Cheikh Anta Diop University in Dakar, toldBloomberg in July. “People think we are used to heat, but we are having high temperatures for a longer duration. Nobody is used to this.”

The Associated Press reported Monday that “there is some frustration on the continent about being asked to develop in cleaner ways than the world’s richest countries—which have long produced most of the emissions that endanger climate—and to do it while much of the support that has been pledged hasn’t appeared.”

Mohamed Adow of Power Shift Africa told AP that “we have an abundance of clean, renewable energy and it’s vital that we use this to power our future prosperity. But to unlock it, Africa needs funding from countries that have got rich off our suffering.”

In addition to calling on rich nations to contribute the aid they’ve promised to support Africa’s renewable energy transition, African civil society groups are urging their leaders to reject fossil fuel expansion, specifically warning against the completion of TotalEnergies’ East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP).

A recent Human Rights Watch report warned that more than 100,000 people in Uganda and Tanzania are set to “permanently lose land to make way for the pipeline and Tilenga oilfield development.” One analysis indicates the pipeline could result in 379 million tonnes of planet-warming emissions over its lifespan—more than 25 times the combined annual emissions of Uganda and Tanzania.

Zaki Mamdoo, coordinator of the Stop EACOP Coalition, said Monday that “the African Climate Summit could provide the platform needed for the continent to dramatically shift its trajectory and future—from one that is set to bear the brunt of climate collapse, to one of energy security and prosperity driven by decentralized and people-centered renewables.”

“For this to happen,” said Mamdoo, “African leaders will need to rise to the occasion and make firm commitments to significantly upscale renewable energy developments while resisting and withdrawing any and all support for exploitative and destructive projects like the East African Crude Oil Pipeline.”

Original article by JAKE JOHNSON republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Continue ReadingRich Nations Have Delivered Mere ‘Pittance’ to Help East Africa Tackle Climate Crisis: Oxfam

Dutch gov’t spends €37.5 billion per year on fossil fuel subsidies

Spread the love
image reads STOP FOSSIELE SUBSIDIES
image reads STOP FOSSIELE SUBSIDIES

https://nltimes.nl/2023/09/04/dutch-govt-spends-eu375-billion-per-year-fossil-fuel-subsidies

The Dutch government misses out on 37.5 billion euros in income every year due to schemes that favor using fossil fuels. Researchers from SOMO, Oil Change International, and Milieudefensie arrived at this amount in a study into how the government “subsidizes” the fossil fuel industry.

Researcher Boris Schellekens of the Foundation for Research on Multinational Enterprises (SOMO) called the estimate conservative. He and his colleagues ignored all costs of environmental damage. “We purely looked at missed state revenues.” The researchers are convinced that their overview is the most complete to date.

The report published on Monday describes 31 regulations that, in one way or another, make the use of fossil fuels more economical. That usually does not concern money that the government transfers to companies’ accounts but mainly tax discounts and exemptions. For example, major natural gas consumers do not have to pay energy tax on most of their consumption, and aviation and shipping are exempt from excise duty on kerosene and fuel oil. Oil refineries, coal-fired power stations, and the steel industry also enjoy such tax benefits.

The biggest hit, 13.5 billion euros per year, is in the energy tax, which is degressive in the Netherlands. That means that companies that use more energy have to pay relatively less tax on their consumption. The researchers call this “a perverse incentive.”

https://nltimes.nl/2023/09/04/dutch-govt-spends-eu375-billion-per-year-fossil-fuel-subsidies

Continue ReadingDutch gov’t spends €37.5 billion per year on fossil fuel subsidies