G20 Nations Dished Out at Least $1 Trillion in Fossil Fuel Subsidies in 2022: Analysis

Spread the love

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

Painting by Lady Frieda Harris used as the Hermit card in the Thoth tarot. It includes an image of Cerberus, the three-headed dog from Greek mythology..
Painting by Lady Frieda Harris used as the Hermit card in the Thoth tarot. It includes an image of Cerberus, the three-headed dog from Greek mythology..

“This support perpetuates the world’s reliance on fossil fuels, paving the way for yet more energy crises due to market volatility and geopolitical security risks.”

An analysis released this week by the International Institute for Sustainable Development shows that G20 countries spent at least $1 trillion on fossil fuel subsidies in 2022, running afoul of recent pledges to curb financial support for the sector most responsible for the global climate emergency.

IISD’s report estimates that G20 governments provided a record $1.4 trillion in support for fossil fuels last year, including subsidies and loans from public financial institutions.

“This support perpetuates the world’s reliance on fossil fuels, paving the way for yet more energy crises due to market volatility and geopolitical security risks,” researchers with IISD and other organizations wrote in a detailed analysis of the new findings.

“It also severely limits the possibilities of achieving climate objectives set by the Paris Agreement by incentivizing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions while undermining the cost-competitiveness of clean energy,” they added. “G20 governments need to shift their financial resources away from fossil fuels to instead provide targeted, sustainable support for social protection and the scaling-up of clean energy. Maintaining fossil fuel prices that reflect the cost these fuels impose on society will be necessary to reduce fossil fuel use.”

The researchers noted that the surge in fossil fuel subsidies—which quadrupled in 2022 compared to the previous year—was “largely due to a dramatic expansion in consumer support in response to peaking fossil fuel prices.”

“Helping households and businesses during an energy crisis is understandable and necessary, but there are better ways to do it than subsidizing fossil fuels, which keeps consumers locked into emissions-intensive, polluting, and price-volatile energy sources,” the researchers wrote. “Shifting support from fuels to people is fundamental for the sustainable implementation of G20 governments’ pledges to phase out fossil fuel subsidies.”

G20 governments also provided financial support for fossil fuel production.

As the researchers explained, “these subsidies are problematic because they influence larger private investment flows, lock in higher fossil fuel production and emissions, and take up scarce fiscal resources that are needed to catalyze investments in clean energy transition solutions.”

Global investment in renewable energy reached a record high last year, according to IISD, but it still amounted to just half the total worldwide investment in fossil fuels.

The analysis calls on G20 nations to establish a firm deadline for completely eliminating fossil fuel subsidies, which disproportionately benefit wealthy households that contribute far more to the climate crisis than lower-income households.

At the 2021 COP26 summit in Glasgow, 197 countries agreed to phase out “inefficient” fossil fuel subsidies—but they did not agree on a timeframe for action, nor did they clearly define “inefficient.”

The IISD analysis notes that “more than half of the signatories with significant international financing have implemented their Glasgow commitment with integrity, including Canada, France, and the United Kingdom.”

“However, several developed G20 countries have not yet delivered on implementation: Italy’s policy is not aligned with the Glasgow statement, nor is Germany’s draft policy, and the United States has not published its regulation,” the analysis says. “These countries are among the most responsible for historical CO2 emissions and should take greater responsibility for preventing further emissions by shifting financing from fossil fuels to clean energy.”

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

Continue ReadingG20 Nations Dished Out at Least $1 Trillion in Fossil Fuel Subsidies in 2022: Analysis

UK academics urge Royal Society to condemn fossil fuel industry

Spread the love

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/aug/23/uk-academics-urge-royal-society-to-condemn-fossil-fuel-industry

Greenpeace activists display a billboard during a protest outside Shell headquarters on July 27, 2023 in London.
Greenpeace activists display a billboard during a protest outside Shell headquarters on July 27, 2023 in London. (Photo: Handout/Chris J. Ratcliffe for Greenpeace via Getty Images)

Guardian Exclusive: Letter signed by more than 1,200 leading figures calls for ‘unambiguous statement’ about climate crisis

The Royal Society is under pressure from more than 1,200 leading academics to issue a clear condemnation of the fossil fuel industry.

The academics have written to the association of the world’s most eminent scientists calling for an “unambiguous statement about the culpability of the fossil fuel industry in driving the climate crisis”.

The society has agreed to meet representatives of the academics to discuss their demands. Most of those who signed the letter to the society’s president and council are based in the UK.

The letter says: “The Royal Society has thus far failed to condemn fossil fuel companies that are building new infrastructure that will carry the world far beyond 1.5 degrees of warming and that are lobbying across the world to dictate the pace and terms of an energy transition that will protect their profits at the planet’s expense.”

The companies were “committing an unprecedented act of violence against humanity”, the letter said, referring to a statement from the UN secretary general, António Guterres.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/aug/23/uk-academics-urge-royal-society-to-condemn-fossil-fuel-industry

Continue ReadingUK academics urge Royal Society to condemn fossil fuel industry

Amazon’s emissions ‘doubled’ under first half of Bolsonaro presidency

Spread the love

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/aug/23/amazons-emissions-doubled-under-first-half-of-bolsonaros-presidency-aoe

New study published in Nature says period was as destructive as record 2016 El Niño drought and heatwave

The first half of Jair Bolsonaro’s presidency was so destructive for the Amazon that it was comparable to the record 2016 El Niño drought and heatwave in terms of carbon emissions, according to scientists.

Annual emissions from the world’s largest rainforest roughly doubled in 2019 and 2020, compared with the 2010 to 2018 average, according to a new study published in Nature, as swaths of forest were deliberately cleared and burned for cattle ranching and farming during the first two years of the far-right leader’s time in office.

While the amount of carbon that the Amazon absorbs and emits changes with weather cycles, generally sucking in more in wet years and less in dry periods, the study found that the rise in emissions under Bolsonaro had little to do with natural processes, but was instead caused by the systematic removal and downgrading of environmental law enforcement in Brazil.

Under Bolsonaro, the number and severity of fines for illegal deforestation by Brazilian authorities fell dramatically while fires and land-clearing soared, the study found. Carbon emissions increased from an annual average of 0.24 gigatonnes from 2010-18 to 0.44GtC in 2019 and 0.55GtC respectively.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/aug/23/amazons-emissions-doubled-under-first-half-of-bolsonaros-presidency-aoe

Continue ReadingAmazon’s emissions ‘doubled’ under first half of Bolsonaro presidency

Spy tech firm Palantir was shoo-in for NHS data deal, leaked emails suggest

Spread the love

Original article by Lucas Amin republished from OpenDemocracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

NHS sign

Exclusive: Labour and Tory MPs demand review as email chain appears to show health chiefs knew firm would win deal

US spy-tech firm Palantir was a shoo-in for a multi-million-pound NHS contract months before the deal was signed, emails obtained by openDemocracy appear to show.

The email exchange from 2020, in which senior NHS executives discussed the budget for a new national data platform, sees more than one person referring to Palantir as the recipient of the funding.

The firm, owned by billionaire Donald Trump donor Peter Thiel, has won five NHS deals in a row without tender. It is heavily tipped to secure a separate contract worth £480m later this year to build a new “operating system” for the NHS.

Conservative MP David Davis told openDemocracy it was “incredibly concerning that the NHS appears to have already taken decisions to award contracts to Palantir before the end of the procurement process”.

He added: “Allowing a company with Palantir’s provenance into the NHS needs careful scrutiny. It must not be railroaded through in secrecy.”

Palantir officially signed a £23.5m deal on 11 December 2020 to operate a full-scale “datastore” of NHS patient information, building on work carried out in the pandemic.

More than two months earlier, on 5 October 2020, an official from NHS England and NHS Improvement sent an email to the health service’s chief data and analytics officer Ming Tang with the subject line: “Update finances for data platform project [sic].”

The email provided detailed information on how NHS England could structure a budget for the project, and appears to refer to Palantir as the recipient of the funding, stating at one point: “This [the budget proposal] provides a total of £26m for Palantir higher than our previous ask of £24m.”

The exec, whose name is redacted, then asks for “an accountant to support us to get the budget transfers” before warning: “Delays here could lead to risk of non-delivery.”

Tang responded three hours later, writing: “We are trying to keep Palantir to 10-12M per year,” and told the unnamed person to prepare information on the “costs vs funding” of this.

She also said of the proposed budget: “I won’t send him yet – will share screen instead.” The name of the person she is referring to is redacted throughout the documents openDemocracy has seen, and it is unclear what their role is and which organisation they work for.

NHS England has denied any wrongdoing. A spokesperson said: “Clarifications were being sought from several potential suppliers as part of routine financial planning and commercial decision-making.” The spokesperson insisted NHS England had “acted in accordance with all relevant commercial and legal rules”.

But critics say the documents seen by openDemocracy are further proof that Palantir is favoured by NHS executives, despite its controversial links to Donald Trump and the CIA.

Cori Crider, the director of legal campaigners Foxglove, told openDemocracy: “This goes to show that a handful of officials have favoured them from the start.”

Surveillance software

Thiel, the “big money man” for Trump’s Make America Great Again campaign, founded Palantir in 2003 with funding from the CIA-controlled firm, In-Q-Tel. The firm’s clients include the US army, which uses its surveilling software to conduct drone strikes.

British healthcare campaigners have questioned whether a company with Palantir’s history should be entrusted to work in the NHS. In 2021, the government promised not to enter any new contracts with Palantir without consulting the public after openDemocracy and Foxglove took legal action against the Department for Health and Social Care.

But earlier this year an openDemocracy investigation revealed the NHS, seemingly in breach of that pledge, had ordered all English hospitals to share confidential patient information with Palantir.

Parliament must scrutinise why Palantir is being singled out to deliver sensitive data servicesLabour MP Rachael Maskell, vice chair of the health select committee

Health service insiders believe Palantir has now been lined up to win a £480m NHS contract later this year to run a “Federated Data Platform”. Final tenders for the platform, which will act as a new “operating system” for the NHS, were due to be submitted last week.

Jo Maugham, the director of Good Law Project, told openDemocracy: “It’s widely believed that Palantir is being lined up for this hugely valuable NHS data contract – despite concerns over what it will do with patient data. These emails support those concerns.”

There are further concerns about the usefulness of Palantir’s software, with 11 hospital trusts either pausing or suspending trials of the company’s Foundry database. Crider said: “Several real-life pilots of Palantir software at hospitals appear to have failed. We’ve called on Parliament to investigate the deal and get to the bottom of the failed pilots before it’s too late.”

Labour MP Rachael Maskell, vice chair of the health select committee, also called for more parliamentary scrutiny. She told openDemocracy: “Before another deal is signed with Palantir, Parliament must have the opportunity to scrutinise the financial operations of NHS England and the way it is handing out contracts, issues concerning public consent over data use, and why Palantir is being singled out to deliver sensitive data services.”

The National Data Guardian

Six weeks after NHS data chief Tang wrote about “trying to keep Palantir to 10-12M a year”, she met the government’s patient privacy champion, Dame Fiona Caldicott, who was then probing the health service’s relationship with Palantir.

A document of Tang’s ‘talking points’ for the 19 November meeting, disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act and dated the previous day, suggested no provider had yet been chosen for the contract: “We have been working with Palantir to continue to build out the modules that we think are critical to our response and to package up the code and data models. And we are currently in an open procurement process for a longer-term solution.”

Caldicott, who has since died, was at the time serving as the UK’s first statutory National Data Guardian and was a hugely influential figure in medical confidentiality. In 2016, her review of the government’s botched attempt to reuse patient data without consent led to the failure of its care.data project.

Caldicott’s successor at the National Data Guardian, Dr Nicola Byrne, warned NHS England last year that its new data platform “must avoid common pitfalls around trust and transparency that have frustrated previous initiatives”.

An NHS England spokesperson told openDemocracy: “The description of the procurement process [in Tang’s talking points] was accurate – it was ongoing, and was being conducted on an open basis within a transparent government procurement framework.”

Palantir told openDemocracy it could not comment on NHS procurement issues.

Read the emails in full

Original article by Lucas Amin republished from OpenDemocracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

Continue ReadingSpy tech firm Palantir was shoo-in for NHS data deal, leaked emails suggest

‘They Will Never Change on Their Own’: Top Oil Giants Have No Serious Plans to Curb Emissions

Spread the love

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

Canadian wildfire 2023
Canadian wildfire 2023

“Instead of providing desperately needed clean energy, they feed us greenwashing garbage.”

A new analysis of the activities of twelve major fossil fuel giants shows that the companies are misleading the public about their emission-reduction commitments while raking in record profits from fossil fuels, which are driving catastrophic extreme weather events across the globe.

In a report published Wednesday, Greenpeace Central and Eastern Europe examines the decarbonization pledges, investments, and profits of six global fossil fuel giants—including Shell, BP, and TotalEnergies—and six European oil companies.

The results indicate that, in 2022, close to 93% of the oil giants’ investments on average went to keeping the companies on the “fossil oil and gas path” while just 7.3% were aimed at promoting “low-carbon solutions” and sustainable production.

“Although most of the sample companies are committed to ‘net zero’ by 2050, a closer look shows that none of them has developed a coherent strategy to achieve this,” the report notes, adding that the examined companies are in fact “scaling back their ambitions” even as their polluting activities wreak havoc worldwide. Shell and BP recently announced they are ditching previous plans to curb oil production and emissions.

The report shows that BP, Equinor, Wintershall and TotalEnergies cut their investments in renewable products last year—a fact that, according to Greenpeace, bolsters the case for “compulsory investment in genuinely green infrastructure” and other government regulations.

Kuba Gogolewski, a finance campaigner at Greenpeace CEE, said Wednesday that “as the world endures unprecedented heat waves, deadly floods, and escalating storms, Big Oil clings to its destructive business model and continues to fuel the climate crisis.”

“Instead of providing desperately needed clean energy, they feed us greenwashing garbage,” Gogolewski added. “Big Oil’s unwillingness to implement real change is a crime against the climate and future generations. Governments need to stop enabling fossil fuel companies, heavily regulate them, and plan our fossil fuel phase-out now. They will never change on their own.”

“Fossil fuel companies like Shell, TotalEnergies, BP Equinor, and ENI have shown the public they are incapable of self-regulation.”

The new report offers several examples of companies offering misleading data in an apparent attempt to convince investors and the public of their commitment to the renewable energy transition.

“Shell reports a ‘renewable capacity’ of 6.4 gigawatts for the 2022 financial year,” the analysis observes. “Only in the footnote… does one learn that this figure also includes plants that are still under construction or committed for sale. The actual capacity at the end of 2022 was only 2.2 gigawatts, as the group admits in another place in its reporting.”

In the case of BP’s 2022 financial disclosures, the report notes, “there is no number that would show the amount of wind and solar power” the company generated last year.

“This lapse is only an indication that no major oil company can show a comprehensible plan for a ‘net zero’ in 2050,” the report states.

“Fossil fuel companies like Shell, TotalEnergies, BP Equinor, and ENI have shown the public they are incapable of self-regulation after scaling back their climate ambitions, despite being heavily responsible for the climate crisis,” said Gogolewski. “That’s why Greenpeace is calling for European governments to strictly regulate the industry and begin its rapid economic and political downsizing.”

The new analysis comes in the wake of devastating fires in Maui, Hawaii that were fueled by climate change, which contributed to the severely dry conditions that allowed the fires to spread rapidly.

Maui County is currently suing Shell, BP, and other fossil fuel giants, accusing them of engaging in a “coordinated, multi-front effort to conceal and deny their own knowledge” about the climate threat and profiting “from a massive increase in the extraction and consumption of oil, coal, and natural gas, which has in turn caused an enormous, foreseeable, and avoidable increase in global greenhouse gas pollution and a concordant increase in the concentration of greenhouse gases.”

The Maui lawsuit states that “wildfires are becoming more frequent, intense, and destructive in the county” as the planet warms due to ever-rising carbon emissions.

Last month was the hottest on record.

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

Continue Reading‘They Will Never Change on Their Own’: Top Oil Giants Have No Serious Plans to Curb Emissions