‘Morally Obscene’: UK Approves Massive Undeveloped Oil and Gas Field in North Sea

Spread the love
Campaigners take part in a Stop Rosebank emergency protest outside the U.K. Government building in Edinburgh, after the controversial Equinor Rosebank North Sea oil field was given the go-ahead Wednesday, September 27, 2023. (Photo: Jane Barlow/PA Images via Getty Images)
Campaigners take part in a Stop Rosebank emergency protest outside the U.K. Government building in Edinburgh, after the controversial Equinor Rosebank North Sea oil field was given the go-ahead Wednesday, September 27, 2023. (Photo: Jane Barlow/PA Images via Getty Images)

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

“The disgraceful decision to give Rosebank the green light shows the extent of the U.K. government’s climate denial,” one activist said.

Regulators in the United Kingdom on Wednesday greenlit the Rosebank oilfield in the North Sea, which campaigners warn contains enough oil and gas to match the yearly emissions of 28 low-income countries.

The U.K. government said it welcomed the approval, in a statement that comes one week after Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced he was delaying some elements of the country’s net-zero plan.

“By approving Rosebank, Rishi Sunak has confirmed he couldn’t care less about climate change,” climate lawyer and executive director of the advocacy group Uplift Tessa Khan said in a statement. “As we’ve heard repeatedly, our world can no longer sustain new oil and gas drilling. And when we’re witnessing scorching temperatures, wildfires, devastating flooding, and heatwaves in our seas, it could not be clearer that this is a decision by the prime minister to add more fuel to the fire.”

Rosebank, which is located off the northwest coast of the Shetland Islands, is the largest currently undeveloped oil field in the U.K., CNBCreported. Equinor, Norway’s state-owned oil company, has an 80% share in the project, with British company Ithaca Energy holding the remaining 20%.

Equinor said it expected development to begin in 2026-2027 and for the field to produce more than 300 million barrels of oil overall, while Friends of the Earth Scotland said it contained 500 million barrels.

The approval comes despite the fact that the International Energy Agency concluded in 2021 that no new fossil fuel projects should be launched if world leaders wanted to limit global heating to 1.5°C. It also comes on the heels of a government report finding that a record number of people in England died of heat-related causes in 2022.

“This decision is nothing but carte blanche to fossil fuel companies to ruin the climate, punish bill payers, and siphon off obscene profits.”

Green Member of Parliament Caroline Lucas called the approval “the greatest act of environmental vandalism in my lifetime” in a statement posted on X, formerly known as Twitter.

“This is morally obscene,” she added in a second post. “It won’t improve energy security or lower bills—but it will shatter our climate commitments and demolish global leadership. Govt is complicit in this climate crime—as is Labour unless they pledge to do all possible to revoke it.”

Sunak, a conservative, promised to approve hundreds of oil and gas drilling licenses in the North Sea in July, arguing it was necessary for energy security. The opposition Labour Party says it will prioritize renewable energy if it takes power, but will respect any licenses or approvals already in place, according to Reuters.

“The disgraceful decision to give Rosebank the green light shows the extent of the U.K. government’s climate denial,” Friends of the Earth Scotland’s oil and gas campaigner Freya Aitchison said in a statement. “Fossil fuels are driving both climate breakdown and the cost of living crisis yet the U.K. Government is slamming its foot down on the accelerator.”

Aitchison also called on the Scottish government specifically to oppose the project.

“Delivering a fair and fast transition away from fossil fuels is one of the defining challenges of Humza Yousaf’s term as First Minister,” Aitchison said. “This must start with unequivocally condemning Rosebank and opposing the U.K. government’s decision to go ahead with a project that deliberately prioritizes the interests of Equinor while bringing little or no benefit to Scottish people.”

Campaigners also questioned who would benefit from the project. While the government argued that it would inject cash into the economy and create almost 1,600 jobs, activists pointed out that Equinor made £62 billion in pre-tax profits last year and would get more than £3.75 billion in tax breaks for its work on Rosebank, meaning the U.K. would ultimately lose £750 million in tax money from the field’s development.

“The ugly truth is that Sunak is pandering to vested interests, demonstrating the stranglehold the fossil fuel lobby has on government decision-making. And it’s bill payers and the climate that will suffer because of it,” Greenpeace U.K. climate campaigner Philip Evans said in a statement. “Why else would he make such a reckless decision?

“This decision is nothing but carte blanche to fossil fuel companies to ruin the climate, punish bill payers, and siphon off obscene profits,” Evans added.

Opponents of the project have promised to take legal action to stop it.

“There are strong grounds to believe that the way this government has come to this decision is unlawful,” Khan said in a statement. “We shouldn’t have to fight this government for cheap, clean energy, and a liveable climate, but we will.”

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

Continue Reading‘Morally Obscene’: UK Approves Massive Undeveloped Oil and Gas Field in North Sea

Italian Oil Giant Eni Knew About Climate Change More Than 50 Years Ago, Report Reveals

Spread the love

Original article by Stella Levantesi and Benjamin Franta republished from DeSmog.

A 1970 report by Eni’s Isvet research centre warned of “catastrophic” climate risk from the build-up of CO2 caused by burning fossil fuels. Flickr via PRP Channel (CC BY-2.0)
A 1970 report by Eni’s Isvet research centre warned of “catastrophic” climate risk from the build-up of CO2 caused by burning fossil fuels. Flickr via PRP Channel (CC BY-2.0)

Italian oil major Eni knew of the climate impacts of fossil fuel extraction since 1970, according to a report by Greenpeace Italy and advocacy group ReCommon shared with DeSmog. 

The report comes four months after the two organizations announced a lawsuit against the company alleging Eni used “lobbying and greenwashing” to push for more oil and gas production, despite having known about the risks fossil fuels posed over the past 53 years.

The two groups had previously unearthed a 1970 report by Eni’s Isvet research centre that warned of the “catastrophic” climate risk from the build-up of carbon dioxide (CO2) caused by burning fossil fuels. They also found a 1978 report produced by Eni’s Tecneco company that included a projection of how much atmospheric CO2 levels would rise by the turn of the 21st century.

But, until now, compared to other oil majors, relatively little evidence was uncovered that Eni had longstanding knowledge of the damage its fossil fuel products would cause. 

“Our investigation shows how Eni joins the long list of fossil fuel companies that, as emerged from numerous international investigations conducted in the recent years, were aware at least since the early 1970s of the destabilizing effect of coal, gas, and oil exploitation on global climate balances, due to greenhouse gas emissions,” said Felice Moramarco, a communications strategist with Greenpeace Italy, who coordinated the research for this report.

“If we find ourselves today in the midst of a climate crisis that threatens the lives of each and every one of us,” he added, “the responsibility falls mainly on companies like Eni, which have continued for decades to exploit fossil fuels, ignoring the alarming and growing warnings from the global scientific community.”

The report aims to build on evidence in Eni’s 1970 and 1978 report, and is the result of months of research within public and private archives in Italy, including the company’s own archive.

The findings add to the existing body of research that fossil fuel companies have been aware of the climate risks of burning fossil fuels since at least the 1970s and 80s, but still chose to expand oil and gas production and obstruct climate action. 

‘They’ve Been Playing Us All for Fools’

Last week, California filed what may be the most consequential climate lawsuit yet against a range of Carbon Majors, including Exxon, Shell, Chevron, and BP for covering up what they knew about emissions and misleading the public for decades about the climate crisis. Speaking about the fossil fuel defendants, California Governor Gavin Newsom charged, “They’ve been playing all of us for fools,” and noted that the legal action could “illuminate their deception and their lies over 50, 60, 70 years.”

The report in the Italian case shows that Eni also foresaw damages from its products going back more than 50 years. 

In 1971, Eni set up a new company in Rome to study pollution problems called Tecneco. In a 1973 report, Tecneco predicted that human activities could cause permanent changes to the atmosphere, including changes that could “gradually cause the disappearance of all life on earth.” Among the atmospheric changes listed was “climatic modifications.” Another section of the report stated that the increase of carbon dioxide “in the atmosphere is considered a potential cause of climate change.”

Another 1978 Tecneco report was even clearer, stating, “Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the ultimate oxidation product of fossil fuels … it exists in air in concentrations of about 300 ppm [parts per million] and only human activity increases this value by interfering with natural processes, so that above a certain threshold it becomes a pollutant.” 

The report warned that continued production and use of fossil fuels would “alter the heat balance of the atmosphere, leading to climatic change with serious consequences for the biosphere.” Another section predicted that “climatic changes may occur on a regional scale due to the continued, increasing consumption of fossil fuels, and this may become a major problem by the end of the century … the best available data indicate that the CO2 content of the atmosphere will reach 375–400 ppm in the year 2000; this would increase the temperature of the atmosphere by 0.5 °C.” Eni’s prediction was quite accurate: Global warming in the year 2000 was exactly 0.5 °C and CO2 concentrations were around 370 ppm.

Eni also understood the need to limit fossil fuel pollution decades ago, according to the report. A 1988 issue of the company’s corporate magazine Ecos – widely read by employees and executives – warned that continued use of “fossil sources” of energy would produce a “greenhouse effect that could lead to climate change with devastating effects on the entire earth’s ecosystem.” Another issue of the magazine from the same year stated that as research on global warming continued, “it is incumbent on us to work as of now, as far as possible, to contain the phenomenon of carbon dioxide emissions. … It is generally agreed that it is very important to ‘buy time’ so as to refine the complex prediction models and identify the most appropriate solutions. Buying time means limiting the increase in CO2 as far as possible.”

The same issue also includes an article detailing the link between “greenhouse effect” and fossil fuel “combustion processes,” and contains information on CO2 concentration: “From samples of air trapped in glaciers, data on the concentration of carbon dioxide in the air in past times can be obtained. It has been estimated by this route that the concentration of CO2 in the air has increased by about 25% in the last 200 years, from a level of 275 parts per million by volume to a current level of around 330-340 ppm (volume).”

In 1992, Eni claimed it needed more research before taking action on climate change. Credit: Petar Milošević Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-2.0)
In 1992, Eni claimed it needed more research before taking action on climate change. Credit: Petar Milošević Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-2.0)

Earlier this year, a DeSmog investigation also found that Eni has misleadingly promoted fossil gas since the 1980s as the “clean energy of the future,” despite its damaging effects on the climate. 

Eni also continued to be a member of IPIECA – the International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association. Starting in the late 1980s, the organization  coordinated Big Oil’s efforts to delay fossil fuel controls around the world (and weaken the foundational UN Framework Convention on Climate Change) by emphasizing scientific uncertainty and misleading the public about the industry’s own knowledge.

The report reveals that at a 1992 IPIECA symposium in Rome co-hosted by Eni, for example, the company’s manager of Safety, Quality and Environmental Protection department insisted that “before taking political decisions, such as adopting a carbon tax, which could lead to dire and unexpected economic consequences, it is necessary to obtain more data … on several controversial points such as the role of the oceans and clouds in climate change, as well as data on their behaviour in various countries and economic and geographic areas.” 

Experts say Big Tobacco and other polluters used the “we need more research” refrain as a delay tactic. The Eni manager at the 1992 symposium added that “Eni feels that its objectives are very similar to those of IPIECA and strongly supports this important international association founded by oil companies.”

“In due course [Eni] will make the respective pleadings and arguments public so that anyone can get a full, correct, accurate (and free from misleading ideologies) idea of the very significant issues and complexities associated, as well as the correctness of both the company’s behavior and its energy transition strategies,” said the company in a recent statement to Italian newspaper Domani. 

And added that “following the logic described by the NGOs, which is devoid of any foundation and knowledge of the industrial and technological history of energy systems, as well as the evolution of economic and industrial systems and the energy mix required for their operation, anyone who has been using fossil energy or fuel for the past 50 years would have ignored these ‘alarms’ and would be similarly responsible for the emissions generated through their use.”

On July 25, Greenpeace Italy and ReCommon received a “request for mediation” from Eni in response to their lawsuit. This is a mandatory prerequisite for filing a defamation lawsuit under Italian law. The company also stated it may seek at least 50,000 euros in damages from each group.

“We intend to resist this attempt at intimidation by Eni and call for the support of all people and public and private entities who care about the cause of climate justice, starting with those who live and work in the territories that are suffering the catastrophic consequences of the crisis themselves,” said Antonio Tricarico,  program director at ReCommon.

Original article by Stella Levantesi and Benjamin Franta republished from DeSmog.

Continue ReadingItalian Oil Giant Eni Knew About Climate Change More Than 50 Years Ago, Report Reveals

Al Gore leads international chorus of disapproval for Sunak’s climate U-turn

Spread the love

Decision by UK prime minister to water down key climate policies ‘really shocking to me’, says former US vice-president

Image of Al Gore by JD Lasica  Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.
Image of Al Gore by JD Lasica Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.

Al Gore, the former US vice-president, has described the decision by the UK prime minister, Rishi Sunak, to water down key climate policies as “shocking and disappointing” and “not what the world needs from the United Kingdom”.

Gore, now one of the world’s foremost advocates for swift action to avert the climate crisis, told CNN: “I find it shocking and really disappointing … I think he’s done the wrong thing. I’ve heard from many of my friends in the UK including a lot of Conservative party members who have used the phrase, ‘utter disgust’.

“And some of the young people there feel as if their generation has been stabbed in the back. It’s really shocking to me.”

‘Pathetic’: what scientists and green groups think of UK’s net zero U-turn

UK not a serious player in global race for green growth, says Greenpeace, while Oxfam says move is ‘betrayal’

Just Stop Oil protesting in London 6 December 2022.
Just Stop Oil protesting in London 6 December 2022.

Jim Watson, professor of energy policy and director of UCL’s Institute for Sustainable Resources

“Rishi Sunak’s net zero speech is full of contradictions, and will make it harder to meet our medium- and long-term climate change targets. It also risks increasing the costs by delaying the shift away from fossil fuels and reducing the economic benefits to the UK.”

Prof Sir Brian Hoskins, chair of the Grantham Institute at Imperial College London

“Our PM wants to have his cake and eat it when he says that the government wants to keep to the UK climate change targets but to weaken the policies to achieve them. These policies were already too weak according to the June report of its advisers, the Climate Change Committee.”

Rebecca Newsom, head of politics at Greenpeace UK

“The grim reality is that Britain is no longer seen as a serious player in the global race for green growth. Under the Conservative government, Britain has gone from leader to laggard on climate change and further planned U-turns leaked last night will only hasten our waning influence on the world stage.”

Lyndsay Walsh, Oxfam’s climate change policy adviser

“Any further weakening of the government’s climate policies is a complete betrayal of people living in poverty – both in the UK and abroad – who are most vulnerable to climate change. The government needs to put long-term interests ahead of short-term politics and that means a fast and fair move towards renewable energy.”

Continue ReadingAl Gore leads international chorus of disapproval for Sunak’s climate U-turn

Greenpeace Protests ‘Shock Doctrine’ by Blockading New TotalEnergies LNG Terminal

Spread the love
Greenpeace activists paint "Gas kills" on the hull of the Cape Ann.
Greenpeace activists paint, “Gas kills,” on the hull of the Cape Ann.
 (Photo: Jean Nicholas Guillo/Greenpeace)

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

Gas companies “cynically used… the Russian invasion of Ukraine to frighten governments into massive, unneeded investment into and expansion of fossil gas imports and infrastructure,” one campaigner said.

As part of the Global Fight to End Fossil Fuels, activists from Greenpeace France attempted to block a new TotalEnergies liquefied natural gas terminal [tanker] from entering the port of Le Havre Monday morning.

Kayakers paddled between the port entrance and the tanker carrying the terminal—the Cape Ann—and wrote “Gas kills” in white paint along its side, Reuters reported.

“This LNG terminal is yet another blatant example of ‘shock doctrine,’ where gas operators shifted their public messaging and lobbying from ‘energy transition’ to ‘energy security’ and cynically used the opportunity after the energy supply concerns triggered by the Russian invasion of Ukraine to frighten governments into massive, unneeded investment into and expansion of fossil gas imports and infrastructure,” Greenpeace France oil, transport, and ocean campaigner Hélène Bourges said in a statement.

ation unit did arrive at the port in Western France Monday morning, TotalEnergies told Reuters.

But the Greenpeace activists argue its arrival contradicts French President Emmanuel Macron’s 2022 promise to make France the first major nation to abandon the fossil fuels driving the climate emergency. What’s more, the gas is mostly U.S. shale gas, obtained by fracking—a method banned in France because of the harm it does to the global climate and the health and environment of local communities.

The activists in kayaks carried banners reading “Total: shale dealer,” “Macron: shale dealer,” and “End Fossil Crimes.”

Members of Scientists in Rebellion also came to Le Havre to support the action.

“This LNG terminal is a sham that responds neither to the crisis nor to energy sovereignty and pushes us into a scenario of climate chaos,” the group wrote on X, formerly Twitter.

Greenpeace challenged the narrative that increased LNG is necessary to help France and the rest of Europe meet their energy needs in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In a report copublished in June with Disclose, Greenpeace France pointed out that the country’s existing LNG terminals did not use their maximum capacity in 2022 and were underutilized during the first half of 2023.

“If France really suffered from a gas supply crisis in 2022 that was severe enough to justify the new floating terminal in Le Havre, it’s surprising that the capacities of existing terminals, particularly the ones at Dunkerque and Fos Tonkin, were underutilized,” the report authors wrote.

“This summer’s extreme weather events have highlighted the urgency of moving away from fossil fuels.”

Instead, they argued that the LNG increase was the result of lobbying from the oil and gas industry.

“The only beneficiaries of the LNG gas infrastructure in Le Havre are TotalEnergies, the operator of the floating terminal, and its shareholders, whose private interests and gains prevail over climate action and people’s health, with the complicit support of the French government that granted an unprecedented legal preferential regime to set up this operation,” Bourges said in a statement.

Greenpeace’s action followed a summer of deadly heatwavesfires, and floods and a global mobilization to end fossil fuels from September 15-17.

“This summer’s extreme weather events have highlighted the urgency of moving away from fossil fuels,” Greenpeace France wrote on social media.

The group said it had two demands for Macron: to prevent the new terminal from being used and to kill any other fossil fuel projects under consideration.

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

Continue ReadingGreenpeace Protests ‘Shock Doctrine’ by Blockading New TotalEnergies LNG Terminal

Greenpeace says new Energy Secretary Claire Coutinho has a lot of catching up to do

Spread the love
Greenpeace image, sign reads CHOOSE OCEANS, NOT OIL
Greenpeace image, sign reads CHOOSE OCEANS, NOT OIL

Commenting on the appointment of Claire Coutinho as the new Energy and Net Zero Secretary, Greenpeace UK’s policy director Dr Doug Parr said:

“We don’t envy the new energy secretary’s job. She’s picked up the baton for the final leg of a relay where her fellow runners have mostly been walking, sometimes backwards. Her department has a huge amount of catching up to do to tackle both the energy and climate challenges in her new job title.

“Fortunately, there are plenty of things that will deliver on both, from removing absurd blockages to cheap renewables to fixing our energy-wasting homes and bringing our power grid into the 21st century.

“In her maiden speech, Claire Coutinho described renewables as ‘one of the most remarkable success stories in the UK today’. Perhaps she could persuade the Prime Minister to build on that success story instead of blocking it. If she can do that, it’ll be good news for bill payers, the climate and the economy. We wish her best of luck with that.”

Continue ReadingGreenpeace says new Energy Secretary Claire Coutinho has a lot of catching up to do