UK Socialist blog

Court confirms Greenpeace right to peaceful protest as activists’ 200 hour long protest against deep sea mining in the Pacific continues

Amsterdam, The Netherlands —  A Dutch court has largely rejected a request by a deep seabed mining company to issue an injunction against protest by Greenpeace International, stating that it is “understandable” the organisation has resorted to direct action in the face of the “possibly very serious consequences” of the company’s plans.

Greenpeace International activists from the Rainbow Warrior attach a flag reading 'Stop Deep Sea Mining'' to a cable holding the prototype robot Patania II in April 2021. (Photo: Marten van Dijl/Greenpeace)
Greenpeace International activists from the Rainbow Warrior attach a flag reading ‘Stop Deep Sea Mining” to a cable holding the prototype robot Patania II in April 2021. (Photo: Marten van Dijl/Greenpeace)

In the case brought by NORI, a wholly-owned subsidiary of The Metals Company (TMC), the judgement states that Greenpeace International’s climbers who were occupying the vessel’s stern crane must disembark, but denies NORI’s request to keep Greenpeace activists from being within a 500 metre radius of MV COCO. The court decision comes after nearly 200 hours of peaceful protest by Greenpeace International activists against the MV COCO, which is collecting data for TMC as part of its drive to file the first-ever deep sea mining application next year.

“This is without question a massive setback for the deep sea mining industry. The Dutch court not only affirmed Greenpeace’s right to protest but also agreed that nodule mining is a highly controversial activity. The Metals Company has never been interested in scrutiny and they can’t stand that Greenpeace is watching and opposing them at every turn. Our activists are speaking the truth to destructive companies like TMC that are only out for their own profit, at huge cost to us all. We are determined to keep bringing this dangerous industry to public attention and will continue to disrupt its plans”, said Mads Christensen, Executive Director of Greenpeace International.

After five days of a non-stop kayak activity around the MV COCO, the vessel was safely climbed by five Greenpeace International activists on 25 November. Activists aboard the Greenpeace ship Arctic Sunrise took turns occupying the vessel’s stern crane to peacefully draw attention to the demand that TMC stop its deep sea mining exploration activities and drop its destructive plans in one of the world’s last untouched ecosystems. NORI claims the protest has been costing it 1M Euros a day. 

The Dutch court denied NORI’s request for an injunction to keep Greenpeace activists from being within a 500 metre radius of COCO, a call that was repeated by the International Seabed Authority Secretary-General but which the judge described as ‘not an enforceable measure’. 

Greenpeace International climbers descended on 30 November, but the 200-hour ongoing peaceful protest continues.  

“The ISA Secretariat should learn from Greenpeace International activists as an example of a bold fight back against the destruction of this still unknown ecosystem. The power of the global movement against deep sea mining is growing, and is undimmed by corporate efforts and behind the scene’s agreements to limit protest. Brave action across the world by people standing up for what is right will stop deep sea mining”, said Greenpeace International Stop Deep Sea Mining campaigner Louisa Casson, aboard the Arctic Sunrise.

Greenpeace International activist Sofia Castellanos said: “We are standing up against the first ever deep sea mining application that TMC are trying to rush through against scientific warnings and political opposition of 24 countries calling for a moratorium. We will continue to protest every time TMC tries to push forward this dangerous industry, for the sake of our oceans and the rich and mysterious life of the deep sea.” 

Continue ReadingCourt confirms Greenpeace right to peaceful protest as activists’ 200 hour long protest against deep sea mining in the Pacific continues

The cruise industry says LNG is a climate solution. It’s not

https://www.climatechangenews.com/2023/09/26/the-cruise-industry-says-lng-is-a-climate-solution-its-not/

A cruise ship docked in the Port of Miami, Florida, USA (Pic: Anthony Quintano/Flickr)

…

LNG is a fossil fuel whose use is not consistent with the Paris Agreement 1.5C temperature goal. It consists primarily of methane, an extremely powerful greenhouse gas (GHG), which has climate impacts over 80 times greater than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period. Methane leaks into the atmosphere across the full production lifecycle of LNG, and once on the ships, the unburned gas escapes from the smokestacks into the air.

Despite the devastating frontloaded climate impact of methane, to date policymakers have been slow to address its use in regulation, and public awareness of the issue is low. This gives cruise companies the latitude to invest in LNG as an alternative fuel – and they have done so with gusto.   

Why do cruise companies love LNG? 

There are some benefits to LNG on paper: in the short term it reduces air pollution and CO2 emissions when burned, compared to standard shipping fuel. This has led to some of the world’s biggest cruise companies (including Carnival Corporation & plc and MSC Cruises and Royal Caribbean Group) to portray their cruises as sustainable, and their newest ships “clean”, “green” and “eco-friendly”.

Across the industry, company webpages are littered with references to LNG superimposed on images of idyllic blue seas, thriving coral reefs, and green forests. Most of us aren’t specialists in the climate impacts of differing fuel compositions, and it’s easy to be taken in.  

But the reality is that these adverts are a very effective smokescreen for the fact that the true climate effect of LNG is likely worse than if the companies had stuck with dirty heavy marine fuel oil.  

…

Protest placard reads Greenwash detected
Protest placard reads Greenwash detected

https://www.climatechangenews.com/2023/09/26/the-cruise-industry-says-lng-is-a-climate-solution-its-not/

Continue ReadingThe cruise industry says LNG is a climate solution. It’s not

U.S. Expected to Reach New Record for Fossil Fuel Production This Year

https://www.ecowatch.com/fossil-fuel-production-us-2023.html

Construction cranes at the Golden Pass LNG Terminal in Sabine Pass, Texas, on April 14, 2022. The Washington Post / Getty Images

The year 2023 is already expected to be the hottest on record, following a record-hot summer. But despite this, the U.S. is expected to reach record numbers in fossil fuel production for the year.

Liquified natural gas exports from North America are expected to double through 2027, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) recently reported. Most of the liquified natural gas projects under construction in North America are in the U.S., particularly concentrated in the Gulf of Mexico, where a major oil spill with over 1 million barrels of crude oil was recently discovered.

The latest short-term energy outlook from EIA forecasted that for 2023, crude oil production in the U.S. will reach 12.9 million barrels per day, up from 11.27 million barrels per day in 2021 and 11.91 million barrels per day in 2022. Further, the administration estimated that in 2024, U.S. crude oil production will reach 13.15 million barrels daily.

Overall, U.S. officials predict that oil and gas production will likely continue reaching near-record levels year after year to 2050, The Guardian reported.

“It’s particularly alarming to see the projections of record U.S. oil and gas production year after year until 2050,” Michael Lazarus, a senior scientist at Stockholm Environment Institute, told The Guardian. “The U.S. is locking in production for years that makes it hard to meet climate goals. It’s out of sync and it needs reckoning.”

…

https://www.ecowatch.com/fossil-fuel-production-us-2023.html

Continue ReadingU.S. Expected to Reach New Record for Fossil Fuel Production This Year

Carbon Offsets 101: Why We Can’t Offset Our Way Out of the Climate Crisis

The buildings and steaming cooling towers of a coal-fired power plant behind a landscape park in Germany. Frank Bienewald / LightRocket via Getty Images

https://www.ecowatch.com/carbon-offsets-climate-crisis.html

… Carbon offsets are in theory a way to cancel out greenhouse gas emissions by funding an activity that will remove a supposedly equal amount of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or prevent an equal amount of carbon pollution. They can be purchased by everyone from major companies pursuing net-zero emissions goals to individuals looking to compensate for high-carbon activities like flying. Typically, an institution or individual will purchase a certain amount of carbon credits, with one credit usually standing in for one metric ton of carbon dioxide — or what is typically emitted by driving 2,513 miles in a gas car — removed from the atmosphere. (That’s roughly the distance between San Francisco and Atlanta). Whoever buys the carbon credit is essentially buying the right to count the emissions reduction as theirs even if it’s being performed by a tree-planting or renewable energy project on the other side of the globe.

…

Quick Facts

  • One carbon credit usually equals one metric ton of carbon dioxide supposedly removed from the atmosphere, or the equivalent of driving 2,513 miles in a gas-powered car.
  • The voluntary carbon market quadrupled in value between 2020 and 2021 to reach nearly $2 billion. 
  • The average tree absorbs 20 pounds of carbon dioxide each year during the first 20 years of its life.
  • Only four percent of carbon offset projects actively remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, as opposed to preventing additional emissions. 
  • More than 170 climate, environmental and Indigenous rights groups signed an open letter opposing carbon offsets. 
  • At least 52 percent of carbon-offset generating wind projects in India would have been built anyway.
  • California’s forest carbon offsets program likely overestimated its emissions reductions by at least 80 percent. 
  • A Ryanair program to offer passengers €1 carbon offsets only actually offset the company’s emissions by 0.01 percent. 
  • Sixty-six percent of highly-polluting companies studied relied on carbon offsets to meet their net zero targets.
  • There are only around 500 million hectares of land available for tree-planting carbon offset projects and Shell wants to claim 10 percent of it.

…

They’re a Scam: One of the main criticisms of carbon offsets is that many projects don’t really do what they say they are going to do, namely, prevent additional emissions. A major ProPublica report published in 2019 reviewed 20 years of forest-preservation-based offset projects and found that “In case after case […] carbon credits hadn’t offset the amount of pollution they were supposed to, or they had brought gains that were quickly reversed or that couldn’t be accurately measured to begin with.” A 2021 study of wind farms in India found that at least 52 percent of the projects used to back offsets would have been constructed regardless and that therefore the selling of the offsets to polluting industries actually increased emissions. Two studies of California’s forest carbon offsets program found that it overestimated its emissions reductions by at least 80 percent. The dubious nature of many carbon-offset projects leads to charges of greenwashing, because fossil fuel or airline companies can use their purchasing of offsets to market themselves as being more sustainable than they really are. For example, a Ryanair program to charge its customers €1 to offset their flight only lowered the company’s emissions by 0.01 percent.

…

They’re a Distraction From Reducing Emissions: Even if every carbon offset project worked exactly as advertised, however, it wouldn’t be an effective tool for fighting climate change. That’s because the climate crisis is caused by pumping greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere and will only be halted if emissions actually stop as well. Yet a 2021 study looking at net-zero pledges from the sectors responsible for 64 percent of greenhouse gas emissions found that 66 percent of them relied on carbon offsets. Oil, gas and mining companies were especially dependent on offsets for their net zero plans. 

…

What everyone in the climate space can agree on is that the emphasis needs to move away from purchasing offsets and towards actually reducing fossil fuel emissions. At their best, offsets could be a stop-gap measure to fund beneficial projects and counteract emissions that there is not yet a technologically feasible way to reduce directly. At their worst, carbon offsets risk giving polluters an easy way to greenwash their image while continuing business as usual, actually increasing emissions through miscounting and reproducing the injustices underlying the climate crisis. Given that the current system tips more towards the latter than the former, it’s important for governments, companies and individuals to focus on not putting greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere in the first place. 

Read the original article https://www.ecowatch.com/carbon-offsets-climate-crisis.html

Continue ReadingCarbon Offsets 101: Why We Can’t Offset Our Way Out of the Climate Crisis