Tag: scientists
‘Monumental Victory for the Ocean’: Norway Halts Plans for Deep-Sea Mining
Original article by Olivia Rosane republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
Kirsti Bergstø, leader of the Socialist Left Party, speaks at a protest against deep-sea mining outside Norwegian Parliament. (Photo: Greenpeace) One campaigner called it “a testament to the power of principled, courageous political action, and… a moment to celebrate for environmental advocates, ocean ecosystems, and future generations alike.”
Environmental organizations cheered as Norway’s controversial plans to move forward with deep-sea mining in the vulnerable Arctic Ocean were iced on Sunday.
The pause was won in Norway’s parliament by the small Socialist Left (SV) Party in exchange for its support in passing the government’s 2025 budget.
“Today marks a monumental victory for the ocean, as the SV Party in Norway has successfully blocked the controversial plan to issue deep-sea mining licenses for the country’s extended continental shelf in the Arctic,” Steve Trent, CEO and founder of the Environmental Justice Foundation, said in a statement. “This decision is a testament to the power of principled, courageous political action, and it is a moment to celebrate for environmental advocates, ocean ecosystems, and future generations alike.”
“Today, thanks to the SV Party and all those around the world who spoke up against this decision, the ocean has won. Now, let’s ensure this victory lasts.”
Norway sparked outrage in January when its parliament voted to allow deep-sea mining exploration in a swath of its Arctic waters larger than the United Kingdom. Scientists have warned that mining the Arctic seabed could disturb unique hydrothermal vent ecosystems and even drive species to extinction before scientists have a chance to study them. It would also put additional pressure on all levels of Arctic Ocean life—from plankton to marine mammals—at a time when they are already feeling the impacts of rising temperatures and ocean acidification due to the burning of fossil fuels.
“The Arctic Ocean is one of the last pristine frontiers on Earth, and its fragile ecosystems are already under significant stress from the climate crisis,” Trent said. “The idea of subjecting these waters to the destructive, needless practice of deep-sea mining was a grave threat, not only to the marine life depending on them but to the global community as a whole.”
“Thankfully, this shortsighted and harmful plan has been halted, marking a clear victory in the ongoing fight to protect our planet’s blue beating heart,” Trent continued.
In June, Norway announced that it would grant the first exploratory mining licenses in early 2025. However, this has been put on hold by the agreement with the SV Party.
“This puts a stop to the plans to start deep-sea mining until the end of the government’s term,” party leader Kirsti Bergstø said, as The Guardian reported.
Norway next holds parliamentary elections in September 2025, so no licenses will be approved before then.
The move comes amid widespread opposition to deep-sea mining in Norway and beyond. A total of 32 countries and 911 marine scientists have called for a global moratorium on the practice. More than 100 E.U. parliamentarians wrote a letter opposing Norway’s plans specifically, and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) has sued to stop them.
“This is a major and important environmental victory!” WWF-Norway CEO Karoline Andaur said in a statement. “SV has stopped the process for deep seabed mining, giving Norway a unique opportunity to save its international ocean reputation and gain the necessary knowledge before we even consider mining the planet’s last untouched wilderness.”
Haldis Tjeldflaat Helle, the deep-sea mining campaigner at Greenpeace Nordic, called the decision “a huge win.”
“After hard work from activists, environmentalists, scientists, and fishermen, we have secured a historic win for ocean protection, as the opening process for deep-sea mining in Norway has been stopped,” Helle said in a statement. “The wave of protests against deep-sea mining is growing. We will not let this industry destroy the unique life in the deep sea, not in the Arctic nor anywhere else.”
Sorry, this content could not be embedded. [X/twitter embed still broken … Is there a work-around?]
XHowever, Norway’s Arctic waters are not entirely safe yet.
Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere, of the Labour Party, toldTV2, on Sunday, “This will be a postponement.”
The government said that other work to begin the process of deep-sea mining, such as drafting regulations and conducting environmental impact surveys, would move forward. Norway is currently governed by the Labour and Center parties. The two parties leading in polls for September’s elections—the Conservatives and Progress Party—also both back deep-sea mining, according toReuters.
“If a new government attempts to reopen the licensing round we will fight relentlessly against it,” Frode Pleym, who leads Greenpeace Norway, told Reuters.
Other environmental groups tempered their celebrations with calls for further action.
Trent of the Environmental Justice Foundation said that “while today is a cause for celebration, this victory must not be seen as the end of the struggle.”
“We urge Norway’s government, and all responsible global actors, to make this a lasting victory by enshrining protections for the Arctic Ocean and its ecosystems into law, and coming out in favor of a moratorium or ban on deep-sea mining,” Trent added. “It is only through a collective commitment to sustainability and long-term stewardship of our oceans that we can ensure the health of the marine environment for generations to come.”
Trent concluded: “Today, thanks to the SV Party and all those around the world who spoke up against this decision, the ocean has won. Now, let’s ensure this victory lasts.”
Andaur of WWF said that this was a “pivotal moment” for Norway to “demonstrate global leadership by prioritizing ocean health over destructive industry.”
As WWF called on Norway to abandon its mining plans, it also urged the nation to reconsider its exploitation of the ocean for oil and gas.
“Unfortunately, we have not seen similar efforts to curtail the Norwegian oil industry, which is still getting new licenses to operate in Norwegian waters, including very vulnerable parts of the Arctic,” Andaur said. “Norway needs to explore new ways to make money without extracting fossil fuels and destroying nature.”
Greenpeace also pointed to the role Norway’s pause could play in bolstering global opposition to deep-sea mining.
“Millions of people across the world are calling on governments to resist the dire threat of deep-sea mining to safeguard oceans worldwide,” Greenpeace International Stop Deep-Sea Mining campaigner Louisa Casson said. “This is a huge step forward to protect the Arctic, and now it is time for Norway to join over 30 nations calling for a moratorium and be a true ocean champion.”
Original article by Olivia Rosane republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
- ‘Shameful’: Norwegian Government Backs Deep-Sea Mining
- Campaigners Demand Global Ban on Deep-Sea Mining
- Global Campaigners Call On Norway to Ditch Deep-Sea Mining Plan
- Greenpeace Says Ban Deep-Sea Mining, Not Our Right to Protest Against It
dizzy: Welcome back BTW, hosting server was down for an hour or so 9.30 – 10.30 a.m. GMT. Seems fast now.
Fix the climate or appease the fossil fuel industry – we can’t do both
Britain ended more than 140 years of coal power when it closed its last generator in September.
Coal emits more heat-trapping gas to the atmosphere than any other fossil fuel, so its demise as a source of electricity is an unalloyed good for the climate. Yet, with another announcement a week later, the UK government has helped extend the reign of fossil fuels well into the 21st century.Read more: How mainstream climate science endorsed the fantasy of a global warming time machine
This roundup of The Conversation’s climate coverage comes from our award-winning weekly climate action newsletter. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 35,000+ readers who’ve subscribed.
Less than six months from polling day, the UK Labour party (then the official opposition) scrapped a campaign commitment to provide an annual stimulus of £28 billion (US$36.6 billion) for green industries.
Read more: Labour’s £28 billion green investment promise could be watered down – here’s why
Six billion pounds shy of this figure will now be raised over 25 years, Keir Starmer’s Labour government has revealed, but for a specific purpose: carbon capture and storage.
“The technology works by capturing CO₂ as it is being emitted by a power plant or another polluter, then storing it underground,” says Mark Maslin, a professor of natural sciences at UCL.
The Guardian reports that oil companies BP and Equinor will invest in a cluster of carbon capture and storage installations in Teesside, north-east England. Eni, an Italian oil company, is expected to develop sites in north-west England and north Wales. In each case, emissions will probably be pumped via gas pipes beneath the seabed.
Starmer anointed “a new era” for green jobs when announcing this funding, but experts claim he is actually offering symbolic and strategic support to climate-wrecking energy sources that have dominated for centuries.
A new error
“This announcement represents a massive bet on a still unproven technology, and will lock the UK into fossil fuel dependence for decades to come,” Maslin says.
Read more: The UK’s £22 billion bet on carbon capture will lock in fossil fuels for decades
“The Climate Change Act mandates the UK should achieve net zero emissions by 2050, yet this will be impossible if carbon capture leads to the UK building new gas power stations instead of wind and solar farms.”
Our ability to capture all this carbon is not guaranteed. DimaBerlin/Shutterstock Maslin was one of several scientists who wrote to energy secretary Ed Miliband criticising the plans. As he sees it, the government would not fund these projects if it did not see a future for fossil fuels beyond the middle of this century, by which time scientists have said our interference in the climate must end.
The message is clear: expensive imports of natural gas (essentially methane, a potent greenhouse gas) are here to stay. Even successful deployment of carbon scrubbers at the point of burning this gas would not erase its climate impact, Maslin says, as it leaks at all stages of its production and use.
But Maslin also doubts carbon capture and storage can siphon off the emissions of gas-fired power plants without adding to climate change. This is why climate scientists often describe carbon capture and storage as an unproven technology for decarbonising electricity and heavy industry: most of its applications have been in natural gas processing facilities where CO₂ is extracted for commercial uses.
“The track record of adding carbon capture to power plants is much worse, with the vast majority of projects abandoned,” Maslin explains.
More damning still, almost 80% of all the CO₂ captured by existing installations has been reinjected into oil fields – to pump more oil.
Could carbon capture and storage tech turn natural gas into zero-carbon hydrogen, as some hope? Again, Maslin is dubious. Water is a cleaner source for hydrogen and using this fuel to heat homes or decarbonise factories is a second-rate solution compared with renewable electricity, he says.
The fruits of appeasement
Maslin and his co-signatories say that carbon capture and storage should be limited to reducing emissions from existing fossil power plants or steel furnaces while these emission sources are rapidly phased out.
Marc Hudson at the University of Sussex is a historian of climate politics and policy in Australia, the US, UK and internationally. He has encountered policy proposals for carbon capture dating back to the 1970s and in his view, their overwhelming effect has been to prolong the use of fossil fuels by justifying investment in their expansion.
Read more: Relying on carbon capture and storage may be a dangerous trap for UK industry
“It’s the equivalent of smoking more and more cigarettes each day and gambling that a cure for cancer will exist by the time you need it,” he says.
When trying to explain why rational climate policies like the mass insulation of draughty homes tends to lose out to investment in carbon capture and storage, Nils Markusson, a lecturer in environmental politics at Lancaster University, found something similar:
“Home insulation does nothing to shield the profits of fossil fuel companies or landlords in the large and growing private rental sector,” he says.
Read more: Does carbon capture and storage hype delay emissions cuts? Here’s what research shows
In other words, appeasing the fossil fuel industry is a proviso of policies drafted to address climate change. This limitation has also infiltrated scientific assessments of the climate.
A new report shows that “overshoot” scenarios – that is, projections of future climate change which accept the global target of 1.5°C will be at least temporarily breached – are rife in mainstream climate science.
This is despite evidence of the permanent damage such a breach would cause – and our doubtful ability to reverse warming once it has exceeded these dangerous levels using speculative carbon removal technology.
There is not enough land or energy to rapidly restore the carbon we have emitted. Oksana Bali/Shutterstock What has led us here? Comprehending the climate crisis and its solutions on terms favourable to the fossil fuel industry say Wim Carton and Andreas Malm, political ecologists at Lund University.
“Avoiding climate breakdown demands that we bury the fantasy of overshoot-and-return and with it another illusion as well: that the Paris targets can be met without uprooting the status-quo.
Read more: How mainstream climate science endorsed the fantasy of a global warming time machine
“One limit after the other will be broken unless we manage to strand the necessary fossil assets and curtail opportunities for continuing to profit from oil and gas and coal.”
Jack Marley, Environment + Energy Editor, The Conversation
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
‘Extraordinary’ Antarctic Heatwave Puts Temps 50°F Above Normal
Original article by EDWARD CARVER republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
Seals rest on an ice mass in Antarctica in April 2024. (Photo: Sebnem Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images) The long-lasting heatwave is an “eye-opening sign that climate change is starting to really transform the planet,” a climate scientist said.
Antarctica is experiencing its second extreme heatwave in the last three years, with temperatures more than 50°F higher than normal, The Washington Post reported Wednesday.
The heatwave is notable not just for its intensity but also its timing and duration: It’s hit during Antartica’s winter and is expected to last. Temperatures of 36°F to 50°F above average are expected to persist up to 10 days, and July temperatures were already well above average before it began. The spiking temperatures were also spread across a large area, covering much of the continent, scientists said.
The world has faced exceptionally high temperatures in the last year, with 13 straight monthly heat records and counting, and the poles are warming at roughly twice the rate of the global average. Scientists say the changing conditions around Antarctica have increased the likelihood of higher winter temperatures on the continent.
“It is likely that having less sea ice and a warmer Southern Ocean around the Antarctic continent ‘loads the dice’ for warmer winter weather over Antarctica,” Edward Blanchard, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Washington, told the Post.
Scientists warned that this heatwave was a sign of what’s to come as the planet heats up thanks primarily to fossil fuel emissions.
“This historic warm spell in East Antarctica is an ominous example of the temperature spikes this polar climate could experience more of in a warming world,” the Post reported.
Jonathan Overpeck, a climate scientist at the University of Michigan, said on social media that the heatwave is an “eye-opening sign that climate change is starting to really transform the planet.”
In March 2022, Antarctica experienced the most intense heatwave in the planet’s recorded history, with temperatures up to 72°F above normal. On-site scientists at the time wore shorts and removed their shirts to bask in the sun. The heatwave was the subject of intense scientific research in the two years that followed, with a 54-person team trying to decipher the causes, which they described as “head-hurting” in their complexity.
The 2022 heatwave contributed to reduced sea ice levels. Antarctica experienced the lowest summer and winter levels of sea ice ever recorded last year.
High temperatures in Antarctica are relative—this week’s heatwave still had temperatures hovering at about minus-4°F. But sustained periods at such temperatures are highly unusual.
“The heatwave on the Antarctic Plateau is extraordinary more for its duration than for its intensity, although some values are notable,” Stefano Di Battista, an expert on Antarctic temperatures, told the Post.
The heatwave is likely the result of changes in the stratosphere roughly 20 miles above ground, scientists said. At the South Pole, the stratosphere contains a polar vortex that is normally stable with cold temperatures and low pressure during the Antarctic winter, but a sudden stratospheric warming event occurred due to atmospheric wave activity, Amy Butler, an atmospheric scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, told the Post.
Original article by EDWARD CARVER republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
Why I Was Arrested for Protesting Citigroup’s Funding of Climate Chaos
Original article by SANDRA STEINGRABER republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
Scientist Sandra Steingraber is arrested outside Citigroup’s New York City headquarters on June 12, 2024.
(Photo: Alec Connon)I am here today to say to Citi that if you won’t listen to the data of scientists, you will need to listen to the bodies of scientists blocking your doors.
Editor’s note: The following is a speech read by Sandra Steingraber before being arrested outside Citigroup’s New York City headquarters on June 12, 2024.
My name is Sandra Steingraber. I have a PhD in biology, and I’ve worked as a scientist my whole adult life.
Here are two things biologists are worried about.
The first thing is happening in the ocean. When fossil fuels are burned and CO2 fills the atmosphere, some of it falls into the sea.
When carbon dioxide touches water, it turns into carbonic acid: H2CO3.
Acid makes calcium carbonate (CaCO3) dissolve. Seashells are made of calcium carbonate. So fossil fuels are turning our oceans into pits of acid, and animals made of shells are starting to dissolve.
I did not become a biologist to write eulogies for the species I study.
All together, the babies of animals with shells are called zooplankton.
Zooplankton are the basis of the marine food chain.
If you dissolve their parents, zooplankton disappear—along with the fish who eat them.
One half of the world’s human population depends on fish for protein. The pH of the oceans is now on track to crash the world’s fish stocks. As a biologist I worry about that.
Now let’s go on land and look at bees. Bumblebees also have babies, and they need to stay cool. So adult bees beat their wings like a thousand little ceiling fans to cool the bee nursery. But they can’t keep up due to more intense heatwaves. Baby bees are dying. Populations are crashing.
Bees help plants have sex. Bees turn flowers into fruits, nuts, vegetables. One-third of the food we eat is made for us by bees. And they do it for free. It’s called an ecosystem service.
If we lose the bees, crops fail. This is how the ecological crisis becomes a human rights crisis. Biologists are worried about this
I have studied climate change since 1982. I’ve testified. I’ve sent letters to the White House. I’ve met with the science adviser. I went to the Paris climate talks. But CO2 levels just reached a new high, and Citigroup is financing the arsonists.
Citi has poured $396 billion dollars into the fossil fuel industry just since 2016.
So, I am here today to say to Citi that if you won’t listen to the data of scientists, you will need to listen to the bodies of scientists blocking your doors. Today my body is a data point. And all together, all these data points on this blockade line make a trend. The trend is that when extinction rates accelerate, scientists get louder.
My message to Citi CEO Jane Fraser: I did not become a biologist to write eulogies for the species I study. I am morally obligated to use my knowledge to defend life against extinction and oppose those who finance it.
Original article by SANDRA STEINGRABER republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).
- Dozens Arrested As Scientists Worldwide Mobilize To Demand ‘Climate Revolution’ ›
- 40+ NYC Activists Arrested For Protests Against Banks Fueling Climate Emergency ›
- Dozens Arrested As Activists Target Citigroup For Bankrolling Climate Breakdown ›
- Why I Brought My Toddler To Protest At Citi CEO Jane Fraser’s House ›
- ‘We Need To Engage People’: Scientists Arrested Demanding Climate Action ›
- ‘Just The Beginning’: 50+ Arrested For Blockading Citigroup Bank Over Climate Crimes ›
Experienced climbers scale a rock face near the historic Dumbarton castle in Glasgow, releasing a banner that reads “Climate on a Cliff Edge.” One activist, dressed as a globe, symbolically looms near the edge, while another plays the bagpipes on the shores below. | Photo courtesy of Extinction Rebellion and Mark Richards
