A protest march against the Line 3 pipeline in St. Paul, Minnesota on May 18, 2018. Fibonacci Blue / CC BY 2.0
By Collin Rees
We know that people power can stop dangerous fossil fuel projects like the proposed Line 3 tar sands oil pipeline in Minnesota, because we've proved it over and over again — and recently we've had two more big wins.
<p>In Oregon, a powerful coalition of tribes, landowners and activists has been resisting the proposed Jordan Cove LNG and Pacific Connector pipeline project for years, pressuring Oregon's Gov. Kate Brown to block the project. Earlier this month, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality <a href="https://www.nolngexports.org/deq-denies-permit" target="_blank">denied a crucial water permit</a> for the huge fracked gas project, dealing it a "potentially fatal blow," in the words of the coalition.</p><p>This was followed by a major win in New York last week, as Gov. Andrew Cuomo's administration <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/15/nyregion/williams-pipeline-gas-energy.html" target="_blank">denied a water permit</a> for the Northeast Supply Enhancement gas pipeline, better known as the "Williams Pipeline." The rejection of this permit follows a string of important victories for the anti-pipeline movement in New York, sends Williams back to the drawing board, and <a href="https://www.insidernj.com/press-release/coalition-calls-murphy-stop-transco-williams-pipeline/" target="_blank">increases pressure on New Jersey's Gov. Phil Murphy</a> to deny permits for that state's section of the fracked gas pipeline.</p><p>In Minnesota, Gov. Tim Walz and Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan have the chance to show the same kind of real leadership by strongly opposing the massive Line 3 tar sands pipeline that would threaten Minnesota's water, <a href="https://www.minnpost.com/community-voices/2019/05/line-3-pipeline-proposal-yet-another-abuse-against-native-americans/" target="_blank">impose on treaty rights</a> and wreck the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change" target="_self">climate</a>. But they're not going to take action without hearing from thousands of people from all corners of Minnesota and from across the country.</p><p>In April, Donald Trump <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/trumps-executive-order-would-make-it-harder-to-block-pipelines" target="_blank">signed two executive orders</a> aimed at gutting clean water protections, silencing people's voices and making it easier for fossil fuel companies to build dangerous <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/pipelines" target="_self">pipelines</a> like Line 3. These executive orders and the big win in Oregon are clear signs that our strategy is working. Nationwide, people-powered resistance is raising the bar for climate leadership and keeping fossil fuels in the ground.</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTU1MTUxOS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTU5NjUwOTY3Mn0.EVqN-ml0eWDGjQOnvCTvGwKbK19G_tbJxEUHQUR30so/img.jpg?width=980" id="be3e6" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="ee713013ab636e6f4d760ad79cfa5777" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Photo credit: Emma Fiala
<p>The <a href="https://www.stopline3.org/issues" target="_blank">Line 3 pipeline</a> would cross over 200 bodies of water in Minnesota, including two crossings of the iconic Mississippi River. Allowing Line 3 to move forward would put Indigenous rights, precious water and the climate at deadly risk. Pipeline owner Enbridge wants to force Line 3 from Alberta to Wisconsin through the sacred wild rice beds and treaty territory of the Anishinaabe people, crossing multiple Canadian provinces and three U.S. states.</p><p>Gov. Walz and Lt. Gov. Flanagan have shown willingness to question Line 3's permits before, but they've yet to take a definitive stand against the pipeline and commit to stopping it. Walz has said that Line 3 needs a "social permit" in order to be built — so now it's the job of the indigenous and climate justice movements to make it clear that the public is strongly opposed to this tar sands project.</p><p>Thousands of people have already signed petitions, made calls to the governor's office, and shown up in person to urge Gov. Walz and Lt. Gov. Flanagan to "<a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23StopLine3" target="_blank">#StopLine3</a>" since they took office earlier this year, but more pressure is still needed. Oil Change is joining local partners in Minnesota and other national groups to make one thing very clear: Climate leadership in Minnesota means that Line 3 must be canceled for good.</p><p><a href="https://act.priceofoil.org/sign/stop-line-3-walz/?t=5&ak_proof=1&akid=23474%2E397288%2Es5DYnT" target="_blank">Click here to send a message to Minnesota's leaders — Line 3 must never be built, and real leadership means standing with the people against Big Oil's dirty tar sands.</a></p><p>In light of <a href="https://theintercept.com/2018/10/09/un-report-climate-change-fossil-fuels/" target="_blank">reports on what's needed</a> to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, preventing tar sands oil from being extracted and burned is <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/18/business/climate-us-coal-mining/index.html" target="_blank">more crucial than ever</a>. Our new report on U.S. extraction, released in January, makes it clear that <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2019/01/16/report-drilling-towards-disaster/?ak_proof=1&akid=20636.0.2sFtDj&rd=1&t=9" target="_blank">continued oil and gas production could wreck the world's chances of achieving climate goals</a>. It's time for a rapid and just phase-out of fossil fuel extraction if we're going to meet these goals, and that starts with rejecting dirty projects of the past like Line 3, and investing in real, community-led solution for a clean-energy future that respects Indigenous rights and Mother Earth.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Who Is Gov. Tim Walz and Why Is He So Important for the Climate? <a href="https://twitter.com/Tim_Walz?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Tim_Walz</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/GovTimWalz?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@GovTimWalz</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/lakotalaw?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@lakotalaw</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/IENearth?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ienearth</a><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/climatechange?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#climatechange</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/minnesota?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#minnesota</a><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/tarsands?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#tarsands</a><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/pipelines?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#pipelines</a><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/water?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#water</a><br> <a href="https://t.co/gSITiycTJD">https://t.co/gSITiycTJD</a></p>— EcoWatch (@EcoWatch) <a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/status/1103296102151999488?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 6, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2019/05/23/people-power-can-stop-line-3-pipeline/" target="_blank">Oil Change International</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Dirty Pipelines Are Bad Investments and a Reputational Risk for Banks ›
- New York Rejects Williams Pipeline Over Water, Climate Concerns - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
U.S. Oil and Gas Industry Is Drilling Us Towards Climate Disaster
16 January 2019
Insights + Opinion
Oil rig operating next to a walk and bike way in the Signal Hill area of Los Angeles. Sarah Craig / Faces of Fracking / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
By Kelly Trout
As the 116th Congress commences, in the wake of dire reports from climate scientists, the debate over U.S. climate policies has taken a welcome turn towards bold solutions. Spurred on by grassroots pressure from Indigenous communities, the youth-led Sunrise Movement and communities from coast to coast fighting fossil fuel infrastructure, Capitol Hill is alive once again with policy proposals that edge towards the scale required to address the crisis we're in.
<p>A <a href="http://priceofoil.org/drilling-towards-disaster" target="_blank">new study</a> <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2019/01/16/report-u-s-oil-and-gas-expansion-threatens-to-unleash-climate-pollution-equivalent-to-nearly-1000-coal-plants/" target="_blank">released Wednesday</a> by Oil Change International and 17 partner organizations makes it clear that managing a rapid and equitable decline of U.S. fossil fuel production must be a core component of any comprehensive climate policy.</p><p>Here's a breakdown of what we find in the report:</p><h2>Existing Fossil Fuel Projects Are Too Much Already</h2><p>Previous <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2016/09/22/the-skys-limit-report/" target="_blank">analysis</a> of the global disconnect between fossil fuel industry plans and climate goals underlies our U.S. report. Existing oil and gas fields and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/coal">coal</a> mines around the world already contain enough carbon to push the world beyond the goals of the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/paris-agreement">Paris agreement</a>—and well beyond 1.5 degrees Celsius (°C) of temperature rise (Figure 1). There is already no room for new fossil fuel development anywhere in the world. Meeting the Paris agreement goals requires stopping new exploration and extraction projects and managing the decline of the fossil fuel industry over the next few decades.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTA5MjI1Ny9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyNjc4NzMwMH0.qcnAKntoo5_b_OXjv0bDJ4shzI1jiZu4g-HW2HiJRzU/img.png?width=980" id="14add" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9be46e0afbf2599d20d5d0b86dcacd4e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
</p><p>The U.S., as one of the world's largest extractors and emitters of fossil fuels—and as a wealthy country with the resources to manage a rapid and just transition to renewable energy—should be moving first and fastest to phase out fossil fuel production. Yet …<br></p><h2>… U.S. Oil and Gas Extraction Is Rapidly Expanding</h2><p>Our <a href="http://priceofoil.org/drilling-towards-disaster" target="_blank">analysis</a> shows that the U.S. is set to drive nearly 60 percent of global <em>growth</em> in oil and gas supply between now and 2030—expanding production by four times the amount of any other country (Figure 4). By contrast, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)'s recent <em>Special Report on 1.5°C of Global Warming</em> warns that the world <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/summary-for-policy-makers/" target="_blank">needs to cut carbon emissions nearly in half by 2030</a> to keep warming within that limit.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTA5MjI2MC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzMDkyNjc1N30.56CkXXXYiTOauDYR7ZTmbFAxabTIvOysPgnh3NuIwyU/img.png?width=980" id="f0c2e" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="623325274f7b44fc1bc3806e859f68d6" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
</p><p>Between 2018 and 2050—the time span over which fossil fuel emissions should be zeroing out—new U.S. drilling projects could unleash 120 billion tons of new carbon pollution (Figure 5). If left unchecked, this would amount to the world's largest burst of new carbon emissions from oil and gas development through 2050. It would be equivalent to the lifetime carbon pollution of nearly 1,000 average U.S. coal-fired power plants.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTA5MjI2NC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0Mzc5NTQxOH0.ps7q8gQnnluO2k1Vf-Au9it76lXSmWaNrq0NHBouIMs/img.png?width=980" id="c94fb" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="bd0926e5c776e4c957b26927f077f796" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
</p><p>To summarize: At precisely the time when the world must rapidly decarbonize to avoid climate disaster, the U.S. is moving further and faster than any other country to expand oil and gas extraction.<br></p><p>If not stopped, this continued drilling spree would be a disaster not only for the climate but for communities on its front lines. Our analysis indicates that communities living atop and around the Permian Basin in Texas and New Mexico and the Appalachian Basin underlying Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia face the biggest onslaught of new drilling (Figure 9).</p><p>Upwards of 90 percent of the projected drilling expansion analyzed in our report would depend on <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fracking/">fracking</a>. This would bring with it <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/16102015/fracking-studies-overwhelmingly-indicate-threats-public-health-air-water-pollution" target="_blank">more air and water pollution</a>, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/25/pollutants-from-fracking-could-pose-health-risk-to-children-warn-researchers" target="_blank">health risks</a>, heavy trucks <a href="https://apps.publicintegrity.org/blowout/" target="_blank">taking over roadways</a> and <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/15082018/fracking-environmental-impacts-data-water-usage-oil-natural-gas-sand-pollution-study" target="_blank">growing competition for water</a>. It would mean more <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/05092018/standing-rock-tribe-dapl-dakota-access-pipeline-oil-spill-risk-report-army-corps" target="_blank">dangerous pipelines</a> threatening the sovereign land and water sources of Indigenous peoples. It would mean more communities being entangled in a volatile industry that has no viable future on a livable planet.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTA5MjI2OC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NzIwNDgyN30.HW4cmQp0PDmiEu7WbDDxzS5UiRoQud5plhvbNz2KvC4/img.png?width=980" id="82d0f" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="c0a60dc09e2050cfc477c66b33c633ba" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
</p><h2>What Does Real Climate Leadership Require?</h2><p>Over the past decade plus, community-led movements have come together across North America to fight new <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/pipelines">pipelines</a>, fracking rigs, export terminals and, increasingly, <a href="https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/07/01/state-regulators-struggle-keep-industry-pushes-multi-billion-dollar-fracked-petrochemical-projects" target="_blank">petrochemical plants</a>. They've won crucial victories: Case in point, while still being pushed by its Canadian backers and the Trump administration, the Keystone XL pipeline <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/09/climate/judge-blocks-keystone-pipeline.html" target="_blank">still isn't built</a>.</p><p>But too few U.S. politicians have used their own power to stop this spread of fossil fuel infrastructure and extraction. This is a major reason the oil and gas industry is in a position to drill us towards climate disaster. The industry is riding high off of decades of compounding policy decisions to <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/publications/papers/Grounded.pdf" target="_blank">lease federal and state lands and waters</a> for extraction, to approve permits for new wells, pipelines and other infrastructure, to leave fracking <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/stories/we-could-do-lot-more-regulate-fracking" target="_blank">woefully unregulated</a>, to <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2017/10/03/dirty-energy-dominance-us-subsidies/" target="_blank">maintain billions of dollars in taxpayer-funded subsidies</a>, and, at the end of 2015, to <a href="https://apps.publicintegrity.org/blowout/us-energy-dominance/" target="_blank">lift the four-decade-long ban</a> on crude oil exports.</p><p>The U.S. is now the world's largest oil and gas producer and, <a href="https://apps.publicintegrity.org/blowout/" target="_blank">increasingly</a>, dumping our excess oil and gas into global markets, which drives down prices and undermines policies aimed at reducing demand for fossil fuels.</p><p>This <a href="http://priceofoil.org/drilling-towards-disaster" target="_blank">report</a> should be a wake-up call for elected officials and policymakers at all levels of U.S. government who consider themselves to be climate leaders. Real climate leadership requires decisively saying "no" to further expansion of the fossil fuel industry while enthusiastically saying "yes" to a <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/renewable-energy/">renewable energy</a> transition on the pace and scale of a Green New Deal.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTA5MjI3My9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0MTMwMjIyNH0.actLA-2frzVob6gb-5ZLlmJnfAkYRIlML_qNs23yYj4/img.png?width=980" id="ed819" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="5ef66e60f9f2be21e8171457b5aef0db" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
</p><p>Our report distills this into a five-point checklist for U.S. officials:<br></p><ol class="ee-ol"><li>Ban new leases or permits for new fossil fuel exploration, production and infrastructure (and reject existing proposals in the meantime);</li><li>Plan for the phase-out of existing fossil fuel projects in a way that prioritizes environmental justice;</li><li>End subsidies and other public finance for the fossil fuel industry;</li><li>Champion a Green New Deal that ensures a just transition to 100 percent renewable energy; and</li><li>Reject the influence of fossil fuel money over U.S. energy policy.</li></ol><p>Every decision around a new fossil fuel lease, permit, subsidy or setback is an opportunity for U.S. politicians to stop fossil fuel expansion and champion a just transition to an economy powered by clean energy. The U.S. fossil fuel industry is gearing up to swing a giant wrecking ball through global climate goals. U.S. politicians cannot afford to stand by and let them … or worse yet, help swing it.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="26d63" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3T0KZE1576663290"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1047097654486786048" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Trump’s NAFTA Replacement Ignores Climate Change, Favors Fossil Fuel Interests https://t.co/E67mHORPoV https://t.co/u6EnWCdYym</div> — Renewable Search (@Renewable Search)<a href="https://twitter.com/RenewableSearch/statuses/1047097654486786048">1538482509.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2019/01/16/us-oil-and-gas-industry-is-drilling-us-towards-climate-disaster/" target="_blank">Oil Change International</a>.</em><br></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Oil Spill Continuing for 14 Years Could Become Nation's Worst Environmental Disaster
02 January 2019
Insights + Opinion
WWLTV / YouTube screenshot
By Andy Rowell
It may be a New Year, but there is an old oil spill that keeps on spilling. The trouble is that you will probably have never have heard about the spill.
But you need to know. Because, for more than 14 years, some 10,000 to 30,000 gallons of oil have leaked daily from a sunken oil rig owned by Taylor Energy into the Gulf of Mexico, about 12 miles south of the mouth of the Mississippi River.
<p>The disaster began way back in September 2004, when the company's oil platform, known as MC-20 Saratoga, was destroyed by Hurricane Ivan. Although the company contained some of the pollution caused by the loss of the platform, it did not stop all the leaks.</p><p>Unless the oil spill is stopped, the sunken rig could carry on leaking for 100 years, becoming America's worst environmental disaster. Even now, if you take the high end of the leak estimate, the site may have released an estimated 150 million gallons of oil. This is silently creeping towards the estimated 200 million gallons spilled by <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/bp">BP</a> during the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010.</p><p>Back in November last year, the U.S. Coast Guard directed Taylor Energy to implement a new containment plan which "must eliminate the surface sheen and avoid the deficiencies associated with prior containment systems." In theory the company could be fined $40,000 a day for failing to comply.</p><p>As you would expect, the company responsible for the spill, Taylor Energy not only disputes the figures concerning the leaks, but even whether it is to blame for the leak itself. Over the years it has tried to dismiss the leak as nothing more than a mere "<a href="https://www.nola.com/environment/2018/12/coast-guard-and-taylor-energy-disagree-over-source-of-14-year-gulf-oil-leak.html" target="_blank">trickle</a>." That is hardly surprising because it could cost an estimated $1 billion to fix.</p><p>The bottom line is that this a slow unseen disaster that could have been stopped years ago. As NOLA reports, some six years ago, Skytruth, an environmental group based in Shepherdstown, measured the oil sheen coming from the platform at over 20 miles long and urged the authorities to act. However, it was not until 2016 that the U.S. authorities <a href="https://www.nola.com/environment/index.ssf/2017/07/federal_damage_assessment_for.html" target="_blank">began investigating</a> the ongoing pollution.</p><p>Dustin Renaud, communications director for the <a href="https://healthygulf.org" target="_blank">Gulf Restoration Network</a> told <a href="https://www.nola.com/environment/2018/11/coast-guard-orders-taylor-energy-to-stop-14-year-oil-leak.html" target="_blank">NOLA</a>, "The time to clean this up was 14 years ago. Taylor Energy has shown nothing but negligence all this time."</p><p>He is rightly not the only one concerned about what is going on. Writing in <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/28/worst-oil-disaster-youve-never-heard-of-taylor-energy-gulf-of-mexico?utm_term=RWRpdG9yaWFsX0d1YXJkaWFuVG9kYXlVUy0xODEyMjg%3D&utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GuardianTodayUS&CMP=GTUS_email&fbclid=IwAR3qKco91mgaAARlrbal8H5XhNi2UjFXlUps2wRuCdWG4JVdm03ZdPXzODw" target="_blank">The Guardian</a> at the end of last year, Janis Searles Jones, the CEO of <a href="https://oceanconservancy.org/" target="_blank">Ocean Conservancy</a> and Philippe Cousteau, from <a href="http://earthecho.org" target="_blank">EarthEcho International</a>, said the thought of the spill carrying on for decades is a "nightmare scenario that should terrify anyone who cares about the health of the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife">wildlife</a> and people who live along the Gulf coast."</p><p>Taylor Energy's tricks continue. Just before Christmas, according to <a href="https://www.nola.com/environment/2018/12/taylor-energy-sues-contractor-chosen-to-fix-its-14-year-old-oil-leak.html" target="_blank">NOLA</a>, "The company <a href="https://www.nola.com/business/2018/12/taylor-energy-sues-to-block-order-to-contain-14-year-old-oil-leak-in-gulf-of-mexico.html" target="_blank">filed a federal lawsuit</a> in New Orleans asking the court to toss out a recent <a href="https://www.nola.com/environment/2018/11/coast-guard-orders-taylor-energy-to-stop-14-year-oil-leak.html" target="_blank">Coast Guard order to contain the leak</a>." The company said that "containing the leak is unnecessary."</p><p>And the ongoing spill has not stopped the <a href="https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/417905-trumps-half-baked-offshore-drilling-plan-is-not-safe" target="_blank">pro-oil Trump</a> administration attempting to open vast amounts of <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/offshore-oil-drilling">offshore areas for drilling</a>.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="d9b1b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="BD0KN81576662838"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1054457420083351553" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">The Largest U.S. #Oil Spill You've Probably Never Heard of Is Still Leaking After 14 Years @skytruth… https://t.co/2zcNw2GmUG</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/1054457420083351553">1540237214.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2019/01/02/15-year-old-oil-spill-could-become-bigger-than-deepwater-horizon/" target="_blank">Oil Change International</a>.</em><br></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
International Energy Agency
By Greg Muttitt
The release of the World Energy Outlook (WEO) 2018 on Monday marked another missed opportunity for the International Energy Agency (IEA) to provide a roadmap to Paris success.
Governments and investors alike have been calling on the IEA to help guide them towards achievement of the Paris goals. Two years ago, the IEA itself proposed updating its climate scenario to match the ambition of the Paris goals, and also gave its updated scenarios a cameo in the WEO 2017.
<p>The IEA has backtracked, however, removing any reference to the higher-ambition scenarios, or to the 1.5 degree Celsius (°C) goal. This comes just a month after the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a <a href="http://report.ipcc.ch/sr15/pdf/sr15_spm_final.pdf" target="_blank">powerful report</a> showing both the critical importance of limiting warming to 1.5°C, and pathways for doing so.</p><p>Following a summer of particularly devastating <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change">climate</a> impacts, with unprecedented heat waves across much of the world, the IEA has opted for promoting the energy status quo. And 11 months after the <a href="http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2017/12/12/world-bank-group-announcements-at-one-planet-summit" target="_blank">World Bank Group</a> decided to end financing for oil and gas extraction, the WEO 2018<em> </em>instead calls for expanded investment in oil, gas and even <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/coal">coal</a>.</p><p><strong>Memories of Leadership</strong></p><p>The IEA has proven that it can be a leader in steering energy decisions towards achievement of climate goals. When it first published its "450 Scenario" (450S) in 2008, the IEA was ahead of the curve. That scenario—designed to give a 50 percent chance of keeping warming to 2°C above pre-industrial levels—reflected the goals of the more progressive governments at the time. </p><p>But climate science has since indicated that even 2°C is <a href="http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/sb/eng/inf01.pdf" target="_blank">dangerous</a>—reiterated in last month's IPCC <a href="http://report.ipcc.ch/sr15/pdf/sr15_spm_final.pdf" target="_blank">report</a>. It was for this reason that governments decided in 2015 to increase their ambition, committing in Paris to pursue efforts to keep warming to 1.5°C, and in any case to hold warming well below 2°C.</p><p>At first, the IEA seemed to take this on board, as we explained in a recent <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2018/10/31/explainer-iea-scenarios-and-the-paris-goals/" target="_blank">blog</a>. In the 2016 edition of the WEO, the IEA recognized that the 450S was not in line with the new Paris goals. It proposed developing two new scenarios, one aiming for "well below 2°C" (WB2), and one for 1.5°C.</p><p>The German government commissioned and funded a full exposition of the WB2 Scenario, published in a <a href="https://webstore.iea.org/insights-series-2018-perspectives-for-the-energy-transition-investment-needs-for-a-low-carbon-energy-system" target="_blank">stand-alone report</a> in March 2017. Many hoped then that the 2017 WEO, published in November of that year, would use this work to update its ambition to reflect the Paris goals. It was <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2017/11/14/international-energy-agency-undermining-governments-climate-goals/" target="_blank">not to be</a>.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODgyODE4NS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMjU1MTE1NX0.IC80KaqvDSR2XcOvrUm9O-mxYmFqN3kmKflRKSWaQ-s/img.jpg?width=980" id="ee059" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="c40cb5f0f04e71b15274c0c55cbbb687" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
</p><p>In WEO 2017, the IEA replaced the 450S with a new "<a href="https://www.iea.org/weo/weomodel/sds/" target="_blank">Sustainable Development Scenario</a>" (SDS), with the welcome addition of goals on energy access and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/air-pollution">air pollution</a>. But on climate change, the SDS maintained the pre-Copenhagen ambition level of the 450S. As the graph shows, the emissions pathways of the scenarios were identical. WEO 2017 only briefly mentioned the WB2 Scenario, and did not mention the 1.5°C Scenario at all.<br></p><p>Now, the new 2018 edition of the WEO omits reference to the WB2 Scenario as well, and fails to address 1.5°C at all.</p><p><strong>Missed Goals</strong></p><p>The WEO 2018 states that the SDS "is fully aligned with the Paris Agreement's goal of holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C." That statement omits the other half of the <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf" target="_blank">Paris</a> goals, which are in full:</p><p>Holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C.</p><p>As for the "well below 2°C" part of the goals, the IEA claims that the SDS will lead to 1.7 to 1.8°C of warming. But how can a different result arise from the same emissions pathway that led to a 2°C outcome in the 450S? The answer is that the IEA has changed its assumption about what happens after 2040, beyond the scope of its own scenarios.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODgyODI1My9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzODAzMDkwMn0.vexbhDmNZeSbqVT7Do4XnSC8hd4Po3S8TRAUG26K0OE/img.jpg?width=980" id="6f319" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="35132ea923feaa45b8999a849cef93b2" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
</p><p>The IEA makes the 1.7 to 1.8°C claim by <a href="https://www.iea.org/weo/weomodel/sds/" target="_blank">comparing</a> the SDS with scenarios that lead to that amount of warming. As the IEA's graph shows, those scenarios depend on large-scale use of negative emissions technologies later in the century—including technologies that have been considered in theory but never tried in practice. If achieving the Paris goals is predicated on the later availability of these technologies and they do not work out, emissions to that point will be irreversible and climate limits broken.</p><p>Previous editions of the WEO have warned that negative emissions are likely not feasible at this level: WEO 2016 stated, "Such a situation is vastly removed from the realities of the current energy system, and the prospect is remote from today's perspective." WEO 2017 also cautioned that "all such technologies face severe technical, economic and resource constraints." And climate scientists have expressed growing concerns about reliance on negative emissions, as discussed in our recent <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2018/10/31/explainer-iea-scenarios-and-the-paris-goals/" target="_blank">blog</a>.</p><p>In contrast, the new WEO 2018 describes negative emissions technologies as one of the "important sectors for innovation," and gives no warning about the dangers of reliance on them.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-youtube">
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="57633607e382266ddb9add1e691d066f"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/YK-iLUH48II?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">World Energy Outlook 2018</small>
<small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">
<a href="https://youtu.be/YK-iLUH48II" target="_blank">youtu.be</a>
</small>
</p>
<p><strong>Misguided</strong><br></p><p>All of this matters because, as the new WEO puts it, "Robust data and well-grounded projections about the future are essential foundations for today's policy choices." Scenario data and projections serve as a guide to the future, ideally to enable good decisions.</p><p>Without information about how to do it, it will be hard for governments to "pursue efforts" to keep warming to 1.5°C.</p><p>Investors too are increasingly using climate scenarios to test the robustness of their portfolios. They are vital tools for delivering the <a href="https://www.fsb-tcfd.org/publications/final-recommendations-report/" target="_blank">Taskforce on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures</a>' recommendations and for the <a href="http://www.climateaction100.org/" target="_blank">Climate Action 100+</a> initiative.</p><p>The new WEO states that:</p><p>Continued investment in oil and gas supply, however, remains essential even in the Sustainable Development Scenario to 2040, as decline rates at existing fields leave a substantial gap that needs to be filled with new upstream projects.</p><p>As Oil Change International's <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2016/09/22/the-skys-limit-report/" target="_blank">research</a> has shown, investment in new oil and gas fields—beyond those that are already in operation—is not consistent with the Paris goals. The IEA is able to make the contrary claim for the SDS only because the SDS falls short of the Paris goals.</p><p>This is a crucial omission. Based on such projections, governments may continue licensing new oil and gas, locking in their future emissions, while failing to plan for an orderly just transition for workers. Investors may understate the risks associated with the energy transition, leading to future economic disruption.</p><p><strong>More Fossil Fuels</strong></p><p>The vast majority of WEO 2018, like in previous editions, is focused on the "New Policies Scenario" (NPS), which would lead to around 3°C of warming. By comparison, the SDS gets only one paragraph in the six-page summary.</p><p>The IEA has said before (in WEO 2017), if the future turns out like the NPS, "this will not be a sign of success," adding that, "Success for the WEO is about helping countries to achieve the long-term energy and related goals that they have chosen."</p><p>But since the NPS is so centrally promoted, it is the NPS that decision makers use as the default guide. As we showed in our <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2018/04/04/off-track-the-iea-and-climate-change/" target="_blank">Off Track</a> report, the NPS' demand projections have been used by governments and investors to support damaging projects from Australian coal mines to Arctic oil drilling. This is why Oil Change International calls for the goals-based scenario—which the IEA says is the one it wants—to be made the central one in the WEO.</p><p>Furthermore, in the new WEO, the IEA repeatedly advocates for <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fossil-fuels">fossil fuel</a> investment in line with the NPS. This investment will help create that very future that the IEA says it does not want. On oil:</p><p>Today's flow of new upstream projects appears to be geared to the possibility of an imminent slowdown in fossil fuel demand, but in the New Policies Scenario this could well lead to a shortfall in supply.</p><p>We estimate that around 16 billion barrels of new conventional crude oil resources would need to be approved each year between now and 2025 to avoid any potential "mismatch" between supply and demand. However, the average annual level of new resources approved in the three years since the oil price fall in 2014 was around 8 billion barrels. … The level of conventional crude oil approvals therefore needs to double if there is to be a smooth matching between supply and demand.</p><p>Much of today's media coverage can be expected to focus on the IEA's projection that (in the NPS) oil demand will not peak until after 2040. This narrative of ongoing future demand will also drive ongoing investment in more oil.</p><p>The same is true of gas: The WEO states that "building up infrastructure … requires conscious choices in favour of natural gas." It urges governments and companies "to ensure that adequate and cost-effective investment in new supply keeps gas as competitive as possible with other fuels," in other words reinforcing gas against competition from <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/renewable-energy/">renewables</a>.</p><p>Oil Change International research has <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2017/11/09/burning-the-gas-bridge-fuel-myth/" target="_blank">found</a> that there is no room for new gas development while achieving the Paris goals: Gas cannot be considered a "bridge fuel," as some claim.</p><p>Remarkably, the WEO also calls for increased investment in coal mining, especially in China and India, with $1 trillion of investment in new mining capacity over the period to 2040, as worldwide coal demand increases in the NPS until at least 2040: "Capital expenditures are needed along the value chain to sustain existing and to establish new mining operations, as well as to build railway and port infrastructure to connect new or expanding mining regions to coal importers."</p><p><strong>Time to Change</strong></p><p>Oil Change International believes the IEA has a significant opportunity for leadership, an opportunity that it regrettably missed in WEO 2018. It would in fact be easy for the IEA to become a climate champion by updating the SDS to match the Paris goals and by making that the central scenario in the WEO.</p><p>Decision makers—political and financial alike—are demanding the tools to implement their policy commitments and plan for success in a rapidly changing energy landscape. It is an opportunity that can't be ignored and, as the IEA faces increasing public pressure in 2019, calls for this increased ambition will only grow.</p><p>With time to spare to incorporate the IPCC Special Report, the mounting political and investor concerns, and the moral imperative of action on the heels of a year of devastating climate impacts, the 2019 WEO must step up high-profile ambition or risk becoming irrelevant in a world urgently demanding pathways to success.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="6f1db" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="T1GZQZ1576661971"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="976975594259873792" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Global Carbon Emissions Rise for First Time Since 2014 https://t.co/Oi1UefIhFr @Connect4Climate @350</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/976975594259873792">1521764107.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
David Speier / NurPhoto / Getty Images
By Andy Rowell
Over the last week, the German Police have deployed thousands of officers, backed up by water cannons and armored vehicles, to evict hundreds of climate activists trying to defend the last remnants of an ancient forest in Germany from being destroyed by RWE, which wants to expand the biggest open coal mine in Europe.
<p>And Wednesday this brutal eviction ended in tragedy when it caused the loss of life of a young blogger and journalist, called Steffan. He reportedly fell from a suspension bridge between two cabins which had been built by <a href="https://reporterre.net/Il-s-appelait-Steffen-A-Hambach-un-blogueur-militant-chute-mortellement-lors-de" target="_blank">activists high up</a> in the trees to try and prevent the ancient 12,000 year old and much-loved Hambach forest—known locally as Hambi—being cut down.</p><p>After Steffan's death, tensions were running high. <a href="https://hambachforest.org/blog/" target="_blank">Last night activists</a> pasted a statement that: "We are deeply shaken. All our thoughts and desires are with him. Our compassion goes to all the relatives, friends and people who feel concerned. We urge the police and RWE to leave the forest immediately and stop this dangerous operation. No further lives may be endangered."</p><p>The fight between RWE and climate activists has been going on for years and has become of the defining battles of fossil fuel extraction of our time. Activists are arguing RWE has to stop mining dirty coal to protect the oak and hornbeam forest, home to protected species such as bats, frogs and dormouse. They are also trying to prevent wider climate change too.</p><p>The Hambach <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/the-battle-for-villages-and-forests-in-germanys-coal-country/a-39964913" target="_blank">open-pit mine</a> is already vast: some 85 square kilometers or 33 square miles and a huge open scar on the landscape. One of the largest man-made holes in Europe, it is half the size of the U.S. capital of Washington DC. Most has already been ripped up and dug for lignite or brown coal, an especially dirty and carbon intensive fossil fuel. Of the 4,100 hectares that were there origin ally, some 90 percent has already been destroyed and only 200 hectares remain.</p><p>The tragedy could have been avoided. Like many other front-lines battles over fossil fuel extraction, it is a conflict that should not be taking place. We should not be expanding coal production. Steffan joins a list of people stretching back to Ken Saro-Wiwa in 1995, who have died fighting (or reporting on the fight) between Big Oil and Big Coal and those seeking to protect their land or the wider climate.</p><p>Undeterred by the protests and criticism, RWE belligerently plans to clear cut the forest next month and bull-doze two more villages: the 1000 year old village of Kerpen-Manheim and Morschenich. Four other villages have also been destroyed in the last thirty years, consumed by Germany's love of dirty coal. They were bulldozed for the "common good."</p><p>But the fight to protect the forest has been growing for years and has come to a head this week, with police trying to evict the protestors. Last Sunday, saw thousands of activists—some estimates say 9,000 people—march towards the woodland between<a href="https://www.dw.com/en/hambach-forest-police-clearing-treehouses-again-despite-sundays-mass-protests/a-45510700" target="_blank"> Cologne and Aachen</a> in support and solidarity.</p><p>Others remain in the treetops. One of them is Mux, who told DW: "The problem is that it's not only destroying the forest and nature here, as well as the place where people in this region live, it's also causing climate change. There are lots of people dying because of global climate change, which is caused here, so I think I have to use my privileges to stand against that. I have to do it because I can do it."</p><p>Another activist, Emil Freitag, from <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/hambach-forest-protesters-raise-spirits-of-treehouse-dwellers/a-45508557" target="_blank">Aktion Unterholz</a>, added: "It's not just about the forest, the forest is a symbol for climate justice and if we stop the eviction and the cutting of the forest, we can also stop the lignite mining in the area. That's what all this is about. We want Germany to stop coal mining immediately because it's the dirtiest form of power. So the forest is a kind of symbol."</p><p>He is not alone arguing that the forest is a symbol of the fight between dirty coal and a clean energy future. Andreas Büttgen of Buirer für Buir, a citizens' initiative from the nearby town of Buir, also saif: "The Hambach Forest—for us a symbol of a future-orientated society—now threatens to become a memorial for the destruction of our future."</p><p>And the figures back him up. Kai Niebert, head of environmental group, <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/hambach-forest-battleground-for-climate-action/a-45475705" target="_blank">Deutscher Naturschutzring</a>, argued that expanding the mine would make it almost impossible for Germany to meet its 2015 Paris agreement commitments. "There's around 1.5 billion tons of carbon under us here in the Hambach area," he said. "If it was burned, we would use up virtually all Germany's carbon budget, and that would be anything but a socially acceptable way to exit coal. It would mean all the other mines in Germany would have to close tomorrow."</p><p>After last night's tragedy, no one is sure what will now happen. In response to Steffan's death, the <a href="http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/hambacher-forst-nrw-regierung-setzt-raeumung-aus-a-1229020.html" target="_blank">North Rhine-Westphalian</a> state government has suspended the clearance "until further notice."</p><p>A petition signed by <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/hambach-forest-journalist-dies-after-fall-from-treehouse-bridge/a-" target="_blank">500,000 people</a> due to handed in today to North Rhine-Westphalia's state premier Armin Laschet calling for the state government to step in and save the forest, has been postponed.</p><p>If there is any good that can come out of Steffan's death it is that RWE should stop mining dirty coal. They should also stop clearing the forest immediately too and declare that this last remnant will never be cut down. And maybe they should rename this ancient beautiful forest of oaks and hornbeams after Steffan, too.</p><p> <em>Reposted with permission from our media associate </em><em><a href="http://priceofoil.org/2018/09/20/killed-by-coal-journalist-dies-in-clash-over-dirty-coal-in-germany/" target="_blank">Oil Change International</a>.</em></p>
Read More
Show Less
America Burns From Climate Change While Trump Officials Attend Climate Denial Conference
13 August 2018
Climate
The Ferguson Fire burns in the Sierra National Forest and Yosemite National Park on Aug. 10. Pacific Southwest Region 5 / CC BY 2.0
By Andy Rowell
The disconnect could not be greater. As wildfires raged across the U.S. last week, inflamed by climate change, Trump officials attended the America First Energy Conference, where delegates heard age-old fossil fuel arguments that, amongst others, carbon dioxide makes the planet greener and could not be creating a climate crisis.
<p>The conference comes after an unprecedented heat wave in the Northern hemisphere. Scientists are warning that this summer's heatwave is caused by climate change, which in turn has caused unprecedented temperatures and wildfires in Canada, Greece, Sweden and the U.S. Indeed this summer's heatwave was made more than twice as likely by <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jul/27/heatwave-made-more-than-twice-as-likely-by-climate-change-scientists-find" target="_blank">climate change</a>, according to a rapid assessment by scientists.</p><p>Some scientists are even warning that we are descending into "<a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/08/07/1810141115" target="_blank">hothouse earth</a>," where a series of positive feedback mechanisms could trigger even more extreme warming.</p><p>A record number of Americans now believe that humans are causing climate change, too. The latest survey by the <a href="http://closup.umich.edu/files/ieep-nsee-2018-spring-climate-belief.pdf" target="_blank">University of Michigan</a> Muhlenberg College revealed that "a record 60% of Americans now think that global warming is happening and that humans are at least partially responsible for the rising temperatures."</p><p>These high temperatures continue to cause <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/12/wildfires-more-than-100-us-six-new-blazes-erupt" target="_blank">massive wildfires</a> with more than 100 major active blazes in the U.S. right now. Some 30,000 personnel are battling wildfires that have devastated more than 1.6 million acres (648,000 hectares) of land.</p><p>Meanwhile, the climate dinosaurs continue as if nothing is happening. They <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-denier">deny the science</a> and evidence as the flames get ever closer.</p><p>The conference was organized by the leading climate denial think tank, Heartland Institute, which has been regurgitating the same climate denial old rubbish—what we now would now call "fake news"—for the last two decades. It has received significant funding from <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/exxon">Exxon</a> and the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/koch-brothers">Koch brothers</a> to do so.</p><p>But all their climate denial friends were there too, according to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-climatechange/at-america-first-energy-conference-solar-power-is-dumb-climate-change-is-fake-idUSKBN1KU1Y1" target="_blank">Reuters</a>, including speakers from JunkScience, the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, and the Center for Industrial Progress and officials from the U.S. Department of Interior and the White House.</p><p>The panels included sessions on "Carbon Taxes, Cap & Trade, and Other Bad Ideas," "Fiduciary Malpractice: The Sustainable Investment Movement," and "Why CO2 Emissions Are Not Creating a Climate Crisis."</p><p>Another one of the ludicrous conspiracy theories peddled at the conference was "that the United Nations puts out fake science about climate change to control the global energy market." Oh and they hate <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/renewable-energy/">renewable energy</a> too, calling <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wind">wind</a> and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/solar">solar</a> energy "dumb."</p><p>According to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-climatechange/at-america-first-energy-conference-solar-power-is-dumb-climate-change-is-fake-idUSKBN1KU1Y1" target="_blank">Reuters</a>, the U.S. officials who attended included White House special assistant Brooke Rollins, Interior Department Assistant Secretary Joe Balash, and Jason Funes, an assistant in the office of external affairs at Interior. All "praised the administration's moves to clear the way for oil industry activity."</p><p><a href="http://americafirstenergy.org/#close" target="_blank">Tim Huelskamp</a>, president and CEO of the Heartland Institute, closed the seminar by stating the person who had made the difference to the climate deniers was Donald Trump. "We have a president who has kept his promises," he said. "It proves that one man can make a difference." He called Trump "our last political chance at freedom."</p><p>And in many ways he is right. Trump represents the last chance for the fossil fuel industry to wreck this planet. What they call freedom, we call wildfires. When they see freedom, we see <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/sea-level-rise">sea level rise</a>.</p><p>Huelskamp told <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-climatechange/at-america-first-energy-conference-solar-power-is-dumb-climate-change-is-fake-idUSKBN1KU1Y1" target="_blank">Reuters</a>, "The leftist claims about sea level rise are overblown, overstated or frankly just wrong."</p><p>Ironically, the conference was held in New Orleans, which was once ravaged by Hurricane Katrina. As Reuters—not normally seen as left-wing conspiracy theorists—noted: "Evidence of sea level rise, however, is strewn across the state that hosted the conference."</p><p>The panel speakers are so blinkered in their climate denial they do not notice what is happening right now. They may look, but they cannot see. On the speaker's lectern was the strapline "freedom rising." Maybe someone should have just written "sea level rising" instead.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="d1311" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="6R0B651576663370"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="971943772803293184" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">At Least 20 Climate Change Deniers Lead Trump Team, POLITICO Reports https://t.co/angApWTJxF @IMPL0RABLE @American_Bridge</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/971943772803293184">1520564427.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2018/08/13/as-america-burns-from-climate-change-trump-officials-attend-denial-conference-to-discuss-why-climate-change-is-fake/" target="_blank">Oil Change International</a>.</em><br></p>
From Your Site Articles
- Trump: 'Ice Caps Were Going to Be Gone, But Now They're Setting ... ›
- At Least 20 Climate Change Deniers Lead Trump Team, POLITICO ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
By Andy Rowell
If Justin Trudeau didn't know before, he does now. If Canada's prime minister could blame ignorance before, he can't now.
Every day brings reports of new deaths and disasters as the intense heat wave which has gripped much of the Northern Hemisphere continues.
<p>The numbers do not lie. Some fifty dead in Greece, at least 44 dead in Japan, at least 70 dead in Canada. Sweden alight. Numerous other parts of the world are scorching, too.</p><p>Let's start with <a href="https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/greece-forest-fires-at-least-four-dead-as-country-declares-state-of-emergency-and-seeks-a3894556.html" target="_blank">Greece</a>. Many people awoke this morning to the distressing news that at least 50 people have been killed, including a six-month old baby and many children, with dozens more injured and hundreds rescued as devastating <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/wildfires-erupt-in-greece-2589562645.html">wildfires</a> swept through a small resort near Athens. The authorities have called a state of emergency, and has asked for international help.</p><p>Twenty-six people had reportedly died huddled together close to a beach in a town called Mati. Nikos Economopoulos, head of Greece's Red Cross, told the country's Skai TV, "They had tried to find an escape route but unfortunately these people and their kids didn't make it in time."</p><p>One Mati resident, <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/23/europe/athens-wildfires-intl/index.html" target="_blank">Kostas Laganos</a>, said that he escaped by diving into the sea: "Thankfully the sea was there and we went into the sea, because the flames were chasing us all the way to the water, it burned our backs and we dove into the water."</p><p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/23/greeks-urged-to-leave-homes-as-wildfires-spread-near-athens" target="_blank">Greek</a> authorities urged residents at the coast west of Athens to abandon their homes as the tinder dry conditions continued, with temperatures over 40°C (104°F).</p><p>Greece is not alone. Yesterday I blogged on the heatwave in <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2018/07/23/as-japan-begins-olympic-countdown-it-swelters-in-41-1-degrees-heat/" target="_blank">Japan</a>. Today, the country's weather agency has declared <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-44935152" target="_blank">the heatwave</a> a natural disaster, saying that at least 65 deaths had been recorded in the past week. Experts believe there will be many more.</p><p>Meanwhile <a href="https://www.thelocal.se/20180723/sweden-heatwave-hottest-july-in-at-least-260-years" target="_blank">in Sweden</a>, where the country is experiencing the hottest July for 260 years, the country has asked for international help to put out <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/the-arctic-is-burning-2587826571.html">wildfires in the Arctic</a>.</p><p><a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-44779367" target="_blank">In Canada</a>, the hot weather has reportedly caused the deaths of at least 70 people in Quebec alone. Earlier this month, in Ottawa, in Ontario, the humidity index—the method used there to measure the combined humidity level and temperature—hit 47°C (116.6°F) on July 2.</p><p>But the hot temperatures are back. Early this morning, the Canadian government issued another heat warning for the Montreal area, advising people that the so-called humidex values are expected to reach the high thirties.</p><p>"Heat warnings are issued when very high temperature or humidity conditions are expected to pose an elevated risk of heat illnesses, such as heat stroke or heat exhaustion," <a href="https://weather.gc.ca/warnings/report_e.html?qc67" target="_blank">it said</a>.</p><p>Parts of Canada too are alight. <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-columbia/article-wildfires-expected-to-intensify-this-week-in-both-bc-and-ontario/" target="_blank">As of last weekend</a>, there were more than one hundred fires burning in British Columbia, and a further 118 burning in Ontario, with 29 of them considered "out of control."</p><p>Finally, some in the media are waking up. One BBC journalist tweeted: "Climate change. It's here. It's catastrophic. This month alone: — '50 dead' in Greece wildfires — Arctic Circle ablaze — Japan heatwave, flooding and landslides kill hundreds — Record temperatures in Algeria, Morocco, Oman — Drought squeezes US lemons."</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="466bd" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="KPTVCB1576662441"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1021652233543331841" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Climate change. It's here. It's catastrophic.
This month alone:
— '50 dead' in Greece wildfires
— Arctic Circle a… https://t.co/mEQ5iMMupj</div> — James Cook (@James Cook)<a href="https://twitter.com/BBCJamesCook/statuses/1021652233543331841">1532415848.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>But not, it seems, Justin Trudeau, who is asleep in the heat. All he has to do is switch on the news to see what is happening. As people die across the globe, his government was searching for a buyer for the controversial Trans Mountain pipeline, which will triple the amount of dirty <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/tar-sands">tar sands</a> exported from Alberta to Vancouver to <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/trans-mountain-pipeline-ownership-1.4757351" target="_blank">890,000</a> barrels a day.<br></p><p>The pipeline has become the most toxic political issue in Canada. It is vehemently opposed by the government of British Columbia and by a coalition of First Nations, community and environmental groups.</p><p>Despite all the warnings about the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change">climate</a> impact of the pipeline, Trudeau's government offered to buy it from Kinder Morgan after the company froze investment, to keep construction continuing. They had hoped to sell the pipeline quickly to a new buyer.</p><p>But that has not happened and no buyer could be found before the deadline, which was on Sunday. So Trudeau's government has no option now but to be the full-time owner of the tar sands pipeline.</p><p>As the <a href="https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2018/07/22/trans-mountain-pipeline-deadline-passes-ottawa-fails-to-find-new-buyer.html" target="_blank">Canadian Star</a> stated: "But with that date set to pass without a deal, it was expected the pipeline company will now take Ottawa's $4.5-billion offer to purchase the project to its shareholders."</p><p>On Saturday, the day before the deadline, protesters amassed in Parliament Hill wearing hazardous-materials suits and carrying a fake pipeline. One of the protesters, Aaron Thornell, said, "I think that this investment sets us down a completely wrong and long path that will not lead to the [clean energy] transition. Another, <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/trans-mountain-pipeline-kinder-morgan-deal-deadline-federal-liberal-government-justin-trudeau-canada-1.4756653" target="_blank">Pat Taylor</a>, added, "It's just crazy. And you know, I have a son. I think about my grandchildren to come and it just breaks my heart."</p><p>The formal sale now looks likely to be approved next month, or in September. It is undoubtable that more people will die from the global heatwave in the meantime. But that won't worry Trudeau who is on holiday. Ironically, in British Columbia.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="260d9" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="T6PZQ91576662441"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="999832538041417728" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">236 Civil Society Groups to Justin Trudeau: 'The Time for Investment in New Fossil Fuel Infrastructure Is Over'… https://t.co/MYATeBUbyc</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/999832538041417728">1527213627.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2018/07/24/as-more-die-in-the-global-heatwave-canada-invests-in-climate-disaster/" target="_blank">Oil Change International</a>.</em><br></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Donald Trump and Russia's President Vladimir Putin arrive to attend a joint press conference after a meeting at the Presidential Palace in Helsinki, on July 16, 2018. YURI KADOBNOV / AFP / Getty Images
By Andy Rowell
A "traitor." "Putin's Poodle." "Open Treason." These are just some of the harsh headlines to greet Trump after yesterday's summit in Helsinki with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The papers back home were indignant with rage. The New York Times called Trump Putin's "lackey." The paper said that this was the summit that Putin had dreamed of for eighteen years, and Trump had willingly obliged.
<p>The <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/trump-just-put-russia-first/2018/07/16/8391f9aa-8914-11e8-a345-a1bf7847b375_story.html?utm_term=.5a877642b833" target="_blank">Washington Post's</a> bruising editorial headline was "Trump just colluded with Russia. Openly."</p><p>The paper thundered "Trump appeared to align himself with the Kremlin against American law enforcement before the Russian ruler and a global audience … Trump in fact was openly colluding with the criminal leader of a hostile power."</p><p>It was not just the press who criticized the president, as he also received cross-party political condemnation.</p><p>Senate Minority Leader <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/16/trump-putin-latest-news-updates-republicans-democrat-response-treason" target="_blank">Chuck Schumer</a> said in a statement: "For the president of the United States to side with President Putin against American law enforcement, American defense officials, and American intelligence agencies is thoughtless, dangerous and weak. The president is putting himself over our country."</p><p>John Brennan, the CIA director under Barack Obama, said: "Donald Trump's press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of 'high crimes & misdemeanors.' It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump's comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin," he tweeted.</p><p>Arizona Republican senator John McCain added it was "one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president in memory … It is clear that the summit in Helsinki was a tragic mistake … no prior president has ever abased himself more abjectly before a tyrant."</p><p>The condemnation is everywhere, filling column inches after column inches in the press. Another headline in the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-is-a-putin-fanboy-someday-well-know-why/2018/07/16/f2b1ef66-892d-11e8-85ae-511bc1146b0b_story.html?utm_term=.6f96e9a221a5" target="_blank">Post</a> stated "Trump is a Putin Fanboy: Someday we will know why."</p><p>There are many reasons why Trump is a "fanboy" of Putin. And we can guess why. As well as finding common cause to dismiss the evidence of Russian meddling in the flawed election he won, the egotistical narcissistic hard men have much in common, too. And one of those issues is oil.</p><p>As one <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/16/putin-suggests-russia-and-us-could-work-together-to-regulate-oil-price.html" target="_blank">news outlet</a>, CNBC, put it: "Russian President Vladimir Putin suggested that Moscow and Washington could cooperate to soothe volatility in the oil market that has roiled the industry in recent years."</p><p>Putin said at the conference: "I think that we as a major oil and gas power, and the United States as a major oil and gas power as well, we could work together on regulation of international markets, because neither of us is actually interested in the plummeting of the prices."</p><p>Putin added: "But nor are we interested in driving prices up because it will drain a lot of juices from all other sectors of the economy, so we do have space for cooperation here."</p><p>Indeed the meteorologist Eric Holthaus, writing in <a href="https://grist.org/article/trump-and-putin-are-clearly-in-cahoots-over-propping-up-fossil-fuels/" target="_blank">Grist</a>, also picks up the oil theme: "There's no way to understand Trump's relationship with Russia without putting oil and climate politics at its center" he wrote. "If you're upset at Trump and Putin for undermining our democracy, just wait until you find out that they are likely colluding to destroy our planet's climate system, too."</p><p>He added: "After Monday's meeting in Helsinki, it's clearer than ever that we are at a crucial moment in our American democracy as well as in the biggest and most important fight we've ever had—the fight against <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change">climate change</a>."</p><p>Holthaus continued: "Russia is a petrostate, and the U.S. is now, too. In fact, the two countries are the world's largest non-OPEC oil producers, extracting nearly as much as all OPEC countries combined … By working together, they can keep the global economy swimming in oil and gas."</p><p>The two hardmen are propped up by <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fossil-fuels">fossil fuels</a> and our addiction to oil and gas. So Holthaus finishes by arguing, "The quicker we resolve to move away from our dependence on fossil fuels, the quicker Putin and Trump will become powerless."</p><p>And that can only be a good thing. For all of us.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="5c603" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="GGJ7XR1576663386"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="833799675123789824" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Steel Made by Russian Company Tied to Putin Used in Keystone XL and Dakota Access Pipelines https://t.co/K0d4hinZRu @OccupyHouston</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/833799675123789824">1487628308.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2018/07/17/traitor-trump-colludes-with-putin-over-oil/" target="_blank">Oil Change International</a>.</em><br></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
U.S. Sees Steady Solar Growth Despite Trump, But China Slashes Subsidies
18 June 2018
Renewable Energy
Minnesota Senate Building solar array ribbon-cutting ceremony on May 10. MN Administration / CC BY 2.0
By Andy Rowell
Donald Trump can't stop the sun from shining. Despite the climate denier's pro-fossil fuel agenda, and despite his tariffs on imported solar panels, the U.S. still installed more solar than any other source of energy in the first quarter of the year.
The amount of solar power installed in the U.S. climbed 13 percent in the first quarter, according to the trade body, the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA).
<p>The trade body said that solar accounted for 55 percent of all new power generation, beating new <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wind">wind</a> and natural gas turbines for a second straight quarter.</p><p>The SEIA expects new installations this year to be roughly the same as last year, despite Trump's antics with tariffs that are expected to increase costs. The association said it expected 10.8 gigawatts of solar to be installed, rising to 14 gigawatts by 2024.</p><p>"Solar has become a common-sense option for much of the U.S., and is too strong to be set back for long, even in light of the tariffs," SEIA Chief Executive Officer <a href="ttps://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2018-06-12/solar-surpasses-gas-and-wind-as-biggest-source-of-new-u-s-power?__twitter_impression=true" target="_blank">Abigail Ross Hopper told Bloomberg</a>.</p><p>The Chinese solar industry, however, is now struggling after what is known as the "solar-coaster" where just as increased subsidies can signal a boom, removing them can lead to a downturn.</p><p>At the beginning of this month, the Chinese government announced that subsidies via feed in tariffs would be slashed, even though the country has been the largest solar installer for the last four years. Indeed, last year the country installed a whopping 55 gigawatts of solar power. This is more than five times the amount in the U.S. market.</p><p>According to the <a href="https://www.economist.com/business/2018/06/14/can-the-solar-industry-survive-without-subsidies" target="_blank">Economist</a>, some 20 GW of projects could now be scrapped in China, leading to a potential stall in the global solar market and huge market vulnerability. The only positive of this is as demand falls, the cost of panels could also fall too, making solar more economic in other countries.</p><p>So in the short term, Yvonne Liu, solar analyst at Bloomberg New Energy Finance, argues that "2018 is likely to be the first-ever year seeing negative annual [worldwide] installation growth."</p><p>But medium term, there is the prospect of Chinese manufacturers flooding the global market with panels, which could help solar compete globally.</p><p>The <a href="https://www.economist.com/business/2018/06/14/can-the-solar-industry-survive-without-subsidies" target="_blank">Economist</a><em> </em>reports that Bloomberg New Energy Finance believes that this fall in panel costs could mean that, in the longer term, "more markets may embrace solar … The cheaper solar gets, the more appealing it becomes, especially in poor countries struggling to satisfy rising energy demand."</p><p><a href="https://www.ozy.com/fast-forward/china-sends-solar-shivers-with-subsidy-cuts/87416" target="_blank">Nick Boyle</a>, chief executive of Lightsource BP, a leading solar developer, said about the Chinese move, "For us it is only good."</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="84ba7" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="06GJ3Q1576663178"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="990017785123233792" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Renewable Energy Dominates Early 2018 Power Plant Construction https://t.co/52VSzo9jID @RenewablesNews @cleantechnica</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/990017785123233792">1524873608.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2018/06/17/us-sees-steady-solar-growth-despite-trump-but-china-slashes-subsidies/" target="_blank">Oil Change International</a>.</em><br></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Canada Risks Billions in a 'Carbon Bubble' as Kinder Morgan Execs Get Big Bonuses
05 June 2018
Energy
Oil sands, Fort McMurray, Alberta on Nov. 11, 2010. eryn.rickard / CC BY 2.0
By Andy Rowell
Days after Justin Trudeau blew an estimated $15 billion of hard-earned Canadian taxpayer money on Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain pipeline, scientists are warning just how financially and ecologically stupid and short-sighted the investment was.
In a peer reviewed scientific paper published Monday, the scientists warn of the existence of a "carbon bubble," due to the plunging price of renewables and improved energy efficiency measures, which will make many fossil fuel projects "stranded assets."
<p>The abstract in the prestigious journal <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0182-1" target="_blank"><em>Nature</em></a> could make Trudeau choke on his morning coffee: "Several major economies rely heavily on <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fossil-fuels">fossil fuel</a> production and exports, yet current low-carbon technology diffusion, energy efficiency and climate policy may be substantially reducing global demand for fossil fuels."</p><p>It continues: "This trend is inconsistent with observed investment in new fossil fuel ventures, which could become stranded as a result."</p><p>Crucially, the scientists argue that many fossil fuel projects will become stranded due to changing market conditions, especially with the cost of renewables rapidly decreasing.</p><p>But this economic loss of "stranded fossil fuel assets" will be exemplified if "new climate policies to reach the 2°C target of the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/paris-agreement">Paris Agreement</a> are adopted and/or if low-cost producers (some OPEC countries) maintain their level of production ('sell out') despite declining demand."</p><p>If this happens there will be winners and losers, with "winners (for example, net importers such as China or the EU) and losers (for example, Russia, the United States or Canada, which could see their fossil fuel industries nearly shut down)."</p><p>So Canada will be a net loser. And the reason will be the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/tar-sands">tar sands</a>. And if the tar sands are "shut down," Kinder Morgan is a <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/pipelines">pipeline</a> to nowhere.</p><p>Professor Jorge Viñuales, co-author, told <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jun/04/carbon-bubble-could-spark-global-financial-crisis-study-warns" target="_blank">The Guardian</a>: "Contrary to investor expectations, the stranding of fossil fuel assets may happen even without new <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change">climate</a> policies. Individual nations cannot avoid the situation by ignoring the Paris agreement or burying their heads in coal and tar sands."</p><p>Dr. Jean-François Mercure, the lead author, from Radboud and Cambridge universities, also told the newspaper: "If people stop putting funds now in fossil fuels, they may at least limit their losses."</p><p>Trudeau has just done the opposite. As the prime minister buries his political future in the tar sands, others have criticized last week's bail-out as a clear "subsidy" to the oil industry, which goes against a G7 pledge to phase out "inefficient" support for polluting sectors by 2025.</p><p>"The decision by the Canadian government to acquire the Trans Mountain pipeline from Kinder Morgan has essentially been taken because, given the risk, no other private investor would step in," argues <a href="http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/05/31/canada-oil-pipeline-buyout-subsidising-market-failure/" target="_blank">Mark Campanale</a>, the executive director of Carbon Tracker. "It is government subsidizing a market failure."</p><p>But it gets worse: As Trudeau invests in "carbon bubbles" and "market failures," two Kinder Morgan bosses are literally laughing all the way to the bank. <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/kinder-morgan-retention-bonuses-1.4690911" target="_blank">Two senior</a> executives have each been awarded $1.5-million "retention bonuses" in connection with the $4.5 billion sale of the pipeline.</p><p>Opposition MPs were outraged at the news: One, the B.C. New Democrat MP Nathan Cullen, said in the<a href="http://www.timescolonist.com/opposition-criticizes-1-5-million-retention-bonuses-for-kinder-morgan-execs-1.23324181" target="_blank"> House of Commons</a>: "Adding insult to injury to this public bailout, it includes a $3 million bonus to Kinder Morgan executives."</p><p>Canadian economist <a href="https://www.nationalobserver.com/2018/06/01/news/kinder-morgan-execs-ian-anderson-and-david-safari-offered-15-million-bonuses-under" target="_blank">Robyn Allan</a>, who has spent the past few years <a href="https://www.nationalobserver.com/2018/05/15/opinion/whats-behind-kinder-morgans-may-31-ultimatum-follow-money" target="_blank">analyzing</a> the dodgy finances behind the Trans Mountain project, also criticized the payouts: "It's a large amount of money and it's something that most people are going to be shocked about."</p><p>They are right to be shocked about another example of rewarding <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/big-oil">big oil</a> executives for climate failure.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="e0f1b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3MSN641576662665"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1002117510764924929" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Canada to Buy Controversial Tar Sands Pipeline https://t.co/fVBsX1gtz3 @TarSandsAction @NoTarSands</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/1002117510764924929">1527758407.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="http://priceofoil.org/2018/06/05/as-canada-risks-billions-in-a-carbon-bubble-km-bosses-get-big-bonuses/" target="_blank">Oil Change International</a>.</em><br></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Paul Lowry / Flickr / CC BY 2.0
The world's richest countries continue to subsidize at least $100 billion a year in subsidies for the production and use of coal, oil and gas, despite repeated pledges to phase out fossil fuels by 2025.
<p style="">
The Group of Seven, or G7, consists of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and the U.S. The group, as well as the larger G20, <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/worlds-biggest-economies-still-backing-fossil-fuels-1882118563.html">agreed as early as 2009</a> to phase out fossil fuels in order to combat <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/">climate change</a>.</p><p style="">
But a new <a href="https://www.odi.org/publications/11131-g7-fossil-fuel-subsidy-scorecard" target="_blank">report</a> from Britain's <a href="https://www.odi.org/" target="_blank">Overseas Development Institute</a> (ODI) reveals that on average per year in 2015 and 2016, the G7 governments supplied at least $81 billion in fiscal support and $20 billion in public finance, for both production and consumption of oil, gas and coal at home and overseas.
</p><p style="">
"With less than seven years to meet their 2025 phase-out deadline, G7 governments continue to provide substantial support the production and use of oil, gas and coal," the authors <a href="https://www.odi.org/publications/11131-g7-fossil-fuel-subsidy-scorecard" target="_blank">stated</a>.
</p><p style="">
The study, co-authored by <a href="http://priceofoil.org/" target="_blank">Oil Change International</a>, the <a href="https://www.iisd.org/" target="_blank">International Institute for Sustainable Development</a> and the <a href="http://www.nrdc.org/" target="_blank">Natural Resources Defense Council</a>, was issued Monday ahead of the G7 summit in Canada.
</p><p style="">
<span></span>"Governments often say they have no public resources to support the clean energy transition," the study's lead author Shelagh Whitley told the <a href="http://news.trust.org/item/20180604000222-a4hxn" target="_blank">Thomson Reuters Foundation</a>. "What we're trying to do is highlight that those resources are there (but) it is being used inefficiently."
</p><p style="">
For the study, each G7 member was rated on the following measures: transparency; pledges and commitments; ending support for fossil fuel exploration; ending support for coal mining; ending support for oil and gas production; ending support for fossil fuel-based power; and ending support for fossil fuel use.
</p><p style="">
France ranked the highest overall, with 63 out of 100 points. While the country is lagging behind in its support for fossil fuel use, France earned the top spot for making early progress in <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/france-fossil-fuels-2482177328.html">ending fossil fuel exploration</a> and production and ending coal mining, the researchers determined. Germany (62 points) and Canada (54 points) rounded out the top three in the dubious list.
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image" style="">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xNzkxNzUwNi9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxMjg3MDg1Nn0.8tqyHr3LeJK6ut58NqGRjWq0Kq45PRdr4VqVzkRXrpM/img.png?width=980" id="bf4e4" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="d51e41291c59ed4f582a345f714de599" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
</p><p style="">
Unsurprisingly—due to <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/trump">President Donald Trump</a>'s intention to pull the U.S. out of the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/paris-agreement">Paris agreement</a> and his administration's unrelenting push of fossil fuels—the U.S. was ranked lowest on the list, scoring only 42 out of 100 points.
</p><p style="">
The report showed that the U.S. spent $26 billion a year supporting fossil fuels and scored the worst in ending support for coal mining, a pet project of President Trump.<span></span>
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed" style="">
</p><div id="fd877" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="L9OPJ51576662762"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1003645049890955264" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Among #G7 countries, the U.S. is the worst performer in the new #G7scorecard, wasting over $26 billion a year suppo… https://t.co/krPYoKa0nq</div> — ODIclimate (@ODIclimate)<a href="https://twitter.com/ODIclimate/statuses/1003645049890955264">1528122601.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p style="">
"Despite their numerous commitments, not only have G7 governments taken limited action to address fossil fuel subsidies but they have also failed to put in place any mechanisms to define and document the full extent of their support to oil, gas and coal, or to hold themselves accountable for achieving these pledges," the authors said.
</p><p style="">
The researchers urged the governments to establish concrete plans to end fossil fuel subsidies by 2025 as promised, Reuters reported.
</p><p style="">
"What should be a low-hanging fruit in terms of moving public resources away from fossil fuels is not happening, or where it is happening, it's not happening fast enough," Whitley told the news service.
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="21490" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="N09G541576662762"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1002586193534640128" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Trump Administration Plans Costly Taxpayer Bailout of Unprofitable Energy Industries https://t.co/oDn4G7Fl6S… https://t.co/ZyvbkH6beZ</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/1002586193534640128">1527870150.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
- Trump Administration Plans Costly Taxpayer Bailout of Unprofitable ... ›
- Pruitt and Aides Rack Up $90,000 in Taxpayer-Funded Travel in ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less