Crooked Bough News Round-up

— Pathways Alliance Paid Google to Advertise on ‘Greenwashing’ Searches

 

at 4/18/24 2:22pm

A major Canadian oil sands group has been running advertisements on Google that target people seeking information about oil industry “greenwashing,” the practice by which companies make false and misleading environmental promises.  The Pathways Alliance is a marketing and lobbying organization representing the country’s six largest oil sands producers: Imperial Oil, Suncor, ConocoPhillips, Cenovus, CNRL and MEG. Credit: Chris Russill Google ad records viewed by DeSmog show that it’s been paying to advertise on the search term “Pathways Alliance greenwashing,” meaning that when people type that phrase into Google, one of the first results that appears is the Pathways Alliance website.  “It’s part of their systematic attempt to influence the climate policy discussion,” Chris Russill, a Carleton University journalism professor and academic director of the climate communication centre Re:Climate, told DeSmog. The Pathways Alliance is currently under investigation by the Competition Bureau of Canada due to a complaint from Greenpeace about the accuracy of its advertisements. Those ads, which have run in national newspapers, during hockey games and even on the sides of buses, portray oil sands companies as climate leaders “on the road to net zero,” when actually the industry is expanding its production of climate-altering crude oil to record high levels.  This is but one of “numerous indicators of greenwashing in Pathways Alliances public communication,” according to recent peer-viewed research from Russill and other academics in Canada and the U.S.  Their research, as well as the ongoing Competition Bureau investigation and a national ban on misleading fossil fuel advertising proposed by NDP member of Parliament Charlie Angus, have generated significant media attention this spring about the legitimacy of climate promises made by the Pathways Alliance.  But when Canadians went searching on Google for additional information about accusations of “greenwashing,” one of top results they may have encountered was sponsored content from the Pathways Alliance claiming that the country’s biggest polluters “are working to reduce carbon emissions from oil sands.” (In fact, Canadian oil and gas emissions grew 13 percent last year, according to federal regulators, and are likely vastly underestimated in official counts).   Pathways Alliance is under investigation for false or misleading ads. Credit: Pathways Alliance / YouTube It’s a potentially effective strategy, however, because “the links that show up first are the ones people use,” Russill said. “That’s why Google sells those spots.”  That might seem to contradict an ad policy adopted by Google in 2021 prohibiting climate disinformation, including “content that states a false claim as fact.” But when DeSmog reached out to the tech company, it concluded that the Pathways Alliance advertising doesn’t violate its policies. “Our climate change policy prohibits ads from promoting false claims about the existence and causes of climate change,” a Google spokesperson wrote to DeSmog. “Ads intended to debate or promote green initiatives are permitted.” The Pathways Alliance didn’t respond to a media request. This isn’t the first instance of oil sands companies using Google search to shape public perception about the industry’s environmental record. A DeSmog investigation revealed last year that the Pathways Alliance has advertised on search terms such as “how we can stop climate change,” “what is global warming,” “why is climate change important” and “government of canada climate change.”  “People search for this stuff for a variety of reasons. Schoolkids who are doing their homework. Cash-strapped farmers that want to understand the carbon tax. Voters interested in climate policy,” Russill said. “It’s really disappointing and problematic when you’re dealing with an oil sector that’s engaging in an influence operation at this scale.”  The post Pathways Alliance Paid Google to Advertise on ‘Greenwashing’ Searches appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— Liz Truss Book Calls for Climate Laws to be Abolished and Boasts of Effort to Cancel UK COP Summit

 

at 4/18/24 9:43am

The new book by former Prime Minister Liz Truss urges the UK, U.S. and EU to drop their landmark climate change laws, spreads falsehoods about green policies, and fondly recalls an attempt to cancel a major climate conference. Truss, who is the Conservative MP for South West Norfolk, resigned as prime minister in October 2022 after just 49 days in office. Since leaving 10 Downing Street, Truss has attempted to expose the “deep state” forces that allegedly brought down her premiership, while advocating for “free market” ideas within the Conservative Party, helping to launch the Popular Conservatives group. In her book, Ten Years to Save the West, which she is promoting widely this week, Truss writes that “the zealous drive to net zero”, the UK’s legally binding 2050 climate target, amounts to “unilateral economic disarmament” and is “a drag on economic growth”. She also claims that, while serving in the Treasury, she attempted to cancel the 2021 COP26 climate summit in Glasgow. Truss writes: “We should abolish the Climate Change Act and instead adopt a new Climate Freedom Act that enables rather than dictates technology”. She adds that “the U.S. should reverse the Inflation Reduction Act, and the EU should abandon its equivalent measures”. The Climate Change Act legalised the UK’s commitment to reducing carbon dioxide emissions by at least 80 percent by 2050 from 1990 levels. The Inflation Reduction Act is a $369 billion package of grants and subsidies by the U.S. government to spur green technology investment.  Scientists at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have said that without “immediate and deep emissions reductions across all sectors” limiting global heating to 1.5C is beyond reach. Restricting global temperatures to this threshold – the target agreed by the UK as part of the 2015 Paris Agreement – would prevent the worst and most irreversible effects of climate change, including floods, droughts, heatwaves, and wildfires. In the book, Truss also attacks climate advocates, writing that “the environmental movement is fundamentally driven by the radical left”, adding: “This ‘watermelon’ tendency is green on the outside, red on the inside – a modern rebranding of socialism. It features the same instincts of collectivism and authoritarianism.” Truss writes that “we should cancel” the United Nations annual COP climate summit, and falsely claims that electric vehicles are worse for the environment than those powered by fossil fuels. “In recent years, more radical forms of climate misinformation and disinformation have become mainstreamed”, said Jennie King, director of climate research and policy at the Institute of Strategic Dialogue think tank. “Such content continues to grow in virality and engagement online, but its impacts are vastly increased when platformed in the media or by politicians.” King said “the normalisation of wild and outlandish claims”, with climate action “being framed through a conspiratorial, tribalist and anti-scientific lens”, can lead to “real-world harm”.  “When such ideas are conveyed from the very corridors of power, it sets a dangerous precedent”, she added.  The IPCC warned in 2022 that efforts to tackle climate change were being delayed by “rhetoric and misinformation that undermines climate science and disregards risk and urgency”. Truss Claims ‘Couldn’t be Further from the Truth’ Truss’s book is published by Biteback Publishing, a company owned by former Conservative deputy chair and major party donor Michael Ashcroft.  The former prime minister dedicates a chapter to green policies, titled ‘A Hostile Environment’, apparently a play on the term used by the Conservative government about its anti-immigration policies.  Truss writes that current environmental policies should be scrapped in favour of a “free market” approach. On energy, she calls for more fossil fuel extraction, advocating a mix of “oil and gas as well as nuclear and renewables”, adding: “The use of North Sea oil and gas is crucial, so there needs to be investment in that too. There also should be fracking in the UK.” Fracking for shale gas is a controversial practice that risks causing air, water, and noise pollution. She fails to mention that oil and gas firms receive major subsidies and tax breaks from the government, which would logically be removed in a “free market” energy system. The UK government has given £20 billion more in support to fossil fuel producers than renewables companies since 2015. Truss’s book also attacks the multilateral UN COP process, which has seen agreements on transitioning away from fossil fuels, and financial support for poorer countries suffering the worst effects of climate change.  Truss writes that “we should cancel the COP gravy train”. She claims that, in 2018, when she was chief secretary to the Treasury, she made “11th-hour attempts to ditch COP26”, the UN climate summit hosted by the UK in 2021, arguing that it was not a spending priority.  At COP26, nearly 200 countries agreed to ramp up efforts to cut emissions, also calling on wealthy countries to double their funding to poorer nations that have contributed the least to climate change. More than 40 countries also pledged to quit coal, the dirtiest fossil fuel and the world’s largest source of carbon dioxide emissions. The book also spreads false claims about climate policies. Truss writes that “in the UK and Europe, Russia has funded anti-fracking campaigns”, a claim which is not supported by any evidence. Truss claims that policies like “the switch from petrol to diesel in cars or the use of electric vehicles, have either harmed the environment in other ways or empowered our polluting adversaries elsewhere in the world”.  Colin Walker, head of transport at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit think tank, told DeSmog: “The notion that the switch to electric vehicles will have little discernible environmental impact, and make us dependent on imported gas and coal, couldn’t be further from the truth. “The total lifetime CO2 emissions of an electric vehicle, from being built to being driven, are three times lower than a petrol vehicle – a figure that will only get higher as our grid becomes cleaner. And while older technologies like petrol cars and gas boilers rely on fossil fuels imported from abroad, EVs and heat pumps can be powered by electricity generated by British wind and solar farms.” Truss also writes of “ludicrous claims that pursuing a net zero agenda will boost the economy and drive growth”.  Walker added: “The UK’s net zero economy is now worth £74 billion, and grew by nine percent in 2023.  The wider economy grew just 0.1 percent. Talking down the economic opportunities net zero has to offer the UK is at odds with a growth agenda when the U.S., EU and China are all competing for clean industries.”  Truss’s Climate Denial Ties Truss has a long history of opposing climate policies. In the 2022 Conservative Party leadership contest, she attacked solar farms on agricultural land and, during her brief time in 10 Downing Street, she overturned the UK’s ban on fracking. (A policy reversed by her successor, Rishi Sunak.) As DeSmog reported at the time, Truss’s leadership campaign received £30,000 from a pro-fracking lobby group, £10,000 from a climate denial activist, and £100,000 from the wife of a former BP oil executive. Truss received a further £5,000 from Lord Vinson, a Tory peer who has provided funding to the UK’s leading climate science denial group, the Global Warming Policy Foundation.  Since leaving office, Truss has received £250,000 in speaking fees, including £7,600 last April from the Heritage Foundation, a right-wing U.S. think tank that has long promoted climate science denial. Heritage President Kevin Roberts provides a long and glowing blurb for Truss’s book.  Earlier this year, Truss helped to launch the Popular Conservatives (PopCon), a new initiative run by Truss-ally Mark Littlewood, the former director general of the Institute of Economic Affairs, a think tank which received funding from oil major BP for at least 50 years.  At the PopCon launch, Truss attacked “net zero zealotry”, claiming voters “don’t like the net zero policies which are making energy more expensive”. Additional reporting by Sam Bright The post Liz Truss Book Calls for Climate Laws to be Abolished and Boasts of Effort to Cancel UK COP Summit appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— ‘Hard-Right’ NatCon Event Was Organised by Oil Funded Group

 

at 4/16/24 10:27am

A gathering of “Europe’s hard-right elite” held in Brussels today was organised by a fossil fuel funded think tank, DeSmog can reveal.  The National Conservatism (NatCon) conference was mired in controversy after the mayor of Brussels ordered police to shut down the event, leading to a standoff with its organisers.  The conference was due to be attended by critics of net zero policies and climate science, as well as radical right-wing figures from across Europe. French far-right politician Eric Zemmour was due to attend, alongside Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, widely considered to be a far-right leader, GB News presenter and Reform UK president Nigel Farage, and former Home Secretary Suella Braverman.  The NatCon Brussels event was sponsored and coordinated by Mathias Corvinus Collegium (MCC), a Hungarian think tank funded by oil and gas money. MCC received more than £1.3 billion in Hungarian state funding in 2020, awarded a 10 percent stake in the country’s oil and gas giant MOL. The location of the conference had to be moved on two occasions after the Socialist Mayor of Brussels Philippe Close said that the event wasn’t welcome in the city. It eventually went ahead in a venue provided by the events company Claridge, after which police were ordered to shut down the gathering “to guarantee public safety”.  The event continued while its organisers considered their legal options, allowing Farage and Braverman to make their speeches.  Farage used his address to encourage other member states to break away from the “anti-democratic” EU, saying: “What has happened here, in this epicentre of globalism, is a new unholy trinity: big politics, big business, and big banks.” In his speech, live-streamed on GB News, Farage also took aim at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) for its first climate verdict last week, which found that insufficient action to tackle climate change is a violation of human rights. The ECHR is “telling us we have no option but to implement net zero policies” Farage said, who highlighted that India’s annual coal production has now hit one billion tonnes.  Pointing at other countries and their climate failures is a common tactic used by those who oppose action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  MCC’s shares in MOL were gifted by the Hungarian government, which also awarded MCC a 10 percent stake in the pharmaceutical firm Gedeon Richter, plus $462 million in cash and $9 million in property.  Through Gedeon Richter and MOL, the think tank was handed shares in two of the country’s three most valuable companies. The New York Times reported in 2022 that MOL announced dividends of $652 million to be distributed among its shareholders, with $65 million going to MCC – comfortably more than its annual budget.  MCC is chaired by Balázs Orbán, who is the Viktor Orbán’s political director. The think tank’s board also includes Hungary’s Minister of Culture and Innovation, János Csák. According to the investigative outlet Follow The Money, MCC is conservative, nationalist and Eurosceptic, and “plays a key role in spreading the ideology of the Hungarian government”. Balázs Orbán has said: “It is our goal for Hungary to become an intellectual powerhouse, in which MCC plays a key role.” The NatCon organising committee also featured sociologist Frank Furedi, the executive director of MCC Brussels. Furedi delivered the 2020 annual lecture at the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), the UK’s leading climate science denial group, on the subject “eco hysteria”. During the lecture, he promoted the fringe claim that politicians and corporations are trying to push civilisation into a “climate lockdown” by reducing individual freedoms.  Jacob Reynolds, the head of policy at MCC Brussels, chaired one of the NatCon panels, and is described on its website as the conference coordinator. Viktor Orbán has resisted EU measures to reduce emissions and cut off Russian fossil fuels following Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Orbán has opposed an embargo of Russian oil, claiming it would devastate the Hungarian economy, and has only recently announced that the country will not renew its supply agreement with the Russian energy giant Gazprom. The deal will expire in January 2025.  MOL’s recent profits have been directly attributed to its access to cheap Russian oil and gas, while the firm’s CEO used an MCC event in 2023 to claim that sanctions against Russia had been ineffective.  NatCon’s conference in London in May 2023 also featured a number of anti-net zero campaigners and those with ties to the oil and gas industry. NatCon and MCC have been approached for comment.  UK Attendees The NatCon Brussels event invited figures from across the UK and EU who have downplayed or dismissed the threat of climate change.  The panellists included Melanie Phillips, a writer for The Times, who has disputed climate science. In an article for The Times in July 2022, Phillips claimed that “there is no evidence that anything is happening to the world’s climate that lies outside historic fluctuations.” The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the world’s foremost climate science body, has stated it is “unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land”. Farage and Braverman have also repeatedly attacked the legally-binding policy of achieving net zero emissions by 2050. During the 2022 Conservative leadership race, Braverman was one of only two candidates to signal an opposition to net zero, stating that: “in order to deal with the energy crisis we need to suspend the all-consuming desire to achieve net zero by 2050.” Farage is the honorary president and owner of anti-net zero party Reform UK, and has called for a referendum on the UK’s net zero commitment. Farage has also questioned climate science, arguing on GB News in August 2021 that, “What annoys me… is this complete obsession with carbon dioxide almost to the exclusion of everything else, the alarmism that comes with it, based on dodgy predictions and science”. The IPCC has stated that carbon dioxide “is responsible for most of global warming” since the late 19th century, which has increased the “severity and frequency of weather and climate extremes, like heat waves, heavy rains, and drought”. Reform UK accepted £135,000 from climate science deniers and fossil fuel interests last year, the warmest on record.  Reform ally and academic Matthew Goodwin also participated in the NatCon event, having spoken at Reform’s 2023 conference.  Influential backbench Conservative MP Miriam Cates was another guest at the NatCon conference. Cates is a supporter of the Net Zero Scrutiny Group of Tory MPs, which campaigns against the UK’s net zero commitments, and has spoken out against alleged climate “alarmism”. At the May 2023 NatCon event in London, Cates claimed that “epidemic levels of anxiety and confusion” among young people are being caused by “culture, schools and universities” teaching that “our country is racist, our heroes are villains, [and] humanity is killing the Earth.” Conservative backbencher Daniel Kawczynski was reprimanded by the party in 2020 for speaking at a NatCon conference in Rome alongside far-right politicians.  “Daniel Kawczynski has been formally warned that his attendance at this event was not acceptable, particularly in light of the views of some of those in attendance,” the Conservative Party said at the time. Kawczynski spoke alongside Viktor Orbán and other far-right figures from across the EU. Orbán-Linked Organisers The Brussels conference was organised with the help of several groups with close ties to the Hungarian government.  In addition to MCC, the event was co-sponsored by the European Conservative, a right-wing publication based at MCC’s headquarters in Budapest.  The European Conservative receives direct funding from the Hungarian government via the non-profit Batthyány Lajos Foundation (BLA).  Orbán has openly expressed his desire for hard-right policies to be exported across the Western world. “This war is a culture war,” he told the 2022 Conservative Political Action Conference in Dallas, Texas. “We have to revitalise our churches, our families, our universities and our community institutions.” The NatCon event was co-sponsored by the Danube Institute, a think tank that has also received funding from the BLA.  The NatCon Brussels organising committee included John O’Sullivan, Danube’s president, who has argued that climate change is not occurring at the rate held by the world’s leading scientists, and has enthusiastically cited the work of the GWPF.  While police gathered outside the venue, attendees heard from Dutch MEP Rob Roos, who has in the past claimed that, “Climate policy leads to blackouts and has zero impact on the climate”. The conference also hosted a panel “in defence of farmers, food, and energy security” featuring several figures who have attacked net zero policies. Farmers’ protests across Europe have been appropriated by right-wing politicians who claim that measures to cut agricultural emissions are devastating rural economies – even though a range of complex factors are motivating the protests.  Chaired by MCC’s Jacob Reynolds, the panel featured Mike Hume and Ralph Schöllhammer, both of whom have close ties to British publication Spiked, which regularly publishes climate science denial.  Hume is the former editor of Spiked, and is now a columnist. He has argued that farmers are united by an “opposition to the way that the EU elites are subordinating agricultural policy to their green agenda and net zero obsession, leading to more hardship for farmers and higher food prices for other Europeans.” Schöllhammer is a regular commentator for Spiked, writing frequently on energy and net zero. He has claimed that “climate extremists” are trying to create a world that would be “devastating for the poorest people on the planet”, and that net zero is a “threat to human civilisation”.  During the panel, Schöllhammer claimed that left-wing leaders are “at war with modern life: industry, energy, and anything that makes Western life possible.” The panel also featured Helen O’Sullivan, an Irish livestock farmer who has repeated the false claim that 200,000 cows will be culled in Ireland to meet the EU’s climate targets.  Government officials in Ireland had discussed “displacing” up to 65,000 cows a year to meet its climate goals, but this was never formally adopted as a policy.  O’Sullivan used the panel to suggest that current high energy costs are partly the result of shutting down coal and gas plants. However, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Britain was the worst hit country in Western Europe following the invasion because of its over-reliance on gas. The European Conservative and the Danube Institute have been approached for comment.  The post ‘Hard-Right’ NatCon Event Was Organised by Oil Funded Group appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— MPs Challenged to Cut Ties with Polluters

 

at 4/15/24 9:30am

A new campaign is calling on MPs to break the fossil fuel sector’s “chokehold” on politics in a critical election year. Lawmakers returning to work today (Monday) were greeted with smoke flares and a demand to “Stop Polluting Politics” from a banner hung off London’s Westminster Bridge. The message forms the name of the campaign by Climate Resistance, a new collective that aims “to push the fossil fuel lobby out of Westminster and stop polluters from bankrolling political parties”.  In 2019, under the Conservatives, the UK was the first country in the world to introduce legally binding commitments to reach net zero emissions by 2050.  But since making that commitment in 2019, the party has been criticised for dramatically weakening key climate policies.  In the last year, the Conservatives have delayed the ban on sales of petrol and diesel vehicles, and postponed measures to ramp up the installation of heat pumps in the UK’s gas-reliant homes.  The Conservative Party has regularly accepted donations from polluting interests and climate science deniers, worth £3.5 million in 2022. Two-thirds of the directors in charge of the party’s multi-million-pound endowment fund have a financial interest in oil, gas, and highly polluting industries. “Politicians are elected to represent the people, not the interests of corporate donors,” Ajaya Haikerwal, a spokesperson for Climate Resistance told DeSmog. “It’s frankly outrageous that in 2024, oil and gas lobbyists can quite freely cosy up to politicians, hand them fat stacks of cash, and see a favourable change in policy. “The fossil fuel industry has politics in a chokehold – and this needs to end if we ever hope to achieve any sort of meaningful climate action.” Fossil Fuel Donations Scientists, experts and campaigners have been calling for parties to make strong climate pledges ahead of the general election, expected to take place later this year. Climate campaigners have long warned that the actions of elected representatives in accepting donations from polluting interests raises concern over corporate capture and the influence of polluting donations on policy-making. Under Rishi Sunak, the Conservatives handed out over 100 new oil and gas licences, and voted through compulsory annual North Sea licensing rounds. In January, DeSmog revealed that Net Zero Secretary Claire Coutinho had received a donation from one of the early funders of the UK’s principal climate science denial group, the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF). There have also been accusations of a revolving door between the fossil fuel industry and the civil service. Over 100 people from the oil and gas sector have been appointed to top government roles since 2011. Anti-net zero party Reform UK, which now has one MP, the former Conservative MP Lee Anderson, is polling closely behind the Conservatives. The party, which is registered as a limited company and owned by Nigel Farage, accepted £135,000 from climate science deniers and fossil fuel interests last year, the warmest on record.  Labour MPs have also accepted donations from polluting interests. In February, Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves took a £10,000 donation from Lord Donoughue, the former chair of the GWPF.  Millions of Brits will also head to the polls for local elections on 2 May. Conservative Party candidate Susan Hall and Reform UK’s Howard Cox, both of whom have promoted climate science denial, are promising to roll back London’s Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ) if elected as London’s mayor. Recent polling suggests that despite the weaponization of green politics by some parties and candidates, public concern over climate change remains high. A July 2023 poll by Ipsos MORI found that 77 percent of Brits consider it a serious global threat, and 77 percent say they find it concerning. These concerns do not appear to align with the UK government’s action on climate change. In September, an analysis by scientific project Climate Action Tracker downgraded the UK’s overall climate action rating to “insufficient”, adding that it “needs to urgently accelerate climate policy development and implementation to regain credibility on the global stage”. Need for Action A sharp reduction in greenhouse gases is widely considered critical to limit the severity and frequency of floods, droughts, heatwaves and wildfires globally. Scientists at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have said that without “immediate and deep emissions reductions across all sectors” limiting global heating to 1.5C is beyond reach. Restricting global temperatures to this threshold – the target agreed as part of the Paris Agreement – would prevent the worst and most irreversible effects of climate change, but the window to do so is rapidly diminishing. “Flooding, famines and fires – climate change is already on our doorstep. But in the UK, were still heavily reliant on fossil fuels, which is driving up our energy bills and pushing people into poverty,” said Haikerwal of Climate Resistance. “The upcoming general election will be crucial in deciding our climate’s future – whichever party forms the next government must take bold action: rewiring our profit-over-people economy, getting us off volatile oil and gas, and investing in clean, reliable wind and solar. “By challenging candidates and MPs who get too cosy with polluters and exposing them in public, we will make it politically toxic to associate with these companies.” The post MPs Challenged to Cut Ties with Polluters appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— Campaigners Challenge MPs to Cut Ties with Polluters

 

at 4/15/24 9:30am

A new campaign is calling on MPs to break the fossil fuel sector’s “chokehold” on politics in a critical election year. Lawmakers returning to work today (Monday) were greeted with smoke flares and a demand to “Stop Polluting Politics” from a banner hung off London’s Westminster Bridge. The message forms the name of the campaign by Climate Resistance, a new collective that aims “to push the fossil fuel lobby out of Westminster and stop polluters from bankrolling political parties”.  In 2019, under the Conservatives, the UK was the first country in the world to introduce legally binding commitments to reach net zero emissions by 2050.  But since making that commitment in 2019, the party has been criticised for dramatically weakening key climate policies.  In the last year, the Conservatives have delayed the ban on sales of petrol and diesel vehicles, and postponed measures to ramp up the installation of heat pumps in the UK’s gas-reliant homes.  The Conservative Party has regularly accepted donations from polluting interests and climate science deniers, worth £3.5 million in 2022. Two-thirds of the directors in charge of the party’s multi-million-pound endowment fund have a financial interest in oil, gas, and highly polluting industries. “Politicians are elected to represent the people, not the interests of corporate donors,” Ajaya Haikerwal, a spokesperson for Climate Resistance told DeSmog. “It’s frankly outrageous that in 2024, oil and gas lobbyists can quite freely cosy up to politicians, hand them fat stacks of cash, and see a favourable change in policy. “The fossil fuel industry has politics in a chokehold – and this needs to end if we ever hope to achieve any sort of meaningful climate action.” Fossil Fuel Donations Scientists, experts and campaigners have been calling for parties to make strong climate pledges ahead of the general election, expected to take place later this year. Climate campaigners have long warned that the actions of elected representatives in accepting donations from polluting interests raises concern over corporate capture and the influence of polluting donations on policy-making. Under Rishi Sunak, the Conservatives handed out over 100 new oil and gas licences, and voted through compulsory annual North Sea licensing rounds. In January, DeSmog revealed that Net Zero Secretary Claire Coutinho had received a donation from one of the early funders of the UK’s principal climate science denial group, the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF). There have also been accusations of a revolving door between the fossil fuel industry and the civil service. Over 100 people from the oil and gas sector have been appointed to top government roles since 2011. Anti-net zero party Reform UK, which now has one MP, the former Conservative MP Lee Anderson, is polling closely behind the Conservatives. The party, which is registered as a limited company and owned by Nigel Farage, accepted £135,000 from climate science deniers and fossil fuel interests last year, the warmest on record.  Labour MPs have also accepted donations from polluting interests. In February, Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves took a £10,000 donation from Lord Donoughue, the former chair of the GWPF.  Millions of Brits will also head to the polls for local elections on 2 May. Conservative Party candidate Susan Hall and Reform UK’s Howard Cox, both of whom have promoted climate science denial, are promising to roll back London’s Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ) if elected as London’s mayor. Recent polling suggests that despite the weaponization of green politics by some parties and candidates, public concern over climate change remains high. A July 2023 poll by Ipsos MORI found that 77 percent of Brits consider it a serious global threat, and 77 percent say they find it concerning. These concerns do not appear to align with the UK government’s action on climate change. In September, an analysis by scientific project Climate Action Tracker downgraded the UK’s overall climate action rating to “insufficient”, adding that it “needs to urgently accelerate climate policy development and implementation to regain credibility on the global stage”. Need for Action A sharp reduction in greenhouse gases is widely considered critical to limit the severity and frequency of floods, droughts, heatwaves and wildfires globally. Scientists at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have said that without “immediate and deep emissions reductions across all sectors” limiting global heating to 1.5C is beyond reach. Restricting global temperatures to this threshold – the target agreed as part of the Paris Agreement – would prevent the worst and most irreversible effects of climate change, but the window to do so is rapidly diminishing. “Flooding, famines and fires – climate change is already on our doorstep. But in the UK, were still heavily reliant on fossil fuels, which is driving up our energy bills and pushing people into poverty,” said Haikerwal of Climate Resistance. “The upcoming general election will be crucial in deciding our climate’s future – whichever party forms the next government must take bold action: rewiring our profit-over-people economy, getting us off volatile oil and gas, and investing in clean, reliable wind and solar. “By challenging candidates and MPs who get too cosy with polluters and exposing them in public, we will make it politically toxic to associate with these companies.” The post Campaigners Challenge MPs to Cut Ties with Polluters appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— Reform’s National Organiser Claimed Tommy Robinson Had Been ‘Persecuted’

 

at 4/13/24 3:41pm

One of Reform UK’s senior officials publicly defended far-right figure Tommy Robinson, DeSmog can reveal.  The party is standing by Noel Matthews, who is running as Reform’s parliamentary candidate for North West Leicestershire, despite other candidates having been dropped for similar offences.  In 2018, Matthews posted an article on Twitter from the U.S. conservative magazine National Review. Matthews’s tweet included the headline of the article: “Tommy Robinson Drew Attention to ‘Grooming Gangs’. Britain Has Persecuted Him”. In an apparent emphasis of the statement, Matthews added the word “THIS”, before the headline.  Robinson is a prominent far-right figure who founded the English Defence League (EDL).  A year earlier, in 2017, Matthews encouraged his Twitter followers to watch a video from former UKIP London Assembly Member David Kurten entitled “Why Islamophobia is a silly made up word”. According to BuzzFeed, Matthews has also said that accusations of Islamophobia are an “excuse for closing down the debate”. Following the August 2017 white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, Matthews supported then-president Donald Trump’s claim that both sides were to blame for the violence, in which a counter-protester was murdered. “He’s right,” Matthews wrote.  In response to DeSmog’s findings, Reform UK said: “This isn’t just offence archeology, you appear [to] have reached the mesolithic strata in your excavation.” In relation to the Kurten video, the party said that Matthews was “arguing against the use of the suffix ‘phobia’ being slapped on to every rights issue”. A party spokesperson added there was no evidence that Matthews “ever said that Tommy Robinson has been persecuted or whether he thought that to be good or bad”. The party did not respond when DeSmog supplied a screenshot of Matthews’s aforementioned tweet.  Reform has decided to defend Matthews despite sacking at least two parliamentary candidates for supporting Tommy Robinson on social media.  The party dropped its candidate for Swindon North, Yvette Maxwell-Darkes, after she claimed that Robinson had “very good things to say”. On 6 April, The Mirror reported that the party’s candidate for Lewes, Ian Harris, had also been dropped after liking tweets posted by Robinson and former far-right BNP leader Nick Griffin.  In his role as Reform’s national organiser, it appears that Matthews has been personally responsible for sacking Reform candidates. Maxwell-Darkes claims that she was informed of her dismissal by Matthews, matching statements made by several other dropped candidates.  Matthews was formerly the national election agent for Reform’s predecessor party, the Brexit Party, having previously worked as a director of UKIP. Nigel Farage, Reform’s majority shareholder and honorary president, was the leader of both the Brexit Party and UKIP.  According to polling published by GB News, which employs Farage and Reform leader Richard Tice, Reform poses one of the biggest threats to the Conservatives in North West Leicestershire. The constituency in which Matthews is standing backed Brexit by 60.8 percent in 2016, while UKIP won 16.9 percent of the vote in the 2015 general election. Joe Mulhall, director of research at HOPE not hate, said that Matthews’s comments made him “totally unsuitable to be a candidate in North West Leicestershire – one of the partys top targets”. He added: “There is also a remarkable level of hypocrisy on display. Matthews holds a senior position in Reform UK despite making comments indistinguishable from candidates he has been involved in removing.” In a press conference on 8 April, addressing questions about the party dismissing several of its candidates, Tice said: “If you’re going to have a glass of wine on a Friday night, don’t use social media. It’s not sensible.” He added that if candidates made “inappropriate” or “unacceptable” comments online “then we’re going to part company. You can have your freedom of speech, your freedom of expression, but that doesn’t mean you have the right to represent Reform UK as a parliamentary candidate.” On the same day, Tice claimed on BBC Radio 4 that “we’re the fastest party to get rid of inappropriate candidates”. The party has been forced to drop at least 50 candidates, and still has more than 200 candidate vacancies to fill before the general election, which is expected to be held later this year. Reform’s Climate Science Denial Reform UK has been campaigning on an overtly anti-climate platform, and has called for the UK’s 2050 net zero emissions target to be scrapped. The party has also proposed holding a referendum on the subject.  The party last year received £135,000 from donors who deny climate science or have business links to fossil fuels.  Tice has said “CO2 isn’t poison, it’s plant food”, while the party’s London mayoral candidate Howard Cox has said “man is not responsible for global warming”. Reform’s policy platform claims that “scientists disagree as to how much” humans have had an impact on global warming. The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the world’s foremost climate science body, has stated that it is “unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land”. Tice claimed in his 8 April press conference that Reform would be able to spend more money on the NHS by scrapping the UK’s net zero target. The UK’s Climate Change Committee, which advises the government on measures to achieve net zero emissions by 2050, estimates that the combined policies will cost less than one percent of the country’s national output. The Office for Budget Responsibility, the UK’s independent economic forecaster, has also said that “the costs of failing to get climate change under control would be much larger than those of bringing emissions down to net zero”. According to Scarlett Maguire, director of the polling company JL Partners, “A substantial majority of every major demographic believe the climate is changing as a result of human activity, and overall support the government’s target of reaching net zero by 2050.” A version of this article was published by The Mirror The post Reform’s National Organiser Claimed Tommy Robinson Had Been ‘Persecuted’ appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— Prospective GB News Board Member is Fossil Fuel Investor

 

at 4/12/24 6:15am

A Conservative peer who is expected to join the board of broadcaster GB News has shares in Equinor, the oil and gas multinational behind the Rosebank oil field in the North Sea.  According to his parliamentary register of interests, Lord Theodore Agnew has shares of at least £100,000 in Equinor, the Norwegian state-owned energy producer. Equinor has a majority stake in the Rosebank North Sea oil field, which has been dubbed a “carbon bomb” by environmental law charity ClientEarth.  Agnew is set to replace hedge fund millionaire Paul Marshall on the board of GB News’s parent company All Perspectives Ltd, according to Sky News.  Marshall is one of the key backers of GB News, holding a 45 percent stake in the company. He is reportedly planning to step back from GB News in order to launch a bid for the Telegraph Media Group, which includes The Telegraph newspaper and The Spectator magazine.  His withdrawal could potentially throw GB News into turmoil. The startup broadcaster has lost £76 million since its launch in 2021 and relies on the resources of Marshall and its other big stakeholder, UAE-based investment firm Legatum, to survive. Sky News reported that GB News is now preparing to make job cuts as part of a “corporate reorganisation”. This may have implications for how climate change is covered in the UK. An investigation by DeSmog found that one in three GB News presenters had spread climate science denial on air in 2022, while more than half had attacked climate action. “It comes as no surprise that members of the GB News board have ties to the oil and gas industry, given the way its presenters have championed continued oil and gas expansion,” said Tessa Khan, director of environmental non-profit Uplift.  Agnew, a former Cabinet Office minister under Boris Johnson, was in October appointed chair of UnHerd Ventures, another Marshall media vehicle. The company runs UnHerd, a publication founded in 2017 to give a platform to marginalised views. Agnew also has shares in Carbon Plus Capital, a private investment company which specialises in carbon offsetting “based on the protection of forests”. This involves companies paying to plant trees to “offset” their greenhouse gas emissions.  Carbon offsetting is a controversial idea that has been criticised by climate campaigners as a form of greenwashing. An investigation published last year by newspapers The Guardian, Die Zeit and non-profit SourceMaterial found that 90 percent of rainforest carbon offsets approved by the world’s largest certifier Verra were “largely worthless” and could actually increase global heating.  Carbon Plus Capital partner Robin Warwick Edwards is a trustee of the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) think tank and the chair of its advisory council. The IEA, a free market group that has advocated for more fossil fuel extraction, received funding from BP for at least 50 years.  Agnew and Edwards declined to comment. GB News did not respond.  “Climate denial and investment in the fossil fuel industry go hand in hand”, said Carys Boughton of campaign group Fossil Free Parliament.  “It makes complete sense that an expected new board member of GB News – a channel absolutely committed to attacking climate science and policy at every turn – is invested in Equinor, a company that, according to research by Oil Change International, ranks eighth worst in the world for its commitment to expanding oil and gas production.” She added: “By spreading disinformation about the climate crisis, GB News is feeding into the fossil fuel industry’s licence to operate and thus helping to line the pockets of the industry’s shareholders.” GB News in Turmoil GB News hosts regularly attack climate policies and the science behind them.  Numerous GB News presenters have also been vocal about their support for policies that would maintain and even extend the UK’s reliance on oil and gas.  On 9 December 2022, host Mark Dolan praised West Cumbria Mining’s plan to open a new coal mine in Cumbria. He said the UK should “drill, baby, drill” for coal, oil and gas,  adding: “I think the push for net zero here is another element of liberal progressivism which is infecting the West.” DeSmog revealed in October that Marshall Wace, the hedge fund run by Paul Marshall, had £1.8 billion invested in fossil fuel companies as of June 2023. This included Chevron, Shell, Equinor, and 109 other fossil fuel companies.  Marshall reportedly invested £10 million in GB News when it first launched two years ago and, in August 2022, joined the Dubai-based investment firm Legatum Group in a £60 million capital injection and buyout of GB News’s other major investor, Discovery.  If he joins the All Perspectives board, Agnew would become the latest Conservative politician to be adopted by the right-wing broadcaster. GB News hosts include Jacob Rees-Mogg, who was business and energy secretary under Liz Truss, Lee Anderson, a former Tory deputy chair who defected to anti-net zero party Reform UK last month, as well as Conservative MPs Esther McVey and Philip Davies.   The All Perspectives board also includes Tory peer Baroness Helena Morrissey and George Farmer, a Reform UK donor and the son of Conservative peer Lord Michael Farmer.  GB News reported losses of £42 million in the year to May 2023, and £76 million since its launch in 2021. This comes as rival populist channel TalkTV is closing its TV operation and switching to YouTube, having suffered losses of £90 million since it launched in 2022.  Agnew’s appointment has not been confirmed by Marshall, Agnew or the company.  “With advertisers steering clear, GB News is haemorrhaging cash – yet they continue to push misleading messages on climate change,” said Richard Wilson, director of the Stop Funding Heat campaign.   “In the last month alone, GB News commentators have claimed climate change is a ‘social mania’, dismissed climate harms as ‘hypothetical’, and attacked United Nations warnings about the need for urgent climate action as ‘hysteria’. “Now we learn that a prospective GB News board member has fossil fuel investments”. He added: “Britain urgently needs a media that supports the public interest – not the interests of a toxic industry that is putting all of our futures at risk”. Fossil Fuel Projects Equinor claims it supplies 27 percent of the UK’s energy from oil and gas, and is currently investing $6 billion (£4.8 billion) a year in fossil fuel exploration and drilling. It also says that it powers one million homes in Europe via renewable offshore wind.  Rosebank is the UK’s largest undeveloped oil and gas field, and could produce around 300 million barrels of oil over its lifetime, emitting 200 million tonnes of carbon dioxide.  In October, DeSmog revealed that Equinor urged the UK government to help promote the oil and gas industry, and was one of several companies which lobbied to water down the windfall tax on oil and gas company profits following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.  The UK government controversially approved the Rosebank project in September, despite the International Energy Agency stating that new oil and gas exploration is incompatible with the ambition to reach net zero emissions by 2050. Green Party MP Caroline Lucas labelled the decision “morally obscene”. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak used his address at the COP28 climate summit in December to claim that “climate politics is close to breaking point”, while stating that the UK will meet its net zero targets, “but we’ll do it in a more pragmatic way, which doesn’t burden working people”. However, a 2023 court case found that the government’s plans only added up to 95 percent of the reductions needed to meet its net zero targets. The Conservative government has said it plans to “max out” the UK’s North Sea oil and gas reserves. Tessa Khan added: “Those pushing for new oil and gas drilling, whether that’s the UK government, GB News or Equinor, are making things worse for the millions struggling with high energy bills and for those now struggling to cope with the impacts of climate change such as UK farmers – and all just to make a few oil and gas companies and their shareholders even richer.” DeSmog has previously revealed that the Conservative Party received £3.5 million in donations from fossil fuel interests and climate science deniers in 2022, while two-thirds of the directors in charge of the party’s multi-million-pound endowment fund have a financial interest in oil, gas, and highly polluting industries. The post Prospective GB News Board Member is Fossil Fuel Investor appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— EPA’s New Rule Aims to Cut Toxic Emissions, but Cancer Alley Air Pollution Could Worsen

 

at 4/10/24 4:35pm

Leaders in the fight for clean air from Louisiana’s Cancer Alley joined the Environmental Protection Agency’s Administrator Michael Regan on April 9 in Washington, D.C., for the announcement of a new rule governing air toxics-spewing chemical plants. The rule is intended to prevent cancer in surrounding low-income and minority communities. The announcement represents a milestone for environmental justice in communities historically overburdened by air-toxics pollution. But a growing number of proposed industrial projects threaten to further pollute the mostly low-income black neighborhoods along the Mississippi River between Baton Rouge and New Orleans — already home to a large number of petrochemical plants and refineries.  Robert Taylor, leader of the Concerned Citizens of St. John the Baptist Parish, and Sharon Lavigne, head of  RISE St. James, expressed gratitude to Regan for setting the new rules. They praised him for following through with his promise to help their communities, though both activists are painfully aware that the fight for environmental justice is far from over.  Robert Taylor with the Concerned Citizens of St. John the Baptist Parish in the Zion Travelers Cemetery next to the Marathon Refinery, April 6, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky The EPA stressed that the regulations, which pertain to synthetic organic chemical plants and polymer- and resin-producing facilities, will dramatically reduce the risk of elevated air toxics-related cancer in communities surrounding plants that emit ethylene oxide (EtO), chloroprene and other dangerous chemicals, officials said. Rules pertaining to EtO and chloroprene have been years in the making.The new regulations for EtO, chloroprene, benzene, vinyl chloride,1,3 butadiene and ethylene dichloride emissions pertains to over 200 manufacturing facilities across the nation that emit one or more of the hazardous chemicals   One of Evonik’s facilities in St. John the Baptist Parish, which is a source for EtO emissions, April 8, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky A Dow Chemical facility in Lake Charles Parish identified by the EPA as being one of the largest emitters of Eto in the country, Jan. 12, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky On April 8, RISE St. James, and Inclusive Louisiana, another Cancer Alley community advocacy group in St. James, held back-to-back press conferences before meeting in court to challenge St. James Parish officials for permitting Koch Industries’ planned expansion of its looming methanol plant in St. James, which is already underway.  Gail LeBoeuf In front of Inclusive Louisianas new headquarters in St. James Parish, April 8, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Pam Spees, far right, an attorney representing the Cancer Alley plaintiffs speaks at Inclusive Louisiana’s press conference on April 8, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Community members argue that the parish council didn’t weigh the potential damage from the plants pollution against its economic benefits. We have had enough of them telling us about jobs and the economy when our health is suffering,” Barbara Washington, one of the founders of Inclusive Louisiana, said before the hearing began. Gail LeBoeuf, another founding member of Inclusive Louisiana, concurred, adding that the economic gains to the community from the plant expansion are negligible.  The “parish and Koch attorneys say the groups have misread and misapplied the parishs land-use laws and engaged in ‘hyperbole’ over the expansions pollution levels and its possible health impacts on its neighbors,” according to the Advocate, a Louisiana newspaper. Koch Industries methanol facility in St. James, October 22, 2022. Credit: Julie Dermansky A former high school in St. James Parish is now an administrative office for Koch Industries’ methanol plant, Oct 22, 2022. Credit: Julie Dermansky The fact that Koch Industries’ administrative office is located in a former high school, which Yuhuang Chemical Industries bought from the parish’s school board a few years ago before selling it to Koch, shows how the parish favors industry over community concerns, according to members of Rise St. James and Inclusive Louisiana. They allege that the sale of the facility, which had been renovated shortly before its sale to a chemical company, was part of the parish’s plan to depopulate the Fifth District, where Formosa Plastics plans to build its massive petrochemical complex.  Members of the Descedants Project, another Cancer Alley community group, attended the St. John the Baptist Parish’s council meeting held on April 9, to voice opposition to a vote the council held to weaken environmental protections already in place. The council voted 7 to 2 to alter its zoning rules — which in turn granted a waiver to Greenfield LA to exempt them from a 2,000-foot setback, bringing the company one step closer to building a proposed grain elevator project. The controversial facility, if realized, will subject the community to additional air pollution. The Descendants Project asserts the grain elevator will destroy its community’s way of life by further industrializing the once pastoral region. Greenfield, like Koch, contends that its project will be an asset to the community and will not harm it. EPA Administrator Michael Regan, left, Robert Taylor, middle, the founder of the Concerned Citizens of St. John the Baptist Parish, and Lydia Gerard, far right, walk to the Fifth Ward Elementary School during Regans Journey for Justice Tour, November 16, 2021. Credit: Julie Dermansky Sharon Lavign with EPA Administrator Michael Regan in St. James Parish, Nov. 16, 2021. Credit: Julie Dermansky At the announcement of the new EPA rule, Regan reflected on his first visit to Robert Taylor’s community in November 2021 on his “Journey to Justice” tour. He said the Black students at the Fifth Ward Elementary School who were exposed to chloroprene emissions from the nearby Dupont/Denka manufacturing facility, reminded him of his son. Regan said that listening to Cancer Alley community members and others exposed to toxic chemicals across the Gulf south during that trip inspired him to use his “bully pulpit” to protect them as much as he could, and praised the Biden administration for directing him to do so.  Before the new rule was announced, Taylor, whose community has the dubious distinction of being the only one in the U.S. exposed to EtO and chloroprene, expressed concern to me that despite the new EPA regulations, the children that go to the Fifth Ward Elementary School will continue to be bombarded with toxic emissions until the rule is enacted. He is outraged that students still attend the school, and he can not understand why, even after the EPA sent a highly critical letter to the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) and the state’s Board of Health that encouraged  the state regulators to direct the St. John the Baptist School Board to relocate the children. The EPA does arguably have the power to shut down the plant, though it would not give me a yes or a no when I asked the agency if it does. When the EPA had the Department of Justice file a complaint against Denka in 2023, it cited an emergency power granted in Section 303 of the Clean Air Act that not only empowers the agency to take legal action, but also to use its authority to address risks before they cause harm. This includes the ability to stop a facility from operating for at least 60 days while other measures are being considered if the EPA deems its emissions to be an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health or welfare of the environment.  Lavigne, who won the Goldman Environmental Prize for her efforts fighting against Formosa Plastic’s proposed multi-billion-dollar plastic manufacturing complex in 2019, had to walk back her claims of victory against the project earlier this year. Louisiana’s First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the LDEQ’s decision to issue air pollution permits for the project, which a lower court had revoked in 2022.  RISE St. James continues to call on the Biden administration to protect its community by directing the the U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers to deny Formosa Plastics a permit to build in designated wetlands. In November 2020, the Corp. revoked a permit it issued to the company after acknowledging errors in its original analysis.  Wilma Subra in her office in Iberia Parish, March 3, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Environmental scientist and community advocate Wilma Subra, who was part of a team of  environmental justice advocates that advised the EPA on the finalized rule on chemical plants, was hesitant to hail the new regulation as a major victory. “While there is a lot to cheer about,” she told me on a call after the rule was announced, “only time will tell if they will ever be enacted.”  Subra noted that legal challenges and or a change in who is running the White House  could derail the rule from being enacted. And even if the new rule is put in place, the companies impacted by it have a grace period between 90 days and up to two years to comply with different requirements included in it. Meanwhile, Louisiana is poised to welcome more polluting facilities to Cancer Alley and to allow existing ones to expand.  Like Taylor, Subra is dismayed that students still attend the Fifth Ward Elementary School.  She warned school board members in 2023 about the cumulative health impacts that exposure to nearby toxic emssions can have, especially on children. A flare at Shell’s Norco Manufacturing Complex in St. Charles Parish, Jan. 19, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Exxonmobil Baton Rouge Refinery and Chemical Complex, Jan. 17, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Subra also pointed out that with more extreme weather events predicted by climate scientists due to climate change, like the cold snaps in south Louisiana this winter when temperatures dipped below freezing for a few days in a row, chemical plants often release toxic emissions well beyond their permitted levels. While the new rule could lead to a decrease in some toxic emissions when these types of pollution incidents occur, it is unclear how much impact the new rule could have during these events. The post EPAs New Rule Aims to Cut Toxic Emissions, but Cancer Alley Air Pollution Could Worsen appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— EPA’s New Rule Aims to Cut Toxic Emissions, But Cancer Alley Air Pollution Could Worsen

 

at 4/10/24 4:35pm

Leaders in the fight for clean air from Louisiana’s Cancer Alley joined the Environmental Protection Agency’s Administrator Michael Regan on April 9 in Washington, D.C., for the announcement of a new rule governing air toxics-spewing chemical plants. The rule is intended to prevent cancer in surrounding low-income and minority communities. The announcement represents a milestone for environmental justice in communities historically overburdened by air-toxics pollution. But a growing number of proposed industrial projects threaten to further pollute the mostly low-income black neighborhoods along the Mississippi River between Baton Rouge and New Orleans — already home to a large number of petrochemical plants and refineries.  Robert Taylor, leader of the Concerned Citizens of St. John the Baptist Parish, and Sharon Lavigne, head of  RISE St. James, expressed gratitude to Regan for setting the new rules. They praised him for following through with his promise to help their communities, though both activists are painfully aware that the fight for environmental justice is far from over.  Robert Taylor with the Concerned Citizens of St. John the Baptist Parish in the Zion Travelers Cemetery next to the Marathon Refinery, April 6, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky The EPA stressed that the regulations, which pertain to synthetic organic chemical plants and polymer- and resin-producing facilities, will dramatically reduce the risk of elevated air toxics-related cancer in communities surrounding plants that emit ethylene oxide (EtO), chloroprene and other dangerous chemicals, officials said. Rules pertaining to EtO and chloroprene have been years in the making.The new regulations for EtO, chloroprene, benzene, vinyl chloride,1,3 butadiene and ethylene dichloride emissions pertains to over 200 manufacturing facilities across the nation that emit one or more of the hazardous chemicals   One of Evonik’s facilities in St. John the Baptist Parish, which is a source for EtO emissions, April 8, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky A Dow Chemical facility in Lake Charles Parish identified by the EPA as being one of the largest emitters of Eto in the country, Jan. 12, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky On April 8, RISE St. James, and Inclusive Louisiana, another Cancer Alley community advocacy group in St. James, held back-to-back press conferences before meeting in court to challenge St. James Parish officials for permitting Koch Industries’ planned expansion of its looming methanol plant in St. James, which is already underway.  Gail LeBoeuf In front of Inclusive Louisianas new headquarters in St. James Parish, April 8, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Pam Spees, far right, an attorney representing the Cancer Alley plaintiffs speaks at Inclusive Louisiana’s press conference on April 8, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Community members argue that the parish council didn’t weigh the potential damage from the plants pollution against its economic benefits. We have had enough of them telling us about jobs and the economy when our health is suffering,” Barbara Washington, one of the founders of Inclusive Louisiana, said before the hearing began. Gail LeBoeuf, another founding member of Inclusive Louisiana, concurred, adding that the economic gains to the community from the plant expansion are negligible.  The “parish and Koch attorneys say the groups have misread and misapplied the parishs land-use laws and engaged in ‘hyperbole’ over the expansions pollution levels and its possible health impacts on its neighbors,” according to the Advocate, a Louisiana newspaper. Koch Industries methanol facility in St. James, October 22, 2022. Credit: Julie Dermansky A former high school in St. James Parish is now an administrative office for Koch Industries’ methanol plant, Oct 22, 2022. Credit: Julie Dermansky The fact that Koch Industries’ administrative office is located in a former high school, which Yuhuang Chemical Industries bought from the parish’s school board a few years ago before selling it to Koch, shows how the parish favors industry over community concerns, according to members of Rise St. James and Inclusive Louisiana. They allege that the sale of the facility, which had been renovated shortly before its sale to a chemical company, was part of the parish’s plan to depopulate the Fifth District, where Formosa Plastics plans to build its massive petrochemical complex.  Members of the Descedants Project, another Cancer Alley community group, attended the St. John the Baptist Parish’s council meeting held on April 9, to voice opposition to a vote the council held to weaken environmental protections already in place. The council voted 7 to 2 to alter its zoning rules — which in turn granted a waiver to Greenfield LA to exempt them from a 2,000-foot setback, bringing the company one step closer to building a proposed grain elevator project. The controversial facility, if realized, will subject the community to additional air pollution. The Descendants Project asserts the grain elevator will destroy its community’s way of life by further industrializing the once pastoral region. Greenfield, like Koch, contends that its project will be an asset to the community and will not harm it. EPA Administrator Michael Regan, left, Robert Taylor, middle, the founder of the Concerned Citizens of St. John the Baptist Parish, and Lydia Gerard, far right, walk to the Fifth Ward Elementary School during Regans Journey for Justice Tour, November 16, 2021. Credit: Julie Dermansky Sharon Lavign with EPA Administrator Michael Regan in St. James Parish, Nov. 16, 2021. Credit: Julie Dermansky At the announcement of the new EPA rule, Regan reflected on his first visit to Robert Taylor’s community in November 2021 on his “Journey to Justice” tour. He said the Black students at the Fifth Ward Elementary School who were exposed to chloroprene emissions from the nearby Dupont/Denka manufacturing facility, reminded him of his son. Regan said that listening to Cancer Alley community members and others exposed to toxic chemicals across the Gulf south during that trip inspired him to use his “bully pulpit” to protect them as much as he could, and praised the Biden administration for directing him to do so.  Before the new rule was announced, Taylor, whose community has the dubious distinction of being the only one in the U.S. exposed to EtO and chloroprene, expressed concern to me that despite the new EPA regulations, the children that go to the Fifth Ward Elementary School will continue to be bombarded with toxic emissions until the rule is enacted. He is outraged that students still attend the school, and he can not understand why, even after the EPA sent a highly critical letter to the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) and the state’s Board of Health that encouraged  the state regulators to direct the St. John the Baptist School Board to relocate the children. The EPA does arguably have the power to shut down the plant, though it would not give me a yes or a no when I asked the agency if it does. When the EPA had the Department of Justice file a complaint against Denka in 2023, it cited an emergency power granted in Section 303 of the Clean Air Act that not only empowers the agency to take legal action, but also to use its authority to address risks before they cause harm. This includes the ability to stop a facility from operating for at least 60 days while other measures are being considered if the EPA deems its emissions to be an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health or welfare of the environment.  Lavigne, who won the Goldman Environmental Prize for her efforts fighting against Formosa Plastic’s proposed multi-billion-dollar plastic manufacturing complex in 2019, had to walk back her claims of victory against the project earlier this year. Louisiana’s First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the LDEQ’s decision to issue air pollution permits for the project, which a lower court had revoked in 2022.  RISE St. James continues to call on the Biden administration to protect its community by directing the the U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers to deny Formosa Plastics a permit to build in designated wetlands. In November 2020, the Corp. revoked a permit it issued to the company after acknowledging errors in its original analysis.  Wilma Subra in her office in Iberia Parish, March 3, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Environmental scientist and community advocate Wilma Subra, who was part of a team of  environmental justice advocates that advised the EPA on the finalized rule on chemical plants, was hesitant to hail the new regulation as a major victory. “While there is a lot to cheer about,” she told me on a call after the rule was announced, “only time will tell if they will ever be enacted.”  Subra noted that legal challenges and or a change in who is running the White House  could derail the rule from being enacted. And even if the new rule is put in place, the companies impacted by it have a grace period between 90 days and up to two years to comply with different requirements included in it. Meanwhile, Louisiana is poised to welcome more polluting facilities to Cancer Alley and to allow existing ones to expand.  Like Taylor, Subra is dismayed that students still attend the Fifth Ward Elementary School.  She warned school board members in 2023 about the cumulative health impacts that exposure to nearby toxic emssions can have, especially on children. A flare at Shell’s Norco Manufacturing Complex in St. Charles Parish, Jan. 19, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Exxonmobil Baton Rouge Refinery and Chemical Complex, Jan. 17, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Subra also pointed out that with more extreme weather events predicted by climate scientists due to climate change, like the cold snaps in south Louisiana this winter when temperatures dipped below freezing for a few days in a row, chemical plants often release toxic emissions well beyond their permitted levels. While the new rule could lead to a decrease in some toxic emissions when these types of pollution incidents occur, it is unclear how much impact the new rule could have during these events. The post EPAs New Rule Aims to Cut Toxic Emissions, But Cancer Alley Air Pollution Could Worsen appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— EPA’s New Rule Aims at Cutting Toxic Emissions, But Cancer Alley Air Pollution Could Worsen

 

at 4/10/24 4:35pm

Leaders in the fight for clean air from Louisiana’s Cancer Alley joined the Environmental Protection Agency’s Administrator Michael Regan on April 9 in Washington, D.C., for the announcement of a new rule governing air toxics-spewing chemical plants. The rule is intended to prevent cancer in surrounding low-income and minority communities. The announcement represents a milestone for environmental justice in communities historically overburdened by air-toxics pollution. But a growing number of proposed industrial projects threaten to further pollute the mostly low-income black neighborhoods along the Mississippi River between Baton Rouge and New Orleans — already home to a large number of petrochemical plants and refineries.  Robert Taylor, leader of the Concerned Citizens of St. John the Baptist Parish, and Sharon Lavigne, head of  RISE St. James, expressed gratitude to Regan for setting the new rules. They praised him for following through with his promise to help their communities, though both activists are painfully aware that the fight for environmental justice is far from over.  Robert Taylor with the Concerned Citizens of St. John the Baptist Parish in the Zion Travelers Cemetery next to the Marathon Refinery, April 6, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky The EPA stressed that the regulations, which pertain to synthetic organic chemical plants and polymer- and resin-producing facilities, will dramatically reduce the risk of elevated air toxics-related cancer in communities surrounding plants that emit ethylene oxide (EtO), chloroprene and other dangerous chemicals, officials said. Rules pertaining to EtO and chloroprene have been years in the making.The new regulations for EtO, chloroprene, benzene, vinyl chloride,1,3 butadiene and ethylene dichloride emissions pertains to over 200 manufacturing facilities across the nation that emit one or more of the hazardous chemicals   One of Evonik’s facilities in St. John the Baptist Parish, which is a source for EtO emissions, April 8, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky A Dow Chemical facility in Lake Charles Parish identified by the EPA as being one of the largest emitters of Eto in the country, Jan. 12, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky On April 8, RISE St. James, and Inclusive Louisiana, another Cancer Alley community advocacy group in St. James, held back-to-back press conferences before meeting in court to challenge St. James Parish officials for permitting Koch Industries’ planned expansion of its looming methanol plant in St. James, which is already underway.  Gail LeBoeuf In front of Inclusive Louisianas new headquarters in St. James Parish, April 8, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Pam Spees, an attorney representing the Cancer Alley plaintiffs speaks at Inclusive Louisiana’s press conference on April 8, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Community members argue that the parish council didn’t weigh the potential damage from the plants pollution against its economic benefits. We have had enough of them telling us about jobs and the economy when our health is suffering,” Barbara Washington, one of the founders of Inclusive Louisiana, said before the hearing began. Gail LeBoeuf, another founding member of Inclusive Louisiana, concurred, adding that the economic gains to the community from the plant expansion are negligible.  The “parish and Koch attorneys say the groups have misread and misapplied the parishs land-use laws and engaged in ‘hyperbole’ over the expansions pollution levels and its possible health impacts on its neighbors,” according to the Advocate, a Louisiana newspaper. Koch Industries methanol facility in St. James, October 22, 2022. Credit: Julie Dermansky A former high school in St. James Parish is now an administrative office for Koch Industries’ methanol plant, Oct 22, 2022. Credit: Julie Dermansky The fact that Koch Industries’ administrative office is located in a former high school, which Yuhuang Chemical Industries bought from the parish’s school board a few years ago before selling it to Koch, shows how the parish favors industry over community concerns, according to members of Rise St. James and Inclusive Louisiana. They allege that the sale of the facility, which had been renovated shortly before its sale to a chemical company, was part of the parish’s plan to depopulate the Fifth District, where Formosa Plastics plans to build its massive petrochemical complex.  Members of the Descedants Project, another Cancer Alley community group, attended the St. John the Baptist Parish’s council meeting held on April 9, to voice opposition to a vote the council held to weaken environmental protections already in place. The council voted 7 to 2 to alter its zoning rules — which in turn granted a waiver to Greenfield LA to exempt them from a 2,000-foot setback, bringing the company one step closer to building a proposed grain elevator project. The controversial facility, if realized, will subject the community to additional air pollution. The Descendants Project asserts the grain elevator will destroy its community’s way of life by further industrializing the once pastoral region. Greenfield, like Koch, contends that its project will be an asset to the community and will not harm it. EPA Administrator Michael Regan, left, Robert Taylor, middle, the founder of the Concerned Citizens of St. John the Baptist Parish, and Lydia Gerard, far right, walk to the Fifth Ward Elementary School during Regans Journey for Justice Tour, November 16, 2021. Credit: Julie Dermansky Sharon Lavinge with EPA Administrator Michael Regan in St. James Parish, Nov. 16, 2021. Credit: Julie Dermansky At the announcement of the new EPA rule, Regan reflected on his first visit to Robert Taylor’s community in November 2021 on his “Journey to Justice” tour. He said the Black students at the Fifth Ward Elementary School who were exposed to chloroprene emissions from the nearby Dupont/Denka manufacturing facility, reminded him of his son. Regan said that listening to Cancer Alley community members and others exposed to toxic chemicals across the Gulf south during that trip inspired him to use his “bully pulpit” to protect them as much as he could, and praised the Biden administration for directing him to do so.  Before the new rule was announced, Taylor, whose community has the dubious distinction of being the only one in the U.S. exposed to EtO and chloroprene, expressed concern to me that despite the new EPA regulations, the children that go to the Fifth Ward Elementary School will continue to be bombarded with toxic emissions until the rule is enacted. He is outraged that students still attend the school, and he can not understand why, even after the EPA sent a highly critical letter to the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) and the state’s Board of Health that encouraged  the state regulators to direct the St. John the Baptist School Board to relocate the children. The EPA does arguably have the power to shut down the plant, though it would not give me a yes or a no when I asked the agency if it does. When the EPA had the Department of Justice file a complaint against Denka in 2023, it cited an emergency power granted in Section 303 of the Clean Air Act that not only empowers the agency to take legal action, but also to use its authority to address risks before they cause harm. This includes the ability to stop a facility from operating for at least 60 days while other measures are being considered if the EPA deems its emissions to be an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health or welfare of the environment.  Lavigne, who won the Goldman Environmental Prize for her efforts fighting against Formosa Plastic’s proposed multi-billion-dollar plastic manufacturing complex in 2019, had to walk back her claims of victory against the project earlier this year. Louisiana’s First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the LDEQ’s decision to issue air pollution permits for the project, which a lower court had revoked in 2022.  RISE St. James continues to call on the Biden administration to protect its community by directing the the U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers to deny Formosa Plastics a permit to build in designated wetlands. In November 2020, the Corp. revoked a permit it issued to the company after acknowledging errors in its original analysis.  Wilma Subra in her office in Iberia Parish, March 3, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Environmental scientist and community advocate Wilma Subra, who was part of a team of  environmental justice advocates that advised the EPA on the finalized rule on chemical plants, was hesitant to hail the new regulation as a major victory. “While there is a lot to cheer about,” she told me on a call after the rule was announced, “only time will tell if they will ever be enacted.”  Subra noted that legal challenges and or a change in who is running the White House  could derail the rule from being enacted. And even if the new rule is put in place, the companies impacted by it have a grace period between 90 days and up to two years to comply with different requirements included in it. Meanwhile, Louisiana is poised to welcome more polluting facilities to Cancer Alley and to allow existing ones to expand.  Like Taylor, Subra is dismayed that students still attend the Fifth Ward Elementary School.  She warned school board members in 2023 about the cumulative health impacts that exposure to nearby toxic emssions can have, especially on children. A flare at Shell’s Norco Manufacturing Complex in St. Charles Parish, Jan. 19, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Exxonmobil Baton Rouge Refinery and Chemical Complex, Jan. 17, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Subra also pointed out that with more extreme weather events predicted by climate scientists due to climate change, like the cold snaps in south Louisiana this winter when temperatures dipped below freezing for a few days in a row, chemical plants often release toxic emissions well beyond their permitted levels. While the new rule could lead to a decrease in some toxic emissions when these types of pollution incidents occur, it is unclear how much impact the new rule could have during these events. The post EPAs New Rule Aims at Cutting Toxic Emissions, But Cancer Alley Air Pollution Could Worsen appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— As Cancer Alley Activists Look on, EPA Unveils Clean Air Rule to Cut Chemical Emissions

 

at 4/10/24 4:35pm

Leaders in the fight for clean air from Louisiana’s Cancer Alley joined the Environmental Protection Agency’s Administrator Michael Regan on April 9 in Washington, D.C., for the announcement of a new rule governing air toxics-spewing chemical plants. The rule is intended to prevent cancer in surrounding low-income and minority communities. The announcement represents a milestone for environmental justice in communities historically overburdened by air-toxics pollution. But a growing number of proposed industrial projects threaten to further pollute the mostly low-income black neighborhoods along the Mississippi River between Baton Rouge and New Orleans — already home to a large number of petrochemical plants and refineries.  Robert Taylor, leader of the Concerned Citizens of St. John the Baptist Parish, and Sharon Lavigne, head of  RISE St. James, expressed gratitude to Regan for setting the new rules. They praised him for following through with his promise to help their communities, though both activists are painfully aware that the fight for environmental justice is far from over.  Robert Taylor with the Concerned Citizens of St. John the Baptist Parish in the Zion Travelers Cemetery next to the Marathon Refinery, April 6, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky The EPA stressed that the regulations, which pertain to synthetic organic chemical plants and polymer- and resin-producing facilities, will dramatically reduce the risk of elevated air toxics-related cancer in communities surrounding plants that emit ethylene oxide (EtO), chloroprene and other dangerous chemicals, officials said. Rules pertaining to EtO and chloroprene have been years in the making.The new regulations for ethylene oxide, chloroprene, benzene, vinyl chloride,1,3 butadiene and ethylene dichloride emissions, pertains to over 200 manufacturing facilities across the nation that emit one or more of the hazardous chemicals   One of Evonik’s facilities in St. John the Baptist Parish, which is a source for EtO emissions, April 8, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky A Dow Chemical facility in Lake Charles Parish identified by the EPA as being one of the largest emitters of Eto in the country, Jan. 12, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky On April 8, RISE St. James, and Inclusive Louisiana, another Cancer Alley community advocacy group in St. James, held back-to-back press conferences before meeting in court to challenge St. James Parish officials for permitting Koch Industries’ planned expansion of its looming methanol plant in St. James, which is already underway.  Gail LeBoeuf In front of Inclusive Louisianas new headquarters in St. James Parish, April 8, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Pam Spees, an attorney representing the Cancer Alley plaintiffs speaks at Inclusive Louisiana’s press conference on April 8, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Community members argue that the parish council didn’t weigh the potential damage from the plants pollution against its economic benefits. We have had enough of them telling us about jobs and the economy when our health is suffering,” Barbara Washington, one of the founders of Inclusive Louisiana, stated before the hearing began. Gail LeBoeuf, another founding member of Inclusive Louisiana, concurred, adding that the economic gains to the community from the plant expansion are negligible.  The “parish and Koch attorneys say the groups have misread and misapplied the parishs land-use laws and engaged in ‘hyperbole’ over the expansions pollution levels and its possible health impacts on its neighbors,” according to the Advocate, a Louisiana newspaper. Koch Industries methanol facility in St. James, October 22, 2022. Credit: Julie Dermansky A former high school in St. James Parish is now an administrative office for Koch Industries’ methanol plant, Oct 22, 2022. Credit: Julie Dermansky The fact that Koch Industries’ administrative office is located in a former high school, that Yuhuang Chemical Industries bought from the parish’s school board a few years ago before selling it to Koch, shows how the parish favors industry over community concerns, according to members of Rise St. James and Inclusive Louisiana. They allege that the sale of the facility, which had been renovated shortly before its sale to a chemical company  was part of the parish’s plan to depopulate the Fifth District, where Formosa Plastics plans to build its massive petrochemical complex.  Members of the Descedants Project, another Cancer Alley community group, attended the St. John the Baptist Parish’s council meeting held on April 9, to voice opposition to a vote the council held to weaken environmental protections already in place. The council voted 7 to 2 to alter its zoning rules — which in turn granted a waiver to Greenfield LA to exempt them from a 2,000-foot setback, bringing the company one step closer to being able to build a proposed grain elevator project. The controversial facility, if realized, will subject the community to additional air pollution. The Descendants Project asserts the grain elevator will destroy its community’s way of life by further industrializing the once pastoral region. Greenfield, like Koch, contends that its project will be an asset to the community and will not harm it. EPA Administrator Michael Regan, left, Robert Talyor, middle, the founder of the Concerned Citizens of St. John the Baptist Parish, and Lydia Gerard, far right, walk to the Fifth Ward Elementary School during Regans Journey for Justice Tour, in 2021. Credit: Julie Dermansky At the announcement of the new EPA rule, Regan reflected on his first visit to Robert Taylor’s community in November 2021 on his “Journey to Justice” tour. He said the Black students at theFifth Ward Elementary Schoolwho were exposed to chloroprene emissions from the nearby Dupont/Denka manufacturing facility, reminded him of his son. Regan said that listening to Cancer Alley community members and others exposed to toxic chemicals across the Gulf south during that trip inspired him to use his “bully pulpit” to protect them as much as he could, and praised the Biden administration for directing him to do so.  Before the new rule was announced,Taylor, whose community has the dubious distinction of being the only one in the U.S. exposed to EtO and chloroprene, expressed concern to me, that despite the new EPA regulations, the children that go to the Fifth Ward Elementary School will continue to be bombarded with toxic emissions until the rule is enacted. He is outraged that students still attend the school, and he can not understand why, even after the EPA sent a highly critical letter to the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) and the state’s Board of Health that encouraged  the state regulators to direct the St. John the Baptist School Board to relocate the children. The EPA does arguably have the power to shut down the plant, though it would not give me a yes or a no when I asked the agency if it does. When the EPA had the Department of Justice file a complaint against Denka in 2023, it cited an emergency power granted in Section 303 of the Clean Air Act that not only empowers the agency to take legal action, but also to use its authority to address risks before they cause harm. This includes the ability to stop a facility from operating for at least 60 days while other measures are being considered if the EPA deems its emissions to be an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health or welfare of the environment.  Lavigne, who won the Goldman Environmental Prize for her efforts fighting against Formosa Plastic’s proposed multi-billion-dollar plastic manufacturing complex in 2019, had to walk back her claims of victory against the project earlier this year. Louisiana’s First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the LDEQ’s decision to issue air pollution permits for the project, which a lower court had revoked in 2022.  RISE St. James continues to call on the Biden administration to protect its community by directing the the U.S. Army Corp. of Engineers to deny Formosa Plastics a permit to build in designated wetlands. In November 2020, the Corp. revoked a permit it issued to the company after acknowledging errors in its original analysis.  Wilma Subra in her office in Iberia Parish, March 3, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Environmental scientist and community advocate Wilma Subra, who was part of a team of  environmental justice advocates that advised the EPA on the finalized rule on chemical plants, was hesitant to hail the new regulation as a major victory. “While there is a lot to cheer about,” she told me on a call after the rule was announced, “only time will tell if they will ever be enacted.”  Subra noted that legal challenges and or a change in who is running the White House  could derail the rule from being enacted. And even if the new rule is put in place, the companies impacted by it have a grace period between 90 days and up to two years to comply with different requirements included in it. Meanwhile, Louisiana is poised to welcome more polluting facilities to Cancer Alley and to allow existing ones to expand.  Like Taylor, Subra is dismayed that students still attend the Fifth Ward Elementary School.  She warned school board members in 2023 about the cumulative health impacts that exposure to toxic emssions can have, especially on children. Flare at Shell’s Norco Manufacturing Complex in St. Charles Parish, Jan. 19, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Exxonmobil Baton Rouge Refinery and Chemical Complex, Jan. 17, 2024. Credit: Julie Dermansky Subra also pointed out that with more extreme weather events predicted by climate scientists due to climate change, like the cold snaps in south Louisiana this winter when temperatures dipped below freezing for a few days in a row, chemical plants often release toxic emissions well beyond their permitted levels. While the new rule could lead to a decrease in some toxic emissions when these types of pollution incidents occur, it is unclear how much impact the new rule could have during these events. The post As Cancer Alley Activists Look on, EPA Unveils Clean Air Rule to Cut Chemical Emissions appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— The ECHR’s First Climate Ruling: What Does it Mean?

 

at 4/9/24 10:09am

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has today ruled that insufficient action to tackle climate change is a violation of human rights. In a historic judgement, the court ruled that Switzerland’s failure to do enough to cut its greenhouse gas emissions breached the rights to life and respect for family and private life of some of its most vulnerable citizens. It is the first time this court, which is responsible for interpreting the European Convention on Human Rights, a treaty signed by all members of the Council of Europe (including the UK), has ruled on a climate change-related matter. The court heard three climate cases last year in its grand chamber, which is reserved for the most serious and novel complaints. The first was brought by a group of more than 2,000 Swiss women over the age of 64, known as the KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz (Senior Women for Climate Protection Switzerland). They argued they were particularly vulnerable to the climate crisis because heatwaves, which are becoming more frequent and intense, put their health at risk. Supported by Greenpeace Switzerland, their legal team presented scientific evidence showing that older people – particularly women – are more likely to die during periods of intense heat. They asked the court to order Switzerland to do everything in its power to help keep the global temperature rise to below 1.5C – the 2015 Paris Agreement’s goal warming limit. The Swiss government agreed that rising temperatures were harming people’s health but argued in court that the KlimaSeniorinnen should not be treated as victims under the law and said the link between its actions and their suffering was “too tenuous and remote”. It also said that some of the claimants, several of whom were over the age of 80 and some of whom had died since the case was first filed, were unlikely to be alive by the time the global temperature rise potentially breaches the 1.5C threshold. In a near-unanimous decision, the 17-judge panel ruled that there were critical gaps in Switzerland’s attempt to put in place a domestic climate regulation framework. It said Swiss authorities had failed to quantify how they would cut national greenhouse gas emissions, through a carbon budget or otherwise, and had failed to meet past emission reduction targets. While recognising that states have wide discretion in setting their own laws and developing measures to cut national emissions, the court said Swiss authorities had not acted quickly or decisively enough. The only dissenting opinion was from UK judge Tim Eicke, who has previously said that the ECHR is not designed for environmental cases. He argued that the rest of the panel “tried to run before it could walk” and “went beyond what was legitimate”. In his view, the judgement would not make a real difference to the fight against climate change and he said the other judges were “giving (false) hope that litigation and the courts can provide the answer”. Nonetheless, the near unanimous decision was an unusual display of solidarity for this court. The judgement cannot be appealed. Aoife Nolan, professor of international human rights law at the University of Nottingham, said the decision was a “huge step forward in terms of ensuring European human rights law protection in relation to the environment”. She added that the decision would have a “seismic impact” on ongoing political discussions around amending the European Convention on Human Rights to recognise the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. Wider Implications Climate litigation is a growing phenomenon around the world, and courts have previously linked climate inaction with human rights breaches, but this is the first time an international court has ruled on the matter. Professor Nolan said the court’s ruling on article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights was particularly important. “It found that this article encompasses a right to effective protection by the state authorities from the serious adverse effects of climate change on lives, health, well-being and equality of life,” she said.  The court did not prescribe exactly what Switzerland should do to resolve the problem, leaving it to the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers (composed of the foreign ministers of all member states) to come up with a solution. But it did lay out minimum governance standards that states should seek to follow. These include setting carbon budgets and interim targets, keeping these updated based on the best available evidence, and being transparent about how well they are being met. Jenny Sandvig, partner at law firm Simonsen Vogt Wiig, who gave a statement to the court during the KlimaSeniorinnen hearing in her previous role as policy director at the Norwegian National Human Rights Institution, said that Switzerland would likely need to tighten its climate goals.  “It’s implicit in the scientific grounding of the judgement that reduction targets have to be based on the remaining global carbon budget, without disproportionately burdening younger and future generations,” she said. Furthermore, the ruling stated that all countries within the court’s jurisdiction have to “undertake measures for the substantial and progressive reduction of their respective greenhouse gas emission levels, with a view to reaching net neutrality within, in principle, the next three decades.”  Although the judgement only applies directly to Switzerland, experts said it has clear implications for other states within the Council of Europe that have not set sufficiently ambitious emission reduction targets. More Cases to Answer The court dismissed the two other climate change lawsuits it heard last year. The most high profile of these was brought by a group of six young people from Portugal, led by 24-year-old Cláudia Duarte Agostinho, who claimed that government inaction on climate change discriminates against young people and poses a tangible risk to their life and health. Their case was motivated by forest fires that killed more than 100 people in Portugal in 2017 and which were worsened by climate change. The court ruled that the group had not cleared the initial legal hurdles for bringing a case to the ECHR, given that they had not taken their case through the whole domestic legal system first. Corina Heri, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Zurich, said that even though two cases were dismissed, the three climate lawsuits drew on and supported each other. “In particular, the arguments created by the Duarte Agostinho case shifted what was thought legally possible, and they created new approaches to how much states know and can be expected to do about climate change.” The judgments now open the way for a number of other climate-related lawsuits which had been adjourned. The highest profile of these was brought by Greenpeace Nordic against the Norwegian government, seeking to prevent the expansion of fossil fuel extraction in the Arctic. Another, brought by a group of Norwegian grandparents, challenges Norway on the same issue. The other cases are: ●  An Austrian man with a temperature-dependent form of multiple sclerosis who argues, like the Swiss women, that this makes him particularly vulnerable to heatwaves. ●  Five people from France, Cyprus, Belgium, Germany and Switzerland are taking action against 12 states, arguing that membership and use of the Energy Charter Treaty prevents governments from taking immediate measures to tackle climate change and therefore makes it impossible to achieve their Paris Agreement goals. ●  Nine teenagers and young adults say the German Climate Protection Act, an amended version of which entered into force on 31 August 2021, is not strong enough to meet climate targets in line with the Paris Agreement. This case is a follow-up to Germanys Federal Constitutional Court’s landmark judgment in Neubauer, which ordered the government to amend the act to comply with its climate targets. ●  A pair of related lawsuits are led by two young Italian women. As in the Duarte Agostinho case, they’re challenging all members of the Council of Europe, saying storms, forest fires, flooding and heatwaves have affected them physically and psychologically. Experts say some of these claims are similar to the successful KlimaSeniorinnen lawsuit, where individuals in particularly vulnerable situations are holding their governments to account for failing to take climate action. The decision is also expected to lead to fresh climate litigation against governments, at a national level, at the ECHR, and against major polluters. “Businesses are required to respect fundamental human rights under various instruments, so this is directly transposable to obligations for large companies,” said Sandvig. “The Swiss ruling sets a crucial legally binding precedent serving as a blueprint for how to successfully sue your own government over climate failures,” said Ruth Delbaere, legal campaigns director for activist group Avaaz. “The indomitable senior women have therefore opened a new chapter in climate litigation, showing how ordinary citizens can force climate action on reluctant governments.” The post The ECHR’s First Climate Ruling: What Does it Mean? appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— Sell Our CO2 to Pump More Oil? It’s Likely, Says Iowa-based Carbon Capture Project.

 

at 4/8/24 12:46pm

Despite pledges to the contrary, a massive proposed carbon capture project could in fact be used to pump more oil out of the ground, rather than simply storing carbon emissions from ethanol production, as it was pitched originally. A recent Reuters report indicates that, according to its review of regulatory filings and recordings of company officials, representatives from Summit Carbon Solutions have said the company is open to using captured carbon dioxide for enhanced oil recovery (EOR), a potential lifeline to North Dakota’s waning oil sector. “Today, we dont have any shippers who want to ship CO2 for EOR. When that changes, we will likely move it for that purpose, Wade Boeshans, Summits executive vice president, said at a December event in North Dakota hosted by the oil industry-backed astroturf group Friends of Ag and Energy. The company previously had denied its expansive Midwest Carbon Express project would be used for EOR, a process that involves injecting carbon dioxide into old oil wells to extract otherwise inaccessible sources of oil. A DeSmog investigation of a dozen major CCS projects, including many EOR projects, found cost-overruns, missed targets, and net increases in emissions.  While the oil industry brands carbon capture and storage (CCS) as a climate solution, most carbon capture projects currently operating in the United States, and around the world, are actually just used for EOR. And they aren’t even that good at storing carbon. “During EOR, 40 percent of the CO2 captured is released right back to the air,” Mark Jacobson, civil and environmental engineering professor at Stanford University, told DeSmog. And that’s before the newly extracted hydrocarbons are burned or otherwise used. Instead of reducing emissions, EOR projects rebranded as “CCS” are using federal tax incentives to keep oil and gas fields operational that otherwise would have run dry years ago. As proposed, Midwest Carbon Express is a 2,000-mile, $5.5 billion pipeline network that would connect 34 ethanol refineries in five states — Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, and North and South Dakota — and deposit carbon dioxide for permanent sequestration in North Dakota. The project has since grown to include over 50 ethanol plants. Primarily made from corn, ethanol is a major business for states like Iowa, the nation’s top corn-producer, but the biofuel’s environmental impact has increasingly come under fire and the Inflation Reduction Act offers tax incentives to ethanol producers that sequester their CO2. That created a major opportunity for Iowa-based Summit Carbon. However, the path to completion has been bumpy for Midwest Carbon Express. Last August, regulators in both North and South Dakota denied permits and applications for Summit Carbon to build portions of the pipeline network in those states. At the time, Summit Carbon indicated the company would refine its proposal and refile the necessary applications.  Meanwhile, the project has faced opposition from unlikely bedfellows, ranging from Native American tribes and farmers to environmentalists and rural conservatives. For instance, the North Dakota Republican Party is preparing to vote on a resolution supporting property rights and objecting to eminent domain for CO2 pipeline projects. Eminent domain is a legal tool used to seize private property, with compensation, for projects deemed in the public interest, and has been used for fossil fuel pipelines and highways. In late March, the North Dakota Public Service Commission announced a series of public hearings on the controversial CCS project, the last of which will take place in June. According to the North Dakota Monitor, Summit Carbon changed part of the pipeline route through North Dakota to avoid landslide areas and move it farther away from the capital city of Bismarck. Summit Carbon Solutions and its parent company have not returned requests for comment. A Change of Rhetoric? In its website’s ‘get the facts’ section, Summit Carbon states explicitly that the Midwest Carbon Express project would not be used for enhanced oil recovery. It then goes out of its way to distance the project from North Dakota’s well-established Bakken oil field, whose production peaked in 2019. “The permits we have filed, which specifies exactly what we are requesting from regulators, note clearly that our project is about the permanent sequestration of CO2,” states the company’s website. It goes on: “Summit Carbon Solutions’ sequestration site outside of Bismarck, North Dakota is entirely separate and apart from the Bakken or other areas where enhanced oil recovery is possible. The company is investing $100 million in its permanent storage locations in North Dakota.” An earlier version of the website, dating back to 2022, indicated that statements suggesting the project would use CO2 for EOR were a myth: “Summit Carbon Solutions … will not utilize this project for enhanced oil recovery.” The project’s critics, from corn farmers to climate scientists, previously identified the possibility that Midwest Carbon Express could divert its captured carbon to squeeze more oil out of the North Dakota Bakken formation, a concern that now appears to be justified. As reported by the North Dakota Monitor, Summit’s chief operations officer Jimmy Powell told the Iowa Utilities Board last year, “If another carrier decided to use, or ask us to transport CO2 for another purpose, like enhanced oil recovery, then that’s a possibility.” If Summit’s going to do enhanced oil recovery, it’s not a back door, it’s a wide-open front door to increase carbon dioxide emissions, because they’re going to increase oil production. That’s the whole game.David Schlissel, IEEFA That Summit Carbon has been entertaining opening their carbon capture project for EOR purposes in North Dakota is not surprising to Jacobson, the Stanford professor. He speculates that while Summit’s original plan may have been to store carbon dioxide underground, the company lacked a financial incentive to do so. “They have more incentive to find a buyer for the carbon dioxide,” said Jacobson, “and oil companies are by far the most interested in buying CO2, since they can use it for EOR. I think reality hit and they realized the cost of their project would be much greater than they thought, and so they began considering a way to pay for that.” The oil industry and its allies routinely argue that CCS, and EOR in particular, are “a critical part of meeting [American] global climate and energy security goals.” But given the tendency for EOR projects to overpromise and underdeliver, Jacobson dismisses such ‘ethical oil’ arguments as greenwashing. Another key issue with carbon capture and EOR is that both depend heavily on government subsidies, according to David Schlissel, Director of Resource Planning Analysis with the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA), a research nonprofit focused on the sustainable energy transition. With existing and proposed subsidies for CCS, Schlissel anticipates the U.S. government could be handing out tens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars on a technology and to companies that will continue exacerbating the climate crisis. “If Summit’s going to do enhanced oil recovery, it’s not a back door, it’s a wide-open front door to increase carbon dioxide emissions, because they’re going to increase oil production,” said Schlissel. “That’s the whole game.” He added that government incentives for alternative fuels, such as ethanol and hydrogen, or flawed technologies such as carbon capture and EOR, further sap limited financial resources from existing and proven climate technologies, including renewables, battery storage, and energy efficiency. “Im 77 and I tell young people this is the fight of their lives,” said Schlissel. The post Sell Our CO2 to Pump More Oil? It’s Likely, Says Iowa-based Carbon Capture Project. appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— U.S. Meat Lobby Celebrates ‘Positive Outcome’ of COP28

 

at 4/8/24 3:02am

Lobbyists for the world’s biggest meat companies have lauded a better than expected outcome at COP28, which they say left them “excited” and “enthusiastic” for their industry’s prospects. U.S. livestock bosses reflected on the conference’s implication for their sector on a virtual panel, fresh from “sharing U.S agriculture’s story” at the climate summit last December. Campaigners and climate scientists had hoped the summit – which was billed as a “Food COP” due to its focus on farming – would see governments agree to ambitious action to transform food systems in line with the goals of the Paris climate agreement. But while more than 130 governments pledged to tackle agriculture’s carbon footprint, a slew of announcements and initiatives failed to set binding targets, or to broach the question of reducing herds of ruminant livestock such as cattle and sheep, which are agriculture’s largest driver of emissions. In the online discussion, which was hosted by the trade outlet FeedStuffs, meat lobbyists groups made it clear they saw COP28 as a win.The three representatives all said there had been widespread recognition at the Dubai summit that agriculture was a “solution” to climate change, despite livestock accounting for over 30 percent of anthropogenic methane emissions.Outcomes at the summit were characterised as “a far more positive outcome than we had anticipated” by Constance Cullman, the president of the Animal Feed Industry Association (AFIA) – a US lobby group whose members include some of the world’s biggest meat and animal feed producers.She added that this was the first time she had “felt that optimistic” after a “large international gathering like this one”.Cullman also praised the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO)’s Global Roadmap to tackle the climate crisis and end hunger, which she described as “music to our ears”, stating that she particularly welcomed the report’s emphasis on “production and efficiency” over “looking at reduced consumption of animal protein”. Academics described the FAO report’s failure to recommend cuts to meat-eating as “bewildering” in a March submission to the journal Nature Food. According to a March paper, which surveyed more than 200 environmental and agricultural scientists, meat and dairy production must be drastically reduced – and fast – to align with the Paris Agreement. The report concludes that global emissions from livestock production need to decline by 50 percent during the next six years, with “high-producing and consuming nations” taking the lead.The FAO told DeSmog in a statement that its roadmap took a “balanced” approach to animal agriculture, saying that its report had “acknowledged the importance of livestock for poor people in traditional agrifood systems” and referenced the need for dietary shifts.“We believe that some comments on the change in diets and the role of animal products in them are either misinformed because people have not properly read the Roadmap report, or deliberately disingenuous for the sake of feeding vested interests narratives,” it said.Another industry panellist, Eric Mittenthaler, had attended COP28 on behalf of lobby group the Meat Institute (formerly the North American Meat Institute, or NAMI). He stressed the importance of sharing the message that animal agriculture is necessary for nutrition and sustainability. The Meat Institute, which runs an initiative called the ProteinPACT, represents hundreds of corporations in the meat supply chain, including the meat sector’s three largest companies, JBS, Cargill and Tyson, which together have emissions equal to oil majors Shell or BP.Sophie Nodzenski, a senior campaign strategist on food and agriculture at Greenpeace International, said it was “unsurprising” that industrial meat producers felt positively about COP28’s outcomes “given that their interests essentially took the central stage there”. The number of lobbyists for big meat and dairy companies tripled at COP28 as revealed by  DeSmog and the Guardian, amid rising scrutiny of the food sector’s climate impacts. Meanwhile, smallholders and family farmers at the summit said they felt “drowned out”. “COP28 has rightly put the spotlight on the link between food production and the climate crisis, but the sheer number of Big Ag lobbyists present gave them an outsized influence,” Nodzenski said.  Missed Opportunity   Documents seen by DeSmog and the Guardian show that the meat industry was poised to “tell its story and tell it well” before and during the Dubai conference, which it described as a “notoriously challenging environment”.COP28 had promised to accelerate action on food systems transformation, but campaigners and experts said its declarations and reports fell far short of what climate science says is needed. On the second day of the summit, the leaders’ declaration on sustainable food systems, which was signed by more than 130 countries, committed to food systems transformation.  But while it was praised for moving food up the global climate agenda, the International Panel of Experts on Food Systems (IPES Food) co-chair Lim Li Ching criticised the declaration for its “vague language”, in a statement at the time, and noted the lack of any reference to “reducing overconsumption of industrially produced meat”. The long-awaited FAO Global roadmap followed. While it proposed a 25 percent reduction in livestock methane emissions by 2030 to put the agriculture sector on track to reach global climate goals, it again failed to explicitly recommend a cut to meat and dairy consumption.A reduction to “excess meat eating” – which is prevalent in high-income countries like the U.S and U.K – is a key recommendation of major scientific bodies, appearing in reports from  UN climate science body the IPCC and the findings of the EAT-Lancet commission. The third COP28 agreement which failed to tackle food system emissions was the Global Stocktake, in which agriculture was mentioned only in relation to adaptation to climate impacts, not mitigation, despite food systems making up around a third of greenhouse gas emissions overall.Emile Frison, a senior advisor to the Agroecology Coalition, told DeSmog the many conversations on food and farming at Decembers conference had failed to move the dial on cutting emissions. “Action on food systems transformation is still dangerously ignored,” he said.  Efficiency Trumps Reduction  The lobbyists highlighted the FAO’s Global Roadmap “welcome message” that improved efficiency would help fight the climate crisis. Jamie Burr, a representative of the U.S Pork Board who spoke on Feedstuff’s panel, said that he was “excited to see” the roadmap recognise efficiency as the best pathway to emissions reduction, going on to describe U.S agriculture as the “most efficient in the world”.Industrial meat companies stress emissions intensity and efficiency over absolute cuts to emissions, or dietary shifts that would lead to a drop in production.This is especially true in the U.S, where livestock methane emissions as reported to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change have increased by around five percent since 2010 according to the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP), and have increased around 20 percent since 1990. AFIA president Cullman also welcomed the FAO’s proposals – including its plug for the role new technologies could play in bringing down methane emissions.Numerous assessments have found that there is a role for efficiency and innovation to cut livestock emissions, although many technologies are unproven at scale. But to be effective, they should also be accompanied by a shift away from meat in diets, and, researchers warn, should not be used to delay demand-side policy. Nusa Urbancic, the CEO of Changing Markets, told DeSmog the roadmap had “bought into big meat and dairy companies’ narratives” choosing to focus on efficiency and technology and, she said, ignoring mainstream and peer-reviewed science.Scrutiny of the FAO’s relationship with industry has grown in recent years. Last autumn former officials said their work on livestock emissions had been censored due to pressure from industry and diplomats from large producer countries. Experts have called on the FAO for greater transparency, querying the lack of authors on the roadmap. The FAO said: “The Global Roadmap has been developed with reference to and based on existing scientific and peer reviewed publications. In no stage of the development of the Roadmap were livestock industries consulted, or any inputs were received from them.”AFIA, NAMI and the US Pork Board did not respond to a request for comment. Feeding the World The meat lobbyists, whose industry enjoyed many routes to influence at the summit, also celebrated the cut-through of their message that industrial animal agriculture has an important role to play in addressing global hunger.  Cullman said that she was pleased to see there had been a “strong recognition” at COP28 that animal products “had a real role in meeting the nutritional needs of folks around the globe”.Burr added that COPs provided an opportunity for U.S. agriculture groups to demonstrate how they “feed the world”, while Mittenthaler said the Meat Institute, which runs the Protein Pact initiative, had showcased how agriculture can be a “solution” for “healthy people and a healthy planet”. A spokesperson for the Global Alliance for the Future of Food said the argument that industrial agriculture is “critical to address hunger” is one of the greatest “myths” shared by the industry.  As well as helping to drive global heating, which is undermining food security worldwide, the meat industry is also the leading driver of deforestation and ecosystem loss. Meanwhile the over-consumption of animal products has been linked to greater likelihood of developing illnesses like heart disease.Key messages around hunger were a pillar of the meat industry’s COP28 PR plans, which primed its attendees to target decision-makers with the idea that “meat plays a key role in reducing food insecurity”. While an estimated 828 million people go hungry, experts say that nourishing the planet will involve addressing issues of power, access and distribution, rather than a blanket increase in food production.The EAT-Lancet commission recommends stabilising or increasing animal protein in diets in only two regions in the world: sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, and decreasing it in other regions. In Africa, around half the continent’s meat and milk is provided by pastoralists, who are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. In the world’s most food insecure regions, experts call for support for  pre-existing local production as a priority, not scaling up industrial livestock production in large exporting nations overseas.“Industrial livestock operations are tied to significant greenhouse gas emissions, air and water pollution, and a range of other environmental and public health impacts – not to mention wasting vast acreage for livestock feed – all of which exacerbates hunger,” the Global Alliance for the Future of Food told DeSmog. Keep Pushing  While they celebrated the outcomes of COP28, the lobbyists also discussed the rising scrutiny of their industry, and the need to keep up the positive PR. messaging.Mittenthal stressed that industry’s voice at COPs was “critical” given that some summit attendees were “not representing the science or the reality on the ground”. Speaking about how the industry can continue to have a positive impact, he highlighted the importance of “non-traditional” partnerships with big NGOs, which could help the industry “to be taken seriously”. He added that working together and co-ordination was important as “groups opposed to animal agriculture will come back stronger”. Cullman emphasised that while the industry had got “breathing room” with this COP, “this is a marathon for us.” Asked about the year ahead, she said: “We need to jump into that and make sure that we dont take the pressure off of communicating the incredible work thats been done for decades and continues to be done. “The short answer is: not take the foot off the gas pedal – we’ve got to keep pushing.”A version of this article appeared in The GuardianEditing by Hazel Healy The post U.S. Meat Lobby Celebrates ‘Positive Outcome’ of COP28 appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— IEA Think Tank Contributes to Climate Science Denial Documentary

 

at 4/5/24 5:06am

A senior figure at the influential Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) think tank contributed to a new documentary that spread numerous myths about climate change.  Stephen Davies, an academic who has worked in educational outreach roles at the IEA since 2010, appeared several times in Climate The Movie: The Cold Truth – a new film directed by climate science denier Martin Durkin.  In the documentary, Davies claims that climate activists want to impose an “austere” life on ordinary people. “Behind all the talk about a climate emergency, climate crisis” is “an animus and hostility towards” working-class people, “their lifestyle, their beliefs and a desire to change it by force if necessary,” he says. According to the website Skeptical Science, which debunks climate misinformation, Climate The Movie contains more than two dozen myths about climate change. The film suggests that we shouldn’t be worried about greenhouse gas emissions, because plants need carbon dioxide. “We’re in a CO2 famine,” one interviewee claims. The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the world’s foremost climate science body, has stated that carbon dioxide “is responsible for most of global warming” since the late 19th century, which has increased the “severity and frequency of weather and climate extremes, like heat waves, heavy rains, and drought”. Climate The Movie producer Thomas Nelson told DeSmog that “I see the misguided fight against carbon dioxide as being as crazy as fighting against oxygen or water vapour, and I think scaring innocent children about this is deeply evil”. A screenshot of Stephen Davies of the Institute of Economic Affairs in Climate The Movie: The Cold Truth. Credit: Climate The Movie / YouTube In 2018, Greenpeace’s investigative journalism unit Unearthed revealed that the IEA had received funding from oil major BP every year since 1967. In response to the story, an IEA spokeswoman said: “It is surely uncontroversial that the IEA’s principles coincide with the interests of our donors.”  The IEA also received a £21,000 grant from U.S. oil major ExxonMobil in 2005. The IEA has extensive influence in politics and the media. It was pivotal to Liz Truss’s short-lived premiership as prime minister, and has boasted of its access to Conservative ministers and MPs. During the year ending March 2023, the IEA appeared in the media on 5,265 occasions, a figure 43 percent higher than its previous peak in 2019. The group has also received donations from a number of philanthropic trusts accused of channelling funds from the fossil fuel industry and helping to support climate science denial groups. The IEA is a member of the Atlas Network – an international collaboration of “extreme” free market groups that have been accused of promoting the interests of fossil fuel companies and other large corporations. It’s not known if the IEA has received funding from BP since 2018. The IEA is a prominent supporter of the continued and extended use of fossil fuels. The group has advocated for the ban to be lifted on fracking for shale gas, calling it the “moral and economic choice”. The IEA has also said that a ban on new North Sea oil and gas would be “madness”, has criticised the windfall tax imposed on North Sea oil and gas firms, and said that the government’s commitment to “max out” the UK’s fossil fuel reserves is a “welcome step”. The IEA is part of the Tufton Street network – a cluster of libertarian think tanks and pressure groups that are in favour of more fossil fuel extraction and are opposed to state-led climate action. These groups are characterised by a lack of transparency over their sources of funding. The IEA does not publicly declare the names of its donors.  “From Brexit to Trussonomics, the IEA has consistently peddled and promoted destructive and damaging policies,” Green Party MP Caroline Lucas told DeSmog. “Yet perhaps nothing will prove more dangerous long term than the stream of climate denialism and calls to delay action that have been pouring out of Tufton Street for many years. “Clearly the IEA is now ramping up its climate culture war and the Conservative Party has been following suit. The cross-party consensus on climate action we used to have in Parliament is under strain like never before. The IEA and Stephen Davies were approached for comment.  Climate The Movie During the documentary, Davies suggests that action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is being used to limit the freedom of individuals. He claims that climate activists want to impose “a much more austere simple kind of lifestyle” on people “in which the consumption choices of the great bulk of the population are controlled or even prohibited.” Davies adds that: “What you have here is a classic example of class hypocrisy and self-interest masquerading as public spirited concern. You could take these kinds of green socialist more seriously if they lived off grid, they cut their own consumption down to the minimum, they never flew. Instead you get constant talk about how human consumption is destroying the planet but the people making all this talk show absolutely no signs of reducing their own.” The documentary also features an interview with Benny Peiser, the director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) – the UK’s leading climate science denial group. Peiser has previously claimed that it would be “extraordinary anyone should think there is a climate crisis”, while the GWPF has expressed the view that carbon dioxide has been mischaracterised as pollution, when in fact it is a “benefit to the planet”.  The film was favourably reviewed by commentator Toby Young in The Spectator magazine, who described it as “a phenomenon”. Young has previously said that he’s sceptical about the idea of human-caused climate change.  The IPCC has stated it is “unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land”, while scientists at NASA have found that the last 10 years were the hottest on record. Earth’s average surface temperature in 2023 was the warmest since records began in 1880.  The IPCC has also warned that false and misleading information “undermines climate science and disregards risk and urgency” of climate action. The documentary also features Claire Fox, a member of the House of Lords who was nominated for a peerage by former prime minister Boris Johnson in 2020.  Fox used the documentary to claim that, by tackling climate change, people will be forced to pay more “to simply live the lives that they were leading”. She suggests that supporters of climate action are trying to “take away what we consider to be not luxuries but necessities.” The UK’s Climate Change Committee, which advises the government on measures to achieve net zero emissions by 2050, estimates that the combined policies will cost less than one percent of the country’s national output. The Office for Budget Responsibility, the UK’s independent economic forecaster, has also said that “the costs of failing to get climate change under control would be much larger than those of bringing emissions down to net zero”. Those suffering during the cost of living crisis have seen their energy bills increase by nearly £2.5 billion, in turn reducing their disposable incomes, due to successive governments failing to implement green reforms.  Claire Fox and the GWPF were approached for comment.  A Charitable Cause? The IEA is a registered charity, meaning that it receives generous tax breaks.  The group justifies this charitable status partly on the basis of its educational outreach programme, which aims to “equip tomorrow’s leaders with a deep understanding of free market economics”. The IEA claims that: “Our aim is to change the climate of opinion in the long term and our work with students is a key part of this.” In the year ending March 2023, the group claimed to have engaged with 3,500 students and 1,200 teachers via its seminars, internships and summer schools. Formerly the IEA’s head of education and now a senior education fellow, Davies is a senior member of the group’s outreach programme. He is the first person listed in the IEA’s student speakers brochure, which advertises the IEA staff members who are available to speak at schools or universities.  The brochure also lists the IEA’s chief operating officer Andy Mayer, who has said that the government should “get rid of” its target of achieving net zero emissions by 2050, which he called a “very hard left, socialist, central-planning model”. The non-profit Good Law Project recently made a complaint to the Charity Commission about the IEA, claiming that the libertarian group had breached charity rules. Namely, the Good Law Project claims that the IEA is in breach of rules stating that charities must avoid presenting “biased and selective information in support of a preconceived point of view”. The Charity Commission rejected this complaint, stating that: “We have assessed the concerns raised and have not identified concerns that the charity is acting outside of its objects or the Commission’s published guidance.”  Good Law Project campaigns manager Hannah Greer told DeSmog: “It won’t be a surprise to anyone that the IEA is cementing its role as a major mouthpiece for climate change scepticism. It’s a huge scandal that the IEA is still allowed to peddle fringe views under the guise of being an ‘educational charity’ while benefiting from taxpayer subsidies. “This has been allowed to happen because we have seen alarming and unambiguous regulatory failure from the Charity Commission – who have been presented with evidence of how the IEA is flouting charity law, but have chosen to look the other way.” The post IEA Think Tank Contributes to Climate Science Denial Documentary appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— Vast Majority of Global CO2 Emissions Tied to Just 57 Entities

 

at 4/4/24 9:29am

Since the Paris Agreement was signed in 2015, a small number of fossil fuel entities — just 57 corporate and state producers — have been responsible for 80 percent of planet-warming carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. And a majority of those actors have only expanded production in the intervening years. That’s according to a new report released today by InfluenceMap detailing its Carbon Majors project, an influential database of fossil fuel production data. The database analyzes the individual carbon emissions of 122 “carbon majors” — publicly owned corporations, nation states, and state-owned entities — that, together, are responsible for more than 70 percent of fossil fuel and cement emissions since the start of the Industrial Revolution.  “The Carbon Majors research shows us exactly who is responsible for the lethal heat, extreme weather, and air pollution that is threatening lives and wreaking havoc on our oceans and forests,” said Tzeporah Berman, international program director at the grassroots environmental organization Stand.earth, in a press release.  The database — which academics, lawyers, and advocates often rely on for research and legal cases — had only included information through 2017. Today’s update brings the numbers current through 2022, providing a granular and timely portrait of the world’s biggest climate polluters. Their ranks have become even more intensely consolidated: In 2017, the rankings showed that 100 entities were responsible for 71 percent of the sector’s emissions between 1988 and 2015. The 36 largest producers alone make up that same share today.  Just five modern-day companies — ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips — are responsible for 11.1 percent of fossil CO2 emissions between 1854 and 2022. Of those companies, only Chevron has expanded oil and gas production in the years after the Paris Agreement; emissions from the other four entities have held roughly steady or declined. But Chevron’s approach is much more characteristic of the other majors listed in the report. In its analysis of the new data, InfluenceMap, a London-based nonprofit think tank, found that two-thirds of investor- and state-owned fossil fuel companies outside of North America expanded oil and gas operations between 2016 and 2022. In Asia, the difference was even starker: 87 percent of companies are polluting faster than they did in the seven years before Paris. Only in North America were a slim minority of carbon majors — 16 of 37 — linked to rising emissions.  “It goes against clear, science-based statements from, for example, the International Energy Agency, saying there should be no new expansion of fossil fuels if were on a net-zero trajectory,” said Daan Van Acker, an InfluenceMap program manager who worked on the update and led the work on InfluenceMap’s report.  “Shell is committed to becoming a net-zero emissions energy business by 2050, a target we believe supports the more ambitious goal of the Paris Agreement,” a spokesperson from Shell said, writing by email that the company had reduced its production from 1.9 million barrels of oil daily in 2019 to 1.5 million barrels of oil. The company had no comment on the report itself.   Emissions from nation-state producers have also soared in recent years, InfluenceMap’s analysis found, largely thanks to increased Chinese and Russian coal production, as well as Chinese cement production. Chinese coal alone accounts for 25 percent of global fossil fuel CO2 emissions.  Years of Number Crunching Findings like these weren’t always so readily available. For years, greenhouse gas emissions statistics were aggregated at the national level, making it difficult to point the finger at specific entities. That changed in 2013, when Richard Heede, cofounder of the Climate Accountability Institute, first launched the Carbon Majors database, a project that had required years of number crunching. He used public production data from SEC filings, annual reports, and other corporate publications to assess historical production volumes for the world’s biggest carbon emitters, using that self-reported data to estimate impacts from extraction, processing, transportation, and consumption.  “This work is objective,” Heede told DeSmog in an interview. “Its based on corporate reporting of what they produce each year, in a peer-reviewed methodology for how to quantify emissions.”  Heede’s approach has had significant impact on legal outcomes and academic research. In the U.S., the Carbon Majors database has been cited in a growing number of lawsuits filed by plaintiffs seeking to hold companies responsible for climate-related damages; in its report, InfluenceMap cited related cases in Maryland, Oregon, and California. Carly Phillips, a research scientist for the Union of Concerned Scientists, told DeSmog that her organization had used the database to assign responsibility for rising sea levels, ocean acidification, and the increased frequency of forest fires.  “It’s not an understatement to say it really transformed the landscape of corporate accountability, including corporate legal accountability, when it was released — and its become a critical instrument in in holding big climate polluters accountable,” said Carroll Muffett, President and CEO of the nonprofit Center for International Environmental Law, in an interview.  InfluenceMap took over the database from Heede and the Climate Accountability Institute two years ago, Van Acker said. He told DeSmog that the organization plans to start making data updates annually — meaning its portrait of carbon majors is about to get even more timely.  ExxonMobil, BP, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips did not respond to requests for comment by press time.  The post Vast Majority of Global CO2 Emissions Tied to Just 57 Entities appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— Pathways Alliance Co-founder Donated to Pierre Poilievre Campaign, Records Show

 

at 4/4/24 9:02am

For the past year and a half an industry group called the Pathways Alliance has been running national ads claiming oil sands producers are climate leaders “on the road to net zero.”  But federal records newly reviewed by DeSmog reveal that the group’s co-founder has personally donated to the Conservative Party of Canada, whose leader Pierre Poilievre is campaigning to abolish the country’s most prominent climate policy, a nationwide tax on carbon emissions, saying it brings “misery and suffering on the Canadian people.” Alex Pourbaix, executive chairman of the Calgary-based oil sands company Cenovus, made a $1,600 donation to the Conservative Party the day after attending a private fundraiser last year entitled “An evening with Pierre Poilievre,” contributions data on the Elections Canada site show. The maximum allowable donation was $1,700.  Pathways cofounder Alex Pourbaix. Credit: Ed Ritger / www.edritger.com Pourbaix helped create the Pathways Alliance, a marketing and lobbying organization that is representing the six largest Canadian oil sands producers in multi-year talks with the current Liberal government of Justin Trudeau about cutting the sector’s climate impacts via large taxpayer-funded investments in carbon capture and storage technology.  “It’s certainly interesting — or telling — that he made a political donation to the leader of the official opposition,” Emilia Belliveau, energy transition program manager for the non-profit organization Environmental Defence, told DeSmog. She recently wrote a post detailing Pourbaix’s long history of climate obstruction.   Neither the Pathways Alliance nor Poilievre’s office responded to questions about the donation.  Credit: Elections Canada The fundraising event, which was originally reported on by The Breach, took place at a private residence in the mountain resort town Banff, Alberta, on April 11, 2023. It was promoted by the Conservative Party as a “Bring it Home fundraiser with Pierre Poilievre.”  Unlike the grassroots members of his party, who in 2021 voted against a resolution acknowledging “climate change is real,” Poilievre acknowledges the existence of human-caused global temperature rise. But he opposes national laws designed to address it.  Under his leadership, the Conservative Party has claimed that a proposed federal cap on oil and gas emissions would “send dollars to dictators.” He is currently touring Canada promising to “axe” the country’s carbon tax and recently led a failed attempt to topple the minority Liberal government over the policy. In place of climate legislation, he proposes oil and gas industry expansion. “Were going to clear the way for pipelines,” Poilievre has promised. “I am going to support pipelines south, north, east, west. We will build Canadian pipelines.”   Around two dozen guests at his 2023 fundraiser in Banff hold executive-level positions with Canadian oil and gas companies or work adjacent to the industry as Calgary-based investors and lawyers specializing in fossil fuels, according to an attendance list analyzed by DeSmog.  They included Mark Little, the former CEO of Suncor and Tim McKay, the outgoing CEO of CNRL. Both oil sands companies are members of the Pathways Alliance. Fundraising records show that Little and McKay each donated $1,600 to the Conservative Party in the lead-up to the event.  Credit: Elections Canada Those donations came as the Pathways Alliance blitzed the country in advertisements claiming that the oil sands sector is aligned with the Trudeau government’s goal of eliminating or neutralizing all Canadian greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. “Our net-zero plan is in motion,” read one ad on the side of a bus in Vancouver. The Pathways Alliance reported that it generated 1.5 billion “total advertising impressions” in 2023 alone. However, that campaign is now being investigated by the Competition Bureau over a complaint from Greenpeace alleging that Pathways made false claims downplaying the environmental impact of its members, which are among Canada’s biggest polluters.  A new peer-reviewed study from researchers at universities in Canada and the U.S. builds on that complaint, concluding that Pathways Alliance advertising throughout 2023 was filled with “greenwashing.” That includes vastly underreporting the true climate impact of oil sands operations, omitting that its carbon capture and storage plan is intended to boost oil sands production and failing to state that the majority of funding would come from Canadian taxpayers, not oil sands companies.  “In the public-facing content we looked at, their numbers were either questionable or misleading or even just missing when they were talking about their emissions or the cost of the plan,” Chris Russill, a Carleton University journalism professor and academic director of the climate communication centre Re:Climate, told DeSmog about the new peer-reviewed research. “We don’t find their net-zero plan credible.” Pourbaix insists that decarbonization is a top priority for the oil sands. “Next to safety, there is nothing more important to Cenovus and our industry than reaching a durable solution between government and industry to achieve our emission aspirations,” he told a conference call with analysts several months before the Conservative fundraiser. Records from last year show he didn’t make any contributions to the federal Liberals. The post Pathways Alliance Co-founder Donated to Pierre Poilievre Campaign, Records Show appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— Chevron Owns This City’s News Site. Many Stories Aren’t Told.

 

at 4/3/24 1:28pm

This article, a joint reporting project of Floodlight and NPR, is published here as part of the global journalism collaboration Covering Climate Now. Open flames shot upward from four smokestacks at the Chevron refinery on the western edge of Richmond, Calif. Soon, black smoke blanketed the sky. News spread quickly that day last November, but by word of mouth, says Denny Khamphanthong, a 29-year-old Richmond resident. We dont know the full story, but we know that you shouldnt breathe in the air or be outside for that matter, Khamphanthong says now. It would be nice to have an actual news outlet that would actually go out there and figure it out themselves. The citys primary local news source, The Richmond Standard, didnt cover the flare. Nor had it reported on a 2021 Chevron refinery pipeline rupture that dumped nearly 800 gallons of diesel fuel into San Francisco Bay. Chevron is the citys largest employer, largest taxpayer and largest polluter. Yet when it comes to writing about Chevron, The Richmond Standard consistently toes the company line. And theres a reason for that: Chevron owns The Richmond Standard. Chevron is the citys largest employer, largest taxpayer and largest polluter. Yet when it comes to writing about Chevron, The Richmond Standard consistently toes the company line. And theres a reason for that: Chevron owns The Richmond Standard. If you look at Chevrons website and you look at The Richmond Standard, a lot of the information is copy and paste, says Katt Ramos, a local climate activist. They present a very skewed viewpoint that is bought and paid for by Chevron. The sites very name evokes the history of Chevron, created when John D. Rockefellers Standard Oil was broken up by federal trust-busters more than a century ago. The Richmond Standard prides itself on being the number one source for local, community-driven news about the city. The city of Richmond exists in the shadow of the nearby Chevron refinery, which has been connected to poor air quality and health issues in the nearby community.(Brian L. Frank for NPR and Floodlight) Around town, in coffee shops, an architects office, at a Mexican restaurant, even at a waterside National Park Service site, the Standard is recognized as the main source of news about the city. It carries stories about charity drives and street closings. New bars and art exhibits. Youth soccer events and local concerts and safety initiatives. Decades ago, the city relied on the Richmond Independent and the San Francisco Chronicle to report on the community. And then a pattern familiar across the U.S. unfolded. The Chronicle pulled back. The Independent got folded into a newspaper in nearby Berkeley, which itself shut down in 1984. Papers in other East Bay cities shriveled up. Now the citys news landscape is dominated by its major corporate force. Markets where news outlets shut down are often called news deserts. The Standard has created something of a news mirage: Stories are told — but with an agenda. Facts displeasing to Chevron are omitted; hard truths softened. The company is seeking to get its point of view across and to convey that it can be trusted. On a recent February night, a city council meeting focused repeatedly on developments involving Chevron. Not a single journalist attended in person — other than those for NPR and Floodlight. The same San Francisco public relations firm that operates the Standard for Chevron runs a similar site about developments in the Permian Basin in West Texas and New Mexico, where Chevron has major business interests. It also runs one of the companys sites in Ecuador, where the energy giant has fought back decades of litigation. Richmond is a working-class city of 115,000 — nearly half of whom are Latino. Most of the people who work at the Chevron refinery live outside the city. (Brian L. Frank for NPR and Floodlight) Chevrons bid to control the public discourse comes as efforts to combat climate change threaten the fossil fuel industry, especially in California. State regulators would effectively ban the sales of gas-powered cars by 2035. They released the worlds first plan to achieve net-zero carbon pollution. Other states and countries have adopted similar goals. In February, Chevron revealed that it was taking a loss of about $1.8 billion on assets mainly in California, because of a tougher regulatory climate in the state. Chevrons corporate headquarters is in San Ramon, about a 35-mile drive southeast of Richmond, though the company has moved the bulk of its workforce to Texas. The company saw a need to offer the community more news coverage of Richmond, which had been largely ignored by traditional media with the exception of crime stories, said Braden Reddall, a manager of external affairs at Chevron. Most people in Richmond will tell you there is a lot more to the community than what is known and reported by traditional media outlets. Its a proud community, filled with interesting people who are doing interesting things. Other outlets more than adequately cover Chevron, added Reddall, who earlier covered the company for the international news service Reuters. Former schoolteacher Patricia Dornan says she reads The Richmond Standard but skips the stories about Chevron. I dont read any of the articles about how wonderful their company is, she says. (Brian L. Frank for NPR and Floodlight) Lifelong Richmond resident Patricia Dornan says she cherry-picks which stories she reads in the Standard. If you understand that its going to have a Chevron-Standard Oil point of view, its fine because most of the stuff that theyre putting out has nothing to do with them, says Dornan, a retired middle school teacher. And so long as it doesnt have to do with Chevron, its fine. I dont read any of the articles about how wonderful their company is. Dornan volunteers at the Rosie the Riveter World War II Home Front National Historical Park. She tells visitors about the marvels of American manufacturing in a time of war and about the women welders of Richmond who were able to turn out warships in 51 days rather than two years. Loading Her grandmother moved to town in 1905 — just three years after the refinery first opened — and her family has been there ever since. One of the streets in town is named after her father. She says Richmond cant function without Chevron, but a true local news outlet would help hold it accountable to the community. When she wants to know what Chevron is up to, Dornan says, I usually ask my friends who are retirees from the refinery — whats going on? Richmond deserves more news coverage When the Standard launched in 2014, it proclaimed: Richmond deserves more news coverage. For the first time in more than 30 years, Richmond will have a community-driven daily news source dedicated to shining a light on the positive things that are going on in the community, the site announced. Chevron presents the Standard as an investment in the Richmond community. The public relations firm operating the Standard wrote, This site would tell the stories other outlets had lost the resources to tell. But not all of the stories. A recent review found The Richmond Standard had published 434 stories that touch on its owner, Chevron, since the sites inception. Eight articles refer to flaring incidents. None cite oil spills. The majority of the stories that mention Chevron focus on profiles, awards ceremonies, community projects and celebrations it throws on such occasions as Black History and Hispanic Heritage months. When Bay Area air pollution regulators secured landmark concessions from Chevron in February to settle a lawsuit, they called it a decisive victory. The San Jose Mercury News headline cited $20 million in fines for hundreds of air-quality violations. The Richmond Standard was more reserved: Chevron agreement with Air District called win for environment and energy. The article did not clearly lay out the core of the litigation. The words fine and penalty did not appear. Careful readers might have been able to piece together what transpired: The news outlet described an agreement involving $20 million that solidifies the future of energy production at the Richmond Refinery. There are a whole host of news outlets around the Bay Area that cover the refinery, said Reddall, the Chevron spokesperson. The Standard seeks to fill in the gaps. From where Im sitting, I dont think that its a refinery thats not written about. A News Mirage Boundaries blur between city and corporation in this largely working-class city of 115,000 people, almost half of whom are Latino. The tech boom of nearby Silicon Valley and the opulence of neighboring Marin County feel like universes away. The public high schools mascot is the Oilers. Streets are named Ammonia and Petrolite and Xylene. Chevrons network of pipes, low-lying cooling ponds and even sulfuric stench have become defining parts of the towns character. A nature park where tufted egrets and hummingbirds frolic abuts the nearly 3,000-acre refinery itself — an expansive preserve of smokestacks, pipelines and tanks. Chevron, which recorded $21.3 billion in profits last year, has played an outsized role in Richmond for decades. It supplies the city with jobs — yet most Chevron employees live elsewhere. It pays roughly $50 million a year to Richmond — more than a sixth of the towns annual revenue. The companys relationship with Richmond turned sour rather abruptly in 2012. An explosion at the refinery injured 19 employees. The air pollution from the resulting industrial fire could be seen from miles away. In the ensuing days, 15,000 Bay Area residents went to medical centers for respiratory complications. State and local prosecutors charged Chevron with criminal negligence and other crimes; the company settled by pleading no contest to six charges, paying out roughly $10 million to affected local residents, agencies and hospitals. Chevron also paid $5 million directly to the city of Richmond to settle a separate civil lawsuit. By the time of the incident, political sentiment in Richmond started to swing away from the company. As the months passed, progressives were threatening to take control of the city government. They promoted a future without the refinery — just as Chevron was seeking approval from city officials for a sweeping project to overhaul and modernize it. As the 2014 election cycle dawned, Chevron took action to make sure its voice was heard. It promised a huge investment in scholarships and public health programs. Chevron also spent $3 million to help propel pro-industry candidates. They all lost. The election became a referendum on Chevron, said Tom Butt, at the time a city council member who won election as mayor. Chevron also launched The Richmond Standard that year. From the outset, the company disclosed its involvement. In small letters at the top of its homepage, the site reads Funded by Chevron. Tom Butt was elected mayor of Richmond in 2014. He says that election was a referendum on Chevron. (Brian L. Frank for NPR and Floodlight) In the aftermath of the election, the Standard published a 428-word statement from Chevron in its entirety that defended the companys actions and criticized the citys new leaders. The question for Richmond is: Will local leaders recognize that business is integral to the citys success? the Chevron statement read. Or, will city leaders continue to oppose efforts to create growth, preferring instead to watch the business climate — and the prosperity that business helps generate — decline? ‘We should be outraged’ Katt Ramos, who helps lead Communities for a Better Environments Richmond chapter, stages tours to demonstrate what she says is Chevrons destructive legacy. It also illustrates what happens when independent local news disappears. She stops by Peres K-8 School in the Iron Triangle, a nickname derived from the three train tracks that intersect here. Older kids play soccer on a field with a coach while younger ones cavort on a playground. Beyond the school fence, the Chevron plant stands less than a mile away. A sign next to the schools entrance warns of a shallow hazardous liquid pipeline from the refinery, a warning to not dig there. Nothing that is normalized about childhood is normalized in Richmond, Ramos says. Adults have to tell kids they cant play outdoors due to a high number of bad air days, she says. Nothing that is normalized about childhood is normalized in Richmond, says Katt Ramos, a local climate activist. She says the citys air pollution problems and residents health issues are rarely covered in the news. (Brian L. Frank for NPR and Floodlight) Perhaps the best way of gauging the seriousness of such concerns is to look at child admissions to emergency rooms for asthma, says Anne Kelsey Lamb, who oversees asthma research for the Oakland-based Public Health Institute. Children in the ZIP code of the Iron Triangle — which includes the refinery as well as the neighborhoods surrounding the Peres school — are admitted for emergency care for asthma at triple the rate for California at large. (The institute provided an analysis of the most recent available state statistics at the request of NPR and Floodlight.) Parceling out responsibility for air pollution is complicated, given Richmonds many highways and railroads, along with the refinery. The regional board that regulates air quality found that Chevron accounts for 63% of all particle pollution in Richmond and two neighboring towns. Children in the ZIP code that includes the refinery and neighborhoods surrounding the Peres K-8 School are admitted for emergency care for asthma at triple the rate for California at large. (Miranda Green/Floodlight) These issues rarely get covered, Ramos says. She starts to weep gently when talking about the citys future. I think at best we should be outraged, you know? she says. Everyone should be concerned about the conditions that our community has to face. The PR Firm Running the Standard While Chevron owns the Standard, San Francisco-based Singer Associates runs it from across the bay. The consulting firm is known for handling PR crises. Founder Sam Singer is no stranger to Richmond; he grew up in Berkeley and briefly worked at the Richmond Independent and a sister paper before moving on. Singer Associates has written that the news outlet came about after Chevron developed a fractured relationship with many stakeholders including city government leaders. The site was part of an effort to provide the company with greater freedom to operate by increasing awareness for the positive role it plays in Richmond, according to Singers application for an industry award, as cited in a U.S. House Natural Resources Committee staff report. Most Standard articles are written by Singer Associates employee Mike Aldax, a former reporter for the defunct San Francisco Examiner and the Bay City News Service. (Aldax did not return messages seeking comment.) The site also hired two journalists who live in Richmond to write for the site. Our team has worked hard to build relationships with the community, which is why people trust us, and turn to us, to cover community stories, Singer wrote in an email for this story. The pace of reporting ebbs and flows. Some featured videos on the Standards homepage are several years old. The metabolism of fresh posts stepped up in early March, shortly after NPR and Floodlight first sent a series of queries about the Standard to Chevron and Singer for this story. Chevron Newsrooms Begin in South America In launching the Standard, Chevron followed a path the fossil fuel giant had first forged thousands of miles to the south. Since 2009, Singer has run The Amazon Post in Ecuador at Chevrons direction. The English-language site emerged as Chevron confronted lengthy multibillion-dollar litigation seeking to hold it liable for the pollution from oil drilling there. (Chevron had acquired Texaco in 2001, which was responsible for the oil extraction.) Chevrons legal battle spread to other nations, including the U.S. and Brazil. The American attorney who led the suits against Chevron for Ecuadorian farmers and Indigenous peoples was a frequent target of the site. He was ultimately disbarred in New York for his actions in the case. The Amazon Post caters to English-speaking audiences and clearly discloses that it reflects Chevrons Views & Opinions on the Ecuador Lawsuit. A subsequent Spanish-language site called Juicio Crudo (an allusion to crude oil) focuses squarely on a damning legal judgment against Chevron that a U.S. court later found to be fraudulent. It reprints text directly from Chevrons Spanish-language press releases. By contrast, El Oriente, a Spanish-language digital outlet launched in 2019, presents itself as a news site aimed at audiences who reside in the Ecuadorian Amazon. El Oriente is one of the Spanish-language news websites published by Chevron. This site is aimed at audiences in Ecuador, where the oil giant had a long-running legal battle over pollution from its facilities. Days after NPR and Floodlight started posing questions about Chevrons sites, the affiliation to Chevron was moved to the top, just beneath the sites name. Until recently, it noted at the bottom of its page that it is sponsored by Chevron. Days after NPR and Floodlight started posing questions about Chevrons sites, the affiliation was moved to the top, just beneath the sites name. The sites link to one another. Chevron says those sites are managed separately, not by Singer. In at least one instance, the controversies surrounding Chevron in Ecuador inspired fodder for the Standard back in Richmond. In 2014, Richmonds then-mayor, Gayle McLaughlin, traveled to see Ecuadors environmental degradation at a time when her party was seeking to force Chevron to pay more to the city. Shortly after she returned home, the Standards Aldax reported: The mayors six-day trip to Ecuador was in support [of] the South American nation in its ongoing battle against Chevron, which it falsely blames for polluting the rain forest. Aldax wrote that McLaughlin was late in filing $4,499 in expenses for the trip, which had been paid for by the Ecuadorian government. The article embedded a video produced by The Amazon Post. It was a rare instance of the Standard producing anything other than benign community news. She had to pay a $200 fine. Today, McLaughlin calls her misstep minor. She tells NPR and Floodlight she believes the story was intended as a warning to Chevrons critics that it could embarrass them or just ignore them altogether. The Richmond Standard will never, ever print anything that is critical of Chevron, McLaughlin says, and it will never print anything that upholds the communitys victories against Chevron. And we need to spread the word about those victories. Expanding to Texas Chevron launched its latest newsroom, called Permian Proud, in the Permian Basin in August 2022. Chevron launched its latest newsroom, called Permian Proud, in the Permian Basin in August 2022. The site posts stories about West Texas and New Mexico. They are home to the nations highest-producing oil fields, where Chevron has substantial drilling interests — and where local news has been hard hit. The site posts stories about West Texas and New Mexico. They are home to the nations highest-producing oil fields, where Chevron has substantial drilling interests — and where local news has been hard hit. Permian Proud explained its mission this way: We aim to complement the important work of existing local media by providing hyper-local news you wont find anywhere else. Unlike California, Texas is a deeply red state with a broader base of support for the oil and gas industry. Even so, Chevrons future there is similarly deeply reliant on the goodwill of residents and regulators. Over the past year and a half, Permian Proud has put a spotlight on national spelling bee contestants, the local arts community, nonprofit organizations, community events, high school sports, industry accomplishments, and much more, Chevron spokesperson Catie Matthews wrote in a statement for this story. Additionally, the platform has amplified coverage of local stories by other news outlets, and provided a digital arm to some of our rural communities and smaller nonprofit organizations who would otherwise not have one. Permian Proud also promotes Chevrons perspective. Many of the articles on the site are rewritten press releases. For example, Permian Prouds article Chevrons Permian Basin operations to tap into more recycled water, is almost identical to Chevrons press release. The original text read, By using recycled water in our fracking operations, we help preserve fresh water and groundwater in drought-prone areas. Permian Proud swapped Chevron helps for we help. Among the few listed bylines: Mike Aldax of Singer and The Richmond Standard. Relying on Word of Mouth In the absence of independent local news sources, Richmond residents say they rely on each other for accurate information. A husband-and-wife team started a small news site last year. A former mayor shares his thoughts about local politics in a newsletter. When school is in session, journalism students at the nearby University of California, Berkeley cover Richmond as part of their studies. A nonprofit group has held listening sessions about plans to extend a hyperlocal site to the area. And sometimes — when the news is big enough — San Francisco TV stations cross the bay to cover it. But mostly, theres word of mouth. Activist Katt Ramos points to the February 2021 pipeline rupture. As Chevron publicly conceded, a resident spotted the tainted water long before Chevron or any news outlet alerted the community. A lot of our news is really from me, gathered by our local kind of independent folks that go around covering things for us, Ramos said. Because we have to deal with publications like The Richmond Standard that are giving us the opposite of the truth. Felicia Alvarez, Maria Fernanda Bernal and Richard Tzul of the University of California at Berkeleys Graduate School of Journalism contributed to this report. The post Chevron Owns This City’s News Site. Many Stories Aren’t Told. appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy, California, Chevron, disinformation, Ecuador, texas]

— Dozens of Ad & PR Industry Directors Have Ties to Heavily Polluting Industries

 

at 4/3/24 9:01am

Half of the board members at the worlds six largest advertising and public relations companies have ties to polluting industries, DeSmog can reveal.  Of the 64 total board members at Omnicom Group, WPP, Interpublic Group (IPG), Publicis Groupe, Dentsu and Havas, 32 have significant experience in carbon-heavy sectors such as fossil fuels, fossil fuel financing, plastics, utilities, and aviation. Twenty-two are still serving in roles at such companies. With combined revenues of $67 billion in 2022, the six firms dominate the communications industry, and have hundreds of subsidiary agencies around the world. Over the past two years, they have collectively held at least 163 contracts with fossil fuel clients, according to research by DeSmog and campaign group Clean Creatives. DeSmog’s findings highlight the extent to which some of the most powerful leaders in the communications industry may face conflicts of interest amid growing calls from campaigners, scientists, lawmakers, and their own employees to stop producing branding, marketing, PR, and lobby campaigns that promote and protect the fossil fuel industry, or portray climate-damaging companies as green. The tangled web of board memberships is a key barrier to agencies moving away from working with fossil fuel clients, said Belinda Noble, founder of Comms Declare, an industry campaign against representing polluting companies. All six companies in DeSmog’s analysis have made public commitments to slash the carbon emissions from their operations, creating an appearance of climate awareness. This may be helping them recruit a new generation of talent, as young creatives say they are more likely to join a company that has good sustainability credentials, and less interested when the company has fossil fuel industry clients.  In practice, however, the six do not seem to be giving up pursuit of lucrative contracts with oil and gas companies or related industries, and employees who raise issues around representing polluting brands have told DeSmog that they are meeting opposition at the highest levels of these companies.  “It makes me very ashamed to be in this industry, said a WPP employee, who asked not to be named for fear of professional repercussions. “There are people in it who do genuinely want to use their skills and knowledge for positive change — lots actually — but unfortunately none of us hold positions of power and there’s only so much we can do.” The PR industrys six largest companies — WPP, Omnicom, IPG, Publicis, Dentsu, and Havas — have a combined total of 64 board members. DeSmogs analysis reveals that half of these directors have connections to polluting industries. Credit: DeSmog DeSmog sent requests for comment to the six holding groups and the directors named in this story via both company media teams and their personal company email addresses, as well as to the other companies named in this story. WPP declined to comment. None of the directors, other holding groups, or other companies responded. Disheartening Omnicom’s board stood out as the most climate-conflicted, with seven of its 11 directors having direct affiliations with polluting industries.  Among them, Valerie Williams holds a non-executive directorship at the Devon Energy Corporation and Leonard S. Coleman Jr. holds a non-executive directorship at Hess Corporation, both major U.S. oil and gas companies. Chevron is currently in the process of acquiring Hess in a $53 billion deal.  Ronnie S. Hawkins, a non-executive director at Omnicom, is currently a partner at Global Infrastructure Partners, which he joined from EIG Global Energy Partners. Both are fund managers that invest heavily in fossil fuel infrastructure, such as pipeline and refinery projects. DeSmog found that many of these projects are owned by current or recent Omnicom clients, including Shell, BP, ExxonMobil, and Repsol. Hawkins spent 19 years as a senior member of the energy investment divisions at Citigroup and Credit Suisse, respectively the 2nd and 20th largest private financers of fossil fuel projects from 2016 to 2022, according to BankTrack. BankTrack’s research also shows that both banks have a history of funding oil and gas majors that also employ Omnicom agencies. Hawkins also did a stint as managing director of Harbour Energy, a London-listed oil and gas company with interests in the UK, Indonesia, Vietnam, Mexico, and Norway. Omnicom has held 54 fossil fuel contracts since the beginning of 2022, including three with Exxon, the third-largest oil and gas company in the world by revenue. A series of videos published on Exxon’s YouTube page in 2023 promoted carbon capture and storage as a way to reduce carbon emissions from fossil fuel production — even though the technology largely has a two-decade record of failure at curbing CO2 pollution, and is mostly used by the oil industry to extract more oil. Scientists continue to cast doubt on whether carbon capture will ever function at the huge scale required to make a dent in climate change. In another 2023 campaign, Mobil (Exxon’s automotive car fuel brand) launched an advert positioning petrol-powered cars as a way of “disconnecting”, in an apparent swipe at electric vehicles. DeSmogs analysis found that the proportion of board members with ties to polluting industries ranges from 33% at Havas to 64% at Omnicom Group. DeSmog also found that Omnicom agencies have had dozens of fossil fuel contracts since the start of 2022. Credit: DeSmog “When youre in a position like I am, trying to make change at an agency to make it more climate-minded, and you see this research, it makes you wonder whether its all a bit of a waste of time, said an Omnicom employee who is involved in staff-led climate groups. “It helps you understand why were continuing to see agencies and holding companies like Omnicom take on fossil fuel briefs. Its pretty disheartening.” In its 2022 annual report, Omnicom stated that 2 percent of its revenues — around $286 million — came from the oil, gas, and utilities sectors. Nadeem Khan, who leads the graduate program in Board Practice and Directorship at the University of Reading, said that accelerating climate action at a company such as Omnicom will require bold decisions. “Currently, a director’s reputation is mainly judged on delivering short-term financial successes, rather than social and environmental wins, Khan told DeSmog. “You need a board and CEO that are accepting of an organisation’s needs to adapt as renewed, evolved forms in the long-run, otherwise eventually it may not compete as markets themselves evolve.” No Appetite for Change New York-based IPG followed closely behind Omnicom in DeSmog’s analysis, with six of its 10 board members having experience in polluting industries such as natural gas, shipping, and plastics. In 2022, IPG published a policy directly addressing the issue of working for fossil fuel clients — something the other five companies have yet to do. The policy has a number of requirements, including that clients must set specific emission reduction goals that are aligned with net-zero emissions by 2050. However, IPG employees have previously told DeSmog that some elements of the policy mean it is weaker than it appears, such as the fact that it only applies to new clients. “You could drive an oil tanker through some of the loopholes in it, said one IPG insider.  Another employee, who recently left one of IPG’s subsidiary agencies, told DeSmog that it was clear to staff engaging with leadership on polluting clients that “behind closed doors, there was no genuine appetite for change at the top of the company. Both employees asked not to be named for fear of professional repercussions. In November, DeSmog reported that McCann, an IPG advertising agency, will pitch to retain its relationship with Saudi Aramco when the current contract runs out this year.  With 2022 revenues of $604 billion, Saudi Aramco is the largest oil and gas company in the world.  At WPP, board chair Roberto Quarta has seven current and past ties to polluting industries, the highest in DeSmog’s analysis, including two current partnerships at Gulf Capital and Clayton, Dubilier & Rice, fund management companies that have significant stakes in fossil fuel infrastructure and logistics companies. Many of those companies work closely with Exxon,TotalEnergies, Sabic, PTT Oil, Shell, BP, and Chevron. All are current or past clients of at least 10 WPP agencies, DeSmog found. Another WPP board member, Simon Dingeman, is the former head of UK investment banking at Goldman Sachs. Since the establishment of the 2015 Paris Agreement, Goldman Sachs has provided $143 billion in fossil fuel finance, according to BankTrack, putting it in the top 15 private funders of the sector. Dingeman is currently a senior advisor at the investment firm Carlyle Group, which has been criticised by campaigners for making claims about its climate leadership whilst doubling the emissions related to its investments between 2011 and 2021, according to research group Private Equity Climate Risks. At Paris-based Havas, three out of nine board members have ties to polluting industries. They include Havas chairman-CEO Yannick Bolloré and board member Marie Bolloré, his sister, who have ties to the oil logistics division of the family-run Bolloré Group — which also owns Havas parent company Vivendi. In 2023, Havas won a major contract with Shell to manage the company’s worldwide advertising spots. With $386 billion in revenue in 2022, Shell is the world’s fourth-largest oil company. A DeSmog investigation, published in January, revealed growing discontent amongst Havas employees who saw the move as undermining Yannick Bolloré’s numerous public statements of concern about climate change. The investigation also documented a number of current or recent fossil fuel clients among Havas subsidiaries, as well as deep ties between the Bolloré Group and fossil fuel projects in Africa and Canada.  Five out of Dentsu’s nine directors have ties to polluting companies or sectors. Just under half of the 13 directors at Publicis and 12 directors at WPP have similar ties. Board members at these companies have experiences at a range of companies with fossil fuel interests.  Dentsu’s board chairman, Tim Andree, was previously chief communications officer of BASF, the biggest chemical producer in the world and a major supplier of petrochemicals and services for the oil and mining industries. The German company has a history of lobbying against EU regulations on polluting chemicals. At Publicis, board member André Kudelski was previously vice-chair of the Geneva Airport and a director at Swiss International Airlines. A number of Publicis agencies have produced campaigns supporting the aviation industry in recent years, including Publicis Sapient’s adverts for Swiss International Airlines’ premium economy class.  The aviation industry accounted for 2 percent of global carbon emissions in 2022, according to the International Energy Agency, with emissions in the sector growing faster than in road, rail, and shipping.  DeSmog’s analysis did not include similar examples below the parent company level. For example, John Dawkins is co-chair of GRACosway, one of Omnicom’s leading political lobbying agencies in Australia, whilst also holding chair and non-executive director roles at mining companies Precious Metal Resources Ltd and Tiaro Coal Ltd, respectively. GRACosway and Dawkins did not respond to DeSmog’s requests for comment. Low-Hanging Climate Commitments Agencies and industry bodies have been slow to acknowledge the true climate impact of the industry, campaigners say. While five of the six holding companies have now set net-zero goals, these plans only account for emissions generated by their own business operations, such as employee travel, energy used to power office buildings, and the production of advertising campaigns. All six are members of Ad Net Zero, a voluntary industry initiative whose members pledge to voluntarily reduce these sorts of in-house greenhouse gas emissions. Ad Net Zero’s five-step action plan does not ask members to consider the potential wider climate impacts of their work, such as the risk that producing campaigns that enhance the images of heavily-polluting clients could deflect pressure to cut emissions. The polluting industry ties among the relevant 32 board members are concentrated in three sectors: banks that finance fossil fuel development, polluting energy production, and investment and holding companies. Credit: DeSmog Purpose Disruptors, a campaign group focused on the ad and PR industry, defines the carbon pollution associated with an advertising-generated uplift in sales of heavily polluting products and services, such as SUVs or air travel, as “advertised emissions.” The concept has been recognised by the United Nations-led Race to Zero campaign, which focuses on getting businesses, universities, cities, and others to eliminate their carbon emissions no later than 2050. A 2023 report by Dentsu estimated that the company’s 2022 advertised emissions were 32 times the size of its own operational carbon footprint.  “Board directors have been adamant publicly about their dedication to climate action and their companies’ pivot towards net zero, said Sarah Chow, an investment analyst at the Sydney-based ethical pension fund Future Super. The fund has been trying to engage with Publicis and WPP on their work for high-carbon-emitting clients. “But behind closed doors and after public [annual general meetings], our relations with these directors have gone cold.”  Some experts argue that the pace of change in the industry is also constrained by the parent company structure of these six firms, which limits the power of subsidiary agencies to make their own decisions on issues such as climate strategy.  “You have to remember, these few leading directors are setting the tone and agenda not just for the overarching company, but multiple chains of companies, said the University of Reading’s Khan. Andreas von Angerer, head of impact investing at Zurich-based Inyova, led a group of investors in raising the issue of advertised emissions with the Publicis board at its annual general meeting in May 2023.  The group, which also includes French asset-manager Ecofi and Australia’s Future Super, collectively manages assets worth more than 16 billion euros. Publicis’ board “told us that all of their clients are reducing emissions, even though their oil clients such as Saudi Aramco and ADNOC” — the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company — “are clearly not, von Angerer told DeSmog.  “Currently these boards dont have the progressive mindset needed to really set up a company for the future, he said. “We really need new faces, new ideas and new minds on boards to make sure these old, established companies keep up with the transition [to net zero].” Transitioning With the Times? In a report released in April 2022, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change referenced the communication industry’s role in protecting polluters. Several months later, UN Secretary-General António Guterres told the General Assembly that “we need to hold fossil fuel companies and their enablers to account [including] the massive public relations machine raking in billions to shield the fossil fuel industry from scrutiny.” For the better part of two decades, advertising regulators in the UK, France, Australia, and some other jurisdictions have taken stands on greenwashing. In June 2023, the UK’s Advertising Standards Authority banned adverts by Shell, Repsol, and Petrobras that made misleading claims about their investments in renewable energy. Shell’s adverts had been created by WPP’s Wunderman Thompson (now VML), and Repsol’s by DDB Spain, an Omnicom agency. In November, for the first time, the Advertising Standards Authority banned two ads for promoting driving that harms the environment. The adverts for the Toyota Hilux SUV were made by WPP agency The&Partnership, according to industry publication The Drum. Experts say that these sorts of greenwashing complaints and regulatory bans pose legal risks to individual board members, because they have the potential to inflict reputational damage that could trigger financial losses. “Directors of advertising agencies must have sufficiently robust governance structures to mitigate and respond to these [reputational and financial] risks, said barrister Margherita Cornaglia of Doughty Street Chambers, a group of barristers focused on human rights and civil liberties. “Failure to identify or address risks as a result of their links with fossil fuel and other polluting companies could place them in breach of their fiduciary obligations.” Communications companies may be taking note. In its 2022 annual report, WPP mentioned the “increased reputational risk associated with working on client briefs perceived to be environmentally detrimental.” Dentsu has also mentioned these risks in public documents.  Experts say they expect action on issues such as climate change to increase as younger generations join these boards of directors. “Boards tend to transition in decennial cycles, the University of Reading’s Khan said. “There emerges a generational shift, a new way of thinking. You can see the difference of mindsets through faster evolving changes — for example at Google, Nvidia, or Microsoft in the tech industry — where boards are made up of more entrepreneurial attitudes and comparatively younger directors.” But Sarah Chow of Future Super believes these changes need to happen now. “Board directors are often removed from the actual problems their employees face, she said. “They need fresh blood that understands the pulse of a companys workforce, and what the workforce wants.” Chow would also like to see union or other employee representatives on the agencies’ boards. A former WPP employee shared Chow’s vision: “Why isnt a creative holding company saving a board seat for a junior creative? They are the future of the industry.” The post Dozens of Ad PR Industry Directors Have Ties to Heavily Polluting Industries appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy, climate accountability]

— Big Oil Clouded the Science on Extreme Weather. Now It Faces a Reckoning.

 

at 4/2/24 5:13pm

This story was originally published by ExxonKnews. When Bucks County, Pennsylvania, filed a lawsuit last week against major oil and gas companies for climate damages, Commissioner Chair Diane Ellis-Marseglia pointed to “unprecedented weather events here in Bucks County that have repeatedly put residents and first responders in harm’s way, damaged public and private property and placed undue strain on our infrastructure.” The county argues oil companies’ “campaigns to deceive and mislead the public about the damaging nature of their fossil fuel products” delayed climate action for decades, robbing communities of precious time to mitigate the climate-driven disasters they now face. One of those disasters occurred last year, when a rainstorm in Bucks County caused deadly flash flooding that swallowed vehicles and killed 7 people, including two children. Scientists said the deluge and its aftermath — not the countys first 100-year flood in recent years — are a harbinger of the intense and dangerous rainstorms that a warming climate is making more likely. As the science connecting climate change to more frequent and severe weather events becomes clearer, there is mounting evidence that members of the fossil fuel industry coordinated to downplay that link — evidence that could be valuable to lawsuits seeking accountability.  Bucks County is just one in a growing list of communities taking legal action against fossil fuel companies in the wake of deadly extreme weather events. Multnomah County, Oregon sued oil, gas, and coal majors after a 2021 heat dome that killed nearly 70 people. On the 10 year anniversary of Superstorm Sandy, New Jersey’s attorney general took Exxon, Chevron, and other oil giants to court, citing the billions of dollars in damage and deaths the hurricane caused in the state. In the first-ever racketeering lawsuit against Big Oil companies, Puerto Rico municipalities are seeking to recover costs incurred by Hurricane Maria.  Fossil fuel majors, these cases argue, should help communities pay for the costs of adapting to and recovering from climate disasters given the industry’s early research into — and subsequent denial of — their products’ harm. “We’re already seeing the human and financial tolls of climate change beginning to mount,” said Commissioner Ellis Marseglia. “If the oil companies’ own data is to be believed, the trend will continue.” It’s a trend that the fossil fuel industry worked to obscure for decades. A collection of evidence just published to ClimateFiles.com reveals the extent to which oil companies and their trade associations sought to deny and downplay the relationship between climate change and extreme weather.  Nicky Sundt, a climate expert and former communications director for the U.S. Global Change Research Program during the George W. Bush administration, said she tried to publicly communicate the science behind that link, but was “stymied over and over again” by industry interests inside and outside the White House — an experience she has discussed with The Guardian and PBS Frontline. “By interfering with the communications of climate science to the public, [the fossil fuel industry] knew that the public was less likely to become agitated and do something about it,” Sundt said. “The consequence was to slow efforts to reduce our emissions, and to leave us more unprepared for the impacts of climate change. The longer you wait, the more expensive it is to deal with all of these issues, and they’ve eaten up incredibly important time we needed.” “A new norm” In 1997, fossil fuel interests successfully convinced prominent United States officials to oppose U.S. ratification of the Kyoto Protocol — an international climate agreement that would have limited greenhouse gas emissions decades ago.  A year later, the American Petroleum Institute (API) — the largest oil and gas trade association in the U.S. — bluntly outlined a plan to keep drumming up opposition to the Kyoto Protocol as negotiations continued. According to a newly uncovered February 1998 internal strategy proposal reviewed by ExxonKnews, API would “develop and implement a campaign-style ‘rapid response’ team… to respond to op-eds that make exaggerated claims about climate science… and to media events staged by government officials and/or environmental organizations seeking to tie extreme weather events to possible human impacts on global climate.”  Long before that campaign began, internal industry memos and promotional materials show, major oil companies knew about the role that climate change would play in intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts, heatwaves, precipitation patterns, and other extreme weather events. One 1979 memo distributed to Exxon management, about a report conducted by Steve Knisley of Exxon’s Research and Engineering Department, accurately predicted the growth of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations by 2010 and referenced the “ecological consequences of increased CO2 levels.” Those consequences were listed in detail, including global temperature increases, water shortages in the U.S. southwest, increased rainfall, and “violent storms.” In a 1991 film production by Shell, called “Climate of Concern,” a narrator warns that “if the weather machine were to be wound up to such new levels of energy, no country would remain unaffected,” and that “what is now considered abnormal weather could become a new norm.” Another film produced that year by BP, called “This Earth – What Makes Weather?”, alludes to the ways climate change would increase the frequency and damage caused by extreme weather events like storms, flooding, and drought. “From warmer seas, more water would evaporate — making storms and the havoc they cause more frequent,” the narrator predicts. “Catastrophic floods could become commonplace and low-lying countries like Bangladesh would be defenseless against them.” But around the same time, the industry began to worry about how public understanding of those phenomena could affect their core business. A 1989 presentation by Duane LeVine, a senior executive at Exxon, expressed concern that an extreme heat and drought event the year before had “drawn much attention to the potential problems and we’re starting to hear the inevitable call for action. Exactly what happens now is not clear… but this critical event has energized the greenhouse effort and raised public concern over PEG [potential enhanced greenhouse].” Under the cover of trade associations and front groups, through PR campaigns and funded academic research, the industry developed a strategy to undermine the link between climate change and weather-related disasters — and discredit those who sought to communicate that science to the public. A Campaign to Turn the Tide One ad from a PR campaign by the “Information Council on the Environment,” funded by fossil fuel and electric utility interests. Minnesota is now suing ExxonMobil, Koch Industries, and the American Petroleum Institute for climate fraud. One key player was the Global Climate Coalition (GCC) — an international industry lobbying group that was instrumental in early efforts to deny climate change and generate opposition to policy action to reduce emissions. In 1994, the GCC hired weather forecasting service AccuWeather Inc. to produce a report minimizing the impact of global warming on extreme weather, which the GCC would cite in a pamphlet distributed at the United Nations climate convention the following year.  “No convincing, observational evidence exists that hurricanes, tornadoes and other extreme temperature and precipitation events are on the rise because of the recent slight increase in the Earth’s surface temperature,” the report states.  A report that AccuWeather produced minimizing the impact of global warming on extreme weather in 1994. In response to ExxonKnews’ requests for comment on the report, a spokesperson for AccuWeather said that “AccuWeather and the other leading consulting meteorologists involved had been engaged to produce an analysis based upon the available data at that time. There was much debate and uncertainty in the scientific community over the causes and effects of global warming during that time period, and a new generation of computer modeling studies was just beginning to emerge that would create an important shift in scientific judgment.”  “As an organization rooted in science, AccuWeather’s view on global warming and extreme weather has evolved over the past three decades, as has the view of many other scientific organizations,” they said, noting that data now shows a “marked increase in billion-dollar disasters due to extreme weather events.” Today, the spokesperson added, AccuWeather has signed the “Global Climate Science-Media Action Pledge”, and is committed to communicating the impacts of climate change on extreme weather to the public. The GCC also hired academics to further their cause. Internal meeting notes from July 1997 show that the GCC commissioned a research paper from Robert E. Davis, a University of Virginia climatologist, explicitly denying the climate and extreme weather connection.  Excerpt from Global Climate Coalition meeting notes in 1997. “A belief commonly held is that global warming will produce more extreme weather,” the published paper read. “While this thinking serves as convenient fuel for sensationalist headlines linking what only a decade ago would have been viewed as the normal vagaries of weather to some approaching climatic apocalypse, it is not based on sound science.” From a folder handed out by the GCC at the UN climate negotiations in 1999. In 1999, in the wake of Hurricane Floyd, Frank Maisano, then a spokesman for the GCC, faxed a memo to “Communicators Interested in Global Climate Issues. As millions of people flee Hurricane Floyd, many climate activists have again suggested — despite the facts — that hurricanes and global warming are connected,” the memo stated. In response to questions about the memo and the GCC’s positions, Maisano told ExxonKnews that “Any fair review of the debate over any link between climate and severe weather has always been the subject of significant discussion between the experts themselves, especially with regard to hurricanes.” “Importantly,” Maisano said, “GCC’s main focus at the time was on the economic impacts, sovereignty and effectiveness of any policy proposed to address climate change.” Maisano now runs a strategic communications practice for Bracewell LLP, a firm that provides “Industry-Focused Legal and Advocacy Strategies” for oil and gas companies including Eni (currently being sued for climate deception in Italy) and Phillips 66 (which is a defendant in many U.S. climate lawsuits, including those filed by Bucks County and the state of New Jersey).  The industry’s campaign stretched on for years. In 2006, shortly after Hurricane Katrina, the DCI Group — a lobbying and campaign contractor with ties to Exxon — produced and sent VHS tapes of videos designed to look like a national news broadcast to Gulf of Mexico area news stations. The tape featured Dr. William Gray, a (now deceased) hurricane scientist at Colorado State University and climate change denier, stating that in the past 20 years, scientists had seen “no significant change in the frequency and intensity of major hurricanes around the globe…. This is the way nature sometimes works.” (Scientists have since concluded that climate-driven warming contributed to the increased rainfall and severity of storm surge during Hurricane Katrina, which killed nearly 2,000 people.)  According to Sundt, after Hurricane Katrina hit, the communications arm of the U.S. Global Change Research department proposed hosting a session on the implications for preparing for climate change on the Gulf Coast. “We had a well developed proposal, and it was just killed [by the White House] without explanation,” she said. “A more resilient world” Today, the steady growth of attribution science — or research investigating the role of climate change in altering or intensifying extreme weather events — has put a dent in Big Oil’s designs. The field of study has developed to even be able to tie the emissions of specific corporate actors to climate-worsened disasters — opening up more possibilities for those companies to be held liable for climate damages in court. One such study, from researchers from the Union of Concerned Scientists and the University of California, Merced, found that nearly 40% of all forests burned in the Western U.S. and Canada since 1986 can be tied to emissions from just 88 of the world’s largest fossil fuel and cement manufacturers. That research was cited in Multnomah County’s lawsuit against oil and gas majors for climate damages last year. Delta Merner, lead scientist for the Union of Concerned Scientists’ climate litigation hub and a co-author of the study, pointed out that many of the same companies that fought regulation of climate-warming emissions adapted their own fossil fuel infrastructure to account for rising seas, warming temperatures, and worsening storms decades ago.  “As you look through the oil industry’s own reactions to their knowledge about climate change, they were able to build better infrastructure to be resilient,” Merner said. “We would have a more resilient world, we would not be facing the realities of climate change that we’re seeing today if it wasn’t for the lies the industry propped up for so long.” At least one oil major anticipated legal action decades ago. In a planning scenario from 1998, Shell made an eerie prediction: “In 2010, a series of violent storms causes extensive damage to the eastern coast of the U.S. … Following the storms, a coalition of environmental NGOs brings a class-action suit against the US government and fossil-fuel companies on the grounds of neglecting what scientists (including their own) have been saying for years: that something must be done.” Shell was ahead of its time. Between the increased frequency, severity, and costs of extreme weather events, the advancing science connecting them to polluters, and mounting legal theories, Merner said she expects more communities to file suit. Even as she sees the industry’s deception evolving in content and sophistication — like companies trying to shift the blame for emissions onto consumers to avoid responsibility — Merner believes attribution research is evolving faster. “It’s a testament to the power of science that climate litigation has been able to withstand an additional onslaught of disinformation from the fossil fuel industry and is now a key part in the fight for climate justice,” she said.  Note: Additional individuals mentioned here were asked to provide comment. The piece will be updated if they respond. The post Big Oil Clouded the Science on Extreme Weather. Now It Faces a Reckoning. appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

— Where Was Exxon Planning to Inject CO2 in Louisiana? It’s a Trade Secret.

 

at 3/29/24 4:13pm

While two dozen carbon capture projects are proposed in Louisiana, figuring out exactly where companies plan to inject carbon dioxide underground for storage is a bit of a mystery. That’s because a state law passed in 2021 regulating carbon capture includes a provision allowing companies to claim a wide range of project information — including location — as trade secrets.  The state law mirrors a federal provision that also allows companies to classify the location of their injection site as “proprietary business information” (PBI), which means that, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the most the agency can say without violating PBI status is the parish or county where carbon dioxide will be injected into deep geological formations. As a result, people concerned about these projects are unable to evaluate their potential for harm until the time-limited public commenting period, which no project in Louisiana has reached yet. Take for example, the case of David Levy, who served on Louisiana’s Oilfield Site Restoration Commission and was concerned about a potential conflict of interest with a carbon capture and storage (CCS) project proposed by ExxonMobil. Levy has been trying to figure out why the Department of Energy and Natural Resources (DENR) spent more than $900,000 plugging and cleaning up an orphaned wastewater well site on ExxonMobil’s property in Vermilion Parish, about 40 miles southwest of Lafayette, before more polluting and dangerous orphaned well sites. He suspected that Exxon asked the state to clean up the well site in preparation for a carbon capture project in the parish. But Levy was unsure of the exact location where the project’s Class VI injection well — used for long-term storage of carbon dioxide deep underground — would be drilled. Freshwater City site after the wastewater disposal well was plugged on Exxons property in April 2022. Credit: Julie Dermansky DeSmog filed a public records request for communications between DENR decision-makers and ExxonMobil staff to find clues as to why the state prioritized the saltwater disposal well, called Freshwater City, and if it had anything to do with Exxon’s future plans to store carbon in the parish. The internal emails DeSmog received in response didn’t prove ExxonMobil directed the state to clean up a well abandoned by a smaller, bankrupt oil company on its property. But the records did show locations Exxon considered for their carbon capture project: on state lands, beneath White Lake Wetlands Conservation Area and Rockefeller Wildlife Refuge.  As DeSmog tracked down the location of Exxon’s carbon injection site, the project changed locations and was later put on hold. Still, the proposed project raises red flags about the lack of transparency surrounding CCS permitting in the state, even when projects are proposed for state lands. Levy was selected to sit on Louisiana’s Oilfield Site Restoration Commission in 2021 because of his knowledge of the oil and gas industry. He owns a company called Petrotechnologies, which designs specialty tools for wells. But he eventually resigned from the commission in December 2022 after coming to believe that the state was selecting orphaned well sites for restoration using state funds based on political favors for well-connected landowners. Emails uncovered by DeSmog’s public record request left Levy with even more questions. David Levy at a Louisiana Oilfield Site Restoration Commission meeting. Credit: Julie Dermansky “I don’t know why they want to do this on state lands. It makes no sense either,” he said. “If that place being cleaned up gets tied to CCS in any manner, then it was just a gift to Exxon.” Freshwater City, the saltwater disposal well plugged by the state, was orphaned in 2015 when its last owner and operator Black Elk Energy went bankrupt. When Hurricane Laura swept through Louisiana in 2020, the storm made a mess of the well site, displacing massive storage tanks and scattering pilings. Levy says it does not make sense that the state prioritized such a costly site restoration when the well did not appear to be as much of a public health or climate threat as orphaned well sites actively leaking methane. “They spent a very small amount plugging that well,” Levy said. “All the work was to get the tanks within Exxon’s property. So that was the cost. Not the well, which makes it even more bizarre.” In July 2021, the state sought reimbursement from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for disposing of the tanks and plugging the well in the wake of Hurricane Laura. Ultimately, FEMA did not agree to reimburse the state for cleaning up the site. Storage tank blown off the Freshwater City disposal well site next to Freshwater Bayou on May 8, 2022. Credit: Julie Dermansky Still, the state paid a company named Gulf Inland Contractors to clean up the site, which the firm completed in April 2022. Before Black Elk, Freshwater City had four previous owners. Louisiana collects fees on oil and gas production to fund its program of plugging wells left behind by oil and gas companies that go belly up. The state has the authority to sue previous owners of orphaned wells to recoup the cost of plugging and abandoning them when the costs exceed $250,000.  Yet, in the case of Freshwater City, the state failed to do so, despite the bill draining nearly $1 million from the orphaned well fund, which typically pulls in just $15 million to $16 million a year. Storing Carbon on State Land Less than two weeks after the well was plugged, ExxonMobil’s Joe Coletti confirmed via email that the company had received a signed Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) from DENR’s attorney, Blake Canfield, regarding a carbon capture project that ExxonMobil could build about 10 miles away from the orphaned wastewater site. The oil giant wanted to take CO2 captured from the largest polluter of greenhouse gases in the state — the CF Industries ammonia manufacturing facility in Donaldsonville, Louisiana — and transport it via pipeline to be stored in state-owned lands in Vermilion Parish.  DENR’s spokesman Patrick Courreges said it is not unusual for the agency’s attorney to sign an NDA with a company when it relates to representing the state’s mineral rights as a landowner. “It can be a protection private companies ask for to ensure their negotiation positions aren’t shared with potential competitors,” he said. While the company has been hush-hush about where the carbon would be injected, an email from Colleti to DENR staff on May 9, 2022 included a draft operating agreement to store CO2 in deep geological formations beneath White Lake Wetlands Conservation Area and Rockefeller Wildlife Refuge. Exxon proposed that the company would pay $75 per acre to the state for the first two years and $50 per acre after that to inject CO2. The project could inject up to 10 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year into the state-owned lands. Louisiana’s Mineral and Energy Board voted to move forward with negotiations with the company on May 11, 2022. But when DeSmog recently asked DENR about the project, the state said the proposed location had changed. To where, the state couldn’t say.  “That one gets a little tricky — our Injection and Mining folks have a Class VI application from ExxonMobil in so they know the proposed site location, but we can’t put it out there yet because the state law that enabled our rules also included the provision that means we have to abide by the federal definitions of trade secrets/business confidentiality on these,” Courreges wrote in an email. But the location of Class V wells, which are being used to test injection pressures for CO2 storage, are not considered trade secrets, nor are the locations of proposed oil and gas wells. The EPA’s Region 6 Press Officer, Joe Robledo, confirmed that the EPA — which regulates the storage of carbon dioxide in every state but Louisiana, North Dakota, and Wyoming — doesn’t release the exact location of Class VI wells before the public commenting period either. “The highest level of site resolution we can provide without violating [proprietary business information] status is at the Parish level,” Robledo wrote in an email. “At this time, we are unable to release additional location details.” After DeSmog sent questions to DENR about the location of Exxon’s Class VI and Class V wells, the agency published a map of Class V well project locations in Louisiana. These approximate well locations are near where companies plan to inject CO2, as companies will want to test near the final project location. Class V test wells associated with potential Class VI carbon dioxide storage projects in Louisiana, March 2024. Credit: Louisiana DENR The state never notified nearby landowners or the public that Exxon was thinking about injecting carbon on state-owned land. Why the company would want to pay to build the CCS project on public land when it owns 125,000 acres in the parish is unclear. One explanation could be that it has to do with Exxon limiting their liability, said Jane Patton, the U.S. Fossil Economy Campaign Manager for the Center for International Environmental Law.  “It is really troubling to me that Exxon, a very large landowner in Louisiana, is trying to use state-owned, protected lands for the injection of CO2,” Patton said. “The public wasnt the one who profited off the emissions of the CO2 to begin with. So then to try to put the dangerous accumulated pollution in public land after you’ve made an awful lot of money on it, that just seems like foisting all of the bad and none of the good on the public.” Colleti, who directs Exxon’s Gulf Coast carbon capture ventures, did not respond to questions about why the company wanted to inject CO2 into public land, when it owns land nearby. Since May 2022, the company has not taken any further steps to finalize an agreement with the state for pore space under White Lake Wetlands Conservation Area and Rockefeller Wildlife Refuge. On March 1, Exxon clawed back permit applications for two Class V test wells in Vermilion Parish, telling regulators that the company was reviewing its portfolio after acquiring Denbury, a CCS firm specializing in enhanced oil recovery, last November. Oil and gas well site in Vermillion Parish, Louisiana. Credit: Julie Dermansky Vermilion Parish is no stranger to oil and gas activity. There are more than 130 well bore holes within five miles of where Exxon planned to drill its two test wells in the parish, said Scott Eustis, Healthy Gulf’s Community Science Director. Each of those holes into the earth could have become avenues for CO2 to escape the geological formation where Exxon wanted to trap the CO2 underground, he said.  Without information about where CO2 injection wells will be located, Eustis said its not possible to notify local landowners of the potential risks to their drinking water or assess if there are pathways for leaks, such as underground faults. In areas with underground salt domes, like Vermilion Parish, CO2 leakage and pressure can extend up to 12 miles away from the injection site, according to research by the University of Texas at Austin. A new report commissioned by the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project warns of the risks of proposing carbon disposal wells in areas dense with abandoned oil and gas wells. “Class VI applicants cannot keep the locations of the underground plume secret, and also have a comment period,” Eustis said. He questioned how his organization could warn the public about the potential safety hazards of pollution in such a short time frame. Most projects in the state only require a 30-day commenting period. “The risks extend far from the injection site, and can affect hundreds to thousands of landowners, although we hope that will be unlikely,” he said. The post Where Was Exxon Planning to Inject CO2 in Louisiana? It’s a Trade Secret. appeared first on DeSmog.

[Category: Energy]

As of 4/18/24 9:47pm. Last new 4/18/24 3:01pm.