radiofree.asia 
radiofree.asia 
radiofree.asia 

Category: Climate

  • Pacific 2025: Vanuatu quake, Tongan and Kanaky shakeups, Trump questions set tone for coming year

    Navigating the shared challenges of climate change, geostrategic tensions, political upheaval, disaster recovery and decolonisation plus a 50th birthday party, reports a BenarNews contributor’s analysis.

    COMMENTARY: By Tess Newton Cain

    Vanuatu’s devastating earthquake and dramatic political developments in Tonga and New Caledonia at the end of 2024 set the tone for the coming year in the Pacific.

    The incoming Trump administration adds another level of uncertainty, ranging from the geostrategic competition with China and the region’s resulting militarisation through to the U.S. response to climate change.

    And decolonisation for a number of territories in the Pacific will remain in focus as the region’s largest country celebrates its 50th anniversary of independence.

    The deadly 7.3 earthquake that struck Port Vila on December 17 has left Vanuatu reeling. As the country moves from response to recovery, the full impacts of the damage will come to light.

    The economic hit will be significant, with some businesses announcing that they will not open until well into the New Year or later.

    Amid the physical carnage there’s Vanuatu’s political turmoil, with a snap general election triggered in November before the disaster struck to go ahead on January 16.

    On Christmas Eve a new prime minister was elected in Tonga. ‘Aisake Valu Eke is a veteran politician, who has previously served as Minister of Finance. He succeeded Siaosi Sovaleni who resigned suddenly after a prolonged period of tension between his office and the Tongan royal family.

    Eke takes the reins as Tonga heads towards national elections, due before the end of November. He will likely want to keep things stable and low key between now and then.

    Fall of New Caledonia government
    In Kanaky New Caledonia, the resignation of the Calédonie Ensemble party — also on Christmas Eve — led to the fall of the French territory’s government.

    After last year’s violence and civil disorder – that crippled the economy but stopped a controversial electoral reform — the political turmoil jeopardises about US$77 million (75 million euro) of a US$237 million recovery funding package from France.

    In addition, and given the fall of the Barnier government in Paris, attempts to reach a workable political settlement in New Caledonia are likely to be severely hampered, including any further movement to secure independence.

    In France’s other Pacific territory, the government of French Polynesia is expected to step up its campaign for decolonisation from the European power.

    Possibly the biggest party in the Pacific in 2025 will be the 50th anniversary of Papua New Guinea’s independence from Australia, accompanied hopefully by some reflection and action about the country’s future.

    Eagerly awaited also will be the data from the country’s flawed census last year, due for release on the same day — September 16. But the celebrations will also serve as a reminder of unfinished self-determination business, with its Autonomous Region of Bougainville preparing for their independence declaration in the next two years.

    The shadow of geopolitics looms large in the Pacific islands region. There is no reason to think that will change this year.

    Trump administration unkowns
    A significant unknown is how the incoming Trump administration will alter policy and funding settings, if at all. The current (re)engagement by the US in the region started with Trump during his first incumbency. His 2019 meeting with the then leaders of the compact states — Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, Republic of Marshall Islands — at the White House was a pivotal moment.

    Under Biden, billions of dollars have been committed to “securitise” the region in response to China. This year, we expect to see US marines start to transfer in numbers from Okinawa to Guam.

    However, given Trump’s history and rhetoric when it comes to climate change, there is some concern about how reliable an ally the US will be when it comes to this vital security challenge for the region.

    The last time Trump entered the White House, he withdrew the US from the Paris Agreement and he is widely expected to do the same again this time around.

    In addition to polls in Tonga and Vanuatu, elections will be held in the Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, New Caledonia and for the Autonomous Bougainville Government.

    There will also be a federal election in Australia, the biggest aid donor in the Pacific, and a change in government will almost certainly have impacts in the region.

    Given the sway that the national security community has on both sides of Australian politics, the centrality of Pacific engagement to foreign policy, particularly in response to China, is unlikely to change.

    Likely climate policy change
    How that manifests could look quite different under a conservative Liberal/National party government. The most likely change is in climate policy, including an avowed commitment to invest in nuclear power.

    A refusal to shift away from fossil fuels or commit to enhanced finance for adaptation by a new administration could reignite tensions within the Pacific Islands Forum that have, to some extent, been quietened under Labor’s Albanese government.

    Who is in government could also impact on the bid to host COP31 in 2026, with a decision between candidates Turkey and Australia not due until June, after the poll.

    Pacific leaders and advocates face a systemic challenge regarding climate change. With the rise in conflict and geopolitical competition, the global focus on the climate crisis has weakened. The prevailing sense of disappointment over COP29 last year is likely to continue as partners’ engagement becomes increasingly securitised.

    A major global event for this year is the Oceans Summit which will be held in Nice, France, in June. This is a critical forum for Pacific countries to take their climate diplomacy to a new level and attack the problem at its core.

    In 2023, the G20 countries were responsible for 76 percent of global emissions. By capitalising on the geopolitical moment, the Pacific could nudge the key players to greater ambition.

    Several G20 countries are seeking to expand and deepen their influence in the region alongside the five largest emitters — China, US, India, Russia, and Japan — all of which have strategic interests in the Pacific.

    Given the increasingly transactional nature of Pacific engagement, 2025 should present an opportunity for Pacific governments to leverage their geostrategic capital in ways that will address human security for their peoples.

    Dr Tess Newton Cain is a principal consultant at Sustineo P/L and adjunct associate professor at the Griffith Asia Institute. She is a former lecturer at the University of the South Pacific and has over 25 years of experience working in the Pacific islands region. The views expressed here are hers, not those of BenarNews/RFA. Republished from BenarNews with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Five Pacific region geopolitical ‘betrayals’ in 2024

    COMMENTARY: By David Robie, editor of Asia Pacific Report

    With the door now shut on 2024, many will heave a sigh of relief and hope for better things this year.

    Decolonisation issues involving the future of Kanaky New Caledonia and West Papua – and also in the Middle East with controversial United Nations votes by some Pacific nations in the middle of a livestreamed genocide — figured high on the agenda in the past year along with the global climate crisis and inadequate funding rescue packages.

    Asia Pacific Report looks at some of the issues and developments during the year that were regarded by critics as betrayals:

    1. Fiji and PNG ‘betrayal’ UN votes over Palestine

    Just two weeks before Christmas, the UN General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to demand an immediate ceasefire in the Gaza Strip under attack from Israel — but three of the isolated nine countries that voted against were Pacific island states, including Papua New Guinea.

    The assembly passed a resolution on December 11 demanding an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, which was adopted with 158 votes in favour from the 193-member assembly and nine votes against with 13 abstentions.

    Of the nine countries voting against, the three Pacific nations that sided with Israel and its relentless backer United States were Nauru, Papua New Guinea and Tonga.

    The other countries that voted against were Argentina, Czech Republic, Hungary and Paraguay.

    Thirteen abstentions included Fiji, which had previously controversially voted with Israel, Micronesia, and Palau. Supporters of the resolution in the Pacific region included Australia, New Zealand, and Timor-Leste.

    Ironically, it was announced a day before the UNGA vote that the United States will spend more than US$864 million (3.5 billion kina) on infrastructure and military training in Papua New Guinea over 10 years under a defence deal signed between the two nations in 2023, according to PNG’s Foreign Minister Justin Tkatchenko.

    Any connection? Your guess is as good as mine. Certainly it is very revealing how realpolitik is playing out in the region with an “Indo-Pacific buffer” against China.

    However, the deal actually originated almost two years earlier, in May 2023, with the size of the package reflecting a growing US security engagement with Pacific island nations as it seeks to counter China’s inroads in the vast ocean region.

    Noted BenarNews, a US soft power news service in the region, the planned investment is part of a defence cooperation agreement granting the US military “unimpeded access” to develop and deploy forces from six ports and airports, including Lombrum Naval Base.

    Two months before PNG’s vote, the UNGA overwhelmingly passed a resolution demanding that the Israeli government end its occupation of Palestinian territories within 12 months — but half of the 14 countries that voted against were from the Pacific.

    Affirming an International Court of Justice (ICJ) opinion requested by the UN that deemed the decades-long occupation unlawful, the opposition from seven Pacific nations further marginalised the island region from world opinion against Israel.

    Several UN experts and officials warned against Israel becoming a global “pariah” state over its 15 month genocidal war on Gaza.

    The final vote tally was 124 member states in favour and 14 against, with 43 nations abstaining. The Pacific countries that voted with Israel and its main ally and arms-supplier United States against the Palestinian resolution were Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Palau, Tonga and Tuvalu.

    Flags of decolonisation in Suva, Fiji
    Flags of decolonisation in Suva, Fiji . . . the Morning Star flag of West Papua (colonised by Indonesia) and the flag of Palestine (militarily occupied illegally and under attack from Israel). Image: APR

    In February, Fiji faced widespread condemnation after it joined the US as one of the only two countries — branded as the “outliers” — to support Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territory in an UNGA vote over an International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion over Israel’s policies in the occupied territories.

    Condemning the US and Fiji, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki declared: “Ending Israel’s impunity is a moral, political and legal imperative.”

    Fiji’s envoy at the UN, retired Colonel Filipo Tarakinikini, defended the country’s stance, saying the court “fails to take account of the complexity of this dispute, and misrepresents the legal, historical, and political context”.

    However, Fiji NGOs condemned the Fiji vote as supporting “settler colonialism” and long-standing Fijian diplomats such as Kaliopate Tavola and Robin Nair said Fiji had crossed the line by breaking with its established foreign policy of “friends-to-all-and-enemies-to-none”.

    Indonesian military forces on patrol in the Oksop regency of the West Papua region.

    2. West Papuan self-determination left in limbo
    For the past decade, Pacific Island Forum countries have been trying to get a fact-finding human mission deployed to West Papua. But they have encountered zero progress with continuous roadblocks being placed by Jakarta.

    This year was no different in spite of the appointment of Fiji and Papua New Guinea’s prime ministers to negotiate such a visit.

    Pacific leaders have asked for the UN’s involvement over reported abuses as the Indonesian military continues its battles with West Papuan independence fighters.

    A highly critical UN Human Right Committee report on Indonesia released in May highlighted “systematic reports about the use of torture” and “extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances of Indigenous Papuan people”.

    But the situation is worse now since President Prabowo Subianto, the former general who has a cloud of human rights violations hanging over his head, took office in October.

    Fiji’s Sitiveni Rabuka and Papua New Guinea’s James Marape were appointed by the Melanesian Spearhead Group in 2023 as special envoys to push for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ visit directly with Indonesia’s president.

    Prabowo taking up the top job in Jakarta has filled West Papuan advocates and activists with dread as this is seen as marking a return of “the ghost of Suharto” because of his history of alleged atrocities in West Papua, and also in Timor-Leste before independence.

    Already Prabowo’s acts since becoming president with restoring the controversial transmigration policies, reinforcing and intensifying the military occupation, fuelling an aggressive “anti-environment” development strategy, have heralded a new “regime of brutality”.

    And Marape and Rabuka, who pledged to exiled indigenous leader Benny Wenda in Suva in February 2023 that he would support the Papuans “because they are Melanesians”, have been accused of failing the West Papuan cause.

    Protesters at Molodoï, Strasbourg, demanding the release of Kanak indigenous political prisoners being detained in France
    Protesters at Molodoï, Strasbourg, demanding the release of Kanak indigenous political prisoners being detained in France pending trial for their alleged role in the pro-independence riots in May 2024. Image: @67Kanaky
    /X

    3. France rolls back almost four decades of decolonisation progress
    When pro-independence protests erupted into violent rioting in Kanaky New Caledonia on May 13, creating havoc and destruction in the capital of Nouméa and across the French Pacific territory with 14 people dead, intransigent French policies were blamed for having betrayed Kanak aspirations for independence.

    I was quoted at the time by The New Zealand Herald and RNZ Pacific of blaming France for having “lost the plot” since 2020.

    While acknowledging the goodwill and progress that had been made since the 1988 Matignon accords and the Nouméa pact a decade later following the bloody 1980s insurrection, the French government lost the self-determination trajectory after two narrowly defeated independence referendums and a third vote boycotted by Kanaks because of the covid pandemic.

    This third vote with less than half the electorate taking part had no credibility, but Paris insisted on bulldozing constitutional electoral changes that would have severely disenfranchised the indigenous vote. More than 36 years of constructive progress had been wiped out.

    “It’s really three decades of hard work by a lot of people to build, sort of like a future for Kanaky New Caledonia, which is part of the Pacific rather than part of France,” I was quoted as saying.

    France had had three prime ministers since 2020 and none of them seemed to have any “real affinity” for indigenous issues, particularly in the South Pacific, in contrast to some previous leaders.

    In the wake of a snap general election in mainland France, when President Emmanuel Macron lost his centrist mandate and is now squeezed between the polarised far right National Rally and the left coalition New Popular Front, the controversial electoral reform was quietly scrapped.

    New French Overseas Minister Manual Valls has heralded a new era of negotiation over self-determination. In November, he criticised Macron’s “stubbornness’ in an interview with the French national daily Le Parisien, blaming him for “ruining 36 years of dialogue, of progress”.

    But New Caledonia is not the only headache for France while pushing for its own version of an “Indo-Pacific” strategy. Pro-independence French Polynesian President Moetai Brotherson and civil society leaders have called on the UN to bring Paris to negotiations over a timetable for decolonisation.

    West Papuan leader Benny Wenda (left) and Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka
    West Papuan leader Benny Wenda (left) and Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka . . . “We will support them [ULMWP] because they are Melanesians.” Rabuka also had a Pacific role with New Caledonia. Image: Fiji govt/RNZ Pacific
    4. Pacific Islands Forum also fails Kanak aspirations
    Kanaks and the Pacific’s pro-decolonisation activists had hoped that an intervention by the Pacific Islands Forum in support of the Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front (FLNKS) would enhance their self-determination stocks.

    However, they were disappointed. And their own internal political divisions have not made things any easier.

    On the eve of the three-day fact-finding delegation to the territory in October, Fiji’s Rabuka was already warning the local government (led by pro-independence Louis Mapou to “be reasonable” in its demands from Paris.

    In other words, back off on the independence demands. Rabuka was quoted by RNZ Pacific reporter Lydia Lewis as saying, “look, don’t slap the hand that has fed you”.

    Rabuka and Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown and then Tongan counterpart Hu’akavameiliku Siaosi Sovaleni visited the French territory not to “interfere” but to “lower the temperature”.

    But an Australian proposal for a peacekeeping force under the Australian-backed Pacific Policing Initiative (PPI) fell flat, and the mission was generally considered a failure for Kanak indigenous aspirations.

    Taking the world's biggest problem to the world’s highest court for global climate justice
    Taking the planet’s biggest problem to the world’s highest court for global climate justice. Image: X/@ciel_tweets

    5. Climate crisis — the real issue and geopolitics
    In spite of the geopolitical pressures from countries, such as the US, Australia and France, in the region in the face of growing Chinese influence, the real issue for the Pacific remains climate crisis and what to do about it.

    Controversy marked an A$140 million aid pact signed between Australia and Nauru last month in what was being touted as a key example of the geopolitical tightrope being forced on vulnerable Pacific countries.

    This agreement offers Nauru direct budgetary support, banking services and assistance with policing and security. The strings attached? Australia has been granted the right to veto any agreement with a third country such as China.

    Critics have compared this power of veto to another agreement signed between Australia and Tuvalu in 2023 which provided Australian residency opportunities and support for climate mitigation. However, in return Australia was handed guarantees over security.

    The previous month, November, was another disappointment for the Pacific when it was “once again ignored” at the UN COP29 climate summit in the capital Baku of oil and natural gas-rich Azerbaijan.

    The Suva-based Pacific Islands Climate Action Network (PICAN) condemned the outcomes as another betrayal, saying that the “richest nations turned their backs on their legal and moral obligations” at what had been billed as the “finance COP”.

    The new climate finance pledge of a US$300 billion annual target by 2035 for the global fight against climate change was well short of the requested US$1 trillion in aid.

    Climate campaigners and activist groups branded it as a “shameful failure of leadership” that forced Pacific nations to accept the “token pledge” to prevent the negotiations from collapsing.

    Much depends on a climate justice breakthrough with Vanuatu’s landmark case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) arguing that those harming the climate are breaking international law.

    The case seeks an advisory opinion from the court on the legal responsibilities of countries over the climate crisis, and many nations in support of Vanuatu made oral submissions last month and are now awaiting adjudication.

    Given the primacy of climate crisis and vital need for funding for adaptation, mitigation and loss and damage faced by vulnerable Pacific countries, former Pacific Islands Forum Secretary-General Meg Taylor delivered a warning:

    “Pacific leaders are being side-lined in major geopolitical decisions affecting their region and they need to start raising their voices for the sake of their citizens.”

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The Best of CounterSpin 2024

     

    Right-click here to download this episode (“Save link as…”).

     

    Janine Jackson (Creative Commons photo: Jim Naureckas

    CounterSpin host Janine Jackson

    CounterSpin is your weekly look behind the headlines of the mainstream news. This is the time of year when we take a listen back to some of the conversations from the past year that have helped us clarify the events that bombard us—in part by showing how elite media are clouding them.

    It’s not to say Big Media always get the facts wrong; but that what facts they point us toward, day after day, whose interpretation of those facts they suggest we credit, what responses we’re told are worth pursuing—all of that serves media’s corporate owners’ and sponsors’ bottom line, at the expense of all of our lives and our futures. An important part of the work we do—as producers and as listeners—is to help create and support different ways to inform ourselves and stay in conversation.

    Guests featured on this year’s Best of CounterSpin include Chip Gibbons,  Svante Myrick, Monifa Bandele, Aron Thorn, Evlondo Cooper, Joe Torres, Colette Watson, Greg Shupak and FAIR’s Julie Hollar and Jim Naureckas.

    As always, we are deeply thankful to all of the activists, researchers, reporters and advocates who appear on the show.

    This post was originally published on CounterSpin.

  • Your gadgets are actually carbon sinks — for now

    At any given moment, crude oil is being pumped up from the depths of the planet. Some of that sludge gets sent to a refinery and processed into plastic, then it becomes the phone in your hand, the shades on your window, the ornaments hanging from your Christmas tree.

    Although scientists know how much carbon dioxide is emitted to make these products (a new iPhone is akin to driving more than 200 miles), there’s little research into how much gets stashed away in them. A study published on Friday in the journal Cell Reports Sustainability estimates that billions of tons of carbon from fossil fuels — coal, oil, and gas — was stored in gadgets, building materials, and other long-lasting human-made items over a recent 25 year period, tucked away in what the researchers call the “technosphere.” 

    According to the study by researchers at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands, 400 million tons of carbon gets added to the technosphere’s stockpile every year, growing at a slightly faster rate than fossil fuel emissions. But in many cases, the technosphere doesn’t keep that carbon permanently; if objects get thrown away and incinerated, they wind up warming the atmosphere, too. In 2011, 9 percent of all extracted fossil carbon was sunk into items and infrastructure in the technosphere, an amount that would almost equal that year’s emissions from the European Union if it were burned. 

    “It’s like a ticking time bomb,” said Klaus Hubacek, an ecological economist at the University of Groningen and senior author of the paper. “We draw lots of fossil resources out of the ground and put them in the technosphere and then leave them sitting around. But what happens after an object’s lifetime?”

    The word “technosphere” got its start in 1960, when a science writer named Wil Lepkowski wrote that “modern man has become a goalless, lonely prisoner of his technosphere,” in an article for the journal Science. Since then, the term, a play on “biosphere,” has been used by ecologists and geologists to grapple with the amount of stuff humankind has smothered the planet in.

    “The problem is that we have been incredibly wasteful as we’ve been making and building things.” said Jan Zalasiewicz, a professor of paleobiology at the University of Leicester in the United Kingdom, who was not involved in the University of Groningen study.

    In 2016, Zalasiewicz and his colleagues published a paper that estimated the technosphere had grown to approximately 30 trillion tonnes, an amount 100,000 times greater than the mass of all humans piled on top of each other. The paper also found that the number of “technofossils” — unique kinds of manmade objects — outnumbered the number of unique species of life on the planet. In 2020, a separate group of researchers found that the technosphere doubles in volume roughly every 20 years and now likely outweighs all living things. 

    “The question is, how does the technosphere impinge upon the biosphere?” Zalasiewicz said. Plastic bags and fishing nets, for example, can choke the animals that encounter them. And unlike natural ecosystems, like forests and oceans that can absorb carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, humans are “not very good at recycling,” Zalasiewicz said.

    Managing the disposal of all this stuff in a more climate-friendly way is precisely the problem that the researchers from University of Groningen want to draw attention to. Their research looked at the 8.4 billion tons of fossil carbon in human-made objects that were in use for at least a year between 1995 and 2019. Nearly 30 percent of this carbon was trapped in rubber and plastic, much of it in household appliances, and another quarter was stashed in bitumen, a byproduct of crude oil used in construction.

    “Once you discard these things, the question is, how do you treat that carbon?” said Kaan Hidiroglu, one of the study’s authors and an energy and environmental studies PhD student at the University of Groningen. “If you put it into incinerators and burn it, you immediately release more carbon emissions into the atmosphere, which is something we really do not want to do.”

    Each year, the paper estimates, roughly a third of these fossil-products in the technosphere get incinerated. Another third end up in landfills, which can act as a kind of long-term carbon sink. But unfortunately, the authors acknowledge, these sites often leach chemicals, burp out methane, or shed microplastics into the environment. A little less than a third is recycled — a solution that comes with its own problems — and a small amount is littered.

    “There’s so many different aspects to the problem and treating it properly,” Hubacek said. Nevertheless, he said, landfills are a good starting point if managed well. According to the study, the bulk of fossil carbon that’s put into landfills decays slowly and stays put over 50 years. Designing products in a way that allows them to be recycled and last a long time can help keep the carbon trapped for longer.

    Ultimately, Hubacek said, the real solution starts with people questioning if they really need so much stuff. “Reduce consumption and avoid making it in the first place. But once you have it, that’s when we need to think about what to do next.”

    This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Your gadgets are actually carbon sinks — for now on Dec 20, 2024.


    This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Sachi Kitajima Mulkey.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Biden just set a big new climate goal. Can the U.S. achieve it?

    With just a month left in office, the Biden administration is setting a bold new target for U.S. climate action. On Thursday, the White House announced a national goal that would see the country’s greenhouse gas emissions drop 61 to 66 percent below 2005 levels by 2035. That would keep the United States on a “straight line” trajectory toward Biden’s ultimate goal of hitting net zero emissions by 2050, officials said. If that happens, it would mean the country is only emitting as much carbon as it’s simultaneously sequestering through techniques like restoring forests and wetlands — in other words, that it’s no longer playing any part in warming the planet.

    The announcement is the latest in a series of climate-related actions Biden is taking during his final months in office. In the last week alone, his administration pushed for an international deal to limit global fossil fuel finance and published a study that cautioned against new export infrastructure for liquefied natural gas. These actions are designed to shore up environmental action ahead of president-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration in January. 

    Just as he did during his first term, Trump is promising to boost fossil fuels when he takes office next year. He’s also pledged to claw back funding from Biden’s landmark climate legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act, which provides billions of dollars in subsidies and tax breaks to supercharge renewable energy adoption, and to once again pull the United States out of the landmark Paris climate agreement, the 2015 United Nations accord intended to limit global warming to under 2 degrees Celsius compared to preindustrial levels. (That withdrawal process took years when Trump first tried it, but it will likely move much faster this time.)

    “The Biden-Harris administration may be about to leave office, but we’re confident in America’s ability to rally around this new climate program,” said John Podesta, the administration’s senior climate advisor, on a call with reporters. “While the United States federal government under President Trump may put climate action on the back burner, the work to contain climate change is going to continue in the United States with commitment and passion and belief.”

    Podesta maintained that the Inflation Reduction Act, or IRA, and other federal policies have created enough momentum that emissions will continue to decline without further federal encouragement. He noted that the private sector has announced $450 billion in investments in clean energy projects over the past four years, much of which was stimulated by the IRA, and more investment is likely to follow even under Trump’s tenure. A study from Princeton University found that the law will be enough to reduce U.S. emissions by as much as 48 percent by 2035 — a good portion of the way toward the new goal, but not all the way there.

    Much of the work will fall on states, who regulate their own utilities and can promote the switch to renewable energy sources. Cities run their own public transportation systems and set energy-efficiency building codes. Governors and mayors have long collaborated on more ambitious goals than the federal government, even under Democratic administrations.

    “Across the country,” White House National Climate Advisor Ali Zaidi said in the press call Wednesday, “we see decarbonization efforts to reduce our emissions in many ways achieving escape velocity, an inexorable path, a place from which we will not turn back.” 

    A wide coalition of governors, mayors, tribes, and companies has pledged to continue climate progress over the next four years under Trump, and more than 200 of these entities have laid out their own climate plans. They can attempt their own decarbonization efforts, as New York state plans to do through its new congesting pricing policy in Manhattan, or by litigating against Trump’s emissions-boosting policies, as California Governor Gavin Newsom has said he plans to do.

    Fundamental market forces are also at work. The prices of renewables like solar panels and wind turbines, plus the batteries to store that energy, have been plummeting. That’s partly why Texas — not exactly a bastion of climate action — now generates more renewable energy than any other state. And heat pumps — which move heat into a home using electricity instead of fossil fuels — now outsell gas furnaces in the U.S.

    “Pioneering offshore wind farms are delivering clean power,” Zaidi said. “Retired nuclear plants are coming back online. America is racing forward on solar and batteries. Not just the deployment, but also the means to stamp those products ‘Made in America.’”

    The new plan places particular emphasis on efforts to reduce emissions of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas that warms the earth around 80 times as fast as carbon dioxide but lingers in the atmosphere for a shorter time period. Biden has rolled out regulations designed to penalize the huge share of methane emissions that come from the oil and gas sector, a move that even ExxonMobil CEO Darren Woods has asked Trump not to repeal. Last month, at the United Nations’ international climate meeting, COP29, the U.S. announced a partnership with China to track methane leakage from oil infrastructure and develop technologies to mitigate it. The administration said it expects methane emissions to fall by 35 percent over the next decade if the nation meets its broader climate target.

    The United States is submitting its new target as part of its requirements under the Paris Agreement. The treaty calls on every country to outline its climate ambitions every five years in documents known as “nationally determined contributions,” or NDCs. When he took office in 2021, Biden set a national pledge to reduce the country’s greenhouse gas emissions by 50 to 52 percent from 2005 levels by 2030. The new 61-66 percent target for 2035 puts the U.S. in the middle of the pack when it comes to this round of Paris climate plans, which are due from all countries in February. The United Kingdom announced a much more ambitious 81 percent reduction target at COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, last month, while the United Arab Emirates has only committed to a 47 percent reduction over the same period. Brazil, which is hosting COP30 next year, has a goal that is similar to Biden’s. 

    Some advocacy organizations chastised Biden for not setting an even more ambitious target, one in line with that of the United Kingdom.

    “With a climate denier about to enter the White House, the Biden administration’s new national climate plan represents the bare minimum floor for climate action,” said Ashfaq Khalfan, the climate justice director at Oxfam America, the U.S. chapter of the global anti-poverty advocacy organization. “It falls far short of the U.S.’s fair share of emissions reduction as the world’s largest historical polluter.”

    But others praised Biden for trying to ratchet up climate ambition despite the dark short-term outlook. Rachel Cleetus, the climate policy director at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said other nations would appreciate that the outgoing government had set a realistic target for the nation’s climate ambition. 

    “I think the international community will welcome the U.S. showing it understands the importance of doing its part to meet global climate goals,” she said. “There will be challenges, for sure, but what’s not reasonable is letting political winds dictate the future of the planet and the safety of people now and for generations to come.”

    This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Biden just set a big new climate goal. Can the U.S. achieve it? on Dec 19, 2024.

    This post was originally published on Grist.

  • Superpower rivalry makes Pacific aid a bargaining chip – vulnerable nations still lose out

    ANALYSIS: By Sione Tekiteki, Auckland University of Technology

    The A$140 million aid agreement between Australia and Nauru signed last week is a prime example of the geopolitical tightrope vulnerable Pacific nations are walking in the 21st century.

    The deal provides Nauru with direct budgetary support, stable banking services, and policing and security resources. In return, Australia will have the right to veto any pact Nauru might make with other countries — namely China.

    The veto terms are similar to the “Falepili Union” between Australia and Tuvalu signed late last year, which granted Tuvaluans access to Australian residency and climate mitigation support, in exchange for security guarantees.

    And just last week, more details emerged about a defence deal between the United States and Papua New Guinea, now revealed to be worth US$864 million.

    In exchange for investment in military infrastructure development, training and equipment, the US gains unrestricted access to six ports and airports.

    Also last week, PNG signed a 10-year, A$600 million deal to fund its own team in Australia’s NRL competition. In return, “PNG will not sign a security deal that could allow Chinese police or military forces to be based in the Pacific nation”.

    These arrangements are all emblematic of the geopolitical tussle playing out in the Pacific between China and the US and its allies.

    This strategic competition is often framed in mainstream media and political commentary as an extension of “the great game” played by rival powers. From a traditional security perspective, Pacific nations can be depicted as seeking advantage to leverage their own development priorities.

    But this assumption that Pacific governments are “diplomatic price setters”, able to play China and the US off against each other, overlooks the very real power imbalances involved.

    The risk, as the authors of one recent study argued, is that the “China threat” narrative becomes the justification for “greater Western militarisation and economic dominance”. In other words, Pacific nations become diplomatic price takers.

    Defence diplomacy
    Pacific nations are vulnerable on several fronts: most have a low economic base and many are facing a debt crisis. At the same time, they are on the front line of climate change and rising sea levels.

    The costs of recovering from more frequent extreme weather events create a vicious cycle of more debt and greater vulnerability. As was reported at this year’s United Nations COP29 summit, climate financing in the Pacific is mostly in the form of concessional loans.

    The Pacific is already one of the world’s most aid-reliant regions. But considerable doubt has been expressed about the effectiveness of that aid when recipient countries still struggle to meet development goals.

    At the country level, government systems often lack the capacity to manage increasing aid packages, and struggle with the diplomatic engagement and other obligations demanded by the new geopolitical conditions.

    In August, Kiribati even closed its borders to diplomats until 2025 to allow the new government “breathing space” to attend to domestic affairs.

    In the past, Australia championed governance and institutional support as part of its financial aid. But a lot of development assistance is now skewed towards policing and defence.

    Australia recently committed A$400 million to the Pacific Policing Initiative, on top of a host of other security-related initiatives. This is all part of an overall rise in so-called “defence diplomacy”, leading some observers to criticise the politicisation of aid at the expense of the Pacific’s most vulnerable people.

    Kiribati: threatened by sea level rise
    Kiribati: threatened by sea level rise, the nation closed its borders to foreign diplomats until 2025. Image: Getty Images/The Conversation

    Lack of good faith
    At the same time, many political parties in Pacific nations operate quite informally and lack comprehensive policy manifestos. Most governments lack a parliamentary subcommittee that scrutinises foreign policy.

    The upshot is that foreign policy and security arrangements can be driven by personalities rather than policy priorities, with little scrutiny. Pacific nations are also susceptible to corruption, as highlighted in Transparency International’s 2024 Annual Corruption Report.

    Writing about the consequences of the geopolitical rivalry in the Solomon Islands, Transparency Solomon Islands executive director Ruth Liloqula wrote:

    Since 2019, my country has become a hotbed for diplomatic tensions and foreign interference, and undue influence.

    Similarly, Pacific affairs expert Distinguished Professor Steven Ratuva has argued the Australia–Tuvalu agreement was one-sided and showed a “lack of good faith”.

    Behind these developments, of course, lies the evolving AUKUS security pact between Australia, the US and United Kingdom, a response to growing Chinese presence and influence in the “Indo-Pacific” region.

    The response from Pacific nations has been diplomatic, perhaps from a sense they cannot “rock the submarine” too much, given their ties to the big powers involved. But former Pacific Islands Forum Secretary-General Meg Taylor has warned:

    Pacific leaders were being sidelined in major geopolitical decisions affecting their region and they need to start raising their voices for the sake of their citizens.

    While there are obvious advantages that come with strategic alliances, the tangible impacts for Pacific nations remain negligible. As the UN’s Asia and the Pacific progress report on sustainable development goals states, not a single goal is on track to be achieved by 2030.

    Unless these partnerships are grounded in good faith and genuine sustainable development, the grassroots consequences of geopolitics-as-usual will not change.The Conversation

    Dr Sione Tekiteki, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law, Auckland University of Technology. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • ‘The people will save the people’: Rage and solidarity in the wake of Spain’s floods

    On October 29, the Spanish town of Paiporta, Valencia, was swept by more rain in four hours than it had received in the past three years. The resulting torrent gutted the entire community, killing over 200 residents. While Valencians have banded together to survive and rebuild, their solidarity of necessity is accompanied by a simmering fury at the government’s failures. The Real News reports from Valencia, Spain.

    Producers: Belal Awad, Leo Erhardt
    Videography: Mario Capetillo Torres
    Video Editor: Leo Erhardt

    Transcript

    David – Paiporta resident: 

    When the water rose all the way up there, that’s when the cell phone warnings came through. By then, my dog had already drowned here on the ground floor, that’s when the alarms went off, the warnings started coming in: “Peep peep! Watch out, the ravines are overflowing.” What happened here is unacceptable. It’s unacceptable. 

    Narrator: 

    On October 29th, 2024, the small Spanish town of Paiporta became a flashpoint in an unprecedented natural disaster. A rare weather event caused by the meeting of warm and cold fronts unleashed huge amounts of rainfall on the Spanish region of Valencia. More rain in 4 hours than the previous 3 years combined. The storm – referred to by the abbreviation DANA – claimed the lives of 220 people, with tens of people still missing. Today, the town’s residents are angry, they accuse the regional and central government of a slow and negligent response. But where the authorities have failed, volunteers have stepped in. 

    Goyo – Volunteer: 

    Well, it looks like some heads might roll. Watching the news, you get the impression they didn’t issue a very effective warning for people to take the necessary precautions, knowing that such a massive flood was on its way. 

    But groups like ours are really essential because, right now, we don’t see any military presence distributing food. It’s only the volunteer organizations and NGOs providing support to those in need. 

    Volunteer: 

    – Would you like some slices of melon? 

    – Yeah, we’ve got a Tupperware. 

    – Of course. 

    David – Paiporta resident: 

    They left us abandoned for the first 24 hours. We were alone for the first 48 hours. We were entering supermarkets, grabbing food trying to survive as if there were no government. It wasn’t until the third or fourth day that we finally started seeing some presence from the army and others. We felt completely alone and forsaken. In a country where we pay taxes, this should not be happening. And then, just last night, they pulled six more bodies out from under the mud along the tracks. Does it make sense that after ten days, they still haven’t sent enough personnel to find all the missing, or at least most of them? It’s unacceptable, completely unacceptable.

    Paiporta resident: 

    But as I’m saying, this could happen to any Spaniard. The flood has impacted Valencia. But all of Spain, our leaders have abandoned us. Tomorrow, this could happen somewhere else in Spain. We’ll help, but bear in mind, our leaders won’t. What do we even need those leaders for? I don’t want them; I’ll govern myself, damn it. 

    Narrator: 

    It was here in Paiporta, that the King and Queen of Spain, the Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez and the regional leader of Valencia, Carlos Mazon came to visit after DANA. And it was here where they were all greeted with mud and dirt thrown at them by angry locals. Whilst the King and Queen stayed to talk to locals, Prime Minister Sanchez and regional head Mazon, both made a hasty retreat. 

    David – Paiporta resident: 

    It’s a huge outrage, and the anger running through the town is impressive. There are a lot of inconsistencies; the numbers they’re giving about the missing don’t add up. They’re still finding people. There are garages they haven’t even been able to check because the walls have collapsed. So they can’t tell the truth. Three homeless people who lived there are nowhere to be found. They’re not listed as missing. In Picaña, there were three or four homeless people in a park who are also unaccounted for. They could write this off as other causes of death. We’re furious, indignant, and feeling a deep-seated rage that’s indescribable. 

    Chantings: 

    Where’s your mud? Where’s your mud? 

    Murderers! Murderers! Murderers! 

    You’re defending a murderer! 

    Narrator: 

    Over 130,000 protesters took to the streets to not only demand the resignation of regional leader Carlos Mazón, but to demand answers. Answers to questions like, why did Valencian residents only receive warning text messages 14 hours after the regional government had received a series of red weather alerts? For many the text messages came all too late. 

    Chantings: 

    Resign! Resign! 

    Where were you when you were needed? Where? You’re all dogs! You, you, and you are worthless! 

    Protester:

    Mazón was completely absent. Here, the people are saving the people. That’s what’s happening here today in the Town Hall square, in this November 9 protest, demanding Mazón’s resignation. 

    Protester: 

    We’ve had to coordinate ourselves. We’re doing everything by ourselves. And now they try to paint us as heroes, we don’t have to take care of this, they have to take care of everything. And next week, now that the people are more or less safe, what has to happen is that instead of asking for forgiveness, they resign! Out of pure shame of what they’ve done. 

    Paul – Valencia resident: 

    My view is that the management by the Valencian government bordered on criminal negligence, by not warning people, downplaying the tragedy beforehand, and trying to hide their incompetence. The Spanish central government, too, treats us like a colony, more worried about getting the AVE train to Valencia and making sure tourists can still come to the beach. And companies prioritize their interests over the safety of their workers, both on the day of the disaster and in the days afterward. 

    Lucia – Valencia resident: 

    I believe it’s our duty as citizens to present our complaints against the entire political mismanagement of this DANA, which led to the loss of countless lives that could have been saved. And the chaos that followed the DANA has been even worse than the DANA itself. 

    Chantings: 

    Long live Valencia! 

    Volunteer: 

    Sandwiches! Go forward if you want one. 

    I’m making it with whatever little we have so they can enjoy a little taste of home. We need all of this to go into storage. 

    Carlota – Volunteer: 

    We’re all in this together. Nobody is anyone’s enemy. It would be easy for us to have a little disagreement and say you’re on one side, and I’m on the other. But right now, we all need to be together and find a solution. I have my opinions, but I’ll keep them to myself because, right now, the priority is for us all to be here, helping however we can with the resources we have. 

    Maria del Pilar – Volunteer & victim: 

    I’m personally very grateful to the youth, to the people of Valencia who came to the towns to help us, to help us clear everything out and clean our homes. I’m so grateful that, if I could, I’d thank every one of these people personally.

    Jesus – Paiporta resident: 

    So many different people have come here — people from all over, from outside, from Valencia. Even people from abroad. It’s been remarkable. We can be proud of everyone who’s come to lend a hand. The people will save the people.

    This post was originally published on The Real News Network.

  • Nigel Farage Denies Man Made Climate Change | April 2024 | Just Stop Oil #shorts


    This content originally appeared on Just Stop Oil and was authored by Just Stop Oil.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Nigel Farage Denies Man Made Climate Change | April 2024 | Just Stop Oil #shorts


    This content originally appeared on Just Stop Oil and was authored by Just Stop Oil.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • The climate cost of Trump’s tariffs

    Shortly after he was elected, Donald Trump announced an economic gambit that was aggressive even by his standards. He vowed that, on the first day of his second term, he would slap 25 percent tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico, and boost those already placed on Chinese products by another 10 percent. 

    The move set off a frenzy of pushback. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau even flew to the president-elect’s Florida resort to make his case. Economists say the potential levies threaten to upend global trade — including on green technologies, many of which are manufactured in China. The moves would cause price spikes for everything from electric vehicles and heat pumps to solar panels. 

    “Typically, with tariffs, we’ve seen [companies] pass them along to the consumer,” said Corey Cantor, electric vehicles analyst at Bloomberg NEF. Ansgar Baums, a senior fellow at the nonpartisan foreign policy think-tank Stimson Center, said retaliatory moves from the three targeted countries would only make things worse. “It will drive up consumer costs and hurt those who cannot afford it.”

    Trump acknowledges that possibility. But he has argued that tariffs are necessary to force Canada and Mexico to crack down on drugs, particularly fentanyl, and migrants crossing the border into the U.S. 

    It’s not the first time Trump has turned to tariffs as a foreign policy tool. In 2018 and 2019, he imposed them on a litany of goods, from steel and aluminum to photovoltaic solar panels and washing machines. While the Biden administration eased some of those duties, it kept many in place, especially those targeting China, and recently raised tariffs on Chinese items including electric vehicles, solar cells, and electrical vehicle batteries. Experts say these efforts have done little more than raise prices. 

    “The consensus on the first round of Trump tariffs is that [they] generally did not improve American productivity,” said Alex Muresianu, a senior policy analyst at the Tax Foundation, a right-leaning think tank. The nonprofit calculated that, in the long run, Trump’s first round of tariffs will hurt gross domestic product and cost the United States some 142,000 jobs. Baums was even more blunt about their impact: “They were a big failure. They didn’t achieve much.” 

    The recently threatened tariffs would ratchet prices even higher on things like solar panels, but are also much more far reaching because of their broad application to North American trading partners. One sweeping impact would be on gasoline prices because, although the U.S. is world’s largest oil producer, older domestic refineries can only process the type of heavier crude that comes from Canada. GasBuddy projects that tariffs could add 35 to 75 cents to a gallon of gas.

    Automakers will also be hard hit, as $97 billion in parts and some four million vehicles come from Canada and, especially, Mexico. That’s where some of the more affordable electric vehicles, such as Ford’s Mustang Mach-E and the Chevrolet Equinox, are manufactured. Wolfe Research said that “given the magnitude, we’d expect most investors to assume Trump ultimately does not follow through with these threats” but that, if they were put in place, tariffs would add $3,000 to the price of the average car, regardless of whether it’s powered by gasoline or a battery.

    Cantor, at Bloomberg NEF, says adding even a few thousand dollars to the price can drastically expand or contract the potential market of buyers for a vehicle. For example, about 70 percent of consumers consider a $35,000 car, a number that jumps to about 87 percent when a car is $30,000. 

    “People adjust their behavior,” he said. That could further harm an EV sector that will also likely be reeling from Trump’s rollback of federal tax-credits for electrified vehicles. 

    Baums doesn’t believe that more tariffs will meaningfully shift industries to the US and the Trump administration “underestimates” how complicated that process would be. Others say some relocation could occur. Michelle Davis, director and head of global solar for research firm Wood Mackenzie, wrote that the levies “would undoubtedly increase domestic manufacturing activity to meet market needs.” But even then, she adds, that “this would result in a more expensive market for domestic buyers.”

    In addition to prices, Muresianu also worries that the type of protectionism that Trump favors could stymie innovation. He points to the U.S. shipbuilding industry as an example: it once supplied most of the world’s ships but, in large part due to policies meant to shield domestic shipyards from competition, American vessels have since become drastically more expensive than those made overseas and now account for less than 1 percent of the global total. Tariffs could impose similar stagnancy on other U.S. industries, Muresianu says.

    Baums’ concerns are more existential. Trump, he says, is geo-politicizing issues like climate change in ways that will ultimately make it more difficult to share technology, lower costs, and combat greenhouse gas emissions. He would like countries to instead come together and agree that some industries — including cleantech — are too important to put at the center of a trade war.

    “The planet is burning,” said Baums. “If there’s anything we should try to cooperate on, it’s stuff that makes a clean transition happen.”

    This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The climate cost of Trump’s tariffs on Dec 12, 2024.

    This post was originally published on Grist.

  • Fiji government accused over human rights violations, free speech curb

    By Apenisa Waqairadovu in Suva

    Fiji’s coalition government has come under scrutiny over allegations of human rights violations.

    Speaking at the commemoration of International Human Rights Day in Suva on Tuesday, the chair of the Coalition of NGOs, Shamima Ali, claimed that — like the previous FijiFirst administration — the coalition government has demonstrated a “lack of commitment to human rights”.

    Addressing more than 400 activists at the event, the Minister for Women, Children, and Social Protection Lynda Tabuya acknowledged the concerns raised by civil society organisations, assuring them that Sitiveni Rabuka’s government was committed to listening and addressing these issues.


    Ali criticises Fiji government over human rights         Video: FBC News

    The "Human rights for all" theme
    The “Human rights for all” theme at Fiji’s World Human Rights Day march in downtown Suva. Image: FBC News

    Shamima Ali claimed that freedom of expression was still being suppressed and the coalition had failed to address this.

    “We are also concerned that there continue to be government restrictions on freedom of expression and assembly through the arbitrary application of the Public Order Amendment Act, which should have been changed by now — two years into the new government that we all looked forward to,” she said.

    A "Girls wanna have fundamental human rights"
    A “Girls wanna have fundamental human rights” placard at the World Human Rights Day march in Suva. Image: FBC News

    Ali alleged that serious decisions in government were made unfairly, and women in leadership continued to be “undermined”.

    “Nepotism and cronyism remain rife with each successive government, with party supporters being given positions with no regard for merit, diversity, and representation,” she said.

    “Misogyny against certain women leaders is rampant, with wild sexism and online bullying.”

    An "Our rights, our future now" placard at Fiji's Human Rights Day rally.
    An “Our rights, our future now” placard at Fiji’s Human Rights Day rally. Image: FBC News

    Responding, Minister Tabuya acknowledged the concerns raised and called for dialogue to bring about the change needed.

    “I can sit here and be told everything that we are doing wrong in government,” Tabuya said.

    “I can take it, but I cannot assure that others in government will take it the same way as well. So I encourage you, with the kind of partnerships, to begin with dialogue and to build together because government cannot do it alone.”

    A "Stop fossil fuel production, consumption and distribution" placard at Fiji's World Human Rights Day march
    A “Stop fossil fuel production, consumption and distribution” placard at Fiji’s World Human Rights Day march . . . climate crisis is a major human rights issue in the Pacific. Image: FBC News

    The minister stressed that to address the many human rights violation concerns that had been raised, the government needed support from civil society organisations, traditional leaders, faith-based leaders, and a cross-sector approach to face these issues.

    Republished from FBC News with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Vanuatu becomes first country to partner with new UN climate loss funding network

    By Anita Roberts in Port Vila

    Vanuatu has reaffirmed its global leadership in climate action as the first country to launch a technical assistance programme under the Santiago Network for Loss and Damage.

    This historical achievement has been announced by the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) and the UN Office for Project Services (UNOPS), according to a statement from the Department of Climate Change (DoCC) and the National Advisory Board (NAB) on Climate Change.

    “Vanuatu will benefit from US$330,000 from the new Santiago Network to design a loss and damage country programme as a first step towards getting money directly into the hands of people who are suffering climate harm and communities taking action to address the unavoidable and irreversible impacts on agriculture, fisheries, biodiversity infrastructure, water supply, tourism, and other critical livelihood activities. With such a L&D programme,” the statement said.

    “Vanuatu aims to be first in line to receive a large grant from the new UN Fund for responding to Loss and Damage holding US$700 million which has yet to be used.

    “Loss and damage is a consequence of the worsening climate impacts being felt across Vanuatu’s islands, and driven by increases in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) concentrations which are caused primarily by fossil fuels and industry.

    “Vanuatu is not responsible for climate change, and has contributed less than 0.0016 percent of global historical greenhouse gas emissions.

    “Vanuatu’s climate vulnerability is one of the highest in the world.

    “Despite best efforts by domestic communities, civil society, the private sector and government, Vanuatu’s climate vulnerability stems from insufficient global mitigation efforts, its direct exposure to a range of climate and non-climate risks, as well as inadequate levels of action and support for adaptation provided to Vanuatu as an unfulfilled obligation of rich developed countries under the UN Climate Treaty.”

    The Santiago Network was recently set up under the Warsaw International Mechanism for loss and damage (WIM) of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) to enable technical assistance to avert, minimise and address loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change at the local, national and regional level.

    The technical assistance is intended for developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change.

    The statement said that because Vanuatu’s negotiators were instrumental in the establishment of the Santiago Network, the DoCC had worked quickly to ensure direct benefits begin to flow to communities who are suffering climate loss and damage now.

    “Now that an official call for proposals to support Vanuatu has been published on the Santiago Network website www.santiago-network.org, there is an opportunity for Vanuatu’s local Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), private sector, academic institutions, community associations, churches and even individuals to put in a bid to respond to the request,” the statement said.

    “The only requirement for local entities to submit a bid is to become a member of the Santiago Network, with membership open to a huge range of Organisations, Bodies, Networks and Experts (OBNEs).

    “Specifically defined, organisations are independent legal entities. Bodies are groups that are not necessarily independent legal entities. Networks ate interconnected groups of organisations or individuals that collaborate, share resources, or coordinate activities to achieve common goals.

    “These networks can vary in structure, purpose, and scope but do not necessarily have legally established arrangements such as consortiums. Experts – individuals who are recognised specialists in a specific field.”

    According to the statement, to become a member, a potential OBNE has to complete a simple form outlining their expertise, experience and commitment to the principles of the Santiago Network.

    “The membership submissions are reviewed on a rolling basis, and once approved, OBNEs can make a formal bid to develop Vanuatu’s Loss and Damage programme for the UN Fund for responding to L&D,” the joint DoCC and NAB statement said.

    “Vanuatu’s Ministry of Climate Change prefers that Pacific based OBNEs apply to provide this TA because they have deep cultural understanding and strong community ties, enabling them to design and implement context-specific, culturally appropriate solutions. Additionally, local and regional OBNEs have been shown to invest in strengthening national skills and knowledge, leaving behind lasting capacities that contribute to long-term resilience, and build strong local ownership and sustainability.”

    The deadline for OBNEs to submit their bids is 5 January 2025.

    There will be an open and transparent selection process taken by the UN to determine the best service provider to help Vanuatu and its people most effectively address growing climate losses and damages.

    In addition to Vanuatu’s historic engagement with the Santiago Network on Loss and Damage, Vanuatu will also hold a board seat on the new Fund for Responding to L&D, as well as leading climate loss and damage initiatives at the International Criminal Court, the International Court of Justice, advocating for a new Fossil Fuel Non Proliferation Treaty, developing a national Loss and Damage Policy Framework, undertaking community-led Loss and Damage Policy Labs and establishing a national Climate Change Fund to provide loss and damage finance to vulnerable people across the country.

    Republished from the Vanuatu Daily Post with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • This county has an ambitious climate agenda. That’s not easy in Florida.

    Florida keeps trying to kill Betsy Riley.

    Riley says it as a joke, a way to make light of surviving three weather-related scares over the past three years. The first time was in 2022, a year after Riley and their partner moved to Alachua County in the northern part of the Sunshine State. On the June day that they brought their then-newborn baby home, a record-setting heat wave overwhelmed the air conditioner until it broke. The next summer, extreme heat struck again, leading to the explosion of a lawn mower’s battery close to where the family’s two dogs were sleeping. Then, this past September, Hurricane Helene sent an oak tree smashing through the roof of their home, bringing a ceiling rafter down on Riley’s partner. Though the branches missed their second child — then 4 months old — by about 5 feet, the infant was showered with insulation foam. 

    “When I talk about it, I have to keep from crying,” they said. “But you know, nothing stops when you’re a hurricane survivor. You still have to go to work.”

    About two months after the hurricane, Riley found themself in like-minded company. As Alachua County’s sustainability manager, the 35-year-old spent a recent Saturday helping lead the inaugural Alachua County Climate Action Summit in Gainesville. Facing a crowd of residents, local leaders, activists, and scientists, one presenter asked, “Who has lived through a hurricane when the power went out?” Hands flew into the air.

    A man at a podium stands next to a projector screen with the words, "Climate Action Plan: Purpose & Vision Statement. To guide, develop, and cultivate environmentally, socially, and economically resilient strategies and equitable solutions to climate change for the whole community." There is a crowd of several dozen people in front of him. Some of their hands are raised.
    Steven Hofstetter, director of the Alachua County Environmental Protection Department, speaks to a crowd at the Alachua County Climate Summit in November 2024.
    Grist

    The daylong program was intended to tell the community about climate impacts in store for Alachua County, and to get feedback on an official climate action plan, which organizers hope to finalize and begin executing early next year. Within the conference center’s rooms, the atmosphere hummed with urgency, and it was hard to believe that preparing for climate change was at all controversial. For decades, Alachua County has remained a haven for liberals, a blue dot in a deeply red state: Democrats hold most local offices and Democratic candidates for president have garnered landslide majorities since the county backed President Bill Clinton in 1992.

    But in Republican-dominated Florida, where Governor Ron DeSantis has scrubbed several mentions of “climate change” from the state’s laws, Alachua County’s ambition looks like an easily popped bubble. Even though a large majority of Floridians say they want action on climate change, the state has become increasingly hostile toward many such policies. Recent headwinds, like state laws written to override local ones, precarious federal funding, and a battle over a local utility, threaten to derail the county’s efforts. “To be a Floridian and to be an Alachua County citizen is to hold profoundly different realities,” said Cynthia Barnett, an environmental journalist, in a speech at the summit. 

    Alachua County sits squarely in North Central Florida, with several hours of interstate buffering residents from coastlines and the nearest big cities, Orlando and Jacksonville. On the day of the summit, downtown Gainesville — the city at the county’s center — bustled with weekend traffic. The city is home to the University of Florida, and some of its 60,000 students were biking to brunch, while others joined throngs of orange-and-blue clad tailgaters in front of the football stadium. 

    The university is the county’s largest employer, and its progressive influence radiates throughout Gainesville and its 150,000 residents. Leave the city, and the bohemian coffee shops and pride flags vanish, replaced by boiled peanut stands, billboards advertising fireworks, and “Make America Great Again” lawn signs. A little further, and the Spanish moss-draped canopies of live oak trees give way to farmland and pine forests grown for timber. In this perimeter lie the county’s eight other towns, with populations ranging from less than 1,000 to nearly 10,000. 

    Highway Route 441 cuts through Paynes Prairie, a state park and nature preserve in Alachua County.
    Jeffrey Greenberg / Universal Images Group via Getty Images
    A person bikes along a road near the University of Florida Campus.
    Jeffrey Greenberg / Universal Images Group via Getty Images

    Regardless of where Alachua County’s 285,000 residents live, climate change is expected to upend their daily lives. According to the county’s climate vulnerability assessment, finalized this past summer, the next century will likely bring a litany of disasters, from intensified hurricanes to long periods of drought. An upswing in extreme rainfall events could flood large swathes of the low-lying region, which is built around wetlands. By the end of the century, residents can expect a heat index, a measure of temperature and humidity, of over 130 degrees Fahrenheit for more than a third of the year.  

    “It’s critical that we have a climate action plan that considers these future challenges,” said Stephen Hofstetter, the director of the county’s environmental protection department, which organized the summit.

    To protect all these people as climate change ramps up, Alachua County is in the final stages of drafting its climate action plan — the first inland county in the state to do so. Gainesville, the county’s largest city, finished creating its climate action agenda in the spring, part of the City Commission’s goal of reaching net-zero emissions by 2045. The two have worked closely together, and each plan focuses on different issues to create a comprehensive series of mitigation and resilience strategies, including establishing more cooling centers, limiting development on floodplains, investing in renewable energy production and electric vehicles, protecting agricultural land, and decreasing waste. 

    “It’s about maintaining the quality of life for the people,” said Dan Zhu, Gainesville’s chief resilience officer. She hopes that the City Commission formally adopts the plan at the beginning of next year.

    a woman wearing glasses, a black hair clup, and red tweed jacket stands at a podium in front of an assorted group of people in suits and formal work wear behind a city council bench, each has a name tag in front of them. There is a draped Florida state flag behind the people at the city council bench.
    Dan Zhu, Gainesville’s chief resilience officer, presents an update to the Gainesville Climate Action Plan to the City Commission in November, 2024
    Grist

    Alachua County and Gainesville are facing an uphill battle, and it starts with the way they discuss their plans with residents. In May, DeSantis signed a sweeping “don’t say climate change” bill that erased most references to global warming from state laws. The next month, climate change references were removed from textbooks after state officials pressured publishers and school boards to take related content out of grade school curriculums.

    The hostile political climate has already undercut the county’s work. The organizers of the climate action summit originally included programming specifically for kids, but after local teachers expressed concerns about getting involved with anything labeled “climate,” the youth portion of the summit was canceled — save for an intergenerational panel with college and high-school students. 

    Other state laws take direct aim at Gainesville. Florida, along with Texas, has recently become a leader in “preemption laws,” state-level bills that block local government laws from taking effect. A number of the city’s climate-minded policies have already been preempted by the state legislature. These include the reduction of single-use plastic, improving energy efficiency standards in homes, ending restrictive zoning, and increasing electric vehicle charging stations. 

    “You never know when the next shoe is going to drop,” said Bryan Eastman, a city commissioner. To Eastman, Gainesville’s climate work is swept up with other issues in a larger culture war. “Climate’s not the only one, but it’s a big one.”

    The state law with arguably the most potential for kneecapping the county and city’s plans was passed in 2023, when DeSantis signed a measure that overhauled Gainesville Regional Utilities, or GRU, the largest utility in Alachua County. The measure took control of the public utility from the City Commission and gave it to DeSantis’ hand-picked GRU Authority board. It also mandated that the city’s utilities be managed with only financial benefits in mind, rather than considerations like climate change and affordability. 

    “We can’t control our climate action initiatives unless we control our power source,” said John “Ronnie” Nix, a recently retired energy conservation specialist and member of the local citizen climate advisory committee, which works with the city and county’s Joint Water and Climate Policy Board. Gainesville Regional Utilities provides gas, electricity, and water to nearly all of Gainesville. In 2021, 72 percent of that energy came from natural gas or coal. Nearly all the rest comes from a controversial biofuel plant. “We can’t do it without GRU, we need to make it work with GRU,” he said.

    A man stands in profile in front of a building. His hair is cropped short and grey. The building has a sign that says, "Alachua County Public Schools."
    John “Ronnie” Nix stands in front of the Alachua County Public Schools administrative office building, where he worked as an energy conservation specialist.
    Grist

    The utility’s new CEO, Ed Bielarski, eliminated its office of sustainability and reliance a week after the board appointed him in June. Since then, the utility has stopped sending a representative to attend the county’s climate meetings. The board has also reduced incentives for residential solar energy, and cut the utility’s usual contribution to the city budget — typically millions of dollars that fund essential services — by more than half. 

    During the November election, Gainesville’s voters overwhelmingly backed a ballot referendum to return the utility back to the city, with 72 percent in support. Because the GRU authority board had challenged the referendum before the vote, a judge is expected to rule on whether the city can act on the results in mid-December. Even if the referendum doesn’t stick, Nix is hopeful that the citizen committee’s efforts to maintain a good relationship with the utility will be successful. A spokesperson from GRU did not respond to a request for comment.

    Other utilities in the area may be able to support some of the county’s goals, but funding remains an open question for Alachua County and Gainesville’s climate action plans. The Inflation Reduction Act, the country’s largest climate bill, allocated money for renewables and cleaning up pollution when it was passed in 2022, but DeSantis rejected the money, blocking local governments from accessing it. And while the city can apply directly for some federal grants, it hasn’t always been eligible. 

    “Gainesville has been missing out on a lot of funding because we’re not big enough,” Riley said, explaining that some federal climate funding is earmarked for cities of a certain size. In other cases, the city was required to show it had a climate action plan in its grant application. Now, just as the plan is nearly ready, Donald Trump’s return to the White House with Republican control of Congress means any unspent funds from Biden’s climate law will likely wind up elsewhere. “The timing couldn’t be worse,” Riley said. “The scale of what we can accomplish is going to be so much less.” 

    A person with short hair, glasses, and a plaid flannel jacket gestures with their hands while speaking. There is a body of water behind them, with a boardwalk and water plants visible.
    Betsy Riley speaks with Grist about Alachua County’s climate action plan at Sweetwater Wetlands Park, one of Alachua County’s 11 nature preserves.
    Grist
    A group of people sits around a florescently-lit conference table. It is dark outside.
    Stephen Hofstetter, John Nix, and Betsy Riley listen to Dan Zhu present an update to the Gainesville Climate Action Plan during a Citizen Climate Advisory Comittee meeting.
    Grist

    While local proponents of climate action acknowledge the coming years won’t be easy, many are self-described optimists, scattered to various corners of city government and community organizations. Hofstetter hopes that the economic benefits associated with renewable power will encourage the federal government and utility to embrace it, while Zhu points out that key parts of Gainesville’s plan are already underway, like the rollout of electric buses, bolstered by federal grants. 

    Alachua County residents have also been taking action on climate change on their own. Last spring, the University of Florida student senate passed a Green New Deal, a first of its kind in the nation. The Community Weatherization Coalition, a local group that started in a church, has spent decades helping low income neighborhoods fortify homes to be more energy efficient. It’s also part of a larger collaboration creating a community solar project for the county. Other organizations, like the local Sierra Club chapter, have tried to nudge the utility’s new board toward solar energy as a cheaper alternative to gas. 

    Riley also sees an opportunity for building public support for the plan in more conservative parts of the county by exchanging the word “climate” for less politicized synonyms. “Words really matter, but it’s about doing the work,” they said. In the town of Hawthorne, located in the far east corner of Alachua county, organizers ended up holding a sustainability and resilience summit instead of a climate one earlier this year. Zhu’s title also recently changed from “chief climate officer” to “chief resilience officer.”

    Nix, who speaks to churches on behalf of the climate action committee, says that once people understand how preparing for climate change can protect them, they have no problem with using the word “climate.”

    “The best way to communicate climate impacts is to meet people where they are,” he said. “Find out how it impacts them. Get them to feel it’s personal. People will work a little bit harder to do the small things that they can.”

    This story was originally published by Grist with the headline This county has an ambitious climate agenda. That’s not easy in Florida. on Dec 9, 2024.

  • Cook Islands seeks ‘decolonisation’ of international law at ICJ

    RNZ Pacific

    The Cook Islands has used its first-ever appearance at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to advocate for the “decolonisation” of international law.

    While making an oral statement for an advisory opinion on the obligations of states regarding climate change, Auckland University senior lecturer Fuimaono Dr Dylan Asafo placed the blame on “our international legal system” for “the climate crisis we face today”.

    He said major greenhouse gas emitters have relied “on these systems, and the institutions and fora they contain, like the annual COPs (Conference of Parties)” for many decades “to expand fossil fuel industries, increase their emissions and evade responsibility for the significant harms their emissions have caused.”

    “In doing so, they have been able to maintain and grow the broader systems of domination that drive the climate crisis today — including imperialism, colonialism, racial capitalism, heteropatriarchy and ableism.”

    Fuimaono called on nations to “dismantle these systems and imagine and build new ones capable of allowing everyone to live lives of joy and dignity, so that they are able to determine their own futures and destinies.”

    He said the UN General Assembly’s request for an advisory opinion offers the ICJ “the most precious opportunity to interpret and advise on existing international law in its best possible light in order to empower all states and peoples to work together to decolonise international law and build a more equitable and just world for us all.”

    The Cook Islands joined more than 100 other states and international organisations participating in the written and oral proceedings — the largest number of participants ever for an ICJ proceeding.

    Fuimaono said the Cook Islands believes states should owe reparations to climate vulnerable countries if they fail to meet their adaptation and mitigation obligations, and the adverse effects to climate change lead to displacement, migration, and relocation.

    The island nation’s delegation was led by its Foreign Affairs and Immigration director of the treaties, multilaterals and oceans division Sandrina Thondoo; foreign service officer Peka Fisher; and Fuimaono as external counsel.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Palau’s president invites Trump to visit Pacific to see climate crisis impacts

    By Lydia Lewis, RNZ Pacific presenter/Bulletin editor

    Palau’s President Surangel Whipps Jr is inviting US President-elect Donald Trump to “visit the Pacific” to see firsthand the impacts of the climate crisis.

    Palau is set to host the largest annual Pacific leaders meeting in 2026, and the country’s leader Whipps told RNZ Pacific he would “love” Trump to be there.

    He said he might even take the American leader, who is often criticised as a climate change denier, snorkelling in Palau’s pristine waters.

    Whipps said he had seen the damage to the marine ecosystem.

    “I was out snorkelling on Sunday, and once again, it’s unfortunate, but we had another heat, very warm, warming of the oceans, so I saw a lot of bleached coral,” he said.

    “It’s sad to see that it’s happening more frequently and these are just impacts of what is happening around the world because of our addiction to fossil fuel.”

    Bleached corals in Palau.
    Bleached corals in Palau. Image: Dr Piera Biondi/Palau International Coral Reef Center/RNZ Pacific

    “I would very much like to bring [Trump] to Palau if he can. That would be a fantastic opportunity to take him snorkelling and see the impacts. See the islands that are disappearing because of sea level rise, see the taro swamps that are being invaded.”

    Americans experiencing the impacts
    Whipps said Americans were experiencing the impacts in states such as Florida and North Carolina.

    “I mean, that’s something that you need to experience. I mean, they’re experiencing [it] in Florida and North Carolina.

    “They just had major disasters recently and I think that’s the rallying call that we all need to take responsibility.”

    However, Trump is not necessarily known for his support of climate action. Instead, he has promised to “drill baby drill” to expand oil and gas production in the US.

    Palau International Coral Reef Center researcher Christina Muller-Karanasos said surveying of corals in Palau was underway after multiple reports of bleaching.

    She said the main cause of coral bleaching was climate change.

    “It’s upsetting. There were areas where there were quite a lot of bleaching.

    Most beautiful, pristine reef
    “The most beautiful and pristine reef and amount of fish and species of fish that I’ve ever seen. It’s so important for the health of the reef. The healthy reef also supports healthy fish populations, and that’s really important for Palau.”

    Bleached corals in Palau.
    Bleached corals in Palau. Image: Palau International Coral Reef Center/RNZ Pacific

    University of Hawai’i Manoa’s Dr Tarcisius Tara Kabutaulaka suspects Trump will focus on the Pacific, but for geopolitical gains.

    “It will be about the militarisation of the climate change issue that you are using climate change to build relationships so that you can ensure you do the counter China issue as well.”

    He believed Trump has made his position clear on the climate front.

    “He said, and I quote, ‘that it is one of the great scams of all time’. And so he is a climate crisis denier.”

    It is exactly the kind of comment President Whipps does not want to hear, especially from a leader of a country which Palau is close to — or from any nation.

    “We need the United States, we need China, and we need India and Russia to be the leaders to make sure that we put things on track,” he said.

    Bleached corals in Palau.
    Bleached corals in Palau. Image: Palau International Coral Reef Center/RNZ Pacific

    For the Pacific, the climate crisis is the biggest existential and security threat.

    Leaders like Whipps are considering drastic measures, including the nuclear energy option.

    “We’ve got to look at alternatives, and one of those is nuclear energy. It’s clean, it’s carbon free,” he told RNZ Pacific.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Don’t blame Biden for inflation. Blame the climate.

    Angela Bishop has been struggling with what she describes as “the cost of everything lately.” Groceries are one stressor, although she gets some reprieve from the free school lunches her four kids receive. Still, a few years of the stubbornly high cost of gas, utilities, and clothing have been pain points. 

    “We’ve just seen the prices before our eyes just skyrocket,” said Bishop, who is 39. She moved her family to Richmond, Virginia from California a few years ago to stop “living paycheck to paycheck,” but things have been so difficult lately she’s worried it won’t be long before they are once again barely getting by. 

    Families nationwide are dealing with similar financial struggles. Although inflation, defined as the rate at which average prices of goods or services rise over a given period, has slowed considerably since a record peak in 2022, consumer prices today have increased by more than 21 percent since February 2020. Frustration over rising cost of living drove many voters to support president-elect Donald Trump, who campaigned on ending inflation. 

    Simply put, inflation was instrumental in determining how millions of Americans cast their ballots. Yet climate change, one of the primary levers behind inflationary pressures, wasn’t nearly as front of mind — just 37 percent of voters considered the issue “very important” to their vote. Bishop said that may have something to do with how difficult it can be to understand how extreme weather impacts all aspects of the economy. She knows that “climate change has something to do with inflation,” but isn’t sure exactly what. 

    In 2022, inflation reached 9% in the U.S. — the highest rate in over 40 years. That was part of a global trend. The lingering impacts of the pandemic, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, higher fuel and energy prices, and food export bans issued by a number of countries contributed to a cost of living crisis that pushed millions of people worldwide into poverty.

    Extreme weather shocks were another leading cause of escalating prices, said Alla Semenova, an economist at St. Mary’s College of Maryland. “Climate change is an important part of the inflationary puzzle,” she said.

    In February of 2021, Winter Storm Uri slammed Texas, causing a deadly energy crisis statewide. It also caused widespread shutdowns at oil refineries that account for nearly three-quarters of U.S chemical production. This disrupted the production and distribution of things necessary for the production of plastics, which Semenova says contributed to ensuing price hikes for packaging, disinfectants, fertilizers and pesticides. 

    Food prices are another area where the inflationary pressure of warming has become obvious. A drought that engulfed the Mississippi River system in 2022 severely disrupted the transportation of crops used for cattle feed, increasing shipping and commodity costs for livestock producers. Those added costs were likely absorbed by consumers buying meat and dairy products. Grain prices jumped around the same time because drought-induced supply shortages and high energy prices pushed up the costs of fertilizer, transportation, and agricultural production. Not long after, lettuce prices soared amid shortages that followed flooding across California, and the price of orange juice skyrocketed after drought and a hurricane hit major production regions in Florida. 

    Though overall inflation has cooled considerably since then, the economic pressures extreme weather places on food costs persist. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations reported that weather disruptions drove global food prices to an 18-month high in October. In fact, cocoa prices surged almost 40 percent this year because of supply shortages wrought by drier conditions in West and Central Africa, where about three-quarters of the world’s cocoa is cultivated. This can not only impact the price tag of chocolate, but also health supplements, cosmetics, and fragrances, among other goods that rely on cocoa beans. 

    “What we have seen, especially this year, is this massive price spike,” due to abnormal weather patterns, said Rodrigo Cárcamo-Díaz, a senior economist at U.N. Trade and Development. 

    But the impact on consumers “goes beyond” the Consumer Price Indicator, which is the most widely used measure of inflation, said Cárcamo-Díaz. His point is simple: Lower-income households are most affected by supply shocks that inflate the price of goods as increasingly volatile weather makes prices more volatile, straining households with tighter budgets because it can take time for wages to catch up to steeper costs of living. 

    Rising prices are expected to become even more of an issue as temperatures climb and extreme weather becomes more frequent and severe. In fact, a 2024 study found that heat extremes driven by climate change enhanced headline inflation for 121 countries over the last 30 years, with warming temperatures expected to increase global inflation by as much as 1 percent every year until 2035. Lead researcher and climate scientist Maximilian Kotz noted that general goods, or any physical things that can be bought, broadly experienced “strong inflationary effects from rising temperatures.” 

    Electricity is already getting more expensive as higher temperatures and disasters strain grids and damage infrastructure, driving higher rates of utility shutoff for lower-income U.S. households. Without significant emission reductions, and monetary policies set by central banks and governments to mitigate the financial impacts of climate change by stabilizing prices, this inequitable burden is slated to get much worse. Severe floods derailing major production regions for consumer electronics and auto parts have recently disrupted global supply chains and escalated costs for things car ownership in the U.S. Persistent climate shocks have even triggered an enormous increase in the cost of home insurance premiums.

    All told, the inflationary impact of climate change on cost of living is here to stay and will continue to strain American budgets, said Semenova. “The era of relatively low and stable prices is over,” she said. “Costs have been rising due to climate change. It’s the new normal.”

    That’s bad news for families like the Bishops, who are simply trying to get by. 

    This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Don’t blame Biden for inflation. Blame the climate. on Dec 5, 2024.

    This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Ayurella Horn-Muller.

  • Climate justice: Action groups livid over Australia’s submission at ICJ

    ABC Pacific

    Australia’s government is being condemned by climate action groups for discouraging the International Court of Justice (ICJ) from ruling in favour of a court action brought by Vanuatu to determine legal consequences for states that fail to meet fossil reduction commitments.

    In its submission before the ICJ at The Hague yesterday, Australia argued that climate action obligations under any legal framework should not extend beyond the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement.

    It has prompted a backlash, with Greenpeace accusing Australia’s government of undermining the court case.

    “I’m very disappointed,” said Vepaiamele Trief, a Ni-Van Save the Children Next Generation Youth Ambassador, who is present at The Hague.

    “To go to the ICJ and completely go against what we are striving for, is very sad to see.

    “As a close neighbour of the Pacific Islands, Australia has a duty to support us.”

    RNZ Pacific reports Vanuatu’s special envoy to climate change says their case to the ICJ is based on the argument that those harming the climate are breaking international law.

    Special Envoy Ralph Regenvanu told RNZ Morning Report they are not just talking about countries breaking climate law.

    Republished from ABC Pacific Beat with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Vanuatu’s landmark case at ICJ seeks to hold polluting nations responsible for climate change

    RNZ Pacific

    Vanuatu’s special envoy to climate change says their case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is based on the argument that those harming the climate are breaking international law.

    The case seeks an advisory opinion from the court on the legal responsibilities of countries in relation to climate change, and dozens of countries are making oral submissions.

    Hearings started in The Hague with Vanuatu — the Pacific island nation that initiated the effort to obtain a legal opinion — yesterday.

    Vanuatu’s Special Envoy for Climate Change and Environment  Ralph Regenvanu told RNZ Morning Report they are not just talking about countries breaking climate law.

    He outlined their argument as: “This conduct — to do emissions which cause harm to the climate system, which harms other countries — is in fact a breach of international law, is unlawful, and the countries who do that should face legal consequences.”

    He said they were wanting a line in the sand, even though any ruling from the court will be non-binding.

    “We’re hoping for a new benchmark in international law which basically says if you pollute with cumulative global greenhouse gas emissions, you cause climate change, then you are in breach of international law,” he said.

    “I think it will help clarify, for us, the UNFCCC (UN Framework Convention on Climate Change) process negotiations for example.”

    Regenvanu said COP29 in Baku was frustrating, with high-emitting states still doing fossil fuel production and the development of new oil and coal fields.

    He said a ruling from the ICJ, though non-binding, will clearly say that “international law says you cannot do this”.

    “So at least we’ll have something, sort of a line in the sand.”

    Oral submissions to the court are expected to take two weeks.

    Another Pacific climate change activist says at the moment there are no consequences for countries failing to meet their climate goals.

    Pacific Community (SPC) director of climate change Coral Pasisi said a strong legal opinion from the ICJ might be able to hold polluting countries accountable for failing to reach their targets.

    The court will decide on two questions:

    • What are the obligations of states under international law to protect the climate and environment from greenhouse gas emissions?
    • What are the legal consequences for states that have caused significant harm to the climate and environment?

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The Man Who Brought Climate Change Into Today’s Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric


    This content originally appeared on ProPublica and was authored by ProPublica.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • The Man Who Brought Climate Change Into Today’s Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric


    This content originally appeared on ProPublica and was authored by ProPublica.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • COP29 concludes with an insufficient climate finance deal

    This year’s annual global climate negotiations, COP29, concluded with an inadequate commitment on climate finance which countered the Paris Agreement’s foundational principles of global climate justice.

    When countries signed the Paris Agreement in 2015, they agreed that wealthy countries would provide financing to the most vulnerable countries (often referred to as the Global South) to help advance global climate action and respond to climate disasters. Meeting this promise of climate finance was the priority at this COP. 

    Over 190 nations gathered to negotiate the new climate finance commitment. The negotiations are challenging – but wealthy countries did not show up with the funds for collective climate action, and therefore did not show up with a fair spirit of delivering what they had committed to under the Paris Agreement. The final decision was steamrolled through despite opposition from the world’s most vulnerable nations.

    Experts recognize that over $1.3-trillion must be mobilized every year to transition away from fossil fuels, scale up clean energy, and adapt to climate damages. Only $300-billion was offered as a commitment at COP29, and even this was rife with loopholes. A $300-billion commitment sounds like a lot, at first. But by contrast, countries provide subsidies to oil and gas companies that exceed $1.3-trillion each year, and these companies collect trillions in profits as a result. Those funds could be redirected towards financing climate action globally. 

    We all know a dollar does not go as far as it used to. When you account for inflation, the new target of $300 billion barely exceeds the previous global commitment that was set in 2009, despite increasing climate damages and the growing urgency of climate action. 

    In the past years, we experienced climate damages that harmed communities and cost billions of dollars, at home in Canada and around the world. Mitigating climate change by ending pollution from oil and gas is the only way to reduce these damages. Countries like Canada owe a climate debt to vulnerable communities based on our historically high emissions; yet even independent of this, providing financing for climate action to the Global South is important. Climate action is a team sport. We can only win if everyone brings all they have onto the rink to help any teammate score a goal. 

    The outcome of COP29 advanced the conversation on global climate finance and provided a foundation to build on. The commitment itself fell short, but increases and improvements in the years ahead are possible. For next year’s negotiations to be more successful, wealthy high emitting countries need to play our role on the global team.

    Moving to COP30, countries like Canada must deliver finance that actually meets what is needed. We also need to strengthen our own climate action at home. For example, the next round of national climate plans under the Paris Agreement are due in February. Canada’s current emissions reduction plan is currently not on track to keep our homes and communities safe from climate disaster. We will need to deliver a stronger plan, both to reduce emissions at home and scale up climate finance globally, to align with our fair share.

    The post COP29 concludes with an insufficient climate finance deal appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • ICJ to begin hearings in landmark Pacific climate change case started by students

    SPECIAL REPORT: By Doug Dingwall of ABC Pacific

    A landmark case that began in a Pacific classroom and could change the course of future climate talks is about to be heard in the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

    The court will begin hearings involving a record number of countries in The Hague, in the Netherlands, today.

    Its 15 judges have been asked, for the first time, to give an opinion about the obligations of nations to prevent climate change — and the consequences for them if they fail.

    The court’s findings could bolster the cases of nations taking legal action against big polluters failing to reduce emissions, experts say.

    They could also strengthen the hand of Pacific Island nations in future climate change negotiations like COP.

    Vanuatu, one of the world’s most natural disaster-prone nations, is leading the charge in the international court.

    The road to the ICJ — nicknamed the “World Court” — started five years ago when a group of University of the South Pacific law students studying in Vanuatu began discussing how they could help bring about climate action.

    “This case is really another example of Pacific Island countries being global leaders on the climate crisis,” Dr Wesley Morgan, a research associate with UNSW’s Institute for Climate Risk and Response, said.

    “It’s an amazing David and Goliath moment.”

    The UN's top court, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), is housed in the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands.
    Environmental advocates and lawyers from around the world will come to the International Court of Justice for the court case. Image: CC BY-SA 4.0/ Velvet

    Meanwhile, experts say the Pacific will be watching Australia’s testimony today closely.

    So what is the court case about exactly, and how did it get to this point?

    From classroom to World Court
    Cynthia Houniuhi, from Solomon Islands, remembers clearly the class discussion where it all began.

    Students at the University of the South Pacific’s campus in Vanuatu’s capital, Port Vila, turned their minds to the biggest issue faced by their home countries.

    While their communities were dealing with sea level rise and intense cyclones, there was an apparent international “deadlock” on climate change action, Houniuhi said.

    And each new report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change painted a bleak picture of their futures.

    “These things are real to us,” Hounhiuhi said. “And we cannot accept that . . .  fate in the IPCC report.

    “[We’re] not accepting that there’s nothing we can do.”

    Their lecturer tasked them with finding a legal avenue for action. He challenged them to be ambitious. And he told them to take it out of their classroom to their national leaders.

    So the students settled on an idea: Ask the World Court to issue an advisory opinion on the obligations of states to protect the climate against greenhouse gas emissions.

    “That’s what resonated to us,” Houniuhi, now president of Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change, said.

    Ngadeli village in Temotu Province, Solomon Islands, is threatened by sea level rise.
    Students were motivated to take action after seeing how sea level rise had affected communities across the Pacific. Image: Britt Basel/RNZ Pacific

    They sent out letters to Pacific Island governments asking for support and Vanuatu’s then-Foreign Minister Ralph Regenvanu agreed to meet with the students.

    Vanuatu took up the cause and built a coalition of countries pushing the UN General Assembly to send the matter to its main judicial body, the International Court of Justice, for an advisory opinion.

    In March last year, they succeeded when the UN nations unanimously adopted the resolution to refer the case — a historic first for the UN General Assembly.

    World leaders, activists and other influential voices have gathered at UNHQ for the 78th session of the UN General Assembly.
    Speakers at the UN General Assembly hailed the decision to send the case to the International Court of Justice as a milestone in a decades-long struggle for climate justice. Image: X/@UN

    It was a decision celebrated with a parade on the streets of Port Vila.

    Australian National University professor in international law Dr Donald Rothwell said Pacific nations had already overcome their biggest challenge in building enough support for the case to be heard.

    “From the perspective of Vanuatu and the small island and other states who brought these proceedings, this is quite a momentous occasion, if only because these states rarely have appeared before the International Court of Justice,” he said.

    “This is the first occasion where they’ve really had the ability to raise these issues in the World Court, and that in itself will attract an enormous amount of global attention and raise awareness.”

    Dr Sue Farran, a professor of comparative law at Newcastle University in the United Kingdom, said getting the case before the ICJ was also part of achieving climate justice.

    “It’s recognition that certain peoples have suffered more than others as a result of climate change,” she said.

    “And justice means addressing wrongs where people have been harmed.”

    A game changer on climate?
    Nearly 100 countries will speak over two weeks of hearings — an unprecedented number, Professor Rothwell said.

    Each has only a short, 30-minute slot to make their argument.

    The court will decide on two questions: What are the obligations of states under international law to protect the climate and environment from greenhouse gas emissions?

    And, what are the legal consequences for states that have caused significant harm to the climate and environment?

    Vanuatu will open the hearings with its testimony.

    Regenvanu, now Vanuatu’s special envoy on climate change, said the case was timely in light of the last COP meeting, where financial commitments from rich, polluting nations fell short of the mark for Pacific Islands that needed funding to deal with climate change.

    Ralph Regenvanu, leader of the opposition in Vanuatu.
    Vanuatu’s climate change envoy Ralph Regenvanu said the ICJ case was about climate justice. Image: Hilaire Bule/RNZ Pacific

    For a nation hit with three cyclones last year — and where natural disaster-struck schools have spent months teaching primary students in hot UNICEF tents – the stakes are high in climate negotiations.

    “We just graduated from being a least-developed country a few years ago,” Regenvanu said.

    “We don’t have the financial capacity to build back better, build back quicker, respond and recover quicker.

    “We need the resources that other countries were able to attain and become rich through fossil fuel development that caused this crisis we are now facing.

    “That’s why we’re appearing before the ICJ. We want justice in terms of allowing us to have the same capacity to respond quickly after catastrophic events.”

    He said the advisory opinion would stop unnecessary debates that bog down climate negotiations, by offering legal clarity on the obligations of states on climate change.

    Cyclone Lola damage West Ambrym, on Ambrym island in Vanuatu
    Three cyclones struck Vanuatu in 2023, including Tropical Cyclone Lola, which damaged buildings on Ambrym Island. Image: Sam Tasso/RNZ Pacific

    It will also help define controversial terms, such as “climate finance” — which developing nations argue should not include loans.

    And while the court’s advisory opinion will be non-binding, it also has the potential to influence climate change litigation around the world.

    Dr Rothwell said much would depend on how the court answered the case’s second question – on the consequences for states that failed to take climate action.

    He said an opinion that favoured small island nations, like in the Pacific Islands, would let them pursue legal action with more certainty.

    “That could possibly open up a battleground for major international litigation into the future, subject to how the [International Court of Justice] answers that question,” he said.

    Regenvanu said Vanuatu was already looking at options it could take once the court issues its advisory opinion.

    “Basically all options are on the table from litigation on one extreme, to much clearer negotiation tactics, based on what the advisory opinion says, at the forthcoming couple of COPs.”

    ‘This is hope’
    Vanuatu brought the case to the ICJ with the support of a core group of 18 countries, including New Zealand, Germany, Bangladesh and Singapore.

    Australia, which co-sponsored the UN resolution sending the case to the ICJ, will also speak at today’s hearings.

    “Many will be watching closely, but Vanuatu will be watching more closely than anyone, having led this process,” Dr Morgan said.

    A Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade spokesperson said Australia had engaged consistently with the court proceedings, reflecting its support for the Pacific’s commitment to strengthening global climate action.

    Some countries have expressed misgivings about taking the case to the ICJ.

    The United States’ representative at the General Assembly last year argued diplomacy was a better way to address climate change.

    And over the two weeks of court hearings this month, it’s expected nations contributing most to greenhouse gases will argue for a narrow reading of their responsibilities to address climate change under international law — one that minimises their obligations.

    Other nations will argue that human rights laws and other international agreements — like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights — give these nations larger obligations to prevent climate change.

    Professor Rothwell said it was hard to predict what conclusion the World Court would reach — and he expected the advisory opinion would not arrive until as late as October next year.

    “When we’re looking at 15 judges, when we’re looking at a wide range of legal treaties and conventions upon which the court is being asked to address these questions, it’s really difficult to speculate at this point,” he said.

    “We’ll very much just have to wait and see what the outcome is.”

    There’s the chance the judges will be split, or they will not issue a strong advisory opinion.

    But Regenvanu is drawing hope from a recent finding in a similar case at the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea, which found countries are obliged to protect the oceans from climate change impacts.

    “It’s given us a great deal of validation that what we will get out of the ICJ will be favourable,” he said.

    For Houniuhi, the long journey from the Port Vila classroom five years ago is about to lead finally to the Peace Palace in The Hague, where the ICJ will have its hearings.

    Houniuhi said the case would let her and her fellow students have their experiences of climate change reflected at the highest level.

    But for her, the court case has another important role.

    “This is hope for our people.”

    Republished from ABC Pacific with permission and RNZ Pacific under a community partnership.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • COP29: Pacific takes stock of ‘baby steps’ global climate summit

    By Sera Sefeti in Baku, Azerbaijan

    As the curtain fell at the UN climate summit in Baku last Sunday, frustration and disappointment engulfed Pacific delegations after another meeting under-delivered.

    Two weeks of intensive negotiations at COP29, hosted by Azerbaijan and attended by 55,000 delegates, resulted in a consensus decision among nearly 200 nations.

    Climate finance was tripled to US $300 billion a year in grant and loan funding from developed nations, far short of the more than US $1 trillion sought by Least Developed Countries and Small Island Developing States.

    COP29 BAKU, 11-22 November 2024
    COP29 BAKU, 11-22 November 2024

    “We travelled thousands of kilometres, it is a long way to travel back without good news,” Niue’s Minister of Natural Resources Mona Ainu’u told BenarNews.

    Three-hundred Pacific delegates came to COP29 with the key demands to stay within the 1.5-degree C warming goal, make funds available and accessible for small island states, and cut ambiguous language from agreements.

    Their aim was to make major emitters pay Pacific nations — who are facing the worst effects of climate change despite being the lowest contributors — to help with transition, adaptation and mitigation.

    “If we lose out on the 1.5 degrees C, then it really means nothing for us being here, understanding the fact that we need money in order for us to respond to the climate crisis,” Tuvalu’s Minister for Climate Change Maina Talia told BenarNews at the start of talks.

    PNG withdrew
    Papua New Guinea withdrew from attending just days before COP29, with Prime Minister James Marape warning: “The pledges made by major polluters amount to nothing more than empty talk.”

    20241117 SPC Miss Kiribati.jpg
    Miss Kiribati 2024 Kimberly Tokanang Aromata gives the “1.5 to stay alive” gesture while attending COP29 as a youth delegate earlier this month. Image: SPC/BenarNews

    Fiji’s lead negotiator Dr Sivendra Michael told BenarNews that climate finance cut across many of the committee negotiations running in parallel, with parties all trying to strategically position themselves.

    “We had a really challenging time in the adaptation committee room, where groups of negotiators from the African region had done a complete block on any progress on (climate) tax,” said Dr Michael, adding the Fiji team was called to order on every intervention they made.

    He said it’s the fourth consecutive year adaptation talks were left hanging, despite agreement among the majority of nations, because there was “no consensus among the like-minded developing countries, which includes China, as well as the African group.”

    Pacific delegates told BenarNews at COP they battled misinformation, obstruction and subversion by developed and high-emitting nations, including again negotiating on commitments agreed at COP28 last year.

    Pushback began early on with long sessions on the Global Stock Take, an assessment of what progress nations and stakeholders had made to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees C.

    “If we cannot talk about 1.5, then we have a very weak language around mitigation,” Tuvalu’s Talia said. “Progress on finance was nothing more than ‘baby steps’.”

    Pacific faced resistance
    Pacific negotiators faced resistance to their call for U.S.$39 billion for Small Island Developing States and U.S.$220 billion for Least Developed Countries.

    “We expected pushbacks, but the lack of ambition was deeply frustrating,” Talia said.

    20241119 SPREP fiji delegate Lenora Qereqeretabua.jpg
    Fiji’s Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs Lenora Qereqeretabua addresses the COP29 summit in Baku this month. Image: SPREP/BenarNews

    Greenpeace Pacific lead Shiva Gounden accused developed countries of deliberately stalling talks — of which Australia co-chaired the finance discussions — including by padding texts with unnecessary wording.

    “Hours passed without any substance out of it, and then when they got into the substance of the text, there simply was not enough time,” he told BenarNews.

    In the final week of COP29, the intense days negotiating continued late into the nights, sometimes ending the next morning.

    “Nothing is moving as it should, and climate finance is a black hole,” Pacific Climate Action Network senior adviser Sindra Sharma told BenarNews during talks.

    “There are lots of rumours and misinformation floating around, people saying that SIDS are dropping things — this is a complete lie.”

    20241119 SPREP Pacific negotiators meet.jpg
    Pacific delegates and negotiators meet in the final week of intensive talks at COP29 in Baku this month. Image: SPREP/BenarNews

    COP29 presidency influence
    Sharma said the significant influence of the COP presidency — held by Azerbaijan — came to bear as talks on the final outcome dragged past the Friday night deadline.

    The Azeri presidency faced criticism for not pushing strongly enough for incorporation of the “transition away from fossil fuels” — agreed to at COP28 — in draft texts.

    “What we got in the end on Saturday was a text that didn’t have the priorities that smaller island states and least developed countries had reflected,” Sharma said.

    COP29’s outcome was finally announced on Sunday at 5.30am.

    “For me it was heartbreaking, how developed countries just blocked their way to fulfilling their responsibilities, their historical responsibilities, and pretty much offloaded that to developing countries,” Gounden from Greenpeace Pacific said.

    Some retained faith
    Amid the Pacific delegates’ disappointment, some retained their faith in the summits and look forward to COP30 in Brazil next year.

    “We are tired, but we are here to hold the line on hope; we have no choice but to,” 350.org Pacific managing director Joseph Zane Sikulu told BenarNews.

    “We can very easily spend time talking about who is missing, who is not here, and the impact that it will have on negotiation, or we can focus on the ones who came, who won’t give up,” he said at the end of summit.

    Fiji’s lead negotiator Dr Michael said the outcome was “very disappointing” but not a total loss.

    “COP is a very diplomatic process, so when people come to me and say that COP has failed, I am in complete disagreement, because no COP is a failure,” he told BenarNews at the end of talks.

    “If we don’t agree this year, then it goes to next year; the important thing is to ensure that Pacific voices are present,” he said.

    Republished from BenarNews with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Open letter plea by NZ community broadcaster for end to Israel’s ‘sadistic cruelty’ in Gaza

    Pacific Media Watch

    A community broadcaster in Aotearoa New Zealand has appealed for an end to the “sadistic cruelty” and the “out in the open genocide” by Israel in Gaza and the occupied Palestine territories.

    In an open letter, Lois Griffiths, co-presenter of the environmental, social justice and current affairs programme Earthwise on Plains FM, has criticised the “injustices imposed by colonialism” and has cited Bethlehem Lutheran pastor Munther Isaac in saying “Gaza today has become the moral compass of the world”.

    Her letter is published by Asia Pacific Report to mark the UN International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People.

    The open letter by Griffiths says:

    K Gurunathan’s article “Sparks fly as political tinder of Māori anger builds” (The Press and The Post, November 25) argues that the injustices imposed by colonialism, including the “systematic confiscation of Māori land”, leading to poverty and cultural alienation are factors behind the anger expressed by the recent Hīkoi.

    We need to learn Aotearoa New Zealand history.

    One needs to learn history in order to understand the present.

    But we need to learn world history too.

    Coincidentally, I am in the middle of reading Israeli journalist Gideon Levy’s most recent book The Killing of Gaza: reports on a catastrophe.

    Levy has been there many times, reporting first hand about the sadistic cruelty imposed on its people, a cruelty that began in 1948.

    He explains that Hamas promotes armed resistance as a last resort. Any other approach has been ignored

    The Israeli regime is being accused now of war crimes. But war crimes have been going on for decades.

    But it sickens me to even think of what is happening now. It is genocide, genocide out in the open.

    In the words of Bethlehem Lutheran pastor Munther Isaac: “Gaza today has become the moral compass of the world.”

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Climate protests to continue despite 170 charged in Newcastle ‘protestival’

    Despite Australia’s draconian anti-protest laws, the world’s biggest coal port was closed for four hours at the weekend with 170 protesters being charged — but climate demonstrations will continue. Twenty further arrests were made at a protest at the Federal Parliament yesterday.

    SPECIAL REPORT: By Wendy Bacon

    Newcastle port, the world’s biggest coal port, was closed for four hours on Sunday when hundreds of Rising Tide protesters in kayaks refused to leave its shipping channel.

    Over two days of protest at the Australian port, 170 protesters have been charged. Some others who entered the channel were arrested but released without charge. Hundreds more took to the water in support.

    Thousands on the beach chanted, danced and created a huge human sign demanding “no new coal and gas” projects.

    Rising Tide is campaigning for a 78 percent tax on fossil fuel profits to be used for a “just transition” for workers and communities, including in the Hunter Valley, where the Albanese government has approved three massive new coal mine extensions since 2022.

    Protest size triples to 7000
    The NSW Labor government made two court attempts to block the protest from going ahead. But the 10-day Rising Tide protest tripled in size from 2023 with 7000 people participating so far and more people arrested in civil disobedience actions than last year.

    The “protestival” continued in Newcastle on Monday, and a new wave started in Canberra at the Australian Parliament yesterday with more than 20 arrests. Rising Tide staged an overnight occupation of the lawn outside Parliament House and a demonstration at which they demanded to meet with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.

    News of the “protestival” has spread around the world, with campaigners in Rotterdam in The Netherlands blocking a coal train in solidarity with this year’s Rising Tide protest.

    Of those arrested, 138 have been charged under S214A of the NSW Crimes Act for disrupting a major facility, which carries up to two years in prison and $22,000 maximum fines. This section is part of the NSW government regime of “anti-protest” laws designed to deter movements such as Rising Tide.

    The rest of the protesters have been charged under the Marine Safety Act which police used against 109 protesters arrested last year.

    Even if found guilty, these people are likely to only receive minor penalties.Those arrested in 2023 mostly received small fines, good behaviour bonds and had no conviction recorded.

    Executive gives the bird to judiciary
    The use of the Crimes Act will focus more attention on the anti-protest laws which the NSW government has been extending and strengthening in recent weeks. The NSW Supreme Court has already found the laws to be partly unconstitutional but despite huge opposition from civil society and human rights organisations, the NSW government has not reformed them.

    Two protesters were targeted for special treatment: Naomi Hodgson, a key Rising Tide organiser, and Andrew George, who has previous protest convictions.

    George was led into court in handcuffs on Monday morning but was released on bail on condition that he not return to the port area. Hodgson also has a record of peaceful protest. She is one of the Rising Tide leaders who have always stressed the importance of safe and peaceful action.

    The police prosecutor argued that she should remain in custody. The magistrate released her with the extraordinary requirement that she report to police daily and not go nearer than 2 km from the port.

    Planning for this year’s protest has been underway for 12 months, with groups forming in Brisbane, Adelaide, Melbourne, Canberra Sydney and the Northern Rivers, as well as Newcastle. There was an intensive programme of meetings and briefings of potential participants on the motivation for protesting, principles of civil disobedience and the experience of being arrested.

    Those who attended last year recruited a whole new cohort of protesters.

    Last year, the NSW police authorised a protest involved a 48-hour blockade which protesters extended by two hours. Earlier this year, a similar application was made by Rising Tide.

    The first indication that the police would refuse to authorise a protest came earlier this month when the NSW police successfully applied to the NSW Supreme Court for the protest to be declared “an unauthorised protest.”

    But Justice Desmond Fagan also made it clear that Rising Tide had a “responsible approach to on-water safety” and that he was not giving a direction that the protest should be terminated. Newcastle Council agreed that Rising Tide could camp at Horseshoe Bay.

    Minns’ bid to crush protest
    The Minns government showed that its goal was to crush the protest altogether when the Minister for Transport Jo Haylen declared a blanket 97-hour exclusion zone making it unlawful to enter the Hunter River mouth and beaches under the Marine Safety Act last week.

    On Friday, Rising Tide organiser and 2020 Newcastle Young Citizen of the year, Alexa Stuart took successful action in the Supreme Court to have the exclusion zone declared an invalid use of power.

    An hour before the exclusion zone was due to come into effect at 5 pm, the Rising Tide flotilla had been launched off Horseshoe Bay. At 4 pm, Supreme Court Justice Sarah McNaughton quashed the exclusion zone notice, declaring that it was an invalid use of power under the Marine Safety Act because the object of the Act is to facilitate events, not to stop them from happening altogether.

    When news of the judge’s decision reached the beach, a big cheer erupted. The drama-packed weekend was off to a good start.

    Friday morning began with a First Nations welcome and speeches and a SchoolStrike4Climate protest. Kayakers held their position on the harbour with an overnight vigil on Friday night.

    On Saturday, Midnight Oil front singer Peter Garrett, who served as Environment Minister in a previous Labor government, performed in support of Rising Tide protest. He expressed his concern about government overreach in policing protests, especially in the light of all the evidence of the impacts of climate change.

    Ships continued to go through the channel, protected by the NSW police. When kayakers entered the channel while it was empty, nine were arrested.

    84-year-old great-gran arrested, not charged
    By late Saturday, three had been charged, and the other six were towed back to the beach. This included June Norman, an 84-year-old great-grandmother from Queensland, who entered the shipping channel at least six times over the weekend in peaceful acts of civil disobedience.

    The 84-year-old protester Jane Norman
    The 84-year-old protester Jane Norman . . . entered the shipping channel at least six times over the weekend in peaceful acts of civil disobedience. Image: Wendy Bacon/MWM

    She told MWM that she felt a duty to act to protect her own grandchildren and all other children due to a failure by the Albanese and other governments to take action on climate change. The police repeatedly declined to charge her.   

    On Sunday morning a decision was made for kayakers “to take the channel”. At about 10.15, a coal boat, turned away before entering the port.

    Port closed, job done
    Although the period of stoppage was shorter than last year, civil disobedience had now achieved what the authorised protest achieved last year. The port was officially closed and remained so for four hours.

    By now, 60 people had been charged and far more police resources expended than in 2023, including hours of police helicopters and drones.

    On Sunday afternoon, hundreds of kayakers again occupied the channel. A ship was due. Now in a massive display of force involving scores of police in black rubber zodiacs, police on jet skis, and a huge police launch, kayakers were either arrested or herded back from the channel.

    When the channel was clear, a huge ship then came through the channel, signalling the reopening of the port.

    On Monday night, ABC National News reported that protesters were within metres of the ship. MWM closely observed the events. When the ship began to move towards the harbour, all kayaks were inside the buoys marking the channel. Police occupied the area between the protesters and the ship. No kayaker moved forward.

    A powerful visual message had been sent that the forces of the NSW state would be used to defend the interests of the big coal companies such as Whitehaven and Glencore rather than the NSW public.

    By now police on horses were on the beach and watched as small squads of police marched through the crowd grabbing paddles. A little later this reporter was carrying a paddle through a car park well off the beach when a constable roughly seized it without warning from my hand.

    When asked, Constable Pacey explained that I had breached the peace by being on water. I had not entered the water over the weekend.

    Kids arrested too, in mass civil disobedience
    Those charged included 14 people under 18. After being released, they marched chanting back into the camp. A 16-year-old Newcastle student, Niamh Cush, told a crowd of fellow protesters before her arrest that as a young person, she would rather not be arrested but that the betrayal of the Albanese government left her with no choice.

    “I’m here to voice the anger of my generation. The Albanese government claims they’re taking climate change seriously but they are completely and utterly failing us by approving polluting new coal and gas mines. See you out on the water today to block the coal ships!”

    Each of those who chose to get arrested has their own story. They include environmental scientists, engineers, TAFE teachers, students, nurses and doctors, hospitality and retail workers, designers and media workers, activists who have retired, unionists, a mediator and a coal miner.

    They came from across Australia — more than 200 came from Adelaide alone — and from many different backgrounds.

    Behind those arrested stand volunteer groups of legal observers, arrestee support, lawyers, community care workers and a media team. Beside them stand hundreds of other volunteers who have cleaned portaloos, prepared three meals a day, washed dishes, welcomed and registered participants, organised camping spots and acted as marshals at pedestrian crossings.

    Each and every one of them is playing an essential role in this campaign of mass civil disobedience.

    Many participants said this huge collaborative effort is what inspired them and gave them hope, as much as did the protest itself.

    Threat to democracy
    Today, the president of NSW Civil Liberties, Tim Roberts, said, “Paddling a kayak in the Port of Newcastle is not an offence, people do it every day safely without hundreds of police officers.

    “A decision was made to protect the safe passage of the vessels over the protection of people exercising their democratic rights to protest.

    “We are living in extraordinary times. Our democracy will not irrevocably be damaged in one fell swoop — it will be a slow bleed, a death by a thousand tranches of repressive legislation, and by thousands of arrests of people standing up in defence of their civil liberties.”

    Australian Institute research shows that most Australians agree with the Council for Civil Liberties — with 71 percent polled, including a majority of all parties, believing that the right to protest should be enshrined in Federal legislation. It also included a majority across all ages and political parties.

    It is hard to avoid the conclusion that it is a fear of accelerating mass civil disobedience in the face of a climate crisis that frightens both the Federal and State governments and the police.

    As temperatures rise
    Many of those protesting have already been directly affected by climbing temperatures in sweltering suburbs, raging bushfires and intense smoke, roaring floods and a loss of housing that has not been replaced, devastated forests, polluting coal mines and gas fields or rising seas in the Torres Strait in Northern Australia and Pacific Island countries.

    Others have become profoundly concerned as they come to grips with climate science predictions and public health warnings.

    In these circumstances, and as long as governments continue to enable the fossil fuel industry by approving more coal and gas projects that will add to the climate crisis, the number of people who decide they are morally obliged to take civil disobedience action will grow.

    Rather than being impressed by politicians who cast them as disrupters, they will heed the call of Pacific leaders who this week declared the COP29 talks to be a “catastrophic failure” exposing their people to “escalating risks”.

    Wendy Bacon is an investigative journalist who was the professor of journalism at University of Technology Sydney (UTS). She worked for Fairfax, Channel Nine and SBS and has published in The Guardian, New Matilda, City Hub and Overland. She has a long history in promoting independent and alternative journalism. She is a Rising Tide supporter, and is a long-term supporter of a peaceful BDS and the Greens.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • COP29: Pacific climate advocates decry outcome as ‘a catastrophic failure’

    RNZ Pacific

    The United Nations climate change summit COP29 has “once again ignored” the Pacific Islands, a group of regional climate advocacy organisations say.

    The Pacific Islands Climate Action Network (PICAN) said today that “the richest nations turned their backs on their legal and moral obligations” as the UN meeting in Baku, Azerbaijan, fell short of expectations.

    “This COP was framed as the ‘finance COP’, a critical moment to address the glaring gaps in climate finance and advance other key agenda items,” the group said.

    COP29 BAKU, 11-22 November 2024
    COP29 BAKU, 11-22 November 2024

    “However, not only did COP29 fail to deliver adequate finance, but progress also stalled on crucial issues like fossil fuel phase-out, Loss and Damage, and the Just Transition Work Plan.

    “The outcomes represent a catastrophic failure to meet the scale of the crisis, leaving vulnerable nations to face escalating risks with little support.”

    The UN meeting concluded with a new climate finance goal, with rich nations pledging a US$300 billion annual target by 2035 to the global fight against climate change.

    The figure was well short of what developing nations were asking for — more than US$1 trillion in assistance.

    ‘Failure of leadership’
    Campaigners and non-governmental organisations called it a “betrayal” and “a shameful failure of leadership”, forcing climate vulnerable nations, such as the Pacific Islands, “to accept a token financial pledge to prevent the collapse of negotiations”.

    PICAN said the pledged finance relied “heavily on loans rather than grants, pushing developing nations further into debt”.

    “Worse, this figure represents little more than the long-promised $100 billion target adjusted for inflation. It does not address the growing costs of adaptation, mitigation, and loss and damage faced by vulnerable nations.

    “In fact, it explicitly ignores any substantive decision to include loss and damage just acknowledging it.”

    Vanuatu Climate Action Network coordinator Trevor Williams said developed nations systematically dismantled the principles of equity enshrined in the Paris Agreement at COP29.

    “Their unwillingness to contribute sufficient finance, phase out fossil fuels, or strengthen their NDCs demonstrates a deliberate attempt to evade responsibility. COP29 has taught us that if optionality exists, developed countries will exploit it to stall progress.”

    Kiribati Climate Action Network’s Robert Karoro said the Baku COP was a failure on every front.

    ‘No meaningful phase out of fossil fuels’
    “Finance fell far short, Loss and Damage was weakened, and there was no meaningful commitment to phasing out fossil fuels,” he said.

    “Our communities cannot wait for empty promises to materialise-we need action that addresses the root causes of the crisis and supports our survival.”

    Tuvalu Climate Action Network’s executive director Richard Gokrun said the “outcome is personal”.

    “Every fraction of a degree in warming translates into lost lives, cultures and homelands. Yet, the calls of the Pacific and other vulnerable nations were silenced in Baku,” he said.

    “From the weakened Loss and Damage fund to the rollback on Just Transition principles, this COP has failed to deliver justice on any front.”

    PICAN’s regional director Rufino Varea described the outcome of the meeting as “a death sentence for millions”.

    He said the Pacific Islands have been clear that climate finance must be grants-based and responsive to the needs of frontline communities.

    “Instead, developed countries are handing us debt while dismantling the principles of equity and justice that the Paris Agreement was built on. This is a betrayal, plain and simple.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • COP29: Carbon credit trading scheme criticised as ‘get out of jail free card’

    By Kate Green , RNZ News reporter

    A new carbon credit trading deal reached in the final hours of COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, has been criticised as a free pass for countries to slack off on efforts to reduce emissions at home.

    The deal, sealed at the annual UN climate talks nearly a decade after it was first put forward, will allow countries to buy carbon credits from others to bring down their own balance sheet.

    New Zealand had set its targets under the Paris Agreement on the assumption that it would be able to meet some of it through international cooperation — “so getting this up and running is really important”, Compass Climate head Christina Hood said.

    COP29 BAKU, 11-22 November 2024
    COP29 BAKU, 11-22 November 2024

    “It’s a tool, it’s neither good nor bad, but there’s going to have to be a lot of scrutiny on whether the government is taking a high-ambition, high-integrity path, or just trying to do the minimum possible.”

    The plan had taken nine years to go through because countries determined to do it right had been holding out for a process with the right checks and balances in place, she said.

    As it stood, countries would have to report yearly to the UN on their trading activities, but it was up to society and other countries to scrutinise behaviour.

    Cindy Baxter, a COP veteran who has been at all but seven of the conferences, said it was in-line with the way Aotearoa New Zealand wanted to go about reducing its emissions.

    ‘We’re not alone, but . . .’
    “We’re not alone, Switzerland is similar and Japan as well, but certainly New Zealand is aiming to meet by far the largest proportion of our climate target, [out of] anywhere in the OECD, through carbon trading.”

    The new scheme fell under Article six of the Paris Agreement, and a statement from COP29 said it was expected to reduce the cost of implementing countries’ national climate plans by up to US$250 billion (NZ$428.5b) per year.

    COP29 president Mukhtar Babayev said “climate change is a transnational challenge and Article six will enable transnational solutions. Because the atmosphere does not care where emissions savings are made.”

    But Baxter said there was not enough transparency in the scheme, and plenty of loopholes. One of the issues was ensuring projects resulting in carbon credits continued to reduce emissions after the credits were traded.

    “For example, if you’re trying to save some mangroves in Fiji, you give Fiji a whole bunch of money and say this is going to offset this amount of carbon, but what if those mangroves are destroyed by a drought, or a great big cyclone?”

    Countries should be cutting emissions at home, she said.

    “And that is something New Zealand is not very good at doing, has a really bad reputation for doing. We’ve either planted trees, or now we’re trying to throw money at offset.”

    Greenpeace spokesperson Amanda Larsson said she, too, was concerned it would take the onus off big polluters to make reductions at home, calling it a “get out of jail free card”.

    ‘Lot of junk credits’
    “Ultimately, we really need to see significant cuts in climate pollution,” she said. “And there’s no such thing as high-integrity voluntary carbon markets, and a history of a lot of junk credits being sold.”

    Countries with the means to make meaningful change at home should not be relying on other countries stepping up, she said

    The Green Party foreign affairs spokesperson Teanau Tuiono said there was strong potential in the proposal, but it was “imperative to ensure the framework is robust, and protects the rights of indigenous peoples at the same time as incentivising carbon sequestration”.

    It should be a wake-up call to change New Zealand’s over-reliance on risky pine plantations and instead support permanent native afforestation, he said.

    “This proposal emphasises how solving the climate crisis requires global collaboration on the most difficult issues. That requires building trust and confidence, by meeting commitments countries make to each other.

    “Backing out of these by, for instance, restarting oil and gas exploration directly against the wishes of our Pacific relatives, is not the way do to that.”

    Conference overall ‘disappointing and frustrating’
    Baxter said it had been “very difficult being forced to have another COP in a petro-state”, where the host state did not have much to gain by making big progress.

    “What that means is that there is not that impetus to bang heads together and get really strong agreement,” she said.

    But the blame could not be placed entirely on the leadership.

    “The COP process is set up to work if governments bring their A-games, and they don’t,” she said.

    “People should be bringing their really strong new climate targets [and] very few are doing that.”

    Another deal was clinched in overtime of the two-week conference, promising US$300 billion (NZ$514 billion) each year by 2035 for developing nations to tackle climate emissions.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • “A Great Swindle”: Activists Slam Draft Climate Plan Reducing How Much Rich Polluting Countries Owe


    This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • “Trillions, Not Billions”: Climate Activists Protest as COP29 Closes in on a “Bad Deal”


    This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • “A Great Swindle”: Activists Slam Draft Climate Plan Reducing How Much Rich Polluting Countries Owe

    Seg2 state of talks wide

    Broadcasting from Baku, Azerbaijan, on the final official day of this year’s finance-themed United Nations climate summit, we look at how climate justice activists are outraged at how little money is being offered by the most polluting nations to countries most severely affected by climate change. We speak with Mohamed Adow, founding director of Power Shift Africa, and Claudio Angelo, head of international policy at the Brazilian Observatório do Clima (Climate Observatory), who describe the latest text as “a great swindle” and “totally unacceptable.”


    This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.