radiofree.asia

Category: pollution

  • Labour causes UPROAR as it gives London City Airport expansion the greenlight

    The Labour Party’s transport secretary Louise Haigh has a cunning climate-crisis solution, to top all climate solutions. Buckle up – your chin that is, because you’re in for a ride. Haigh’s master plan: put the plebs on bikes to offset Labour’s capitalist chums flying out in business class from London City Airport’s swanky new flights.

    That is, the day after she green-lit the London City Airport expansion, Haigh was peddling some cycling funding to tackle the climate crisis and health inequality. We know which mode of transport Starmer will be using most.

    London City Airport expansion

    On Monday 19 August, Haigh gave the green light to London City Airport’s expansion plans. Specifically, the new Labour government transport secretary approved:

    • An increase from 6.5 million to nine million passengers.
    • More early morning flights.c

    It rejected the airport’s request for an extension on a Saturday afternoon curfew. It ensures that the airport doesn’t carry out operations after 12.30am. As such, this remains the case.

    Of course, plenty have highlighted how the decision flies right in the face of the climate crisis:

    Notably, as the New Economics Foundation (NEF) has highlighted, it will mean the UK will pump out a further 230,000 tonnes of carbon-equivalent emissions a year, up to 2050. It’s why  independent advisory body the Climate Change Committee had previously argued that the government shouldn’t approve any airport expansion proposals.

    Of course, the shameless red Tories haven’t heeded this advice:

    But don’t worry, because: cycling!

    So, following the hare-brained decision to bulldoze through Labour’s climate credentials, Haigh tried to peddle back.

    Not on the airport decision, of course – but with what looked like a hasty public relations damage control stunt. Specifically, liberal lackey the Guardian carried the news that Labour would invest:

    “unprecedented levels of funding” in cycling and walking as a critical part of plans to improve health and inequality

    The puff piece gave over paragraphs to Haigh crooning over Labour’s national cycle network plans. Obviously, safer cycle paths for cyclists is largely a good thing. However, the announcement’s timing was a little on the nose. As was much of Haigh’s guff throughout. Unironically, or perhaps purposely hypocritically, she said:

    We’re in a climate crisis. We’re in a public health crisis; getting people walking and cycling and moving more are essential to solving both of those in the immediate term and in the long term

    That’s the very same climate crisis that London City Airport expansion will exacerbate then? The Guardian made a nice little aside that:

    Almost three-quarters of trips in England are less than five miles.

    In not an unrelated line of thinking: just three days ago, the outlet’s environment reporter Helena Horton revealed the NEF’s findings that passengers on the majority of London City Airport flights could make their journeys on a single train in under eight hours.

    But then, let’s not forget private jet-setter Starmer flew from Wales to Scotland for a ‘clean energy’ campaign rally in May. He’d be a real hypocrite if he told his City mates not to fly. Gone are the days of a Labour leader rocking up on his bike.

    Not to mention either that London City Airport’s inefficient planes are also MORE polluting:

    City capitalists over poorest London communities

    However, Haigh and the Guardian didn’t dwell on the climate angle for too long. Instead, they boasted the benefits for tackling UK health inequalities:

    There’s lots of evidence to show that will reduce the number of GP appointments by hundreds of thousands, if not millions, a year.

    Apparently, not so much the extreme air pollution-worsened health inequalities of marginalised communities in London:

    As the NEF has underscored:

    London City airport’s location means that aircraft fly over dense urban areas as they approach and depart the airport, particularly in Newham, Lewisham, Tower Hamlets and Southwark. These areas are among the most deprived communities in the UK, as shown in the government’s Index of Multiple Deprivation (see map below).

    In other words, Labour is pushing more air and noise pollution – and all the associated respiratory and other health impacts – onto people living in some of the most deprived parts of London.

    Health inequalities for the poorest communities’ are evidently an afterthought. Especially when Labour’s business buddies need to nip on a quick flight to have meetings they could have held on Zoom, or likely, put in a WhatsApp instead. Because at the end of the day, the UK’s wealthiest, corporate city sell-outs are the airport’s frequent-flyers:

    Funny how the transport secretary didn’t tell the UK’s capitalist class jetting out of London’s central airport to get on their bikes. But then, when you have friends in high-flying places in the City, why would you do that?

    Feature image via the Canary

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Labour is really mopping up the water companies’ mess with its latest nil stars for sewage-spillers sham

    Regulator the Environment Agency (EA) is about to hit the profiteering effluent-mongering water companies where it really hurts.

    The rankings!

    Specifically, the EA is “considering” reforms to its flawed star rating system, which has allowed water companies to dump sewage and still rack up a full sweep of stars to their names.

    Because, tightening the water company ‘Top of Plops’ is really going to stick it to the shareholders. The idea stinks almost as much as UK rivers – and that’s a lot right now, given some are so pungent people can’t sleep at night.

    Water companies: something reeks in their ranks

    On Tuesday 20 August, the Guardian reported that:

    The regulator gives each company a star rating each year. One star is the lowest mark and means the company is urgently in need of improvement, while the highest mark is four stars, which comes with the accolade of being an “industry leader”.

    Companies are judged on seven metrics including drought resilience and transparency over sewage spills: if they score highly on some of these, they can get top marks even if they have spilled large amounts of human waste into England’s rivers and seas.

    The reforms being considered would mean that to achieve the new highest score, companies would not be able to have a low score for sewage discharges. This metric will also be tightened, the Guardian understands, so it is harder to achieve a good score.

    According to the outlet, if water companies’ bosses can’t claim four-star status, they won’t be able to justify staggering pay rises.

    Well, we call rivers rammed with bullshit on this.

    What makes it think that exactly? The widespread news scandal of parasite-infested Devon drinking water didn’t stop shameless capitalist parasite South West Water ‘Chief Excrement Officer’ Susan Davy from skimming off company profits for a stonking £300,000 pay increase.

    Debt-ridden Thames Water is another case in point. Water company regulator Ofwat has at least ruled out the flailing firm foisting the cost of its £156.6m pension scheme shortfall on customers. However, it still found – get this – £158.3m to fork out to shareholders in March. The figures speak for themselves.

    Another gimmick

    The Canary isn’t the only one that thinks stripping stars will be just a sewage-spilling slap on the wrist with little to no impact. One was Dave Throup, a former EA area manager:

    Undertones star-turned-water campaigner Feargal Sharkey pointed out the rating system has always been a sham:

    As another poster underscored, since when could we trust stinking capitalists making stonking profits to do the right thing?

    Instead of doing away with this ranking system plagued with problems, it’s thinking about… adding more stars! As the Guardian wrote:

    Sources at the EA say it plans to add at least one extra star rating in an overhaul of the rules, so no company found to be spilling sewage will be able to call itself an “industry leader” at the top of the league table and therefore escape scrutiny and justify high CEO pay.

    Accounting professor Prem Sikka called it out for what it is. He said that since it doesn’t directly curb profits, the UK waterways will continue up shit’s creek:

    However, Sikka also pointed out that’s precisely what regulators aren’t going to target. Notably, this is because Ofwat has a ‘growth duty’:

    Water campaigners warned this could bring it in conflict with its role regulating the industry. Already, as Sikka noted on the deferred fine, this looks to be coming into play.

    Starmerroid-infested sewage-spillers

    Of course, it’s likely this is all the stench of Labour’s water company lobbyist links wafting through the halls of the EA already. That is, as the Canary previously highlighted:

    more than a dozen firms that have lobbied for the UK water sector in the last five years hold significant ties to the Labour Party. In particular, the Canary has identified a revolving door of Labour MPs, aides, and high profile staff from the party. Invariably, these have moved into prominent roles with consultant lobby companies working for the UK’s private water corporations.

    One poster noticed that even this meek reform is non-committal:

    While we’re on the topic of ratings, the UK Health and Security Agency (UKHSA) has given 19 open swimming beaches bottom marks. It’s for their piss-poor water quality, with pollution posing the risk of diarrhoea, sickness, and picking up dangerous infections. Seaside souvenirs include delightful bacteria like E.coli and viral chest, ear, skin, and eye infections, and Hepatitis.

    Fortunately, being a spineless, slimy Starmerrhoid isn’t contagious – at least not outside Westminster. The capitalist profiteer pollution of politics on the other hand – the murky waters are visible for all to see.

    Feature image via the Canary

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Nike Promised Climate Action, But Its Corporate Jets Kept Flying – and Polluting

    On dozens of occasions since 2020, a private Gulfstream jet belonging to Nike has touched down at Moffett Field, a federally owned airfield on the banks of San Francisco Bay. The Silicon Valley site’s most notable feature is a hulking building known as Hangar One, which in the 1930s housed a U.S. Navy airship and today is a conspicuous landmark along U.S. 101. It also happens to sit…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • The state tried to protect climate-wrecker Drax, but protesters would not be silenced

    State servile cops and complicit courts have shielded climate-wrecker Drax from public scrutiny. So, between the 9 to 12 August, climate protesters mobilised. After a pre-emptive swathe of arrests, climate crisis protesters refused to stay silent over UK mega-polluter Drax’s climate-wrecking biomass plant.

    Drax: the greenwashing giant

    Bioenergy giant Drax operates the world’s largest wood pellet-burning biomass power station near Selby, Yorkshire. The UK’s single largest carbon dioxide emitter, in 2023, it belched out 11.5m tonnes of the greenhouse gas driving the climate crisis.

    Drax sources from around the world, primarily the US, Canada, and the Baltic States. In many of these places, the company is responsible for razing high-risk forests, including old growth, ancient trees.

    What’s more, the company has situated its wood pellet production sites predominantly in environmental justice communities. These include majority Black communities in places like Mississippi and Louisiana. There, Drax’s facilities emit large amounts of pollutants that cause respiratory and pulmonary health impacts.

    The corporation has repeatedly made the bold claim that it produces renewable energy. Unsurprisingly, this does not wash. Because as it turns out, cutting down forests is not so sustainable. On top of this, burning wood pellets produces more carbon emissions than the dirtiest of fossil fuels: coal. Not so green then either.

    However, because the UK government counts woody biomass ‘carbon neutral’ (it’s clearly not), it throws enormous renewable energy subsidies at Drax anyway. These amount to over £600m a year. Little wonder then that the company raked in over a billion in profits for 2023 alone.

    Cops acting as Drax’s ‘private security firm’

    It was in the context of all this that a group of climate protesters planned to take the major greenwashing corporation to task. Predictably however, the criminal justice instruments of the state closed ranks to shield Drax from peaceful, public scrutiny and protest.

    First, the company sought an injunction against them ahead of their planned ‘climate camp’ at the site. On 25 July, the High Court granted this draconian injunction to Drax. It meant that protesters would be relegated to a small strip of land near the power station. Despite this, protest groups proceeded in preparations for their peaceful demonstration undeterred.

    Then, on 8 August, North Yorkshire police, led by the Met, conducted a raid. They pre-emptively arrested 22 climate protesters purportedly for conspiracy to interfere with key national infrastructure. Of course, this was before the protesters had done anything. As the Canary’s HG reported:

    A protester who has been helping to coordinate the camp told the Canary that North Yorkshire Police are essentially acting as Drax’s own private security firm. Repeatedly they said they are not opposed to peaceful protests. However, they have still taken away the kit the protesters were using to ensure the camp was both peaceful and safe. Essentially, they are being silenced for speaking out against greenwashing.

    North Yorkshire Police’s response only made this complicity glaringly apparent. In a statement, its silver commander for the operation superintendent Ed Haywood-Noble said:

    I would like to reassure the public that we are not complacent, a large police presence will remain in place in the area around Drax to ensure that disruption to our communities and operations at Drax Power station is kept to a minimum.

    In short, cops are posting up outside a multibillion corporation’s power plant to shield it from peaceful climate protesters. Following the Thursday raid, the force also arrested three further protesters for similar so-called offences.

    But the climate protesters would not be silenced.

    Police ‘patronising codswallop’ over Drax protest

    First, on Friday 9 August, activists from Reclaim the Power and Axe Drax carried out a defiant act of brandalism:

    Then, they took their message to Drax’s front door. Drax may have forced protesters into a back garden-sized strip of land, but on Sunday 11 August, it was Drax that activists backed into a corner.

    Hundreds of people had planned to turn out to the site, but the police had confiscated vital infrastructure to host a safe and accessible protest of this scale. This included essential items like wheelchair accessible track, toilets, and fire safety equipment.

    Despite this, a small group gathered outside Drax to show they would not bow to the company’s state-abetted repression of their right to peaceful protest.

    Protesters formed a line outside Drax’s gates:

    Climate protesters form a line with banners and placards. Drax flue stacks loom behind. Banners and placards read from left to right: "Count Drax-ula", "Solidarity from Yorkshire to Mississippi", "Drax: You can't hide", "Stop burning trees", "Stop CO2lonialism - Axe Drax - People & Planet Sheffield".

    To a backdrop of gargantuan gas flue stacks spewing out pollution, they brandished placards and banners calling out the company:

    Climate protesters form a line with banners and placards. Drax flue stacks loom behind. Banners and placards read from left to right: "Count Drax-ula", "Solidarity from Yorkshire to Mississippi", "Drax: You can't hide", "Stop burning trees", "Stop CO2lonialism - Axe Drax - People & Planet Sheffield".

    Placards drew attention to not only the planetary costs of Drax’s pollution, but the health impacts, especially for sidelined communities:

    Drax towers loom over two protesters holding placards reading: "Wood pellets cause lung disease and cancer in local communities." and "Axe Drax".

    Reclaim the Power, who were organising for the camp added:

    The miniscule size of the spot designated for protest shows the ridiculousness of Drax and the police claiming to ‘support peaceful protest’. They knew hundreds of people wanted to come to a peaceful protest, so arresting nearly 30 people and taking kit needed to make the event safe and accessible is not exactly supportive is it?

    Patronising Codswallop that our concerns are ‘misguided’ is going unchallenged because Drax are too afraid that if we actually get to let more people know what is happening they won’t be funded to continue burning millions of trees, belching out huge carbon emissions and poisoning small communities in the US.

    A protester travelling from the Sheffield area said:

    People need to know public money is funding enormous environmental damage and decimating the health of small communities living beside their poisonous pellet production plants. If they aren’t afraid of people speaking out, let us speak out.

    Climate protesters ‘will not be silenced’

    And if Drax thought that was the end of it, the climate criminal had another thing coming.

    On Monday 12 August, Reclaim the Power staged a blockade of Drax’s public relations machine.

    As the Canary has previously detailed, through this, the biomass giant greenwashes its image. For instance, on International Day of Forests 2024, Drax released its annual report and it was chock-full of greenwashing:

    Euphemistically titled Committed to the world’s energy transition, the document boasts a series of the company’s supposed environmental credentials.

    Throughout, Drax has greenwashed its UK power plant operations in sections on its purported climate and nature “positive” impacts.

    In a nutshell, it routinely presents its gargantuan carbon emissions, the burning of vital trees, and poisoning of local communities as ‘green energy’.

    So, Reclaim the Power activists flooded the inboxes and jammed the phone lines of the climate-complicit company. In just two hours, it filled Drax’s inbox with over seven thousand emails. They continued this mass disruption action of Drax’s core communications throughout the working day.

    Reclaim the Power told the Canary:

    This is not an action against the Drax workers, but instead a strategic blockade of the PR machine that paints the single biggest carbon emitter in the UK as green. Drax has been working around the clock to suppress the truth and repress protest. Drax and the Police may have prevented our peaceful camp from going ahead, but we will not be silenced. We know that we are going up against a massive PR campaign propped up by billions in public subsidies but we can still make our voices heard.

    Featured image and additional images via Reclaim the Power

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • US Military Has Polluted Guam for Decades. This Year, It Could Get Even Worse.

    Naek Flores’s day-to-day life in Guam has always been shadowed by the U.S. military. The U.S. military owns about one-third of Guam, where it stations three important bases in which about 10,000 military personnel are located. For the Pentagon, Guam is one of its most strategic locations in the Pacific, while the CIA credits military operations as being “the island’s most important…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Drax pumps out more pollution than any other company, but climate protesters are the criminals?

    The day after cops pre-emptively nicked 22 peaceful protesters, a new report has revealed the staggering climate-wrecking impact of their target. In 2023, Drax biomass power station pumped out by far the most carbon dioxide pollution of any UK power plant, and then some.

    Drax: planet and public enemy number one

    Bioenergy giant Drax operates a gargantuan wood pellet-burning biomass station near Selby, Yorkshire. The corporation has repeatedly made the bold claim that its this produces renewable energy

    However, the company could practically write the ‘Greenwashing for Dummies’ handbook. As the Canary’s HG reported on its renewables claims, Drax is puffing out a lot of hot air on this:

    Both Drax and the government claim that the emissions ‘don’t count’ because the trees are grown in other countries, and because one day far in the future another tree will store that carbon. Obviously, that is absolutely insane.

    Notably, there’s nothing remotely ‘renewable’ about its wood pellet-burning operation. Instead, repeated nonprofit investigations have shown the devastating environmental impacts of Drax’s core business activities.

    Now, it’s once again evident it’s pouring out a lot worse as well. Specifically, 11.5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions in 2023 alone. This is according to a new analysis from climate think tank Ember published 9 August. It means Drax’s Selby power station put out the equivalent of nearly 3% of the UK’s territorial emissions.

    In fact, this barely scratched the surface. Ember found that Drax’s biomass power station emitted four times MORE carbon dioxide than the UK’s remaining coal plant. Yes, coal plant – often considered the dirtiest fossil fuel – and Drax is producing masses more.

    This is partly because, wood pellets actually pack more carbon dioxide emissions per kilowatt hour of electricity.

    If that wasn’t bad enough though, it also generated more carbon dioxide than the next four power stations combined. Moreover, Ember noted that:

    Although it is the recipient of public funding earmarked for low-carbon projects, Drax remains the largest single source of CO2 in the country.

    Footing the bill for a forest-destroyer

    Despite this, the UK taxpayer is footing the bill for climate and forest-destroyer Drax:

    In short, the UK government gifts Drax huge subsidies at the planet, and the public’s expense. And that’s not all. As the Canary has previously highlighted, the company wants to squeeze more from the public purse to ramp up its greenwashing gambit. In particular, the Tory government greenlighted its plans for carbon capture and storage technology at its Yorkshire facility. However, Ember also previously noted that for this:

    it’s the public who will foot the bill for the corporation’s expensive climate vanity project. It identified that the project could add £1.7bn to UK energy bills each year. Of course, this comes at a time when UK energy bills are already astronomically high and unaffordable, with energy companies pushing millions into fuel poverty.

    In addition, the new analysis underscored that:

    Like the gas power plants which also make up a large proportion of the largest emitters, the UK large biomass power sector is highly dependent on imports. Drax power station consumed 5.8 million tonnes of wood biomass, none of which was sourced in the UK.

    Extinction Rebellion UK pointed out the astounding absurdity of calling this renewable energy:

    Climate protesters versus corporate criminal Drax

    Also in the headlines this fine Friday 9 August:

    ‘Twenty-two people police want to find over disorder’

    Funny that, were the cops too busy arresting 22 peaceful climate protesters who hadn’t even committed a crime, to find the perpetrators of racist riot violence? State priorities and all that.

    But then, it’s a case of follow the money. And it has been flowing into the coffers of the Labour Party of course:

    That is, while Drax was spewing out more carbon emissions than any other company in the UK, it was also ploughing thousands in donations to Labour and getting its lobbyists in the room where it happens with to-be government to boot.

    As ever then, the corporate climate criminals get off scott-free. Meanwhile cops serving the interests of the establishment, punish people fighting for the future of the planet.

    At the end of the day:

    It’s people and the planet who continue to lose out.

    Feature image via Youtube – the Science Channel/the Canary

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Lawsuit promises justice for Rio Tinto’s mining disaster in Bougainville – but some say it’s a cash grab

    INVESTIGATIVE REPORT: By Aubrey Belford of the OCCRP

    High in the forested mountains of Papua New Guinea’s Bougainville Island lies an abandoned, kilometer-wide crater cut deep into the earth.

    Formerly one of the world’s largest gold and copper mines, the open pit now serves as an unsightly monument to the environmental and social chaos that underground riches can create.

    Run for years by a subsidiary of Anglo-Australian giant Rio Tinto, the Panguna mine earned millions for Papua New Guinea (PNG) and helped bankroll its newfound independence. But it also poured waste into local waterways and fuelled anger among locals who felt robbed of the profits.

    When an armed uprising ultimately shuttered the mine in 1989, the impoverished island was left reeling.

    Nearly three decades later, in late 2022, human rights activists, the local government, and the mine’s former operators joined forces to produce a definitive assessment of the mine’s toxic legacy.

    Their report, due to be released later this month, will become the basis for negotiations aimed at getting the mining companies to finally clean up the mess and compensate affected communities.

    But its supporters now worry their efforts will be undermined by a class-action lawsuit launched in May against the mine’s erstwhile operators. The legal effort is being championed by former rebel leaders — and backed by anonymous offshore investors who stand to make hundreds of millions of dollars if it succeeds.

    Worldwide litigation boom
    The lawsuit is part of a worldwide boom in litigation financing that seeks to take multinational companies to task for ecological or social damage while potentially reaping a fortune for lawyers and funders.

    Critics in Bougainville worry the lawsuit will reopen old wounds at a time when the island is making a push to break free of Papua New Guinea and become the world’s newest sovereign nation. Many Bougainvilleans are hoping to reopen the mine, using its wealth to fund their own independence this time around.

    The region’s government and many local leaders believe the class action could put the mine’s revival at risk. There are also concerns the lawsuit would leave many Bougainvilleans empty handed, while the anonymous foreign investors would walk away with a significant share of the payout.

    Unlike the official assessment, which seeks to identify everyone who needs to be compensated, the class action will only share its winnings — which could potentially be in the billions of dollars — with the locals who have signed on. Others will get nothing.

    “There’s already fragmentation in the community and families are already divided,” said Theonila Roka Matbob, who represents the area around Panguna in the local Parliament and has helped lead the government-backed assessment process as a minister in the Autonomous Bougainville government.

    She speaks from personal experience. The chief litigant in the class-action lawsuit, Martin Miriori, is her uncle. The two are no longer on speaking terms.

    A losing deal
    Gouged from Bougainville’s lush volcanic heart, the Panguna mine in its heyday supplied as much as 45 percent of PNG’s export revenue, providing it with the financial means to achieve independence from Australia in 1975.

    The windfall, however, did not extend to Bougainvilleans themselves. Ethnically and culturally distinct from the rest of PNG’s population, they saw Panguna as a symbol of external domination.

    The mine delivered only a miserly 2-percent share of its profits to their island — along with years of environmental havoc.

    Locals walk by buildings left abandoned by a subsidiary of Rio Tinto at the Panguna mine site.
    Locals walk by buildings left abandoned by a subsidiary of Rio Tinto at the Panguna mine site. Image: OCCRP/Aubrey Belford

    During the 17 years of Panguna’s operation — from 1972 to 1989 — over a billion metric tons of toxic mine waste and electric blue copper runoff flooded rivers that flowed downstream towards communities of subsistence farmers. The result was poisoned drinking water, infertile land, and children who were drowned or injured trying to cross engorged waterways.

    In 1989, enraged Bougainville locals launched an armed rebellion against the PNG government. The mine was shut down, closing off a vital source of revenue for the national government in Port Moresby.

    A brutal civil war raged on for nearly a decade, leaving more than 15,000 people dead, while a naval blockade by PNG’s military obliterated the island’s economy.

    A peace deal in 2000 granted Bougainville substantial autonomy. But nearly a quarter-century later, the legacy of Panguna and the war it provoked is still deeply felt.

    Few paved roads, bridges
    There are few paved roads and bridges in the island’s interior. Residents earn a modest living through cocoa and coconut farming, or by unregulated artisanal mining in and around the abandoned Panguna crater.

    Rivers polluted by years of runoff are still an otherworldly shade of milky blue.

    At least 300,000 people are estimated to live on Bougainville, including as many as 15,000 who live downstream of the mine. Of those, some 4500 have joined Miriori — Roka’s estranged uncle and a tribal leader whose brother, Joseph Kabui, served as the first president of autonomous Bougainville — in seeking restitution through the class-action suit.

    “We’ve got to make people happy,” Miriori said. “They’ve lost their land forever, environment forever. Their hunting grounds. Their spiritual, sacred grounds.”

    Martin Miriori, the primary litigant in the class action lawsuit.
    Martin Miriori, the primary litigant in the class action lawsuit. Image: OCCRP/Aubrey Belford

    ‘Alert to opportunities’
    Miriori took many by surprise when he became the public face of the suit filed in PNG’s National Court in May against Rio Tinto and its former local subsidiary, Bougainville Copper Limited.

    While the tribal leader and former rebel is a well-known figure in Bougainville, the funders of the lawsuit are not. They have managed to keep their identities secret in part because the company behind the suit, Panguna Mine Action LLC, is registered on Nevis, a small Caribbean island that does not require companies to publicly disclose their shareholders and directors.

    Miriori declined to comment on who was behind the company, saying, “I will not tell you where the funding is based … you can source that from our people down there [in Australia].”

    James Sing, an Australian based in New York, is Panguna Mine Action’s chief public representative. He initially agreed to an interview, but later referred reporters back to a London-based public relations agency, Sans Frontières Associates.

    The agency declined to reveal Panguna Mine Action’s investors.

    Litigation funding documents obtained by OCCRP, however, shed some light on the history of the case. The documents show that Panguna Mine Action began to investigate the possibility of a class-action suit as early as July 2021.

    The Bougainvillean claimants, led by Miriori, were formally brought into an agreement with the company and its Australian and PNG lawyers in November 2022. The suit was publicly announced this May.

    Handsome profit
    The lawsuit’s investors stand to profit handsomely from any eventual settlement: Panguna Mine Action is poised to receive a cut of 20 to 40 percent of any payout resulting from the suit, with the percentage increasing the longer the process takes, the funding documents show.

    In interviews and statements, both Miriori and Panguna Mine Action have put the potential value of any award in the billions of dollars.

    The lawsuit’s financiers defend their substantial share of the potential benefits as standard practice.

    “The costs of launching and running the class action against a global miner are significant, and almost certainly could not be met from within Bougainville without funding from an external party,” the company said in its statement.

    Panguna Mine Action added it would bear sole responsibility for costs if the lawsuit is unsuccessful.

    According to Michael Russell, a Sydney-based class action defence lawyer, such funding arrangements are typical in the burgeoning world of litigation finance, where investors seek out cases that promote virtuous social causes while offering huge potential payoffs.

    A similar case is unfolding in Latin America, where more than 720,000 Brazilians are seeking $46.5 billion as part of a gargantuan class action against mining giant BHP and its local subsidiary for their role in a 2015 dam collapse.

    In such cases, funders can justify walking away with significant cuts of any winnings because of the substantial risk they face of losing their investment if a case fails, Russell said.

    Such cases were rarely initiated at the grassroots level by the victims themselves, he added.

    “Most of the time, either the plaintiff firms or the funders will be the catalyst for a claim,” he said. “They are very alert to opportunities.”

    Rival restitution plans
    Government officials including Miriori’s niece, Roka, say the class-action case, which is due to hold opening arguments in October, threatens to derail the ongoing impact assessment aimed at calculating the full cost of the mine’s environmental impact and developing recommendations for addressing the damage.

    The assessment, which counts community members among its stakeholders and bills itself as an independent review, is supported by Australia’s Human Rights Law Centre, which has hailed the project as “an important step” towards rectifying the mine’s devastating impact on thousands of Bougainvilleans.

    However, while Rio Tinto and Bougainville Copper are both funding the project, they have not yet committed to paying for any compensation or cleanup. Roka said she was concerned the lawsuit could reduce the company’s willingness to engage with the process, since it could view the assessment as a tool that could be used against them in the courtroom.

    Bougainville President Ishmael Toroama backs the impact assessment and has lambasted the class action suit as the work of “faceless investors . . .  taking advantage of vulnerable groups.” (His office did not respond to an interview request.)

    He also expressed concern that the court proceedings threaten to “disrupt” his government’s efforts to reopen the mine, which still holds an estimated $60 billion in untapped deposits.

    Bougainville’s leaders see the mine as key to securing the island’s economic future as it sets out to form an independent state — a dream that drew overwhelming public support in a 2019 referendum.

    Exploration licence
    Earlier this year Toroama’s government granted Bougainville Copper a five-year exploration licence for the Panguna site.

    The lack of media and polling in Bougainville make it hard to measure public opinion on plans to reactivate the mine, but many locals appear to support reopening it under local control as an essential tool for achieving independence.

    Bougainville Copper’s brand is still toxically associated with Rio Tinto and its past abuses, despite the fact that the international mining giant gave away its majority stake for no money in 2016.

    The publicly traded company is now majority co-owned by the governments of PNG and Bougainville, and Port Moresby has pledged to hand over all its shares to the autonomous region in the near future.

    Panguna Mine Action acknowledges that its effort could stand in the way of the mine’s reopening — but the company says that is a good thing.

    “It is our understanding that the people of Bougainville do not wish mining to be recommenced under any circumstances or, alternatively, unless Rio Tinto and Bougainville Copper acknowledge the past, pay compensation and remediate the rivers and surrounding valley,” the company said in a statement.

    Rio Tinto declined to comment. Mel Togolo, the chairman of Bougainville Copper, told OCCRP that the lawsuit was the work of “a foreign funder who no doubt is seeking a return on an investment.”

    View of the tailings located downstream of the Panguna mine.
    View of the tailings located downstream of the Panguna mine. Image: OCCRP/Aubrey Belford

    View of the tailings located downstream of the Panguna mine. Photo: OCCRP / Aubrey Belford

    ‘Only those who have signed will benefit’
    The fight over Panguna adds even more uncertainty to long-running anxiety over Bougainville’s future.

    With global copper prices soaring on high demand for renewable energy and electric vehicles, the Panguna mine would be an attractive prize for both Western mining companies and firms from China, which is dramatically expanding its influence in the South Pacific.

    Since a future Bougainvillean state would be economically dependent on the mine’s revenue, some have raised concerns that control of the mine could become a proxy battle for geopolitical influence in the broader region.

    For his part, Miriori expressed little concern that a multibillion-dollar payout might stir resentment by reaching only a fraction of the people affected by the mine’s environmental destruction.

    “Only those who signed will benefit,” he said, adding that the opportunity was made “very clear to people” through awareness campaigns.

    “Those who have not signed, it’s their freedom of choice.”

    An aerial view of the abandoned Panguna mine pit.
    An aerial view of the abandoned Panguna mine pit. Image: OCCRP/Aubrey Belford

    Among those who did not sign is Wendy Bowara, 48, who lives in Dapera, a bleak settlement built on a hill of mine waste. Bowara said she is looking to the government-backed assessment, not the lawsuit, to deliver compensation and clean up Panguna’s toxic legacy.

    “We are living on top of chemicals,” she said. “Copper concentration is high. I don’t know if the food is good to eat or if it’s healthy to drink the water.”

    But while it may seem odd given her grim surroundings, Borawa says she strongly supports reopening the mine.

    “It funded the independence of Papua New Guinea,” Bowara said. “Why can’t we use it to fund our own independence?”

    Allan Gioni contributed reporting.

    Aubrey Belford is the Pacific editor for the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting project (OCCRP). Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Nations join ranks to delay deep-sea mining approval by UN regulator

    SPECIAL REPORT: By Stephen Wright in Kingston, Jamaica

    The obscure UN organisation attempting to set rules for the exploitation of deep-sea metals is facing a potential shake-up as more nations call for a mining moratorium and a new candidate for its leadership vows to address perceptions of corporate bias.

    The number of countries against the imminent start of mining for metallic nodules on the seafloor has jumped to 32 during the International Seabed Authority’s annual assembly this week in Kingston, Jamaica after Austria, Guatemala, Honduras, Malta and Tuvalu joined their ranks.

    “We are running ahead of ourselves trying to go and extract minerals when we don’t know what’s down there, what impact it is going to have,” said Surangel Whipps, president of the Pacific island nation of Palau.

    As governments become more aware of the risks, “hopefully we get them motivated to say let’s have a pause, let’s have a moratorium until we understand what we are doing,” he told BenarNews.

    Tuvalu delegates Monise Laafai and Demi Afasene declared their country’s support for a precautionary pause on deep-sea mining, pictured on July 30, 2024. [IISD-ENB]

    Ten members of the 18-nation Pacific Islands Forum (PIF), including the territories of New Caledonia and French Polynesia whose foreign policies are set by France, are now opposed to any imminent start to deep-sea mining.

    Mining of the golf ball-sized nodules that litter swathes of the sea bed is touted as a source of metals and rare earths needed for green technologies, such as electric vehicles, as the world reduces reliance on fossil fuels.

    Irreparable damage
    Sceptics say such minerals are already abundant on land and warn that mining the sea bed could cause irreparable damage to an environment that is still poorly understood by science.

    EW4A2636 (1).JPG
    Palau President Surangel Whipps . . . making a point during an interview with BenarNews in Kingston, Jamaica. Image: Stephen Wright/BenarNews

    Brazil has nominated its former oil and gas regulator Leticia Carvalho, as its candidate for ISA secretary-general, challenging the two-term incumbent Michael Lodge. He has been criticized for his closeness to The Metals Company, which is leading the charge to hoover up the metallic nodules from the seabed.

    Carvalho, a former oceanographer and currently a senior official at the UN Environment Program, said a third consecutive term for Lodge would be inconsistent with “best practices” at the UN

    Carvalho.jpg
    Leticia Carvalho, Brazil’s candidate for secretary-general of the International Seabed Authority. . . pictured at the 14th Ramsar Convention on Wetlands agreement. Image: IISD-ENB/BenarNews

    “I would be guided by integrity as a value,” she told BenarNews. “Secondly the secretary-general function, it’s a neutral function. You are a civil servant, you are there to set the table for the decision makers, which are the state parties.”

    “I have learned in my life as a regulator that you try to find by consensus, balances – what you agree collectively to protect and what you agree to sacrifice,” Carvalho said.

    Lodge has been nominated by Kiribati, one of three Pacific Island nations that The Metals Company is working with to harvest vast quantities of nodules from their areas in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone.

    The 4.5 million square kilometer [1.7 square million mile] area in the central Pacific is regulated by the ISA and contains trillions of polymetallic nodules at depths of up to 5.5 kilometers. All up, the ISA regulates more than half of the world’s seafloor.

    Dropped out
    Carvalho said she was present at a meeting at the UN in New York last month, first reported by The New York Times, when Kiribati’s ambassador to the UN. Teburoro Tito, proposed to Brazil’s ambassador that Carvalho drop out of contention for secretary-general in exchange for another senior role at the ISA.

    Lodge has said he was not involved in that proposal and also denied the concerns of some ISA delegates that his travel this year to nations including China, Cameroon, Japan, Egypt, Italy and Antigua and Barbuda was a re-election campaign using ISA resources.

    Michael Lodge flyer - ISA-29 Assembly - 31Jul2024 - Photo.jpg
    A campaign pamphlet of incumbent ISA secretary-general Michael Lodge who is standing for a third term with the support of Kiribati. Image: IISD-ENB/BenarNews

    “Mr Lodge has no comment on any questions concerning hearsay,” the ISA said in a statement. “Mr Lodge was not privy to the discussions referenced and is not party to the alleged [Kiribati] proposal.”

    Deep-sea mineral extraction has been particularly contentious in the Pacific, where some economically lagging island nations see it as a possible financial windfall, but many other island states are strongly opposed.

    Nauru President David Adeang told the assembly that its mining application currently being prepared in conjunction with The Metals Company would allow the ISA to make “an informed decision based on real scientific data and not emotion and conjecture”.

    Nauru in June 2021 notified the seabed authority of its intention to begin mining, which triggered  the clock for the first time on a two-year period for the authority’s member nations to finalise regulations.

    Through deep-sea mining, Nauru, home to some 10,000 people and just 21 square kilometers in area, would contribute critical metals and help combat global warming, Adeang said.

    The International Seabed Authority assembly
    The International Seabed Authority assembly . . . pictured in session last month in Kingston, Jamaica.
    Image: Diego Noguera/IISD-ENB/BenarNews

    ‘Necessity’ for our survival
    “The responsible development of deep sea minerals is not just an opportunity for Nauru and other small island developing states,” he said. “It is a necessity for our survival in a rapidly changing world.”

    Still, a sign of how little is understood about deep sea environments came earlier this month when scientists published research that showed the metallic nodules generate oxygen, likely through electrolysis.

    It was an own-goal for The Metals Company, which partly funded the research in Nauru’s area of the Clarion-Clipperton Zone. It quickly attacked the results as based on flawed methodology.

    “Firstly it’s great that through our funding this research was possible. However we do see some concerns with the early conclusion and will be preparing a rebuttal that will be out soon,” chief executive Gerard Barron told BenarNews.

    Among the other 32 nations at the 169-member ISA supporting a stay on deep-sea mining are Brazil, Canada, Chile, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, France, Germany, Mexico, New Zealand, Palau, Samoa, United Kingdom, and Vanuatu.

    Copyright ©2015-2024, BenarNews. Republished with the permission of BenarNews.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Olympian Ordure: Swimming and Shitting in the Seine

    Swimming, or dipping, in faecal polluted waters is not unusual.  The spirit longs for purity in the staining aqua, and the body keeps pace with it.  The Ganges, for instance, features sacred rites and ceremonies defiant of science.  In an aqueous body of lingering corpses, thickening pollutants and full flowing faeces, foolhardy believers can find spirituality.

    Such foolhardiness has also found itself in Paris 2024, the occasion of the XXXIII Summer Olympiad.  Since 1923, the River Seine’s toxicity had become the stuff of legend.  Over five decades, the famous river received untreated sewage.

    With the award of the Olympics came the intention to feature the Seine in various sporting events.  No less than €1.4 billion was spent on cleaning the river, a project underway since 2015.  There was much exaggerated nonsense coming from Paris deputy mayor Emmanuel Gregoire, who told Time that, “Swimming at the root of the Eiffel Tower will be very romantic.”

    In May, the city’s officials, including the president of the Paris 2024 organising committee, Tony Estanguet, opened an underground water storage facility intended to collect residual and access rainwater and halt untreated wastewater from entering the Seine.  The structure, known as the Bassin d’Austerlitz, took 42 months to build at the cost of €90 million, with a storage capacity of 50,000 cubic metres.

    There has been a procession of volunteers wishing to take to the Seine’s waters, if only to prove the point that it is sanitary.  President Emmanuel Macron promised that he would “do it, but I won’t give you the date.”

    French Sports Minister Amélie Oudéa-Castéra, rarely resisting a chance for gratuitous publicity, was less cautious, clumsily taking the plunge.  Then came the city’s mayor, Anne Hidalgo, who similarly made good her promise.  (The occasion had been delayed by the sudden call for parliamentary elections.)  “The Seine is exquisite,” she felt programmed to say.  On emerging from the river, she professed to finding the water “very, very good.  A little cool, but not so bad.”

    Whatever exquisiteness Hidalgo might have detected, the data from Paris examined by POLITICO between June 3 and July 23 revealed concentrations of E. coli bacteria in excess of European safety standards for more than half the days surveyed.

    The European branch of the Surfrider Foundation had also busied itself with testing water quality over the course of six months, paying special attention to the presence of E. coli and enterococci.  In April, it issued a grave warning: “Of the 14 samples taken, whether after heavy rain or on a sunny day, only 1 enabled our team to conclude that the quality of the water in the Seine at this particular point was even satisfactory.”  Participating athletes would “be swimming in polluted water and taking significant risks to their health.”

    The sceptics have certainly been out in force.  Many found themselves agitatedly grouped in a movement that came to be called, “Je Chie Dans La Seine Le 23 Juin”, the original date of Hidalgo’s Seine venture.  The meaning had the true freshness of resistant ordure: “I shit in the Seine on 23rd June.”  Some duly obliged.

    Whatever the safety issues of this curving body of water banked by cultural monuments, the Seine featured as a vital prop to the event’s opening, marked by its murky and brooding flow, barges, discordant performances and enthusiastic athletes braying, cheering and crowing.  But the organisers had not anticipated the extent of the downpour.  Therein began the headaches.

    On July 30, three hours before the Olympic triathlon’s first leg, intended to feature 1,500 metres of swimming, the World Triathlon announced that the men’s trial had been postponed till July 31.  The decision to do so was made following a meeting “on water quality” held at 3.30am.  “The tests carried out in the Seine today revealed water quality levels that did not provide sufficient guarantees to allow the event to be held.”

    Two previous training sessions had also been cancelled for the same reasons.  Despite those cancellations, the Organising Committee CEO Étienne Thobois was unjustifiably optimistic in claiming that events could be held on Tuesday.  “The required flow of the river of one cubic metre per second has been met and we don’t have an issue.”

    Belgium’s Marten Van Riel, ranked fourth in the men’s triathlon at the Tokyo Olympics, was less impressed.  “Changing the day like that in the middle of the night is disrespectful to the years of preparation of the athletes and to all (y)our fans that were going to watch live or on TV,” he vented on Instagram.

    His fellow athletes are also taking few chances with the promises of officialdom, ingesting an increased amount of probiotics and refusing to wash hands after toilet sessions in an effort to improve immunity.  But as Bill Sullivan of the Indiana University School of Medicine observes with sagacious relevance, “in the Olympics between humans and germs, the germs usually win.”

    The post Olympian Ordure: Swimming and Shitting in the Seine first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Pennsylvania Oil Companies Quietly Dumped Toxic Wastewater Across the State

    Siri Lawson and her husband live on a stamp of wooded, hilly land in Warren County, Pennsylvania, nestled in the state’s rural northwest corner. During the summer heat, cars traveling on the county’s dirt roads cast plumes of dust in their wake. Winter’s chill can cause a hazardous film of ice to spawn on paved roads. To protect motorists from both slippery ice and vision-impairing dust…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Former FANG president Vijay Naidu talks Pacific anti-nuclear activism

    Pacific Media Watch

    An interview with former University of the South Pacific (USP) development studies professor Dr Vijay Naidu, a founding president of the Fiji Anti-Nuclear Group (FANG), has produced fresh insights into the legacy of Pacific nuclear-free and anti-colonialism activism.

    The community storytelling group Talanoa TV, an affiliate of the Whānau Community Centre and Hub and linked to the Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN), has embarked on producing a series of short educational videos as oral histories of people involved in the Nuclear Free and Independent Pacific (NFIP) Movement to document and preserve this activist mahi and history.

    The series, dubbed “Legends of NFIP”, are being timed for screening in 2025 to coincide with the 40th anniversary of the Rainbow Warrior bombing in Auckland harbour on 10 July 1985 and also with the 40th anniversary of the Rarotonga Treaty for a Nuclear-Free Pacific.


    Legends of NFIP – Professor Vijay Naidu.   Video: Talanoa TV

    These videos are planned to “bring alive” the experiences and commitment of people involved in a Pacific-wide movement and will be suitable for schools as video podcasts and could be stored on open access platforms.

    “This project is also expected to become an extremely useful resource for students and researchers,” says project convenor Nikhil Naidu, himself a former FANG and Coalition for Democracy (CDF) activist.

    In this 14-minute interview, Professor Naidu talks about the origins of the NFIP Movement.

    “At this time [1970s], there were the French nuclear tests that were actually atmospheric nuclear tests and people like Suliana Siwatibau and Graeme Bain started the ATOM movement (Against Nuclear Tests on Moruroa) in Tahiti in the 1970s at USP,” he says.

    “And we began to understand the issues around nuclear testing and how it affected people — you know, the radiation. And drop-outs and pollution from it.”

    Published in partnership with Talanoa TV.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Climate Change Committee issues scathing report on government – but will Labour act?

    Only one third of emissions reductions required to meet the UK government’s 2030 climate target have credible plans. This the consensus from the Climate Change Committee (CCC) on tackling the climate crisis.

    In a new progress report to parliament, the UK government’s key independent advisory body has issued another scathing assessment of the previous Conservative government’s inaction. So now, it has put forward a series of urgent recommendations for the new Labour government to implement to kickstart it’s climate ambitions.

    Climate Change Committee: Tory legacy of failure

    On Thursday 18 July, the CCC published a new assessment on the UK government’s progress in meeting its climate goals. Specifically, under its national Paris Climate commitments, it has committed to reduce emissions in 2030 by 68% compared to 1990 levels.

    However, the CCC has repeatedly exposed the former Tory government over its persistent failures on this. For instance, in June 2023, the committee stated that it was “markedly less” confident that the Conservative government could meet its climate aims than it had been the previous year. With the Tories’ increasing hostility to so-called “net zero” policies, this was a theme that continued.

    In March, the CCC followed that damning assessment with another, equally scathing report. Once again, the CCC criticised government inaction – in this instance over its climate adaptation plans. Notably, this set out how the government plans on this were “not working”, are “inadequately funded”, and lack “the frameworks needed to track adaptation and climate risk effectively”.

    Now, just six years away from its 2030 deadline, the CCC is once more saying that the country is not on track to hit this target. While it commended a handful of policies under the former Conservative government, overall it concluded that these were “not enough”. The report lambasted the Tories for rolling back a number of its main green policies:

    The previous Government gave inconsistent messages on its commitment to the actions needed to reach Net Zero, with cancellations of, and delays and exemptions to, important policies. It claimed to be acting in the long-term interests of the country, but there was no evidence backing the claim that dialling back ambition would reduce costs to citizens. Of particular concern to the Committee were changes to buildings policy, including exempting 20% of households from the phase-out of fossil-fuel boilers by 2035. These could seriously undermine the UK’s ability to reach its targets.

    The UK should now be in a phase of rapid investment and delivery. Yet almost all our indicators for low-carbon technology roll-out are off track, with rates needing to significantly ramp up.

    Labour now needs to step up to the task

    However, even with these in place, the government had been flouting its climate commitments. Because, by its own calculations, the Conservative government had not been on the trajectory for meeting its legally binding carbon budgets anyway. The carbon budget is the limit on emissions that the government has set for each sector. This aims to ensure the country collectively reaches net zero emissions by 2050, in line with the Climate Change Act, and its international commitment to cut greenhouse gas emissions by over two thirds (68%) by 2030.

    But as the Canary previously articulated on its latest climate blueprint, ‘the Carbon Budget Delivery Plan’, it was falling far short of this. In April, it introduced this, partially in response to a High Court judgement brought by environmental groups. Specifically, we wrote how the plan:

    details how the government intends to deliver its net zero targets. But the document shows that the UK is set to fall short of meeting its legally-binding emissions reductions between 2033 and 2037.

    As a result, the UK High Court has ruled in two separate cases that the UK government’s climate plans are unlawful.  Coincidentally, the CCC’s new report is in fact two years to the day of the first of these judgements. Then, in May, the court found this new plan was still breaching its legally binding commitments. The case expected the Secretary of State to draw up a revised plan within 12 months. So now, the buck has passed to the new Labour government.

    Ten commandments from the Climate Change Committee

    In its report, the committee provided ten key recommendations for the new government. These were:

    • Make electricity cheaper.
    • Reverse recent policy rollbacks.
    • Remove planning barriers for heat pumps and electric vehicle charge points.
    • Introduce a comprehensive programme for decarbonisation of public sector buildings.
    • Effectively design and implement the upcoming renewable energy auctions.
    • Accelerate electrification of industrial heat.
    • Ramp up tree planting and peatland restoration.
    • Finalise business models for large-scale deployment of engineered carbon removals.
    • Publish a strategy to support skills, supporting workers in sectors which need to grow or transition.
    • Strengthen National Adaptation Programme (NAP3). This is the government’s third plan to meet it’s international climate targets.

    The CCC also highlighted that the UK would need to ramp up the roll-out of renewable and low carbon energy and technology. Notably, it said that:

    • Annual offshore wind installations must increase by at least three times, onshore wind installations will need to double and solar installations must increase by five times.
    • Approximately 10% of existing homes in the UK will need to be heated by a heat pump, compared to only approximately 1% today.
    • The market share of new electric cars needs to increase from 16.5% today to nearly 100%.

    Committed to climate targets or big business?

    Already, insofar as a number of these, the new Labour government appears to be setting itself apart from its anti-net zero predecessor. For one, Labour has made ending new oil and gas licences a key part of its plans. On Wednesday, the King’s Speech detailed a raft of new bills the new government is launching as priority. Its Great British Energy Bill was chief among these as Labour’s climate-focused offering.

    This centres round the government’s flagship Great British Energy (GB Energy) plan. Initially, Labour put this forward as a supposed public energy company. However, it was forced to backtrack on this. Crucially, it acknowledged that it was instead ostensibly a Private Finance Initiative (PFI) for funnelling public funds to the private renewable sector. In other words, it wasn’t the fully nationalised publicly-owned company the party had been claiming it to be.

    Moreover, while on the face of it, the new government seems committed to turning things around on climate, the party has rubbed shoulders with many of the same big polluters the Tory party was previously pandering to.

    Ultimately, the CCC has set out in no uncertain terms that the new Labour government must make up for lost time, and fast. However, whether it’s truly committed to this and up to the task remains to be seen.

    Feature image via the Canary

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Despite court rulings, major airlines are STILL greenwashing their climate impacts

    Environmental groups have issued a clear warning to airline companies misleading passengers with their contradictory climate crisis credentials. Notably, they have called on 71 airlines operating out of Schiphol airport to cease greenwashing their business operations. Invariably, these major polluters continue to make turbulent claims on their climate impacts – but naturally, they’re largely hot air.

    ClientEarth, Fossielvrij and Reclame Fossielvrij have sent a letter to airlines to take them to task over this. Crucially, this set out that air travel companies should not promote common industry claims about ‘sustainable aviation fuels’, ‘offsetting’ and ‘net zero by 2050’ as they are likely to be unlawful.

    Airlines greenwashing: a lot of hot air

    In March this year, the District Court of Amsterdam ruled in a precedent-setting case that advertising by KLM had broken EU consumer law. Specifically, the court judged that the Dutch airline company had misled customers by using “vague and general” adverts detailing its efforts to offset the pollution impacts from flying.

    Despite this, many airlines have failed to stick the landing on keeping in step with the ruling. Therefore, climate groups addressed a legal letter warning among others, companies including:

    • Ryanair
    • Lufthansa
    • Delta
    • American Airlines
    • British Airways
    • Easyjet
    • Etihad
    • Cathay Pacific Airways
    • Qatar Airways
    • Singapore Airlines
    • Turkish Airlines

    Lawyer at ClientEarth Johnny White said:

    The misleading sustainability claims pushed by KLM and found unlawful by the Dutch Court come straight from the wider industry’s greenwashing playbook to keep air traffic growing as the climate crisis escalates.

    Airlines continuing to promote these misleading messages do so in breach of the law. The Dutch ruling set clear red lines for the aviation sector’s climate advertising. Failing to abide by them exposes airlines to legal action from a range of actors, from civil society, to consumers, regulators and even competitors.

    Red lines for aviation advertising

    Notably, one major finding from the Dutch Court judged to be misleading was the industry’s description of alternative fuels. For instance, this can include minor amounts of used cooking oil utilised as biofuel. The industry has promoted this as a ‘promising solution’ and ‘sustainable aviation fuel’.

    Therefore, the letter warned that airlines cannot use the label ‘sustainable aviation fuel’. It also cannot employ the abbreviation ‘SAF’ in consumer-oriented communication. On top of this, the ruling laid out that they should not use other vague terms like ‘more sustainable aviation fuel’. Doing so gives the impression that it can make a substantial contribution to reducing the climate impact of aviation. Of course, in reality, it does not.

    It also made clear that airlines are prohibited from making ‘offsetting’ claims. This means stopping schemes that suggest customers can pay towards a tree planting project or the costs of biofuels as a way to reduce, compensate, or neutralise the climate impact of a flight.

    As the Canary reported in April, in a separate ruling in Germany, a court ruled similarly over airline Eurowing’s offsetting claims.

    Specifically, Eurowings uses an offsetting calculator to offer its passengers the opportunity to make their flights supposedly “CO2-neutral”. This is done by passengers making a small financial contribution to forest protection and cooking stove projects.

    However, the court ruled that the forest protection projects it used for the alleged offsetting are not suitable for achieving actual compensation. In particular, it found that forest projects cannot be operated for the same length of time as the carbon emitted by the flight remains in the atmosphere.

    Previous research has rubbished airline’s offsetting claims. For instance, a 2021 investigation by Greenpeace Unearthed and the Guardian revealed that major airlines’ carbon neutral claims over forest offset projects could not be verified. Similarly, Climate Home News also found that so-called cleaner cooking stove offset initiatives largely offered ‘junk credits’. In other words, claims to offset greenhouse gas pollution were essentially bogus.

    Aviation growth is more airline greenwashing

    Overall, airlines that are failing to make substantial emissions reductions cannot claim they are committed to the Paris Agreement. Equally, they are prohibited from implying that they are on their way to a more sustainable future, or are on a path to ‘net zero’ by 2050.

    The environmental groups also warned that aviation industry growth is not consistent with limiting the dangerous climate crisis.

    The Dutch Court did not specifically hold KLM’s decision to grow its business against the airline. Nevertheless, judges found that its other measures meant it could not lawfully claim to be tackling the climate crisis in line with global climate goals.

    The letter pointed out that KLM’s unlawful claims appear to be part of the industry-wide climate PR strategy to protect what KLM calls the industry’s ‘licence to grow’.

    The European Commission and the European network of consumer protection authorities’ recent regulatory action confirms the widespread nature of this strategy. Currently, they are investigating 20 airlines across the European Union over potentially misleading sustainability claims.

    Hiske Arts, campaigner at Fossielvrij, said:

    Aviation is a highly polluting, fossil-fuelled industry. Pursuing growth inherently undermines action to tackle the climate crisis, which demands a limit on air traffic. Airlines cannot tout their empty climate promises to win public and political favour while planning to keep on polluting our planet with more fossil fuel burned in the skies.

    The organisations are calling for a tobacco-style ad ban on air travel and all other fossil-fuel based goods. These would cite the significant harm these products cause to people’s health and livelihoods through fuelling climate breakdown.

    Rosanne Rootert, campaigner at Fossielvrij Reclame, said:

    Tackling greenwashing is currently a cat-and-mouse game. You can only react when the harm is already done and people have already seen the ads. A complete ban on fossil advertising, such as for air travel, is the only way to truly eliminate sophisticated greenwashing by these companies.

    Feature image via Casey Planespotting – Youtube

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • New Research Links Common Foods to Higher Levels of PFAS in the Body

    Common foods including white rice and eggs are linked to higher levels of “forever chemicals” in the body, new research from scientists at the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth shows. The researchers also found elevated levels of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in people who consumed coffee, red meat, and seafood, based on plasma and breast milk samples of 3,000 pregnant people.

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • EXPOSED: eight Labour candidates linked to PR firms that have LOBBIED for water companies

    As the Labour Party looks set to form the next government after the general election, the party is up to its neck in lobbying connections with the UK’s sewage-scandal-rife water industry. Yet Starmer has promised to mop up the mess left behind by the Tories’ on sewage pollution.

    Now, the Canary can reveal that more than a dozen firms that have lobbied for the UK water sector in the last five years hold significant ties to the Labour Party. In particular, the Canary has identified a revolving door of Labour MPs, aides, and high profile staff from the party. Invariably, these have moved into prominent roles with consultant lobby companies working for the UK’s private water corporations.

    Labour’s light touch on the water industry

    Throughout the election campaign, the scandal-riddled water industry has been a focal issue.

    In 2023, water companies dumped more sewage into the sea than ever before. Environment Agency figures revealed that water companies were responsible for 477,972 discharges. This was a 59% increase from the year prior.

    In other words, the sewage crisis has continued to ramp up, putting the health of people and the environment at increasing risk.

    All the while, shareholders have continued to reap the rewards of Thatcher’s neoliberal privatisation racket. As the sector pumped the UK’s waterways full of shit, it divvied out astronomical shareholder payouts. Campaign group We Own It found that for every hour the industry polluted in 2023, companies paid shareholders £377.

    So what are Labour planning to do about it? The party’s manifesto states that:

    Labour will put failing water companies under special measures to clean up our water. We will give regulators new powers to block the payment of bonuses to executives who pollute our waterways and bring criminal charges against persistent law breakers. We will impose automatic and severe fines for wrongdoing and ensure independent monitoring of every outlet.

    Ostensibly, Starmer’s Labour is pitching the problem as a failure of the regulatory regime. It therefore proposes tougher action on water companies and profiteering bosses.

    Stopping short of nationalisation

    However, multiple environmental groups and political opponents have exposed the glaring holes in Labour’s sewage pollution pledges. Most notably, under Starmer Labour has walked back plans to nationalise the industry. Independent challenger to Starmer in his Holborn and St Pancras seat Andrew Feinstein has criticised the Labour leader for bowing to big business:

    Water companies, which have been making mega profits from massive price increases while polluting our rivers, must be returned to public ownership. Labour’s ultra cautious manifesto doesn’t go nearly far enough and will have no meaningful impact on the numerous crises Britain faces. Instead, under Starmer, it will be business as usual for the super rich and mega corporations.

    However, Starmer’s Labour is seemingly unmoved by cautionary tales for the ills of privatised water – like those from Thames Water. How odd, you might think. Well, not really – when you realise former New Labour environment minister Ian Pearson sits on Thames Water’s board.

    So as UK water pipelines fall apart, it’s this very politics-to-private pipeline that could be to blame.

    The revolving door with the private water sector

    Naturally, Pearson isn’t the only former MP using the revolving door between UK parliament and the private water sector.

    In March, trade body for the sector Water UK appointed fellow previous New Labour MP Ruth Kelly as its head. As the Morning Star mused, the umbrella lobby group will benefit from her:

    “New Labour” skill of appearing to offer business-led reform which actually ends up charging the public, a la PFI.

    Besides Kelly, former Labour shadow minister-turned Change UK to Liberal Democrats MP Chuka Umunna has held indirect ties to the industry as well. While he was working for multinational lobby firm Edelman, the company counted multiple private water corporations among its clients. This included Water UK, Anglian Water, South West Water’s parent company Severn Trent, and United Utilities. Umunna left the firm in 2021 for a new role at JP Morgan.

    Gemma Doyle, who lost her seat in 2015, went on to join FTI Consulting. Throughout 2023 and 2024, the PR firm has worked on behalf of Water UK.

    Angela ‘funny tinge’ Smith is one of the more recent MPs to have leveraged her tenure in parliament to pursue a new career in the water industry.

    A ‘funny tinge’ alright

    For Smith’s part, in a piece for the Guardian in 2018 she railed against Corbyn’s then nationalisation plans. All the while, she sat as chair for the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Water. But, as campaign group We Own It have previously pointed out, the APPG is in the pocket of the industry itself. Specifically, a number of private UK water companies almost entirely fund the group.

    After Smith’s break-off party Change UK tanked, she secured a role with Portsmouth Water.

    Then, in 2022, Smith quietly returned to the party without fanfare. During this election run, Smith has publicly declared her support for Starmer, and described his ‘changed’ party as the reason she rejoined. A number of people on X have surmised that Starmer’s massive step back on nationalisation might well have something to do with it:

    Labour candidates’ lobbyist links

    Of course, the revolving door – as the term suggests – works both ways. While Smith is not standing this time, another Labour candidate is up for election on the 4 July, after a long-term career in the water industry.

    Lee Pitcher is standing for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme. As Byline Times reported, the Labour candidate previously worked for Yorkshire Water.

    Largely however, the majority of connections between Labour and the UK’s water industry manifest through lobbying firms. After his long stint at Yorkshire Water, Pitcher himself took up a role as head advisor on the water sector for consultancy company Jacobs.

    And of course, he isn’t the only one. The Canary found at least eight Labour candidates standing for election who have recently worked for lobby and PR firms connected to the water industry.

    Three of these were employed by Lexington Communications. The company was one of the firms at the heart of the 1999 cash-for-access scandal. Throughout the past year, the company has lobbied for disgraced water firm United Utilities.

    In February, the company polluted the iconic Lake Windermere, in the Lake District National Park. Despite illegally pumping millions of litres of sewage into the famous lake, it still made more than £300m in payouts to its shareholders in May.

    In bed with the water industry?

    As well as this, as the Canary’s James Wright noted previously, the Australian investment bank Macquarie is one of its clients too. While owners of Thames Water, the bank leeched billions in loans and dividends from its subsidiary. When Macquarie sold the company in 2017, Thames Water was over £10bn in debt – and the investment bank itself had saddled it with a significant portion of this.

    The Lexington employees included Steve Race, standing for Exeter, and Mary Creagh, who is standing for Coventry East. According to Novara, Oliver Ryan, standing for Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield purportedly worked for the firm until at least February this year.

    A spokesperson for Mary Creagh told the Canary that:

    Mary now longer works for Lexington Communications. During her time at Lexington she had did not work with United Utilities.

    Alongside Lexington, the Blakeney Group has lobbied on behalf of Pennon during periods of 2023 and the start of 2024. It is the parent company of the infamous South West Water – responsible for the recent outbreak of a parasite in Devon drinking water. Labour candidate Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby) worked for the firm. As the Canary reported in June, following the diarrhoea-inducing-parasite scandal that hospitalised two residents, the company awarded CEO Susan Davy a 58% pay-rise.

    Other MP candidates working for water industry lobbyists are Gregor Poynton (Headland), Jade Botterill (Portland), Dan Bewley (Lowick), and Ieuan Môn Williams (5654). Their firms represented Affinity Water, Anglian Water, Southern Water, and the sector’s main lobbying body, Water UK.

    The Canary contacted these MP candidates for comment, but did not hear back from them by the time of publication.

    Labour senior staffers-turned-sewage scandal soothsayers

    However, it isn’t only MPs and candidates riding the PR lobbyist-to-politics gravy train. Many water industry consultant lobbyist firms employ staff from former high-profile positions within the Labour right.

    PR company Cavendish Consulting has worked for Southern Water, United Utilities, and Veolia in the past year. Among its directors is Ali Craft – a former Labour deputy regional director. His bio on Cavendish’s site states that:

    Since leaving in 2019, he has remained closely involved, working for Morgan McSweeney (now Keir Starmer’s campaign chief) and on Keir Starmer’s leadership campaign. He remains a key figure in national Labour politics and has been advising clients about how to engage with the party at a national, regional and local level.

    Similarly consultancy company Pagefield has another former Starmer staffer among its employees. Specifically, it states that its associate partner Juliet Patterson:

    joined Pagefield from Ed Miliband’s office, where she was his political advisor and led the Labour Party’s media activity on business, energy and climate change. During her time working for Labour she was also seconded to work as a press officer for the Leader of the Opposition, Sir Keir Starmer.

    Pagefield has counted Pennon Group among its clientele throughout periods of 2023 and 2024.

    Other consultant lobbyists that have run public relations or lobbying for water companies in the previous year alone, have a multitude of employees from senior Labour positions. This includes Teneo, which has listed Severn Trent, United Utilities, and Thames Water among its clients as recently as at least 31 May this year. The company’s senior managing director Patrick Loughran worked closely with New Labour during its time in government. In particular, he operated as a special advisor to Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, and Peter Mandelson.

    Meanwhile, FTI Consulting has former front bench advisor Ben Craig, and current Labour NEC member Abdi Duale among its employees.

    And as the Morning Star has also reported, Joe Vinson, a former aide to Wes Streeting now works for Lexington. The outlet noted how:

    Vinson describes one of his pre-Lexington lobbying campaigns as having “created and delivered a crisis stakeholder engagement plan for a UK water company facing increasing criticism of its performance on sewage spills from the public, regulators, and politicians” — so he has stood up for a private water firm, most likely South West Water and its owner Pennon, as they are rightly lambasted for squeezing cash out of the water system while pouring filth into British rivers.

    Then, there’s Connect Public Affairs, which has acted as secretariat for the APPG for Water. Connect’s managing director for its London office – Dan Simpson – has held a number of senior roles for Labour. This includes his time as secretary to the party in Westminster, as a campaign agent for Sadiq Khan, and stints as regional director in both London and the east of England.

    Water company lobbyists front and centre

    If these previous senior officials’ path to PR firms employed by private water wasn’t enough, the party has direct dealings with some of these companies too.

    In May, Open Democracy reported that shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves has seconded a staffer from corporate lobby firm FGS Global. Since mid February, the FGS employee has provided advisory services valued to the tune of over £10,000.

    What’s more, as the Canary’s Rachel Swindon has noted that:

    Shadow secretary of state for health and social care, the Blairite disciple Wes Streeting, was gifted hospitality worth more than a grand at Hay Festival courtesy of the broadcaster Sky and on top of that he received £600 worth of tickets to the opera at Glyndebourne by a lobbying and public affairs company, FGS Global.

    During the April to June 2023 reporting period, FGS operated as a consultant lobbyist for Water UK.

    Of course, Starmer’s corporate-captured Labour has made cosying up to lobbyists a key feature of his reformed party.

    SEC Newgate’s chairman Mark Glover was among the 120 business leaders that declared support for Labour in the upcoming election.

    In 2022, the PR company previously hosted a series of roundtable discussion dinners. It did so with shadow business secretary Jonny Reynolds, then-shadow business minister Seema Malhotra, and senior Labour officials. Glover led the networking events. According to its website, it hosted the “high level dinners” to help its clients:

    to develop relationships with senior Labour figures to get a sense of what a Labour government would mean for their business – and position themselves to influence Labour’s policy agenda.

    Among those in attendance were representatives of Anglian Water. The Public Affairs Board register shows that SEC Newgate has maintained the water company as a key client throughout 2023 and 2024 so far. At the Labour Party’s 2023 annual conference in Liverpool, Glover and his company hosted another business dinner event. There too, they met with then shadow business minister Seema Malhotra.

    Glover’s wife, Johanna Baxter, is also standing as the Scottish Labour candidate for Paisley and Renfrewshire at the upcoming election.

    In bed with big polluters

    At the end of the day, Labour might talk the tough act on water companies, but ultimately, it’s the corporate-captured continuity party at the polling booth. When it comes down to it, Labour’s intimate links with lobbyists and PR firms show precisely why it’s shying away from renationalising the UK’s waterways.

    In other words, Labour’s capitalist crony right is in bed with the big polluters. As ever, the corporate stooges in parliament will stifle any meaningful action to protect people and the environment. By the next election, we’ll still have seas full of sewage. However, at the same time, a Labour MP or two might bag themselves a pretty penny as a lobbyist for the private water sector.

    Feature image via the Canary

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Supreme Court Blocks the EPA’s Plan to Reduce Ozone Air Pollution

    In a ruling that court observers said was “really extraordinary” and achieved through “a procedural strangeness,” the Supreme Court on Thursday blocked a federal plan to reduce air pollution that blows across state lines. The 5-4 decision from the court’s conservative justices halts, for now, the Environmental Protection Agency’s “Good Neighbor” rule and its stringent smokestack emissions…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Plastic Industry Is Selling False Promise of New Recycling Tech. Don’t Buy It.

    Last year, I became obsessed with a plastic cup. It was a small container that held diced fruit, the type thrown into lunch boxes. And it was the first product I’d seen born of what’s being touted as a cure for a crisis. Plastic doesn’t break down in nature. If you turned all of what’s been made into cling wrap, it would cover every inch of the globe. It’s piling up, leaching into our water and…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • New Study Reveals Air in Louisiana’s “Cancer Alley” Is Even Worse Than Expected

    Since the 1980s, the 85-mile stretch of the Mississippi River that connects New Orleans and Baton Rouge, Louisiana, has been known as “Cancer Alley.” The name stems from the fact that the area’s residents have a 95 percent greater chance of developing cancer than the average American. A big reason for this is the concentration of industrial facilities along the corridor — particularly…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • South West Water pumps out whopping pay-rise for CEO amidst parasite-infested water scandal

    Something stinks about a major British utility company and its not just the sewage it has been dumping into UK waterways. No, on 10 June, Pennon Group – owner of South West Water – pumped out its latest annual report. And predictably, the company has stacked on a whopping £300,000 pay increase for ‘Chief Excrement Officer’ Susan Davy.

    You read that right – the CEO of the company leaving drinking water in Devon awash in parasites has had a pay-rise.

    Of course, if it reeks of capitalist profiteering while shitting on the public, that’s because it very much is.

    South West Water boss gets a stinking, stonking pay rise

    As the Guardian reported:

    The boss of South West Water’s owner has received a pay increase of £300,000, weeks after an outbreak of diarrhoea caused by a parasite in Devon’s water supply.

    Susan Davy, the chief executive of Pennon Group, was awarded £860,000 in total pay for the latest financial year, up from £543,000 the year before, according to accounts published on Monday.

    So after South West Water told 17,000 households to boil their water to avoid a diarrhoea-inducing parasite, Davy is rolling in a stonking 58% pay increase. Cue the definitely warranted crapping on her and South West Water on X:

    Did we mention that the parasite outbreak in Devon isn’t over? Well, as it was posting its pay awards, South West Water sure did on X:

    What’s more, as one poster pointed out, her over 50% pay rise correlated almost perfectly with the increase in sewage spills over the past year:

    Notably, data from the Environment Agency showed that South West Water were responsible for 464,056 spills in 2023. This was a 54% increase on 2022.

    Davy says: “it’s the right thing to do”

    Meanwhile, dutiful corporate sewage stooge Sky News instead lavished Davy with undue media praise for oh-so graciously forgoing her annual bonus.

    Naturally, they were quite happy to report the effluent coming out of her mouth:

    The head of under pressure South West Water’s parent firm has foregone her annual bonus and donated a long-term award to a scheme in support of struggling customers, saying “it’s the right thing to do”.

    We hear you Davy, ditching that £237,000 bonus will dress up your parasitic profiteering – and literal parasites – quite nicely. In particular, Davy had “recommended” to the remuneration committee to drop the annual bonus and deferred long-term pay award.

    Evidently, Sky thought it had quite the sparkling (poop and) scoop, but missed the part where South West Water’s Davy’s full remuneration still sat at a tidy £860,000.

    Don’t worry though, we’re sure a different Davey in glistening lifejacket will arrive to save the day (probably). Watch this space for cut footage from Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey’s next daring sewage-soaked escapades in Devon soon. That’ll sure teach those sleazy water company CEOs a lesson.

    In fairness to the Lib Dems, they did recently put forward an amendment to criminalise water companies for dumping sewage. However, this failed to make it into the legislation. That would be because Labour poo-poo’d the idea. Specifically, Starmer and his slimy squadron of suck-up MPs abstained on the amendment.

    Not that breaking the law seems to have made a jot of difference, as Violation Tracker was on the scene to remind everyone:

    And if you thought things couldn’t look any worse, wrong. One Green Party candidate highlighted that South West Water parent company Pennon Group is taking over another local water utility:

    The privatisation to poo pipeline

    As some pointed out then, it’s hard to imagine anything short of full-scale renationalisation flushing away the pungent stench of corporate capitalist profiteering:

    One thing’s for certain – we’re all sick of scummy sewer rat-come-corporate capitalists like South West Water shitting on us. So here’s the plan:

    • Number 1: vote the toxic Tory assholes who privatised water companies in the first place and keep their sewage-monger mates in business out at the general election.
    • Number 2: Make these wastemen (and women) CEOs mop up this mess with their big pay packets – and finally stop draining the public purse for their undeserved profits once and for all.

    Feature image via Accounting for Sustainability/Al Jazeera – Youtube/the Canary

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • EPA Enabled PFAS Contamination of Farmland From Fertilizer, New Lawsuit Claims

    regulators failed to prevent toxic PFAS in fertilizers from contaminating farmland across the country, alleges a lawsuit filed this week by a watchdog group on behalf of two Texas farm families who suffered health problems after their properties were polluted. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) violated the Clean Water Act by failing to identify at least 18 per- and polyfluoroalkyl…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Lawsuit Claims Company Knowingly and Illegally Dumped Cancer-Causing Waste

    A Mississippi auto parts company illegally dumped toxic waste for more than 50 years, poisoning workers and sparking a cluster of cancer cases, according to a lawsuit filed this week by a group of former employees. The lawsuit, filed June 4 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi, names EnPro Industries and multiple other corporate entities as defendants in the case…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Scientists Discover Way to Destroy Harmful “Forever Chemicals” in Water Supply

    PFAS are known as “forever chemicals” for a reason. Originally added to a wide variety of products ranging from firefighting foam to nonstick food packaging, the chemical bonds that make up per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, also known as PFAS, accumulate quickly and break down slowly over time, making the pollutants extremely persistent in the environment — and our drinking water supply.

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • It was World Environment Day – so Israel launched an ecocidal bombing campaign in Lebanon

    On Wednesday 5 June it was World Environment Day. So naturally, the settler colonial state of Israel marked the occasion with another despicable act of ecocide. As it continued its genocidal assault on Gaza, it wreaked environmental devastation on communities. In short, Israel bombs Lebanon with white phosphorus.

    The same day, two reports exposed Israel’s wave of ecocidal destruction against the backdrop of its imperial expansionist, and genocidal ambitions in the region.

    Israel bombs Lebanon on World Environment Day

    Since 1973, the UN has led World Environment Day – the largest annual international event for the environment – on 5 June.

    This year, as the day kicked off, Israel rained down white phosphorus bombs in Lebanon:

    White phosphorus is a lethal chemical substance that ignites on contact with oxygen and continues to blaze until deprived of it. Burning at more than 800°c, it eviscerates human skin through to the bone, and can cause dysfunctions in multiple organs of the body. Its munitions produce a white smoke that Israel utilises as a smokescreen.

    Human Rights Watch also published a report on the same day Israel launched this latest assault. In it, the rights group detailed that:

    verified the use of white phosphorus munitions by Israeli forces in at least 17 municipalities across south Lebanon since October 2023, including 5 municipalities where airburst munitions were unlawfully used over populated residential areas.

    Notably, Israel uses this toxic substance to weaponise the environment. In comments to the National in November, environmental researcher at the American University of Beirut and activist of grassroots nonprofit Green Southerns Abbas Baalbaki described Israel’s tactics of environmental devastation. He explained that:

    The Israelis have long employed a strategy to make the land inhospitable. Their targets are not military objectives; instead, they destroy centuries-old olive trees, which have been preserved for generations.

    They understand that by targeting the ecosystem, they break the profound ties between the people and their ancestral land. People do not want to live in a wasteland, so they end up leaving: It is Israel’s strategy of militarising the environment

    In just over a month between 8 October and 14 November, Israel had burnt approximately 462 hectares of land in Lebanon with white phosphorus bombs. Of this, 60% was woodland, 25% agricultural land, and a further 15% was fruit and olive trees. What’s more, Israel’s crusade on Lebanese soil had put hundreds of thousands of farm animals at risk and destroyed around 150 beehives.

    Of course, Israel’s assault on Lebanon’s environment has continued unabated – as its most recent attack on Wednesday demonstrated.

    Israel’s “catastrophic” environmental destruction in Gaza

    Ostensibly then, these bombing campaigns forms part of its settler colonial expansion and annexation agenda in the region.

    This is of course, nothing new. Israel has long targeted the environment to systematically deprive Palestinians of their basic rights too. As Zaki Mamdoo previously wrote for the Canary, this has involved the “deliberate unravelling of Gaza’s social fabric” which for instance:

    has led to the collapse of waste management systems including water treatment, water pumps, sanitation, and desalination facilities. This has resulted in sewage flowing through the streets, seeping into the land and flowing into the sea – spreading water borne illnesses like typhoid, cholera and hepatitis while obviously having a devastating impact on ocean ecosystems.

    What’s more, as with South Lebanon, Israel has purposely destroyed hundreds of thousands of ancestral olive trees across Palestine.

    In other words, Israel has engaged in a torrid history of ethnic cleansing by environmental harm. Given this, it’s little wonder two reports have now underscored this in the context of its ongoing genocidal siege in Gaza.

    Firstly, the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics and the Environmental Quality Authority in Gaza released a joint report on Wednesday. Crucially, this detailed how Israel’s assault on Gaza had caused immense environmental damage, rendering the strip uninhabitable.

    Moreover, it pinpointed Israel’s deliberate targeting of vital civilian infrastructure in this. Specifically, it highlighted that two key water desalination plants are now operating at just 20% capacity. Alongside this, Israel’s bombing campaign and manufacturing of fuel shortages has decimated its wastewater networks. In particular, it described how Israel’s brutal attacks have halted 65 sewage pumps and destroyed 70km of sewage pipes.

    In tandem with this, the United Nations refugee agency UNRWA echoed these findings on Wednesday.

    As the Andalou Agency reported, in a statement UNRWA said that:

    The war in Gaza has upended millions of Palestinian lives and caused catastrophic damage to the natural environment that they depend upon for water, clean air, food and livelihoods

    What’s more, it relayed that:

    Restoring environmental services will take decades and cannot even start until a ceasefire

    Of course, all this is only exacerbating the humanitarian crisis Israel has fomented in Gaza. Evidently, the environmental destruction is by design, as part of its forced displacement of Palestinians from Gaza.

    No climate justice in a world set on fire by colonialism

    In short, Israel’s ecocidal assaults in Lebanon and Gaza cannot be extricated from its broader settler colonial project. Destroying the very environmental foundations of life is a key tool in the Zionist’s tyrannising campaign of ethnic cleansing. Of course, ultimately this underpins its white supremacist imperial expansionism in the region. Once more, it’s a vital reminder that climate and environmental justice can never flourish in a world where settler colonists exist – because they’re the very reason it’s on fire.

    Feature image via X screengrab

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Court Gives Preliminary Approval of $600M East Palestine Derailment Settlement

    This week, the court overseeing a lawsuit for the February 2023 train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, gave preliminary approval for a $600 million settlement to be paid by Norfolk Southern Railway, lead attorneys in the class action lawsuit said in a press release. The lawsuit stems from the disaster last year in which a Norfolk Southern train carrying an array of toxic chemicals — some of…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Small island states win legal case, forcing rich nations to slash climate-wrecking carbon emissions

    Small island states are leading the charge against the climate crisis. Leaders of nine low-lying island nations have won a historic case at the UN’s maritime court. The group sought to hold countries to account for their greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). Now, the ruling means that rich nations will have clean up their act on ocean pollution through climate-wrecking GHG emissions.

    Crucially, they have a responsibility to do so for small island nations bearing the brunt of the climate breakdown.

    Ocean pollution and the climate crisis

    In December 2022, the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law (COSIS) launched a case at the UN’s maritime court the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS).

    A collection of small island states had formed the COSIS coalition at the 2021 COP26 climate summit in Glasgow. This comprises of Antigua and Barbuda, Tuvalu, Palau, Niue, Vanuatu, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saint Kitts and Nevis, and the Bahamas.

    In September 2023, ITLOS began a series of public hearings. As the Canary previously reported on the it:

    The island states are asking the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) to determine whether carbon dioxide emissions absorbed by the oceans can be considered pollution. If ITLOS determines so, nations could have specific obligations to prevent it under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The international treaty binds countries to preventing the pollution of the oceans.

    ITLOS has now unanimously ruled that this is the case. Specifically, it determined that carbon emissions are pollution under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

    The UNCLOS treaty binds countries to prevent pollution of the oceans. Crucially, it defines pollution as the introduction of “substances or energy into the marine environment” that harms marine life. However, it does not spell out carbon emissions as a specific pollutant. So, plaintiffs in the case argued it should qualify.

    As such, the ruling now obligates nations to reduce their GHG emissions to protect the ocean. Notably, in an expert opinion it said that:

    Anthropogenic GHG emissions into the atmosphere constitute pollution of the marine environment

    As a result, the court ruled that polluting countries therefore have:

    the specific obligation to take all measures necessary to ensure that… emissions under their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage by pollution to other states and their environment

    Small island states ‘fighting for their survival’

    Ocean ecosystems create half the oxygen humans breathe and limit global heating by absorbing much of the carbon dioxide emitted by human activities.

    However, increasing emissions can warm and acidify seawaters, harming marine life and ecosystems.

    Soaring global sea temperatures are also accelerating the melting of polar ice caps. This causes sea levels to rise. Naturally, this poses an existential threat for small island nations.

    The countries that brought the case called the court decision “historic”. Prime minister of Antigua and Barbuda, Gaston Browne, said small island nations were “fighting for their survival”. He emphasized that:

    Some will become uninhabitable in the near future because of the failure to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. We demand that the major polluters respect international law, and stop the catastrophic harm against us before it is too late

    Global sea surface temperatures hit a monthly record in April for the 13th month in a row, according to the EU’s Copernicus Climate Change Service.

    Rich nations must take responsibility for ocean pollution

    So of course, small low-lying islands are shouldering the burden of climate breakdown. Alongside rising sea levels, they are particularly exposed to the impacts of climate-fueled extreme weather. For example, a World Meteorological Organization (WMO) analysis found that small island states had suffered devastating economic impacts from climate-exacerbated extreme weather. During fifty years of climate disasters between 1970 and 2021, for small island states:

    one in five disasters had an impact “equivalent to more than five per cent” of GDP, with some disasters wiping out countries’ entire GDP.

    Significantly, the ITLOS ruling has now laid out that countries’ climate action may need to go beyond the Paris Agreement for them to meet their legal obligations on marine protection.

    Moreover, it found that states with the greatest historic responsibility for the climate crisis must step up and do more. Crucially, they need to address pollution from GHG emissions. The ruling distinguished between those with larger footprints and those least responsible for causing the climate crisis.

    For example, an IPCC report highlighted that rich industrialised nations were responsible for approximately 57% of global greenhouse gas emissions between 1850 and 2019. Conversely, the poorest, least industrialised nations and small island states contributed just 0.4% and 0.5% respectively during this period.

    The UN maritime court’s ruling echoed UN chief Antonio Guterres’ previous calls for rich nations to take action.

    The ‘fates of two global commons’

    Importantly, experts have said the ruling could be influential in shaping the scope of future climate litigation involving greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

    While the court’s opinion is advisory and non-binding, it will influence how the UN treaty is interpreted around the world. In a press release ClientEarth lawyer Lea Main-Klingst said that:

    Next year, states must improve the climate plans they submit to the United Nations – known as their Nationally Determined Contributions – and today’s outcome will be instrumental to push the countries most responsible for the climate crisis to ramp up their ambition.

    Amnesty International’s head of strategic litigation Mandi Mudarikwa agreed the ruling was:

    likely to inform future climate justice cases in national, regional and international courts

    Main-Klingst also said that:

    The momentum from today is only set to grow, as 2024 is a year of serious legal reckoning on climate change in international courts.

    The Inter-American Court is hearing arguments on how climate change is impacting human rights this month in Brazil and the world’s highest court – the International Court of Justice – will be considering a similar question later this year.

    The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) echoed this. CIEL attorney Joie Chowdhury stated that:

    For the first time, an international court has recognised that the fates of two global commons – the oceans and the atmosphere – are intertwined and imperilled by the climate crisis

    The Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) are due to give their rulings on these two other climate cases in the coming months.

    Feature image via Youtube – CPDC NGO

    Additional reporting via Agence France-Presse

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Nonprofits to take fossil fuel giant TotalEnergies to court for manslaughter over the climate crisis

    French fossil fuel giant TotalEnergies will once again feeling the heat in a court of law.

    On Tuesday 21 May, three nonprofits and individuals filed a criminal complaint against the company and its top shareholders in Paris. Crucially, they are calling to try the company for involuntary manslaughter and other consequences of climate crisis “chaos”.

    The case targets the company’s board, such as its chief executive Patrick Pouyanne, alongside major shareholders that backed its climate strategy. Naturally, this includes key shareholders like US investment firm BlackRock, and Norway’s central bank, Norges Bank.

    On the same day they launched the legal action, a new report has singled out TotalEnergies among eight companies setting the world on a trajectory to climate disaster.

    TotalEnergies ‘deliberately endangering’ lives

    In a statement, the three nonprofits and eight individuals said they accused the group of:

    deliberately endangering the lives of others, involuntary manslaughter, neglecting to address a disaster, and damaging biodiversity

    Specifically, the nonprofits underscored TotalEnergies’s role in delaying action on the climate crisis. They said that:

    TotalEnergies has known the direct link between its activities and climate change for over half a century, since at least 1971… TotalEnergies followed a climate sceptic line in order to waste time, delay decision-making and protect its increasing investments in fossil fuels

    Of course, TotalEnergies has also maintained its climate-wrecking business-as-usual. As the Canary previously reported during its investor day in 2023:

    TotalEnergies’ green energy trajectory pales in comparison to the company’s fossil fuel expansion plans. By 2030, its solar, wind, and low carbon energy – which includes biofuels, biogas, and hydrogen – will make up just 20% of its energy mix.

    Meanwhile, the oil and gas major is intending to develop new fossil fuel projects. Oil Change International has estimated that its expansion plans between 2023 and 2025 alone will generate over 1,600Mt of carbon dioxide over the new project’s lifetime.

    Naturally, the company’s 80/20 fossil fuel/green energy mix will also fail to lower its emissions. Despite the vital need for emissions reductions from all sectors, TotalEnergies’s plans will maintain its output at the same level to 2030.

    Now, a new report has also spelled out how TotalEnergies’s continued polluting operations are wreaking havoc on the climate. Coinciding with the legal case announcement, Oil Change International published its ‘Big Oil Reality Check’ report.

    This analyses the climate pledges and plans of eight international oil and gas companies. Predictably, all of them fall short of keeping to Paris climate goals. Instead of keeping temperatures under 1.5°c above pre-industrial levels, the eight companies will send them soaring over 2.4°c. Moreover, as the report noted, TotalEnergies has:

    explicit goals to increase oil and gas production within the next three years or beyond

    Time to ‘hold those responsible to account’

    The nonprofits filed their complaint at the Paris judicial court three days ahead of TotalEnergies’s annual shareholders meeting. The prosecutor now has three months to decide whether to open a judicial investigation. If it does not go ahead, the plaintiffs can take their case directly before an investigative judge.

    Plaintiffs include “victims or survivors of climate-related disasters” in Australia, Belgium, France, Greece, Pakistan, the Philippines and Zimbabwe.

    One of the plaintiffs in the latest case is Benjamin Van Bunderen Robberechts. The 17-year-old from Belgium whose friend Rosa died in flash floods in Belgium at the age of 15 in 2021. Van Bunderen founded the non-profit Climate Justice for Rosa in her memory. He said that:

    It’s horrible that there are people who value their profits so much more than human lives…I will do everything in my power to fight the climate situation and hold those responsible to account

    Of course, it isn’t the first time nonprofits and individuals have put the French oil giant in the hot seat either. For instance, in June, nonprofits took the company to court to stop TotalEnergies proceeding with fossil fuel projects across the world.

    However, this new case it taking a new and groundbreaking tack. As the nonprofits stated:

    This legal action could set a precedent in the history of climate litigation as it opens the way to holding fossil fuel producers and shareholders responsible before criminal courts for the chaos caused by climate change

    In other words, the case could mark a sea change in holding destructive fossil fuel corporations to account. Put simply, TotalEnergies is risking peoples’ lives through the devastating impacts of the climate crisis with its continued reckless fossil fuel profiteering. Plaintiffs will say enough is finally enough.

    Feature image via TotalEnergies – Youtube

    Additional reporting by Agence France-Presse

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Protesters target fossil fuel giant singing ‘Shell kills’ inside its AGM

    Climate protesters have disrupted fossil fuel giant Shell’s AGM.

    On Tuesday 21 May, activists from multiple climate justice groups launched a demonstration against the climate-wrecking company in central London.

    Activists from Fossil Free London, Extinction Rebellion UK, Climate Justice Coalition, War on Want, among others disrupted the meeting inside. Meanwhile, protesters supported the action in a rally outside the InterContinental Hotel London, where Shell shareholders brushed shoulders for the annual event.

    Crucially, protesters sought to highlight the damage Shell’s operations have done in the Niger Delta and its broader role exacerbating the climate crisis.

    ‘Shell kills’: protest at its AGM

    Outside the AGM, over 50 protesters sang Shell Kills in defiant rendition of Dolly Parton’s iconic “Jolene”. They waved pictures of Shell’s logo on fire in the air as they sung:

    A number of activists also broke into protest song inside the AGM:

    When security guards and police started carrying protester out of the AGM, they were undeterred and continued chanting:

    Shell in the Niger Delta

    Protesters have previously targeted Shell AGMs for the company’s appalling climate record. For instance, in May 2022, groups forced Shell to pause its shareholder meeting with a similar action.

    This time, protesters drew attention to Shell’s abysmal history of ecocide and human rights abuse in the Niger Delta.

    The Niger Delta is the most polluted place in the world because of Shell’s oil spills. Between 2011 and 2022, there were 10,463 spill incidents, according to the National Oil Spill Detection and Response Agency. Shockingly, there, life expectancy is 10 years lower than the rest of Nigeria.

    As the Canary previously reported, Shell is now seeking to ditch its assets in the delta. However, rights groups have accused it of trying to slip away from cleaning up its mess.

    In November 2023, a UK court ruled in favour of more than 13,000 farmers and fishers in Niger Delta. Specifically, it determined that human rights claims against Shell over water pollution can be heard in the UK.

    Shell AGM: shareholders versus the planet

    Meanwhile, protesters also underscored the company’s continued climate-wrecking business plans.

    Since 2021, Shell has approved the development of at least 20 new fossil fuel extraction sites. These projects will extract more than 2.1 billion barrels of new oil and gas equivalent, producing 753 million tonnes of carbon pollution. According to Oil Change International, this is incompatible with 1.5°c of warming.

    In April, Shell was also trying to weasel out of a landmark legal ruling from 2021. Notably, the Hague District Court had ruled that the company must reduce its carbon emissions by 45% by 2030. Of course, Shell therefore fought this – in April it started an appeal against the judgement.

    Of course, it has been continuing these planet-destructive operations while paying staggering dividends to its shareholders. For instance, as the Canary highlighted in March, Shell’s CEO Wael Sawan pocketed £8m in 2023.

    Ultimately, Shell obstinately refuses to take responsibility in the Niger Delta, and for its climate-wrecking operations at large. Given this, activists were right to raise their voices above the clamour of another corporate AGM packed with shareholders profiteering off the backs of people and the planet.

    Feature image via Fossil Free London – X

    By Hannah Sharland

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Forever Chemicals “Ubiquitous” in Water, Atmosphere in Great Lakes Basin

    A first-of-its-kind study published this week shows that levels of toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are now so ubiquitous in the environmental that they have begun building up in the Great Lakes Basin after entering it through rainwater and the air, contaminating 95% of the United States’ fresh surface water supply. Researchers at Indiana University…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Portugal’s ecocidal airport grounded, but more climate-wrecking air travel infrastructure on the horizon

    The Portuguese government has grounded an ecocidal airport that would have decimated a biodiverse wetland. However, it isn’t the end of the climate-wrecking air travel plan. Specifically, the government is still hurtling ahead with plans to build the new airport at a different location. Of course, this will be disastrous for the climate crisis and nature.

    Portugal’s airport plans

    In 2019, the Portuguese government announced plans to build a new airport outside of Lisbon.

    The government planned to build this in the Tagus Estuary, close to Portugal’s capital. However, it is one of the main estuaries in Western Europe and Portugal’s most important wetland for waterbirds.

    Moreover, the location is protected as a Special Protection Area (SPA) and Site of Community Importance (SCI) under the EU nature law. Notably, it has special Ramsar wetland status and the government has designated the area a Portuguese Nature Reserve.

    The Tagus Estuary regularly hosts up to 200,000 wintering birds. Alongside this, it is the most important place in the country for wintering ducks, waders, and other waterbirds such as flamingos and gulls. Meanwhile, in any given migration season, the Tagus can play host to in excess of 300,000 birds, as it acts as a crucial pit stop for migratory birds on their long journey.

    So, in June 2020, ClientEarth and Sociedade Portuguesa para o Estudo das Aves (SPEA, BirdLife Portugal), along with eight Portuguese NGOS, filed a court action with the Lisbon Administrative Court. The environmental groups argued that the Portuguese authorities failed to carry out proper environmental impact assessments.

    Specifically, they said that Montijo Airport’s Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) goes against EU and national law and should be annulled.

    An EIS is a document in which the government sets out its assessment of a project’s impact on the environment. EU law requires authorities to carry out a series of assessments to determine a project’s impact on a protected site. Only after it has conducted these assessments, and shown it would cause no harm to the area, can it greenlight a project.

    Portugal airport on an “irreplaceable nature reserve”

    Now, the government has finally dropped its plans for the new Portugal airport on the biodiverse estuary.

    Head of ClientEarth’s Iberian and Mediterranean office Soledad Gallego said:

    It is unbelievable that the Portuguese authorities were considering building a new airport on this protected site. The airport would have significantly deteriorated the habitats of this irreplaceable nature reserve and seriously compromised the migratory route from Europe to Africa of birds that depend on this unique area for survival. The decision to abandon building on the Tagus was the only feasible route to take.

    Gallego added:

    The authorities have clearly realised that building the airport on this internationally protected site would be incompatible with tackling the biodiversity crisis we are facing. The knock-on effects that this project would have had on migratory birds would have been felt well beyond Portugal’s borders.

    Flies in the face of climate commitments

    The development is part of the government’s plans to increase air traffic capacity in Portugal’s two main cities of Lisbon and Porto. Notably, this includes expansion of infrastructure at Lisbon’s Portela Airport. There, the government intends for air traffic increases of 50%. Meanwhile, it also aims to increase air traffic by 60% at Porto’s Francisco Sá Carneiro Airport. The new Montijo airport in the Tagus Estuary sits alongside these expansions.

    According to the community database the Environmental Justice Atlas, this would send air-traffic-related carbon emissions soaring. Crucially, these plans would make it the single largest contributor of carbon pollution in Portugal.

    As such, campaigners, scientists, and members of the public have said it flies in the face of the government’s own goal for carbon neutrality by 2050.

    And while the government has now dropped plans on the protected site, it now intends to build the new Portugal airport at a different location. In other words, it’s continuing with its mega-polluting air travel project.

    Following the launch of the groups’ legal action, the Portuguese authorities announced they would carry out a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). This would determine the most appropriate location for the new airport. The announcement made by Prime Minister Montenegro to now build the airport near Alcochete is the outcome of the SEA.

    Of course, climate groups have pointed out that the alternative airport location will still have far-reaching impacts on the environment. Gollego said that:

    airports have global climate impacts regardless of where they are built. The Portuguese government should be asking itself whether building a new airport at all is in line with its climate goals and in the best interest of the health of people and nature.

    Feature image via Marulvw – Youtube

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Mining, big agribusiness, and fossil fuel sectors linked to over 600 attacks against 20,000 human rights defenders in 2023

    Mining, big agribusiness, and the fossil fuel sectors have unleashed an astronomical spate of attacks on human rights defenders (HRDs) throughout 2023. Crucially, perpetrators linked to companies and projects in these sectors account for the majority of over 600 attacks across the course of the year.

    This is according to a new damning report by the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre (BHRRC).

    Staggering scale of attacks against human rights defenders

    On Tuesday 7 May, the BHRRC published its annual briefing on attacks against HRDs.

    Alarmingly, the data recorded 630 attacks which directly impacted an estimated 20,000 people. In particular, these were those involved in speaking out against business-related harms during 2023.

    The BHRRC records multiple types of attacks against HRDs. It has most frequently recorded cases of judicial harassment (328), killings (87), physical violence (81), and intimidation or threats (80) throughout 2023.

    Despite the staggering scale of attacks, the BHRRC impressed that these figures are just the tip of the iceberg. Crucially, this is because the data only reflects what is accessible through public sources of information. As such, the briefing noted that:

    many attacks, especially non-lethal attacks (including death threats, judicial harassment and physical violence), never make it to media sources and there remains a significant gap in government monitoring of attacks, the problem is even more severe than these figures indicate. In addition, an “attack” may be against one person named in public sources or against a large number of unidentified people, such as an instance of charges being filed against 11,000 garment workers protesting for higher wages in Bangladesh. Thus, the number of individual HRDs experiencing attacks is higher than the number of attacks mentioned here.

    Corporations driving attacks

    Although attacks were recorded in almost every sector in 2023, certain extractive sectors stood out. Specifically, the BHRRC found that mining (165), agribusiness (117) and oil, gas & coal (112) were the most prolific sectors connected to attacks.

    Of course, the briefing noted that the mining sector is a hotbed for allegations in part due to the drive to transition to greener technology.

    For instance, a separate BHRRC report recently documented the soaring number of rights allegations tied to transition minerals in Eastern Europe and Central Asia.

    Largely, companies did not directly perpetrate these attacks directly. Notably, state actors including the police and judicial systems, as well as the military carried out most of these attacks. However, allegations mentioned specific businesses in 50% of these cases. Moreover, as the report stated for instance:

    Companies are often connected with attacks on HRDs, even when state actors are the direct perpetrator. This includes calling police or state security forces to disperse peaceful protests; cooperating with state repression, for example by providing services or products enabling surveillance; and obstructing unionisation. Other tactics used by companies to gain control over land and resources, often leading to conflict and attacks, include dividing communities and engaging in inadequate consultation processes.

    As such, they have consistently been the most dangerous sectors since BHRRC began documenting these attacks in 2015. In tandem with this, these are of course the very sectors fueling the climate and biodiversity crises in the first place.

    Indigenous defenders

    Additionally, companies, states, and organised crime outfits perpetrated over three-quarters (78%) of these attacks against people taking action to protect the climate, environment and land rights.

    Indigenous Peoples are particularly at risk when fighting for our planet. Since January 2015, the BHRRC has recorded more than 1,000 attacks against Indigenous defenders globally.

    The majority of these – 93% – were raising concerns about harms to their lands and territories, our climate and/or the environment.

    In 2023 alone, over a fifth of attacks (22%) were against Indigenous defenders. Indigenous defenders protect over 80% of the world’s remaining biodiversity. However, they comprise approximately 6% of the global population. Over three-quarters (78%) of these attacks against Indigenous defenders took place in Latin America, which has been one of the most dangerous regions for attacks against defenders consistently since 2015.

    Voluntary action is “insufficient”

    Co-head of the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre’s civic freedoms and human rights defender programme Christen Dobson said:

    We have been documenting attacks against those speaking out about harmful business activities since 2015 – and every year are appalled at the continued violence against people protecting our rights and planet. Mining, agribusiness, and the fossil fuels sectors – those fuelling the planetary crisis – are yet again connected with the highest number of attacks against human rights and environmental defenders. Companies in these sectors must adopt and implement policy commitments to zero tolerance for attacks on defenders. These sectors also urgently need to shift their practice to prioritise a just transition to renewable energy grounded in respect for human rights, including Indigenous Peoples’ rights to self-determination and free, prior and informed consent. This includes the right to say no.

    Many business actors are failing in their responsibility to respect human rights, resulting in harm to people and the environment, fuelling the triple planetary crisis we currently face. Listening to defenders is vital to understanding the risks and harms associated with business activity and to ensuring the transition to green economies is just and benefits workers, environmental defenders and their communities.

    Moreover, Dobson noted that companies’ voluntary action is “insufficient”. As such he argued that:

    there is an urgent need for robust mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence legislation, grounded in safe and effective stakeholder engagement and containing strong safeguards for human rights defenders. Governments must step in and fulfil their duty to protect the rights of defenders. One critical step is legally recognising and protecting Indigenous Peoples’ rights, including their rights to self- determination and to their lands, territories and resources.

    Feature image via Youtube – Bloomberg Quicktake

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.