Monday, September 24, 2018

We’ve got 10 years to ditch fossil fuel cars – or it’s game over for the climate

by Richard Casson

There’s an important line in the Paris climate agreement which says:
“[The Paris climate agreement] aims to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change… by holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels.”
Basically, the world needs to get more ambitious when it comes to limiting global warming. 
Though the difference between 1.5°C and 2°C might not seem like much, that half a degree difference really stacks up – as this neat-looking infographic explains.
What a difference 0.5ºC makes - Carbon Brief
1.5°C of global warming vs. 2°C – a snapshot of the difference in impact. Source: CarbonBrief
Since the Paris climate talks in 2015, scientists and researchers have been busy turning that 1.5°C target into something more meaningful, like working out how quickly we need to stop burning coal and oil, how many wind and solar farms we need to build, and how soon we need to switch from gas guzzling cars to zero-emissions vehicles.
In a new study – commissioned by Greenpeace and carried out by Germany’s Aerospace Centre – researchers set out to shine a light on one of the big questions that falls out of the 1.5°C target: ‘How soon do we need to stop the sale of new fossil fuel cars?’
And the answer is: pretty damn soon.
Cars in Beijing © Greenpeace / Natalie Behring
Rush hour in Beijing © Greenpeace / Natalie Behring
The car conundrum
For the climate to stay under 1.5°C of warming, every industry you can think of needs to start making radical changes. From companies that produce electricity, to construction firms that build our homes and offices, through to the big food and agriculture firms that oversee so much of the food we all buy – these industries make up the bulk of the global economy, and they all need to play their part in transitioning from a high carbon world to a low carbon one.
Getting every industry on the planet to change its business practices might seem a little daunting, but in some sectors it’s already happening.
EU emissions by sector EU greenhouse emissions per sector. Transport emissions have risen in recent years and predicted to flatline. Source: European Commission.
Take the electricity sector, where thousands of wind farms and solar panels have been installed over the last decade. Wind, solar and biomass now supply more than 20% of electricity generated in the EU, up from less than 10% in 2010.
But it’s a different story when we look at transport.
Transport is the only major sector where greenhouse gas emissions have gone up in recent years, with rising car sales and a soaring demand for larger vehicles (like SUVs) driving the problem.
With the automobile industry quite literally steering plans to tackle climate change in the wrong direction, some governments are now talking of forcing them onto a path that’s better for the climate. Like the UK and France, who are discussing plans to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel vehicles by 2040.
But with 2018 being so scorching hot that wildfires broke out across the northern hemisphere, this year’s weather raises the question: can we really wait for these proposed bans to fix things?
 © David McNew / Greenpeace
Wildfires swept through California this summer © David McNew / Greenpeace
2028 deadline
To answer this question, the German researchers began by charting what they think will happen naturally to the car industry, without new laws to force car firms to change. Their predictions factored in the fact that, due to public concerns about the health impact of diesels, the sale of diesel-powered cars is already falling dramatically.
Next, the research team calculated the ‘carbon budget’ that can be attributed to the transport industry (the amount of CO2 that can be pumped out while keeping warming below a certain temperature threshold).
What they found is that, without laws to drive change, the rate at which electric vehicles will be introduced to the market won’t be enough to stop the industry blowing through its carbon budget.
The two graphs below sum things up. The top one shows what the researchers think will happen over the coming few decades unless any action is taken. The bottom graph shows how much faster the sale of diesels, petrols and hybrid engines need to decline if we’re going to have a decent chance of hitting the 1.5°C target.
Sales of vehicles
Top: DLR’s current projection for new car sales in Europe. Bottom: target car sales for a 66% chance of staying under 1.5°C of warming. Source: DLR
Looking at the bottom graph, we can see that the sale of new high emission vehicles needs to fall to zero by around 2028. That means we’ve got about a decade to completely ban the sale of petrol and diesel vehicles.
At this stage we should also state the research only looks at the car industry in Europe, and not vehicles in Asia and the Americas. More research is need to cover these regions. And it’s entirely possible that some countries would need to phase out fossil fuel cars even quicker.
<span style="width: 0px;overflow: hidden;line-height: 0" class="mce_SELRES_start"></span>
The Norway model
So how realistic is it do this by 2028?
It’s estimated that by the end of 2018, only 2.35% of new cars and vans sold in Europe will be electric. So switching the entire industry from being a high carbon one to a low carbon one, might seem like an impossible task in 10 short years.
But here’s the good news; Norway is showing how fast things can change.
In Norway, a combination of tax incentives and government policies are driving staggering electric car growth. So much so that the Scandinavian country has set 2025 as the goal for all new cars to have zero emissions.
Norway electric car growth - WIkipediaNorway has the world’s fastest electric car growth. Source: Wikipedia
We need to think beyond cars
Cutting pollution from transport doesn’t only have to be a choice between fossil fuel power cars and electric ones.
A truly sustainable plan for transport should be about constructing more bike lanes, building cycling infrastructure that would make it easier for people to get around without cars. It should be about making public transport more affordable, leading to more people using trains or buses to get around. And it should be about investing in car sharing schemes, and reducing the amount of vehicles on the road.
Following such a path would be a sensible for a whole raft of reasons. It would mean reduced pressure on natural resources, as fewer cars would mean less demand for steel and plastic used to build vehicles.
It would mean a quicker route to cleaning up our air, as more polluting cars could be taken off the roads sooner.
And most of all, it would mean an even greater chance of keeping under 1.5°C degrees of warming.
Richard Casson is the digital engagement lead of the air pollution campaign 

Saturday, September 22, 2018

Cidades incríveis são feitas pelas pessoas, para as pessoas

por Luiza Lima

No Dia Mundial Sem Carro, reflita: se você pudesse fazer algo para melhorar o transporte do lugar em que vive, o que faria?

Logo Cidade Que Flui
Se é nas cidades que a maior parte das pessoas vivem e trabalham, são as pessoas e sua qualidade de vida que devem estar no centro das discussões dos planos urbanos e de mobilidade.
Hoje, dia 22 de setembro, é o Dia Mundial Sem Carro. Junto com escritórios do Greenpeace em outros países e em diversas cidades do Brasil, estamos realizando uma série de atividades – bicicletadas, caminhadas, vagas-vivas, debates, mostra de cinema – para celebrar um mundo que não mais coloque o carro como prioridade. Mais do que simplesmente banir os automóveis das ruas, estamos convidando você a refletir sobre a relação que tem com sua cidade, com as pessoas ao seu redor e como se locomove no dia-a-dia.
Menina com bicicleta, cidade que flui
Se você pudesse fazer algo para melhorar o transporte do lugar em que vive, o que faria? Colocaria mais linhas de ônibus circulando? Conectaria melhor ônibus e trens? Construiria mais ciclovias? Daria mais espaço para pedestres? Estimularia ações educativas no trânsito? Tiraria veículos movidos a diesel de circulação? 
As pessoas unidas têm o poder de transformar suas cidades. É por acreditar nisso que, desde 2013, o Greenpeace Brasil vem trabalhando com a temática da mobilidade urbana, com o objetivo de questionar o modelo de transporte atual, que depende fortemente da indústria do petróleo e do transporte individual motorizado. Nesses cinco anos de mobilização, ajudamos a desenhar o modelo da cidade que desejamos: mais limpa, humana, justa e acessível.
De lá para cá, fizemos parcerias importantes com pesquisadores renomados para elaboração de estudos, nos unimos às principais organizações que trabalham com o tema e consolidamos uma Rede de Mobilidade em São Paulo. Juntos, conseguimos um compromisso claro da Prefeitura de São Paulo de garantir 100% da frota de ônibus com combustível limpo até 20xx, com a promulgação da lei nº 16.802/2018.
Em 2018, lançamos um edital de mobilidade para Recife, com o intuito de fortalecer organizações que trabalham com mobilidade urbana e meio ambiente e também acreditam que é possível construir uma cidade melhor para todos.
Isso é só o começo. Queremos contribuir cada vez mais com soluções que mostrem que as pessoas são a verdadeira essência dos lugares. Estamos criando cidades mais habitáveis para o futuro, agora. Queremos cidades que fluem. Venha com a gente fazer parte dessa transformação!
#CidadeQueFlui  #MoveYourCity

Temos 10 anos para abandonar carros movidos a combustíveis fósseis, ou o jogo acabou para o clima

por Greenpeace Brasil

Spoiler : já existem tecnologias que possibilitam a transição para alternativas mais limpas


Greenpeace abre a Semana de Mobilidade em 2017 com protesto por ônibus não poluentes em São Paulo.
Protesto por ônibus não poluentes em São Paulo em 2017 © Barbara Veiga / Greenpeace
É tudo ou nada. Um novo relatório do Greenpeace, produzido pelo Centro de Aeronáutica Alemão (DLR), deixa claro que os carros movidos a combustíveis fósseis precisam deixar de ser fabricados até 2028. Só assim conseguiremos garantir que a temperatura média do planeta não aumente em mais de 1,5°C.
Na Europa, transporte é o setor que mais contribuiu com a emissão de gases do efeito estufa (GEE) no últimos anos. Com o aumento da venda de carros e a crescente demanda por veículos maiores (como os utilitários esportivos), que emitem ainda mais gases poluentes , o cenário do futuro nos parece assustador, tipo cena do filme “Mad Max” – ou seja, uma verdadeira catástrofe ambiental.
A boa notícia é que a solução está a nosso alcance. Apesar de focado no mercado europeu, nosso relatório mostra que já existem tecnologias que possibilitam a transição, nos próximos 10 anos, de automóveis poluentes para alternativas mais limpas, como carros elétricos. Essa substituição é fundamental não somente para garantir o equilíbrio climático, como também ar mais limpo para a população.
Cartoon que diz: "A indústria automobilística está tendo um encontro sobre o futuro dos carros movidos a combustíveis fósseis..."
Cidades para as pessoas
No Brasil, ainda temos um longo caminho a percorrer. Em outro estudo que publicamos em 2017 com o Instituto Saúde e Sustentabilidade (ISS) e o Professor Paulo Saldiva, descobrimos que os ônibus movidos a diesel na cidade de São Paulo são responsáveis por mais de 4 mil mortes prematuras por ano, decorrentes da inalação da fuligem que esses veículos emitem.
É por isso que precisamos enterrar de uma vez por todas os veículos movidos a petróleo e diesel. A indústria automobilística tem um papel crucial na conquista de um planeta com baixa emissão de carbono. Nossas cidades precisam garantir que as pessoas possam escolher outras opções de locomoção para não serem dependentes de carros, como usar transporte público de qualidade, andar a pé ou de bicicleta. Só assim para termos qualidade de vida de verdade nos centros urbanos e garantir vida longa nesse planeta que chamamos de casa.
Leia o novo relatório completo aqui (disponível somente em inglês).
#CidadeQueFlui

Um pequeno alívio para os Corais da Amazônia

por Thaís Herrer

A bacia da foz do rio Amazonas, onde fica o recife, não entrou na lista de áreas a serem leiloadas para a exploração de petróleo em leilões futuros. Mas a ameaça aos Corais da Amazônia continua


Voluntários do Greenpeace seguram placas com imagem de uma plataforma de petróleo e da morte para protestar contra exploração de petróleo perto dos Corais da Amazônia.
Voluntários do Greenpeace em Florianópolis protestam contra a exploração de petróleo perto dos Corais da Amazônia. © Bruno Leão
Alívio. Foi a sensação que tivemos ao ler a notícia sobre dois futuros leilões de áreas onde empresas poderão no futuro perfurar para extrair petróleo. A bacia da foz do Rio Amazonas, onde fica o recife dos Corais da Amazônia, ficou de fora dos leilões da 17a e 18a rodadas, que acontecerão em 2020 e 2021. A notícia foi dada pelo Conselho Nacional de Política Energética (CNPE), que publicou uma resolução autorizando a Agência Nacional do Petróleo a realizar essas rodadas de licitações para exploração e produção de petróleo e gás natural.

Os blocos na bacia da foz do rio Amazonas faziam parte dos planos, mas foram deixados de lado dessa vez. Isso traz algum alívio porque é ali que estão os Corais da Amazônia, um ecossistema único no mundo e que já está ameaçado pela indústria do petróleo que pretende perfurar a região. Infelizmente, o alívio para por aí. Atualmente, o recife está sob a ameaça iminente da petrolífera francesa Total, que está em fase final de seu processo de licenciamento.
Em abril, fomos com nosso navio Esperanza pela segunda vez até o litoral do Amapá estudar o recife e os seres marinhos que habitam ali. Descobrimos que existe um banco de rodolitos (algas calcárias) dentro de um dos blocos que a Total que explorar. Isso já seria suficiente para invalidar o Estudo de Impacto Ambiental da empresa, que insiste nesse plano insano.

Também achamos uma formação recifal na Guiana Francesa, semelhante aos Corais da Amazônia. Isso ajuda a provar em breve que o ecossistema vai muito além do que imaginávamos.

Mais de 2 milhões de pessoas já assinaram uma petição e se tornaram defensoras dos Corais da Amazônia, para evitar que o petróleo ameace esse tesouro natural. Se você não assinou, ainda dá tempo.

ASSINE A PETIÇÃO

Queremos nossas praias sem plástico

por Thiago Gabriel

Segunda edição da #SemanaMaresLimpos começou neste sábado e já conta com várias ações. No ano passado, foram mais de 24 toneladas de resíduos coletadas nas praias brasileiras.

Voluntários em São Luís (MA) mostram a quantidade de lixo recolhida em um único dia de limpeza.
Voluntários em São Luís (MA) mostram a quantidade de lixo recolhida em um único dia de limpeza. © Cynthia Carvalho/Greenpeace São Luís
Sabe aquele feriadão que você junta a família, coloca as coisas no carro e parte pro litoral pegar uma praia? Sol forte, protetor no rosto, você vai se refrescar com um merecido mergulho no mar e, de repente… dá de cara com aquela garrafinha de plástico bem no seu nariz, o pé gruda na sacolinha de supermercado e você vê boiando aquela bituca de cigarro bem do seu lado. Pois tem gente que não fica só no incômodo e já está se mobilizando contra essa sujeira.
Esse é o objetivo da #SemanaMaresLimpos, uma campanha da ONU Meio Ambiente em parceria com o Instituto Ecosurf, para promover a conscientização e a limpeza das praias brasileiras. As ações começaram neste sábado, dia 15, e seguem até o próximo domingo (23). Você pode cadastrar seu grupo e contar com a ajuda dos organizadores para mobilizar e divulgar uma atividade de limpeza em qualquer cidade do país, basta acessar e preencher o formulário da campanha.
Todos os anos, são mais de 8 milhões de toneladas de lixo indo parar nas águas do planeta, segundo as estimativas globais. Dentre essa quantidade, algo em torno de 60% a 90% dos resíduos são diferentes tipos de plástico.
Estudos indicam que, se nosso ritmo de consumo não diminuir e o descarte dos resíduos não for feito de forma adequada, em 30 anos teremos mais plástico do que peixes nos oceanos. Então, além de assumir um consumo consciente e evitar que nosso problema aumente, precisamos cuidar do estrago que já foi feito, certo?
Na praia de Torres (RS), os voluntários fizeram a separação do lixo coletado durante a ação.
Na praia de Torres (RS), os voluntários fizeram a separação do lixo coletado durante a ação. © Cínthia Bordini / Greenpeace RS
Neste ano, os organizadores da campanha pretendem ultrapassar os números alcançados na primeira edição, em 2017, quando 136 grupos realizaram ações de limpeza em 18 estados, e coletaram mais de 24 toneladas de resíduos.
Além de promover a limpeza do litoral e garantir a preservação dos oceanos, a separação dos resíduos coletados permite identificar quais os materiais que mais poluem as águas e estabelecer um panorama do lixo no país para cobrar soluções efetivas de governos e empresas.
Segundo o relatório #SemanaMaresLimpos 2017, que foi lançado com a segunda edição da campanha, os itens mais recolhidos pelos voluntários foram: bitucas de cigarro, tampas de garrafa, canudos, garrafas plásticas e sacolas plásticas de supermercado.
A praia de Itapoá, em Santa Catarina, foi o local escolhido para dar o pontapé inicial nas atividades deste ano, que devem se espalhar por todo o litoral brasileiro. A data de início marca também o Dia Internacional de Limpeza de Praias, com mobilizações em mais de 150 países.

JUNTOS SOMOS MAIS FORTES

Os voluntários do Greenpeace ao redor do Brasil não poderiam ficar de fora e estão fazendo sua parte para despoluir as praias e conscientizar os banhistas sobre a necessidade do descarte correto de nosso lixo. Em São Luís (MA), Praia de Torres (RS), Praia do Tarumã (AM), Salvador (BA), Bertioga (SP) e várias outras localidades, de norte a sul do país, os grupos de voluntários locais se juntaram a outras organizações e coletivos parceiros para as ações de limpeza neste último sábado.
Para Denison Ferreira, do grupo de voluntários de São Luís (MA), essas ações fortalecem a articulação local e ajudam a multiplicar a conscientização ambiental. “Atividades como essa tem um significado extraordinário para o time local, conseguimos envolver e engajar mais pessoas e isto acaba nos inspirando para multiplicar essa corrente do bem. As pessoas se envolvem e se sentem empoderadas para fazer a mudança acontecer e nos dão esperança de dias melhores para este planeta!”
Denison Ferreira, do Grupo de Voluntários São Luís, em ação de limpeza das praias.
Denison Ferreira, do Grupo de Voluntários São Luís, em ação de limpeza das praias. © Cynthia Carvalho/Greenpeace São Luís
Além de somar forças com a mobilização da #SemanaMaresLimpos, os grupos de voluntários do Greenpeace realizam ações de limpeza das praias brasileiras ao longo do ano, em diferentes localidades. Em 2017, foram quase 7 toneladas de lixo recolhidas só com a força de vontade e articulação com grupos locais. Em 2018, já foram mais de 3,5 toneladas de lixo nos estados do Amazonas, São Paulo e Rio Grande do Sul.
“O Grupo de Voluntários do Greenpeace em São Luís já soma forças na limpeza das nossas orlas há dois anos e pretendemos continuar. Os resultados são os melhores, sempre conseguimos impactar e sensibilizar as pessoas que usam a praia de forma positiva.”, explica Denison.
Grupo de voluntários reunidos em São Luís.
Ação de limpeza das praias do Grupo de Voluntários São Luís (MA). © Cynthia Carvalho/Greenpeace São Luís
Voluntários reunidos após ação de limpeza na praia de Tarumã (AM).
Voluntários reunidos após ação de limpeza na praia de Tarumã (AM). © Kamila Craveira / Greenpeace Amazonas

E EU?

Agora, você deve estar pensando: mas e eu, que não posso participar dessas ações, o que posso fazer para mudar isso? Cada ação conta e, sem dúvida, o primeiro passo é assumir um consumo consciente:
  • Não utilizar mais materiais do que precisa;
  • Separar os resíduos e cobrar de nossos governantes políticas públicas de reciclagem;
  • Pressionar empresas para que abandonem embalagens desnecessárias;
  • Evitar comprar água mineral engarrafada. Leve com você sua própria garrafinha;
  • Desenvolver soluções criativas para substituir, por exemplo, os copos descartáveis.
Essas são ações simples que fazem uma grande diferença!
Ação de limpeza das praias do Grupo de Voluntários São Luís (MA).
Ação de limpeza das praias do Grupo de Voluntários São Luís (MA). © Cynthia Carvalho/Greenpeace São Luís
Voluntário recolhe lixo em ação de limpeza na praia de Tarumã (AM).
Voluntário recolhe lixo em ação de limpeza na praia de Tarumã (AM). © Kamila Craveira / Greenpeace Amazonas
Ação de limpeza das praias do Grupo de Voluntários São Luís (MA).
Ação de limpeza das praias do Grupo de Voluntários São Luís (MA). © Cynthia Carvalho/Greenpeace São Luís
Os mares e rios são responsáveis por metade do oxigênio que respiramos e por alimentar um terço da população mundial. Ou seja, a preservação dos oceanos é a preservação da vida no planeta. A grande maioria do plástico que jogamos no lixo vai direto para os oceanos e causa um enorme desequilíbrio no ecossistema marinho.
Desde peixes e outros animais que acabam comendo esses resíduos plásticos e morrem, até a poluição visível em nossas praias e a contaminação dos peixes que depois se tornam nossos alimentos, o plástico é o grande perigo para os oceanos do planeta.
Faça a diferença!

Wednesday, September 19, 2018

Forest destroying products and producers, time’s up!

by Kiki Taufik

A lot has happened since Greenpeace has been fighting forest destruction for palm oil.
Apple invented the iPhone. Shell went into – and pulled out of – the Arctic. Spain, Germany and France won the World Cup.
We had some campaign wins too. Back in 2010, the makers of KitKat, Ritz crackers, Doritos, Dove and Colgate toothpaste promised that they’d stop doing business with forest destroyers – and would only buy palm oil from responsible companies that protected rainforests.
Deforestation for Palm Oil by Bumitama in Indonesia © Kemal Jufri / Greenpeace 
Deforestation for palm oil in Central Kalimantan © Kemal Jufri / Greenpeace 
2010 was a really long time ago. So why are Indonesia’s rainforests still getting destroyed by palm oil companies?
Greenpeace has spent the better part of the last two years answering that question. Our investigation took us all over the world: conference centres in Bali, Paris and Washington DC; rainforests in Sumatra, Papua and Borneo; corporate HQs in London, Tokyo, Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta, Paris and cities all over the USA.
The answer is really simple. Despite promising not to buy palm oil from rainforest destroyers, the world’s biggest brands are, in fact, still buying palm oil from companies that destroy rainforests.
Greenpeace researchers investigated the 25 most notorious palm oil companies in Southeast Asia. Our report, Final Countdown, lays out what we found. It isn’t easy reading. Between them, these 25 dirty companies had destroyed over 130,000 hectares of rainforest since 2015 – an area almost twice the size of Singapore.
 © Irmawan / Greenpeace
One of several plantations in Indonesia that shows the extent of deforestation for palm oil plantations © Irmawan / Greenpeace
It isn’t even just forest destruction. We also documented worker exploitation, conflicts with communities, illegal deforestation, development without permits, plantation development in areas zoned for protection and forest fires linked to land clearance.
But it gets worse – because these are the companies big brands get their palm oil from.
In fact, brands were getting their palm oil from 24 of the 25 companies (the other one wasn’t producing palm oil yet). 12 brands – including the makers of Kit-Kat, Colgate toothpaste, Johnson’s Baby Lotion, Dove, Doritos, Kellogg’s Pop Tarts, Ritz crackers, M&M’s and Head & Shoulders – had at least 20 of these dirty growers in their supply chains.
The time is up for forest-destroying products and producers.
If big brands want our business, they need to earn it. If they promise something important – and protecting rainforests is super important – then they need to keep that promise. So starting today, we’re going to be calling out the biggest brands and demanding that they get with the programme.
That means only buying palm oil from companies that can prove they aren’t destroying rainforests – and cutting off Wilmar, the rogue trader selling them this dirty palm oil.
It’s up to us to make this happen. Are you in?
Kiki Taufik is head of Greenpeace’s global Indonesia forests campaign

Aves do Paraíso: conheça os pássaros ameaçados na Indonésia

por Alexander Navarro
 A indústria do óleo de palma está derrubando as florestas na Indonésia e destruindo a casa de algumas das espécies mais belas do planeta.
Mural pintado na Califórnia mostra a devastação das florestas na Indonésia
Esse mural em Long Beach, Califórnia, mostra como a destruição das florestas tropicais coloca em perigo não apenas as Aves do Paraíso, mas também as comunidades locais que dependem das florestas para sobreviver. © David McNew / Ricky Lee Gordon / Greenpeace
Por muito tempo, a história da biodiversidade na Indonésia foi marcada pela queima de florestas tropicais, desaparecimento de espécies e desrespeito às comunidades locais. As empresas de óleo de palma, extraído da mesma árvore usada na produção do nosso óleo de dendê, têm desempenhado um papel preocupante nesse processo. Essas empresas parecem ser guiadas apenas pela ganância, seja qual for o custo para a humanidade ou para a natureza.
Uma ave em um galho em mural bastante colorido em Taiwan.
Essa bela Ave do Paraíso em Taipei, Taiwan, é apenas uma das muitas espécies que estão sendo expulsas de suas casas pela destruição das florestas tropicais. © Hong-Chi Huang / Greenpeace
Muito pouco se sabe sobre a beleza das espetaculares Aves do Paraíso, que tem como seu lar as florestas da Papua, uma província indonésia. Até agora, cerca de 40 espécies diferentes desses pássaros foram encontradas, sendo consideradas por muitos como algumas das criaturas mais belas da Terra.
Depois de devastar as florestas de Bornéu e Sumatra, a indústria do óleo de palma chegou à fronteira final, Papua, a casa das Aves do Paraíso. Tanto os pássaros como a floresta estão ameaçados se permitirmos que essas empresas continuem agindo dessa forma.
É por isso que artistas de rua e voluntários de todo o mundo, da Austrália a Taiwan, da Áustria aos Estados Unidos, decidiram agir para chamar a atenção do mundo todo para o assunto.
Sua missão é simples: recriar em painéis de grafite enormes obras de arte mostrando a beleza desses pássaros: suas extravagantes cores e plumagens e até as curiosas danças de acasalamento dessas aves. As intervenções artísticas nos lembram da constante ameaça à vida selvagem na Indonésia, mas também nos inspiram a agir para protegê-la.
É hora de nos unirmos para garantir o futuro das florestas na Indonésia, participe desse grande movimento. Conheça e admire as obras de arte #WingsOfParadise através das redes sociais, compartilhe sua imagem favorita com amigos e converse com eles sobre a importância de proteger o futuro das florestas e do nosso planeta.

Confira mais obras do movimento #WingsOfParadise:

Anterior

Eleições 2018: presidenciáveis apresentam propostas contra o meio ambiente

por Greenpeace Brasil

O Greenpeace analisou os planos de governo que os candidatos à Presidência registraram no TSE, assim como suas declarações públicas. O resultado é preocupante para a área ambiental

O Brasil vive hoje um momento grandes retrocessos socioambientais. A política nacional se transformou em um jogo de vale-tudo, no qual os interesses pessoais têm sido colocados acima dos direitos humanos e da proteção do meio ambiente, do qual todos nós dependemos para viver.
O cenário das eleições 2018 mantém esse nosso alerta de retrocessos no nível máximo: dentre todas suas características incomuns deste processo eleitoral, está a defesa aberta de propostas antiambientais por parte dos candidatos à presidência, colocando em risco importantes conquistas da sociedade nas últimas décadas.
Fizemos uma avaliação dos planos de governo e das declarações públicas dos presidenciáveis em relação ao meio ambiente e o resultado é nitidamente preocupante. Entre as propostas, desfilam ideias que colocam em risco a proteção de nossos patrimônios naturais e podem resultar no aumento da destruição florestal e dos conflitos fundiários, além de colocar em risco até mesmo a saúde humana.
Destacamos abaixo os posicionamentos dos candidatos à Presidência que representam maior risco para a área ambiental.
No quesito retrocessos socioambientais, as propostas e posicionamentos do candidato Jair Bolsonaro (PSL) merecem destaque. Apoiado por boa parte da bancada ruralista, já se comprometeu com a extinção do Ministério do Meio Ambiente, declara que pode retirar o Brasil do acordo internacional do clima (Acordo de Paris) e afirma que irá enfraquecer órgãos de fiscalização a crimes ambientais, como o Ibama. O candidato também promete avançar sobre áreas protegidas e florestadas, principalmente terras indígenas e quilombolas, e ataca os direitos destes povos.
Bolsonaro também anuncia o enfraquecimento das regras de licenciamento ambiental, o que poderia acarretar no aumento na judicialização em obras, principalmente as de grande porte, afetando os investimentos no país. E, em um país onde a violência no campo e a impunidade imperam, o candidato promete liberar armas a proprietários rurais.
Já o candidato Geraldo Alckmin (PSDB), ao tentar rotular como “Lei do Remédio” o Pacote do Veneno, faz graça com a saúde pública e ignora totalmente os alertas feitos por órgãos como Fiocruz, Instituto Nacional do Câncer, Anvisa, Ministério Público, Ibama, SBPC e até a ONU. O projeto de lei dos agrotóxicos coloca em risco o meio ambiente e a saúde da população, uma vez que libera para registro produtos cancerígenos, que causam malformação fetal e mutações genéticas. Pelo texto, tais tóxicos também poderiam receber registros provisórios de uso antes que sua análise de periculosidade fosse totalmente concluída. Assim como Alckmin, Bolsonaro também é a favor do PL do Veneno. Assim como Bolsonaro, Alckmin também flerta com a ideia de armar produtores rurais.
Álvaro Dias (Podemos) também é entusiasta do projeto de agrotóxicos e acena positivamente com a possibilidade de liberação de armas no campo.
Na campanha de Ciro Gomes (PDT), quem se destaca é sua vice, Kátia Abreu. Em recente entrevista, ela disse que a lista suja do trabalho escravo é um “apedrejamento antecipado” e, portanto, não deveria ser divulgada. Vale lembrar que a lista reúne o nome daqueles que foram flagrados cometendo o crime de manter trabalhadores em situação análoga à escravidão.
É claro o crescimento, em todo o mundo, da preocupação com o meio ambiente. Empresas se esforçam para garantir que os produtos que oferecem ao consumidor não estejam manchados pela destruição da natureza ou desrespeito aos direitos de trabalhadores e populações tradicionais. Ao adotarem tais agendas, alguns candidatos prestam um desserviço econômico, ambiental e de imagem ao país. E podem causar prejuízos irreversíveis a todos nós.
Confira aqui os planos de governo dos candidatos.
Confira abaixo algumas declarações públicas dos presidenciáveis em relação à pauta ambiental:

Fontes das frases:
(1) https://www.agrolink.com.br/agromidias/video/bolsonaro-diz-que-liberacao-de-defensivos-agricolas-deve-ser-responsabilidade-do-mapa_18774.html
(2) https://www.correiobraziliense.com.br/app/noticia/politica/2018/09/04/interna_politica,703981/bolsonaro-pretende-unir-ministerios-diz-30-saude-vai-para-o-ralo.shtml
(3) https://g1.globo.com/ro/rondonia/eleicoes/2018/noticia/2018/08/31/bolsonaro-desembarca-em-porto-velho-para-cumprir-agenda-eleitoral.ghtml
(4) https://canalrural.uol.com.br/programas/bolsonaro-defende-posse-fuzil-para-produtores-rurais-70017/
(5) https://www.campograndenews.com.br/politica/em-dourados-bolsonaro-volta-a-atacar-demarcacao-de-terras-indigenas
(6) https://br18.com.br/wp-content/uploads/sites/683/2018/08/PLANO_DE_GOVERNO_JAIR_BOLSONARO_2018.pdf
(7) https://br.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idBRKCN1LJ1YT-OBRDN
(8) https://oglobo.globo.com/brasil/alckmin-elogia-projeto-que-flexibiliza-uso-de-agrotoxicos-lei-do-remedio-22953622
(9) https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/poder/2018/08/alckmin-acena-ao-agronegocio-com-promessas-de-defesa-de-propriedade-rural.shtml
(10) https://www.metropoles.com/brasil/brasil-voltara-36-anos-no-tempo-com-pl-do-veneno-diz-procurador
(11) https://politica.estadao.com.br/noticias/eleicoes,seguranca-vira-demanda-dos-ruralistas-na-eleicao,70002296695
(12) https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/poder/2018/09/lista-do-trabalho-escravo-e-apedrejamento-antecipado-diz-katia-abreu.shtml

Monday, September 17, 2018

Wings of Paradise: Drawing attention to rainforest destruction

by Alexander Navarro

Wings of Paradise mural, Tokyo, Japan
Japanese artist Tsukasa Suzuki paints a Birds of Paradise mural at the Ryozan Park Sugamo community space in central Tokyo. © Greenpeace
For too long the story of Indonesian forests has been painted with the darkness of burning rainforests, disappearing species and displaced communities.
Greedy palm oil companies, that only seem to be driven by the bottom line whatever the cost to humanity or biodiversity, have played a major role in this.
Little or nothing is known about the beauty of the spectacular Birds of Paradise that call the forests of Papua home. So far, around 40 different species of these birds have been found, and they’re considered by some to be among the most beautiful creatures on earth.
Street artist Ano paints a mural depicting birds of paradise close to Taipei 101, in the centre of the city. © Greenpeace
After ravaging the forests of Borneo and Sumatra, the palm oil industry has reached the final frontier, Papua, home to these Birds of Paradise. Both the birds and the forest could be lost if we allow these companies to continue.
That’s why street artists and volunteers from all over the world, from Melbourne to Taipei and Vienna to LA, are taking matters into their own hands.

Their mission is simple – to re-create the essence of the extravagant, brightly coloured plumage, crazy courtship dances and bizarre behaviours of these birds in our cities through huge artworks on walls. To remind us of the constant threat to Indonesian wildlife, but also inspire us to act to protect it.
© Greenpeace / Andrea Marcus. Wings of Paradise mural, Geelong, Australia.
A beautiful bird of paradise enjoys the colourful sunset in Australia. Street artist Bonsai painted this mural  in Geelong, Victoria. © Greenpeace / Andrea Marcus
It’s time for us to stand together for the future of Indonesian forests. Artists, students, bird enthusiasts or consumers buying palm oil products in supermarkets, we need to come together and act.
© Emeric Fohlen/ Greenpeace
Street artist Urbanimal Jean pastes up images of Birds of Paradise in Bondy, France, to highlight deforestation in the Indonesian province of West Papua. © Emeric Fohlen/ Greenpeace
Join this massive movement!
Admire and get lost in the #WingsOfParadise artworks in your home city or on social media, or share your favourite piece with friends and start your own conversation about protecting the future of the forests and our planet.

Saturday, September 15, 2018

Justice for Berta Cáceres, justice for people and the planet

by Miguel Ángel Soto

Indigenous Environmental Activist Berta Cáceres © Goldman Environmental Prize
Berta Cáceres next to the Gualcarque River, which she fought most of her life to defend from a destructive megadam project. © Goldman Environmental Prize
Every day, in every corner of the planet, those dedicated to defending human rights and the environment are met with criminalization, threats, surveillance, and outright violence on the part of governments and corporations. Their movements are labeled as “terrorism” and “mafias” and attacked with multi-million dollar lawsuits designed to swamp them with legal costs and prevent them from speaking out.
And yet these defenders persist in protecting air, water, land, and human rights, knowing that the cost could be their lives. Violence against environmental activists continues to increase with each passing year. According to Global Witness, at least 207 environmental defenders were killed in 2017 — up from 201 in 2016 and 154 in 2015 — but the real total is likely much higher due to the number of deaths that have gone unrecorded.
Berta Cáceres was one of those activists who lost her life defending the planet.
On 2 March, 2016, hired assassins invaded Berta’s home Tegucigalpa, Honduras, murdering her and gravely injuring Mexican environmental activist Gustavo Castro Soto. The murder came less than a year after Berta was awarded the Goldman Environmental Prize for her peaceful opposition to the Agua Zarca megadam. The dam project, backed by the Honduran government, would have destroyed fragile ecosystems around the Gualcarque River and violated the rights of the Lenca Indigenous community, of which Berta was a member.
Salvador Zuñiga Cáceres in Buenos Aires © Martin Katz / Greenpeace
Berta’s son Salvador Zuñiga Cáceres walks past a mural painted in memory of his mother outside the Honduran embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentina in 2016. © Martin Katz / Greenpeace
In 2017, an independent expert investigation revealed that the planning of Berta’s assassination extends back to 2015 and implicates top security officials at DESA, the company behind Agua Zarca. While those who carried out her murder are now set to stand trial, those who were behind the planned assassination from the beginning remain free.

The road to justice

This coming week in Tegucigalpa marks the beginning of the trial for the eight men accused of carrying out Berta’s murder, expected to run through 19 October. But it represents much more than that.
We can no longer live in a world that does nothing to protect those who protect our planet. Already, 66 more environmental defenders have been killed in 2018, and only a movement strong enough to stand up to the governments and corporate interests responsible can reverse that trend. This trial is a chance to show those governments and corporations around the world that they can no longer get away with persecuting environmental defenders. It’s a chance to end the corruption and impunity that has allowed too many of their killers to walk free, and to set us on a path to justice.
It is up to all of us to shine a light on Berta’s trial and make this the turning point for violence against environmental defenders we desperately need it to be. Share this post to demand justice for Berta, justice for people, and justice for the planet.
Miguel Ángel Soto is a senior campaigner for Greenpeace Spain. 

Here’s what happened at the 2018 International Whaling Commission Meeting

by Willie Mackenzie

The 67th meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC), the global body tasked with looking after the world’s whale populations, has just wrapped up in Florianopolis, Brazil.
Over the years we have become used to polarisation between countries in these meetings, and this meeting was no different. Greenpeace, along with other conservation and environmental groups were there as observers. Here’s what we saw:
The Florianopolis Declaration was agreed.
Supported by a clear majority of countries, the Florianopolis Declaration both enshrines the importance of whales in the global ecosystem, and the IWC as a conservation body. For decades Greenpeace has tirelessly campaigned for this to be the focus for the IWC. This year’s declaration is a welcome and necessary move forward in a world where threats to whales — like climate change, plastic pollution, seismic blasting and industrial fishing — are increasing year after year.
© Greenpeace / Pierre Gleizes
IWC conference 1981. Brighton, UK. © Greenpeace / Pierre Gleizes
Attempts to undermine the ban on commercial whaling were rejected.
The Government of Japan and its pro-whaling allies tried to get an agreement to undermine the existing ban on commercial whaling. Their ‘Way Forward’ proposal attempted to establish a working group to look at re-establishing commercial hunts. After a heated debate this was roundly rejected by a clear majority of countries. Commercial whaling, which has now been banned for over 30 years, is the one threat we can immediately control. It’s great to see this clearly consigned to history by the assembled global delegations.
© Greenpeace / Hiroto Kiryu
Greenpeace activists with large banner in front of the IWC (International Whaling Commission) convention centre during the 54th annual meeting. © Greenpeace / Hiroto Kiryu
No South Atlantic Whale Sanctuary, again.
Despite best efforts and high hopes from key supporter and host nation Brazil, there was again not enough support to create a South Atlantic Whale Sanctuary. Though it had clear majority support, it didn’t have the super-majority it needed.
Humpback Whale in the Indian Ocean. © Paul Hilton
A Humpback whale breaks the surface as it heads south to Antarctica for the summer. © Paul Hilton
The good news is that the role of the IWC as a conservation-focused organisation has been reaffirmed, and that’s what the world’s remaining whales need it to be. The conservation measures that exist — many thanks to this body — are still being challenged, however. That’s why it’s so important that we keep momentum in the right direction for our oceans and the fantastic and fragile life that depends on them.
You can be a part of the global work to create large, fully-protected ocean sanctuaries for marine life like whales to survive and thrive for generations to come. We need you now more than ever – whether in the iconic Antarctic or Arctic Oceans, in national waters, or on the global High Seas.


about the author

Willie Mackenzie is an Oceans Campaigner with Greenpeace International.

What a Global Ocean Treaty means—and why it matters to all of us

by Louisa Casson

We have paddled the first nautical miles of a long voyage. The first meeting at the United Nations’ headquarters about a treaty to protect all the oceans which lie beyond national borders is coming to an end. It’s been two weeks of political meetings, origami turtles, too many policy acronyms, but, at the heart of it all, the fate of our global oceans. Why? Because the future of almost half of our planet is at stake.
My friends have asked me why I eagerly volunteered to endure two weeks of windowless rooms and legal jargon at the United Nations. It’s because these discussions really matter. For the first time in history, governments have come together to decide on a plan by 2020 that can turn the tide and restore the health of our global oceans. These oceans beyond borders cover more space on our planet than all continents combined!
Humpback Whale in the Indian Ocean. © Paul Hilton
A Humpback whale breaks the surface as it heads south to Antarctica for the summer. © Paul Hilton
Right now, our oceans face growing threats from industrial fishing, pollution and climate change. Even though I feel so small when I look out at sea, collectively, humanity has had a huge impact on these blue expanses.
Public awareness of the threats to our oceans is surging and the calls for ocean protection have been mounting for years. Governments are finally heeding the call and, over the past two weeks, they have finally started to develop a plan to protect our shared oceans: A Global Ocean Treaty. This is a historic opportunity to safeguard the future of our oceans for generations to come. We have to get this right.
United Nations Ocean Message in New York. © Stephanie Keith
Greenpeace activists fly a giant turtle kite outside the United Nations headquarters in New York as countries gathered to begin negotiations towards a treaty covering all oceans outside of national borders. © Stephanie Keith
Skyhigh ambition
We kicked off these negotiations in true Greenpeace style: with activists, boats and a giant, flying, inflatable turtle! At sunrise on the day the negotiations started, activists sailed on the river directly in front of the UN building to fly a banner reading “Global Oceans Global Treaty!” next to a giant turtle kite (which is harder to handle than it looks!). The pictures of the action made headlines around the world, helping us to tell the story of why this matters so much. See the video of the action here.
By shining a spotlight on these talks and hand-delivering origami sea creatures directly to negotiators, with the message “The fate of our oceans is in your hands”, we wanted to make sure that governments know that the world is watching and that we expect results. Sea creatures don’t have a voice at these negotiations, so it’s our job to creatively bring them and the voices of millions of people who care deeply about our oceans to bear on these decisions about our shared oceans.
United Nations Ocean Message in New York. © Stephanie Keith
Greenpeace activists delivered origami representing marine animals to delegates in the United Nations headquarters during the beginning of negotiations for a Global Ocean Treaty. © Stephanie Keith
This first round of talks was a good start. We’ve seen governments from Africa, Pacific and Caribbean islands and Europe strongly supporting a Global Ocean Treaty with powers to create ocean sanctuaries on the high seas. You can track all the statements in detail in the Treaty Tracker. As South Africa and Argentina said: “we need a Treaty that bites when necessary. We need a Treaty that is a real tiger, not a paper tiger.” But now it will be crucial to see countries take the lead on ocean protection in practice.
Greenpeace activist delivers origami to UN delegate © Stephanie Keith
(From right) Delegate from Monaco and Greenpeace activist, Louisa Casson hold origami in the United Nations headquarters in New York. © Stephanie Keith
These calls for a strong treaty are exactly what we, and our oceans, need. While the usual suspects like the Russia, Norway and Iceland, disappointingly joined by Australia, New Zealand and the US, lagged far behind in terms of ambition, most governments are keen to move on to negotiate an actual draft text for the treaty. They know they need to move fast to agree all the details by the deadline of 2020. Our oceans, and billions of people depending on them, can’t wait.
The journey has just begun
The next two years are crucial to ensure the treaty is designed in such a way that it enables the global creation and management of ocean sanctuaries on the high seas. Greenpeace, alongside the millions of people who want to see our oceans protected, will do everything in our power to achieve this. As a campaigner, I know we won’t win the protections that our oceans desperately need if we’re only a small group inside the negotiations. Industry are already lobbying to keep the status quo, which has pushed our oceans to the brink of destruction. To overcome this, we need to keep up the pressure far beyond the UN – from capital cities to the most remote waters on our planet. Join us on this journey and together we can make history for marine life and this vast blue world on which we all depend.
Even while negotiations for the Global Ocean Treaty are at this early stage, next month we have a huge opportunity to create the biggest protected area on Earth: an Antarctic Ocean Sanctuary. A global movement of almost 2 million people are calling for this sanctuary to protect penguins, whales, and help us all tackle climate change. If we win, we will generate unstoppable momentum for an ambitious Global Ocean Treaty.
There’s never been a more critical or exciting time to be fighting for our oceans.
Join this wave: the future of the oceans is in our hands.
Louisa Casson is an Oceans Campaigner with Greenpeace UK and has attended the negotiations for a Global Ocean Treaty.

Hothouse Earth

by Rex Weyler
 n July of this year, during record-smashing heat waves and forest fires, a group of scientists published “Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene,” exploring the risk that climate feedbacks could lead to runaway heating and a “Hothouse Earth.” Will Steffen, Johan Rockström, and Katherine Richardson — from the Universities of Stockholm, Australia, and Copenhagen, with colleagues from Stanford, Cambridge, Potsdam, The Netherlands, and elsewhere — published the paper in the US Proceedings of the National Academy of Science.
Eiffel Tower Climate Banner © Greenpeace / Pierre Gleizes
Message on the Eiffel Tower as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assembles in Paris, 2007 © Greenpeace / Pierre Gleizes
Earth has not experienced such a hothouse state — characterized by the absence of continental glaciers and sea-level over 100-meters higher — since the Cretaceous period, 100-million years ago. At that time, atmospheric CO2 had reached 2000 parts-per-million (ppm) and average temperatures had reached 11°C warmer than the 20th century average. We’re now at about 410 ppm CO2, and 1°C warmer than the 20th century average. Meanwhile, in spite of good intentions, we have not slowed our carbon emissions.
The Hothouse Earth paper documents how “a psychology of denial” has biased IPCC climate reports, research summaries, policy decisions, and public discourse. As a result, the authors claim, we have failed to act responsibly, and have underestimated the extreme risks of that failure.
Breaking the wrong records
This is a La Niña year — normally the cool phase of the global temperature cycle — but 2018 has broken heat records around the world, the hottest La Niña year in history, on track to be the fourth hottest year ever recorded, following the last three: 2015, 2016, and 2017.
This July, meteorologists recorded 51.3°C (124.3°F) in Ouargla, Algeria, the highest temperature ever reliably recorded in Africa. Quriyat, Oman, recorded an overnight “low” of 42.6°C, the highest “low” temperature ever recorded in the world. Denver, Colorado, tied its all-time high-temperature 40.5°C, and in Quebec, Canada, a prolonged heat wave left 54 people dead. Heat records were set in Tbilisi, Georgia (40.5°C), Shannon, Ireland (32°C), and Motherwell, Scotland (33.2 °C).
“It’s not just the magnitude in any one location,” said Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University. “What’s unusual is the hemispheric scale of the heatwave.”
All-time record highs in Britain melted roofs and buckled train rails. During the World Cup in June and July, the heat grew so intense in Russia that the Football Federation granted hydration breaks to keep players from fainting. This summer, wildfires burned a record 1.3 million acres of British Columbia, Canada. In the Krasnoyarsk region of Russia, daily temperature anomalies reached 7°C above average. In Siberia wildfires accelerated the permafrost melt, causing record methane releases, which adds to global heating, an example of the climate feedbacks that concern the Hothouse Earth authors.
We’ll always have Paris
In 2015, many politicians and environmentalists praised the Paris Climate Accord, intended to hold Earth’s warming under 2°C with national “pledges” to reduce carbon emissions. However, the Hothouse Earth report notes that the Paris Accord “is almost devoid of substantive language,” is not binding, and that “national interests and lowest-common-denominator politics,” have undermined the promises.
“Few are willing to contemplate that we have set in motion an irreversible process that poses an existential threat to so-called civilization,” wrote William Rees, professor emeritus of human ecology at the University of British Columbia, to fellow researchers. “Even if implemented, the Paris Accord has us on course for a catastrophic 3°C warming — and — it is not being implemented!”
Since the Paris pledges are not being kept, we appear on course for 4°C or more. Kevin Anderson, professor at the University of Manchester and deputy director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research writes that “avoiding even a 4°C rise demands a radical reframing of both the climate change agenda and the economic characterisation of contemporary society.”
In 1979, the World Meteorological Organization, with full knowledge of the carbon dioxide risk, convened the first international climate conference in Geneva. At that time, annual carbon emissions of about 5 gigatonnes per year (GtC/yr) were increasing atmospheric CO2 content by about 0.5 ppm per year. Now 30 years later, after 29 international climate meetings, and with over 800 international climate laws on the books, carbon emissions have grown to over 10 GtC/yr, and — since carbon sinks have become saturated — we are now increasing atmospheric CO2 content by about 3.5 ppm per year, seven times faster.
Wild Fires in Amur Region, Russia © Maria Vasilieva / Greenpeace
Wild fires in Amur region, Russia. This year the area affected by fire, including all categories of land in the region, is 1.69 million hectares. © Maria Vasilieva / Greenpeace
In August, so disgusted with the pace of climate action by his own government, French Environment Minister Nicolas Hulot resigned. “I don’t want to lie any longer,” Hulot said. “I don’t want to maintain the illusion that my presence in government means that we are meeting these environmental challenges. France is doing more than a lot of other countries [but] it is not doing enough. Europe is not doing enough. The world is not doing enough.”
What is enough?
The Hothouse Earth study warns that with a heating of 3 or 4°C, Earth’s “self-reinforcing feedbacks” — wildfires, methane release, forest dieback, and so forth — can drive the temperature even higher, toward runaway heating, a “nonlinear process” that no amount of human intervention can control.
Kevin Anderson describes “an endemic bias” among those building emission scenarios, and warns that “the modelling community is actually self-censoring its research focus to conform to the dominant political and economic paradigm.”
Steffen and colleagues document a “scholarly reticence” at the research level, that avoids articulating the full risk of climate change. This reticence is magnified by politically-biased climate conference delegations, who understate climate risk in IPCC reports. This downplayed risk is then translated through “executive myopia” within government and business to produce “a policy failure of epic proportions.”
“We’re moving so slowly,” says financial analyst and former Royal Dutch Shell economist Jeremy Grantham, “that by the time we’ve fully decarbonized our economy, the world will have heated up by 2.5ºC to 3ºC, and a great deal of damage will have been done … capitalism and mainstream economics simply cannot deal with these problems.”
In spite of all our efforts — decades of environmental action, legislation, investment in renewable energy, electric cars, and those 29 climate conferences — total global carbon emissions continue to rise. Since the year 2000, solar and wind have added the equivalent of about 300 million tons of oil (MTOE) to annual energy consumption, a hopeful sign. However, during that same period, fossil fuel consumption increased ten times faster, by over 3000 MTOE, which explains why carbon emissions continue to rise.
In a series of papers from 2011 to 2015, T. J. Garrett, from the Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Utah, explains why: The growth of human economy “cannot be decoupled” from energy consumption. The data shows that for every 1US$ of economic growth, worldwide, human enterprise requires about 9.7 milliwatts (mW) of energy (± 0.3 mW). Contrary to visions about “decoupling” growth from energy, there is no evidence that this decoupling is occurring or could occur. Garrett and others point out that windmills and solar panels also require fossil fuels to build, that more energy stimulates the economy to grow, and that this growth is fed by even more fossil energy.
In the 1950s, anthropologist/ecologist Gregory Bateson and colleagues coined the term “Double Bind” to describe just such a dilemma: Contradictory demands that are inherently impossible to fulfill. According to Garrett, “seeking global prosperity alongside mitigated climate change” puts human enterprise in just such a “double-bind.”
To slow climate change we must actually reduce carbon emissions, and to achieve this, the Hothouse Earth authors claim, we have to address global “consumption patterns,” and make “rapid progress toward slowing or reversing population growth.” To escape the double bind, human enterprise has to contract, not grow. “The Business-as-Usual approach of industry and their hand-puppet governments,” says Dr. William Rees, “is a prime illustration of one of the few things on Earth that is unlimited: The human capacity for self-delusion.”
Young activists respond
“My generation, the millennials, will never know a time when climate change wasn’t a grave threat,” writes young meteorologist Eric Holthaus in Grist. In response, Holthaus believe the youth are “radically remaking climate activism.” In 2016 at the Canada-US border, for example, Emily Johnston closed the emergency shut-off valve on the Enbridge tar-sands pipeline. At her trial she claimed that her action was a “necessity” in response to a climate emergency.
Twenty-one US students have filed a class-action lawsuit against the U.S. government, the president, and federal agencies for violating their constitutional rights to due process and equal protection. By failing to act on climate change, the youth plaintiffs argued that the government had discriminated against youth as a class.
Demonstration against Industrial Exploitation of the Great Northern Forest in Finland © Jonne Sippola / Greenpeace
The Indigenous Sámi youth organisation Suoma Sámi Nuorat, Suohpanterror artivist collective and Greenpeace activists join in a demonstration against industrial exploitation of the Great Northern Forest in the Sámi territory in northern Finland early September 2018. © Jonne Sippola / Greenpeace
This fall, fifteen-year-old Swedish student Greta Thunberg refused to go to school and instead staged a climate protest at the Swedish parliament. “Facts don’t matter any more,” Thunberg said. “Politicians aren’t listening to the scientists, so why should I learn?” Her protest has attracted support throughout Sweden after a summer of record heat and wildfires.
In Spain this summer, a young activist wrote on a wall: “Ese incómodo momento en que hay que explicar a Galileo que el mundo no gira alrededor del Sol, sino del dinero.” (“That uncomfortable moment, in which one must explain to Galileo that the world does not rotate around the sun, but around the money.”)
“Gradual or incremental change, with a focus on economic efficiency is not adequate” write the Hothouse Earth authors. The necessary changes require a “fundamental reorientation of human values.”
==============
References and Links
“Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene” PNAS, Will Steffen, Johan Rockström, Katherine Richardson, et al., July , 2018
Canadian follow up to the Hothouse Earth report: The Conversation, August 22, 2018.
“Global and regional drivers of accelerating CO2 emissions,” Michael R. Raupach, Gregg Marland, Philippe Ciais, Corinne Le Quéré, Josep Canadell, Gernot Klepper, and Christopher Field; PNAS, 2007
J. Garrett on economic growth and carbon emissions: “Coupled evolution of economy and atmosphere,” Earth System Dynamics, 2012; “Are there basic physical constraints on future anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide?,” Climate Change, 2011. Springer and pdf; “Long-run evolution of the global economy,” Earth System Dynamics.
What Lies Beneath: The Scientific Understatement of Climate Risk, David Spratt and Ian Dunlop, Breakthrough, Melbourne, Australia, 2017.
“Carbon Dioxide Emission-Intensity in Climate Projections: Comparing the Observational Record to Socio-Economic Scenarios.” Felix Pretis, Max Roser, Oxford University Dept. of Economics.
“Heatwave sees record high temperatures around world this week,” Jonathan Watts, The Guardian, July, 2018
“2018 is on pace to be the 4th-hottest year on record,” Eric Levenson, Brandon Miller, CNN, July 28, 2018
All-time heat records have been set all over the world,” Jason Samenow, Independent, UK, 5 July 2018
Four hottest years on Record: 2015-18, CNN, based on difference from 20th century average
Fires: “Climate Change sets the world on Fire,” DW News, Aug. 2018
French Environment Minister Nicolas Hulot resigns over slow climate progress: Reuters, DW News, Aug. 27, 2018
“Why we’re losing the battle to keep global warming below 2C,” The Guardian.
Renewable energy growth vs. fossil fuel growth: “The power of Fossil Fuels” Rune Likvern, with data from British Petroleum Statistical Review of World Energy 2018, FractionalFlow.com; and Biophysical Economics Policy Centre; “Fossil fuel expansion crushes renewables,” Barry Saxifrage, with data from J. David Hughes, September 2017, National Observer.
“The Energy Sustainability Dilemma,” J. David Hughes, 2012, Global Sustainability Research Inc., lecture for Cornell University.
Jeremy Grantham: “Race for our Lives,” Morningstar video and file of graphics used: pdf.
“Scientists Warn the UN of Capitalism’s Imminent Demise,” Nafeez Ahmed, Aug 27 2018, Motherboard
“Report Outlines Climate Change Risks Faced by Insurance Sector,”
Insurance Journal, August 2018
Mayer Hillman on the climate reality no one else will dare mention, Patrick Barkham, The Guardian, April 26, 2018.
“Target atmospheric CO2: Where should humanity aim? J. Hansen, M. Sato, P. Kharecha, et. al. (NASA, Columbia Univ., Univ. Sheffield, Yale Univ., LSCE/IPSL, Boston Univ., Wesleyan Univ., UC Santa Cruz): Cornell University Library
Daily CO2 readings: CO2 Earth
Climate Sensitivity to doubling CO2 = 2.2 – 4.8°C: Nature; summary in The Guardian
The 1.5 Generation: radically remaking climate activism, Grist, Eric Holthaus, Aug. 22, 2018.
Youth sue federal US government over climate change liability, Grist, 2018.
Greta Thunberg: “The Swedish 15-year-old who’s cutting class to fight the climate crisis,” The Guardian, Sept. 1, 2018.


about the author

Rex Weyler was a director of the original Greenpeace Foundation, the editor of the organisation's first newsletter, and a co-founder of Greenpeace International in 1979. Rex's column reflects on the roots of activism, environmentalism, and Greenpeace's past, present, and future. The opinions here are his own.