Two Greenpeace activists who were occupying an oil rig have been removed from the structure and arrested, police said.

Campaigners from the environmental organisation had been occupying the structure since Sunday evening. They were calling on BP to stop drilling for oil and hoped to stop the drilling rig from reaching the Vorlich oil field.

Officers boarded the rig in the Cromarty Firth at around 2pm on Thursday and arrested two men, aged 40 and 50, ending a five-day protest.

Activists

Chief Superintendent George Macdonald, Highlands and Islands divisional commander, said: “The particular nature of this protest on an oil platform within a marine environment made this an extremely complex and challenging operation.”

Greenpeace said that on Thursday a police helicopter was seen landing on the rig’s helideck, dropping off a group of police officers in climbing gear. The organisation said that rig operators then started lowering the structure into the sea to bring the climbers closer to the water’s edge.

Greenpeace said that two police boats then approached the rig while police climbers approached the activists from above and removed a banner reading “climate emergency” from the gantry.

The activists were occupying a gantry on a leg of the 27,000-tonne rig below the main deck. The pair who first boarded the rig on Sunday were relieved by two more activists on Monday evening.

Safe

John Sauven, the Greenpeace UK’s executive director, said: “Our activists have blocked BP’s rig for four long days, braving the rain and the cold, to stop this oil giant from fuelling the climate emergency.

“They’ve now been arrested but there are many more ready to take action. Business as usual is not an option – we won’t give up until BP ditches fossil fuels and switches to renewables.”

Police said the two men who were arrested were taken to shore by boat, bringing the total number of people arrested in connection with the operation to nine. The force said that inquiries are ongoing.

The Transocean PBLJ rig was under contract to BP. A BP spokesman said: “BP is grateful for the support of Police Scotland, Transocean and all authorities who helped bring this incident to a safe conclusion.”

This Article

Lucinda Cameron is a reporter with Press Association Scotland

Tree planting efforts in England have failed to meet a government target, according to figures released a day after Theresa May, the prime minister announced a new commitment to tackle climate change.

In the past year 1,420 hectares of woodland was created across the country, falling short of the annual target of 5,000, provisional figures from the Forestry Commission suggest.

While the overall figures for the UK in the year to March 31 are up, that success is down to large increases in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the Woodland Trust said.

Human

Theresa May this week announced a legally binding target to end the UK’s contribution to climate change by 2050. The Government laid out legislation in Parliament on Wednesday to set a new target to cut emissions to “net zero” by the middle of the century.

The statutory instrument will amend the existing goal to cut climate pollution by 80 percent by 2050, which was agreed by MPs under the Climate Change Act in 2008.

Following the latest figures, Abi Bunker, from the Woodland Trust, said: “The UK needs renewed ambition when it comes to tree planting and woodland expansion.

“The scale of what needs to be achieved to reach net zero targets is obvious; it will necessitate a three-fold increase on current levels.

“Let’s not shy away from the truth. It will be a challenge, it will cost money, it will mean tough choices, but the human race is at a crossroads for our environmental future.

Amitious

“To avoid climate breakdown we have to act, that’s the reality we live in, tough choices, big challenge, but we can all rise to meet it head on.”

The percentage of woodland cover in the UK remains at 13 percent, with 10 percent in England, 15 percent in Wales, 19 percent in Scotland and 8% in Northern Ireland.

A spokeswoman for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said: “Our forest and woodlands are vital for providing timber, reducing flood risk and protecting our wildlife, which is why planting more trees is at the heart of our ambition to protect the environment for future generations.

“This is why we are introducing our new Environment Bill, which will include ambitious legislative measures to take direct action to address the biggest environmental priorities of our age.”

This Author

Aine Fox is a reporter with the Press Association.

Theresa May has made a move to grasp a meaningful legacy from the jaws of Brexit by seeking a legally binding commitment to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050, making Britain the first major economy to do so.

She has chosen the right cause. The climate crisis is upon us, and every day brings new stories from every corner of the world.

Entire villages in India are being abandoned, leaving only the sick and the elderly, as the country bakes in 50°C heat. Southern Africa is still reeling from cyclones Idai and Kenneth, that shook the lives of 2 million people. Farmers in the US look out at vast acreages of flooded fields, unable to plant for the season to come.

Climate justice?

May is right that the UK must lead. Britain has benefited from hundreds of years of high-carbon exploitation, and that has rocket-fuelled our economy, giving many of us comfortable lives, and making some astonishingly wealthy.

Nations in the global south have not reaped the benefits of such emissions-intense development, and yet are now suffering the impacts of the climate crisis first and worst.

Reaching zero carbon is vital, but we must not hide from the fact that the goal should be far closer to 2030 than 2050.

Theresa May is right too, to dismiss Philip Hammond’s tired, partisan and above all inaccurate claim that achieving this would harm the economy. There are jobs and money to be found in renewable energy that will far outweigh those in petro-chemicals.

And let’s not forget the benefits of clean air; of solar or wind-driven energy independence; of a clean, efficient public transport system; of greening our country and expanding the wild places that ultimately sustain us all.

Carbon credits

These would all deliver benefits far beyond the crude, short-term monetary equations applied by the UK’s Chancellor of the Exchequer. And critically, while these benefits may accrue to the citizens of the UK first, they will also benefit all on our planet in the long-term.

Over 10 million people are employed in the renewable energy sector today, and that will only grow if the government puts in place realistic policies to achieve these targets.

Being at the forefront of renewable technology would also put the UK in an enviable position globally, as other countries turn to British expertise as they strive to meet their own climate targets.   

Britain has benefitted from a carbon-heavy industrial revolution, but it wasn’t the only reason the country became a major economy. Colonialism enabled the UK to profit from resources that were never ours to take. Now once again we seek to export our problems.

May’s new development includes the option of using ‘international carbon credits’. In other words, the UK can pay for other countries to make carbon cuts on our behalf – we can continue to benefit from our addiction to carbon, while others pay the real cost.

Climate crisis

Carbon credits are not an answer to the climate crisis. The UK government’s own advisors, tell us they are ineffective when it comes to mitigation, and the same investment to balance carbon budgets within the UK would yield better, fairer results. 

The UK’s official Committee on Climate Change has made it abundantly clear it is “essential” that the commitment is achieved without use of international carbon credits.

The UK can and should lead the world, ramping up its efforts, proving to the world how determination and political will can deliver a new economy that benefits both people and planet.

Playing a leading part in preventing the climate crisis and the suffering of hundreds of millions of people will make us the architects of a sustainable world of which we can be truly proud – to pass on to our children and theirs.  

This Author

Steve Trent is executive director at the Environmental Justice Foundation. 

Image: EU2017EE, Flickr.

It should not come as a surprise that laws protecting elite profiteering come at the expense of laws that protect people and the planet.

But we never consented to allowing corporations to treat our lakes, rivers, farmlands and forests as resource colonies and dumping grounds for investor gains, nor to be governed by greed.

We certainly didn’t create and pay for the government and its agencies so they could legally permit poisons to enter our children’s bodies and destroy our future on this planet. Yet this is the system we live under.

Community rights

Some of us have had enough. We realize that we need to advance a movement to shift the bedrock priorities of the government.

We realize we must shift a culture that currently measures success in quantities of “stuff.” So we are taking back the law and using it to protect what is dear to us: our families, our homes, our communities.

We need laws that reflect the values and morals of the people, not just the elite. 

This is the Community Rights Movement. In Ohio, individuals and communities have proposed and passed dozens of local laws that embody the paradigm shift we envision, with the additional support of the Ohio Community Rights Network (OHCRN) and the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (Celdf). 

In Toledo, Ohio, 61 percent of voters passed the Lake Erie Bill of Rights (Lebor). It is the first law in the US that specifically acknowledges the rights of a distinct ecosystem, securing the Lake’s rights to exist, flourish, and naturally evolve.

Water health

Lebor reflects the values of the people who experienced suffering when they completely lost their water for three days in 2014 due to the Lake’s toxicity. It recognizes both Lake Erie and Toledoans’ right to be healthy. The people of Toledo understand their health is dependent on the health of Lake Erie.

Lebor also subordinates the “rights” of corporations to the rights of people and the Lake – a necessary and bold move given that our legislatures and courts have illegitimately granted “rights” to corporations through their lawmaking and judicial decisions. Under Lebor, life comes before corporate privileges and profits.

In response to Toledo’s adoption of Lebor, the Ohio House of Representatives passed their 2020-2021 budget bill and sneakily inserted language that would ban all existing and future Rights of Nature laws in the state. The Ohio Senate has since followed suit. A full chamber vote on the budget language could come this week, with a final budget due on Gov. Mike DeWine’s desk by June 30.

As Salon wrote: “Ohio [legislators have] at once both acknowledged rights of nature to exist, and taken them away.” 

Soon after the House vote, a judge granted the State of Ohio intervention in a lawsuit brought by an agribusiness farm against Lebor. However, Ohio is intervening on behalf of agribusiness rather than Toledoans, arguing to overturn Lebor. 

Direct harm

The state claims to be the ultimate and sole authority that can protect Lake Erie. But we’ve seen clearly that the state is not exercising its power on behalf of the people and the Lake.

Instead, we see the state using its authority to “regulate” how Lake Erie is used and exploited. They have allowed sewage and toxic dredge, fertilizers and pesticides, and oil and gas waste to be dumped into the Lake “legally.”

Lake Erie and the people have suffered direct harm due to “our” state government’s determination to act on behalf of corporate profiteers rather than people and nature.

Let’s think about that a moment. Toledoans realize no one is protecting them or Lake Erie. They realize their government is protecting profits over their children’s health.

So they protect themselves – through democratic action. They voted in Lebor. And then their purported government intervenes, insisting on its authority to “protect” the Lake and on the corporate “right” to pollute. 

Illegitimate profits

Specifically, in the lawsuit, the corporate farm and our state government collaboratively argue that the people’s efforts to protect the lake are illegitimate.

The people of Toledo now realize, in fact, that it is their government’s actions that are illegitimate. Attempting to strip the people’s authority is what’s illegitimate.

Protecting polluters’ claimed “right” to profit is illegitimate. Allowing people to drink toxic poisoned water is unconscionable – as is interfering with communities’ unalienable right to life and the pursuit of happiness.

In a press statement attacking the Lake Erie Bill of Rights, Ohio State Attorney General David Yost said: “Giving the Lake the right to sue is legal nonsense. Should the algae in turn have the right to answer Lake Erie’s lawsuit and counterclaim?”

Such simplistic logic finds it unfathomable that scientific conversations about the complexities of the natural world might take place within a courthouse.

Local democracy 

My response to the AG is: “Giving non-living corporate entities the right to sue is legal nonsense. Should the corporate form have the right to force pollution into communities trying to protect their air, soil, and water?”

It’s preposterous. Yet it happens daily. And when people tried to protect themselves, corporations were given standing in a US court to overturn the law while the people are barred from that same court.

We will not wait for individuals like Yost to wake up to the crisis we inhabit. Instead, we will take the government into our own hands.

The Ohio State Constitution reads: “All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter, reform, or abolish the same, whenever they may deem it necessary.”

Many Ohioans are engaging a concerted effort to exercise these rights to establish local democracy and Rights of Nature, and to inspire others across the continent to join with us. 

Legal rights

As our governments continue to break the laws that govern life, we have a responsibility to alter or abolish them in such a way that moves law away from a reverence for commerce, and toward a reverence for life-giving systems and the laws of nature.

When tornadoes, hurricanes and forest fires hit, it is clear which law is superior. We must make haste, and, as quickly as possible, reorient the priorities reflected in our laws by establishing legal rights for the ecosystems upon which we depend.

A study out of Australia just reported that in just 31 years, 90 percent of mankind may be “annihilated” by the effects of the global climate crisis.

First, we must change minds, which Toledoans have accomplished with worldwide recognition and support for their Rights of Nature law. Then we change the law. But will it happen soon enough to save Lake Erie, the people of Toledo and the majority of life on this planet?

This Author 

Tish O’Dell is the Ohio organizer for the Community Environmental legal Defense Fund. She can be reached here.

Climate change campaigners will block major London roads during rush hour, in an attempt to put pressure on the Government over air quality.

Extinction Rebellion Lewisham are planning to “swarm” roads in the south east of the city as commuters head to work on Friday.

The group have said that drivers heading towards central London on Friday morning will be disrupted on the A205 South Circular in Catford, on the A21 at Lewisham station, and on the A2 in Deptford, between 7.30am and 9am.

Crisis

They have said that traffic will be blocked for up to seven minutes at a time, as they protest against air pollution in the borough.

In November London Mayor Sadiq Khan called Lewisham’s air quality a “health crisis”. The death of a nine-year-old child who lived in the area is to be re-examined at an inquest, to determine whether it was linked to air pollution.

Ella Kissi-Debrah, who lived near the South Circular Road in Lewisham, died in 2013 after having an asthma attack. She had been having seizures for three years.

Lorna Greenwood, nine months pregnant and a mother of two, will be taking part in Friday’s action. She said: “Air pollution is an environmental and health crisis across the UK.

Trains

“The aim is not to make life harder for ordinary people, we’ve all got jobs too and we know how annoying this is. It’s about forcing our politicians to confront the truth that our children are literally dying to breathe.”

This is the latest in a series of actions by Extinction Rebellion, who brought parts of central London to a standstill in April.

Protesters in Parliament Square, Waterloo Bridge, Oxford Circus and Marble Arch led to road closures and traffic gridlock for ten days.

More than 1,000 people were arrested after campaigners glued themselves to DLR trains and parked a boat in the middle of Oxford Circus.

This Author

Caitlin Doherty is a reporter for the Press Association.

Climate change campaigners will block major London roads during rush hour, in an attempt to put pressure on the Government over air quality.

Extinction Rebellion Lewisham are planning to “swarm” roads in the south east of the city as commuters head to work on Friday.

The group have said that drivers heading towards central London on Friday morning will be disrupted on the A205 South Circular in Catford, on the A21 at Lewisham station, and on the A2 in Deptford, between 7.30am and 9am.

Crisis

They have said that traffic will be blocked for up to seven minutes at a time, as they protest against air pollution in the borough.

In November London Mayor Sadiq Khan called Lewisham’s air quality a “health crisis”. The death of a nine-year-old child who lived in the area is to be re-examined at an inquest, to determine whether it was linked to air pollution.

Ella Kissi-Debrah, who lived near the South Circular Road in Lewisham, died in 2013 after having an asthma attack. She had been having seizures for three years.

Lorna Greenwood, nine months pregnant and a mother of two, will be taking part in Friday’s action. She said: “Air pollution is an environmental and health crisis across the UK.

Trains

“The aim is not to make life harder for ordinary people, we’ve all got jobs too and we know how annoying this is. It’s about forcing our politicians to confront the truth that our children are literally dying to breathe.”

This is the latest in a series of actions by Extinction Rebellion, who brought parts of central London to a standstill in April.

Protesters in Parliament Square, Waterloo Bridge, Oxford Circus and Marble Arch led to road closures and traffic gridlock for ten days.

More than 1,000 people were arrested after campaigners glued themselves to DLR trains and parked a boat in the middle of Oxford Circus.

This Author

Caitlin Doherty is a reporter for the Press Association.

Climate change campaigners will block major London roads during rush hour, in an attempt to put pressure on the Government over air quality.

Extinction Rebellion Lewisham are planning to “swarm” roads in the south east of the city as commuters head to work on Friday.

The group have said that drivers heading towards central London on Friday morning will be disrupted on the A205 South Circular in Catford, on the A21 at Lewisham station, and on the A2 in Deptford, between 7.30am and 9am.

Crisis

They have said that traffic will be blocked for up to seven minutes at a time, as they protest against air pollution in the borough.

In November London Mayor Sadiq Khan called Lewisham’s air quality a “health crisis”. The death of a nine-year-old child who lived in the area is to be re-examined at an inquest, to determine whether it was linked to air pollution.

Ella Kissi-Debrah, who lived near the South Circular Road in Lewisham, died in 2013 after having an asthma attack. She had been having seizures for three years.

Lorna Greenwood, nine months pregnant and a mother of two, will be taking part in Friday’s action. She said: “Air pollution is an environmental and health crisis across the UK.

Trains

“The aim is not to make life harder for ordinary people, we’ve all got jobs too and we know how annoying this is. It’s about forcing our politicians to confront the truth that our children are literally dying to breathe.”

This is the latest in a series of actions by Extinction Rebellion, who brought parts of central London to a standstill in April.

Protesters in Parliament Square, Waterloo Bridge, Oxford Circus and Marble Arch led to road closures and traffic gridlock for ten days.

More than 1,000 people were arrested after campaigners glued themselves to DLR trains and parked a boat in the middle of Oxford Circus.

This Author

Caitlin Doherty is a reporter for the Press Association.

Ed Miliband has insisted the government must show leadership on climate change action and not just on setting targets.

The Labour former energy secretary welcomed moves by the UK to aim to cut emissions to “net zero” by 2050, with legislation to guarantee this target in law.

But he cautioned the government must back this up with the right policies, including bringing forward the date to phase out new petrol and diesel vehicles.

Targets

Speaking in the Commons, Mr Miliband also welcomed the five-year review mechanism before adding: “It may well be we need to bring forward the net zero date from 2050. That may well not be the original intention of the review mechanism but it may be necessary.

“Can I, however, ask the Secretary of State to recognise that in its advice the Climate Change Committee said very specifically that as well as setting the target itself, the government must put in place the policies to meet the target.

“That means, as they said, a 2030 cut-off date for new petrol and diesel vehicles – not 2040. A proper decarbonisation plan for our 27 million homes, which we don’t have.

“And an end to what I believe is now economically illiterate, which is a moratorium on onshore wind given it is now our cheapest fuel available. So can the secretary of state assure us that henceforth that there’ll be leadership not just on targets but also on action?”

Business Secretary Greg Clark, in his reply, said: “We are not credited simply with leadership in terms of legislation and targets but with achievements.

Progress

“We are, of the major industrialised countries, the world’s leader in decarbonising our economy at the same time as growing that economy, and that is something that I think we should be proud of.”

Lib Dem climate change spokeswoman Wera Hobhouse said: “The Liberal Democrats are setting out more ambitious targets to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2045, together with clear interim targets to make sure we don’t kick the can down the road.”

She added: “Today’s announcement is somewhat in contradiction with other Government policies on, for example, fracking, fossil fuel, and withdrawal from the European Union, which undermines international cooperation.”

Mr Clark said he was “disappointed” with Ms Hobhouse’s remarks, and said the timetable of reaching net zero by 2050 is correct for the UK. He said it is “always possible” to review this progress and said in five years’ time, there will be an assessment of the progress made so far.

Plaid Cymru MP Ben Lake (Ceredigion) asked Mr Clark whether the Government would review policies on fracking and fossil fuels to make sure they comply with the emissions targets.

Recommendation

Mr Clark replied: “The Climate Change Committee that advises not just the House, but the country on this, do recognise that there will be the need for a transition and gas and oil will be required in that.

“In that context, and recognising the jobs that are generated by them and the exports that are generated by them, it seems to me we should do that as efficiently and with the best deployment of technology as we possibly can.”

Former Green party leader Caroline Lucas said: “The committee recommended that the emission reduction effort needs to be done here at home, not outsourced to poorer countries.

“Carbon offsetting basically slows decarbonisation, it deprives poorer countries of the low-hanging fruit that they need in order to meet their own reduction targets. Will you review the decision to rely on dodgy loopholes and make sure that the domestic action is all done here at home?”

Mr Clark replied: “The Climate Change Act includes the use of credits, that was part of the legislation passed, and the Climate Change Committee have not recommended that we should repeal that part of the act, that is not their recommendation, just that we should not aim to make use of them.

“And we agree with their recommendation, we support it, we accept it, we agree with it precisely, so we won’t be making use of them.”

This Author

Richard Wheeler and Josh Thomas are members of the political staff of the Press Association.

The exiting European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker said the bloc should keep its policy to cut emissions to 40 percent of their 1990 level by 2030.

Junker said, speaking at a Politico Europe event: “To fix new goals again and again doesn’t make sense. Let’s focus on delivering what we already agreed.”

The EU has committed to review its climate plan by the end of 2020, like all Paris Agreement signatories. The 2030 target is the central pillar of the EU’s commitment.

Political priorities

UN chief Antonio Guterres has called on leaders to update their pledges a year ahead of time and bring them to a summit he has organised for 23 September.

EU climate commissioner Miguel Arias Cañete has said current policies have the bloc on track to beat its 2030 target, meaning the EU “would be in a position” to increase its Paris goal.

But Juncker said: “The objectives are clear: climate neutral in 2050, in the midway steps to be taken by 2030. It’s up to the member states to put these into reality.”

Climate change and Guterres’ summit are on the agenda for a European Council meeting next week – Juncker’s last as commission chief. It will be the last chance for leaders to discuss adopting new goals for 2030 and 2050 before Guterres’ meeting.

Juncker said the council would “take climate change inside the cortège of political priorities”.

Growing pressure

The commission’s official policy is to revise its 2050 goal, setting a new mark of net zero. Juncker backed this target, which has not been adopted by member states.

In May, an 8-country coalition comprising France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden, Denmark, Spain, Portugal and Luxembourg signed a paper calling on the EU to hike its ambition to carbon neutrality by 2050.

On Tuesday, the UK stepped ahead of all other major economies by committing to end its contribution to warming by the middle of the century.

Absent from the appeal were Germany, Poland and Italy. But Angela Merkel, whose Christian Democrat party is now under growing pressure from the Greens, has since asked her cabinet to explore how to go net zero by 2050 at a domestic level.

In November, Cañete described Europe’s targets as “clearly not sufficient to meet the long-term temperature goals of the Paris Agreement”.

Climate neutral

Cañete said: “This is why going climate neutral is necessary, possible and in Europe’s interest.”

Juncker and Cañete are in the final months of their term at the head of the EU’s executive body. A new commission will be confirmed in the autumn.

This Author

Natalie Sauer reports for Climate Home News. She has contributed to a variety of international outlets, including Politico Europe, AFP and The Ecologist. This story was first published on Climate Home. 

Image: European People’s Party, Flickr. 

The centre-right cabinet of the world’s third largest economy has approved a bill setting “a carbon-neutral society as the final goal, and seek[ing] to realise it at the earliest possible time in the latter half of this century”. 

The strategy builds upon a 2016 pledge to slash emissions by 80 percent by 2050 on the base of 2010 levels, and sets out to innovate in areas such as hydrogen and carbon dioxide capture and utilization.

It commits to commercializing carbon capture and utilization (CCU) technology by 2023, and carbon capture and storage (CCS) used in coal-fired power generation by 2030. It also aims to slash production costs of hydrogen to less than one-tenth by 2050.

Disruptive innovation

But the plan was criticised for not tackling the country’s coal dependency. The fuel powered 33 percent of the country’s electricity in 2015, according to data from the World Bank, while Japanese banks and development agencies are financing coal-fired power plants from Vietnam to Indonesia.

In Japan, 30 new coal-fired power plants are either at the stage of planning or construction.

Green groups said the legislation was unambitious. Yuri Okubo, a senior researcher at the Renewable Energy Institute, said that so-called “‘disruptive innovation’ [is] often used as an excuse to avoid the implementation of reduction measures by technologies that can be used immediately,”  

Okubo warned that Japan risked becoming a “CCS, CCU, and hydrogen society. If Japan still aims to [receive] a quarter of its power source from coal by 2030 and does not revise its low renewable energy target, Japan will not be seen as taking a serious stance on tackling climate change” .

This Author

Natalie Sauer reports for Climate Home News. She has contributed to a variety of international outlets, including Politico Europe, AFP and The Ecologist. This article was first published on Climate Home.