Support Common Dreams Today
Journalism that is independent, non-profit, ad-free, and 100% reader-supported.
#
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Wade Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, issued the following statement after the U.S. Department of Justice announced that it would begin phasing out the use of private prisons:
"Today's announcement is a sign that the Department of Justice is taking the mass incarceration crisis seriously and is taking a more humane and budget-conscious approach to dealing with one of the country's most intractable problems.
Wade Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, issued the following statement after the U.S. Department of Justice announced that it would begin phasing out the use of private prisons:
"Today's announcement is a sign that the Department of Justice is taking the mass incarceration crisis seriously and is taking a more humane and budget-conscious approach to dealing with one of the country's most intractable problems.
Ending these arrangements is good for the country and good for the future prospects of the 23,000 people incarcerated under these contracts. People in private prisons are more likely to be assaulted, have less access to basic rehabilitative services, and leave worse off than when they arrived.
This is also a positive indication that the smart-on-crime approach to fair sentencing is slowly shrinking the largest prison population in human history.
The Department of Homeland Security should follow the example set today by reducing its own prison population so it too can discontinue the use of private prisons.
We applaud this important announcement and the leadership of Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates for advancing the vision that our justice system can work better for all people."
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights is a coalition charged by its diverse membership of more than 200 national organizations to promote and protect the civil and human rights of all persons in the United States. Through advocacy and outreach to targeted constituencies, The Leadership Conference works toward the goal of a more open and just society - an America as good as its ideals.
(202) 466-3311Keenan Anderson, a 31-year-old high school English teacher, suffered cardiac arrest after police repeatedly used a Taser on him following a traffic accident.
"I can't," Anderson says as he struggles to breathe. "They're trying to George Floyd me."
Seconds later, one of the officers uses the Taser on Anderson several times as he pleads for help.
Watch (warning: the video is disturbing):
\u201c\u201cThey are trying to George Floyd me\u201d\n\n- Keenan Anderson\n\nEnglish Teacher, friend, mentor and so much more tased to death by the LAPD in this encounter:\nhttps://t.co/EHgrFUx9dX\u201d— Isaac G. Bryan (@Isaac G. Bryan) 1673530181
Anderson, who was visiting Los Angeles on winter break, was a 10th grade English teacher at the Digital Pioneers Academy in Washington, D.C.
In a statement, the school said it is "deeply saddened" by Anderson's death and called the details of the police encounter "as disturbing as they are tragic."
"Keenan is the third person killed by the Los Angeles Police Department in 2023, and we're 12 days into the new year," the statement notes, referring to the police killings of 45-year-old Takar Smith and 35-year-old Oscar Sanchez earlier this month.
Last year, U.S. police killed at least 1,176 people, the highest number on record. A Reutersinvestigation published in 2017 showed that "more than 1,000 people in the U.S. have died after police stunned them with Tasers, and the stun gun was ruled to be a cause or contributing factor in 153 of those deaths."
"Keenan's family deserves justice," the Digital Pioneers Academy said in its statement. "And our students deserve to live, to live without fear, and to have the opportunity to reach their fullest potential."
Cullors, the Black Lives Matter co-founder, said in an interview with The Guardian that "my cousin was asking for help, and he didn't receive it. He was killed."
"Nobody deserves to die in fear, panicking and scared for their life," Cullors continued. "My cousin was scared for his life. He spent the last 10 years witnessing a movement challenging the killing of Black people. He knew what was at stake and he was trying to protect himself. Nobody was willing to protect him."
Summarizing the video footage released by the LAPD, The Guardian's Sam Levin reported that "an officer who first arrived to the car collision at around 3:30 pm at Venice and Lincoln boulevards found Anderson in the middle of the road, saying, 'Please help me.'"
"The officer told him to go on the sidewalk, and issued commands, saying, 'Get up against the wall,'" Levin noted. "Anderson held his hands up, responding, 'I didn’t mean to. I'm sorry.' Anderson complied with the officer's commands and sat down on the sidewalk. After a few minutes, he appeared to be concerned with the officer's behavior, saying, 'I want people to see me,' and 'You're putting a thing on me.' Eventually, Anderson started to flee, at which point the officer chased him on his motorcycle, shouting, 'Get down to the ground, now,' and 'Turn over on your stomach.' Anderson repeatedly responded, 'Please help me,' and 'They’re trying to kill me,' as multiple officers arrived and held him down."
In a statement issued Wednesday following the release of the video footage, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said she has "grave concerns about the deeply disturbing tapes."
"Full investigations are underway," said Bass. "I will ensure that the city's investigations will drive only toward truth and accountability. Furthermore, the officers involved must be placed on immediate leave."
"No matter what these investigations determine, however, the need for urgent change is clear," the mayor continued. "We must reduce the use of force overall, and I have absolutely no tolerance for excessive force."
"Our analysis shows that ExxonMobil's own data contradicted its public statements, which included exaggerating uncertainties, criticizing climate models, mythologizing global cooling, and feigning ignorance," said lead author Geoffrey Supran.
"This is the nail in the coffin of ExxonMobil's claims that it has been falsely accused of climate malfeasance."
That's what University of Miami associate professor Geoffrey Supran said about a peer-reviewed study on the fossil fuel giant's global warming projections published Thursday in the journal Science, which he began work on as a Harvard University research fellow.
"Our analysis shows that ExxonMobil's own data contradicted its public statements, which included exaggerating uncertainties, criticizing climate models, mythologizing global cooling, and feigning ignorance about when—or if—human-caused global warming would be measurable, all while staying silent on the threat of stranded fossil fuel assets," said Supran, the study's lead author.
\u201cNEW: In @ScienceMagazine today, our latest peer-reviewed research shows Exxon scientists predicted global warming with shocking skill & accuracy between 1977 & 2003, contradicting the company's decades of climate denial. THREAD.\n\n\ud83d\udcf0No pay wall for 2 weeks: https://t.co/JDtT9nkbzC\u201d— Geoffrey Supran (@Geoffrey Supran) 1673549975
Exxon—and the fossil fuel industry overall—has faced scrutiny from campaigners, journalists, lawmakers, and scientists for spending decades hugely profiting off of its planet-wrecking products while spreading climate misinformation.
The new study from Supran, Harvard professor Naomi Oreskes, and University of Potsdam professor Stefan Rahmstorf—who is also a researcher at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research—comes as policymakers worldwide continue to allow major corporations to cash in on fossil fuels, despite the increasingly devastating impacts of heating the planet.
Supran and Oreskes have previously published peer-reviewed research on the "discrepancy between what ExxonMobil's scientists and executives discussed about climate change privately and in academic circles, and what it presented to the general public," confirming the findings from 2015 reports by Inside Climate News and The Los Angeles Times.
\u201cThe first peer-reviewed analysis of an oil company\u2019s climate research, by @geoffreysupran, @NaomiOreskes, @rahmstorf, shows Exxon\u2019s climate research was spot on \u2014 and that management disregarded its own scientists\u2019 findings. #ExxonKnew https://t.co/IEaDkrIN6h\u201d— ExxonKnews (@ExxonKnews) 1673550970
For their latest study, the pair and Rahmstorf analyzed all known global warming projections documented and modeled by Exxon scientists between 1977 and 2003. The researchers found that 63-83% of the company's projections were accurate.
"ExxonMobil's average projected warming was 0.20° ± 0.04°C per decade, which is, within uncertainty, the same as that of independent academic and government projections published between 1970 and 2007," the publication states.
The study includes the following graphic, which shows Exxon scientists' projections from internal documents and peer-reviewed publications for the review period in gray along with historically observed temperature change in red.
The company's science was "actually astonishing" in its precision and accuracy—but so was its "hypocrisy because so much of the ExxonMobil disinformation for so many years... was the claim that climate models weren't reliable," Oreskes toldThe Associated Press.
In a statement to AP and other media outlets, Exxon spokesperson Todd Spitler said that "this issue has come up several times in recent years and, in each case, our answer is the same: Those who talk about how 'Exxon Knew' are wrong in their conclusions."
"Some have sought to misrepresent facts and ExxonMobil's position on climate science, and its support for effective policy solutions, by recasting well-intended, internal policy debates as an attempted company disinformation campaign," he said. "ExxonMobil's understanding of climate science has developed along with that of the broader scientific community."
Meanwhile, climate advocates and experts echoed the points made by the study's authors.
\u201cThank you @GeoffreySupran, @NaomiOreskes and @rahmstorf for today\u2019s groundbreaking study that so plainly lays out just how accurately Exxon scientists predicted the climate crisis: https://t.co/5kXRobB4JQ\u201d— Sunrise Movement \ud83c\udf05 (@Sunrise Movement \ud83c\udf05) 1673565929
"A fossil fuel company? Putting profits over people? We're shocked. This is shocking news," Earthjustice sardonically tweeted.
"In all seriousness, this is an outrage," the group added. "Exxon has had fairly accurate data on climate change for decades... and buried it. Instead, it has been fervently and publicly contradicting its own research to preserve its profit."
As The Guardianreported:Climate scientists said the new study highlighted an important chapter in the struggle to address the climate crisis. "It is very unfortunate that the company not only did not heed the implied risks from this information, but rather chose to endorse nonscientific ideas instead to delay action, likely in an effort to make more money," said Natalie Mahowald, a climate scientist at Cornell University.
Mahowald said the delays in action aided by Exxon had "profound implications" because earlier investments in wind and solar could have averted current and future climate disasters. "If we include impacts from air pollution and climate change, their actions likely impacted thousands to millions of people adversely," she added.
Drew Shindell, a climate scientist at Duke University, said the new study was a "detailed, robust analysis" and that Exxon's misleading public comments about the climate crisis were "especially brazen" given their scientists' involvement in work with outside researchers in assessing global heating. Shindell said it was hard to conclude that Exxon's scientists were any better at this than outside scientists, however.
"The harm caused by Exxon has been huge," University of Michigan professor Jonathan Overpeck told the AP. "They knew that fossil fuels, including oil and natural gas, would greatly alter the planet's climate in ways that would be costly in terms of lives, human suffering, and economic impacts. And yet, despite this understanding they choose to publicly downplay the problem of climate change and the dangers it poses to people and the planet."
Alyssa Johl, vice president of legal at the Center for Climate Integrity, said that "this quantitative assessment puts a fine point on the fact that Exxon knew with incredible precision that the burning of their fossil fuel products would result in temperature increases and severe climate harms in the 2000s and beyond."
"They pretty much nailed these predictions with incredible accuracy. That cannot be refuted at this point," Johl added, suggesting that the research could bolster climate liability lawsuits filed by dozens of U.S. states and municipalities against ExxonMobil and other fossil fuel companies for driving the global emergency.
"There are two very important pieces to the puzzle that need to be established and proven in these cases: the fact that oil and gas companies had longstanding knowledge of the causes and consequences of climate change, and that rather than disclose that information, they actively concealed and denied it," she said. "This analysis shows once again that Exxon knew."
As Fossil Free Media director Jamie Henn put it: "This is exactly like Big Tobacco companies knowing that cigarettes caused cancer but lying about it anyway. Exxon knew they were causing catastrophic damage and buried the truth. Time to make them pay."
"We're talking about new clean energy technology markets worth hundreds of billions of dollars as well as millions of new jobs," said the head of the International Energy Agency—if countries implement their climate pledges.
Clean energy manufacturing jobs will more than double by the end of the decade if countries worldwide live up to their climate and energy pledges, according to a report published Thursday by the International Energy Agency.
"The energy world is at the dawn of a new industrial age—the age of clean energy technology manufacturing—that is creating major new markets and millions of jobs but also raising new risks, prompting countries across the globe to devise industrial strategies to secure their place in the new global energy economy," the IEA report—entitledEnergy Technology Perspectives 2023—asserts.
The publication is a "comprehensive analysis of global manufacturing of clean energy technologies today—such as solar panels, wind turbines, EV batteries, electrolyzers for hydrogen, and heat pumps—and their supply chains around the world, as well as mapping out how they are likely to evolve as the clean energy transition advances in the years ahead."
\u201cThe @IEA's Energy Technology Perspectives 2023 is out!\n\nIt shows we're entering a new industrial age \u2013 the age of clean energy technology manufacturing\n\nThis will create new markets worth hundreds of billions of dollars & millions of jobs this decade \u2b07\ufe0f https://t.co/kb2bxOBkW5\u201d— Fatih Birol (@Fatih Birol) 1673499727
According to the paper:
The global market for key mass-manufactured clean energy technologies will be worth around $650 billion a year by 2030—more than three times today's level—if countries worldwide fully implement their announced energy and climate pledges. The related clean energy manufacturing jobs would more than double from six million today to nearly 14 million by 2030—and further rapid industrial and employment growth is expected in the following decades as transitions progress.
The report cautions that "at the same time, the current supply chains of clean energy technologies present risks in the form of high geographic concentrations of resource mining and processing as well as technology manufacturing."
For example, the three largest producers of technologies like solar panels, wind turbines, electric vehicle batteries, electrolyzers, and heat pumps "account for at least 70% of manufacturing capacity for each technology—with China dominant in all of them."
\u201cThe new global energy economy brings new opportunities, but also new risks\n\nMost steps of today\u2019s clean energy supply chains are geographically concentrated, especially for technology manufacturing\n\nThis underscores the need for diversification \ud83d\udc49 https://t.co/Z09U22Por7\u201d— International Energy Agency (@International Energy Agency) 1673559901
"Meanwhile, a great deal of the mining for critical minerals is concentrated in a small number of countries," the analysis states. "The Democratic Republic of Congo produces over 70% of the world's cobalt, and just three countries—Australia, Chile, and China—account for more than 90% of global lithium production."
IEA executive director Fatih Birol said in a statement that the new global energy economy "has become a central pillar of economic strategy and every country needs to identify how it can benefit from the opportunities and navigate the challenges."
"We're talking about new clean energy technology markets worth hundreds of billions of dollars as well as millions of new jobs," Birol continued. "The encouraging news is the global project pipeline for clean energy technology manufacturing is large and growing. If everything announced as of today gets built, the investment flowing into manufacturing clean energy technologies would provide two-thirds of what is needed in a pathway to net-zero emissions."
"The current momentum is moving us closer to meeting our international energy and climate goals—and there is almost certainly more to come," he added.
"The encouraging news is the global project pipeline for clean energy technology manufacturing is large and growing."
Birol also stressed that "the world would benefit from more diversified clean technology supply chains."
"As we have seen with Europe's reliance on Russian gas, when you depend too much on one company, one country, or one trade route—you risk paying a heavy price if there is disruption," he noted, referring to Russia's ongoing war against Ukraine.
An analysis of U.S. federal data published earlier this month by the sustainable energy development nonprofit SUN DAY Campaign concluded that wind and solar alone could generate more electricity in the United States than nuclear and coal in 2023.
A separate report released this week by the Rhodium Group, a New York-based nonpartisan research firm, found that while U.S. carbon emissions rose for the second straight year in 2022, renewable energy surpassed coal as a power source in the United States for the first time in more than 60 years.