January, 10 2018, 11:15am EDT
![350.org](https://assets.rbl.ms/32012661/origin.jpg)
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Lindsay Meiman,Senior U.S. Communications Specialist,lindsay@350.org,us-comms@350.org,+1 347 460 9082,New York, USA
New Yorkers Celebrate as NYC Mayor Announces Divestment From Fossil Fuels, Files Climate Lawsuit
#DivestNY victory reverbates around the world as New Yorkers vow to keep up the fight for bold climate action.
New York, NY
Today, following over five years of persistent campaigning from New Yorkers, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio announced the City is moving forward with full fossil fuel divestment. The city's five pension funds, a combined $191 billion, will divest $5 billion in securities from over 100 fossil fuel reserve owners.
New York's announcement brings the total number of global divestment commitments to 810 institutions representing more than $6 trillion in assets.
"New York City today becomes a capital of the fight against climate change on this planet. With its communities exceptionally vulnerable to a rising sea, the city is showing the spirit for which it's famous: it's not pretending that working with the fossil fuel companies will somehow save the day, but instead standing up to them, in the financial markets and in court," said Bill McKibben, co-founder of 350.org. "Ever since Sandy, New Yorkers understand the risk, especially for the poorest and most vulnerable. Now, thanks to Mayor de Blasio and his team, the city is fighting back, and in ways that will actually matter."
In addition to this multi-billion-dollar hard-won divestment, Mayor de Blasio announced the City is launching a lawsuit against five major oil companies, including ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP, Shell, and ConocoPhillips for climate damages. With New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman investigating ExxonMobil, and seven municipalities across California fighting similar damage lawsuits, this announcement adds significant momentum to the #ExxonKnew campaign to hold fossil fuel corporations accountable for the role in climate destruction.
"New York City is standing up for future generations by becoming the first major city to divest our pension funds from fossil fuels," said Mayor Bill de Blasio. "At the same time, we're bringing the fight against climate change straight to the fossil fuel companies that knew about its effects and intentionally misled the public to protect their profits. As climate change continues to worsen, it's up to the fossil fuel companies whose greed put us in this position to shoulder the cost of making New York safer and more resilient."
"Today is a momentous day in the fight against corporate greed exploiting our communities and fueling climate chaos," said Betamia Coronel, US Reinvestment Coordinator, 350.org. "While the oil-washed White House rolls back protections, New York City has leapt forward in modeling climate leadership. Divesting our city's pensions from the dirtiest companies is an enormous hard-won first step; holding companies like Exxon accountable for their role in climate deception is next. Today's announcement is a rallying signal to cities all over the world that the dawn of a fossil free world has arrived."
This New York City announcement is sending ripples around the world, reinvigorating divestment fights from California to Japan and beyond. The San Francisco pension board is scheduled for a long-awaited divestment vote on January 24.
On January 31, the day after the State of the Union, 350.org is launching Fossil Free US, with leaders including Senator Bernie Sanders, Bill McKibben, Varshini Prakash, and Rev. Lennox Yearwood speaking at a livestreamed event in Washington D.C. to lay out the plan for the climate resistance in 2018 and beyond.
QUOTE SHEET:
Naomi Klein, author and activist, said, "Emanating from the financial capital of the world, the message of today's historic announcement is unmistakable: investing in fossil fuel companies is a high-risk, bad bet. New York City is now leading cities and states to not only divest from fossil fuel companies but also insist that the corporations that profit from destabilizing our shared planet pay for the mess they knowingly created. As of today, the entire fossil fuel sector finds itself under a cloud of huge potential court-imposed costs, as well as the growing global momentum of investor flight. That means no matter how many oil and coal leases the Trump Administration hands out, the economics of new drilling will make less and less sense. This is very good news."
Jonathan Westin, Executive Director, New York Communities for Change (NYCC), said, "Climate change is especially destructive to communities of color in the U.S. and globally. It's time to defund corporations like ExxonMobil and all fossil fuel infrastructure and move rapidly to good jobs in a world powered by 100% renewable energy. The city's actions announced today are the big, bold action we need to save our collective future from climate destruction."
Michael Johnson, NYCC member & Sandy Survivor, said, "When Sandy came, I lost everything, so i am so proud that my City will stop financing climate destruction by divesting from oil and gas corporations like Exxon and begin a vital battle for justice in our court system," said Michael Johnson, a member of New York Communities for Change and Sandy survivor from Coney Island. "With Trump taking the federal government backwards, it's especially vital for cities and states to act; This is the type of bold action urgently needed to fight the accelerating climate crisis."
Denise Patel, Coordinator, Divest Invest Network, said, "From global financial capital to a center for climate action, New York City's leaders have created a watershed moment for the climate movement in a city devastated by Superstorm Sandy just five years ago. Today, under the leadership of Mayor De Blasio, Comptroller Stringer, and Public Advocate Letitia James through her unwavering support and leadership for divestment, New York City is taking aim at the heart of the fossil fuel industry and holding them accountable from the bow of resistance against the Trump Administration. We commend them for this bold move to protect all New Yorkers and the hard-earned pensions of the city's workers."
Lyna Hinkel, of 350NYC, said, "While the latest scientific studies confirm that rapid climate change is already upon us, the federal government is aggressively reversing the little progress we've made towards solving the crisis. It is enormously encouraging that on the local level Mayor de Blasio, Comptroller Stringer, and Public Advocate James are taking bold action and leading by example and that their leadership will not only safeguard the retirement income of NYC pensioners, but will opens the floodgates for other cities and states to get on board. Today is a good day for New York City and the rest of the planet.
Greg Young, Gloverville Supervisor and Elected Officials to Protect New York coordinator, said, "On behalf of 220 local officials from 50 counties, we applaud Mayor de Blasio and City Comptroller Stringer for aligning New York City's investments with its climate leadership by divesting from fossil fuels. Not only is this imperative for climate change, it's necessary to protect pensioners given that fossil fuels and climate change cost billions and threaten the stable future for retirees that pension funds are intended to provide. This sends a clear message that the era of fossil fuels is over, and now state and local governments across the country should follow New York City's example."
Tom Sanzillo, Former First Deputy State Comptroller and Current Director Finance of Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (ieefa.org), said, "The decision by the Mayor, Comptroller, union leaders and elected officials is a proper exercise of their financial responsibilities as trustees to the City pension systems. Oil and gas stocks were once world leaders. They are now laggards with weak revenues, weak markets for their products and a negative outlook. All three of the industries fail as investments. Industry leaders like ExxonMobil have also offered no turnaround plans to investors preferring instead to frustrate the efforts of independent outside reviewers like Attorney General Schneiderman. The legal actions contemplated by the City are overdue as management attempts to stop legally valid inquiries into corporate affairs is a serious matter worthy of shareholder action."
Christopher Ito, CEO, Fossil Free Indexes, said, "We are pleased that the City of New York is including The Carbon Underground 200(TM) in its divestment plans for NYCERS and TRS. The decision to address the risks and opportunities of a transition to clean energy reflects a growing trend among fiduciaries. FFI welcomes an opportunity to work with the city to implement a strategy that seeks to safeguard the benefits owed to plan participants."
Carroll Muffett, President, Center for International Environmental Law, said, "Today's announcements are a watershed in corporate accountability for climate change and a wakeup call to investors that the risks facing fossil fuel companies are real, material and rapidly growing. New York City joins a growing list of governments both within and beyond the United States determined to hold Exxon, Shell and other fossil fuel producers accountable for their role in the climate crisis. The announcements underscore the enormous financial risk facing Exxon and other fossil fuel companies in an era of energy transition and accelerating litigation. In light of these risks, the decision to divest New York City's public pensions from the world's biggest fossil fuel producers by 2022 is a victory for New York pensioners. It is also a clarion call to other pension fund fiduciaries that fossil fuel investments are growing ever more toxic, and that the time left to protect their assets and their beneficiaries is limited."
Fletcher Harper, GreenFaith, Executive Director, said, "It's wrong for investors to profit from an industry that has recklessly endangered people and the planet for its own gain, and it's patently unfair for the industry to shirk responsibility for the harm it has caused. New York City is on the side of the angels with its dual announcement today."
Dan Sherrell, Campaign Coordinator for NY Renews, said, "We commend Mayor de Blasio's bold announcement that his office will be suing top fossil fuel companies for the massive harm they've caused to New Yorkers' wellbeing and safety, including billions of dollars in damage to the city's infrastructure suffered during Superstorm Sandy - a storm made deadly by climate change. Now we must extend that accountability beyond a single lawsuit, by passing a corporate polluter fee in New York State, so that all fossil fuel companies are made to pay for the true cost of their emissions. In the process, we could generate billions of dollars in revenue every year, to invest in renewable energy development and job creation--a Green New Deal for the Empire State. As Mayor de Blasio takes bold steps to begin holding fossil fuel companies accountable for their role in creating the greatest ecological crisis of our generation, Governor Andrew Cuomo should be taking note. It will be his responsibility to ensure that this ethic of accountability is enshrined at the state level, in the form of a corporate polluter fee."
Rev. Lennox Yearwood Jr., President & CEO of Hip Hop Caucus, said, "Our communities are seeing the impacts of climate change more and more each day. Today, Mayor de Blasio took a necessary and imperative step to protect our communities now and planet for future generations by divesting from the fossil fuels causing climate change. Leaders at all levels of government around the country have the power and need to follow the example of New York City immediately. Superstorm Sandy, Hurricanes Harvey and Maria, massive wildfires -- the urgency to act for the future of a habitable planet has never been greater. The time for action is now and we applaud the Mayor's action today."
350 is building a future that's just, prosperous, equitable and safe from the effects of the climate crisis. We're an international movement of ordinary people working to end the age of fossil fuels and build a world of community-led renewable energy for all.
LATEST NEWS
Critics Warn Manchin-Barrasso Permitting Bill 'Is Taken Straight From Project 2025'
"You thought Project 2025 was just a threat after the election? It's actually happening *right now,*" said one climate campaigner.
Jul 26, 2024
Climate and environmental defenders on this week implored U.S. senators to block a permitting reform bill introduced this week by Sens. Joe Manchin and John Barrasso that one campaigner linked to Project 2025, a conservative coalition's agenda for a far-right overhaul of the federal government.
Common Dreamsreported Monday that Manchin (I-W.Va.) and Barrasso (R-Wyo.)—respectively the chair and ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee—introduced the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024.
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) noted that although the proposal "includes several positive reforms for the accelerated development of transmission projects," it also advocates "limiting opportunities for communities to challenge projects, loosening oversight for drilling and mining projects, extending drilling permits and fast-tracking [liquified natural gas] permits, and several other provisions friendly to fossil fuel giants."
"This dangerous bill doesn't deserve a floor vote."
These are nearly identical policies to what's proposed in Project 2025's Mandate for Leadership. The plan, which was spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, calls for "unleashing all of America's energy resources," including by ending federal restrictions on fossil fuel drilling on public lands; limiting investments in renewable energy; and rolling back environmental permitting restrictions for new oil, gas, and coal projects, including power plants.
While Manchin has been trying—and failing—to pass fossil fuel-friendly permitting reform legislation for years, Brett Hartl, director of public affairs at the Center for Biological Diversity, said that his "Frankenstein legislation is taken straight from Project 2025, and it's the biggest giveaway in decades to the fossil fuel industry."
Hartl said the bill "deprives communities of the power to defend themselves and gives that power to Big Oil by making it harder for communities to challenge polluting projects in court," and "prioritizes the profits of coal barons over public health."
"And it mandates oil and gas extraction in our oceans," he continued. "The insignificant crumbs thrown at renewable energy do nothing to address the climate emergency."
"Monday was the hottest day in recorded history," Hartl noted. "It's shocking that as the climate emergency continues to break records around us, the Senate continues to fast-track the fossil fuel expansion that is killing us. This dangerous bill doesn't deserve a floor vote."
Hartl added that "to preserve a livable planet," Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) "must squash this legislation now."
Manchin—who has said this will be his last term in office—has been a steadfast supporter of the fossil fuel industry, partly because his family owns a coal company. The senator says his permitting reform bill "will advance American energy once again to bring down prices, create domestic jobs, and allow us to continue in our role as a global energy leader."
However, Allie Rosenbluth, Oil Change International's U.S. manager, warned Thursday that "this bill is yet another dangerous attempt by Sen. Manchin to line the pockets of his fossil fuel donors, sacrificing communities and our climate along the way."
"Don't be fooled: The Energy Permitting Reform Act is another dirty deal to fast-track fossil fuels above all else," she continued. "It would unleash more drilling on federal lands and waters, unnecessarily rush the review of proposed oil and gas export projects, and lift the Biden administration's pause on new LNG exports."
"We urge Congress to reject this proposal and commit to action that protects frontline communities from the impacts of fossil fuel development and the climate crisis," Rosenbluth added.
"Don't be fooled: The Energy Permitting Reform Act is another dirty deal to fast-track fossil fuels above all else."
NRDC managing director of government affairs Alexandra Adams said Wednesday that "this bill is a giveaway for the oil and gas industry that will ramp up drilling and environmental destruction at a time when we need to be putting a hard stop to fossil fuels."
"We cannot afford to roll back so many of our bedrock environmental and community legal protections and offer a blank check to the oil and gas industry," she stressed. "We need new solutions for permitting if we are going to meet our clean energy potential and address the climate challenge. But this is not it."
"This bill would altogether be a leap backward on climate, health, and justice if passed into law," Adams added. "The Senate should reject it and look toward alternative solutions already being considered."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Nothing To Eat': War-Torn Sudan Faces Mass Famine as Military Delays Aid
Both parties in Sudan's civil war are to blame for a looming mass famine, experts say, and the military's blocking of U.N. aid at a border crossing with Chad exacerbates the problem.
Jul 26, 2024
Sudan's military is blocking United Nations aid trucks from entering at a key border crossing, causing severe disruptions in aid in a country that experts fear may be on the brink of one of the worst famines the world has seen in decades, The New York Timesreported Friday.
The border city of Adré in eastern Chad is the main international crossing into the Darfur region of Sudan, but the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), the state's official military, which is engaged in a civil war with a paramilitary group called the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), has refused to issue permits for U.N. trucks to enter there, as it's an RSF-controlled area.
U.S. and international officials have issued increasingly alarmed calls for steady aid access to help feed the millions of severely malnourished people in Darfur and other areas of Sudan.
Last week, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the United States ambassador to the U.N., said that the SAF's obstruction of the border was "completely unacceptable."
Both warring parties in Sudan continue to perpetrate brazen atrocities, including starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. This piece focuses on the SAF's ongoing obstruction of essential aid. The situation is catastrophic. The policy is criminal. https://t.co/FKhqQh3EI9.
— Tom Dannenbaum (@tomdannenbaum) July 26, 2024
The Sudanese who've made it out of the country and into Adré reported dire and unsafe conditions in their home country.
"We had nothing to eat," Bahja Muhakar, a Sudenese mother of three, told the Times after she crossed into Chad, following a harrowing six-day journey from Al-Fashir, a major city in Darfur. She said the family often had to live off of one shared pancake per day.
Another mother, Dahabaya Ibet, said that her 20-month-old boy had to bear witness to his grandfather being shot and killed in front of his eyes when the family home in Darfur was attacked by gunmen late last year.
Now the mothers and their families are refugees in Adré, where 200,000 Sudanese are living in an overcrowded, under-resourced transit camp.
In addition to those that have made it out of the country, there are 11 million people internally displaced within Sudan, most of whom have become displaced since the civil war began in April 2023.
An unnamed senior American official told the Times that the looming famine in Sudan could be as bad as the 2011 famine in Somalia or even the great Ethiopian famine of the 1980s.
In April, Reutersreported that people in Sudan were eating soil and leaves to survive, and The Washington Postcalled it a nation in "chaos," reporting that World Food Program trucks had been "blocked, hijacked, attacked, looted, and detained."
In late June, a coalition of U.N. agencies, aid groups, and governments warned that 755,000 people in Sudan faced famine in the coming months.
The U.S. last week announced $203 million in additional aid to Sudan—part of a $2.1 billion pledge that world leaders made in April, which some countries have not yet delivered on.
Some officials including Thomas-Greenfield, who has dubbed the situation in Sudan "the worst humanitarian crisis in the world," have called for the U.N. Security Council to allow aid delivery into the country even in the absence of SAF approval; it's believed that Russia would veto such a measure.
Sudan's civil war has seen a great deal of international interference. Amnesty International on Thursday published an investigatory briefing showing that weapons from Russia, China, Serbia, Turkey, Yemen, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) had been identified in the country. And The Guardian on Friday reported that the passports of Emirati citizens had been found among wreckage in Sudan, indicating the UAE may have troops or intelligence officers on the ground, though the UAE denied the accusation.
The International Service for Human Rights on Friday warned that both the SAF and RSF were engaged in wrongful killings and arrests, especially targeted at lawyers, doctors, and activists. The group called for an immediate cease-fire.
The SAF and Sudanese government figures have cast doubt on international experts' claims about famine in the country.
Keep ReadingShow Less
JD Vance Doubles Down on Attack on 'Childless Cat Ladies'
Vance "meant no disrespect to cats, but he did mean to demean women and still holds the view in 2024 that they should be punished for not having children."
Jul 26, 2024
After days of condemnation from critics including actress Jennifer Aniston and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, U.S. Sen. JD Vance was given the opportunity on Thursday to clarify his remarks from 2021 in which he said the Democratic Party was run by "childless cat ladies."
Instead, the Ohio Republican and running mate of former President Donald Trump assured SiriusXM host Megyn Kelly on "The Megyn Kelly Show" that while he has "nothing against cats," he meant what he said in terms of "the substance" of his argument.
Vance made it clear, said Aaron Fritschner, deputy chief of staff for Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), "that he meant no disrespect to cats, but he did mean to demean women and still holds the view in 2024 that they should be punished for not having children."
The comments in question were made by Vance to then-Fox News host Tucker Carlson when Vance was running for the Senate.
Calling out Buttigieg—who, the secretary disclosed this week, was struggling at the time to adopt a child with his husband—and Vice President Kamala Harris, a stepmother of two and the Democratic Party's presumptive presidential nominee, Vance said people without biological children "don't really have a direct stake in" the future of the country and therefore shouldn't hold higher office.
In separate remarks that same year, Vance said parents should "have more power" at the voting booth and that "if you don't have as much of an investment in the future of this country, maybe you shouldn't get nearly the same voice."
He also specifically categorized people who don't have children as "bad" in an interview in 2021, saying the government should "reward the things that we think are good" and "punish the things that we think are bad," with people taxed at a lower rate if they have children.
While a spokesperson for Vance told ABC News that the senator's taxation proposal was "basically no different" than the child tax credit supported by the Democratic Party, Democrats who have pushed for the credit have heralded its proven ability to slash child poverty rates and help families afford groceries, childcare, and other essentials, rather than viewing the tax savings as a way to reward people for procreating.
In his interview with Kelly on Thursday, Vance attempted to pivot away from his own comments, saying his point was to criticize "the Democratic Party for becoming anti-family and anti-child" and claiming without evidence that the Harris campaign had "come out against the child tax credit"—a signature policy of the Biden-Harris administration.
"I'm proud to stand for parents and I hope that parents out there recognize that I'm a guy who wants to fight for you," said Vance. "The Democrats, in the past five, 10 years, Megyn, they have become anti-family. It's built into their policy, it's built into the way they talk about parents and children. I don't think we should back down from it, I think we should be honest about the problem."
Vance and Kelly went on to lament the anxiety "hardcore environmentalists" and progressive lawmakers such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) have expressed about the damage fossil fuel extraction is doing the planet, accusing them of pushing people to forgo having families—but said nothing about Republican policies that have made child-rearing less accessible.
In recent years, the entire Republican caucus in Congress was joined by conservative then-Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia in blocking the extension of the enhanced child tax credit, which had been credited with cutting the national child poverty rate in half. Republicans also allowed a pandemic-era universal school meal program to expire, while several Democratic-led states have passed state-level programs to ensure all children can have meals at school, regardless of their family's income.
Under Republican abortion bans, numerous stories have cropped up of pregnant people who have been forced to carry pregnancies to term despite finding out that their fetuses had fatal abnormalities and would die soon after birth—as have stories of children who were forced to give birth or had to cross state lines in order to get abortion care.
As with his position that nonparents should be "punished" for not having children, "who else does 'pro-child/family' Vance think should 'face consequences and reality' by way of curtailing choices, rights, and freedoms?" asked writer Alheli Picazo. "Women and girls who become pregnant through rape/incest."
University of North Carolina law professor Carissa Byrne Hessick said that one could test "empirically" Vance's claim that Democratic policies are anti-family.
"But I haven't heard the GOP talk much about things that would help my family and my kids," she said, "like reducing childcare and tuition costs."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular