December, 12 2018, 11:00pm EDT
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
Landmark Fossil Fuel "Divestment" Reached
1000+ institutions are withdrawing investments from coal, oil and gas companies
Katowice, Poland
As governments meet in Poland for another round of climate talks, a major milestone has been reached in the worldwide movement to divest from the fossil fuel companies driving the climate crisis, with the announcement that over 1000 institutions with managed investments worth almost USD$8 trillion (EUR7 trillion) have committed to divest.
The 1000th institution to divest was the Caisse des depots et consignations (CDC), which manages France's public sector pensions, savings, and investments worth EUR173 billion (USD$196 billion). It recently announced that from 2019 it will no longer invest in companies that make more than 10% of their business from coal - this implies that the top 200 companies in the coal-industry are now effectively blacklisted.
The latest commitments propelling the campaign to over 1000 institutions include:
AG2R la mondiale (USD$114 billion)
Australian Vision Super Fund (USD$9 billion)
Brandeis University (USD$997 million)
Launching a report detailing the history of the "divestment" movement and highlighting the 1000th divestment commitment at the UN Climate Summit in Katowice, May Boeve, Executive Director of 350.org said:
"When this movement started in 2012, we aimed to catalyse a truly global shift in public attitudes to the fossil fuel industry, and people's willingness to challenge the institutions that financially support it. While diplomats at the UN climate talks are having a hard time making progress, our movement has changed how society perceives the role of fossil fuel corporations and is actively keeping fossil fuels in the ground."
The report details that since 2012 the number of institutions commiting to fossil fuel divestment has increased rapidly, as has the total number of dollars of those who commited to sell their fossil fuel investments.
May Boeve, Executive Director of 350.org said:
"The reach and impact of this global movement is huge -- major institutions with almost USD$8 trillion in assets have commited to divest from the likes of Exxon and Shell. The momentum has been driven by a people-powered grassroots movement - it's ordinary people pushing their local institutions to take a stand against the fossil fuel industry - the industry most responsible for the current climate crisis."
Nico Haeringer, an organiser who supports divestment groups globally, at 350.org said:
"Getting our public institutions to go Fossil Free is something that we can all do. Whether it is our university, our municipal government, or our pension fund we can turn off the money tap to polluting industries and we can force them to make better choices like investing in local renewable energy. It's something that we see happening everywhere, with a momentum all of its own."
The report shows:
-The exponential rate of growth in the number of institutions and total funds divested from fossil fuels companies;
-The global breakdown of divestments including numerous commitments on every continent;
-The sectoral breakdown of divestment actions, which demonstrates the moral leadership of the faith sector on the issue of divestment;
-Politically significant commitments such as those of the sovereign wealth funds of Ireland, Norway and city divestments of Cape Town and New York.
The first fossil fuel divestment commitment made since the movement was launched was made by Unity College (Maine) in the United States in 2012.
On the momentum for divestment since 2013 - Nico Haeringe said:
"This is a moral movement as well as a financial one. Just five years ago we had 181 divestment commitments and USD$50 billion shifted away from polluting industries and today we're over 1000 and approaching USD$8 trillion dollars."
"Despite the enormous progress and the spike of divestment commitments, we need hundreds more to move their money out of dangerous fossil fuels. Massive pension funds like New York State, to moral authorities like the Vatican, to iconic institutions like the Nobel Foundation, to premiere universities like Harvard, Yale, Oxford, and Cambridge, and US based insurance giants AIG, and Berkshire Hathaway. The tide is turning and the time to divest is now."
On the theory of change of the movement - May Boeve of 350.org said:
"The fossil fuel industry is one of the most powerful political actors in the history of the world. The tentacles of this industry reach into the offices of the powerful, including at this UN Summit where they've been welcomed on the red carpet. The divestment movement gives every person the opportunity to join the dots and make clear that climate change is not 'just happening' - it's being actively fueled by corporations like Exxon and Shell and anyone who funds them."
"This movement started to send a clear message to the fossil fuel industry that we would not sit by while they profited by selling fuels that cause climate breakdown. It's not just about the bottom-line, it's also about their reputations in the public square. The scale of this movement shows that selling products that you know cause climate change is not acceptable, and nor is investing in them."
On trends and opportunities in investment decisions relating to fossil fuels Nico Haeringer, said:
"New people powered campaigns are starting almost daily to get local and prominent institutions to divest divest and also fund managers are increasingly making this decision of their own accord as it becomes clear that in 2018 an investment in fossil fuels is not ethical and is also risky financially."
"The next step in our campaigns will be to push this number past 2000 commitments and to actively call on these fund managers to invest in the just transition to 100% renewable energy for all."
"All financial analysis of changes in the sector show there are real limitations to simple shareholder engagement and we we are running out of time to change the course of these polluting behemoths. If extracting climate-change-causing fuels is the core business of a corporation then that's not likely to change. The divestment strategy is the most forceful and impactful approach we have to signal a global standard that we cannot invest in or build any new fossil fuel projects."
Speaking on a local divestment campaign Miriam Frank, Community Organizer of the Divestment campaign at Green Course, attended the press conference and said:
"Divesting the Hebrew University's investments from fossil fuels contributes to weakening the legitimacy of the fossil fuel industry, by calling them out for the harm they cause to our planet and the exploitation of people. Israel is not doing enough in the fight against the Climate Crisis, even though recent studies show that the Middle East is a high risk area and will be severely affected by the costs of climate change, that's why in Green Course we are taking matters into our own hands"
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
Amid Forced Starvation in Gaza, NGO Coalition Decries Israel's New Registration Rules
"Under international humanitarian law, occupying powers are obligated to facilitate impartial humanitarian assistance and ensure the welfare of the protected population."
May 06, 2025
A coalition of 55 international humanitarian groups operating in Palestine on Tuesday denounced Israel's new rules for registering foreign-based nongovernmental organizations, a move that came amid the Israeli government's forced starvation and "complete siege" of Palestinians deprived of lifesaving aid in the embattled Gaza Strip.
In March, a new law on the registration and visa issuance process for international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) took effect. Israeli and international critics condemned the new rules—which dozens of European lawmakers called "purposely vague" and "highly discretionary"—as aimed at barring INGOs from helping Palestinians, who are suffering from a genocidal invasion and siege in Gaza and decades of illegal occupation, apartheid, and colonization in the West Bank including East Jerusalem.
"Under the new provisions, INGOs already registered in Israel may face de-registration, while new applicants risk rejection based on arbitrary, politicized allegations, such as 'delegitimising Israel' or expressing support for accountability for Israeli violations of international law," the 55 groups said in an open letter.
"Other disqualifiers include public support for a boycott of Israel within the past seven years (by staff, a partner, board member, or founder) or failure to meet exhaustive reporting requirements," the letter states. "By framing humanitarian and human rights advocacy as a threat to the state, Israeli authorities can shut out organizations merely for speaking out about conditions they witness on the ground, forcing INGOs to choose between delivering aid and promoting respect for the protections owed to affected people."
"INGOs are further required to submit complete staff lists and other sensitive information about staff and their families to Israel when applying for registration," the signers noted. "In a context where humanitarian and healthcare workers are routinely subject to harassment, detention, and direct attacks, this raises serious protection concerns."
"These new rules are part of a broader, long-term crackdown on humanitarian and civic space, marked by heightened surveillance and attacks, and a series of actions that restrict humanitarian access, compromise staff safety, and undermine core principles of humanitarian action," the letter adds.
In addition to blocking or delaying aid shipments to Gaza under a siege and targeted starvation policy that United Nations experts have repeatedly called genocidal, Israeli forces have killed, wounded, kidnapped, tortured, and otherwise abused at least hundreds of aid workers; banned the U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees; falsely accused humanitarian workers of being terrorists; obliterated Gaza's healthcare infrastructure; and much more.
Israel has also suspended the visas of foreign humanitarian officials and suspended the work permits for Palestinians in the illegally occupied West Bank. Meanwhile, Israeli lawmakers are debating legislation that would impose a tax of up to 80% on foreign government funding to INGOs and bar them from seeking legal redress.
In the United States, the administration of President Donald Trump has eliminated or dramatically reduced humanitarian funding, including via the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). This has forced numerous aid agencies to cut back or halt operations in Palestine.
"Under international humanitarian law, occupying powers are obligated to facilitate impartial humanitarian assistance and ensure the welfare of the protected population," the 55 INGOs said in their letter. "Any attempt to condition humanitarian access on political alignment or penalize organizations for fulfilling their mandate risks breaching this framework."
"The International Court of Justice ordered Israel to allow unimpeded delivery of humanitarian aid to Gaza in three legally binding provisional measures orders in 2024," the letter adds. Israel has been accused of ignoring the orders by the ICJ, which is currently weighing a genocide case brought by South Africa against Israel.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant are also fugitives from the International Criminal Court, which last year issued arrest warrants for the pair for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in connection with the 19-month assault on Gaza that has left more than 185,000 Palestinians dead, injured, or missing and most of the coastal enclave's population forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened.
In a Tuesday interview with Al Jazeera, Bushra Khalidi, policy lead at the Jerusalem branch of Oxfam—one of the 55 groups that signed the letter—said that "Gaza is in the worst possible phase" since the beginning of Israel's onslaught, as mass starvation worsens amid a tightened blockade and pledges by Israeli leaders to conquer and ethnically cleanse the coastal enclave.
"We've not been able to operate, basically, since the second of March," she added. "Our food distribution has completely halted. We have nothing in the warehouses... Catastrophic doesn't even describe the situation in Gaza. It's hell."
Keep ReadingShow Less
House Dems Launch Effort to Thwart GOP Evisceration of Medicaid, SNAP
"Will any House Republican join us, or will they all support taking healthcare and food from millions of Americans?" asked Rep. Greg Casar, chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
May 06, 2025
A group of House Democrats launched an effort Tuesday to force a vote on a measure that would prevent Republicans from slashing Medicaid and federal nutrition assistance in their forthcoming reconciliation package, which is expected to include massive tax breaks for the wealthy.
Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said his discharge petition is "an opportunity for every member of Congress to show where they stand."
If the petition receives at least 218 signatures, the House would be required to vote on a bill that would prohibit cuts to Medicaid or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) in the filibuster-proof budget reconciliation process, which Republicans are using to advance President Donald Trump's legislative agenda.
"The Republican budget includes the largest cuts to Medicaid and SNAP in our nation's history—cuts that would jeopardize healthcare and food assistance for millions of Americans," Boyle added. "We intend to gather 218 signatures from both parties, and I sincerely hope my colleagues across the aisle will join us. If they truly believe in protecting these essential benefits, this is their chance to prove it."
The petition currently has seven signatures listed, and several other leading Democrats—including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus—have endorsed the petition.
"House Democrats oppose taking food and healthcare from working people to pay for tax cuts for billionaires," said Casar. "Now the question is: Will any House Republican join us, or will they all support taking healthcare and food from millions of Americans?"
"Republicans should join Democrats in signing this discharge petition to bring our bill to the House floor to ensure Medicaid will not be cut to pass tax breaks that help the rich get richer."
To succeed, Boyle's petition needs the support of every member of the House Democratic caucus and at least five Republicans.
Some GOP swing votes, such as Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, have expressed concerns about the $880 billion in Medicaid cuts that the party has voted to allow in the reconciliation package. Bacon has proposed a ceiling of $500 billion in spending reductions over a decade, which would still be the largest Medicaid cut in U.S. history and remove millions from the program.
Republican hardliners, meanwhile, are clamoring for "structural Medicaid reform," according to a letter that 20 far-right GOP lawmakers sent to their colleagues last week. The letter was led by Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), but Politicoreported that the letter's true author appears to be the president of a policy organization funded by the Koch network.
Medicaid cuts are broadly unpopular with the American public. According to one recent survey, 76% of U.S. voters oppose "major cuts" to the program.
Trump has publicly claimed to oppose Medicaid cuts, but one top House Republican said over the weekend that the president has expressed "openness" to imposing work requirements on enrollees—most of whom already work.
In the states where they've been tried, Medicaid work requirements have caused many to lose benefits without boosting employment.
"Republicans have repeatedly claimed they're not going to take away people's healthcare by cutting Medicaid," Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said in a statement Tuesday. "If they're telling the truth, Republicans should join Democrats in signing this discharge petition to bring our bill to the House floor to ensure Medicaid will not be cut to pass tax breaks that help the rich get richer."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Tariffs Seen as 'Baby Tax' as Costs Soar for Parenting Essentials
"His tariff policies are making it harder and more expensive to prepare for a new baby or raise kids, and his solution is to tell parents to buy fewer toys for their children," said the head of the Groundwork Collaborative.
May 06, 2025
The progressive think tank Groundwork Collaborative on Tuesday highlighted how U.S. President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs are effectively a "baby tax" paid by parents, given rising prices of everything "from car seats to sippy cups."
"President Trump's economic policies are an affront to young families," said Groundwork Collaborative executive director Lindsay Owens in a statement. "His tariff policies are making it harder and more expensive to prepare for a new baby or raise kids, and his solution is to tell parents to buy fewer toys for their children."
"While the president works overtime to give his billionaire donors a massive tax giveaway, he's placing a baby tax on every parent across the country," added Owens, referencing an effort to get a package containing more tax cuts for the rich—paid for by gutting the social safety net—through the GOP-controlled Congress.
"He's placing a baby tax on every parent across the country."
Citing the Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association (JPMA)—which has directly pressured Trump to "exclude all juvenile products" from tariffs on Chinese imports—The New York Timesreported Friday that "about 90% of durable baby and children's products sold in the United States are manufactured overseas, with the vast majority produced in China."
Noting that statistic, Groundwork focused on the costs of some essentials for babies and young children, including clothes, cribs, high chairs, sippy cups, and toys. For example, the group pointed out, the car seat and stroller companies Evenflo, Nuna, and UPPAbaby have recently announced price hikes.
"This represents a major challenge for parents, as car seats—which can run over $400—are required by law in all 50 states and should be bought new due to safety concerns," Groundwork said. "New parents spend, on average, $1,000 on baby safety gear."
As for strollers—or, as Trump put it, "the thing that you carry the babies around in"—UPPAbaby's Vista "just increased from $900 to $1,200," Groundwork continued. "Or, for a cheaper option, Bombi's flagship stroller now costs $225 instead of $199."
Some companies, including UPPAbaby, have made clear that the price increases are a direct result of Trump's evolving tariff policy.
"Due to rising import tariffs, updated pricing will go into effect on May 5th, 2025 across most UPPAbaby products," the company explained in a blog post last month. "If tariffs are reduced or lifted, we'll reassess pricing as quickly as business operations allow."
UPPAbaby is also among 13 U.S.-based companies that launched an advertising campaign calling tariffs a "baby tax," as The Washington Postreported last week. The ad declares that "becoming a parent is one of life's greatest joys, one our country should champion, not tax."
In addition to UPPAbaby chief executive Bob Monahan, the ad is signed by the CEOs of Babylist, Ergobaby, Frida, Guava Family, Hatch Baby, Lalo, Million Dollar Baby Co., Mockingbird, Munchkin, Nanit, Owlet, and Willow Innocations.
Groundwork highlighted Tuesday that "the CEO of popular baby accessory brand Munchkin, Steve Dunn, said the company will increase prices on about 90% of products, likely by at least 20%. Their cheapest high chair is currently $170."
Crib costs are also a concern. "Three-quarters of all baby furniture is made in China," Groundwork noted. "Get ready for some sleepless nights: the popular smart bassinet SNOO is manufactured in China and might soon cost more than its current $1,695 price tag."
Additionally, the clothing giant "Carter's has already raised prices on many items," which often come from Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, and Vietnam, and "Mattel CFO Anthony DiSilvestro has warned of possible price hikes as 40% of Mattel toys come from China," the think tank added.
Groundwork's statement was released as a bipartisan group called the Cost Coalition officially launched on Tuesday. Its goal, according toThe Associated Press, is "to highlight Trump's struggle to control rising costs."
"In 100 days, Donald Trump put the best-performing economy in the world on a crash course toward recession. Trump's tariffs—the biggest middle class tax hike in modern history—are making everyday prices skyrocket and wreaking havoc for businesses large and small," said Terry Holt, a former spokesperson for Republican leaders, and Andrew Bates, who was a Democratic spokesperson, in a joint statement to the AP.
"Next up are grossly inflationary tax cuts for the wealthy that will only saddle future generations with staggering debt," Holt and Bates continued. "Whether you're a Republican, Democrat, or anything else, Donald Trump's agenda is an economic crisis threatening your livelihood and standard of living."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular