April, 30 2024, 01:59pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7413 5566,After hours: +44 7778 472 126,Email:,press@amnesty.org
Global: G7’s coal power phase out must come faster to protect people on the frontline of the climate crisis
Responding to an agreement reached by G7 member states today to phase out all unabated coal-fired electricity generation in the first half of the 2030s, Candy Ofime, Amnesty International’s Climate Justice Researcher, said:
“This is not the goal for coal we need and it will not deliver climate justice. Commitments put forward by G7 members – which have burnt coal for power for more than a century – to stop using this pollutant by 2035 are simply too late and weakened by unacceptable caveats.
“The end of coal power generation cannot come soon enough for those experiencing the worst effects of the climate crisis. Coal is one of the dirtiest energy sources and its burning has immense health impacts, particularly in lower income countries and among marginalized, often racialized, frontline communities globally.
The end of coal power generation cannot come soon enough for those experiencing the worst effects of the climate crisis. —Candy Ofime, Amnesty International’s Climate Justice Researcher
“Protection of human rights requires an urgent, full, fair and funded phase out of all fossil fuels. A just and equitable phase out means ending financing for coal production and coal energy everywhere. The rights of workers in the coal industry must be protected during this transition.
“There appears to be no curb in this deal on the use of coal for steel production, which accounts for about 30% of coal consumption, and the commitment to phase out just so-called ‘unabated’ coal is misleading. Abatement relies on the use of carbon capture and storage, and other technologies such as ammonia and hydrogen co-firing with coal, which are unproven at scale and can come with other risks. Coal pollution cannot be adequately abated, and harms health and the climate whenever it is used.
“This deal must not encourage an uptake of so-called natural gas, which is mostly methane, as an energy alternative. Its exploitation is increasingly associated with releases of this hugely potent greenhouse gas, which is a major contributor to global warming.
“As the world’s highest income countries, and among those most responsible for greenhouse gas emissions, G7 states have the greatest responsibility to help lower income states to move away from all fossil fuels.”
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
LATEST NEWS
Energy Experts, Frontline Advocates Call On Biden to Stop LNG Exports for Good
"You cannot say that tripling or quadrupling the level of exports from today's record highs is not going to result in significant financial harm," one expert said.
May 21, 2024
Gulf Coast community advocates on Tuesday called for U.S. President Joe Biden to permanently ban the export of liquefied natural gas.
In January, Biden's Department of Energy (DOE) announced a pause on approvals for new LNG exports to non-Free Trade Agreement countries so it could develop a new metric for whether these exports are in the public interest. The new metric should consider factors such as energy prices and the climate emergency, the administration said. The move was widely welcomed by climate and environmental justice groups, but it earned instant backlash from the fossil fuel industry and their allies in Congress.
In a Tuesday press briefing, frontline Louisiana fisherman and founder of the group Fishermen Involved in Sustaining our Heritage (F.I.S.H.) Travis Dardar, Louisiana Bucket Brigade director Anne Rolfes, and energy policy expert Tyson Slocum spoke about the harm that the LNG export boom has already done to Gulf ecosystems, livelihoods, and communities and why permitting more would be disastrous for the region, the country, and the climate.
"We've seen the destruction that just one of these plants has, so to be in the public interest to build all these other ones would be… a ridiculous notion," Dardar told reporters. "I mean, this is literally destroying people's lives."
'We're Living This Nightmare'
Dardar described how life changed in Cameron Parish, Louisiana, after Venture Global built its first Calcasieu Pass terminal, which began operations in early 2022.
"We went from sitting on the porch at night, and you could hear the beach, to the roar of the plant, to the point where they would shoot, literally vibrate pictures off the walls and the flares would make nighttime seem like daytime," he said.
People began to get sick from cancer and other mysterious illnesses. Dardar was threatened with truancy charges because his children had missed so many school days due to ailments that doctors have failed to diagnose.
"It's awful to watch these people who are from Louisiana act as lobbyists, even when they're congresspeople, act as lobbyists for a company that is actually destroying our culture."
Dardar also detailed impacts to the fishing industry. LNG barges create large waves that have sunk and destroyed fishing boats, dredging has polluted the water with sediment, and the catches of fish and shrimp have "decreased dramatically."
"Cameron used to be No. 1 for shrimping, and now they call it No. 1 LNG capital of the world. You know, that leaves a bitter taste in my mouth," Dardar said.
Dardar and other fishers in the region are now mobilizing to stop Venture Global from building a second planned terminal, Calcasieu Pass 2 (CP2).
He noted that politicians and others who support Venture Global's plants either live in other parts of the state or moved out of Cameron Parish.
"They know better than to live there, but yet they're willing to sacrifice the people in the industry for, you know, money, greed," Dardar said.
But the people left behind are not seeing any benefits.
"We're living this nightmare," he said.
Fishing Communities v. Industry Lobbyists
Rolfes of Louisiana Bucket Brigade said that one reason Venture Global had been able to get away with operating in such a destructive way was because the state of Louisiana has long been "controlled by the petrochemical industry."
This makes it all the more important, Rolfes said, that the DOE rule the LNG export boom is not in the public interest.
"This is why we need intervention at the federal level," she said.
She also criticized current and former Louisiana politicians who put the oil and gas industry over the well-being of their own constituents. She highlighted a letter sent by House Majority Leader Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) and Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chair Willie Phillips on April 16, in which they urged FERC to approve CP2.
In the letter, they recycled debunked industry talking points, such as the argument that gas is a "clean-burning" fuel and that exports will help U.S. allies "transition away from Russian gas."
In fact, new science has shown that methane leaks make fossil gas at least as much of a climate pollutant as coal and Europe is moving quickly away from gas all together and toward renewable energy sources.
"At the highest levels of Congress, they are acting on behalf of Venture Global," Rolfes said.
She also pointed to the example of former Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), who now works at law firm Van Ness Feldman and posted on Facebook Monday that the firm was "proud" to represent Venture Global, which she called an "outstanding company"
"This is who is in the debate regarding the public interest," Rolfes said. "On our side, it's fishermen, fishing families, and people who are worried about the prices of energy. And on their side, it's a damn Venture Global lobbyist."
Rolfes added, "It's awful to watch these people who are from Louisiana act as lobbyists, even when they're congresspeople, act as lobbyists for a company that is actually destroying our culture."
Failing the Test
Slocum, who directs Public Citizen's energy program and works as a professor at University of Maryland Honors College, said that restoring LNG exports wouldn't just work against the interests of frontline communities in the Gulf.
"The record volumes of methane gas that we're currently exporting have extraordinary impacts on domestic energy markets that have exposed working families and businesses across the United States to higher prices," Slocum said.
He also gave the history of why the DOE must consider the public interest before it approves shipping gas abroad: It dates to the Natural Gas Act of 1938, which placed this condition on future exports.
"It is inconceivable that it is in the public interest to force the poorest American families to bear higher and more volatile energy burdens."
"The Biden administration's decision to pause pending reviews was required by the law," Slocum said, "because the standards developed to assess the public interest that were conducted during the Trump administration were irrelevant and based upon extraordinarily poor data and methodologies."
As to what the DOE will eventually determine, Slocum said it has historically relied on an overall cost-benefit analysis. In this case, it would consider jobs created and money made from export operations on one hand and higher prices and impacts on local communities and industries on the other. Slocum said that the planned LNG expansion could not be considered in the public interest "by any metric."
"You cannot say that tripling or quadrupling the level of exports from today's record highs is not going to result in significant financial harm," he said.
At the same time, the Biden administration has also mandated that regulatory agencies need to complete a "distributional analysis," meaning they most consider how policies will impact people depending on their income levels. In the case of LNG exports, any increase in prices will necessarily hit low-income families and individuals harder.
"It is inconceivable that it is in the public interest to force the poorest American families to bear higher and more volatile energy burdens, to prioritize bigger profits for commodity traders, LNG exporters, and foreign markets," Slocum said.
He concluded, "Any honest assessment would have to conclude that additional LNG exports fail the public interest test."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Global Tribunal Issues 'Historic' Ruling for Oceans and Small Island Nations
"Protecting the global commons of the oceans and atmosphere is a matter of life and death," said one expert who praised the decision.
May 21, 2024
An international tribunal on Tuesday delivered a decision that green groups and leaders of small island nations celebrated as a "groundbreaking victory for ocean and climate protection."
The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) announced in an advisory opinion that greenhouse gas emissions are marine pollution under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and parties to the treaty "have the specific obligation to adopt laws and regulations to prevent, reduce, and control" them.
The advisory came in response to a December 2022 submission by the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law (COSIS), which includes Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas, Niue, Palau, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and Grenadines, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu.
"The tribunal's opinion is an historic legal victory for small island nations, demonstrating their global leadership on this crucial issue for the future of humankind," said Payam Akhavan, a COSIS legal representative to ITLOS. "It is a manifest injustice that they make negligible contributions to the problem, but suffer the worst effects of rising sea levels and extreme weather events that have brought some to the brink of extinction."
"As the guardian of the ocean treaty, ITLOS has taken the critical first step in recognizing that what small island nations have been fighting for at the COP negotiations for decades is already part of international law," he continued, referring to United Nations climate summits. "The major polluters must prevent catastrophic harm to small island nations, and if they fail to do so, they must compensate for the loss and damages."
"To those that would hide behind the weaknesses of international climate treaties, this opinion makes clear that compliance with the Paris agreement alone is not enough."
COSIS was initiated at COP26 by Tuvalu along with Antigua and Barbuda, whose prime minister, Gaston Browne, welcomed the ITLOS decision, stressing that "small island states are fighting for their survival" and "some will become inhabitable soon because of the failure to mitigate greenhouse emissions."
Eselealofa Apinelu, Tuvalu's high commissioner to Fiji, pointed out that the advisory opinion "spells out the legally binding obligations of all states to protect the marine environment; to protect against the existential threats posed by climate change."
Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) Climate & Energy Program director Nikki Reisch noted Tuesday that "to those that would hide behind the weaknesses of international climate treaties, this opinion makes clear that compliance with the Paris agreement alone is not enough."
"Pledges and promises at annual climate conferences do not satisfy states' legal duties to take all necessary measures to prevent, reduce, and control the greenhouse gas emissions polluting the marine environment, in line with climate science and the goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C," Reisch continued.
"We know that doing so requires rapidly phasing out all fossil fuels. States that fail to comply face legal responsibility," she added. "Protecting the global commons of the oceans and atmosphere is a matter of life and death—not just for entire marine ecosystems and the coastal and island communities most directly dependent on them and at greatest risk from climate change, but for all of humanity and the planet as a whole."
CIEL and Greenpeace International last year had formally urged ITLOS to reach the conclusion that the tribunal ultimately did.
Louise Fournier, legal counsel for climate justice and liability at Greenpeace, also cheered the outcome, saying Tuesday that "the ITLOS advisory opinion marks a significant step forward in international environmental law and the protection of our oceans."
"It sets a clear legal precedent for addressing climate change through existing international frameworks and reinforces states' responsibilities to act on climate change," Fournier said. "Oceans are the world's largest carbon sink. Our oceans provide us with food, livelihoods, culture, and half of the oxygen in the atmosphere; they are vital in the fight against the climate crisis, and in maintaining all life on the planet. ITLOS confirmed it unanimously: Climate change is an existential threat to human rights."
As Reutersreported:
But the road to concerted global action is far from smooth.
China, the world's biggest carbon polluter, had argued in court that the tribunal did not have general authority to issue advisory opinions, saying these could fragment international law. China's foreign ministry was not immediately available for comment.
Additional forthcoming legal opinions could further complicate matters, as the international community prepares for COP29.
"This is the first of three advisory opinions international tribunals have been asked to provide to clarify what legal obligations states have to combat climate change," Euronewsexplained. "Opinions are also expected from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the International Court of Justice."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Global Rights Groups Back ICC Warrants for Israeli and Hamas Leaders
"The fact that the court is not caving to Israeli or massive U.S. pressure and intends to continue its investigation cannot be praised highly enough," said one advocate.
May 21, 2024
Human rights defenders around the world on Tuesday welcomed the International Criminal Court's application for arrest warrants targeting Israeli and Hamas leaders for alleged crimes on and after October 7, with Amnesty International hailing the effort as "a crucial step toward justice."
ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan on Monday formally applied to a panel of judges on the 18-member Hague-based tribunal for permission to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged "crimes of causing extermination, causing starvation as a method of war, including the denial of humanitarian relief supplies, [and] deliberately targeting civilians in conflict."
Khan is also seeking warrants for the arrest of Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Ismail Haniyeh, and Mohammed Deif for alleged "extermination, murder, taking of hostages, rape, and sexual assault in detention."
Responding to the ICC request, Amnesty International secretary general Agnès Callamard said: "No one is above international law: no leaders of armed groups, no government officials—elected or not, no military officials. Regardless of the cause they are pursuing, no one is above the law."
"This move by the ICC prosecutor sends an important message to all parties to the conflict in Gaza and beyond that they will be held accountable for the devastation they have waged on the peoples of Gaza and Israel," Callamard added.
Balkees Jarrah, associate international justice director at Human Rights Watch, asserted that Khan's application "reaffirms the crucial role of the International Criminal Court."
"Victims of serious abuses in Israel and Palestine have faced a wall of impunity for decades," she continued. "This principled first step by the prosecutor opens the door to those responsible for the atrocities committed in recent months to answer for their actions at a fair trial."
"ICC member countries should stand ready to resolutely protect the ICC's independence as hostile pressure is likely to increase while the ICC judges consider Khan's request," Jarrah added.
The ICC has endured pressure from the United States—which gives Israel billions of dollars in military aid and diplomatic cover on the world stage—not to pursue charges against Israeli leaders. The Biden administration reportedly worked with the Israeli government to prevent arrest warrants, while some Republican U.S. senators have threatened to retaliate against ICC jurists. Under an existing U.S. law dubbed the Hague Invasion Act, the president may order action up to military intervention to free citizens of the United States or allied nations who are arrested and in ICC custody.
"The fact that the court is not caving to Israeli or massive U.S. pressure and intends to continue its investigation cannot be praised highly enough," said Andreas Schüller, director of the international crimes and accountability program at the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights.
"Just roughly one year ago, the court caused an uproar with its arrest warrant against [Russian President Vladimir] Putin for his responsibility for war crimes in Ukraine," Schüller noted. "By requesting arrest warrants against Israeli politicians and military officers, as well as leading representatives of Hamas, prosecutors in The Hague are making it clear that international criminal law is universal and that everyone who violates it must ultimately face accountability."
Israeli and Hamas leaders decried the ICC request, with Netanyahu calling it "absurd" and antisemitic and a Hamas spokesperson accusing the tribunal of equating "the victim with the executioner."
U.S. President Joe Biden condemned the court's "outrageous" move and reasserted that Israel's 228-day assault "is not genocide," even though it has killed, maimed, or left missing more than 126,000 Gazans, according to Palestinian and international officials.
"What is 'outrageous' is Israel's U.S.-enabled, decadeslong impunity for war crimes and crimes against humanity against Palestinians, which has emboldened it to carry out its wholesale assault against 2.2 million people in Gaza, while increasing attacks and landgrabs in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem," the Center for Constitutional Rights said Tuesday in a statement welcoming Khan's application.
The United Nations' International Court of Justice is currently weighing a case brought by South Africa and supported by more than 30 countries accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza. In March, the U.N. Human Rights Council published a draft report that found "reasonable grounds to believe" Israel is committing the crime of genocide.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular