October, 30 2023, 08:08am EDT
Over 250 organizations back groundbreaking efforts by OECD countries to end $41 billion a year in fossil fuel finance
- Proposal could end USD 41 billion per year flowing from government-run Export Credit Agencies to fossil fuels, and free it up for clean energy instead
As Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) delegates prepare to meet in Paris from November 6-10, over 250 civil society organizations (CSOs) from 30 countries published an open letter calling on negotiators to support an end to OECD export finance for fossil fuels. Signatories include Amnesty International, Greenpeace International, and Friends of the Earth International.
The Financial Times (FT) has revealed that the UK and the EU will put forward proposals for doing so, with Canada planning to back the UK’s proposal. These efforts can end the USD 41 billion per year flowing to fossil fuel projects from government-run OECD export credit agencies (ECAs).
The OECD Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits sets rules that all OECD country ECAs must follow. OECD countries have previously placed extensive restrictions on the financing of coal, and civil society is now calling on restrictions to cover oil and gas too. Ending OECD oil and gas support is critical to limit global heating to 1.5°C. The International Energy Agency (IEA) has established that no new coal, oil, fossil gas supply or LNG infrastructure investments are compatible with a 1.5°C warming limit.
The proposal is expected to attract significant support, since over 50% of OECD countries already signed on to the Clean Energy Transition Partnership (CETP), an international commitment forged in Glasgow in 2021 under which signatories promised to end their international public finance for fossil fuels by the end of 2022 and support efforts to advance this agenda elsewhere, “in particular at the OECD.”
The civil society letter, addressed to CETP signatory country negotiators in the OECD, calls on them to live up to their commitment and support the UK’s and the EU’s efforts to end public finance for fossil fuels. Canada is already planning to do so. According to the Financial Times, Canada’s finance department stated it “looked forward to working alongside like-minded partners at the OECD and in other international forums to grow and promote the clean economy around the world”.
Oil Change International research shows that OECD ECAs provided an average of $41 billion per year in export support to fossil fuels between 2018 and 2020, almost five times more than their clean energy export finance ($8.5 billion). This directly contradicts international climate goals, including the CETP and the Paris Agreement objective to align financial flows with the low-carbon energy transition. OECD ECAs are particularly responsible for advancing large fossil fuel infrastructure projects that enable the rest of the industry, for example investing in 56 percent of new hazardous liquified gas (LNG) export terminal capacity built in the last decade (providing at least $81 billion total).
The initial OECD proposal is expected to kick-off a period of negotiations on oil and gas export finance restrictions at the OECD starting on 6 November. These negotiations will succeed only if and when a large enough number of OECD members support the proposed restrictions. By doing so, OECD members have a historic opportunity to not only avoid breaching climate goals, but also stranded fossil fuel assets.
Nina Pusic, Strategist at Oil Change International, said: “This is the moment where OECD countries can turn their words into action. Will they live up to the pledge most of them made in Glasgow in 2021 to end international public finance for fossil fuels at the OECD? All eyes are on them, the world is watching. Immediate action is necessary to align global financial flows with a habitable climate future, and this November represents a critical opportunity that we can’t afford to miss.”
Kate DeAngelis, Senior International Finance Program Manager at Friends of the Earth United States, said: “We have waited long enough for the United States, and other wealthy historical emitters, to be a force for good at the OECD. The U.S. must turn away from its multi-billion dollar fossil financing and support the UK and Canada proposal, leading the push to finally end export credit agency support for fossil fuels.”
Yuki Tanabe, Program Director at Japan Center for a Sustainable Environment and Society (JACSES), said: “Japan should not be a blocker at the OECD negotiations and should agree to end its public finance for fossil fuel projects. Ammonia and hydrogen co-firing should not be exempted as ‘abatement’ technologies, since the current co-firing development roadmap is not in line with the Paris goals”
Samuel Okulony, Chief Executive Officer at Environment Governance Institute Uganda (EGI), said: “The impacts of climate change in Africa are a matter of life and death, and Japan, Korea and other OECD countries should listen to the lived realities of global south communities, who have been devastated by the impacts of climate change for decades. It is imperative that these countries make resolute commitments, support a resolution to stop public financing for fossil fuels at the OECD, and demand the global community align itself with the commitments to keep the 1.5°C target alive.”
Oil Change International is a research, communications, and advocacy organization focused on exposing the true costs of fossil fuels and facilitating the ongoing transition to clean energy.
(202) 518-9029LATEST NEWS
Sanders Votes No on Giving Israel Aid to Continue 'Inhumane War' on Gaza
"I do not believe that we should give the right-wing extremist Netanyahu government an additional $10.1 billion with no strings attached."
Dec 07, 2023
Sen. Bernie Sanders was the lone member of the Senate Democratic caucus to oppose advancing a $110.5 billion supplemental foreign aid measure on Wednesday, expressing opposition to the bill's unconditional military assistance for the Israeli government.
"I voted NO on the foreign aid supplemental bill today for one reason," said Sanders (I-Vt.). "I do not believe that we should give the right-wing extremist Netanyahu government an additional $10.1 billion with no strings attached to continue their inhumane war against the Palestinian people."
"Israel has the absolute right to defend itself against the Hamas terrorists who attacked them on October 7," Sanders added. "They do not have the legal or moral right to kill thousands of innocent Palestinian men, women, and children."
The aid package, which also includes billions in military assistance for Ukraine, failed to clear a procedural hurdle Wednesday, with every Republican voting no over the absence of immigration policy changes that progressives have condemned as draconian. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) flipped his initial yes vote to no in a maneuver that will allow him to bring the bill forward again at a later date.
According to a summary released by the Senate Appropriations Committee, the supplemental package contains over $10 billion in military aid for Israel, which already receives roughly $4 billion in assistance from the U.S. per year and has gotten tens of thousands of bombs, artillery shells, and other weaponry since the Hamas-led October 7 attack.
The measure is largely in line with a request issued in October by the Biden White House, which has sought to expedite U.S. arms shipments to Israel even as the nation's military is using American-made weaponry to commit heinous war crimes in the Gaza Strip.
One human rights monitor estimated earlier this week that at least 90% of the people killed by Israeli forces in Gaza since October 7 have been civilians.
Sanders, who has faced progressive criticism and outrage for rejecting calls for a permanent cease-fire in Gaza, said in a Senate floor speech on Monday that Israel "must dramatically change its approach to minimize civilian harm and lay out a wider political process that can secure lasting peace."
The senator conceded during his remarks that there is no evidence Israel has altered its approach in response to light pressure from top U.S. officials, pointing to recent bombings of United Nations schools and other civilian infrastructure.
"Israel's indiscriminate approach is, in my view, offensive to most Americans, it is in violation of U.S. and international law, and it undermines the prospects for lasting peace and security," said Sanders.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Green Groups Slam 'Harmful' GOP Vote to Kill Biden Clean Vehicle Rule
"House GOP leaders should be ashamed for trying to thwart the EPA, and its authority under the Clean Air Act, to limit dangerous and deadly pollution," said one campaigner.
Dec 06, 2023
Climate and environmental campaigners on Wednesday bristled as the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives voted to block a proposed Biden administration rule meant to accelerate the transition from gasoline-powered to electric automobiles.
House lawmakers voted 221-197, almost entirely along party lines, in favor of H.R. 4468, the so-called Choice in Automobile Retail Sales Act of 2023. The office of House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) claimed the bill "stops President [Joe] Biden's agenda to force Americans to drive electric vehicles, which will cede our auto future to China."
However, Democratic Congressman Paul Tonko of New York condemned the measure during a House floor speech Wednesday, asserting that "we should be putting our clean energy standards in overdrive to protect consumers and our planet, not reversing course on vital electric vehicle policies."
"We should be putting our clean energy standards in overdrive to protect consumers and our planet, not reversing course on vital electric vehicle policies."
When the Biden administration unveiled its proposed clean transportation standard in April, progressive critics argued that it did not go far enough. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) projects that under the most robust version of its
proposal—which, if implemented, would take effect in 2027—electric vehicles could account for two-thirds of all new U.S. light-duty automobile sales by the 2032 model year. Last year, just 6% of new vehicles sold in the U.S. were electric.
A coalition of green groups slammed H.R. 4468 this week, writing to congressional leaders that "rather than recognize the twin crises of unmitigated climate change and public health impacts from transportation pollution and the transition to zero-emission vehicles underway, this bill aims to stem the tide of progress towards clean air and a healthy future."
"We need to move forward," the groups added, "not backward."
Margie Alt, director of the San Diego-based Climate Action Campaign, said in a statement that "today's vote on H.R. 4468 is a cynical and tremendously harmful attempt by some in Congress to placate their deep-pocketed fossil fuel executive and lobbyist allies."
"House GOP leaders should be ashamed for trying to thwart the EPA, and its authority under the Clean Air Act, to limit dangerous and deadly pollution from light duty and medium duty vehicles and trucks," she continued. "Cleaner cars standards protect all Americans from the significant respiratory and other health impacts of tailpipe pollution, not to mention limit the impacts of the climate crisis from a key source of climate pollution."
"Vehicle pollution endangers millions of Americans," Alt added, "particularly vulnerable Americans living near highways and high-traffic corridors."
H.R. 4468 has little chance of passing the Senate and even if it did, the White House has signaled that Biden will veto the measure. The White House Office of Management and Budget said Monday that the GOP proposal "would catastrophically impair EPA's ability to issue automotive regulations that protect public health, save consumers money, strengthen American energy security, and protect American investments in the vehicle technologies of the future."
Republican lawmakers on Wednesday also advanced a raft of what GOP leaders called "American energy solutions" that critics slammed as damaging to the climate, environment, Indigenous rights, and frontline communities. These bills include H.R. 6009, a measure introduced by Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) that would force taxpayers to foot the bill for cleaning up oil and gas wells on federal lands.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Dems Unveil Bill to Guarantee Incarcerated Citizens Right to Vote
"This bill champions inclusion and representation, which are vital for community reintegration and public safety," said one supporter.
Dec 06, 2023
Members of the National Voting in Prison Coalition and other advocacy groups on Wednesday welcomed the introduction of Democratic legislation that would end felony disenfranchisement in federal elections and guarantee incarcerated U.S. citizens the right to vote.
"Too often, citizens behind the wall and those with a record are wrongfully stripped of their sacred right to vote and denied the opportunity to participate in our democracy," said U.S. Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), who is leading the bill with Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.).
Pressley stressed that "with Republicans and the Supreme Court stopping at nothing to undermine voting rights and exclude Black and brown folks from participating in our democracy, we must protect and expand access to the ballot box—including for incarcerated citizens."
"As someone whose family has been personally impacted by mass incarceration, I'm proud to partner with Sen. Welch on the Inclusive Democracy Act to ensure everyone can make their voice heard in our democracy," she added. "Momentum is growing in states across the country and Congress must follow suit by swiftly passing this crucial legislation."
The National Voting in Prison Coalition—made up of over two dozen groups including the Campaign Legal Center, Center for Popular Democracy, Common Cause, Dēmos, Stand Up America, and the Sentencing Project—said that "the Inclusive Democracy Act stands as a beacon of hope for the more than 4.6 million Americans currently disenfranchised due to criminal convictions."
"The Inclusive Democracy Act of 2023 is a long-overdue step towards fulfilling the promise of our democracy, where every American has a voice and a stake in shaping our nation's future," the coalition continued.
Some coalition members also put out their own statements of support. Common Cause's Keshia Morris Desir said that "the Inclusive Democracy Act takes significant steps to help end the racist and discriminatory practice of felony disenfranchisement that grips communities of color."
Stand Up America's Sunwoo Oh called felony disenfranchisement "a stain on American democracy" and pledged that the group's nearly 2 million members "are ready to do whatever we can to push this legislation forward at the federal level."
Nicole D. Porter of the Sentencing Project noted that "not only is expanding voting rights the morally correct thing to do—it is also effective policy: For people who have been impacted by the criminal legal system, restoring voting rights has been linked to reduced recidivism, as it helps them rehabilitate and reintegrate into civic life."
According to its sponsors, the bill would:
- Guarantee the right to vote in federal elections for citizens who have criminal convictions;
- Require state and federal entities to notify individuals who are convicted, incarcerated, on probation, or on parole of their right to vote in federal elections;
- Outline the process for citizens in carceral settings to register to vote by mail, if registration is required by their state;
- Outline the process for citizens in carceral settings to vote by mail, including protecting and prioritizing election mail, curing ballots with mistakes, and casting a provision ballot;
- Ensure citizens in carceral settings have access to information about elections through mechanisms available to them such as the internet, campaigns, and third-party groups;
- Provide guidance to state officials to not prosecute citizens in carceral settings who complete an election ballot that includes an election they are not eligible to vote in; and
- Provide a private right of action to enforce this legislation.
"This bill champions inclusion and representation, which are vital for community reintegration and public safety," said David Ayala of the Formerly Incarcerated Convicted People & Families Movement. "It ensures that the voices of those directly impacted by the criminal legal system shape federal policies, addressing reentry challenges effectively."
Jeremiah Mungo of More Than Our Crimes declared that "every American deserves a voice in their homeland."
The new bill is backed by 17 other House Democrats as well as Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) but is unlikely to pass the GOP-controlled lower chamber or split Senate. Despite the odds, lawmakers have also unveiled other voting rights measures throughout the year, including the Freedom to Vote Act and the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular