Canada and global warming: a state of denial 2

Despite  2010-2019 being the hottest decade ever recorded, despite 2019 being the second hottest ever, and despite eight of the top ten hottest years being in the 2010s, as reported today and described in the last post, the Trudeau government, supposedly committed to dealing with global warming continues to push forward with:

(1) the Trans Mountain pipeline to the BC coast;

(2) looking at approving the Frontier Mine in Alberta, which "would  cover 24,000-hectares (roughly double the size of the City of Vancouver) and would produce 260,000 barrels of bitumen each day at its peak (https://thenarwhal.ca/10-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-massive-new-o...) making it one of the largest oilsands mines;

 (3) the completion of Enbridge's Line 3 to Manitoba in December that " will have oil export capacity of 760,000 barrels per day (bpd)" when the US portion is finished this year (https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/enbridge-line-three-shipping-oil-1.5377031),

(4)the proposed $14 billion LNG pipeline from Ontario to Saguenay Quebec for export to Europe, Asia and Brazil (https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/may-2019/quebecs-natural-gas-ex...).

(5) The Trudeau government "treated Donald Trump’s election as “positive news” for Canada’s energy industry and welcomed the help of Canada’s main corporate oil group in lobbying the US administration, documents show." (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/true-north/2018/feb/09/trudeau-g...) Therefore, there is no doubt the Trudeau Liberals are celebrating the announcement today of the great news that work on the US portion of the XL pipeline will resume in February.

Miles of unused pipe, prepared for the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline, sit rusting in North Dakota. ANDREW BURTON/GETTY

 Canadian pipeline company TC Energy Corp said on Tuesday that it planned to start pre-construction work in February for its Keystone XL oil pipeline, the start of a busy planned work schedule in 2020 for the long-delayed project. ...

The $8-billion Keystone XL project would carry 830,000 barrels per day of oil sands crude from Alberta to the U.S. Midwest and then on to the Gulf Coast. It has been delayed for more than a decade by opposition from landowners, environmental groups and tribes and after former U.S. President Barack Obama rejected the project. ...

TC said it plans to start building pumping stations along the entire pipeline route in June. Work on a pipeline segment in Nebraska would also start in June, followed by the start of construction of some segments in Montana and South Dakota in August.

The schedule hinges on starting to mobilize equipment in February, TC said. Work will continue in 2021.

https://calgaryherald.com/pmn/business-pmn/tc-energy-to-resume-work-on-k...

You are a unique climate change activist, Trudeau.

Greta Thunberg and 21 other youth are attending the Davos summit that starts on January 20th to demand that the world shift away from fossil fuels. 

Greta Thunberg and fellow youth climate campaigners are demanding that global leaders immediately end the “madness” of huge ongoing investments in fossil fuel exploration and enormous subsidies for coal, oil and gas use.

The 21 young activists are also calling on the political and business leaders who will be attending the World Economic Forum in Davos to ensure investment funds dump their holdings in fossil fuel companies. ...

“Anything less would be a betrayal against life itself,” said Thunberg and colleagues in an article in the Guardian. “Today’s business as usual is turning into a crime against humanity. We demand that you play your part in putting an end to this madness.” ...

“Young people are being let down by older generations and those in power,” the climate strikers said. “To some it may seem like we are asking for a lot. But this is just the very minimum effort needed to start the rapid sustainable transition.”

Much of the world’s existing coal, oil and gas reserves must be kept in the ground to avoid the worst impacts of global heating. But investment in fossil fuel exploration and extraction remains high.

Since the Paris climate agreement in 2015, the world’s largest investment banks have provided more than $700bn (£535bn) to fossil fuel companies to develop new projects, with the total investment estimated to be trillions of dollars. Fossil fuel companies argue that their products will be used for many years to come and that they have a pivotal role in shifting the energy system to zero emissions. But their investments in green energy are tiny compared with those in fossil fuels.

Subsidies for fossil fuels also remain high despite a G20 pledge in 2009 to eliminate them. The IMF estimates such subsidies run at $10m a minute, or $5.2tn a year. “The fact that [ending investment and subsidies] hasn’t been done already is, quite frankly, a disgrace,” said Thunberg and colleagues.

Just 10% of fossil fuel subsidy cash 'could pay for green transition'

Investors managing funds totalling $12trillion have already divested from coal, oil and gas, but the climate activists demand that “all companies, banks, institutions and governments immediately and completely divest from fossil fuels”.

Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of England, said in December that the financial sector was not cutting investments in oil and gas companies rapidly enough and warned that assets in the sector could end up “worthless”. He said in October that companies and industries not moving towards zero-carbon emissions would be punished by investors and go bankrupt.

“It ought to be in every company and stakeholder’s interest to make sure that the planet they live on will thrive,” said the climate strikers, who come from nations across the world, including the US, Australia, Brazil, Russia, India and Nigeria. “But history has not shown the corporate world’s willingness to hold themselves accountable. So it falls on us, the children, to do that.”

The agenda for the 50th annual meeting of the World Economic Forum, which begins on 20 January in Switzerland, lists four “urgent and important” global issues. The first is “how to address the urgent climate and environmental challenges that are harming our ecology and economy”.

The climate strikers said: “The world’s leaders should invest their money in existing sustainable technologies, research and in restoring nature. Short-term profit should not trump long-term stability of life.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/10/greta-thunberg-tells...

Trump's NAFTA is a Giveaway To the Fossil Fuel Industry (and vid)

https://twitter.com/SenSaunders/status/1218199340717629446

"Not a single damn mention of 'climate change'. Trump's NAFTA is a giveaway to the fossil fuel industry. I voted NO because the future of our planet is more important than the short-term profits of Exxon Mobil and Chevron..."

Too bad you never opposed it, Canada.

At the World Economic Forum in Davos Switzerland, young climate activists, including Canadian Autumn Peltier of the Anishinabek Nation, Greta Thunberg, Natasha Wang Mwansa from Zambia, and Salvador Gómez-Colón of Puerto Rico, criticized the economic and political elites for failing for their inaction on global warming. 

Michelle Lewis

- Jan. 11th 2020 9:00 am ET

Young climate activists including Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg told business and political elites gathered Tuesday at the World Economic Forum that they aren't doing enough to tackle the climate emergency and warned them that time was running out.

At a panel in the Swiss ski resort of Davos, climate campaigners expressed hope that their generation could work with those in power to bring about the change needed to limit global warming even as Thunberg - a vocal critic of leaders' inaction - said not enough has been done.

“We need to start listening to the science, and treat this crisis with the importance it deserves," said the 17-year-old, just as U.S. President Donald Trump was arriving in Davos, where he later gave a speech. Trump has pulled the U.S. out of the Paris accord to limit climate change and has traded barbs with Thunberg on social media.

"Without treating it as a real crisis we cannot solve it,” Thunberg said , adding that it was time to stop burning fossil fuels immediately, not decades from now. ...

Speaking in the afternoon, Thunberg brushed aside Trump's announcement that the U.S. would join the economic forum's initiative to plant 1 trillion trees across the globe to help capture carbon dioxide from Earth’s atmosphere.

“Planting trees is good of course but it’s nowhere near enough," Thunberg said. "It cannot replace mitigation," she added, referring to efforts to drastically cut emissions in the near term.

Thunberg accused leaders of "cheating and fiddling around with numbers" with talk of cutting emissions to 'net zero' - that is, emitting no more carbon than is absorbed by the planet or technical means - by 2050. ...

"My generation will not give up without a fight," she said.

Her views were echoed by other climate activists, such Natasha Wang Mwansa, an 18-year-old activist from Zambia who campaigns for girls’ and women’s rights. She told an audience in Davos that “the older generation has a lot of experience, but we have ideas, we have energy, and we have solutions."

Salvador Gómez-Colón, who raised funds and awareness after Hurricane María devastated his native Puerto Rico in 2017, said young activists are doing more than just talking.

“We’re not waiting five, 10, 20 years to take the action we want to see. We’re not the future of the world, we’re the present, we’re acting now. We’re not waiting any longer.”

Autumn Peltier, the chief water commissioner for the Anishinabek Nation of indigenous people in Canada, said plaudits are not what they are looking for at the World Economic Forum.

“I don’t want your awards. If you are going to award me, award me with helping to find solutions and helping to make change.”

Thunberg cited a report released in 2018 by the U.N.'s science panel that calculated the amount of additional carbon dioxide the atmosphere can absorb before global average temperature increases exceed 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit). Leaders agreed to try to stay below that threshold when they signed the 2015 Paris climate accord, but scientists warn the chances of doing so are dwindling.

Thunberg noted that the remaining carbon “budget” to confidently meet that target stood at just 420 gigatons of CO2 two years ago, the equivalent of 10 years of global emissions. Even with a more optimistic calculation, keeping the global temperature rise below 1.5 C would require a massive reduction in emissions over the next two decades.

"These numbers aren't anyone's political opinions or political views," said Thunberg. "This is the current best-available science."

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2020/01/21/news/thunberg-slams-davos-el...

As the Alberta Conservative government continues to blithely push ahead with more fossil fuel production, with Kenney saying he wants Alberta to be the last place in the world to take a barrel of oil of the ground, CBC is reporting that the province, unlike North Dakota, is only collecting a tiny fraction of the money needed for cleanup, which the article reports is $30 billion with only $227 million in fees for cleanup collected.  However, in November 2018, Vice President Rob Wadsworth of Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) , which is responsible for collecting the cleanup fees, told a private audience that it could cost $260 billion to clean up 94,000 inactive wells and 3,400 abandoned wells. (https://globalnews.ca/news/4617664/cleaning-up-albertas-oilpatch-could-c...)

While the Alberta Conservatives blamed the NDP government for this, it is obvious from the huge amounts involved and the date that the fee levels were set that many previous governments were involved. Landowners with wells on their land also find it extremely difficult to develop or sell their land. On the other hand, In North Dakota companies must pay the estimated cleanup costs in advanced. Kenney is now demanding Ottawa help pay for the cleanup. Its truly amazing how much he, and from all the signs coming out of Ottawa Trudeau, is willing to subsidize an industry that may well destroy life on this planet. 

It also sounds like the AER was totally captured by the industry as it did nothing to correct the situation. The auditor general is investigating these problems but the horse has long left the barn. 

There are currently 3,406 orphan wells scattered around the province, usually on the properties of rural landowners, where they lie untended. 

There are another 94,000 inactive wells in the province, with the worry that many of these may become orphaned as their owners struggle — and taxpayers could be left with the bill.

The auditor general's office will look at whether the province is doing enough to prevent wells from becoming orphaned in the first place, and whether it is prepared for more to be added to the list due to ongoing pressure on Alberta's energy economy. ...

"We will be focusing on both whether the government — and specifically the Alberta Energy Regulator — has the systems and processes to assess whether orphan oil and gas sites are being managed and reclaimed efficiently and economically in the best interests of Albertans," said Val Mellesmoen, spokesperson for the Office of the Auditor General of Alberta.  ...

The Alberta Energy Regulator (AER), an arm's-length agency of the provincial government that oversees the energy industry and its activities, has a liability management system that is supposed to make sure companies that are permitted to drill have a healthy enough bottom line to pay for cleanup later on. ...

But the regulator has been using a formula based on out-of-date commodity prices that has inflated the assets of many companies. As a result, companies were not asked to put down large enough security deposits for future cleanup. The province's own estimate of the eventual cleanup bill for every oil and gas well in Alberta is $30 billion, while the AER only holds $227 million in financial security. ...

Alberta has asked the federal government to help pay for cleaning up orphan wells. In a November 2019 letter sent by Alberta Finance Minister Travis Toews to Bill Morneau, his federal counterpart, the province asked Ottawa for funding and tax instruments to encourage investment in well reclamation.

"This system is just not sustainable," said Lucija Muehlenbachs, an economist at the University of Calgary who specializes in the energy industry. It's not functioning, so it will have to be completely thrown out the window. But it's many years too late." ...

But the AER has been using commodity prices from 2008-2010, back when oil prices were much higher, to estimate the value of assets. Even though the regulator assesses these assets every month, because of its use of old commodity prices, many companies that should be putting up security deposits have not had to. ...

Meanwhile, landowners who agreed to lease their land to oil companies so they could drill wells were promised the companies would clean up after the wells were done producing and restore the surface of the land to its original state.

Instead, many are left with inactive wells that nobody is monitoring, let alone cleaning up and closing. ...

Dwight Popowich has an oil well on his property near Two Hills, Alta., about 100 kilometres east of Edmonton, that was drilled in 2008. It stopped producing in 2012, and its owner, Sequoia Resources Corp., stopped operating in March 2018. No remediation work has been done on the well. ...

Across the border in North Dakota, as oil prices declined, the state saw a growing number of inactive wells, but it has not experienced the same problem with orphan wells as Alberta.

North Dakota has strict timelines in place to deal with inactive wells. If a well stops producing for as little as three months, it's immediately flagged. The state also collects a bond from companies upfront — $50,000 US if the company is drilling one well — and can use that money to pay for plugging and remediating wells. 

North Dakota, which is the second largest crude oil producer in the U.S. after Texas, has only 1,683 inactive wells — and not one of them is an orphan.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/alberta-orphan-wells-liability-audit-re...

The Trudeau Liberal government has continued to proclaim its climate change program will achieve its greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, while at the same time reassuring Alberta that it is open to further tarsands oil production. Any shred of its tattered credibility on dealing with climate change that it has left will disappear however if it approves the Frontier Mine oilsands development that will increase oilsands emissions by 20% and destroy an area twice the size of Vancouver. 

Last year a federal-provincial panel said the billions the Frontier Mine would generate would more than offset the damage to the environment locally and the greenhouse gas emissions it would produce. However, this was based on $95 a barrel oil, which is far above current prices, so it could end up being a white elephant as well. 

The Frontier bitumen mine would extend mining of Alberta’s oilsands northward, adding 20 per cent of climate-destabilizing emissions growth. Photo via Wikimedia.

The Trudeau government is under intense scrutiny for a looming decision — one that will powerfully signal whether it favours oil patch growth over fighting the climate emergency. 

Will the Liberals approve a new bitumen mine twice the size of Vancouver that alone is expected to add 20 per cent of additional oilsands emissions over the next three decades? 

Or will Justin Trudeau’s government make good on its promise to set Canada on the path to having “net-zero” emissions by 2050 by rejecting the Frontier mine being proposed by Vancouver-based Teck Resources?

Federal Environment and Climate Change Minister Jonathan Wilkinson, who represents the riding of North Vancouver, is reportedly “wrestling” with the decision, which is expected sometime next month.

Wilkinson has said that achieving Canada’s aggressive net-zero target, which would result in the country effectively ceasing to contribute to global temperature rise within three decades, is not open to negotiation: “That is a target that is not informed by politics. It’s informed by science.” 

If that’s the case, then the Liberals need to forcefully reject what is one of the biggest oilsands mining projects ever proposed, says Eriel Deranger, executive director of the Edmonton-based group Indigenous Climate Action. “We cannot afford more destabilization of critical ecosystems and the creation of massive amounts of carbon emissions,” she told The Tyee.

A Liberal decision to approve the $20.6-billion Teck Resources Frontier mine could make it impossible to achieve the government’s long-term climate targets — not to mention the near-term Paris agreement targets Canada is already on track to miss because of oilsands emissions.

The Frontier mine, if constructed, would emit four to six megatonnes of greenhouse gases annually until 2066, meaning the net-zero by 2050 target would be blown out of the water,” said Catherine Abreu, executive director of the Climate Action Network Canada. “If this project is approved, I think it will dramatically undermine their credibility on this issue.” ...

The looming Liberal decision is the final regulatory hurdle Teck has to clear before being able to build Frontier. A federal-provincial review panel last year determined that the $70 billion in government revenues Frontier could potentially generate outweighed the destruction of thousands of hectares of old-growth forest, wood bison habitat, climate sequestering wetlands and other “significant adverse environmental effects.”

Yet in making that assessment the panel appeared to uncritically accept Teck’s projection that oil prices will average $95 per barrel in coming years, an assumption that even the mining company no longer seems to support. In a presentation to investors last month, it said that a lower price of $60 to $70 per barrel is more likely.

https://thetyee.ca/News/2020/01/21/Trudeau-Government-To-Choose-Climate-...

Last week indigenous and the environmental group Extinction Rebellion protested against the opening of the Frontier  Mine that would increase oilsands greenhouse gas emissions by 20%. 

Protesters against approval of Teck's Frontier oilsands mine gather on 9th Avenue S.E. in Calgary on Wednesday, Jan. 22, 2020. The protest was countered by a pro-oilsands group. JIM WELLS/POSTMEDIA

SHAREADJUSTCOMMENTPRINT

About 100 protesters gathered outside of a downtown Calgary office Wednesday morning to rally for — and against — a proposed oilsands mine in northern Alberta.

Protesters from both the pro-pipeline Canada Action and the environmentalist Extinction Rebellion groups convened outside Teck Resources’ office on 9th Avenue S.E., calling on the federal government to back or reject the $20.6-billion Frontier project.

“We’re putting pressure on the government to take action on the climate crisis that we feel is bearing down on society,” said Extinction Rebellion spokeswoman Sarah Flynn. “We feel that the Teck mine is for many reasons not in line with Canada’s goals, so we’re here to put pressure on the government to reject this proposal.”

https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/protesters-for-and-against-oil...

One of the least reported impacts of global warming is the increase in violence against women that it has stimulated. 

 

Women and children try to shelter from the sun at a health clinic in Kapua, Turkana County, northwest Kenya, 29 January 2017. Photo:Flickr/Russell Watkins/DFID (CC BY 2.0) 

Climate breakdown and the global crisis of environmental degradation are increasing violence against women and girls, while gender-based exploitation is in turn hampering our ability to tackle the crises, a major report has concluded. Attempts to repair environmental degradation and adapt to climate breakdown, particularly in poorer countries, are failing, and resources are being wasted because they do not take gender inequality and the effects on women and girls into account. ...

The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) carried out what is understood to be the biggest and most comprehensive study yet of the issue, taking two years and involving more than 1,000 sources of research. “We found gender-based violence to be pervasive, and there is enough clear evidence to suggest that climate change is increasing gender-based violence,” said Cate Owren, a lead author of the report, published on Wednesday. “As environmental degradation and stress on ecosystems increases, that in turn creates scarcity and stress for people, and the evidence shows that, where environmental pressures increase, gender-based violence increases.” ...

Owren found abundant examples of the close links between gender-based violence and the exploitation of women and girls, and the competition for resources engendered by the impacts of global heating and our destruction of the natural environment. For instance, sexual abuse was found in the illegal fishing industry in south-east Asia, and in eastern and southern Africa fishermen reportedly refused to sell fish to women if they did not engage in sex. The illegal logging and charcoal trade in the Democratic Republic of Congo is linked to sexual exploitation, and in Colombia and Peru illegal mines are strongly associated with an increase in sex trafficking.

There have also been numerous examples of gender-based violence directed against environmental defenders and activists, who try to stop the destruction or degradation of their land, natural resources and communities. Sexual violence is used to suppress them, undermine their status within the community and discourage others from coming forward. ...

Global heating puts pressure on resources, as extreme weather, including heatwaves, droughts, floods and fiercer storms, grows more frequent and devastating. In most parts of the world, women are already disadvantaged and lack land rights and legal rights, so are vulnerable to exploitation. When the additional stresses caused by the climate crises bite, they are the first to be targeted. For instance, in some communities, young girls are married off as early as possible when the family faces hardship exacerbated by the climate. Globally, about 12 million more young girls are thought to have been married off after increasing natural disasters, and weather related disasters have been shown to increase sexual trafficking by 20-30%.

Women and girls are also burdened with tasks such as drawing water and finding firewood, which are becoming more scarce in many areas under the ecological impact of our scramble for resources, and which expose them to further dangers of violence.

Grethel Aguilar, acting director-general of the IUCN, said: “Environmental degradation now affects our lives in ways that are becoming impossible to ignore, from food to jobs to security. This study shows that the damage humanity is inflicting on nature is also fuelling violence against women around the world – a link that has so far been largely overlooked.” ...

Bob Ward, policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on climate change and the environment at the London School of Economics, who was not involved in writing the report, said: “This report highlights the complex but clear link between growing climate change impacts and violence against women and girls. He pointed to the role that female campaigners were playing in bringing the world’s attention to the problems. “When we see the inspiring leadership of female activists like Greta Thunberg, we should recognise that the lives and livelihoods of women and girls around the world are particularly threatened by climate change,” said Ward. “The empowerment of women and girls and their protection from the direct and indirect consequences of climate change must lie at the heart of the just transition to zero-carbon and climate-resilient societies.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/29/climate-breakdown-is...

"Earth is heating at a rate equivalent to five atomic bombs per second. Or two Hurricane Sandys' - Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

https://twitter.com/JonathanLanday/status/1224371221879410698

Approval of such a monstrous project would be an international climate-crime of outrageous proportions and should not be countenanced under any circumstances.

Major damage to coastlines is already being done and accelerating around the world, as noted in the following article about the US coastline.  With Canada having by far the longest coastline in the world (3.5 times as long as the country with the next longest coastline - Norway, as noted in the previous post), it can expect even greater damage from coastal flooding.

 About 61,000 tons of sand is being dumped on Miami Beach to counter rising sea levels as highest rate of rise was recorded along the Gulf of Mexico shoreline. Photograph: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

The pace of sea level rise accelerated at nearly all measurement stations along the US coastline in 2019, with scientists warning some of the bleakest scenarios for inundation and flooding are steadily becoming more likely.

Of 32 tide-gauge stations in locations along the vast US coastline, 25 showed a clear acceleration in sea level rise last year, according to researchers at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (Vims).

The selected measurements are from coastal locations spanning from Maine to Alaska. About 40% of the US population lives in or near coastal areas.

The gathering speed of sea level rise is evident even within the space of a year, with water levels at the 25 sites rising at a faster rate in 2019 than in 2018. ...

Researchers at Vims said that the current speed-up in sea level rise started around 2013 or 2014 and is probably caused by ocean dynamics and ice sheet loss. Worldwide, sea level rise is being driven by the melting of large glaciers and the thermal expansion of ocean water due to human-induced global heating.

“Acceleration can be a game changer in terms of impacts and planning, so we really need to pay heed to these patterns,” said John Boon, Vims emeritus professor and founder of institute’s project to chart sea level rise. ...

The US’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa) has also reported an acceleration in sea level rise, warning that if greenhouse gas emissions are not constrained there may be a worst-case scenario of as much as a 8.2ft increase by 2100, compared with 2000 levels.

The current pace of change means “we may be moving towards the higher projections”, according to Molly Mitchell, a Vims marine scientist.

“We have increasing evidence from the tide-gauge records that these higher sea-level curves need to be seriously considered in resilience-planning efforts,” Mitchell said, adding that the US west coast will probably start seeing more rapid increases, akin to the east.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/03/sea-level-rise-accel...

Thanks for the cartoons and the link, jerrym.  They are very clever.

On January 13th 2020, twelve young activists who were arrested in Switzerland for protesting inside a Credit Suisse bank in November 2018 have won a court case after being arrested and fined $21,600 Swiss francs ($22,200 US) in which the judge ruled that it was a necessary and proportional action in view of the great risk posed by global warming. 

From 2016-2018 Credit Suisse invested $57 billion in the fossil fuel industry. (https://www.ran.org/bankingonclimatechange2019/)

A child holds a protest sign in Lausanne Switzerland during the climate change protest on January 17th following the climate change victory in court on January 13th

The imminent danger posed by climate change means activists were not guilty of trespassing when they occupied a Swiss bank and played tennis to demand an end to funding of fossil fuel projects, a judge ruled on Monday. 

Wearing whites and wigs, a group of young people staged the tennis sit-in at the Lausanne branch of Credit Suisse in November 2018 to highlight their campaign and urge Swiss maestro Roger Federer to end his sponsorship deal with the bank. 

The activists were charged with trespassing and fined 21,600 Swiss francs ($22,200), but in their appeal hearing on Monday Judge Philippe Colelough said they had acted proportionately and waived the fine.

The activists had argued they were in the bank in the face of an “imminent danger” - and the judge agreed. 

“Because of the insufficient measures taken to date in Switzerland, whether they be economic or political, the average warming will not diminish nor even stabilize, it will increase,” he said, pointing to the country’s melting glaciers. 

“In view of this, the tribunal considers that the imminence of danger is established,” the judge said. “The act for which they were incriminated was a necessary and proportional means to achieve the goal they sought.” 

The packed court room in Renens, Lausanne, reacted with whoops of excitement and a standing ovation. 

“I didn’t think it was possible,” said one of the accused, Beate Thalmann, in tears of joy. “If Switzerland did this, then maybe we have a chance.” 

Pressure is rising on Switzerland’s financial sector to divest from fossil fuels and thousands of students have marched through Swiss cities in recent months demanding action on climate change. 

The country, which is warming at twice the global average due to the heat-trapping effect of its mountains, has an target to cut net carbon emissions to zero by 2050 but activists say that the country’s biggest impact is via the financial center. 

Credit Suisse, which had filed charges against the activists, said last week, when they launched the appeal after refusing to pay the fine, it respected their cause but deemed their actions unacceptable. The state will pay the fine instead. 

The bank said in December said it would stop financing the development of new coal-fired power plants.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-trial/climate-change-p...

The following article discusses how the fossil fuel industry used fake news to win the PR battle over global warming in the US. Much of it also applies to Canada. But the PR machine is starting to breakdown as more and more evidence of the damage created by climate change piles up.

Ivy Lee invented fake news to cover up Standard Oil's mistakes in the early 1900s.

The world has known about the dangers of climate change for decades — so why are oil and gas companies still drilling for crude as if there’s no tomorrow? There’s no simple answer. But any explanation would have to give some credit to the wizards of public relations. For more than a century, these spinmasters downplayed misdeeds, twisted facts, and cajoled the media into mimicking their talking points.

“A lot of what we have as PR today, in general, was built in service of the fossil fuel industry,” said Amy Westervelt, the host of Drilled, billed as “a true-crime podcast about climate change.” The first season of Drilled investigated the history of climate denial, and the second looked at the West Coast crabbers suing Big Oil for contributing to warmer oceans and throwing the marine food web out of whack. In the latest season launched last month, Westervelt introduces the “Mad Men of Climate Denial” — the publicists who coached the fossil fuel industry how to shape public opinion over the past century. ...

Creating a cloud of confusion around established science is one of their well-known tactics. Exxon and the coal industry knew about global warming as early as the 1960s; instead of telling the public, they spread doubt about the science behind it. That’s just one facet of the fossil fuel industry’s propaganda machine. (“Propaganda” might seem too strong of a word, but Westervelt says it’s the very definition: “a one-sided message with the aim of shifting public opinion or policy.”) Digging through archives, presidential libraries, and old PR books, Westervelt found the pushy executives, manipulative schmoozers, and “inventive” storytellers who made it work.

“People are largely unaware that there’s a massive system running underneath everything,” Westervelt said in an interview with Grist. “A lot of the ideas they have about the fossil fuel industry and even the language they use has been crafted very carefully by the industry itself.”

Fake news: “Fake news” proliferates on the internet today, a plague of modern life with a long pedigree. You can trace it back to Ivy Ledbetter Lee, often called the father of modern public relations. In the early 1900s, Lee was tasked with rehabilitating the public image of the tycoon John D. Rockefeller. His company, Standard Oil, had brutally stamped out a workers strike at a Colorado coal mine in 1913, setting tents on fire and spraying their camp with machine guns. Lee crafted a story to smooth things over, claiming that the strikers were actually plants hired by a labor union, and that the whole thing had been orchestrated by Mother Jones, a famous labor organizer (he also made up that she ran a nearby brothel). “What are facts anyway but my interpretation of what happened?” Lee said later on.

Corporate philanthropy: Lee’s coverup went so well that Rockefeller kept him on board for the rest of his life. In addition to inventing the press release (imagine, the newspaper prints your version of the story word for word!), Lee prodded Rockefeller to donate to charitable causes, like museums, to burnish his reputation. The approach gained traction as other robber barons realized that they, too, could be remembered as kindly philanthropists. The arts are now soaked with oil money — and with their names emblazoned on art museum walls and festivals signs, corporations get a similar reputational boost.

Astroturfing: What better way to counter grassroots activists than to fake your own grassroots group? This practice, called “astroturfing,” was the brainchild of Daniel Edelman, a PR whiz who advised Mobil Oil, Big Tobacco, and many other companies in the mid-20th century. There are now hundreds of fake front groups backed by oil-funded lobbying groups like the Western States Petroleum Association, said Christine Arena, former vice president of the firm Edelman (yes, named after Daniel), in the podcast. They go by friendly names like “California Drivers Alliance” or “Washington Consumers for Sound Fuel Policy.”

False equivalence: Herb Schmertz, who advised Mobil starting in the 1960s, took an aggressive stance toward the press. He’d attack any journalist or outlet critical of his company, arguing that they weren’t hearing Mobil’s side of the story, and then watch them overcorrect in the next edition. The approach eventually expanded to demanding airtime for climate deniers. One study looking at climate change articles in major U.S. outlets between 1988 and 2002 found that more than half of them presented climate science and fringe, Big Oil-friendly theories as equivalent. “It took a while for newspapers to realize that this was not a great way to go,” Westervelt said.

It seems like many in the media have decided to stop playing along. And there are other signs that the tide is turning against the oil industry. Once the world’s most valuable company, Exxon’s stock has dropped by a third over the last five years, wiping away nearly $200 billion in market value. ...

“As soon as an industry starts to get an irretrievably bad image, the PR folks start dropping off, and the industry has to find somebody else to do this stuff,” Westervelt said. She said she has seen oil companies turn to more obscure consulting groups, like FGI Consulting and the DCI group, to do their PR work.

The fossil fuel industry is starting to move away from publicly denying the facts about climate change (which isn’t working as well these days) and back toward pro-oil, all-American messaging, like the new ads from the American Petroleum Institute that tout oil and natural gas as “energy progress.” If only Big Oil was as good at cutting greenhouse gas emissions as it was at marketing.

https://grist.org/climate/how-the-oil-industry-pumped-americans-full-of-...

Hamburg Germany was the largest Fridays for Future strike for climate change action this week with 60,000 attending but there were many other around the world as can be seen in the other pictures from the following article. American youth climate change activists say its time for US youth to also do this on a regular basis. The same can be said for Canada. 

Participants of a Fridays for Future climate demonstration parade through Hamburg, Germany on Feb. 21, 2020. Two days before the state elections in Hamburg on 23 February, thousands took to the streets for a different climate policy. (Photo: Axel Heimken/picture alliance via Getty Images)

U.S.-based youth climate activists on Friday drew attention to the climate protest in Hamburg, Germany, where organizers said roughly 60,000 people took part, and hoped that Americans took inspiration from their European counterparts.

Among those taking part in the large Fridays for Future action in the northern German city was school strike for climate founder Greta Thunberg of Sweden.

Fridays for Future organizer Alexandria Villaseñor of New York City shared Thunberg's tweet showing the massive crowd and asked, "Where are you USA?"

"The United States needs these types of numbers on a regular basis," said Jerome Foster II, a high school senior and Fridays for Future organizer in Washington, D.C.

"What is it going to take for the U.S. to rise up like this?" wondered the Durham, N.C. branch of Extinction Rebellion. "We are in a climate catastrophe and people around the world, particularly in the global south are facing the brunt NOW!  January 2020 was the warmest since we've recorded temperatures."

Thunberg, who's in her 79th week of Fridays for Future actions, noted in her remarks to the Hamburg crowd that the weekly actions have spread globally.

"For almost one and half years young people have been striking from school all over the world," she said.

"The world is failing on ensuring us a future. And I honestly don't understand how the people in power can continue like now. How they can look their children in the eyes while they are stealing their future?" she asked.

"We are facing an existential crisis," said Thunberg, "but we must keep on pushing."

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/02/21/60000-strong-fridays-future...

Teck withdraws

NorthReport wrote:

Teck withdraws

Good news but even Teck Resources Inc.'s withdrawal of their application for the Frontier Mine will provide them with a  C$1.13 billion writedown and subsidy in the form of tax relief. Will the fossil fuel subsidies ever end?

Protesters on both sides of the Frontier mine issue gather in Calgary on Wednesday, Jan. 22, 2020.Jim Wells/Postmedia

 

Canadian miner Teck Resources Ltd has withdrawn an application to build its C$20.6 billion ($15.7 billion) Frontier oil sands mine in Alberta, days before the federal government was to decide on whether to approve the project opposed by environmentalists and indigenous groups. ...

"The growing debate around this issue has placed Frontier and our company squarely at the nexus of much broader issues that need to be resolved,” Lindsay wrote in his letter. ...

On Friday, the Canadian miner floated a potential exit from the oil sands and warned of the possible C$1.13 billion hit should Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government reject the Frontier bitumen mine.

“The withdrawal of Teck’s Frontier Mine application is more devastating news for the Canadian economy, especially for Albertans and indigenous people,” Alberta Premier Jason Kenney tweeted on Sunday. “This decision is clearly the result of federal regulatory uncertainty and the current lawless opposition to resource development.”

Teck said on Sunday it would write down the C$1.13 billion ($852.12 million) carrying value of the project. The news was first reported by the Globe and Mail newspaper.

The company released a letter by Teck Chief Executive Don Lindsay to Canada’s environment minister, stating Teck was “disappointed to have arrived at this point.”

The fate of the mine was expected to be decided as early as Tuesday in what has become a test of Canada’s commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and repair relations with the country’s indigenous people.

At full capacity, the mine would have produced 260,000 barrels of crude oil per day, making it one of the largest in Alberta’s carbon-intensive oil sands.

https://business.financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/teck-drops-c20-6-bln...

There is now another pipeline constrution project facing protests from indigenous groups - the Northern Ontario to Sauguenay Quebec pipeline project aimed at carrying LNG to the Saguenay for export to Europe, South America and Asia. 

Opposition builds across Quebec to the proposed Gazoduq natural gas pipeline and gas refinery plant.

Quebec's environmental review agency will begin examining next month a controversial natural gas project that is already facing opposition from Indigenous communities, but which also has the government's blessing.  

Environment Minister Benoit Charrette sent a letter last week to the head of the agency, known by its French acronym as the BAPE, in which he indicates the review process will begin March 16, according to Radio-Canada.

The natural gas project is composed of both a pipeline component and a plan to construct a $9.5-billion liquefaction plant by the Saguenay port, roughly 230 kilometres northeast of Quebec City.

It is the proposed plant, backed by GNL Québec, that will be reviewed first. The pipeline, which would stretch 780 kilometres from Ontario to Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean and cost an estimated $4.5 billion, will be studied by the BAPE separately.

Charrette's letter said the environmental review was necessary because the liquefied natural gas (LNG) project raises a number of potential issues, including greenhouse gas emissions, damage to wetlands and water environments and risk of accidents. 

Premier François Legault has repeatedly indicated he is favourable to the project, claiming among other things that it will help reduce emissions globally by facilitating exports of LNG, which emits fewer emissions than coal. ...

Innu opposition

The project has also stirred opposition from members of Innu communities, whose ancestral territory would be crossed by the pipeline if it's built. 

Several dozen Innu members attended protest marches this weekend in Mashteuiatsh, on the eastern shores of Lac-Saint-Jean, and in L'Anse-Saint-Jean, about 100 kilometres southeast of Saguenay.  

At the demonstrations, where they were joined by local environmental groups, Innu expressed both opposition to the LNG project in Quebec and support for the Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs opposing a pipeline project in British Columbia. ...

"I have lots of grandchildren and I have two great-grandchildren. I want them to be able to live on a healthy planet," said Huguette Volant, one of the Innu protesters.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/controversial-natural-gas-projec...

There is also strong opposition to the Saguenay pipeline project from scientists and others, besides the indigenous people, who live along the project's route.

Quebec scientists have demanded that the pipeline proposal be rejected, noting we need to have less fossil fuel infrastracture, not more. These scientists also point out that total emissions from the project would cancel all the emission reductions Quebec has achieved since 1990, without taking into account leakages, which would further greatly increase emissions.

Tankers bound for Europe and as far away as India and China would carry LNG from a proposed liquefaction plant and marine terminal near this deep-water, inland port on the Saguenay Fjord. CBC News Interactives - CBC.ca ...

The wrenching debate over fossil fuels and climate change is lapping up against the shores of the magnificent Saguenay Fjord in the heart of Quebec. Here, just upstream from the Saguenay-St. Lawrence Marine Park — a protected area for the endangered beluga whale — two major, intertwined projects are in the planning and evaluation stages. 

Gazoduc is to deliver Alberta natural gas through an as-yet unbuilt, 782-kilometre pipeline extending from northern Ontario through Quebec's Abitibi and Lac-Saint-Jean regions. If the project gets approval, it would be an important boost for an industry struggling to get its product to market. ...

Its promoters say it would be among the greenest LNG plants in the world. Tanker ships would carry the LNG from the marine terminal, down the Saguenay Fjord and on to markets in Europe and Asia. ...

But standing in the way are profound concerns about increased greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, with many demanding action in the face of the global climate crisis. ...

Adrien Guibert-Betez, an organizer of the opposition group Coalition Fjord, doesn't think there is anything the promoter can do to make the project acceptable.

"All the scientists all over the world said that we have to cut our greenhouse gases, and by that, we have to stop the utilization of gas and petrol and coal. So at the foundation itself, the project is not a good project."

Guibert-Betez's coalition has been mobilizing residents along the Saguenay Fjord who question whether a company should contribute to the production of natural gas at all, regardless of its environmental commitments. ...

In June, a group of 160 Quebec scientists signed an open letter calling on the federal and Quebec governments to reject the projects because they are "incompatible with the idea of energy transition."

"It is essential to reduce the number of infrastructures linked to fossil fuels and not build more," they wrote, in order to meet the 2050 goal of carbon neutrality.

"The total emissions connected to the project in Canada would be comparable to the total of Quebec's GHG reductions since 1990," concluded the two principal authors of the letter, Université Laval chemistry Prof. Jesse Greener and Université du Québec à Montréal environmental science Prof. Lucie Sauvé. ...

That total, the scientists said, doesn't take into account leakage, known as fugitive emissions, along the way.

"Since natural gas is essentially made up of methane, a greenhouse gas that is 84 times more powerful than CO2 over a 20-year period, the contribution of these leaks to planetary warming is enormous," they wrote.

"So it is possible that the total GHG emissions associated with the project will be considerably higher than the best available estimates." ...

If it becomes simply another energy source in the market and does not replace coal or oil, "the result will be a global increase in emissions."

Université Laval's Greener says that last conclusion is important to highlight. "That's the massive amount of the problem: its utilization or misutilization downstream," the chemist said. "Obviously, we can't even guarantee that this gas is not going to replace sustainable energy projects." 

"So the report is being spun," Greener said. 

"If we're supposed to assume the product is going to be replacing dirtier forms of energy, there's no guarantee of that. And if you just look at the energy needs across the world, it's much more likely that these products are simply going to add to current consumption, not replace."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/energie-saguenay-how-green-is-na...

Besides the environmental dangers created by the proposed Ontario to Saguenay Quebec LNG pipeline, there are major questions about the job numbers offered by the pipeline supporters - numbers that are even questioned by economists. Furthermore, those jobs will be temporary and gone was construction is finished relatively leaving few jobs in their wake. In fact, in an open letter 40 economists have they do see how the project makes economic or environmental sense. As the picture below shows, there are relatively few jobs created for the many billions that goes into such a megaproject. 

A group of Quebec economists have gone public with their criticism of a proposed 750-kilometre natural-gas pipeline and a liquid natural gas (LNG) processing plant that GNL Québec intends to buildin Saguenay, expressing serious doubts over its promised economic benefits.

In an open letter published Tuesday in several media outlets, the 40 signatories contend that the gas carried along the pipeline would replace cleaner, conventional natural gas or renewable source electricity as well as increase greenhouse gas emissions.

The economists contend that natural gas replacing more polluting forms of energy, such as coal, is not a credible assertion.

They also question the promise that 6,000 jobs would be created directly or indirectly by the construction of the project and of 1,100 more once the processing plant is operational.

The economists point out that last month, Quebec’s Commission de la construction announced that more than half of the construction trades in the Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean area lacked workers, that mining firm Rio Tinto had to repeatedly halt production because of a shortage of workers and that Resolute forest products needed to find 800 employees to replace those on the verge of retirement. ...

The authors of the letter conclude that the jobs promised by GNL Québec will be filled by workers from outside the region or those quitting their jobs to work on the construction of the plant, which will simply increase the area’s labour shortage.

https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/economists-question-number-o...

With the longest coastline in the world by far at 202,000 km compared to Norway's #2 at 58,000 km) Canada faces many problems from sea level rise. One that is rarely discussed is the loss of many of Canada's beaches, which would have important environmental, economic and social effects. A new report warns that half of the world's sandy beaches are at risk of being washed away, so sea level rise is projected to leave Canada with the second greatest loss of beaches, after Australia.

SEONGJOON CHO VIA GETTY IMAGES

People play volleyball at Vancouver's Kitsilano Beach in this undated photo. Many sandy shorelines, particularly in densely populated areas, could be lost by 2100 because of rising sea levels.

 Half the world’s sandy beaches may be wiped away by the end of the century due to rising sea levels and other climate change effects, with Australia, Canada, Chile, Mexico, China and the United States among the hardest hit, researchers said on Monday.

Many beaches that attract frolicking vacationers may be turned into rocky remnants as rising seas, changing weather patterns and other factors erode sandy shorelines that now account for more than a third of global sea coasts, they added.

A large proportion of shoreline in densely populated areas is projected to be lost.

“Touristic areas, which have sandy beaches as their main selling point, will probably face strong consequences,” said coastal oceanographer Michalis Vousdoukas of the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre in Ispra, Italy, lead author of the study published in the journal Nature Climate Change. ...

Aside from economic value, sandy shorelines play a vital environmental role.

“Sandy beaches are important habitats supporting a wide range of species. They also protect the coast from the effects of storms, so without sandy beaches other inland environments can be affected by the effects of waves and saltwater intrusion,” Vousdoukas added. ...

The researchers analyzed satellite images showing shoreline changes during the past three decades and applied these trends to two climate change scenarios looking forward, one envisioning a moderate mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions linked to climate change and the other envisioning high emissions.

By 2050, the researchers projected losses of 13.6 to 15.2 per cent of global beaches, amounting to 36,097 to 40,511 kilometres of lost sandy shorelines. By 2100, they projected losses of 35.7 to 49.5 per cent of beaches spanning 95,061 to 131,745 km.

Australia would lose more sandy shoreline than any other country, with up to 14,849 km projected to be gone by 2100, about half its current total sandy coastline.

Canada ranks second in projected losses (up to 14,425 km). It is followed by Chile (up to 6,659 km), Mexico (up to 5,488 km), China (up to 5,440 km), the United States (up to 5,530 km), Russia (up to 4,762 km) and Argentina (up to 3,739 km).

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/canada-beaches-climate-change_ca_5e5...

Here's a little more on opposition to the Energie Saguenay pipeline by the Innu and the countervailing support for the project from the Quebec Federation of Chambers of Commerce.

Meanwhile, the article notes that Trudeau says we must find a balance environment and the economy while suggesting we need to attract investors. While more than 10,000 scientists have warned that we need to shift from fossil fuels to renewables starting right now, Trudeau continues to promote a "balance" that primarily involves much more investment in fossil fuels. 

 

Le tracé proposé par Gazoduq. (plan: courtoisie)

Michel Potvin, deputy mayor of Saguenay, told Radio-Canada's Tout un matin that this represents a real setback for the project. "It's concerning when we talk about an investor putting in $4 billion of $9 billion. It's clear that Mr. Buffet has good reasons. We're seeing the rail crisis — that's surely one of the reasons." ...

In Quebec, the LNG project has also stirred opposition from members of Innu communities. The proposed pipeline would go through their ancestral territory.

"It takes the acceptance of Indigenous people," Potvin said. "In our head, here in Saguenay, we thought we had it. We thought it was accepted by the people. What we're seeing is that actually nothing is certain."

The Quebec Federation of Chambers of Commerce released a statement Thursday calling on the provincial and federal governments to reassure potential investors.

The federation is asking for "concrete measures" to restore confidence and encourage foreign investment in Quebec. ...

Quebec opposition parties were skeptical of the purported reasons for the investment company's withdrawal. "Honestly, I think they are putting a lot on the back of Indigenous Nations," said Sylvain Gaudreault, the Parti Québécois MNA for the borough of Jonquière in Saguenay.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said measures are in place to strike a balance between the environment and economy.

"With climate change, with the environmental awareness of so many consumers and investors, we need to do more to demonstrate that the jobs that we are creating, that the investments we are attracting, will be able to succeed in a world where the reality of climate change is hitting harder and harder," he told reporters on Thursday.

"This climate of uncertainty is deplorable and needs to be reversed," said President Charles Milliard in the news release.

The federation, which represents 130 chambers of commerce across the province, says the country is facing "an image crisis" on the international stage.

"The governments of Quebec and of Canada need to fix this significant damage in order to support businesses impacted by the rail blockades," Milliard said.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/saguenay-lng-project-1.5486517

NDPP wrote:

Brent, WTI Oil Futures Crash 20% Over Opec Deal Failure and Coronavirus Fears

https://on.rt.com/acef

Crude oil just crashed down to $30/barrel as Saudi launches oil price war following collapse of OPEC output deal last week. Details to follow...

Even more reason to leave it in the ground.

Unfortunately that is not the reason it crashed.

A few theories: 

One is geopolitical play from the non opec countries.

But a more credible one is the realization that this crisis is different becuase in the past you could get agreement to slow production becuase it was money in the bank. Now with climate change pressure, efficiency pressure, cheaper and better alternatives -- these pressures are not going away. Better for them to compete and sell in a glut now than to wiat assuming they will get much later. Supply is increasing demand is falling. Now economic difficulty makes this more urgent.

Sean in Ottawa wrote

But a more credible one is the realization that this crisis is different becuase in the past you could get agreement to slow production becuase it was money in the bank. Now with climate change pressure, efficiency pressure, cheaper and better alternatives -- these pressures are not going away. Better for them to compete and sell in a glut now than to wiat assuming they will get much later. Supply is increasing demand is falling. Now economic difficulty makes this more urgent.

Bill McKibbon, environmental activist and leader of the environmental organizaiton 350.org (The 350 in the name stands for 350 parts per million of carbon dioxide which has been identified as the safe upper limit to avoid a climate tipping point. We already have reached 415 ppm.) has written an article in January after BlackRock reported it is shifting away from fossil fuels. BlackRock is the world's largest asset manager.

As McKibbon notes the change has come too late for the Arctic (and the Antarctic) and many other places, but it may (or may not)  save us from the worst potential effects of climate change.

Meanwhile Trudeau continues to pursue a "balance" between economic and environmental long after more than 10,000 scientists warn that we only have ten years left to make a transitional gigantic change in energy use, a change that may already be too late. By hanging onto this "balance" approach Trudeau not only risks Canada's environment, but also its economic future as investments continue to shift away from 30-40 year fossil fuel megaprojects as an economic driver. 

Here's part of the McKibbon article. 

In response to mounting public pressure, Larry Fink, the C.E.O. of BlackRock, announced, in a letter to investors, that the firm will make some modest policy changes related to climate change.Photograph by Damon Winter / NYT / Redux

If you felt the earth tremble a little bit in Manhattan on Tuesday morning, it was likely caused by the sheer heft of vast amounts of money starting to shift. “Seismic” is the only word to describe the recent decision of the asset-management firm BlackRock to acknowledge the urgency of the climate crisis and begin (emphasis on begin) to start redirecting its investments.

By one estimate, there’s about eighty trillion dollars of money on the planet. If that’s correct, then BlackRock’s holding of seven trillion dollars means that nearly a dime of every dollar rests in its digital files, mostly in the form of stocks it invests in for pension funds and the like. So when BlackRock’s C.E.O., Larry Fink, devoted his annual letter to investors to explaining that climate change has now put us “on the edge of a fundamental reshaping of finance,” it marked a watershed moment in climate history.

What’s changed now are a couple of factors. For one, fossil-fuel stocks have begun to drag down portfolios. As the Timesobserved, “Had Mr. Fink moved a decade ago to pull BlackRock’s funds out of companies that contribute to climate change, his clients would have been well served. In the past 10 years, through Friday, companies in the S&P 500 energy sector had gained just 2 percent in total. In the same period, the broader S&P 500 nearly tripled.”

But, at least as important, public pressure just keeps mounting. Activist campaigns have been working to make the financial industry start to pay attention. (I’m involved with one, and was among those arrested, on Friday, after a sojourn in the lobby of a Chase branch.) In the past few months, Goldman Sachs, Liberty Mutual, and the Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., have all put forth new climate policies, and the European Investment Bank—the largest international public bank in the world—announced that it would stop lending to fossil-fuel projects altogether.

Meanwhile, more and more people around the world have started questioning their financial advisers. Climate change, Fink said in his letter, is “almost invariably the top issue that clients around the world raise with BlackRock.” And BlackRock’s clients aren’t the only ones concerned, so you may well see Vanguard and State Street, the other asset-managing behemoths, following this lead in the months to come.

BlackRock’s actual policy changes are modest compared with Fink’s rhetoric. At least at first, the main change will be to rid the firm’s actively managed portfolio (about $1.8 trillion in value) of coal stocks; but coal, though still a major contributor to climate change, is already on the wane, except in Asia. The companies that mine it have tanked in value—even Donald Trump’s coddling has been unable to slow the industry’s decline in this country. So an investor swearing off coal is a bit like cutting cake out of your diet but clinging to a slice of pie and a box of doughnuts.

And Fink is apparently stuck in a decade-old time warp, suggesting on CNBC that “natural gas plays a very large role in the energy transition.” This is also the new official position of the American Petroleum Institute; sadly, the science shows that fracking for natural gas releases large amounts of methane, the second-most significant contributor to climate change.

The other weakness of the plan is that it doesn’t directly address BlackRock’s main business, which is passive index funds. The company has previously maintained that it can’t do anything about the contents of those indexes. But BlackRock’s announcement suggests that this position is changing. ...

But BlackRock is so enormous that the signal it sent will likely be heard even through the layers of detail. “I, for one, see this as the beginning of the end for the fossil-fuel system,” Kingsmill Bond, an analyst who used to work at Citibank and Deutsche Bank, and is now with the London-based Carbon Tracker Initiative. ...

So, Bond explained, “If you have a gas network or a coal ship or a diesel-car factory, Fink is essentially saying that there will very shortly be no buyers for these assets. And, because markets think that one through, it means that the next time you try to refinance your loan on these assets, or the next time you try to sell them, you will struggle. In fact, that is how capital markets pull risk forward.”

There is still much work to be done. For today, though, it’s enough that the biggest guy on the block has begun knuckling under to reality—a reality that Fink acknowledges will only grow larger. ...

It’s come late—too late to save the Arctic, too late to save the species that have likely gone extinct in Australia’s fires, too late to save the homes of millions of people around the world forced to flee them amid withering droughts and rising seas. But if, for a moment, you want to feel a little hopeful about the future of the climate, then today is your day.

[/quote]

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/citing-climate-change-black...

• 

  Acqua alta in Venice

  15 NOVEMBER 2019

• 

  Amazon rainforest on fire

  27 AUGUST 2019

•