Climate

Climate Justice

We need responses that are truly intersectional. So how about as we decarbonise and create a less polluted world, we also build a much fairer society on multiple fronts?
Many environmentalists hear that and think: “Well, that sounds a lot harder than just implementing a carbon tax or switching to green energy.” And the argument we make in the climate justice movement is that what we’re trying to do is to build a power base that is invested in climate action. Because if you’re only talking about carbon, then anybody who has a more daily emergency – whether it’s police violence, gender violence or housing precarity – is going to think: “That’s a rich person problem. I’m focused on the daily emergency of staying alive.” But if you can connect the issues and show how climate action can create better jobs and redress gaping inequalities, and lower stress levels, then you start getting people’s attention and you build a broader constituency that is invested in getting climate policies passed.
I don’t believe we have the luxury of throwing up our hands and saying: “We’re doomed, let’s just go Mad Max on this.” I think there are ways of preparing for those shocks, that build a way of living with one another that is significantly kinder and more generous than the way we currently live with one another, which is really quite brutal. That requires investing in the labour of care at every level, and guaranteeing basic economic rights, like the right to housing, food and clean water. If we build out that infrastructure, we can weather shocks with far greater grace. That’s where I place my hope.
— from an interview with Naomi Klein by Madeleine de Trenqualye in the Guardian

Will we follow Belize? The UN just confirmed the Great Barrier Reef is in Danger

What just happened?

The Great Barrier Reef has been World Heritage listed since 1981. This means it’s considered an area of outstanding value to humanity. Covering an area the size of Italy, this iconic area includes some 3,000 separate reefs, over 1,000 islands and a variety of other significant habitats.

The latest UN mission has just reported back, finding the reef’s condition is worsening and recommending it be listed as “in danger”. It also offered practical solutions.

Previous governments have fought to ensure the reef is not listed as in-danger despite their own five-yearly reviews demonstrating an obvious decline. In 2009, the reef’s condition was rated poor and declining. In 2014 it was poor and declining and in 2019, very poor and declining.

So the government knows the reef is in danger. We know, and the tourism industry knows. While some tourism operators worry about their business, the opposite appears to be true: more people go, thinking it might be their last chance to see it. And already, operators are adapting by taking tourists to areas still in good condition.

Federal governments just don’t want the reef on the list because of the hit to their international reputation – and to their domestic standing.

If the reef is officially listed as “in danger” next year, it will draw a much greater focus to the reef’s plight. And that may help galvanise effective national and global action.
Take the case of the famous coral reefs of Belize in Central America. When these reefs were listed, the government banned nearby oil exploration and protected mangroves. Belize’s reefs have now been taken off the in-danger list.

— Jon C Day, the Conversation, We all know the Great Barrier Reef is in danger – the UN has just confirmed it. Again

NOT ZERO: How ‘net zero’ targets disguise climate inaction

from the Joint technical briefing by climate justice organisations Action Aid, Corporate Accountability, Friends of the Earth International, the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice, Third World Network and What Next?

Far from signifying climate ambition, the phrase “net zero” is being used by a majority of polluting governments and corporations to evade responsibility, shift burdens, disguise climate inaction, and in some cases even to scale up fossil fuel extraction, burning and emissions. The term is used to greenwash business-as-usual or even business-more-than-usual. At the core of these pledges are small and distant targets that require no action for decades, and promises of technologies that are unlikely ever to work at scale, and which are likely to cause huge harm if they come to pass.

Key takeaways:

  • The term “net zero” is used by the world’s biggest polluters and governments as a façade to evade responsibility and disguise their inaction or harmful action on climate change.

  • “Net zero emissions” does not mean “zero emissions”, and should not be accepted at face value.

  • There is simply not enough available land on the planet to accommodate all of the combined corporate and government “net zero” plans for offsets and Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) tree plantations.

  • Collectively, “net zero” climate targets allow for continued rising levels of greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions, while hoping that technologies or tree plantations will be able to suck carbon dioxide (CO2) out of the air in the future.

  • By putting the burden for carbon sequestration onto land and tree plantations in global South countries – which have done little to cause the climate crisis – most “net zero” climate targets are effectively driving a form of carbon colonialism.

  • Many governments and corporations have pledged to achieve “net zero” by a distant date, further compounding the harm caused.

Read more >>

COP27 Update

from In numbers: The state of the climate ahead of Cop27 by Chloé Farand, Climate Change news

We’re headed for 2.4-2.8C of warming

The Emissions Gap report described progress made since the Cop26 climate talks in Glasgow as “woefully inadequate”.

The updated 2030 climate plans submitted this year reduce projected emissions in 2030 by less than 1%. Countries’ combined climate plans, including targets conditional on international finance, would reduce emissions by 10% by 2030 compared with projections based on current policies.

That’s far off track the 45% reductions scientists say are needed to keep 1.5C within reach.

Current policies would lead to 2.8C of warming by the end of the century. Countries’ unconditional commitments to 2030 would put the world on track for 2.6C of warming. If they deliver further emission cuts contingent on international finance, this would be reduced to 2.4C.

The report adds that investments worth at least $4-6 trillion are needed to decarbonise the global economy.


There have been baby steps on ambition

UN Climate Change’s assessment puts a more positive slant on the numbers but it’s conclusion is similar: “We are still nowhere near the scale and pace of emission reductions required to put us on track toward a 1.5 degrees Celsius world,” said UN Climate Change head Simon Stiell.

The 24 updated plans submitted this year have made a small difference, according to its assessment. Emissions are set to rise 10.6% by 2030 from 2010 levels. That’s slightly better the projected 13.7% increase last year. But not fast enough to keep in line with the Paris Agreement temperature goals.

The synthesis report analyses the contributions of 193 countries submitted to the UN between Cop26 and the 23 September. Together, they cover 94.9% of total global greenhouse gas.


Emissions keep rising 

As the world continues to extract and burn fossil fuels, the World Meteorological Organization finds, once again, that the three main greenhouse gases – carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide – reached new record highs in 2021. 

Read more >>

Tell the Albanese government: it’s time for a national Energy Transition Authority!

Australia has traditionally relied on coal fired power stations to meet its energy needs. This is now rapidly changing, as renewable energy and storage becomes cheaper and older coal fired power stations become ever more expensive to run and less reliable. 

Friends of the Earth has long argued for the need for a national Just Transition Authority

Now, the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) has issued a call for the Albanese government to establish an independent and properly resourced national Energy Transition Authority to manage an orderly and fair transition process for affected workers – including support for redeployment, skills and training, and secure job opportunities.

Friends of the Earth supports this call and encourages our members and supporters to sign the letter below, which will go to the prime minister Anthony Albanese.

You can find details on the ACTU proposal in their Secure Jobs for a Safer Climate report.

Tell the Albanese government: it’s time for a national Energy Transition Authority!
Send a letter