body-container-line-1

Kick Out Fossil Fuel Companies In Paris

Feature Article Kick Out Fossil Fuel Companies In Paris
NOV 29, 2015 LISTEN

In spite of its apparent unavoidability, the extreme influence over and privileged accessed to political decision makers enjoyed by big Fossil Fuel Companies should continue to be resisted to safeguard our environment. Why should world political leaders selfishly safeguard their political interest to hold onto power with the support of these powerful and worthy companies who do not care about sustainability of our environment? But only think about huge profit they make in staying in their businesses. I think it is the ultimate responsibility of our political leaders to stop allowing themselves to be influenced by these polluters who destroy our environment.

In the summer of 2010, a large swathe of the British political establishment called on the White House to ‘stop bashing BP’ – support that assisted the company in persuading President Obama to say on TV: “BP is a strong and viable company and it is in all our interests that it stays that way”

The first corporate sponsors of this winter's 'historic' UN climate talks (COP21) have been unofficially unveiled: luxury brand Luis Vuitton (LVMH) and Suez Environment, a key member of the French pro-fracking lobby. According to an article by ATTAC's Maxime Combes , others were initially announced in the press (BMW, Vattenfall and New Holland Agriculture) but later denied by the COP21 organisers.

In November 2014, the French Government announced that the Senate had cut the public budget , and therefore they would look to the private sector. But there were also many reassurances to civil society groups that the French Presidency of the climate talks would not make the same mistake as two years previously in Warsaw, when some of the biggest polluters – including Big Oil, Gas and Coal – were all able to clad themselves in the conventional colours of the UN and claim to be in support of tackling climate change.

suing the German government for phasing out nuclear, and already won a case against Berlin daring to increase efficiency standards of its coal plants), gas-guzzling BMW (who roped in Angela Merkel to lobby against higher car emissions standards ) and New Holland Agriculture (involved in 'climate smart agriculture', putting farming into the hands of multinationals and failed carbon markets ). Even if not the official COP21 sponsors, all three are confirmed as sponsors of the corporate-friendly Sustainable Innovation Forum 2015 taking place during COP21 (7-8 December). While not the main event, it has been given the official COP21 seal of approval (a 'label' used to endorse all sorts of initiatives), and its website makes the connection unmistakable: http://cop21paris.org .

Sponsorship of COP21 is only the tip of the corporate iceberg in terms of how multinationals are trying to use the talks and the attention around them to promote their own solutions to climate change. Unfortunately, such false solutions will only ensure a continuation of business as usual rather than the transformative change we need to see. Corporate events inside the UN negotiations – like last year's Shell- and Chevron- sponsored attack on the fossil fuel divestment movement in favour of experimental technologies – will be widespread. Two years ago the preparatory negotiations in Warsaw were held between negotiators and corporations with civil society excluded, so it wouldn't be such a big step to take – if a death sentence for the climate and those already suffering.

Corporate influence over the UN talks has already begun. In the French capital, events are popping up everywhere, like the Business & Climate Summit in May, co-hosted by UNESCO, UNEP and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development – which includes oil company Shell, Dow Chemicals and LaFarge cement manufacturers among

others (citizens staged a big protest against the event in Lima last year during the UN climate talks). In the capitals, big business is already hard at work, through direct lobbying and big PR events, to ensure that when leaders arrive in Paris, their work is already done and our political leaders are all singing the same pollution song.

To sustain the struggle against Fossil Fuel Companies civil society organizations in Africa particular should continue to put pressure on their governments who are already singing the songs of these polluters.

It was a welcome news when the World Bank on Tuesday, November 25, 2015

unveiled a new plan that calls for 16 billion U.S. dollars to help African countries adapt to climate change and build up the continent's resilience to climate shocks.

Dubbed: ‘’Accelerating Climate-Resilient and Low-Carbon Development’’, the Africa Climate Business Plan will be presented to the global climate talks in Paris on Nov. 30.

It spells out actions plans to boost the resilience of the continent's assets including its people, land, water, and cities, as well as other moves including boosting renewable energy and strengthening early warning systems.

"Sub-Saharan Africa is highly vulnerable to climate shocks, and our research shows that could have far ranging impact on everything from child stunting and malaria to food price increases and droughts," said World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim.

"This plan identifies concrete steps that African governments can take to ensure that their countries will not lose hard-won gains in economic growth and poverty reduction, and they can offer some protection from climate change," he noted.

The Plan has it that, the region requires five to 10 billion dollars per year to adapt to global warming of two degrees centigrade.

The World Bank and the United Nations Environment Program approximate that the cost of managing climate resilience will continue to rise to 20 to 50 billion dollars by mid-century, and closer to 100 billion dollars in the event of a four degrees centigrade warming.

Out of 16.1 billion dollars that the ambitious plan proposes for fast-tracking climate adaptation, some 5.7 billion dollars are expected from the International Development Association (IDA), the arm of the World Bank Group that supports the poorest countries.

The remaining amount of the money will come from various climate finance instruments, development community, private sector and domestic sources.

"The Africa Climate Business Plan spells out a clear roadmap to invest in the continent's urgent climate needs and to fast-track the required climate finance to ensure millions of people are protected from sliding into extreme poverty," said Makhtar Diop, World Bank Group Vice President for Africa.

"While adapting to climate change and mobilizing the necessary resources remain an enormous challenge, the plan represents a critical opportunity to support a priority set of climate-resilient initiatives in Africa," he added.

So the question is where are the sources of the money that that the World Bank has just announced to be given to the Africa continent to combat climate change.

To me this is where the controversy is because there are so many questions regarding the sources of money since we are told that the remaining amount of the 16.1 Million will come from various climate finance instruments, development community, private sector and domestic sources.

It is arguably true that over the years the biggest sponsors of Climate events including COP21 are BIG FOSSIL FUEL companies. Ironically, they try to show that they really care about climate change and its impact on mankind. However, these companies are in dilemma about the outcome of COP21 in Paris. Many cooperate bodies have raised so many questions worthy of attention in connection of double standards these Fossil Fuel Companies are portraying. So the question is should the world continue to embrace these polluters.

I do not think so. I sincerely believe that some drastic action should be taken to respond to this hypocritical Fossil Companies’ stance and their allies to give respite to the world from their inimical activities.

African leaders should not only smiles to the offer by the World Bank to combat the Climate Change they should also do well to ask questions about strings attached to the money in order to go to sleep after the money is made available to them.

Ahead of COP21 in Paris a former President of Ghana, John Agyekum Kufuor and a UN Envoy for Climate Change has already asked donor countries to commit adequate fundings to help Ghana and Africa countries in general to contain Climate Change.

The United Nations provided Ghana 8.8 million dollars over the period of five years starting from 2012 to 2017 to help fight deforestation. In addition to that Ghana received 5.2 million dollars from World Bank to combat climate Change.

Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA) Ghana has noted that the country is 70 percent prepared to combat oil spill. This assertion can be tied in with how financially prepared the country is in fighting oil spill as has been touted by the EPA.If this same Fossil companies are going to assist the country in tackling the problem it give credence about the fact that these companies will continue to be in business and the oil spill will not stop but everything will be in life cycle to the detriment of the countries ecosystem.

I would want to urge African leaders to take footsteps of people like Green Party MP Caroline Lucas in fighting Climate Change.

According to a report filed by Ben Lucas on Thursday, November 19, 2015:

Fossil fuel companies should be “kicked out” of the climate negotiations in Paris at the end of this month, Green Party MP Caroline Lucas has told the House of Commons.

She made this comment during a questioning session with the Secretary of State for the Department of Energy and Climate Change, Amber Rudd, in parliament on Thursday afternoon.

Lucas said: “For over 20 years governments have met, yet greenhouse gas emissions have not decreased and the climate keeps changing. The forces of inertia and obstruction prevail, the fossil fuel giants and the politicians who do their bidding are responsible. And that’s why I call for the fossil fuel lobby to be kicked out of the UN climate negotiations.”

The Brighton Pavilion MP also emphasized the importance of divestment from fossil fuel companies, particularly parliament’s own pension fund, and criticised the government in general for its recent environmental policies including tax breaks for offshore oil and gas production and the removal of solar energy subsidies.

She threw a caution that policies like these will weaken the UK’s credibility on climate change. Lucas noted: “International leadership has to depend on domestic action at home otherwise it has absolutely no credibility and that is where I fear this Secretary of State is letting us down.”

Lucas’s words were echoed in a damning report issued earlier this week criticising the infiltration of big energy companies into climate negotiations since they began decades ago.

The report by the Corporate European Observatory (CEO) argues that “the market-based and techno-fix solutions on the table are diverting attention from the real culprits and delaying real action.”

They also claim that politicians have chosen measures that “suit existing business models and continued corporate profit making” which has largely been down to strong corporate lobbying.

Recent examples cited in the report include lobbying by the European Automobile Manufacturers' Association. Their current president, who is from Renault-Nissan ( a COP21 sponsor ) has consistently fought against tougher car emissions targets and been instrumental in delaying new testing procedures on behalf of its members – including Volkswagen, who used to chair the group.

This year's talks are also sponsored by some of France’s “dirtiest corporations”. This includes Air France, nuclear and coal giant EDF, energy utilities company Engie (formerly GDF Suez) and coal-financing bank BNP Paribas.

The report also looked to dispel the myth that gas is the clean alternative to dirty fossil fuels. It explains that the extraction process, particularly fracking, can be even worse for the climate than coal due to methane leakage.

Furthermore, the report states that focusing on gas means less attention is paid to proper clean energy solutions and it allows oil and gas companies to “remain in the driving seat” for future climate negotiations.

For these reasons, the report concludes that the big energy companies have already captured the negotiations.

A “fundamental change in approach” is therefore needed in order to make for truly significant negotiations it says.

CEO proposes that climate negotiations should follow the example of the World Health Organization, which introduced a firewall between public health officials and the tobacco industry, in order to effectively tackle the effects of smoking.

Alex Ababio , climate tracker for adopt a negotiator program. Email: [email protected]

body-container-line