@marine_stephan
•
Marine Stephan
12 h
•
Esther Duflo, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, presented a proposal to the G20 summit that suggests taxing global corporations and the world’s top billionaires to raise money for climate adaptation in countries that are most impacted by the climate crisis. The tax would range from 15-20% for multinational corporations and 2% for the world's top 3,000 billionaires. These 2 taxes could raise up to $400 billion per year for a loss, damage, and adaptation fund. “Richer citizens emit much more than poorer citizens,” Duflo wrote in her proposal to the G20. But the brunt of extreme heat will be felt by poorer citizens who tend to live in hotter regions of the world. “Moreover, poverty makes it harder to adapt to warm temperatures,” she said. This is the first time that a climate tax also aiming to address inequalities has been suggested and proposed to leaders of G20. This is pretty good that someone with such renown would advocate this. Read more: https://heated.world/p/nobel-prize-winning-economist-calls?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=2473&post_id=143911851&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoxMTYzNzY0MywicG9zdF9pZCI6MTQzOTExODUxLCJpYXQiOjE3MTM5NTY5NTQsImV4cCI6MTcxNjU0ODk1NCwiaXNzIjoicHViLTI0NzMiLCJzdWIiOiJwb3N0LXJlYWN0aW9uIn0.M0dcmE4UD8Ne_P9QLT4CZ4-NEGCSKBo2pmKp4LlEyvQ&r=6xfnv&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
3 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
Shared by Marine Stephan
Erlijn van Genuchten
15 h
•
climate change is progressing, extreme weather events are occurring more frequently. As I explained in Chapter 3 of my book “A Guide to a Healthier Planet”, extreme weather events include heat waves, tornadoes, wildfires, floods, and droughts. Not every country is affected by these events in the same way, meaning that some places will experience tornadoes more frequently while other places will be facing droughts more often and longer. Drought is different from most of the other extreme weather events as it can last a lot longer: often a decade or more. This can be caused by natural processes such as interactions between the ocean and atmosphere, heat waves, and El Niño. El Niño happens when deep water that normally rises to the surface in the Pacific Ocean remains deep. This means fewer nutrients and less cold water reach the surface, resulting in warmer, nutrient-poorer water. Apart from natural causes of droughts, other causes involve human behavior, such as fires and global warming caused by carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Global warming impacts droughts through increasing temperatures that cause more water from the ground to evaporate, and through reducing soil moisture, the amount of flowing water, and the water level in water storage areas such as streams and lakes. They can be categorized based on intensity: - Meteorological drought: a lack of precipitation such as rain and snow and depends on how much water in a certain area evaporates - Agricultural drought: a lack of water in the soil, causing low soil moisture and a lack of water for plants - Hydrological drought: a period of unusually low surface or underground water levels and a reduced water flow below and above the ground. This drought usually follows meteorological and agricultural drought - Socioeconomic drought: the inability to meet human needs because of water shortage As these types of drought differ in intensity, the impact differs as well. For example, while meteorological droughts affect terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, they usually don’t lead to a lack of drinking water for us. And this type of drought usually has a small impact on energy production. On the other end of the scale, socioeconomic droughts can for example lead to illness and conflicts, and in the worst case to death. Also, the impact differs between countries, across areas within countries, and within the population, especially when an area is unprepared for drought. This is how droughts can impact our health: 1. Water-related effects The first way droughts impact our health is through water-related effects. Even though less water is involved in a drought, the risk of diseases being spread by water is higher. This is because drought impacts not only water availability but also water quality. How water quality is affected by droughts is a complex mechanism that depends on climate and environmental conditions and watershed characteristics. A watershed is an area that drains rainwater or melted snow to streams, lakes, or wetlands. For example, when less water flows during drought, water stays in the same place for longer. This allows pollutants such as chemicals, metals, and other solid particles to gather in this stagnant water. And the number of harmful microorganisms have the opportunity to grow. This makes it more likely that we are affected by diseases. Unfortunately, climate change is expected to worsen these effects because harmful organisms are more likely to spread in warmer and saltier water (further reading: How does Climate Change Impacts Plants in Urban Environment). The number of nutrients decreases and water can become less clear during drought, too. This is because fewer nutrients can be transported to other areas, soil erodes more easily due to evaporating water, and internal processes such as nutrient cycling can be affected. Nutrient cycling involves exchanging nutrients between living organisms, the environment, and non-living components to support the life and growth of organisms. This can lead to reduced nutrients and oxygen in water, making plants and animals struggle to survive, and can make water unsafe to drink. While water availability and quality are reduced during droughts, the need for water can increase, for instance, to water plants. This is critical as it makes us more likely and maybe even force us to use unsafe water. This can in turn make us more likely to become ill. This is especially the case for poor populations with limited access to water and sanitation. 2. Food-related effects The second way droughts impact our health is through food-related effects. These effects are closely related to decreased food security and nutrition — in the worst case even starvation — during a drought. Especially low- and middle-income countries are affected because they have fewer opportunities to make up for food scarcity, for example because of poor transportation networks and limited access to other markets. Climate change is expected to increase food insecurity and malnutrition through droughts, which is critical as already about 1 in 3 people worldwide don’t have access to adequate food. This is because droughts cause fewer crops to grow, limit the availability of livestock, and affect fisheries. This means that both the quantity and quality of food in drought-affected areas change. Also, food prices will change because of limited availability, which will affect the quantity and quality of food people can afford. The consequences of limited quantity and quality of food — and the resulting under-nutrition — are far-reaching. For example, children who survive under-nutrition often suffer from long-term cognitive damage, physical underdevelopment, and a higher risk of infections, such as malaria. Also, pregnant women who are under-nourished have a higher risk of bearing early and giving birth to babies with low birth weight. And in all of us, undernutrition can lead to mental health issues, including more stress, anxiety, and depression. In extreme cases, these mental health issues can trigger suicide. 3. Virus-related effects The third way droughts impact our health is through virus-related effects. How droughts cause these effects is complex, as several changes can happen at the same time. For example, the number of viruses that are spread by mosquitoes can increase when storage containers are filled with limited available water. At the same time, the number of breeding grounds can decrease because droughts reduce the number of breeding grounds for mosquitoes in natural environments. Also, other animals that carry viruses are affected by droughts, such as ticks. Ticks thrive in wet environments, which means that their numbers decrease during droughts. 4. Air-related effects The fourth way droughts impact our health is through air-related effects. Air-related effects are caused by droughts because they impact air quality by increasing the concentration of air pollutants. For example because of more and more severe wildfires and dust. Inhaling these pollutants can block our airways, cause inflammation, and make blood more likely to form clots. This can lead to problems with our heart and blood vessels. In the worst case, it can even lead to death. These risks are especially high in cities that also suffer from other pollution sources, such as particles from vehicles that burn fuel. (Further reading on the impact of dust on our health: How Earthquake Debris Affects The Environment and Our Health) In this video, you can see a huge dust cloud in Parkes (United Kingdom). This cloud was caused by a strong low air pressure area, which picked up a lot of dust from the very dry ground: https://youtu.be/Esz6ne9x9yM Apart from inorganic particles, air pollutants can also include organic matter, such as harmful microorganisms, allergens, and fungi spores. They can irritate the lungs after inhaling them, and increase the chance of diseases, allergies, and infections. Such diseases are more likely to spread during droughts as they can more easily be carried by the wind. How we can take action So, climate change makes meteorological, agricultural, and hydrological drought worse by less rainfall and snow, and by higher temperatures that cause more water to evaporate. This affects us as this can turn into a socioeconomic drought, meaning that we don’t have enough water to meet our needs. But there are practical ideas of what you and I can do to prevent droughts and reduce the negative impact of droughts: - Installing a rain barrel to capture rainwater - Removing pollutants from water, for example by using plants and microorganisms (further reading: Chapter 11 of A Guide to a Healthier Planet: “Pollution Solutions: Removing Pollutants from Soil and Water”) - Reusing wastewater (further reading: 10 Technologies That Allow Us To Reuse Our Daily Wastewater) - Reducing water use, for example by washing at the sink or having shorter showers - Harvesting water when drinking water runs out (further reading: 2 Methods That Can Save Us When Freshwater Runs Out) - Educating yourself in resilient and sustainable agriculture - Voting for a political party that takes climate change seriously and puts solutions into practice Which one of these can you implement in your daily life? And do you have further ideas of what you and I could do? Thank you in advance for putting them into practice and sharing them in a comment to this question to inspire all of us. --- Did you enjoy this article? Then I’m sure you’ll love my book “A Guide to A Healthier Planet” as well. Have a peek inside the book at: https://www.sustainabledecisions.eu/guide-to-a-healthier-planet --- About the author Dr. Erlijn van Genuchten is a an internationally recognized environmental sustainability expert. She is a science communicator, helping scientists in the fields of nature and sustainability increase the outreach of their results and allowing us all to put scientific insights into practice and contribute to a sustainable future. Erlijn has inspired thousands of people around the world — for example — by supporting the United Nations with her expertise, her book “A Guide to A Healthier Planet” published by Springer Nature, her YouTube channel Xplore Nature, and her posts on social media. Credit Chivangulula, F. M., Amraoui, M., & Pereira, M. G. (2023). The Drought Regime in Southern Africa: A Systematic Review. Climate, 11(7), 147. Salvador, C., Nieto, R., Vicente-Serrano, S. M., García-Herrera, R., Gimeno, L., & Vicedo-Cabrera, A. M. (2023). Public health implications of drought in a climate change context: A critical review. Annual review of public health, 44, 213–232.
•
•
13 h
This is quite informing...the issue of climate change and possible hazards that are likely to come up is well explained.there's actually alot that we can learn from this.
Marine Stephan
15 h
•
Welcome to a new week of climate denial. In her new book "Ten Years to Save the West", Liz Truss, the UK's former Prime Minister, urges governments to drop their climate laws and spreads falsehoods about green policies and climate solutions. I won't go too much into detail here (but I would recommend you read this great article which dismantles one by one the false claims she makes in her book), but this book is a great example of how ideology and personal beliefs (or stupidity?) can get in the way of common sense. Among other things, she writes that we should scrap climate policies, calls for more fossil fuel extraction, and falsely claims that EVs are worse for the environment than vehicles powered by fossil fuels. Oh, and she also fondly recalls her attempt to cancel the 2021 COP26 climate conference in Glasgow. Something to be proud of, right? At least, she is. She claims that when she was chief secretary to the Treasury in 2018, she made “11th-hour attempts to ditch COP26”. And that is pretty scary. When politicians (and former Prime Ministers) start spreading climate misinformation and disinformation, it becomes even more dangerous... Liz Truss and climate denial is a long love story. You just have to look at her profile on We Don't Have Time to notice it. And this time is no exception... and not a surprise, especially when you know that during her leadership campaign, she received £30,000 from a pro-fracking lobby group, £10,000 from a climate denial activist, and £100,000 from the wife of a former BP oil executive. Climate denialism is a lucrative business. Read more: https://www.desmog.com/2024/04/18/liz-truss-book-climate-change-net-zero/
44 more agrees trigger social media ads
•
•
7 h
This is heartbreaking, she a bad influence, and does not care about the planet
•
•
14 h
What the...! It is like openly denying something that is staring you right in the face! How could one be so so ignorant!
•
•
14 h
It's heartbreaking to see influential figures take such a stance on an issue as crucial as climate change. However, it's important for individuals and communities to continue advocating for responsible environmental policies and actions to address this pressing global challenge. Also it is important for leaders to support and strengthen climate laws, rather than advocate for their abolition.
Shared by Marine Stephan
Varsa Mahananda
4 w
•
Aren't we polluting our environment further by vouching for fossil fuel subsidy? Elections are round the corner throughout the world, and we see all kinds of election campaigns doing their rounds everywhere. One campaign particularly caught my attention. It is not that uncommon, however. It is the promise to reduce fossil fuel prices and to provide subsidies on LPG. I understand this is an attractive proposition for the people in the short-term scenario. I mean, yes, everyone wants cheaper petrol and diesel in a world where an electric vehicle, and its infrastructure, is still expensive and very much in need of development. But aren't the parties resorting to a 'cheaper' way out to gain votes? We know we should move on to clean and green energy. Shouldn't the parties in power be promising us more environment-friendly solutions instead of going for the easy way out? And the easy way out would still have been okay, had it not been a sure shot way of killing our planet. If you want to promise us something, then promise us a better environment. Focus on building clean energy, in building the electric vehicle infrastructure, and make greener options cheaper...! Oh well, who am I to say? Who wants to do that much work when we, as individuals, are so much happier to get that minimal subsidy, let alone the fact that there won't be a world to enjoy it in, for much longer. Did you know that the world's governments today are handing $7 trillion of their taxpayers' money in fossil fuel subsidies, as we speak, while not even spending even half of it on climate solutions? So when they say they are helping us, that is actually making things worse, by fueling an already overheated crisis. Learn more about how the fossil fuel industry is being funded right out of our pockets: https://www.imf.org/en/Blogs/Articles/2023/08/24/fossil-fuel-subsidies-surged-to-record-7-trillion
•
•
4 w
Subsidies serve to encourage consumption so fuel subsidies encourage consumption of fossil fuels. They should be done away with to discourage use of fossil fuels. Infact we should increase the prices of fuel prices
•
•
4 w
Scaling back fossil fuel subsidies would reduce air pollution and make a major contribution to slowing climate change.
•
•
4 w
In as much as the government is failing us..it's quite discouraging seeing citizens happy for subsidies on fossil fuels....we should atleast be willing to pay a little bit more money and go green for the common good of everyone
Shared by Marine Stephan
Varsa Mahananda
18 h
•
Louisiana State University has accepted $25 million as donation from Shell to allow the fossil fuel company to decide what research can be carried out at the university. At a time when the whole world is trying to work towards phasing out fossil fuel, this news comes as a disappointment. The donation that Shell made to LSU allowed the former to get a seat on the latter’s advisory board and the autonomy to choose research areas at the university. And that’s not all. Shell also holds a say to put a stop on an ongoing research project as well. Talk about the death of academic freedom! Robert Mann, a political commentator and former LSU journalism professor, told the Lens and the Guardian, “I have a hard time seeing a faculty member engaged in legitimate research being eager for an oil company or representative of a chemical company to vote on his or her research agenda. That is an egregious violation of academic freedom.” Educational institutions are the places where we are supposed to be taught the basics, the difference between right and wrong. If these institutions become the places where a research on fossil fuel can be carried out, what is the hope for the rest of the world? Where do we educate our children about the reality of climate change? Learn more about the LSU and the other universities forming these fossil fuel partnerships: https://thelensnola.org/2024/04/19/lsus-fossil-fuel-partnerships/
17 more agrees trigger social media ads
•
•
6 h
The influence of fossil fuel companies on research areas at LSU will raise ethical concerns and potential conflicts of interest. Maintaining the integrity and independence of academic research is crucial, and transparency in research partnerships is essential to uphold the credibility and objectivity of scientific inquiry.
•
•
16 h
This practice can lead to conflicts of interest and compromise the objectivity of scientific inquiry.
•
•
13 h
Financial vulnerability of this institution should not push them to allow such a dangerous decision. On the same Shell should desist from using other institutions to clean their name when they have a motive to continue with fossil fuels production.
Shared by Marine Stephan
Matin Ahrimankosh
18 h
•
In a world where 783 million people suffer from hunger, we waste over 1 billion meals every single day. But it is more than just unfinished meals. Food loss and waste generate 8 to 10 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions and drive biodiversity loss. In 2022 the world wasted 1.05 billion tonnes of food. With better data, countries can target hotspots, drive innovation, and track progress to halve food waste by 2030. Cities have the greatest potential for food waste reduction and circularity and by reducing food waste in our homes, we can contribute to collective global action. 🍽️🌍 Check out the latest Food Waste Index Report 2024. It gives us a better look at how much food we waste globally and suggests ways to reduce it. The report shows that we're making progress in understanding and tackling food waste. https://www.unep.org/resources/publication/food-waste-index-report-2024
22 more agrees trigger social media ads
•
•
6 h
The urgent need for targeted action and innovation to halve food waste by 2030 becomes increasingly apparent. This report underscores the importance of addressing food waste to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and contribute to global sustainability goals by 2030. Together we are the solution to climate crisis.
•
•
13 h
This should be a great turning point for all to understand how to take only the required proportions of food to avoid wasted. And in addition find ways to utilise food waste if any.
•
•
7 h
Cities play a pivotal role in reducing food waste and promoting circularity, and each of us can contribute to global action by minimizing waste in our own homes. 🏙️💡 Let's use this report as a catalyst for change and strive for a more sustainable food system.
Shared by Marine Stephan
Nick Nuttall
1 d
Remarks by Nick Nuttall, the UN Spokesperson for the Paris Climate Agreement and We Don’t Have Time Presenter at an Event Hosted at the Nordic Pension Fund SPP Stockholm, 22 April 2024--The next UN climate conference in Baku, COP29, is being billed as the finance COP. So how fast and how big are the financial flows right now in terms of financing a transition to a low carbon economy that meets the goals of the landmark Paris Climate Agreement of 2015? Let us remind ourselves, that we need to halve global emissions by 2030, to have a 50/50 chance of hitting net zero midcentury and keeping an average global temperature rise no higher than 1.5C. Without finance shifting, we won’t make it. It is a massive topic, and there a lot of numbers out there. But the world is getting better at unravelling this substantial jigsaw puzzle in terms of climate finance flows within countries and between them. One good source, that does a good job at simplifying the numbers of government and perhaps more importantly private sector flows, is the Global Landscape of Finance by the Climate Policy Initiative (CPI) It estimates that climate finance reached almost $1.3 trillion in the period 2021/2022, the last date we have. At the time of the Paris Agreement of 2015, it stood at around $ 570 billion, so you could note that it has more than doubled since nations all agreed to act together. Yet, and perhaps this is important, it is only currently around 1 per cent of global GDP. It also masks the fact that most of this money is being spent on two key sectors---both renewable energy and energy efficiency, and the electrification of transport. This current figure is also heavily skewed towards investments in richer countries in Europe and North America plus a relatively small number of big emerging economies like China, Brazil and some parts of Africa. Investment in other key sectors is much lower—think transitioning to smart, regenerative agriculture, forestry, other infrastructure, waste management, natural or nature-based systems and adapting to climate impacts. That is the best guess on the current state of play. Perhaps more importantly perhaps is what is actually needed to spare the world and its people from dangerous climate change over the coming years? What finance flows are needed to keep at or below the key safety target of 1.5C target? The International Energy Agency estimates $4.5 trillion a year by 2030 for clean energy investments alone—a big slice of that is needed in developing or poorer countries. Remember, climate change will not be solved by simply rich countries doing the right thing domestically, we need to help the poorer countries do their bit—a finance issue again. Of course, clean energy is just part of the finance landscape, albeit a big part. To cover all sectors beyond just energy, will require climate finance flows increasing from the current £1.3 trillion a year to $8 to 9 trillion up to 2030, according to the Climate Policy Initiative authors. And then the flows need to jump perhaps as high as over $12 trillion a year from 2031 to 2050—the 2050 date being when the world needs to be what they call net zero. Think of net zero as the point when we have restored the balance, where the emissions we produce into the atmosphere are down so low, a restored natural world of forests and other nature-based systems can absorb the pollution as it did in the past. The sums involved sound big. But remember investments in energy, transport and infrastructure and agriculture and so on will be happening anyway. It is a question of an additional, extra cost, to make those investments work for climate action, to help decarbonize our global economy. How much is this extra cost then, above and beyond what you might call business and usual investment flows? The consultancy McKinsey, writing for the World Economic Forum, estimates that $3.5 trillion of the bigger sums suggested will be extra money to climate proof the global economy. So, to deal with climate change might be not as high as it looks on first glance, something like 3 per cent of GDP perhaps. There is an alternative. We don’t invest in decarbonization across all sectors in all parts of the globe, in other words we sit back, go play golf and have permanent wild parties watching the sun set. Setting aside the suffering and misery that uncontrolled climate change would cause, the best economics indicate not investing in climate action would also be economic shot in the foot. The Climate Policy Initiative report says: “The longer we delay meeting total climate investment needs, the higher the costs will be both to mitigate global temperature rise and to deal with impacts”. They compare carrying on as we are with acting to keep the temperature rise no higher than 1.5C. “Although climate investment needs are large, the amount required is a fraction of the estimated losses….from direct impacts of increased weather-related and other uninsurable damages, increased production costs, productivity losses and health costs”. To move the needle fast, given we have just 6 years before 2030, we will need increases in government finance including to a variety of international sources. Ones like the Green Climate Fund, the Global Environment Facility, government overseas development aid and the various small funds managed by the UNFCCC like the adaptation fund. But this will never be enough—governments struggled to meet a target of giving poor countries $100 billion in climate support pledged at the UN climate conference in Copenhagen in 2009. Some think it was only, finally met, by last year’s UN climate conference in Dubai after 13 years—but this is more a political success than a finance mobilization one. No, what we need is private sector finance to step up big time, not for charitable reasons, but because it is in everyone’s self-interest—let the temperature soar and many will find their business models under stress and perhaps in danger of collapse. Unfortunately, there appears to be a collective schizophrenia here among far too many banks, equity funds and others able to make a difference. Not least when it comes to funding or not funding the very substances that are causing much of the problem: the fossil fuel companies. On May 13th, the latest report in a series called Banking on Climate Chaos will be released by a group of NGOs. We don’t have the new numbers. But last year’s shows that since the Paris Agreement, the world’s biggest 60 banks have poured over $5.5 trillion into the big oil companies, fueling expansion. These include both private and government fossil fuel companies like Shell, Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Total Energies, Conoco Phiilips and BP and Saudi Aramco and China Petrochemical. The general consensus is that the fossil fuel industry should at the very minimum be not bringing new coal, and oil and gas on stream. A point repeatedly made by the International Energy Agency in their reports on hitting net zero by 2050. And if we are to meet the safety goals of the Paris Agreement fossil fuel companies should be going beyond that by having pathways to decarbonize their operations and supply chains. The main funders, according to the Banking on Chaos Report last year were US banks like JP Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citi and Morgan Stanley. But there are also European banks in the mix, like BNParibas, Barclays, Deutsche Bank and Scotiabank. So, what is going on given that many of these banks say they support the Paris Agreement and some are members of something called the Net Zero Banking Alliance. Insiders say these banks think tighter government regulation will come, so they want to support as much fossil fuel expansion as possible—and make a lot of money-- before that happens. They are happy it seems to lock the world into more fossil fuel infrastructure in the name of profit, even if that infrastructure leads to more climate change and may soon be stranded—another definition of madness! I asked if the report’s authors if they would be happy for a bank to support a We Don’t Have Time broadcast on the topic and the named only one-- La Banque Postale in France. I checked: Their portfolio of fossil fuel investments has declined sharply, and according to independent certifiers, they are on track to meet their target of fully exiting fossil fuels by 2030—magnifique, but just one out of a long list. Fortunately, La Banque Postale is not a person or investor’s only choice if they care about climate change. A new report out this week by the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty with the Global Alliance for Banking on Values, who were regular guests on our shows from COP29 in Dubai, has 17 banks calling for a fossil fuel phase out including Ekobanken in Sweden and Merkur Cooperative Bank in Denmark plus some American banks. So, we do have choices about where we bank—we can move the money away from the masters of the universe to the fathers and mothers of a better future! There is some good news—funding for coal by banks seems to be declining generally, except perhaps for Chinese banks. Insurance companies are also part of the story. Despite many being crucially aware of the risks to their business from growing numbers of extreme weather events, many are still underwriting fossil fuel expansion. Many are at the same time becoming ever more risk adverse to underwrite property insurance amid concerns of climate fueled extreme weather events. Yet they are still part of the ecosystem that keeps the oil pumping busy. Again, surely some cognitive dissonance here. Finally let me talk about equity funds briefly. Influence Map is a research organization out of London. Their last report on funds looked at 593 equity funds with over $265 billion in total net assets classed as Environmental Social and Governance (ESG) funds. They found that over 70 per cent were not aligned with the goals of the Paris Agreement. They also looked at 130 funds theme as climate funds—55 per cent were not aligned with the Paris goals. Companies in the funds regularly popping up include Exxon Mobil, TotalEnergies, Kinder Morgan, Halliburton and Chevron. Without Influence Map, many casual investors in such funds managed by familiar names like Black Rock or UBS, would think they are doing good—but they are not, one might say they are even being duped. If you want to know more, check out We Don’t Have Time’s broadcast from last year’s NYC Climate Week where we featured these findings and discussed it with experts—it was good TV. Ladies and gentlemen, let me conclude. The coming 1 to 2 years is going to be potentially a key window in the history of humanity. At the last UN climate conference in Dubai, where we were broadcasting daily for close to 12 days, governments kicked started the process to revise upwards their collective national climate plans. The plans will, for the first time, include all sectors of the economy and finance is going to be a hot topic. This process will begin in Bonn, Germany, the HQ of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in June when governments meet and will pass through the next UN annual climate conference in Baku in November and culminate in Brazil in 2025 at COP30. Indeed, the finance debate has already started. Last week at the World Bank-International Monetary Fund’s Spring meeting a group of countries led by Barbados, France and Kenya, stepped up the push of what is called the International Tax Task Force. The aim is creating new levies on fossil fuel producers and sectors like aviation and shipping plus a levy on international financial transactions. The aim is to support the generation of up to $2.4 trillion to support low income and emerging countries fight climate change. In parallel, Brazil is lobbying for support under the G20 for a 2 per cent minimum wealth tax on the world’s billionaires. We Don’t Have Time will certainly try to bring the debate to a global audience with broadcasting in June from the UNFCCC, through NYC Climate Week at COP29 in Baku. If you think this is important, you can support our work and even be guests on our programmes if you want to contribute to the discussions and influence opinion. So let me conclude, the money is moving but not as fast as the science says we need. Governments have only so much money to support both domestic climate action and poorer countries who need support to meet their climate plans including adapting to the impacts many are already experiencing. It is beyond this short snap shot to cover all the solutions. But it is clear governments, who have signed up to all the climate science reports on the risks we are running and committed under the Paris Agreement to hold a temperature rise to no higher than 1.5C, need to exercise their policy powers. They need to regulate whether it be on banking regulations, and they need to remove the trillions of dollars of public subsidies propping up the fossil fuel industry. They also need to urgently ensure that there is transparency in the area of investment funds too so investors can make real choices. Perhaps new measures, like the EU’s directive on corporate sustainability reporting will help—let’s see. But overall progressive investors in equity funds or people with money in banks, need to stand up and be counted to ensure that their money is working for the future, rather than trapping us in the past with all the chilling consequences for every man, woman and child. It is time to move the money!
•
15 h
Fantastic read Nick! Thank you 🙏
•
•
•
1 d
Looking forward to hearing from speakers that We Don't Have Time will bring in the programs for discussion,debate, to the whole global audience in June,etc, their voices will influence important opinions. It's that time to #MoveTheMoney.
Marine Stephan
1 d
•
Another day, another setback in the fight against climate climate, and another climate villain. The winner of this "Oh you really thought I couldn't do anything worse for the climate" award? Unilever 🥳 Unilever has now decided to scale back its environmental and social pledges. Yes, you read me right. Amidst the climate crisis and rising social inequalities, Unilever just decided to give up, give up on our planet, give up on humans, give up on our future. On April 19, Unilever's CEO, Hein Schumacher, confirmed plans to water down the company’s ethical pledges on a range of issues including plastic usage and equal pay. Yes, just like that. But who cares about ethics huh? Unilever is one of the largest users of plastic packaging and had previously promised to halve its use of virgin plastics by 2025. Instead (yes, again another broken promise), it will now aim for a reduction of 1/3 by 2026. This means about 100,000 tonnes (!) more fresh plastic will be produced and wasted yearly. Oh, but this isn't all. The company is also abandoning a pledge to pay direct suppliers a living wage by 2030. I mean yeah, who cares about humans being able to afford living huh... (!!!) It is also dropping a commitment that 5% of its workforce will be made of people with disabilities by 2025. Their excuse? Blablabla we receive pressure from shareholders in corporations (banks, oil companies, etc.) to cut costs and focus more on stock market performance than green projects. That makes sense, right? Money matters way more than our future, our planet, and our fellow humans! But congratulations to Unilever for being a liar and climate villain! This is why we should never trust companies and believe in their pledges unless they are actually ACTING on them 🤡 Read more: https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2024/apr/19/unilever-to-scale-back-environmental-and-social-pledges
23 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
•
•
7 h
@Unilever this is a HUGE disappointment. We're in a climate crisis and you're BACKING DOWN on plastic reduction and social responsibility?
•
•
1 d
It is a shame to see Unilever in this category ... something needs to change urgently
•
•
1 d
It truly is heartbreaking to witness such actions, especially considering the urgency of addressing climate change and social inequalities. It's important for individuals and organizations to continue advocating for sustainable practices and ethical commitments to safeguard the well-being of our planet and its inhabitants.
Shared by Marine Stephan
Munene Mugambi
1 d
•
Argentina has a long history of pioneering climate research. But the recent budget cuts to universities threaten to dismantle this legacy and cripple the nation's ability to address the climate crisis. As a concerned party, I would urge you to reconsider this shortsighted decision. Universities are the breeding grounds for innovation. By slashing their funding, you're not just silencing researchers today, you're jeopardizing Argentina's future in the fight against climate change. With rising global temperatures, every nation needs robust climate solutions. We need Argentinian scientists at the forefront, developing revolutionary technologies and strategies. Budget cuts will leave you playing catch-up, lagging behind other countries while our environment suffers. The world is rapidly transitioning to a sustainable future. Lest you be left behind, invest in the universities, invest in the climate researchers, and invest in a greener Argentina. https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/04/22/argentinian-scientists-condemn-budget-cuts-ahead-of-university-protests/
Argentinian scientists condemn budget cuts ahead of protests
Argentinian Far-right president has taken an axe to funding for education and scientific bodies, sparking protests among university students
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/04/22/argentinian-scientists-condemn-budget-cuts-ahead-of-university-protests/
30 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
•
•
7 h
This is outrageous! Cutting university funding is like shooting ourselves in the foot in the fight against climate change.
•
•
1 d
Milei is a threat to democracy and it will obviously have consequences on climate action
•
•
1 d
“El calentamiento global es una mentira”?? How do you explain the weaken of "El niño" and the rise of "La niña"? I feel sorry for the Argentinos..
Shared by Marine Stephan
Varsa Mahananda
1 d
•
“On climate change, we often don't fully appreciate that it is a problem. We think it is a problem waiting to happen.” - Kofi Annan I was looking out the window today when I saw this bird trying to build a nest with twigs. When I first noticed the bird, it held a piece of twig four times the size of its whole body and was trying to walk fast enough to build momentum to fly up to its nest on a nearby tree. It made multiple attempts to fly but the twig kept falling off given its weight. The bird wouldn’t lose hope. I kept watching the bird struggle for a long time, but after several attempts, it finally managed to get the twig up to its nest. Imagine my happiness at the bird’s success! But then again, it is an everyday struggle for the bird, while it was a one-time watch for me. The point being? We lose hope and give up so soon at the sight of a little struggle and start complaining. But look at the bird. It has no option but to persevere. I saw a similar sight of perseverance at the Global Climate Strike held in Stockholm on the 19th of April, 2024. Our climate is getting hotter and we are starting to see some drastic changes to the planet which is neither good for us nor for our children. On an individual level, making any changes to the climate situation can seem too daunting and impossible to achieve. However, to the people who were part of the strike, this was not the case. They have this united belief that if they fight for this just cause, they will finally achieve what they aim: a cleaner and greener planet. Their hope and determination was contagious. Although not a part of the actual strike, I did walk alongside them to observe how the strike was proceeding. I noticed a man with his little daughter (she must have been about 3) in a stroller participating in the strike. The little girl was cold (it was zero degrees) so the father covered her up with a little shawl. It would have been much easier to leave the group and take shelter from the cold and nobody would have missed them. But both father and child felt their presence was necessary in this fight for a better climate future. I was amazed at their perseverance in the same way the bird with the twig amazed me! They both believe they are an important part of the solution, and we need more people like them. It was a two-kilometer walk in zero-degree temperature but the excitement and determination did not fall short. The sight of so many people with so many colorful banners and placards singing along to fight for a greener climate was extremely contagious. The walk began in Odenplan and ended at Sergels Torg in the heart of Stockholm where climate activists spoke about their fight against climate change for so many years, without fail, despite all odds. One lady, Matilda Bergström, famously known as Rebel Mama, was even deemed a security risk and a threat to democracy by the government because of her constant fight to claim a better future for the children of today and tomorrow! She is a part of the Mothers’ Rebellion for Climate Justice, fighting for the future of the children, both her own, and of the world. Although most of the speeches were in Swedish, and very little in English, therefore difficult for me to understand, the energy of the whole ensemble was so high, it was almost electric! As an individual I might feel inconsequential and hopeless at the incapability to make a change, but you have to be there to experience the determination of these people to demand a change to believe that all hope is not lost yet. Just like the bird, we also have to start realizing that we have no option but to persevere. We need more and more people to participate in this cause so we save our planet, because after all, there is no planet B, and all of us have to live on this one and only mass of rock and water. Learn more about the Global Climate Strike held in Stockholm last Friday: https://www.instagram.com/p/C58fD3HtO51/?igsh=MW4yN3BuMjIweHUxbg== https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7188162760470380545/
•
•
7 h
It's heartening to see individuals, like the father with his daughter, braving the cold to be part of the solution. 👨👧 Their actions inspire us to keep pushing forward despite the challenges. Let's continue to raise our voices and take action for a sustainable planet because there's no planet B. 🌿
•
•
1 d
These strikes and marches are so important. We often feel alone fighting against giants, but the strikes remind us that we are not alone and give us hope. Thanks for sharing how you experienced it!
Marine Stephan
1 d
•
If you're following French influencers on social media, you might have already seen in your feed this influencer trip organized by Ultra Premium Direct –a French company that does food for dogs and cats. Some French influencers are currently on Reunion Island carrying out different activities such as bringing stray dogs and cats back to mainland France for adoption, a clean walk at Piton de la Fournaise, a coral cutting operation, and an operation to release "Barau Petrels" (a species of bird) into the wild. Sounds pretty great, doesn't it? Well, yes. Except that... it isn't. It isn't because Ultra Premium Direct is flying a bunch of influencers to the other side of the world –we're talking about an 11-hour flight- to... carry out actions to protect the environment. It is pretty incoherent, and if you compare the (positive) impact of their actions on the ground with the (negative) impact of their trip, I'm not really sure it balances out. Especially when you take into account that some of these influencers care very little (or not at all) about the environment as they usually collaborate with fast fashion brands and promote unsustainable consumption and lifestyle patterns. I am just wondering something: why not organize this trip in mainland France? There are also places impacted by human activities to restore and protect, and local associations to promote. And guess what? You don't even have to take the plane to get there! Just a bold idea for Ultra Premium Direct: maybe try to do impact studies (and coherence studies as well) of your marketing campaigns before implementing them. Thanks to Paye ton Influence for highlighting this issue: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/amdlc_cohaezrence-activity-7188115434968162304-VmFs?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
144 more agrees trigger scaled up advertising
•
•
7 h
It's disheartening to see well-intentioned efforts to protect the environment overshadowed by the environmental footprint of extravagant influencer trips. Let's advocate for more thoughtful and environmentally-conscious approaches to conservation efforts.
•
•
1 d
This does not really add up.It sounds more of a publicity staunt than actual action.Climate influencers should walk the talk
•
•
1 d
Some deep level of rethinking is missing from all this. I wonder sometimes, if all this is part of a publicity stunt and not any actual motivation to work for the environment.
Marine Stephan
5 d
•
Do you know what happens to the half-used hotel soap you leave behind? No surprise here: they end up in the trash. On average, we are throwing away about a million bars of soap every day. Well, at least, that was the case before Clean the World was created. What they do is pretty simple: they recycle partially used soap left behind by hotel guests and distribute it to those in need. By collecting, melting, reforming, and packaging partially used soap, the nonprofit has distributed nearly 82 million bars of soap in more than 127 countries, helping those in need to have better access to hygiene products. According to their website, "With over 8,200 participants in its Global Hospitality Recycling Program, and more than 1.4 million hotel rooms processed daily, Clean the World has already diverted over 25.8 million pounds of waste from landfills and donated over 82 million bars of recycled soap since its inception in 2009." This is pretty impressive and they deserve climate love 💚 Read more: https://cleantheworld.org/about-us/about-us-overview/ https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/17/travel/clean-the-world-hotel-soap.html
33 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
•
•
7 h
This is amazing! Love that Clean the World is reducing waste and getting hygiene products to people in need. Small changes can make a big difference. Let's all support organizations that are finding creative solutions to our environmental challenges.
•
•
5 d
That's amazing! I was actually thinking about that the last time I stayed at a hotel but didn't know that this organization existed.
•
•
5 d
This is a tremendous achievement, this not only create a sustainable environment but also empowers a society, congratulations to @Cleantheworld
Shared by Marine Stephan
Sarah Chabane
1 w
•
On April 19 it's time for a new Global Climate Strike! 💥 Join others, make your voices heard and demand urgent action to end fossil fuels. Together, we can pressure governments and corporations to prioritise sustainability and protect our planet, especially in a key election year like 2024. Whether you're in a city centre or a rural community, in Sweden, Canada, Uganda or Australia your presence matters. 💪 Let's show solidarity with youth activists from Fridays for Future. More than ever this is a crucial moment to amplify the message; it's time to #EndFossilFuels and push for real change. Don't miss this opportunity to be part of history and take climate action. Find your local strike or register yours: https://fridaysforfuture.org/april19/
138 more agrees trigger scaled up advertising
•
•
4 d
See you all at the Global Climate Strike on April 19th! ✊ This is our chance to demand and push for real climate action.
•
•
1 w
In full support, our efforts combined is needed to fight climate crisis and make the world a better place to live
•
•
1 w
Together we are the solution to the climate crisis.✅🌍💪
Shared by Marine Stephan
walter lungayi
1 w
•
The Environmental Protection Agency of Sweden stated that the country will not meet its climate targets without additional political measures to reduce carbon emissions. Despite strong EU policies and leadership in green transition within the industry, further political decisions are necessary to achieve the climate goals. Recent changes in biofuel mixing requirements and fossil fuel tax cuts are expected to raise emissions, making it challenging to meet the targets. The EU's goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 55% by 2030 requires Sweden to decrease its use of fossil fuels and accelerate the electrification of transportation. While the government is committed to reaching net zero emissions by 2045, there are still pending political decisions and budget allocations to be made. It's concerning to see that Sweden is facing challenges in meeting its climate targets, especially with the recent policy changes expected to increase emissions. There is an urgent need for further political action and budget allocations to address climate change. Additionally, the impact of rising sea temperatures and human activities on the coral reefs in the archipelago highlights the broader environmental consequences of not meeting these targets, affecting both the ecosystem and tourism. This underscores the importance of swift and effective measures to mitigate climate change and its impacts. https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/sweden-will-miss-its-climate-goals-without-policy-changes-environment-agency-2024-04-12/ https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2024-04-12/sweden-will-miss-its-climate-goals-without-policy-changes-environment-agency-says
24 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
•
•
10 h
Sweden's always been a bit of a role model when it comes to the environment. It's a bit disheartening to see them struggle like this.
•
•
1 w
This is so disappointing protecting the environment is the goal action should be taken.
•
•
1 w
I have always admired Sweden's commitment to protecting our environment. This is heartbreaking
Shared by Marine Stephan
Kevin
6 d
•
The Scottish government is to ditch its flagship target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 75% by 2030. The final goal of reaching "net-zero" by 2045 will remain, but BBC Scotland News understands the government's annual climate targets could also go. Ministers have missed eight of the last 12 annual targets and have been told that reaching the 75% milestone by the end of the decade is unachievable. A statement is expected at Holyrood on Thursday afternoon. The Climate Change Committee (CCC) - which provides independent advice to ministers - warned back in 2022 that Scotland had lost its lead over the rest of the UK in tackling the issue. Former first minister Nicola Sturgeon saw her SNP administration as world leaders on climate change when the targets were introduced in 2019, often asserting that Scotland had the "most stretching targets in the world." Hers was the first government in the world to declare a climate emergency and Glasgow hosted the COP26 climate summit in 2021, yet environmentalists believe the emergency response never came. With the closure of Scotland's last coal-fired power station at Longannet in 2016, politicians conceded that the low-hanging fruit had all been picked and any future progress would require big changes to how we live our lives. But the Greens believe the current system has fundamentally failed with too much emphasis placed on targets rather than policies. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-68841141?xtor=AL-72-%5Bpartner%5D-%5Bbbc.news.twitter%5D-%5Bheadline%5D-%5Bnews%5D-%5Bbizdev%5D-%5Bisapi%5D&at_ptr_name=twitter&at_campaign_type=owned&at_link_type=web_link&at_bbc_team=editorial&at_medium=social&at_campaign=Social_Flow&at_link_id=668CF092-FCE2-11EE-AC43-EE2B45BDBE88&at_format=link&at_link_origin=BBCWorld
75 more agrees trigger scaled up advertising
•
•
2 d
This came as a really surprising and shambolic move by the Scottish government. Why would you water down climate ambitions when we are supposed to be increasing our commitment to saving the planet?
•
•
6 d
The Scottish government should really focus on reducing gas emissions like other nations so as to achieve our climate goal as a whole.
•
•
6 d
The Scottish government must work to reach the climate target immediately since tomorrow is late and the world is burning of climate disasters. It's time to prioritize mother earth
Shared by Marine Stephan
Rukia Ahmed Abdi
6 d
•
A significant victory for environmental conservation has been achieved following a decision by the Lands Court in Kenya. The Lands and Environmental court has granted a conservatory order, as requested by the East African Wild Life Society, halting the Kenya National Highways Authority from proceeding with the planned construction of a road cutting through the Aberdares National Park and Aberdares Forest. This decision underscores the importance of preserving these vital natural habitats and sets a precedent for prioritizing environmental protection over infrastructure development in ecologically sensitive areas. https://nation.africa/kenya/news/conservationists-win-after-court-suspends-sh4-4bn-aberdare-road-project-4593008
21 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
•
•
4 d
This is fantastic news for the Aberdares and wildlife in Kenya! Huge win for the East African Wild Life Society for stopping this destructive road project. This is how we protect our natural heritage for future generations!
•
•
6 d
Road construction and expansion result in loss of wildlife habitat by transforming natural habitats to pavement, dirt tracks, and cleared roadsides or right-of-ways. Some wildlife are more vulnerable to habitat loss than others. Indeed this was a good decision.
•
•
6 d
The united people can never be defeated, this is a massive win by the majority in Kenya!
Shared by Marine Stephan
Sarah Chabane
1 w
•
European Union lawmakers have approved legislation to impose methane emission limits on oil and gas imports by 2030. This first-of-its-kind law is set to apply pressure on international suppliers to minimise leaks of methane, a potent greenhouse gas. Methane, the primary component of gas and a short-term pollutant, ranks as the second-largest contributor to climate change just behind carbon dioxide. Its short-term warming effect far exceeds that of CO2, making it imperative to reduce methane emissions to avert severe climate consequences swiftly. Green lawmaker Jutta Paulus, co-lead negotiator for the EU Parliament, hailed the legislation as a crucial step in combating the "climate killer" methane. She highlighted its significance in helping the EU achieve its climate objectives and uphold commitments made in the Global Methane Pledge. Under the new regulations, producers exporting fossil fuels to the EU will face limits on "methane intensity values" starting in 2030. This move will impact major gas suppliers such as the United States, Algeria, and Russia. Notably, Norway, whose gas supply boasts one of the world's lowest methane intensities, has emerged as Europe's primary pipeline gas supplier following reduced deliveries from Moscow. The legislation has cleared the vote at the EU Parliament, it awaits formal adoption by the European Council. Once published in the EU Official Journal, the law will come into force 20 days later. One would love for it to be effective before 2030, but it's always a first step to tackling short-term pollutants. Check out our series on short-term pollutants with UNEP's Clean Air Coalition to learn more about methane: https://www.wedonthavetime.org/events/climateandcleanair https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-lawmakers-adopt-law-hit-fossil-fuel-imports-with-methane-emissions-limit-2024-04-10/
141 more agrees trigger scaled up advertising
•
•
2 d
Congratulations to EU lawmakers for walking the talk on the fight against climate.Such a bold move will lead to reduced methane emissions to the environment
•
•
1 w
This are encouraging steps in the roadmap to reduce greenhouse gas emmisions, imposing such laws are so important for the sake of our planet.
•
•
1 w
This is a groundbreaking step. This move not only applies pressure on international suppliers to minimize methane leaks but also sets a precedent for global environmental regulations.
Shared by Marine Stephan
Varsa Mahananda
6 d
•
Construction and development is inevitable. We are going to have more and more of that. However, with construction comes carbon dioxide emissions and pollution. Approximately 8% of carbon dioxide emissions come from building material. So imagine having a more climate-friendly way of building things! Fortera Corporation has found a way for making cement with less carbon dioxide emissions that will operate at a large scale. The technology used by the company allows them to intercept the carbon dioxide released during the cement-making process in the kilns and reuse it in making more cement. They are adding the technology to a CalPortland facility in Redding, California, which is one of the largest cement plants in the western United States. Ryan Gilliam, CEO of Fortera says, “Our target is about being a ubiquitous solution that can really work at any plant.” In the initial days, the company will produce cement that reduces carbon emissions by 10% but they will gradually scale up to reduce the emissions by 40-50% and then eventually 70%, depending on the demand. Read more on cement manufacturing company’s journey: https://apnews.com/article/cement-concrete-carbon-emissions-energy-climate-buildings-a01ea5e9962d3f00a98227e06e2b7917?utm_medium=email&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_wsXy6KDulPE2wfWjrmBkJmUdc7QFzy8MNIH3wPQzMw_uNg5mr7HAnv6OCA9oSVQpIVpT0Ez9VfixIZmMzHsdOy86SqSXI3-TkCZSG5JzNlHBWcBY&_hsmi=303042037&utm_content=303042037&utm_source=hs_email
73 more agrees trigger scaled up advertising
•
•
1 d
Very interesting! Cement is one of the most polluting materials out there, we need to change the way it's produced if we want to decarbonise our economies
•
•
6 d
It's inspiring to see companies prioritizing environmental responsibility while meeting the demands of development and construction.
•
•
6 d
All we need is the green technology that will help to reduce the impact of climate change
Shared by Marine Stephan
Markus Lutteman
6 d
•
•
The European Election is around the corner, but how will European citizens be able to determine which candidates to trust regarding climate policy? Since action speaks louder than words, the best way is to look at how the different members of the European Parliament (MEPs) have voted on climate, energy, and environment during 2019-2024. Thanks to the EU Parliament Scoreboard, it is now easy to get an overview of this matter. BirdLife Europe, Climate Action Network Europe, European Environmental Bureau, Transport & Environment, and WWF European Policy Office have analyzed European Parliament voting records of the last five years to provide citizens with an interactive overview that scores all the national political parties and European Parliamentary Groups based on their voting performance. The EU Parliament Scoreboard looks at the individual voting behaviour of every MEP during the 2019-2024 legislative term and scores them against the voting recommendations of the five European environmental organisations. This provides a measure of each MEPs commitment to environmental sustainability - with the result being a score out of 100. Results are aggregated in the scoreboard for political groups and national parties represented in the European Parliament. Sadly, this in-depth data research reveals that only a minority of MEPs during the 2019 – 2024 mandate acted to protect Europe’s climate, nature and air quality. The good thing is that all European eligible voters can now see this – and choose to vote differently in June. See the scoreboard.
72 more agrees trigger scaled up advertising
•
•
4 d
After delving into MEPs’ environmental performance, it’s clear that while some groups like the Greens/European Free Alliance and The Left are leading the charge with commendable efforts, others, notably the European People’s Party and Identity and Democracy, are trailing behind with disappointing records. This underscores the ongoing challenge that Europe’s environmental policies must urgently address the pressing crises at hand, despite some progress being made.
•
•
6 d
Wow! This sounds like a great piece of information to have
•
•
6 d
This is a great move, transparency and accountability is the key to success in phasing out fossils fuels.
Shared by Marine Stephan
Ingmar Rentzhog
1 w
•
•
Since the pandemic, air travel in Sweden has seen a decline as citizens increasingly opt for trains, demonstrating a shift towards more sustainable travel habits. Despite this, the Swedish government and the Finance Minister have disproportionately allocated resources, with 1 billion SEK going to the aviation industry, none to railways, and a mere 100 million SEK to other climate solutions. This allocation to aviation, an industry suffering from reduced demand and known for high emissions, is deeply troubling. It reflects a disturbing trend: as Swedes become more eco-conscious, the government paradoxically bolsters fossil fuel interests, stalling necessary industrial adaptation. Such policies seem less like governance and more like corruption. How can the Finance Minister defend these choices? As I happen to be invited to meet the Finance Minister at a breakfast roundtable next week, I will press for answers and advocate for a redirection of funds towards solving the climate crisis. We must move the money into the solutions, not the other way around! We cannot wait any longer. Join the "Move The Money" campaign by We Don't Have Time and learn how to direct your money towards real climate solutions. Together, we can push for the change we need. We have created guides on how your money can be moved to the solutions: https://wedonthavetime.org/movethemoney Source the new spring budget for Sweden (in swedish): https://klimatgranskaren.se/varbudgeten-10-ganger-mer-till-flygplatser-an-till-klimatet/ Source for: Dip for air travel – new norms come into play: https://www.tn.se/naringsliv/25920/dipp-for-flyget-nya-normer-spelar-in/
144 more agrees trigger scaled up advertising
•
•
18 h
https://happywheels.one Thanks for the nice blog. It was very useful for me. I'm happy I found this blog. Thank you for sharing with us,I too always learn something new from your post.
•
•
1 w
This is very dissapointing action should be taken
•
•
1 w
The basis of such cost economics needs to be analysed and questioned.
Shared by Marine Stephan
Assaad Razzouk
1 w
•
Good climate news this week 1. Swiss women open floodgates to net zero court challenges as top EU rules human rights violated by climate inaction 2. Top India court: right to life includes climate change 3. Brazil in new program to cut deforestation 4. New York sues world’s biggest meat company 5. EVS 50% of China’s new cars sales by 2030 6. EU in new law to cut methane emissions on oil & gas imports 7. Zurich Insurance will no longer underwrite new oil & gas projects Climate anxiety is real and widespread. This thread ⬆️, which has run weekly for more than 4 years, aggregates good climate news to show that climate action and climate justice are widespread - and have momentum. Just keep on clicking for a big dose of good climate news! Follow me on LinkedIn and X to see the full thread of good climate news.
•
•
3 d
Tomorrow April 22nd is Earth Day 🌍💚🙏
Shared by Marine Stephan
Greece prime minister announced today in an ocean international conference that Greece will become the first country to ban bottom trawling in marine protected areas by 2030, where by the country will spend 780 millions euros in order to protect marine biodiversity and ecosystems. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/apr/16/greece-becomes-first-european-country-to-ban-bottom-trawling-in-marine-parks
19 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
•
•
1 d
Way to go, Greece!
•
•
1 w
This is a monumental move towards preserving its marine biodiversity.
•
•
1 w
This will be a great achievement so far, We need to invest more in protecting marine and ecosystem
Marine Stephan
1 w
•
For several weeks now, France has been "fighting" with the UK over the issue of fishing in certain UK marine protected areas. On March 22, the British government banned bottom trawling –a destructive fishing technique involving scraping the ocean floor with heavy nets– in 13 of its marine protected areas, to protect these rich ecosystems. The problem with this measure? None. Well, "none" if you care about the planet and its ecosystem... which doesn't seem to be the case for the French government. For France, this measure to protect our planet (and our future) is "above all a discriminatory measure against its fishermen", who operate in these protected areas. The thing is that... it isn't discriminatory as it applies to everyone, including British ships. As Claire Nouvian, president of Bloom, nicely puts it: "It's one thing for France not to want to protect its so-called 'protected' areas, but it's absolutely scandalous that it should also decide to attack states that really want to protect their own." So long for the "Year of the Sea" that Emmanuel Macron promised 2024 would be. I guess it is just easier not to care about our ecosystems, marine lives, and our planet. Sources (in French): https://bloomassociation.org/les-manoeuvres-francaises-pour-saper-les-ambitions-ecologiques-du-royaume-uni/?mc_cid=c9f85ca36f&mc_eid=8d8bcb0292 https://www.francebleu.fr/infos/economie-social/aires-marines-protegees-le-ministre-de-l-europe-promet-aux-pecheurs-boulonnais-de-resister-2136961?mc_cid=c9f85ca36f&mc_eid=8d8bcb0292
21 more agrees trigger contact with the recipient
•
•
4 d
This is so disappointing! France refusing to respect protected marine areas hurts the environment.
•
1 w
What will future fishermen even be able to catch? Its a race to the bottom, literally....
•
•
1 w
This is such a silly dispute
Marine Stephan
1 w
•
In a report published on April 9, 2024, New Climate and Carbon Market Watch analyzed the climate strategies of 51 major global companies and the integrity of their climate pledges and commitments to reduce their emissions. And the results are worrying... Major companies’ net-zero targets were mostly ambiguous and lacked commitments to reducing emissions. The collective ambition of companies to reduce emissions by 2030 fell far short of the requirements to be aligned with 1.5°C pathways. And here, I am just talking about ambitions, not even actions... Some of these companies (yes I am talking about you: Walmart, Nestlé, JBS, Duke Energy, Toyota, Engie, and others) don't even try to pretend to care about our future and our planet. The report finds that even if all these targets are met (and I underline here the word targets, not action), the median CO2 emission reduction by 2030 will only be 30%, compared to the 48% needed to be aligned with the Paris Agreement. Among the worst performers are Nestlé, Toyota, Engie and... Walmart, whose targets for reductions by 2030 bring down the median commitment of the 51 companies to 30%. I am copying extracts from the report (see pages 126-127 for the full report on Walmart). It is a bit technical but there is one thing to understand from it: Walmart is not doing (nor pledging) enough when it comes to mitigating climate change. "Most of Walmart’s emissions (94% of 2022 emissions) originate from the procurement of goods (upstream scope 3). Walmart has set targets to take responsibility for its operational scope 1 and 2 emissions. However, its strategy for upstream scope 3 emissions, which account for most of the company’s overall climate impact, lacks a clear reduction commitment. Walmart sets no emissions reduction target for scope 3 emissions but rather builds on Project Gigaton, a programme in which Walmart engages with its suppliers to set targets and reduce emissions themselves voluntarily. Walmart does not have a separate target for FLAG emissions." "Since the publication of its scope 1 and 2 SBTi targets in 2016, Walmart has made no progress in target ambition, despite the critical insufficiency of these targets in the context of the climate crisis now many years later." Don't hesitate to read the full report or to search for your favorite (or least favorite) company from one of the five sectors included in the study (Food & Agriculture; Electric Utilities; Fashion Companies; Automotive Manufacturers; Others): https://newclimate.org/sites/default/files/2024-04/NewClimate_CCRM2024.pdf
149 more agrees trigger scaled up advertising
•
•
1 w
Dear Marine Stephan Your climate warning has received over 50 agrees! We have reached out to Walmart by email and requested a response. I will keep you updated on any progress! To reach more people and increase the chance of a response, click the Share button above to share the review on your social accounts. For every new member that joins We Don't Have Time from your network, we will plant a tree and attribute it to you! /Adam, We Don't Have Time
•
•
1 w
Quick legal action should be taken on Walmart and companies doing the same.
•
•
1 w
Most of these companies' net-zero targets fall short of what's needed to tackle the climate crisis effectively. When will they start taking the climate crisis seriously?
Marine Stephan
1 w
•
Volvo Cars' manufacturing plant in Taizhou, China, is now Volvo Cars' first climate-neutral plant in China. How? It has switched to biogas. This will result in a reduction of more than 7,000 tonnes of CO2 per year. The Taizhou plant already uses 100% solar and therefore climate-neutral electricity, with 40% being produced on-site, with its solar panels. With this switch to biogas, it has now also climate-neutral heating. This is Volvo Cars' second car plant globally to become climate-neutral, the first one being its facility in Gothenburg, Sweden. “We’re acting fast when viable climate-neutral energy alternatives become available,” says Javier Varela, chief operating officer and deputy CEO at Volvo Cars. “The switch to biogas at our Taizhou plant demonstrates how each of our manufacturing locations across the globe is developing its own climate-neutral energy mix, based on what’s available in the region.” However, I have a question for Volvo Cars: where do you source your biogas? How do you ensure that its raw materials come from sustainable sources? (and doesn't come from palm oil that causes deforestation) Read Volvo Cars' press release: https://www.media.volvocars.com/global/en-gb/media/pressreleases/325665/volvo-cars-uses-biogas-to-achieve-its-first-climate-neutral-plant-in-china
148 more agrees trigger scaled up advertising
•
•
1 w
It goes without saying that it's encouraging to see Volvo Cars taking proactive steps towards climate neutrality in their manufacturing plants. However, ensuring the sustainability of biogas sources is crucial for maintaining environmental integrity. This should become standard practice for all companies transitioning to climate-neutral operations.
•
•
1 w
That's great news! But it's important for them to make sure the biogas comes from sustainable sources, so it doesn't harm forests or cause other issues.
•
•
1 w
Great news!! The switch to biogas marks a significant step towards reducing CO2 emissions by over 7,000 tonnes annually, demonstrating Volvo's commitment to sustainable and environmentally friendly production practices.
Write or agree to climate reviews to make businesses and world leaders act. It’s easy and it works.
Certified accounts actively looking for your opinion on their climate impact.
One tree is planted for every climate review written to an organization that is Open for Climate Dialogue™.
•
•
•
2 h
Thank you Esther. Your voice and climate tax insights proposal should be considered and implemented soonest.
•
•
12 h
This is a tough measure that is welcome for the sake of our environment. I hope the proposal tabled by @EstherDuflo will be adopted by the G20 members. However it is important to note that funds from this should be well utilised.
•
•
8 h
This is exactly the kind of bold leadership we need on climate change. $400 billion a year for adaptation could make a HUGE difference.