Climate Researchers Warn: Warmer Climate Could Lead To “Cold Waves Across Northern Europe”!
By P Gosselin on 2. November 2024, https://notrickszone.com/2024/11/02/climate-researchers-warn-warmer-climate-could-lead-to-cold-waves-across-northern-europe/
In a recent open letter, researchers warned that a warmer Arctic could lead to cold waves across Northern Europe – due to “complex feedback mechanisms”.
According to Forschung & Wissen here, an international group of renowned scientists recently published an open letter (PDF) stating that the melting of ice in the Arctic could disrupt ocean currents in the Atlantic, and thus have “devastating and irreversible impacts especially for Nordic countries, but also for other parts of the world.”
According to their publication in the journal Nature Communications, October 2024, doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-53401-3, melting of sea ice during the last interglacial significantly impacted the density and salinity of seawater, and thus led to significant changes in ocean currents and heat distribution in the oceans.
The researchers looked at sediment cores collected in the North Sea and reconstructed surface temperatures and salinity and found that these processes have led to a significant drop in temperature in northern Europe.
According to Mohamed Ezat: “Our discovery that the increased melting of Arctic sea ice in the Earth’s past probably led to significant cooling in northern Europe is alarming.”
He adds: “The impacts particularly on Nordic Countries would likely be catastrophic, including major cooling in the region while surrounding regions warm. This would be an enlargement and deepening of the ‘cold blob’ that already has developed over the subpolar Atlantic Ocean and likely lead to unprecedented extreme weather.”
Why were the floods in Spain so bad? A visual guide
Guardian 1st Nov 2024
At least 205 people have died in Spain after torrential rains triggered the
country’s deadliest floods in decades, unleashing a deluge of muddy water
that turned village streets into rivers, destroyed homes and swept away
bridges, railways tracks and cars. An unknown number of people remain
missing, while thousands of others are without electricity or phone
service. The majority of those killed were in the coastal region of
Valencia, where the state-run agency said that nearly a year’s worth of
rain had fallen in just eight hours. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/31/why-were-the-floods-in-spain-so-bad-a-visual-guide
Half of world’s biggest cities to face severe climate risks by 2050, LSEG finds.
Edie 31st Oct 2024
Dozens of populous cities including Dubai, which hosted last year’s
international climate summit, will face high physical risks from the
climate crisis by 2050, the London Stock Exchange Group (LSEG) has warned.
LSEG’s new Net-Zero Atlas projects that half of the world’s largest 49
cities will be at high risk of one or more climate hazards by 2050—up
from just one in five today.
Hazards covered in the analysis include
floods, cyclones, heatwaves and water stress. Cities in the Middle East and
Southeast Asia are particularly vulnerable to multiple hazards, the Atlas
explains. Jakarta is expected to experience at least quadruple the number
of extreme heat days in 2050 as it did last year. And cities including
Singapore, Surabaya, Dubai, Riyadh, and Jeddah face similar heatwave risks,
which would be compounded by water stress.
This does not mean that cities
in other geographies are immune to physical climate risks. LSEG predicts
that, by 2050, London will experience a 133% increase in heatwave days and
a 22% rise in water stress, and Manchester will face a 93% increase in
heatwaves and a 45% rise in water stress.
https://www.edie.net/half-of-worlds-biggest-cities-to-face-severe-climate-risks-by-2050-lseg-finds/
Gravelines nuclear power plant: EDF refuses to respond on flood risks and tries to silence whistleblowers
Greenpeace France reminds that Monday morning’s action in the perimeter of the Gravelines power plant carries a message of public interest on the risks of marine submersion and flooding on the Gravelines power plant, an area combining climatic, industrial and nuclear vulnerabilities. For Greenpeace France, in light of the forecasts of scientists and the large uncertainties of the different climate scenarios, it is too dangerous to build two new nuclear reactors on this site, as EDF aims to do.
Greenpeace France 30th Oct 2024, https://www.greenpeace.fr/espace-presse/gravelines-edf-refuse-de-repondre-sur-les-risques-dinondations-et-tente-de-faire-taire-les-lanceurs-dalerte/
After more than 48 hours of deprivation of liberty, 10 of the 12 activists arrested have just been released. This arrest follows the action of Greenpeace France in the perimeter of the Gravelines power plant . Since 9 a.m. this morning, a gathering has been taking place in front of the Dunkirk Judicial Court, at the initiative of several local organizations that came to support the activists. The court informed the activists that a trial would be held on March 3, 2025 at 1:30 p.m. for intrusion into a civil facility housing nuclear materials in assembly. EDF has filed a complaint [1].
After spending two nights in police custody, the activists were brought before the Dunkirk Judicial Court in the early morning, at the request of the public prosecutor. The first activist to be released was deprived of his liberty for a total of 52 hours.
Greenpeace France reminds that Monday morning’s action in the perimeter of the Gravelines power plant carries a message of public interest on the risks of marine submersion and flooding on the Gravelines power plant, an area combining climatic, industrial and nuclear vulnerabilities. For Greenpeace France, in light of the forecasts of scientists and the large uncertainties of the different climate scenarios, it is too dangerous to build two new nuclear reactors on this site, as EDF aims to do.
While EDF refused to respond to Greenpeace France’s questions sent during the summer concerning the consideration of the impacts of climate change on the choice of the Gravelines site and the construction of new nuclear reactors, Greenpeace France dug into the subject and examined EDF’s project file, which resulted in the publication of a report on October 3 demonstrating the underestimation of the seriousness of climate change and the risks inherent in this project to build new reactors.
Greenpeace France also got involved in the consultation areas, particularly the ongoing public debate in Gravelines, and repeated its questions to obtain information on flood risks and the protective measures planned for the new reactors, ahead of the meetings on nuclear safety (theme of 19 November) and climate change (theme of 10 December). After Monday’s action, media reported that EDF did not wish to comment.
For Pauline Boyer, Energy Transition campaign manager at Greenpeace France: ” EDF is ignoring our questions about the risks that the construction of the two EPR2 reactors in Gravelines would create for the population, the workers at the plant and for the environment. In line with its behavior during the public debate for its similar project in Penly, it is clearly sending a signal of contempt for questions from the public, whether NGOs or residents. EDF is operating a diversion strategy by taking activists to court over the form of their action, in order to better evade the substantive issues. EDF is losing more points of trust. EDF will not succeed in gagging the whistleblowers. “
For Marie Dosé, the activists’ lawyer: ” The custody measures are unjustified and have only one purpose: to dissuade activists from alerting the population on a subject of general interest. All of them could have been the subject of a free hearing but, once again, the prosecuting authority preferred to make them sleep two nights in cells and bring them hastily before the court. “
Two activists remain in court at the time of writing this press release.
Australian Civil Society Statement for COP29 Baku, Azerbaijan
(from Scott Ludlam, on behalf of numerous, and increasing number of Australian civil groups)) 30 Oct 24
We, the undersigned Australian Civil Society organisations are united in support for the global clean energy transition and opposition to the nuclear industry playing a spoiling role in this transition.
Nuclear power is too slow, costly and inflexible to play any meaningful role in the global decarbonisation efforts. Nuclear also brings unique risks and long-lived wastes.
Given the environmental, economic and human urgency of addressing climate change and advancing the energy transition the nuclear industry must not be allowed to cause the global diplomatic community any further delay.
Australia is moving purposefully away from centralised fossil fuel combustion and toward distributed renewable energy generation and storage. In 2024, 40% of Australia’s electricity is generated from renewable energy. This capacity is proven, delivering and expanding rapidly.
We have been fortunate to learn from the world’s experience with nuclear power. We understand why its role in global energy systems and its contribution to global electricity production has been in decline for decades. Its legacy is one of underperformance, burgeoning cost, intractable health impacts and long-lived radioactive wastes.
Despite this, a coordinated campaign is currently being waged to undermine public support for this decarbonisation effort. The last thing Australia needs now is nuclear distraction and delay.
As the former Australian Chief Scientist Dr. Alan Finkel said, “Any call to go directly from coal to nuclear is effectively a call to delay decarbonisation of our electricity system by 20 years”.
Australia, and the world, cannot afford this delay. We stand resolute in our support for real climate action through the clean energy transition and in our opposition to false nuclear promises.
Record levels of heat-related deaths in 2023 due to climate crisis, report finds
Almost half of global land area saw extreme drought for at least one month, according to Lancet Countdown
Anna Bawden, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/oct/30/record-levels-of-heat-related-deaths-in-2023-due-to-climate-crisis-report-finds
Heat-related deaths, food insecurity and the spread of infectious diseases caused by the climate crisis have reached record levels, according to a landmark report.
The Lancet Countdown’s ninth report on health and the climate breakdown reveals that people across the world face unprecedented threats to their health from the rapidly changing climate.
“This year’s stocktake of the imminent health threats of climate inaction reveals the most concerning findings yet,” warned Dr Marina Romanello, executive director of the Lancet Countdown at University College London.
“Once again, last year broke climate change records with extreme heatwaves, deadly weather events, and devastating wildfires affecting people around the world. No individual or economy on the planet is immune [to] the health threats of climate change.
The relentless expansion of fossil fuels and record-breaking greenhouse gas emissions compounds these dangerous health impacts, and is threatening to reverse the limited progress made so far and put a healthy future further out of reach.”
The report finds that in 2023, extreme drought lasting at least one month affected 48% of the global land area, while people had to cope with an unprecedented 50 more days of health-threatening temperatures than would have been expected without the climate crisis. As a result, 151 million more people faced moderate or severe food insecurity, risking malnutrition and other harm to their health.
Heat related deaths among the over-65s rocketed by 167% in 2023, compared with the 1990s. Without the climate crisis, an ageing global population means such deaths would have increased, but only by 65%. High temperatures also led to a record 6% more hours of lost sleep in 2023 than the 1986–2005 average. Poor sleep has a profound negative effect on physical and mental health.
Hotter and drier weather saw greater numbers of sand and dust storms, which contributed to a 31% increase in the number of people exposed to dangerously high particulate matter concentrations, while life-threatening diseases such as dengue, malaria and West Nile virus continue to spread into new areas as a result of higher temperatures.
But despite this, “governments and companies continue to invest in fossil fuels, resulting in all-time high greenhouse gas emissions and staggering tree loss, reducing the survival chances of people all around the globe”, the authors found.
In 2023, global energy-related carbon dioxide emissions reached an all-time high, 1.1% above 2022, and the proportion of fossil fuels in the global energy system increased for the first time in a decade during 2021, reaching 80.3% of all energy.
Responding to the findings, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director general of the World Health Organization, said: “The climate crisis is a health crisis. As the planet heats up, the frequency and intensity of climate-related disasters increase, leaving no region untouched.”
The report makes it clear, he added, that “climate change is not a distant threat, but an immediate risk to health”.
Meltdown nightmares: silent spring for climate change
“Dirty Secrets of Nuclear Power in an Era of Climate Change,” strips away the myth that nuclear energy solves climate change
By Choi Hee-jin, October. 29. 2024, Korea Times: https://m-koreatimes-co-kr.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.amp.asp?newsIdx=384891—
Asia is buzzing with the 2024 Nobel Prize announcements. The Nobel Prize in literature was awarded to a Korean author, Han Kang, and the Peace Prize to the Japanese organization Nihon Hidankyo, formed by Hibakusha in 1956 to improve support for victims and lobby governments to abolish nuclear weapons. Today, I would like to introduce a timely book that came out this summer on the topic of the Nobel Peace Prize.
In 1962, Rachel Carson published “Silent Spring,” a landmark book that ignited the modern environmental movement by exposing the hidden and devastating effects of widespread pesticide use. Her message raised public awareness about the harmful effects of DDT and led to the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency in 1970. Consequently, it contributed to banning DDT in the United States in 1972 and internationally in 2004.
Like Carlson’s book, the recently released “Dirty Secrets of Nuclear Power in an Era of Climate Change,” strips away the myth that nuclear energy solves climate change and calls our attention to nuclear power. Its authors are Doug Brugge, professor and chair of the Department of Public Health Sciences at the University of Connecticut, and Aaron Datesman, visiting professor at the University of Virginia and engineer at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center.
Before delving into the book, some fundamental questions about climate change should be addressed. Is climate change real? Yes, it is happening. As temperatures continue to rise swiftly, the melting of glaciers and polar ice is becoming more pronounced, serving as a visible and reliable sign of climate change. What is the cause? There is much debate on this topic, but human activity — particularly our reliance on fossil fuels in built environments, cities, and infrastructure — is the main culprit. What is crucial in addressing climate change? Time. It depends on how quickly we switch from fossil fuels to other energy sources. Nuclear power, even in “highly developed” countries, takes a significant amount of time to implement as a solution.
Hidden Costs
Brugge and Datesman conclude that the effects of nuclear power may be more severe and longer lasting because some radioactive materials have such long half-lives, and nuclear accidents are so catastrophic. It exposes the hidden problems of the nuclear industry by looking at its impacts on people and the environment, with a focus on uranium mining, waste management and the dangers of nuclear proliferation.
Uranium mining disproportionately impacts Indigenous communities, leaving a legacy of pollution and health problems. The waste dilemma poses another challenge, with no permanent storage solution for high-level nuclear waste, potentially poisoning water, food chains and ecosystems for thousands of years.
The history of Fukushima and Chernobyl still haunts us and reminds us of the danger of nuclear accidents. The authors say even well-designed reactors are prone to failure due to human error, natural disaster or terrorism. These types of accidents would be a national security issue and would require massive long-term clean-up, and the communities affected would continue to live with the effects.
Economic realities of nuclear power
The economics of nuclear are also covered. Supporters point to the financial benefits of nuclear. But the book shows that the actual costs still need to be added in. Recent numbers bear this out: between 2010 and 2020, the cost of utility-scale solar and onshore wind fell 85 percent and 56 percent, respectively, while nuclear costs increased. The economics are shifting and making nuclear look less and less like a solution to climate change. The authors argue that renewable energy technologies offer a safer and more viable path to a decarbonized future.
A call for responsible energy choices
Nuclear power is being promoted as a solution in many countries and regions. Still, its inherent risks and unsolved problems mean there are better options for achieving net zero emissions and a carbon-free world. “Dirty Secrets of Nuclear Power in the Age of Climate Change” calls for global action to transition to more sustainable and equitable energy solutions. No one knowingly leaves a ticking time bomb in their house when there are safer alternatives.
In industrial history, miners would take small canaries deep into the earth, their delicate respiratory systems acting as an early warning system for toxic gases. A canary’s song, or its silence, could mean the difference between life and death for miners. While we continue to grapple with the ever-present dangers of invisible nuclear radiation and the consequences of its hazardous waste, we seem to treat future generations as unwitting canaries.
Perhaps the debate over nuclear power is outdated. It is essential to envision a completely new society with a carbon-free economy that ensures sustainable prosperity. We need to invest boldly in new alternatives and develop innovative technologies that harness nature’s limitless energy before it’s too late.
Choi Hee-jin is the author of “Future Cities” in The Routledge Handbook for Sustainable Cities and Landscapes in the Pacific Rim (2022), Salzburg Global Seminar Fellow (2023), and founder and CEO of RestFullness(restfullness.net), a platform for rest. She leads vocational formation and leadership sessions and coaches young leaders at METES Institute(metes.io).
Climate Goal “Will Be Dead Within a Few Years” Unless World Acts, UN Warns
The world is well on track to blow past a goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius that many countries have put at the center of their climate efforts
By Sara Schonhardt & E&E News
Climate Goal “Will Be Dead Within a Few Years” Unless World Acts, UN
Warns. The world is well on track to blow past a goal of limiting global
warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius that many countries have put at the center
of their climate efforts. I
f current trends continue, “there is virtually
no chance” of limiting global warming over the past 170 years to 1.5
degrees, according to the latest emissions gap report from the United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Even in the most optimistic
scenarios, where all countries deliver on their emission-cutting pledges,
“there remains about a 3-in-4 chance that warming will exceed 1.5C,” it
adds.
Scientific American 25th Oct 2024, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-goal-will-be-dead-within-a-few-years-unless-world-acts-un-warns/
‘We have emotions too’: Climate scientists respond to attacks on objectivity
Climate scientists who were mocked and gaslighted after speaking up about
their fears for the future have said acknowledging strong emotions is vital
to their work. The researchers said these feelings should not be suppressed
in an attempt to reach supposed objectivity. Seeing climate experts’
fears and opinions about the climate crisis as irrelevant suggests science
is separate from society and ultimately weakens it, they said. The
researchers said they had been subject to ridicule by some scientists after
taking part in a large Guardian survey of experts in May, during which they
and many others expressed their feelings of extreme fear about future
temperature rises and the world’s failure to take sufficient action. They
said they had been told they were not qualified to take part in this broad
discussion of the climate crisis, were spreading doom and were not
impartial.
Guardian 25th Oct 2024,
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/oct/25/we-have-emotions-too-climate-scientists-respond-to-attacks-on-objectivity
‘Climate crunch time’: UN warns world risks over 3C warming without urgent action this decade.
Capping global warming at 1.5C remains technically
possible, but only with unprecedented action from governments around the
world to slash global greenhouse gas emissions by an average of 7.5 per
cent every single year over the next decade, the United Nations has warned.
Published today, the UN Environment Programme’s (UNEP) annual assessment
calculates the ’emissions gap’ between what scientists say must happen to
limit global warming to the 1.5C goal established by the Paris Agreement,
and the emissions reductions targeted and delivered by governments
worldwide.
As ever, the report underscores the rapidly closing window of
time to deliver the deep emissions reductions required this decade if the
goals of the Paris Agreements are to be met, warning that based on current
policies the world risks careering towards catastrophic temperature
increases of between 2.6C and 3.1C over the course of this century.
Business Green 24th Oct 2024
Nuclear lobby on track to sabotage COP29.
By Noel Wauchope | 24 October 2024, https://independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/nuclear-lobby-on-track-to-sabotage-cop29,19101
The nuclear lobby is on track to sabotage the COP29 UN Climate Change Conference next month in Azerbaijan — lobbying governments for support and investors for money, writes Noel Wauchope.
IT’S NOT SO LONG AGO that the global nuclear energy lobby used to deny the threat of climate change. Even as recently as 2020, a leading nuclear propagandist, Michael Shellenger, was downplaying climate change, while trashing renewable energy.
But that’s changed.
In the face of public anxieties about nuclear health and safety dangers – and above all, of nuclear costs – the propagandists desperately needed a new shtick.
The answer was — nuclear power to beat climate change!
COP28 UN Climate Change Conference in December 2023 — the global nuclear lobby trumpeted its “success”
But, in reality, only a tiny minority at COP28 agreed that nuclear power was needed to address global warming.
198 Parties (197 countries plus the European Union) attended this climate summit in Dubai in 2023. Only 22 agreed to the pro-nuclear declaration proposed by France’s President Emmanuel Macron — the Declaration to Triple Nuclear Energy Capacity by 2050, Recognizing the Key Role of Nuclear Energy in Reaching Net Zero.
And, 31 countries that do have nuclear power — why didn’t Russia and China sign up?
Thirteen other countries that have key nuclear programs were also missing from the declaration — five in Europe (Armenia, Belarus, Belgium, Switzerland and Spain), two in South Asia (India and Pakistan) three in the Americas (Argentina, Brazil and Mexico), South Africa (the only nuclear energy producer in Africa), and Iran.
COP29 United Nations Climate Change Conference November 2024, Baku, Azerbaijan
The global nuclear lobby is much better organised now — and will try again.
It’s well to keep in mind that the United Nations is beholden to the nuclear industry.
On 28th May 1959, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) – not yet two years old! – and The World Health Organisation (WHO) signed an agreement referred to as WHA 12-40. Though, it might, on paper, appear balanced and reciprocal, in practice the WHA 12-40 puts WHO in a subordinate position to the IAEA.
So, the United Nations (UN) is tethered to the nuclear industry. The IAEA is part of the UN system — and its brief is to promote the “peaceful” nuclear industry.
COP29 is all about the money
So, the global nuclear push is well prepared with the recent release of an IAEA report on Climate Change and Nuclear Power focussing on the need for investment.
‘The 2024 edition of the IAEA’s Climate Change and Nuclear Power report has been released, highlighting the need for a significant increase in investment to achieve goals for expanding nuclear power.’
According to the report, global investment in nuclear energy must increase to USD$125 billion annually – up from the around USD$50 billion invested each year from 2017-2023 – to meet the IAEA’s high case projection for nuclear capacity in 2050.
The more aspirational goal of tripling capacity – which more than 20 countries pledged to work towards at COP28 last year – would require upwards of USD$150 billion in annual investment.
IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said:
“Across its near century-long lifetime, a nuclear power plant is affordable and cost-competitive. Financing the upfront costs can be a challenge however, especially in market-driven economies and developing countries, ….the private sector will increasingly need to contribute to financing, but so too will other institutions. The IAEA is engaging multilateral development banks to highlight their potential role in making sure that developing countries have more and better financing options when it comes to investing in nuclear energy.”
The new report also examines ways to unlock private-sector finance — a topic that is gaining increasing attention worldwide.
Last month, 14 major financial institutions including some of the world’s largest banks came together during a New York Climate Week event to signal a willingness to help finance nuclear newbuild projects.
On the sidelines of Climate Week in New York City, major banks, government representatives and industry executives met at the Financing the Tripling of Nuclear Energy Leadership Event.
Note that this event was sponsored by the IAEA and the Clean Energy Ministerial’s (CEM) Nuclear Innovation: Clean Energy Future (NICE) initiative. The CEM’s role is to run forums for propagandising the nuclear industry.
The IAEA report continues:
‘Nuclear power’s inclusion in sustainable financing frameworks, including the European Union (EU) taxonomy for sustainable activities, is having a tangible impact. In the EU, the first green bonds have been issued for nuclear power in Finland and France in 2023. Electricité de France (EDF) was one of the first recipients, with the award of €4 billion in green bonds and around €7 billion in green loans between 2022 and 2024.’
The report makes the case for policy reform and international partnerships to help bridge the financing gap and accelerate nuclear power expansion into emerging markets and developing economies — including for small modular reactors.
What does this mean for COP29?
Well, despite the IAEA hype, the nuclear push at COP28 was a bit of a flop.
Forcefully led by France, which is stuck with its unfortunate situation of nuclear monopoly on its energy system. The pro-nuclear declaration was not a global success.
The aim then was to get governments to promote the industry. And, that’s still the aim, despite the pleas for private investment.
But the two go together – lobbying governments to weaken safety regulations, assume the financial risk and provide tax breaks and incentives – while simultaneously encouraging investors about government support.
Ideally, like France, governments could nationalise the nuclear industry. After all, the taxpayer is the most reliable customer.
Sustainability campaigner and author, Jonathon Porritt, predicts COP 29 will be:
‘Baku will be worse than Dubai – as the capital of an even more corrupt, even more misogynistic, and more autocratic petrostate than the UEA.’
The polluting industries will be there in force to counter any real action — as they did in 2023.
In a happy partnership with them will be Rafael Grossi and his nuclear crew.
The much-touted nuclear resurgence – if it happens at all – will be so long coming that it will be irrelevant to the galloping global heating.
Meanwhile, the nuclear push will enable coal, oil and gas to rocket on — while investment in renewable energy will be stymied.
Climate is the big argument. That is for now.
If they win world acceptance that financing nuclear power is essential for climate action, the nuclear lobby can then go on to erase other lingering concerns — on health, safety, wastes, weapons proliferation, indigenous rights.
The world media has dutifully regurgitated the promotion of those mythical beasts — the small nuclear reactors (SMRs).
The digital age – so far – has enabled such myths to be widely promoted and widely accepted.
Ever-increasing AI is becoming accepted as essential — along with its ever-increasing lust for electricity.
I see the global belief in “nuclear for climate” as the first of many global successes in perpetrating lies.
TODAY. Behind the really nasty “NICE” nuclear energy push to control the November COP Climate Change Conference.
Prepare to be dangerously greenwashed.”
The billionaires and other manipulators have been planning this for years
Their goal is to direct United Nations policy, and the finances for climate action, towards the nuclear industry . Their motives are mixed, but MONEY is the big one.
The 2024 United Nations Climate Change Conference or Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC, more commonly known as COP29, will be held in Baku, Azerbaijan from 11 to 22 November, 2024.
The nuclear push is led by a relatively small phalanx of wealthy, powerful individuals – not many in number, compared to the many thousands of people who have qualms about the nuclear lobby running the show at Azerbaijan . But of course, the nuke lobby will be helped along by the fossil fuel giants. If nuclear is accepted as the cure for climate change, there will be a delay of decades for nuclear power to get going again – which means that oil, gas, coal will have full sway.
Nuclear and fossil fuel energies are partners in this crime against our planet.
Even at the 2015 COP Paris Climate Agreement, nuclear ‘influencers’ like Ernest Moniz and Bill Gates were touting the plan – nuclear as the cheap way to fund climate action. A plan quickly taken up by Jeff Bezos (Amazon), Marc Benioff (Salesforce), Michael Bloomberg, Richard Branson, Jack Ma (Alibaba), David Rubenstein (Carlyle Group), Tom Steyer, George Soros, and Mark Zuckerberg – forming the Breakthrough Institute
Now it was time to really go for the tax-payers’ money, as Bill Gates launched Mission Innovation – to “increase government support” for new generation nuclear technologies. Mission Innovation involves 24 national governments, including the USA, Canada, China and India, the World Economic Forum, the International Energy Agency, and the World Bank.
Joyce Nelson has outlined the development of this “nuclear for climate” push, kicking off the new enthusiasm for small nuclear reactors, especially in Canada, around 2018. No surprise that the scandal-ridden company SNC-Lavalin jumped onto this bandwagon, forming a consortium the Canadian National Energy Alliance (CNEA)
By 2018, Gates was launching Breakthrough Energy Europe, a collaboration with the European Commission. In 1919 Canada hosted the Clean Energy Ministerial/Mission Innovation summit launching NICE -the “Nuclear Innovation Clean Energy Future”
M.V. Ramana warned in advance of the summit, “Note to Ministers from 25 countries: Prepare to be dangerously greenwashed.”
I doubt that the COP 29 summit has any credibility with intelligent people. Held in Azerbaijan, one of the world’s worst petrochemical autocracies, this supposed climate action meeting will be one blatant front for the fossil fuel lobby, as well as the nuclear one.
Sad to have the United Nations sponsoring this pack of liars.
Cop29 host Azerbaijan set for major fossil gas expansion, report says
Exclusive: Those with ‘interest in keeping world hooked on fossil fuels’ should not oversee climate talks, say report authors
Guardian, Damian Carrington Environment editor, 23 Oct 24
Azerbaijan, the host of the Cop29 global climate summit, will see a large expansion of fossil gas production in the next decade, a new report has revealed. The authors said that the crucial negotiations should not be overseen by “those with a vested interest in keeping the world hooked on fossil fuels”.
Azerbaijan’s state-owned oil and gas company, Socar, and its partners are set to raise the country’s annual gas production from 37bn cubic metres (bcm) today to 49bcm by 2033. Socar also recently agreed to increase gas exports to the European Union by 17% by 2026.
The Cop29 summit, starting on 11 November, comes as scientists say that continued record carbon dioxide emissions means “the future of humanity hangs in the balance”. The International Energy Agency said in 2021 that no new fossil fuel exploitation should take place if CO2 emissions were to fall to zero by 2050.
But in 2023 Socar pushed 97% of its capital expenditure into oil and gas projects, the report found. The company launched a “green energy division” a few weeks after Azerbaijan was appointed as Cop29 host, promising investments in wind, solar and carbon capture technologies. But according to the report, Socar’s renewable operations remain insignificant.
Azerbaijan’s climate action plan was rated “critically insufficient” by Climate Action Tracker (CAT) in September. “Azerbaijan is among a tiny group of countries that has weakened its climate target [and] the country is doubling down on fossil fuel extraction,” said the CAT analysts.
Azerbaijan and Socar had also been accused of human rights violations, the report said. The authors said defeating the climate crisis required civil society to have freedom of speech and protected human rights.
“Given Socar’s pivotal role in Azerbaijan’s economy and its close ties to the country’s political elite, its influence will surely be felt throughout the climate negotiations in Baku,” said Regine Richter at the German NGO Urgewald, lead author of the report. “As we prepare for Cop29, we cannot but ask ourselves: did we put the fox in charge of the henhouse?”
Azerbaijan’s president, Ilham Aliyev, told a climate conference in April: “Having oil and gas deposits is not our fault. It’s a gift from God.” Aliyez appoints Socar’s management board and was vice-president of Socar until he succeeded his father as the country’s president in 2003. Azerbaijan’s ecology and natural resources minister, Mukhtar Babayev, will run Cop29. He previously worked for Socar for 26 years until 2018. Rovshan Najaf, the president of Socar, is part of the Cop29 organising committee.
………………………………………………………………………….. Socar works with some of the world’s biggest fossil fuel companies, including BP, TotalEnergies, the Russian oil giant Tatneft and the United Arab Emirates’ state oil company Adnoc. The CEO of Adnoc, Sultan Al Jaber, was president of Cop28 in Dubai, where nations failed to agree to “phase out” fossil fuels, as many wanted, instead choosing the weaker ambition of “transitioning away from fossil fuels”.
Socar also receives substantial financial backing from major international institutions, totalling $6.8bn in loans and underwriting between 2021 and 2023, according to research by the Banking on Climate Chaos coalition. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/oct/23/cop29-host-azerbaijan-set-for-major-fossil-gas-expansion-report-says
The world’s top lying nuclear salesman is after your climate action money.
Do these highly paid leaders really believe what they’re saying? I guess their number 1 motive is to hang on to their lucrative jobs. And number 2 motive – to not look silly by telling the truth.
They all know damn well that the nuclear fuel chain increases greenhouse emissions, along with its radioactive emissions.
They all know that covering the planet with 1000s of small nuclear reactors could never be done in time, even if nuclear did work against climate change.
They all know that the real rationale for nuclear is not climate action – it’s nuclear weapons.
New IAEA Report on Climate Change and Nuclear Power Focuses on Financing.
International Atomic Energy Agency, Matt Fisher, IAEA Department of Nuclear Energy, 18 Oct 24
The 2024 edition of the IAEA’s Climate Change and Nuclear Power report has been released, highlighting the need for a significant increase in investment to achieve goals for expanding nuclear power. The new report was launched last week on the margins of the Clean Energy Ministerial (CEM) in Brazil.
……….global investment in nuclear energy must increase to 125 billion USD annually, up from the around 50 billion USD invested each year from 2017-2023………
“Across its near century-long lifetime, a nuclear power plant is [?] affordable and [?]cost competitive. Financing the upfront costs can be a challenge however, especially in market driven economies and developing countries,” said IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi “The private sector will increasingly need to contribute to financing, but so too will other institutions. The IAEA is engaging multilateral development banks to highlight their potential role in making sure that developing countries have more and better financing options when it comes to investing in nuclear energy.”
The new report also examines ways to unlock private sector finance, a topic that is gaining increasing attention worldwide. Last month, 14 major financial institutions including some of the world’s largest banks came together during a New York Climate Week event to signal a willingness to help finance nuclear newbuild projects.
The report was presented at a side event jointly organized by the Agency and the CEM’s Nuclear Innovation: Clean Energy Future (NICE) initiative on the margins of the 15th CEM in Brazil.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………. Nuclear power’s [!!!] inclusion in sustainable financing frameworks, including the European Union (EU) taxonomy for sustainable activities, is having a tangible impact. In the EU, the first green bonds have been issued for nuclear power in Finland and France in 2023. Electricité de France (EDF) was one of the first recipients, with the award of €4 billion in green bonds and around €7 billion in green loans between 2022 and 2024. …………………………………………….. https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/new-iaea-report-on-climate-change-and-nuclear-power-focuses-on-financing
Is it worse to have no climate solutions – or to have them but refuse to use them?
Rebecca Solnit, 16 Oct 2024 ,
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/16/climate-crisis-technology-ai
Tech barons are forever predicting some amazing new technology to fix the climate crisis. Yet fixes already exist.
When it comes to some of the tech oligarchs, I suspect the sheer modesty of the solutions is not the kind of gee-whiz rocket science they love.’
There are so many ways to fiddle while Rome burns, or as this season’s weather would have it, gets torn apart by hurricanes and tornadoes and also goes underwater – and, in other places, burns. One particularly pernicious way comes from the men in love with big tech, who are forever insisting that we need some amazing new technology to solve our problems, be it geoengineering, carbon sequestration or fusion – but wait, it gets worse.
At an artificial intelligence conference in Washington DC, the former Google CEO Eric Schmidt recently claimed that “[w]e’re not going to hit the climate goals anyway because we’re not organized to do it” and that we should just plunge ahead with AI, which is so huge an energy hog it’s prompted a number of tech companies to abandon their climate goals. Schmidt then threw out the farfetched notion that we should go all in on AI because maybe AI will somehow, maybe, eventually know how to “solve” climate, saying: “I’d rather bet on AI solving the problem than constraining it.”
Eventually is not good enough. A distinguished group of scientists said in a paper published on 8 October: “We are on the brink of an irreversible climate disaster. This is a global emergency beyond any doubt. Much of the very fabric of life on Earth is imperiled. We are stepping into a critical and unpredictable new phase of the climate crisis.”
We need to pull back from that brink, but Schmidt is arguing for plunging over it, because guys like him are excited about AI. This is like arguing we should jettison the lifeboats and hang out on the sinking ship because what if there was eventually a totally awesome, new kind of lifeboat we can’t even imagine right now?
We have the lifeboats now – we have the solutions, and we have had them for a while, and they keep getting better, as in better-designed, more efficient, more affordable and adaptable. We just need to implement them, but they’re just not the solutions a lot of the rich and powerful like. Proposing we go for some false or nonexistent solution has become an excuse constantly deployed as an excuse for not supporting the solutions we have.
Delay is the new denial” became a slogan in the climate movement a few years ago, and maybe “decoy is the new denial” should be added to it, by which I mean proposing we ignore workable present-day solutions in favor of unworkable and nonexistent ones while continuing to burn fossil fuel.
One might think that Schmidt, whose net worth is estimated at around $23bn, would devote some time and resources to organizing us to reach our climate goals rather than excuse himself from acting with his dismissive defeatism. But overall billionaires and the very rich are part of the problem, with their outsized power and the dismal ways most of them use it. And their climate impact is obscene – the richest 1% of humanity is responsible for more carbon emissions than the poorest 66%.
Scientists and engineers have been telling us for a very long time what we need to do and how to do it, and most of us already know that what we need to do is make a swift transition away from burning fossil fuels. Protecting forests and other natural systems and redesigning how we live, travel and produce and consume also matter, but phasing out the extraction and burning of fossil fuels is the big one. Schmidt lives in California, where we’ve been getting more than 100% of our electricity needs met many days this year by sun, wind and water, and storing the surplus in immense battery systems. Obviously not everything in California runs on electricity, but this is a nice demonstration model of how rapidly a renewable system can scale up.
When it comes to some of the tech oligarchs, I suspect the sheer modesty of the solutions – that we should consume less, which means we can produce less, and make this energy transition to a renewable-powered world – is not the kind of gee-whiz rocket science they love. (Though solar and wind technologies are pretty amazing, particularly if you know how rapidly their design has improved, their cost has plummeted and their implementation has spread.) It is in many ways a social solution in which lots of us adjust how we live and how we power our devices, not a grand centralized invention that is super profitable for a few.
I do not know if it would be worse to live in a world in which we genuinely did not have the solutions, or to live in one where we have them but are not implementing them on the speed and scale we know we need to. But I know we have the solutions.
- Rebecca Solnit is a Guardian US columnist. She is the author of Orwell’s Roses and co-editor with Thelma Young Lutunatabua of the climate anthology Not Too Late: Changing the Climate Story from Despair to Possibility
1 This Month
Website of the Week
New book – https://www.amazon.com/dp/1923372157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- January 2026 (127)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 