Greenpeace UK Press Releases

Arctic council fails to act on climate change warning from its own scientists

sgelmini — Wed, 15 May 2013 12:32:18 +0000

15 May, 2013

Despite strong calls for more action to address climate change from its own working groups and scientists, and many of the Ministers attending the meeting, today’s Arctic Council foreign ministers meeting has ended with no plans for binding international agreements to regulate black carbon emissions or curb the Arctic oil rush. Further, the Cooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic Agreement, which was signed by the foreign ministers in Kiruna, includes no specific practical minimum standards that governments must adhere to, and has no provisions to hold companies liable for the full costs and damages of a spill should one occur.

Commenting from Kiruna outside the Arctic Council meeting, Ruth Davis, Greenpeace International senior policy advisor, said:

"The Arctic Council has long been renowned for commissioning top-notch science and then ignoring its implications. There were two conferences going on here — one that warned of the dangers of climate change and rapid industrialisation in this fragile region, and another, attended by Foreign Ministers, that took almost no concrete steps to address them. Throughout this meeting, the evidence from scientists and Indigenous Peoples has highlighted the devastating impacts of our fossil fuel addiction on the Arctic. Yet the Council seems in the thrall of business interests wishing to extract more oil and gas, whatever the costs to local people, wildlife and the future health of the planet. This is tantamount to a doctor showing you the lump in your lung whilst his boss offers you a cigarette.”

“The lack of any meaningful action comes in stark contrast to the firm recommendations from its own scientists based on the Council-commissioned reports on ocean acidification and the impact of climate change on biodiversity — which synthesised its findings with first-hand evidence from Arctic Indigenous Peoples about changes they are witnessing. The reports conclude that without urgent action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and a precautionary approach to industrialisation, the future of the Arctic and the Peoples who call it home is grim.”

“While it’s good that the Council is opening its doors to more voices by admitting more states as Observers, at the end of the day what we need is a body that listens to those most affected by climate change and not just the rich and powerful who have the most to gain from the rush to carve up the Arctic and sell off its parts. It is also imperative that the Arctic Council strengthens the participation of Indigenous Peoples by ensuring full, prior and informed consent in all Arctic Council decision making.”

Greenpeace believes that during the next two years, the Arctic Council must deliver concrete results protecting the environment and the people who rely on it by:

· Agreeing to develop new, binding common standards to apply to offshore oil and gas drilling, including a ban on oil drilling in the Arctic, as it is not possible to intervene to prevent a spill or clean up the event of a spill.

· Undertaking new, urgent action to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of Arctic states, including but not restricted to action to reduce emissions of black carbon.

· Taking action on marine reserves, including supporting the establishment of a global sanctuary in the central Arctic Ocean, as part of an enhanced plan to protect Arctic biodiversity.

· Tackling the risks from unsustainable industrial fishing.

· Strengthening the participation of Indigenous Peoples by ensuring full, prior and informed consent for all Arctic Council decision making and developing a work plan to include transparency and inclusiveness that will help deliver these outcomes.

For more information, please contact:

Stefano Gelmini, Greenpeace UK, 07506 512 442

Jessica Wilson, Greenpeace International communications, +44 7896 893 118

Ruth Davis, Greenpeace International senior policy advisor, +44 7949 024 173

Notes for editors:

[1] As expected, the Council approved the cooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic, a disappointingly weak document that Greenpeace International leaked in February.

[2] The Council announced its decision on the 14 applicants for observer status, opening its doors to six countries: China, India, Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Italy. The European Union’s application is unresolved pending resolution of a dispute with Canada over trade in some marine animal products. The Council tabled the applications of all other NGOs and organisations, including Greenpeace.

[3] A briefing on the Arctic Council can be found here.

[4] A briefing on Canada’s chairmanship can be found here.

Greenpeace Reveals Environmental Policy Conflict at the Heart of Liberal Democrats

Graham Thompson — Mon, 13 May 2013 08:39:16 +0000

Activists scale building in minister’s constituency

13 May, 2013

Greenpeace has this morning released confidential internal policy documents from Transport Minister Norman Baker that shows how he is blocking new legislation to reduce carbon emissions from new cars. The proposed law could save motorists up to £400 per year, and have been proposed by leading Liberal Democrat MEP Fiona Hall.

In the leaked briefing Baker and his officials call for ‘opposing’ a proposal by Liberal Democrat Fiona Hall, who sits on the Industry Research and Energy (ITRE) committee of the European Parliament, which called for the reduction of CO2 emissions from all new cars to 70g CO2/km for 2025. In the document the minister explains why he wants MEPs to vote against his fellow Lib Dem’s proposal.

Among the other details the internal documents show are:

Watering down legislation through introducing so-called ‘Super Credits’ – a loophole which would allow car makers to offset gas guzzling cars by over-counting the EVs they produce. This would have the effect of raising CO2 emissions above the target allowed in the law.

Blocking a car emissions target for 2025

Advising MEPs to vote against fellow Lib Dems who have proposed a 2025 target

To coincide with the release of the documents at 8am today Greenpeace activists have scaled a five story building on Lewes High Street, the shopping centre at the heart of his constituency to unfurl a huge advert demanding that Norman Baker takes decisive action to limit carbon emissions . At the same time a second team of activists are greeting commuters with leaflets that explain how the Transport Minister can improve the quality of air, reduce carbon emissions and save drivers £400 a year.

Commenting on today’s action, Sara Ayech Greenpeace campaigner said:

“These documents reveal that there is a split at the heart of the Liberal Democrats over policy to reduce carbon emissions and save motorists money. Norman Baker should follow the progressive political lead of Fiona Hall and support laws that will help the environment, whilst putting an average of £400 a year back into the pockets of hard pressed motorists. “

ENDS

For media enquiries call Niall on 07711156881

Greenpeace Reveals Environmental Policy Conflict at the Heart of Liberal Democrats

benstewart999 — Mon, 13 May 2013 06:27:06 +0000

Activists scale building in minister’s constituency

13 May, 2013

Monday 13^th May 2013

Greenpeace Reveals Environmental Policy Conflict at the Heart of Liberal Democrats

Activists scale building in minister’s constituency

Among the other details the internal documents show are:

Watering down legislation through introducing so-called ‘Super Credits’ – a loophole which would allow car makers to offset gas guzzling cars by over-counting the EVs they produce. This would have the effect of raising CO2 emissions above the target allowed in the law.

Blocking a car emissions target for 2025

Advising MEPs to vote against fellow Lib Dems who have proposed a 2025 target

Commenting on today’s action, Sara Ayech Greenpeace campaigner said:

ENDS

Carbon dioxide levels hit historic mark

sgelmini — Fri, 10 May 2013 17:15:19 +0000

10 May, 2013

Commenting on data from one of the science institutes monitoring CO2 concentrations at Mauna Loa (NOAA), which shows that carbon dioxide levels have hit the historic 400 ppm mark on May 9^th, Greenpeace UK executive director John Sauven said:

“This is a landmark moment for humankind, a milestone every bit as important as when the global population passed six then seven billion. Our common future is now bound up with this one simple measurement, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, and it now stands well above what some of our greatest scientific minds say is safe.

“The implications are grave, we’re facing major adverse planetary changes, our seasons are shifting faster than we thought possible, but even now there is still cause for hope. Last year China installed more pollution-free renewable energy than coal, and it was the same in the USA. The tools exist to halt the relentless loading of our atmosphere with heat-trapping gases, all we need to do is tap the ingenuity of humankind to deploy them. We're in a fight for our future, but it's a fight we can win.”

ENDS

Stefano Gelmini

Greenpeace UK press officer

m 07500 866 860

Battle over ‘ownership’ of Britain’s fish begins in High Court

Graham Thompson — Wed, 01 May 2013 09:12:50 +0000

1 May, 2013

LONDON – An unusual alliance of Greenpeace, the government, and small-boat fishermen is poised for an unprecedented court battle with Britain’s most powerful fishing groups which could decide the 30-year-old question of who ultimately controls the UK's fishing quota – a public resource estimated to be worth billions of pounds.

Environmental campaigners and small-scale fishermen will be demonstrating outside the High Court as the first day of hearings begins today, to draw attention to a landmark case which could have momentous consequences for the definition of fish as a public good and the government’s ability to ensure Britain's seas are fished sustainably.

At the heart of the dispute is the decision by the Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (Defra) to reallocate a small amount of consistently unused fishing quota from Fish Producer Organisations – consortia of vessel owners controlling over 95 per cent of the UK’s fishing rights – to small-scale fishermen, who have access to a tiny 4 per cent share of this resource, despite making up over three quarters of the UK’s fishing fleet. (1)

The industry heavyweights, represented by the UK Association of Fish Producer Organisations (UKAFPO), have taken Defra to court over the move arguing that reallocating part of their share of fishing quota is tantamount to ‘deprivation of possessions ’ – an argument implying that they regard quota as a private asset.

Greenpeace and the New Under Ten Fishermen’s Association (NUTFA), who have been given permission by the court to intervene in the case, will be arguing that fish is not a private commodity but a public good held in trust by the government on behalf of all citizens.

"This case is not just about shifting a bit of fishing quota from one sector of the fleet to another – it's a fight for the very soul of our seas,” says Greenpeace ocean campaigner Ariana Densham. “The industry heavyweights are effectively asking the court to rubberstamp the largest privatisation by stealth of a public good in centuries – a massive fish grab which is threatening the livelihoods of many small-scale fishermen, the largest and most sustainable part of our fleet. Greenpeace is here today to remind the fishing barons that our seas are not for sale."

Fishing quotas were introduced for the first time three decades ago by the then new EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) in an attempt to regulate the exploitation of fish stocks. Each year, after EU fisheries ministers have negotiated the overall amount of fish their fleets are allowed to catch (Total Allowable Catch), member states parcel it out to their respective fleets in the form of fishing quotas.

Officially, fishing quotas have always been no more than temporary concessions to utilise a public resource, reallocated to fishermen every year. In practice, vessel owners have ended up treating quota as a private asset – buying it, selling it, renting it out to other fishermen, and even using it as collateral for bank loans (2).

"Producer organisations are a bit like quota squatters: they have been ‘occupying’ a public good for some time and now claim the government can't take it back because it’s their private property," says Densham. "But the public nature of fishing rights is enshrined in the Magna Carta itself, and the sell-off of this resource to private interests would represent a swing from public to private that would turn history on its head, ending centuries of established rights.”

Greenpeace has warned that if fishing giants were to win this case, this would severely hamper the government's ability to manage the UK's fisheries, including the implementation of key elements of the much anticipated new Common Fisheries Policy currently debated in Brussels.

"The people of this country have everything to lose from the privatisation of our seas," says Densham. "If the government can't allocate quota as it sees fit, then our minister will effectively lose the ability to manage our fisheries in the public’s interest, and our seas will be left at the mercy of unfettered market forces. The hard-won proposals to prioritise low-impact fishermen included in the new EU fisheries policy would be dead in the water."

The outcome of today’s case is bound to have a direct impact on Britain’s 4,000-plus small-scale fishermen (3), many of whom are struggling to scrape a living from the little fishing quota they have access to.

“It’s simply unacceptable that access to a public resource should be considered as just another commodity, to be bought and sold to the highest bidder, irrespective of its vital social, economic and cultural importance to fishermen and the hundreds of coastal communities they support,” says Jerry Percy, chief executive to NUTFA. "This is the last chance saloon for many small scale and sustainable fishermen who will not have a future if their birth right ends up in the hands of a few big players”.

The UK's fishing quota – estimated to be worth over one billion pounds back in 1999, and now likely to be a multi-billion pound asset (4) – has been the object of growing media and public scrutiny over the last few years.

At present there is no publically available information on who holds fishing quota besides the amount which is allocated to producer organisations every year. Following media reports suggesting banks and even football clubs may have bought quota as a financial investment (5), Defra has been under pressure to publish a register of quota holders, and has indicated it intends to do so by the end of the year (6).

Findings from a Greenpeace investigation published earlier this year also revealed that a large amount of fishing quota held by members of the UK's most influential lobby body for the fishing sector – the National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations (NFFO) – is in the hands of Spanish, Dutch, and Icelandic interests, which a damning 2009 report by Defra found to be contributing little or nothing to the UK economy (7).

Greenpeace and NUTFA are represented by Harrison Grant Solicitors instructing Kassie Smith QC of Monckton Chambers.

ENDS

A group of small-scale fishermen will hold a brief demonstration in front of the High Court building on the Strand from 9-10am today.

Notes to editors

http://www.nutfa.org/#/fisheries-management/4543399029
Agriculture Select Committee ‘Eight Report – Sea Fishing’ 1999 UK Parliament, para 85 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199899/cmselect/cmagric/141/14108.htm
MMO vessel list, 1st April 2013: http://www.marinemanagement.org.uk/fisheries/statistics/vessel.htm
Agriculture Select Committee ‘Eight Report – Sea Fishing’ 1999 UK Parliament, para 83.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-13682451 http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/05/fishing-quotas-privatised
Defra’s spokesperson quoted in http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/anger_over_fish_quota_of_foreign_fleet_linked_to_lowestoft_1_1867622
http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/media/reports/wolf-shrimps-clothing

Govt votes against saving bees - and loses

kcumming — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 12:57:18 +0000

29 April, 2013

The UK has voted in Brussels against banning pesticides known to harm bees. However a majority vote for the ban means it will go ahead despite the UK's position.

Greenpeace’s Chief Scientist Dr Doug Parr said:

“By not supporting the ban, Owen Paterson has exposed the UK Government as being in the pocket of big chemical companies and the industrial farming lobby.

"Government policy should be evidence-based and the evidence in this case is clear– these pesticides are badly affecting bees. That Mr Paterson chose to ignore it does not bode well.”

ENDS

For more information, please contact the Greenpeace press office: 07711156881

Sunday Time tax story - Greenpeace response

benstewart999 — Sat, 27 Apr 2013 22:00:57 +0000

27 April, 2013

Sunday 28th April 2013

Commenting on revelations that tax avoiders are using the Greenpeace name to avoid tax in offshore havens, John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK, said:

“We had no idea we were named as a beneficiary of this trust and we certainly never received so much as a penny from it. It looks like our name has been exploited by somebody operating from an island notorious for facilitating tax avoidance. Global tax loopholes are costing governments trillions, setting back the fight against poverty and environmental destruction. The fact that tax avoiders may be using the names of campaign groups to pull it off is a distasteful irony. Greenpeace does not accept any money from governments or corporations.”

ENDS

Greenpeace - 0207 865 8255

ECC Committee report on fracking - Greenpeace response

Graham Thompson — Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:45:49 +0000

EMBARGOED UNTIL 00:01 APRIL 26

25 April, 2013

In response to the Energy and Climate Change Committee Report into the impact of UK shale gas on energy markets, Greenpeace Climate Campaigner Leila Deen said:

“This report confirms that what we know about UK shale gas is that we don’t know much.The only thing most experts agree on is that it won’t reduce bills.

“Fracking remains a fantasy and a dangerous distraction from renewables, which continue to fall in cost. The Government needs to start backing energy winners, instead of gambling with consumers’ pockets and the climate.”

ENDS

Greenpeace launches whistleblowing website to expose Arctic drilling truths

Graham Thompson — Wed, 24 Apr 2013 13:59:11 +0000

24 April, 2013

24 April 2013 (London) — Greenpeace International has launched a whistleblowing website today to encourage employees and subcontractors of oil companies involved in Arctic drilling to come forward and help expose the incredible risks corporations are taking as they look to plunder the resources of this pristine region.

As www.arctictruth.org went live this morning, the environmental campaign group made a direct appeal to oil industry employees who may have access to inside information, particularly on operational safety, poor practices and potential breaches of environmental regulations.

This latest initiative in Greenpeace's campaign to protect the Arctic from creeping industrialisation comes at a time of heightened concern over the safety of drilling operations in the region. Over the last year, Shell has lurched from one safety blunder to another — its oil spill containment was “crushed like a beer can” during tests; its barge failed to meet safety standards; one of its rigs ran aground in Alaska while the other had a fire in its engine, and both are now under federal, criminal investigation.

“Shell’s recent experience in the Arctic has been a shambles from start to finish. If it hadn’t been for such close public and media scrutiny, very little of the truth about the company’s appalling safety practises would ever have come to light. That is why we are looking for information relating to oil drilling in the far north, which would usually be kept under wraps. The public needs to know about the incredible risks these companies are taking each and every day they drill in the fragile Arctic,” said Ben Ayliffe, head of Arctic oil at Greenpeace International.

Posters advertising the new website are appearing today in the streets surrounding the London offices of Anglo-Dutch oil giant Shell — one of the biggest oil companies leading the Arctic resource rush. Flyers are also being handed out to employees outside the company's headquarters in the UK and the Netherlands, whilst Greenpeace is also launching an online charm offensive to reach Shell's staff through the professional networking site LinkedIn.

Arctic Truth offers the opportunity to submit information securely and in confidence. Greenpeace International will treat all information with absolute respect and use it to challenge irresponsible practices in the Arctic, whilst ensuring that our sources are protected.

“The Arctic is the most remote and technically challenging drilling environment imaginable and so far the industry has proven that it’s simply not up to the challenge. But without close public scrutiny, the full extent of Shell’s recklessness and lax attitude towards even basic safety standards would never have come to light,” said Ayliffe. “The human, environmental and economic impacts of an accident in the polar north would be catastrophic, and we hope this new website will reveal the truth about the gamble oil companies like Shell are willing to take.”

Greenpeace has a long history of documenting environmental abuses by corporations and regularly receives information from industry insiders. This includes a concerned former whaler tipping the organisation off about wrongdoing in Japan's 'scientific' whaling programme and a disillusioned former employee of a waste recycling site in England, who highlighted that much of the waste was being dumped in Africa rather than being recycled.

ENDS

For more information, please contact:

Stefano Gelmini, Greenpeace press officer, t. 0207 865 8296 m. 07506 512 442

Jessica Wilson, Greenpeace International Arctic campaign, +44 7896 893118

CCC report on competitiveness - Greenpeace response

Graham Thompson — Tue, 23 Apr 2013 15:48:54 +0000

23 April, 2013

In response to the Committee on Climate Change's new report, 'Reducing the UK's carbon footprint and managing competitiveness risks', Greenpeace UK political director Joss Garman said:

“Of course to prevent dangerous climate change the transition to a cleaner economy based on new industries and technologies can’t only happen in the UK.

That’s why it’s essential we and the rest of Europe work to deepen partnerships with other countries – both in the developed and developing world – who are also committed to cutting carbon emissions.”

ENDS

People’s fracking concerns go well beyond earth tremors

kcumming — Wed, 10 Apr 2013 08:28:56 +0000

10 April, 2013

Greenpeace response to new Durham University study

Greenpeace Energy Campaigner Lawrence Carter said:

“People’s apprehensions about fracking go well beyond earth tremors – communities are concerned about the industrialisation of the English countryside, including noise, increased traffic, falling house prices and environmental damage.

“Documents obtained by Greenpeace reveal the Environment Agency’s private fears over threats to drinking water near potential fracking sites in Sussex. (1) While in the US, the release of climate change gases around fracking sites has been found to be so high that shale gas could end up being as polluting as coal. (2)

“Everyone from Ofgem to BP agree UK shale gas won’t bring down bills, so fracking could end up being a lot of pain for very little gain. Instead we need to move towards a carbon free electricity system, which will be cleaner, safer and cheaper over time.”

ENDS

(1) https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/482162-rishale.html

(2) http://www.nature.com/news/air-sampling-reveals-high-emissions-from-gas-field-1.9982

Greenland halts new oil drilling licences

sgelmini — Thu, 28 Mar 2013 14:33:59 +0000

27 March, 2013

Responding to news that the newly-elected Greenland government has decided to pause the issuing of new licenses to oil companies looking to drill in the fragile Arctic environment, Jon Burgwald, Arctic Campaigner for Greenpeace in Denmark, said:

“This is a major step towards protecting Greenland from a catastrophic oil spill, but more still needs to be done to protect the unique local environment. Almost all of west Greenland is already open for oil drilling, so the threat of a catastrophic oil spill in areas like Baffin Bay remains.”

“Until now, the people in Greenland have been kept in the dark about the enormous risks taken by the politicians and companies in the search for Arctic oil. Now it seems that the new government will start taking these risks seriously, the logical conclusion must be a total ban on offshore oil drilling in Greenland.”

The new government has announced a welcome change from the former government’s policy of secrecy, stating that "the offshore industry's safety plans for environmental and safety should be generally available to the public.” (1) This means the government is bound to ensure that future oil extraction is carried out with full public transparency.

The agreement states:

- Current exploration and extraction permits for oil extraction will stay in force, but the government will be reluctant towards granting new permits

- A resource monitoring system will be created.

- Royalty, which is based on world market prices, will be added to the existing legislation. The fee may be increased depending on project size.

- A supervisory within the parliament will be created, which will maintain parliamentary supervision of mineral resources.

- All plans from companies shall be publicly announced and full transparency in the administration must be ensured.

- Offshore industry safety plans for environment and safety in general must be publicly available.

For further information, please contact:

Stefano Gelmini, Greenpeace press officer, 020 7865 8296

Jon Burgwald, Greenpeace Nordic Arctic campaigner, +45 40 81 88 98

1. Coalition agreement of the newly formed Greenlandic government: http://sermitsiaq.ag/sites/default/files/koalitionsaftale_2013_2017_dk.pdf

Greenpeace on appointment of Michael Fallon

kcumming — Thu, 28 Mar 2013 10:52:56 +0000

28 March, 2013

Responding to news Michael Fallon is replacing John Hayes as Energy Minister, Greenpeace Policy Director Doug Parr said:

“Britain is at a crossroads, with decisions being made now that will define how we get and use energy for the next 30-40 years. As such, Michael Fallon has a real opportunity to clean up our power sector, capitalise on clean, home-grown energy and properly open Britain for green business.

"In opposition he authored a law to drive investment in renewable energy, and as Deputy Chairman of the Conservatives he described the renewables sector as “the work force of tomorrow" (1).

“We look forward to him putting this vision into practice and safeguarding green jobs and growth."

ENDS

Notes:

Fallon authored a Private Members Bill on the Merton Rule, designed to drive investment in renewable energy systems in housing developments. He said the renewables sector would provide “the workforce of tomorrow” here: http://bit.ly/13zTR2a

Greenpeace launches online contest for new action pod design

Nic S — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 18:26:36 +0000

27 March 2013 - For immediate release. Pictures and footage available.

27 March, 2013

Greenpeace is giving designers and creatives a once-in-a-lifetime chance to leave their mark on one of its most iconic and photographed pieces of action equipment – the survival pod.

The environmental campaign group launched an online competition this week to come up with a new look for 'Pod 3' – the third generation of dome-shaped shelters used by Greenpeace activists to confront environmental villains on their own turf.

Earlier models have played a vital role in some of the campaign group's most spectacular actions. Pictures of the pods have been seen across the globe, showing them perched on top of a wave-lashed rock in the Atlantic Ocean, hooked onto the anchor chain of a giant drilling ship, or hanging off the side of an oil platform.

With the existing pods still held by police authorities overseas after having been impounded during protest actions, Greenpeace is crowd sourcing both the funding and the design of the new equipment, offering supporters a chance to 'own' acrucial piece of its frontline action gear.

The new model's first deployment is likely to be to the Arctic, where Greenpeace is gearing up to confront the oil giants hell-bent on plundering this fragile and pristine environment. The new protective structure will shelter activists from the extreme harshness of the Arctic climate as well as attacks from water cannons, allowing them to remain in hostile conditions for longer.

Announcing the launch of the competition, Greenpeace campaigner Victoria Henry, said:

"A veteran of many iconic battles to protect our fragile planet, the pod is a physical manifestation of Greenpeace values: our tenacity and our willingness to stand up to those who seek to harm the environment, no matter their size.

"Thiscompetition gives our supporters a once-in-a-lifetime chance to apply their creative skills and imagination at the very sharp end of environmental campaigning. Defining the look of our pod, their artwork will become the focal point of daring actions to stop environmental villains in their tracks. These images will inspire millions of people the world over."

The competition ends on April 25, and submissions will be judged by a panel of experts shortly after, with the winning artwork announced in early May.

ENDS

Competition website: http://pod.greenpeace.org.uk/design

Twitter hashtag: #HopeOnARope

Pictures and footage of the pod in action are available.

Contact:

Stefano Gelmini, Greenpeace UK press officer, t 0207 865 8296 m 07506 512 442

NFFO under pressure to reveal foreign boats' quota

sgelmini — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:14:34 +0000

27 March, 2013

Pressure is mounting on the National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations (NFFO) to disclose the amount of fishing quota held by its foreign-controlled members after Greenpeace released more evidence of large-scale quota exploitation by Spanish-controlled vessels affiliated to a fishing consortium represented by the federation.

Research by the environmental group has revealed that a Spanish-controlled 'phantom fishing fleet', affiliated to the Fleetwood Fish Producer Organisation (FFPO) but not seen by local people for over a decade, has been carting off to Spain millions of pounds worth of fish caught using quota allocated to Lancashire fishermen.

Previously unpublished landings figures obtained by Greenpeace show that seven of the 14 Spanish-controlled vessels registered with the FFPO landed £7.5m worth of fish destined for the Spanish market in just one year, between April 2011 and March 2012. According to local industry sources in Scotland, where the fish is landed, catches are immediately trucked off to Spain, having been pre-sold there before even touching the ground.

The details have emerged just days after the fisheries minister announced a clampdown on foreign fishing interests profiting from UK quota amid fears that vessels owned by overseas operators are contributing little or nothing to the British economy. The latest government estimates suggested that foreign-controlled vessels like those in Fleetwood are likely to add no value to the British economy, instead exploiting UK fishing quota to trouser what should be UK profits.

The Fleetwood Spanish fleet includes the O Genita, a vessel owned by the Vidal family, who were convicted for their role in one of the most egregious cases of illegal fishing in British maritime history, which resulted in total penalties of £1.62m being handed down to two companies they own.

Five of the eight producer organisations making up the backbone of the NFFO’s membership, including the FFPO, were found by a Greenpeace investigation to have between 75 and 100 per cent of their fishing capacity controlled by foreign interests. In a report entitled ‘A Wolf in Shrimp's Clothing’ published in February the environmental group revealed that over half of the fishing capacity represented by the NFFO is controlled by overseas operators – a shocking figure that the federation has not refuted, or even directly addressed, since.

"It’s deeply concerning that foreign boats in the crosshairs of a government clampdown on fish quota ‘abuse’ are represented by the industry’s most influential lobby group,” said Ariana Densham, Greenpeace oceans campaigner. “The NFFO has been sticking its head in the sand on the issue of its foreign-dominated fleet, but reality is catching up with their denial.”

Densham added: “Last year the federation came out in favour of a public register of quota holders arguing that it would stop 'hysterical speculation'. Now that the speculation has turned into troubling evidence, it’s time for the NFFO to put its money where its mouth is and be transparent about how much fishing quota is held by its foreign-controlled members.”

ENDS

Contact

Stefano Gelmini, Greenpeace press officer, t 020 7865 8296 m 07506 512 442

Rising Hollywood star on North Pole trek to save the Arctic

sgelmini — Mon, 25 Mar 2013 18:11:40 +0000

25 March, 2013

Up-and-coming Hollywood talent Ezra Miller will travel to the North Pole in early April to plant a ‘flag for the future’ on the seabed, as part of a major international campaign to protect the Arctic, amid a growing rush for the region’s natural resources.

The 20-year-old actor, who played the title role in We Need to Talk About Kevin and recently starred in The Perks of Being a Wallflower, will ski for up to eight hours per day and camp out in temperatures that could drop to -31°F. He will be joined by three other youth ambassadors from communities directly threatened by climate change, and will be cheered on by 2.7 million others who have backed a Greenpeace campaign to create a global sanctuary in the uninhabited area around the North Pole.

Once they arrive at the top of the world, the team will attempt to lower a special flag to the seabed, several miles below the surface. The flag’s design, chosen by Vivienne Westwood as part of an international competition, is intended to symbolise global unity and peace and will stand in defiance of previous attempts, most notably by Russia, to claim this region and its resources for any one country.

Announcing his participation in the trip, Ezra Miller said:

“I’ve never camped in the snow before and I’m definitely not an Arctic explorer, but I’m determined to plant this flag at the North Pole to declare it protected. I’m skiing with three young people want to create a sanctuary up there and fight climate change across the world.”

“The Arctic is melting in front of us, but right now people just see that as a chance to go up there and drill for more oil. It’s time to create a new story. Millions of people have signed their name at savethearctic.org to draw a line in the ice and say ‘this stops here’.”

Attached to the flag will be a special pod which contains over 2.7 million names of people who support the campaign including Paul McCartney, One Direction, and Cameron Diaz. This pod will be made of glass and titanium and is intended to rest on the seabed for decades to come.

Ezra recently completed a training course in Montreal, Canada, which required him to drag a sled containing over 170lbs of equipment, as well as learning to melt snow to cook freeze dried food. Once on the trip he will be expected to pitch camp, pack his own sled and pee in a bottle during the night.

In April the North Pole is bathed in nearly 24 hours of sunlight. The team will use GPS locators to find the actual pole itself, a task made harder by constantly shifting ice floes which can pull expeditions south as they walk north.

Ezra Miller continued:

“Even after months of training I’m still pretty terrified about skiing across the frozen Arctic Ocean. But I feel really honoured to have been asked to take part along with these amazing young people, and it’s a story that I will tell to my grandchildren once we’ve won this huge fight against climate change.”

Ezra will be joined by three other youth ambassadors with different connections to the Arctic:

Renny Bijoux from the Seychelles, whose island nation could disappear due to rising sea levels.

Josefina Skerk is from the Indigenous Sami community in Sweden and a member of the Sami parliament.

Kiera Kolson is a young Tso’Tine-Gwich’in woman from Denendeh, Canada. She works to protect the Arctic with Greenpeace and defends the rights of Indigenous Peoples who have lived there for thousands of years.

ENDS

Contacts:

Stefano Gelmini at Greenpeace on 020 7865 8296 stefano.gelmini@greenpeace.org

Images

Images can be viewed at the link below and are available in high resolution from the Greenpeace picture desk. Please email john.novis@greenpeace.org

http://photo.greenpeace.org/C.aspx?VP3=PSR&PSID=27MZ4BCP3IG

Video

A b-roll edit (5min33sec) of Ezra Miller training for polar conditions in an area outside of Montreal can be previewed via this unlisted YouTube link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErqOpMzsX6U

Greenpeace congratulates Stockport MP on safeguarding green growth

kcumming — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 14:57:43 +0000

21 March, 2013

Greenpeace today congratulated Hazel Grove Liberal Democrat MP Andrew Stunell for supporting green jobs and growth in the North West.

Andrew Stunell this morning became the ninth Lib Dem to join a growing body of cross-party MPs calling for the Government to change its energy policy. (1)

In question is whether there should be a goal for carbon-free electricity by 2030 built into the Energy Bill going through Parliament. The goal is part of Lib Dem party policy but was left out of the legislation following pressure from Chancellor George Osborne and the Treasury, who prefer increased use of gas over clean electricity.

But Andrew Stunell has now added his name to an amendment that would see the 2030 goal put back in.

“It is fantastic to see people like Andrew sticking their neck out to safeguard green jobs and growth in the North West,” said Greenpeace Energy Campaigner Emma Gibson.

“There were more green jobs in the North West in 2010-11 than the motor and telecommunications trades combined (2), and across Britain, one third of all growth in 2011-2012 came from the low carbon sector.

“The 2030 amendment is crucial for continued investment and growth in low carbon goods and services, but George Osborne has tried to side-line it to clear the way for his dash for gas.

“It is people like Andrew Stunell who may just help carbon-free power become law, which will be cleaner, safer and cheaper over time. The Government’s own energy advisors have said that renewable electricity will be hundreds of pounds cheaper a year for the average household over time than gas.” (3)

Hundreds of industry leaders, investors, business and civil society groups have called publicly for the 2030 target. (4) An editorial in the Times earlier this month also backed it. (5)

The energy rebellion is expected to come to a head in a key Commons vote next month.

ENDS

For more information, please contact the Greenpeace press office on 02078658255

Notes to editors

(1) http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2251949/senior-lib-dems-to-join-crossparty-rebellion-on-decarbonisation-targets

(2)North West statistics:

93,909 low carbon and environmental jobs in 2010-11, compared with motor trades (58,100), financial services (100,500) and telecommunications (21,100). (Reference: Green employment data: Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (BIS), 2012, Low carbon environmental goods and services: report for 2010-11; general employment data: ONS, 2011 , Business register employment survey 2010

(3) http://hmccc.s3.amazonaws.com/ENERGYbill12/1672_CCC_Energy-Bills_bookmarked.pdf

(4) http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefing_notes/2030_decarb_for_against.pdf

(5) http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/leaders/article3710228.ece

The budget - Greenpeace responds

benstewart999 — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 13:42:15 +0000

20 March, 2013

20^th March 2013

THE BUDGET – GREENPEACE RESPONDS

Commenting on today’s budget, Greenpeace executive director John Sauven said:

“This was a twentieth-century budget for a twenty-first century economy. We got tax breaks for polluters and almost complete disinterest in the green economy, one of the only sectors that has consistently delivered jobs and growth in recent years. British businesses stand poised to become dominant forces in the global clean energy market, but they’re being undermined by a Chancellor who seems increasingly ill-suited to the times we live in. This man lacks a vision.”

FRACKING

Responding to the Chancellor’s announcement of tax breaks for the shale gas industry, Greenpeace energy campaigner Lawrence Carter said:

“The Chancellor is slashing public services with one hand while gifting tax breaks to the fossil fuel industry with the other. This is unfair on struggling households, especially when everyone from the energy regulator Ofgem to BP to the Energy Secretary say UK fracking won’t bring down bills.”

He continued:

“Bungs to the gas industry make it harder for Britain to meet its climate targets and stifle the low carbon sector, which provided one third of all UK growth between 2011-2012. Green jobs and investment are at risk here. George Osborne needs to stop playing Britain’s JR Ewing and instead back the shift to carbon free energy, which will create jobs and be cleaner, safer and cheaper over time.”

ENDS

Greenpeace press office – 0207 865 8255

Why Hinkley C fails every test

kcumming — Tue, 19 Mar 2013 11:38:43 +0000

BRIEFING

19 March, 2013

Two announcements are expected imminently on EDF’s proposal for a new nuclear power station at Hinkley. One is planning permission for the project and the other is the agreement reached between Government and EDF over the price that will be paid per unit of power generation at Hinkley – the “strike price”.

Greenpeace believes the project should not proceed on the grounds it is unfair to consumers, will lock the UK into high priced nuclear for decades to come, and will displace investment in renewables.

1) Hinkley is unfair on consumers

Press reports suggest the strike price for nuclear power will be in the order of £100/MWh[1], that it will be fixed for 40 years[2] and that EdF is looking for a 10% rate of return on its investment[3].

£100/MWh is approximately double the current market price for electricity, and well above the cost of electricity from a similar reactor in France (which is expected to be €74/MWh (around £65/MWh).[4]

Meanwhile the National Audit Office, in its briefing for the House of Commons Energy and Climate Change Select Committee, quoted 2011 revisions to DECC’s costs of nuclear power as being £74/MWh.[5]

So not only is the strike price double the current market price for electricity, and significantly above the estimated cost of electricity from the same reactor in France, but it is also 25% above DECC’s original cost estimate for nuclear power.

EDF is driving up the price by reportedly demanding a 10% rate of return on its investment – that’s double what is offered to renewables. When DECC was challenged over the reduction in the rate of return it’s willing to offer under the Feed in Tariff (FiT) for small scale solar PV, it stated, “we continue to consider that a significantly lower tariff is needed to provide generators with a rate of return of 4.5% to 5% for well-located installations. We are not persuaded that a higher rate of return would be reasonable given the focus of the FiT’s scheme ... and given the current investment climate.” [6]

The Government contract with EDF for Hinkley will guarantee nuclear power a fixed price for a suggested 40 years, excluding inflationary indexing until 2060. This is double the commitment for renewable energy sources, which are expected to receive guarantees for just 20 years.

EDF has also reportedly asked for the Treasury to guarantee loans and to cover construction risk.[7]

It is not at all clear that this level of support would be legal under European competition law. European Commission officials have launched the first stage of a formal investigation into the use of taxpayer subsidies for nuclear.

2) The renewable alternative is cheaper

DONG Energy, a big offshore wind farm developer, said this month that it could reduce its energy costs to £87/MWh by 2020.The Crown Estate has carried out research suggesting that the cost of wind will fall to £100 or below by 2020.

The cost of manufacturing and deploying other renewable energy sources at scale is falling. In the solar sector panels have fallen by 80% in the last three years and wind power is now around a quarter of what it was two decades ago.

In Germany, the FiT for large scale solar PV has decreased from €450/MWh in 2004 to just over €180/MWh (£154/MWh) currently, and is falling further [8]. That’s with guaranteed support for only 15 years (compared with the 40 years demanded by EdF).

Even if this price regression slows in subsequent years, large scale solar support schemes will be cheaper than the suggested UK nuclear strike price in the early 2020s, the earliest at which the first reactor could come on stream.

But if Hinkley is gifted an exorbitant strike price by the Government of £100/MWh, this will displace investment in these cleaner, safer, newer technologies.

3) We have nowhere to put the waste

The decision by the Cumbria local authorities to reject a waste storage site beneath the Lake District leaves the Government with no plan for waste disposal from existing or new nuclear power plants. No other local authorities have volunteered to host a waste store.

Instead waste would have to be stored on site at Hinkley, posing considerable environmental risk, for example from flooding. Storing waste locally and indefinitely breaches the Government’s own guidelines.

The Prime Minister has himself said that until the waste issue is sorted, no new nuclear is possible. Greenpeace has written to the Government warning it that new nuclear without a solution to waste may be illegal.

4) Nuclear won’t deliver

Delays to nuclear power could undermine the UK's ability to hit its climate targets and keep the lights on.

There are two reactors being built in Europe that are similar to Hinkley - both are overdue and considerably over budget.

In Flamanville France, Italian utility, Enel recently pulled out after repeated delays and cost over-runs. In Finland the Olkiluoto 3 project (already four years overdue) recently announced it will fail to meet its latest deadline of 2014 and a new deadline has not been set. The delays are forcing Finland to burn more fossil fuels and have led it to rule out further reactors to the same design.

Far from keeping the lights on, SSE's Dr Keith Maclean has argued that gambling our energy future on nuclear and shale will almost certainly put them out. Parliament's Energy and Climate Change Committee also found no significant implications for UK security of supply if a deal with EDF is not signed.

Even if built, nuclear power is far from an ideal energy source. The need to run it constantly forces significant investment in storage and nuclear power plants are prone to outages, requiring significant gas or even coal backup, and grid reinforcement.

5) Renewables can deliver

Offshore wind and renewables offer a ready-to-deploy alternative to ensure security of supply at low cost.

Committee on Climate Change Chief Executive David Kennedy has told Parliament that backing up wind to ensure power that’s always on would cost £10-20/MWh. Rob Gross from Imperial and the UK Energy Research Centre put the number at £3-5.

There are also considerable opportunities from reducing waste and inefficiency in the power sector – a policy process which has been very slow to get started under EMR whilst nuclear policy has been the focus.

Germany and Denmark are both also seeking to make ambitious carbon reductions without nuclear power.

Interconnectors, new developments in storage, gas plants which also provide heat and smart grids that help manage demand are just a few of the ways the UK could decarbonise without nuclear.

Meanwhile If the UK hits its target of 15% renewables by 2020, it will create 10 times more new jobs than Hinkley, even at the peak of Hinkley’s construction.

Conclusion:

Given the expected cost of nuclear build and the electricity price guarantee being demanded, this proposed nuclear deal looks to be deeply unfair to consumers. While a state-owned French company reaps the benefits, UK households would be getting ripped off for the next 40 years.

Even if Hinkley is completed to time and budget (which has not occurred with similar projects in Europe), it will displace investment in newer, cleaner, cheaper technologies and leave us locked into high priced nuclear for decades.

ENDS

For more information contact the Greenpeace press office on 02078658255 or Kathy Cumming on 07801212959

[1]http://www.utilityweek.co.uk/news/news_story.asp?id=198046&title=Nuclear+strike+price+rumoured+to+go+below+%26%23163%3B100%2FMWh

[2] http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/feb/19/edf-40-year-contract-nuclear-plant

[3] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21654697

[4] http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmenergy/117/117.pdf

[5] http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/1012/nuclear_energy_landscape.aspx

[6] https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/48268/4140-gov-response-q1-fits-solar-pv-cons.pdf

[7] http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cd66bcaa-8744-11e2-bde6-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2Nsnwt300

[8] http://www.germanenergyblog.de/?page_id=8617

Hinkley C fails every test

kcumming — Mon, 18 Mar 2013 13:00:42 +0000

19 March, 2013

Greenpeace Executive Director John Sauven:

“Hinkley C fails every test – economic, consumer, environmental, and arguably legal.

"It will lock a generation of consumers into higher energy bills, via a strike price that’s expected to be double the current price of electricity, and it will distort energy policy by displacing newer, cleaner, cheaper technologies.

"With companies now saying the price of offshore wind will drop so much it will be on par with nuclear by 2020, there is no rationale for allowing Hinkley C to proceed.

“Giving it the green light when there is no credible plan for dealing with the waste could also be in breach of the law. The Prime Minister has said himself that until the waste issue is sorted, no new investment is possible. (1)”

ENDS

(1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnycGD-7SFo