In ‘Huge Victory for Polar Bears and Our Climate,’ Court Rejects Trump Approval of Offshore Drilling Project in Arctic 

In ‘Huge Victory for Polar Bears and Our Climate,’ Court Rejects Trump Approval of Offshore Drilling Project in Arctic

While welcoming the win, activists vowed to continue fighting against destructive oil and gas extraction in the region.

By Jessica Corbett

Climate action advocates and wildlife defenders celebrated Monday after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit rejected the Trump administration’s approval of Liberty, a proposed offshore oil-drilling project in federal Arctic waters that opponents warned would endanger local communities, animals, and the environment.

“In the face of a worsening climate crisis, the federal government should not be in the business of approving irresponsible offshore oil development in the Arctic.”
—Jeremy Lieb, Earthjustice

“This is a huge victory for polar bears and our climate,” declared Kristen Monsell, oceans legal director at the Center for Biological Diversity, in a statement. “This project was a disaster waiting to happen that should never have been approved. I’m thrilled the court saw through the Trump administration’s attempt to push this project through without carefully studying its risks.”

Marcie Keever, legal director at Friends of the Earth, similarly applauded the ruling (pdf), saying that “thankfully, the court put the health of our children and our planet over oil company profits.”

Both groups joined with fellow advocacy organizations Defenders of Wildlife, Greenpeace, and Pacific Environment for a lawsuit challenging the Hilcorp Alaska project, which was approved in 2018. The energy company planned to construct an artificial island, wells, and a pipeline along the Alaska coast in the Beaufort Sea.

Jeremy Lieb, an attorney at the nonprofit law organization Earthjustice, which represented the advocacy groups, praised the court for rejecting the administration’s “inaccurate and misleading analysis of this project’s impact to the climate.” The court determined that the administration hadn’t properly considered Liberty’s climate impacts as required by the National Environmental Policy Act, specifically taking issue with an economic model claiming the project would benefit the climate.

“In the face of a worsening climate crisis, the federal government should not be in the business of approving irresponsible offshore oil development in the Arctic,” Lieb said. “The world cannot afford to develop new oil prospects anywhere, but especially in the Arctic where warming is already taking such a significant toll.”

“If we are going to create a just, green, and peaceful future, it must start with rejecting destructive projects like Liberty.”
—Tim Donaghy, Greenpeace

Research has shown that the Arctic is warming faster than the rest of the world, which has devastating effects on its human and animal inhabitants—including caribou, polar bears, reindeer, and walruses—and the planet more broadly. As one expert put it last year: “What happens in the Arctic does not stay in the Arctic.”

Calling the court ruling “a victory for the planet and its people,” Greenpeace senior research specialist Tim Donaghy said that it “affirms that the U.S. must take steps to transition off of oil and gas if we are to have any hope of halting the climate crisis.”

“If we are going to create a just, green, and peaceful future, it must start with rejecting destructive projects like Liberty,” he explained, before referencing President-elect Joe Biden’s win over President Donald Trump. Ahead of the November election, climate advocates had rallied around Biden while pushing him to embrace bolder policies.

 

“Climate action must happen now and the Biden administration needs to keep its promise to halt any new oil and gas leasing on federal lands and waters,” Donaghy said.

In addition to the climate finding, the court also determined that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service failed to sufficiently analyze Liberty’s impact on polar bears, in violation of the Endangered Species Act—a decision that was welcomed by Nicole Whittington-Evans, Alaska program director at Defenders of Wildlife.

“Today’s news is a victory for Alaska’s imperiled polar bears that are threatened by oil and gas development throughout virtually all of their terrestrial denning critical habitat—in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, and in the nearshore marine environment as well,” she said, vowing to “continue our fight against destructive oil and gas drilling and for the survival of polar bears in the Arctic.”

Despite the win for the region’s polar bears in terms of offshore drilling, the animals are still threatened by the Trump administration’s ongoing effort to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas extraction—despite opposition from local Indigenous people as well as environmentalists.

The administration on Monday proposed an “incidental harassment authorization” that would allow energy companies to disrupt polar bears while looking for oil and gas deposits. According to Reuters:

The Fish and Wildlife Service said that no polar bears are expected to be injured or killed during seismic operations, some of which are scheduled to take place next month, and expects disturbances to impact only a few bears.

But several veteran Arctic scientists and environmentalists in Alaska have warned against seismic operations—which can involve blasting to produce sonic images of underground formations. They argue the testing will upset wildlife and that the heavy machinery and activity involved in the work will damage tundra and speed up the thaw of permafrost.

As Monsell concluded: “The Trump administration seems determined to push polar bears further down the path to extinction before leaving office.”

Source: In ‘Huge Victory for Polar Bears and Our Climate,’ Court Rejects Trump Approval of Offshore Drilling Project in Arctic | Common Dreams News

 

 

 

 

As World Teeters on Brink, Over 250 Scientists and Scholars Warn of Full-Fledged ‘Societal Collapse’ 

As World Teeters on Brink, Over 250 Scientists and Scholars Warn of Full-Fledged ‘Societal Collapse’

“It is time to invite each other into difficult conversations, so we can reduce our complicity in the harm, and be creative to make the best of a turbulent future.”

By Jessica Corbett

More than 250 scientists and scholars from 30 countries have issued an open letter calling on policymakers to “engage more with the growing risk of societal disruption and collapse due to damage to the climate and environment,” arguing that only then “might communities and nations begin to prepare and so reduce its likelihood, speed, severity, harm to the most vulnerable, and to nature.”

The letter, a version of which appeared in The Guardian Sunday, comes on the heels of a pair of United Nations reports warning of the dire direction in which the planet is headed. As U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres put it: “The state of the planet is broken. Humanity is waging war on nature. This is suicidal.”

This weekend, world leaders will hold the Climate Ambition Summit 2020 to mark the fifth anniversary of the Paris climate agreement. After failing in the years since then to cut greenhouse gas emissions in line with that accord, the letter says, “we must now face the consequences.”

While “some armed services already see collapse as an important scenario, requiring planning,” the letter notes that “the topic is not well reported in the media, and mostly absent from civil society and politics,” even though such collapse “is already the experience or memory of many communities in the Global South.”

The U.K. arm of Extinction Rebellion shared pieces of the letter on Twitter with photos of climate activists around the world demanding urgent action:

Denouncing media coverage that “typically cites people who condemn discussion of the topic,” the letter says that “ill-informed speculations, such as on foreign misinformation campaigns, or impacts on mental health and motivation, will not support serious discussion. Rather, such claims risk betraying the thousands of activists and community leaders whose anticipation of collapse is part of their motivation to push for change on climate, ecology, and social justice.”

 

The letter continues:

People who care about environmental and humanitarian issues should not be discouraged from discussing the risks of societal disruption or collapse. That could risk agendas being driven by people with less commitment to such values.

Some of us believe that a transition to a new form of society may be possible. That will involve bold action to reduce damage to the climate, nature and other people, including preparations for major disruptions to everyday life. We are united in regarding efforts to suppress discussion of collapse as hindering the possibility of that transition.

“We have experienced how emotionally challenging it is to recognize the damage being done, along with the growing threat to our own way of life,” the letter concludes. “We also know the great sense of fellowship that can arise. It is time to invite each other into difficult conversations, so we can reduce our complicity in the harm, and be creative to make the best of a turbulent future.”

Signatories and supporters of the letter shared it on social media with the hashtag #scholarswarning, offering their summaries of what the letter calls for and detailing why they signed on to it.

“We’re saying we must confront the real possibility of climate collapse so that we can do our utmost to avoid it,” American climate scientist Peter Kalmus, a signatory to the letter, said in a tweet Sunday. “This is as far from ‘doomerism’ as you can get.”

In a statement, University of Cumbria professor Jem Bendell, another signatory, explained that “we come from dozens of countries and subject disciplines and perceive a resistance by the establishment to serious engagement in adapting to the increasing disruptions to food, water, health, and the economy.”

“It is time to listen to the scholarship,” Bendell added, “and try to reduce harm from societal disruption and even collapse.”

Source: As World Teeters on Brink, Over 250 Scientists and Scholars Warn of Full-Fledged ‘Societal Collapse’ | Common Dreams News

‘What the Hell Are They Doing?’ Outrage as GOP Tries to Adjourn House With Millions Going Hungry, Covid Surging 

‘What the Hell Are They Doing?’ Outrage as GOP Tries to Adjourn House With Millions Going Hungry, Covid Surging

“They’re treating this like a game. Leaders don’t abandon people in their time of greatest need,” said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

By Jake Johnson

With mass layoffs persisting at an unprecedented clip, coronavirus deaths surging, and hunger on the rise nationwide, a group of House Republicans on Thursday attempted to pass a motion to adjourn the chamber in what Democratic lawmakers denounced as an “outrageous” stunt by members of a party that continues to stand in the way of desperately needed economic relief.

Though the motion, introduced by House Freedom Caucus Chair Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), was ultimately defeated by the Democrat-controlled House, the attempt to adjourn was viewed as another telling example of the GOP’s refusal to take seriously the coronavirus pandemic and resulting economic crisis.

“The Republican Party’s contempt for working people is on full display.”
—Rep. Ayanna Pressley

“People are going hungry and they’re treating this like a game,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) tweeted in response to the motion, which Republicans used to complain about House rules allowing proxy voting to prevent the spread of Covid-19 on Capitol Hill. “Leaders don’t abandon people in their time of greatest need.”

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) called the GOP ploy “batty” and noted that “Americans are in dire need of food and paychecks.”

Over the opposition of the chamber’s Republicans, House Democrats in October passed legislation that would send another stimulus check to most Americans, restore the lapsed $600-per-week federal unemployment boost, and provide aid to cash-strapped state and local governments. The Republican-controlled Senate, led by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), has refused to consider the measure.

“More people died yesterday from Covid-19 than any day since,” Swalwell said Thursday. “We have work to do. Yet, the House GOP just motioned to adjourn Congress. What the hell are they doing?”

“Isn’t this a procedural stunt you ask? Sure,” Swalwell continued. “What makes it outrageous is a single vote now takes well over an hour to occur with Covid-19 restrictions in place. Then the chamber must be sanitized. These are final days of Congress. It’s like pulling the fire alarm during a final exam.”

Other Democratic members voiced similar outrage over the motion, introduced as U.S. coronavirus hospitalizations soared to a record high and the Labor Department reported that a million Americans filed jobless claims last week, a blaring signal that the economic crisis is nowhere near over.

 

The House GOP’s procedural maneuver came as coronavirus relief negotiations showed signs of life for the first time in weeks, with a possible government shutdown just seven days away and the end of the year rapidly approaching. Failure to approve additional Covid-19 relief before year’s end would be disastrous, economists have warned, particularly given that more than 13 million Americans are set to lose unemployment benefits as emergency federal programs expire on December 26.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and President-elect Joe Biden have expressed support for using a $908 billion bipartisan compromise proposal unveiled earlier this week as a framework for talks going forward, while acknowledging that the plan—which lacks direct payments and provides just $300 per week in additional unemployment benefits—is nowhere near sufficient.

“The McConnell Senate enabled the Trump administration’s mismanagement of the health crisis and still insists on doing as little as possible to contain the economic fallout.”
—Jeremy Funk, Accountable.US

“Of course, we and others will offer improvements, but the need to act is immediate and we believe that with good-faith negotiations we could come to an agreement,” Pelosi and Schumer said in a joint statement Wednesday. “In light of the urgency of meeting the needs of the American people and the hope that the vaccine presents, it’s time for Leader McConnell to sit down with Democrats to finally begin a true, bipartisan effort to meet the needs of the country.”

McConnell and Pelosi spoke by phone Thursday afternoon for the first time since the presidential election and, according to the Kentucky Republican, had a “good conversation” about coronavirus relief and an end-of-year spending package to avert a government shutdown.

“Compromise is within reach,” McConnell said in a floor speech Thursday. “We know where we agree. We can do this.”

The Republican leader’s remarks came just days after he circulated a relief proposal of his own that was immediately dismissed as a non-starter by many Senate Democrats and progressive critics, who lambasted the plan’s sweeping liability shield for corporations and exclusion of additional weekly unemployment benefits.

Jeremy Funk, spokesperson for government watchdog group Accountable.US, slammed McConnell for “shilling for special interests” instead of offering real relief to the tens of millions of Americans struggling to afford basic necessities and possibly facing eviction in the near future.

“The McConnell Senate enabled the Trump administration’s mismanagement of the health crisis and still insists on doing as little as possible to contain the economic fallout,” said Funk. “McConnell’s big idea of giving corporations permission to mistreat workers with impunity during a pandemic and giving more handouts to coal CEOs means absolutely nothing to the millions of families who face hunger and homelessness in the Trump recession.”

Source: ‘What the Hell Are They Doing?’ Outrage as GOP Tries to Adjourn House With Millions Going Hungry, Covid Surging | Common Dreams News