First Nations in front line of fight against fossil fuels

Protests in 30 Canadian cities, organised by First Nation Canadians of the Idle No More movement, are demanding the right-wing government rescind new laws that breach historic treaties and open the door to land theft and environmental destruction.

The government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper smuggled new measures into a Budget Bill, sparking protests and a hunger strike led by Chief Theresa Spence and other tribal leaders.

The British Crown has a key role, because the omnibus Bill C–45 transfers responsibility for treaty issues and land rights to provincial governments. Yet Idle No More insists the tribes signed national treaties with the Crown, and it is illegal to transfer responsibility away from the national parliament.

C-45 lumps together more than 550 provisions on 30 topics, ensuring that it was impossible to examine it properly before the Conservative Party used its majority to force it through. Measures to protect water and rainforest can be set aside and treaty land privatised.

Campaigner Joe Weasel Child says Bill C-45 “provides the minister of Aboriginal Affairs as well as self-serving or misguided native politicians and unscrupulous lawyers the power to expropriate First Nations’ lands and resources for quick cash, corporate greed and to perpetuate the image of a wealthy Canada.”

It will also be used to facilitate construction of the Northern Gateway pipeline, running west from the Alberta tar sands through British Columbia to the harbour at Kitimat. It would cross rivers and lakes, the Rocky mountains and hundreds of miles of pristine wilderness, much of it treaty land.

Tankers would collect the bitumen for transportation mainly to China and a leak at Kitimat would pollute not only the ocean but also the Great Bear rain forest, the world's largest remaining coastal temperate rain forest.

Enridge, the company proposing to build it, has had 800 oil spills since 1999, including a 2010 pipeline burst that released 3.8 million litres of toxic tar sludge into the Kalamazoo River, Michigan.

Idle No More is also springing up in the United States, where American Indian people fought but failed to prevent construction of the Keystone pipeline which runs from the Alberta Tar Sands. It was completed in early 2012 and has already suffered 11 major leaks, including one in May that spilled 21,000 gallons in North Dakota.

This year president Obama must take a decision on whether to allow an extension on a route through South Dakota and across the Nebraska Sand Hills, through Oklahoma and Texas to Port Arthur, where tankers for China will be queuing up. He faces an unlikely opposition that include the Republican governor of Nebraska, American Indian tribal elders, environmentalists, farmers and ranchers.

The Nebraska Sand Hills are a unique eco-system of pristine wetland and prairie. They also form the porous natural cover for the giant Ogallala Aquifer. The fossil water of the Ogallala supplies one-third of the country's irrigation and 82% of the drinking water for people who live within its boundary.

James Hansen, Director of the NASA Goddard Institute, says burning tar sands puts civilisation itself at risk. “The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has risen from 280 parts per million to 393 ppm over the last 150 years. The tar sands contain enough carbon — 240 gigatons — to add 120 ppm,” he explains.

For historic reasons, the first nations of the America (Canada, US and south) and Australia, find themselves in the front line of the opposition to ruthless extraction of fossil fuels. It is not an exaggeration to say that the struggle they are leading is a life or death one for the human race and life on earth.

Penny Cole

Environment editor

Dirty gas gets the green light

As the government’s experts on renewable energy form a queue at the exit, the gas specialists are moving in, counting the zeros on their budgets. Dirty gas will get big tax breaks following George Osborne’s budget.

He wants big investment in “unconventional gas” to match the big money British banks have already invested in Canadian tar sands. These are huge deposits of bitumen, a tar-like substance that’s turned into oil through energy-intensive processes. 

Now a quarter of Scotland has been earmarked for drilling for gas to replace declining stocks from the North Sea. Companies will be invited to apply for licences next year. At the same time, the ban on fracking has been lifted.

The process involves drilling down and creating tiny explosions to shatter and crack hard shale rocks to release the gas inside. Cuadrilla, whose operations caused earthquakes in Blackpool, is back on site and ready to resume this dangerous dash for gas.

There is clear evidence from Australia and the United States, about the dangers of fracking. Water supplies have been contaminated with toxic chemicals that make people constantly ill, with the potential to cause cancer and even to change people’s gender.

The most advanced proposition is coal-bed methane capture. Australian corporation Dart Energy has already drilled 16 exploratory wells around Falkirk and Stirling. They have agreed a £300m deal to supply Scottish and Southern Electricity and plan to expand rapidly with at least 20 more wells in short order.

Campaign group Frack Off has raised serious questions about Dart’s operations. But the Scottish government led by the SNP has nothing to say – they smell they money, not the methane. So much for the promise that Scotland’s energy future lies in becoming the world leader in wind and tide!

Coal-bed methane extraction pumps water into the seam and gas bubbles through. But nobody seems to have planned what to do with the contaminated water. It’s the nuclear waste disposal story all over again.

The Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) will wait until companies apply to start work to examine the list of chemicals they plan to use. But fracking licences have already been issued in the south-west of Scotland and companies can simply move from exploration to production without any further discussion

Hundreds of objections from community groups and individuals are pouring in to SEPA. Network Rail is worried that wells drilled near the main line to the north might blow it up.

But these concerns are not high on the list of government priorities. It’s as if some ruthless Victorian coal owner travelled forward in time to take charge of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (causing it). It’s all back to the fossil fuel future for capitalism’s energy policy.

Chancellor Osborne, told a meeting in New York: "I see with admiration what has happened in the US in the way your shale gas revolution has made a contribution to GDP.”

In the interests of short-term profits governments will permit absolutely anything corporations propose. They know the dangers – they know about climate change – but remain paralysed by the economic and social changes needed to tackle it. And when a system can only move backwards, it is in terminal crisis.

So it’s over to us – we call on all those who want to defend the environment to form or join People’s Assemblies, popular forms of alternative government that can challenge the power of the corporations to befoul the land for profit and replace the governments, national or local, that facilitate them.

Penny Cole

Environment editor

A symbol of hope's limitations

Poorer workers, Latinos, Afro-Americans, young urban professionals and women put their trust in Barack Obama. And this morning they are celebrating. But despite their vote of defiance against the rich, right-wing, racist Republicans the euphoria will melt away.

The re-election of Obama for a second term is certain to disappoint the voters as, in the words of historian Simon Schama, the triumph of reality returns to the surface.

The changing demographics of the United States have brought millions into the working, or as they call it “middle” class from across the border. They were attracted by the promise of a better life, drawn in by the expanding economy but now left hung out to dry by the global slump.

The pressing demands of the so-called fiscal cliff of tax and budget cuts towers over the renewed administration. Republicans who control the House of Representatives have pledged to block Obama at every step.

In any case, the power behind the billions of corporate dollars – estimates say $6 billion were spent in support of the candidates – will secure Washington’s allegiance to the future of global capitalist interests.

This came through in almost the first words of his victory speech, with Obama promising to talk to the defeated Romney to see "where we can work together to move this country forward".

And he will have to. Agreements will have to be forged to get federal spending limits raised yet again and budgets passed.

Obama may have demonstrated good intentions and won many votes with his largely frustrated attempts to improve access to health care for the tens of millions who’ve lost jobs and hence health insurance along with their homes, and no doubt he’ll be seen to be trying even harder.  

But the pursuit of growth to secure more jobs will see an accelerating spiral of decline in real incomes as the global competition to attract production back from China and elsewhere intensifies. Inequality will grow even deeper than it is at present.

The president’s watchword is “hope” but the savage programme of cuts that must follow in the attempt to stave off the world’s biggest economy declaring itself bankrupt will vastly overshadow the European austerity programmes which have brought millions to the brink of revolution in Greece and Spain. Romney would have handed the responsibility to the states – many of which are already bankrupt – to do the job. Obama will do it at federal level.

The election pushed fears of a new storm into the background, temporarily. But another was threatening the East Coast even before the effects of Hurricane Sandy which still left more than a million without power had begun to sink in.  Staten Island is still in darkness, and the looters are at work.

These record-breaking, life-shattering storms draw their enormous power from the energy poured into the atmosphere by the corporations that bought the presidency. Neither Obama nor Romney had anything to say about climate change during the campaign. No doubt their corporate backers ruled it out.

With or without Romney, Obama may well authorise spending on improved storm defences, but will continue to break records in oil drilling, tar sand extraction and fracking, and he will approve the northern half of the Keystone XL pipeline. All in pursuit of energy independence and profits for Big Oil.

Obama may seem like a nice enough family man, but, whatever he wants to achieve, he and his administration will intensify the economical, technological and psychological warfare against any and every government or movement that stands in the way of corporate advantage.  The threat of a military strike against Iran mounts, day by day.

Millions voted for Obama in the often desperate hope his election would ward off the ravages threatened by the Republicans. Their support was reluctantly given. Their frustration, their aspirations for a better future will have to find another route if they are to be fulfilled in practice.

Gerry Gold

Economics editor

Can capitalism keep the lights on?

The claim that the crisis at the Fukushima power plant is a Japanese problem because they foolishly built nuclear reactors on an earthquake fault is fatally flawed. As climate change brings more and more extreme weather events, there are many other reactors at risk, from inundation by rising sea levels to damage from hurricanes.

What can happen as a result can be seen from the deterioration in the situation at Fukushima, with continual leaks of dangerous radiation into the air, sea and soil. UN nuclear monitors have urged the Japanese government to expand the evacuation zone round the plant from 20km to 40km. The UK and US governments have told their citizens living in Japan to move at least 80km away from the plant.

Emissions of radioactive iodine and caesium, the isotopes most readily absorbed by the human body, are rising towards the levels that followed the Chernobyl disaster of 1986.

Austrian researchers using a worldwide network of radiation detectors have found iodine-131 at daily levels 73% of those seen at Chernobyl, and caesium-137 at 60%. Researchers are still trying to assess how many new cancer cases have been caused by caesium released at Chernobyl.

Iodine causes thyroid cancer and caesium builds up in the bones, remaining in the body for up to 30 years. Levels of radioactive iodine in seawater off-shore from the Fukushima plant rose by 25% in one day and are now 4,385 times the legal limit. As the concentration increases, so the affected area spreads. A ban on fishing 20km offshore won’t be enough.

The Japanese government says it will consider the UN’s advice about expanding the exclusion zone, but that it doesn’t seem urgent. Citizens disagree, with big anti-nuclear protests taking place on the streets of Tokyo and other cities.

The plant’s owners, Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco) have announced that all four reactors will have to be decommissioned and the company cannot survive this disaster. Behind the scenes, the Japanese government is considering nationalising the company.

As a result, Japanese taxpayers will have to cover the cost of decommissioning and the massive clean up operation. Radiation levels around the plant mean crops and milk will not be useable for many years and it could be decades before it is safe for refugees to return to the area.

Many countries have begun to rethink their nuclear future, including Britain according to coalition deputy prime minister Nick Clegg. But without nuclear power, capitalism faces a massive gap in energy supply.

The response is not to immediately invest in renewable energy however – it is the exact opposite. For example, the Spanish government has slashed its subsidies for solar power, as part of its cuts programme and in response to pressure from big fossil-fuel generating companies Iberdrola, Endesa and Gas Natural.

Instead, the rush is backwards, to the dirtiest forms of fossil fuel. The Obama administration has just given the go-ahead for an expansion in coal mining on federal land, enough to raise the country’s annual climate pollution by more than half. And major oil companies, facilitated by governments, are pushing ahead with the polluting process of extracting shale oil from tar sands.

As energy supplies dwindle, the poorest will pay the price, with rising fuel bills and higher prices for basics such as food and clothes. Capitalism is struggling to sustain “business as usual” from the planet’s dwindling energy resources, and now the question is, can it even keep the lights on? There is clearly no solution within the current economic and political framework of production of energy and commodities for profit.

Penny Cole

Environment editor

Tar sands: not ‘dirty oil’ but ‘bloody oil’

A new report produced by the campaigning organisation Platform reveals the extent of global banks’ funding for the world’s most polluting activity. And RBS, which is 84% owned by the UK public, is the biggest lender.

The campaign to stop RBS and the Royal Bank of Canada from funding the extraction of oil from tar sands in Alberta was stepped up this week with protests in London and Toronto. The Platform report explains how tar sands extraction is devastating Indigenous communities, wildlife and vast areas of boreal forests, as well as being many times more carbon-intensive to produce than “conventional” oil.

“The higher oil prices in recent years have meant that it’s become a more attractive prospect for oil companies to expand their operations in the costly process of obtaining and processing the thick bitumen into a usable form. It’s estimated that the industry is looking for a capital investment of $120-$220 billion over the next 20 years to build the new pipelines, mines, refineries and upgraders that are necessary to sustain the boom,” says campaigner Kevin Smith.

In fact, the banks have blood on their hands, says George Poitras, of the Mikisew Cree First Nation: “We are seeing a terrifyingly high rate of cancer in Fort Chipewyan where I live. We are convinced that these cancers are linked to the Tar Sands development on our doorstep. It is shortening our lives. That's why we no longer call it 'dirty oil' but 'bloody oil.”

The report scrutinises Investments of 26 banks from across the world, including Barclays, RBS and HSBC – both their direct lending to companies involved in tar sand extraction and to others involved indirectly, for example, in transporting the oil.

Platform, and other organisations, are mounting a further legal challenge to the UK Treasury, insisting that the government could and should make RBS halt this investment. When first hauled into court last year, the Treasury claimed that any such restriction would be interference in RBS’ profitability, and that it would be inappropriate for ministers to impose wider policy objectives on RBS.

But the campaign disputes this standpoint and says that the government could issue some instructions if it wanted to. After all, tar sands extraction runs entirely counter to the government’s own stated policies on sustainable energy and carbon reduction.

What this case underlines is the extent to which the corporations, and their financial backers, are the driving force of climate change and that they are not going to change now.

RBS had losses of £3.6bn in 2009, but the losses were lower than expected. There is no doubt that all the banks will continue to pursue any potentially profitable investment, and for them fossil fuels are one of the routes back to improved balance sheets. Another example is that of Chase Manhattan, under attack for funding the most environmentally-damaging open cast coal mining in the US.

Green campaigners sometimes speak about ending “our addiction to fossil fuels”. In the case of individuals this is a misleading characterisation – we are not addicted to fossil fuels, we are force fed them in a million different ways.

But in the case of the banks, it is spot on – though it might be more accurate to say they are addicted to profit. Faced with the options of making a fast buck from investing in proven, but polluting, technology or investing in cutting-edge sustainable technology that may not deliver profits in the short term – you know what decision the banks are going to make.

Penny Cole
Environment editor

Only so much oil in the ground

Native Americans from the Cree clan will today announce a legal challenge to the Alberta government’s issuing of permits allowing oil corporations to start extracting oil from tar sands in the Beaver Lake area. This highly profitable activity will pollute hunting and fishing lands and destroy protected areas and species. The Co-operative Bank has offered the Cree £50,000 towards their legal costs.

The rush for cheap oil is speeding up everywhere, though the oil price has plummeted. The International Energy Agency explains why: even assuming no growth in demand, an extra 45 million barrels per day of oil production will be needed by 2030 in order to compensate for falling output in ageing oilfields.

But the low price means there is no incentive to explore for underground or undersea deposits. Tar sand doesn’t need to be searched for – you just drag out the oil, devastate the land, and pocket the profits.

The anarchy and injustice of the market is nowhere more clear than in energy. Investment in alternative energy is now at a standstill as the corporations abandon any efforts to reduce carbon emissions. The price of carbon credits has fallen so low, that it is cheaper to go on polluting than to invest in cleaner technologies.

Governments are reducing subsidies for alternative energy and the credit crunch means there loans to alternative energy companies are few and far between. The big energy giants are pulling out of alternatives with the exception of bio-fuels from grain, which are heavily subsidised in the US.

BP is cutting solar cell production in Australia, abandoning all its wind power projects except in the US and scrapping plans for “experimental” carbon capture power stations. It is doing it because its net profit for the last quarter was only $2.605 billion compared to a forecast $2.98 billion. BP is one of the companies involved in the Alberta Basin project.

The oil corporation is also cutting investment in an experimental project to produce oil from jatropha, a hardy plant that can be grown on land unsuitable for food crops. This is just the kind of production that could offer a living to farmers in poor countries in the future – although the model used of growing the plant in India and Africa and then importing it to Mansfield, seems completely crazy.

BP’s partner in the business, D1, has already shut plants in Merseyside and Middlesbrough. They produced bio-diesel from rape seed oil but could not compete with subsidised US bio-diesel. So fuel is being used, and emissions created, to transport supposedly green diesel across the Atlantic ocean.

Now the Mansfield plant faces contraction, and the farmers in India and Africa commissioned to grow 500,000 acres of jatropha will be hit too. And yet, world governments continue to look to this market to deliver consistency of supply AND reduce carbon emissions at the same time. It is the double bind of profit-driven globalisation, which they can see no escape from.

This flawed system is incapable of delivering a just, affordable and sustainable energy supply. We must urgently develop the alternative. Join A World to Win in planning how that can be achieved – start by reading our Action Plan for the Eco-Crisis. And I find it concentrates the mind wonderfully if you have playing in the background the amazing Tower of Power’s prescient 1973 hit "Only so Much Oil in the Ground".

Penny Cole
Environment editor