Post Tags: fossil fuels

Despite Commission promise, new list of energy infrastructure ‘projects of common interest’ prioritises climate-wrecking fossil gas

Categories

Food

350.org, Corporate Europe Observatory, Counter Balance, PowerShift, Gastivists, Justice and Environment, Food & Water Europe

BRUSSELS —Today, the European Commission presented its third “Projects of Common Interest” (PCI) list composed of energy infrastructure projects. It contains around 90 gas infrastructure projects. This is even more than the list of 2015 and directly contradicts Climate and Energy Commissioner Miguel Arias Cañete’s claim that the new PCI list was moving away from gas.[*]

“Supporting more climate-killing gas infrastructure is definitely not in the common interest of Europeans, and even less in the interest of communities worldwide that are already heavily impacted by climate change. Providing EU tax-payer money for many of these “priority” projects is a step into the past and a big step away from the Paris Agreement. It also further closes the short gap of time we still have to combat climate change” says Frida Kieninger from Food & Water Europe.

Projects on the PCI list are given the highest national priority and benefit from accelerated permits and streamlined environmental impact assessments. Many of them receive granting from the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) – EU tax payer’s money.

“We can clearly see the gas industry’s fingerprints on the design of this years’ PCI list. Unfortunately, in EU institutions as well as in Member States departments, the gas industry lobby is still setting the agenda. The PCI process itself has been led by the gas industry through the central role of industry lobby group ENTSO-G [the European Transmission System Operators for Gas] in deciding which projects are eligible or needed”, says Pascoe Sabido from Corporate Europe Observatory. “It is obvious that ENTSO-G will never work towards its own abolishment, so involving it so closely in the PCI process undermines much needed climate action.”

The European Parliament now has two months to object to the list, otherwise it will be automatically approved. The Parliament has no ability to vote on single projects or on gas PCIs alone, and must decide on the PCI list as a whole.

Besides a number of electricity and some oil and smart grid projects, the 90 gas projects mean that for the third time in a row, the Commission has not managed to reduce the amount of fossil fuel projects to even close to 50, as stipulated by the TEN-E regulation.[*]

However, the European Commission claims it is supporting fewer gas projects through the PCI list, because it has clustered many together to count them as single projects. “Clustering projects to artificially lower their number is nothing but a cheap accounting trick and changes nothing about the fact that the PCI list still supports far too much gas infrastructure”, says J&E Board Member Birgit Schmidhuber.

The current list not only contains a host of mega-pipelines such as the $45bn Southern Gas Corridor pipeline, the Baltic Pipe and the “Eastring”. Meanwhile, demand has been declining for over a decade. Also on the list is a number of new LNG terminals to import costly, climate damaging liquefied gas from all over the globe. Terminals in Sweden, Ireland, Croatia and Poland get EU support while the EU-wide use of such terminals was at less than one fifth of their capacities in the past.

So far, gas PCIs eligible for funding received twice as much money – over €1bn – as electricity projects, despite the CEF regulation stipulates that electricity PCIs should receive the majority of CEF funding. Over €3bn of the €4.7bn foreseen for gas and electricity PCIs from 2014-2020 still remains unspent. It is still unclear whether the trend of favouring gas project funding will be turned for the benefit of electricity projects in the next three years.

 

End notes

[*] Cañete told Ends Europe in November 2017 “In the [PCI] list we will publish at the end of November, you will see there is a big shift from gas to electricity” (behind a paywall)
[*] TEN-E regulation

Ineos’ Court Injunction Won’t Stop UK Anti-Fracking Movement

Categories

Food

Washington/Brussels/London—Today, the High Court of the United Kingdom upheld an injunction sought by petrochemical giant Ineos intended to stifle protest against the company’s plans to frack sites in the UK.

In response, Food & Water Watch and Food & Water Europe Executive Director Wenonah Hauter issued the following statement:

“This decision undermines our basic democratic rights to protest and defend our communities.

“Ineos is facing sustained protests for a reason. The company has amassed an atrocious environmental record across Europe, from chemical leaks and substantial pollutant releases to fires and explosions. If this company is being allowed to frack the UK, more pollution and more accidents are likely to follow.”

“The public knows the dangers fracking poses to our clean air and water, and that’s why activists in England are taking bold action to protect their communities against these threats. Ineos would like to stifle this movement, and unfortunately this High Court injunction has given the company a potentially powerful tool to threaten those advocating for a healthy climate and a livable world. If Ineos thinks a court injunction will stop the movement to protect our water, climate and communities from fracking, they are in for a surprise.“

 

The Awful Environmental Record of Ineos Disqualifies Fracking Ambitions

EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE: November 21, 2017 6:01 AM

New Report Takes Hard Look at Chemical Giant’s Trail of Pollution

WASHINGTON, DC/BRUSSELS—Facilities owned by the massive chemical corporation Ineos are responsible for scores of serious health and safety violations across the globe, a troubling record that should move United Kingdom leaders to slam the brakes on the company’s push to begin fracking in the United Kingdom. Ineos has never drilled a commercial gas or oil well, and its indifferent safety record in chemical plants justifies blocking its foray into fracking.

A new issue brief from Food & Water Watch and Food & Water Europe examines Ineos plants in the UK, and across Europe and the United States. The company’s 71 facilities in 18 countries are responsible for a vast array of accidents, chemical leaks, fires and explosions, and substantial air and climate pollution.

“From towering chemical fires in Germany to toxic air pollution in Scotland and plastic pellets littering our oceans, Ineos’s safety record is appalling,” said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch. “The company is also a climate disaster waiting to happen—benefiting from fracking in the U.S. while planning to bring the dangerous practice to the United Kingdom. This company’s plans have been met with a passionate, committed grassroots movement, and political leaders are beginning to understand that the right response to fracking is to stop it before it starts.”

The company’s Grangemouth facility in Scotland is the largest industrial site in in the country, and the hub for Ineos’s global fracking ambitions. It can manufacture one million tons of chemicals per year, and has repeatedly received low environmental ratings by Scottish regulators. The plant is Scotland’s single largest emitter of carbon dioxide.

The story is similar at other Ineos facilities, which have amassed a record of fires, explosions, and chemical leaks. The Ineos facility in Cologe, Germany was the site of a massive fire in 2008, and there have been a series of high profile accidents elsewhere—a major oil leak in Norway, a number of chemical leaks in France, long-running controversies over chemical dumping in Italy, and the release of toxic gas that resulted in the hospitalization of workers in Belgium.

Over a quarter of Ineos’s facilities are located in the United States, where the company’s awful record continues. The report shows that between 2014 and 2017, 12 of the company’s 14 plants in one EPA database were failing to comply with a major environmental regulation for at least one three-month period.

Already a chemical industry giant, Ineos has been expanding into fossil fuel infrastructure and drilling, with a plan to bring hydraulic fracturing or fracking to the United Kingdom.

From beginning to end, Ineos’s business model represents grave threats to clean air and water. The company relies on fracked hydrocarbons from Pennsylvania and Ohio, which delivers immediate negative impacts in the communities near drilling sites. These dangerously explosive materials must be transported via major pipelines, like the Mariner East 2 under construction across Pennsylvania, drilling for which has already caused dozens of spills and several cases of water contamination. The materials are shipped across the Atlantic Ocean to the plastics and chemical manufacturing sites, which contribute further environmental threats to the air, water and public health.

“The Ineos vision for the future is a disaster for clean air and water, and a disaster for the climate as well,” said Hauter. “At a time when the entire world must be moving off fossil fuels, Ineos represents a series of dangerous gambles that will take us backwards.”

See the report.

Contact:

Andy Gheorghiu, Policy Advisor, Food & Water Europe, agheorghiu[at]fweurope.org

Ineos’ Chequered Environmental Track Record in Europe

Categories

Fossil Fuels

DOWNLOAD PDF VIEW ON SCRIBD

The petrochemical company Ineos is transforming into a dominant UK fossil fuel firm with oil and gas extraction, storage, processing and pipeline assets.

Since its 1998 inception, Ineos has rapidly assembled a sprawling corporate empire by snapping up chemical factories and companies.

But it also has garnered a chequered environmental record in its aggressive climb to become one of the world’s largest chemical conglomerates.

The petrochemical industry, plastics production and fracking are innately risky to the environment and public health. Methane leaks from oil and gas infra- structure are a leading contributor to global warming, and in the United States the fracking industry has been responsible for thousands of spills and accidents that have contaminated groundwater resources. Ineos is pushing to frack the UK, but its troubled environmental and safety record at its chemical manufacturing plants makes the company a risky bet for UK communities and the environment. The Ineos chemical plants have released millions of tonnes of the green- house gas carbon dioxide as well as other hazardous pollutants.

Find out the dangers and what should happen instead in our report.

Vast Polluter Subsidies in EU Emissions Trading Deal Irresponsible and Counterproductive, Say NGOs

NGOs Include Attac France, Corporate Europe Observatory, Ecologistas en Acción, Food & Water Europe, Friends of the Earth Europe, Global Justice Now, re:Common, the Transnational Institute

Brussels—The ‘trilogue’ negotiations concluded between the EU Commission, Parliament and Council in the early hours of the night has prolonged the future of the EU Emissions Trading System as a source of billions of euros in polluter subsidies, according to Attac France, Corporate Europe Observatory, Ecologistas en Acción, Food & Water Europe, Friends of the Earth Europe, Global Justice Now, re:Common and the Transnational Institute.

EU member states will potentially be able to use a sizable chunk of these funds to continue burning fossil fuels, with Poland, for instance, looking to prolong the lifespan of its aging coal infrastructure.

Commenting on the ‘trilogue’ deal, Corporate Europe Observatory’s climate campaigner Belén Balanyá said:

“Using emissions trading revenues to subsidy fossil fuels is extremely irresponsible and works directly against efforts to halt catastrophic climate change. Once again, it is obvious that the emissions trading system benefits big polluters far more than it does the climate. “

Maxime Combes of Attac France added:

“While an increasing number of member states are phasing out coal power, it is absurd that emissions trading revenues may end up supporting this type of fossil-energy generation in other parts of the EU.”

But coal financing is just the tip of the iceberg. Polluter subsidies linked to emissions trading revenues could reach close to €200 billion between 2021 and 2030. The largest share of this money is earmarked for free pollution permits to be handed to steel and cement producers, in order to help them delay the transition away from fossil fuels.

Food & Water Europe campaigner Frida Kieninger commented:

“While the EU touts its ‘climate leadership’ at the UN talks in Bonn, the emissions trading policy agreed in Brussels means the EU will continue to shirk its fair share of global climate action. Emissions trading is clearly a part of the problem rather than a climate solution.”

Notes to editors:

  • The ‘trilogue’ negotiations establish the rules for a new, fourth phase of the EU Emissions Trading System, which will run from 2021-2030. The ETS has consistently been used to undermine other climate policies, including energy efficiency and renewable energy. The example of coal-fired power generation shows how this could continue in the fourth phase. As well as offering direct subsidies to “modernise” coal generation, the extension of the ETS assumes that significant power generation from coal will continue until 2030. Yet an increasing number of EU countries are announcing plans to phase out coal-power generation in the next decade. Tougher standards on air pollutants, passed this summer as part of the implementation of the Industrial Emissions Directive, have put pressure on other countries to do the same.
  • Corporate Europe Observatory has highlighted the industry lobbying which skewed the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) in favour of polluting corporations, analysing how big polluters influenced the ETS reform to ensure it would serve their interests.

 

Advocacy Groups Release Legal Resource for Fighting Fossil Fuel Projects

New toolkit helps clarify EU legislation to challenge exploration and extraction of hydrocarbons
Brussels—Food & Water Europe – with the pro bono support of The Good Lobby – has released today the 1st guide through the jungle of European environmental legislation for activists and non-governmental organisations that oppose fossil fuel projects.

The Hydrocarbons Toolkit provides legal arguments for activists in the European Union (EU) against the exploration and extraction of hydrocarbons in general (and shale gas/oil, tight gas/oil and coal-bed methane in particular) by referring to relevant articles of existing and binding EU law. It explains in accessible language the most relevant directives and regulations that are applicable to the exploration and extraction of hydrocarbons.

More precisely, the toolkit discusses the individual pieces of legislation along the hydraulic fracturing process, starting from prior assessments to liability. For each Directive/Regulation it discusses the goal and scope, the most relevant provisions, limitations, and the general line of argument that activists and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) can use to challenge the exploration and extraction of hydrocarbons. Case law is discussed where relevant. Lastly, the toolkit establishes the procedural steps that citizens and/or organisations can take to contest a certain project on the EU level.

“Despite the abundant scientific evidence that methane emissions from oil and gas extraction in general and from shale oil and gas in particular are a significant driver of climate change, the EU Commission and Member States are nonetheless pushing for more unneeded gas projects in Europe,” says Andy Gheorghiu, Policy Advisor for Food & Water Europe. “Since we all know that we need to act quick to prevent the worst outcomes of global warming, we want to give activists free legal advice on how they could possibly fight these fossil fuel projects.”

“Alberto Alemanno, director of The Good Lobby”, says “this project epitomizes the importance of intensified collaboration between academics, professionals and EU civil society organisations. This tool-kit will guide future infirmed and evidence-based advocacy in the field so as to gain policymakers’ respect and trust. As such, it is a model for future co-operation”.

In one glance, NGOs or activists can see which regulations may provide legal arguments to fight oil and gas exploration/extraction projects in their countries. For more extensive information on the exact obligations and possible limitations of these regulations, download the toolkit here.

Contact: Andy Gheorghiu, Food & Water Europe, agheorghiu(at)fweurope.org, Giacomo Delinavelli, The Good Lobby, Giacomo(at)thegoodlobby.eu

###

The Good Lobby is a skill-based volunteering network that makes European academics, legal professionals and students available on a pro bono basis to support non-governmental organisations working on key social and political issues at the European level. The Good Lobby does not engage in any actual lobby. It supports legal and policy advocacy carried out by NGOs across Europe, it fosters pro bono collaborations, it carries out advocacy training, and we connect communities of public interest actors.