September, 24 2024, 10:20am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Nicole Rodel, Oil Change International – nicole@priceofoil.org
Valentina Stackl, Oil Change International – valentina@priceofoil.org
Climate Experts Show Rich Countries Can and Must Raise Trillions for Climate Action
Today, Oil Change International released a briefing showing rich countries can mobilize well over $5 trillion a year for climate action at home and abroad by ending fossil fuel handouts, making big polluters pay, and changing unfair global financial rules.
NEW YORK
Today, Oil Change International released a briefing showing rich countries can mobilize well over $5 trillion a year for climate action at home and abroad by ending fossil fuel handouts, making big polluters pay, and changing unfair global financial rules. The briefing is published as global leaders meet at Climate Week NYC and the United Nations General Assembly and ahead of COP29, where leaders must agree on a new global climate finance target (NCQG). Climate experts say this target must be $1 trillion annually in grants and grant-equivalent finance and that an ambitious target is essential for countries to deliver last year’s commitment to transition away from fossil fuels. Only strong finance targets will unlock strong national climate plans (NDCs) due in 2025 that phase out fossil fuels.
Following global protests demanding rich countries #PayUp their share of climate damages and mitigations, the briefing, titled “Road to COP29: Shifting and Unlocking Public Finance for a Fair Fossil Fuel Phase-out,” outlines critical steps for negotiators to ensure adequate funding for global climate action. The briefing emphasizes the need for a fair and funded fossil fuel phase-out, highlighting the importance of grant-based financing for countries in the Global South facing record-breaking debt and cost-of-living crises.
Key Points:
- The success of COP29 depends on the adoption of an ambitious new climate finance target (NCQG) of at least $1 trillion annually in grants and grant-equivalent finance.
- Rich countries have the means to mobilize well over $5 trillion a year for climate action at home and for the NCQG, including by ending fossil fuel handouts, making big polluters pay, and changing unfair global financial rules.
- Grant-based and highly concessional financing, not more harmful loans, is an urgent need to fulfill the landmark COP28 decision to phase-out fossil fuels, especially for adaptation, loss and damage, and key mitigation projects in the Global South.
- Countries must not get distracted by voluntary energy finance proposals or oil money funds that do little more than greenwash. Instead they should focus on delivering a strong and accountable NCQG and making polluters pay through well-designed and legislated fossil fuel levies.
- Last year at COP28, governments committed to transition away from fossil fuels. The next key step to make good on this landmark energy agreement is rich countries agreeing to a new climate finance goal (NCQG) to make this possible. This will allow countries to deliver national climate plans (NDCs) due in 2025 that phase out fossil fuels.
Laurie van der Burg, Oil Change International Public Finance lead, said: “Last year countries agreed to phase out fossil fuels. Now it’s time for rich countries to pay up to turn this promise into action. There is no shortage of public money available for rich countries to pay their fair share for climate action at home and abroad. They can unlock trillions in grants and grant-equivalent climate finance by ending fossil fuel handouts, making polluters pay and changing unfair financial rules. They owe this money to Global South countries that have not caused this crisis and need fair finance to deliver strong climate plans next year that phase out fossil fuels. This is essential to avoid climate breakdown and save lives.”
Tasneem Essop, Executive Director of Climate Action Network International, said: “In the countdown to COP29, we are witnessing developed nations clinging to the remnants of a colonial past, dragging their feet in the crucial negotiations for a new climate finance goal. Let’s be clear: the Global North owes an immense climate debt to the Global South, a debt born from decades of greenhouse gas emissions for their industrialisation and that continues today at the expense of vulnerable communities in the Global South. The solutions are within reach and the resources exist – but the political will remains shamefully absent. While trillions are funnelled into militarisation and fossil fuel subsidies, these funds could be redirected to build a just, sustainable future. It’s time to stop stalling. It’s time to make polluters and the wealthy pay for the harm they have caused. The world can no longer afford excuses. We need bold, transformative action—now.”
Andreas Sieber, Associate Director of Policy and Campaigns , 350.org said: “It is a bitter irony that rich nations hide behind claims of fiscal restraint, yet trillions are still spent on fossil fuel subsidies and militarization. The truth is simple: the money exists, but the political will does not. By treating climate finance as a zero-sum game, wealthy countries not only deepen global inequality but also undermine their own futures. The energy transition isn’t charity—it’s an investment in global stability and security. Ignoring the need for support only worsens the climate crisis, which knows no borders. The real question isn’t whether we can afford to act, but whether we can afford not to.”
Alejandra López Carbajal, Transforma Climate Diplomacy Director said: “There is an attempt from developed countries to frame the new climate finance negotiations in a context of public finance scarcity when in reality, there are enough resources to address the climate crisis, for example, in fossil fuel subsidies which are socially regressive and only deepening the climate crisis. We are calling for a true leadership package from developed nations to agree on an ambitious NCQG that enables to possibility to keep 1.5°C in reach and drives necessary transitions and investments throughout the developing world”
Erika Lennon, Senior Attorney, Centre for International Environmental Law said: “No more excuses, no more pretending carbon markets are climate finance, no more subsidizing fossil fuels. It is long past time for Global North polluters to step up and put the money they owe on the table for real, effective, rights compatible climate action—or face legal consequences. The money is not missing, it’s being misused. Continuing to fund fossil fuels and fossil foolery — dangerous distractions and techno-fixes that only prolong the fossil economy and perpetuate fossil fueled-climate destruction — is not just inexcusable; it’s incompatible with human rights and environmental law. At COP29 we need a climate finance goal in the trillions and follow through to deliver it.”
The briefing is endorsed by 36 organizations calling on negotiators and world leaders to prioritize these demands in the lead-up to COP29, ensuring that climate finance commitments match the scale and urgency of the climate crisis.
Oil Change International is a research, communications, and advocacy organization focused on exposing the true costs of fossil fuels and facilitating the ongoing transition to clean energy.
(202) 518-9029LATEST NEWS
Warren Bill Would Stop Companies From Placing Shareholder Paydays Over Worker Rights
"Following the most lucrative election in history for special interests," said the senator, "my bill will empower workers to hold corporations to responsible decisions that benefit more than just shareholders."
Dec 11, 2024
Aiming to confront "a root cause of many of America's fundamental economic problems," U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Wednesday unveiled a bill to require corporations to balance growth with fair treatment of their employees and consumers.
The Massachusetts Democrat introduced the Accountable Capitalism Act, explaining that for much of U.S. history, corporations reinvested more than half of their profits back into their companies, working in the interest of employees, customers, business partners, and shareholders.
In the 1980s, said Warren corporations began placing the latter group above all, adopting "the belief that their only legitimate and legal purpose was 'maximizing shareholder value.'"
That view was further cemented in 1997 when the Business Roundtable, a lobbying group that represents chief executives across the country, declared that the "principal objective of a business enterprise is to generate economic returns to its owners."
Now, Warren said in a policy document, "around 93% of American-held corporate shares are owned by just 10% of our nation's richest households, while more than 40% of American households hold no shares at all."
"This means that corporate America's commitment to 'maximizing shareholder return' is a commitment to making the rich even richer, while leaving workers and families behind," said Warren in a statement.
The Accountable Capitalism Act would require:
- Corporations with more than $1 billion in annual revenue to obtain a federal charter as a "United States corporation," obligating executives to consider the interests of all stakeholders, not just investors;
- Corporate political spending to be approved by at least 75% of a company's shareholders and 75% of its board of directors; and
- At least 40% of a company's board of directors to be selected by employees.
The bill would also prohibit directors of U.S. corporations from selling company shares within five years of receiving them or within three years of a company stock buyback.
Warren noted that as companies have increasingly poured their profits into stock buybacks to benefit shareholders, worker productivity has steadily increased while real wages have gone up only slightly. The share of national income that goes to workers has also significantly dropped.
"Workers are a major reason corporate profits are surging, but their salaries have barely moved while corporations' shareholders make out like bandits," said Warren told The Guardian. "We need to stand up for working people and hold giant companies responsible for decisions that hurt workers and consumers while lining shareholders' pockets."
The senator highlighted that big business interests invested heavily in November's U.S. presidential election.
"Following the most lucrative election in history for special interests," she said, "my bill will empower workers to hold corporations to responsible decisions that benefit more than just shareholders."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Crushing Blow to the Labor Agenda' as Manchin, Sinema Block Biden NLRB Nominee
"These two senators effectively handed Trump control of the board when his term begins," noted one observer.
Dec 11, 2024
In a move likely fraught with major implications for worker rights during the impending second administration of Republican President-elect Donald Trump, Democratic-turned-Independent U.S. Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema on Wednesday blocked Democrat Lauren McFerran's bid for a second term on the National Labor Relations Board.
With every Republican senator except Sen. Roger Marshall of Kansas voting against President Joe Biden's nomination of McFerran for a new five-year term, the fate of the woman who has led the agency since 2021 was up to Manchin and Sinema—who, as More Perfect Union founder and executive director Faiz Shakir put it on social media, "consistently spoiled the story of 'what could have been'" by years of fighting to thwart their own former party's agenda.
Sinema struck first, her "no" vote on McFerran grinding the confirmation tally to a 49-49 tie. Manchin, who showed up later, cast the decisive vote, negating speculation that Vice President Kamala Harris, the Senate president who lost the presidential contest to Trump last month, would break the stalemate.
"It is deeply disappointing, a direct attack on working people, and incredibly troubling that this highly qualified nominee—with a proven track record of protecting worker rights—did not have the votes," lamented Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).
Chris Jackson, a former Democratic Lawrence County, Tennessee commissioner and longtime labor advocate, called Manchin and Sinema's votes "a crushing blow to the labor agenda."
"By casting decisive NO votes against President Biden's NLRB nominee, they've guaranteed Democrats will lose control of the national labor board until at least 2026," Jackson said. "Their votes effectively hand Donald Trump the keys to the board the moment he takes office again. This is a betrayal of working families—and a gift to corporate interests, which is par for the course for these two."
Trump's first term saw relentless attacks on workers' rights. Critics fear a second Trump administration—whose officials and agenda are steeped in the anti-worker Project 2025—will roll back gains achieved under Biden and work to weaken the right to organize, water down workplace health and safety rules, and strip overtime pay, to name but a handful of GOP wish-list items.
The latest votes by Manchin and Sinema—who are both leaving Congress after this term—sparked widespread outrage among workers' rights defenders on social media, with one account on X, formerly known as Twitter, posting: "Manchin is geriatric and Sinema has a long fruitful career ahead of her in a consulting firm that advocates child slave labor, but at least they kicked the working class in the teeth one last time. Nothing to do now but hope there's a hell."
Keep ReadingShow Less
With Defeat of Megamerger, Sanders Thanks Khan for Taking On 'Corporate Greed'
"The proposed Kroger-Albertsons merger would have led to higher prices at the grocery store and harmed workers," said the Vermont senator.
Dec 11, 2024
Praise for Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan continued to pour in on Wednesday after a pair of judges blocked the merger of grocery chains Kroger and Albertsons following challenges by the FTC and state attorneys general.
"The proposed Kroger-Albertsons merger would have led to higher prices at the grocery store and harmed workers," said U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders. "Let me thank FTC Chair Lina Khan for successfully fighting this merger and standing up to corporate greed."
Congressman Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) also welcomed the rulings and sent "a big thank you to Lina Khan and her team at the FTC."
Their comments on Wednesday followed similar applause from Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Pramila Jayapal as well as groups including the American Economic Liberties Project (AELP) and Groundwork Collaborative.
Khan addressed the win during a Tuesday stream with political commentator Hasan Piker, noting that "this is the first time that the FTC has ever sought to block a merger not just because it's gonna be bad for consumers, but also because it's gonna be bad for workers."
Khan, an appointee of outgoing Democratic President Joe Biden, has won praise from progressives for taking on not only grocery giants and other companies trying to build monopolies but also Big Pharma and Big Tech.
Sanders recently called her "the best FTC chair in modern history" and AELP earlier this year published a document detailing how, under Khan's leadership, the agency "has entered a new era of more effective, modern, and democratic enforcement to better protect consumers, workers, and independent businesses."
Examples included in the AELP roundup include Khan's "crackdown on deceptive 'junk fees,'" a ban on noncompete clauses that's being challenged in court, a historic lawsuit against Amazon.com, and a "click-to-cancel" rule that requires sellers to "make it as easy for consumers to cancel their enrollment as it was to sign up."
However, the new era of the FTC is set to soon come to an end. Since President-elect Donald Trump's victory last month, speculation has been building that he would replace Khan with someone who would do the bidding of big business. Amid celebrations of the rulings against the Kroger-Albertsons merger on Tuesday, the Republican announced Andrew Ferguson as his pick for chair.
As Common Dreamsreported earlier Wednesday, Basel Musharbash, principal attorney at Antimonopoly Counsel, said that elevating Ferguson, who already sits on the FTC, to chair, "is an affront to the antitrust laws and a gift to the oligarchs and monopolies bleeding this country dry."
Although the agency is expected to be friendlier to mergers under the next Trump administration, Albertsons responded to the Tuesday rulings by bailing on the $24.6 billion deal and suing Kroger for billions of dollars on Wednesday, rather than appealing or moving to in-house FTC hearings.
That move could reflect industry fears of U.S. courts that are willing to block major mergers, as The Prospect executive editor David Dayen pointed out after the federal court decision on Tuesday.
"The important thing here is not that Biden's enforcers blocked a merger... it's that courts are increasingly comfortable with merger enforcement," he said. "States can sue under the Sherman Act, and they will. The real change to track is in the judiciary. Wall Street, take note."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular