October, 17 2023, 08:22am EDT
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/688e7/688e7a3ab542448aef9d03526505e3388c3654d2" alt="Oil Change International"
EU sets path to secure fossil fuel phase-out agreement at COP28
EU sets path to secure fossil fuel phase-out agreement at COP28
BRUSSELS
Yesterday night European Union (EU) environment ministers agreed on their negotiation position for COP28, the UN climate conference starting at the end of November in Dubai. The ministers will aim to secure an objective to triple renewable energy capacity and for this goal to go “hand in hand with the phase-out of fossil fuel energy production and consumption, to be adopted by COP28” while providing technical and financial support to developing countries to secure the benefits of this transition. They underline that a near-term peak in unabated fossil fuel consumption is required and the importance of securing an energy-system predominantly free of fossil fuels well before 2050, including securing a fully or predominantly decarbonized electricity system in the 2030s.
Importantly, while the EU recognizes the need for the energy sector to be free of fossil fuels, well ahead of 2050, it does not fully close the door to ‘abatement’, a set of poorly defined technologies that have been promoted by the fossil fuel industry and its enablers to distract from the need to rapidly phase out all fossil fuels, which risks weakening its negotiating position in Dubai. However, the EU makes it clear that such technologies have a limited role to play and are no substitute for the phase out of fossil fuels. The Environment ministers say: "emissions abatement technologies ... exist at limited scale and are to be used to reduce emissions primarily from hard to abate sectors." They also state that they "should not be used to delay climate action in sectors where ... alternatives are available,” which includes the energy sector.
Compared to previous EU COP positions, this negotiation position shows increased, albeit ambiguous, ambition on phasing-out ‘inefficient fossil fuel subsidies’. The EU wants to see a deadline for ending these subsidies adopted at COP28. It calls for these subsidies to be phased-out “as soon as possible, and aiming at 2025 and no later than 2030”. As part of the G7, the EU already adopted a 2025 deadline for ending ‘inefficient fossil fuel subsidies’ back in 2016. At the UNFCCC the commitment to end inefficient fossil fuel subsidies first adopted at COP26 in 2021 did not include a timeline.
In response, Romain Ioualalen, Global Policy manager at Oil Change International said:
“The EU’s COP28 mandate is a mixed bag. While the clear focus on the need for COP28 to agree to a phase out of fossil fuel production and consumption alongside strong renewable energy and energy efficiency targets is welcome, the EU’s failure to shut the door to so-called abatement technologies risks undermining its negotiation success. While the EU recognizes that these technologies should not delay climate action and only exist at limited scale, it should have held a firm line against abatement to have a strong negotiation position and credibility at COP28. Abatement technologies are the fossil fuel industry's favorite tool to distract from the need for a full phase out of all fossil fuels. Missing from the EU’s position is the need for a just and equitable phase out of fossil fuels and an immediate halt to new fossil fuel infrastructure, which is incompatible with the stated objective of keeping warming under 1.5°C.
“Avoiding a worsening crisis, unnatural disasters, and fossil fuel and climate related illnesses and deaths, requires countries to agree to end fossil fuel expansion and build a just and equitable phase out of fossil fuels. We urge the EU to work hard to bring other countries along to achieve that outcome in Dubai and to provide adequate finance in support of the global energy transition."
Laurie van der Burg, Co-Manager Global Public Finance at Oil Change International, said:
“The EU seems to be the very first negotiating party that will aim to add a timeline to the commitment to phase-out ‘inefficient’ fossil fuel subsidies at COP28. But it is a real shame that it weakened the call from earlier drafts for these subsidies to be phased-out by 2025 - a timeline it already agreed to as part of the G7. It is now calling on countries to “aim at 2025 and no later than 2030”. Governments worldwide still waste over a trillion dollars a year on fossil fuel subsidies. Redirecting this money to renewable energy, energy efficiency, and social protection measures is both a matter of urgency and a huge opportunity to free up significant sums that can be used to keep climate and energy access goals in reach. If the EU wants to be effective in Dubai it should decisively raise the bar on this agenda instead of promoting obscure positions and backsliding on previously agreed timelines.”
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
'Thuggery From Trump and Vance': World Reacts to Oval Office Meltdown With Zelenskyy
"Donald Trump is treating the destruction of a democracy as a political show—throwing Ukraine to the wolves and doing a favor for Putin," said one Senate Democrat.
Feb 28, 2025
A televised Oval Office screaming match between U.S. and Ukrainian leaders on Friday led to politicians worldwide reaffirming support for Ukraine, congressional Democrats decrying the Trump administration, and human rights advocates expressing alarm about what lies ahead.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance took turns berating Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who reportedly left the White House without plans for a cease-fire or a rare minerals deal with the United States, which has put nearly $183 billion toward help Ukraine respond to the 2022 Russian invasion.
"This is thuggery from Trump and Vance, plain and simple," Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats in the United Kingdom, said of the public spat on Friday—a day after the U.K.'s Labour prime minister, Keir Starmer, visited the White House and urged Trump to proceed cautiously on a potential peace deal for the region.
"Your dignity honors the bravery of the Ukrainian people," European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen
told the Ukrainian leader on social media Friday. "Be strong, be brave, be fearless. You are never alone, dear President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. We will continue working with you for a just and lasting peace."
Zelenskyy responded, "Thank you for your support." He shared that same message in response to similar comments from the presidents of the European Council and Parliament as well as leaders in Austria, Canada, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Moldova, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, and Sweden.
Despite the incident at the White House, Zelenskyy also said: "Thank you America, thank you for your support, thank you for this visit. Thank you President Donald Trump, Congress, and the American people. Ukraine needs just and lasting peace, and we are working exactly for that."
While world leaders largely focused on rallying behind Ukraine and its president, many Democrats on Capitol Hill were quick to condemn Trump and Vance's conduct.
"Trump and Vance are an EMBARRASSMENT and DISGRACE. It was absolutely shameful to watch them berate the president of another country. Let alone one of our allies!" said Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas).
Crockett also blasted Trump's ultimatum for the Ukrainian leader, saying: "That's not leadership—this is a power play with no regard for what's really happening in the world. President Zelenskyy is literally fighting for his country's survival!
Congresswoman Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) slammed the U.S. leaders' subservience to the Russian president, charging that "there is no clearer evidence that Trump and Vance kiss the ring of Vladimir Putin than today's meeting with President Zelenskyy."
"What the American people saw was Trump and Vance behaving in ways that are unbefitting their offices," she continued. "Trump's obsession with pleasing Putin is a betrayal of the Ukrainian people, a national security threat, and an international crisis."
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) denounced their behavior as "disgusting and damaging," while Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) opted for "shameful and dangerous." She added that "Donald Trump is treating the destruction of a democracy as a political show—throwing Ukraine to the wolves and doing a favor for Putin."
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) similarly said that "the United States doesn't support Ukraine as a favor, but because it serves our security. Putin is a dictator, not Zelenskyy. Putin started the war, not Zelenskyy. Yelling in the Oval Office and siding with Putin is shameful and a danger to democracy around the world."
Andrew Albertson, executive director of Foreign Policy for America—which was founded after Trump's first win and is largely aligned with the Democratic Party—said in a Friday statement that "in capitals around the world, our closest allies are expressing tonight their shock and dismay at what they witnessed from an American president in the Oval Office."
"Once again," Albertson said, "we saw two things from President Trump: his bizarre affinity for the murderous dictator Vladimir Putin and Trump's grotesque willingness to make even this—Ukraine's fight for survival in the face of Russia's unconscionable invasion—about himself, turning a White House meeting into something we would expect from a reality TV show."
Amnesty International USA said on social media that "nothing that was said today in the Oval Office changes the facts: Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine was an act of aggression and a manifest violation of the U.N. Charter. Sustainable peace in Ukraine is only possible through justice and accountability for all crimes under international law committed since 2014."
Kenneth Roth, a former executive director of Human Rights Watch who's now a visiting professor at Princeton University, called out Vance over berating Zelenskyy for "daring to exercise his free speech rights before the American media," and Trump for "making life-and-death decisions based on his fragile ego."
"Because Ukraine's President Zelenskyy didn't immediately kiss the 'king's' ring, Trump threatens to abandon Ukraine's democracy to Putin's predation," he said. "Trump seems to be so accustomed to sycophants that he becomes outraged when Zelenskyy has the audacity to argue back. Zelenskyy rightly points out that Putin has already breached prior agreements. Why would this one be different without security guarantees?"
"Trump pretends to miss the point," Roth added. "Zelenskyy is perfectly 'ready for peace.' But he wants peace that will last, not a pause in the fighting that will enable Putin to rearm and reinvade. That requires a U.S. security guarantee that Trump refuses to provide."
Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress praised Trump—as did Dmitry Medvedev, a former Russian president who is now deputy chair of the country's Security Council.
"The insolent pig finally got a proper slap down in the Oval Office," Medvedev said of Zelenskyy. "And Donald Trump is right: The Kiev regime is 'gambling with WWIII.'"
The battle in Ukraine over the past three years has elevated global fears of a world war and the potential use of nuclear weapons. Of the nine nations with nukes, Russia and the United States have the largest arsenals.
The U.S.-based peace group CodePink said in a Friday statement that "the heated exchange in the White House... is not helpful for finding an immediate solution to the conflict," but also argued that "without an end to U.S. weapons to Ukraine, the war would continue to present an increased risk of nuclear catastrophe."
"The response to this exchange in the media has been largely about the demonstrated lack of decorum from the Trump administration regarding Ukraine—but we encourage the public to focus instead on the material realities facing Ukraine and Russia," the group said. "This war continuing would cost thousands of more Ukrainian and Russian lives—and an escalation would have an impact on the entire world."
"We hope the U.S. and Ukraine come back together on a more realistic basis before the war escalates further, but that will require serious diplomacy. It will require Europe to stop encouraging Ukraine to keep fighting," CodePink added. "Now is the moment when all sides must recognize that this war must be settled at the negotiating table, no matter how hard that is."
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Freed Palestinians Describe Torture, Trump OKs $3 Billion Arms Package for Israel
Like the Biden administration, Trump is claiming an "emergency" in order to bypass Congress.
Feb 28, 2025
As Palestinians released from Israeli imprisonment recount torture and other abuse suffered at the hands of their former captors, the Trump administration on Friday approved a new $3 billion weapons package for Israel.
The new package, reported by Zeteo's Prem Thakker, includes nearly $2.716 billion worth of bombs and weapons guidance kits, as well as $295 million in bulldozers. The Trump administration said that "an emergency exists that requires the immediate sale," allowing it to bypass Congress, as the Biden administration did on multiple occasions. However, the weapons won't be delivered until 2026 or 2027.
The Trump-Vance State Department just approved $3.01 billion in arms & equipment sales to Israel $2.04 billion in bombs $675.7 million in bombs & weapon guidance kits $295 million in bulldozers Administration said "an emergency exists that requires the immediate sale," waiving congressional review
[image or embed]
— Prem Thakker ツ ( @premthakker.bsky.social) February 28, 2025 at 4:56 PM
From October 2023 to October 2024, Israel received a record $17.9 billion worth of U.S. arms as it waged a war of annihilation against the Gaza Strip that left more than 170,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing and millions more displaced, starved, or sickened. Israel is facing genocide allegations in an International Court of Justice case brought by South Africa. The International Criminal Court has also issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.
Reporting on the new package came after U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Monday announced an effort to block four other arms sales totaling $8.56 billion in offensive American weaponry to Israel.
Meanwhile, some of the approximately 1,000 Palestinians released by Israel as part of a prisoner swap described grim stories of abuse by Israeli forces. The former detainees, who were arrested but never charged with any crimes, "have returned visibly malnourished and scarred by the physical and psychological torture they say they faced in Israeli prisons," according toThe Washington Post. Some returned to what were once their homes to find them destroyed and their relatives killed or wounded by Israeli forces.
Eyas al-Bursh, a doctor volunteering at al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City when he was captured by Israeli troops, was held in Sde Teiman and the Ofer military prison in the illegally occupied West Bank for 11 months.
"The places where we were held were harsh, sleep was impossible, and we remained handcuffed and blindfolded," al-Bursh told the Post.
"We endured psychological and physical torture without a single day of respite—whether through beatings, abuse, punches, or even verbal insults and humiliation," he added.
The Israel Defense Forces told the Post that it "acts in accordance with Israeli and international law in order to protect the rights of the detainees held in the detention and questioning facilities."
However, farmer Ashraf al-Radhi, who was held for 14 months—including at the notorious Sde Teiman prison in Israel's Negev Desert—told the Post that "we witnessed all kinds of humiliation."
According to the newspaper:
Radhi said he "wished for death" during his detention, which included long periods when he was blindfolded, handcuffed, andcrammed into a filthy cell with dozens of other prisoners. The 34-year-old said he had no access to a lawyer; no idea why he was there; or what, in his absence, had become of his family.
Rahdi also said that Mohammed al-Akka, a 44-year-old detainee held with him, died last December. Al-Akka is one of dozens of Palestinian prisoners who have died in Israeli custody, some from suspected torture and, in at least one case, rape with an electric baton. A number of Israeli reservists are being investigated for the alleged gang-rape of a Sde Teiman prisoner.
Keep ReadingShow Less
$60 Billion in Waste and Fraud Easily Found Where Trump Refuses to Cut: The Pentagon
"We need a better balance between military spending and investments in diplomacy, development, humanitarian aid, global public health, and environmental protection," said one analyst.
Feb 28, 2025
A trio of government watchdogs on Friday advised U.S. President Donald Trump and his billionaire adviser, Elon Musk, to take a "road map for achieving efficiency" at the only federal agency that has failed seven consecutive audits of its spending, and the one that spends by far the most in taxpayer money: the Department of Defense.
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has spent recent weeks seizing data and slashing spending and tens of thousands of employees at agencies across the government, including the Department of Education, the U.S. Agency for International Development, and the Department of Labor.
But Musk's advisory body has had considerably less to say about waste and fraud at the Pentagon. The Tesla CEO met with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth earlier this month for preliminary talks about possible spending cuts; Hegseth suggested climate programs at the Pentagon could be on the chopping block, but did not mention any cuts to weapons systems—advocating instead to shift current spending to other DOD programs.
"Unlike cuts to education, medical research, environmental protection, and food assistance programs, the administration is proposing that any Pentagon 'savings' be redirected to missile defense systems, border militarization, and other controversial and destructive military projects," wrote Mike Merryman-Lotze of the American Friends Service Committee in a column on Friday. "This is an enormous missed opportunity. We don't need a rearranging of the deck chairs on the Pentagon's titanic budget. We need fundamental change."
A new report by the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, the Stimson Center, and Taxpayers for Common Sense on Friday suggested "eliminating dysfunctional weapons systems and outmoded business practices"—steps that would cut at least $60 billion in waste and inefficiencies at the DOD.
"The result will be more security at a lower cost," said William Hartung, senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute.
The report highlights significant cuts that could be made, including:
- The F-35 combat aircraft program, saving $12 billion or more per year;
- Aircraft carriers, saving $2.3 billion or more annually;
- Canceling plans to replace land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), saving $310 billion total; and
- Cutting long-range missile defense, saving $9.3 billion per year.
The think tanks also advised introducing measures to rein in overcharging by defense contractors, who are known to charge the government as much as 3,800% above the fair and reasonable price, as one did for a spare part in a recent case; and cut excess basing infrastructure around the world, saving as much as $5 billion each year.
"Contrary to popular belief in Washington, national security and fiscal discipline are not mutually exclusive," reads the report. "In fact, they are inextricably linked. Budgeting for U.S. national security needs today and into the future requires that policymakers tackle wasteful spending and inefficiencies across the board, and with the Pentagon budget closing in on $1 trillion per year, the United States cannot afford to ignore it."
"Thankfully, tackling Pentagon programs and practices that do not offer a good return on investment will not only save taxpayers billions of dollars—it will also help illuminate and sustain the U.S.' greatest national security priorities," the report continues.
Gabe Murphy of Taxpayers for Common Sense pointed out that F-35 combat aircrafts and the Sentinel ICBM are "overpriced, underperforming, and out of step with current missions."
Defunding such weapons programs "would allow us to invest more in real priorities," said Murphy.
Truly eliminating waste at the Pentagon, Hartung toldThe Intercept on Friday, "would mean abandoning America's 'cover the globe' military strategy in favor of a genuinely defensive approach, and one would have to make sure that cuts in legacy systems weren't just filled in with drones and other emerging tech."
"We need a better balance between military spending and investments in diplomacy, development, humanitarian aid, global public health, and environmental protection," Hartung added. "Some of our biggest existential threats are not military in nature—such as climate change and pandemics."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular