Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
Post Reply
User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3735
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: nadir of brie

Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Bird on a Fire » Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:06 pm

As discussed on other threads, rapid action is needed to reconcile scientific knowledge about the causes of present and future climate disruption, and the current lack of meaningful political action to address it. For instance, the Paris Agreement's commitments are far too weak, and most countries aren't going to make them anyway:
The majority of the carbon emission reduction pledges for 2030 that 184 countries made under the Paris Agreement aren’t nearly enough to keep global warming well below 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius). Some countries won’t achieve their pledges, and some of the world's largest carbon emitters will continue to increase their emissions, according to a panel of world-class climate scientists.

Their report, “The Truth Behind the Paris Agreement Climate Pledges,” warns that by 2030, the failure to reduce emissions will cost the world a minimum of $2 billion per day in economic losses from weather events made worse by human-induced climate change. Moreover, weather events and patterns will hurt human health, livelihoods, food, and water, as well as biodiversity.

On Monday, November 4 [2019], the Trump Administration submitted a formal request to officially pull the United States out of the 2015 Paris Agreement next November. Every nation in the world has agreed “to undertake ambitious efforts to combat climate change,” according to language in the pact.

“Countries need to double and triple their 2030 reduction commitments to be aligned with the Paris target,” says Sir Robert Watson, former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and co-author of the report that closely examined the 184 voluntary pledges under the Paris Agreement.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/scie ... -billions/

The Death of Fossil Fuels thread has been doing a fascinating job covering the technological advances that mean that a net-zero-carbon world by 2030 is completely achievable. Unfortunately, the availability and advantages of that technology don't do enough to overcome the economic, societal and political impediments to the effecting the necessary transitions.

With that in mind, I thought it would be interesting and useful to start another thread to collate and discuss sensible actions being undertaken to enact change. In particular, I'd like to think about ideas that utilise as far as possible the current institutions and status quo viz. distributions of wealth and power, because if we have to change politics and the economy in general before we can fix 2030's carbon emissions than we are probably totally f.cked.
Ceterum autem censeo humanitatem esse delendam

#ShowYourStripes

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3735
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: nadir of brie

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Bird on a Fire » Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:12 pm

Method 1: the courts, using legislation that has already been passed.

For example, Portuguese children sue 33 countries over climate change at European court:
Young activists from Portugal have filed the first climate change case at the European court of human rights in Strasbourg, demanding 33 countries make more ambitious emissions cuts to safeguard their future physical and mental wellbeing.

The crowdfunded legal action breaks new ground by suing multiple states both for the emissions within their borders and also for the climate impact that their consumers and companies have elsewhere in the world through trade, fossil-fuel extraction and outsourcing.

The plaintiffs – four children and two young adults – want the standard-setting court to issue binding orders on the 33 states, which include the EU as well as the UK, Norway, Russia, Turkey, Switzerland and Ukraine, to prevent discrimination against the young and protect their rights to exercise outdoors and live without anxiety.

The case is being filed after Portugal recorded its hottest July in 90 years. It was initiated three years ago following devastating forest fires in Portugal that killed over 120 people in 2017. Four of the plaintiffs are from Leiria, one of the worst-hit areas. The two other applicants live in Lisbon, which sweltered through record-breaking 44C heat in 2018.

Expert testimony will warn that these trends will worsen in the future. On the current path of about 3C of warming above pre-industrial levels, scientists have predicted a thirty-fold increase in deaths from heatwaves in western Europe by the period 2071-2100. At 4C, which is also possible, they say heatwaves above 40C would endure for more than 30 days a year, quadrupling the risk of forest fires.
Deliberately taking actions that will result in unsafe conditions in the future does seem to be a pretty clear case of prejudicing somebody's welfare. I'm not a lawyer, but organisations like GLAN (who are behind this action) and ClientEarth (who have had several notable successes in the past) are, and seem to think it's worth bringing a case.
Ceterum autem censeo humanitatem esse delendam

#ShowYourStripes

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3735
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: nadir of brie

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Bird on a Fire » Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:24 pm

Method 2: economics.

There have been campaigns for divestments for at least a decade, often centred on universities, but now it's becoming mainstream. For example, Managers Of $40 Trillion Make Plans To Decarbonize The World:
The Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC) is a European group of global pension funds and investment managers, totaling over 1,200 members in 16 countries, who control more than $40 trillion in assets (€33 trillion). They have drawn up a plan to cut carbon in their portfolios to net-zero and hope other investors will join them.

The group’s mission is to mobilize capital for a global low-carbon transition and to ensure resiliency of investments and markets in the face of the changes, including the changing climate itself. They provide asset managers with a set of recommended actions, policies, collaborations, measures and methods to help them meet the net-zero goal by 2050 in an effort to address climate change. Their framework was developed with more than 70 funds worldwide.

The European Union aims to be climate-neutral by 2050 – an economy with net-zero greenhouse gas emissions. This objective is at the heart of the European Green Deal and in line with the EU’s commitment to global climate action under the Paris Agreement.
Part of the motivation may well be humanitarian, but this is probably also good economic and legal sense. Not only are fossil fuel companies in increasing legal difficulty, for both direct fraud and for misleading the public for 50 years over climate change risks, there's also growing awareness of the fact that the majority of the world's carbon stocks can't be burned anwyay, making most of them worthless, and regulators are slowly beginning to take an interest in the carbon bubble.

The article continues with some back-of-envelope economic calculations:
The equivalent in electricity to charge an all-electric vehicle fleet is about 28 billion kWhs/day, the output of almost 2,000,000 MW of new installed generation. This is another 10 trillion kWhs/year, bringing our total future energy needs worldwide to about 45 trillion kWhs/year.

At a world average price of 14¢/kWh, that represents about $6 trillion/year.

But we spend over $5 trillion globally on fossil fuel subsidies and these would be freed up for this task of decarbonization if we forgo fossil fuel. So cost doesn’t have to be the big issue we think it is.

Plus, if a society uses coal for over 30% of its energy needs, their health care costs increase about 10%. Global spending on health care totals about $8 trillion, so replacing coal could save up to $800 billion/year. That, plus ending the subsidies, could well pay for most of this huge change.
The point about healthcare shouldn't be underestimated. Within the EU, one in eight deaths is linked to pollution, much of it from fossil fuels. This is almost certainly a bigger problem in countries with worse air quality and more young people: how many €trillions are we wiping off future productivity with the diesel generators of Lagos or Chinese coal fumes?
Ceterum autem censeo humanitatem esse delendam

#ShowYourStripes

User avatar
discovolante
After Pie
Posts: 1850
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by discovolante » Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:29 pm

I listened to a podcast on strategic climate litigation a few weeks ago, can't remember if I've linked to it already: https://www.lse.ac.uk/lse-player?catego ... &facet=all

it was quite interesting. One thing that was interesting was Irum Ahsan talking about litigation in Asia - firstly how it is perceived as something that interferes with development and industry which is needed to bring people out of poverty, when as she argues it's necessary that development is sustainable, and I think she also talks about a 'friendly' judiciary who are amenable to considering these issues, and providing training etc.

I have to admit I wasn't listening to it that closely as I was cooking and generally mooching about while it was on, so I can't highlight any 'take aways' from it, but if you have 90 mins to spare...

Thanks for all these sorts of threads btw.
don't get any big ideas, they're not gonna happen

User avatar
discovolante
After Pie
Posts: 1850
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by discovolante » Thu Sep 10, 2020 3:08 pm

discovolante wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:29 pm
I listened to a podcast on strategic climate litigation a few weeks ago, can't remember if I've linked to it already: https://www.lse.ac.uk/lse-player?catego ... &facet=all

it was quite interesting. One thing that was interesting was Irum Ahsan talking about litigation in Asia - firstly how it is perceived as something that interferes with development and industry which is needed to bring people out of poverty, when as she argues it's necessary that development is sustainable, and I think she also talks about a 'friendly' judiciary who are amenable to considering these issues, and providing training etc.

I have to admit I wasn't listening to it that closely as I was cooking and generally mooching about while it was on, so I can't highlight any 'take aways' from it, but if you have 90 mins to spare...

Thanks for all these sorts of threads btw.
Actually just to link economics and law - I've forgotten a lot of the detail so may be getting my facts slightly skewed but one example of litigation given by one of the speakers was a case in Poland, where the claimants bought some (a small number of) shares in I think a company that invested in coal, and then brought an action against the company for breach of its duty to them as shareholders for investing in an energy source that isn't financially viable in the long run. Or something like that anyway. It's probably written down on the internet somewhere!
don't get any big ideas, they're not gonna happen

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3735
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: nadir of brie

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Bird on a Fire » Thu Sep 10, 2020 3:41 pm

discovolante wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 3:08 pm
discovolante wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:29 pm
I listened to a podcast on strategic climate litigation a few weeks ago, can't remember if I've linked to it already: https://www.lse.ac.uk/lse-player?catego ... &facet=all

it was quite interesting. One thing that was interesting was Irum Ahsan talking about litigation in Asia - firstly how it is perceived as something that interferes with development and industry which is needed to bring people out of poverty, when as she argues it's necessary that development is sustainable, and I think she also talks about a 'friendly' judiciary who are amenable to considering these issues, and providing training etc.

I have to admit I wasn't listening to it that closely as I was cooking and generally mooching about while it was on, so I can't highlight any 'take aways' from it, but if you have 90 mins to spare...

Thanks for all these sorts of threads btw.
Actually just to link economics and law - I've forgotten a lot of the detail so may be getting my facts slightly skewed but one example of litigation given by one of the speakers was a case in Poland, where the claimants bought some (a small number of) shares in I think a company that invested in coal, and then brought an action against the company for breach of its duty to them as shareholders for investing in an energy source that isn't financially viable in the long run. Or something like that anyway. It's probably written down on the internet somewhere!
I'm going to listen to that podcast this evening - it looks fascinating. So thanks!

Someone I follow on Twitter posted recently that they're running to be on the "Representative Committee" of their bank (in the Faeroe Islands) in order to demand that it divests from hydrocarbons. So maybe amongst financial institutions with more democratic governance structures there's opportunities to push for this sort of thing.
Ceterum autem censeo humanitatem esse delendam

#ShowYourStripes

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3735
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: nadir of brie

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Bird on a Fire » Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:25 am

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 3:41 pm
discovolante wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 3:08 pm
discovolante wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:29 pm
I listened to a podcast on strategic climate litigation a few weeks ago, can't remember if I've linked to it already: https://www.lse.ac.uk/lse-player?catego ... &facet=all

it was quite interesting. One thing that was interesting was Irum Ahsan talking about litigation in Asia - firstly how it is perceived as something that interferes with development and industry which is needed to bring people out of poverty, when as she argues it's necessary that development is sustainable, and I think she also talks about a 'friendly' judiciary who are amenable to considering these issues, and providing training etc.

I have to admit I wasn't listening to it that closely as I was cooking and generally mooching about while it was on, so I can't highlight any 'take aways' from it, but if you have 90 mins to spare...

Thanks for all these sorts of threads btw.
Actually just to link economics and law - I've forgotten a lot of the detail so may be getting my facts slightly skewed but one example of litigation given by one of the speakers was a case in Poland, where the claimants bought some (a small number of) shares in I think a company that invested in coal, and then brought an action against the company for breach of its duty to them as shareholders for investing in an energy source that isn't financially viable in the long run. Or something like that anyway. It's probably written down on the internet somewhere!
I'm going to listen to that podcast this evening - it looks fascinating. So thanks!

Someone I follow on Twitter posted recently that they're running to be on the "Representative Committee" of their bank (in the Faeroe Islands) in order to demand that it divests from hydrocarbons. So maybe amongst financial institutions with more democratic governance structures there's opportunities to push for this sort of thing.
I did listen to this, by the way, and it was great! Super interesting people, approaching a problem I'm familiar with from an angle I know nothing about, and getting good things done. They did mention that energy company as well, but I can't remember what it was now.
Ceterum autem censeo humanitatem esse delendam

#ShowYourStripes

User avatar
discovolante
After Pie
Posts: 1850
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by discovolante » Fri Oct 02, 2020 6:40 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:25 am
Bird on a Fire wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 3:41 pm
discovolante wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 3:08 pm


Actually just to link economics and law - I've forgotten a lot of the detail so may be getting my facts slightly skewed but one example of litigation given by one of the speakers was a case in Poland, where the claimants bought some (a small number of) shares in I think a company that invested in coal, and then brought an action against the company for breach of its duty to them as shareholders for investing in an energy source that isn't financially viable in the long run. Or something like that anyway. It's probably written down on the internet somewhere!
I'm going to listen to that podcast this evening - it looks fascinating. So thanks!

Someone I follow on Twitter posted recently that they're running to be on the "Representative Committee" of their bank (in the Faeroe Islands) in order to demand that it divests from hydrocarbons. So maybe amongst financial institutions with more democratic governance structures there's opportunities to push for this sort of thing.
I did listen to this, by the way, and it was great! Super interesting people, approaching a problem I'm familiar with from an angle I know nothing about, and getting good things done. They did mention that energy company as well, but I can't remember what it was now.
Cool, glad to hear it :)
don't get any big ideas, they're not gonna happen

plodder
Catbabel
Posts: 865
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by plodder » Sat Oct 03, 2020 7:51 am

The Good Law Project have moved into the environmental realm. Agreed that the law is the trick to it all. It sets the baseline for economic activity.

https://goodlawproject.org/case/energy-policy/

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3735
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: nadir of brie

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Bird on a Fire » Sun Oct 04, 2020 1:09 pm

Interesting perspective on the divestment movement in the Graun https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... -emergency, following news that Cambridge University is divesting its massive endowment of fossil investments:
We appear to have firmly entered the era that divestment campaigners have long foreseen: fossil fuels are simply no longer good investments.

This year, oil companies have written down billions in assets, and waves of bankruptcies have swept US shale gas while the North Sea oil and gas industry has shed jobs. ExxonMobil was removed from the Dow Jones industrial average after nearly a century, and five tech companies now dominate the S&P500, occupying an astonishing 20% of the index’s value compared with the measly 2.3% claimed by the entire energy sector.

Prudent financial institutions are responding by shifting investments to industries where returns are both greater and more secure in the long term. Sometimes this includes green energy, but often it simply means following the market, with freed-up cash shifting to tech and other financial companies.
But there is a limit to the number of endowments and funds that represent beneficiaries who can be readily organised and are willing to submit to these demands, such as student bodies, religious communities and the constituents of progressive councils and cities. A vast amount of the financial system is deeply undemocratic, and – despite the industry’s gloomy outlook – demonstrably unresponsive to demands for an end to fossil fuel finance. Just five North American banks, for instance, have financed nearly $1tn in fossil fuels since 2016, with little sign of slowing. The question, then, is what comes next?

Divestment is a means of addressing an urgent, immediate problem: the financing of fossil fuels. But the divestment movement is fighting a war of attrition, in which its opponents – at least within the economic and political systems built by and for them – are considerably better resourced. The climate crisis is a product of those same systems, and it demands that we fight against them.
Ultimately, we've reached a crisis point where the overwhelming majority of people are being f.cked over by a tiny number with immense entrenched power. It's nice to see the rules of capitalism used to chip away at that edifice, but I sometimes have my doubts as to whether those efforts on their own will be sustainable - capitalism is, after all, a system for entrenching the power of small numbers of people at the expense of the masses.

So yes, I think political and legal instruments will be the way to go, and there's a huge diversity of options there, from international agreements to civil cases.

Thanks for the Good Law Project link, btw - I've seen them in other circs before and they seem like an excellent bunch, so it's great to have them on board.
Ceterum autem censeo humanitatem esse delendam

#ShowYourStripes

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3735
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: nadir of brie

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by Bird on a Fire » Sun Oct 04, 2020 1:12 pm

But, in case anyone is in doubt about the enormous power and influence of fossil corporations, here they are trying to get their grubby hands into the UK-organised COP26 climate summit. The offers to sponsor events are bad enough, but offering to mediate meetings between world leaders with their own businesspeople in the room is egregious, and I can't think of a single decent reason the government would entertain these clowns.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... sgow-cop26
Ceterum autem censeo humanitatem esse delendam

#ShowYourStripes

User avatar
discovolante
After Pie
Posts: 1850
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Tackling the Climate Emergency:Economic and judicial instruments

Post by discovolante » Thu Oct 22, 2020 5:29 pm

If anyone is interested: https://www.scottishlegal.com/article/m ... nvention-2
A judge of the European Court of Human Rights is to deliver this year’s Macfadyen Lecture virtually.

The Scottish Council of Law Reporting has arranged for Judge Tim Eicke to deliver his lecture from Strasbourg at 6:00pm on Thursday 5 November.

The lecture is expected to last for about 25 minutes. There will then be an opportunity for Q&A. Registration is free.

The full text of the lecture will be published on the council’s website as soon as possible after 5 November.
don't get any big ideas, they're not gonna happen

Post Reply