Farmers' protests, the fight against the climate crisis and food security

news tags about us privacy
GratisForGratis

ValigiaBlu

https://www.valigiablu.it/proteste-agricoltori-europa-crisi-climatica/

Farmers

The weekly round-up on the climate crisis and data on carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.

The columns of tractors that have blocked the roads of France and Germany in recent weeks are nothing new.They are just the latest wave of a growing protest by European farmers against some decisions by national and European governments to protect nature from pollution generated by agricultural production and livestock farming.For some of them, already in difficulty due to the energy crisis and the consequences of the pandemic, paying higher taxes for the pollution produced is unsustainable.Others say they feel overwhelmed by bureaucracy and that they are unheard and misunderstood by city dwellers who eat the food they grow without knowing where it comes from.In agricultural giants such as the Netherlands and France, farmers have expressed frustration at pressure from governments to produce less, after years of encouragement to produce more.

“In recent years we have expressed ourselves forcefully, but we have not been listened to,” said the largest European agricultural lobby, Copa Cogeca, in recent days in an open letter to the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen.“The survival of European family farming as we know it today is in danger.”

The protests have been going on for some time.The strongest reaction so far in the Netherlands, where a court ruling on nitrogen emissions in 2019 sparked furious protests against government efforts to shut down the number of animals raised.In Belgium, the tractors arrived in Brussels last March.In Ireland, dairy farmers protested nitrogen restrictions in December by marching their cows to the offices of three ministries.Exactly one year ago, farmers took to the streets of Madrid, Spain, after the government announced plans to limit the amount of water they could take from the drought-stricken Tagus River.In February, also last year, French farmers crossed Paris with tractors to protest against the ban on the use of pesticides.Scenes then replicated in recent days along the streets outside the French capital:hay bales and tractors were used to block major highways;manure was thrown on public buildings and supermarkets in the south-west;crates of tomatoes, cabbages and cauliflowers that farmers said had been imported cheaply were thrown onto the streets.

“We are fed up and exasperated,” He says to the Guardian Pierre Bretagne, 38 years old."I love my job:I grow organically because it's what I believe in and it's the right thing ethically and in terms of health.In nine years of farming, I have never participated in a protest, I prefer to be with my animals.But things are getting really difficult:we need decent prices that reflect not only the quality of our products, but the love we put into this work and into the countryside.This is a passion, a vocation, but we don't receive recognition for it."

The farmers were joined by Breton fishermen and workers from other sectors could join if the protests continue, converging into a large social protest movement.Protesters are demanding a guarantee of fairer prices for products, the continuation of diesel tax breaks for agricultural vehicles, an end to additional French bureaucracy on top of EU rules and immediate aid for struggling organic farmers.

Germany, why farmers are protesting.And the far right could take advantage of it

The requests in Germany are more or less similar.There, too, farmers dumped manure in the streets of Berlin in protest at the German government's cutting of state subsidies.A court ruling last year found that the government could not continue to use pandemic funds for government incentives and subsidies.Thus the chancellor, Olaf Scholz, he found himself having to fill it a hole of 60 billion euros and to review the spending items.Farmers are protesting because they have been downsized tax breaks for the agricultural sector.These include fuel subsidies which can reach up to 3 thousand euros per year for a medium-sized company:however, it should be specified that the funds for the pandemic they were intended for subsidies for the production of chips and for clean energy and not for benefits of that type.

“Farmers have sent a clear signal to the federal government to completely withdraw the planned tax increases,” commented Joachim Rukwied, president of the German farmers' association, in those days.“Without farmers:no food, no future,” it was read in one of the protesters' banners.

The farmers' protests are a ground of consensus for the extreme right

The far right seeks revolution in farmers' protests, titled a few days ago an article from BBC about the protests in Germany which were also joined by the Dutch political expert Eva Vlaardingerbroek, who climbed onto a tractor to rail against "the global elites who wage a war against the hard-working people who put food on our tables" .

In an interview with the former host of Fox News, Tucker Carlson, last year Vlaardingerbroek revived a popular conspiracy theory claiming that groups like the World Economic Forum are trying to get the Dutch to eat insects with the aim of shutting down farms and opening insect factories.A narrative along the lines of those conveyed in our country especially by the League.The video of the interview above YouTube was displayed more than half a million times.“We don't want to eat bugs, we want our steaks,” he said.

Vlaardingerbroek he described farmers as “one of the few groups in society with enough manpower to wage a real fight against the globalists who want to radically change our way of life.”

However, explains Miro Dittrich, researcher of CeMAS and an expert on far-right movements, as much as far-right groups are trying to control demonstrations and seek revolution in the countryside, the only thing that can be said with certainty at the moment is that it is taking root in German society a deep discontent that is strengthening political extremism.

The German farmers' association has distanced itself from far-right groups that have tried to exploit their protests.Some farmers showed up at the protests with banners on their tractors reading:“Agriculture is colourful, not brown,” in reference to the brown uniforms of fascist groups.

However, this discontent and the permeability between some slogans and positions of the extreme right and the farmers' protests should not be underestimated:for example, some protesters, heard from BBC, while claiming not to be supporters of the AfD, have made some of their slogans their own, such as “Germany First”, “There is money for people all over the world, but not for our people”, “We cannot spend everything and then there is nothing left for us, for the farmers”. 

In the Netherlands, the nitrogen crisis led to the creation of the Citizens-Farmers Movement, a rural party that performed well in provincial elections in March and came sixth in general elections in November.

Léonie de Jonge, a political scientist at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands who researches the far right, speaks in this regard of "agrarian populism that is emerging in these countries".Farmers' issues can lend themselves to far-right ideology through nostalgia for the past and "blood and soil" themes, adds De Jonge.There was a “cross-contamination of different types of extremism” between some actors in Germany and the Netherlands.

For climate-sustainable agriculture

For their part, environmental activists say they are not asking for a reduction in subsidies to farmers, but for these subsidies to be spent in a less destructive way.More than 50 environmental groups – including Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and Extinction Rebellion – they released a joint statement saying they “refuse to be labeled as enemies” of farmers.

“We know the impact that agriculture has on the environment:the quality of the land, air, water, what we eat and, of course, the climate all depend on what we grow and raise and how we do it,” it reads.“Environmental standards should not be attacked indiscriminately, but should be funded in a way that maintains incomes and makes their application compatible with agricultural practices.”

Farmers - continues the statement - should not be left to cope with green standards without compensation and should not compete with low-cost imports.“We have always been allies of farmers.And contrary to what government propaganda says or authoritarian rhetoric that foments hatred among us to gain more from our lives, we will continue to be your allies, because it is a matter of survival."

“We need a better subsidy policy that achieves more for agricultural income, climate protection and nature with the same funds,” says Sascha Müller-Kraenner, head of the campaign group Environmental Action Germany.“Subsidies that are harmful to the climate must be eliminated.”

It is the key to preventing farmers' protests from becoming fertile ground for far-right parties and from a shift to the right also with respect to climate and energy policies, as is already happening with migration policies.We already had a taste of it last year, in the European Parliament, when a union between the European People's Party (EPP) and right-wing groups narrowly failed to get the vote rejected. a bill on the restoration of biodiversity on the grounds that it would harm farmers.The proposal was a key pillar of the European Green Deal that the EPP had previously supported.

Scientists, meanwhile, underline the pernicious effects of climate change on crops, in an endless spiral that links pollution, global warming and manifestations of the climate crisis:pollution heats the planet whose climate becomes increasingly less hospitable for human beings.According to the European Commission, more than 80% of habitats in Europe are in poor condition and the yields of some crops have already been affected by poor soils, lack of water and extreme weather events that are becoming increasingly violent.

The short-sightedness of European governments and the double standard towards protests by farmers and climate activists

But for some European governments, the more pressing threat is the attention that the farmers' protests have attracted from far-right parties.Thus coming true the narrative of the opposition between combating the climate crisis and food security, between reducing CO2 emissions and self-sufficiency in the production of food and other basic necessities.

And the first effects of this myopia were immediate.Last Wednesday, writes the environmental journalist of Guardian, Ajit Niranjan, the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, he asked the Member States to delay a key regulation for biodiversity and soil health protection by a year.It follows other concessions from French and German politicians who have so far done little to stop the protests.

The rules which will be delayed until 2025 require farmers to set aside at least 4% of their land for non-productive purposes, hedges and trees, if they want to continue receiving EU subsidies.It is not the first time that the Commission has postponed the regulation.It had already happened after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, faced with fears that the war would jeopardize grain supplies and food security.

“The bottom line is that, whether we have too much or too little, the solution is always to destroy nature and intensify production,” said Ariel Brunner, director of Bird Life Europe.

Analysts are divided on whether this "green strike" against climate policy could spread to other sectors and gain broad public support.Some have pointed out the double standard by politicians towards protests depending on whether they are farmers or environmental activists.

A shift to the right in the European Parliament would mean more seats occupied by parties that deny climate change or oppose action to stop it.Although most of the policies that make up the European Green Deal have already been approved, the June elections could tip the scales in favor of climate denialism in the name of hypocritical pragmatism.

Biden Suspends Liquefied Natural Gas Exports:what impacts on action against climate change?

The President of the United States, Joe Biden, he announced a “temporary pause” in the expansion of liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals.For some commentators it is an "electoral decision" to gain the consensus of climate activists, for others it is a choice that could even increase global emissions.This is, in some ways, a decision with a strong symbolic value – points out Bill McKibben on his blog – because he peremptorily buries the idea that natural gas is a “bridge fuel”:now we know that it is a bridge to nowhere, writes the environmentalist writer and journalist.

LNG exports from the US have boomed in recent years, making the US the world's largest LNG exporter in 2023.The main market of the United States was Europe which has resorted to LNG to make up for the shortfall in fossil fuel supplies from Russia after the invasion of Ukraine. Second Reuters, as of December 2023 Europe received 61% of US LNG exports.

But analysts noted that Europe's need for US LNG could decline rapidly:a rapid increase in renewable energy and a decline in energy demand they contributedor to fill the deficit left by the decline in supplies from Russia.Furthermore, the EU's proposed climate policies imply a significant decline in demand for fossil fuels, including LNG imports.The European Commission is currently processing a proposal to reduce EU emissions by 90% by 2040 and EU fossil fuel use by 80% compared to 1990 levels by 2040.For this reason, a group of 60 members of the European Parliament he urged Biden not to use Europe as an "excuse" for further expansion.

Using liquefied natural gas will not reduce bill prices:the lesson to keep in mind for the Piombino regasification plant

And, indeed, in announcing the temporary pause in new terminal expansion, Biden referred to the evolving “market need for LNG, the long-term supply of LNG, and the dangerous impacts of methane on our planet ”.LNG export capacity is already more than sufficient to meet global demand for this fuel, if countries meet national and international climate targets, points out the British site Carbon Brief in an analysis of Biden's decision.

On the other hand, this is not an impromptu initiative:already during COP26 in 2021, Biden himself had thrown together with the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, an international action against methane, called the Global Manthrop Pledge, and at COP27 in 2022, he had described action against methane as a key “turning point” to tackle climate change.

Second some commentators and representatives of the fossil fuel industry, the pause imposed by Biden could push states that are starting their transition from coal to other energy sources to turn to other LNG exporting countries, or even to use more coal.But, summarize Carbon Brief, these statements are in clear contradiction with scientific evidence which has shown that all fossil fuels must be eliminated rapidly to achieve global climate goals.

Recently the International Energy Agency (IEA) he has declared that focusing climate policy efforts exclusively on the supply or demand of energy sources alone is "useless and risks postponing - perhaps indefinitely - the necessary changes".To meet both existing climate commitments and the 1.5°C target, the IEA highlights the need for “a broad range of different policies… to increase both demand and supply of clean energy and to reduce demand and supply fossil fuels and emissions equitably.”In another report, the IEA found that onshore wind and solar power are now cheaper to build than gas and coal power in virtually all circumstances, globally.

Biden's decision weighed climate, energy and trade, and environmental impacts.The suspension will stop temporarily 17 projects awaiting approval.Together, he noted a study, these projects would export enough gas to produce more emissions than the European Union does in a year.

Regarding energy and trade aspects, the European Commission was informed in advance:“This pause will have no short- to medium-term impact on the EU's security of supply,” an EU official said.

Finally, the impacts on local communities living along areas of the US coast that have seen the expansion of LNG export terminals.Last December, Travis Dardar, a fisherman and member of the Isle of Jean Charles tribal community off the coast of Louisiana, he had declared to Al Jazeera that the expansion of LNG export terminals threatened his community's health and ability to fish for profit.This was precisely one of the points touched by Biden in the official statement on the suspension of the new projects:“We must adequately protect ourselves from health risks to our communities, especially frontline communities in the United States that disproportionately bear the burden of pollution from new export facilities,” the White House said.

Exxon Mobil is suing two investors to prevent their climate proposal from being voted on by shareholders

Exxon Mobil sued two investors to prevent their proposal to reduce the oil giant's emissions from being put to a shareholder vote.

In a complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Exxon accused the investors, Arjuna Capital and Follow This, a group of Dutch green activist investors, of abusing the shareholder voting proposal process to advance their priorities with votes “calculated to diminish the existing business of the company.”

In December, Arjuna submitted a nonbinding motion for a resolution urging Exxon to accelerate its plans to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and broaden the scope of measured emissions to include its suppliers and customers.Follow This joined the proposal shortly after.

It's unclear whether Exxon also sent a "no-action letter" to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the typical route taken by publicly traded companies trying to stop a vote on a resolution.The company argued that Follow This and Arjuna's proposal violates U.S. regulator rules aimed at preventing shareholders from "micromanaging" companies' decisions through the proposals.

Exxon said it already planned to exclude the proposal from a shareholder vote at the company's annual meeting in May, arguing that U.S. securities law allows the company to reject proposals that "address issues related to operations ordinary commercial activities of the company".Surprisingly, however, the company sued investors in an attempt to obtain a “declaration” from a judge to support their decision to exclude the proposal from a shareholder vote.In the lawsuit, Exxon noted that a large majority of shareholders rejected similar proposals made by Follow This in 2022 and Follow This and Arjuna in 2023.

Mark van Baal, founder of Follow This, called Exxon's legal action an attempt to "prevent shareholders from exercising their rights."The company has “a fundamental right and duty to express its concern about climate risk, its impact on the global economy and shareholder value,” commented Natasha Lamb, co-founder of Arjuna.

Follow This for years presents motions at annual general meetings of oil companies, as part of a campaign to tighten emissions reduction commitments.Shell is facing action from investors who own around 5% of its shares over a Follow This resolution at this year's general meeting.

Reusing rare earth metals from old cell phones could meet much of global demand

A vast and largely overlooked source of rare earth metals, key materials for renewable energy, could be found in our homes, in the backs of our closets and in our junk drawers.

A new study conducted by Chinese and Dutch researchers, published on Nature Geoscience, estimated that reusing or recycling rare earth metals from old cell phones, hard drives, electric motors, and turbines could meet up to 40% of the demand for these metals in the United States, China, and Europe by 2050.

Rare earths are essential for green technologies, such as electric vehicles and wind turbines, and are used in the aviation industry.However, their extraction has a large environmental impact.For this reason, the recycling and reuse of rare earths is of fundamental importance to reduce the risk of soil and water pollution resulting from their extraction.Furthermore, rare earth mining operations are a site of local conflicts and human rights violations.

The idea of ​​reusing or recycling rare earths is not new.In the 1980s, some Japanese researchers they coined the term urban ming to describe the collection of rare metals from discarded household appliances and electronic devices.Common metals such as iron, copper and aluminum are already widely recycled.But, according to researchers, only 1% of the rare earths in old products are reused or recycled.

However, recycling rare earths is not that simple.Rare earths are often combined with other metals, so extracting them can be difficult.Some rare earth recycling methods require dangerous chemicals and a lot of energy.Extracting the few grams, or even milligrams, of rare earths present in any old product can be a daunting task.And there aren't many ways to collect old electronics and other items.Although several experiments have been started:researchers at the Department of Energy's Critical Materials Innovation Hub at Idaho National Laboratory, for example, are developing methods to use microbes instead of toxic chemicals to extract rare earths from old products.Apple is developing robots that help recover critical materials, including rare earths, from old iPhones.

70% of the rare earth supply comes from China, according to the United States Geological Survey.A recent United Nations report he estimated that the extraction of raw materials will increase by 60% by 2060.The exploitation of the Earth's resources is already responsible for 60% of the impact of global warming, including land use change, 40% of the impact of air pollution, more than 90% of global water stress and the loss of biodiversity linked to the territory, we read in the report.An increase in extraction and exploitation of the planet will only worsen the impacts and consequences.

Archives of high-altitude glaciers lost to melting due to climate change

With the melting of glaciers we are losing an archive of information on atmospheric composition, temperature, droughts, precipitation, forest fires and industrial pollutants.A study points this out published on Nature Geoscience on January 26th by a group of scientists including Carlo Barbante, director of the Institute of Polar Sciences of the CNR.

The study measured the concentration of ammonium, sulphate and nitrate ions (compounds that come from the valley and are transported to high altitude by the air and then fall back and deposit on the glaciers when it snows) in two samples of firn (partially compacted snow that has not yet become ice) collected on the Corbassière glacier, in Switzerland, in 2018 and 2020.

While in the common part of the two samples, corresponding to the years between 2016 and 2018, the concentrations of these compounds overlap, in the older sections, prior to 2016, the two profiles diverge.The divergence, according to scientists, would be the result of the melting of the glaciers:in the 2020 sample “the ions were repositioned with the meltwater in even deeper layers or removed completely with the percolated meltwater.”“There was no single trigger for this strong melting, but it is the result of many recent warm years,” explained Margit Schwikowski, the scientist from the Swiss research institution Paul Scherrer Institut who led the research group.

Due to anthropogenic global warming we are witnessing the destruction of glaciers "not only as unique landscapes and precious water reserves, but also as natural archives that preserve data on climate and environmental changes that have occurred in the past", explains Antonio Scalari in a post on Facebook.

“It is as if someone had entered a library and not only had messed up all the shelves and books, but had also stolen many of them and confused the individual words in the remaining ones, making it impossible to reconstruct the original texts”, it is read on the Paul Sherrer Institute website.

From 2021 the Ice Memory Foundation, an initiative of seven Italian, French and Swiss scientific institutions, collects ice cores from several glaciers currently at risk of degradation or disappearance.“A memory of ice.To save what can be saved from what global warming - i.e. the emissions caused by fossil fuels - is taking away from us.A significant part of the glaciers is in fact now considered lost, even if we turned off the CO2 switch now.But much can still be saved.If only we took seriously what science is now screaming in our ears,” Scalari further observes.

Data on carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere

Preview image:Sky News video frame via YouTube

Licensed under: CC-BY-SA

Discover the site GratisForGratis

advertising

 

^