Suing the Norwegian State over constitutional violations

The past two years we have seen every previous heat record to date being broken. We know the reason why this is happening. The burning of fossile fuels as oil, coal and gas give us carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions that escalates the global heating. This is causing the world we live in to be more unevenly distributed, where those who have done the least to contribute to the global heating are the ones suffering the most. 

In June 2016, the Norwegian government handed out permissions to drill for oil in the Barents Sea, through the 23rd licensing round. In total, 53 new search licences were distributed and Statoil announced that they would start the oil drilling already next summer. Not many months after, the Norwegian government handed out even more licences in the 24rd licence round. 

This does not make any sense due to two good reasons: 

1. We have a Environmental paragraph in our constitution, paragraph 112, that states: ‘Everyone has the right to an environment that ensures the health, and to a nature where production capability and diversity is preserved. Natural resources should be allocated on the basis of a long-term and versatile consideration that safeguards this right also to the coming generations’ and ‘the States authorities shall implement measures to conduct these principles.’ 
2. In Paris in December last year, Norway ratified, as one of the first countries, on the new climate agreement that states that we wish to hold the human created global heating to less than 1,5 degrees.

A new report from Oil Change International has also stated that if we are to reach these climate goals, we have to leave all the undiscovered oil in the ground. The report also states that the oil resources we already are drilling will contribute to a higher CO2 emission target than 2 degrees, if we are to burn the oil. This makes it pointless to drill for more new oil. 

Norway likes to think of itself as a green country, and the best in the class, but our actions speaks louder than words. 

Because of this is a number of environmental organisations now suing the Norwegian State for violations on our constitution. 

‘We think that the state has broken its responsibility for future generations by opening for large scale oil drilling. If we are to have a Earth to live on in the future, we need to take the climate changes seriously and leave the oil in the soil’ said Ingrid Skjoldvær, leader of Nature and Youth. 

‘At the same time as Erna Solberg, Norwegian Prime minister, signed the Paris agreement and promised big emission cuts, the Norwegian government opened for large scale oil drilling in the Barents Sea. We ask the court to make these licences void, because more oil will lead to higher emissions, not lower’, said Truls Gulowsen, leader of Greenpeace Norway. 

‘Norway seems determined on sabotaging the Paris-agreement even before it went into action’ wrote Nasa scientist James Hansen, in an open letter to Erna Solberg. 

With this lawsuit, the environmental organisations aim to focus on that environmental damages is not only a political problem. This regards the livelihoods of the humans that live now, but also the ones that will come after us. Given that we have a Constitution that states as clearly as the Norwegian environmental paragraph does, there are certain limits what the Norwegian government can do. The resources found in our nature are to be distributed with thoughts to a longterm and safe future. 

If you wish to follow the lawsuit, and add your name to show your support, you can follow this link: https://www.savethearctic.org/en/the-people-vs-arctic-oil/?utm_source=internal&utm_medium=post&utm_term=People%20vs%20Arctic%20Oil,arctic,action%20page,oil&utm_campaign=Polar&__surl__=IgOs9&__ots__=1476909143400&__step__=1

On saving all the endangered species, not just the cute ones

In September, we got the great news that China has managed to reverse the trend of letting the panda become extinct. For more on how they did this, you can follow this link:  http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-37273337 . However, what is troublesome is that even though the panda has become the symbol of endangered species, we haven't grasped the full concept of why we need to save all the endangered species, not only the cute ones. 

There are many "invisible" species that plays a key role in ecosystems we depend on for our daily life. One recent example that the media has given a bit of attention is the disappearance and mass dying of bees. Without bees there will be no pollination, which in turn will affect all the fruit and vegetables that we eat. This is a fairly simplified cause and effect chain, but the same rules apply to other species. If we change the natural habitat too much for one key species, we might alter something entirely larger without having intended that to be the consequences. 

From a preservationist perspective, the solution would be to not make interferences that can not be undone. In order to keep the numbers of dying species under control, we have something called the Red List: http://support.iucnredlist.org and WWFs: https://www.worldwildlife.org/species/directory?direction=desc&sort=extinction_status and many countries have their own specific, for example Norway has its own "rødliste": http://data.artsdatabanken.no/Rodliste . In Norway, we have lost over 125 species in the past 200 years. Last week, the new state budges was published in Norway, and there are no new budgetary savings set aside for the protection of new species. This is a bad sign for the environmental situation we are in. If we start protecting more nature and saving species, we will effectively stop the escalating effect that we for example have seen with the bees. There are many other, probably undiscovered, links that we need to take in consideration. A healthy biodiversity will bring us closer to solving the climate crisis. 

Thank you for reading and engaging. 

Today the World did it!

We finally have a binding global climate agreement! Today, on the 5th of October, we reached the threshold of 55% of the countries that contributes to the most climate emissions, have signed the agreement! This happened when the EU ratified the agreement. From now and onwards, we have to follow up on the content. It is not an easy task, but it is completely necessary to go through with. 

Earlier today, I wrote an article for a Norwegian environmentalist magazine about how the Norwegian oil industry is still given the green light to continue to look for oil, even though we know we have to kick the habit. In my research for the article, I looked up what is known as "Earth Overshoot Day" http://www.overshootday.org It is the day that marks when we had reached this years carbon emissions limit, if we are to stay below 1,5 degrees temperature rise. This year we reached that day on the 8th of August. This means that every CO2 emission every country make after this date and towards the rest of the year, is why we won't reach our joint target this year. Even the fact that we have something called Earth Overshoot Day is a sad fact, but in order to combat our ways, we have to face the reality. That reality is that we are still letting out too much CO2. One of the pledges you can do on the website is to familiarize yourself with how much more CO2 your country let out, and how many Earths would be needed if everyone lived the way they do in your country. For me in Norway, that is 3,5 Earths. But we don't have that many, we only have the one. That is why we need this agreement, and that is why we need it to work. Have a look at the Earth Overshoot Day for some friendly tips on what you can do to do your share.

We are almost there..!

This is the current status of the Paris agreement - but what does that mean? As previously stated in another blogpost http://theclimateschool.com/news/2016/9/4/progress-on-the-paris-agreement  the Paris agreement will first take effect when at least 55 countries has ratified (UN language to say agreed to). As of 23rd of September, we have 60 countries that have ratified the agreement. There is however one more formality that remains, and that is that of the 55+ the countries that have ratified the agreement, we need to have those countries who contribute to at least 55% of the globale climate emissions. Currently we have reached 47, 78%, so nearly there! 

This is exciting! Look forward to climate related celebrations when we hit the right number! 

As always, thank you for reading and caring about the climate. 

A small win for the Norwegian environmental movement!

Follow my blog with Bloglovin

This week has shown us how a united, climate educated and alert environmental movement managed to put a stop to the the Norwegian oil ministers wish of opening for oil licensing in vulnerable areas. In Norway, the 24th License round was recently opened up (on the 30th of August) making it possible for oil companies to nominate areas where they want to drill for oil. One of these areas that were on the new map was the Lofoten archipelago and previously unopened areas on the coast of Møre. The trouble with licensing out blocks in the Lofoten archipelago, in addition to how it contains: 

- The area is unique in a global context because the worlds last and largest cod tribe spawns here

- It contains the worlds largest cold water coral reef 

- 70% of the fish we fish in Norway has its key area in the Lofoten area

In addition to these figures, its also a part of the governmental coalitions agreement that these areas shall remain untouched in this governmental periode (ending in the late summer of 2017). When the two coalition parties (the Christian Democrats and the Liberals) that did not agree with this sneak opening joined forces with a united climate movement, then there could be no real argument from the oil pro remains of the government, and they had to backtrack their statement. The environmental movement used both social media to get the message across, in addition to the written press and TV news to inform the people of Norway what was happening and how outraged they were about this process. This is a massive win for Norway, as it shows how open democratic processes should work, and Norway has very open process so as a citizen it is easy to engage yourself and be part of the process. 

Thank you for reading. 

Why we need to keep the global temperature below 1,5 degrees

This is one of the most pressing issues within the climate movement. The difference between the 2 degrees celsius target (above 1990-level) and the 1,5 degrees celsius is the difference between life and death for several small island developing states (often referred to as SIDS in climate literature) or Alliance of Small Island States (Aosis). 

Within the UN world of climate negotiations, this group consist of 44 countries, mainly small, low-lying states in Africa, the Caribbean, Indian Ocean, Mediterranean, Pacific and South China Sea, including Belize, Cape Verde, the Maldives, Jamaica, Singapore and Papua New Guinea. The difference to the hundreds of millions of people who live in these places are whether or not their homes are inhabitable. Some islands, like Tuvalu has already lost significant landmass to the ocean, and it is only losing more each year. 

There is also a disproportionate spiraling effect that sets in when the climate change with half a degree more. The difference between 1,5 and 2 degrees will for example lead to: 

• Heat waves and rainstorms will last longer, with higher intensity
• Certain crops could become scarce
• Tropical coral reefs would cease to exist 
• Sea-level would rise by roughly one third more, and is likely to keep rising long after air temperature is stabilized. 

The sea level rising is a topic for another blog post, but to illustrate it for now, I will include an infographic that shows which cities would disappear first if sea levels were to rise from anywhere from 1 to 8 meters. (for the source http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/when-sea-levels-attack-2/) 

as always, thank you for reading. 

Progress on the Paris agreement!

The biggest climate news of this week is that both China and the US ratified the Paris agreement. This means that they made it legally binding, and it also sends a strong signal to countries that have yet to ratify it. If you follow this link  http://www.paris-agreement.fr you can see which countries that have agreed, and how long we are into the process of having it ratified globally. 

A quick summary of what the Paris agreement contains:  

- A promise to keep the global warming emissions below 2 degrees celsius, and try to limit it to below 1,5 degrees (a blog post on why this is so will come soon)

- Will contribute with adaptation and loss and damages from the effects of climate change, and secure the financial part of the low emission development

- The agreement will take effect when at least 55 countries - who are contributing to at least 55 % of the global climate emissions - formally has signed the agreement

- So far 177 countries have signed the agreement and 24 countries have ratified it