Rupert Murdoch turned ‘blind eye’ to wrongdoing, Prince Harry lawyers allege

Spread the love

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/mar/20/rupert-murdoch-knew-of-unlawful-news-tactics-prince-harry-documents-claim

Rupert Murdoch leaving his London flat at the height of the phone-hacking scandal in 2011. Photograph: Oli Scarff/Getty Images

High court hears allegations media mogul oversaw ‘culture of impunity’ at the Sun and News of the World

Rupert Murdoch “turned a blind eye” to an extensive cover-up of wrongdoing at his newspapers, Prince Harry’s lawyers have alleged at the high court in London.

The direct allegations against the 93-year-old billionaire about activity at his publications are the latest stage in Harry’s war against the tabloid media, with lawyers for the Duke of Sussex and others accusing the media mogul of overseeing a “culture of impunity” at News Group Newspapers, the publisher of the Sun and the now defunct News of the World.

Court papers, which cover a period from the mid-1990s until 2016, also allege that Sir Will Lewis, the newly appointed publisher of Jeff Bezos’s Washington Post, played a key role in deleting millions of potentially incriminating emails, when he was tasked with managing the fallout from phone hacking.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/mar/20/rupert-murdoch-knew-of-unlawful-news-tactics-prince-harry-documents-claim

Continue ReadingRupert Murdoch turned ‘blind eye’ to wrongdoing, Prince Harry lawyers allege

Industry Elites Applaud Saudi Aramco CEO for Calling Oil Phaseout a ‘Fantasy’

Spread the love

Original article by JAKE JOHNSON republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Saudi Aramco CEO Amin Nasser speaks during the CERAWeek oil summit in Houston, Texas on March 18, 2024.  (Photo: Mark Felix/AFP via Getty Images)

“The fossil fuel industry has always pursued a strategy of delay when it comes to the climate crisis,” said one campaigner. “First, it was focused on casting doubt on the science. Now, it’s all about casting doubt on the solutions.”

The CEO of the world’s largest oil company said Monday that calls to phase out fossil fuels are a “fantasy” that policymakers should abandon, a remark that drew applause from energy elites gathered in Houston, Texas for a major industry conference.

“We should abandon the fantasy of phasing out oil and gas and instead invest in them adequately reflecting realistic demand assumptions,” Saudi Aramco chief executive Amin Nasser told CERAWeek attendees, dismissing the International Energy Agency’s projection that global fossil fuel demand will peak by 2030.

“Peak oil and gas is unlikely for some time to come, let alone 2030,” Nasser said, suggesting oil consumption could continue growing through 2045. That scenario would serve the interests of Saudi Aramco, which in 2022 posted the largest-ever annual profit for a fossil fuel company.

Power Shift Africa, a climate think tank, called Nasser’s comments “outrageous.”

Jamie Henn, director of Fossil Free Media, noted that “the fossil fuel industry has always pursued a strategy of delay when it comes to the climate crisis.”

“First, it was focused on casting doubt on the science,” he observed. “Now, it’s all about casting doubt on the solutions.”

“It’s clear that not only are they not committed to reducing emissions, they’ve actually come to CERAWeek to continue promoting fossil fuel production and extraction and delaying the transition to a just, clean energy future.”

Climate scientists say that a rapid, global transition away from fossil fuel production and toward renewable energy is necessary to avert the worst of the planetary emergency, which is driving increasingly destructive and deadly extreme weather events, sea-level rise, ocean warming, and other alarming phenomena.

But Nasser claimed technologies such as carbon capture—which has repeatedly proven to be ineffective and even harmful—are better at lowering emissions than “alternative energies,” Reutersreported. Nasser specifically criticized wind, solar, and electric vehicles and said that “we should phase in new energy sources and technologies when they are genuinely ready, economically competitive, and with the right infrastructure.”

Just one day after Nasser’s remarks, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) released a report showing that “renewable energy generation, primarily driven by the dynamic forces of solar radiation, wind, and the water cycle, has surged to the forefront of climate action for its potential to achieve decarbonization targets.”

The WMO said Tuesday that renewable energy capacity increased nearly 50% last year compared to 2022.

But the continued production and burning of fossil fuels is wreaking global havoc, the WMO found, pushing planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions and temperatures to all-time highs.

In the face of such alarming findings, the major oil and gas industry players have rolled back their own weak emissions commitments and—in the case of ExxonMobil CEO Darren Woods—blamed the public for fueling the climate crisis.

“For years we’ve demanded action, not empty words, from Big Oil,” Josh Eisenfeld, campaign manager of corporate accountability, said in a statement before the Houston conference kicked off on Monday. “If you look at their actions, it’s clear that not only are they not committed to reducing emissions, they’ve actually come to CERAWeek to continue promoting fossil fuel production and extraction and delaying the transition to a just, clean energy future.”

Original article by JAKE JOHNSON republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Gore Calls Out Fossil Fuel Industry ‘Shamelessness’ in Lying to Public

‘North Sea Fossil Free’: Activists in 6 Countries Protest ‘Unhinged’ Oil and Gas Development

Fury Over $500 Million US Export-Import Bank Loan to Bahrain ‘Climate Bomb’

Continue ReadingIndustry Elites Applaud Saudi Aramco CEO for Calling Oil Phaseout a ‘Fantasy’

Climate change is speeding up in Antarctica

Spread the love

Mongkolchon Akesin / Shutterstock

Sergi González Herrero, Universitat de Barcelona

In recent years, Antarctica has experienced a series of unprecedented heatwaves. On 6 February 2020, temperatures of 18.3C were recorded, the highest ever seen on the continent, beating the previous record of 17.5C which had only been set a few years earlier.

Around February 2022, another strong heatwave in Antarctica led to record-breaking surface ice melt. In March of the same year, East Antarctica saw its strongest ever heatwave, with temperatures soaring to 30C or 40C higher than the average in some areas.

Over the last year, we have seen the lowest levels of Antarctic sea ice coverage since records began.

Record-breaking temperatures during the heatwave on 6 February 2020.
González-Herrero et al. (2022)

Events in recent years have bordered on the unbelievable, and it is difficult not to link them to climate change. In fact, studies have already emerged that clearly attribute some of these heatwaves to global warming: one of our investigations strongly suggests that without the influence of climate change, 2020’s record-breaking temperatures would not have occurred.

Antarctica’s changing climate

In 2009, a study quantified the speed of ecosystem migration due to climate change on a global scale, and documented, essentially, the speed at which certain species have to move to ensure their survival. It concluded that biomes were moving at a speed between 0.8 and 12.6km per decade, with an average speed of 4.2km per decade.

In our more recent study, published in February 2024, we adapted this measurement of speed and applied it to the edges of Antarctica. To do this, we tracked the southward migration of the zero-degree isotherm.

The zero-degree isotherm is an imaginary line that encloses the areas that are at zero degrees or lower. Its southward movement means that the area with temperatures below zero Celsius in Antarctica is getting smaller and smaller. Given that water freezes at zero degrees, this movement will have serious consequences for ecosystems and for the cryosphere (areas of the Earth where water is frozen).

Our calculations show that the zero-degree isotherm has moved at a speed of 15.8km per decade since 1957 in the area surrounding the Antarctic, while on the Antarctic peninsula itself it has moved at 23.9km per decade. As a result, it now sits over 100km south of where it was in the mid 20th century.

These measurements show that the speed of climate change on the edge of Antarctica is four times faster than the average of other ecosystems.

Evolution of the annual and seasonal position of the zero-degree isotherm in Antarctica between 1957 and 2020. The initials indicate the seasons for each measurement. MAM: autumn, JJA: winter, SON: spring, DJF: summer.
González-Herrero et al. (2024)

The effects of emissions

To predict the consequences of the southward migration of the zero-degree isotherm, we ran our data through twenty different climate models. Although there is some variation in the shift of the isotherm among the models, all agree that it will move significantly further southward over the next few decades.

The models also predict that, over the coming decades, the isotherm’s movement will accelerate regardless of emissions. However, the extent of its southward movement in the second half of the 21st century will depend on how much carbon we emit.

If we continue at our current rate of emissions, the zero-degree isotherm will continue to advance at a similar rate before slowing down during the second half of the 21st century. However, if emissions are higher, the isotherm’s migration will accelerate continuing its southward movement until the end of the century.

Change in the summertime position of the zero-degree isotherm over the course of the 21st century. Based on IPCC climate scenario SSP5-8.5, whereby current emission levels are approximately doubled by 2050.
Adapted by González-Herrero et al. (2024)

Impacts on the cryoshpere and ecosystems

The zero-degree isotherm’s southward movement will not remain solely in the atmosphere, it will also affect the cryosphere (all of the frozen areas of Antarctica) and the biosphere (the species that live there).

Changes in the isotherm’s position will mean more liquid rain instead of snow in the outermost regions of the continent, though it may in fact cause increased snowfall in other areas.

Reduced snowfall on the frozen sea – which acts as insulation – may lead to accelerated loss of sea ice during summer thaw periods.

Although the effects on permafrost, ice shelves and continental ice are still uncertain, it will undoubtedly affect the peripheral glaciers of the Antarctic Peninsula. These constitute one of the largest potential sources of sea level rise in the coming decades.

Changes in the cryosphere will also lead to changes in ecosystems. New areas will become habitable thanks to thawing ice, but with more areas above zero degrees, invasive species from warmer, more hospitable continents may be able to settle, and they will compete with native species for resources.The Conversation

Sergi González Herrero, Científico atmosférico, Universitat de Barcelona

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue ReadingClimate change is speeding up in Antarctica

Court of Appeal Rules Climate Crisis A Matter of ‘Opinion’

Spread the love

Original article by Tim Crosland republished from DeSmog.

When environmental defenders are tried in future they will be barred from giving evidence of climate impacts to the jury to explain their motives, writes Tim Crosland, director of climate justice charity Plan B Earth.

Environmental activist Trudi Warner is ejected from the Royal Courts of Justice on February 21. Credit: Defend Our Juries

The Court of Appeal this week delivered another blow to the rights of climate activists to defend themselves in court.

The case centred on a jury’s decision to acquit a group of activists last year after hearing evidence of the consequences of climate breakdown as part of the defence.

It was one of a number of “not guilty” verdicts in similar cases, which showed how seriously juries take such evidence – as long as they are allowed to hear it.

For the climate movement, It was a major boost to see that the public, in the form of juries, was on its side.

But on Monday, following an appeal by Attorney General Victoria Prentis, Lady Justice Carr delivered a ruling to the effect that the juries should not be allowed to hear that evidence in the future.

What this amounts to is that from now on, when environmental defenders are tried for criminal damage in the future, they will no longer be able to give climate impacts as evidence to explain their motives.

‘Show Trials’

This defence was one of the last available to activists in an increasingly hostile climate that has seen the UK, under Rishi Sunak’s administration, dish out some of the most punitive sentencing for peaceful protest in recent history.

The implications are grave. From now on, we will see jury trials turn into show trials, in which the defendants are banned from explaining to the jury their principled motivation for taking action.

Lady Justice Carr’s ruling was made even though the relevant legislation (the Criminal Damage Act of 1971) expressly provides for a jury to take into account the “circumstances” of environmentalists’ action. 

The key question here is what counts as the “circumstances” of criminal damage, which is often the crime of which peaceful protestors stand accused. That might take the form of causing damage to property with graffiti, say by spray-painting #ShellKnows onto the oil company’s headquarters.

In this example, climate activists would argue they do this in order to hold those responsible for climate breakdown – and that the message serves to highlight the company’s decades-long knowledge and obfuscation of the impacts of fossil fuels on global heating.

The legal ‘logic’ of the new ruling is that “circumstances” refers to objective matters and therefore excludes a defendant’s beliefs. In the words of Lady Justice Carr, who read out the ruling of the court:

“The circumstances would not include the political or philosophical beliefs of the person causing the damage … Evidence from the defendant about the facts or effects of climate change would be inadmissible.”

The flaw in this logic is obvious. The climate crisis is not a matter of belief. It is a terrifying and objective reality. Not just according to scientists or the British parliament, but as evidenced by the well-documented destruction and mass loss of life that is already occurring across Europe and around the world. 

Lady Justice Carr might try explaining that the climate crisis is all in their minds to the UK home-owners, whose properties are now uninsurable due to repeat flooding, or the mothers whose children’s bodies washed up on a Libyan shore after dams collapsed in the wake of heavy rains.

Sadly, this ruling, which is based on such obviously flawed reasoning, was widely predicted. 

That’s because the ruling perpetuates an antagonism within the justice British system that has become impossible to ignore. 

‘Embarrassment to the State’

On the one hand you have the juries, who represent our communities. They keep acquitting environmental defenders when they hear the full story.

And then you have some judges, paid by the state, who are taking increasingly bizarre measures to prevent the juries from giving not guilty verdicts (Judge Silas Reid has even banned the use of the words ‘climate change’ in court proceedings).

In February 2023, a jury acquitted campaigners who had splashed pink paint over Conservative and Labour Party HQs. In October, another acquitted a group who sprayed the Treasury with fake blood; and in November, yet another acquitted the HSBC 9, who broke windows to protest the bank’s £80 billion investments in fossil fuels since the Paris Agreement.

Such jury acquittals come as an embarrassment to the state. Since juries are composed of randomly selected members of the public, they expose a media-constructed fiction. The public doesn’t want the government to get tough on those taking measures against climate breakdown, they want it to take measures to stop climate breakdown. 

As long as juries are allowed to hear evidence about a) the extreme danger of the climate crisis, b) the government’s systematic failure to follow the pathways that science dictates, and c) the efficacy of nonviolent direct action, it follows that those activists who are acting on the science are acquitted.

The British legal system, however, seems increasingly determined to prevent juries hearing the full facts. Judge Silas Reid has not only banned the words, he has sent people to prison simply for saying “climate change”.

At the end of February, almost as if he’d been tipped off on the Court of Appeal’s likely ruling, he used his office to cast doubt on the objective reality of the climate crisis:

“The circumstances of the damage do not include any climate crisis which may or may not exist in the world at the moment… Whether climate change is as dangerous as each of the defendants may clearly and honestly believe or is not, is irrelevant and does not form any part of the circumstances of the damage.”

Reid then threatened the jury with criminal charges if they applied their conscience to the case. 

But such oppressive rulings are backfiring. The public, as evidenced by jury acquittals, knows that the climate crisis is real and urgent. When courts suggest otherwise the legal system loses public support, undermining the social contract and the rule of law.

Last year hundreds of people demonstrated outside Crown Courts across England and Wales in solidarity with Trudi Warner, who was arrested for holding a sign outside court that explained the right of juries to acquit a defendant as a matter of conscience. Many actively invited the Attorney General to prosecute them for contempt of court. 

In February, more than a hundred members of the public staged a ‘peaceful makeover’ of the Royal Courts of Justice, conducting a lawful assembly into the courts’ erosion of democratic freedoms, until they were forcefully ejected by court security.

For as long as judges believe they can rule away our collective desire to live and to protect those we love, the situation will only escalate.

Tim Crosland is a former government lawyer and director of the climate justice charity Plan B.Earth.

Original article by Tim Crosland republished from DeSmog.

dizzy: The climate crisis is of course a matter of established fact. 2023 is the warmest year ever, climate records are getting broken monthly, they’ll be getting broken daily again in the summer. Capitalism has destroyed the climate and intends to destroy it more, fossil fool companies are pursuing more oil and gas extraction ignoring the established fact that it’s destroying the climate – so that rich cnuts get richer. Courts are supposedly independent, impartial and separate from the state instead of clearly part of it.

7.30am Equinox update: It’s a totally irrational denial of reality mirroring Rishi Sunak UK government’s own legislating that black is white, up is down, in is out. There’s a psychological term – reaction formation – that applies. The problem is that judges are meant to make wise, considered decisions and here they are instead behaving totally irrationally.

Image of InBedWithBigOil by Not Here To Be Liked + Hex Prints from Just Stop Oil's You May Find Yourself... art auction. Featuring Rishi Sunak, Fossil Fuels and Rupert Murdoch.
Image of InBedWithBigOil by Not Here To Be Liked + Hex Prints from Just Stop Oil’s You May Find Yourself… art auction. Featuring Rishi Sunak, Fossil Fuels and Rupert Murdoch.
Continue ReadingCourt of Appeal Rules Climate Crisis A Matter of ‘Opinion’

Wealth of US Billionaires Hits $5.5 Trillion—Up 88% Since Pandemic Hit

Spread the love

Original article by CHUCK COLLINS and OMAR OCAMPO republished from Common Dreams under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.

Jeff Bezos and his fiancée Lauren Sánchez arrive at an event in Milan, Italy on January 13, 2024.  (Photo: Jacopo Raule/Getty Images)

It’s been a rough few years for most people around the world—but not these folks.

Four years ago, the United States entered the Covid-19 pandemic. Forbes published its 34th annual billionaire survey shortly after with data keyed to March 18, 2020. On that day, the United States had 614 billionaires who owned a combined wealth of $2.947 trillion.

Four years later, on March 18, 2024, the country has 737 billionaires with a combined wealth of $5.529 trillion, an 87.6 percent increase of $2.58 trillion, according to Institute for Policy Studies calculations of ForbeReal Time Billionaire Data. (Thank you, Forbes!)

The last four years have been great for particular billionaires:

On March 18, 2020, Tesla CEO Elon Musk had wealth valued just under $25 billion. By May 2022, his wealth had surged to $255 billion. As of March 18, 2024, Musk is at $188.5 billion, more than a seven-fold increase in four years.

Over four years, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos has seen his wealth increase from $113 billion to 192.8 billion, even after paying out tens of billions in a divorce settlement and donating tens of billions to charity.

Three Walton family members — Jim, Alice, and Rob — are the principal heirs to the Walmart fortune. They saw their combined assets rise from $161.1 billion to $229.6 billion.

In 2020, only one billionaire — Jeff Bezos — had $100 billion or more. Today, the entire top ten are centi-billionaires, bringing their collective wealth to a staggering $1.4 trillion.

The only billionaire on the 2020 top 15 wealthiest Americans list to see their wealth decline in four years was MacKenzie Scott. Four years ago, on March 18, 2020, the ex-wife of Jeff Bezos had a net worth of $36 billion. It has declined to $35.4 billion due to her aggressive giving to charity.

For more details on how America’s billionaires have fared since the onset of the pandemic, check out our updates page.

Original article by CHUCK COLLINS and OMAR OCAMPO republished from Common Dreams under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.

Continue ReadingWealth of US Billionaires Hits $5.5 Trillion—Up 88% Since Pandemic Hit

Gore Calls Out Fossil Fuel Industry ‘Shamelessness’ in Lying to Public

Spread the love

Original article by OLIVIA ROSANE republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Al Gore, former vice president of the United States, speaks onstage at The New York Times Climate Forward Summit 2023 at The Times Center on September 21, 2023, in New York City. (Photo: Bennett Raglin/Getty Images for The New York Times)

“They are continuing to do similar things today to try to fool people and pull the wool over people’s eyes just in the name of greed,” the former vice president said.

In reflecting on nearly 50 years of climate advocacy, former Vice President Al Gore said that he had “underestimated” the greed of the fossil fuel industry.

The remarks came in an interview published in USA Today on Sunday. When asked if he had any regrets, Gore responded that he had “put every ounce of energy” he had into climate advocacy, but added:

“I was pretty slow to recognize how important the massive funding of anti-climate messaging was going on. I underestimated the power of greed in the fossil fuel industry, the shamelessness in putting out the lies.”

“They are continuing to do similar things today to try to fool people and pull the wool over people’s eyes just in the name of greed,” Gore continued.

“What’s at stake is so incredible.”

Gore, who tried to raise awareness about the climate crisis in the U.S. House of Representatives as early as 1981 and brought the issue to national attention in 2006’s documentary An Inconvenient Truth, has taken a harsher tone against oil, gas, and coal companies in recent months. In August 2023, he said that the “climate crisis is a fossil fuel crisis,” and in September, he implored the industry to “get out of the way.” In December, he lamented that the industry had “captured the COP process,” referring to the appointment of the United Arab Emirates national oil company CEO Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber to preside over the United Nations’ COP28 climate conference in that country.

In the USA Today interview, Gore also named the fossil fuel industry when asked about his greatest frustration.

“Well, that we haven’t made more progress,” Gore answered, “and that some of the fossil fuel companies have been shameless in providing, continuing to provide lavish funding for disinformation and misinformation.”

“What’s at stake is so incredible,” he added.

However, Gore told USA Today that he tried not to focus on his anger, but instead on continuing to raise awareness about the crisis and what can be done about it. And he remained hopeful that his grandchildren would live in a world in which people had come together and acted in time.

“We’ve got all the solutions we need right now to cut emissions in half before the end of this decade,” he said. “We’ve got a clear line of sight to how we can cut the other 50% of emissions by mid century.”

He also encouraged more people to get involved with the climate movement.

“I would say the greatest need is for more grassroots advocates because the most persuasive advocates are those in your own community,” he said.

Original article by OLIVIA ROSANE republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Continue ReadingGore Calls Out Fossil Fuel Industry ‘Shamelessness’ in Lying to Public

Government accused of ‘conjuring up culture war with energy policy,’ as Rees-Mogg calls for ‘indefinite’ postponement of Net Zero targets

Spread the love

https://leftfootforward.org/2024/03/government-accused-of-conjuring-up-culture-war-with-energy-policy-as-rees-mogg-calls-for-indefinite-postponement-of-net-zero-targets/

‘Another step backwards on the critical road to Net Zero.’

Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg has called for Net Zero targets to be postponed ‘indefinitely.’

The comments were made after Rishi Sunak announced that Britain needs to build new, gas-fired power stations to ensure the country’s energy security. The stations would replace many aging existing plants. However, the plans do not include climate-change measures, which critics say could threaten a legally binding commitment to cut carbon emissions to Net Zero by 2050.

Shadow energy secretary Ed Miliband accused the Tories of “persisting with the ludicrous ban on onshore wind, bungling the offshore wind auctions, and failing on energy efficiency.”

Liberal Democrat energy and climate change spokesperson Wera Hobhouse said that announcement was “another step backwards on the critical road to Net Zero.”

But for Jacob Rees-Mogg, who has a long record of climate denialism, the government’s announcement to build new gas-fired power stations is a good first step against what he referred to as the Net Zero ‘obsession.’

https://leftfootforward.org/2024/03/government-accused-of-conjuring-up-culture-war-with-energy-policy-as-rees-mogg-calls-for-indefinite-postponement-of-net-zero-targets/

Continue ReadingGovernment accused of ‘conjuring up culture war with energy policy,’ as Rees-Mogg calls for ‘indefinite’ postponement of Net Zero targets

How bad are private jets for the environment?

Spread the love

https://www.energymonitor.ai/sectors/transport/how-bad-are-private-jets-for-the-environment/

Private jet use is increasingly under scrutiny as the effects of climate change become apparent. Credit: zorazhuang via Getty Images.

As public pressure grows, some governments are attempting to reduce the number of private and commercial short-haul flights.

Recent coverage of celebrities like Taylor Swift and politicians using private jets for short journeys has reignited a debate about the justifiability of their use. As public pressure to curb carbon emissions grows, some governments are attempting to reduce the number of short-haul flights undertaken by commercial and private jet aircraft.

The crux of the issue with private jets, is they have a dramatically higher carbon footprint per passenger than commercial alternatives.

A 2021 report from Brussels-based campaign group Transport and Environment found that private jets are five to 14 times more polluting per passenger than commercial flights and 50 times more polluting than trains.

The report also stated that some private jets emit two tonnes of CO2 per hour, which is staggering when compared to the average annual output per person of 8.2 tonnes in advanced economies.

“Aeroplanes are one of the most polluting methods of transport due to the variety of released gases,” explains GlobalData analyst Will Tyson. “It is not just CO2 emissions, but also nitrogen oxides and the effects of vapour trails.

“The altitude from which the gases are emitted also has an impact due to the greenhouse effect being stronger the higher in the air you are.”

As a whole, air travel accounts for 2% of CO2 emissions. In contrast, militaries around the world contribute 5.5% of CO2 emissions.

Global NGO Greenpeace is part of a growing number of organisations lobbying to ban private jet use once and for all, arguing that, despite 80% of the world’s population having never taken a flight, the super-rich 1% are responsible for half of the world’s aviation emissions.

https://www.energymonitor.ai/sectors/transport/how-bad-are-private-jets-for-the-environment/

One of the many occasions climate destroyer and UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak uses a private jet.
Climate destroyer and UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak often uses private jets.
Continue ReadingHow bad are private jets for the environment?

UK a ‘tax haven’ for polluting SUVs, says green thinktank

Spread the love

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2024/mar/01/uk-tax-polluting-suv-green-thinktank-environment

The BMW X5 is among the large SUVs with a low vehicle excise duty in the UK compared with other countries in Europe. Photograph: Tony Vingerhoets/Alamy

First-year vehicle excise duty is a fraction of that in countries such as France and the Netherlands

Low taxation on petrol SUVs in the UK compared with much of Europe is inviting a glut of large, polluting luxury cars, according to an analysis by a green thinktank.

The tax paid when buying a new petrol or diesel SUV in the UK is only a fraction of the levies in neighbouring countries, including France and the Netherlands, and lower than many others in Europe, making it a “tax haven” for the bigger, less environmentally friendly vehicles, the report from Transport & Environment (T&E) found.

Britain’s first-year vehicle excise duty (VED) charge does relatively little to incentivise the purchase of less damaging cars, with the difference in buying a petrol SUV or a battery electric equivalent smaller in the UK than under most of Europe’s comparable acquisition taxes.

The first-year VED for a medium-large SUV, such as the BMW X5, costs £1,565 in the UK compared with a €60,000 (£51,400) tax in France, which also has a further surcharge on heavier cars.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2024/mar/01/uk-tax-polluting-suv-green-thinktank-environment

Continue ReadingUK a ‘tax haven’ for polluting SUVs, says green thinktank