Connect with us

Published

on

Nicola Sturgeon is an MSP (Member of the Scottish Parliament) and former First Minister of Scotland. Ben Wilson is International Policy Lead for Stop Climate Chaos Scotland.

The world is at a crossroads. The impacts of climate change are destabilising societies, causing conflict, and deepening economic hardship. Yet, instead of rising to the challenge, too many political leaders are retreating from climate commitments, undermining a global consensus that has anchored peace and security since the Second World War.

This, then, is a moment to remind ourselves that climate action is not just about protecting the environment – it is also essential for global security. Failure to act now will drive population displacement, fuel political unrest, and create conflict.

Climate change is already driving conflicts around the world. The war in Tigray, Ethiopia, was fuelled in part by climate-induced droughts. Similarly, in Sudan, shifting migration patterns due to desertification and water scarcity have heightened ethnic and regional tensions, leading to violence and mass displacement.

These are not isolated incidents. If we don’t act now, climate disasters will fuel human insecurity on an unprecedented scale. 

The economic consequences of climate inaction also pose a serious threat to peace. When communities lose their livelihoods, social unrest can follow. Economic hardship opens the door to far-right forces seeking to stoke xenophobia and racism. Governments that neglect climate action now increase the likelihood of instability in future.

“Forgotten” fragile states unite to end climate-finance blind spot

Net zero will bring economic benefits

The trend of global leaders backtracking on climate action is being driven by an increasingly sensationalist (and ill-informed) public narrative that net zero is bad for the economy. This is a falsehood now (a recent CBI report showed that the net-zero industry is an important driver of growth) and certainly wrong in the long-term. Ignoring climate action now will saddle us with significant financial and human costs in the years ahead.

As the Stern Review made clear nearly two decades ago, the economic benefits of taking decisive action on climate change far outweigh the costs of inaction. But it’s not just about economics – it’s also about justice.

The latest IPCC reports confirm that climate impacts are already driving poverty, hunger and displacement in some of the world’s most vulnerable communities. These inequalities will deepen – with consequences for all of us – unless emissions are reduced and adaptation efforts accelerated. 

UK aid budget cuts threaten climate finance pledge to vulnerable nations, experts warn

The decision of the UK and many other governments to cut aid budgets to fund defence is particularly jarring. The climate finance commitments of the Paris Agreement will almost certainly be hit, further undermining the delicate balance between the Global North and the Global South. COP29 in Baku only just avoided collapse. Without a renewed commitment to climate justice this year, COP30 and the underlying premise of global cooperation on climate change will be at risk.

Loss and damage funding not a luxury

There is no doubt that climate justice demands a sharper focus on mitigating emissions and adaptation. But it needs more than that.

At COP26 in Glasgow, Scotland became the first country to commit finance to the issue of loss and damage. Loss and damage refers to payments from the Global North to the Global South to deal with the irreversible climate impacts they are already experiencing. It is an act of reparation rather than charity.

The Scottish Government’s initial commitment of £2m was modest but heralded as “breaking the taboo” on this most contentious of issues. Other countries followed and by COP28, the United Nations Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage had been established with more than US$700 million pledged.

Loss and damage fund to hand out $250 million in initial phase

In the face of pushback against action on mitigation and adaptation, and a re-emergence of climate denial in UK and global politics, many people, even climate activists, might wonder if loss and damage is now an unaffordable luxury, and question if this is the time to spend political capital, let alone hard cash, on reparations.

In our view, stepping back from loss and damage would be a serious mistake. Failure to ameliorate the irreversible impacts already being suffered will drive more conflict across the world. Moreover, if the Global North breaks its promises again, the understandable scepticism of the Global South about the efficacy of the COP process will only grow. Acting in good faith on all aspects of climate injustice is fundamental to any vision of a peaceful world.

At its core, climate action is a question of justice. The poorest countries have contributed least to the crisis and yet they bear the brunt of its impacts. This is not just a moral failure – it is also a geopolitical risk. We cannot expect the Global South to cooperate in a system that repeatedly ignores their needs and priorities. The principle of fairness is not just an ethical consideration; it is a practical necessity for sustaining peace.

Multilateralism on the line at COP30

This is why the principle of multilateralism – the foundation of the post-war global order – must be defended.

Small nations matter. The principle that Fiji and Kiribati have the same vote as the United States or Russia in climate negotiations is not a flaw – it is a cornerstone of global peace. When powerful countries sideline ‘one country, one vote’ multilateralism – as many in today’s geopolitical wrangling are doing – they signal that might makes right, an approach that make conflict more, not less, likely.

In short, the retreat from strong, multilateral climate action is not just an environmental failure – it is a security risk. Leaders who defund climate finance in favour of military spending are not making the world safer; they are creating the conditions for future conflicts.

COP30 chief calls for global unity on climate action as cooperation falters

At COP30 in Brazil, the future of global cooperation on climate change – indeed of the UN process itself – is on the line. Leaders of goodwill across the world must recognise that climate justice, whether on mitigation, adaptation, or loss and damage, is an essential ingredient for a peaceful world. Pandering to strong-man egos will only deepen injustice and increase global instability.

For the sake of future generations, this one’s leaders must stand up for justice. They must be willing to see beyond today’s headlines and secure a future built on the common good. 2025 might feel like the start of a road toward global conflict and climate breakdown, but it doesn’t need to be.

With political will, COP30 can be a bounce-back moment when the norms and values necessary for peace are reinforced. The imperative of bequeathing a healthy and peaceful planet to those who come after us demands that it be so.

The post Climate justice is vital for global security  appeared first on Climate Home News.

Climate justice is vital for global security 

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Nearly One-Fifth of Americans Are Consuming Water With High Levels of Nitrates

Published

on

Nitrates, largely from agricultural runoff, are linked to cancers and birth defects. Research says areas with factory farms have higher levels of risk.

Close to 20 percent of Americans are exposed to water polluted with high levels of potentially cancer-causing nitrates, known to come mostly from agricultural runoff, according to new research published this month.

Nearly One-Fifth of Americans Are Consuming Water With High Levels of Nitrates

Continue Reading

Climate Change

WATCH: ‘This is a fossil fuel crisis’, Greenpeace tells Senate gas tax Inquiry

Published

on

Greenpeace Australia Pacific has slammed gas corporation war profiteering and environmental damage in a scathing Senate hearing as part of the Select Committee on the Taxation of Gas Resources, urging fair taxation of gas corporations and the transition to secure, homegrown renewable energy to protect Australian households and the economy from future energy shocks.

Speaking at the hearing, Greenpeace said the US and Israel’s illegal war on Iran has laid bare the fundamental flaws of an energy system built on fossil fuel extraction, geopolitical power plays and corporate greed, and will be a defining moment for how the world thinks about energy security.

Watch the hearing:

Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:

“This is not an energy crisis, it’s a fossil fuel crisis. The crisis we’re all facing lays bare the dangers of fossil fuel dependence, for our energy security, our communities, and for global peace and stability.

“Gas corporations like Woodside, Santos, Shell and Chevron — the same companies whose CEOs refused to front this Inquiry — are making obscene war profits, using the illegal war on Iran to price gouge, profiteer and push for more gas we don’t need — while people and our environment pay the price.

“Australians are getting smashed by soaring bills and the impacts of climate disasters — gas corporations should be paying their fair share to help this country, instead of sending billions offshore, tax-free.

“But we’re at a turning point — while gas corporations cynically push to open up more of our oceans and land to drilling for fossil fuels, our allies like the UK are doubling down on renewables in response to the fossil fuel crisis. Our trading partners in Asia are making the same reassessment of fossil fuels.

“Which is why the hearing today is crucial: an effective and well-designed tax on the gas industry’s obscene war time profits is a chance to channel funds to people and communities, fast-track the rollout of clean, secure homegrown wind and solar energy, while holding polluters accountable.

“Our dependence on fossil fuels leave us overexposed to the whims of tyrants like Trump — it’s in Australia’s national interest to end the fossil fuel chokehold for good and usher in the era of clean energy security.”



Offshore rig


Tax gas exports

Use our easy tool to send a message to the federal government


Send my message

WATCH: ‘This is a fossil fuel crisis’, Greenpeace tells Senate gas tax Inquiry

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Greenpeace Australia Pacific settles in lawsuit against Woodside

Published

on

SYDNEY, Wednesday 22 April 2026 — A settlement has been agreed in a lawsuit brought by Greenpeace Australia Pacific against fossil fuel multinational Woodside, being heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

Greenpeace Australia Pacific filed the lawsuit against Woodside in December 2023, alleging the fossil fuel giant had misrepresented both its prior emissions reductions, and its emissions reductions targets for 2025, 2030, and 2050.

Greenpeace alleged, among other things, that Woodside represented that its emissions reduction targets will achieve substantial reductions in its actual scope 1 and scope 2 emissions, when in fact Woodside will rely heavily on offsets to achieve a decrease in net emissions.

Greenpeace also alleged that Woodside represented that its emissions reduction targets are consistent with what the most recent climate science sets out as necessary to meet the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement when in fact Woodside’s emissions reduction targets do not include Woodside’s scope 3 emissions (which account for over 90% of Woodside’s emissions) and Woodside has plans to significantly expand its oil and gas production and processing and thereby the sum of its actual scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions would not materially decrease by 2030 and may increase past 2030.

Greenpeace filed expert evidence which it alleges supported its claim and demonstrated why Woodside’s claims were misleading or deceptive or likely to mislead or deceive.

Woodside has since changed how it represents its strategy to respond to climate change. For example, initially, Woodside displayed a ‘Net zero by 2050 or sooner’ banner on its website, but around July 2025, Woodside removed the banner from its website.

Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:

“Greenpeace Australia Pacific cares about transparent and accurate climate disclosures, and in December 2023, took Woodside to court challenging its claims. 

“During the course of the case, Woodside changed how it was presenting its plans on carbon emissions from what they had said prior to us bringing this case. We take that as a win and have decided to continue the fight against fossil fuel corporations outside of the courts. 

“Settling this case does not signal the end of our fight against Woodside’s climate and nature-destroying gas projects. While we may have agreed to resolve our court action against Woodside, in which we alleged it made misleading and deceptive claims to investors regarding its climate plans, the fact is the court of public opinion will judge Woodside for the harm it inflicts on our climate.

“Woodside’s greed-driven appetite to expand fossil fuel production is accelerating the climate crisis, putting the environment and communities at risk.

“Greenpeace strongly supports public interest litigation as a crucial tool in democratic engagement to protect our planet and holding large corporations accountable for their contributions to climate change. 

“Investors and the public deserve accurate information about a company’s true climate impact and strategy, especially when those strategies are presented as ‘Paris-aligned’ — an absurd claim for a company responsible for one of the largest LNG export terminals in Australia, and now the United States

“The expansion of fossil fuels is incompatible with a 1.5C-aligned world — Greenpeace will continue to campaign to fast-track the transition to homegrown, clean, affordable wind and solar energy, the only solution to the energy crisis we are currently all facing globally.”

Greenpeace and Woodside agreed for the proceeding to be dismissed on the basis that each party bears its own costs.

-ENDS-

Media contact

Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org
Kimberley Bernard on 0407 581 404 or kbernard@greenpeace.org

Greenpeace Australia Pacific settles in lawsuit against Woodside

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com