GREENPEACE
Greenpeace is an environmental independent organisation, present in more than 55 countries, including Norway. One of the biggest projects this organisation is working on, is related to the major problem of climate change, caused by the burning of fossil fields in Norway and globally. Greenpeace doesn't accept contributions from the state or any private sectors, it's only financed by its support from members. Through non-violent actions, informative campaigns and direct actions, lobbying, research and ecotage, Greenpeace reaches its environmental goals.
|
Greenpeace exists because this fragile earth deserves a voice. It needs solutions. It needs change. It needs action. |
Below you'll find an interactive map showing the countries from each continent where Greenpeace operates
Countries where Greenpeace operates
INTERVIEW WITH TRULS GULOWSEN
Truls Gulowsen is the leader of Greenpeace Norway, an organisation founded the 22nd of August 1988. Through an interview with him, we present his ideas and opinions on how Norway should sustain with renewable energies. He tells us about the environmental agreements that have been promised but not fulfilled, and talks about sensitive areas and how Greenpeace is proud of wining environmental battles. Listen to the complete interview below.
We make change happen a bit faster, quicker and better. Sometimes it's about connecting dots, exposing bad; and sometimes it's about showing the way.
Greenpeace doesn't ask for the World to suddenly stop using oil, that is not possible, so isn't shutting down the Norwegian wells. What can be done, is to stop looking for new fields and investing in this research. Norway has burned so much oil already, that if new oil needs to be burned, it doesn't have to come from Norwegian wells. If we want to reach any reasonable climate targets, we cannot afford burning more than a fraction of the fossil fields, that we have already found. Therefore, new investments in more operations, drilling, platforms, plant infrastructure, is a bet against global warming limitations.
There are areas where the oil industry wants to make research on, but these are very sensitive areas. From a nationalistic point of view, it is sad that money that has been saved, is being used in pointless investments, after fields that will be useless in the future. This money should be used in new positive developments. The Lofoten Islands is one of the protected areas, where this need for protection is clearly understood; but is sad to spend so much money to prove and reprove something so obvious, like the need of protection in this area. Many people see it and understand it, and it is impressive what Greenpeace has reached, but because of the time and energy spent in this matter, other bad things have been happening behind their backs.
It's a shame, that we spend so many resources, to protect something, that clearly shouldn't be drilled
There are targets that Norway has been promising every couple of years, since 1990, but never reached. They are absolutely doable, but Norway doesn't fulfill it, so they keep on putting further and higher expectations, new goals are promised but it remains to be seen how and if it will be reached. There are two sets of goals in the Paris Agreement, which is confusing. First you have an individual agreement for countries like Norway, with a specific goal for 2030. Second you have another set of global emission trajectory, that combined with our first goal, lead us to more than 3 degrees of global warming, which is catastrophic. So Norway agrees to a target, lower than 2 degrees, that is actually much more ambitious to what the agreement requires.
For the targets to be reached, massive cuts need to be done immediately
The data is retrieved from 2015. The graph above shows the CO2 emission from different sectors of the Norwegian society, revealing that 'Industry and mining' and 'Road traffic' are big on the outlet of emission, but the biggest one is the 'Oil and gas' sector.
We hear that our biggest source is our people and their work; and this is right. We have the possibilities, but the brains and money have gone into oil, which is a success, but I'm afraid it is not a lasting one
Norway should start investing in climate jobs and the new economy. It is difficult to name or decide on one thing that will replace oil, but if we are clear about the oil sector not being an indicator of huge growth in opportunities, then people will start to look actively for power elsewhere, instead of only talking about it. Let's take Germany as an example. They said ,,We are done with nuclear power", they didn't have anything planned, they just stopped it and started finding a solution, and they did.
Norway is the leader of electric transportation, but hasn't built an industry around it. This can be done, not necessarily the production of cars, but the building of the smart systems around it. Norway has everything in the energy sector: solar power, offshore wind power and smart heating systems. They have a lot of educated people that know that sort of things.
If we look towards Denmark and Sweden, they don't have oil, but they have a well functioning society, with big international markets. They bring solutions to the world and they are not based on oil.
Renewable energy is going up, the energy market is growing globally and it provides much more jobs. If we compare, Norway has an 8% of global market in oil industry - that's a lot. But when it comes about renewable energy, that actually has the same size of global cash market as oil; Norway has only around 0,2% of market share. This shows that they are not a player in this growing game. They have hydro power, electric installations, but they don't take advantage of this. To solve the climate problem, we'll have to invest an enormous amount of money. Is challenging, but it's a huge business opportunity, even if we don't succeed to stabilise the climate change enough.
Greenpeace's biggest project at the moment is the fight for the 2030 licensing round. They don't want to see more drill rigs. The upcoming election will be another possibility to promote the pro-climate awareness. This is a golden opportunity, but time is still running.
Norway is the leader of electric transportation, but hasn't built an industry around it. This can be done, not necessarily the production of cars, but the building of the smart systems around it. Norway has everything in the energy sector: solar power, offshore wind power and smart heating systems. They have a lot of educated people that know that sort of things.
If we look towards Denmark and Sweden, they don't have oil, but they have a well functioning society, with big international markets. They bring solutions to the world and they are not based on oil.
Renewable energy is going up, the energy market is growing globally and it provides much more jobs. If we compare, Norway has an 8% of global market in oil industry - that's a lot. But when it comes about renewable energy, that actually has the same size of global cash market as oil; Norway has only around 0,2% of market share. This shows that they are not a player in this growing game. They have hydro power, electric installations, but they don't take advantage of this. To solve the climate problem, we'll have to invest an enormous amount of money. Is challenging, but it's a huge business opportunity, even if we don't succeed to stabilise the climate change enough.
Greenpeace's biggest project at the moment is the fight for the 2030 licensing round. They don't want to see more drill rigs. The upcoming election will be another possibility to promote the pro-climate awareness. This is a golden opportunity, but time is still running.