Greenpeace European Unit

A jury in North Dakota has ruled that three Greenpeace entities must pay US$ 660 millions to Energy Transfer, a giant pipeline company, for protests conducted together with the Standing Rock Sioux tribe almost a decade ago. A perfect example of a SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) lawsuit, meant to silence civil society freedom of expression and public participation. The trial and this unbelievable court's decision go beyond environmental and climate concerns. At stake there is nothing less than freedom of speech, the right of people to voice their concerns, and the very health of democracy. Despite this shameful decision we will not be silenced. Kristin Casper, General Counsel, Greenpeace International said: “The fight against Big Oil isn’t over today, and we know that the truth and the law are on our side. Greenpeace International will continue to campaign for a green and peaceful future. We will not back down, we will not be silenced. “Energy Transfer hasn’t heard the last of us in this fight. We’re just getting started with our anti-SLAPP lawsuit against Energy Transfer’s attacks on free speech and peaceful protest. We will see Energy Transfer in court this July in Amsterdam. We will not back down, we will not be silenced.” Deepa Padmanabha, Senior Legal Advisor, Greenpeace USA said: “What we saw over these three weeks was Energy Transfer's blatant disregard for the voices of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. And while they also tried to distort the truth about Greenpeace's role in the protests, we instead reaffirmed our unwavering commitment to non-violence in every action we take. After almost eight years, we were proud to share our story with the people of Mandan and beyond. To be clear, Greenpeace’s story is not the story of Standing Rock; that is not ours to tell, despite the allegations in the lawsuit. Our story is how an organization like Greenpeace USA can support critical fights to protect communities most impacted by the climate crisis, as well as continued attacks on Indigenous sovereignty. We should all be concerned about the future of the First Amendment, and lawsuits like this aimed at destroying our rights to peaceful protest and free speech. Greenpeace will continue to do its part to fight for the protection of these fundamental rights for everyone.” Attorney Marty Garbus, a longtime civil rights lawyer who has represented civil rights champions like Nelson Mandela, said: “In my six decades of legal practice, I have never witnessed a trial as unfair as the one against Greenpeace that just ended in the courts of North Dakota”. “I think this is one of the worst First Amendment decisions in American history”. #WeWillNotBeSilenced https://lnkd.in/ea3UjD6Z

The European Commission wants to slash human rights and environmental protections. Greenpeace joins 360+ organisations in urgently calling on the European Parliament and national governments to block the Omnibus package. ❌ No to dangerous deregulation! #NoToOmnibus https://lnkd.in/e5E6Y6RY

Read our Marco Contiero's piece on the European Commission's 'Vision' for the future of food and farming in the EU

📊 AMAZING DATA VISUALISATION ALERT 📈 Reading the great new research from Beyond Fossil Fuels on how electricity-hungry data centres threaten Europe's chances at cutting out oil, gas and coal and avoiding the worst of climate breakdown (well done Jill McArdle PhD and Pierre Terras) I'm reminded of this fantastic piece from the Claire Byrne show on RTÉ in 2021 Ireland has a particularly huge problem with data centres (they consumer over 21% of the electricity!) but the visualisation below applies to anywhere – and, as Paul Deane says, it's every engineer's dream to work with Lego (I bet the camera person enjoyed the very last shot, too)

Have you heard of genetically modified organisms (GMOs)? Read on 📖👉to learn how a new EU law could deregulate gene-edited plants, strip away safety checks, and put the livelihoods of small & medium-sized farmers at risk.🍃💔 The Polish EU Council Presidency is pushing to reach an agreement on the proposal with EU governments on 14 February. ❗We urgently call on EU leaders to reject this deregulation❗ Share this post to spread the word and read our letter signed by 200+ organisations here > https://lnkd.in/e52im3HP

In Brussels on 5 February? MEPs Lynn Boylan and Lena Schilling will host a debate in the European Parliament on banning new fossil fuel projects in the EU 2024 was the first year where global temperatures exceeded 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels, the limit agreed by countries in Paris in 2015. We’re fast exhausting our global carbon budget and need to accelerate the phase out of fossil fuels, by far the largest contributors to this climate crisis. The first step is to stop any *new* fossil fuel projects. Wednesday 5 February, 9:30-11:30 European Parliament, room Spaak 7C50 Register here (by 11:30 on Friday 24 January if you don't already have EU Parliament access) https://lnkd.in/ehk__az8

Greenpeace EU has been called out on Bluesky for using AI-generated images on a post. Only thing is: we didn’t! Because we don’t. Last Tuesday, Sean Carroll at Foresight Media wrote a piece that featured our senior climate campaigner Lorelei Limousin. It’s a great piece about changing people’s transport habits. Check it out at the link in the comments. Foresight illustrated Sean’s piece with a few images generated by the AI program Midjourney: city scenes of trees, trams and people cycling. The images are very artificial-looking: the light is too perfect, some of the trams have no overhead wires. Everything is unnaturally tidy. We posted a link to the piece, and Bluesky featured one of the Midjourney images. Quite a few people who saw our post thought we had started using generative AI. As well as reacting to the article, several people said Greenpeace shouldn’t be presenting AI images as photographs. But they don't need to worry. As a photographer, I want to make one thing perfectly clear: Greenpeace does not use AI as a replacement for photography or videography. In line with news industry standards, we don't doctor images in any way. We don't even edit photographs beyond cropping and a bit of colour grading. Greenpeace activists are often on the frontlines of the climate and nature crisis, demanding action and change. We also send photographers and videographers to document environmental destruction in real time. The images and stories that come back are meaningful because they’re real. That’s irreplaceable. We will never break our supporters’ trust by attempting to pass off something artificial as real and true. Does that put us at a disadvantage in the age of AI-generated images and deepfakes? We don’t think so. Greenpeace exists to give a voice to our planet, to stop nature destruction and climate breakdown, to promote peace and justice, to solve hard problems and make people's lives better. Facts, truth and trust are absolutely essential to what we do. I’ve talked mostly about AI and photography. But what about other uses of AI, like producing text, illustrations or music? In fact Greenpeace EU doesn’t use generative AI in its external communications. For all AI applications in general, we carefully consider things like energy and water use, privacy and data storage, copyright and transparency, and bias and discrimination. We continually assess our relationship with new technologies, looking at the benefits and the harms. We’ll always be transparent about this. And we’re open to feedback. Please let us know what you think! Finally, we want to buck the trend and work MORE with real people: photographers, videographers, illustrators, designers, artists and storytellers of all kinds. If that’s you, and if you want to work with us on our projects in Brussels, get in touch! Send a portfolio to peu@greenpeace.org so we know where to find you next time we’re cooking up something exciting. 📸 Chris J Ratcliffe / Greenpeace

If you have connections with MEPs, especially from the European People's Party, please ask them to vote against the amendments the EPP group has tabled for next week's vote on the EU's deforestation regulation, the EUDR, and to vote against the proposal to delay the law's application. The EUDR is one of the most significant achievements of the EU Green Deal. It came after more than a million Europeans wrote to the European Commission asking for a strong law to combat deforestation. Forests regulate the climate, defend us from floods, provide livelihoods for millions of people, and are absolutely key to preserving biodiversity. Forests urgently need the protection that this law offers, and we need forests. The law covers products that are often linked to deforestation, like coffee, chocolate and wood. It requires companies that want to sell on the EU market to prove that their products don't come from recently deforested areas. The EUDR was agreed - with EPP support - in 2022. It's a clever piece of legislation that is designed to actually work. Lots of companies have been preparing for it since then. But - after giving in to pressure from some of the industries and countries who would have to adapt to the law - the European Commission in October asked governments and MEPs to approve a one-year delay to the EUDR. Now, like a stroppy footballer arguing with the referee after the final whistle has blown, the EPP group is seeking changes to the law. The changes would nullify all the preparations that have been underway for years, as well as introduce loopholes and critically weaken some of the fundamentals of how the law works. Entire countries would be exempt - almost certainly leading to challenges in the WTO. Traders would not be obliged to check their supply chains, which is critical for the law to really work. And for good measure, they've asked for a two-year delay, rather than one. Companies that have already prepared for the EUDR as adopted in 2022 are rightly furious, as are human rights activists and environmentalists like me, and anyone who cares about the EU's credibility in the world or its reputation as a place with laws that are stable and predictable. This law was agreed two years ago, to apply from the end of this year. Trying to change it now at this late, late stage can only create a mess. And to be clear, the Commission should not have asked for a delay in the first place: it should not have dragged its feet as it did, or opened the door to this nonsense. Please, if you have them, ask your contacts in the European Parliament: vote NO to all the amendments and NO to any delay. Thank you. 📸 Martin Katz / Greenpeace

In our new ☀ sunny short ☀ Sara Pizzinato from Greenpeace España writes on how we need renewables, but we have to do it right ✅ The renewable revolution is picking up momentum in Spain, but to keep breaking records, the deployment of wind and solar needs to be done in a manner that is people-centred and respects nature 💚 #TogetherFor100RE Find out how👇 https://lnkd.in/eWdnBiQc