Bankwatch

Home > Archives for Press release

Press release

Joint reaction on the Energy Community’s Roadmap from CEE Bankwatch Network and Climate Action Network Europe


On Friday 16th October the Ministerial Council meeting in Tirana adopted a Roadmap on the future of the Energy Community.[1]

The joint reaction from CEE Bankwatch Network and Climate Action Network (CAN) Europe follows:

Ioana Ciuta, Energy Co-ordinator at CEE Bankwatch Network:

“The Energy Community’s Roadmap is significant as a declaration of political intentions to narrow the gap between the Energy Community countries and the EU in terms of environmental standards, procurement and subsidies in the energy sector. Unfortunately though, it is very light on detail and much work is still needed to translate this intent into reality.

“We very much welcome the adoption of the Energy Efficiency Directive by the Energy Community and urge the countries to start with implementation without delay, not just for the sake of compliance, but because of the huge cost and comfort benefits that can be reaped from saving energy.”

For more information contact

Ioana Ciuta
Energy Coordinator, CEE Bankwatch Network
ioana.ciuta@bankwatch.org
Tel.: +40 724 020 281

Notes

1. The documents from the Energy Community meeting, including the Roadmap are available at:
https://www.energy-community.org/portal/page/portal/ENC_HOME/INST_AND_MEETINGS?event_reg.category=E14340

Major blow for Croatian coal plant as Crédit Agricole announces new coal power policy


Paris, France – Today’s publication of new criteria for coal-fired power plant financing by French bank Crédit Agricole suggests that the bank will not be able to finance the controversial €800 million Plomin C coal power plant in Croatia, believe campaign groups. [1] The policy now rules out finance for coal power plants in high-income countries, which includes Croatia.

The new policy from Crédit Agricole has been announced less than a month after the publication by Friends of the Earth France and Croatia, BankTrack and CEE Bankwatch Network of a study which shows the incompatibility of the Plomin C project with the bank’s own corporate social responsibility standards. [2] Crédit Agricole had responded to the report and publicly defended its advisory role in the project [3]. However today’s policy changes now rule out the bank’s involvement in Plomin C.

Lucie Pinson, campaigner at Friends of the Earth France, said:

“This is one more victory for civil society against the banking industry’s support for coal and we welcome this further step from the only French bank so far to have ended its support for coal mining.”

Bernard Ivčić, director of Friends of the Earth Croatia, said:

“By losing the support from its advisory bank, the project promoter Marubeni will now be faced with a much bigger problem to find the necessary financing from international banks. This is one more obstacle for a project that besides being a hazard for health and the environment also violates local and European laws. Alternatives to fossil fuels exist. Only 12.5% of wind potential and 0.2% of solar photovoltaic potential has been utilised in Croatia. Crédit Agricole must focus its support in these high potential energy sectors.” [4]

Yann Louvel, Climate and energy coordinator for BankTrack, said:

“The adoption of new coal criteria by Crédit Agricole proves that mobilising is paying off. Already in March this year we congratulated the commitment from French banks not to finance the development in Australia of the world’s largest coal zone, as well as the decision from Crédit Agricole to end its support for coal mine projects and for companies specialised in the coal mining sector. Today we are stepping up pressure on all international banks to serve notice to the coal sector before the Paris climate summit by signing the Paris Pledge to quit coal.” [5]

Other major banks, such as BNP Paribas, a sponsor of the Paris climate summit and France’s top coal financing bank, have yet to make any commitments that would bring about an end to their coal financing. [6]

Lucie Pinson commented:

“We are still a long way from climate excellence and the new Crédit Agricole policy is still very disappointing given the stakes. New coal-fired power plants should not be being built anywhere. Yet the Crédit Agricole policy only rules out finance for them in high-income countries. Thus, it’s business as usual in 88% of the market. These new criteria only make Crédit Agricole the best of the worst students in the class, but it is vital that other banks now start to move.” [7]

Civil society organisations are now focused on stepping up pressure on the worst coal finance offenders, including BNP Paribas in France, Deutsche Bank in Germany and Morgan Stanley in the United States. Friends of the Earth France is calling on customers of major banks to participate in a day of action on October 10 and switch their accounts away from climate damaging banks to banks with no fossil fuels in their portfolios.

For more information, contact:

Lucie Pinson, Friends of the Earth France,
Tel: +33 9 72 43 92 62
Email:lucie.pinson@amisdelaterre.org

Yann Louvel, BankTrack,
Tel: +33 06 88 90 78 68
Email: yann@banktrack.org

Bernard Ivčić, Friends of the Earth Croatia,
Tel: +385 99 314 9138
Email: bernard@zelena-akcija.hr

Pippa Gallop, CEE Bankwatch Network,
Tel: +385 997 559 78
Email: pippa.gallop@bankwatch.org

Notes for editors:

1. Crédit Agricole announcement, September 30, 2015, only in French:
http://www.credit-agricole.com/Actualites-et-decryptage/Communiques-de-presse/Communiques-generaux/Communique-Credit-Agricole-S.A.-Credit-Agricole-S.A.-prend-de-nouveaux-engagements-face-aux-enjeux-du-charbon-et-du-carbone?hootPostID=cf40402b99ba4ae8588fdd2ac77d12ee

2. See press release, September 10, 2015:
http://www.banktrack.org/show/news/credit_agricole_violating_own_coal_policies_with_new_croatian_power_plant_support_new_report

3. Crédit Agricole answer to Friends of the Earth France and BankTrack, September 10, 2015:
http://www.credit-agricole.com/en/News-analysis/Positions/10-September-2015-Credit-Agricole-s-answer-to-Amis-de-la-Terre-Plomin-C

4. Wind potential: Sander and Partner (data provided for the SEE SEP energy modelling project and used for the Balkan wind atlas http://balkan.wind-index.com/). Installed wind capacity in Croatia:
http://www.ewea.org/fileadmin/files/library/publications/statistics/EWEA-Annual-Statistics-2014.pdf

Technical potential for solar PV (rooftops only): DOOR, data used for SEE-SEP 2050 energy model. Installed PV capacity:
http://www.pv-magazine.com/news/details/beitrag/croatian-pv-sector-owes-it-all-to-rooftops_100017362/#axzz3loVINDAS

5. See: http://dotheparispledge.org/

6. See: http://coalbanks.org/#score

7. According to the database Global Coal Plant Tracker, which gathers information on every known coal-fired electrical generating unit proposed since January 1, 2010, 12% are in high income countries using the World Bank’s definition.

Image by Zelena Akcjia

Southeast Europe must close the gap on energy efficiency, says new report


Countries of Southeast Europe (SEE) waste much more energy than the members of the European Union, according to a new report Energy Efficiency – Just Do It! published today by a group of civil society organizations from across the region.[1]

The report is available at:
https://bankwatch.org/sites/default/files/Energy-Efficiency-Just-Do-It.pdf

Published in the final stage of adopting the Energy Efficiency Directive (EED) in the region, through the Energy Community framework[2], the report emphasizes why the adoption of the EED is crucial for the countries of the region. Energy Community data shows that the most inefficient sector, buildings, could use from 20% to 40% less energy, if appropriate energy efficiency measures were implemented.[3] Furthermore, over 500 million EUR provided by international development organizations remain unused, “due to the lack of appropriate delivery mechanisms to link the local energy efficiency projects with the available financing.” [4]

Most of the SEE countries lag behind in meeting their current, non-binding target of 9% energy savings by 2018, which has been prescribed by the Energy Community framework. The adoption of the EED, scheduled for mid-October, with its set of binding measures to achieve a target of 20% savings by 2020 could be a game changer in the region. That is, as long as the countries make sincere efforts to implement it.

Maroš Šefčovič, Vice-President of the European Commission in charge of the Energy Union, provided the foreword of the report and encourages South East Europe to reinforce its efforts on energy efficiency. “Energy efficiency is one of the key dimensions of the Energy Union. We need to fundamentally rethink energy efficiency and treat it as an energy source in its own right. The better use of energy while fighting climate change is both a spur for new jobs and growth and an investment in our collective future”, states Šefčovič.

“The biggest barrier to energy efficiency is the total lack of political will to improve it amongst some of our elected representatives. It is disturbing when you compare how much is invested in coal that pollutes the air and contributes to climate change, and how much is being spent on energy efficiency that gives us warmer houses, local jobs and cleaner environment”, said Garret Tankosić-Kelly, principal of SEE Change Net.

“A balanced approach to energy policy that includes reducing unnecessary demand through energy efficiency improvements will bring vast benefits to SEE economies”, says Rod Janssen, the lead author of the report. “By creating the necessary policy framework for energy efficiency, the SEE countries can decrease individual energy costs and energy poverty, make businesses more efficient and reduce energy imports.”

“The people of the Southeast Europe deserve to have the same living standards when it comes to energy efficiency as those in the EU” – says Dragana Mileusnić, energy policy coordinator for South East Europe at Climate Action Network Europe. “The EU needs to push for a full adoption of the EED in the Balkans, as a crucial step in the reform of the Energy Community. With the Paris climate summit on the horizon, the EU has a duty to encourage its neighbours to step up their efforts to save energy and thus protect the climate.”

For more information, contact:

Ania Drazkiewicz
CAN Europe Communications Coordinator
ania@caneurope.org
+32 494 525 738

Dragana Mileusnić
CAN Europe Energy Policy Coordinator for South East Europe
dragana@caneurope.org
+32 2 894 46 82

Masha Durkalić
SEE Change Net Communication Officer
masha@seechangenet.org
+ 387 33 213 716

Notes for the editor

1. The South East Europe Sustainable Energy Policy (SEE SEP) is a programme that has 18 CSO partners from across the region (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Kosovo**, Macedonia*, Montenegro and Serbia) and the EU. The SEE SEP project aims to empower CSOs and citizens to better influence policy and practice towards a fairer, cleaner and safer energy future in SEE.

SEE SEP partner organisations are: SEE Change Net, Analytica (Macedonia*), ATRC (Kosovo**), CEKOR (Serbia), CPI (Bosnia and Herzegovina), CZZS (Bosnia and Herzegovina), DOOR (Croatia), EDEN (Albania), Ekolevizja (Albania), Eko-Svest (Macedonia*), Forum for Freedom in Education (Croatia), Fractal (Serbia), Front 21/42 (Macedonia*), Green Home (Montenegro), MANS (Montenegro), WWF Adria
CEE Bankwatch, Climate Action Network Europe

* According to the UN, the official name for Macedonia is “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”.
** This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/99 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence.

2. The Energy Community brings together Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo**, Macedonia*, Moldova, Montenegro, Serbia and Ukraine – and soon also Georgia – with the goal of creating a common energy market between the EU and some of its neighbours. It also aims to extend the EU internal energy policy to south east Europe and the Black Sea region. This includes the obligation for member countries to implement EU environmental law and renewable energy targets.

3. The Energy Community Secretariat estimates that potential improvements are: Transport: 10%; Household sector: 10 – 35%; Public: 35 – 40%; Service sector: 10 – 30%; Industrial and commercial: 5 – 25%. They estimate that the potential yield (public buildings and private households): 805 million EUR in energy savings by 2020. ECS, Energy Community – Tapping on its Energy Efficiency Potential, 1 June 2015, p. 12.

4. Energy Community Secretariat, Energy Community – Tapping on its Energy Efficiency Potential, 1 June 2015, p. 20.

Bankwatch and Counter Balance statement on the adoption of the European Investment Bank Climate Strategy

“As Europe prepares to host the seminal UN climate summit in Paris at year’s end, the EU’s house bank is turning away from its commitment to finance the bloc’s climate action.

“In a meeting today (September 22) the European Investment Bank (EIB) voted to adopt a new Climate Strategy to guide the compliance of its investments with the EU’s climate targets for the next fifteen years. But while the strategy has commendable guidelines, it lacks clear implementation timelines, action plans or measureable objectives that would ensure investments in energy and infrastructure projects are in line with Europe’s goal of a transition to a low-carbon economy.

“Above all, the new strategy offers no commitment to scale up financing to support the EU’s climate and energy targets, specifically for boosting energy efficiency and expanding renewable energy sources.

“At the same time, rather than restricting its financing for fossil fuels, the bank has recently announced a possible EUR 2 billion loan to the Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP), part of the Southern Gas Corridor meant to import even more gas, from the repressive regime in Azerbaijan.

“The EIB is meant to support Europe’s transition to a low-carbon, resource efficient economy. But the climate strategy adopted by the board falls far short of this objective, and therefore seriously undermines the credibility of the EU’s climate and energy commitments.

“Bankwatch, Counter Balance and other civil society organisations have repeatedly (pdf) called on the EIB to ensure that its new Climate Strategy accounts for a number of key issues: a thorough review and upgrade of the bank’s Emissions Performance Standard in order to limit carbon emissions; an explicit commitment to the EU’s principle of ‘energy efficiency first’; and an increased climate action target for mobilising the necessary resources both to meet the international goal of capping global temperature rise at two degrees and to make the EU more resilient to a changing climate.”

For more information please contact:

Anna Roggenbuck
EIB campaign Co-ordinator, CEE Bankwatch Network
annar@bankwatch.org
+48 509970424

Xavier Sol
Director Counter Balance
xavier.sol@counter-balance.org
+32 2 893 08 61

Rural communities in Ukraine bearing the brunt of unchecked agribusiness expansion, say two new reports

Residents in Ukraine’s southwest are facing environmental decline, intimidation and deteriorating quality of life as a result of the rapid emergence of Europe’s largest poultry farm, finds a report released today by CEE Bankwatch Network. Owned by Mironivski Hliboproduct (MHP), Ukraine’s biggest poultry producer, the Vinnytsia project has been enjoying hefty support from Europe’s public financial institutes and the World Bank, and plans to double the facility’s size are only likely to exacerbate its social and environmental impacts, shows another report released today by the Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations (SOMO).

Bankwatch’s report “Black Earth: Agribusiness in Ukraine and the Marginalisation of Rural Communities” can be found here:
https://bankwatch.org/publications/black-earth

SOMO’s report “Chicken Run: The Business Strategies and Adverse Impacts of Poultry Producer MHP in Ukraine” can be found here:

Publication_4228

A blog post with high-resolution images and details on the amount of public finance and beneficiaries in Ukraine’s agricultural sector can be found here:
https://bankwatch.org/news-media/blog/images-and-graphs-large-scale-agribusiness-ukraine-and-local-communities

A fact finding mission, comprised of members of Ukrainian and international civil society organisations, visited the site and met with over 100 local residents in May 2015. They heard a large number of accounts of people being aggressively pressured by MHP representatives to lease their lands to the company to allow the expansion of the poultry production facility.

The civil society delegation was also able to document strong foul smell from chicken rearing houses and manure heaps in the fields surrounding the Vinnytsia complex as well as other poultry production waste. In addition, the mission was also shown the effects of increased truck traffic through the villages on local roads and buildings. These and other findings are brought in detail in Bankwatch’s report.

MHP has so far received over EUR 500 million in loans from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the European Investment Bank (EIB), and primarily from the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation (IFC).

This financial support, part of which was used for the construction of the Vinnytsia complex, has obliged MHP to implement a number of safety and environmental standards, and the company claims it complies with Ukrainian law and follows best international practices.

But local residents’ testimonies show that the social and environmental impacts are insufficiently mitigated, in spite of these claims. Not only did the company avoid consultations with the communities, but it has also never disclosed information that could address their concerns, despite repeated requests. As a result, MHP’s unwillingness to directly engaged with concerned residents has naturally bred mistrust.

SOMO’s analysis finds that a major cause of the adverse impacts experienced by the local communities is the poultry farm’s rapid expansion. Already in 2014, the first year of its operations, the Vinnytsia poultry farm produced 205,000 tonnes of poultry, according to MHP reports. A second phase of the facility, slated to begin late this year and be completed by 2018, will see the company producing 900,000 tonnes of poultry, much of it intended for export.

Moreover, mitigation of the effects on the environment and the local communities is hampered by MHP’s continued refusal to disclose relevant information and offer an orderly redress mechanism. In addition, in effect since 2014, the Ukrainian government’s moratorium on inspections means that violations of public health and environmental laws could remain undetected and not addressed.

“The approach of both the EU and the investment banks towards Ukraine’s economic development serves a different interest than that of the local communities,” says Tim Steinweg, senior researcher with SOMO. “The case of MHP shows that there are limits to the expansion of industrialized farms before they interfere with the livelihoods of local communities.”

“Financial institutions who see MHP as an important contributor to the country’s economic recovery and Ukraine as a key player in the global food supply must prioritise transparency, accountability and participation of the local communities, not their exclusion and concentration of control over land in the hands of the few,” says Fidanka Bacheva-McGrath, EBRD Co-ordinator at CEE Bankwatch Network.

For more information contact:

Fidanka Bacheva-McGrath
EBRD Campaign Co-ordinator
fidankab@bankwatch.org
Tel.: +359 877 303097
Skype: fidanka_b
Twitter: @fidankabmg

Tim Steinweg
Senior Researcher, Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations
T.Steinweg@somo.nl
Tel.: +31 206391291
Twitter: @TSteinweg

Olexi Pasyuk
National Ecological Centre of Ukraine
opasyuk@bankwatch.org
Tel. +38 0505711684
Twitter: @opasyuk

Russian environmental organisation forced to choose between ‘foreign agent’ label and shutdown

Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Russia – Sakhalin Environment Watch (SEW), Bankwatch member group in Russia’s far east, has been ordered by the Russian authorities to register itself as a ‘foreign agent’. The group rejects claims it is engaged in any political activity, and intends to contest the decision. If the decision is not repealed, the group will consider shutting down.

Introduced in 2012, the restrictive ‘foreign agent’ law has been roundly criticised for the way in which it intrudes on and hinders the activities of independent civil society organisations. In the case of Sakhalin Environmental Watch, the classification would tarnish its impeccable reputation of two decades and limit its ability to engage with decision-makers, the media and the general public.

The decision comes as a result of an unscheduled two weeks long inspection in late August by officers from the Ministry of Justice of the Sakhalin Province, the fourth such inspection in two years.

The inspection report received by SEW on Wednesday (September 9) says it found no indications of extremism in the group’s activities, the decisions of its governing bodies are competent, and the organisation’s operations are in line with its statutory objectives.

Yet, the Ministry of Justice report says the inspection found “a focus on the formation of public opinion in order to influence the decisions of government authorities, an intention directed at a public reaction and attracting the attention of the government authorities of the Sakhalin Province.”

As evidence the report cites a link to a WWF Russia statement on the need to protect the Arctic posted to SEW’s unofficial account on Russian social media website Vkontakte, a signature of SEW’s director on a letter of support from Russian environmentalists to their Ukrainian peers sent during the Euromaidan protests, as well as a May 2015 article by the organisation’s director on the need for parks and for stopping the construction of new buildings at the expense of greenery in the crowded city of Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk.

These findings, the inspectors opined, indicate SEW’s engagement in political activity, and since the organisation is partially funded by international charities, it should have applied to register itself in the “registry of noncommercial organisations performing the functions of a foreign agent”.

According to 2012 amendments to the federal law on non-commercial organisations, local nonprofits that engage in so-called political activity and receive funding from abroad are to be classified as ‘foreign agents’. In fact, while the term “political activity” is defined rather vaguely in the law, the protection of flora and fauna has been explicitly excluded from this definition by an April 2014 ruling of Russia’s Constitutional Court. So far, 91 non-governmental organisations have been put on this list, most of them are now trying to legally challenge this status.

“SEW cannot operate under the label of ‘foreign agent, because it never was a foreign agent, and cannot accept being labeled as something it is not,” says Dmitry Lisitsyn, the director of Sakhalin Environment Watch and a 2011 Goldman Environmental Prize laureate. “SEW has protected the environment of Sakhalin and its citizens’ environmental rights for 20 years. We have much to be proud of. We have never engaged in politics. We do not support any political party and do not participate in the elections ourselves, nor do we engage in any political struggle. Appeals to the authorities and publications on environmental topics— this is our constitutional right and one method of protecting the environment.”

A longtime member of CEE Bankwatch Network and an environmental champion, SEW is intent to have this decision reversed and will legally challenge it. However, if these efforts are unsuccessful the organisation will convene a general assembly to consider its dissolution.

For more information contact:

Dmitry Lisitsyn
Director, Sakhalin Environment Watch
sakhalinwatch@gmail.com
Tel. +7(4242) 46-14-16, +7 924 190 1022
http://www.ecosakh.ru
https://www.facebook.com/ecosakh