Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
MORE THAN 20 environmental and climate groups have launched a campaign calling for a ban on fossil fuel advertising and sponsorship across the European Union, similar to bans on tobacco advertising.
More than 80 Greenpeace activists blocked the entrance to Shell’s oil refinery in the Dutch port of Rotterdam to draw attention to the launch of the European Citizens’ Initiative calling for the advertising ban.
The action comes less than a month before the start of the United Nations climate summit, Cop26, in Glasgow.
The 12-day summit aims to secure more ambitious commitments to limit global warming to well below 2 degrees, with a goal of keeping it to 1.5 degrees compared with pre-industrial levels.
Activists used floating cubes emblazoned with fossil fuel-linked advertisements to block the entrance, along with the protest ship Beluga, with the words “Ban Fossil Fuel Advertising” strung between its two masts.
Activists also climbed up an oil tank and attached advertisement posters next to Shell’s logo.
“I grew up reading signs about how cigarettes kill you, but never saw similar warnings in petrol stations or fuel tanks. It’s frightening that my favourite sports and museums are sponsored by airlines and car companies,” said Chaja Merk, an activist on board the Greenpeace ship.
“Fossil fuel adverts belong in a museum – not sponsoring them.”
Shell said the company is investing billions of dollars in “lower-carbon energy”. It added: “To help alter the mix of energy Shell sells, we need to grow these new businesses rapidly. That means letting our customers know through advertising or social media what lower-carbon solutions we offer now or are developing, so they can switch when the time is right for them.”
Calls for fossil fuel advertising bans are gaining traction. Earlier this year, Amsterdam imposed a ban in the city’s metro network on ads linked to what it called “fossil products” such as cheap airline tickets. The municipality called the move a first step in a wider move to remove such ads from the Dutch capital’s streets.
The campaign for a law banning ads linked to fossil fuels across the EU needs to gather one million verified signatures in a year. If it succeeds, the EU’s executive commission has to look at the request, but is not obliged to take action.
“This legislation would increase public awareness of products and technologies that are responsible for climate change and other environmental and health harms,” the environmental coalition said on its website.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Why did it take so long for people to start demanding action to be taken ?
@Al Fresco: because it’s so normalised. They’re desensitised to it all and it takes children being murdered again and again for them to care.
@Al Fresco: This isn’t the first time marches and nation-wide protests have occurred. But what do you expect ordinary people to do when there is political obstruction at every turn. Obama tried to introduce gun control legislation and he was shut down by the elements of the GOP in Congress. The Northern Ireland ‘troubles’ weren’t solved by the ordinary citizen. It was a series of circumstances that came together and which allowed the peaceful center politics to carry the extremists in its wake.
@Al Fresco: it’s been demanded before, nothing will happen
@Al Fresco: They get vociferous after it happens in a red state. Won’t make a difference to the guns, god and glory though.
@: yes, I hear what you are saying,
It still baffles me how that it could take so long for a movement to rise up of people demanding “ this must stop, NOW”
Innocent little children are being casually murdered on an almost daily basis,
Make it stop,
NOW!
@Al Fresco: wha…seriously…people have been demanding action to be taken for years…BUT good luck with that when their duly elected officials have been put there by party contributions by the NRA!
If the slaughtering of innocent children doesn’t make them change the laws, I really don’t see how a few thousand people marching in the capital will.
@Sean Murnin: this isn’t the first school shooting and nothing changed in the past
@Jim Buckley Barrett: I am well aware of the history of school shootings in America Jim. That was the point I was making.
Ref the last paragraph, you can’t vote them out unless you have an alternative to vote in. That alternative doesn’t exist. The gun lobby have control of the candidates. When the Democrats had control of the Congress they didn’t change the gun laws either.
@Pat Duggan: they attempted to in 2013 but it was voted down in the senate by a combination of republicans and swing state/obstructionist democrats.
Won’t make a difference to Lynsey Graham, Mitch McConnel etc. and theyre still the ones wholl decide. Awful set-up.
@Rob Gale: what’s awful? The people elected them.
@v39e84kK: I think you meant “That’s awful! The people elected them?”
@v39e84kK: so what…you Reep what u sow?
Nothing will change.
Forget the marches it’s in effective…….starve the NRA. of cash and financial support in America all they care about is money
@David cotter: NRA are bankrupt. How can they be the main obstacle without money?
@v39e84kK: there not bankrupt….gun manufacturers gave them a cash injection to stay afloat
@David cotter: I don’t get it you are saying they are barely afloat how are they influencing all the politicians then? Genuinely I don’t get it, don’t they need a lot of money to buy off the senators etc.
@v39e84kK: NRA is a waning power but the Republicans have moved far more to the right which means that their position is not been dictated by the NRA but by the prevalent Republican POV, which in the end is the same place. No restrictions on guns.
The only way things will change is if enough Dems are elected in the mid terms to have control of both house and Senate (not including Manchin or Sinema)
While the vast majority of people believe in “sensible” gun control, the majority of the money isn’t.
The Republicans will ignore the protests. They are working on banning doors.
American politicians and the NRA don’t have much say in this issue. The US Constitution protects gun ownership and it is not going to change. After the riots millions of Liberals bought guns : it was Blue Cities that burned. Anyway America doesn’t have a gun problem. It has a mental health and culture of violence problem.
@Des Hanrahan: America doesn’t have a gun problem? Are you serious? I would also suggest that Ireland has a mental health problem but we don’t have people walking into schools and shooting children. Wanna know why? Because we don’t have a gun problem!
@Des Hanrahan: evidence on the millions of Liberals claim? The 2nd amendment states “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”, what is not specified is what counts as arms. why is an ak15 allowed but not a rocket launcher? A lot of people would see no difference, the rocket launcher and ak15 are both weapons of war that hold no use for hunting or protecting one’s home but to inflict as much damage as quickly as possible
@Colm O’ Shea: During the riots vast numbers of people who had previously supported gun ownership controls bought guns and found themselves on the other side of the argument. There were so many that they even caused supply problems. The phenomenon was widely covered in American media at the time. So if you want to check it out it shouldn’t be too difficult.
I’m actually surprised the the Irish aren’t out marching/protesting gun control too. We are great at virtual signalling. I do think we should protest and March on the journal, for emojis and a edited button. (Smiley face)
They need millions of people for it to make a difference
Until your 14 year old heart is stopped by a bullet from an AR15 – you will never realise how much you miss your Mom and Dad and Brothers and Sisters and friends. – why are the gun laws so Liberal????????
@Michael Flanagan: isn’t the ar15 banned..wasn’t that the pathetic token jesture they came out with under the Obama administration
@Damien Leen: there was a law which banned them but it expired after 10 years without renewal. Enacted by Clinton and let sunset by W Bush.
Obama tried and failed in 2009
Obviously Americans value their access to guns more important than the lives of their children or they wouldn’t keep voting for these gun nuts who prevent any reform
The last NRA convention attracted more visitors. Personally I would keep up with the free sale of weapons. But I’d make the sale, purchase and possession of ammunition a criminal offence, with 1 month of prison per bullet. Checking the constitution, it only guarantees the right to wear a weapon, but not the right to own ammunition ;)
have your say