Greenpeace argues European-backed projects hamper countries’ ability to decarbonise their own economies

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/18628816

“The global north must take responsibility for reducing its own consumption and building domestic renewable capacity, instead of externalising socio-environmental costs to the global south. We must continue to fight to decolonise and transform the global financial architecture.”

  • solo@slrpnk.netEnglish
    12·
    24 hours ago

    Ok. Well, I suppose if you read this summary and still wonder, I don’t think I can say something in a few sentences to make its content more clear.

    • nahostdeutschland@feddit.orgEnglish
      2·
      23 hours ago

      I know what they are saying. I just don’t think that building a solar farm in Morocco is really colonialist and would push them to still use fossil fuels as claimed. Go to google maps, search for those projects mentioned in the Guardian article and they are being build in the literal desert with enough space around:

      https://www.google.com/maps/search/Noor+3+solar+power+station,+Ouarzazate/@31.0343835,-6.8871281,12839m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDIxOS4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

      However the article is claiming:

      European countries are extracting renewable energy from Morocco and Egypt to “greenwash” their own economies, while leaving north Africans reliant on dirty imported fuels and paying the environmental costs, a Greenpeace report says.

      But why?

      • solo@slrpnk.netEnglish
        12·
        22 hours ago

        I asked you to read the article to make obvious why some charts for Europe are actually kinda rigged. (Edit: Energy consumption from fossil fuel may look “good” for europe, but at what cost for other places) And btw, it was not by mistake that I used the global chart. So from the article:

        both Egypt and Morocco also remain net importers of fossil fuel energy, buying in large quantities of oil and gas to fuel their own economies, while selling their cleaner energy to Europe,

        I thought I would be clear why it is so bad to do these projects where water is scarce. From the article

        Greenpeace’s report argues that European-backed renewable and lower-carbon projects producing energy for export are hampering the two countries’ ability to decarbonise their own economies, displacing local populations and consuming millions of litres of fresh water, in some cases in environments where it was already scarce.

        In relation to your question but why?, for me the answer is the rest of the article and from the summary you mentioned in the following sections which I will not copy-paste:

        • Extractivism and Neocolonialism in the Global South

        • Morocco and Egypt: From extractivism to green colonialism

        I’m sorry, I don’t know what else to say.

        • nahostdeutschland@feddit.orgEnglish
          1·
          22 hours ago

          Yeah, and I’m talking about solar farms, which do not use any water at all. Maybe some to clean the panels, but that is exactly my issue here: The article is throwing stuff together that really doesn’t belong together. Buying gas from Egypt is different than building a solar farm or building industrial hydrogen plants or importing agricultural products.