G1. Progressive Green

.entry-header{display:none;}

The post Tell Congress: No Immunity for Big Oil appeared first on Stop the Money Pipeline.

Horne 5: une épée de Damoclès en zone urbaine surpolluée Quebec, Canada

Image : Horne 5. Crédit : Ressources Falco Ltée, Rouyn-Noranda.(1)

Résumé

Notre cas emblématique de résistance à l’extractivisme concerne la réouverture d’une mine dans la ville de Rouyn-Noranda, au Québec (Canada). Le projet minier Horne 5 de Ressource Falco Ltée vise l’extraction d’un gisement polymétallique dont le principal attrait économique est l’or. Le projet est situé dans le quartier Notre-Dame et sous la Fonderie Horne de Glencore qui, depuis son ouverture en 1927, pollue drastiquement l’air de Rouyn-Noranda. 

 

Le projet Horne 5 figure parmi les projets miniers les plus dangereux, inacceptables et nuisibles des dernières décennies au Québec. En plus de présenter des risques psychosociaux importants, ce projet comporte des dangers catastrophiques pour la sécurité publique, l’équilibre socioéconomique, ainsi que pour la protection de l’environnement.

Image : La Fonderie Horne – Symbole de la pollution à Rouyn-Noranda, 1978. Crédit : Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec.(2)

Image : Les travailleurs de la Mine Noranda — photo prise entre 1962 et 1978. Crédit : Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec, Rouyn-Noranda.

Image : Travailleurs de la Mine Noranda sur la ligne de piquetage pendant la grève de 1946-1947. Crédit : Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec, Rouyn-Noranda.

Image : Marche anti-pollution organisée par le théâtre de Coppe qui avait pour thématique l’enterrement du lac Osisko, 1985. Crédit : Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec, Rouyn-Noranda.

Image : La Fonderie Horne de Glencore sous la neige et les rejets toxiques, photo prise entre 1962 et 1978. Crédit : Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec, Rouyn-Noranda.

Image : La Fonderie Horne de Glencore pollue encore aujourd’hui. Crédit : Guillaume Proulx, 2019. Rouyn-Noranda.

 

Le paysage culturel de Rouyn-Noranda

Rouyn-Noranda est une ville de 42 000 habitant·e·s, située sur le Nitakinan, anicinape aki, territoire anicinabe non cédé. Le contexte politique de Rouyn-Noranda a été marqué par des luttes critiques sur les plans sociaux et juridiques et favorisant historiquement les industries extractives. Cette ville est un îlot de culture (musique, arts visuels, arts performatifs, théâtre, etc.) au sein de la forêt boréale. Rouyn-Noranda est le berceau d’une communauté pluriculturelle, résistante, militante et familiale. Le projet Horne 5 est situé notamment sur le territoire ancestral de la Première Nation de Long Point. Rouyn-Noranda cohabite avec les activités industrielles historiques depuis sa création, il y a 100 ans cette année.

Image : Page Facebook du Collectif 33 (3), Rouyn-Noranda.

Si accepté, le projet minier Horne 5 s’insérerait au cœur même de ce milieu de vie, sous une zone déjà fragilisée par de nombreuses galeries minières abandonnées. La littérature reflète d’ailleurs un manque de données sur les mines en milieu urbain, puisque ces études de cas sont peu nombreuses.

 

Horne 5 – L’épée de Damoclès

Image : Ressources Falco Ltée (4).

Le projet Horne 5 qui prévoit l’extraction de 15 500 tonnes de minerai par jour à des profondeurs allant jusqu’à 2 000 m et générant 80 millions de tonnes de résidus miniers a été soumis au BAPE (Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement) pour une consultation publique en 2024. Cette procédure nécessite, lorsque le gouvernement confie un tel mandat, que le président du BAPE forme une commission d’enquête chargée d’évaluer les impacts du projets., Cette évaluation formelle a mis en lumière  est associé à plusieurs enjeux critiques, dont :

1. Affaissements de terrain et sismicité induite : Sans compter tous les risques liés aux affaissements de terrain et la sismicité induite, notons que le projet est situé sous la Fonderie Horne — composée d’infrastructures désuètes — où des bassins d’acide sulfurique et autres produits toxiques pourraient engendrer de véritables catastrophes environnementales et des risques de mortalités importantes chez les travailleur·euse·s de même qu’au sein de la population. Rouyn-Noranda aura d’ailleurs déjà été témoin d’affaissement de terrain soudain en 2013, en plein coeur du parc Mouska — une aire de détente et de jeux familiale. Le trou de plus de 3 mètres se trouvait au-dessus du site de l’ancienne mine Chadbourne, l’une des nombreuses mines abandonnées dans les sous-sols de la ville. (5)

2. Droits ancestraux : L’apparence de contravention aux droits ancestraux de la Première Nation de Long Pointe constitue un enjeu important à ce projet minier. En effet, lors de la commission d’enquête, les réponses fournies par le gouvernement ont soulevé « des doutes raisonnables à l’effet que l’obligation constitutionnelle de consulter les autochtones détenteurs de droits ancestraux n’a pas été respectée pour l’ensemble des communautés dont le territoire est visé par le projet minier Horne 5, à commencer par la Première Nation de Long Pointe. ». (6)

3. Protection de l’eau : En plus de menacer l’intégrité de nombreux plans d’eau par l’implantation de pipelines de prélèvement d’eau douce, le projet Horne 5 comporte de nombreux risques de contamination grave du lac Dufault, soit le lac qui approvisionne l’unique station de pompage en eau potable de la ville de Rouyn-Noranda. Cette contamination pourrait se matérialiser par des fuites des pipelines de 17 km transportant les résidus miniers ou des fuites provenant des digues des parcs à résidus.

4. Écoblanchiment : La compagnie utilise un discours d’écoblanchiment quant aux actions liées à son plan de gestion du passif minier du projet, alors que leur plan en ce qui concerne les résidus miniers menace sérieusement l’environnement et la santé humaine. En effet, après avoir sélectionné un site non restauré pour accumuler les résidus projetés, le promoteur cherche à faire croire à la communauté qu’ajouter des matières acidogènes, lixiviables et cyanurées dans l’environnement puisse constituer une option avantageuse.

5. Qualité de l’air : Les activités industrielles réalisées par la Fonderie Horne de Glencore dans la ville de Rouyn-Noranda génèrent des taux alarmants de métaux lourds (arsenic, baryum, cadmium, cuivre, nickel et plomb). Les niveaux inacceptables de pollution atmosphérique générés par la fonderie, ainsi que la complicité du gouvernement qui les tolère constituent l’un des scandales environnementaux les plus persistants et les plus controversés au Québec. La littérature démontre d’ailleurs que la population de Rouyn-Noranda est exposée à un surplus de cancers du poumon, de maladies pulmonaires obstructives chroniques, de problèmes neurologiques et à des retards de croissance intra-utérins. La Fonderie Horne est encore autorisée à opérer la fonte de déchets provenant des quatre coins de la planète pour en extraire le cuivre, sous le seuil de 45 ng/m³ d’arsenic dans l’air à Rouyn-Noranda. La compagnie réclame actuellement un report jusqu’en 2030 pour l’atteinte d’un seuil intérimaire de 15 ng/m³, nonobstant la norme québécoise de 3 ng/m³. Pourtant, l’Institut national de santé publique du Québec stipulait en 2022 que si le seuil de 15 ng/m³ protège les groupes vulnérables (comme les enfants) contre certains effets, la seule cible à considérer comme sécuritaire demeure la norme de 3 ng/m³. Le projet Horne 5 cherche ainsi à s’insérer dans un milieu où les normes sont déjà dépassées, contrevenant au régime d’application de l’article 197 du Règlement sur l’assainissement de l’atmosphère. L’autorisation d’un nouveau projet minier ne ferait ainsi qu’aggraver une situation illégale tolérée depuis trop longtemps.

 

Credit: Guillaume Proulx, 2019, Rouyn-Noranda.

 

6. Coûts sociaux et économiques multiples : Les impacts socioéconomiques incluent d’abord l’augmentation de la demande en logement induite par l’arrivée de nouveaux travailleurs et de leur famille. Cette demande se manifeste malgré un taux d’inoccupation extrêmement faible de 0,9 % en 2025 (7), ce qui est nettement inférieur au seuil d’équilibre de 3 % reconnu au Québec. Autrement dit, Rouyn-Noranda est déjà confrontée à une grave crise du logement qui ne fera qu’empirer avec l’arrivée de nouveaux travailleurs. « Par ailleurs, la relocalisation progressive de résident·e·s pour la création d’une zone tampon à proximité de la Fonderie Horne — mesure à venir après 2028 — témoigne de l’ampleur des défis environnementaux et sanitaires avec lesquels la ville et sa population doivent (déjà) composer» (8). S’ajoutent à cela l’anxiété et la fatigue sociale de la population ainsi que les menaces sur l’attractivité et la vitalité de Rouyn-Noranda sur le long terme.

Agenda des luttes et de la résistance

Voici un survol de l’agenda de la mobilisation citoyenne en lien avec le projet Horne 5.

• 17 mai 2024 | Appel à la mobilisation citoyenne

Diffusion d’un communiqué de presse qui invitait la population de Rouyn-Noranda à assister à la première rencontre d’information au sujet du projet Horne 5. 

• 21 mai 2024 | Envoi d’une lettre officielle au ministre de l’Environnement et d’une lettre officielle au président du BAPE 

Envoi d’une lettre officielle au ministre faisant la demande conjointe d’audiences publiques menées par le Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement (BAPE) concernant le projet Horne 5 ainsi que d’une lettre officielle au président du BAPE faisant la demande conjointe de tenir une rencontre préparatoire à l’intention du public avant l’audience publique. La rencontre préparatoire a eu lieu le 13 août 2024.

• 27 juin 2024 | Invitation à un atelier de planification de la participation communautaire

Diffusion d’un communiqué de presse invitant les citoyen·ne·s à un atelier gratuit le 7 juillet 2024 sur la planification d’une participation aux audiences du Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement (BAPE) pour le projet minier Horne 5.

• 14 et 26 août 2024 | Participation à des rencontres stratégiques avec les citoyen·ne·s de Rouyn-Noranda

Deux rencontres stratégiques tout juste avant le début de la commission d’enquête.

• 27 août 2024 | Début des audiences du BAPE à Rouyn-Noranda : Plusieurs questions cruciales à poser sur l’inquiétant projet minier Horne 5

Diffusion d’un communiqué de presse stipulant que : « La société civile est prête pour l’exercice. Malgré le déclenchement du dossier en plein été et une présentation de la documentation anarchique et sans préavis de la part de la compagnie, les groupes sont parvenus à étudier en détail le dossier en mettant leurs ressources en commun.»

Image : Rouyn-Noranda pendant le Bureau d’audiences publiques de l’environnement au sujet du projet Horne 5. Crédit : Radio-Canada / Lise Millette (9)

• Du 27 au 29 août 2024 | Participation aux cinq séances de la première partie des audiences publiques du BAPE à Rouyn-Noranda.

Période d’information et de présentation des tenants et aboutissants du projet ainsi que des enjeux environnementaux. Les citoyen·ne·s peuvent notamment poser des questions au promoteur. 

 

• 16 au 26 septembre 2024 | Période de temps octroyée à la transmission de points de vue à l’oral, par le biais d’un mémoire, par commentaire ou par image commentée.

Le 26 septembre était la date limite pour le dépôt des mémoires. La Coalition Québec Meilleure Mine et MiningWatch Canada ont fait un dépôt d’un mémoire conjoint concernant le projet minier Horne 5 de Ressource Falco Ltée.

 

• 30 septembre au 3 octobre 2024 | Deuxième partie d’audience publique du BAPE pour le projet minier Horne 5 de Ressources Falco.

Cette deuxième partie permet aux personnes de s’exprimer sur le sujet. C’est l’occasion d’émettre, par exemple, des recommandations ou même de faire la présentation à l’oral de son mémoire.

 

• Automne 2024 | Recommandation d’octroi d’un mandat d’analyse des risques sismiques de la part des autorités de santé régionales.

Les autorités de santé régionales (le CISSS-AT) ont recommandé au ministère d’exiger des études approfondies sur les risques de tremblements de terre causés par la mine. La préoccupation majeure concerne le centre de radio-oncologie — également situé dans le quartier Notre-Dame — de Rouyn-Noranda, où les vibrations pourraient endommager les équipements de soin.

• 23 décembre 2024 | Dépôt du rapport du BAPE au ministre.

 

Le nerf de la guerre

C’est par le processus du Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement (BAPE) que la Commission d’enquête a officiellement conclu, le 7 janvier 2025, que le projet Horne 5 est inacceptable. Le rapport stipule que le projet ne répond pas aux exigences minimales de sécurité, de santé publique et de protection de l’environnement. Un réseau important d’organisations s’est uni pour se tenir debout face à Ressource Falco Ltée avant et pendant la Commission d’enquête menée par le BAPE.

 

Portrait des combattant·e·s

Premières Nations

• Première Nation de Long Point (LPFN) : Suite à la commission d’enquête, la Première Nation se questionne au sujet des répercussions du projet sur la qualité de l’air, de l’eau et sur l’économie locale. Elle exige que des études environnementales et socioéconomiques soient menées directement par la communauté pour protéger ses droits ancestraux. La LPFN s’est exprimée lors des audiences du BAPE, a fait valoir ses droits sur son territoire traditionnel non cédé et a insisté sur le fait que le projet doit obtenir le consentement préalable et éclairé de la LPFN, tel que détaillé dans son communiqué de presse : « No Consent = No project ».

 

Groupes environnementaux

• Conseil Régional de l’environnement de l’Abitibi-Témiscamingue — Organisme sans but lucratif (OSBL) visant à promouvoir la conservation et l’amélioration de la qualité de l’environnement) : a soumis 162 recommandations au BAPE, dénonçant le manque de considération des effets cumulatifs du projet. Le CREAT souligne l’insécurité sanitaire illustrée par les « gestes simples » (nettoyage par aspirateur avec filtres HEPA, alimentation spécifique pour limiter l’absorption de plomb et de cadmium) suggérés à la population par la Santé publique, témoignant d’un milieu déjà saturé de contaminants et de stresseurs environnementaux.

• Eau Secours — OSBL basée à Montréal visant la promotion de la protection et de la gestion responsable de l’eau au Québec : rappelle à la deuxième partie du BAPE le manque flagrant de cohérence dans la proposition de la compagnie de créer un parc à résidus minier (prévision de 40 millions de tonnes de résidus hautement réactifs et acidogènes) directement dans le bassin versant de la source d’eau potable de la ville, soit le Lac Dufaut. L’organisme souligne que le promoteur n’a d’ailleurs pas présenté de plan d’urgence en cas de bris d’installations.

• Action Boréale — OSBL basée en Abitibi-Témiscamingue visant à promouvoir la préservation des forêts boréales du Québec : Rappelle au gouvernement, suite au dépôt du dur rapport du BAPE, son rôle de responsable de l’environnement. L’Action Boréale affirme que le projet comporte plus de répercussions négatives que d’avantages pour la communauté.

• Société pour vaincre la pollution (SVP) — OSBL oeuvrant à défendre les droits des citoyen·ne·s à un environnement sain : Apporte un soutien, affirmant qu’« il s’agit d’une mine de trop pour Rouyn-Noranda ».

• MiningWatch Canada — organisation non gouvernementale basée à Ottawa, agissant à titre de chien de garde de l’industrie minière : Demande encore à ce jour au gouvernement de cesser tout investissement dans ce projet nocif et de confirmer publiquement son opposition.

• Regroupement vigilance mines de l’Abitibi et du Témiscamingue (Revimat) — OSBL qui milite pour améliorer la Loi sur les mines et pour la protection de l’environnement : réitère son opposition au projet dans un communiqué de presse conjoint de réaction notamment puisque « la possibilité de mouvements sismiques peut causer des dommages aux structures de la fonderie et libérer des produits toxiques dans l’air ». 

• Comité Arrêt des rejets d’émissions toxiques (ARET) — groupe citoyen qui milite pour la réduction des polluants atmosphériques  : fais, pour sa part, référence à la qualité de l’air dans ce même communiqué de presse : « Nous comptons donc que ces recommandations mettront fin au projet, car la population est déjà surexposée à des rejets toxiques de façon inacceptable ».

Santé, justice sociale, et solidarité communautaire

• Mères au Front (Rouyn-Noranda) — groupe local du mouvement pancanadien Mères au front qui rassemble des mères et grands-mères mobilisées par le désir d’agir pour protéger l’avenir de nos enfants et la vie sur terre face à l’urgence climatique. Ce groupe, agissant uniquement par devoir de protection envers les générations futures, place au cœur de sa lutte le droit à la santé, à la sécurité et à un environnement sain. Elles considèrent que l’industrie minière est incompatible avec les périmètres urbains et s’opposent au projet Horne 5 parce qu’il accroîtrait la vulnérabilité d’une population déjà surexposée à de nombreux contaminants neurotoxiques.

Image : Manifestation organisée par Mères au Front le 13 octobre 2024 à Rouyn-Noranda pour rappeler au gouvernement Legault (premier ministre à l’époque) que la situation qui perdure à Rouyn-Noranda est inacceptable. Crédit : Maude Desbois (10)

• Centre Entre-Femmes : Présent dans la communauté depuis plus de 30 ans, cet organisme œuvre à l’amélioration des conditions de vie des femmes. Sa lutte contre le projet Horne 5 porte sur la pauvreté et les inégalités économiques : les emplois créés étant majoritairement masculins, le centre dénonce un accroissement des écarts salariaux en région industrielle et demande une analyse des impacts selon le genre, craignant également une hausse des risques de violence et des problématiques liées à la consommation d’alcool et de drogue.

 

• Coopérative d’habitation Boréale : S’opposant à la vision de 15 ans du promoteur, la Coopérative défend un cycle de développement urbain sur 40 ans en vue d’assurer l’avenir du quartier. Sa lutte met en lumière les coûts sociaux invisibles : elle rappelle que les populations portent dans leur chair les détresses (suicides, violences conjugales) liées aux fluctuations du prix de l’or, des drames humains dont aucun budget ne prévoit d’éponger les conséquences. La Coopérative a reçu une très forte demande dans les dernières années, demande auquel elle ne peut répondre.

 

 

• L’Association des locataires de l’Abitibi-Témiscamingue : s’oppose aussi au projet Horne 5 et a participé au BAPE, revendiquant notamment au sujet de la pression que ce projet viendrait ajouter à cette « zone sacrifiée ». Cette association considère qu’un logement est « un lieu où toustes devrait être en sécurité jour et nuit. ». La ville de Rouyn-Noranda est en crise du logement depuis près de 15 ans. Leur argumentaire soulignait aussi qu’en plus de toutes les dangerosités soulevées du projet, le milieu a plus souvent qu’autrement le fardeau de trouver des solutions et les accommodements pour la population. Cette pression supplémentaire n’est absolument pas souhaitable sur les organismes communautaires de Rouyn-Noranda.

L’oppression systémique de l’extraction

 

Au Québec, les communautés visées par des projets miniers sont opprimées par un flagrant manque de suivi de la part du gouvernement dans les investissements massifs qu’il octroie au secteur minier, ainsi que par l’accélération des projets miniers au détriment des communautés. 

Pour sa part, Ressources Falco Ltée. exerce une rétention et une déformation de l’information perpétuelle, en plus de manquer d’écoute face aux inquiétudes de la population et de considération envers les évaluations environnementales. Le dépôt récent (sorti dans les médias à la fin mai 2026) du rapport d’experts mandaté pour l’analyse des risques associés à la sismicité abonde en ce sens. Ce rapport tant attendu par la population n’a pas éclairé le flou qui persiste quant à la sécurité des personnes et du centre de radio-oncologie. Une demande d’accès à l’information n’a permis d’obtenir qu’une version entièrement caviardée dudit rapport, empêchant de connaître presque l’entièreté du contenu. 

Parallèlement, la communauté de Rouyn-Noranda subit un cycle historique de menaces de fermeture industrielle de la part de Glencore, créant une polarisation profonde au sein des familles et de la population, plaçant les citoyen·ne·s dans un faux dilemme permanent entre survie économique ainsi que de la protection de l’environnement et de la santé globale. 

Toustes retiennent leur souffle depuis longtemps maintenant.

Un an et demi après le dépôt du rapport du BAPE, le projet Horne 5 franchit ses dernières étapes d’évaluation d’impacts. À ce stade critique précédant une possible exploitation, les communautés sont dans l’attente de la décision finale concernant le décret d’autorisation prétendu pour juin 2026, selon le dernier Comité consultatif de la compagnie en date du 18 mars 2026. Le paysage culturel de la ville dépend désormais de ce décret gouvernemental, qui déterminera si les autorités choisissent d’ignorer ou de respecter le constat d’inacceptabilité émis par le BAPE. Il est sincèrement souhaité que la décision finale serve le meilleur intérêt de la population locale et de la Première Nation Anicinape, tout en garantissant la protection de l’environnement ainsi que la qualité de l’eau et de l’air.

À ce jour, toutefois, le réseau de militant·e·s demeure mobilisé. 

Et dans quel but?

Une victoire signifierait le rejet et l’arrêt définitif du projet Horne 5 afin de garantir la sécurité et la santé des citoyen·ne·s de Rouyn-Noranda grâce à une considération réaliste des impacts cumulatifs du projet, de la capacité de support du milieu où siège le projet et du rythme effréné de l’agenda pro-extractiviste des entreprises qui prisent la région de l’Abitibi-Témiscamingue. En attendant, nous sommes fier·ère·s de dire que les gens de Rouyn-Noranda sont une grande inspiration pour la Coalition Québec meilleure mine et que leurs efforts représentent un exemple à suivre. Les moyens pris par la communauté pour se mobiliser contre tous ces géants extractivistes est « admirable à l’échelle mondiale ».

Image : La Fonderie Horne au coucher du soleil. Crédit : Guillaume Proulx, 2020, Rouyn-Noranda.

Image : Quartier Notre-Dame, la nuit. Crédit : Guillaume Proulx, 2019, Rouyn-Noranda.

Notes de fin d’ouvrage

 

1 – Profil Facebook de l’entreprise : https://www.facebook.com/RessourcesFalco/

 

2-  Rivard, J. (December 2021). Démarrage de l’usine d’acide sulfurique de la fonderie Horne – 20 décembre 1989 | Héros sans panache | Société d’histoire de Rouyn-Noranda.http://shrn.ca/des-jours-qui-ont-fait-rouyn-noranda/20-decembre-1989-demarrage-de-lusine-dacide-sulfurique-de-la-fonderie-horne

 

3 – Page Facebook du Collectif 33 :https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=122104798005292317&set=pcb.122104801341292317&locale=fr_CA

 

4 –  Cotnoir, J.-M. (May 25, 2026).Horne 5 : le flou persiste quant aux risques sismiques. Radio-Canada.https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/2256119/horne-5-mine-risque-sismique-cisss-at

 

5 –  Luneau, A.-C. (2013, February 6). Rouyn-Noranda : le sol s’affaisse au parc Mouska. Radio-Canada.  https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/599141/trou-parc-mouska

 

6 –  QMM and MWC. (2024, September 26). Mémoire | BAPE projet minier Horne 5 de Ressources Falco à Rouyn-Noranda | Mining Watch Canada. https://miningwatch.ca/fr/blog/2024/9/26/memoire-bape-projet-minier-horne-5-de-ressources-falco-rouyn-noranda

 

7-  OBVAT. (2026, 4 juin). Taux d’inoccupation des logements, Abitibi-Témiscamingue et Québec, 1996 à 2026p – L’Observatoire de l’Abitibi-Témiscamingue. https://www.observat.qc.ca/statistiques/taux-dinoccupation-des-logements-abitibi-temiscamingue-et-quebec-1996-a-2026p/ 

8- BAPE, Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement. (2024).Projet Horne 5 à Rouyn-Noranda par Ressources Falco ltée: rapport d’enquête et d’audience publique. Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement. https://www.bape.gouv.qc.ca/fr/dossiers/mine_horne5/

 

9 –  Millette, L. (2025, 4 mars). Projet Horne 5 : Québec freine l’élan de Ressources Falco. Radio-Canada. https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/2145532/falco-horne-fonderie-rouyn-noranda-mine

10 –  Fortin-Rondeau, I. (2025, 18 novembre). Le Pudding à l’arsenic : une version industrielle signée Fonderie Horne. https://www.meresaufront.org/billets-de-blogue/le-pudding-a-larsenic-une-version-industrielle-signee-fonderie-horne

 

Horne 5: A Sword of Damocles Hanging Over a Heavily Polluted Urban Area Quebec, Canada

Image: Horne 5. Credit: Ressources Falco Ltée, Rouyn-Noranda. (1)

Abstract

Our emblematic case of resistance to extractivism concerns the reopening of a mine in the city of Rouyn-Noranda, Quebec (Canada). Falco Resources Ltd’s Horne 5 mining project aims to extract a polymetallic deposit whose primary economic value lies in gold. The project is located in the Notre-Dame neighborhood and beneath Glencore’s Horne Smelter, which, since its opening in 1927, has drastically polluted the air in Rouyn-Noranda. The Horne 5 project ranks among the most dangerous, unacceptable, and harmful mining projects in Quebec in recent decades. In addition to posing significant psychosocial risks, this project entails catastrophic dangers for public safety, socioeconomic stability, and environmental protection.

Image: The Horne Smelter – A symbol of pollution in Rouyn-Noranda, 1978. Credit: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec. (2)

Image: Workers at the Noranda Mine—photo taken between 1962 and 1978. Credit: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec, Rouyn-Noranda.

Image: Noranda Mine workers on the picket line during the 1946–1947 strike. Credit: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec, Rouyn-Noranda.

Image: Anti-pollution march organized by the Théâtre de Coppe, themed around the “burial” of Lake Osisko, 1985. Credit: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec, Rouyn-Noranda.

Image: Glencore’s Horne Smelter under snow and toxic waste, photo taken between 1962 and 1978. Credit: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec, Rouyn-Noranda.

Image: Glencore’s Horne Smelter continues to pollute to this day. Credit: Guillaume Proulx, 2019. Rouyn-Noranda.

 

The Cultural Landscape of Rouyn-Noranda

Rouyn-Noranda is a city of 42,000 residents, located on Nitakinan, Anicinape Aki, unceded Anishinaabe territory. The political context of Rouyn-Noranda has been marked by critical social and legal struggles and including a long legacy of tensions with extractive industries. This city is an island of culture (music, visual arts, performing arts, theater, etc.) within the boreal forest. Rouyn-Noranda is the home of a multicultural, resilient, activist, and family-oriented community. The Horne 5 project is located notably on the ancestral territory of the Long Point First Nation. Industrial activities have been a central part of Rouyn-Noranda’s development since the city’s founding 100 years ago this year.

Image: Facebook page of Collectif 33 (3) , Rouyn-Noranda.

If approved, the Horne 5 mining project would be situated at the very heart of this dynamic city, in a vibrant residential area, beneath an area already weakened by numerous abandoned mine tunnels. The literature also reflects a lack of data on mining in urban areas, as there are few such case studies.

 

Horne 5 – A Sword of Damocles

Image: Falco Resources Ltée. (4)

The Horne 5 project, which plans to extract 15,500 tons of ore per day from depths of up to 2,000 meters and generate 80 million tons of mine tailings, was entrusted to the BAPE (Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement) for a public review in 2024. As is standard procedure when the government grants such a mandate, the BAPE president formed a commission of inquiry to evaluate the project’s impacts. This formal examination brought to light several critical issues including:

1. Land subsidence and induced seismicity: Even before considering the risks associated with ground subsidence and induced seismicity, it is worth noting that the project is located beneath the Horne Smelter—an industrial complex with outdated infrastructure—where ponds of sulfuric acid and other toxic substances could cause major environmental disasters and pose significant risks of fatalities to workers as well as the general population. Rouyn-Noranda has, in fact, already witnessed a sudden ground subsidence in 2013, right in the heart of Mouska Park—a family recreation and playground area. The hole, over 3 meters wide, was located above the site of the former Chadbourne Mine, one of the many abandoned mines beneath the city. (5)

2. Ancestral Rights: The apparent violation of the ancestral rights of Long Point First Nation is a major issue in this mining project. Indeed, during the commission of inquiry, the government’s responses raised “reasonable doubts that the constitutional obligation to consult Indigenous peoples holding ancestral rights was not respected for all communities whose territory is affected by the Horne 5 mining project, starting with the Long Point First Nation.” (6)

3. Water Protection: In addition to threatening the integrity of numerous water bodies through the installation of freshwater intake pipelines, the Horne 5 project poses numerous risks of serious contamination of Lake Dufault, the lake that supplies the sole pumping station in the drinking water supply of the city of Rouyn-Noranda. This contamination could result from leaks in the 17-kilometer pipelines transporting mine tailings or from leaks in the tailings pond dams.

4. Greenwashing: The company uses greenwashing rhetoric regarding actions related to its project’s mining liability management plan, even though its plan for handling mine tailings poses a serious threat to the environment and human health. Indeed, after selecting an unreclaimed site to store the planned tailings, the developer is trying to convince the community that adding acid-generating, leachable, and cyanide-containing materials to the environment could be a beneficial option.

5. Air Quality: The industrial activities carried out by Glencore’s Horne Smelter in the city of Rouyn-Noranda generate alarming levels of heavy metals (arsenic, barium, cadmium, copper, nickel, and lead). The company’s unacceptable levels of air pollution from the smelter and the government’s complicity in allowing it are one the most persistent and controversial environmental scandals in Quebec. The literature shows that the population of Rouyn-Noranda is exposed to an increased incidence of lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, neurological problems, and intra-uterine growth retardation. The Horne Smelter is still authorized to operate by smelting waste from all over the world to extract copper, provided that arsenic levels in the air in Rouyn-Noranda remain below 45 ng/m³. The company is currently seeking an extension until 2030 to meet an interim threshold of 15 ng/m³, despite Quebec’s standard of 3 ng/m³. However, the Institut national de santé publique du Québec stated in 2022 that while the 15 ng/m³ threshold protects vulnerable groups (such as children) from certain effects, the only target to be considered safe remains the 3 ng/m³ standard. The Horne 5 project thus seeks to operate in an environment where standards are already being exceeded, violating the enforcement regime of Section 197 of the Clean Air Regulation. Authorizing a new mining project would therefore only exacerbate an illegal situation that has been tolerated for far too long.

Credit: Guillaume Proulx, 2019, Rouyn-Noranda.

 

6. Multiple social and economic costs: The socioeconomic impacts include, first and foremost, the aggravation of the housing crisis. The arrival of new workers and their families will lead to an increased demand for housing. This demand occurs despite an extremely low vacancy rate of 0,9 % recorded in 2025 (7), which is significantly below the 3% balance threshold recognized in Quebec. In other words, Rouyn-Noranda is already facing a severe housing crisis that will be further exacerbated by the arrival of new workers. “Furthermore, the gradual relocation of residents to create a buffer zone near the Horne Smelter — a measure to be implemented after 2028 — underscores the scale of the environmental and health challenges that the city and its population must (already) contend with.” (8) Added to this are the population’s anxiety and social fatigue, as well as threats to Rouyn-Noranda’s long-term attractiveness and vitality.

Timeline of Resistance

Here is an overview of the timeline of citizen mobilization related to the Horne 5 project.

• May 17, 2024 | Call for citizen mobilization

Release of a press release inviting the residents of Rouyn-Noranda to attend the first information meeting regarding the Horne 5 project. 

• May 21, 2024 | Official letters sent to the Minister of the Environment and the President of the BAPE 

An official letter was sent to the Minister requesting that the Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement (BAPE – Office of Public Hearings on the Environment) hold public hearings regarding the Horne 5 project, along with an official letter to the President of the BAPE requesting a preparatory meeting for the public prior to the public hearing. The preparatory meeting took place on August 13, 2024.

• June 27, 2024 | Invitation to a community engagement planning workshop

Release of a press release inviting citizens to a free workshop on July 7, 2024, on planning participation in the Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement (BAPE) hearings for the Horne 5 mining project.

• August 14 and 26, 2024 | Participation in strategic meetings with residents of Rouyn-Noranda

Two strategic meetings just before the start of the public inquiry.

• August 27, 2024 | Start of the BAPE hearings in Rouyn-Noranda: Several crucial questions to ask about the troubling Horne 5 mining project

Release of a press release stating: “Civil society is ready for the process. Despite the case being launched in the middle of summer and the company’s chaotic and unannounced presentation of documentation, the groups managed to study the case in detail by pooling their resources.”

Image: Rouyn-Noranda during the Bureau d’audiences publiques de l’environnement (BAPE) hearing on the Horne 5 project. Credit: Radio-Canada / Lise Millette (9)

• August 27–29, 2024 | Participation in the five sessions of the first part of the BAPE public hearings in Rouyn-Noranda.

Period for providing information and presenting the ins and outs of the project as well as environmental issues. Citizens may, in particular, ask questions of the proponent.

 

• September 16–26, 2024 | Period set aside for the submission of views orally, via a brief, through comments, or via annotated images.

September 26 was the deadline for submitting briefs. The Coalition Québec Meilleure Mine and MiningWatch Canada submitted a joint brief regarding Falco Resources Ltd.’s Horne 5 mining project.

 

• September 30 to October 3, 2024 | Second part of the BAPE public hearing for Falco Resources’ Horne 5 mining project.

This second part allows individuals to speak on the subject. It is an opportunity to, for example, make recommendations or even present one’s brief orally.

 

• Fall 2024 | Recommendation by regional health authorities to commission a seismic risk analysis.

Regional health authorities (the CISSS-AT) recommended that the ministry require in-depth studies on the risks of earthquakes caused by the mine. The primary concern is the radiation oncology center—also located in the Notre-Dame neighborhood—in Rouyn-Noranda, where vibrations could damage medical equipment.

 

• December 23, 2024 | Submission of the BAPE report to the minister.

 

The turning point

It was through the process of the Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement (BAPE) that the Commission of Inquiry officially concluded, on January 7, 2025, that the Horne 5 project is unacceptable. The report states that the project does not meet minimum requirements for safety, public health, and environmental protection. A large network of organizations came together to stand up to Ressource Falco Ltd. before and during the BAPE-led Commission of Inquiry.

 

Portraits of the activists

First Nations

• Long Point First Nation (LPFN) : Following the inquiry, the First Nation has raised concerns about the project’s impact on air and water quality, as well as on the local economy. It is demanding that environmental and socioeconomic studies be conducted directly by the community to protect its ancestral rights. The LPFN spoke at the BAPE hearings, asserted its rights over its traditional unceded territory, and emphasized that the project must obtain the LPFN’s prior and informed consent, as detailed in its press release: “No Consent = No Project”.

 

Environmental Groups

• Abitibi-Témiscamingue Regional Environmental Council — A non-profit organization (NPO) dedicated to promoting environmental conservation and improving environmental quality. They submitted 162 recommendations to the BAPE, criticizing the lack of consideration for the project’s cumulative effects. The CREAT highlights the health risks illustrated by the “simple measures” (vacuuming with HEPA filters, specific dietary guidelines to limit lead and cadmium absorption) suggested to the public by provincial public health authorities, reflecting an environment already saturated with contaminants and environmental stressors.

 

• Eau Secours — a Montreal-based non-profit organization dedicated to promoting the protection and responsible management of water in Quebec. Eau Secours has pointed out to the second part of the BAPE the glaring lack of consistency in the company’s proposal to create a mine tailings pond (projected to hold 40 million tons of highly reactive and acid-generating tailings) directly within the watershed of the city’s drinking water source, Lake Dufaut. The organization also points out that the developer has not presented an emergency plan in the event of a facility failure.

 

• Action Boréale — a non-profit organization based in Abitibi-Témiscamingue dedicated to promoting the preservation of Quebec’s boreal forests. They have consistently reminded the government, following the release of the BAPE’s scathing report, of its responsibility for the environment. Action Boréale asserts that the project has more negative impacts than benefits for the community.

 

• Société pour vaincre la pollution (SVP) — a non-profit organization working to defend citizens’ rights to a healthy environment: Offers support and states that “this is one mine too many for Rouyn-Noranda.”

 

• MiningWatch Canada — an Ottawa-based non-governmental organization acting as a watchdog for the mining industry. They continue to call on the government to cease all investment in this harmful project and to publicly confirm its opposition.

 

• Regroupement vigilance mines de l’Abitibi et du Témiscamingue (Revimat) — a non-profit organization advocating for improvements to the Mining Act and environmental protection. They have consistently reiterated their opposition to the project in a joint press release, noting in particular that “the possibility of seismic activity could damage the smelter’s structures and release toxic substances into the air.” 

 

• Comité Arrêt des rejets d’émissions toxiques (ARET) — a citizens’ group advocating for the reduction of air pollutants. They refer to air quality issues in the same press release: “We therefore expect these recommendations to put an end to the project, as the population is already unacceptably overexposed to toxic emissions.”

 

Health, Social Justice, and Community Solidarity

• Mères au Front (Rouyn-Noranda) — a local chapter of the pan-Canadian Mères au Front movement, which brings together mothers and grandmothers driven by a desire to act to protect our children’s future and life on Earth in the face of the climate emergency. This group, acting solely out of a duty to protect future generations, places the right to health, safety, and a clean environment at the heart of its struggle. They believe that the mining industry is incompatible with urban areas and oppose the Horne 5 project because it would increase the vulnerability of a population already overexposed to numerous neurotoxic contaminants.

Image: Protest organized by Mères au Front on October 13, 2024, in Rouyn-Noranda to remind the Legault government that the ongoing situation in Rouyn-Noranda is unacceptable. Credit: Maude Desbois (10)

 

• Centre Entre-Femmes: Active in the community for over 30 years, this organization works to improve women’s living conditions. Its opposition to the Horne 5 project centers on poverty and economic inequalities: since the jobs created are primarily male- , the center condemns the widening wage gaps in industrial regions and calls for a gender-based impact analysis, also fearing an increase in the risk of violence and issues related to alcohol and drug use.

 

• Coopérative d’habitation Boréale: Opposing the developer’s 15-year vision, the housing cooperative advocates for a 40-year urban development cycle to secure the neighborhood’s future. Its struggle highlights the invisible social costs: it points out that communities bear the brunt of the hardships (suicides, domestic violence) linked to fluctuations in the price of gold—human tragedies for which no budget provides to absorb the consequences. The Cooperative has received a very high volume of demand in recent years, a demand it cannot meet.

 

• The Abitibi-Témiscamingue Tenants’ Association also opposes the Horne 5 project and participated in the BAPE, raising concerns in particular about the pressure this project would place on this “sacrificed zone.” This association considers housing to be “a place where everyone should be safe day and night.” The city of Rouyn-Noranda has been in a housing crisis for nearly 15 years. Their argument also emphasized that, in addition to all the dangers raised by the project, the community more often than not bears the burden of finding solutions and accommodations for the population. This additional pressure is absolutely undesirable for Rouyn-Noranda’s community organizations.

The systemic oppression of extraction

 

In Quebec, communities affected by mining projects are oppressed by a glaring lack of oversight by the government regarding the massive investments it grants to the mining sector, as well as by the acceleration of mining projects at the expense of communities. 

For its part, Falco Resources Ltd. engages in the constant withholding and distortion of information, in addition to failing to listen to the public’s concerns and to take environmental assessments seriously. The recent filing (released to the media in late May 2026) of the expert report commissioned to analyze the risks associated with seismic activity supports this view. This report, so eagerly awaited by the public, has failed to clarify the uncertainty that persists regarding the safety of people and the radiation oncology center. A freedom of information request yielded only a heavily redacted version of the report, making it impossible to access nearly all of its content. 

At the same time, the community of Rouyn-Noranda is enduring a historic cycle of threats of industrial closure from Glencore, creating deep polarization within families and the population, and placing citizens in a constant false dilemma between economic survival and the protection of the environment and overall health. 

Everyone has been holding their breath for a long time now.

A year and a half after the BAPE report was submitted, the Horne 5 project is entering the final stages of its environmental impact assessment. At this critical juncture preceding potential mining operations, communities are awaiting the final decision regarding the authorization decree, which is reportedly scheduled for June 2026, according to the company’s latest Advisory Committee meeting dated March 18, 2026. The city’s cultural landscape now hinges on this government decree, which will determine whether authorities choose to ignore or respect the BAPE’s finding of unacceptability. The community is sincerely holding out hope that the final decision will serve the best interests of the local population and the Anicinape First Nation, while ensuring the protection of the environment as well as water and air quality.

To date, however, the network of activists remains mobilized. 

 

And to what end?

A victory would mean the rejection and permanent stop of the Horne 5 project in order to ensure the safety and health of the citizens of Rouyn-Noranda through a realistic assessment of the project’s cumulative impacts, the carrying capacity of the project site, and the relentless pace of the pro-extractive agenda of companies targeting the Abitibi-Témiscamingue region. In the meantime, we are proud to say that the people of Rouyn-Noranda are a great inspiration to the Coalition Québec meilleure mine, and that their efforts serve as an example to follow for other mining struggles throughout the province. The measures taken by the community to mobilize against all these extractive giants are “admirable on a global scale.”

Image: The Horne Smelter at sunset. Credit: Guillaume Proulx, 2020, Rouyn-Noranda.

Image: Notre-Dame neighborhood at night. Credit: Guillaume Proulx, 2019, Rouyn-Noranda.

Endnotes

 

1 – Company Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/RessourcesFalco/

 

2-  Rivard, J. (December 2021). Démarrage de l’usine d’acide sulfurique de la fonderie Horne – 20 décembre 1989 | Héros sans panache | Société d’histoire de Rouyn-Noranda.http://shrn.ca/des-jours-qui-ont-fait-rouyn-noranda/20-decembre-1989-demarrage-de-lusine-dacide-sulfurique-de-la-fonderie-horne

 

3 – Collectif 33 Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=122104798005292317&set=pcb.122104801341292317&locale=fr_CA

 

4 –  Cotnoir, J.-M. (May 25, 2026).Horne 5 : le flou persiste quant aux risques sismiques. Radio-Canada.https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/2256119/horne-5-mine-risque-sismique-cisss-at

 

5 –  Luneau, A.-C. (2013, February 6). Rouyn-Noranda : le sol s’affaisse au parc Mouska. Radio-Canada.  https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/599141/trou-parc-mouska

 

6 –  QMM and MWC. (2024, September 26). Mémoire | BAPE projet minier Horne 5 de Ressources Falco à Rouyn-Noranda | Mining Watch Canada. https://miningwatch.ca/fr/blog/2024/9/26/memoire-bape-projet-minier-horne-5-de-ressources-falco-rouyn-noranda

 

7-  OBVAT. (2026, 4 juin). Taux d’inoccupation des logements, Abitibi-Témiscamingue et Québec, 1996 à 2026p – L’Observatoire de l’Abitibi-Témiscamingue. https://www.observat.qc.ca/statistiques/taux-dinoccupation-des-logements-abitibi-temiscamingue-et-quebec-1996-a-2026p/ 

8- BAPE, Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement. (2024).Projet Horne 5 à Rouyn-Noranda par Ressources Falco ltée: rapport d’enquête et d’audience publique. Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement. https://www.bape.gouv.qc.ca/fr/dossiers/mine_horne5/

 

9- Millette, L. (2025, March 4). Projet Horne 5 : Québec freine l’élan de Ressources Falco. https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/2145532/falco-horne-fonderie-rouyn-noranda-mine

 

10-  Fortin-Rondeau, I. (2025, November 18). Le Pudding à l’arsenic : une version industrielle signée Fonderie Horne. https://www.meresaufront.org/billets-de-blogue/le-pudding-a-larsenic-une-version-industrielle-signee-fonderie-horne 

 

The following statement was delivered during the Closing Plenary on June 18 2026 on behalf of the ENGO-DCJ constituency during the 64th meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB64) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC):

Thank you chairs, I speak on behalf of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice, ENGO-DCJ. We echo statements from TUNGO, WGC, YOUNGO and ENGO-CAN.These SBs are left with a bitter taste; we keep having the same discussions all the time! It is time to stop. 

The era of implementation must be the era of public, just and grant based accessible finance including adaptation and loss and damage. We demand a stand alone agenda item on Article 9.1 Climate Finance Work Programme at COP31.

We need a Just Transition mechanism with ambitious options on governance, accountability and implementation support. This means we need intersessional work — with full support for developing countries’ and observer constituencies’ participation.

We condemn the false solutions that exploit the land and the people, and divert us away from the Paris Agreement goals. 

We must acknowledge that climate action will not deliver as long as Big Polluters continue to write the rules of climate action. 

We urge COP31 presidencies to ensure full and broad social participation in Antalya, and the respect and safeguard of civil society’s rights to protest inside and outside the conference.

We demand an end to genocide and illegal wars around the world by the perpetrators of the climate crisis.

The post SB64 Intervention- June 18 Closing Plenary appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

MEDIA ADVISORY

For Immediate Release

The Rocky Road to COP31–

Deep dive from experts on how UNFCCC Bonn climate talks leave gaping hole in climate action ahead of Türkiye

Bonn, Germany— Over the past two weeks, world governments have gathered in Bonn, Germany to take part in the 64th meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB64) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). These negotiations have happened in a moment of paramount importance. The climate crisis is impacting communities all around the world and especially in the Global South. Emissions are soaring to record heights with no plateau in sight and food scarcity is increasing. Fossil fuelled economy and war is causing death and devastation in Palestine, Iran, West Asia, and around the world. Compounded crises caused by extractivism, colonialism, imperialism, patriarchy and racism are impacting the lives of millions daily.

For SB64 to deliver climate action that can truly protect people and the planet, governments would have needed to act with urgency and holding equity as a core principle. Instead, due to endless time waste and obstruction from Global North governments most responsible for the climate crisis, we witnessed unlimited inertia, lack of political will and excuses across the board by them – whether on Article 9.1 and climate finance, adaptation, just transition, and equity. 

Looking ahead, the road to the UNFCCC Conference of the Parties (COP31) in Türkiye later this year now looks rocky and riddled with potholes. So much needs to now be done to make up for the setbacks at Bonn. But what exactly, and do we have what it takes? 

Join policy experts of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) to do an extensive deep dive into what SB64 did and didn’t deliver and how to restore faith in climate action in the months ahead. 

WHEN: Thursday 18 June 2026, 11:00-11:30 CEST (UTC + 2) 

WHERE: Nairobi 4, Main building, Inside the World Conference Center and webcast here

WITH: 

• Meena Raman, Third World Network
• Victor Menotti, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice
• Moderated by Rachitaa Gupta, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice

CONTACT: dcj.comms@demandclimatejustice.org

The post Media Advisory: The Rocky Road to COP31 appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

The following statement was delivered during the Arrangements for Intergovernmental Meetings (AIM) on June 17 2026 on behalf of the ENGO-DCJ and ENGO-CAN constituencies during the 64th meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB64) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC):

Thank you. I am Teresa Rose Sebastian of Re-Earth, speaking on behalf of ENGO’s Climate Action Network and Demand Climate Justice Campaign.

We would like to express our disappointment that progress important for us and the people and communities we represent is being delayed over a few words. We remind Parties of the urgency of this work and we cannot accept any obstruction or delays to this process.

A lot of work still lies ahead to ensure COP 31 delivers the JT mechanism promised by Parties at COP30.  More ambitious options on governance, accountability and implementation support are needed. Space to translate what currently stand as bullet points into negotiating text is needed.

This includes and necessitates intersessional work, with full support for developing country and observer constituency participation, to push these negotiations forward and to swiftly deliver on the commitment that was made in COP30.

In terms of substance as we move forward, we urge Parties to consider the following:

Establishing the JT Mechanism at COP31 would send the right signal on the urgency and importance of just transitions.

This urgency will not be satisfied if the mechanism is merely a space for knowledge-sharing. It has to do more to truly enable the implementation of just and inclusive transitions. It needs to help identify gaps, monitor progress and challenges in the implementation of just transition pathways, and ensure that support effectively reaches those who need it most. It needs to ensure that the available support it provides or channels is aligned with the principles of equity and CBDR-RC.

Lastly, a just transition cannot be designed behind closed doors. The mechanism needs to include governance arrangements that guarantee meaningful inclusion and decision-making spaces for rightholders directly affected by transition processes. Those experiencing transitions on the ground need not only a voice, but also a seat at the table.

As civil society, we remain confident on the ability of Parties to reach the right agreement in Antalya, and encourage you all to deliver for those people most vulnerable to both climate crisis and actions. Save the ToR, but even more important, Save the BAM.

The post SB64 Intervention- June 17 Just Transition Work Programme appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

MEDIA ADVISORY

For Immediate Release

All eyes on Article 9.1

Bonn, Germany— Under Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement, Global North countries most responsible for historical emissions and spurring the climate crisis are required to help provide the climate finance necessary for Global South countries to respond to climate change. Yet, year after year, Global North governments come to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and refuse to pay their climate debt while using every tactic in their obstructionist playbook to block any meaningful attempt to discuss, let alone implement, delivery of meaningful climate finance. As the 64th meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies of the UNFCCC (SB64) heads into its final stretch the story is no different. 

Finance remains entirely inadequate. Article 9.1 continues to be contested and diluted. But Global North countries must fulfil their obligations under Article 9.1 and provide public, grant-based, predictable and adequate finance to the Global South. Not as aid or charity, but as the fulfillment of a  a legal and moral obligation. In the final hours of these climate negotiations, climate finance remains a defining test of whether the climate regime is prepared to uphold the principles of equity and historical responsibility. 

Join members of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) to hear about what’s currently happening in the Article 9.1 negotiations and what can be done to set us on a path towards a COP31 that delivers on climate finance obligations.  

WHEN: Wednesday 17 June 2026, 11:00-11:30 CEST (UTC + 2) 

WHERE: Nairobi 4, Main building, Inside the World Conference Center and webcast here

WITH: 

• Aleijn Reintegrado – Asian Peoples’ Movement on Debt and Development 
• Meena Raman – Third World Network
• Teresa Anderson – ActionAid
• Wanun Permpibul – Climate Watch Thailand
• Moderated by Rachitaa Gupta, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice

CONTACT: dcj.comms@demandclimatejustice.org 

For more detail on DCJ’s demands across all topics on the agenda for Bonn, read  DCJ’s SB64 Position Paper: Advancing Climate Justice in an Age of Climate Crisis

The post Media Advisory: All eyes on Article 9.1 appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

Maryland county allows dense development over fire training area

By Pat Elder
June 16, 2026

This map shows PFAS contamination in surface waters downstream of the former Montgomery County Public Safety Training Academy in Rockville, Maryland, where firefighting foams containing PFAS were historically used during training exercises. The striped corridor marks the Maryland water-contact advisory area along Muddy Branch Creek, while sampling locations MB8 and MB9 document contamination extending through a residential watershed near the former training grounds.

NBC4 Washington recently reported that PFAS contamination has been discovered in a creek and pond system near the former Montgomery County Public Safety Training Academy in Rockville. The report included a map showing contaminated surface waters, sampling locations, and a water-contact advisory area. The contamination has been traced to historical firefighting activities at the former academy, where firefighting foams containing PFAS were used during training exercises for decades.

Maryland maintains a statewide firefighter training network through the Maryland Fire and Rescue Institute (MFRI), which operates six regional training centers serving every part of the state. In addition to these state-supported facilities, many counties operate their own fire academies and public safety training centers, including facilities in Montgomery, Carroll, Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Howard, Prince George's, and Washington counties. These facilities have trained generations of firefighters and emergency responders, often using live-fire exercises and, historically, firefighting foams containing PFAS.

Dozens of firefighter training grounds, burn pits, foam-training areas, airport fire-training facilities, and military fire-training sites have operated throughout Maryland over the last fifty years. These facilities routinely discharged aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), the same PFAS-laden foam responsible for widespread contamination at military bases throughout the state.

Military Poisons has documented PFAS contamination at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Joint Base Andrews, Fort Meade, Fort Detrick, Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Webster Field, the Naval Research Laboratory Chesapeake Bay Detachment, Forest Glen Annex, and several former military facilities throughout Maryland. At the same time, the organization has repeatedly warned that firefighter training academies, airports, and other non-military facilities have also created contamination patterns similar to those found on military bases.

The Maryland Department of the Environment has been reluctant to investigate, publicize, regulate, or clean up any of this. Maryland is behind many states in this regard.

Mongomery County planning documents provide disturbing details.

The former Montgomery County Public Safety Training Academy property consisted of approximately 44.84 acres at 9710 Great Seneca Highway in Rockville, Montgomery County, approved the disposition of essentially the entire site for private redevelopment as "The Elms at PSTA," (Public Safety Training Academy) a project containing roughly 630 residential units plus retail and open space. The academy closed in 2016, and the county subsequently sold or agreed to sell the property to the developer.

Montgomery County still owns land immediately adjacent to the former academy. Planning documents identify a 6.25-acre county-owned parcel south of the redevelopment site, currently occupied by the County Innovation Incubator and the National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence. The county also retained and received additional land associated with a potential future school site (Parcel V), which planning documents describe as approximately 6.5 acres.

‍Hundreds of homes are being built on property that served as Montgomery County's primary police and firefighter training facility for roughly forty years. The question that now demands an answer is whether Montgomery County or MDE investigated the property for PFAS contamination associated with historical firefighting activities before approving the redevelopment.

Given the well-established association between firefighter training facilities and PFAS contamination, it is difficult to understand how a comprehensive PFAS investigation was not publicly discussed before the site was approved for redevelopment. Firefighter training centers have been recognized nationwide as major PFAS source areas for years.

The planning documents note that a stream and approximately 3.35 acres of stream buffer run through the eastern portion of the former academy property and drain toward Muddy Branch.

The Maryland Department of the Environment recommends that all private well owners, regardless of location, have their well water tested at least once a year to ensure that their water is safe to drink and to include PFAS in that testing. The agency ought to be identifying well owners much further away and it ought to be providing these services. They dropped the ball.

‍It is important that the public be provided with the analytical results for each PFAS compound detected in the creek, pond, groundwater, and air. This is precisely the type of information the Maryland Department of the Environment has been hesitant to release at other severely contaminated PFAS sites around the state.

Although most PFAS compounds are not volatile, several compounds, especially PFOS, which is likely to dominate the chemical signature here, can attach to soil particles and become airborne. The carcinogens saturate the banks of the creek. When the water recedes, the toxins dry in the sun and are lifted by the wind into our lungs and into our homes as dust. The dust is a major PFAS pathway to small children. People living nearby should have their houses tested and they should change their air conditioner filters regularly. Sweeping and vacuuming ought to be traded for wet-mopping.

Since 2019, I have been writing about Maryland’s PFAS contamination associated with firefighter training activities. In 2021, when elevated PFAS levels were discovered in drinking water wells serving Westminster and Hampstead, I publicly questioned whether the Carroll County Public Fire Training Center was contributing to the contamination. At the time, I argued that Maryland should move beyond testing drinking water wells and begin identifying actual contamination sources through groundwater and surface-water investigations. My concern was that firefighter training facilities had used PFAS-containing foams for decades and were being overlooked as potential contributors to contamination. I sent all of my work to the Maryland Department of the Environment. They know the score.‍

The analytical data collected from Muddy Branch are essential for a host of reasons, but mostly because PFAS compounds can accumulate in fish. The EPA has reported that PFOS may bioaccumulate in fish up to 4,000 times the amount in the water. Streams and retention ponds near firefighter training facilities have been documented with PFOS concentrations in the hundreds and thousands of parts per trillion. Under such conditions, fish may contain PFAS concentrations in the hundreds of thousands or even millions of parts per trillion. One fish outside a fire training area in Michigan had 10 million parts per trillion in its filet.

‍The county health department must strive to identify those who have consumed fish from these waters. The county should also offer blood testing to individuals who may have been exposed to PFAS through consumption of the fish. The state will not do it.‍ ‍

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine has established guidance for PFAS blood levels and recommends clinical follow-up for individuals with more than 2 parts per billion of seven different PFAS compounds. Residents should not be forced to pay out of pocket to determine whether they have been exposed to chemicals released from a government-operated facility. But, government agencies may balk at the idea, so If people living in these nice new homes ought to know a PFAS skin prick test is available for $279 from Empower DX.‍ ‍

We must demand complete transparency. The state and the county should release the full analytical results for every PFAS compound detected at each sampling location, including surface water, groundwater, sediment, fish tissue, and any other environmental samples collected during the investigation. The public cannot adequately assess the risks posed by this contamination without access to the underlying data.

The contamination discovered near the former Montgomery County Public Safety Training Academy is not an isolated incident. It is the predictable consequence of decades of PFAS use at firefighter training facilities throughout Maryland. The question is no longer whether these facilities contaminated groundwater, streams, ponds, fish, and nearby communities. The question is how many sites remain uninvestigated, how many people have been exposed, and why state regulators failed to act sooner despite years of warnings.‍‍ ‍

——————————

I’ve written 80 articles on PFAS contamination emanating from fire training areas in Maryland. Here are two:

Bad News for Westminster (MD) and the Surrounding Region – February 2, 2021

Here, I identified the Carroll County Public Fire Training Center as a potential PFAS source and asked, "Where's the PFAS coming from in Westminster?"

https://patelder.weebly.com/westminster-md--pfas.html?utm_source=

——————————————————

Small Naval Facility in Southern Maryland Causes Massive PFAS Contamination - April 15, 2021

This article connected extremely high PFAS concentrations to a naval fire station and historical firefighting foam use.

https://www.militarypoisons.org/latest-news/small-naval-facility-in-southern-maryland-causes-massive-pfas-contamination?utm_source=‍ ‍

The following statement was delivered during the COP31 Presidency’s informal consultations with observers on June 16 2026 on behalf of the ENGO-DCJ constituency during the 64th meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB64) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC):

Thank you Co-Chairs

I am speaking on behalf of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice, ENGO DCJ.

As we move from COP30 to COP31, the central challenge before us is implementation. But there is no implementation without means of implementation. The commitments made in Belém must now be translated into concrete action that delivers justice for the communities already living at the front line of the ongoing climate crisis.

On climate finance, Article 9.1 must remain at the centre of this work. Developed countries have a legal obligation to provide public, grant-based, predictable and adequate climate finance to developing countries. Climate finance cannot be reduced to mobilisation targets, voluntary contributions or private investment. We are very concerned about the repeated attempts to erase the decisions and commitments in Belém on Adaptation and Adaptation finance including the commitment to triple the adaptation finance. Without finance for adaptation and loss and damage, our communities on the ground will continue to suffer.

On just transition, civil society condemns tactics from the Global North to weaken and delay the just transition mechanism: developed countries claim that all the bodies in the UN doing just transition work must be mapped before we can develop the mechanism and that the mechanism is not mandated to go beyond knowledge sharing. Developing countries, Indigenous Peoples, frontline workers, peasants, fisherfolk, Afro-descendants, fenceline communities, women and youth will feel the effects of these delay tactics first and foremost.  We urge the COP31 presidency to name just transition as a priority for intersessional work, and, given that negotiations for the JT mechanism are lacking in time, that intersessional work and negotiations are organised to ensure that the Just Transition Mechanism – or the BAM, as we like to call it – can be operationalised as swiftly as possible to deliver concrete actions for people and communities on the ground. Intersessional work is absolutely crucial at this point, and we don’t need Pre-COP or HoDs to be that place. We need it earlier and at negotiators’ level due to the detailed negotiations required. Crucially, civil society must be a strong and present participant in the intersessional work on just transition. 

We further urge you to support DCJ’s demands for the BAM. 

We emphasise that the BAM must be people-powered.

The BAM must give representation and decision-making power to UN observers and broader civil society in the mechanism’s governing structure as well as its knowledge-generation arm. The BAM must provide guidelines for the inclusion of all sectors in the processes of national and local transitions.

The BAM must align with and promote the principles of a just transition.

The just transition principles developed in COP30 already serve as strong signals to all actors on what just transition should mean. The BAM must be guided by these principles but also empower people and governments to further develop and expand these principles.

The BAM must enable just and equitable finance, technology transfer and capacity building.

There can be no equitable transition without provision of grant-based climate finance, technology transfer and capacity building from developed to developing countries.  The BAM must prioritise direct access to funding people, workers and communities. Technology transfer should also be grounded in justice and equity while also excluding false solutions.

The BAM must go beyond the energy transition.

The BAM must take a whole-of-economy approach and address the multidimensional nature of just transition, beyond the mitigation-centric focus on the energy workforce. Just transition cannot be limited to energy systems alone. It must address food systems, workers’ rights, public services, care economies, critical minerals and development pathways.

Lastly, the BAM must be fully operational by 2027.

We’re also deeply concerned with the presence of nature-based solutions and other false solutions throughout this space including in the JT, climate finance, adaptation, and also using the 1.5 degree overshoot narrative to push for more of these technofixes. False solutions commodify and exploit Mother Earth, promote land grabs from Indigenous Peoples and fail to address pollution at its source. Market-based mechanisms, which are pervasive within the UNFCCC, fail to address the fossil fuel extraction and capitalistic greed at the root of climate change while rewarding polluters by allowing them to claim carbon neutrality for business as usual. 

On agriculture, we urge Parties to prioritise agroecology and food sovereignty, including seed sovereignty, as proven solutions that strengthen resilience, livelihoods and biodiversity. Climate action in agriculture must address the harms of industrial agricultural systems and reject approaches that commodify land, food and ecosystems through climate smart agriculture, carbon markets and other market-based mechanisms. We therefore hope that the COP31 Presidency not only elevates agriculture and food security through the Action Agenda, but also injects renewed ambition, political will and urgency into the formal negotiations. 

The credibility of this process will be measured not by new initiatives and dialogues, but by whether it delivers accountability, finance and justice for the peoples and communities on the frontlines of the crisis.

Thank you.

The post SB64 Intervention- June 16 COP31 Presidency informal consultations appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

The following statement was delivered during Town Hall with the UNFCCC Executive Secretary and observers on June 16 2026 on behalf of the ENGO-DCJ constituency during the 64th meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB64) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC):

My name is Rachitaa, and I’m making this intervention on behalf of Demand Climate Justice. 

Thank you for the opportunity to engage in this discussion with you today. As the climate crisis intensifies outside these halls, the urgency and equity with which progress is made within these halls must match the scale of the crisis. 

Unfortunately, by no measure is this the case. The integrity of the UNFCCC remains at stake, but more importantly so do hundreds of millions of lives and livelihoods. 

We’ve continued to witness the impacts of the Global North’s failure to do its fair share of climate action and pay its climate debt. And the fingerprints of the world’s largest polluting corporations are still all over the texts and negotiations. How many more years must we fail? 

We welcomed the Open Dialogue on transparency and inclusiveness, and appreciate the work invested into the dialogue, while acknowledging what has been said all along- this is one small step of many. We note that much was raised about conflicts of interest. Most Parties agreed it needed to be discussed further, even if the topic is complex. We call on the Secretariat to advance leadership on this issue and take additional steps to advance transparency and accountability now. Beginning with expanding the disclosure requirements and affirmation of alignment to all badge types, which there was no objection to in the room. We also look to you to further conversation with Parties, including the formal consultations that were suggested by some Parties. 

Big Polluters continue to hold the pen of climate action, all while space for equitable inclusion of civil society continues to shrink and the voices of those most impacted continue to be censored and excluded.

We would also like to share our concerns related to UNFCCC’s continued reliance on big technology corporations for its digital platform, given the role that such corporations have played in contributing to the climate crisis the world faces. 

On just transition, the priority now is operationalising the Just Transition Mechanism in a way that supports real transformation. The BAM must be people-powered. It must enable just and equitable finance, technology transfer, and capacity building. We insist The BAM must go beyond the energy transition and must be fully operational by 2027.

Finally, we understand that the COP30 presidency wrote to the secretariat advising that Article 9.1 should be on the agenda moving forward, and we strongly support this. The reality is that there is no climate action without climate finance, and no climate justice if the Global North is not paying their climate debt.

The post SB64 Intervention- June 16 Town Hall with the UNFCCC Executive Secretary appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

Every year on 16 June, South Africa commemorates Youth Day and honours the courage of the young people who stood up for dignity, equality, and a better future in 1976.

Fifty years later, young people continue to face barriers that limit their opportunities and undermine that vision. While democracy opened many doors, millions of young South Africans are still locked out of opportunities by poverty, unemployment, and the rising cost of living.

One of the most overlooked barriers is access to affordable electricity.

As South Africa prepares for the 2026 Local Government Elections, we must ask: How can young people build their futures without reliable, affordable, and clean energy?

For many households, the promise of opportunity is interrupted by rising electricity costs, disconnections, and an energy system that prioritises profit over people’s needs. For young people in particular, access to affordable electricity can shape the course of their futures. It means being able to study after dark, charge devices needed for learning and job-seeking, access information, and participate in an increasingly digital world. Affordable electricity is therefore about far more than keeping the lights on. It powers opportunity, helping to unlock the rights to education, health, and dignity that every young person deserves. 

Yet South Africa’s energy system continues to fail those who need it most. Around 80% of the country’s electricity still comes from ageing coal-fired power stations, locking communities into a system that is polluting, expensive, and increasingly unreliable. Air pollution linked to coal-fired power generation contributes to thousands of premature deaths every year, while rising electricity costs leave millions in the dark.

Young people are among those hardest hit. With youth unemployment at around 60% and the cost of living continuing to rise, many households are forced to ration electricity or go without it. What should be a basic service has become another source of hardship and inequality.

The Free Basic Electricity (FBE) programme was introduced to support vulnerable households for these kinds of hardships. However, despite its intention, millions of eligible families remain excluded due to administrative barriers and outdated systems. 

It’s not like there is no solution. South Africa has abundant renewable energy resources and the potential to build an energy system that delivers clean, affordable, reliable power to communities. With the right investments, municipalities can play a leading role in generating and distributing publicly owned renewable energy that strengthens local economies and expands access to electricity.

Expanding FBE from 50 kWh to 350 kWh through municipally owned renewable energy would help ensure households can meet their basic energy needs while reducing dependence on expensive, polluting fossil fuels. More than a social support measure, an expanded FBE programme is an investment in education, employment, public health, and economic opportunity. It is an investment in the future of South Africa’s young people.

 

28 July 2023: Portrait of Letta Kedebone. Photograph by Daylin Paul

The generation of 1976 fought to transform the South Africa they inherited. Today’s generation must do the same. Ours is to ensure that future generations inherit a country where access to affordable energy, economic opportunity, and a healthy environment is not a privilege but a right enjoyed by all. A better future requires more than promises. It requires power.

—

Author: Boitumelo Masipa

The post Powering the Future: Why Energy Justice is a Youth Issue appeared first on 350.

The following statement was delivered during the Arrangements for Intergovernmental Meetings (AIM) on June 15 2026 on behalf of the ENGO-DCJ and ENGO-CAN constituencies during the 64th meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB64) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC):

On Saturday, for the first time in the thirty years of this climate regime, an Open Dialogue was held on integrity and transparency in this process, with an included focus on conflict of interest. It’s an important step that Presidencies, Parties and Observers came together to discuss these matters. At the same time, this step was long overdue, and it is only the beginning on a very long road.

The dialogue demonstrated that there is a wide recognition among the majority of actors gathered, including Parties, of the need to address conflicts of interest in the UNFCCC, even if that is a complex matter. 

This dialogue must be the start of a more formal and extensive process. A dedicated space is needed to discuss conflicts of interest, and come to an agreement on a comprehensive approach to address it, including through the development of conflict of interest policies to ensure that all engagement happens in a way that is fully aligned with the UNFCCC’s mandate and objectives.

We look forward to Parties formally recognising the outcomes of the dialogue and working to create space to continue the discussion on how to manage and protect against real or potential conflicts of interest, while enhancing engagement and inclusiveness. As part of this, and as an immediate step, we ask Parties to agree on the establishment of an Accountability Framework and to increase the transparency of Party and Party overflow badges by applying the same transparency and disclosure requirements as those for observers, and by making this mandatory.  

The UNFCCC needs to evolve to a space that is not only free from corporate capture but also transparent, inclusive, participatory and effective, including by changing the ways decisions are made.

That also means: 

• Formally recognizing a Disability Constituency, going beyond the current recognition of the informal disability observer group, as requested by Guatemala and supported by AGN and Kenya.
• Putting in place a unified, equitable UNFCCC visa system, and providing proactive and reactive visa support.
• Putting in place a zero tolerance policy for harassment, intimidation, and violence, including a focal point on these matters, as requested by Colombia, and in the mid-term clarifying and enhancing the “speak up” complaints mechanisms to ensure clarity on the process, follow-up, and monitoring of incidents.

The language on these critical matters in the draft text now does not reflect key demands that have been made in the room, and are not clear enough on the way forward.

Climate action will continue to fail to meaningfully address the climate crisis as long as polluting interests are granted unlimited access to policymaking processes and are allowed to unduly influence and weaken the critical work of the UNFCCC, and rights holders are excluded. 

We urge you to take these matters seriously and ensure that this year’s AIM conclusions kick off a clear process to finally curb the corporate capture of this space, while mandating deep process reform, as well as real policies to enhance public participation of rights holders, and protect their safety and security.

The post SB64 Intervention- June 15 Arrangements for Intergovernmental Meetings (AIM) appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

As the European Union tightens sanctions on Moscow, Russia’s Arctic energy exports continue to find buyers—and increasingly rely on opaque and potentially dangerous shipping practices. New developments highlighted in Bellona’s April Arctic Digest show that Russian liquefied natural gas exports to Europe actually increased in early 2026, while vessels transporting Arctic oil have been linked to fraudulent insurance documents and increasingly evasive tactics aimed at avoiding oversight.

Together, the trends illustrate a growing contradiction. Europe is trying to wean itself from Russian fossil fuels, but the transition remains slow. In the meantime, the expanding “shadow fleet” used to move Arctic oil and gas is introducing new environmental and maritime safety risks into one of the world’s most fragile regions.

Russian LNG exports to Europe continue to rise

In April, the EU adopted its twentieth sanctions package against Russia, introducing new restrictions aimed at Arctic oil and LNG exports. Among the measures were bans on servicing Russian LNG carriers, sanctions on the port of Murmansk, and an expansion of the list of sanctioned vessels. Beginning in 2027, EU LNG terminals will no longer be allowed to provide services to Russian companies.

Yet despite mounting sanctions pressure, Russian LNG exports are still growing.

According to Reuters, Russia exported 11.4 million tons of LNG during the first four months of 2026, an increase of 8.6 percent compared with the same period in 2025. Exports to Europe rose even faster. Data compiled by the environmental group Urgewald showed that EU countries imported 91 cargoes of LNG from the Yamal LNG project between January and April, totaling 6.69 million tons—17.2 percent more than during the same period a year earlier. Belgium’s Zeebrugge terminal remained the leading destination.

Bellona analysts say the sanctions are beginning to bite, but much more slowly than many had hoped.

“The previously introduced ban on imports of Russian LNG into Europe did not have a substantial impact on LNG import volumes in April,” Bellona noted in its commentary. “The ban on purchasing LNG under short-term contracts entered into force on April 25 and is likely to produce any noticeable effect only closer to the end of the year.”

Longer-term prospects are more challenging for Moscow. Analysts at the Centre for High North Logistics concluded that once the European market closes entirely in 2027, redirecting exports to Asia will require a major overhaul of Russia’s Arctic logistics system. Existing shipping capacity would be able to support barely half the number of voyages currently needed.

For now, however, Europe’s effort to disentangle itself from Russian gas remains incomplete.

Phantom insurers and growing environmental risks

As sanctions tighten, Russia’s shadow fleet is becoming increasingly opaque.

Bloomberg reported in April, citing Ukrainian intelligence, that several tankers carrying Russian oil were sailing under insurance certificates issued by a company called Seaguard P&I. But investigators discovered that the company appeared to exist only on paper. Its supposed address in Pinneberg, Germany, turned out to be an ordinary residential building, and no corporate registration records could be found.

One of the vessels carrying such documentation was the tanker Paz, which loaded Arctic oil in Murmansk in March. Another vessel, Deyna, was detained by French authorities while transporting Russian oil from Murmansk. Ukrainian intelligence says at least five additional vessels obtained similarly questionable insurance certificates.

The implications extend beyond sanctions evasion.

“The observed increase in the number of shadow fleet tankers operating along the Northern Sea Route represents the primary risk factor for oil spills in the harsh Arctic environment,” Bellona warned.

Many of the vessels involved are aging tankers purchased secondhand and transferred to obscure ownership structures. Should an accident occur, uncertainty over insurance coverage could complicate cleanup efforts and compensation claims.

Dodging Norway while GPS signals disappear

Another pair of developments highlighted by Bellona point to the increasingly uneasy security environment surrounding Arctic shipping.

In April, the 23-year-old tanker Apple, operating under the flag of Equatorial Guinea and already sanctioned by the United States, European Union and United Kingdom, made an unusual approach to Murmansk. Instead of entering waters where Norwegian authorities might exercise oversight, the vessel made a wide detour roughly 200 nautical miles offshore, bypassing Norway’s exclusive economic zone and avoiding inspection. Attempts by Norway’s Vessel Traffic Service in Vardø to establish contact failed.

“They were unable to make contact,” Arve Dimmen of the Norwegian Coastal Administration told the Barents Observer. As a result, Norwegian authorities were unable to obtain information normally required under pollution reporting systems.

At the same time, Norwegian authorities reported increasing interference with GPS and satellite navigation signals near the Russian border and over the Barents Sea. Measurements detected jamming and spoofing at unusually low altitudes, with preliminary analysis indicating Russia as the source.

“Everyone who uses GPS must be able to trust the information they receive,” warned Stein Kristian Hansen of the Finnmark Police District. “Manipulating these signals is unacceptable.”

Taken together, these developments suggest that sanctions alone are unlikely to bring about a rapid decline in Russia’s Arctic exports. Instead, they are producing a sprawling parallel maritime system—one characterized by aging ships, obscure insurers, evasive navigation and growing environmental risks.

For Europe, the challenge is becoming increasingly clear: reducing dependence on Russian energy may be proceeding more slowly than expected, but the risks associated with allowing those flows to continue are rising just as rapidly.

The post Europe’s Russian LNG Dilemma Deepens as Shadow Fleet Risks Mount in the Arctic appeared first on Bellona.org.

MEDIA ADVISORY

For Immediate Release

Will Bonn catalyse or catastrophise:

State of play during week two of UN Bonn climate negotiations

Bonn, Germany— There are only a few days remaining before the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations in Bonn, Germany officially come to a close. To catalyse the action needed to curb the climate crisis, governments must make every minute in the negotiating rooms count. Real action in this moment means:

1. Advancing a Belém Action Mechanism that is people-centred, incorporates Just Transition principles, goes beyond the energy sector and is operationalised by COP32. 
2. Following through with commitments from the Global North to deliver the climate finance needed to ensure Global South communities can meaningfully adapt and respond to climate change. 
3. Rejecting risky, unproven and harmful schemes like carbon markets in Article 6 and geo-engineering, which lock us into decades more of fossil fuels rather than curbing emissions. 
4. Laying the groundwork for the community-driven solutions that can truly transform all emissions-intensive industries, including the fossil fuel industry and industrial agriculture.
5. Addressing the links between fossil-fuelled violence and genocide, and acknowledging that the military industrial complex is sending emissions soaring while destroying land and communities already experiencing devastating impacts from the climate crisis.
6. Ending corporate capture of climate policy and holding the Global North accountable to doing their fair share of climate action. 

Join members of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) to hear about the current state of play in the negotiations and what governments must do as the clock winds down to ensure that the UN Bonn climate talks catalyse climate action, not further catastrophise the climate crisis. 

WHEN: Tuesday 16 June 2026, 9:30-10:00 CEST (UTC + 2) 

WHERE: Nairobi 4, Main building, Inside the World Conference Center and webcast here

WITH: 

• Meena Raman, Third World Network
• Margaret Mullen, Re-Earth Initiative
• Chadli Sadorra, Asian Peoples’ Movement on Debt and Development
• Jax Bongon, IBON International 
• Moderated by Rachitaa Gupta, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice

CONTACT: dcj.comms@demandclimatejustice.org

For more detail on DCJ’s demands across all topics on the agenda for Bonn, read  DCJ’s SB64 Position Paper: Advancing Climate Justice in an Age of Climate Crisis

The post Media Advisory: Will Bonn catalyse or catastrophise? appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

The Pondera County Commissioners filed litigation against the Environmental Protection Agency on Friday, June 12th challenging the agency’s decision to exempt a portion of the Madison Aquifer in the county from protections under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The exemption and corresponding permits will allow Montana Renewables, a Great Falls-based biofuels company, to truck high strength industrial wastewater from its refinery in Great Falls and inject it into the Madison Aquifer via two retired oil and gas wells about 7 miles southwest of the town of Valier.

The Madison Aquifer Coalition (an affiliation of local landowners and county residents), the Golden Triangle Resource Council, and Glacier-Two Medicine Alliance joined Pondera County in filing the suit, with Earthjustice and the Western Environmental Law Center as legal representatives.

The groups contend that the EPA erred when it determined that the industrial wastewater will not contaminate shallower aquifers that currently serve as sources of drinking or agricultural water, or that the exempted portion of the Madison Aquifer could never be a viable source of drinking water in the future.

“The EPA relied on an outdated model and wildly inaccurate assumptions about the geology, water quality, and economic viability of the Madison Aquifer as a source of drinking water in reaching its short-sighted decision to permit Montana Renewables to pollute this aquifer,” said Zane Drishinski, Pondera County Commissioner, farmer and rancher. “Rural communities across central Montana increasingly rely on deeper and deeper aquifers like the Madison for their water supply and the Commission simply wants to preserve the ability for people in our county to safely do so as well.”

A prolonged recent drought, coupled with climate prediction models that indicate reduced precipitation for this part of Montana in the future, has ranchers like Lisa Schmidt worried.

“My whole livelihood, like most of my neighbors, depends on access to clean water,” said Lisa Schmidt, a member of the Madison Aquifer Coalition who operates a 131-year-old sheep and cattle ranch. “Every year that water is getting less and less reliable. It makes no sense to me to put our fragile water supplies at further risk by injecting industrial wastewater into the Madison Aquifer.”

The EPA issued the aquifer exemption last month, along with two permits to the well owner, Montalban Oil and Gas Operations, to explicitly allow Montana Renewables to inject upwards of 232,000 gallons of industrial wastewater per day into the Madison Aquifer. The industrial wastewater, a byproduct of the manufacture of transportation biofuels like “renewable biodiesel” or “sustainable aviation fuel,” is currently being shipped out of state as it is too contaminated to be accepted for treatment by the City of Great Falls wastewater treatment facility.

“Clean water is essential to our farming and ranching economy and our quality of life in Pondera County,” said Jim Morren, Pondera County Commissioner. “The EPA’s short-sighted decision is particularly frustrating because a common-sense alternative exists, a solution that does not put farmers, ranchers, and rural residents’ water at risk, and that solution is treatment.”

In 2024, Montana Renewables received a $1.67 billion loan guarantee from the U.S. Department of Energy to expand its production of biofuels. The agreement included financing and direction for Montana Renewables to build a wastewater treatment facility at its Great Falls refinery. In July 2025, Montana Renewables publicly committed to building that treatment facility. Despite this commitment, the company has refused to rule out the disposal of wastewater via underground injection in Pondera County.

“The initial exemption was right at the bottom of each well,” said Millie Whalen of Golden Triangle Resource Council. “When we and others pointed out all the reasons why the injected wastewater would likely not stay there, such as natural cracks characteristic of karstic formations, improperly sealed wells that dot the landscape, injection pressure, and the EPA’s own acknowledgement of hydrological connections, the EPA simply made the exemption bigger rather than take the close look required.”

The County and other groups involved in today’s filing have been fighting the underground injection for nearly 2.5 years. Throughout that time, the Pondera County Sanitarian and Board of Health have repeatedly asked for wastewater samples from Montana Renewables, only to be rebuffed.

“At the initial public meeting in January 2024, Montana Renewables CEO Bruce Fleming claimed the wastewater was so clean you could drink it,” Corrine Rose, Pondera County Sanitarian recalled. “Yet they refuse to provide the County with a sample, and the lab results they provided the EPA indicate this wastewater is nasty stuff. Before any of this high strength industrial wastewater is dumped in our aquifer, we want to see the EPA require more transparency, testing and monitoring.”

The delivery of the wastewater would require several dozens of trucks a day traversing rural ranch roads, creating potential hazards for county infrastructure, public safety, and local wildlife.

“The wells are situated near Dupuyer Creek which provides important habitat and a dispersal corridor for grizzly bears,” said Peter Metcalf, executive director of Glacier-Two Medicine Alliance, an East Glacier-based conservation organization focused on protecting local public lands, waters and wildlife. “In addition to impacts to clean water, this ill-conceived project could have real effects on grizzly bears and other fish and wildlife in the area, all of which could be avoided by treating the wastewater on site.”

“We are deeply disappointed in the EPA for not protecting our rural community and our water and with Montana Renewables for trying to foist their wastewater on us when an attainable alternative exists,” said Tom Kuka, Pondera County Commissioner, rancher and Blackfeet tribal member. “We are simply asking the court to invalidate this aquifer exemption and for Montana Renewables to be a good neighbor and treat its wastewater.”

Contacts:

Andrew Hawley, Western Environmental Law Center, 206-487-7250, hawley@westernlaw.org

Jim Morren, Zane Drishinski, or Tom Kuka, Pondera County Commissioners, 406-271-4010, commissioner@ponderacountymt.gov

Corrine Rose, Pondera County Sanitarian, 406-271-4020, sanitarian@ponderacountymt.gov

Lisa Schmidt, Madison Aquifer Coalition, 406-728-0159, lschmidt@a-land-of-grass-ranch.com

Mildred Whalen, Golden Triangle Resource Council, mwhalen729@verizon.net

Caitlin Cromwell, Northern Plains Resource Council, 406-248-1154, caitlin@northernplains.org

Peter Metcalf, Glacier-Two Medicine Alliance, 406-434-6223, peter@glaciertwomedicine.org

Jenny Harbine, Earthjustice, 406-223-7781, jharbine@earthjustice.org

 

The post Pondera County, local landowners, conservationists sue EPA to protect Madison Aquifer from industrial wastewater injection  appeared first on Western Environmental Law Center.

When the US-Israel war in Iran began, it took just one 50km waterway to remind the entire world how fragile fossil fuel dependence really is. Oil prices spiked, energy bills surged, and households from Asia to Europe were left absorbing the cost of a crisis they had no part in creating. 

We are all currently living through the second major energy crisis in five years. And it’s raising the same question as the first: is the world finally investing in energy that can’t be blockaded, weaponized, or priced out of reach by a conflict on the other side of the globe?

The IEA’s World Energy Investment 2026 report, released earlier this month, tracks where the world’s money is going in energy. This is important because investment is a leading indicator of real, physical things being built: solar plants, wind turbines, power lines, gas pipelines, coal mines. Follow the money, and you can see the future taking shape.

The money is finally moving in the right direction

So the good news first. The report reveals that for the first time in history, clean energy is on track to get nearly twice the investment of fossil fuels in 2026. Renewables, energy storage, power grids and low-emission fuels are attracting US$2.2 trillion this year, compared to US$1.2 trillion still flowing to oil, gas and coal.* Just over a decade ago, in 2015, renewables received just one sixth of the money that went into energy— roughly US$290 billion out of USD US$1.8 trillion. Today clean energy commands two-thirds of all global energy investment. 

Solar is leading the charge, pulling in US$365 billion – which is US$1 billion every single day. A decade ago, building 1 gigawatt of solar capacity cost US$3 billion. Today it costs US$700 million. That 80% cost decrease is why solar has grown nearly ten times and why its fast becoming the energy source of first resort in places that can no longer afford to wait for governments to move away from fossil fuels. The unglamorous infrastructure of a renewable future, grids and batteries, is also finally getting the capital it has long been denied with grid investment up nearly 20% to US$550 billion, and battery storage crossing US$100 billion.

The report also reveals that when the fossil fuel system fails people, they don’t wait. After declaring a national energy emergency in March 2026 as a result of the ongoing global energy crisis, the Philippines tripled its solar imports in a single quarter. Fifteen African countries recorded nearly as many solar imports in the first three months of 2026 as in all of 2025 combined. In India, when LNG supplies were disrupted in early 2026, households switched to induction cookstoves. EV sales in Southeast Asia more than doubled in 2025, reaching half a million with a nearly 20% market share — up from just 9% in 2023. European heat pump sales jumped 17% in the first quarter of 2026, even as governments cut subsidies.

The world is moving towards renewables, faster and more irreversibly than any single government, conflict or corporate lobby can stop — and this report, for all its uncomfortable contradictions (that you’ll read below), confirms it.

The money flowing into clean energy is not reaching the people that need it most

Now the bad news. Renewables attracting nearly twice the investment of fossil fuels is, by any measure, a significant shift. But look at where that money is actually going, and a very different picture emerges. Wealthy countries and China account for more than 70% of all energy investment in 2026. 

Emerging economies, home to two-thirds of the world’s population, receive less than 30% of global energy investment, and just 20% of power sector investment specifically. This is because borrowing costs in emerging economies are already double those of wealthy nations and China — meaning the same solar project that makes financial sense in Germany simply does not pencil out in Ghana. Higher financing costs are not a minor inconvenience; they are the difference between a project happening and not happening at all.

And yet the proof that clean energy works — for energy security, for affordability, for independence from volatile fossil fuel markets — is right there in the data. Clean energy investments saved China, the European Union, Japan and Korea, Southeast Asia and India a combined US$260 billion in 2025 alone. That money would otherwise have been spent in fossil fuels subsidies or costs, but was made free for other investments – like better schools, health systems and extreme weather protection. China had the largest benefit at US$110 billion. Those savings are real. But they must also reach the two-thirds of humanity that needs them most.

Coal and gas investments is rising 

Unfortunately, the report also shows that Big Oil executives didn’t read this energy crisis as a warning to back down. They took the crisis as a chance to expand production and speculate on higher prices. While oil investment is falling for the third year running, companies are already eyeing new offshore frontiers in Africa, Asia and Latin America — waiting to see how high prices go before committing further.

Meanwhile, coal and gas are not waiting at all. Coal investment has hit a 14-year high, reaching US$180 billion in 2026, with China accounting for 70% of it and India having doubled its coal investment over the past decade. Rather than retreating from the crisis, companies are accelerating investment in Africa, Central and South America while simultaneously pushing deeper into LNG. 

Global LNG investment has surged more than 10% to US$330 billion, a ten-year high, driven largely by the United States — where it turns out the biggest new customers for fossil fuel infrastructure are not oil companies but tech giants. Gas turbine orders hit a 25-year high in 2025, with American tech companies ordering US$28 billion worth of turbines for onsite power generation alone. The AI boom is being built on fossil fuels and those data centres, already consuming 1.5% of global electricity, are on track to more than double their demand by 2030. 

None of this is consequence-free, neither for us or our planet. Coal is the single largest contributor to the human-caused climate crisis, responsible for over 40% of global CO₂ emissions. And gas — still marketed in some quarters as a transition fuel — leaks methane at every stage of production, a greenhouse gas over 80 times more potent than CO₂ over a 20-year period. Every billion that goes into new fossil fuel infrastructure is a decision to lock in decades of emissions the planet has no room left to absorb. 

The contradiction in this report is not a market failure. It is a choice.

While the war in South West Asia (Middle East) did not create the energy transition, it has made its urgency impossible to argue with. Energy generated from the sun and wind cannot be blockaded, weaponized or held hostage the same way as fossil fuel shipping routes can be.

And yet, beyond all logic, billions are still being poured into coal mines, gas pipelines and LNG terminals — infrastructure built to last decades, for a fuel system the world is already moving away from. Every dollar spent locking in fossil fuel dependency is a bet against the direction the world is already travelling — and a cost that will ultimately be borne by the communities least responsible for the crisis.

The renewable revolution is not a future event. It is happening now, in the Philippines, in India, in fifteen African countries quietly breaking solar import records while the headlines focus elsewhere. Now the trillions still flowing to coal, gas and oil need to be stopped urgently. 

Governments have a choice. Stop enabling polluters, and urgently invest money into renewables. 

So do we. Let’s demand better.

Join the Great Power Shift.

 

*The IEA’s $2.2 trillion figure for ‘clean energy’ includes nuclear energy alongside renewables, storage, grids and low-emission fuels. 350.org does not support nuclear as clean energy due its carbon intensive set-up and proven high risk of deadly disasters. We use the IEA’s aggregate here for reference only. 

 

The post Clean energy just hit record investment appeared first on 350.

For Immediate Release

What UNFCCC’s WTO dialogue did—and did not—do-

Climate & Trade Justice Groups React

Bonn, Germany— Join climate and trade justice analysts and advocates with the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) at the UN Bonn Climate talks to hear more about the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change’s first ever trade and climate dialogue. The dialogue, which occurred on Saturday June 13, included officials from the World Trade Organization (WTO), UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the International Trade Center (ITC). Kicking off a three-year forum mandated at COP30 in Belém, trade and climate officials discussed all things trade at a day-long dialogue focused on the relationship between their two multilateral regimes and changes needed for both.

WHEN: 15 June 2026, 12pm CEST (UTC + 2) 

WHERE: Nairobi 4, Main building, Inside Bonn’s World Conference Center, or webcast here

WHO

• Priscilla Papagiannis, Brazilian Network for Peoples’ Integration (REBRIP)
• Erika Lennon, Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL)
• Luc Tezenas, Resource Justice Network (RJN)
• Victor Menotti, Demand Climate Justice

CONTACT dcj.comms@demandclimatejustice.org

The post Media Advisory: What UNFCCC’s WTO dialogue did—and did not—do appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

Media Advisory

For Immediate Release

Delay, Distract, Destruct, Repeat–

Global North governments abandoning climate action at home and at UN climate talks

Bonn, Germany— The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations in Bonn, Germany (SB64) are headed into the final days. In these rooms, governments continue to construct the foundation of international climate collaboration in an era of climate crisis. The details of many of the essential building blocks are still being debated– including on climate finance, just transition, false solutions, historical responsibility, agriculture and a fossil fuel phase-out. 

Global North governments like the United States, United Kingdom, Japan and the European Union are historically most responsible for the climate crisis. The Global North should be the most invested in laying the groundwork to ensure we can build a strong and sustainable house of climate action. Instead, their extraction, colonialism, imperialism, patriarchy, racism and war-mongering has fuelled this planet to the brink of collapse, risking hundreds of millions of lives and livelihoods. According to the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR) enshrined in the UNFCCC, Global North governments should be leading the way to a climate just world by doing their fair share of climate action, delivering their climate debt, rapidly enacting just transitions and supporting Global South countries and communities in doing the same.  

Instead of acting like the climate champions they proclaim they are, Global North governments are ramping up a predictable yet inexcusable strategy of “Delay, Distract, Destruct, Repeat.” In the case of the United States, it hasn’t even officially shown up to the table, yet is still pulling the strings behind the scenes. Meanwhile the United Kingdom. Japan and the European Union are rolling back their already very weak climate commitments at home and reneging on all of their responsibilities in the global house of climate action. 

Join members of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) to learn more about how Global North governments are destroying international collaboration here in Bonn and delaying climate action at home, and what can be done to hold them accountable. 

WHEN: Monday 15 June 2026, 11-11.30 CEST (UTC + 2) 

WHERE: Nairobi 4, Main building, Inside the World Conference Center and webcast here

WITH: 

• Leon Sealey-Huggins, War on Want
• Victor Menotti, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice
• Tobias Holle, Shifting Advocacy
• Analyah Schlaeger dos Santos, ShiftUS, Global Afro Descendants
• Moderated by Nona Chai, Just Transition Alliance

CONTACT: dcj.comms@demandclimatejustice.org

For more detail on DCJ’s demands across all topics on the agenda for Bonn, read  DCJ’s SB64 Position Paper: Advancing Climate Justice in an Age of Climate Crisis

The post Media Advisory: Delay, Distract, Destruct, Repeat appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

MEDIA ADVISORY

For Immediate Release

Just or Bust:

Will Bonn deliver a truly just transition, or bust the phase-out with false solutions?

Bonn, Germany— Saturday marks the close of week one of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations in Bonn, Germany. With only one more week left to go, so much remains to accomplish before these negotiations– SB64 – can be considered a true success. 

In one room, governments are discussing the next steps for the Just Transition Mechanism, which was agreed at COP30 thanks to the sustained organising of civil society and movements. But importantly, the creation of a mechanism alone does not guarantee justice. A central question in Bonn is whether the Belém Action Mechanism (BAM) will be people-powered, align with just transition principles and become fully operational by 2027. 

In other rooms, governments– especially from Global North countries– are seeking to seed carbon markets in place of true climate finance and ramp up dangerous, risky technologies like geo-engineering in place of keeping fossil fuels in the ground. All of this equates to those who have done the most to cause the climate crisis orchestrating their great escape from accountability and liability. 

What are the differences between false solutions and real solutions that will advance a just transition and help address the climate crisis?And is progress so far at the Bonn climate negotiations meeting expectations? Join members of the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) as we close week one of the UN Bonn climate talks to hear more about the state of negotiations and what governments must make happen in week two.

WHEN: Saturday 13 June 2026, 11-11.30 CEST (UTC + 2) 

WHERE: Nairobi 4, Main building, Inside the World Conference Center and webcast here

WITH: 

• Nona Chai, Just Transition Alliance 
• Theresa Rose Sebastian, Re Earth Initiative
• Ranjana Giri, Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development
• Kaveri Choudhury, ETC group 
• Moderated by Rachitaa Gupta, Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice

CONTACT: dcj.comms@demandclimatejustice.org 

The post Media Advisory: Just or Bust appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

We invite you to watch this short “teaser” video of "Radical Visions Reconnecting Academia and Nature: A Community Truth, Reckoning and Right Relationship" from a two-day event in March 2026.

The post Radical Visions Reconnecting Academia and Nature: A Community Truth, Reckoning and Right Relationship appeared first on CELDF - Community Rights Pioneers - Protecting Nature and Communities.