Paris, France – Greenpeace France and French activist networks ANV-COP21 and Action Justice Climat have displayed a giant banner in front of the Eiffel Tower denouncing, among others, French President Macron and US President Trump for sabotaging climate action in an activity on the eve of the 10th anniversary of the Paris Agreement.

The 300 square metre banner featured the faces of both Macron and Trump, and also French far-right politician Marine Le Pen, French billionaire businessman Vincent Bolloré, TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanné and US billionaire Jeff Bezos. On the banner, written in French, were the words: ‘10 years of climate sabotage’ and the word ‘Stop’ to demand an end to climate sabotage.

Photos of the activity can be found in the Greenpeace Media Library.

Sarah Fayolle, Climate Campaign Manager, Greenpeace France said: “These are just some of the faces of climate sabotage. Ten years after the Paris Agreement, our climate is at risk of spiraling out of control due to the weakness and irresponsibility of political decision makers. They have sold our future safety to powerful private interests at the expense of social and climate justice, endangering us all. We must resist and rise up!”

The Paris Agreement was adopted on 12 December 2015 in the French capital at the UN climate conference COP21, committing the world’s governments to limiting global warming to 1.5°C. Ten years later and on the eve of COP30 in Belém, Brazil, last month, the UN warned it is very likely the 1.5°C threshold will be exceeded, at least temporarily, within the next decade.[1]

The UN Emissions Gap Report 2025 predicted global temperatures to reach 2.3-2.5°C by the end of the century. Since the adoption of the Paris Agreement, temperature predictions have fallen from 3-3.5°C, but faster action is urgently required.

Jasper Inventor, Deputy Programme Director, Greenpeace International said: “We must face the reality that 2035 climate action plans are dangerously off track and the 1.5°C limit is not just under threat, it’s almost gone. Governments must urgently confront this truth and take rapid action to bridge the ambition gap. That means holding polluters to account by making them pay, ending deforestation and accelerating the transition away from fossil fuels.”

Thursday’s action was carried out with French activist networks Action Justice Climat and ANV-COP21. The faces depicted on the banner symbolise the political and business forces undermining the fight against climate change. But despite these actors, millions around the world are mobilising and demanding change.

Zoé Pelegry, spokesperson, ANV-COP21 said: “From politicians to the CEOs of oil and gas companies and billionaires laughing all the way to the bank, these are the faces that represent the injustice of our extractive-based economy that puts profit first and people and planet last. But we will not give up and with millions of people around the world we’ll continue with our actions to show that other paths exist in the face of climate sabotage!”

Léa Geindreau, spokeperson, Action Justice Climat Paris said: “Each of the faces depicted on the banner embodies a form of climate sabotage: from Trump’s ‘drill, baby, drill’ mentality to Macron’s climate cynicism or the climate disinformation orchestrated by private actors like Vincent Bolloré. Each of them, in their own way, are derailing climate action.”

The banner also featured the face of Patrick Pouyanné, head of the oil and gas major TotalEnergies, a leading force in the global expansion of fossil fuels. Jeff Bezos represents the billionaires whose lifestyles and investments fuel the climate crisis, while Marine Le Pen embodies the French far right and its threat to climate action and social justice.

ENDS

Photos available in the Greenpeace Media Library.

Notes:

[1] UNEP Emissions Gap Report 2025 

Contacts:

A press conference “Climate: Listening to Other Voices,” highlighting the perspectives of those on the front lines of the climate crisis, will be held on December 12 at 8:45 am at Greenpeace France headquarters, 13 rue d’Enghien, 75010 Paris. This press conference can also be followed via video conference. To register, contact Franck Mithieux at Greenpeace France by email: franck.mithieux@greenpeace.org 

Greenpeace International Press Desk, +31 (0)20 718 2470 (available 24 hours), pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org

London/Quezon City – Survivors of Super Typhoon Rai – locally known as Odette – in the Philippines are suing Shell Plc for propelling the climate catastrophe with knowledge of the risks, in the first major transnational lawsuit seeking personal and property damages from an oil and gas company. 

The case, the first civil claim to also directly link the climate impacts of oil and gas companies to deaths and personal injury already suffered in the Global South, will be heard in the United Kingdom under Philippines law, and is being brought on behalf of over 100 Filipinos who lost loved ones, homes, or suffered serious injuries when Rai struck in December 2021.[1]

Greenpeace Philippines Climate Campaigner Jefferson Chua said, “We’re seeing a surge of climate cases led by Global South communities – a clear sign that people will no longer let oil and gas giants like Shell profit while those who contributed least to this crisis bear the heaviest costs.” 

“Odette survivors are showing extraordinary courage by demanding accountability from one of the world’s biggest climate polluters. They are seeking justice for what they have endured and fighting to protect our collective future. Shell must answer for its part in fueling the extreme weather that devastates their communities.”

The case draws on new climate attribution research which found that human-induced climate change more than doubled the likelihood of an extreme weather event like Typhoon Rai.[2] According to government authorities, Super Typhoon Odette killed more than 405 people in the Philippines, injured around 1,400, and cost the Philippines more than US$700 million in damage.[3] 

The survivors argue that Shell’s historic carbon pollution worsened disasters like Super Typhoon Odette and are seeking compensation for the harm suffered from the typhoon. It is the first civil case to directly link an oil major’s polluting actions to deaths and injuries from climate impacts in the Global South.

Survivors contend that Shell — responsible for over 41 billion tonnes of CO₂e , or more than 2% of global fossil fuel emissions, according to the Carbon Majors database — cannot claim ignorance.[4] Even after Odette, the company scaled back climate commitments and expanded oil and gas investments, contradicting clear scientific guidance that no new fossil fuel development is compatible with a liveable future.[5] This comes on top of a long history of industry disinformation and lobbying that delayed climate action.[6] For survivors, Shell’s recent decisions show that despite understanding the risks, Shell continued to expand its fossil fuel operations. 

Shell raked in record profits of US$40 billion the year after Odette, and the company’s latest full-year profit was recorded at US$16.5 billion.[5]

Trixy Elle, one of the claimants in the case, said in Filipino, “Suing a big corporation like Shell for their role in worsening Typhoon Rai might be a tall task, but I have to think about my children’s future.”[6]

“That’s where I get my motivation to go on with the case. It’s so unfair that we have to suffer the effects of climate change even if our contribution to global pollution is so minuscule compared to Shell. Why is it that we have to shoulder the burden?”

This community-led legal action comes on the heels of the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion in respect of climate change (ICJAO), confirming that states must regulate businesses for climate harms caused by their emissions, regardless of where the harm occurs and builds upon the landmark investigation by the Philippines Commission on Human Rights on the corporate responsibility of the climate crisis of 2015-2022.[7][8]

The Odette survivors’ case is both a call for climate justice and systemic accountability: to make polluters pay, and reclaim the Filipino people’s right to a balanced and healthy ecology.  

ENDS

Photos can be accessed from the Greenpeace Media Library

Notes:

[1] Consistent with well-established legal principles, the case will be brought in the UK courts, where the defendant is domiciled, and apply the law of the Philippines, where the harm occurred. As the case relates to actions taken by a UK-domiciled company in the UK and/or throughout their global operations rather than operations of their subsidiaries in the Philippines, the UK is the only proper legal forum for this case. While the case will be taken in the UK courts, the law applicable to the case is the law of the Philippines, according to the provisions of the Rome II Regulation, 7 as this is the country in which the damage occurred.

[2] The influence of anthropogenic climate change on Super Typhoon Odette (Typhoon Rai) and its impacts in the Philippines

[3]  https://monitoring-dashboard.ndrrmc.gov.ph/assets/uploads/situations/Infographics_Odette.pdf

[4] Carbon Majors – Shell  

[5] Annual Report and Accounts 2024 | Shell Global  

[6] Translation by Greenpeace Philippines

[7] Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change 

[8] The Climate Change & Human Rights Inquiry Archive – Greenpeace Philippines 

Contacts: 

Karl Isaac Santos, Communications Team, Greenpeace Philippines, +63 917 675 8883, socmedph@greenpeace.org

Atty. Ryan Roset, Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center (LRC), mythrandrir@gmail.com

Amsterdam, Netherlands – The economic potential of seabed polymetallic nodules in the South Pacific’s Cook Islands has been overstated, according to a new independent study commissioned by Greenpeace International.[1] Once costs, market factors, and technological challenges are accounted for, deep sea mining for Cook Islands nodules is more likely to incur an economic loss, the analysis indicates.

Juressa Lee, Campaigner, Greenpeace Aotearoa, said: “Deep sea mining companies that have made bold claims to try and win social licence in places like the Cook Islands are now being exposed — their sales pitch simply doesn’t add up. Scientific warnings are crystal clear: deep sea mining will damage the oceans and harm biodiversity. Millions of people across the world, including people in the Cook Islands, are concerned about the threats posed by this industry. When you add the major financial risks, it’s hard to understand why anyone is still pushing this industry at all.”

Polymetallic nodules are metal-rich rocks that sit on the deep seafloor, increasingly targeted by mining companies despite scientists’ warnings of severe ecological damage. [2]

The new report highlights several reasons why the promise of these “golden apples” — as Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown described the nodules — does not hold up. The author finds that the technologies required to extract the nodules have not been commercially demonstrated, noting that operating “at depths three times greater than the Deepwater Horizon and >15 times deeper than North Sea oil, pose significant challenges to reliable operation”. According to the author, the estimated operating costs at such depths are on a par with, or higher than, their expected market value, making commercial operations unviable. 

According to this expert’s assessment, there are no single processing facilities worldwide capable of converting raw nodules into saleable metals, and building new plants and supply chains would involve major technical and financial risks. Market outlook is weakest for cobalt and manganese, the primary components of value in Cook Islands nodules. The expert finds Cook Islands nodules’ estimated market value is only US$100–140 per dry tonne, far below the level needed to support a profitable industry.

‘The release of the study comes as the deep sea mining frontrunner, Belgium’s  Global Sea Mineral Resources (GSR)announces its plan to divest its interests in the Cook Islands and refocus on activities in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ). GSR intends to sell its share of the joint venture company Cobalt Seabed Resources (CSR), which was established to pursue mining in the Cook Islands. Although no buyer has been officially named, local reporting has pointed to speculation about a possible sale to American company Wetstone, a newly formed company with little public track record and who seems close to former International Seabed Authority Secretary General, Michael Lodge.[3][4][5]

Juressa Lee, Campaigner, Greenpeace Aotearoa said: “Resistance to seabed mining in the Cook Islands and across the Pacific is strong and persistent. Pacific Peoples will not be sidelined by corporations and powerful countries trying to impose this new form of extractive colonialism on the region. Alongside our allies, who want to protect the ocean for future generations, we will continue to resist wannabe miners who want to strip the seafloor, causing irreversible harm for profits that are clearly far from guaranteed.” 

The future of Pacific Island nations is inextricably linked to healthy oceans — yet this future is now at risk from proposals to open the deep sea to mining, whether within national waters or in international waters. The Pacific Ocean, and the livelihoods it sustains, must be protected. Greenpeace urges coordinated action from Pacific Island governments to safeguard their own waters by putting a ban on deep sea mining, while a global moratorium at the International Seabed Authority is needed to defend the world’s largest ocean commons.

ENDS

Notes:

[1] Link to report: Economic Potential of Seabed Manganese Nodules in the Cook Islands

The Author: Lyle Trytten is a chemical engineer and metallurgical consultant with over three decades of global experience in sustainable battery metals, spanning R&D, project development, operations, and lifecycle and techno-economic assessments across nickel, cobalt, copper, lithium, and graphite. His expertise has been featured in The Elements of Deep Sea Mining, the Redefining Energy – Tech podcast series, and major media outlets including Bloomberg, Time, The Economist, and The Wall Street Journal. He has also informed national and international agencies and contributed to the analytical foundation of the recent RAND Corporation report on seabed mining.

[2] Study measuring the impacts of a deep-sea mining machine finds the abundance of animals at the site decreased by 37%. Study measuring the impacts of a deep-sea mining machine finds the abundance of animals at the site decreased by 37% | Natural History Museum

[3] GSR and the Cook Islands Investment Corporation (CIIC) hold exploration rights through their joint venture, Cobalt Seabed Resources Ltd, but GSR has confirmed it is withdrawing from its Cook Islands interests. GSR Announces Strategic Review of Its Seabed Mineral Interests to Advance Priority Initiatives in the CCZ – GSR 

[4] GSR is potentially selling to Wetstone. Te Ipukarea Society: Questions mount as mining company exits Cook Islands – Cook Islands News

[5] U.S. federal agency clears ways for deep-sea mining — and companies are lining up 

Contacts:

Sol Gosetti, Global Media Coordinator, Stop Deep Sea Mining campaign, Greenpeace International, WhatsApp +44 (0) 7380845754, sol.gosetti@greenpeace.org

Greenpeace International Press Desk, +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours), pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org