Community | July 08, 2009 | 36 comments

Greenpeace activists hijack four Italian power stations, G8

Image
bansheewail
Six Greenpeace activists scale the Federico II coal power plant in Brindisi, Italy, demanding strong leadership from the G8 on climate. Photograph: Greenpeace

Four coal-fired power stations in several parts of Italy were today occupied by Greenpeace activists as G8 leaders met in L'Aquila to discuss issues including action on climate change. More than 100 Greenpeace activists from 18 countries took part in the protests, which hope to draw attention to the group's campaign for action by world leaders on cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

One of the targets was Italy's biggest coal-burning power station at Brindisi in south-eastern Italy where protestors climbed the chimney and occupied the conveyor belt carrying coal into the plant.

A local news agency quoted one of the demonstrators as saying the power station's management had started the belt while the Greenpeace activists were still on it. "At first, they didn't know we were on the conveyor belt", said Serena Bianchi. "Then we went to tell them, but even then we had some difficulty in persuading them to stop everything."

The organisation also occupied working plants near Venice and Genoa and staged a protest at an old oil-fired power station at Porto Tolle in northern Italy that is being converted to coal. The UK activist Ben Stewart, who previously climbed the Kingsnorth coal power station in 2007 and today climbed a 160ft chimney at a site near Venice, said: "Politicians talk but leaders act. The G8 leaders must stop putting the interests of big coal and other climate polluting industries ahead of the planet and take strong, decisive leadership on climate change."

Greenpeace is campaigning for carbon dioxide emissions to be cut by 40% by 2020 from their 1990 levels, and the group is also seeking a pledge from the G8 nations to provide developing countries with more than $100bn a year for action on climate change.

There have been several other protests in Italy ahead of the G8 meeting. Ten people were arrested on Tuesday, and five were detained yesterday near L'Aquila where the conference is being held.
  1. groups:
    Community,   News and Politics,   Politics
  2. tags:
    News News and Politics Politics Protest 7 more
  3. recommended by:
    ras_menelik
  4.     
    |

36 comments // Greenpeace activists hijack four Italian power stations, G8

  • Bren589
  • felixtalkin
  • ShawnMRill
    • 0
      ShawnMRill  
    • We need more people like this. The technology that is harming the planet is controlled by the companies and governments in a position to earn big money from harming the Earth. They wheel the power over the citizens to keep them in control of believing that they are slowly making progress to become greener but the truth of the matter is we have the technology, today, in the world to go completely green. If the focus was taken away from coal and other nature-harming technologies and focus was completely on green-solutions we would all have more.

    • 2 years ago
  • Ares
    • 0
      Ares  
    • This story had better be updated in the next 2 hours to read: Six Greenpeace Activists Shot Dead for Terrorism.

    • 2 years ago
  • travism1337
    • 0
      travism1337  
    • Ares:

      Haha, that funny, and as nice as that would be you know that the word "hijacking" would quickly be turned around to peaceful protest on this site. I think the title would read more like
      "Six greenpeace members shot down by firing squad during peaceful protest"

    • 2 years ago
  • travism1337
    • 0
      travism1337  
    • So, they stopped a power plant for a day by walking onto the conveyor belt. Well, in thier quest to stop global warming lets see what they have done today:

      Pros:
      They stopped all greenhouse emissions from that one factory for a day.
      They made people think about greenhouse gases and some people may change thier ways slightly
      They scaled a smoke stack for no apparent reason.
      They looked badass.

      Cons:
      They managed to piss off a lot of people, people that lobby and vote on bills that involve greenhouse gases
      They managed to make those people take them less serious when they get into politics.
      They put a dent the size of a pin head in a carbon footprint the size of a battleship.
      The power plant will not stop because of this.

      So really did this one day of being obnoxious help at all? I dunno, I don't think so, I do think that if you took all the money used to organize this and put it into lobbying and getting bills passed, it would have been a much bigger bang for their buck.

    • 2 years ago
  • royulery
    • 0
      royulery  
    • time ran out long ago to stop global warming, it's already happening. these terriorist efforts will be considered heroic, to those in the future who survive.

      get off your ass and, plant a tree, drive less, use alternitive energy, look up new alternitive energy products and promote them, become an example of responsibility and lead.

      green peace started humbly in the mid 60s in santa barbara. there was a major oil leak from platform holly, the oil covered the ocean and beaches to more then a foot thick. g.o.o. (got oil out} started here and eventually became green peace. i was 13 and i helped g.o.o. clean the beach in summerland. the thick tar was filled with; fish,dolphin and seal. there was a huge whale shark weighing many tons, it had to be blown up. platform holly is still there. it is believed locally that santa barbara has the highest gas prices in the country because green peace started here.

      the point is you are responsible for the world our children inherit. plant a tree or climb a power plant.

    • 2 years ago
  • adamrl07
  • Anacrusis
  • ALLNATURALVEGANS
  • thewarnerla
    • 0
      thewarnerla  
    • good move! did they turn off the plant eventually? I think that giving Africa 100 billion a year is a trap into another depression. they won't be able to pay up, and then the western powerful elite will take their land. either way Africa should be carbon neutral by returning to tribalism

    • 2 years ago
  • Ish05
    • 0
      Ish05  
    • thewarnerla:

      I have a better idea for the environmental extremist. Hold your f-ing breath and squeeze your ass checks shut to hold your f-ing farts in. I will thank you. The planet will thank you.
      You want reliable and efficient alternative energy. We have it. It's called nuclear. Work to improve that technology and improve the science used and maybe these concerns of "nuclear waste" you environmentalist are so afraid of can be solved to refine this waste into even more energy. Polluting our lands with wind turbines and solar collectors (which, bouncing the sun's rays back into the atmosphere can't be good at slowing down this global warming predicament) are not going to be an efficient source of power. Not enough to power a modern human society. You want high speed rail, or hydrogen based energy, water management (I have to break it to you, but we will need to go with nuclear desalination at some point) then you will need a continual amount of efficient and reliable, highly dense energy which can only come from nuclear energy, to power that type of future.

    • 5 days ago
  • killtheinc
    • 0
      killtheinc  
    • I can't believe they're calling this ecoterrorism. I can't help but picture all the coal bigwigs jumping up and down in a fit of utter indignance because they won't make their vacation home payment for that day. Meanwhile, the brave souls who 'hijacked' the plants are risking life and limb to stand up for our environment.

      The real 'ecoterrorism' comes from the smokestacks in those plants.

    • 2 years ago
  • ras_menelik
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • 'Hijack?' Fighting for the sustainability of this planet is now 'hijkacking?' WHAT UTTER BS. You go GREENPEACE. Get in those G8 faces.

    • 2 years ago
  • cephas
  • masterzip
    • 0
      masterzip  
    • the word "peace" should be removed from their name, as hijacking is a criminal activity and has nothing to do w/ peace. This is criminal activism. Peaceful protest would not require such extreme actions, and this is more likely an attempt to get press coverage. I do not think the press will be on the side of greenpeace, since they rarely take the side of criminals.

    • 2 years ago
  • JamesAJanisse
    • 0
      JamesAJanisse  
    • masterzip:

      How are they hijacking though? I was under the impression that hijacking was usurping and using for your own use, not just shutting down something. I don't really see anything "extreme" about their actions, which are pretty much glorified sit-ins that happen to be on conveyor belts.

    • 2 years ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • masterzip:

      LEADERS NOT LEADING require this action now. Criminal activity my a**. BURNING COAL that is tipping the climate balance of this planet along with killing people and giving them cancer willingly knowing it does so is CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.

    • 2 years ago
  • masterzip
    • 0
      masterzip  
    • masterzip:

      Janforgore, I will have to respectfully disagree, as I can not find any laws about burning coal being criminal,and I can find laws Greenpeace violated by their actions.
      Look, I am not saying I am a coal loving, coal burning, anti-planet individual. There are (2) methods of protest,..the MLK way and the MalcomX way, one is really peaceful and uses the power of the message and power of the quantity of people standing behind it, and one uses all methods available be it criminal or legal.
      What Greenpeace has essentially done can be considered extreme, as they are shutting down industry, to serve the purpose of "a message." therefore, by that logic, any person can strap themselves to an abortion clinic, or wind turbine to get their "anti-whatever message" across.

    • 2 years ago
  • Rorenado
    • 0
      Rorenado  
    • masterzip:

      I agree with masterzip. There is a better way to get your message across. It may not be 'hijacking,' but it's still trespassing, which is still illegal. Nothing can justify that. They willingly entered this property with the intention of disrupting the work there.

      I agree that there is a problem with the environment, and that we should do something about it. We need to act legally. Utilize legal avenues. Protest if you want to! Do it legally, so that the media doesn't portray environmentalists as nut jobs (a la the status quo). I'll support them then.

      What about the people who are working there. Most of them are innocent bystanders in this whole affair. They have a job. They're just trying to make money. What happens? Somebody comes in and impedes your work! How would you feel if that happened to you!? You'd be pissed!

      What we need to do is have a little respect. Demonstrate in a manner that is both legal and engaging. The reason that many politicians don't care about listening to environmentalists is that many of them are standoff-ish and not willing to listen to the other side of the argument.

    • 2 years ago
  • JanforGore
  • masterzip
    • 0
      masterzip  
    • masterzip:

      janforgore, I appreciate your passion and respect your opinion, although your sign off Satyagraha should not have been used as it refers to one of my heros M.G. and the meaning is passive resistance, the complete opposite of your argument.

      the doctrine of Mohandas Gandhi:Satyagraha: emphasizing passive resistance and noncooperation
      Etymology: < Hindi, lit., a grasping for truth < Sans satyā, truth + graha, grasping

    • 2 years ago
  • Rorenado
    • 0
      Rorenado  
    • masterzip:

      No Jan, that's called illegal dumping. Use the proper legal avenues. Photograph that stuff. Send it to the media. For chrissakes, don't be an armchair critic of these policies. If you know that they are doing illegal activities, catch 'em in the act!

    • 2 years ago
  • jsutandyo
    • 0
      jsutandyo  
    • what does it mean hijack? did they actually disable the towers? Sorry, I have absolutely no knowledge of this type of stuff.

      if it did disable the tower then i am very much 50/50 with this one. otherwise, very cool.

    • 2 years ago
  • Nettle
    • 0
      Nettle  
    • Well, all anything really needs to qualify for terrorism is spreading fear into people's hearts that will make them change their ways, but this is certainly not terrorism. Nothing was even blown up, defiled or damaged. Also didn't see anyone making scary faces in hopes the leaders would be snapped into thinking differently. A very decent, albeit rather strange, protest.

    • 2 years ago
  • betruelarue
  • jh64487
    • 0
      jh64487  
    • Terrorism: "Terrorism is the intentional use or threat to use violence against civilians and non-combatants "in order to achieve political goals"[1]. This tactic of political violence is intended to intimidate or cause terror[2] for the purpose of "exerting pressure on decision making by state bodies."[1] The term "terror" is largely used to indicate clandestine, low-intensity violence that targets civilians and generates public fear. Thus "terror" is distinct from asymmetric warfare, and violates the concept of a common law of war in which civilian life is regarded."

      Nowhere in this article do i see any terrorist activities. Hijacking is more apt but still not accurate.

      Were the civil rights sit's ins in the 50's considered "terrorism" or "hijackings"? this is a "ballsy" protest.

      green peace, gettin shit done.

    • 2 years ago
  • bansheewail
  • JamesAJanisse
  • pjacobs51
  • Rorenado
  • neonbunny
  • neocongo
    • 0
      neocongo  
    • People need to die or be injured for this type of thing to be remotely considered terrorism. Fox news calls it terrorism because it is activism against their sponsors and constituents.

    • 2 years ago
  • neonbunny
  • bansheewail
more from Community:

top videos