Climatebabes Goes Paris (Again) ;-)

Next week we will be in Paris from wednesday until sunday (with possible extention to monday). We will be making pictures and staging our demonstrations around the activities for the COP21, just like we where at the COP15 in Copenhagen (where most people where freezing to death in the -9 degrees outside the conference halls).

It’s not about this COP21 actually. It does help. But seeing that Shell and other fossil companies sponsor it, that the whole event is a big perk for anyone that is into climate action but doesn’t like to be cast out of the economic sect, and seeing that most progress has been achieved by people not caring for the laws, working with and around them to bring about more renewable energy electric transport, zero impact products and services etc. etc. the manna will not fall from the sky. What we are looking for is the opportunity to draw attention to the big secret of renewable energy : There is a lot of it.

Fossil fuel are really a pittance compared to solar. Wind is the cheapest, but solar is the most abundant and even as the climate warms solar will keep producing while wind will fall off as the winds die (they depend on large temperature differences, but this is many years from now). Solar can bring thousands of times the wealth we now enjoy, and will bring it without any negative side effects. If we embrace it.

Help us by using our banners (only with smiles and babes of course) and promote the idea that the sooner we break the power of fossil economics, the sooner we will all benefit from a wildly growing wealth, health and security around the world. All because the Sun is everywhere and nobody owns it (but for a woman in Spain, who actually claimed ownership of the Sun but doesn’t seem to mind us using it’s fallout radiation).

Invite us by tweeting to @climatebabes

Some COP21 Side event links













Kamps Onverschilligheid

We lezen in het NRC dat Henk Kamp een potje met reserves tbv duurzame energie wil gebruiken om de schade door gaswinning in Groningen te betalen. Het geld is afkomstig van de opslag duurzame energie die alle burgers betalen. Het is een schande.

Vanuit Kamps perspectief is het wel slim, hij is namelijk de voorvechter van fossiel, en slaat zo twee vliegen in een klap. U kunt denken “Hoe kan hij zo onverschillig zijn” maar dat is makkelijk uit te leggen.

Stel dat er compensatie komt voor gasbeving schade, wat er ook gebeurt, dit zal een aanslag zijn op fossiele energiereserves die onze nederlandse economie ter beschikking staat. Dwz de lobby tegen gas, de lobby tegen de gasbevingen en fossiel rekent in feite altijd op het aanspaak kunnen maken op fossiele energie om het probleem op te lossen. Dit is best vreemd. Je hebt een vijand, en vervolgens verwacht je dat die meewerkt en zich inzet.

Om de gasstroom op gang te houden ziet Kamp zich genoodzaakt een deel ervan via geld te verruilen tbv bouwwerkzaamheden aan huizen. Als dat toch moet, en het moet van een groep die tegen het bestaan van deze gasreserves is, dan kan het net zo goed mbv geld dat al aan deze groep was toegedicht. ‘t is het een of het ander.

Kamp weet : De fossiele sector moet geven, en mensen vinden dat normaal. Dat is het niet. Als je je huis wil herstellen/beschermen ivm gas bevingen van gas waar je lekker warm bij was en zelf op gekookt hebt, dan zal dat ten koste gaan van een ander anti-fossiel gebruik van dezelfde fossiele energie. Lekker puh!

We hebben dan ook een EZ minister nodig die de transitie begrijpt en sterk genoeg is om bij fossiel te pakken wat nodig is om ons snel naar een fossielvrije en bewoonbare duurzame maatschappij te loodsen.



Gas-t-vrij Terschelling In Den Haag

Tulip Oil wants to drill for gas on Terschelling. The ‘republican’ wing of government, which is in power with the labour party, is set on making that happen, and using every tactic to leave open the possiblity.

So the citizen of the beautifull island are protesting in The Hague (here is their website gastvrijterschelling) and we joined them. The protest coincides with a general meeting  about energy in which the minister Kamp can be challenged on his policy to push for gas, fracking and other irresponsible plans. On the positive side he informed the attendees that he will postpone granting the lisence to Tulip Oil until 2016.

Henk Kamp does however misrepresent the truth when he says that the explorative license doesn’t mean actuall drilling will take place. It is up to Tulip Oil to decide to go ahead if the test drilling is promising, and then it is too late to stop them.  When it came to fracking activity the same strategy was used ‘just let them see if there is any gas’. The present delay is due to a change in the mining laws that was forced explicitly to delay or halt fracking and gas drilling.

It is not necessary to drill for more gas in Holland, it is possible to cover heat needs with solar, wind and other technologies. Importing gas out of Russia is also in the pipeline, for that purpose a special nitrogen plant is being constructed (because russian gas is more energy dense than what dutch stoves are used to).

Holland is still in the grip of people that want to make it a gas hub, let it burn coal for neighboring countries, burn wood from Canada with heavy subsidies  We’re the country of Shell that wants to drill in the Arctic. It is a shame and a burden on our health, decency and future.

Climate Babe Amber Rud

“I want to unleash a new solar revolution – we have a million people living under roofs with solar panels and that number needs to increase,” (source)

Britain is not the least green country in Europe, It has added impressive wind power plants like the London Array (630 WM). It brought 1.3 GW of new wind power capacity online during 2014. Now with Amber Rudd in office it seems it will accelerate it’s solar capacity.

The UK has recently lost it’s access to possible Falkland reserves, and has had trouble with its North Sea gas and oil supply (it is running out). It has allowed the US to supply gas and is now (possibly in return) making way for fracking to happen, against strong local opposition.

We hope that in spite of the harsh attitude of the Tories, who are selling out to the fossil fuel based private sector, we will see more renewables, which will ultimately change the financial dynamics so as to enable acceleration towards 100% and maybe 1000% renewables. Start the avelanche!

Soap Stare Climatebabe’s Protest Against Fur

We love Carley Stenson for taking action against fur. It is a sick industry that mistreats animals in the most horrific way. Peta is very active against fur and animal
rights, which is a good thing because as we enforce more respect for animals we change expectations of animal treatment
in general, and may move out of a barbaric era..

More often than before are animal rights being respected in court of law. Recently chimpansees have been granted human rights in a US court. The growth in identification with other species is a result of countering the myths most animals are dumb and dangerous.

Now you know what a smiling indian cow looks like..

Many mammals are in fact social, emotional, and intelligent. Cows have friends, Many animals can befriend other animals like we befriend them. Having people rip the skin of still living minkses becomes unpallatable. Peta is doing the job of drawing attention to the cruelty, just like we try to do it with other topics.

Climatebabes Are Making a Difference

Since a few weeks we are cycle tweeting the images of climatebabes of our active campaigns on twitter (follow the twitter link). This is where we make most posts, along with more serious ones on (in Englsih and Dutch).

We had a real good time on Kingsday, in Amsterdam, and at other events like the Rotterdam Marathon (below).

The wind is wealth campaign is generally well understood. Holland is a country that was one of the first to use wind power on an industrial scale for everything from sawing wood to pumping water. Now it is an exploding market and the cheapest gateway to a renewable powered future. We want people to consider it as a source of wealth, productive power, and embrace them even if it is for only the next 20 years or so.

Another campaign we are starting is Maximize Life. It is to promote anyting that grows, biodiversity, soil aware farming, reforrestation and qildlife and jungle conservation. We need to maximize the biodiversity to provide shelter for dwindlin species and to prepare for changes that will put evolutionary pressure on organisms.

Monocultures like created by Monsanto (a company that also reduces the number of varieties around) are a risk because of their sensitivity to plagues and molds etc. Having many genetic varieties increases the chance we have one that can withstand the challenges of a warming world.

We also started tweeting visuals. They work very well in communication a message. If you have any for us send us a tweet at @climatebabes.

Search Google for Solar or Wind and you still see many boring pictures. The marketing of the clean wealthy future is carp, mainly because marketing bureaus are serving a lot of fossil fuel related clients. Also because there is an expectation of rejection, it is something we must do, not something we want to do. Our perspective is different. If you want to eradicate poverty, go renewable, if you want to eradicate war, go renewable, if you want to have free healthcare, go renewable, Acting on climate change is like bailing out of a burning ship that is in the middle of the garden of Eden. The landing will be soft. Now help us tell everyone.

Look at the picture below. The amount of energy (when corrected by us) we use today is a pixel in a huge solar energy balloon. We only need to harvest that solar energy to experience a wealth boom unseein on our history. The more we prioritize that process over sticking with fossil fuels, the sooner you can enjoy the benefits. We’re not after 100% renewables, but at least 500%!

The use of renewables could even lead to peace in the middle east, as there is so much sun there they could green the desert and still have enough solar energy to grow plants underground. At least they would not have to be fighting over who is the best muslim or who gets to give away oil to the West the longest.

if you have a fun project or want us to make pictures in your city, let us know via . Any suggestion is welcome. You can donate here. Our serious department is the website We also install solar panels and give expert advise and information about renewable technology (we know a lot about it).

Case Against the Dutch State to take Stronger Climate Action

Update : This case was won by Urgenda et al. This means the judge ruled the dutch state must seek to reach 25% reduction by 2020. More on the victory here. The dutch state now is appealing the verdict, and is discouraged to do so by countries and people around the world. Join them and send a message to our minister president to stop being a douchebag and start caring for our future.


Basic agreed assumptions

  • Climate change is man made and can be influenced by policy
  • Current policy is not ambitious
  • Furthermore
  • Holland has had twice the ambition but this is reduced by the right wing government
  • Emissions Trading Scheme
  • The scheme will retain a surplus of about 2 billion rights
  • Many states have suplemantary carbon taxes to reduce CO2 This is allowed within the EU


  • Emissions moving elsewhere due to measures
  • Companies moving to less strickt countries
  • Predicted that any reduction of emissions will be 82%-88%
  • Carbonleaking to outside the EU is not observed


  • The court can not argue that it can’t act because of ineffectiveness
  • The state claimed it was tied to EU ETS, this is not true
  • The economic crisis has caused an emissions reduction
  • Emissions targets need to be independent of the economic situation
  • The state will have to choose stronger targets to achieve their stated reduction goals
  • Germany targets a 55% reduction in 2030 which is much more ambitious than the EU target
  • English reports show that the EU target of 40% in 2030 does not suffice
  • The EU economy will suffer 0,04% from more ambitious climate policy
  • If the EU doesn’t stive for more ambitious targets the cost will have to be carried by emerging economies
  • The EU talks about 80% in 2050, but 80-95% was originally required
  • The EU target of 40% is not certain due to a ‘flexibility clause’ that requires all members to match the commitments.
  • To achieve a 40% reduction in 2050 we need 25% reduction in 2020

The court should and has no reason to not dictate at least 25% in 2020 The court can dictate a faster trajectory, as is followed by Germany We have 1000 Gigaton emissions left, which will run out in 2035, meaning that we should be 100% carbon neutral in 2035. This means we have to do the maximum possible at the shortest possible terms. Current trajectory makes 2 degrees Celsius unavoidable. This drives citizen to demand the court to order the state to take stonger action. Remarks second lawyer

  • What the state does is a matter of politics.
  • The state has been locked up in a “You first” mentality.
  • All negotiations have failed to meet the required targets.
  • We are facing 4 degrees catastrophic climate change.
  • Dutch government is aware it is not meeting targets.
  • Binding reduction targets are no longer the goal of the climate conference.
  • Holland doesn’t negotiate at the COP 20 meeting.
  • Targets for the COP20 meeting are already set and for 2030.
  • All emissions should stop asap
  • CO2 will remain in the atmosphere for thousands of years
  • Warming is linear with emissions
  • Zero emissions is expected to be reached in 2050-2070

Dutch State Defence Responses

  • State is aware of climate change and the need for action
  • Since 1995 governmental action was to keep below 2 Celsius degrees warming
  • Holland can not do it alone
  • Holland is pleading for climate action at the COP20 meeting in Paris
  • There is no legal binding law telling Holland to reduce emissions
  • The emission reduction target can not be checked on validity by the state
  • Any decision by the judge should be to some advantage, what is that advantage? It has to be new law. And a judge can not order the creation of new laws.
  • As long as Holland is acting on the climate threat a supplementary ruling by the judge is unecessary.
  • With current targets extra measures are needed to achieve 40% reduction in 2030.
  • Climate problem is a global commons problem, needs to be tackled together
  • Limits should be widespread and pervasive in each industry plus monitoring.
  • In 2014 Holland has -pledged- 100 mljn in the green climate fund.
  • Human rights only valid within the participants of the human rights agreement
  • It is not yet sure that the 2 degree targets are not going to be met.
  • Risk will always remain
  • EU court judges climate and other diseaster responsibility in terms of specific risks and victims.
  • State considers itself to have a wide margin for action, so it can not be forced to specific constraints from Urgenda
  • Judges should not talk about specific targets
  • The conditions of the unjust act are not met, there is no clear causal link.
  • Also the human rights act does not force countries to protect its citizen.

More details to follow..


Verdict will be delivered on the june 24th at 10:00 am.