Don't give any thanks to the Romanian government, give thanks only to the Romanian NGOs, citizens and the lawyers that defended us against Gabriel Resources (the Canadians that wanted to mine there). The government did absolutely nothing, the NGOs and the citizen constantly protesting and keeping their eyes on the issue made it possible. I protested for many years against this initiative from Gabriel Resources.
The Romanian government sided with Gabriel Resources from the get-go, thanks to old friendships and the power of "lobbying". It also sided with other monstrosities, like Chevron, when fracking became all the rage. And, as foamyrocks665 said, if it wasn't for the population, lawyers and NGOs, things would be wildly different now.
@@erikw2460 because Communism worked, didn't it? If Capitalism is creating the problem, Communism also created the problem, Fascism created the same problem... it seems like people are the problem, not the system.
@@Beckford4000 communism did work wonders, it only failed against itself, as in dictatorship...otherwise it would have been the strongest and most prevailing economy in the world, if it existed today
@erikw2460 Socialism is the issue and why food production is stalling. Thousands of farmers across Europe aren't driving their tractors to the Capitols in protest because of Capitalism.
I wish all the farming communittees in the world can use these legal practices to take the US government to court. The US government massively subsidizes the fossil fuel industry, so when global warming reduces farming production across the entire world all the farmers effected should take legal action against the US government to stop them giving money to the fossil fuel industry. That should be many hundreds of billions in USD.
As a citizen of the US I agree with this. If you can Id prefer it you sue our politicians and the corps directly. We can at least use our taxes to fund better things.
😂 “wonderful” how Marat missed the boat completely. The opportunity to move farming off gas and oil is to go electric and develop other sources of power. The ready availability of gas and oil has been steadily coming to a very unpopular end. Because we can develop better means of powering food production. As to iPhones… not sure how but again developing ways to do modern life may not be as automatic as using what’s in place already. It won’t be. But the point is- better get busy instead of becoming more and more irrelevant. It’s been ruinous. Nobody can breathe money.
In Serbia we have the similar problem with Rio Tinto. They want to turn beautiful green land (like in Romania in this video) to a mine pit where they will produce the lithium for "green" industry. They bought the government, they are paying the government news station and police are arresting the people who are protesting against this mine. Those people are accused off attempting a coup.
Is that the case where now Olaf Scholz and Germany are also involved in as well? Once again with disastrous environmental risks and consequences for everyone?
The strange thing is there are already better alternatives to lithium batteries in the making and yet lithium gets pushed. While i am all for a change into green technologies, lithium is not one in my book.
@@YourD3estinY not really as we are not up to speed in electric cars. We had a lead in the 90s and then the car and oil industry thought it would be great to stick with combustion and barried and lobbied against electric cars.
The Canadian Gabriel Resources is (or was) owned by a former Romanian Secret Police officer. He and his cohort worked with crooked former team mates that became the country's leaders after the fall of the communism to get the land and the rights to mine that gold. And he got them, 'cause, well... it was mutually beneficial. All the way up to 2018 or so, every government tried its best to help the "Canadian" company start its business there, regardless of what side of the political spectrum it was, going as far as to try and enshrine into law expropriating land owners for the benefit of other individuals (be they persons or companies). It pretty much was the straw that broke the camel's back, imo. Now the site is UNESCO heritage, so the former secret policeman's company can suck a bag of rotten eggs. What's baffling though, is the fact that the arbitration courts tend to always side with the companies, paying no attention to all the scummy tactics those companies used to get their way... then again, we look at the ICC ruling on what's going on across the Mediteranean Sea and can conclude that it's nothing but smoke and mirrors, a circus for the dumb masses. And if the ICC can be easily ignored by all the big, powerful countries, each time its decisions aren't... appreciated, why would the more "benign" arbitration court or the bullies going there care about the impact of its ruling on the average person? The politicians get rich with all the "lobbying", the corporats get rich, the people get shafted, as it's always the case when "financial discipline" and the bottom line are the only things worth caring for. Serbia, Australia, the US, Colombia... good luck trying to find a country on the map that isn't being infested with these leeches!
It's too bad that the government of the Canadian province of Alberta is going in the pro-corporate direction: opening up beautiful and once-protected areas of the Rocky Mountains to Australian coal mining companies, potentially affecting the water quality in a province known for water shortages. What's worse is that the voters keep electing them.
Corporations don't pay for extreme weather damage, governments do (via tax payers money). Money for disaster recovery is diverted from other social support services e.g. healthcare, education, employment support etc - which, BTW, corporations don't pay for either. Corporate profits go to company owners & shareholders, not shared with the general public ie corporate profits are not a social good, but hoarded away from the public good. We must also ALWAYS remember there was much resistance to social change from corporate self interest e.g. slavery, worker rights & child labour etc, women's right to vote etc etc etc. Corporations generally resist any policies that foster social well-being... their SOLE job is to protect the interests of owners / shareholders (1% of the population). Governments have to balance economic prosperity (for everyone) & the common social good (corporations continued to make profits even after slavery was abolished, workers received broader rights, women were able to vote etc).
"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control on government by controlling money and it's issuance." ~James Madison Via The Venus Project
I had no idea about ISDS. It doubtless explains a great deal about planning decisions across the globe which are widely attributed to simple political corruption. That’s not to say that there isn’t corruption as well because undoubtedly these corporations employ both carrot and stick.
Corruption has long been legalized and institutionalized anyway. ISDS was put in place by giant multinational corporations in the first place, it is itself a product of the state and corporate machinery being one and the same at this point.
The world should rise up and nationalize any international site that threatens the well being of the local people and the world at large. It's time we begin putting people ahead of profits...
Not just modern, the ONLY goal of corporations is to always make more and more profit, no matter the cost, it’s why they used to employ children and why so many people used to die while working in factories, mines, ecc. Regulations are essential and we need to make sure these corporations can’t buy governments (also known as “lobbying”) or you end up like the US where corporations control EVERYTHING.
It might be a controversial opinion, but in practice the legal system in most countries ends up protecting the extremely wealthy and corporations instead of general society (middle and low class), environment, education, health, and so on. Remember, it is not a flaw or a bug, this is by design.
I'm all for diversifying our energy production ( lots of reasons) and I'm all for not destroying our forest/seas/mountains and waters. My rub is that "Green" is a poor marketing name. Something doesn't come from nothing. There is a cost to any and all energy solutions. Someone, somewhere will bear the burden for producing the infrastructure to build any energy economy.
People are doing great work nowadays cleaning up the mess these corporations are causing. Communities coming together for a common cause is going to be the key to stop further exploitation
We need to Prioritise the focus on corporates registered in developed countries. Then corporates in global south can’t point fingers and will have to follow the same
ISDS is ultimately based on treaties and agreements, and countries can withdraw from them, just like European countries are quitting the Energy Charter Treaty in order to be able to favour renewables without being sued by fossil fuel.
@@pedrova8058 Yes, if treaty partners do not want to change those provisions they can force smaller ones to accept them. But helping the oil industry is increasingly frown upon. Amending or withdrawing from treaties seems a simple solution to explore.
Great Information, however, I got Tragedies of the Commons and Eco Nimbyism vibes from it. At the end of these supply chains are Consumers, most of whom are in the West. These consumers would be very upset if their standard of living worsened due to these Industries moving closer to home or switched to cleaner extraction practices whilst abroad.
dont be fooled, DW is highly conservative, just not the US way. They would never even start question the rights to private property, but they are german, so they are perfectly fine to point out that "Property obligates" (§14 of our Grundgesetz, basically constitution), and also, basically none of germanys forest are original, we bascially de-wooded the country a few hundred years ago and the royalty re-forrested everything. So nature and stuff is of concern for conservatives :)
So, the wealthy imperialist nations use the argument that they don’t need to protect the environment because developing countries won’t do so either so there’s no point, but in reality don’t allow these nations to do so under threat of violence.
The Colombian government is supposed to be an ambientalist one, but they're keeping this Glencore issue under the radar even when people's rights are in danger.
In an effort to mellow the conversational climate and dilute the number of populist and ragebait comments on here I will just say: I believe countries should have a right of economic self-determination. International contracts that are binding beyond a single legislative term do provide security for the companies that seek to invest there, but they also bind the hands of governments and entrench exploitative economic relationships. The value gained via resources by the extracting companies and first world states that buy them is not the same as that gained by those countries whose resources and ecosystems are being extracted. I can recommend Jason Hickel's book "The Divide - a guide to global inequality". It goes into detail on why he thinks that for example sub-saharan Africa has not just failed to catch up, but actually fallen further behind economically.
It's interesting to see how these kind of documentaries still always draw out the same crowd, trying to counter with the same boring old nonsense arguments they did use 20 years ago.
DW’s audio engineer made this unwatchable. I had to stop video shortly after 5:15 mark when the music was clearly louder than the narrator. I don’t have A.D.D. Just a musician with an open ear. So get a new audio engineer DW.
Coal = EROI🤞🏾🤞🏾🤞🏾🤞🏾. Every thing manufactured in China has a bit of coal @ In 2021, 56% of primary energy consumption in China was from coal, according to official statistics. In 2020, coal's share was 57%; in 2015, it was 64%.
Yes its going down all the time. Coal plants are build fir securing the grid. Main sources are to be renewables and nuclear. You can not point to China any more. Its doing more to transition than the whole world combined.
Great Information, at the end of these supply chains are Consumers. Most consumers would be very upset if their standard of living worsened due to these Industries switching to cleaner, but worse EROI alternatives. A bottom-up solution would be hard, classic Tragedies of the Commons issue.
Govts should learn to follow agreements and only sign agreements they can keep. Nigeria is losing litigations in foreign courts because they dont honor agreements. Yes, there's corporate greed and that should make developing nations cautious. But the converse is the case, and it's unfortunate.
How about we quit this mining nonsense, make space access affordable so we can start mineing those gaint rocks full of precious metals floating just above us?
Everyone is blaming the companies. It‘s of course only on first glance and very shallow thinking. The companies acquired the rights to mine in those regions from the government. It‘s not like they went there and built a mine and noone knew about it. I agree, it‘s great that they could save that town in Romania. But the company should never have gotten the rights to mine there in the first place. The litigations are because they paid for the rights to mine there, not because they want to get money by suing the government or because they want to force anything. That Glencore moved a river is another example. If they had the rights to do so, why did the government give it in the first place? And if they did not have rights, I‘m sure the state would fine them and even more importantly, they should have to redo the old river path, leaving everything at least how it was before, if not better. I dont like these reportages. They just show everything one-sided. It looks like the companies are soo soo powerful and they are there illegaly by force and noone knew about it. And it looks like the government is fighting for the population, where the government gave the company the right to do this in the first place. But absolutely 0 mention of this.
And how did the corporations _get_ those resource rights from the governments? Surely not by offering junkets, lobbying, kickbacks, bribes, management positions and directorships. Money _buys_ power and influence.
These mines have to get permission from the government before they can even buy the property. How is it governments approve the sale of land to mining companies then tell the mining companies that they can't mine the land they bought in order to mine then turn around and sue the corporations? If I sell you property for you to build a house, then I tell you that you have to leave the property exactly how it is, would you want your money (investment) back? The governments shouldn't have approved the sales of the properties in the first place.
nope, in most cases, companies are not "owners" of the territory, that is what a concession is all about. What is sold is the potential money that an exploitation will generate, and that is what companies then sue the state for (almost the entire economy works like this: what is traded is debt, money that "doesn't exist yet" (this is very obvious, for example, in the real estate business). In these cases, what is sued is for the "potential" profit that was expected and was not achieved, it's much more money than the concessions previously paid (and many times, these companies have "tax benefits", they don't pay the same _proportionally- as a small local company in the same sector)
@@pedrova8058 I was not aware of that. Thank you. But, the last sentence still holds. The government shouldn't have approved the project in the first place without the input from the affected communities. I wonder if the companies can sue to get their bribe money back?
.... right.. who pays your governments to govern? You put them there. Do they make choices you do not agree with vote on someone else. Corporations are bad? Well to be miserable and to starve because you kant aford food is worse i am sure of that. Governments need to legislate and supervise mining and exploitation of natural resources. But as long as the people of said contry profits from the business ... and please prove to me that the only thing driving the planet s temperature up is the burn of fossil fuels. Not only that, but if it is so, and electricity is the solution, why are nuclear olants being ahut down? Olease make it make sense.
People: Want to consume nonstop and for an affordable price Companies: Trying to fullfil that demand and destroying nature People: These evil companies 😡😡😡😡
You have a point but 1) not everyone is a mindless consumerist and 2) the money companies spend on advertising is one of the main causes of our consumerist culture. Are you saying we should not put all the blame on companies but put all the blame on consumers? It's probably neither.
But you do know that companies spent insane money in an effort to raise us to be like that, right? Do you know Bernaise? Like all the Expos around the 1900 in the US? It used to be unthinkable a company was allowed to send ads over the TV or Radio, it was an insane breach of privacy. That was in the 80s... The world has never been like it is now, and somehow corpos made us believe its always been the same
Even if the whole of Europe would suddenly dissapear, not much would change in terms of emissions, as we make up only 7% of the total global output. Why should Europe go bankrupt and ruin it's economy, when other countries quadruple our emissions and have no plans or serious intentions to do anything about it?
Canada's the same way, Canada makes up less then 2% of world emissions with industry they could take every green initiative cancel it and double their industrial outlook and oil extraction and be 2.3% of the worlds emissions. Theres no reason for western countries to go bankrupt. Places like India and China and eastern countries are the ones poisoning the world. Them and the top 100 companies are the polluters, having western populations choke on costs is just their ways of killing westerners slowly. It's war of eastern countries on the west.
Protecting the environment does not make money. Also, i am very upset with your race going all over the world and destroying everyone else's environments.
![Kodak Black - Catch Fire [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A4ch-olIuZo/mqdefault.jpg)
What do I think about corporations? There are no words for how horrible those people are.
Quite horrible, true, though the greens are arguably worse.
Only Ursula is worse.
@@ireminmonlmao ok
no they are not worse, they are however still capitalist which enables these corpos
@@mo-s- found the guy that never worked in the private sector
lol how are the greens worse than these corporations poisoning and exploting people? Makes no sense.
Excellent video. Good on the Romanians and their government for standing up to the mining company.
Don't give any thanks to the Romanian government, give thanks only to the Romanian NGOs, citizens and the lawyers that defended us against Gabriel Resources (the Canadians that wanted to mine there). The government did absolutely nothing, the NGOs and the citizen constantly protesting and keeping their eyes on the issue made it possible. I protested for many years against this initiative from Gabriel Resources.
The Romanian government sided with Gabriel Resources from the get-go, thanks to old friendships and the power of "lobbying". It also sided with other monstrosities, like Chevron, when fracking became all the rage. And, as foamyrocks665 said, if it wasn't for the population, lawyers and NGOs, things would be wildly different now.
Money and companies shouldn't have this kind of Power...we're talking about lives and Nature, this is the most important matter than profits
Capitalism is the issue.. need something that removes their power.. whatever that is.
@@erikw2460 because Communism worked, didn't it? If Capitalism is creating the problem, Communism also created the problem, Fascism created the same problem... it seems like people are the problem, not the system.
@@Beckford4000 We don't have to move from one extreme to the other. There are reasonable ways to contain capitalist greed.
@@Beckford4000 communism did work wonders, it only failed against itself, as in dictatorship...otherwise it would have been the strongest and most prevailing economy in the world, if it existed today
@erikw2460 Socialism is the issue and why food production is stalling. Thousands of farmers across Europe aren't driving their tractors to the Capitols in protest because of Capitalism.
ISDS cases should not be allowed when the government has an environmental basis to stop a project.
I wish all the farming communittees in the world can use these legal practices to take the US government to court.
The US government massively subsidizes the fossil fuel industry, so when global warming reduces farming production across the entire world all the farmers effected should take legal action against the US government to stop them giving money to the fossil fuel industry.
That should be many hundreds of billions in USD.
@@DivanProdOfficial That's all people like Marat are really worried about. The ability to swipe right when they want to.
As a citizen of the US I agree with this. If you can Id prefer it you sue our politicians and the corps directly. We can at least use our taxes to fund better things.
😂 “wonderful” how Marat missed the boat completely.
The opportunity to move farming off gas and oil is to go electric and develop other sources of power.
The ready availability of gas and oil has been steadily coming to a very unpopular end. Because we can develop better means of powering food production.
As to iPhones… not sure how but again developing ways to do modern life may not be as automatic as using what’s in place already. It won’t be. But the point is- better get busy instead of becoming more and more irrelevant. It’s been ruinous. Nobody can breathe money.
In Serbia we have the similar problem with Rio Tinto. They want to turn beautiful green land (like in Romania in this video) to a mine pit where they will produce the lithium for "green" industry. They bought the government, they are paying the government news station and police are arresting the people who are protesting against this mine. Those people are accused off attempting a coup.
Is that the case where now Olaf Scholz and Germany are also involved in as well? Once again with disastrous environmental risks and consequences for everyone?
Well, Germany needs it for their car industry, duhh.
The strange thing is there are already better alternatives to lithium batteries in the making and yet lithium gets pushed.
While i am all for a change into green technologies, lithium is not one in my book.
@@YourD3estinY not really as we are not up to speed in electric cars. We had a lead in the 90s and then the car and oil industry thought it would be great to stick with combustion and barried and lobbied against electric cars.
The Canadian Gabriel Resources is (or was) owned by a former Romanian Secret Police officer. He and his cohort worked with crooked former team mates that became the country's leaders after the fall of the communism to get the land and the rights to mine that gold. And he got them, 'cause, well... it was mutually beneficial. All the way up to 2018 or so, every government tried its best to help the "Canadian" company start its business there, regardless of what side of the political spectrum it was, going as far as to try and enshrine into law expropriating land owners for the benefit of other individuals (be they persons or companies). It pretty much was the straw that broke the camel's back, imo. Now the site is UNESCO heritage, so the former secret policeman's company can suck a bag of rotten eggs.
What's baffling though, is the fact that the arbitration courts tend to always side with the companies, paying no attention to all the scummy tactics those companies used to get their way... then again, we look at the ICC ruling on what's going on across the Mediteranean Sea and can conclude that it's nothing but smoke and mirrors, a circus for the dumb masses. And if the ICC can be easily ignored by all the big, powerful countries, each time its decisions aren't... appreciated, why would the more "benign" arbitration court or the bullies going there care about the impact of its ruling on the average person? The politicians get rich with all the "lobbying", the corporats get rich, the people get shafted, as it's always the case when "financial discipline" and the bottom line are the only things worth caring for. Serbia, Australia, the US, Colombia... good luck trying to find a country on the map that isn't being infested with these leeches!
It's too bad that the government of the Canadian province of Alberta is going in the pro-corporate direction: opening up beautiful and once-protected areas of the Rocky Mountains to Australian coal mining companies, potentially affecting the water quality in a province known for water shortages. What's worse is that the voters keep electing them.
It seems absurd that a company/corporation can sue a government for changing the laws
Glencore doesn't want to talk about Bruno
Brilliant!
Corporations don't pay for extreme weather damage, governments do (via tax payers money). Money for disaster recovery is diverted from other social support services e.g. healthcare, education, employment support etc - which, BTW, corporations don't pay for either. Corporate profits go to company owners & shareholders, not shared with the general public ie corporate profits are not a social good, but hoarded away from the public good. We must also ALWAYS remember there was much resistance to social change from corporate self interest e.g. slavery, worker rights & child labour etc, women's right to vote etc etc etc. Corporations generally resist any policies that foster social well-being... their SOLE job is to protect the interests of owners / shareholders (1% of the population). Governments have to balance economic prosperity (for everyone) & the common social good (corporations continued to make profits even after slavery was abolished, workers received broader rights, women were able to vote etc).
I cannot believe how shameless and ruthless these fossil fuel companies are.
I’m looking forward to seeing them go out of business.
me too, man 😊😊😊😊
"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control on government by controlling money and it's issuance." ~James Madison Via The Venus Project
A bit of a silly question: can we the people enter in to a class action lawsuit against the corporations?
Why this music in the background?
Nationalize the mine, Colombia!
I had no idea about ISDS. It doubtless explains a great deal about planning decisions across the globe which are widely attributed to simple political corruption. That’s not to say that there isn’t corruption as well because undoubtedly these corporations employ both carrot and stick.
Corruption has long been legalized and institutionalized anyway. ISDS was put in place by giant multinational corporations in the first place, it is itself a product of the state and corporate machinery being one and the same at this point.
@DWNews the jaunty music was too loud and really distracting. Please make background music background!
The world should rise up and nationalize any international site that threatens the well being of the local people and the world at large. It's time we begin putting people ahead of profits...
o7
Why the irritating, distracting background music? What exactly does it do to enhance your message?
That was my point too. It certainly wasn't background enough and it was really distracting. I had to give up watching.
Same @@Beckford4000
It's very frustrating, eh? This video's great, tons of useful info, but it's under a heavy blanket of annoying music.
Great video and important topic, but background music should be in the background, not in competition with the narration.
😢The activities of modern corporations are Unconscionable !!😢
Not just modern ones unfortunately
and they always will be, as corporations are inherently immoral
Not just modern, the ONLY goal of corporations is to always make more and more profit, no matter the cost, it’s why they used to employ children and why so many people used to die while working in factories, mines, ecc. Regulations are essential and we need to make sure these corporations can’t buy governments (also known as “lobbying”) or you end up like the US where corporations control EVERYTHING.
So basically ISDS is just one of the ways corporate pressure resource rich countries
It might be a controversial opinion, but in practice the legal system in most countries ends up protecting the extremely wealthy and corporations instead of general society (middle and low class), environment, education, health, and so on. Remember, it is not a flaw or a bug, this is by design.
I'm all for diversifying our energy production ( lots of reasons) and I'm all for not destroying our forest/seas/mountains and waters.
My rub is that "Green" is a poor marketing name. Something doesn't come from nothing. There is a cost to any and all energy solutions. Someone, somewhere will bear the burden for producing the infrastructure to build any energy economy.
People are doing great work nowadays cleaning up the mess these corporations are causing. Communities coming together for a common cause is going to be the key to stop further exploitation
We need to Prioritise the focus on corporates registered in developed countries. Then corporates in global south can’t point fingers and will have to follow the same
They're Criminal! Human Suffering Will Not Change In A Monetary System. ~The Venus Project
ISDS is ultimately based on treaties and agreements, and countries can withdraw from them, just like European countries are quitting the Energy Charter Treaty in order to be able to favour renewables without being sued by fossil fuel.
Small countries cannot, their economies could not withstand economic blockades.
@@pedrova8058 Yes, if treaty partners do not want to change those provisions they can force smaller ones to accept them. But helping the oil industry is increasingly frown upon. Amending or withdrawing from treaties seems a simple solution to explore.
Excellent report. I liked the analogy between both cases. Many people are not aware yet of ISDS and its abuse records across many countries.
Countries are starting to withdraw from ISDS's, not before time.
You should consider doing a piece about Mina de Aguas Teñidas in Andalucia, Spain. They are doing mining right
Great Information, however, I got Tragedies of the Commons and Eco Nimbyism vibes from it. At the end of these supply chains are Consumers, most of whom are in the West. These consumers would be very upset if their standard of living worsened due to these Industries moving closer to home or switched to cleaner extraction practices whilst abroad.
dont be fooled, DW is highly conservative, just not the US way. They would never even start question the rights to private property, but they are german, so they are perfectly fine to point out that "Property obligates" (§14 of our Grundgesetz, basically constitution), and also, basically none of germanys forest are original, we bascially de-wooded the country a few hundred years ago and the royalty re-forrested everything. So nature and stuff is of concern for conservatives :)
So, the wealthy imperialist nations use the argument that they don’t need to protect the environment because developing countries won’t do so either so there’s no point, but in reality don’t allow these nations to do so under threat of violence.
This is captalist colonialism at its finest
I own money on corporations but we coorporations should stop making money against the enviroment. Shame on us coorporations
The Colombian government is supposed to be an ambientalist one, but they're keeping this Glencore issue under the radar even when people's rights are in danger.
In an effort to mellow the conversational climate and dilute the number of populist and ragebait comments on here I will just say:
I believe countries should have a right of economic self-determination.
International contracts that are binding beyond a single legislative term do provide security for the companies that seek to invest there, but they also bind the hands of governments and entrench exploitative economic relationships.
The value gained via resources by the extracting companies and first world states that buy them is not the same as that gained by those countries whose resources and ecosystems are being extracted.
I can recommend Jason Hickel's book "The Divide - a guide to global inequality".
It goes into detail on why he thinks that for example sub-saharan Africa has not just failed to catch up, but actually fallen further behind economically.
ultimately, when money talks everything else is nonsense
it's not the money that's bad, it's that the money is in the hands of few
DW placing atrocious audio and making the narration a backgroud music instead, are you supporting glencore too?
It's interesting to see how these kind of documentaries still always draw out the same crowd, trying to counter with the same boring old nonsense arguments they did use 20 years ago.
They work. For goverment officials takimg bribes and people getting their news on social media.
since the process is secret I can only imagine that it's something very very bad
Soo evil these corporation are
Save Our Planet Now
DW’s audio engineer made this unwatchable.
I had to stop video shortly after 5:15 mark when the music was clearly louder than the narrator.
I don’t have A.D.D. Just a musician with an open ear. So get a new audio engineer DW.
I gave up at 07:00 because it was really annoying and becoming louder than the narrator.
Coal = EROI🤞🏾🤞🏾🤞🏾🤞🏾. Every thing manufactured in China has a bit of coal @ In 2021, 56% of primary energy consumption in China was from coal, according to official statistics. In 2020, coal's share was 57%; in 2015, it was 64%.
Yes its going down all the time. Coal plants are build fir securing the grid. Main sources are to be renewables and nuclear. You can not point to China any more. Its doing more to transition than the whole world combined.
Great Information, at the end of these supply chains are Consumers. Most consumers would be very upset if their standard of living worsened due to these Industries switching to cleaner, but worse EROI alternatives. A bottom-up solution would be hard, classic Tragedies of the Commons issue.
Govts should learn to follow agreements and only sign agreements they can keep. Nigeria is losing litigations in foreign courts because they dont honor agreements. Yes, there's corporate greed and that should make developing nations cautious. But the converse is the case, and it's unfortunate.
Wasting time fighting for keeping what they have now, they miss to fight for what they could have, if they made the transition a success.
Green transition is just corporate bussiness.
👏👏👏👏
🌈🦋🌈
Wow the inhumanity is still surprising.
How about we quit this mining nonsense, make space access affordable so we can start mineing those gaint rocks full of precious metals floating just above us?
Everyone is blaming the companies. It‘s of course only on first glance and very shallow thinking. The companies acquired the rights to mine in those regions from the government. It‘s not like they went there and built a mine and noone knew about it.
I agree, it‘s great that they could save that town in Romania. But the company should never have gotten the rights to mine there in the first place. The litigations are because they paid for the rights to mine there, not because they want to get money by suing the government or because they want to force anything.
That Glencore moved a river is another example. If they had the rights to do so, why did the government give it in the first place? And if they did not have rights, I‘m sure the state would fine them and even more importantly, they should have to redo the old river path, leaving everything at least how it was before, if not better.
I dont like these reportages. They just show everything one-sided. It looks like the companies are soo soo powerful and they are there illegaly by force and noone knew about it. And it looks like the government is fighting for the population, where the government gave the company the right to do this in the first place. But absolutely 0 mention of this.
And how did the corporations _get_ those resource rights from the governments? Surely not by offering junkets, lobbying, kickbacks, bribes, management positions and directorships. Money _buys_ power and influence.
These mines have to get permission from the government before they can even buy the property. How is it governments approve the sale of land to mining companies then tell the mining companies that they can't mine the land they bought in order to mine then turn around and sue the corporations? If I sell you property for you to build a house, then I tell you that you have to leave the property exactly how it is, would you want your money (investment) back? The governments shouldn't have approved the sales of the properties in the first place.
nope, in most cases, companies are not "owners" of the territory, that is what a concession is all about. What is sold is the potential money that an exploitation will generate, and that is what companies then sue the state for (almost the entire economy works like this: what is traded is debt, money that "doesn't exist yet" (this is very obvious, for example, in the real estate business). In these cases, what is sued is for the "potential" profit that was expected and was not achieved, it's much more money than the concessions previously paid (and many times, these companies have "tax benefits", they don't pay the same _proportionally- as a small local company in the same sector)
@@pedrova8058 I was not aware of that. Thank you. But, the last sentence still holds. The government shouldn't have approved the project in the first place without the input from the affected communities. I wonder if the companies can sue to get their bribe money back?
Ban ISDS
america and uerope again
western capital go brrrr
Many riches are right on top of special places where life flourishes, coincidence?
Good on your government. My US government stinks.
.... right.. who pays your governments to govern? You put them there. Do they make choices you do not agree with vote on someone else. Corporations are bad? Well to be miserable and to starve because you kant aford food is worse i am sure of that. Governments need to legislate and supervise mining and exploitation of natural resources. But as long as the people of said contry profits from the business ... and please prove to me that the only thing driving the planet s temperature up is the burn of fossil fuels. Not only that, but if it is so, and electricity is the solution, why are nuclear olants being ahut down? Olease make it make sense.
We should start mining asteroids
Hehe, we're doomed😅
USA, lawyers State 😂😂😂😂
A d youre not going to do anythinG, about it,
People: Want to consume nonstop and for an affordable price
Companies: Trying to fullfil that demand and destroying nature
People: These evil companies 😡😡😡😡
What are the options available to us? It’s hard to break free from these corporations when they have a stronghold on us. Example: watch the video.
@@patrickbte1 what. you don't even know what you're saying. Seek help
You have a point but 1) not everyone is a mindless consumerist and 2) the money companies spend on advertising is one of the main causes of our consumerist culture. Are you saying we should not put all the blame on companies but put all the blame on consumers? It's probably neither.
But you do know that companies spent insane money in an effort to raise us to be like that, right? Do you know Bernaise? Like all the Expos around the 1900 in the US? It used to be unthinkable a company was allowed to send ads over the TV or Radio, it was an insane breach of privacy. That was in the 80s... The world has never been like it is now, and somehow corpos made us believe its always been the same
What European country consume is the greater importer of carbon to generate electricity?? Germany 😂😂
Even if the whole of Europe would suddenly dissapear, not much would change in terms of emissions, as we make up only 7% of the total global output. Why should Europe go bankrupt and ruin it's economy, when other countries quadruple our emissions and have no plans or serious intentions to do anything about it?
you cannot come with facts against an ideology
that has a hysterical touch
Because pollution has it's greatest effects locally.
Guys let’s be Frank you are in trouble….
@@HolloMatlala1 you so woke, love it
Canada's the same way, Canada makes up less then 2% of world emissions with industry they could take every green initiative cancel it and double their industrial outlook and oil extraction and be 2.3% of the worlds emissions. Theres no reason for western countries to go bankrupt.
Places like India and China and eastern countries are the ones poisoning the world. Them and the top 100 companies are the polluters, having western populations choke on costs is just their ways of killing westerners slowly. It's war of eastern countries on the west.
The green scam
Don't complain about unemployment😂😂😂
Protecting the environment does not make money. Also, i am very upset with your race going all over the world and destroying everyone else's environments.