Beware the demons disguised as angels for they are the most dangerous of all

Ecocide is an international crime against the environment and easily the worst of all crimes. Unlike other crimes it is not limited in space or time. Its harm may spread across the globe and far into the future. It is also a new crime. And therefore not yet codified, but that does not mean that it can be committed with impunity. The Nuremberg trials have created precedents that make it possible to convict perpetrators even if their crimes were not formally codified when committed but are so heinous that not doing so would be a monstrous injustice. Ecocide is such a crime.

Norway is guilty of that crime. Like other big oil producers, it knew, at the very latest since 1990, when the first IPCC report was published, that emissions had to be cut to prevent dangerous warming of the planet. Norway ignored this warning and started to increase its oil and natural gas production steadily. Between 1990 and 2000 it almost doubled its production of oil from 1.7 million barrels a day to 3.4 million barrels. Since then it dropped back to 1.7m as a result of sources being exhausted but it is rapidly rising again.

In spite of this temporary setback it is still one of the major oil producers in the world:



The most remarkable aspect of this behavior is that there is no need for Norway to keep on doing this. It has already built up enormous wealth from fossil fuel profits. It has become one of the richest countries in the world, has the highest standard of living and has stashed away about 1.5 trillion dollars in a "Wealth Fund". It could easily reduce its fossil fuel activities to a minimum without any hardship for itself.

Norwegian environmental groups repeatedly tried to stop their government's plan to continue fossil fuel production. However, Norwegian courts consistently sided with the government, arguing feeble points of (national) law and even claiming that Norway was not responsible for the consequences of its acts. That was a very curious defense, seldom used unless a defendant wants to plead insanity. But that was not the intention here. The judges actually meant that their government was not responsible for its acts, which is utter nonsense. Any bright six-year-old already knows that we are all responsible for our acts and, inevitably, their consequences. Even if Norway does not actually use the fossil fuels, it is complicit in their use. It voluntarily and intentionally made those fuels available, knowing fully well what was going to be done with them. In a legal sense that makes Norway an accomplice, who is regarded in many legal systems in the world as just as guilty as the actual perpetrator. Accomplices may receive slightly different sentences but they are anything but innocent.

Calls for making ecocide an international crime are getting louder by the day. It will happen eventually, but probably not until the number of deaths that it causes begin to skyrocket. Then the criminals causing the ongoing destruction of our world will be held accountable and punished accordingly.

In the meantime Norway is not showing any sign of slowing down. In 2023, with fires and floods causing immense damage and suffering across the globe, the Norwegian government announced that it is going to increase its oil and gas production drastically and will keep on doing this for decades. It has even urged other producers to do the same.

This is not only criminal and immoral but also stupid and unrealistic. If Norway (and others like it) continue their destructive behavior, global warming will destroy modern civilization in the very near future. The fact that Norway fails to recognize this, proves that it is still a staunch denier of climate change.

There's more rotten in the state of Norway

Despite its extreme international wrongdoings Norway has managed to create the illusion that it is a leader in the "fight" against climate change and a protector of the environment. This is largely achieved by PR stunts. It brags a lot about its use of renewable electricity, especially hydropower and electric cars. It dims lights in towns and builds wind farms and promises to electrify everything. It even hands out money to developing countries to protect the environment.

None of this means anything. It is just window-dressing, greenwashing.

Hydropower, for instance, is not only ecologically harmful but also a source of greenhouse gases.

Ironically, hydropower is also becoming very vulnerable to global warming. In the spring of 2023 China already suffered a decline of 22% in energy production from hydropower because of droughts and this will only get worse, while the opposite, too much water, threatens many hydropower dams with collapse. We already discussed the immense harm done by electric cars on a special page. The link is at the bottom of this page.

Norway's intention to "electrify everything" is an empty slogan, because it is impossible with the current state of technology. That technology would have to take several quantum leaps to make it possible. And even if those leaps are made, global warming has already advanced so far that there will be not enough time to make such innovations operational on a global scale.

Norway also pretends to be deeply concerned about the forests of the world. In 2008 it gave Brazil $1bn to help protect the Amazon rain forest. In 2016 its government declared that it would no longer award contracts to companies that took part in deforestation. It made Norway a shining example of environmental protection in the eyes of the world.

In reality it was just a very clever ploy to deflect attention away from Norway's more sinister activities. Its oil and gas production does more harm to the forests of the world than its money can repair. To a country with 1.5 trillion dollars in the bank a few billion dollars are a paltry sum to pay for being seen as a benefactor instead of a villain like all other fossil fuel producers, which are faced with increasing hostility and lawsuits all around the world.

But even if we ignore Norway's international pollution, it still is no example for the rest of the world. In spite of all its boasting about its use of renewables its ecological footprint is still far too high.

A study by the WWF (2022). "Reducing Norway’s footprint - bringing our production and consumption within planetary boundaries. Oslo, Norway." shows that Norway still has an ecological footprint that requires 3.6 planets to be sustainable. Most ironically the biggest problem is CO2 emissions, showing once again that renewables are not the solution they are cracked up to be.

Mourn the Norwegian wolf

Another example of Norway's deceitfulness is its treatment of wolves.

Like all predators wolves play a vital part in ecosystems and benefit their prey by removing unfit individuals, which maximizes opportunities for the fitter ones.

Wolves are by far the most maligned animals in the world. For centuries they were persecuted, mainly through ignorance, superstition and malice. Finally, in the 20th century, truth prevailed, when studies by wildlife biologists showed how beneficial wolves are and how undeserved their monstrous image was. All over the world attempts were made to reintroduce them in the many places where they had almost been driven into extinction.

The Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats was part of those attempts. Under that convention the wolf is a strictly protected fauna species, which must not be killed.

To uphold its image of environmental virtue, Norway signed and ratified that convention. This meant that it officially committed itself to ensuring the survival of wolves on its soil. In reality Norway, however, violates or ignores many articles of the convention, such as:

• the prohibition to kill a strictly protected fauna species, which the wolf is
• the obligation to take the necessary measures to maintain the population to a level that corresponds to ecological and scientific requirements
• the obligation to promote education and general information on the need to conserve the relevant species (especially important for the wolf, which is the victim of so many ancient falsehoods)
• the obligation to seek non-lethal solutions for any serious problems with members of the species.

Norway deliberately keeps the number of wolves so low that it endangers their survival. These numbers are set arbitrarily by the Norwegian authorities without any scientific basis.

According to experts their numbers should be 300 at the very least, preferably several times more. That should not be a problem because Norway is one of the least densely populated countries in the world.

Instead the number of wolves is kept well below 100 by means of annual culls. The killing is not even done by professional wildlife experts, but by amateurs, hunters who kill for sport and can apply for licences from the authorities. It is immensely popular among hunters, with as many as 10,000 lining up for a few dozen licences.

The main reason given for these draconic and environmentally harmful measures is the alleged harm that wolves do to sheep.

That makes no sense.

Norway has about 2 million sheep, which are allowed to roam freely across the countryside. Annually about 150,000 die of natural causes, including predators. Wolves only account for about 1500 animals or less than 0.01% of the total population. Economically, that is an insignificant number, especially because sheep are not expensive and sheep farmers receive compensation for animals killed by wolves. In fact it is very likely that the cost of hunting wolves exceeds the economic harm they do.

It would be equally absurd to argue emotional distress on the part of the sheep owners. Sheep farming is a brutal business. Every year the vast majority of Norwegian lambs, hundreds of thousands of them, are selected for slaughter by the time they are about 155 days old. Against the background of that carnage it is absurd to persecute wolves for killing an occasional sheep. To further raise the madness wolves are also hunted in (northern) regions where there are no sheep at all, even in so-called protected wolf areas and even during breeding seasons, so that any orphaned pups will also die.

Naturally this official hostility towards wolves by Norwegian governments also encourages illegal killings, which are hardly ever prosecuted.

Norway is also deeply at fault in its treatment of wolves because they are critically endangered according to its own Norwegian Red List.

In 2022 several Norwegian activists submitted an official complaint to the standing committee of the Bern Convention. We have added it to the links at the bottom of the page, in which all the details of Norway's misdeeds can be found.

The bane of sheep

To further show its true colors as an enemy of a healthy environment and climate Norway also presents sheep as a blessing for the environment. According to glowing reports in official Norwegian tourist publications sheep promote biodiversity. Again, this is far from the truth.

Grazing sheep indeed have an enormous impact on vegetation, for instance by preventing the growth of trees. This may change biodiversity but rarely improves it. A major study on sheep grazing in the North Atlantic region, including Norway, reached the conclusion that: "Many studies point to overall benefits to biodiversity from a reduction in sheep grazing intensity".

Sheep can only benefit diversity when their numbers are carefully managed. This is obviously not the case in Norway, where they are left to fend for themselves.

On top of everything else sheep are ruminants, which produce methane, one of the worst greenhouse gases. Yet another reason why they are definitely not an environmental blessing. What the world really needs is less sheep and more wolves.

More harm to wildlife

Whaling has been one of humanity's worst crimes against the environment. It is estimated that in the 20th century about 3 million of these majestic animals were killed. A recent study has shown that surviving whales still suffer a significant loss in genetic diversity as a result.

The practice of killing whales is also extremely cruel. We shall not go into the sickening details, but it amounts to prolonged torture. No human with a grain of empathy would ever dream of inflicting such suffering upon another sentient being.

In 1986 a moratorium on all commercial whaling was put in place by the International Whaling Commission. In spite of being a member Norway ignored the ban and has continued to hunt whales ever since. With its familiar deceitfulness it claims that it does so "sustainably", which is too ridiculous for words.

Postscript

All the above is more than enough to brand Norway as one of the most environmentally hostile countries in the world. To make matters even worse it is now planning to start deep seabed mining in a huge ocean area in the Arctic. According to the World Wildlife Fund it is "one of the worst environmental decisions Norway has ever made". And that is saying something, given Norway's true environmental record.