The outspoken parliament member has been subjected to repeated smears and attacks from representatives of the Sweden Democrats’ partner party, the Liberals, without any support or backing from her own party leadership. As a result, she has now decided to leave the Sweden Democrats and remain a political wild card.
Elsa Widding, a member of the parliament, who has repeatedly questioned the frequent claims of an acute climate crisis, has decided to leave the Sweden Democrat party of which she was previously a member.
Widding points out that high-ranking representatives in SD’s partner party Liberalerna have repeatedly smeared her and accused her of being a “conspiracy theorist” and a “political extremist”, without her own party leadership coming to her defense.
For example, Education Minister Mats Persson (L) tweeted that “Widding shows a contempt for knowledge that does not befit a member of parliament. It is a serious matter to support conspiracy theories about climate, vaccines and the Holocaust“, after Widding had participated in a conference generally critical of the system.
– SD supports the government through the Tidö Agreement. But I would have expected my party to distance itself from these despicable attacks by the Liberals’ main representatives. They accuse me of supporting those who deny or belittle a terrible genocide of six million Jews, Widding comments.
– In spite of this slander, SD chooses not to comment on the issue in the media. But the silence speaks volumes. A line has now been crossed here as well. I have therefore decided to leave the party, she continues.
She states that she will remain in Parliament during her term and focus on issues that are important to the voters who elected her:
– As long as I can be useful in the Swedish Parliament, I will remain in office with the ambition to focus on three important issues. 1. To contribute to a more nuanced climate policy; 2. To increase the understanding of the environmental impact and inefficiency of wind power; and 3. To contribute to the Parliament discussing the consequences for Sweden’s sovereignty of the WHO’s plans to expand its mandate.
We don’t have a billionaire owner, and our unique reader-funded model keeps us free from political or corporate influence. This means we can fearlessly report the facts and shine a light on the misdeeds of those in power.
Consider a donation to keep our independent journalism running…
Norwegian Progress Party politician Sylvi Listhaug has grown tired of Greta Thunberg "repeatedly" returning to Norway to participate in climate activist actions.
Climate activist protests at Norway’s largest oil refinery have triggered harsh criticism from opposition leader Sylvi Listhaug, who is now demanding that Swedish activist Greta Thunberg be expelled from the country.
Monday’s blockade at Equinor Mongstad outside Bergen, Norway, gathered approximately 200 demonstrators from the widely media-covered group Extinction Rebellion. The activists blocked roads to the refinery, which is the country’s largest and primarily produces gasoline, diesel and aviation fuel.
Progress Party leader Sylvi Listhaug launches a fierce attack against Thunberg in a podcast with Bergen newspaper Bergens Tidende. She is upset that the Swedish activist repeatedly travels to Norway to participate in protests and actions, and believes that enough is enough.
Listhaug, who often profiles herself as a tough law-and-order politician, believes that Thunberg’s repeated demonstrations constitute a serious problem requiring drastic measures.
— I believe she should be expelled, says Listhaug, who even describes Thunberg as a “Swedish gang criminal”.
Thunberg, who temporarily left the demonstration to return on Tuesday, explained the action’s purpose in a press release:
“We are here because there is no future in oil. Fossil fuels lead to death and destruction”, it states.
“Breaks the rules of the game”
Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre tries to navigate between fundamental rights and practical consequences. In Bergen newspaper Bergensavisen, he emphasizes that Norway stands firm on freedom of expression and demonstration, but simultaneously signals that the activists’ methods are unacceptable when they prevent ordinary people from getting to work.
— It breaks the rules of the game. There are people going to work and they shouldn’t have to experience insecurity with that, the prime minister emphasizes.
The view of Thunberg among European leaders has changed markedly since she was celebrated as a teenager at summits around the world.
After she expanded her activism to include criticism of Israel’s war crimes in Gaza and other political issues, she has increasingly begun to be regarded as a disruptive element and an “extremist” who must be stopped or restricted – a sharp contrast to how she was previously portrayed as a hero and role model for young Europeans.
A nearly three-year legal process concluded this week when all activists from Restore Wetlands (Återställ Våtmarker) were acquitted for blocking the E4 motorway in August 2022, which in addition to causing long traffic jams also delayed an ambulance on an emergency call.
According to Sweden’s Supreme Court (Högsta domstolen), the road blockade was not comparable to the threats against vital societal interests required by law for a conviction of sabotage, and therefore acquitted all participants in the climate alarmist group’s action. The Supreme Court particularly emphasized the importance of freedom of demonstration and freedom of expression in a ruling that will serve as guidance for how civil disobedience should be punished, which in practice opens the door for more motorway blockades.
– The legal situation has been unclear regarding what constitutes a serious disruption or obstruction in these cases. It’s good that we now have clear guidance from the Supreme Court on how prosecutions for sabotage should be assessed in the future, says Chief Prosecutor Katarina Johansson Welin in the Supreme Court’s press release.
The group itself describes its action as an “act of love”.
– Victory! Today we celebrate that the sabotage charge has been shot down for the last time. In my heart, I have always known that I acted exactly right. To sit peacefully and openly on a motorway and demand that emissions decrease is among the strongest acts of love for our children and for life that you can do, and we did exactly that, says one of those acquitted in the climate group’s press release.
That fewer children are born in Sweden is only good for the environment, argues Green Party (Miljöpartiet) politician Lennart Olsen. Children and young people also cost more than older people, who can still work at higher ages if the pension age is raised, he adds.
Olsen writes in a debate article in the Bonnier publication Dagens Nyheter that people should view positively the fact that Swedes are not reproducing themselves.
“What’s needed here is a reversed perspective, where lower birth rates and eventually decreasing population should be welcomed to reduce the exploitation of the earth’s ecosystems“.
The Green Party member believes that the Swedish government’s investigation aimed at proposing measures to raise the very low birth rates in Sweden is “misguided”. He argues that the state can save money from fewer children being born.
“For the state’s and municipal sector’s economy, children and young people are a much greater expense than the elderly. This is because virtually all people between 0 and 20 years old cost a lot of money in the form of preschool, school, higher education, parental insurance, child allowance and more“, Olsen explains his thesis and argues that older people also won’t need as much pension if the retirement age is raised further.
Above all, the Green Party economist sees the possibility that fewer Swedish children will lead to a better climate in the long term.
“The positive effects of such a development can then also take effect and lead to reduced pressure on the earth’s ecosystems“, writes Olsen.
Olsen represents a so-called neo-Malthusian line, an ideological movement that strives for reduced population and strongly influences the climate alarmist movement.
Despite promises of groundbreaking climate solutions, Swiss carbon dioxide giant Climeworks’ facility in Iceland has not only captured far less than promised – it has also emitted more carbon dioxide than it has absorbed.
Critics say the whole operation is deeply deceptive and one of many examples of scam projects created to profit from the alleged climate crisis.
Climeworks, a Swiss company that markets itself as a pioneer in direct carbon capture (DAC), has failed to achieve its targets in Iceland despite significant investment and media attention.
According to data from the verification company Puro.Earth and the company’s own annual reports, Climeworks has only captured around 2,400 tons of CO₂ in Iceland since 2021 – far below the promised capacity ceiling of 12,000 tons. In addition, the company’s own emissions from its operations have exceeded its capture: in 2023 alone, Climeworks emitted 1,700 tons of CO₂, significantly more than its total capture.
Climeworks’ first facility, Orca, was unveiled in 2021 with a capacity of 4,000 tons of CO₂ per year. In reality, it has never even reached half that target. The larger Mammoth facility, which could capture 36,000 tons annually, has only managed to collect 105 tons after ten months of operation.
According to CEO Jan Wurzbacher, Mammoth requires 5,000–6,000 kWh per ton of CO₂ captured – a process described as extremely inefficient. To offset Iceland’s total emissions (12.4 million tons in 2024), 72 terawatt hours of energy would be needed – four times the country’s annual electricity production.
Professor: “A scam”
Climeworks’ Icelandic subsidiary has negative equity of ISK 3.6 billion (€25 million) and is entirely dependent on funding from its parent company. The value of the Orca machine has also been written down by €1.25 million due to underperformance.
Despite this, the company has sold future carbon credits equivalent to one-third of Mammoth’s planned capacity for the next 25 years – even though over 21,000 private subscribers who have paid in advance risk having to wait decades for their certificates.
Mark Z. Jacobson, professor of environmental science at Stanford University, calls the entire DAC industry a big scam and fraud.
– Direct capture is a scam, carbon capture is a scam, blue hydrogen is a scam, and electrofuel is a scam. These are all scam technologies that do nothing for the climate or air pollution.
“Semi-magical technology”
Michael de Podesta, a British pensioner who paid ISK 135,000 (€940) for 2.2 tons of CO₂ capture, expresses similar concerns in his blog, and after looking into the company more closely, he believes he has probably been scammed.
“This has all the hallmarks of a scam. There are undoubtedly a lot of highly paid people traveling the world to sell their services to large corporations to remove carbon credits in the future. They are using a semi-magical technology that doesn’t work as well as expected (better known as Orca) but will work perfectly in a larger version (Mammoth)”.
“I am urged to convince my friends to join the project. The answers are scarce and full of PR chatter. Climeworks’ operations look like a scam and talk like one. But is it a scam? I don’t know. I think it could work, but the company’s answers are so opaque that it’s hard to say”, he continues.
He will not know for sure until 2027 whether Climeworks has actually captured the 2.2 tons of carbon dioxide he has paid for.
Millions from the US
It is also worth noting that the company has received or been promised around $800 million in public subsidies, including $625 million from the US Department of Energy and $5 million from Switzerland. Despite this, the cost per ton of CO₂ captured remains at $1,000 – ten times higher than the original target.
Due to the failures of DAC, Climeworks has now instead begun to focus on “enhanced weathering”, a highly controversial method in which crushed rock is bound with CO₂. However, researchers believe that this is a sign of desperation to fulfill credits that have already been sold.
In summary, critics point out that Climeworks’ operations have been characterized by exaggerated promises, technical shortcomings, and financial irresponsibility since its inception. Despite being ranked as one of the world’s leading green tech companies by Time Magazine, its contribution to climate action is described as marginal at best – and at worst as directly counterproductive and harmful.
