The environment in the news friday, January 07 2011

Nicotine is a neurotoxin, that is, it attacks the insect nervous system. In recent years, pesticide companies such as the German giant Bayer have developed a group of compounds which act in a similar way; they have been christened neonicotinoids ("new nicotine-like things"). Neonicotinoids are now among the most widely-used insecticides because they are very effective, and they are effective because they are "systemic". That means that they do not simply sit on the plant's surface but are taken up into the plant itself, so that any part of it becomes toxic to the aphid or other troublesome wee beastie attempting to feed upon it.

Unfortunately, when we say "any part", that is literally true: not only the stem and the leaves are contaminated but so, even at the heart of the plant's flowers, are its pollen and its nectar. And when pollinating insects come along to gather them, such as honeybees, bumblebees, solitary bees, moths, butterflies, or hoverflies, which are by no means the "target" species of the insecticide, they get a shot of poison nonetheless. They may get a tiny shot. But each time they buzz to a contaminated flower for more pollen or nectar, they get another one. And another one. And another one.

In the great mysterious crash of bee populations, which has been gathering speed around the world for the past decade or so, and which has started to alarm even governments because of the vast worth of bee pollination to the agricultural economy (more than £12bn annually just in Europe), neonicotinoids are increasingly suspect. In the great crash of other insect populations which has similarly been taking place, about which governments do not give a toss but which nonetheless threatens the natural environment with catastrophe (many insectivorous birds are dropping dramatically in numbers), neonicotinoids are similarly in the frame.

For they do not only pose problems through pollination. Neonicotinoids persist in the soil and have high leaching potential, meaning that they can not only harm soil organisms but can be washed out and end up contaminating water bodies, and they may be implicated in the enormous decline in aquatic insects such as mayflies which we have seen in recent years.

So how can such pesticides be licensed for use? In European countries, the initial licensing is done at European Union level by way of a Draft Assessment Report (DAR); but although the basic research for it is usually done by independent scientists, the organisation of the report – remarkably, you may think – is carried out by the manufacturer. So the DAR for the commonest neonicotinoid, which is called imidacloprid, was put together by Bayer, which makes imidacloprid, and which makes many millions of pounds from it every year. And guess what? Bayer's report found no reason why it should not be approved!

Fifteen months ago, however, the British invertebrate conservation charity Buglife conducted a review of all the available scientific literature about the effects of neonicotinoids, and imidacloprid in particular, on non-target insect species; this produced a much more troubling picture. Referring directly to 100 independent, peer-reviewed scientific papers, the Buglife study highlighted a raft of concerns that neonicotinoids are indeed harmful for bees and other pollinating insects, especially chronically (that is, through tiny doses ingested from repeated visits to contaminated flowers) – something which the testing methodology of the imidacloprid DAR, the Buglife study said, simply did not pick up.

These concerns have become widely shared, at the national level – France, Germany, Italy and Slovenia have all banned neonicotinoids to a greater or lesser degree – and they have been further heightened by the recent leak of a confidential internal memo from the US Environmental Protection Agency, which warned that bees and other insects were at risk from another Bayer-produced neonicotinoid, currently on the market, called clothianidin.

The British response? Zero. At present, despite the concerns, about 30 products containing imidacloprid are cheerfully licensed for use on British farms and in British gardens. But then the British government, especially the present one, is very relaxed about pesticides, as was made clear by the junior environment minister, Lord Henley, in his response before Christmas to new EU legislation on sustainable pesticide use. He could have brought in various improvements on the back of it, such as a ban on pesticides near schools, playgrounds or hospitals, or a mandatory requirement to notify communities before pesticide spraying which might affect them. He chose to do nothing.

Yet many might think that applying substantial doses of poison to the landscape is hardly an issue to be relaxed about: get it wrong and the consequences are horrendous. Rachel Carson first showed us that 50 years ago next year when she published Silent Spring, the book which, in documenting the terrible toll pesticides were taking on American wildlife, effectively launched the modern environment movement. Carson's concern then was organochlorine substances, principally DDT. But looking at neonicotinoids, and the mounting evidence against them, and the persistence of their use, the thought is overwhelming: have we learned nothing in 50 years? Carson feared a world without birdsong; and here we are fearing a world without bees, half a century on.

Compost your rubbish to reduce your use of plastic bags.

Don't use bin liners – just tip your rubbish into the bin.

Bring unusable cloth bags to the shops with you.

Avoid buying beverages in plastic bottles – opt for glass where possible.

Carry your own thermal mug and ask coffee retailers to fill it for you rather than taking a disposable cup. Bring your own coffee mug to work with you.

Avoid buying foods packaged in plastic. Buy loose fruit and vegetables.

Make your own bread or buy it from bakeries that package it in paper.

Clean your home with baking soda and vinegar instead of using cleanering products packaged in plastic.

Buy washing powder in boxes, not liquid in plastic containers.

Buy cheese and meat from your local delicatessen and have it wrapped in paper.

Use bar soap to wash your dishes – and yourself.

Use scented candles or incense instead of artificial air fresheners.

Buy milk in paper cartons or glass, rather than plastic bottles.

Buy toilet paper that is wrapped in paper, not plastic.

Don’t wrap left-over foods in cling film - use aluminium or wax paper instead.

Use matches instead of plastic-encased lighters.

Give your pets cloth-based toys, like catnip mice and soft balls.

Buy cloth nappies instead of disposables.

Stuff delicate postal packages with old newspapers or junk mail instead of bubble wrap.

Use rechargeable batteries to avoid buying batteries packaged in plastic.
Back to Menu

_________________________________________________________________
EPA wants to issue Texas greenhouse gas permits
6^th January 2011
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has asked a federal court in Washington to allow it to issue greenhouse gas permits in Texas, even though the state has asked the judges to stop the federal move.

The EPA filed its motion Thursday in the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington. The motion came after the court asked the agency to wait until Friday before implementing its plan to directly issue the permits in Texas, the nation's leader in greenhouse gas emissions and industrial pollution.

In its court plea, Texas accused the EPA of overstepping its authority.

But the EPA argues that Texas has left it no choice. Texas is the only state that has refused to comply with the EPA's new greenhouse gas rules that went into effect on Jan. 2.

The Department of Justice lawsuit, filed in Pittsburgh at the request of the Environmental Protection Agency, said the plant, with coal-fired, steam-generating boilers, had been modified unlawfully, resulting in significant discharge of harmful chemicals into the air around it in Homer City, a tiny rural community about 50 miles east of Pittsburgh.

"These pollutants harm public health and the environment, contributing to premature mortality, asthma attacks, acid rain and other adverse effects in downwind communities and natural areas," the lawsuit says.

The defendants include EME Homer City Generation LP and previous owners and operators New York State Electric & Gas Corp., or NYSEG, of Rochester, N.Y., and Erie-based Pennsylvania Electric Co., also known as Penelec.

A spokesman for the plant's current operator, Edison Mission Energy, of Santa Ana, Calif., said the company hadn't reviewed the lawsuit and couldn't comment on it. But he noted the company has spent about $300 million since its 1999 purchase to reduce emissions.

"It appears, based on an earlier notice of intent that we received from the government, that all of the alleged violations occurred before we acquired the facility," spokesman Charley Parnell said.

Edison Mission Energy is a subsidiary of Edison International, of Rosemead, Calif.

Penelec spokesman Scott Surgeoner also declined to comment because the lawsuit hadn't been reviewed. But he noted the company sold its share of the Homer City plant more than a decade ago. Penelec is a subsidiary of First Energy Corp., of Akron, Ohio.

NYSEG spokesman Clay Ellis said the company doesn't comment on pending litigation.

The lawsuit asks the court for an injunction to prevent operation of the plant in violation of the Clean Air Act, to require defendants to obtain permits and remedy past violations, to force them to audit modifications and report the results and to have them surrender emissions allowances or credits to offset illegal emissions.

It also wants an order that the defendants "take other appropriate actions to remedy, mitigate and offset the harm to public health and the environment" caused by violations of the Clean Air Act, and it seeks civil penalties and legal costs.
Back to Menu

_________________________________________________________________
AP: Oil findings boost chance of corp. criminal charge
6^th January 2011
Months of investigation by a presidential commission and other panels reinforce the likelihood that companies involved in the Gulf oil spill will be slapped with criminal charges that could add tens of billions of dollars to the huge fines they already face, legal experts said Thursday.

The reports don't blame a single person or group responsible for the series of mistakes. That means in the end no one may go to prison for the worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history.

BP, Transocean and Halliburton should survive thanks to their financial arsenal, though charges would take another chink out of their armor.

"The evidence of negligence is too compelling and the harm is too great," said David Uhlmann, former chief of environmental crimes at the Justice Department. "The Justice Department is likely to believe that BP, Transocean and Halliburton were negligent and should be criminally charged. There's no question about that."

Uhlmann, now a law professor at the University of Michigan, cited excerpts released Wednesday from the presidential oil spill commission's report, saying it alone shows the standard for criminal charges has been met.

Among the panel's conclusions: decisions intended to save time and money created an unreasonable amount of risk that triggered the April 20 explosion in the Gulf of Mexico and led to the oil spill. The panel said another similar disaster could happen again without significant reforms by industry and government.

But the panel also concluded that the mistakes were the result of systemic problems, not necessarily the fault of any one individual.

The blast killed 11 workers on the rig Deepwater Horizon and led to more than 200 million gallons of oil spewing from BP's well a mile beneath the Gulf of Mexico, according to government estimates. BP disputes the figure, but has yet to provide its own.

Gregory Evans, a Los Angeles attorney who is an expert in environmental law, said prosecutors have wide discretion about whether to bring criminal charges.

"It appears that the panel has concluded that BP, Transocean and Halliburton and several subcontractors working for them took a series of very hazardous steps which appeared to be motivated by economic concerns or at least efficiency," Evans said. "This again can be seen by a prosecutor as evidence of an environmental crime."

Evans also noted, however, that the commission blamed government regulators in its report, which could mitigate culpability of the companies.

"Given the wide latitude they have, I think they could go either way on it," he said.

Criminal charges would cause fines to soar.

Under the Clean Water Act, BP, alone, already faces up to $21 billion in civil fines. Evans noted that under the Alternative Fines Act, a criminal prosecution would pose the threat of a criminal fine equal to twice the aggregate financial losses caused by the offense. A July study by Oxford Economics commissioned by the U.S. Travel Association estimated that the oil spill could cost the Gulf region $22.7 billion in travel-related economic losses over three years. That could translate into a more than $45 billion criminal fine.

The Justice Department has an ongoing criminal investigation and has already sued some of the companies involved, seeking unspecified damages. Halliburton, the cement contractor for the well that blew out, was not named in the Justice Department lawsuit.

"We continue to aggressively investigate the causes of the spill, and will examine all evidence and facts that may be relevant to that investigation and all parties potentially responsible for the spill," Justice spokesman Wyn Hornbuckle said.

The companies pointed fingers at each other — again — in statements after the presidential panel's conclusions.

BP PLC said the accident was the result of many causes, involving multiple companies. Transocean Ltd., which owned the rig being leased by BP to perform the drilling, said "the procedures being conducted in the final hours were crafted and directed by BP engineers and approved in advance by federal regulators." Halliburton Co. also said it acted at the direction of BP and was "fully indemnified by BP."

Robert Force, a Tulane University professor who is an expert in maritime law, said it is increasingly possible some of the companies will face charges. He did caution that the question of negligence is a tricky one.

And individuals involved with the rig and well may be able to rest easier.

"I haven't seen a revelation that said, 'we have found something really bad,' where there was an intentional violation of a regulation or improper conduct. Usually something like that would have been revealed by now," said Steve Yerrid, a Tampa, Fla. attorney who until Dec. 31 was oil spill counsel to former Florida Gov. Charlie Crist. "The likelihood of an individual or a group being indicted for a criminal offense has waned with time."

Big companies can usually survive criminal convictions, but not always.

On the other hand, Hospital Corp. of America — the nation's largest private hospital chain — is thriving despite paying a record $1.7 billion fine for massive Medicare fraud involving guilty pleas to 14 felonies that occurred when the company was known as Columbia/HCA.

Besides possible criminal charges, the investigations also could play a key role in the outcome of the hundreds of civil lawsuits. In those cases, attorneys for the fishermen, businesses, property owners and others want to prove gross negligence by BP and its partners, which could lead to bigger payouts.
Back to Menu

AP: Four Loko, other drinks turned into ethanol in Va.
6^th January 2011
Truckloads of Four Loko and other alcohol-laced energy drinks are being recycled into ethanol and other products after federal authorities told manufacturers the beverages were dangerous and caused users to become "wide-awake drunk."

Wholesalers from Virginia, North Carolina, Maryland and other East Coast states started sending cases of the high-alcohol, caffeinated malt beverages to MXI Environmental Services in Virginia after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced a crackdown on the sale of such beverages in November.

Brian Potter, vice president of operations at MXI's facility in Abingdon, Va., said about a couple of hundred truckloads of the drinks would be coming to the plant. Each truck holds 2,000 cases of the 23.5-ounce cans.

MXI Enterprises is one of three facilities in the U.S. that recycle ethanol, according to the American Coalition for Ethanol, an industry group. Potter said Thursday that his competitors also are taking shipments of the drinks.

"We're equipped to process four truckloads a day, and we're at full capacity," he said. "There are about 30 different products involved, and we've only seen a couple of them at this point. It could go on for several months."

The FDA issued warning letters to four companies on Nov. 17 saying the beverages' combination of caffeine and alcohol can lead to a "wide-awake drunk." The agency called the caffeine an "unsafe food additive." Warning letters were sent to Phusion Projects, Charge Beverages Corp., New Century Brewing Co. and United Brands Company Inc.

FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg said at the time that consuming the drinks has led to alcohol poisoning, car accidents and assaults.

Health experts have raised concerns that the caffeine can mask a person's perception of intoxication, leading them to drink more than they typically would before passing out. Many of those who consume the drinks are college-age and underage drinkers.

The four companies decided to pull their beverages from stores or reformulate them to remove caffeine or other stimulants after the FDA's ruling. Under pressure from states' attorneys general, Anheuser-Busch and MillerCoors removed their Bud Extra, Tilt and Sparks drinks from the market two years ago.

The National Beer Wholesalers Association didn't issue specific guidance to distributors on how to dispose of the products, but spokeswoman Kathleen Joyce said the trade group has advised members to work promptly with state regulators to ensure the products were handled in compliance with the FDA directive and any state laws.

In Virginia, distributors have been buying back the canned drinks from retailers to get them off the market after the Virginia Beer Wholesalers Association sent a request for its members to stop selling the drinks to retailers and to buy back inventory from the stores, spokesman Jim Babb said.

In addition to accepting the drinks from wholesalers, MXI has a contract to take Phusion Projects' discontinued Four Loko beverages.

MXI distills the alcohol from the drinks, then sells the fuel to be blended into gasoline, Potter said. It sells the aluminum cans to a recycler. Potter estimated it takes "30 days until it's back on the shelf as another beer can." It also recycles the drinks' water, cardboard packaging and shipping pallets.

"These are actually things that could go directly into a landfill or incinerator or some other waste process that's not as environmentally friendly, so I think it's a good thing," he said.
Back to Menu

_________________________________________________________________
AFP: Bacteria ate Gulf oil spill methane in 4 months
6^th January 2011
The huge quantity of methane released in the Gulf of Mexico last year during the worst oil spill in US history was ingested by bacteria in four months, according to a scientific study published Thursday.

Methane made up 20 percent of the huge plume of crude oil that escaped from a broken pipeline nearly one mile (1,600 meters) below the Gulf surface, after the BP-operated Deepwater Horizon platform exploded on April 20, killing 11 workers.

The leak, the worst oil spill in US history, was finally plugged on July 15, after spewing millions of gallons of crude into the Gulf.

"The methane was completely consumed by early September... it happened very quickly and it was a surprise to us," University of California Santa Barbara geochemistry professor David Valentine told AFP.

Valentine, one of the lead authors of the study in Thursday's edition of the journal Science, said the rapid "digestion" of the methane by bacteria showed the vital role microorganisms likely play in preventing greenhouse gases at the bottom of the ocean from entering the earth's atmosphere and contributing to global warming.

"They do serve an important function, and as we see here under certain conditions these bacteria can be very effective at preventing the methane from reaching the atmosphere," he added.

Valentine said research he published in September-October showed that other species of bacteria also consumed the ethane and propane released by the blast.

Bacteria also consumed some of the crude oil that was spilled in the Gulf, but researchers have yet to determine the quantities, he said, adding that chemical dispersants facilitated its absorption by the microorganisms.

In contrast to crude oil, methane and other gases naturally dissolve in ocean water before they are ingested by bacteria.
Back to Menu

_________________________________________________________________
Guardian (UK): BP cost-cutting blamed for 'avoidable' Deepwater Horizon oil spill
6^th January 2011
• Disaster could have been prevented – White House
• Complacency 'could lead to another catastrophe'

The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico was an avoidable disaster caused in part by a series of cost-cutting decisions made by BP and its partners, the White House oil commission has concluded.

In a preview of its final report, due next week, the national oil spill commission said systemic management failure at BP, Transocean, and Halliburton caused the blow-out in the Gulf of Mexico, and warned that such a disaster would likely recur because of industry complacency.

Many of the poor decisions taken on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig before the fatal blow-out on 20 April were taken to save time and money.

"Whether purposeful or not, many of the decisions that BP, Halliburton, and Transocean made that increased the risk of the Macondo blowout clearly saved those companies significant time (and money)," the report said.

In a separate chart, it identified nine decisions that increased risk; seven of these saved the companies time. BP was involved in all nine decisions.

BP, which owned the well, did not enforce the proper controls to manage those increased risks, the report said. "BP did not have adequate controls in place to ensure that key decisions in the months leading up to the blow-out were safe or sound from an engineering perspective."

It continued on the same theme, concluding: "Most of the mistakes and oversights at Macondo can be traced back to a single overarching failure – a failure of management."

In earlier pronouncements, the commission's chairmen have suggested a culture of complacency ruled on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig and in the oil industry.

"This disaster likely would not have happened had the companies involved been guided by an unrelenting commitment to safety first," commission co-chairman Bob Graham, said in a statement. "And it likely would not have happened if the responsible governmental regulators had the capacity and will to demand world-class safety standards."

On 11 January, the seven-member commission will publish its full report into the causes of the blow-out, which killed 11 men and spewed 4.9 million barrels of oil into the Gulf. Its findings could prove critical to the civil lawsuit filed last month by the US Justice Department against BP, Transocean and other companies involved in the spill for damages to the environment, as well as the hundreds of lawsuits filed by Gulf residents who have lost their livelihoods because of the spill.

The report warned that BP and the other companies could be liable for billions more in compensation to people who have lost money because of the oil spill, and for damage to natural resources.

The explosion was caused by a sudden kick of gas through the 5,000 ft riser pipe connecting the well to the Deepwater Horizon oil rig that – another investigation found – went undetected for several crucial moments. The report identified a series of mistakes that, it said, eventually made the blow-out "inevitable."

It paid particular attention to the faulty cementing job, performed by Halliburton, at the bottom of the well. But it blamed BP for failing to exercise proper oversight over the cementing job, and for misreading a pressure test that indicated the well had not been properly sealed.

"Based on evidence currently available, there is nothing to suggest that BP's engineering team conducted a formal, disciplined analysis of the combined impact of these risk factors on the prospects for a successful cement job," the report said.

It also criticised BP's choice of a long string well design. BP crew were also wrong to replace heavy drilling mud in the riser pipe with lighter seawater before the well was properly sealed, the report said.

Transocean also came in for criticism for failing to communicate to its crew the risks of deepwater drilling even after a near-miss only months earlier.

BP said in a statement that it was working with government regulators to ensure that the experience in the Gulf led to improved practices.

Transocean tried to shift the blame to BP and government. "The procedures being conducted in the final hours were crafted and directed by BP engineers and approved in advance by federal regulators," a company statement said.

Halliburton, which has previously criticised commission lab tests finding a faulty cement seal, said the commission had made use of selective information.

Environmental group Greenpeace handed out grades Thursday to what it said were the world's "greenest" consumer electronics makers, as the annual gadget industry trade show opened here on Thursday.

Greenpeace released an update to its "Green Electronics Survey" at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES), which brings together the world's leading manufacturers of computers, mobile phones, televisions and other devices.

The Greenpeace product survey evaluated the "greenest" desktop computers, notebook computers, netbook computers, computer monitors, mobile phones, smartphones and televisions available in the first quarter of 2011.

"Our survey shows that electronics manufacturers have made demonstrable progress over the past few years by producing products that are free of the worst toxic chemicals, more energy efficient and more easily taken back for reuse or recycling," said Renee Blanchard, Greenpeace International Toxics Campaigner.

"Major brands are responding to consumer demand for greener gadgets, and we expect them to continue to innovate and make all their products, and not just a niche few, with these higher green standards," Blanchard said in a statement.

"The next challenge for the industry is to design green products that last longer and can be repaired rather than replaced every few years," Blanchard said.

Greenpeace said 21 leading electronics companies were invited to take part in the survey. Most agreed but Apple and Philips were among the companies which declined to participate, the environmental group said.

Greenpeace ranked the products according to various criteria including energy efficiency, product lifespan and energy used in production.

The VW-247H-HF computer monitor made by Asus scored the highest with 7.5 points on a 10 point scale and the Taiwan-based company had another winner in the notebook computer category with its Asus UL30A.

The TM8172 from Taiwan's Acer was the top-ranked netbook computer and the HP Compaq 6005 Pro was the leading desktop computer.

The LC-52SE1 from Japan's Sharp was the leader in the television category.

The Sony Ericcson Aspen rang up the highest score in the smartphone ranks and Samsung's GT-S75550 came out on top in the mobile phone space.

Other companies submitting products included Dell, Fujitsu, HCL, Lenovo, LG Electronics, Motorola, Nokia, Panasonic, Research In Motion, Toshiba and Wipro.

The original artwork was designed for Greenpeace's Save Or Delete campaign and was intended to highlight the problem of deforestation.

It features characters from Walt Disney's The Jungle Book film put on to an image of a devastated forest but was never used because of copyright issues.

It will go on sale at Bonham's auction house in New Bond Street, central London, on Tuesday January 11.

Also going on sale is a work by graffiti artist Futura 2000, painted on stage during a performance by the Clash on their Combat Rock tour.

It is estimated to sell for between £15,000 and £20,000.

A screen print of a Barack Obama Change poster by American artist Shepard Fairey, supporting his 2008 presidential campaign, is expected to fetch £1,500.
Back to Menu

_________________________________________________________________
The Independent (UK): Mass bird and fish deaths stoke curiosity
7^th January 2011
Five thousand dead blackbirds rained from the sky on the first day of the New Year in Arkansas. Then more dead birds fell in other states. Then huge fish kills were discovered in multiple US waterways. And suddenly it became a worldwide phenomenon, with reports of mass die-offs of birds and fish in Sweden, Britain, Japan, Thailand, Brazil and beyond.

Doves, jellyfish, snapper, jackdaws... it seemed no species was immune.

Conspiracy theorists, doomsdayers and religious extremists warned that the end was nigh.

Could it be astronauts testing a potent sound beam to ward off aliens? The US military experimenting with satellite-powered energy weapons?

What about chemical sprays, meteor showers, or earthquakes activating pollutants from the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico?

"Birds" surged to the most searched term on The New York Times website.

Religious bloggers loaded their sites with Bible verse, Hosea 4:1-3: "The land dries up, and all who live in it waste away; the beasts of the field, the birds in the sky and the fish in the sea are swept away."

But as speculation roiled the blogosphere, wildlife experts rolled their eyes.

"It is not that unusual," said Kristen Schuler, a scientist at the US Geological Survey's National Wildlife Health Center.

"There is nothing apocalyptic or anything that is necessarily out of the ordinary for what we would see in any given week."

Indeed, the USGS keeps a log on its website with reports of groups of birds dying each week, averaging from dozens to thousands.

Regarding the bird deaths in Arkansas, where the local custom is to set off fireworks to mark New Year's Eve, officials determined it was likely that the noise set off a deadly bird panic.

"It appears unusually loud noises, reported shortly before the birds began to fall, caused the birds to flush from a roost," the USGS National Wildlife Health Center said in a statement posted on the Arkansas Fish and Game Commission website.

"Additional fireworks in the area may have forced the birds to fly at a lower altitude than normal and hit houses, vehicles, trees and other objects. Blackbirds have poor night vision and typically do not fly at night."

In Louisiana, Schuler said it looked like cold weather might have killed off about 500 birds.

Meanwhile in Maryland, locals were spooked by reports of some two million dead fish in the Chesapeake Bay.

But officials were quick to assuage those concerns, saying the deaths were a result of an unusual cold snap, combined with an overpopulation of a species known as spot fish.

"Natural causes appear to be the reason for the deaths of the fish," said a statement by the Maryland Department of the Environment.

"Spot may have difficulty surviving in colder temperatures, and the species' susceptibility to winter kills is well-documented," it said, noting that surface water temperatures last month were the coldest in 25 years.

As for the bird and fish deaths elsewhere in the world, many were still under investigation.

According to the National Wildlife Federation's Doug Inkley, the most frequent cause of mass death in birds is disease, though pollution and "just plain accidents" can also trigger large scale die-offs. Often, people just are not aware of them.

"Most of the time these areas are not near human habitation such as in forests or in the woods," he said on CNN.

But in today's Internet Age, when hardly anything remains secret, word of mass bird deaths has spread with unparalleled speed.

"In 1960 if a bunch of birds started falling from the sky it may have been noticed by some people. It may have gotten reported in the local paper, but it may never have gotten any further than that," said Robert Thompson, professor of pop culture at Syracuse University.

"Now some of these kinds of stories, because they get out there on the Internet, if they are compelling enough they can immediately make this jump to national news," he said.

"Let's face it, big quantities of birds falling from the sky or fish going belly up is a pretty compelling story."

Fireworks had been set off near the scene earlier, said veterinarian Robert ter Horst.

Cold weather, difficulties finding food and possible shock from the fireworks could be responsible, leading to the birds dying from the stress or being run over by vehicles.

Five of the dead jackdaws were being tested.

Mass bird deaths aren't uncommon.

In the US, New Year's Eve fireworks were blamed in Arkansas for killing thousands of blackbirds, and a few days later power lines were blamed for killing about 450 birds in Louisiana.

The American proposal would have forced Japan to reduce the number of whales that Japan killed each year in the Antarctic whale sanctuary in return for the legal right to hunt other whales off its own coasts. In addition, the US proposed to ratify laws that would "guarantee security in the seas" – a reference to acting against groups such as Sea Shepherd that have tried to physically stop whaling.

The US proposal was eventually shot down by Britain and the EU in June 2010, but the cables show that the Sea Shepherd group had become a political embarrassment to Japan after stopping its whaling fleet reaching its annual quota of whale killed for several years.

The group, led by Captain Paul Watson, a co-founder of Greenpeace, has a reputation for physically confronting whalers, sealers and illegal fishing boats. Its flotilla of ships, which sport the skull and crossbones flag, monitors illegal fishing in the Galapagos islands and spends months each year following and harassing the Japanese whaling fleet in frequently dangerous clashes.

Yesterday two Sea Shepherd ships, the Steve Irwin and the Gojira were involved in cat and mouse skirmishes with two whaling ships. Activists reportedly hurled stink bombs onto the deck as whalers tried to use water cannon.

The US cables show how on 2 November 2009, Shuji Yamada, Japan's vice-minister for international affairs, asked lead US negotiator Monica Medina about an investigation of the tax affairs of Sea Shepherd. It is unclear whether the US government had already launched an investigation or which country had proposed it.

"Yamada inquired about an investigation into the tax status of the US-based NGO Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and repeated Japan's request for the US to take action against the organisation, which he said created a very dangerous situation on the seas," says one cable.

The US government dodged this request but the cable continues: "The DCM replied that the US places the highest priority on the safety of vessels and human life at sea, and added that if any violations of US law are discovered, we will take appropriate enforcement action".

But the Japanese diplomats then responded, "It would be easier for Japan to make progress in the IWC negotiations if the US were to take action against the Sea Shepherd".

One week later, the Japanese pressed the US to take action against Sea Shepherd again, saying that "violent protests by the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (SSCS) could limit the government of Japan's flexibility in the negotiations".

It appears from the diplomatic chatter that the US did look into the NGO's status. In the same cable, Medina is reported as saying that the US government, "can demonstrate the group [Sea Shepherd] does not deserve tax exempt status based on their aggressive and harmful actions".

The cables then suggest that the US had itself proposed the tax investigation of Sea Shepherd, saying in the same cable on 9 November 2009: "the Netherlands should have primary responsibly for taking action against the SSCS, but he [the Japanese diplomat] appreciates the US government initiative to address the group's tax exempt status".

The US attempt to compromise with Japan failed at the IWC meeting in June after a majority of countries, led by Australia, the European Union, and the Latin American nations rejected it.

In a statement made yesterday from the Sea Shepherd flagship, Captain Watson said: "The US government may have very well looked into Sea Shepherd's activities and if they did so, then they obviously did not find any irregularities or unlawful activities because Sea Shepherd was never contacted by any US government official in connection with this matter. For Sea Shepherd, the most important part of this document is the declaration by Japan that Sea Shepherd has been responsible for the whaling fleet not reaching their quotas for the last few years. This completely validates Sea Shepherd's actions as effective."

Edinburgh University experts gave the parasites "jet lag" by inserting them into mice whose body clocks were different to their own 24-hour cycle.

Some of the mice were awake in the daytime and others active at night.

They found malaria was only half as effective at causing infection and spreading disease in mice which had a different routine to the parasite.

The study gives scientists a greater understanding of when malaria parasites are at their most harmful and when they are vulnerable.

'Clever tricks'

The scientists said the findings may also be a useful aid in developing treatments to tackle the disease.

Dr Sarah Reece, of Edinburgh University's school of biological sciences, who led the research, said: "For this study, we effectively gave the parasites jet lag.

"Our findings suggest that parasites have developed some clever tricks to get their timing right and cause an infection.

"This is rare evidence that organisms whose body clock is in sync with their environment have a better chance of survival.

"The more we know about how malaria parasites work, the better equipped we will be to tackle them effectively."

Internal body clocks, found in most living things, are determined by patterns of daylight and darkness and govern a range of functions such as sleep cycles, blood pressure, and physical strength.

Malaria, which is spread by the bite of the mosquito, kills one million people each year in sub-Saharan Africa. It affects hundreds of millions more.

The research was carried out at the universities of Edinburgh and Oxford.

The study was funded by the Wellcome Trust and the Royal Society and published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B.
Back to Menu

=============================================================

ROA MEDIA UPDATE

The fears becomes even more real in Nigeria, where the Federal environmental Protection Agency (FEPA) once found that 58 animal species and a huge number of plant species are on the verge of being lost to extinction. It has also been noted that Nigeria has already lost an estimated 38, 133 kilometres square covering about 43 per cent of the total forest land of Nigeria, to human activities. http://allafrica.com/stories/201101060323.html

Reuters, 6 Jan 2011, Alistair Doyle

Storms, hail or lightning can kill birds while tornadoes or waterspouts may suck up small fish or frogs and drop them far away. Human causes, such as fireworks, power lines or a collision with a truck, may explain avian deaths.

The U.N. Environment Program (UNEP) urged more research into baffling deaths -- ranging from why whales sometimes make the fatal mistake of swimming onto beaches to recent bird deaths, dubbed the "Aflockalypse" by one newspaper.

"Science is struggling to explain these things. These are examples of the surprises that nature can still bring," said Nick Nuttall, spokesman of Nairobi-based UNEP. "More research is needed."

Modern threats such as pollution or climate change may be adding to background stresses on wildlife.

About 500 dead birds were discovered in Louisiana this week and 5,000 in Arkansas at New Year, many of them red-winged blackbirds. Swedish authorities have been investigating the deaths of 100 jackdaws found in a street in Falkoping.

"We made an autopsy on five of the birds yesterday and found internal bleeding but no external lesions," said Marianne Elvander of Sweden's National Veterinary Institute.

NO BIRD FLU

She said there was no sign that they had died from diseases such as bird flu -- the main worry in such cases. Among the theories was that a truck had collided with the flock.

In Beebe, Arkansas, one theory is that fireworks spooked the birds to fly into buildings or other objects. Such birds roost in vast numbers, fly fast and have poor night eyesight, Nuttall said.

The widely publicized deaths meant other incidents received far more attention than they otherwise would have. "This is a classic example of freak events coinciding," said Petter Boeckman, a zoologist at the Norwegian Natural History Museum.

He said mass deaths of birds were not unheard of, but they normally happened unnoticed at sea or in rural areas away from towns. Many birds are weak and die in winter when food is scarce.

In one infamous example, 60,000 ducks died in the Baltic Sea in 1976 after they landed on a small oil slick, fatally mistaking it for an attractive patch of calm water.

Storms that suck up small creatures have been linked to reports of small perch fish falling out of the sky in Australia in 2010 far from open water and to a hail of frogs in northwestern Serbia in 2005. Lemmings often die en masse when food runs short.

Whale beachings might be caused by factors such as illness, or disorientation caused by extra noise in the oceans, from shipping or oil and gas drilling.

Boeckman said the response to the bird deaths also illustrated differences between more religious-minded Americans, versed in Biblical accounts of plagues of frogs or locusts, and secular Swedes who place their trust in human authority.

"In the United States the reaction is 'oh no, Doomsday is coming'. In Sweden, they say 'let's call the veterinary authorities'," he said.


From Cancun compromises to concrete action we don’t need a binding deal to act now on efficiency

Huffington Post, 5 Jan 2011, Roger Platt

And that the U.N. had further determined that the key strategies for pursuing that opportunity were also the least costly to society?

And finally -- what if these greenhouse gas emission reduction strategies worked in tandem with successful economic development of emerging economies, and to the long-term resiliency of communities?

It would be fair to say that you might expect action on this solution. We certainly do. The opportunity that the U.N., the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the International Energy Agency (IEA), and countless other climate and economic experts are talking about is the world's building stock. Experts have identified the building sector as having the single greatest potential for greenhouse gas emission reductions. They have also determined that energy efficiency -- including efficiency in new and existing buildings -- is a highly profitable strategy with economic development benefits for entire societies.

Even President Felipe Calderon, the President of Mexico and host of the recent U.N. climate talks in the city of Cancún, declared efficiency strategies as those with "positive net present value." In other words, good for business. At the same event hosted by Calderon, World Bank President Robert Zoellick called energy efficiency "a diamond." (And then reminded us that a diamond is really just coal under pressure).

These words from such renowned leaders carried a refreshing optimism at COP-16 -- shorthand for the 16th Conference of the Parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change -- especially as countries remained gridlocked on bigger issues like "Kyoto or No Kyoto." They underscored the message that we were there to carry: We can, and must, act now to capture the opportunities presented by the built environment. And we can do so while advancing socioeconomic goals such as energy access, the priority of most of the developing world.

While the Cancún talks produced some serious progress on difficult issues -- that's something no one can deny -- governments must now get to work back at home on climate change. For clear reasons, the planet and the economy is in desperate need of an ambitious binding agreement to hold countries accountable to emission reductions and to support a new, global clean energy economy. But we can't wait for that to act. While Kyoto lingers on the brink, there are actions that can be taken today, both domestically and internationally, to begin unlocking efficiency in the built environment.

Momentum is building. Recently, with the help of the U.S. Green Building Council and the World Green Building Council, a new coalition of businesses and environmental NGOs formed to begin pushing for action on buildings and other infrastructure as a central strategy for tackling climate change. The Global Leadership in Our Built Environment (GLOBE) Alliance is advocating for accelerated investment in the built environment and for policy frameworks that will address buildings, transportation, and cities to reduce emissions and increase resiliency to climate impacts. GLOBE will working on a national and international level to influence decision-makers. Things like the United Nations Foundation's "Building Block Approach" seem to be gaining traction as implementable, common-sense pathways to begin immediate work on climate change. The Mexican Government has already started on a path toward low emission development through a variety of programs designed to boost affordable, efficient, low-carbon housing, which they showcased proudly at COP-16.

We encourage other governments to do the same. In the U.S., for example, there are tools at our government's disposal to begin greening our existing building stock that will create jobs and capture those emission reductions, like green mortgages and a national building energy labeling program, just to name a few. Every country can devise their own specific tools tailored to local circumstances. But no country can afford not to start with buildings -- both new and existing -- if they want to make real progress for the climate and for the economy.
US climate envoy Jonathan Pershing: in implementing the Cancun Agreements, the US will be the focus of global attention

Climate Science Watch, 6 Jan 2011, Alexa Jay

Pershing gave an overview of the progress made in global climate negotiations from the adoption of the UN Framework Convention in 1992 to the COP16 (16^th Conference of the Parties) talks in Cancun, Mexico, in December 2010.  He argued that, in considering the state of the global negotiations, the incremental progress in global engagement made over the past twenty years is the appropriate frame for analysis.  He commented on the strength of the fundamental science underlying the negotiations, suggesting that recent research offers “nuance around the margins of how bad it will be.”

Pershing said that the Copenhagen talks of 2009 represented a profound paradigm shift in the negotiations.  Under the Kyoto Protocol, emissions obligations were allocated in a "top-down" fashion and were restricted to current member countries of the OECD.  In contrast, he said, the framework that came out of Copenhagen outlined a "bottom-up" approach in which countries could voluntarily take on actions suitable to their circumstances. Ultimately, this approach incorporated a much larger group of countries than those that made commitments under the Kyoto Protocol.  He said this change reflected the reality that the largest emitters are not prepared to commit to a binding top-down agreement.

Following the Copenhagen Accord, the Cancun Agreements of 2010 put together a package of bottom-up steps toward the Framework Convention’s goal of avoiding dangerous anthropogenic interference in the climate system.  Pershing identified the following key elements of the Agreements: a shared vision for a balanced package of mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology, and capacity building; a commitment to reducing emissions from destruction and degradation of forests (REDD); and substantive mechanisms for advancing these objectives.

Pershing said the “Adaptation Framework” is significant in its acknowledgement that, collectively, we cannot solve the climate problem before damages occur, especially in the least developed nations.  Efforts to adapt to inevitable climate change consequences are essential.

The Agreements established a Green Fund for disbursing climate funding to developing nations.  Pershing said there is a consensus that an alternative to the World Bank is needed as an appropriate funding vehicle.  The parties also agreed to a mobilization of $30 billion in “fast-start” public and private capital through 2012 to developing countries to reduce emissions and adapt to climate change, and to mobilize $100 billion annually by 2020.  A technology mechanism will also be launched to assist with technology transfer from developed to least developed countries.

CSW Director Rick Piltz was recently asked on Al Jazeera English TV if it might be better to leave the U.S. out of these negotiations altogether.  Pershing answered a similar inquiry, saying, in effect, that without buy-in from both the U.S. and the major developing economies, a global, legally binding agreement will not be possible.  With that in mind, however, Pershing said that he does not anticipate a legally binding outcome in the 2011 COP17 talks in Durban, South Africa.

In response to a question about the significance of U.S. financing for a global agreement, given the collapse of U.S. climate legislation and with it a mechanism for raising funds, Pershing conceded that it is “an open question as to what Congress chooses to do” for near-term financing, but said that he believes the U.S. is on track to making an appropriate contribution.  It is not clear how this would happen.

With the amount of deficit demagoguery taking place in the U.S. Congress, it’s difficult to imagine a robust commitment to near-term financing making it through the appropriations process.  As Kate Sheppard of Mother Jones reported, four Senate Republicans have already sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton opposing the “transfer of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to developing nations in the name of climate change.”  It’s only going to get worse.

Significant steps were undoubtedly taken in Cancun.  Confidence in the UN multilateral negotiating process was seen as revived by many observers.  The process did not run off the rails as it had looked like it might.  But it remains questionable whether bottom-up domestic deployment and support for international efforts, in the absence of binding emissions caps in the major emitting economies and guaranteed funding from the U.S. and other developed nations, can come anywhere near reaching the goal of limiting the global average warming to 2^o C above the preindustrial level.  Commitments that have been made to date leave us very far from that goal.

Another year of diplomacy has gone by.  Speaking diplomatically and acknowledging the great complexity of the negotiating issues, the climate change problem still appears almost as intractable as ever.

Pershing says Kyoto pact is not a model for the future

Climate Wire, 6 Jan 2011, Lisa Friedman

Speaking at the Center for Strategic and International Studies about the U.N. climate conference last month in Cancun, Mexico, Pershing hailed the set of agreements yielded there enabling countries to make voluntary emission cuts.

He referred to the so-called Cancun Agreements, which fleshed out a bare-bones political agreement reached a year earlier in Copenhagen, Denmark, as a reflection of "where the world currently stands" on fighting rising global temperatures.

"We would never have gotten what we got in Cancun if we had not had Copenhagen," Pershing said, calling Cancun outcome the product of "a 20-year negotiation, not a 12-month negotiation."

The final result, which 193 countries with the exception of Bolivia agreed to adopt, agrees to keep temperature rise below 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels. All major emitting countries formally etched in their Copenhagen pledges to cut carbon by varying amounts, and agreed to establish a global monitoring system to ensure that nations keep their promises.

Helping vulnerable countries adapt to the climate damages that will occur, whether or not emissions dip, got priority attention, and countries agreed to establish a Global Green Fund that by 2020 will help deliver $100 billion annually to poor nations.