The environment in the news thursday, 19 June 2008
Friends of the Earth take Ottawa to court over Kyoto
Download 257.69 Kb.
|
Friends of the Earth take Ottawa to court over KyotoGlobe and MailMARTIN MITTELSTAEDT ENVIRONMENT REPORTER June 18, 2008 at 12:52 PM EDT The federal government is being challenged in court by Friends of the Earth Canada for filing a plan to reduce greenhouse gases that doesn't meet Canada's obligations under the Kyoto Protocol, the first time any country has faced such a lawsuit. If successful, the legal action, being heard Wednesday in Federal Court in Toronto, could be politically embarrassing for the Conservatives by forcing them to devise a new plan to fight climate change that meets the tough targets in the Kyoto Protocol, an international plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that has been ratified and signed by Canada. Under the protocol, Canada is supposed to cut releases of planet-warming gases — mainly carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels — by 6 per cent below the country's 1990 levels during the period 2008-12. But last year Environment Minister John Baird introduced a climate-change program that would allow emissions to be about 34 per cent above the pact's limit in 2012, and not attain the required reductions until after 2020. Canada is the only one of 38 industrial countries with binding Kyoto targets that has announced it would ignore the reduction requirements. Friends of the Earth filed the action to try to force the government to put “its political will behind meeting” the protocol, says Beatrice Olivastri, the group's chief executive officer, who said Canadians want the country “to play an honourable role for climate action for the planet.” Lawyers for the group say that Mr. Baird's plan is a violation of the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act, which was passed by the combined opposition parties last year against the wishes of the government, and requires Canada to meet the pact's target. But federal lawyers have argued in a legal brief on the case that the adequacy of Mr. Baird's plan is “not justiciable” and is a matter for Parliament rather than the courts to resolve. A ruling in the case is expected in the summer or early fall. The case for Friends of the Earth is being presented pro-bono by Toronto lawyer Chris Paliare, along with additional legal council from Ecojustice.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Offshore oil drilling opponents are rethinking June 18, 2008 By Richard Simon and Bob Drogin, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers WASHINGTON -- The environmental movement, only recently poised for major advances on global warming and other issues, has suddenly found itself on the defensive as high gasoline prices shift the political climate nationwide and trigger defections by longtime supporters. Opposition to offshore drilling -- once ironclad in places like California and Florida -- has begun to soften. Gov. Charlie Crist of Florida on Tuesday eased his opposition to new energy exploration off the coast. "Floridians are suffering, and when you're paying over $4 a gallon for gas, you have to wonder whether there might be additional resources that we might be able to utilize to bring that price down," said Crist, a Republican. At the same time, pressure to drill is mounting. President Bush today is expected to call on Congress to lift the ban on new offshore drilling, and a House committee will consider a proposal to relax the moratorium. John McCain, the presumed Republican presidential nominee, opposed new offshore drilling in his 2000 presidential campaign. He said Tuesday that he now supported lifting the long-standing ban. "I believe it is time for federal government to lift these restrictions and put our own reserves to use," the Arizona senator said in a Houston speech on energy security. Much of the nation's coastal waters are off-limits to new oil and gas leasing until 2012 under executive orders first issued by Bush's father,President George H.W. Bush, in 1991 and extended by President Clinton in 1998. In addition, Congress has taken action annually since 1981 to preclude drilling in coastal areas. But high petroleum prices have caused policymakers to begin rethinking a variety of issues, including opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to energy exploration and imposing mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions from oil refineries and power plants. "For years I have argued that we should avoid offshore drilling and tapping into underground reserves in ANWR until there was an emergency that left us with no choice," Rep. James T. Walsh (R-N.Y.), a longtime backer of the drilling ban, said recently. "That time has come." The developments are the latest indication of the growing power of energy prices to overwhelm other priorities. "We're seeing a large shift in public attitudes toward exploration," said C. Jeffrey Eshelman of the Independent Petroleum Assn. of America, expressing hope that McCain's change of heart "breaks ground for others to follow." Environmentalists are increasingly concerned. Richard Charter of the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund called this "the most risky year in 29 years" for the drilling ban. In one sign of concern, an effort to pass a major climate-change bill stumbled this month amid complaints from Democrats as well as Republicans that it would drive up energy prices. McCain, in reversing his long-held position in support of the offshore ban, said he continued to oppose drilling in the Arctic refuge, an environmentally sensitive wilderness that he said deserved to stay off-limits. Environmental groups, as well as McCain's Democratic rival, Sen. Barack Obama, argued that renewed offshore drilling would not increase supplies or lower prices for years. They warned that new drilling off California and other states would carry the risk of pollution. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a senior advisor to McCain's campaign, acknowledged in a conference call to reporters that new offshore drilling would have no immediate effect on supplies or prices. But he added: "There is an important element in signaling to world oil markets that we are serious." Congressional Republicans have been seizing on high energy prices to ratchet up the pressure on Democrats to allow more domestic drilling. "For a long time, for appropriate reasons, we've been very sensitive about offshore drilling in California because of our beautiful Pacific Coast," Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands) said recently on the House floor, adding that technology could allow for a second look. Despite skyrocketing oil prices, efforts to weaken the offshore ban face stiff opposition. "The people of California feel strongly about protecting the coast of California from offshore drilling. And so do I," Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said Tuesday. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger opposes lifting the moratorium but "still absolutely supports" McCain, said Aaron McLear, a spokesman for the Republican governor. "They're going to disagree from time to time, and this is one of those cases," he said. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) decried McCain's stance. "He ought to know he'd ruin Florida's $65-billion tourism economy by allowing oil rigs off the coast." But as Bush adds his support to the drive to lift the ban, a new attempt is expected today in the House Appropriations Committee to allow drilling 50 miles or more off the coast. The ban, inspired by a devastating 1969 oil spill off Santa Barbara, has prohibited drilling in most coastal waters except for parts of the Gulf of Mexico and areas off Alaska. Rep. Lois Capps (D-Santa Barbara) expressed confidence that Congress would resist efforts to roll back the ban. But Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) said he saw a shifting political climate. "I think it's changed. And I think $4 a gallon has done that," he said. "This is compelling. I hear that from people everywhere I go." Martinez said in the new climate, the nation needed resources. "It's about how can we supply enough product so that there is more supply available to meet the ever-increasing demand," Martinez said. "And offshore may be a part of that equation."
Los Angeles Times June 18, 2008
Santa Monica passed an ordinance banning all non-recyclable plastic and polystyrene (Styrofoam) at food service establishments in February, and with daily fines topping $250, restaurants have been quick to comply. "Our goal is to become zero waste . . . to go back to a 1950s approach of using less, like wrapping a sandwich in paper instead of plastic," explains Josephine Miller, an environmental analyst for the city of Santa Monica's Green Programs Division. "But first we've got to do what it takes to get the Styrofoam and non-recyclable plastic out of the ocean." Acceptable choices include recyclable aluminum and plastic, paper and those compostable vegetable products. But compostable isn't the same as biodegradable. Corn forks must be professionally composted at high temperatures, or they'll end up sharing landfill space with Styrofoam. Some chefs, including Daniel Snukal of , have always preferred paper products "because they just decompose." And they cost a fraction of their shiny new vegetable great-grandchildren. But others aren't as up on their composting lingo. At Bar Pintxo, manager Angel Stork says the restaurant recently switched from aluminum to corn to-go containers "because they were on the city's list, and they sounded better, so we thought they must be." Aluminum, almost 100% recyclable, is also on the list. The problem isn't the product, but the lack of public compost bins. "The city said we could sign up for a food waste program," says Sang Yoon, owner of Father's Office in Santa Monica. "But we don't use to-go containers. Our customers do." Santa Monica doesn't currently have public compost bins. Miller says the city plans to provide green compost bins for all single-family homes "very soon" (some private homes already have them). But getting compost bins to apartment buildings and office parks "is much more complex." At Andiamo in Silver Lake, which isn't affected by the ban but "tries to keep everything compostable," manager Casey Anderson offers to take customers' used corn products and "put them in our composter." So far, no one has brought back their used cornware. "You can always boil the stuff until it dissolves," Anderson says. But he calls back to say, "Forget that -- it'll only turn the fork into a twisted-up, weird science experiment." And distinguishing between recyclable plastic items and corn products isn't always easy. The website for Tender Greens in Culver City touts its "strong sense of environmental responsibility." But co-owner David Dressler says he doesn't alert customers that the box housing their tuna niçoise salad can't be recycled. "We're not the end user of the product, so it's not our responsibility." http://www.latimes.com/news/science/environment/la-fo-journal18-2008jun18,0,6091597.story Scientists fighting disease with climate forecasts By RANDOLPH E. SCHMID, AP Science Writer June 18, 2008
"Everything is connected in our earth system," Conrad C. Lautenbacher, head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, said at a panel on "Changing Climate: Changing Health Patterns." The key is bringing all types of data together — health, weather, human behavior, disasters and others — "it's science without borders," Lautenbacher said. He said 73 countries and more than 50 international organizations are currently participating in the Global Earth Observation System of Systems and more are expected to join. "It's a full court press" to observe what's going on on the Earth, he said. When it comes to health and disasters "we can't afford to be wrong a lot of the time. We have got to get ahead of it." Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, noted that "we have these very modern technologies that are very good at sensing atmosphere and earth surfaces, and you can put them in computers and model some of these weather events ... and we're pretty good at it right now. "But imagine for a moment, that not only that we measure that stuff, that we then actively and aggressively do something about it to mitigate the effects to people, to the environment, to planets, to plants." Take a disease like cholera, Lautenbacher said, noting that research has shown that outbreaks in India vary with the temperature of the Bay of Bengal. Satellites cam measure that temperature. In addition, climate researchers are now doing forecasts of the Pacific Ocean phenomenon known as El Nino, which affects temperatures in the bay, so that might also be used to forecast cholera. Barbara Hatcher, secretary-general of the World Federation of Public Health Associations, likened the research to the work of Dr. John Snow, the 19th century English physician who first tracked down a source of cholera in London, using a map of victims' homes and where they got their water. Lautenbacher noted that changes in vegetation and moisture can help forecast outbreaks of malaria, showing a vegetation map of Africa based on satellite data. But it isn't just weather data that must be worked into the system, he added, researchers must also use information on population changes, transportation, migration, epidemiology and social and behavioral factors. Robert W. Corell of the Heinz Center for Science, Economics and the Environment said he had been asked to investigate an outbreak of anaphylactic shock in Alaska. He traced it to stings from a type of bee that hibernates in wet soil, which had never lived there before but had moved north as the climate became milder and wetter. In another case, he said, diarrhea-causing giardia has appeared in parts or northern Norway, where moderating climate has allowed beavers — which can spread the germ — to move into territory once exclusive to reindeer. Dr. Bryan McNally of Emory University School of Medicine, suggested requiring hospitals, as part of being accredited, to set up plans to work with local weather and warning forecasters. Traditionally hospitals have sought to ride out storms, but that didn't work out well when hurricane Katrina inundated New Orleans. Having a relationship with a warning forecaster would allow a hospital to prepare for arrival of floods, hurricanes, tornadoes or whatever the local hazard is, he explained. They could work out plans in advance if they needed to evacuate, and hospitals nearby would have plans to take in the patients as well as to deal with the newly injured. Predicting the arrival of flooding should be more than just protecting property, it could include warnings about the spread of disease such as schistosomiasis, also known as snail fever, said Joshua P. Rosenthal of the National Institutes of Health. Such warnings should also include the spread of things like fuel and toxic pollutants, he said. Factors to be considered should include land use patterns, urbanization, agriculture, poverty, economic infrastructure and wastewater treatment facilities. "It's important ... that we build climate into these other types of long-term analyses rather than trying to separate it out," he said. "What we do know is it's probably going to hit the most vulnerable populations the hardest: The poor, children, the elderly, those in low- and middle-income countries with weak infrastructure, degraded ecological environments, poor health-delivery systems," he said.
June 18 2008 OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS: I English: 1- Regional - How to Atone for Beef's Sins 2- Argentina - Hake Could Disappear from Argentina's Seas 3- Brazil - Brazil throws weight behind Amazon soy ban 4- Cuba: Don’t Worry, Be Ready - for Hurricanes 5- Guyana - Using protected seedling production houses to Combat Climate Change 6- Trinidad & Tobago - Floods in the city II Spanish: 7- Costa Rica - Proseguirá Costa Rica proyecto contaminante en frontera con Nicaragua 8- Guatemala - Deslaves causan cinco muertos en Guatemala 9- Panamá - Caguamas inician desove
1- Regional - How to Atone for Beef's Sins 06 – 16 – 08 Cattle consume many kilos of feed for each kilo of meat they produce and they are an enormous source of greenhouse gases in Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay. RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil. - The global food crisis and climate change have cast the spotlight on some of the negatives of the cattle industry, such as the high consumption of vegetable protein to generate relatively little meat and its role in global warming. Because of its cattle, Brazil is among the world's leading emitters of greenhouse-effect gases. The livestock industry has encroached on the Amazon and is a leading cause of deforestation. According to the first national inventory, in 1994, logging represented 75 percent of Brazil's greenhouse gases. The destruction of forests, which has accelerated since the 1980s, coincides with the expansion of cattle raising. From 1994 to 2006, the national herd grew from 158 million to 205 million head, and 82 percent of that increase took place in the Amazon region, according to the study "The Kingdom of Cattle" by the environmental group Friends of the Earth-Brazilian Amazon, released in January. Cattle in the Amazon -- 73.7 million head in 2006 -- occupied 74 percent of the total deforested area. But the original cause of deforestation is not cattle raising, but rather the lack of stimuli for sustainable production in the Amazon, said Mario Menezes, assistant director of Friends of the Earth and co-author of the study. Without agricultural regulation, state control and development policies, "the expansion is unregulated," he told Tierramérica. Most Amazon land is public, but the government does little to monitor it. Many ranchers occupy areas illegally, and have to spend little to eliminate the forests, says Paulo Barreto, a researcher with the Institute of Man and the Environment in the Amazon. Meanwhile, recuperating degraded pasture costs two and a half times more, Barreto said. With productivity at little more than one head per hectare, Brazilian cattle hunger for cheap land. Deforesting the land -- which carries little risk of penalty -- then becomes a logical route. In the Amazon, furthermore, cattle have found "sun, heat and water year round," which means cheaper beef, "competitive despite the distance" to the industrial centers, Assuero Veronez, head of the environment committee of the Agriculture and Livestock Confederation of Brazil, told Tierramérica. To attribute three-quarters of Brazil's greenhouse gas emissions to deforestation is a mistake, Veronez believes, because the calculation includes all of the area's biomass, neglecting that before the "quemadas" (burning to clear forest), the useful lumber is removed and what burns is just 30 to 40 percent of the original biomass. Tito Díaz, an animal health and protection officer with the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in Latin America, also underscored that "pastures fix carbon in their roots (at a volume) that is quite considerable and is not taken into account." But now "everything is banned" because of environmental issues, which leads to a "stranglehold on the Amazon economy," Veronez complains. And the pressure grows stronger. Brazil's Consumer Defense Institute (IDEC) launched a campaign in March, "Change Consumption, Don't Change the Climate", urging the public and supermarkets to track beef origins and reject any that comes from cattle that have contributed to deforestation. According to Lisa Gunn, IDEC information manager, beef "is not sustainable" because it comes from the conversion of a much greater quantity of food and plant protein into meat, and requires too much land. But it is only possible to change habits gradually, she says, which is why the institute is calling for reducing consumption of beef instead of eliminating beef from the diet altogether. In pasture-fed cattle operations like those of South America, one kilogram of beef is produced with 18 to 20 kilos of grasses. For feedlot cattle, where the diet is based on grain, six to eight kilos are needed to produce one kilo of meat, according to Francisco Santini, veterinarian at Argentina's National Institute of Agricultural Technology. Cattle that are raised confined in feedlots require less space, but they also cause deforestation because they are fed soybeans, of which Brazil and Argentina are major producers. This effect is evident in the increase in deforested area in the Amazon each time there is a rise in the international price for soybeans. Brazil's greenhouse gas emissions tally must also include the methane released from the intestinal fermentation of cattle and the nitrous oxide in the manure. These gases represent a much smaller volume of the total greenhouse gas emissions, but, respectively, they have 21 and 300 times the greenhouse effect that carbon dioxide from the forest fires does. In Argentina, cattle ranching has transferred 11 million hectares to crop farming in the last 14 years, while maintaining a herd of 54 million head. Methane emissions have declined with the increase in grain feed, said Santini. But the most recent data available indicate that agriculture generates 44 percent of the country's greenhouse gas emissions, with an increased share from cattle-origin methane. In Uruguay, which has 10 million head of cattle -- three times the human population -- in addition to 15.2 million sheep, agriculture generates 91 percent of the country's methane emissions and is the country's second leading source of greenhouse gases. A 2006 FAO report estimated that livestock generated 18 percent of the world's greenhouse gases, surpassing transportation as an emissions source. The calculation included the effects of deforestation, food production and its chemical inputs (pesticides and fertilizers), gases produced by the animals, meat processing and agricultural transport. Across most of Latin America forests have been lost to livestock and soybean production, but Chile and Uruguay have increased their tree-covered areas, which indicates that livestock can expand "without putting an end to forests," Díaz, the FAO expert, told Tierramérica. The region has the advantage of feeding its herds with grasses and forage, which don't compete with human food, given the high prices of grains that Europe and the United States utilize in their heavily subsidized cattle industries, he said. But, not to miss this opportunity, Latin America must promote "sustainable cattle-raising systems" and recover degraded pastures, Díaz added. Sustainability is being pursued in Acre, a state in northwest Brazil, by integrating agriculture, pasture and forestry, which improves the productivity of small, medium and large properties. The yield reaches three head of cattle per hectare, three times the national average, reports Judson Valentim, head of the local center of the government's agricultural research agency, Embrapa. Valentim admits that livestock production leads to deforestation as a result of cheap land, but says this can be corrected with higher productivity and with measures like the ban (beginning July 1) on loans to farmers or ranchers who are involved in illegal logging. Brazilian cattle raising could be made sustainable with more productive technologies, with ranching limited to appropriate areas, and leaving aside land that is better suited to growing crops, he says. But Barreto and Veronez agree that this would require policies that compensate for what has been invested in recovering degraded or more costly land, paying farmers and ranchers for environmental services, and changing the economic logic that currently favors deforestation.
Directory: cpi -> briefs briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news briefs -> The environment in the news Download 257.69 Kb. Share with your friends:
|