Environmental Justice
-
Videos to Watch: Climate week highlights, what's next in int'l talks
-
Climate at the G20: White House briefs bloggers on climate discussions
-
Obama to Press Cuts in Fossil Fuel Subsidies at G20
Charged with a Felony? Blame Global Warming
Published November 18, 2009 @ 06:00AM PT
When college student Tim DeChristopher bid his way to committing $1.7 million for 13 oil and gas drilling leases last December at a Bureau of Land Management auction, he had the greater good in mind; he apparently planned to mitigate climate change by blocking the pillaging of the Earth, reports the Associated Press.
Who knows how he thought this would work, considering that he bid with the knowledge that he had no ability whatsoever to pay for the parcels near Utah's national parks that he won. Indeed, instead of being honored as a hero he was indicted in April on felony charges. Apparently, Tim, it's rather illegal to interfere with government auctions and make false representations.
His opinion? The auction itself was illegal, so his interference of it couldn't possibly run afowl of any law. He came before the judge trying to use a "necessity defense," stating that he was forced to choose between two evils, namely the evil of lying in the auction and the evil of allowing climate change to continue unabated.
Logically, U.S. District Judge Dee Benson denied DeChristopher's lawyers' motion to use the defense. According to the AP, his nine-page ruling included this amusing statement: "Unlike a person demolishing a home to create a firebreak, DeChristopher's actions were more akin to placing a small pile of dirt in the fire's path."
Photo courtesy of walknboston via flickr
Why Climate Change Will Hit Women Hardest
Published November 11, 2009 @ 06:00AM PT
I wrote the other day over on Change.org's sustainable food blog about the fact that women produce the lion’s share of the world’s food but own only 2 percent of the Earth’s tillable land. Considering that climate change is going to present special challenges to farmers, who depend on abundant resources and stable weather patterns, women are, as they say, in for it. And I haven't even mentioned disease or disappearing drinking water yet.
A new “Gender and Climate Change Manual” from the Global Gender and Climate Alliance rightly states that “the poor, the majority of whom are women living in developing countries, will be disproportionately affected. Yet most of the debate on climate so far has been gender-blind.”
This topic is remarkably important and almost entirely ignored. The issue pops up infrequently and peripherally, as when the 52nd session of the UN’s Commission on the Status of Women last year took “gender perspectives on climate change” as its “emerging issue.” It's only "emerging" now because no one was paying attention before, but this should have been part of the debate since the beginning.
Developing World Stands Up To Developed Nations
Published October 16, 2009 @ 11:00AM PT
I'm currently on the Greenpeace ship Esperanza in the South Pacific. We're on the Defending Our Pacific tour, which is a campaign to establish a global network of marine reserves, stop overfishing of Pacific fisheries, and support Pacific island nations efforts to stop Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing in their waters.
Crewman aboard the Japanese vessel Koyu Maru 3, fishing in Cook Islands waters illegally, haul a tuna onboard. Like climate change, overfishing of the world's fisheries is threatening the livelihood of developing countries who are not contributing significantly to the source of the problem. Image © Paul Hilton/Greenpeace
Last week, we caught the Japanese ship Koyu Maru 3 fishing in Cook Islands waters without a license, which is obviously illegal. When I blogged a bout it on the Greenpeace website, I made the point that this was not just illegal but also immoral. So why is it immoral?
Last week, a new study was released by The Commonwealth that underscores the drastic need for government action on overfishing and climate change in order to stave off a collapse of global fisheries. The report warns that the oceans could soon become “deserts” and goes on to say:
The study reveals that those least responsible for the state of the oceans are most likely to suffer the consequences of poor management and climate change. Small island states in particular are vulnerable to illegal and unfair fishing by foreign fleets and to migration of fish away from warming seas.
The Esperanza has been in the Pacific region since May to support Pacific Island countries on issues ranging from climate change to fisheries collapse and marine conservation. But of course Greenpeace’s history in the Pacific Ocean goes back much further than that — all the way back to the early 1970s when we were protesting the French nuclear blasts at Moruroa. The fallout from these blasts also disproportionately affected those Pacific islanders living downwind from the blast sites — another instance of those not responsible for a problem suffering the most. While there was nothing technically illegal about these blasts, the total disregard for human health and welfare is egregious.
The industrialized commercial fishing vessels that are literally stealing fish from Pacific island nations' waters is just another example of the developed world doing as they please and disregarding the well-being of the people affected by their actions. That's why it’s very encouraging that eight Pacific island nations have come together and are standing up for their rights against these invading international commercial fishing fleets.
Pacific island states are not the only developing nations that are banding together to force the developed world to live up to their other moral obligations: “Africa will demand billions of dollars in compensation from rich polluting nations at a UN climate summit for the harm caused by global warming on the continent, African officials said Sunday.”
Lest we doubt that there is any need for this stand by African nations, even the World Bank, generally no friend to the developing world, is warning of the threats those nations are facing as the climate crisis looms: “The World Bank estimates that the developing world will suffer about 80 percent of the damage of climate change despite accounting for only around one third of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.”
So the real question we must be asking ourselves is: Will the developed world stand up and do the right thing in regard to these moral obligations?
"Alternative Nobel" For Environmental Activists
Published October 14, 2009 @ 12:00PM PT
The Right Livelihood Award Foundation, which aims to promote global ecological balance, eliminate material and spiritual poverty and contribute to lasting peace and justice in the world, has announced its 2009 Right Livelihood Award, often described as the "alternative Nobel Prize."
This year the Foundation has honored, among other people, Canadian environmentalist and television personality David Suzuki "for his lifetime advocacy of the socially responsible use of science, and for his massive contribution to raising awareness about the perils of climate change and building public support for policies to address it," and René Ngongo of Greenpeace "for his courage in confronting the forces that are destroying the Congo's rainforests and building political support for their conservation and sustainable use."
Suzuki received an honorary award, which does not include a cash prize. The other three winners -- Ngongo, Australian doctor Catherine Hamlin who works in her adopted country of Ethiopia benefits Africa's poorest women, and nuclear-disarmament activist Alyn Ware of New Zealand -- will receive 50,000 euros ($74,000). The awards ceremony will occur in December in the Swedish parliament.
In a video interview with Greg Bourne of WWF-Australia, Suzuki reflected on the devastating changes in the natural world that have occurred since he was a boy. "The change has been absolutely dramatic in my lifetime. The fish I took for granted as a child are simply not there," he said. (See a collection of videos on the award winners here.)
People often say that's the price of progress, he reflected, but "I don't think it's progress to use up the rightful legacy of future generations."
Photo courtesy of environmentnorth on flickr
Cattle Industry Giants Agree to Protect the Amazon and the Climate
Published October 10, 2009 @ 10:15AM PT
A Greenpeace activist urges the President of Brazil to attend The UN climate meeting in Copenhagen. The presence of the Heads of States of the most influential countries are needed in order to secure an ambitious and legally binding agreement in Copenhagen in December, and measures to stop deforestation must absolutely be part of that agreement. ©Greenpeace/Johanna Hanno
Four giants of the cattle industry have agreed to stop supporting deforestation of the Amazon — and that’s huge news for the climate in addition to forests. Now we just need Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva to get on board with the zero deforestation initiative as well, and take that pledge to Copenhagen.
I haven’t been writing my weekly guest blogs lately because I’m currently in the middle of the Pacific Ocean on the Greenpeace ship Esperanza as part of a campaign to stop overfishing and establish a global network of marine reserves, but I had to take a break to write about this tremendous victory.
I’ve reported here on this blog about the role tropical deforestation plays in contributing to climate change. To briefly summarize, deforestation is responsible for nearly 20% of global carbon emissions every year — more than the entire transportation sector. In other words, tackling global climate change means stopping deforestation.
I also wrote about Greenpeace’s campaign to urge major shoe manufacturers to put their foot down and tell their Brazilian suppliers that they would no longer purchase their leather until they could guarantee it wasn’t coming from destruction of the Amazon rainforest. Cattle ranchers are responsible for 80% of deforestation in the Amazon.
Fatalistic Friday: Climate treaty still stalled, catastrophic climate change forecast, more
Published October 02, 2009 @ 03:53PM PT
Above: At a press conference held midway through the Climate Change Talks in Bangkok, Yvo de Boer told reporters that progress has been made key areas including adaptation, technology and capacity-building in developing countries. However, progress on rich nation emission reduction targets and financial support for climate change action in developing countries is still elusive.
Grab a stiff drink and take in this week's bad news about global warming:
Climate talks stall on targets, finance: Efforts to convince rich nations to toughen emissions cuts have failed to make much headway at climate talks in the Thai capital, the U.N. said on Friday. "Progress toward high industrialized world emissions cuts remains disappointing during these talks. We're not seeing real advances there," Yvo de Boer, the head of the U.N. Climate Change Secretariat, told reporters. "Movement on the ways and means and institutions to raise, manage and deploy financing support for the developing world climate action also remains slow." (Reuters)
Catastrophic climate change could happen with 50 years: If average global temperatures arc toward a rise of 7.2 deg. F (4 deg. C) by 2100 (over those of the mid-19th century), according to a study released this week by the UK's Met Office, we'd be screwed in diverse ways as soon as 2060: Arctic temperatures would increase by 28.8 deg F (16 deg C), while parts of sub Saharan Africa and North America would be devastated by an increase in temperature of up to 18 deg F (10 deg C); rainfall could decrease by 20 per cent in Central America, the Mediterranean and parts of coastal Australia, causing mass drought; Temperature rises in the Amazon would cause the rainforests to die, while Alaska and Siberia would see the melting of the permafrost causing more carbon dioxide to be released. (The Telegraph)
An Open Letter From Van Jones: 'What you can do'
Published September 17, 2009 @ 06:03PM PT
Van Jones e-mailed this message to friends and supporters on Tuesday, Sept. 15. It's his first public comment since resigning from the White House on Sept. 6:
Dear Friends:
My family and I want to thank everyone for the outpouring of love and support that we have received over the past week or so. I resigned from the White House on Sept. 6, and I have remained silent since then—in keeping with my promise not to be a distraction during a key moment in the Obama Presidency.
Over the past several days, however, many people have been asking how they can help and what they can do.
The main thing is this: please do everything you can to support both President Obama and the green jobs movement. Winning real change is ultimately the best response to these kinds of smear campaigns.
I ask everyone to:
