Photos from Argentina’s farms, documenting an agrochemical plague

In Argentina’s #GMO soy areas, homes, classrooms & drinking water are routinely contaminated. http://t.co/TKVXuCoOsv pic.twitter.com/swZPoAPpD5

— GMWatch (@GMWatch) November 22, 2014

The top ten countries for solar energy

La Chine a été 2ème dans la top liste des pays #photovoltaïques en 2013 pic.twitter.com/nsQhawa5NQ

— InSunWeTrust (@InSunWeTrust) 16 Novembre 2014

This Genius Machine Feeds Stray Dogs In Exchange For Recycled Bottles

Green news

Tweets from https://twitter.com/EcologicalView/lists/green-news

There’s One Industry That Deserves a Carbon Tax, But No One is Talking About it

There’s One Industry That Deserves a #CarbonTax, But No One is Talking About it http://t.co/qyLdREsjDD #ClimateChange pic.twitter.com/lQckLT78dP
— one green planet (@OneGreenPlanet) October 19, 2014

Go vegan

pic.twitter.com/LX6HJPrNps
— Alice Carroll (@7alicecarroll) October 17, 2014

The warmest September ever!

This is what the world's warmest September ever looks like. #ActOnClimate here: http://t.co/NxEsIp35Ih pic.twitter.com/eUta9qMp8v
— NRDC (@NRDC) October 19, 2014

Yes!

Découvrez le Tweet de @UN : https://twitter.com/UN/status/503634177183735808

25% of the world’s population consumes 58% of the energy, 45% of the meat and fish, 84% of the paper, and 87% of the vehicles

 ©Chris Jordan

People in the Highly Developed Countries start to embrace a type of consumption, known as voluntary simplicity, which recognize that individual happiness and quality of life are not necessary linked to the accumulation of material goods. People who embrace voluntary simplicity recognize that a person’s values and character define that individual more than how many things he or she owns. Little commitment at an individual level can lead to a big step to save the planet for future generations.    

 The United States, Europe and Japan must live within the planet’s limits by controlling their use of natural resources, for obvious ethical reasons a decent civilization with human value must tolerate that "10 million die every year of hunger and hunger-related diseases." A rich family in the United States or Europe must not waste food at dinner table while one sixth of the world population is malnourished.We are today 6.6 billion people living on the planet and several millions people would be added to the world in the 21st century. 

The United Nations states that "nine planet Earths would be required to absorb the world's carbon if every person had the same energy-rich lifestyle as people in developed countries." Not only overpopulation, and the unbalanced global demography is at blame when one-third of the world’s population, approximately 2 billion people, live in sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia and, they account for less than 4% of the total worldwide consumption expenditures. 

The solution; a green economy in developed and developing countries that would encompasses many sectors, such as local small scale agriculture, green building, new innovative technologies and sustainable business opportunities that will  boost a new job market economy while reducing the carbon footprints of the wealthiest, preventing it to consume the world’s limited resources.

References:

State of the World 2004, Worldwatch Institute. http://www.worldwatch.org/node/1043

United Nation. Millennium Development Goals http://www.mdgmonitor.org/goal1.cfm

Micropower; smaller, cleaner and cheaper

 Yann Arthus Bertrand

Micropower, also known as distributed generation (DG), is a growing sector of the energy market that holds great promises for locally decentralized generation. This clean technology creates power with fuel cells, solar panels, microturbines, generating electricity from many small energy sources and help avoiding economical, logistical, safety, health, and environmental problems of large power plant. Additionally, a centralized power source can substantially reduces the economic and environmental cost of electrical services and lead to a new economical system based on improving human health against global warming.

In addition, our increasingly digital dependence, decreasing quality of infrastructures and the intensification of storms make us vulnerable to disruptions of power, a more distributed and decentralized network of small systems can reduce the problem. Furthermore, micropower systems can make a huge difference in the developing world, where “power poverty” is an important economical and political unsustainable problem, nearly one third of humanity, have been left utterly powerless by the centralized model. In developing countries micropower has the potential to allow people to develop “stand-alone village systems” with no more need for expensive grid extension.

Micropower is challenging the “bigger-is-cheaper” concept and is an available and accessible solution to global warming and the global economical crisis. The promising sector of small new electric clean source companies in both the developed and developing world, venture capital and microcredit models are being used to finance micropower, helping [startup] companies "survive their revenue-losing early years and enabling potential customers to surmount the high first cost of the new technologies”.

A radical societal shifts can occur when the large scale electricity model struggle to find economic and ecological solution. Historians remind us that technical systems are formed at the intersection of technologies and values.

The video shows an independent solar house with the option to sell the exceed energy back to the company…

References:
Worldwatch Institute. Micropower: The Next Electrical Era. Seth Dunn, July 2000. From http://www.worldwatch.org/system/files/EWP151.pdf
Micropower Council. Promoting the small-scale generation of sustainable energy.  http://www.micropower.co.uk/welcome.html

The Story of Bottled Water

Can nature be priced?

 

© Swimmer off Blue Bay, Island of Mauritius, Republic of Mauritius

Yann Arthus-Bertrand

Can we find an appropriate value for life? Can we express our own lives in economical terms? 

The main critic of cost-benefit analysis (CBA); the traditional economical formula to measure economical wealth, applied to the environmental and social issues, is limited. It is impossible to measure in dollar amount biodiversity or people's lives.

Human evaluation, in a monetary sense, must reflect the best value in terms of aesthetic and spiritual assets since its not because something or someone has no market value that we should let them die. An example is the case of the sick child, the market logic won’t be applicable in looking for his treatment however, we  must save the child. For natural resources such as access to water, pure air and soil, it means for the people with no access to them; death, people do not die of lack of incomes but they die for not accessing vital natural resources. 

Another monetary evaluation; the method of contingent variation (CV), used when pricing a specie or the aesthetic value of ecosystems does not understand that maintaining biological diversity includes improving the health of all ecosystems and that even the most unpopular insects is part of it. The perfect demonstration is the value of pest. For example pest, who wants to save pest? yet, if we exterminate insects, for example, the suppression of 68 herbivore species are link to the distortion of some insects and parasitoids. An ecosystem is a circle of life and eliminating one of its species is jeopardizing the entire ecosystem.

Assessing the economic value of ecosystem services by using dollars does not require that it be bought and sold on global market places, thus, dollar figures can be used as an indicator that has a concrete representation for people. It is easier to mobilize media, people and politics with figures such as; in 1997, the value of the global ecosystem was estimated at $33 trillion, compare with the 2009 world’s GDP was $58,141 trillion. However, placing value on ecological services and natural resources can be good for alerting and saving in the emergency in where we are now.

Another approach, to value nature is the “travel cost method”, to measure recreational attribute of National Parks for example. The method can reflect actual choice by consumers and might help pricing, assessing and saving natural resources used by humans for recreational benefits. Furthermore, biodiversity is disappearing at an unprecedented rate. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife estimates that more than 500 U.S species have gone extinct during the past 200 years, thus, the discussion on the dollar value placed on the global ecosystems and environmental services can and must be debated until an alternative solution could emerged and save the environment from an economically predicted destruction. The value of ecological services and their importance in policy making decision must be a global and urgent preoccupation and until global awareness on the vital threat of destructing the environment is becoming our number one preoccupation.

We all agree that nature must not be seen as a free good any longer, as an example is the fast depletion of the world fish stock. It is not possible to pollute the own source of our subsistence any longer. Another example, our drinking water, which is a limited vital supply where we dump our pesticides and wastes. The cost of pollution is real and can be estimate in dollar value “but it has been individuals and governments to bear the costs associated with those effects ”. These costs must be measured in a monetary sense and being included in the cost-benefit analysis. In economical terms these externalities must be internalized because before having a debate about valuating nature with a classic economical approach, this economical method must be accurate and must take into account the real cost of our pollution. 

The real paradox of the debate is that if more ecological consideration and sustainable scientific solutions can be applied to industries and economical activities, the stage of the biodiversity and important natural resources would in a better shape and our economical situation as well. 

References:

Taking Sides: Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Environmental Issues, 13th Ed.
Publisher: McGraw-Hill. Paperback
World Bank. World Development Indicators. http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development-indicators?cid=GPD_WDI
Berg, L.R., & Hager, M.C. (2009). Visualizing environmental science (2nd Ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Hummers and other SUVs are hurting our children

To illustrates how cars should be more efficient and regulations changed and reinforced; the Hummer H2, an expensive car, less safe than standard cars because of high center of gravity weighing 6,400 pounds that puts the Hummer into the category of truck, for which a tax deduction may be taken on its purchase if the vehicle is to be used for business, Hummer owners are able to deduct about $38,000 from their taxes. However, the H2 releases about 40 pounds of smog-causing pollutants for every 15,000 miles driven. 

Polluters should pay for their pollution. The Hummer driver must pay a higher share than the drivers of a fuel efficient cars. About 70% of our oil consumption is used for transportation and need political strong and comprehensive initiatives to be changed. Obama new objectives announced in its States of the Union’s speech, and want to bring reforms. The first step for a strong reduction in carbon emissions is to give incentives for more efficient cars.

The future of America dependent on a clean energy and if we are ready to fight oil consumption, SUVs and Hummers must be out of the market, CAF standards reinforced and hybrid drivers should be rewarded.

8.5 million jobs in the clean-tech sector, what are we waiting for?

Nationwide, the American Solar Energy Society estimates, that 8.5 million jobs in the clean-tech sector, are projected to grow to 40 million by 2030 with the right policies.

Green and sustainable economic projects are beneficial for the economy especially for job creation. Critics say that a clean economy is expensive, yet, the clean sector creates more jobs than our old dirty economy green investment project can advance a full employment agenda because it will create about 17 jobs for every $1 million in outlays, whereas spending the same $1 million in the oil and coal industries creates about 5.5 jobs—i.e., the job-creation effect of green investments is more than 3 times larger than  for fossil fuel production.  

Furthermore, sustainable development in America would create local jobs which would profit the American people and not foreign interests. The oil industry spends only “80 cents of every dollar” in the United States, and the rampant negative effect of globalization on the labor market with 20 to 30 % of all US jobs in the range of 30 million to 40 million are ready to export U.S jobs to cheap labor countries. 

Additionally, local economies reduce poverty and have a positive social impact on the entire society. Sustainable development is not a far utopia but a real and financially solid initiative “we spend about $600 billion a year in the oil, natural gas and coal sectors. Transferring, for example, 25% of those funds into energy efficiency and renewable energy projects can jump start a new sustainable economy. 

Local green jobs would benefit people directly encouraging employment in a sustainable manner “the 1990s to 2000 job growth was driven by the irrational Wall Street dot-com frenzy. By contrast, a green investment program can underwrite a durable full employment economy precisely because it is environmentally sustainable and morally just”. A change in the economy must be encouraged by strong government intervention in economic policies by investing and subsiding sustainable programs, “as a tool for fighting the recession, green projects can inject more money into the economy as quickly as possible. In this way, a $100 billion green investment program would create on the order of 1.7 million new jobs." 

No debate on jobs and the economical situation should take place without debating a new green and sustainable economy. Today, we have a major problem with the job market but we have also the solution with a green collar market. Similarly, we have enormous challenges with environmental degradation and we have a large workforce ready to be employed. The remedy is available for a better environment and a better job market; we have the solution to our problems. For the new economy to emerge the Federal government must invest in the public and private sectors to stimulate new environmental activities. 

The change for a green and sustainable economy in America is not only going to create millions of jobs but also would help people to live a meaningful life. This belief requires a deep change in human behavior as people must purchase and uses fewer items. In addition, renewable energy efficiency and, cap on fossil fuel consumption would help to improve social and environmental justice. It would give us clean air and water and would break our dependence on foreign oil. Environmental sustainability is a concept that must become our economy, philosophy, policy and a way of life. 

References:

Hazell, Stephen. "Green Collar Revolution." Alternatives Journal 35.6 (2009): 8-11. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 
OLLIN, ROBERT. "DOING THE RECOVERY RIGHT. (Cover story)." Nation 288.6 (2009): 13-18. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 
Walsh, Bryan, et al. "Why Green Is the New Red, White And Blue. (Cover story)." Time 171.17 (2008): 45-57. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO.

Business-NGO partnerships; hope for a sustainable future

The WWF - Johnson & Johnson partnership is a vivid example of a successful collaboration; the company profit from a public image and drive eco-conscientious consumers, while WWF accomplishes a step toward sustainable future supporting companies that cares for the health of other.

A new business universe can emerge from a sustainable innovative economy. WWF Climate Savers program is a group of leading corporations worldwide, working with World Wildlife Fund to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  A strong commitment as emerged between Johnson & Johnson Companies and WWF to reduce green gas emissions and let to the WWF’s Climate Savers initiative with 15 other major international companies committed to reduce their total emissions of carbon dioxide by over 10 million tons per year (WWF, 2010). 

Climate Savers companies were among the first to recognize that climate change posed both risks and opportunities to businesses and leading corporations to establish ambitious targets to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions voluntarily. By increasing efficiency, Climate Savers companies are saving hundreds of millions of dollars, proving that protecting the environment is also a sound business practice. This collaboration is a plus for Johnson & Johnson’s image; the company has been publicizing its CO2 reduction goal around the world.  J&J covers buildings, “equipment, management practices, maintenance practices, and operational practices developed a comprehensive set of energy efficiency best practices. ”

In addition,  J&J is participating in the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification program for existing buildings with its world headquarters building serving as a pilot project.  J&J invested in on-site renewable generation with the installation of 4 solar systems; in California, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Brazil. In his Texas operations has 15% wind power (10.6 million kWh/year).  

Business-NGO partnerships may represent an alternative to partnerships between multi-billion dollar global corporations and local community groups. NGOs increasingly need to work with businesses in order to realize their organizational goals in a globalized economy especially when innovative projects, fair trade practices and micro-credit are representing an incredible potential for the developing world. 

However, NGOs must keep independent guidance in order to respond appropriately to concerns about the social and environmental impacts of their products and production processes. 

References:

WWF. Companies commit to saving climate. http://www.jnj.com/connect/caring/environmentprotection/.  

Climate Savers: Elements of Fulfillment Strategies.  Johnson & Johnson. http://www.worldwildlife.or/climate/featuredprojects.html.  

Carbon emissions reduced by the economic slowdown while climate negationists pollute Congress

Emissions of carbon dioxide fell 6% in 2009 and were at their lowest level since 1995. The economic slowdown and a shift from coal to cleaner-burning natural gas to produce electricity, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, have contributed to the decline. 

Meanwhile, Mr. Cuccinelli, a Virginia’s attorney general, a right-wing conservative/Tea Party is suing the Environmental Protection Agency over its ruling that carbon dioxide and other global warming gases pose a threat to human health and welfare, describing the science behind the agency’s decision as unreliable and unverifiable.

In reality, in human urban areas, up to 90% of CO is emitted by motor vehicles. There is a terrestrial dimension to air pollution that we can’t ignore any longer. Human well-being is better served by controlling the accumulation in the atmosphere of carbon monoxide than to let air pollution ruining people's health, the environment and altering global climate, for the wealth of few lobbyist in Washington.

Mass Killing; dead infant dolphins in the Gulf

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) declared that an unusual mortality of dolphins in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida was observed since the spill.

The death toll along 200 miles of shoreline has climbed to at least 82 death since the spill, about 15 times the normal mortality rate for dolphins along the Gulf Coast this time of year,

This increasing number of dead infant dolphins is completely without precedent.  Not mentioning the unfrequented beaches of Alabama, blocked by BP and far from media coverage where dead infant dolphins are left in the sand. How could we believe that tons of oil and dispersant can be just disappearing?

1.5 millions of Americans diagnosed with cancer

The President’s Cancer Panel is a group established in 1971 by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), a group of experts who review America’s cancer program and report directly to the president. On May 6 2010, the Cancer Panel released its annual report and stated that in 2009, 1.5 million Americans were diagnosed with cancer, and 562,000 died from the disease, while recognizing that cancer resulting from environmental and occupational exposures could have been prevented through appropriate national action.

The Panel recognized that “environmentally induced cancer has been grossly underestimated” and 80,000 chemicals on the market, used by millions every day are “ understudied and largely unregulated, exposure to potential environmental carcinogens is widespread ”. The panel stated that chemicals during pregnancy are the greatest and 300 contaminants have been detected in umbilical cord blood of newborn babies, furthermore the Panel reported the nation needs a comprehensive, cohesive policy agenda regarding environmental contaminants and protection of human health.

Environmental hormones are a danger to developing human embryos, industrial and agricultural chemicals, the are named endocrine disruptor. From the schoolchildren in Minnesota that discovered frogs with extra legs and eyes on their shoulders at their local pound after pesticides was dumped. Or, the Alligators of the Lake Apopka almost all dead, the only survivors showing feminine characteristic, the phenomena has long been observed. Nowadays, the argument seems more political than scientific; against or for environmental regulations.

The purpose of environmental legislation is to protect human health and the environment from pollutants; however, chemical regulations of the federal government are challenged by strong business incentives represented by lobbyists. If it was not about economical interest in the commercialization of chemicals, the precautionary principle should have been applied, anticipating instead of reacting.

Endocrine disruptors had represented a great danger for many years and it should be proved safe instead of the sickness of people proving that it is harmful. In addition, here is a notion of environmental justice that must prevail on political believes or unclear scientific skepticism. In 2006, the American Cancer Society noted that “significant number of annual cancer deaths in the U.S. is caused by environmental pollutants and occupational exposures; lower-income workers and communities are disproportionately affected by these exposures”.

Fortunately, Congress has enacted numerous statutes in the last thirty years, such as, the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) regulating pesticide production; the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) and Clean Water Act (CWA) that regulates pollutants discharged into waters.

Addressing environmental issues and ethics necessitate the use of science for long-term environmental sustainability since safer alternatives to currently used chemicals are urgently needed such as green chemicals and the development of a green industry, while stronger regulation should limit all environmental contaminants.

References:

National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute. 2008–2009 Annual Report President’s Cancer Panel. http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/pcp/annualReports/pcp08-09rpt/PCP_Report_08-09_508.pdf

Berg, L.R., & Hager, M.C. (2009). Visualizing environmental science (2nd Ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

National Cancer Institute. 2008-2009 MEETING SERIES Environmental Factors in Cancer http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/pcp/glance/At-a-Glance_Environmental.pdf

Climate negationists are financed by industry Lobbyists

The Global Climate Coalition, a group representing industries with profits tied to fossil fuels, which led an aggressive lobbying and public relations campaign against the idea that emissions of heat-trapping gases could lead to global warming. In 1997, the year of the Kyoto Protocol, the budget of the Coalition totaled $1.68 million much more than the 1.9 Millions allocated to the EPA programs.

Throughout the 1990, the coalition conducted a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign challenging the merits of an international agreement, policy makers and pundits were fiercely debating whether humans could dangerously warm the planet. By questioning the science on global warming the Global Climate Coalition were able to dulled public concern and delay government action. The coalition disbanded in 2002, but some members from the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Petroleum Institute, continue to “lobby against any law or treaty that would sharply curb emissions”.

  

Far from special interests, the IPCC is a scientific body of 2,500 scientists from all over the world committed to the work of the IPCC on a voluntary basis and an intergovernmental body endorsed by 194 governments and the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel. The IPCC believes than 90 percent of human activities, namely fossil fuel burning, explained most of an indisputable warming of the planet in the past 50 years. The panel said temperatures will likely rise by between 1.8 and 4.0 Celsius (3.2 and 7.8 Fahrenheit) this century.

Today, the rapid degradation due to climate change highlights the urgency of changing laws and regulations without further delay. The visible degradation of our planet required more flexible, adaptable policy and regulation than the one shaped so far by our industries. We are now seeing the first environmental refugees in the South Pacific, an entire country is slowly disappearing; Bangladesh. We have experienced an another winter of record-setting cold in many parts of North America. The list of critical issues is long, the global climate is out of control.

We are the last generation on earth that would be able to curb current and future emissions, we are collectively responsible and we have to stop pretending that we are not warned. Researching the topic of global climate change I realized that science and technology are ahead of economics, politics and people consciousness.


References:
 The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Retrieved April 24, 2010 http://www.ipcc.ch/

How can we get digital cable and Internet in our homes, but not clean water?

“19.5 million Americans fall ill each year from drinking water contaminated with parasites, bacteria or viruses and this number does not include illnesses caused by other chemicals and toxins” , declared the scientific journal Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, that an estimated.


The New York Times has compiled data on more than 200,000 facilities that have permits to discharge pollutants from the Environmental Protection Agency. These hundreds of thousands of water pollution records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act regarding violation of Safe Drinking Water Act and publishes a series of editorials and investigations on a blog called “Toxic Water; a series about worsening pollution in America’s water and the regulator respond".


- Find Water Polluters Near You
http://projects.nytimes.com/toxic-waters/polluters
- What’s in Your Water
http://projects.nytimes.com/toxic-waters/contaminants
- Clean Water Act Violations, check enforcement record
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/09/13/us/0913-water.html


An example of water pollution and environmental injustice:

In a remote corner of Appalachia in West Virginia, 10 years ago, a terrible smells began coming from local taps, and water was sometimes gray, cloudy and oily. Bathtubs and washers developed "rust-colored rings that scrubbing could not remove and industrial water filters turned black". Tests showed that their water contained toxic amounts of lead, manganese, barium and other metals which can contribute to organ failure or developmental problems.

At the same time, closed coal companies started pumping industrial waste into the ground, to wash their coal to remove impurities. A black fluid containing dissolved minerals and chemicals was disposed in vast lagoons into dumped mines, then the liquid flows into water supplies. Coal companies have injected more than 1.9 billion gallons of coal slurry and sludge into the ground since 2004 and millions more gallons have been dumped into lagoons. This pose serious health risks in violation of state regulations and the Safe Drinking Water Act and are illegal concentrations of chemicals including arsenic, lead, chromium, beryllium or nickel. Nationwide, polluters have violated the Clean Water Act more than 500,000 times.


These chemicals contribute to cancer, organ failures and other diseases; nevertheless, these companies were never fined or punished for those illegal injections, according to state records. They were never even warned that their activities had been noticed. Worsening symptoms, like gall bladder diseases, fertility problems, miscarriages and kidney and thyroid issues became common. The community sued in county court, seeking compensation. That suit is pending. Until now the community gets regular “deliveries of clean drinking water, stored in coolers or large blue barrels outside most homes”. The construction of a pipeline bringing fresh water to the community is on the way, however, most residents still use polluted water to bathe, shower and wash dishes.


“How can we get digital cable and Internet in our homes, but not clean water?” said Madam Massey, her son has scabs on his arms, legs and chest due to bathwater and many of “his brother’s teeth were capped to replace enamel that was eaten away”.


Reference:
Clean Water Laws Are Neglected, at a Cost in Suffering. (2009, September 12). New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/us/13water.html?pagewanted=4

Obama saves the Endangered Species Act endangered by Bush

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) passed by the United State Congress in 1973 for the protection of endangered animals and their habitats was attacked in 2004 by the Bush’s administration. They act was untouched since 1982. In December 2008, the Bush administration changed this longstanding practice under the Endangered Species Act by issuing rules that allowed agencies to move ahead with projects and programs without seeking an independent review by either the Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 

Obama Administration’s policy on ESA  is to restore rules obliging U.S. agencies consultation with independent federal experts to determine if their actions might have harmed and threatened endangered species. By March 2009, Obama had signed the memorandum to help restore the scientific process to its rightful place in the working of the Endangered Species Act and the selection of candidate species. By reversing Bush's attempt to deregulate the consultation process, Obama restored oversight and balance, therefore, endangered species have now a chance to survive. 

References:

New York Time. Greenwire. September 9, 2009 Obama Admin Confronts 'Candidate Species' Backlog http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/09/08/08greenwire-obama-admin-confronts-candidate-species-backlo-22609.html?scp=3&sq=obama%20Endangered%20Species%20Act&st=cse

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. http://www.fws.gov/endangered/factsheets/history_ESA.pdf

Offshore drilling in the Artic or the polar bear; we must make a choice

Oil industry’s wanted to drill offshore in the Arctic for 20 years. A United States Geological Survey report released last November; cut by 90 percent the agency’s estimates of onshore oil in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve, after environmentalists successfully challenged a decision to grant the company air-quality permits , throwing Shell's exploration program into disarray. This is a victory especially for the polar bears as the oil and gas development was planning to drill in America’s most important polar bear habitat. The polar bear is not a small species is the representation of an entire ecosystem. Additionally, large carnivores are sensitive indicators of ecosystem health; WWF has identified the polar bear as a unique symbol of the complexities and inter-dependencies of the arctic marine ecosystem.

The environmental problem associated with oil is also the burning and the transport that contribute to global warming. The Arctic sea-ice, the Polar Bear Habitat may be reduced if Greenhouse gas emissions are stabilized (USGS, 2010). In addition, according to the journal, Nature, habitats essential to polar bears would benefit if global greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced. Due to Oil and gas activity, and shipping, the Arctic between September 2006 and September 2007, has a loss of sea ice equaled the total amount of ice lost during the previous 27 years (USGS, 210). This exponential loss of ice in such a short time was one of the reasons why so many scientists were concerned that there “might be a tipping point beyond which sea ice would be irreversibly lost” (USGS, 2010).

One aspect of increasing fossil fuel costs is to try to drill at any price the last fossil fuel world’s reserves regardless of the terrible consequences for the environment. Offshore oil drilling is a good example of what human can do to an already highly polluted ocean when huge financial interests are involved. Oil spill can spoil the ecology and economic value of a region for decades. Offshore drilling jeopardizes our natural richness for short term economic profit for Multinational Corporations which pays taxes also offshore, thus, do not contribute to the local economy and do not including the cost of environmental damages into the equation. The oil industry’s benefit is at the opposite of the long term perceptive that concerns the environment and social, health, ascetic, educational, environmental and natural heritage. Furthermore, environmental damages can be irreparable if animal species or coral reefs are harmed.

The oil companies can drill and make us pay the high price of any non-renewable declining commodity, a clean cut benefit for them. Some scientists estimate that the reserve of oil will be depleted within 50 years, thus, our children will live in a world without fuel. Even with technological advances, the most optimistic predictions are for global oil production to peak around 2035 (Murck, Skinner, 2010). We are the last generation to be able save what left of the Arctic and the world’s biodiversity. While the discussion of drilling in the Arctic is ongoing, the technology in photovoltaic, wind, geothermal, biomass and some many innovative scientific technologies is only waiting for a little investment. 

 
References: 

Murck, B. W., Skinner, B. J., & Mackenzie, D. (2010). Visualizing geology, 2nd ed. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley. USGS. Press release (2010) http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2666&from=news_side New York Times. Editorial (2010). http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/24/u-s-firms-up-critical-habitat-for-polar-bears/?scp=4&sq=offshore%20drilling%20Arctic%20National%20Wildlife&st=cse VANISHING KINGDOM, The Melting Realm of the Polar Bear. (n.d.). [Brochure]. Retrieved from
http://www.worldwildlife.org/climate/Publications/WWFBinaryitem4928.pdf

Sustainable agriculture for an environmentally and social responsible future

©Yann Arthus Bertrand

A pressing demand on the agricultural sector for production, are increasing needs for cultivation and agricultural sustainable practices. Increases in production and the use of intensive agricultural techniques lead to  dependence on fertilizers and overuse of water that can degrade soils and water resources.   

The three major nutrients; nitrate, phosphate and potassium leach into ground water or surface water and generate pollution. Many alternatives to modern agriculture are available to enhance sustainable agricultural systems and management practices such as the promotion of mixed agricultural systems like rice-fish farming and agroforestry, integrated pest management, pollination management, soil and water conservation and management options of grasslands and forage resources. Biodiversity for food and agriculture can be managed to maintain and enhances ecosystem services (FAO).   

The ability to enhance these soil biological processes can increase nutrient availability and efficiency and available soil nutrients to reduce the need for mineral fertilizer and minimize the cost of inputs and the environmental footprint of crop production. The conservation of biological diversity for agriculture and sustainable use are necessary for providing food and create subsistence and sustainable economy, as well as social and environmental improvement.  The conservation and enhancement of biodiversity in cropping systems are part of the foundation of sustainable farming practices (FAO). 

The growth of  healthy crops with the least possible disruption to ecosystems including crop rotation, inter-cropping,  conservation tillage,  balanced soil fertility and water management, optimum use of organic matter; prevent spreading of harmful organisms, protection and enhancement of important beneficial organisms and ecological infrastructures.

In addition, meeting consumer needs for quality products that are safe and produced with respect of the environment and in a socially responsible is leading the developed world to invest and research organic farming and the impact of climate change by developed nations is creating the need to rethink agriculture by promoting ecosystem-based approaches.

References:

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).  Sustainable Crop Production Intensification. http://www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/core-themes/theme/spi/en/.

Nuclear energy, is it worth it?

 Nuclear fusion

The combustion of coal to produce electricity is responsible for more than one-third of the air pollution in the United States and contribute to acid precipitation and climate change, while, nuclear power emit only few pollutants into the atmosphere. However, nuclear energy “generates radioactive waste in the form of spent fuel”, and nuclear plants produce radioactive material. These wastes are radioactive, thus, extremely dangerous and pose a major hazard for the environment and health of people.

Storage of nuclear waste is a major problem that did not find solution yet. In producing nuclear waste our generation has to think that this waste will be the heritage of future generation and our grandchildren would have to find solutions. Scientists opposed to nuclear energy contend that the replacement of coal-burning power plants with the replacement of nuclear power plants would not reduce climate change because “only 15% of the greenhouse gases come from power plants. Auto emissions and industrial processes produce most of the greenhouse gases and neither is affected by nuclear power”.

The nuclear industry must develop appropriate, long-term technology solutions to geological concerns about the development of nuclear energy with the use of uranium reserves, the storage of wastes, and economical parameter such as the cost of plants and equipment and transport, but there is also a social concern on the issue. Environmental Justice researchers had shown that Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDF) are located unfairly and that there is a “geographic association between race, ethnicity, economical indicators and area that contain hazardous substances”. Nuclear organizations must prove governments and the public that waste can be disposed safely and where.

Nuclear power is in competition with other energy sources, safer, cleaner and less dangerous. A balance of safety and cost must be found for regulation of the nuclear industry before any further development. The weaknesses in environmental regulations that the BP oil spill had revealed are bugs in the system that if happening on nuclear regulation can lead to enormous risks. Additionally, the use of nuclear fission is involved not only in the production of energy but also in the fabrication nuclear weapons, thus, increase terrorist threats because it only takes several kilograms of plutonium to make a nuclear bomb.

The position of the International Energy Agency (IEA) is that nuclear power has the potential to be a sustainable energy source of tomorrow but that there are no fundamental energy supply. Member countries of the IEA have stated they want to maintain nuclear power as an energy option for the future (IEA, 1998). Furthermore the IEA believes that nuclear power could make an important, contribution reducing carbon dioxide production for energy use because in developing countries, where electricity demand is growing, nuclear power could help in the search for a model of sustainable development (IEA, 1998).

References:
Berg, L.R., & Hager, M.C. (2009). Visualizing environmental science (2nd Ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Dr. John Paffenbarger of the Energy Diversification Division, working. IEA. Nuclear Energy Report (1998). http://www.iea.org/textbase/nppdf/free/1990/nuclearpower98.pdf
Ronald G. Burns, Michael J. Lynch and Paul Stretesky, Environmental Law, Crime, and Justice (2008).

The Story of Cap & Trade

Birds victims of the insufficient investment in wind power technology

The Fish and Wildlife Service and Wind Energy Development have established the Project Planning Program that reviews potential wind energy developments on public lands through the National Environmental Policy Act.  Under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Service has established a Wind Turbine Siting Working Group in 2002, to “develop a set of comprehensive national guidelines for siting and constructing wind energy facilities”. The purpose of the guidelines was to help protect “wildlife resources streamline the site selection and design process.

Wind energy is one of the lowest-priced renewable energy technologies available today. The wind is an affordable, inexhaustible energy that provides jobs, powers the economy without causing pollution. Wind energy is clean generating no hazardous wastes or depleting natural resources. Wind towers can revitalize the economy of rural communities, providing income through lease or royalty payments to farmers and other landowners.Service Program Roles in Wind Energy Development is required by the Endangered Species Act to assist other Federal agencies in “ensuring that any action they authorize, implement, or fund, including wind energy developments, will not jeopardize the continued existence of any federally endangered or threatened species”. 

However, the American Bird Conservancy (ABC), a not-for profit organization whose mission is “to conserve native wild birds and their habitats throughout the Americas”. They analyzed the recent U.S. studies and concluded that bird mortality at wind turbine projects varies from less than one bird/turbine/year to as high as 7.5 birds/per turbine/year. This means that between 10,000 and 40,000 birds may be killed each year at wind farms across the country and about 80% of which are songbirds, and 10% may be birds of prey. Bats are also subject to high mortality at wind farms frequently at considerably higher rates than birds.Bats are also impacted; a good illustration is the West Virginian dispute, a wind developer called Beech Ridge Energy applied to build a 122-turbine project along an Appalachian ridgeline in Greenbrier County. The county is home to the Indiana bat, which the federal government listed as endangered in 1967. A federal judge’s ruling that stopped the construction to protect an endangered bat “underscores the growing conflicts between green energy and imperiled wildlife”. In this case, an assessment of the project had estimated that it would annually kill 6,746 bats of all kinds.

Many innovations must be made in the near future to mitigate the negative effects of wind farms on wildlife. New generators could be built to standards that minimize the potential for bird kills. Wind is a new technology and not enough investment has been made so far. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Steven Chu announced recently the selection of 53 new wind energy projects for up to $8.5 million in total DOE funding. These investments will lead progress on the technology employed to develop wind energy, but also in the science to assess its potential impacts to birds and bats. A Wind Turbine Guidelines Advisory Committee composed of 22 members appointed by the Secretary established guidelines for, siting, operating, and preventing avian and other wildlife impacts that have been issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

References:

The Fish and Wildlife Service and Wind Energy Development http://www.fws.gov/habitatconservation/wind.html

Interim Guidelines to Avoid and Minimize Wildlife Impacts from Wind Turbines. http://www.fws.gov/habitatconservation/Service%20Interim%20Guidelines.pdf

 American Birds Conservancy. http://www.abcbirds.org/conservationissues/threats/energyproduction/wind.html

New York Times. Green Inc., December 10, 2009. Judge Halts Wind Farm Over Bats. http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/10/judge-halts-wind-farm-over-bats/?scp=2&sq=wildlife&st=cse

Watch Blue Gold: World Water Wars

Blue Gold: World Water Wars is an award-winning 2008 documentary by Sam Bozzo, based on the book Blue Gold: The Right to Stop the Corporate Theft of the World’s Water by Maude Barlow and Tony Clarke 

210,000 gallons a day of toxic mining waste into 23 acres lake in Alaska

On Monday June 24, 2009, the Supreme Court hurt the Clean Water Act in a court decision by opening the door to industrial dumping into our water. An American gold mining company was allowed to discharge 210,000 gallons a day of potentially toxic mining waste into 23 acres lake near Juneau in Alaska. 

This decision was made possible by an amendment pushed by the Bush Administration and voted on May 9, 2002. The Wetland page on EPA’s website explains “the Federal Register published a final Corps and EPA rule reconciling their previously differing Clean Water Act section 404 regulations defining the term "fill material" and amended their definition of "discharge of fill material”. While working on infrastructures such as bridges or levees, the Army Corps of engineer was the only institution using the right of discharging “fill material” in water. Bush Administration enlarged the definition to include contaminated mining in the “fill material” to serve the interest of the Mining industry. “This is the same regulatory trick the corps relies on to allow coal mining companies in Appalachia to dump the waste from mountaintop mining into the valleys below — a practice that has obliterated 1,200 miles of streams.”

NEPA (National Environmental Protection Act) requires Federal Agencies to allow public participation on their actions involving the environment. The intent is to have the public engaged into Federal decision-making process and be better informed on environmental matters. Federal agencies when conducting environmental reviews determine the level of documentation and actions needed. Therefore, they conduct an analysis to determine if an Environmental Impact Statement, (EIS) and an Environmental Assessment (EA) would be necessary. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) defines CEs as "a category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment." (40 C.F.R § 1508.4), and for that reason, do not require the preparation of an EA or an EIS. The purpose of CE is to save agency resources when certain activities have a limited environmental impact. However, CEs are also directly responsible for public involvement, if an agency agree on a CE, no environmental review or public participation are mandatory.

Federal agencies like the BLM have utilized CE beyond their intended purpose and this extensive used can have a negative environmental impact. The goal of the NEPA and the idea of the entire process are to have better qualified and improved Federal agencies. Conversely, the abuse of CE can lead to incomplete analysis and harmful activities and can affect communities, as public concerns are not including into their decisions. The GAO investigation found that BLM illegally approved some oil and gas drilling applications on public lands from 2006 to 2008”. BLM used categorical exclusions to approve more than “a quarter of applications during those years about 6,100 of 22,000 and to modify hundreds of existing permits”.  

In this case and other involving CEs, the BLM decided that environmental analysis where not necessary neither the public participation nor eventual examination of extraordinary circumstances that might have conducted to further analysis. Science and full public participation provide a foundation for equitable and sustainable development and CE an instrument to serve political and economical special interest.   

References:
Final Revisions to the Clean Water Act Regulatory Definitions of "Fill Material" and "Discharge of Fill Material" http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/guidance/fillfinal.html
NEPA, the Environmental Quality Improvement Act of 1970. Sec. 1508.4 Categorical exclusion. http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/Nepa/regs/ceq/1508.htm#1508.4

New York Time. Editorial. June 24, 2009. One More Threat to Clean Water. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/25/opinion/25thu2.html?_r=2&scp=1&sq=Clean%20Water%20Act%20&st=cse