Category: Sustainable Settlement and Agriculture

The Generator is founded on the simple premise that we should leave the world in better condition than we found it. The news items in this category outline the attempts people have made to do this. They are mainly concerned with our food supply and settlement patterns. The impact that the human race has on the planet.

  • People who don’t want to live in glass houses should throw stones

     

    It’s not only Sydney. Just as a tree’s age and context are legible in its annular rings, so a city’s age and determinants are legible in the density of its core and its subsequent growth-rings. Sydney was luckier than Auckland, say, or Houston, in having crystallised, as it were, that much earlier, before the car blew it all apart. But as Haskell notes, cities everywhere – including the Parises and Florences – are now ringed by medium and low-density sprawl every bit as relentless and hideous as ours.

    This, though – and the fact that when Sydneysiders hear the word ”density” those beige boxes and redbrick walk-ups are what they see – tells us more about 20th century arrogance than about density per se.

    That’s scandalous enough, but the real jaw-dropper is that architecture wants to go again, and is reviving modernism holus bolus. Pick up any mag and you’ll be hit by some odd-angled, flat-topped, board-form concrete house; eaveless, shadeless, shadowless, sill-less. As though water no longer ran downhill, glass no longer trapped heat, people no longer delighted in grace, breeze or transition.

    The particular house I’m slagging is the Fosc House in Chile, but it could be any one of hundreds that have been darlinged by the design mags over recent months, including several in this country. Modernism is not only back, it’s back unrethought, unreconstituted, unrepentant. How can sentient professionals be so dumb?

    It’s sometimes tempting to think this stuff trivial, and in a way it is. But the density issue illustrates just how pivotal architecture will be in determining the future of the species.

    In November 2008, while the world’s eyes were crossed on Obama and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, humanity passed an important milestone. Thenceforth, more than half of us live in cities. How those cities are shaped – and how lovely they are – will largely determine our wellbeing and even our survival.

    Again as Haskell notes, the European city-cores we admire are distinguished by “the type of architecture that ensures inner-city living can be a pleasure”. Can this be so hard to do? Well no. It’s not hard. It’s just that pleasure – other than the architect’s pleasure at making the glossy front covers – hasn’t been on architecture’s critical path for some time. And now, making matters worse, we’ve allowed a system to take root that means it can never be reinstated.

    There are several factors here: the way modernism played – nay, danced – into the hands of the profiteers, the way successive governments sold out to these same profiteers in the fiasco we call ”planning”, and the way virtually all city-building is now done by publicly-listed developers whose shareholders actively eschew superfluities like delight (ours).

    So just when it matters most, environmentally, that we get our cities right; just when city living has become a majority interest and just when democracy ensures that our cities cannot be shaped by fiat but only by desire; at this precise moment we find ourselves saddled with a building procurement system that all but prohibits the building of pleasurable cities.

    Cities are greener than suburbs. No question, and in countless ways. Edward Glaeser’s Harvard study compared city and suburban emissions from driving, public transport, heating, electricity across 46 US cities. His report is on the net. Check it out. There are also savings in construction, infrastructure, farmland, forest and food transport. But to save us, cities have to be more than green. They have to make us want them.

    So it’s heartening that Glaeser makes San Francisco America’s greenest, since it is also lovely; light, tight timber terraces and apartments, medium and high density, rent-controlled and in general, height-controlled. But its big achievement – and this is hard – is accommodating the car without losing its picturesqueness.

    The only Sydney example that comes close is Surry Hills’s Moore Park Gardens. Designed by Alan Jack + Cottier back in the ’90s, MPG provides 560 apartments in three to 20 storeys on 2.6 hectares. By our standards that’s pretty dense.

    But it doesn’t feel it. With its sophisticated and varied composition, myriad walkways, luscious planting, parks, pools and established delis, it creates not just a community, but a genuine middle-class chic. This is seriously rare. The disgrace is that in the last decade’s huge medium-density boom, nothing has come even close.

    For me the acid test is this. Can I imagine someone reading Kant in there, hammering out the next Dada, writing the next Houellebecq, making the next Star Wars? Answer, yes, actually. No trouble.

  • Govt accused of paving way for pulp mill pipeline

     

    The head of Roads and Transport Peter Todd said Gunns may be allowed to use the land, if its pipeline does not interfere with the bypass.

    “We can only compulsorily acquire the land for road purposes and that’s what we’ve done,” he said.

    Mr Todd said there has been no special planning to accommodate the pipeline.

    The Greens leader Nick McKim is not convinced and said the Premier’s promise to end support for the pulp mill has become laughable.

    “His Government may well have acted illegally in compulsorily acquiring private land for private purpose,” Mr McKim said.

    The Premier said he is not aware of the issue.

    “So I’m not going to be commenting on a story that is speculative,” he said.

    Mr Bartlett said it is Government policy not to acquire land for Gunns pulp mill

  • Palm oil plantations could be classified as forests

    Palm oil plantations could be classified as forests

    Ecologist

    8th February, 2010

    European Commission guidance would allow biofuels to be labelled as sustainable even if forests have been destroyed to make way for the palm oil plantations

    EU plans to allow palm oil plantations to be classified as ‘forests’ have been strongly criticised by environmental campaigners.

    According to a leaked document from the European Commission, reclassifying palm plantations as forested land could be justified and allow it to meet sustainability criteria.

    ‘Continuously forested areas are defined as areas where trees have reached, or can reach, at least heights of 5 meters, making up a crown cover of more than 30 per cent. They would normally include forest, forest plantations and other tree plantations such as palm oil. Short rotation coppice may qualify if it fulfils the height and canopy cover criteria.

    ‘This means,’ continues the leaked document, ‘for example, that a change from forest to oil palm plantation would not per se constitute a breach of the criterion. A change form short rotation coppice to annual agricultural crops could constitute a breach of the criterion.’

    Sustainable biofuels

    Friends of the Earth said the plans, if accepted, would allow rainforest to be destroyed to make way for palm plantations and the resulting biofuel to still be classified as sustainable.

    ‘If the incoming Commission is serious about tackling climate change and halting biodiversity loss it needs to clean up the biofuels legacy and urgently ensure that forests are not sacrificed to fuel cars,’ said Friends of the Earth agrofuels campaign coordinator Adrian Bebb.

    The EU is due to publish a report on greenhouse gas emissions from biofuel production in March 2010.

    A Nuffield Council consultation on next generation biofuels and whether they can be environmentally sustainable is currently under way. The deadline for public views is 15th March 2010.

    Useful link
    EU document on sustainability criteria for biofuels

    Nuffield Council consultation on biofuels

  • Gunns abandons legal chase

    Gunns abandons legal chase

    ABC January 30, 2010, 2:26 pm

     

    Tasmanian timber company Gunns has dropped legal action against a group of conservationists.

    The company took action in 2004 against 17 environmentalists and three organisations, claiming they had hurt its business by protesting, trespassing and damaging machinery.

    Now Gunns has announced it will pay $155,000 towards the legal costs of the four remaining defendants to end the proceedings.

    One of the individuals being sued Adam Burling, who works for the Huon Valley Environment Centre, says it is a win for free speech.

    “The case had the potential to set a dangerous precedent where anyone who spoke out against any development in Australia could potentially be sued,” Mr Burling said.

    “Gunns pursued us for more than five years and has spent millions of dollars hounding us through the courts … it’s an embarrassing backdown.”

    Australian Greens Senator Bob Brown says the Government should introduce legislation to discourage corporations from pursuing dissenting individuals.

    “We need governments to legislate, as the Australian Capital Territory has done and many states in the US, to prevent actions like this against citizens who are taking a reasonable and opposite point of view to developers in the great debates about the environment,” Senator Brown explained.

    Gunns says the settlement is a commercial decision.

  • Gunns 20 Case Goes to Trial

     

    Bob Brown was being sued for writing to Japanese paper companies (at the time 80 per cent of Tasmania’s woodchip exports went to Japanese paper production) and disputing Gunns claims that their woodchips predominantly come from plantations rather than native forest.

    Dr Frank Nicklason was being sued for writing about the possible health effects of decomposing wood chips in Gunns’ export chip piles.

    Adam Burling, along with the kitchen-building grandmother Lu Geraghty, were accused of orchestrating a blockade to stop logging in their community.

    After much legal wrangling and millions of dollars in costs, cases against 16 of the defendants were dropped. The trial for the remaining four — Burling, Geraghty, Brian Dimmick and the Huon Valley Environment Centre — will begin in the Victorian Supreme Court on Tuesday.

    When corporations take legal action against their detractors, the effects often reach far beyond those sued. The spectre of well-financed litigation is enough to strike fear into the hearts of those who might otherwise add their voices to the chorus of critics. Individuals and whole communities can be silenced, fearing they could be next. For the defendants themselves, time and resources are channelled into their case — and away from their initial concern of public interest.

    Legal co-ordinator for the Wilderness Society and author of Gagged, The Gunns 20 and other law suits, Greg Ogle explains the ramifications of the Gunns 20 case:

    “There were certainly examples of people pulling out of activity protesting Gunns’ pulp mill, and of others being afraid even to put submissions into government assessment processes … The litigation also impacted on public debate simply because of the many hours required to address the case. These were hours which were not available for the defendants to spend on the protection of Tasmania’s forests.”

    The Gunns 20 case sent a chill around the island state and across Bass Strait. With what might be termed “instructive” timing, Gunns announced their proposal for a $2.5 billion pulp mill in the Tamar Valley north of Launceston just days after issuing the 20 writs.

    Although the north of the Tamar is no stranger to industry, the valley is also populated by viticulturists who produce 40 per cent of Tasmania’s cool climate wines. Looking at how the wine industry has responded to the pulp mill — and to the Gunns 20 case — illustrates the ways in which SLAPP suits reach beyond particular defendants.

    Wine and tourism are the Tamar’s chief industries: the 58 kilometre Tamar Valley Wine Route boasts 19 boutique wineries and the Valley has over 40 in total. The area’s mainly owner-operated and family-based tourist ventures — restaurants, cafes, bed and breakfast accommodation — are worth approximately $300 million annually. These businesses are certainly likely to register the effects of the mill.

    It is projected that the mill will pump some 30 billion litres of liquid effluent into Bass Strait each year. And daily, it will release 300 kilograms of particulate air pollution into the Tamar Valley — an output which will include so-called “non condensable gases”, which human nostrils up to 55 kilometres away may mistake for the aroma of rotten eggs. The Tasmanian Government has helpfully exempted the pulp mill from adhering to national air pollution limits.

    Aghast at the potential loss of so much fine wine, the Victorian Sommeliers Association (VSA) wrote to its members about the proposed pulp mill. The VSA also considered orchestrating a boycott against Gunns; alongside their timber interests Gunns also has a stake in Tasmania’s wine industry, owning the labels Tamar Ridge and Devil’s Corner. However, the VSA decided against the boycott. President Ben Edwards said the decision was based less on the likelihood of losing a court case against Gunns, and more on the prospect of being dragged through the courts for years, regardless of the outcome. Edwards said the decision was directly influenced by the Gunns 20 case.

    Another example of the chilling effects of the Gunns 20 case could be evidenced in the pages of the University of Tasmania’s student magazine, Togatus. While the folks who advise us on what red to drink with our tagine may not be renowned for their political activism, student-run publications have a reputation for just that.

    When Wilderness Society volunteer Paul Oosting submitted an article likening Gunn’s description of the pulp mill as “world’s best practice” to Orwell’s ‘newspeak’, Togatus refused to publish it for fear of retaliatory litigation.

    Oosting eventually published his pulp mill article on the Tasmanian Times website. He also got the job of pulp mill campaigner for the Wilderness Society and can be heard frequently on Tasmanian radio vehemently criticising the mill and its owners. Even so, Greg Ogle describes the Togatus episode as bringing home to him the adverse effect the case has had on free speech.

    The Gunns 20 case is the most high profile of a new breed of lawsuits, which direct industrial and commercial law at environmental and community protest, using charges of ‘conspiracy to injure’, ‘hindering trade’ and ‘unlawfully interfering with trade and business’. While some of the alleged actions in the case involved a direct stopping of business, most of their case against the Wilderness Society and Greens politicians were about broader political processes like the lobbying of business and government or making statements to the media.

    Ogle argues that law reform, along the lines of anti-SLAPP legislation in the US, is needed to protect the public’s right to participate in political debate and protest: “Legislation must be framed around a positive right to public participation, not around a question of whether a case is an abuse of process, although outlawing such abuses may be part of the legislation. The right to public participation must be paramount.”

    The Gunns 20 case signals the urgent need for Australian legislators to introduce measures to protect community activism from the wrath of corporations scorned. 

    This is the first in a two-part series on the Gunns 20 and the legal issues surrounding public protest and advocacy. Tomorrow, Liesel will look at the history of Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation suits.

  • Garrett axes forest ecology and solders up greenhouse trigger

    “Citing community concern Dr Hawke and his panel of experts came up with
    a clear and sensible plan to prevent the destruction of endangered
    habitats and fragile wildlife ecosystems in Australia’s forests. But
    Garrett has opted to axe that advice and toady to Labor and the forest
    industry instead,” Senator Brown said

    “Garrett has also dumped the long-awaited recommendation of a climate
    change trigger. This would have enabled the minister to review
    developments which resulted in huge greenhouse gas emissions.”

    “On the cusp of the International Year of Biodiversity (to quote
    Garrett), this is particularly appalling behaviour by our nation’s chief
    environmentalist.”

    “Which other minister would turn down recommendations to enhance his or
    her power to do their job properly?” Senator Brown asked.

    Media contact: Peter Stahel 0433 005 727 Greens Media Release.

    _______________________________________________
    GreensMPs Media mailing list