EcoRadio

Category: News

Add your news
You can add news from your networks or groups through the website by becoming an author. Simply register as a member of the Generator, and then email Giovanni asking to become an author. He will then work with you to integrate your content into the site as effectively as possible.
Listen to the Generator News online

 
The Generator news service publishes articles on sustainable development, agriculture and energy as well as observations on current affairs. The news service is used on the weekly radio show, The Generator, as well as by a number of monthly and quarterly magazines. A podcast of the Generator news is also available.
As well as Giovanni’s articles it picks up the most pertinent articles from a range of other news services. You can publish the news feed on your website using RSS, free of charge.
 

  • APEC climate proposal damned

    Draft resolutions being prepared for the APEC summit in September and leaked to the ABC called for avoiding deforestation as a partial solution to climate change. The proposal has been criticised by Greenpeace clean energy campaigner, Ben Pearson, as being a step backward from Kyoto. "It is a return to the aspirational targets of the early nineties," he said. he called for the conference to embrace and extend the Kyoto Protocol, rather than undermining it.

    Greens leader Bob Brown has announced an invitation to the APEC heads of government to come to Tasmania  and view the clear felling of native forests which are being destroyed to feed the new pulp mill being built in Tasmania. The pulp mill, proposed by woodchipping giant, Gunns Limited, will burn 500,000 tonnes of wood per annum and put out millions of tonnes of greenhouse gases. Environment minister Malcolm Turnbull has said he will assess the environmental impact of the pulp mill but has not agreed to consider greenhouse gas pollution as part of that assessment.

    "Prime Minister Howard will be an APEC hypocrite if he calls on other countries to stop burning forests but continues to subsidise and promote it in Australia," Bob Brown said.

     

  • Farmers and tree huggers form climate alliance

    Rural communities, and the businesses that support them, are at the front line of climate change impacts. With a changing climate and uncertainty about future government responses to the challenge, rural communities are vulnerable to both the physical and regulatory consequences of climate change.

    The Alliance acknowledges that Australia is tracking close to its Kyoto target due largely to the efforts of Australian farmers reducing emissions, particularly from practices such as minimum tillage and ceasing broad-scale land-clearing, while emissions from most other sectors have continued to increase.

    The Alliance believes that rural Australia can continue to help turn around Australia’s rising greenhouse gas emissions and make the switch to a clean energy economy. While commitments to introduce a price of greenhouse gas emissions are welcome, complementary measures will be necessary to help rural Australia play its part.

    We need to build on rural Australia’s history of innovation and resilience by ensuring a mix of policies and programs to:

    1. Prosper: Create effective and sustainable economic drivers from harvesting clean renewable energy, farming carbon and bio-diversity stewardship, such as setting a target for clean renewable energy.

    2. Strengthen: Secure a viable, vital and productive future for rural Australia by forward planning and providing for social and physical infrastructure and services such as mental health facilities and workforce skills.

    3. Adapt: Make information, tools and resources accessible to rural Australians with a view to adapting to and preparing for the unavoidable impacts of climate change. Recognise that farmers have an ageing profile and many operate small or medium scale enterprises.

    Working together and supported by government, rural Australia can prosper from a clean energy future.

  • World Bank censored climate change report

    It was politics that prevented the publication of that paper, according to
    one senior bank insider who spoke to the Los Angeles Times, and politics
    that has been the principal obstacle to progress since. Only now, with the
    Bush administration on the ropes politically and the scientific evidence for
    global warming reaching such critical mass that even President George Bush
    has been forced to acknowledge its reality, are those same bank officials
    trying again to put the issue on the agenda. "Our biggest obstacle has been
    that politically, [climate change] is very controversial," Kristalina
    Georgieva, the bank’s strategy and operations director for sustainable
    development, told the LA Times.

    She said that, even under the best of circumstances, it will be at least two
    years before the bank starts measuring the impact of fossil fuel-related
    projects on the planet’s health. "We are not moving fast enough," she added.
    "It’s not possible to be moving fast enough."

    The GAP has uncovered evidence of one striking instance of Bush
    administration censorship. In 2006, the bank’s vice presidents responded to
    a request from the Group of Eight industrialised countries and commissioned
    a draft report entitled Climate Change, Energy and Sustainable Development:
    Towards an Investment Framework. They endorsed the report, according to the
    minutes of a meeting obtained by the GAP.

    Subsequently, however, Mr Wolfowitz’s office put out a memo asking the team
    to rework the paper, "shifting from a climate lens mainly to a clean-energy
    lens". The edited paper issued a few months later was eventually called
    Clean Energy and Development: Towards an Investment Framework.

    The World Bank has come under fire from environmental groups for a number of
    decisions, including a recent grant to develop lignite mining and power
    plants in Kosovo. Lignite — or brown coal — pollutes the air heavily when
    burnt and is generally regarded as one of the dirtiest fuel sources on the
    planet.

    The investment appears to go against the bank’s own policy, from 2001,
    whereby it decided to try to phase out oil and gas investments by 2008 and
    to extend an existing moratorium on investments in coal mining.

    The GAP put out a report in March detailing similar problems at other
    agencies, most notably the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
    which, among other duties, tracks hurricanes and other extreme weather
    phenomena. The report cited "objectionable and possibly illegal restrictions
    on the communication of scientific information to the media" — including
    censorship of interviews and press releases.

    More recently, the GAP has reported the Bush administration’s refusal to
    consider climate change as it prepares to expand the national air transport
    system threefold over the next 20 years. A multi-agency group called the
    Next Generation Air Transportation System has simply ignored global warming
    in its past two annual reports.

    Mr Wolfowitz was forced to step down in June after it emerged that he had
    given a lucrative sinecure to his girlfriend and offered her excessive pay
    rises.

  • Arctic metldown will release greenhouse gas


    For thousands of years, the fossil fuel deposits lay locked under the ice
    and inaccessible. Ironically, the very process of burning fossil fuels
    releases massive amounts of carbon dioxide, or CO2, and forces an increase
    in the Earth’s temperature, which in turn melts the Arctic ice, making
    available even more oil and gas for energy. Burning these potential oil and
    gas finds would further increase CO2 emissions in coming decades, depleting
    the Arctic ice even more quickly.

    But there is an even more dangerous aspect to the unfolding drama in the
    Arctic. While governments and oil giants are hoping the melting ice will
    allow them access to the world’s last treasure trove of oil and gas,
    climatologists are deeply worried about something else buried under the ice
    that, if unearthed, could wreak havoc on the biosphere, with dire
    consequences for human life.

    Much of the Siberian sub-Arctic region, an area the size of France and
    Germany combined, is a vast, frozen peat bog. Before the most recent Ice
    Age, the area was mostly grassland, teeming with wildlife. The coming of the
    glaciers entombed the organic matter below the permafrost, where it has
    remained ever since. Although the surface of Siberia is largely barren,
    there is as much organic matter buried underneath the permafrost as there is
    in all of the world’s tropical rain forests.

    Now the permafrost is thawing on land and along the seabeds. If it occurs in
    the presence of oxygen on land, the decomposing of organic matter leads to
    the production of CO2. If the permafrost thaws along lake shelves, in the
    absence of oxygen, the decomposing matter releases methane. Methane is the
    most potent of the greenhouse gases, with a greenhouse effect 23 times that
    of CO2.

    Katey Walter of the Institute of Arctic Biology at the University of Alaska
    in Fairbanks wrote in the journal Nature last year, and in Philosophical
    Transactions of the Royal Society in May, that the melting of the permafrost
    and subsequent release of methane is a "ticking time bomb."

    Walter and her researchers warned of a tipping point sometime within this
    century, when the release of methane could create an uncontrollable feedback
    effect, dramatically warming the atmosphere, which would in turn warm the
    land, lakes and seabed, further melting the permafrost and releasing more
    methane. Once that threshold is reached, there will be nothing humans can
    do. Scientists suspect that similar events have occurred in the ancient
    past, between glacial periods.

    Scientists are particularly concerned that the thawing permafrost is also
    creating shadow lakes across the Siberian sub-Arctic landscape. The lake
    waters have a higher ambient temperature than the surrounding permafrost. As
    a result, the permafrost near the lakes thaws more quickly, forcing the
    ground surfaces to collapse into the lakes. The stored organic carbon then
    decomposes into the lake bottoms. Methane from that decomposition bubbles to
    the surface and escapes into the atmosphere. Scientists calculate that
    thousands of tons of methane will be released from Arctic lakes as the
    permafrost thaws.

    A global tragedy of monumental proportions is unfolding at the top of the
    world, and the human race is all but oblivious to what’s happening.

    When U.S. astronauts stepped onto the moon in 1969, Neil Armstrong’s first
    words were, "One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind." The
    Russian aquanauts, landing on the Arctic seabed, might just as well have
    said, "One small dive for man, one giant leap backward for life on Earth."

    …………

    Jeremy Rifkin is the author of "The Hydrogen Economy: The Creation of the
    World Wide Energy Web and the Redistribution of Power on Earth."

  • Farmer on international crusade against GM crops

    Australian Broadcasting Corporation

    TV PROGRAM TRANSCRIPT

    LOCATION: http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2002/s599018.htm

    Broadcast: 04/07/2002

    Farmer on international crusade against GM crops

    Reporter: Sarah Clarke

    KERRY O’BRIEN: The new age of genetically modified crops is moving so fast it’s hard to keep up.

    But for some Australian farmers crunch point has arrived.

    Canola farmers have to make a choice between jumping on the GM bandwagon and producing higher yields, or sticking with traditional practice.

    For them, the experience of Canadian grower Percy Schmeiser may have particular resonance.

    He claims to have been a victim of genetic contamination and is now travelling the world to advise others to resist.

    Science and environment reporter, Sarah Clarke reports.

    ARTHUR BOWMAN, CANOLA FARMER:     We only have one chance.

    It’s irreversible.

    Once we go GM canola, there is no way we can go back to a free state.

    SARAH CLARKE, REPORTER: Arthur Bowman has been growing canola in NSW central west for 18 years.

    He’s one of many farmers who harbour reservations about the world-wide push to change to genetically modified canola.

    It’s chemical giant Monsanto leading the charge in Australia.

    Doing the hard-sell, vowing huge benefits to farmers.

    BRIAN ARNST, SPOKESPERSON for chemical and agricultural seed giant     MONSANTO: The results have been outstanding in terms of better weed control, lower costs to the farmers, better use of the environment.

    SARAH CLARKE:     Monsanto has spent more than five years trialling GM canola in secret plots across Australia.

    Now it wants to go into full commercial production.

    But wary farmers believe there should be more time for debate.

    ARTHUR BOWMAN:     It all seems to be Monsanto, Monsanto, Monsanto.

    And we — we’re in the fortunate position we’re an island and can afford to keep out of this technology in the meantime.

    And in that time, we can prove all these plus and minuses to the farmers.

    SARAH CLARKE:     There have already been negatives in Europe with nervous consumers abandoning GM products in favour of organic, costing Canada one-third of its exports.

    PERCY SCHEMEISER, CANADIAN CANOLA FARMER: It has destroyed our market of canola in many countries of the world.

    All of the European common market will not buy one bushel of canola from us.

    That means 30 per cent of our exports have been lost just to Europe alone.

    SARAH CLARKE:     Canadian farmer, Percy Schmeiser became a GM canola producer by accident.

    His crop was contaminated by pollen from a neighbouring genetically modified crop.

    Any complaints he may have had were steamrolled by Monsanto, which successfully sued to seize his crop.

    PERCY SCHEMEISER: I lost it all to a contamination because a judge ruled in my case it doesn’t matter how Monsanto’s genetically modified canola gets on my land or any farmers land.

    You violate the pattern and you infringe on the pattern and your seed becomes Monsanto’s property.

    SPEAKER: This meeting, I think is probably one of the most important meetings that’s been held in Dubbo for a long time.

    SARAH CLARKE:     Australian farmers are now being warned by Percy Schmeiser that they too could become victims of genetic contamination.

    He claims they will be powerless to stop GM pollen being spread in a number of ways, whether it be by wind, by bees or even off the back of a truck.

    That could spell disaster for those farmers who are not yet ready to embrace GM technology.

    PERCY SCHEMEISER:     Once you release it into the environment through cross pollination and direct seed movement, as in my case, it will contaminate organic farmers and conventional farmers because the GMO gene is a dominant gene and will take over the plant that it gets into.

    So there’s no such thing and repeating, there’s no such thing as coexistence.

    BRIAN ARNST: We are firmly of the belief that coexistence can occur.

    I think that as we go forward, everyone will realise that in fact in a situation like Australia where our agricultural systems are somewhat different than those in Europe, for example, and the UK, that in fact growing biotech crops in coexistence with organic farming will be successful.

    SARAH CLARKE: Monsanto has pinned its argument on a new study published in the prestigious ‘American Science Journal’.

    While it found the pollen drift from GM canola can travel up to 3km, contamination levels were considered insignificant.

    PROFESSOR RICK ROUSH, COOPERATIVE RESEARCH CENTRE FOR WEED MANAGEMENT:     People don’t have to be as concerned as they might have been about the extent of pollen flow between the fields.

    The organic industry will have concerns and I think it’s a matter of trying for – there’ll have to be some effort for people to work with one and other and figure out where the GM fields are going and where the organic farms are going and see if some accommodation can be met.

    SARAH CLARKE: By this time next year, Monsanto could have its first commercial canola crop in the ground in Australia.

    While the Federal regulator is currently assessing its application, the company is confident its track record overseas and here in Australia will get it across the line.

    BRIAN ARNST: We’re confident that when we get to commercialisation in let’s say 12 months time, these systems are available, management systems for farmers to ensure that coexistence can occur.

    PERCY SCHEMEISER: What does this do?

    SARAH CLARKE:     That is simply a pipedream according to some who have already lost out in the new age of genetically modified farming.

    PERCY SCHEMEISER: I have five children and 14 grandchildren.

    Do I want to leave them a legacy of land and food with poisons?

    No.

    I want to leave them a legacy of land and food without poisons.

    Think very serious about allowing GMOs into Australia.

    There is no turning back.

    BRIAN ARNST: The whole industry has to be – embrace this technology if it’s going to be successful and go forward, from food, health and safety, through to the environmental and the growing of the crops, right through to the trade.

  • GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD CROPS

    Scientist attacks politician comments on GM

    News in Science, ABC online  

    Monday, 2/8/99

    A New Zealand expert on evolutionary genetics has attacked comments made by one of the few Australian health ministers to support labelling of genetically modified foods.

    Dr Peter Wills, a theoretical biologist from the University of Auckland, attacked comments by the Queensland Health Minister, Wendy Edmond (ALP), that genetic engineering was an extension of traditional breeding practices. The comments come on the eve of a ministerial meeting in Canberra to discuss the issue.

    "That extrapolation is rubbish," Dr Wills told The Lab. "The whole point of genetic engineering is to overcome the restrictions of sexual reproduction."

    "Evolutionary theory dictates that such barriers are essential for species to remain stable. So crossing them is a very significant event."

    Ms Edmond said that she would be supporting the labelling of genetically engineered food at a health minister’s meeting in Canberra tomorrow but indicated she thought people misunderstood the nature of genetic engineering.

    "I think people don’t often realise that cross-breeding that we’ve done in the cattle industry to get strains of cattle that give us tender meat which is still lean, that’s genetic modification," she said.

    "Similarly, to get sweeter easy-to-peel mandarines, things like that. What genetic modification in the laboratory does is speed up that process."

    But Dr Wills disagrees.

    "Cross-breeding does indeed speed up natural processes but it is a fundamentally different technique from genetic engineering," he said.

    "In the long term, use of genetic engineernig runs the risk of completely blowing ecological stability as we know it. This is the most important risk that the health ministers should be taking into consideration tomorrow."