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.
 

  • Carbon Dioxide is now pollution

    From the New York Times

    WASHINGTON — The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday formally declared carbon dioxide and five other heat-trapping gases to be pollutants that endanger public health and welfare, setting in motion a process that will lead to the regulation of the gases for the first time in the United States.

    The E.P.A. said the science supporting the proposed endangerment finding was “compelling and overwhelming.” The ruling initiates a 60-day comment period before any proposals for regulations governing emissions of heat-trapping gases are published.

    Although the finding had been expected, supporters and critics said its issuance was a significant moment in the debate on global warming. Many Republicans in Congress and industry spokesmen warned that regulation of carbon dioxide emissions would raise energy costs and kill jobs; Democrats and environmental advocates said the decision was long overdue and would bring long-term social and economic benefits.

    The E.P.A. administrator, Lisa P. Jackson, said: “This finding confirms that greenhouse gas pollution is a serious problem now and for future generations. Fortunately, it follows President Obama’s call for a low-carbon economy and strong leadership in Congress on clean energy and climate legislation.”

    The United States has come under fierce international criticism for trailing other industrialized nations in regulating emissions of carbon dioxide and other pollutants tied to global warming. With this move and steps by Congress toward a cap-and-trade system to curb heat-trapping gases, the American government can now point to progress as nations begin to write a new international treaty on climate change.

    The European Union already has a system of trading permits for industrial emissions of heat-trapping gases in which polluters can meet limits either by reducing emissions or buying credits from more efficient producers. Europe also has a system for regulating emissions of heat-trapping gases from vehicles.

    Japan and several other nations have programs limiting tailpipe pollution that are more stringent than the limits expected to be proposed by the E.P.A.

    The E.P.A. announcement did not contain specific targets for reductions of heat-trapping gases or new requirements for energy efficiency in vehicles, power plants or industry. Those will come after a period of comment and rule-making or in any legislation that emerges from Congress.

    Senator Christopher S. Bond, Republican of Missouri, said the agency’s regulation of heat-trapping gases would be expensive and cumbersome.

    “The Obama administration’s actions today,” Mr. Bond said, “will do more to endanger families, farmers and workers with new energy taxes and lost jobs than it does to protect the environment.”

    As the E.P.A. begins the process of regulating the climate-altering substances under the Clean Air Act, Congress is writing wide-ranging energy and climate legislation that would alter, combine with or override the actions taken by the agency. Mr. Obama and Ms. Jackson have said they much prefer that Congress address global warming rather than have the E.P.A. tackle it through administrative action that could be subject to lawsuits.

    When the agency announced its finding, Mr. Obama was en route from Mexico City to Trinidad and Tobago for a meeting of Western Hemisphere nations. The agency made its decision public in a news release and an 133-page explanation of the scientific and legal basis of its proposed finding.

    In 2007, the Supreme Court, in Massachusetts v. E.P.A., ordered the agency to determine whether heat-trapping gases harmed the environment and public health. The case was brought by states and environmental groups to force the E.P.A. to use the Clean Air Act to regulate heat-trapping gases in vehicle emissions.

    Agency scientists were virtually unanimous in determining that those gases caused such harm, but top Bush administration officials suppressed their work and took no action.

    In his first days in office, Mr. Obama promised to review the case and act quickly if the findings were justified. The announcement Friday was the fruit of that review.

    According to the E.P.A. announcement, the finding was based on rigorous scientific analysis of six gases — carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride — that have been widely studied by scientists. The agency said its studies showed that concentrations of the gases were at unprecedented levels as a result of human activity and that it was highly likely that those elevated levels were responsible for an increase in average temperatures and other climate changes.

    Among the ill effects of rising atmospheric concentrations of the gases, the agency found, were increased drought, more heavy downpours and flooding, more frequent and intense heat waves and wildfires, a steeper rise in sea levels and harm to water resources, agriculture, wildlife and ecosystems.

    Environmental advocates applauded the decision, which they had sought for years.

    Auto companies, utilities and others tied to polluting emissions had long dreaded this day but generally reacted with caution because the regulatory process had just begun and they hoped to address their concerns in the legislation before Congress.

    The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers said its members were developing cars and trucks to meet the expected tougher emissions standards.

     

  • Genetic modification delivers little benefit say scientists

    WASHINGTON – The use of genetically engineered corn and soybeans in the United States for more than a decade has had little impact on crop yields despite claims that they could ease looming food shortages, a study released on Tuesday concluded.

    [A farmer harvests his corn crop near Morris, Illinois. The use of genetically engineered corn and soybeans in the United States for more than a decade has had little impact on crop yields despite claims that they could ease looming food shortages, a study has concluded. (AFP/Getty Images/File/Scott Olson)]A farmer harvests his corn crop near Morris, Illinois. The use of genetically engineered corn and soybeans in the United States for more than a decade has had little impact on crop yields despite claims that they could ease looming food shortages, a study has concluded. (AFP/Getty Images/File/Scott Olson)

    From Common Dreams

    “A hard-nosed assessment of this expensive technology’s achievements to date gives little confidence that it will play a major role in helping the world feed itself in the forseeable future,” said the report by the Union of Concerned Scientists.

    The study evaluated the effect on corn and soybean crop yields of genetically engineered varieties commercialized in the United States over the past 13 years, examining peer-reviewed academic studies that date back to the early 1990s.

    “Based on that record, we conclude that GE (genetic engineering) has done little to increase overall crop yields,” it said.

    The report said genetically engineered soybeans account for 90 percent of soybeans grown in the United States, while genetically engineered corn accounts for 63 percent of the US corn crop.

    “Overall, corn and soybean yields have risen substantially over the last 15 years, but largely not as a result of the GE traits,” the report said. “Most of the gains are due to traditional breeding or improvement of other agricultural practices.”

    It found that corn and soybeans that were genetically modified to increase their tolerance to herbicides “have not increased operational yields, whether on a per acre or national basis, compared to conventional methods that rely on other available herbicides.”

    Corn modified with genes from Bt, or Bacillus thuringienisis, bacteria for resistance to several kinds of insects did provide higher yields, but the study estimated the increase at between 0.2 and 0.3 percent a year on average over the past 13 years.

    Overall corn yields in the United States have increased an average of about one percent a year, it said.

    “More specifically, US Department of Agriculture data indicate that the average corn production per acre nationwide over the past five years (2004-2008) was about 28 percent higher than for the five-year period 1991-1995,” it said.

    “But our analysis of specific yield studies concludes that only 4-5 percent of that increase is attributable to Bt, meaning an increase of about 24-25 percent must be due to other factors such as conventional breeding,” it said.

     

  • Germany bans GM corn

    Germany has banned the cultivation of GM corn, claiming that MON 810 is dangerous for the environment. But that argument might not stand up in court and Berlin could face fines totalling millions of euros if American multinational Monsanto decides to challenge the prohibition on its seed.

    From Der Spiegel

    The sowing season may be just around the corner, but this year German farmers will not be planting gentically modified crops: German Agriculture Minister Ilse Aigner announced Tuesday she was banning the cultivation of GM corn in Germany.

     

    Greenpeace activists take a sample from a Monsanto test site near Borken in North Rhine-Westphalia: The GM crop MON 810 has been banned in Germany.

    DPA

    Greenpeace activists take a sample from a Monsanto test site near Borken in North Rhine-Westphalia: The GM crop MON 810 has been banned in Germany.

    Under the new regulations, the cultivation of MON 810, a GM corn produced by the American biotech giant Monsanto, will be prohibited in Germany, as will the sale of its seed. Aigner told reporters Tuesday she had legitimate reasons to believe that MON 810 posed “a danger to the environment,” a position which she said the Environment Ministry also supported. In taking the step, Aigner is taking advantage of a clause in EU law which allows individual countries to impose such bans.

    “Contrary to assertions stating otherwise, my decision is not politically motivated,” Aigner said, referring to reports that she had come under pressure to impose a ban from within her party, the conservative Bavaria-based Christian Social Union. She stressed that the ban should be understood as an “individual case” and not as a statement of principle regarding future policy relating to genetic engineering.

     

  • Climigration tops polar conference agenda

    From the UK Guardian

    In Alaska, climate change is creating an unforeseen humanitarian crisis. Arctic sea ice – which had protected communities from coastal erosion and flooding – is rapidly disappearing and signalling a radical transformation of this northern ecosystem. Scientific observations during the summer of 2007 documented a new record low.

    In 2006, the US government completed a $2.5m (£1.7m) seawall to protect the native village of Kivalina, located on an island in the Chukchi Sea. But on the day of the dedication ceremony, a storm surge partly destroyed the newly constructed sea barrier. One year later, the community was evacuated to protect inhabitants from a severe storm.

    The situation looks set to get worse. Winter temperatures along the northern Alaskan coast have increased an average of 3.5C (38.3F)since 1975. These warming temperatures are causing the arctic seas to freeze later in autumn and the permafrost – usually permanently frozen subsoil – to thaw. Along the northwestern Alaskan coast, permafrost is the glue that keeps the land intact and habitable.

    Approximately 200 indigenous villages that have inhabited the arctic for millennia are located along Alaska’s coasts and rivers. Dozens of these communities are now endangered because of accelerating erosion and flooding. Five indigenous communities, located along the Bering and Chukchi Seas, have concluded that relocation is the only durable solution to the climatic events that are threatening their lives.

    Government agencies now realise that erosion and flooding control can no longer protect these coastal communities. In 2006, a US government report found that relocation of three communities is required because a catastrophic climatic event could submerge them within 10-15 years. Despite these dire predictions, no community has yet been relocated because of the governance issues that must be addressed to facilitate relocation. The report recognised that no government agency has the authority to relocate communities, no governmental organisation exists that can address the strategic planning needs of relocation, and no funding is specifically designated for relocation.

    Since 2006, government officials have organised numerous meetings to address the policy and practical challenges of relocation. One village, Newtok, is in the relocation process. The Newtok Planning Group is the only interdisciplinary governmental workgroup in Alaska focused on relocation. The Newtok Traditional Council is leading the effort.

    Next week in Alaska, the Inuit Circumpolar Conference will host a gathering of indigenous peoples from all over the world. The goal is to develop recommendations for the UN Convention on Climate Change meeting in December 2009. One of the topics will be the creation of a human rights regime to protect those forced to relocate because of climate change. “Climigration” is the word that best describes this type of population displacement. Climigration requires a new and unique institutional response based in human rights doctrine. Communities, rather than individuals, will be forced to migrate. Permanent relocation will be mandated because there will be no ability to return home because home will be under water or sinking in thawing permafrost.

    Catastrophic random environmental events, such as hurricanes, do not cause climigration. However, these random environmental events, if on-going, may alter ecosystems permanently, cause extensive damage to public infrastructure, repeatedly place people in danger and require communities to relocate. Determining which communities are most likely to encounter displacement will require a complex assessment of a community’s ecosystem vulnerability to climate change, as well as the vulnerability of its social, economic and political structures. Permanent relocation must only occur when there are no other durable solutions.

    International human rights principles need to be specifically created for climigration to ensure that the social, economic and cultural human rights of individuals and the communities forced to migrate are protected. These principles will ensure that the affected community is a key leader and decision-maker in the relocation process. The principles will also affirm that families and tribes remain together. For indigenous communities, tribal relationships are essential to cultural identity.

    The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts that 150 million people may be displaced by climate change by 2050. The United Nations University has developed an international research agenda on climate change and forced migration. The IPCC needs to convene an expert working group to fully develop the human rights framework that will guide nation-states in addressing climigration. The time to act is now.

    Robin Bronen is a human rights attorney and a National Science Foundation fellow. She lives in Anchorage, Alaska.

  • Iran leads fall in population growth

    From the Jerusalem Post

    While fertility levels continue to decline worldwide, the global population is still expected to reach 9.1 billion in 2050, increasing by about 33 million people annually at that time, according to the UN’s “World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision.”

    A number of factors are believed to be responsible for the decrease, including better access to family planning, urbanization, and empowerment of women.

    Education and access to family planning can go a long way toward reducing population growth, even in conservative Muslim states, a UN official told reporters at a population conference last week.

    “Even in cultures that are Muslim, advances of a very big quantity can be made if the government has enough commitment to provide the services and the social infrastructure that validates those changes,” said Hania Zlotnik, director of the population division at the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, according to The New York Times.

    A March report from the Washington Institute for Near East Policy argued that the “empowerment of women” was the main factor for the slowing population growth rate in the Middle East and North Africa.

    “Middle Eastern women have made great progress at gaining more equal access to education,” wrote Patrick Clawson, the institute’s deputy director for research.

    However, Clawson said, “that has not yet translated into more access to employment outside the home.”

    While the slowing birth rate means a relatively light burden for the economy in terms of caring for children and the elderly, the Middle East can only benefit from this if it can create enough jobs for the young who were born during the previous years, when there was rapid population growth, Clawson argued.

    “If jobs are not created in sufficient numbers to absorb those joining the labor market, the resulting rise in unemployment could have a considerable political impact,” he said. “Iran has seen a wave of unemployed youth turning to antisocial behavior, especially drug addiction and prostitution. Political extremists from Algeria to Palestine and Iraq have been able to recruit readily among young people who face a bleak future.”

    From 1950 to 2000, the Middle East experienced “explosive population growth,” he wrote. The region’s population grew from 92 million to 349 million, a 3.8-fold increase, or 2.7 percent a year.

  • Lies about Pirates

    Pirates were the first people to rebel against this world. They mutinied against their tyrannical captains – and created a different way of working on the seas. Once they had a ship, the pirates elected their captains, and made all their decisions collectively. They shared their bounty out in what Rediker calls “one of the most egalitarian plans for the disposition of resources to be found anywhere in the eighteenth century.” They even took in escaped African slaves and lived with them as equals. The pirates showed “quite clearly – and subversively – that ships did not have to be run in the brutal and oppressive ways of the merchant service and the Royal navy.” This is why they were popular, despite being unproductive thieves.

    The words of one pirate from that lost age – a young British man called William Scott – should echo into this new age of piracy. Just before he was hanged in Charleston, South Carolina, he said: “What I did was to keep me from perishing. I was forced to go a-pirating to live.” In 1991, the government of Somalia – in the Horn of Africa – collapsed. Its nine million people have been teetering on starvation ever since – and many of the ugliest forces in the Western world have seen this as a great opportunity to steal the country’s food supply and dump our nuclear waste in their seas.

    Yes: nuclear waste. As soon as the government was gone, mysterious European ships started appearing off the coast of Somalia, dumping vast barrels into the ocean. The coastal population began to sicken. At first they suffered strange rashes, nausea and malformed babies. Then, after the 2005 tsunami, hundreds of the dumped and leaking barrels washed up on shore. People began to suffer from radiation sickness, and more than 300 died. Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN envoy to Somalia, tells me: “Somebody is dumping nuclear material here. There is also lead, and heavy metals such as cadmium and mercury – you name it.” Much of it can be traced back to European hospitals and factories, who seem to be passing it on to the Italian mafia to “dispose” of cheaply. When I asked Ould-Abdallah what European governments were doing about it, he said with a sigh: “Nothing. There has been no clean-up, no compensation, and no prevention.”

    At the same time, other European ships have been looting Somalia’s seas of their greatest resource: seafood. We have destroyed our own fish-stocks by over-exploitation – and now we have moved on to theirs. More than $300m worth of tuna, shrimp, lobster and other sea-life is being stolen every year by vast trawlers illegally sailing into Somalia’s unprotected seas. The local fishermen have suddenly lost their livelihoods, and they are starving. Mohammed Hussein, a fisherman in the town of Marka 100km south of Mogadishu, told Reuters: “If nothing is done, there soon won’t be much fish left in our coastal waters.”

    This is the context in which the men we are calling “pirates” have emerged. Everyone agrees they were ordinary Somalian fishermen who at first took speedboats to try to dissuade the dumpers and trawlers, or at least wage a ‘tax’ on them. They call themselves the Volunteer Coastguard of Somalia – and it’s not hard to see why. In a surreal telephone interview, one of the pirate leaders, Sugule Ali, said their motive was “to stop illegal fishing and dumping in our waters… We don’t consider ourselves sea bandits. We consider sea bandits [to be] those who illegally fish and dump in our seas and dump waste in our seas and carry weapons in our seas.” William Scott would understand those words.

    No, this doesn’t make hostage-taking justifiable, and yes, some are clearly just gangsters – especially those who have held up World Food Programme supplies. But the “pirates” have the overwhelming support of the local population for a reason. The independent Somalian news-site WardherNews conducted the best research we have into what ordinary Somalis are thinking – and it found 70 percent “strongly supported the piracy as a form of national defence of the country’s territorial waters.” During the revolutionary war in America, George Washington and America’s founding fathers paid pirates to protect America’s territorial waters, because they had no navy or coastguard of their own. Most Americans supported them. Is this so different?

    Did we expect starving Somalians to stand passively on their beaches, paddling in our nuclear waste, and watch us snatch their fish to eat in restaurants in London and Paris and Rome? We didn’t act on those crimes – but when some of the fishermen responded by disrupting the transit-corridor for 20 percent of the world’s oil supply, we begin to shriek about “evil.” If we really want to deal with piracy, we need to stop its root cause – our crimes – before we send in the gun-boats to root out Somalia’s criminals.

    The story of the 2009 war on piracy was best summarised by another pirate, who lived and died in the fourth century BC. He was captured and brought to Alexander the Great, who demanded to know “what he meant by keeping possession of the sea.” The pirate smiled, and responded: “What you mean by seizing the whole earth; but because I do it with a petty ship, I am called a robber, while you, who do it with a great fleet, are called emperor.” Once again, our great imperial fleets sail in today – but who is the robber?

    © 2009 Huffington Post

    Johann Hari is a columnist for the London Independent. He has reported from Iraq, Israel/Palestine, the Congo, the Central African Republic, Venezuela, Peru and the US, and his journalism has appeared in publications all over the world.