Ian McEwan on what Obama's election means for the environment ...
After years of living in fear of climate change, we are fast acquiring the weapons to defeat it. But the only one who can unite humanity for this life-or-death struggle is Barack Obama - and he must act now.
OK so I'm a day or two off the pace with this story (courtesy of a long weekend - well even we need a day or two off once in a while), and didn't find out about Monday's tuna direct action in Paris until I showed up at the office again today. So what did I miss? Well, our French colleagues took the opportunity to protest against France's leading role in decimating Mediterranean bluefin tuna stocks by dumping five tonnes of tuna fish heads outside the door of the French Fisheries Ministry.
Timed to coincide with coincide with the opening of the annual meeting of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), in Marrakech, the action targetted France
(as opposed to Italy or Spain, the two other worst offenders) in this instance because French Premier Nicholas Sarkozy currently holds the EU presidency. He has been using it to shape the EU position in favour of the short-term interests of his fishing industry above the need to save the Mediterranean bluefin tuna stock from collapse.
And the fact that it is on the verge of collapse is beyond dispute; ICCAT's scientific committee, the body charged with regulating tuna fishing in the Med, has been recommending for years that tuna quotas are set too high. In 2007 they set a sustainable level at 15,000 tonnes, but this was raised to close to 30,000 tonnes to pacify French, Spanish and Italian tuna fishermen. That would be bad enough, but it's not the whole story because the actual capacity of the combined fleets is something over 60,000 tonnes, and the regulatory regime is so slack that ICCAT's scientists themselves estimate that the amount of bluefin actually being caught is closer to this figure.
An article in The Economist this week quotes Raül Romeva, a green MEP from Spain, as saying that the EU Community Fisheries Control Agency's report on the state of the Mediterranean bluefin fishery has been sanitised and suppressed, because its contents are so embarrassing.
Unless serious steps are taken at this week's meeting, those countries who are members to ICCAT will bear the blame for managing the collapse of one of the most important and profitable fisheries of our time, and the destruction of a way of life for the fishermen of the region. To put this into a wider international context, even major Japanese companies are now recognising that the situation cannot go on - the giant Mitsubishi Corporation, the largest tuna importer into Japan (with about 40 per cent of the market) recently issued a revised statement on its sourcing policy saying that it "supports lower quotas, shorter seasons, an increase in minimum size of tuna that
can be fished, and the protection of tuna
spawning grounds…"
Close the fishery now
So what can ICCAT do? Well, the only hope is to close the bluefin fishery immediately and keep it closed until:
Marine reserves have been established to protect all tuna species' spawning grounds;
Fishing capacity has decreased to sustainable levels;
A new management plan in strict compliance with the scientific advice has been adopted and is being properly enforced.
Sadly, although its scientists recognise the impending disaster which is staring them in the face, ICCAT is ultimately a political organisation, and so far the politicians continue to run scared of the short-term demands of their powerful fishing industries. Quelle surprise, as M Sarkozy might say.
The first shipment of certified sustainable palm oil is due to arrive in Rotterdam any day now for a company called United Plantations. But our investigations on the ground in Indonesia reveal that Universal Plantations' operations are far from sustainable. In fact, they fail to meet the already inadequate criteria established by the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO - its a bit of a mouthful), and the certification, in this instance, looks like little more than a bit of marketing lubrication for the industry.
We've been pushing the RSPO for some time now to implement its currently weak standards and to make standards tougher moving forward - not least by ensuring that its members stop clearing vast areas of forest and peatland. For example, the criteria of this voluntary initiative is weak at preventing the development of plantations on peatlands even though these same peatlands are one of the largest carbon stores on earth and their protection is crucial in the fight against climate change.
In August, United Plantations was the first company to be certified by the RSPO. While the certification only applies to their Malaysian operations, all of their operations, including those in Indonesia need to meet certain minimum standards, through the so called 'partial certification' process. Environmental groups pushed for this condition so that big companies couldn't certify a showcase plantation to woo buyers, while trashing forests and peatlands on their other lands.
And lo and behold, our investigation team discovered United Plantations doesn't comply with the key standards around partial certification on its Indonesian estates. Our evidence shows that the company is embroiled in illegal practices, including deep peat conversion and land disputes to name but a few issues.
You can read our full 12-page report here (pdf), but I've summarised the highlights for you below to give you an idea how much further we have to go to get sustainable palm oil - and why we are calling on the RSPO to support a moratorium on forest and peatland clearing.
Failed - compliance with local law
Our field investigations found that a subsidiary of United Plantations has been clearing peatlands, including some as deep as three metres in Runtu village. Indonesian law doesn't allow development or degradation of peatland any deeper than two metres. Operations have also failed to respect conservation areas around lakes and additionally there are irregularities in their planning permits and documentation.
Failed - mutually agreed resolutions where land disputes exist
Four community members from Runtu village in Kalimantan have been jailed allegedly for their opposition to land clearing activities by a United Plantations subsidiary. The RSPO rules for partial certification require that a mutually agreed resolution takes place when such disputes happen - their imprisonment indisputably shows that significant land conflicts still exist in palm oil concessions owned by United Plantations.
Failed - speedy plan for full certification
The RSPO requires companies that go for partial certification to have in place an "adequately ambitious and realistic" plan for certification of all their operations. While other companies such as New Britain Palm Oil have committed to achieving full certification in one to three years, United Plantations are working towards much longer timelines.
All in all it's not a good start for certified palm oil. The case shows that there are fundamental flaws within the RSPO if certified members are failing to comply with the minimum standards, and certifiers are missing key issues like land conflict and breaches of Indonesian law.
Moreover, all members of the RSPO - certified or not - should not be allowed to keep clearing forests and peatlands. The RSPO's going to have to take a tougher line if it wants to save the forests, the climate and its reputation.
Storage fears over high-level nuclear waste
Government plans for a new generation of nuclear power plants face growing concerns the industry needs another waste repository involving a massive escalation in cost.
The government would have you believe that all is well in the world of nuclear power. That the path to building more of them in the UK is smooth and care-free.
It isn't. We know this because we're keeping a keen eye on the whole process. A very keen eye. And Greenpeace investigations have exposed that the path is not as smooth as the government will have you believe.
Legal advice from top lawyers says that the government's nuclear plans are open to a number of challenges, on a number of fronts, over a number of years.
The document mentions several times a "risk of legal challenge". There are, it makes clear, "several routes of challenge". Until at least 2012. For example, the government "will face further legal challenge which is capable of knocking back the programme by a year or more, if it continues to give the impression that the process is a foregone conclusion."
Or, "particularly if the target local communities show themselves as concerned at the prospect."
The legal advice also identified that the "environmental assessment is potentially a source of delay and challenge". And, they concluded, "it remains to be seen whether the new system will be able to deliver in a sensitive and transparent way which is satisfactory without delay from the courts or electoral upset."
If you've visited a Greenpeace website, or have received an email from a Greenpeace email address, you have a man called Sjoerd Jongens to thank for laying the foundations. He built the networks connecting Greenpeace offices and
people, as well as helping Greenpeace to win campaigns in Antarctica and around the world.
Sjeord died in a bicycle accident
on his way to work at Greenpeace International in Amsterdam last week. Brian pays tribute on Making Waves:
Sjoerd foresaw that a new thing called 'the internet' might be something we'd want to use in future, and he started a gopher, WAIS, and FTP server back in the late 80s. He registered the domain www.greenpeace.org and put our first website up in 1992, serving as the organisation's first webmaster...
He was possibly the grumpiest support person in the history of IT support. And yet he was beloved by everyone who caught a glimpse of the heart behind the gruffness. His managers, myself among them, quickly learned to keep him close to the computers, far from the staff. Mike Townsley once approached him to say he was having trouble with his laptop. "No, Mike. I suspect we'll find that your laptop is actually having trouble with you," was the unironic response.
But those who saw him at sea or in Antarctica saw a different Sjoerd...
Two Greenpeace ships - one of them the Rainbow Warrior - have been impounded and their captains and 90 others arrested after three days of nonviolent direct actions in the Netherlands.
Some of the 100 volunteers occupying the construction site of a new E.on coal plant in Rotterdam.
I'll start at the beginning. On Friday evening, nearly 100 Greenpeace volunteers pitched tents next to the construction site of a new E.on coal
plant in Rotterdam (one of eight E.on plans to build in Europe), to bear witness to
the unfolding climate disaster.
At first light on Saturday, they moved onto the
site and occupied it, stopping construction for 10 hours
before all being arrested.
The nearby Rainbow Warrior, supporting the direct action, was boarded by police on Saturday night - and then again on Sunday
afternoon - before going on to block Rotterdam harbour and stop coal ships from entering it along with another of our ships, Beluga II.
Yesterday evening, the police aggressively took control of the Warrior, forcing the captain to leave the coal port. Beluga II maintained her position to continue blockading the coal port for a while.
Both the Rainbow Warrior and Beluga II have now been impounded, and both captains (including Mike Finken who you may remember from the recent Give Coal the Boot tour in the UK) have been taken for police questioning. As our international website says: "If only the Dutch government would deal with climate change so aggressively."
The climate crunch will soon make the credit crunch look trivial, and the G20 summit must tackle it now, writes Greenpeace UK Executive Director John Sauven writes for Comment is free.
This evening, 20 world leaders
will gather in Washington, where they will dine at the table of their
host, George W Bush, before attempting to perform life-saving surgery
on the global economy.
Even
in the face of the extraordinary repudiation delivered last week by the
American people, Bush is unlikely to use the summit to also reshape the
world's response to climate change. But that's exactly what his 19
guests should do.
As the world economy lies on the operating
table and the doctors - Sarkozy, Brown et al - gather around, where
should they make the first cut? For proponents of a Green New Deal,
the answer is simple: we need a shared vision for low-carbon
prosperity, not an unstrategic spending splurge and the risk of worse
to come because of climate change.
The economic crash and the climate crunch must be viewed as one problem. Lord Stern,
former chief economist for the World Bank and author of the 2006 Stern
Review on the economics of climate change, observes that the current
global economic crisis and climate change share two fundamental
elements: both have been years in the making and the world's poorest
countries will suffer disproportionately.
He concludes that
the longer we delay strong action on global warming, the worse the
social and economic consequences will be. Current estimates of the
costs are about 2 per cent of GDP per year if immediate action is taken. A
10-year delay could double the annual costs, with the bill eventually
coming in at 20 per cent of GDP if no action is taken.
The global
economic system is undeniably in intensive care. Seemingly rock-solid
financial institutions have either collapsed or have required massive
injections of government and taxpayer money. The failed economic system
depends on a high-carbon, energy-hungry model. Merely keeping this
system on life support before resuscitating it is a recipe for
disaster. The expansion or renewal of high-carbon infrastructure in
developed countries - building new coal-fired power stations and
runways - will make it virtually impossible for us to perform the
necessary decarbonising surgery on our economy in the coming years and
decades.
Without such an operation - one that cuts out unabated fossil-fuel electricity production and slashes
CO2 emissions from heating and transport - carbon emissions will not
fall fast enough to stabilise the climate. Without those huge
reductions, growing climate instability threatens to create huge social
and economic instability and political conflict. As Lord Stern dryly
notes, high-carbon growth will choke off growth. Current uncertainties
in global credit, equity and commodity markets are no excuse for
inaction on climate change.
The situation we find ourselves
in is an opportunity for the developed world, economies in transition,
and poorer countries alike to change course fundamentally. Short-term
economic security must not be bought at the cost of the climate. The future lies in building low-carbon prosperity.
According to the International Energy Agency,
investment in world energy infrastructure over the next 20 years will
average approximately $1tn a year. It is only possible to spend this
money once; it is crucial that this investment is in low-carbon
technology.
The Washington meeting can start by delivering a
global recovery plan founded on long-term investment in our energy
sector. Priorities include energy efficiency, energy infrastructure
(notably regional or "decentralised" energy systems where energy is
generated close to point of use) and renewable energy technologies. As
well as protecting us from future crises through tackling climate
change, such a recovery plan would deliver jobs, reduced reliance on
fossil fuels and lower bills through energy efficiency.
While
the bulk of the economic activity will take place in the private
sector, the leverage of public sector investment in setting the
trajectory of that investment must not be underestimated. This kind of
investment can only take place in a relatively secure political and
regulatory climate, with clear objectives and incentives to reduce
emissions dramatically by 2020 and for virtual decarbonisation by 2050.
By contrast, high-carbon investment in industries such as unabated coal
need to be exposed to their true economic liabilities. The cost to the
planet of emissions from a single UK coal-fired power station amounts
to around $400m a year. Let the owners of those plants pay the true
cost of its operation, and then let's see if they continue to push for
new unabated plants.
As President-elect Barack Obama has said
of the climate crisis, "It is absolutely critical that we understand
this is not just a challenge, it's an opportunity. It can be an engine
that drives us into the future the same way the computer was the engine
for economic growth over the last couple of decades."
"While the environmental threats facing Africans
are urgent and critical, Africa is in a position to leapfrog dirty
development and become a leader in helping to avert catastrophic
climate change and protect the natural environment. We are here to help
make that happen."
Amadou Kanoute, Executive Director of Greenpeace Africa.
Greenpeace Africa is here! Marking a whole new era for Greenpeace, we opened our first African office yesterday, in Johannesburg. In the coming weeks, we'll be opening two more - one in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and the other in Senegal.
Although we've been working in Africa to end environmental destruction
and for the right of Africans to a healthy environment since
the early 1990s, the launch of Greenpeace Africa is a huge leap forward in our work to challenge
some of the most urgent environmental problems facing Africans today -
climate change, forest destruction and overfishing.
When making its decision on Stansted, says SSE, the government made three assumptions that breached previous assurances and may be "wrong in law":
That the increase in greenhouse gas emissions can be
disregarded;
that the economic impact on the UK trade deficit can be disregarded;
and that the noise impacts on local residents and others can't amount to a reason for refusal.
Stop Stansted Expansion's appeal (which we and several other organisations are supporting) will challenge all three of these assumptions. Their chairman, Peter Sanders, explains: "when it reaches the stage where the government is prepared to disregard the climate change impacts, the noise impacts and even the interests of the UK economy in order to satisfy its obsession for airport expansion, then it is time to ask the High Court to intervene. The issues at stake here go far wider than Stansted."
As Sanders hints, this move isn't just important for Stansted; it's a direct
challenge to a government that insists it can both expand airports
and tackle climate change.
We'll keep you updated. If you want to support the legal challenge financially, Stop Stansted Expansion has launched an appeal. To find out more, you can watch the BBC's report here.
The Sierra Club just won a HUGE legal victory in a coal permitting case at the Environmental Protection Agency's Environmental Appeals Board [in the USA]...
While the Sierra Club's legal team and
other lawyers are still determining the full implications of the
decision, it appears that this decision will essentially stop all new coal plant permitting dead in it's tracks for at least a year as EPA decides what BACT means in the context of CO2...
In short, with this new regulatory uncertainty, it's highly unlikely anyone will want to invest a dime in a new coal plant for the foreseeable future.
Greenpeace volunteers worked constantly over several days to build the domed Rescue Station.
As governments prepare for the next round of crucial climate talks this December in Poznan, Poland, we're making a few preparations of our own. Obviously, we'll be at the talks, pressuring governments to quit coal and work towards a meaningful deal
to save the climate - but we also have plenty planned for the run up to the talks.
On the edge of a vast open pit coal mine in Konin, Poland, we've set up a Climate Rescue Station - a four storey high earth dome powered by renewable energy - to highlight the true cost of coal in the lead up to the negotiations. People from 15 countries will be staying at the station, telling the story of how coal (the single greatest threat to our climate) is affecting our planet.
On 8 December, a week into the talks, we'll be moving the dome to Poznan town square, for a free concert for the climate, with an orchestra and other top musicians.
Time to bury the 'clean coal' myth
In the second of his Greenwash columns, Fred Pearce exposes how energy companies and governments are trying to rebrand coal as a clean fuel of the future despite the evidence
Obama's green jobs revolution
Democrat will lead effort to curb world's dependence on oil; Plans to create five million new posts in clean energy projects
U.S. court reinstates Bhopal water pollution case
A lawsuit contending that thousands of people in India were exposed to polluted drinking water after the 1984 Union Carbide toxic-gas disaster in Bhopal was reinstated on Monday by a U.S. appeals court, which said a lower court improperly threw out the case.
