Saturday, 30 April 2011

Indigenous women's Walk for Water

Anishinaabe women are leading a Mother Earth Water Walk 2011, from the Gulf of Mexico to Lake Superior. Carrying a pail of water from the Gulf of Mexico, they will walk forty miles a day (see map with  their blog) for over six weeks to reach their destination. On June 12 in Wisconsin, they will meet other groups carrying water from the Atlantic, Hudson Bay and the Pacific—representing the four directions of Turtle Island.

Sharon Day director of the Indigenous People's Task Force in Minneapolis, explains:
“We want the walk to be a prayer. Every step we take we will be praying for and thinking of the water. We’ll carry the water and an eagle staff. We’ll start at sunrise and end at sun down each day. Every four days, we’ll have a ceremony. This will be our life until we get to Lake Superior. Water is essential to life. We live in the water of the womb of our mother before we come into the world. We are birthed from water, our bodies are primarily water and we can’t survive without clean water. At some time in your life you have to take a stand.” 

More details are given in a slideshow on the IPTF site:

Giganawendamin Nibi
Mahnomen
• We must all take care of the water and the food that grows on the water like Mahnomen [wild rice]
• Only 1 percent of the earth’s water is drinkable
• It has been foretold that soon, water will be more expensive than oil or gold. (Phillip Deere and Baudwaywidun)

What can we do?
We can talk to the water and tell the water “thank you, migwetch”
We can sing to the water and tell her we love her.
Nibi...................
Gizahgayigoo
Giimigwetch awayngimigoo
Gizhaywaygimigoo *

Plants need water.
The whales need clean water.
The Arctic ice caps are melting.
The White Bear, our relative, who sits in the north, needs our help!


Practice our Teachings. Women care for the water. Acknowledge the power of the water. Water is essential to life.






7 Anishinaabe Teachings
• Humility - Dabasendizowin - to take up the work for the water
• Truth - Debwewin - The truth is only 1% of the water on the earth is drinkable
• Courage - Zoongide’iwin - Courage to take a stand
• Honesty - Gwayakwaadiziwin - to share with the people about the water
• Respect - Manaji’idiwin - Respect for the water
• Love - Zaagi’idiwin - Love for the people
• Wisdom - Nibwaakaawin - Through this work you will gain knowledge and knowledge leads to wisdom.

How can I help?
• Be conservative in your use of water
• Drink tapwater / use a re-useable bottle for drinking water
• Wash laundry only when you have a complete load.
• Remember all the chemicals you use in your house, on your lawn or garden, go into the rivers and
streams.
• The next generations are counting on us! Send donations for food, shelter and fuel to Indigenous Peoples Task Force 3019 Minnehaha Ave. S. Minneapolis, MN 55406 Migwetch!
 
The Great Lakes hold 20 per cent of the fresh water in the world. But they face grave dangers: fracking (fracturing of bedrock for oil and gas exploration), toxic releases, transport of radioactive waste, invasive species, oil refineries, huge consumption by bottled water companies and other corporate users along with the increasing privatization of water services for the 44 million people who get their drinking water from the lakes.

Anishinaabe elder Josephine Mandamin began the Mother Earth Water Walk in 2003.  She had grown up eating the fish and drinking the water on Manitoulin  Island in Lake Superior and witnessed the collapse of the Great Lakes ecosystem. Today, most Anishinaabe communities have to boil their water before drinking it, and health agencies warn of the dangers of eating fish, once a staple of Great Lakes Indian Nations. “What will you do?” she asked herself. That spring, she picked up a copper pail and walked all around Lake Superior, to raise awareness of threats to the lake, and to teach people to love and care for the water. Since then, every spring she and a small band of Anishinaabe and supporters have walked around one of the Great Lakes. This year, the Walk is continent-wide.

Indigenous Nations, inner-city organizations, environmental groups and social justice advocates have launched a Great Lakes Commons Initiative with the goal of declaring the Great Lakes a commons, public trust and protected bioregion.

* Click here for an MP3, history and translation of the water song. Videos of elder Josephine Mandawin, of Garden River ON, describing the first Water Walks in 2003-2005.

Wednesday, 27 April 2011

REDD in the Lacandon forest -- by Silvia Ribeiro

Silvia Ribeiro is a researcher with ETCgroup; this was translated from her article in La Jornada, 23 Apr 2011.
The gap of Usumacinta, Montes Azules, Chiapas: photo Rich Hoyer
Based on an agreement between Chiapas and California state governments working together with organizations like El Colegio de la Frontera Sur (Ecosur) and big conservation NGOs, REDD projects are invading Chiapas -- selling the very air of the forests and dispossessing native communities of their right to the territory.

In order to sell carbon permits to the California government and polluting industries that support its cap-and-trade plan,  Chiapas authorities propose driving a line through the Lacandon Jungle to define the REDD area, with consequent abuse and pollution of indigenous territory. In March 2011, state government officials admitted to Global Justice Ecology that they plan to open the Lacandon by bridging the area of the canyons, "where the Zapatistas live". The new cutline would define a forest preserve.

Exactly what they planned four decades ago, when a survey of the territory of one of the seven indigenous peoples to open up "the Lacandon cutline" united the entire region against it, and sparked formation of the EZLN.

In 1971, the government granted 614 321 hectares (almost 10,000 each) of forest to 66 "Lacandon community members" -- despite the fact that they are not of that tribe, nor original inhabitants of that region -- adding to the existing chaos of overlapping land titles; the grant was never surveyed because of indigenous resistance. But ever since these so-called "Lacandon" have given signed consent for timber, tourism or (most recently) REDD projects and contracts submitted to them by the government. The real Lacandones were killed around 1700; other communities migrated there or were displaced under threat in recent decades.

REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) is presented as a program to prevent the emission of greenhouse gases caused by deforestation, paying carbon credits to owners to avoid clearing forest. But local communities, once foreign consultants certify a management plan, cannot use the forest and lose autonomy over the territory.

This is great for polluters, who get "indulgence" to continue emissions and/or resell credits at a profit  to other companies. It costs them nothing and defeats environmental regulation. On April 7, 2011, Greenpeace International published Bad Influence, a report denouncing McKinsey, a Wall Street  consultancy long active in privatization projects, and now a REDD "adviser" to poor countries. McKinsey inflated statistics for Guyana and the Congo, to show future deforestation trends far greater than the real; these baselines allow higher REDD credits and further deforestation, because it is supposedly less than the inflated projection.

Previous "payments" to communities in Mexico reveal concrete examples of resource-stripping that  these schemes can cause. REDD and PES are similar mechanisms. "Payment to protect the forest" actually means depriving small communities of their land rights. There are cases in Oaxaca where after a 5-year payment for environmental services, the state declared a 30-year "protected natural area" against the will of the community. Deprived of their traditional forest livelihood, they had to migrate, even though they held the land title.

That's what is about to happen in the forests and jungles of Chiapas: selling corporations permits to trade pollution for the carbon absorbed by forests, dislocating the forest communities (another government strategy) to so-called "sustainable rural towns".  Displaced and uprooted, deprived of the means to live in dignity, they are mere pawns of the state, to be replaced with biofuel plantations.

Technically these are not REDD projects, but they forecast the future. The Mexican example shows  what happens when a state governor (Juan Sabines) and cronies lay a foundation for market mechanisms. When consultants inflate statistics to justify claims of "biomass", "less" deforestation, and "carbon absorption." When Ecosur graduates, the national REDD committee and an alphabet soup of government agencies (Conafor, CONABIO, SEMARNAT), and carbon traders provide "greenwash" for polluters to claim they are promoting conservation and biodiversity. Who loses? The indigenes, the forest, and the planet.

Last but not least is remote-sensing technology, by a semi-military satellite that "indicates the capacity of carbon sequestration" combined with on-the-ground monitoring for which local men are already in training. All very clean and scientific, tracking not only wildlife but also the humans who live there -- monitoring "Zapatistas" and preparing for the next generation of biopiracy.
***
See also the Durban Statement on REDD (2010), and  No REDD: a reader, prepared for the Cancún climate negotiations by Global Justice Ecology Project, Censat Agua Viva, Amazon Watch, Acción Ecológica, COECOCEIBA, OFRANEH, World Rainforest Movement, Carbon Trade Watch, RisingTide, ETC Group, Indigenous Environmental Network and REDD-Monitor.

Tuesday, 26 April 2011

When the Water Ends: tribal conflicts in Kenya

This story is reprinted from Yale Environment 360, an online publication of the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. See also the UNCHR debate on incitements to hatred in Africa.

To view this content, you must have Javascript enabled in your browser preferences. You will also need to download the latest Flash Player.

For thousands of years, nomadic herdsmen have roamed the harsh, semi-arid lowlands that stretch across 80 percent of Kenya and 60 percent of Ethiopia. Descendants of the oldest tribal societies in the world, they survive thanks to the animals they raise and the crops they grow, their travels determined by the search for water and grazing lands.

These herdsmen have long been accustomed to adapting to a changing environment. But in recent years, they have faced challenges unlike any in living memory: As temperatures in the region have risen and water supplies have dwindled, the pastoralists have had to range more widely in search of suitable water and land. That search has brought tribal groups in Ethiopia and Kenya in increasing conflict, as pastoral communities kill each other over water and grass.

“When the Water Ends,” a 16-minute video produced by Yale Environment 360 in collaboration with MediaStorm, tells the story of this conflict and of the increasingly dire drought conditions facing parts of East Africa. To report this video, Evan Abramson, a 32-year-old photographer (see his slideshow and intervew) and videographer, spent two months in the region early this year, living among the herding communities. He returned with a tale that many climate scientists say will be increasingly common in the 21st century and beyond — how worsening drought in parts of Africa, the Middle East, and elsewhere will pit group against group, nation against nation. As one UN official told Abramson, the clashes between Kenyan and Ethiopian pastoralists represent “some of the world’s first climate-change conflicts.”

But the story recounted in “When the Water Ends” is not only about climate change. It’s also about how deforestation and land degradation — due in large part to population pressures — are exacting a toll on impoverished farmers and nomads as the earth grows ever more barren.

The video focuses on four groups of pastoralists — the Turkana of Kenya and the Dassanech, Nyangatom, and Mursi of Ethiopia — who are among the more than two dozen tribes whose lives and culture depend on the waters of the Omo River and the body of water into which it flows, Lake Turkana. For the past 40 years at least, Lake Turkana has steadily shrunk because of increased evaporation from higher temperatures and a steady reduction in the flow of the Omo due to less rainfall, increased diversion of water for irrigation, and upstream dam projects. As the lake has diminished, it has disappeared altogether from Ethiopian territory and retreated south into Kenya. The Dassanech people have followed the water, and in doing so have come into direct conflict with the Turkana of Kenya.

The result has been cross-border raids in which members of both groups kill each other, raid livestock, and torch huts. Many people in both tribes have been left without their traditional livelihoods and survive thanks to food aid from nonprofit organizations and the UN.

The future for the tribes of the Omo-Turkana basin looks bleak. Temperatures in the region have risen by about 2 degrees F since 1960. Droughts are occurring with a frequency and intensity not seen in recent memory. Areas once prone to drought every ten or eleven years are now experiencing a drought every two or three. Scientists say temperatures could well rise an additional 2 to 5 degrees F by 2060, which will almost certainly lead to even drier conditions in large parts of East Africa.

In addition, the Ethiopian government is building a dam on the upper Omo River — the largest hydropower project in sub-Saharan Africa — that will hold back water and prevent the river’s annual flood cycles, upon which more than 500,000 tribesmen in Ethiopia and 300,000 in Kenya depend for cultivation, grazing, and fishing.

The herdsmen who speak in this video are caught up in forces over which they have no real control. Although they have done almost nothing to generate the greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming, they may already be among its first casualties. “I am really beaten by hunger,” says one elderly, rail-thin Nyangatom tribesman. “There is famine — people are dying here. This happened since the Turkana and the Kenyans started fighting with us. We fight over grazing lands. There is no peace at all.”

Monday, 25 April 2011

De la democracia a la biocracia -- por Margot Bremer, Asunción, Paraguay

Sor Margot BREMER, RSCJ, Asunción, Paraguay.
In English: her biography and translation of this article in World Latin American Agenda 2010

Hoy nos vemos todos ante fenómenos alarmantes como el agotamiento de las reservas naturales, la contaminación ambiental de aire, agua, tierra... por agrotóxicos, basuras patológicas, nucleares, etc., destrucción irreversible de la capa de ozono, pérdida de la biodiversidad, desertificación, etc.

Causa principal es nuestro ritmo y nuestro modelo de consumo, que oculta las consecuencias para el medio ambiente. Estamos presenciando en este momento un ecocidio, que es a la vez un biocidio, pues con la muerte de la naturaleza se muere todo tipo de vida, también la humana.

No podemos vivir sin la vida de la tierra, pero ésta ya da claras señales de que no aguanta más. Hemos llegado a un punto de insostenibilidad que ya no tiene arreglo. El sistema neoliberal, el culpable principal de esta situación, ha transformado nuestra «casa común», la Tierra, en su mercado, sometiendo a la naturaleza a sus intereses capitalistas, sin misericordia, explotándola hasta el agotamiento, sin pensar en las generaciones futuras. Su proyecto de «desarrollo» se ha mostrado insostenible, ha aumentado las desigualdades sociales, ha depredado la naturaleza, y ha consumido y está agotando sus recursos.

Si no consideramos nuestras interrelaciones e interacciones en su interdependencia, no estaremos al servicio de la vida (bios), seguiremos sirviéndonos de ella como nuestra propiedad privada. Para llegar a vivir en armonía con la naturaleza es necesario que extendamos el sentido de la comunidad humana hacia todos los seres vivos que la Tierra produce. Será otro el mundo cuando formemos una sola comunidad cósmica que incluya toda la diversidad de la vida. Optar por esta convivencia, implica optar por un estilo de vida austero, pues la vida (bios) no busca el consumo, la ganancia y el lujo; busca comunión, mediante interrelaciones solidarias; por eso es totalmente contraria a la lógica del sistema neoliberal, que fomenta el individualismo y la competencia.

La lógica privatizadora llega a su máxima cúspide en la pretensión actual del capitalismo neoliberal de patentar semillas o conocimientos ancestrales, desarrollados por las culturas locales, que con razón resisten hoy día al capitalismo.

En busca de alternativas

La urgente necesidad de incluir toda la vida de la naturaleza dentro de nuestro sentido de comunidad no se resuelve con lindos sentimientos, sino exige un cambio de visión y de relación con la vida de esta tierra que nos sostiene. Dijo un cacique xavante en la Cumbre de la Tierra, Rio de Janeiro, ECO’92: - ...las multinacionales que han venido aquí, no tienen pasión por la tierra. No aman a las plantas ni a los animales, aman el dinero. Por eso, tampoco tienen pasión por el pueblo... Sin pasión por el pueblo no es posible vivir verdaderamente la democracia (demos = pueblo). Las sabias palabras de aquél indígena confirman que la ambición de ganancia individual y privada se impone sobre los intereses del pueblo y también sobre la sostenibilidad ambiental. Su capacidad de relacionamiento está reducida al dinero.

Esta situación actual exige un cambio en la visión y en la relación, una transición desde la democracia hacia una biocracia, centrada en la vida, con su inmensa diversidad. Vandana Shiva, ecologista hindú, propone una «democracia ecológica» que incluya a todos los seres vivientes, tanto en la biodiversidad como en la diversidad cultural. Será llamada comunidad de la tierra, con una economía de la tierra, basada en la diversidad, la sostenibilidad y pluralidad, como una economía viviente.


Esta nueva economía debe construirse desde las necesidades locales. La futura biodemocracia tendrá su fundamento en la inclusión y en la diversidad, tomará sus decisiones desde lo local hacia lo global (ascendente), en un perfecto equilibrio entre derechos y responsabilidades. Respetando las culturas locales, será posible globalizar la paz, el cuidado y la compasión.
Iguazu, Paraguay
Dos ejemplos hacia la Biodemocracia

Parte de estas propuestas las encontramos ya aprobadas en las recientes Constituciones (2008) de dos países latinoamericanas: Ecuador y Bolivia. Parece que frente al fracasado sistema neoliberal, estos dos países, de antigua población incaica, quieren ofrecer otro modelo de convivencia basado en sabidurías ancestrales.

Con un nuevo vigor han hecho emerger su antigua y siempre nueva utopía del BUEN VIVIR, o del VIVIR BIEN, que los antepasados, desde hace milenios. experimentaron como sostenible en sus respectivos lugares. han sabido diseñar un nuevo futuro sobre unos fundamentos propios, que han rescatado del pasado, sin tener que copiar ni dejarse imponer modelos del Primer Mundo.

El hecho de que las dos nuevas Constituciones se apoyen en valores de sus culturas «precoloniales» es signo de que se ha iniciado ya un proceso de des-colonización de varios colonialismos de diferentes épocas, colonización que se ha dado sobre todo en el campo de sus saberes.

Según la Constitución ecuatoriana, el verdadero desarrollo se consigue solamente mediante la convivencia humana en armonía con la naturaleza, reconociendo y aceptando la íntima interdependencia entre humanos (humus...) y tierra. Tal convivencia es constitutiva para el BUEN VIVIR.

La sociedad moderna no es capaz de respetar la vida de la naturaleza, a causa de su voracidad depredadora. Pero sin respeto a la vida de la tierra no es posible la vida humana. Por tanto, uno de los derechos fundamentales de los ciudadanos es vivir en un ambiente sano, y uno de los derechos fundamentales para la naturaleza es su preservación, conservación y recuperación: - ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado, que garantice la sostenibilidad y el BUEN VIVIR, «sumak kawsay». Se declara de interés público la preservación del ambiente, la conservación de los ecosistemas, la biodiversidad y la integridad del patrimonio genético del país, así como la prevención del daño ambiental y la recuperación de los espacios naturales degradados (art. 14 y 15).

La nueva Constitución prohíbe el uso de contaminantes orgánicos persistentes altamente tóxicos, agroquímicos internacionalmente prohibidos, tecnologías y agentes biológicos experimentales nocivos y organismos genéticamente modificados perjudiciales para la salud humana que atenten contra la soberanía alimenticia, así como que se ingrese desechos tóxicos al territorio nacional (cf. art.15).
Aquí se manifiesta claramente que la convivencia con la naturaleza es concebida como parte integral de la constitución humana, lo que los pueblos originarios siempre habían expresado con la frase «la tierra no nos pertenece, sino que nosotros pertenecemos a la Tierra».

También la nueva Constitución boliviana apunta al medio ambiente como patrimonio natural (art. 384) de sus habitantes. Defiende a la naturaleza como un bien común vital, y penaliza su depredación, ya que daña a los habitantes:

Quienes realicen actividades de impacto sobre el medio ambiente deberán, en todas las etapas de la producción, evitar, minimizar, mitigar, remediar, reparar y resarcir los daños que se ocasionen al medio ambiente y a la salud de las personas, y establecerán medidas de seguridad para neutralizar los efectos de los pasivos ambientales (art. 347).

Ambas Constituciones afirman la necesidad de una convivencia entre personas y naturaleza, pues la naturaleza es nuestra casa común (eco-logía: oikos = casa).

De especial importancia consideran ambas Constituciones los recursos naturales que forman parte del bien común de toda la población. En la jerarquía de los derechos del BUEN VIVIR, la Constitución ecuatoriana menciona en primer lugar el derecho al agua. Para la boliviana, el agua, es patrimonio nacional, y constituye un derecho fundamentalísimo para la vida, en el marco de la soberanía del pueblo. El Estado promoverá el uso y acceso al agua sobre la base de principios de solidaridad, complementariedad, reciprocidad, equidad, diversidad y sostenibilidad (art. 373).

En la Constitución ecuatoriana el agua es lo más esencial para la vida y por tanto es inalienable, imprescindible, inembargable (art. 12).

También la tan necesaria producción energética debe cambiar para no seguir dañando la vida de la naturaleza: El Estado desarrollará... nuevas formas de producción de energías alternativas, compatibles con la conservación del ambiente (art. 379).

El BUEN VIVIR de los ciudadanos con los demás seres vivos es garantizado por la Constitución ecuatoriana al concebir a la naturaleza como un sujeto vivo, con derechos constitucionales propios.
En nuestra búsqueda, pues, de alternativas, caminando hacia una biodemocracia, las dos constituciones nos aportan los siguientes principios fundamentales:
  • convivir respetuosamente con la naturaleza y relacionarnos con ella como un ser vivo,
  • buscar una convivencia sostenible, con relaciones equilibradas entre los pobladores y la naturaleza,
  • respetar y proteger la tierra, utilizando racionalmente los recursos naturales renovables, y, como son limitados, hay que rechazar lo superfluo y buscar lo esencial para una vida digna para todos;
  • una visión integradora frente a la complejidad y diversidad de la vida.
Encontramos aquí principios que no están lejos del sueño de la «democracia ecológica» que defiende Vandana Shiva. Son principios fundamentales que representan una auténtica alternativa al actual sistema globalizante, homogéneo, acumulativo y monopolizante que pretende ser la única solución a la crisis que él mismo provocó.

Debata / dialogue / comente con su grupo:

  • Nuestras Constituciones políticas son muy respetuosas con los derechos humanos, pero enemigas de la naturaleza...
  • La naturaleza, la fauna, los bosques... no pueden votar, pero yo puedo representar con mi voto sus intereses...
  • La forma política máxima ya no puede ser la «demo»-cracia, sino la biocracia.

Friday, 22 April 2011

Questionnaire -- a poem by Wendell Berry

Thanks to Lynne Phillips for pointing us to this poem, which originally appeared in The Progressive magazine. See the biography of Wendell Berry, read and listen to his poetry online. The latest Orion magazine has an online podcast of Berry and others discussing principled activism against MTR.


Questionnaire

1. How much poison are you willing to eat for the success of the free market and global trade? Please name your preferred poisons.

2. For the sake of goodness, how much evil are you willing to do? Fill in the following blanks with the names of your favorite evils and acts of hatred.

3. What sacrifices are you prepared to make for culture and civilization? Please list the monuments, shrines, and works of art you would most willingly destroy.

4. In the name of patriotism and the flag, how much of our beloved land are you willing to desecrate? List in the following spaces the mountains, rivers, towns, farms you could most readily do without.

5. State briefly the ideas, ideals, or hopes, the energy sources, the kinds of security, for which you would kill a child. Name, please, the children whom you would be willing to kill.

Thursday, 21 April 2011

Bâtir le pays sacré -- par Diane Noury

Diane Noury, auteure-compositeure-interprète, fait partie du comité de citoyens de Nicolet-Yamaska et Bécancour qui demandent un débat public au Québec sur la question de l'énergie, l'amendement de la loi des mines, des mesures pour atteindre les objectifs de Kyoto, et le développement des énergies propres. Voir leur manifestation du nov 2010 et leur lettre au Ministre des Mines au sujet du gaz des schistes, et la mobilisation Vigilance Ènergie dont ils font partie. Face à un gouvernement laxiste dirigé par les intérêts fossiles pétro-nucléo-gazières, le mouvement populaire s'est élargi avec le congrès Cochabamba+1 tenu à Montréal la semaine dernière, là où Diane a redigé ce poème... bientôt une chanson? Elle fait également partie du Moratoire d'une génération et d'En vert et pour tous.
village de St-Grégoire       
Sommes-nous les seuls êtres humains qui se retournent vers
leur passé ?
Sommes-nous les seuls à penser qu’ils seront peut-être les
derniers ?
Sommes-nous tellement intelligents que nous seuls voyons les
choses aller ?
Sommes-nous tout seuls à aimer la terre comme une mère ?
parc de la rivière Gentilly          
Je sais que non, j’espère que non.
Je cherche l’autre du dehors, celui et celle de l’autre bord.
Je tends la main, je l’ouvre pour donner, pour recevoir, pour
échanger.
Pour être tendre avec la vie qui me porte.
J’aime l’humain, j’honore le vivant.

Et je me lève en ce jour pour marcher droit, le regard fier
Jusqu’à l’horizon d’un jour nouveau que nous allons refaire
Ensemble
Unis
Divers
Forts de nos différences et du meilleur de soi.*

centre nucléaire Gentilly-2 (réfection contestée)
Je veux me battre contre mes propres peurs et mes inhibitions

Et bâtir le pays sacré qui nous habite tous.
Je veux rejoindre le bien et le beau en tout.
Le voir renaître, grandir, mûrir et rebâtir le monde.
***
*Le meilleur de soi, un livre de Guy Corneau
à droite: le manoir Bécancour
à gauche: cuisine communale à Bécancour

Wednesday, 20 April 2011

Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature -- a campaign for Rio+20

On Earth Day, April 22, the Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature launches an international campaign for the Rights of Nature to be recognized at the UN Rio+20 Earth Summit in 2012.

Global Alliance partners include the US Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (CELDF); Ecuador's Fundación Pachamama and its supporters in the Pachamama Alliance; Cormac Cullinan's EnAct International; Maud Barlow's Council of Canadians; Global Exchange, and many other NGOs; its Advisory Council includes Vandana Shiva.
Reference books:
Cormac Cullinan, Wild Law: A Manifesto for Earth Justice (2nd ed. 2011); The Rights of Nature (2011); Does Nature Have Rights? (2011) online with the full article by the co-founders of Pachamama Alliance; what follows is an excerpt.

The Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature
By Natalia Greene and Bill Twist, co-founders of Pachamama Alliance in Ecuador

On the first days of September 2010, conscious individuals and organizations, with the background of having worked to promote the recognition and guarantee of Rights for Nature, met in Patate, Ecuador, in Hacienda Manteles, at the foot of the Tungurahua Volcano and gave rise to the Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature.

Recognizing that exploitation, abuse, and contamination have caused the destruction, degradation and disruption of Mother Earth (1), putting all life at risk through phenomena such as climate change; the Global Alliance [warns of] a multi-dimensional crisis and collapse of an unsustainable system based on accumulation and disrespect for nature.

The Global Alliance, convinced that we are an interdependent living community, and recognizing that ancient native communities have always defended Mother Earth’s rights because those rights are innate to their cosmovision (2), recognize that nature is not an object or commodity, but a subject of inalienable rights to exist, maintain and integrally regenerate its vital cycles, structure, functions and evolutionary processes.

Its objective is to encourage the recognition and effective implementation (3) of the Rights of Nature through the creation of a world network of individuals and organizations that through active cooperation, collective action and legal tools, based on Rights of Nature as an idea whose time has come, can change the wrong direction towards which humanity is taking our Planet.

In 2008, Ecuador became the first country in the world to include this recognition in its National Constitution. In the United States, more than 100 communities have included this recognition in their local ordinances. In April, 2010, Bolivia hosted the first Peoples Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth in Cochabamba. The Global Alliance… encourages the UN adoption of the Universal Declaration of Mother Earth Rights….

The Global Alliance, aims at becoming a platform to share the experience and expertise of its
By driving Rights for Nature into law and creating global, national and local jurisdiction and cases that guarantee these Rights, will serve as a starting point to reproduce this concept virally though the world, invading systems of thought and juridical systems. The world could be a different place if crimes against Nature could be dealt internationally in an International Rights of Nature Court, if humans understood that they we are part of nature and whatever we do to the planet we do to each other.

The Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature calls upon all organizations and people of the Earth to join in the Rights of Nature as an idea whose time has come. Mother Earth (3) and we, her children, are in extreme peril; we must unite and ACT NOW!

references to aboriginal traditions:
1 Pachamama: (Kichwa) Mother Earth, only broader, i.e. Mother Cosmos
2 Cosmovision: world view, philosophy of life
3 Minka: (Kichwa) collective community work for the betterment of all


Universal Declaration of Rights of Mother Earth
at April 22, 2010 World People’s Conference on Climate Change
 and the Rights of Mother Earth, Cochabamba, Bolivia

Preamble

We, the peoples and nations of Earth:
  • considering that we are all part of Mother Earth, an indivisible, living community of interrelated and interdependent beings with a common destiny;
  • gratefully acknowledging that Mother Earth is the source of life, nourishment and learning and provides everything we need to live well;
  • recognizing that the capitalist system and all forms of depredation, exploitation, abuse and contamination have caused great destruction, degradation and disruption of Mother Earth, putting life as we know it today at risk through phenomena such as climate change;
  • convinced that in an interdependent living community it is not possible to recognize the rights of only human beings without causing an imbalance within Mother Earth;
  • affirming that to guarantee human rights it is necessary to recognize and defend the rights of Mother Earth and all beings in her and that there are existing cultures, practices and laws that do so;
  • conscious of the urgency of taking decisive, collective action to transform structures and systems that cause climate change and other threats to Mother Earth;
  • proclaim this Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth, and call on the General Assembly of the United Nation to adopt it, as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations of the world, and to the end that every individual and institution takes responsibility for promoting through teaching, education, and consciousness raising, respect for the rights recognized in this Declaration and ensure through prompt and progressive measures and mechanisms, national and international, their universal and effective recognition and observance among all peoples and States in the world.
Article 1. Mother Earth
(1)  Mother Earth is a living being.
(2)  Mother Earth is a unique, indivisible, self-regulating community of interrelated beings that sustains, contains and reproduces all beings.
(3)  Each being is defined by its relationships as an integral part of Mother Earth.
(4)  The inherent rights of Mother Earth are inalienable in that they arise from the same source as existence.
(5)  Mother Earth and all beings are entitled to all the inherent rights recognized in this Declaration without distinction of any kind, such as may be made between organic and inorganic beings, species, origin, use to human beings, or any other status.
(6)  Just as human beings have human rights, all other beings also have rights which are specific to their species or kind and appropriate for their role and function within the communities within which they exist.
(7)  The rights of each being are limited by the rights of other beings and any conflict between their rights must be resolved in a way that maintains the integrity, balance and health of Mother Earth.

Article 2. Inherent Rights of Mother Earth
(1)  Mother Earth and all beings of which she is composed have the following inherent rights:
(a)  the right to life and to exist;
(b)  the right to be respected;
(c)  the right to regenerate its bio-capacity and to continue its vital cycles and processes free from human disruptions;
(d)  the right to maintain its identity and integrity as a distinct, self-regulating and interrelated being;
(e)  the right to water as a source of life;
(f)   the right to clean air;
(g)  the right to integral health;
(h)   the right to be free from contamination, pollution and toxic or radioactive waste;
(i)    the right to not have its genetic structure modified or disrupted in a manner that threatens it integrity or vital and healthy functioning;
(j)    the right to full and prompt restoration the violation of the rights recognized in this Declaration caused by human activities;
(2)  Each being has the right to a place and to play its role in Mother Earth for her harmonious functioning.
(3)  Every being has the right to wellbeing and to live free from torture or cruel treatment by human beings.

Article 3. Obligations of human beings to Mother Earth
(1)  Every human being is responsible for respecting and living in harmony with Mother Earth.
(2)  Human beings, all States, and all public and private institutions must:
(a)  act in accordance with the rights and obligations recognized in this Declaration;
(b)  recognize and promote the full implementation and enforcement of the rights and obligations recognized in this Declaration;
(c)  promote and participate in learning, analysis, interpretation and communication about how to live in harmony with Mother Earth in accordance with this Declaration;
(d)  ensure that the pursuit of human wellbeing contributes to the wellbeing of Mother Earth, now and in the future;
(e)  establish and apply effective norms and laws for the defence, protection and conservation of the rights of Mother Earth;
(f)   respect, protect, conserve and where necessary, restore the integrity, of the vital ecological cycles, processes and balances of Mother Earth;
(g)  guarantee that the damages caused by human violations of the inherent rights recognized in this Declaration are rectified and that those responsible are held accountable for restoring the integrity and health of Mother Earth;
(h)  empower human beings and institutions to defend the rights of Mother Earth and of all beings;
(i)    establish precautionary and restrictive measures to prevent human activities from causing species extinction, the destruction of ecosystems or the disruption of ecological cycles;
(j)    guarantee peace and eliminate nuclear, chemical and biological weapons;
(k)  promote and support practices of respect for Mother Earth and all beings, in accordance with their own cultures, traditions and customs;
(l)    promote economic systems that are in harmony with Mother Earth and in accordance with the rights recognized in this Declaration.

Article 4. Definitions
(1)
  The term “being” includes ecosystems, natural communities, species and all other natural entities which exist as part of Mother Earth.
(2)  Nothing in this Declaration restricts the recognition of other inherent rights of all beings or specified beings.

Sign up in any of four groups on Facebook. All are linked to the Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature. Also Canadian Youth Climate Coalition. See videos of Maude Barlow (Council of Canadians), Vandana Shiva (Earth Democracy), and Shannon Biggs (Global Exchange) on Democracy Now 22 May, and GRIT-TV 20 May

Saturday, 16 April 2011

Towards an eco-theology -- Latin American voices

Reprinted from World Council of Churches news, 30 Mar 2011. The author, Dr Marcelo Schneider, has been working as assistant to the WCC Central Committee moderator since 2006. He lives in Porto Alegre, Brazil and writes for several Latin American ecumenical and church-related news agencies.
***
The father of the Kyoto treaty, Argentina's ambassador Raul Estrada Oyuela (see his biog), spoke on the international diplomatic framework on climate change, in a seminar held 28 - 29 March at the Protestant theological school Instituto Universitario ISEDET in Buenos Aires.
 
 
The accepted axiom is, as the climate changes so the world, too, will change in dramatic and sometimes undesirable ways.

What does this often rapid change mean to Christians whose faith is intertwined with the glory and beauty of God’s creation, but challenged when that creation is corrupted and irreversibly altered?

Is the churches’ current theological reflection on stewardship and climate change ready for the rapid shifting of winds, weather, and life on earth as we know it and our grandparents knew it?

These questions were enough to prompt a variety of churches in Argentina to explore the "Christian faith and ecology: towards an eco-ecumenical theology",
The event was sponsored by ISEDET, the non-governmental Argentina-based Rural Reflection Group and the World Student Christian Federation (WSCF) Latin America and Caribbean region and was supported by the World Council of Churches (WCC) and the United Church of Canada.

An imperative concern for nature

"Climate changes occur very rapidly and have astonishing consequences,” said Dr Alfredo Salibian, an Argentinian biologist in an address to the group. “We are witnessing changes in our own lives, not only in relation to the context in which our parents or grandparents lived, but in relation to twenty, ten or five years ago."
Salibian proposed the addition of the prefix "eco" to theology, reflecting an imperative, urgent concern for nature. "We have to recall that the redemption offered by Jesus Christ is bidirectional,” he said. “On one side it is vertical because it allows for the restoration of relations of human beings with the Creator. But we tend to neglect the other part of this relationship, which is horizontal, which aims to heal the damaged relations between human beings and the rest of God's creation.” Therefore it is time to update Latin American theology, incorporating the prefix "eco" to redefine the meaning of "creation", "Christ", “human being” and "ecumenism" in light of stewardship for creation.
But it goes even further than that, says the father of the Kyoto Protocol, Raul Estrada Oyuela, who spoke on the international diplomatic framework linked to the theme of climate change at the event.

Theology and politics

Oyuela warned that the lack of mutual understanding between theology and politics could be damaging. "If we do not understand what happens in politics, it will be very difficult to interfere in the construction of policies," he said. Oyuela chaired the group created by the First Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to negotiate a legally binding instrument on climate change today known as the Kyoto Protocol.
"There are many people from the member churches of the World Council of Churches in international diplomatic circles that deal with environmental issues,” he said, pressing the issue that the church can influence power. “If theologically, the WCC proposes ethical reference points, why not strengthen the process of awareness raising and advocacy among these actors, so that the agenda has a more significant impact on the final results of the negotiations?"
"We Christians warned, some years ago, about the urgent need to promote an ethic of social responsibility on the management of natural resources and care for creation, something we called 'stewardship for creation'”, Salibian reminded the audience. “This concept still is in opposition to the current dominant school of thought asserting the supremacy of economy over nature, which becomes oppressive to many humans, and breaks the relationships of people with nature."
Reinforcing the need for a review of the Latin American theology, the WCC programme executive on climate change, Dr Guillermo Kerber, from Uruguay, added that one of the main impacts of climate change on theology is the emerging need to reform the theological understanding of creation. "What is the place of the human being in creation and in relation to it? We need an epistemological change of our theology in relation to ecology," Kerber said.

Peace with the earth”

One of the methodological efforts made during the event has been the attempt to explain the links between violence, peace-building and care for creation. This reflects one of the main themes, “peace with the earth”, of the upcoming International Ecumenical Peace Convocation (IEPC) being held 17-25 May in Kingston, Jamaica and sponsored by the WCC, the Caribbean Conference of Churches and the Jamaica Council of Churches.

Emerging from the seminar in Argentina is a holistic view trying to build on the acknowledgement that the environmental crisis resulting from climate change has economic, political and spiritual components.

The impact of climate change, particularly on migration, is leading to an ethically-based debate on the issue of justice involving the testimony of the most vulnerable groups such as women, impoverished and indigenous people.

"We must recognize that justice is a central theme in the Bible. The God of the Bible is a God of justice who does justice. Therefore, we include in our theology the issue of 'eco-justice'", said Kerber.

This is not the first time that the WCC and its member churches have been supporting dialogue and reflection on ecology and theology in Argentina.

In addition to an event under the theme "Man and His Environment" in 1974, there was also a seminar in 1990 on "Crisis, Ecology and Social Justice". The seminar, hosted by ISEDET, was held in preparation of the Call for Justice Peace and Integrity of Creation (JPIC), held that year in Seoul, South Korea.

Thursday, 14 April 2011

Renewable power isn’t just safer than nuclear, it’s cheaper -- Amory Lovins

Reprinted from Living on Earth April 14, 2011: Listen to the program.
On March 25, Bruce Gellerman of the Public Radio International program Living on Earth spoke with the co-founder of Rocky Mountain Institute about the true costs of nuclear power.
“Nuclear is such a slow and costly climate solution, it actually reduces and retards climate protection" -- Lovins

LOE: There are “dangerously high” radiation levels in water leaking from Reactor number 3 at Japan’s Fukushima plant. At our deadline, operators still struggling to gain control of the facility, fear the core might be breached. Prime minister Kan calls the situation “grave and unpredictable” and officials are urging those within 19 miles of the nuclear plant to leave voluntarily, and avoid eating many kinds of green vegetables.To say the least, the nuclear disaster in Japan has refocused attention on the future of the atom as a source of energy. But the threat of global climate change has led even some die hard environmentalists to reconsider and embrace nuclear power. But not Amory Lovins. He’s chairman and chief scientist of Rocky Mountain Institute in Snowmass, Colorado. Amory Lovins, welcome to Living on Earth!
LOVINS: Thank you.
LOE: So is it possible that we can meet our carbon reduction targets without nuclear power?
LOVINS: Of course! Not only that, but we could do so more effectively and more cheaply. It is quite true that if a nuclear plant displaces a coal plant that would replace carbon emissions.
But if you spent the same money on efficiency, renewables and combined heat and power, you would reduce the carbon emissions by about two to ten times more and about 20 to 40 times faster. So nuclear is such a slow and costly climate solution, it actually reduces and retards climate protection, compared with a best buys first approach.
LOE: When you say it’s slow, isn’t it people like you that are holding up the process with lawsuits, holding up the process of licensing nuclear power plants?
LOVINS: Not in the least! I know the industry likes to blame environmental groups — of which, by the way, we are not one — for holding up licensing for several decades. New nuclear power plants in this country are offered subsidies that now rival or exceed their total construction costs.
And yet, even though that’s been true since 2005, three years before the financial crash, they’ve been unable to raise a penny of private capital, simply because the cost and risks are unfinanceable. Wall Street will not invest in them — it’s an utterly unfinanceable technology, and it’s obvious why — it’s grossly uncompetitive.
LOE: But can renewables, like wind for example, produce enough energy, enough density to replace nuclear power plants, which are huge and hugely powerful. And, plus, the wind doesn’t blow on calm days.
LOVINS: Yeah, well, that’s two separate points. The first one — I’m afraid the industry got it backwards. Actually, if you properly do the math — and count if you count the whole nuclear fuel cycle, not just the power plant, not just the core of the reactor, but the occlusion zone, the uranium mining and so on, it turns out that wind power uses hundreds or thousands of times less land per kilowatt hour, than nuclear does.
Even solar photovoltaics are equal to or might be better than nuclear in that respect. As for the wind not blowing and the sun not shining all the time, that’s true. Every kind of power plant can fail. They differ, however, how much fails at once, how often, how long and for what reasons and how predictably. You can predict pretty well when wind or solar will not work, but you cannot predict when a nuclear plant will fail.
They break without warning about three to five percent of the time — big coal nuclear plants are down about ten or twelve percent of the time — and for that reason, we’ve designed grids for over a century to cope with that intermittence that every power plant suffers from. So you don’t depend on any single plant, you depend on the whole grid.
So it turns out, if you diversify renewables by type so they’re not all affected by weather the same way, you diversify them by location, so they don’t all see the same weather at the same time, and you integrate them with the resources on the grid, both power plants and ways to save or shift electric use, then you can have a largely, or wholly renewable electric supply system at very reasonable cost, with greater reliability and resilience than we have right now.
LOE: I find it a little bit ironic, you know — I see in these pictures from Japan — and if they had put a little bit — if they had put a wind turbine on top of the nuclear complex there, the plant might have had power and would still be running.
LOVINS: Actually, the wind machines in the vicinity were not affected by the earthquake and tsunami, and the utilities have been calling for them to crank out every bit of juice they can to help keep the grid up. Look, here’s a quick summary of what’s going on with nuclear in the world. At the end of 2010, there were 66 nuclear units, officially listed as “under construction” worldwide.
You look a little closer, you’ll find a dozen of them have been listed as “under construction” for over 20 years, 45 of them have no official start up date, half of them are late. All 66 of them are in centrally planned power systems, not a single one of them is a free-market purchase. And since 2007, nuclear growth has added less electricity to our supply each year, then even the costliest renewable — solar power — and it will probably never catch up.
LOE: But they’re having rolling blackouts in Japan right now because they don’t have the nuclear power plants online.
LOVINS: Of course if you lose a lot of capacity, you can be short. And they were already a bit short. But I would actually view that as a drawback of nuclear power in two respects. First, to make it cheap, they tried to put a bunch of plants in one place, which was always a bad idea, because if something goes wrong with one plant, you can’t even get in to fix the others and keep them from developing serious problems.
Second, nuclear plants are shut down abruptly, when there’s a loss of grid connection, like in the tsunami. And the trouble with that is, it is then very hard to restart the plant. So in 2003, we had a big blackout in the northeastern US, nine plants were running perfectly until the blackout and then they went to zero, and it took two weeks to get them all back up. And so they’re like an anti-peaker, they’re guaranteed unavailable when you most need them. Renewables don’t have that problem.
LOE: Amory Lovins is the chairman and chief scientist of Rocky Mountain Institute in Snowmass, Colorado. Well, Mr. Lovins, thank you so very much.
LOVINS: You’re welcome.

Sunday, 10 April 2011

The Journey Begins -- by Ruah Swennerfelt


This is  Ruah's first posting on her research and visits to  Transition Towns in North America, the Middle East, and Europe. To read more of her writing, click on Vision Transitions.
***
I am about to embark on a search for how our civilization will survive the current “perfect storm” of peak oil, climate disruption, and economic instability. We live in a time where our world economic system requires perpetual growth to survive. This is not sustainable since there is a limited supply of Earth’s resources available. My search will take me to Israel, the Palestinian Territories, Europe, Scandinavia, and North America. I want to help articulate the world vision that exists as a result of the wonderful efforts of Transition Town Initiatives, Sustainable Cities, and other municipal “green initiatives”.

Like a quilt, each piece is unique and beautiful on its own, but the finished quilt is something greater than the parts. I hope that my research will reflect this whole as a blueprint for our necessary transition. I hope that you who follow my blog, will comment, suggest, argue, and support what I write. I’m depending on that interaction to enrich my research and the results of it.

How will the human race live as we enter the post-carbon world? What if people in towns or section of cities got together regularly for local foods potlucks, discussions about sharing resources and building resilience, listening to speakers and watching films, making music, and having fun? What if the place we each call home had really prepared for the end of cheap, abundant fossil fuels? What might that look like? Can one imagine bringing people together who are from different political viewpoints, different incomes, and different educational backgrounds? How can the obstacles to that vision be overcome?

These are the goals of the Transition Towns, Sustainable Cities, and other “green” movements. There are many fine grassroots movements around the globe that are individually working on community efforts to prepare for the impacts of climate change and peak oil. It will be a difficult transition—with fewer resources to help that happen. I have learned from previous journeys about the difficulties of improving the lives of people in developing countries and the hopes and fears of people in our own country.

In November 2001 my husband Louis Cox and I embarked on a six-month journey through Central America and Cuba. We chose to travel by bus (and once in Cuba, traveled by train and bus), the way that the majority of the world travels, to experience people in an intimate and real way. Also, from November 2007 to April 2008 (see blog) Louis and I walked from Vancouver, British Columbia, to San Diego, California, bringing 18th century Quaker John Woolman’s message of living with integrity to West Coast Quakers and others. We shared Woolman’s concern for the root cause of slavery, greed, among slave holders. We see the striving after ease and luxury as the cause of current poverty, war, and destruction of the earth’s resources.

Louis and I learned so much from our past experiences and continue to travel by bus and train in the United States, by which we also encounter this country’s poor and disempowered. We search for humbling and enriching experiences that will enable us to be present to the Spirit in forgotten or difficult places. We continue to walk, when given the chance, in the places we visit, again having rich experiences with the people we meet. We then share those experiences through presentations, informal gatherings, and articles.

We attempt to live simply and search for ways to reduce our footprint on this planet. We live in a hand-built, off-grid, solar-electric home. We have found much joy in our journey through life together, reading aloud, playing music, and learning skills of earlier times like canning food, mowing with a scythe, maple sugaring, quilting, and generally being resourceful. We share that joy with others, hoping that they can see from our example that simpler living is neither drudgery nor dull. (For some understanding of our choices, go to www.peaceforearth.org) But I have this growing concern that there is no vision to help most people make the transition into what will be a very difficult world when world oil production peaks and begins its irreversible decline (the U.S. Department of Defense predicts the peak will occur in 2012) and climate change. How will we all learn to live joyful lives without the same resources, primarily cheap, abundant oil, or with the changing climate? How will we change in a way that isn’t frightening, degrading, or depressing?

Since returning from our 1,400-mile walk we have thrown ourselves into the Transition Town Initiative (helping to co-found it in our town), recognizing that the way we can prepare for a climate-change and post-petroleum era is to build resilient communities. Only through community can we help each other find the joys of simpler living and provide mutual support when times are tough. We know this well as Quakers, but how do we share this with a broader constituency?

The Transition Town movement began in England, using permaculture principles to equip communities for the dual challenges of climate change and peak oil. The methodology they’ve developed has a lot to do with tapping into the inherent wisdom of a community and the belief that ordinary people have tremendous creative problem-solving capacity. The movement currently has member communities in many countries worldwide. (See www.transitionnetwork.org for more information.) We have had some successes in our town, and I want to learn from successful examples and the challenges of sustainable initiatives elsewhere in order to give others hope and tools.

Although there is a website which reports various activities of the different initiatives, there still isn’t an overall, global vision emerging. I understand that the work needs to be done locally, but how do all those local efforts relate to one another? I hope to reflect these varied successes, struggles, actions, and joys into that vision. I hope to reflect a vision that includes rural, suburban, and urban living in developed countries and what their relationship to developing nations will be.

At the end of December 2010 I retired from my 16 years of work with Quaker Earthcare Witness and begin my visits in February, 2011 in North America. In May, I head for the Middle East by plane and then travel by land transportation for the next 3 months.

I will be asking each group a set of questions. For example, I will ask about their work to assure quality employment for all, how to make sure that the disenfranchised are included in the new, joyful life, and how they are engaging their local governments in the process. I am still developing the questions and would love some suggestions.

I hope to compile what I have learned into a book to help others in the “Great Turning” (as Joanna Macy and David Korten call this time in human history.) How can we learn from the hundreds of initiatives instead of always trying to start our own from scratch? How do we live into a new world if we don’t have the vision of what that world might be? I hope my blog and book will share such a vision, with practical tools for action.

I probably would not be undertaking this effort if it were not for my belief that we are living in a time of planetary crisis at many levels, all of which are reflections of a spiritual crisis. While we must understand the spiritual basis of the crisis and act from the heart, we must also learn the practical tools to try to avoid the potentially great suffering when cheap fossil fuels are no longer available for agriculture, transportation, and manufacturing. I hear a call to awaken to my complicity in this crisis and to undertake the necessary radical changes to leave a healthy, peaceful, and just planet for future generations.

Although I do not make a regular practice of flying, due to the environmental impacts, I believe that the potential outcome of my research is worthy enough to justify the plane travel. I hope we can partner on this project.

I will write periodically as I prepare for my journey and write more frequently when I am engaged in the process. I look forward to your comments.

Thursday, 7 April 2011

The Goggles Project


Sometime soon, on a college campus, you may see some people wearing plastic bottle bottoms over their eyes. It's not as weird as you might think. A traveling street-theatre troupe, the Goggles Project, aka Rethink University, has come to town.

It's the brainchild of Dr Tarah Wright, a Dalhousie University environment prof. In a two-year study, she found that university presidents were unaware of sustainability issues and did not know how to change. She decided to generate awareness and support from the bottom up. She enlisted a dedicated group of young actors from Halifax NS to tour from coast to coast, going out to meet youth in their favourite campus haunts. wherever there is high foot traffic. Lounging on the lawn, or rubbernecking at the actors, you may suddenly become part of the action.

On Goggles. Stop and question passing students. Do you know what sustainability is? Do you know what you can do? How? Here's a pair, now do you see things differently? Many do. The 12-minute script allows lots of interaction, improvisation, and just plain fun.
So far the troupe has toured 18 Canadian universities. A sweep into US campuses is planned this year. They have also been seen at ASSHE in Denver, and at the EMSU conference in Delft, the Netherlands. Next show will be at York U's Staging Sustainability Conference, April 20-22 in Toronto.

Friday, 1 April 2011

Greenhouse gases: animated maps by various scientists

CO2 emissions across the US. Vulcan project animation shows daily pulses, and plumes of CO2 drifting across Canada and far across the Atlantic. Presenter: Dr Kevin Gurney, Purdue U.

More details of Vulcan hi-res map of the US are explained here.

Temperature change globally 1870-2100, by British Met Office, using IPCC's "middle-range" scenario (A1B) where alternative energy gradually replaces fossil fuels. This is not the worst case.


CO2 emissions globally, presented by Michael Freilich, director of NASA's Earth Science Division; the animated map starts at 2:15.

CO2 emissions in North and South America by NOAA.

Methane emissions globally increase with seasonal or other warming, by Michael Buchwitz, U of Bremen.

Nitrogen dioxide emissions globally. NASA satellite data show daily pulses of this toxic, closely linked to vehicle exhausts and coal-fired electricity.

Ocean impacts due to humans: acidification, coral reel loss, and overfishing -- by New Scientist.

Global gravity by GOCE: places that are prone to quakes and volcanic eruptions. 31-3-2011 update.

Pipelines in N. America. See the article in Low-tech magazine and Wikipedia on carbon capture and storage (CCS).

See also the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS) on the NASA Aqua Spacecraft which tracks CO2, CO, Methane, and black carbon; NASA scientists discuss the data trends (7 min video Jan 2009); explanation of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, nitrogen dioxide and ozone in Wikipedia. The CEC's North American Environmental Atlas offers online maps; its Google Earth interactive map shows pollution from 35,000 sources.