George Poitras, member of Mikisew Cree indigenous First Nation talks about the issues of pollution and cancers suffered by many of the First Nations people as a result of the Oil companies action extractive industries.
“My people are dying, and we believe British companies are responsible. My community, Fort Chipewyan in Alberta, Canada, is situated at the heart of the vast toxic moonscape that is the tar sands development. We live in a beautiful area, but unfortunately, we find ourselves upstream from the largest fossil fuel development on earth. UK oil companies like BP, and banks like RBS, are extracting the dirtiest form of oil from our traditional lands, and we fear it is killing us.” – George
BP has been prompted to disclose much information that has not been publicly available before. Tar sands has become a hot topic among the investment community and BP has been subject to a far higher level of investor scrutiny on the issue than ever before.
The shareholder resolution about BP’s involvement in tar sands production was discussed and put to the vote at the oil major’s AGM. Results presented by BP at the meeting show that almost 15% of voters either supported the resolution or abstained despite the board’s recommendation to reject it. This is a significant expression of concern about the company’s decision to invest in new tar sands projects.
15th of April BP holds their AGM
You and I Films
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
In pictures: Thousands gather for the climate change summit in Bolivia
At least 15,000 people from worldwide indigenous movements and civil-society groups, as well as presidents, scientists, activists and observers from 90 governments, are expected to attend what is being called the "Woodstock" of climate change summits
View pictures at The Guardian here.
Photograph: Aizar Raldes/AFP/Getty Images
View pictures at The Guardian here.
Photograph: Aizar Raldes/AFP/Getty Images
Great Lakes Still Under Seige from Toxic Pollution
New report shows Canadian companies in Great Lakes St. Lawrence River basin produce more cancer-causing air pollution than US counterparts
Canadian companies in the Great Lakes basin reported releasing almost three times more cancer-causing pollutants to the air (on a per facility basis) than companies in the United States, according to a report released today by CELA and Environmental Defence (under the PollutionWatch project) along with Great Lakes-area environmental groups from both sides of the border. A total of four million kilograms of known carcinogens were released to the basin airshed in 2007 by facilities in both countries.
The report relies on pollution data from Canada's National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) and the US Toxic Release Inventory (TRI). The report also notes details of overall emissions to air, water and land. Despite huge volumes of pollution, total figures are less than ten percent of the true emission picture since only large facilities are required to report. Timed to coincide with the re-negotiation of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, this new report underscores the need for greatly renewed attention to toxic pollution in the Great Lakes ecosystem. Highlights of the groups' recommendations include the need for governments in Canada and the US to quantify and annually report pollution loadings, to develop and implement a binational strategy to eliminate and reduce toxic chemicals, to expand and strengthen both national pollution monitoring programs and the role of the International Joint Commission (IJC).
On-line: media release; full report
The report relies on pollution data from Canada's National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) and the US Toxic Release Inventory (TRI). The report also notes details of overall emissions to air, water and land. Despite huge volumes of pollution, total figures are less than ten percent of the true emission picture since only large facilities are required to report. Timed to coincide with the re-negotiation of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, this new report underscores the need for greatly renewed attention to toxic pollution in the Great Lakes ecosystem. Highlights of the groups' recommendations include the need for governments in Canada and the US to quantify and annually report pollution loadings, to develop and implement a binational strategy to eliminate and reduce toxic chemicals, to expand and strengthen both national pollution monitoring programs and the role of the International Joint Commission (IJC).
On-line: media release; full report
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Climate Justice and its Anti-Capitalist consequences
by Apocalypse Anonymous
InfoShop News
The governments of the world have been unable to act to avert climate disaster; this failure reveals the contradictions inherent in a system which is responsible for causing this crisis. Many people are now seeing the climate crisis as one of the symptoms of the general catastrophe we call capitalism. Climate change stands alongside the current political-economic crisis and the impending energy, food and water crises as problems caused and exacerbated by the capitalist system of social relations. Ruling elites are consequently seeking to legitimise a system which is the root cause of these socio-ecological crises; using “crisis management” as an opportunity for capitalism to re-assert itself, creating a new round of accumulation and enhanced social control.
The green capitalist project of 'ecological modernisation', through false solutions such as; carbon trading, agro-fuels, nuclear power and carbon capture and storage, will continue to concentrate political and economic power to the hands of the ruling class. These elites have a vested interest in maintaining economic growth and business as usual, despite ever increasing destruction of our planets ecosystems and widening inequality between rich and poor. Climate change is evidence of the limits faced by a system of infinite growth on a finite planet. However our political systems are institutionally unable to respond to the scale of this challenge due to their commitment to serving the neoliberal agenda. Solutions must come from people themselves through an emancipatory transformation of social relations, in order not just to save the world, but to create a better one.
Read the full article here.
InfoShop News
The whole political landscape of the climate 'debate' has changed immensely in the past year particularly in the wake of the UN climate negotiations in Copenhagen. This article attempts to stake out some of the new terrain and present some of the ideas that are now appearing at the level of grassroots social movements for climate justice.
Capitalism is crisis
The green capitalist project of 'ecological modernisation', through false solutions such as; carbon trading, agro-fuels, nuclear power and carbon capture and storage, will continue to concentrate political and economic power to the hands of the ruling class. These elites have a vested interest in maintaining economic growth and business as usual, despite ever increasing destruction of our planets ecosystems and widening inequality between rich and poor. Climate change is evidence of the limits faced by a system of infinite growth on a finite planet. However our political systems are institutionally unable to respond to the scale of this challenge due to their commitment to serving the neoliberal agenda. Solutions must come from people themselves through an emancipatory transformation of social relations, in order not just to save the world, but to create a better one.
Read the full article here.
Bolivia's People's Summit on Climate Change: Day One
Blog from Bolivia
The Democracy Centre
Readers,
Imagine you live in a slow and sleepy village where the cow population rivals that of people and suddenly some ten thousand people from all parts of the planet descend upon it – bearing slogans. Welcome to Tiquipaya on the opening day of the People's Summit on Climate Change.
My personal day began by riding my bike to the conference site (the local university, Univalle) to make an 8 am appearance on Democracy Now with Amy Goodman. You can see the interview here. If you watch it you will know why people always tell me that I have a face made for radio. The rest of the day is a blur of chatting with journalists, sitting in on workshops, and trying to get a handle on what is going on here.
Please pass this along to others interested in the Tiquipaya Summit, and keep reading.
The Democracy Centre
Readers,
Imagine you live in a slow and sleepy village where the cow population rivals that of people and suddenly some ten thousand people from all parts of the planet descend upon it – bearing slogans. Welcome to Tiquipaya on the opening day of the People's Summit on Climate Change.
My personal day began by riding my bike to the conference site (the local university, Univalle) to make an 8 am appearance on Democracy Now with Amy Goodman. You can see the interview here. If you watch it you will know why people always tell me that I have a face made for radio. The rest of the day is a blur of chatting with journalists, sitting in on workshops, and trying to get a handle on what is going on here.
Welcome to the opening day of our Blog coverage of the summit. The Democracy Team is on the task and here is the plan. I'll be covering the question, "Where's the Strategy?" Jessica Camille Aguirre will be following the ideas and conversations among indigenous groups and social movements at the summit. Elizabeth Cooper is tracking an issue vital to low-income people and nations: How does combating climate change compete with the desire for economic and social development?
Please pass this along to others interested in the Tiquipaya Summit, and keep reading.
Jim Shultz
Monday, April 19, 2010
People First Economics
Toxic debt, rising job losses, collapsing commodity prices and expanding poverty. How can we rein in these beasts unleashed by the free market economy?
People First Economics takes a long, hard look at the mess globalized capitalism is in, and shifts the focus back to where it belongs – putting the needs of people and the environment first.
People First Economics buzzes inspiration and action. Evo Morales promotes his 10 step programme to save the world, life and humanity... Michel Albert advocates a classless alternative to capitalism... Naomi Klein encourages public revolt...
It’s about radical changes that are social, moral and ecological it provides the opportunity to rethink what really matters in life.
Purchase at Amazon.ca
Government takes undue credit for drop in emissions
PJ Partington
Pembina Institute blog
Well folks, the numbers are in and it's a blow out! In 2008, Canada's emissions dropped 2.1 per cent from their all-time high of 750 million tonnes the year before. Fantastic news! And, if you believe last week's press release from Environment Minister Jim Prentice, we have mostly the federal government's clever policies to thank.
The release attributes the decline in emissions to "Canada's efforts to use greater amounts of clean energy power generation, which is part of the Government's efforts to target greenhouse gas production."
Sounds great, but a few key details are missing from that picture. For instance, the increase in hydro use came primarily because of increased rainfall, not federal support for large-scale hydro. A decline in Ontario's coal use is also partly to thank, as a result of its nuclear plants being more reliable than in 2007, paired with its commitment to phase out coal-fired generation by 2014. And then (as the release does mention), there was the start of the recession, which led to an overall decline in energy use in Canada. It's also worth mentioning that the pervious year's high of 750 million tonnes resulted from a whopping 4.5 per cent jump in 2007.
Unfortunately, it's much harder to pinpoint any federal government-led efforts that may have contributed to the drop.
But who wants to let details get in the way of an opportunity to make the government look good? The release also states that, "The Government of Canada is a strong supporter of renewable energy technologies." This is the same government that failed to renew the funding in its last budget for the main federal program supporting renewable electricity — one reason why the U.S. federal government is set to outspend ours nearly 18:1 per capita on new renewable energy investments in 2010.
Still, government members have not been shy to take credit for the recent decline. Manitoba MP James Bezan, chair of the House of Commons Environment committee, announced last Wednesday:
"Just today we released a national inventory report for 2008 which shows that greenhouse gas emissions are down 2.1 per cent from 2007, or 16 megatonnes of CO2. That is an incredible achievement in just a few short years in government. Our government has acted on climate change and has got results."
If these results were policy-driven, then surely they would have been predicted by Environment Canada? Well, last spring, considering the impacts of all of its policies — including, charitably, the now-defunct Turning the Corner regulatory framework — the government anticipated that it would reduce emissions by one million tonnes in 2008. Instead, emissions actually fell by 16 million tonnes. So either this government's less-is-more approach is wildly more successful than even it anticipated, or there was some other cause for the bulk of the emissions drop.
Now, if we accept the former explanation, we shall also have to bow to the climate policy superheroes of the Bush Administration, who clearly out-policied us with a three per cent drop in emissions in 2008 (compared to our 2.1 per cent).
Or we just might have to give credit where credit is really due.
The summary of the new emissions inventory by Environment Canada staff finds that the decline in emissions can be attributed largely to factors we mention above. No mention, sadly, of any federal government policies.
It's worth noting that in the absence of major new government policies, the underlying trend in Canada's emissions (setting aside the occasional fluctuations caused by the economy or the weather) is one of continued, indefinite increases.
Expect the spin to follow similar trends.
Pembina Institute blog
The release attributes the decline in emissions to "Canada's efforts to use greater amounts of clean energy power generation, which is part of the Government's efforts to target greenhouse gas production."
Sounds great, but a few key details are missing from that picture. For instance, the increase in hydro use came primarily because of increased rainfall, not federal support for large-scale hydro. A decline in Ontario's coal use is also partly to thank, as a result of its nuclear plants being more reliable than in 2007, paired with its commitment to phase out coal-fired generation by 2014. And then (as the release does mention), there was the start of the recession, which led to an overall decline in energy use in Canada. It's also worth mentioning that the pervious year's high of 750 million tonnes resulted from a whopping 4.5 per cent jump in 2007.
Unfortunately, it's much harder to pinpoint any federal government-led efforts that may have contributed to the drop.
But who wants to let details get in the way of an opportunity to make the government look good? The release also states that, "The Government of Canada is a strong supporter of renewable energy technologies." This is the same government that failed to renew the funding in its last budget for the main federal program supporting renewable electricity — one reason why the U.S. federal government is set to outspend ours nearly 18:1 per capita on new renewable energy investments in 2010.
Still, government members have not been shy to take credit for the recent decline. Manitoba MP James Bezan, chair of the House of Commons Environment committee, announced last Wednesday:
"Just today we released a national inventory report for 2008 which shows that greenhouse gas emissions are down 2.1 per cent from 2007, or 16 megatonnes of CO2. That is an incredible achievement in just a few short years in government. Our government has acted on climate change and has got results."
If these results were policy-driven, then surely they would have been predicted by Environment Canada? Well, last spring, considering the impacts of all of its policies — including, charitably, the now-defunct Turning the Corner regulatory framework — the government anticipated that it would reduce emissions by one million tonnes in 2008. Instead, emissions actually fell by 16 million tonnes. So either this government's less-is-more approach is wildly more successful than even it anticipated, or there was some other cause for the bulk of the emissions drop.
Now, if we accept the former explanation, we shall also have to bow to the climate policy superheroes of the Bush Administration, who clearly out-policied us with a three per cent drop in emissions in 2008 (compared to our 2.1 per cent).
Or we just might have to give credit where credit is really due.
The summary of the new emissions inventory by Environment Canada staff finds that the decline in emissions can be attributed largely to factors we mention above. No mention, sadly, of any federal government policies.
It's worth noting that in the absence of major new government policies, the underlying trend in Canada's emissions (setting aside the occasional fluctuations caused by the economy or the weather) is one of continued, indefinite increases.
Expect the spin to follow similar trends.
Iceland Volcano’s Eruption Sends Quick Wake-up Call on “Peak Oil”
By Dorothy
West Coast Climate Equity
What does an erupting volcano in Iceland have to do with our future oil supply running out?
A lot, if you consider only the effect the recent grounding of planes all over the world has had on food supply. When oil runs out, as it will, food delivery will be drastically curtailed, and the disruption caused by the April 15 eruption of the Iceland volcano demonstrates just what this might mean. Airline won’t be back to normal until volcanic activity subsides, and in the meantime vegetables grown in Kenya are rotting; undelivered roses are being ground up for compost. Kenyan flower growers are losing $2 million a day.
Food producers have in Southern Spain have also been effected, as well as the electronics and pharmaceutical industries, who rely on overnight delivery for many of their products.
The UK Guardian published this article, April 19: Iceland volcano: Can fruit and vegetable shortages turn us on to local food?
Here’s a clip:
‘But the food miles debate has a practical element to it that’s less often discussed. It really doesn’t take long for the efficiency of our global food distribution system to be found wanting. This is the system that we’ve become uber reliant on, that grew at the expense of our local food infrastructure. It can only be hoped that any shortages will boost the flourishing interest in localising our food system.
Those annoying, bandied-about terms like “local food” and “provenance” suddenly feel less like marketing buzzwords. Supporting local growers and small producers, becoming more self sufficient through campaigns like Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall’s admirable Landshare project, initiatives like the Fife Diet, and making an effort to understand the produce we eat, the effort to get it to our table, to value it more and waste less – it all feels less like a smug lifestyle choice and more like common sense, doesn’t it?’
See also this article from The Telegraph: Volcano Chaos Could Continue for Months
The Icelandic volcano causing travel chaos across Europe could go on erupting for months, geologists have warned.
West Coast Climate Equity
What does an erupting volcano in Iceland have to do with our future oil supply running out?
Food producers have in Southern Spain have also been effected, as well as the electronics and pharmaceutical industries, who rely on overnight delivery for many of their products.
The UK Guardian published this article, April 19: Iceland volcano: Can fruit and vegetable shortages turn us on to local food?
Here’s a clip:
‘But the food miles debate has a practical element to it that’s less often discussed. It really doesn’t take long for the efficiency of our global food distribution system to be found wanting. This is the system that we’ve become uber reliant on, that grew at the expense of our local food infrastructure. It can only be hoped that any shortages will boost the flourishing interest in localising our food system.
Those annoying, bandied-about terms like “local food” and “provenance” suddenly feel less like marketing buzzwords. Supporting local growers and small producers, becoming more self sufficient through campaigns like Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall’s admirable Landshare project, initiatives like the Fife Diet, and making an effort to understand the produce we eat, the effort to get it to our table, to value it more and waste less – it all feels less like a smug lifestyle choice and more like common sense, doesn’t it?’
See also this article from The Telegraph: Volcano Chaos Could Continue for Months
The Icelandic volcano causing travel chaos across Europe could go on erupting for months, geologists have warned.
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Video from Cochabamba – Live!
Watch live coverage of the World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, April 20-22, at Climate and Capitalism, courtesy of OneClimate.net.
Link to Climate and Capitalism video page here.
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Footprints: National Film Board of Canada Resources
The NFB and the Environment
Key films, important moments in NFB history and decisive events in the 20th century reveal how environmental problems have been addressed in NFB documentaries over the last sixty years. You'll see how certain world events affected film production in the first twenty years. Note the propagandist character of sponsored films of the 1960s and 1970s. Watch the more personal and engaged works of filmmakers in the 1990s and 2000s.
Visit the NFB here.
Key films, important moments in NFB history and decisive events in the 20th century reveal how environmental problems have been addressed in NFB documentaries over the last sixty years. You'll see how certain world events affected film production in the first twenty years. Note the propagandist character of sponsored films of the 1960s and 1970s. Watch the more personal and engaged works of filmmakers in the 1990s and 2000s.
Visit the NFB here.
Ecofeminism meets ecosocialism
Eco-sufficiency and Global Justice: Women write political ecology
Review by Ben Courtice
Green Left Online
What material basis could women have that might make them an objectively environmentalist constituency? This theme is an important part of Ariel Salleh’s essays in her 2009 collection of women’s writing on the environment, which tries to bring together ecofeminist and ecosocialist ideas into a synthesis.
The essays examine and take the side of the third world poor, and especially of indigenous people, peasants, and the women in those communities.
Salleh distances her materialist ecofeminism from “what ancient woman-nature mythologies say — that women have a fixed, innate identity or essence, which is ‘closer to nature’ than the essence of men is”. She rejects this characterisation of ecofeminism, but also rejects the liberal feminists who see all ecofeminism as mysticism.
Her ideas are based in women’s experience in the global division of labour. “The global majority of women do labour hands-on with nature and cope with the matter/energy transformations of their own gestational bodies.”
She also points out that, as women are often poor in time as well as money, “the timing of reproductive labour tasks is slower than the speeded up pace of capitalist working time, because regenerative work is bound to preserving, not interrupting natural processes.” This echoes the analysis of agricultural labour made by Marxist ecologist Richard Lewontin.
Lewontin argued in the 2000 book, Hungry for Profit, that the persistence of small proprietors in farming even in highly industrialised economies such as the US is related to the fact that in agriculture, “the cycle of reproduction of capital cannot be shortened because it is linked to an annual growth cycle in plants, or a fixed reproductive cycle in large animals”.
Ecosocialists look to learn from the experience of indigenous, pre-industrial cultures because of their complex interaction with and understanding of their natural environment.
Socialist Alliance’s water management policy includes the statement: “The knowledge of Indigenous communities is an essential part of … developing sound proposals for water conservation.” Themes like this recur in the book.
The various essays differ significantly in their quality and usefulness. At worst, some essays are impenetrably abstract — overly concerned with debates inside academia. But there are also some very good essays such as Nalini Nayak’s “Development for some is violence for others”.
Nayak examines how neoliberal “progress” has destroyed the status and livelihood of women (in particular) in Indian fishing communities.
The essay blames what might seem to be progressive modernisation — larger boats, motor boats, net-making machines and so on. Clearly, economic justice for the poor does not result from capitalist economic development in general. This lesson can be useful for activists looking to support environmental sustainability, women’s liberation and alternative avenues of development for the world’s poor.
The main let-down of the book is the overly academic tone of much of the writing, including Salleh’s own essays. For someone who is not accustomed to reading academic texts, it can be impenetrable. In some sections, a familiarity with many other academic works referenced is necessary — and possibly a dictionary as well.
This is a pity as many of the points raised are central to current ecosocialist debates, and deserve to be explained to a broader audience.
For those willing to make the effort, there is stimulating material in this book.
Eco-sufficiency and Global Justice: Women write political ecology
Edited by Ariel Salleh
Pluto Press/Spinifex Press, 2009
Review by Ben Courtice
Green Left Online
The essays examine and take the side of the third world poor, and especially of indigenous people, peasants, and the women in those communities.
Salleh distances her materialist ecofeminism from “what ancient woman-nature mythologies say — that women have a fixed, innate identity or essence, which is ‘closer to nature’ than the essence of men is”. She rejects this characterisation of ecofeminism, but also rejects the liberal feminists who see all ecofeminism as mysticism.
Her ideas are based in women’s experience in the global division of labour. “The global majority of women do labour hands-on with nature and cope with the matter/energy transformations of their own gestational bodies.”
She also points out that, as women are often poor in time as well as money, “the timing of reproductive labour tasks is slower than the speeded up pace of capitalist working time, because regenerative work is bound to preserving, not interrupting natural processes.” This echoes the analysis of agricultural labour made by Marxist ecologist Richard Lewontin.
Lewontin argued in the 2000 book, Hungry for Profit, that the persistence of small proprietors in farming even in highly industrialised economies such as the US is related to the fact that in agriculture, “the cycle of reproduction of capital cannot be shortened because it is linked to an annual growth cycle in plants, or a fixed reproductive cycle in large animals”.
Ecosocialists look to learn from the experience of indigenous, pre-industrial cultures because of their complex interaction with and understanding of their natural environment.
Socialist Alliance’s water management policy includes the statement: “The knowledge of Indigenous communities is an essential part of … developing sound proposals for water conservation.” Themes like this recur in the book.
The various essays differ significantly in their quality and usefulness. At worst, some essays are impenetrably abstract — overly concerned with debates inside academia. But there are also some very good essays such as Nalini Nayak’s “Development for some is violence for others”.
Nayak examines how neoliberal “progress” has destroyed the status and livelihood of women (in particular) in Indian fishing communities.
The essay blames what might seem to be progressive modernisation — larger boats, motor boats, net-making machines and so on. Clearly, economic justice for the poor does not result from capitalist economic development in general. This lesson can be useful for activists looking to support environmental sustainability, women’s liberation and alternative avenues of development for the world’s poor.
The main let-down of the book is the overly academic tone of much of the writing, including Salleh’s own essays. For someone who is not accustomed to reading academic texts, it can be impenetrable. In some sections, a familiarity with many other academic works referenced is necessary — and possibly a dictionary as well.
This is a pity as many of the points raised are central to current ecosocialist debates, and deserve to be explained to a broader audience.
For those willing to make the effort, there is stimulating material in this book.
Eco-sufficiency and Global Justice: Women write political ecology
Edited by Ariel Salleh
Pluto Press/Spinifex Press, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)