PERU: Stepping Up Protection for Native Groups in Voluntary Isolation

March 27, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

Peru-small1

Women and children from a Nanti community in initial contact with Western culture in the Peruvian region of Madre de Dios. Credit: INDEPA

Milagros Salazar

LIMA, Mar 26 (IPS) – In the dense Amazon rainforest of Peru, there are five reserves inhabited by indigenous groups who have chosen to remain totally or partially isolated from the rest of society. But these areas are not officially demarcated as indigenous lands, and only one is protected with a control post.The authorities responsible for them are now attempting to reinforce protection of these vulnerable populations, ignored for years by the state.

“A reserve is an instrument to protect the rights of these communities, who have found themselves obliged to live in isolation due to a series of violations they have suffered, particularly during the rubber boom. We owe them a historical debt,” Paulo Vilca, the general director of intercultural affairs and peoples’ rights at the Vice Ministry of Intercultural Affairs, told Tierramérica*.

Throughout the late 19th century and the first half of the 20th century, the expansion of rubber tapping in the Amazon brought disease, death and virtual extermination to the rainforest’s indigenous peoples, who were forced into slave labour.

Groups living in “voluntary isolation” have chosen to avoid all contact with the rest of society in the countries where they live, for historical reasons such as the extermination described above. Other groups are categorised as living in “initial contact”: while they remain largely isolated, they engage in contact with the outside world for certain concrete reasons, such as health care.

After many years of waiting, a multi-sectoral commission in Peru recognised five reserves in August 2012. Three of them – Isconahua, Murunahua and Mashco-Piro – are in the eastern region of Ucayali. The Madre de Dios reserve is in the southeastern region of the same name, while the Kugapakori-Nahua-Nanti reserve is in the southern region of Cusco.

The latter is additionally home to the Matsiguenga and Yora peoples, but it also overlaps with the natural gas fields in Lot 88, an area under lease to the Camisea gas consortium.

All five are currently classified as “territorial reserves” but are slated to be designated as “indigenous reserves”, a category created in 2007 by Law 28.736 to provide greater protection for people living in isolation or initial contact.

In order for this reclassification to be official, the executive branch must issue a supreme decree. The Vice Ministry of Intercultural Affairs submitted the proposal in the first week of March, and it is now under study by the Presidency of the Council of Ministers.

The categorisation of these lands as indigenous reserves would mean the official demarcation of the territory needed to provide greater guarantees for these populations who face permanent ongoing threats, said Vilca.

Julio Ibáñez, an attorney with the Inter-Ethnic Association for the Development of the Peruvian Rainforest (AIDESEP), stressed the need for indigenous organisations to form part of the commission responsible for evaluating these requests, in order for the native peoples themselves to have a say in the decision.

“This would guarantee that the rights of indigenous peoples in isolation or initial contact are represented and protected by genuinely representative organisations,” Ibáñez told Tierramérica.

This commission is currently made up by representatives of the national government, regional governments and universities, but includes no indigenous delegates.

Vilca reported that his department is drafting a proposal for the inclusion of indigenous organisations in the commission.

Since becoming active again in mid-2012, the commission has had to deal with a number of pending issues, such as the evaluation of requests for the recognition of another five reserves, which date back 10 to 14 years.

Vilca is preparing a report on this matter, after receiving the files for these requests in December from the National Institute for the Development of Andean, Amazonian and Afro-Peruvian Peoples (INDEPA).

He acknowledged that the state has not paid sufficient attention to these populations, but is now trying to rectify that situation.

Of the five territorial reserves that have been recognised, only the Kugapakori-Nahua-Nanti reserve is protected with a control post.

The vice ministry has announced the signing of agreements with local governments and the National Natural Protected Areas Service to guarantee the protection of the other reserves.

In the meantime, a whole range of threats loom over them, from illegal logging to oil and gas operations.

Argentine-based Pluspetrol, which heads up the Camisea gas consortium, is seeking to expand its activities in Lot 88 into a section of the Kugapakori-Nahua-Nanti reserve – which encompasses three communities in initial contact: Santa Rosa de Serjali, Montetoni and Marankeato – and the buffer zone around Manu National Park.

In 2010, the government agency that promotes oil and gas industry investment accepted the request from Pluspetrol, which presented the terms of reference and a citizen participation plan to modify its environmental impact assessment in order to include the new activities.

In May 2012, technicians from INDEPA and Vilca’s department stated that gas exploration activities would pose a risk to the populations living in isolation.

As a result, the public participation mechanisms should only apply to the three communities in initial contact mentioned above.

Pluspetrol then asked Vilca’s agency if it should present a citizen participation plan to inform these three settlements of its activities.

The response, which came in late August, was that this would not be necessary unless the communities themselves demanded it, and that it should be carried out in coordination with the Vice Ministry, since it would be an ad hoc procedure.

The non-profit organisation Law, Environment and Natural Resources (DAR) questioned this response, since it opens up the possibility of information-sharing workshops in territories that are supposed to be protected.

Vilca replied that the mission of the Vice Ministry of Intercultural Affairs is not to promote investment, but rather “to enforce respect for the rights of the peoples.”

In addition, his team must still evaluate the modification of the environmental impact assessment for the expansion of activities in Lot 88, and in this case, its evaluation will be binding.

After Pluspetrol activities were reported in the Manu National Park buffer zone, the company stated that it would not continue with its plans in the area. But DAR and indigenous organisations believe that the matter is far from settled.

Tierramérica contacted Pluspetrol and the Department of Energy-Related Environmental Affairs for their input on the subject, but neither had responded by press time.

In the meantime, a million dollars in funding from the Inter-American Development Bank will be used this year to step up protection of indigenous reserves, reported Vilca.

* This story was originally published by Latin American newspapers that are part of the Tierramérica network.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Culture, Environment, Human Rights, Justice, Latin America, Lead, Politics Tagged With: ,

Nuclear Safety Plan Has Ukrainians Worried

March 27, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

Pavol Stracansky

KIEV, Mar 27 (IPS) – A 300 million euro loan to improve nuclear safety in the Ukraine has been attacked by environmental groups who say it will instead be used to keep ageing reactors working well beyond their planned lifespans – increasing the risks of a nuclear accident – while doing nothing to address serious issues with the country’s energy intensity.The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), which approved the loan earlier this month, has said that the money will be used to upgrade safety at nuclear plants to international standards.

But environmentalists say it will instead be used by state energy company Energoatom to keep open or restart ageing reactors and that the EBRD should be helping the Ukraine move away from nuclear power and support renewable energy projects.

Iryna Holovko of the pan-European Bankwatch NGO, which together with other environmental groups has opposed the loan, told IPS: “Energoatom and the Ukrainian government is imposing another 20 years of additional nuclear risk – because of the increased risks associated with ageing of reactors – on the people of Ukraine without developing or offering an alternative option.”

Nuclear power is key to Ukraine’s energy production. Fifteen plants around the country provide almost half of its electricity.

But while many countries in Europe have recently reaffirmed their opposition to nuclear power or abandoned or scaled back their reliance on it in the wake of the Fukushima disaster, Ukraine’s energy policy has been amended in the last two years to include new nuclear capacity and the extension of the lifespans of existing plants by, in some cases, 20 years.

Environmental groups in the Ukraine point to an accident at the Rivne nuclear power plant’s Reactor 1. Its original lifespan had expired at the end of 2010 but it was given an extension for 20 years. One month later there was an accident, although no radiation leaked.

The funding provided by the EBRD, together with a further European Commission loan under the Euratom Treaty, will support a programme including more than 80 measures addressing safety issues at plants, such as replacing equipment and improving accident management.

Environmental groups claim that Energoatom has not properly analysed the risks and safety issues related to the safe operation of nuclear units for decades beyond their original lifespans.

In particular, they argue, a reactor at the South Ukrainian nuclear power plant will be restarted again using the financing approved by the EBRD. The reactor’s lifespan has expired and it is no longer generating electricity. But Energoatom has been told its lifespan can be extended and the reactor restarted if it carries out safety upgrades.

Holovko told IPS: “It is one thing to improve the safety of nuclear reactors that still have some years of their original operating time left, but it is not OK to finance measures at facilities whose lifespans have expired and which have already stopped working and at the same time saying the loan has nothing to do with lifespan extension.”

Greenpeace and other groups such as the German NGO Urgewald have said that the EBRD, as one of the largest investors in the Ukraine and other European countries, should be spending money on decommissioning old nuclear reactors and supporting renewable energy instead.

Jutta Matysek of Greenpeace Central and Eastern Europe said: “European public money should be used to support renewable energy to help Ukraine overcome its dependence on nuclear energy and imported carbon fuel. A country which is still suffering from the terrible effects of the Chernobyl disaster will not survive another nuclear catastrophe.”

The EBRD has vigorously defended the financing. The bank says its energy policy is geared towards improving energy efficiency, but that it has a clear mandate to financing nuclear safety improvements at an operating facility.

In a statement following approval of the loan, the bank said: “Nuclear safety is a consideration of the utmost priority at any time regardless of whether a unit has just been connected to the grid or has been producing electricity for decades.”

Stressing that the bank has no mandate to force a sovereign state to rule out the use of any source of energy, it added: “Ukraine is currently reviewing its own energy strategy but has made it clear that it will continue to use nuclear power generation. Consequently, addressing the safety issues and raising standards is the EBRD’s primary concern and its due role.”

It also emphasised that Energoatom’s safety upgrade plan had taken into account recommendations from the International Atomic Energy Agency and Ukrainian and international experts.

EBRD representatives in the Ukraine who spoke to IPS stressed that the bank has invested more than 200 million euros in renewable energy projects in Ukraine to date. It has also lent tens of millions of euros to local municipalities for energy efficiency projects.

EBRD Ukraine representative Anton Usov told IPS: “The EBRD should get more recognition for its efforts to make Ukraine more energy efficient and for the renewable energy projects we have implemented in this country – something which no other institution has done.”

Environmental groups say sensitivity to nuclear safety remains particularly high because of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster.

A nationwide poll carried out in April 2011 showed that 39 percent of respondents believed Ukrainian plants were “quite dangerous” and that 25 percent said they were “extremely dangerous”. More than 69 percent said they were completely opposed to the construction of new nuclear power plants.

But Usov said that there was no widespread opposition to extending the lifespans of ageing reactors, and that the public accepted that nuclear power was essential to meeting the country’s energy needs.

He told IPS: “People in Ukraine are generally sensitive to nuclear industry-related subjects for obvious reasons….There is a broad understanding in society that the country cannot survive without nuclear power plants, at least in the short-term.”

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Energy, Environment, Europe, Health, Report Tagged With: , ,

Spain Leads the EU in GM Crops, but No One Knows Where They Are

March 27, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

TA-small2

Genetically modified corn in Spain. Credit: Friends of the Earth

Inés Benítez

MÁLAGA, Spain, Mar 27 (IPS) – Spain has more large-scale plantations of genetically modified seeds than any other country in the European Union (EU).Based on the number of trials conducted and the area of land planted, Spain accounts for 42 percent of all field trials of genetically modified crops in the EU, according to figures from the European Commission Joint Research Centre.

“Experimentation is being carried out on a wide scale with no knowledge of its consequences for human health, the environment and the future of agriculture,” environmentalist Liliane Spendeler, director of Friends of the Earth Spain, told Tierramérica*.

Her organisation has launched a campaign, “Únicos en Europa”, to inform the public about these crops.

Genetically modified organisms or GMOs, also known as transgenic organisms, are the result of a laboratory process of taking genes from one species of plant or animal and inserting them into another species in an attempt to obtain a desired trait or characteristic, such as resistance to pests or adverse weather conditions like drought.

There is no conclusive evidence that GMOs are harmless to human health and the environment, which has led the World Health Organization to recommend that they be studied on a case-by-case basis.

In 2012, more than 116,300 hectares of land in Spain were planted with MON810 corn, produced by the U.S.-based biotech transnational Monsanto. This was 20 percent more than in 2011, according to figures from the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment calculated on the basis of seed sales.

Environmentalists are critical of the fact that these figures are imprecise estimates, and that there is no public registry specifying the location of these transgenic corn fields.

When certified organic crops are contaminated by genetically modified crops, the farmers lose their organic certification, but cannot sue the owners of the transgenic crops because of the lack of a registry. They cannot demand compensation for losses and damages, either, because there is no provision for this in Spanish or European legislation, explained Spendeler.

In Spain, as in the rest of the EU, only transgenic corn is authorised. Genetically modified soy and cotton are imported from Argentina, Brazil, Canada and the United States.

“Transgenic crops produced in developing countries are filling the bellies of cows and pigs in industrialised countries,” Luís Ferreirim, the head of Greenpeace Spain’s anti-GMO campaign, told Tierramérica.

According to a report from the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA), published Feb. 20, “From 1996 to 2011, biotech crops contributed to food security, sustainability and climate change” (sic).

A record 170.3 million hectares of transgenic crops were grown globally in 2012, up six percent from 2011, the ISAAA reports. The United States is the biggest producer, followed by Brazil.

But despite the benefits touted by their promoters, such as increased productivity and efficiency and decreased pesticide use, genetically modified seeds have been banned by a significant number of European countries, noted Ferreirim.

In Europe there are 11 countries that prohibit the use of genetically modified seeds, eight of them in the EU, following the addition of Poland in 2013. And in 2012, only Portugal, Spain, Romania, Slovakia and the Czech Republic planted transgenic crops, he added.

A whopping 95 percent of these crops in the EU are concentrated in Spain (88 percent) and Portugal (seven percent).

The bulk of this transgenic corn is used to produce animal feed. “Given that the food pyramid has been turned upside down and there is an ever greater demand for animal protein, it ends up right on our plates,” said Ferreirim.

European legislation requires that food products be labelled if they contain GMOs, unless these account for 0.9 percent or less of the total ingredients.

The animal feed sold in Spain is a mixture of transgenic and conventional corn, which represents a serious violation of cattle farmers’ right to choose non-GMO feed for their livestock, said Spendeler.

Environmental activist Carmela San Segundo, a member of Ecologists in Action in the southern Spanish city of Málaga, stressed the “great power” wielded by the agrochemical corporations that sell genetically modified seeds.

Through the efforts of the non-governmental organisation she works with, a dozen towns in the province of Málaga have declared themselves Transgenic-Free Zones, a legal status recognised by the EU.

“It takes a lot of work, talking with community associations, farmers’ associations, members of local governments. It’s not a problem that people worry about much, because they know very little about it,” she told Tierramérica.

In Spain, the planting of transgenic corn began in 1998 as a means of confronting the economic consequences of insect invasions, according to the Ministry of Agriculture.

But today there are no figures on the real incidence of the European corn borer, the crop’s main insect enemy.

“Can the use of this technology be justified without concrete figures on the losses caused by pests?” asked Ferreirim.

He explained that Monsanto’s genetically modified Bt corn does away with the need to use pesticides because its flowers produce a bacterium that is toxic to these insects.

But even though there is not always a threat of insect infestation, the corn constantly releases this gene, and after harvesting, it remains in the soil, decreasing its fertility, Ferreirim said.

“It has been shown in transgenic crops in various countries that over the long term, secondary pests appear, leading to the need to use other pesticides,” he added.

In addition, GMO field trials are not subjected to any safety controls in Spain, Ferreirem stressed.

According to a survey published in 2010 by the EU, 53 percent of Spaniards were against the splicing of genes from other species into food crops, while only 27 percent were in favour.

* This story was originally published by Latin American newspapers that are part of the Tierramérica network.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Agriculture, Environment, Europe, Health, Report Tagged With: ,

Group Warns of “Natural Resources Giveaway” in Latin America

March 27, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

tailings640-629x472

Caudalosa workers clean up mining tailings in Peru’s Opamayo River. Credit: Milagros Salazar/IPS

Joe Hitchon

WASHINGTON, Mar 26 (IPS) – Researchers have unveiled new data warning that governments in Latin America are infringing on the rights of their indigenous populations in a bid to fuel development through the extraction of natural resources.The Rights and Resources Initiative (RRI), a Washington-based organisation, says it has documented a “natural resources giveaway” in Latin America, which highlights how an outdated development model is trampling on human rights and the environment throughout much of the region.[pullquote]3[/pullquote]

“Without recognition of local rights, transparency of deals and decisions, and mechanisms to ensure accountability of governments and investors, there will be a rollback of environmental, human and tenure rights of forest communities,” Omaira Bolanos, RRI’s programme director for Latin America, told IPS from Bogota.

“Foreign investors prefer countries with weakened regulations to expand their investments. So, governments, citizens, civil society and businesspeople must work together to address the risks and opportunities of advancing the economic development and prosperity of all Latin Americans.”

She added: “But this must be done without harming the human and tenure rights of rural, indigenous and Afro-descendant communities.”

A new study from RRI (available in Spanish here) finds that even while some governments in Latin America are increasingly looking to natural resources extraction to fuel their economic development, several are paying scant attention to the impact of mining, oil exploration and other activities on the environment or local landowners.

Margarita Florez, executive director at Asociación Ambiente y Sociedad, an environmental and human rights group in Colombia, analyses the impacts of the extractive industries on the collective land and forest rights of people and communities in Colombia, Peru, Guatemala and Panama.

Florez writes that the mining activities in those countries increased in intensity and range over the last two decades, particularly focusing on lands owned by indigenous and Afro-descendant communities.

“A lot of the real impacts aren’t coming to light,” Augusta Molnar, director for country and regional programmes at RRI, told IPS.

“Governments think they can dramatically expand mining or petroleum exploration in their countries because it is a small percent of the total land area and, therefore, they believe the environmental impact will be small – despite the fact that 90 to 100 percent of these areas are in the middle of forests and indigenous lands. So in fact, the impacts are quite massive.”

All four countries, for instance, reported destruction to vital water sources for indigenous communities, due to the very high water demand for mining operations.

Little oversight

In each of these four countries, foreign direct investment (FDI) was found to be focused mainly on the extractives sector. In Colombia, for example, oil and mining investment accounted for 92 percent of FDI in 2011 – around 13.2 billion dollars.

FDI also increased in these sectors in Guatemala, Peru and Panama. Indeed, the states evidently competed to attract FDI, often reducing or eliminating restrictions or regulations in order to attract companies.

In addition, the report says little consultation appears to be taking place between affected communities and governments – let alone with the private mining companies. This sets the stage for conflict and creates precedents that undermine both legal and governance issues at the national level.

“There are some companies with high standards and some companies with very poor standards,” Molnar said.

“Broadly, we found that the institutions are not in place at the state level to oversee the environment impact assessments and their implementation. There is not a broad set of standards for prior consent, and there is a prevailing assumption that a set of consultations have been carried out when in reality there is no mechanism in place for oversight.”

Opposition movements have attempted to push back, but these have been countered by government efforts to paint indigenous communities as obstacles to eagerly awaited progress.

“If you fully recognise a people’s rights, than the engagement with these peoples and decisions to go ahead with an investment make them very much in the middle of negotiations between the companies and the state,” Florez writes.

“This will require the state to be much more accountable. We know that indigenous people are very important actors in managing forests and living in harmony with forests. We also know that poverty increases if you don’t work with these local people.”

She continues, “A company cannot just collect revenues and expect the local economy is going to grow. There needs to be a balanced development.”

Need for consultation

In 2011, James Anaya, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, published a report questioning the current development model in much of Latin America. The idea that the extraction of natural resources leads to progress, Anaya stated at the time, constitutes a violation of indigenous peoples’ cultural, social, environmental and economic rights.

Florez furthers this line of inquiry. For instance, she highlights an inequitable distribution of royalties garnered from the exploitation of the region’s non-renewable natural resources, and finds that this money has failed to translate into greater well-being for local communities.

Over the weekend in Bogota, representatives from the four governments, including leaders from indigenous and Afro-descendant groups, gathered to discuss the effects of resource extraction on nearby communities. According to Molnar, both the government and indigenous representatives were happy to be able to talk face to face.

“We hope this demonstrates that the governments are at a pivot point,” she says. “Will they pursue massive resource extraction at any cost or create a detailed and regulated development plan?”

According to Melissa Blue Sky, project attorney with the Washington-based Centre for International and Environmental Law (CIEL), it is a precedent that is gaining force. A consultation law just came into force last year in Peru, and other Latin American countries are creating similar national laws.

“An increased level of dialogue and an effort to protect the rights of indigenous peoples is being seen in Latin America as more countries are beginning to implement national consultation laws,” she told IPS.

“High oil and gas prices are giving countries new incentive to extract from previously undisturbed regions where indigenous people often live. National consultation laws are giving strength to these voices.”

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Development, Environment, Featured, Latin America Tagged With: ,

Climate Rally Draws "Line in the Sand" on Canadian Pipeline

February 17, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

tar_sands-629x472

The tar sands in Alberta, Canada. Credit: howlmonteal/cc by 2.0

Stephen Leahy

UXBRIDGE, Canada, Feb 16 (IPS) – The largest climate rally in U.S. history is expected Sunday in Washington DC with the aim of pressuring President Barack Obama to reject the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline.Activists are calling Keystone "the line in the sand" regarding dangerous climate change, prompting the Sierra Club to suspended its 120-year ban on civil disobedience. Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune was arrested in front of the White House during a small protest against Keystone on Wednesday.

"The Keystone XL pipeline is part of the carbon infrastructure that will take us to dangerous levels of climate change," said Simon Donner, a climate scientist at the University of British Columbia.[pullquote]3[/pullquote]

"By itself, Keystone won’t have much of an impact on the climate, but it is not happening on its own," Donner told IPS.

Carbon emissions are increasing elsewhere, and the International Energy Agency recently warned humanity is on a dangerous path to four degrees C of warming before the end of this century. Children born today will experience this. Preventing that dire future is inconsistent with expanding tar sands production, Donner said.

A new study released this week revealed that the volume of Arctic sea ice is declining rapidly. Ice volume has fallen 80 percent since 1980, according to the latest data from European Space Agency satellite, CryoSat-2. Summers with a sea ice-free Arctic are only a few years away, scientists now agree. This will have significant and permanent impacts on weather patterns in the Northern Hemisphere.

"Keystone XL is the key to opening up the expansion of the tar sands industry," said Jim Murphy, senior counsel with the National Wildlife Federation.

"By rejecting the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, we can keep this toxic oil in the ground," Murphy said in a statement.

Keystone XL is intended to bring 700,000 to 800,000 barrels of a heavy, tar-like oil from the northern Alberta tar sands 2,400 kilometres south to the refineries on the Gulf Coast. Nearly all the resulting fuels are destined for export.

Since the seven-billion-dollar Keystone XL crosses national borders, it is up to President Obama to issue a permit declaring the pipeline serves the "national interest" in order for it to be approved.

"The only way Keystone XL could be considered in the national interest is if you equate that with profits for the oil industry," Steve Kretzman of Oil Change International previously told IPS. Oil Change is an NGO that researches the links between oil, gas, coal corporations and governments.

"It couldn’t be simpler: Either we leave at least two-thirds of the known fossil fuel reserves in the ground, or we destroy our planet as we know it," wrote Sierra Club’s Michael Brune in explaining the decision to engage in civil disobedience.

"That means rejecting the dangerous tar sands pipeline that would transport some of the dirtiest oil on the planet," said Brune.

Tar sands carbon emissions on a "well-to-tank" basis (i.e., production) result in emissions that are on average 72 to 111 percent higher than other U.S. transportation fuels, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.

Canada’s tar sands aren’t really a "carbon bomb" from a scientific perspective, says Donner. The world’s coal deposits contain many times more carbon. However, the tar sands and Keystone have symbolic importance.

"Climate change is a complicated problem. Lots of things need to be done to address it. We’re at a point where changes need to happen soon," he says.

Writing in the Daily Kos Saturday, Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins, CEO of the environmental justice group Green For All, writes, "Hurricane Katrina taught us a lesson – and Superstorm Sandy reinforced it. People living in neighborhoods with the fewest resources have a harder time escaping, surviving, and recovering from disasters.

"And they’re more vulnerable to the extreme weather climate change will bring. For example, African-Americans living in Los Angeles are more than twice as likely to die during a heat wave than other residents of the city," she says in a piece titled "Why People of Color Should Care about the Keystone Pipeline".

"To permit the pipeline would represent a heartbreaking acquiescence to climate change on the part of President Obama and our national leaders. It would be throwing our hands up helplessly in the face of one of the biggest threats our country has ever faced. That’s not the kind of leadership we voted for.

"There are certain points in history, like the Civil Rights Movement, when the consequences of inaction are so great that we have to make bold choices," Ellis-Lamkins says. "This is one of those times."

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Canada, Energy, Environment, Human Rights, Politics, Report Tagged With: , , , ,

Brazilian Ethanol in the Slow Lane to Global Market

February 17, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

sugarcane_640-629x472

Sugarcane harvesters have become a fixture in the Brazilian landscape. Credit: Mario Osava /IPS

Mario Osava

RIO DE JANEIRO, Feb 15 (IPS) – Following a promising start, Brazil’s dream of positioning ethanol in the global market on an equal standing with petroleum-based fuels is hindered by new and old challenges.Brazil’s goal of expanding ethanol sales across the world will only be attained when there are "more countries in a position to buy and supply," noted Eduardo Leão de Sousa, director of the Brazilian Sugarcane Industry Union (UNICA), an organisation that represents the country’s top sugar and ethanol producers.

Brazil and the United States produce close to 85 percent of the world’s ethanol, according to information from the International Energy Agency. Since it is produced almost exclusively for domestic consumption, international sales are still marginal.

De Sousa told IPS that the critical level of demand necessary to stimulate ethanol production is not something that emerges spontaneously and must be driven by public policies, such as regulations that require a certain volume of renewable fuel to be blended into petroleum-based transport fuels.

Growing demand is led by the United States, spurred by the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) programme that set increasing annual quotas for ethanol production through 2022, and the European Union (EU), which aims to bring the percentage of renewable fuels in transport vehicle engines up to 10 percent by 2020.

The RFS programme, created under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and further expanded in 2007, with the aim of cutting greenhouse gas emissions and reducing U.S. dependence on foreign oil, established a limit of 56.78 billion litres for annual consumption of conventional ethanol fuels, which are those produced from food crops such as corn.

As U.S. consumption is nearing that limit, the bulk of the increase towards the 2022 target of 132.5 billion will have to come from cellulosic ethanol – a biofuel from wood, grasses or the inedible parts of plants, which is new and still too costly to produce- and from "advanced" biofuels.

"Advanced" or "second generation" biofuels are those produced by sustainable feedstock, which are defined by availability of the feedstock, greenhouse gas (GHG) emission levels and biodiversity and land use impact.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency designated sugarcane ethanol as an advanced biofuel because it lowers GHG emissions by more than 50 percent as compared to gasoline, taking into account the full lifecycle of production and consumption, including the use of land to grow the crop.

This development will boost demand for ethanol produced by Brazil and other sugarcane growing countries, bringing it up to 15.14 million litres by 2022.

As for the EU, based on a directive to promote the use of energy from renewable sources (Directive 2009/28/EC) that requires that 10 percent of the energy used in transport be sourced from renewable fuels by 2020, ethanol consumption for that year is projected at 15 to 16 billion litres, half of which could be supplied from outside the bloc, according to de Sousa.

EU and U.S. imports combined, then, will equal Brazil’s current domestic market, developed over the course of almost four decades, de Sousa estimated.

But that demand is not a sure thing. The EU’s executive body, the European Commission, is considering revising its transport fuel target to impose a limit on crop-based biofuels in an effort to prevent negative impacts on food supply, while in the United States the powerful oil and corn lobbies are pressuring against the RFS, the UNICA director said.

Out to conquer emerging markets

Another huge potential market is China, but only if it adopts an ambitious programme once "a supply of diverse and permanent sources is guaranteed," de Sousa forecasted.

Many countries introduced the use of ethanol as a fuel additive in the 1990s. But there are numerous cases in which national programmes for the adoption of this biofuel were postponed or implemented on a trial basis. For example, after establishing a voluntary three percent biofuel blend in 2003, Japan is still reluctant to make it mandatory.

On the supply side, efforts are also "timid," although sugarcane ethanol is being produced in other South American countries and in Central America and Africa, as well as in Southeast Asia, where UNICA sees "great potential."

Mexico has extensive agricultural land but fragmented into tiny private plots that hinder large-scale production. Something similar occurs in India, which already has a large cane production to supply sugar for its 1.2 billion people, de Sousa said.

In Africa, the lack of infrastructure and labour trained for ethanol production are an obstacle to this activity. In Angola and Mozambique, where Brazilian companies are implementing sugar projects, landholding is also an issue, but for a different reason. As all land is state-owned, producers cannot purchase land and must depend on government concessions.

This eliminates land purchase costs but drives away investors who see property as a guarantee.

"The key is having clear rules and streamlining implementation," said Felipe Cruz, investment director at Angola’s Capanda Agroindustrial Pole, an initiative of the Brazilian company Odebrecht, which is building the Angolan Bioenergy Company (Biocom) set to begin production this year.

"The focus is on sugar," António Carlos de Carvalho, Biocom manager and financial director, said. Angola, which was self-sufficient in that food crop prior to independence in 1975, lost its entire sugarcane industry during its 27-year-long civil war. Now it is trying to rebuild it with projects across the country.

In addition to 260,000 tons of sugar, Biocom plans to produce 30 million litres of ethanol, which will be used to replace petroleum-based additives.

Blazing a winding trail

As a pioneer in the use of ethanol fuel and a major sugarcane producer, Brazil has developed technology and companies in the field that have made it possible for the country to pursue ethanol projects in every continent.

This strategy was launched as a response to rising international oil prices in the mid 1970s, when Brazil imported 80 percent of the fuel it consumed.

A decade later, almost all new vehicles manufactured in Brazil were running exclusively on ethanol, while the rest of the country’s vehicle fleet had switched to gasoline blended with an increasing percentage of biofuel. Today, vehicles run on a blend that ranges from 18 to 25 percent.

This initial success was followed by a crisis produced by a drop in oil prices. But in the 1990s, amid growing environmental concerns, Brazilian ethanol emerged as a effective way of reducing pollution.

Also at this time, the U.S. began producing and using flexible-fuel vehicles (or flex vehicles), which run on any blend of up to 85 percent ethanol. In Brazil, an improved version of flex vehicles with no limit to the percentage of ethanol triggered a new biofuel boom in 2003.

But without the expected climate agreements and with environmental concerns clouded by the more pressing economic crisis, global interest in ethanol has waned. Brazilian efforts to create an international market for this product, led by one of ethanol’s champions, former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (2003-2011), are not yielding the expected results.

While the strong support from the U.S. -the world’s largest producer of ethanol since 2006-means that Brazil is no longer alone in its efforts, it has exacerbated critics who argue that diverting huge volumes of corn to ethanol production will raise food prices.

Another cause for concern is the potential development of electric and hydrogen vehicles.

De Sousa is confident that "cellulosic ethanol will alter this equation," expanding biofuel production and increasing its sustainability, while all the other alternatives will only be competitive in the long term.

However, no alternative should be ruled out. "Every region will find the solution that is most suitable" for its conditions, he concluded.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Agriculture, Development, Energy, Environment, Latin America, Report Tagged With: ,

Q&A: Venerable Sierra Club Gets Radical on Tar Sands

February 17, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

brune

Michael Brune. Courtesy of Sierra Club.

George Gao

NEW YORK, Feb 15 (IPS) – The term “civil disobedience” takes its roots from an 1849 essay by U.S. poet, philosopher and environmentalist, Henry David Thoreau, originally entitled “Resistance to Civil Government”.Civil disobedience is often used as a non-violent tool of protest against widespread injustices, such as in the American Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s.

On the morning of Feb. 13, prominent activists gathered in front of the White House in Washington, DC, and participated in an act of civil disobedience, to protest the idea behind the Keystone XL Pipeline.

This pipeline would run from Alberta, Canada all the way across the United States, to its coastline in the Gulf of Mexico. It would carry about a million barrels of crude oil each day, and according to protestors and scientists, contribute dangerously to climate change.[pullquote]3[/pullquote]

The protestors – who include NASA climate scientist James Hansen, poet Bob Haas and lawyer Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., among others – were arrested after blocking a main thoroughfare in front of the White House and refusing to move.

Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, was among the participants in this event. It was his organisation’s first act of civil disobedience in its 120-year old history, and the first time its executive director was arrested.

Brune spoke with IPS correspondent George Gao about his experience at the protest, as well as the environmental significance of the Keystone XL Pipeline. Excerpts from the interview follow.

Q: Can you describe what unfolded on the morning of Feb. 13 outside of the White House?

A: We organised about 50 community leaders from across the country who have been resisting various aspects of both the tar sands and other destructive projects in civil disobedience outside of the White House.

The point of this was to call on President (Barack) Obama to make sure that he’s doing everything within his power to turn away from extreme energy sources, and to embrace clean energy as much as he can.

Q: What specifically makes the tar sands’ oil deposits in Alberta, Canada – and the Keystone XL Pipeline that would transport these deposits – unique and deserved of such attention, as compared to other pipelines?

A: The tar sands is the most carbon intensive fuel source on the planet. It’s hard to access and takes a lot of energy to extract this thick gooey oil out of the ground. So we are deeply concerned that by expanding production of the tar sands, it will make it almost impossible to stop runaway climate change.

We have been advocating that instead of building a massive pipeline that would take almost a million barrels of oil per day, from Canada down into the U.S., that we should investing that same money, seven billion dollars worth, in clean energy instead – solar, and wind and energy efficiency and advanced energy technologies.

So we were fighting this both because the pipeline itself was highly destructive, but also because it’s a symbol of the kind of investments that we need to turn away from as a society.

Q: Proponents of the pipeline argue that this will create easy jobs for a slumping economy – ready jobs that the U.S. know how to allocate. Is this a misperception?

A: We have to be honest in this debate: there are jobs in installing a pipeline, and for many people those are important jobs. Any energy investments create jobs. If you create a coal plant, that will put people to work, if you create a pipeline, that will put other people to work.

But if we’re going to be honest about that, we should also be honest about the big picture, which is that we can produce more jobs – we have produced more jobs in clean energy than with dirty fuels.

There are at least three times more jobs that come from solar and wind than for an equivalent amount of gas or coal or oil. So if we care about climate change, of course you want to move to clean energy. If you care about the economy and producing jobs, you should probably move to clean energy as well.

The folks who are the most defensive and resistant towards a clean energy transition are the ones who are profiting from our dependence on fossil fuels.

Q: Does the pipeline run through any environmentally sensitive areas or protected lands in the United States?

A: It runs through Ogallala Aquifer in Nebraska, which is one of the most important drinking water supplies in the country. It also runs through people’s farms and ranches, many of whom have been farming and ranching in those areas for generations.

I was next to a couple of ranchers yesterday from Nebraska. They don’t want any part of a dirty oil pipeline running through their farm. They don’t feel as though companies like TransCanada and others have any right to take their property, risk their water supply – all for a substance that will pollute our air and pollute our atmosphere.

Q: What executive powers does U.S. President Barack Obama wield over this situation?

A: An enormous amount. The president can reject this pipeline outright. The State Department is currently reviewing the proposal, will issue a recommendation – or what’s known as a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement – and then it is the president’s decision about whether the pipeline should be built or not.

One person gets to decide. That’s why we were out in front of the White House.

Q: Do you see this decision as a significant moment that sets the tone for future climate change policies in the U.S.?

A: Absolutely. We’re having the largest rally in U.S. history on climate change in the National Mall this Sunday, and it’s coming at a time where there are several important decisions that the president will make: about mountain top removal, about fracking across the country, about drilling in the arctic, whether or not to build a deadly and destructive pipeline.

What we’re seeing is a resurgence of committed, passionate Americans who are willing to advocate and fight for clean energy, and it’s really inspiring to be a part of.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Americas, Energy, Environment, Health, Interview, Politics Tagged With: ,

Can Leak Detection End the Pipeline Impasse? Interview with Adrian Banica

February 17, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy

By James Stafford of Oilprice.com

Pipelines used to be things that were just built without blinking. It is said that there are enough pipelines now in the US to encircle the Earth 25 times with enough left over to also tie a bow around it. Today, getting a pipeline built is not so easy – there are too many environmental concerns and the industry has become highly polarized. But here’s one thing that could bring everyone together: pipeline safety technology. And it’s something we all want, especially for those who live along the thousands of miles of aging pipeline routes that carry hazardous liquids.

Spawned by research that started in space, remote-sensing technology designed to detect dangerous leaks in pipelines has the potential to provide the neutral ground for decisions to be made and consensus to be formed. The clincher: This technology is not only affordable -it saves money and could eventually save the industry.

In an exclusive interview with Oilprice.com, Adrian Banica, founder and CEO of Synodon – the forerunner in leak detection systems – discusses:

• How a technology that started in space has the potential to quell intensifying protests

• Why Keystone XL will eventually be a reality – sooner rather than later

• How remote sensing technology can fingerprint pipeline leaks

• How remote sensing technology can find the little leaks before they become big leaks—at no extra cost

• Why North America’s new pipelines aren’t the problem and why the focus should be on aging pipelines that are going to experience a lot more leaks

• How this technology could bring the industry and environmentalists together

• How external leak detection can save lives in high-risk areas

Interview with James Stafford of Oilprice.com

James Stafford: Now that pipelines are the hottest topic on the oil and gas scene and have found themselves on the frontline of conflict between environmentalists and the industry, high-tech leak detection systems such as Synodon’s remote sensing technology seem to be offering a way out of the chaos. Can you put this into perspective for us?

Adrian Banica: Yes. In North America alone, there are upwards of a million kilometers of transmission pipelines – and this does not even count the gathering and distribution pipelines. What we offer is attractive to both sides in this conflict: environmentalists want it and the industry can afford it.

Methods for inspecting pipelines have existed for many decades. What we’re providing is a better way of doing it. Synodon’s technology offers an accurate and precise method of oil and gas leak detection. This technology detects small leaks before they become big leaks.

James Stafford: In layman’s terms, how does it work?

Adrian Banica: It is relatively simple. Synodon has developed a remote sensing technology that can measure very small ground level concentrations of escaped gas from an aircraft flying overhead. This "realSens" technology is mounted on a helicopter and piloted by GPS over a pipeline.

Think of this gas sensor as a big infrared camera that is particularly adept at detecting very, very small color changes in the infrared spectrum. The color changes that we detect are caused by various gasses that the instrument looks at. Every gas in nature absorbs and colors the infrared light that passes through it in a very specific way. From the shade of the color, we can also infer how much methane or ethane we can see with our instruments. In effect, it’s like a color fingerprint of the gas.

James Stafford: Can you give us a sense of how this technology has evolved into what it is today—essentially the potential tool for bringing environmentalists and industry leaders together over the pipeline issue?

Adrian Banica: Yes. It started in space. Back in the 1990s, I was aware of technology being developed for various space programs, including Canada’s and NASA’s. I was looking for technologies that could solve oil and gas problems, but that were also novel, unique. That is how the whole idea started: It was matching a technology that the Canadian Space Agency funded to develop an instrument that measured carbon monoxide and methane from orbit.

So the idea then was if one can detect methane from space, why couldn’t we adapt that technology to detect methane by flying it on a plane? In 2000, I founded Synodon in order to monetize and commercialize this.

James Stafford: How effective are automated leak detection systems?

Adrian Banica: They are typically only able to detect high level leaks above 1% of the pipeline flow. They measure the volume of the product that passes a sensor (flow measurements) and the pressure in the pipeline–if there is a leak the pressure will be lower downstream from it, among other things. However, as a recent report from the Department of Transportation in the US points out, these systems only detect a leak at best about 40% of the time, irrespective of how big a leak is.

It is also important to differentiate between catastrophic leaks and small leaks. For catastrophic leaks, most pipelines use these flow meters which operate 24/7. But smaller leaks can only be detected by performing an above-ground survey either by foot patrol, vehicle or aircraft. The predominant technologies used would be sampling gas sensors, thermal cameras, laser detection or our remote sensing system.

James Stafford: So this remote sensing technology uses a sort of "fingerprinting" to detect leaks, but we understand that it has much more to offer the industry …

Adrian Banica: Yes. The core offering is the technology we developed for natural gas and liquid hydrocarbon leak detection, but there is a basket of services designed to reduce the overall costs for our clients. During our leak detection surveys, we collect a lot of different types of data such as visual images, thermal images and very, very accurate GPS information. We’ve repackaged all those data sets into new value-added products. We can provide these extra services without incurring additional costs.

For instance, we could offer some of those services for new construction, in which case it would speed up the process of getting all the information required for the necessary regulatory filings.

The most important thing, as I mentioned earlier, is trying to find small leaks before they become large leaks. All our services and all the data we provide are geared towards preventative maintenance. We sought to add services beyond leak protection because all pipeline operators still need to get their other data sets from somewhere. We are consolidating everything they need in a very cost effective and efficient manner.

James Stafford: A late-2012 study on leak detection by the U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) has brought this subject to the forefront. Dr. David Shaw, one of the report’s authors, says that pipeline leaks, ruptures, and spill are "systematically causing more and more property damage…in bad years you have $5 billion in damages due to pipeline-related accidents". The logic of the study is that pipleline operators could be spending 10 times more on leak detection given what kind of damages they are being awarded now.

Adrian Banica: Yes, the study makes the most valid point here, and that is that leak detection systems represent a bottom line savings, not an expense. For instance, Dr. Shaw has pointed out that pipeline companies would likely be justified in spending $10 million per year for every 400 miles of pipelines because they are already spending more than that on public property damage.

We have demonstrated that we can detect a leak that is less than 1 liter/min or 380 gallons/day. If our technology was deployed every 30 days and the leak were to happen in the middle of this period (on average), the total spill would be 5,700 gallons (380×15 days), which is 50 times smaller than the standard technology daily leak rate. That’s a huge difference.

Another difference is that pipeline operators pay around $12 per hour to have personnel walk the pipeline, and they can only catch leaks that are close enough for them to see.

James Stafford: Could leak detection systems also save lives?

Adrian Banica: Yes. The PHMSA study points out that 44% of these old hazardous liquid pipelines are in High Consequence Areas (HCAs)—which means that peoples’ lives are at risk if they blow up. We’re talking about 44% of over 170,000 miles of these pipelines. On a public platform, this alone should lend a new urgency to the leak detection debate. The point is that remote—or external—sensors can head off a dangerous leak faster than an internal system.

The challenge then is to convince pipeline operators to adopt external technologies that actually detect leaks rather than relying on the inconsistencies of visual detection, which sooner or later would see the pools of oil, but it might be a while.

James Stafford: Is the market ready for this technology?

Adrian Banica: The market is ready, but not necessarily because of leak detection—it’s the overall basket we discussed earlier.

There is a tremendous need in the industry for remote leak detection. But we had to account for budget constraints within our potential clients. We think we’ve developed a technology that’s very capable of providing the information our customers are looking for and doing so at a competitive price they are willing to pay.

We’ve been operating on the North American market for the last 2.5 years. It’s a very large market that has lately been in the eye of the media and the environmentalists. We’re talking about over 55 companies in Canada and almost 700 pipeline operators in the US, where some 100 companies operate or control roughly 80% of the pipeline infrastructure. It is also a regulated market, and regulators require operators to perform some level of leak detection surveys.

James Stafford: Will Keystone XL—or the San Bruno pipeline explosion—have any notable impact on the regulatory environment or the market for remote sensing technology?

Adrian Banica: Personally I don’t think that either of these will impact the leak detection practices in the industry. Rather, the driver will be the aging pipelines which will continue to have incidents and spills which the public will not accept.

James Stafford: And how is this playing out on the regulatory scene?

Adrian Banica: Congress passed a new law a year ago on this topic. The US regulators have yet to act on new regulations based on this law, but the trend is indeed there. Pipeline companies are concerned about potential upcoming new regulations and are working with the regulators to try and come up with proactive solutions and preempt their moves. There are a lot of discussions going on in the US on this topic right now and the regulator has proposed a set of new rules which are out for comment and discussion in the industry. It is a slow and drawn out process.

James Stafford: Everyone is waiting for the Obama administration to make a decision on Keystone, and while most analysts seem to think it will be given the final green light, the protest movement shows no sign of letting up. How do you see this playing out?

Adrian Banica: With the governor of Nebraska now approving it, I think the administration has no choice and no excuses for not approving it.

James Stafford: Would regulations governing pipeline safety actually boost support for Keystone XL?

Adrian Banica: Personally, I don’t think so. The most vocal opposition for Keystone comes from the side of the environmental movement that does not want to see the pipelines build in order to decrease our overall dependence on oil rather than their concern for spills. So it is a philosophical position based on decreasing CO2 emissions rather than one based on spills in the environment which will not be appeased by regulations.

James Stafford: What about any potential regulatory protection leak detection systems could offer pipeline companies?

Adrian Banica: The benefit to our customers is that they can demonstrate due diligence and that they have employed the best techniques available to ensure pipeline integrity. They will be covered if there is any court action or regulatory action. The value of our data in case something does happen could be quite substantial.

There may be small differences in the regulations with the US being somewhat stricter and tighter than the Canadian regulations. So there are a few more incentives for US based customers to use our service.

James Stafford: Protests continue over the Enbridge pipeline in Vancouver, for instance. How could this play out. Could big pipeline players like Enbridge be able to embrace something like your technology to quell some of those protests?

Adrian Banica: This is a good case in point. Yes they absolutely could, and should. I’m very firm on that answer and I think they are looking at it. Enbridge is a customer of ours already in the United States and they’re very aware of what we offer and do.

James Stafford: So these are early days for commercial viability?

Adrian Banica: These are very early days, and we have just turned the corner from a science concept into something that is commercially realizable. We spent 2011 and 2012 working very hard to penetrate the industry and to convince clients that this is not a science project anymore—this is a genuine commercially viable technology. We are now starting to see the adoption of our technology and services. So I believe we are at the tipping point and by no means do I think that shareholders have missed the boat.

James Stafford: Adrian, thank you for your time. This has been a very interesting discussion and the topic is one we will be following closely over the coming months. Hopefully we will get a chance to talk later in the year to see if any of the developments discussed have come to pass.

Adrian Banica: Absolutely, I’d be delighted to catch up later in the year.

Source: http://oilprice.com/Interviews/Can-Leak-Detection-End-the-Pipeline-Impasse-Interview-with-Adrian-Banica.html

This article should not be republished or redistributed without the permission of the original author or copyright holder.


Filed Under: Energy, Environment, Interview Tagged With: , ,

Escaping to Ecovillages in Argentina

February 17, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

8033205879_6099bf23a9_z-615x472

Ecovillages, where people grow their own produce and live sustainably with nature, are mushrooming across Argentina. Credit: Natalia Ruiz Díaz/IPS

By Marcela Valente

BUENOS AIRES, Feb 14 (IPS) – Almost imperceptibly, sustainable settlements that combine community living with the preservation of natural resources have mushroomed across Argentina as an alternative to rampant consumerism.Ecovillages, where people grow their own produce in community gardens and live sustainably in close contact with nature, are a growing trend in the provinces of Buenos Aires, Santa Fe and Misiones (east and northeast), Córdoba (centre-north), Catamarca (northwest), San Luis (west), Río Negro (south), and even in the capital city of Buenos Aires.

Some of these initiatives — which operate as living laboratories — have sprung from successful family projects that planted the seed of an eco-friendly community. Others started out as an idea conceived by a group of friends who share a common worldview.

"It’s sort of like regaining your freedom," said Tania Giuliani, a biologist with a Master’s degree in sustainable development who is participating in the establishment of a new ecovillage on an island in the district of El Tigre, on the last stretch of the Paraná Delta, in northeastern Buenos Aires.

[pullquote]3[/pullquote]Giuliani has not given up her teaching position in Buenos Aires but, even though the project is still in the early stages, she left her apartment in the city and moved to the island so she can work on her house.

The project is called ‘i-tekoa’ (which means "water village" in Guarani) and in addition to Giuliani it involves seven other friends who decided to embrace this alternative way of life. A total of eight houses will be built using natural materials found on the land and based on designs in harmony with the marshland environment.

The group also to plans to erect a community centre to hold art, gardening and permaculture workshops.

Permaculture — a contraction of "permanent agriculture" or "permanent culture" — originated in the 1970s in Australia and "involves designing sustainable development models where people can live in harmony with nature", Carlos Straub told Tierramérica.

Straub was among the first to introduce permaculture in Argentina back in the 1990s, along with the founders of Gaia, the first ecovillage in the country, which has operated since 1996 in the Navarro district of the province of Buenos Aires.

Gaia consists of cottages built with natural materials and it houses the Argentine Institute of Permaculture, which offers training workshops for anyone interested in replicating this experience.

Workshop participants are taught the basics of organic cooking, eco-farming, seed production, natural building techniques, renewable energy and alternatives for sustainable sanitation and community living.

Gaia is part of the Global Ecovillage Network (GEN) that connects thousands of similar initiatives.

Straub is currently the head of Cidep (Centro de Investigación, Desarrollo y Enseñanza de la Permacultura), a permaculture research and teaching centre, located on a small farm near El Bolsón, in the southwest province of Río Negro, which has offered workshops since 2004.

Twenty families are establishing a new ecovillage next to Cidep’s facilities, which provide temporary shelter for eight members of the project while they build their houses.

Straub also teaches courses in different communities in the Patagonia region, both in Argentina and Chile.

"There’s a very large movement of people migrating away from cities and looking to purchase land with others for initiatives like this," he said.

Before starting the i-tekoa project, Giuliani lived in an ecovillage in New Zealand. For her, capitalism imposes an individualistic, consumerist and anti-natural way of life that people are increasingly turning away from.

"People live solitary and materialistic lives, working all day, coming home to an apartment and buying chemical-laden foods," she told Tierramérica.

She joined a group of friends who were as unhappy as she was with their way of life and bought a plot of land where they are now building their houses and a community centre. The buildings are being constructed without filling or drying the plot, which is marshland, so as to preserve the natural purification role played by wetlands.

Non-native trees are being cut down and their wood used to build the houses. Native species will be planted in their place. Project participants are still debating whether to use dry toilets or biodigesters as a sewage treatment solution.

"Living solely off the land seems a bit idealistic. Our goal is to live off what we produce in our gardens and (the money we raise in) the centre’s workshops, and gradually, if we can, we’ll give up our jobs in the city," Giuliani said.

According to Straub, ecovillages are multiplying as a reaction against a way of living that is exhausted. "People want a simpler life that will allow them to fulfil old dreams without having to wait until they retire," he said.

"It’s not about going back to primitive times or the Stone Age; it’s about recovering the capacity to make our own decisions. Ecovillages may not be the solution for everyone, but the project helps bring back a more humane way of looking at life," he added.

The idea is to "change our perspective. The miracle has to occur within us, and if that happens it doesn’t matter whether you live in an ecovillage or in the middle of the city, what matters is that your life is not governed by the system," Straub said.

Straub himself lives 15 kilometres from Cidep, in El Bolsón, and is not sure he wants to live in an ecovillage. But he does believe he can play a role in the process as seed producer.

Most importantly, he says, more and more people are choosing to go down this road. "When I started in Gaia there was only 15 or 20 of us, but at an event I attended recently there were 500 other people who had joined this experience."

*This article was originally published on Feb. 9 by the Latin American network of newspapers Tierramérica.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Development, Environment, Latin America, Report Tagged With: , ,

Climate Change Threatens Caribbean Coral Reefs

February 17, 2013 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

Peter Richards

PORT OF SPAIN, Trinidad, Feb 14 (IPS) – Scientists and researchers are working together in a new initiative to collect data that will help determine the effects of climate change on coral in the Caribbean Sea."We want to know how climate change will impact our corals. So we will measure variables that would impact corals due to climate change," said Mark Bynoe, senior research economist at the Belize-based Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (CCCCC).

Bynoe told IPS that the idea behind the project is to be able to able to monitor parameters that can affect corals from a climatological standpoint, such as increased acidification, sea temperature, and water quality.

The CCCCC has awarded the Florida-based global company, YSI Integrated Systems and Services, a contract for five marine monitoring buoys that will collect high-quality data for researchers studying climate change in the Caribbean Sea.

"Our waters are the bread basket for the region, and we must be diligent in protecting and sustaining them," Kenrick Leslie, executive director of the CCCCC, said.

The CCCCC has said that climate change is already profoundly affecting the region’s biological and socioeconomic systems. Belize, for example, has substantial natural capital along its cost, including the largest coral reef ecosystem in the Americas, mangrove areas, tropic forests and inland wetlands. The coral reefs are extremely important economically and environmentally.

But since the 1970s, Belize’s coral reefs have felt the impact of a warmer sea. "Live coral cover on shallow patch reefs has decreased from 80 percent in 1971 to 20 percent in 1996, with a further decline from the 20 percent in 1996 to 13 percent in 1999," the CCCCC noted.

A critical resource

In an address to graduating students of the University of Belize late last month, Leslie described how climate change has affected the country. "We have seen serious degradation in our coral reef system due to warmer sea temperatures, mechanical damage from tropical cyclones, and sedimentation caused by more frequent and intense flooding," he said.

"These conditions can only be further exacerbated by the further warming of the atmosphere and oceans," he said, adding that the private sector "would be advised to start thinking about their assets and how climate change may impact them".

Coral reefs also play an extremely important role in the Caribbean tourism economy, as well as in food production and food security, but they have been adversely affected by rising sea temperatures and pollution.

"There are threats from land based sources, from agrochemicals, pollutants from the tourism sector, threats from the fishing industry where guys moor the boats and drop them on corals as well as the cruise ships. There are also threats from nature," Bynoe added.

Monitoring environmental conditions in the Caribbean will help researchers track the health of the reefs. This monitoring mirrors similar systems already installed at key reef sites in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. The data gathered will help develop climate models and ecological forecasting for coral reefs.

The CCCCC said that the customized buoys will measure, record, and transmit in real-time meteorological and water quality data as the key components of five Coral Reef Early Warning Systems (CREWS). The data gathered will be used by researchers, scientists and non-governmental organisations.

The CCCCC will work with the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and YSI to install and operate this network beginning in the spring of 2013.

Regional impact

"The Caribbean is a closed basin, so what happens in Trinidad and Tobago could affect what happens in Cuba," said Bynoe. "The five stations that we are installing is a contribution to a regional network. These five we believe will capture the variability within the basin. We are basically covering the area necessary…. areas with the most significant corals."

At the Twelvth International Coral Reef Symposium in Cairns, Australia last year, researchers noted that fast-blooming seaweed is the main reason why the Caribbean’s coral reefs take longer to recover from stress than Australia’s Great Barrier Reef in Australia and those in the Indo-Pacific region.

"Indo-Pacific reefs have less seaweed than the Caribbean Sea," explained George Roff of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies in Australia, in the journal Trends in Ecology and Evolution. The ARC is a leading research centre on coral reefs. One of its studies includes survey data from the Indo-Pacific and Caribbean reefs from 1965 to 2010.

"Many of the doom and gloom stories have emanated from the Caribbean, which has deteriorated rapidly in the last 30 years," said Peter Mumby, professor at the University of Queensland, Australia. "We now appreciate that the Indo-Pacific and Caribbean are far more different than we thought."

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2013.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Americas, Environment, Report Tagged With: ,
«Older Posts