Our ecologically illiterate presidential candidates

Yansen, The Jakarta Post 26 Jun 09;

Concerns have been expressed regarding the presidential candidates' lack of consideration of environmental topics.

An editorial in the June 22 The Jakarta Post lamented that in the first presidential debate, the candidates' responses to environmental problems, in this case the Lapindo mudflow tragedy, were disappointing. Economic issues have dominated the campaign season.

This is understandable, as economic matters play a very substantial role in people's lives. However, without paying attention to ecological sustainability, the hope for long-term economic prosperity can only be a dream.

But is this only their fault? I would argue not. As professional politicians, the candidates are fully aware of political market behaviour.

They understand their dependency on voters. Voters are their consumers, as well as "the king", even though this special position is only recognized during the election time.

Because those leaders fully realize what their constituents want, environmental issues are not a major concern. They know that we citizens and voters are ecologically illiterate.

Environmental subjects are not "sexy" or marketable. As a result, the importance of the sustainability as a foundation for natural resource-based economics is not a significant issue.

We could again look at, for example, the mudflow tragedy. The root of this problem was actually that the government failed to properly manage development.

It is true that Lapindo caused the problem, but the government failed to monitor their mining activities.

However, the government's inability to deal with this significant environmental problem is not affecting the Yudhoyono administration's popularity, as indicated by polls and surveys. Most of us have already forgotten the problem.

It would be worthwhile to rethink our understanding and commitment as citizens to the principles of ecological sustainability. The government's lack of concern for environmental issues reflects our lack of awareness of ecological consequences.

Not surprisingly, ecological disasters keep occurring in this beautiful country. Consequently, development in this nation will not reach the sustainable ideal.

In truth, the ability to create sustainable development and live harmoniously with nature is technically possible.

If we try to dig deeper, the lack of ecological awareness among the people can be attributed to the inability of our education system to instill environmental sensitivity. In a report by Kompas (May 29), it was revealed that many teachers could not answer many questions about environmental problems. But of course it is not totally those teachers' fault.

Our education system seems unable to develop healthy minds and souls and fostering environmental compassion is a symptom of this problem.

A good education, according to David Orr in his essay in Ecological Literacy (2005), is not simply a mastery of a subject matter, but also a cultivation of values. Education, he said, "has to deal with the timeless question of how we are to live."

It is sad then, that when we look at our schools we see that our education focuses only on quantitative achievements. There is no appreciation given to other achievers, such as environmentally friendly students.

This paradigm is not only present in schools, but is also implanted in parent's minds. No wonder our leaders are concerned only with their quantitative popularity. The political process is an educational process. Its place as a field for the cultivation of values has never been seriously considered.

It was not an exaggeration when Orr insisted that "the ecological crisis is in every way a crisis of education."

Therefore, now is the right time to assess the capacity of our education system to raise ecologically literate citizens.

If environmental education is offered to the stakeholders, they often argue that our school curriculum is full. But environmental education could be integrated to many subjects.

The main problem is actually that one important aspect of education has been neglected: education should be enjoyable. The rigid quantitative restraints of study have rendered schools unenjoyable for students.

Therefore, education innovations must be made. In Laskar Pelangi (Rainbow Soldier) we saw how . Muslimah, the teacher, took her students to the beach for a science class. Michael Stone, in another essay, "Ecological literacy" (2005), told a similar story about a STRAW (Students and Teachers Restoring a Watershed) project.

In this project, students of a local Marin County (USA) school reintroduced freshwater shrimp to a creek from which it had disappeared. From this project, students learned many things. They studied river ecology as well as zoology and botany. They even started to understand political science, as they had to liaise with local farmers in order to get support for the project. This was fun, but the students also learned many subjects in one project.

If we would like to raise people's understanding of the threats of the ecological crisis, we have to begin with education, from elementary to tertiary.

Environmental education means not just creating an ecologically literate society but also breeding leaders with an environmental vision. Maybe then environmentally sustainable development and a harmoniously existence with nature can become a reality.

The writer is a lecturer on ecology at the Department of Forestry, University of Bengkulu and an Australian Leadership Award fellow


Read more!

Mangroves fast disappearing in Malaysia

R.S. Kamini, New Straits Times 26 Jun 09;

KLANG: The increase in commercial use and unsustainable logging have left the Telok Gedong Mangrove Forest Reserve bereft of certain mangrove species.
Despite dangers to human settlements posed by tsunami and constant flooding, the species known as Asiatic mangrove (Rhizophora mucronata) has been disappearing fast due to its high commercial value.

Realising the environmental damage that could occur as a result of unsustainable logging, the Global Environment Centre has taken the initiative to rehabilitate the mangrove reserve by replanting 3,000 Asiatic mangrove trees to replace the ones that were harvested for commercial use.

GEC's Forest and Wetland Conservation Programme coordinator Suzana Mohkeri said the tree-planting was extremely crucial to protect the coastal area from unsustainable logging.

She said the Telok Gedong area was wiped clean of the particular mangrove species (Asiatic mangrove) for commercial use, leaving the area with just one of two types of tree species.
Besides its medicinal properties, the Asiatic mangrove is commercially popular as its parts can be used to make construction materials, including house frames, pilings and poles, light wine, tannins, hair dye, paper and rayon productions.

"When a species is singled out, it dominates the area and projects low biodiversity. Replanting the Asiatic mangrove enriches the biodiversity and retention power in the area," she said.

Guided by the Forestry Department, GEC has set out on a mangrove rehabilitation programme which is part of its coastal greenbelt initiative after the 2004 tsunami disaster.

Mangrove reserves act as a natural buffer for tsunamis and heavy storm besides enhancing fisheries and the natural vegetation process.

"Some trees act as mudtraps, others stabilise the soil so you need a diversified range of species in one mangrove reserve," she said.

The tree-planting event was officiated by Iris Corporation Berhad chairman Tan Sri Razali Ismail and was attended by more than 200 people including college students and villagers from the area.

Iris Corporation and United Kingdom-based Plant A Tree Today Foundation had sponsored 1,000 trees each.


Read more!

Whales and Indonesian coastal communities

Jakarta Post 26 Jun 09;

As a whale researcher who has been working on Savu Sea sperm and blue whales since 2002, I would like to make it clear that the Savu Sea Marine National Park (MNP) is not about stopping traditional sperm whaling.

In fact, as we have said many times in various official meetings, I regard the Lamalera community as part of this productive seascape, and a village of unique cultural heritage. It's important to note that the Savu Sea NMP is to be of a multi-purpose nature and, as such, can accommodate all stakeholders within it, including traditional sea hunters. As the article correctly points out there are certain features within adat (traditional) law which have strong conservation values.

When combined and preserved without modernization, these adat laws ensure a level of "traditional catch per unit effort" or T-CPUE. These laws can form the basis of whale management in these waters, with a major input from the Lamalera community itself.

The Lamalera community has indeed much to benefit from the NMP as it will address key threats to whales such as net entanglements, shipping and pollution, as well as issues of major concern to the community like: a) coastal mining in Lembata, including plans to dump massive volumes of waste in the nearby sea and b) commercial long-line fleets encroaching on their traditional hunting grounds.

The village elders have informed me of these issues on many occasions over the years. Marine Protected Areas are widely used around the world to deal with such conflicts and allow for the traditional use of marine mammals (for example, indigenous Australians can hunt certain numbers of sea turtles and dugong within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park).

As such it is unfortunate there is still a lot of misunderstanding in the media and other parties on the goals of this Marine National Park and how it can benefit local communities, including the Lamalera.

The over-aching principle here is sustainability, and as I also hear from the Lamaler, this is of common interest: No more whales, no more traditional whaling culture. In my view the Savu Sea National Marine Park will help to avoid this by ensuring healthy, productive seas, on which both the whales and coastal communities depend for their livelihoods and future.

Banjamin Kahn

Lembata, East Nusa Tenggara


Read more!

Uphill battle to save the orang utan

Bruce Gale, Straits Times 26 Jun 09;

PRESIDENT Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono told the World Climate Change Conference in Bali in December 2007: 'The key understanding is to save the orang utan. For that, we must save the forest and by that, we are doing our part to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.'

It was an important speech, ending years of official hypocrisy on the subject. Decades of rampant deforestation - the result of rising demand for timber, pulp and palm oil plantations - had seriously damaged Indonesia's international reputation.

And while policymakers dithered and corrupt officials enriched themselves by turning a blind eye to regulatory infractions, important wildlife populations were being pushed to the edge of extinction.

The first step towards recovery, they say, is admitting you have a problem. But what you do after that first step matters even more.

To his credit, President Yudhoyono backed up his words with action, announcing a major conservation plan. Since then, illegal logging has been reduced, and work has begun on protecting endangered species.

Last month, Indonesia became the first country in the world to release regulations governing a UN-backed scheme that could potentially raise billions of dollars in carbon credits in exchange for conserving and rehabilitating forests.

A closer look, however, shows that the government's record remains patchy.

According to Mr Darmawan of Flora and Fauna Indonesia, official efforts vary by province - and even district. In North Sumatra, for example, police and government officials have worked closely with non-governmental organisations to stamp out the illegal trade in orang utan parts. But officials have been markedly less cooperative in Kalimantan.

As for carbon trading, early drafts of revenue-sharing rules suggest that up to 30 per cent of the money might go the government, a point widely criticised by potential investors as threatening the economic viability of the forest protection scheme by making it more profitable to turn virgin forest into palm oil plantations.

Not all of the progress in recent years can be attributed to government efforts either.

Environment Minister Rachmat Witoelar maintains that the deforestation rate has dropped from about 2.8 million ha per year in 2000 to its current level of about 1.08 million ha.

Conservationists The Straits Times spoke to did not deny that progress had been made, but they suggested that it was not just the result of stepped-up measures against illegal loggers. 'Most of the more accessible forests have already been cleared,' noted Mr Darmawan.

The decline in illegal logging in places such as the Betung Kerihun National Park in West Kalimantan can also be at least partly attributed to the growing determination of the United States and European countries to avoid buying illegally harvested timber.

Unfortunately, other aspects of the conservation programme, such as identifying areas suitable for designation as protected wildlife habitats, have been less successful. Indeed, forest-clearing for palm oil plantations - most of it perfectly legal - continues to be blamed for the killing of apes, tigers and other protected animals, particularly those living outside official conservation areas.

Hope for the future lies in the fact that the more open political system that followed the collapse of the New Order regime in 1998 has made it a lot easier for civil society groups to publicise their views.

According to Mr Togu Simorangkir, director of the Indonesian Orangutan Foundation (Yayorin), Indonesians are much more aware of environmental issues now than they were 10 years ago: 'People talk about it much more, and every day you can find environmental issues reported in the newspapers.'

Even so, it is still an uphill battle. A few politicians from Ms Megawati Sukarnoputri's Indonesian Democratic Party - Struggle and the Muslim-based Prosperous Justice Party have occasionally sought to champion environmental causes. As organisations, however, Indonesian political parties remain largely uninterested. Few parties took the trouble to highlight such issues when campaigning for the April parliamentary elections, for example. Even President Yudhoyono's 2007 initiative had more to do with agitation from local and international environmentalists.

Last month, Greenpeace sought to ratchet up the pressure, submitting a petition signed by 60,000 'forest defenders' urging the President to declare a moratorium on logging.

Activists cited the situation in East Kalimantan, where the local administration built a 60km road through the Kutai National Park in 2002. Seven villages were later constructed, complete with an airport, gas stations, market place, bus terminals and even a prostitution complex. Official records show that the population of orang utans in the park has declined from 600 in 2004 to around 60.

Asked about the impact of President Yudhoyono's 2007 announcement, most conservationists The Straits Times spoke to still thought it was a positive development. 'It is much better now that we have an action plan,' noted Mr Simorangkir.

One target, for example, commits the government to ensuring that there will be no need for non-governmental organisations to run rehabilitation centres for displaced orang utans in Kalimantan by 2015.

But such optimism is tempered with the knowledge that the going will remain tough for some time. 'Progress is slow,' admitted Mr Simorangkir.


Read more!

Thirteen World Heritage Sites stay on Danger List

IUCN 25 Jun 09;

Thirteen natural World Heritage Sites, including the Galapagos Islands, will stay on the List of World Heritage in Danger, following the advice of IUCN.

The decision of the World Heritage Committee to retain the Galapagos Islands on the the danger list comes two years after they were recognised as being under severe threat because of growing tourism, invasive species and immigration.

"The decision to retain Galapagos of the World Heritage List shows the clear commitment of the government of Ecuador to continue with its conservation efforts and work together with the international community, to maintain the outstanding universal value of this unique place on Earth says Pedro Rosabal, Senior Programme Officer of IUCN.

“Ecuador has a history of working in line with the World Heritage Convention, which led to the removal of Sangay National Park from the danger list. IUCN considers this as “best practice”of using the danger list as a mechanism for enhancing the conservation and management of endangered sites. IUCN, through its Regional Office for South America, will further support the efforts of Ecuador towards the removal of the Galapagos Islands from the Danger List.

The Galapagos Islands of Ecuador and the Manas Wildlife Sanctuary in India are the two natural sites on the danger list outside Africa. The other 11 sites are all located in the African continent.

The Galapagos islands were among the first sites to be inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1978 and further extended in 2001.The wide variety of flora and fauna on the 19 islands has contributed to Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. Due to increased tourism, immigration and threats from invasive species brought by plane and boat by the visitors, the islands have been inscribed on the danger list, following IUCN’s recommendation in 2007.

SPOKESPERSONS:
• Pedro Rosabal, Senior Programme Officer, IUCN’s Programme on Protected Areas,
e pedro.rosabal@iucn.org

MEDIA TEAM:
• Borjana Pervan, Media Relations Officer, IUCN, m +41 79 8574072 , e borjana.pervan@iucn.org
• Sonsoles Sanroman, IUCNCommunications, t + 34.95.202.8430 (ext. 106),
e sonsoles.sanroman@iucn.org

MATERIALS FOR THE MEDIA:
• Please visit www.iucn.org/worldheritage for press materials, including:
• Press releases on the latest news from IUCN at the World Heritage Committee
• Photo gallery of new natural sites inscribed on the World Heritage List
• Fact sheets on each new natural site inscribed on the World Heritage List
• Downloadable audio interviews with IUCN’s experts


Read more!

€4.4bn EU subsidies have boosted overfishing, figures show

Ian Traynor, guardian.co.uk 25 Jun 09;

Spain benefits most from fisheries payments which Brussels admits have been a failure

Spain has raked in more than €2.7bn (£2.29bn) in EU subsidies for its fishing industry over 12 years as part of a spending policy that Brussels admits has been a failure, according to data revealed today.

The figures suggest tens of millions have been spent subsidising vessels and practices exacerbating illegal fishing, increasing EU fleet over-capacity, and compounding overfishing in European waters.

Out of 27 countries in the EU, Spain got 48% of the subsidies dispensed, while the percentages for the other big fishing powers – France, Britain and Denmark – are only in single figures.

Two NGOs, the Pew Environment Group and EU Transparency, spent almost two years trying to obtain figures for the EU's Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) subsidies. A website – fishsubsidy.org – launched by them today analyses data obtained from the European Commission and member governments. Of €4.4bn in EU handouts to the fishing industry in 1994-2006, Spain got more than €2.7bn and Britain, where the Scottish fleets make up around 70% of the industry, was given €225m – a 12th of the Spanish total.

In the current EU budget period of 2007-13, Brussels is doling out a similar level of subsidies, €4.3bn – or €837m a year.

The figures show some of the biggest cash windfalls went to ships and firms notorious for their questionable operations. A huge Spanish trawler named by Greenpeace as the most egregious offender against vulnerable stocks of Mediterranean blue fin tuna enjoyed EU subsidies of more than €4m, and more from the Spanish government. Three vessels blacklisted by Greenpeace were given handouts believed to run into millions.

The CFP falls under the authority of Brussels and the commission, not national governments. The EU fisheries commissioner, Joe Borg, this year admitted the policy was a failure.

"The large majority of subsidies are spent on vessels fishing stock that are already overfished," said Marcus Knigge of Pew. The researchers found the subsidies policy was making over-capacity worse. In Spain, most of the funding went to building new boats, while in the other countries the bulk went towards scrapping vessels. At least seven vessels notionally scrapped under subsidy received further payments. The data indicates the names of the vessels, but not the actual beneficiaries of the payments, the owners and firms, since the official suppliers of the information refused to disclose that information.

"Vessels themselves are not the recipients of EU funds. It is the owner of the vessel who receives the funds," the researchers noted. "Record-keeping by members states is not good enough," said Jack Thurston of EU Transparency.


Read more!

Whaling ban holds as conference ends in disarray

Yahoo News 25 Jun 09;

FUNCHAL, Portugal (AFP) – The International Whaling Commission's annual conference ended in disarray Thursday, keeping in place a ban on commercial whaling amid deep rifts between hunters and conservationists.

The commission's new chairman said the IWC should now question its role as the conference on the Portuguese island of Madeira wrapped up a day early with delegates agreeing only to extend negotiations on whaling for another year.

"We have to re-establish a consensus on what the IWC is and should do, and there are at least two contradictory perceptions to answer that question," said Cristian Maquieira, who was elected chairman during the talks this week.

Joji Morishita, a senior official with the Japanese delegation, said the commission should approve limited commercial whaling by next year, adding: "Without that... the future of the IWC is seriously in doubt."

Conservation groups were also angry, with Greenpeace saying: "After 12 months of talking... all the IWC has achieved is another 12 months of talking."

The Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS) said it "deeply laments the fact that not a single of the important whaling topics was resolved."

The IWC was set up in 1946 by 15 whale-hunting nations in order to manage a whale population that was being threatened by the fishing industry. The body now has 85 members and has taken an increasingly conservationist approach.

In 1986, it instituted a ban on commercial whaling that still stands today.

The commission has been deadlocked in recent years by divisions between countries such as Japan that say the dangers of whaling are exaggerated and other nations like Australia which want the whaling ban to be kept in place.

Maquieira said a compromise was "not impossible" but would be very tough.

In a further sign of divisions, delegates failed to agree Thursday on whether Denmark could resume limited hunting of humpback whales off the coast of Greenland as part of "aboriginal" subsistence hunting by local communities.

"As it has not been possible to reach a consensus on Denmark's request, an extraordinary meeting will be organised to discuss the matter again," Portuguese commissioner Jorge Palmeirim told AFP.

"There is no other option but to postpone the matter," he said.

Denmark had proposed to hunt 10 humpbacks a year off Greenland, a semi-autonomous Danish territory.

Environmental campaigners, who are against Denmark's proposal, were angered by the failure of the countries present to vote on the issue.

Commercial hunting of humpbacks has been banned since 1966 but Greenland continued to capture the marine mammals until 1987, when the moratorium was extended to "aboriginal" subsistence hunting.

Some European delegates at the IWC conference had deemed the proposal unacceptable, arguing that Denmark had failed to prove that Greenland's native Inuit populations had greater need of whale meat.

Whaling body skirts divisive Greenland request
Shrikesh Laxmidas, Reuters 25 Jun 09;

FUNCHAL, Portugal (Reuters) - The International Whaling Commission (IWC) on Thursday postponed a decision on Greenland's request to hunt 10 humpback whales, after failing to create a consensus between pro and anti-whaling nations.

IWC chairman Bill Hogarth said that due to the lack of consensus the body decided to appoint a scientific committee to provide further data on Greenland's request.

Greenland's bid for the aboriginal subsistence hunting has been one of the contentious issues at the IWC annual meeting, as the body struggles to marry views of anti-whaling nations such as Australia and pro-whaling countries Japan, Norway and Iceland.

A day earlier, IWC delegates also failed to find a compromise between pro- and anti-whaling nations on how to merge their views, extending for a year a deadline to decide on the future of the IWC if no agreements can be made.

The Greenland request even split 23 European Union members that usually vote as a bloc against whaling, with sources at the meeting saying Germany and the United Kingdom strongly opposed the bid, while others changed their positions over the week.

"The EU vote was split ... but I think it is good that we now have a scientific group to discuss the Danish wish," German Delegate Gert Lindermann said. Greenland is a self-governing state of Denmark.

Germany believes Greenland has not demonstrated its need for the humpback whaling quota, but said the new committee can be a forum for it do so, he added.

A moratorium on commercial whaling was agreed in 1986, but Japan continues to skirt it for scientific research, while Iceland and Norway, simply ignore it and harpoon whales for commercial use.

Aboriginals in Greenland, Russia and Alaska have, however, special permissions to hunt whales for subsistence ends. Greenland has a quota to hunt 200 mink whales, 19 fin whales and 2 bowhead whales every year.

Some conservation groups believe humpback whales are a vulnerable species, while others say that Greenland is abusing its aboriginal's rights for subsistence whaling.

The IWC decision to postpone Greenland's bid divided conservation groups at the meeting, some welcomed it while others said it was a stalling tactic.

"While we are pleased that the proposal has not been approved, we see the IWC decision to not make a decision on this matter and simply create a panel is simply outrageous," said Nicolas Entrup of the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS).

(Editing by Axel Bugge and Matthew Jones)

Whale chief mulls ending hunt ban
Richard Black, BBC News 26 Jun 09;

The outgoing chair of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) has suggested whale conservation could benefit from ending the commercial hunting ban.

Dr William Hogarth's remarks came at the end of this year's IWC meeting, which saw pro- and anti-whaling nations agree to further compromise talks.

A Greenpeace spokesman said the moratorium had to stay intact.

The meeting deferred a decision on a controversial bid from Greenland to add humpback whales to its annual hunt.

The Greenland Inuit are one of the indigenous peoples granted hunting quotas because they are deemed to need whalemeat.

The meeting wrapped up a day ahead of schedule, although a small group of delegates convenes on Friday to start planning a second year of talks about a possible compromise deal between the various blocs.

The first year's discussions were supposed to reach a deal by this meeting, but the deadline proved too tight.

Sustainable yields

The 1982 commercial whaling moratorium is one of the conservation movement's iconic achievements, and environment groups and anti-whaling nations are, at least on the surface, lined up four-square behind it.

But Dr Hogarth, a US fisheries expert who led the compromise talks for the last year, suggested it could now be a problem for whale conservation.

"I'll probably get in trouble for making this statement, but I am probably convinced right now that there would be less whales killed if we didn't have the commercial moratorium," he told BBC News immediately after the meeting ended.

His argument is that Japan's hunts, conducted under a clause in the whaling convention that gives any country the right to hunt as many whales as it wants for scientific research, are essentially unregulated.

Currently Japan catches more than 1,000 whales each year; and Dr Hogarth believes use of the scientific whaling clause encourages large hunts in order to get enough samples to draw scientifically valid conclusions.

"I'm not sure you'd need nearly so many whales if it were strictly for sustainable use," he said.

The key, he suggested, was to find a way of allowing limited, tightly regulated small-scale whaling for local consumption, while outlawing large-scale, heavily commercial hunts and keeping international trade under control.

No return

The Japanese delegation has kept a low media profile during this meeting, but it is likely that Dr Hogarth's words will be well received in Tokyo as it seeks to win international agreement for introducing "small-type coastal whaling" as part of a compromise deal.

How it goes down with environmental groups is another matter.

Greenpeace oceans campaigner John Frizzell, a long-time opponent of whaling, said the moratorium had to stay.

"Lifting the commercial moratorium would be an extremely bad idea," he said.

"Before the moratorium, under the IWC's guidance and supervision, populations were driven down to commercial extinction one after the other and heavily depleted.

"The moratorium is the only management procedure that has even halfway worked, and to talk about scrapping it is going back to the old days."

Privately, some anti-whaling campaigners may be prepared to countenance a partial end to the moratorium, with strict regulations placed on catch quotas, trade and monitoring, in return for bringing scientific whaling under the IWC's control.

Sue Lieberman, head of the global species programme at WWF International, said that although Japan was not currently offering to end scientific whaling within a timeframe of a few years, progress was possible in the longer term.

"I don't think anyone should expect Japan to come forward and say 'you're right, we've been wrong all these years, we give up'," she said.

"But I think it's important to sit down with Japan and talk about it.

"It is time to give it up. Economically it makes no sense, it's not necessary for food security, it's time to leave the Southern Ocean [whale] sanctuary as a sanctuary - and I hope politically Japan will understand that."

Local needs

The meeting's other potentially contentious issue - Greenland's request to add 10 humpback whales per year to the minkes, bowheads and fin whales that the Inuit already catch - was left open after EU nations could not agree a position among themselves.

EU policy is to vote as a bloc in all international environmental agreements.

But here there was an unbridgeable split between those such as the UK who found the detail of Greenland's proposal unacceptable and others who favoured approval.

With the EU commanding so many votes in the IWC as to hold the balance of power, the option of deferring a decision, awaiting research into how much meat Greenlanders obtain from whales, poured diplomatic oil on troubled waters.

But it did not find favour with Amalie Jessen, Greenland's deputy minister for fisheries, hunting and agriculture.

"I don't think EU countries understand the needs of traditional hunters," she said.

"I have observed very little tolerance and very little understanding of our situation, and they are always coming up with new requests and questions and conditions."

Greenland's request was turned down at the last two IWC meetings, and the government cites the issue as a reason for wanting to move its whaling outside the commission's remit.

Southern climes

Away from these main issues, environmental groups were pleased to see the passage of a resolution noting that climate change will affect cetaceans, and appealing to IWC members to "take urgent action to reduce the rate and extent of climate change".

Environmental lawyers said this could be a precedent for regional fisheries management organisations, which normally shy away from discussion of climate issues.

There was also appreciation for Australia's initiation of a new research partnership in the Southern Ocean that will use exclusively non-lethal methods.

Although comment on Japan's research in the same region tends to focus on the lethal aspects, its fleet also carries an international team of scientists that documents whale numbers by sightings and other techniques.

A long-time contention of some observers has been that if countries such as Australia want Japan to stop its expeditions, they have to start funding an alternative research operation - and now that message appears to have been heard.

With Dr Hogarth's departure, the job of steering next year's negotiations between Japan and anti-whaling countries such as Australia falls to incoming chairman Cristian Maquieira, who said that on a scale of difficulty from one to 10, this was "about a 12".

"Speaking candidly, it's an organisation that has no carrots and no sticks," he said.

But the Chilean diplomat was optimistic about the negotiations

"I feel if there's one common element involved here, it's that everybody believes the status quo is no longer acceptable," he said.

Plodding whale meeting makes climate change breakthrough
WWF 26 Jun 09;

Madeira, Portugal – The International Whaling Commission adopted a major climate change resolution on the last day of its 61st meeting, although it failed to take decisions on contentious whaling issues after days of negotiations that have hampered its progress in recent years.

On Thursday, IWC member countries unanimously agreed to adopt a resolution on climate change co-sponsored by the United States and Norway. The 85-member body began its annual meeting on Monday, though it set aside most major decisions until later in the year.

The resolution states that climate change is a key threat to whales, and urges governments to commit to reducing their carbon emissions at the UN Climate meeting in Copenhagen in December. It also directs IWC to engage in external climate change meetings in the run up to Copenhagen.

“This is a very positive development that will help ensure that climate negotiations take into account impacts on biodiversity,” said Dr. Susan Lieberman, WWF International Species Programme Director. “However, members did not take action that would stop commercial whaling outside of IWC regulation, which is a fundamental problem that the IWC must address—and which continues today.”

IWC members, for example, did not take action on “scientific whaling” by Japan, which has led to the killing of thousands of whales, particularly in the Antarctic Whale Sanctuary. Under the guise of scientific research, Japan has continued to defy the 1986 moratorium on commercial whaling by hunting whales in both the Antarctic and the North Pacific, claiming that these whales must be killed to answer critical management questions.

Although IWC members did not take decisions on many key whaling-related issues that have dominated negotiations during the annual meeting in past years, they did discuss another prominent whale conservation issue that needs attention – the protection of smaller whales, such as dolphins and porpoises.

That discussion coincided with the release during the meeting on Wednesday of Small Cetaceans: The Forgotten Whales, a new WWF report stating that small whales are disappearing from the world’s oceans and waterways as they fall victim to fishing gear, pollution, and habitat loss – compounded by a lack of conservation measures such as those developed for great whales.

Support for the recommendations in the report at the meeting came from Australian Environment Minister Peter Garrett, who simultaneously announced an AU$500,000 pledge to the IWC for the conservation and protection of smaller whales. Meanwhile, Belgium called for a review of work on conservation and management for small cetaceans to take place before IWC 62 in 2010.

“It is time for the IWC to build on these commitments, to become a modern 21st century convention, and to dedicate itself to the conservation of all whales, great and small,” Dr. Lieberman said.


Read more!

Biofuel Showdown: Should Domestic Ethanol Producers Pay for Deforestation Abroad?

The biofuel lobby will win big by delaying rules on "indirect land-use change" for six years, but the National Academy of Sciences may now study the issue

Brendan Borrell, Scientific American 25 Jun 09;

After a fierce battle over agricultural incentives in a landmark climate bill, Congress plans to ask the National Academy of Sciences to study how biofuel production in the Midwest can shift food production abroad, stimulating a wave of deforestation.

Tomorrow's expected vote in the House of Representatives on the climate bill would move the nation a step closer to a cap-and-trade system that would limit greenhouse gas emissions. But the bill's sponsors have made significant concessions to Agriculture Committee Chairman Colin Peterson (D–Minn.), who threatened to torpedo the legislation as it was written. President Obama is pressing for its passage, which would still have to work its way through the Senate in July to become law.

Environmentalists have walked a fine line between encouraging growth of the renewable energy sector and regulating it enough to ensure that it does not lead to increased greenhouse emissions as forests are cleared abroad for food production. Scientists believe that market forces and government incentives will cause domestic farmers to shift from food production to biofuels creating a demand for foreign agriculture to fill in the food gap. The technical term for this phenomenon is "indirect land-use change".

Taking into account indirect land-use change, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that corn-based ethanol will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by just 16 percent. That means it won't meet the threshold of 20 percent required to be classified as a renewable fuel and cannot receive the economic incentives the federal government promised to provide under a 2007 energy law. Biodiesel producers would also lose because they say that vegetable oils would not qualify under the restrictions, leaving only recycled restaurant grease and animal fats.

In sticking up for farm states, Peterson has now proposed an amendment to the legislation that would prevent such requirements from becoming part of renewable fuel or electricity standards for at least six years. At the end of a five-year period, the National Academy of Sciences will study the issue, and the EPA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture will decide whether indirect land-use changes can be accurately measured. In a statement yesterday, the American Coalition for Ethanol heralded the delay in ruling on biofuels, noting that the "agreement ensures that science, not politics, will determine whether the EPA can go forward with this highly controversial theory."

For many scientists, however, the question is not whether there are indirect impacts but rather how big they are. Environmentalists think it would be a mistake for the EPA to lower the bar for biofuels so soon. "We want the EPA to use the best science and economics to establish regulation," says Nathanael Greene of the National Resources Defense Council in New York City. "We recognize that the regulation is going to be imperfect so let's update it."

At the same time, there's rising sentiment that growing new crops to quench the thirst for biofuels is not the best strategy for reducing greenhouse emissions.

David Tilman, an ecologist at the University of Minnesota, who recently chaired a panel on alternative fuels for the National Research Council in Washington, D.C., says that the new standards should encourage the use of the half billion tons of biomass, such as forest slash, that is already available per annum. "We could have a policy that uses biomass sources with a minimal impact on indirect land use," he says.


Read more!

China aims to build "Three Gorges of wind power"

Yahoo News 25 Jun 09;

BEIJING (AFP) – China is aiming to build a huge wind farm in the northwest by 2020 that will have energy capacity similar to the gigantic Three Gorges Dam, a senior official said Thursday.

Feng Jianshen, a vice governor of Gansu province, told reporters that the province planned to expand the installed capacity of its wind power base to more than 20 gigawatts in 11 years, more than 10 times the current level.

"Gansu will have built a 'Three Gorges on the land' by then," he said, referring to the country's 23-billion-dollar dam that spans the middle reaches of the Yangtze River.

The dam, the biggest hydro-electrical project in the world, currently has 26 generators with a capacity of 18.2 gigawatts, which will eventually rise to 22.4 gigawatts when six more generators are added.

One of the world's largest greenhouse gas emitters alongside the United States, China now depends on coal for nearly 70 percent of its total energy consumption.

The government has said it aims to rely more on cleaner ways to power its economic growth, with the development of wind power a focus.

It has set a target to install 100 gigawatts of wind power capacity by 2020, likely making the country the world's fastest growing market for wind energy technology.

Zhang Guobao, head of China's National Energy Administration, said last year that the government would build several "Three Gorges of wind power" by 2020 in provinces and regions including Inner Mongolia, Xinjiang, Gansu and Jiangsu.


Read more!

Major economies consider halving world CO2

Alister Doyle, Reuters 25 Jun 09;

OSLO (Reuters) - Major economies including the United States and China are considering setting a goal of halving world greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 when they hold a summit in Italy next month, a draft document showed.

The text also says the 17-member Major Economies Forum (MEF) will seek to double public investments in low-carbon technology by 2015 and boost funding from both public and private sources as well as from carbon markets to fight global warming.

The draft was put forward by the United States and Mexico at talks in Mexico this week, without reaching accord before a MEF summit on July 9. U.S. President Barack Obama launched the MEF to help toward a new U.N. climate pact due in December.

"We support an aspirational global goal of reducing global emissions by 50 percent by 2050, with developed countries reducing emissions by at least 80 percent by 2050," according to the draft text, obtained by Reuters and dated June 22.

Last year, industrialized nations in the Group of Eight agreed at a summit in Japan to a "vision" of halving world greenhouse gases by 2050 to help avert ever more droughts, floods, heatwaves and rising sea levels.

Developing countries including China, India and Brazil did not adopt that 2050 goal in Japan, arguing that the rich first have to set tough 2020 cuts for themselves. The MEF summit will be on the sidelines of this year's G8 summit in Italy.

The two-page draft declaration does not set clear goals but says that developed countries, including the United States, the European Union and Japan, would "undertake robust aggregate and individual mid-term reductions in the 2020 timeframe."

RECESSION

Developing nations such as China and India say that the rich should cut emissions by "at least 40 percent" below 1990 levels by 2020 -- a target developed nations say is out of reach when they are trying to stimulate recession-hit economies.

And the text says developing nations would take actions by 2020 to ensure a "significant deviation from business as usual" to slow rising emissions, mainly from burning fossil fuels.

The text also stops short of setting a peak year for global emissions. "The peaking of global and national emissions should take place as soon as possible, recognizing that the timeframe for peaking will be longer in developing countries," it said.

The 17 MEF members account for 80 percent of global emissions so any agreement among them would go a long way to defining a new U.N. climate treaty due to be agreed in Copenhagen in December.

The text also says that the nations will set up a global partnership aiming to double public sector investments in research and development of low-carbon technologies by 2015.

The partnership would seek to remove barriers and create incentives to promote technologies "such as energy efficiency; solar energy; smart grids; carbon capture, use and storage; advanced vehicles; and bio-energy."

The text also says that funds to combat climate change "will need to be substantially scaled up to address climate change." It suggests a "fast start" funding, perhaps of $400 million, to help developing nations.

The text also goes some way to acknowledging a goal of the EU and many developing nations to limit global rises in temperatures to no more than 2 Celsius above 1990 levels. That goal has not been adopted by the United States.

The text mentions that leaders are "aware of the broad scientific view that the increase in global average temperatures above pre-industrial levels ought not to exceed 2 degrees C."

(Editing by Janet McBride)


Read more!

Growth of global carbon emissions halved in 2008, say Dutch researchers

Duncan Clark, guardian.co.uk 25 Jun 09;

Recession and oil price main drivers behind fall in consumption as developing world emissions rise above 50% for first time

The growth of global carbon dioxide emissions fell by half in 2008, according to data released today. The global recession and high oil prices played a major role in reducing the rate of emissions. But measures to tackle global warming by cutting emissions such as renewable energy were only partly responsible. The data from the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (NEAA) also show that, for the first time, CO2 emissions from the developing world account for more than half of the global total.

Analysis from the NEAA draws on fossil fuel consumption figures published last week by BP. It shows that the rise in the world's emissions from fossil fuel burning and cement production in 2008 was just 1.7%, compared with 3.3% in 2007.

The slowdown in emissions growth was caused primarily by a 0.6% fall in the consumption of oil – the first decline in global oil use since 1992. This trend was unevenly distributed around the world. In China oil use continued to rise, but at only 3%, down from an average of 8% since 2001. In the US, oil consumption fell by a massive 7%.

The falling global demand reflects high prices for oil in the first half of 2008 and the economic slowdown in the second half of the year. Increasing biofuel production also helped displace a substantial volume of fossil-fuel petrol and diesel.

Jos Olivier, the NEAA researcher responsible for the new data, acknowledged that the environmental benefits of biofuels would look "less favourable" in a broader analysis considering the impact of all greenhouses gases, rather than CO2 alone. Furthermore, the data does not take into account the CO2 released by deforestation, which accounts for almost 20% of all greenhouse gas emissions and takes place overwhelmingly in the developing world.

Increasing renewable energy capacity and improving energy efficiency in many countries will also have contributed to the reduced rise in CO2 emissions. Olivier said: "The impact of energy and climate policy is hard to distinguish from those of fuel prices and the recession, but policies encouraging renewable electricity generation will have helped avoid around 500 million tonnes of CO2 from fossil-fuel power stations."

Coal consumption continued to creep up at a slower rate than in previous years, but the rise in the consumption of natural gas remained unchanged.

It is too early to determine whether the recession will lead to global emissions flattening off entirely this year. But policymakers are likely to be particularly struck by the second revelation in the NEAA analysis.

In 2008, the developing-world accounted for 50.3% of CO2 emissions, exceeding developed nations and international travel combined for the first time. With crucial UN climate negotiations over a successor to the Kyoto protocol now less than six months away, this new data will provide useful ammunition for those arguing for binding emissions targets for all nations.


Read more!

Climate science is by nature uncertain

Adam Corner, guardian.co.uk 25 Jun 09;

For climate sceptics, the mere presence of uncertainty is reason enough to doubt. But doubt is not an enemy – it is the stimulus that drives science forward

It seems the one thing climate change sceptics are certain of is uncertainty, in particular how uncertainty in the predictions of climate models fatally undermines their legitimacy.

So the recent revelation of the UK government's projections of global warming through to 2080 was met, predictably, with some cynicism by the deniers. While some commentators used the detailed projections about possible future UK climate scenarios to underscore why we must take strong action on climate change, the response of climate sceptics was to say that the error bars in the projections made them worthless.

Never mind that the level of uncertainty about mean temperature increase, sea level rise and seasonal rainfall was dealt with in painstaking and meticulous detail in the report. For some, the mere presence of uncertainty was reason enough to doubt. But uncertainty is not an enemy of science that must be conquered – it is the stimulus that drives science forward. As in economic forecasts, medical diagnoses, and policy making, uncertainty runs through climate science like the lettering in sticks of rock.

The good news is that scientists are particularly adept at acknowledging, identifying and modelling it. The Met Office team responsible for the climate projections managed to systematically indicate what they did know, what they didn't know and how confident they were about these judgments. If there's one group of people who have thought long and hard about uncertainty, its climate scientists. But Irene Lorenzoni and her colleagues at the University of East Anglia have shown that people frequently view uncertainty as a reason for inaction on climate change.

Such is the level of scepticism in some quarters that climate scientists are constantly required to apologise for what they don't know, rather than encouraged to communicate what they do.

But uncertainty is not the same as ignorance – which is why the labelling of GM food became mandatory in 2004. The Food Standards Agency did not demand certainty before taking action, although the uncertainty surrounding the risks of genetic modification is far greater than the considered consensus of climate science.

One reason that so much attention is given to the uncertainty associated with climate models is that they form the basis of important and costly policy decisions. But the "precautionary principle" is a well-established method of policy making when uncertainty prevails, on the basis that it is better to be safe than sorry. Could it be that climate sceptics' obsession with uncertainty is simply an unwillingness to accept the consequences of the climate changing – that their lifestyles will have to change as well?

The UK climate projections are not a weather forecast for 3 July 2078. They are a set of scientifically rigorous probabilistic assessments of what the UK climate might be like in, say, 50 years time. But the writers of the report seemed to feel compelled to get their counter-arguments in early. Of course, it is absolutely essential that all uncertainties in climate models are made clear. But it's odd reading a scientific report where the caveats come before the take-home message.

There is one crucial uncertainty, however, that cannot be captured in any climate model: the extent to which action is taken to cut the emissions of greenhouse gases. The irony of the debate surrounding what we can and can't infer from climate models is that they sketch out possible, not inevitable futures. By giving us some idea of what lies ahead, they furnish us with a critical opportunity to change course. Rather than procrastinating about uncertainty – an inescapable fact of life – we should be taking the opportunity to get serious about climate change, and prove the climate models wrong.

• Dr Adam Corner is in the understanding risk research group at Cardiff University


Read more!