Wednesday, September 09, 2009

Japan increases its greenhouse reduction target

Japan increases its greenhouse reduction target.

By Joanie Bergeron Poudrier

At the beginning of the week, future Nippon prime minister Yukio Hatoyama declared that Japan would try to reduce its greenhouse emission by 25% until 2020, compared to the 8% target set during the G8 in l’Aquila, in July.

Hatoyama announced its decision during a climate change Forum held in Tokyo, explaining that his decision was based on the urgent scientists’ requests to fight climate change. He also stated “[…]it was a political promise we made in the election manifesto.”

Hatoyama who will officially be named prime minister on September 16th, reminds us he will launch as soon as possible a “Hatoyama initiative” to help developing countries to reduce their carbon emission.

Now that one of the G8 leaders has pronounced himself… Who will be next ? Harper, Obama, Sarkozy?

Picture:Future prime minister Hatoyama on September 7th in Tokyo

Friday, September 04, 2009

Tiny Township victory sets a big example -David Suzuki

By David Suzuki with Faisal Moola

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” ~ Margaret Mead

Anthropologist Margaret Mead’s words came to mind when I heard about a recent victory for the citizens of Tiny Township and surrounding communities in Simcoe County, Ontario. The people banded together to stop a garbage dump from being built on one of the purest sources of water on the planet – the Alliston aquifer, a subterranean lake that stretches from Georgian Bay to the Oak Ridges Moraine in southern Ontario.

As well as being the source of drinking water for residents in the region, the aquifer provides cold water to the Wye River and surrounding wetlands. The river and wetlands, in turn, support important wildlife species, including many amphibians, song birds, and fish.

Citizens in the area, including many First Nations, have argued for nearly 30 years that Simcoe County and the provincial government should explore other options to manage the region’s garbage, such as composting programs, upgrades to existing landfills, and improved recycling. Despite those alternatives, local authorities and the Ontario Environment Ministry gave the go-ahead for a solid-waste landfill to be built in and on top of the Alliston aquifer, on a parcel of land known as Site 41.

It’s another clear example of our tendency to ignore the real costs of getting rid of our garbage. We create a lot of solid waste, greenhouse gas emissions, and other forms of pollution, and then we bury them in the ground, dump them into our waters, or pump them into the air and think we can forget about them. In doing so, we fail to take into account the real value of the goods and services that nature provides.

Site 41 became a flashpoint of conflict this summer when area residents peacefully blockaded the landfill site. As the blockade dragged on and the number of people (including elders) being hauled off to jail increased, the “grassroots” struggle to close Site 41 attracted the support of the “grass-tops”, powerful advocacy organizations and unions such as the Council of Canadians, the David Suzuki Foundation, and the Canadian Union of Public Employees. I got involved, in part, because I was impressed by the organizing skills, courage, and dedication of the citizens of Tiny Township and local First Nations in trying to protect our most precious resource, our drinking water.

How this dump got approved in the first place boggles the mind. Experts believe that for the landfill to be built at Site 41, as much as 225 million litres of clean groundwater would have to be pumped out and disposed of before construction. Over the life of the landfill, even more groundwater would have to be pumped out to maintain the dump’s structural integrity. Concerns have also been raised about potential long-term engineering problems and landfill leakage that would contaminate the aquifer.

Landfills are often the preferred solution for dealing with garbage because the costs appear low when compared to other methods of waste management and disposal. But they only seem low because we fail to include the very real costs that dumps incur when they degrade the natural services that watersheds, forests, and other ecosystems provide for our health and well-being – like clean air, clean water, and healthy food.

When these natural services are degraded by development activities such as landfills, they must be replaced with expensive substitutes, such as water-filtration plants, dykes, and other engineering. The economic arguments against the Site 41 dump, with its potential to harm the local drinking-water supply, should kill this landfill plan once and for all.

In response to efforts of local citizens, the province and the government in Simcoe County have approved a one-year moratorium on the Site 41 landfill so that further scientific assessments can be done. This shows that people who join together for a common cause really do have the power to affect the decisions of governments and corporations.

The backhoes and other equipment at Site 41 are now silent, at least temporarily. Let’s hope that the politicians continue to listen to the people of Tiny Township and work to find better ways to deal with our waste.

Take David Suzuki’s Nature Challenge and learn more at www.davidsuzuki.org.

For more info on the action taking place to stop dump site 41 visit www.stopdumpsite41.ca

Fruits and Veggies Not Created Equal

One of my most common cravings in the summer is for a fruit salad. But unless it’s all organic, I’ve also been craving a mouthful of pesticides - ew!

The Washington DC-based Environmental Working Group has researched the top twelve fruits and veggies that require the most pesticides to grow.

Can you guess what tops the list?


The Dirty Dozen
1. Peaches
2. Apples
3. Bell peppers
4. Celery
5. Cherries
6. Nectarines
7. Strawberries
8. Kale
9. Lettuce
10. Imported grapes
11. Carrots
12. Pears

Read more on www.simplegreenaction.ca

Open letter to the Ambassador in charge of negotiations on climate

By Florent Baarsch

Sir,

If you do not remember me and the program for which I work, I am Florent Baarsch, the “tracker” for France. We met once in Poznan last year and this year in Bonn in June

One member of our team was present during recent discussions in Bonn III. Our whole team will be present in Bangkok, then probably in Barcelona and certainly in Copenhagen. We’re eager to continue to “track” your progress and to encourage you to take ambitious, fair and courageous positions in the talks to address climate change.

I send this email to express a number of questions that I hope you or your collaborators can answer. These issues include the French memorandum, but also the reshuffle and the recent talks in Bonn which just completed. The size of Adopt a Negotiator’s audience is growing quickly and more and more readers are curious about your positions and the thinking behind those positions.

Government reshuffle:

Following the administration reshuffle after the European elections, Minister of State Jean-Louis Borloo became officially responsible for the climate negotiations. Does this mean that there is no longer a shared competence between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Environment Ministry, or perhaps has nothing changed? I personally see a strong political signal in preparation of Copenhagen, showing the importance of this issue for France, but maybe I’m wrong. Could you tell me more about that?

Memorandum:

In the memorandum dated June 3, 2009, paragraph 7, it appears the expression “on a autonomous basis.” This refers directly to the establishment of a system for adaptation to climate change in developing countries. How are you defining autonomy? Is the challenge using technology recognized in the Convention or financial aid still under discussion at present? Again, thank you for that clarification.

Declaration of Yvo de Boer at Bonn III:

Last Tuesday, Mr. Yvo de Boer said that the countries in Annex I were coming together around the common goal of reductions between 15 and 21% for 2020 (based on year 1990). Beyond the fact that this doesn’t get us to where IPCC tells us we need to go, it is worrying to note that France and the European Union also have stopped making their voices heard. Indeed, the European Union in paragraph 5 of the decision of Council of Ministers of the Environment March 2, 2009 affirmed the need for a 30% reduction of emissions under an international agreement, the commitment is listed in paragraph 17 of the French memorandum. Can you provide more information about this?

2 ° C:

In the second paragraph of the memorandum presents an ambitious and necessary objective – the objective of limiting global warming below 2 ° C above the pre-industrial levels. This appears especially urgent in light of the findings of the IPCC. According to the findings of the IPCC, to prevent global warming is greater than 2 ° C, we must reduce anthropogenic emissions between 25 and 40% compared to 1990 in 2020, and between 50 and 85% in 2050. The question then is how we can achieve the objectives presented in the memorandum but also aims to present a balance in negotiations. Can you tell me how is France going to encourage other countries in Annex I to become more ambitious?

To conclude this message I would like to share a hope that many young people, NGOs, and citizens have. With the Copenhagen conference’s profound role in the setting the course for humanity going forward, we hope some of the most important heads of states and governments worldwide will attend COP15. In December 2008 the President of the Republic, Mr. Nicolas Sarkozy helped an agreement is reached within the climate energy package. Can we again count on the Presidents presence again this year?

Please Ambassador in charge of negotiations on climate, accept this expression of my solidarity and sustainable greetings.

Florent Baarsch, French Tracker

*****

More about «Adopt a Negotiator»

Have you ever wondered who actually makes the agreements on behalf of your country at those big global summits and conferences? We did too. and as we really want all of our countries to agree to a safe and fair Climate Change treaty in December, we decided to do something about it.

That’s why we thought we would Adopt a Negotiator, and follow them through the many meetings, conference and events that they will take part in from now to December and report them back to you, so you can follow them as well.

So join us and let the negotiators know that we are watching and willing them to negotiate a Climate Change deal that is safe, fair and will ensure that we all have a future!

Each of our Climate Trackers will follow the Lead Climate Negotiator from their country and update you with the latest information., so you can stay up to date and either support or put pressure on your country’s climate negotiator to aim for a safe and fair deal.

Adopt A Negotiator is a project of the Global Call for Climate Action (GCCA) you can find out more about GCCA and it’s other activities at www.tcktcktck.org