ShareThis

Showing posts with label Climate Change. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Climate Change. Show all posts




It is much easier to spot an enemy outside your own ranks, but try doing so when the one in question still strangles recovery, genuine fair trade and enterprise under the mascarade of... " free- market " ... and happens to be one of the strongest lobbies in America.
Here is a to-the -point article we'd like you to read and think about ...



  Chamber of Commerce goes after climate dissenters in its ranks

   A new split over climate policy is brewing within the ranks of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as a breakaway group of local chambers is getting ready to publicly split with the business lobby's hardline stance against climate legislation. The new climate coalition, known as the Chambers for Innovation and Clean Energy (CICE), will press Congress to take stronger action on climate and energy issues. It has already signed up about a dozen chambers and will officially launch later this year.

The U.S. Chamber is already working behind the scenes to discredit the new group. After it caught wind of the effort last month, it fired off a letter to local chamber leaders, discouraging them from joining CICE, which it claimed was "established by the Natural Resources Defense Council." The letter, written by U.S. Chamber board member Winthrop Hallett, the president of Alabama's Mobile Area Chamber of Commerce, states that the new group's "indirect purpose appears to be undermining the U.S. Chamber's and the business community's leadership on" climate issues.

The claim that CICE is little more than a front group for the NRDC is "outrageous" and "really just pissed me off," says Steve Falk, the president of the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, which has been organizing the independent climate coalition. Hallett's letter, which has not been posted publicly but which Mother Jones has seen, does not explain the alleged connection between CICE and the NRDC. Hallett and a spokesman for the U.S. Chamber did not respond to requests for comment.

In a letter that Falk sent to local chamber leaders last week in response to the U.S. Chamber's attack, he speculated that its claim of a NRDC link might be based on CICE's connection with Environmental Entrepreneurs (E2), a NRDC partner group that bills itself as "the independent business voice for the environment." Falk and E2 cofounder Bob Epstein say that the group did help create CICE's website but did not conceive of the idea for the group or craft its talking points.

In his letter to chamber leaders, Falk assured them that "no organizations other than local chambers of commerce have or will influence CICE's principles." The "core principles" published on CICE's website call for America to "lead the clean energy race" and assert that "limiting carbon emissions will drive innovation." Falk says the principles were crafted in partnership with other chambers and were based on language the San Francisco Chamber had originally developed in support of AB 32, California's cap-and-trade law, which is scheduled to go into effect later this year.

Falk says the San Francisco Chamber began organizing the alternative climate coalition two months ago after he realized that lobbying for a climate bill on his own "is probably not the best way to impact national legislation." Thousands of businesses have signed up to support carbon regulations through coalitions such as American Businesses for Clean Energy, but he noticed that no similar effort existed among local chambers of commerce. He worried that the chambers' failure to go to bat on the issue could mean that companies in San Francisco and other progressive cities "will wake up one day and question the relevance of chambers of commerce." Dozens of local chambers from cities across the country are seriously considering joining CICE, accordig to Falk. Last month, he decided to postpone CICE's original August launch date after plans to limit carbon emissions stalled in the Senate. But the group's existence leaked out late last week after a reporter from the Aspen Daily News attended a board meeting of the Aspen Chamber of Commerce, a CICE member.

Though the national Chamber of Commerce has said that it could support some form of climate bill, it has opposed aggressive efforts to limit carbon emissions and argued that any such action should be the result of a global treaty, not federal regulation. Over the past year, it has faced widening divisions over its policy. Since last August, when Chamber Vice President Bill Kovacs called for a "Scopes Monkey Trial" on climate science, more than a dozen major companies have dropped out of the Chamber or distanced themselves from its climate policy. Several local chambers have publicly opposed the national group's climate stance; the San Francisco Chamber even lobbied against it in Washington.


The U.S. Chamber has known about the new climate coalition since mid-July, when its West Coast representative obtained a copy of a membership solicitation from the group. Falk then sent the U.S. Chamber a copy of CICE's principles and asked for feedback. The only official response he's gotten to date is a copy of the letter from Winthrop Hallett, who chairs the U.S. Chamber's Committee of 100, a top policy committee.



Falk ultimately hopes to attract 30 to 50 local chambers to CICE -- enough to earn the group a prominent spot in the national climate debate. The way he sees it, there's no conflict between advocating for a progressive climate policy and remaining staunchly pro-business. "I mean, we're a chamber of commerce," he says. "We don't want government to mandate how business is run. But we know that there's a whole new economy out there, a whole new economic development engine with a move to clean energy. We see it happening in San Francisco. We think that's possible elsewhere."


Many thanks to  Josh Harkinson, staff reporter at Mother Jones Climate Desk Collaboration to bring us those news !.

Posted by asd Thursday, August 5, 2010 0 comments

Innovation projects bring food security in Himalayas

24 February 2010
 
In the Ladakh region of high Himalayas where farming is only possible from April to August three-quarters of people depend on government subsidised food for survival. However innovation projects like artificial glaciers, hydraulic ram pumps to lift water and cooperative farming are changing the ground situation.
Himalayas, India: Growing enough food is not easy in Ladakh, a desert region high in the mountains of Jammu and Kashmir, India's most northern state. With farming possible only from April to August, this bare and cold Himalayan area struggles to feed its 300,000 people.
April to August farming.jpg
Farming is possible only from April to August/Photo credit: Flickr/ Alles-schlumpf
In the winter, temperatures drop to minus 45 degrees Celsius and most local residents, save the few who migrate to the lowlands, remain indoors, drinking copious cups of steaming, salty yak butter tea.
Until the 1960s, Ladakhis were self-sufficient, relying on a diet of barley, wheat and potatoes. But today there are more Indian army personnel deployed in the region, which lies on the India-China border. Ladakh's youth, meanwhile, are increasingly switching from backbreaking agriculture in the harsh terrain to more profitable jobs in the booming tourism industry.
Now almost three-quarters of the population depend on government-subsidised food for survival, as Ladakh's food production falls far short of local demand.
Projects now underway in Ladakh could reverse this negative trend. Spearheading the effort for sustainable food production are an unlikely mix of non-governmental organisations (NGOs), India's Defence Institute of High Altitude Research (DIHAR), and the local administration, the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council (LAHDC).

Artificial_Glacier.jpg 

 

Artificial glaciers collect and store glacial melt on the sides of hills that are shadowed from the sun/ Photo credit: Wikicommons


But although their approaches differ, they illustrate how simple agricultural innovations may help overcome the gap between demand and supply in an inhospitable terrain.
Artificial glaciers provide water…
The most popular of the innovations is the 'artificial glacier' designed by civil engineer Chewang Norphel for the Leh Nutrition Project, which was set up in 1978, initially with the aim of providing water to farmers during the sowing season in April.
Irrigation in Ladakh depends on snow and glacial melt from the Himalayas, but the peak times for water availability do not coincide with farmers' needs. Norphel created an ingenious embankment system that collects and stores glacial melt on the sides of hills that are shadowed from the sun.
By the time the ice starts to melt in April, when it is planting time, the water is released to villages through a network of canals. Artificial glaciers collect and store glacial melt on the sides of hills that are shadowed from the sun.
As Norphel added: “Availability of irrigation water in early spring enables farmers to harvest two crops in a year, which was not possible earlier.” Today, nine artificial glaciers are in place, with four more scheduled for mid-2011.
But water and food security concerns are further complicated by the impact of climate change on glaciers. “80% of the farmers in Ladakh depend on snow and glacier melt water for irrigation,” said Norphel. “The glaciers are receding rapidly and winters are getting shorter and warmer. Whatever little snowfall there is melts away quickly.”
…with simple machines in play
For most of the NGOs active in the region, the key to self-sufficiency lies in keeping traditional knowledge alive and maintaining established structures of cooperative farming among widely scattered settlements. But they are also providing simple technologies such as mechanised threshers and hydraulic pumps.
seabuckt_hornberries.jpg
Local farmers do not receive any money from the sale of products such as seabuckthorn berries/ Photo credit: Flickr/ konstantin timo
The Ladakh Development Foundation, for example, focuses on providing mechanised, diesel-powered threshers to families that have traditionally used animals for the job, cutting the average post-harvest threshing time from 14 days to two.
Similarly, another NGO, the Ladakh Ecological Development Group, has installed 62 hydraulic ram pumps to lift water to higher slopes in the parched terrain.
In addition to technology, organisations such as the Women's Alliance of Ladakh conduct information and training sessions and foster networks among communities, encouraging organic, cooperative farming methods.
High-end research
Meanwhile, the Defence Institute of High Altitude Research (DIHAR), as its name suggests, is engaged in more sophisticated and costly research and development at its labs housed in a sprawling complex near Leh, the region's largest town.
DIHAR is researching a range of agriculture and animal husbandry technologies, including studying the genetic diversity of fruits and vegetables, changing breeding practices for sheep and goats and applying the abundant medicinal plants of the Himalayas for commercial use.
One simple but valuable output from DIHAR is a technique to store vegetables underground during the winter, giving them a much longer 'shelf life'.
DIHAR is researching a range of agriculture and animal husbandry technologies, including changing breeding practices for sheep.
Army comes first
DIHAR engages with local communities to some extent-holding training sessions, running festivals to provide information and working with LAHDC in some areas.
But its first priority is to feed the army-although there can also be considerable benefits for local people. For instance, greenhouse technologies have been given to local people so they can provide army personnel with fresh vegetables.
As DIHAR scientist, Om Prakash Chaurasia, says: “We have been able to supply 50% of soldiers' vegetables by working with local cooperatives and farmers.”
The benefits to Ladakh's farmers are not DIHAR's chief concern, but local communities now have improvements to traditional makeshift greenhouses that grow fresh vegetables during the winter.
DIHAR's greenhouses have three side walls built with mud bricks, a roof made of native willow and poplar logs, and the front covered by ultraviolet stabilised films that absorb large amounts of sunlight. During the night, thick straw mats are placed over the structure to retain heat.
But other DIHAR technologies have brought limited benefits to local communities. Take commercial packaging of products such as juices and jams from the seabuckthorn berry that grows widely in Ladakh. Today, a variety of seabuckthorn products are found in Indian cities. But local communities are involved only in the initial labour-intensive and least-profitable packaging operations.
And local farmers do not receive any money from the sale of the products, although Chaurasia points out that DIHAR generates local employment and “local cooperatives set the price which farmers are to receive per kilogram of seabuckthorn pulp.”
Ladakh Council shows leadership
Besides DIHAR and the NGOs, leadership and commitment from Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council (LAHDC) is essential to promoting self-sufficiency, and the organisation is also helping to roll out low-cost technologies to extend the growing season and increase yields.
For example, it is now giving a 50% subsidy to help farmers cover the $US2,000 cost of building community greenhouses that can grow plants all year. There are now 20 such greenhouses in Ladakh, with 20 more planned for this year.
LAHDC's agriculture and animal husbandry departments have extensive programmes to distribute high-yield seedlings and assist in the selective mating of cattle to improve breeds.
And LAHDC has also designated 8,000 hectares of land in Igophey-an uncultivated expanse on the banks of the Indus river, near Leh-for agricultural use.
An irrigation canal with a web of sub-channels is in place to supply water to the fields and the plan today is to provide plots of about half-a-hectare to families to farm, although bureaucratic obstacles still need to be overcome.
It is unclear whether such land division will result in sufficient yields. As Tsering Phuntsog, a district sheep husbandry officer at LAHDC, points out: “It is very labour-intensive work and finding labour is a big problem in Leh.”
Instead, leasing the area to local entrepreneurs to set up mechanised, commercial-scale operations may make the biggest dent in reducing Ladakh's massive food dependency.
“Mechanised agriculture must come with other improvements, such as a better public transport and distribution system,” added Phuntsog.
Today, a number of pressures are weighing heavily on Ladakh's fragile agricultural landscape, including increasingly less glacial and snow melt, a growing lack of interest in farming among young people and the continuing loss of arable land to tourism.
Reversing the trends will be difficult. But hope lies in the determination of some individuals and organisations to provide more sustainable and innovative agrarian approaches.


Posted by asd Thursday, February 25, 2010 0 comments

Si le monde était un village...

Statistiques. Un autre regard sur les chiffres quand on les ramène à 100 habitants.

Si le monde était un village...
Si le monde était un village...


INFOGRAPHIE -- Alors que nous sommes actuellement 6,8 milliards d'habitants sur la Planète bleue, les prévisions tablent sur 9,3 milliards d'habitants à l'horizon 2 050. Serons-nous trop nombreux et faut-il freiner cette croissance, notamment dans les pays dont la population augmente rapidement ?
La question, qui revient régulièrement et encore récemment au sommet de l'ONU sur le réchauffement climatique à Copenhague, n'est pas nouvelle. En 1970 déjà, le Club de Rome, un organisme international de réflexion regroupant une cinquantaine de pays, demandait à une équipe de scientifiques du Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) de plancher sur les dangers écologiques de la croissance économique et démographique. Ces travaux ont débouché sur un rapport inédit intitulé « Les limites de la croissance » et communément appelé Rapport Meadows, du nom de deux des chercheurs, Donella et Dennis Meadows. Ce document avançait alors la proposition choc de la croissance zéro, reprise depuis par certains altermondialistes.
Trente ans plus tard, Donella et Dennis Meadows ont travaillé sur un nouveau rapport - publié en 2004 et salué cette année par le Japan Prize - et sur de nouveaux modèles de développement, comme le « World3 », qui est une simulation informatique des interactions entre population, croissance industrielle, production de nourriture et limites des écosystèmes terrestres. Les Meadows ont également suscité l'intérêt pour les questions démographiques dans le grand public. En 1990, Donella Meadows publie « State of the Village Report » (Et si le monde était un village de 1000 personnes) pour mieux percevoir le visage de l'humanité derrière les statistiques.
Cette idée a été reprise depuis et a donné lieu à plusieurs livres, dont ceux du japonais Ikeda Kayoko, qui a co-écrit plusieurs ouvrages collectifs « Si le monde était un village de 100 personnes. » Surtout, internet s'est emparé du phénomène pour relayer les principales données de cette extrapolation.
Sous forme de chaîne sur la Toile, plusieurs textes circulent, souvent expédiés par e-mail, qui donnent à voir une autre vision de notre planète.


Les plus de 60 ans toujours plus nombreux

On estime que la population mondiale pourrait atteindre 7 milliards d'habitants en 2 011 et dépasser 9 milliards en 2 050. L'essentiel de cette croissance se concentrera dans les pays en développement. Leur population atteindrait 7,9 milliards en 2 050. Les 15-59 ans seraient 1,2 milliard et les plus de 60 ans 1,1 milliard ; cela en raison de la baisse du nombre d'enfants de moins de 15 ans dans ces pays en développement.
Parallèlement, la population des régions les plus développées resterait pratiquement inchangée avec 1,2 milliard d'individus. Ces chiffres sont issus de la Révision 2 008 des estimations et projections démographiques officielles des Nations Unies. Parmi les autres enseignements que l'on peut tirer de ce document réalisé sur la base des recensements nationaux, d'études spécialisées sur la démographie et d'un examen exhaustif des tendances démographiques passés et présentes figurent notamment le fait que globalement, la population âgée de plus de 60 ans va croître fortement.
Dans les pays développés, les plus de 60 ans vont augmenter de 50 % dans les 40 prochaines années, passant de 624 millions à 416 millions en 2 050. Dans les pays en développement, les plus de 60 ans pourraient passer de 473 millions à 1,6 milliard en 2 050.

Article publie sur La depeche Du midi 2/1/10
.

Posted by asd Saturday, January 2, 2010 0 comments


Aligning with China only undermines New Delhi's negotiating position and costs its people dearly.


BRAHMA CHELLANEY

China has been publicly excoriated by U.S. officials and others for opposing a binding climate-change deal at this month's United Nations summit in Copenhagen. But the real loser was India.

By aligning itself with China's negotiating position, India bracketed itself with the world's largest polluting nation. This tack has been months in the works; back in October, New Delhi signed a five-year memo of understanding with Beijing and agreed, among other things, to present a united front in Copenhagen. Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh went so far as to declare there "is no difference" between the two countries' negotiating positions.

Yet there is a huge difference in actual emissions. China is the world's largest polluter, responsible for 24% of global carbon emissions. Most of these emissions are due to China's economic development path, which has relied heavily on carbon-intensive, manufacturing industries. China's per-capita carbon emissions are four times higher than India's, which boasts the lowest per-capita emissions among all-important developing countries, at 26% of the world's average.

China also doesn't share India's basic approach to curbing global warming. New Delhi wants per-capita emission levels and historic contributions to the build-up of greenhouse gases to form the objective criteria for any global carbon mitigation plan. China, as the world's factory, wants a different formula that discounts carbon intensity linked to export industries.

Nor does India have much in common with other major developing nations, either in its carbon profile or industrial-development levels. For example, in 2007 (the latest figures available) India's per-capita emissions totalled 1.2 tons; South Africa, 9.4; China, 4.8; and Brazil, 2.1, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

These facts argue for India to align itself with the least developed nations, which have lower emissions profiles. Yet the government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh entered the Copenhagen negotiations joined at the hip with China, first by agreeing to put up a united front and then by following in Beijing's footsteps to unveil a voluntary plan to slash its carbon intensity by 2020.

The move forced the U.S. to strike a watered-down deal with the developing-world bloc of Brazil, India, South Africa and China—rather than deal directly with the world's largest polluter, China. The deal also committed India to "implement mitigation actions" open to "international consultations and analysis." Rather than focus on providing basic services—like electricity and safe drinking water—to the hundreds of millions of poor Indians who desperately need them, Mr. Singh also pledged to slash India's emissions intensity by 20% "regardless of the outcome" in Copenhagen.

Past experience should have taught India that whenever it has joined hands with China on environmental issues, it has been let down by Beijing's proclivity to jettison principles in the ruthless pursuit of self-interest. Take the 1989 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer: China teamed up with India in the negotiations, only to reverse its stance and agree to abide by the protocol if it were compensated for the compliance costs. India was forced to follow suit.
In Copenhagen, India would have done better to delink itself from China and the other two leading developing nations and to encourage the world's largest polluters—the U.S. and China—to do a deal.

India not only aligned itself with the wrong group, but also it presented itself inadvertently as a major global polluter by making common cause with China, whose developmental path threatens to unleash a carbon tsunami on the world. After all, had the situation in Copenhagen been reversed—with India's per-capita emissions four times higher than China's, and with India in the line of international fire—would Beijing have helped provide New Delhi diplomatic cover?

Mr. Chellaney, professor of strategic studies at the Centre for Policy Research in New Delhi, is the author of "On the Frontline of Climate Change: International Security Implications" (Konrad Adenauer Foundation, 2007).

Climate Change (Original Mix)
Ecological Consequences of Global Climate Change: Summaries of the 2009 Scientific Literature

Posted by asd 0 comments

Subscribe here

Viadeo widget

Stumble upon submit

networked blog

Followers