[discuss-dan] Planet Cancer

["getmelissa@uswest.net" <getmelissa@uswest.net>]

(melissa's note: I grew up in Lousiana'a Cancer Alley.  If we ALL do not
get involved however we are able, Cancer Alley will reproduce itself
many times over. It's already begun. Planet Cancer anyone?)



           Groups work valiantly to help public understand climate issue
   
   
    By C. GERALD FRASER
   © Earth Times News Service 
   
   THE HAGUE--Tenacious and savvy, international nongovernmental
   organizations sunk their teeth into climate change and global warming
   topics before most people had heard the phrases.
   
   For at least eight years, since the Rios Earth Summit, members of the
   three dominant environmental NGOs have critically examined national
   and private sector responses to increasingly solid scientific
evidence
   on greenhouse gas emissions. They also labored, especially in Europe,
   to increase public awareness.
   
   The three NGOs--Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, and World Wildlife
   Fund, hundreds strong?arrived at the Sixth Conference of the Parties
   to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, prepared to lobby,
   encourage, teach, publicize, and do battle in order to ensure that
   governments go away committed to meaningful reductions of emissions.
   
   At the same time, one woman, Margie Richard came and presented Shell
   Oil Company officials a bag of toxic air from around her Norco,
   Louisiana home located next to a Shell plant. Norco is part of an
area
   termed "Cancer Alley." She also gave Shell a bottle of contaminated
   water from a plant site in Ogoni in Nigeria. She was sponsored by
   Corporate Watch, an online publication.
   
   Since Day 1 at The Hagues conference center, NGOs have mounted an
   unrelenting onslaught on the worlds large industrial nations, some of
   whom environmentalists here accuse of attempting to evade previous
   commitments to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, thereby lessening the
   likelihood of a series of large and small, climate-change-stimulated
   natural disasters.
   
   Every day in their briefings, spokespersons for the NGOs criticized
   the behavior of Japan and the US. Australia and Canada were also
   denounced. The NGOs seemed so dispirited that they were asked why not
   just walk away. Kert Davies, of Greenpeace, said I don t think the
   international community will ever walk away. There must be a solution
   and well be here.
   
   One so-called crunch issues turned out to be carbon sinks -forests,
for
   example, are reservoirs, or sinks, that remove carbon emissions from
   the air. Forests are the main focus of WWF, said Lars Georg (CQ),
   Jensen. And WWF has a number of forests experts here.. The U.S. is
one
   of a few governments arguing that the capacity of its forests to
   remove carbon emissions for the atmosphere be considered. To do so
   would, in effect, enable the U.S. to continue unrestricted production
   of carbon emissions from a variety of sources.
   
   Many of the proposals put on the table are highly complex and you
need
   to be a forests expert to deal with them, Jensen said. WWF has a team
   of 22 policy people here to help the media and those delegations, out
   of the 150 here, with little or no expertise, to find their way
   thgrough voluminous computer-generated scenarios of how many metric
   tons of carbon dioxide emissions can be removed with sinks.
   
   The number crunchers can right away sit down at computers and
   calculate what new proposals mean and the complexities of the issues,
   Jensen said.
   
   At practically every news briefing WWF was involved in, Jennifer
   Morgan, railed against the U.S.s position on sinks and the
deleterious
   impact of giving a country credit for its use of sinks. WWFs strength
   is in its technicians and they, or their work in the form of,
   sometimes hourly, press releases, have been, available for the entire
   COP6.
   
   All of the international NGOss staffs are highly professional, but
   they differ in style, or as Tony Juniper said, tone of voice. Juniper
   is based in London for Friends of the Earth and manages people and
   budgets, he said, although he did not know how much FOE spent on the
   climate change conference. His NGO, the worlds largest environmental
   group, has 40 people inside conference meetings and a world wide
grass
   roots network. FOE is strong in the Netherlands. Its chair, Ricardo
   Navarro, an engineer from El Salvador, emphasizes the impact of
   climate change on people. In news briefings, he discusses the ethics
   of polluting which affects non-polluters and the impact on people of
   hurricanes in Central America and floods in Mozambique. Juniper said,
   in an interview, that FOE planned six months for the afternoon last
   Saturday that was devoted to building a 400-meter-long dike outside
   the conference center.
   
   On business interests, Juniper said they were more visible at the
   Kyoto climate change conference than they are here. Then, they had a
   fear of what a climate change agreement might do to their short-term
   interests. Now, he said, industrial interests such as insurance and
   renewables are becoming more visible.
   
   Greenpeace International is perceived by the other big NGOs as
   dramatic. It has the largest number of people registered here,
   although FOE has more grassroots delegates. Greenpeace Internationals
   climate change team is led by Bill Hare, who instructed
correspondents
   on the intricacies of loopholes nat ions were trying to slip into the
   agreement being negotiated.
   
   Thursday, U.S. NGOs held their first daylight news briefing. They,
   too, beat up on the U.S. condemning their nation as bringing
   negotiations to the brink of failure.
   
   The U.S. was accused of wanting to take credit for doing nothing, by
   Anna Aurelio of US Public Interest Research Group. Dan Lashof of
   Natural Resources Defense Council. said U.S. positions "dont
represent
   any real reductions of emissions going into the atmosphere." Others
at
   that briefing were Michael Oppenheimer of Environmental Defense, John
   Passacantando of Greenpeace US, WWFs Jennifer Morgan, and Phillip
   Klapp of National Environment Trust.
   
   The environmentalists were asked why the U.S. came to the climate
   change conference with such retrograde positions. Panelist said more
   vocal public support was needed. One British journalist said,
   "American environmental organizations are too busy inside the
Beltway,
   sucking up to Al Gore."
   
           Copyright © 2000 The Earth Times All rights reserved.

References

   1. mailto:comments11-27GROUPS@earthtimes.org
   2. http://www.earthtimes.org/lowgraphics.htm
------------------------------------------------------------------------

           Climate failure heralds delay on global warming 

  NETHERLANDS: November 27, 2000
   
   THE HAGUE - The world lost a good opportunity to fight global warming
   at failed UN climate talks on Saturday and might wait years for
   another chance, analysts said. 
   
   But as 180 nations surveyed the wreckage of their attempt to seal an
   accord at talks in The Hague, not everyone was in mourning.
   
   "Champagne corks will be popping in the boardrooms of auto, coal and
   oil companies around the globe," said the US Sierra Club
environmental
   group.
   
   "No deal is better than a bad deal," said the conservative business
   pressure group the Global Climate Coalition. "We are pleased that the
   US recognised a bad deal when they saw it."
   
   A combination of business pressure and US politics will ensure it
will
   be later rather than sooner before nations start the complex job of
   fighting climate change, analysts said.
   
   "This was a window of opportunity that may not come again," said the
   National Environmental Trust, a green pressure group.
   
   Experts said any resumption of talks on cleaning the planet would
have
   to await a result in the US presidential election, currently mired in
   a dispute over ballot counts in Florida.
   
   If the winner turns out to be former oilman and Republican candidate
   George W. Bush, progress would be slow.
   
   "Bush was suckled on oil," said environmental analyst George Monbiot,
   referring to the one-time business careers of the Texas governor and
   his father, former President George Bush.
   
   They said the Clinton administration, while not environmentally
strong
   in European eyes, was more sympathetic to green concerns than any
Bush
   government was likely to be.
   
   "This is likely to have been the European nations' best opportunity
to
   achieve a strong climate treaty," said Philip Clapp of the US
National
   Environmental Trust. Bush was likely to push even harder to promote
   conservative business interests.
   
   "It's a tragedy that they didn't give it one more push," said Alden
   Meyer of the US Union of Concerned Scientists.
   
   "The EU is going to face a very different negotiating partner if it's
   a Bush administration," he said.
   
   But even a Gore victory offered no prospect of a quick result, as
   attempts by the White House to make progress on climate change
   perennially face strong opposition in Congress, where powerful energy
   and farm lobbies wield influence.
   
   Green groups in The Hague nevertheless sought decisive action from
the
   Clinton administration because they argue the United States has a
duty
   to act given that it is the world's biggest polluter.
   
   ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTER
   
   The talks tried to agree steps to implement a pact reached in Kyoto,
   Japan in 1997 calling for a five percent average cut in developed
   nations' 1990 levels of emissions by 2010.
   
   Scientists say gases like carbon dioxide threaten potentially
   disastrous effects on weather, sea levels and the spread of diseases
   like malaria and dengue fever.
   
   US and EU negotiators said they came very close to sealing an
   agreement, but in the end a row over how to bear the costs of
cleaning
   the planet's atmosphere scuppered the talks.
   
   Many delegates urged a resumption in coming weeks, but US chief
   negotiator Frank Loy said that Washington stood ready to resume
   negotiations only at some point in the coming year, a possible
   reflection of disarray over the US election.
   
   "We came so close, only to see our efforts unravel," Loy said. "We
   didn't quite manage to push it over the goal line."
   
   Green groups said US intransigence, coupled with an EU negotiating
   team weakened by red tape and political infighting, deprived the
   conference of a historic accord.
   
   The result was a victory for polluters and defeat for poorer nations
   facing devastating storms and floods, green groups said.
   
   The United States insisted on solutions that would absolve its
   companies and farmers from making substantial cuts in emissions.
Green
   groups were furious and said voters would not forget who was
   responsible.
   
   "Who is to blame for this fiasco? Blame the United States and its
   supporters Japan, Australia and Canada who fought tooth and nail to
   exploit every loophole," said Friends of the Earth.
   
   Story by William Maclean
   
   REUTERS NEWS SERVICE

   7. http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=9107#top
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
           World must push US on climate - Greenpeace
 
   NETHERLANDS: November 27, 2000
   
   THE HAGUE - The rest of the world needs to put enormous pressure on
   the United States to fight global warming following the failure of UN
   climate talks, an official of the Greenpeace environmental group said
   on Sunday. 
   
   Bill Hare, climate policy director of Greenpeace International, said
   the group would step up its campaigning for a deal on practical
   measures to tackle climate change when the negotiations resume next
   May.
   
   "It is crystal clear now that US needs to come under enormous
   pressure," Hare told Reuters.
   
   "We will be working like hell to make sure that happens. We will
   revive and redouble our efforts."
   
   The talks in The Hague collapsed on Saturday when the United States
   and the European Union failed to settle a bitter dispute over how to
   curb emissions of harmful gases believed to be causing climate
change.
   
   Hare said Washington had tried to railroad a deal at the two-week
   talks and its negotiators were astounded when the 15-nation EU stood
   firm.
   
   "The Americans were bullheaded. They just don't understand the public
   pressure for action in Europe and the rest of the world," he said.
   
   The EU-US dispute was mainly over a US plan to allow developed
nations
   to count carbon dioxide soaked up by forests, so-called carbon sinks,
   against emissions reduction targets.
   
   Washington, backed by Australia, Canada and Japan, says it could not
   reach its targets without such methods. Opponents say the plan might
   actually lead to an increase in global emissions.
   
   REUTERS NEWS SERVICE

   7. http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=9109#top
----------------------------------------------------------------------

           Climate pact fiasco leaves business awaiting rules

   NETHERLANDS: November 27, 2000
   
   THE HAGUE - The failure of UN climate talks has dashed business hopes
   for clear rules over potentially lucrative technology transfer to the
   developing world and the emerging market of trading greenhouse gas
   emissions.
   
   "Business is disappointed with the outcome," said Nick Campbell,
   chairman of the Climate Change Working Group at the International
   Chamber of Commerce.
   
   "We came here expecting a decision which would have clarified the
   rules and guidelines of the Kyoto Protocol. We now walk away as empty
   handed as everyone else and leave as confused as when we arrived
about
   the role we might play in contributing to solutions."
   
   The two-week conference ended without agreement on measures to fight
   global warming, after the United States and the European Union failed
   to settle a bitter wrangle over ways to cut greenhouse gas emissions
   implicated in climate change.
   
   However, there are tentative plans for the conference to resume some
   time next year, probably in Bonn.
   
   "This decision represents a setback but not a permanent breakdown in
   the process," said Eileen Claussen, president of the US-based Pew
   Center on Global Climate Change.
   
   "I hope in the weeks and months ahead, all sides will lower their
   voices and resume discussions toward an agreement that can stand the
   test of time.
   
   Many companies say the international fight against global warming
will
   provide big growth opportunities to build clean power stations in
   developing countries, especially in Asia and Latin America, where
   electricity demand is soaring.
   
   Such openings would be provided by the so-called clean development
   mechanism, a measure that allows countries to encourage companies to
   make clean investments to offset national obligations to cut
emissions
   of greenhouse gases.
   
   BILLIONS OF DOLLARS AT STAKE
   
   But the failure of The Hague talks meant that no such techniques were
   agreed upon.
   
   "American businesses looking for the rules of the road under the
Kyoto
   protocol have been left high and dry," said Glenn Kelly, executive
   director of Global Climate Coalition, an industry group.
   
   The mechanism, and others including one allowing the trading of the
   right to pollute, were proposed under an agreement reached in Kyoto,
   Japan, in 1997 that set targets for cuts in emissions of
heat-trapping
   gases.
   
   At stake are investments worth billions of dollars, but companies are
   reluctant to invest in new schemes until they know how the terms of
   the Kyoto protocol will be implemented, executives say.
   
   Emissions trading allows countries whose emissions are below their
   Kyoto targets to sell carbon credits to countries whose emissions are
   above their agreed pollution limits.
   
   For businesses, the Kyoto agreement would open the doors to a vast
   array of projects ranging from renewable energy schemes to forestry
   plantations.
   
   Green groups and the EU said Washington's enthusiastic advocacy of
   such measures amounted to a scam that would absolve the United
States,
   the world's biggest polluter, from having to make any real cuts in
   emissions at home.
   
   The lure of profits has helped change corporate attitudes to tackling
   climate change since the Kyoto summit when many companies, including
   all the oil giants, opposed measures to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
   
   "The consensus on climate change has deepened in the last three
years.
   Nowhere is this more true than in the business community," Frank Loy,
   US chief negotiator at the talks, told delegates to the conference.
   
   "They (companies) went to Kyoto largely to block action, but they
have
   come to The Hague to contribute constructively."
   
   Story by Margaret Orgill
   
   REUTERS NEWS SERVICE
   

   7. http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=9113#top
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
Britain still hopeful of global climate deal
   
   UK: November 27, 2000
   
   LONDON - British Environment Minister Michael Meacher said yesterday
   the failure to reach a pact on global warming at UN climate talks
need
   not spell the end of efforts to coordinate cuts to emissions of
   harmful gases.
   
   The two-week conference in The Hague ended without agreement on
   measures to fight global warming, after the United States and the
   European Union failed to settle a bitter wrangle over ways to cut
   greenhouse gas emissions implicated in climate change.
   
   "We did fail last night. It is a tragedy, but it's a reversible
   tragedy and we will now put together those last final loose ends that
   we didn't have the time to do last night," Meacher told the BBC's
   Breakfast With Frost Programme.
   
   He said there was still hope for some progress towards implementing a
   pact reached in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997, which called for a five
percent
   average cut in developed nations' 1990 levels of emissions by 2010.
   
   "We cannot ratify (the Kyoto agreement) before 2002. You need 55
   countries who have got to ratify and they must account for 55 percent
   of total global greenhouse gas emissions," Meacher said. "I'm still
   convinced that we can reach that."
   
   He said that no country could afford to ignore the issue for much
   longer.
   
   "This is not something that the world can walk away from. Every
   country in the world is a victim of climate change - we all have the
   same incentive to reach agreement and we will."
   
   Negotiations are set to resume next May. But experts say that the
   failure in The Hague to agree on cuts to emissions of greenhouse
   gases, such as carbon dioxide (CO2) would bring more storms and
floods
   of the kind that have ravaged parts of Asia, Europe and Australia
this
   year.
   
   The EU-US dispute was mainly over a US plan to allow developed
nations
   to count carbon dioxide soaked up by forests, co-called carbon sinks,
   against targets for cutting emissions.
   
   Washington, backed by Australia, Canada and Japan, says it could not
   reach its targets without such methods, but opponents say the plan
   might actually lead to a rise in global emissions.
   
   REUTERS NEWS SERVICE

   7. http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=9118#top
------------------------------------------------------------------------


-- 
$EA$ON$ GREETING$,
 melissa

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/4/_/_/_/975349504/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
discuss-dan-unsubscribe@egroups.com