EU-US Deal on Energy Savings from Office Equipment
The European Commission and the US Environmental Protection Agency have agreed this month to make new ambitious specifications for computers, copiers and printers under the EU-US Energy Star Programme. The new criteria are effective from 1 July, and are expected to trigger 22 TWh electricity savings during the next four to six years in the EU which is comparable to the annual electrictiy consumption of Ireland. Energy Star is part of the EU's strategy to better manage energy demand, contribute to security of energy supply and mitigate climate change.
“The new criteria are an important contribution to reach the EU's energy efficiency targets. Energy Star is a successful example of energy efficiency cooperation with the US, delivering concrete energy and CO2 savings worldwide, while saving citizens' and enterprises' money", said Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs.
The new technical specifications for computers and imaging equipment, i.e. printers, copiers, fax machines, multifunctional devices etc. were developed together with EU Member States, the US Environmental Protection Agency and stakeholders from around the world. The new criteria for computers and imaging equipment are expected to save 18 TWh and 4 TWh, respectively, in the EU alone due to purchases over the next three years. The savings will be achieved over the lifetime of the products, i.e. during four to six years. Criteria for new office equipment categories will be added soon to the EU-US Energy Star programme, including servers and data storage equipment.
Food, Inc.
In Food, Inc., filmmaker Robert Kenner lifts the veil on America's food industry, exposing the highly mechanized underbelly that has been hidden from the American consumer with the consent of the government's regulatory agencies, USDA and FDA. The nation's food supply is now controlled by a handful of corporations that often put profit ahead of consumer health, the livelihood of the American farmer, the safety of workers and the environment. There are bigger-breasted chickens, the perfect pork chop, insecticide-resistant soybean seeds, even tomatoes that won't go bad, but there are also new strains of E. coli—the harmful bacteria that causes illness for an estimated 73,000 Americans annually. The nation is riddled with widespread obesity, particularly among children, and an epidemic level of diabetes among adults.
Featuring interviews with such experts as Eric Schlosser (Fast Food Nation), Michael Pollan (The Omnivore's Dilemma, In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto) along with forward thinking social entrepreneurs like Stonyfield's Gary Hirshberg and Polyface Farms' Joel Salatin, this film reveals surprising—and often shocking truths—about what we eat, how it's produced, what America has become as a nation and where it is going from here.
Canadian Farmers Critical About GM Wheat
A new study on Canadian farmer perceptions toward genetically modified (GM) wheat - specifically Roundup Ready wheat (RRW), evaluates farmer attitudes towards the benefits and risks of RRW using both quantitative and qualitative methods. The study, Farmer knowledge and a priori risk analysis, initiated in 2004, included responses from 1566 farmers across Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba, and includes organic, conventional, and no-till farmers.
The controversy over the world's first GM wheat, Roundup Ready wheat (RRW), challenged the efficacy of 'science-based' risk assessment, largely because it excluded the public, particularly farmers, from meaningful input. Risk analysis, in contrast, is broader in orientation as it incorporates scientific data as well as socioeconomic, ethical, and legal concerns, and considers expert and lay input in decision-making. Local knowledge (LK) of farmers is experience-based and represents a rich and reliable source of information regarding the impacts associated with agricultural technology, thereby complementing the scientific data normally used in risk assessment.
In 2004, data were collected from farmers using mail surveys sent across the three prairie provinces (i.e., Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta) in western Canada. A stratified random sampling approach was used whereby four separate sampling districts were identified in regions where wheat was grown for each province. Rural post offices were randomly selected in each sampling district using Canada Post databases such that no one post office exceeded 80 farms and that each sampling district comprised 225-235 test farms (n = 11,040). In total, 1,814 people responded, representing an adjusted response rate for farmers of 33%. A subsequent telephone survey showed there was no non-response bias.
The primary benefits associated with RRW were associated with weed control, whereas risks emphasized the importance of market harm, corporate control, agronomic problems, and the likelihood of contamination. Overall, risks were ranked much higher than benefits, and the great majority of farmers were highly critical of RRW commercialization. In total, 83.2% of respondents disagreed that RRW should have unconfined release into the environment. Risk was associated with distrust in government and corporations, previous experience with GM canola, and a strong belief in the importance of community and environment. Farmers were critical of expert-based risk assessment, particularly RRW field trials, and believed that their LK was valuable for assessing agbiotechnology as a whole.
Getting More From Less
A new LIFE Focus publication, Getting more from less: LIFE and sustainable production in the EU, aims to showcase how LIFE funding has helped to reduce the environmental footprint of production processes in five of Europe’s main industrial sectors: Machinery & equipment; Chemicals & plastic; Metal & non-metallic minerals manufacturing; Food & Beverage; and Wood, pulp, paper & printing.
The brochure features successful LIFE initiatives supporting companies that have taken proactive measures to strengthen their environmental performance. The results of these projects can help to reinforce the EU’s action plans on sustainable consumption and production and on sustainable industrial policy.
Austria Proposes GMO Opt-Out Clause
At the EU Environment Council meeting this month, the Austrian delegation intervened on the basis of a note concerning policy options for the regulation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the EU. Austria, supported by a large number of delegations, argued that individual member states should be enabled to prohibit or regulate the cultivation of GMOs on the whole territory or certain areas. The way forward described involves agreeing on socio-economic criteria for this, as well as on a set of minor amendments to relevant EU legislation. The member states supporting this initiative urged the Commission to put forward a proposal and possible additional options.
The authorisation of GMOs is one of those rare subjects of EU legislation where no qualified majority has been achieved in recent years. In accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC on Committee Procedure and in the absence of a qualified majority, it has primarily been the European Commission which has adopted decisions for the authorisation of GMOs.
On four occasions, a qualified majority in Council voted against EC proposals to lift the safeguard clauses invoked with regard to certain GMOs by several Member States: in June 2005, in December 2006, in February 2007 and most recently in March 2009. These safeguard clauses concerned in particular GMOs approved for cultivation.
The French EU Presidency showed great initiative by establishing the Ad hoc Council Working Party on GMOs in the second half of 2008, which resulted in unanimous Council conclusions on 4 December 2008. These Council conclusions called inter alia for a strengthening of environmental risk assessment, more freedom for Member States to decide upon GMO-free zones on their national territory and the appraisal of socio-economic benefits and risks.
The Netherlands delegation came up with a declaration at the March Environment Council calling for Member States to have the right to decide for themselves on the cultivation of GMOs. A number of EU Member States, which include Austria, Bulgaria, Ireland, Greece, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland and Slovenia, appreciate this initiative and are willing to develop it further in order to find a satisfactory long-term solution.
In addition to reasons of nature conservation and biodiversity, the delegations supporting this initiative are of the opinion that relevant socio-economic aspects could form a basis for individual Member States to prohibit or regulate the cultivation of GMOs on the whole territory, or certain defined areas, of individual Member States. However, there is currently no methodology available for defining and evaluating socio-economic criteria. Such criteria could be discussed and agreed upon during the process of discussion on socio-economic aspects that started with the adoption of the Council conclusions of 2008.
In anticipation of the development of socio-economic criteria, they believe that options should be considered which could allow Member States to decide for themselves as regards cultivation, without changing the general authorisation procedure for placing GMOs and products thereof on the market.
The legally soundest solution they envisage is a set of minor amendments to relevant EU legislation, which should introduce the right of an individual Member State to restrict or prohibit indefinitely the cultivation of authorised GMOs on its territory. The amendments could be based on the subsidiarity principle (Article 5 TEC) and the principle of unanimity for decisions on land use (Article 175 TEC). According to the Member States, such an "opt-out" clause could be formulated in quite straightforward legal terms and could easily be integrated into the existing legislation.
Home the Movie
Humanity has upset the balance of the planet, established by nearly four bilion years of evolution. The price to pay is high, but it's too late to be a pessimist: humanity has barely ten years to reverse the trend, become aware of the full extent of its destruction of the Earth's riches and change its patterns of consumption.
In the 90 minute full-length film, never-before-seen landscapes from the sky aim to raise awareness of the current state of planet Earth and demonstrate the urgency for more sustainable living. Home is a journey across planet Earth, filmed in 54 countries in over 120 locations, which took 217 days of shooting over 18 months to complete.
Journey to the West: Driving Forces of China's CO2 Emissions
In 2007, China emitted 21 per cent of global CO2 emissions, making it the largest emitter in the world. A new international study, Journey to world top emitter: An analysis of the driving forces of China's recent CO2 emissions surge, shows that exports to the West are a major source of these emissions.
China is the world's third largest exporter; alongside its growth in export-orientated production its energy consumption has nearly doubled. Trade between the EU and China has increased in recent years and China is now the EU's second trading partner behind the USA.
In 2006, China made its first commitment to improving energy efficiency, aiming to reduce energy consumption by 20 per cent from 2005 to 2010. However, with just one year to go, China is facing a major challenge. By understanding the causes of its growth in emissions, China may be able to manage the key driving forces and the EU can understand its role in terms of imports.
The study used a method called 'structural decomposition analysis' whereby CO2 emissions were 'decomposed' into five driving forces: population, emission intensity or efficiency, economic production structure, consumption patterns and per capita consumption volume. It used data from the Chinese National Bureau of Statistics for the period 2005 to 2007.
The analysis demonstrated that two main factors drive the growth in emissions: an increase in per capita consumption (37 per cent of growth in emissions) and changes in the structure of production (27 per cent of growth in emissions). Population growth and changing lifestyles are relatively weak factors, causing only 2 and 1 per cent of emission increase respectively. Efficiency gain has largely lost its capacity to offset CO2 emissions because electricity generation has remained coal dominated.
Changes in China's production structure are mainly due to its growth in manufacturing, especially for exported products. Half of the emissions increase is due to production of exported goods and services, 60 per cent of which are exported to the West. This means Western consumers are partially responsible for one third of increases in Chinese emissions. These exports tend to be electronic products, metals, chemicals and textile products.
The results raise a number of implications. Firstly, China should focus on energy efficiency in its manufacturing and accelerate its development in low-carbon technologies. It must also review its export structure, perhaps by adding further value to its exports. In addition, international climate agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol could consider ways to address 'carbon leakage', whereby a country reduces emissions in its own territory but causes increases elsewhere through imports. The EU is already taking steps to assess this at a European level.
The current global financial crisis has temporarily reduced the growth of China's exports and CO2 emissions, but export-related emissions will rise in the long-run and measures need to be introduced. For example, climate policy could be redesigned to be similar to tax policy, i.e. carbon taxes could be introduced on imported products similar to value-added taxation.
Ensuring Quality of Life in Europe's Cities and Towns
In May 2008, the Council of Europe's Congress of Local and Regional Authorities captured the concerns and desires of urban policy‑makers and citizens in the title of its new European Urban Charter: Manifesto for a new urbanity. Like numerous other international and European charters, conventions and declarations, the manifesto describes with some apprehension the 'unprecedented environmental, democratic, cultural, social and economic challenges' facing urban centres and their inhabitants.
A new report by the European Environment Agency, Ensuring Quality of Life in Europe's Cities and Towns, reiterates these concerns but also unravels the many apparent paradoxes of urban development and the sometimes perplexing realities of urban Europe today. The report defines a vision for progress towards a more sustainable, well‑designed urban future, and in doing so inevitably raises many questions:
- why call for a new urbanity at a time when Europeans' living standards, notwithstanding the current global economic downturn, have on average and over decades progressively risen?
- why call for a new urbanity when it is evident that urban governance measures have improved living conditions?
- why call for a new urbanity to be delivered by our political leaders, the construction sector and ordinary citizens, when the vast majority of urban areas have benefited from this new prosperity?
The simple answer to these apparent paradoxes is evident in the many concerns expressed by the vast majority of policy‑makers, professionals and civil society. They point out that the current urban model delivers higher living standards and prosperity but fails to deliver 'quality of life'. Unsurprisingly, the complex interaction between the many determinants of quality of life means that efforts to promote one element can have unexpected impacts elsewhere.
However, understanding these apparent paradoxes is vital to realising the vision of a vibrant urban future in which economic, social and environmental aspirations can be delivered concurrently. The notion of 'quality of life' normally implies broad and long‑term societal objectives and indicators, which can be at odds with the short‑term, sectoral targets that guide much policy‑making. With that in mind, the prime aim of this report is to explore the many perceptions of quality of life in order to help define urban problems more clearly, identify options for remedial action and construct evaluations of effectiveness. All these areas are relevant to improving the governance of today's urban realities throughout Europe.
This report highlights the connections between the different dimensions of quality of life and analyzes the inherent causal relationships. These range from clear linkages such as the health benefits of green open space for urban populations to less evident relationships such as the way that individual choice of housing has environmental impacts that affect quality of life. In this way, the report addresses the sustainable design and development of Europe's cities, perceiving environmental quality as a fundamental building block of social well‑being and urban quality of life.
National and Regional Impacts of Climate Change in America
Climate change is already having visible impacts in the United States, and the choices we make now will determine the severity of its impacts in the future, according to a new and authoritative federal study assessing the current and anticipated domestic impacts of climate change.
The report, Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States, compiles years of scientific research and takes into account new data not available during the preparation of previous large national and global assessments. It was produced by a consortium of experts from 13 U.S. government science agencies and from several major universities and research institutes. With its production and review spanning Republican and Democratic administrations, it offers a valuable, objective scientific consensus on how climate change is affecting—and may further affect—the United States.
Key findings of the report include:
1.Global warming is unequivocal and primarily human-induced.
2.Climate changes are underway in the United States and are projected to grow.
3.Widespread climate-related impacts are occurring now and are expected to increase.
4.Climate change will stress water resources.
5.Crop and livestock production will be increasingly challenged.
6.Coastal areas are at increasing risk from sea-level rise and storm surge.
7.Risks to human health will increase.
8.Climate change will interact with many social and environmental stresses.
9.Thresholds will be crossed, leading to large changes in climate and ecosystems.
10.Future climate change and its impacts depend on choices made today.
Rich Countries' Double Duty to Act on Climate Change
Rich countries have a ’double duty’ to cut emissions at home and to help fund emissions reductions in poor countries in order to get a fair and safe climate deal, according to a new report by Oxfam.
The Oxfam report Hang Together or Separately?, launched at the UN talks in Bonn this month, says that only rich countries can break the deadlock now crippling international climate negotiations and prevent the world lurching into climate disaster.
The science shows that annual global emissions need to return to 1990 levels or below by 2020. Oxfam says roughly half of these reductions need to be achieved through the establishment of a ‘Global Mitigation and Finance Mechanism’ which will provide poor countries with the up front support they need to limit the growth in their emissions.
Rich countries must also collectively cut their emissions by at least 40 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020, with a majority of these reductions occurring at home. Oxfam’s report spells out exactly how much individual countries need to cut their emissions by to meet this target and shows that no rich country is anywhere near delivering their fair share of the reductions needed.
Blueprint on SCP
A new publication, Blueprint for European Sustainable Consumption and Production, is the result of a common effort made by representatives from environmental and social organisations and the research community. It brings together cutting-edge analysis, technical expertise, and civil society representation to communicate urgent and priority actions to help Europe change its consumption and production patterns. The document ends with a list of proposed actions and expected leadership from government, business and civil society organisations (CSOs).
The authors find that the formal SCP agendas developed in European countries so far often suggest ‘convenient truths’. Too often the bet is that marginal changes or technical progress will save the day. Scientifically, this is erroneous. The scale of destruction already created by the world’s 6.7 billion people (which is largely driven by production for and consumption in "Western", industrialised societies) can be considered a “global collision” between ecological limits and economic performance. By 2050, 9 billion people are forecasted to inhabit the Earth, almost 50% more than today. Nowadays, despite poverty and low consumption patterns for the majority, globally we already consume resources as if we have 1.3 planets available.
This overconsumption and the related destruction of the planet will accelerate to 2 planets by 2030 and beyond that from then on. Under these conditions, there is simply no technical improvement scenario that can deliver the level of decoupling needed between economic growth and absolute limits on energy and resource use. Such a situation demands that we address the underlying problems in how we have structured our societies and to undertake a fundamental re-think of production, consumption and our economic system as a whole. This would mean providing good lives for everyone in the world, while remaining within set ecological limits.
The backdrop of this document is a policy agenda called ‘Sustainable Consumption and Production’ (SCP). At the European Union level, a Sustainable Consumption and Production and Sustainable Industrial Policy Action Plan was produced in 2008 as part of international level work on the United Nations’ Ten Year Framework of Programmes on SCP. In preparing the Blueprint, the NGO and research communities wanted to present their views on the SCP agenda and what actions public institutions (governments at all levels), the business community, and civil society can – and should - undertake. So the Blueprint acknowledges the complexity of this challenge, particularly as Europe includes some of the most industrialised, consumerist countries in the world.
Yet, the formal SCP agendas as they have been developed so far often deny complexity. Too often the bet is that marginal changes or technical progress alone will save the day, ignoring or denying that we have already had difficulties maintaining the “gains” made from improved efficiencies because increased consumption has eaten up these gains. Pressing problems hence often remain under-addressed or ignored, posing important risks in the longer term. This is even true for SCP agendas in European countries, often seen as world leaders on issues of sustainability, especially on environmental issues.
This Blueprint takes a different approach. It shows that business as usual is a dead end street and marginal change is not enough. It tries to provide clear ways forward or hints towards some new paths needed, to help us make the change to more equitable societies that live within the Earth’s ecological limits. Such an effort includes looking at how we have organised our economic systems around production and consumption, and therefore the need to change both the systems and the behaviour they encourage if we truly want to achieve sustainable development.
Although the Blueprint looks at SCP from a European perspective, the global impacts of these activities are implicitly considered. The shared vision is global equity in wellbeing and access to resources, and recognition that Europe’s policies and behaviour have global impacts. Representing European individuals and institutions, it starts from a principle of moral obligation to achieve such global equity and from a spirit of collaboration and interdependence.
Waterlife
Waterlife tells the epic story of the Great Lakes by following the cascade of its water from northern Lake Superior to the Atlantic Ocean, through the lives of some of the 35 million people who rely on the lakes for survival.
Providing Earth with 20 per cent of its surface fresh water and its third largest industrial economy, the Great Lakes are a unique and precious resource under assault by toxins, sewage, invasive species, evaporating water and profound apathy. They are also one of the planet's great preserves of extraordinary wilderness beauty and a bounty of unique species.
Simple Things Won't Save the Earth
We drive cars with "Save the Whales" bumper stickers, buy aerosol sprays that advertise "no chlorofluorocarbons," and wear T-shirts made from organically grown cotton. All of these "earth friendly" choices and products convince us that we are "thinking globally, acting locally" and saving the planet. But are we really?
In Simple Things Won't Save the Earth, J. Robert Hunter asserts that using catchy slogans and symbols to sell the public on environmental conservation is ineffective, misleading, and even dangerous. Debunking the Fifty Simple Things You Can Do to Save the Earth approach, Hunter shows that there are no simple solutions to major environmental problems such as species extinction, ozone depletion, global warming, pollution, and non-renewable resource consumption.
The use of slogans and symbols, Hunter argues, simply gives the public a false sense that "someone" is solving the environmental crisis—while it remains as serious now as when the environmental movement began.
Without using the "doomsday" style characteristic of much of the popular ecological literature, Hunter present a sober picture of earth's future, should we continue our current rate of exploitation of natural resources justified by human's insatiable needs. Our behavior is compared to the insects or microorganisms that, finding a large supply of their preferred nourishment, abandon all logic and proceed to feed and multiply until the source of food is gone and the environment is depleted, hence causing their own demise.
