BirdLife urges Parties to recognise the importance of NBSAPs as the guiding mechanism to implement the Strategic Plan 2011-2020 at national level (Image credit: M Cooper).
Advanced Biofuels and Biobased Chemicals to Be Topic of Discussion in Houston, TX
HOUSTON, TX–(Marketwire – Sep 19, 2012) – The 2012 National Advanced Biofuels Conference & Expo taking place November 27-29, 2012 in Houston, TX, announced its preliminary agenda this week. With three (3) comprehensive program tracks titled Pathways & Partnerships, Inputs & Supply Chains and Money & Markets, this year’s event will feature advanced biofuels and biobased chemicals — technology scale-up, project finance, policy, national markets and more — with a core focus on the industrial, petroleum and agribusiness alliances defining the national advanced biofuels industry.
Presentation topics include:
Converting existing industrial assets into next-generation biofuels
Forging powerful project alliances
Aviation and military industry positions on biobased jet fuel
Venture capital and private equity viewpoints
Overcoming barriers to market entry
The national market outlook for biobased fuels and chemicals
Exceeding the performance of petroleum-based products
“The National Advanced Biofuels Conference & Expo will bring the entire biofuels industry together under one roof,” says Tim Portz, Vice President of Content & Executive Editor at BBI International. “This comprehensive agenda exemplifies the current direction the national biofuels industry is taking. Drop-in biofuels, advanced and cellulosic ethanol, biobased chemicals — we’re covering it all in Houston.”
Attendees and exhibitors will include hundreds of professionals in key sectors including finance (venture, private and institutional equity); petroleum and petrochemical refining; pulp and paper milling; biofuels and biobased products manufacturing; agricultural processing; waste management; auto manufacturing; aviation; government/military; research and academia.
Minister Hogan announces recipients of 2012 Local Agenda 21 Environmental Partnership Fund Grants
14/09/12
Mr Phil Hogan T.D., Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, announced today (14/9/2012) the recipients of grants under the 2012 Local Agenda 21 Environmental Partnership Fund. These projects are co-funded by the Department and Local Authorities. €337,000 has been provided by the Department and €337,500 is being provided by local authorities, bringing the total funding to €674,500 for 2012.
The Local Agenda 21 Environmental Partnership Fund promotes sustainable development by assisting small scale, non-profit environmental projects at a local level. Projects are recommended for funding by local authorities following an open call for applications. A total of 490 projects have been funded this year.
Announcing the recipients of this year’s funding the Minister stated “This funding goes to a wide range of local environmental initiatives right across the country; including community gardens, waste reduction and biodiversity projects. I’m delighted that my Department, in conjunction with the local authorities, can help to make these projects happen and can assist the good work that’s being done in communities right across the country”.
A full list of this year’s successful projects is now available at:
PR, search and social media agency Punch Communications has been appointed by eco-friendly electricity provider, green energy uk, to raise the brand’s national profile to consumers and businesses.
Since its appointment, Punch has been responsible for building awareness of the brand as a key player in the green energy sector, utilising its position outside of the ‘big six’ providers. The agency has also commenced an off-site link building SEO strategy to raise green energy uk’s organic positioning in search engine rankings.
Established in 2001 and based in Hertfordshire, green energy uk is an electricity provider with personality, providing a greener and more customer focussed approach to utility supply. It sources energy from traditional green resources, such as wind and solar, as well as more unusual places including tomato plants, skip waste and even pig poo.
It is this personality alongside telling the brand story of green energy uk founder, Doug Stewart, which Punch is highlighting through its media outreach.
Doug Stewart, CEO at green energy uk, commented: “Over the last 10 years, we have built our niche within the sector as a green energy provider with a no-nonsense attitude and exemplary customer service. We wanted to appoint a like-minded PR agency that not only had a good understanding of the industry, but also understood our culture, our core business proposition, while being able to adopt the character and personality of the brand.”
Pete Goold, managing director at PR, social and search agency Punch Communications, added: “As soon as we met Doug and the team we were instantly captivated by the culture of the business and passions that drive them. There is a real appetite in the media for stories about alternative energy, therefore it is an opportune moment for green energy uk to start putting its head above the parapet and commenting on green issues.”
At the World Heritage Committee (WHC) meeting in June 2011, the Tanzanian government confirmed that the 53km stretch of road through the Serengeti National Park would not be paved, and would continue to be managed by TANAPA (the Tanzanian National Park Authority). It would be continue to be used mainly for tourism and administrative purposes, which results in a low level of traffic. The Tanzanian government was also said to be seriously considering construction of an alternative road running south of the Serengeti.
The BirdLife Partnership welcomed this statement as the removal of a threat to the world’s best known national park, which is part of the route of the world’s greatest mammal migration, involving 1.8 million wildebeest and other antelopes. But since June 2011, the Tanzanian authorities have been progressing the plans for the eastern stretch of the Serengeti road, and there have been no clear public statements about the western stretch of the road. A revised Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) has not been published or submitted to the WHC. Nor has there been any public statement about an alternative southern route.
BirdLife understands that some commercial traffic is already passing through the Serengeti National Park. Although some of the Tanzanian Government communications state that the road will not be upgraded and will remain a gravel road, at present it is not a gravel road but a seasonal dirt track, so any change, including gravelling, will in fact amount to upgrading.
The Serengeti National Park, a UNESCO World Heritage Site and Important Bird Area, is home to over 450 bird species including two endemic to Tanzania. It is thought one third of Africa’s population of Endangered Rueppell’s Vultures Gyps rueppellii uses the Serengeti ecosystem.
300,000 tourists visit the Serengeti every year, and tourism is a major foreign exchange earner for Tanzania. It would therefore be an economic as well as an environmental mistake to endanger the Serengeti. Globally, public perceptions would be very negative, eclipsing the current goodwill and admiration for the many conservation achievements of Tanzania. The local communities’ livelihoods base could also be greatly and negatively impacted.
BirdLife is concerned that a road across the Serengeti would negatively affect its biodiversity in a number of ways, but especially through increased road kills of large mammals and attendant scavengers, including vultures, which are facing extreme pressure outside Protected Areas. It could also increase the risk of poaching. Furthermore, the proposed road will pass close to Lake Natron, by far the most important breeding site for Lesser Flamingos in the world, and could adversely affect their breeding.
The Wildlife Conservation Society Tanzania (BirdLife in Tanzania) and the BirdLife International Partnership recognise the need for Tanzania to upgrade its transport infrastructure, including the road network, to provide increased access for local people around the Serengeti National Park.
However, BirdLife remains concerned that development of the eastern stretch of the road is proceeding, particularly as this is happening in advance of any studies on an alternative southern route. This piece-meal approach is likely to lead to increased future pressure for the section of the road through the Serengeti to be upgraded.
Transport solutions must be sustainable and environmental issues should be properly taken into account in route decisions as is required by both Tanzanian and international law. BirdLife believes a solution is possible through strategic planning. A Land Use Plan exercise supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), with full public consultation, should be carried out for Northern Tanzania to examine strategic options for meeting transport needs and for integrating these with environmental objectives (including biodiversity protection) and the needs of local people.
BirdLife, therefore, requests that at its June 2012 meeting, the World Heritage Committee adopts a decision which:
Urges Tanzania to set a clear timetable for undertaking Land Use Plan/Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) processes to examine a range of potential alternative routes, which could meet the objectives of the proposed Serengeti Highway (providing an international transit corridor and better transport links for local communities) without serious damage to the World Heritage Site;
Urges Tanzania to put individual road projects on hold, including plans for any tarmac roads through migration routes and/or up to the edges of the National Park, pending completion of the Land Use Plan/SEA; and
Urges Tanzania to confirm that it has abandoned plans for upgrading the dirt track road across the Serengeti National Park (by gravelling or otherwise).
The influential Tory MP Zac Goldsmith says the intense focus on climate change in the last decade has encouraged politicians and environment groups to drop key green issues like air pollution, biodiversity and food and avoid reform of the economic system.
“Climate change went too far. A lot of stuff slipped off the agenda. The environment became about carbon and not the environment that you can feel and touch and see. Food, biodiversity, air quality all got knocked off. When we talked about forests we talked about them as sticks of carbon.
“If you are just looking only at climate change you do not really have to address the economic system in the same way. By focusing so much on carbon it allowed us to take our eye off the ball.”
Goldsmith, who edited the Ecologist magazine in the 1990s and came under attack by Monsanto and GM companies, was talking in a series of Guardian interviews with leading figures in the environment debate over the last 60 years. He underlines his long-standing opposition to GM food: “GM was never about feeding the world or environmental problems, but about control of the entire food system by a handful of very powerful companies. The war continues.”
In other interviews, Jonathon Porritt, former chair of the Ecology party and head of the Sustainable Development Commission, says that Margaret Thatcher and her environment secretary Nicholas Ridley did more than anyone in the last 60 years to put green issues on the national agenda and swell the membership of groups like Friends of the Earth.
“Things really took off during Mrs Thatcher’s short-lived green period. From 1987/1988 when [she] started to talk about the ozone layer and acid rain and climate change, a lot of people who had said these issues were for the tree-hugging weirdos thought, ‘ooh, it’s Mrs Thatcher saying that, it must be serious’.
“She played a big part in the rise of green ideas by making it more accessible to large numbers of people. Nicholas Ridley was one of the best recruiting sergeants we ever had. He was always on the wrong side of the science and public opinion. We always had a fantastic response every time he talked.”
Stanley Johnson, former Conservative MEP and the father of London mayor Boris Johnson, called on the government to introduce a population policy. “Britain’s population should be 10-15 million people. That would do us splendidly. It’s a nonsense that we are confronted with 70 million people. But we have been shunted aside by the rise of liberal correctness. You cannot talk about [population] now without being accused of being anti-feminist or a racist. The government has to start taking immigration seriously. If you look at the rise of Britain’s population you see a really serious differential in the fertility of the immigrant as opposed to that of the [indigenous] population.”
Johnson, who in the 1970s drafted the first EU legislation on nature protection, attacks the coalition for dismantling the planning system. “Osborne has been completely panicked by the recession. They have lost their marbles. Suddenly they think that the only way they can achieve economic growth is by ripping up environment legislation. We are in the process of…sacrificing the crown jewel of countryside protection and reducing it to 52 pages of nonsense. It does seem to be most extraordinary for a party that has until now prided itself on its environmental record.”
Former government adviser, head of the London Zoo and chief scientist at the departments of environment and transport Sir Martin Holdgate, says that the government did not take the environment seriously in the 1950s. “Britain was led kicking and screaming into the new environment future. Government was very complacent. Frankly it wasn’t [until the 60s] that it had much to do with ordinary people. The lead was with the scientists and researchers. It was academic, scientific. Like many scientists I was not in tune with the popular [environment] movement. It seemed to be emotion-driven, a bit populist, not really too keen about the scientific rigour on which it was basing its statements.”
“All Congolese have the right to enjoy the nation’s wealth. The State has a duty to redistribute it equitably and to guarantee the right to development.”
This basic constitutional right of the Congolese people – to fairly benefit from the natural wealth of the country – should be the priority for Congo’s new government and for its returning President, Joseph Kabila. The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is currently the least developed country in the world, according to the United Nations, with one in every five children dying before their fifth birthday. Some parts of the country that are richest in natural resources are also the most deprived, lacking basic health and education services.
As the DRC’s new parliamentarians and government leaders begin their terms of office, they should demonstrate a commitment to upholding Congolese law as it applies to natural resources. The DRC’s weak justice sector, combined with poor law enforcement, is a major reason why potential gains from the resource sector do not materialise. There are few deterrents or consequences for those looking for personal enrichment at the expense of the state and people.
Aspects of the trade in minerals, oil and timber should be open for all to see so that officials can be held accountable for their role in managing the country’s resources. The authorities have recently taken encouraging steps, including the publication of dozens of mining contracts and an endorsement of measures designed to prevent armed groups profiting from the minerals trade. A key measure to improve the transparency of the resources sector should be the proper accounting by the government of all financial and in-kind payments made in relation to resource agreements, including signature bonuses and taxes. All of this information should be made publicly available.
This document sets out proposals for reforms in the DRC’s natural resource sector, covering the three key industries: mining, hydrocarbons and logging. Through their implementation the new government would show a clear commitment to ensuring the Congolese people benefit from the country’s natural wealth.
Arlington, Va. – Last week Dr. Greg Stone, the senior vice president and chief scientist for Oceans at Conservation International served as a panelist at an open-session plenary meeting at the 42nd annual meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF) where over 1,600 business leaders, 40 heads of state and hundreds of leaders from academia, the media and non-profit organizations met to discuss the current state of the global economy and address and meet future economic challenges.
Stone, who works to advance the agenda of the WEF Ocean Governance Council, spoke at the interactive plenary session titled, ‘The Ocean Solution,’ which included featured speakers Robert B. Zoellick, President, The World Bank Group, Clarence Otis Jr, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Darden Restaurants, Koji Sekimizu, Secretary-General, International Maritime Organization (IMO) and moderator John Micklethwait, Editor-in-Chief, The Economist, United Kingdom.
“The vast wealth our oceans can provide has the potential to solve the looming global problems of the 21st century,” Stone said. “Before they can feed and provide livelihoods for our growing population, we must first be able to understand what their limits are and how we can restore their abundance and health to an optimal level.”
The oceans act as the Earth’s primary life support system. They are responsible for providing a whole host of ecosystem services which include the provision of seafood, biodiversity, clean water, and oxygen of which they supply over 50% to the air we breathe. It is these services and others that make the planet a livable and prosperous place for people and societies. As the demands on the oceans increase, however, so too do the impacts on their overall health and ability to provide these critical services. In particular, through overfishing – FAO data shows that 53% of marine fishery stocks are fully exploited with no room for further expansion; 28% are overexploited; 3% are depleted; and 1% are recovering from depletion and require plans for rebuilding.
Currently, 1 billion people depend on fish for essential nutrition. In 1997, is was estimated, using the entire World’s GDP, that the ocean provides over $ 21 trillion (Costanza et al) of unaccounted value to the world economy – these are goods and services that are supplied to mankind for free; today this value would be much higher. A 2010 UN study has estimated that by the year 2050 the global population will reach 9 billion people and will include 3 billion new people in a middle class that will total 5 billion.
“Participating in this discussion at the World Economic Forum is a sign that the health of our oceans is finally on the global agenda,” Stone said. “With our population growing and becoming more prosperous, how the health of mankind is closely linked to the health of oceans is an issue we can no longer afford to put off.”
For more information, contact: Kevin Connor, Media Manager, Conservation International Office +1 703 341 2405 / mobile +1 571 232 0455 / email [email protected]
Note to editors: Conservation International (CI) — Building upon a strong foundation of science, partnership and field demonstration, CI empowers societies to responsibly and sustainably care for nature, our global biodiversity, for the long term well-being of people. Founded in 1987 and marking its 25th anniversary in 2012, CI has headquarters in the Washington DC area, and 900 employees working in nearly 30 countries on four continents, plus 1,000+ partners around the world. For more information, please visit at www.conservation.org, or on Facebook or Twitter.
But Obama chose to co-opt the Republicans’ pro-oil and natural gas position rather than defend his own green agenda, as environmental groups had hoped.
“This country needs an all-out, all-of-the-above strategy that develops every available source of American energy – a strategy that’s cleaner, cheaper and full of new jobs,” Obama said.
Obama’s main challenge was to disarm Republicans attacks over his rejection of the Keystone tar sands pipeline last week. Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich regularly attack Obama for blocking the project to pump Alberta crude to the refineries on the Texas coast, accusing him of squandering a chance to create jobs.
The word “Keystone” did not cross Obama’s lips on Tuesday night – but he made sure to signal his support for oil.
“Over the last three years, we’ve opened millions of new acres for oil and gas exploration,” Obama said, reiterating the administration’s decision last year to open up new areas for drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, scene of the BP oil spill, and the Arctic.
“Right now, American oil production is the highest that it’s been in eight years. That’s right – eight years,” he said.
The support for an “all-of-the-above” energy strategy – itself a line borrowed from Republicans – is unlikely to give Obama total protection.
Mitch Daniels, the Republican governor of Indiana chosen to give the party’s official response to the address, accused Obama of being an extremist.
“The extremism that stifles the development of homegrown energy, or cancels a perfectly safe pipeline that would employ tens of thousands, or jacks up consumer utility bills for no improvement in either human health or world temperature, is a pro-poverty policy,” Daniels said in prepared remarks.
The other big unmentionable was Solyndra, the solar company that was first in line for an Obama clean energy loan – and then went bankrupt last year. The company is also a staple of Romney and Gingrich stump speeches.
Obama indirectly acknowledged Solyndra, saying: “Some technologies don’t pan out; some companies fail. But I will not walk away from the promise of clean energy.”
Against the 20 or so references to “energy”, there was only one mention of climate change – which is one more than last year’s State of the Union when Obama did not dare utter the word. But it was in a line in which Obama said there was little chance of Congress passing climate change legislation.
“The differences in this chamber may be too deep right now to pass a comprehensive plan to fight climate change,” Obama said.
There was also no specific mention of the Environmental Protection Agency – a frequent target of Republicans. Obama said he would be prepared to fight Congress to get legislation passed.
“I will not back down from making sure an oil company can contain the kind of oil spill we saw in the Gulf two years ago,” he said. “I will not back down from protecting our kids from mercury poisoning, or making sure that our food is safe and our water is clean.”
On the other energy and environment issues, it was not immediately clear what Obama was offering.
His promise to open up more areas for offshore drilling seemed like a reiteration of the drilling policy put forward last year. He said the federal government would require oil and gas companies to disclose what chemicals they use in the controversial process known as fracking – even though most states already require such disclosures.
Obama also mentioned expanding clean-energy projects – such as giant solar farms – on public lands, to generate enough electricity for 3m homes a year. The department of energy approved 18 such projects by the end of last year that, by conservative estimates, would power at least 3m homes.
Obama also called on Congress to set a clean energy standard – a call he made last year. But, unlike last year’s State of the Union which called for electricity companies to get 80% of their power from renewables, Obama did not bother to set a target this time around.
One other omission will probably be better received by campaigners. There was no mention, for example, of developing America’s nuclear industry, which was a main theme of Obama’s first State of the Union in 2010. After Fukushima, neither Obama nor Republicans seem inclined to put a nuclear renaissance back on the agenda.
