oh, larissa

“Peaty wetlands emit about 1.3 billion tonnes of CO2 a year as a result of human activity that drains them and thus exposes them to the oxidative effect of the atmosphere. This figure does not include the effect of fire on dried-up bogs, which can double the amount. That, at least, is the conclusion of a report published by Wetlands International, a lobby group, this week. Drained peat occupies 0.3% of the world’s land surface, but is responsible for 6% of man-made CO2 emissions. Indonesia is the biggest emitter, but richer countries are guilty too. However, the report’s findings contrast with the conclusions of a paper on deforestation also published this week in Nature Geoscience. The conventional figure is that tree-felling causes 20% of man-made CO2 emissions, but the new paper puts that figure at closer to 12%. Together, both studies suggest a change of emphasis may be needed, and that efforts should be made to preserve not just forests, but also bogs. (source)”

Why Cutting Carbon Emissions is not Enough

Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary General and UN Environment Program Executive Director, on lessons from the Montreal Protocol on chlorofluorocarbons in relation to COP15’s focus on carbon emissions and climate mitigation.

“In its annual “World Development Report” published on Tuesday September 15th, the World Bank notes that they accounted for 64% of global CO2 emissions from fossil fuels between 1850 and 2005. In 2005 itself, however, this share had fallen to 50%, and middle-income countries such as India and China (now the world’s biggest emitter) accounted for almost half of CO2 emissions and more than half of wider greenhouse-gas emissions. But rich countries’ 1 billion people emit far more on a per person basis compared with the 4.2 billion people who live in middle-income countries.”

Bundanoon. It was here it all started. In a little rural community in New South Wales, Australia, with approximately 2,500 inhabitants. Bundanoon. Today they will all gather and by show of hands decide to ban bottled water from the town. All shop owners has agreed, despite the fact that they lose over a thousand bucks a years, each. They say it’s a moral question. I say it’s fucking brilliant.

It all started when a big bottled water company wanted to buy land from the town for drilling wells. Visitors and tourists will be encuraged to use tap water by being provided with empty bottles and public water fountains along the main street. Bottled water is a $500 million business in Australia and the townspeople are hoping that their initiative will catch on and spread. Lets all hope so. (via onepointofview)

July 08, 2009, 7:29pm

(via sabino)

The basis of sustainability in policy development.  Had a conversation last week about how it is always an uphill battle against the monetary bottom line.

szymon:rainforests

dihard:

The big blame game is really getting to be too much. 77% of Americans blame the government for high gas prices, 75% blame oil companies, and 70% blame foreign oil producers, per a recent Consumer Reports survey. But all of those culprits pin the blame on another party. So, really, who is to blame for high oil prices?

Oil companies? Many like to blame big oil companies with their “windfall” profits. But they only get 4% of the cost of gasoline at the pump. Big oil often passes the blame onto speculators, the government, or a dearth of supplies.

Speculators? They’re not to blame either, according to recent news. First of all, the percent of futures contracts held by speculators has declined over the past year, so they can’t be to blame. Secondly, in order for speculators to actually change the price of oil, they’d have to take the physical oil off the market. Which they don’t - traders buy a futures contract, or an agreement for the seller to deliver a certain amount of oil on a certain future date for a certain price. But they resell the contract just before the date of delivery, and it typically rolls over into the next month’s contract.Thus, speculators don’t affect the actual spot-price of oil.

In fact, futures trading actually encourages oil companies to make costly investments in new production, which keeps the gas prices down. And they may actually discourages hoarding and makes prices less volatile.

Oil producers? The US Energy Secretary blames insufficient oil production, which has not kept up with demand. But they, namely OPEC, have been blaming speculators and the decline in the dollar, indicating that we are gouging ourselves. OPEC Secretary General stated today there is “no shortage” in the oil market.

The news? Economist Martin Feldstein concludes in today’s WSJ that “news stories, rumors and industry reports can cause substantial fluctuations in current prices – all without anything happening to current demand or supply.”

Congress? While only 4% of the cost of gasoline goes to oil companies, 15% of the cost of gasoline goes for taxes. Plus, Congress prohibits the production of domestic oil and natural gas, so they’re certainly to blame, right? This op-ed argues that if Congress were even to announce it has opened the way for domestic production, prices would drop. There’s that “news stories, rumors, and industry reports” component again. Congress likes to also blame the speculators. But a recent Fortune article invites Congress to “demonstrate a basic understanding of the mechanics of futures trading… Even better, they should be required to explain in detail how it is that investors who never take delivery of a single barrel of crude - and thus never remove a drop of oil from the open market - are causing record high oil prices.”

July 29, 2008, 10:48pm

szymon:

To put beach pollution into perspective, trash was collected from various beaches, packaged it to look like seafood and displayed it at local farmers’ markets. (source)