Blog List

Friday 16 September 2016

Could Geothermal Reservoirs Under Salton Sea Save the Colorado River?

Untapped resource could replace power generated at Glen Canyon Dam

This article originally appeared in EcoWatch
President Obama made a historic announcement Wednesday, saying that the federal government is considering investing in the geothermal power in the rock formations under the Salton Sea in Southern California. Considered to be "the most powerful geothermal reservoirs in the world," the Salton Sea announcement could play a critical role in the future management of the Colorado River.
Salton SeaPhoto by Stephen Kallao The Salton Sea announcement could play a critical role in the future management of the Colorado River. 
Fifty years ago, Glen Canyon Dam was built above the Grand Canyon, and the Colorado River was enslaved to generate electricity to feed the hunger of the booming southwestern cities and suburbs. The Colorado's pulsing flows had carved and nourished the Grand Canyon for millennium, but that came to a crashing halt when the gates were closed and the water was ponded in Lake Powell. The environmental damage and steady decline of one of our nation's crown jewels has led to many calls for restoration of the natural system through the removal of Glen Canyon Dam.
The dam's ability to provide power has shielded it from any serious attempt to bring it down. Times change though and, over the last 16 years, the historic drought in the Southwest U.S. has drained Lake Powell to historic lows, severely diminishing the potential to generate hydroelectricity from the massive turbines encased in Glen Canyon Dam. Water and electricity managers are scrambling to come up with a plan to prop up the lake above what's called "power pool" so they can continue to generate and sell power. Any such solution is, however, clearly a stop-gap measure to keep the dam operational and is doomed to fail when confronted by the realities of climate change.
Fortunately, Obama's announcement offers a true path to the future.
The Salton Sea announcement could create an opportunity to replace the hydroelectric power generated at Glen Canyon Dam and a path forward to restoring the Grand Canyon. The geothermal reservoirs under the Salton Sea are an untapped resource that could add power to the grid as Lake Powell is slowly drained and Glen Canyon Dam is removed. Lake Powell's water could be put into Lake Mead, its downstream sister, thus keeping one fully functioning hydroelectric facility on the grid. Further, this "geo-hydro power trade" could keep the federal government solvent in its current financial contracts to provide electricity to the Southwest U.S.
The idea has already generated a bit of a buzz when Geothermal Resources retweeted this tweet:
Salton Sea Geothermal power could be used replace Glen Canyon hydropower as #climatechangedrains Powell. #CORiver
Climate change scientists have painted a bullseye on the Southwest U.S. and the Colorado River, indicating the area will become warmer and dryer with even less flow in the Colorado River. Hydroelectricity is threatened at both Lakes Powell and Mead, as well as reservoirs in California. Salton Sea geothermal power could be a breakthrough in building a climate change-resistant Southwest while also preserving and restoring the lifeblood of the region—the Colorado River.


For further information log on website :
http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/geothermal_reservoirs_under_salton_sea_save_the_colorado_river

Standing Rock: Images and Notes From the Field

The Dakota Access Pipeline has rallied Native Americans tribes like no other issue in recent history

Mni Wiconi” – pronounced “Min-nee wi-chon-ey,” roughly translates to “Water of life” or “Water is life” and this rings sacred and true to the tribes that rely on the Missouri River as a source of water for themselves and their land. This water has now been threatened, as the North Dakota Access Pipeline, which would pump up to half a million barrels of crude oil under the Missouri River, directly under their life supply.
Watter in a gallon pastic bottlePhoto by Sara Lefleur-VetterA gallon of Missouri River water bears the mantra: “Water of life” or “Water is life.” 
Time and time again we’ve seen the environmental disasters that follow big oil, displace people and animals. The movement at Standing Rock Reservation, where members of over 200 tribes have set up a massive encampment, the largest gathering of different Native Americans in history, is calling for a ban on the Dakota Access Pipeline. Mainstream media calls them “protestors” but they prefer the term “water protectors.” Many of the folks here have quit their jobs to be a permanent fixture of this movement, leaving behind their families and the comforts of home to live in a tent and off the grid.
In the early hours of Friday, September 9, tribal elders and war veterans led a march from the encampment to the blockade and the burial site of their ancestors that’s now been reduced to a pile of dirt, hardly resembling the sacred site it was just days before the bulldozers arrived for the $3.8 billion pipeline. They led a pipe ceremony at the site followed by a drum and dance where hundreds held hands, chanting and praying in solidarity.
Lakota chief Arvol Looking HorsePhoto by Sara Lefleur-VetterChief Arvol Looking Horse, Keeper of the Sacred White Buffalo Calf Pipe, and leader of the Lakota Sioux Nation, observes a drum-circle near the construction blockade at Standing Rock. 
“Would you like to put down your sacred camera over there with my things?” Asked the man to my left. “I think we will dance now.”
The elder to my right sobbed as he sang. I couldn’t help feeling like I was in the middle of something momentous. At the end of the ceremony, the man to my left unclasped hands with me and told me “good job,” as we turned to leave.
On the news you've probably seen the brave Dale “Happi” Americanhorse lock himself to construction equipment for six hours to stop movement at the pipeline site, you may have seen private security personnel use mace and dogs in an attempt to keep water protectors from interfering with construction, and you’ve likely seen the Green Party’s presidential candidate Jill Stein spray-paint construction equipment in an attempt to express her solidarity with Standing Rock.
Woman in headdress holding up a fistPhoto by Sara Lefleur-VetterPaddlers from the Pacific Northwest and elsewhere arrive at the shore of the main encampment on the edge of the Standing Rock Reservation after a two-day paddle from Bismark and are received warmly by Chairman Dave Archambault II and campers. 
But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. What I’m witnessing here at the Standing Rock is the way in which thousands of people, a mix of Native Americans and their supporters, are co-existing on a sunny plot of land near the Cannonball River. Tribes that have traditionally warred are coming together to protect their most precious resource.
As I’m listening to the deep histories of different tribes, to their memories of massacres and colonization, it seems like every person I meet has his or her own personal history of fossil fuels polluting their environment, killing their fish, destroying their clean water supply.
The #NoDAPL movement has rallied Native Americans like no other issue in recent history.
mealtime at campPhoto by Sara Lefleur-VetterThe Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians' flag flies proudly at the construction blockade site at Standing Rock Reservation along with hundreds of other tribes' flags. 
The planned 1,172-mile pipeline would carry about half a million barrels of crude oil daily from North Dakota's Bakken oil fields through South Dakota and Iowa to an existing pipeline in Patoka, Illinois. The pipeline — which would cross Lake Oahe, which lies at the confluence of the Cannonball and Missouri rivers — could impact drinking water for more than 8,000 tribal members and millions who rely on it downstream, and would damage several Indigenous historic and sacred sites.
At the camp, I hear Native folks say time and time again — we are not just here fighting for ourselves, we're also fighting for you and your children and grandchildren.
When the original Sacred Stone camp was started in early April after the pipeline project was announced, it had only a handful of residents. But hundreds began gathering here in late August when construction work began on this stretch of the pipeline.
mealtime at campPhoto by Sara Lefleur-VetterAt the main camp, meals are prepared for upwards of 2,500 people at a time, with volunteers preparing food, manning the grill, stirring the gigantic pots, and chopping wood to keep the fire stoked all day long. 
On September 2, construction crews plowed through a burial ground about a mile from the encampment right after the Standing Rock Sioux tribe disclosed several significant cultural sites in the path of the pipeline.
"They did this on a holiday weekend, one day after we filed court papers identifying these sacred sites. The desecration of these ancient places has already caused the Standing Rock Sioux irreparable harm," said Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Chairman Dave Archaumbault II.
After the initial destruction construction workers returned and dug up additional grounds before dawn the next day. These artifacts cannot be replaced.
protest marchPhoto by Sara Lefleur-VetterGreg Cournoyer, Dakota-Yankton Sioux and Steven Gray of the Lakota Nation march in solidarity against the Dakota Access Pipeline.
The Lakota Sioux Nation (a confederation of seven related Sioux tribes of the Great Plains) are no strangers to this kind of behavior. In 1868 they were packed into a reservation where they were promised no White folks would cross, but once the colonizers found gold in the Black Hills three years later, the White folks decided “screw it, we want those hills” and gradually began to split the Sioux up into six smaller reservations, where they live to this day. 
Skip forward another century to the 1940s, when the Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program authorized five dams on Native land, costing Standing Rock about 55,000 acres, destroying "more Indian land than any other public works project in America," according to historian Michael Lawson, author of Dammed Indians: The Pick-Sloan Plan and the Missouri River Sioux, 1944-1980.  
man and child on horsePhoto by Sara Lefleur-VetterFrank Archambault rides with his grandson at his campsite at Standing Rock. A member of the Sioux tribe, Frank is a single father of five and can often be seen giving horse riding lessons or guiding horse games at sunset. He also works as security for the camp, doing daily runs on horseback to make sure residents have everything they need. 
Fast forward another 70 years, and today the Lakota Nation's way of life is again being threatened in a very dramatic way. But this instance is different because of a prophecy. A seventh generation Lakota prophecy said that this current generation of tribespeople would encounter a black snake that would threaten to end their world, and that they would have to rise up and defeat it and demand their stewardship over Earth be returned. 

In part, it’s this prophecy that has drawn hundreds of Native Americans from all over the all over the country to the camp to support the Standing Rock Sioux in the efforts to block the pipeline. But it’s also the fact that many people here at Standing Rock have experienced disrespect for the land and water in their own backyard in the form of fracking, methane gas pollution, and oil spills. It’s not just Sioux nations along the Missouri that would feel the effects of an oil spill in the Missouri, but everyone downstream and along the Mississippi as well.
Woman in headdress holding up a fistPhoto by Sara Lefleur-VetterSweetwater Nannauck of Idle No More, Washington, stands at a rally in Bismarck, North Dakota on September 9. Native Americans know from their long history of dealing with the US government that their battle is far from over.  
On Friday afternoon, a federal judge in Washington D.C. ruled against the Standing Rock Sioux tribe request to stop construction. However, moments later the Army Corp of Engineers, the Department of the Interior, and the Justice Department temporarily halted all construction within 20 miles of Lake Oahe, acknowledging complaints from the Sioux and other tribal nations who said their concerns for their water supply and cultural sites were being ignored. The US government admitted they need to look into this further.
The feeling on the ground after the ruling has been both celebratory and pensive. Much of the media has packed up and left, but the tribespeople remain. They know from their long history of dealing with the US government that their battle is far from over.
Sara Lafleur-Vetter 
Sara Lafleur-Vetter is a documentary filmmaker and photojournalist who’s been at the Standing Rock camp since late August. She is working on a documentary that seeks to memorialize the movement against the Dakota Access Pipeline. Check out her GoFundMecampaign for details.


For further information log on website :
http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/standing_rock_notes_from_the_field

Life Beyond Coal

Can a tiny Australian coal town reinvent itself?
The Hazelwood power station and coal mine are just visible from David Briggs’ property up in the mountains that surround the town of Morwell. He sweeps an outstretched arm across the valley and points, in case I miss it. His old fluorescent mining jacket hangs loosely on his frail limbs. 
photo of a multitude of transmission linesphoto by Tony Jackson
Morwell is a small town encircled by open-cut coal mines and power stations in the Australian state of Victoria, less than a hundred miles east of Melbourne. A few miles to the north of it stand the massive exhaust stacks of the Yallourn power plant. Farther east lies the Loy Yang plant. The Hazelwood power plant and mine complex pushes right up against the town’s southern border; only a four-lane freeway and a thin strip of grass separate the mine from some homes. All power lines from here lead to Melbourne. 
In February 2014, at the tail end of a scorching Australian summer of record heatwaves, it was there that a change in wind brought an out-of -control bushfire into the northern face of the open-cut coal mine. Briggs, 55, usually works on mines up in northern Australia, but he was back home here on holidays when the fire broke out. He got a call from a contractor saying they were looking for machinery operators to help put out the blaze. He figured, Why not? It would probably be a couple of days’ work. Briggs shakes his head now, remembering, and his eyes glaze over. “Of course in hindsight, I never would have taken it,” he says. 
The Hazelwood mine fire would burn for 45 days straight, sending plumes of toxic smoke and ash over the town of Morwell and across the entire Latrobe Valley. People had to walk through thick, chemically laced ash to get home, and even the interiors of many houses were covered in black dust. As hundreds of Morwell residents began complaining about shortness of breath, headaches, dizziness, asthma, and bloody noses, schools began to bus children out during the day. Only after the fire had already been burning for 19 days did the state health department recommend temporary relocation of “vulnerable people” – pregnant women, the old, and the very young – from the southern part of town.
For the next eight weeks Briggs worked twelve-hour nightshifts, six days a week, using machinery to move the burning coal to allow it to cool off. During the day it was difficult to see what was on fire, but at night the burning walls of the opencast mine would glow orange. 
In September 2014, long after the fire was out, Briggs fell sick with what he thought was the flu. The local doctor referred him to a hospital for tests that came back positive for pulmonary fibrosis – a terminal lung disease caused by scarring throughout the lungs. Briggs is being kept alive by medicines that are gradually becoming less effective. His doctors are considering chemotherapy as a final effort to prolong his life. He is unable to work and money has become tight. 
While no direct link can be proven, Briggs believes there is no other explanation for his disease than the fire. He says that while working on the fire, none of the crew was given respiratory masks to wear. Engie (formerly known as GDF Suez), the French energy giant that owns the Hazelwood plant and mine, says the company had hired subcontractors for the fire-suppression work and had given them respiratory masks to pass on to their workers.
From the paddock we walk back to the large converted shed where Briggs lives with his wife Penny. Briggs is excited to have me there, listening, and he tells Penny that he showed me the distant outline of Hazelwood way out in the valley. She snorts. “A bazooka will be what we will buy next!” He lifts his eyebrows at her and she shrugs her shoulders, “What? We have nothing left to lose,” she says. 
Briggs’ death, when it comes, will add to the list of fatalities likely linked to the mine fire. 
Hazelwood is one of four major power plants located in the greater Latrobe Valley region. The coal burned at these plants is brown coal or lignite. Found near the surface in thick seams, this kind of coal lends itself to low-cost, large scale, open-cut mining. However, its high moisture content – which ranges from 48-70 percent – reduces its effective energy content and also makes it expensive to transport long distances, unlike the more commonly mined black coal. Brown coal, therefore, has to be burned in power plants close to where it is mined. The Hazelwood plant is located right next to its associated mine.
The Latrobe Valley region, which produces around 85 percent of Victoria’s electricity needs, contains an estimated 65 billion tons of brown coal. Coal mining in the valley started in the 1920s and steadily expanded to keep up with the growth of Australia’s second most populous state. Home to around 100,000 people, the valley is a place still longing for its better days. While there are some farms in the region and a few other industries – timber and paper mills, and a dairy factory – coal mining is and always has been the biggest driver of the area’s economy.
photo by Jarni BlakkarlyDavid Briggs, who spent eight weeks helping to put out the Hazelwood fire, has been diagnosed with pulmonary fibrosis, a fatal lung disease.
But while brown coal brought jobs and revenue into the region, it also brought along an unwelcome side effect: air pollution. Burning lignite generates slightly more CO2 emissions than black coal (by about 6 percent), and between three and seven times more than gas. In fact, brown coal use is one of the largest contributors to Australia’s total domestic greenhouse gas emissions and a source of huge controversy for the country that has the highest per capita carbon emissions in the world. Additionally, just as with black coal, burning brown coal produces dust, nitrous oxides, and sulfur dioxide emissions – a toxic cocktail that can increase the risk of lung cancer, chronic bronchitis, heart disease, and many other respiratory ailments.
Three vast open cut mines – Loy Yang, Yallourn, and Hazelwood – all of which are old and inefficient, feed four power plants in Latrobe Valley. And by all accounts, the Hazelwood plant, which is served by the Hazelwood mine and until recently single-handedly produced 25 percent of Victoria’s power needs, is the worst of the lot. 
The Hazelwood complex has played a prominent role in Australia’s national debate on climate change since well before the mine fire, which turned out to be one of the biggest environmental disasters in Victoria’s history. Back in 2005, a World Wildlife Fund report found the now 50-year-old plant to be the dirtiest in the industrialized world, and it retains that dubious distinction to this day. Hazelwood emits around 17 million tons of carbon dioxide a year, the equivalent of around 2.8 percent of the entire country’s annual emissions. 
Before it was privatized in 1996, the plant was scheduled to be taken offline in 2005. But after the then-new corporate owners, the United Kingdom-based International Power, made some upgrades in the plant’s infrastructure to reduce dust emissions, Victoria extended its mining license until at least 2030. The aging plant has become a symbol of one of the big challenges Australia faces in transitioning to a cleaner energy system: shifting away from dirty coal. In the bargain, it has also become a frequent target of environmentalists who want the country to decarbonize its economy. 
The most significant action against Hazelwood took place in 2009, as the Australian parliament was debating the implementation of a carbon emissions trading scheme introduced by the Julia Gillard Labor government (and repealed in 2014 by the Tony Abbot Liberal government). In September that year, hundreds of activists from the “Switch Off Hazelwood” campaign converged on Morwell marching, chanting, and carrying banners. Some clashed with police at the gates of the power station and 22 people were arrested for trespassing. 
Over this same period of time, by dint of its association with Hazelwood, the little town of Morwell too, has taken up a unique spot in the national psyche – as a place synonymous with pollution. 
There isn’t much to Morwell, population 14,000, which grabs the eye. A strip of stores lines both sides of the main street, some of which have “for lease” signs on the windows. Beyond that there’s suburban sprawl of mostly rundown, weatherboard homes. There are a few much nicer modern estates around the edges of the town where those on well-paid, full-time mining jobs live. Unemployment rates are high here, as is crime, which is no surprise given Morwell is one of the most economically depressed towns in Victoria. It would be an entirely forgettable town if it weren’t for the mines. 
photo by Keith Pakenham / Country Fire Authority
Along with the rest of the population of Latrobe Valley, residents here have the lowest life expectancy in Victoria. (It doesn’t help that the valley also has the highest smoking rate in the state.) People here, especially among power plant workers, are seven times more likely to contract asbestos-related diseases like mesothelioma, than anywhere else in Victoria because the toxic material was used to build the plants back in the day. Essentially, Morwell is one of those innumerable places across the world that environmental activist and author Naomi Klein describes as a “sacrifice zones” – poor, out-of-the way communities that may have once had a thriving industry, but now, as the industry is on the wane, are left dealing with the brunt of resource extraction.
Everyone you talk with in Morwell will tell you how privatization destroyed the place. 
Until the 1990s the mine was operated by the State Electricity Commission of Victoria (SECV). Locals gave it the nickname “Slow, Easy, and Comfortable” for its well-paid and easy-going jobs. Then in the 1990s the conservative state government began to privatize the industry. At least 50,000 direct jobs, which employed about a third of Morwell’s population at the time, were lost. Thousands more would eventually be cut, leading to a mass population exodus from the region. 
“We never really recovered from privatization,” says Luke van der Meulen, president of the mining and energy division of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU). The offices of the local CFMEU are only a short turn off the road to Hazelwood. They look out on one of the now-closed and rusting sections of the power station.
Van der Meulen, a lifelong miner and unionist who is nearing retirement, leads me down a long, empty corridor lined with drab brown ‘80s carpeting into a meeting room. He is passionate and speaks straight to the point. As we talk he occasionally lurches out of his chair mid-sentence and walks across the room to take a photo off the wall that illustrates what he is trying to say. He points to photos of decades-old fires and accidents. “In the past we’ve had fires, even bigger ones that would burn for five, six, seven days,” he says. “I don’t think anyone thought [the 2014 one] was going to be a 45-day fire.” 
Immediately after the fire, the Victoria government set up an inquiry that found that the incident was entirely foreseeable given that bushfires are a common part of life in rural Australia during long hot summers, and that it could have been put out faster had Engie done more than take a “minimal compliance” attitude towards fire risk.
Van der Meulen also lays plenty of blame on the government regulators and International Power, the earlier corporate owner of Hazelwood that Engie bought out in 2012. However, more than two years on he has a resigned attitude. “This is privatization – what do you expect?” he says. “Our entire society is set up around an economy. The companies must be guaranteed a profit and the community gets pushed out of the way.” 
Pushed out of sight is how the residents of Morwell felt in the days after the fire broke out, when there seemed to be little concern about their well-being. Increasingly frustrated at the government’s slow response to their health concerns, Tracie Lund, a local social worker, began compiling lists of health complaints from residents. Weeks into the fire, Lund and other community members organized the first protest demanding action and accountability. A citizens’ group, Voices of the Valley, emerged from the ashes of the disaster. Small towns in Australia aren’t usually associated with activism, but this time it was different. “You have a community that thought it was being looked after by these mining companies,” Lund says, “then all of sudden, Mother’s not minding the gate anymore.” It was time to take matters into their own hands.
Lund says the initial government inquiry that wrapped up August 2014, some six months after the fire, was all about getting things back to business as usual as soon as possible. Voices of the Valley began campaigning to have the inquiry reopened to examine whether smoke from the fire had caused premature deaths in the area. It also urged the government to explore longer-term goals for mine rehabilitation and the future of Morwell if the coal industry were to shut down. 
photo by Keith Pakenham / Country Fire AuthorityDuring the day, it was hard to see which parts of the Hazelwood coal mine were on fire, but at night the walls of the mine would glow orange.
In November 2014, Lund ran as an independent for the seat of Morwell in the state elections. “Someone had to stand up and present an alternative to the major parties. They have neglected this seat for far too long,” she says. “They are looking after corporate interests, mining interests, everyone but the community they are supposed to represent.” She ended up securing just over 10 percent of the vote in the state election; however she hails turning the once safe-seat into a marginal one a success. Pressure from her campaign contributed to the new Labor government’s decision in May 2015 to reopen the Hazelwood fire inquiry. 
In February 2016, the new inquiry handed down its report that found the fire likely contributed to premature deaths in the region. The report recommended that about $45 million (US) be spent to improve the health of local residents. In yet another report published in April, the inquiry team recommended that the government dramatically increase the amount mine operators for all three of the Latrobe Valley’s mines are required to set aside for mine rehabilitation costs. Bonds are meant to cover 100 percent of the cleanup if a company collapses or defaults, but the inquiry found that the rehabilitation bonds paid by the plants were much lower than the real cost of cleaning up the sites. The amount Engie is required to put aside for rehabilitating Hazelwood rose 500 percent from $11 million to $55 million. The state government has said that it will eventually implement all the recommendations made by the inquiry. 
Wendy Farmer, president of Voices of the Valley, is pleased with the outcome of the inquiry, but both she and Lund say that the government needs to develop a comprehensive plan to help Latrobe Valley transition away from coal so that places like Morwell don’t turn into ghost towns when the power plants shut down. “We’ve never had so much attention in the Latrobe Valley as we do right now,” Farmer says, “If we don’t take this opportunity, we’ve lost it.” 
While supportive of the concept of transitioning the economy away from coal, Van der Meulen from the CFMEU, is far from hopeful. “We all want to use this term ‘transition’ because it’s better than just ‘collapse,’ [or] saying ‘well when these power stations shut down we got nothing,’” he says. He points out car manufacturing, a once major industry, is on its way out across Australia, then he raises his hands as if to surrender: “These ‘jobs of the future’ for the Valley? Fucked if I know what they are, haven’t got a clue.” 
Afew years ago, any discussion about the region’s future post-coal would have been almost unthinkable in Morwell, or in any of the coal-mining towns in Latrobe Valley. After all, the region still has some 500 years’ worth of untapped brown coal deposits just sitting there. But the 2014 fire woke up many staunchly pro-coal locals to the risks of living next to a coal mine and provided an opening for such conversations. 
“Before the fire this was all rumbling away but you just couldn’t talk about it,” Lund told me. “It might be an ugly discussion that no one wants to hear, but this conversation needs to be had,” she says, calling it a silver lining of the disaster. 
The Hazelwood fire also refocused national attention on the need to shut down the country’s most polluting coal plants if Australia were to even begin the task of meeting its emissions reduction targets. 
photo of a woman speakingphoto by Jarni BlakkarlyThe 2014 fire opened the door for honest discussions about the region’s future post-coal,
says Morwell resident and activist Tracie Lund.
At the Paris climate talks last year, Australia – which ranks well below the US and China when it comes to carbon emissions, but is in the top 20 emitters globally – committed to a 26 to 28 percent reduction from 2005 emission levels by 2030, a pledge that was on the lower end of commitments by developed nations. (The Climate Change Authority, an independent agency that provides expert climate advice to the government, has said Australia needs to reduce emissions to between 40 and 60 percent of 2000 levels by 2030 to be taking on its “fair share” of global emission reduction efforts.)
According to the Australian Energy Market Operator, the agency that runs the national electricity grid, the country’s coal-fired power stations will face early closure if the nation is to meet even these modest emissions-reduction commitments. Starting with shuttering the Latrobe Valley’s brown coal plants should be a no-brainer. But given the tangled mess of environmental politics in this country – where 60 percent of electrical power comes from coal – it’s not clear if and when that will happen. Australia is also one of the world’s biggest black coal exporters – and is considering permitting a new coal mine in Queensland that would be Australia’s largest.
There’s been some cautious optimism among environmentalists since last September, when Malcolm Turnbull ousted his Liberal Party colleague Tony Abbott, a vocal climate sceptic, as prime minister. Many hoped Turnbull would take stronger action on climate change, as he had been an outspoken supporter of the Gillard emissions trading scheme back in 2009. However, the country’s new leader, constrained by his party’s right wing, has yet to reveal any plans for a progressive environmental policy. 
While politicians continue to hedge their bets, it seems that the combined realities of climate change and global market forces are already catalyzing the gradual demise of the country’s coal industry. 
In January, an Oxford University report found that Australian coal mines are one of the riskiest investments in the world because of their unusual reliance on exporting coal. Though brown coal is used up locally, Australia exports in total more than three times as much coal as it consumes locally. Therefore, most coal mining in the country is reliant on the global market, where demand is falling because of competition with renewables. 
A similar scenario is playing out in the domestic power sector. In May this year, as the rise in wind and solar power production in South Australia resulted in an oversupply in the National Energy Market, Engie announced that it would either close or sell the Hazelwood complex. The announcement came a week after the closure of two coal-fired power plants in South Australia that could no longer compete with wind and solar power. However, given the volatile energy market, a new buyer would be unlikely any time soon, and Engie hasn’t given a time frame for the plant closure 
There’s been talk of closing Hazelwood in the past too. In 2010, when the Julia Gillard government’s fixed carbon-pricing policy came into force, the state held buyout negotiations with the valley power plant owners, but the talks collapsed after the parties couldn’t agree on a price. This time round, the Latrobe City Council wants to have a viable transition plan in place before the plants shut down.
Councilmember Sarah Rhodes-Ward says the council is having conversations with the state government and the mining industry about long term planning for the town’s economic future. “We have survived the transition to privatization before, we will survive whatever is next,” Rhodes-Ward says. 
The state government has been supportive in this regard, announcing broad policies to encourage renewable energy production through purchasing power and allocating about $40 million in its recent budget toward diversifying the Latrobe Valley economy.
Though the state hasn’t made any decisions about how this money will be used and there’s some doubt about whether it’s an adequate amount, in general, there’s a sense of hope among locals that the valley can reinvent itself. And while some like Van der Meulen might not have a clue about what the jobs of the future would look like, ideas are pouring in from all sides. 
Options being discussed by the city council include turning the valley into an engineering or educational hub, setting up a meat factory or even a timber-manufacturing center, and exploring alternate, cleaner uses of brown coal such as using it to make agricultural fertilizer. A workshop conducted by the nonprofit Environment Victoria produced suggestions like a motorsport complex, a concert venue, a giant lake (in place of the massive hole left by the Hazelwood mine), or even a botanical garden. Earthworker, a Melbourne-based environmental cooperative, is about to set up a solar hot water tank factory in Morwell by next year.
To meet its modest emissions-reduction goals, Australia needs to shut down
its most polluting coal plants.
Voices of the Valley too, is focusing its attention on exploring how Latrobe can be turned into a center for green energy and innovation. The valley might not be the best place for large-scale wind and solar farms but it could certainly be a key part of Australia’s new green grid, Farmer says. “Why can’t the Valley be a renewable energy hub?” she asks. “We already have all the power lines to Melbourne.” 
Morwell’s makeover, if it ever materializes, could be a boon to local residents, bringing reliable jobs to the region without the health, safety, and climate risks of coal. 
It will, however, be too late for David Briggs and many others who have paid the price of working in, or living next to, a dirty coal mine. 
Jarni Blakkarly is a freelance journalist based in Melbourne, Australia. He tweets @jarniblakkarly.

For further information log on website :
http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/eij/article/life_beyond_coal

Scarlet Macaws Fly Free Again in Mexico’s Wilds

Scientists and an amusement park work together to reintroduce an iconic bird in the rainforests of Chiapas and Veracruz 

Mexico is one of the top ten countries in the world in terms of bird diversity, but poverty, crime, and corruption can make it a difficult place for conservationists to work. In the remnant rainforests of Veracruz and Chiapas, however, the restoration of an iconic tropical bird that had all but vanished from the country provides reason for hope: Nearly extirpated from Mexico’s forests for decades, scarlet macaws are once again filling the canopy with their raucous calls.
Two scarlet macaws Photo by Eric Carlson/FlickrWild scarlet macaw populations in Mexico have plummeted to 2 percent of their historic numbers due to deforestation and rising human encorachment of their forest habitats.
The scarlet macaw’s range extends from southern Mexico through Central America to much of northern South America. While the International Union for the Conservation of Nature Red List categorizes this brilliantly hued bird as a species of “Least Concern” because it remains fairly common in many parts of its range, in Mexico it has suffered severe population declines.
 Threatened by capture for the pet trade as well as habitat loss due the region’s rising human population and the clearing of rainforest for cattle pastures, the scarlet macaw’s range in Mexico is now only 2 percent of what it was historically. As of 2013, only about 250 wild scarlet macaws were estimated to remain in the country and the Mexican government has classified it as endangered.
Now, a bold reintroduction project spearheaded by a group of scientists and their unlikely partner: an amusement park, is seeking to reverse the decline of wild scarlet macaw populations in Mexico.
Xcaret Ecopark is a Disney-esque theme park located on Mexico’s Caribbean coast that has been breeding a captive population of macaws for over two decades. In 2009, the Guinness Book of World Records recognized it for having the most macaws born in captivity in one year. The park’s record-breaking breeding program is now providing birds that can be released back into Mexico’s remaining rainforests.
Of course, reintroducing macaws back into the wild is not as simple as driving a truckload of birds from the amusement park out into the middle of the woods and letting them go. Before the first macaw can ever be released, a long list of questions must be answered to determine whether the project has any hope of success. This begins with the captive macaws themselves — are the same subspecies as the scarlet macaws historically present in Mexico? Are they genetically diverse enough to found a healthy wild population, safe from the problems of inbreeding? Are they free of infectious diseases? Fortunately, tests showed that for the Xcaret macaws, the answer to all of these questions was yes.
The next step was determining whether there was enough habitat remaining to be able to support them in the wild. Two sites were selected for macaw reintroductions, one in Chiapas and one in Veracruz, both of which had enough intact forest to (hopefully) provide for healthy populations of these large, colorful birds. Xcaret selected genetically diverse groups of young macaws, and the researchers built large enclosures in the forest where the birds could get acclimated to their new surroundings in preparation for their release. They needed time to get to know each other and form the social bonds that would keep them together as a flock, time to build up their physical strength by flying around the large, L-shaped cages, and time to learn to recognize the foods they’d encounter in the wild. Their caretakers provided branches of fruiting plants so the macaws could practice foraging.
The human community too, had to be prepared to accept their new neighbors. Patricia Escalante, the scientist in charge of the Veracruz site, says that after decades without them many locals didn’t remember that scarlet macaws had ever lived in the area. “I was talking to a campesino, a farmer, and he said yes, they were here once, but not anymore. When I told him we were doing that he was very happy,” she says. “But not many people remember the scarlet macaws.” So the researchers organized massive education campaigns to garner support for the reintroduction program. A popular local musician in Chiapas wrote a song about Scarlet Macaws that was aired on local TV and radio stations, an annual “scarlet macaw festival” was created with a parade and costume competition, and a macaw-themed coloring book was distributed to local children.
Finally, on a Sunday morning in April 2013, government officials and members of the public gathered to watch the first group of scarlet macaws be released into the Chiapas rainforest near Palenque National Park. The day before, the macaws had been lured from their large flight cage into the smaller “release cage” at one end, and now the weather conditions were just right and there was nothing left to wait for. The gates opened, the red, blue, and yellow birds took flight, and Mexico’s population of Scarlet Macaws increased by 17.
Eight more groups of birds have been released since then, five in Chiapas and three in Veracruz. But the work doesn’t end when the macaws enter the open forest. Project staff and volunteers conduct regular surveys around release sites, recording where they observe the macaws, what they’re doing, and what they’re eating. At the Chiapas site, an observation tower makes it possible to watch flocks in flight from a central location. Some of the macaws are fitted with radio collars to facilitate detailed tracking of their movements. Researchers have even used an aerial drone to film and photograph the macaw flocks and their habitat.
This intensive effort is yielding some impressive results. Out of 96 individual parrots released at the Chiapas site, only nine have died — four were eaten by crocodiles after falling into a lagoon, two flew into branches shortly after being released, and in two more died of unknown causes. The numbers from Veracruz are similar, with 85 releases and only seven deaths. Even more exciting is the fact that the released birds are nesting in the wild; there have been twelve nesting attempts by birds in the Chiapas population, seven in natural cavities and five in artificial nest boxes provided by researchers. Half of those nests successfully fledged chicks.
The story of the macaws’ return to Mexico isn’t over. Much of the bird’s rainforest habitat was cleared to make way for cattle pastures that are no longer profitable for their owners. Escalante sees the next step as restoring this habitat while promoting ecotourism and agroforestry to help support local communities. She has started an agroforestry demonstration garden at the Veracruz site and hopes to provide locals with tree species to plant that will provide habitat and food for macaws as well as fruit and wood that can be harvested commercially.
“Little by little people are realizing that maybe it’s a good idea,” she says. Escalante hopes that the macaws will also help attract bird-loving tourists to the area who will spend money on things like lodging, guides, and transportation, providing further economic benefit.
Macaws were powerful symbols for the ancient people of Mexico. Aztecs paid tributes of macaw feathers to their kings and Mayan stories tell of a macaw demon that pretended to be the sun and moon. While they may need a little human help to continue to thrive in Mexico today, that doesn’t make them any less awe-inspiring. Thanks to the hard work of scientists and local communities, today these beautiful birds are flying free once again.



For further information log on :
http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/scarlet_macaws_flying_free_in_mexico

The Bakas, National Forests, and the Conservation Conundrum

Dispute between WWF and Survival International highlights how some conservation efforts continue to displace Indigenous peoples

Complaints about deforestation and human rights abuses in an African nation are so common that, sadly, they hardly make headlines anymore. But when the complaints are leveled at one of the biggest environmental groups in the world – that’s unusual enough to draw attention.
two Baka people sitting in a forestPhoto by Zuzu/FlickrSurvival International alleges that the World Wildlife Fund bears some blame for the harassment and displacement for the Baka people in three national parks that WWF helped create in Cameroon. 
Survival International, a nonprofit that campaigns for the rights of Indigenous people worldwide, has lodged a formal complaint this year against World Wildlife Fund for Nature, contending that conservation group bears some blame for the harassment and displacement for the Baka people in three national parks that WWF helped create in Cameroon.
The Baka, a semi-nomadic forest-dwelling Indigenous tribe who live in the tropical rainforests of southern Cameroon, have allegedly been abused and booted off their lands by “ecoguards” funded by the WWF, one of the world’s largest and best-known environmental organizations.
In February, Survival complained that anti-poaching squads, financed and equipped in part by WWF, subjected Baka people in Cameroon ( who are often called “pygmies”) to violence and denied them access to their lands. It alleges that the parks – established between 2001 and 2014 – have “engulfed almost all of the ancestral territory that the Baka had not already lost to the loggers, miners, and farmers.”
The complaint, filed with a Swiss government agency, cites violations of human rights and due diligence provisions of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development or OECD. The OECD is a Paris-based consortium made up of 35 countries, including the United States, whose stated mission is to promote the economic and social well-being of people globally. (The complaint was filed in Switzerland because that’s where WWF’s international headquarters is based) It says WWF didn’t make a serious enough effort to understand just how much of the forest area was occupied by the Baka, who traditionally survived on yams, fruit, honey, and wild game from the rainforests, and neither did the conservation group obtain the Baka’s full and informed consent before helping establish the parks.
The OECD says complaints against nonprofits alleging violations of the OECD guidelines are rare. (It usually receives complaints against multinational corporations.) And a grievance by one NGO against another? Unprecedented. A decision on the matter is still pending.
Then in June, Survival issued a press release accusing WWF of partnering with a logging company that felled trees in an area of nearly 1.5 million acres in Cameroon without the consent of local Baka. It castigated WWF for being an “official partner” of Paris-based timber products company Rougier Group.
Survival’s claims fly in the face of WWF’s assertion that it works “to support Indigenous and traditional peoples to sustainably manage their resources, and … strengthen their traditional ecological knowledge.”
WWF, for its part, says the accusations are baseless. It says that it helped establish a Baka community forest, and unlike Survival, has staffers on the ground in Cameroon. WWF consults with Cameroon government officials, but ultimately many issues raised by Survival concern matters that must be addressed by the local government, such as land use decisions and the conduct of its employees, the conservation group says.
WWF also denies Survival's allegation that it’s involved with the Rougier Group because it is “more interested in securing corporate cash than really looking out for the environment.” 
“This claim is entirely false,” says Brendan Rohr, a WWF spokesman. Some of the trees are in an area that will be inundated by a future dam and aren’t subject to the WWF partnership, he says. He says that Rougier is required to recognize Baka land rights by the Forest Stewardship Council, which promotes responsible management of forests, and must take actions to advance their welfare as part of its partnership with WWF. Rohr pointed out that Rougier undergoes independent and transparent annual audits, and the auditing body sought input from Survival, which didn’t respond.
The dispute between the two nonprofits began back in March 2014 when Corry wrote to Hanson Njforti, WWF’s country director for Cameroon, saying that Baka in and around the three national parks “are a routine target of violence and intimidation, and sometimes of murder.” Ecoguards and armed troops are the perpetrators, he said, and they couldn’t intervene without the “technical, logistical and material support that WWF provides.”
Njiforti responded that poaching in general and elephant poaching, in particular, had reached “alarming levels” in recent years, and the Baka were increasingly being supplied with assault weapons like AK-47s to kill wildlife on behalf of “white collar poachers.” Some 4 of 10 AK-47s seized by ecoguards between 2010 and 2013 were from Baka involved in killing elephants, Njiforti added. But he admitted that discrimination against the Baka was also a problem. Many park rangers and soldiers in the region are poorly educated and “their attitudes towards Indigenous groups are marked by social norms and stereotypes against the Baka,” Njiforti wrote. WWF has provided basic training in human rights and WWF’s principles on Indigenous peoples to ecoguards, he added.
The two sides have agreed on little since. For example, WWF asked Survival for details on incidents of Baka purportedly being abused so it could investigate. Survival insisted that WWF should commission an independent inquiry of the issue as a whole, not focus on individual clashes. Survival said the Baka have asked WWF to suspend support for protecting the forest. Not true, WWF maintains. Survival argued that WWF should suspend financing wildlife law enforcement. WWF countered that this was simplistic and would harm, not help the Baka.
The exchanges between the two nonprofits quickly became testy, a review of three dozen letters and emails over a 21-month period in 2014 and 2015 reveals.
July 24, 2014: Njiforti to Corry: “We [are] all concerned at the amount of time all of us have spent on letters, telephone and Skype calls” without progress.
October 2, 2014: Corry to WWF International chief Marco Lambertini: WWF’s “supine approach” to incidents of Baka abuse make a “mockery” of its principles on indigenous peoples and conservation.
Oct. 16, 2014: Lambertini to Corry: “Survival International’s campaign of denigrating WWF hardly helps foster the collaborative action that will most advance the cause of the Baka.”
Oct. 28, 2014: Corry to Lambertini: “I … would be grateful if you would take steps to ensure our concerns are not further belittled.”
May 27, 2015: Lambertini to Corry: “The insinuation that WWF has done nothing and is doing nothing for the Baka is both untrue and insulting to the many WWF staff” working with the Baka.
Dec. 7, 2015: WWF’s head of issues management, Phil Dickie to Corry: “A preoccupation with capitalizing on incidents is likely to impede rather than assist in resolving them.”
The dispute shines a light on tensions that can arise when Indigenous peoples are barred or restricted from their traditional lands due to conservation efforts to protect flora and fauna.
“Without knowing much more about this particular case, I can say that this appears to reflect a trend we’ve seen for decades,” says David Pellow, a professor of environmental studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara. It is a “problem that has been endemic with global conservation groups both inside and outside of the U.S,” he says.
Survival has railed against major conservation groups in the past, especially WWF. Corry maintains that Indigenous people, “not the ideologues and evangelists of the environmental movement,” are the best stewards of their traditional lands in Cameroon and elsewhere.
There is a hummingbird-versus-giant panda quality to this dispute. WWF has 1.2 million members in the United States and nearly 5 million worldwide. It reported operating revenues of $289.4 million in fiscal year2015. With a US headquarters in Washington, D.C., it is active in about 100 countries. The London-based Survival has offices in seven countries. The US office is in San Francisco. The organization says about 250,000 people “over the years” have contributed money. It reported income of 1.7 million British pounds — about $2.3 million — in 2015.
The dilemma over how to balance conservation needs with those of Indigenous people has played out elsewhere in the past, such as with Bushmen in Botswana’s Central Kalahari Game Reserve, who have been displaced from their ancestral homes over the past two decades in the name of conservation.
Pellow’s own research on the creation of a national park in Uganda similarly found that wildlife officials there had violently forced Indigenous locals, the Benet, to leave the area. Park rangers killed more than 50 people in 2004, Pellow wrote. A judge later ruled that part of the park be set aside for the Benet and they be allowed to farm there. 
Indeed, the story of Indigenous people being forcefully removed from their ancestral lands in the name of conservation,is an old, well-known one. In many cases, conservation is simply used as an excuse to clear out lands that are then taken over by industry. The unfortunate fact is that despite our awareness about what is basically a human rights abuse, this same narrative is still playing out in forests across the world.
The issue is being raised at the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s annual conference that’s currently underway in Hawai’i.
“The world’s most vulnerable people are paying the price for today’s conservation,” Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, UN special rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, told The Guardian last week. She has already sounded the alarm at the UN over the impact that conservation is having on Indigenous peoples across the world, especially as hundreds more parks are being created every year in an effort to meet the United Nation’s goal to protect 17 percent of this planet’s land by 2020.
As the world’s population continues to grow and wildlife habitat shrinks, conflicts between Indigenous peoples and conservation advocates are bound to grow. “I’m quite sure this problem will intensify,” Pellow says.


For further information log on website :
http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/bakas_national_forests_and_the_conservation_conundrum

The Profanity of the Profanity Peak Wolf Pack Massacre

The only realistic solution to this conflict is to retire the grazing allotments on public lands

The recent killing of six members of the Profanity Peak wolf pack in NE Washington in retribution for the loss of a few cattle is emblematic of what is wrong with public land policy. As I write, trappers are out to kill the remaining pack members- including 4-month old pups.
night photo of young wolves in a forestphoto by Protect the WolvesTrappers are currently hunting down the remaining pack members, including four-month-old pups.
What is significant about the destruction of this pack is that the Profanity Peak wolves roamed national forest lands. These are our lands.  They belong to all Americans and are part of our national patrimony.  
Currently private commercial businesses such as the livestock industry are allowed to use public lands if they do not damage, degrade and impoverish our public lands heritage. Clearly the killing of this pack violates that obligation and responsibility.
What is particularly egregious about the on-going slaughter of the Profanity Pack is that it was essentially a preventable conflict. Had the rancher, whose cows invaded the wolf pack’s territory, been required to use other public lands, or better yet, simply lease private pasture, there would have been no livestock losses, hence wolf deaths.
Placing cows on top of a wolf pack territory is analogous to, and irresponsible as leaving picnic baskets or coolers out in a campground. In most national parks, if you leave a cooler or other food available to bears, you are fined for this careless behavior. We don’t blame the bear if it happens to eat that food. But when it comes to the livestock industry, we essentially allow four-legged picnic baskets to roam at will on our lands, and should a predator – be it a coyote, cougar, bear or wolf – kill one of those mobile picnic baskets, we don’t hold the rancher responsible, we kill the public wildlife.
This represents the wrong priorities.
We expect different behavior from people using public resources. I can, and do, mark up and highlight passages in books that I own in my personal library, but it would be inappropriate for me to mark up or otherwise damage books in a public library.
In a similar manner, we should expect different consequences for livestock owners who willingly use public lands (at almost no cost I might add) for their private commercial interests. In this case and others like it across the public lands of the West, we should expect ranchers utilizing public lands (our lands) to at the least accept any losses from predators that may occur while they are using public property.  And if conflicts continue, we should remove the livestock, not the wolves or other predators.
It’s important to note that the mere presence of livestock negatively impacts wolves whether they are shot or otherwise killed.
Domestic livestock consume forage that would otherwise support the native prey of wolves, like elk. So more domestic animals means fewer elk.  In essence, domestic livestock grazing public lands are compromising the food resources of public wildlife so that ranchers can turn a private profit. 
Worse for wolves, especially wolves confined to a den area because of pups, as was the case in the Profanity Peak Pack, when domestic cattle are moved onto our public lands, it creates a social displacement of elk. In other words, elk avoid areas actively being grazed by livestock. If the livestock are grazing lands near a den site, then the wolves automatically have fewer elk to take and must travel further to find their dinner.
Who can blame the wolves if they take the most available prey – which is often domestic livestock. Robert Weilgus, a Washington State University professor, studying the Profanity pack noted that cattle were placed near the den site, or as he was quoted in a Seattle Times article as saying the cattle were released “right on top of the den”. 
Some commentators, including Washington State University tried to discredit Wielgus suggesting the cattle were released about four miles away. What that demonstrates is either their ignorance of wolf biology or a not so-veiled attempt to confuse the public. If you are a wolf where regular daily hunting exclusions of 20-30 miles are common, four miles is a short romp. It is essentially “right on top” of the wolves.
If you place cattle within a dozen miles of a wolf pack you are essentially putting the livestock “right on top” of the wolves.  And if the presence of cattle forces native prey like elk to abandon the area, can anyone blame the wolves if they resort to killing a domestic animal once in a while?
The loss of the Profanity Peak Pack has occurred on the same grazing allotment where another wolf pack was destroyed in 2012. This begs the question of whether any livestock grazing should be permitted in this area. It is obviously good wolf habitat – except of course for the presence of domestic animals. The only realistic long-term solution is to retire the grazing allotment. Either transfer the cattle to another portion of the public lands or, better yet, simply pay the rancher with a voluntary permit retirement to close the allotment and permanently remove the livestock.


For further information log on website :
http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/the_profanity_of_the_profanity_peak_wolf_pack_massacre

Advantages and Disadvantages of Fasting for Runners

Author BY   ANDREA CESPEDES  Food is fuel, especially for serious runners who need a lot of energy. It may seem counterintuiti...