FollowUp 3: "FRAC! Baby FRAC!"

Wow! Great lyrics, popular style, and a nuanced take on a real problem. I'm impressed with the students of Studio 20 NYU and their follow-up to ProPublica's ongoing research.

Thanks to The Young Turks for the heads up.

13 November 2011, Original Pedantic Political Ponderings post.
10 December 2011, FollowUp 1.
2 January 2012, FollowUp 2.

Praise: 2012 Living Planet Report

The World Wildlife Fund has been working for half a century to keep our planet healthy for us.  I last mentioned them regarding Earth Hour.  Their 2012 Living Planet Report is disheartening, but important information.  The summation of chapter one says a lot:

2012 Living Planet Report, page 12.

The ongoing loss of biodiversity is frightening.  We don't know how much more loss can be sustained without a collapse to the system ... a collapse that could include our species.  As we continue to grow our population far beyond the numbers where we don't harm our environment, something is going to give.  Some of that is seen in loss of species and diminished fresh water supplies.

The report is not all doom and gloom.  Chapter four includes sixteen points for sustaining our world.

1. Significantly expand the global protected areas network
   • Protect 20 per cent of representative land, freshwater and
   marine areas, including areas key for ecological processes
   necessary for biodiversity, food, water and energy security,
   and climate change resilience and adaptation.
   • Implement adequate funding mechanisms for effective
   protected area management.
2. Halt loss of priority habitats
   • Achieve Zero Net Deforestation and Degradation by 2020 and
   maintain thereafter.
   • Halt fragmentation of freshwater systems.
   • Increase the area of effectively managed marine protected areas
   from 5 per cent to at least 20 per cent.
3. Restore damaged ecosystems and ecosystem services
   • Prioritize restoration of ecosystems and ecosystem services
   necessary for food, water and energy security, and climate
   change resilience and adaptation.
4. Significantly reduce inputs and waste in production systems
   • Increase total food supply-chain efficiency.
   • Maximize energy, water and material efficiency.
   • Maximize recycling and recovery.
   • Minimize greenhouse gas emissions.
5. Manage resources sustainably
   • Eliminate overfishing by commercial fleets, including the
   indiscriminate capture of non-target organisms.
   • Eliminate water over-abstraction.
   • Implement policies to secure water quality.
   • Minimize further habitat conversion through maximizing
   the sustainable use of productive land by improving
   genetic selection, adopting best practices, increasing
   efficiency, improving soil organic matter and rehabilitating
   degraded lands.
6. Scale-up renewable energy production
   • Increase the proportion of sustainable renewable energies in
   the global energy mix to at least 40 per cent by 2030 and 100
   per cent by 2050.
   • Increase the share of renewable energy in the overall energy
   mix, along with ambitious energy demand management,
   especially in sectors with limited renewable options that are
   likely to be dependent on bioenergy. (Aviation, shipping and
   high heat industrial applications are likely to be among these.)
7. Change energy consumption patterns
   • Decrease energy demand by 15 per cent by 2050 compared
   to 2005.
   • Increase the proportion of electricity produced using
   renewable energy to cover all global energy needs by 2050.
   • Provide sustainable energy to everyone in “off-grid” areas.
8. Promote healthy consumption patterns
   • Balance protein intake per capita as recommended by the
   World Health Organization (WHO).
   • Minimize retailer and consumer food waste in high- and
   middle-income countries.
9. Achieve low-footprint lifestyles
   • Minimize resource consumption and waste by high income
   individuals.
   • Maximize market share of certified sustainable products.
   • Transition urban areas to “smart” cities with low-footprint
   solutions for meeting urban housing, food, water, energy, and
   mobility needs.
10. Value nature
    • Implement an inclusive and globally accepted system
    for measuring the economic and non-economic value of
    natural capital.
    • Fully integrate this value into mainstream economic
    development policy and decision-making.
11. Account for environmental and social costs
    • Integrate social and environmental costs of production and
    consumption over long timeframes into standard national
    and corporate accounting and reporting methodologies.
    • Ensure that social and environmental costs are reflected in
    the market price of all commodities and products, and in
    environmental impact assessments.
12. Support and reward conservation, sustainable resource management and innovation
    • Eliminate all subsidies that undermine sustainable resource
    use and conservation, particularly those underpinning fossil
    fuel use and unsustainable agriculture, forestry and fisheries.
    • Develop/implement new financial mechanisms that redirect
    public and private investment to support sustainable practices
    and new technologies for sustainability, and provide new
    additional financing for conservation and restoration of
    natural capital.
    • Improve policy for increased investments and large-scale
    deployment of innovations and new technologies that
    can enable sustainable development in both public and
    private spheres.
13. Share available resources
    • Implement natural resource governance built on inclusive
    processes and broad participation by communities dependent
    on natural resources.
    • Minimize the footprint of high-income populations and urban
    areas (see “Consume more wisely”).
    • Promote the transition toward sustainable, resource-efficient
    cities and reduce the direct impact of cities on water and land
    by limiting urban sprawl, promoting urban agriculture and
    sustainable waste (water) management.
14. Make fair and ecologically informed choices
    • Implement policies and tools for analysing, resolving and
    managing competing land use and water use claims.
15. Measure success “beyond GDP”
    • Include social and environmental indices in national indicators
    to measure and reward success.
    • Implement economic policies with targets and indicators to
    monitor the impact of economic governance on natural capital
    and human well-being.
16. Sustainable population
    • Explicitly integrate population dynamics (size, growth
    rate, composition, location and migration) and per capita
    consumption trends into national planning policies to support a
    better balance between population and available resources.
    • Ensure universal access to gender-sensitive reproductive health
    services and information, reduce child mortality and support
    the empowerment of women and young girls through greater
    access to higher education and employment opportunities.

Most of this is common sense.  A few points are political triggers (#13 smacks of socialism, #15 smacks of anti-capitalism, and #16 will grate against religious fundamentalists who think that there are not enough humans ever).  Still more is based on science that some will be eager to deny.  Nonetheless, this report needs to be taken seriously.  We don't have a control group for the experiment we are running with our ecosystem.

Praise: Bernie Sanders and Keith Ellison take on Big Oil

From Senator Sanders' website:

Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Keith Ellison on Thursday introduced legislation to end billions of dollars in oil, coal and gas subsidies. "We are here today not just to announce new legislation, but to send a message that it is time to end the absurdity of taxpayers providing massive subsidies to hugely profitable fossil fuel corporations," Sanders told a news conference outside the U.S. Capitol. "In these difficult economic times, it is imperative that we support the taxpayers of this country and not the fossil fuel industry - one of the most powerful special interests in the world," he added.

Joining Sanders at a news conference, Ellison noted that big oil companies make more than $300 million every day. "Why should Americans prop up these companies with tax dollars and have to pay ridiculous fuel prices?" he asked. "We need to get off the fossil fuel bandwagon that keeps us dependent on oil and contributes to climate change.  The $113 billion in taxpayer handouts that oil, gas, and coal companies receive should be used to invest in green jobs. It's time for this corporate welfare to end."

The measure would do away with tax breaks, financial assistance, royalty relief, direct federal research and development and many loopholes that benefit the fossil fuel industry. Under current law, more than $113 billion in federal subsidies would go to oil, coal and gas industries in the coming decade.

Doing a little quick research online, I found the following:  The net profit for the first quarter of 2012 for Chevron was 6.471 Billion Dollars.  The net profit for the first quarter of 2012 for Exxon Mobil was 9.45 Billion Dollars.  This was not the gross profit, it was net.

I did not find the quarterly report for BP, but for the full year of 2011 the net profit for BP was 26.097 Billion Dollars.  Again, this is net not gross.  In all three cases it is billion with a B.

I do not object to companies making money.  If they can make a lot of money, that's good too.  But, subsidizing their profit is where I have a problem.  They should be taxed like small companies are.

Speaker Boehner and the House GOP are sure to block this legislation.  But it is good that Senator Sanders of Vermont and Representative Ellison of Minnesota are offering the legislation.  Better would be seeing it pass.

Praise: The Royal Society on Population

Late last month the Royal Society, a British and Commonwealth organization of scientists and engineers, published the People and the Planet Report.



This very careful report comes to some conclusions that environmental groups have shied away from for far too long. The report has the following Key Recommendations.

1. The international community must bring the 1.3 billion people living on less than $1.25 per day out of absolute poverty, and reduce the inequality that persists in the world today. This will require focused efforts in key policy areas including economic development, education, family planning and health.
2. The most developed and the emerging economies must stabilise and then reduce material consumption levels through: dramatic improvements in resource use efficiency, including: reducing waste; investment in sustainable resources, technologies and infrastructures; and systematically decoupling economic activity from environmental impact.
3. Reproductive health and voluntary family planning programmes urgently require political leadership and financial commitment, both nationally and internationally. This is needed to continue the downward trajectory of fertility rates, especially in countries where the unmet need for contraception is high.
4. Population and the environment should not be considered as two separate issues. Demographic changes, and the influences on them, should be factored into economic and environmental debate and planning at international meetings, such as the Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development and subsequent meetings.
   

These recommendations are common sense if one has not been involved in politics, either within the environmental movement or government. The politics of "population control" is a bit complicated and, sadly, was embraced by racists as well as scientists.  As an example, the Sierra Club members voted in 1998 against consideration of immigration as part of population control and a squabble over control of the board of directors in 2004, which ended up steering that core environmental group away from consideration of population impact on our environment.  They were arguing over a single precondition to the causal end of the problem and ended up running from that larger cause to address symptoms.

The problem is that our population has continued growing despite human politics (and sometimes because of political decisions) and our population has a huge impact on our environment.  Yes, human migration affects our population growth in addition to affecting locations of population, but the degree of affect of migration is not sufficient to address our planet's burgeoning population.  The new report from the Royal Society does so.

One thing that gives this report some additional credibility is that it was not written in isolation.  Among the authors are biologists, climatologists, ecologists, economists, environmentalists, ethologists, sociologists, theologists, and zoologists.  There are professors and scientsts from Africa, the Americas, Asia, and Europe.  Regarding the Sierra Club controversy, the report addresses migration in a way that makes sense from all of the included fields; from the Summary on page 7:

Population is not only about the growing numbers of people: changes in age structure, migration, urbanisation and population decline present both opportunities and challenges to human health, wellbeing and the environment. Migrants often provide benefits to their countries of origin, through remittances, and to their host countries by helping to offset a workforce gap in ageing populations. Current and future migration will be affected by environmental change, although lack of resources may mean that the most vulnerable to these changes are the least able to migrate. Policy makers should prepare for international migration and its consequences, for integration of migrants and for protection of their human rights.

Here are the nine Recommendations, as summarized on page 9 (all highlighting as in the original).

Recommendation 1

The international community must bring the 1.3 billion people living on less than $1.25 per day out of absolute poverty, and reduce the inequality that persists in the world today. This will require focused efforts in key policy areas including economic development, education, family planning and health.

Recommendation 2

The most developed and the emerging economies must stabilise and then reduce material consumption levels through: dramatic improvements in resource use efficiency, including: reducing waste; investment in sustainable resources, technologies and infrastructures; and systematically decoupling economic activity from environmental impact.

Recommendation 3

Reproductive health and voluntary family planning programmes urgently require political leadership and financial commitment, both nationally and internationally. This is needed to continue the downward trajectory of fertility rates, especially in countries where the unmet need for contraception is high.

Recommendation 4

Population and the environment should not be considered as two separate issues. Demographic changes, and the influences on them, should be factored into economic and environmental debate and planning at international meetings, such as the Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development and subsequent meetings.

Recommendation 5

Governments should realise the potential of urbanisation to reduce material consumption and environmental impact through efficiency measures. The well planned provision of water supply, waste disposal, power and other services will avoid slum conditions and increase the welfare of inhabitants.

Recommendation 6

In order to meet previously agreed goals for universal education, policy makers in countries with low school attendance need to work with international funders and organisations, such as UNESCO, UNFPA, UNICEF, IMF, World Bank and Education for All. Financial and non-financial barriers must be overcome to achieve high-quality primary and secondary education for all the world’s young, ensuring equal opportunities for girls and boys.

Recommendation 7

Natural and social scientists need to increase their research efforts on the interactions between consumption, demographic change and environmental impact. They have a unique and vital role in developing a fuller picture of the problems, the uncertainties found in all such analyses, the efficacy of potential solutions, and providing an open, trusted source of information for policy makers and the public.

Recommendation 8

National Governments should accelerate the development of comprehensive wealth measures. This should include reforms to the system of national accounts, and improvement in natural asset accounting.

Recommendation 9

Collaboration between National Governments is needed to develop socio-economic systems and institutions that are not dependent on continued material consumption growth. This will inform the development and implementation of policies that allow both people and the planet to flourish.

The report sees and addresses "two critical issues" (page 11), increasing human population and increasing per capita consumption.  Again, the impact of each on our environment should be obvious.  The combined impact is disastrous.  We need to move beyond debates over racism and over Rev. Malthus and focus on the science of what we are doing to our world.

For example, historically (at least since the writings of Rev. Mathus) we have been concerned with having sufficient food to sustain our growing population.  As it turns out, food has not been an insurmountable problem (the report does address food in Chapter 3 starting on page 52), although the politics of food distribution has resulted in large numbers of people suffering and starving.  Water, however, particularly fresh water, is a problem that we are going to face as our population continues to grow.  From page 49,

Over the last few centuries global aggregate water use has grown exponentially (MA 2005a) and has been closely linked to economic development and population growth. A fifteen-fold increase in global water withdrawals occurred between 1800 and 1980 (Lvovich and White 1990) when population increased by a factor of four (Haub 1994): a 3.5 fold increase in average per capita consumption. Since 1980 per capita water use rate has dropped a little from 700 to 600 cubic meters per year although the aggregate global withdrawal continues to increase (Shiklomanov and Rodda 2003). Between 1960 and 2000 world water use doubled from about 1800 to 3600 km3 per year (MA 2005a). Water use is dominated by agriculture (roughly 70% of withdrawals are for agricultural use (FAO 2010b), followed by industrial (19%) and then municipal (including domestic) applications (11%).

A child born in the developed world consumes 30 to 50 times as much water as one born in the developing world (UNESCO 2003). In 2008 it was estimated that 884 million people were still without access to safe drinking water and 2.6 billion were without access to basic sanitation (WHO and UNESCO 2006) exposing them to preventable infectious diseases. The fresh water requirements for meeting basic human needs gives a total demand of 50 litres per day, which equals 18 m3 per capita per year (Gleick 1996). This is based on a minimum drinking water requirement, basic requirements for sanitation, bathing and food preparation (Gleick 1996).

The world’s natural water resources are distributed unevenly around the world. Among inhabited areas, at the continental level America has the largest share of the world’s total freshwater resources with 45%, followed by Asia with 28%, Europe with 15.5% and Africa with 9% (FAO 2003). Central Asia has just 0.6% of the world’s total freshwater resources. There is therefore wide variability in the total renewable freshwater resources available between countries; for example Kuwait has 10m3 per inhabitant while Canada has more than 100,000m3 per inhabitant (FAO 2003).

Even where the phrase "renewable freshwater resources" is used, it should be kept in mind that our aquifers require time to generate fresh water.  In many cases we are depleting our aquifers faster than they can recharge.  We are polluting our groundwater.  The number of superfund sites in the United States is appalling.

There is an explanation of some of the debates over population and consumption on page 60.

The sustainable development debate has, over recent years, been typified by those who argue that population growth is the source of current unsustainable trends, and those who believe that consumption is the primary culprit. This artificial distinction is unhelpful as it can lead to argument over whether policy should focus on reducing population growth or on improving the sustainability of consumption, while both are clearly important.

Continuing on page 62.

Consumption and demography are closely inter-twined. Every person must consume, and each additional person on the planet will add to total consumption levels. Other than population size, demographic factors such as ageing or urbanisation can also influence consumption levels. Policies should not treat population and consumption as separate issues.

The nature of our closed ecosphere is discussed quite well in chapter 4, including a discussion of how finite our resources are in section 4.5.  This should be required reading for students.  The politics of healthcare, currently a huge issue in the United States, is part of the discussion in 5.4.  Family planning is crucial to getting human population under control.  A bit from chapter 6, page 101:

[H]uman impact on the earth raises serious concerns. This report has explored the interactions between population, consumption and the environment. Humans are consuming resources and producing waste at an unprecedented rate. Population and consumption are both important: what matters is the combination of increasing population and increasing per capita consumption. Both global population and global consumption continue to rise and signs of unwanted impacts, interactions and feedback are growing – for example climate change reducing crop yields in some areas – and of irreversible changes – for example the increased rate of species extinction.

If you can make the time, read the Report on People and the Planet.  This is extremely important.

Earth Day 2012

Since its inception by the late Senator Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin, Earth Day has been an important part of the environmental movement. The first Earth Day, in 1970, was inspired by Rachel Carson's Silent Spring and the anti-war movement, designed as a teach-in for college campuses and high schools.  Thousands of universities and high schools participated.  Many wanted the date for Earth Day to coincide with the Vernal Equinox, but Senator Nelson thought otherwise.

Senator Nelson chose the date in order to maximize participation on college campuses for what he conceived as an "environmental teach-in". He determined the week of April 19–25 was the best bet as it did not fall during exams or spring breaks. Moreover, it did not conflict with religious holidays such as Easter or Passover, and was late enough in spring to have decent weather. More students were likely to be in class, and there would be less competition with other mid-week events—so he chose Wednesday, April 22.

The 22nd of April has also been designated International Mother Earth Day by the United Nations.  While the United States produces a significant portion of the world's pollution, we neither produce it all nor can we be responsible for it all.  Our planet is more than any small part of itself and all parts need to take responsibility for the byproducts of their decisions.

In the 1970s, as I became active in the environmental movement, I planted thousands of trees.  Part of this year's promotions is A Billion Acts of Green.  While I'm not planting thousands more trees this year, I will be planting tomorrow.  Consider what you can plant:  trees, ideas, other small acts that make a difference.  The small acts add up.

Thanks to Dhruv Planet for the closing graphic.

Praise: Earth Hour 2012

This is the sixth year that people around the world are turning off their lights for an hour.  Earth Hour.

Hundreds of millions of people, businesses and governments around the world unite each year to support the largest environmental event in history – Earth Hour.  

More than 5,200 cities and towns in 135 countries worldwide switched off their lights for Earth Hour 2011 alone, sending a powerful message for action on climate change. It also ushered in a new era with members going Beyond the Hour to commit to lasting action for the planet. Without a doubt, it’s shown how great things can be achieved when people come together for a common cause.

Starting with the World Wildlife Fund in Australia, now all around the world.  Let's save a bit of energy and think about what more we can do.  We live in a closed ecosphere and must protect our home.