US Spying a Threat to Global Climate Deal

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

The US government has been at it again spying at all and sundries and this time it is revealed the target were the UN Climate Talks and its participants.

Activists and experts have expressed outrage at the revelations that the US government, through the NSA and its allies, has conducted espionage on participants of UN climate talks.

They are calling for President Obama to commit to no further spying on participants of the talks, accompanied by a drastically increased commitment to climate action on the part of the United States, if the talks are to succeed as they build toward another global summit at the end of 2015.

"The UN climate talks are supposed to be about building trust - that's been under threat for years because of the United States' backward position on climate action - these revelations will only crack that trust further," Meena Raman, negotiations expert from the Malaysian based Third World Network, said.

Brandon Wu, Senior Policy Analyst with development organization ActionAid in the United States, said: "Fighting climate change is a global struggle, and these revelations clearly show that the US government is more interested in crassly protecting a few vested interests - rather than acting ethically by taking responsibility to lead and working cooperatively with others to find solutions."

"This is yet again an underhanded, undemocratic and arrogant use of power by the US government to protect corporate interests. We urge the citizens of the United States to condemn these actions by their government and call for an immediate stop to its blocking progress in the climate talks," said Lidy Nacpil, director of Jubilee South Asia Pacific Movement on Debt and Development, a social movement headquartered in the Philippines.

And Asad Rehman, Head of International Climate at Friends of the Earth EWNI in the UK, said: "If Obama's rhetoric on climate change in the State of the Union is to be believed he must use an executive order to stop spying on climate negotiators and take up a position on pollution cuts that is consistent with the science."

But, let's face it, the United States government and its funders, the industries with vested interest, and those of it allies, have no interest in the success of the UN Climate Talks as that could and would mean that things would have to change. This could not possibly allowed to happen now, could it, as it would cut into the profits of the companies and the “income” of the politicians industry has managed to bribe.

All the United States and most other developed countries do is pay lip service with regards to climate change and the wish to make changes and then they look at (1) buying carbon credits from Third World countries and (2) play with fire by claiming that nuclear power is the answer to a carbon-free future. But I will not start a discourse on nuclear even though it is not the answer. The fact is that the powers that be in the developed countries have no interest in reduction of carbon emissions and reduction of consumption as that does not bring them money; it is as simple as that. And that is why the likes of the US and the UK will spy on the talks in the same way that they declare climate protests acts of terrorism.

There is lots of rhetoric from the sides of the powers that be in the often referred to as “Western” nations but it is but rhetoric as far as climate action is concerned totally missing the point that action is required and total different action that which they are advocating in their speeches and all the papers that are being produced by them.

They wish to have business as usual and further economic growth (and this is not just the way it is seen in the developed world) on a Planet that cannot grow and with ever diminishing resources. How that is supposed to work beats the hell out of me, for sure.

A copy of the leaked document, which concerns the 2009 climate talks in Copenhagen, can be found here.

© 2014

UN launches biofuels report

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Responding to a report launched on Wednesday, June 26, 2013 by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization on the impacts of biofuels on food security, Friends of the Earth's Biofuels Campaigner Kenneth Richter said: “This is a stark reminder that Europe's biofuel targets are driving up food prices and increasing hunger among the world's poorest people.

“The biofuels industry is lobbying hard against new proposals before the European Parliament to limit the use of food crops for biofuels.

"MEPs must not bow to industry pressure - they must end the use of food for fuel.”

The report, written by the UN's High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security, confirms that the production of biofuel from crops has a significant and direct impact on food prices and food availability:

• "When crops are used for biofuels, the first direct impact is to reduce food and feed availability. This induces an increase in prices and a reduction of food demand by the poor."

• "Everything else being equal, the introduction of a rigid biofuel demand does affect food commodity prices. This observation holds in each context, even in the context of prices going down for other reasons than biofuels."

• "In the last few years (since 2004) of short-term commodity food price increase, biofuels did play an important role."

• "All crops compete for the same land or water, labor, capital, inputs and investment and there are no current magic non-food crops that can ensure more harmonious biofuel production on marginal lands. Therefore, non-food/feedcrops should be assessed with the same rigor as food/feedcrops for their direct and indirect food security impacts."

Biofuels, of whatever kind, are not the answer. What is required is a rethinking of the way we do things and the way we travel. In addition to that studies have shown that bio-diesel, for instance, has a higher output of particulate matter than has diesel derived from fossil oil. Those minute particles released into the atmosphere are the causal agents of asthma and other respiratory problems.

The problem is, however, that the powers-that-be wish to maintain the status quo of motoring for all as event he mere suggestion of it in public would put the cat among the pigeons, proverbial speaking, and lose them votes.

There is a possibility of one option for bio-diesel, though it again would mean that most people would have to give up the use of their private motorcars, and that is the use of gasoline made from hemp, as was intended for the first cars made by Henry Ford. He also built an entire car body from hemp fiber plastic.

Hemp, though, while an almost miracle crop, could never sustain the current level of motoring around the world and the only way we can progress and keep the Planet safe and healthy is by returning to other modes of personal transportation, which does not include the car.

For governments to even suggest this at this present moment in time, however, would be political suicide as the people have gotten so used to personal motoring that they will vote for anyone – regardless – who will promise them the continuation of this. And with regardless I mean here also that they are quite prepared to let the Planet go to hell in a hand basket, so to speak, for their short-term motoring freedom.

It has already been established that the growing of crops for biofuels is causing hunger in many areas and food shortages in general, as well as shortages on other levels, such as water but the people in the developed world do not care enough. Their only interest is the continuation of the status quo as regards to motoring and other ways of life.

Vast stretches of tropical rainforests are being destroyed wholesale for the growing of oil palms for palm oil for the creation of biofuels and also palm oil for use in cosmetics and other products. And other areas are being destroyed too for the growing of other crops for biofuel production; areas that could, even though claimed to be “marginal” lands, for the growing of foods.

When it comes to growing of certain foods too we have a problem such as when in Kenya “French” beans are being grown for consumption in the UK and other parts of the EU. The growing of those, and other crops, which are not part of the diet of the local population, is water intensive and occupies land that those countries, where hunger is a daily problem for many, could much better use in order to grow food for their people.

I have no problem with taking surplus crops from far away places if they are indeed surplus but am dead against cash crop produce grown for the markets in the developed world which being foods that the local people do not eat.

It is high time that the world rethought its priorities and fuel and cash crops are not priorities.

When it comes to fuel for motor vehicles it is time that we rethought personal motoring and while it has given people the freedom to live far away from their jobs and commute this has done no one any real favors. On the contrary.

© 2013

The UN's report 'Biofuels and food security' can be found here.