McDonald's, PepsiCo and KFC are to help write British health policy

Department of Health putting fast food companies at heart of policy on obesity, alcohol and diet-related disease

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

I did check the date: It is NOT April 1st, thus it cannot be an April Fools. On the other hand, a John McEnroe term comes to mind. Yes, the famous one of 'You cannot be serious'. Alas, it would appear that they are.

The British “Department of Health” is putting the fast food companies McDonald's and KFC and processed food and drink manufacturers such as PepsiCo, Kellogg's, Unilever, Mars and Diageo at the heart, pardon the pun, of writing government policy on obesity, alcohol and diet-related disease.

If it would not be such a serious issue I'd be laughing and I guess so would everyone else as it is so absolutely stupid, ludicrous and ridiculous that it is fit for a comedy. This is like putting the fox in charge of the hen house.

In an overhaul of public health, said by campaign groups to be the equivalent of handing smoking policy over to the tobacco industry, health secretary Andrew Lansley has set up five "responsibility deal" networks with business, co-chaired by ministers, to come up with policies. Some of these are expected to be used in the public health white paper due in the next month. Thus it would appear that someone is going to be putting the security of the hen house in the capable paws of the fox.

The groups are dominated by food and alcohol industry members, who have been invited to suggest measures to tackle public health crises. As I have already said, if it would not be such a serious matter one could but laugh, mistaking this as a comedy.

Working alongside those are public interest health and consumer groups including Which?, Cancer Research UK and the Faculty of Public Health.

The alcohol responsibility deal network is chaired by the head of the lobby group the Wine and Spirit Trade Association.

The food network to tackle diet and health problems includes processed food manufacturers, fast food companies, and Compass, the catering company famously pilloried by Jamie Oliver for its school menus of turkey twizzlers. The food deal's sub-group on calories is chaired by PepsiCo, owner of Walkers crisps.

The leading supermarkets are an equally strong presence, while the responsibility deal's physical activity group is chaired by the Fitness Industry Association, which is the lobby group for private gyms and personal trainers.

One can but wonder, methinks, as to where some politicians have their brains and how many get a good backhander out of some of those deals.

In early meetings, these commercial partners have been invited to draft priorities and identify barriers, such as EU legislation, that they would like removed. They have been assured by Lansley that he wants to explore voluntary not regulatory approaches, and to support them in removing obstacles. Using the pricing of food or alcohol to change consumption has been ruled out. One group was told that the health department did not want to lead, but rather hear from its members what should be done.

While public interest groups are taking part in drawing up the deals, many have argued that robust regulation is needed to deal with junk food and alcohol misuse.

Instead of listening to the experts in public health the government has decided to listen to industry and thus allow those that make money out of the sales of this or that not very healthy product to make policy. In the same way the food labeling was done according to what industry wanted rather than the warning traffic light which was asked for by the experts.

I am beginning to wonder when the government is going to put the security of the realm into the capable hands of the likes of the FSB and maybe even the Taliban and Al-Qaeda?

According to a spokesman government wanted to improve public health through voluntary agreements with business and other partners, rather than through regulation or top-down lectures because it believed this approach would be far more effective and ambitious than previous efforts.

While big government, such as what Labor wanted, is not a good idea neither is this way of running things. There must be a balance and we cannot allow them to do what seem to be happening in the USA where the FDA, amongst others, seems to be owned, lock, stock and barrel by lobbying groups.

© 2010

Super-dairy plan resubmitted

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Responding to the resubmission of plans by Nocton Dairies Ltd for Britain's largest dairy farm on Thursday 18 November 2010, Friends of the Earth's food campaigner Sandra Bell said: "Nocton's promoters have scaled down their plans for now but with a view to expanding them in the future - and they still plan to cram their cows into massive sheds, rather than graze them outdoors.

"The introduction of US-style mega dairies would force small farmers out of business and push the UK's farming sector further towards crisis.

"Instead of subsidizing farming like this the Government should be using taxpayers' money to support the planet-friendly farms that people in the UK want and that could help create a thriving farming sector."

From what I know and have heard about that kind of dairy operations in the United States, in the same way as the beef operations, the so-called “feed lots”, it would be best if this application, and other such applications, would be disallowed, as a matter or principle, and this be made clear to any potential applicant.

In addition to this we need to get rid of the Holstein and Frisian cows; those modern milk production “factories” on four legs, which are aggressive and thus dangerous to stockmen and public alike, and which create an awful lot of moothane.

The proper dairy cows produce some 70+% less that do those above mentioned and therefore let's get back to some real farming, whether dairy or other.

Feed lot beef cattle and the cows in the “dairy factories” are pumped full of antibiotics and other veterinary medicines to just keep them working and producing and, as far as the feed lots and some dairy factories are concerned, they could not survival without such medication.

Let's also consider that all of those antibiotics and other medication will come through, in one way or the other, in the milk and the meat, as far as beef cattle are concerned, which could affect us as consumers.

Time to tell factory farms where to get off...

© 2010

Fairtrade movement celebrates as Bicester becomes the 500th Fairtrade Town

The town of Bicester in Oxfordshire on November 1, 2010 became the UK’s 500th Fairtrade Town and joins a growing international Fairtrade Towns movement which now spans 19 countries and unites capital cities such as Rome, Brussels, Paris and London with small market towns and remote Scottish Islands.

A group of 14 Fairtrade supporters in Bicester have been working for the last four years to make their town a Fairtrade Town and now have the added bonus of hitting the 500th mark. The group has worked hard to meet the five goals required for Fairtrade Towns status. These include getting local workplaces and community organisations to use Fairtrade products whenever possible, including a flagship employer. In fact, they went one better and their campaign succeeded in getting regional rail company Chiltern Railways to switch all their onboard coffee and hot chocolate to Fairtrade. The campaign group has also been working with local faith groups and schools, with the result that two thirds of local churches are now using Fairtrade. Half of local schools have also been actively supporting the campaign.

Colin Cockshaw from the Bicester Fairtrade Steering Group said: ‘Being number 500 is really great. It has been a lot of work, but also a lot of fun. The town campaign has brought people of all ages together in a community-building task which we hope will be of lasting benefit to Bicester. We also hope that this achievement provides a platform for future growth in the use of Fairtrade products in our town and of local people’s understanding of the difference that buying Fairtrade can make.’

The Fairtrade Towns movement was launched 10 years ago when Garstang in Lancashire declared itself the world’s first Fairtrade Town at a public meeting in April 2000. Five goals were then developed through which any community could make a collective commitment to Fairtrade. Since 2000, the grassroots movement has swelled to include 6,000 Fairtrade Faith groups; almost 5,000 schools registered in the Fairtrade Schools Scheme; and 127 Fairtrade Universities and Colleges.

Harriet Lamb CBE, Executive Director for the Fairtrade Foundation, says: ‘Congratulations to Bicester for becoming the 500th Fairtrade Town and to all the Fairtrade campaigners who have been involved in this extraordinary grassroots movement that has been one of the outstanding phenomena of the decade. Through their tireless campaigning they have won the hearts and minds of consumers and helped Fairtrade sales in the UK grow. Fairtrade Towns have helped to tip the balance in favour of some of the poorest producers in the world and we hope that with the continued growth in Fairtrade Towns internationally we will see similar successes across Europe and beyond.’

People in Bicester will join in celebrations with hundreds Fairtrade campaigners gathering in Cardiff via a live satellite link. This event is the culmination of a 10-day, 500-mile relay bicycle ride to celebrate this milestone. The cyclists set off from Aberfeldy, the joint first Fairtrade Town in Scotland on Saturday 23 October. Fairtrade campaigners have been passing the baton, a ceremonial parchment, to cyclists from 10 other prominent Fairtrade Towns including, Garstang (the world’s first Fairtrade Town), and; Chester (the world’s first Fairtrade City), before arriving in Cardiff (the world’s first Fairtrade capital city), this afternoon. The baton has been carried by the lead cyclists on each leg of the journey and signed at special celebratory events held each day along the route.

One of the cyclists arriving in Cardiff is Bruce Crowther, the Garstang vet who had the original idea of starting the Fairtrade Towns movement and now is the Fairtrade Towns Advisor. ‘This milestone is a tremendous achievement that should be enjoyed and celebrated, especially by the grassroots campaigners that made it happen. But our campaign is a long journey and we are now looking forward to the next 500 towns.’

Fairtrade campaigners are using this event to ask their MPs to sign an Early Day Motion (EDM), calling on the government to reaffirm it’s commitment to supporting the continued growth of fair and ethical trade in the UK. More than 58 MPs across all parties have so far signed the EDM.

An independent evaluation of the impact of the European Fairtrade Towns Movement undertaken on behalf of the Fairtrade Foundation last year found clear examples of ‘the uniquely powerful nature of Fairtrade Towns campaigns as a means of securing local and global social change.’ It said that further learning about the Fairtrade Towns movement ‘would be incredibly valuable for informing other sustainable development awareness and action activities and movements’.

The FAIRTRADE Mark is the only label which gives groups of farmers and producers the means to improve their livelihoods through the guaranteed minimum price and additional Fairtrade premium to invest in social, environmental and business projects. Around 7.5 million people (farmers, workers, their families and communities) across 58 countries in the developing world benefit from the international Fairtrade system.

Towns, Cities, Villages, Islands, Boroughs, Counties and Zones can achieve Fairtrade status by meeting five goals set by the Fairtrade Foundation. For simplicity all these places are referred to as Fairtrade Towns. The five goals to achieve Fairtrade Town status are: the local council passes a resolution supporting Fairtrade and agrees to serve Fairtrade coffee and tea at its meetings and in its offices and canteens; a range of Fairtrade products is readily available in the area’s shops and catering establishments; Fairtrade products are used by a number of local work places and community organisations (churches, schools etc); media coverage and popular support is encouraged for the campaign; and a local Fairtrade Steering Group is convened to ensure commitment to Fairtrade Town status. To find out more about Fairtrade Towns and to see a full list of declared Towns in the UK visit www.fairtrade.org.uk/get_involved_fairtrade_towns.htm

Source: Fairtrade Foundation

Turnover soars for family-run eco firm from Croydon

The Green Desk has seem profits rise despite the recession.

By Michael Smith (Veshengro)

A husband and wife team from Croydon, Surrey, south of London, have seen turnover soar after cementing their position as one of the borough's greenest companies.

As “First Impressions”, which was founded in 2002, the company established its credentials as a supplier of environmentally friendly office equipment, picking up Best of Business and South London Business green awards.

But two years ago, Bruce Halai-Carter and his wife Yasmin decided to give their company a new name – “The Green Desk” – and a new ethos.

This saw the company move from solely a supplier of equipment to offering a complete business service to companies looking to establish and expand their own green credentials.

Now, on top of being able to supply everything from pens and stationery to desks made of sustainable materials, “The Green Desk” offers cleaning services, business support with marketing and design and health and safety advice.

And as a social enterprise, the company, which has around ten staff and bases in Gloucester Road, Croydon, and Spout Hill, Addington, is donating surpluses it makes to charity.

“The business is all about sustainability.” Bruce said. “When we look to supply goods for our customers we need to know who has made them, hopefully within the UK or Western Europe and that they are of good quality and are not going to harm the environment.”

The approach, he said, was proving to be an increasing success and over the past year the number of companies wanting to set out on the road to becoming greener is increasing.

The GREEN (LIVING) REVIEW wishes “The Green Desk” continued success on their journey to make the world a better place.

© 2010

Lawsuit Filed to Halt Release of Genetically Engineered Eucalyptus Trees Across the American South

FORT PIERCE, FL : An alliance of conservation organizations on July 1, 2010 sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture over its approval of open-air field tests of a genetically engineered (GE) hybrid of eucalyptus tree across the southern United States. The permit, issued to a company called ArborGen, which is a joint initiative of International Paper, MeadWestvaco and Rubicon, was approved May 12 with minimal environmental review. It authorizes the experimental planting and flowering of a new, genetically engineered hybrid on 28 secret sites across seven southern states – Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Texas.

“In refusing to prepare a detailed environmental review, the Department of Agriculture ignored serious risks before permitting this action,” said Marc Fink, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. “Federal agencies can’t be allowed to neglect their duty to the public trust. Once this genie is out of the bottle and escapes to neighboring lands, it’s irreversible.”

ArborGen hopes its GE “cold-tolerant” Eucalyptus will become widely planted for pulp and biomass. But eucalyptus trees are not native to the United States and are known to become invasive, displacing native wildlife and plants in various areas around the country and increasing wildfire risk. “Releasing GE cold-tolerant Eucalyptus trees into the wild in multiple states greatly increases the risk they will spread uncontrollably throughout the region,” said Dr. Neil Carman of the Sierra Club.

In approving the GE eucalyptus permits, the Department of Agriculture ignored the concerns of numerous agencies and scientists, including the Georgia Department of Natural Resources and the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council, which formally criticized the proposed open field tests of these genetically engineered trees.

In addition to approving these test sites, Agriculture is also considering a “deregulation” petition submitted by ArborGen that would allow widespread commercial planting of GE Eucalyptus without any limits or regulation. According to the U.S. Forest Service, GE Eucalyptus plantations in the southern United States would use more than twice the water of pine plantations in a region already suffering from a depleted water supply.

“These tests include planting over a quarter of a million genetically engineered eucalyptus trees along the Gulf Coast and into South Carolina,” said Anne Petermann of Global Justice Ecology Project and the STOP GE Trees Campaign. “Ultimately they plan to produce up to half a billion GE eucalyptus seedlings annually for planting across the U.S. South. This would be another disaster for these beleaguered Gulf Coast states, leading to a loss of native forests and biodiversity, depleting ground water and worsening climate change.”

The Government Accountability Office and USDA inspector general have both issued sharply critical reports on the USDA’s management of genetically engineered organism (GMO) field tests. In 2006, a GE rice field test contaminated southern U.S. long-grain rice fields, causing billions in losses to farmers; in 2007, a federal court found that a GE bentgrass field test had contaminated a protected national grassland in Oregon. “The Department of Agriculture continues to tell the public that no further restrictions are needed on these novel organisms,” said George Kimbrell, an attorney for the plaintiffs. “In light of history, their empty promises here ring hollow.”

“Over the last generation the people of the South have watched the forests of our region destroyed by industrial forestry, impacting our water quality, wildlife habitat and quality of life,” said Scot Quaranda of Dogwood Alliance. “The federal government's decision to approve the use of GE Eucalyptus trees in our region will open the door to further exploitation of the people and forests of the South. This decision must be overturned.”

The organizations are represented by attorneys Marc Fink of the Center for Biological Diversity, George Kimbrell of the International Center for Technology Assessment and the Center for Food Safety, and Jeanne Marie Zokovitch Paben, director of the Earth Advocacy Clinic at Barry University School of Law.

The organizations that filed suit are the Center for Biological Diversity, Sierra Club, Dogwood Alliance, International Center for Technology Assessment, Center for Food Safety and Global Justice Ecology Project.

Source: Center for Biological Diversity

Ireland forced to take EU bailout

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

November 20, 2010: Ireland has been forced to take a EU sponsored financial bailout for that is the way the European Union works. Sovereignty no longer exists, despite all that is said, and the EU decides what is going to happen, if need be with a little force.

Is this really what the people of Europe had in mind when they thought it to be such a good idea to all be in the EU? The founders may have had that in mind but then again they might not have; the people on the other hand, no one seems to actually ask them and if a referendum is done the countries are told to run it so long until the outcome is positive.

Despite the fact that, originally, the government of the Emerald Isle was vehemently rejecting any attempt of accepting this financial bailout from the EU and the IMF in the end it has to surrender to the demands of the European Union “leadership” in Brussels.

We can, I believe, clearly see here now from which quarter the wind is blowing as far as the European Union is concerned and that every attempt will be made to hold this structure together, even if by use of duct tape, coercion, and even force.

Countries that are part of the European Union, and this includes Britain, despite the fact that the British governments of which ever color and persuasion will keep telling the people that this is not so, have had to hand over, theoretically, all sovereignty interest to the unelected folks in Brussels, to the Commission.

The Commission and Council really runs the EU and not the parliament, despite claims to the contrary, and the commission and the council are bodies that are not accountable to anyone, it would appear, and definitely not to the individual member states.

The financial bailout pressure that has been put on Eire is simply because they do not, on any account, want to have to abandon the Euro, the European federal currency, that no one, as it would seem, even wants any more. The majority of Germans, for one, want the D-Mark back and get rid off the Euro. The politicians, on the other hand, are prepared to do everything possible to keep the Euro, and even if it means keeping it on life support and artificially alive.

Any EU country that has the Euro as currency that ends up defaulting financially and thus might endanger the Euro will, no doubt, be put under the same pressures as has been Ireland and will have to take a bailout from the EU and other sources forced on it.

Why is this so? The answer here is a very simple one and one that even a blind man with a stick would be able to see; namely that in that way the country or countries that have financial problems will be bound by loans even closer to that lot in Brussels and thus are controllable.

It has nothing to do with wishing to help any of those countries, and how could the UK even try with more than 800 billion Pounds of public deficit anyway, and not allowing them to go bankrupt but everything to do with personal – for lack of a better word – interest and with the wish to control.

While Britain's offer of “help” to Eire is not necessarily based on the latter, the wish to control, but on economic interests in that Ireland is one of the biggest importers of British goods, as far as Brussels is concerned it is all about control and power over the individual member states.

Time to tell the EU where to get off...

© 2010

Fairtrade raisins from Afghanistan now available

Fairtrade raisins from Afghanistan will be available in the UK from November 2010 onwards as part of the Fairtrade Foundation’s ongoing work to help producers in conflict affected areas gain access to global markets

The raisins carry the FAIRTRADE Mark and have been produced by Tropical Wholefoods in partnership with international non-governmental organisation Mercy Corps and the Parwan Raisin Producer Co-operative (PRPC), who are based in the Shomali Plain in Parwan province, just outside Kabul. PRPC consists of five groups of around 300 farmers who own on average five jeribs of land with 2.13 jeribs of this being vineyard. A jerib is equivalent to just under half a hectare. To read more about the PRPC see the article in Fair Comment here.

Haji Aenudin, 54, lives with an extended family of 18 including his son’s family. He says selling his raisins in the UK and to other international markets will not only mean that he will be able to get a better price for his raisins but also that he will be able to send his children to school. ‘By selling directly to exporters and not going via a trader, we will get more money for our raisins,’ he explains. ‘My great hope is that peace will return to Afghanistan and for a good life for my children, and their children.’

Fairtrade Labelling Organisations International has been working with producers from conflict areas as part of its strategy to spread and deepen the impacts of Fairtrade globally. Chris Davis, the Fairtrade Foundation’s Director of Producer Partnerships said: ‘This new product is great news for Fairtrade and the Afghani farmers. Areas of conflict – even sporadic – suffer extreme poverty and there are many opportunities for Fairtrade to make an impact in supporting communities in these areas.’

Adam Brett from Tropical Wholefoods first began working with the raisins in 2006. He said: ‘The past three decades of fighting during the Soviet occupation, civil war and Taliban regime have virtually decimated the plain. Grape farmers experienced ever decreasing yields, and due to the troubles, access to improved technology and to markets was impossible. Fairtrade will help them to them a sustainable living by creating export opportunities.’

Because of security in the region, Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International (FLO) auditors have not been able to carry out the physical inspections. However, a process of assessment by NGOs and local consultants to provide desk research information on compliance with Fairtrade standards has been implemented.

Because of this unusual situation, Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International (FLO) has made an exception to allow the Fairtrade Foundation to license UK based traders to sell products from these producers using the FAIRTRADE Mark. This exceptional approach means that the producer is not considered fully certified, which will be made clear on the raisin packs.

Source: Fairtrade Foundation

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle Match

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Recycle Match is one of those ideas that should have existed ages ago. It's a fabulous concept and ultimately aims to get people reusing, trading, re-purposing and repairing before purchasing something new, or sending it to landfill.

Recycle Match is a web-based service that let's companies who have an excess of of no longer used or needed materials, sell them away to people or organizations who can make good use of the waste. One example given on the website is a surplus of Vinyl billboards used by an advertising company being given to a person who makes bags from scrap vinyl.

The service only charges if a successful match is made. In most cases it's a win-win situation. If companies can make a bit of profit from their commercial waste by using Recycle Match, rather than it go to landfill and people and organization can gain materials they need second hand, everyone benefits.

While I have not have had any experience with Recycle Match personally the idea itself strikes me as a brilliant one and one that can but be encouraged.

It is just such a shame that when one goes to many companies oneself, seeing the waste material, say, dumped in a skip, that one ends up being told: “No, you cannot have that stuff. It is our waste that we pay to have taken away.”

That approach is ever so daft, to say the very least. The companies would actually save money if people would take their stuff away for they would not have to pay for it to be hauled to the dump or the recycling facilities.

This applies equally to the likes of manufacturing companies as well as to building sites. No, you cannot possibly help yourself to that wood that they throw out. There might be some nails in there and you could hurt yourself on them and then decide to sue the company. Duh?

There is so much waste, commercial waste, often rather clean waste, that goes to landfill while someone else could use this to make things with. Thus Recycle Match is a good concept and hopefully the message will get across.

© 2010

Why Cancun Matters

Pending Decisions on Forests and Related Issues Have Big Implications, Says the Rainforest Alliance

New York –The global NGO Rainforest Alliance is sending a delegation of 18 representatives to the Conference of Parties (COP16) climate treaty conference in Cancún, Mexico (held November 29 – December 10) to advocate for decisions on key fronts in the fight against climate change, especially REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation). The Rainforest Alliance is a global leader in promoting certified sustainable forestry, agriculture and tourism. Its climate change work includes pioneering on-ground community forestry projects that lead to reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, carbon credit verification and validation and carbon accounting for farms.

REDD+ will be highlighted on the COP16 agenda, along with agriculture, adaptation and mitigation, MRV (monitoring, reporting and verification), financing and other issue areas that track closely with the Rainforest Alliance’s work for global sustainability. In recent weeks the Council of the European Union, 62 environmental ministers at the biodiversity conference in Nagoya, Japan, the foreign minister of Mexico and UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon have all indicated that progress in these key areas can and should be achieved in Cancún.

Focusing on these issues highlights the important nexus between conserving forests, sustainable agriculture and land use practices, sustainable development and climate protection. Deforestation accounts for about 17% of global greenhouse gas emissions, the equivalent of emissions from the world’s entire transport sector. The interaction of forest loss and agriculture account for significantly more than that. Agriculture and agribusiness drive deforestation, clearing and degrading forests to feed markets for such commodities as cattle, soy, oil palm, etc. Progress in Cancún on REDD+, financing, agriculture, land use and related areas would be significant for cutting global emissions as well as preserving biodiversity, securing a sustainable food supply and helping people in developing countries adapt to and mitigate climate change that is already underway. At the same time, it would also advance programs and policies to help make private-sector agribusiness a key part of the climate solution as opposed to a key part of the problem.

“Whether or not it achieves a new treaty, Cancún matters,” said Tensie Whelan, president of the Rainforest Alliance and one of those attending COP16. “We need a comprehensive, binding agreement and all countries need to keep working for one in the near future. But meanwhile, COP16 may advance important decisions on implementing and financing REDD+ and other measures that will help developing countries conserve forests and improve land use. Taking those decisions would be a major step forward.”

Although contentious preparatory meetings in Bonn and Tianjin dimmed prospects for a new binding treaty in Cancún (last year touted as a possible future outcome of the COP15 meeting in Copenhagen),

Rainforest Alliance representatives at COP16 will advocate for decisions on key aspects of REDD+, and provide delegates in Cancún with information on REDD+ implementation and finance mechanisms. Most estimates put the costs of cutting deforestation in half by 2020 range of $25 to $35 billion per year. A diverse set of funding sources, including both market and non-market (i.e. national government and multilateral) funding, will be required. REDD+ should ultimately be coordinated at the national level. But while oversight mechanisms are getting established, sub-national implementation for a defined interim period is needed. Indigenous peoples and local communities must be fully enfranchised and empowered any REDD+ system and share equitably in its benefits.

The Rainforest Alliance has field tested these positions in REDD+ community forestry projects it is piloting in biodiverseareas of Ghana and Honduras, in collaboration with the Global Development Alliance of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).

Throughout COP16 the Rainforest Alliance will discuss its work and positions on REDD+, climate change, sustainable forestry, sustainable agriculture and related issues. The Rainforest Alliance will host a booth on the COP16 floor, co-host a UNFCCC side event, and highlight these topics during a presentation at Agriculture and Rural Development Day December 4, a booth at Forest Day December 5 and other events TBA.

The Rainforest Alliance works with people whose livelihoods depend on the land, helping them transform the way they grow food, harvest wood and host travellers. From large multinational corporations to small, community-based cooperatives, businesses and consumers worldwide are involved in the Rainforest Alliance’s efforts to bring responsibly produced goods and services to a global marketplace where the demand for sustainability is growing steadily. For more information, visit www.rainforest-alliance.org.

Source: Rainforest Alliance

This press release is presented without editing for your information only.

Department of Navy Recognized as Energy Leader by Industry Experts

The Department of Navy has been selected as a finalist in three categories in the international competition for the 2010 Platts Global Energy Awards. The awards recognize individuals and organizations that have demonstrated excellence in leadership, innovation and performance in the energy field. Prior winners include Exxon Mobil, Shell, Walmart, and the Tennessee Valley Authority. 

The finalists were selected by a panel of international industry experts from over 200 nominations submitted from more than 30 countries. 

“Selection of the Navy as a finalist in three categories in the same year is unprecedented for a military service,” said Rear Admiral Philip Cullom, director of the Energy and Environmental Readiness Division of the Chief of Naval Operations staff, and the architect of Task Force Energy. “I am pleased to see the Navy’s energy accomplishments recognized by this prestigious awards program.” 

The Navy’s achievements in each of the three finalist categories are indicated below.

Category:  Industry Leadership Award

The Navy’s establishment of aggressive energy goals and its implementation of Task Force Energy qualified the service as a finalist for this award. The award is given to an organization that has taken decisive action resulting in a substantial transformation in its energy posture. 

The Chief of Naval Operations created Task Force Energy with the mission of enhancing the Navy’s strategic, tactical and operational capabilities through greater energy efficiency and development of more secure and sustainable energy supplies. Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus issued amplifying and visionary energy goals that will transform Navy energy use over the next ten years, moving the Navy from a vulnerable and unsustainable petroleum-based energy strategy to the widespread use of alternative/renewable fuels for ships and aircraft. 

Key Navy achievements thus far include the Earth Day 2010 flight of an F/A-18 aircraft on a 50/50 blend of camelina-based biofuel and petroleum based fuel and the October 2010 operation of an experimental riverine command vessel on a 50/50 blend of algae-based biofuel and petroleum. 

“These achievements demonstrate significant progress in meeting the Secretary of the Navy’s goal of supplying half the Navy’s energy needs with alternative fuels by 2020,” said Cullom.

Category: Energy Efficiency Program of the Year

The Navy’s Incentivized Energy Conservation (i-ENCON) program has qualified the service as a finalist for this award. The award is given to the top energy management program that effectively improves an organization’s energy use.

The i-ENCON program encourages and rewards bottom-up management practices and cultural change in fuel usage by Navy ships. Vessels demonstrating a reduction in fuel usage while maintaining all operational commitments are rewarded by additions to their operating budget. This program also disseminates to all ships the fuel-saving lessons learned by each in areas such as managing fuel consumption, adjusting transit speed, selecting fuel efficient routes, and eliminating unproductive energy expenditures.

“We are proud of the Navy’s i-ENCON program,” said Cullom. “During Fiscal Year 2009, Navy ships achieved savings of more than $99 million in fuel costs, as compared with the projected amounts. These are significant savings.”

Category: Engineering Project of the Year

The commissioning and operation of USS MAKIN ISLAND (LHD 8), the Navy’s first ship incorporating an electric Auxiliary Propulsion System (APS) - also referred to as a hybrid electric drive - has qualified the service as a finalist for this award, which is presented for engineering excellence. 

Although similar technology is widely used in automobiles, it has never been adapted to power a large vessel. The ship employs gas turbines and electric motors and services rather than the typical steam powered turbines, greatly improving overall energy efficiency. Gas turbines are inefficient when operating at low speeds – something large deck amphibious ships spend significant time doing. 

By using its APS for speeds of 10 knots or less, fuel costs were reduced by $2 million during the ship’s 2009 maiden voyage from Mississippi to San Diego. Total fuel savings over the ship’s lifetime will amount to nearly $250 million.

“Where possible, the Navy will be an 'early adopter' of new technologies that enhance national security in an environmentally sustainable way," said Cullom. “The USS MAKIN ISLAND is a great example how the Navy is leading the way to achieve energy efficiency.”

The international winners of the 2010 Platts Global Energy Awards will be announced December 2, 2010.

To learn more about the U.S. Navy’s Energy, Environment and Climate Change programs, visit http://greenfleet.dodlive.mil.

100422-N-XXXXS-001 PATUXENT RIVER, Md. (April 22, 2010) The Navy celebrates Earth Day by showcasing a supersonic flight test of the "Green Hornet," an F/A-18 Super Hornet strike fighter jet powered by a 50/50 biofuel blend. The test, conducted at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md., drew hundreds of onlookers, including Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus.  Mabus has made research, development, and increased use of alternative fuels a priority for the Department of the Navy. (U.S. Navy photo by Kelly Schindler/Released)

101022-N-6889J-107 NORFOLK (Oct. 22, 2010) Sailors assigned to Riverine Group 1 conduct maneuvers aboard Riverine Command Boat (Experimental) (RCB-X) at Naval Station Norfolk. The RCB-X is powered by an alternative fuel blend of 50 percent algae-based fuel and 50 percent NATO F-76 fuel, supporting the Secretary of the Navy's efforts to increase the use of alternative fuels in Navy vessels. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Gregory N. Juday/Released)

090815-O-0000X-001 STRAIT OF MAGELLAN (Aug. 15, 2009) The amphibious assault ship Pre-Commissioning Unit Makin Island (LHD 8) sails easterly through the Strait of Magellan as the ship prepares to enter the Pacific Ocean. Makin Island departed Pascagoula, Miss., July 10 and is currently circumnavigating South America to its new homeport in San Diego. (Photo courtesy of Chilean Navy/Released)

Source: US Navy

This press release is presented without editing for your information only.