Earth Hour is all about small changes that people are capable of making and we in our day to day life forget about environment and all that needs to be done to preserve it.
On March 28th, 2009, some 1000 cities across different countries together are observing the Earth Hour by switching off lights for an hour. In Bangalore, there is touted to be large scale participation of people to this need of the hour by switching off lights from 8.30 to 9.30 PM. This is primarily aimed at sending a powerful global message that it’s possible to take action on climate change.
In Bangalore atleast, we have forced Earth Hour once in the morning and once at night not taking into account the numerous Earth Minutes:-), so it wont make a difference as we have learnt to live in darkness as well as in light.
Showing posts with label Environment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Environment. Show all posts
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Monday, February 11, 2008
Coca-Cola-nization of Plachimada
From one agitation in Kerala to another..
Coca Cola in Kerala has been in the news more for the wrong reasons rather than any other. The company's Plachimada set up has stirred the hornet's nest by allegedly employing many practices not taken lightly by the people in Kerala in general and the people in Palakkad in particular. It is shocking to see how Coca Cola gave back to Plachimada.
Dr. P. R. Sreemahadevan Pillai, Principal,P.E.T. Engineering College, Tiruchendur Road, Valliyoor, Tirunelveli, who has been involved extensively in efforts to conserve nature and has taken part in issues against environmental degradation (click here for one of his write ups)has written a book,
I am pasting herein the Preface from the book, The Saga of Plachimada.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental regulation has experienced tremendous growth in the last quarter of the century resulting in a heavily centralized command-and-control bureaucracy overseeing all aspects of environmental protection including enforcement. Still there are many regions severely polluted by the functioning of industries and stressed by resource crunch, including scarcity of drinking water, which has made the lives of the people there difficult in many aspects. Water is a prime natural resource very essential for life. The amount of potable surface water available is only 0.38% of the total amount of water available on the whole of earth. Kerala State in India is rich in such resources with 44 rivers. Palakkad (Palghat) district of the Kerala State has the highest percent of irrigated land in the State and also has a good potential of water resources. The water available at Plachimada in Palakkad district was suitable for domestic and industrial purposes. It wasin the year 2000 that the Coca Cola bottling plant was set up in Plachimada, after which there was a considerable depletion in the ground water and also degradation in the quality of the available water, making it unsuitable for domestic purposes. When the people at Plachimada resisted the overexploitation of ground water by the multinational corporation, the Coca Cola, it took a new dimension of fight for existence. Environmentalists and human rights activists rallied behind the adivasis of Plachimada in their historic resistance against the scrupulous exploitation of the natural resource with profit motive. Plachimada became a global symbol of a new movement. Though the struggle was begun by the resident adivasis of Plachimada, the involvement of the environmentalists and Government agencies gave some academic input to the whole issue. A lot of investigations were made by institutions and individuals on the depletion and pollution of ground water at Plachimada, the accumulation of toxic elements in water and plants, the health hazards in the locality etc. The author and his team have conducted two such studies from 2004 to 2006. The first study was sponsored by the Science, Technology andEnvironment Department of the Government of Kerala and the second one was sponsored by the Vikas Adhyayan Kendra, Mumbai (erstwhile Bombay). The results of both these studies as also relevant results of the studies conducted by others are included in this book.The socio-economic impacts of Coca Cola at Plachimada is also a matter of concern. Analysis in this line is worth comprehending. Being associated with the struggle from its beginning, the author had chances to address the mass gathering of protestors at Plachimada on some occasions. Plachimada has now become a catch word and hence a comprehensive document on this historical struggle is a sine qua non. This book came out because of the constant persuasion and inspiration of Mr. Ajit Murikkan and Mr.Mustafa Desamangalam. This book is dedicated to the more than a billion people of the world, deprived of safe drinking water.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These kind of books may well be in the direction of making more and more people aware of the implications of such a project and ensure there is minimal to nil degradation of our environmental resources which are a loan from our ancestors to be held in trust to be handed over to our future generations.
Coca Cola in Kerala has been in the news more for the wrong reasons rather than any other. The company's Plachimada set up has stirred the hornet's nest by allegedly employing many practices not taken lightly by the people in Kerala in general and the people in Palakkad in particular. It is shocking to see how Coca Cola gave back to Plachimada.
Dr. P. R. Sreemahadevan Pillai, Principal,P.E.T. Engineering College, Tiruchendur Road, Valliyoor, Tirunelveli, who has been involved extensively in efforts to conserve nature and has taken part in issues against environmental degradation (click here for one of his write ups)has written a book,
The Saga of Plachimadawhich deals exclusively with the cola giant's escapades in Plachimada. The Saga of Plachimada, written in English and published by M/s. VAK, Mumbai, is being released at 1 p.m. on 14 Feb 2008, at the venue of the VIBGYOR film festival at Thrissur, Kerala, India.
I am pasting herein the Preface from the book, The Saga of Plachimada.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental regulation has experienced tremendous growth in the last quarter of the century resulting in a heavily centralized command-and-control bureaucracy overseeing all aspects of environmental protection including enforcement. Still there are many regions severely polluted by the functioning of industries and stressed by resource crunch, including scarcity of drinking water, which has made the lives of the people there difficult in many aspects. Water is a prime natural resource very essential for life. The amount of potable surface water available is only 0.38% of the total amount of water available on the whole of earth. Kerala State in India is rich in such resources with 44 rivers. Palakkad (Palghat) district of the Kerala State has the highest percent of irrigated land in the State and also has a good potential of water resources. The water available at Plachimada in Palakkad district was suitable for domestic and industrial purposes. It wasin the year 2000 that the Coca Cola bottling plant was set up in Plachimada, after which there was a considerable depletion in the ground water and also degradation in the quality of the available water, making it unsuitable for domestic purposes. When the people at Plachimada resisted the overexploitation of ground water by the multinational corporation, the Coca Cola, it took a new dimension of fight for existence. Environmentalists and human rights activists rallied behind the adivasis of Plachimada in their historic resistance against the scrupulous exploitation of the natural resource with profit motive. Plachimada became a global symbol of a new movement. Though the struggle was begun by the resident adivasis of Plachimada, the involvement of the environmentalists and Government agencies gave some academic input to the whole issue. A lot of investigations were made by institutions and individuals on the depletion and pollution of ground water at Plachimada, the accumulation of toxic elements in water and plants, the health hazards in the locality etc. The author and his team have conducted two such studies from 2004 to 2006. The first study was sponsored by the Science, Technology andEnvironment Department of the Government of Kerala and the second one was sponsored by the Vikas Adhyayan Kendra, Mumbai (erstwhile Bombay). The results of both these studies as also relevant results of the studies conducted by others are included in this book.The socio-economic impacts of Coca Cola at Plachimada is also a matter of concern. Analysis in this line is worth comprehending. Being associated with the struggle from its beginning, the author had chances to address the mass gathering of protestors at Plachimada on some occasions. Plachimada has now become a catch word and hence a comprehensive document on this historical struggle is a sine qua non. This book came out because of the constant persuasion and inspiration of Mr. Ajit Murikkan and Mr.Mustafa Desamangalam. This book is dedicated to the more than a billion people of the world, deprived of safe drinking water.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These kind of books may well be in the direction of making more and more people aware of the implications of such a project and ensure there is minimal to nil degradation of our environmental resources which are a loan from our ancestors to be held in trust to be handed over to our future generations.
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Dam and be damned?
Where ever a dam is proposed to be built, it is quite common to see protests galore. In places it becomes imperative to have the dams whereas in some others it can be avoided. Often than not, it is a clash between conservation and development. Development...well that becomes a controversial subject with many views.
Medha Patkar led Narmada Bachao Andolan's struggle to stall the Sardar Sarovar project is widely publicised but we hardly hear about the Athirappilly project in Kerala though the activists feel that the damage that would occur due to the Kerala State Electricity Board's proposed 163 MW Athirappilly Hydro Electric Project across the Chalakudy River in the Western Ghats in Kerala takes off on the 31st of March as decided by the KSEB would be devastating. This has been possible due to the judgment of the Kerala High Court on 1-1-2008. The struggle against this Hydro Electric Project has been going on for quite a few years now and the Environmental Clearance granted has been cancelled twice by the High Court of Kerala in response to the PILs filed by Chalakudy Puzha Samrakshana Samiti,another organization called NIlanilpu and Athirappilly Grama Panchayat. Since the judgment of the 1st of January, two more PILs are pending before the Court against the Environmental Clearance accorded to start work which is yet to be heard. This project if it takes off will be the 7th dam across this river.
As per Environment Groups, the loss that could ensue if this project takes off -
1. Loss of Athirappilly Waterfalls – An ICON of the Chalakudy River, one of the most visited tourist spots in South India, well placed in the Tourism map of India
2. Loss of the last remaining riparian forest stretch in the river ( the rest has been mostly submerged under the six dams upstream and dried up downstream of the dams ) – perhaps the only remaining low elevation ( 200-300 MSL) riparian stretch in Kerala Western Ghats
3. Submergence of most frequently used elephant route from Parambikulam Wild Life Sanctuary to Pooyamkutty forests
4. Most frequent citing area of all the four Hornbills together in the Kerala Western Ghats – Pied Hornbill cited most frequently
5. Vazhachal Forest Division within which the project area falls has very high conservation value of 75% as per French Institute of Pondicherry’s Studies on Kerala State forests (second to Mankulam Forest Division) – need for preserving the area from further destruction
6. Endemic, highly endangered, primitive, forest dwelling and river dependent Kadar tribal community under threat of loss of livelihood and habitat due to the new dam. A tribe already displaced several times due to the dams upstream with no proper rehabilitation package so far. Around 300 out of the 1500 number of the tribe remaining on earth to be displaced.
7. The habitat of one of the highest Fish Diversity Rivers (104 sp) in India to be destroyed. Presence of riffles, pools and rapids in the river along with riparian forests at low altitude sustains the high diversity of fish species for a 144 km small river with five sp. new to science. Upstream area recommended for a Fish Sanctuary by the National Bureau of Fish Genetic Resources (NBFGR).
8. Drinking and irrigation water needs of lakhs of people to be severely affected due to high daily flow fluctuation in the river. The Project is intended to be operated as a peak load station from 6pm to 11 pm. The summer flow in the river is already very low due to the peaking operation of the existing 48 MW HEP just 3 km upstream of the dam and regulation by the other five dams above out of which four divert around 40% water to Tamil Nadu via Parambikulam Aliyar Inter State Inter Basin Treaty.
A seventh dam would mean the death of the river itself...
The resistance against the project is growing.
Since the fresh Environmental Clearance granted to the project in July 2007, people’s resistance to the project has been increasing. Several political parties and social and environmental groups have joined hands with the movement to SAVE THE RIVER from further damming.
There is expert opinion that the Environment Impact Assessment carried out is quite porous and this project is definitely not going to bring in a revolution in the "power" scenario in Kerala. Tightening pilferage of electricity, trying to get the functional hydro electric projects to yield optimum power might just be the solution without touching this river further to ensure there is no further environmental damage
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Who Won and Lost at Bali
In the nearly a decade since the U.S. rejected the landmark climate changeagreement known as the Kyoto Protocol, the U.S. has become accustomed tobeing attacked at U.N. environmental gatherings. But the pounding it took inthe tortured all-night negotiations that capped the UN climate changeconference in Bali was unprecedented. Not only did developing nations big and small from India to Papua New Guinea openly chastise the U.S. for its last-minute refusal to endorse the new agreement dubbed the Bali Roadmap,but — with the exception of a confused statement from Japan — not one of the allies that had generally stood with the U.S. the past two weeks —Australia, Russia, Canada — rose in its defense.
In the end, the U.S.'s total isolation was too much for even it to bear. "We've listened very closely to many of our colleagues here during these twoweeks, but especially to what has been said in this hall today," said leadAmerican negotiator Paula Dobiansky. "We will go forward and joinconsensus." Boos turned to cheers, and the deal was essentially sealed.
Here's a breakdown of what it means, who won and who lost:
WHAT WAS ACHIEVED--
The roadmap is essentially the beginning of a beginning. The negotiations to come have a specific end date — 2009 — and for the first time, dismantles what the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change executive secretary Yvo de Boer called "the Berlin Wall of climate change," the idea that only the rich nations need to take responsibility for fighting globalwarming. Both developed countries The two sides still have different responsibilities, with developed nations ready to take on more quantifiable emissions cuts, and developing nations preparing to take on less specific national actions, but no country is left behind. That matters because the majority of future carbon emissions will come from the developing world, and no climate deal can work without the participation of China and India. "The developing nations of the South areon the same road as the North," says Peter Goldmark, director for the climate and air program for Environmental Defense. "They're using the same road map."
Bringing the developing nations on board made it possible for the U.S. to join,since the Kyoto Protocol was signed. Lost a bit in the final drama was the Bali roadmap's most substantial achievement: putting forestry front and center for future climate change negotiations.
Deforestation accounts for up to 20% of man-made globalwarming emissions, but the Kyoto Protocol has no mechanism to support the protection of forests. That will change, and eventually tropical nations could be rewarded for not cutting down their forests, providing a way toreduce carbon emissions
WHAT WASN'T ACHIEVED:
The Bali roadmap contains no specific commitments or figures on the emissions reductions that developed countries will need to take, beyond language that "deep cuts" will be needed. Earlier in the week the EU fought hard to include a specific target of 25 to 40% cuts for developed nations by 2020, and a need to halve global emissions — two figures cited by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) latest assessment of global warming science. Neither made it into the final text, thanks largely to determined opposition from the U.S., although a footnote points to the IPCC report. For environmentalists who had hoped that the recent avalanche of data underscoring the rising crisis of climate change might prompt tougher action, Bali was a disappointment.
"It was a rather weak deal," said Meena Rahman, chair of Friends of the Earth International. "It'scompromised."
WHO WON:
After years of essentially rolling over against the Bush Administration on climate change, the EU showed surprising spine. A mid-week threat led by Germany to boycott the upcoming major emitter' conference — a Bush initiative that would bring together the world's biggest economies to talk about climate change But the clear big winners are China and India, which have fully arrived as major players on international climate action. China in particular came to Bali ready to negotiate hard, but also prepared to give something — a vital change after years of insisting that it would take no responsibility for climate change. While India began the negotiations seemingly disengaged, the country elevated its game in the final day, and showed that it was willing to go beyond its own narrow national interests. That was the case for the developing world as a whole, which stood up to the U.S. without scuttling the possibility of a future deal.
"The developing countries allowed this discussion to begin in a whole new way," says David Doniger, policy director for the Natural Resource Defense Council's climate center.
WHO LOST:
It should be difficult for a country to make the final concession that allows a landmark deal to fall into place, and still appear selfish and churlish — but the U.S. somehow managed to do that. Years of blocking climate action at every turn meant the Bush Administration came into the Bali talks with little public credibility, and while there was a sense before the talks that the U.S. might show flexibility, that hope was quickly dispelled. Throughout the negotiations the U.S. — with help, at least until the last night, from Canada, Australia and Japan — blocked attempts to make climate diplomacy match the urgency of climate science. "The U.S. needed to come in here and build up its credibility," says Kevin Knobloch, President of the Union of Concerned Scientists. "Instead, they just burnished their Darth Vader image."
WHAT'S NEXT:
That's the real question. The roadmap outlines the next steps for negotiation, and calls for a deadline of 2009 — in time to have a formal successor to the Kyoto Protocol. But as tortuous as Bali was, the next round— which will have to tackle the specific actions to be taken by developedand developing nations alike.
Courtesy- Reuters and the Hindu
In the end, the U.S.'s total isolation was too much for even it to bear. "We've listened very closely to many of our colleagues here during these twoweeks, but especially to what has been said in this hall today," said leadAmerican negotiator Paula Dobiansky. "We will go forward and joinconsensus." Boos turned to cheers, and the deal was essentially sealed.
Here's a breakdown of what it means, who won and who lost:
WHAT WAS ACHIEVED--
The roadmap is essentially the beginning of a beginning. The negotiations to come have a specific end date — 2009 — and for the first time, dismantles what the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change executive secretary Yvo de Boer called "the Berlin Wall of climate change," the idea that only the rich nations need to take responsibility for fighting globalwarming. Both developed countries The two sides still have different responsibilities, with developed nations ready to take on more quantifiable emissions cuts, and developing nations preparing to take on less specific national actions, but no country is left behind. That matters because the majority of future carbon emissions will come from the developing world, and no climate deal can work without the participation of China and India. "The developing nations of the South areon the same road as the North," says Peter Goldmark, director for the climate and air program for Environmental Defense. "They're using the same road map."
Bringing the developing nations on board made it possible for the U.S. to join,since the Kyoto Protocol was signed. Lost a bit in the final drama was the Bali roadmap's most substantial achievement: putting forestry front and center for future climate change negotiations.
Deforestation accounts for up to 20% of man-made globalwarming emissions, but the Kyoto Protocol has no mechanism to support the protection of forests. That will change, and eventually tropical nations could be rewarded for not cutting down their forests, providing a way toreduce carbon emissions
WHAT WASN'T ACHIEVED:
The Bali roadmap contains no specific commitments or figures on the emissions reductions that developed countries will need to take, beyond language that "deep cuts" will be needed. Earlier in the week the EU fought hard to include a specific target of 25 to 40% cuts for developed nations by 2020, and a need to halve global emissions — two figures cited by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) latest assessment of global warming science. Neither made it into the final text, thanks largely to determined opposition from the U.S., although a footnote points to the IPCC report. For environmentalists who had hoped that the recent avalanche of data underscoring the rising crisis of climate change might prompt tougher action, Bali was a disappointment.
"It was a rather weak deal," said Meena Rahman, chair of Friends of the Earth International. "It'scompromised."
WHO WON:
After years of essentially rolling over against the Bush Administration on climate change, the EU showed surprising spine. A mid-week threat led by Germany to boycott the upcoming major emitter' conference — a Bush initiative that would bring together the world's biggest economies to talk about climate change But the clear big winners are China and India, which have fully arrived as major players on international climate action. China in particular came to Bali ready to negotiate hard, but also prepared to give something — a vital change after years of insisting that it would take no responsibility for climate change. While India began the negotiations seemingly disengaged, the country elevated its game in the final day, and showed that it was willing to go beyond its own narrow national interests. That was the case for the developing world as a whole, which stood up to the U.S. without scuttling the possibility of a future deal.
"The developing countries allowed this discussion to begin in a whole new way," says David Doniger, policy director for the Natural Resource Defense Council's climate center.
WHO LOST:
It should be difficult for a country to make the final concession that allows a landmark deal to fall into place, and still appear selfish and churlish — but the U.S. somehow managed to do that. Years of blocking climate action at every turn meant the Bush Administration came into the Bali talks with little public credibility, and while there was a sense before the talks that the U.S. might show flexibility, that hope was quickly dispelled. Throughout the negotiations the U.S. — with help, at least until the last night, from Canada, Australia and Japan — blocked attempts to make climate diplomacy match the urgency of climate science. "The U.S. needed to come in here and build up its credibility," says Kevin Knobloch, President of the Union of Concerned Scientists. "Instead, they just burnished their Darth Vader image."
WHAT'S NEXT:
That's the real question. The roadmap outlines the next steps for negotiation, and calls for a deadline of 2009 — in time to have a formal successor to the Kyoto Protocol. But as tortuous as Bali was, the next round— which will have to tackle the specific actions to be taken by developedand developing nations alike.
Courtesy- Reuters and the Hindu
Thursday, October 4, 2007
Ban the Bulb
Continuing my earlier post on Conservation which is becoming a very important issue, I came across this by Greenpeace urging the banning of the bulb. I would urge everyone, for whatever it is worth, to send the mail to our Government. Even if an iota of difference is made, it might mean a world of difference to our future generations
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Conservation- The path ahead
Protecting nature in India often means competing for valued living space and resources with some of the country's most under privileged people.Industrial and commercial pressures are also expanding rapidly, undermining the ecological integrity of parks in hitherto unprecedented ways. Simply garrisoning the fortresses will not, indeed, cannot work.
But for wildlife and humans to survive, each other requires a synthesis of the best of the insights the biological and humanistic disciplines have on offer. It also calls for innovative and often out of the box thinking.
Drawing on the book he has recently co-edited, Dr. Mahesh Rangarajan in his book, "Making Conservation work", looks back and ahead, not only at why things are at the current impasse but of how we can move forward. It is possible to look ahead with cautious hope, drawing on the systemic strengths of Indian democracy to reconcile competing demands and keep priceless biota intact in a manner that is just and stable.
P.S- Talking about Conservation, I chanced upon Blackle and the quantum of energy it could save in comparison to Google. I also saw this Blog by Google.
But for wildlife and humans to survive, each other requires a synthesis of the best of the insights the biological and humanistic disciplines have on offer. It also calls for innovative and often out of the box thinking.
Drawing on the book he has recently co-edited, Dr. Mahesh Rangarajan in his book, "Making Conservation work", looks back and ahead, not only at why things are at the current impasse but of how we can move forward. It is possible to look ahead with cautious hope, drawing on the systemic strengths of Indian democracy to reconcile competing demands and keep priceless biota intact in a manner that is just and stable.
P.S- Talking about Conservation, I chanced upon Blackle and the quantum of energy it could save in comparison to Google. I also saw this Blog by Google.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)