THE GALLON ENVIRONMENT LETTER
Canadian
Institute for Business and the Environment
Fisherville,
Ontario, Canada
Tel. 416
410-0432, Fax: 416 362-5231
Vol. 15, No. 10, January 19, 2011
****************************************************
This is the honoured reader
edition of the Gallon Environment Letter and is distributed at no charge: send a
note with Add GL or Delete GL in the subject line to
subscriptions@gallonletter.ca. Subscribers receive a more complete edition
without subscription reminders and with extensive links to further information
following almost every article. Organizational subscriptions are $184 plus HST
nd provide additional benefits detailed on the web site. Individual
subscriptions are only $30 (personal emails/funds only please) including HST. If
you would like to subscribe please visit http://www.cialgroup.com/subscription.htm If you feel you should be receiving the paid subscriber edition or have
other subscriber questions please contact us also at subscriptions@gallonletter.ca. This
current free edition is posted on the web site about a week or so after its
issue at http://www.cialgroup.com/whatsnew.htm. See also events of external
organizations at http://www.cialgroup.com/events.htm
Back free editions from January 2009 are also
available.
****************************************************
****************************************************
ABOUT THIS
ISSUE
New readers may be surprised to
see our guest editorial on climate change from the Canadian Council of Chief
Executives but regulars will know that we are enthusiastic promoters of views on
sustainability with which we agree. In this case, CCCE wrote almost exactly the
same opinion on the Cancun climate conference that we had been intending to
share. We think that, at least on this occasion, CCCE is more in tune with
public and scientific opinion on climate change than the Harper government. The
report of Canada's Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
seems to agree. Maybe Canada's new Environment Minister, the fifth in five years
(John Baird was Minister twice) will fix things. It seems unlikely: after almost
five years of saying that Canada must follow the US lead on climate change,
Environment Minister Peter Kent now seems to have changed Canada's direction and
has said that we must not follow the US lead on climate change. Whatever can it
all mean?
The New York Times has drawn the
world's attention to a respected climate change scientist who helped identify
the scope of the problem and who was a prominent Republican. We summarize the
story. The article also provides a useful overview of the scientific method.
However, not everyone agrees: we summarize a letter we received recently from a
Florida-based scientist and laboratory owner who has been an honoured reader of
Gallon Environment Letter for years. We find it strange that companies and
governments continue to purchase environmental services from people who purport
to be scientists, have scientific qualifications, but who apparently think that
a rant is an appropriate response to a science-based conclusions with which they
disagree.
As if the debate over climate
change has not been sufficiently loud, an Australian software developer has put
on line a 'bot' - an automated responder - that will engage climate sceptics in
dialogue. Maybe it will keep some of our federal politicians so busy that they
will forget to show up for votes in the House of Commons!
Who noticed that 2010 was the
United Nations Year of Biodiversity? At least Ontario Power Generation's Senior
Advisor on Sustainable Development noticed and used a television interview in
December to highlight the risks of declining biodiversity. He gave advice on
steps companies should be taking to help preserve biodiversity and he outlined
what OPG is doing. The Canadian Business and Biodiversity Council is one of the
organizations that can help and has published some interesting case
studies.
You may have heard that Target is
coming to Canada but who knew that Target, with only a few exceptions, is doing
more for the environment than many Canadian retailers? Maybe Target will help
set the environmental pace in Canada. A recent BC court decision highlighted the
costs and risks of not taking due diligence when handling hazardous materials.
In this case the problem involved PCBs but as more and more hazardous product
rules come into force one can imagine that in future similar cases might spring
from plastics or metal recycling or many other business activities. Far too many
businesses fail to obtain adequate environmental science expertise or to apply
sufficient due diligence when handling materials that may have a negative
environmental or public health impact. Such shortcuts can prove to be very
expensive, both in terms of fines and damage to reputation. A US television
advertisement for a different product shows that some companies are just plain
careless, or perhaps even negligent, when making claims for their products. GL's
experience is that quite a large number of marketers and advertising agencies
are very poorly informed when it comes to the requirements for environmental
labelling and advertising. New tougher rules, which we summarize in part in this
issue and which we will comment again in a future issue, are the result of the
failure of business to get it right the first time.
Environmental statistics are
scarce in Canada but Statistics Canada has at least updated its survey of waste
management in Canada. The amount of waste has scarcely increased in the two
years since 2006 but costs are up sharply. Our review of the StatsCan report
provides more of the details.
In our next issue we will be
presenting a general review of environment and sustainable development issues
that have crossed our desk in the last few months and that may be relevant to
the year ahead. We will also be reviewing a brand new British book Climate
Change for Football Fans. While your curiosity about that book may be killing
you, we hope you find lots of interest in this issue. Keep those Letters to the
Editor coming - we always welcome what you have to say about Gallon Environment
Letter, even when you disagree with our analysis! Send letters to
editor@gallonletter.ca and do not reply to the address from which
you received this issue.
****************************************************
GUEST EDITORIAL
THE ROAD AHEAD - WHAT CANADA SHOULD BE DOING ON CLIMATE
CHANGE
By Linda Hasenfratz and Hal
Kvisle
Despite clear signs of progress
in building an international consensus, the outcome of the latest round of UN
climate change negotiations in Cancun appears to have fallen short of the
target: a clear and comprehensive plan to reduce global greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions.
Many of the most contentious
issues remain unresolved, including whether to incorporate the negotiators’
goals in a legally binding agreement and how to distribute responsibility for
the $100-billion in annual aid that wealthy nations have promised to give poor
countries to enable them to adjust to climate impacts.
Still, the fact that a global
agreement has proven so elusive does not absolve Canadians of the responsibility
to strengthen our own efforts to limit the growth of GHG emissions and
contribute to the search for more environmentally sustainable forms of
development.
What specifically should Canada
be doing? In our view, five priorities deserve attention.
First, we need to get our act
together as a country when it comes to climate policy. In particular,
governments at all levels should commit to a national approach to GHG reductions
and carbon pricing. The alternative—conflicting federal and provincial targets,
plans and policies—is a recipe for confusion and inertia.
Second, we need a national vision
as to the role that energy should play in our economy, and an informed
discussion about the policies that will be needed to ensure that Canada's
diverse array of energy resources continues to be source of competitive
advantage. Tough choices will need to be made, but there is no question that
development of, and access to, reliable, affordable and cleaner sources of
energy can be a significant contributor to jobs, government revenue and economic
prosperity.
Third, the business community and
the public sector should work together on a framework that can stimulate future
generations of energy and environmental technology. Around the world, the race
is on to find new, more sustainable ways to power our homes, factories, and
transportation systems. Smart policy can help to ensure that Canadian companies
win a larger share of the burgeoning market for innovative energy
technologies.
Fourth, the federal government
should seek to negotiate a broad energy and environmental accord with Canada's
closest trading partner and biggest energy customer, the United States. To be
sure, Congress and the Obama Administration are focussed on other issues at the
moment. But that gives Canadians time to develop a more coherent view of our
national interests, agree on our key demands and make the case to Americans for
why greater cooperation on energy policy, regulatory standards and technology
development will benefit both countries.
Fifth, governments, industry and
other interested groups should strengthen their efforts to build a national
ethic of energy conservation and a clearer public understanding of the costs and
benefits of various energy choices. The goal must be to encourage employers of
all sizes, as well as individual Canadians, to make smarter choices about
day-to-day energy use.
Linda Hasenfratz is chief
executive officer of Linamar Corporation. Hal Kvisle is former chief executive officer of TransCanada Corporation.
Together, they chair the Canadian
Council of Chief Executives' Task
Force on Energy, the Environment and Climate Change.
****************************************************
CESD: CANADA HAS NO CLIMATE ADAPTATION PLAN
Scott Vaughan, Canada's
Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development CESD released his
annual report in December. After the report was tabled in the House of Commons
on December 7 it was sent to the Standing Committee on Environment and
Sustainable Development which discussed it on December 8. There, Christian
Ouellet (Brome—Missisquoi, BQ) said "Mr. Vaughan, last year, you told us, on the
subject of climate change, that the government had no plan, no strategy. You
repeat that this year. Has there been no change since last year? Are you
reporting the same observation as last year?" Vaughan replied, "Last year, we
submitted a report to Parliament on the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act. We
said the government had an annual plan. However, we said there were gaps in that
plan, and the Act requires that the government present a plan each year. So we
have an obligation to do that. This time, the situation is different, we are
talking about climate change in terms of adaptation to the impacts. We said
there was no federal strategy, no federal plan. In addition, Mr. Keenan said
that in 2007, the government was supposed to prepare a federal strategy to deal
with the impacts of climate change, but as of today we still have no plan."
Michael Keenan, Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy Branch, Department
of the Environment was at the committee meeting.
One of the chapters in the CESD
was entitled Adapting to Climate Impacts and audited five key federal
departments with mandates affected by climate change: Environment Canada,
Natural Resources Canada, Health Canada, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, and
Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Adaptation is adjusting decisions, activities and
thinking processes to reduce the severity of adverse effects and take advantage
of opportunities. (1) The CESD said that some of the impacts of changing climate
are already affecting Canada's environment, communities and economy especially
in the North. Example including thawing of permafrost affecting roads, pipelines
and other infrastructure, forest diseases and pests, human diseases such as Lyme
Disease and West Nile, water shortages (e.g. in Ontario where the levels of the
Great Lakes are expected to drop, in the Prairies due to reduced precipitation
and BC due to shrinking glaciers), storm surges, drought and worse to
come.
The audit looked at whether the
departments:
- identified and assessed the
risks posed by climate change
- are taking steps to adapt to the
risks by including them in their planning and decision
making.
The audit also examined four
climate change adaptation programs in the departments to see how they collected
and shared information with those who needed the information such as other
federal departments, provinces, municipalities, industry, non-governmental
organizations ngos and academics. Scott Vaughan gave some
examples for good work being done but these were inadequate for
the magnitude of the risks affecting Canada from climate
change:
- The Atmospheric Change
Adaptation Strategies Program of Environment Canada
- The Climate Change Geoscience Program of Natural
Resources Canada
- The Climate Change Adaptation Program of Indian and
Northern Affairs Canada
- The Pilot Heat Alert and Response Systems Program of Health
Canada
These aren't a complete set of
government initiatives that address climate impacts and
adaptation.
The conclusions
included:
- There are no central government
priorities for addressing the need to adapt to climate change despite a
commitment in 2007 to develop strategy and an action plan by the end of 2008.
This leaves departments without needed direction. Failure to develop a federal
strategy and plan means that policies cannot meet objectives to protect the
most vulnerable which include communities in the North, especially Aboriginal
communities. Climate change has implications for a wide range of sectors,
almost all federal portfolios.
- Departments have not revised
policies or practices to respond to adapting to the risks of climate impacts
although four of the departments had done some risk assessment and
prioritization of risks. Indian and Northern Affairs started but hasn't
finished a department-wide assessment of climate change risks.
- Funding for the Clean Air Agenda
is ending March 2011 which will mean ongoing need for climate information
won't be funded unless funding in extended. So far the government hasn't said
it would extend the funding which could mean programs in progress will cease.
Demonstration programs won't be built upon in other areas or
communities.
- The focus of the audit is just
on domestic adaptation but the report lists the commitments Canada has made in
international agreements to cooperate on preparing for adaptation to the
adverse effects of climate change. As a party fo the UNFCCC, Canada has
committed to adaptation through the Kyoto Protocol, Bali Action Plan; the
Nairobi Work Programme on Impacts, Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate
Change and the Buenos Aires Programme of Work. The Canadian government has
also made domestic commitments and as a member of the G8 to supposed to be
giving a high priority to adapting to climate change.
Information
Sharing with Canadian Very Poor
Two key reports informed the
CESD's concern about the seriousness of the risks facing Canada and Canadians.
The Natural Resources Canada-led From Impacts to Adaptation: Canada in a
Changing Climate 2007 and Health Canada-led report The Human Health in a
Changing Climate: A Canadian Assessment of Vulnerabilities and Adaptive Capacity
2008. Vaughan was quite scathing in his polite way about the low profile these
important reports were given by the government. Although both has been planned
to be released with a reasonable amount of publicity, they were presented in a
very muted way. Given how important it is that Canadians know what the risks
are, Vaughan spent some time criticizing this poorly communicated situation,
including the failure of Health Canada to make the report on human health
vulnerability assessment available on the Health Canada website. Natural
Resources Canada's assessment has had very limited public communication. No new
release was issued to tell Canadians what risks were assessed although Natural
Resources Canada did make its assessment available on its web
sites.
Although these assessments
indicate that the risks are severe, the report states that the government
"failed to take simple steps that would raise Canadians’ awareness and
understanding of the risks. The dissemination of these vulnerability assessments
was inconsistent with the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada to
facilitate Canadians’ access to these publications."
(1) A more formal definition of
adapting to climate impacts is "Adaptation—The adjustment in natural or human
systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects.
Adaptation moderates harm or exploits beneficial
opportunities.
"
****************************************************
PETER KENT: CANADA'S NEW MINISTER OF THE
ENVIRONMENT
Canada's new Environment Minister
was elected in 2008 in what was historically a Liberal riding, Thornhill,
Ontario. Peter Kent was appointed Minister of State of Foreign Affairs
(Americas) shortly after his election and became Environment Minister after Jim
Prentice resigned in late 2010. [John Baird provided a brief interregnum,
serving as Environment Minister for a second time but for long enough to ensure
Canada's representation at the annual UN Climate Change conference in Cancun].
GL wonders whether Prentice was avoiding being the fall guy at the Cancun
meetings where Canada once again received a relatively large share of
Fossil awards.
Kent is well-known to many
Canadians for his work for the CBC in the 1960s and 70s covering the Expo '67,
the Quebec kidnap crisis, and the Yom Kippur War. He co-hosted News Magazine
with Lloyd Robertson and was host of The National for two years. At the time he
was unhappy with the idea that the CBC was too compliant with the Prime
Minister's office in issuing news. [GL notes this could be ironic since some are
suggesting he was given the job of Environment Minister more for his
communication skills to sell the status quo than for skills to protect the
environment e.g more to polish the reputation of the oil sands which he has
called "ethical" than to reduce the environmental impact of oil sands
production.] By 1981, Kent was working on The Journal with Barbara Frum and Mary
Lou Finlay. When he was assigned abroad, he moved to Global television as a
Deputy Editor.
When he decided to run politically,
he said, "My colleagues were surprised I wasn't running as a bleeding-heart
Liberal." GL hopes this was said in a slip of the tongue in the euphoria of
an election win: GL knows that politics is often about word and image spinning,
a scoring of political points which unfortunately seems to work, but the term
"bleeding heart" doesn't convey much to us except as some gratuitous and unsubstantiated
insult, not on the scale of the new attack ads the Conservatives have developed,
the puffin shit animation used by the Conservatives to attack opposition leader
Stéphane Dion
in the last Canadian election, or the gun sights on Congresswoman Gifford's
district by Sarah Palin's campaign in the US election though all trend in the
same direction. GL hopes that the pendulum will swing soon from attacking politicians
of a different political party as the enemy to debating different views of issues
as an inherent and essential part of a democratic system.
Canada and US Must Be in Step for Climate Action: December
2009
After the Copenhagen Climate
Summit in December 2009, Canada's government lowered Canada's target for
greenhouse gas emissions yet again, this time to match the percentage reduction
committed to by the US. Then Environment Minister Jim Prentice reported from
Copenhagen with the news that Canada would align with the US. Prentice wrote
"Canada is working to align our clean energy and climate change policies with
those of the Obama Administration" When Jim Prentice was interviewed on CBC's
The House on January 16 ((see GL Vol. 14, No. 11, January 26, 2010) Prentice
himself pointed out the difficulty of that. He said that the circumstances in
the US and Canada were completely different. While Canada has hydro and nuclear
for electricity in the US, he said over 60% of electricity is generated by coal.
He also said the way the government works in the US is different to Canada yet
throughout that interview he stressed the constraints on the Canadian government
by the US. While he said. "Our level of prosperity depends on our trading
relationship with the US" GL noted "he doesn't really explain how that requires
that our environment and energy laws to be the same or nearly the same (if that
is what harmonize means) as the US or why we have to wait for the Americans to
act." Prime Minister Stephen Harper said at the time that Canada couldn't act
alone because it is limited by its economic ties to the US. If the US didn't act
to reduce emissions, neither could Canada and "Likewise, if the Americans are
prepared to act, it’s essential that we act.”
Canada and US Must Not Be in Step for Climate Action: December
2010
After the 2010 Climate Summit in
Cancun, the Climate Action Network’s 500 member organisations gave Canada the
Colossal Fossil for the year award for giving "110% in the battle for fossil
supremacy." calling it Can'"t"nada. This was the fourth time in four years that
Canada has been so negatively named. The United States and Russia also got
Fossil awards.
Now the US Environmental
Protection Agency has developed regulations on greenhouse gas emissions. Whether
that push will result in permanent regulations may depend on what happens in a
Republican dominated House in Congress, However, Canada's claim to align its
greenhouse gas initiative to the US seems to have been found to be false as soon
as there was any sign of action. The Canadian government was quick to distance
itself from taking any such action. New Environment Minister Kent said on CBC's
Power and Politics hosted by Evan Solomon said that ""We will not follow their
course." Sometimes GL feels that the climate action plan the government called
Turning the Corner should be called Turning Around in Circles. Observers suggest
that Kent's appointment as Environment Minister may not be doing him any favour
as Environment is not highly regarded in the Conservative
government.
Paid
subscribers see link to original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
KEELING: FORTY YEARS OF RISING ATMOSPHERIC CO2
CONCENTRATIONS
Taking a step back, New York
Times writer Justin Gillis wrote a great piece in December about American
scientist Charles David Keeling's work over 40 years beginning in 1958 to
measure atmospheric carbon dioxide. Gillis' article is unlike so many stories in
the media which are artificially and erroneously "balanced" by contrary views
which aren't usually supported by much evidence. After reading it, GL found also
that Keeling himself wrote an essay in 1998 on his life's work which is even
better reading as he explains how scientists work - there may be the odd Eureka
moment but mostly it is a constant attention to detail, improving the
instruments, collecting evidence, using the evidence to correct errors,
collecting more evidence, and struggling to explain why this project is
important enough to be funded. Keeling also demonstrated that a political
conservative can accept climate change as he was a life-long
Republican.
In 1953, Keeling obtained a PhD
in chemistry but couldn't find a job except crushing rock for another student
who was working for the US Atomic Energy Commission to find uranium in granite
for nuclear power. He wrote, ""I was very proud of my new PhD. I didn't think
two weeks were needed to master the science of rock crushing." He audited
geology courses and eventually his advisor at CalTech suggested he combine his
chemistry with geology. He began to find ways to measure carbon dioxide first
too near urban areas, then in a state park on the Big Sur, where he didn't mind
sleeping outdoors to be available to take the measurements through the day and
night and later in other areas. At the time, scientific literature said that CO2
concentrations varied widely but he developed a method and measuring tools for
measuring carbon dioxide in air or carbonate in water with high precision
outdoors under real conditions. He found consistent diurnal patterns from the
rain forests on the Olympic peninsula near Canada to mountain in Arizona. The
air in the afternoon had nearly the same CO2 about 310 parts per million ppm of
air after correcting for water vapour. The concentrations were very variable at
night and always higher in the afternoon.
1956 was the International
Geophysical Year. The Weather Bureau's priority was on measuring the geophysical
impacts of the solar cycle which was at its maximum but it had been planning to
measure CO2 at remote locations during IGY. The Bureau had already built a new
meteorological observatory on the Island of Hawaii on a 13,000 foot high volcano
called Mauna Loa. Keeling had taken the gamble of recommending continuous
measurements of atmospheric CO2 even though continuous gas analyzers were just
beginning to be marketed. The members of the US IGY steering committee weren't
keen on spending lots of money on equipment to achieve accuracy in atmospheric
CO2 measurement but it was agreed to conduct measurement in Hawaii and the South
Pole.
By then, scientific data had
already indicated the CO2 in the air was increasing; the rate could be accounted
for by burning coal, natural gas and petroleum. Some distrusted this data as it
was thought that the oceans would absorb at least half of the CO2 released by
fossil fuel. Keeling's sampling would provide a reliable estimate of uptake by
the oceans of the CO2. He found as well as daily fluctuations there were
seasonal effects e.g. CO2 concentrations rose in the winter more strongly in the
northern hemisphere and weakly in the southern hemisphere. The highest CO2
concentration was in the spring just before plants put on leaves . Nature was
withdrawing CO2 from the air for plant growth during the summer and returning it
in the winter. There were also 10 year or so fluctuations. These didn't seem to
be related to sunspots which has a slightly longer cycle. In 1969 the rate of
increase had slowed down even though emissions from fossil fuels were increasing
and then in 1971 the rate was speeding up again. Keeling said they couldn't
understand what was going on. These fluctuations were accounted for when the
"southern oscillation" (El Nino) was discovered in equatorial Pacific Ocean.
This matched the puzzling feature in the CO2 records. There were also
irregularities in patterns over number of years but in 1976, the set of 14 years
of data showed "the unmistakable rise in CO2 concentrations and its irregular
pattern." Many of the mechanisms of fluctuations could only be puzzled out with
the advent of computers, atmospheric circulation models and more CO2 data
collected over decades. Other puzzles and data gaps remain.
As the data accumulated, Keeling
found despite the fluctuations overall a steady long term increase in
concentration of atmospheric CO2 at every location where measurements were made.
The scientific literature indicated that the rise in CO2 levels was linked to
the rise in use of natural gas, petroleum and coal. Temperature records have
been recorded since 1855 much longer than CO2 data. He found that the data from
the British Meteorologic Office of the global time series of sea-surface
temperatures closely matched the trends in CO2 with both influenced by El Nino
events.
He wrote that he listened to
another scientist's concern about returning a half a billion years’ accumulation
of carbon to the air in the form of natural gas, coal and petroleum and noted
his own personal experience in watching CO2 rise. He wrotethat he thought about
what would happen in 30 years or so, "“If present trends are any sign, mankind’s
world, I judge, will be in greater immediate danger than it is
today.”
He was constantly faced with
budget crisis and in 1964, there is a gap in the data because the measurement
ceased everywhere until more funding came through. He wrote, "I learned a lesson
that environmental time-series programs have no particular priority in the
funding world, even if their main value lies in maintaining long-term continuity
of measurements." He was very committed to ensuring the quality fo the data and
opposed to the government's program to remove safeguards which he said he
adopted to ensure valid data. Newcomers often thought that measuring CO2 wasn't
difficult but he had spent years solving problems to ensure valid data over very
long periods.
By 1998, when he wrote the essay,
there was 40 years of data. He wrote about the confusions created by the media
which spent so much effort in calling a myth something which was "the unfolding
of scientific evidence of man-made global change and its possible significance
to future human welfare." He mused what proof of global warming would be
convincing and suggested, "Perhaps convincing proof will be acknowledged to have
arrived when a substantial number of US Congressman are discovered to have
secretly purchased real estate in northern Canada." When the first data came
from Mauna Loa in 1959, the CO2 readings were nearly 316 ppm. When Keeling died
in 2005, the CO2 readings in Hawaii were 380 ppm. The latest three readings
(rounded) were:
- 2008 385 ppm
- 2009 387 ppm
- 2010 389
ppm
The latest years' numbers are
subject to further quality control. In fact, all numbers are subject to quality
control but the changes tend to be minor.
Paid
subscribers see link to original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
MISINFORMED CLIMATE RANT
GL received this letter partially
extracted as follows: "Please remove me from your mailing list. I did not
realize your publication was a left-wing, socialist propaganda machine. Call it
climate change, global warming, or whatever, it's still a load of crap
completely made up - and this "UCS" seems to be the little marching band who
doesn't get that they are being lied to and used. Your intro stated that the UCS
is not a left wing radical group, but they sure do read like one. I am a
scientist by education and trade, and do not buy into the horse squeeze that so
called scientists have concocted for purely "global" political
reasons.
The US EPA needs to be striped of
powers, not given more uncapped 'authority' to ruin the USA. Bet you guys up
there believe in this cap and trade nonsense as well, eh?"
GL finds that there are so many
comments like this on the internet that we have given up in many cases even
reading the comment section on such web sites as the CBC, major newspapers and
blogs discussing climate change. Sometimes the rages are even in favour of
climate change evidence but are still too volatile and offensive. GL thinks that
the heyday of those who say climate change is a hoax is just about over: there
is just too much independent evidence. There will always be room for sceptics
who provide peer-reviewed evidence that there are errors in the current data and
correction needed in statements in the climate science
publications.
However, our point here is not
the rant about climate change evidence itself but about the charge that somehow
we have hidden evidence about our position in supporting the need for action. We
can only conjecture that the writer hasn't read what we have written (for
shame!). The evidence is that we have clearly and often stated our view on the
reality of climate change, the need to take action and yes, we need to use all
available tools which would include cap and trade properly constructed to
achieve greenhouse gas emission reductions. Cap and trade isn't a silver bullet
and can't replace direct emission reductions.
****************************************************
CLIMATE CYBORG
Australian software developer
Nigel Leck built a bot on Twitter which seeks out what he considers to be words
typical of climate sceptics. Instead of engaging in argument with someone who
probably wouldn't listen anyway, he provides a automatic response linking the
"sceptic's" perceived misstatement automatically with a scientific-based
explanation. A link on the auto reply provides more detail.
GL thinks one observer's comments
that we will end up having one bot talk to another with no human getting any the
wiser is probably the most accurate. We are not sure how sending a tweet to
somebody who doesn't want to be persuaded is helpful.
Paid subscribers see link to
original documents and references here.
****************************************************
THIRTY-SECOND SUMMARY
Reusables
Katie Boothroyd-Roberts from
Montreal wrote "Hi Gallon, I really liked your ideas for sustainable holiday
gifts. I just had a comment about tins of cookies, which showed up on your list
of presents to avoid. Tins may be bad if they are only used once, but in my
circle we re-use those tins year after year. Many of us bake our own holiday
treats and put them in old cookie tins, so the tins get passed around and the
home-made treats make a delicious and low-cost present (both in terms of money
and environmental impact)."
GL's editor commends those who
reuse stuff such as cookie tins and other containers. We also try to reuse or
repurpose as much as we can e.g. glass jars for bulk food or hardware storage.
But the warm fuzzy feelings we get for doing good only apply to the very few
number of containers which we can reuse, which is very few despite the numerous
tomato sauces sold in jars labelled "Mason" In a way, most of the "ables" such
as reusable, biodegradable, recyclable, and compostable share this problem: they
are only as good for the environment as the extent of their conversion to done:
reused, biodegraded, recycled and composted. While Frito-Lay said it took those
biodegradable packages for sunchips off the market because they made excessive
noise, the real problem is that it is doubtful that most chip bags get put in a
place where they could get biodegraded.
***
Toronto Region Sustainability Program: Cleaner and Greener
Manufacturers
Frank Granek from OCETA wrote to
GL highlighting three new resources which provides information on pollution
prevention and toxics use reduction in the program called Toronto Region
Sustainability Program TRSP. Many other sources are provided but the highlighted
resources are:
- Cleaner and greener
manufacturing web portal which is hosted by the Canadian Manufacturers &
Exporters with emphasis on toxics reduction in compliance with Ontario's Toxic
Reduction Act 2009.
- Greening your business: Report
on Business & the Environment: Manufacturing 2011. Discusses the benefits
and the challenges. Examples from other companies are showcased.
- Business Value of Toxics
Reduction and Pollution Prevention Planning. An OCETA report about 63 clients
of the TRSP "based on environmental performance improvements and the financial
metrics of cost avoidance, business risk reduction and competitive
advantage."
Fred Granek is the Vice President
Sustainability, Ontario Centre for Environmental Technology Advancement (OCETA),
and Executive Director, Canadian Centre for Pollution Prevention
(C2P2)
Paid
subscribers see link to original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
BIODIVERSITY: STEVE HOUNSELL OF OPG
Steve Hounsell , Senior Advisor,
Sustainable Development at Ontario Power Generation, was interviewed on Green
Majority in December. Green Majority says it is "Canada's first and only
environmental news hour" and is broadcast on university campuses. Hounsell is
trained as a biologist and discussed biodiversity (1). 2010 was the United
Nations Year of Biodiversity.
Hounsell said that "We are losing
biodiversity at an alarming rate, faster than at any time of human activity.
Humanity can be called the giant meteorite of our time." When asked why humans
need to worry about that since massive extinctions have happened in the
geological past, he replied that while there have been five major extinction
events in the past, this time, the huge number of species disappearing are our
responsibility and "by the way" we would be part of the collapse this time, "It
is enlightened self interest to preserve the capital base on which we rely." We
live on the services nature provides. He asked listeners to consider the huge
endowment humanity has been given, enabling humans to prosper for a very long
time, "The natural earth is our living bank account. We should be living off the
interest but instead have been living by means of deficit spending since the
1980s, drawing down from the savings at the rate of 1.5 planets every year"
Climate services are affected by excessive carbon releases, draw down on fresh
water is related to food availability. Ontarians have the 4th highest ecological
footprint on earth resulting in waste, loss of species and habitat and declining
air and water quality.
Climate change and biodiversity
are interconnected. For example, climate change threatens species dependent on
ice such as polar bears. Both climate change and biodiversity require
individuals and businesses to reduce pressures, to become more efficient to gain
more profit per unit of resource. Investing in restoration and recovery of
ecosystem reduces carbon emissions while also creating economic value: jobs
associated with well-qualified university degrees such as ecological degrees
applied to the recovery of species.
Biodiversity at OPG
Hounsell says he developed the
4Rs of Biodiversity at OPG:
- Retain and protect significant
natural areas: safeguard what we have.
- Restore if you can't protect.
Restore what is sensitive trying to restore ecosystem and species
health
- Replace or offset habitat of
similar kinds. Plant forest; offset wetlands. Habitat restoration works for
most types of habitat but not all e.g. we can''t replace a bog
- Recover. Recover species at
risk
The company policy is integrated
into policy at various levels OPG's actions towards its biodiversity goal is
outlined in a corporate brochure. The biodiversity goal is stated
as:
"To demonstrate that OPG can
co-exist with nature without causing or contributing to the long-term decline of species, or the habitats upon which
they depend, on a regional basis."
Between the springs of 2000 and
2009, the flyer says that the company and its partners have planted 3.8 million
native trees and shrubs on more than 1,850 hectares of land in Southern Ontario.
Cumulatively this could store 2 million tonnes of carbon dioxide over the
lifetime of the trees. By working with conservation partners, the company seeks
to reconnect the fragmented landscape and to improve the resiliency of the
woodlands to withstand future climate change. OPG has donated about $150,000 to
Ontario Nature to help preserve reserves of vulnerable wildlife
habitats.
OPG is also a member of the
Canadian Business and Biodiversity Council (see separate article
below).
While companies often fight
against regulations, Hounsell said it is time for regulations to protect the
ecosystem services including biodiversity. The market economy cannot achieve the
goal alone nor can non-governmental groups ngos on their own. What is needed is
ngos working with the market place, providing consumer with needed resources.
Hounsell said, "If the market recognizes it can be sustainable, with a closed
loop industrial complex, we have a chance of surviving."
(1) When asked by host Peter
Stock, "What is biodiversity?", Hounsell said, "The ecosystem; all the species,
genetic variability within the species and the ecological processes; the entire
diversity of life."
The Green Majority: Host: Peter
Stock TGM #220 – Biodiversity 101. December 17, 2010.
****************************************************
CANADIAN BUSINESS AND BIODIVERSITY COUNCIL: CASE
STUDIES
The Canadian Business and
Biodiversity Council was established following a Montreal Business and
Biodiversity Conference held in 2008. One of the purposes of the Council is to
demonstrate the business case for biodiversity conservation through case study
illustrations to be used as learning tools for business and to showcase business
leadership.
The first volume of case studies
was issued in 2010. It has an introduction by Johanne Gélinas who is Partner
with Deloitte and is Chair, Canadian Business and Biodiversity Program Steering
Committees. Gélinas was Canada's Commissioner of Environment and Sustainable
Development until fired by the Auditor General for what was mostly described as
Gélinas' outspoken calls for action to be taken on climate change. For the
federal minority government elected in 2006 led by Stephen Harper which has been
opposed to any such action, it was one of a series of firings and resignations
of high profile critics.
Each case outlines what the
company did, why it undertook those actions, and benefits for the company and
biodiversity. Seventeen companies including Ontario Power Generation (see above)
present cases. Cases include:
- The Canadian Cattlemen's
Association Environmental Stewardship Award. The award is presented annually
to a cattle producer who goes beyond standard practices in conservation.
Example of practices including fencing to keep cattle out of sensitive areas,
rotational grazing and maintenance of natural ecosystems to protect
rangeland.
- L'Oreal developed a Raw Material
Sustainability Assessment Framework in 2005 to assess impacts on health,
environment, fair trade, human rights and biodiversity. Argan oil from the
seeds and leaves of the argan tree (Argana spinosa) from Morocco is the key
ingredient for 7 out of 25 company brands sold in Canada and is supplied by
one supplier Cognis Care Chemicals. The argan forest ecosystem is threatened
by over-exploitation, soil erosion, and desertification with an annual decline
of 1%. UNESCO designated the forest as a Biosphere Reserve in 1998. More
benefit sharing with the local community, traceability of substances including
complaince with social and environmental practices are part of the fair trade
supply chain. With the increasing value of the oil and better use made of the
leaves, the community is finding that harvesting the argan tree for fuelwood
and charcoal has less value.
- P & G has set standards for
wood pulp procurement for tissue and absorbent hygiene products including
avoiding genetically modified tree sources, avoiding conflict timber which
drives armed conflict, requiring suppliers to document that wood is legally
harvested and that sustainable forest management practices are
used.
****************************************************
TARGET'S CSR 2010
Target Corporation (NYSE: TGT)
announced on January 13, 2011 that it was paying C$1.825 billion to buy Zellers
Inc., a subsidiary of the Hudson's Bay Company (HBC) taking over up to 220
sites. Target expects to open 100 to 150 Target stores throughout Canada in
2013. Target Corporation's strategy is to provide value for money under the
theme Expect More, Pay Less. The company's Corporate Social Responsibility
Report says it has since 1946 given 5 percent of pretax earnings to community
organizations in bad times and good, a commitment it has promised to keep also
in Canada. Its corporate social responsibility program is called Here for
Good.
In a press release in December
2010, Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel announced commitments to environmental
stewardship. Among the commitments are:
- helping guests and team members
(GL: customers and employees) adopt a more sustainable lifestyle
- expand the selection of
sustainable products
- be an industry leader in smart
development by creating buildings which use space more efficiently and are
located convenient to customers and employees.
- meet targets for using resources
responsibility, eliminating waste and minimizing the carbon
footprint
Specific targets for Target by
2016 include:
- reduce operating waste sent to
landfill by 15%
- reduce water usage by 10 % per
square foot
- reduce greenhouse gas emission
by 10% per square foot and 20% per dollar of retail sales
- have 75% of its buildings with
ENERGY STAR®)
- improve efficiency of general
merchandise transportation inbound to distribution centres by 15% and outbound
by 20% and support the adoption of cleaner and more fuel-efficient
transportation practices.
CSR Report
The achievement is the 2010
report overview include:
- 270 acres of stormwater
retention ponds at stores, distribution centre and headquarters
- 30% reduction in restroom water
use through use of low flow faucets and fixtures
- 21 target stores using solar
energy generating about 15-20% of their annual energy requirements
- 1 million pounds of corrugated
paperboard saved due to changes in Target Home sheet packaging
- 20 million delivery miles and 3
million galls of fuel saved by 2009 by increasing the number of cartons in
each Target trailer
- 700 plus organic foods offered
at SuperTarget, a USDA certified organic grocer
- 13 million reusable bags used
with Target paying 5 cents for each use
- eliminated farmed
salmon; buys wild salmon certified by the Marine Stewardship
Council
- energy savings such as LED
lights, motion detectors in coolers and low wattage lights computers put on
standby
- instore recycling for customers
to recycle plastic shopping bags, plastic and glass bottles, cans, cell
phones, MP3 players and ink cartridges.
The 2010 overview is only 12
pages and isn't really a report. Previous full reports are available from 2007
to 2009. The full 2009 report provides more detail but contains no environmental
targets or indicators for the retailer. A graph compares last year to this year
on a limited number of issues.
The 2009 report discusses the
company's global compliance program for vendors. For Target-own-brands, some of
the requirements are
- Vendors are expected to produce
Target brand products in accordance with Standards of Vendor Engagement,
Vendor Conduct Guide and local laws. An education program is provided as well
as an audio tape available in a number of languages.
- Vendors are required to register
all primary and subcontracted factories used in the production of Target
merchandise
- Each year unannounced audits are
done randomly to verify the vendor's compliance. Refusal to allow the auditors
to enter results in a financial penalty against the vendor. Issues identified
by the audit become part of Corrective Action Plans.
- If a second audit indicates the
corrections weren't made, then the factory may not be used for a year for
Target brand products. Severe infractions e.g."bribery, illegal transshipment,
corporal punishment, country of origin or underage labor would cause immediate
termination of a factory relationship".
- Diamonds, gold or other precious
metals only from responsible mining practices including social, human rights
and environmental standards.
Paid
subscribers see link to original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
LIABILITY: VENDOR CHAIN FOR HANDLING HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS
A BC Supreme Court case
highlighted the need for all those involved in generating, consigning,
transporting, storing, and disposing of hazardous materials to meet a standard
of care which includes communicating "complete and accurate information about
the nature and risks related to the proposed waste." In the case before the
court, one of the subcontractors along the vendor chain, Enviro West sent a
truck to pick up oil from an industrial transformer from Copper Mountain Mining
Corporation expecting that the oil contained PCBs below 50 ppm, above which
amount the Enviro West has no license. After transporting, the company mixed its
oil with 91,000 other litres and then found out that the transformer oil was
almost pure PCBs The truck and the storage tanks, pipes and all equipment were
cleaned up and then Enviro West sued the waste generator and all the
subcontractors in the chain for damages. The court awarded Enviro West nearly
$800,000. The case is a warning to all in the web of handlers, transporters,
waste brokers, inspectors, storage facilities and disposers of hazardous
waste.
Wainwright Alberta Case
The judge quoted from a previous
case called Wainwright (Town of) v. G-M Pearson Environmental Management Ltd. In
that case, furniture waste caused a fire in the town's waste facility
because the material was flammable. The waste generator Vaughn-Bassett,
furniture company based in the US, had provided clear instructions that the
furniture waste was hazardous and must only be incinerated at the Bovar facility
in Swan Hills, Alberta, the sole waste disposal facility approved to incinerate
hazardous waste at that time. The broker was provided with detailed instructions
about the composition and the risks of the furniture waste. This information was
sufficient to enable the broker to handle the waste safely and in accordance
will all regulatory requirements. Others along the chain failed to pass this
information along but the waste generator was found innocent of fault because it
had done its due diligence and hence was not responsible to failures by
subsequent handlers.
Factors in Assessing Negligence
Some of the court's comments
were:
- A variety of factors are taken
into account in determining negligence: "the foreseeable risk, the likelihood
of damage, the seriousness of threatened harm, the cost of preventative
measures, the utility of the defendant’s conduct, any circumstances of
emergency, compliance with approved practice or custom, and post-accident
precautions. The decision provides a list of factors.
- A higher standard of care is
applied to those with special skill and knowledge which means they can perform
tasks more ordinary people can't.
- The defendants all knew that the
transformer contained PCBs at a high concentration
- Legislative standards are a
factor in setting the standard of care. PCBs are regulated by BC's
Environmental Management Act, the Hazardous Waste Regulation, and the federal
Canadian Environmental Protection Act, (CEPA). as well as the federal
Transportation of Dangerous Good Act. The TDG Act places the responsibility of
classifying waste on the generator or consignor to ensure that the waste
doesn't end up in the wrong waste stream.
- One of the subcontractors has
clear policies which would have prevented the damage but failed to follow its
own policies.
The decision outlines the steps
that led to the mixup. An electrician distracted by other requirements as the
mine was reopening and the transformer was just one of a number of electrical
jobs. Willingness of the company management to delegate to the electrician and
his recommendation for contractors without finding out whether those handlers
were qualified to do the work. Assumptions made by the subcontractors along the
chain that the oil contained less than 50 ppm of PCBs, assumptions that were
wrong. The plaintiff Enviro West who won the suit also made that assumption but
the judge ruled that although Enviro West could have prevented the
contamination,"clear last chance" in BC is extinct: the persons who were
negligent or careless are still liable even if Enviro West could have done
something to prevent it. Although when Enviro West sold oil, it would be
required to test it, there wasn't any requirement to test it when it arrived in
the facility nor is there an industry standard for such testing. The judge said
that Newalta, to which company Enviro West shipped some of the contaminated oil,
conducts such testing but "it must be recalled that Newalta operates a recycling
facility and regularly receives and recycles many different grades of waste oil.
Testing would be central to conducting business at such a
facility."
GL found it somewhat amusing
(something that is easy if one isn't the one being sued) that the judge found
the company's mine manager to be very credible. Unfortunately, the manager
seemed to have explained all too well how much he and the company failed to take
adequate care ending up in a state of chaos: "the blind leading the
blind."
The Honourable Madam Justice Boyd
ruled that damages totalling $776,033.75 were to be assessed, "The waste
generator, Copper Mountain must bear the lion’s share of the responsibility for
this loss. For the reasons reviewed earlier, I find that Copper Mountain had all
of the necessary information at its disposal to fully understand the highly
hazardous nature of this waste and to take proper steps to arrange for its
disposal. It failed miserably to do so. In the end result, I allocate 60% of the
responsibility for the loss to Similco/Copper Mountain, 20% to Canyon Electric
and 20% to Boundary Electric."
Paid
subscribers see link to original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
GREEN CLAIM "SAFE": JUST ONE LITTLE R MISSING
One of GL's associates was
watching television when an ad featured a flash of the US EPA logo for Design
for the Environment and the statement that the cleaning product is "safe" for
the environment. A reasonable person would assume that the DfE certification
supported the claim. The US Environmental Protection Agency web site for Design
for the Environment, however, says, it is labelling for "safer" products; "DfE
label means a product is safer for people and the environment." The Design for
Environment logo is based on currently available information and scientific
understanding based on information on composition, ingredients and attributes of
the products as provided by the company to the EPA and verified by a third party
qualified under the Program. The EPA does not do independent assessment itself
such as chemical analysis but uses currently available information and
scientific knowledge to determine that the chemical formula has better health
and environmental features compared to conventional products. Hence the "safer"
rather than "safe."
The Program was initiated to
reduce the amount of pollutants from industry as much as provide greener
products to consumers. The approach is reviewing the chemicals based on their
function such as surfactants, solvents, and chelating agents. In order to ensure
performance, some of these functions might require chemicals with more hazard
than others filling other functions. The safer chemistry is based on "informed
substitution" by substituting safer chemicals for each of the functions compared
to those chemicals for those functions used in conventional cleaners and other
products.
Companies ought to do a better
job of vetting their advertising and their web sites as some would categorize
this slip of the R as greenwashing. Despite these slips in the marketplace what
is even more important is to see companies investing in initiatives to improve
the environmental performance of their products. As the EPA web site says,
"Product formulators who become DfE partners, and earn the right to display the
DfE label on recognized products, have invested heavily in research,
development, and reformulation to ensure that their ingredients and finished
product align at the green end of the health and environmental spectrum, while
maintaining or improving product performance."
Paid
subscribers see link to original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
US EPA DFE PROPOSES CHANGES
The US EPA's Design for the
Environment is reviewing its program. Consultations on specific changes closed
January 14, 2011 but are accepted any time. Proposed changes
include:
- public disclosure of
intentionally added ingredients
- chemically-specific ingredient
listing not just "dyes" or "preservatives" must be as specific as possible
without revealing trade secret information.
- listing of ingredients over a
certain amount in order by weight/weight percentage.
- Test results are required to
demonstrate performance is comparable to conventional products
- On the six criteria set out by
the Sustainable Packaging Coalition, the company must be at the 25% level e.g.
at least 25% of primary packaging is sourced from renewable or recycled
sources. At each renewal (every three years) the company will report on
progress in relation to improving sustainable packaging.
- Packaging may not contain heavy
metals or other specified ingredients of concern such as Bisphenol A.
- more restrictions on chemicals
such as volatile organic compounds. air pollutants, chemicals on toxic
chemical lists, flammability, pH, and products designed for dermal contact.
Depending on toxicological hazards, certain endocrine disrupting chemicals may
not be allowed.
- no ingredients that are
irritating to skin and eyes. DfE products will no longer be allowed to require
precautionary statements as irritants.. Restrictions also on potential
allergens and sensitizers and tests are required for ingredients which can be
absorbed by the skin.
Paid
subscribers see link to original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
STATISTICS CANADA: WASTE MANAGEMENT
Statistics Canada has published a
new survey of waste management in Canada. It is a snapshot of types of waste and
recycling as well as financial and employment summary within business and local
governments providing waste management services.
Waste Quantity and Disposal
Among the observations for 2008
were:
- Of the waste generated, 21
million was from non-residential sources and 13 million from
residential
- The waste management industry
handled 34 million tonnes of waste with 26 million going to landfill or
incineration. 8 million tonnes was diverted to material recovery or composting
facilities. There was little change in the amount of waste sent
to disposal from 2006 to 2008 compared to a 3% increase from 2004 to
2006.
- One third of the waste for
disposal or incineration was from residential sources and two thirds from
non-residential.
- about 1,031 kilograms of waste
was produced per capita, almost no change since 2006. Most of the waste
777 kg was landfilled or incinerated with 254 kg diverted. The undiverted
waste of 777 kg was 256 kg of residential waste and 520 kg of non-residential
waste.
- Nova Scotia had the lowest per
capita sent to disposal at 378 kg while Alberta had the highest at 1,133 kg.
Newfoundland and Labrador, Quebec, Manitoba and Saskatchewan exceeded the
national average. for per capita waste disposal
Waste Diversion
The amount of waste diversion
rose by about 10% to 8.5 million tonnes from 2006 to 2008, almost half from
residential sources. While the increase involved most materials, the largest
increase was in electronics, up 115% from 2006. Plastics diversion was the
second highest increase up 40% since 2006. Paper makes up the largest single
component of the diverted material accounting for 41%.
Financial and Employment
Local governments received
revenues of $1.8 million from municipal waste management levies. They spent $2.6
billion in 2008, in current expenditures and $494 million in capital
expenditures in 2008, both figures up from 2006. The average per person
spent on waste management was $79. The highest cost area for local governments
was the collecting and transporting of waste ($1.1 billion in
2008)
Revenues for waste management
businesses increased by 13% from 2006 to 2008 totally $5.8 billion. Operating
costs rose from 19% to $5.1 billion. The number of full-time workers employed in
the waste management industry in 2008 totalled 31,344 for the government and
business sectors combined, an increase of 11% from 2006. Over three-quarters of
those employed in the waste management industry work in the business
sector.
Paid
subscribers see link to original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
PEOPLE
Anne Tennier
Vice president, Environmental
Affairs and since 2009 VP, Food Safety Regulatory Affairs, Maple Leaf Foods,
Anne is running for nomination as the Liberal candidate in the Ontario riding of
Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale riding in the next federal election. Her
website lists her education, community involvement, political involvement and
her comments on her ability to do the job of Member of Parliament. She describes
herself, "A chemist and professional engineer for more than 25 years, I have
succeeded in traditionally male-dominated positions. I am tough but respectful."
Tennier headed the riding association until her decision to
run.
Others contesting the nomination
are Dave Braden who was a Hamilton councillor and withdrew from running as Mayor
in 2006. His company builds green houses. The other candidate for the nomination
is Bryan Kerman a retired environmental scientist and former Ancaster
councillor.
Whoever wins will be contesting
the riding seat held by incumbent MP Conservative David Sweet who represented
the riding since 2006.
***
Alex Bielak
Alex Bielak is now Senior Advisor
to the Chair - UN-Water and Senior Research Fellow and Knowledge Broker at the
Freshwater Ecosystems Programme United Nations University - Institute for Water,
Environment & Health (UNUINWEH) based in Hamilton, Ontario. He was formerly
the Director Science & Technology Liaison, Environment Canada (till Sept
2010).
He masterminded and facilitated a
special workshop at the Canadian Science Policy Conference held in Montreal in
October 2010 on knowledge brokering and translation. Knowledge brokers mediate
between sources of information such as science and research and users of
knowledge such as government policy makers. Keynote speaker was Andrew Campbell
from Triple Helix Consulting in Australia. Campbell said that Australia is an
example of "Converging insecurities" with impacts due to climate change, decline
in fresh water availability, the end of cheap oil and need to increase food
production. These are immense technical challenges. Decision makers want answers
to the key question "What should we do?". Science and scientists often can't
speak to policymakers who these days haven't been in their job very long, aren't
staying long and have no any deep knowledge. Scientists often aren't able to
communicate at the brevity (one page briefing for the Minister) and at the level
(practical, short-term, political and adversarial). Campbell called the needed
knowledge brokering similar to what has already been developed in agriculture
(it's called extension).
Paid
subscribers see link to original documents and references
here.
***
Errick "Skip" Willis
Skip Willis died January 4, 2011
of complications after surgery for a tumour on his spine. GL's editor has long
known and respected Skip who played a very active role in helping to build the
Ontario Environmental Industry Association. He was another example of a
Conservative committed not only to the business of the environment but also to
the protection of the environment. After many years as a political consultant,
he took on the challenge of helping government and industry meet challenges of
climate change and formed his own consultancy specializing in carbon reductions.
In addition to his work as a consultant in Canada and elsewhere, he spent much
time, unfortunately not always successfully, trying to persuade his federal
government friends to implement climate change solutions. He was named as a
Fellow of the International Emissions Trading Association.
****************************************************
LOCAL LIBRARY: USE IT OR LOSE IT
Cost cutting in Milton Keynes in
England led the regional municipal council to announce closure of the largest
library in the town of Stony Stratford. Protests called "Wot, No Books" led to
the community deciding to check out every book in the library. At its peak the
library was checking out 378 books per hour to a total 16,000 books until the
shelves were virtually empty. The library has a limit of 15 books at a time so
quite a large number of people must have expressed their displeasure and joined
the mass checkout. The budget meeting of Council is to be held February
22.
GL notes that some consider
libraries inherently green because they foster multiple use and sharing of
common materials, information, and spaces.
Paid
subscribers see link to original documents and references
here.
****************************************************
QUOTE
The increasing global temperature
trend is sometimes referred to as 'global warming'. However, the increasing
amounts of greenhouse gases will have an impact on the Earth's climate that far
exceeds just a change in temperature. We have learned that a change in one part
of the climate system can lead to a series of reactions that can disrupt normal
weather patterns around the world. The term 'global climate change' more clearly
describes the situation the world is facing.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Copyright © Canadian Institute for Business
and the Environment
119 Concession 6 Rd Fisherville ON N0A 1G0
Canada. Fisherville & Toronto
All rights reserved. The Gallon Environment
Letter (GL for short) presents information for general interest and does not
endorse products, companies or practices. Information including articles,
letters and guest columns may be from sources expressing opinions not shared by
the Canadian Institute for Business and the Environment. Readers must verify all
information for themselves before acting on it. Advertising or sponsorship of
one or more issues consistent with sustainable development goals is welcome and
identified as separate from editorial content. Subscriptions for organizations
$184 + HST = $207.92. For individuals (non-organizational emails and paid with
non-org funds please) $30 includes HST. Subscription includes 12 issues about a
year or more. http://www.cialgroup.com/subscription.htm
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx