ENVIRONMENT:

A TASTE OF SHELL GAMES TO COME IN THE ARTIC:

 

Shell Loses Control Of Arctic Drilling Rig In Alaskan Harbor

By Climate Guest Blogger on Jul 16, 2012 at 12:23 pm

Photo: Teresa Derrick-Laxfoss

by Kiley Kroh
Royal Dutch Shell’s preparedness to drill offshore in the harsh and remote Arctic Ocean this summer has been called into question by a series of recent events.
Over the weekend, the company’s drilling rig, the Noble Discoverer, appears to have come dangerously close to running aground near Dutch Harbor, where Shell’s fleet has been assembled. The Noble Discoverer is one of two dozen ships Shell plans to send into some of the most challenging conditions on the planet. According to the US Coast Guard, the vessel slipped anchor and drifted within 100 yards off shore before being pulled back into deeper water by a Shell tugboat.
The Los Angeles Times reports:

The vessel‘s anchor failed to hold and the 514-foot ship began drifting, but its movement was halted when tug boats were called in to assist, Coast Guard spokeswoman Sara Francis told the Los Angeles Times.
“We don’t know exactly what happened yet. We do know that the vessel’s anchor didn’t hold, they began to drift, they let out more anchor chain to slow that drift and called for immediate tug assistance,” Francis said.

Although Shell and the Coast Guard asserted there was no evidence of grounding, onlookers — including longshoreman David Howard and Dutch Harbor captain Kristjan Laxfoss — contradicted this account, saying the vessel was not moving and appeared grounded: “There’s no question it hit the beach. That ship was not coming any closer. It was on the beach.”
Petty Officer Sarah Francis said winds of 27-35 miles per hour likely led to the ship drifting — conditions that are benign compared with the hurricane-force gales, 20-foot swells, and dynamic sea ice the Discoverer could encounter off the North Slope where the company plans to drill offshore.
Pete Slaiby, vice president of Shell Oil in Alaska, noted both the Discoverer and Kulluk drilling ships will be secured by an 8-point anchor system when operating in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas.
The incident immediately follows the Coast Guard’s refusal to certify Shell’s oil spill response barge, the Arctic Challenger, because of concerns about the fire protection system, wiring, and piping on the 37 year-old vessel. The Coast Guard also expressed doubts about the barge’s ability to withstand harsh Arctic storms. The containment barge is essential to the fleet as it is designed to deliver oil spill response equipment to the five drilling sites. Without it, Shell would not have access to the equipment necessary to contain an oil spill in the Arctic Ocean.
In addition to the extreme and unpredictable weather, there is an alarming dearth of infrastructure necessary to mount a large-scale response effort off the North Slope. As detailed in the Center for American Progress report, Putting a Freeze on Arctic Ocean Drilling: America’s Inability to Respond to an Oil Spill in the Arctic, the area lacks roads, railroads, a permanent Coast Guard facility, a major port, or sufficient infrastructure to house and feed a large influx of people. As a result, Shell has said that its oil spill response efforts will be largely self-contained. The fact that the company is experiencing problems with this equipment before even reaching the drill sites raises serious concerns about their contingency plan.
Shell’s flotilla will continue to wait in Dutch Harbor – 1,000 miles south of the proposed drilling sites; the closest major port to the North Slope – while unexpectedly heavy sea ice prevents them from making the voyage to the Beaufort and Chukchi seas.
Slaiby, Shell’s VP in Alaska, recently told CNN that the company’s proposed exploration in the Arctic will be the “most complex, most difficult wells we’ve drilled in company history.”
Kiley Kroh is the Associate Director of Ocean Communications at the Center for American Progress.

HUMOUR:

MISSING THE POINT:

Another great cartoon from the pen of Stephanie McMillan.

HUMOUR:

THE MODERN WAY OF LIFE:

Yet another item from the pen of Stephanie McMillan.

HUMOUR:

HUNGARIAN TOXIC SPILL:

Another cartoon from Stephanie McMillan.

HUMOUR:

WHY LEAVE A JOB HALF DONE:

Here's another winning item from the pen of Stephanie McMillan.

HUMOUR:

OBAMA TRIES TO REVIVE GULF TOURIST TRADE:

ECOLOGY CANADIAN POLITICS:

OPPOSITION TO THE NORTHERN GATEWAY PIPELINE:

The oil company Enbridge has recently joined BP on the "most unwanted list" of corporate vandals because of its pipeline spill in Michigan. Not content with playing second fiddle to the head capo of corporate crime, however, Enbridge has for some time been preparing a made in Canada potential disaster to put it up with the big boys. I refer to the planned 'Northern Gateway Pipeline' from the Alberta Oil Sands to the Pacific coast in British Columbia. This project has attracted a wide variety of opposition from environmental groups to first nations whose lands will be threatened by the development. It has even been opposed by the BC Central Coast Chamber of Commerce because of the dangers that it hazards. The Pembina Institute, a Canadian think tank concerned with energy policy, has produced a very critical report outlining the problems with this project as well as with another proposed northern pipelines. Consult that website for further details.

Canadian labour, in the person of the BC section of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE BC) has also come out in opposition to Northern Gateway. Here's their statement from the website of CUPE BC.

CLCLCLCLCL
CUPE BC opposes Enbridge tanker plans to navigate off coast
BURNABY—Citing this week’s Enbridge oil spill that has threatened a Michigan river and the earlier disaster by British Petroleum that devastated the U.S. Gulf Coast, the B.C. division of the Canadian Union of Public Employees today joined First Nations and environmental groups in voicing opposition to the Enbridge Northern Gateway project.

The project would involve super tankers carrying bitumen from the Alberta tar sands and navigating the coast of British Columbia, including the fragile Great Bear Rainforest.

CUPE BC says that any potential benefits of the Enbridge plan are outweighed by the high risk of another disaster like the BP oil spill. Enbridge itself has lost credibility in recent days with a pipeline leak that resulted in more than 3 million litres of oil flowing into the Kalamazoo River in southern Michigan, coating birds and fish.

“As we’ve seen in Michigan and the Gulf coast, any kind of oil spill on our coast would have a tremendous impact on the natural environment and would impact wildlife, including salmon and the Kermode bear which is unique to the Great Bear Rainforest,” says CUPE BC diversity vice-president (aboriginal workers) Leanne Louie. “With the BP oil spill, the damage is irreversible. We can’t let that happen here.”

Penetration of the B.C. coastline by oil tankers is only part of a massive plan to build a 1,150-kilometre underground pipeline that will result in the transportation of 525,000 barrels of oil each day across Alberta and B.C. The federal government and its joint review panel are currently reviewing Enbridge’s application for the project despite the B.C. government’s 2006 promise to protect the Great Bear Rainforest.

“Enbridge claims there is minimal risk of an oil spill. In reality, it’s not if but when an oil spill will occur,” says Sheryl Burns, co-chair of the CUPE BC environment committee. “The Campbell government says it wants to fight climate change. But by supporting the Enbridge application it’s doing precisely the opposite, since the pipeline will be a major incentive for increased production of climate-damaging oil from the tar sands. We should be creating green jobs instead that will employ British Columbians while also protecting our environment.”

In a letter to Premier Gordon Campbell, CUPE BC president Barry O’Neill reminds the premier of B.C.’s promise in 2006 to protect the Great Bear Rainforest. “We urge the provincial government to oppose the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway Project altogether and honour the Great Bear Rainforest agreement it signed,” writes O’Neill.

HUMOUR:

THE END OF THE OIL SPILL ?

A BIRD'S EYE VIEW:

HUMOUR:

OIL SPILL CUISINE

HUMOUR:

THE AXLES OF EVIL:

ENVIRONMENT:

EXPLOSION DEAD NOT LIKELY ONLY VICTIMS:

The 11 workers who died during the explosion that started the largest oil spill ever seen in the world are unlikely to be the only victims. Clean-up workers on the Gulf Coast are reporting an increasing number of illnesses caused by their exposure to the oil washing up on the beaches. There is now a Facebook group dedicated to pressuring for proper safety procedures for the workers involved in the cleanup. It also has a wealth of information from previous similar accidents. See 'Support Health and Safety protections for Gulf Oil Spill Clean-up'. Meanwhile here's a short article on what is happening from the US magazine 'In These Times'.

BPBPBPBPBPBPBP
Oil Spill Clean-up Workers: We’re Getting Sick From Lack of Protective Gear
By Lindsay Beyerstein

Some fishermen hired by BP to clean up spill oil say they've become ill after being exposed to oil and dispersant without proper personal protective equipment.

Several south Louisiana fishermen working on the cleanup told the LA Times that they had developed headaches, coughing, nausea, and other symptoms. The workers said they'd been working without facemasks or gloves.

BP spokesman Graham McEwen told the Times that he was not aware that any workers were getting sick.

Yesterday, 125 fishing boats working off Breton Sound in Louisiana were called off the job after workers on three separate boats reported nausea, chest pain, and other symptoms. One worker had to be evacuated by air ambulance and two others were driven to hospital, according to the U.S. Coast Guard.

Rep. Charlie Melancon (D-La.) wants the Department of Health and Human Services to set up mobile clinics for clean-up workers and send the bill to BP. Melancon outlined the proposal in a letter to Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. As Melancon explained in the May 19 letter, workers are being exposed to hazardous materials on a daily basis and many are hours away from the nearest clinic.

HUMOUR:

OIL SPILL FUNNIES:

HUMOUR:

OBAMA'S PLAN B:

CANADIAN LABOUR - TORONTO:

LIEING THROUGH GREEN TEETH:

Here's an item after my own heart touching as it does on one of my pet peeves ie the ability of both people and business to use rhetoric hypocritically in the service of quite different purposes. Right at the bottom of this cesspool, along with those who imagine that they are "saving the Earth" by anti-litter campaigns (so stuff can rot in the dump instead of on the street), are the various hotel chains that use "green cons" to reduce their services to guests. And not so incidentally reduce the number and income of their employees. Here's an item from Toronto, originally from the Unite Here Local 75 and brought to Molly's attention via the online progressive news service Straight Goods.

CLCLCLCLCLCLCL
Hotel workers blow whistle

Sheraton, Delta hotels told to stop "fake green" programs foisted on guests.
from UNITE HERE

Guests at Sheraton Centre Toronto Hotel, the Delta Chelsea and Delta East hotels are unwittingly participating in purported "green" programs that deliver negligible environmental benefits and are instead aimed at significantly reducing the number of room attendants employed at the hotels each day.

Hotel workers, along with unions who do business with the hotels, have called for an end to the Sheraton's "Make a Green Choice" program and the Delta's "Green Star" programs.

"After five days of no housekeeping, it takes us three times as long to clean the room."



"This is one of the most deceptive programs ever foisted on hotel guests who want to make a difference," said Ontario Federation of Labour President Sid Ryan.

While turning down daily towel and linen service has long been offered as a way to save energy, the Sheraton and Delta programs offer guests the option of declining housekeeping services to "conserve natural resources" in return for a $5 daily voucher.

Between 70 to 100 guests have hung the notices out each night at the Sheraton, for example, allowing the Sheraton to economize on housekeeping staff. If more room attendants are required, they are called early the next morning to come in for a shift.

"After five days of no housekeeping, it takes us three times as long to clean the room. We use almost as much cleaning fluids as we'd use on a daily basis because the rooms are so dirty," said Brigida Ruiz, who works as a room attendant at the Sheraton Hotel.

"Most guests have told me they didn't really read the card and thought they were doing something good. Then they've asked for housekeeping services, not realizing that they've declined them."

UNITE HERE, the union representing hotel workers, estimates that between 30 to 40 eight-hour shifts are being lost by room attendants every week at the Sheraton because of the program. When the Ontario Secondary School Teachers Federation (OSSTF) refused the program at its recent convention at the Sheraton, the hotel had to call in about 20 more room attendants.

The Ontario Public Services Employees Union (OPSEU) and United Steelworkers have also asked the hotel to remove the 'green choice' cards from members' rooms at their conferences. UNITE HERE estimates that union conventions and conferences make up about 40 percent of the Sheraton Centre's business.

"Each day, room attendants with lower seniority wait to see if they are called. They can't plan their life or take another job because they never know if they are going to be called into work," added Ruiz.

Winnie Ng, co-chair of the Good Green Jobs for All Coalition, added that green programs are meant to create good green jobs on an equitable basis for all workers, not lead to precarious work. "Not only is this program deceiving guests, it is eroding good jobs for hotel workers, many of whom are immigrants, women and workers of colour who are trying to support their families."

Local 75 represents over 7000 hotel, hospitality and gaming workers in the Greater Toronto Area. For more information, please visit our website at the link below.


References
The website of Local 75

ENVIRONMENT:

STOP THE TARSANDS PIPELINE:

The following story and petition comes originally from the Friends of the Earth via the Care2 site. I have to admit that I am somewhat uneasy about this item. It is all well and good to be against a pipeline that is intimately tied to bringing oil from the Alberta tarsands to its major market, the USA. Still, it's a simple fact that of the USA continues with its present economic system that they plainly need such oil, as in necessity. This sort of project will go ahead because there is no alternative for the USA in the way it presently operates. I don't think that such projects can be realistically opposed unless a lot of other things are opposed simultaneously. Be that as it may here's the article and appeal.

TSTSTSTSTSTSTSTS
Public Comment Needed To Prevent New Oil Pipeline
posted by: Beth Buczynski


Canada, and more specifically the province of Alberta, is ground zero for tar sands extraction.

As North America’s number one source of foreign oil, the tar sands produce the world's most harmful type of oil for the atmosphere, emitting high volumes of greenhouse gases during development, which contribute to global warming.

To access these underground stores, Big Oil companies must strip mine huge tracts of forest, causing cancer hot spots in indigenous communities living downstream from the toxic byproducts.

As if these characteristics weren't horrifying enough, these same companies are now pressuring the Obama administration to allow construction of a pipeline that would pump oil from the Canadian tar sands to refineries in the Gulf Coast that supply our country's gasoline.

Known as the "Keystone XL," oil companies are counting on this massive pipeline to make the expansion of tar sands operations profitable profitable, but they've failed to take into account (at least publicly) the "extra-large" effects this will have on environment, wildlife, and human health.

Consider these points from DirtyOilSands.org:

Oil sands production harms human health in at least two ways: when extracted, and when processed and refined from bitumen into gasoline. As described above extraction pollutes water resources. Communities downstream, in some cases hundreds of kilometers downstream, have been impacted: directly, with elevated cancer rates; and indirectly, with their subsistence economy endangered by polluted fisheries.

The spread of refineries processing tar sands oil is a problem because the synthetic heavy crude produced from tar sands is laden with more toxins than conventional oil. Communities adjacent to tar sands oil refineries face increased carbon dioxide emissions, and increased exposure to heavy metals, and sulfurs.

The communities along the Keystone XL pipeline's proposed path, would face increased risk of spills, and, at the pipeline's end, the health of people living near Texas refineries would suffer, as tar sands oil spews higher levels of dangerous pollutants into the air when processed.

Thankfully, President Obama has the power to halt this plan because Big Oil needs his permission, in the form of a presidential permit, to begin construction.

On April 9, the State Department released a draft analysis of the project, called an Environmental Impact Statement, which kicked off a 45-day public comment period.

Submitting official comments is a key opportunity for members of the public to pressure the Obama administration to reject this pipeline. The State Department is required by law to listen to your concerns and take them into account before making a final determination as to whether this project is in the public interest.

Click here to make your voice heard. Urge the Obama administration to reject new pipelines for the world's dirtiest oil.

TSTSTSTSTSTSTSTS

THE LETTER:

Please go to the link above to send the following letter to the Obama Administration.

TSTSTSTSTSTSTSTS
I am writing to submit my concerns about the impacts the proposed Keystone XL pipeline would have on the climate and communities -- and to urge you to deny a permit for this pipeline.

Tar sands oil is dirtier than conventional oil, causing three times more greenhouse gas emissions than regular gasoline. The 900,000 barrels of dirty oil that would be pumped through this pipeline every day would add 38 million tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere annually, which is equal to adding six million new cars to the road. Your draft environmental impact statement ignores how this pipeline would make global warming worse, a serious oversight that must be amended.

CANADIAN LABOUR/CANADIAN POLITICS:

GREEN ECONOMY NETWORK LAUNCHED:

This past Earth Day which Molly successfully ignored the Green Economy Network was founded. This is a collaborative effort on the part of a large number of Canadian labour, environmental and social justice groups, and is dedicated to promoting "green jobs" in the Canadian context. Here's their self introduction from their website. All very well, though I have some doubts about the statist methods which they intend to use to promote their goals. The federal government should do this, and the federal government should do that, etc.,etc.,etc.. Little attention seems to have been given to either local or cooperative initiatives. Yet such initiatives are the very ones that could actually both invoke the greatest public participation/enthusiasm and generate the greatest number of jobs. Dependence upon government, especially the federal government, is like depending on giant corporations. Much will be lost in waste, and what results is not necessarily the best outcome in terms of either ecology or employment. For what it is worth, however, here is their introduction.

GEGEGEGEGEGEGEGE
Vision Statement--Green Economy Network
We have come together as members of unions, environmental and social justice organizations to form a common front of civil society groups for the building of a green economy in Canada. In so doing, we realize we are living in one of those critical moments of history wherein urgent decisions and actions must be taken that will ultimately affect our destiny as a people, a nation, and the planet itself.



Like most of the world, Canadians continue to experience the turbulence of an ongoing global economic crisis. It is increasingly evident that the current economic model is broken. Any economic recovery based on a simple return to the old status quo would risk being a feeble and jobless one. At the same time, this economic crisis both augments and is compounded by an environmental crisis, highlighted by the alarming advance of climate change and global warming that now threatens civilization and global ecosystems. In turn, this environmental crisis is further reinforced by an emerging energy crisis in which our societal addiction to fossil fuels is now threatened by diminishing conventional and cheap oil supplies. What’s more, our economy and society are seriously plagued by an equity crisis of increasing poverty marked by growing gender, race and class disparities.



We believe the time has come to chart a new model and direction for Canada’s economy. This country can no longer afford an economic model that treats the natural environment and human beings as disposable goods. Instead, Canadians need to rethink our manufacturing processes, the way we use and generate energy, and the ways we construct our buildings. We need to rethink the way we transport ourselves, move goods, use water, fuel industries, and heat our homes and businesses. In doing so, we also need to break our addiction to fossil fuels and overcome the poverty and inequalities that plague our society. In short, we need to build a green economy that transforms the mode of production and consumption in our society, makes existing jobs more environmentally sustainable, and simultaneously creates new decent paying, full time, safe and healthy green jobs in all sectors of society, to address the pressing economic and social inequalities of our time.



Although both the public and private sectors have key roles to play in building a green economy for the future, we maintain that governments and publicly-owned institutions must now take the lead, since they alone have the tools to marshal resources of the magnitude and speed necessary for this kind of economic transformation. Through public sector-led investments and infrastructure, sound regulation and targeted incentives, governments can stimulate the private sector to play a key role in greening the major industrial sectors of the economy ­-­ such as manufacturing, resource, transportation, and construction industries. Moreover, much of the impetus for creating green jobs is going to come from local and regional economies where people live and work in closer relationship with their environment.



As civil society organizations, we are committed to make every effort to inspire Canadians to join in building an economy aimed at providing good green jobs for all, so that current and future generations can meet their needs while living in harmony with each other and the ecosystems that support human life and prosperity. To advance this transition to a real green economy, we will vigorously advocate concrete proposals and organize campaign activities designed to meet the pressing environmental, energy and equity challenges of our times. In doing so, we will make use of all the educational tools at our disposal, not only to inform and animate our members and the public at large, but to cultivate a broad-based movement for a green economy in this country and in solidarity with like-minded movements around the world.




It is only by progressively developing, step-by-step, a new economic model in Canada ­-­ one which is clean and sustainable, just and participatory ­-­ that we have any hope of contributing to the building of a better world in the 21st century and protecting the biosphere for succeeding generations to come.

HOLIDAYS:

WHY I WILL IGNORE EARTH DAY:

This Thursday April 22 will be the now traditional Earth Day. While there is some small competition from people who hold that the day of the Spring Equinox should be the date the powers that be have pretty well made this artificial holiday into a worldwide event. As seems usual for this sort of thing the child has grown and grown, and now we have 'Earth Week'. For those who are interested, in addition to the Wikipedia article highlighted above you can find more information on the USA Earth Day site and the Earth Day Canada site. No doubt other countries have their own pretenders to the title of "official site". For myself, however, I really don't care. Why ? Read on.

Now, I have no objections to people taking the opportunity to have a big party. I'm rather pleased by it as a matter of fact. I could only wish, however, that it wasn't mixed up with a gigantic, almost Roman clerical, dose of hypocrisy...the pretense that the participants are actually doing something that will accomplish the nebulous goal of "saving the Earth".

That's what it is - pretense. It's all very "nice" to send the yard apes out to pick up trash

from the local parks for instance, but whatever this has to do with changing to a more "sustainable" economy escapes me entirely. Similarly I have no desire to mindlessly consume "green bric-a-brac". I have plenty of green shirts already thank you very much, and once more the point escapes me. Except to observe that such consumption is the precise opposite of the sort of simplification that might actually make our societies more ecologically sustainable.

Neither do I have much interest in listening to the barely disguised advertisements for corporate and government sponsors as they tout their 'green credentials'. To me it smells of scam, and yes I have more than my fill of advertising every day as well. I'd prefer new green shirts. If the reader is interested in one of tens of thousands of examples of how business hopes to expand into this lucrative market then check out this salivating call to prosper. Think I'm wrong about the snake oil aspect of the whole thing ? Consider what sort of business Canada's reigning King of Con Rahim Jaffer was involved in. That's right. 'Green Technology'.

I think the key word in all the above is the term "expand". I have no doubt that certain important reforms can be accomplished even in our present political and economic system. Still, if we are to lead a life that is both sustainable and also humanly fulfilling I cannot see how this can be done when we are burdened with an economic system whose very nature demands continual expansion. Neither can I see how this can be done when this drive is mirrored and quite often exceeded by centralized government and its planning. Both the corporations and government presuppose the division of society into order givers and order takers. Any reforms that might come about by their efforts will see the costs borne chiefly by the order takers and the benefits reaped disproportionately by the order givers. That's the way it will be.

I see little to celebrate about such a skillful piece of fraud, unless, of course, you wish to admire its sheer larcenous beauty in a purely intellectual fashion, like admiring the work of a safe cracker. I wish everyone a good party, but it'll be an ordinary workday for me. Now if organizers of such events would borrow a page from the month before and promote green beer as part of their anti-consumption consumption well then I might at least stop off for a drink.

INTERNATIONAL POLITICS/CANADIAN LABOUR:

THE STATE OF OUR WATER:

Today is World Water Day, and the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) is involved in many events around the issue of water availability. Here's a story from CUPE about the significance of this day to Canada.

WWWWWWWWWWWW

Learn, organize and act for public water
Today, water activists are mobilizing to mark World Water Day. It’s an opportunity to re-energize CUPE’s work protecting public water systems and community water resources.

Our union has a long history of stopping water privatization by building grassroots coalitions. When we come together – workers, environmentalists, citizens’ groups, indigenous organizations, faith groups, young and old – we are unbeatable. Just look at the recently-opened water treatment plant in Vancouver, or Whistler’s new state-of-the-art sewage treatment system. Both remain public thanks to community activism against privatization.

Last fall’s Blue Summit celebrated a decade of our Water Watch coalition with the Council of Canadians. The summit declaration outlines our collective vision for public water resources and services.

At home and around the globe, privatization, underfunding, pollution, and international trade agreements are roadblocks to building and strengthening public water services.

Federal funding for community infrastructure, including water, hasn’t kept pace with growing needs in Canadian cities and towns. The federal government and several provinces are pushing P3s by attaching strings to public funding and through a federal privatization agency – PPP Canada Inc.

But in the wake of the economic and financial crisis it’s crystal clear that P3s for water infrastructure and services don’t work.

CUPE is also concerned about the state of water and sanitation services in some First Nations communities. More than 110 First Nations communities are living with undrinkable water. In some cases, they endure tainted, polluted and unsafe water for years. This violates a basic human right, and is a national disgrace.

Another threat is the proposed trade agreement between Canada and the European Union, which is backed by the European water multinationals. This deal could open public procurement of services – including water and wastewater – to foreign corporations. It would give corporations new rights and erodes the ability of governments to regulate in the public interest.
Finally, Canada must do its part to end the global water crisis. This begins with Prime Minister Stephen Harper reversing Canada’s opposition to the right to water at the United Nations.

Upholding this right and giving developing-world governments the resources to fulfill it will help lift millions in the global South out of poverty, especially women and children.

We encourage CUPE members to get active on these and other water issues in their communities this World Water Day.

Promoting public sector alternatives is as important as fighting privatization. We know that public works best for our water and wastewater systems. Through innovative new initiatives such as public-public partnerships, we will continue to show that privatization is no solution.
Together, in CUPE and with our allies, we will continue to protect water resources and services – for future generations, and for the planet. Public water is a human right!

CANADIAN POLITICS:

CANADA: WAR SPENDING BEATS THE ENVIRONMENT:

There is a persist myth about Canada as "the peaceable kingdom", a myth hardly born out by the facts, especially as successive Liberal and Conservative governments have done their best to be good mercenaries in the American war in Afghanistan. Just how far off this myth is from reality is shown by the following from the Canadian anti-militarist group Cease Fire.

††††††††††††††††††

Environment Spending Dwarfed by Rising Defence Budget:

Read the media coverage of the new report that appears in more than 30 newspapers across Canada:Ottawa Citizen Canwest News Sun Media

I want to let you know about a new report from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives by Rideau Institute senior adviser Bill Robinson.

The report shows that Canada’s rising National Defence spending is $21.185 billion in 2009-2010, making Canada’s rank 13th highest in the world, and 6th highest among NATO’s 28 members, dollar for dollar.

Bill Robinson says the rise in defence spending is an indication of the government’s priorities. “Government spending on National Defence is twenty times that of federal Environment Department spending,” said Robinson. By comparison, the Department of the Environment was allocated only $1.064 billion.

The report, “Canadian Military Spending 2009,” notes that Department of National Defence spending has increased by 9.6% over last year, or $1.8 billion. ”The government could have doubled its planned multi-departmental spending on climate change initiatives this year had it not increased military spending by that amount,” added Robinson.

Canada has spent $23.1 billion in successive increases to National Defence spending since the outset of the Global War on Terror in 2001 (calculated by comparing spending to date above the 2000-01 budget). Roughly half of that amount has been spent on the Afghanistan war.

In historical terms, military spending today has surpassed Cold War spending in 1989 by 22%, and Canada is committed to increased spending under the Conservative government’s Canada First Defence Strategy.

“If the extra $130 billion to $155 billion that Canada will spend over the next 18 years as a result of its post–Cold War military budget buildup were spent instead on aid, it would be enough to nearly triple Canadian development assistance over that period, enabling us to meet and even exceed the 0.7% target and to provide additional resources for climate change aid,” said Robinson.

“Canadian Military Spending 2009” is published by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. Bill Robinson is a defence analyst and senior adviser of the Rideau Institute.

In peace,

Steven Staples,

Ceasefire.ca

AMERICAN LABOUR/ENVIRONMENT:

CHILDREN ARE NOT "PESTS":

The following story and appeal to pressure the US EPA about the use of farm pesticides near to schools and residential areas comes from the United Farm Workers.

‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡
Help Protect Children From Toxic Pesticides:
Luis Medellin and his three little sisters, aged 5, 9 and 12, live in the middle of an orange grove in Lindsay, CA--a small farming town in the Central Valley. During the growing season, Luis and his sisters are awakened several times a week by the sickly smell of nighttime pesticide spraying. What follows is worse: searing headaches, nausea, vomiting.

The Medellin family’s story is not unique. From apple orchards in Washington to potato fields in Florida, drifting poisonous pesticides plague the people who live nearby--posing a particular risk to the young children of the nation's farm workers, many of whom live in industry housing at the field's edge.

This situation also often exists in schools in agricultural areas where it's not uncommom to have a school next to a field. According to a November 7 article in the Salinas Californian, "When schools use pesticides on campus, they post a warning a day before. But when acres of farmland next to classrooms are sprayed with industrial-grade chemicals, often no sign goes up."

Gonzales resident Aurora Valdez said she's fearful pesticides sprayed near Gonzales High School, where her kids attend classes, will harm her teenage sons. She said she often prays to the Virgin of Guadalupe to keep her sons from experiencing what she said her husband, Francisco, went through 12 years ago after being exposed to pesticides. "I worry constantly about pesticides," Valdez said.

That's why the UFW and a coalition of environmental groups petitioned the government to set safety standards protecting children who grow up near farms from the harmful effects of pesticide drift--the toxic spray or vapor that travels from treated fields. We're also asking officials to immediately adopt no-spray buffer zones around homes, schools, parks and daycare centers for the most dangerous and drift-prone pesticides.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has taken the first step in addressing this problem--opening up the petition for public comment. It's a promising sign. The agency's leadership needs to hear that you think they're on the right track. Because they'll surely be getting an earful from the pesticide industry telling them to keep the status quo. In fact, industry interests like Monsanto and CropLife have already started weighing in. If we want EPA to do the right thing and put immediate pesticide buffers in place around homes, schools, daycare centers and playgrounds, we need to push back. Please help.

In the past, the EPA has not made this issue a priority--ignoring a law Congress passed that requires the agency to protect children from all exposures to pesticide, including pesticide drift. The agency is already three years overdue in setting safety standards that protect children from drift. But there is new hope with the Obama administration. Will you please add your voice to those calling for a change?
Thank you!
http://www.ufwaction.org/campaign/drift

‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡

THE LETTER:

Please go to the link above to send the following letter to the US Environmental Protection Agency.

‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡

We appreciate the opportunity to submit comments on the Petition to Protect Children From Pesticide Drift and the Draft Guidance for Pesticide Registrants on Pesticide Drift Labeling.
After years of delay under the previous administration, I am heartened to see the first step toward making sure all of our nation's children are protected from exposure to pesticides.

In 1996, Congress required the EPA to set standards by 2006 to protect children from pesticides. This deadline passed 3 years ago and the job is only partially complete. It?s great that the EPA has made some progress banning the use of some pesticides in the home and on lawns.

However, you also must protect children from these same pesticides when they drift from treated fields into nearby yards, homes, schools, parks and daycare centers. The threat to children is real and these risks must be fully evaluated.

The EPA must adopt immediate protective buffers. Without these protective buffers, children face the risk of drift exposure to such dangerous pesticides. This is simply unacceptable and must be stopped now.

Finally, the proposed general label warnings, while welcome, are not adequate alone to protect children from pesticide drift. Please adopt immediate protective buffers for the most dangerous pesticides. It may be many years before this process is complete--and children are being threatened by exposure to pesticide drift right now.

Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments. I urge you not to let another growing season go by without taking action. The children who live, play, and go to school near our nation's fields and orchards are counting on you to protect them.