Sustainable Pacific Rim Cities

The World’s Top Twenty Toxic Pollution Problems

2012-01-14T21:48:00.000-08:00

The 2011 World’s Worst Pollution Problems Report is a first attempt to quantify the human health impact of source industries and the specific toxic pollutants they create. This evaluation is based on data that the Blacksmith Institute and Green Cross Switzerland have collected on toxic hotspots around the world. Quantifying the global health impacts from these places is a relatively new area in environmental health research. Blacksmith Institute and Green Cross Switzerland believe such research is vital to show the true magnitude of the damage caused by toxic pollution from mining, industrial and agricultural activities to create awareness on the economic and social impact of pollution, and on the need to fund and implement clean up activities.

The Toxic Top Ten:

Key Pollutant and Source Industry (Estimated Population at Risk)

Mercury pollution from gold mining (3.5 million people)
Lead pollution from industrial parks (nearly 3 million)
Pesticides from agriculture (more than 2.2. million)
Lead smelting (just under 2 million)
Chromium pollution from leather tanning (more than 1.8 million)
Mercury residue from other mining (more than 1.5 million)
Lead pollution from mining (more than 1.2 million)
Lead pollution from improper battery recycling (nearly one million)
Arsenic in groundwater (at least 750,000)
Pesticide manufacturing and storage (more than 700,000).

The Rest of the Toxic Twenty

Source Industry (Type of Pollution)

11. Chemical Manufacturing (Chromium Pollution)
12. Chemical Manufacturing (Mercury Pollution)
13. Dye Industry (Chromium Pollution)
14. Industrial Estates (Chromium Pollution)
15. Industrial and Municipal Dump Sites (Lead Pollution)
16. Mining and Ore Processing (Arsenic Pollution)
17. Mining and Ore Processing (Cadmium Pollution)
18. Mining and Ore Processing (Cyanide Pollution)
19. Product Manufacturing (Lead Pollution: especially from plating, electronics manufacture and battery manufacture)
20. Uranium Mining and Ore Processing (Radionuclide Pollution)

Source:
Blacksmith Institute
www.worstpolluted.org

Poverty in America likely to get worse, report finds

2012-01-11T21:04:00.000-08:00

Indiana University study says 46 million Americans are living below the poverty line – up 27% since start of recession

by Chris McGreal
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 11 January 2012 16.12 GMT

A soup kitchen in Detroit. The report said Michigan had one of the highest rates of poverty, with minorities among the hardest hit. Photograph: Mark Blinch/Reuters

Millions of Americans will be forced into poverty in the coming years even as the US hauls itself out of the longest and deepest recession since the second world war.

A study from Indiana University, released on Wednesday, says the number of Americans living below the poverty line surged by 27% since the beginning of what it calls the "Great Recession" in 2006, driving 10 million more people into poverty.

The report warns that the numbers will continue to rise, because although the recession is technically over, its continued impact on cuts to welfare budgets and the quality of new, often poorly paid, jobs can be expected to force many more people in to poverty. It is also difficult for those already under water to get back up again.

"Poverty in America is remarkably widespread," concludes the study, At Risk: America's Poor During and After the Great Recession. "The number of people living in poverty is increasing and is expected to increase further, despite the recovery."

The white paper, drafted by the university's school of public and environmental affairs, which is among the best ranked schools of its kind in the US, says that six years ago, 36.5 million Americans fell below the poverty line. By 2010, the number of people living in poverty rose to 46.2 million and continued to grow over the past year.

"The Great Recession has left behind the largest number of long-term unemployed people since records were first kept in 1948. More than 4 million Americans report that they have been unemployed for more than 12 months," said the report.

John Graham, dean of the school and one of the authors of the report, said that the numbers of "new poor" will continue to rise.

"One of the big surprises is that poverty in the United States is likely to continue to increase even as the economic recovery unfolds," said Graham. "The unique feature of the great recession is not just the high rate of unemployment, but the long duration of unemployment that millions of Americans have experienced. [For] a lot of these long-term unemployed, the job that they had won't exist when they go back in to the labour market."

Graham said that many of those who once held well-paid jobs will be forced to settle for lower paying work, trapping some in a permanent cycle of poverty.

"As a consequence they will be poor or near poor for a substantial period of time," he said.

The latest census data shows that nearly one in two of the US's 300 million citizens are now officially classified as having a low income or living in poverty. One in five families earns less than $15,000 (£9,600) a year.

The Indiana University study says that the numbers of people falling into poverty is also likely to grow because of severe cuts to state and federal welfare budgets.

"The states by their constitutions all have to have a balanced budget each year. A lot of states are already in the process of cutting back their safety net programmes at the same time that poverty is increasing," said Graham. "Their needs are going up but the programmes are receiving less support. It's going to continue because the revenues of state governments are not increasing as rapidly as is needed and the federal government will be under a lot of pressure because of its large deficit to decrease funding given to the states."

The report warns that the situation is likely to become even worse if the long-term unemployed lose their jobless benefits. Congress extended them for two months at the end of the year, but it is unlikely they will be continued indefinitely.

Among the most severely affected states are Florida, Nevada and Arizona, which have been particularly badly hit by the housing foreclosure crisis, and Michigan and Ohio, which have seen the collapse of traditional manufacturing.

Minorities are among the hardest hit. More than one in four African Americans and Hispanics is officially recorded as living in poverty. About one in 10 white Americans fall below the poverty line.

"We can expect to find that the most vulnerable parts of our society are the ones who will recover most slowly from a deep recession like this. More have gone in to poverty and they'll be slower coming out of it," said Graham. "If you look at the educational levels and skill levels of African Americans and Hispanics, they are more vulnerable as the job market tightens. They don't have either the extra edge in education or skills that white Americans do."

The report says that the situation would have been much worse had it not been for the Obama administration's 2009 federal stimulus package, which increased child health insurance for poorer families, and cut taxes for low income workers.

Still, the study says that although unemployment is officially falling, that may not be the whole story. Some workers give up looking for jobs and are no longer counted in the unemployment rate.

"Although the official rate of unemployment is declining, much of this apparent progress is attributable to the fact that many adults are giving up on the search for a job," it said.

The report argues that a better measure of how well an economy is creating employment is the "jobs-to-people ratio". It says that in a healthy economy the range is between 0.60 and 0.70. The US fell within that range until it fell to 0.582 at the end of 2009. It had risen only to 0.585 in November 2011.

"These data suggest that the reported progress in reducing the rate of unemployment may not be as encouraging as we think since increasing numbers of the unemployed may simply be giving up on the search for a job," the report said.

Source: guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 11 January 2012 16.12 GMT

Environmentalists versus Economists: Time for a Truce?

2012-01-06T11:00:00.000-08:00

by Dan Farber

Environmentalists and economists have always had a troubled relationship. In the 1970s, some notable economists described environmentalism as a quasi-religious, irrational approach to policy. Environmentalists reciprocated by dismissing economists as narrow-minded bean-counters who ignored environmental values, ecological realities, and distributional issues. Of course, I’m oversimplifying a bit, but you get the idea about the general attitudes.

Environmentalists and economists begin from different premises, and there will probably always be some disconnect in their views. But the gap is less than it used to be. Since then, many environmentalists have become more open-minded about regulatory tools such as cap-and-trade and pollution taxes, and some people (notably NYU’s Richard Revesz) have argued that cost-benefit analysis, if properly conducted, could incorporate environmentalist values. On the other side, economists have learned a lot in the past forty years. Current analytical tools allow consideration of environmental values (via contingent valuation and ecosystem services), irreversible changes (via real option theory), and catastrophic risks (via fat-tailed distributions). In short, although some economists use methods that environmentalists will reject, others are more open-minded.

So the intellectual reason for a detente is that the gap is smaller than it used to be. But there’s also a practical political reason for environmentalists to pay more attention to economics. As this graph shows, there has been a profound shift in public attitudes over the past dozen years.

The trend is unmistakable. Currently, just over a third of Americans prioritize the environment over the economy. So environmentalists will be on the most solid ground when they can claim the support of economic analysis.

Similarly, economists need to realize that mainstream environmentalists, by and large, are part of the “reality-based community.” Many of the anti-regulatory leaders are not (or are too in debt to special interests to care about the facts). For instance, although many economists do want to go slower on climate mitigation than environmentalists favor, at least they aren’t denying the scientific facts, unlike one of our major political parties. The current foes of environmental regulation are no longer interested in cost-benefit analysis. They’re against regulation even when the benefits clearly outweigh the costs, as in the case of EPA’s mercury rule.

In short, although these viewpoints remain distinct — and although some factions on each side are likely to remain deeply opposed — there may be much more room today for a constructive dialogue. There are increasing reasons to think that economics could be an important tool of persuasion for environmentalists. And economists may find it easier to have a reasoned conversation with environmentalists than with certain “free market” politicians. Isn’t the time ripe for rethinking past differences?

Source: The Legal Planet

Down and Out: Measuring Long-Term Hardship in the Labor Market

2012-01-06T10:52:00.000-08:00

January 2012, John Schmitt and Janelle Jones

From peak to trough, the United States lost almost nine million jobs in the most recent economic downturn. What was completely unprecedented about the most recent recession, however, was the explosion in long-term unemployment. The depth and length of the recession pushed the long-term unemployment rate – the share of unemployed workers who have been unemployed for 27 weeks or longer – to over 40 percent throughout the entirety of 2010 and 2011. The official concept of “long-term unemployment,” however, is incomplete and, in some cases, even potentially misleading. As tracked by government statistics, the long-term unemployed are only a relatively small part of the population facing extended, sometimes permanent, spells without work.

This paper proposes rethinking our understanding of long-term unemployment in two ways. First, we encourage shifting from a narrow focus on long-term unemployment toward a broader concept of “long-term hardship” in the labor market. Many workers or potential workers who do not fit the official definition of long-term unemployment – including “discouraged” and “marginally attached” workers and those involuntarily working part-time jobs – face long-term hardship in the labor market, but are not captured in the standard measure of long-term unemployment.

Second, we suggest complementing the standard measure of long-term unemployment, which reports the share of the unemployed who have been out of work for six months or more, with an alternative measure, which reports the share of the total labor force that has been unemployed for six months or more. This alternative measure avoids some counter-intuitive properties of the standard statistic and is better for making comparisons across demographic groups.

Report in PDF

source: Center for Economic and Policy Research

In Memory of the Victims of Climate Change 2011

2011-12-31T22:30:00.001-08:00

A girl's room is exposed in a destroyed house in the devastated town of Pleasant Grove, Alabama, on May 1, 2011, the second-worst tornado disaster on record.

Source: Indiatimes

Marine life under threat because of our dependence on plastic

2011-12-04T19:41:00.000-08:00

by Laura Brown

Environmentalists are warning about the effect on sea-life, particularly sea-turtles, of the impact of humans' dependency on plastic.

The stomach contents of a young sea-turtle found dead off the Argentinian coast were examined by scientists. It was found to contain hundreds of small pieces of plastic detritus. More than half of the 90 sea-turtles found dead of the coast of Brazil were found with similar shards of plastic in their guts or faeces.

Environmentalists say the small pieces of plastic are caused by human waste. Over 290 million tonnes of plastic are produced each year. When thrown away or dumped in the world's oceans they are not biodegradable so do not break down naturally. Instead they are broken up into smaller and smaller pieces by the seas' currents.

(Video:The Great Pacific Garbage Patch)

Sea-life, young sea-turtles in particular, mistake the debris for food. Once ingested they can scratch or become lodged in their intestine making eating and digestion virtually impossible often leading to death.

The level of waste in the world's oceans was flagged up in a horrifying image of the 'great garbage pile', an island of debris, almost the size of Texas, that is believed to include over 3.5 million pieces of debris.

Environmentalists warn that if humans do not curb their dependence on plastic, they run the risk of severely depleting, or even contributing to the extinction of some species of sea-life harmed by ingesting small pieces of plastic. Efforts to raise the awareness of the need to reduce waste, from balloons, plastic bags, toothbrushes etc are run in the UK by groups like the Marine Conservation Society, who monitors the impact of marine litter on the British coast. In the South East the society launched a campaign called ''Don't Let Go'' aimed at reminding people not to let balloons go in order to protect wildlife.

Data Source: The Earth Times

A new danger for city cyclists?

2011-12-04T19:16:00.000-08:00

by Dave Collier

You may want or need to consider a face mask if cycling in the city.

It may seem like common-sense to think that an individual living in the city is more likely to suffer from the effects of air pollution than someone in the country. However it may surprise you to discover that choosing to cycle in the city will certainly not make this negative aspect of city life any better. Research led by Professor Jonathan Grigg at Queen Mary, University of London has shown that levels of black carbon found in the lungs of London cyclists are considerably higher than that of other city dwellers.

Soot is the product of burning organic substances, and is an impure form of carbon. It has played a part in the poor health of city folk since cities came into existence but it has only been since the advent of industry that this form of air pollution has become a real issue. Inhalation of soot is associated with general issues of poor lung health. This can include inefficient lung performance and lung cancer. It can also have generalised effects such as heart problems.
Grigg's research began with the hypothesis that cyclists are exposed to more black carbon than other commuters. They took ten healthy non-smokers; five cyclists and five pedestrians, and took sputum samples for analysis. Unfortunately for bike-loving commuters, the research supported their hypothesis.

Although there were relatively few participants in the study, the results found that riding to work is likely to give you an intake of 230% of that found when walking.

The reasons for the dramatic difference were not identified, although a number of contributing factors were suggested. In particular, the inhalation of car exhaust fumes while cycling is likely to involve quicker, deeper breaths. A pedestrian is also likely to be walking at a greater distance from motor vehicles. These two points could explain the difference but need further study.

Another area that may require study is whether these findings can be connected to any difference in health. This study only focused on black carbon volumes and not the health impact. We will need to wait and see if a connection can be made.

Data Source: Earth Times

Rescuing Baby Penguins

2011-11-22T10:57:00.000-08:00

by Dan Farber

More than 2000 sea birds died following an oil spill off New Zealand. However, over forty blue penguins have been cleaned of oil and released.

Image from celsias

Source:
Legal Planet

Department of "Huh?!": John Taylor and Milton Friedman's Monetary Policy Edition

2011-11-20T12:29:00.000-08:00

Milton Friedman, 1998: the Bank of Japan should buy bonds for cash and keep doing so until the Japanese economy recovers:

Reviving Japan: The surest road to a healthy economic recovery is to increase the rate of monetary growth, to shift from tight money to easier money, to a rate of monetary growth closer to that which prevailed in the golden 1980s but without again overdoing it. That would make much-needed financial and economic reforms far easier to achieve…. The Bank of Japan can buy government bonds on the open market, paying for them with either currency or deposits at the Bank of Japan, what economists call high-powered money. Most of the proceeds will end up in commercial banks, adding to their reserves and enabling them to expand their liabilities by loans and open market purchases. But whether they do so or not, the money supply will increase.

There is no limit to the extent to which the Bank of Japan can increase the money supply if it wishes to do so. Higher monetary growth will have the same effect as always. After a year or so, the economy will expand more rapidly; output will grow, and after another delay, inflation will increase moderately…

That is an example of Milton Friedman advocating a "target rule".

Now comes John Taylor to claim that Milton Friedman did not advocate "target rules":

Economics One: More on Nominal GDP Targeting: [A]s Amity Shlaes argues in her recent Bloomberg piece, NGDP targeting is not the kind of policy that Milton Friedman would advocate. In Capitalism and Freedom, he argued that this type of targeting procedure is stated in terms of “objectives that the monetary authorities do not have the clear and direct power to achieve by their own actions.” That is why he preferred instrument rules like keeping constant the growth rate of the money supply. It is also why I have preferred instrument rules, either for the money supply, or for the short term interest rate…

First, John Taylor should not cite Amity Shlaes as an authority on Milton Friedman's thought (or on anything else, come to think about it). That is simply wrong. Shlaes is one of those most willing to sacrifice contact with reality in order to advance what she thinks are the current goals of Team Republican. Remember her 2005:

Bush has learnt to ride the storm: [I]s President George W. Bush's foreign policy affecting the federal government's response to New Orleans? Did America react differently to Katrina because it was thinking about Iraq?… [T]he fact that the country and President Bush personally were already mobilised for disaster has saved lives…. September 11 changed Mr Bush and the country…. The level of preparedness for a giant storm may not have been obvious outside the country. But the US was prepared for Katrina. All the old and new federal offices worked together and confronted the storm early…

Second, Milton Friedman--if he were here--would almost surely say that John Taylor's claim that the Federal Reserve "do[es] not have clear and direct power to [boost nominal GDP] by their own actions" is simply wrong. The Fed, he would say, does have the power to do so. What the Fed does not have the power to do , Milton Friedman would say, is to keep the unemployment rate at an average of 4% or real GDP growing at an average of 5%/year.

What Friedman objected to was target rules focused on real outcomes. Friedman, at least by the 1990s, definitely approved of favor of target rules focused on nominal outcomes.

source:
Brad Delong blog

The Iconic Image of The Occupy Movement

2011-11-19T15:33:00.000-08:00

The photograph of pepper-sprayed pensioner Dorli Rainey recreates the image of a humiliated Christ in a modern context
by Jonathan Jones

Occupy activist Dorli Rainey, 84, after being hit with pepper spray during a protest in Seattle. Photograph: Joshua Trujillo/AP

www.guardian.co.uk, Friday 18 November 2011 09.01 EST

Occupy protestors say it is 99% v 1%. Are they right?

2011-11-16T17:23:00.000-08:00

Are the Occupy Wall Street protesters right? How unequal is the US? We've animated the key data - see what it says

Occupy protesters say it is 99% v 1%. Are they right? Toy Lego characters on a table in Zuccotti Park earlier this month. Photograph: Andrew Burton/REUTERS
Is it really 99% v 1%? It has become the rallying cry of the Occupy Wall Street movement - and the Occupy protests around the world. But is it true?

This is the data behind this animation, produced by Guardian interactive designer Mariana Santos. And that data does show some people have done better out of America's economic booms of the last 20 years than others - as this report from the Congressional Budget Office shows too.

When Americans are asked how US wealth is distributed, they think the very richest fifth should own up to 40% of the national wealth - and that includes 90% of Republicans surveyed. In fact, that richest group owns 85% of the nation's wealth. Those surveyed also thought the bottom 120 million people should own around 10% of the national wealth. The reality: 0.3% Link to this video

In fact, the super rich - the top 0.01% of the population - own more of the national wealth now than at any time since 1928, just before the Great Depression. And the richest 1% of the US population? They own a third of US net worth.

In Bill Clinton's boom of 1993-2000, average incomes went up - just as they did during George W Bush's boom at the beginning of his presidency. But if you were rich, you gained even more: nearly half of all the growth in the Clinton boom years. Under George W Bush it was 65%.

There are now over 3.1m millionaires and the US has over 400 billionaires, more than any other country in the world. Who's at the top of that pile? Bill Gates with a net worth of $59bn, Warren Buffett ($39bn), Lawrence Ellison ($33bn). That's just over the combined budget shortfall of every state in the US for 2011

In 2010, the average American earned $26,487 - down over $2,000 in real terms on 2006. That's a drop of 5.27%, including inflation. If you were poor it's been an even bigger drop - the 24 million least wealthy households in America saw their average income go down by 10% From $12,276 in 2006 to $11,034 in 2010.

If you were super rich it went down too. The 400 wealthiest American households lost around 4%, including inflation Between 2006 and 2008 - the latest year we have the data - the richest 400's household income went down by 4% - if you include inflation. That's to an average of $270.5m per household Nearly 5,400 times the average household income in the United States.

Part of the reason average Americans have been hit so hard is where their wealth comes from. Before the crash, middle-class Americans had 65% of their wealth tied up in their house.. But the richest 1% of the population kept most of their wealth in stocks and shares and business. So, when house prices went south, many Americans found their wealth disappearing too.

Now, one in every seven Americans lives below the poverty line - that's a record 46.2 million people (although it might actually be higher).
• One in six Americans have no health insurance - 50 million people, a population twice the size of Texas (27m people). Of every 17 Americans, at least one will be earning below the minimum wage of $7.25 per hour.
• 14.5% of Americans households are defined as "food insecure". That means for every seven households, one will have trouble putting enough food on the table

US poverty map. Click image to explore the data

Meanwhile, a Washington Post investigation found

"since the 1970s, median pay for executives at the nation's largest companies has more than quadrupled, even after adjusting for inflation, according to researchers. Over the same period, pay for a typical non-supervisory worker has dropped more than 10%".

What about taxes? The 400 wealthiest households paid $19.6bn in taxes in 2008 - the latest year we have data. That's 1.9% of all the income tax the IRS collects. If you are in the top tax bracket, your tax rate is 35%. But it doesn't quite work like that.

Imagine you are a billionaire and your income comes mostly from investments. Imagine you are Warren Buffet. You would end up paying a tax rate of under 20%. In fact, Buffett paid 17.4% tax last year. This is the "effective" tax rate.

If you earn between $100,000 and $200,000 you will be paying up to 25% effective tax rate - and that's before payroll taxes kick in. The 400 richest tax returns surveyed by the IRS paid just 18.1% in 2008.

Is it the 99% v the 1% What do you think?

You can read the animation's complete script below - and download the data for yourself.

Source:
The Guardian

Our Massive Impact On Earth, In Glowing Maps

2011-11-15T09:31:00.000-08:00

Whether it’s building cities, railroads, or even power lines, our interconnected world has a heavy footprint on the rest of the environment. These mind-blowing renderings by the cartographers at Globaïa show the awe-inspiring power of human ingenuity.

Global Transportation System
Cities are yellow ; roads are green ; ships are blue ; airlines are white.
Energy Flux
Pipelines are orange; transmission lines are white ; submarine cables are turquoise.

Data Source:
http://globaia.org/
www.fastcoexist.com

Recycling Around the World

2011-11-09T13:23:00.000-08:00

By Alan Taylor
November 15 is America Recycles Day, an annual event launched in 1997 by the National Recycling Coalition. The need to reuse and recycle raw materials has never been as urgent as it is today. The human race has reached a worldwide population of 7 billion, and America is responsible for consuming a disproportionate share of the planet's resources. In many parts of the world, recycling is done by necessity. In others, artists, governments, and businesses have found creative and useful ways to reuse materials -- a plastic bottle may find itself reborn as artwork, a warm blanket, or fuel oil. Collected here are photographs of various recycling efforts around the world, ranging from small and whimsical to industrial in scale. [33 photos]

A laborer rests on piles of plastic bottles at a recycling center in Jiaxing, Zhejiang province, China, on November 6, 2011. (Reuters/Stringer)

A boy scout walks among recycled aluminum cans that fellows boy scouts had earlier used to form a gigantic fleur-de-lis, at the Zocalo Plaza in Mexico City, on October 9, 2011. Scouts descend on the main plaza for the annual event to form their group's emblem. According to organizers the cans used to make the giant emblem are sold and the money used to help the needy. (AP Photo/Marco Ugarte)

A man digs into a heap of garbage to recover copper and other metals from discarded electronic waste, to be exchanged for money at nearby junk shops, in the Smokey Mountain rubbish dump in Manila, Philippines, on April 7, 2011. (Reuters/Cheryl Ravelo)

An Afghan girl scavenges for recyclable items on the outskirts of Kabul, on October 4, 2011. (Shah Marai/AFP/Getty Images)

A worker holds one of many scrap mobile phones at a recycling facility of Re-Tem Corp, in Tokyo October 15, 2010. (Reuters/Toru Hanai)

Israeli army decommissioned tanks are is seen in a scrapyard in the "Tank Cemetery", located inside an army base near the southern Israeli city of Kiryat Gat, on May 5, 2011. Some 700 decommissioned Israeli tanks used by the Jewish state during different wars were for sale for about 0.25 USD/kilo, to be used for metal recycling. (Menahem Kahana/AFP/Getty Images)

For more Information: Recycling Around the World

Is Tim Cook’s Apple Going To Stop Poisoning China?

2011-11-07T09:08:00.000-08:00

by Ariel Schwartz

The company is already notorious for the way workers in its Chinese suppliers' factories are treated, but what's less known is those same factories' incredible impact on the environment. But after years of ignoring concerns, Apple may be starting to come around.

Before Tim Cook became Apple's CEO, his job was to make sure that all the moving pieces of the company's massive and complex supply chain functioned smoothly, efficiently, and in the shadows. Apple's supply chain is notoriously opaque, and for good reason; the company thrives on rumors about its next big products, but all that mystique could be taken away if its supply chain was exposed. That's not to say that Apple's suppliers are completely unknown--after Taiwanese manufacturer Foxconn experienced a spate of suicides last year, Apple executives publicly visited the factory to figure out how to prevent more people from killing themselves. It was Cook who led this delegation.

Despite its progress in the human rights arena, Apple has a very long way to go in improving its suppliers' environmental practices. Even the company's 2011 Supplier Responsibility Report pays little attention to environmental issues. Now that Cook, who is already getting a reputation as being a bit more friendly and open then Steve Jobs (he's already reversed the company's anti-philanthropy stance), has taken over, will the supply chain also get more friendly? Or will Cook's ultra-efficient, ulta-secretive creation keep churning out iPads at the expense of Chinese lives and the environment? Ma Jun, the Director of China's Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs (IPE), spoke with Co.Exist at BSR's 2011 conference about the trouble with Apple's suppliers, and how the electronics manufacturer is finally gearing up to make changes.

Ma's interest in the IT supply chain stems from the dozens of heavy metal poisonings that have occurred in China since 2009. Mines, leather producers, and the chemical industry are traditionally the kinds of companies blamed for the poisonings, but the IT industry has recently also come under scrutiny.

Apple really stood out. They were totally evasive if not unresponsive.
In 2010, the IPE teamed up with The Green Beagle and the Friends of Nature to release a series of reports about the IT industry's environmental violations. "At the beginning, not many companies responded. After quite a few months of interaction, Apple really stood out," says Ma. "Many others would at least say okay, I received your letter, and most of them would say we need to check on [these violations]. But Apple was totally evasive if not unresponsive."
Secrecy breeds curiosity, however, and many of Apple's suspected suppliers are listed on the IPE's pollution maps, which offers the environmental supervision records of Chinese manufacturers and suppliers as well as data on local levels of water and air pollution. So the organization and a team of partner organizations decided to dig even deeper into Apple's supply chain, first with a report in January 2011, and then with a follow-up in August 2011.

The first report details some grim human rights violations, but the second report delves into the environmental practices of Apple suppliers, which have not often scrutinized. "We found violations of wastewater standards and water pollution, air pollution, air emissions problems, and hazardous waste disposal problems," says Ma. "The volume of hazardous waste generated by the supply chain is amazing. In one case, we found that a single factory generated 110,000 tons of hazardous waste a year." It's an unsustainable practice on many levels, explains Ma, both because Apple (and its supply chain) is growing so fast, and because product life cycles are getting so much shorter--meaning more and more people want the goods that these factories pump out.

EDITOR'S NOTE
Apple has not responded to multiple requests for comment on this story. We will update it if they do.
Take the city of Kushan, in Jiagsu Province. Kaedar Electronics and Unimicron Electronics, a pair of suppliers, are both based there. Kaedar dumps untreated wastewater into the local community's waterways and releases toxic spray coating emissions, while Unimicron releases acid gas emissions.

When IPE visited Kunshan, it found locals who complained of a "poisonous gas" emitted by the companies--a smell so strong that they do not dare open their windows for fear of choking in the middle of the night. Residents also complained of chest pain, dizziness, frequent nose bleeds, and "inky black" water in a nearby stream.

The report offers this harrowing anecdote:

"During the investigation, the villagers spontaneously took water from the stream, pouring the water into a plastic bottle. Suffering from gastric cancer, Zhu Guifen, who has already had her stomach removed due to cancer, clutched a plastic bottle; along with more than ten middle-aged villagers they assembled in front of us. At that time, we were astonished by the scene in front of our camera. These 21 ladies, with an average age of 55 suddenly and simultaneously fell to their knees, clutching the bottle of polluted water and pleaded “We beg you, help us! Help us ordinary people!”

Ma recalls one factory worker--an 18 year-old girl--who was poisoned while working for an Apple supplier. "After half a year [at work] she couldn't walk properly and fell to the ground. She couldn't pick up a brush or chopsticks," says Ma. "She got better, but the problem is, she is not fully recovered, and her family spent so much of their money [on medical bills]. It was a desperate situation."

It's not that Apple is so much worse than its competitors. The company is just becoming so large that everything it does has an outsized impact. "Apple is simply growing from a niche market product manufacturer into a major manufacturer, and the volume is getting a lot bigger," says Ma. "The sheer scale of that means that its impact is growing."

After the IPE and its partners published the second Apple report, the company "expressed its willingness to set up a platform to communicate," according to Ma. "We had a candid discussion about issues that we identified. They explained their take, and both sides agreed that we should try to work together." Apple still refuses to disclose its suppliers, of course, but that doesn't really matter. The IPE largely knows who Apple's suppliers are (from talking to locals and monitoring media reports), so if Apple makes changes, it will be apparent to all concerned.

The IPE has now had multiple meetings with Apple. This past month, Ma went to Apple's Cupertino headquarters along with colleagues from the National Resource Defense Council for a five-hour meeting. "They're hiring experts to check up on their suppliers, on the cases we raised. They're going to update us about this."

Ma believes that pressure on suppliers from Apple is already making a difference. "Suppliers have come to us--and local NGOs where they're based--telling us what went wrong and how they've tried to fix their problems. And some of them give us a timeline. For example, Foxconn told us they would finish their corrective actions on October 27," he says. In this case, the "corrective actions" include installing better emissions control equipment in workshops near local residences.

Ma also recently received a call from a factory manager at 2:30 a.m.; his factory had been discharging copper into a local waterway. The supplier urgently wanted to meet Ma and figure out a way to dredge the lake, insisting that it was because of his environmental consciousness. "I want to give some credit to Apple," says Ma.

Apple's overtures toward the IPE have sparked hope that the company will continue to more closely regulate its supply chain. Ma cites Siemens, which has software that compares its 10,000 suppliers with the IPE's 90,000-plus pollution records, as a company to emulate. When Siemens discovers a problem, the company sends a letter in the name of the CEO and COO requesting corrective action to be taken within a certain deadline. "It's important for Apple to move from being passive to being proactive," says Ma. "I'd hope they could set up their own screening system to identify problems before, in a proactive way, instead of waiting for us."

The Apple Supplier Responsibility, 2011 Progress Report
The Other Side of Apple
THE OTHER SIDE OF APPLE II: POLLUTION SPREADS THROUGH APPLE’S SUPPLY CHAIN

Source:

fastcoexist.com
Institute of Public & Environmental Affairs

Tracking 20 years of environmental change, UN report lays out challenges ahead

2011-11-02T09:02:00.000-07:00

1 November 2011

New UNEP report tracks the changing global environment over the past two decades
Concerted and rapid action is urgently needed to curb resource depletion and ensure human activities do not destroy the very environment that supports economies and sustains life, warned a United Nations report released today, which tracks the environmental changes the planet has gone through over the past 20 years.

The report, Keeping Track of our Changing Environment: From Rio to Rio+20, compiles relevant statistical data on population, climate change, energy and food security among other key issues, to draw a picture of the current environmental landscape, spotlighting challenges ahead.

Achim Steiner, Executive Director of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), said the report was a timely reminder for world leaders of the areas that continue to need urgent attention such as the rapid build-up of greenhouse gases, the erosion of biodiversity and the use of natural resources, which increased by 40 per cent from 1992 to 2005, a much faster pace than population growth.

Other key issues highlighted by the report include ongoing forest loss in Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, with a decrease of 300 million hectares of forest areas in the region since 1990, and the diminishing glaciers which have influenced the current rise in sea-levels, threatening the well-being of approximately one sixth of the world’s population.

However, Mr. Steiner said the report also highlights areas where progress has been made and “underlines how, when the world decides to act it can dramatically alter the trajectory of hazardous trends that threaten human well-being – action to phase-out ozone-damaging chemicals being a spirited and powerful example.”

The report notes that many environmental issues, which were only emerging in 1992, when the Earth Summit was held in Rio de Janeiro, are now part of mainstream policy-making in many countries due to consumer and civil society demands.

Some of these issues include the implementation of recycling practices, the commercialization of renewable energy, the rise in sales of organic products and eco-labelling, and the use of carbon trading as a way to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

In addition, the report draws attention to the increase in the support for developing green economies, with more government investment in ways to effectively manage their resources and curb their carbon emissions as part of their broader economic development strategy.

Mr. Steiner said the upcoming UN Conference on Sustainable Development Rio+20 in the Brazilian city of Rio de Janeiro next June could help address the negative effects mentioned in the report and enhance efforts already having a positive impact.

“Rio+20, under the two themes of a Green Economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication and an institutional framework for sustainable development, can, with the requisite level of leadership, trigger the necessary switches that may ensure that the balance of negative versus positive trends moves from the red into the black and that the right to development is enjoyed by the many rather than the few,” he said.

The report is part of UNEP’s Global Environmental Outlook-5 (GEO-5) series, which assesses the state and trends of the global environment. The full GEO-5 report will be launched next May, one month ahead of Rio+20.

Source:
UNEP
UN News Center
International Law Observer

Women in Farming

2011-10-25T10:35:00.000-07:00

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2011

Farmville (Part IV): Women in Farming

This past week in our Law of Rural Livelihoods class we read an excerpt from Farmer Jane. The storeline of women in farming and the roles they play reminded me of a story I had read a few month prior in my local paper. The story was about four sisters taking up the family farm and operating the farm on their own. When I originally read the story I remember thinking, "These girls are doing it all on their own? How are they going to manage?" Now, I whole heartily believe that a woman can do anything a man can, so looking back on my thought process I am surprised I ever thought a woman could not farm on her own.

There are few women owned farm in America. 2.8 million people claim farming as an occupation in the US, however there are only 300,000 women owned farms. Even though the numbers might suggest women are not involved with farming, actually female farmers are the fasted growing population buying and operating small farms. While more women are entering the farming world, many still face gender discrimination.

In an NPR interview, two women farmers were asked about their experiences in the agricultural industry. A previous blog post on this interview can be found here. Both women spoke about the discrimination they face. They described how men in the industry can feel since they are women, they might not know as much about farming as a man would. In addition to cultural discrimination, until recently, women farmers also faced institutional discrimination.

In 2000, a number of women farmers filed a lawsuit against the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) for gender discrimination. The women stated they were unfairly denied farm loans because of their gender. In response to the lawsuit, Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro and Congresswoman Anna Eshoo introduced HR 4246, also known as the Equality for Women Farmer's Act in 2009. The bill would force the Department of Agriculture to write a letter to denied applicants for farm loans, explaining the reasoning behind the denial. The farmer would then be given an opportunity to provide rebuttal evidence to show they in fact meet the program requirements.

The bill has stalled, however, because on February 25th, the USDA announced it would be launching a program for resolving women farmer's discrimination claims against the agency. The program will provide at least 1.3 billion in compensation and up to 160 million in farm debt relief to eligible women. Additionally the program would provide for up to $50,000 for reach woman farmer claimant who is successful in establishing the USDA discriminatory denied her a loan during certain periods between 1981-2000.

Since there are still very few women farmers, it is important there is a support group these women can go to. The USDA has a women outreach program. The program, "partner(s) with other federal and state agencies, community-based organizations and various grower organizations to improve the lives of women farmers and ranchers". Additionally, there is the California Women for Agriculture group. The group develops the interest of California women in agriculture and holds multiple social events to provide a support group for each other.

Data Source: Legal Ruralism

The Credibility of Climate Science

2011-10-25T10:23:00.000-07:00

The Credibility of Climate Science

tags: climate denial, climate science, conspiracy theories, scientific integrity

OCTOBER 25, 2011

by Dan Farber

Climate denialists contend that climate science is either the result of a conspiracy of some kind or of groupthink plus institutional incentives to support alarmist predictions. The conspiracy theory makes even less sense than most conspiracy theories, because there would have to be hundreds, perhaps thousands of people involved, scattered across the world at numerous institutions. The other theory is less ridiculous, but it doesn’t hold up. New research can go either way rather than being uniformly alarmist.

An example involves recent research on glacial water supplies. As ClimateWire explains:

From the Andes to the Himalayas, scientists are starting to question exactly how much glaciers contribute to river water used downstream for drinking and irrigation. The answers could turn the conventional wisdom about glacier melt on its head.

Stream chemistry analyses have found that far less surface water comes from glacier melt than previously assumed. In Peru’s Rio Santa, which drains the Cordilleras Blanca mountain range, glacier contribution appears to be between 10 and 20 percent. In the eastern Himalayas, it is less than 5 percent.

It remains to be seen whether this new research itself holds up to the give-and-take of scientific debate. But the point is that the debates within climate science are very active, and scientists are constantly pushing the envelope in terms of data and modeling.

So the forces of groupthink and the pressures of institutional funding do not, in fact, seem to be overwhelming. That’s what you’d expect: scientists make their careers by finding new things, not by parroting existing views.

By the way, when I say climate science is credible, that doesn’t mean there’s an absolute certainty that the thrust of climate science is correct. Maybe more like 95% certainty. For comparison purposes, scholars of evidence law customarily translate “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” into 90% certainty.

Is 95% probability enough? A comparison may be helpful. At a recent public gathering, a major presidential candidate was enthusiastically applauded because of the large number of executions in his state. The juries in those cases were asked to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, in other words, the 90% standard. In short, the evidence supporting those executions was weaker than the evidence for climate change.

data resource: Legal Planet

Celebrate the First Annual Food Day by Supporting Local Food

2011-10-24T14:37:00.000-07:00

Statement by Jeffrey O’Hara, Union of Concerned Scientists

WASHINGTON (October 24, 2011) – While Americans celebrate the first annual Food Day today, experts at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) point out that current government policies make the wrong foods cheaper. Billions in federal subsidies underwrite the production of corn syrup and other ingredients for unhealthy processed foods, while farmers who grow fruits and vegetables receive little or no support.

With Congress on a fast track to set funding levels for the 2012 Farm and Food Bill—and with job-creation at the top of everyone’s mind—UCS says now is the time for lawmakers to embrace policies that create new jobs and encourage farmers to grow healthy food in ways that don’t damage our soil, water and air. In particular, UCS would like to see more federal support for farmers who grow healthy food for local markets. This week, Maine Rep. Chellie Pingree and Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown are expected to introduce the Local Farms, Food, and Jobs Act to provide guidance for Food and Farm Bill authors about programs that promote regional farm and food systems.

Below is a statement by Jeffrey O’Hara, an agricultural economist at UCS’s Food & Environment Program. O’Hara recently released a report on the economics of local food, Market Forces.

“When Americans celebrate the first annual Food Day today, they should remember that local food systems – including neighborhood farmers markets, roadside stands and community supported agriculture networks – provide rural and urban communities substantial economic and health benefits. The more than 100,000 farms selling food directly to consumers nationwide have generated thousands of local jobs and kept money circulating within communities, bolstering local economies. These markets are great examples of America’s innovative entrepreneurship. Most of these markets emerged through the tireless efforts of volunteers, community organizers, and food and farm policy advocates – and they now represent a $1-billion-a-year industry.

“But much of this phenomenal growth has happened with little help from the federal government, whose policies favor industrial commodity farms. We need a smarter federal food policy that fosters economic growth and healthier food choices. For example, if reauthorized, the Farmers Market Promotion Program could create thousands of jobs.

“The upcoming Food and Farm Bill will determine agricultural spending for the next five years. With the right provisions, it could take healthy, local food systems to the next level, kick-starting economic growth on and off the farm – and it’s vital that Congress gets that message.

“So, one of the most important thing Americans can do on Food Day is tell their representatives in Congress to support job-creating local foods initiatives in the Food and Farm Bill.”

Data resource: The Union of Concerned Scientists

Find Water Polluters Near You

2011-10-22T18:19:00.000-07:00

Across the nation, the system that Congress created to protect the nation’s waters under the Clean Water Act of 1972 today often fails to prevent pollution. The New York Times has compiled data on more than 200,000 facilities that have permits to discharge pollutants and collected responses from states regarding compliance. Information about facilities contained in this database comes from two sources: the Environmental Protection Agency and the California State Water Resources Control Board. The database does not contain information submitted by the states.

The United States Polluter Map

China Polluter Map

Water and Women

2011-10-22T09:37:00.000-07:00

Women have traditionally played an important role in almost all agriculture and livestock activities of the farm. They also have a key role in securing the household food and water availability through fetching and collecting water and water rational use at farm and household level. However, women participation in water resource management is still hampered by their lack of decision-making power. (more)