<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>Forest Conservation Blog</title>
      <link>http://forests.org/blog/</link>
      <description></description>
      <language>en</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2007</copyright>
      <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 16:47:57 -0600</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

      
      <item>
         <title>ALERT: Protest Failed World Bank Congo Rainforest Policy and Proposed Ill-Conceived Forest Carbon Payments</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><img alt="Congo rainforest" src="http://www.rainforestportal.org/issues/img/congo_rainforest.jpg" width="75" height="75" class="floatRight" /><em><strong>Given revelations of misconduct in Democratic Republic of Congo's rainforests by the World Bank and UK aid agencies, the World Bank's desire to administer global carbon payments for rainforest protection as a means to address climate change is suspect</strong></em></p>

<p><strong><a href="http://www.rainforestportal.org/shared/alerts/send.aspx?id=world_bank_forest_policy">TAKE ACTION!</a></strong> The World Bank's independent inspection panel has found serious violations of the Bank's own rules as foreign companies were encouraged to destructively log the Democratic Republic of Congo's (DRC) rainforests, endangering the lives of thousands of Congolese Pygmies. Along with the British government, the Bank has since 2002 sought to "create a favorable climate for industrial logging" in the Congo by rushing through new forestry laws and dividing the country's massive rainforests into logging zones. This is the World Bank's most recent failure to promote "sustainable" ancient rainforest logging, and comes as they position themselves to administer international carbon market funds meant to protect ancient rainforests for their climate benefits... </p>

<p>The concept of "avoided deforestation" -- whereby countries are paid to protect forests -- has the potential to maintain standing rainforests in an intact, fully functioning condition; while meeting reasonable local development needs... Many crucial details regarding how avoided deforestation payments would work remain undefined... To be maximally effective, avoided deforestation climate payments should only support strict preservation of ancient forests; and not their "sustainable" selective logging, certified or otherwise... </p>

<p>Industrial ancient forest logging must be rejected and replaced with an emphasis upon community development based upon standing, intact rainforests. This requires abandoning subsidizing of DRC's industrial forestry, fully protecting Pygmy rights and ensuring carbon payments are made only for strict rainforest preservation.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.rainforestportal.org/issues/2007/10/alert_protest_failed_world_ban.asp</link>
         <guid>http://www.rainforestportal.org/issues/2007/10/alert_protest_failed_world_ban.asp</guid>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Rainforest Conservation</category>
        
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">avoided deforestation</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">carbon market</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">rainforest protection</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">World Bank</category>
        
         <pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 16:47:57 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Mining Water to Produce Ethanol Biofuel</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>A whole range of environmental and social woes have emerged from an ill-informed, incautious rush into biofuels. Humanity's knee jerk reaction has been to seek to replace our dependency upon fossil fuels with a dependency upon living biomass; rather than embracing conservation, efficiency and true renewables. Emerging concerns with biofuels have included well-documented <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=biofuel%20rainforest%20destruction">destruction of rainforests [search]</a>, <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=biofuel%20human%20rights">human rights abuses [search]</a>, and an <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=biofuel%20food%20prices">increase in food prices [search]</a> as we choose to feed our cars before the poor and hungry. </p>

<p>Yet perhaps no element of biofuel policy is more alarming and unacknowledged than the degree to which <a href="http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/44776/story.htm">biofuel production requires unsustainable use of scarce water resources</a> [<a href="http://www.waterconserve.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=85868">ark</a> | <a href="http://www.waterconserve.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=water%20biofuels">search</a>]. The National Research Council reports that the US ethanol rush will result in a drain on drinking water as corn production requires vast quantities of water for irrigation (planned cellulosic ethanol from biomass almost certainly will as well). Large scale, commercial production of biofuels mines water and soil resources, diminishing them -- making biofuels a non-renewable energy source. Biofuels are a deadly distraction from powering down the industrial Earth destroying growth machine.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.waterconserve.org/blog/2007/10/water_mined_to_produce_ethanol.asp</link>
         <guid>http://www.waterconserve.org/blog/2007/10/water_mined_to_produce_ethanol.asp</guid>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Water Conservation</category>
        
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">biofuel</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">environment</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">water use</category>
        
         <pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2007 21:18:37 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Oil Palm Biofuel Campaign Yielding Results</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><img alt="Indonesia's carbon rich rainforests should not be cleared to produce biofuels" src="http://www.climateark.org/blog/img/indonesia_dipforest.jpg" width="50" height="90" class="floatLeft" />The global campaign to ensure biofuels are not produced at the expense of ancient rainforests appears to be yielding positive results, as these efforts are <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=85577">costing oil palm market share in Europe</a>. Ecological Internet's work has been instrumental to this success, as we were the first environmental organization to raise concerns regarding <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=biofuel%20rainforest%20destruction">rainforest destruction and biofuel production [search]</a>. Our latest efforts highlight <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/alerts/send.aspx?id=colombia_biofuel">murderous biofuel production in Colombia [alert]</a>. It is nonsensical to grow a crop for its purported benefits in addressing climate change by clearing ancient rainforests thus releasing their carbon. Within an ever growing coalition, we have worked long and hard to raise awareness and build the campaign. Quite simply, there is <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=85569">not enough arable land, water or surplus food supplies</a> to grow an appreciable share of the world's energy needs from biofuels; and by trying both climate and rainforests will be irrevocably destroyed.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/10/oil_palm_biofuel_campaign_yiel.asp</link>
         <guid>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/10/oil_palm_biofuel_campaign_yiel.asp</guid>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Climate Change</category>
        
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">biofuel</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">orangutan</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">palm oil</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">rainforest destruction</category>
        
         <pubDate>Sun, 07 Oct 2007 22:15:09 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>VICTORY: World Bank Found to Have Seriously Violated Own Rules as Sought to Raze Congo&apos;s Rainforests</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><img alt="Rainforest logs" src="http://www.rainforestportal.org/issues/img/rainforest_logs.jpg" width="75" height="75" class="floatRight" />A leaked report by the World Bank's independent inspection panel has found the <a href="http://www.rainforestportal.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=85403">World Bank gravely broke its own rules in regard to rainforest policies and projects</a> pursued since 2002 in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The World Bank encouraged foreign companies to destructively log DRC's rainforests, endangering the lives of thousands of Congolese Pygmies; misled Congo's government about the value of their forests, and repeatedly broke their own rules regarding natural habitat and indigenous protections.</p>

<p>Congo's rainforests are the second largest in the world, hold some 8% of the Earth's carbon, and possess critical global ecosystems containing rich biodiversity. These forests provide medicines, shelter, timber and food for 40 million people. When the World Bank reentered the Congo in 2002, after years of war, it said industrial forestry could contribute to the country's recovery. It rushed through new forestry laws, divided the country's rainforests into logging zones, and along with the British government aimed to create a favorable climate for industrial logging. These efforts have now been discredited.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.rainforestportal.org/issues/2007/10/world_bank_seriously_violated.asp</link>
         <guid>http://www.rainforestportal.org/issues/2007/10/world_bank_seriously_violated.asp</guid>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Rainforest Conservation</category>
        
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">Congo</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">DRC</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">rainforest policy</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">rainforest protection</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">World Bank</category>
        
         <pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2007 10:51:49 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Wai Wai of Guyanan Amazon Choose Rainforest Conservation Economy</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><img alt="Most benefits flow from keeping rainforests standing" src="http://www.rainforestportal.org/issues/img/amazon_rainforest_canopy.jpg" width="75" height="75" class="floatLeft" />Finally some good rainforest news that involves empowering local peoples to benefit from standing ancient rainforests, rather than logging them a bit more carefully. The Wai Wai of Guyana have chosen to <a href="http://www.rainforestportal.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=85431">benefit from intact, standing rainforests</a>. Their massive region covering some 625,000-hectares (1.54-million-acres) on the northern border of Brazil?s Pará state has been declared Guyana's first Community Owned Conservation Area. With the assistance of Conservation International, the Wai Wai are "building a 'conservation economy' based on the sustainable use of their natural resources. The plan will create jobs from conservation activities, such as newly trained para-biologists working with researchers to assess the territory?s flora and fauna, and local rangers patrolling the area. Other economic activities include ecotourism and expanding the traditional Wai Wai craft business." Economies based upon standing ancient rainforests will have tremendous local, regional and global ecological benefits; not only in terms of terrestrial biodiversity and ecosystems, but also climate and water as well.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.rainforestportal.org/issues/2007/10/wai_wai_of_guyanan_amazon_choo.asp</link>
         <guid>http://www.rainforestportal.org/issues/2007/10/wai_wai_of_guyanan_amazon_choo.asp</guid>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Rainforest Conservation</category>
        
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">community management</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">Guyana</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">rainforest protection</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">water</category>
        
         <pubDate>Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:02:50 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Open Letter of Concern Regarding RAN&apos;s Support for Ancient Forest Logging, and Notification of Impending Campaign</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>October 4, 2007</p>

<p>Mr. Michael Brune<br />
Executive Director<br />
Rainforest Action Network<br />
221 Pine Street, 5th Floor<br />
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA<br />
mbrune@ran.org</p>

<p>Re: Open letter of concern regarding RAN's support for ancient forest logging, and notification of impending campaign</p>

<p>Dear Mr. Brune,</p>

<p>I am writing on behalf of Ecological Internet's global ancient forest protection network to express grave concern with Rainforest Action Network's (RAN) continued support for "sustainable" first time logging of ancient forests (defined as primary and old-growth forests). And to inform you that we intend to intensify our <a href="/shared/campaigns/">"End Ancient Forest Logging" campaign</a>, targeting RAN until your organization disavows industrial first time logging of primary and old-growth forests and joins efforts to end industrial logging of all such remaining ancient forests.</p>

<p>As the largest, most visible rainforest campaigning organization in the United States; we are extremely distressed at your failure to embrace the current groundswell of concern regarding climate change and the major role ancient forest protection, including but not limited to rainforests, has in its mitigation. RAN is actively impeding a broad based, international movement to end ancient forest logging as a keystone response to global warming by clinging to old failed forest conservation initiatives, and continues to issue misleading clichés regarding industrial logging of ancient forests contributing to environmental protection.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.rainforestportal.org/issues/2007/10/open_letter_of_concern_regardi.asp</link>
         <guid>http://www.rainforestportal.org/issues/2007/10/open_letter_of_concern_regardi.asp</guid>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Rainforest Conservation</category>
        
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">ancient forests</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">certified forestry</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">FSC</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">rainforest protection</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">RAN</category>
        
         <pubDate>Thu, 04 Oct 2007 12:44:30 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>American Lifestyle Is the Problem and to Suggest Otherwise is Delusional</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><img alt="Consumption, over-polluting American lifestyle destroying the Earth" src="http://www.climateark.org/blog/img/pollution.jpg" width="50" height="90" class="floatRight" />We are assured by Florida's Governor Crist that the <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=American%20lifestyle%20climate%20change">American lifestyle is not incompatible with the need to address climate change [search]</a> and reduce fossil fuel consumption. <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=85389">As paraphrased by Reuters</a>, "Americans do not need to pare back their lifestyles to help protect the global environment but may need to use sugar or orange peel to power their energy-guzzling Hummers and Cigarette boats. " It was awfully decent of Mr. Crist, a Republican, to unlike his compatriots, even acknowledge global heating is occurring, and introduce very modest efforts in Florida to reduce emissions. Yet he is dead wrong about what will be required to address climate change.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/10/american_lifestyle_is_the_prob.asp</link>
         <guid>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/10/american_lifestyle_is_the_prob.asp</guid>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Climate Change</category>
        
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">biofuel</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">climate change</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">consumption</category>
        
         <pubDate>Wed, 03 Oct 2007 22:01:24 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Australia&apos;s Own Issue Dire Climate Warning</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><img alt="Australia's climate change causing drought and bushfires" src="http://www.climateark.org/blog/img/australia_bushfire.jpg" width="50" height="90" class="floatLeft" />Australia, already suffering some of the <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=Australia%20climate%20change%20impacts">most evident impacts of climate change anywhere [search]</a> and ravaged by a <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=Australia%20climate%20change%20drought">monumental climate change enhanced drought [search]</a>, has this week been further buffeted by <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=85249">scientific predictions regarding climate change</a> [<a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=85223">more</a> | <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=85197">more2</a> | <a href="http://www.climateark.org/news/welcome.asp?region=All&recnum=25&country=All&sort=Article+Date&year=All&summary=Show&keyword=CSIRO&submit2=Set+Filter&oldHideFilter=False&formHideFilter=False&txtPage=1&txtPageBot=1">news search</a>] from its own government scientists that border upon apocalyptic. The <a href="http://www.csiro.au/resources/ps3j6.html">first comprehensive climate projections since 2001</a> from the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Australia's national science agency, presented dire new evidence that Australia faces a sharp rise in temperatures, danger from bushfires, and severe drought if greenhouse gas emissions are not curbed. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=85263">Sydney's temperature is predicted to rise</a> by an average 4.3C by 2070, drought months are expected to increase by 20% nationwide, and a nationwide increase of temperature of 1.0C by 2030 is now considered unavoidable. Sadly, the nation is failing miserably to mobilize to reduce energy use and emissions, continues to clearcut its native forests, and refuses to participate in good faith with international cooperation on establishment of mandatory emission cut targets.  Australia teeters upon continental scale ecological collapse, yet parties on like there is no tomorrow, ensuring this may indeed be the case</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/10/australias_own_issue_dire_clim.asp</link>
         <guid>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/10/australias_own_issue_dire_clim.asp</guid>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Climate Change</category>
        
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">Australia</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">climate change</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">climate science</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">CSIRO</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">drought</category>
        
         <pubDate>Tue, 02 Oct 2007 18:52:52 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>ALERT: Final Push Needed as Australia&apos;s Final Decision on Horrendous Tasmanian Pulp Mill Expected Soon</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/alerts/send.aspx?id=tasmania">TAKE ACTION</a></strong>: Australian media reports that Australia's Federal Minister for Environment and Water Resources, Malcolm Turnbull, will be announcing this week whether the federal government will provide environmental approval for the proposed Tasmanian ancient forest fed pulp mill. As expected the Tasmanian state parliament recently rubber-stamped the project. However, Malcolm Turnbull then announced a six week extension to decide whether the federal environmental would approve the project. Of particular concern was the mill's proposed effluent discharge into the area's fragile marine environment. This extended period of consideration is nearing its end. </p>

<p>It is also reported that Gunns logging and Tasmanian government have sent a high profile delegation to Canberra for last minute lobbying. Meanwhile Australian and international protest continues to surge against the ill-conceived, fast-tracked doubling of logging in Tasmania's ancient forests for throw away paper products. Ecological Internet's network alone has sent 387,476 protest emails to Australian authorities form 3,545 people in 83 countries. The world's forest and climate protectors need to make a final push on this difficult and detestable matter. <strong><a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/alerts/send.aspx?id=tasmania">TAKE ACTION!</a></strong><br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://forests.org/blog/2007/09/final_push_needed_as_australia.asp</link>
         <guid>http://forests.org/blog/2007/09/final_push_needed_as_australia.asp</guid>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Forest Conservation</category>
        
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">Australia</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">forest protest</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">Gunns</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">Tasmania forest</category>
        
         <pubDate>Sun, 30 Sep 2007 11:22:49 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Australia and Africa Climate Disasters Preview of Global Future</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><img alt="Global heating is causing both more flooding and droughts" src="http://www.climateark.org/blog/img/dried_ground.jpg" width="75" height="75" class="floatLeft" />Climate change is not some future abstraction that can be put off with a bit of piddling about now, it is here and killing now. Australia is undergoing one of its <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=Australia%20drought">most severe droughts ever [search]</a>; as <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=84969">agriculture is failing</a>, whole <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=84968">towns are abandoned</a>, and the government <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=84786">pays farmers to leave their land</a>. Meanwhile in Africa, <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=84287">massive floods are washing away crops</a> and entire villages [<a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=84605">more</a>], as the poor pay the price for over-development by others as <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=84954">basic needs go unmet</a>.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/09/australia_and_africa_climate_d.asp</link>
         <guid>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/09/australia_and_africa_climate_d.asp</guid>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Climate Change</category>
        
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">Africa</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">Australia</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">climate change</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">droughts</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">extreme weather</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">floods</category>
        
         <pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2007 12:19:41 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Global Citizens Crave Climate Action, Who Will Lead?</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><img alt="Climate protest banner" src="http://www.climateark.org/blog/img/climate_banner.jpg" width="90" height="90" class="floatRight" />A <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=84707">new BBC poll</a> finds 2 out of 3 respondents from 21 countries including big polluters such as the U.S., India and China believe <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=84708">"major steps starting very soon" need to be taken to combat global warming</a>. Further, 8 in 10 accept that "human activity... is a significant cause of climate change." What is needed is not simply action, but radical action; policy adequate to save the climatic system and heal the biosphere. This will require massive reductions in energy use and emissions, achievable only by shrinking human populations and total consumption (but more equitable); as well as an end to coal burning, primary forest logging and reductions in aviation. The <a href="http://www.climateark.org/news/welcome.asp?keyword=United+Nations+climate+conference&region=All&country=All&year=All&recnum=25&sort=Article+Date&summary=Show&submit2=Search%2FSet+Filter&oldHideFilter=False&formHideFilter=False&txtPage=1&txtPageBot=1">UN climate change conference [news search]</a> being held in New York is rife with <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=84662">calls for action</a> [<a href="http://www.climateark.org/news/welcome.asp?region=All&recnum=25&country=All&sort=Article+Date&year=All&summary=Show&keyword=United%20Nations%20climate%20action&submit2=Set+Filter&oldHideFilter=False&formHideFilter=False&txtPage=1&txtPageBot=1">news search</a>]; but of the posturing and greenwashing sort. Who will lead, truthfully and wisely?</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/09/global_citizens_crave_climate.asp</link>
         <guid>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/09/global_citizens_crave_climate.asp</guid>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Climate Change</category>
        
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">calls action</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">climate change</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">climate policy</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">climate poll</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">public opinion</category>
        
         <pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 02:20:34 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>Corn and Rapeseed Biofuels Release More Greenhouse Gases Than Petroleum</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><img alt="Corn biofuels release more GHGs than oil" src="http://www.climateark.org/blog/img/corn.jpg" width="75" height="75" class="floatRight" />Shockingly, a new scientific study finds that <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=84545">two prominent biofuels release more total greenhouse gases (GHG)</a> [<a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=84543">more</a>] than burning comparable amounts of oil and petroleum. This is because their <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=84629">release of nitrous oxide</a> -- a particularly potent GHG -- has been vastly underestimated. <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=corn%20biofuel">Corn based biofuel [search]</a>, prevelant in the United States, was found to release up to 50% more GHGs than oil; and <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=rapeseed%20biofuel">rapeseed based biofuel [search]</a> which is the norm in Europe was found to release as much as 70% more GHGs. This finding highlights the fact that carbon is not the only GHG to be considered in fuel emissions.</p>

<p>Agrofuels produced by burning food crops have been tauted as a climate change solution with great economic benefits. In fact they have intensified deadly climate change and terrestrial ecosystem decline. Major concerns have emerged regarding food based biofuels and resultant increases in <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=biofuel%20food%20prices">food prices [search]</a>, <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=biofuel%20human%20rights">human rights issues [search]</a>, and <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=biofuel%20rainforest">loss of rainforests [search]</a> and other natural habitats. And now we find it was all a lie that these biofuels protect the climate.</p>

<p>This current finding further illustrates the extent to which failure to reduce energy consumption through conservation and efficiency has lead to half-assed measures to try to maintain our wasteful levels of energy consumption that are doing more damage than good. We need real efforts to dramatically reduce the use of energy and resultant GHG emissions now if advanced human and natural systems are to survive.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/09/corn_and_rapeseed_biofuels_rel.asp</link>
         <guid>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/09/corn_and_rapeseed_biofuels_rel.asp</guid>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Climate Change</category>
        
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">biofuels</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">climate change</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">energy conservation</category>
        
         <pubDate>Sat, 22 Sep 2007 14:34:30 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>ALERT: Climate Protection Payments Must Avoid Deforestation of Ancient Rainforests AND Their Industrial Diminishment</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><img alt="Intact rainforests hold most carbon" src="http://www.climateark.org/blog/img/brazil_rainforest_canopy.jpg" width="75" height="75" class="floatLeft" /><a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/alerts/send.aspx?id=climate_rainforest"><strong>TAKE ACTION</a>: Selective logging diminishes primary and old-growth forests' carbon stores, ecosystems, and biodiversity; and has no place in proposed carbon market payments for rainforest and climate protection</strong><br><br />
The concept of "avoided deforestation" -- whereby countries are paid to protect forests -- is the most promising rainforest and climate change policy development in years. It fights climate change at a low cost while preserving other ecosystem services, safeguarding biodiversity and improving living standards for some of the world's poorest people. Unlike other proposed forest conservation solutions, such as "certified" forest logging of ancient forests (primary and old-growth forests), it has the potential to maintain standing rainforests in an intact, fully functioning condition; while meeting reasonable local development needs... </p>

<p>For the first time a grouping of tropical rainforest rich countries, called the "Forestry Eight" and controlling over 80 percent of the world's tropical rainforests, agree and are proposing a plan to be paid to protect their rainforests and thus reduce global warming... Troublingly, many crucial details regarding how avoided deforestation payments would work remain undefined... </p>

<p>Let the "Forestry Eight" know that in order to ensure carbon payments for rainforest and climate protection are rigorous and maximally effective, they must be made to avoid both rainforest deforestation AND diminishment, which excludes ANY industrial development. Only equitable payments for strict preservation will maximize climate, ecosystem, biodiversity and local benefit. Anything less is greenwashing and will not solve anything. <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/alerts/send.aspx?id=climate_rainforest"><strong>TAKE ACTION</strong></a>:<br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/09/alert_climate_protection_payme.asp</link>
         <guid>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/09/alert_climate_protection_payme.asp</guid>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Climate Change</category>
        
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">avoided deforestation</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">climate change protest</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">rainforest protection</category>
        
         <pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:51:22 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>World Protest Makes Ocean City Think Twice About Boardwalk </title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>New Jersey based Friends of the Rainforest and Ecological Internet's campaign to stop the use of ancient rainforest timbers for boardwalk repairs is progressing nicely -- <a href="http://www.rainforestportal.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=84232">garnering media attention</a> and already changing the city council's vote. An important precedent is being set that ancient rainforest timbers belong in rainforest canopies, not in construction projects and consumer products. You can still <a href="http://www.rainforestportal.org/shared/alerts/send.aspx?id=jersey_boardwalk">take action</a> -- we are making a difference with every protest email we send and every new <a href="/subscribe/">protest network participant we recruite</a>.</p>

<p>The crusade to keep ipê out of Ocean City's boardwalk reconstruction is a rejection of Forest Stewardship Council and big greens' efforts to certify and greenwash industrial ancient forest logging as being responsible, while falsely implying sustainability. First time logging of primary rainforests -- selective, certified, ecosystem based or otherwise -- results in an immediate huge release of carbon, permanent reductions in future carbon sink potential, and reductions in species numbers and diversity. One of the gravest obstacles to mitigating climate change, conserving ancient forests and achieving global ecological sustainability is the pernicious myth that selectively logging ancient forests (certified or not) is environmentally beneficial. It is NOT.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.rainforestportal.org/issues/2007/09/world_protest_makes_ocean_city.asp</link>
         <guid>http://www.rainforestportal.org/issues/2007/09/world_protest_makes_ocean_city.asp</guid>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Rainforest Conservation</category>
        
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">FSC</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">greenwashing</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">protest</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">rainforest protection</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">water</category>
        
         <pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 15:48:26 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>No Time for Further Climate Change Dithering</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Scientists at Britain's MetOffice Hadley Centre have confirmed what many of us suspected. Given continuing delays in real efforts to decrease greenhouse gas emissions, <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=83836">the world will almost certainly exceed two degrees Celsius of warming</a> above pre-industrial levels, the point near where it is generally considered global heating will become particularly dangerous. And this does not fully factor in the potential for high impact events with greater levels of current uncertainty such as the <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=Greenland%20ice%20melt">melting of Greenland's ice [search]</a>, <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=permafrost%20melt">melting permafrost [search]</a>, <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=rainforest%20die-back">rainforest die-back [search]</a> and/or <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=ocean%20methane%20melt">melting ocean methane [search]</a> to cause <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=abrupt%20runaway%20climate%20change">abrupt, run-away climate changes [search]</a>. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=83883">Global warming's impact is expected to be like a nuclear war</a>, yet where is the urgent policy response? The world is decades behind the curve in instituting actual actions to reduce emissions, and yet the world's leaders still dither. Global climate leader Germany informs us it will <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=83830">take time to achieve a successor Kyoto deal</a>. Fighting for his political life, Prime Minister Howard of Australia achieves <a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=83788">"aspirational goals" rather than binding commitments for emissions reduction</a> [<a href="http://www.climateark.org/shared/search/welcome.aspx?searchtext=APEC%20climate">search</a>] during their hosting of this week's APEC meetings. International policy responses to climate change continue to limp forward as global warming tightens its grip upon the Earth, her ecology, and her humanity and species. </p>

<p>Emission reductions must commence with all haste in late 2007 in Bali, Indonesia, if the human family is to have any chance of maintaining the Earth's climatic and biosphere systems.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/09/no_time_for_further_climate_ch.asp</link>
         <guid>http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/09/no_time_for_further_climate_ch.asp</guid>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Climate Change</category>
        
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">climate change</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">climate policy</category>
        
          <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">emission reductions</category>
        
         <pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2007 18:31:30 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
   </channel>
</rss>
