Britain opposes the use of carbon import tariffs against developing countries to encourage them to tackle global warming, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change Ed Miliband said on Saturday.
A bill passed by the US House of Representatives last month could allow import taxes on products made in countries that do not have statutory curbs on greenhouse gas emissions, sparking an outcry from emerging economies such as India and China.
"We are sceptical about the notion of trade tariffs as a good solution to the issues that we face in relation to climate change," Miliband told AFP.
"Obviously anything that countries put forward is part of the discussion and the considerations that we make...but our position on this is pretty clear," he added.
In Europe, France has been a vocal supporter of carbon tariffs, insisting they could be a plausible option if no deal is struck at December's UN climate talks in Copenhagen, Denmark.
But the French proposals have so far received little support from their fellow EU members.
The Swedish EU presidency has said the threat of introducing such measures would only make negotiations in the Danish capital more difficult, while German State Secretary for Environment Matthias Machnig described them as "a new form of eco-imperialism" that would send out the wrong message.
Some rich countries say tariffs are necessary as they could dissuade polluting industries from shifting operations overseas to places with less stringent environmental controls.
But countries such as China and India reject that view, arguing they are merely a pretext for protectionism.
It is under the Swedish presidency that the the 27-member bloc will finalise its joint position for Copenhagen.
The goal is to forge a global deal to tackle global warming after the existing Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012.
EU nations in 2007 committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent by 2020, compared to their 1990 levels.
Monday, July 27, 2009
India Won’t Accept Emission Caps, Minister Reiterates (Update1)
India won’t accept emission caps as part of a global plan to curb global warming, Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh reiterated.
India is “conscious” that emissions in the world’s second fastest-growing major economy will increase significantly in the next few years and has pledged to keep per-capita pollution low, Ramesh said in New Delhi today.
“The world has nothing to fear from India’s development,” Ramesh said. “An artificial cap is not desirable and not even necessary as we haven’t been responsible for emissions in the first place.”
India is committed to a global climate treaty in Copenhagen, where almost 200 countries are scheduled to gather in December to debate the terms for a new accord to combat rising temperatures and sea levels. The minister said there is a “misplaced” conception that India’s isn’t doing enough to ease climate change.
India spends 2.6 percent of its $1.2 trillion gross domestic product on mitigating the effects of climate change, according to the government’s survey of the economy this month. The country has resisted demands from the U.S. to adopt legally binding caps on carbon emissions, arguing that rich nations fueled their growth for decades and were responsible for today’s global warming.
Forest Cover
“There is simply no case for the pressure” considering India produces among the lowest per-capita emissions in the world and 500 million of its citizens have no access to commercial energy, Ramesh told U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during a closed-door discussion July 21. He later distributed his remarks to the press.
India plans to increase its forest cover by 15 million hectares in the next six years, Ramesh said. The country at present has about 70 million hectares of forests. Forests and tree plantations can act as carbon “sinks” that absorb carbon- dioxide emissions.
“The most significant carbon sinks are being created in India,” Ramesh said. “Our forest cover is rising, whereas in many countries it’s shrinking.”
U.S. President Barack Obama’s concern for global warming has improved the chances of an accord being reached in Copenhagen to succeed the Kyoto protocol, which expires in 2012, the chief of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra K. Pachauri, said in an interview on July 8.
At a summit of world leaders in Italy this month, the richest countries and developing nations such as China agreed for the first time to limit the rise in average global temperature. They failed to reach an accord on goals for reducing greenhouse gases.
India is “conscious” that emissions in the world’s second fastest-growing major economy will increase significantly in the next few years and has pledged to keep per-capita pollution low, Ramesh said in New Delhi today.
“The world has nothing to fear from India’s development,” Ramesh said. “An artificial cap is not desirable and not even necessary as we haven’t been responsible for emissions in the first place.”
India is committed to a global climate treaty in Copenhagen, where almost 200 countries are scheduled to gather in December to debate the terms for a new accord to combat rising temperatures and sea levels. The minister said there is a “misplaced” conception that India’s isn’t doing enough to ease climate change.
India spends 2.6 percent of its $1.2 trillion gross domestic product on mitigating the effects of climate change, according to the government’s survey of the economy this month. The country has resisted demands from the U.S. to adopt legally binding caps on carbon emissions, arguing that rich nations fueled their growth for decades and were responsible for today’s global warming.
Forest Cover
“There is simply no case for the pressure” considering India produces among the lowest per-capita emissions in the world and 500 million of its citizens have no access to commercial energy, Ramesh told U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during a closed-door discussion July 21. He later distributed his remarks to the press.
India plans to increase its forest cover by 15 million hectares in the next six years, Ramesh said. The country at present has about 70 million hectares of forests. Forests and tree plantations can act as carbon “sinks” that absorb carbon- dioxide emissions.
“The most significant carbon sinks are being created in India,” Ramesh said. “Our forest cover is rising, whereas in many countries it’s shrinking.”
U.S. President Barack Obama’s concern for global warming has improved the chances of an accord being reached in Copenhagen to succeed the Kyoto protocol, which expires in 2012, the chief of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Rajendra K. Pachauri, said in an interview on July 8.
At a summit of world leaders in Italy this month, the richest countries and developing nations such as China agreed for the first time to limit the rise in average global temperature. They failed to reach an accord on goals for reducing greenhouse gases.
Raja slams Environment Ministry
Communist Party of India MP D. Raja has criticised the Union Environment and Forests Ministry for the manner in which it had bypassed Parliament, ignoring the Standing Committee recommendations on the Compensatory Afforestation Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) funds. ‘Disturbing’
Describing the Ministry’s recent moves as “disturbing,” Mr. Raja, in a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, said the Ministry had done little to comply with the Standing Committee’s report and address the concerns it raised. Such actions could not be condoned as the government claimed to be concerned about the rights of forest dwellers and the protection of the environment. It was important that the government take steps to frame a Bill as per the Standing Committee’s recommendations. “In the wake of debates on global warming and climate change, effective protection of natural forests, environmentally sound measures to respond to deforestation and effective safeguards for the rights of marginalised communities are vital,” Mr. Raja said, seeking Dr. Singh’s intervention. “Rights ignored”
The Centre had introduced a Bill in 2008 to access Rs. 11,400 crore in the CAMPA fund by creating a statutory CAMPA authority. The Standing Committee rejected the Bill because of the lack of respect for the rights of forest dwellers, centralisation of decision-making, and the fact that it did not address the fundamental issues in the diversion procedure under the Forest (Conservation) Act, Mr. Raja said.
Hence, it was expected that the Ministry would re-frame the Bill as per the Standing Committee’s recommendations and table it in Parliament. “Yet, I learned to my shock and dismay recently that the Ministry has now decided to bypass Parliament and instead seek approval from the Supreme Court. Instead of redrafting the Bill and approaching Parliament, the Ministry approached the Attorney-General and a Supreme Court-appointed committee.”
Describing the Ministry’s recent moves as “disturbing,” Mr. Raja, in a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, said the Ministry had done little to comply with the Standing Committee’s report and address the concerns it raised. Such actions could not be condoned as the government claimed to be concerned about the rights of forest dwellers and the protection of the environment. It was important that the government take steps to frame a Bill as per the Standing Committee’s recommendations. “In the wake of debates on global warming and climate change, effective protection of natural forests, environmentally sound measures to respond to deforestation and effective safeguards for the rights of marginalised communities are vital,” Mr. Raja said, seeking Dr. Singh’s intervention. “Rights ignored”
The Centre had introduced a Bill in 2008 to access Rs. 11,400 crore in the CAMPA fund by creating a statutory CAMPA authority. The Standing Committee rejected the Bill because of the lack of respect for the rights of forest dwellers, centralisation of decision-making, and the fact that it did not address the fundamental issues in the diversion procedure under the Forest (Conservation) Act, Mr. Raja said.
Hence, it was expected that the Ministry would re-frame the Bill as per the Standing Committee’s recommendations and table it in Parliament. “Yet, I learned to my shock and dismay recently that the Ministry has now decided to bypass Parliament and instead seek approval from the Supreme Court. Instead of redrafting the Bill and approaching Parliament, the Ministry approached the Attorney-General and a Supreme Court-appointed committee.”
Earliest Animals Lived in a Lake Environment, Research Shows
Evidence for life on Earth stretches back billions of years, with simple single-celled organisms like bacteria dominating the record. When multi-celled animal life appeared on the planet after 3 billion years of single cell organisms, animals diversified rapidly. Conventional wisdom has it that animal evolution began in the ocean, with animal life adapting much later in Earth history to terrestrial environments. Now a UC Riverside-led team of researchers studying ancient rock samples in South China has found that the first animal fossils in the paleontological record are preserved in ancient lake deposits, not marine sediments as commonly assumed. “We know that life in the oceans is very different from life in lakes, and, at least in the modern world, the oceans are far more stable and consistent environments compared to lakes which tend to be short-lived features relative to, say, rates of evolution,” said Martin Kennedy, a professor of geology in the Department of Earth Sciences who participated in the research. “Thus it is surprising that the first evidence of animals we find is associated with lakes, a far more variable environment than the ocean.”The study, published in the July 27-31 online edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, raises questions such as what aspects of the Earth’s environment changed to enable animal evolution.In their research, the authors focused on South China’s Doushantuo Formation, one of the oldest fossil beds that houses highly preserved fossils dated to about 600 million years ago. These beds have no adult fossils. Instead, many of the fossils appear as bundles of cells interpreted to be animal embryos.“Our first unusual finding in this region was the abundance of a clay mineral called smectite,” said lead author Tom Bristow, who worked in Kennedy’s lab. “In rocks of this age, smectite is normally transformed into other types of clay. The smectite in these South China rocks, however, underwent no such transformation and have a special chemistry that, for the smectite to form, requires specific conditions in the water – conditions commonly found in salty, alkaline lakes.”The researchers’ work involved collecting hundreds of rock samples from several localities in South China, carrying out mineralogical analysis using X-ray diffraction, and collecting and analyzing other types of geochemical data.“All our analyses show that the rocks’ minerals and geochemistry are not compatible with deposition in seawater,” Bristow said. “Moreover, we found smectite in only some locations in South China, and not uniformly as one would expect for marine deposits. This was an important indicator that the rocks hosting the fossils were not marine in origin. Taken together, several lines of evidence indicated to us that these early animals lived in a lake environment.”Bristow noted that the new research gives scientists a glimpse into where some of the early animals lived and what the environmental conditions were like for them – important information for addressing the broader questions of how and why animals appeared when they did.“It is most unexpected that these first fossils do not come from marine sediments,” Kennedy said. “It is possible, too, that similarly aged or older organisms also existed in marine environments and we have not found them. But at the very least our work shows that the range of early animal habitats was far more expansive than presently assumed and raises the exciting possibility that animal evolution first occurred in lakes and is tied to some environmental aspect unique to lake environments. Furthermore, because lakes are of limited size and not connected to each other, there may have been significant parallel evolution of organisms. Now we must wait and see if similar fossils are found in marine sediments.”Kennedy, who directs the Graduate Program in Global Climate and Environmental Change at UCR, and Bristow were joined in the study by Mary Droser and Arkadiusz Derkowski of UCR; Ganqing Jiang of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas; and Robert Creaser of the University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.Kennedy was supported by grants from the National Science Foundation and NASA Exobiology; Bristow, who joined UCR in 2003, was supported by a student research grant from the Geological Society of America. The research was done in its entirety while Bristow was at UCR. In 2008, he graduated with a doctoral degree in geological sciences and joined the California Institute of Technology, where he is a postdoctoral scholar researching Martian clay minerals.
Boom in hydropower pits fish against climate
The Rocky Reach Dam has straddled the wide, slow Columbia River since the 1950s. It generates enough electricity to supply homes and industries across Washington and Oregon.But the dam in recent years hasn't produced as much power as it might: Its massive turbines act as deadly blender blades to young salmon, and engineers often have had to let the river flow over the spillway to halt the slaughter, wasting the water's energy potential.
The ability of the nation's aging hydroelectric dams to produce energy free of the curse of greenhouse gas emissions and Middle Eastern politics has suddenly made them financially attractive -- thanks to the new economics of climate change. Armed with the possibility of powerful new cap-and-trade financial bonuses, the National Hydropower Assn. has set a goal of doubling the nation's hydropower capacity by 2025.Expanding hydropower is fraught with controversy, much of it stemming from the industry's history of turning wild rivers into industrialized reservoirs struggling to support their remaining fish. The emerging boom in hydroelectric power pits two competing ecological perils against each other: widespread fish extinctions and a warming planet.The issue has been particularly contentious in the Pacific Northwest, where some are calling for actually breaching dams on the Snake River in an effort to bring back the declining salmon and steelhead.
"Hydropower does have pretty significant and serious impacts on rivers. We know that. The industry knows that," said John Seebach, director of the Hydropower Reform Initiative launched by the conservation group American Rivers. "It also provides some pretty significant benefits in terms of power production. So it's a tricky balance to get those benefits while trying to minimize those impacts."Across the country, there are about 82,600 dams, but only about 3% of them are used to generate electricity. Hydropower produces about 6% of the nation's electricity, and nearly 75% of all renewable electric power.The increasing mandates for power utilities to expand their portfolios of renewable energy are prompting dam operators to take a second look at thousands of dams now used for flood control, irrigation, navigation, recreation and industrial water supply that might also be used to generate electricity without further harm to fish."Most of the bang for the buck is at existing dams and reservoirs without hydropower facilities, and hydropower facilities that need to be upgraded for additional capacity," said Norman Bishop, vice president of MWH Americas Inc., which designed the dam improvements in Chelan County, Wash., home to the Rocky Reach facility.The U.S. Department of Energy estimated that there are up to 30,000 megawatts of potential energy at 5,677 undeveloped sites across the nation, more than half of which already have dams.Newly added to the equation is the emerging market for so-called carbon credits. The credits are part of a strategy to place "caps" on damaging greenhouse gas emissions while allowing companies that can't meet the restriction to buy credits from ones that achieve significant savings. The cap would be gradually lowered to reduce overall emission levels.Hydroelectric power is a prime candidate to sell credits because it is largely emission-free. The credits typically would be granted only for new or additional power.The market for the credits is tiny now, but legislation is moving forward that would create caps and a national market that could ultimately reach $120 billion a year.Even without a national cap-and-trade law, markets such as the Chicago Climate Exchange now allow companies to voluntarily limit their carbon emissions and lower their carbon footprint by purchasing credits, traded on the market like stock.This added incentive has made building or upgrading hydroelectric facilities a more alluring prospect.The small rural Chelan County Public Utility District last year became the first hydropower facility in the U.S. to begin trading carbon credits on the Chicago Climate Exchange.The money the district has made from selling credits -- about $1.6 million so far -- is going back to Chelan County and its customers for new investments in carbon-free electricity. The district has invested heavily in making sure its new electricity results have no net harm to salmon -- a key requirement for trading on the Chicago exchange.But the possibility of more hydroelectric construction around the world has set off alarm bells among some groups of environmentalists."Rivers in the U.S. have been seriously impacted by dam construction," the conservation group International Rivers said in urging California authorities to disqualify hydropower projects producing more than 10 megawatts of power from receiving carbon credits."Fortunately, some of this damage is now starting to be reversed by dam removals," the group said. "California climate action should not act as an incentive to increase damage to rivers and prevent efforts to restore them."California gets about 9.6% of its power from large hydro generators. The state has said it will consider as renewable energy only those hydro projects smaller than 30 megawatts that do not require the diversion of any new water.Climate-change activists particularly balk at the idea of offering carbon credits in the U.S. for large hydropower projects in developing countries, such as Chile, Peru, Uganda and elsewhere, where environmental protections may be lax and the overall contribution to global welfare dubious.But here at Rocky Reach Dam, engineers say they believe there is a way to reduce emissions, increase power output and save fish at the same time -- although at a cost.The Chelan County utility district spent $292 million overhauling Rocky Reach's 11 aging generators and installing new, more efficient turbines and an expensive mile-long safe-passage tunnel for up to 3.5 million young salmon and steelhead that navigate the dam each year.With the juvenile-fish passage facilities -- along with commitments to improve habitat and expand hatchery production for salmon -- the district could meet its targets for healthy fish and allow much less water to spill over the dam.Five years ago Rocky Reach had to spill up to a quarter of its water over a 31-day period during the height of the spring salmon juvenile migration, but last spring it got permission to spill no water at all.Yet more than 90% of the young salmon and 94% of the steelhead are surviving their trip past Rocky Reach Dam, according to district records.The result is that the dam has been able to produce an additional 1.75 million more megawatt-hours of electricity over a recent three-year period, the equivalent of 702,204 metric tons of carbon if the electricity were generated at a natural-gas-fired power plant."What we have been able to do is provide more power with the same amount of water," said Tracy Yount, the Chelan County utility district's external affairs director. "We're saying, let's skip the new facilities, skip the regulatory issues associated with new dams and go to our existing facilities and get more value from them."
The ability of the nation's aging hydroelectric dams to produce energy free of the curse of greenhouse gas emissions and Middle Eastern politics has suddenly made them financially attractive -- thanks to the new economics of climate change. Armed with the possibility of powerful new cap-and-trade financial bonuses, the National Hydropower Assn. has set a goal of doubling the nation's hydropower capacity by 2025.Expanding hydropower is fraught with controversy, much of it stemming from the industry's history of turning wild rivers into industrialized reservoirs struggling to support their remaining fish. The emerging boom in hydroelectric power pits two competing ecological perils against each other: widespread fish extinctions and a warming planet.The issue has been particularly contentious in the Pacific Northwest, where some are calling for actually breaching dams on the Snake River in an effort to bring back the declining salmon and steelhead.
"Hydropower does have pretty significant and serious impacts on rivers. We know that. The industry knows that," said John Seebach, director of the Hydropower Reform Initiative launched by the conservation group American Rivers. "It also provides some pretty significant benefits in terms of power production. So it's a tricky balance to get those benefits while trying to minimize those impacts."Across the country, there are about 82,600 dams, but only about 3% of them are used to generate electricity. Hydropower produces about 6% of the nation's electricity, and nearly 75% of all renewable electric power.The increasing mandates for power utilities to expand their portfolios of renewable energy are prompting dam operators to take a second look at thousands of dams now used for flood control, irrigation, navigation, recreation and industrial water supply that might also be used to generate electricity without further harm to fish."Most of the bang for the buck is at existing dams and reservoirs without hydropower facilities, and hydropower facilities that need to be upgraded for additional capacity," said Norman Bishop, vice president of MWH Americas Inc., which designed the dam improvements in Chelan County, Wash., home to the Rocky Reach facility.The U.S. Department of Energy estimated that there are up to 30,000 megawatts of potential energy at 5,677 undeveloped sites across the nation, more than half of which already have dams.Newly added to the equation is the emerging market for so-called carbon credits. The credits are part of a strategy to place "caps" on damaging greenhouse gas emissions while allowing companies that can't meet the restriction to buy credits from ones that achieve significant savings. The cap would be gradually lowered to reduce overall emission levels.Hydroelectric power is a prime candidate to sell credits because it is largely emission-free. The credits typically would be granted only for new or additional power.The market for the credits is tiny now, but legislation is moving forward that would create caps and a national market that could ultimately reach $120 billion a year.Even without a national cap-and-trade law, markets such as the Chicago Climate Exchange now allow companies to voluntarily limit their carbon emissions and lower their carbon footprint by purchasing credits, traded on the market like stock.This added incentive has made building or upgrading hydroelectric facilities a more alluring prospect.The small rural Chelan County Public Utility District last year became the first hydropower facility in the U.S. to begin trading carbon credits on the Chicago Climate Exchange.The money the district has made from selling credits -- about $1.6 million so far -- is going back to Chelan County and its customers for new investments in carbon-free electricity. The district has invested heavily in making sure its new electricity results have no net harm to salmon -- a key requirement for trading on the Chicago exchange.But the possibility of more hydroelectric construction around the world has set off alarm bells among some groups of environmentalists."Rivers in the U.S. have been seriously impacted by dam construction," the conservation group International Rivers said in urging California authorities to disqualify hydropower projects producing more than 10 megawatts of power from receiving carbon credits."Fortunately, some of this damage is now starting to be reversed by dam removals," the group said. "California climate action should not act as an incentive to increase damage to rivers and prevent efforts to restore them."California gets about 9.6% of its power from large hydro generators. The state has said it will consider as renewable energy only those hydro projects smaller than 30 megawatts that do not require the diversion of any new water.Climate-change activists particularly balk at the idea of offering carbon credits in the U.S. for large hydropower projects in developing countries, such as Chile, Peru, Uganda and elsewhere, where environmental protections may be lax and the overall contribution to global welfare dubious.But here at Rocky Reach Dam, engineers say they believe there is a way to reduce emissions, increase power output and save fish at the same time -- although at a cost.The Chelan County utility district spent $292 million overhauling Rocky Reach's 11 aging generators and installing new, more efficient turbines and an expensive mile-long safe-passage tunnel for up to 3.5 million young salmon and steelhead that navigate the dam each year.With the juvenile-fish passage facilities -- along with commitments to improve habitat and expand hatchery production for salmon -- the district could meet its targets for healthy fish and allow much less water to spill over the dam.Five years ago Rocky Reach had to spill up to a quarter of its water over a 31-day period during the height of the spring salmon juvenile migration, but last spring it got permission to spill no water at all.Yet more than 90% of the young salmon and 94% of the steelhead are surviving their trip past Rocky Reach Dam, according to district records.The result is that the dam has been able to produce an additional 1.75 million more megawatt-hours of electricity over a recent three-year period, the equivalent of 702,204 metric tons of carbon if the electricity were generated at a natural-gas-fired power plant."What we have been able to do is provide more power with the same amount of water," said Tracy Yount, the Chelan County utility district's external affairs director. "We're saying, let's skip the new facilities, skip the regulatory issues associated with new dams and go to our existing facilities and get more value from them."
Combining being gay and green
Gerod Rody didn't mess around with noble sentiments.
When I asked him why he started a green group pitched at the gay community, he said, "I kind of wanted to date and have the parts of my life come together."
But he is serious about both gender identity and environmental sustainability. And as far as he knows, his organization, Out for Sustainability, is the only one that tries to combine being gay with being green.
Rody is regularly drawing people out to social and educational events, sponsored by his and other pro-green organizations. On Earth Day, Out put on two Earth Gay events, doing habitat restoration on Beacon Hill and building a garden in South Park so some kids going through drug recovery can have fresh vegetables.
Rody is a designer and business consult who has a bachelor's degree in European studies from the University of Washington. He lives in West Seattle and just this June finished his master's degree in sustainable business at the Bainbridge Graduate Institute. He's planned weddings and helped design buildings, including helping his mother develop an organic restaurant in Puyallup.
He said his parents helped steer him toward social involvement. His father is a chiropractor and his mother has always been committed to natural living.
"So I kind of grew this early-on sense that you are supposed to be responsible your own self and your community as well."
His faith plays a role, too. Rody was brought up as an evangelical Christian. He's a Presbyterian now, but he's always believed "one of the reasons I was brought into the world is to effect positive change."
There weren't many other gay people at the Bainbridge institute, he said, so he felt "my values, centered on sustainability and my sexuality, were really disconnected."
He looked for organizations that bridge the gap but couldn't find one. So he enlisted fellow student Julian O'Reilley, and she helped him put together an organization (the Web site is outsustainability.com) with help from their network of friends in green groups and the gay community.
The sustainability movement is more than a subculture now, he said, and LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) people are moving toward the mainstream. It felt like the right time to do some matchmaking.
There is a lot of diversity in the LGBT community. Rody's demographic, gay men, like most of us, has a mixed reputation when it comes to sustainable living.
var zflag_nid="1061"; var zflag_cid="2"; var zflag_sid="1"; var zflag_width="300"; var zflag_height="250"; var zflag_sz="9";
on error resume next
t0=IsObject(CreateObject("ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash.5"))
if(t0
rsi_pub = '4F62E1E1D2D648BFACEF51BEFB0B5246';rsi_site = 'A0AFB18244C29F37C480E028D4FA8654';rsi_width = '300';rsi_height = '250';
on error resume next
t0=IsObject(CreateObject("ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash.5"))
if(t0
Remember "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"? That image doesn't hold true for everyone, but it's common enough, and a flair for consumption is not green. But living in small spaces in urban areas is.
Even Rody isn't entirely green. "Most of my clothes, I buy used, but I like shoes."
His idea isn't to push for perfection, but "to affirm people in what they already do" and provide them opportunities to learn about other things they can do.
"I've been surprised by how many people say they aren't being sustainable, but they take the bus to work, or they compost."
So far, the project hasn't jump-started his dating life, but Rody said, "It has expanded my social network and added depth to it."
That's nice, but there's something noble here, too: getting more people to embrace sustainable lifestyles.
When I asked him why he started a green group pitched at the gay community, he said, "I kind of wanted to date and have the parts of my life come together."
But he is serious about both gender identity and environmental sustainability. And as far as he knows, his organization, Out for Sustainability, is the only one that tries to combine being gay with being green.
Rody is regularly drawing people out to social and educational events, sponsored by his and other pro-green organizations. On Earth Day, Out put on two Earth Gay events, doing habitat restoration on Beacon Hill and building a garden in South Park so some kids going through drug recovery can have fresh vegetables.
Rody is a designer and business consult who has a bachelor's degree in European studies from the University of Washington. He lives in West Seattle and just this June finished his master's degree in sustainable business at the Bainbridge Graduate Institute. He's planned weddings and helped design buildings, including helping his mother develop an organic restaurant in Puyallup.
He said his parents helped steer him toward social involvement. His father is a chiropractor and his mother has always been committed to natural living.
"So I kind of grew this early-on sense that you are supposed to be responsible your own self and your community as well."
His faith plays a role, too. Rody was brought up as an evangelical Christian. He's a Presbyterian now, but he's always believed "one of the reasons I was brought into the world is to effect positive change."
There weren't many other gay people at the Bainbridge institute, he said, so he felt "my values, centered on sustainability and my sexuality, were really disconnected."
He looked for organizations that bridge the gap but couldn't find one. So he enlisted fellow student Julian O'Reilley, and she helped him put together an organization (the Web site is outsustainability.com) with help from their network of friends in green groups and the gay community.
The sustainability movement is more than a subculture now, he said, and LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) people are moving toward the mainstream. It felt like the right time to do some matchmaking.
There is a lot of diversity in the LGBT community. Rody's demographic, gay men, like most of us, has a mixed reputation when it comes to sustainable living.
var zflag_nid="1061"; var zflag_cid="2"; var zflag_sid="1"; var zflag_width="300"; var zflag_height="250"; var zflag_sz="9";
on error resume next
t0=IsObject(CreateObject("ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash.5"))
if(t0
rsi_pub = '4F62E1E1D2D648BFACEF51BEFB0B5246';rsi_site = 'A0AFB18244C29F37C480E028D4FA8654';rsi_width = '300';rsi_height = '250';
on error resume next
t0=IsObject(CreateObject("ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash.5"))
if(t0
Remember "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"? That image doesn't hold true for everyone, but it's common enough, and a flair for consumption is not green. But living in small spaces in urban areas is.
Even Rody isn't entirely green. "Most of my clothes, I buy used, but I like shoes."
His idea isn't to push for perfection, but "to affirm people in what they already do" and provide them opportunities to learn about other things they can do.
"I've been surprised by how many people say they aren't being sustainable, but they take the bus to work, or they compost."
So far, the project hasn't jump-started his dating life, but Rody said, "It has expanded my social network and added depth to it."
That's nice, but there's something noble here, too: getting more people to embrace sustainable lifestyles.
Noise pollution affects birds' nesting habits
A new study has come up with the strongest evidence yet that noise pollution negatively influences the nesting habits of birds.The study also indicates that at least a few species opt for noisy areas over quiet ones, perhaps because of their vocalisation pitches, a reduction in nest predators and less competition from other song birds that prefer quiet environments. The researchers found that 32 bird species nested in quiet areas undisturbed by noise pollution, while 21 species were nesting in noisy areas. The team also found only three bird species nested exclusively at the noisy sites, while 14 species nested only in the quiet sites. The three-year study compared nesting birds inhabiting pinyon-juniper woodland sites surrounding natural gas extraction sites and their noise-producing compressors with birds nesting in adjacent, quieter woodland sites. While bird species richness declined at noisy sites, bird nesting success was higher there than in the nearby quiet sites, said Clinton Francis, University of Colorado at Boulder (CU-B) who led the study. "This is the first study to show that noise pollution causes changes in species interactions within bird communities," said Francis. "Since noise pollution can be a major cause of declining bird diversity in and around urban areas, better noise control using quieter road surfaces and sound-reducing walls should be considered to help preserve such communities." While other studies have shown noise pollution can have a negative impact on bird species, most have been conducted near heavily used roads, said Francis. These findings were published online in Current Biology
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)