Nestle says it drops palm oil supplier after Greenpeace report

Bob — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 21:33:55 +0000

Greenhouse Neutral Foundation Comment Although on the surface this statement from Nestle on the report of its palm oil consumption by Greenpeace, it begs the question if the statement by Reuters that Sinar Mas is Indonesia’s biggest palm oil producer and the second biggest in the world, where and to who its production is going. Look closely at the ingredients on products you buy and if it indicates Palm, decide as to whether you wish to support the manufacture of that product with its purchase.

AMSTERDAM (Reuters) – Nestle, the world’s biggest food group, said it had stopped buying palm oil from Indonesia’s Sinar Mas due to concerns about rainforest destruction, following a similar move by consumer goods firm Unilever.

Nestle’s announcement came after Greenpeace released a report on Wednesday which looked into how the company was sourcing palm oil.

Switzerland’s Nestle, which uses the edible oil in its food products such as KitKat bars, said it had replaced Sinar Mas with another supplier for further shipments after conducting its own investigations into its palm oil supply chain.

“We will continue to pressure our suppliers to eliminate any sources of palm oil which are related to rainforest destruction and to provide valid guarantees of traceability as quickly as possible,” Nestle said in a statement.

It added that it had only bought from Sinar Mas for manufacturing in Indonesia, and no palm oil bought from Sinar Mas had been used by Nestle for manufacturing in any other country.

Environmentalist group Greenpeace highlighted the practices of Nestle’s suppliers’ and their impact on rainforests, peatlands and the habitat of endangered orangutans in their report on Wednesday.

Anglo-Dutch Unilever, the world’s largest user of palm oil, said in December it had suspended purchases from Sinar Mas on similar concerns.

Greenpeace alleges that Sinar Mas, Indonesia’s biggest palm oil producer and the second biggest in the world, has been responsible for widespread deforestation and peatland clearance, practices which release vast amounts of carbon dioxide.

Sinar Mas was not immediately available for comment on Wednesday. It has previously denied that its activities are damaging for the environment and in December it invited Unilever to inspect its operations.

Nestle has said it aims to only use palm oil that is certified as sustainable by 2015.

Want a weekly update of all the greatest posts on the web? Subscribe for the weekly VOICE FOR CHANGE Newsletter and never miss a story! CLICK Bob Williamson and in the subject line type SUBSCRIBE

Greenpeace reveal that Nestlé are driving rainforest destruction pushing orangutans to brink of extinction

Bob — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 03:38:07 +0000

GREENPEACE STATEMENT – Nestlé, maker of Kit Kat, uses palm oil from companies that are trashing Indonesian rainforests, threatening the livelihoods of local people and pushing orang-utans towards extinction.

We all deserve to have a break – but having one shouldn’t involve taking a bite out of Indonesia’s precious rainforests. We’re asking Nestlé to give rainforests and orang-utans a break and stop buying palm oil from destroyed forests.

Have a break? from Greenpeace UK on Vimeo.

Nestlé is using palm oil from destroyed Indonesian rainforests and peatlands, in products like KitKat, pushing already endangered orangutans to the brink of extinction and accelerating climate change, a new Greenpeace report reveals.(1) In Canada, Nestle products made with palm include: KitKat, Rolo, Coffee Crisp, Turtles, Butterfinger, Drumsticks, Crunch ice cream, most baby cereals and all infant formulas.(7)

A damning new Greenpeace report, Caught Red-Handed, exposes how Nestlé is sourcing palm oil from suppliers, including Sinar Mas, Indonesias largest producer of palm oil, which continue to expand into the rainforest and carbon-rich peatlands, as well as into critical orangutan habitat. Sinar Mas also owns Asia Pulp and Paper, Indonesias largest pulp and paper company, notorious for its role in rainforest destruction.

This morning, protests are taking place across Europe as around 100 Greenpeace activists, some dressed as orangutans, went to Nestlés headquarters and factories in the UK, Germany and the Netherlands. They called on Nestlé staff to urge the company to stop using palm oil thats the result of forest destruction.(2)

Nestlé, the worlds leading food and drinks company, is a major consumer of palm oil. In the last three years, its annual use has almost doubled, with 320,000 tonnes of palm oil going into a range of products, including KitKat.(3)

Every time you take a bite out of a KitKat, you may be taking a bite out of Indonesias rainforests, which are critical for the orangutans survival, said Stephanie Goodwin, forest campaigner with Greenpeace Canada. Nestle needs to give the orangutan a break and stop using palm oil from suppliers that are destroying the rainforests.

The reports launch follows numerous attempts to persuade Nestlé to cancel its contracts with Sinar Mas. Most recently, in December, Greenpeace wrote to Nestlé with evidence that Sinar Mas is breaking Indonesian law and ignoring its commitments as a member of the Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO), the industry body that claims to be making the palm oil industry more sustainable. But evidence shows Sinar Mass forest destruction continues.(4)

In the face of its unacceptable environmental practices, several major companies, including Unilever and Kraft, have cancelled their palm oil contracts with the company.(5)

Other big companies are taking action, but Nestle continues to turn a blind eye to the worst offenders which supply them, said Goodwin. Its time for Nestle to cancel its Sinar Mas contracts and stop being complicit in rainforest and peatland destruction.

Indonesia has one of the fastest rates of forest destruction on the planet, with palm oil plantations being a major cause. As a result, it is now the worlds third largest greenhouse gas emitter, after China and the US.(6)

NOTES TO EDITORS:

(1) Caught Red-Handed: How Nestlés Use of Palm Oil is Having a Devastating Impact on Rainforest, The Climate and Orang-utans athttp://www.greenpeace.org/international/press/reports/caught-red-handed-how-nestle

NOTE: Globally, KitKat is one of the best-known Nestlé products containing palm oil. In the United States, KitKat is licensed to Hershey Foods Corporation through an original agreement executed with Rowntree Products in 1969. In 1988, Nestlé purchased Rowntree and markets KitKat products worldwide outside of the United States. The Greenpeace report does not examine Hershey Foods Corporations palm oil sourcing.

(2) Protests are being held at Nestlé headquarters in London (Croydon), Amsterdam and Frankfurt, and at seven Nestlé factories across Germany.

(3) In communication with Nestlé October 2007, it admitted to using 170,000 tonnes of palm based oil. By February 2010, it said its use had risen to 320,000 tonnes. See Nestlé response to BBC Panorama questionnaire sent to major food manufactures in the UK, in connection to its programme Dying for a biscuit, 22 February 2010:http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/panorama_nestle.pdf.

(4) Illegal forest clearance and RSPO greenwash: Case study of Sinar Mas athttp://www.greenpeace.org.uk/files/pdfs/forests/sinarmasRSPOgreenwash.pdf and photographic evidence of Sinar Mas subsidiary PT. Agro Lestari Mandiri clearing forest in Ketapang, West Kalimantan, 9 March 2010.

(5) Unilever cancelled its $30 million (21 million euros) annual contract in 2009, seehttp://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6952288.ece Kraft announced the cancellation of its contract with Sinar Mas in a letter to Greenpeace, 16 February 2010. Both moves followed Greenpeace evidence of Sinar Mass environmental destruction.

(6) FAO 2005. Global Forest Resources Assessment (FRA) 2005.http://www.fao.org/forestry/site/fra2005/en/; on palm oil:www.unep.org/grasp/docs/2007Jan-LastStand-of-Orangutan-report.pdf; and on climate: WRI 2008. Climate Analysis Indicators Tool (CAIT) Version 6.0 (Washington, DC: World Resources Institute) http://cait.wri.org/

(7) Nestle products sold in Canada that contain or may contain palm oil:http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/campaigns/boreal/kit-kat/product_llist

Source

Methane May Be Building Under Antarctic Ice

Bob — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 02:18:16 +0000

BALTIMORE — Microbes living under ice sheets in Antarctica and Greenland could be churning out large quantities of the greenhouse gas methane, a new study suggests.

In recent years scientists have learned that liquid water lurks under much of Antarctica’s massive ice sheet, and so, they say, the potential microbial habitat in this watery world is huge. If the methane produced by the bacteria gets trapped beneath the ice and builds up over long periods of time — a possibility that is far from certain — it could mean that as ice sheets melt under warmer temperatures, they would release large amounts of heat-trapping methane gas.

Jemma Wadham, a geochemist at the University of Bristol in England, described the little-known role of methane-making microbes, called methanogens, below ice sheets on March 15 at an American Geophysical Union conference on Antarctic lakes.

Her team took samples from one site in Antarctica, the Lower Wright glacier, and one in Greenland, the Russell glacier. Trapped within the ice were high concentrations of methane, Wadham said, as well as methanogens themselves — up to 10 million cells per gram in the Antarctic sample and 100,000 cells per gram in Greenland. That’s comparable to the concentration of methanogens found in deep-ocean sediments, she said. The species of microbes were also similar to those found in other polar environments, such as Arctic peat or tundra.

The team then put scrapings from both sites into bottles and incubated them with water to see which microbes might grow. For the Antarctic samples, Wadham said, “nothing happens for 250 days and then bam! You get tons of methane.” The Greenland samples haven’t been growing for as long and so far don’t show much signs of giving off methane — but perhaps they just need more time, she reported at the meeting.

Other researchers have also recently found methanogens in icy settings. Mark Skidmore, a microbiologist at Montana State University in Bozeman, reported at the conference that his team has found methanogens in the Robertson glacier in the Canadian Rockies. “It underscores the importance of subglacial methanogenesis,” Skidmore said.

The studies flesh out a picture of Antarctica as a much more dynamic and watery environment than the frozen, static one once envisaged. At least 386 lakes have been identified buried beneath the ice sheet, scientists from the University of Edinburgh reported at the meeting. Plans for major drilling projects are underway for several of them.

Images: 1) NASA. 2) Zina Deretsky/NSF.

Reflecting on the roots of our activism.

Bob — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 01:34:05 +0000

In recent days with the harsh reality brought home once more that activism and change costs money, I have reflected on past actions against the odds.

Where we started and why we did.

We will over the coming weeks and months be asking those who value change to a better and safer future, to get behind us. We’ll have to be blatant with our hands extended for financial assistance from all that value as we do, the Voice for (essential) Change. I can’t say I’m, or anyone at the Foundation is that comfortable with the pleas for you to help us with donations, or for asking you to think of and make introductions to organisation that could benefit by taking sponsorship opportunities with the Foundation, but ask for your help we must.

As I say we have been through this as many have before, so let’s go back a decade and more to 1997. I have not only due to our current financial circumstances revisited past actions, it has been that now finally we; people around the world are starting to wake up to the consequences of not thinking long term about what have become unconscious and ‘out of sight out of mind’ issues of plastic.

Over the coming weeks and months I will revisit the years from 1997 to 2006, the years where our everyday activities before the Greenhouse Neutral Foundation were spent. Pot Recyclers – meet the little man that was our mascot. Notice how the arrows around the logo go in the opposite direction to the well known recycling symbol; anticlockwise? That was deliberate to symbolise not going forward but turning back the clock on past practices.

As I mention, others like we did in 1997, are starting to look deeper into the outcome of the plastic planet we embarked on in the 1950. We see the concern now finally coming to roost on the use of BPA in a range of polymers and with its use to coat the inside of just about every can we buy our processed food in, or drink our soda’s from. We see in plastics where the carcinogens as in the case of diethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP) can cause endocrine disruption which can lead to cancers, birth defects, immune system suppression and developmental problems in our children.

We are finally starting to become aware that the oceans have a problem with our plastic addiction. We are starting to become aware that our marine life is threatened. We are not yet starting to think even further down the outcome trail to the positive feedback that the return of ingested BPA or DEHP will have, when it again returns to our plates in the sea food we eat. Or how eventually as it leaches out of landfill into our water tables, will come back to haunt us through our taps.

I have been saying lately that the Foundations ‘Voice For Change’ started in 2006, but I guess that is wrong because it really started to be raised in 1997. So Ill write more on the plastic plague in coming posts that will make you go WOW! but for now, think how you value a Voice For Change and help it continue even if only to the donation of the cost of your next cup of latté or the value of that next ‘Big Mac’ Donate it here.

And sit back and watch the following about our oceans plastic legacy, by not thinking through our present practices.

I can’t say I’m a fan of Letterman but I am grateful to Captain Charles Moore who reportedly was the first to raise the issue of the Pacific Gyre.

Don’t forget DONATE HERE. If you value the Voice For Change.

Charles Moore on David Letterman Part 1 HD 1080p

Charles Moore on David Letterman Part 2 HD 1080p

Where there is no sunlight, no food, frozen conditions – NASA finds complex life in Antarctica under the Ice Shelf

Bob — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 23:31:41 +0000

In a discovery at the bottom of the world that could have implications on the search for extraterrestrial life, researchers were astounded to find an amphipod swimming beneath a massive Antarctic ice sheet.

The amphipod—a shrimp-like creature—was caught on video swimming 600 feet below the ice, where the NASA team expected to find no higher life form than some microbes.

“We were operating on the presumption that nothing’s there,” NASA ice scientist Robert Bindschadler told the Associated Press. “It was a shrimp you’d enjoy having on your plate […] We were just gaga over it,”

The bright orange 3-inch Lyssianasid amphipod was precocious enough to land on the NASA camera’s cable.

The team also pulled up a tentacle which they believed belonged to a foot-long jellyfish—another animal they never expected to find in the hostile environment.

One of the questions related to this discovery is where do these species find food to survive on?

Whatever the answer turns out of be, researchers say that if higher life forms such as amphipods and jellyfish are capable of surviving in this hostile environment, it bodes well for discoveries on distant worlds.

Video of amphipod beneath Antarctic ice produced by the Associated Press.

Bluefin tuna ban proposal meets rejection – Sad day for a species

Bob — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 22:31:32 +0000

A proposal to ban international trade in Atlantic bluefin tuna, which is a sushi mainstay in Japan, has been rejected by a UN wildlife meeting.

Thursday’s decision occurred after Japan, Canada and many poor nations opposed the measure on the grounds it would devastate fishing economies.

Monaco tabled the plan at the meeting of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).

Stocks have fallen by about 85% since the industrial fishing era began.

Monaco argued that the organisation responsible for managing the bluefin fishery – the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (Iccat) – had not implemented measures strict enough to ensure the species’ survival.

Scientists and campaigners working with conservation organisations were disappointed with the outcome.

“We think it is quite a blow,” said Glenn Sant, leader of the global marine programme with Traffic, the international wildlife trade monitoring network.

“Iccat has not been able to demonstrate that it is able to implement procedures that will lead to [the bluefin's] recovery.

“There was really no question that it met the [scientific] criteria for listing,” he told BBC News from the conference in Doha, Qatar.

“Listing” is the technical term for imposing restriction on international trade through CITES.

Bluefin tuna was slated for listing on Appendix One – a complete ban.

Mr Sant was a member of the expert panel convened last year by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization to examine whether the Atlantic bluefin’s plight was severe enough to meet Appendix One criteria.

A majority of the panel believed it did, though consensus was not achieved. Earlier, Iccat’s scientific advisers had concluded a trade ban was justified.

UK defiance

The US, which supported and lobbied for the ban, also described the outcome as “disappointing”.

“Today’s vote was a setback for the Atlantic bluefin tuna,” said Tom Strickland, head of the nation’s CITES delegation.

“But we will keep fighting to ensure that the fishery is managed sustainably, so that future generations may see it return to health.”

US officials said they would be pressing governments to live up to promises to control fishing through Iccat.

Japan – the principal bluefin-consuming nation – had made its opposition to the proposal clear before the CITES meeting started.

It argues that commercial fisheries should be managed through bodies such as Iccat.

The debate – described by one observer as “passionate” – saw two votes.

The first, on an EU amendment that weakened the original Monaco proposal but still endorsed the ban, was defeated by 72 votes to 43 in a secret ballot.

(The EU is supposed to vote as a bloc in these negotiations. Nations with active tuna fleets such as France, Italy and Spain had been unwilling to support an outright, immediate ban.)

The vote on the original motion then went down by 68 votes to 20.

In theory, EU nations had to to abstain on the second vote as not all delegates had authority from their governments to vote for it.

However, some – including the UK – did support the motion, BBC News has learned – a move that potentially risks sanctions from the European Commission.

Bear facts

Sue Lieberman, director of international policy with the Pew Environment Group, suggested lobbying from the fishing industry was ultimately responsible for the defeat.

“This meeting presented a golden opportunity for governments to take a stand against overfishing, and too many governments failed to do so,” she said.

“The market for this fish is just too lucrative, and the pressure from fishing interests too great, for enough governments to support a truly sustainable future for the fish.”

CITES votes can be reviewed on the meeting’s final day, but the substantial margin of defeat suggests this one will not be.

Earlier in the day, a US-sponsored motion seeking to ban international trade in products made from polar bears was also defeated.

Opponents argued that the species’ main threat was not trade, but climate change. Some conservation groups – including Traffic – did not support the proposal, therefore.

There were also concerns that banning the trade might hurt indigenous peoples around the Arctic who sometimes hunt the bears for meat.

Source BBC News

Israel Kamakawiwo’ole Tribute – IZ Lives!

Bob — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 06:06:47 +0000

In 2006 on the way to be bestowed with the great honour of the Global Environment for Plastic Recycling in Atlanta Georgia, we were privileged to stop over in Hawaii. An island paradise where all visitors are greeted as Cousins. The true meaning of the ‘family of man’ came to us from these warm hearted and wonderful people.

Meet one of them in IZ, a gentle heart gone but not forgotten who can be celebrated on May 1st Tribute to a Pasted Soul Day

Is Twitter a Human Right? One Chinese Activist Thinks So

Bob — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 02:59:05 +0000

Katherine Ventura of the Huffington Post writes about Monday’s discussion between Twitter Founder Jack Dorsey and Ai Weiwei:

“Twitter is the people’s tool, the tool of the ordinary people, people who have no other resources,” Chinese artist and activist Ai Weiwei said at the Paley Center for Media in New York Monday night, after challenging Twitter founder Jack Dorseyto make Twitter’s web interface available in Chinese… Ai Weiwei pressed Dorsey for a commitment to open Twitter to Chinese language translators, saying: “I need a clear answer, yes or no.”

Dorsey, who was participating via screen from San Francisco, clearly felt the pressure, but cautioned that, while Twitter’s goal was “end to end translation in every language,” it would take time.

“The Chinese people think you are some kind of god,” Ai Weiwei told Dorsey. “You created a possibility for people in this very dark room to see a ray of light… to freely give their opinion.” If Twitter were to create a Chinese language interface, he suggested, Dorsey would become “one of the most important heroes in Chinese political development.”

Saying he spent a minimum of 8 hours a day on Twitter, Ai Weiwei said that Twitter was well suited to a language where each character is an entire word. “With 140 characters in Chinese you really can write a novel,” he quipped…Ai Weiwei described the disappointment Chinese activists felt during Barack Obama’s recent trip to China, not only about his avoidance of Human Rights issues, but also because he made a point of saying that he had never used Twitter. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, drew praise however, for her strong stance on Internet Freedom.

See also this past CDT post featuring a video of the discussion.

On CNN, Christiane Amanpour interviewed Ai Weiwei about Twitter and other social media in China:

Voices and echoes of support

Bob — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 00:55:10 +0000

I have to say that the voices of support for the work the Foundation has so far done, have echoed in our ears over the last few days. I give my personal thanks and those of all involved with the Foundation to the many people who have made contact to express their feelings to the news that the Foundation was to suspend its Operations.

It is testament to your support that the few days of suspension of operations, may go into the Guinness Book of Records and the shortest on record. From here we must forge on with the fight on Terra and ‘Not Back Down’ Thank You! Bob Williamson.

Bob
We were very surprised to receive your email re suspending operations of the Greenhouse Neutral Foundation. What are you going to do with yourself now? We didn’t realise that it was costing you so much, what a nightmare!! – AC – France

Dear Bob–so terribly sorry about this! We were looking forward to working
with you and continuing your good work. In addition to consulting, I also
have a Safari business and see that the impact of the down economy is worse
this year than even last. Perhaps funding opportunities will improve in
the not too distant future. – LR – Africa

Hi Bob,
I’m terribly sorry to hear that you had to suspend your GNF operations.
Your work is what I’ve found the most interesting of this kind on internet ever.
And always the same problem: the FINANCING!!! – VM – France

Dear Bob, It was with a heavy heart that I read of the suspension of operations of Greenhouse Neutral Foundation. I know how hard you have worked to establish this great initiative and that you have put your heart and soul, as well as considerable financial resources into developing the Foundation and you have achieved so much. – JM – Australia

Hi Bob,
Sorry to hear this – you have done a great job. Pity we seem to be taking steps backwards again in Australia, when for a while there I thought we were actually moving forwards.

Good luck and I will look forward to hearing from you again sometime when it is all happening again, which no doubt it will.
Good work….brilliant. – LF – Australia

Hi Bob, I am very sorry you have had to stop production of this very valuable web site.
I have found it a very good source of information on environmental matters.
Thank you for your dedication and commitment
Best wishes for the future. – W- Australia

Hey Bob,
Very sorry to hear this news….
Hope some funding will become available in the future for you to continue
this important work.
Give my best to all and keep your chin up. – NS – Australia

Bob – Sorry to hear that, but you still have a voice and a presence which has to be reckon with in the future. I feel your pain, but I am sure you know how to use it and turn it into something beautiful. – MB – USA

Dear Bob,
I am so very sorry to hear this news! You have been doing such an incredible job and it grieves me to know that you have used up all your funds from Pot Recyclers. I bought your book late last year and have lent it to several people already and they all agree that you are a man of great wisdom and intelligence. I do hope you find a way to continue your amazing work in the near future. Our planet needs you!!!!!

With love and support, – SS – Australia
P.S. If I had some funds to offer your foundation, I would gladly do so.
Unfortunately, I am unemployed and am currently living off my savings while caring for my elderly Mother. I’m sorry!

Dear Bob,
I’m sorry to hear that you have to suspend your good work in this area but I hope it will lead to other good works. I wish you well for the future and applaud you for your contribution to making the world a better place.
Best wishes, – LL – Australia

Hey Bob
Very sad to hear all this. Perhaps the backlash against the Climate Change message has spread too widely. Shame really as I think the tide is turning again with people like the CSIRO Chair-person making strong statements again lately. It seems as though there has been such competition for research funding that too many scientists have stretched the truth just a little in order to get $s. This is a function of our competitive research grants system in all fields, including my own…………..
It seems that your ‘act locally’ idea with pot re-cycling was really the most effective way of contributing to the greenhouse deal. It seems to me that the actions will be left to those few who do know and understand – and act locally. – WA – Australia

Dear Bob,
I am sorry to hear of your financial difficulties. I do hope that you will soon have stability once more.

Thank you for your efforts regarding the environment. You have achieved much more than the vast majority of people.
Regards, – RC – Canada

Hello Bob,
I was very shocked to read this. Didn’t know there was even any risk this might happen. I can tell things are not okay, but don’t quite know what to say or do.

When you can take a moment, let me know if there is any way I can help. You are a good friend and great ally.
All the best, JT – USA

Bob,
……I don’t know what to say. “I’m sorry” doesn’t even come close.

I had a conversation once, on Twitter, with another compassionate friend. We started talking about money and the fact that neither of us had any. I told him, the only time I wish I had more money was when someone I cared about needed it, and I couldn’t do enough to help. That’s how I feel, now…..

Of course, your family has to come first. How can you help the planet, when you, yourself, are struggling? So, I understand your decision. But, I also understand your dedication to the Foundation. There must be something that can be done…..? I have no idea how much you’d need, to stay afloat. If you want to give me an estimate, maybe I could help you brainstorm. I’m sure there are others who would do the same.

Let me know what I can do, please.
Yours, – KC- USA

Sorry Bob
I saw on twitter you are suspending operations…… I am so sorry to hear, you have been an inspiration to us all. MG – USA

Dear Bob and Suzanne,
It was quite sad and disheartening to read your e mail on discontinuing GNF, but I would consider it as end of a stage instead of the end of a mission. I appreciate your cause and I understand your problems. I know it is virtually impossible to carry out activism without money and sponsorship like everything extracts a price.

But Bob,…..suppose you had no access to funding ever. Would you keep quite? Would you remain voiceless and silent?
No….. a big No…… would be your answer. So all you have to find out is….. how?
- SS- India

Bob I am so sad to read this but understand your situation. I hope that you are able to stay online and update us with some wonderful green titbits and stay engaged while you also seek to do what is necessary to take care of the family. Best wishes always and many thanks for all you do for the Earth. – DR – USA

Sorry to hear this Rob. My heartfelt thanks for the invaluable work you have done towards the cause and in writing the book. The concern and momentum must somehow be kept up, but each of us can only do so much without burning out. I hope you will keep the information side of the website and also the blog going. – BR – Australia

Bob,
I feel sad hearing your great passion has been thwarted in part. You and your family have made a great contribution and nothing will take away from that reality. You are the kind of people who will move on from this to new and perhaps even greater things. I send you my blessings.

Love and peace, – HM Australia

Bob – Brothers forever – DB – Taiwan

Donate a dollar to the Voice for Change

Aquatic ‘Dead Zones’ Contributing to Climate Change

Bob — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 21:19:23 +0000

As covered in the book ZERO Greenhouse Emissions ‘Since first recorded in 1970 ocean dead zones have been on a dramatic increase, doubling in each decade from recorded areas in the 90’s to 150 in 2003, some stretching 70,000 square kilometers. The United Nations reports over the following two years 2003–2005 estimates were of 200. In 2008 the reported figure was 417 worldwide.’

From Science Daily -The increased frequency and intensity of oxygen-deprived “dead zones” along the world’s coasts can negatively impact environmental conditions in far more than just local waters. In the March 12 edition of the journalScience, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science oceanographer Dr. Lou Codispoti explains that the increased amount of nitrous oxide (N2O) produced in low-oxygen (hypoxic) waters can elevate concentrations in the atmosphere, further exacerbating the impacts of global warming and contributing to ozone “holes” that cause an increase in our exposure to harmful UV radiation.

“As the volume of hypoxic waters move towards the sea surface and expands along our coasts, their ability to produce the greenhouse gas nitrous oxide increases,” explains Dr. Codispoti of the UMCES Horn Point Laboratory. “With low-oxygen waters currently producing about half of the ocean’s net nitrous oxide, we could see an additional significant atmospheric increase if these ‘dead zones’ continue to expand.”

Although present in minute concentrations in Earth’s atmosphere, nitrous oxide is a highly potent greenhouse gas and is becoming a key factor in stratospheric ozone destruction. For the past 400,000 years, changes in atmospheric N2O appear to have roughly paralleled changes in carbon dioxide CO2 and have had modest impacts on climate, but this may change. Just as human activities may be causing an unprecedented rise in the terrestrial N2O sources, marine N2O production may also rise substantially as a result of nutrient pollution, warming waters and ocean acidification. Because the marine environment is a net producer of N2O, much of this production will be lost to the atmosphere, thus further intensifying its climatic impact.

Increased N2O production occurs as dissolved oxygen levels decline. Under well-oxygenated conditions, microbes produce N2O at low rates. But at oxygen concentrations decrease to hypoxic levels, these waters can increase their production of N2O.

N2O production rates are particularly high in shallow suboxic and hypoxic waters because respiration and biological turnover rates are higher near the sunlit waters where phytoplankton produce the fuel for respiration.

When suboxic waters (oxygen essentially absent) occur at depths of less than 300 feet, the combination of high respiration rates, and the peculiarities of a process called denitrification can cause N2O production rates to be 10,000 times higher than the average for the open ocean. The future of marine N2O production depends critically on what will happen to the roughly ten percent of the ocean volume that is hypoxic and suboxic.

“Nitrous oxide data from many coastal zones that contain low oxygen waters are sparse, including Chesapeake Bay,” said Dr. Codispoti. “We should intensify our observations of the relationship between low oxygen concentrations and nitrous oxide in coastal waters.”