2Celsius Network

Carlo Petrini. Climate and Food Change

2009-10-27T01:40:00.000-07:00

Carlo Petrini, president of Slow Food, speaks about climate change and food security, Central and Eastern Europe and socialism's heritage. Petrini focused on the manifesto's eighth point, knowledge transition for climate adaptation.

"This is the central point, the most important cultural and political point," he stated. "Virtuous practices already exist in the cultural biodiversity of the farmers of the world. They have extraordinary knowledge and there must be a dialog with official science, an honest, frank and sincere dialog as equals."

The manifesto is based upon the strong link between climate change and agriculture, drawing attention to the contribution to the problem by the industrial globalized food system and the potential to mitigate it by adapting to ecological and organic farming.

Indian scientist and activist Vandana Shiva, founder of NGO Navdanya and vice-president of Slow Food International, elaborated on each of the manifesto's nine points, providing a passionate summary of its principles. Shiva argues that as 35 percent of the climate change crisis comes from agriculture, therefore 35 percent of the solution also lies in farming and food and that we must look seriously at this vital component in analyses of climate change and discussions of possible solutions.

She argues that we must return to sustainable, local, bio-diverse systems that are better adapted to dealing with the cyclones and floods created by climate change, as well as contributing to cleaner air and water and better food.

Download the Manifesto on Climate Change and the Future of Food Security in five languages here, www.future-food.org

South Park Takes on Japanese Whaling

2009-10-27T01:28:00.001-07:00

The Japanese are on a mad hunt to kill all the world’s dolphins and whales in an all-new "South Park" titled, “Whale Whores,” premiering on Wednesday, October 28 at 10:00 p.m. on COMEDY CENTRAL.

Stan and his family are spending his birthday at the Denver Aquarium where they will get to swim with the dolphins. Things turn bloody when the Japanese attack, kill all the dolphins and ruin Stan’s big day. There seems to be no end to the senseless killing. Stan takes on the cause to save the dolphins from the Japanese.

You can see a preview from the episode below, and you can catch the whole thing when it premieres this Wednesday, October 28, 2009.

Climate Change Positives. Giddens’ Track Record

2009-10-25T01:05:00.000-07:00

Anthony Giddens says that all the books about climate change that he read proposed revolutionary solutions.

Although, with his latest book – The Politics of Climate Change, Polity Press 2009, the prestigious sociologist brings into the public sphere new concepts and original approaches climate policy or risk society, he records numerous positive steps. I propose a tour of this "track record" of climate change positives.

1. Except for Germany and Denmark, in the top league fighters against climate change there are those countries that have concerns related to their energy security and not necessarily to global warming.

They have reduced emissions and focused on energy efficiency policies for purely economic reasons.

Coupling of energy efficiency policies and climate change counteraction is a good lesson to follow, despite criticism of radical environmentalists. Obama, during the election campaign, perfectly understood the energy security/climate change action binomial.

2. Hence, continuity of climate policies is affected by the left-right political spectrum.

Until now, effective policies have been conducted, in general, by regimes of the center-left.

The Scandinavian countries are an example of continuous application of such policies and they invariably had center-left governments.

However, climate policies must be consensual and the result of agreements, in principle, between absolutely all political parties.

3. A tool that operates effectively via coercive force of the state is the emission tax. Carbon should have a price – from here goes climate policies. The great advantage of taxes compared to other climate policy lies in the fact that the imposition is universal and compulsory. To the extent that taxations are reconciled with social equity (the poor are the hardest hit by tax charges), taxes are the optimal climate policy making. The European Trading Scheme, the EU carbon market solution, was eventually embraced only because Member States could not agree on carbon tax harmonization.

4. Subsidies for renewable energy is a fourth component of a climate policy's success. They give a stable base for investment in an era where gas prices and oil fluctuate.

5. Nuclear energy, many analysts assert, may be part of the energy mix of many countries, despite fierce opposition. Concerns related to use of nuclear energy are significant, however. Personally, I oppose nuclear for many reasons. But Anthony Giddens is a sociologist and applies mere statistics. For many developed countries, a high risk of not reaching their targets of reducing emissions without the use of energy generation in nuclear reactors should be considered.

6. Relocation of industries has made the Western manufacturing sector to steeply decline in the past two decades. The West is depending on the goods "made in China" or produced in other developing countries. Western carbon emissions would be thus much higher if production was not transferred to Eastern markets. Therefore, global equity in reducing carbon emissions shall be a key factor in Copenhagen.

“All governments face deep dilemmas in reconciling climate change and energy policy with sustaining popular support, especially in times of economic difficulty. […] In order to cope, governments will have to resort to a range of strategies while at the same time trying to foster a more widespread consciousness of the need for action. The habits and routines of everyday life stand in the way, but the key problem is the difficulty of getting people to accept that the risks are real and pressing”. (Giddens, 230)

Ride Planet Earth

2009-10-21T11:48:00.000-07:00

Kim Paul Nguyen is a 27 years old Australian and he is riding planet earth. Well, he is riding his bike “merely” from Brisbane, Australia to Copenhagen, so that would make about half of the globe. Kim’s professional background is in social work, he has been working in the child protection field for the past eight years, interspersed with a lot of traveling, some environmental volunteering and “a few too many hours watching Liverpool miss out on the title again”. He is also a documentary video maker, a cycling enthusiast and an environmentalist.

Even though at the time you are reading this blog post he is cycling somewhere in Europe, Kim had the kindness to answer 2C a few questions just to unveil the reasons that lie at the root of such a crazy and beautiful two-wheeled enterprise.

1. Did you get a lot of brotherly support from environmental NGOs in the countries that you've crossed?

I have received a lot of support from NGOs and more and more as I get closer and closer to Copenhagen. It started off with mainly Friends of the Earth Australia but over the course of the journey I've worked closely with Greenpeace, WWF and other local orgs. Its been brilliant really, learning about the work they are doing and receiving help with accommodation, good company and promoting the message of stopping climate change.

2. What about simple people? How did they react to your initiative?

Well, I wouldn't call them simple people but most of the people I've met and seen live in isolated parts of Asia, and they are usually farmers of some kind, or living and working in small villages. They have responded in all kinds of ways, with enthusiasm and excitement, shock and bewilderment, and very rarely aggression. But most people have been very supportive and I have been fortunate to have received amazing hospitality from people everywhere I've been. A place to stay, food, a friendly smile. But the language barrier has made it hard to discuss climate change. When I have had an interpreter with me the people have openly talked about the changing climate and its impacts but have often been unaware of the political process going on at meeting such as the COP15, and how they might effect them.

3. Did cyclists' communities express their solidarity? In what ways?

Yeah, cyclists have been great. I've cycled with a number of local people and meet many cyclists and they have been wonderful. Local cycling groups are arranging many of the Ride Planet Earth events on 6th Dec. They are often most interested in the details of my experiences. I am trying to help bring the cycling and environmental groups together and so far this has been working well. They have been working with me to publicise Ride Planet Earth which has climate change as its main focus.

4. Were the roads friendly with you and your crew? Could you rank the regions function of "friendliness towards cyclists"?

I am very used to crazy drivers, narrow roads and dicing with death cycling through Beijing, Jakarta or Istanbul. I always feel pretty safe on the road, although I probably shouldn't. Only a few times have cars driven close and caused me any trouble. These incidences have been in Australia and Europe, in Asia drivers expect something crazy to happen when they are driving so they drive slowly and generally dodge you.

5. Does your message have to get across governments or companies as well?

Of course the message needs to be heard by everyone. For change to come at the speed is needs to in order to avoid the worse of dangerous climate change government and industry must be involved and proactive. I think ordinary people can change their behaviour, this is a necessity, but part of that change must be to engage with their governments to make protection of our planet a priority. Even if business only listens to money they will have to change if they buyers decisions change and our governments pass laws that will regulate the carbon they can produce. It is all connected.

6. Is there a political conviction beyond your initiative? Do you also pledge for green jobs or against our evil consumerist behaviours?

I can't say I really understand this question. Yes, I have a strong political conviction behind this project, my actions, and the actions I am encouraging in others. I can't pledge for green jobs but I think this is the way forward, the green revolution. If government subsidises renewable energy and green jobs instead of subsidising fossil fuel production and consumption it will have positive environmental, social and economic impacts.

I think that sustainable development must be based on a reduction in the current levels of consumption. With climate change we consumers are the problem. When we start consuming less, and consuming smarter our planet will be safer.

7. Why do you think that a climate deal in Copenhagen this year is essential to combat runaway climate change?

The timeliness of the COP15 is why it is so important. The next 10 years will determine what path humanity takes. The one that will lead us to environmental and eventual social devastation, or the one that will lead to a healthy planet and a healthy society for future generations. We can't put it off any longer. It starts in Copenhagen. If we don't take action before 2020 the level of carbon in the atmosphere will be high enough to bring devastating effects to communities all over the planet.

8. Even though you are not going to cross the United Stated of America, probably you do know that the Climate Bill is debated in the Senate and its targets of CO2 emissions reduction are pretty weak. What would you say to the US senators? What would you say to President Obama, given that, most probably, there will be no U.S. Climate Bill before COP15?

I would say that we are all connected. Everything is connected. To act now is to improve our lives and the lives of our children and grandchildren. To look after the planet is to look after ourselves. The health of our planet is worth more than all the money in the world, it will bring happiness and safety and long life to us where money never could. Don't follow the money, follow your hearts and minds. We must act now before its too late and ensure that we stop polluting the atmosphere and start looking after our earth. Our children, our grandchildren, and their children will look back on how we took action when we needed to, how we overcame the greatest challenge of our own insatiable greed, and did something truly noble, preserved our beautiful world for them.

9. What is a bicycle? Is it just sports equipment? Is it leisure? Or is it a serious alternative, at least for urban transport.

I think it is clearly one of the most important sustainable, environmentally friendly, travel and transport options. We need to be looking for alternatives to fossil fuel based transport, oil driven, especially when it is unnecessary. The bicycle is one of the big options that we need to encourage, partly by building better infrastructure for cyclists. But it isn't just bikes, walking, taking public transport, skating, blading, all these forms of travel are preferred to driving a car alone. A bike can be used for recreation, or transport, or for both. whichever way bikes should be promoted for improving health, saving you money and saving the planet from unnecessary pollution.

10. Were the cities that you've already been through open to bicycle transport (bicycle lanes, racks etc.)?

Actually, unfortunately, very few were. I do think you can cycle in any city, and you usually be quicker on a bike, but only a few that I've seen have specific cycling lanes. It seems that places with only a small bike culture, like Australia, have less infrastructure for bikes and drivers are ruder. In most places in Asia drivers gave me a lot of space so I felt very safe.

11. What bike are you riding?

It’s a Vivente World Randonneur.

12. Are your preoccupations revolving around other environmental issues or merely climate change?

Again, it’s all connected. I think the important thing is that people need to feel a connection with the planet, and then they'll want to protect it. The environmental abuses that continue, such as deforestation, and pollution, cause local problems as bad or worse than what climate change does at a planetary scale. But for this project I couldn't focus on every issue, so I chose the one that is the most important, climate change.

13. How do you foresee the world in 2050 if average temperatures will increase with more than 2 degrees Celsius?

There will be major problems, with droughts, floods, storms, access to water, and climate refugees. I don't think the earth could cope and there would not be enough resources for everyone.

14. How's Eastern Europe so far?

Great. nearly everyone has been really happy to see us. In the cities we've connected with local people a lot, we've traveled with a Bulgarian man, a Romanian woman and a Serbian guy. I hope to come back to Romania next year, beautiful land, beautiful people.

Romania’s chance to gain the EU’s Agriculture Commissioner seat is lost by domestic power wringing

2009-10-16T12:09:00.000-07:00

At the EU level, Romania is not considered a serious candidate for the portfolio of the European Commissioner on Agriculture. Romania’s entire political class compromised the chances of small farmers to be represented by a Romanian commissioner at the EU’s Agriculture Commission. The lack of responsibility manifested in the past months by the Romanian Government and Parliament in this highly important issue and opportunity of the future is absolutely condemnable, reads an Eco Ruralis press release.

According to internal sources, Romania once had a good chance at securing EU's Agricultural portfolio,with several influential member states backing Romania. But now, after a long delayed nomination and apparent signalling from EU Commission head Jose Miguel Barroso, big supporters like France, Germany and Finland have switched their allegiance to more viable candidates from Ireland and Austria. Romania failed to see this opportunity and as a result the interests of the approximately 3 million small farmers in Romania, which represent over 50% of the total number of the small farmers in the EU will remain unrepresented.

The PD-L liberal and PSD socialist parties (the coalition that until 2 weeks ago formed the Romanian Government) as well as the parties in opposition, contributed to the loss in support for a Romanian EU Agriculture Commissioner. Romania’s politicians instead considered the presidential campaign and internal power wringing as being more important and thus demonstrated a total disregard for the country’s agricultural sector, which is one of the country’s most important sectors. The defective way in which the Romanian authorities have managed European funds so far further highlights and exacerbates this situation. The corruption in the Romanian administration only aided to a lack of confidence on the part of the European Commission to trust Romania with the responsibilities of coordinating the EU's Agricultural portfolio and the substantial budget that comes with it.

The way in which the Romanian authorities dealt with this lost opportunity shows the political classes’ incompetence. Despite the evident signals from Brussels which questioned Romania’s capacity to coordinate such an important portfolio and despite the pressures for Romania to submit on time its nominations for the post, the Romanian authorities instead preferred to work on other issues like the upcoming presidential campaign. During the last months the Romanian authorities had ample opportunities to gain the EU’s trust and the support of the member states. Instead, the scandalous and irresponsible fight for power in Bucharest made Romania a very weak candidate for this vital position. Mr. Dacian Ciolos was eventually nominated by the Romanian Government but this happened far too late and without the government even initiating any kind of negotiations with Barroso, the EC president and member states. While the country is currently inundated by propagandistic speeches from politicians who pretend to serve the national interest, the country’s farming sector is angered by the political realities and lost opportunities.

Eco Ruralis is a Romanian grassroots association made up of small farmers who practice organic and traditional farming based on environmentally conscious principles.

Florestania: Amazonian Social Development in the Heart of the Forest

2009-10-15T20:51:00.000-07:00

Building on the legacy of Chico Mendes’ socio-environmentalism, in the last twenty years his followers in the state of Acre have developed and implemented the most successful sustainable development strategy in the Amazon basin.

The pioneering work of the father and martyr of Brazil’s environmental movement has flourished in a series of innovative approaches guided by the concept of florestania, or forestinzenship, which brings together the expansion of citizenship rights with demands for better quality of life for the peoples of the Rainforest.

Development in the Amazonian region does not merely lie in laws and consultancy programs; “it presupposes a social pact, a permanent dialogue, that comprises all layers of the society in the region,” said Binho Marques, governor of the Brazilian state of Acre.

This type of developmental pattern is named Ecological Economic Zoning - EEZ. It is defined by FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) as a form of land use planning that takes into account all elements of the physic and biotic environment on the one hand and the socio-economic

environment on the other. It then matches both of them through multiple goal analysis, thereby providing a neutral tool for the various land users to arrive at a consensus on the optimal use or non-use of the land

The Acre developmental system is based on a strong social capital, assessment of environmental vulnerability, and an excellent educational system. “The main base of sustainability is education”, stresses Marques. The government of Acre has practically created a “digital jungle” of libraries, modern computers, and access to information and knowledge.

‘Ecosystem services’ is the economic concept that revolves around the development of Acre. “We are manufacturers for the forest,” stresses the governor, “an industrial park that takes good economic advantage of the forest’s resources functions as a mix of public and private investments.” The condom factories use natural rubber and enjoy successful exports, while a poultry processing plant involves a vast number of local households. Agro-forestry is at the center of both agricultural and environmental development of the small Brazilian state, giving as outcomes reforestation of the world’s most important carbon sink and sustainable exploitation of rubber and fruits.

As governments and environmental, scientific and business organizations prepare to launch the negotiations of a new global protocol to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in December, in Copenhagen, the governor of the state of Acre militates for a global deal to be sealed in the Danish capital. “We need our sustainable practices related to forest conservation to be internationally assessed and recognized in order to lead to a certification of our products and services.”

Following Chico Mendes’ heritage, Foster Brown, Senior Scientist, Woods Hole Research Center, expert on the Acre experience, spoke on the capacity building given to the indigenous people in the Amazon under the REDD mechanism. Their observances of the regional changes are extremely accurate and noteworthy for any scientist, even though they are not published in Science Magazine.

A UN Framework Convention on Climate Change’s program, REDD - Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation mechanism - addresses incentives for conservation in tropical forests, so it does not maximize the carbon sequestration potential of natural systems worldwide – nor their social and biodiversity benefits. The mechanism is an important part of the solution, and leaving conservation out of REDD would be a monumental missed opportunity. It now looks as if REDD+ is in place for the climate talks in Copenhagen this December. This is an important step in the right direction – for people, for biodiversity, and for climate.

Chico Mendes (1944 – 1988) was a Brazilian rubber tapper, unionist and environmental activist in the state of Acre. He fought to stop the burning and logging of the Amazon Rainforest to clear land for cattle ranching, and founded a national union of rubber tappers in an attempt to preserve their profession and the rainforest that it relied upon. He was murdered in 1988 by ranchers who opposed his activism.

Predatory Capitalism Causes Climate Change

2009-10-14T17:55:00.000-07:00

All crises, climate crisis included, have been created by “predatory capitalism”, stated John Perkins at the Green Festival in Washington, D.C, October 2009.

The root of all this, said the controversial author of “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man”, lies in the adolescent stance on competition that Americans find deeply embedded in their education: “be better”, “beat others”.

“It might be positive for our homeland security, however… Our homeland is the Earth.”
The world is witnessing the first global empire that was created not by military force, but by economic means and corporations. These latter ones, believes Perkins, are central to politics for they control the whole economy via lobbying and the media.

However, “corporations exist only because of us; we buy their products and we worship their leaders by printing on the covers of the magazines their bosses’ faces. But they use slave labor (…). Say ‘no’ to that! Say no to Nike shoes manufactured in Vietnam!”
It takes real consumer responsibility and a deep reform of politics and of government. “If we don’t buy their tennis shoes and their cars they are going to have to come around. Instead of Monsanto’s GMO’s and dirty crops of Chiquita or Kraft why not go organic in Africa and local elsewhere”, said the “Economic Hit Man”.

The best students in Economics are oriented towards entrepreneurship and they do not want follow a corporate career. “Who the hell would want to look like that guy with ridiculous hairdo and that repeats that cynical line on TV – ‘you’re fired!’ – Donald Trump? Who wants to look like this guy?” asked Perkins.

If we want to put an end to “corporatocracy” we will need a new rule for business: make profits – yes, but only if your work creates a better world. More than 200 years ago corporations, continued Perkins, could exist only if they served the public interest in USA. And that was capitalism too.

There are many examples of Latin-American countries that had brutal dictators and currently they turned to good democracies. “We don’t want foreign aid, they would cry out with Perkins’ words, we must give our peoples the opportunity to raise out of their bootstraps.”

What you can do?

Find your passion, advises Perkins. Join an organization that fights for good causes. “We must rise up, we are a democracy, so act democratically,” shouts Perkins. See good democratic examples such as Yes! Magazine or Dream Change!

Or as Perkins states in the Epilogue of “Confessions…”:

“(…) cut back on your oil consumption. In 1990, before we first invaded Iraq, we imported 8 million barrels of oil; by 2003 and the second invasion, this had increased more than 50 percent, to over 12 million barrels.' The next time you are tempted to go shopping, read a book instead, exercise, or meditate. Downsize your home, wardrobe, car, office, and most everything else in your life. Protest against "free" trade agreements and against companies that exploit desperate people in sweatshops or that pillage the environment.

I could tell you that there is great hope within the current system, that there is nothing inherently wrong with banks, corporations, and governments — or with the people who manage them — and that they certainly do not have to compose a corporatocracy. I could go into detail about how the problems confronting us today are not the result of malicious institutions; rather, they stem from fallacious concepts about economic development. The fault lies not in the institutions themselves, but in our perceptions of the manner in which they function and interact with one another, and of the role their managers play in that process.

(…)
I could enumerate the amazing opportunities we have available to us for creating a better world, right now: enough food and water for everyone; medicines to cure diseases and to prevent epidemics that needlessly plague millions of people today; transportation systems that can deliver life 's essentials to even the most remote corners of the planet; the ability to raise literacy levels and to provide Internet services that could make it possible for every person on the planet to communicate with every other person; tools for conflict resolution that could render wars obsolete; technologies that explore both the vastness of space and the most minute, subatomic energy, which could then be applied to developing more ecologic and efficient homes for everyone; sufficient resources to accomplish all of the above; and much more.” (Perkins, 222)

“We do not know where this movement is going to go, but we have faith,” closed Perkins in mystical manner. “We have faith in a sustainable, peaceful, and a just world for everyone!”

John Perkins recently launched his new book, “Hoodwinked”. Besides “Confessions…”, previous books by John Perkins include “Shapeshing”,” The World Is As You Dream It”, “Psychonavigation”, “The Stress-Free Habit”, and “Spirit of the Shuar”. To learn more about John, to find out where he is lecturing, to order his books, or to contact him, go to his Web site:

www.JohnPerkins.org

Perkins is also twittering under the I.D. of ‘Economichitman’.

WWF: Money woes threaten Romanian protected areas

2009-10-02T14:19:00.001-07:00

Brasov, Romania: Dwindling resources and bureaucratic hurdles are threatening to destroy Romania’s protected area system – home to some of Europe’s largest remaining natural forests.

The protected area system, which on paper covers 20 percent of Romania, also houses more than half of Europe’s populations of bears, wolves, and other large carnivores.

Despite these natural riches, salaries of many park rangers and other staff have not been paid for months, and telephone and internet connections are being cut as operational funds disappear.

Although the Romanian Government has committed to ensuring the protection of these lands, both as a member of the European Union and through its signature on several international agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, it has failed to stand by these pledges, citing fiscal difficulties.

“The Romanian government must take immediate action to address the crisis faced by the country’s protected areas and their tremendous natural wealth,” said Andreas Beckmann, Director of WWF’s Danube-Carpathian Programme. “Priorities should be setting up and properly financing a single national agency to oversee and manage the areas.”

Back to "paper parks"?

The protection afforded by the Romanian protected area network is impressive - at least on paper.

Significant support for protection activities has been financed through EU and various governmental and private funds, including the Dutch MATRA programme. An ongoing WWF programme supported by the MAVA Foundation has been providing significant training and support for protected area professionals in Romania and other parts of the Carpathian Mountains.

According to the Romanian legislation, Protected Area management can be subcontracted to institutions, companies or organizations that have the interest and resources to support active management and implementation of management plans.

Based on this legislation, in 2005 the Ministry of Environment subcontracted the National Forest Administration to manage most of the nation’s national and nature parks, including flagship areas such as Retezat, Rodna and Piatra Craiului National Parks, with no contribution to the management costs from the state budget.

The National Forest Administration provided funding to Protected Area administrations allowing for the management teams to function at a minimal capacity and carry out some management activities. Although the support provided was limited, it nevertheless was critically important for at least the basic functioning of the protected areas.

This system worked, even if not with maximum efficiency, until 2009 when the National Forest Administration began facing major financial difficulties.

As a result, many PA staff have not received salaries for months or are receiving salaries with very significant delays; office costs are not covered, leading to situations where PA staff have no access to telephone or internet service, and have major problems meeting basic costs.

Situation critical

The situation is now critical, WWF said.

Many of the PA staff are planning to leave or have left already, and there are no possibilities to hire new people. Work in previous years to build an effective protected area system in Romania is quickly unraveling.

The current state of Romania's protected area system is proving a liability not only for the future of the country's natural treasures but also for local development.

For example, many of the areas in Romania that have been designated as part of the EU's Natura 2000 network of specially protected sites often cover very large areas of 150,000-250,000 ha, including numerous communities and their administrative land. Approval of various local development projects is being held up by the lack of management plans and guidelines for the protected areas.

Although the Ministry of Environment has overall responsibility for protected areas, including Natura 2000 sites, there is very limited capacity within the Ministry to coordinate and support protected area management.

The previous government planned for and issued a governmental decision for the establishment of a National Agency for Protected Areas, with dedicated staff for PA related issues.

However, the present government has decided not to establish the agency, citing the financial crisis.

Unfortunately, even those funds that are available for nature protection are not being effectively used. More than €250 million in EU regional development funds have been allocated for Natura 2000 and Protected Areas.

But bureaucratic restrictions imposed largely by Romanian authorities have made it difficult if not impossible for institutions and organizations to access this support.

European and global treasures

Some 20 percent of Romanian territory is covered by one form of protected area or another, ranging from relatively strictly protected areas such as national parks to areas with fewer restrictions such as nature parks and biosphere reserves.

It also contains the globally important Carpathian Mountains and Danube Delta ecoregions.

This tremendous natural capital is of national and even European and global significance, and provides a host of ecosystem benefits, including food and fiber, growing opportunities for tourism and recreation as well as flood protection and carbon sequestration.

Romania's protected area system goes back to the early 20th century.

The first nature reserves were established in the 1920’s, followed by Retezat as the country's first national park in 1935. But few if any measures were taken for the management of protected areas in Romania until the mid 1990s, when the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), the global financing instrument for the Convention on Biological Diversity among other conventions, supported the establishment of the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve Administration.

In 1999-2000, with GEF support, the first national and nature park administrations were established and management plans developed and partly implemented for Retezat National Park, Piatra Craiului National Park as well as Vanatori Neamt Nature Park. GEF support continued and some financial resources were allocated from the National Forest Administration and other institutions, permitting the establishment of management teams for most of the national and nature parks by 2006.

Eastern European allowances reveal weakness of the EU carbon market

2009-09-27T19:43:00.000-07:00

Only in Poland and Estonia there will be extra 80 – 90 tons of CO2 emitted in the atmosphere in one year. The two countries won court challenges against the European Commission limits on carbon-dioxide emissions by energy and manufacturing companies.

This decision of the European Court of First Instance took the market by surprise, said Daniel Butler, carbon trader and Senior Consultant at the Czech based Wallich & Matthes. The market was down anyway and we expected a downward trend. However, this made the market to drop hard, it was the straw that broke the camel’s back. If early September 2009 a carbon certificate revolved around EUR 15, now it might get to EUR 8, argues Butler.

The European Court of First Instance in Luxembourg ruled in its Judgment that the European Commission has a restricted authority to review national plans for allocating CO2 permits in the EU emissions trading system, ETS – European Trading Scheme, the biggest greenhouse-gas market in the world today. The Commission set tough CO2 limits on Eastern European Member States.

The European Commission, however, is contemplating an appeal to the European Court of Justice.

More similar cases are pending from Hungary, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania and Romania.

The rulings may undermine a push to curb the supply of CO2 allowances in the EU market as six other nations in Eastern Europe demand looser limits. With the United Nations negotiating an accord to fight climate change, the Commission aims to make fossil fuels more expensive and turn the European emissions trading system into the cornerstone of a global market.

The Copenhagen deal in December does not look good from this perspective, believes Butler. USA and China seem to want to go separately and not link to a global market. I would not say that this is the end of the carbon market but it sure induces a lot of pessimism. At the moment we talk (September 25, 2008 a certificate is worth EUR 12.5). And that is not all: many carbon funds will close down.

Probably the extra tons of carbon will not affect the atmosphere too much as the European production market is very weak. Steel mills work at a little capacity, industrial centers are slow, there is an obvious economic slow down and that means less carbon, explains Butler.

In October 2008, as the financial crisis started to bite, a ‘rebellious’ group of EU Member States pressed for a deferment of the date at which EU’s plans for emissions targets were supposed to be accepted as binding. A group of Eastern European nations and Italy were gathered into a protest against emissions reduction. The leaders of the ‘revolt’ were the Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, and his Polish counterpart, Donald Tusk. Governments of Bulgaria, Hungary, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Slovakia followed them.

Global Impacts of a Warming Arctic Surpass Predictions

2009-09-01T20:08:00.000-07:00

Warming in the Arctic could lead to flooding affecting one quarter of the world’s population, substantial increases in greenhouse gas emissions from massive carbon pools, and extreme global weather changes, according to a new WWF report.

The Arctic Climate Feedbacks: Global Implications report, released today, outlines dire global consequences of a warming Arctic that are far worse than previous projections. The unprecedented peer-reviewed report brings together top climate scientists who have assessed the current science on arctic warming.

“What they found was a truly sobering picture,” said Dr. Martin Sommerkorn, senior climate change advisor for WWF’s Arctic programme. “What this report says is that a warming Arctic is much more than a local problem, it’s a global problem.”

“Simply put, if we do not keep the Arctic cold enough, people across the world will suffer the effects.”

The report shows that numerous Arctic climate feedbacks – negative effects prompted by the impacts of warming -- will make global climate change more severe than indicated by other recent projections, including those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2007 assessment.

The dramatic loss of sea ice resulting from the Arctic warming at about twice the rate of the rest of the world will influence atmospheric circulation and weather in the Arctic and beyond. This is projected to change temperature and precipitation patterns in Europe and North America, affecting agriculture, forestry and water supplies.

In addition, the Arctic’s frozen soils and wetlands store twice as much carbon as is held in the atmosphere. As warming in the Arctic continues, soils will increasingly thaw and release carbon into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide and methane, at significantly increased rates. Levels of atmospheric methane, a particularly potent greenhouse gas, have been increasing for the past two years, and it is suggested that the increase comes from warming arctic tundra.

In a first-of-its kind assessment incorporating the fate of the ice sheets of Greenland and West Antarctica into global sea level projections, the WWF report concludes that sea- levels will very likely rise by more than one meter by 2100 -- more than twice the amount given in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2007 assessment that had excluded the contribution of ice sheets from their projection. The associated flooding of coastal regions will affect more than a quarter of the world’s population.

“This report shows that it is urgently necessary to rein in greenhouse gas emissions while we still can,” Sommerkorn said. “If we allow the Arctic to get too warm, it is doubtful whether we will be able to keep these feedbacks under control.

WWF has joined with other NGOs to produce a model climate treaty for Copenhagen that gives the world a blueprint for achieving the kind of emissions cuts needed to likely avoid arctic feedbacks.

“We need to listen now to these signals from the Arctic, and take the necessary action in Copenhagen this December to get a deal that quickly and effectively limits greenhouse gas emissions,” said James Leape, director general of WWF International.

In December 2009, the governments of 191 countries will meet in Copenhagen, Denmark, for the final round of negotiations for a new global agreement on climate change. The first period of the current agreement, called the 'Kyoto Protocol', will end in three years, in December 2012. The negotiations in Copenhagen are supposed to approve a new legal framework for global climate action from 2013 onwards.

According to WWF, this framework must guarantee much deeper and more rapid emission cuts from industrialized countries, and financing to developing countries to enable them also to take climate action.

Environmental Journalism...

2009-05-09T01:45:00.000-07:00

Five years ago I had the chance, given by the Romanian Center for Independent Journalism, to carry out the first environmental journalism course. Every one labeled it "exotic" at the time, as environmental journalism was merely a theoretical twist for the Romanian media in 2005. "Interesting stuff, man, but get back to the real world," friends used to tell me with a tap on my shoulder. In five years we shall see offsprings of journalism materials that will consider environmental risk and report on green business, I used to reply. Three years after, almost all media set up green coverage, environmental pages or eco-events. Now it's a hype!

This course sought to instill an environmental facet of reporting for young Romanian journalists. The core of the lectures consisted of the analysis of global and local environmental issues with the tools and instruments of the reporter. Key concepts such as media effects, media events or media salience have been molded on environmental aspects of today's social and political life, enhancing a journalists' bias on sustainable development and imposing the "language of risk".

Here is a "schemata" of the course. For a detailed syllabus please contact me via e-mail.

1. Environment and Journalism. This lecture sought to shed a light on the complex relationship between the media system in a country and the management of indicators describing uncertainty that environmental journalism requires.

2. Flow and Framing of Environmental Information. The cyanide pollution disaster from Baia Mare was an excellent illustration that helped students observe PR and communication strategies of the companies, institutions, ngo's and mass media involved, as well as the international implications of such an incident.

3. Environmentalists and Their Communication. This lecture focused on Dieter Rucht's brilliant analysis of Greenpeace and Earth First!'s organisation and communication. A short presentation of an environmental national active network, Legambiente in Italy, concluded the lecture.

4. Reporting with an Environmental Bias. Sustainable Development. Media: an important actor that takes part in environmental conflicts, a watchdog that has to always raise the question "how risky?".

5. Access to Environmental Information. This discussion was concentrated on a thorough analysis of the Aarhus Convention and its implementation in Romania. Questions of environmental law, public international law and transparency were also taken into consideration. The Bystroe Canal case mirrored the above mentioned theory.

6. Environmental Press and Environmental Reporting in the Mainstream Media. Students were presented a few tools of quantitative and qualitative media research methods. The media coverage of Dracula Park in 2002 has been a relevant case study in this respect (Raul Cazan - "Environmental Issues Covered in the Romanian Press - The Case of Dracula Parc", MA Thesis, CEU, 2002). Agenda setting, framing and objectivity were the notions that we followed.

From SuperAlp! to SuperCarpatica!

2008-10-11T12:46:00.000-07:00

SuperAlp!2 consisted of a demonstrative crossing of the Alps using only sustainable means of transport: bike, train, bus, cableway, without forgetting the most eco-friendly and the natural way: walking. However, this project was more than just a journey across the Alps. The 2008 edition, put into practice by Marcella Morandini, wanted to make this crossing an occasion to discover the different existing networks, also at the local level, which contributed to the creation of a good future for the alpine nature and communities, in compliance with the principles of the Alpine Convention.

The Alpine Convention will support such sustainable projects in the Carpathian region. "If crossing the Alps, from Chambery in France via Switzerland and Austria, up to the Italian Dolomites, has been a project with an obvious success, you have my guarantee that, at least as a good practice and know-how this will be applied in the Carpathians probably next year," said the Secretary General of the Alpine Convention, Marco Onida.

"We are open to participate in such a project in the Carpathian mountains, and, inevitably, I suggest its name: SuperCarpatica!", added Onida. The aim was to discover and ask about the different networks, especially at the local level, to highlight the foundation for cooperation between alpine mountain communities. Moreover, the project was set to be an example of good practice which could be "exported" to other mountain areas rich in biodiversity and traditions such as Carpathians, concluded Onida.

Encouraging consumption of local products, presentation of eco-initiatives, in alpine towns or in tourist destinations, such as sustainable mass transport, generation of energy from biomass or protection of flora and fauna were the streng ths of the project.

Messner. Man in the Clouds

2008-10-11T11:53:00.000-07:00

Museum in the Clouds or Messner Mountain Museum is the highest expositional structure in the world, situated at 2181 metres altitude. One cannot access it but on mountain paths or on an old mountain road by a coach especially dedicated to the “ascension in the clouds”.
The great alpinist, activist and entrepreneur, Reinhold Messner, after a lifelong climbing on the 14 world’s 8000ers with no oxygen mask, is dedicating his energy to cultivating the image and culture of the mountain. He is voicing alpine communities in the Dolomites, is a promoter of sustainable tourism and founder of a museum structure with no precedent in the world.
At Firmiano Castle there is the “administrative” centre of his museums. At Juval the myths of the mountains are “hosted”, while in Ortles one can visit the museum of the ice worlds. In Brunico, the museum of the mountain peoples. On Monte Rite, the most shocking attraction – the museum of alpinism and of the rocks. As I was already contemplating the Carpathian variant of the SuperAlp, I wondered if his projects were worthy of being transposed in a Carpathian environment.
Then bigger questions came up. What is the culture of the mountain? How will we maintain
natural equilibria and life in the mountains? At the conclusion of the SuperAlp!2 – a project of the Alpine Convention, which consisted of sustainable crossing of the Alps from Chambery (France) to Belluno (Italy) with low carbon footprint means of transportation (hike, bike, train or bus) – the rough mountain man answered my questions with an “unusual kindness”, as some locals told me…

Are your projects exportable in the Carpathians?

Such museum related initiatives as well as support for the mountain peasants can be done in the Carpathians. However you must find someone to be willing of carrying out such job.
I for one cannot be that person simply because I do not have the power and the means to export my work all the way to the Carpathians in order to create from scratch such structures. I visited Bulgaria lately, the Balkan Mountains, and I noticed that poverty over there is way higher that it used to be in the South Tyrol or in the Dolomites 50 years back. I am aware that the economic differences with regards to the mountainous areas between Bulgaria and Romania are rather minimal.
There is though the possibility to grow a large sustainable tourism initiative, but you will be in need of financial means and a lot of energy. A museum structure such this one is just a drop of water in the sea. Nonetheless it is a structure that functions, it is beautiful and I am convinced that these kinds of museums will be more successful in the next two decades.

But why a museum in the clouds?
I am glad that you, the SuperAlp! guys ended your itinerary here in Monte Rite because you have the occasion to enjoy this Mountain Museum, a project that speculates already existing construction structures. The walls of the museum belong to an old fort from WWI, and there is nothing I have changed in terms of construction. Even the road that led you here is almost a century old. However, I gave this old structure content and I filled it with culture. The idea of a mountain museum in the Alps does not presuppose building of new structures because they might have a negative impact on the environment. A mountaineer can see that in the objects exhibited in the museum lies a great culture and history. There are old paintings that reveal alpine ascensions’ histories, ancient objects that belong to the alpinists, documents, photographs and geological data that speak the history of the alpine rocks.
The exhibitions comprise, in each room of the fort, one decade in the history of ascensions on the alpine peaks.

Isn’t it a perfect infrastructure needed for such a project? Whom these initiatives belong to?

The most important thing lies in the common will and determination of those who live or are linked with the mountain area; strength of a single man, whoever he may be, does not suffice. Even hiking freaks and nature lovers eventually need hotel rooms, good tourism structures, incentives to get people to walk in the mountains. We need open roads with a sufficient breadth as to allow access of a bus, but with restricted access for automobiles. Problems such as these are solvable if there is local will and initiative. This is the essential thing: locals and only locals must be involved in development structures of sustainable tourism development in order to sell their products to mountaineers that respect the mountain. I do believe that it is wrong and unproductive to blame politicians. Local is the key word, each must acknowledge her own responsibility.

Have you ever been in the Carpathians?

Yes, I have, unfortunately not in Romania, but in Tatra. Carpathians are much different than the Alps, it is a long range and well forested, much more than here. It is a big mountain chain and I am sure that extraordinary things can be done over there. However, you must carry them out!

Why does the alpine tourism suffer?

I see now that a lack of structures which can promote sustainable tourism in the last four decades made us enter in competition with the global tourism, and I am referring to the whole European continent. Today we compete with Africa, China, South America, with the whole globe. Nowadays, a three week trip to Nepal costs less than a little holiday trip from Frankfurt to Cortina d’Ampezzo with the same duration. Investments in alpine areas are essential as long as they aim at sustainable mountain tourism or mountain agriculture, if they are made in the spirit of cleanliness and respect for those places. Moreover, we should not be depending on any government. For the case here, the regional Government in Venice or the Italian Government in Rome are way too remote, they have no clue about what the mountain is. Same in Brussels, 90% of the politicians come from the plains and they simply cannot be well informed on what is happening in the mountains. Governments impose taxes or start over some programmes, nothing more. But what should governments do? How can mountain inhabitants be supported? Governments must allow people to live in the mountains as genuinely as they can. Tourism must be an incentive for people of the mountain, which, by their own old means of production maintain sustainability in the area. They must work in order to survive, to eat and drink, to make it through tough winters. The main condition is to be left alone.
The success of sustainable tourism in South Tyrol lies primarily in the fact that people realized that peasants, mountain producers, cannot be successful unless they become owners of small hotels. We are talking about very small hotels with few guest rooms where they serve typical products directly on the plate. And everything with no state aid whatsoever. Peasants are smarter than politicians; they understood that before the government.

Are you involved in such agro-tourism projects?

I own two small guesthouses which I leased to good administrators – otherwise I would not be here for the interview – that function very well in our south Tyrolean system. What I want most is to have the opportunity to work freely with no cap-laws coming from Bolzano, Rome or Brussels, which are almost imprisoning us. In the mountains the rules are pretty tight anyway. In mountain households there is no need of state aid nor state taxes. The model is valid since the Middle Ages. What I produce is enough for me and my family, the surplus will be sold to those who come in my “Agritour”. I do not sell a single bottle of wine on the market because the competition simply kills me. If a peasant sells his litre of milk to a dairy company at a certain price, this price will be quadrupled on the table of the city consumer. Thus, by producing and consuming everything in your own household, naturally – with respect to all hygiene norms, the peasant exits politics and the market, becomes his own master. If one has not got enough funds, household can unite in cooperatives of 20-30 entrepreneurial families that manage their selling points. All the time, however, they must keep a hawk’s eye on attracting tourists and on avoiding commercial companies that “chase” their products to re-sell them, thus decreasing quality. Cheese, produced and consumed in one household, is unique and has a way greater value and quality than labeled merchandise which is sold in the city.

In the end, why are you so preoccupied with sustainable mountain tourism?

I give a great deal of importance to the mountains ; mountains per se are not that important, but I add value by the things I do and I hope many others will do the same here and elsewhere.

Fourteen years now, I no longer climb the highest peaks of the world, I only practice some moderate alpinism – it is no longer the scope of my life, however I completely dedicated myself to promoting and deeply knowing the Alps, the Dolomites.

I am for the idea of creating a type of natural parks dedicated to those who truly love mountains and feel the urge to spend their holidays in the alpine areas. Mountain peasants have always climbed towards 2000 metres altitude to get their construction stones or wood for the winter.

There is thus a possibility to live in the mountains if we use what local knowledge and culture offers. We must turn to good account the alpine zones and forget the naïve idea we can bring back the wilderness in the mountains – in the Alps, at least. This is no longer possible.

But it is possible to show respect for the majesty of high zones and do not touch that, which in the past was not touched because it did not offer oil or wood. Up there, there was a place of those who wanted to get closer to the sun. Walking in the mountains does not mean roaming around, climbing and enjoying picturesque views. It is literature, art and philosophy. I want to give this culture’s substratum to the wanderer that comes from afar.

Translated from Italian

Third Industrial Revolution in Bucharest

2008-06-19T07:21:00.000-07:00

Jeremy Rifkin held a killer conference on his Third Industrial Revolution in Bucharest just before the European Climate Change Citizens' Agora. Had a nice conversation with him, me and my buddy, Mihai Stoica, about '68, even got an autograph on my 68 Magnum Photoalbum. Rifkin was leading at the time the March on the Pentagon and recognized Marc Riboud's famous shot of a hippie 'planting' flowers on the National Guard soldiers' rifles (see photo above). It was the cornerstone image of the peace movement. But let's stick to environmental issues.

Raul:Let’s talk about European reality and surpass a little the European Dream. I just came back from Brussels, there was the Green Week conference series and listened to a presentation held by Anders Wijkman. He is also approaching your holistic way of thinking, and, more importantly, he was also supported by Dimas. He mentioned the pressure on ecosystems and this would be more important than emissions and emissions trading. On the other hand Dimas talked about sustainable consumption and production, wich Europe kind of lacks now. It’s not such a rosy situation…

Jeremy Rifkin:It’s not, dreams is what you’d like to be, it’s what you want to be, but the good news is that at least if you begin thinking what you want to be, than you got to do it. It’s a gap between dreaming and making it happen.

R: What about the terms, how can we get there?

JR: I think that that’s why I was that tough about nuclear and coal because I think you got huge potential here, you got to move quickly with your renewables you got enough hydro here to do a lot, you got sun, wind, you got biomass and forestry waste, you got everything you need.
What Romania has to do is to get together the civil society and the business sector, the younger generation has to embrace the Third Revolution.
Romania has got 21 milion people, it’s a big elephant. Start moving the damn country.

R: Carbon trading, ETS. Linking ETS with the American trading scheme…

JR: let me say this about the carbon trading fact. I think that the carbon trading plan is part of the sollution, but if anyone thinks it’s the solution is kidding himself. It’s buying us time, it sets some standards. You know what the real value of carbon trading is? It’s a learning credit, what it actually allows people to do is understand that everytime I do something I affect the rainforest or other locations. I realise that what I do affects someone else. It’s actually a learning thing. People actually start to integrate into their mind that everything I do has an impact on everyone else. That’s actually the biggest benefit it has, to show that we are responsible for everyone else. In terms of the actual carbon trading it’s a small part of what we need to to, what we really need to do, we’ve got to get a tax on carbon, on feed grain, on meat production- The second major cause on global warming. No one talks about it, No 1 is buildings, No 3 is transportation, and No 2 is meat production. No one mentions that, no government leader.
39% of the grains in the world is feed grain for animals, a third of the land space and that’s a killer. We should talk about tax on feed grain, on meat production. So we are taxing cars and petrol, now we oughtta be taxing meat.

R: Green Hydrogen Initiative?

JR: It was set out when Romano Prodi was president, I set down with him and I said you have to make a hydrogen programme to store renewables. He put together two billion dollar programme wich is now moving to a joined technology initiative to the market, it will be 500 million Bruxelles and 7 billion private this year. The programme has a 26 technology platform of R&D engines for industry. I brought in business leaders in December to meet with president Barosso, and after that meeting I was encouraged by the commission to star having a conversation with the other platforms. What we did, we located 13 platforms of the 26 technology platforms that would lay the basis for a Third Industrial revolution, like road, rail, sustainable chemistry, computing, hydrogen, construction, etc. and we asked their chair persons would they join the technology working platform group and they all did. We had two long meetings and we are now creating a NASA airbus model with all these industry platforms that are now interfacing to create a world map. It’s very exciting.

R: GMO and biofuels?

JR: Big mistake. The opposition on GM food started in my office in 1982, we brought the first lawsuit that stopped the first release of a GMO in the environment. We’ve been fighting Monsanto for years. The GMO makes no sense. But there is a new generation of weed search called marker assisted selection, which I m in favour of. It’s a cutting edge of genomic revolution. What you don’t know is that the majority of companies like Monsanto do most of their research now on marker assisted selection. Why? Because GMO doesn’t work. It doesn’t give you much. Moreover, MAS shall not be patented, it’s gonna be like file sharing on the internet or local virtual networks.

Skeptically, on Food Crisis and More

2008-06-01T05:54:00.000-07:00

Surpassing my convictions (and preconceptions) I interviewed for Green Report "the Skeptical Environmentalist", Bjorn Lomborg, just a few days ago. This is how the discussion went on.

Raul Cazan: Given that I am old enough to remember communism, I feel a little bit ashamed when I find myself sustaining leftist environmental ideas or strategies. I lived in a European country, nowadays an EU Member State and, to a considerable extent, I experienced in the communist Romanian society malnutrition, scarcity of health and sanitation services, terrible education (I still remember freezing during classes in winter while in elementary school). Now, today’s environmental discourse may sound a little out of balance for an East-European… Romania, for one, is focusing on accelerated economic growth and is open to foreign direct investment. Environmental education, coverage of environmental issues and global warming were utterly ignored until the accession to the EU.

We should be starting this interview with the big issue that, these days, floods all the newswires: the Food crisis. In a certain way, it plays along your tune. I made some ad hoc content analysis lately and Environmental news largely switched to issues related to malnutrition in the Third World. Food scarcity is definitely newsworthy and in this case, CO2 cuts passed on the second place. It seems that the media have already found other priorities for their news.

Bjorn Lomborg: It is certainly true that there is a stark contrast in our concerns on different issues when we realize that yes, there is a food crisis, and we realize that maybe this is more important than many other worries that we have been talking about. And of course, one of the crucial points, such as the food crisis is, was entirely avoidable, in the sense that we know that the long term problem is that we have not invested not even nearly enough in research and development of food production.

Actually this was the fifth outcome, the fifth best investment in the Copenhagen Consensus that entangles the best strategies of the best investments to do in the world.

But perhaps, more importantly, we have seen exactly the kind of trade off we talked about. We talked about global warming and everybody wants to switch to, for instance, biofuel causing, a fair amount, about 12% of the US food production to be converted into fuel. Essentially, we are the first civilization, on a major scale, to burn its own food. And so, it is not surprising that this is one, it is important to stress, it is only one, but one of the main, recent, worldwide food shortage.

So it is very clear that there are priorities. If we over-focused on one thing, as we have done with biofuels, it means we end up under-focusing on other major issues, as for instance the food crisis. And there are many other problems in the world.

Raul Cazan: Indeed, malaria, HIV/AIDS or trade barriers are still a bit… retro.

Bjorn Lomborg: Exactly. One of the things that I wanted to point out is that you have to be honest: if you focus on something it means you focus less on other things and we have to ask ourselves if cutting carbon emissions is the best way to head the world forward. Unfortunately, although most people fail to believe so, most academic economic studies show that while climate change is indeed happening and it is a serious problem, the current way of dealing with it is actually a very expensive way of doing virtually no good even a hundred years from now.

Raul Cazan: George Monbiot in his latest book, Heat, with his leftist and anarchist touch – that I personally enjoy, talks about grand strategies and philosophical change in the way we relate to the Earth by criticizing the very foundation of our economic system: the Capital. Yet, on the other hand, policies that promote economic growth might actually be the solution for the developing countries. Or do they?

Bjorn Lomborg: George Monbiot focuses very much on climate change. The way he casts the problem is all about cutting carbon emissions right now. If you are going to do that, he is absolutely right, this is not something that we can do and maintain our current standard of living. He is also right when he says that this requires an effort akin to the World War II effort that will lead to a much slower and passive, negative growth. The problem I have with this sort of argument is not that he wants to cut carbon emissions right now. Two reasons for that.

One is that he is essentially advocating something that even, I would argue, the most ardent promoters of the viewpoint would see as remotely likely to happen. So, basically, even if we follow this advice, chances are that we are going to end up talking a lot, doing nothing about global warming and nothing about the other problems in the world – essentially the worst outcome of them all.

The second part is to say that if you really want to do something about climate change, don’t you want to make sure that it becomes a much better deal to cut carbon emissions and say “well, maybe we should focus on investments, research and development, maybe we want to make solar panels cheaper rather than put out a lot of solar panels. Right now Germans are paying 120 billion euros till 2035 for solar panels that if they all offer what Germans are expecting, they will yield one hour of global warming postponement by the end of the century. Therefore, they are paying 120 billion euros for nothing. So this is the big problem, there are people spending a lot of money doing virtually no good even a hundred years from now. The real investment will be in making much better solar panels so that by, say, 2050 there will be solar panels, improved and cheaper than fossil fuels. That way we would actually fix global warming because we can make an incentives’ structure for everyone, not just for the rich world, but also for the Chinese and the Indian to cut their emissions by switching to solar panels.

And the third part, which is the crucial discussion, that you also mentioned, is that George Monbiot is a green activist and he is making an argument for climate. However, there are many other issues in the world. He is a very nice guy, he undoubtedly wants to do good, but he is talking only about climate. Obviously there are many other problems in this world and shouldn’t we tackle them as well? For example malaria victims. Not only does malaria cause a million people to die each year, it also causes about a billion people to get infected with malaria and be debilitated several weeks, maybe a month, per year. This has a huge impact not only on the fact that a lot of people die, but also on economy, on the general robustness of the society. Many people, including George Monbiot, threat about the fact that global warming will make malaria slightly more prevalent by the end of the century. This is entirely true. But, of course, we can do much much more if we cared about the malaria victims by dealing with malaria problems right here, right now. What I am trying to point out is that for every time George Monbiot will say that one person dying of malaria had the same money been spent in the smartest possible way to deal with the disease, you could, for the same amount of money, have saved 36,000 people from dying from malaria.

Raul Cazan: You use the World Economic Forum's Environmental Sustainability Index to underline the principle deriving from your book, Cool It, that "higher income in general is correlated with higher environmental sustainability". The scholars that wrote the Index have an open interest in maintaining the status quo, haven’t they? I mean, I do not perceive a shift in the environmental paradigm, but the same polluting production with a greenwashing twist. So to speak, do we have to pollute a lot in order to reach environmental sustainability? Quite a paradox, here.

Bjorn Lomborg: First of all we have to realize that most countries do not pollute nearly as much in rich industrialization as we did in the long past. Most cities in the Western world, for instance London, at the turn of last century were much more polluted than most polluted cities in China today. And that is because they are using our technology, which is more environmentally conscious. The crucial question is to say “do really that people whose kids are dying from incurable infectious diseases, who do not have enough food to feed their children, and who do not get a proper education, care about the environment 50 to a hundred years from now?” Of course not! They care about their next meal. After these previously mentioned problems are solved they will care about environmental issues. And not because they are bad people, but because they have more important and immediate problems related to their very existence.

If we want to make sure that people in the third world and also, as you mentioned, in Eastern Europe, care as much about the environment as many as in the richest countries of the planet do, we have to make sure that they get as rich. So yes, it is important to realize that prosperity is the best way to ensure people care about the environment. This is not necessarily true, it seems, for global warming, but it stands for virtually all other environmental indicators. As people get richer they stop cutting down their forests, they start cleaning up their air, their rivers and lakes.

Raul Cazan: There are many claims of radical environmentalists that CO2 cuts are a global hoax, a mere hypocrisy. Even though emission cuts are reported gloriously by companies, in absolute numbers we consume more, that is we use more energy. “All that fuel is going to be burned, and it takes more and more”, says Monbiot, criticizing capitalism. A good example at hand is the country where I was born, Romania: giant energy generators, such as Electrabel or Enel, are investing Greenfield in coal burning plants. I’m talking here about a new EU member state, but I’m terrified about what is happening in China or India, noting their poor emission standards. Aren’t you concerned about that?

Bjorn Lomborg: No, I think that a tone averted of CO2, anywhere on the planet, is a tone averted. In that sense it is absolutely smart to say that if we want to cut tons of carbon we should definitely cut them where they are cheapest, in Romania and probably in China and India. But the main point, again, is to realize that people will note that we saved this much CO2, we improved our production processes and so forth. This is all good. However, we have reduced our carbon intensity in our economies in the last 200 years. It probably annually decreased about a percentage for the last two centuries. So it will not be surprising to see even more people reducing CO2. Actually this is what we should hope they would do. Just remember, this is all built-in to the business-as-usual scenario. This is what it will happen if nothing else is done. We see lots and lots of events from businesses around the world, from governments and building constructors; they al say, “we are cutting carbon emissions”. This is what we hoped it would happen just like it happened for the last 200 years. Today we want to cut emissions dramatically and see this as painting a wishful thinking picture. “Wouldn’t it be nice to cut carbon emissions dramatically?” But we will not! Unless we are willing to either accept dramatic costs, which I do not believe that anyone is keen to do, or to invest in R&D so that we could have smarter technologies at hand.

Raul Cazan: Global warming is the last hype, obviously the engine of the last worldwide hysteria. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall it is the only one that threatens Western comfort. If global warming were only a construct, do you think people would have found other “threats”, and create other fashionable trends? Maybe the prioritization of global problems that you propose is too… rational.

Bjorn Lomborg: There is no doubt that we were always flooded with events such as airplane crashes, tsunamis, disasters or earthquakes. We are naturally intrigued and perhaps secretly thrilled about reading about that. This is all part of the “world is going down” sort of mythology. In the 60s we worried about the overpopulation, in the 70s about running out of everything, in the 80s we thought acid rains would eradicate life on Earth. It is important to say that all had parts of arguments that were actually true. And just like that, global warming is true, but it is vastly overplayed, one sided and exaggerated. I am proposing a rational way to look at the world today. Rationality is not exactly what governments need. But most people would like to try be more rational, they would rather do something that really works rather than just make them feel good. It’s about being rational rather than fashionable.

Raul Cazan: Would you summarize, for Green Report, in a few words the size of the problem that climate change is? What is, in brief, the solution you propose? Please do also refer to the costs of dealing with it.

Bjorn Lomborg: Climate change will have a lot of impact, but, let us just remember, over the next hundred years. People will talk about sea levels rise of about 30 centimeters, which is the standard estimate of the UN Climate Panel. Obviously there will be some problems, but only over a century. Over the last 150 years though, sea levels rose about 30 centimeters. Yet I would defy if anyone really noticed. We must adapt to the long period ahead of us and slowly deal with it. It does not mean that the fight against global warming will be costless, but today’s implicated costs are much overstated. If you do the economic model, and that is what climate economists do, the costs of global warming will probably be one half a percentage point of the global GDP over the coming century. And this gives you a sense of proportion: half a percentage point is obviously a problem, but by no means a catastrophe. In 100 years we will be looking back and say “wow, global warming was the defining moment of the 21^st century.” The important thing, however, is that what we can do about global warming, in very round numbers, is to spend 3 to 5 percent of GDP to avoid part of the problem. And this is why global warming economic models show that dealing with climate change the way we do is a very bad idea. We need smarter ideas. We should invest in research and development. The Copenhagen Consensus states that for each dollar we invest in R&D we yield 60 dollars, whereas if we invest in Kyoto-style policies it is less than a dollar back on a dollar. That’s the difference between doing something really smart and something pretty stupid.

The bottom line is that many people will say you should not be a climate denier. It is absolutely true, one should not ignore what the best climatologists tell you. But likewise, you should not be an economics denier. You should not deny what the best economists are telling you that the way we deal with global warming today is an incredibly expensive way of doing little good even a hundred years from now. Let’s get smarter.

Raul Cazan: You present a cost-benefit analysis justification as to why we ought not to cut emissions significantly, but this presents more problems than it solves. The model you are using, developed by William Nordhaus of Yale University, has been criticized by scholars for exaggerating the costs of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by ignoring the economic potential for conversion to cleaner energy sources and evolution of technologies - in the model, cuts are just cuts. For example, rather than using a wind turbine, you have to switch the lights off. Technologies’ evolution, even though this is an uncertain indicator, play a big role in reducing CO2 emissions more effectively in the future, don’t they?

Bjorn Lomborg: It is true that the Nordhaus model does not include dramatic technological change; it would have been pretty difficult to put it into the model. But it assesses that we got better and better in cutting carbon emissions over the years. However, the new models include technological evolution and shows that investment in R&D is an incredibly much better strategy than just cutting carbon emissions.

Raul Cazan: Thank you.

Romania: Selective waste management? Pay me!

2007-10-22T05:43:00.000-07:00

Most Romanians deem it is worthless to put effort in selectively collecting waste products just to have a clean environment and request to be recompensed for doing so, an IMAS study shows.

The study revealed selective waste management is a low-profile issue on the Romanian public agenda. As for the individuals' willingness to separate waste collected from households, few of the interviewees answered in favor.

The fact very few are willing to make an effort for a clean environment proves Romanians do not associate their personal welfare with the environment they live in, Environment Minister Attila Korodi said. Problems regarding environment are deemed to concern only the public authorities. However, Romanians admit they would be motivated to select waste by a system of rewards.

The study shows women are more prone to comply with the selective waste management, while men are motivated more by the negative effects of waste products upon the environment. Youngsters are more responsive to financial stimuli while old people perceive selective waste management more as a duty.

The study was conducted on 1,449 people from 115 towns and villages. Based on the study, the environment ministry launched a campaign to inform the public on selective waste management; it will last until November 15.

EC report reveals large water saving potential in Europe

2007-09-03T06:38:00.000-07:00

Find below the Executive Summary of the study. For further details consult http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/quantity/scarcity_en.htm

Executive Summary

In recent years, a growing concern has been expressed throughout the EU regarding drought events and water scarcity. For an increasing number of EU Member States not limited anymore to Southern Europe as it was traditionally the case, the occurrence of seasonal or longer term droughts and water scarcity situations have become a noticeable reality in recent years.

In order to support the European Commission in the preparation of a Communication on
water scarcity and droughts, a study was commissioned to assess the EU water saving
potential.

The study addresses the savings that can by achieved via technical measures without major changes in human behaviour or production patterns. Furthermore, it looks towards instruments such as water pricing, drought management plans or labelling that can foster the implementation of these measures.

This report concentrates on the four main water users, namely public water supply (including households), agriculture, industry and tourism. It is based on a large literature review and data synthesis of existing studies and experiences of water savings in Europe but also outside Europe (e.g. Australia). This literature review is complemented by four detailed case studies in Spain, Greece, the UK and France that illustrate the feasibility of implementation and likely impacts of potential water savings measures.

The study has revealed high data gaps and data uncertainty in estimating today’s water abstraction and consumption, current applications of water saving technologies or future trends in water consumption and withdrawals. Thus, results presented in this report provide an order of magnitude of the water saving potential at EU level but detailed figures should be used with caution. In addition, a detailed analysis at river basin level would be necessary to take into account the regional specificities of water uses.

Key findings

Total water abstraction in the European Union (EU 27) amounts to about 247 000 million m³/year. On average, 44% of total water abstraction in EU is used for energy production, 24% for agriculture, 17% for public water supply and 15% for industry.

As regards public water supply (including households, public sector and small businesses), the reduction of leakage in water supply networks, water saving devices and more efficient household appliances have the potential for up to 50% water savings. These water saving technologies are easy to introduce and implement and they also have short payback periods, further enhancing their uptake possibilities. Applying the above mentioned measures would allow for a reduction in water consumption from 150 litres/person/day (average in the EU) to a low 80 litres/person/day. A similar reduction could be applied to public water supply, leading to an estimate of potential saving up to 33% of today’s abstraction.

In agriculture, water savings can be carried out with improvements in irrigation
infrastructure and technologies. Potential water savings resulting from improvements in the conveyance efficiency of irrigation systems ranges between 10 to 25% of their water withdrawals. Water savings resulting from improving application efficiency are estimated at 15% to 60% of water use. Additional water savings can be expected from changes in irrigation practices (30%), use of more drought-resistant crops (up to 50%) or reuse of treated sewage effluent (around 10%). The potential water savings in the irrigation sector would amount to 43% of the current agricultural volume abstracted.

Industries that use large amounts of water include the paper & pulp, textile, leather (tanning), oil and gas, chemical, pharmaceutical, food, energy, metal and mining sub-sectors. Based on the examples found the application of technical measures (e.g. changes in processes leading to less water demand, higher recycling rates or the use of rainwater) can lead to estimated savings between 15 and 90% with an global estimate up to 43% of today's water abstraction.

A particular sub-sector of industry is electricity production. Electricity production uses large quantities of water for abstracting fuel and for cooling purposes in thermoelectric power plants. However, as usually a large proportion of the water abstracted in the energy sector flows back to the local environment, the benefits of water saving in this sector is marginal; therefore the global estimate of the total EU water saving potential does not involve this sector.

The tourism sector can represent a key water user in some areas of Europe. Technical water saving measures for the tourism sector are similar to those for households. The sector has the potential to increase water use efficiency significantly by installing newer appliances in guest rooms, cafe areas, kitchens, etc. Since some of the measures identified in the report show a potential for a maximum of 80-90% savings, tourist accommodations could considerably reduce costs by buying more efficient appliances that only have payback periods of 3 years or less. In the case of irrigation of golf courses and sporting areas, more efficient irrigation techniques or rain water harvesting could provide additional savings up to 70%.

Clearly, the potential water saving volumes estimated are large and stress the potential for policy action at EU level.

Water savings will help addressing water scarcity and droughts. They will also deliver financial and economic benefits. Such benefits include delayed or avoided procurement of additional water supply infrastructures, reduction in sewage and wastewater treatment
capacity or reduced water bills. Further water saving can also bring environmental benefits beside reduced stress in a river basins such as reduced fertiliser use, reduce soil erosion and leaching. It should be noted however that “net” water savings leading to environmental improvements in the status of aquatic ecosystems will only be achieved if all water saved in one sector is not used elsewhere by the same or another sector! Last but not least, water savings will also bring additional ancillary benefits, for example by reducing energy consumption, electricity bills and thus CO2 emissions – thus contributing to climate change strategies and policy actions.

Eight licenses for alternative energy in 2006 Romania

2007-08-30T11:26:00.000-07:00

Romania’s power market regulator, National Authority for Energy Settlement (ANRE), issued last year eight licenses allowing electricity production from renewable sources, according to an ANRE report on 2006.

ANRE granted 52 licenses for the production, distribution and supplying of electricity in 2006. Some 12 licenses were granted for the production of electricity, out of which four were given for the production of electricity coming from fossil fuels. The rest were given for the production of electricity coming from renewable sources.

Last year, ANRE granted 11 licenses for the production of electricity, out of which six were granted for the production of electricity from renewable sources. The government, in June, changed rules for issuing energy licenses and increased five-fold the minimum amount an applicant needs to have, to 500,000 euros.

The new law approved by the government contributes to the strengthening of the business environment by raising standards regarding the viability of economic operators that can receive licenses to deliver electricity in order to protect potential clients. The law was modified so that new applicants receive similar treatment as current ones.

Renewable energy in Romania: 24.8m lei for 3 projects

2007-08-27T06:43:00.000-07:00

Romania's Environment Fund Administration (AFM) decided to grant for the first time 24.8 million lei for three projects regarding renewable energy and is now waiting for the approval of the European Commission, AFM president, Mihai Toti said.

AFM will finance a biomass project with 4.6 million lei, a project for producing electricity with 18.4 million lei and a micro-water plant project with 1.8 million lei. The projects have been approved by the Competition Council and will also be sent to Brussels for further approval.

AFM has also approved three projects for planting trees. The projects eye areas with problems such as Tulcea county, near the Black Sea and Timis county, in western Romania. These projects will receive 263,000 lei, 445,000 lei and 272,000 lei.

Environment Minister Attila Korodi, said at the beginning of August that one of the measures to encourage usage of the renewable energy potential would be to open a financing line for individuals.

Biogas - Biodiesel Synergy in North Western Romania

2007-08-17T03:41:00.000-07:00

Biogas Nord AG, Bielefeld has been commissioned to construct a larger biogas plant featuring 2.8 MW of electrical power.

The value of the order is approximately €3.5 million. The ordered biogas plant will be built in the Transylvanian region close to the county town of Oradea. “This order proves that we are successfully proceeding with the internationalization of Biogas Nord AG and that the trend towards larger biogas facilities is continuing”, explains, for Budapest Business Journal, the board director Dr. Holger Schmitz.

Through the operation of this biogas plant, the client would like to make use of synergy effects resulting from the construction of a biodiesel plant, which is also being planned. In so doing, the waste products resulting from the production of biodiesel, such as rapeseed pellets and glycerin, will be brought to the biogas plant as substrates. The warmth produced in addition to the generation of electricity at the biogas plant will then be used for the biodiesel plant.

The plant will also be flexibly designed so that corn silage and porcine liquid manure coming from agricultural operations from the surrounding area can be brought in. The plant consisting of three digesters, two second digesters and three storage containers will allow Biogas Nord to be a reference object for more than just the Romanian market.

“As a result of their site located in the region bordering Hungary, the interest of Hungarian investors will also be spurned”, declares Rainer Thiel, the person responsible for Eastern European marketing at Biogas Nord. “We're currently conducting intensive negotiations with potential customers in both countries.”

EU requires WEEE collection of 4kg per capita

2007-08-16T04:26:00.000-07:00

The European Union required Romania to collect four kilograms of electrical waste and electronic equipment (WEEE) per capita by the end of next year, in line with the Union’s legislation.

EU countries are collecting on average six kilograms WEEE per capita this year and Romania’s target is set at three kilograms per capita for 2007. Producers and dealers of electronic equipment have to finance WEEE recycling, according to European legislation.

However, in Romania there are only 215 WEEE collection centers and only 145 are functional. Romania’s Recycling Association announced it will start collect WEEE from July 1, marking the first action of its kind in the country.

Romania needs to invest 3.8 billion euros in waste management, according to the environment minister. Moreover, the country has committed itself to gradually reduce the amount of wastage products by 2016 while by 2013 it needs to reach the global recycling target set at 55 percent.

Governmental Decision on the management of tyres proposed

2007-08-16T04:17:00.000-07:00

On 18 July 2007 the Administration of Funds for Environment (Administratia Fondului pentru Mediu) drafted for the Romanian Government (Guvernul Romaniei) a project of Decision (Hotarare) that aims at regulating the management of tyres, under conditions that protect health and the environment. The draft provides that natural or legal persons may only place on the market new or remoulded tyres that are approved in accordance with the legislation in force. The provisions of the present decision do not apply to tyres intended for the initial equipping of vehicles within the field of application of Government Order no. 2406/2004 on end-of-use vehicles, with its subsequent amendments.

The project of Governmental Decision on management of tyres was drafted on 18 July 2007 and shall be adopted within a 90 day term. The draft is compliant with EU regulations and is providing that natural or legal persons introducing used tyres into Romanian territory are obliged use them in accordance with the criteria laid down in the notification document provided for in Council Regulation (EEC) no. 259/93 on the supervision and control of shipments of waste within, into and out of the European Community.
Natural or legal persons placing on the market new tyres, and natural or legal persons placing on the market remoulded tyres or used tyres intended for reuse or remoulding originating from outside of Romanian territory, are obliged to collect the used tyres, 80% of the quantity that they placed on the market during the previous year and ensure (Art. 5):
- reuse in accordance with the technical and operational safety conditions;
- remoulding in accordance with the conditions necessary for remoulding;
- recycling for operations to reinforce roads, dams, security barriers for roads, motorways, jetties, silos; or
- recovery.
The aforementioned obligations may be carried out through a transfer of responsibilities to a natural or legal person authorised by the Directorate for the Recycling of Materials within the Ministry of Economic and Financial Affairs (Departamentul pentru Reciclarea Materialelor din cadrul Ministerului Economiei si Finantelor). This person must:
- sort and store the used tyres collected separately in two categories: used tyres intended for reuse or remoulding and discarded used tyres.
- hand over the used tyres intended for reuse or remoulding to natural or legal persons who market used tyres intended for reuse or natural or legal persons who carry out remoulding;
- hand over discarded used tyres to natural or legal persons who carry out recovery activities under contract.
Natural or legal persons who carry out one or more of the activities of collection, remoulding and/or recovery of used tyres shall be obliged:
- to keep documented evidence on the quantity of used tyres collected, remoulded or recovered, where relevant;
- to retain the evidence stipulated above for a period of 3 years.
The objects of the legal proposal are:
- Tyres for motor vehicles with two or three wheels or similar (mopeds, motorcycles, motortrikes, quadbikes)
- Tyres for motor cars and other motor vehicles of a total maximum authorised weight of up to 3.5 tonnes, and for trailers.
- Tyres for motor vehicles of a total maximum authorised weight of over 3.5 tonnes, and for trailers and semi-trailers.
- Tyres for tractors, self-propelled works machines, agricultural machines and mobile non-road machines.
- Tyres for machines and equipment for construction and mining.

Impact

The company must be aware that obligations related to management of tyres differ function of the legal person’s use of tyres. Thus, businesses that market, following their placing on the market, new tyres, remoulded tyres and/or used tyres intended for reuse to end consumers, must obtain from the end consumer used tyres in the quantity in which they have been marketed and ensure adequate storage capacity for used tyres until the time of delivery. Legal persons placing on the market new tyres, remoulded tyres and/or used tyres intended for reuse or remoulding are obliged to report the following information to the Directorate for the Recycling of Materials within the Ministry of Economic and Financial Affairs by 15 March of each year, for the previous calendar year:
- the quantity of tyres placed on the market;
- the quantity of used tyres collected and handed over for reuse, recycling, remoulding or recovery, during the previous year.

Decision regarding arsenic and PFOS' marketing restrictions on public debate

2007-08-16T02:28:00.000-07:00

Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development (Ministerul Mediului si Dezvoltarii Durabile) opened a public debate in order to modify Annex 1 of the Government’s Decision (Hotararea Guvernului) no. 347/2003 regarding use and marketing restrictions for certain dangerous substances and chemical preparations. Proposals, suggestions and opinions regarding the modifications can be transmitted until 30 August 2007. The proposal is aiming at harmonizing national legislation with EU regulations regarding marketing restrictions of perfluorooctane sulfonates and, mainly, restrictions on the marketing and use of arsenic compounds.

The proposal of modification of Annex 1 of the Government’s Decision (Hotararea Guvernului) no. 347/2003 regarding use and marketing restrictions for certain dangerous substances and chemical preparations implements Directive 2006/122/EC amending for the 30th time Council Directive 76/769/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations (perfluorooctane sulfonates) and Directive 2006/139/EC amending Council Directive 76/769/EEC as regards restrictions on the marketing and use of arsenic compounds for the purpose of adapting its Annex I to technical progress.

1.Arsenic

Arsenic Compounds will not be placed on the market or used as substances and constituents of preparations intended for use to prevent the fouling by micro-organisms, plants or animals of:
- the hulls of boats,
- cages, floats, nets and any other appliances or equipment used for fish or shellfish farming,
- any totally or partly submerged appliances or equipment;
Moreover, arsenic will not be placed on the market or used as substances and constituents of preparations intended for use in the treatment of industrial waters, irrespective of their use. The compounds will not be used in the preservation of wood and, furthermore, wood so treated must not be placed
on the market.
By way of derogation, relating to the substances and preparations for the preservation of wood, the compounds may only be used in industrial installations using vacuum or pressure to impregnate wood if they are solutions of inorganic compounds of the copper, chromium, arsenic (CCA) type C and if
they are authorized according to EU regulations. Wood treated with CCA solutions in industrial installations may be placed on the market for professional and industrial use provided that the structural integrity of the wood is required for human or animal livestock safety and skin contact by the general public
during its service life is unlikely:
- as structural timber in public and agricultural buildings, office buildings, and industrial
premises,
- in bridges and bridgework,
- as constructional timber in freshwater areas and brackish waters e.g. jetties and bridges,
- as noise barriers,
- in avalanche control,
- in highway safety fencing and barriers,
- as debarked round conifer livestock fence posts,
- in earth retaining structures,
- as electric power transmission and telecommunications poles,
- as underground railway sleepers.

Without prejudice to the application of other Community and National provisions on the classification, packaging and labeling of dangerous substances and preparations, all treated wood placed on the market shall be individually labelled “For professional and industrial installation and use only. It contains arsenic”.

Treated wood previously referred to will not be used:
- in residential or domestic constructions, whatever the purpose,
- in any application where there is a risk of repeated skin contact,
- in marine waters,
- for agricultural purposes other than for livestock fence posts and structural uses,
- in any application where the treated wood may come into contact with intermediate or
finished products intended for human or animal consumption.

Wood treated with arsenic compounds or with CCA that was in use in the Community before 30 September 2007, or that was placed on the market in accordance with the rules of the modified Government’s Decision may remain in place and continue to be used until it reaches the end of its service life.

2.Perfluorooctane sulfonates

Perfluorooctane sulfonates (PFOS), reads Directive 2006/122/EC, are persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic to mammalian species and, therefore, indicate cause for concern.

The Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks, after a consultation, concluded that PFOS fulfill the criteria for classification as very persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic. PFOS also have a potential for long range environmental transport and have the potential to produce adverse effects and therefore fulfill the criteria for being considered as persistent organic pollutants under the Stockholm Convention.

The European Commission mentioned in its Directive 2006/122/EC that on-going critical uses of PFOS in the aviation industry, the semiconductor industry and the photographic industry, which appear to pose a risk to the environment or human health, if releases into the environment and workplace exposure are not minimized. With regard to fire-fighting foams, EC agrees that health and environmental risks of substitutes should be assessed before a final decision can be taken. EC also agrees with restricting the use of PFOS in the metal plating industry.

Thus, in order to protect health and the environment, it is therefore necessary that the placing on the market and the use of PFOS should be restricted. The Directive and subsequent national regulations are intended to cover the major part of the exposure risks. Other minor uses of PFOS do not seem to pose a risk and they are currently exempted.

Environment Minister Korodi targets 26sqm of green space per capita

2007-08-16T02:17:00.000-07:00

Romania's Environment Minister Attila Korodi will table a bill that would stipulate 26 square meters of green space per capita to reach the European average.

Korodi called for action on this front citing Bucharest where the green areas stand at less than ten square meters per capita. There will be negotiations with each city to find solutions as there are cases where spaces for parks have been overrun by construction works.

The government approved in June to allot 25 million lei from the environment fund to finance projects regarding green spaces this year.

Korodi is attending on Thursday and Friday the Peninsula festival in Targu Mures, central Romania, where he is trying to rise environmental awareness among young people through the Green Peninsula program.

Safety and environmental protection - big issues for Romanian SMEs

2007-08-16T02:06:00.000-07:00

Labor costs is the main problem for Romanian small and medium sized companies in adapting to the European Union acquis after joining the block, a study of the National Council for SMEs shows.

According to the study “100 days in Europe”, the technical regulations and standards regarding products is a problem for 31 percent of the participant companies. Some 24.11 percent of the companies have difficulties with competition rules, 23.6 percent with safety regulations, 21.9 percent with quality and safety of products, 21.73 with customer protection, 16.64 percent with environmental protection and 51.18 percent with intellectual property issues.

The study also shows that in 47 percent of the companies the acquis implementation process is ongoing while it has not started in more than 40 percent. Only 5.34 percent of the companies have succeeded in implementing the EU acquis.

Tourism companies encountered the most problems in adapting acquis regulations.

The study was conducted on a sample of 1,178 Romanian SMEs in April.

Romania to receive 270 million euros for environmental projects in 2007

2007-08-16T01:52:00.000-07:00

Romanian Environment Minister Attila Korodi announced he will contract 270 million euros through the Sectoral Operational Program (SOP) to use by 2010 on waste management and water quality projects.

Some 15 such projects will be financed of which ten are part of a priority program to build 90 water filtering units that will soak up 60 percent of the total 29.3 billion euros in SOP funds.

Ten of the water management projects will be sent to the European Commission for approval by the end of July and another 15 projects regarding waste management will be sent by September, as under EU regulations any program exceeding 25 million euros requires approval.

Next year the ministry plans to send another 25 projects for approval. Some 15 projects within the priority axis are worth 1.5 bilion euros while the other ten total 500 million euros. Other 12 projects regarding water management are being prepared with help from the World Bank.

Under the SOP for Environment Infrastructure, 4.5 billion euros are available for Romania during 2007-2013 plus state and local budget co-financing of 1 billion euros. European finance come from the European Fund for Regional Development and the Cohesion Fund.