Thursday, November 25, 2010
Environmental news from California and beyond - Greywater Report looks at Wastewater's Potential
LA Times
Environment
Environmental news from California and beyond
Greywater Report looks at Wastewater's Potential
November 23, 2010
About 50% of the water used inside U.S. homes can be reused to irrigate landscapes and flush toilets, according to a greywater report released by the Oakland-based Pacific Institute last week. The Overview of Greywater Reuse examined the application of greywater systems worldwide to determine how the wastewater generated from sinks, baths, showers and clothes washers could be reused to reduce demand for more costly, high-quality drinking water.
"In California, there are a lot of reasons why we're looking for new and innovative water sources, including the legal restrictions that are coming to bear on our ability to move water around the state," said Juliet Christian-Smith, senior research associate at the Oakland-based research institute. "Climactic changes are occurring.... We are looking at a future with less of a natural reservoir in our snow in the Sierras and less water available from the Colorado River system."
In 2009, California modified its plumbing code to allow the reuse of certain types of gray water. The Pacific Institute was interested in examining how that change might affect the state and aid its development of a "soft path of water management."
"The 20th century was dominated by a paradigm of water supply and water extraction which focused on large-scale centralized resources like reservoirs, canals and pipelines that have been very successful at moving water and providing a higher standard of living but also come with social, environmental, energy and economic costs that weren't apparent from the beginning," said Christian-Smith. "As we move into the 21st century, we're starting to think about other options ... such as demand management -- conservation and efficiency -- and to look at new technologies that reuse water."
Australia is the most progressive country in terms of gray water policy. The government for this drought-prone continent not only promotes gray water reuse but provides monetary incentives for systems that recycle wastewater from showers and sinks to flush toilets and irrigate outdoor plants. Korea, Cyprus, Japan and Germany are also at the forefront of gray water technology implementation.
While there is no national policy in the U.S. regarding gray water, about 30 of the 50 states have some sort of gray water regulation, some of which require treatment of the wastewater before its reuse. Other states, including Arizona and California, use a landscape's soil as a natural filter to reduce potential contaminants.
According to the report, which cited a study conducted in Barcelona, Spain, this year, factors determining public acceptance of gray water include a perceived health risk, perceived cost, operation regime and environmental awareness.
The Overview of Greywater Reuse is a starting point, Christian-Smith said, to "a larger project that will start to outline supportive and protective instruments" for understanding the long-term impacts of gray water reuse.
LA Times Editorial: Don't Drill, Baby!
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-anwr-20101124,0,2720419.story
Los Angeles Times.com
Editorial
Don't drill, baby!
President Obama should designate the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as a national monument, ending the battle over oil exploration there.
November 24, 2010
Right about now in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, dozens of pregnant female polar bears are preparing to give birth in dens they dug into the snowdrifts last month, unaware that the fate of their home, and possibly their species, hinges on the price of gasoline. The Obama administration can and should change that.
Big Oil and its congressional allies have been mounting attempts to open the refuge to oil and gas development since the 1970s. There is no immediate danger that they'll succeed. Although the GOP electoral landslide this month ended Democratic control of the House and produced an incoming class of congressional freshman who are ardently pro-drilling, the Senate is still controlled by Democrats who oppose opening the refuge. More important, gas prices have been stable for more than a year. But should they spike — which is likely to happen if the economy significantly improves — the false perception that we could drill our way out of the problem would increase public support for opening the refuge, pressuring centrist Democrats to change their stance.
This is why half the members of the Senate (all of them Democrats except Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut) sent a letter to President Obama last week urging him to grant the "strongest possible" federal protection to the refuge, thus ending the perennial battles over drilling. Several environmental groups have joined in, urging Obama to designate the land as a national monument, which would prohibit most forms of development.
The refuge is a diverse and extremely fragile ecosystem that teems with animals, such as the Porcupine caribou and muskoxen, that would be seriously harmed by drilling activities. It is thought to be the most important onshore denning habitat for polar bears, a threatened species, in the United States. Oil development would bring road and pipeline construction, noise and pollution, and spills would be deadly to local wildlife. And drilling would have little impact on oil prices. The U.S. Energy Information Administration predicts that output from the refuge could reduce the world oil price by just 75 cents a barrel in 2025 (crude is currently trading at about $81 a barrel, and such a small decrease would be next to meaningless at the pump). Moreover, OPEC would be able to wipe out any savings simply by restricting its supplies. Oil companies would certainly profit from the opportunity to drill, but consumers probably would not.
A monument designation by Obama would most likely lead to a legal battle, because it's not clear whether federal lands available for state use in Alaska can be withdrawn without congressional approval. But that's a fight well worth having. The refuge is a threatened treasure that must be guarded.
Copyright © 2010, Los Angeles Times
Los Angeles Times.com
Editorial
Don't drill, baby!
President Obama should designate the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as a national monument, ending the battle over oil exploration there.
November 24, 2010
Right about now in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, dozens of pregnant female polar bears are preparing to give birth in dens they dug into the snowdrifts last month, unaware that the fate of their home, and possibly their species, hinges on the price of gasoline. The Obama administration can and should change that.
Big Oil and its congressional allies have been mounting attempts to open the refuge to oil and gas development since the 1970s. There is no immediate danger that they'll succeed. Although the GOP electoral landslide this month ended Democratic control of the House and produced an incoming class of congressional freshman who are ardently pro-drilling, the Senate is still controlled by Democrats who oppose opening the refuge. More important, gas prices have been stable for more than a year. But should they spike — which is likely to happen if the economy significantly improves — the false perception that we could drill our way out of the problem would increase public support for opening the refuge, pressuring centrist Democrats to change their stance.
This is why half the members of the Senate (all of them Democrats except Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut) sent a letter to President Obama last week urging him to grant the "strongest possible" federal protection to the refuge, thus ending the perennial battles over drilling. Several environmental groups have joined in, urging Obama to designate the land as a national monument, which would prohibit most forms of development.
The refuge is a diverse and extremely fragile ecosystem that teems with animals, such as the Porcupine caribou and muskoxen, that would be seriously harmed by drilling activities. It is thought to be the most important onshore denning habitat for polar bears, a threatened species, in the United States. Oil development would bring road and pipeline construction, noise and pollution, and spills would be deadly to local wildlife. And drilling would have little impact on oil prices. The U.S. Energy Information Administration predicts that output from the refuge could reduce the world oil price by just 75 cents a barrel in 2025 (crude is currently trading at about $81 a barrel, and such a small decrease would be next to meaningless at the pump). Moreover, OPEC would be able to wipe out any savings simply by restricting its supplies. Oil companies would certainly profit from the opportunity to drill, but consumers probably would not.
A monument designation by Obama would most likely lead to a legal battle, because it's not clear whether federal lands available for state use in Alaska can be withdrawn without congressional approval. But that's a fight well worth having. The refuge is a threatened treasure that must be guarded.
Copyright © 2010, Los Angeles Times
Friday, October 15, 2010
BBC: India's Global Warming Fears Floods in West Bengal Was This Caused by Global Warming?
Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1037114.stm
India's global warming fears: Floods in West Bengal
Was this caused by global warming?
By Jill McGivering in Delhi
In India, weather-related natural disasters already cause annual chaos.
Two months ago, whole regions of West Bengal disappeared under water - rescue workers had to use boats to give emergency help to more than 16 million affected people.
These were the worst floods for more than 20 years.
One of the problems is that these models are sometimes converted into scary stories which is something we shouldn't fall for
Dr RR Kelkar
Several factors were blamed - from silted riverbeds to mismanagement of resources. But could global warming also have played a part?
Journalist Nirmal Ghosh firmly believes global warming is going to cause far more chaos across India in the future.
"Global warming is going to make other small local environmental issues... seem like peanuts, because it is the big one which is going to come and completely change the face of the Earth.
"We're talking about mass migrations because of changing weather. That will have implications on politics. There are states in India which are fighting court cases over water," Mr Ghosh says.
Shrinking glaciers
As well as floods, India also suffers acute water shortages - earlier this year the western state of Rajasthan was struck by drought.
Nirmal Ghosh says the steady shrinking of Himalayan glaciers means the entire water system is being disrupted - global warming, he says, will cause even greater extremes.
Himalayas
The Himalayan glaciers are said to be shrinking
"Statistically, it is proven that the Himalayan glaciers are actually shrinking, and within 50 to 60 years they will virtually run out of producing the water levels that we are seeing now.
"This will cut down drastically the water available downstream, and in agricultural economies like the plains of UP (Uttar Pradesh) and Bihar, which are poor places to begin with. This is probably going to, over a short period of time, cause tremendous social upheaval," he says.
Not everyone agrees. Some scientists say the glaciers have been shrinking for decades and other factors are to blame.
Certainly, India has a long history of extreme weather patterns - and extremes of temperature across the continent. So is it too simplistic to blame global warming just because recent floods and droughts have been acute?
West blamed
Dr RR Kelkar, the director general of the Indian meteorological department, says it is too early for accurate data to be available yet.
"India is a tropical country, we must remember that. We are used to hot environments, we are used to heavy rains, we are used to cyclones, and really there is no clear statistically significant trend that things are going to change drastically.
Drought-hit Rajasthan
India suffers acute water shortages
"There is a need now for scientists to probe into them and find out how they will be affecting us - but one of the problems is that these models are sometimes converted into scary stories which is something we shouldn't fall for," Dr Kelkar says.
Scary stories or not, there are also concerns that knowledge being gathered about the impact of global warming is controlled by the West.
Scientists in the subcontinent do not always have the resources available to challenge data being compiled by developed countries.
Professor SK Sinha is a specialist at the water technology centre at the Pusa Institute. He accuses the West, and in particular the United States, of manipulating the debate.
"They make the rules. In fact, they even lure people from the developing countries to substantiate or to confirm that data, not necessarily always with very valid equipments and arguments," he says.
Cyclones, floods and droughts aren't in themselves new - but how much is global warming likely to worsen them, and how far will countries like India be able to influence the global debate?
India's global warming fears: Floods in West Bengal
Was this caused by global warming?
By Jill McGivering in Delhi
In India, weather-related natural disasters already cause annual chaos.
Two months ago, whole regions of West Bengal disappeared under water - rescue workers had to use boats to give emergency help to more than 16 million affected people.
These were the worst floods for more than 20 years.
One of the problems is that these models are sometimes converted into scary stories which is something we shouldn't fall for
Dr RR Kelkar
Several factors were blamed - from silted riverbeds to mismanagement of resources. But could global warming also have played a part?
Journalist Nirmal Ghosh firmly believes global warming is going to cause far more chaos across India in the future.
"Global warming is going to make other small local environmental issues... seem like peanuts, because it is the big one which is going to come and completely change the face of the Earth.
"We're talking about mass migrations because of changing weather. That will have implications on politics. There are states in India which are fighting court cases over water," Mr Ghosh says.
Shrinking glaciers
As well as floods, India also suffers acute water shortages - earlier this year the western state of Rajasthan was struck by drought.
Nirmal Ghosh says the steady shrinking of Himalayan glaciers means the entire water system is being disrupted - global warming, he says, will cause even greater extremes.
Himalayas
The Himalayan glaciers are said to be shrinking
"Statistically, it is proven that the Himalayan glaciers are actually shrinking, and within 50 to 60 years they will virtually run out of producing the water levels that we are seeing now.
"This will cut down drastically the water available downstream, and in agricultural economies like the plains of UP (Uttar Pradesh) and Bihar, which are poor places to begin with. This is probably going to, over a short period of time, cause tremendous social upheaval," he says.
Not everyone agrees. Some scientists say the glaciers have been shrinking for decades and other factors are to blame.
Certainly, India has a long history of extreme weather patterns - and extremes of temperature across the continent. So is it too simplistic to blame global warming just because recent floods and droughts have been acute?
West blamed
Dr RR Kelkar, the director general of the Indian meteorological department, says it is too early for accurate data to be available yet.
"India is a tropical country, we must remember that. We are used to hot environments, we are used to heavy rains, we are used to cyclones, and really there is no clear statistically significant trend that things are going to change drastically.
Drought-hit Rajasthan
India suffers acute water shortages
"There is a need now for scientists to probe into them and find out how they will be affecting us - but one of the problems is that these models are sometimes converted into scary stories which is something we shouldn't fall for," Dr Kelkar says.
Scary stories or not, there are also concerns that knowledge being gathered about the impact of global warming is controlled by the West.
Scientists in the subcontinent do not always have the resources available to challenge data being compiled by developed countries.
Professor SK Sinha is a specialist at the water technology centre at the Pusa Institute. He accuses the West, and in particular the United States, of manipulating the debate.
"They make the rules. In fact, they even lure people from the developing countries to substantiate or to confirm that data, not necessarily always with very valid equipments and arguments," he says.
Cyclones, floods and droughts aren't in themselves new - but how much is global warming likely to worsen them, and how far will countries like India be able to influence the global debate?
BBC Reports that Beer Technology Used to Monitor Water Quality in Water Treatment Plants.
From the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3753162.stm
Beer Technology used to check for diluted beer in kegs returned to breweries could soon be used to monitor water quality in water treatment plants.
A new technique developed by an Irish firm determines how "dirty" water is by analysing the colours in the light reflected from it.
The AquaPod could save money by cutting the chemicals needed to clean up water.
A similar device used in breweries is important because returned beer kegs can result in refunds for publicans.
It is put in a box, acts like a web server and can be controlled from an operator's desk
Eon O'Mongáin, Spectral Signatures
Breweries do not want to pay out for tap water that some unscrupulous landlord might have added to a barrel just to make its contents look greater than they really are.
In and out
Previously, examining if the beer inside was diluted or not would have required a painstaking chemical analysis of each sample.
But the Spectral Signatures instrument provided a quicker alternative that simply involved shining light on the dregs and measuring its spectral profile to decipher the contents.
Recently, the firm applied for a patent for a device it calls AquaPod, which is designed specifically to monitor water quality.
Its uses range from checking the incoming water quality at drinking water plants to examining the content of sewerage inflows or outflows.
The main advantage of having a remote instrument is that, regardless of how dirty the water is, the instrument will not be fouled up - a problem that can befall analytical instruments that need to be immersed in fluids.
Lower costs
The AquaPod is mounted above the water. It determines what is in the water by measuring the colour spectrum of light reflected.
Water molecules, H2O, show a peak in the spectrum in the infrared, just past where the eye can see.
This never changes, so the instrument is calibrated by the water molecules themselves. The change in the light due to other dissolved materials is seen by comparison with the water.
These materials include organic molecules, such as phosphates, nitrates and proteins.
They all produce the same colour, which is why many liquids look brown. It is these dissolved materials that give, for example, beer and urine their brownish colour.
Aquapod also looks for suspended matter in the water, which can be anything from sand and dirt to faeces. This material scatters the light and makes the water appear cloudy.
Measuring just how much dissolved and suspended material there is determines how dirty the water is and how much processing is required.
In water treatment plants, dirty water clogs up filters if there is too much suspended matter. Excess dissolved matter means the colour of the water will be brown and this colour needs to be removed to make it palatable.
This is done by adding chemicals such as aluminium or iron salts. Minimising the use of chemicals is better for the water drinkers and also for company costs. And knowing the colour of the incoming water and therefore the amount of dissolved material should cut these costs.
On trial
"AquaPod is essentially a laboratory spectrometer brought out into the open and made robust enough to keep working in all weathers," said Spectral Signatures director Dr Eon O'Mongáin.
"It is put in a box, acts like a web server and can be controlled from an operator's desk."
The company previously developed and patented a product called ChlorFlow which is used by the UK's Environment Agency for monitoring chlorophyll levels in English coastal waters.
A build-up of chlorophyll in the water, which is caused by too much nitrogen coming off the land, can kill off fish by depleting the oxygen in the water they need to breathe.
It can also lead to large, smelly algal blooms being deposited on beaches. It has been known for bulldozers to be called in to remove large piles of horrible gunge from a beach.
The accuracy of the AquaPod is now being tested against traditional sampling methods at a water treatment plant in Dublin.
Beer Technology used to check for diluted beer in kegs returned to breweries could soon be used to monitor water quality in water treatment plants.
A new technique developed by an Irish firm determines how "dirty" water is by analysing the colours in the light reflected from it.
The AquaPod could save money by cutting the chemicals needed to clean up water.
A similar device used in breweries is important because returned beer kegs can result in refunds for publicans.
It is put in a box, acts like a web server and can be controlled from an operator's desk
Eon O'Mongáin, Spectral Signatures
Breweries do not want to pay out for tap water that some unscrupulous landlord might have added to a barrel just to make its contents look greater than they really are.
In and out
Previously, examining if the beer inside was diluted or not would have required a painstaking chemical analysis of each sample.
But the Spectral Signatures instrument provided a quicker alternative that simply involved shining light on the dregs and measuring its spectral profile to decipher the contents.
Recently, the firm applied for a patent for a device it calls AquaPod, which is designed specifically to monitor water quality.
Its uses range from checking the incoming water quality at drinking water plants to examining the content of sewerage inflows or outflows.
The main advantage of having a remote instrument is that, regardless of how dirty the water is, the instrument will not be fouled up - a problem that can befall analytical instruments that need to be immersed in fluids.
Lower costs
The AquaPod is mounted above the water. It determines what is in the water by measuring the colour spectrum of light reflected.
Water molecules, H2O, show a peak in the spectrum in the infrared, just past where the eye can see.
This never changes, so the instrument is calibrated by the water molecules themselves. The change in the light due to other dissolved materials is seen by comparison with the water.
These materials include organic molecules, such as phosphates, nitrates and proteins.
They all produce the same colour, which is why many liquids look brown. It is these dissolved materials that give, for example, beer and urine their brownish colour.
Aquapod also looks for suspended matter in the water, which can be anything from sand and dirt to faeces. This material scatters the light and makes the water appear cloudy.
Measuring just how much dissolved and suspended material there is determines how dirty the water is and how much processing is required.
In water treatment plants, dirty water clogs up filters if there is too much suspended matter. Excess dissolved matter means the colour of the water will be brown and this colour needs to be removed to make it palatable.
This is done by adding chemicals such as aluminium or iron salts. Minimising the use of chemicals is better for the water drinkers and also for company costs. And knowing the colour of the incoming water and therefore the amount of dissolved material should cut these costs.
On trial
"AquaPod is essentially a laboratory spectrometer brought out into the open and made robust enough to keep working in all weathers," said Spectral Signatures director Dr Eon O'Mongáin.
"It is put in a box, acts like a web server and can be controlled from an operator's desk."
The company previously developed and patented a product called ChlorFlow which is used by the UK's Environment Agency for monitoring chlorophyll levels in English coastal waters.
A build-up of chlorophyll in the water, which is caused by too much nitrogen coming off the land, can kill off fish by depleting the oxygen in the water they need to breathe.
It can also lead to large, smelly algal blooms being deposited on beaches. It has been known for bulldozers to be called in to remove large piles of horrible gunge from a beach.
The accuracy of the AquaPod is now being tested against traditional sampling methods at a water treatment plant in Dublin.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
International Environmental Threats
International environmental threats today are more problematic than those in the past, as a consequence of growing industrialization in the developing world. This growth has been responsible for increasing the standard of living for many of the world’s poor. However, it has also been accompanied by a concomitant swelling of population. These two factors have had many negative effects on the environment, including global warming, increased pressure on natural resources - consisting of the destruction of forests and increased waste from mining – as well as a concomitant expansion of water pollution, air pollution, water scarcity and desertification.
For example, the forests of tropical Asia are among the most threatened on earth. The relative rates of tropical deforestation have been about twice as high in Asia (0.8–0.9% per year) than in either Latin America or Africa (0.4–0.5% per year). Southeast Asia has also suffered higher rates of industrial logging than the other major tropical regions across the world. Dam building for hydropower generation, to provide electricity to those who heretofore have not had access to power, has also caused massive problems.
Due to their impact on human health and the environment these international problems today are more than ever critical issues within the legal academy, the political branches of many governments and society in general. These problems however do not stop at the borders of individual states, which of course, do not coincide with natural systems. Rather, they are a transboundary phenomena. Indeed, one expert recently observed that “[i]t is now recognized that the planet faces a diverse and growing range of environmental challenges which can only be addressed through international co-operation. Acid rain, ozone depletion, climate change, loss of biodiversity, toxic and hazardous products and wastes, pollution of rivers and depletion of fresh water resources, are some of the issues which international law is being called upon to address.”
Transboundary environmental problems pose unique difficulties for international law and international legal institutions. Some of these environmental problems include the technical and/or scientific complexity of pollution, water scarcity and allocation; lack of information regarding how natural systems work; and the impact on future generations. Moreover, the transnational environmental problematic incorporates the involvement or overtones of various and dissimilar domestic laws, political regimes, cultural features, and diverse priorities. Finally, one question that confronts national Supreme Courts and international courts and tribunals is how to be disciplined enough to develop a normative framework for adjudicating underground and surface water problems.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Bin Laden blasts US for Climate Change
Here's something that both the Dems and Republicans can probably chuckle about together and possibly agree upon. Osama bin Laden is blaming the U.S. for Climate Change. Of course, the SOB leaves out India and China, as well as his family's construction company (The bin Laden Group). The latter is one of the largest builders of refineries in the world. Just, accept America, you can't do any good!
The ensuing article was published today in the Washington Post. The link is http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/29/AR2010012901463.html
Bin Laden blasts US for Climate Change
By LEE KEATH and SALAH NASRAWI
The Associated Press
Saturday, January 30, 2010; 2:24 AM
CAIRO -- Osama bin Laden sought to draw a wider public into his fight against the United States in a new message Friday, dropping his usual talk of religion and holy war and focusing instead on an unexpected topic: global warming.
The al-Qaida leader blamed the United States and other industrialized nations for climate change and said the only way to prevent disaster was to break the American economy, calling on the world to boycott U.S. goods and stop using the dollar.
"The effects of global warming have touched every continent. Drought and deserts are spreading, while from the other floods and hurricanes unseen before the previous decades have now become frequent," bin Laden said in the audiotape, aired on the Arab TV network Al-Jazeera.
The terror leader noted Washington's rejection of the Kyoto Protocol aimed at reducing greenhouse gases and painted the United States as in the thrall of major corporations that he said "are the true criminals against the global climate" and are to blame for the global economic crisis, driving "tens of millions into poverty and unemployment."
Bin Laden and other al-Qaida leaders have mentioned global warming and struck an anti-globalization tone in previous tapes and videos. But the latest was the first message by bin Laden solely dedicated to the topic. It was also nearly entirely empty of the Islamic militant rhetoric that usually fills his declarations.
The change in rhetoric aims to give al-Qaida's message an appeal beyond hardcore Islamic militants, said Evan Kohlmann, of globalterroralert.com, a private, U.S.-based terrorism analysis group.
ad_icon
"It's a bridge issue," Kohlmann said. "They are looking to appeal to people who don't necessarily love al-Qaida but who are angry at the U.S. and the West, to galvanize them against the West" and make them more receptive to "alternative solutions like adopting violence for the cause."
"If you're looking to draw people who are disenchanted or disillusioned, what better issue to use than global warming," he said. While the focus on climate may be new, the tactic itself is not, he said: Al-Qaida used issues like the abuse of prisoners by U.S. soldiers at Abu Ghraib in Iraq and the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay to reach out to Muslims who might not be drawn to al-Qaida's ideology but are angry over the injustices.
Bin Laden "looks to see the issues that are the most cogent and more likely to get popular support," Kohlmann said.
The al-Qaida leader's call for an economic boycott helps in the appeal - providing a nonviolent way to participate in opposing the United States.
"People of the world, it's not right for the burden to be left on the mujahedeen (holy warriors) in an issue that causes harm to everyone," he said. "Boycott them to save yourselves and your possessions and your children from climate change and to live proud and free."
Al-Jazeera aired excerpts of the message and posted a transcript on its Web site. The tape's authenticity could not be independently confirmed, but the voice resembled that of bin Laden on messages known to be from him. The new message comes after a bin Laden tape released last week in which he endorsed a failed attempt to blow up an American airliner on Christmas Day.
Maybe the Supreme Court's decision in United Citizens v FEC, the 2010 decision that stands for the proposition that corporations have unfettered right to spend as much money as they want to "express" their free speech, and influence politics, will nopw give bin Laden the opportunity to influence U.S. politics.
The ensuing article was published today in the Washington Post. The link is http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/29/AR2010012901463.html
Bin Laden blasts US for Climate Change
By LEE KEATH and SALAH NASRAWI
The Associated Press
Saturday, January 30, 2010; 2:24 AM
CAIRO -- Osama bin Laden sought to draw a wider public into his fight against the United States in a new message Friday, dropping his usual talk of religion and holy war and focusing instead on an unexpected topic: global warming.
The al-Qaida leader blamed the United States and other industrialized nations for climate change and said the only way to prevent disaster was to break the American economy, calling on the world to boycott U.S. goods and stop using the dollar.
"The effects of global warming have touched every continent. Drought and deserts are spreading, while from the other floods and hurricanes unseen before the previous decades have now become frequent," bin Laden said in the audiotape, aired on the Arab TV network Al-Jazeera.
The terror leader noted Washington's rejection of the Kyoto Protocol aimed at reducing greenhouse gases and painted the United States as in the thrall of major corporations that he said "are the true criminals against the global climate" and are to blame for the global economic crisis, driving "tens of millions into poverty and unemployment."
Bin Laden and other al-Qaida leaders have mentioned global warming and struck an anti-globalization tone in previous tapes and videos. But the latest was the first message by bin Laden solely dedicated to the topic. It was also nearly entirely empty of the Islamic militant rhetoric that usually fills his declarations.
The change in rhetoric aims to give al-Qaida's message an appeal beyond hardcore Islamic militants, said Evan Kohlmann, of globalterroralert.com, a private, U.S.-based terrorism analysis group.
ad_icon
"It's a bridge issue," Kohlmann said. "They are looking to appeal to people who don't necessarily love al-Qaida but who are angry at the U.S. and the West, to galvanize them against the West" and make them more receptive to "alternative solutions like adopting violence for the cause."
"If you're looking to draw people who are disenchanted or disillusioned, what better issue to use than global warming," he said. While the focus on climate may be new, the tactic itself is not, he said: Al-Qaida used issues like the abuse of prisoners by U.S. soldiers at Abu Ghraib in Iraq and the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay to reach out to Muslims who might not be drawn to al-Qaida's ideology but are angry over the injustices.
Bin Laden "looks to see the issues that are the most cogent and more likely to get popular support," Kohlmann said.
The al-Qaida leader's call for an economic boycott helps in the appeal - providing a nonviolent way to participate in opposing the United States.
"People of the world, it's not right for the burden to be left on the mujahedeen (holy warriors) in an issue that causes harm to everyone," he said. "Boycott them to save yourselves and your possessions and your children from climate change and to live proud and free."
Al-Jazeera aired excerpts of the message and posted a transcript on its Web site. The tape's authenticity could not be independently confirmed, but the voice resembled that of bin Laden on messages known to be from him. The new message comes after a bin Laden tape released last week in which he endorsed a failed attempt to blow up an American airliner on Christmas Day.
Maybe the Supreme Court's decision in United Citizens v FEC, the 2010 decision that stands for the proposition that corporations have unfettered right to spend as much money as they want to "express" their free speech, and influence politics, will nopw give bin Laden the opportunity to influence U.S. politics.
Rights to Drinking Water
In 1992 Stephen McCaffrey authored a seminal article proposing a human right to water. In the intervening years a stream of scholarship affirming the right has followed McCaffrey’s lead. Today, the existence of a human right to water is seldom challenged and it now appears to be well rooted in international human rights law. Nevertheless, to date there has been little to no scholarship about what the practical contours of the right should be.
If legal tools are to benefit the world’s poor and disenfranchised they cannot be void due to the impossibility of implementation. This is the problem with the purported human right to water. It is quixotic. International lawyers then must ferret out the means to provide those who have little or no access to potable water and proper sanitation with a suite of meaningful and workable legal options.
A. The Dilemma with the Right
There are two fundamental problems with the “right”. First it is unenforceable. Indeed, it is axiomatic that there can be no right without a remedy. Moreover, as Joseph Vining has observed, “[t]hat which evokes no sense of obligation is not law. It is only the appearance of law . . . .” Thus, the putative right is of little help or solace for those who have no access to potable water or the millions who die annually due to its privation.
Second, the rights scholars do not address how the issue of privatization of water utilities, especially the failure of corporate privatization and the comodification of water, should fall within the penumbra of the right. Indeed, these issues have yet to be addressed, leaving this area of the law unsettled and crammed with practical pitfalls.
A. The Enormity of the Problem
“Safe drinking water, sanitation and good hygiene are fundamental to health, survival, growth and development.” Accordingly, the World Health Organization (“WHO”) recently observed that “[s]afe drinking water and basic sanitation are so obviously essential to health that they risk being taken for granted.” Unless people gain access to sources of drinking water that are clean, safe and reliable “[e]fforts to prevent death from diarrhea or to reduce the burden of such diseases as ascaris, dracunculiasis, hookworm, schistosomiasis and trachoma are doomed to failure . . . .”
The problem is so pervasive that former South African President Thabo Mbeki recently asserted that “[w]e have a duty to fight against domestic and global apartheid in terms of access to water.” Indeed, the United Nations recently declared that “[o]vercoming the crisis in water and sanitation is one of the great human development challenges of the early 21st century. [In addition, s]uccess in addressing that challenge through a concerted national and international response would act as a catalyst for progress in public health . . . .”
Unfortunately, the average person in the developing world will not realize the universal availability of faucets or water piping at home “in the short – or even medium term.” Consequently, these people will be bereft of safe water for the foreseeable future. Of course, the burdens of polluted water, lack of access to potable water, as well as basic sanitation falls on the poor. Not only are they much “less likely to have access to safe water and sanitation, but they are also less likely to have the financial and human resources to manage the impact of this deprivation.”
Additionally, the poor are treated less equitably because the laws and policies of many states offer scant protection for the vulnerable. Even where these laws are on the books, they are seldom enforced. The rural poor also have little or no access to the political process, and comprise “[s]ome 80% of those who have no access to improved sources of drinking water.” Indeed, in 2002 the World Health Organization (“WHO”) estimated that more than 1.1 billion people worldwide lack clean drinking water and that “2.6 billion people have no sanitation . . . .” WHO also estimates that at least 1.8 million people die annually from diarrheal diseases (including cholera); with children below the age of five, mostly in developing countries, constituting 90% or 1.6 million of these deaths. This figure is five times the number of children who die annually from HIV/AIDS. Of the deaths caused by diarrhoeal disease, fully 88% are ascribed to unsafe water and deficient sanitation.
It is for these reasons that in 2003 WHO declared that the providing water to the peoples of the developing world was an urgent priority. Similarly, in 2000 the United Nations adopted the Millennium Development Goals. The Goals’ aim is to halve the number of people who do not have access to water by 2015. Nevertheless, without any financial support these programs have done little.
Finally, the “[l]ack of basic sanitation indirectly inhibits the learning abilities of millions of school-aged children who are infested with intestinal worms transmitted through inadequate sanitation facilities and poor hygiene.” It also adds to a higher rate of wasteful and unproductive time due to adult illness and the need to stay home taking care of children. If the world’s poor are to climb out of their morass, their status quo must change. One option for those who seek to aid these folk is privatization. There are of course problems with privatization. These include obstacles grounded in possible litigation before the World Trade Organization and national Supreme courts, as well as suspension in or from the practice of legal regimes, which provide water via public or privatized sources. In addition, those that use tanks to distribute water may also face actions to suspend these actions by corporate entities, who may claim that there rights are being infringed upon. These corporations may seek indemnification for loss of profits.
If legal tools are to benefit the world’s poor and disenfranchised they cannot be void due to the impossibility of implementation. This is the problem with the purported human right to water. It is quixotic. International lawyers then must ferret out the means to provide those who have little or no access to potable water and proper sanitation with a suite of meaningful and workable legal options.
A. The Dilemma with the Right
There are two fundamental problems with the “right”. First it is unenforceable. Indeed, it is axiomatic that there can be no right without a remedy. Moreover, as Joseph Vining has observed, “[t]hat which evokes no sense of obligation is not law. It is only the appearance of law . . . .” Thus, the putative right is of little help or solace for those who have no access to potable water or the millions who die annually due to its privation.
Second, the rights scholars do not address how the issue of privatization of water utilities, especially the failure of corporate privatization and the comodification of water, should fall within the penumbra of the right. Indeed, these issues have yet to be addressed, leaving this area of the law unsettled and crammed with practical pitfalls.
A. The Enormity of the Problem
“Safe drinking water, sanitation and good hygiene are fundamental to health, survival, growth and development.” Accordingly, the World Health Organization (“WHO”) recently observed that “[s]afe drinking water and basic sanitation are so obviously essential to health that they risk being taken for granted.” Unless people gain access to sources of drinking water that are clean, safe and reliable “[e]fforts to prevent death from diarrhea or to reduce the burden of such diseases as ascaris, dracunculiasis, hookworm, schistosomiasis and trachoma are doomed to failure . . . .”
The problem is so pervasive that former South African President Thabo Mbeki recently asserted that “[w]e have a duty to fight against domestic and global apartheid in terms of access to water.” Indeed, the United Nations recently declared that “[o]vercoming the crisis in water and sanitation is one of the great human development challenges of the early 21st century. [In addition, s]uccess in addressing that challenge through a concerted national and international response would act as a catalyst for progress in public health . . . .”
Unfortunately, the average person in the developing world will not realize the universal availability of faucets or water piping at home “in the short – or even medium term.” Consequently, these people will be bereft of safe water for the foreseeable future. Of course, the burdens of polluted water, lack of access to potable water, as well as basic sanitation falls on the poor. Not only are they much “less likely to have access to safe water and sanitation, but they are also less likely to have the financial and human resources to manage the impact of this deprivation.”
Additionally, the poor are treated less equitably because the laws and policies of many states offer scant protection for the vulnerable. Even where these laws are on the books, they are seldom enforced. The rural poor also have little or no access to the political process, and comprise “[s]ome 80% of those who have no access to improved sources of drinking water.” Indeed, in 2002 the World Health Organization (“WHO”) estimated that more than 1.1 billion people worldwide lack clean drinking water and that “2.6 billion people have no sanitation . . . .” WHO also estimates that at least 1.8 million people die annually from diarrheal diseases (including cholera); with children below the age of five, mostly in developing countries, constituting 90% or 1.6 million of these deaths. This figure is five times the number of children who die annually from HIV/AIDS. Of the deaths caused by diarrhoeal disease, fully 88% are ascribed to unsafe water and deficient sanitation.
It is for these reasons that in 2003 WHO declared that the providing water to the peoples of the developing world was an urgent priority. Similarly, in 2000 the United Nations adopted the Millennium Development Goals. The Goals’ aim is to halve the number of people who do not have access to water by 2015. Nevertheless, without any financial support these programs have done little.
Finally, the “[l]ack of basic sanitation indirectly inhibits the learning abilities of millions of school-aged children who are infested with intestinal worms transmitted through inadequate sanitation facilities and poor hygiene.” It also adds to a higher rate of wasteful and unproductive time due to adult illness and the need to stay home taking care of children. If the world’s poor are to climb out of their morass, their status quo must change. One option for those who seek to aid these folk is privatization. There are of course problems with privatization. These include obstacles grounded in possible litigation before the World Trade Organization and national Supreme courts, as well as suspension in or from the practice of legal regimes, which provide water via public or privatized sources. In addition, those that use tanks to distribute water may also face actions to suspend these actions by corporate entities, who may claim that there rights are being infringed upon. These corporations may seek indemnification for loss of profits.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)