Earth News:
* Premier's award to Sue Coleman Haseldine
* Uranium sales to Russia
* Ten most polluted sites
* 'Clean coal' and other greenhouse myths
* Earth's vital signs in bad shape
* Green Electricity Watch
* OceanaGold accused of strong-arm tactics in Philippines
* Tax-deductible carbon offsets
* Dirty energy threatens health of two billion

* Austrian nuclear report

------------------->

Premier's award to Sue Coleman Haseldine

Sue Coleman Haseldine, a Kokatha Mula Traditional Owner from the west coast of South Australia, has won the inaugural Premier's Award for excellence for indigenous leadership in natural resource management.

Sue was nominated for the award because of her work as an activist, environment protector and cultural teacher in her homelands, which include Yumbarra and Pureba Conservation Parks and Yellabinna Regional Reserve, part of the largest stretch of stunted mallee woodlands in the world.

She regularly leads trips of up to 600 kilometres into the bush to clean and maintain rock waterholes for native animals. Hosted by the Kokatha Mula people to raise awareness and share culture, the rock hole trips attract people from all over Australia.

Sue said: "People think there's nothing out there but there is. It's life, it's our church, our spirituality is out there, our school where we teach the children how to survive and how to care for each other. It's our pharmacy, our bush medicines are out there - it's all those things.

"We will keep going, keep fighting for the protection of our peoples' land and culture."

Earlier this year, the Kokatha Mula held a blockade to protect the Yumbarra Conservation Park from mining exploration activities.

More information:
* Kokatha Mula <http://kokathamula.auspics.org>
* Chain Reaction #100, pp.38-39, <www.foe.org.au/resources/chain-reaction>.
* Premier honours NRM and Landcare commitment, <www.ministers.sa.gov.au/news.php?id=2283>.

------------------->

Uranium sales to Russia

Proposed uranium sales to Russia will be controversial despite the outcome of the November 24 federal election. The following Greens resolution was 'negatived' due to Coalition and Labor opposition in the Senate on August 14:

That the Senate
    (a) notes:
    (i) growing concern about the deteriorating state of human rights, democracy, freedom of expression and the rights of civil society in the Russian Federation (Russia), particularly the use of force against peaceful demonstrators, the suppression of the democracy movement and the increasingly unfair Duma elections, as well as reports of the use of torture in prisons;
    (ii) the bashing and murder of sleeping activists protesting against the planned construction of an international uranium enrichment centre at the Angarsk uranium enrichment plant in Siberia;
    (iii) the 2005 Russian deal to sell uranium to Iran to fuel the Russian-built Bushehr nuclear plant, in spite of widespread fears about Iran's suspected nuclear weapons program; and
    (iv) the Government's negotiation of a proposed agreement to sell uranium to Russia, in spite of its close nuclear relationship with Iran; and
    (b) calls on the Government not to negotiate any agreement on the supply of uranium to Russia.

------------------->

Ten most polluted sites

The Blacksmith Institute has published its 2007 list of the world's top ten most polluted sites: Sumgayit, Azerbaijan; Linfen, China; Tianying, China; Sukinda, India; Vapi, India; La Oroya, Peru; Dzerzhinsk, Russia; Norilsk, Russia; Chernobyl, Ukraine; Kabwe, Zambia.

The sites, drawn from a 'dirty thirty' short list, include a chemical weapons centre, the Chernobyl nuclear power site, a coal industry hub, a lead production site, and two heavy metal mines. Many of the sites are in remote mountain areas and are linked to mining.

Consumers in rich countries are indirectly responsible for some of the pollution, the report notes, citing nickel and lead as examples.

The Blacksmith Institute is involved in remediating toxic sites in developing countries. It has offices in India, the US and Australia.

The report is posted at: <www.blacksmithinstitute.org/ten.php>

------------------->

'Clean coal' and other greenhouse myths

The Australia Institute published a report, 'Clean coal' and other greenhouse myths, in August. The report analyses the following 16 arguments:
1. Coal can be part of the solution. In reality, coal is the main problem, and curtailing its use is essential. There is no such thing as 'clean coal' at present, and there is a chance there will never be.
2. Carbon sequestration can be the centrepiece of policy. This technology is unproven and expensive.
3. Nuclear power can be the centrepiece of policy. This technology is expensive and risky and, if pursued, is unlikely to have any significant impact for 15-20 years.
4. Renewable energy is always benign. All forms of energy have advantages and disadvantages, and not all renewables are completely 'clean'.
5. Renewable energy can support our current level of energy use. In reality, we cannot make the transition to a renewable energy system without first relying on natural gas and greatly increasing the efficiency of energy use.
6. Renewable energy cannot provide baseload power. An electricity system that uses a mix of renewable technologies, with some gas-fired power and energy storage, could supply as much reliable baseload power as the current system.
7. Voluntary 'greenpower' schemes can make a difference. Experience shows that they have had little effect.
8. Buying carbon offsets is the same as actually reducing emissions. In fact, buying offsets is too often just a smokescreen for large emitters who intend to operate on a 'business as usual' basis.
9. We can plant enough trees to get us out of trouble. We can't.
10. We need to wait for new technology. In reality, if the technology is not already available, it will come too late.
11. The hydrogen economy will save the day. Energy is required to produce hydrogen, so the hydrogen economy would be only as greenhouse friendly as the energy used to manufacture it.
12. Expanding public transport is the answer. Cars are here to stay and reducing emissions from them must be the primary focus of policy.
13. It won't cost anything. Tackling climate change will mean the end of the era of cheap energy.
14. Higher energy prices mean lower living standards. In fact, with good policies energy bills could come down while energy prices go up.
15. Australia will meet its Kyoto target. We won't.
16. There is no point ratifying the Kyoto Protocol. Australia's interests would be best served by having a seat at the table. The G8 summit endorsed the UN process.

G. Wilkenfeld, C. Hamilton and H. Saddler, August 2007, 'Clean coal' and other greenhouse myths, Australia Institute Web Paper, <www.tai.org.au/documents/downloads/WP108.pdf>.

------------------->

Earth's vital signs in bad shape

The Worldwatch Institute released "Vital Signs 2007-2008" in September. The report tracks and analyses 44 trends in these areas: food, agricultural resources, energy and climate, global economy, resource economics, environment, conflict and peace, communications and transportation, population and society, and health and disease.

Some of the points highlighted in the report include:
* More wood was removed from forests in 2005 than ever before.
* Meat production hit a record 276 million tonnes (43 kilograms per person) in 2006.
* Meat consumption is one of several factors driving rising soybean demand. Rapid expansion of soybean plantations in South America could displace 22 million hectares of tropical forest and savanna in the next 20 years.
* The rise in annual seafood consumption to 156 million tonnes comes as many fish species become scarcer.
* While US carbon emissions continue to grow, the fastest rise is occurring in Asia, particularly China and India.

The report is available as hard copy or PDF for US$18.95 from <www.worldwatch.org/node/5327>.

------------------->

Green Electricity Watch

The 2007 Green Electricity Watch survey results have been released by the Total Environment Centre, the Australian Conservation Foundation and WWF-Australia.

The report ranks 52 green power schemes for households on their ability to reduce greenhouse emissions and support growth in new renewable energy in Australia. Criteria also include the clarity and accuracy of information the retailer provides, and penalties are given for misleading practices.

The report stresses the distinction between accredited and non-accredited schemes. Non-accredited green power has been available for years whereas accredited green power results in new renewable energy generation and a reduction in greenhouse emissions. The report states: "Non-accredited green electricity is very unlikely to make any difference to Australia's greenhouse emissions or increase the amount of renewable electricity supply."

Green Electricity Watch <www.greenelectricitywatch.org.au>.

------------------->

OceanaGold accused of strong-arm tactics in Philippines

Melbourne-based mining company OceanaGold has been accused by Filipino villagers of harassment and the use of strong-arm tactics to pressure them to accept its plans to develop a large gold and copper mine, according to a new report released by Oxfam Australia in September. The report is the result of five years of investigative work by Oxfam Australia.

"There is significant opposition to the project by many in the community as well as the elected local Council, which has not freely given its consent to the project despite OceanaGold allegedly resorting to coercive means to secure continuation of the project," said Shanta Martin from Oxfam.

Tactics include allegedly attempting to pressure people to sell their land at a price determined by OceanaGold and threatening legal proceedings against illiterate farmers. Villagers also assert that OceanaGold has deliberately incited an adversarial atmosphere that has fuelled community division over the proposed mine.

And in what would constitute a serious breach of Australian law, Oxfam heard allegations that company representatives offered financial inducements to members of the democratically elected Didipio Barangay Council in the form of money, employment and enormously inflated offers for their land.

Oxfam's report also shows that OceanaGold may have publicly misrepresented levels of community support for the proposed Didipio mine, including to shareholders and the Australian Stock Exchange. Misleading investors and potential investors is contrary to Australian corporate law and a matter likely to be of interest to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission.

The Oxfam recommends ways that OceanaGold can address community complaints in Didipio such as:
* supporting an official investigation into allegations of offering financial inducements;
* ceasing land acquisition activities described by community members as constituting harassment and intimidation;
* respecting the authority of the current democratically elected Didipio Barangay Council;
* respecting indigenous peoples and communities' decision-making processes and their right to give or deny their free, prior and informed consent; and
* supporting independent social, environmental and gender assessments of the likely impacts of the mine operation.

Oxfam calls for the establishment of a formal, broad-based complaints mechanism to oversee Australian mining industry activities overseas.

Oxfam, 2007, "Mining Ombudsman Case Report: Didipio Gold and Copper Mine", <www.oxfam.org.au/campaigns/mining/ombudsman/2003/cases/didipio/didipio-report07.pdf>.

------------------->

Tax-deductible carbon offsets

Legislation to allow tax deductions for the cost of carbon offset schemes passed through federal parliament in September. The Greens were unsuccessful with their efforts to require that trees planted under carbon offset schemes remain in the ground for at least 100 years and be native species, and that carbon offset forests must first be subject to an assessment of the water usage required to sustain them.

In August, the Australia Institute published a report, Carbon Offsets: Saviour or cop-out?, which concludes that Australia needs a compulsory accreditation scheme for offsets projects. The paper finds that, in the absence of a rigorous scheme, governments and business are exploiting greenhouse fads as a smokescreen to distract people from the need for real cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.

Christian Downie from the Australia Institute said: "The evidence indicates that offsets from renewable energy are the most effective, followed by those from energy efficiency projects, with forestry projects ranked last.

"Concerned citizens should be congratulated for wanting to reduce their carbon footprint. But when they buy offsets from a forestry project with their airline ticket, for example, they are actually buying a promise that the immediate emissions from their flight will be gradually offset over the next 100 years. There can be very little if any guarantee that this will actually happen."

The report concludes: "Some types of offsets, such as those from renewable energy projects, can provide consumers and businesses with an effective means to offset their emissions. However, offsets should only work to complement domestic actions that cut greenhouse gas emissions and they should not be seen as a license to pollute or as a means to continue unsustainable practices. Too often, offsets are being used by governments and business as a smokescreen to distract people from the need to cut emissions. By diverting people's funds and attention to projects that are unlikely to significantly reduce emissions, offsets could do more harm than good."

Meanwhile, the Vatican announced in July that it would be the world's first carbon-neutral sovereign state, having accepted a donation which it will use to fund a reforestation project in Hungary. An official from the Vatican's council for culture compared reducing energy consumption to the "penance" of offset schemes such as the Vatican's forest project. In Australia, Cardinal George Pell continues to dispute anthropogenic climate change, to link environmentalism with paganism, and to promote the nuclear industry.

Christian Downie, August 2007, "Carbon Offsets: Saviour or cop-out?", Australia Institute Research Paper #48, <www.tai.org.au/documents/downloads/WP107.pdf>.

------------------->

Dirty energy threatens health of 2.4 billion

The medical journal The Lancet has produced a set of reports on energy and health and made them available on its website. The reports consider access to electricity and energy poverty, transport, agriculture, nuclear and renewable power, and a range of other energy issues, and the effect each has on health.

Among the key findings are the following:
* 2.4 billion people worldwide are exposed to pollution from inefficient burning of solid fuels like wood, coal and dried cow dung. This causes around 1.6 million premature deaths each year -- roughly double the level of deaths from air pollution in cities -- and many more non-fatal cases of respiratory diseases.
* Around 1.6 billion people worldwide have no electricity.
* An accelerated switch to renewable sources has the potential to deliver appreciable health benefits.
* Nuclear power remains controversial because of public concern about storage of nuclear waste, the potential for catastrophic accident or terrorist attack, and the diversion of fissionable material for weapons production. Health risks are smaller for nuclear fusion, but commercial exploitation will not be achieved in time to help the crucial near-term reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions.
* Carbon dioxide capture and storage could in future have an economic role in reducing carbon dioxide emissions from large point sources, but its effects on health are likely to be mixed because efficiency losses mean greater consumption of the primary fuel and other resources, and greater production of waste.
* Halting the increase of greenhouse-gas emissions from agriculture, especially livestock production, should be a top priority, because it could curb warming fairly rapidly.
* The world's richest populations use up to 20 times more energy per head than those from poor countries

Energy and Health <www.thelancet.com/online/focus/energy_health>.

------------------->

Austrian nuclear report

The Austrian government has produced an excellent, comprehensive report which, in the words of Austrian environment minister Josef Proll, concludes that "in spite of nominal safety improvements in nuclear power plants a long list of 'near-misses' documents that severe accidents can never be excluded; nuclear installations can only marginally be protected against terrorist attacks; proliferation continues to be a serious problem and a sustainable solution of the radioactive waste problem is not in sight."

<www.nirs.org/climate/background/austriangovtreport607.pdf>

------------------->