SANTIAGO, Aug 28, 2010 (IPS) - Controversial plans to build the Barrancones thermoelectric plant near a protected area in the northern Chilean region of Coquimbo were cancelled Friday, but not before reviving the debate on other projects for polluting coal-fired power stations."Now Barrancones is being talked about as if it were the only project of its kind," Lorenzo Núñez, head of the Mother Earth Defence Committee (CODEMAT) in Tarapacá region, over 1,700 kilometres north of Santiago, told IPS. For years CODEMAT has opposed the construction of two coal-fired thermoelectric plants close to the Chanavayita fishing cove, 54 kilometres south of Iquique, the capital of Tarapacá. They are the Pacífico plant, a project of the Chilean company Río Seco, and the Patache project belonging to Compañía Eléctrica Tarapacá, which is controlled by Endesa, a Spanish energy giant. CODEMAT, made up of groups of local residents and social organisations, organised a National Meeting of Social Movements Against Coal-Burning Thermoelectric Plants, running Thursday to Saturday Aug. 26-28 in Iquique.
As the proposed Cape Wind offshore wind farm in Massachusetts fends off some last ditch legal challenges to become the first offshore wind farm in the U.S., New Jersey yesterday passed a law that would ultimately make it the leading provider of offshore wind energy in the country. The Offshore Wind Economic Development Act directs the state's Board of Public Utilities (BPU) to establish an offshore renewable energy certificate program that calls for a percentage of electricity sold in the state to be from offshore wind energy. The act would support the development of at least 1,100 megawatts of offshore wind energy capacity. The bill was signed into law yesterday by Gov. Chris Christie yesterday at a former BP port facility that will be transformed into a regional hub for the offshore wind industry.
As the proposed Cape Wind offshore wind farm in Massachusetts fends off some last ditch legal challenges to become the first offshore wind farm in the U.S., New Jersey yesterday passed a law that would ultimately make it the leading provider of offshore wind energy in the country.
The Offshore Wind Economic Development Act directs the state's Board of Public Utilities (BPU) to establish an offshore renewable energy certificate program that calls for a percentage of electricity sold in the state to be from offshore wind energy. The act would support the development of at least 1,100 megawatts of offshore wind energy capacity.
The bill was signed into law yesterday by Gov. Chris Christie yesterday at a former BP port facility that will be transformed into a regional hub for the offshore wind industry.
Distributing new varieties of drought tolerant maize to African farmers could save more than $1.5 billion dollars, boost yields by up to a quarter and lift some of the world's poorest out of poverty, a study found.The study published on Thursday by the Mexico-based International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), with input from other food research institutes, focused on 13 African countries in which it has been handing out drought tolerant maize to farmers over the past four years. ADVERTISEMENT It described maize as "the most important cereal crop in Africa," a lifeline to 300 million vulnerable people.The Drought Tolerant Maize for Africa plan aims to hasten the adoption of maize varieties that withstand dry weather.
Distributing new varieties of drought tolerant maize to African farmers could save more than $1.5 billion dollars, boost yields by up to a quarter and lift some of the world's poorest out of poverty, a study found.
The study published on Thursday by the Mexico-based International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), with input from other food research institutes, focused on 13 African countries in which it has been handing out drought tolerant maize to farmers over the past four years.
ADVERTISEMENT
It described maize as "the most important cereal crop in Africa," a lifeline to 300 million vulnerable people.
The Drought Tolerant Maize for Africa plan aims to hasten the adoption of maize varieties that withstand dry weather.
So, whose agenda is driving this ? What trademarked weedkillers and fertilizers do they need to thrive ? What do the seeds cost ? and by that I don't necessarily mean how much but what else gets damaged ?
Who benefits ? Who starves ? who goes thirsty ? keep to the Fen Causeway
CAPE TOWN, Aug 27, 2010 (IPS) - Civil society organisations have reacted with outrage to claims that the international campaign against genetically modified (GM) crops is partly responsible for food shortages and food insecurity in Africa."Food insecurity in developing regions such as Africa is partially a result of the anti-GM campaign," David King, director of the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment at Oxford University in Britain, said during the 15th World Congress of Food Science and Technology held between Aug 22-26 in Cape Town, South Africa. King added that, "many African countries have the idea that food that is not good enough for Europeans, is not good enough for Africans. "In Europe, people might have a choice between conventional and genetically modified products. In Africa, this is not the case. Here, any food that is available is great." South African organisations that oppose the genetic modification of food, such as the South African Freeze Alliance on Genetic Engineering (SAFeAGE), have condemned King's statements. "Africa's food insecurity has nothing to do with the anti-GM campaign," said Fahrie Hassan, media spokesperson at SAFeAGE.
Reading about the recall of 550 million possibly salmonella-tainted U.S. eggs, laid and packed in just a handful of massive Iowa factories made me think about the egg aisle of a Sainsbury's supermarket I visited in England, near Brighton, two years ago. I was so struck by the store signage, which read not only "Organic" and "Free Range" -- familiar terms -- but also "Barn" and "Caged," that I took several pictures with my iPhone. ...... In line with its more protective attitude toward consumers, Europe requires any genetically modified food ingredients to be identified as such. Egg operations over a certain size are required to vaccinate their flocks for salmonella unless they can demonstrate that they have strict preventive measures in place or that there hasn't been an incidence of salmonella on the property in the previous year. As a result, salmonella infections in England have dropped a stunning 96 percent since 1997. And the European Food Safety Authority has strongly discouraged the use of antimicrobials for controlling salmonella because of the risk of creating antibiotic-resistant strains of the bacteria. Governments in Europe have much more power to enforce food safety testing and to shut down infected farms. Whereas, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has only recently acknowledged that the routine non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in farm animals -- which promotes growth -- might be causing antibiotic-resistant bugs. Here in America we even don't have mandatory recalls. We let the industry conduct its own testing for pathogens, and when it is nice enough to tell the FDA it's found some, we let the company recall months-old tainted products on its own schedule.
Reading about the recall of 550 million possibly salmonella-tainted U.S. eggs, laid and packed in just a handful of massive Iowa factories made me think about the egg aisle of a Sainsbury's supermarket I visited in England, near Brighton, two years ago.
I was so struck by the store signage, which read not only "Organic" and "Free Range" -- familiar terms -- but also "Barn" and "Caged," that I took several pictures with my iPhone. ...
...
In line with its more protective attitude toward consumers, Europe requires any genetically modified food ingredients to be identified as such. Egg operations over a certain size are required to vaccinate their flocks for salmonella unless they can demonstrate that they have strict preventive measures in place or that there hasn't been an incidence of salmonella on the property in the previous year. As a result, salmonella infections in England have dropped a stunning 96 percent since 1997.
And the European Food Safety Authority has strongly discouraged the use of antimicrobials for controlling salmonella because of the risk of creating antibiotic-resistant strains of the bacteria. Governments in Europe have much more power to enforce food safety testing and to shut down infected farms.
Whereas, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has only recently acknowledged that the routine non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in farm animals -- which promotes growth -- might be causing antibiotic-resistant bugs.
Here in America we even don't have mandatory recalls. We let the industry conduct its own testing for pathogens, and when it is nice enough to tell the FDA it's found some, we let the company recall months-old tainted products on its own schedule.
A study commissioned by the German government has recommended an extension of up to 20 years to the life nuclear power plants, according to reports. The government faces resistance if it presses ahead. Experts from Germany's Institute of Energy Economics at the University of Cologne (EWI) were asked to give their advice to the government on a range of scenarios about extending the operational lifetimes of plants by 4, 12, 20 and 28 years. The study recommended that nuclear power plants should be kept open for between 12 and 20 years more than currently planned, the German news magazine Focus reported Saturday. A number of studies, many of which have come to different conclusions, have been recently issued by think-tanks and environmental organizations.
Experts from Germany's Institute of Energy Economics at the University of Cologne (EWI) were asked to give their advice to the government on a range of scenarios about extending the operational lifetimes of plants by 4, 12, 20 and 28 years.
The study recommended that nuclear power plants should be kept open for between 12 and 20 years more than currently planned, the German news magazine Focus reported Saturday.
A number of studies, many of which have come to different conclusions, have been recently issued by think-tanks and environmental organizations.
A new report has outlined why ending the use of nuclear energy matters for the development of renewable energy infrastructure. Its sponsors say the nuclear power fight is post-war Germany's largest-ever economic dispute. In the midst of an ongoing debate over whether to extend the lifespan of Germany's 17 nuclear power plants, a new report has revealed that the continued availability of nuclear power would likely cause a decrease in investment into renewable energies. Increases in wind and solar energy capacities will eventually lead to nuclear power plants being used less, the report states. The reason: energy from renewable sources enjoys legal priority over nuclear and coal power. It is fed into the grid before electricity from non-renewable sources. As the capacity of electricity from wind or solar sources increases, conventional electricity sources will only be needed to fill in gaps when there is a lack of wind or sun. But it takes about 50 hours to restart a nuclear power plant that has been completely shut down, meaning it would be necessary to keep the plant running at 50 or 60 percent capacity. Gas powered turbines, however, can be turned on within 20 minutes and can also be run on biogas. Other possibilities to bridge fluctuations in renewable electricity output include the decentralized approach of using micro-power stations or accessing the batteries of electric cars.
In the midst of an ongoing debate over whether to extend the lifespan of Germany's 17 nuclear power plants, a new report has revealed that the continued availability of nuclear power would likely cause a decrease in investment into renewable energies.
Increases in wind and solar energy capacities will eventually lead to nuclear power plants being used less, the report states. The reason: energy from renewable sources enjoys legal priority over nuclear and coal power. It is fed into the grid before electricity from non-renewable sources.
As the capacity of electricity from wind or solar sources increases, conventional electricity sources will only be needed to fill in gaps when there is a lack of wind or sun. But it takes about 50 hours to restart a nuclear power plant that has been completely shut down, meaning it would be necessary to keep the plant running at 50 or 60 percent capacity.
Gas powered turbines, however, can be turned on within 20 minutes and can also be run on biogas. Other possibilities to bridge fluctuations in renewable electricity output include the decentralized approach of using micro-power stations or accessing the batteries of electric cars.
So I imagine that somebody helpfully wrapped all this up to provide the most helpful pro-nuclear spin where, and I know you disagree with this, nuclear vs DFH-energy is a zero-sum game. So there will always be an element of punch-a-hippy about such things. keep to the Fen Causeway
