Tag Archives: amazon

Resistance to LNG across the Pacific Rim

Posted on by
Reply

The Oregon (US) based community campaign against the LNG Palomar gas pipeline has been building solidarity connections and investigating impacts of LNG projects elsewhere in the world. In their own words,


“In the Pacific Northwest, NW Natural Gas claims that the Palomar pipeline and Bradwood Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) terminal will bring “clean” fuel to the United States. But the truth is the real impacts of LNG importation are enormous, and extend far beyond the Pacific Northwest. LNG threatens to harm Oregon’s economy and environment, but the impacts of LNG are huge even before the fuel reaches Oregon’s shores. Far from being “clean”, the environmental and social impacts of the full LNG supply chain show LNG is a dirty, costly fuel. This series highlights the global impacts of LNG, which strongly resemble the global impacts of oil production.”

 

 

The first two articles highlighted local impacts of gas extraction and liquefaction operations along the Pacific Rim, on Sakhalin Island in Russia and the Peruvian Amazon.

The Sakhalin article highlighted the impacts of Shell’s pipeline construction on local salmon runs, also a major concern in Oregon. Sakhalin’s fisheries are absolutely critical for the local economy of Sakhalin Island. THe picture shows the destruction of salmon runs.

The following article on Camisea in Peru demonstrated the impacts LNG will have on human rights abuses and Amazon destruction.

When a violent police crackdown on non-violent indigenous rights activists in Peru left around 100 people dead, the human rights abuses of government-backed corporate ventures in the Amazon exploded into the concsiousness of the international community. Many factors – most notably implementation of the US-Peru Free Trade Agreement – contributed to the impasse which prompted 30,000 indigenous Peruvians to take non-violent direct action against seizure of their traditional lands for private profit. Yet when Peruvian police fired on protesters outside the city of Bagua, it was in some ways the predictable result of an economic model which has long shunted human rights and environmental concerns to the side while paving the way for industrial projects like LNG.

Read more…

Say no to Shell’s slave sugar cane biofuel plans in Brazil

Posted on by
Reply

Shell has just signed what could be the world’s largest biofuel deal ever – a $12 billion MoU with controversial Brazilian sugar came company Cosan. According to rainforest campaigners Rettet den Regenwald, the deal threatens to lead to deforestation in the Amazon, increased climate chaos and support Cosan in its continued use of slave labour.

Here is an online email action targetting Shell on the issue.

According to Rettet den Regenwald,

“Shell’s role includes contributing about $1.625 billion and 2,740 filling stations. Initially the joint venture will produce about 2 billion litres a year but the companies plan to increase this to a whopping 5 billion litres a year which would make the venture one of the world’s top three ethanol producers.

The Brazilian government and Brazilian ethanol companies have invested large amounts of money and time in persuading the world of sugar cane’s green credentials, glossing over some devastating impacts of Brazil’s sugar cane industry.

Brazilian sugar cane plantations are responsible for the destruction of large areas of cerrado and forest, including the Amazon. The industry will tell you no tropical deforestation occurs as a result of sugar cane plantations. Yet in September 2009 the Brazilian Government felt the need to propose new legislation that would prevent sugar cane expanding directly into the Amazon in the future. The government states, however, that “sugarcane plantations currently in progress, and also the scheduled expansions, even in the Amazonia… should not be prohibited.”

Neither can the proposed legislation stop the phenomenon of indirect land use change where existing agricultural land is given over to sugar cane plantations, and farmers travel to find and create new land for their agriculture. It is very difficult to determine these indirect impacts of biofuel crops such as sugar cane and this is a hotly debated policy area in EU legislation. Current policy ignores these direct impacts, yet they can make the difference between biofuels being better for the climate than fossil fuels and being worse for the climate. Bioethanol from sugar cane is given a high CO2 saving rating in EU law but if indirect deforestation is taken into account it can actually have higher CO2 emissions than petrol.

Another crucial issue for the sugar cane industry is the use of slave labour and appalling working conditions. Shell’s new bedfellow Cosan is currently embroiled in a battle with the Brazilian government over whether or not it should be included on their “black list” of sugar cane companies that use slave labour. Walmart temporarily suspended its supply contract with Cosan in January 2010 because the company was included on the list on 31 December 2009 after an inspection found workers being mistreated (see Bloomberg: Cosan Falls on Slavery Charges . Cosan has since won an injunction and has been removed from the list, but the Brazilian attorney general plans to fight this injunction.

No stranger to the need to seem “green”, Shell has developed some sustainability criteria for its biofuels investments. These include:

“Shell will work with its suppliers to incorporate sustainability clauses into supply contracts that seek to ensure that bio-components and feedstocks are not knowingly linked to violation of human rights (child or forced labour) and have not knowingly been cultivated, produced or manufactured in areas of high biodiversity value”.

Sounds good? However, later down in the principles we find the get-out-clause which it has obviously applied to Cosan:

“Shell recognises that many existing suppliers may not meet our expectations in full immediately. If these suppliers wish to supply to Shell, they must commit to work with us to develop a more sustainable supply chain.”

The Fight for the Mountains & the Forests

Posted on by
Reply

AlJazeera International (in English) recently broadcast several investigative programmes on popular movements opposing destructive fossil fuel projects, as part of its People & Power series. The shows cover local resistance to Barrick Gold in Argentina/Chile, Talisman’s oil operations in the Peruvian Amazon and mountain removal coal mining in the Appalachians.

What the film-makers didn’t realise is that this series could have been titled “Communities resist RBS-financed destruction”, as the (now largely public-owned) bank provided hundreds of millions of dollars of loans to Barrick Gold,Talisman (participating in three loans totalling in $3.1 billion in 2005 & 2006) and Mountain Top Removal (taking part in providing $800 million of credit).

RBS is the target of a public campaign over its dangerous lending, while the British Treasury faces a hearing over its role in not reigning in the bank’s destructive practices.

Oil in the Amazon

Talisman and other oil companies are driving their extraction operations deeper into the Peruvian Amazon rainforest, supported by President Alan Garcia’s campaign to ease restrictions on mining and oil drilling.

Indigenous Peruvians have been protesting that they were not consulted about new laws that could destroy their environment and their way of life. Most of them depend on the land for survival but the contamination left by oil companies is putting their livelihood at risk.

Talisman are the main operator in Block 64, in the Achuar area near the Peruvian border with Ecuador. Amazon Watchreport that 84% –27 out of 32– of Achuar communities within Talisman’s Block 64 in Peru have repeatedly expressed their vehement opposition to drilling on their lands.

Talisman is headed up by John Manzoni, who moved to the company in 2007 from BP, where he was considered to be partly responsible for the Texas City refinery disaster in which 15 people were killed in 2005. Apart from its role in Peru, Talisman was widely condemned for its role in violence in Sudan and more recently for signing contracts in Iraq.

Mountain Top Removal mining in Appalachians

Massey Energy, a coal company, wants to mine Coal River Mountain in South West Virginia using a surface mining technique called mountaintop removal where the top of the mountain is blasted off and the toxic waste is dumped in the valleys.

But local residents and environmentalists are sick of the pollution and destruction, and through acts of civil disobedience are trying to save the mountains. Their alternative proposal, to provide local energy is to build a wind farm instead.

Barrick Gold

In the past 20 years, more gold has been extracted from the earth than during the previous five centuries.

Modern open-pit mining techniques can pulverise mountains, crushing 80 tonnes of rock to extract just one ounce of gold. This creates so much toxic waste that, if allowed to contaminate river systems, it can leave whole communities sickened and impoverished.

But in Esquel, Argentina, locals have fought back. Canadian mining giant, the Barrick Gold Company, has been forced out by local pressure, led by women who are concerned about what will be left of their mountains, their environment and their communities once the miners have gone.