Ethical | News & Views

Battle over climate science spreads to US schoolrooms

11 March 2010 by Debora MacKenzie

SCHOOLS in three US states – Louisiana, Texas and South Dakota – have been told to teach alternatives to the scientific consensus on global warming. The moves appear to be allied to efforts to teach creationism in public schools. Such efforts have in the past been thwarted when courts ruled them unconstitutional, but those advocating the teaching of sound science may find it harder to fight misrepresentations concerning climate change.

Last week, South Dakota’s state legislature adopted a bill which “urges” schools to take a “balanced approach” to teaching about climate change, because the science is “unresolved” and has been “complicated and prejudiced” by “political and philosophical viewpoints”.

When New Scientist asked what these were, the bill’s sponsor, Don Kopp, mentioned claims commonly cited in opposition to the idea of human-induced global warming: for example, that any global warming is due to changes in solar activity. “I am against bankrupting the country to fight warming,” he said, “without being sure it’s true.”

The measure makes no mention of evolution, but its wording resembles bills in other states primarily aimed at teaching alternatives to evolution. Since a court in Pennsylvania ruled in 2005 that “intelligent design” had religious origins, so could not be taught in state schools, states have used vaguer language in bills when calling for schools to teach alternatives to established science.

In Michigan in 2005, one such bill also called for students to “critically evaluate… theories of global warming”. It failed, as have all similar bills – except in Louisiana, which in 2008 passed a law requiring “open and objective discussion” of warming, evolution and human cloning. Kentucky is now debating a similar bill.

In March 2009, Texas adopted school standards that both allow creationist claims and say students must “evaluate different views on the existence of global warming”. Texas buys more textbooks than any other state, so publishers often conform to Texan demands, including adding scepticism about warming.

Bundling warming with evolution in calls for “academic freedom” may make it harder to challenge these laws. Steve Newton of the National Center for Science Education in Oakland, California, observes that the US constitution restricts the teaching of religious ideas in state schools, but not the teaching of bad science. A study last year found that evangelical Christians, who account for most creationists, are up to three times as likely as other Americans to deny that warming has human origins.

Moves against climate science and in favour of creationism are linked in other ways too: some see warming, like evolution, as the product of a hostile scientific establishment. When the US Chamber of Commerce, which opposes stringent cuts in greenhouse emissions, called for a public hearing on climate science last August, it called it “the Scopes monkey trial of the 21st century”, after the 1925 Tennessee trial about teaching evolution.

>>> Read the full article here

Scientists to review climate body

By Richard Black
Environment correspondent, BBC News website

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has asked the world’s science academies to review work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Work will be co-ordinated by the Inter-Academy Council, which brings together bodies such as the UK’s Royal Society.

The IPCC has been under pressure over errors in its last major assessment of climate science in 2007.
Mr Ban said the overall concept of man-made climate change was robust, and action to curb emissions badly needed. The Inter-Academy Council will convene a panel of experts to conduct the review, and will be run independently of UN agencies.

One issue that was raised at the UN news conference was how independent the scientists on the Inter-Academy Council’s review panel will be from the scientists who contributed work to the IPCC in the first place. “Let me be clear – the threat posed by climate change is real,” said Mr Ban, speaking at UN headquarters in New York.
“I have seen no credible evidence that challenges the main conclusions of [the IPCC's 2007] report.”

Robbert Dijkgraaf, the council’s co-chair, said the review panel will be chosen so that it includes both inside knowledge of the IPCC and outside perspectives.
“The panel will look forward and will definitely not go over all the vast amount of data in climate science,” he said.

REVIEW’S TERMS OF REFERENCE
Analyse the IPCC process, including links with other UN agencies
Review the use of non-peer reviewed sources, and quality control on data
Assess how procedures handle “the full range of scientific views”
Review how the IPCC communicates with the public and the media

“It will see what are the [IPCC's] procedures, and how can they be improved, so we can avoid certain types of errors.”

But Roger Pielke Jr, a professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado who has recently criticised the IPCC over its assessment of the costs of climate-related disasters, said the terms of reference appeared to have some significant omissions. “How will it deal with allegations of breakdowns in procedures in the AR4?”, he asked. “The terms of reference say nothing about looking at the AR4 procedures, but it would be difficult to do a serious evaluation without actually evaluating experience,” he told BBC News.

“Should it ignore the AR4 issues, then it will risk being called a whitewash.” Prof Pielke also suggested the panel might look at apparent conflicts of interest within the IPCC’s staff. The conflict of interest charge has been levelled against the IPCC’s chair, Rajendra Pachauri, over his business interests.

But standing alongside Mr Ban, he welcomed the review.
“The IPCC stands firmly behind the rigour and reliability of its Fourth Assessment Report from 2007, but we recognise that we can improve,” he said. “We have listened and learned from our critics, and we intend to take every action we can to ensure that our reports are as robust as possible.”

The review was demanded by world governments at last month’s meeting of the United Nations Environment Programme (Unep) Governing Council. The Inter-Academy Council has been asked to finalise its conclusions by August, in time that its recommendations can be discussed and adopted at October’s IPCC meeting.

>>> Read the full article here

Top Ten Eco-Ways to Get Fit and Lose Weight!

This article shows you how to get fit and lose weight in a way that won’t bust your pocket or your carbon footprint!

1. Go for a walk – There is nothing more refreshing or eco-friendly than going for a stroll! It uses absolutely no carbon energy and can be a replacement for your school or work trip meaning you save on petrol as well as keeping fit!

2. Eat seasonally – Save on energy consumption by buying local, seasonal and fresh produce. Try not to buy anything that has been flown in from abroad and have a go at trying some new foods to mix up your diet!

3. Go to a local exercise class – Support your local community and businesses by attending a local exercise class. Whether it’s pilates, yoga or spinning this can be a great way to trim up and meet new people in the area.

4. Take your nutrients – Shops like Holland & Barretts provide a great range of vitamins and supplements that will help keep you fighting fit and your metabolism high.

5. Cycle to work – Cycling has many benefits for your body. It’s great cardiovascular exercise and, now the weather is warming up, can be a brilliant way to get to and from work.

6. Don’t take too many baths! – Not only do too many baths waste water and energy, they are also bad for your skin! Having too many can dry out your skin meaning you require more moisturiser and products that can be detrimental to your bodily health.

7. Get your Five-a-day – Make sure you get your recommended five fruits and vegetables a day. Keep them seasonal, keep them local and try them in all kinds of combinations. You will be surprised what a difference it can make to how you feel.

8. Lose weight the sensible way – Don’t invest time, money and energy in fad dieting and overpriced exercise machines. Go for a run, take the kids to the park and eat right and you will see that weight come off at a healthy rate that is maintainable.

9. Eat less meat – Get your protein from other sources, such as nuts, and help cut your personal carbon footprint as well as naturally increasing the healthy foods you eat during the day.

10. Have fun – Enjoy the outdoors, enjoy your food and look and feel eco-fabulous!

New “Low Carbon World website” to Accelerate Transition to Green Economy

The “Low Carbon World” website, a web-based communications platform was officially launched today (Thursday) in Bali, Indonesia at the United Nations Environment Programme’s annual Governing Council.

The new website, a joint project between Low Carbon Economy.com and the United Nations Climate Neutral Network (CN NET) aims to facilitate the move to global low carbon economies, a necessary imperative if we are to combat dangerous and escalating climate change.

The new website will assist knowledge transfer and simplify access to information and tools that can be difficult to trace.

LowCarbonEconomy.com will list every country’s carbon policies, commitments, historical performance, future projections and opportunities, as well as country-specific marketplaces, networks, associations and standards which are relevant to government departments and investment agencies.

“Everyone agrees that the transition to a low carbon economy is an environmental and economic imperative, and will require increased collaboration globally – particularly between public and private sectors. Until now, access to the necessary low carbon information has been extremely restricted and very time consuming. With this project we have changed that and we look forward to continuing to work with UNEP and other major partners over the coming months and years,” said Toddington Harper, TLCE’s Managing Director.

Annual global greenhouse gas emissions should not exceed 40 to 48.3 Gigatonnes (Gt) of equivalent C02 in 2020, if a rise in global temperatures is to be curbed at 2 degrees C or less, whilst between 2020 and 2050, global emissions ideally need to fall by between 48 per cent and 72 per cent.

“The solutions for the transition to a low carbon economy already exist, and it is a question of removing barriers for rapid and mass uptake. These barriers include technical, financial and informational aspects. I look forward to seeing this project develop further,” said Achim Steiner UN Under-Secretary General and Executive Director of UNEP.

The Climate Neutral Network (CN Net) celebrated its second anniversary at UNEPs 11th Special Session of the Governing Council in Bali, Indonesia by hosting a side event titled “High hopes, low carbon – making it work!” The side event showcased work and success stories undertaken between CN Net and The Low Carbon Economy Ltd (TLCE) over the past 12-months.

>>> The home page for the ‘Low Carbon World’ initiative is available here and will soon also be available on UNEPs Climate Neutral website.

>>> You can read this press release online here

>>> New information is being uploaded daily.

>>> Please read the full article here

New tool released to calculate greenness of food products

coffeebreak300

A new tool has been released that will allow people to measure the environmental cost of their food, as well as the nutritional value.

Carbonostics has released an updated version of its lifecycle management tool, which can determine the ‘hotspots’ in the food production process.

According to the company, the newly enhanced version features end-of-life calculation that takes in food and packaging materials and carbon emissions from the packaging process.

In addition, all the new information is broken down by steps in the supply chain process, meaning that more information is available than ever for calculating food choices.

The tool is suitable for small food manufacturers, retailers, public buildings and any suppliers in the food retailing sector.

A recent analysis of two studies by New Scientist, looking at green purchases, found that most consumers were easily fooled by packaging and a brand’s historical reputation meaning that they over-estimated the greenness of some products.

>>> Please read the full article here

Fewer children now walking to school

Less than one in two primary school children now walk to school. backtoschool2008

In the three years to 1991 the proportion of children aged five to 10 walking to school in Britain was 62 per cent, but this has now dropped to 48 per cent according to figures released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

By contrast, the proportion of children travelling to school by car has increased from 27 to 43 per cent.

The move from walking to travelling by car is only partly explained by the fact that the average length of a trip to school has increased for primary school children from 1.3 miles in 1995–97 to 1.6 miles in 2008.

Less walking makes roads ‘safer’ and more dangerous

The fact that many children are now driven to school may go some way to explaining the improvements in British road casualty figures. Road deaths on British roads have fallen below 3,000 for the first time since records began in 1926.

A spokesperson for the Environmental Transport Association (ETA) said: “There may be fewer casualties, but if people switch from walking to cars, high levels of traffic makes streets feel dangerous and puts more people off cycling and walking”

“The increasing number of vehicles on British roads and its effect on the travel habits of children continues a vicious cycle – the more traffic there is, the more likely children are to be ferried to school by car.”

>>> Read the full article here

Hurricane Katrina victims seek to sue greenhouse gas emitters

Victims of Hurricane Katrina are seeking to sue carbon gas-emitting multinationals for helping fuel global warming and boosting the devastating 2005 storm, legal documents showed.

The class action suit brought by residents from southern Mississippi, which was ravaged by hurricane-force winds and driving rains, was first filed just weeks after the August 2005 storm hit.
“The plaintiffs allege that defendants’ operation of energy, fossil fuels, and chemical industries in the United States caused the emission of greenhouse gasses that contributed to global warming,” say the documents seen by AFP.

The increase in global surface air and water temperatures “in turn caused a rise in sea levels and added to the ferocity of Hurricane Katrina, which combined to destroy the plaintiffs’ private property, as well as public property useful to them.”

More than 1,200 people died in Hurricane Katrina, which lashed the area, swamping New Orleans in Louisiana when levees gave way under the weight of the waves.
The suit, claiming compensation and punitive damages from multinational companies including Shell, ExxonMobile, BP and Chevron, has already passed several key legal hurdles, after initially being knocked back by the lowest court.

Three federal appeals court judges decided in October 2009 that the case could be heard. But in February the same court decided to re-examine whether it could be heard this time with nine judges.
Other companies named in the suit include Honeywell and American Electric Power, with the residents charging that “the defendants’ greenhouse gas emissions caused saltwater, debris, sediment, hazardous substances, and other materials to enter, remain on, and damage plaintiffs’ property.”
They allege that companies had a duty to “avoid unreasonably endangering the environment, public health, public and private property.”

The district court, which initially rejected the case, ruled that it was “a debate which simply has no place in the court.”
The court argued that Congress first had to enact legislation “which sets appropriate standards by which this court can measure conduct.”
Mississippi residents must now wait for the appeals court to fix a new hearing, in principle within the next three months.

A decision would then be due by the end of 2010, and both sides could also then take the case to the Supreme Court.

>>> See the whole article here

MoreEco Fairtrade Guide

banner_654271fairtradewebsite1

To celebrate the end of Fairtrade fortnight, the MoreEco team thought they would put together an article that explains exactly what Fairtrade is, and why you should do your best to buy their produce.

What is Fairtrade?

The concept of ‘fair trade’ has been around for over forty years but did not include a formal system until the late 1980s. It was established by Christian Aid, CAFOD, Oxfam, Traidcraft and the World Development Movement and later joined by the Women’s Institute. The first product to be certified was Green & Black’s Maya Gold Chocolate followed by Cafedirect coffee and Clipper tea.

The concept has taken off dramatically since these first products were certified and now includes a variety of food, clothing and gift ranges. The Fairtrade Foundation is an independent non-profit organisation which envisions a world in which sustainable development, equality and fair pay form the basis of any trade structure. In order to achieve this, Fairtrade attempts to transform previous trading structures in order to help the disadvantaged and poverty-stricken. They work with businesses, communities and individuals all around the world to improve the trading rights and position of organisations who are often taken advantage of.

Why Should You Buy Fairtrade?

Fairtrade is not just any non-profit organisation. Not only do they provide a fair and honest service to the communities and businesses involved but they also provide the consumer with great quality produce at a fair price. You reap the benefits of investing in Fairtrade products. The Fairtrade certification enables the consumer to make informed decisions about their purchase choices and means they can be safe in the knowledge that their money is providing a reasonable income for those people who are involved. The quality of the produce is well worth the price, especially with the realisation that the people putting in the groundwork get fair compensation for their services.

Fairtrade Towns

Fairtrade also promotes the education of local communities involved with trade structures and issues. As a charity it believes that ordinary people can make a dramatic difference to the livelihood of the producers and aims to increase awareness of this belief. Fairtrade towns are those which are committed to promoting understanding of trade issues in their local community – to find out more please take a look at the Fairtrade website.

Fairtrade Fortnight 2010

Fairtrade Fortnight 2010 took place from the 22^nd of February until the 7^th of March and was labelled ‘the big swap’! Fairtrade asked the nation to swap their usual produce choices to Fairtrade – whether it be coffee, chocolate, fruit or socks. By doing this the general public proved that they care about their responsibility as consumers and can make a real difference to the lives of the people who grow or sew that which we buy, eat and wear. Fairtrade fortnight was a phenomenal success with celebrities such as Emma Watson creating Fairtrade fashion lines, Oxfordshire schools hosting a week of incredible green events and Cadbury’s offering songs from the likes of Paolo Nutini and Sway when you registered your swap to Fairtrade.

.
The nation spoke out and showed the world that Britain cares about the lives of the farmers and workers that provide us with so much of our material goods. Why not try to make the swap to Fairtrade certified products yourself and reap the benefits of great quality products that make a real difference to the lives of the producers.

Whaling worsens carbon release, scientists warn

By Victoria Gill

A century of whaling may have released more than 100 million tonnes – or a large forest’s worth – of carbon into the atmosphere, scientists say. Whales store carbon within their huge bodies and when they are killed, much of this carbon can be released. US scientists revealed their estimate of carbon released by whaling at the Ocean Sciences meeting in Portland, US. Dr Andrew Pershing from the University of Maine described whales as the “forests of the ocean”.

Dr Pershing and his colleagues from the Gulf of Maine Research Institute calculated the annual carbon-storing capacity of whales as they grew. “Whales, like any animal or plant on the planet, are made out of a lot of carbon,” he said. “And when you kill and remove a whale from the ocean, that’s removing carbon from this storage system and possibly sending it into the atmosphere.” He pointed out that, particularly in the early days of whaling, the animals were a source of lamp oil, which was burned, releasing the carbon directly into the air.

“And this marine system is unique because when whales die [naturally], their bodies sink, so they take that carbon down to the bottom of the ocean. “If they die where it’s deep enough, it will be [stored] out of the atmosphere perhaps for hundreds of years.”

In their initial calculations, the team worked out that 100 years of whaling had released an amount of carbon equivalent to burning 130,000 sq km of temperate forests, or to driving 128,000 Humvees continuously for 100 years. Dr Pershing stressed that this was still a relatively tiny amount when compared to the billions of tonnes produced by human activity every year.

When whales die [naturally], their bodies sink, so they take that carbon down to the bottom of the ocean.
Dr Andrew Pershing, University of Maine. But he said that whales played an important role in storing and transporting carbon in the marine ecosystem. Simply leaving large groups of whales to grow, he said, could “sequester” the greenhouse gas, in amounts that were comparable to some of the reforestation schemes that earn and sell carbon credits.

He suggested that a similar system of carbon credits could be applied to whales in order to protect and rebuild their stocks. Other scientists said that he had raised an exciting and interesting problem.

Dr Pershing said: “These are huge and they are top predators, so unless they’re fished they would be likely to take their biomass to the bottom of the ocean [when they die].”

Read the full article at BBC News

Met Office to look again at global warming records

By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent

The Met Office is to re-examine 160 years of global temperature records following the ‘climategate’ scandal.

The project, in partnership with the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), will gather the original temperature records from thousands of weather stations around the world. The readings will be double-checked and new information that has become available, such as improved understanding of atmospheric change, will be added. The data will then be independently analysed to assess how the temperature has changed over different regions.

The new analysis, that will take three years, will not only provide a more detailed picture of global warming but boost public confidence in the science of climate change.

Climate change sceptics claim that emails stolen from the University of East Anglia show scientists were willing to manipulate global warming data in a scandal known as ‘climategate’.
In another scandal known as ‘glaciergate’ the UN body in charge of climate change science, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), was forced to retract a claim that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035.
However leading scientists, including the Royal Society, insist the case for man-made global warming is convincing and it remains a threat to the world.

Vicky Pope, Head of Climate Change Advice, at the Met Office, said the new global temperature analyses would not change the trend of global warming.
But she said it would verify the existing data and provide more information so the world can better adapt to climate change.

Read the full article at Telegraph Earth