GreenGoa : Messages : 845-874 of 874

The differences between some species are imperceptible to the human eye.

Credit:Public domain

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=49351

BIODIVERSITY: Plants Finally Get DNA Barcodes
By Stephen Leahy*

MÉRIDA, Mexico, Nov 20 (Tierramérica) - Advances made in genetic profiling could be used to fight illegal timber trading, provide authentication of herbal medicines and map entire food chains, according to experts at a conference of the Mexican Academy of Sciences.

"It's taken four years, but the new science of DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) barcoding now has the crucial 'marker' for plants," said David Schindel, executive secretary of the Consortium for the Barcode of Life (CBOL).

"Biodiversity scientists are using DNA technology to unravel mysteries, much like detectives use it to solve crimes," Schindel told Tierramérica from Mexico City, where CBOL was co-host of the Nov. 10-12 conference of the Mexican Academy of Sciences with the Biology Institute of the Autonomous National University of Mexico (UNAM).

"This work in Mexico and elsewhere is enormously important," says Patricia Escalante, chair of the Institute's zoology department.

"Barcoding is a tool to identify species faster, more cheaply, and more precisely than traditional methods," Escalante stated in a press release.

DNA is a complex molecule containing all the genetic instructions for any organism to develop. While the DNA of a human is different and more complex than that of a worm, mouse DNA is quite similar to human DNA.

Several years ago, Canada's Biodiversity Institute of Ontario identified a portion of a gene called "cytochrome c oxidase I" that has proved to be the location of the unique "barcode" for all animal species. Knowing the location each species' unique barcode now allows scientists to quickly and easily identify them.

In a few years the technology is expected to progress to the point that identifying a species will require little more than taking a tissue sample and using a scanner similar to the barcode scanners used in grocery stores, says Schindel.

While different areas of DNA have been identified that serve as the barcode regions for birds and for insects, plants had remained elusive, in part because there are an estimated 400,000 species of flora.

CBOL scientists can now compile a database of all known plant species with their unique barcodes, which can be utilised as a sort of global reference library.

In the near future, inspectors will be able to take a small sample from raw logs or lumber and determine if it is from illegally harvested trees.

Similar testing can also verify if an exotic wood is being sold at a premium price on the legal market is indeed what it claims to be. This can raise the value of the product and stem illegal trade or reveal fakes, according to Schindel.

The same is true for herbal medicines. Mixtures of dried and ground up herbal preparations are extremely difficult to identify without DNA barcoding, he says.

Mexico has roughly 800 species of cactus, some of which are very rare and prized by collectors. Many are used in landscaping. But there are no maps of the habitats of the various types, and only a few experts in the world can identify individual species.

"If Mexico doesn't protect these rare species, they'll be gone, but first you have to know where they are," Schindel said.

DNA barcoding could help to map the distribution of each type of cactus. That, in turn, could open new markets for local people to sell these plants because officials could determine whether it could be done sustainably, he explained.

Legal versus illegal trade in wild animals is also difficult to sort out if there are no simple ways available to identify the species. In 2003 a Brazilian man was caught smuggling 58 eggs, which he claimed were quail eggs. But airport police suspected they might be parrots.

The eggs never hatched, but DNA barcoding showed three of the eggs were blue and gold macaws (a vulnerable species, according to the IUCN - International Union for the Conservation of Nature), 51 blue-bellied or yellow-faced Amazon parrots (both threatened species) and four yellow-crowned Amazons, which are not endangered.

The applications for genetic profiling seem endless. In Mexico City, scientists from Spain announced they had DNA barcoded blood in the bellies of 100 mosquitoes, biting midges and sandflies to reveal which animals the insects bite besides humans.

According to a news release, they found the insects had bitten 18 mammals, including hares, partridges and mongoose, and 26 types of birds. The results are important to malaria and other disease vector research.

Canadian scientists presented new research based on the DNA analysis of bat guano, which revealed that eight bat species feed on over 300 types of insect - one of the largest food webs ever discovered.

This extension of DNA barcoding to unravel complex dynamics in the wild is an exciting new research field with important implications for nature conservation, Atilano Contreras, of the UNAM Institute of Biology, told Tierramérica.

While not yet widely used in Mexico, DNA barcoding has identified several new species of parasites. Fungal parasites are believed to be the main cause of the worldwide decline in amphibians, Contreras said.

(*This story was originally published by Latin American newspapers that are part of the Tierramérica network. Tierramérica is a specialised news service produced by IPS with the backing of the United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Environment Programme and the World Bank.) (END/2009)

--
Frederick Noronha :: +91-832-2409490
Writing, editing, alt.publishing, photography, journalism
ANOTHER GOA: http://tiny.cc/anothergoa

#873

From: Frederick Noronha <fredericknoronha@...>
Date: Thu Nov 26, 2009 12:21 am
Subject: PERU: Fighting Hunger with Native Crops

fredericknor...

Offline

Dionicio Sarmiento, from Tinquerccasa, displays his best seed potatoes.

Credit:Milagros Salazar/IPS

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=49366

PERU: Fighting Hunger with Native Crops
By Milagros Salazar

PAUCARÁ, Peru, Nov 21 (IPS) - As if he were showing off a treasure, Dionicio Sarmiento holds up his seed potatoes with a smile. "Look how nice they are, all ready to plant. It'll be a good harvest," says the peasant farmer from Huancavelica, Peru's poorest province, where most of the population depends on subsistence farming.

Good seeds can make the difference between going hungry or putting food on the table for your family.

Sarmiento lives in the village of Tinquerccasa, more than 3,500 metres above sea level, where the houses are made of adobe, farmers use simple tools, and food production barely covers the families' needs. Piped water is available here only one hour a day, and there is no sewer system.

Tinquerccasa is in the district of Paucará, where more than 90 percent of the population is poor. In Huancavelica as a whole, where indigenous people make up the majority of the population, nearly 86 percent of people live in poverty, and approximately 45 percent of children in native communities are malnourished.

Despite these grim statistics, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) has found fertile ground in the village for fighting hunger and promoting food security through a project aimed at strengthening community organisations, reviving consumption of traditional foods, and connecting farm production with markets, to boost the incomes of local farmers.

While FAO has forged alliances with local, provincial and central government authorities, as well as universities, perhaps the project's most important capital is the traditional knowledge of the local indigenous people and their dreams of getting ahead.

FAO reports that global food insecurity has worsened, and that it remains a serious threat to humanity, due to high food prices in developing countries. The U.N. agency estimates that the number of hungry people worldwide will increase by 100 million this year, to more than one billion.

Bringing dreams to life

The project in Huancavelica is attacking the problem of hunger from different angles.

"Planning is very important for local development and to guarantee that local families have food," Hernán Mormontoy, coordinator of the FAO project, told IPS. "And large investments are not needed, just a great deal of ingenuity, energy and commitment."

When Mormontoy, an agricultural engineer from Cuzco with more than 25 years experience in rural areas and excellent people skills, visits the participating communities, he walks from one end to the other, talking to people all along the way.

He says planning is the key, and asks local families to literally illustrate their dreams by drawing on a piece of construction paper, which is called their "future land management plan."

In the drawing, the families graphically lay out their hopes for improvements to their homes and farms, and business possibilities.

"Over here is my organic garden, and a little shed for my guinea pigs," Sarmiento showed IPS. "Right here I'm going to put a shed for my cows; on this other side will go the pig sty; and in the front, we want to put a restaurant and a hostel for tourists."

His son Bush, who is just five years old, attentively listens to his father's explanation, while his mother, Dionicia, looks on with a smile, holding their six-month-old daughter Zoraida.

"In this project, the whole family gets involved," says Mormontoy.

"I help water the organic garden, where lettuce and beets are already growing," says Dionicia in Quechua, her native tongue. "I also help select the seeds, and prepare the clay for the adobe bricks used to make houses. I help out in several ways."

The project has dozens of outreach workers like Sarmiento, who are in charge of getting other local families involved.

Through the project, more than 50 rustic-looking but effective seed storage units have been built, which have helped guarantee good harvests. The families participating in the project have also cut their food expenses 30 percent, while increasing their incomes 40 percent, FAO reports.

As part of the plan, large plots have been planted with traditional crops like native potato varieties, the Andean root vegetable olluco (Ullucus tuberosus), and tarwi or Andean lupin (Lupinus mutabilis), whose seeds are used in different recipes.

The Lima-based Centre for the Study and Promotion of Development (DESCO) provides the farmers with technical advice, as part of its aim to bolster production and consumption of high-protein traditional foods.

Other nutritional native foods are quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa, also known as Inca wheat), oca (Oxalis tuberosa), a root vegetable, and amaranth (Amaranthus), a traditional grain.

But promoting consumption of tarwi and amaranth is a challenge for FAO, because local communities are not familiar with their nutritional qualities or do not know how to prepare and cook them anymore.

"We made tarwi once and it tasted like poison, it was so bitter," 59-year-old peasant farmer Pablo Vargas told IPS. He has grown the crop but basically just to sell, because he is unfamiliar with the technique for preparing the seeds, which are bitter due to a high alkaloid content. Preparation involves soaking the seeds in water for several days.

To boost consumption of these traditional products, food fairs have been held, where cooks - mainly women - showcase their creative recipes.

There is also an alliance with the National Institute of Agrarian Innovation (INIA) to help diversify crops in the native villages. IPS visited Tinquerccasa when INIA was providing the community leaders with more than 662 varieties of oca, olluco and mashua (Tropaeolum tuberosum), another root vegetable.

The INIA experts plan to observe in situ the productivity of these different varieties and their resistance to different conditions, in order to replicate the experience in other areas.

Without water, life is not possible

Food security and improved living conditions among these communities are also related to access to water for farming and consumption. Julián Soto, a dedicated farmer and father of five, and his family are building a water storage tank.

Like in other Andean communities, water is becoming more and more scarce in the area, because climate change has reduced the sources of water as a result of the melting of the glaciers and changes in rainfall patterns.

Mormontoy said this aspect has been taken into account in the project.

Soto is a symbol of rural development despite the adversities he has faced: not only has he managed to increase his farm production, but with the support of his children he has refurbished and enlarged the family home and founded a small dairy product company run by his wife, Máxima Silvestre.

"I have travelled up north, to Cajamarca, to learn how to make cheese and yoghurt. I'm going to make them myself, and sell them at lower prices to the people in my community," said Silvestre, who did not stop weaving for one second while talking to IPS.

In such a poverty-stricken area, many local residents are in need of support, and the FAO project cannot cover everyone's needs.

Félix Unocc, from the community of Padre Rumi, asked Mormontoy to go with him to one of his plots of land to see if it was possible to build a water storage pond there.

After a walk along a rocky path, the farmer, the agricultural engineer and IPS reached the hill where Unocc's field lies. Mormontoy looked at the stream and the land, and told the farmer: "We could dig a pond here to collect the water that runs down the hill, to irrigate your crops and those of other families, because the water belongs to everyone."

Unocc nodded and said of course he understood that the water was for the entire community. "We only want a little orientation and help," he said softly, his response reflecting the urgent need for these remote indigenous communities to receive help from the state to guarantee their survival in the fight against hunger. (END/2009)

--
Frederick Noronha :: +91-832-2409490
Writing, editing, alt.publishing, photography, journalism
ANOTHER GOA: http://tiny.cc/anothergoa

#872

From: Frederick Noronha <fredericknoronha@...>
Date: Thu Nov 26, 2009 12:20 am
Subject: Q&A: ‘Creating Artificial Glaciers Is Simple, Easy and Replicable’

fredericknor...

Offline

Chewang Norphel pioneered artificial glaciers in Ladakh, India.

Credit:Athar Parvaiz/IPS

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=49369

Q&A: ‘Creating Artificial Glaciers Is Simple, Easy and Replicable’
Athar Parvaiz interviews CHEWANG NORPHEL, India's 'Glacier Man'

LADAKH, India, Nov 22 (IPS) - His is a classic case of a man’s fight against nature in this trans-Himalayan region of Ladakh, as he battles climate change.

In this region that seldom sees rains, the glaciers—for ages the fountainheads of water for this arid region—are receding at a rapid rate. Farmers find it difficult to grow crops in their agricultural lands, with water in extremely short supply when it is most needed to irrigate the fields.

But 74-year-old Chewang Norphel, a former government civil engineer, has devised a way to deal with this challenge. No, he does not have the power to stop the melting of glaciers, but he has pioneered a solution by creating artificial glaciers, yes glaciers, which help farmers to stave off irrigational crises right at the onset of crop growing.

In an interview with IPS, Norphel talks about his novel concept, his struggles and hopes as he pursues his pioneering endeavor that has earned him the moniker ‘Glacier Man’.

IPS: Your idea of creating artificial glaciers is slowly gaining wide acceptance. Tell us about this whole concept.

CHEWANG NORPHEL: The creation of artificial glaciers is a high-altitude water conservation technique in the wake of climate change. The glaciers are receding rapidly and winters are getting shorter and warmer. Therefore, whatever little snowfall is received melts away quickly. The snow and glacier meltwater drains into the river without any use (to the farmers) for the most part of the year, and farmers are unable to find any water when it is needed during the snowing season.

So, construction of artificial glaciers is a means for harvesting glacial meltwater for the irrigational needs of farmers. Natural glaciers are way up in the mountains, and they melt slowly in summer and thereby reach the villages in June whereas artificial glacier starts melting in spring, right when the first irrigation requirement called ‘Thachus’ which means ‘germinating water’ is most needed.

IPS: How do you create artificial glaciers?

CN: Artificial glaciers are a simple water-harvesting technique suited for high-altitude cold deserts that are totally dependent on glaciers. Glacier melt at different altitudes is diverted to the shaded side of the hill, facing the north, where the winter sun is blocked by a ridge or a mountain slope. At the start of winter (November), the diverted water is made to flow onto the sloping hill face through appropriately designed distribution channels or outlets.

At regular intervals stone embankments are built, which impede the flow of water, making shallow pools. In the distributing chambers, 1.5-inch diametre G pipes are installed after every five feet for proper distribution of water.

Water flows in small quantities and at low velocity through the G pipes, and freezes instantly. The process of ice formation continues for three to four winter months and a huge reserve of ice accumulates on the mountain slope, aptly termed ‘artificial glacier’.

IPS: How many farmers are benefiting from artificial glaciers?

CN: Since artificial glaciers are constructed close to a village, all the families in the village or hamlet are equally benefited. Eighty percent of the farmers of Leh [Ladakh’s capital] depend on glacier melt for irrigating their agricultural land, where they grow vegetables, barley and wheat.

So far, we have created eight glaciers adjacent to many villages, which means farmers of these villages are benefiting from artificial glaciers. Once this facility is extended to all the villages, all the farmers will be able to reap the benefits of artificial glaciers.

IPS: What are the other benefits of simulated glaciers?

CN: Apart from solving the irrigation problem, the artificial glaciers help in the recharging of ground water and rejuvenation of springs. They enable farmers to harvest two crops in a year, help in developing pastures for cattle rearing and reducing water sharing disputes among the farmers. They also help build the confidence of farmers based in an arid region like Ladakh. Villagers can earn cash income while remaining as farmers.

IPS: How did the idea of creating artificial glaciers occur to you?

CN: You know, we in the cold regions leave the tap in our bathrooms half running during winter nights to keep water in the supply pipe from freezing. One fine morning, I realised that this water was getting frozen in our nearby garden. It struck me that small artificial glaciers could be formed in the same manner.

Since I had travelled to most of the places in the region as a government engineer until 1986, I was aware of its entire topography; I thought the shaded areas in the lower ranges could be utilised for this purpose. Thus emerged the first artificial glacier I created in Phuktse Phu village in 1987 by using this simple method.

IPS: How much does it cost to create an artificial glacier?

CN: It varies from site to site. Generally, it costs around three to 10 lac Indian rupees (around five to six thousand U.S. dollars).

IPS: What else is needed to build such a structure?

CN: Villagers are the main stakeholders, so their involvement is crucial to the sustainability of the project. A community contributes to the construction and maintenance of the glaciers, and that makes the project sustainable and beneficial over the long term.

IPS: Where do you get the funding for creating the glaciers?

CN: The funding for artificial glaciers near Stakmo village comes the Indian Army under its operation Sadbhavna while that for other artificial glaciers has come to a limited extent from the government’s watershed development programmes. Recently, the Science and Technology department also started giving funds toward the rehabilitation of damaged artificial glaciers. The funding is made to a non-government organisation, Leh Nutrition Project.

IPS: What are the challenges to building artificial glaciers?

CN: The availability of funds is a problem, because it takes a long while to arrange funds for the creation of artificial glaciers.

On the other hand, people’s interest (in helping build artificial glaciers) has begun to wane. They used to volunteer themselves for the creation of these collective resources, but not anymore. They are getting subsidised food grains from the government, which has made them a bit indolent. Road inaccessibility and high transportation costs of materials are the other main problems we face, since we have to work at a high altitude of 4,600 metres above sea level.

IPS: Can your artificial glacier model be replicated elsewhere?

CN: As I said, the technique for creating artificial glaciers is easy and simple and can be replicated in similar geo-climatic regions as Ladakh, such as Spiti in Hamachal Pradesh-India and some central Asian countries like Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. This technology can be replicated in areas which have the following features like a 4,666- to 5,333-metre altitude; temperature as low as -15 to -20 degree Celsius during peak winters; and longer winter periods of four to five months to ensure longer expansion and formation of glaciers

IPS: World leaders are assembling in Copenhagen in December for a climate change summit. As someone who has been helping address this issue on the adaptation front, what is your message to them?

CN: My humble suggestion to the people of the regions that have already been hit by climate change or will be in the future would be that they should act and make things happen. To the world leaders, my humble request to them is they work hard to evolve an agreement that will safeguard the future and interests of the people of the entire planet.

(END/2009)

--
Frederick Noronha :: +91-832-2409490
Writing, editing, alt.publishing, photography, journalism
ANOTHER GOA: http://tiny.cc/anothergoa

#871

From: Yogita Mehra <yogitamehra@...>
Date: Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:30 am
Subject: eeni meeni myna and mo....

yogitamehra

Offline

Hello!

Eeni Meeni Myna and Mo are looking for a home.

They are 4, thorough local bred puppies, healthy, resilient and very loving.

If you would like to have one of them, you can come meet them in Alto St. Cruz.
Please feel free to pass this mail to anyone you know who might be interested in having them.

woof woof!
Yogita

2 of 2 Photo(s)

Eeni Meeni Myna Mo.jpg

Myna and Mo.jpg

#870

From: Parag Rangnekar <paragrangnekar@...>
Date: Tue Nov 17, 2009 5:44 am
Subject: Fw: ornithology course

paragrangnekar

Offline

Dear All,

For all those who are interested.

regards

Parag Rangnekar

"Man is but a small strand in the web of life, what he does to the web he does to himself....."

--- On Mon, 11/16/09, Anand Padhye <adpadhye@...> wrote:

From: Anand Padhye <adpadhye@...>
Subject: ornithology course
To: adpadhye@..., "Adwait Godbole" <adwaitgodbole@...>, abhyankarrashmi@..., nandudp@..., anushreejadhav@..., "Amod Zambre" <amodzambre@...>, "Aboli Kulkarni" <aboli.kulkarni5@...>, "Anuja Datye" <datye.anuja@...>, "Sanjay Auti" <autisanjay@...>, "BHALCHANDRA BHOLE" <bdbhole@...>, "Ani - my favourite bird on nest" <achaoji@...>, "balaji aglave" <ba_aglave@...>, agczoodept@..., "Mr W.N. Gade (HOD - Dept. Of Biotechnology)" <wngade@...>, "Dr.Sushama R Chaphalkar" <director.vsbt@...>, malihemant1@..., catchnamrata@..., creativeye_nandita@..., cutemormon4u@..., "Dharne, Mahesh" <msdharne@...>, "nagesh daptardar" <nagesh_daptardar@...>, "Devna Arora" <devnakarora@...>, "Neelesh Dahanukar" <neeleshdahanukar@...>, dasharath.sachin@..., "sneha loving every moment........." <ssneha_3@...>, "fatima lukmani" <f.Sweetgal4u@...>, fatima_lk@..., "Gauri Haval" <gaurihaval@...>, "Hemant Ghate" <hemantghate@...>, "Nivedita Ghayal" <gnivedita12@...>, "swapnil Y." <greateswapnil@...>, gnivedita_ghayal@..., "purva gado" <purva_gd@...>, "sudhir gade" <gadesudhir@...>, "swapnil gaikwad" <swapy28@...>, "Anil Gupte" <gupteanil@...>, "hrushikesh hasabnis" <hrushikesh83@...>, "Sanjay Molur" <herpinvert@...>, head.chm@..., head.ese@..., head.phy@..., head@..., head@..., iamamolbhagwat@..., jinstorm1199@..., jagdish.chinchore@..., "Mayuresh Kadu" <mskadu@...>, "sanjay kharat" <kharat.sanjay@...>, kooldeep1228@..., "yogendra kunte" <yogendra.kunte@...>, Kanishashah@..., kirtitelgu@..., "Puja Khedkar" <puja_khedkar@...>, "Sanjay Khatavkar" <sanjaykhatavkar@...>, "sulabha karandikar" <k.sulabha@...>, kirti.telgu@..., "Swaroop Kulkarni" <swappy_rk@...>, "Leena Vernekar" <verenkarlb@...>, "lakhan pardeshi" <lakhanp1@...>, "Mahesh Shindikar" <maheshshindikar@...>, "Narayan" <nrd1675@...>, nrd1675@..., "nilesh Rane" <neeleshrane@...>, neeleshdahanukar@..., "Omkar ShElKe####" <omkar7691@...>, pallavipatil@..., "Parag Rangnekar" <paragrangnekar@...>, prashantkulkarni64@..., prashantkulkarni@..., priyanka.runwal@..., priyankarunwal@..., rajuchikate@..., "rasika rairikar" <rasika_rairikar@...>, "Rohan Shetti" <rohanshetti@...>, "Rohan Pandit" <rohanpandit87@...>, ssnehathegreat@..., "Sheetal Shelke" <write2shi@...>, "Vishwasrao Vivek V" <vvishwasrao@...>, "Aranya Vaak" <aranyavaak@...>, vishnubiradar11@..., y.gunjal@...
Date: Monday, November 16, 2009, 6:11 PM

Dear all,

We are starting the sixth Ornithology course on 7th Dec 2009.

Please tell this news to interested persons in your contact.

I am attaching the press release for the same

Thanks and Regards

Dr. A. D. Padhye,

Course Co-ordinator,

Reader, Dept. of Zoology,

A. G. Collage,

Pune 411 004.

1 of 1 File(s)

Ornitho

#869

From: marlon menezes <goacom@...>
Date: Sat Nov 14, 2009 4:13 am
Subject: Plastic Roads Offer Greener Way to Travel in India

goacom

Offline

The article also briefly mention's Goa's plastic problem...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/14/business/global/14plastic.html

Reply | Forward | Messages in this Topic (2)

#868

From: Luis Dias <diasfluis@...>
Date: Fri Nov 13, 2009 3:00 am
Subject: Children's Day: On your bikes!

diasfluis

Offline

Help make Goa a safer place to cycle for children

Date: Saturday November 14, 2009
Time: 4:30pm
Location: Campal Football Ground (near Kala Academy), Panjim, Goa

Join Goa Cycle Club and TI Cycles (makers of Hercules and BSA cycles) for a community-wide Cyclathon. We are looking to have at least 250 cycles on the road that day for the event. Why Children's Day? Because they are the future and if we have a message to give our people there is nothing better than passing it on through the children. Moreover we would like to involve the school children and what better day to do that than on Children's day?

Open to all schoolchildren, can also be accompanied by parents. Route will start at Campal Football Ground (near Kala Academy), continue to Miramar, turn left after Goa Science Centre, round Taleigao High Mast opp. Education Minister's house and to Miramar Dona Paula highway to Dona Paula and back to The football ground.
WE NEED SOME VOLUNTEERS TO HELP OUT WITH THE EVENT AS WE WILL HAVE TO GO TO THE SCHOOLS AND TELL THEM. THOSE WILLING TO HELP PLEASE CONTACT GOA CYCLE CLUB, SPECIALLY IF YOU HAVE ANY CONNECTIONS WITH ANY SCHOOLS.
Come friends, neighbours, office mates, relatives, kids, adults, everyone welcome, free admission, join the fun!
For more information about this event or Goa Cycle Club, call Joe Rodrigues on 9822166165 or send a message by email. If you need a cycle, call Elroy Fernandes on 9420252108. Join Goa Cycle Club on Facebook to meet other cyclists and stay up-to-date on cycling activities.

Reply | Forward | Messages in this Topic (2)

#867

From: marlon menezes <goacom@...>
Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 5:34 am
Subject: Re: We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

goacom

Offline

________________________________
From: abhijit prabhudesai <abhipama@...>
Consumerism is quite distinct from the verb 'to consume', or its derivatives.
Consumerism refers to the culture of buying more and more products, usually not
essentials, while 'to consume' relates to using resources, which are usually
necessary to the consumer. Persons living sustainable lives are also consumers,
but do not indulge in consumerism. Consumerism is driven by brainwashing through
ads or 'expert' opinions, social pressures, glamour, ignorance and other causes,
but excludes consumption for basic necessities.
---
How does one draw the line between your definitions of consumerism and
consumption? For example, is the pursuit of education, culture (arts, music etc)
and the consumption it entails consumerism or consumption? I believe there is no
boundary between them. The boundary that exists between the levels of
consumption is primarily determined by one's economic capacity.

________________________________
From: abhijit prabhudesai <abhipama@...>
With regards the debate of the role of various classes of people, I tend to like
Gadgil and Guha's classification in one of their books, where they group the
entire polupation into three broad classes , viz 'the ecological people', 'the
ecological refugees' and 'the omnivores'. The ecological people are those who
live sustainable lives by producing or collecting from the land on which they
live. These include sustenance farmers (such as in Goa), forest dwellers,
traditional fishermen, etc. The ecological refugees are the construction,
industrial and other workers, who used to be ecological people but are forced to
work for a living since they are displaced from their ancestral lives. And the
omnivores are those who do not directly produce anything, and who inevitably
indulge in 'consumerism'.
  ---
First let me make the reasonable assumption that one's energy/consumption foot
print is directly correlated with one's carbon footprint. Now, if we were to
maintain a low energy/low carbon footprint, the amount of physical land required
to maintain a "sustainable" but moderate/middle class lifestyle would be huge.
This is clearly a non starter with the levels of population we have today. One
would in effect be trading carbon/mechanization for more land. Due to the
productivity loss, one would also have to give up/reduce a lot of other
activities - again an exchange of reduced carbon for reduced services (no
electricity, limited time/resources for education etc). If this is what we want,
we might as well log off our computers and return to the woods. Again, this
feeds into my argument that consumption is not the real issue. Instead I would
say that it is the carbon based energy source enabling the consumption that is
the problem.

The fact is that there is an almost infinite source of energy (the sun), which
means that there are no theoretical limits to consumption. If materials get
limited, they can always be substituted or recycled - at the cost of added
energy. Right now, being wealthy and green is often an oxymoron, because of the
tenacious link between consumption and the carbon based energy sources that
power it. However, it was not always the case in the past and it need not be so
in the future. Over the last decade, breaking this carbon-energy link has become
the hottest area of research.  If present trends continue, it is conceivable
that alternate energy sources such as solar could become as cost effective as
carbon based energy sources within the next decade in many parts of the world.
When that happens we could actually see a reversal in the correlation between
one's carbon foot print and level of consumption.

Another issue which I obliquely addressed in my previous email was energy
efficiency. This is another factor in reducing one's footprint while still
allowing higher consumption. Right now for example, the energy/carbon input per
unit of output/consumption is much higher in the poorer countries than their
wealthier counterparts. Of course, the gains from efficiency in the richer
nations gets blown out by the fact that their total overall consumption is
significantly higher, which leads to higher carbon output/person.

Besides the carbon-energy link, the other real issue that I think folks are
inadvertently bringing up is the inequitable access/distribution of
energy/consumption between various economic groups and nations. This is a whole
topic in itself.

Marlon

#866

From: abhijit prabhudesai <abhipama@...>
Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:00 pm
Subject: Re: We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

abhipama

Offline

Hi all

Thanks for the lively correspondence on a subject that is close to all our lives. My take is:

Consumerism is quite distinct from the verb 'to consume', or its derivatives. Consumerism refers to the culture of buying more and more products, usually not essentials, while 'to consume' relates to using resources, which are usually necessary to the consumer. Persons living sustainable lives are also consumers, but do not indulge in consumerism. Consumerism is driven by brainwashing through ads or 'expert' opinions, social pressures, glamour, ignorance and other causes, but excludes consumption for basic necessities.

I do believe that the subject is about a change. It is really a social change we are talking about. I think that it is quite clear that the reality around us has changed dramatically from what it was say 40 years ago. All agree that unless we as a species change quickly, we could face serious challenges in the future. However, social changes through self-correction can only take place through if we undertake many simultaneous processes. For starters, the fundamentals of our current socio-economic theories must be systematically explored with an open mind for errors. The difficulty is that we are so brainwashed with the current theories, or so wrapped up in our own short lives, that we lose objectivity.

An important characteristic of society is that it resists change and displays amazing inertia in its evolution. Also, social changes are often sudden, and once they take place the society again holds on hard to its new set of postulates with unbelievable ease. Another characteristic of social changes, which is the one that weighs the most on my mind, is that if a critical change is resisted long enough, natural events shall perform the correction, and the social change will be automatically forced or even rendered unnecessary, due to the ferocity of the natural correction. Extinctions of species are not unusual in the history of our planet.

With regards the debate of the role of various classes of people, I tend to like Gadgil and Guha's classification in one of their books, where they group the entire polupation into three broad classes , viz 'the ecological people', 'the ecological refugees' and 'the omnivores'. The ecological people are those who live sustainable lives by producing or collecting from the land on which they live. These include sustenance farmers (such as in Goa), forest dwellers, traditional fishermen, etc. The ecological refugees are the construction, industrial and other workers, who used to be ecological people but are forced to work for a living since they are displaced from their ancestral lives. And the omnivores are those who do not directly produce anything, and who inevitably indulge in 'consumerism'.

You may argue that this classification is too general or too critical of the 'omnivores', and you are probably right, but it does throw light on the current organization of modern world economy and the vast disparity in the roles played by different classes. The fact that the majority of Indian population still lies in the first category is in my opinion the real reason for India's immunity to the recent economic recession.

Finally, the need to cut down on our consumption cannot be denied. Every person's effort to embrace the new values is a positive step in the evolution of our society. Of course, whether our small steps shall be enough or not, only time will tell.

Regards

abhijit

--- On Tue, 10/11/09, Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@...> wrote:

From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@...>
Subject: Re: [GreenGoa] We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism
To: GreenGoa@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, 10 November, 2009, 10:27 AM

2009/11/10 Yogita Mehra <yogitamehra@ gmail.com>

Briefly, everyone has a role, and not all roles will be equal. That's true of any change cycle.

Granted.

Because as consumers we can have a powerful influence on markets (we vote with our money right?), hence consumerism has a powerful role to play today.

I disagree here. Let us take the disposable plastics issue. We've been banging on about reducing usage, and have done so to whatever extent we can (which is pretty limited, since nearly everything comes packaged in plastic). Result? Zilch.

Whereas if we demand legislation, properly enforced, to ban plastic bags, we're getting somewhere.

Green consumerism does little but give a warm, fuzzy feeling. To some extent it may build up a momentum for demanding political change, but I would like to see more evidence of that.

If Oscar Wilde was right when he said "The cynic knows the price of everything and the value of nothing...", then I guess I'm glad to be an optimist :-)

Ouch! But maybe it would be better to be a realist?

Marlon has made some interesting points. I respond below.

2009/11/10 marlon menezes <goacom@yahoo. com>:
> I do not buy your claim that the middle class and wealthy in general are morally inferior to the less well to do with respect to their environmental decisions.

I do not make any such claim. I am concerned about the practical issues. The wealthier you get, the more inferior you are to the the less well to do in environmental terms. It is a straight correlation that accounts for 95% of the matter, making it almost deterministic. Any green consumerism or whatever is merely cosmetic dressing on this simple fact.

The extent to which I am concerned about morality is when we, with our trivial and cosmetic green lifestyle choices, blame and target the poor for environmental problems. That is clearly morally wrong.

> Bottom line is that instead of judging groups of people, one needs to focus on creating more awareness of the issue. As society understands this issue, it will automatically create solutions to resolve it.

Agreed.

Let me make it clear that I am not in disagreement with the points made. The only reason I raised these issues was because of the following concerns:

1. Middle-class environmentalism often descends into self-righteousness over cosmetic choices. And there is an unwillingness to think through the socio-political issues involved. Warm, fuzzy feelings are often what it's all about. This must change.
2. This unwillingness to think things through means we target the poor, set ourselves up on some undeserved environmental pedestal, and fail to ally our consumer actions with a push for political change, rendering them as good as useless.

Enough said on my side on this matter. Over and out!

--
Whatever it is, I'm against it -- Groucho Marx

From cricket scores to your friends. Try the Yahoo! India Homepage!

#865

From: "Dr. Jen Lewis" <jen_lew3@...>
Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:22 pm
Subject: Have you sent your Cardboard Climate Campaigner to make a flap in Copenhagen?

jen_lew3

Offline

>>>
Have you sent your Cardboard Climate Campaigner to make a flap in Copenhagen?
http://weblog.greenpeace.org/climate/2009/11/have_you_sent_your_cardboard_c.html

Our Action-Pact virtual march on Copenhagen
(http://www.action-pact.org/?source=climateblog) has been going for less than
two weeks, and we already have 10,000+ 11,000 entries! These Virtual Cardboard
Care Packages are being sent from all around the world with clever messages
demanding polticians deliver a pact to act on climate change. Here are just a
few of my favourites:



The best slogan is going to be put on a banner and displayed, Greenpeace-style
(wink wink wink), at the Copenhagen summit -- you can vote for your faves in the
gallery. Many of these characters are going to be marching across a jumbo video
screen as well, reminding delegates that the whole world is watching. Got
something to say? Don't contain yourself, tell the worldâ€™s polluters to PACK
IT IN!



<<<<<

#864

From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@...>
Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:57 am
Subject: Re: We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

gadgilvidyadhar

Offline

2009/11/10 Yogita Mehra <yogitamehra@...>

Briefly, everyone has a role, and not all roles will be equal. That's true of any change cycle.

Granted.

Because as consumers we can have a powerful influence on markets (we vote with our money right?), hence consumerism has a powerful role to play today.

I disagree here. Let us take the disposable plastics issue. We've been banging on about reducing usage, and have done so to whatever extent we can (which is pretty limited, since nearly everything comes packaged in plastic). Result? Zilch.

Whereas if we demand legislation, properly enforced, to ban plastic bags, we're getting somewhere.

Green consumerism does little but give a warm, fuzzy feeling. To some extent it may build up a momentum for demanding political change, but I would like to see more evidence of that.

If Oscar Wilde was right when he said "The cynic knows the price of everything and the value of nothing...", then I guess I'm glad to be an optimist :-)

Ouch! But maybe it would be better to be a realist?

Marlon has made some interesting points. I respond below.

2009/11/10 marlon menezes <goacom@...>:
> I do not buy your claim that the middle class and wealthy in general are morally inferior to the less well to do with respect to their environmental decisions.

I do not make any such claim. I am concerned about the practical issues. The wealthier you get, the more inferior you are to the the less well to do in environmental terms. It is a straight correlation that accounts for 95% of the matter, making it almost deterministic. Any green consumerism or whatever is merely cosmetic dressing on this simple fact.

The extent to which I am concerned about morality is when we, with our trivial and cosmetic green lifestyle choices, blame and target the poor for environmental problems. That is clearly morally wrong.

> Bottom line is that instead of judging groups of people, one needs to focus on creating more awareness of the issue. As society understands this issue, it will automatically create solutions to resolve it.

Agreed.

Let me make it clear that I am not in disagreement with the points made. The only reason I raised these issues was because of the following concerns:

1. Middle-class environmentalism often descends into self-righteousness over cosmetic choices. And there is an unwillingness to think through the socio-political issues involved. Warm, fuzzy feelings are often what it's all about. This must change.
2. This unwillingness to think things through means we target the poor, set ourselves up on some undeserved environmental pedestal, and fail to ally our consumer actions with a push for political change, rendering them as good as useless.

Enough said on my side on this matter. Over and out!

--
Whatever it is, I'm against it -- Groucho Marx

#863

From: Hansel Vaz <fishbonehans@...>
Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:39 am
Subject: Re: We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

fishbonehans@...

Vidhyadhar has written exactly what I have been thinking for a while now. I absolutely concur with everything he says. But then being labelled as a "green" doesnt remove an indivisual from being human. Any species if left unchecked will consume until left with nothing. Koala's in Australia have killed huge tracts of gum trees because they just ate all the shoots. They did as they were programed by nature. And with no trees they starved to death. But when conservationists saw it, aussis went gaga about culling koalas to save the forest, and ironically the kola population. If we put ourselves in the same picture we are very much like that...we will consume unabated, unless we decrease our population proportionate to our lifestyles. Human impact cannot be ever ruled out on the earth. As a dominant species, we will have a greater impact on our environment than ever before, not only because consumerism has had a resulted in drastic changes in the way a resource is consumed all over the planet, but simply because now we have a population bigger than ever before. The impact of a huge population is simply mind boggling if we all want comfortable lives. We all want basic amenties; clean water and food... electricty. For that to be satisfied there is no way that the earth can satisfy all this with organically grown food, or clean fuels. Industrial needs of power today can only be met by fossil fuels and nukes, which no one wants. So what do we do then? Climate change: I recently had a long discussion with my brother on exactly the same issue. i don't like the term of 'phony green consumerism" but how practical everything is or should be. We spoke at length in particular the about the issue of climate change... which we have had on earlier occasions. For the greater part of my student like, I grappled with a lot of what geology taught me, making me unlearn a lot of what i already thought was right. Climate change is not a new phenomena, something that the earth has seen for eons. Neither are mass extinctions, whether is because of climate or its because of impact from a particular species. Each wave of change only helped make life more resilient and more diverse, as we see today. We can rave and rant as much as we want, about how much we need to do, trying to slow down the cogs of nature. But we cannot. No one is denying anything about the human impact, we acknowledge it. But maybe we are just behaving how nature intended us to behave. Guilty and condemned: Guilt is a major way of controlling people. The guilt flying around sometimes is questionable. i will end now I am emailing from my cell phone, and will reply in detail to the conversation in a couple of days. The whole "organic" thing to me borders on an excellent marketing strategy for a novel way to make money by preying on guilty mindsets. While I would be much happier using compost and manure to enrich my fields, how practical is it to grow crops for a voracious human population? Turning organic will still deny populations, not us because we are we have food security, but populations raved by floods, drought, corrupt leaders etc. We cannot offload any kind of guilt, because we are what we are...we consume to survive. I do not by any means try to thrash the efforts of those who have dedicated their lives to the green cause. Its because of them that we can have such a debate because we are sensitised to it. But a dose of reality will help. hansel

On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Yogita Mehra <yogitamehra@...> wrote:

I think that while "Vidhyadhar's" email raises a couple of valid concerns 'phony green consumerism' and 'high consumption groups', the conclusions are something that I find difficult to agree with.

1. Any movement (of this nature) needs people that are involved at different levels and in different ways. Its simply not possible for everyone to have the same degree of commitment and approach to how they can become 'greener' in their lives. The person who decides to by a green knick-knack as a symbol of their green credentials my not be changing much - but symbols do have a value in this process, especially if they come in sufficiently large numbers. Similarly, real green consumerism of the kind that "Bevinda" described, has a role to play (and a more important one) as it sets an example for each of us.

Briefly, everyone has a role, and not all roles will be equal. That's true of any change cycle.

2. The process that we are going through now is a pretty significant re-education cycle, one where the manner in which we decide which product we buy and how we use it, is the most sustainable for our planet. This is not easy, and information is both scarce and disorganised. We've had decades of experience learning how to find the cheapest/most advanced/most convenient products, so switching to this new set of measures will be difficult, inconvenient and time consuming for each of us. Helping each other learn the new metrics, can help speed up the process.

Because as consumers we can have a powerful influence on markets (we vote with our money right?), hence consumerism has a powerful role to play today.

If Oscar Wilde was right when he said "The cynic knows the price of everything and the value of nothing...", then I guess I'm glad to be an optimist :-)

Yogita

On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 8:49 PM, Vivian D'Souza <shenzi62@...> wrote:

Very impressed by all you do to fight the climate change Bevinda. My wife (of 44 years)

and I have not recycled each other. Not yet anyway. But we do our part for the environment in small ways. We are into rain-water harvesting and have terraced our hilly property. We are experimenting with drip irrigation to save water. We plant trees and trees and trees. Sometimes it is a heartbreaking task when vandals yank out the trees

along public roads that we have so carefully nurtured. But we persevere. We carry our own bags when we go shopping. We also walk a lot and have a small car - WagonR which just

completed 8,000 km after nearly 5 years or ownership. That's right Eight thousand km.

We use public transportation a lot. We compost all our organic material and use it around

trees. Are we doing enough ? Hell NO !! But we each need to be aware and persevere and get our friends involved as well. This is a hell of an uphill task, but every little bit counts. Keep up the fight. It is about a change in attitudes and spreading the message.

The future of this planet depends on each of us.

--- On Mon, 11/9/09, bevinda collaco <bevindac@...> wrote:

From: bevinda collaco <bevindac@...>
Subject: Re: [GreenGoa] We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism
To: GreenGoa@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 5:46 AM

Dear Vidyadhar,

Actually this is a much beaten dead horse, which is why no one has reacted, I guess.

It does make me laugh when Priyanka Chopra and Abhishek Bachchan talk about doing their bit for the environment. They drive around in gas guzzling cars, with their A/Cs on full, they live in airconditioned houses. The water they waste could make life worth living for the entire taluka of drought-hit Sangli.

As you say, we have to have a sea-change in our political outlook. The NDA government had come out with a study regarding the feasibility of a river linking project in the country which could be used for water navigation too with a series of lochs. But UPA - 1 threw it out because Jawaharlal Nehru rubbished it when it was first floated shortly after Independence.

River linking would rob the corrupt of means to grow wealth. Floods and drought and a miserable abject populace is what makes the wheels of power turn. Until the common man becomes aware and raises his voice, this state of affairs will continue.

On a personal level, living a green life is bloody hard work. I only do it because I have a husband who is a very vocal Spartan. Everything is used, reused and recycled in our house. We walk when we don't have to drive. Lights are switched off when not in use. Taps are fixed immediately. Flushes, with varying quantities of water have been installed. Our automatic washing machine was returned and a semi-automatic installed so that the waste water can be used for washing our balcony and the public stairway outside out building. It's not easy. Hardly anything is thrown out. So hardly anything new is brought in. Which can really get one's goat when one wants to throw out the old and bring in the new.

Come to think of it. Maybe that's why we will be 'celebrating' our 30th wedding anniversary in Dec. We haven't gotten new spouses either! Neither of us threw the other one out. You think living green has anything to do with longevity of marriage?

Let's have some responses to this????

Best regards,

Bevinda Collaco

tel: +91 9822380049 +91 9822380049

http://www.ujusgott alaugh.blogspot. com

"On the keyboard of life, always keep one finger on the escape key."

From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@gmail. com>
To: Green Mailgroup <GreenGoa@yahoogroup s.com>

Sent: Mon, November 9, 2009 10:33:28 AM
Subject: [GreenGoa] We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

Nobody responded to my post below, which I sent a few days ago. Either
everybody agrees with what I have written, or nobody could be bothered
to think about it. If the former, then why bother with most of our
green actions at all? If the latter -- well, what can I say? There are
none so blind as those who refuse to even look as to whether there is
something to see?

Anyway, on a similar note, George Monbiot's latest article in the
Guardian raises certain interesting points. See
http://www.counterc urrents.org/ monbiot081109. htm.
The article says: 'The researchers call this the "licensing effect".
Buying green can establish the moral credentials that license
subsequent bad behaviour: the rosier your view of yourself, the more
likely you are to hoard your money and do down other people.' This
does seem to characterise much of the middle- and upper-class
environmental movement. I wish he had elaborated the last point in his
article -- guilt is good, and greenwashing that guilt with trivial
environment- friendly lifestyle choices is a cop-out that can actually
make things worse?

Monbiot's words in this article are a great guideline: "Our power
comes from acting as citizens - demanding political change - not
acting as consumers."

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@gmail. com>

But on a more provocative note, I have long wondered about what use
many of our individual 'green' initiatives are. I could make a very
good case to show that the environmental damage (or carbon footprint
or whatever) one causes has a 95% correlation with one's income level.
The rest is at best pure cosmetic time-pass -- kind of straining at a
gnat while swallowing an elephant with no problems whatsoever. At
worst, it's a strategy by the upper and middle classes to offload
their guilt on to the poor and blame them for the problems.

Like, a rich environmentally aware guy does something profound like
not buying something in plastic packaging (instead buying something in
organic packaging which costs five times as much), feels most
uplifted, gets into his SUV and drives to the airport to whizz into
the air en route to his next destination. The poor guy goes and buys
something in plastic packaging because that's what's cheaply
available, walks to his slum dwelling and falls asleep. But somehow
the first guy thinks he's the profound one and implicitly blames the
slum dweller.

We have seen this most classically in the tiger issue where rich
carbon-spewing urban environmentalists kick tribals out of their
forests to save the tiger (which is why I was impressed with this
list, since it actually included a whole lot of political issues like
this and action rather than individualised initiatives which achieve
nothing but help the participants shed some guilt). Or when we rush
around trying to save the frog by hassling some poor peasants for
catching frogs rather than tackling habitat change and pesticide
usage, which are the real problems.

Okay, enough already. I think this qualifies as an A-1 flame bait.
Hope people feel flamed enough to respond :-)

--
Whatever it is, I'm against it -- Groucho Marx

--
Whatever it is, I'm against it -- Groucho Marx

--
Cheers

Hansel

#862

From: marlon menezes <goacom@...>
Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:57 am
Subject: Re: We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

goacom

Offline

Vidya,

There is no doubt that the size of the environmental footprint increases with
economic wealth.  While I am sure there are a few who choose greenwashing for
superficial purposes, I do not buy your claim that the middle class and wealthy
in general are morally inferior to the less well to do with respect to their
environmental decisions. In most cases, people (even the rich) may not fully be
aware of the environmental consequences of their actions. As I think Bevinda
said, being green is hard, to which I would add the corollary, if you are well
off it is even more difficult to be truly green.

Right now, one of the biggest green crazes is towards fully electric vehicles.
The conventional wisdom is that electricity is cleaner than fossil fuels. What
is invisible to the end user is that fact that in most likelihood, the source of
the electricity is a dirty coal powered plant. Alternatively, rather than going
hybrid, there are many simple  "hypermiling" driving techniques that one can use
to extract 10-20% efficiency gains from the vehicle one already has.
Unfortunately, most people are not aware of it.

In N.America, one of the biggest environmental footprints is one's home. It is
estimated that around 30% of the total carbon emissions are due to consumption
at home. Again, over here, there are various opportunities to reduce this
footprint, but many are simply not even aware of them. Going one step back, the
design of the home and landscape can play a significant role in reducing the
environmental load.  But here, besides lack of knowledge, most have no role in
the design decisions that take place prior to them owing the house.
Counteracting situational issues like these requires fighting inertia that is a
legacy of several decades in the making, when the issue of climate change was
not on the radar. When I was in high school, over 20 years ago, my idiosyncratic
chemistry teacher
raised the issue of carbon emissions and global warming. At that time,
even I thought huh?.

With respect to global warming, the biggest issue is economic - currently, the
costs of carbon emissions are not being fully factored in. However, I think some
form of costs will eventually be factored in, but the path will be strewn with a
lot of failed attempts along the way.  In the end, I have faith in humanity's
ability to surmount any existential challenge that may be ahead it. In a lighter
but very true vein, one of the biggest issues during the Victorian era was the
road side accumulation of horse dung. This was so serious that city planners
predicted that if the dung growth rate continued at its then rapid pace, the
city of London would eventually become a huge dung pile.

Bottom line is that instead of judging groups of people, one needs to focus on
creating more awareness of the issue. As society understands this issue, it will
automatically create solutions to resolve it.

Marlon




----- Original Message ----
From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@...>
To: Green Mailgroup <GreenGoa@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sun, November 8, 2009 11:03:28 PM
Subject: [GreenGoa] We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

Nobody responded to my post below, which I sent a few days ago. Either
everybody agrees with what I have written, or nobody could be bothered
to think about it. If the former, then why bother with most of our
green actions at all? If the latter -- well, what can I say? There are
none so blind as those who refuse to even look as to whether there is
something to see?

Anyway, on a similar note, George Monbiot's latest article in the
Guardian raises certain interesting points. See
http://www.countercurrents.org/monbiot081109.htm.
The article says: 'The researchers call this the "licensing effect".
Buying green can establish the moral credentials that license
subsequent bad behaviour: the rosier your view of yourself, the more
likely you are to hoard your money and do down other people.' This
does seem to characterise much of the middle- and upper-class
environmental movement. I wish he had elaborated the last point in his
article -- guilt is good, and greenwashing that guilt with trivial
environment-friendly lifestyle choices is a cop-out that can actually
make things worse?

#861

From: Yogita Mehra <yogitamehra@...>
Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:58 am
Subject: Re: We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

yogitamehra

Offline

I think that while "Vidhyadhar's" email raises a couple of valid concerns 'phony green consumerism' and 'high consumption groups', the conclusions are something that I find difficult to agree with.

1. Any movement (of this nature) needs people that are involved at different levels and in different ways. Its simply not possible for everyone to have the same degree of commitment and approach to how they can become 'greener' in their lives. The person who decides to by a green knick-knack as a symbol of their green credentials my not be changing much - but symbols do have a value in this process, especially if they come in sufficiently large numbers. Similarly, real green consumerism of the kind that "Bevinda" described, has a role to play (and a more important one) as it sets an example for each of us.

Briefly, everyone has a role, and not all roles will be equal. That's true of any change cycle.

2. The process that we are going through now is a pretty significant re-education cycle, one where the manner in which we decide which product we buy and how we use it, is the most sustainable for our planet. This is not easy, and information is both scarce and disorganised. We've had decades of experience learning how to find the cheapest/most advanced/most convenient products, so switching to this new set of measures will be difficult, inconvenient and time consuming for each of us. Helping each other learn the new metrics, can help speed up the process.

Because as consumers we can have a powerful influence on markets (we vote with our money right?), hence consumerism has a powerful role to play today.

If Oscar Wilde was right when he said "The cynic knows the price of everything and the value of nothing...", then I guess I'm glad to be an optimist :-)

Yogita

On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 8:49 PM, Vivian D'Souza <shenzi62@...> wrote:

Very impressed by all you do to fight the climate change Bevinda. My wife (of 44 years)

and I have not recycled each other. Not yet anyway. But we do our part for the environment in small ways. We are into rain-water harvesting and have terraced our hilly property. We are experimenting with drip irrigation to save water. We plant trees and trees and trees. Sometimes it is a heartbreaking task when vandals yank out the trees

along public roads that we have so carefully nurtured. But we persevere. We carry our own bags when we go shopping. We also walk a lot and have a small car - WagonR which just

completed 8,000 km after nearly 5 years or ownership. That's right Eight thousand km.

We use public transportation a lot. We compost all our organic material and use it around

trees. Are we doing enough ? Hell NO !! But we each need to be aware and persevere and get our friends involved as well. This is a hell of an uphill task, but every little bit counts. Keep up the fight. It is about a change in attitudes and spreading the message.

The future of this planet depends on each of us.

--- On Mon, 11/9/09, bevinda collaco <bevindac@...> wrote:

From: bevinda collaco <bevindac@...>
Subject: Re: [GreenGoa] We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism
To: GreenGoa@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 5:46 AM

Dear Vidyadhar,

Actually this is a much beaten dead horse, which is why no one has reacted, I guess.

It does make me laugh when Priyanka Chopra and Abhishek Bachchan talk about doing their bit for the environment. They drive around in gas guzzling cars, with their A/Cs on full, they live in airconditioned houses. The water they waste could make life worth living for the entire taluka of drought-hit Sangli.

As you say, we have to have a sea-change in our political outlook. The NDA government had come out with a study regarding the feasibility of a river linking project in the country which could be used for water navigation too with a series of lochs. But UPA - 1 threw it out because Jawaharlal Nehru rubbished it when it was first floated shortly after Independence.

River linking would rob the corrupt of means to grow wealth. Floods and drought and a miserable abject populace is what makes the wheels of power turn. Until the common man becomes aware and raises his voice, this state of affairs will continue.

On a personal level, living a green life is bloody hard work. I only do it because I have a husband who is a very vocal Spartan. Everything is used, reused and recycled in our house. We walk when we don't have to drive. Lights are switched off when not in use. Taps are fixed immediately. Flushes, with varying quantities of water have been installed. Our automatic washing machine was returned and a semi-automatic installed so that the waste water can be used for washing our balcony and the public stairway outside out building. It's not easy. Hardly anything is thrown out. So hardly anything new is brought in. Which can really get one's goat when one wants to throw out the old and bring in the new.

Come to think of it. Maybe that's why we will be 'celebrating' our 30th wedding anniversary in Dec. We haven't gotten new spouses either! Neither of us threw the other one out. You think living green has anything to do with longevity of marriage?

Let's have some responses to this????

Best regards,

Bevinda Collaco

tel: +91 9822380049 +91 9822380049

http://www.ujusgott alaugh.blogspot. com

"On the keyboard of life, always keep one finger on the escape key."

From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@gmail. com>
To: Green Mailgroup <GreenGoa@yahoogroup s.com>

Sent: Mon, November 9, 2009 10:33:28 AM
Subject: [GreenGoa] We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

Nobody responded to my post below, which I sent a few days ago. Either
everybody agrees with what I have written, or nobody could be bothered
to think about it. If the former, then why bother with most of our
green actions at all? If the latter -- well, what can I say? There are
none so blind as those who refuse to even look as to whether there is
something to see?

Anyway, on a similar note, George Monbiot's latest article in the
Guardian raises certain interesting points. See
http://www.counterc urrents.org/ monbiot081109. htm.
The article says: 'The researchers call this the "licensing effect".
Buying green can establish the moral credentials that license
subsequent bad behaviour: the rosier your view of yourself, the more
likely you are to hoard your money and do down other people.' This
does seem to characterise much of the middle- and upper-class
environmental movement. I wish he had elaborated the last point in his
article -- guilt is good, and greenwashing that guilt with trivial
environment- friendly lifestyle choices is a cop-out that can actually
make things worse?

Monbiot's words in this article are a great guideline: "Our power
comes from acting as citizens - demanding political change - not
acting as consumers."

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@gmail. com>

But on a more provocative note, I have long wondered about what use
many of our individual 'green' initiatives are. I could make a very
good case to show that the environmental damage (or carbon footprint
or whatever) one causes has a 95% correlation with one's income level.
The rest is at best pure cosmetic time-pass -- kind of straining at a
gnat while swallowing an elephant with no problems whatsoever. At
worst, it's a strategy by the upper and middle classes to offload
their guilt on to the poor and blame them for the problems.

Like, a rich environmentally aware guy does something profound like
not buying something in plastic packaging (instead buying something in
organic packaging which costs five times as much), feels most
uplifted, gets into his SUV and drives to the airport to whizz into
the air en route to his next destination. The poor guy goes and buys
something in plastic packaging because that's what's cheaply
available, walks to his slum dwelling and falls asleep. But somehow
the first guy thinks he's the profound one and implicitly blames the
slum dweller.

We have seen this most classically in the tiger issue where rich
carbon-spewing urban environmentalists kick tribals out of their
forests to save the tiger (which is why I was impressed with this
list, since it actually included a whole lot of political issues like
this and action rather than individualised initiatives which achieve
nothing but help the participants shed some guilt). Or when we rush
around trying to save the frog by hassling some poor peasants for
catching frogs rather than tackling habitat change and pesticide
usage, which are the real problems.

Okay, enough already. I think this qualifies as an A-1 flame bait.
Hope people feel flamed enough to respond :-)

--
Whatever it is, I'm against it -- Groucho Marx

--
Whatever it is, I'm against it -- Groucho Marx

#860

From: Goa Desc <goadesc@...>
Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 9:38 am
Subject: FRIDAY BALCAO: 25 years of the Bhopal Gas Disaster and lessons for Goa.

goacan

Offline

---------------------------------------
Welcome to the FRIDAY BALCAO
-----------------------------------------

Dear Cybergaonkars on Green Goa,

We continue with FRIDAY BALCAO
on 13th November from 4pm. to 6pm.
at Goa Desc Resource Centre
No.11, Liberty Apartments,
Feira Alta, Mapusa Goa.

TOPIC: 25 years of the Bhopal Gas Disaster and lessons for Goa.

SPEAKER: Open Discussion

We invite you to express your viewpoint
by attending the Friday Balcao event
but if you cannot attend, then please send your
views and action plan suggestions by post to
FRIDAY BALCAO Post Box 78, Mapusa 403 507
or by email to goadesc@...

best wishes,

Roland Martins
-------------------------------------------------------
Don't miss out on the discussion. Information is power,
Share it equitably. Lets make things happen in Goa !!
-------------------------------------------------------
====================================

GOA DESC RESOURCE CENTRE
11 Liberty Apts., Feira Alta, Mapusa, Goa 403 507
mailto:goadesc@...
--------------------------------------------------------
Working On Issues Of Development & Democracy
=====================================

#859

From: Vivian D'Souza <shenzi62@...>
Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 3:19 pm
Subject: Re: We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

shenzi62@...

Very impressed by all you do to fight the climate change Bevinda. My wife (of 44 years)

and I have not recycled each other. Not yet anyway. But we do our part for the environment in small ways. We are into rain-water harvesting and have terraced our hilly property. We are experimenting with drip irrigation to save water. We plant trees and trees and trees. Sometimes it is a heartbreaking task when vandals yank out the trees

along public roads that we have so carefully nurtured. But we persevere. We carry our own bags when we go shopping. We also walk a lot and have a small car - WagonR which just

completed 8,000 km after nearly 5 years or ownership. That's right Eight thousand km.

We use public transportation a lot. We compost all our organic material and use it around

trees. Are we doing enough ? Hell NO !! But we each need to be aware and persevere and get our friends involved as well. This is a hell of an uphill task, but every little bit counts. Keep up the fight. It is about a change in attitudes and spreading the message.

The future of this planet depends on each of us.

--- On Mon, 11/9/09, bevinda collaco <bevindac@...> wrote:

From: bevinda collaco <bevindac@...>
Subject: Re: [GreenGoa] We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism
To: GreenGoa@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 5:46 AM

Dear Vidyadhar,

Actually this is a much beaten dead horse, which is why no one has reacted, I guess.

It does make me laugh when Priyanka Chopra and Abhishek Bachchan talk about doing their bit for the environment. They drive around in gas guzzling cars, with their A/Cs on full, they live in airconditioned houses. The water they waste could make life worth living for the entire taluka of drought-hit Sangli.

As you say, we have to have a sea-change in our political outlook. The NDA government had come out with a study regarding the feasibility of a river linking project in the country which could be used for water navigation too with a series of lochs. But UPA - 1 threw it out because Jawaharlal Nehru rubbished it when it was first floated shortly after Independence.

River linking would rob the corrupt of means to grow wealth. Floods and drought and a miserable abject populace is what makes the wheels of power turn. Until the common man becomes aware and raises his voice, this state of affairs will continue.

On a personal level, living a green life is bloody hard work. I only do it because I have a husband who is a very vocal Spartan. Everything is used, reused and recycled in our house. We walk when we don't have to drive. Lights are switched off when not in use. Taps are fixed immediately. Flushes, with varying quantities of water have been installed. Our automatic washing machine was returned and a semi-automatic installed so that the waste water can be used for washing our balcony and the public stairway outside out building. It's not easy. Hardly anything is thrown out. So hardly anything new is brought in. Which can really get one's goat when one wants to throw out the old and bring in the new.

Come to think of it. Maybe that's why we will be 'celebrating' our 30th wedding anniversary in Dec. We haven't gotten new spouses either! Neither of us threw the other one out. You think living green has anything to do with longevity of marriage?

Let's have some responses to this????

Best regards,

Bevinda Collaco

tel: +91 9822380049 +91 9822380049

http://www.ujusgott alaugh.blogspot. com

"On the keyboard of life, always keep one finger on the escape key."

From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@gmail. com>
To: Green Mailgroup <GreenGoa@yahoogroup s.com>
Sent: Mon, November 9, 2009 10:33:28 AM
Subject: [GreenGoa] We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

Nobody responded to my post below, which I sent a few days ago. Either
everybody agrees with what I have written, or nobody could be bothered
to think about it. If the former, then why bother with most of our
green actions at all? If the latter -- well, what can I say? There are
none so blind as those who refuse to even look as to whether there is
something to see?

Anyway, on a similar note, George Monbiot's latest article in the
Guardian raises certain interesting points. See
http://www.counterc urrents.org/ monbiot081109. htm.
The article says: 'The researchers call this the "licensing effect".
Buying green can establish the moral credentials that license
subsequent bad behaviour: the rosier your view of yourself, the more
likely you are to hoard your money and do down other people.' This
does seem to characterise much of the middle- and upper-class
environmental movement. I wish he had elaborated the last point in his
article -- guilt is good, and greenwashing that guilt with trivial
environment- friendly lifestyle choices is a cop-out that can actually
make things worse?

Monbiot's words in this article are a great guideline: "Our power
comes from acting as citizens - demanding political change - not
acting as consumers."

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@gmail. com>

But on a more provocative note, I have long wondered about what use
many of our individual 'green' initiatives are. I could make a very
good case to show that the environmental damage (or carbon footprint
or whatever) one causes has a 95% correlation with one's income level.
The rest is at best pure cosmetic time-pass -- kind of straining at a
gnat while swallowing an elephant with no problems whatsoever. At
worst, it's a strategy by the upper and middle classes to offload
their guilt on to the poor and blame them for the problems.

Like, a rich environmentally aware guy does something profound like
not buying something in plastic packaging (instead buying something in
organic packaging which costs five times as much), feels most
uplifted, gets into his SUV and drives to the airport to whizz into
the air en route to his next destination. The poor guy goes and buys
something in plastic packaging because that's what's cheaply
available, walks to his slum dwelling and falls asleep. But somehow
the first guy thinks he's the profound one and implicitly blames the
slum dweller.

We have seen this most classically in the tiger issue where rich
carbon-spewing urban environmentalists kick tribals out of their
forests to save the tiger (which is why I was impressed with this
list, since it actually included a whole lot of political issues like
this and action rather than individualised initiatives which achieve
nothing but help the participants shed some guilt). Or when we rush
around trying to save the frog by hassling some poor peasants for
catching frogs rather than tackling habitat change and pesticide
usage, which are the real problems.

Okay, enough already. I think this qualifies as an A-1 flame bait.
Hope people feel flamed enough to respond :-)

--
Whatever it is, I'm against it -- Groucho Marx

--
Whatever it is, I'm against it -- Groucho Marx

#858

From: Wendell Rodricks <wendellrodricks@...>
Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 12:55 pm
Subject: Re: We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

rodrickswendell

Offline

All is debatable

As long as people WANT to strike a balance; just the intention is fine.

When I look at the vast quantity of books in my library or the fact that I cannot write on a computer and use reams of paper, I am certain the forests are at risk

I also have a gas guzzling car and travel many miles in aircrafts.

Apart from doing all the low watt lights and the water sewage treatment, there is much more we all can do

We cannot sit in judgement on anything.

I have seen many activists who shop without a market bag and blissfully lug around the plastic bags given out by vendors. And then on reaching home they pontificate on the net or in journals. Its not a criticism. Merely an observation

Thats fine. To each his own.

In the end we are ALL guilty of enviornment damage. The wealthy with their emnas. The middle class in theirs. And the poor who have no option to pollute as a maens to survive

As long as we all agree that there are issues that need to be addressed and the fact that we need to leave a better earth for future generations

I liked the "haven't got new spouses" bit :o)

Happy Anniversary Bevinda in advance and God bless you both

2009/11/9 bevinda collaco <bevindac@...>

Dear Vidyadhar,

Actually this is a much beaten dead horse, which is why no one has reacted, I guess.

It does make me laugh when Priyanka Chopra and Abhishek Bachchan talk about doing their bit for the environment. They drive around in gas guzzling cars, with their A/Cs on full, they live in airconditioned houses. The water they waste could make life worth living for the entire taluka of drought-hit Sangli.

As you say, we have to have a sea-change in our political outlook. The NDA government had come out with a study regarding the feasibility of a river linking project in the country which could be used for water navigation too with a series of lochs. But UPA - 1 threw it out because Jawaharlal Nehru rubbished it when it was first floated shortly after Independence.

River linking would rob the corrupt of means to grow wealth. Floods and drought and a miserable abject populace is what makes the wheels of power turn. Until the common man becomes aware and raises his voice, this state of affairs will continue.

On a personal level, living a green life is bloody hard work. I only do it because I have a husband who is a very vocal Spartan. Everything is used, reused and recycled in our house. We walk when we don't have to drive. Lights are switched off when not in use. Taps are fixed immediately. Flushes, with varying quantities of water have been installed. Our automatic washing machine was returned and a semi-automatic installed so that the waste water can be used for washing our balcony and the public stairway outside out building. It's not easy. Hardly anything is thrown out. So hardly anything new is brought in. Which can really get one's goat when one wants to throw out the old and bring in the new.

Come to think of it. Maybe that's why we will be 'celebrating' our 30th wedding anniversary in Dec. We haven't gotten new spouses either! Neither of us threw the other one out. You think living green has anything to do with longevity of marriage?

Let's have some responses to this????

Best regards,

Bevinda Collaco

tel: +91 9822380049

http://www.ujusgottalaugh.blogspot.com

"On the keyboard of life, always keep one finger on the escape key."

From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@...>
To: Green Mailgroup <GreenGoa@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, November 9, 2009 10:33:28 AM
Subject: [GreenGoa] We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

Nobody responded to my post below, which I sent a few days ago. Either
everybody agrees with what I have written, or nobody could be bothered
to think about it. If the former, then why bother with most of our
green actions at all? If the latter -- well, what can I say? There are
none so blind as those who refuse to even look as to whether there is
something to see?

Anyway, on a similar note, George Monbiot's latest article in the
Guardian raises certain interesting points. See
http://www.counterc urrents.org/ monbiot081109. htm.
The article says: 'The researchers call this the "licensing effect".
Buying green can establish the moral credentials that license
subsequent bad behaviour: the rosier your view of yourself, the more
likely you are to hoard your money and do down other people.' This
does seem to characterise much of the middle- and upper-class
environmental movement. I wish he had elaborated the last point in his
article -- guilt is good, and greenwashing that guilt with trivial
environment- friendly lifestyle choices is a cop-out that can actually
make things worse?

Monbiot's words in this article are a great guideline: "Our power
comes from acting as citizens - demanding political change - not
acting as consumers."

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@gmail. com>

But on a more provocative note, I have long wondered about what use
many of our individual 'green' initiatives are. I could make a very
good case to show that the environmental damage (or carbon footprint
or whatever) one causes has a 95% correlation with one's income level.
The rest is at best pure cosmetic time-pass -- kind of straining at a
gnat while swallowing an elephant with no problems whatsoever. At
worst, it's a strategy by the upper and middle classes to offload
their guilt on to the poor and blame them for the problems.

Like, a rich environmentally aware guy does something profound like
not buying something in plastic packaging (instead buying something in
organic packaging which costs five times as much), feels most
uplifted, gets into his SUV and drives to the airport to whizz into
the air en route to his next destination. The poor guy goes and buys
something in plastic packaging because that's what's cheaply
available, walks to his slum dwelling and falls asleep. But somehow
the first guy thinks he's the profound one and implicitly blames the
slum dweller.

We have seen this most classically in the tiger issue where rich
carbon-spewing urban environmentalists kick tribals out of their
forests to save the tiger (which is why I was impressed with this
list, since it actually included a whole lot of political issues like
this and action rather than individualised initiatives which achieve
nothing but help the participants shed some guilt). Or when we rush
around trying to save the frog by hassling some poor peasants for
catching frogs rather than tackling habitat change and pesticide
usage, which are the real problems.

Okay, enough already. I think this qualifies as an A-1 flame bait.
Hope people feel flamed enough to respond :-)

--
Whatever it is, I'm against it -- Groucho Marx

--
Whatever it is, I'm against it -- Groucho Marx

--
cell: +91-9422443029
Office hours: +91-832-2420604
Office email:rns.wendell@...
www.wendellrodricks.com

#857

From: bevinda collaco <bevindac@...>
Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 10:46 am
Subject: Re: We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

bevindac

Offline

http://www.ujusgottalaugh.blogspot.com

Dear Vidyadhar,

Actually this is a much beaten dead horse, which is why no one has reacted, I guess.

It does make me laugh when Priyanka Chopra and Abhishek Bachchan talk about doing their bit for the environment. They drive around in gas guzzling cars, with their A/Cs on full, they live in airconditioned houses. The water they waste could make life worth living for the entire taluka of drought-hit Sangli.

As you say, we have to have a sea-change in our political outlook. The NDA government had come out with a study regarding the feasibility of a river linking project in the country which could be used for water navigation too with a series of lochs. But UPA - 1 threw it out because Jawaharlal Nehru rubbished it when it was first floated shortly after Independence.

River linking would rob the corrupt of means to grow wealth. Floods and drought and a miserable abject populace is what makes the wheels of power turn. Until the common man becomes aware and raises his voice, this state of affairs will continue.

On a personal level, living a green life is bloody hard work. I only do it because I have a husband who is a very vocal Spartan. Everything is used, reused and recycled in our house. We walk when we don't have to drive. Lights are switched off when not in use. Taps are fixed immediately. Flushes, with varying quantities of water have been installed. Our automatic washing machine was returned and a semi-automatic installed so that the waste water can be used for washing our balcony and the public stairway outside out building. It's not easy. Hardly anything is thrown out. So hardly anything new is brought in. Which can really get one's goat when one wants to throw out the old and bring in the new.

Come to think of it. Maybe that's why we will be 'celebrating' our 30th wedding anniversary in Dec. We haven't gotten new spouses either! Neither of us threw the other one out. You think living green has anything to do with longevity of marriage?

Let's have some responses to this????

Best regards,

Bevinda Collaco

tel: +91 9822380049

"On the keyboard of life, always keep one finger on the escape key."

From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@...>
To: Green Mailgroup <GreenGoa@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, November 9, 2009 10:33:28 AM
Subject: [GreenGoa] We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

Nobody responded to my post below, which I sent a few days ago. Either
everybody agrees with what I have written, or nobody could be bothered
to think about it. If the former, then why bother with most of our
green actions at all? If the latter -- well, what can I say? There are
none so blind as those who refuse to even look as to whether there is
something to see?

Anyway, on a similar note, George Monbiot's latest article in the
Guardian raises certain interesting points. See
http://www.counterc urrents.org/ monbiot081109. htm.
The article says: 'The researchers call this the "licensing effect".
Buying green can establish the moral credentials that license
subsequent bad behaviour: the rosier your view of yourself, the more
likely you are to hoard your money and do down other people.' This
does seem to characterise much of the middle- and upper-class
environmental movement. I wish he had elaborated the last point in his
article -- guilt is good, and greenwashing that guilt with trivial
environment- friendly lifestyle choices is a cop-out that can actually
make things worse?

Monbiot's words in this article are a great guideline: "Our power
comes from acting as citizens - demanding political change - not
acting as consumers."

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@gmail. com>

But on a more provocative note, I have long wondered about what use
many of our individual 'green' initiatives are. I could make a very
good case to show that the environmental damage (or carbon footprint
or whatever) one causes has a 95% correlation with one's income level.
The rest is at best pure cosmetic time-pass -- kind of straining at a
gnat while swallowing an elephant with no problems whatsoever. At
worst, it's a strategy by the upper and middle classes to offload
their guilt on to the poor and blame them for the problems.

Like, a rich environmentally aware guy does something profound like
not buying something in plastic packaging (instead buying something in
organic packaging which costs five times as much), feels most
uplifted, gets into his SUV and drives to the airport to whizz into
the air en route to his next destination. The poor guy goes and buys
something in plastic packaging because that's what's cheaply
available, walks to his slum dwelling and falls asleep. But somehow
the first guy thinks he's the profound one and implicitly blames the
slum dweller.

We have seen this most classically in the tiger issue where rich
carbon-spewing urban environmentalists kick tribals out of their
forests to save the tiger (which is why I was impressed with this
list, since it actually included a whole lot of political issues like
this and action rather than individualised initiatives which achieve
nothing but help the participants shed some guilt). Or when we rush
around trying to save the frog by hassling some poor peasants for
catching frogs rather than tackling habitat change and pesticide
usage, which are the real problems.

Okay, enough already. I think this qualifies as an A-1 flame bait.
Hope people feel flamed enough to respond :-)

--
Whatever it is, I'm against it -- Groucho Marx

--
Whatever it is, I'm against it -- Groucho Marx

#856

From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@...>
Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 5:03 am
Subject: We Cannot Fight Climate With (Green) Consumerism

gadgilvidyadhar

Offline

Nobody responded to my post below, which I sent a few days ago. Either
everybody agrees with what I have written, or nobody could be bothered
to think about it. If the former, then why bother with most of our
green actions at all? If the latter -- well, what can I say? There are
none so blind as those who refuse to even look as to whether there is
something to see?

Anyway, on a similar note, George Monbiot's latest article in the
Guardian raises certain interesting points. See
http://www.countercurrents.org/monbiot081109.htm.
The article says: 'The researchers call this the "licensing effect".
Buying green can establish the moral credentials that license
subsequent bad behaviour: the rosier your view of yourself, the more
likely you are to hoard your money and do down other people.' This
does seem to characterise much of the middle- and upper-class
environmental movement. I wish he had elaborated the last point in his
article -- guilt is good, and greenwashing that guilt with trivial
environment-friendly lifestyle choices is a cop-out that can actually
make things worse?

Monbiot's words in this article are a great guideline: "Our power
comes from acting as citizens - demanding political change - not
acting as consumers."

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@...>

But on a more provocative note, I have long wondered about what use
many of our individual 'green' initiatives are. I could make a very
good case to show that the environmental damage (or carbon footprint
or whatever) one causes has a 95% correlation with one's income level.
The rest is at best pure cosmetic time-pass -- kind of straining at a
gnat while swallowing an elephant with no problems whatsoever. At
worst, it's a strategy by the upper and middle classes to offload
their guilt on to the poor and blame them for the problems.

Like, a rich environmentally aware guy does something profound like
not buying something in plastic packaging (instead buying something in
organic packaging which costs five times as much), feels most
uplifted, gets into his SUV and drives to the airport to whizz into
the air en route to his next destination. The poor guy goes and buys
something in plastic packaging because that's what's cheaply
available, walks to his slum dwelling and falls asleep. But somehow
the first guy thinks he's the profound one and implicitly blames the
slum dweller.

We have seen this most classically in the tiger issue where rich
carbon-spewing urban environmentalists kick tribals out of their
forests to save the tiger (which is why I was impressed with this
list, since it actually included a whole lot of political issues like
this and action rather than individualised initiatives which achieve
nothing but help the participants shed some guilt). Or when we rush
around trying to save the frog by hassling some poor peasants for
catching frogs rather than tackling habitat change and pesticide
usage, which are the real problems.

Okay, enough already. I think this qualifies as an A-1 flame bait.
Hope people feel flamed enough to respond :-)




--
Whatever it is, I'm against it -- Groucho Marx



--
Whatever it is, I'm against it -- Groucho Marx

#855

From: Kevin Saldanha <vegvet@...>
Date: Tue Nov 3, 2009 4:42 pm
Subject: Fwd: Meatout Mondays Newsletter

kevin.saldanha

Offline

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: FARM Media <media@...>
Date: Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 5:47 PM
Subject: [ivu-veg-news] <US> Meatout Mondays Newsletter
To: ivu-veg-news@yahoogroups.com

Please visit http://www.meatoutmondays.org/current.htm to take a peek at the current edition of FARM's Meatout Mondays e-newsletter. This issue features a recipe for Halloween Creepy Crawlies, info about the Vegetarian Site, health news about milk and protstate cancer, and inspiration about the Humane League of Baltimore!

Meatout Mondays is an excellent vehicle for reaching out to your veg-curious friends, family, and associates. You can forward them a copy or just subscribe them directly at http://www.meatoutmondays.org/regForm.php. There is no charge.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--

Mike Ditka Â - "If God had wanted man to play soccer, he wouldn't have given us arms."

#854

From: Kevin Saldanha <vegvet@...>
Date: Wed Nov 4, 2009 2:41 am
Subject: Fwd: Environmental Impact of Animals Raised for Food Recalculated: World Watch Magazine Links Human Diet & Greenhouse Gases

kevin.saldanha

Offline

United Poultry Concerns
2 November 2009

Environmental Impact of Animals Raised for Food Recalculated
World Watch Magazine Links Human Diet & Greenhouse Gases

The November/December issue of World Watch magazine, pp. 10-19, presents
a powerful challenge to previous estimates of the effect of raising
animals for food, while setting forth "the best strategy for reversing
climate change."

The complete article can be read at:
[http://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/Livestock%20and%20Climate%20Change.pdf].

THE PROBLEM (briefly)

In "Livestock and Climate Change: What if the key actors in climate
change are . . . cows, pigs, and chickens?" environmentalists Robert
Goodland and Jeff Anhang offer compelling evidence that animal
agriculture, already well-known to contribute heavily to greenhouse gas
emissions (GHGs), actually accounts for "at least half" of all
human-caused greenhouse gases. They build on the widely cited 2006
report by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO),
Livestock's Long Shadow.

The FAO report estimates that 7,516 million metric tons per year of
carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalents, or 18 percent of annual global
greenhouse gas emissions, are attributable to cattle, buffalo, sheep,
goats, camels, horses, pigs, and poultry. The Goodland and Anhang
analysis shows that "livestock and their byproducts actually account for
at least 32,564 million tons of CO2 equivalents per year, or 51 percent
of annual worldwide GHG emissions" (p. 11).

As part of their calculation model for greenhouse gases attributable to
livestock products, the authors observe that a full accounting "would
cover portions of the construction and operation of pharmaceutical and
medical industries" used to treat the millions of cases of worldwide
illnesses linked to the consumption of animal products (p. 15).

THE SOLUTION (briefly)

Goodland and Anhang observe that the human population is projected to
grow by about 35 percent between 2006 and 2050, and that the number of
animals raised for food worldwide is projected to double during this
same time period. If these projections come true, livestock-related GHG
emissions "would also approximately double," significantly increasing
the amount of livestock-related greenhouse gases imperiling life on
earth (p. 15).

With these grave risks confronting us, the authors argue that "an
effective strategy must involve replacing livestock products with better
alternatives, rather than substituting one meat product with another
that has a somewhat lower carbon footprint" (p. 15).

Replacing animal products with soy-based and other plant-based
alternatives, according to this study, can "reverse the ongoing world
food and water crises." It can also reduce future greenhouse gas
emissions "because meat and dairy analogs are produced without the
GHG-intensive processes used in raising livestock." In addition, a
significant amount of tropical land now being used to graze animals and
grow grains to feed them would be left alone and allowed to regenerate
as forest to absorb carbon already in the atmosphere (pp. 15, 17).

Pay particular attention to this observation about marketing strategies
and promotional actions recommended in the article:

"To achieve the growth discussed above will require a significant
investment in marketing, especially since meat and dairy analogs will be
new to many consumers. A successful campaign would avoid negative themes
and stress positive ones. For instance, recommending that meat not be
eaten one day per week suggests deprivation. Instead, the campaign
should pitch the theme of eating all week long a line of food products
that is tasty, easy to prepare, and includes a 'superfood,' such as soy,
that will enrich their lives. When people hear appealing messages about
food, they are listening particularly for words that evoke comfort,
familiarity, happiness, ease, speed, low price, and popularity.
Consequently, several other themes should be tapped to build an
effective marketing campaign: (p. 17).

To learn which "several other themes" the authors recommend tapping in
order to build an effective marketing campaign, go to pages 17-19 of
this World Watch article, which concludes that the case for change "is
no longer only a public policy or an ethical case, but is now also a
business case." Find out why. Here again is the link:

[http://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/Livestock%20and%20Climate%20Change.pdf].

UPC thanks Dr. Richard Schwartz, Director of Veg Climate Alliance and
president of Jewish Vegetarians of North America
([http://www.JewishVeg.com]), for bringing this terrific article to our
attention.

For more ideas about avoiding negative themes and stressing positive
ones in advocacy campaigns, click on Moving Beyond . . . the Rhetoric of
Apology in Animal Rights:
[http://www.upc-online.org/thinking/rhetoric.pdf]

---------------------------

Clarification: World Watch Report on "Livestock and Climate Change"

While this report contains vital, usable information about the
contribution of animal farming to greenhouse gas emissions and argues
strongly for a plant-based diet free of meat and dairy ingredients, it
isn't clear whether the authors are including eggs in their use of the
term "dairy."

In addition, four of the five meatless products highlighted on page 16 of
the report contain animal ingredients and therefore are not vegan. The only
vegan product pictured on p. 16 is the Organic SUNSHINE Burgers. As for the
other products pictured on p. 16:

1. Gardenburger - The Original Veggie Burgers contains dairy milk:
MOZZARELLA CHEESE, CHEDDAR CHEESE, NATURAL BUTTER FLAVOR, AND WHEY.

2. MorningStar Farms Bacon Strips contains eggs and dairy milk: EGG
WHITES and NONFAT DRY MILK.

3. Boca Meatless Breakfast Links contains dairy milk: CULTURED WHEY
(FROM DAIRY MILK).

4. Quorn Naked Chik'n Cutlets contains eggs and milk: REHYDRATED EGG
WHITE AND WHEY PROTEIN CONCENTRATE.

While egg and dairy ingredients in processed foods, like the ones shown
above, might seem negligible compared with cartons of eggs and quarts of
milk, in reality the volume of eggs and dairy milk in non-vegan processed
foods is enormous. Processed foods ranging from "vegetarian" burgers to
cake mixes that contain egg and dairy milk ingredients are dumping grounds
for huge egg and dairy surpluses, involving millions of cows, calves, hens,
roosters and chicks on industrialized farms.

So ubiquitous are processed eggs (liquid, dehydrated, and frozen) in the
food industry that some egg farms devote 100 percent of their business to
preparing eggs strictly for the processed food market using equipment with
a capacity for handling 90,000 eggs per hour, according to Commercial
Chicken Meat and Egg Production, 5th edition, p. 977.

--
United Poultry Concerns is a nonprofit organization that promotes the
compassionate and respectful treatment of domestic fowl.
Don't just switch from beef to chicken. Go Vegan.
[http://www.UPC-online.org]

http://www.upc-online.org/environment/091102animal_ag_impact_recalculated.html

--

Jonathan Swift Â - "May you live every day of your life."

#853

From: Asma Jahangir <asma_jahangir83@...>
Date: Tue Nov 3, 2009 8:22 am
Subject: Re: Re: Center Plans ban on laminated pouches

asma_jahangir83

Offline

Please unsubscribe me. thx

From: Tallulah D'Silva <tallulahdsilva@...>
To: Clinton Vaz <klintvaz@...>
Cc: GreenGoa <GreenGoa@yahoogroups.com>; goacan goa <goacan@...>; Frederick Noronha [???????? ????????] <fredericknoronha@...>; "Prashant Maurya, "India Invites"" <pmaurya@...>; Tushar <tushar@...>; Arati Das (GT) <arati05@...>; Caroline Howe <caroline@...>; Meegan Jones - Sustainable Event Guide <meegan@...>
Sent: Tue, November 3, 2009 8:46:33 AM
Subject: [GreenGoa] Re: Center Plans ban on laminated pouches

So true Clinton. A bigger step of course would be to opt for sustainable alternatives closer home to really make a difference. And in order to do that awareness is a crucial key.
T

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 7:56 AM, Clinton Vaz <klintvaz@gmail. com> wrote:

Reading the headline on todays Herald absolutely made my monday morning! :) Was trying to find a solution to laminates for a really long time! Best way to deal with it is not to have it in the first place. Alternates exist, so they will replace easily. Rico pls carry on Goanet.

More info below:
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_centre-plans-ban-on-laminated-pouches-of-shampoo-gutkha_1305749

http://www.toxicsli nk.org/nalert- view.php? id=242

Clinton..
+91 9890936828

--
Tallulah D'Silva
architecture R/T,
4,T4 Dukle Residency,
St. Inez, Panaji.

#852

From: Kevin Saldanha <vegvet@...>
Date: Tue Nov 3, 2009 2:05 pm
Subject: Re: 10 Easy Ways to save Environment

kevin.saldanha

Offline

Hi Clinton,

Great list!Â However, I think there is an attitude that has to change with regard to EVERYTHING we do and buy.Â

I have assuaged my guilt of driving a small SUV by making it a hybrid.Â However, even the term SUV (Sport Utility Vehicle) needs to be qualified.Â Many (CUVs) are now being built on car platforms with the concomitant stricter emission standards.Â The SUV originally was developed by the US auto industry to take advantage of lax emission controls on utility vehicles (small heavy load capacity vehicles commonly referred to as trucks) by putting a passenger body on a truck frame/engine.Â The gas/electric hybrid engines are now being similarly abused by putting them into these 'monster' vehicles and labelling them GREEN.

Consumer trends are linked to income and one indication of the rising consumerism is generation of garbage (materials that are either unusable, eg. packaging, or those that have reached the end of their utility, sometimes prematurely!)Â Looking at the amount of garbage generated per person in a household will indicate the level of consumption.Â I'm sure that those values will be much lower in Goa than in N. America which by the latest statistics ranged from 2.5lb (Canada) - 3.5lb (US) per person per day!

There is no doubt that plastic water bottles have become one of the most visible signs of upward mobility of the consumer, and given the state of potable public water availability in India, it is a convenient alternative to risking water borne disease (for most of us immunodeprived visitors at least).Â But plastics have taken over the entire market, from causos to grave markers.Â They are a petroleum based product and, apart from the limited recycling, are poisoning our world.Â We need to think of sustainable alternatives all around the world, even if it means going back to caning our chairs with real cane (wonder if anyone still uses it in Goa).

I could comment on every point but will end with your #9 .... shun McWorld... and embrace vegetarianism.Â Although India is far from the factory farming seen in the west, the poultry industry is ballooning to supply meat to a fast rising middle class who measure their worth by their intake of flesh.Â Avian Flu was a wakeup call to the industry worldwide that we cannot continue to mechanize and increase the industry without repercussions.Â Plant proteins and industrial farming are not without their own demons but on the scale practiced in Goa, are a much healthier alternative for our own physical health and that of the planet.\

Thank you for posting this list.Â Each point (and more) can be used to encourage discussion on this list.

Kevin

On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Clinton Vaz <klintvaz@...> wrote:

Â

Very pertinent!

-Clinton..

Below I jotted down from one institute next to GEDA's old office:

Â

Â

Â

1) Take a bus and leave your car home. Don't ever drive SUV, say not to diesel cars.

Â

2) Junk bottled water. Demand clean water for all, insist that water free and as a right is an entitlement to each person, but agree to pay more since you use more.

Â

3) Use less water, discharge less sewage. Think of the polluted river, every time you flush. Insist your colony recycles its waste water, even reuse it.

Â

4) The tiger is beautiful, so are poor tribals who co-exist in the habitat. Demand justice for both.

Â

5) To make your beautiful home green, harvest rain water, use water saving toilets, segregate garbage and compost bio-degradable kitchen waste. Use CFL bulbs, a solar hot water heater.

Â

6) Impose economic sanctions againts the US for rogue climate behaviour

Â

7) Do not use any product, any food or other stuff, which uses plastic as packinig. This will put pressure on manufacturers to make re-cyclable packaging.

Â

8) Levy a global 'greenwash service' tax on corporates. Make them fully liable for products that damage the environment today or tomorrow.

Â

9) Do not first adopt wasteful and environmentally bad habits and then become green. Think of the last person. Do not first buy processed food and then askfor organic and home-made food. Do not first eat junk food and then go on a diet. Enjoy bio diversity in food and life style. Shun McWorld.

Â

10) Use less of everything that you use in your daily life. Not greed of some, but need of all, is the only way ahead.

Â

Â

--

Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach Â - "Even a stopped clock is right twice a day."

#851

From: "Tallulah D'Silva" <tallulahdsilva@...>
Date: Tue Nov 3, 2009 3:46 am
Subject: Re: Center Plans ban on laminated pouches

tallulah_f

Offline

So true Clinton. A bigger step of course would be to opt for sustainable alternatives closer home to really make a difference. And in order to do that awareness is a crucial key.
T

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 7:56 AM, Clinton Vaz <klintvaz@...> wrote:

Reading the headline on todays Herald absolutely made my monday morning! :) Was trying to find a solution to laminates for a really long time! Best way to deal with it is not to have it in the first place. Alternates exist, so they will replace easily. Rico pls carry on Goanet.

More info below:
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_centre-plans-ban-on-laminated-pouches-of-shampoo-gutkha_1305749

http://www.toxicslink.org/nalert-view.php?id=242

Clinton..
+91 9890936828

--
Tallulah D'Silva
architecture R/T,
4,T4 Dukle Residency,
St. Inez, Panaji.

#850

From: Vidyadhar Gadgil <vgadgil@...>
Date: Mon Nov 2, 2009 9:04 am
Subject: Re: 10 Easy Ways to save Environment

gadgilvidyadhar

Offline

2009/11/1 Clinton Vaz <klintvaz@...>:
> Very pertinent!

Yes, these suggestions appear pretty good.

But on a more provocative note, I have long wondered about what use
many of our individual 'green' initiatives are. I could make a very
good case to show that the environmental damage (or carbon footprint
or whatever) one causes has a 95% correlation with one's income level.
The rest is at best pure cosmetic time-pass -- kind of straining at a
gnat while swallowing an elephant with no problems whatsoever. At
worst, it's a strategy by the upper and middle classes to offload
their guilt on to the poor and blame them for the problems.

Like, a rich environmentally aware guy does something profound like
not buying something in plastic packaging (instead buying something in
organic packaging which costs five times as much), feels most
uplifted, gets into his SUV and drives to the airport to whizz into
the air en route to his next destination. The poor guy goes and buys
something in plastic packaging because that's what's cheaply
available, walks to his slum dwelling and falls asleep. But somehow
the first guy thinks he's the profound one and implicitly blames the
slum dweller.

We have seen this most classically in the tiger issue where rich
carbon-spewing urban environmentalists kick tribals out of their
forests to save the tiger (which is why I was impressed with this
list, since it actually included a whole lot of political issues like
this and action rather than individualised initiatives which achieve
nothing but help the participants shed some guilt). Or when we rush
around trying to save the frog by hassling some poor peasants for
catching frogs rather than tackling habitat change and pesticide
usage, which are the real problems.

Okay, enough already. I think this qualifies as an A-1 flame bait.
Hope people feel flamed enough to respond :-)




--
Whatever it is, I'm against it -- Groucho Marx

#849

From: Birds <birds@...>
Date: Mon Nov 2, 2009 5:53 am
Subject: Re: Center Plans ban on laminated pouches

indiaspechtje

Offline

Great news indeed! :-)

Clinton Vaz wrote:

Reading the headline on todays Herald absolutely made my monday morning! :) Was trying to find a solution to laminates for a really long time! Best way to deal with it is not to have it in the first place. Alternates exist, so they will replace easily. Rico pls carry on Goanet.
More info below:
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_centre-plans-ban-on-laminated-pouches-of-shampoo-gutkha_1305749
http://www.toxicslink.org/nalert-view.php?id=242
Clinton..
+91 9890936828
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GreenGoa/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GreenGoa/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:GreenGoa-digest@yahoogroups.com mailto:GreenGoa-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
GreenGoa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.43/2474 - Release Date: 11/01/09 07:38:00

#848

From: "Tallulah D'Silva" <tallulahdsilva@...>
Date: Mon Nov 2, 2009 5:56 am
Subject: Green Christmas

tallulah_f

Offline

Dear Friends,
Christmas is not a long way off and it's about time we consciously plan on celebrating it in as sustainable way as we possibly can.
Here are Mission Green’s tips for a green Christmas:

Decorate a tree in your garden instead of an artificial one or a tree cutting placed indoors. Go traditional. You can keep using garden trees for years.

If you haven’t bought one, invest in a potted one. Don’t buy a plastic tree, get a natural one instead that you can keep indoors and reuse for a few years and then can be planted in a garden. If you do not have space, you can gift it to someone who has a green space.

If you have an artificial one, use it and reuse every year. Please don’t throw it away, it’ll only add to the pile in landfills.

Buy eco products, local crafts, books, saplings, abandoned kittens or puppies to gift your loved ones. Buy gifts only if necessary, for example kids matter the most, older relatives and friends understand that Christmas is not just about receiving gifts! Present gifts that are non material, like a trip to a wildlife Sanctuary, membership to a local library, etc.

Wrap your gifts in cloth or old present papers or even news paper

How about solar powered Christmas string lights?

Avoid plastic, thermacol decorations as these are non biodegradable. Use eco friendly decorations made from paper, bamboo and cloth.

Send e-cards and save paper. If you need to use cards, source those made by NGO’s, self help groups, etc. Make your own cards too like a collage from old photos, news papers, recycled material, etc

Beeswax candles are so natural, use if required. Use instead of artificial lights.

Celebrate this Christmas in as ethical and non material way as possible. Family, friends and the environment are more important. Enjoy in a way that benefits our world.

Get Christmas sweets made locally. Plan in advance so that your requirement is taken care of.

Please reduce on the use of fireworks this Christmas. Go for smoke less and less noisy ones. Encourage your ward or housing colony to buy fireworks rather than each family buying in bulk. It also promotes the idea of sharing and communal harmony.

Make cribs out of natural material like mud and grow grass naturally. Also use terracotta statues instead of plastic ones. Even for professional cribs or competitions follow this practice. Avoid the use of non-biodegradable items. Support local crafts and potters.

Make sure that you or others in your area do not place any wild animals like pythons or civets in the cribs to attract the attention of the crowd. If you come across this practice please contact us immediately.

HAVE A MERRY GREEN CHRISTMAS!

--
Tallulah D'Silva
architecture R/T,
4,T4 Dukle Residency,
St. Inez, Panaji.

#847

From: marlon menezes <goacom@...>
Date: Mon Nov 2, 2009 3:36 am
Subject: Re: 10 Easy Ways to save Environment

goacom

Offline

While most of the recommendations make sense, some don't:

1) Take a bus and leave your car home. Don't ever
drive SUV, say not to diesel cars.
---
As far as carbon emissions are concerned, diesel is a far better alternative to
petrol powered vehicles. Not only does it take less energy to produce diesel,
the distance traveled per unit of carbon emitted with the diesel option is
around 15-20% lower than petrol. There are issues with NOx emissions from
diesel, but new ammonia based treatments that have been recently introduced in
N.America have eliminated this deficit viz petrol engines. Also with the advent
of HCCI engine technology in around 5 years, the designation of diesel versus
petrol will become moot as this new engine technology will employ the advantages
of both within one engine. When someone asks you if you have a diesel or a
petrol engine under your hood, you will be able to say you have both.



6) Impose economic sanctions againts the US for
rogue climate behaviour
---
Maybe true with the last US administration. However the current US government
has made a dramatic shift in domestic and international policies with respect to
climate change. Dr. Steven Chu, a Nobel laureate and  the current energy
secretary is passionate about the issue of global warming. I had the honor of
meeting him about two years ago while he was still a professor and it very clear
that he is deadly serious about this issue.



8) Levy a global 'greenwash service' tax on
corporates. Make them fully liable for products that damage the environment
today or tomorrow.
---
In many cases, what corporates produce is driven by what customers want. The
fact is many customers want the cheapest product, the environment be damned.
Consumers should realize that if they don't want to pay now, they will need to
pay a lot more later. Policies should be made that provide an legal and economic
incentive for industry to choose options that are sustainable. However, imposing
a green tax on corporates just because they "exist" is pointless, which will in
any case end up going into the larger coffers of the government, only to
disappear into the general budget.

Marlon

#846

From: Clinton Vaz <klintvaz@...>
Date: Mon Nov 2, 2009 2:26 am
Subject: Center Plans ban on laminated pouches

klintvaz

Offline

Reading the headline on todays Herald absolutely made my monday morning!
:) Was trying to find a solution to laminates for a really long time!
Best way to deal with it is not to have it in the first place.
Alternates exist, so they will replace easily. Rico pls carry on Goanet.

More info below:
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_centre-plans-ban-on-laminated-pouches-of-sh\
ampoo-gutkha_1305749

http://www.toxicslink.org/nalert-view.php?id=242

Clinton..
+91 9890936828

#845

From: Clinton Vaz <klintvaz@...>
Date: Sun Nov 1, 2009 4:23 pm
Subject: 10 Easy Ways to save Environment

klintvaz

Offline

Very pertinent!

-Clinton..

Below I jotted down from one institute next to GEDA's old office:

1) Take a bus and leave your car home. Don't ever drive SUV, say not to diesel cars.

2) Junk bottled water. Demand clean water for all, insist that water free and as a right is an entitlement to each person, but agree to pay more since you use more.

3) Use less water, discharge less sewage. Think of the polluted river, every time you flush. Insist your colony recycles its waste water, even reuse it.

4) The tiger is beautiful, so are poor tribals who co-exist in the habitat. Demand justice for both.

5) To make your beautiful home green, harvest rain water, use water saving toilets, segregate garbage and compost bio-degradable kitchen waste. Use CFL bulbs, a solar hot water heater.

6) Impose economic sanctions againts the US for rogue climate behaviour

7) Do not use any product, any food or other stuff, which uses plastic as packinig. This will put pressure on manufacturers to make re-cyclable packaging.

8) Levy a global 'greenwash service' tax on corporates. Make them fully liable for products that damage the environment today or tomorrow.

9) Do not first adopt wasteful and environmentally bad habits and then become green. Think of the last person. Do not first buy processed food and then askfor organic and home-made food. Do not first eat junk food and then go on a diet. Enjoy bio diversity in food and life style. Shun McWorld.

10) Use less of everything that you use in your daily life. Not greed of some, but need of all, is the only way ahead.