Friday 29 November 2013

FRACKING UNDERWAY IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA

While a fierce debate rages about fracking in South Africa and elsewhere, the Botswana government has been silently pushing ahead with plans to produce natural gas, keeping the country in the dark as it grants concessions over vast tracts of land, including half of the Central Kalahari Game Reserve—the ancestral home of the San people.
A new documentary film—The High Cost of Cheap Gas—has uncovered incontrovertible evidence that drilling and fracking are underway in Botswana and that international companies are planning massive gas operations in the future. But there has been little attempt to inform the public, despite growing international concerns about the harmful effects of natural gas production.
“The people of Botswana have the right to know about developments on this scale and to be given the chance to publicly debate their pros and cons and then decide whether natural gas production is in their best interest,” said Jeffrey Barbee, director of the film, which was funded by the Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa.
For more than a decade, the authorities in Botswana—routinely referred to as one of Africa’s best-governed states—have been quietly granting licenses to international companies. South Africa’s SASOL, Australian-based Tamboran Resources, Anglo American, Tlou Energy, Kalahari Energy, Exxaro, and many more are drilling for coal bed methane without any public debate about the industry, particularly the serious threats these large-scale developments pose to the environment and communities.
While activists have been campaigning against the extraction of shale gas and coal bed methane for years, the film documents alarming new evidence from the United States, exposing the damage these industries can inflict on human and animal health, and the environment. Structural problems with the entire production process mean that “unconventional” natural gas like this can end up being “dirtier” than coal—contributing even more to greenhouse gas emissions and global climate change.
For a water-scarce country like Botswana, gas extraction—whether through fracking or simple drilling—poses another worrying threat: Coal Bed Methane extraction requires vast amounts of water to be pumped out of the ground, which can significantly lower the water table. In some parts of America, where this process was pioneered, water tables have dropped by as much as 30 meters.
“Lowering the water table in parts of rural Botswana could mean the difference between a community having access to water one day and not the next,” said the film’s director, Jeffrey Barbee. “It might be in Botswana’s best interests to allow fracking but only if all the potential impacts based on the latest science—not just the promises of gas companies—are openly debated and if the regulations are tough enough and are rigorously enforced long after drilling has stopped.”
However, if America is anything to go by, the natural gas industry is adept at undermining, bypassing, or riding roughshod over government regulations and regulators. Astonishingly, fracking companies in the USA are not bound by the Clean Air Act, the Community Right to Know Act, or the Clean Water Act.
And despite Botswana government claims to the contrary, a senior official at SASOL, which is planning thousands of gas wells in Botswana, says in the film that they were not required to produce an environmental management plan. Apparently, SASOL did produce one anyway since it is international best practice, but other companies might be more willing to exploit this inexplicable weakness in the regulations.
In particular, there are fears that the hard-won right of the San to live on, and access water from, their ancestral land will be threatened by the coal bed methane concessions in and around the Central Kalahari Game Reserve. Indeed, according to the film, drilling is already taking place within the confines of the world-famous reserve.
Elsewhere in the country, the unfenced buffer zones on the borders of other bio-diversity rich—and economically important—national parks, like Chobe and Kgalagadi, are already being drilled. In fact, it appears that the government has also granted some concessions within Chobe National Park. This endangers not only the local communities but also the largest herd of migrating elephants left in the world.
The gas industry promises jobs and economic development but evidence from the USA shows that the few local jobs are created and that riches usually do not trickle down to the local communities, who have to live with the extraction.
“It is time for the Botswana government to come clean about natural gas operations in the country and to encourage an open and genuine debate so that the population can decide what is best for them and their country—not just an elite few,” said Barbee. “Instead the authorities keep everyone in the dark, particularly the San, who now face another grave threat to their future from Botswana’s secretive dash for gas.”

Tuesday 5 November 2013

GEF Grants Conservation International and World Wildlife Fund-US Direct Access to Environmental Funding

WASHINGTON, DC, November 5, 2013?Two global civil society organizations, Conservation International (CI) and the World Wildlife Fund-US (WWF-US) can now directly access funding from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) under a decision welcomed today by the GEF?s governing Council.
The decision marks an important milestone in the 22-year history of the GEF. For the first time, civil society organizations can directly access GEF funding for environmental projects without having to go through another GEF agency. The approval given to CI and WWF-US by an independent GEF Accreditation Panel comes after a rigorous assessment confirmed that they meet the GEF?s fiduciary standards and environmental and social safeguards. A review process considering applications by other organizations to become GEF Project Agencies is underway.
In remarks Tuesday to the GEF Council, meeting in Washington this week, GEF CEO and Chairperson Naoko Ishii congratulated CI and WWF-US on the approval. Both organizations have a long history of working with the GEF. The partnership designation gives them much greater initiative in the design of projects, and responsibility in their implementation.
?I would like to sincerely welcome Conservation International and World Wildlife Fund-US to the GEF family. The accreditation of new GEF Project Agencies, enabling them to access GEF funds to implement environmental projects, is an important way to strengthen the GEF Partnership. I am very excited about having CI and WWF-US among us. CI and WWF-US will help us further diversify the GEF?s tool-box, and allow us to present countries with a broader array of options that can best support them to address the drivers of global environmental degradation ? Ishii said.
CI and WWF-US join the roster of 10 GEF Agencies: the African Development Bank, Asian Development Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Inter-American Development Bank, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Environment Programme, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization, and the World Bank.
?We are pleased and honored to receive the accreditation as a GEF Project Agency. This is a historic moment for us as it will be the first time that non-governmental organizations can directly access and disburse resources from the largest public funder of projects to improve the global environment. We look forward to working together with governments, private sector and other GEF agencies to design strong projects that will leverage science-based solutions to protect nature for human well-being but also contribute to the sustainable development agenda?, said Lilian Spijkerman, Vice President of Global Public Partnerships at Conservation International?s Center for Environment and Peace.
?WWF is proud to join the GEF partnership. We commit to work with the GEF and leverage our partnerships and resources to help developing countries address some of the biggest challenges of our day. Natural resource depletion and climate change continue to destabilize ecosystems. We need a whole new set of partnerships and innovations to ensure a future in which both people and nature thrive,? said Carter Roberts, president and CEO of World Wildlife Fund ? US (WWF-US).
(Left to right) Niels Crone, Chief Operations Officer of Conservation International and Carter Roberts, President and CEO of WWF-US
CI has worked with the GEF since its inception in 1991 in endeavors ranging from engaging as a member of the GEF non-governmental organization network to supporting the execution of approximately $80 million in GEF funding in the past seven years. CI?s vast experience in innovative funding for environmental projects and private sector engagement and will add immense value to the network of agencies by providing expertise in the most pressing environmental and development challenges.
WWF offices around the world have been involved with the design or execution of more than 100 GEF projects over the past 20 years. With over 5,000 conservation professionals in more than 100 countries, the breadth of WWF?s global presence is unmatched among conservation non-governmental organizations. WWF-US is the North American branch of WWF.
About the Global Environment Facility
The Global Environment Facility (GEF) unites 183 countries in partnership with international institutions, civil society organizations (CSOs), and the private sector to address global environmental issues while supporting national sustainable development initiatives. An independently operating financial organization, the GEF provides grants for projects related to biodiversity, climate change, international waters, land degradation, the ozone layer, and persistent organic pollutants.
Since 1991, the GEF has achieved a strong track record with developing countries and countries with economies in transition, providing $11.5 billion in grants and leveraging $57 billion in co-financing for over 3,215 projects in over 165 countries. Through its Small Grants Programme (SGP), the GEF has also made more than 16,030 small grants directly to civil society and community based organizations, totaling $653.2 million.

TANZANIA NEEDS LAW TO CONTROL LEAD PAINT


 
EACH year, according to World Health Organisation (WHO) statistics, childhood lead exposure causes an estimated 600,000 new cases of intellectual disabilities and 143,000 deaths.
99 per cent of the victims live in low-and middleincome countries’, which include Tanzania.
 
Experts say lead is a naturally occurring bluish-gray metal found in the earth’s crust. Prior to current knowledge of its health hazards, it was widely used in products such as gasoline, batteries, metal products, crystal, food cans, fishing sinkers and ammunition.
 
It is also contained in paints. It is well known for its anti-corrosive properties and has been extensively used in construction industry. Despite its seemingly usefulness, lead poisoning is said to be the number one environmental health concern for children globally, with lead paint as a major flashpoint for children’s potential lead poisoning.
 
“In this day and age, it is quite frankly breathtaking that parents painting their child’s nursery a cheerful red, or handing their child a colourful toy may, through no fault of their own be exposing that child to a pernicious and damaging toxin: lead,” said Nick Nuttall, UN Environment Programme’s Spokesperson and Director of Communications recently.
 
Indeed, more than 90 years after the League of Nations called for a ban on lead in paint, and despite the existence of many safe alternatives, young children and pregnant mothers in the developing world are still exposed to high levels of the dangerous toxin through unsafe paints.
 
It is against this background the first ever International Lead Poisoning Prevention Week of Action (Theme: “Eliminating Lead in Paints”) under the auspices of the United Nations was marked from October 20-26, this year.
The event aimed at raising awareness about lead poisoning, highlight efforts to prevent childhood lead poisoning, and to urge further action to eliminate lead paint.
 
As the main organiser, the Global Alliance to Eliminate Lead Paint (GAELP), which is jointly coordinated by the UNEP and the WHO, invited governments, industries, civil society groups and other stakeholders to support and participate in the Week of Action.
 
As a key stakeholder in the awareness campaign, the Executive Secretary of Dar es Salaam-based Agenda for Environment and Responsible Development (AGENDA) Silvani Mng’anya called for concerted efforts by the government and other stakeholders to address the lead exposure problem.
 
Registered in 1997, AGENDA is a non-governmental, non profit sharing organisation (NGO) whose mission is to promote a culture of responsibility to the environment amongst the general public through advocacy, capacity building and stakeholders’ involvement in Tanzania and beyond.
 
Giving AGENDA’s situational analysis on lead paint in Tanzania, Mr Mng’anya says today paints are still sold with added lead in developing countries and countries with economies in transition such as Tanzania. He says this was demonstrated during a Global Study on Lead in Paint in 2009 conducted by Toxics Link, the International Persistent Organic Pollutants Elimination Network (IPEN) in collaboration with NGOs in various countries.
 
AGENDA was amongst the partners who participated in the said study, which collected 20 samples of oil based paint available in Tanzanian market. 19 out of 20 paints had lead levels above 450 parts per million (PPM). On what the law says about Lead Paint in Tanzania, the Agenda boss says the study in 2009 and a follow-up one last year, noted that there was a voluntary standard set by the Tanzania Bureau of Standards which indicates Lead in Paint should not exceed 450 ppm or 0.045%.
 
“Also the Industrial and Consumer Chemicals Act No. 3 of 2003 Sect. 30 support the restriction, banning and elimination of all proven dangerous and toxic chemicals to human health and environment and chemicals which are subjected to action according to international Convention or Treaty ratified in the United Republic of Tanzania.
 
However, there are no specific laws or regulations on lead in paint in Tanzania.” He says human exposure to lead is mainly through inhalation, ingestion, or in a small number of cases, absorption through the skin. “Lead has the same affinity for our biological systems as essential minerals such as iron, calcium and zinc.
 
Lead causes harm wherever it deposits in the body. In the blood stream, for example, it damages red blood cells and limits their ability to carry oxygen to tissues and organs. Most lead ends up in the bones, where it interferes with the production of blood cells and the absorption of calcium that bone needs to grow healthy and strong.’
 
According to experts, young children are most vulnerable as their growing bodies absorb lead more easily than adults. Even low level of lead exposure may harm their intellectual development, growth, behaviour and hearing. Furthermore, during pregnancy, especially in the last trimester, lead can cross the placenta and affect the unborn child.
 
Female workers exposed to high levels of lead have higher risk of miscarriages and still births.
 
Also people with occupational exposure to lead, like painters, renovators, workers in refineries and smelters, have higher risk of lead poisoning.
 
A study by the UN Environment Programme, released during the International Lead Poisoning Prevention Week of Action, analysed enamel decorative paints from nine countries: Argentina,
Azerbaijan, Chile, Cote d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kyrgyzstan, Tunisia and Uruguay.
 
The report found that the majority of the paints tested would not meet regulatory standards established in most highly industrialised countries- for example, 90 parts per million (ppm) in the United States and Canada-and that some contain astonishingly high and dangerous levels of lead.
 
While the report covers nine countries, previous research by IPEN and others shows that lead levels remain high in other countries with economies in transition.
 
For example, a study published in September 2012 by the Kenyan NGO iLima found an average lead concentration of 14,900 ppm in 31 samples of household paint.
 
Over the last seven years, similar studies found equally unsettling concentrations in other African nations: Cameroon, 23,100 ppm; Egypt, 26,200; Nigeria (two studies), 37,000 and 15,750 ppm; Senegal 5,870 ppm; South Africa, 19,860; and Tanzania 14,500 ppm. Worldwide, 30 countries have already phased out the use of lead paint.
 
The Global Alliance to Eliminate Lead Paint, co-led by WHO and UNEP, has set a target of 70 countries by 2015. “While this study shows many nations face a grave problem, it always very clearly demonstrates that established and enforced government regulations on lead levels in paint have a strong positive impact,” said Sara Brosche, Project Manager for IPEN’s lead paint projects.
 
“However, paint manufacturers have a responsibility to act on their own, particularly when there is virtually no associated negative economic impact for their businesses. There is absolutely no reason why paints with high levels of lead should continue to be sold and poison children.”
 
The report recommends action in three distinct areas: Regulatory Frameworks: National efforts to promote the establishment of an appropriate legal and regulatory framework to control the manufacture, import, export, sale and use of lead paints and products coated with lead paints should be encouraged.
 
The evidence of paints with very low lead contents coexisting in the market with equivalent lead paint suggests there should be few economic barriers to the introduction of legal or regulatory controls and the elimination of lead paint. Public Awareness: There is a need for information campaigns in countries where results show the presence of lead paint on the market.
 
These campaigns should inform the public about the hazards of lead exposure, especially in children; the presence of lead decorative paints for sale and use on the national market; lead paint as a significant source of childhood lead exposure; and availability of technically superior and safer alternatives.
 
Voluntary Action and Labelling: Paint manufacturers in countries that lack a well-enforced national lead paint control regime are encouraged to eliminate lead compounds from their paint formulations, especially of those paints likely to contribute to lead exposure in children and others.
 
Paint manufacturers also are encouraged to consider voluntary participation in programmes that provide third party paint certification that no lead has been added to their paint, and to label products in ways that help consumers identify paints that do not contain added lead.
 
Indeed the seriousness of the problem calls for need to raise awareness among governments, manufacturers and consumers not just that the problem exists, but that there are cheap and safe alternatives to lead already in use that can lift this health burden in a very short time.
 
“The good news is that exposure to lead paint can be entirely stopped through a range of measures to restrict the production and use of lead paint,” said Dr Maria Neira, WHO Director for Public Health and Environment.

Friday 1 November 2013


WHO: Lead paint causes 600,000 cases of intellectual disabilities a year. Chinese migrant workers put a new coat of white paint on pedestrian barriers lining a street in Beijing. UPI/Stephen Shaver
License Photo
Every last week of October each year is set aside for campaign against Lead poisoning globally.
Last month in commemoration of the week in New York, a U.N. Health official had this to say; "Countries should strengthen actions to eliminate lead paint, which causes as estimate 600,000 disabilities each year".
Maria Neira, director for Public Health and Environment at the World Health Organization, said 30 countries phased out use of lead paint and the Global Alliance to Eliminate Lead Paint has set a target of 70 countries by 2015.
WHO estimated 143,000 deaths per year result from lead poisoning, with lead paint is a major contributor. Exposure contributes to 600,000 new cases of children with intellectual disabilities every year and 99 percent of children affected by high exposure to lead live in low- and middle-income countries.
At high levels of exposure, lead damages the brain and central nervous system to cause coma, convulsions and even death. Children who survive such poisoning are often left with intellectual impairment and behavioral disorders, Neira said.
At lower levels of exposure, lead affects brain development in children, resulting in reduced IQ, behavioral changes such as shortened attention span and increased anti-social behavior, and reduced educational attainment. These effects are believed to be irreversible.
Adults are at increased risk of kidney disease and raised blood pressure, Neira said.
Lead paint may be found in the home, on toys, furniture and on other objects. Decaying lead paint on walls, furniture and other interior surfaces creates lead-contaminated dust in the home that young children easily ingest.
"The good news is that exposure to lead paint can be entirely stopped through a range of measures to restrict the production and use of lead paint," Neira said in a statement.


Read more: http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2013/10/18/WHO-143000-deaths-per-year-from-lead-poisoning/UPI-11551382150700/#ixzz2jNPA1Lra

GLOBAL ACTIVISTS:PAINT MAKERS MUST AGREE TO REMOVE LEAD IN PAINT


pots-of-paint
Lead might give red, yellow and white paints their bright hues and be cheaper to use than alternatives, but concerns remains about the health risks of lead poisoning, particularly in the developing world.
As the United Nations launches a week of action against lead poisoning, the manufacturer of Dulux paint has today called on its industry to voluntarily ban lead compounds from its supply chain.
Some firms have already started to develop lead-free alternative paints, but AkzoNobel believes it is the only paint company in the world to have a blanket ban on lead from its products. In 2011, it produced its last drop of paint containing lead and now only uses safer lead-free alternatives.
However, the rest of the industry has so far resisted calls to phase out lead entirely, despite the proven health risks associated with the material - lead poisoning has been blamed for 0.6 per cent of the global burden of disease and is said to result in 600,000 new cases of learning difficulties in children each year. Earlier this month, the International Paint and Printing Ink Council (IPPIC) issued a statement effectively saying it is working to comply with any legislation, but is also reluctant to take a lead on the issue.
The European Union is already on track to ban all lead compounds from June 2015, after it was labelled as a material of "high concern" under the REACH chemical regulations.
But Julian Hunter, regulatory affairs manager for AkzoNobel, argues that companies should be taking a more proactive approach in order to anticipate new chemicals rules coming into effect around the globe.
Last week AkzoNobel wrote to all the trade associations of which it is a member asking to discuss the prospects for a voluntary industry agreement to phase out lead. The move included letters to the IPPIC and the coatings associations representing Britain, Europe and America.
"As paint manufacturers we all have a responsibility to take care for the people who come into contact with our products and the environment in which they are used," the letter states. "Given effective alternatives are available, we do not believe that continued use of coatings containing lead compounds is compatible with Coatings Care, Product Stewardship or the Sustainability aspirations of our industry. Therefore in our opinion continued use of lead compounds in paint is now unacceptable to society."
Hunter told BusinessGreen that AkzoNobel's company ban has already removed 300 tonnes of lead compounds per year from its products, adding that an industry-wide voluntary ban could have a major impact on global health.
"We believe that if all the companies in the world followed our example, the environment would be saved from hundreds and hundreds of tonnes of lead," Hunter told BusinessGreen. "We're saying we'd like to take a more proactive lead and lead by example, we could do this quite quickly as the alternatives to lead pigments and driers are available, you can buy them off the shelf from suppliers and suppliers will tell you how to formulate with them, so it's not rocket science. All paint companies have good lab chemists on their staff who should be able to formulate products that don't use lead compounds in them."
The cost of such a transition is inevitably the main barrier to the adoption of a global ban, as safer alternatives to lead-based paints tend to be more expensive. But Hunter reckons the price of cleaner raw materials would fall if an industry-wide ban was enacted.
AkzoNobel is one of the largest paint companies in the world, but it remains to be seen whether it can encourage its peers to embrace its lead-free push. Since writing the letter, the company said it has only received one response - the British Coatings Association said that it would consult with its members about the proposal.