Photo credit: geoftheref

New Zealand has long been associated with the eco-travel movement, having implemented a number of eco-friendly practices in their tourist industry over the course of many years. Just about any outdoor activity can be enjoyed in an eco-friendly manner, from whale watching and bird watching to trekking, biking, and caving. There are hundreds of New Zealand guide and outfitting companies that specialize in eco-tourism; most of them care deeply about sustaining their local habitats and work with both local and national conservation organizations to promote sustainability.

Black Cat Cruises, an established marine tourism guide company in Lyttelton and Akaroa, is a great example of how conscientious many New Zealand guide companies can be. They use new and efficient engines and energy efficient lighting for their fleet, plan routes that travel the least distance, train all their staff in environmental awareness, and employ locals to reduce commuting times (among a host of other eco-friendly steps that can be found here).

New Zealand is renowned for its organic farming industry, with established internship programs for tourists who want to stay awhile and really get to know the local culture. Willing Workers On Organic Farms (WWOOF) is the largest and most established network of organic farming opportunities in New Zealand with hundreds of listings to choose from.

The indigenous Maori culture set the tone for properly living within the means of the land many hundreds of years ago and provide a unique opportunity for eco-tourists to see how these practices have influenced New Zealand culture as a whole. Respect Nature Tours is one outfitter that works closely with Maori by hiring them as guides, using Maori-run accommodations and supporting local Maori preservation programs.

Tourists can educate themselves on the best eco-friendly programs and outfitters by checking out sites like EcoTours New Zealand and the New Zealand Tourism Guide.

Mayors from 400 cities around Europe have signed the Covenant of Mayors agreement and promised to go beyond EU’s 20% by 2020 energy and climate goals.

The whole idea with the Covenant of Mayors pact is to “go beyond” EU’s 20% greenhouse gas emission cuts and 20% renewable energy by 2020. The German city Hamburg plans to reduce emissions by 40 percent by 2020. Paris on the other hand says it hopes to reduce emissions by 25 percent over the same period.

EU’s Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs said the plan, which will affect 80 million Europeans, is equivalent to reforest each year a surface larger than the whole of Hungary, or taking out from the streets more than 35 million cars or closing down 20 coal-fired 50MW power plants. At a conservative estimation the plan will save around €8 billion ($10.4 billion) in energy costs every year.

“Most of the energy produced in Europe is consumed in urban areas. The battle against climate change will have to fought and won in the cities. This is why, the commitment shown by Mayors across Europe by signing the Covenant of Mayors send us a strong message of hope, particularly in the difficult times that we are facing “, said Commissioner Piebalgs.

Cities in non-EU member states have also backed the climate change agreement. These include cities in Switzerland, Norway, Ukraine, Turkey, Buenos Aires, Argentina and New Zealand. In USA the New York mayor Michael Bloomberg backed the EU plan and said his city would aim to reduce emissions by 30 percent by 2030.

Committee of the Regions President Luc Van den Brande, speaking at the signing ceremony, said that the plan “is not for big cities alone” and that “smaller cities and towns, as well as regions as a whole” should make the environmental pledge:

“The Covenant of Mayors is an excellent initiative which will continue to grow in partnership with the Committee of the Regions. Europe’s ambitious targets for cutting greenhouse gases will only be met when European local and regional authorities pull together and become involved as partners. The Covenant is not for big cities alone: smaller cities and towns, as well as regions as a whole, should also be encouraged to sign the Covenant and make the environmental pledge. The Committee of the Regions is also exploring the idea of creating a network for cities and regions signed up to the Covenant, helping them to share best practice ideas and experience.”

Top British climate scientist Professor James Lovelock FRS has warned that over 6 billion people will die this century due to unaddressed climate change. Already 16 million people die avoidably in the world each year due to deprivation and deprivation-exacerbated disease (see: “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950” (G.M. Polya, Melbourne, 2007). It is already clear from declining agricultural production due to drought and massive storm surge disasters in India, Bangladesh, Burma and the US that global warming is already impacting on global avoidable mortality.

Greenhouse gas pollution – mostly due to carbon dioxide (CO2) from fossil fuel burning – is driving global warming and attendant species extinctions, droughts, sea level rise, decreased agricultural production and increased human death. However a major reality that is generally ignored is the death toll associated with pollutants other than CO2 generated by fossil fuel burning, notably carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, particulates, volatile organic components, nitrogen oxides and heavy metals such as mercury. As outlined below an upper limit of about 0.3 million people die avoidably each year in the world due to the effects of toxic pollutants from fossil fuel burning.

The Ministry of Energy of Ontario, Canada, commissioned a report into “true cost” of coal-fired power plants i.e. the “true cost” taking into account the environmental cost and the human impact in terms of mortality (deaths) and morbidity (illness) (see: “Cost Benefit Analysis: Replacing Ontario’s Coal-Fired Electricity Generation” (PDF) by DSS Management Consultants Inc. and RWDI Air Inc., for the Ontario Ministry of Energy, April, 2005, 93 pages). The report found that the “true cost” of coal-based electricity was 4-5 times the “market price” depending upon whether one valued a human life at $4 million or $5 million.

Of crucial importance to analysis of human deaths from coal-based electricity generation, the Canadian report found that 668 Ontarians die due to 27 TWh (27 trillion Watt hours) of electricity generation (for a summary see: http://evworld.com).

Canada and Ontario in particular have excellent medical services that are readily accessed by all members of society. Further, the population density in Ontario is much lower than in other countries (indeed even continental Australia most of the coal-fired power stations and most of the population are confined to relatively densely populated coastal regions). Accordingly, estimates of “annual coal-based electricity deaths” in other countries based on the Ontario ratio of 668 avoidable deaths per annum /27 TWh = 24.7 deaths per TWh are likely to be UNDER-estimates.

Coal, gas and oil burning all produce toxic agents such as carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, particulates, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, volatile organic components and heavy metals, notably mercury (Hg) (see: http://dar.csiro.au/…/urbanpollution.html). Sulphur (S) content varies and mercury (Hg) pollution from combusted petroleum and natural gas is about 10 times less than that which derives from coal (66 Mg/y in the US); however this estimate was based on Hg from US fuel oil of 1,500 kg/y whereas the US EPA estimates Hg from fuel oil at 10,000 kg/y (10 Mg/y: http://www.epa.gov/…/.pdf).

We will initially ASSUME for arithmetic simplicity and “ball-park estimation” that the oil, gas and coal combustibles used to generate electricity are equally dirty in terms of toxic products and deadly impact – and then go back to assess coal-specific electricity generation using available data on the percentage of fossil–fuel-based electricity generation due to coal burning.

For authoritative information on energy usage we can refer to the US Energy Information Administration (US EIA) that reports official energy statistics from the US Government covering the last quarter century. For all US EIA International data see: http://eia.doe.gov/international and for US EIA data on 2005 thermal electricity production, see http://eia.doe.gov/…/electricitygeneration.html.

The Ontario Ministry of Energy study indicated 668 deaths /27 TWh of coal-based electricity generation = 24.7 deaths/TWh. Using this figure we can estimate annual deaths from fossil fuel-based electricity generation (assuming equality in toxicity of coal, oil and gas burning and other factors such as medical services, population density and environmental protection services). Since Canada has excellent, publicly-accessible medical services, low population density and good environmental protection our estimate for other countries will be under-estimated – however the assumption that coal-burning is no more toxic than the burning of other fossil fuels may lead to over-estimation of the death toll.

Before providing these mortality estimates for all major fossil fuel-burning nations, it is useful to compare the estimates of annual deaths from fossil fuel-based electricity generation (“annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths”) with those from coal-based electricity generation (”annual coal-based electricity deaths”) for several key countries. Thus “annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths” for the US, the UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand are 71,877, 6,854, 5,394, 3,760 and 355, respectively (2005). These estimates are compared with estimates for “annual coal-based electricity deaths” for these countries.

The US “annual coal-based electricity deaths” have been estimated at 30,000 [2002]: “Coal-burning air pollution harms human heath in several different ways. Tiny particles of sulfur and nitrogen from coal burners lodge deep in our lungs, causing as many as 30,000 premature deaths per year, according to the most up-to-date study by EPA consultant Abt Associates“. According to Janet Larsen of The Earth Policy Institute it is 25,100 [2004]: “By moving beyond coal, the United States could avoid a legacy of smog-filled skies, acid rain, polluted waterways, contaminated fish, and scarred landscapes. This could each year save some 25,000 lives, reduce respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses, avert potential neurological damage for 630,000 babies, and erase a health care bill of over $160 billion”.

49% of US electricity of 4,065 TWh is from coal i.e. 1,991 TWh (2006: Sources: Wikipedia and EIA) indicating 49,153 [2006] ”annual coal-based electricity deaths” as compared to 71,887 “total annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths”.

The UK produced 409 TWh of electricity in 2005 of which 33.6% was coal-based i.e. 137.4 TWh, this corresponding to 137.4 TWh x 668/27 TWh = 3,399 [2005] “annual coal-based electricity deaths” as compared to 6,854 “total annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths”.

Australia produced 255 TWh of electricity in 2006 of which 92% was from fossil fuels and 77% was from burning black or brown coal, this yielding an estimate of 0.77 x 255 TWh x 668/27 TWh = 4,858[2006] ”annual coal-based electricity deaths” as compared to 0.77 x 5,394/0.92 = 4,515 [2005] ”annual coal-based electricity deaths” (see above) and total ”annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths” of 5,395 (2005; see above).

Canada produced 567 TWh of electricity in 2003 of which 28% was from fossil fuels and 19% was from coal burning i.e.107.7 TWh and we can calculate 107.7 TWh x 668/27 TWh = 2,665 [2003] ”annual coal-based electricity deaths” as compared to 0.19 x 3,760/0.28= 2,551 [2005] ”annual coal-based electricity deaths” and 3,760 [2005] “total annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths”.

New Zealand produced 41.6 TWh of electricity in 2005. In 2004, 73% of the total input into electricity generation was from renewable resources(predominantly hydro), 16% was from gas and 11% was from coal i.e. 4.6TWh (2005) corresponding to 114 [2005] “annual coal-based electricity deaths” as compared to 355 “total annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths”.

It is useful to compare the above figures from the “Anglo” countries with those for the World and the major non-European Developing countries China and India using data from the US Energy Information Administration, the World Coal Institute and the Pew Centre on Climate Change (see: http://pewclimate.org/…/coalfacts.cfm). Thus the “total annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths” for India, China and the World can be estimated to be 13,319, 47,477 and 282, 945, respectively. In India 69% of electricity is from coal i.e. 456.5 TWh/y corresponding to 11, 276 “annual coal-based electricity deaths”. In China about 80% of electricity is from coal, corresponding to 1,898 TWh/y and 46,868 “annual coal-based electricity deaths”. For the World as a whole coal provides 40% of the total electricity i.e. 6,940 TWh/y and corresponding to 171,418 “annual coal-based electricity deaths”.

The World is not responding to warnings from top climate scientists such as NASA’s Dr James Hansen and his colleagues who are calling for a “negative CO2 emissions” policy to reduce atmospheric CO2 to a safe level of no more than 350 ppm from the current already dangerous level of 385 ppm (see: http://arxiv.org/…/.pdf and http://mwcnews.net/…/23119/42/). The warnings of such eminent scientists are obfuscated by self-interested climate scepticism, especially from the leading per capita CO2 polluters, the US and Australia.

However the above analysis shows that there is a horrendous reality ALREADY of about 170,000 deaths annually throughout the world from the effects of coal-based electricity generation and as many as 0.3 million deaths annually from pollutants from fossil fuel-based electricity generation in general – a huge death toll that cannot be ignored. Please tell everyone you can.

Dr Gideon Polya published some 130 works in a 4 decade scientific career, most recently a huge pharmacological reference text “Biochemical Targets of Plant Bioactive Compounds” (CRC Press/Taylor & Francis, New York & London, 2003). He has just published “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950” (G.M. Polya, Melbourne, 2007: http://mwcnews.net and http://globalbodycount.blogspot.com);
see also his contribution “Australian complicity in Iraq mass mortality” in “Lies, Deep Fries & Statistics” (edited by Robyn Williams, ABC Books, Sydney, 2007). He is currently preparing a revised and updated version of his 1998 book “Jane Austen and the Black Hole of British History” as biofuel-, globalization- and climate-driven global food price increases threaten a possibly 100-fold greater famine catastrophe than the man-made famine in British-ruled India that killed 6-7 million Indians in the “forgotten” World War 2 Bengal Famine (see recent BBC broadcast involving Dr Polya, Economics Nobel Laureate Professor Amartya Sen and others).

The documentary tells the story about the very first Rainbow Warrior who were sunk by the French foreign intelligence agency (DGSE) while docked in Auckland harbour, New Zealand, on 10 July 1985.

Video after the jump.

Link to video: The Rainbow Warrior: what really happened

Japan’s whaling fleet has once again sets sail for Antarctic, on a mission to brutally slaughter whales. Let’s call it what it’s actually is and not “scientific research”, like Japan calls it.

But this time it’s a little different. This year they have decided to go big and brutally murder around 1000 whales. That’s the largest whaling mission Japan has ever done. Included in that amount are 50 humpback whales. That means that Japan will break a 44-year ban on hunting humpback whales.

This decision has already sparked loud protests from environmental groups and governments around the world. Especially the UK, Australia and New Zealand have sharply criticised Japan.

Labor, the opposition party in Australia has suggested that if they are elected in the Australian federal election this Sunday they will track down Japans whaling fleet using their military.

Greenpeace will, once again, try to track down the whaling fleet and disturb their hunt as much as possible. Karli Thomas, expedition leader onboard the Greenpeace ship Esperanza says that “the whaling fleet must be recalled now. If it is not, we will take direct, non-violent action to stop the hunt”.

Sea Shephard has also set sails to try and track down and stop the whaling fleet. Captain Paul Watson says that they “need to find and intercept these vicious killers as soon as possible. Every day of searching will cost the lives of whales”.