I live in a coal producing state. I even live in a dirty coal-burning city (Chicago boasts two 1950s-era coal-fired power plants). But in the face of a climate crisis and international opposition to disproportionate American consumption of world resources, it shouldn’t be this way. Which is why I was disappointed this morning to read some of the headlines about the Senate energy votes yesterday…..

I…Why coal, as so-called “clean coal”, or coal-to-liquids, is even remotely on the table is completely beyond me. U.S. Senator Obama (D-IL) released this vague statement yesterday regarding coal to liquids in the Senate energy debate <http://obama.senate.gov/press/070619-obama_statement_69/> (my own emphasis added):

“Achieving energy independence and significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions are two of the greatest challenges America faces. With the right technological innovations, coal has the potential to be a cleaner burning, domestic alternative to imported oil. However we are not there yet. The Bunning amendment would have been premature in requiring the production of billions of gallons of coal-to-liquids without providing strong environmental safeguards to ensure that this new fuel alleviates, not worsens, our climate crisis. The Tester amendment, on the other hand, gives us the tools to determine whether we can make coal into a clean fuel source. We cannot solve the climate crisis without addressing coal – which generates half of America’s electricity.”

“Moving forward, I believe we should only invest in coal-to-liquid fuels that burn at least 20 percent less lifecycle carbon emissions than conventional fuels. I also introduced a low-carbon fuel standard to mandate a 10 percent reduction in emissions for all vehicle fuels by 2020, with incentives for producers to make their fuels more efficient and to exceed that level, without prejudging which fuel will turn out to be the best for our environment and our economy.”

How could coal fit anywhere in our energy future, much less how would coal possibly fit in our energy portfolio in the context of the climate crisis, as Obama puts it? The only way to stop increasing atmospheric carbon is to stop putting carbon into the atmoshere — coal must stay underground if we are to seriously address global climate destabilization.

Obama’s recent statements on coal-to-liquids are like a wink and a nudge to both the coal industry and his somewhat environmentally-leaning supporters, and raise serious questions about his commitment to fighting climate change.

Meanwhile in Illinois, new coal-fired power plants and coal proposals are popping up like hives all over the place. Today’s news carries a story about Peabody Energy’s plans to begin construction with Bechtel Power Corp. of a new coal-fired power plant in Illinois’ Washington County, southeast of St. Louis. <http://www.kentucky.com/471/story/102399.html>

Last week, Illinois EPA granted a permit for a new $2 billion 630-megawatt coal facility, to be partially financed by $500 million in low-cost bonds from the state, called the Taylorville Energy Center. That plant was hailed as a so-called “clean coal” plant by many in the state, even though the technology to sequester the carbon it will produce is not yet available. <http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN0531883820070605> Chicago’s WBEZ aired a segment on the TEC <http://www.wbez.org/Program_848.aspx?episode=11228>. Why do they keep calling it “clean coal”? What’s clean about mining, transporting, or burning coal?

In all, there are currently 23 coal-fired power plants in Illinois, with 17 new, additional plants proposed…

To see a list of over 150 new coal plants being proposed across the US, see: http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/refshelf/ncp.pdf

(This DOE publication includes the exclamation that these new plants will generate equivalent power for 90 million homes. Out of curiosity, I checked the census bureau’s population projection for, say, 2040 in the US — the Census Bureau thinks there will be about 391,946,000 people in the US in 2040. Today there are about 302,148,016. So, taking these numbers and the DOE numbers, the proposed new coal fired power plants alone (not taking into account any conservation measures or other energy sources, either conventional or “alternative”), will generate more than enough energy for every single NEW person (babies, family members, everyone…) in the US to consume an entire household worth of energy between now and 2040. Obviously I just did this calculation for fun and there are details to be worked out, but hopefully you can see my point that we clearly don’t need all this new coal power to come on line. Aside from the fact that this would just lead to a ridiculous amount of new energy and environmental degradation, and is really just a way to line the pockets of the coal and utility industries, many have shown that we can meet our energy needs with cleaner technologies and some conservation. All I wanted to do by including the population projection numbers was to put the number in context, since it’s hard for me to imagine really what 90GW amounts to… I’ll try to add more on some of the alternative plans that I’ve read in a future post.)

Sierra Club also links to info on some 117 new coal plants: <http://www.sierraclub.org/maps/coal.asp>.

Boeing, the second largest defense contractor, is based here in chicago. here’s a link to my recent indymedia post on the april 2007 boeing protest in chicago:

http://chicago.indymedia.org/newswire/display/77045/index.php

we’re heading into the fifth year of war on iraq, after four years of orderly anti-war marches and rallies… these events obviously haven’t done much to stop or even slow down this war. but i’m living in a new city, and i’m curious — and even though i feel permitted marches are not that helpful, or effective, on this issue at this point, it’s still doing something, and i love seeing first-time marchers and feeling their energy… i also still feel the need to go and support, and feel for just a moment that i live among people who also oppose the war. i was a little late arriving at the pre-march rally point, and as i walked toward that part of the city, i had a good vantage point for getting a little perspective on the gathering. from a mile away i heard and saw the helicopters, then getting closer i saw lines of armed and geared up police. turning the corner, i followed the loudspeaker and crowd noise to the main gathering point. folks were clustered inside the fenced-in school yard, listening to speakers, assembling banners, distributing materials. outside the fence, others were distributing literature, meeting up with friends, and so on. the fence was a distraction, and kind of an unfortunate circumstance, as it visually broke up the mass of protesters and also literally enclosed people. a lot of police were milling about outside the fence as well — getting cameras and their own gear ready.

over the weekend as i had listened to the speeches from saturday’s anti-war marches and rally at the pentagon, it just struck me as sad to think at how ineffectual the resistance has been. when the war started and masses gathered and people shut down parts of cities or blockaded war contractors, the message seemed more powerful. these days more people oppose the war, yet numbers dwindle at protests and the war drags on and the threat of another war looms. years ago, marching around in permitted parades used to at least make me feel like i could send a message to “stop the war”, but i’m tired from it now.
i’m tired of the war. i’m tired of marching around in opposition to the war. i’m tired of having to hear about ever-more dead and wounded (now at over 3200 american military fatalities, over 23,000 wounded american military, and 650,000 to three quarters of a million iraqi civilians and climbing, as well as a growing refugee crisis where 1.8 million iraqis have left the country and as many as 1 in 8 iraqis have fled their home) and i’m tired of not hearing about the dead and wounded (i.e. the corporate evening news). i’m tired of hearing people say, “with this many people marching, they’ll HAVE to listen”, or “with the democrats back in power in congress….”, etc. etc. so here’s the thing: nobody in power HAS to listen to us. profit and corporate money equals power and influence in our country, and i’m just not seeing anything on the pro-justice and peace side of things that even approaches the power over congress and government that corporations on the pro-war side of things wield. anyway, back to last night’s march….

the corporate news reported that about 4,000 people marched in chicago on march 20. the ratio of police to marchers was really noticable to me — officers lined the sides of the march, walking alongside protesters and between protesters and the surprised onlookers on the sidewalks. the police traffic control minimized traffic disruption — rerouting cars to alternate streets — which also meant that less people downtown actually witnessed the throngs marching by. this was disappointing to me — i know it was intended to be a permitted march with minimal and predictable disruption, but i think some of the message is lost when 4,000 people can march downtown and most other folks won’t even see or hear about it. if the point is to demonstrate that people are sick of the war and the death and the killing then it seems pretty key that as wide an audience as possible sees that message. and unfortunately i don’t think that happened last night. it’s good to make people feel a part of something, and it’s great to provide a safe way for new people to get involved, but that alone won’t stop the war or U.S. empire-building. it’s like a pill we take to feel better about our complacency in letting things be the way they are.

as i left the rally i spotted a homeless man trying to keep warm in the entry to the el station…. it is so absurd to me that a city and country that spends what it does on the war (as well as on a police presence to keep the anti-war voices literally in line) does not prioritize providing shelter or healthcare to its people (not to mention appropriate medical and mental health care to its wounded soldiers).

meanwhile, people displaced by hurricane katrina in new orleans are left to languish as public housing remains closed and whole neighborhoods are cleared. why is our government’s money going toward lining the pockets of defense contractors and oil companies when there is so much need here at home?

…

sorry to sound so down on the rallies — like i said, i’m just tired and frustrated and disappointed in the war and the system that allows it to continue. real thanks to people who organized these and other events, and extra thanks and support to folks who staged creative protests and civil disobedience… die-ins in san francisco, oil war/climate justice protest at chevron headquarters, successful blockade of NREC by organizers in pittsburgh, ….

In December 2006, EPA struck a blow at a public right-to-know law by relaxing toxic chemical reporting requirements for businesses under EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory (TRI). EPA’s December rule (published to the Federal Register on Friday, December 22, just before a long holiday weekend) changed the TRI reporting requirements for facilities storing, transporting, or releasing certain chemicals into the environment to increase the threshold amount of toxics that can be released by a facility before more detailed reporting to EPA (and the public) would be required. Basically, the reporting changes mean that a facility may quadruple releases, emitting up to 2,000 pounds annually, before the public would have a right to know the details of just how much and which chemicals were in their neighborhood. The new rules allow facilities to use the less detailed “Form A”, which doesn’t require chemical volume or details on releases to land, air, or water, if the facility creates less than 5,000 pounds of waste annually and release less than 2,000 pounds to the environment. EPA’s rules went further to, for the first time in TRI’s history, allow the use of the simpler reporting form for persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic substances (PBTs) such as mercury compounds so long as the facility recycles and treats no more than 500 pounds of that waste in a year and eliminates releases.

As usual with government actions on the environment, the plot thickens, with allegations of senior management efforts to modify the draft rule late in the game and to then expedite impact analysis…. In February, GAO (the Government Accountability Office, which sometimes refers to itself as the “congressional watchdog”) released a report that blasted the TRI reporting changes, saying that EPA’s changes “will likely have a significant impact on information available to the public about dozens of toxic chemicals from thousands of facilities in states and communities across the country”. GAO went further to state that “EPA did not adhere to its own rulemaking guidelines in all respects when developing the proposal to change TRI reporting requirements”. (You can find a one page abstract of the report here <http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d07464thigh.pdf>; or read the full GAO report at this link: <http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07464t.pdf>.

Now, some in congress have proposed a bill to reverse some of this administration’s weakening of TRI and to protect TRI – and the public right to know about toxic releases – in the future. According to a statement from Representative Frank Pallone’s (NJ) office, the bill would codify the stronger reporting requirements that were in place before the Bush administration weakened them late last year, and would additionally prevent this or future administrations from changing the reporting guidelines without congressional approval. Track changes to the house and senate legislation here (search for the “toxic right-to-know protection act”, or H.R. 1055, or S. 595).

It is important to be aware of this bill and others relating to changes in TRI. The toxic chemical release inventory is a provision of EPCRA (Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act), which was passed in 1986 as a response to the Union Carbide methyl isocyanate leak in Bhopal, India that killed and injured thousands of people. (A month after the disaster in Bhopal, it was disclosed that a similar Union Carbide facility in West Virginia had leaked the same chemical, which is used to make pesticides, at least 28 times. Eight months later 3,800 pounds of the chemical leaked in West Virginia, this time sending dozens of people to hospitals. Congress passed EPCRA to make sure people had access to information on hazardous chemicals in their communities.)

The National Environmental Trust released a report in October 2005 that used TRI data from 2003 to analyze the impact of EPA’s then-proposed rule. Here in Illinois, NET’s data showed, 7% of Illinois zip codes would lose data from all reporting facilities within their area if EPA followed its proposed changes for short-form eligibility and 46 Illinois zip codes (12%) would lose data on half of the releases in their area. As you can imagine, popular sentiment rose up against EPA’s proposed TRI changes — the Agency received over 120,000 comments from the public, of which over 99% opposed the proposed changes, according to OMB Watch (see “Against the Public’s Will” at http://www.ombwatch.org/article/archive/241).

In addition to being used by concerned community members and neighbors, some groups rely on TRI data to look for environmental justice trends in facility siting or emissions. For example, on February 17 the Center for Justice, Tolerance, and Community at University of California Santa Cruz released a report that used TRI and census data to document the disproportionate burden of environmental hazards that is placed on poor and minority communities in the San Francisco Bay Area. Even EPA’s own analysis of the proposed rule estimated that minorities comprise 31.8% of the U.S. population and 41.8% of the population living within one mile of facilities that filed at least one long form for TRI in 2003. (EPA also estimated that within a mile of a detailed TRI-reporting facility, the percentage of individuals living below the Census Bureau poverty level is slightly higher than the U.S. average. See EPA’s “Response to Comments” in the final rule.)

Related links and sources for this post

EPA’s “Toxics Release Inventory Burden Reduction Final Rule” (published in Dec 22 Federal Register):
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-TRI/2006/December/Day-22/tri21958.pdf

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on EPA’s implementation of the TRI rule: here http://www.gao.gov/docsearch/abstract.php?rptno=GAO-07-464T

GAO’s preliminary report: http://www.gao.gov/htext/d07464t.html or http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07464t.pdf

OMB Watch news and articles on TRI: http://www.ombwatch.org/article/archive/241

OMB Watch Report, “Against the Public’s Will”, released December 2006 and summarizing TRI comments: http://www.ombwatch.org/info/TRICommentsReport.pdf

National Environmental Trust TRI news and analysis site: http://www.net.org/health/tri.vtml

Presidential executive order exempting federal facilities from reporting: here or  http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/07-374.htm

And finally, use the data while it’s still there!

The following URLs link to sites that use TRI data and let anyone plug in their zip code or look up a facility to find out about its emissions or to calculate environmental and community health risk:

EPA’s TRI website (contains info on the new rule as well as searchable data for communities): http://epa.gov/tri/

Scorecard (get information on pollution and risk in your zip code): http://www.scorecard.org/

EPA’s own Risk Screening Environmental Indicator (RSEI) site — compares toxic chemical released from industrial sources and allows communities to set risk-based priorities for further action and analyze geographic trends: http://epa.gov/oppt/rsei/

By the way, it should come as no shock, but this administration and corporate interests’ assault on the environment is relentless…. while EPA and the public and Congress battle it out over TRI, the whitehouse is also quietly changing other requirements using the fine print of executive orders. One recent example is President Bush’s January 26 executive order, E.O. 13423, “Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management”, which at quick glance does _appear_ to promote environmental improvements. However, this new executive order also rescinds several previous executive orders relating to environmental improvement in the government, including E.O. 13148, “Greening the Government Through Leadership in Environmental Management”, which had maintained the Clinton-era requirement that federal facilities (like Department of Defense sites), must report releases under TRI. This is significant because according to analysis of TRI data by the National Environmental Trust, DoD sites stand to benefit greatly from the weakening of TRI. In my opinion, the community’s right to know about the release or disposal or storage of significant amounts of toxic chemicals should not vary depending on the source of those chemicals — impacts to health and the environment don’t lessen just because the toxic exposure originates somewhere else.

100 Years of Land Loss in Louisiana (large pdf file)

oh, the environment in new orleans…i started this post while i was in new orleans, but wasn’t able to finish uploading these links until now… so now i’ve tried to update it again with some more recent info and analysis on coastal land loss from USGS. please take a look at some of these links – if you have a fast enough connection, the usgs maps and charts are interesting and scary and depict impacts of wetlands trends that are not soon forgotten.

many groups have been testing and cleaning and remediating in the year+ since katrina struck. but the environmental disaster that followed katrina can’t really be understood without the context of what the environment was like here in new orleans and in lousiana before the storm hit. new orleans and coastal louisiana were home to superfund landfills, degraded wetlands, refineries, and many other sites with a history of releases… katrina’s unusual force added additional stress to a system that should have protected the people and ecology of new orleans, but there were many sites that handled, stored, or released hazardous materials in existence before katrina hit and whose flooding added to the city’s vulnerability and lasting toxic after-effects from the storm. (click on the above links to do your own searches on chemicals or facilities, or go to Lousiana Environmental Action Network’s (LEAN) TRI data and maps for Louisiana chemical corridor: <LEANwebmaps>)

the city’s vulnerability was also increased by ongoing loss of wetlands along the louisiana coast. these wetlands should act as a buffer between gulf storms and inland populations, but as wetlands are lost to dams, levees, navigation projects and channels, rising seas, changing land use, storms, etc., the buffer is lost and the result is stronger storm surges and effects further inland. in addition, most scientists and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change agree that global warming is and will continue to lead to an increase in severity of tropical storms (this is because hurricanes gather strength from warmer ocean surface waters). scientists have already published studies showing that hurricanes are becoming stronger everywhere that they occur <http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/nature03906.html>.

in 2003, usgs reported that coastal louisiana was losing land at an alarming rate, averaging 34 square miles per year between 1956 and 2000, and that the “primary cause of this land loss appeared to be dams, levees and navigation projects along the main stream and tributaries of the mississippi river that started in 1928 and were completed in 1963, coinciding with the first observations of major coastal land loss in louisiana”.

the usgs has compiled some amazing and scary reports on land loss in coastal louisiana — please note that some of these reports were printed several years ago and include both assessments of landloss from 1932-2000 and predictions for future land loss in louisiana (2000-2050)….

usgs released a report in october 2006 where they note that (1) their november 2005 assessments of land loss due to katrina and rita were underestimated and that in fact 217 square miles of louisiana’s coastal lands were transformed to water after hurricanes katrina and rita, and (2) actual observed land loss from katrina and rita has already accounted for (42%) of the louisiana coastal land loss they had previously predicted to take place from 2000-2050:

Land transformed to water along the coast and on barrier islands further reduces Louisiana’s natural protection from future storms. Louisiana had already lost 1,900 square miles of coastal lands, primarily marshes, from 1932 to 2000. The 217 square miles of potential land loss from the 2005 hurricanes represent 42 percent of what scientists had predicted, before Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, would take place over a 50-year period from 2000 to 2050, even though they had factored storms into their model.

land loss along louisiana coast:
http://www.nwrc.usgs.gov/special/landloss.htm

For some perspective on what all this water and toxic sludge means to real people, one additional source of information and data on New Orleans population, maps of hurricane floodwater, etc. can be found here: http://gnocdc.org/

link to map of flooding

leaving new orleans was hard… there’s still so much to do, and it was so hard to say goodbye to people i’ve grown close to during my brief few months in new orleans. i’m in chicago now, putting together next steps. i haven’t written to many of you in a long time — it got so hectic in new orleans it was hard to keep up with communications. i’m still surprised at the questions and reactions i get from people that i talk with about new orleans — people asking, “is it worth rebuilding?” or “is there still that much left to do?!”. i’ve included a few pictures in this post… these are pictures from my last weeks in new orleans – pictures of new orleans nine and ten months after the storm. in the end i needed to leave to try to catch up again with the life i’m just starting out in chicago. it is strange being in another city – one with infrastructure that functions, to a degree – after being so consumed by the damage and debris and unmet needs and military presence of new orleans. it does help to put some context into the inquiries i had been getting (is there still really all that much to do there?). it’s hard to imagine how devastated parts of the city are when you aren’t there. it’s difficult for me even after spending several months living in the disaster zone… i came back to chicago and at first had the overwhelming sense of being somewhere where things worked. traffic lights, phones, electricity…. it starts to seem so normal that it seems just absolutely ridiculous that there could be whole communities in the urban united states that don’t have those things and people/media have moved on to other things.

anyway, i’m getting distracted. i did want to share in this post a few updates on the scene in new orleans since i last wrote, as well as a few pictures to help illustrate. i know, everyone has seen the new orleans pictures. i too had seen a lot of pictures of the flood aftermath – the visual story was definitely part of what compelled me to quit my job and go to new orleans to witness and to contribute in some way. i also knew that the pictures and stories that i was seeing and hearing from most media outlets were failing to provide me with the whole story and i wanted to be able to experience part of the story personally so that i could in turn try to share that with others in my network of friends and family. i’d like to write more, but honestly i’m exhausted. here are some starter pictures in the meantime, maybe of things that you haven’t seen (people resisting the government and standing up for environmental justice and the human right to shelter)… i’ll try to add text slowly in future posts, as well as additional pictures of the state of gutting and rebuilding in the 9th ward.
National Guard Reoccupies 9th Ward – vehicles line up in front of a church

St. Bernard – one of several public housing sites slated for demolition by HANO and HUD

Pictures taken July 4, 2006, on a day of protest, rally, and unity for survivors and former residents.

(lots of pics and information available: see also http://survivorsvillage.com/ and http://justiceforneworleans.org/)

People Gather at City Hall to Protest the Fast-Tracked Opening of the Chef Menteur landfill

The landfill site raises environmental justice issues because the landfill will take debris from all areas of New Orleans but is located near the primarily Vietnamese Village de l’Est community, as well as other minority communities in eastern New Orleans. (here’s an article on the event at city hall: http://www.neworleanseast.com/news/article/landfill/landfill1.htm)

I don’t have much time to write before I head off to New Orleans, but I did want to quickly get in a couple of words and points from Reclaim the Commons and Bioethics2006 events this week in chicago…

After rushing to pack up my San Francisco apartment and desk, I arrived in Chicago in time (barely) to take part in Chicago’s Reclaim the Commons events April 8-12th. Reclaim the Commons (RTC) is an annual response to the biotech industry’s own annual convention (BIO2006 (http://bio.org/)). I wanted to participate in Chicago’s RTC not just because i’m interested in health and social/environmental justice issues around corporate agriculture (*wallmart* has an organic division?! come on!) or increasing access to safe, sustainable food systems, but also to see what kind of public response or activism is here in my new city. Even though biotech and GM foods are not a new issue to me, by the end of the week, I was swept away (again) by people’s tales of how genetically modified (GM) foods and corporate agriculture were impacting their lives and livelihoods.

the following links provide some context for the events:

http://www.biodev.org/
http://www.biodev.org/archives/001702.php
http://reclaimthecommons.net/
http://www.genewise.org/
http://altercampagne.free.fr/

Joint International GMO Opposition Day (April 8th)
http://altercampagne.free.fr/

So, the whole thing started with a really really free market and tabling and speeches and food not bombs downtown (the “loop” . The event was reasonably attended by supporters, but didn’t appear to get too much street traffic, probably due to its taking place on a saturday afternoon on a really cold day downtown. that evening there was a fantastic panel on genetic engineering and human rights which i will post more on below. sunday’s workshops were also excellent, and full of proactive ideas and things to do today to increase the sustainability and health of your own choices. rtc wrapped up on monday and tuesday with marches, pickets, and a community gardening project to reclaim an abandoned city lot as a community resource. overall, the events were not as well attended as i would hope… not sure why… are people not concerned about this issue or just too tied up with other causes? as you’ll see from the stats below, apparently americans aren’t that aware of the prevalence of GM crops in our food supply, but i thought there would be more folks attending rtc who are already aware and want to fight big biotech.

now that you have the context, i can’t help myself but to share some of the bits and pieces and resources from the week…

75% of Americans don’t know or don’t believe that they’ve eaten a GM food.
Only 24% of Americans believe they have eaten genetically engineered foods, while 58% say they have not. Actually, nearly all Americans have eaten genetically engineered foods since 70-75% of all processed foods contain soy or corn that has been genetically engineered.
link to survey: http://www.thecampaign.org/pew0903.pdf
75% foods contain GM ingredients according to GMA: http://www.mindfully.org/GE/2005/Americans-Clueless-GMOs23mar05.htm

the U.S. is the world leader in production of biotech crops (the next largest producer is Argentina, then Canada, Brazil, China, and South Africa). the top US biotech crops are corn, soybeans, and cotton — by 2004, the percentage of US soybeans planted in GM varieties grew to 85%, the percentage of corn planted in GM varieties grew to 45%, and the percentage of GM cotton planted rose to 76%, and US-produced canola is 51% genetically engineered (not to mention the percentages of genetically modified canola being produced in Canada).
http://pewagbiotech.org/resources/factsheets/display.php3?FactsheetID=2

10 corporations own 49% of the world seed market
The ETC Group estimates that the top ten corporations control 49 percent of the global seed market. (A similar report from July 2005 by Phillips McDougall, UK-based agribusiness industry analysts, valued the worldwide commercial seed market slightly lower and thus estimated that the top ten companies owned 51% of the global seed market.)
http://www.mindfully.org/Farm/2005/Global-Seed-Industry6sep05.htm

i didn’t expect a connection to be made between corporate seed patents and the war in Iraq this week, but here it is: When former Coalition Provisional Authority administrator Paul Bremmer left Baghdad in June 2004, he left behind executive orders he had enacted as chief of the occupation in Iraq. Among them was Order Number 81 on “Patent, Industrial Design, Undisclosed Information, Integrated Circuits and Plant Variety”. Order 81 amended Iraq’s previous patent law, citing changes needed to join the WTO, and “modernizing” intellectual property rights to make it illegal for Iraqi farmers to re-use seeds from new varieties harvested under the law. Then Reuters reported on August 8 2005 that the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation stated the war had destroyed Iraq’s seed supply. “Iraq had a relatively stable and functioning public-sector-controlled seed industry before the war in 2003. After the war, research and seed production facilities have greatly deteriorated,” FAO said in a statement. If no immediate action is taken, serious seed shortages can be expected in the near future, threatening the country’s food security….” http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=12547

so now it’s not much mystery to me which corporations are going to sweep into Iraq with their seeds for sale now that war has ravaged the traditional and native seed supply. is there no end to the destruction being caused by this war?
link to the order: http://www.iraqcoalition.org/regulations/20040426_CPAORD_81_Patents_Law.pdf

as a side note, i wanted to comment one argument i often hear in favor of genetic engineering — the claim that GM foods are the answer to world hunger and will feed us all…. first, leave alone the fact that there are food surplusses all over the place, that food is being produced and subsidized but not getting to the people who need it, and instead rotting away on lots or store shelves. let’s just focus for the sake of this argument on the US — the leading producer of GM foods, a country that has over 100 million acres of cropland devoted to producing GM foods (ignore the fact that 25% of cultivated land worldwide consisted of GM crops in 2004 and people are still being allowed to go hungry). according to the USDA, more than 13million US families in 2004 could not afford to buy the food they needed. the government also classifies more than 38 million americans as food insecure. if GM crops are supposed to *solve the problem of world hunger*, then why are so many people in a country as affluent and apparently productive as the US unable to afford to feed their families? http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5021812 see also this greenpeace study on GM foods and hunger in Argentina, the next largest producer of GM food: Record Harvest, Record Hunger — Starving in GE Argentina

panel discussion on genetic engineering and human rights on April 8, 2006
Audio Link: http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2006/04/9413.php.
Moderator: Jeffrey Smith (Institute for Resonsible Technology, Author of _Seeds of Deception_)
Panelists: John Kinsman (National Family Farm Coalition), Anuradha Mittal (Founding Director of the Oakland Institute), Carmelo Ruiz-Marrero (Author and Director of the Puerto Rican Project on Biosafety), and Sarah Alexander (White Earth Land Recovery Project).

If you listen to the audio, there is one segment where the audience and panel collectively tried to come up with a list of Internet resources to share… These are in no particular order, and since they were just kind of captured from URLs people recalled off the top of their heads, these are a good place to look for info, but not comprehensive by any means)

Agroecology in Action
http://agroeco.org/
The Oakland Institute (think tank to increase participation and promote fair debate on critical social, economic, and environmental issues)
http://oaklandinstitute.org/
Third World Network
http://www.twnside.org.sg/
Californians for GE-Free Agriculture
http://calgefree.org/
etc group — monitoring power, tracking technology, strengthening diversity
http://www.etcgroup.org/en/
Save Wild Rice (& protect wild rice from genetic engineering)
http://savewildrice.org/
White Earth Land Recovery Project &Native Harvest Online Catalog
http://www.nativeharvest.com/
National Family Farm Coalition
http://www.nffc.net/
Family Farm Defenders
http://www.familyfarmdefenders.org/
Institute for Responsible Technology (GM-free schools)
http://www.responsibletechnology.org/
GMWatch.org
http://www.gmwatch.org/
GRAIN (seed biodiversity and legislation tracking)
http://grain.org/
Center for Food Safety
http://centerforfoodsafety.org/

Despite the depressing overtones of the week’s information (updates on new crops as well as reminders of old issues), we were also left a little inspired… inspired at local initiatives around the country and globe to promote local food security and access to healthy choices, inspired at people’s commitments to educating others about GM food and food security issues in general, and inspired by individuals and organizations who were making it their work to link food safety and social justice issues with local actions… the information and the list of inspiring speakers and organizations and individuals was extensive…. i hope our energy can carry forth into actions.

look for community supported agriculture (CSA) farms and opportunities in your area!

note: i’ve tried to keep these links updated and also provided a link to more recent survey information where available (i.e. the new Pew survey released on December 6, 2006) (Jan 2007)
http://pewagbiotech.org/research/2006update/

I still can’t believe that the State killed Stanley “Tookie” Williams… I wrote numerous letters to the Governor, participated in protests and press conferences, and finally decided to join the Walk for Abolition the day before the scheduled execution. On that day, I just didn’t know what else to do.

The walk is an approximately 25 mile walk from San Francisco to the gates of San Quentin to bear witness and post vigil and hopefully send a message of support for abolition of the death penalty. The Rev. Lyle Grosjean organized and has walked in protest and witness of every scheduled execution since 1960.

Many of the people participating in the walk were people of strong faith who don’t believe in taking any life. Others included a youth group, a shelter worker, prison abolitionists, seniors, youth, everyone in between, as well as a man whose son had been murdered earlier this year. He carried a sign with a picture of his son that simply stated, “My son was murdered. He opposed the death penalty. So do I.” We were joined along the way with additional walkers, the occasional celebrity (Jesse Jackson and Joan Baez), and local groups like Marin Seniors for Peace.

At one point somewhere in the north bay mid-morning the the police approached us and directed us to change our course. They said they didn’t want us to walk along the winding road because there was too much traffic (isn’t the point of the walk to raise awareness and voice our dissent by being seen publically opposing the state killing?!) and “it would be unsafe”. The organizers for the walk had never before been asked to change their course during a walk… perhaps this was because of the relatively high profile of this particular execution and vigil? or maybe there were more of us walkers than usual due to the publicity around the case? there was some discussion between a couple of walk coordinators and the police and then the walk coordinators led the group along the alternate path. The mood changed dramatically at this point as people were frustrated at not being able to walk along the more visible route that they’d always used and at not being able to fully understand why/how the whole group was suddenly taking this new path. There was no group discussion at all about whether we should stick to the original plan and walk along the public streets that we have a right to use anyway. Other coordinators were worried that the new route (that nobody was quite sure of — the area was unfamiliar to us all) might make us late for our rendezvous at the next meeting point. The new route wound through a few very quiet wooded residential areas… the only vehicles that passed us during that whole diversion were a UPS delivery truck that passed us twice and maybe two local homeowners.

There was some talk along the way, as some participants knew each other from previous walks or work to abolish the death penalty, and others were coming together feeling some hope for the outcome of the day and the larger group who had assembled in this silent protest at the system. Mostly though, it was a silent and somber crowd — particularly as the day wore on and we received the news that the Governor had denied clemency. I and a few others had held some hope up to that point. Walking the last few miles into San Quentin was more difficult. Night fell. It got cold and damp. The group tensed up considerably and mood grew even more solemn. Cars drove by, eeking through their own rush-hour traffic, many curiously reading our signs, some others honking their horns or raising their hands in support. Throughout the day there were also a handful of vehicles that drove by shouting things like, “go home dirties” or “fry ‘im!”. The organizers and long-time supporters of the walk for abolition alternately answered calls from the press or rendezvous points and speculated about the turnout of walkers. There were more than usual and they wondered at the motivations of these more recent additions — were these people a sign that public sentiment about the death penalty was changing, or just a blip due to the high profile of Stanley “Tookie” Williams’ case?

Coming out of the dim light of twilight and more lightly travelled frontage roads, the first thing you noticed was this intense light from in front of the east gate of San Quentin. It wasn’t just the normal prison lighting but the brightness of the corporate news crew floodlights that caused you to recoil a bit after having been walking along the dim frontage roads for a while. Broadcast antennas dotted the perimeter of the lane leading up to the gate and the inside was full of eager cameras and reporters. Having started our walk at 7am, we arrived in San Quentin a little after 6pm and were among the first witnesses to arrive. The media were hungry for interviews with “the walkers” and immediately surrounded us and pushed in with cameras and lights and microphones. There were also a few (limited in number but very loud and aggressive) reporters from a station in LA harassing us and hurling racist comments and insults. it was overwhelming and a little unreal to break the silence and contemplation of the day by suddenly dropping into this media frenzy.

The vigil at the gates was something else again. The notoriety of this case and the publicity around this particular execution meant the crowds – both in support and in protest — swelled to much bigger proportions than “normal” state executions. Speaker after speaker got up on the stage to address the crowd and provide updates. And then midnight came, and the crowd became still. And then the crowd became restless… there was no news, the minutes passed… what was happening inside? We were scared to find out, but why wasn’t there any news? It was horrible to wait there like that for someone’s life to end. And then we did receive word, and we knew for sure what had happened on the other side of the gate, inside the prison where Stanley Williams had waited to die under the watchful eye of the state for years.

I’m still processing the events. As you know, I feel very strongly about the State, my state, taking another human’s life. I have never understood how this is supposed to right any wrongs. The first California execution i can remember turned my stomach and so has every single one since. I got home very late last night — our group had scattered and a new friend and I were stranded looking for rides home from San Quentin until a thoughtful driver pulled over to pick us up around 2am — and I am still processing the events. It’s unbelievable to me that the state kills people — but I knew I was immersing myself in that issue when the day started and the sun rose behind our group’s initial gathering in San Francisco. What I found harder to believe through the day were the number of people who supported the killing, and also the reasons they voiced behind their oppinions. I didn’t start the day expecting to be insulted or practically physically assaulted by pro-death penalty (or anti-Stanley Williams?) individuals or crowds. I wasn’t really thinking that my day would end, some twenty hours later, with such an immense sense of failure.

As of the time of this writing, AB1121, California Moratorium on Executions Act, is pending in the California legislature. This act would impose just a temporary moratorium while a Commission studies the system for fairness, errors, and flaws. Get in touch with the legislature and the governnor and let them know how you feel about state murders.

Pictures of the walk are here:
http://www.indybay.org/archives/archive_by_id.php?id=3822&category_id=12
General pictures of the protest and additional coverage can be viewed here:
http://www.indybay.org/archives/archive_by_id.php?id=3905&category_id=12