I am delighted to welcome Robert Wyse Jackson (graduate of Trinity College Dublin and postgraduate student at the London School of Economics) as a guest contributor to Envirolarm:
Capitalism – the arch nemesis of Mother Nature! At least, that’s what environmentalists would like you to believe. Countless environmental NGOs and activists have argued that immediate and radical social change is imperative, or the environment will pay the price for excessive corporate greed. These assertions might have truthful elements, but it is increasingly apparent in modern business that large corporations are waking up to the financial and reputational risks of failing to go green.
On 20th April 2010 an explosion on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig killed 11 men and sent millions of gallons of oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico. The effect of the explosion has been felt on the coasts of Florida and Louisiana, where beautiful beaches have been swamped by black oil, causing huge environmental impact. Subsequently, there was widespread public and political outrage directed towards the rig’s owners, British Petroleum (BP). At the end of October, BP announced that it expects the crisis to have cost it over $40 billion dollars in clean up costs, financial penalties and legal costs. In addition, vast sums of money have been spent on repairing BP’s tattered reputation to consumers which threaten to harm BP’s long term profitability. The effect of the crisis was manifest in BP share prices, which had fallen by 35% on the FTSE.
What is evident from the BP crisis is that it makes good business sense for corporations to invest in the environment. Many corporate leaders have woken up to the loss of public trust in business, and are taking an active role in conducting their businesses in environmentally sustainable ways. This contrasts heavily with the failure of governments to agree new steps to cut greenhouse gases. Last month, Unilever launched an ambitious plan to halve the environmental impact of its products by 2020. Coca Cola has implemented a programme of water conservation to protect the most important ingredient in its production process. In addition, many banks have recently adopted the equator principles, a voluntary set of standards for determining, assessing and managing social and environmental risk in project financing. By signing up to this agreement, banks commit to not providing loans to projects where the borrower will not or is unable to comply with their respective social and environmental policies and procedures that implement the equator principles.
These are examples of voluntary initiatives by large corporations to address their corporate social responsibilities. They represent an increasing awareness by large corporations that it increasingly makes good business sense to conduct their operations in an environmentally sustainable manner. The BP oil crisis has demonstrated to corporate leaders the huge financial and reputational risks of conducting their business without due regard to the environment. The scepticism towards big business after the financial crisis will only increase corporate awareness of the need to be perceived as environmentally friendly by consumers.
As corporate responsibility increases in business, capitalism will increasingly be viewed less as an enemy to Mother Nature and more as a friend.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Monday, December 20, 2010
Freedom to Roam and Public Rights of Way
Henry David Thoreau wrote in his journal in 1842, ‘I am amused to see from my window here how busily a man has divided and staked off his domain. God must smile at his puny fences running hither and thither everywhere over the land.’
Mr Justice McMahon’s judgment (20th Dec 2010) in the Lissadell public right of way case would certainly have brought a smirk to Thoreau’s face. Documentary evidence dating back 200 years, two Senior Counsel asserting private property rights over their demesne and the public’s desire to keep on strollin’ in the free world. This case had it all – a true slobber-knocker.
Eddie Walsh and Constance Cassidy sued Sligo County Council, claiming slander to their title to Lissadell and improper interference with their business interests. They have been unsuccessful. The gist of the High Court’s ruling is that the public has a right of way on the avenues of Lissadell estate in Co Sligo.
The Court established that the onus lay on Sligo County Council to demonstrate that the previous owner had dedicated a right of way across his lands to the public. To discharge this burden, the defendant County Council called 25 witnesses to give evidence as “users as of right.” Judge McMahon was convinced by their testimony – a picture emerged “that since the early 1950s at least many people, who had no specific business or other reason to be there, entered and exited the estate through all four entrances.” Furthermore, the fact that the past owners of the land did not object was interpreted as acquiescence and thus acceptance of the practice.
The evidence offered by people from the town and with long-lasting familial connections to the estate seems to have been decisive to the conclusion reached by McMahon. As a result, it would be inappropriate to exaggerate the importance of this judgment for the future, given how fact-specific the case was. The Court’s response is a positive outcome for those in Sligo. For the rest of us, it offers hope of a possible trend in the courts’ treatment of public rights of way cases that encourages people to open up their land and let others enjoy the countryside.
Mr Justice McMahon’s judgment (20th Dec 2010) in the Lissadell public right of way case would certainly have brought a smirk to Thoreau’s face. Documentary evidence dating back 200 years, two Senior Counsel asserting private property rights over their demesne and the public’s desire to keep on strollin’ in the free world. This case had it all – a true slobber-knocker.
Eddie Walsh and Constance Cassidy sued Sligo County Council, claiming slander to their title to Lissadell and improper interference with their business interests. They have been unsuccessful. The gist of the High Court’s ruling is that the public has a right of way on the avenues of Lissadell estate in Co Sligo.
The Court established that the onus lay on Sligo County Council to demonstrate that the previous owner had dedicated a right of way across his lands to the public. To discharge this burden, the defendant County Council called 25 witnesses to give evidence as “users as of right.” Judge McMahon was convinced by their testimony – a picture emerged “that since the early 1950s at least many people, who had no specific business or other reason to be there, entered and exited the estate through all four entrances.” Furthermore, the fact that the past owners of the land did not object was interpreted as acquiescence and thus acceptance of the practice.
The evidence offered by people from the town and with long-lasting familial connections to the estate seems to have been decisive to the conclusion reached by McMahon. As a result, it would be inappropriate to exaggerate the importance of this judgment for the future, given how fact-specific the case was. The Court’s response is a positive outcome for those in Sligo. For the rest of us, it offers hope of a possible trend in the courts’ treatment of public rights of way cases that encourages people to open up their land and let others enjoy the countryside.
The Pipe - Shell's Law
‘The Pipe’ is a gripping, albeit one-sided, documentary about the struggle between big business and the interests of a local community.
The story will be familiar to most. It all began around 1996, when the Corrib natural gas field was discovered. Development of the project by Shell began in 2004, with a proposal to place an offshore pipeline that would run through the community of Rossport to the refinery at Bellanaboy. This plan was delayed in 2005 by local opposition – five men were jailed by Finnegan J. for contempt of court after refusing to obey a temporary court injunction forbidding them to interfere with work being undertaken by Shell on their land (The Rossport 5).
The film begins in the aftermath of these events. It focuses on the experiences of Willie Corduff and Pat O’Donnell, but also portrays the Rossport community’s campaign for change (for the gas to be refined at sea, rather than inland, as is done with Ireland’s only other producing gas field off Cork) and how divisive this debate is. Enter Maura Harrington.
The residents’ claim that the proximity of a natural gas pipeline is a health and safety risk to local residents and livelihoods is a compelling one. However, without input from Shell or evidence from a more objective 3rd party, it is difficult to assess the legitimacy of these fears.
It’s certainly well worth watching.
Here’s the trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0JeVbrDx5M
The story will be familiar to most. It all began around 1996, when the Corrib natural gas field was discovered. Development of the project by Shell began in 2004, with a proposal to place an offshore pipeline that would run through the community of Rossport to the refinery at Bellanaboy. This plan was delayed in 2005 by local opposition – five men were jailed by Finnegan J. for contempt of court after refusing to obey a temporary court injunction forbidding them to interfere with work being undertaken by Shell on their land (The Rossport 5).
The film begins in the aftermath of these events. It focuses on the experiences of Willie Corduff and Pat O’Donnell, but also portrays the Rossport community’s campaign for change (for the gas to be refined at sea, rather than inland, as is done with Ireland’s only other producing gas field off Cork) and how divisive this debate is. Enter Maura Harrington.
The residents’ claim that the proximity of a natural gas pipeline is a health and safety risk to local residents and livelihoods is a compelling one. However, without input from Shell or evidence from a more objective 3rd party, it is difficult to assess the legitimacy of these fears.
It’s certainly well worth watching.
Here’s the trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0JeVbrDx5M
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Eye of the Tiger - The Cream of the Fight
Charismatic, independent and capable of arousing the interest of Leonardo di Caprio, Naomi Campbell and Vladimir Putin, the tiger is a majestic animal in serious difficulty.
While tigers once roamed in at least 25 countries at the start of the 20th century, today they are in dwindling, separated communities across just 13 nations. Their demise has been rapid – of the eight original subspecies of tigers, three have become extinct in the last 60 years. Subspecies have also collapsed one after another – the Bali tiger in the 1940s, the central Asia tiger in the 1970s, the Java tiger in the 1980s, the south China wild tiger the 1990s.
The remaining populations are as follows: India 1,200-1650; Indonesia 450-700; Bangladesh 400; Nepal 350; Russia 350; Bhutan 70-80; China 40-50; Cambodia 10-50; Laos 50; Vietnam less than 30; Burma about 100; Thailand 250-500; Malaysia 300-500.
So, what’s going on? How can we explain such an incredible decline?
Well, there are myriad reasons, most of which can be reduced to commercial interest and human exploitation.
Unlike lions, leopards and cheetahs, tigers prefer to live in densely covered land where they can hide in tall grass, camouflaged by their dark stripes, and ambush their prey. However, with population growth, agricultural/industrial expansion and human intervention generally, tigers are being pushed into smaller areas of land. This attack on their habitat makes it easier for poachers to hunt them. As usual, short-term economic gain supersedes longer term environmental concerns. Their skins and body parts are sold as ingredients for traditional Chinese medicines.
It is this backdrop which gave rise to the International Tiger Forum in St Petersburg (Nov 21st – 24th), an event which aims to secure $350m for tiger conservation. There have been some notable contributions already. India, which has the largest wild population, said it planned to establish eight new reserves, while Thailand promised to spend $98.6m over five years to strengthen conservation and tackle the illegal wildlife trade. Russia pledged to crack down on poachers and to work with China to set up a shared, cross-border protected area aimed at adding space for an extra 500 Amur tigers. Malaysia said it would increase its population, but it would need help with the expected cost of $1m per tiger.
Tigers are critically endangered and they don’t stand a chance unless we radically change our behaviour. Putin’s Tiger Forum is a step in the right direction, but it can’t end with a four day photo-op. Long term commitment with regular meetings between these 13 countries and a tightening of the standards of wildlife crime should be next on the agenda.
While tigers once roamed in at least 25 countries at the start of the 20th century, today they are in dwindling, separated communities across just 13 nations. Their demise has been rapid – of the eight original subspecies of tigers, three have become extinct in the last 60 years. Subspecies have also collapsed one after another – the Bali tiger in the 1940s, the central Asia tiger in the 1970s, the Java tiger in the 1980s, the south China wild tiger the 1990s.
The remaining populations are as follows: India 1,200-1650; Indonesia 450-700; Bangladesh 400; Nepal 350; Russia 350; Bhutan 70-80; China 40-50; Cambodia 10-50; Laos 50; Vietnam less than 30; Burma about 100; Thailand 250-500; Malaysia 300-500.
So, what’s going on? How can we explain such an incredible decline?
Well, there are myriad reasons, most of which can be reduced to commercial interest and human exploitation.
Unlike lions, leopards and cheetahs, tigers prefer to live in densely covered land where they can hide in tall grass, camouflaged by their dark stripes, and ambush their prey. However, with population growth, agricultural/industrial expansion and human intervention generally, tigers are being pushed into smaller areas of land. This attack on their habitat makes it easier for poachers to hunt them. As usual, short-term economic gain supersedes longer term environmental concerns. Their skins and body parts are sold as ingredients for traditional Chinese medicines.
It is this backdrop which gave rise to the International Tiger Forum in St Petersburg (Nov 21st – 24th), an event which aims to secure $350m for tiger conservation. There have been some notable contributions already. India, which has the largest wild population, said it planned to establish eight new reserves, while Thailand promised to spend $98.6m over five years to strengthen conservation and tackle the illegal wildlife trade. Russia pledged to crack down on poachers and to work with China to set up a shared, cross-border protected area aimed at adding space for an extra 500 Amur tigers. Malaysia said it would increase its population, but it would need help with the expected cost of $1m per tiger.
Tigers are critically endangered and they don’t stand a chance unless we radically change our behaviour. Putin’s Tiger Forum is a step in the right direction, but it can’t end with a four day photo-op. Long term commitment with regular meetings between these 13 countries and a tightening of the standards of wildlife crime should be next on the agenda.
Monday, November 15, 2010
Competition For Waste
Different coloured bins, each with its own special day, tells us that there must be some semi-sophisticated process for waste disposal. But beyond ensuring that our green, brown or black bin is ready for collection on the appropriate day, have you ever wondered where all your waste actually goes? Does paying for the service obviate a need to consider its consequences? Who are we entrusting the system of waste disposal to?
Well, wonder no more. The Irish Times (Friday 12th November 2010) makes clear that Bord na Móna and Oxigen are two of the big players. They have secured six-month contracts (worth about €10 million) to dispose of Dublin’s general household waste at landfill sites in Cavan and Kildare from January. Both counties are said to be delighted by the prospect of 150,000 tonnes of waste coming from Dublin - a similar pleasure may lie in store for other counties in the near future, with Limerick, Louth and Wexford all tauted as possible contenders for our waste.
Here's the full article: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1112/1224283151260.html
Well, wonder no more. The Irish Times (Friday 12th November 2010) makes clear that Bord na Móna and Oxigen are two of the big players. They have secured six-month contracts (worth about €10 million) to dispose of Dublin’s general household waste at landfill sites in Cavan and Kildare from January. Both counties are said to be delighted by the prospect of 150,000 tonnes of waste coming from Dublin - a similar pleasure may lie in store for other counties in the near future, with Limerick, Louth and Wexford all tauted as possible contenders for our waste.
Here's the full article: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1112/1224283151260.html
Gormley Beyond His Powers
The Commercial Court has ruled that Environment Minister John Gormley acted outside his powers under the Planning Acts. This occurred when he overturned Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council’s designation of the Park Village lands in Carrickmines as a “district centre”. (Thursday, 11th Nov 2010)
The basic facts are as follows: Tristor Ltd acquired the lands in 2006 and wanted to develop the Park Village as a “district centre”. Gormley opposed this and claimed that the draft development plan for the area did not comply with the Planning and Development Act 2000 because it failed to set out “an overall strategy for the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.” The Minister favoured a “neighbourhood centre” – the development of groups of small shops serving a localised catchment population, rather than a “district centre” which allows for a development with considerably more retail space.
The kernel of the case revolved around the interpretation of Section 31 PDA 2000. Clarke J. found that this provision did not entitle the Minister to issue a direction simply because he disagreed with the strategy contained in the development plan and preferred another. For this section to be effectively invoked, Gormley needed to show that the Council had breached its obligations to agree to a development plan which set out an overall strategy for the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. This had not occurred. Many strategies could be adopted which would be consistent with the requirement for an overall strategy for the proper planning and sustainable development of an area and it was for the elected representatives of the Council to decide which of the range of possible strategies was to be included in the development plan. It was not for the Minister to “second guess” the Council.
Fair procedures in planning also featured in this case. Clarke J. ruled that the Minister’s directions were invalid because he failed to give interested parties, including Tristor Ltd, which planned to develop the Carrickmines District Centre, the opportunity to be heard.
The Irish Times article on this case: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/1111/breaking55.html
The basic facts are as follows: Tristor Ltd acquired the lands in 2006 and wanted to develop the Park Village as a “district centre”. Gormley opposed this and claimed that the draft development plan for the area did not comply with the Planning and Development Act 2000 because it failed to set out “an overall strategy for the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.” The Minister favoured a “neighbourhood centre” – the development of groups of small shops serving a localised catchment population, rather than a “district centre” which allows for a development with considerably more retail space.
The kernel of the case revolved around the interpretation of Section 31 PDA 2000. Clarke J. found that this provision did not entitle the Minister to issue a direction simply because he disagreed with the strategy contained in the development plan and preferred another. For this section to be effectively invoked, Gormley needed to show that the Council had breached its obligations to agree to a development plan which set out an overall strategy for the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. This had not occurred. Many strategies could be adopted which would be consistent with the requirement for an overall strategy for the proper planning and sustainable development of an area and it was for the elected representatives of the Council to decide which of the range of possible strategies was to be included in the development plan. It was not for the Minister to “second guess” the Council.
Fair procedures in planning also featured in this case. Clarke J. ruled that the Minister’s directions were invalid because he failed to give interested parties, including Tristor Ltd, which planned to develop the Carrickmines District Centre, the opportunity to be heard.
The Irish Times article on this case: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/1111/breaking55.html
Monday, November 8, 2010
Tsunamis - a brief history
Drop a stone into a small pond and it will create a series of ripples. A tsunami is just like those ripples, but rather than a stone, the disturbance which sets it in motion is often an undersea earthquake, landslide or volcanic eruption. The seafloor buckles where drifting plates collide and waves emanate, hitting the shore hard with almost all of its initial energy.
Tsu (harbour) nami (wave). The term is said to have originated with Japanese fishermen who, upon returning to port, found the area surrounding the harbour devastated. History demonstrates the Pacific Ring of Fire’s vulnerability to tsunamis, but also shows its impact elsewhere:
2004 Indian Ocean Tsunamis Affecting Southern Asia and Eastern Africa
A massive earthquake measuring over 9.0 on the Richter scale occurred under the Indian ocean floor just off the coast of the Indonesian island of Sumatra. Tsunami waves slammed into the coastline of 12 Indian Ocean countries (Indonesia, India, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Malaysia, Maldives, Myanmar, Bangladesh, the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, the Maldives, Seychelles, Somalia, Tanzania, and Kenya) and killed over 230,000 people. The earthquake that generated the great Indian Ocean tsunami of 2004 is estimated to have released the energy of 23,000 Hiroshima-type atomic bombs, according to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).
1998 Tsunami Affecting Papua New Guinea
On July 17th, 1998, an earthquake measuring 7.1 on the Richter scale occurred about 15 miles just off the coast of northern Papua New Guinea, an island nation located in the southwestern Pacific Ocean just south of Indonesia and north of Australia. While the magnitude of the quake was not large enough to create the tsunami directly, it is believed the earthquake generated an undersea landslide, which in turn caused the tsunami. Following the earthquake, a tsunami with waves reaching 12 meters (40 feet) hit the Papua New Guinea coast within 10 minutes, destroying the villages of Arop and Warapu. An estimated 2,200 people were killed.
1976 Tsunami Affecting the Philippines
August 1976 and an earthquake measuring approximately 7.6 on the Richter scale occurred in the Moro Gulf a few miles away from the coast of the Philippine island of Mindanao. The earthquake itself was responsible for causing widespread damage, but its effect paled in comparison to the tsunami it helped created. The massive tsunami that devastated 700 kilometers of coastline destroyed coastal towns and killed over 5,000 people.
1964 Tsunami Affecting the West Coast of North America
The Good Friday Tsunami was caused by an earthquake (9.2) off the coast of Alaska. Waves reached heights of 11.5 meters and killed 106 people.
1960 Tsunami Affecting Chile and Pacific Nations
On May 22 1960, the biggest earthquake ever recorded at the time occurred just off the coast of South central Chile, a nation of South America. The earthquake measured 9.5 on the Richter scale with swarms of aftershock earthquakes that measured as large 8.0 that followed. The earthquakes triggered the creation of tsunami, which was responsible for most of the ensuing devastation and death of 2,000 people. The waves spread outwards across the Pacific, flooding Hilo (on the island of Hawaii), causing 200 deaths in Japan and damage in the Marquesas, in Samoa, and in New Zealand.
Tsu (harbour) nami (wave). The term is said to have originated with Japanese fishermen who, upon returning to port, found the area surrounding the harbour devastated. History demonstrates the Pacific Ring of Fire’s vulnerability to tsunamis, but also shows its impact elsewhere:
2004 Indian Ocean Tsunamis Affecting Southern Asia and Eastern Africa
A massive earthquake measuring over 9.0 on the Richter scale occurred under the Indian ocean floor just off the coast of the Indonesian island of Sumatra. Tsunami waves slammed into the coastline of 12 Indian Ocean countries (Indonesia, India, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Malaysia, Maldives, Myanmar, Bangladesh, the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, the Maldives, Seychelles, Somalia, Tanzania, and Kenya) and killed over 230,000 people. The earthquake that generated the great Indian Ocean tsunami of 2004 is estimated to have released the energy of 23,000 Hiroshima-type atomic bombs, according to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).
1998 Tsunami Affecting Papua New Guinea
On July 17th, 1998, an earthquake measuring 7.1 on the Richter scale occurred about 15 miles just off the coast of northern Papua New Guinea, an island nation located in the southwestern Pacific Ocean just south of Indonesia and north of Australia. While the magnitude of the quake was not large enough to create the tsunami directly, it is believed the earthquake generated an undersea landslide, which in turn caused the tsunami. Following the earthquake, a tsunami with waves reaching 12 meters (40 feet) hit the Papua New Guinea coast within 10 minutes, destroying the villages of Arop and Warapu. An estimated 2,200 people were killed.
1976 Tsunami Affecting the Philippines
August 1976 and an earthquake measuring approximately 7.6 on the Richter scale occurred in the Moro Gulf a few miles away from the coast of the Philippine island of Mindanao. The earthquake itself was responsible for causing widespread damage, but its effect paled in comparison to the tsunami it helped created. The massive tsunami that devastated 700 kilometers of coastline destroyed coastal towns and killed over 5,000 people.
1964 Tsunami Affecting the West Coast of North America
The Good Friday Tsunami was caused by an earthquake (9.2) off the coast of Alaska. Waves reached heights of 11.5 meters and killed 106 people.
1960 Tsunami Affecting Chile and Pacific Nations
On May 22 1960, the biggest earthquake ever recorded at the time occurred just off the coast of South central Chile, a nation of South America. The earthquake measured 9.5 on the Richter scale with swarms of aftershock earthquakes that measured as large 8.0 that followed. The earthquakes triggered the creation of tsunami, which was responsible for most of the ensuing devastation and death of 2,000 people. The waves spread outwards across the Pacific, flooding Hilo (on the island of Hawaii), causing 200 deaths in Japan and damage in the Marquesas, in Samoa, and in New Zealand.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)