Ecuador shuts down nonprofit environmental group

By Associated Press

President Rafael Correa’s government has shut down a nonprofit environmental group that opposes Amazon rainforest oil drilling, alleging it was involved in disturbing public order.

The closure Wednesday is the first of an advocacy group by Correa’s government, which has been criticized as hostile to free expression and has broadened state authority over nonprofits by decree this year.

More than a dozen government agents descended unannounced on the Quito offices of the Pachamama Foundation and shut it down.

“We consider it an act of violence,” foundation director Belen Paez said. “That is not how one notifies a legally constituted organization that it is being shut down.”

She says the group did nothing illegal and will file suit in Ecuador and an appeal to the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights.

Correa had accused Pachamama of participating in the physical harassment last week of Chile’s ambassador and a Bielorussian businessman after they left a presentation on Amazon oil concessions.

In a Saturday TV appearance, Correa showed photos of protesters and fingered some as Pachamama members. The Interior Ministry accused the nonprofit via Twitter of “straying from its statutory objectives” and endangering “internal security and public peace.”

Paez denied any Pachamama activists were involved in the harassment.

“What angers President Correa is that we are at the front lines in a conflict over this country’s economic development. We oppose the expansion of the frontier of oil exploration into the Amazon,” said Paez.

Her organization works closely with Achuar indigenous people, who oppose the exploration, said Patricia Usner, special projects director of the Pachamana Alliance, a San Francisco-based sister organization.

Pachamama means “Mother Earth” in the native Quechua and Quichua languages. The foundation says it has eight workers in Ecuador and an annual budget of $800,000 from donors including Germany, Finland, Norway, Holland, Italy and Belgium.

The protest last week followed the government’s auction of 13 oil concessions in the provinces of Pastaza and Morona Santiago on the Peruvian border.

The nonprofits say they oppose the drilling because the government has not sought the approval of natives living in the region.

Correa has been at loggerheads with environmentalists since announcing in August plans to extract oil from the pristine Yasuni National Park. An initiative he announced in 2007 failed to persuade rich countries to pay Ecuador not to drill there.

Ecuador shuts down nonprofit environmental group

Israel Cultivates Desert Agriculture

UN launches Green Climate Fund - IOL SciTech | IOL.co.za

By Stian Reklev and Choonsik Yoo

The Green Climate Fund, designed as the United Nations' most important funding body in the battle on climate change in developing nations, launched its headquarters on Wednesday in South Korea, but uncertainty over finances clouded the event.

The launch was largely symbolic, as the Fund, set up by developed nations to channel most of the $100-billion they aim to spend each year by 2020, is not expected to be fully operational until the latter half of next year.

Rich nations, reluctant to stress their already fragile economies, have not paid up as scheduled. Now the Fund has just $40-million at its disposal, a sum promised by South Korea that must also cover administrative expenses.

“The Fund is on track to start its resource mobilisation next year with a rapid and substantial initial capitalisation, so that we can get the money flowing to the countries in greatest need,” said Jose Maria Sarte Salceda, co-chairman of the fund's board.

The Fund will help pay for cuts in greenhouse gas emissions and projects in poor nations to protect communities at risk from the effects of climate change, such as rising sea levels, prolonged droughts and damage to food crops.

Rich nations promised in 2010 to provide $10-billion per year in fast-start climate finance over 2011 to 2013, and scale funding up to $100-billion annually by 2020.

But inflows have fallen far short of expected levels, with new finance even dropping by more than two-thirds in 2013 from 2012, Britain's Overseas Development Institute says.

For example, it said in a recent report, “Funding in response to German flood damage in 2013 was four times higher than funding to help developing countries adapt to climate change since 2003.”

Most of the climate finance that has emerged so far will be distributed by national governments or private funds run by multilateral organisations such as the World Bank.

Germany and Sweden have signalled willingness to contribute, Executive Director Hela Cheikhrouhou told reporters at Wednesday's opening ceremony, with Sweden intending to pay $45-million into the fund.

“The office opening is both a symbolic and practical demonstration that the Fund is ready for business,” she said in a statement, but added it would become fully operational around the second half of next year.

The fund was set up at UN climate talks in Mexico in 2010 in recognition that climate change has historically been caused mainly by greenhouse gas emissions in developed countries.

At climate talks in Poland last month, developing nations pushed for a detailed plan to scale up funds, and proposed a target of $70-billion in 2016, but failed to win over developed countries.

The finance aspect remains a sticking point in efforts to agree a new global pact on climate change that nearly 200 nations hope to clinch in Paris in December 2015.

Major emerging economies such as India say they do not want to commit to targets for capping carbon dioxide emissions before the developed world has delivered on its promises on climate finance. “What is wrong with the Global Climate Fund is that there is no money there,” Indian Environment Minister Jayanthi Natarajan told a news conference during last month's talks in the Polish capital of Warsaw.

UN launches Green Climate Fund - IOL SciTech | IOL.co.za

Biogas plants for Kenyan schools ease pressure on forests

By Caleb Kemboi, Thomson Reuters Foundation

Most of Kenya’s educational institutions depend on firewood as their main source of energy for cooking, contributing to deforestation and placing a financial burden on schools and universities due to rising prices for their fuel.

In response, the Kenya Forest Service and the African Development Bank (AfDB) have initiated a project dubbed “Green Zone Development”, in which biogas technology is being introduced as an alternative energy source to learning facilities in the Rift Valley.

“Boarding schools and day schools use a lot of firewood for cooking, (so) this project will reduce the dependence on the forest, and hence ease pressure on the ecosystem,” said Solomon Mibei, head of conservation for the Kenya Forest Service in the North Rift Valley area.

St. Agatha Mokwo Girls’ Secondary School in Kaptarakwa, Elgeiyo Marakwet County, is among the schools that have benefited from the initiative.

“The projects have worked very well in our school - in fact, we are now used as a demonstration centre and we have received several visitors from different places,” smiled Margaret Chebaskwony, the school’s principal.

“Apart from acquiring the gas for cooking, we also use the bio-effluent as fertiliser since it is safe for production of crops, and hence boosts food security,” Chebaskwony said.

The school’s small-scale biogas plant consists of a large digester, in which bacteria convert animal dung into methane gas through the process of anaerobic digestion. The biogas is used for cooking and lighting.

Thanks to their efforts to protect the environment, the school was awarded a Prestigious Green Award (PGA), the first for a biogas project in Kenya.

The award was created in 1999 by the National Environment Trust Fund (NETFUND), a non-governmental organisation, to recognise innovation, groundbreaking research, ideas and extraordinary grassroots initiatives in Kenya. It aims to promote sustainable use and management of natural resources by rewarding the best examples.

St. Agatha Mokwo is also used by athletes during school holidays as a training centre. Both the bakery and fish pond, built with support from the Kenya Forest Service, have been a major attraction for athletes who want to improve their home science skills.

So far eight schools have installed biogas plants under the project, and more are at different stages of deploying the technology across the 17 counties where Green Zone Development operates.

LESS NEED FOR FUELWOOD

Introducing biogas technology in schools does appear to improve environmental protection in the local area.

David Kipyego, chairman of the Eldoret Educational Resource Centre, a school in Eldoret town, said that since the biogas project began there, use of fuelwood has been cut by half.

“We have reduced the use of firewood for cooking from 24 tonnes to 12 tonnes per term (of three months), which is an added advantage for the conservation of the environment, as well as being economical for the school,” Kipyego said.

Apart from the biogas, the organic waste material used to produce the gas can serve as manure, which is more beneficial to the environment than chemical fertilisers, Kipyego said.

David Chemweno, executive director of Save Kenya Water Towers, an organisation set up in 2010 to rehabilitate degraded water catchment areas, said each of 20 schools visited by his staff consumed an average of 20 tonnes (20,000 kg) of firewood per term.

Schools are licensed to harvest dead wood but end up cutting down trees in order to get the amount they need for cooking, he added.

His organisation has also spearheaded a separate programme called the “Green Ribbon Initiative”, which involves bringing biogas to schools located near indigenous forests.

“We are targeting more than 20 schools…with subsidised biogas, where the schools will contribute 60 percent of the project while we contribute 40 percent to cover the cost of the technical knowhow,” Chemweno said, adding that Save Kenya Water Towers will also donate cows to assist in biogas production.

LOWER EMISSIONS

Minimising the use of firewood by schools will also contribute to climate change mitigation, experts say.

“Harmful greenhouses gas emissions can be reduced and the forest can now act better as a carbon sink,” said Mibei of the Kenya Forest Service. The local climate had changed due to massive deforestation in the area, with rainfall becoming less frequent, he noted.

The school biogas project is inspiring communities living nearby, and a number of them have adopted the same technology at household level.

“Most of our neighbours living around the schools have embraced the technology - some other educational institutions have also visited with a view to copying this worthy initiative,” Chebaskwony said, adding that some have come from as far afield as other parts of East Africa.

Local leaders are also backing the project, urging people to embrace the technology in order to protect the environment.

“This is the way to go - as leaders we totally support the project, we are going to rally behind it so that every household living next to the forest can hold to the idea,” said Thomas Kigen, a member of the county assembly for Kaptarakwa ward in Elgeiyo Marakwet County.

Recently, the county’s governor, Alex Tolgos, called for an end to cutting down trees. “The harvesting of the forest must stop immediately to give room for the forest to grow. Let’s support biogas technology,” he said.

“We are in the process of recovering the degraded forest by planting more trees - as many as we can to reclaim the vanished forest,” Mibei said. The forest service has planted 10 million trees in the Rift Valley alone, he added.

Kipyego, chairman of the Eldoret school, said people should take care of natural resources for their own benefit. “A well-conserved, kept and maintained environment equals good health, long life, economic growth and reduction of crime,” he argued.

Biogas plants for Kenyan schools ease pressure on forests

How can Peru make next year’s climate summit a success?

Guy Edwards and Timmons Roberts, Eco-business

As delegates begin to reflect on the limited success of the UN Climate Change negotiations in Warsaw which ended last week, eyes are now turning optimistically to Peru as the incoming president of COP20 in 2014.

Poland, as host of COP19, has now taken three bites at the apple of leading UN climate negotiations, and a number of observers believe the country is too compromised with its coal dependency and drive for economic growth to guide the world to a low-carbon future requiring tough choices.

Although the conference in Warsaw managed to secure some progress on a range of issues, Peru will have to do some very heavy lifting to ensure the delicate timetable of agreeing a new climate deal in Paris in 2015 is kept on track.

This is all sounds slightly familiar. After the train wreck in 2009 at the COP15 in Copenhagen, Mexico rode to the rescue of multilateralism the following year at COP16 in Cancún.

Mexico created a Special Representative for Climate Change and dispatched one of its top diplomats, Luis Alfonso de Alba, to rebuild confidence in the process. De Alba spent roughly 250 days in 2010 travelling around the world, listening to countries rich and poor. Mexico lowered expectations and adopted a pragmatic approach that served to rebuild trust and encourage consensus.

Mexico’s position as a middle-income country helped to build consensus. Former Mexican President Felipe Calderón and his foreign minister, Patricia Espinosa, put climate change at the top of the political agenda and were committed to a successful outcome at COP16.

Calderón decided that the process needed extensive multilateral experience, so the Ministry of Foreign Affairs took responsibility instead of the Ministry of Environment. At COP16 considerable attention was placed on the process of inclusion as much as the content.

Consequently, nearly all countries had only praise for Mexico’s stewardship (Bolivia was a lone resistor).

Peru is next up and has great potential to secure progress in the global climate negotiations at COP20 in Lima in 2014.

Peru is a bridge builder between developing and developed countries and is considered a leading actor on climate change. In 2008, it was the first developing country to announce a voluntary emission reduction pledge, offering to reduce the net deforestation of primary forests to 0 by 2021 and produce 33 per cent of its total energy use from renewable sources by 2020.

In 2010 Peru’s Ministry of Environment published its Plan of Action for Adaptation and Mitigation of Climate Change (Plan CC). However, according to the Latin American Platform on Climate, the low level of implementation of its domestic climate policies still needs urgent attention.

At the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Peru is part of the Association of Independent Latin American and Caribbean States (in Spanish, AILAC) alongside Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala and Panama.

AILAC attempts to build consensus between developed and developing countries on the need for all to take ambitious action on climate change, and on the importance of there being a legally binding agreement holding countries to account. However, AILAC countries at times come under fire for their domestic policies, which seem to clash with their progressive rhetoric at the UNFCCC.

Alongside its AILAC partners and others—including the United Kingdom and Bangladesh—Peru also participates in the Cartagena Dialogue for Progressive Action. The Dialogue is an informal space, open to countries working towards an ambitious, comprehensive and legally binding regime, and committed domestically to becoming or remaining low-carbon economies. The Dialogue has been able to achieve progress at the negotiations by seeking collective ambition from all countries, particularly at COP16 and COP17.
Strategies

En route to COP20, Peru has a year to make a vital contribution to restore confidence and ratchet up global climate action. Otherwise, the goal of producing a draft text in Lima to be decided in Paris at COP21 in 2015 will be simply unreachable.

Peru could focus on three key strategies. First, Mexico’s extensive and tireless preparations and management of COP16 should serve as a template. Mexico’s participation in the Cartagena Dialogue as COP16 president was also crucial. This experience shows that Peru can be more active in the Dialogue without undermining its neutrality.


Peru’s climate diplomacy in 2014 could focus on the following key players. A major step is to reach across to the major emitters – including the US, Japan, Australia and Canada.

Peru and the EU share similar views on the need for ambitious action to increase progress in the negotiations. Discussions surrounding an increase in ambition by the EU and Peru and its AILAC partners could increase confidence. As Venezuela will be hosting the pre-COP20 event, close collaboration between Peru and Venezuela and the other ALBA countries (e.g., Ecuador and Bolivia, the group is the Bolivarian Alliance for Our Americas) will be essential in ensuring a strong regional voice calling for progress in Lima.

Peru can also attempt to facilitate dialogue between the US and the BASIC group—Brazil, China, India and South Africa. Finally, Peru’s diplomacy with the least developed countries (LDCs) and the Association of Small Island States (AOSIS) is paramount in ensuring that the most vulnerable are actively involved.
Equity

Second, Peru’s flexible interpretation of the critical phrase “Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities”, and its view that all countries need to act to varying degrees to reduce emissions, will be essential. So will driving forward discussions on equity, which again arose this year in Warsaw.

Peru’s membership in AILAC and the idea of the “beautiful middle” can help put medium-sized countries at the center of the climate debate. A focus on reducing emissions by all—which is contingent on developed country support on climate finance, adaptation and capacity building—can help establish a more holistic narrative tying together the myriad threads of the negotiations.

As a medium-sized country, Peru can develop and drive forward this narrative and avoid the polarizing debates between the North and South that undermine the talks.

Third, when Peru put forward its voluntary pledge, it established a new climate discourse. This discourse needs a boost and a major platform to test its utility. COP20 can be that space. Peru, alongside its AILAC partners, can put ambition front and center by promoting their collective pledges. AILAC may also consider increasing their own pledges and activities in the interest of generating confidence in the process and promoting low-carbon growth.

Combining these strategies could revitalise the UNFCCC process following the modest results in in Warsaw. As a country very vulnerable to climate impacts, Peru can promote urgency, ambition and equity. Lima will be a decisive battleground to ensure the 2015 deadline for a new deal is not missed. Peru must start this daunting task now in earnest.

How can Peru make next year’s climate summit a success?

Do we fit our planet? (ecological footprint)

Happy Cows Help Save the Planet: Climate Smart Agriculture in Costa Rica

Costa Rica has become a world leader in agricultural and forestry practices that help reduce global warming by reducing carbon output -- but the real winners are ranchers and farmers who say environmentally sound practices save them money and benefit their livestock, their crops and their livelihoods.