Greenpeace

Yesterday, White House energy advisor Carol Browner made it very clear that President Obama remains committed to opening new areas of America’s coastlines to drilling for oil, despite the disastrous oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Lessons from the BP Deepwater Disaster, which continues to spew as much as 5,000 barrels of oil — 200,000 gallons — into the Gulf every day, will be “folded in” to the Interior Department’s review of new leases, she said.

This morning, however, White House senior advisor David Axelrod was on TV saying that in the wake of this catastrophic oil spill, "All [President Obama] has said is that he's not going to continue the moratorium on drilling but... no additional drilling has been authorized and none will until we find out what happened here and whether there was something unique and preventable here."


Wednesday, April 28, 2010 - A view of the Gulf of Mexico south of Louisiana where oil leaking from the Deepwater Horizon wellhead continues to spread. Ships work on containing the oil on the surface of the water, which could make landfall as early as today. Photo by Sean Gardner/Greenpeace

That’s certainly welcome news, but it doesn't go nearly far enough. President Obama needs to reinstate the moratorium on offshore drilling to ensure a disaster like this doesn't threaten any more coastal communities and ecosystems. Because despite assurances from the oil industry that new technologies have made “accidents” that result in oil spills less likely, the BP Deepwater Disaster shows that’s simply not true. It’s not a matter of if another spill will occur, but when — and where.

Unfortunately, Shell has already been awarded a lease to do exploratory drilling in 2.7 million acres of the Chukchi Sea, off of Alaska’s northern coast, within prime hunting grounds for the Inupiat people and a critical migration route for endangered bowhead whales. Shell just received a key permit for the project from the EPA last month, and plans to go ahead with drilling there this summer even though this is a very fragile ecosystem where conditions would make cleanup so difficult that the Coast Guard has described a major oil spill there as a “nightmare scenario” that it does not have the capacity to deal with.

The Gulf, by contrast, may be the one place on earth where authorities are prepared to deal with oil spills, with plenty of manpower and spill response equipment close at hand. We’ve seen how difficult it has actually been over the past week, though, as all attempts to stop the spill from making landfall have so far failed. I shudder to think what it would mean if this had happened in the remote, pristine waters of the Arctic.


A ship cuts through some of the oil on the surface of the Gulf of Mexico after a BP-leased oil platform exploded on April 20 and sank after burning. Eleven workers are missing and presumed dead. Photo by Sean Gardner/Greenpeace

The Obama administration’s commitment to offshore drilling amounts to no less than a decision to endanger our coastal ecosystems with the risk of catastrophic oil spills, which is especially worrisome because there seems to be little to no commitment from companies like BP and Transocean, who leased the Deepwater Horizon oil rig to BP, to prevent oil spills like this from occurring. Transocean actually lobbied the Minerals Management Service, which oversees the lease of our coastal waters to oil companies who do the drilling, to exempt the Deepwater Horizon rig from certain safety requirements because it was a “marvel of modern technology” and, according to the company, virtually immune from a spill of this magnitude. Yeah, not so much, Transocean.

Unfortunately, President Obama seems all too willing to swallow the oil industry’s lies and distortions hook, line, and sinker, even to the point that he’s repeated the myth that Hurricane Katrina didn’t cause any oil rig spills because oil rigs these days are simply too darn fail-safe. In defending his plan to open our coastlines to drilling, Obama said, “It turns out, by the way, that oil rigs today generally don’t cause spills. They are technologically very advanced. Even during Katrina, the spills didn’t come from the oil rigs, they came from the refineries onshore.” Yeah, not so much, Mr. President.

Hopefully the very real catastrophe we are witnessing in the Gulf will open our president’s eyes to the reality of the oil industry, and he will act in time to prevent this from happening in the Chukchi Sea as well. No matter how the industry’s PR machine spins it, oil is intrinsically a dirty business, and there is no technological fix for that fact. President Obama needs to reinstate the moratorium on offshore drilling immediately and take decisive action to replace dangerous and dirty fossil fuels with safe and clean renewable energy.

Reprinted from the Huffington Post
April 30, 2010

As stories of the catastrophic oil spill off of Louisiana travel around the world, we have dramatic and disturbing new photos of the oil rig explosion that set off this catastrophe.  This is what you didn't get to see on day one.



There's a different story and new photos emerging from the Gulf everyday.  Today the amount of oil gushing from the seabed is five times larger than it was quoted as being just yesterday.  It's being compared to the Exxon-Valdez spill off the coast of Alaska, one of the worst in U.S. History.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration estimates the spill at 5,000 barrels (210,000 gallons) a day -- five times BP's earlier estimate of yesterday, and exceeding the worst-case scenario.

Greenpeace flew over the spill yesterday to capture images and to see the disaster first hand.



This is why the President's offshore drilling proposal needs to be taken off the table now.

Greenpeace and Gulf environmental groups sent the President an open letter today, calling for the President to personally visit the site of the spill and reverse his position on offshore drilling.

The horrific and historic environmental disaster unfolding before our eyes in the Gulf of Mexico has everyone taking a new look at the true cost of oil addiction.

Everything was going so well for Big Oil. The American Petroleum Institute, its members, and their army of lobbyists were having their way with Congress and the White House, demanding access to off-limits coastal waters and other giveaways in return for dropping opposition campaigns to block global warming and energy legislation. Easy pickings.

They had duped everyone into thinking that oil drilling is harmless and safe and that drilling for more oil domestically would solve our oil problems and cure our economic woes. All cold blooded lies.

This was a very modern rig, presumably best available technology, best safety precautions... yet something went catastrophically wrong and the costs of those lies are being borne by creatures and people of the Gulf coast. The truth will emerge in due time, but apparently British Petroleum was too cheap to pay for a $500,000 safety valve and safety precautions may have not been a top priority.

Drilling for oil along our coasts will never ever never ever solve our domestic oil demand. The oil companies know this. Lee Raymond, former CEO of Exxon and the Darth Vader of global warming wars, always spoke the truth on this, saying in 2004, "I think that the notion in the United States of energy independence, which was first proposed in the Nixon administration, was a poor concept 30 years ago and it is a poor concept today." (Quoted in Financial Times, "Exxon chief hits at energy debate", September 17, 2004.)

This spill is already one of the worst oil spills of all time, with estimates the Coast Guard upgraded today (April 29) of up to 5,000 barrels of crude oil blasting out of the ocean floor every day, a mile deep. That's 210,000 gallons a day, or 8,750 gallons an hour, 146 gallons a minute... Staggering.



The oil hasn't even hit the beaches and wildlife refuges, the vast wetland habitat of the Gulf Coast. Right now we are concerned about the populations of sperm whales, dolphins, sea turtles, whale sharks and other creatures that inhabit these fragile waters.

What is happening to the spawning grounds of the endangered bluefin tuna, the sea turtle nesting grounds, the massive flocks of waterfowl and shore birds that inhabit the coastal zone? We probably won't be able to assess the full damage for decades to come.

Everyone's thoughts are on stopping the leak as soon as possible and preventing even more ecological harm. Our thoughts are also with the poor men who lost their lives, and their families. We are reminded of the Massey coal mine disaster this month and the true costs of dependence on dirty energy like coal and oil.

What will it take for President Obama to retract his "Drill baby drill!" approval of expanded offshore drilling? Maybe this disaster will serve as a wake up call for the nation, to get us on the path away from oil addiction and make us once again skeptical of the words and lies of Big Oil?

Greenpeace produced a series of maps showing what this oil spill would be doing if it were 50 miles off the coast of Virginia, say in 2025. As of Thursday April 29, the oil spill would already be threatening the beaches of Cape May, NJ, Ocean City, MD, Virginia Beach, the Outer Banks, and would have entered the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay and Assateague National Seashore and Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge.



This is a long way from over

This article cross-posted on HuffingtonPost.

We’ve just released the latest version of our Cool IT Leaderboard, and Cisco has leapt to the top of our list of global tech companies leading the way toward a cleaner, greener high-tech future.

Other companies seem, shall we say, unable to decide if climate solutions that reduce energy wastage and carbon emissions are a significant business opportunity (to say nothing of the morally right thing to do) or a mere marketing strategy.
 
Cisco doubled its score from the previous version of our leaderboard by demonstrating the effectiveness of its solutions for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Meanwhile, Ericsson made a strong debut in the second place spot.

You can download the Cool IT Leaderboard version 3 as a PDF, if you like.
 
The IT sector has the potential to quickly design and implement technologies that achieve greater energy efficiency and cuts in carbon emissions. But as the IT sector grows, its growth must be powered by clean energy sources rather than dirty 19th century technologies like coal. Which is to say, the industry must ensure that its own growing carbon footprint doesn’t negate the impact of the solutions it’s offering.

To that end, please join me and nearly a quarter million other activists worldwide in telling Facebook to use 100% renewable energy, not dirty coal.
 
Our report, "Make IT Green: Cloud Computing and its Contribution to Climate Change," shows that the rise of cloud computing represents a major challenge to the otherwise positive climate contributions of the IT sector. The report finds that the “cloud” – comprised of cloud computing services such as social networks, video streaming, email, and photo storage, as well as the telecommunications networks that give us access any time and anywhere to data stored in centralized data centers rather than on our computers’ hard drives — is poised to gobble up three times as much energy in 2020 as it currently does today.

The data centers running the cloud draw electricity from the grid to run the servers that bring us Facebook, Gmail, Flickr, and YouTube to our laptops, iPhones, or tablet computers. With these amazing technological achievements, IT companies are remaking our society. They are to the 21st century as fossil fuel companies were to the past — they have the power to shape the economy and, in turn, the future of our climate. So while Microsoft, Google, IBM, and other Leaderboard companies must use their considerable political influence to lead the transformation to a clean energy economy backed by smart grids and smart technology, they also need to be mindful of their own share of climate pollution.

Greenpeace just released fresh evidence that palm oil and pulp and paper giant Sinar Mas continues to destroy critical Paradise rainforest areas despite promises not to do so.  This builds on the case we made in our Caught Red Handed report, that companies like Nestle which buy large amounts of palm oil need to cut Sinar Mas out of their supply chains entirely.

After mountains of bad press, an unprecedented online outcry and actions from China to Switzerland, Nestle has responded to our campaign…sort of.

Nestle Chairman Peter Brabeck-Letmathe released a public statement to explain what Nestle is doing (or not doing) to address its links to deforestation.  His statement has been a main feature on the Nestle homepage since the company’s shareholder meeting – which was invaded by orangutans and banner dropping activists.

His statement expresses concern about rainforests and peatlands, but does not make commitments that would go far enough to save them.

In addition to side-stepping adequate action, Brabeck tried to shift blame onto the biofuels industry, another large user of palm oil.  It is true that growing demand for palm oil derived biofuels for transportation is a real threat to rainforests.  This is not news to anyone, especially Greenpeace forest campaigners who have been working the issue for years.  But Brabeck’s half-hearted attempt to shift the blame does not erase his company’s contribution to the problem.

So, what has Nestle actually done to deal with its palm oil problem?  A few hours after our global campaign began, Nestle canceled direct contracts with Sinar Mas.  But Nestle’s direct contracts with Sinar Mas made up a very small amount of the company’s overall palm oil purchases.  Nestle continues to use palm oil and other products from Sinar Mas via third party suppliers such as agribusiness giant Cargill.  

Brabeck’s statement said that "Cargill has informed us that Sinar Mas needs to answer Greenpeace’s allegations by the end of April. They have indicated that they will delist Sinar Mas if they do not take corrective action by then."  There are only two days left in April.

If Cargill misses this deadline, or does not delist Sinar Mas, what will Nestle do?

Will the largest food and drink company hold its suppliers like Cargill accountable?  Will it follow-up words with real action?  Do Nestle executives actually think empty promises and half-measures will stop the public outcry over orangutan habitat destruction, deforestation and climate pollution?  Let's ask them!

Tweet a question to: @Nestle.

Fill out their customer service form.

And click on our take action page to deliver your message to Nestle.

Ask Nestlé what it will do if Cargill does not confirm by end of this week that it will drop Sinar Mas. Read fresh evidence of forest destruction and the fascinating first hand account from Greenpeace Southeast Asia campaigner Joko Arif here.

If you watch any TV or spend any time online, you’ve seen the commercials: Music swells in the background as a normal and sincere looking engineer locks eyes with you and tells you how ExxonMobil is leading the way to environmentally safe energy. Or you’re treated to a montage of everyday Americans just going about their lives as Big Oil, King Coal or the nuclear industry labor selflessly to keep the economy humming and keep the lights on while, of course, protecting the planet.

This Exxon ad has the requisite affable-looking engineer, meant to reassure you that the oil industry is looking out for you and your children's future.

Recent events have shown the terrible impact oil drilling can have on people, communities, and the environment.

The ads are slick and highly effective, and the message is always the same: We care about the environment, just like you. And through the miracle of technology, we’ve made fossil fuels safe and clean. Don’t worry about a thing.

Over the past month, though, we’ve borne witness to the awful truth about our dependence on dirty fossil fuels like coal and oil.

The month began with a spate of coal mining accidents in China, where dozens of Chinese miners were killed in a flood. On April 3rd, a coal barge ran aground on the Great Barrier Reef, leaking tons of heavy fuel into the ocean and causing damage to the reef that won’t be repaired for decades. The following week, 29 American coal miners were killed in an explosion at Massey Energy’s Upper Big Branch mine in West Virginia. And two weeks after that, eleven workers went missing and are presumed dead when a BP oil platform exploded and sank in the Gulf of Mexico, an accident that continues to release 42,000 gallons of oil into the water every day.

All this in just one month. We can add the horrific toll of these tragedies to the thousands of deaths in the US and around the world that are the direct result of air pollution caused by the burning of fossil fuels as well as the lives cut short by the impacts of climate change. None of these events can simply be chalked up to bad luck. Catastrophic accidents, cancer and other diseases, and climate change are simply realities of our dependence on fossil fuels.

Every American should be outraged that in the face of disasters like these our leaders continue to parrot the ad campaigns of the coal and oil industry rather than doing what’s necessary to get us off fossil fuels and start a clean energy revolution. At the beginning of this ill-fated month, President Obama announced that his administration would open up leases in new areas of the nations’ coastal waters to Big Oil. Obama declared, "We're responsibly developing traditional sources of energy," and that, going forward, we’ll “employ new technologies that reduce the impact of oil exploration.” Sound familiar?

A campaign by the oxymoronically-named American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity seeks to portray coal as a postitive force in American communities.

This picture points up the devastating loss West Virginia has suffered because of the coal industry.

Image credit: stephendamron

Across town, the Senate could soon begin work on legislation that would increase offshore oil drilling, give away billions of dollars to the coal industry, and handcuff the EPA and states from taking action on climate change -- all giveaways to polluter lobbyists and corporations who agreed in return to support the legislation. The politicians are already saying that their bill will lead the way toward environmentally safe energy, and that they’re doing what’s necessary to protect the planet while keeping the lights on. But it’s no truer coming from them than it is when Don Blankenship says it.

But there’s hope. Today, the Obama administration approved the first American offshore wind farm—Cape Wind in Nantucket Sound. These 130 turbines will provide three quarters of the power to Cape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket, creating hundreds of new jobs in the meantime. Projects like these are possible in every corner of our country, if we can muster the courage to follow its example.

We’ve been saying it for decades: The solutions exist. We just need to take the first step of saying no to fossil fuels.

Talking points, flashy ads, and political horse-trading can’t change the reality of coal and oil. If our leaders are serious about protecting people, protecting ecosystems, and creating a sustainable global economy, they’d better get to work helping us make our vehicles and homes more efficient, putting up wind turbines and solar panels, leaving coal and oil in the past where they belong, and dropping risky investments like nuclear power.

If you haven’t already, please become a member of Greenpeace and join me in telling President Obama that his decision about increasing offshore drilling is dead wrong. And as legislation begins to move over the coming weeks and months, be ready to work with Greenpeace to remind our leaders that lives hang in the balance.

The Deepwater Horizon accident in the Gulf of Mexico is a disaster unfolding before our eyes. Eleven lives were lost in the initial explosion, and that incalculable loss is compounded daily as oil continues to flow from the wellhead despite efforts on the part of BP and TransOcean to quell it. No one can accurately predict how long it will take to cap the leaking wellhead: it could be a matter of days, weeks, months. And regardless of how long it takes to staunch the flow of oil, the impacts of the oil spill on the people, economy and environment of Gulf coast states will persist for decades.

Documenting the impacts of the Selendang Ayu spill in Unalaska, Alaska in December 2004.

Here in Alaska, the impacts of the Exxon Valdez oil spill that took place more than 21 years ago are still being felt by people, communities, and the environment. You can still see a “bathtub ring” of Exxon’s oil in Prince William Sound, and you don’t have to dig very deep to find oil lingering below rocks on beaches. Exxon Valdez oil is still being ingested by wildlife more than two decades after the spill, and many species have yet to recover.  

The phrase “oil spill clean up” is an oxymoron. In most cases, the lion’s share of spilled oil is not removed from the environment, it is dispersed, diluted, burned, or it sinks in globs, or it is left behind in one form or another to wreak havoc on the environment for years to come.

And let’s not forget the issue of corporate accountability — ExxonMobil hunkered down for the long haul, using every trick in the book to appeal, stall, and delay court cases seeking accountability or damages from the spill. In fact, one-fifth of the plaintiffs who sought damages for the Exxon Valdez spill passed away before the case finally went to the US Supreme Court.  

Regardless of where the fault lies with the Deepwater Horizon — BP, TransOcean, or some other entity — people who have lost loved ones or their livelihoods because of the spill will have to fight a long, uphill battle for recompense and justice.

On a related note, just last year BP and TransOcean aggressively opposed new safety regulations proposed by the Minerals Management Service, the federal agency that oversees offshore drilling. The impetus for MMS’s new regulations was a study that found numerous accidents occurring in the industry.

The tragedy we’re witnessing right now is but the latest in a long line of oil spills, be they from pipelines, tankers, or exploratory drill rigs like the Deepwater Horizon. Each accident brings with it Congressional inquiries, finger pointing, scathing editorials and public outrage, yet we as a nation are no closer to weaning ourselves from oil than we were after any other big oil spill. So long as we remain dependent on oil we will continue to pay the price in human lives, as well as in environmental and economic damage.

The Deepwater Horizon was lauded as a state-of-the-art “marvel of modern technology” when it was first deployed in 2001. The rig was able to drill at depths that were unthinkable a mere decade before. Let’s keep that in mind as the President, Congress, and oil companies propose expanding oil drilling in US waters — there is no technological fix when it comes to oil exploration, drilling and transportation. You can take action now to tell President Obama that it's time to break our addiction to oil.

Oil will spill, period. And it can’t be adequately “cleaned up.” Let’s hope the legacy of this disaster is not one of more oil drilling and spills, but of a meaningful shift away from our dependence on oil in order to protect human life, the economy, and the environment.

Images from April 28, 2010

While you and I were celebrating the Earth and vowing to help protect the environment, President Obama was reopening whaling by announcing his intention to support a deal at the International Whaling Commission that would legitimize commercial whaling for the first time in over two decades. I’m not sure exactly what the President has against our oceans and whales, but we need to let him know that this is a horrible idea.

So, On June 3rd, Greenpeace will be delivering tens of thousands of names and messages to high-ranking officials in the White House.

But to really make a splash with our delivery event we need thousands more Americans to take action. So we’re starting a massive “Wave for Whales” online. You can help us kick off the Wave for Whales by copying and pasting the following message(s) to your Facebook and/or Twitter account.

Facebook:

Save the Whales! „ø¤º°¨°º¤ø¸„ø¤º°¨°º¤ Join the Wave for Whales at http://ow.ly/1D7Ig ¸„ø¤º°¨°º¤ Copy and repost this message to keep the wave going!

Twitter:

Save the Whales! „ø¤º°¨°º¤ø¸„ø¤º°¨°º¤ Join the #WaveforWhales http://ow.ly/1D7AF ¸„ø¤º°¨°º¤ RT to keep the wave going!

We only have until the start of the IWC meetings in June to convince the President that legalizing commercial whaling for the first time in over 20 years is a horrible idea. You can help make that happen by sharing the Wave for Whales with your friends and followers today. There’s not much time.

It’s been two years since Greenpeace released our first assessment of the sustainability of seafood sold at major U.S. supermarkets.  The scorecard released today marks the fourth installment of the Carting Away the Oceans project, and while last year’s leaders have maintained their presence at the top of the chart, they’ve certainly jostled around a bit.

Target has now taken over the top spot, largely due to a new purchasing policy that resulted in the removal of all farmed salmon products from their stores.  This policy is still in nascent stages; word on the street is that Target is now wrestling with other thorny seafood complexes, such as farmed shrimp and tuna.  No doubt even more impressive steps are still to come.

Wegmans continues to scale the rankings at an admirable pace, this time taking second place overall.  Even though it is by the far the smallest chain appraised by the Carting Away the Oceans in terms of total stores, Wegmans has outdistanced most of the other retailers through their strong policy development and, most recently, their announcement that they will not sell any seafood from the environmentally fragile Ross Sea.  This Antarctic body of water is the world’s most pristine shallow sea, and Wegmans has publicly announced that they are not interested in selling any seafood that is caught at the expense of this delicate area.  At this point, that includes Antarctic toothfish (sold as Chilean seabass) and krill.  Wegmans’ stance on this issue is extraordinarily impressive – it bespeaks a seafood retailer that is truly taking responsibility for its environmental footprint.  Hopefully other retailers will follow Wegmans’ lead and stand up to protect the Ross Sea.

Whole Foods and Safeway have also made significant gains.  Whole Foods now boasts the most complete seafood policy of any major retailer in the United States – unfortunately, the company continues to sell a great number of red list seafood items.  If Whole Foods proves willing to discontinue its sale of Atlantic halibut, hoki, Chilean seabass, and other imperiled species, it will undoubtedly find itself back on top of the charts.  Safeway has recently joined forces with the environmental organization FishWise, which is working behind the scenes to help the gargantuan retailer move towards a more sustainable seafood operation.  In the short time the two groups have been partnered, Safeway has dropped monkfish and red snapper and pledged to support necessary protection measures for the critically endangered bluefin tuna in the Gulf of Mexico.  This is fabulous progress.

Ahold slipped in the overall rankings this time around, but that doesn’t mean that the chain isn’t making progress.  Ahold excels at communicating sustainability information to its consumer base, and now that its purchasing policy is publicly available, it is leading the pack in overall transparency.  If Ahold took some steps towards diminishing its red list seafood inventory and stepped up its game in initiative participation – perhaps by appending its name to the “No seafood from the Ross Sea” petition – the company would again be in the running for the brass ring.

In addition to these consistent leaders, some retailers that had been sources for concern have made tremendous progress.  A&P has recently taken a flying leap into the seafood sustainability arena, discontinuing many unsustainable species and launching itself upwards by a larger margin than any other retailer since the 2009 Carting Away the Oceans report.  Price Chopper, too, has started to engage the issue, and while the chain still slings a shocking variety of unsustainable seafood items – including shark – it has at least begun crafting a sensible seafood sourcing policy.

Trader Joe’s –a perennial poor performer in the Carting Away the Oceans rankings – has changed the game by making a strong commitment to its customers and to the oceans.  The company has discontinued orange roughy and red snapper, has begun the process of developing a sustainable seafood policy, and has pledged to redesign their labeling in a more transparent and informative manner.  Beyond this, the company has called out the need for marine reserves in fishery management and has promised to use its purchasing dollars to support visionary leadership in industry (such as closed-containment salmon).  Their work has only just begun, but it’s nice to know that this company, which was once an incorrigible laggard in these areas, in now in the process of becoming a true leader.

Despite the actions of these progressive companies, however, the unfortunate fact of the matter is that there is still a cadre of laggards willfully ignoring the role that they are playing in our ocean’s worsening crisis.

Companies like H.E. Butt, Meijer, and Costco have demonstrated absolutely zero interest in these critical issues.  Even after nearly three years of entreaty by Greenpeace, these companies have not even deigned to respond to inquiries.  This in itself is not the real issue, however; other companies, such as Aldi, continue to work under Greenpeace’s radar but have made measureable progress.   The true problem is that these three offenders have done nothing to even acknowledge – let alone to mitigate – the damage that their business operations are doing to the environment.

Publix, SUPERVALU, and Giant Eagle are certainly no stars in this contest – all three companies continue to refuse any sort of public acknowledgement of their need to address seafood sustainability – but at least they have begun to address the issue through closed partnerships with other NGOs.  Publix is now working with the Sustainable Fisheries Partnership (SFP) and the Ocean Conservancy, while SUPERVALU and Giant Eagle have entered into partnerships with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF).  Virtually no information has yet been made available to outside parties as to the nature or timeline of these arrangements, however, which exasperates many concerned customers and environmental advocates alike.

Greenpeace calls upon all seafood retailers to enact strong, effective, sustainable seafood policies that will reduce pressure on flagging fish stocks and help heal our ailing oceans.  Retailers must also use their massive buying power to leverage positive change in our oceans and to support governmental initiatives that will create marine protected areas (MPAs) and other measures integral to a sensible, ecosystem-based fisheries management approach. Lastly, responsible retailers should demonstrate their commitment to this process by removing key red list species from their inventories immediately. If we are to save our oceans from destruction by over-exploitation, we cannot continue to sell unsustainable species like shark, orange roughy, and hoki. There is a better way to sell seafood, and it is time for progressive retailers to take the reins and lead the industry away from the negligent practices that have brought us to the brink of catastrophe.

Consumers deserve to be able to purchase seafood from retailers that care about the condition of our oceans and that properly steward our marine resources. The days of selling fish with no regard for the environment are over. Companies have two choices—they can implement strong seafood policies and become leaders, or they can ignore reality and continue their unsustainable seafood practices until many popular seafood items are no longer available. And increasingly, if they choose the latter course, they will reap the wrath of a consumer public that has simply had enough.

In the fourth edition of Greenpeace’s seafood sustainability scorecard, Carting Away the Oceans, we are noticing a trend emerging among the largest US seafood retailers. It’s becoming clear that several supermarkets—such as Wegmans, Target, and Whole Foods—are deeply invested in making better decisions and providing safer, more sustainable seafood options for their customers.

At the same time, there are many supermarkets that haven’t taken any responsibility for the seafood they sell, or for the damage they are doing to our oceans—such as H.E.B., Meijer, Costco, SUPERVALU, Publix, and Winn Dixie.

Join us as we take an insider look at these supermarkets to see how they are coping with their status as ocean destroyers. Will their support group help them realize they have a problem and begin to make improvements? Or, will they spiral further towards the bottom of the barrel?

 

 

This post was written by Joko Arif, a Forest Campaigner at Greenpeace Indonesia who helped compile the new evidence of Sinar Mas' forest destruction that is outlined in our new report.

Vast, bald, deforested areas surrounded us, while in the background we could see the wall of surviving forest. Evidence of forest clearing was all around us so we had what we'd come for — but strangely we hadn't caught anyone red-handed. There were no workers in sight.

Our scouting team went ahead to track down the company in the act of destroying the forest while the rest of us stayed behind to bake in the extreme heat. There's not a single tree left, so there was no shade. It was noon on Friday April 23rd and we had found fresh evidence that palm oil supplier Sinar Mas is still in the process of destroying Indonesian rainforests.


Land is ready to begin planting for expansion of palm oil plantations in the concession area of PT Buana Adhitama © Greenpeace / Bina Karos

Today, April 27th, Sinar Mas held its Annual General Meeting in Singapore and we presented the fresh evidence we collected over the weekend at a press conference just before the start of the AGM — but getting this new evidence was not easy.

We set out for Palangkaraya, the capital of Central Kalimantan in Indonesia, on April 23rd to meet other NGO friends, exchange information, and gather more data on what PT Buana Adi Tama (PT BAT for short), a subsidiary of notorious forest and climate destroyer Sinar Mas, has been up to in the area.

See the latest evidence of Sinar Mas' forest destruction on Al Jazeera:

Previously, after hours of pawing through documents, we had discovered that the company was — as we suspected — illegally clearing the forest without a timber cutting permit until 2008. And from what we had seen, we strongly suspected that it was still operating illegally. Sinar Mas has broken its promise to stop this sort of destruction — again. The area the company is clearing also overlaps with orangutan habitat and it has already cleared some areas where orangutans have been frequently spotted. We had to catch them red-handed.

We wasted no time. The following day, we picked up some journalists who wanted to come with us to gather their own evidence and, along with the rest of our team, stepped on it. We were in a remote region and the road was bad. We went off the track several times and it felt as though we were in an international rally, the only difference was that there were no flags and people waving — and that on either side of us lay mile upon mile of degraded forest land and palm oil plantations.


© Greenpeace / Bina Karos

Finally we arrived in Kuala Kuayan, a small village on the Mentaya river bank, our final stop before we headed out to the scene of the destruction.

The next day we were up before dawn and rushed to kickstart the trip. On the way, we picked up our local contact and a local deer hunter, who frequently sees orangutans during his hunting trips near forest areas that PT BAT is destroying. There were now 12 people in our group, including two drivers. We traveled fast through the morning dawn, nervous because we had no idea what awaited us or whether we’d run into unfriendly folks from the company while we gathered our evidence.

Just half an hour from our target site we skidded to a halt. The road had already been bad but ahead it became an impossibly deep, muddy off-road track. We suddenly faced our most difficult situation of the trip. The drivers were not convinced we could get through it. Motorcycles were our best bet — but where could we find motorcycles in the middle of nowhere? But luck was on our side — it was as if God was forbidding us to give up: two local guys appeared from nowhere on motorbikes. When our local contact told them about our destination, they offered to help us in any way they could. Minutes later, one of the journalists and a couple of our team were off up the track to scout conditions on the road ahead. They returned with bad news: there were two big ditch-like paths that we’d have to get past to get to the location. It was too hot to hike so we had no choice but to try and move on.

We were all holding our breath as the first car drove in to the muddy and deep pathway — but it got through. This gave us enough bravery to try the other one. We had to haul it out of the mud with ropes, but we did it. The old saying proved right: if you already have the courage to overcome one big obstacle and you succeed, that success will guide you to beat the others. And with that optimism we overcame the other two obstacles, though we had to pull the cars all the way.


Pulling the cars out.

By noon we had reached the location where the clearing was taking place, but no workers were there. To solve the puzzle, we headed off to the workers' barracks, hoping to find someone brave enough to tell us what was going on. There were only two people there, a worker and someone from a village adjacent to the area the company is destroying. The truth of what was happening rolled out: there was no land clearing today because yesterday some people from the community had attacked the workers as they destroyed the forest.

It appears that the company has spurred a land conflict with the community from the adjacent village. We know of many cases of these kinds of social conflicts, particularly when Sinar Mas is involved, and they often become very violent — the villager did not want us to get him on record saying this.

Again, Lady Luck smiled upon us. A guy appeared who introduced himself as an elder from the village and a victim of the conflict. He was willing to be interviewed. According to him, one guy tricked several of the villagers into giving him their letters of land ownership, which he then gave to the company. He had said they would develop the land into a community rubber plantation, but then a big palm oil plantation appeared instead.

We not only had our evidence but also an insight into how the company is operating in the area. Exhausted, we headed back to base and by midnight were preparing the fresh visual evidence of Sinar Mas breaking its promises to stop this sort of destruction. We want to make sure it cannot get away with telling its lies again.

We knew a lot depended on our investigation and that a lot rested on us getting this evidence out to everyone — we had until morning to get it to Singapore, where our team had arranged a press conference in advance of Sinar Mas’ AGM, as well as out to our Greenpeace offices around the world so that we can show everyone what this company is up to in the rainforest.


Joko on location collecting evidence of new forest clearing by Sinar Mas.

The evidence got to our press conference on time, where international media outlets and journalists were able to see it, but we also wanted to make sure we shared it with you, our online supporters.

We want Nestlé to stop buying palm oil from destructive companies like Sinar Mas. Since we launched our Kit Kat campaign, Nestlé has canceled its direct contract with Sinar Mas but it still buys palm oil from the company via Cargill. Nestlé says it expects Cargill to decide whether it will sever its contracts with Sinar Mas by the end of this month.

We’re not against palm oil plantations but we can’t let companies like Sinar Mas get away with destroying our rainforests. With this evidence, how can Nestlé justify carrying on buying Sinar Mas palm oil unless the company genuinely cleans up its act?

On April 27, 1975, Greenpeace launched the world’s first anti-whaling campaign from the docks of Vancouver.  The mission would become the spark that ignited a global “Save the Whales” movement and eventually helped secure an international ban on commercial whaling.  

Sadly, on the 35th anniversary of Greenpeace’s first voyage to save the whales, an American president threatens to undo decades of hard work for whale conservation.  President Obama’s representatives are now supporting a proposal to overturn the international ban on commercial whaling and legitimize Japan’s “scientific” slaughter in the Southern Ocean.

As Greenpeace gears up for one of the biggest battles that the war against whaling has ever seen, we look back on the story of our first anti-whaling mission with the hope that it will inspire President Obama to fulfill his campaign promise of “strengthening the international moratorium on commercial whaling” – not overturning it... 

Following Greenpeace’s historic maiden voyage to protest the nuclear destruction of Amchitka Island, the U.S. nuclear testing program was shut down, Amchitka was designated as a wildlife sanctuary, and Bob Hunter, Greenpeace’s founder and first president, was hailed as the new leader of the environmental movement.  

It was at this critical turning point in Greenpeace’s history that Bob Hunter met Dr. Paul Spong.  Dr. Spong had recently been dismissed from the Vancouver Aquarium where he was studying their first captive orca whale, Skana.  His groundbreaking research with Skana proved for the first time that orcas are highly intelligent, emotional, and social creatures that should not be held in captivity.  The aquarium directors were not pleased when Spong stated publicly that the orca wanted to be free.  

Dr. Spong spoke with Hunter and the rest of Greenpeace about Skana’s plight and the plight of other great whales around the world.  He told the members about the great, stinking death ships in the Pacific which were massacring these gentle giants with factory-like efficiency.  

The Greenpeace team was appalled.  Something had to be done to stop the slaughter.

So on April 27, 1975, Bob Hunter, Dr. Spong, and a brave team of activists hoisted a new sail on the little Greenpeace ship and set out to confront the Pacific whaling fleets head-on.  “If Russia and Japan decide to whale any longer, they will have to do it over our dead bodies,” Hunter proclaimed, as a crowd of 30,000 supporters gathered at the Vancouver docks to see the Greenpeace crew off.  

In late June, the team picked up their first radio transmission from a Soviet whaling ship.  As they drew closer to the coordinates, the sea turned red and the enormous corpses of harpooned sperm whales floated all around them.  The Greenpeace crew immediately lowered several of their high-speed inflatable rafts and zoomed towards the Soviet harpoon boat.  The inflatables chased down the whaling ships and positioned themselves between the harpoons and the whales.  

At one point, a harpoon was fired just over Bob Hunter’s head, nearly killing him.  But the inflatable rafts continued to defend the whales from the whalers and countless were saved.  Eventually, the Soviet ships retreated for fear of killing the humans and creating a major incident.   

The mission was a success.  “For the first time in the history of whaling,” reported The New York Times, “human beings had put their lives on the line for whales.”

The pictures and video that the Greenpeace crew brought back shocked the world and sparked an international outcry.  After several more confrontations and nearly a decade of intense lobbying, the International Whaling Commission finally accepted a moratorium on commercial whaling in 1986.  

Greenpeace paid for the commercial whaling moratorium with our blood, sweat, and tears.  As a result, many whale species once on the verge of extinction are beginning to recover, slowly but steadily. Despite Japan's continued violation of the moratorium through a loophole that allows for "lethal science," just a few decades of protection has done wonders for the whales:

 
* Blue whales are increasing by 8.2% a year.
* Southern right whales are increasing by 7% a year.
* Humpback whales are increasing 3.1% a year in the Northwest Atlantic, 11-12% a year in the Southern hemisphere, and 7% a year in the Northeast Pacific.
* Eastern gray whales have increased from only a few hundred in the early 1900's to more than 20,000 today.
* Fin whales, which Japan continues to hunt, are not increasing in population but their rapid decline towards extinction has been halted.

This is the whales’ most desperate hour.  Please rush your most generous support to help us tackle this new threat head-on and take action by signing our petition and telling President Obama how you feel about his plan to reinstate commercial whaling.

On this 35th anniversary of Greenpeace's first mission to save the whales, I leave you with the words of Dr. Paul Spong and pray that President Obama will heed his warning:

"The whales, the cetacea: creatures of light, monsters of the deep, fuel for ancient lamps, aquatic acrobats, food for empty bellies, the biggest brains on the planet, twenty million years in the making, now on the anvil under the hammer of fate.  Going, going, gone…nearly gone.  It is one of the ironies of our time that, just as we are beginning to marvel at the complexity of the nature of whales, we are on the verge of destroying them forever." 

all photos are (c)Rex Weyler/Greenpeace

 

This $11 billion hydroelectric project will divert the entire flow of the Xingu River through two artificial dams, destroying as much as 50,000 hectares of the Amazon rainforest. As the third-largest hydroelectric project in the world, after the Three Gorges dam in China and the Itapiu dam on the Brazil- Paraguay border, it will require moving as much earth as the Panama canal did.

Belo Monte threatens a beautiful region virtually untouched by development. The dam itself will have a tremendous negative impact on the biodiversity and natural communities of the area. Just as importantly, it will pave the way for further industrial growth. As a result, it imperils even greater quantities of forest than the 50,000 hectares directly affected.

This dam also carries an enormous human cost. 40,000 people live in the area that will be flooded. Indigenous peoples will be particularly affected. The Juruna and Arara people, for instance, live along the famous “Big Bend” in the Xingu River, which will effectively disappear once the Xingu is diverted. It is unclear how the indigenous people who currently live along its banks and fish in its waters will survive.

Sergio Leitao, a campaigner for Greenpeace Brazil, recently said that the dam “represents a step into backwardness for Brazil.” As he explained, this project follows a maxim long ago proven to be flawed: cheap energy at all costs. The energy produced by the dam could easily by generated by a wind-power installation of similar size, for a slightly higher cost, without any of the environmental or social impacts. Sergio is not the only one to recognize the flawed thinking at work here. James Cameron, the director of Avatar, who has ben campaigning against Belo Monte, said recently that it reminded him of a real-life version of that movie.

The destruction of the wilderness and the marginalization of the indigenous by the forces of greed—wouldn’t it be nice if these things happened only in movies? The unforuntate truth, of course, is that James Cameron is right: This is like a real-life Avatar, no 3-D glasses required. That’s why we’re commited to stopping this project from going forward, whatever it takes—and even if what it takes is three more tons of steaming cow manure.

This post originally appeared on Huffington Post on April 24, 2010.

I was saddened to hear the details of the climate bill soon to be released by Senators Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman.

This bill could be a step backwards, not forward, unless the Senators fix key provisions in the upcoming weeks.

Senators Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman have made a heroic effort to craft a bill in the face of opposition from the Chamber of Commerce, Lisa Murkowski, Koch Industries, and other representatives of dirty power. Their hard work to create a bill that would address global warming, make America more secure, and create jobs can come to fruition in the upcoming weeks. This would require the elimination of subsidies for the dying, dangerous nuclear industry, protecting women's and children's health by phasing out coal, supporting states' rights to protect the health of their citizens, and leaving America's Clean Air Act intact.

The main drivers of progress on global warming in the U.S. have been: 1) state laws, such as California's tougher standards on global warming pollution from tailpipes or renewable energy standards, 2) the Supreme Court's decision, brought about by a lawsuit by ICTA, Greenpeace, and other groups, to allow the EPA to regulate carbon pollution, and 3) energy policy.

These drivers have led the coal industry to slide up to the table to eliminate these avenues of regulation in return for one weak, national bill in which the industry will receive tens of billions of tax dollars and a price on carbon that is so weak that no signal will exist to shift the world from coal to clean energy. In return, the coal industry held policy makers hostage, demanding that the EPA be stripped of its authority to regulate carbon pollution in line with what is needed to protect public health. On top of that, states like California could be stripped of their states' rights to pass appropriate air pollution safeguards to protect the public health.

This roll-back of clean air legislation would be a price too high to pay. Giving away the leverage to reduce pollution further in the future leaves our children's future at risk.

Unfortunately, the bill does not address the biggest driver of global warming quickly enough — the burning of coal. You've heard the hype about "clean" coal. If "clean" means being the number one source of mercury, which threatens to cause birth defects or brain damage to the children of one in six American women, then coal is clean. If "clean" means being one of the greatest sources of pollution that triggers asthma attacks and emphysema problems, then coal is clean. In reality, coal is dirty. Burning coal is no longer moral.

The clean energy provisions of the House bill require less clean energy than we will already have; state policies are simply ahead of federal energy policy. We expect the provisions in the Senate bill to be business as usual as well. The price on carbon in both bills will generate a lot of cash but won't be high enough for at least a decade to drive a shift from coal to cleaner energy sources.

The international efforts to address global warming in Copenhagen crumbled in part because, while European heads of state were offering to cut pollution by 30% below 1990 levels, the U.S. commitment is merely 4% below 1990. President Obama's hands were tied there by the very polluters that are now driving loopholes and environmental rollbacks into this bill.

Senator Graham argues that this bill is not an environmental bill; it is a national security bill. The bill, which is ironically scheduled to be released on the anniversary of Chernobyl, includes up to 12 new nuclear power plants. As someone who was in D.C. on 9/11, I dread the thought of new nuclear plants after the 9/11 Commission Report stated that "Atta also ... considered targeting a nuclear facility he had seen during familiarization flights near New York."

Senators Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman should be commended for stepping out as leaders on this issue. The way to address global warming, make America more secure, and create jobs is to update the bill to eliminate subsidies for the dying, dangerous nuclear industry; protect women's and children's health by phasing out coal; support states' rights to protect the health of their citizens; and leave America's Clean Air Act intact.

Follow Philip Radford on Twitter: www.twitter.com/GP_Phil

 Reposted from the Huffington Post, April 23, 2010

“Look, I love whales,” said the President with a smile as he shook my hand.

Yesterday, on Earth Day, I thought I would be calling on the President to push legislation that would actually solve the climate crisis. No such luck. Instead, I found myself on the national mall leading a march on the White House to stop the President from his back room attempts to undo the 35 year moratorium on commercial whaling.

Later that afternoon, I was invited to the White House to meet with the President. I asked my team what I should ask the President. The funniest suggestion was to give him a fist bump and say “drill, baby drill.” As much as I wanted that on film, I decided to ask him about the reversal of his written campaign promise to Greenpeace to end commercial whaling.

He walked person to person, saying hello, as advocate after advocate threw him softball questions. I shook the President’s hand, and said: “Mr. President, I am Phil Radford from Greenpeace. We are concerned that your administration is overturning the ban on whaling.”

“I know” he replied.  “I’ve seen your ads in the papers.”

“Great,” I replied. “What is your plan to change your administration’s position?

“Look,” said the president, sounding like his Saturday Night Live doppelganger, “I love whales. I will do what I can to protect them.”

“Will you reverse your administration’s position?” I asked.

The President responded, “Oh come on, don’t lobby me here right now…”

I’d made our point. There was no point in lobbying the President more. After all, Earth Day should remind us that lobbying played a minor role in securing the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and ban on commercial whaling. People taking action made the difference. The 200 million people in the streets on the first Earth Day are who brought about the change. We’ll be in the streets again until President Obama lives up to his written promise to end commercial whaling.

A California company called Sungevity is offering to put a comprehensive solar system on the White House for free. If President Obama is seriously committed to curbing emissions and preventing runaway climate change, there is simply no better way to show the world that commitment than to run his own house — the seat of the most powerful government in the world — on clean, green solar energy.

The company sent a letter to President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama telling them that “we need a bold statement from the First Family saying that clean energy works, saves money, creates jobs, and is something ‘I want for my home.’”

Sungevity also has a petition online that you can sign to show your support for solar energy and urge Obama to accept the company’s offer to donate and install a solar system at no cost to the Obamas or American taxpayers.

(An astute reader has pointed out to me that it's not just Sungevity offering the solar system to the White House, but a "group of solar manufacturers, installers, and solar advocates from across America." Read more here.)

The White House of course had solar panels once before: A 32-panel system was installed in 1979 by President Carter, who said, “A generation from now, this solar heater can either be a curiosity, a museum piece, an example of the road not taken, or it can be a small part of one of the greatest adventures ever undertaken by the American People.” It was of course an example of the road not taken — at least so far. Reagan removed the panels in 1986, but Obama has a chance to rectify that drastically shortsighted mistake.

Urge Obama and the White House to go solar now!

Today there are still 300 chemical plants that together put 110 million Americans at risk of a disaster worse than Bhopal or 9/11 because each of these plants has enough poison gas on site to kill or injure potentially millions of people living down wind. In June of 2002, the Bush EPA drafted rules for chemical plants as part of a proposed chemical security program to encourage the use of safer chemical processes to eliminate catastrophic hazards. It was so encouraging that the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee voted unanimously for a bill that would have required high risk chemical facilities to use safer chemical processes. Had either the EPA or the Senate bill been adopted they would have been fully implemented by 2004. Unfortunately the Bush White House scuttle the EPA proposal and the Congress let the EPW bill die.

Today we might be evaluating the success or failure of that program. Instead we are relying on a 740 word temporary law passed in 2006 that gave Congress three years to enact a comprehensive law. At a March 3rd Senate hearing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) admitted that they will not complete inspections of the 229 highest risk plants until the end of 2010. Yet Republican leaders, backed by the chemical lobby, want to extend this temporary law for five years!

Let's review the temporary law that chemical makers like so much. It exempts 2,400 water treatment plants and 500 port facilities. It bars the DHS from requiring the use of "any particular security measure." That's like prohibiting fire proofing and prevention systems that are required in public buildings. In this case it would mean requiring the use a safer chemical processes.

The chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security, Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) calls these safer chemical processes "the only foolproof way to defeat a terrorist determined to strike a chemical facility." Instead the current law is based on voluntary industry programs and it doesn't even provide one dollar to assist facilities with conversion costs.

Meanwhile the DHS is spending time and money on "smell phones" to detect poison gas releases and report them via text messages. They might as well buy 100,000 body bags.

The good news is that in November the House of Representatives passed a bill (H.R. 2868) that for the first time would require the use of "foolproof" processes to eliminate these unbelievable risks. Days before the vote, Clorox announced that they were converting all of their U.S. plants to safer processes just as hundreds of other plants have done over the last decade. Those conversions have eliminated chemical disaster risks for 40 million Americans but not at the 300 plants that put 110 million of us in jeopardy.

Senator Lautenberg (D-NJ) is expected to introduce a bill like the House passed bill very soon. Recently, there was a story in Politico that unearthed this sad history and the status of legislation in the Senate.

Please tell your Senator to take action today!

In the 40 years since our first Earth Day, we’ve come a long way in understanding our environment and how our activities affect its health and wellbeing. We’ve passed laws, changed our habits and vowed to do better for the sake of future generations.

This Earth Day, I pose a challenge to you—go out of your way to save the environment in your daily lives. I’m sure you’re a dynamo at bringing canvas bags to the supermarket, taking public transportation as much as you can and only using compact fluorescent light bulbs in your lamps—but what else can you do?

It’s not enough to do “the easy” stuff to save the environment. Challenge yourself to do more this Earth Day. Think of all those “green tips” you’ve seen on websites or heard your friends talking about. Grab onto two or three new ways to save the planet and make them a reality in your life. Then, once you’ve perfected those—get moving onto more—and so on and so on! Keep learning about the world around you and don’t be afraid to dig deeper to find out the truth when you think there’s more to the story.

This is the only planet we have, let’s treat it right so future generations will have clean air to breath, fresh water to drink and biodiversity to discover.

 

 

We've just posted a new video we put together of our Climate Crime investigative team up in NYC searching for secretive billionaire oilman David Koch.

Check it out:


When we first launched our report, Koch Industries: Secretly Funding the Climate Denial Machine, we asked folks to go over to the Koch Industries Facebook page and communicate their concerns about Koch's funding of climate denial and opposition to clean energy legislation directly to the company. Well, it turns out the Kochs can dish it out — to the tune of about $25 million since 2005, no less — but they can't take it. They promptly pulled their Facebook page down rather than have to listen to our concerns.

Before they pulled their page down, however, Koch posted a response to our report in which the company claims to have "long supported science-based inquiry and dialogue about climate change." If that's the case, why are they hiding behind their front groups who do their climate denying for them? And why won't they respond to our letter asking them to participate in a debate and answer some questions about their funding of climate denial?

I happened to notice that Koch Industries quietly put its Facebook page back up this past weekend. And surprise, surprise — their response to our report is still posted, but all of the comments we left for them before they scurried into hiding have been deleted. I guess they're only for "dialogue" when they can secretly participate. So why not head over to the Koch Industries Facebook page and repost your comment, or post a new one? One good reason not to is that then you're on record as "liking" Koch Industries (Facebook recently changed from having people "fan" a page to "liking" it, in case you don't know). So you can always unlike them after you post your comment.

Go ask Koch: "If you're truly for an open dialogue, why won't you respond to Greenpeace's offer to join them in a debate? And why did you erase all the comments concerned citizens wrote on here previously?" Post the link to our report as well (www.greenpeace.org/kochindustries), so that other folks who visit the page can get the full story, not just Koch's version. Their response to our report is the second post on their page.

If you prefer not to "like" Koch Industries on Facebook even temporarily, you can always just go to www.greenpeace.org/kochindustries and use the social networking tools on that page to help expose these climate criminals.

You can also read more over on Huffington Post.

Do you live near Washington, DC? If so, we've got an Earth Day event for you! Please join Greenpeace staff and supporters on Earth Day (Thursday April 22nd) for a rally on the National Mall to show President Obama that Americans are opposed to any deal that would lift the ban on commercial whaling.

The Obama Administration is backing a deal with the International Whaling Commission that would back the restart of legal commercial whaling for the first time in over two decades. It would be a devastating blow for whale populations.

The rally is part of the Earth Day Network’s 2010 program of events and is in partnership with the WhalesNeedUS coalition. There will be a series of speakers including Greenpeace Executive Director Phil Radford and actress Kristin Bauer (HBO’s True Blood). So if you like the whales as much as we do and are in the D.C area, please come out and support us. The rally will be held at the Earthday stage which is set up in the middle of the mall at 12th St from 12:30 to 1 pm followed by a march by the White House. The blue and orange Smithsonian Metro stop is located directly next to the stage.

Though we hope to see you all out there, if you can’t make it please sign our petition and tell Obama that you do not want the whaling ban overturned.

 

I wonder what President Obama has against the oceans? Does he hate the saltwater? Maybe the thought of seaweed getting caught between his toes is too much to bear.

President Obama announced in March that he would allow exploration and drilling in 167 million acres of coastal waters that have been protected for decades. And, now President Obama’s Administration is championing a deal with with the International Whaling Commission that would re-open commercial whaling for the first time in over two decades. I’m shocked!

Millions of Americans love whales, me being one of them! Tell President Obama that this is outrageous! Commercial whaling is cruel and unacceptable.

Sign the petition and tell the President to keep his promise to save the whales.

One of the biggest days of the year for corporate CEOs is the annual shareholder meeting.  It's their chance to trumpet successes, inspire investments in their company, and look forward to the year ahead.  For Nestle executives at their shareholder meeting today, things were anything but rosy as Greenpeace activists took the company to task for buying palm oil linked to the destruction of endangered orangutan habitat.

The day started with a surprise at the German headquarters of Nestle.  A giant screen atop a cargo truck appeared outside the building displaying real-time Twitter messages from people all over the world urging the company to protect Paradise Rainforests.  Greenpeace activists also redecorated the building itself, deploying a giant banner that covered four stories of offices. Oversized messages from countless rainforest supporters streamed across the digital screen all day long.

The day didn't end there. At the Nestle shareholder meeting in Switzerland, huge numbers of displaced orangutans showed up and conducted a mass "die-in" in front of crowds of onlookers.  It's safe to say that the free Nescafe coffee Nestle was passing out tasted a bit sour at the sight of orangutans being dragged across the concrete by police.

Participants seeking a distraction on their smartphones and computers were surprised when they logged onto a free wireless network only to find a webpage encouraging them to send a message to Nestle about rainforest protection and orangutans.  It's amazing what you can do with technology these days!  ;-)

Inside the venue, things got even more interesting.  As Nestle board chairman Peter Brabeck-Letmathe and Nestle CEO Paul Bulcke addressed the crowd, they had to deal with competition for the spotlight.  Undetected activists dropped two banners from the rafters in front of the stage reading: "Give the orangutans a break!"  The banners remained in plain view during keynote speeches -- a constant reminder to executives, investors and the press that Nestle has a growing problem with its links to rainforest destruction

Want to join the world-wide movement to protect Paradise?  Send a message to Nestle here in the U.S. and let them know its time for them to get serious about protecting rainforests.

We know the company is feeling the heat -- the company has made public statements in an attempt to blunt our campaign.  But they need to hear loud and clear that empty words and half measures won't keep rainforests standing.  Business as usual needs to end if we are to save orangutans and their rainforest homes...and we'll keep campaigning until that happens!

Our own Rolf Skar was on the Brian Lehrer Show last night, talking about our campaign telling Nestle to stop using palm oil made from Paradise Forests destruction in its products. Specifically, he was discussing the nearly 100,000 new "fans" Nestle now has on Facebook thanks to Greenpeace's awesome online activists, and Nestle's bumbling response to the feedback those new "fans" were offering.

If you want to get in on the action, you can tell Nestle to protect rainforests and remove Sinar Mas' unsustainable palm oil from their supply chain right now.

Here's the video:

Facebook Battleground: Nestle's Vs. Greenpeace from Brian Lehrer Live on Vimeo.

CEOs for some of the world's largest coal companies testified before the House Select Comittee on Energy Independence and Global Warming on April 14th, and it was quite a show.

There was plenty of predictable hype and misniformation about Carbon Capture and Sequestration, as the coal CEOs demanded more taxpayer dollars to pursue the myth of "clean coal" while ignoring all the reasons why CCS is a dangerous distraction from real clean energy solutions.

The real action came when youth activists confronted the coal CEOs with lumps of coal and blackened hands to show everyone in the hearing room that despite the industry's lobbying and propaganda, young people know that coal is dirty, and has no role in our clean energy future.

I hope that the efforts of the youth activists to challenge the coal CEOs with their dangerous and dirty fuel reminded the policymakers in the room and beyond who is behind the efforts to block solutions to climate change, and that young people will not sit quietly while our future is treated as though it were just another bargaining chip between polluter lobbyists and Congress.

The action was also captured by CNN:

 

Another interesting part of the hearing came when Chairman Ed Markey asked Gregory Boyce, the CEO of Peabody Coal, about his company's efforts to block the EPA's ability to protect the public's health and safety by cutting global warming pollution under the Clean Air Act. Congressman Markey pointed out that Peabody Coal explicitly states in their petition,

"Peabody’s petition is based primarily on the release of email and other information from the University of East Anglia (“UEA”) Climatic Research Unit (“CRU”) in November of last year."

Chairman Markey then asked the coal CEOs if their companies will now back away from their efforts to block the EPA's endangerment finding since the British House of Commons cleared the scientists of any wrongdoing.

Of course, the responses from the coal CEOS just reinforced that the efforts of polluting industries to undermine the Clean Air Act is really about protecting their profits at the expense of the planet and public health, and they will continue to use fake scandals to push their polluter agenda.

You can read more about the hearing from the Sierra Club's Bruce Nilles or hear from one of the youth activists about coming face to face with the dirty coal CEOs. 

UPDATE: check out the video of the action and some selections form the hearing

If you happened to be at the White House yesterday afternoon, you might have noticed a couple of whales hanging around. Yes, the whales are back and they are not leaving until Obama rejects the Japanese proposal to resume the commercial slaughter of whales that is currently being considered by the International Whaling Commission (IWC).

Our whale friends are entertaining; they dance, they give out hugs and stickers, they wave, and they just make people smile. But, what if one day they just weren’t there anymore? The whales are running out of time and their voices alone aren’t enough. They are out there trying to get you to listen to them and help them tell Obama that overturning the whale moratorium could be the most devastating thing to ever happen to the whale populations.

As a candidate, President Obama said, “As president, I will ensure that the U.S. provides leadership in enforcing international wildlife protection agreements, including strengthening the international moratorium on commercial whaling. Allowing Japan to continue commercial whaling is unacceptable.” (March 16, 2008 - Greenpeace candidate questionnaire). We should not be legitimizing whaling, we should be phasing it out.

 The whales need your help to give them a voice; Two whales at the White House may not be enough. If you want to help them out, there is going to be a rally to oppose commercial whaling on Earth day (April 22nd). From 12:30 PM to 1 PM our whales, and hopefully you, will be once again asking Obama to not overturn the ban on commercial whaling. You can find them on the National Mall at 12th street followed by a march past the White House.

If you can’t make it, please take action and help our beloved whales tell Obama to not overturn the whaling moratorium.

Sister Dorothy was an American nun who spent her life working for the preservation of the Amazon and the protection of its poor and disempowered. She helped farmers make a living from small plots or from forest products that could be gathered without deforestation. She stood up to powerful interests that tried to grab land from the farmers she worked with. She was famous for wearing a t-shirt that read: “The death of the forest is the end of our life”.

Her death, in time, provided a tragic illustration of the role that cattle ranchers can play in the Amazon. On April 22, 2005, Sister Dorothy was shot in cold blood by two men hired by a cattle rancher. A biographer described the murder thus: “Her hired assassins…found her in the forest…When they asked if she carried a weapon, she reached into her bag and produced a Bible…Then they shot her.”

For decades, cattle ranchers have been setting the rainforest aflame and replacing it with grazing lands for cattle. Every 18 seconds or so, another hectare of forest is lost in this way. In fact, cattle ranches now occupy 80% of  deforestated area in the Brazilian Amazon.

These ranchers know that this destruction brings quick profits. The beef and leather products that come from their cattle can be exported around the world; they may end up in the hands of consumers from Britain to China. Thanks to the recent expansions, Brazil is now the world’s largest exporter of beef; it claims the largest commercial cattle herd in the world. 

But the expansion of cattle ranches has come at the expense of the rainforest—and the expense of those who live in it, work in it, and defend it. Ranchers grab lands from poor farmers and impinge upon indigenous reservations. They use slave laborers on isolated ranches. And they have a history of intimidating, threatening, and murdering those who dared to defy them. Sister Dorothy’s death is only one example; 772 people were killed in land disputes in the Brazilian state of Para between 1972 and 2007.

These ranchers have operated with impunity in a region where enforcement can be difficult and officials are often corrupt. Few ranchers are ever held accountable for their crimes. As of 2007, only eight of the 772 murder cases had gone to trial.

While the forest is not safe, there has been progress. Last spring, Greenpeace released the “Slaughtering the Amazon” report, which detailed the deforestation created by the expansion of cattle ranching in Brazil. In the wake of that report, major brand-name companies like Nike, Adidas, Clarks, and Timberland sent a simple message to their suppliers: Clean up your act, or we’ll drop your contracts. Last fall, Greenpeace was able to declare victory on that campaign after all four of the largest cattle companies in Brazil (JBS, Bertin, Marfrig and Minerva) agreed to a moratorium on further expansion in the Amazon.

The first step in implementing the moratorium is the mapping and registration of all the ranches that directly supply these slaughterhouses. This is a vital task. Without mapping and registration, it’s impossible to know who is operating in the Amazon and whether or not they have continued to destroy the Amazon to make room for grazing cattle. All the ranches in the Brazilian Amazon must be mapped and registered before truly effective law enforcement and deforestation monitoring can take place. Only then can we bring an end to the deforestation, land grabbing, and violent acts perpetrated by cattle ranchers. Greenpeace is continuing to pressure slaughterhouses to ensure that this all-important task is completed.

And on April 12th, Vitalmino Bastos de Moura was convicted for Sister Dorothy’s murder and sentenced to 30 years in prison. This offers hope that in the future, those fighting to protect the forest will not be tragically silenced. As Paulo Adario, director of Greenpeace’s Amazon campaign, said of the conviction: “It's obviously a sign that the times of violence without consequence are ending”.
 

Behindthegreen.org has an excellent and poignant post up today on the connection between IT and coal. The blogger, Brooks Boliek, comes from a coal mining family, and he's clearly been affected by the recent mining incident in West Virginia in which 29 miners died after being trapped underground. The efficiencies that IT can create could be enough to keep more coal in the ground, Boliek writes.

"What does this have to do with information and communications technologies? ICT can make it possible for fewer people have to go underground. ICT's long suit is efficiency. It can make us use less electricity, and less electricity means we need less of the black stuff that makes it.

There's a conundrum there. It's the same conundrum that faces the miners everyday they ride the man lift. Mining is dangerous, dirty and difficult, but it is also rewarding. Miners make a lot of money and that money fuels the economic activity in small towns in out-of-the way places where there isn't a lot of money to be had. Reducing our need for the black stuff, whether it's coal or oil, could very well have an impact in those small towns and out-of-the way places.

It's a tough problem, but in the end ICT also provides jobs. It has the potential to provide more than those in the coal industry. As much as I personally admire and respect those people who do that dirty, dangerous and difficult job, changing the nation from a country too dependent on the black stuff to a nation dependent on the green stuff is really the only way to go. Making our homes, cars and industries more efficient and less dependent on the black stuff isn't just good for the environment, it's as economic necessity for the country as a whole."

 More at behindthegreen.org.

 

Since Junichi and Toru were arrested in 2008 for exposing a scandal that rocked the Japanese whaling industry - over half a million calls for justice have been made in support of their actions.

After Junichi and Toru were arrested - nearly 300,000 of you called for their immediate release and demanded that the official investigation, into the corruption they exposed, be re-opened. 85,000 of you even went so far as to demand the Japanese government arrest you too for assisting Junichi and Toru in opposing the scandal and corruption of Japan's whaling program in the Southern Ocean. You told Japan that if they are going to start rounding up political prisoners for the crime of defending whales - that they will need to arrest a great many people around the world!

 

 

And earlier this year we launched the "Whale Trial Pledge" - which has been signed by 200,000 of you as "co-defendants." In addition to calling for a fair trial - you asked again for the official investigation to be re-opened.

Today - as the Japanese whaling factory ship, the Nisshin Maru, returned from hunting whales in the Southern Ocean - all of these pledges were submitted to the Public Inquest Committee (PIC) in Japan. They were filed along with our request for the Japanese government to re-open its investigation into the whale industry’s corruption which our activists Junichi and Toru worked so hard and risked so much to expose.

We're highlighting both the ongoing scandal of Japan’s whale hunt in an internationally recognized whale sanctuary and the international community’s failure to deal with Japan’s unscrupulous behavior at the International Whaling Commission.

We're hoping the Japanese Government will hear the sound of over half a million global voices loud and clear! Junichi handed over all the names of people who signed the Whale Trial Pledge today to show the PIC that it's not just a small group of activists in Japan who are calling for the re-opening of the whale meat investigation - it's a whole lot more! 

My colleagues down at Greenpeace Argentina ran this full-page ad in the Washington Post today to call on Argentina's president, Mrs. Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, to rethink her administration's support for dirty coal energy. Pres. Kirchner is in Washington, D.C. this week meeting with Pres. Obama.

The Argentinian government is building a coal-fired plant in Patagonia, in the south of Argentina, as part of a broader investment in the supremely dirty fossil fuel. But as the ad points out:

Global warming is a threat to the existence of the Andean glaciers. These glaciers are the main source of water for many communities in Argentina and the rest of South America. Glaciers are the most important water reserve for future generations of Argentinians. But they are disappearing. The situation will only get worse if more coal plants are built.

By investing in new green jobs and promoting wind power in the Argentine Patagonia, your adminstration has the chance to provide a clean, efficient, modern and decentralized energy supply to your people.

It's time to reidrect our investments from dirty and expensive sources of energy, such as coal, into a clean and renewable future.

If Mrs. Kirchner is swayed at all by the ad, maybe she can put in a word with President Obama. Instead of opening more of our coastlines to offshore drilling, he could and should be supporting policies to kickstart an energy revolution right here at home and leading the way for the rest of the world. You can drop President Obama a line right now and tell him that it's time for America to break our oil addiction, if you're so inclined.

Just as illegal fires are used to slash and burn the Paradise Forests of southeast Asia to make way for palm oil and tree plantations, a suspected arson fire was used to burn the Greenpeace Climate Defender's Camp in Indonesia's Kampar Peninsula yesterday.





A gathering place for community members and international forest advocates alike, here is what the Climate Defenders Camp looked like before the suspected arson blaze:



Please support Greenpeace activists and community volunteers in Indonesia by standing up to violence and intimidation, and saying no to deforestation and peatland destruction. Take action and share this story with others. International attention is needed to protect the safety of forest advocates working on the front lines to save Paradise.

This incident shows that when growing demand for commodities like palm oil is not paired with corporate responsibility, greed, corruption and violence can flourish alongside rainforest destruction. This suspected act of arson also underscores the importance of companies like Nestle — the ultimate users of commodities that are driving Paradise forest destruction — cleaning up their supply chains and being vocal advocates for comprehensive political solutions. Even if you've sent a message before, take a minute to tell Nestle that we need rainforest and peatland protection now!

A press release from the Greenpeace Paradise Forest team in Indonesia is below. You can also read more from the Jakarta Post here.

PRESS RELEASE:
Greenpeace will continue fight for Kampar Protection despite camp burning down

Jakarta, 12 April 2010: Greenpeace today stated that the burning down of the Climate Defenders Camp in Riau’s Kampar Peninsula this weekend will not stop it from campaigning with the local community to stop the destruction of the area’s forests and carbon-rich peatlands. The Climate Defenders Camp was built in October 2009 with community help in the run up to the Copenhagen climate summit to highlight the cost of forest destruction to the climate, local communities and biodiversity.

“The fire which has partially destroyed the camp is a set back but we are now more committed than ever to helping the local community fight the destruction of the Kampar. We are redoubling our efforts to save Indonesia’s environment and make sure that the forests and peatlands of Kampar Peninsular Forests are fully protected,” said Bustar Maitar, Greenpeace Southeast Asia Forest Campaign Team Leader.

The fire broke out in the early hours of Sunday morning and flames were spotted by villagers across the Kampar river in Teluk Meranti. The fire severely damaged the main hall and prayer room but there were no injuries. Initial investigations by the local police indicate that the fire was started deliberately. Greenpeace has reported the case to Riau Province Police Headquarters, urging them to investigate the case seriously and rapidly,” added Bustar.

The Kampar peninsula is one of the largest peatland areas in the world and is under threat of destruction from pulp-and paper companies APRIL and APP. The camp has been visited by a host of international guests, like the US ambassador to Indonesia and French movie star Melanie Laurent. In November, using the camp as base, Greenpeace took action against the ongoing clearance of peatlands by APRIL, blocking the company’s excavators and exposing the company’’s illegal activities. Not long thereafter, Minister of Forestry Zulkifli Hasan ordered APRIL to stop clearing practices in the area, while their permits where under investigation.

The people of Teluk Meranti have been very supportive of the Greenpeace campaign and have organised a thousand-signature petition to reject the expansion of APRIL into the forests in the Kampar. “We need Greenpeace to help us protect the forest against the company because the company has everything — money, power, and political influence" said Pak Yusuf, Teluk Meranti community leader.

The Greenpeace campaign will not stop until the Kampar is fully protected. “We welcome President Yudhoyono’s statement last week that asked NGO’s like Greenpeace to work together with the government to save Indonesia’s environment. As a first step, we urge the President to immediately implement a moratorium on deforestation and peatland destruction,” Maiter concluded.

This post is by Jamie, a web editor for Greenpeace UK (you can view the original post on GP UK's site).

*Please note that while our international campaign urging Nestlé to stop using palm oil made from destruction of Paradise Forests is centered on a spoof of the Kit Kat brand, in the United States Kit Kat is actually licensed to Hershey Foods Corporation. Our report, “Caught Red-Handed: How Nestlé Use of Palm Oil is Destroying Rainforests and the Climate,” does not examine Hershey Foods Corporation palm oil sourcing. Popular Nestlé brand products that are sold in the US and contain unsustainable palm oil include PowerBar, Nestlé Crunch Crisp, and CoffeeMate.

It's three weeks since we launched our Nestlé campaign and, thanks to the fantastic support we've received, it's going from strength to strength. Nestlé's Facebook page is still dominated by questions about where the company gets its palm oil from. It seems that every attempt by their admins to change topic is another opportunity to turn the conversation back to deforestation linked to palm oil and other ethically questionable practices. Meanwhile, our Kit Kat video has sailed past an incredible 1.1m views.

But what's going on in Indonesia? After all, that's where the forests we're trying to protect are located. Well, the work our Indonesian team is doing is somewhat different. Rather than focusing mainly on a large consumer company, they're tackling suppliers directly and challenging the government of Indonesia about deforestation.

The email updates coming from our colleagues in Jakarta show that we're having an effect in political circles.

The president of Indonesia, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, has been talking a lot about forests this week. He talked tough about the "mafia in illegal logging", and commissioned a taskforce to investigate the corruption which is endemic in the industry and which contributes to the clearance of rainforest to make way for palm oil and pulp and paper plantations.

Personally, I was surprised to read that he's also been specifically praising Greenpeace and other pressure groups for criticizing the government's policy on forest management. In a special press conference earlier this week, he also asked for more cooperation between government and organisations like Greenpeace to help protect Indonesia's environment.

ust after the president's statement, our Indonesian team received a request for a meeting with his adviser, where we were joined by other environmental and social NGOs. At the meeting it was explained to the advisor how the president should tackle deforestation: with a moratorium on converting the forest into agricultural land, as well as protecting Indonesia's peatlands.

Well, words don't always translate into action, and Yudhoyono is known for making impressive environmental statements but not following through on his promises. Still, he has pledged to reduce Indonesia's emissions (third largest in the world) by 26 per cent by 2020. As a large proportion of those emissions come from deforestation, reaching that target inevitably means getting serious with the loggers and the agriculture giants who are tearing down forests and burning peatlands.

There's also been a spectrum of reaction from other Indonesian ministers. The agriculture minister said he will work with the palm oil industry to clear its name, and is planning a lobbying tour of Europe to promote Indonesian palm oil. The trade minister has called for an independent investigation into our claims, which is nice. Equally nice to hear the environment minister agreeing that Nestlé had every right to cancel their contracts with Sinar Mas; apparently he would have done the same as well.

Speaking of Sinar Mas, that giant in Indonesia's agriculture sector and rampant destroyer of forests: the company has issued a press release (pdf) announcing it will commission its own independent investigation into our report. Call me cynical, but I don't think I'll be the only one questioning exactly how independent this investigation will be. To me, it sounds like a delaying tactic to draw attention away from the many laws Sinar Mas is currently violating.

We still need you to email or call Nestlé — they're no doubt waiting to hear from you.

 

The whales have left the ocean and are headed for the White House.

Yesterday, a group of D.C activists decided to give the whales a voice in the hopes that Obama might hear it. And where is the best place for Obama to hear some whale pleas? Why, his home of course. Which is why two whales and some petitioners hopped on the metro and headed directly to the White House.

It was swelteringly hot in those bulky whale suits but it was worth it because people can’t help but smile when they see two whales wandering the streets of downtown. Which is why they stopped and listened to what we had to say. Yes, Obama is set to support whaling and overturn the whaling moratorium. We got a lot of “Obama supporting whaling? I don’t believe it…”’s. Neither do we; that’s the point and that’s why we were out there trying to get the message out.

The United States delegation of the IWC (International Whaling Commission) is prepared to back the restart of legal commercial whaling in the Southern Ocean whale sanctuary. We should be trying to phase out whale slaughter, not legitimizing it. As a candidate, President Obama said, “As president, I will ensure that the U.S. provides leadership in enforcing international wildlife protection agreements, including strengthening the international moratorium on commercial whaling. Allowing Japan to continue commercial whaling is unacceptable.” (March 16, 2008 - Greenpeace candidate questionnaire).

As we were heading to metro, a man on the street shouted, “The whales are invading the system”. Yes they are, because if they don’t have the oceans where else can they go? So, if you see some whales in the street, stop and listen to their story. They need you to help them tell President Obama that overturning the commercial whaling ban could be devastating to whale populations and some may never recover.

Take Action. Give a shout out to the whales and tell Obama to save the whaling moratorium. They need all the help they can get.

Yes, today our beloved National's had a sold out season opener against the Phillies and it was the perfect day for a baseball game; 80 degrees, sunny, and a slight breeze. So of course a group of us had to take advantage of the beautiful day and spend it in the stadium. It was the 100th anniversary of a president throwing the first pitch and there was a giddy feeling radiating from the stands at the mere thought of seeing Obama.

Here's how our day went:

We met at the stadium at 7:30 am to sit in line surrounded by rowdy fans to get tickets. A couple of activists took a "break" where they proceeded to wrap our banner with a message to Obama around their legs to get it through security...just in case. Then, we waited...and waited...and waited. At 10:30 they started selling the five dollar tickets we had been waiting for. We got our tickets and headed up to our seats.

Obama was set to throw his opening pitch at 12:55 pm, ten minutes before the actual start of the game. This was our big chance for direct contact. We would hang the banner just as Obama was throwing his pitch so that he'd be on the field just as our "Obama Go to Bat for the Whales; Save the Moratorium" banner unfolded in front of thousands and thousands of people.

The time came for our plan to be put into action, and it went off without a hitch (despite some fan protests about having an obstructed view). Our bright yellow banner stood out in the sea of red and white and displayed our message proudly. Then it was time to sit back, relax, and enjoy some of America's favorite past time.

It may all seem like a good time, but it won't be for the whales if Obama doesn't take this seriously. The United States delegation of the IWC (International Whaling Commission) is prepared to support the legalization of commercial whaling in the Southern Ocean whale sanctuary. As a candidate, President Obama said, “As president, I will ensure that the U.S. provides leadership in enforcing international wildlife protection agreements, including strengthening the international moratorium on commercial whaling. Allowing Japan to continue commercial whaling is unacceptable.” (March 16, 2008 - Greenpeace candidate questionnaire). We should not be legitimizing whaling, we should be phasing it out!

We have made so much progress in conserving our whale populations, legalizing whaling would just be a step back. Yes, today was fun but that does not mean we don't take the issue of whaling seriously. Whale species need all the help they can get; whether it be from Greenpeace activists or baseball fans.

It's the 9th inning, two strikes, the whales are running out of time. Take action and tell Obama that he should be helping to save the whales, not whaling.

Our Climate Crime Unit is still hot on the trail of the world’s most wanted climate criminals: Charles and David Koch.

Today they responded to a climate emergency outside the David H. Koch Theater in NYC, but they were too late. A dead polar bear was foud on the scene.

You might recall that last year a number of polar bears were spotted in Washington, D.C. panhandling for less climate change, not spare change. Seems they were down on their luck because global warming is melting their Arctic home.

No word yet on the exact cause of death in today’s tragedy, but one thing is certain: The climate denial funded by Charles and David Koch is delaying action to stop global warming and usher in a clean energy economy, all but dooming more polar bears to a similar fate of homelessness and death thanks to runaway climate change.

David Koch spends a lot of money on fancy exhibits and theaters to whitewash his real legacy: From 2005 to 2008 alone, David and Charles Koch funneled some $25 million to a network of climate denial front groups.

You can read more about the Koch’s Web of Dirty Money and Influence at www.greenpeace.org/kochindustries. Our Climate Crime Unit was passing out Wanted posters for the Kochs today to help bring them to justice, and you can help too by following that link and using the tools provided to help spread the word.



You can also find links to our report, “Koch Industries: Secretly Funding the Climate Denial Machine,” which exposes the role of oil conglomerate Koch Industries and its owners Charles and David Koch in obstructing clean energy and climate policy by funding climate denial organizations, lobbying federal legislators directly, and spending buckets of cash through their PAC to support candidates for federal office. David and Charles – who tie for 9th richest man in America – are the two principal shareholders of Koch Industries, an oil supply and refining company that is one of the largest private corporations in the US.

Yesterday, we delivered a letter to David and Charles Koch seeking a response to some unanswered questions and offering an opportunity for the Koch brothers to explain their funding of organizations that distort climate science and oppose climate and clean energy policies.

“Given your interest in an “intellectually honest debate,” are you willing to participate in an open debate at the National Press Club on your role in funding climate denial organizations and think tanks?” asked Kert Davies, director of our PolluterWatch project, in the letter, which was delivered to David Koch’s Manhattan office.

We'll let you know how Koch responds.

The first major deadline of the Zero Deforestation Agreement signed by JBS/Bertin, Marfrig and Minerva — Brazil's largest slaughterhouses — has come and gone, and the companies all failed to meet their obligations under the agreement.

You might recall that we released the report “Slaughtering the Amazon,” last year to expose the links between cattle ranching in the Amazon region and deforestation. You might also remember that following the release of the report and the campaign we ran afterward, big supermarket chains such as Wal-Mart and Carrefour, as well as international shoe companies like Nike, Adidas, Clarks, Geox, and Timberland, made it clear to their suppliers — which of course are none other than Marfrig, Minerva, and JBS/Bertin (JBS and Bertin used to be separate, now they have merged) — that they would not purchase leather or meat from the Brazilian slaughterhouses unless the companies could prove they were not sourcing from newly deforested areas.

Smoke from manmade forest fires deliberately set to clear land for cattle and farming rises above the Amazon. ©Greenpeace/Daniel Beltrá

All of which resulted in the Zero Deforestation Agreement signed on October 5, 2009. (You can read more about the "Slaughtering the Amazon" report release and campaign right here on the GPUSA blog.)

The major slaughterhouses of Brazil showed insufficient progress to comply with the first step in the Zero Deforestation Agreement, which required the registration and mapping of all ranches supplying Amazon cattle directly to the slaughterhouses (these ranches are known as the "fattening farms"). This is especially important because without knowing which ranch supplies which slaughterhouse, and exactly what the boundaries are of each ranch, there is no way to determine who is responsible for newly deforested Amazon and hence which cattle to keep out of the supply chain.

Despite missing their deadline, each of the companies did make significant progress, and reaffirmed their commitment to stopping deforestation of the Amazon by cattle ranchers. All three slaughterhouses have asked for an extension of three more months to finish the job.

While these companies were dragging their feet, some 94,888 acres (38,400 hectares) of the Amazon were deforested, according to Imazon, a Brazilian NGO that independently monitors Amazon deforestation.

The folks at PolluterHarmony have done it again! They've made another successful love (of money) match!

The happy couple — Charles, a "secretive bilionaire," and Blanche, a US Senator with an environmental record that is "exactly what [he] was looking for" — have recorded a new testimonial video for PolluterHarmony:


How they find time for each other is a mystery to me, since Charles keeps such a busy schedule of obstructing clean energy and climate policy by funding climate denial organizations. But he also spends lots of money directly lobbying federal legislators like Blanche, and his PAC spends quite a bit to support candidates for federal office — again, like Blanche. So I guess they probably share a lot of $pecial moment$ after all.

Sure enough, since 2009 Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) has received $11,000 from Koch’s PAC, making her the top recipient of Koch PAC money in the US Senate during this election cycle. Senator Lincoln is also the top recipient of campaign contributions from the oil & gas industry, taking $255,650 during the 2009-2010 cycle.

All that extra special attention seems to have swept Senator Lincoln off her feet: Earlier this year she supported legislative efforts to protect big polluters like Charles’ Koch Industries by blocking the Environmental Protection Agency from using the Clean Air Act to address global warming pollution. That’s a sweetheart of a deal for Charles, since Koch Industries owns oil refineries in Texas, Alaska, and Minnesota.

If you want to share the love Charles and Blanche have found, go to www.greenpeace.org/KochIndustries and do so with the tools we’ve provided.

You can view Polluterharmony’s other success stories at PolluterHarmony.com, including a recent profile of the relationship between another major oil CEO, “Rex,” and his partner in offshore drilling, Governor "Bob McD."