TresSugar

Deforestation Costs Economy More Than the Financial Crisis

CitizenSugar — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:35:02 -0700

While the stock market's belly-dancer-gyrations (more of a limbo, "how low can you go?", really) seem significant - according to a study commissioned by the EU, the global economy actually loses more money through the disappearance of forests than through the financial ho-down. The study pegs the cost of the loss of forests between $2 and $5 trillion per year, while calculations put the financial mess at $1.5 trillion.

How did they arrive at that figure? By factoring in the value of the services forest perform, like providing clean water and absorbing carbon dioxide. According to their conclusions the cost sky rockets as nature stops providing the services it used to do for free. Mad, I suppose, at being hacked to pieces. That might do it. Without them the human economy has to replace them by building reservoirs, carbon capture facilities, and growing food that used to come . . . naturally. It's a cost that's also borne disproportionately by the poor.

The good news is that someone is doing this calculation at all - just a few years ago there was no connection between green trees and green backs. So while watching the Dow number flopping around is entertaining, while the markets are closed this weekend, I may just go plant a tree.

Source

Front Page: Annan in Kenya, the FDA, and Rainforests

CitizenSugar — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 07:05:20 -0800

Kofi Annan is in Kenya today, mediating talks between Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki and opposition leader, Raila Odinga. Mr. Annan's presence has already halted one planned protest. The face-to-face talks are hoped to calm the violent clashes between the two parties that have raged since a contested election last month. Recently, the opposition has claimed that the ruling party planned the violence as part of ethnic cleansing.
Studying suicide rates is now mandatory as part of medical trials, according to a recent announcement by the FDA. After evidence that antidepressants may cause psychiatric problems in children, combined with a growing number of new pills that may have psychiatric side effects, the FDA orders that this factor be tested before the drug is approved and given to millions. Dr. Sidney M. Wolfe, director of Public Citizen’s health research group said, “the list of drugs that causes psychiatric problems is a very long one.”
The Brazilian Government announced a troubling spike in the rate of Amazon deforestation. In the last half of 2007, Brazil lost 1,250 square miles of forest. Rising prices for crops like soy are thought to encourage farmers to level forests as a source of cheap land, regardless of environmental impact. Gilberto Camara of satellite imaging service INPE said, "We've never before detected such a high deforestation rate at this time of year."

Eco Debt: Humans Use 30% More Resources Than Sustainable

CitizenSugar — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 12:15:13 -0700

Looks like we've been putting our purchases of "fresh air" and "clean water" on our credit cards lately, and a nasty bill just arrived. The WWF just released a Living Planet report showing that humans are using 30 percent more resources than the planet can sustain and replenish every year.

The interest rate on living beyond our ecological means is huge. Huge. At the current rate of consumption, we're going to need a second planet by 2030. A second planet. Any ideas on where to get a nice used planet that will sustain human life real cheap? Yeah, me either.

The dividends on gobbling up our natural resources are deforestation, unhealthy soils, crappy air and water, and steep declines in the number of fish and other species. Our boundless population growth is outstripping technology's advances to expand natural production. To see what kind of response the report is advocating, read more.

While we've been worrying understandably about our pocket books, the current cost of our environmental shortfalls not only overshadow the cost of the financial crisis, it's going to require as big and immediate a response. According to the study's authors politicians"now need to turn their collective action to a far more pressing concern and that's the survival of all life on planet Earth."

Does this convince you an environmental bailout is needed?

Source

Terrible Odds? One of Every Four Mammals Faces Extinction

CitizenSugar — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 07:55:43 -0700

According a report to be published on Friday in the journal Science, researchers have discovered startling odds on the chances of survival for the world's mammals: 1-in-4. Yikes. Um, aren't humans mammals too. . . ?

The researchers say of the findings, ''We estimate that one in four species is threatened with extinction and that the population of one in two is declining." Did you catch that one? Fifty percent are declining, and the scientists aren't letting us off the hook: ''Within our lifetime hundreds of species could be lost as a result of our own actions, a frightening sign of what is happening to the ecosystems where they live. We must now set clear targets for the future to reverse this trend to ensure that our enduring legacy is not to wipe out many of our closest relatives.''

To see which mammals are threatened most, read more.

The study was done by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, made up of over 1,000 organizations. This particular study involved 1,700 scientists and spanned five years. With the report, was a "red list," containing 44,838 species in total, 16,928 of which are threatened with extinction. Larger mammals are more threatened than smaller ones as they have a lower population density and require more habitat - the exact ecosystems the researchers point - with problems ranging from deforestation to climate change.

There's a tiny silver lining: five percent of currently threatened mammals are showing signs of recovery. Given controversial plans to move species to save them, and scientists predicting that humans themselves need to prepare for extinction, is this study just another environmental scare that can be explained by the cycle of life? Or are we looking at being faced with the choice: bunny, pony, kitten, puppy - which one are you willing to write off?

View 10 Photos ›

Source

Picture It: The Polytheistic Kalash Tribe of Pakistan

CitizenSugar — Tue, 20 May 2008 03:00:13 -0700

When I ran across these jaw-droppingly striking pictures, I couldn't believe I'd never heard of the Kalash Tribe - and I wanted to rectify that immediately. The tribe lives nestled in the North-Western Province of Pakistan. Protected by the Hindu Kush mountain range lives this culture of people Muslims call Kafirs or “infidels”.

Among the region known as Kafiristan lies the town of Brir, considered one of the last remaining settlements of the Kalash - or “wearers of black." Its inhabitants consider themselves the direct descendants of Alexander the Great. The 3,500 souls are the last enclave of pagan tribespeople.

View 10 Photos ›

Incredibly, the Kalash have not changed much over the centuries. They make their own wine, elevate animals to religious status and believe in mountaintop fairies. To find out more about the tribe, read more.

Their gods, like those of the ancient Greeks, are split up into male and female deities and they claim they once belonged to highly literate culture until their books were burned by barbarian tribes. Shown in these pictures celebrating their annual Spring festival, the Kalash still maintain a fertility rite where a teenage boy is sent alone into the surrounding woods for a year and when he returns is treated to a feast and the mating rites to as many of the Kalash women he chooses.

They struggle to preserve their identity from encroaching Islamic rule, deforestation, and entrepreneurs who take advantage of their simple natures - as well as the assault of the Justin Timberlake/cell phone/jeans avalanche of the modern world. Here's to hoping they resist - I'm so taken with the fact that real diversity still exists in our ever-shrinking world.

Have you heard of the Kalash? Have you ever seen such beautiful pictures? Is it possible to maintain an untouched culture in our modern age?

Source

Eco Paradox: Clean Air Bad for Rain Forest?

LibertySugar — Thu, 08 May 2008 00:00:52 -0700

A new study claims that clean air may actually be worsening the drought in the Amazon rainforest - a region whose well being impacts the entire world's climate.

The scientists found that sun-reflective sulfate aerosols, released by coal-burning power plants, bounce light back to the sun, preventing it from hitting the Earth. Add a bunch of scientific mumbo-jumbo, and eventually the buffering impact of a concentrated amount of sulfates from the 1970s and 80s led to more rain in the Amazon. But now, the reduction in pollution, and thus rain, is one more factor leading to the loss of vegetation in the region.

So does this mean you should break out the Aqua Net hairspray? Not at all. The scientists do not recommend increasing the output of dangerous pollutants, and in fact say it is necessary to continue the decrease. In addition, the study urges more action, such as halting deforestation, in order to decrease carbon dioxide emissions.

Does this study surprise you? Are scientists just starting to figure out how Mother Nature and human activity impact the earth? Does this story make you apathetic? Confused? Or inspired to heed the scientists' recommendations that we keep reducing pollution?
Source