Kyo-Ya’s Castle in the Sand

From Marti:

KAHEA joined a coalition of environmental, conservation, and ocean user groups in appealing the decision of the Honolulu Department of Planning and Permitting to allow Kyo-Ya, the owner of the Moana Surfrider Hotel, to build a massive luxury hotel on the beach at Waikiki.

Kyo-ya proposes to knock down the 8-story building (that should not be built there) and build a new huge 26-story, surfboard-shaped, luxury hotel and condo structure right next to the historic Moana Banyan Tree Court and the Kuhio Beach Park (the only public park on Waikiki beach).

Such a proposal is not allowed by the many laws passed over the years to protect Oahu’s shorelines, especially Waikiki Beach.  Despite these protections, the City approved Kyo-ya’s proposal.

Allowing this construction project is such a bad idea, in so many ways:
– it will increase the pressure to use this beach while undermining the overall experience of the beach;
– it will mean a taller skyline and even more seawalls;
– it will make suffering sea level rise that much more painful;
– it will create housing for the absurdly wealthy while adding to the construction waste landfilled in Native Hawaiian communities;
– it won’t create any longterm jobs, but it will make it even harder to fish, dive, and surf in this area; and
– it will weaken the overall efficacy of the laws we established to protect our best interests because the City felt like exempting the hotel from the no-build zone on Waikiki.

That’s why we are appealing the decision to the Zoning Board of Appeals.

Learn more about this issue:

“Coalition fights to keep Waikiki developer Kyo-Ya from bending the rules,” The Hawaii Independent, Jan. 6, 2011.

Appeal filed to the Zoning Board of Appeals, Dec. 28, 2010.

The Surfrider Foundation

Read Full Post »

We Wish You a Greeny Christmas

Have a greener holiday party this year, and no, I’m not talking about your Christmas tree.

Sustainableparty.com has come up with a guide to direct the common person on having sustainable and environmentally friendly parties.

The guides covers issues that include: Community, Resource Conservation, Food, Transportation Materials and Waste Management. Even if you only practice one of their recommendations this year, you will feel better about this wasteful (sometimes even frivolous) season.

Please click on the following link to view these easy and practical ways to reduce your holiday impact:

Sustainable Party Best Practices

Read Full Post »

IMPORTED FUEL TO BE REPLACED… by more imported fuel?!?

From Melissa:

Hawaiian Electric Company (HECO) was denied approval by the state Public Utilities Commission (PUC) of it’s Amended Biofuel Contract with Imperium Renewables on August 5, 2009. The amended contract would have Imperium import biodiesel from a West Coast refinery to power HECO’s new 110-megawatt generating plant, instead of a refinery built by Imperium.

Costs brought on by this amended contract would have shifted costs from Imperium to HECO’s customers, as it would have to import the fuel from the West Coast of the Continental US. The PUC ruled,

“…the Amended Contract limits Imperium’s potential liability for failure to perform, but HECO failed to provide credible evidence that such a provision, which substantially shifted risk from Imperium to HECO and its ratepayers, was necessary.” Given the substantial amendments to the Original Contract, which were not subject to a competitive bidding process (or some other process that would provide the commission with some assurance that the amended terms are reasonable), the commission finds that HECO failed to demonstrate that the Amended Contract is in the public interest…”

Although this is a win for HECO’s ratepayers, they must also ask themselves if biofuel is right for Hawaii. As stated in the testimony of Henry Curtis, Executive Director of Life of the Land, against the Amended Biofuel Contact,

Life of the Land’s position (on HECO’s application requesting the Public Utilities Commission’s of the State of Hawaii’s approval to commit funds estimated at $134,310,260 for the purchase and installation of the Campbell Industrial Park Generating Station and Transmission Additions Project) was that biofuels negatively impact climate change in a number of ways: producing ethanol and biodiesel requires the use of large amounts of fossil fuels, water, and land. Hawai`i is parceling off its agricultural land and where we would get the water remains a huge issue. Will Hawai`i ever be able to grow enough biofuel to satisfy our needs? Life of the Land doubts it. After one hundred plus years of plantation-style monocropping, is this what we really want to do? Growing biofuels is not about small farmers, it is about big agribusinesses and corporate farming. How will this help Hawai`i’s struggling family farms? Should Hawai`i be using our precious agricultural lands to grow energy crops or food? Since Hawai`i imports 90% of our food, wouldn’t promoting food security and feeding our people be a more prudent use of these lands? Biofuel production competes with food products for resources. In the US, corn that could be used to feed people and animals is siphoned off for fuel. In Brazil ethanol production displaces other crops which are then grown in newly decimated Amazon rain forests. The most productive source of biodiesel is palm oil. Most of the world’s biodiesel is grown in Indonesia and Malaysia on recently destroyed rain forests. … Indonesia ranks third in the world in greenhouse gas emissions from the carbon emitted by burning forests and peat soils to make room for mono-cropped palm oil plantations. In essence, we are substituting the greatest source of global warming – the burning of fossil fuels – for the second greatest contributor – deforestation. …

Also provided in the testimony of Henry Curtis, Dr. Tadeus Patzek, Chairman of the Petroleum & Geosystems Engineering Department at the University of Texas at Austin, states:

Now I am predicting the diverse negative consequences of intensive biofuel use in Hawaii and dare the defenders of the Hawaiian Electric Company (HECO’s) decision to burn palm oil from Malaysia in an electrical power plant on Oahu to laugh at me. What seems to be at stake here is a tragically misguided decision by HECO to secure a new source of fossil fuel for its electrical power station. Their thinking seems to be that as long as the new fuel is not crude oil, somehow its flow will increase the strategic security of energy supply of Oahu. This type of linear, unimaginative thinking is characteristic of large bureaucracies under pressure to come up with a quick fix of a perceived problem.

Are monocropped agrofuels the fix to our dependence on petroleum, or should be be looking other places such as renewable energy systems? As HECO moves to solicit bids for alternative biofuel suppliers, that question should be in the back of everyones mind.

Read Full Post »

Leeward Air Quality- IN COLOR!

From Melissa:

Air quality monitoring stations in Lualualei, Timberline and Waianae offer daily measurements of Sulfur Dioxide, Ozone, Carbon Monoxide and Particulates in the surrounding areas on an easy-to-use website. The color-coding system on the website is aesthetically pleasing and shows the condition of each pollutant for that day.

A small disclaimer notes:

The data on this web site are preliminary and await review and validation by qualified staff. The data may be revised or invalidated after review. Every effort is made to assert the validity and integrity of the real-time data displayed on this web site, but data can be affected by equipment malfunctions, technical difficulties and other unforeseen circumstances.

So check your air quality, but question the data as well.

The website is user-friendly and answers basic questions about their system.

West Oahu Air Quality Monitoring website

Read Full Post »

Hawaii’s Renewable Portfolio Standards: Aggressive But in Need of Qualification

From:  Andrea

Just last month, Act 155 was passed in the Hawaii Legislature, amending Hawaii’s renewable energy law.

One of the highlights of this amendment was the strengthening of Hawaii’s Renewable Portfolio Standards (often abbreviated as RPS).  These standards are binding for electric utility companies, which must satisfy the specified percentage of their net electricity sales with electricity generated from renewable energy sources by the specified date.

Now, Hawaii’s Renewable Portfolio Standards are as follows:  10% by 2010; 15% by 2015; 25% by 2020; and 40% by 2030.  The two standards that Act 155 changed are the two later dates:  the 2020 standard was increased by 5%, and the 2030 standard was a new addition.

This strengthening of Hawaii’s Renewable Portfolio Standards was a wise move by the Hawaii Legislature.  Hawaii should be a predominant leader in the renewable energy realm, considering that it is the most oil dependent state with over 90% of its energy needs met by imported fossil fuels– a doubly detrimental impact with carbon footprints from long-distance importation and burning.  The context of climate change and sea-level rise heighten Hawaii’s energy vulnerability.

Yet, Hawaii is also ideally situated to move the ball forward with renewable energy due to the high availability of solar, wind, wave, and tidal energy.  Thus, the Legislature’s addition of the long-term standard, 40% renewable-created electricity by 2030, is in line with Hawaii’s position of great need, vulnerability, and opportunism.

However, the short-term standard could be a bit more aggressive.  Although a five-percent increase to 25% by 2020 is an improvement, a few other states have more stringent short-term standards.  For example, California is requiring 20% renewable-created electricity by 2010– double Hawaii’s 2010 standard.  And, Maine has a 2017 standard of 40%, Hawaii’s standard for 13 years later, while New York has a 2013 standard of 24%– 9% greater than Hawaii’s 2015 standard.

Regardless of the precise standards, the definition of “renewable energy” sources must be amended.  While creating more stringent standards in the short-term is ideal, amending the definition of “renewable energy” to only encompass those sources that are truly clean is a must.

As it stands now, the definition of “renewable energy” does not contain any qualifications.  For example, it includes “biofuels.”  Such an unqualified authorization allows utility companies to meet the standard with, say, palm oil, which fits the broad definition of “biofuels.”

What’s the problem with palm oil qualifying as a renewable energy source?  This “biofuel” implicates a significant carbon footprint due to carbon-emitting land change.  After the deforestation, heavy fertilization, and peatland burning required to produce the palm oil, the production of this “biofuel” actually contributes more to global warming, opposed to ameliorating the crisis.

Renewable energy sources and, thus, renewable portfolio standards for utility companies should authorize only clean renewable sources in life-cycle terms.  Renewability should be just one requisite for clean energy sources; the holistic footprint, including emissions, land change, and other environmental impacts, also must be taken into account.

Otherwise, we may simply displace the impact to another medium.  Without amending the law to reflect this crucial qualification, the renewable portfolio standards may end up perpetuating the very problem that they are intended to improve.

Want Hawaii to lead a meaningful renewable energy transition?

Contact your representatives in the State Legislature and voice your opinion!

Here’s contact information for our House representatives:

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/site1/house/members/members.asp

And, here’s contact information for Senate members:

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/site1/senate/members/members.asp

Read Full Post »

A Sea Change–film on ocean acidification

From Alana:

On Thursday night, a film entitled A Sea Change, was shown at the Bishop Museum. It addressed the much ignored by-product of climate change, ocean acidification. Ocean acidification is, arguably, the most dire consequence of adding ridiculous amounts of carbon dioxide to the air. 

For years, the ocean has been absorbing extra CO2 from the air, a total of 118 billion metric tons of it. Adding 22 billion pounds of CO2 to the ocean each day is severely changing the chemistry of the water. But what is wrong with the pH of the ocean lowering by .1, or .01, or even .001? It may not seem like much to us, but any change affects what all life depends on most: the creatures at the bottom of the ocean food chain, namely pteropods. Pteropods are moth-like, transparent creatures, that seem to fly in the deep ocean. They are the food for a myriad of creatures, which in turn are the food source for hundreds of other creatures, that humans then feed on. Increased amounts of CO2, though, are causing the pteropods’ calciferous shells to disintegrate. This threatens the entire food chain.

Scientists have underestimated the magnitude and haste of climate change. They  assert that we are past the point where we can stop the extinctions that will come with the disappearance of pteropods and coral. This situation is so extreme that within a few centuries humans could be all but extinct as well. As one scientist simply exclaims, “we’re screwed”.

 The thing that disgusts me most about all of this, though, is that we could have solved it by now. It would only cost TWO PERCENT  of our GDP to solve the energy crisis. It can be argued that 2% of GDP is a lot of money, but I think it might be a good asking price for ensuring the continuation of our survival as a species, and the survival of the animals we depend on. To put this in perspective, enough photovoltaic cells could have been built to power the entire United States with only $420 billion–HALF of the Iraq war budget.

A big hurdle that the public has to face is simply realizing how much we rely on the ocean, and that it is in fact possible for us to change something that big. Most people accept the fact that the ice is melting, but continually deny that life is endangered because of human activity. One woman in the film says,

“We are a very visual species. What is below water is invisible to us. What we can’t see, we pollute… because it doesn’t exist to us.”

So what can we do about this? The main thing to do is just analyze your lifestyle and make sure that what you do doesn’t add to this serious problem. Venture capitalists have the choice of going down the alley of exploitation as easily as the alley of sustainability. The government owes it to everyone to do something about this. This type of problem will threaten national security, the world food supply, etc, so when is anyone going to do something about this in terms of strong legislation– or creating an actual plan of action?? Depending on your age, you may not see the effects, but it is real. It is not going away. I know that there will not only be a sea change in my lifetime, but a world of change.

Read Full Post »

Natural Rights: Not Ours, But Nature’s

From:  Andrea

Most people are familiar with our inalienable natural rights, as John Locke summed up as life, liberty, and property.  But what about nature’s right to exist, flourish, and naturally evolve?

These are the inalienable legal rights that the town of Shapleigh, Maine, voted to grant to nature last February.  Now, in the town of Shapleigh, population 2,326, natural communities and ecosystems are endowed with these inalienable, fundamental rights, and any town resident has “standing” to bring a lawsuit on behalf of natural communities and ecoystems.

Read the Boston Globe article here:

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2009/07/19/should_nature_be_able_to_take_you_to_court/?page=1

Shapleigh is on the right track.  While critics may argue there are too many potential litigants, ranging from the Kukui tree to the Waimea River, there exists an entire planet of species and ecosystems deserving of the right to exist.  And, sadly, counts of these potential litigants are diminishing.  See:

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N01296862.htm

The above article, published July 2, reports that more than 800 animal and plant species have gone extinct in the last five-hundred years, with almost 17,000 threatened with extinction now, according to a recent International Union for Conservation of Nature report.  The track record shows that we are failing at conservation.  Endowing nature with the right to exist may bolster our efforts at conserving biodiversity.

Apparent in many facets of our social structure, we have consistently valued profit above nature.  After all, corporations have long had the legal status of a “person” and the corresponding rights, including ability to sue.  If corporations are “persons” in the sense of legal status and rights, then what is the problem with nature possessing rights to exist?  Nature is fundamental to our own existence, quite unlike corporations.

We are behind the time in recognizing nature’s rights.  Notwithstanding the dire situation of lost biodiversity, concepts of an ethical relationship with nature have been around for at least 100 years.  Aldo Leopold, an early environmentalist, wrote about his “land ethic” in A Sand County Almanac.  Based on the idea that ethics should be expanded to encompass nonhuman members of the biotic community, Leopold summed up his land ethic as follows:  “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community.  It is wrong when it tends otherwise.”  If we humans were on board with this profoundly simple land ethic- and had been during our last couple hundred years of pillaging-, then perhaps we would not be in the situation of having to pass town ordinances to grant nature the right to exist.

But, alas, so is human nature.  Our attempts at control have led us to a precarious precipice:  here, at the edge of continuing to diminish biodiversity, we have a choice.  The town of Shapleigh recognized this watershed moment and stepped in the direction of preservation.

If my town votes for a similar ordinance, you bet I’ll holler aye.  And, when critics question, “how do we know what nature wants?” and argue that the interest is actually ours, I’ll have my response.

Sure, we humans may be the ones instituting this groundbreaking regime of granting legal rights to biota.  But in reality, the idea of humans bringing these suits on behalf of nature is not so far-fetched.  After all, people serve as trustees to bring suits on behalf of incompetent people and trust beneficiaries.  Human implementation of nature’s rights is requisite:  the law is our system, and our impacts and attempts to control ecosystems thus far have led to the gross loss in biodiversity.

Humans- but not corporations- are a part of the planetary ecosystem.  We are not the operators behind an enormous control panel, like we have long been masquerading.  As a single species, we should make room in our legal and socioeconomic structures for the other species to survive, lest we deprive them all of their right to exist.

We should be celebrating and wholeheartedly codifying nature’s right to exist, flourish, and naturally evolve.  Without nature, without Earth, homo sapiens would not exist.

Ho’okahi No Ka ‘Aina A Me Na Kanaka.

Read Full Post »

Shrug it off or contemplate security on the ground level?

From:  Andrea

The article says Hawaiians are shrugging off the North Korean missile threat.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/us/23hawaii.html?ref=americas

After all, Hawaiians are accustomed to the various threats and dangers of inhabiting the Planet’s most isolated archipelago. We are out here far from quick and convenient aid from the mainland.

But, perhaps, this threat should be an opportunity to reconsider how secure and independent Hawaii truly is, out here in the middle of the Pacific.  While it may not be time to start worrying about missiles and the universe of possible terroristic threats, which may be unstoppable on a community level, the time is ripe to consider security the people of Hawaii can control.

For instance, food security is something as tangible as dirt in your hands and food in your belly.  Obvious to everyone who buys groceries around here, a huge amount of food sold in stores is imported, reflected by the price.  The exact percentage of imported food may be debatable, but the need for more food production here in Hawaii is undebatable.

What’s an easy way to improve food security here in Hawaii?  Support local farmers markets!  For instance:

Kapiolani Community College Farmers Market

4303 Diamond Head Road
Honolulu, HI 96805

Saturdays, 7:30 a.m. – 11 a.m.

For more info, see:

http://www.yelp.com/redir?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hfbf.org%2FFarmersMarketKCC.html&src_bizid=C8YdYCAIXm0YhevbXuDqzA

Read Full Post »

All Talk, No Action

From  Andrea:

I attended the Reserve Advisory Council meetings on the Draft Science Plan for Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument last Tuesday and Wednesday.  After two full days of meetings, I left thinking the whole process was, in the words of Shakespeare, “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

The Reserve Advisory Council is a citizen advisory body with the important responsibility of providing advice and recommendations to the co-trustees (via NOAA’s representation) on management of our beloved Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument.  The Draft Science Plan discussed at this meeting prioritizes research activities, meaning this plan determines what access and activities will be allowed for research within the protected Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. What access and activities are allowed within the Monument determines, ultimately, what on-the-ground level of conservation the Monument will be afforded.

These two long days of meetings, full of heated debates and hammering out precise language for this important Science Plan, led to…well, nothing!  The Reserve Advisory Council (RAC) did not even have the necessary quorom- that is, minimum number of members necessary to make decisions and carry out their function, leading me to wonder why everyone spent two long, full days for all talk, no action.

I was particularly frustrated that the RAC went through all the motions but in the end lacked quorom because I have issues with the draft Science Plan.  Under the Plan’s prioritization system of permits, most potential activities for permitting were ranked as “critical” or “high” priority.  Can you call it “prioritized,” if everything is deemed important? Such a high proportion of activities deemed to be “critical” and “high” priority implicates a high proportion of permitted activities in the Monument, which was originally established under a guideline of no access unless permitted.  Clearly, the prioritization system needs some refining to serve the purpose of the Monument.

I am afraid to report that, as the draft Science Plan stands now, access into this protected Monument via the permitting system will not be much of a hurdle.  Just as one example, the Science Plan’s risk analysis section asks “what is the harm of NOT conducting the research,”  without ever asking “what is the harm” of conducting it.  How can you assess whether a proposed research project is worth the risk it poses to the environment, if you never ask the question?

Clearly, the Science Plan needs a lot more work.  Unfortunately, who knows when the RAC will have the necessary attendance to decide on revisions to the Science Plan.  I guess the system for determining which permits are granted in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands will have to be put on hold until enough RAC members decide to fulfill their duty of attending RAC meetings.  Otherwise, the plan may be adopted without genuine oversight and input from the “citizen’s” advisory group.

Read Full Post »

April’s Action Alert Line-Up

Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.

Aloha mai Kakou! Spring is here, which means the rains will be coming to an end soon and so will the 2009 Legislative Session.  In these last heated weeks of the session, the public will get one last chance to be heard on the proposals affecting our environment and culture.  At the same time, it is important not to ignore key decisions affecting our public trust resources that are being made outside the Capitol. To help you keep track of it all, here are four pressing issues to take action on right now and help protect the things we all love about Hawaii nei. 1. Defend the NAR Fund… because Conservation Can’t Wait! On Monday, the State Ways & Means Committee will consider a measure to take money away from the Natural Area Reserve Fund in order to balance the state budget.  For the last ten years, this fund has provided for the conservation programs that have successfully protected our native forests, supported important watersheds, and controlled invasive species – not to mention provide affordable housing and encourage local agriculture. Cutting this fund now will short-change our children by denying them the benefit of clean water, climate change control, and healthy native ecosystems.  Plus, we all know it is simply unnecessary because the state could generate at least $50 million a year from the foreign telescopes that currently use state land on Mauna Kea for free!  If the state just renegotiated those leases to be fair (and legal), then Hawaii could weather this economic crisis without cutting programs (or jobs). Take action now!  Tell Hawaii’s Senators: Don’t Raid, Make the Telescopes Pay. http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2699/t/3040/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=779 2. Struggle to Defend Mauna Kea Culminates This Week! This is it.  All of the hardwork to protect Mauna Kea from the pressure to build ever-larger telescopes will culminate in two hearings this week: — On Monday, in Honolulu, the State Ways & Means Committee will decide whether to pass HB 1174 to transfer authority for Mauna Kea to the University. — On Thursday, in Hilo, the State Board of Land and Natural Resources will decide whether to adopt the University’s latest development plan for the summit. Though the University continues to claim it now can properly manage the summit, the details of their plan reveal this is just the same old scam to consolidate its control over the public’s sacred summit. The University’s latest’s scheme does nothing to protect Mauna Kea’s unique and endangered alpine habitat, uphold continued cultural and religious practices on this sacred summit, or control telescope development. Add your voice to the thousands who have already spoken up in support of genuine protections for the sacred summit of Mauna Kea – just click here. http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2699/t/5675/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26592 Attend the Public Hearing in Hilo on April 8th and 9th at the Hilo Hawaiian Hotel (71 Banyan Drive, 96720) at 9:00 am in the Moku Ola Ballroom. 3. Industrial Aquaculture Invades the Kohala Coast Huge, untethered, self-powered, underwater spheres crammed with thousands of fish floating off our coast.  Yikes! Sounds like a science fiction B-film, but this is exactly what is being proposed for the Kohala coast of Hawaii Island. Hawaiian Oceanic Technology, Inc. is applying for a permit to create a new massive tuna ocean fish farm. They want to use 247 acres of our ocean to house 12 orb-like cages so they can grow tuna and export it out of Hawaii.  Their draft EIS does not answer the basic questions everyone is asking: – How much waste will be created and how will it affect the marine environment? – Can the cages withstand major storms?  What if one wanders away – since the cages are not tied down and are only one mile from the humpback whale sanctuary? – What about the sharks attracted to the caged fish? Other farms just kill them.  Is that how to treat our aumakua (diety)? Our ocean is a public trust resource and the public deserves to know what is going to happen to it before this project causes any harm.  Click here to ask Hawaiian Oceanic Technology and the approving agencies to address the public’s concerns and questions before using our waters for a project that could hurt our ocean and the wildlife in it. http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2699/t/3040/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=780 4. Uphold Your Right to Go Beach – Support the Public Access Rights Bill Even though the public’s right to access the shoreline is protected by law, the lack of enforcement has created a de facto barrier on public beach access.  S.B. 1088 is a simple bill that would help improve enforcement of beach access… if only it could get a hearing in the House Judiciary Committee. Click here to urge Rep. Karamatsu to hear S.B 1088 regarding public access. http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2699/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26529 If you have a few minutes, give Rep. Karamatsu a polite phone call at 808-586-8490. Mahalo Pumehana, Us Guys at KAHEA: The Hawaiian-Environmental Alliance www.kahea.org blog.kahea.org phone: 808-524-8220

Sacred Lake Waiau in the Natural Area Reserve at the summit of Mauna Kea. KAHEA: the Hawaiian-Environmental Alliance is a network of thousands of diverse individuals islands-wide and around the world. Together, we work to secure the strongest possible protections for Hawaii’s most ecologically unique and culturally sacred places and resources. Office Address: 1149 Bethel St., #415 Honolulu, HI 96813 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 37368 Honolulu, HI 96837 Phone: 808-524-8220 www.KAHEA.org KAHEA is funded grassroots-style, and does not receive any Federal or corporate money. It is the financial support of many INDIVIDUALS, all giving what they can, that keeps the lights on and the campaigns going here at KAHEA.

Read Full Post »

Sea Level Rise May Flood Out 1-in-10 People on Planet?

Think there are implications for Hawaii, folks?

About 600 million people, or nearly 10 percent of the world’s population, live in low-lying areas at risk of flooding as sea levels rise due to climate change, according to research presented today at the International Scientific Congress on Climate Change in Copenhagen.

This means that if emissions of greenhouse gases are not reduced quickly and substantially, even in the best case scenario rising seas may inundate low lying coastal areas housing about one in every 10 people on the planet.

Full report-back from Coppenhagen by ENS here: http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/mar2009/2009-03-10-03.asp

Read Full Post »

killing the canary

From Marti:

I was listening to this on the radio, and the topic of climate change and ocean resources got me thinking.

Effects being felt by islands in the Pacific are often mentioned in the discussion about the health of our oceans as “early indicators” of the affects of climate change. Bleaching and disease in fragile coral reefs supporting marine ecosystems caused by temperture changes. Sea level rise forcing relocations of island residents. Ocean acidification with unknown consequences. Climate change leaves these islands less able to fend off effects of catastrophic storm events by degrading protective reefs. They decimate an important ocean food resources, depriving islands of their ability to maintain food independence.

Instead of clamoring to make change, and make restitution to these people and places, the continents are instead holding up Pacific islands as”canaries in the mine shaft”–harbingers of things to come for other presumably more important places like the continental U.S. or Europe.

The widely publicized NCEAS map of human impacts to the world’s oceans splits the entire Pacific region, and Hawai`i is not shown at all. (To their credit, Hawaii is there–and can be viewed in the KML version of the map, viewable in GoogleEarth.)

As a lifelong resident of one of these “canaries,” I am extremely concerned that the rapid rise in sea level and sea temperature will mean the loss of our islands – our homes, our communities and our way of life. It is likely, if not inevitable, that the hundreds of unique indigenous cultures in the Pacific–which have existed and developed over millenia–will not be able to adapt to catastrophic environmental changes occuring over the space of 50 to 100 years.

What is most frustrating is these catastrophic changes are the product of unsustainable lifestyels and practices of industrialized nations like the U.S. and Europe, not the Pacific, where the impact isbeing the most directly experienced. This occurs in the context of the well-documented legacy of post-contact 19th and 20th century Pacific imperialsm–in which world powers fought for ownership and dominance of Pacific Islands with little or no concern for the people of these places. The effects of this legacy are still keenly felt throughout Oceania.

From the Ministerial Conference on Environment and Development in Asia and the Pacific 2000:

• In 1994, elevated sea temperatures killed over 90% of the living corals of American Samoa from the intertidal zone to a depth of 10 meters and fishing catches declined drastically in the wake of the coral death.
• Climate Change will shift rainfall patterns causing prolonged droughts in some regions. Each El Niño event has resulted in water shortages and drought in Papua New Guinea, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, American Samoa, Samoa, Tonga, Kiribati and Fiji. More frequent El Niño events also bring an increased risk of tropical cyclones, particularly for Tuvalu, Samoa, Tonga, Cook Islands and French Polynesia.
• The potential socio-economic impacts of climate change on the smaller Pacific island countries were estimated in a series of vulnerability studies. Depending on the worst case scenario (one metre sea level rise), the studies suggest that sea level rise will have negative impacts on tourism, freshwater availability and quality, aquaculture, agriculture, human settlements, financial services and human health. Storm surges are likely to have a harmful impact on low-lying islands.

Their report concludes:

“The options for the Pacific islands, other than continuing to berate the industrial nations on their lack of concerted action, include migration, foreshore stablilisation, resettlement and decentralisation to adapt to the impacts of climate and sea-level changes.”

While global climate change is indeed, a global problem, it is a problem with consequences unequally shared.

Add your voice! Friends of the Earth has launched a Climate Equity Campaign, urging action to assist those most impacted by climate change. Check it out here.

Read Full Post »

got footage?

From Erin Kiley, NRDC Films:

NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council) is starting production and development on a 10-minute movie about ocean acidification, a largely unknown yet equally serious consequence of fossil fuel emissions.  We will produce this short film to introduce the problem of ocean acidification, discuss its consequences, and link the issue with policy solutions for both climate change and improving ocean health.

We’re currently seeking footage that will help us illustrate the chemical phenomenon of ocean acidification, as well as beautiful underwater footage of the organisms and ecosystems at risk.  ] We will gladly credit you or your organization for any footage provided and share copies of the film upon its completion.  We’re also happy to pay for tape and lab costs of outputting materials where necessary.

Footage in High Definition is even better than Standard Definition, but we happily and gratefully accept anything you have to offer.  Feel free to contact ekiley [at] nrdc.org.

Read Full Post »

Are they hoping nobody would notice?

From Marti:

Late in the day on December 23rd, the final version of the Monument management plan was quietly published on the Papahānaumokuākea website.  No press release. No email to the list serv.  Just a quick post on the eve of the Eve of Christmas, which just happened to get picked up in a google alert days later.

Given all the eco-mojo the Bush Administration has tried to squish out of this “blue asterisk,” you would expect a mighty deal be made of finally finishing the management plan two years later.  The fact that the release was so secretive has gotta make you wonder what’s actually in it.

On their website, James Connaugton, chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality is quoted as saying:

“When President Bush first designated the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument in June 2006, his goal was to move beyond just thinking about conservation to carefully managing this important area.”

Yikes! What does the federal government mean exactly when it says “move beyond” conservation?

Well, from what we see in the plan it means:

• no limit on military activities affecting Monument resources (not even a discussion of what it would take to abide by the proclamation and “minimize and mitigate” half-pound pieces of fiery shrapnel hitting Nihoa).
• no ban on bioprospecting, which is the taking of public trust resources for exploitation and profit by corporations, academic institutions, and private individuals.
• no limit on the number of people that can access and/or take from this “no take” reserve.
• no assessment of the cumulative risks and impacts of past and anticipated human activity in the Monument.
• no public advisory council, which has been key in forcing transparent & accountable decisionmaking.

Over 50% of the proposed 355 million-dollar budget is for government operations and research, while a mere 12% goes to reducing existing threats, like clean-up of marine debris and legacy military contamination. The plan also fails to allocate sufficient resources for Native Hawaiian involvement in Monument decision-making, and leaves decision-making to a closed-door Monument Management Board.

The plan essentially abandons the “precautionary principle,” which was a hallmark of the State’s visionary pre-monument protections that required biological, cultural and historic resource integrity be favored when the impacts of any proposed activity were uncertain.

So while the revised vision, mission, and goals now commit to conservation as the purpose of the Monument, you can see that the actions to implement this plan remain largely unimproved over the weak draft released earlier this Spring.

When the draft version of this plan was released, the National Wildlife Federation, the Center for Biological Diversity and more than a dozen other organizations–representing well over 5 million people–joined KAHEA in strongly criticizing the management plan.  Despite two years of advocacy, and thousands of public letters and comments calling for a stronger, more protective plan, it is apparent that our united call for a true pu‘uhonua didn’t fit with the federal government’s vision for the future of “conservation” in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands.

So, here’s our take – a quote for the papers  – on the federal government’s attempt to “move beyond” conservation:

“This is conservation on paper, but not in practice. They have reshuffled the goals to say ‘full conservation’ but their proposed actions speak louder than their words. They are exempting increased military exercises proposed for this extremely delicate ocean habitat from management. They are proposing increased tourism, new construction, and extractive research without adequate public oversight and Native Hawaiian consultation,” said Marti Townsend, Program Director of KAHEA: The Hawaiian-Environmental Alliance.

To learn more about this issue, including a detailed review of the draft plan, visit our website at: www.kahea.org

Read Full Post »

Hawaii Blue Line Project Rally at Stadium Park

from Marion Ano, KAHEA 2008 Graduate Intern:

The afternoon sun cast a warm glow throughout Stadium Park last week Wednesday on the corner of Isenberg and King. I attended the “Blue Line Project” Demonstration to build awareness of climate change, global warming, and to break the silence about sea level rise.

Each participant contributed their own message to Hawai’i. I enjoyed seeing children with their blue chalks in their hands and exchanging in the higher consciousness of the event. A blue line drawn seven blocks from Stadium Park proved to be the boldest statement of the demonstration. Onlookers stopped us and asked questions like “What are you doing?”. We responded by saying that sea level would inevitably rise to this blue line within 50 to 100 years. Unfortunately, no onlookers felt compelled to join in and be a part of this effort.

As I reflect upon the demonstration and the success of the event it is important for all of us to ponder and think of ways to continue building on this momentum. How can we effectively reach out to people and inspire change in the face of an inevitable doom?

One way or another each of us will contribute some effect on global warming. The choice is ours whether that effect will continue to be rapid and unforgiving or slow and responsible. The dialogue must continue before we find ourselves knee deep in water. Nature will no longer allow us to ignore it. Global warming has leaked past the walls of academia and eats away at our existing shorelines.

A fisherman on Moloka’i told me how much land he has lost due to sea level rise and he has done everything to curb the process. But, he knows that nature will win. Besides warmer temperatures and sea level rise, Hawaiian cultural practices could be lost forever. With rising sea levels comes the death of the coral reefs, and the ecosystems that its supports. Our native limu remains threatened by the invasion of non-native species. Furthermore, sea level rise will destroy their habitats and possibly cause remaining limu populations to dwindle.

The bottom line, the blue line that is will cost us more than money. There are some things that money cannot buy. Take responsibility because each of us has that power.

link to Honolulu Advertiser article on the demonstration
link to Sierra Club website find photos and press release

Read Full Post »