Environmental activists from around the world will be gathering in Porto Alegre this month. Credit:Clarinha Glock/IPS

By Mario Osava*

RIO DE JANEIRO, Jan 24, 2012 (Tierramérica) – Large-scale social mobilisation, including street protests and parallel activities, is the only thing can save the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) from ending in nothing but frustration, according to activists and analysts.

A repeat of the failure of recent conferences to negotiate an international climate change pact seems inevitable, said Cândido Grzybowski, the director general of the Brazilian Institute of Social and Economic Analysis (IBASE) and one of the founders of the World Social Forum, the largest global civil society gathering.

Grzybowski based his pessimistic outlook on a number of factors. Chief among them is the economic/financial crisis in the wealthy nations, combined with the fact that this a year of elections in many of them, including France and the United States, moving international commitments to the bottom of their leaders’ agendas. He also blamed what he calls the limited convening power of Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, particularly when it comes to environmental issues.

Only strong pressure from civil society as a “unified voice” at parallel events to Rio+20 can potentially force clearer commitments out of the world’s governments to tackle global imbalances, beginning with “financial hegemony”, Grzybowski told Tierramérica.

The Thematic Social Forum taking place Jan. 24-29 in the southern Brazilian city of Porto Alegre will bring together representatives of social movements and organisations from around the world to prepare for their participation in the UN summit to be held Jun. 20-22 in Rio de Janeiro.

The meeting in Porto Alegre is one of the many local forums or gatherings addressing a specific theme that are linked to the World Social Forum (WSF) and take place in even-numbered years. The WSF itself is now held every two years.

However, according to Eduardo Viola, a professor at the University of Brasilia who studies the consequences of climate change on international relations, the WSF movement has lost strength and will be unable to attract the numbers needed for a march that could make Rio+20 more than a “mega-meeting” devoted exclusively to declarations and have a “major impact on Brazil” in terms of environmental awareness.

Bringing together “a million demonstrators on the streets” is a “rather unlikely but not impossible” feat that could revive the impact of the original 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, which first brought environmental issues to the attention of the Brazilian public in a major way, Viola commented to Tierramérica.

He sees little chance of the Rio summit making a significant impact internationally, however. It will be a largely “reiterative” conference with “diffuse” objectives, at a time of “enormous international impasses,” he said.

But civil society actions must not be limited to Rio de Janeiro, say activists. The Brazilian Forum of NGOs and Social Movements for the Environment and Development (FBOMS) is planning to promote demonstrations in many other cities around the world, with the aid of the internet and social networks.

“Rio has global significance,” and a great deal of successful experience has been accumulated in the organisation of large mobilisations through social networks, stressed FBOMS activist Ruben Born.

The Thematic Social Forum in Porto Alegre will help to coordinate these initiatives, with the participation of representatives of civil society movements like the Indignados (Indignant) movement in Spain and the Occupy movement in the United States, Born told Tierramérica.

Civil society attendance at Rio+20 is to be facilitated by the Brazilian government, which is reportedly interested in promoting strong “popular” participation at least, given the likely absence of heads of state and government at the conference’s official activities.

The People’s Summit, a parallel event to Rio+20 being held Jun. 15- 23, will bring together three times the number of participants in the intergovernmental conference, according to observers. Its slogan, like that of the Thematic Social Forum this month, is “Social and Environmental Justice”.

“To propose a new way of life, in solidarity, against the commodification of nature and in defense of the commons” is the objective of the summit, according to the Brazilian Civil Society Facilitating Committee for Rio+20, which is organizing this major international event.

The People’s Summit aims to build a Permanent People’s Assembly with the goal of “reinventing the world” through the convergence of the different struggles against capitalism, class divisions, racism, patriarchy and homophobia. It is highly critical of the agenda of the official conference, which focuses on the so-called green economy and a global institutional framework.

But these views do not enjoy a consensus of support from civil society. Born, who is also the founder of Vitae Civilis, a non- governmental group active in climate-related issues, highlighted the ideological discrepancies with those who consider environmental initiatives that do not begin with the overthrow of capitalism to be “false solutions”.

Grzybowski stressed the divergence of focus between those who place priority on environmental or social justice, categorising his organisation, IBASE, among the latter.

Chico Whitaker, another World Social Forum founder and radical defender of its egalitarian and participatory principles, was critical of the name chosen for the parallel event: “People’s Summit” maintains a traditional hierarchical vision as opposed to the horizontal structure defended by the WSF from its very inception, he said.

But all of them concur in their rejection of the current world order, described as the “large-scale production industrial model” by Whitaker, as capitalism by the members of the Civil Society Facilitating Committee, and as financial hegemony by Grzybowski, who also attacked such current world “disorders” as transporting millions of tons of Brazilian iron ore to Asia and then bringing it back in the form of steel.

And they are all critical of the official Rio+20 conference itself and the recently released “zero draft” meant to serve as a starting point for a final declaration, because they believe it evades the real challenges.

The whole format of big United Nations summits is no longer viable, said Viola. It is impossible for over 190 countries with “different perceptions of vulnerability” and divergent interests to reach a consensus on climate issues, he explained.

In the meantime, indigenous activists plan to express their cultural and ethnic identity at Rio+20 by calling on their counterparts around the world to participate in the Carioca Village to be set up in Rio de Janeiro.

Around 350 indigenous representatives from different regions of Brazil and 700 from abroad will gather in four “ocas” (traditional houses), one of which will be used for plenary meetings, while another will be equipped for videoconferencing with indigenous peoples in other countries and continents, Marcos Terena told Tierramérica. Terena is one of the organisers of indigenous participation at Rio+20, reprising a role he played 20 years ago at the Earth Summit.

*The writer is an IPS correspondent. This story was originally published by Latin American newspapers that are part of the Tierramérica network. Tierramérica is a specialised news service produced by IPS with the backing of the United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Environment Programme and the World Bank.

(END/2012)

The United Nations climate negotiations ended with the world’s nations still to agree on a new global treaty to reduce carbon emissions. Credit:Tinus de Jager/IPS

DURBAN, South Africa, Dec 11, 2011 (IPS) – The world is increasingly committed to dangerous levels of global warming with yet another failure by nations of the world to agree to needed reductions in carbon emissions here in Durban. However, as the 17th Conference of Parties ended early Sunday morning, members did agree to talk about a new global treaty to reduce emissions.

After two weeks and an additional 29 hours of intense and even bitter negotiations, the 193 nations participating in the United Nations climate talks agreed to a complex and technical set of documents called the “Durban Platform.” These include the continuation of the Kyoto Protocol, a formal structure for a Green Climate Fund, new market mechanisms, and more.

The biggest development reached at dawn Sunday is an agreement to negotiate a new global treaty to reduce emissions by 2015. While this may look like simply agreeing to more meetings, it is the first time all nations have agreed to be governed by a new global emission reduction treaty under the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Currently the promised emission reductions by industrialised countries and those of China, Brazil, South Africa, India and others under the 2009 Copenhagen Accord guarantee a world that is at least 3.5 degrees Celsius warmer on average according to climate science. It will be double that over large parts of the world. Some analysis says this global average could be even higher rising to four or five degrees Celsius threatening our species with annihilation.

Despite the political posturing by the United States, Canada and even the European Union, the fact is that developing countries’ promised reductions are greater than the industrialised world that are responsible for 75 percent of the total human emissions in the atmosphere.

“There are still no new pledges on the table and the process agreed in Durban towards raising the ambition and increasing emission reductions is uncertain in its outcome,” said Bill Hare, Director of Climate Analytics, a non-profit climate science advisory group based in Germany.

COP 17 President, South Africa’s Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, and others pleaded with countries to put their self-interest aside “for the greater good of the planet and its people.” Rich countries like the U.S., Canada and Saudi Arabia blocked progress on numerous fronts leaving smaller nations bitter and frustrated.

“The grim news is that the blockers lead by the U.S. have succeeded in inserting a vital get-out clause that could easily prevent the next big climate deal being legally binding,” said Kumi Naidoo, Greenpeace International Executive Director.

Even if a strong legally binding treaty is agreed to in 2015, it will have to ratified by governments before going into force. It took several years to ratify the Kyoto Protocol that the U.S. backed and then failed to ratify following the election of George W Bush.

Waiting until 2020 to make major cuts means those cuts will have to be far deeper and far more costly to have any hope of keeping temperatures below two degrees Celsius, Hare previously told IPS.

“The world’s collective level of ambition on emissions reductions must be substantially increased, and soon,” said Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Various analysis show that global emissions should peak between 2015 and 2020 to earn a reasonable chance of less than two degrees Celsius at doable cost. If the peak and decline comes later costs and risks of exceeding two degrees Celsius skyrocket.

“Powerful speeches and carefully worded decisions can’t amend the laws of physics. The atmosphere responds to one thing, and one thing only – emissions,” said Meyer.

It was clear that our governments these past two weeks listened to the carbon-intensive polluting corporations instead of listening to the people, Naidoo said in a statement.

The “Durban Platform” includes a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol that will begin January 2013, avoiding a gap at the end of the first commitment period finishing next year. The length of the second commitment period is to be decided at COP 18 in Qatar.

Developing countries insisted on this condition because Kyoto is the only legally binding emissions reduction agreement. However, it only asked for small reductions from industrialised countries like those in Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan and a few others. The U.S. opted out and Canada ignored its obligations and increased emissions 24 percent. And now Canada, Japan and Russia have said they will take not take part in the second commitment period.

The continuation of Kyoto “is highly significant” said Christiana Figueres, UNFCCC Executive Secretary. Participating countries are to submit their emission reduction offers by May 2012.

There is no formal adoption of a second commitment period based on the actual wording of the documents, said Pablo Solón, former lead negotiator for the Plurinational State of Bolivia. “The actual decision has merely been postponed to the next COP.” Kyoto remains on “life support” he said.

The only progress on the Green Climate Fund (GFC) was on its design and governance. The GFC is supposed to funnel 100 billion dollars in assistance annually starting in 2020 to help developing nations to reduce emissions and help them adapt to climate change. There were no commitments on where the money would come from. What was agreed is to set up a “work plan” to mobilise significant climate funds from both private and public sources.

Private sources explicitly include carbon markets as governments from the rich countries frequently cited the financial crisis has tied their purse strings. Civil society and some developing nations noted that governments have made trillions of dollars available for the bank and financial sector and that world’s military budget is more than 10 times what is needed for the GFC.

Even though the carbon market has crashed the private sector is considered by the U.S., EU, New Zealand, Japan and other countries to be a key partner in mobilising money for climate change. Creating private markets for the buying and selling carbon offsets remains highly controversial and very complex in terms measurement, ownership of carbon in soil or forests and more. Then there are the ethics of rich countries offsetting their own emissions by buying up forests or land in poor countries.

“Keep the targets lose the markets” Oscar Reyes of the Friends of the Earth UK urged negotiators in in the final days of COP 17. “We’re worried that when the GCF has money it will lend it to the private sector to drive carbon markets,” Reyes told IPS.

“Durban is a disaster” for a fair and functional Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) programme said experts with Ecosystems Climate Alliance, a coalition of forest NGOs. REDD is by far the biggest potential carbon market.

“From looking at past conferences (climate COPs) it would be more effective if members of the conference would come outside and plant trees for the two weeks. They’d probably make a bigger impact,” said 14-year-old Felix Finkbeiner of Munich, Germany. Finkbeiner launched an organizaton of children called Plant for the Planet that is now working in 70 countries and have planted nearly four million trees in past four years.

Their motto: “Stop Talking. Start Planting.”   (END/2011)

Solar geysers are just one requirement for "green" accommodation. Credit:Kristin Palitza/IPS

By Kristin Palitza

CAPE TOWN , Dec 6, 2011 (IPS) – Counting on responsible travellers who increasingly seek environmentally friendly alternatives for their holidays, South Africa’s tourism sector wants to conserve its biggest asset – nature – while fighting climate change at the same time.

Fair Trade in Tourism South Africa (FTTSA) has developed a green rating system for the tourism industry that certifies tourist accommodation, activities and attractions in South Africa against standard environmental criteria. It also considers fair trade labour, socio-economic and management practices as part of the assessment.

Tourists can also book entire tour packages that have a minimised carbon travel footprint – a first such offering in the world. “We hope the model will be adopted internationally,” says FTTSA certification manager Lisa Scriven, who helped to develop the concept, which was launched in November.

The green rating system promotes responsible tourism, including environmental management, low energy and water use, waste avoidance, recycling and green procurement, building design and construction, the minimal use of chemicals as well as a focus on biodiversity and gardens.

To be certified as environmentally friendly, a tourism business will undergo an assessment by a FTTSA team as well as by an independent review panel made up of South Africa’s top tourism experts.

Scriven says that there are 14 sections of standards and criteria, each with several sub- sections, according to what type of business is assessed. The FTTSA team will measure on-site investments in the environment such as solar geysers and off- site projects such as involvement in local schools. They make an in-kind as well as a financial assessment and compare it to the company’s turnover; to see what percentage they invest in the environment.

FTTSA also cooperates with the South African Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) and the Tourism Grading Council. Every two years, the business’ credentials will be re-assessed to make sure it still fulfils all requirements.

“It’s about tourism that respects the environment and positively affects the economic and social development of local communities,” explains Scriven. Sustainable tourism has become a trend, she says: “I don’t think many people see sustainability as an option anymore. It has become an expectation.”

One of the FTTSA certified tour operators is Ocean Blue Adventures in Plettenberg Bay in South Africa’s Eastern Cape. It offers conservation-oriented whale and dolphin marine eco-tours and has set up the Orca Foundation, which finances conservation in tourism, poor communities around Plettenberg Bay and schools. Visitors are also asked to plant trees to offset the carbon footprint of their travel.

“Nobody was protecting our bay, the reef, the whales and dolphins who come to breed here. We realised we had to do something ourselves to keep it sustainable,” says Ocean Blue assistant general manager Natasha Lilford.

According to Lilford, more and more travellers inquire about fair trade and environmental criteria before they book accommodation or a tour. “People want to give back. They want to spend their money at a place where it goes to a good cause and they can see a difference.”

Through the certification scheme, South Africa wants to boost its share of the global tourism market, which in 2008 stood at just 1.3 percent, according to DEAT statistics. For the state, the tourism sector is an important income earner. It contributed 354 billion dollars, or 7.9 percent, to South Africa’s GDP in 2010, up from 2.7 percent the year before.

“Green tourism is a growing market where people say ‘I’m willing to pay a little bit more because I want to travel in a more environmentally friendly way’,” believes South African Tourism Minister Martinus van Schalkwyk.

“Responsible tourism is about creating better places for people to live in, and better places to visit. South Africa’s natural environment is one of its greatest tourism resources, and therefore the tourism industry needs to be actively involved in conserving and protecting it,” he added.

The FTTSA certification scheme wants to do exactly that, says Scriven. It promotes a more mindful approach to tourism that aims to sustain and improve land, water and air by lessening travellers’ impact on the environment. “Tourists are beginning to show a more responsible attitude towards their travel plans,” she notes.

Almost 70 hotels, bed and breakfasts, activities and tour companies have been FTTSA certified so far. It is only a start, as there are more than 40,000 places to stay in the country. “It’s just a small drop in the bucket,” admits Scriven. “We still have a long way to go, but we are on the right track.”

Perhaps one reason for the slow uptake has been the global economic crisis, which has reduced tourism numbers and forced tourism businesses to tighten their belts since 2008. Because in order to achieve a level of environmental friendliness that will get them certified, travel establishments have to make an initial investment: they have to change light bulbs, install solar water heaters, plant indigenous gardens, insulate windows, buy less toxic paints and so on.

“It is an investment, but in the long term, they will save money due to reduced running costs. They will eventually also gain preferential market access,” believes Scriven. “The environment and the economy have become inseparable.”

This holds true for another FTTSA certified business, the Bartholomeus Klip Farmhouse, a small hotel on a working wheat and sheep farm with an adjoining nature reserve in Wellington, an hour’s drive north of Cape Town. Apart from funding and managing the nature reserve, a national heritage site, the hotel management has turned the guesthouses and cottages into “green” buildings.

“We only use water from mountain springs, have installed solar geysers and bio-toilet systems, recycle and buy all food locally,” says manager Lesley Gillett. “In the long-term, it’s worth your while. We’re starting to see a return on our initial investment.”

If more and more tourism businesses follow this example, South Africa might soon become a global frontrunner in “green” tourism. (END/2011)

Kashmir's rice paddies are giving way to horticulture for water shortages. Credit:Athar Parvaiz/IPS

By Athar Parvaiz*

SRINAGAR, Nov 30, 2011 (IPS) – Sammad Sheikh of Tangchekh village in north Kashmir cannot understand why the rice fields that his family cultivated for generations are drying up.

“It is a mystery as to why water is getting scarcer in summers,” he says. “This has been happening for the past few years though there have been one or two good summers in between.”

With no assurance of water availability, Sheikh, like his fellow farmers in the region, is looking for alternatives to paddy cultivation.

“I have heard that most of the farmers in central and south Kashmir have switched from agriculture to horticulture. I am now seriously thinking of putting a portion of my seven acres under crops that are not water-intensive,” he told IPS.

Farmers in this Himalayan region have heard of climate change. They wonder why the government is yet to step in with improved irrigation facilities to help them tide over the summer months.

“The government has constructed water ponds in some areas for water harvesting, but much more has to be done to cover the entire area,” says Mukhtar Naikoo. “Anyone can see that the droughts have become frequent and rainfall scarcer and more erratic.”

According to the study, ‘Recent Trends in Meteorological Parameters over Jammu & Kashmir (1976 to 2007)’, by A. K. Jaswal and G. S. Prakasa Rao of the Indian Meteorological Department, temperatures are increasing over this state – often likened to Switzerland for its alpine charms and snow-capped mountains.

The study showed an annual increase in the maximum temperature in the Kashmir region from 0.04 to 0.05 degrees Celsius over the period and a corresponding rise in the minimum temperature in the Jammu region from 0.03 to 0.08 degrees C per year.

“Annual rainfall and rainy days are decreasing in both the regions of the state except at Jammu where rainfall trend is significantly increasing (12.05 mm per year),” says the study.

Naikoo has vivid memories of the farmer-friendly weather in Kashmir: “It would rain for days together. And, at times, we would perform a ‘bandar’ (an oblation) seeking God’s pleasure for cessation of rains.”

Like Sheikh, Naikoo is baffled at the creeping dryness. “Maybe God is not happy with our deeds. We are a sinful lot.” Naikoo is not yet ready to switch to horticulture. “I am still hopeful that God will not let us down. Things will get better.”

Scientists in Kashmir are worried at the rapid conversion of paddy lands for horticultural use and the mushrooming of commercial establishments and residential colonies in the areas which were farming lands.

According to official figures, 80 percent of Kashmir’s seven million people are directly or indirectly engaged in agriculture and allied sectors. Much Kashmir’s total area of 2.4 million hectares is mountainous or forested.

Official statistics indicate the 151,352 hectares of land that used to be under cultivation in the state, a few decades ago, has now shrunk to 46,943 hectares.

“This is a dangerous trend,” warns Zaffar Ahmad Reshi, a professor in Kashmir University’s Botany department. “The government in Kashmir has no land-use policy and has failed to provide proper irrigation facilities to the farmers.”

Reshi told IPS that necessary adaptation to climate change in Kashmir includes augmentation of the irrigation network for farming.

According to the Kashmir government’s Economic Survey report for 2010-11, only 41 percent of agricultural land is covered by irrigation facilities with the rest dependent on rain.

Reshi stresses that Kashmir cannot afford to lose all its agricultural land to horticulture and built-up areas. “Rice is the staple food of Kashmiris and it is a primary commodity here. We are already importing more than 50 percent of our rice,” he said.

Naikoo has a similar perception, though from a personal point of view. “For generations our family never bought rice in the market. We grow what we need and more in our rice fields. We can’t think of any other way,” he told IPS.

But, other farmers are more adventurous and have been shifting away from paddy to cash crops like apple, almond and walnuts.

“The trend could be a consequence of climate change as farmers find it increasingly difficult to irrigate their rice fields,” says Shafiq Ahmad Wani, director of research at Kashmir’s Agriculture University.

“In the Brang area of south Kashmir, we have observed an almost total conversion from agriculture to horticulture with farmers attributing it to lack of irrigation facilities and the absence of a marketing system.”

According to Akhtar Hussain Malik, a botanist at Kashmir University, the drop in rice and maize cultivation has resulted in a lack of fodder for cattle. “Our animals are already suffering from insufficient fodder with the degradation and shrinking of pastures in Kashmir.”

Farooq Ahmad Lone, director at Kashmir’s agriculture department says the state government has plans to providing bore wells to farmers whose lands are dependent on rains.

“We suffered a 25 percent loss in maize production this year. We intend to mitigate these losses by providing bore well facilities to farmers in the hilly areas,” Lone told IPS.

*This article is one of a series supported by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network.

(END)

Rooibos plants are severely threatened by climate change. Credit:Kristin Palitza/IPS

By Kristin Palitza *

CAPE TOWN , Nov 24, 2011 (IPS) – South Africa’s Rooibos tea has become a popular drink all around the globe. But prices of the herbal brew could shoot up within the next decade, as the Rooibos plant can only grow in one small region in the world – which is severely affected by climate change.

Pieter Koopman stoops down to inspect a young Rooibos bush. The farmer, who owns an 850-hectare tea farm in the Suid Bokkeveld, in western South Africa, is greatly concerned about the upcoming harvesting season. Droughts and erratic rainfall have destroyed more than half of his crop over the past decade. But he has hope that this year will be a better one.

“The last 10 years have been very hard. We had to learn to adapt to new weather conditions, and we still do. We can’t sit back and wait,” says Koopman. Vital rain, which usually occurs in the South African winter between May and August, the traditional Rooibos planting season, has not been falling. “All our seedlings died. We made losses every season,” the farmer sighs.

In response, Koopman and other farmers in the area started to change their farming techniques. They planted windbreaks with indigenous plants to stop soil erosion, built water catchments and, perhaps most importantly, started to plant seeds instead of seedlings. “Seeds take longer to grow, but are less sensitive to lack of rain,” Koopman explains. “It was a tough lesson to learn.”

If Koopman and his peers manage to successfully adapt to climate change, Rooibos lovers all over the world can breathe a sigh of relief: because the entire global supply of the red bush tea comes from a single production area, the South African Suid Bokkeveld, which measures just 20,000 square kilometres.

Attempts to cultivate it outside of this region have failed, as the plant needs the harsh conditions of the region, where temperatures drop to zero degrees Celsius during winter and rise to a blistering 48 degrees Celsius at the height of summer.

The farmers’ concerns are justified. Experts predict that agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa will be severely affected by climate change. By 2050, changes in weather patterns will cause average rice, wheat and maize yields to decline by up to 14 percent, 22 percent and five percent, respectively, according to the Washington DC-based International Food Policy Research Institute.

“That’s why the long-term prosperity of Rooibos farmers will depend greatly upon their ability to change their farming practices to these new weather conditions,” says Noel Oettle, rural programme manager of the Environmental Monitoring Group (EMG), a non-governmental organisation helping Rooibos farmers increase their resilience to climate change through natural resource management, monitoring weather patterns, soil and water conservation as well as promoting agricultural biodiversity.

“Only if farmers include in their decision making the likelihood of extreme weather events and focus on sustainable production, can the rest of us continue to enjoy Rooibos tea,” reckons Oettle.

Rooibos tea has become a popular drink around the globe not only because of its sweetish nutty taste, but due to its many health benefits. Caffeine-free and rich in anti-oxidants, Rooibos contains a wealth of minerals, such as zinc, copper, calcium, magnesium and potassium and is known to act as a digestive aid as well as an anti-carcinogenic, anti-inflammatory and anti-viral.

According to the South African Department of Agriculture, the country exports about eight tonnes of Rooibos tea per year to key foreign markets, such as Germany, Netherlands, United Kingdom, Japan and the United States, but also to Chile, Poland and Russia.

Rooibos tea farming remains a small industry, with about 300 farmers, most of them smallholders who employ a handful of workers full-time, plus seasonal workers during harvest. The Suid-Bokkeveld is a poverty-stricken area that has seen slow economic improvement since Rooibos has become popular in foreign countries.

“Climate change is likely to have a negative impact on those exports because of the plant’s geographic limitation, but also because there exists only one species of Rooibos. If it gets wiped out, that’s it,” warns Rooibos expert Dr. Rhoda Malgas, a researcher at the Department of Conservation at the University of Stellenbosch in South Africa. By comparison, there are 25 species of Honeybush, another South African herbal tea of the fynbos variety.

One option to save South Africa’s Rooibos plant is to conserve the wild Rooibos plant, Malgas believes, which has been growing naturally in the Suid Bokkeveld for centuries. Wild Rooibos is hardier and more heat resistant than its cultivated cousin, with a more elaborate root system that can survive less rainfall.

“It would be wise to start building seed banks. If you conserve wild Rooibos, you can conserve the genetic material from which the cultivated Rooibos tea is derived,” the scientist suggests.

Some Rooibos farmers have already caught on to the idea. Laurenz Dworkin, who owns a 100-hectare tea field in the Suid Bokkeveld, says he has considered harvesting wild Rooibos in addition to the cultivated variety. He also plans to collect its seeds to be able to protect his farm from the effects of climate change. “Wild Rooibos has not become a commercially viable product yet, but it has potential,” he believes.

But Dworkin is concerned that the trend to commercialise the wild variety will ultimately do more harm than good. Because it grows more slowly, wild Rooibos cannot be harvested on the same scale as cultivated Rooibos – it can only be picked every two years. Yet, farmers desperate for quick profits might harvest the plant annually all the same, and ultimately destroy it.

“We desperately need responsible farmers who think long term and don’t kill the plants for fast profits,” says Dworkin. “Instead, we should work on the assumption that Rooibos prices will keep going up. The plant might become more valuable because yields will decrease due to changing weather patterns.”

Although EMG supports the farmers, it remains their own decision what farming practices they apply. Farmers are often reluctant to take the risk to try new approaches and Rooibos farming remains a small industry, without large amounts of research money behind it.

If Dworkin is right, a hot cup of Rooibos tea might soon cost consumers a premium.

* This article is one of a series supported by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network. (END)

Wind farm under construction in Bom Jardim da Serra, in the southern Brazilian state of Santa Catarina. Credit:Courtesy of Abeeólica

SÃO PAULO, Nov 9, 2011 (Tierramérica) – The term “green jobs”, coined to describe employment that contributes in some way to preserving or restoring the environment, is increasingly entering the vocabulary of companies keen to respond to the social demand for a cleaner economy.

Brazil has not been left behind by this trend. According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), there are more than 2.6 million jobs in the Brazilian formal labor market that meet these criteria, and provide employment for 6.7 percent of the workforce.

A study on green jobs published by the ILO country office in Brazil predicts that the number of these jobs will increase significantly in the medium term.

Renewable energies account for almost 550,000 of the current green jobs in Brazil and constitute one of the market niches that contribute most to the prospects for growth.

While biomass (sugar cane production) and large hydroelectric power plants are the main “green” employers today, much of the growth in the renewable energy sector will be fueled by wind turbines.

What places wind power at the forefront of other energy sources is the fact that it offers decent work, one of the ILO’s prerequisites for a job to be considered genuinely “green”.

“Providing employees with fair working conditions is key. The wind power sector is made up of large projects that primarily offer formal employment,” Paulo Sérgio Muçouçah, coordinator of the ILO’s decent work and green jobs programme in Brazil, told Tierramérica.

“The fact that workers are officially registered and guaranteed their rights makes it possible to classify their jobs as decent work. Both the sugar cane industry and hydroelectric plants have a record of labor conflicts, both on the plantations and in the construction of dams,” he noted. “This puts them at a disadvantage compared to wind power.”

The share of wind power in the worldwide energy mix has increased almost 32-fold over the course of 15 years.

But in Brazil, growth has been much more timid. Although the South American giant’s winds could generate 300 gigawatts (GW) of power, according to the Atlas of Brazilian Wind Energy Potential, by May of this year installed capacity stood at barely 1 GW (one billion watts).

The government’s Ten-Year Energy Plan sets a target of 12 GW by 2020. For the Brazilian Wind Energy Association (Abeeólica), this goal is far too modest. “In fact, we are hoping to almost double it and reach around 22 GW. This growth needs to continue in order to consolidate the national industry,” Élbia Melo, the executive president of Abeeólica, told Tierramérica.

At present, the sector provides almost 13,000 direct and indirect jobs, distributed between the generation and distribution of electric power service, and including the jobs created through the construction of wind farms.

“In addition to the prospects for increased employment alongside the expansion of installed capacity, there are also manufacturers of turbines and other components which represent a promising market,” said Muçouçah.

There are already three manufacturing plants established in Brazil and a number of companies have undertaken studies aimed at opening more plants, he added.

Another factor that places wind power at an advantage as a creator of employment in comparison with hydroelectric power (which currently predominates) is that the production and distribution of one terawatt (one trillion watts) of wind power an hour requires between 918 and 2,400 workers. For the same amount of electricity, hydroelectric power plants require only 250 people.

“The difference in the volume of labor does not affect the price of electricity. The extremely high costs of building hydroelectric power plants and turbines means that the end-consumer must pay for them,” said Muçouçah.

Of the 62 wind farms operating in Brazil, 43 are in the Northeast, the region preferred by the sector for new projects and related industries because of the large concentration and strength of the winds along its Atlantic coast.

“The fact that these new jobs are created in the Northeast, the poorest and least developed region of the country, makes wind energy a contributor to development which in turn makes these jobs even greener,” added the ILO representative.

In the federal government’s last energy auction, wind power plants won half of the contracts, totaling almost 2 GW, offering an average price of less than 100 reals (58 dollars) per megawatt/hour, which is below the cost of hydroelectric power.

This volume represents a major boost for the wind energy sector. But robust growth, and a consequent increase in the country’s green employment statistics, will require improved transportation systems and logistics. “These areas need to be improved to enable the large number of projects contracted,” said Melo.

Moreover, added the president of Abeeólica, “expanding the production of wind energy is a challenge that demands the governance capacity needed to explore the potential still limited by the prevailing energy paradigm, which involves major emissions of greenhouse gases.”

*The writer is a Tierramérica contributor. This story was originally published by Latin American newspapers that are part of the Tierramérica network. Tierramérica is a specialised news service produced by IPS with the backing of the United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Environment Programme and the World Bank. (END)

Construction along the northern branch of the São Francisco River diversion project. Credit:Mario Osava/IPS

SALGUEIRO, Brazil, Oct 21, 2011 (IPS) – The visual impact is harsh: flattened hills, valleys full of mud, and kilometres and kilometres of bulldozed land – the modification of nature in Brazil’s semiarid Northeast region is disturbing due to the enormous dimensions involved.

It will take a total of 713 km of canals, aqueducts, dams, tunnels and pumping stations to divert a small portion of the waters of the São Francisco River, which emerges in central Brazil and runs through part of the northeast before emptying into the Atlantic. The redirected water flow will supply rivers that dry out during the long dry season in the extreme Northeast, an area known as the “drought polygon”.

The megaproject is a complex undertaking because the canals must slope precisely 10 cm per km as they cross a rolling landscape, so the water will run slowly. Taming the topography will require the construction of 42 aqueducts across valleys and five tunnels through mountains.

And nine energy-guzzling pumping stations will be built to pump the water 300 metres uphill along the eastern branch of the project and 170 metres uphill along the northern branch.

The cost of the project has already climbed to 3.9 billion dollars, the Ministry of National Integration admitted in August.

Lula and the BishopThe São Francisco River, once known as the “river of national unity” because it joins the centre of the country with the Northeast, became an apple of discord after tragic droughts, especially in 1993, revived the idea of diverting water from the river as an alternative solution to the chronic shortages in the Northeast. The idea, which first emerged in the 19th century, finally began to be implemented by the administration of former president Lula, who came from a poor family from the Northeast that moved to São Paulo, fleeing the poverty caused in large part by droughts. The highest-profile opponent of the project is Luiz Cappio, the Catholic bishop of a small town on the banks of the São Francisco, who held hunger strikes in 2005 and 2007 demanding that work on the project be called off.

The total investment will be significantly higher than originally projected. Work on some stretches has ground to a halt, and there are contracts to be revised and additional services to be hired. The entire undertaking is far behind schedule.

The work began in 2007, when the plan was for then president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (2003-2011) to inaugurate the project in 2010. But it looks unlikely to even be finished before the term of his successor, President Dilma Rousseff, ends in 2014.

“There is no reason to worry about the fees that consumers will be charged for water, which will be adapted to the local reality,” said José Luiz de Souza, coordinator of support for development projects in the Ministry of National Integration.

The population that will benefit from the water supply is among the poorest in Brazil.

But the fees will take into account operating and maintenance costs, to guarantee that the project is “financially sustainable,” said Souza. However, there is no talk about recouping the investment.

The São Francisco River Integration Project will ensure the supply of good quality water to 12 million people in 390 municipalities in the states of Ceará, Rio Grande do Norte, Paraíba and Pernambuco, according to the government.

The megaproject is expensive, but it is justified in an area with such severe water shortages, says economist Tania Bacelar, a professor at the Federal University of Pernambuco who is an expert on development in the Northeast.

The average amount of water available annually in the northernmost part of the Northeast is 450 cubic metres per capita – one-third of the minimum recommended by the United Nations, according to the Ministry of National Integration.

The integration of river basins will generate synergy – in other words, the combined effect will be greater than the sum of the individual parts of the project, because it will improve water management overall.

Guaranteed supplies in the dry months will make it possible to store less water in the reservoirs and to use it instead to help fuel economic development, while reducing water loss by evaporation, the authorities say.

However, the project has many critics, despite the arguments in its favour, including calls for solidarity with the Northeast, whose nine states are home to 28 percent of the population of 192 million people, but whose river basins have only three percent of the country’s surface water.

Opponents vehemently question the viability of the megaproject. One of them, agronomist João Suassuna, says it will be a “white elephant.”

The volume of water in the São Francisco, the longest river that runs entirely in Brazilian territory, has already been affected by pollution and sedimentation, as well as deforestation along the riverbanks. Suassuna argues that this makes the redirection of water from the river, which is already used for a number of purposes, unsustainable.

The dams built along the river generate 95 percent of the electricity in the Northeast, and the waters supply expanding irrigation projects, he said.

In 2001, drought severely reduced the volume of water in the river, limiting the energy it generates, he pointed out. That is why the priority should be the revitalisation of the river basin, an effort that has fallen short up to now, said Suassuna, a researcher at the Joaquim Tabuco Foundation, an Education Ministry body based in Recife, the capital of the state of Pernambuco.

The criticism is countered by the Rousseff administration, which notes that only 1.4 percent of the water in the São Francisco River – or 26 cubic metres per second – will be diverted.

The volume of water to be redirected will only be higher than that when there is a surplus in the reservoirs, Suassuna said.

Historically, there has only been a surplus of water on rare occasions in Sobradinho, the largest reservoir along the river, the activist pointed out. He added that for 60 percent of its length, the São Francisco runs through the semiarid backlands of the Northeast, where its tributaries have intermittent flows, which limits the volume of water in the main river and the reservoirs.

“For 16 years I have been warning about the risks of the diversion of the water, but now I’m talking about the consequences,” said Suassuna, who has written dozens of articles, many of which have been compiled in a book, criticising the megaproject.

The construction of the canals and dams, which destroys vegetation, has further aggravated desertification in Cabrobó, the municipality where the northern branch of the project begins, said the activist.

Moreover, the canals will interrupt the paths of migrating animals, leading to increasing inbreeding, he said. In addition, he warned, the project will generate biological imbalances in local rivers, as different fish species, especially predator fish, are pumped in from the São Francisco River.

Suassuna said there are cheaper and more effective alternatives. A study by the national water regulatory agency, ANA, suggested better use of the water resources that already exist in the semiarid Northeast, such as groundwater and 70,000 ponds.

Another initiative, which benefits the rural population, the most vulnerable to drought, is rainwater collection and storage in tanks, for human consumption as well as irrigation for community-level small-scale farming.

The Articulação no Semi-Árido Brasileiro (ASA), a network of nearly 1,000 NGOs, labour unions and community and religious institutions focused on Brazil’s semiarid region, has already helped local residents build 350,000 household water tanks and 9,000 irrigation tanks.

Large-scale irrigation, which will be bolstered by the diversion of part of the water from the São Francisco River, “is not sustainable because it leads to salinisation of the soil, due to the increase in evapotranspiration (the sum of evaporation and plant transpiration),” said Jean Carlos Medeiros, coordinator of the rainwater programme, whose goal is to distribute one million water tanks.

The salinisation has already affected the melon crop in Rio Grande do Norte, he pointed out.

ASA’s programmes do not compete with the river diversion project, which would mainly provide water supplies to the urban population. But it does fight for government funds and for priority treatment in public policies.

It will only be possible to gauge the effects of the megaproject, and compare them to the achievements of the rainwater harvesting initiative, once the former is up and running. But that will take years, as the work on the São Francisco River project is moving ahead so slowly that some sceptics even say it may never be completed. (END)

RIO DE JANEIRO, Oct 11, 2011 (IPS) – The Bolsa Verde or Green Grant programme, which gives financial assistance to poor families that help preserve Brazil’s Amazon jungle, may turn out to be only a drop in the ocean if legislation that undermines forest protection is adopted.

The Environmental Conservation Support Programme, known as the Green Grant, was launched Sept. 28 by President Dilma Rousseff in order to help extremely poor families develop environmental conservation activities, as one of the strategies of the Brazil Without Extreme Poverty Plan, which Rousseff calls her government’s key priority.

This month, some 3,500 families will begin to receive the subsidy of 300 reals (160 dollars) a quarter. The aim is to cover 18,000 families by the end of the year, and 76,000 families by 2014.

“The Green Grant is above all a recognition by the federal government that it is essential to offer an incentive that combines guaranteed income with preservation of the environment,” said Rousseff at the programme launch in the city of Manaus, capital of the northern state of Amazonas. “It is critical to our development model. People with higher incomes will be more committed to the environment.”

But the strategy of combining social and environmental policies may have “limited scope,” said Marcio Astrini, a member of Greenpeace-Brazil’s Amazon campaign.

Regressive Forest LegislationThe new Forest Code was approved amid intense controversy by the lower house of Congress on Sept. 25. It has now gone back to the Senate, where it may be further amended. Finally it must be approved by President Rousseff, who has the power to veto it, partially or in full.The bill reduces the percentage of protected forest that must be maintained on rural properties in the Amazon region and the Cerrado – a vast savannah in central Brazil – and grants an amnesty for illegal felling carried out before July 2008, as long as the landholder responsible agrees to a plan to conform to environmental regulations.These are some of the measures introducing flexibility into the Forest Code of 1965, which is strict and was toughened in 2001, but is systematically flouted.If it passes, the bill “will facilitate environmental crimes with absolutely no justification, while leaving the jungle unprotected; several parts of it are also unconstitutional,” said Greenpeace-Brazil’s Astrini. The bill under consideration was called a “disgrace” by President Rousseff in May, and Astrini recalled that during the 2010 election campaign, Rousseff “promised not to change the Forest Code to allow amnesties and more devastation,” and said the government could not remain inactive on the issue. Deforestation of the Amazon is one of the main causes of Brazil’s greenhouse gas emissions. The bill is an “attack” on Brazil’s international commitments, Rousseff said.

“It’s a social programme, with the difference that it includes nature conservation as one more benefit. It’s a good start, but it remains just a drop in the ocean,” Astrini told IPS.

While he regards it as an “interesting policy,” Astrini fears it will be short-lived if Brazil adopts a new forest code being debated in Congress, which would seriously undermine regulations prohibiting the clearing of native jungle.

“In order to receive this subsidy, families have to live within conservation areas or extractive reserves (sustainable use protected areas). But under 100 reales (50 dollars) a month is very little remuneration for families helping to conserve the rainforest, at a time when the government and society are waiting for the new Forest Code to be voted on in Congress,” the activist said.

This “positive gesture” could turn into a “schizophrenic policy,” on the one hand promoting conservation, and on the other bringing in legislation that is an incentive to destroy the jungle, he said.

But Environment Minister Izabella Teixeira said the Green Grant programme, coordinated by her ministry, is “a major achievement.”

“We want people who live in the jungle to enjoy full citizenship and better living conditions, as well as valuing biodiversity. This is the first social and environmental programme that encourages people to make sustainable use of the rainforest,” Teixeira said at a press conference with foreign correspondents.

The government has set aside close to 150 million dollars a year to finance the Green Grant, and says this cost of keeping the rainforest alive is “absolutely feasible,” Teixeira added.

“The programme is part of a strategic policy for eliminating extreme poverty. It is necessary to remunerate the people helping to protect the jungle. The Green Grant’s resources are already secured, and there will be no constraints,” she said.

In her view, after more than three decades of the 1965 Forest Code that laid down the foundations of Brazil’s national environment policy, it is time for second generation social and environmental policies to be introduced.

According to the government, the areas where families who are to receive the Green Grant will be mapped, and the environmental impact of the programme will be assessed. The programme does not ban farming, as long as it is sustainable.

To apply for the grant, households must be registered on a list which already includes 8,000 families.

According to government information, conservation units created under a 2000 law which classified different protection regimes permitting sustainable use of resources are the source of nine percent of the water used in the country for human consumption, and avoid emissions of nearly three billion tonnes of carbon dioxide, one of the main greenhouse gases responsible for global warming.

The goal of the Green Grant programme is to lift 2.65 million people living in the north of Brazil out of extreme poverty. Fifty-six percent of the poorest people in the north live in rural areas.

The programme will be strengthened by widening the coverage of the Bolsa Familia or Family Subsidy plan – which provides an income for poor families, conditional on school attendance and health-care checkups for the children – and other food security and local food production programmes. (END)

The Amazon and Cerrado regions face the risk of the extinction of species on a scale never before seen in human history. Credit:Fabíola Ortiz/IPS

Fabíola Ortiz interviews Brazilian climate expert CARLOS NOBRE * – Tierramérica

PORTO DE GALINHAS, Brazil, Oct 4 (IPS) – Brazil could play a leading role in a new global agenda for sustainable development and become an “environmental power”, says Carlos Nobre, one of the world’s foremost climate change experts.

In addition to a series of natural conditions that make the country particularly suited for this role, there is also a high level of awareness in Brazilian society that this future is possible, believes Nobre, the secretary of Research and Development Policies and Programs at the Brazilian Ministry of Science and Technology and a senior scientist at the National Institute for Space Research.

Brazil has the potential to explore a new model of tropical development, based on the full utilisation of renewable energy sources and a “natural knowledge economy”, stated the engineer and meteorologist who has conducted extensive climate research in the Amazon and shared in the Nobel Peace Prize awarded to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 2007.

Nobre granted Tierramérica an exclusive interview during the 14th World Water Congress of the International Water Resources Association (IWRA), held Sep. 25-29 in Porto de Galinhas, in the northeastern Brazilian state of Pernambuco.

Q: What is your assessment of the situation almost 20 years after the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro?

A: The convention on climate change (adopted in 1992) did not succeed in creating the impetus for a global emissions reduction movement.

The effort should be made, for reasons of equity and justice, first and foremost by the countries that have historically produced the most emissions, and secondly, by the developing countries, who will also have to work towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions if we truly want to embark on a less dangerous trajectory.

Global temperatures could rise by three to five degrees by the end of this century. That is a lot. They already rose by 0.8 degrees in 200 years. The current trajectory is rather pessimistic.

Q: So no progress has been made in this respect since 1992.

A: In 2010 the largest volume of emissions in the history of human civilisation was recorded: almost 45 percent more emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases than in 1990. There is no way you can look at these numbers without feeling worried.

Changing the climate in the space of 200 years to an extent that would normally take 20,000 to 30,000 years in accordance with the earth’s natural cycles is much too abrupt of a change for nature to adjust.

And the first direct victim is biodiversity, which is highly variable. The natural rhythm of emergency response of a given species is measured in hundreds of thousands of years, but extinction happens very quickly, a serious disturbance is all it takes.

Biologists estimate that if this pessimistic scenario persists uncontrolled until the end of the century, the very existence of 40 percent of the world’s species will be endangered. This would be a major cataclysm for life on planet earth.

Q: How can climate change affect water resources?

A: The climate is more variable, which causes disturbances to the production systems that we depend on for survival. For example, today there are a large number of natural disasters and the capacity for resilience is decreasing.

This is the aspect that is most important when we talk about the shortage of water: the climate change projections for this century affect the semiarid regions, where the world’s poverty is concentrated.

In 100 years, the sea level could rise by between 50 centimeters and 1.4 meters. This would lead to the flooding of many low-lying coastal areas where hundreds of thousands of people live, which means they will have to be relocated.

In general terms, large increases in temperature and extreme weather events have a serious impact on global agriculture because of the increase in heat waves and droughts, which become unpredictable. The problem is that agriculture already uses three quarters of the available water resources, it is already at its limit.

Q: Where does Brazil stand in this context of climate crisis?

A: There is undoubtedly a crisis and for Brazil it is no different. Not only is Brazil a mix of cultures in ethnic terms, it is also a mix of climatic and ecological conditions, and it suffers all of the problems that are suffered worldwide. The outlook for semiarid regions is critical in northeastern Brazil, which is the most highly populated semiarid region in the world, with 20 million people.

There has been a significant increase in natural disasters in Brazil, with floods, landslides, heat waves, contamination and an environment that is ever more inhospitable for quality of life.

The greatest ecological vulnerability is in the Amazon and Cerrado (tropical savanna) regions, where there is an enormous risk of the extinction of species on a massive scale, never before seen in human history.

We are talking about the possibility of changes in the Amazon that have not been seen in tens of millions of years, the possibility of rainforest being converted into impoverished savanna. If the climate changes a great deal in 200 years, we will lose a large part of the Amazon rainforest.

Q: These are catastrophic forecasts. What can Brazil do to spearhead a movement of more sustainable development?

A: Brazil is a country that is extremely rich in natural resources, more so than India and China. Brazil’s demographics are highly favorable, and there is a certain aspiration towards sustainable development. The population (currently 192 million) should be stabilised in the next 15 years and not surpass 215 million.

Unlike China and India, Brazil could plan for much more balanced development and a sustainable future, because it has an amount of natural resources that is perhaps greater than any other country in the world.

Today it uses renewable sources for 46 percent of its energy and that could rise to close to 80 percent by 2050. All of this makes it possible to envision a future for Brazil as one of the world’s cleanest countries.

Q: Do you really believe that Brazil, one of the emerging economies, wants to become an environmental power?

A: There is an awareness in Brazilian society today that this future is possible. Brazil does not want to be a hegemonic military power, but it has the potential to explore a new model of tropical development and to be an environmental power by fully utilising renewable energy within the next 20 to 30 years.

The Brazilian economy cannot be separated from the natural knowledge economy. A natural knowledge economy could set it apart from the rest. Brazil could be a world leader of this new vision with the application of knowledge, and that is the image it should present at Rio+20 (the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development).

We want to be the cleanest country in the world in the energy sector, in production, and in sustainable agriculture. (END/2011)

A lot of water is wasted through unmonitored irrigation. Credit:Kristin Palitza/IPS

Kristin Palitza

CAPE TOWN , Sep 1 (IPS) – While many scientists, academics and politicians still theorise about ways to adapt to climate change, a South African civil society organisation has launched a hands-on project that mobilises communities to take easy steps to reduce carbon emissions.

Called the Project 90 by 2030, it encourages individuals, organisations and companies to change the way they live and operate by 90 percent by the year 2030. The idea stems from the suggestion environmental activist George Monbiot makes in his book “Heat” that industrialised nations need to reduce their carbon footprint by 90 percent by 2030.

“It’s a goal-oriented, praxis-oriented approach. It’s actually very simple,” says Project 90 by 2030 director Brenda Martin.

The project’s main purpose is to challenge South Africans to change the way they live and how they relate to the environment, she explains. “As the biggest carbon emitter on the continent, South Africa has the biggest responsibility in Africa to fight climate change,” Martin notes.

With the firm belief that every person can make a small contribution to a healthier environment, Martin suggests that individuals start by reducing their carbon footprint by just 10 percent a year and “keep at it, until they reach 90 percent over several years.” It’s about setting achievable goals, she explains.

Still, Martin is keenly aware of the urgency of preventing further climate change. “If we move as slowly as we do now, we will run out of time to reduce carbon emissions,” she says. “But I do believe that we can make a change. There are sufficient clean energy supply options available to us.”

To set an example, the Project 90 by 2030 initiative has built 15 renewable energy demonstration sites throughout the country over the past four years. The sites showcase affordable, practical solutions, such as biogas digesters, solar panels and solar water heaters. This way, the organisation wants to demystify renewable energy generation for the public and show how renewable energy can provide sufficient, reliable and cheap energy that will not impact negatively on professional activities.

“We want to show people what they can do to reduce climate change on a day-to-day basis,” explains Martin. “Everyone can and must do something. While decision makers continue to deliberate, we are getting on with it.”

One of the demonstration sites is the Johannesburg Zoo, which installed 15 large solar panels on the roof of its education centre to reduce its carbon footprint.

“At the moment, the solar power is fed into the electricity grid, but in future, we hope to make the centre entirely carbon neutral,” says the head of the Zoo’s green team, Lorna Fuller.

The zoo is also running its restaurant with the help of a biogas digester. “We feed kitchen scraps and animal waste into the digester to convert it into gas that we use for cooking in the restaurant,” explains Fuller.

Participating in the initiative was a no-brainer for the zoo management, Fuller says, since “we worry about the impact climate change will have on the environment and the habitat of animals.”

Since the zoo has half a million visitors a year, Fuller hopes that its environmental showcase will find many imitators. “We show visitors how it all works. Some people visit the zoo especially to look at our green installations,” she says.

Project 90 by 2030 is also running 30 school clubs where children get involved in simple, hands-on climate change projects, such as energy saving drives or recycling projects. The only condition: the projects need to have a wider impact than just on the school. They need to benefit the entire community around it. “That’s how we ensure we achieve a broad effect on large groups of people,” Martin explains.

Once projects are up and running for several weeks, the pupils learn how to assess them and measure how much energy, water and carbon emissions have been saved.

“We decided to work with school children to help create a next generation that is more aware of climate change and what can be done,” says Martin. “We want to shape young people and encourage them to create a better world.”

At the Springfield Convent Senior School in Cape Town, a group of pupils started their Project 90 by 2030 involvement with a ‘green audit’ to assess their school’s electricity and water usage as well as how much waste they produce.

The outcome was worrisome, and the learners decided to make some important changes to how their school is managed: they installed low-flow showerheads, geyser blankets as well as a water metre for the river that flows through the school ground, which they use to irrigate the gardens. They also started to recycle waste and use less paper.

“We put an emphasis on individual actions that become a lifestyle and have a collective effect,” says the schools head of geography Fiona Smith, who facilitates the school club. Many of the pupils have also begun to implement similar initiatives in their homes.

Says Smith: “We hope our pupils will grow into adults that treat our planet with more care.” (IPS/END)