Real wages declined with 25%. Youth unemployment is above 50%. The number of people applying for food aid is fast rising. Malnutrition among children is spreading, while hospitals are being closed. UN agencies and Doctors without Borders are talking about a humanitarian crisis. Is this a Sub-Saharan country? No, its Greece, a country that in the last few years was – and still is – mostly governed by Brussels and Washington.

On March 28th we reported about the mini-civil war that broke out in a community in Greece where a Canadian company was going for gold by force. A Greek drama that included a mayor and twelve policemen ‘taken hostage’ by some thousand angry civilians who had surrounded the town hall. But that incident is unlikely to remain a local issue or an isolated incident. A large part of North Greece is planned to be sold and transformed into gold mining pits, starting in Thrake, Halkidiki and Kilkis. Just above Kilkis, ca 50km North of Thessaloniki, another Canadian company (a Greek subsidiary of Eldorado) is trying to open a gold mine in a fertile traditionally agricultural area.

The saga started on July 13th 2011, when the Greek Ministry for the Environment (YPEKA) sent a letter to the district government of Kilkis asking them to express their opinion on the leasing of two areas in the prefecture of Kilkis for the creation of copper-gold mines: the first on the mountain range of Kroussia (roughly 91 km2) and the second on mount Paiko (roughly 84 km2). The 91 km2 area of Kroussia contains 12 villages and mainly consists of farmed fields. Kilkis District and Kilkis Municipality rejected the idea, but that did not stop the national government from speeding up the process.

First, the government managed to pass a vote on the project in October last year. It was an internet vote that nobody in Kilkis knew about (not even the Municipalities involved). Besides not knowing, the villages’ inhabitants of these 12 villages are mostly old-aged and have absolutely no computer literacy. The so-called “vote” runned for roughly 30 days and ended up with only 20 votes. Some votes were coming from people unknown in the area and some from geologists involved in the project.

On January 4th 2012, the Ministry for the Environment announces an open international bidding for the leasing of the area on the mountain range of Kroussia (where Kilkis is located) for the purpose of installing copper – gold mines..The area to be leased also contains the drainage basin of Galikos River from which the city of Kilkis, many smaller towns and villages, plus a part of the city of Thessaloniki get their drinking water. When this news came out, some people started to spread awareness about the consequences of gold mining, which quickly led to a broad resistance movement. In total 5000 signatures were collected and 58 organizations spoke out to put their position against the mining project on paper and in public.

After all this pressure from local citizens, on February 6th and after many calls from the local representatives, officials from the Ministry for the Environment came to the city of Kilkis to try to convince the angry public about the advantages that gold and copper mining will offer to the area. But the public had seen the data and video’s about “gold-mining development” taking place in other parts of the world (Canada KI-land, Swedish Saami, Argentina, Turkey, Bulgaria, …). Despite the differences, a very important thing was said in this meeting: the ministry’s assurance that if the public – as expressed through their elected representatives – decided against the creation of the mines, the whole process would be stopped and the bidding would be canceled.

On February 16th, the Ministry for the Environment invites the local representatives to a committee of the Greek Parliament to discuss all aspects of the copper-gold mines. The ministry’s under-secretary Mr Maniatis accuses everyone of having “phobic syndromes” when told that the municipal council and the public had already decided against the installation of the mines. When asked about the total absence of information or the non-existing consultation with the public, he pleaded lack of personnel and financial resources. But he insisted that somehow the process of informing the public would continue (in committees in Athens that local people could not participate) and that the public’s final decision would be respected. Contrary to his promise, no other actions on that direction were taken. Instead the bidding process went on as planned. When it became clear that the local communities were not going to accept the project, the government only proceeded to give information to the parliamentary committees and decided without the citizens. Finally, on March 14th, the government received the offers from two interested mining companies and the procedure of choosing the mining partner goes on as initially planed. When there’s gold, things like democracy have to step aside.

The story of gold is the story of Greece today. The question all EU citizens should ask: if Greece has transformed from a democracy to a technocratic dictatorship that helps foreign companies to plunder the remaining resources at all cost: who is to blame for it? We have seen how EU leaders reacted after the Greek people voted on May 6. Only 33% of the Greeks voted for parties that implemented and backed the wave of privatizations and mining projects that were given as conditions from the EU and the IMF. Because the two parties that got 33% of the vote still took 49% of the seats and no government could be formed, Greeks will now have to vote again on June 17, but they can wonder: do we still have any choice? Even before the new election was announced, EU leaders were scrambling over each other to say that they did not actually plan to listen to what Greek people had to say about the austerity forced upon them. Instead, they are warning that if ther Greek people do not vote in a way they want them to vote, they will be kicked out of the euro and the EU. They make it appear that there is only one way to pay back the Greek debt and that is by more austerity, which is in effect leading to a humanitarian catastrophy not seen in Europe since the war in the Balkans. They have nothing to say about their own part of blame, neither are there any IMF or EU conditions to start taxing the biggest commercial fleet in the world, the Greek fleet. They simple do not allow Greek politician to make any political choices on where the money should come from – in effect leaving no space for democracy to work. Greek politicians do have ideas on how to re-organise their economy and society but they are not even allowed to speak out for them. The citizens of Kilkis resisting to gold mining have expressed many agricultural, farmer and production proposals that could bring money to the city of Kilkis and thus to the Greek state, but without sacrificing the environment and their quality of life. But these are not even considered by a puppet state that in practice is governed from Brussels and Washington. So the big question is what the EU will put first after the Greek people make their choice on June 17: its neo-liberal ideology or its democratic values? The answer will probably define the EU for years to come.

So here we are in 2012, with REDD projects starting to create carbon permits for the rich to keep polluting at the same rate as usual, now with the extra damage of putting fences around forests used by indigenous peoples for as long as they can remember. Already, civil society all over the globe is up in arms against this insulting ‘solution’ to our climate change problem. A coalition of civil society organisations now made this 6 minute video that explains the issue in a way that is difficult to misunderstand. The problem is not so much the deforestation in the Amazon, but blind consumers and greedy bankers that are now creating a new bubble market at the expense of local communities. Disguised as a solution, we are in effect creating a second injustice upon the existing injustice of climate change. Watch the video and do whatever you can to stop this madness.

It might look like a small victory to stop 1 ship from entering Indian harbors but the consequences are huge. There is of course the symbolic value of not allowing the ship that caused the Exxon Valdez oil disaster in the US to now pollute India with all the toxics it still has on board. But there is an even bigger value to the ruling. India is a party to the Basel Convention, while the USA is not. This makes the attempt to dump the hazardous Exxon Valdez disaster ship not only unjust but also illegal. The US government lifted the moratorium imposed on the transfer of toxic ships to developing countries … but India is keeping the door shut. By doing this, India is showing to other developing countries that you can be an ally with the US – without tolerating such grave and illegal environmental injustices. That is the message this ruling should have.

EJOLT and the ToxicWatchAlliance have joined hands in the work towards this success. Federico Demaria from UAB, who wrote the chapter on shipbreaking for the EJOLT report on industrial waste, presented his results in April together with Gopal Krishna from TWA at the Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi. They were also interviewed by Voice of America and Gopal Krishna from TWA now managed to convince the Supreme Court of India of the need to implement internationally agreed environmental laws. Environmental Justice is not an activist dream, but a reachable goal.

Meanwhile, Indian activist are doing their part of the struggle for environmental justice in the case of shipbreaking. According to the ToxicsWatch Alliance, 5924 end-of-life ships have been beached for dismantling in Alang. There are no data on the amount of hazardous wastes that has been dumped but many ships, like the ‘Oriental Nicety’, contain a lot of toxics. ToxicsWatch filed a Writ Petition (Civil) at the Supreme Court demanding that no end-of-life ship should be allowed without prior decontamination in the country of export as the same court ordered on October 14, 2003. Since May 3, the Supreme Court is handling the case.

And it’s not just dangers from toxics that the workers face. On May 2, a worker on the ship-breaking yard at Chittagong died when a heavy door crushed him. In the last 44 months, at least 38 workers died at ship breaking yards. It should be clear that those who send the ships to these yards have some responsibility in all this. Only 1% of all ships are dismantled in Europe, 2% in the US but 44% are dismantled in India and 17% in Bangladesh. While 90% of international trade goes through ships, it is obvious who is bearing the heavy cost at the end of the lifecycle. This environmental justice needs to be addressed by implementing two interconnected steps:

1) It is technically feasible to have a proper if more expensive dismantling operation (as in Europe). There are in fact many guidelines (Basel Convention, 2002; IMO, 2003; ILO 2004). They are simply not implemented. Action through the Indian Supreme Court to implement them has to be supported.

2) Ship owners could pay a deposit (or guarantee) throughout the ship life to be spent for proper dismantling, established as a requirement for allowing entrance at any harbour. This could allow investments to take the activity off the beach because dry docks operations potentially offer better labour and environmental standards.

EJOLT is planning further steps to use the resources we developped in working towards these goals. As soon as we have new developments we will keep you updated.

In late April 2012, the Argentine government shocked oil markets by re-nationalizing the YPF oil company. President Cristina Fernandez (who succeeded her late husband Néstor Kirchner) belongs to the Peronist movement, which in turn has long dominated the politics of Argentina. The shares of the Spanish private firm Repsol were drastically reduced from 57% to 6%. The expropriation enjoys broad popular and political support, beyond the Peronist government. Founded in 1922 as a state-run company charged with developing the country’s oil deposits, YPF quickly became one of Argentina’s largest, and most iconic, firms. Under pressure from the IMF to increase privatization, it was sold to Repsol in 1992. Later a new Argentine shareholder, the Esquenazi family, with relations to Nestor Kirchner, took a 25% share of YPF. The recent partial expropriation will bring the state (and province) share to 51% of YPF ownership.

Repsol said it will fight expropriation in the courts. It is asking for about 10 billion dollars as an appropriate price to be paid for by Argentina. It is likely to get much less, depending in part on the money valuation of the environmental liabilities. The President and her ministers accuse Repsol YPF of repatriating profits to Spain instead of investing enough in Argentina to reverse years of declining output that have turned the country into a net energy importer for the first time in nearly two decades. Now, the government and some members of the Senate are also bringing forward a new and somewhat contradictory argument. Repsol YPFs dwindling activity has nevertheless left large environmental liabilities behind. The best part of this whole affair is that the words “Pasivo Ambiental” (environmental liability) have become front-page news in Buenos Aires – and beyond.

The expropriation of YPF is making the issue of environmental liabilities very topical not only in Argentina but in general in Latin America. This is similar to the Chevron Texaco court decisions in 2011 and 2012 in Ecuador, though in Argentina civil society has had a much smaller role in claiming environmental liabilities than in Ecuador. The government of Argentina has now gleefully noticed that environmental liabilities can be subtracted from the payment to Repsol’s shareholders. Indeed they can and they should be subtracted. However, in the long run, the insistence on the universal painful truth that the extractive industries leave behind large environmental liabilities (whether it is Repsol or PDVSA, whether Agip or Petrobras) may become double edged. It can also be applied to the national or foreign mining companies (like Xstratra in La Alumbrera) in Argentina, which the current government is promoting and supporting. They are also leaving large environmental liabilities behind, unaccounted for. And the same applies to the very large soybean export industry because of deforestation and damage to human health from glyphosate.

Argentina’s National Appraisal Court will determine what compensation the expropriated shareholders of Repsol YPF will receive. Government ministers have hinted that the Spanish firm might not receive anything at all if YPF’s environmental liabilities are taken into account. Such environmental liabilities (in Loma de la Lata and elsewhere) have been in the news from time to time over the last 15 years, even before Repsol bought YPF in 1992. Claims have come from indigenous groups and from the governments of some provinces (Neuquen, Santa Cruz, Mendoza), through the courts, through politics, through activists’ movements, without much success until now. This is likely to change, with a central government trying to prove as much environmental liabilities as possible.

Also in Spain itself, there has long been a campaign with the title “Repsol Mata” (Repsol kills) based in shareholder activism and other forms of public protest to enhance awareness of what Repsol was doing not only in Argentina but also in Bolivia, Ecuador and elsewhere. While criticized by many, the move from Cristina Fernandez to claim environmental liabilities might not just bring justice to many people in Argentina who suffered from Repsol’s activities, it might make other oil and mining operators throughout the continent and the globe realize that their environmental liabilities will haunt them until they manage to deal with them.

Spanish background articles of interest:

http://www.diagonalperiodico.net/La-decada-prodigiosa-de-Repsol.html

http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elpais/subnotas/192217-58700-2012-04-19.html

And it’s not just Europe where the debate is getting hot. Unconventional gas drilling and oil exploration are emerging as one of the most controversial energy & environmental conflicts around the world today. In the report Fracking the Future, the focus is on how unconventional gas is threatening our water, health and climate – globally. EJOLT recently also wrote on the rising problems with unconventional oil in Canada. Off-shore drilling is also increasingly controversial, with not just the huge BP oilspill but problems in Brazil and the North-Sea as well. So how many more disasters do we need before we see the sillyness of moving to unconventional oil and gas – all the while destroying our climate in the process.

The picture that emerges is one of a collapsing fossil fuel economy that desperately tries to hold on by moving into ever more dangerous territories. Which is eerily similar to the ever more complex financial instruments invented to keep our essentially bancrupt financial system afloat, with the crucial difference that the destruction created by the expansion into unconventional oil and gas is likely to be even more devastating than the collapse of the financial system. Homo sapiens does not need paper money or a bank for pure survival – but it does need drinkable water and a good health. The move from oil and gas in the more dangerous territories of deep oceans or urbanised area’s is not only worsening an already grave climate change crisis, it is making an additional, direct and much more drastic attack on the very resources we depend on for our survival. We’ll need whatever is left of our democracy, in combination with engaged scientists and informed activists to simply forbid companies to move into any destructive unconventional oil and gas, while working on unconventional alternatives for our fossil fuel economy.

We have created a video game called, Age of Yasuní, in which we basically present the conflict that original peoples have with the petroleum activity in a range of cases (Yasuní, in the Amazon, the Niger Delta of Africa, Southeast Asia, Alaska, and the North Sea). If you can prevent the construction of the oil well you win, but if you can’t get the oil companies out of your territory, you lose. The game is simple, appropriate for all ages and for a broad public with little knowledge of these issues.

The game is already in the Appstore and on Google Play and we will soon release a PC and Linux version on our websites. There is a free version and a paid on ($0.99 or the equivalent in Euros). Proceeds from the paid version ($0.99) will support community-led efforts around the world to keep the oil and gas development off of their lands.

The mobile videogame, Age of Yasuní is now available for download. This is an effort to draw attention to the plight of indigenous peoples and the threat of oil to their fragile and biodiverse territories around the planet. From the game you can learn, What is Yasuní? Why defend it? What are the threats caused by the expansion of the oil frontier?

We would like to invite you to be part of a global effort to publicize this initiative among your friends, network lists and in your web pages, and help us get the word out electronically so that people will download the game from the Appstore and Google Play.

For more information, visit:

AMAZONIA POR LA VIDA - www.amazoniaporlavida.org

OILWATCH - www.oilwatch.org

GLOBAL GREENGRANTS - www.globalgreengrants.org

FOR DOWNLOAD “AGE OF YASUNÍ”:

APP STORE:

Paid version - http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/age-of-yasuni-full/id509942480?mt=8
Free version - http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/age-of-yasuni-lite/id507396178?mt=8

GOOGLE PLAY:

Paid version - https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.cocos2dx.aoyfull
Free version –
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.cocos2dx.aoylite&feature=search_result – ?t=W251bGwsMSwxLDEsIm9yZy5jb2NvczJkeC5hb3lsaXRlIl0.

Contacts:
email hidden; JavaScript is required
email hidden; JavaScript is required
email hidden; JavaScript is required

Despite an activist victory to avoid the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline over a sensitive area, oil from Alberta State in Canada is still likely to flow through North America. More important than the route to refineries in Texas is the origin of the oil: tar sands of Northern Canada. Photographer Garth Lenz shows us the beauty and the destruction of the Canadian Boreal Forest. Until now, its mountains, plains and wetlands hosts 60% of Canada’s 800 bird species, and a million indigenous people who speak 500 different languages. These are now under threat.

The Boreal Forest holds hundreds of billions of exploitable oil barrels, under the form of bituminous oil, a form of oil trapped in a natural mixture of sand, clay, and water. Taking the oil means taking the soil away and removing everything that grows from it. This unconventional form of petroleum comes at an extremely heavy price. Heavy equipment is needed to extract oil with a poor quality. Also adding to the problem with oil from tar sands is that this type of oil exploitation is creating 3 to 4 times more greenhouse gas emissions compared to conventional oil exploitation. The insanity of this tragic development is that it doesn’t come from a resource-hungry country, but from the wealthy and lightly populated Canada. By giving an open license to the exploitation of tar sands, the country turned from climate change champion to climate change villain. Environmental activists from around the globe elected Canada as the unbeatable world champions in stimulating human made climate change, for five years in a row.

Our economic system is counter-productive to stop this type of development, unless governments act as safeguards of the common good. The instability of oil prices, and their tendency to continue rising in the mid-term due to peak oil has suddenly made unconventional oil attractive for financial firms. Aligned on the interests of major companies, the government fails to see the bigger picture of this economic activity. The value of the Boreal Forest, the cultures and biodiversity it holds is incommensurably high, and the services it provides, in terms of human wellbeing, cultural value, if evaluated would certainly amount to tens of billions of dollars. According to http://www.borealcanada.ca/ the naturally-occurring ecosystem services provided by the Boreal, such as carbon storage and water filtration, are worth 2.5 times more than the value of extracting resources such as minerals and timber. Important to add here is that no company pays the damage it causes with tar sands exploitation, which usually cannot be repaired. Chevron has recently been condemned to pay $ 18 billion for the damages caused by 28 years of oil exploitation in Ecuador’s rainforest (see our post) But until now, Chevron has refused to pay and even if it pays one day: this fine won’t repair the damage done to the environment or its inhabitants.

The exploitation of tar sands in Alberta shows us the incapacity of current market tools to anticipate what has now became obvious to most: the necessity to engage in an ecological and social transition. It is up to us to remind the Canadian government of their task: to protect the common good.

EARTHLIFE Namibia and CRIIRAD (Commission for Independent Research and Information about Radiation) have organized visits and measurements in areas located in the vicinity of uranium mines in Namibia, especially Rössing. The CRIIRAD team (Christian Courbon and Bruno Chareyron) also conducted training activities and lectures about Radioprotection issues and the impact of uranium mining. The lectures took place in Windhoek and Swakopmund between September and October 2011. In the course of an on site mission carried out between September 22th  and October 2nd 2011, scientists from the CRIIRAD laboratory took radiation measurements in situ, and collected 14 samples of top soil, 13 samples of surface sediments of the Swakop, Gawib and Khan rivers and 11 underground water samples in the alluvium of Swakop, and Khan rivers and tap water from Arandis city. Solid samples have been analysed at the CRIIRAD laboratory in France and water samples have been monitored. The CRIIRAD laboratory accuracy in radiation monitoring is acknowledged by the French Nuclear Safety Authority.

The preliminary findings – submitted on April 10 to the National Radiation Protection Authority – should give reason for concern about uranium mining in Namibia. The dose rate measured by CRIIRAD on the parking of Rössing mine is about 6 times above natural background value. The finest fraction of the radioactive rocks is washed down by rain water and contaminates the sediments of the Khan river: with values 10 times above those measured in sediments collected in Khan river upstream Rössing mine. More on their measurements, maps and methods are in this press release.

The preliminary report, videos and pictures are on the website of CRIIRAD:

http://www.criirad.org/actualites/dossier2012/namibie/mines_uranium.html

This film shows through different lenses the origins and development of the idea of “leaving oil in the soil” (850 million barrels) in one part of the Yasuni National Park in Ecuador. It argues that in this way biodiversity would be preserved, indigenous peoples would be protected, and carbon dioxide emissions would be avoided.  Esperanza Martinez of Accion Ecologica and Alberto Acosta, the former minister of Energy who launched the proposal in 2007, are interviewed. President Rafael Correa presents the plan with vigour at a United Nations speech. Local inhabitants in the heart of the Yasuni National Park are interviewed, next to oil spills. Humberto Cholango, the head of CONAIE, show his support for the proposal and his scepticism about Correa’s motives. The film also shows how Sumak Kawsay, ¨Buen Vivir”, or the concept of The Good Life as well as the rights of Mother Nature, have been formalized in Ecaudor´s constitution.

From the jungle where the Waorani reside to the offices of activists and ministers, from Ecuador to New York and Europe, the film elicits many voices that explain and appraise this sensational proposal, undreamed of a few years ago: LEAVE THE OIL IN THE SOIL!

Please stay tuned for an upcoming report on movements that aim to replicate the Yasuni plan and leave oil and other fossil fuels in the soil, as well as the full video that will be available online in the near future. You can see the trailer here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlbZa-7AitM

Information: http://www.casamerica.es/sociedad/yasuni-el-buen-vivir

Free entry until complete.

Plaza de Cibeles, 2. 28014 Madrid.España.

Tel.: 91 595 48 00