Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta South Africa. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta South Africa. Mostrar todas las entradas

miércoles, septiembre 12, 2007

CLIMATE CHANGE: Extreme climate, extreme politics !

“How are our children going to survive in a land that is dead?” asked a survivor of the wildfires that seared much of southern Greece during the last week of August. Six thousand homes and four million olive trees burned, half the forests of Greece gone, and sixty-four people dead is a huge loss, and in the carbonized landscapes of the Peleponnese it is hard to imagine that people will ever live there again. But what nobody saw coming was the political fallout: this may be the first time that a government falls because of climate change.

When the centre-right government of Costas Karamanlis called an early election last month after only three years in office, it had a comfortable lead in the opinion polls and was cruising towards a certain victory. The fires changed all that, shaking people’s trust in the competence not just of the government but of the established parties in general. In the last published opinion polls (Greek law bans polls in the last two weeks before the September 16 election), neither Karamanlis’s New Democracy nor the centre-left opposition party, PASOK, had even forty percent of the vote.

The beneficiaries were the extreme right Laos party, a normally marginal group preaching nationalism, hatred of immigrants and Orthodox Christianity (its posters urge all Greeks to unite as “one fist”), and the equally fringe party of the hard left called Syriza. Neither party is represented in the present parliament, since they could not clear the legal threshold of three percent of the popular vote.

They are both very likely to be in the next parliament -- and if the two major parties end up more or less tied, as seems probable, extremists of one sort or another will be able to extort a high political price in return for agreeing to support a coalition government.

Obviously, we can’t just extrapolate from this single example and say that climate disasters lead to a polarization and radicalization of politics, but this is a phenomenon that warrants attention. After a week like the Greeks had, there was bound to be a political reaction, but does it mean anything for other places?

First of all, were these fires really caused by climate change? After all, there were fires of a similar scale in Greece about a century ago, and of course the land did turn green again after a few years. But uncontrollable “megafires” are ceasing to be once-in-a-century events. Another one burned about a quarter of the island of Tenerife in the Canary Islands this summer.

There have been comparable megafires in the past few years in France, Portugal, Canada, Russia, Indonesia, South Africa and Brazil. In the United States, where a forest fire that burned more than 5,000 acres (2,000 hectares) was relatively rare twenty years ago, in the past decade there have been more than 200 megafires that burned at least ten times that area. Six of the past ten years have seen the previous U.S. record for the amount of land devastated by forest fires broken.

If this isn’t climate change in full costume dress, it is certainly its first cousin. Temperatures in Greece this summer hit 46 degrees C (115 degrees F), unheard of even ten years ago. In a Mediterranean climate where almost all the rain falls in the winter, this virtually guaranteed massive forest fires.

There is a prima facie case for seeing this as a manifestation of climate change -- so what about the political reaction in Greece? It has been ugly on every side.

Karamanlis’s government, having made few preparations for coping with massive fires despite the speed with which the problem has grown in recent years, was slow to respond to the crisis, and then tried to shift the blame for its failures by claiming that the fires were set by arsonists, saboteurs and terrorists. Its spokesmen rambled on about “asymmetrical terrorist threats” and an “organized plan” to destabilize the country, but those Greeks paranoid enough to believe such claptrap did not forgive the New Democrats for their sins. Instead, they promptly shifted their votes to the extremists who promised to “crack down hard” on something or other.

It hardly matters what they crack down on. Minorities and immigrants are usually favored by the far right, which will probably be the main beneficiary of these events in Greece, but it’s pure symbolism, so the actual target doesn’t matter. Any outsider or foreigner will do.

Now envisage a world where climate change is really hitting hard. The Mississippi delta, various Pacific islands and a good deal of Bangladesh are disappearing beneath the waves. The Amazon is burning, the monsoon has failed for the third successive year in the Indian subcontinent, and Spain, Italy, Greece and Turkey are turning into deserts. Will people and governments be sweetly reasonable, seeking collaborative ways to cope with a shared international disaster?

Sure they will. Just as soon as they have shot down all the flying pigs.

Via|Teheran Times | By Gwynne Dyer
,,,,,,,,,



Found this post useful? Consider subscribing to
.


miércoles, mayo 30, 2007

GLOBAL WARMING: Exxon Holders Reject Climate Proposals, Retain Boskin

by Joe Carroll

Shareholders of Exxon Mobil Corp., the world's largest oil company, rejected a resolution calling on the company to cut greenhouse gases and voted to retain director Michael Boskin.

A proposal for Exxon Mobil to develop a plan to reduce emissions from its refineries and the fuels it makes received 31 percent in balloting at the company's annual meeting in Dallas. Initiatives to cap pay for top executives, including Chief Executive Officer Rex Tillerson, at $500,000 a year and increase investment in ethanol got less than 8 percent of votes.

Boskin, chairman of the board committee that deals with environmental issues, survived a challenge by an investor group that included the California Public Employees' Retirement System, the largest U.S. pension fund. Other holders said Boskin deserved support after the company's shares jumped 36 percent last year, the stock's biggest annual gain since 1980.

``We're very happy with how the company has performed,'' Harry Wickes, a retired dentist from Fort Worth, Texas, said in an interview. Wickes attended the meeting with his wife Violet, who has been a shareholder for 27 years. ``They've been very good to the shareholders.''

Exxon Mobil, based in Irving, Texas, was pressured by pension funds, religious groups and environmentalists in the weeks leading up to today's meeting. Critics included California Treasurer Bill Lockyer, the Episcopal Church, New York City Comptroller William Thompson and Greenpeace.

Boskin, a Stanford University economist and who led the White House Council of Economic Advisors from 1989 to 1993, received 93 percent support, down from 94.5 percent last year. Stanford is home to a global-warming research project to which Exxon has pledged $100 million.

`Dinosaurs'
Boskin, 61, was criticized by Calpers and more than two dozen other institutional managers representing more than $1 trillion in investment funds after he refused five invitations during the past 18 months to have face-to-face discussions on climate change. Boskin has been a director since 1996.

``I don't understand the arrogance of not wanting to talk to people, particularly large investors,'' Lockyer, a Calpers board member, said in a telephone interview. ``At some point, oil companies that fail to plan for a non-oil world are going to become dinosaurs. This is a strategy to die.''

Exxon Mobil said Boskin arranged a daylong meeting in July 2006 between 19 representatives of the investors and three Exxon vice presidents to discuss the issue. Another meeting is planned for later this year, company spokesman Gantt Walton said today.

``Dr. Boskin has communicated with these particular shareholders four different times,'' Kenneth Cohen, who oversees Exxon Mobil's contributions to public-policy groups, said today in an interview in Dallas. ``Because these issues are so important, he did it in writing.''

Protesters
About 35 environmental activists gathered across the street from the meeting at the Morton H. Meyerson Symphony Center in Dallas, holding a banner that said, ``Protect the people, protect the planet.'' Exxon Mobil discontinued the practice of distributing donuts to protesters after the 2005 annual meeting. The protest ended after 45 minutes when a thunderstorm erupted.

The company's stock increased 47 percent since Tillerson, 55, became CEO in January 2006. Exxon Mobil earned $39.5 billion in profit last year, a record for any U.S. corporation. The company's 2006 sales of $335 billion exceeded the gross national products of countries including Norway, South Africa and Ireland.

Shares of Exxon Mobil rose $1.38, or 1.4 percent, to $84 in composite trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

A proposal for Exxon Mobil to add sexual orientation to its employee anti-discrimination policy received 38 percent support, up from 35 percent last year. The resolution has been defeated 10 years in a row.

Governance
A proposal to allow holders of 10 percent of the company's stock to call special shareholder meetings received almost 48 percent support, more than any other investor-sponsored resolution on this year's ballot.

A resolution to recoup bonuses from executives who failed to achieve performance targets garnered 47 percent support. About 41 percent of holders voted in favor of giving shareholders an advisory vote on pay packages for senior managers.

Investors who supported the failed environmental, executive pay and gay rights measures said they would continue to own Exxon Mobil shares.

``Divestiture is something you do in reaction to poor performance, rather than corporate governance and environmental issues,'' Lockyer said.



Blogalaxia Tags:



Label Cloud

The Energy Blog