Behind the Brands: On Food Justice, Oxfam Gives Coca Cola, Kellogg’s, Nestle & Pepsi Failing Grades

democracynow    Published on Feb 27, 2013

http://www.democracynow.org – Oxfam has released a comprehensive report that measures how the world’s 10 largest food companies perform on food justice issues. No company emerges with passing grades. The 10 companies Oxfam scores are Associated British Foods, Coca Cola, Danone, General Mills, Kellogg, Mars, Mondelez, Nestlé, Pepsico and Unilever. Collectively, these companies make $1 billion a day. Oxfam based its report seven criteria: Small-scale farmers, farm workers, water, land, climate change, women’s rights, and transparency. We’re joined by Chris Jochnick, a lead researcher for Oxfam’s new report, “Behind the Brands.”

http://www.behindthebrands.org/en-us?redirect

Environmental Justice   http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre145
Environment Ethics   http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre120
Food-Matters    http://Food-Matters.TV

The Template of Lies

greenmanbucke

Uploaded on Feb 16, 2012

Global Climate Change http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre130
Environmental Justice http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre145
Environment Ethics http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre120
Food-Matters http://Food-Matters.TV

Coastal studies experts: “For coastal management purposes, a sea level rise of 7 feet (2 meters) should be utilized for planning major infrastructure” | ThinkProgress

By Joe Romm on Nov 14, 2010 at 2:54 pm

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2010/11/14/207032/sea-level-rise-planning-coastal-infrastructure/

Front-page NY Times piece on sea level rise gets it mostly right

The New York Times has a splashy front-page story on some of the latest research on sea level rise today. The graphics above make clear the paper gets a big part of the story right — the latest science says we are facing 3 to 6 feet of sea level rise this century.

Kudos to the NYT for featuring such an important story. Given that serious federal climate action is unlikely for years if not a decade or more, it is more incumbent on the media than ever to explain to the public what’s coming.

The story has its flaws, though. For some reason the media — and many scientists — seem constitutionally incapable of explaining that inaction makes things much worse, that inaction greatly increases the chances of the worst impacts. The NYT has usefully cited the work of Rahmstorf, but somewhat simplified and hence sanitized his graph:

Our current do-nothing or do-little path currently matches the A1F1 scenario (see “U.S. media largely ignores latest warning from climate scientists: “Recent observations confirm “¦ the worst-case IPCC scenario trajectories (or even worse) are being realised” “” 1000 ppm“), where the midpoint SLR projection is nearly 5 feet. That’s no surprise since the unrestricted emissions scenario can leads to a staggering warming where the ice is located (see M.I.T. doubles its 2095 warming projection to 10°F “” with 866 ppm and Arctic warming of 20°F).

Global Climate Change http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre130
Environmental Justice http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre145
Environment Ethics http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre120

North Carolina Bill Would Require Coastal Communities To Ignore Global Warming Science | ThinkProgress

By Joe Romm on May 31, 2012 at 6:10 pm

Some North Carolina GOP legislators want to stop the use of science to plan for the future. They are circulating a bill that would force coastal counties to ignore actual observations and the best science-based projections in planning for future sea level rise.

King Canute thought he had the power to hold back the tide (in the apocryphal legend). These all-too-real lawmakers want to go one better and mandate a formula that projects a sea level rise of at most 12 inches this century, far below what the science now projects.

A state-appointed science panel reviewed the recent literature and reported that a 1-meter (39 inch) rise is likely by 2100. Many coastal studies experts think a level of 5 to 7 feet should be used, since you typically plan for the plausible worst-case scenario, especially with expensive, long-lived infrastructure. …(more).

Global Climate Change http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre130
Environmental Justice http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre145
Environment Ethics http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre120

Suppressed South Carolina Climate Change Report Warns of Big Impacts | ThinkProgress

By Climate Guest Blogger on Feb 26, 2013 at 2:25 pm

By Shiva Polefka

South Carolina news outlet TheState.com reported on Sunday that an official, comprehensive assessment of dramatic climate change impacts looming large in South Carolina’s future was buried and barred from release, apparently due to political pressure.

According to TheState.com, the report, completed by a working group of 18 senior state scientists under the auspices of the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, or DNR, found that the Palmetto State faces an average temperature rise of as much as 9 degrees Fahrenheit over the next 70 years. Along with the heat would come increases in wildlife disease, loss of habitat for wild game, degradation of the state’s valuable recreational and commercial fisheries, increases in “dead zones” off the state’s coast, and salt water intrusion into coastal rivers and freshwater aquifers.

The report also issued a dramatic warning: As South Carolina’s climate warms, it could face in-migration of harmful invasive species from Florida, including piranha and Asian swamp eels.

Even more alarming than piranhas and eels, however, is the possibility that South Carolina’s conservative state government may have suppressed the report — intended for public education and planning purposes — for political reasons. ….(read more).

Global Climate Change http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre130
Environmental Justice http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre145
Environment Ethics http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre120

What’s It Like to Land on an Aircraft Carrier?

ClimateDesk

Published on Feb 27, 2013

Hurtling toward the USS Nimitz in a biofuel-powered jet was just one of the adventures that Mother Jones environmental correspondent Julia Whitty had while reporting the cover story for the March/April 2013 issue of the magazine. Read the full story here: http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2013/02/watch-whats-it-land-aircraft-carrier

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/02/navy-climate-change-great-green-fleet
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/03/green-projects-us-military

Produced by: Brett Brownell and James West
Video production by: Sydney Brownstone and Jaeah Lee
Photos by: Julia Whitty
Additional material by: U.S. Navy
Music by: Louis “Remember Remember”, Justin Marcellus “Elimination”, Broke for Free “Budding”

Visit Mother Jones on the web: http://www.motherjones.com

Global Climate Change http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre130
Environmental Justice http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre145
Environment Ethics http://courses.dce.harvard.edu/~envre120

Food Security in China | DuPont Trailer – Food is Heaven

E120, food-matters,

One-Minute Speech by Rep. Ben Ray Lujan, Safe Climate Caucus (February 27, 2013)

E130,

Bush v. Gore – took away your right to vote! (Pt. 1)

E120,

IPO Forecast: How Hurricane Sandy Stalled Solar Power

E130,