Alex Clute
April 16, 2001
0930 EST
An article in Al Jazeera reports that in Brazil environmental and indigenous activists are currently struggling to prevent the construction of the Belo Monte dam on the Xingu River, a tributary of the Amazon. First conceived during the 1980s under the behest of a military government, the $10 billion project would divert 80% of the river, flooding over 100,000 acres of endangered habitat in the Amazon forest and forcing 20,000 indigenous people to relocate. If built the dam will be the third largest in the world and President Dilma Rouseff along with elements in the government claim that the dam will provide electric for 23 million homes and generate jobs and that the dam is needed to bolster Brazil's economic growth, which 7.5% last year.
Businessweek reports that the Belo Monte dam project has been order to halt by the Brazilian courts until twenty-nine undisclosed environmental criteria are met. The Businessweek article places the land that would flooded at 127,506 acres while placing the number of people being relocated at 1000. The dam would be built and controlled by a state-owned companies Eletrobras and Norte Energia.
A study conducted by International Rivers, entitled Environmental Impacts of Brazil's Tucurui Dam, on a similar dam project on the Tucurui River, also in Brazil, during the 1980s concluded that the construction of the dam consistently placed economic interests over those of the environment and people. And also found that the dam was built to fulfill the interests of foreign investment and the aluminum smelting industry. The results of the Tucurui dam were health and social problems coupled with large-scale environmental destruction. While noting that in theory Brazil has improved its environmental and social record, it is likely that future projects will follow the same course. The study calls for transparency in the planning of new development projects so that who benefits may be clearly determined.
Showing posts with label Alex Clute. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alex Clute. Show all posts
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Sunday, April 03, 2011
Blog 10 Losing Cultural Diversity
Alex Clute
April 4, 2011
1100 EST
In an article in the Guardian entitled World's Race for Economic Growth Threatens Greeland's Pure, White Wilderness, Stephen Leonard discusses the disappearance of the Inuit culture as a result of receding sea ice and pressure from environmentalists. The Inuits are the indigenous population of Greenland and practice the remnants of a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. Many making their living today with halibut fishing. This is accomplished by fishing through holes in the ice, the ice that is melting as a result of global warming. There have also been attempts by environmental groups, though none were named specifically, to limit their way of life. The Inuit themselves ask the question why so much attention is being paid to their way of life, which has far less impact on the planet than large-scale capitalist society.
In a previous article by Leonard, Greenland's Race for Minerals Threaten Culture on the Edge of Extinction, he relates how starving polar bears have been foraging in the trash middens around town and that it now unsafe to leave town without a rifle lest one become lunch for a hungry bear. But what truly has the Inuit concerned is the Greenland's government plan to extract the vast tracts of mineral wealth being laid bare as the glaciers melt and shipped over the newly ice-free polar region to China. Greenland's tiny population of 50,000 will not provide sufficient labor to run these operations, so large number of people will have to be brought in from elsewhere, creating fears in the Inuit that they will be swamped and displaced by the newcomers.
Once again traditional societies will be pushed aside to make way for the wholesale liquidation of the Earth's resources. Now, however, the very process set in motion by human burning of fossil fuels and industrial production is paving the way for further exploitation as the ice melts. All over the world traditional societies are being absorbed into the global monoculture when we should be attempting to learn from them and support them as alternatives to this over consumptive and unsustainable way of life. There is much that can be learned from indigenous people, who have learned to survive in various environments in a fashion that does not exceed to carrying capacity of the environment. This is not to say that indigenous cultures should be held perennially in a state of "pristineness" by paternal institutions, likely residing in the First World. Rather indigenous cultures should be given the choice of what they wish to take away from other cultures. We should recognize that there is much we can learn from indigenous peoples and that we have no right to come along a erase their ways in which they live.
April 4, 2011
1100 EST
In an article in the Guardian entitled World's Race for Economic Growth Threatens Greeland's Pure, White Wilderness, Stephen Leonard discusses the disappearance of the Inuit culture as a result of receding sea ice and pressure from environmentalists. The Inuits are the indigenous population of Greenland and practice the remnants of a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. Many making their living today with halibut fishing. This is accomplished by fishing through holes in the ice, the ice that is melting as a result of global warming. There have also been attempts by environmental groups, though none were named specifically, to limit their way of life. The Inuit themselves ask the question why so much attention is being paid to their way of life, which has far less impact on the planet than large-scale capitalist society.
In a previous article by Leonard, Greenland's Race for Minerals Threaten Culture on the Edge of Extinction, he relates how starving polar bears have been foraging in the trash middens around town and that it now unsafe to leave town without a rifle lest one become lunch for a hungry bear. But what truly has the Inuit concerned is the Greenland's government plan to extract the vast tracts of mineral wealth being laid bare as the glaciers melt and shipped over the newly ice-free polar region to China. Greenland's tiny population of 50,000 will not provide sufficient labor to run these operations, so large number of people will have to be brought in from elsewhere, creating fears in the Inuit that they will be swamped and displaced by the newcomers.
Once again traditional societies will be pushed aside to make way for the wholesale liquidation of the Earth's resources. Now, however, the very process set in motion by human burning of fossil fuels and industrial production is paving the way for further exploitation as the ice melts. All over the world traditional societies are being absorbed into the global monoculture when we should be attempting to learn from them and support them as alternatives to this over consumptive and unsustainable way of life. There is much that can be learned from indigenous people, who have learned to survive in various environments in a fashion that does not exceed to carrying capacity of the environment. This is not to say that indigenous cultures should be held perennially in a state of "pristineness" by paternal institutions, likely residing in the First World. Rather indigenous cultures should be given the choice of what they wish to take away from other cultures. We should recognize that there is much we can learn from indigenous peoples and that we have no right to come along a erase their ways in which they live.
Saturday, March 26, 2011
Blog 9 Defending Democracy with All Deliberate Haste
Alex Clute
March 26, 2011
1030 EST
Okay, so I was looking for news concerning water reserves in the Middle East and I found this great article entitled The Middle East Crisis has just Begun by Robert Kaplan in the Wall Street Journal. In the article Kaplan is pretty open about US intentions in the Middle East and it just goes to support Noam Chomsky's point about how media sources like the Wall Street Journal are excellent sources of news precisely because they inform the people who are controlling the government and economy and thus cannot afford to inject all the feel good rhetoric and propaganda of media outlets like Fox or CNN. This is because those who are in charge must have a clear, or at least clearer, picture of what is happening than those who are to be lead. That being said, one can see in an article like Kaplan's the tacit assumptions of those who would rule.
In the first paragraph Kaplan sets the tone by making the remark,
"American policy-makers have been spoiled by events in Tunisia and Egypt, both of which boast relatively sturdy institutions, civil society associations and middle classes, as well as being age-old clusters of civilization where states of one form or another have existed since antiquity."
The implication of this statement is that the people of these countries are uncivilized and in the second paragraph Kaplan is basically asking the question, who are these people and do they have US interests in their hearts? In addition, he uses the word "illiberal", a word which means against free market capitalism. Could these people be against good old American capital? Maybe, so you should be afraid. There is also an the interesting statement, "The United States may be a democracy, but it is also a status quo power, whose position in the world depends on the world staying as it is." Kaplan reaffirms US democracy, saying in a roundabout way that the US is good, but we want things just the way they are, after all, the US has worked very hard to keep them this way. In fact, in Kaplan's own words,
"Because outside of Iran, and with the arguable exceptions of Syria and Libya itself, there is no short-term benefit for the U.S. in democratic revolts in the region. In fact, they could be quite destructive to our interests, even as they prove to be unstoppable."
Further along in paragraphs ten and eleven Kaplan once again invokes US democracy, remember that means the US is inherently good, but we must save ourselves for future wars, saying:
"Democracy is part of America's very identity, and thus we benefit in a world of more democracies. But this is no reason to delude ourselves about grand historical schemes or to forget our wider interests. Precisely because so much of the Middle East is in upheaval, we must avoid entanglements and stay out of the domestic affairs of the region. We must keep our powder dry for crises ahead that might matter much more than those of today." (emphasis added)
So why must we "keep are powder dry?" Well, China off course. China is doing all these things like building up their navy, extracting resources in our imperial holdings of Iraq and Afghanistan, and creating economic ties in Asia and the Pacific. What Kaplan is saying is that China has encroached on the US Empire while we have been trying with all our might to maintain it and we will probably have to go to war with China someday. This future war with China is a neo-conservative fantasy that has been discussed by right-wing think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute and its ilk for some time now. Do not worry though, this talk of war with China is likely just a perception management tool that is being used in the context of the uprising in the Middle East as an excuse to do as little as possible. Consider this: if we attacked China, where would we get all our cheap consumer junk from? There is also the matter of all the US debt held by China, if we were to attack China who would lend us the money to do it? Conversely, from China's perspective why attack its biggest costumer? Now a day may come when China's internal market is large enough to absorb all the goods that are generated within China as the Chinese middle class grows, but how would war with the US be to China's benefit? Once again, China has invested a massive amount of money in the US.
What is really being said in Kaplan's thinly veiled article shilling for US Empire is that the US government is looking for excuses to not get involved in the push for democracy in the Middle East. The Chinese "threat" is just a pretext to sit on the sidelines and let the oppressive governments of Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Bahrain, etcetera, to crush the uprisings in their countries. However, since the US is supposedly a paragon of freedom and democracy, it must be seen to be doing something, or else the people out in TV land might start asking questions. Well, when one is given lemons make lemonade, so the US should use the democratic uprisings in the Middle East to further its own agenda where possible, thus, the US can take out Qaddafi, since it never liked him anyway, and it can militate against Iran. And this is done in our names.
March 26, 2011
1030 EST
Okay, so I was looking for news concerning water reserves in the Middle East and I found this great article entitled The Middle East Crisis has just Begun by Robert Kaplan in the Wall Street Journal. In the article Kaplan is pretty open about US intentions in the Middle East and it just goes to support Noam Chomsky's point about how media sources like the Wall Street Journal are excellent sources of news precisely because they inform the people who are controlling the government and economy and thus cannot afford to inject all the feel good rhetoric and propaganda of media outlets like Fox or CNN. This is because those who are in charge must have a clear, or at least clearer, picture of what is happening than those who are to be lead. That being said, one can see in an article like Kaplan's the tacit assumptions of those who would rule.
In the first paragraph Kaplan sets the tone by making the remark,
"American policy-makers have been spoiled by events in Tunisia and Egypt, both of which boast relatively sturdy institutions, civil society associations and middle classes, as well as being age-old clusters of civilization where states of one form or another have existed since antiquity."
The implication of this statement is that the people of these countries are uncivilized and in the second paragraph Kaplan is basically asking the question, who are these people and do they have US interests in their hearts? In addition, he uses the word "illiberal", a word which means against free market capitalism. Could these people be against good old American capital? Maybe, so you should be afraid. There is also an the interesting statement, "The United States may be a democracy, but it is also a status quo power, whose position in the world depends on the world staying as it is." Kaplan reaffirms US democracy, saying in a roundabout way that the US is good, but we want things just the way they are, after all, the US has worked very hard to keep them this way. In fact, in Kaplan's own words,
"Because outside of Iran, and with the arguable exceptions of Syria and Libya itself, there is no short-term benefit for the U.S. in democratic revolts in the region. In fact, they could be quite destructive to our interests, even as they prove to be unstoppable."
Further along in paragraphs ten and eleven Kaplan once again invokes US democracy, remember that means the US is inherently good, but we must save ourselves for future wars, saying:
"Democracy is part of America's very identity, and thus we benefit in a world of more democracies. But this is no reason to delude ourselves about grand historical schemes or to forget our wider interests. Precisely because so much of the Middle East is in upheaval, we must avoid entanglements and stay out of the domestic affairs of the region. We must keep our powder dry for crises ahead that might matter much more than those of today." (emphasis added)
So why must we "keep are powder dry?" Well, China off course. China is doing all these things like building up their navy, extracting resources in our imperial holdings of Iraq and Afghanistan, and creating economic ties in Asia and the Pacific. What Kaplan is saying is that China has encroached on the US Empire while we have been trying with all our might to maintain it and we will probably have to go to war with China someday. This future war with China is a neo-conservative fantasy that has been discussed by right-wing think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute and its ilk for some time now. Do not worry though, this talk of war with China is likely just a perception management tool that is being used in the context of the uprising in the Middle East as an excuse to do as little as possible. Consider this: if we attacked China, where would we get all our cheap consumer junk from? There is also the matter of all the US debt held by China, if we were to attack China who would lend us the money to do it? Conversely, from China's perspective why attack its biggest costumer? Now a day may come when China's internal market is large enough to absorb all the goods that are generated within China as the Chinese middle class grows, but how would war with the US be to China's benefit? Once again, China has invested a massive amount of money in the US.
What is really being said in Kaplan's thinly veiled article shilling for US Empire is that the US government is looking for excuses to not get involved in the push for democracy in the Middle East. The Chinese "threat" is just a pretext to sit on the sidelines and let the oppressive governments of Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Bahrain, etcetera, to crush the uprisings in their countries. However, since the US is supposedly a paragon of freedom and democracy, it must be seen to be doing something, or else the people out in TV land might start asking questions. Well, when one is given lemons make lemonade, so the US should use the democratic uprisings in the Middle East to further its own agenda where possible, thus, the US can take out Qaddafi, since it never liked him anyway, and it can militate against Iran. And this is done in our names.
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Blog 8 Capitalizing on the Global Water Crisis
Alex Clute
March 19, 2011
1230 EST
In a news release on the MMD Newswire the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-Moon, concerning the state of global water supplies in anticipation of World Water Day, which will be observed on March 22. Pointing that over half the world's population now resides in urbanized regions composed of sprawling slums with little to no access to potable water, the Secretary-General called for future efforts to make freshwater accessible to all. He goes on to say that this lack of access to clean water and basic sanitation facilities has resulted in a dramatic decline in people's health globally and has impacted women to a greater extent, since in many parts of the world it is women who must walk long distances in order to obtain water, which forces girls to drop out of school and exposing them to harassment and rape. In other places the poor are required to pay exorbitant prices to water merchants. The Secretary-General located the source of these problems not in scarcity, but in a failure to govern effectively and stated that water issues will be a large part of the upcoming UN Conference on Sustainable Development.
While it is true that in a number of places in the world we are facing shortages of water, what concerns me is that this latest "crisis" will be used as a means to advance the interests of the global plutocracy. As has been seen in recent years transnational corporations have been eager to gain control of water sources, as in Bolivia way Bechtel attempted to privatize the city of Cochabamba's water utilities and gouge people, and even attempted to make it illegal for people to collect rainwater. What must be remembered is that this discourse of crisis has been, and still is, used to instill fear in populations in order to make them more pliant to a specific brand of economic thinking. In addition, one should not be fooled about talk to the contrary, as in Secretary Moon's condemnation of water merchants, because the supporters of privatization are more than happy to tell people what they what to hear while carrying on the process of privatization. It must always be remember that talk is cheap, and that it is what one does that counts.
March 19, 2011
1230 EST
In a news release on the MMD Newswire the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-Moon, concerning the state of global water supplies in anticipation of World Water Day, which will be observed on March 22. Pointing that over half the world's population now resides in urbanized regions composed of sprawling slums with little to no access to potable water, the Secretary-General called for future efforts to make freshwater accessible to all. He goes on to say that this lack of access to clean water and basic sanitation facilities has resulted in a dramatic decline in people's health globally and has impacted women to a greater extent, since in many parts of the world it is women who must walk long distances in order to obtain water, which forces girls to drop out of school and exposing them to harassment and rape. In other places the poor are required to pay exorbitant prices to water merchants. The Secretary-General located the source of these problems not in scarcity, but in a failure to govern effectively and stated that water issues will be a large part of the upcoming UN Conference on Sustainable Development.
While it is true that in a number of places in the world we are facing shortages of water, what concerns me is that this latest "crisis" will be used as a means to advance the interests of the global plutocracy. As has been seen in recent years transnational corporations have been eager to gain control of water sources, as in Bolivia way Bechtel attempted to privatize the city of Cochabamba's water utilities and gouge people, and even attempted to make it illegal for people to collect rainwater. What must be remembered is that this discourse of crisis has been, and still is, used to instill fear in populations in order to make them more pliant to a specific brand of economic thinking. In addition, one should not be fooled about talk to the contrary, as in Secretary Moon's condemnation of water merchants, because the supporters of privatization are more than happy to tell people what they what to hear while carrying on the process of privatization. It must always be remember that talk is cheap, and that it is what one does that counts.
Sunday, March 06, 2011
Blog 7 "Perfect Storm" on the Horizon
Alex Clute
March 6, 2011
1100 EST
There are a number of pressing problems on humanity's plate, and all of them are interconnected. Globally we are facing the prospects of escalating food prices and shortfalls in fresh water supply along with increasing oil prices and a climatic regime of growing instability. All of these factors militate to disrupt societies with them very likely playing a part in the unrest throughout the Arab world. The countries of the Middle East have seen much of the global population in increase in the past decades skewing their populations to a younger, more volatile demographic. This has created serious strain on the regional water suppliers, for example, as reported in the Guardian, the Middle East has 6.3% of the global population but only 1.4% of the world's renewable fresh water. The World Bank has predicted that this fresh water supply will be reduced by half in the coming years. Indeed, in an article from India Express, water demand will possibly surpass 40% of water supply in the next couple of decades. This will dramatically effect agriculture as it uses 71% of fresh water supplies, further compounding food problems.
In an article from the Brookings Institute, an attempt is made to disentangle the different factors and some possible solutions with regards to the price volatility of food. The article makes the excellent point that the problem with food is not just high prices, but also rapid swings to low prices. While high prices hurt the consumer on the demand side, low prices are detrimental to the producers, i.e. farmers, on the supply side. Continuing, the article connects food price instability to oil prices and the directly related phenomena of climate change. Thus, the heavily dependent nature of modern industrial agriculture on oil-derived inputs from the petrochemical industry combined with climatic volatility causes rapid fluctuation of food prices. Competition from biofuels are also mentioned. However, the article downplays the role of speculation in price volitility and is completely silent concerning the role of agribusinesses and their tremendous influence.
An article from the Malaysia Star takes a different stance and looks at speculation's impact on global food markets. The article begins by citing such factors affecting food prices such as the recent heat wave in Russia and flooding in Australia and also the increasing demand in India and China for meat. It then goes on to point out that there is more than enough food to meet global demand and that the real problem with food distribution and price is linked to viewing food as just another commodity, citing a UN Food and Agriculture Organization figure that, globally, agriculture produces 2720 kilocalories per person per day. Much food is lost due to long supply chains and storage times that results in wastage of vast quantities of food. This article also points out that agribusiness has consistently worked to influence governments to deregulate all types of food production to their advantage.
What is becoming increasingly apparent is that the present system of food production and distribution, as well as future access to fresh water supplies, will create serious problems for all. It is often cited that the poor will bare this disproportionately, and this is most certainly true, but it would be naive, to say the least, to believe that the developed nations will not also feel the effects of these compounding problems. The question is what will we do? So far the government respond seems to intensify the current power relations in a desperate attempt to maintain control. This while only worsen and accelerate the problems facing humanity. It must be considered that after centuries of allegiance to the ideas of global economic growth and expansion, we have only managed to degrade the global carrying capacity of Earth in order to convert natural capital into financial capital that has been used for the aggrandizement of a small section of the global population. It remains to be seen if we humans can overcome our failings and come together to resolve these crises in a way that supports democracy and economic equality while at the same time maintaining the environmental integrity that underwrites our existence.
March 6, 2011
1100 EST
There are a number of pressing problems on humanity's plate, and all of them are interconnected. Globally we are facing the prospects of escalating food prices and shortfalls in fresh water supply along with increasing oil prices and a climatic regime of growing instability. All of these factors militate to disrupt societies with them very likely playing a part in the unrest throughout the Arab world. The countries of the Middle East have seen much of the global population in increase in the past decades skewing their populations to a younger, more volatile demographic. This has created serious strain on the regional water suppliers, for example, as reported in the Guardian, the Middle East has 6.3% of the global population but only 1.4% of the world's renewable fresh water. The World Bank has predicted that this fresh water supply will be reduced by half in the coming years. Indeed, in an article from India Express, water demand will possibly surpass 40% of water supply in the next couple of decades. This will dramatically effect agriculture as it uses 71% of fresh water supplies, further compounding food problems.
In an article from the Brookings Institute, an attempt is made to disentangle the different factors and some possible solutions with regards to the price volatility of food. The article makes the excellent point that the problem with food is not just high prices, but also rapid swings to low prices. While high prices hurt the consumer on the demand side, low prices are detrimental to the producers, i.e. farmers, on the supply side. Continuing, the article connects food price instability to oil prices and the directly related phenomena of climate change. Thus, the heavily dependent nature of modern industrial agriculture on oil-derived inputs from the petrochemical industry combined with climatic volatility causes rapid fluctuation of food prices. Competition from biofuels are also mentioned. However, the article downplays the role of speculation in price volitility and is completely silent concerning the role of agribusinesses and their tremendous influence.
An article from the Malaysia Star takes a different stance and looks at speculation's impact on global food markets. The article begins by citing such factors affecting food prices such as the recent heat wave in Russia and flooding in Australia and also the increasing demand in India and China for meat. It then goes on to point out that there is more than enough food to meet global demand and that the real problem with food distribution and price is linked to viewing food as just another commodity, citing a UN Food and Agriculture Organization figure that, globally, agriculture produces 2720 kilocalories per person per day. Much food is lost due to long supply chains and storage times that results in wastage of vast quantities of food. This article also points out that agribusiness has consistently worked to influence governments to deregulate all types of food production to their advantage.
What is becoming increasingly apparent is that the present system of food production and distribution, as well as future access to fresh water supplies, will create serious problems for all. It is often cited that the poor will bare this disproportionately, and this is most certainly true, but it would be naive, to say the least, to believe that the developed nations will not also feel the effects of these compounding problems. The question is what will we do? So far the government respond seems to intensify the current power relations in a desperate attempt to maintain control. This while only worsen and accelerate the problems facing humanity. It must be considered that after centuries of allegiance to the ideas of global economic growth and expansion, we have only managed to degrade the global carrying capacity of Earth in order to convert natural capital into financial capital that has been used for the aggrandizement of a small section of the global population. It remains to be seen if we humans can overcome our failings and come together to resolve these crises in a way that supports democracy and economic equality while at the same time maintaining the environmental integrity that underwrites our existence.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
British American Tabacco Expects more from Kenya
Alex Clute
February 24, 2011
1100 EST
According to Reuters Africa, British American Tobacco (BAT), operating in Kenya, has just posted a 29% increase in profits, which makes their profits $33 million at the end of their fiscal year. BAT is planning to pay out a dividend of 22 cents per share. Meanwhile, the Kenyan government is rising the excise tax on tobacco, which is displeasing to BAT. BAT states that is has paid $122 million in taxes and that they find an increase in taxes unacceptable. Report revenue for BAT in FY 2010 is $165 million, which, after taxes amounts to $43 million. Subtracting their profits leaves $33 million dollars to cover overhead. At first consideration these numbers do not seem very favorable for BAT, which has paid quite a large sum of money to the government. In a detached sort of way it would appear that BAT is not really receiving a fair shake.
But consider the crop being grown. It seems reasonable to say that most people are well aware of the negative health impacts linked to smoking. And there is also the negative health impacts experienced by farmers. In addition to the human impacts there are environmental impacts as well. In a report to the International Lung Heal Conference and Annual General Meeting of the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases the detrimental aspects of tobacco cultivation for export are summarized, and include deforestation and the release of pesticides into the environment.
The perspective from the point of view of Kenyan farmers is one of desperation. Originally pastoralists that raised cattle, they have mostly given up their cattle and shifted to growing cash crops for export. According to Mwangi Muiruri there are 17,500 small farmers on 15,000 hectares growing tobacco under a contract system where BAT, and some smaller operations, give farmers loans to buy supplies. The price for tobacco is volatile with a low of 5 cents per kilogram to a high of 49 cents. The usual pay out is $37 to $61 yearly for a family of three to five people. sometimes, after BAT deducts for the cost of inputs, people are paid nothing.
There are those in the Kenyan government that wish to see tobacco phased out. Yet BAT holds immense political sway and is quick to sow fear and uncertainty. But taking into account the growing problem of food shortages, can one really justify growing a harmful and destructive crop like tobacco while there are shortfalls of food around the world. I suggest that, rather than cutting down more forests to plant more food crops, we should instead scale back, or eliminate all together crops like tobacco. In reality, the whole model of cash crop production is very likely untenable in its entirety as future increases in oil prices will make in too expensive to to ship food around the global.
February 24, 2011
1100 EST
According to Reuters Africa, British American Tobacco (BAT), operating in Kenya, has just posted a 29% increase in profits, which makes their profits $33 million at the end of their fiscal year. BAT is planning to pay out a dividend of 22 cents per share. Meanwhile, the Kenyan government is rising the excise tax on tobacco, which is displeasing to BAT. BAT states that is has paid $122 million in taxes and that they find an increase in taxes unacceptable. Report revenue for BAT in FY 2010 is $165 million, which, after taxes amounts to $43 million. Subtracting their profits leaves $33 million dollars to cover overhead. At first consideration these numbers do not seem very favorable for BAT, which has paid quite a large sum of money to the government. In a detached sort of way it would appear that BAT is not really receiving a fair shake.
But consider the crop being grown. It seems reasonable to say that most people are well aware of the negative health impacts linked to smoking. And there is also the negative health impacts experienced by farmers. In addition to the human impacts there are environmental impacts as well. In a report to the International Lung Heal Conference and Annual General Meeting of the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases the detrimental aspects of tobacco cultivation for export are summarized, and include deforestation and the release of pesticides into the environment.
The perspective from the point of view of Kenyan farmers is one of desperation. Originally pastoralists that raised cattle, they have mostly given up their cattle and shifted to growing cash crops for export. According to Mwangi Muiruri there are 17,500 small farmers on 15,000 hectares growing tobacco under a contract system where BAT, and some smaller operations, give farmers loans to buy supplies. The price for tobacco is volatile with a low of 5 cents per kilogram to a high of 49 cents. The usual pay out is $37 to $61 yearly for a family of three to five people. sometimes, after BAT deducts for the cost of inputs, people are paid nothing.
There are those in the Kenyan government that wish to see tobacco phased out. Yet BAT holds immense political sway and is quick to sow fear and uncertainty. But taking into account the growing problem of food shortages, can one really justify growing a harmful and destructive crop like tobacco while there are shortfalls of food around the world. I suggest that, rather than cutting down more forests to plant more food crops, we should instead scale back, or eliminate all together crops like tobacco. In reality, the whole model of cash crop production is very likely untenable in its entirety as future increases in oil prices will make in too expensive to to ship food around the global.
Monday, February 14, 2011
Blog 5 Compounding Problems likely to Push Food Prices Higher
Alex Clute
February 14, 2011
1730 EST
The Tehran Times reports that China is facing the possibility of drought that could further effect global wheat prices. This winter has seen like rain or snow in China has placed stress on the winter wheat crop, which usually protected by a layer of snow fall. If the drought continues into the spring there could be major losses, which will forced China, which is mostly self-sufficient when it comes to food, to import wheat. This coupled with the heat wave in Russia that has lead to the Russian government to prohibit wheat exports due to shortages, as well as the floods in Australia could force food prices to increase dramatically. The article goes on to cite soil degradation, fresh water shortages, competition of food crops with biofuels, population increase, and diverting food into increasing livestock production as other factors contributing to rising food prices.
Meanwhile, in Somalia, the Tehran Times article goes on to say that people are seeing a 300 percent increase in the price of water with families selling off their possesses and going into debt just to buy potable water. The Financial Times claims that Somali pirates have extended their operations out into the Arabian Sea, where they have captured an oil tanker bound for the US with $200 million of oil abroad. And seven people were killed in Mogadishu as a result of fighting between al-Shabaab and the transitional government, according AFP.
It would seem that there is a quickening in the rate instability is is spreading in the world. The legacies of colonialism and neo-colonialism have strained the biosphere and centralized the control of wealth into the hands of a few at the expense of the many. The nexus of globe concentration and control is right here in the USA, and as I watched this week's Democracy Now programs I was stunned to see how brazen some in the government, along with their corporate handlers, are becoming. The Governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker, cutting state employee salaries and benefits while notifying the National Guard to be on standby for unrest, Republican efforts to redefine rape and undermine women's access to abortion and birth control, and cutting fuel oil assistance and Pell grants for low-income people, all under the guise of reducing the deficit. So it is becoming clear that as the US empire crumbles there will be no sober reappraisal of the the current global situation. Only a desperate and reactionary attempt to hold onto a hegemonic system that will just serve to make matters worse. The elements that dominate the global economy have in affect said, "To hell with all these people, its not our problem, we're just encharge here!"
February 14, 2011
1730 EST
The Tehran Times reports that China is facing the possibility of drought that could further effect global wheat prices. This winter has seen like rain or snow in China has placed stress on the winter wheat crop, which usually protected by a layer of snow fall. If the drought continues into the spring there could be major losses, which will forced China, which is mostly self-sufficient when it comes to food, to import wheat. This coupled with the heat wave in Russia that has lead to the Russian government to prohibit wheat exports due to shortages, as well as the floods in Australia could force food prices to increase dramatically. The article goes on to cite soil degradation, fresh water shortages, competition of food crops with biofuels, population increase, and diverting food into increasing livestock production as other factors contributing to rising food prices.
Meanwhile, in Somalia, the Tehran Times article goes on to say that people are seeing a 300 percent increase in the price of water with families selling off their possesses and going into debt just to buy potable water. The Financial Times claims that Somali pirates have extended their operations out into the Arabian Sea, where they have captured an oil tanker bound for the US with $200 million of oil abroad. And seven people were killed in Mogadishu as a result of fighting between al-Shabaab and the transitional government, according AFP.
It would seem that there is a quickening in the rate instability is is spreading in the world. The legacies of colonialism and neo-colonialism have strained the biosphere and centralized the control of wealth into the hands of a few at the expense of the many. The nexus of globe concentration and control is right here in the USA, and as I watched this week's Democracy Now programs I was stunned to see how brazen some in the government, along with their corporate handlers, are becoming. The Governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker, cutting state employee salaries and benefits while notifying the National Guard to be on standby for unrest, Republican efforts to redefine rape and undermine women's access to abortion and birth control, and cutting fuel oil assistance and Pell grants for low-income people, all under the guise of reducing the deficit. So it is becoming clear that as the US empire crumbles there will be no sober reappraisal of the the current global situation. Only a desperate and reactionary attempt to hold onto a hegemonic system that will just serve to make matters worse. The elements that dominate the global economy have in affect said, "To hell with all these people, its not our problem, we're just encharge here!"
Sunday, February 06, 2011
Blog 4 Food shortage in Somalia
Alex Clute
February 6, 2011
1800 EST
According to the Guardian, in Somalia a drought has lead to food shortages and the death of livestock, causing prices to rise sharply. One in three children are malnourished with people concentrating on Mogadishu, where food supplies are more readily available and prices lower. Other people are selling off what few possesses they have to raise money to travel to Kenya. Aid to many parts of the country has been hindered by the opposition of the al-Shabaab Islamist group, which controls large parts of the nation and rejects foreign aid.
This would seem to be just the latest crisis in what has been dubbed the global food crisis. There are many causes driving up the price of food, but one particularly troublesome one is the conversion of agricultural lands to the production of biofuels, which constitute one-third of all major land purchases by investors. An additional factor is the degradation to farm land brought on by intense farming methods and urban expansion, amounting to approximately 35 million hectares of farmland being lost annually.
Somalia faces malnutrition crisis
Global food crisis forecast as prices prices reach record highs
February 6, 2011
1800 EST
According to the Guardian, in Somalia a drought has lead to food shortages and the death of livestock, causing prices to rise sharply. One in three children are malnourished with people concentrating on Mogadishu, where food supplies are more readily available and prices lower. Other people are selling off what few possesses they have to raise money to travel to Kenya. Aid to many parts of the country has been hindered by the opposition of the al-Shabaab Islamist group, which controls large parts of the nation and rejects foreign aid.
This would seem to be just the latest crisis in what has been dubbed the global food crisis. There are many causes driving up the price of food, but one particularly troublesome one is the conversion of agricultural lands to the production of biofuels, which constitute one-third of all major land purchases by investors. An additional factor is the degradation to farm land brought on by intense farming methods and urban expansion, amounting to approximately 35 million hectares of farmland being lost annually.
Somalia faces malnutrition crisis
Global food crisis forecast as prices prices reach record highs
Friday, January 28, 2011
Blog 3 Deforestation and Coca
Alex Clute
January 28, 2011
1500 EST
In an article from Chemical and Engineering News tries to establish a connection between the growing of coca, for cocaine that is, and deforestation in southern Colombia. According to the article source coca farming causes as much deforestation as other forms of agriculture, logging, and mining combined. It is stated that "Coca growers typically try to evade detection by working in poor, remote areas with little law enforcement." And goes onto to make the sage observation that "Typical tactics to eradicate coca plantations, such as spraying herbicides, don't seem to protect the threatened forests." Well, image that. To solve this problem the article mentions that the formation of national parks have been effective in stopping coca growing in other parts of the country.
I perceive a number of problems within this article. First off, who are these mysterious coca growers "evading detection" in "remote areas?" The article is vague on this point and that is likely because coca growers are usually poor farmers trying to get by. They grow coca because they receive a better price for coca and the price remains relatively stable. If Western nations like the US would get rid of farm subsidies to their farmers and take steps to stabilize global commodity prices then farmers in Third World nations could switch to legal crops (Oldham and Massey 2004).
By the articles own sources forested area has been reduced from 82% to 78% over the period of 2002 to 2007 and actual land devoted to coca growing is 890km2 out of a total deforested area of 14,000km2. In other words, the area with trees has decreased by 4% and the area with coca plants growing 6%. It seems difficult to conclude from these numbers that coca production is a leading cause of deforestation. In a study of coca growing regions in Bolivia, deforestation was seen to increase as anti-coca policies were put into effect (Bradley and Millington 2008). The author cites a number of political and social factors for this but what it boils down to is that in order to make the same amount of money growing substitute crops more has to be grown to compensate for the loss in income when farmers stop growing coca.
As for the idea of creating a national park, well of course it would stop the insidious coca growers. Once the region was a park everyone would have to find somewhere else to live, which means that poor farmers, mostly of indigenous background, would be displaced. There are better ways to handle this problem.
2008 Coca and Colonists: Quantifying and explaining forest clearance under coca and anti-narcotics policy regimes. Ecology and Society 13(1):31.
Oldham, Jim and Rachel Massey
2002 Health and Environmental Effects of Herbicide Spray Campaigns in Colombia. Institute for Science and Interdisciplinary Studies.
January 28, 2011
1500 EST
In an article from Chemical and Engineering News tries to establish a connection between the growing of coca, for cocaine that is, and deforestation in southern Colombia. According to the article source coca farming causes as much deforestation as other forms of agriculture, logging, and mining combined. It is stated that "Coca growers typically try to evade detection by working in poor, remote areas with little law enforcement." And goes onto to make the sage observation that "Typical tactics to eradicate coca plantations, such as spraying herbicides, don't seem to protect the threatened forests." Well, image that. To solve this problem the article mentions that the formation of national parks have been effective in stopping coca growing in other parts of the country.
I perceive a number of problems within this article. First off, who are these mysterious coca growers "evading detection" in "remote areas?" The article is vague on this point and that is likely because coca growers are usually poor farmers trying to get by. They grow coca because they receive a better price for coca and the price remains relatively stable. If Western nations like the US would get rid of farm subsidies to their farmers and take steps to stabilize global commodity prices then farmers in Third World nations could switch to legal crops (Oldham and Massey 2004).
By the articles own sources forested area has been reduced from 82% to 78% over the period of 2002 to 2007 and actual land devoted to coca growing is 890km2 out of a total deforested area of 14,000km2. In other words, the area with trees has decreased by 4% and the area with coca plants growing 6%. It seems difficult to conclude from these numbers that coca production is a leading cause of deforestation. In a study of coca growing regions in Bolivia, deforestation was seen to increase as anti-coca policies were put into effect (Bradley and Millington 2008). The author cites a number of political and social factors for this but what it boils down to is that in order to make the same amount of money growing substitute crops more has to be grown to compensate for the loss in income when farmers stop growing coca.
As for the idea of creating a national park, well of course it would stop the insidious coca growers. Once the region was a park everyone would have to find somewhere else to live, which means that poor farmers, mostly of indigenous background, would be displaced. There are better ways to handle this problem.
Coca Farming Linked To Deforestation In Colombia
Bradley, Andrew V. and Andrew C. Millington2008 Coca and Colonists: Quantifying and explaining forest clearance under coca and anti-narcotics policy regimes. Ecology and Society 13(1):31.
Oldham, Jim and Rachel Massey
2002 Health and Environmental Effects of Herbicide Spray Campaigns in Colombia. Institute for Science and Interdisciplinary Studies.
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Blog 2 Charcoal and Deforestation in Somalia
Alex Clute
January 22, 2011
1300 EST
According to a story by the Integrated Regional Information Networks (IRIN), deforestation in Somalia is being furthered along rapidly by the charcoal trade. Charcoal, made by burning wood in a low oxygen atmosphere, is used by many around the world for daily cooking, making it a vital component of people's lives. The Somali charcoal trade has increased to meet the demand of Gulf States that have banned charcoal production within their own borders precisely for the same reason, deforestation (Menke 2009). As often seems to be the case in efforts to conserve the environment, preservation of one country's resources means the increased exploitation of another's in a trickle down effect from wealthier nations to poorer. However, Somalia is one of the poorest countries in the world, thus it is unlikely to be able to export its environmental problems.
The reaction in Somalia has been to prohibit charcoal exportation, since it is driving the loss of forests that provide for people and ensure the continuation of groundwater recharge, but also because the charcoal trade is used to fund warlords. Owing to the weakness of the transitional government, it is unlikely that a ban would enforceable. In addition, to tell people that are dependent on a resource for their survival and livelihood to simply stop using it is unreasonable to say the least. People who find themselves in poverty are trying to make it on a day-to-day basis and do not have the luxury of asking what the future holds for them.
In view of this, one may ask what is to be done? People in the government and NGOs say to stop, rebel leaders ask why they should stop, and regular people ask how can they stop? No one seems to ask if what they are doing is the only way or if there might be a better way. I think there is. Instead of cutting down trees in order to make charcoal for cooking, and in some cases heating, why not use methane generated from organic waste instead? Methane can be produced by recycling animal solid wastes and plant residues in anaerobic digestors, a process which is currently being used in some parts of China, India, Latin America, and even here in the US. The equipment neccesary can be purchased for under $200 US, depending on the scale, and be assembled and maintained by local people. The sludge leftover after methane generation can be put through a hot composting method and used as fertilizer. In order for this to be effective in correcting deforestation in Somalia, methane digestors would have to be encouraged in the Gulf States as well to eliminate demand for charcoal altogether.
Helping people build anaerobic digestors would be far cheaper and more effective at curbing deforestation than trying to coerce people to do something they perceive they cannot. It would also show the good faith of governments and NGOs by empowering local people rather than making them more dependent on centralized structures that have historically only marginalized them. Finally, the environment would benefit by a lessened rate of deforestation, and if a program to build anaerobic digestors were coupled with other programs like tree planting and rainwater catchment, many other environmental and social problems could be solved. Our problem lies in thinking that we have discrete problems that can be addressed in a reductionist fashion, but they are all interconnected, and so must be addressed together for there to be real change.
Somalia: Charcoal trade booming despite ban
Biodigestor Construction (Part 1) (Part 2)
January 22, 2011
1300 EST
According to a story by the Integrated Regional Information Networks (IRIN), deforestation in Somalia is being furthered along rapidly by the charcoal trade. Charcoal, made by burning wood in a low oxygen atmosphere, is used by many around the world for daily cooking, making it a vital component of people's lives. The Somali charcoal trade has increased to meet the demand of Gulf States that have banned charcoal production within their own borders precisely for the same reason, deforestation (Menke 2009). As often seems to be the case in efforts to conserve the environment, preservation of one country's resources means the increased exploitation of another's in a trickle down effect from wealthier nations to poorer. However, Somalia is one of the poorest countries in the world, thus it is unlikely to be able to export its environmental problems.
The reaction in Somalia has been to prohibit charcoal exportation, since it is driving the loss of forests that provide for people and ensure the continuation of groundwater recharge, but also because the charcoal trade is used to fund warlords. Owing to the weakness of the transitional government, it is unlikely that a ban would enforceable. In addition, to tell people that are dependent on a resource for their survival and livelihood to simply stop using it is unreasonable to say the least. People who find themselves in poverty are trying to make it on a day-to-day basis and do not have the luxury of asking what the future holds for them.
In view of this, one may ask what is to be done? People in the government and NGOs say to stop, rebel leaders ask why they should stop, and regular people ask how can they stop? No one seems to ask if what they are doing is the only way or if there might be a better way. I think there is. Instead of cutting down trees in order to make charcoal for cooking, and in some cases heating, why not use methane generated from organic waste instead? Methane can be produced by recycling animal solid wastes and plant residues in anaerobic digestors, a process which is currently being used in some parts of China, India, Latin America, and even here in the US. The equipment neccesary can be purchased for under $200 US, depending on the scale, and be assembled and maintained by local people. The sludge leftover after methane generation can be put through a hot composting method and used as fertilizer. In order for this to be effective in correcting deforestation in Somalia, methane digestors would have to be encouraged in the Gulf States as well to eliminate demand for charcoal altogether.
Helping people build anaerobic digestors would be far cheaper and more effective at curbing deforestation than trying to coerce people to do something they perceive they cannot. It would also show the good faith of governments and NGOs by empowering local people rather than making them more dependent on centralized structures that have historically only marginalized them. Finally, the environment would benefit by a lessened rate of deforestation, and if a program to build anaerobic digestors were coupled with other programs like tree planting and rainwater catchment, many other environmental and social problems could be solved. Our problem lies in thinking that we have discrete problems that can be addressed in a reductionist fashion, but they are all interconnected, and so must be addressed together for there to be real change.
Somalia: Charcoal trade booming despite ban
Biodigestor Construction (Part 1) (Part 2)
Monday, January 17, 2011
Blog 1 Environmental Inequality
Alex Clute
January 14, 2011
1730 EST
As my blog topic I would like to look at social inequality and issues of environmental destruction and use. Images of poverty are often depicted in the media accompanied with the plucking of heartstrings but very little in the way of analysis. We are shown starving, desperate people around the world and then vaguely told this is the result of war, famine, or government corruption. It is not mentioned that people around the world have been displaced from their homes and lost their livelihoods to, say, cash crop production or in order to build a resort. There exists a fundamental disconnect between notions of economic "development" and the consequences of inequality and environmental degradation.
One of the first topics in the news that made me aware of the correlation between social inequality and issues of the environment were the Somali pirates that flooded the news outlets in 2009. While at present we hear little to nothing concerning Somalia, but the Pirates of Somali are still active. Reuters reported on the 14th that shipments of grain are having to be diverted around Africa to avoid the pirates, who have been extending their operations further east. This is causing insurance companies to raise premiums which are in turn cause the price of food to go up in African markets. This only serves to compound the problem of already high food costs be experienced in Tunisia.
In 2009, I watched an interview with Mohamed Abshir Waldo, author of the report The Two Piracies in Somalia: Why the world ignores the other, on Democracy Now in which he stated that Somali piracy had at its root illegal fishing in Somali waters by large companies based out of Western nations. These commercial fishing vessels, having exhausted fisheries closer to home, have been fishing off the coasts of poorer countries where people depend on small-scale fishing for subsistence. According to Mr. Waldo, such is the case in Somali where Somali fishermen have had their boats run over and claim to have been shot at by the crews of commercial vessels. In addition to illegal fishing, Mr. Waldo has also accused Western countries of dumping toxic wastes off the coast of Somali. It is because of these crimes that Somali pirates claim that they have decided to hijack foreign ships.
Many issues can be seen within this story. There is the depletion of global fisheries by commercial fleets hailing from Western nations, which have turned in traditional colonial-style to taking from those who are unable to stop them. There are the angry and desperate people, living in poverty, lashing out in one of the few ways open to them, being labeled as the problem. And then there is the silence of the global media corporations that claim to be non-biased while a story of good and evil is wrought, where the money of the US taxpayer will be used to deploy the Navy against the evildoers. Stories like this abound today, with people being displaced from their traditional ways of life to make way for cash crop production or to build resorts for the wealthy. It is imperative that we begin to see the interconnected nature of our existence on this planet in order for us to make sound decisions. We must begin to see that the root of both poverty, inequality, and environmental destruction are inseparable.
January 14, 2011
1730 EST
As my blog topic I would like to look at social inequality and issues of environmental destruction and use. Images of poverty are often depicted in the media accompanied with the plucking of heartstrings but very little in the way of analysis. We are shown starving, desperate people around the world and then vaguely told this is the result of war, famine, or government corruption. It is not mentioned that people around the world have been displaced from their homes and lost their livelihoods to, say, cash crop production or in order to build a resort. There exists a fundamental disconnect between notions of economic "development" and the consequences of inequality and environmental degradation.
One of the first topics in the news that made me aware of the correlation between social inequality and issues of the environment were the Somali pirates that flooded the news outlets in 2009. While at present we hear little to nothing concerning Somalia, but the Pirates of Somali are still active. Reuters reported on the 14th that shipments of grain are having to be diverted around Africa to avoid the pirates, who have been extending their operations further east. This is causing insurance companies to raise premiums which are in turn cause the price of food to go up in African markets. This only serves to compound the problem of already high food costs be experienced in Tunisia.
In 2009, I watched an interview with Mohamed Abshir Waldo, author of the report The Two Piracies in Somalia: Why the world ignores the other, on Democracy Now in which he stated that Somali piracy had at its root illegal fishing in Somali waters by large companies based out of Western nations. These commercial fishing vessels, having exhausted fisheries closer to home, have been fishing off the coasts of poorer countries where people depend on small-scale fishing for subsistence. According to Mr. Waldo, such is the case in Somali where Somali fishermen have had their boats run over and claim to have been shot at by the crews of commercial vessels. In addition to illegal fishing, Mr. Waldo has also accused Western countries of dumping toxic wastes off the coast of Somali. It is because of these crimes that Somali pirates claim that they have decided to hijack foreign ships.
Many issues can be seen within this story. There is the depletion of global fisheries by commercial fleets hailing from Western nations, which have turned in traditional colonial-style to taking from those who are unable to stop them. There are the angry and desperate people, living in poverty, lashing out in one of the few ways open to them, being labeled as the problem. And then there is the silence of the global media corporations that claim to be non-biased while a story of good and evil is wrought, where the money of the US taxpayer will be used to deploy the Navy against the evildoers. Stories like this abound today, with people being displaced from their traditional ways of life to make way for cash crop production or to build resorts for the wealthy. It is imperative that we begin to see the interconnected nature of our existence on this planet in order for us to make sound decisions. We must begin to see that the root of both poverty, inequality, and environmental destruction are inseparable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)