There’s just no way we can prepare for a chemical disaster. It’s unnerving to say, but airborne chemicals travel faster than we could run or drive out of harms way. That’s why we have to focus on preventing these chemical disasters from occuring in the first place! Let’s tighten up security and keep everyone safe.

I was astounded to find out that a third of Americans are at risk. The Department of Homeland Security has identified over 5,800 “high-risk” chemical plants. An accident or an attack on just 300 of them would put 110 million Americans at risk. There is a good possibility that you are at risk of exposure if an accident were to occur.

 But, what kinds of chemicals are being produced at these plants that are risky? I did some digging and found out that chlorine gas is one of the most dangerous chemicals that environmentalists and legislators are trying to protect us from.

Chlorine is used in the production of thousands of products, from household cleaning supplies, to the disinfecting of water; making it one of the top ten most produced chemicals in the United States. It is a naturally occuring chemical element, one of 100 others that make up basic building blocks of matter. Chlorine’s popular disinfectant properties stem from its unstable manner. It easily bonds with other chemicals to destroy various bacteria (most commonly found in nature as already bonded).

However, when isolated Chlorine becomes incredibly dangerous. At room temperature elemental Chlorine is a yellowish-green gas with a pungent odor similar to that of bleach. For shipment and storage, the gas is usually pressurized and cooled to form an amber liquid. If the chemical were to leak, it would quickly turn into a gas and spread rapidly.

Chlorine is incredibly dangerous, unstable and can react with a variety of other chemicals when released into the environment. An accidental leak or spill can pose serious health risks to those exposed. Low levels of exposure can lead to eye, nose, and throat irritation. However, breathing in high levels of airborne chlorine can lead to fluid build up in the lungs, formally known as Pulmonary Edema. This build up can cause shortness of breath and lead to respiratory failure. If not treated this condition can be fatal. 63 of the 101 most dangerous “high-risk” facilities are chlorine gas plants.

But, on the bright side of all this Clorox recently announced that they would move away from extremely hazardous chlorine gas and start using liquid bleach to add extra layers of security.

This highlights the exciting news that safer alternatives are out there! But, unless Congress passes legislation, not everyone will follow the new safety standards. That’s why we’re doing everything we can to push Congress in the right direction. The House of Representatives passed a comprehensive chemical security bill last year. Whoo hooo! Now, it’s the Senate’s turn. And, the timing couldn’t be more urgent. Please help us get the word out.

Take Action. We need to make sure that the bill coming out of the Senate is just as strong as the one that the House passed. That’s where we need your help! Start a picket! Riot in the streets! Well…maybe those aren’t such good ideas. A simple phone call or letter to your Senators can go a long way. You can make a difference.

We can't let the chemical industry lobbyist win! They've been blocking strong chemical security legislation for nine years. These “big business” lobbyists are pulling out all the stops to prevent safety from prevailing. In 2008 Greenpeace identified 169 lobbyists registered to keep Congress from enacting a strong chemical security law. We can’t let them win!

Do you have a few minutes to help us win this important campaign? All you have to do is pick up your phones and call your Senators. It’s easy to do and makes a big difference.

Step 1: Pick up your phone and call the Senate switchboard at (202) 224-3121. Ask for your Senator and you'll be transferred to their office line. If you don't know your Senator, the switchboard will help you find that out. Step 2: When the receptionist answers the phone tell them your name and where you're from (city, state). Step 3: Ask if you can leave a message for your Senator. Here is an example of a message that you can leave, "As a concerned citizen and one of your constituents, I’m calling to ask you to co-sponsor and support Senator Lautenberg's Secure Chemical and Water Facilities Act when it's introduced and comes up for a vote. Putting millions of Americans needlessly at risk when there are safer alternatives readily available is dangerous and doesn't make sense." Step 4: Once you’ve made the call, brag about it! Tell us you made the call and we’ll jump for joy.

It’s just unbelievable that one in three Americans are put at an unnecessary risk from dangerous chemical plants. It’s time for all of us to do our part to get the word out. Thank you so much for your help.

--Rick

 

Following the release of a new report, Greenpeace activists around the world are taking action to tell Nestle – the largest food and drink company in the world – to stop sourcing palm oil from rainforest destroyers.  Send your own message to Nestle and help spread the word!

The new report: “Caught Red Handed: How Nestle’s Use of Palm Oil is Having a Devastating Impact on Rainforest, the Climate and Orangutans” exposes how Nestle’s growing use of palm oil is linked to companies involved in the destruction of forests and peatlands in the Paradise Forest region of Southeast Asia.

The Paradise Forests are one of the most important, but highly threatened, tropical forests on the planet.  Boasting world-famous wildlife diversity, the rainforest islands of Paradise are home to critically endangered orangutans, Sumatran tigers, and spectacular birds found no where else on Earth.  But with a world-record breaking deforestation rate, there’s not much time to protect their habitat.



That’s why Greenpeace is hitting hard and moving fast.  Seven hours after the campaign launch this morning, Nestle has taken a small step in the right direction. In a statement released this morning from its headquarters in Switzerland, the food and drink giants said that it will stop buying palm oil directly from notorious rainforest destroyer Sinar Mas group.

But, that’s not the end of the story.  This action by Nestle is long-overdue and doesn’t address the big palm oil problems facing the company.  Nestle gets a lot more palm oil from Sinar Mas
and other destructive suppliers through traders--companies like Cargill that combine, refine and distribute palm oil to corporate customers.  So, with your help, Greenpeace will continue to push Nestle cut Sinar Mas from its supply chain completely and become a public advocate for peatland protection and a moratorium on forest destruction for palm oil.

In the meantime, clearly worried about their brand image, Nestle petitioned YouTube to remove the new Greenpeace campaign video "Have a break?" due to a copyright claim. If Nestle is really concerned about its corporate image, it should prioritize cutting its links to rainforest destruction instead!

This move has not stopped Greenpeace from spreading the message, you can now view the video on Vimeo below.

Note that the (startling!) video plays off Nestle’s popular, palm oil filled Kit Kat candy bar. Greenpeace is using this video outside of the U.S. because in this country, Kit Kat is licensed to and made by Hershey’s.  While the Hershey’s version of Kit Kat also includes palm oil, our new report does not investigate the company’s palm oil sourcing.  With that in mind, view the spoof advertisement to show Nestle you don’t like rainforest destruction or their meddling with YouTube videos!

And, most importantly, spread the word and send a message to Nestle today!

Have a break? from Greenpeace UK on Vimeo.

Several Greenpeace activists/emergency responders were on the scene of yet another climate crime today, this time in search of billionaire oilman David Koch. As the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History unveiled its new David H. Koch Hall of Human Origins, our activists rolled up in our green emergency vehicles and passed out "Wanted" posters for David Koch and his brother Charles. The two are responsible for spending millions of dollars to lobby against climate action and fund climate denial.



“Who the heck are the Kochs?” you might be asking, and I don’t blame you. They’re a pretty secretive duo, even though they are the principal shareholders of Koch Industries (it's pronounced like "Coke," by the way), an oil supply and refining company that is one of the largest private corporations in the US.

Though they like to brag about being “the biggest company you’ve never heard of,” the Kochs do not why away from meddling in public affairs all the same. Koch Industries is among the biggest lobbying spenders in the oil industry and Koch’s political action committee (PAC) spent more on contributions to federal candidates since the 2006 election cycle than any other oil-and-gas sector PAC.

The Kochs also funnel millions of dollars through their three “charitable” foundations to a whole bunch of the worst climate deniers, like the Cato Instititute and the Heritage Foundation. From 2005 to 2008, the Koch foundations gave over $24.8 million in funding to climate denial groups, outdoing even ExxonMobil, which gave about $9.1 million to similar organizations over the same period of time. You can see the recipients of Koch’s dirty fossil fuel money and the exorbitant sums each has received over the years by visiting www.greenpeace.org/kochmoney.

You’ve probably even seen or heard of their handiwork before, though you may not have known who was behind it. The “Hot Air Tour,” which aims to spread climate denial talking points and misinformation about global warming through a touring hot air balloon, was launched by the Americans for Prosperity Foundation (AFP). David Koch is the founder and chairman of AFP, which, not coincidentally, has receieved some $5 million from Koch foundations.



Plenty more fun and interesting facts about how the Kochs spend their money to buy influence on Capitol Hill and ensure that we delay action on global warming long enough for them to rake in several more billions of dollars can be found in this factsheet (PDF).

How can you help counter the Koch’s influence on the climate debate? Help us shine a light on their funding of climate denial by using the buttons at the top of this post to share this story on Facebook, Tweet it, or send it to your friends and family.

David Koch’s oil money may get his name on an exhibit at the Smithsonian, but together we can ensure that the true Koch family legacy is known as one of environmental crimes, lobbying to block clean energy, and funding global warming denial front groups.

Yesterday, expert witness Prof. Voorhoof in the Tokyo Two case spoke on a panel hosted by Aoyama University Society for the Study of Human Rights.  He sat with lawyers helping to advance freedom of expression in Japanese society, a defendant from the Tachikawa leafletting case, as well as with co defendant Junichi Sato.  Voorhoof spoke about the ‘chilling effect’ that can happen when journalists and citizens no longer puruse information inportant to society for the fear of consequences.  Others spoke about the value of freedom of expression in Japan as a democracy and the need to encourage whistleblowers to come forward.

Read the full statement submitted to the District Court by expert witness Prof. Dirk Voorhoof. 

This university event was important for the T2, because while they are helping to put whaling on trial, they also see their case as a vanguard for civil rights in Japanese society.  The general asessment by both European and Japanese experts is that in most developed democracies, the T2 would not be standing trial for actions done during their investigation into whale meat embezzlement.  Voorhoof and others have outlined the reasons why, and why according to the Japan’s international commitments, it is undermining its own professed values.  

The work of Greenpeace surrounding the Tokyo Two case is an effort to guarantee that whaling be put on trial, that the evidence gathered meticulously to expose whale meat embezzlement be heard.  It is an effort to exonerate those who in the spirit of democracy pursued information for the public good.  This is not an indictment of Japan, it is an indictment of a corrupt whaling industry hiding behind a shadowy government body.  This is a test of a government to uphold democratic principles at home that give it positive standing abroad.  Freedom of expression can be interpreted differently in different situations, but Article 19 of the ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) and relevant international case law show that in the case of the Tokyo Two, Japan is in violation.  

Everyone at one time or another has faced some unpleasant reality about their home country.  At the moment, for the T2 team in Japan, that probably includes the 99+% conviction rate, or the fact that the judges who hear the opening of the trial, won’t be the ones who reach a final verdict.  Most likely, it includes a national media failing to report the trial as a landmark freedom of expression case because of a pro-whaling public, or a government so afraid of the truth, it sends 75 policemen to arrest two people who took then returned a box worth around $500 USD.

Panelists from the university discussion yesterday made some compelling points.  Voorhoof noticed the increased interest in the topic of freedom of expression in Japan from his last visit in June.  Another panelist said that Japanese laws should not be designed to protect those who do not engage in free speech, for those who wish only to be sheltered from unpleasantness.  Taking this idea further, without the engagement of civil society, freedom of expression is just an abstract concept written in a document.  We must act to guarantee the realization of this idea for ourselves and for the Tokyo Two.  Take action before the next trial phase in May and verdict in June.  

"Every action of our lives touches on some chord that will vibrate in eternity."
- Sean O'Casey

Check out this blog from Olly Knowles, I thought you'd all enjoy reading about his work. He's an oceans campaigner with Greenpeace and is currently in Doha, Qatar, following the CITES
meeting that could save or fail Atlantic Bluefin Tuna.

CITES COP 15 is now properly up and running and it’s a veritable quagmire of lobby and counter-lobby, I can tell you. The big issue on the table is of course bluefin tuna – and not just for Greenpeace. It’s a key item for the CITES secretariat as well which means it's very high profile. Most of the other NGOs here are also working very hard on the issue – all of this combined is making bluefin a big media story, not least in the national Qatari press, which is useful because delegates are getting free copies every morning.

It won’t surprise you to hear that the Japanese are here in large numbers and are lobbying aggressively against an Appendix I listing for Atlantic bluefin tuna. Their current strategy is to scare developing nation delegates (especially the West Africans at the moment) with stories of displaced European fleets heading South to raid their waters because they can no longer fish for tuna. It’s nonsense of course – most of the vessels involved in fishing in the Med for instance are nowhere near capable of Atlantic ocean-going fishing or equipped for it – but we are encountering many African delegates who are believing the story. So our efforts, and the efforts of our NGO colleagues, are very much directed at countering this argument at the moment. But it’s not easy – between the official country delegation for Japan, the many Japanese fishing organizations and trade associations that are also here, the Japanese delegation is much larger than usual, way above their usual CITES average. They mean business.

We’ve had some good media on the ground here. Bluefin tuna was a lead article on the front page of the Qatari Gulf Times on the opening day. I’ve also done a head to head on Al Jazeera with a member of the Japanese delegation which went very well for us. I put forward how silly the Japanese position is – if they want to keep eating the stuff, why on earth wouldn’t they support a temporary trade ban to protect it for the long-term. He had difficulty answering.

Other news, the proposed European compromise is obviously a big talking point. The CITES Secretariat has initiated a legal review of the European position which is due to report back in a day or two. It will be interesting to see how this impacts.

You can read more updates from CITES at Charles Clover's blog.

 

One in three Americans is currently at unnecessary risk from dangerous chemical plants. One in three!

And, if you think that’s crazy, wait until you read this. There are safer alternatives to keep us out of harm’s way, but they’re not being used. What’s the holdup? While Congress has the opportunity to change all this, chemical security lobbyists are pulling out all the stops to put profits and politics above our safety and security.

We've proven that we can take on these chemical lobbyists. Last November, the House of Representatives passed comprehensive chemical security legislation. Now, it’s the Senate’s turn. But, we need YOU to take action once again, telling your Senators to get tough on chemical security.

Your help is urgently needed because just this week Senators are meeting to discuss taking up the House bill and to kick off the process. We need to make sure that the bill that comes out of the Senate does as much to protect Americans as the version that passed the House.

Putting millions of Americans needlessly at risk when there are safer alternatives readily available just doesn’t make any sense. Your Senators have a chance to end this insanity by supporting comprehensive chemical security legislation this year. Please take action today.

Polar bears are so deceptive. All along they have been the ones behind global warming and concocting radical schemes to get themselves on the endangered list. They have been polluting Alaskan waters and destroying their own habitats for decades just to prove a point. They want the fame and the fortune that goes hand in hand with being endangered. Polar bears are out to ruin Alaska’s economy, how conniving of them.

Wait, what’s wrong with this picture?

About a fifth of the world’s diminishing polar bear population resides in Alaska. Recently, polar bears have been added to the endangered species list. How outrageous! Those polar bears should be ashamed of themselves! Of course, Alaskan law makers must remedy the bear’s meddling antics by spending millions of dollars to try and have the decision reversed. Those darn bears are purposely ruining their economy!

Polar bears are one of the largest bears on earth whose only predator is man. Global warming and oil spills are the largest threats currently effecting polar bears. Global warming diminishes habitats and when oil sticks to their fur, they cannot regulate their body temperature and if they ingest it while grooming it causes death. Hmm, isn’t Alaska’s main source of state revenue supplied by the oil industry? So, by protecting the polar bears and their natural habitat, it could effect the pipelines? Well, we simply cannot have that. The bears must go!

Or…Alaska’s economy could maintain their fishing and mining economy, which held them for so many centuries. But, why settle when you can kill off a majestic arctic animal that cannot help where it lives or how it is effected? Alaskan lawmakers are trying to put together a campaign to get the bears off the endangered list and into their graves. If polar bears aren’t protected now, what will happen? Despite what these politicians say, the animals are decreasing; their population is not stable. Polar bears cannot just pack up their suitcases and head off to the Caribbean for a nice vacation when things get tough up in the Arctic.

Alaskan legislatures are getting antsy. For years environmentalists have petitioned for more Alaskan animals to be listed and for offshore petroleum exploration be stopped. And now that they have finally gotten their way, lawmakers are not happy (to put it nicely). "The application for this listing is based on the unfounded, unproven scientific hypothesis that climate change is caused by human activity, in the form of increased release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere," said Harris, who was House speaker. Global warming is simply a glitch? It’s not actually happening? Wake up Alaska, global warming is real, and it’s headed strait for the arctic.

Polar bears did not do this to themselves, nor were they scheming to ruin Alaska’s economy. They are just one of the thousands of helpless species subjected to pollution and global warming. They finally caught a break, so please don’t ruin it for them.

 

 

CITES, the Convention of International Trade of Endangered Species, is meeting this week in Doha, Qatar. The star of this meeting is Atlantic Bluefin Tuna - and the big question is whether or not CITES will be able to give this species the protection that regional fisheries management organizations (RFMO) have not been able to give.

Some major fishing nations, like Japan (who also happens to be the main consumer of the species) have been saying that CITES should not be managing fish stocks, that this is a job for RFMOs. They're right. CITES isn't going to be managing the stock, it's going to try to save it.

- Posted by Juliette

 

Today was the final day for this phase of the trial of the Tokyo Two.  Greenpeace activists Junichi Sato and Toru Suzuki are facing trial for exposing a whale meat embezzlment scandal within lethal research whaling in Japan.  Having deconstructed the cover-up of the embezzlement scandal during the first part of the week, the defense now had to establish that Junichi and Toru were not only morally, but also legally justified in their actions. So today, the defense called Professor Dirk Voorhoof, an international expert on the right to freedom of expression, to explain the significance of international treaties Japan has ratified.

Read the full statement of Prof. Dirk Voorhoof.

Article 10 of the European Convention on Human regarding freedom of expression has been interpreted in nearly 600 cases over the past 30 years.  This body of case law is often applied when making judgments on the application of other international conventions like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).  Article 19 of the ICCPR guarantees freedoms of expression and freedom of information.  

There is less case law on Article 19, so countries that are parties to the ICCPR have used examples from the European Court of Human Rights to pass down opinions.  According to Voorhoof and even prominent Japanese legal authorities like Yuji Iwasawa, the current chair of the UN Human Rights Committee, Article 19 should be taken into account in criminal cases in Japan. The ICCPR is binding and has a place within the legal order of Japan.

Case after case was brought to the court showing both Article 19 of ICCPR and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights being applied to journalists, NGOs, and citizens who had acted within their rights of freedom of expression and freedom of information.  According to Voorhoof, these numerous cases help to establish criteria for the European Court of Human Rights and UN Court of Human Rights to decide whether a person who had violated a criminal code in pursuit of information, was still acting in accordance with their rights of freedom of expression.  Below are summarized points Voorhoof made about these criteria and the application of them to the case of the T2.

Voorhoof pointed out to the court  that the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has already handed down an opinion that the arrest of Junichi and Toru, and the seizure of Greenpeace office computers and documents violated Article 19 of the ICCPR.  This is an authoritative opinion reached by international experts appointed by the UN Human Rights Council.  A conviction of Junichi and Toru would only increase the chilling effect in society.  Voorhoof also stated that the T2 case shows how important transparency in a democracy is.  Media, NGOs, and citizens have a right to contribute to this process: "If Japan wants to develop more as an open and pluralistic society, it should value the voices of NGOs and their contribution to the public interest."

Latest Press Release on the T2

GOYODA! /JUSTICE! Take Action

The above images are ©Greenpeace/ Sutton-Hibbert