DK GreenRoots

I've been compiling a list of multinationals that seem to laugh at the excessive deforestation in order to make more money for their shareholders. First, we all know that deforestation is part of the problem with climate change. Secondly, yes, I am aware that corporations must make profits in order to exist...but at what cost to the well-being of the Earth, its population and the disappearance of orangutans? This is maddening! It reminds me of the proverbial story of the scorpion and the frog, I am sure you are all well versed with this cautionary tale.

Like most of you I get email alerts from a variety of eco sites such as Grist, Greenpeace et cetera. This last one, from RAN, broke the camel's back, so to speak. Rainforests are home to roughly 50% of the world's species, making them an extensive library of biological and genetic resources. In addition, rainforests help maintain the climate by regulating atmospheric gases and stabilizing rainfall, protect against desertification, and provide numerous other ecological functions. So what do we do? We destroy them, of course.

Promoted by editors

Back in 2008 I wrote two little noticed diaries about speculative buying that helped to drive food prices higher (here and here), and surprise, surprise, our friends from Goldman Sachs are well represented in this mix of global finance companies.

Two years later, the world food market is still seriously exposed to speculators artificially driving up prices and worsening the risks of malnutrition, and according to one of the world's leading agricultural researchers, Joachim von Braun, the head of the International Food Policy Research Institute (von Brown was one of the first to write about flawed regulatory regimes in banking and finance driving up food prices) an even bigger food crisis is looming, exacerbated as well by climate change. A visit to his site is well worth your time as he speaks eloquently about food and water.

Think about this, what if this Oil spill, as tragic as it is, provides us with the wake up call about how we power our world?
My first thought when the spill happened was, what if we had not gotten rid of the electric car of the 1990's (from the documentary Who Killed the Electric Car?)
and electric cars had grown in usage for the past decade? Would the drilling platform catastrophe still have happened?

Promoted by editors

Pardon the oxymoronic title but these last two years - the world and in particular developing countries - the poor and the vulnerable have been hit by both food and energy crises. Add water to this nightmare: a growing population, changes in trade patterns, urbanization, dietary changes in emerging economies, rising transportation costs, blatant water privatization, increased bio-fuel production, incessant deforestation, climate change and regional droughts are all responsible. Dry water indeed.

I'm not sure which of the two issues is more pressing than the other: the incoming global food bubble (of which I will have a disturbing diary reporting food prices increases next week) or water scarcity. I am truly scared of what the future will bring. I have kids, as many of you do. What are we going to do when the water runs out? And why isn't this issue on the front burner?

Promoted by Editors

It was thought that currently 70 percent of available fresh water is used for agriculture, but with an estimated 40 percent increase in food production required by 2050 (according to FAO), water scarcity is likely to become a global problem for the food chain. Since dietary habits are rapidly changing with higher consumption of meat and vegetables (particularly in both China & India) it looks as though we're in for a shock unless we find new ways of growing grains & vegetables which would use less water.

Given the impending worsening of water security, particularly in some developing countries, water should really be at the centre of international development policy. But it isn't. Instead we have a handful of multinationals snapping up water rights as it is set to become the next currency: for all intents and purposes it has already been commodified. There is no water blueprint for the future, not that I know of. I hope I'm wrong.

Besides the apparent political silence versus the two million shouting voices forty years ago, this Earth Day has some significant differences from the first. It is a different planet, that Bill McKibben calls "Eaarth." This diary is about his new book, and its limitations, and about another book or two that compensate, or help to complete the picture. A picture of the future for the first Eaarth Day.

Cross-posted at DailyKos, Docudharma and was at Progressive Blue.

PBS will be celebrating Earth Day with a special edition of American Experience called "Earth Days" that tracks the American ecological movement and also by showing "Food Inc" on April 21th.

On most PBS stations just before "Earth Days" at 8 PM tonight "Nature" will show "The Thin Green Line" for a second time. It is an indictment of the human race, the fact that we are wiping out the frogs and amphibians and the we will also be sure to follow, has to be the most motivating hour of television I've ever seen.

I'll update my original review below the fold but it would be wonderful if we can get others to watch the devastation so more people will take action. Perhaps you've already seen this "greatest mass extinction since the dinosaurs." and you know that discussing the nature photography alone will get friends to watch. Whatever it takes, people need to get involved and tonight's PBS line up can make a difference.

While the world is ever so slowly moving to address the challenges presented by climate change - rampant desertification and rapidly depleting supplies of fossil fuels, among other known facts - the same awareness does not seem to register when it comes to water. In fact we will probably run out of water long before we run out of fuel. We should not wait until it's gone.

Like most progressives I was saddened at the sight of Glenn Beck's puerile attempts at "explaining" to his viewers why we have experienced more snow and rain this winter, dismissing out of hand the simple facts that real climate scientists have been predicting all along: we're culpable and we will pay dearly for our collective lack of vision in the not so distant future. Rain & floods, by all means, do not mean endless supplies of water.

If you have a moment read the ten facts about Water Scarcity on the WHO site, it is sobering news.

The sheer inanity of drinking bottled water has been diaried here ad nauseam by myself and several other posters. Unless one happens to have a real need for bottled water (emergencies, choked pipes, disasters et cetera) there's absolutely no reason why tap water can't be filled & refilled into water eco-containers when you are on the move. Your tap water tastes horrible? Water filters and reverse osmosis filters are coming down in price and available in most hardware stores and many online shops.

Truth is bottled water is just tap water. That fact isn't stopping people from drinking a lot of it. Estimates variously place worldwide bottled water sales at between $50 and $100 billion each year, with the market expanding at the startling annual rate of 7 percent.

Even if we prevent coal companies from leveling, deforesting, and polluting much of Appalachia by stopping mountaintop removal mining, coal will still not be clean. Even if we stop the release of greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants, coal will still not be clean. Coal-fired power plants produce mountains of combustion waste which have the potential to contaminate ground and surface water with toxic heavy metals like arsenic.

The New York Times had a nice description of the problem: