Obama and McCain Discuss Global Warmng, Environmental Views in Interview

Image courtesy of Backpacker

In an exclusive Backpacker Magazine interview, the presidential candidates discussed their prospective policies regarding a slew of environmental topics: global warming solutions, cap and trade policies, oil drilling, gun laws in national parks, andendangered species rulings were some of the subjects addressed. Plus, they each touched upon the origins of their environmental views, and what shaped their outlook on nature.

Obama and McCain’s Environmental Views
Here’s a rundown of a few of the more interesting stances revealed from the interview:

-McCain would support allowing loaded guns in national parks, (guns are currently banned from almost all national parks) and though he fully supports 2nd Amendment rights, Obama is “concerned about allowing loaded firearms into family-oriented spaces”

-Regarding the protected Rocky Mountain Gray Wolf, McCain welcomes “delisting the wolves where appropriate”

-Obama says he will “will increase funding for the Conservation Security Program and the Conservation Reserve Program and will create additional incentives for private landowners for sustainable agriculture”

-McCain emphasizes the need for a “greater reliance on nuclear power.”

-Both candidates support a cap and trade system for limiting and reducing greenhouse gases (McCain’s goal is 60 percent below levels in the 1990’s, and Obama’s aims for 80 percent below)

Origins of Obama and McCain’s Environmental Views
For Obama, it was growing up in Hawaii that fostered his respect for the great outdoors, and McCain has witnessed the damage done by global warming. From the interview:

What experiences have affected your views on the environment?Obama: My connection to the earth was formed during my time in Hawaii, my birthplace. I think those of us who grew up in Hawaii have a particular attachment to the land and understand how fragile it is. When you are snorkeling through the coral reefs, you can see firsthand that a slight change in temperature or increase in sediment and runoff or change in acidification could end up destroying it all and making it unavailable for your children.

McCain: I have viewed the tremendous harm that global warming has done to our planet. In Greenland, you can see the glaciers have receded dramatically. You can see the impact in northern Norway. You can go to the South Pole and see incredible damage. These are the visible and disturbing manifestations of climate change, and they should compel us to action.

 

Read the entire interview at Backpacker.

More on Environmental Views in Presidential Politics:
Sarah Palin’s Record on the Environment: A Closer Look
My Bottom Line is Green: McCain Vs. Obama on Renewable Energy

Source:

“Obama and McCain Discuss Global Warmng, Environmental Views in Interview“, treehugger.com, Business & Politics, Brain Merchant, 18th Oct 2008

Rising Biofuel and Food Demands Threaten Wetlands

Demand for biofuels could lead to wetlands being converted to farmland

The recent surge in demand for food and biofuel has increased the risks facing the world’s wetlands, warn scientists.

A declaration by 700 scientists said the habitats faced a growing risk of being converted into farmland.

It also stated that the current knowledge of the extent of the world’s wetlands was “unacceptable” and called for a global inventory to be set up.

The document was produced at the end of a UN-convened major scientific conference in Cuiaba, Brazil.

In their statement, the scientists highlighted other activities that were degrading the habitats, such as peat extraction and the construction of hydro-electricity dams.

“It is time to recognise the incalculable value of wetlands to all species – including ours,” said Paulo Teixeira, co-chairman of the 8th Intecol International Wetlands Conference.

“If we don’t plan and invest properly now, the cost to recreate artificially the services wetlands provide will dwarf the cost of preserving and protecting them in the first place.”

In their declaration, the scientists called on the 158 countries that were party to the international wetlands agreement, known as the Ramsar Convention, to adhere to the global framework.

“Some countries have high standards for wetlands management, restoration and protection; however, many others are far behind,” it said.

Fuelling the problem

They also warned against increasing farmland that encroached on the habitat, which caused damage through sediment, fertiliser and pesticide pollution.

There has been a boom in the number of farmers planting corn

“Biofuel production has led to a large loss of wetlands in the US already,” explained Eugene Turner from Louisiana State University.

“They are now growing as much corn to produce biofuels as they used to export out of the country.”

Professor Turner told BBC News that the surge in demand for the crop had resulted in agreements to conserve areas on the margins of farmland being broken.

“It is more profitable now to farm right up to the edge of a stream, so we are losing wetlands in the US from this alone.”

“Of course, there are knock-on effects,” he added. “If you do not grow the corn while the price is high, then somebody else is going to produce it – maybe on a key wetland site.

“This is an example of how interrelationships are not considered when we make decisions.”

Carbon concerns

Another topic that was high on the conference agenda was the role the landscapes played in the global carbon cycle.

“Although that they may be 3-5% of the terrestrial surface, wetlands store about 20% of all terrestrial carbon, which amounts to 500-700 gigatonnes,” explained Professor Turner.

“We are releasing, on a net basis, about 3.5 gigatonnes into the atmosphere, so any small change in the carbon from wetlands going into the atmosphere has a big impact.”

He added that the future well-being of wetlands in the Arctic region was of particular concern.

“The places where it is going to proportionally warm the greatest is towards the Arctic; that region has an awful lot of wetlands.

“You put food in a refrigerator at home to keep it cool; if you don’t, it begins to rot.

“The same thing applies in the Arctic,” he explained. “The carbon is stored under the permafrost, meaning it is permanently frozen.

“The ice is receding, so the carbon that is stored there is going to be released and that is a problem.”

Source:

“Rising demands threaten wetlands”, BBC News Online, Science & Nature, Mark Kinver, 25th July 2008

Plant on Abandoned Farmlands to Make Biofuels Work, Study Says

by Jeremy Elton Jacquot, Los Angeles on 24th June 2008 for treehugger.com

Image from Thiru Murugan

Biofuels could yet play a pivotal role in future energy generation if done right, according to a study released by scientists from Stanford University’s Carnegie Institution. To avoid the need to displace agricultural production or forests, abandoned or depleted farmlands should be used to plant energy crops. This strategy could prove particularly fruitful for developing countries, where the potential exists to produce large quantities of bioenergy that would far outstrip their current needs.

Image from Randy OHC

The energy potential of abandoned farmland crop biofuel production
Elliott Campbell, a postdoctoral fellow in the department of Global Ecology, and his colleagues calculated that there may be up to 4.7 million square kilometers, or 1.8 million square miles, of abandoned farmlands available worldwide. The potential yield could be as much as 2.1 billion tons of dry biomass, enough to produce 41 exajoules’ (1 exajoule = 1 billion billion joules) worth of bioenergy — roughly equivalent to the energy content of 170 million barrels of oil.

The researchers used historical land-use data, satellite images and ecosystem models to calculate the amount of abandoned or degraded agricultural lands and estimate their biofuel potential. Land that had been converted to urban areas or reverted back to forests wasn’t factored into their calculations.

Finding opportunities in the developing world
At best, then, this would still only supply approximately 8 percent of current global energy needs. In some developing countries, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, Campbell believes biomass could provide up to 37 times the amount of energy used now. Thanks to their low fossil fuel consumption and highly productive grassland systems, this can all be done without compromising either food production or forest integrity, the authors argue.

“At the national scale, the bioenergy potential is largest in the United States, Brazil, and Australia. These countries have the most extensive areas of abandoned crop and pasture lands. Eastern North America has the largest area of abandoned croplands, and the Midwest has the biggest expanse of abandoned pastureland. Even so, if 100% of these lands were used for bioenergy, they would still only yield enough for about 6% of our national energy needs,” said Campbell.

Via ::ScienceDaily: Abandoned Farmlands Are Key To Sustainable Bioenergy (news website)

More Biofuel Woes
::Biofuel Crop Expansion Will Destroy Important Kenyan Coastal Wetland
::Biofuel Comparison Chart: The “Good,” the Bad and the (Really) Ugly

Alternatives to Food Crop Biofuels
::Algae-based Biofuels from Power Plant Emissions, Redux
::Sixty Thousand Bushels Beneath The Sea: The Biofuels Potential Of Mariculture

Rice Most Water Intensive Crop Says Australian Stats Bureau

by Jenna Watson, Barcelona on 05.20.08 for treehugger.com

MASH/Getty Images

The Australian Bureau of Statistics released water usage numbers for 2005-06, showing that rice is the most water intensive crop per hectare; however, pasture for grazing is the largest overall consumer of H2O. Although pasture used for grazing is the biggest drain on water resources in Australian agriculture, it requires much less per hectare than hydro-intensive crops like rice, cotton and sugar cane.

In short, rice tops the water usage list at 12.3 megalitres/hectare, followed by cotton at 6.4 megalitres/hectare, then nurseries (5.3 megalitres) and sugarcane (5 megalitres).

Pasture for grazing, which includes dairy farming, beef cattle and lambs, is way down the rankings list in terms of use per hectare, at 3.5 megalitres, but uses the most water in total (2.9 million megalitres) because of the vast number of businesses doing this kind of farming and because it has the most area of land under irrigation (814,000 hectares).

These are interesting numbers and makes one think about the real price of that plate of rice or that cotton t-shirt. The life cycle impacts of what we consume are something we’re starting to hear more and more about and these types of numbers are exactly the kind of thing we should keep in mind when we’re trying to make greener choices. Perhaps this kind of information should be placed on food and clothing labels. Would that make consumers think twice?

 

The report, which covers the 2005-06 financial year, shows that agricultural businesses used a total of 11,689 gigalitres of water for agricultural production. Victorian agriculture was the second biggest consumer of water, using 22.6% of the Australian total.

The figures are a reminder of the importance of the Murray-Darling river system to Australian agriculture and the national economy. The 7300 agricultural businesses in this system used more than two thirds (68.6%) of all water used for irrigation nationally.

Most of the water used in Australian agriculture, 77%, is surface water. Underground water makes up 20.5% while town/mains water (1.1%) and re-cycled or re-used water (1%) play only a minor role.

Richard Anderson, the chairman of the Victorian Farming Federation’s water council, said farmers had in recent years adopted new methods and equipment to be more water efficient such as soil moisture content testing, automated irrigation equipment and drip irrigation equipment.

The average amount of water applied to a hectare of irrigated farmland in Australia has declined slightly during the life of this survey from 4.4 megalitres per hectare in 2002-03 to 4.2 litres per hectare in 2005-06.

 

 

Here are the numbers reported in the article:

WATER USE ON AUSTRALIAN FARMS

water used (megalitres) / average use per hectare (megalitres)
pasture for grazing: 2,887,837 / 3.5
cotton: 1,734,951 / 6.4
rice: 1,253,227 / 12.3
sugar cane: 1,056,598 / 5
pasture for hay/silage: 799,397 / 3.7
cereal crops for grain/seed: 695,365 / 2.4
grapevines: 633,183 / 3.5
fruit and nut trees, berries: 629,639 / 4.5
vegetables 416,875/3.8
other broadacre crops: 166,673 / 3

Sources:

“Grazing a thirsty pursuit : study”, The Age, Darren Gray, Rural Affairs Reporter, 140308 (link)

“Water Use on Australian Farms”, The Australian Bureau of Statistics

More information by treehugger.com:

Ecotips for Conserving Water.

Should Food Labelling Show a Water Footprint.

Water Footprints .