Climate Change

July 12 2019 Coral reefs, Oceans, Climate Change

Why these algae-eating fish may be corals’ greatest allies

Numerous studies have shown that herbivorous fish play a fundamental role in the health and survival of coral reefs by removing the algae that robs corals of the light and space they need to grow. But populations of these small algae-eating fish are diminishing rapidly due to human activity, which puts our reefs at greater risk. In the Mexican Caribbean, for example, 60 percent of the reefs are considered in poor or critical health. There exist a diverse array of herbivorous fish in our oceans; they’re grouped into various families that are, in turn, divided into groups according to their feeding habits and roles in controlling algae growth. Parrotfish are among the most important species, as their strong beaks allow them to clean large amounts of macroalgae. Herbivorous fish live in tropical and subtropical waters, including many Latin American and Caribbean nations—Belize, Colombia, Guatemala, and Mexico, to name a few. These fish contribute to the health of key coral ecosystems like the Mesoamerican Reef System. Despite serving as fish hatcheries and natural barriers against hurricanes, coral reefs are extremely fragile and vulnerable to the global climate crisis, which is driving ocean acidification, sea level rise, and increased algae growth. Experts say that, when faced with the reduced presence of herbivorous fish, reef systems lose their capacity to recover from extreme weather events like hurricanes, which are becoming more and more powerful. But the relationship between herbivorous fish and coral reefs is at increasing risk. Dwindling herbivorous fish populations are evident in the Caribbean, where fishing communities have begun to capture parrotfish after overfishing commercial species. The destruction of mangroves and marine grassland habitats put these fish at risk, since many species of parrotfish rely on them during their life cycle. Environmental degradation also increases sedimentation and the concentration of nutrients, causing an increase in macroalgae. Algae growth and an increase in coral diseases are the result of pollution caused by inadequate wastewater management and runoff from commercial agriculture. These problems require the implementation of urgent measures aimed at preserving herbivorous fish populations and, with them, maintaining the health and regenerative capacity of coral reefs. Such measures should include the establishment and adoption of clear fisheries management and conservation strategies to ensure the recuperation of herbivorous fish, particularly parrotfish, populations. Protected marine areas or regeneration zones that prohibit fishing in key areas should also be created. To adequately protect these fish, States must also: standardize the monitoring of fish populations in the region and implement alternative management strategies; promote comprehensive, regional management that enables local authorities to share experiences and establish common conservation tools; and create and implement regulations and laws to combat overfishing and bad tourism practices, and promote low-impact coastal development. In nature, symbiotic relationships, like that of herbivorous fish and corals, are abundant. We must learn to recognize and value them. Likewise, if we take care of nature, nature will take care of us.

July 09 2019 Climate Change, Human Rights

Putting people’s fundamental rights at the core of solutions to the climate emergency

Announcing the First Ever Global Summit on Human Rights and Climate Change The People’s Summit on Climate, Rights and Human Survival – the first ever global summit on human rights and climate change – will be hosted by leading civil society groups and the UN Human Rights Office in New York on 18-19 September. The People’s Summit aims to galvanize the human rights community to urgently scale-up its efforts on climate justice, creating the most diverse movement ever assembled to tackle the climate crisis. The People’s Summit was announced in an open-letter below, which was published on the Thomson Reuters Foundation. The human rights and environmental communities must seek solutions together. It’s time for all of us to come forward as one to face the climate crisis. Our organisations seek a world where people thrive in a safe and healthy environment, where human rights come before corporate profits. To make it happen, we need to face the climate crisis united in the strongest and most diverse movement ever assembled. Only together can we make world leaders take this emergency seriously. Real solutions to the climate breakdown must place people and our fundamental rights at the core. This is an invitation to all those who value human dignity and wellbeing to fully throw their weight behind the call for global climate justice. And to those working to protect our planet to center their efforts in communities, particularly the people most impacted and least responsible for the climate crisis. The human rights community can bring key constituencies, power and skills to the fight for climate justice. The strength of a collective movement to overcome the climate crisis needs to match the gravity of the problem. Our organisations are coming together to make it happen, and we are urging the environmental and human rights communities to join us. To meet the challenge we, the people, must be more connected with each other and more committed to our planet than ever before. This is a matter of survival. Rampant carbon emissions have triggered unprecedented, dangerous and destabilising changes in our climate. Corporate and governmental neglect has already exposed millions to increasingly extreme weather disasters. We must reverse course now; the window of opportunity to act is closing. Make no mistake. The impacts of climate change already hinder our rights to health, food, water, housing, work and even life itself. These impacts are even more severe for people already in vulnerable situations in places impacted by severe weather, poverty or oppression. Our societies cannot keep on like this. People need access to justice, governments must work for the people and corporations need to be accountable for their actions. Now is the time to act. The signs of a shared will to do so are everywhere. Students are taking to the streets to call for a safe future. Indigenous Peoples are speaking up for the defense of land, water and communities’ rights. Workers are demanding safe and well-paying jobs in better, cleaner industries. Women’s rights activists are putting forward a wealth of feminist solutions. Religious leaders are calling on us to protect communities and nature. Scientists are gathering and sharing evidence to guide us out of the crisis. We know the challenge, and the answers are there. Solutions are available now, including renewable energy sources, respect for fundamental rights and traditional knowledge, and a true focus on the needs of the people over corporate greed. All of our organisations work on climate change already, some more explicitly than others. But now is the moment for us to connect the dots between our causes and join forces. A climate emergency is upon us, and we must act now. Environmental human rights defenders, Indigenous Peoples and local activists have long risked everything to fight environmental degradation. They are now joined in their struggle by growing mass movements such as the school climate strikes, Extinction Rebellion and campaigners calling for a Green New Deal. In this new era of climate activism, the human rights community cannot remain on the sidelines. It is more urgent than ever that we step up by working together to protect the communities and individuals on the frontlines of the climate struggle. That is why 150 non-governmental leaders and activists from different communities are coming together on September 18 and 19 for the ‘People’s Summit on Climate, Rights and Human Survival’. Our organisations will be there along with the United Nations Human Rights Office to support people demanding immediate and ambitious climate action from their governments to protect communities. We believe in unleashing the potential of a diverse movement to safeguard present and future generations. We are united to demand climate justice. Confirmed signers: Astrid Puentes, Co-Executive Director, Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) Bridget Burns, Director, Women’s Environment and Development Organization Carroll Muffett, President and CEO, Center for International Environmental Law Chris Grove, Executive Director, ESCR-Net Ellen Dorsey, Executive Director, Wallace Global Fund Gillian Caldwell, CEO, Global Witness Iago Hairon Souza, Coordinator, Engajamundo Jennifer Morgan, International Executive Director, Greenpeace International Kumi Naidoo, Secretary General, Amnesty International May Boeve, Executive Director, 350.org Phil Bloomer, Executive Director, Business & Human Rights Resource Centre Philip Alston, Center for Human Rights and Global Justice Chair, New York University Sharan Burrow, General Secretary, International Trade Union Confederation Sofia Monsalve, Secretary General, FIAN International Steve Trent, Executive Director, Environmental Justice Foundation Thalita Silva e Silva, Coordinator, Engajamundo

July 06 2019 Climate Change, Human Rights

The GCF should thoroughly assess the policies and practices of the BNDES and require conditions for its accreditation

The Board of the Green Climate Fund (GCF) is considering an application for accreditation of the Brazilian National Development Bank (BNDES, Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social). The accreditation process of the BNDES is an opportunity to strengthen the Bank’s policies and procedures designed to identify, address and remediate environmental and social impacts linked to its activities and operations. With the new administration of President Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil is suffering severe setbacks in its environmental, social and climate policies and agenda. Brazilian environmental agencies are being dismantled, while renowned and effective mechanisms such as the Amazon Fund are at risk of becoming inoperative or even eliminated. In such a context, the effectiveness of the country’s environmental and social (E&S) governance and its instruments, agencies and institutions, risks being severely undermined. In order to fulfil its mandate to promote a paradigm shift towards low-emission and climate resilient development pathways within the context of sustainable developmentthe GCF should ensure that local systems and institutions are adequately equipped to deliver the sustainability outcomes intended by the Fund. The GCF should carefully assess BNDES’ existing E&S policies and procedures and ensure that approval is conditioned upon commitments and measurable steps by the Bank, with political support from the Brazilian government, to further strengthen its policies and procedures to address following shortcomings related to: Disclosure of environmental and social (E&S) information; Design of E&S policies and monitoring tools; Human rights standards and the rights of indigenous peoples and other traditional communities; Grievance mechanism; Commitments concerning climate change. Read the full statement here

May 20 2019 Climate Change, Fracking, Freshwater Sources

Is the UN finally turning against fracking?

The world is divided over the issue of fracking, a fact that is (at times painfully) apparent in the United Kingdom (UK) where I grew up. Four separate countries make up the UK. Of them, England is the only nation that still allows hydraulic fracturing; Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (along with a host of other countries worldwide) have banned the controversial process. Despite earthquakes linked to fracking in areas of the country where such things are virtually unheard of—plus waves of protests, controversy and opposition campaigns— the British government has so far refused to change its position. However, a recent United Nations recommendation to the UK may signal the beginning of the end for fracking in England and, hopefully, around the world. Fracking and the United Nations Until recently, the UN has appeared to have a complicated relationship with fracking. Several different UN bodies have made conflicting statements about the benefits of, and issues with, this means of energy production. In early 2018, the UN Conference on Trade and Development released a report that, according to one of its authors, did “not [say fracking] is good or bad,” but rather that each project’s cost/benefit analysis was dependent on a number of context-specific factors. The report cited positive aspects of fracking, calling it a useful “bridge fuel” for States aiming to move towards more environmentally-friendly renewable power sources, alongside it’s disadvantages. This argument is not viable since the environmental impact of hydraulic fracturing is even greater than that of conventional gas and oil exploitation. Over the last few months, however, it seems the UN has been hardening its position against fracking, particularly given its negative climate change impacts in the context of the Paris Agreement, the intergovernmental treaty in which nations have committed to taking ambitious steps to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees centigrade with respect to pre-industrial levels. Since October 2018, there have been 2 UN recommendations issued against fracking. In the UK, the government was urged to consider a complete and comprehensive ban on fracking; and in Argentina, the government was urged to reconsider the development of a large fracking project. The dangers of fracking Although for its promoters fracking has led to a huge spike in oil and gas production around the world—perhaps most notably in the US—its use has come at great environmental cost, particularly with regards to air quality and water supply due to the amount of water used in the process and its consequent contamination. Fracking releases large quantities of methane, a greenhouse gas whose global warming potential is 86 times greater than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In addition, the release of this gas can be hugely detrimental to the air quality surrounding fracking sites. Fracking also leads to increased earthquake risks due to the high pressure used to fracture layers of shale rock and extract oil and gas from it. In its recommendations to the UK and Argentina, the UN has clearly stressed the dangers of fracking. The key reason behind its recommendation to Argentina to reconsider the fracking project was its effect on climate change, especially in light of the Paris Agreement, and “the negative impact [that the project would have] on global warming and on the enjoyment of economic and social rights by the world’s population and future generations.” In its recommendation to the UK, it was noted that women in the UK are “disproportionately affected by the harmful effects of fracking, including exposure to hazardous and toxic chemicals, environmental pollution, and climate change.” Stopping the spread of fracking While operational in certain areas of the world, and being banned in others, fracking is advancing rapidly in Latin America. In the face of increasing global energy demand, it is crucial that the region, and the international community as a whole, commits to developing only truly sustainable energy projects. Fracking is not one. I believe the UN’s recent change in tone on fracking is a positive advance that should inspire both Argentina and the UK to react accordingly. From a personal point of view, I hope the UK heeds the growing evidence about the dangers of fracking and abandons the practice immediately. For Latin America, and other regions facing fracking’s blind advance, there are many countries to hold up as examples of how to confront the controversial practice. That’s why AIDA recently published a report highlighting the arguments and mechanisms that have been used around the world to restrict fracking and avoid its negative impacts on people and the environment. It is crucial that these impacts be properly considered as we take the ambitious steps needed to create an energy matrix that can solve the world’s energy needs without violating human rights, destroying our common goods, or worsening the catastrophic impacts of the climate crisis.

May 15 2019 Climate Change, Human Rights

Protests Challenge Hydropower Companies at Global Event in Paris

Civil society organizations denounce corporate attempts to label hydroelectric dams as “green energy,” citing human rights abuses and environmental damage. Paris, France—A coalition of activists, organizations and indigenous leaders convened a series of events this week in light of the opening of the World Hydropower Conference, calling attention to the socially and environmentally destructive nature of hydroelectric dams, as well at their climate-aggravating impacts. From May 14-16, the International Hydropower Association (IHA) is hosting its biannual World Hydropower Congress in central Paris. The industry seeks to portray hydroelectric dams as a clean source of renewable energy, which they claim are essential for delivering the Paris Climate Agreement and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. However, a broad coalition of environmental and human rights organizations, together with social movements, argue that the dam industry’s claims amount to greenwashing, and are aimed at capturing new sources of finance from institutions like the Green Climate Fund. They point to numerous cases where hydropower projects have provoked disastrous consequences for people and the environment. Citing mounting scientific evidence that dams are a significant source of greenhouse gases—CO2and, particularly, methane—civil society groups also highlight the role of dams in aggravating climate change. A joint statement signed by more than 250 civil society groups from 70 countries calls attention to the false promises of hydropower and the urgent need for truly sustainable energy solutions. It is available in five languages. These and other issues—including the impacts of hydroelectric dams on natural and cultural heritage sites—were debated by scientists, activists and representatives of affected communities from Brazil, Colombia, Myanmar and Turkey in a parallel event to the IHA Congress, held at the Town Hall of the 6thArrondissement of Paris on May 13. The conference was organized by the NGOs Planète Amazone, GegenStrömung / CounterCurrent, Rivers without Boundaries, International Rivers, and AIDA. Myint Zaw, an activist and researcher from Myanmar who was awarded the 2015 Goldman Prize, was one of the speakers at the conference. “The food security of millions of people is threatened by dam projects planned for the Irrawaddy River that would impact important farmlands needed for rice production along the river and in delta region,” Zaw said. During Tuesday’s opening of the World Hydropower Congress, representatives of indigenous communities, social movements and non-governmental organizations protested together with activists from Extinction Rebellion in front of the Espace Grande Arche in La Défense. A focus of the protest was to call attention to the growing number of human rights and environmental activists murdered in dam-related conflicts. “Miguel Ángel Pabón Pabón disappeared as a result of his activism against the Hidrosogamoso Dam in Colombia, which has continued despite severe human rights violations,“ said Juan Pablo Soler from Movimiento Ríos Vívos of Colombia, mentioning one of many defenders lost. In Gabon, the Kingélé and Tchimbélé dams are adversely affecting populations living beside rivers. “During heavy rains, some villages are flooded when reservoirs overflow. Rivers turn into lakes, water becomes polluted and fish die intoxicated. There is no structure to help us on the ground, nor does the government hear our complaints, which is why we look abroad to issue a distress call,” proclaimed Assossa, a Pigmy leader. Three representatives of the Munduruku people from the Brazilian Amazon—Chief Arnaldo Kabá, Alessandra Korap and Candido Waro Munduruku—participated in both the parallel conference and the protest. After the protest, the Munduruku attempted to hand deliver a letter to the corporate headquarters of Électricité de France (EDF), majority-controlled by the French government. EDF is involved in the controversial Sinop dam on the Teles Pires River, a tributary of the Tapajos, and has contributed to studies that promote the São Luiz do Tapajós mega-dam, which would flood Munduruku territory. EDF representatives refused to speak with the Munduruku leaders. “EDF invades our territory, destroys our rivers, our territory and our sacred places. And when we come here to deliver a letter to this huge company, we’re barred,” stated Alessandra Munduruku. “We’re sad, but we’re determined to continue our struggle to defend our territory.” Press Contacts: Gert-Peter Bruch, Planète Amazone, [email protected] (French, English), + 33 (0)7 81 23 92 91 Brent Millikan, International Rivers, [email protected] (English, Portuguese), +55 61 8153-7009 Thilo F. Papacek, GegenStrömung – CounterCurrent / Forum Umwelt und Entwicklung, [email protected] (German, Portuguese, Spanish, English), ++49 151 412 145 19 Eugene Simonov, Rivers without Boundaries, [email protected](Russian, English, Chinese), +79 (0) 165 491 22 Resources: Further information about the parallel event from May 13: http://www.transrivers.org/2019/2634/ The joint statement, available in Chinese, English, Portuguese, Russian and Spanish can be downloaded here: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1pgS3YHm4zy5_LFSSjRe0KH-DMK773DQI Link to the Munduruku letter of protest to EDF: Électricité de France (Portuguese and English):https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TxqIiOuJDxNUI2YKPtUBrE_wucJLFl-E/view?usp=sharing Press photos available free of charge (Credit: Todd Southgate): https://tinyurl.com/y34b2g7u Clip reel of protest at opening of IHA Congress and Munduruku attempt to deliver letter at IHA headquarters: https://youtu.be/9BrI3AqVnXE Fact sheet from CounterCurrent on hydroelectric dams and UN Sustainable Development: tinyurl.com/y6mbjqj2

An aerial view of the Amazon jungle surrounding the Belo Monte Dam in Brazil.

May 13 2019 Climate Change, Freshwater Sources, Large Dams

The False Promises of Hydropower

How dams fail to deliver the Paris Climate Agreement and UN Sustainable Development Goals A Joint Statement by Civil Society Organizations on occasion of the 2019 World Hydropower Congress in Paris, France We live in an age of urgency. Scientists have warned that we have little time to act to bring climate change under control and protect the integrity of life on our planet. Confronting the climate crisis requires creative solutions that both protect nature and respect human rights. Facing these challenges, we cannot remain silent onlookers while corporate profiteers, financiers, and their allies peddle false solutions for addressing climate change and implementing sustainable development. A flagrant example of such deception is the attempt to portray large hydroelectric dams as a ‘clean and green’ source of energy, as can be seen at the 2019 World Hydropower Congress. Organized in Paris by the industrial lobby of the International Hydropower Association (IHA) in partnership with UNESCO, the conference’s title reads, “Delivering the Paris Climate Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals.” Such glossy portrayals of hydroelectric dam projects—with an eye toward capturing financial incentives through mechanisms like Climate Bonds and the Green Climate Fund—conveniently ignore a long legacy of social and environmental catastrophes, economic waste and, all too often, massive corruption schemes that are the antithesis of truly sustainable development. ... A Call for Action The undersigned civil society organizations call on the members of the International Hydropower Association, governments and international financial institutions to implement the following urgent actions: Steer priorities, investments and financial incentives away from additional hydroelectric projects and towards energy efficiency and truly sustainable renewable energy options (solar, wind and biomass and, when appropriate, micro-hydro). Special attention should be given to opportunities for technological innovation, decentralized generation and improving energy access among isolated, off-grid communities. Eliminate financial incentives for new hydroelectric projects within climate change mechanisms, such as the Green Climate Fund and Nationally Determined Contributions, and within programs to promote implementation of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (with the possible exception of micro-hydro projects). Commission independent audits of controversial existing dam projects and basin-wide cascades in terms of their social and environmental consequences, identifying steps to mitigate impacts and ensure just reparations for affected communities, based on direct consultations. When such measures are prohibitively expensive or otherwise inviable, the de-commissioning of dam projects should be promoted. Ensure the alignment of operational procedures for existing hydroprojects with relevant territorial plans at the basin level, such as integrated water resource management and protected areas that ensure key ecological processes and the rights of local communities, based on the concepts and tools of participatory, adaptive management. Ensure that renewable energy policies and projects adopt, across the board, robust guidelines to safeguard human rights and environmental protections, such as ILO Convention 169 and the UN Principles on Business and Human Rights. No energy facilities that potentially impact the territories and livelihoods of indigenous peoples and other traditional communities should be authorized without obtaining the free, prior and informed consent of the community and ensuring the cooperative design of co-management strategies. Among the benefits of such a paradigm shift in energy strategies and development planning will be major contributions toward protecting the world’s last free-flowing rivers, vital for climate resiliency, biodiversity conservation and sustainable livelihoods. Energy companies and governments must halt all efforts to dam the world’s remaining free-flowing rivers and concentrate instead on: i) improving efficiency and the sustainability of existing hydropower projects and cascades; and ii) investing in energy efficiency and truly sustainable renewables. Moreover, governments must urgently promote the permanent legal protection of the world’s last free-flowing rivers, including transboundary watercourses, with due respect for the territorial rights of indigenous peoples and other traditional communities, who play fundamental roles as the guardians of healthy rivers. Read the Full Statement Here

May 13 2019 Climate Change, Human Rights

Nature first: it’s time to build environmental consciousness

Speaking in front of more than 500 people was a unique and beautiful experience, above all for the reason I came together with such an amazing group of people. We were seven diverse individuals with two powerful things in common: our love for the natural environment and our work to preserve it. We were in Santiago, Chile as part of the conference, “Nature first: a new deal with the environment.” The great interest the audience had in the event filled me with such joy, as did the opportunity to speak beside my colleagues from The Naturalists, a series of interviews in which professionals from distinct environmental professions were invited to speak about what being a naturalist implies in the modern world. The video series and this event was put on by Ladera Sur, an online platform and community built around nature, the environment, the outdoors, travel, and much more. It was Ladera Sur that introduced us as 20thCentury Naturalists, a great honor and an even greater obligation. But what does “nature first,” a title with such urgency, really mean? It means that, for too long, nature has been subsidizing our technological advancements and even our quality of life. We live in a world in which those who have the means can do practically anything. Perhaps some of us have stopped to think about tomorrow, and how it may be difficult for our children or grandchildren to enjoy even the simplest things in life. But the time has come to reorganize our priorities. We have neither the time, nor the credit, to continue borrowing from nature. Before proceeding with any potentially harmful project or activity, we first must demonstrate that the activity would not hurt the health of the planet. Only after assuring that is it worth asking whether a project is also good business, or if it will make our lives easier or more comfortable. This is not the position of an eco-terrorist, nor is it counter to economic development. It’s simply looking ahead at the reality of a living on a sick planet—a planet on whose health we depend. The good news is that the changes we need to make to resolve the environmental crisis are not only achievable; they are what people living on this planet actually want. A world with low emissions is a cleaner and more just world; a world driven by renewables means less pollution and more equitable access to energy; a world with more protected natural areas is a greener, healthier, more verdant world; it is rich in biodiversity and has a greater capacity to provide clean air and water. See the complete video of the conference below.

April 30 2019 Toxic Pollution, Climate Change, Human Rights

Clean air and climate justice: the best gifts for our children

Today Mexico celebrates Children’s Day. The best gift we can give to millions of boy and girls is clean air and climate justice. It’s the only thing I want to give to my children that, sadly, I can’t, at least not this year. Mexico City, where we live, has had bad air quality 112 of the 120 days of 2019, thus far. Those of us who live in this city have suffered from contamination, particularly over the last month; three “environmental contingencies” (air pollution alerts) for ozone were declared for a total of seven days. In recent years, contingencies have occurred during peak ozone season—February 15 to June 15—a period in which tropospheric ozone (present in the air we breathe) exceed the maximum levels allowed by Official Mexican Law. This gas, present throughout the year, rises when the burning of fossil fuels by vehicles and industries is compounded by changing weather conditions: less rain and winds, and more solar radiation. This prevents the air pollution that we produce from dispersing into nearby areas. Increased ozone causes serious damages to the environment and public health, particularly to children. According to the Pan American Health Organization, ozone in the air can affect lung function, making breathing difficult. Thus, the group most vulnerable to contamination also includes people with respiratory diseases, older adults and athletes. Authorities recommend that the people, particularly vulnerable groups, abstain from outdoor activities during the contingencies, particularly between 1:00 and 7:00 p.m. Other measures include increasing vehicle restrictions and reducing the consumption of liquefied petroleum gas. Despite its harsh realities, ozone season is not a new or surprising phenomenon, nor is it normal. It shouldn’t be normal for parents to resign ourselves to its presence, to birthday parties indoors and not letting our children go to the park with their friends. I understand the impossibility of controlling the rain, sun and wind; but ozone is another story. There are clear measures that could and should have been implemented years ago to prevent the ozone season from being unavoidable in Mexico City. Already fully identified, they include: improving the quality of gasoline, vehicular technology and fixed sources; ensuring safe and adequate public transportation and bicycle infrastructure; and effectively controlling fleets of private and public transport. Until now, these actions have been incomplete, inefficient and unable to solve the underlying problem. But the improvement of air quality during gasoline shortages has demonstrated that such solutions are possible. What’s more, actions aimed at reducing air pollution could have a double benefit. Tropospheric ozone is a greenhouse gas that aggravates climate change. It is a short-lived climate pollutant that stays in the atmosphere for only a few weeks, meaning that actions to control it have an almost immediate effect on public health, ecosystems and the climate. Therefore, in addition to improving the health of millions of people living in cities, Mexico has the opportunity to fulfill its international obligations on climate change. Diminishing ozone season requires the urgent and structural change of public policies, laws and their application. New standards must include a human rights perspective that prioritizes public interest and the health of children, and others, above vehicular mobility. While the development and implementation of these measures may not be easy, it’s essential we take the first steps toward the results we want to achieve. Government efforts require the support of our entire society. Companies must contribute to the implementation of solutions, acting with due diligence. Academics, civil society organizations, trade unions and other sectors must contribute with our knowledge and participation to ensure that the plans and programs are ambitious and effective, and that they promote a just transition. Every resident of the city has a duty to contribute. A few weeks ago, Professor David Boyd, the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Human Rights and the Environment, published a report reiterating the obligation of States to guarantee the right to clean air, and the duty of companies to contribute. The report has recommendations related to tropospheric ozone that could be very useful for Mexican authorities. The enjoyment of clean air is a right that has yet to be met. Today almost two million children (from 0 to 14 years old) live in Mexico City, including mine. They and a large part of the more than 35 million children across the country could enjoy clean air; most live in cities and towns with air quality problems. According to organized trade, the celebration of Children's Day in Mexico involves an expenditure of 17 billion pesos ($900 million dollars) in gifts, an amount that could be used for authorities, companies and individuals to implement actions to ensure that the children of the country have something much more valuable: the ability to breathe air that does not endanger their health. This would be aligned with the goal of those who instituted the celebration of Children's Day in Mexico in 1924, and with the intention of the United Nations to establish one day a year to honor the importance of children's rights. Air pollution is, unfortunately, a regional and a global problem. Peru and Colombia also celebrate their children this month. Since their cities are among the most polluted in Latin America, what is reflected here can also be applied to those countries, and the continent as a whole. My gift for my children this year will be to continue working for better air quality in Mexico City, and to collaboratively build a future—hopefully a not-so-distant one—in which climate justice is a reality.

February 14 2019 Climate Change, Fracking, Toxic Pollution

How fracking's methane leaks aggravate climate change

I’ve seen them more times than I can remember, but the shock never fades: ten-foot-high flames burning off gas at the BP processing plant in Whiting, Indiana. The facility is close to where I grew up, so we’ve had a lot of time to marvel at the flare stacks. My sister thought they were volcanoes when she was little and, in my family, the name has stuck. Converting waste methane to carbon dioxide (CO2) through flaring is common practice in oil and gas production. This makes “volcanoes” a familiar feature of drilling and hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, fields. The sight of stacks spewing CO2 directly into the air is both visually striking and enraging: a visual metaphor for a world run on extractive, dirty energy. And yet, when it comes to fracking, the volcanoes and their carbon emissions aren’t even the biggest problem. That which is most dangerous is often hardest to see—invisible, in this case. Fracking’s worst air pollution actually occurs through methane leaks. Methane is a greenhouse gas whose global warming potential is 86 times greater than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. It leaks stealthily at every point in the gas supply chain into our atmosphere, undetectable without advanced equipment and frequent tests. According to NASA, the oil and gas industry is responsible for the global rise in methane emissions, beating even landfills and dairy production. Many of these emissions come from leaking pipes attached to fracked gas wells. While many of fracking’s damages—the contamination of water tables, an increase in man-made earthquakes—are well documented, fracking’s air pollution is a more difficult battle to fight. There are no convenient visuals of tap water set on fire or flattened homes. But the fact that we can’t see methane leaking into the air doesn’t make its impact any less intense: diffuse toxic particles grip the throat like so many invisible hands; methane causes nosebleeds and asthma; gas leaks squeeze the brain into dizzying headaches and seizures; toxic additives cause babies to be born prematurely with low birth weight and life-threatening defects. Leaking methane is also of particular concern when it comes to climate change. When just less than 2 percent of a pipeline’s total carried methane leaks into the air, the gas loses its supposed “cleaner” climate advantage over even coal. Recent studies show that U.S. fracking fields leak at tremendously uneven rates, some up to a whopping 12 percent. In other words, only a small number of wells are responsible for an extreme amount of contamination. But this also means that we already have part of the solution: fixing leaks at these super-polluting fields would be a huge boon for climate regulation. Leak detention and repair requires frequent and careful oversight, but it is also cost-effective, and often actually pays for itself. Gas companies can patrol their own distribution lines, looking for and repairing leaks. Pneumatic pipeline controllers can be replaced with better, low-bleed controllers. This extra care, however, is exactly what fracking’s proponents fight against: the gas industry in the United States has long denied and diminished the severity of leaking pipelines. Like the greenhouse gas pollution that causes it, climate change is a slow-paced disaster. It is a long, diffuse emergency that, in a sound-byte world, isn’t dramatic enough for short-term elections and news cycles, and usually isn’t brought up until it’s too late. Alternatives to fracking But times are changing. And the solution to a warming world isn’t just about fixing leaks. We can’t just mitigate a life-threatening system; we have to end it. Instead of perpetuating our dependence on gas, we must invest in a just transition and move into economically sustainable forms of energy, like solar and wind. Gas delivery systems and their maintenance are as expensive as they are toxic, and will soon become obsolete. We must fight for better regulation of our present system, while building up alternatives for a better tomorrow. This is particularly important in parts of the world that are only now starting to embrace fracking. While somewhat ubiquitous in the global North, fracking has only just begun in Latin America, where roughly 5,000 wells have popped up in the past few years. Frontline communities and human rights defenders from across the Americas have fought hard to win bans or restrictions on fracking. They urge that their nations not fall for fracking’s trap—harms would be amplified by lax regulation and further aggravate climate change. In October they testified before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on the harm fracking has caused to communities across Latin America. Liliana Ávila, a senior attorney at AIDA, explained that fracking-induced pollution impacts basic human rights, and that environmental defenders often face extreme violence when protecting their territories from the gas industry. Part of the battle for a global and just transition towards a sustainable, equitable energy economy is being able to recognize those harms that are harder to see—including those that are invisible at first. It’s the quiet harms that unfold over long time spans that are catching up to us now.

February 02 2019 Coral reefs, Freshwater Sources, Climate Change

Putting my heart in the conservation of wetlands

Coral reefs are my favorite wetlands. They’re full of so many colors and shapes, and simply teeming with life. When I’m underwater, my heart is full of peace and excitement, as I see myself surrounded by so many forms of life, so many species living together. As a marine biologist, I’ve had the opportunity to scuba dive in a variety of countries and see many of these beautiful ecosystems up close. Of all my dives, the ones I enjoyed most were those I did—for work and for pleasure—in the Bay Islands of Honduras. As a recent college graduate and volunteer with the Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef Assessment Program, I was in charge of monitoring the countless organisms that live in or on the reefs—seaweed, sea urchins, lobsters, queen snails, and so many others. Without a doubt, my time diving in the Cayos Cochinos sparked my personal and professional journey. Since then, I’ve set out to protect these magical ecosystems, vital to all life this planet. My current role, as scientific advisor to AIDA, uses science to strengthen the legal arguments employed to protect these and other at-risk natural environments in Latin America. Wetlands, vital and at-risk In addition to coral reefs, wetlands—characterized by the presence of water—include lakes and rivers, underground aquifers, swamps and marshes, grasslands, peat bogs, estuaries and deltas, mangroves, and sea grasses. Wetlands act as the “kidneys” of the planet because they recycle water and waste, retain sediment and nutrients, reduce erosion, and absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, in turn mitigating climate change. However, it’s estimated that since 1700 we’ve lost nearly 87 percent of our wetlands at a speed three times greater than the loss of our natural forests. This has caused a drastic reduction in biodiversity, affecting 81 percent of continental species and 36 percent of marine and coastal species. Among the greatest threats to our wetlands are contamination by garbage, wastewater and industrial pollution; changes in land use; agricultural runoff, erosion and climate change. What’s more, global warming is increasing the temperature of the oceans, raising sea levels, and melting the poles. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, an increase of 1.5°C in global temperature could kill almost 90 percent of the world’s coral reefs—an irreversible and heartbreaking loss. Taking action to save wetlands Given this frightening global scenario, urgent action is required to protect our planet’s wetlands. In fact, there are many ways we can begin to do so immediately, such as: Creating restoration campaigns for vital ecosystems like mangroves and coral reefs. Declaring natural protected areas, to conserve wetlands and the species that depend on them. Developing policies that allow for the rational use of wetlands, where conservation is prioritized. Prohibiting the destruction of these ecosystems in any type of project, be it tourism, development or infrastructure. Establishing water treatment plans to prevent drainage and runoff from contaminating wetlands. Every year, on February 2, we celebrate World Wetlands Day, commemorating the signing of the Ramsar Convention, the only intergovernmental treaty for the conservation and rational use of our planet’s wetlands. This year’s celebration is focused on wetlands and climate change, inviting us all to reflect on the value of our wetlands, the critical services they provide, and urgency with which we must protect them. We are not powerless in the face of climate change. Saving our wetlands may just be the first step toward saving our planet, and ourselves.