www.actualitesolidarite.com
Cette fugurante progression dépasse toutes les prévisions puisque l'AEI n'avait envisagé que la Chine dépasse les Etats-Unis qu'en 2010. Selon Faith Birol, si la Chine continue sur son rythme habituel de croissance économique à 2 chiffres, ses émissions de C02 dévraient représenter "plus du double de tous les pays de l'OCDE réunis" dans vingt-cinq ans.Cette explosion des émissions de CO2 serait notamment due à l'utilisation du charbon pour produire de l'électricité. L'année dernière, selon The Guardian, la Chine a construit en moyenne cinq centrales à charbon par semaine.
Bref, on est bien loin des îles vertes 100% écologistes dont on a déjà eu l'occasion de vous parler...
Source: Le Monde
This project associates this Spanish electricity company Endesa and the Spanish Institute for diversification and energy economy represents an investment of 54 billion euros. Some of the 8 000 inhabitants already complain that the prices rose, and that their life style became more complicated.
As a matter of fact, the electricity supply network will be supplied from a hydroelectric power station, while wind will feed the pumping system, a system of energy economy has been introduced, in order not to use the conventional station that will remain in place as a good angel.
This network should save 18 700 tones of Carbon Dioxide per year.
This tiny island that built its touristic reputation on its loneliness and calm, many business man would go their to relax, is going to keep its airport and multiple renting car agencies. Now, tourists will come to try this new life style, what a wonderful commercial operation…
Studies are doe to introduce such networks in Madera and Crete.
Sources:
www.marianne-en-ligne.fr
www.lemonde.fr
In response to issues of power increase, the "Clash of Powers will, in a first place, analyze issues at stake in the globalized world and, in the afternoon, the strategies of power of the USA, Russia, China and Europe.
For more information: http://www.clashofpowers.com
As said in the French “Tribune” on the 9th march 2007, the last motor show in Geneva looked like a fight for the green car. Major car manufacturers presented their last innovations, calling for a better future : biofuel, clean gasoil, or hybrid propulsion means. Everyones seems to be engaged in the final battle that leads to a better world, in which we could drive cars that would not pollute.
I guess this sounds too “heroïc fantasy”... The final battle is not for tomorow. It is planned in an uncertain future, when producing clean cars will answer to a 
real business case (a 20% ROI?). For the moment, it’s not the case. Thus they’re waiting, greenwashing, making people think that a brighter future and a breathable air in cities are for tomorrow when it’s not.
Actually, this is all about MONEY and INTERESTS. The best one in this game is Toyota. Whith good sales results in an industry in crisis, it has money to reinvest. And they’re putting it into hybrid solutions, giving themselves a green image. Other ones, Renault for example, bet on biofuel, and try to reduce costs to produce “clean” cars. And DaimlerChrysler works in order to match American standards whith its “Bluetec” gasoil, reducing oxidize of nitrogen but not consumption... and thus CO2 emissions.
At least... it’s a mess. No one’s working in the same direction. And no one seems to have a real solution. It seems like they just care about their “green image”, not for our future. It’s urgent that clean cars become a business case!
Source : “Bataille pour la voiture verte au salon de Genève”,
Many countries face or faced strong confrontation between bottle water industries and public water distribution companies.
The French example is very representative.
Between November 2004 and May 2005, the SEDIF (Syndicat des Eaux d’Île-de-France) and “Eau de Paris” launched two commercial campaigns to promote tab water.
They posted few posters in public areas, only little reactions came out at that time, although the message of some posters was quite violent as the one showing a baby bottle, to represent the level a exigence of tab water. The aim of this commercial action was to change the representation consumer had of tab-water. On some posters, we note the participation of NGO’ like les “Amis de la Terre”.
Thecampaigns’ argumentation turns around precise topics:
- Quality of tab water
- Financial benefit of tab water consumption
- The small ecologic impact of tab wat
er consumption- The distribution service
In the meantime the campaign aimed to show that drinking water from the tab was also an act of consumption, they therefor “marketed” it as a usual product. Some posters showed what would be the etiquette's of the “public water”, they also tried to have restaurants bring tab water in special bottle to consumers, saying it was water from the city of Paris.
In response to this campaign, a bottle water brand Cristalline launched a commercial campaign that this time created an important buzz. The argument was to say that the ones how say that tab water is good don’t drink a lot.
The point of the short presentation is to underline the confrontatio
n of two arguments: ecology versus public health. Shows you side.This phenomenon is not only french, in the United States, the environmental protection agency launched the same kind of campaign but with a little detail : the portrait of George W. Bush Jr, on the left side of the poster. In Hungry, the same phenomenon of promotion of tab water.
When most people that buy bottle water do so for its “healthiness”, public water distribution responds with an environmental argument... In this case, the consumer has the easy choice between personal and public interest.
There is no miracle here... the reasons brought forward by the investors are mostly related to finance and profit but at least, they are not trying to make it look as if it was out of sheer concern for the future of Mother Nature.
For example, Mindy Lubber, president of Ceres - a leading coalition of environmental groups - says: "Many US companies are confronting the risks and opportunities from climate change, but others are not responding adequately - and they may be compromising their long-term competitiveness and shareholder value as a result". In the same manner, Richard Moore, North Carolina State Treasurer, tells us that: "Acknowledging the business risks posed by climate change is just good business, and shareholders demand it."
These discours led up to concrete measures since about 42 global warming resolutions were filed with US companies by different coalitions which manage a total of $200 billion. Concerning the "black list" companies, here are the ten corporations concerned: Wells Fargo, TXU, Dominion Resources, Allegheny Energy, ACE, Massey Energy, Consol Energy, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, Bed Bath & Beyond. 
You will not be surprised to see again the name of ExxonMobil which is well-known for its "denial of global warming" lobbying. We already had the opportunity to mention this company in a previous article of ours. Anyway, you should take a look at their website and especially at the "Corporate Citizenship" category. You will be told that Exxon is extremely concerned with preserving biodiversity and invests most of its R&D credits in developing energies which reduce the exhaustion of gaz with greenhouse effect. When we know that ExxonMobil has been singled out by its own team of shareholders, this kind of discourse becomes sadly ridiculous...Source: Corpwatch
During the last motor show in Detroit, car manufacturers tried to build themselves a “green” image. But one of them talked a bit too much during a breakfast at the SAA’s 19th Annual Automotive Outlook conference on Tuesday 9 January. The one who went too far is Van Jolissaint, DaimlerChrysler’s Chief Economist.
According to him, when talking about global warming, Europeans act as “Chicken Little” does : they are running around in circles screaming “the sky is falling”. Jolissaint simply questions climate change. It is “way, way in the
future, with a high degree of uncertainty”. Well, it seems like he explains what american car manufacturers do think.
But how do they explain the “green” image they try to build themselves? Schizophrenia?! The explanation could be far more simple : how to make money whith a concept. Climate change? A myth. Money? A goal! There are a lot of “Chicken Little” on Earth that do believe that global warming is everything but a myth. Thus they had the brilliant idea to sell us “clean fuel”. The message is hidden but simple : keep on polluting, we’re making money thanks to your beliefs on climate change!
Greenwash is cynical. This time, they’re really laughing at us. We’re not dumb. Clean cars on the market still are a myth. But climate change and global warming are real. Thank you Van Jolissaint for helping us to understand that you, car manufacturers, are taking drivers for idiots.
Source : BBC
Contradiction. When you are talking a lot, that is the biggest mistake you can make. Because saying one thing one day and its contrary on the other day simply throws aways any kind of credibility. And the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers is making that mistake.
This alliance explains on its website that green cars are available on the market. That the drivers learn new words such as ?clean diesel? (Yes, we are all learning new words everyday... I couldn?t imagine this one could exist!). That we can already drive clean cars...
Did I miss something? Are we living in the same world? I only know polluting cars. These cars that work with gasoline or gasoil and reject CO2. And if there is a possibility to buy a clean car (I mean, zero pollution) right now, I?m not aware of this! Just take a look at the article on CO2 emissions by cars in Europe (there). As far as I understand what I read, cars do reject CO2.
So, we can drive clean cars that pollute. Thanks to the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, this miracle has become a reality! Just like Santa Claus! But that?s not all...
You can read on their website (right there!) that ?the Alliance supports the development of new technologies and the deployment of cost-effective energy strategies in all sectors to improve energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions?. ?As the global debate on climate change continues, members of the Alliance believe it is prudent to reduce emissions, including carbon dioxide, from our plants, products, and processes.? Talking costs nothing, am I wrong?
These few lines are really hard to believe when you know that on the 30th november 2006 the Alliance was in the US Supreme Court fighting against regulations that limit greenhouse gas emissions, arguing that CO2 wasn?t pollutant. At the same time, all car manufacturers were in L.A. showing clean cars... that won?t be available for decades! This has a name : greenwash!
Just remember, as it is said in an article of the American Chronicle, that ?Motor vehicles are responsible for almost ¼ of annual US emissions of carbon dioxide?the primary global warming gas. »
Sources :
The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers
Article of the American Chronicle
TahitiHowever spreading what he has done in Bora Bora to others islands around Tahiti has not yet become a reality and does not seem to be a priority. The last report/ratio on the bacteriological quality of the lagoon water in these islands was presented in the Council of Ministers on June 7, 2006 by the Ministry of Health. The two main causes of the water pollution in the lagoons of
Surfing is only possible in the commune of Papara during rain. To remain in good heal
th, our friends the surfers will have to be more careful than ever to keep their mouth shut while surfing. Because once someone gets sick, complaints always come. Sustainability policy in action for the lagoons of Tahiti will have to wait to get its water 100% clean like its little sister Va'a pearl.
