I was invited to be a guest speaker at the 19th Irish Environmental Researchers Colloquium hosted by Waterford Institute of Technology on the 19th February last.
The main aim of the annual academic seminar is to capture and communicate some of the enormous research and development currently being undertaken in third level collages and institutions throughout Ireland and abroad. The focus of the seminar is to provide a picture of the current research and development being undertaken in Ireland in areas such as sustainable development, climate change, waste management, environmental technologies and eco-innovation, waste and resource management, human health and environmental policy development.
My presentation given to some 200 scientists and academics was on the responsibilities facing the scientific professional community in attempting to address the enormous challenge of climate change.
A summary of my statements would include the following “that in preparing for the environmental, public health and humanitarian crisis of the 21st century each person in the scientific profession needs to have a vision that extends beyond their discipline. I observed that the environmental profession in Ireland stands at a crossroads. Many believe that environmental pressures will eventually push our society to integrate principles of sustainable development into all levels of government and business. The reality, however, is that the society in which we live is failing to engage with these challenges”. I stated “environmental professionals must develop new skills and demonstrate a greater degree of communication with our community, business and political establishment”.
To face the challenges ahead I remarked that environmental professionals need to become more active. “Truly effective environmental professionals need to be able to develop the talents and potential to influence a brighter future. Most of our knowledge and skills have been focused at building technical expertise. Building technical expertise does not however prepare environmental professionals for the broader range of challenges and responsibilities we will ultimately encounter. Many of you identify the challenges facing humanity as a consequence of climate change and monitor these changes over time but do we really recognize what these challenges mean to our community? And are we prepared to act now to make a difference?”
I noted that science tells us clearly that we cannot wait for the next generation of environmental professionals; the responsibility lies with our generation to ensure that with our collective skills and abilities, our professional and personal values influence policy and our society. I emphasized that as scientists “we have a professional obligation not just for scientific excellence but to use our understanding of science to change the world for the better. As professionals we need to engage in practical action not just in our jobs but at local, regional and national level. This may be unpopular for some but it is essential to our profession.”
I examined the question of why have the public not responded to the message of scientists and have scientists failed in their professional duty to educate the public on the risks of climate change?
In my presentation I showed how the rate of economic growth in the past 50yrs,the increase in population, energy consumption, livestock, houses, cars, aviation, travel, Tourism and unprecedented consumerism has reached the point where the planet can no longer sustain it. “The evidence is unequivical” I noted “that the natural world can no longer support the existing ecomony. The waste emissions created by oil and coal combustion now surpass the national absorptive capacities of the earth. Today the atmosphere has the capacity to absorb only one third of the C02 that we produce each year. CO2 emissions have increased fourfold worldwide since 1950 and continue to grow. I questioned why science is losing the war on climate change, and demonstrated that as long as our economic system is based on chasing economic growth above all else, we are heading for environmental and economic disaster.”
I went on to tell the audience that “the anticipated costs from climate changes for the period 2000-2020 are estimated at €6.3 trillion or €315 billion per year and how over the over the past half century we have seen a seven fold expansion of the global economy with little regard for sustainable yields or environmental protection.”
I noted how the financial meltdown “is a classic example of non rational behaviour. Greed prompted dangerous risk taking, and was followed by panic causing financial chaos and noted that as the ice caps melt there is one thing that both climate change and economic chaos emphatically teach us; we cannot tolerate any more unbridled profiteering.”
What is need urgently I said is for scientists to engage with the public and influence attitudes and actions to tackling climate change at a local regional and national level.
For the educationalists and academics in the audience I questioned how science education needs to change to include communication studies, marketing and media skills in order for scientists to communicate more effectively with the public and policy makers. I reminded the audience that science, in the public interest, must, at this critical time become more political for without political action humanity has no future and said that as environmental professionals we must make our voice heard, we must engage not as spectators but as leaders.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Fact or Scientific Dogma!
In response to Mr. John Streeton’s letter headed “Dictatorial stance on light bulbs” appearing on your February 28th edition may I respond by saying that when it comes to climate change some people are just not persuaded by information and make comments that are simply false and misleading.
Mr Streeton’s letter notes that “I state facts and figures as if it is proven scientific dogma”. A dogma is a belief imposed by an authority and held true even if no or little evidence supports it. Contrary to Mr. Streeton’s comments the overwhelming majority of scientists that study climate change agree that human activity is responsible for changing the climate.
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is one of the largest bodies of international scientists ever assembled to study a scientific issue, comprised of more than 2,000 scientists from 100 countries. The IPCC has concluded that most of the warming observed during the past 50 years is attributable to human activities. The IPPC Fourth Assessment Report published in 2007 is considered the most extensively peer-reviewed science document in history. Its findings have been publicly endorsed by all the major international scientific institutions and national science academies from around the world, yet according to Mr Streeton’s “non scientific point of view, purely as an observer”, it is his conclusion that the jury is still out!
To gain an understanding of the level of scientific consensus on climate change, a recent study examined every article on climate change published in peer-reviewed scientific journals over a 10-year period. Of the 928 articles on climate change the authors found, not one of them disagreed with the consensus position that climate change is happening or is human-induced.
The universal consensus is that the climate is warming rapidly beyond natural variability and the primary cause is human-induced CO emissions.
The different social cultures and political systems these organizations operate within make it hard to see how they would all be labelled as eco warriors by Mr. Streeton. One needs to consider this: what interests have scientists in raising the alarm? What interest have governments in discussing very unpopular measures like energy saving light bulbs, carbon rationing, increases in taxes and duties on petrol and gas, road pricing, travel taxes, etc.. And if there were still serious doubts, why would all governments through out the world agree that climate change is the greatest challenge facing humanity?
The consensus of scientific opinion on anthropogenic global warming is so conclusive there can be no doubt yet some people are not willing or ready to listen and continue to believe that science is not clear because this allows them to continue business as usual.
We are used to living with cheap, readily available energy, in a society which encourages us to consume ever more. The evidence of climate change and what its mitigation means for our lifestyles is therefore deeply unsettling for many.
The debate is over about whether or not climate change is real. Irrefutable evidence from around the world - including extreme weather events, record temperatures, retreating glacier’s, and rising sea levels - all point to the fact that climate change is happening now and at rates much faster than previously thought.
Science, however, has moved on and is now attempting to address the problem. It is hard to convey just how selective you have to be to dismiss the evidence for climate change. You must ignore an entire canon of science, the statements of the world’s most eminent scientific institutions and thousands of papers published in the foremost scientific journals.
What that science is telling us is that if we do not drastically reduce our carbon emissions global warming and climate change could destroy the conditions which allow human beings to remain on the planet. The effort to cut greenhouse gases must come before everything else. Each of us must play our part in this. If this is a dictatorial stance then so be it.
Understanding what the science is saying and planning accordingly is what we need to do now within our communities if we are to have any future. The financial crisis has shown what happens when we pay no attention to sustainable development and try to make the facts fit our desires. Now we must learn to live in the real world. Faced with the overwhelming realities of climate change, some people will clutch at any reassurance. For Mr. Streeton it’s a light bulb. God help us all.
Mr Streeton’s letter notes that “I state facts and figures as if it is proven scientific dogma”. A dogma is a belief imposed by an authority and held true even if no or little evidence supports it. Contrary to Mr. Streeton’s comments the overwhelming majority of scientists that study climate change agree that human activity is responsible for changing the climate.
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is one of the largest bodies of international scientists ever assembled to study a scientific issue, comprised of more than 2,000 scientists from 100 countries. The IPCC has concluded that most of the warming observed during the past 50 years is attributable to human activities. The IPPC Fourth Assessment Report published in 2007 is considered the most extensively peer-reviewed science document in history. Its findings have been publicly endorsed by all the major international scientific institutions and national science academies from around the world, yet according to Mr Streeton’s “non scientific point of view, purely as an observer”, it is his conclusion that the jury is still out!
To gain an understanding of the level of scientific consensus on climate change, a recent study examined every article on climate change published in peer-reviewed scientific journals over a 10-year period. Of the 928 articles on climate change the authors found, not one of them disagreed with the consensus position that climate change is happening or is human-induced.
The universal consensus is that the climate is warming rapidly beyond natural variability and the primary cause is human-induced CO emissions.
The different social cultures and political systems these organizations operate within make it hard to see how they would all be labelled as eco warriors by Mr. Streeton. One needs to consider this: what interests have scientists in raising the alarm? What interest have governments in discussing very unpopular measures like energy saving light bulbs, carbon rationing, increases in taxes and duties on petrol and gas, road pricing, travel taxes, etc.. And if there were still serious doubts, why would all governments through out the world agree that climate change is the greatest challenge facing humanity?
The consensus of scientific opinion on anthropogenic global warming is so conclusive there can be no doubt yet some people are not willing or ready to listen and continue to believe that science is not clear because this allows them to continue business as usual.
We are used to living with cheap, readily available energy, in a society which encourages us to consume ever more. The evidence of climate change and what its mitigation means for our lifestyles is therefore deeply unsettling for many.
The debate is over about whether or not climate change is real. Irrefutable evidence from around the world - including extreme weather events, record temperatures, retreating glacier’s, and rising sea levels - all point to the fact that climate change is happening now and at rates much faster than previously thought.
Science, however, has moved on and is now attempting to address the problem. It is hard to convey just how selective you have to be to dismiss the evidence for climate change. You must ignore an entire canon of science, the statements of the world’s most eminent scientific institutions and thousands of papers published in the foremost scientific journals.
What that science is telling us is that if we do not drastically reduce our carbon emissions global warming and climate change could destroy the conditions which allow human beings to remain on the planet. The effort to cut greenhouse gases must come before everything else. Each of us must play our part in this. If this is a dictatorial stance then so be it.
Understanding what the science is saying and planning accordingly is what we need to do now within our communities if we are to have any future. The financial crisis has shown what happens when we pay no attention to sustainable development and try to make the facts fit our desires. Now we must learn to live in the real world. Faced with the overwhelming realities of climate change, some people will clutch at any reassurance. For Mr. Streeton it’s a light bulb. God help us all.
Eco Light bulbs and Green Politics
There is no doubt about it but the debate on energy saving light bulbs and Green politics certainly seems to lead to much ranting and raving.
Unless we have sound and accurate debate based on scientific and economic facts such tasteless and absurd hyperbole as noted in the ARCHON article last week will drag us all back to the stone age.
We all create our own reality, however, the ignorant and absurd comments of last week, show not only a lack of comprehension of the current economic crisis, the impacts of which are so enormous it is difficult to comprehend, but also a total lack of understanding of science resulting in a hysterial and misinformed article not worthy of publication.
As a member of the Institute of Energy and Chartered Environmentalist I feel duty bound to respond to these comments.
There are a number of problems with this article; not least that the Green party has lost all credibility, abandoned its guiding principles, the Programme for Government and so on, but also that Minister John Gormley's endeavors to ban traditional lights bulbs were not a good idea. Also, bizarrely, ARCHON states that eco light bulbs contain dangerous levels of mercury and damage health!
While to some it may sem trivial to talk about light bulbs, the reality is that lighting accounts for a significant portion of Ireland's electricity use and represents one of the quickest and simplest ways of saving energy. Across Europe, wasteful lightbulbs keep the equivalent of 10 large power stations pumping out up to 50m tonnes of CO2 each year. Given the repeated failure of Ireland to reduce its carbon emissions, the decision to ban incandescent lightbulbs is, in fact, a vital step.
Secondly, energy efficient bulbs will save you money. Each Compact Fluorescent Lamp (CFL) bulb lasts between 6 and 15 times longer than a traditional incandescent bulb. This is because normal bulbs only convert around 5% of the electricity into light while the equivalent figure for CFLs is 20%. A CFL bulb will save you around €8 per year, so even though they are typically more expensive than the old technology, they pay for themselves quickly though efficiency and longevity. If your entire house is fitted with CFL bulbs - and the average home in Ireland has 26 light bulbs - you will save €700 on your lighting bill over the course of the bulb's lifetime.
Thirdly, energy saving Light Bulbs will reduce environmental pollution. The fact that energy-saving lighting contains trace levels of mercury will not bring new environmental problems rather net mercury emissions related to lighting will be reduced by more than 50%, as fewer kilowatt hours of electricity will need to be produced in coal-fired power plants, which emit a relatively high percentage of the substance through their chimneys. It is important to note that the extra coal - a major source of mercury pollution - that is burned in order to light an older incandescent bulb, leads to roughly three times more mercury being released into the atmosphere compared to a CFL bulb.
Fourthly, banning traditional light bulbs will reduce greenhouse gas emission and help tackle climate change. The International Energy Agency staggering figures speak for themselves, globally lighting currently consumes more electricity than is produced by either hydro or nuclear power and results in CO2 emissions equivalent to about 70% of the world's cars. A single low-energy bulb in normal use saves 111 kilos of carbon dioxide annually. Banning old-fashioned lightbulbs across the whole of the EU would cut carbon emissions by about 20 million tonnes a year - and save between 5 and 8 billion euros a year in domestic fuel bills. Is this not good for the consumer, not to mention the environment ?
Fifthly, Ireland is not alone in attempting to ban the old-fashioned light bulb with policies being introduced in California, Canada, Austrialia and Central America. In fact, Prime Minister Gordon Brown has said he wants to see the UK to be one of the first countries to phase out inefficient light bulbs. Also, in the UK supermarkets voluntarily decided to stop replacing their existing stock of 100W lightbulbs after New Year's Day 2009.
Despite the best efforts of the majority of the world's scientists, ARCHON has somehow managed to remain totally oblivious to, or unconcerned by, the hidden financial costs and environmental harm associated with keeping tens of millions of wasteful incandescent lightbulbs alight. Who would have thought that something as mundane as a humble lightbulb would trigger such an outpouring of ill informed journalism? It would seem to be no more than a desperate attempt to whip up a political frenzy over the fact that the public, according to the most recent political survey, believe that the Green Party are acknowledged as a proactive party in Government!
I sincerely hope that the Minister's attempt to ban traditional light bulbs will provide a firm launch pad for all the other, much bigger, improvements that the Green Ministers introduce in the years ahead; improvements that will save the taxpayer money and help the environment. Meanwhile, ARCHON will write smugly about how the Green Party is incoherently bellowing their message. What the author obviously has failed to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath us, that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long, are outdated and that we need to move forward. Suggesting that the party has abandoned its guiding principles is nonsense. For me, it is indeed a healthy sign of any political party that members are willing to resign. Unfortunatley there are too many political parties in this country whoes members from former Taoisigh to elected councillors refuse to resign regardless of principles, justice or moral integrity.
Finally, it appears that political parties in opposition and commentators will attempt to find any and every opportunity to discredit the Green Party. As a small political party operating in Government as a junior partner for the first time in their history and during the most turbulent of ecomomic times, they are managing their respective Departments well and providing new vision and political leadership.
While some wish to say that Bus Éireann cuts are the responsibility of the Green Party, this is a matter for the Minister for Transport. In our present econonomic reality Bus Eireann has seen a sharp decline in passenger numbers as employment has decreased, emigrants return home and consumer spending reduces. Passenger journeys fell by 4 to 5 per cent last year and the company recorded an operating loss of €10 million in 2008 with further decreases expected and projected losses of €30m this year.
Faced with such financial losses any company has no option but to move forward in whatever way they can and minimize further financial losses while securing employment as much as possible. In the private sector, such an operator would cease trading and go into bankruptcy.
What ARCHON appears to support is more public money pumped into a system that is shown not to be working rather than moving forward and adapting the bus service to current demands. In reality what we are talking about is a 10 per cent reduction in staff and the fleet, amounting to 120 vehicles being taken from the Dublin Bus fleet of 1,182 vehicles. This is indeed unfortunate but it is also a failure of successive Governments to invest in sustainable public transport and the public themselves who prefer to travel by private car rather than take public transport even when such options are readily available. This is something that the Green Party has been bellowing about for two decades.
Unless we have sound and accurate debate based on scientific and economic facts such tasteless and absurd hyperbole as noted in the ARCHON article last week will drag us all back to the stone age.
We all create our own reality, however, the ignorant and absurd comments of last week, show not only a lack of comprehension of the current economic crisis, the impacts of which are so enormous it is difficult to comprehend, but also a total lack of understanding of science resulting in a hysterial and misinformed article not worthy of publication.
As a member of the Institute of Energy and Chartered Environmentalist I feel duty bound to respond to these comments.
There are a number of problems with this article; not least that the Green party has lost all credibility, abandoned its guiding principles, the Programme for Government and so on, but also that Minister John Gormley's endeavors to ban traditional lights bulbs were not a good idea. Also, bizarrely, ARCHON states that eco light bulbs contain dangerous levels of mercury and damage health!
While to some it may sem trivial to talk about light bulbs, the reality is that lighting accounts for a significant portion of Ireland's electricity use and represents one of the quickest and simplest ways of saving energy. Across Europe, wasteful lightbulbs keep the equivalent of 10 large power stations pumping out up to 50m tonnes of CO2 each year. Given the repeated failure of Ireland to reduce its carbon emissions, the decision to ban incandescent lightbulbs is, in fact, a vital step.
Secondly, energy efficient bulbs will save you money. Each Compact Fluorescent Lamp (CFL) bulb lasts between 6 and 15 times longer than a traditional incandescent bulb. This is because normal bulbs only convert around 5% of the electricity into light while the equivalent figure for CFLs is 20%. A CFL bulb will save you around €8 per year, so even though they are typically more expensive than the old technology, they pay for themselves quickly though efficiency and longevity. If your entire house is fitted with CFL bulbs - and the average home in Ireland has 26 light bulbs - you will save €700 on your lighting bill over the course of the bulb's lifetime.
Thirdly, energy saving Light Bulbs will reduce environmental pollution. The fact that energy-saving lighting contains trace levels of mercury will not bring new environmental problems rather net mercury emissions related to lighting will be reduced by more than 50%, as fewer kilowatt hours of electricity will need to be produced in coal-fired power plants, which emit a relatively high percentage of the substance through their chimneys. It is important to note that the extra coal - a major source of mercury pollution - that is burned in order to light an older incandescent bulb, leads to roughly three times more mercury being released into the atmosphere compared to a CFL bulb.
Fourthly, banning traditional light bulbs will reduce greenhouse gas emission and help tackle climate change. The International Energy Agency staggering figures speak for themselves, globally lighting currently consumes more electricity than is produced by either hydro or nuclear power and results in CO2 emissions equivalent to about 70% of the world's cars. A single low-energy bulb in normal use saves 111 kilos of carbon dioxide annually. Banning old-fashioned lightbulbs across the whole of the EU would cut carbon emissions by about 20 million tonnes a year - and save between 5 and 8 billion euros a year in domestic fuel bills. Is this not good for the consumer, not to mention the environment ?
Fifthly, Ireland is not alone in attempting to ban the old-fashioned light bulb with policies being introduced in California, Canada, Austrialia and Central America. In fact, Prime Minister Gordon Brown has said he wants to see the UK to be one of the first countries to phase out inefficient light bulbs. Also, in the UK supermarkets voluntarily decided to stop replacing their existing stock of 100W lightbulbs after New Year's Day 2009.
Despite the best efforts of the majority of the world's scientists, ARCHON has somehow managed to remain totally oblivious to, or unconcerned by, the hidden financial costs and environmental harm associated with keeping tens of millions of wasteful incandescent lightbulbs alight. Who would have thought that something as mundane as a humble lightbulb would trigger such an outpouring of ill informed journalism? It would seem to be no more than a desperate attempt to whip up a political frenzy over the fact that the public, according to the most recent political survey, believe that the Green Party are acknowledged as a proactive party in Government!
I sincerely hope that the Minister's attempt to ban traditional light bulbs will provide a firm launch pad for all the other, much bigger, improvements that the Green Ministers introduce in the years ahead; improvements that will save the taxpayer money and help the environment. Meanwhile, ARCHON will write smugly about how the Green Party is incoherently bellowing their message. What the author obviously has failed to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath us, that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long, are outdated and that we need to move forward. Suggesting that the party has abandoned its guiding principles is nonsense. For me, it is indeed a healthy sign of any political party that members are willing to resign. Unfortunatley there are too many political parties in this country whoes members from former Taoisigh to elected councillors refuse to resign regardless of principles, justice or moral integrity.
Finally, it appears that political parties in opposition and commentators will attempt to find any and every opportunity to discredit the Green Party. As a small political party operating in Government as a junior partner for the first time in their history and during the most turbulent of ecomomic times, they are managing their respective Departments well and providing new vision and political leadership.
While some wish to say that Bus Éireann cuts are the responsibility of the Green Party, this is a matter for the Minister for Transport. In our present econonomic reality Bus Eireann has seen a sharp decline in passenger numbers as employment has decreased, emigrants return home and consumer spending reduces. Passenger journeys fell by 4 to 5 per cent last year and the company recorded an operating loss of €10 million in 2008 with further decreases expected and projected losses of €30m this year.
Faced with such financial losses any company has no option but to move forward in whatever way they can and minimize further financial losses while securing employment as much as possible. In the private sector, such an operator would cease trading and go into bankruptcy.
What ARCHON appears to support is more public money pumped into a system that is shown not to be working rather than moving forward and adapting the bus service to current demands. In reality what we are talking about is a 10 per cent reduction in staff and the fleet, amounting to 120 vehicles being taken from the Dublin Bus fleet of 1,182 vehicles. This is indeed unfortunate but it is also a failure of successive Governments to invest in sustainable public transport and the public themselves who prefer to travel by private car rather than take public transport even when such options are readily available. This is something that the Green Party has been bellowing about for two decades.
How Climate Change and sea level rise will affect our coastal towns and cities.
A rise in sea levels and other changes fuelled by global warming global threatens coastal cities and towns in Ireland and worldwide. Housing, businesses, roads, rail lines, ports and other important infrastructure are all at risk and policy makers and planners should be acting now to avoid or mitigate their effects, according to a new report published by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
Sea levels and Earth climate changes are closely linked. Global warming is predicted to cause significant rises in sea levels this century, estimated by the IPCC (2007) as between 0.09 to c. 0.5m by the end of this century. As the climate warms sea level will continue to rise due to the reduction in volume of ice caps, ice fields, mountain glaciers, melting of the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets in addition to the thermal expansion of ocean water. Research findings from Proudman Oceanographic Laboratories show, however, that sea levels globally may rise by up to 1.5m by 2100, values well above those quoted in the IPCC publications.
As Earth's climate continues to warm, then the volume of present-day ice sheets will continue to decrease. Some estimates show that a complete melting of the Greenland ice sheet could result in a sea-level rise globally of about 6.5 m; separately, melting of the West Antarctic ice sheet could result in a sea-level rise of about 8 m which would have a devastating impact on Ireland and other countries around the world. The West Antarctic ice sheet is especially vulnerable, because much of it is grounded below sea level. Small changes in global sea level or a rise in ocean temperatures could cause a break up of the two buttressing ice shelves, the resulting surge of the West Antarctic ice sheet would lead to a rapid rise in global sea level.
Sea-level rise increases the vulnerability of coastal areas to flooding during storms, increasing infrastructure losses, inundation of wetlands and other low-lying lands, Ireland loosing c.20% of its coastal wetlands by 2100, erode beaches, intensify flooding, and increase the salinity of rivers, bays, and groundwater tables.
Researchers and Governments around the world are currently examining the potential impact of sea level rise on coastal areas in order to start planning how to protect economic assets in cities, in the form of buildings, transport infrastructure, utility infrastructure and other long-lived assets from exposure to flooding as a consequence of climate change. No wonder, because if the Greenland ice sheet disappeared than what happened in New Orleans would be a gentle prelude to a chaotic and tragic future. Consider the global consequences for humanity with half of the worlds population needing to be evacuated to higher ground. It is unimaginable, where would they go, how would one feed humanity, provide shelter, sanitation, food and health care? We are the first generation to know with some certainty how our actions and behaviour today can change the world for future generations. We can plan for adaptation and survival or continue to ignore the global crisis humanity, and the planet, through our actions is in.
The OECD report examined 136 port cities around the world to estimate the exposure of the world’s large port cities (with a population of more than one million) to coastal flooding due to storm surge and damage due to high winds. This study also investigates how climate change is likely to impact each port city through exposure to coastal flooding by the 2070s, alongside subsidence and population growth and urbanization. The analysis focuses on the exposure of population and assets to a 1 in 100 year surge-induced flood event (assuming no defenses), rather than the risk of coastal flooding.
The study identified that the top 10 cities in terms of assets exposed are Miami, Greater New York, New Orleans, Osaka-Kobe, Tokyo, Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Nagoya, Tampa-St Petersburg and Virginia Beach. The total value of assets exposed in 2005 is estimated to be US$3,000 billion. By the 2070s, the asset exposure in the 136 cities studied could alone reach $35,000 billion; more than ten times current levels. Yes that’s 35 thousand billion dollars and that’s just for starters.
Given the financial losses on the international markets in the past year this figure taken in context of worldwide economic losses should compel all of us - world leaders, businesses and individuals - towards action rather than the paralysis of fear on climate change. The financial risks for inaction are enormous, more than anything they demand that we need both to reduce our emissions of greenhouse gases immediately and to prepare for the impacts of climate change.
The concentration of future exposure to sea level rise and storm surge in rapidly growing cities urgently underscores the need to integrate the consideration of climate change into both national coastal flood risk management and urban development strategies. Given the heavy concentration of people and assets in port city locations, such as Dublin, Cork Waterford, Limerick and the importance in global trade, failure to develop effective adaptation strategies would inevitably have not just local but also large national or even wider economic consequences.
Coastal cities will face great challenges in managing the significant growth in exposure that will come about from both human and environmental influences, including climate change. The size and concentration of population and economic development in many of the worlds largest port cities, combined with climate change, highlights the strong two-way linkage between development and climate change and the need for more effective governance for climate change adaptation at the city-scale.
The OECD report highlights that a strategic approach to adaptation will be necessary to minimize the likelihood of coastal disasters. The available policy options include a combination of:
• upgraded protection,
• land use planning,
• focusing new development away from the floodplain,
• selective relocation away from existing city areas, and
• flood warning and evacuation, particularly as an immediate response in poorer countries
All port cities require a combination of spatial planning and enhanced defences to manage the rising risk of sea level rise and storm surge with climate change. For cities with large areas at or below mean sea level, flooding can be catastrophic as they can be permanently flooded as illustrated in New Orleans in 2005. Such incidences are lively to increase in intensity in the coming years.
Port cities are a vital component of the global economy, and are also increasingly becoming important concentrations of population and asset value. Thirteen out of the twenty most populated cities in the world in 2005 were port cities. In addition, their economic importance in terms of international trade has grown markedly, as a consequence the concentration of these risks in a few of the world’s cities and nations underscores the urgent need for leadership and attention in these locations particularly as the risk of climate extremes to port cities risks will inevitably increase.
The OCED study examined the economic assets in cities in the form of buildings, transport infrastructure, utility infrastructure and other long-lived assets and their risk exposure to sea level rise, storm surges and population growth. What the reports highlights is that for Dublin by 2070 approximately €25 billion in economic assets in the form of buildings, transport infrastructure, utility infrastructure and other long-lived assets are exposed and that up to 45,000 people may be affected directly (for London the figure is €226 billion with 606,000 people affected).
Taken in a national context and that Ireland has over 7500km of coastline including the port towns of Cork City, Waterford, New Ross, Sligo, Dundalk, Wexford, Cobh, Galway, Wicklow, Limerick, Kinsale, Kenmare, Drogheda, Dundalk and Dun Laoghaire, the economic and environmental impacts are staggering, far in excess of the current financial crises. The cost to insurance markets and the national economy would be catastrophic. The report highlights more than ever the necessity for a national coastal management plan to include flood defense, land use planning and risk assessment. More importantly the report highlights the disturbing analysis from the EPA that greenhouse gas emissions for Ireland will rise in the years to come. So what should our national priorities be?
Putting into place effective disaster management strategies and protection investments will take time and money. According to the OECD the inertia of the socio-economic response suggests that action must begin today to protect port cities and to manage flood risk for impacts expected by the middle of this century. So what we are being told clearly is that we need to invest today to protect our towns, cities and infrastructure for the future, but paradoxically it also means the longer we wait to reduce our emissions the more we will have to pay and not just in fifty years time but tomorrow. Its time we woke up the real international emergency, to paraphrase President Clinton “its not the economy, it’s the environment stupid”
Sea levels and Earth climate changes are closely linked. Global warming is predicted to cause significant rises in sea levels this century, estimated by the IPCC (2007) as between 0.09 to c. 0.5m by the end of this century. As the climate warms sea level will continue to rise due to the reduction in volume of ice caps, ice fields, mountain glaciers, melting of the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets in addition to the thermal expansion of ocean water. Research findings from Proudman Oceanographic Laboratories show, however, that sea levels globally may rise by up to 1.5m by 2100, values well above those quoted in the IPCC publications.
As Earth's climate continues to warm, then the volume of present-day ice sheets will continue to decrease. Some estimates show that a complete melting of the Greenland ice sheet could result in a sea-level rise globally of about 6.5 m; separately, melting of the West Antarctic ice sheet could result in a sea-level rise of about 8 m which would have a devastating impact on Ireland and other countries around the world. The West Antarctic ice sheet is especially vulnerable, because much of it is grounded below sea level. Small changes in global sea level or a rise in ocean temperatures could cause a break up of the two buttressing ice shelves, the resulting surge of the West Antarctic ice sheet would lead to a rapid rise in global sea level.
Sea-level rise increases the vulnerability of coastal areas to flooding during storms, increasing infrastructure losses, inundation of wetlands and other low-lying lands, Ireland loosing c.20% of its coastal wetlands by 2100, erode beaches, intensify flooding, and increase the salinity of rivers, bays, and groundwater tables.
Researchers and Governments around the world are currently examining the potential impact of sea level rise on coastal areas in order to start planning how to protect economic assets in cities, in the form of buildings, transport infrastructure, utility infrastructure and other long-lived assets from exposure to flooding as a consequence of climate change. No wonder, because if the Greenland ice sheet disappeared than what happened in New Orleans would be a gentle prelude to a chaotic and tragic future. Consider the global consequences for humanity with half of the worlds population needing to be evacuated to higher ground. It is unimaginable, where would they go, how would one feed humanity, provide shelter, sanitation, food and health care? We are the first generation to know with some certainty how our actions and behaviour today can change the world for future generations. We can plan for adaptation and survival or continue to ignore the global crisis humanity, and the planet, through our actions is in.
The OECD report examined 136 port cities around the world to estimate the exposure of the world’s large port cities (with a population of more than one million) to coastal flooding due to storm surge and damage due to high winds. This study also investigates how climate change is likely to impact each port city through exposure to coastal flooding by the 2070s, alongside subsidence and population growth and urbanization. The analysis focuses on the exposure of population and assets to a 1 in 100 year surge-induced flood event (assuming no defenses), rather than the risk of coastal flooding.
The study identified that the top 10 cities in terms of assets exposed are Miami, Greater New York, New Orleans, Osaka-Kobe, Tokyo, Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Nagoya, Tampa-St Petersburg and Virginia Beach. The total value of assets exposed in 2005 is estimated to be US$3,000 billion. By the 2070s, the asset exposure in the 136 cities studied could alone reach $35,000 billion; more than ten times current levels. Yes that’s 35 thousand billion dollars and that’s just for starters.
Given the financial losses on the international markets in the past year this figure taken in context of worldwide economic losses should compel all of us - world leaders, businesses and individuals - towards action rather than the paralysis of fear on climate change. The financial risks for inaction are enormous, more than anything they demand that we need both to reduce our emissions of greenhouse gases immediately and to prepare for the impacts of climate change.
The concentration of future exposure to sea level rise and storm surge in rapidly growing cities urgently underscores the need to integrate the consideration of climate change into both national coastal flood risk management and urban development strategies. Given the heavy concentration of people and assets in port city locations, such as Dublin, Cork Waterford, Limerick and the importance in global trade, failure to develop effective adaptation strategies would inevitably have not just local but also large national or even wider economic consequences.
Coastal cities will face great challenges in managing the significant growth in exposure that will come about from both human and environmental influences, including climate change. The size and concentration of population and economic development in many of the worlds largest port cities, combined with climate change, highlights the strong two-way linkage between development and climate change and the need for more effective governance for climate change adaptation at the city-scale.
The OECD report highlights that a strategic approach to adaptation will be necessary to minimize the likelihood of coastal disasters. The available policy options include a combination of:
• upgraded protection,
• land use planning,
• focusing new development away from the floodplain,
• selective relocation away from existing city areas, and
• flood warning and evacuation, particularly as an immediate response in poorer countries
All port cities require a combination of spatial planning and enhanced defences to manage the rising risk of sea level rise and storm surge with climate change. For cities with large areas at or below mean sea level, flooding can be catastrophic as they can be permanently flooded as illustrated in New Orleans in 2005. Such incidences are lively to increase in intensity in the coming years.
Port cities are a vital component of the global economy, and are also increasingly becoming important concentrations of population and asset value. Thirteen out of the twenty most populated cities in the world in 2005 were port cities. In addition, their economic importance in terms of international trade has grown markedly, as a consequence the concentration of these risks in a few of the world’s cities and nations underscores the urgent need for leadership and attention in these locations particularly as the risk of climate extremes to port cities risks will inevitably increase.
The OCED study examined the economic assets in cities in the form of buildings, transport infrastructure, utility infrastructure and other long-lived assets and their risk exposure to sea level rise, storm surges and population growth. What the reports highlights is that for Dublin by 2070 approximately €25 billion in economic assets in the form of buildings, transport infrastructure, utility infrastructure and other long-lived assets are exposed and that up to 45,000 people may be affected directly (for London the figure is €226 billion with 606,000 people affected).
Taken in a national context and that Ireland has over 7500km of coastline including the port towns of Cork City, Waterford, New Ross, Sligo, Dundalk, Wexford, Cobh, Galway, Wicklow, Limerick, Kinsale, Kenmare, Drogheda, Dundalk and Dun Laoghaire, the economic and environmental impacts are staggering, far in excess of the current financial crises. The cost to insurance markets and the national economy would be catastrophic. The report highlights more than ever the necessity for a national coastal management plan to include flood defense, land use planning and risk assessment. More importantly the report highlights the disturbing analysis from the EPA that greenhouse gas emissions for Ireland will rise in the years to come. So what should our national priorities be?
Putting into place effective disaster management strategies and protection investments will take time and money. According to the OECD the inertia of the socio-economic response suggests that action must begin today to protect port cities and to manage flood risk for impacts expected by the middle of this century. So what we are being told clearly is that we need to invest today to protect our towns, cities and infrastructure for the future, but paradoxically it also means the longer we wait to reduce our emissions the more we will have to pay and not just in fifty years time but tomorrow. Its time we woke up the real international emergency, to paraphrase President Clinton “its not the economy, it’s the environment stupid”
Politics of the Environment
Declan Waugh, Environmental Scientist, a native of West Cork was a guest speaker at the 19th Irish Environmental Researchers Colloquium hosted by Waterford Institute of Technology on the 19th February last.
The main aim the annual academic seminar is to capture and communicate some of the enormous research and development currently being undertaken in third level collages and institutions throughout Ireland and abroad. The focus of the seminar is to provide a picture of the current research and development being undertaken in Ireland in areas such as sustainable development, climate change, waste management, environmental technologies and eco-innovation, waste and resource management, human health and environmental policy development.
Declan was invited to speak to the key audience of some 200 scientists and academics on the responsibilities facing the scientific professional community in attempting to address the enormous challenge of climate change.
Declan in his thought provoking presentation said “that in preparing for the environmental, public health and humanitarian crisis of the 21st century each person in the scientific profession needs to have a vision that extends beyond their discipline. He observed that the environmental profession in Ireland stands at a crossroads. Many believe that environmental pressures will eventually push our society to integrate principles of sustainable development into all levels of government and business. The reality, however, is that the society in which we live is failing to engage with these challenges”. Therefore he stated “environmental professionals must develop new skills and demonstrate a greater degree of communication with our community, business and political establishment”.
To face the challenges ahead he remarked that environmental professionals need to become more active. “Truly effective environmental professionals need to be able to develop the talents and potential to influence a brighter future. Most of our knowledge and skills have been focused at building technical expertise. Building technical expertise does not however prepare environmental professionals for the broader range of challenges and responsibilities we will ultimately encounter. Many of you identify the challenges facing humanity as a consequence of climate change and monitor these changes over time but do we really recognize what these challenges mean to our community? And are we prepared to act now to make a difference?”
He noted that science tells us clearly that we cannot wait for the next generation of environmental professionals; the responsibility lies with our generation to ensure that with our collective skills and abilities, our professional and personal values influence policy and our society. He emphasized that as scientists “we have a professional obligation not just for scientific excellence but to use our understanding of science to change the world for the better. As professionals we need to engage in practical action not just in our jobs but at local, regional and national level. This may be unpopular for some but it is essential to our profession.”
Declan examined the question of why have the public not responded to the message of scientists and have scientists failed in their professional duty to educate the public on the risks of climate change?
In his presentation he showed how the rate of economic growth in the past 50yrs,the increase in population, energy consumption, livestock, houses, cars, aviation, travel, Tourism and unprecedented consumerism has reached the point where the planet can no longer sustain it. “The evidence is unequivical” he said “that the natural world can no longer support the existing ecomony. The waste emissions created by oil and coal combustion now surpass the national absorptive capacities of the earth. Today the atmosphere has the capacity to absorb only one third of the C02 that we produce each year. CO2 emissions have increased fourfold worldwide since 1950 and continue to grow. He questioned why science is losing the war on climate change, and demonstrated that as long as our economic system is based on chasing economic growth above all else, we are heading for environmental and economic disaster.”
He went on to tell the audience that “the anticipated costs from climate changes for the period 2000-2020 are estimated at €6.3 trillion or €315 billion per year and how over the over the past half century we have seen a seven fold expansion of the global economy with little regard for sustainable yields or environmental protection.”
He noted how the financial meltdown “is a classic example of non rational behaviour. Greed prompted dangerous risk taking, and was followed by panic causing financial chaos and noted that as the ice caps melt there is one thing that both climate change and economic chaos emphatically teach us; we cannot tolerate any more unbridled profiteering.”
What is need urgently he said is for scientists to engage with the public and influence attitudes and actions to tackling climate change at a local regional and national level.
For the educationalists and academics in the audience he questioned how science education needs to change to include communication studies, marketing and media skills in order for scientists to communicate more effectively with the public and policy makers. He reminded the audience that science, in the public interest, must, at this critical time become more political for without political action humanity has no future and said that as environmental professionals we must make our voice heard, we must engage not as spectators but as leaders.
The main aim the annual academic seminar is to capture and communicate some of the enormous research and development currently being undertaken in third level collages and institutions throughout Ireland and abroad. The focus of the seminar is to provide a picture of the current research and development being undertaken in Ireland in areas such as sustainable development, climate change, waste management, environmental technologies and eco-innovation, waste and resource management, human health and environmental policy development.
Declan was invited to speak to the key audience of some 200 scientists and academics on the responsibilities facing the scientific professional community in attempting to address the enormous challenge of climate change.
Declan in his thought provoking presentation said “that in preparing for the environmental, public health and humanitarian crisis of the 21st century each person in the scientific profession needs to have a vision that extends beyond their discipline. He observed that the environmental profession in Ireland stands at a crossroads. Many believe that environmental pressures will eventually push our society to integrate principles of sustainable development into all levels of government and business. The reality, however, is that the society in which we live is failing to engage with these challenges”. Therefore he stated “environmental professionals must develop new skills and demonstrate a greater degree of communication with our community, business and political establishment”.
To face the challenges ahead he remarked that environmental professionals need to become more active. “Truly effective environmental professionals need to be able to develop the talents and potential to influence a brighter future. Most of our knowledge and skills have been focused at building technical expertise. Building technical expertise does not however prepare environmental professionals for the broader range of challenges and responsibilities we will ultimately encounter. Many of you identify the challenges facing humanity as a consequence of climate change and monitor these changes over time but do we really recognize what these challenges mean to our community? And are we prepared to act now to make a difference?”
He noted that science tells us clearly that we cannot wait for the next generation of environmental professionals; the responsibility lies with our generation to ensure that with our collective skills and abilities, our professional and personal values influence policy and our society. He emphasized that as scientists “we have a professional obligation not just for scientific excellence but to use our understanding of science to change the world for the better. As professionals we need to engage in practical action not just in our jobs but at local, regional and national level. This may be unpopular for some but it is essential to our profession.”
Declan examined the question of why have the public not responded to the message of scientists and have scientists failed in their professional duty to educate the public on the risks of climate change?
In his presentation he showed how the rate of economic growth in the past 50yrs,the increase in population, energy consumption, livestock, houses, cars, aviation, travel, Tourism and unprecedented consumerism has reached the point where the planet can no longer sustain it. “The evidence is unequivical” he said “that the natural world can no longer support the existing ecomony. The waste emissions created by oil and coal combustion now surpass the national absorptive capacities of the earth. Today the atmosphere has the capacity to absorb only one third of the C02 that we produce each year. CO2 emissions have increased fourfold worldwide since 1950 and continue to grow. He questioned why science is losing the war on climate change, and demonstrated that as long as our economic system is based on chasing economic growth above all else, we are heading for environmental and economic disaster.”
He went on to tell the audience that “the anticipated costs from climate changes for the period 2000-2020 are estimated at €6.3 trillion or €315 billion per year and how over the over the past half century we have seen a seven fold expansion of the global economy with little regard for sustainable yields or environmental protection.”
He noted how the financial meltdown “is a classic example of non rational behaviour. Greed prompted dangerous risk taking, and was followed by panic causing financial chaos and noted that as the ice caps melt there is one thing that both climate change and economic chaos emphatically teach us; we cannot tolerate any more unbridled profiteering.”
What is need urgently he said is for scientists to engage with the public and influence attitudes and actions to tackling climate change at a local regional and national level.
For the educationalists and academics in the audience he questioned how science education needs to change to include communication studies, marketing and media skills in order for scientists to communicate more effectively with the public and policy makers. He reminded the audience that science, in the public interest, must, at this critical time become more political for without political action humanity has no future and said that as environmental professionals we must make our voice heard, we must engage not as spectators but as leaders.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Partnership for Change Supports WaterAid on World Water Day
The United Nations General Assembly designated 22 March of each year as the World Day for Water to draw international attention to the critical lack of clean, safe drinking water worldwide.
Water and sanitation are human rights, vital to reducing poverty around the world. Together with good hygiene these essential services are the building blocks for all other development - improving health, education and livelihoods. These basic human rights underpin health, education and livelihoods and form the first, essential step in overcoming poverty.
Partnership for Change (PFC) a non profit voluntary organization established by Chartered Environmentalist Declan Waugh to raise awareness on climate change, encourage adaptation and sustainable development are delighted to support World Water day by sponsoring the work of WaterAid, an international charity working in 17 countries including Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Ghana, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Nigeria, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia in Africa; Bangladesh, India, Nepal and Pakistan in Asia; and Papua New Guinea and Timor-Leste in the Pacific region.
When it comes to climate change, the world’s water crisis will be one of the most significant public health issues of this century. There are still almost 1.1 billion people without adequate access to water and 2.6 billion without adequate sanitation. As a consequence of climate change these numbers are expected to rise dramatically over the next two decades. According to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment report, forty percent or 3.5 billion of the worlds population may be living in countries with chronic water scarcity by 2025.
WaterAid is principally a development organisation, working with communities on long-term solutions to water and sanitation problems providing water, sanitation and hygiene education to some of the world's poorest people.
“5000 children die every day from diseases caused by unsafe water and sanitation; mainly from diarrhoeal diseases like cholera and dysentery. Yet all are easily prevented through water, sanitation and hygiene projects. In the year 2007/8 WaterAid and its partners helped more than 1.3 million people gain access to safe water and over three million people gain access to sanitation. PFC are delighted to support and raise awareness of the work of WaterAid” says Declan Waugh, “their projects have been targeted at the most vulnerable, with special emphasis placed on helping those groups who may be excluded from accessing water and sanitation on the basis of economic and social factors such as disability, ethnicity, religion, gender, age, social status or HIV/AIDS.”
WaterAid are the second development organisation to receive significant sponsorship from Partnership for Change this year. For further information on WaterAid view their website at http://www.wateraid.org or http://www.partnershipforchange.ie
Water and sanitation are human rights, vital to reducing poverty around the world. Together with good hygiene these essential services are the building blocks for all other development - improving health, education and livelihoods. These basic human rights underpin health, education and livelihoods and form the first, essential step in overcoming poverty.
Partnership for Change (PFC) a non profit voluntary organization established by Chartered Environmentalist Declan Waugh to raise awareness on climate change, encourage adaptation and sustainable development are delighted to support World Water day by sponsoring the work of WaterAid, an international charity working in 17 countries including Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Ghana, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Nigeria, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia in Africa; Bangladesh, India, Nepal and Pakistan in Asia; and Papua New Guinea and Timor-Leste in the Pacific region.
When it comes to climate change, the world’s water crisis will be one of the most significant public health issues of this century. There are still almost 1.1 billion people without adequate access to water and 2.6 billion without adequate sanitation. As a consequence of climate change these numbers are expected to rise dramatically over the next two decades. According to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment report, forty percent or 3.5 billion of the worlds population may be living in countries with chronic water scarcity by 2025.
WaterAid is principally a development organisation, working with communities on long-term solutions to water and sanitation problems providing water, sanitation and hygiene education to some of the world's poorest people.
“5000 children die every day from diseases caused by unsafe water and sanitation; mainly from diarrhoeal diseases like cholera and dysentery. Yet all are easily prevented through water, sanitation and hygiene projects. In the year 2007/8 WaterAid and its partners helped more than 1.3 million people gain access to safe water and over three million people gain access to sanitation. PFC are delighted to support and raise awareness of the work of WaterAid” says Declan Waugh, “their projects have been targeted at the most vulnerable, with special emphasis placed on helping those groups who may be excluded from accessing water and sanitation on the basis of economic and social factors such as disability, ethnicity, religion, gender, age, social status or HIV/AIDS.”
WaterAid are the second development organisation to receive significant sponsorship from Partnership for Change this year. For further information on WaterAid view their website at http://www.wateraid.org or http://www.partnershipforchange.ie
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Medicines Sans Frontiers/Doctors Without Borders
The aims of Partnership for Change (PFC) are to face up to the challenge of climate change, to assist in communicating the impacts of global warming, encourage adaptation and sustainable development while also supporting the efforts of individuals and organisations providing essential development and humanitarian aid to communities across the world.
The first organisation to receive a donation on behalf of PFC is Medicines Sans Frontiers/Doctors Without Borders (MSF).
MSF is an independent humanitarian medical aid agency committed providing emergency medical assistance to populations in danger in more than 70 countries. In 1999, MSF was awarded the International Nobel Peace Prize, "in recognition of the organization’s pioneering humanitarian work on several continents." The award honored the work of MSF relief workers bringing medical assistance to people in more than 80 countries over 20 of which are in conflict.
In each country where MSF is working, one or more of four events has taken place. This triggers a medical humanitarian response, and if required, the obligation to speak out to ensure those in need are assisted. The four events are armed conflict, endemic/ epidemic disease, social violence/healthcare exclusion and natural disasters.
“In the past decade MSF have seen a huge increase in the need for their services, we have witnessed an increase in the scale of natural disasters around the world, many as a consequence of climate change. Wherever natural disasters have struck be it in Pakistan, Thailand, or Haiti you will find MSF personal on the front line providing essential humanitarian aid and medical assistance” say Declan Waugh. Populations affected by natural disasters require an immediate medical humanitarian response. They find themselves in desperate conditions, having suddenly lost their homes, material goods, family members and relatives. They are highly traumatized, in need of rapid and diverse medical care and support.
When the news reports about violence or war in Darfur, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan or Chad, where Irish soldiers are stationed, MSF staff are there helping the local community in whatever way they can. You will find them Gaza, providing essential access to medical aid and life saving surgery while risking the lives of their volunteers to help innocent victims. Some of their staff have been murdered providing this humanitarian service a painful reminder of the sacrifices their staff and families make in undertaking their everyday work.
When it comes to climate change according to Declan Waugh “we must release that actions we take here at home contribute to impacts felt in the poorest of communities across the world. How we live our lives here, will impact on the futures of innocent peoples throughout the world, for this reason each of such has a responsibility to rise to the challenge of sustainability within the political, social, cultural or development or economic dimensions. We are releasing that we live in a new age of limits, both economic and environmental. It is an age requiring a new vision of leadership, a new vision of wealth and a new meaning of happiness.”
PFC is delighted to be in position to support and raise awareness of organisations that provide inspiration to us all through their work and commitment to social justice, providing a vision of citizenship and responsibility in an age of such uncertainty and fear.
Further details of this are available on www.partnershipforchange.ie
The first organisation to receive a donation on behalf of PFC is Medicines Sans Frontiers/Doctors Without Borders (MSF).
MSF is an independent humanitarian medical aid agency committed providing emergency medical assistance to populations in danger in more than 70 countries. In 1999, MSF was awarded the International Nobel Peace Prize, "in recognition of the organization’s pioneering humanitarian work on several continents." The award honored the work of MSF relief workers bringing medical assistance to people in more than 80 countries over 20 of which are in conflict.
In each country where MSF is working, one or more of four events has taken place. This triggers a medical humanitarian response, and if required, the obligation to speak out to ensure those in need are assisted. The four events are armed conflict, endemic/ epidemic disease, social violence/healthcare exclusion and natural disasters.
“In the past decade MSF have seen a huge increase in the need for their services, we have witnessed an increase in the scale of natural disasters around the world, many as a consequence of climate change. Wherever natural disasters have struck be it in Pakistan, Thailand, or Haiti you will find MSF personal on the front line providing essential humanitarian aid and medical assistance” say Declan Waugh. Populations affected by natural disasters require an immediate medical humanitarian response. They find themselves in desperate conditions, having suddenly lost their homes, material goods, family members and relatives. They are highly traumatized, in need of rapid and diverse medical care and support.
When the news reports about violence or war in Darfur, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan or Chad, where Irish soldiers are stationed, MSF staff are there helping the local community in whatever way they can. You will find them Gaza, providing essential access to medical aid and life saving surgery while risking the lives of their volunteers to help innocent victims. Some of their staff have been murdered providing this humanitarian service a painful reminder of the sacrifices their staff and families make in undertaking their everyday work.
When it comes to climate change according to Declan Waugh “we must release that actions we take here at home contribute to impacts felt in the poorest of communities across the world. How we live our lives here, will impact on the futures of innocent peoples throughout the world, for this reason each of such has a responsibility to rise to the challenge of sustainability within the political, social, cultural or development or economic dimensions. We are releasing that we live in a new age of limits, both economic and environmental. It is an age requiring a new vision of leadership, a new vision of wealth and a new meaning of happiness.”
PFC is delighted to be in position to support and raise awareness of organisations that provide inspiration to us all through their work and commitment to social justice, providing a vision of citizenship and responsibility in an age of such uncertainty and fear.
Further details of this are available on www.partnershipforchange.ie
Monday, March 2, 2009
Cork Environmental Forum Award for Individual Contribution to Environment
Declan Waugh, chartered environmentalist and environmental scientist was honoured at the 2008 Cork Environmental Forum awards ceremony, which was held in December. Declan, who lives in Bandon but hails from Skibbereen, received the award for outstanding individual contribution to the environment for 2008 for his work in Climate Change.
Senator Dan Boyle, in addressing those at the ceremony, spoke of the significance of the Partnership for Change initiative established by Declan in 2008 and the hugely successful international conference which he organised for Cork City, which included some of the most renowned and acclaimed scientific experts in the world on climate change.
Michael Hobbs of the Cork Environmental Forum nominated Declan for his outstanding achievement in organising the exceptional climate change conference and said that the work undertaken by Declan, which was entirely on a voluntary basis was equal to that of ten people. In addition to organising the conference Declan procured sponsorship for secondary school students from twenty schools in Cork county and city to attend the conference. Pupils from schools in Bandon and Clonakilty were included. Moreover, one hundred university students from eight third level colleges across Ireland also participated under the sponsorship programme. Declan also visited secondary schools across West Cork to give educational climate change presentations to students during the year.
On receiving the award Declan stated “that one of my interests outside of the environment is history and photography and that each of the 31 speakers who contributed to the conference received framed photographic prints of historical sites in West |Cork”. He mentioned how the world’s most distinguished climate scientist Dr James Hansen, Director of NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, had contacted him to say that the only picture hanging in his personal study is the one presented to him of West Cork from Partnership for Change. Declan remarked that “when one reflects on the history of the past two centuries what stands out for me is that in the 19th century humanity managed to remove the shackles of slavery, in the 20th century humanity removed the shackles of colonialism and how now in the 21st century we are at the centre of the greatest challenge facing humanity, one that requires us to remove the shackles of excess consumerism and unsustainable development ”. Declan also noted how “in the last century the world faced three World Wars: World War One, the Second World War and the Cold War, and how this century we face another world war, one of truly global scale, where each of us individually must wage war with ourselves and our unsustainable lifestyles. This personal battle will decide the future of humanity.”
Declan accepted the award on behalf of all speakers who gave freely of their time to the Climate Change Conference and in particular on behalf of the students and delegates who attended the event. The award, he believes, recognises the unique initiative of Partnership for Change, how we can dare to hope that humanity can tackle climate change and in doing so, provide humanity with a different future. In closing Declan noted that at this historic and exciting moment, society needs strong political leadership and in part a new generation of politicians motivated by sustainable development to help solve the ecological crisis we now face.
Presentations given at the conference including recorded video presentations are now available to download and view at www. partnershipforchange.ie
Senator Dan Boyle, in addressing those at the ceremony, spoke of the significance of the Partnership for Change initiative established by Declan in 2008 and the hugely successful international conference which he organised for Cork City, which included some of the most renowned and acclaimed scientific experts in the world on climate change.
Michael Hobbs of the Cork Environmental Forum nominated Declan for his outstanding achievement in organising the exceptional climate change conference and said that the work undertaken by Declan, which was entirely on a voluntary basis was equal to that of ten people. In addition to organising the conference Declan procured sponsorship for secondary school students from twenty schools in Cork county and city to attend the conference. Pupils from schools in Bandon and Clonakilty were included. Moreover, one hundred university students from eight third level colleges across Ireland also participated under the sponsorship programme. Declan also visited secondary schools across West Cork to give educational climate change presentations to students during the year.
On receiving the award Declan stated “that one of my interests outside of the environment is history and photography and that each of the 31 speakers who contributed to the conference received framed photographic prints of historical sites in West |Cork”. He mentioned how the world’s most distinguished climate scientist Dr James Hansen, Director of NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, had contacted him to say that the only picture hanging in his personal study is the one presented to him of West Cork from Partnership for Change. Declan remarked that “when one reflects on the history of the past two centuries what stands out for me is that in the 19th century humanity managed to remove the shackles of slavery, in the 20th century humanity removed the shackles of colonialism and how now in the 21st century we are at the centre of the greatest challenge facing humanity, one that requires us to remove the shackles of excess consumerism and unsustainable development ”. Declan also noted how “in the last century the world faced three World Wars: World War One, the Second World War and the Cold War, and how this century we face another world war, one of truly global scale, where each of us individually must wage war with ourselves and our unsustainable lifestyles. This personal battle will decide the future of humanity.”
Declan accepted the award on behalf of all speakers who gave freely of their time to the Climate Change Conference and in particular on behalf of the students and delegates who attended the event. The award, he believes, recognises the unique initiative of Partnership for Change, how we can dare to hope that humanity can tackle climate change and in doing so, provide humanity with a different future. In closing Declan noted that at this historic and exciting moment, society needs strong political leadership and in part a new generation of politicians motivated by sustainable development to help solve the ecological crisis we now face.
Presentations given at the conference including recorded video presentations are now available to download and view at www. partnershipforchange.ie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
