Last week, eight of us spent a morning filling a 3ft-deep, brick-lined hole in my garden with fresh cow manure. We treated it with seven specially fermented compost preparations and covered it with a wet sack and a wooden board to keep the weather out.

We had just made the biodynamic preparation known as Cow Pat Pit. In three months, no more than a pinch of this power-packed composted manure will be added to a 75-litre drum of water, stirred for an hour, then sprayed on the garden as an autumnal elixir.

Welcome to the world of biodynamics that has engrossed me after a lifetime of organic gardening. It does not mean that I have deserted the organic camp: on the contrary, it is not possible to garden biodynamically without having proper organic husbandry as a base, but it does mean that as a biodynamic practitioner I am incorporating an extra dimension that is not normally taken into account when gardening organically.

This extra dimension is best understood if we look at the word “biodynamic” and see that, derived from the Greek, bio means life and dynamic means force.

Biodynamics sets out to work with the influence of the invisible energies and forces that exist, as well as those we can see around us. And the purpose of biodynamics, as laid out by the Austrian Rudolf Steiner in his eight lectures on agriculture in 1924, is to deepen our understanding of the life forces that underlie nature’s processes in order to produce food of the highest quality.

On a practical level, Steiner’s intention was that farmers should try to work towards allowing soil and plant life to become more receptive to such energies by the use of certain compost preparations and field sprays.

Steiner had his reasons for this – he foresaw the waning vitality of the earth and predicted a time when it would become increasingly difficult for us to grow food (both of which are fairly evident to us today if we take chronic world soil erosion and global warming as examples). The use of the biodynamic preparations would, in his view, strengthen the connection between the cosmic and the terrestrial, that is, the heavenly and the earthly – the stars and the soil.

There is no doubt that organic gardening and farming, which depend on building and maintaining soil fertility and managing land ecologically, are systems that have restored our understanding of the importance of soil health and its relation to human health. The organic approach sets out to achieve and hold the balance just as it is found in nature. We mimic this in organic gardening by growing a diverse range of plants and feeding the soil, and therefore the plants, with compost and other organic matter. The difference is that the practice of biodynamics acknowledges the existence of, and sets out to work with, realms that lie beyond the visible.

Three years ago I started gardening with biodynamic methods. I entered Demeter, the biodynamic certification scheme, and began using the preparations, such as Cow Pat Pit, which are requirements of that scheme. I also began to use the biodynamic planting calendar, the second element of biodynamics, which has to do with the cosmic timing of activities in the garden and which has evolved since Steiner’s time. The calendar has recently come into public awareness since Tesco and Marks & Spencer revealed that they use it to decide when to invite critics to taste their wine ranges.

Interestingly, much of the timing for work to be carried out according to the biodynamic system is to do with the movement of the moon. This is another reason why biodynamic methods are beginning to reach a wider audience. We all know of the moon’s influence on the tides. When I began working with biodynamics and carrying out tasks when the moon was moving through particular constellations, it quickly became apparent that there was more going on than I had first thought.

Changes became noticeable immediately: root systems were different, with many more fibrous feeder roots on certain plants, particularly brassicas, extended seasons of growth before going to seed, improved germination, stronger flavour, deeper flower colour, higher water content… I could go on.

But more than all of this, and this is the hardest thing of all to convey, the feel of the garden changed. It became more alive, as I began to allow for the fact that the forces of nature are active on many levels and that many of them have a direct effect on plants. I may not be able to see them all, but they have influence and they are part of the miracle that is life in our universe. Full article here…

Related posts:

1. Gardening 101: How do I become a no impact gardener?
2. How to create a drought-friendly garden
3. Europe refuses to get soil on its hands

A U.S. court on Wednesday blocked an attempt by the Obama administration to overturn a Bush administration rule that made it easier for coal mining companies to dump mountaintop debris into valley streams.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia said that the Interior Department’s request to vacate the regulation would have allowed the federal government to wrongfully bypass “established statutory procedures for repealing an agency rule.”

Federal agencies have to follow certain procedures, including collecting public comments, before repealing government regulations, the ruling said.

Raising environmental concerns, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar called on the courts in April to withdraw the rule that allowed coal mine operators to dispose of excess mountaintop debris in and within 100 feet of nearby streams whenever alternative options are deemed “not reasonably possible.”

The Bush regulation replaced a 1983 rule that allowed dumping within 100 feet of a stream if it would not “adversely affect the water quantity or quality or other environmental resources of the stream.”

Interior spokeswoman Kendra Barkoff said the department is examining the court’s decision.

“This administration has shown it is determined to improve mining practices and we will do so within the context of the court’s ruling, which we are reviewing,” Barkoff said.

The National Mining Association applauded the ruling.

“The court has preserved an open and transparent regulatory process that provides for notice and protects the rights of all interested parties to comment,” association president Hal Quinn said in a statement.

More than half of U.S. electricity is generated from coal. U.S. surface coal mining is mostly done in the steep mountains of Appalachia, across Virginia, West Virginia, Tennessee and Kentucky and accounts for about 10 percent of U.S. coal production.

Major energy companies, such as Arch Coal Inc and Consol Energy, participate in mountaintop mining, which involves scraping the surface of mountains and pushing the crumbled mountaintop debris into adjoining valleys.

Related posts:

1. Cleaning up the ‘organic’ soap biz
2. Don’t Let Obama Put GMO Boosters in Charge of Food Safety!
3. A President Breaks Hearts in Appalachia

Rubber sidewalks are all grown up. Once perceived mainly as a safe surface for playgrounds, rubber sidewalks have developed into a means of preserving urban trees, reducing stormwater runoff, recycling tires, and curbing greenhouse gas emissions. A company called Rubbersidewalks (what else?) began installing the modular units in 2002, and its rubber sidewalk products now appear in almost 100 cities across the country. Even the U.S. military is getting into the act. Plans are in the works to install rubber sidewalks at Coast Guard Island in Alameda, California, and they’re being promoted by the Pollution Prevention Program at Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland.

The Benefits of Rubber Sidewalks for Urban Trees
Rubbersidewalks (the company, that is) attributes its core concept to Richard Valeriano, a senior public works inspector for the City of Santa Monica. The original idea behind a rubber sidewalk was to achieve a flexible surface that would reduce cracking around tree roots. In turn, that would reduce the need to cut or drastically trim trees with overgrown roots. Over the course of several years, city workers noticed that the rubber surface seemed to slow the growth of roots while providing the tree with sufficient water and oxygen, helping to mitigate the problem of root overgrowth at the source. The modular installation system also enables workers to remove sections of sidewalk to inspect tree roots, without the need for pavement-breaking equipment that could damage a tree.

The Other Benefits of Rubber Sidewalks
Aside from the potential savings in reduced personal injury lawsuits, the modular rubber surface makes it easier to open and close sections of sidewalk for maintenance or utility work. Seams in the modules enable stormwater to infiltrate into the soil instead of running into gutters. They’re handy to use for temporary sidewalks, and they’re suitable for surfacing urban tree wells. On the sustainability side, Rubbersidewalks’s first-generation product was made from 100% recycled tires. It now offers a second incarnation called Terrewalks, which uses a mix of tires and waste plastic from farm irrigation equipment. As a means of finding a use for the millions of tires disposed every year, rubber sidewalks promise a scale similar to that of recycled tire roof shingles — a big leap over smaller projects like tire shoes and toys.

Rubber Sidewalks and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Walking and biking instead of driving are often cited as effective ways to lower one’s personal greenhouse emissions, but the equation skews when you factor in the greenhouse emissions involved in constructing more sidewalks and bike paths. A good chunk of those emissions have to do with concrete surfaces. Concrete is made from cement, which is a significant source of greenhouse gasses. Worldwide, cement is estimated to account for about 5% of all carbon dioxide emissions from human activity, with concrete accounting for about 8% overall. Though rubber surfaces do involve some greenhouse gas in the manufacturing process, there would seem to be a savings in emissions related to transportation, installation, maintenance, and urban street tree health. If there is any way to have your cake and eat it too, a rubber sidewalk could be it.

Related posts:

1. New S.F. Food Policy Boosts Local Farms
2. New Tires Made of Oil from Orange Peels
3. Reviving American Chestnut Trees May Mitigate Climate Change

World Wildlife Fund

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Beijing, China – Major China-based producers and users of palm oil have announced they intend to provide more support for sustainable palm oil, an important boost for efforts to halt tropical deforestation.

The public statement, made at the 2nd International Oil and Fats Summit in Beijing on July 9, committed the companies to “support the promotion, procurement and use of sustainable palm oil in China,” as well as “support the production of sustainable palm oil through any investments in producing countries.”

China is currently the world’s largest importer of palm oil, accounting for one third of all global trade. Increasing demand for palm oil, which is used in everything from soap to chocolate bars, is causing considerable damage to fragile rainforest environments, threatening endangered species like tigers, and contributing to global climate change.

Palm oil producers and buyers making the statement included Wilmar International, IOI Corperation, KLK Berhad, Kulim Malaysia Berhad, Asia Agri., Premier Foods PLC and Unilever PLC. Oxfam International, TransAsia Lawyers, and Solidaridad China were signatories.

“Given the massive of volumes of palm oil now being purchased, any move China makes towards using sustainable palm oil will have a big influence on protecting tropical forest resources in South East Asia and other areas,” said WWF-China Country Representative Dermot O’Gorman.

WWF helped set up the international Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) in 2004, with the aim of establishing global standards for sustainable palm oil production and promoting the use of products containing sustainable palm oil.

WWF-China first introduced sustainable palm oil to Chinese companies in 2004, and continues to encourage the country’s buyers, producers, and traders to participate in RSPO.

Sustainable palm oil received a massive boost in November 2008 when Dr. Huo Jiangguo, President of China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Foodstuffs and Native Produce, attended the RSPO annual conference in Indonesia and announced that China supported the drive for more sustainable palm oil products.

“Industry in China acknowledges that sustainability is one of the key criteria of ensuring competence in the global market,” said Dr. Bian Zhenghu, vice president of the China Chamber of Commerce during his opening address to the forum.

“The roundtable encourages the entire industry chain to make a move towards sustainability, and also gives Chinese stakeholders a big opportunity to play a significant role achieving the aims of RSPO,” Dr. Bian said.

In conjunction with the summit, CFNA and WWF China organized a dialogue on promoting sustainable palm oil in China. More than 100 participants from government and industry attended the summit. Representatives from Malaysia, Indonesia and Europe presented findings on the growth and impact of sustainable palm oil development in key producing countries and trade regions. At the conclusion, the names of pioneer signatories to the Statement of Support for promoting sustainable palm oil in China were announced.

Related posts:

1. New S.F. Food Policy Boosts Local Farms
2. U.N.: Nature Best at Handling Climate Change
3. “Revelry by the River” Honors Some, Inspires All

Tire manufacturer Yokohama is now selling a model made with 80 percent non-petroleum material, substituting orange oil as the primary ingredient to make vulcanized rubber.

The new tire is called the Super E-spec™ and has already received the Popular Mechanics Editor’s Choice Award in 2008. Yokohama will initially market the tire for hybrid car models such as the Toyota Prius.

“The eco-focused dB Super E-spec mixes sustainable orange oil and natural rubber to drastically cut the use of petroleum, without compromising performance,” Yokohama vice president of sales Dan King said. “It also helps consumers save money at the gas pump by improving fuel efficiency via a 20-percent reduction in rolling resistance.”

Orange oil is considered sustainable because it is produced from a renewable resource. The same philosophy of reducing petroleum use is utilized in producing plastics from corn starch or vegetable oil.

Yokohama has yet to release the environmental impact of disposing these tires, which typically provides an environmental concern. The petroleum in traditional tires can burn for months in a landfill and is difficult to extinguish. These fires also release black smoke and toxins into the air. Yokohama has not specified whether the orange oil will biodegrade over time.

The process for recycling tires involves devulcanizing the rubber, which would essentially remove the oil and extract natural rubber. Because this is an expensive process, used tires are often shredded and turned into playground surfacing or additives for the soil in sports turf. It can also be reused as artwork.

Related posts:

1. Rubber Sidewalks Give the Bounce to Concrete

Mountaintop removal coal mining is the worst environmental tragedy in American history. When will the Obama administration finally stop this Appalachian apocalypse?

If ever an issue deserved President Obama’s promise of change, this is it. Mining syndicates are detonating 2,500 tons of explosives each day — the equivalent of a Hiroshima bomb weekly — to blow up Appalachia’s mountains and extract sub-surface coal seams. They have demolished 500 mountains — encompassing about a million acres — buried hundreds of valley streams under tons of rubble, poisoned and uprooted countless communities, and caused widespread contamination to the region’s air and water. On this continent, only Appalachia’s rich woodlands survived the Pleistocene ice ages that turned the rest of North America into a treeless tundra. King Coal is now accomplishing what the glaciers could not — obliterating the hemisphere’s oldest, most biologically dense and diverse forests. Highly mechanized processes allow giant machines to flatten in months mountains older than the Himalayas — while employing fewer workers for far less time than other types of mining. The coal industry’s promise to restore the desolate wastelands is a cruel joke, and the industry’s fallback position, that the flattened landscapes will provide space for economic development, is the weak punchline. America adores its Adirondacks and reveres the Rockies, while the Appalachian Mountains — with their impoverished and alienated population — are dismantled by coal moguls who dominate state politics and have little to prevent them from blasting the physical landscape to smithereens.

Obama promised science-based policies that would save what remains of Appalachia, but last month senior administration officials finally weighed in with a mixture of strong words and weak action that broke hearts across the region. The modest measures federal bureaucrats promised amount to little more than a tepid pledge of better enforcement of existing laws.

And government claims of doing everything possible to halt the holocaust are simply not true. George Bush gutted Clean Water Act protections. Obama must restore them.

First, the White House should fix the “fill” rule the Bush administration adopted in 2002 to allow coal companies to use streams as waste dumps. Under this perverse interpretation of the Clean Water Act, 2,000 miles of Appalachian streams have been interred under mining waste. Obama could reverse the “fill” rule to reflect its original meaning, which forbids waste matter from being dumped into waterways.

Second, the Interior Department should strictly enforce the widely ignored “buffer zone” rule that forbids dumping waste within 100 feet of intermittent or perennial streams.

Third, our laws require companies to restore mined areas to their original condition. The administration should end the absurd fiction that extraction pits filled with unconsolidated rocks and rubble where trees will never grow and streams will never flow are “reclaimed.”

Fourth, current law forbids the issuance of “fill” permits that will cause “significant degradation” to waterways. It is absurd for the Army Corps of Engineers to endorse the canard that filling miles of streams is not causing significant degradation. The president should require the Corps to deny and rescind permits where operations will cause downstream damage.

Fifth, the Clean Water Act requires mining operators to prove that they can restore the “function and structure” of affected streams. Operators have never been compelled to make the functional or structural analyses of the aquatic ecosystem required by the act. Obama should order his officials to stop ignoring this requirement.

Sixth, the administration should enforce the law requiring an environmental impact study for each permit when a mine “may have significant environmental impacts,” individually or cumulatively. The Corps of Engineers routinely allows coal operators to escape this mandate — an illegal practice that should stop.

Instead of acting to enforce these laws, administration officials indicated last month that they will allow more than 100 permits to go forward while they carefully review their regulatory options. If they act accordingly, the ruined landscapes of Appalachia will be Obama’s legacy.

President Obama should go to Appalachia and see mountaintop removal. My father visited Appalachia in 1966 and was so horrified by strip mining — then in its infancy — that he made it a key priority of his political agenda. He complained that Appalachia, with our nation’s richest natural resources, was home to America’s poorest populations, its worst education system, and its highest illiteracy and unemployment rates. These statistics are even grimmer today as mining saps state wealth. In 1966, 46,000 West Virginia miners were collecting salaries and pensions and reinvesting in their communities. Mechanization has shrunk that number to fewer than 11,000. They extract more coal annually, but virtually all the profits leave the state for Wall Street.

The coal industry provides only 2 percent of the jobs in Central Appalachia. Wal-Mart employs more people than the coal companies in West Virginia. Last week a major study documented how coal imposes a net cost to Kentucky of more than $100 million per year. Coal is not an economic engine in the coalfields. It is an extraction engine.

Obama has the authority to end mountaintop removal, without further action from Congress and without formal rulemaking. He just needs to make the coal barons obey the law.

The writer is senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Related posts:

1. U.S. court blocks plan to curb mountaintop mining
2. Obama to Tighten Fuel-Economy Standards

The unique lost rainforest of Mount Mabu is to be given protection from exploitation, following a new expedition to the remote area revealed a host of new species.

The existence of the pristine forest in northern Mozambique was revealed by the Observer last year, and was originally discovered with the help of Google Earth. It is now thought to be the largest such forest in southern Africa.

At a meeting this week in the capital Maputo, government ministers agreed to put conservation measures in place before any commercial logging occurs there after meeting representatives from the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, the Mulanje Mountain Conservation Trust (MMCT), and numerous other groups involved in the project.

“The three messages we conveyed were that there is rich biodiversity in Mozambique, that butterflies and botany can be as important as mammals, and that conservation policy should take into consideration areas such as these mountains or the coastal forests, that do not easily fit into the usual category of national park,” said Kew’s Jonathan Timberlake. The media coverage had clinched the participation of the government, added Paul Smith, head of the Millennium Seed Bank project at Kew.

Julian Bayliss of MMCT, who first identified Mount Mabu as an area of possible exploration using satellite imagery on Google Earth said: “As scientists it is incredibly exciting to go into a previously unexplored area and discover new species of butterfly, snake and chameleon, but our aim was always to secure pledges of conservation towards the protection of these sites.”

The first full-scale expedition to Mabu last October uncovered three new species of butterfly, a new species of bush viper, a number of rare birds and potentially unrecorded plants. “These expeditions into the area are absolutely essential to securing conservation measures,” said Smith. “Unless you know what’s there, then no protective decision can be taken about management of those areas.”

Outside the forest, the land has been devastated by civil war, but inside the landscape was almost untouched. Ignorance of its existence, poor access and the forest’s value as a refuge for villagers during the fighting had combined to protect it. The scientists fear that with local people returning to the area, and Mozambique’s economy booming, pressure to cut the forest for wood or burn it to make space for crops will threaten the ecology.

Just weeks before presenting their findings in Maputo, Bayliss was convinced that further new species could be discovered and so gathered a team of experts – and the Observer – for a final expedition into the area.

After trekking into the thick forest, the team spent its time setting up butterfly traps in sunspots, overturning stones and fallen branches searching for frogs, and tapping at the huge mahogany buttresses to awaken sleeping snakes. Nights saw the bat nets go up and torch-lit searches for chameleons.

“Hunting chameleons at night is much easier,” explained herpetologist Bill Branch. “Because at night they sit out in the open and they bleach to a white colour, which means they stand out in torch light.”

The pygmy chameleons, no bigger than a thumb, were in abundance, but it took three nights to uncover a different beautiful creature with perfectly coiled tail. “It appears similar to the one that is considered endemic to Mount Mulanje, but frankly from the colouration I suspect we have a new species here. This is what I came to Mabu to find,” said Branch.

The expedition discovered eight new species of amphibians, four of butterfly and a new pseudo scorpion.

The findings were reported at the meeting in Maputo, where representatives from the Mozambican department of agricultural research, Birdlife International, WWF, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, and the British High Commission joined the others to convince the government to commit to protection. “It was an extremely positive outcome,” said Smith. Full article here…

Related posts:

1. 10 Ways Herbal Remedies can help protect you against Colds and Flu
2. Sustainable palm oil gets boost in China
3. Brazil grants land rights to squatters living in Amazon rainforest

Brazil’s president Lula has approved a controversial law which grants land rights to squatters occupying land in the Amazon — campaigners fear it will result in a further increase in deforestation of the Amazon region.

The law – known as “provisional measure 458″ – is one of the most controversial environmental decisions of Lula’s two terms in office, with the president coming under intense pressure from both environmental groups and the country’s powerful agricultural lobby.

Marcelo Furtado, Greenpeace’s campaigns manager in Brazil, said the approval of the law showed that Brazil’s policy on global warming was contradictory: “On one hand Brazil is setting targets for the reduction of carbon emissions and on the other it is opening up more areas for deforestation.”

Brazil’s government says more than 1m people will benefit from the law, which covers 67.4m hectares of land, an area roughly the size of France. It believes the law will reduce violent conflicts by giving people private ownership of the land they live on, and will make it easier to track down those illegally felling trees.

But environmentalists – who have dubbed it the “land-grabbers bill” – fear the new rules will offer a carte blanche for those wanting to make money by destroying the Amazon. They say the law effectively provides an amnesty for those who have devastated the Amazon over the last four decades. Around 20% of the Amazon has already been lost, according to environmental campaigners, and deforestation globally causes nearly a fifth of all greenhouse gas emissions.

“This measure perpetuates a 19th century practice [of Amazon destruction] instead of taking us towards a new 21st century strategy of sustainable development,” said Furtado.

Furtado said the law – originally intended to benefit impoverished farmers in the Amazon – had been “hacked apart by the agricultural lobby” and now benefited wealthy farmers rather than smaller landholders. The result, he said, was “a law which will not help increase governance [or] social justice but which simply raises the risk of more deforestation.”

Under the new law, small landowners who can prove they occupied lands before December 2004 will be handed small pieces of land for free, while large areas will be sold off at knockdown rates. The government hopes this will help bring order to a region where land disputes often result in violent clashes and murder. Brazilian human rights group Justica Global, claims 772 activists and rural workers have been killed in the Amazon state of Para between 1971 and 2004.

Human rights groups also criticised the law, saying unscrupulous Amazon ranchers, who often exploit slave labour, stood to gain from the new rules.

Faced with a vocal campaign against the measure, Lula hit back, accusing “the NGOS [of]… not telling the truth.”

In the decision, which came late on Thursday, Lula vetoed two of the most divisive sections of the bill – giving private businesses and absentee landowners the right to regularise their lands. But the Brazilian president gave the green light to one of the most controversial clauses, which will give new landowners the right to resell their properties after three years.

Related posts:

1. Guayaki Delivers Powerful Rainforest Experience with Newest Yerba Mate Beverage Innovations
2. U.S. court blocks plan to curb mountaintop mining
3. Sustainable palm oil gets boost in China

The other evening I had an experience of mundane magic. At the early age of 38, I ate the first vegetable that I had grown all by myself. It was a humble scallion yet on my tongue it had a tang of pride and achievement.

How many of the EU’s environment ministers who will gather in Luxembourg this Thursday produce their own food? I’m not asking that question because I think that my success story with organic scallions suddenly gives me greener credentials than the political masters of this continent. I ask it because I doubt that many of them feel any emotional connection to soil, judging by the cavalier way they disregard it.

Three years ago, the European commission proposed a legal framework for soil protection. Three years later, it is at risk of being consigned to the compost heap as a small but powerful group of EU governments are refusing to approve it. Britain, France, Germany, Austria and the Netherlands are all opposed to the plan, claiming either that implementing it would be too onerous or that soil is a matter best left for national administrations.

The reasons cited for rejecting the blueprint are spurious. Far from being too onerous, the proposal does not go far enough in obliging governments to protect a resource that none of us can live without. Politicians or civil servants from regions with poor soil quality have no reason to fear that Brussels bureaucrats will ambush them with subpoenas. Instead of urgent action, the law would simply require governments to identify areas afflicted by such problems as soil erosion and salinisation (the accumulation of salt) and to compile an inventory of contaminated sites, along with plans to rehabilitate such land.

The soil protection saga is a troubling testament to how the EU’s approach to the environment suffers from compartmentalised thinking. Whereas binding laws have been introduced on air and water, the union lacks similar rules on soil. Any clever child would be able to tell you that all these things are intimately connected. But allegedly well-educated officials and politicians can’t grasp that it’s foolish to try to protect one while neglecting the others.

Britain’s reluctance to endorse the plan offers yet another example of how hollow the rhetoric of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown’s governments on climate change has been. Cared for properly, soil can act as a carbon “sink”, absorbing about one-fifth of all man-made emissions of carbon dioxide. When soil is damaged, however, the pattern is reversed and rather than soaking up CO2, it releases it. Each year British soil loses about 0.6% of its organic matter and the resulting increase in CO2 emissions would be roughly equivalent to putting an extra five million cars on the road. This problem has been acute for several decades: between 1980 and 1995 British soil lost 18% of its organic matter. In 2004, the Environment Agency stated that the degradation caused to soil in England and Wales due to such factors as intensive agriculture and mismanagement of forests (during road construction and harvesting) was unsustainable.

Across the EU, thousands of sites have been polluted because of reckless industrial practices; nobody is sure of the full extent of this damage as there is a paucity of data about soil. The commission, meanwhile, reckons that soil degradation deprives the EU economy of €38bn per annum and that’s probably a conservative estimate.

Soil cannot be shielded from further deterioration by token gestures. A comprehensive and effective strategy would have to grapple with reforms of agricultural and industrial policy and a more sensible attitude to waste management (as I’ve learned from my limited experiments in the garden, composting can be of vital importance in keeping soil fertile). Not only does that strategy seem distant, though, our governments also can’t even agree on minimal rules. It is difficult not to despair.

Related posts:

1. Reviving American Chestnut Trees May Mitigate Climate Change
2. U.N.: Nature Best at Handling Climate Change
3. Report: Agriculture holds the key to solving global warming

Telegraph

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Even operating at just a fifth of their full capacity, a global network of 2.5 megawatt wind turbines sited away from urban centres would easily meet global electricity demands, a study suggests.

Currently only a fraction of energy is supplied by wind power, even in the UK which is considered the windiest country in Europe.

In 2007 wind energy overtook hydropower to become Britain’s largest renewable generation source. However, it still only contributed 2.2 per cent of the UK’s electricity supply.

The Government has set a target of meeting 15 per cent of all the UK’s energy demands from renewables by 2020, which means between 35 per cent to 45 per cent of electricity will have to come from green sources. Most of this is expected to be generated by wind farms.

For the new study, a team of international scientists led by Professor Michael McElroy at Harvard University in the US, divided the world into areas of around 3,300 square kilometres.

They then identified regions that would be suitable for wind farms.

The scientists worked out the potential for wind power electricity generation based on wind speed, air density, the spacing of turbines, and the size of turbine blades.

The findings are published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The researchers concluded: “The analysis suggests that a network of land-based 2.5 megawatt turbines operating at as little as 20 per cent of rated capacity, confined to non-forested, ice-free regions would be more than sufficient to account for total current and anticipated future global demand for electricity.

“The potential for the contiguous US could amount to more than 16 times current consumption. Important additional sources of electricity could be obtained by deploying wind farms in near-shore shallow water environments.”

Nick Rau, of Friends of the Earth, said: “This is further evidence of the huge role that wind power can play in cutting climate-changing emissions and meeting our energy requirements.

“The report also highlights the UK’s huge wind power potential, one of largest in the world, and suggests it could easily supply our electricity needs many times over.

“The Government must reap the economic and environmental rewards from developing green energy by urgently tackling the barriers that prevent wind energy from taking off, and make this country a world leader in developing a clean and prosperous low-carbon economy.”

Related posts:

1. Efficient Planet
2. New S.F. Food Policy Boosts Local Farms
3. Denmark to power electric cars by wind in vehicle-to-grid experiment