Save Eco Destinations

The north pacific gyre is highlighted.

A study by the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego has found a 100-fold upsurge in human-produced plastic garbage in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch within the Pacific Ocean. Researchers found that the plastic debris is disrupting habitats in the ecosystem — but not in the ways you might imagine.

In 2009, a team of graduate students led the Scripps Environmental Accumulation of Plastic Expedition (SEAPLEX) to the North Pacific Ocean Subtropical Gyre aboard the Scripps research vessel New Horizon. The researchers, who focused their studies on an area 1,000 miles west of California, documented an immense amount of human-generated trash, mostly tiny broken down bits of plastic the size of a human fingernail floating across thousands of miles of open sea.

The new study published by a graduate student researcher in the latest issue of the journal Biology Letters reveals that plastic debris in the area popularly known as the “Great Pacific Garbage Patch” has grown by 100 times over in the past 40 years, thereby altering the natural habitat of animals such as the marine insect Halobates sericeus.

“When you go out into the North Pacific, what you find can be highly variable. So, to find such a clear pattern and such a large increase was very surprising,” said graduate student and lead author of the study Miriam Goldstein.

The marine insect Halobates sericeus, also known as a “sea skater” or “oceanic water strider.” Photo credit: Anthony Smith.

These insects — known also as ”sea skaters” or “water striders” – inhabit water surfaces and lay their eggs on flotsam such as seashells, seabird feathers, tar lumps and pumice. Now, sea skaters have are using plastic garbage as new surfaces for their eggs, which is strongly increasing the insects’ egg densities in the gyre.

This increase, documented for the first time in a marine invertebrate in the open ocean, may affect animals across the marine food web, such as crabs that prey on sea skaters and their eggs.

“This paper shows a dramatic increase in plastic over a relatively short time period and the effect it’s having on a common North Pacific Gyre invertebrate,” said Goldstein, chief scientist of SEAPLEX, a UC Ship Funds-supported voyage. “We’re seeing changes in this marine insect that can be directly attributed to the plastic.”

The amount of plastic debris will influence the survival of species specifically adapted to life on or around objects floating in the water.

The new study follows a 2011 report by Scripps researchers showing that 9% of the fish collected during SEAPLEX had consumed plastic waste. That study estimated that such fish in the North Pacific Ocean ingest plastic at a rate of roughly 12,000-24,000 tons a year.

The new study compared changes in small plastic abundance between 1972-1987 and 1999-2010 through historical samples gathered from various sources. In April, researchers with the Instituto Oceanográfico in Brazil published a report that eggs of Halobates micans, another species of sea skater, appeared on many plastic bits floating in the South Atlantic off the Brazilian coast.

“Plastic only became widespread in late ’40s and early ’50s, but now everyone uses it and over a 40-year range we’ve seen a dramatic increase in ocean plastic,” said Goldstein. “Historically we have not been very good at stopping plastic from getting into the ocean so hopefully in the future we can do better.”

Inambari River, Peru

Peru and Brazil signed a pact last month to build six hydroelectric dams in the Peruvian Amazon — and the indigenous peoples in Peru as well as the environment will have to suffer the calamitous consequences.

Populations will be displaced and ecosystems disrupted if these projects are realized, environmentalists say.

Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Peruvian President Alan García signed the pact in question.

Peru has thus committed to deliver a permanent percentage of electricity to Brazil for 30 years. Also, if anyone wants to back down, this will only be possible 15 years into the agreement, according to Peruvian Energy Vice Minister Daniel Cámac. The idea is that Peru will get all the electricity it needs out of the deal, although it hasn’t yet decided how much it will require.

But not everyone thinks this makes sense.

“What is the point of signing a pact without having determined if this is what we need as a country?” asked lawyer César Gamboa, director of the NGO Law, Environment and Natural Resources (DAR). “Why don’t we conduct the studies before we make commitments we can’t back out of?”

The idea of the pact, born in 2006, is to generate 6,000 megavolts (mv) (note: 1 mv = 1 million volts) through the construction of generators in Peruvian turf that will prioritize internal supply and allow for the sale of surplus energy to Brazil, the official version goes.

On the other hand, engineer Alfredo Novoa says this is BS. The director of the NGO ProNaturaleza said,

“Peru doesn’t need energy projects in the Amazon to cover its demand. There is a 22,000 mv potential in the Andes and thousands more along the coast. Why more?”

Professor of the Institute of Electrical Engineering and Energy at the University of Saão Paulo Célio Bermann said the plants won’t meet Peru’s energy needs. Further, the agreement will irrevocably harm the Peruvian Amazon’s ecosystems.

“Yet the energy that will be produced will serve the interest of international and Brazilian mining, and metallurgy companies that are ever-expanding in the Amazon. The power will not go to meet the needs of everyday Peruvians or Brazilians,” he stated.

Moreover, it is still unclear where these generators will be built – it may happen in the Andes instead of the Amazon, Cámac told.

Oy.

Two problems

Asháninka

Mariano Castro, former executive secretary of the Peruvian National Environment Council and lawyer with the Peruvian Society of Environmental Rights (SPDA), said the dams will not ensure clean and renewable energy for Peru.

“On the contrary, it will impose a series of negative environmental and social impacts such as displacement of indigenous people and deforestation in at least five departments of Peru, putting at grave risk the future of the Peruvian Amazon,” Castro said.

One of the controversial projects is to take place in the Inambari River, located in the Amazonian limits of the Cusco, Madre de Dios and Puno regions in the southeastern part of Peru. This would be the largest hydroelectric plant in the country and the fifth-largest in Latin America.

The other is the Paquitzapango Project in the Ene River in Junín, home of the indigenous asháninka population.

Three other projects exist in the pact. The building of all five entails an investment of between USD 13.5 million and USD 16.5 million.

A more important cost will be that paid by the indigenous peoples. More than 4,000 inhabitants of the Inambari region and up to 10,000 in Paquitzapango would be displaced. To make matters worse, the unfortunate asháninka of Paquitzapango were already displaced during the internal Peruvian armed conflict of 1980-2000.

Peru’s greenhouse gas emissions are set to rise by 5.9% as a result of the project.

Brazil's cattle sector takes up 80% of all deforested areas of the Amazon and is Brazil’s main source of carbon emissions. Photo by Greenpeace.

Greenpeace can be a pain in the ass, but more often than not, I think they rule.

Here is one example: In June, the organization released a report called “Slaughtering the Amazon,” which explains why the Brazilian cattle industry is the main cause of deforestation on the planet, with one acre lost every 8 seconds on average.

Through the release of this information, more and more people became educated as to the link between deforestation and cattle ranching, which then bred widespread activism to boycott cattle products from the region.

Activists demanded that shoe companies Adidas, Nike, Timberland, Clarks, and Geox stop buying leather from the Amazon. And it worked!

Even more amazing,

Each of the companies, JBS-Friboi, Bertin, Minerva and Marfrig, declared the adoption of environmental and social standards to ensure their products are free from cattle raised in newly deforested areas of the rainforest. The Brazilian Association of Supermarkets (ABRAS), which includes Walmart and Carrefour, attended the event and supports the call for zero deforestation.

JBS-Friboi, Bertin, Minerva and Marfrig, by the way, are four of the world’s largest beef and leather companies and monopolize the world export market and supply. They have vowed to  ban the purchase of cattle from newly deforested land in the Amazon. This is huge.

Governor Blairo Maggi of the Brazilian state of Mato Grosso, which is responsible for the leading rate of forest destruction in the Amazon and the country’s biggest cattle herd, said Mato Grosso would stand behind efforts to protect the rainforest and “provide high-resolution satellite images for monitoring.”

Well, I’m impressed.

More kick-ass news:

At the United Nations General Assembly in September, President Lula announced a target of 80% reduction in deforestation by 2020 for Brazil.

Hell yes. Go Brazil!

If only more nations would take the lead! I suppose they will when activists annoy them enough…

As we saw in part three of the Peruvian Amazon Interoceanic Highway posts, which also discusses illegal gold mining, Peru’s rainforests are being cut down and the environment and human and nonhuman animals poisoned due to unregulated gold mining.

(Note: Let’s keep in mind that lawful gold mining is destructive as well.)

In the aforementioned post, Peru’s Environment Minister Antonio Brack said that the national government is looking to ban illegal fold mining.

But with such an extensive reach, how can illegal mining be stopped (never mind legal mining)?

We’d need some United States-style, Big Brother-type technology here.

Environmental activist Enrique Ortiz says that a Peruvian mining town near Huaypetue has quadrupled in size in the past six months alone.

“It’s just a cancer that is spreading all around, and with the prices going up of gold, predictions are not so good,” he says.

At the very least, the government would need to send a ton of guards to the Peruvian border with Bolivia and Brazil to span and monitor the entire area.

*Ahem* These guards should ideally not greet bribing attempts with a thumbs up *Ahem*

Brack didn’t even offer information on how the Peruvian government plans to finance the project. I’m not surprised – it’s not as though Peru is known for its wealth, and the region in question is about as large as Belgium (small on a map, yes, but try walking it!).

Gold mining in the Peruvian border with Bolivia and Brazil produced 10% of Peru’s 180 tons of gold output worth USD 5.6 billion in exports in 2008. The country is the fifth-biggest gold producer worldwide, and gold exports constitute its second largest source of revenue.

The Bloomberg article reporters can actually be reached at their respective email addresses here if you have any questions or comments for them.

Let’s boycott!

Hey, how about we do a little bit by boycotting gold? Let’s find out which corporations mining and selling unrenewable natural resources to us – not Peruvians living in extreme poverty and who are desperate for better opportunities – and declare war by boycotting and talking trash about them.

Spreading the word helps, looking for petitions to sign, letters to write, and so on. Whatever you can do!

Here are some disgusting corporations and companies exploiting poor nations’ natural resources and polluting them with cyanide and other poisons:

• Canada-based Manhattan Minerals Corporation, which has also mined gold in Mexico
• Newmont stretches its gold mining operations across five continents and touts itself as the largest gold producer in the world. Good job, guys! Keep on being greedy asshats
• The International Finance Corporation, a member of the World Bank Group
• Venezuelan mining company Buenaventura
• Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Minières
• Boycott Green Karat says it’s an “eco” company because its rings are made of recycled gold. Well, honey, don’t you think that still encourages gold mining? “Ecologically responsible” my ass.
• Chinalco mines copper in Peru and ships it back to China

Gold mining pollution. Yummy. - Getty Images

Rio Huaypetue gold mine - and rampant deforestation - in southeastern Peru - photo by Mangobay.com

Illegal gold mining is a multi-pronged mess, spawning social, environmental, and economic unrest. As mentioned in part two of the Peruvian Amazon Interoceanic Highway posts, Peru sees its fair share of this problem.

The easier it gets to travel to the lowlands, the easier it gets for highlanders to venture down to take on whatever work they can – even if they must destroy their own land in the process – to seek a better living.

Natl Govt looks to ban illegal mining

Environment Minister Antonio Brack said last month that the government will seek to ban unregulated mining for gold in the country’s southeastern rainforest, reports Bloomberg.

Mining operations require cutting down stretches of rainforest. Further, unregulated gold mining pollutes 5 million hectares (12 million acres) of the Amazon River basin, he said, in the Madre de Dios (Mother of God) region.

The Ministry is thus looking to reach an agreement with national and regional governments to stop the environmental destruction.

“Informal mining, which doesn’t meet minimal environmental standards, is the country’s biggest social and ecological problem,” Brack said.

“These operations, which are spreading across the Andes and the Amazon, have an enormous impact on biodiversity and native communities.”

Unregulated gold miners live in extreme poverty

Mercury and the environment

Mercury is used to separate gold ore from rock in the refining process.

Alluvial mining, or dredging for gold along river banks, is the norm in these lowlands. It is extensively harmful to the environment and is deadly for human and nonhuman animals alike.

About 32 tons of mercury are dumped into the rainforest’s rivers annually by miners. The pollution has a reach of 500 km. (300 mi.) – all the way into Brazil.

Read about the terrible effects of these gold mining poisons on local communities.

"Welcome to the Interoceanic Highway South. Sao Paolo, Brazil 4601 kilometers." Photo by NPR

The Brazilian Government is investing part of the financing for a highway construction leading from its Atlantic coast through Peru’s Pacific coast. The last portion is being built in Peru as you read this.

The project will bring new jobs, merchandise, and other financial advantages to the national economy and Peruvians living in isolated Andean villages – as well as environmental destruction in one of the most untraveled and biodiverse rainforests on Earth, the Peruvian Amazon.

Brazil’s dream is “to finally reach the dream of three centuries, which is that even if there is not a Brazilian flag, at least there will be a Brazilian economy on the shores of the Pacific,” said Bruce Babbitt, current chairman of the World Wildlife Fund in the U.S. and former secretary of the interior during the Clinton Administration.

But…

The Peruvian Government, of course, is happy about the opportunities the highway will bring to its people and economy as well.

These developments are also enabling the increase of prostitution, unplanned pregnancies, and venereal diseases taking place. Not to mention the growth of illegal gold mining, which Peruvians in need hope will provide them a higher income.

Thousands of workers live along the road are assembling the highway into the Andes. Apart from the Interoceanic Highway, two other roads traversing the Peruvian Amazon are being forced into the Andes, also with heavy machinery, day and night, thanks to the Brazilian engineering and construction giant Odebrecht.

On the other hand, new shops have already been springing up along the highway to service passersby. One was opened by a woman who lives in an Andean village with a population of 250. You can imagine how much people in these circumstances would need a new source of income.

The Peruvian Government considers the project essential to bring prosperity all around.

Additionally, some hope that ecotourism will grow as a result of facilitated access. But while Peru has favorable protection laws, they are not enforced.

So how do you choose?

Alas, nearsighted governmental authorities have opted not to look into alternative ways to help these people.

It seems like a no-brainer for Brazil when you consider the country’s impetus: easier access to the Pacific to escalate trade with Peru and China, the latter a major business partner. But how practical is transporting soy beans by truck across a staggering amount of miles before you can sell or ship them overseas?

Brazil also plans to invest in five massive dams in Peru, whose purpose will be to generate energy for the massive country.

The moral of the Brazilian Amazon

Since the highway began to construction in the 1970s, unbridled deforestation has been ravaging the Amazon. Isn’t this enough?

(If you’re sick of the topic, just scroll to the bottom for the important stuff.)

Check it out: Not even the Argentine Minister of Health Juan Manzur (left) or President Cristina Kirchner (right) are wearing a mask.

Yes, again. This time because I am in South America, I am freezing my butt off, and the news keeps scaring the hell out of everybody regarding the damn H1N1 — or piggy flu, as I like to call it.

Did you know that those masks are counterproductive? They make the area of your nose and mouth more hospitable to viruses and bacteria by keeping it warm and moist. You’re definitely better off without one. They’re all sold out anyway because the mainstream media lies through their rotten teeth about what will help you prevent becoming a pandemic statistic. What a joke.

Did you know that at the international airport of Ezeiza  in Buenos Aires passengers getting off the planes are given masks to wear just for photojournalists to photograph? It’s disgusting.

Did you know that most people who contract H1N1 experience mild symptoms that go away on their own? Yes, I already told you that Tamiflu is a ripoff.

So scary!

Wait, wrong mammal.

Here we go:

So cute! Thanks for the photo, USDA.

Some eco love

So go ahead and go on your fun South American eco adventure – visit Iguazú, the Patagonia in Argentina/Chile (hey THIS looks pretty sweet and maybe THIS too), marvel at the beauty of Brazilians while gazing at the Atlantic from a mound of warm sand (or while doing one of these activities).

Hey, I wish these places paid me for the advertising. Pfft.

The-important-stuff-at-the-bottom

Here are some crucial and frightening facts that will benefit you if you choose to innoculate yourself in hopes of avoiding an H1N1 infection: Squalene: The Swine Flu Vaccine’s Dirty Little Secret Exposed.

Be safe — but not paranoid! I.E. Don’t watch mainstream news. Stay objective and inform yourself from several disparate sources.

Let’s review.

Essentially, the “green cities movement” comprises loose groups of cities focused on becoming and remaining sustainable. Green cities, I joyfully report, are sprouting worldwide, albeit only in urban areas thus far.

Their point is, as I’m sure you’ve guessed already, to lessen their environmentally destructive impact. Green cities do this by reducing their waste, recycling it, and reusing materials. Their goals are lowering emissions and increasing housing density, green spaces, and sustainable local businesses.

Remember Gothenburg’s ecotopia?  Same concepts, although Gothenburg’s are more evolved.

Examples

Curitiba

I was surprised to learn that a typical green city is located in Brazil: Curitiba. This city went green back in the 1970s!

Curitiba has a high-tech bus system and has worked to increase population density around transit hubs, enabling other areas to become green, open land instead of stimulating urban sprawl.  I’m not sure why this city counts as green when it has such a long way to go, but if it’s the best Brazil’s got right now, I’ll take it. It’s got a lot more than many cities can boast, after all.

And remember Iceland? Reykjavik relies on geothermal and hydropower for heating and generating most of its electricity. This city has the largest geothermal heating system in the world. In fact, it was ranked 1^st in Grist Magazine’s “15 Greenest Cities” list. On the other hand, it’s got large scale urban sprawl and one of the highest worldwide per-capita ownerships. Public transport consists of an unpopular hydrogen-powered bus system.

Rekyjavik

We should note that Reykjavik plans to go fossil fuel-free by 2050, though. Cheers to that.

Other green cities include Sydney, Copenhagen, Portland, and Seattle. More on that coming up.

Parrots in the Amazon (photo by Orthopod1)

I am not a big fan of the World Bank, but maybe this time they’ve done something laudable: the bank has approved a $1.3 billion loan for the Brazilian government to spend on improving environmental management programs.

Given the environmental charge of the Amazon in the world (one-third of the planet’s tropical rainforests), this is good news! Maybe this effort will have a domino effect leading to less deforestation of the Brazilian rainforest. I’m hoping and hard, you better believe it.

The program focuses on forests, water conservation and energy efficiency. All aspects of the program will be involved in the climate change cause, e.g. deforestation leads to biodiversity loss and climate change, therefore, the program’s interests will include diminishing deforestation in Brazil.

Nice. After all, a better environmental management program really isn’t if ravaging deforestation isn’t dealt with! Honestly, I can’t help but be suspicious, even cynical at times. But Brazil does have a lot hanging on the Amazon, since it contains 60% of it, so their motivation lies there. Probably.

“This requires a commitment from all levels of government, whether federal, state or municipal, paying special attention to social programs, many of which include programs for sustainable growth,” said Guido Mantegna, Brazil’s Minister of Finance.

No sh*t. I mean, would we be that surprised if this money ended up being used on pseudo-green projects that would ultimately harm the environment? Anything’s possible with money, and if it were environmentalists who had it, we wouldn’t be in this mess. Plus, they had $488.6 million to spend on the environment and chose to fork it over to the military for “protection.”

To round it out a bit, here’s a related article you might be interested in: whether Obama should give Brazil $16 billion yearly to conserve the Amazon rainforests.

See you soon and don’t forget to add Save Eco Destinations on Twitter!