Dam-affected people occupy Tractebel headquarters in Rio

Nova Ponte hydropower plant, built by Tractebel’s Brazilian entity, Leme Engenharia.

Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, Oct. 30 (ENS)— About 350 men, women, and children from across Brazil, have taken over the headquarters of the Belgian transnational company Tractebel in Rio de Janeiro. Tractebel is the part owner of the electric utility Gerasul, and is constructing controversial dams in Brazil. The takeover is part of a National Mobilization by the Brazilian Movement of Dam-Affected People (MAB), with various dams occupied and public demonstrations taking place in different regions.

The demonstrators are hoping to convince Tractebel to open negotiations with them. The company has been unfair, they say, in the way it has treated people affected by its dams, such as the Ita in Rio Grande do Sul and Santa Catarina states and the Cana Brava dam on the Tocantins River in the central-western region of Brazil.

MAB charges that Tractebel has failed to address outstanding resettlement and compensation issues with 200 families whose problems are as yet unresolved at Ita despite the fact that the dam is now fully operational.

At Cana Brava, a dam financed by the Inter-American Development Bank, the situation is even more serious, says Glenn Switkes with the Latin America Campaigns section of the International Rivers Network.

He says that hundreds of families are still not receiving compensation, and most of the compensation already prescribed is of such low value that is does not permit the rehabilitation of displaced families.

“Most of the sharecroppers, renters, fishermen, and artisan gold miners who worked along the river are being ignored by the company, as well as many families who will be isolated by the formation of the reservoir,” said Switkes.

According to national coordinator Helio Mecca of MAB, “Tractebel has refused to consider the needs of populations who will lose everything when the floodgates on Cana Brava are closed.”

On Oct. 31, communities affected by the Corumba IV dam in Goias state planned to be in the Brazilian capital of Brasilia to deliver their complaints to the federal government.

Protests took place Oct. 29 at Manso dam in the state of Mato Grosso, and Fumaca dam in Minas Gerais state, among others. The Rio Manso system supplies the water for the Metropolitan Region of Belo Horizonte, state capital of Minas Gerais.

The protesters halted their occupation of the headquarters offices of state electric company Furnas, after the company agreed to review resettlement and compensation measures at Manso and at Serra da Mesa dam.

Tractebel officials could not be immediately reached for comment on the demonstrations.

The Belgian company prides itself on its environmental policy. While not specifically mentioning dams on its website, Tractebel says its emissions of carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide have been reduced to below the limits laid down by the European Union, and it has cut the quantity of low-level radioactive waste produced by its nuclear power stations by more than half since 1989.

New techniques for incineration, biodigestion, and selective collection, sorting, and recycling of solid and liquid waste it has developed, the company says, allow more domestic and industrial waste to be converted into products or electrical energy.

And Transbel says its high performance generating facilities, with “modern, flexible cogeneration units,” will foster “sustainable economic development.”

But the MAB demonstrators do not share Transbel’s definition of sustainable. MAB wants its actions to stimulate a discussion of an alternative energy model for Brazil which will prioritize energy alternatives and halt the construction of large dams, “which cause incalculable environmental and social damages,” MAB says.

Environmental radicals undeterred

By Christy Karras

Portland, Oregon, Nov. 6— Environmental radicals have claimed responsibility for at least five acts of sabotage over the past two months, showing they are not going to let the nation’s terrorism scare stand in their way.

Since Sept. 11, they’ve set fire to a maintenance building at a primate research facility in New Mexico, released minks from an Iowa fur farm twice within a week and firebombed a federal corral for wild horses in Nevada.

The current spree started on Sept. 8, when militants torched a McDonald’s restaurant in Tucson, Ariz. Four of the five actions have been claimed by the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and one by its sister organization, the Earth Liberation Front (ELF).

Beth Anne Steele, an FBI spokeswoman in Portland, said it’s “pretty unbelievable” that the groups, considered terrorists themselves by the agency, have continued their sabotage during the nation’s terrorism crisis.

“We believe that their methods of intimidation and violence have crossed the line into unacceptable for law enforcement, and they’ve crossed the line for the majority of Americans,” she said.

But the spokesman for the two groups, David Barbarash, said Americans’ fear of more possible attacks by followers of Osama bin Laden are no reason for the ALF and the ELF to put their own campaign on hold.

“I don’t think underground activists have changed the way they think about what they’re doing,” said Barbarash, a former ALF activist who now acts as their spokesman from his home in Vancouver, British Columbia.

“The Sept. 11 attacks were horrific acts, but we also have to remember that the atrocities against the earth continue unabated,” said Barbarash.

The ALF first surfaced in 1987, and the ELF nine years later. They have claimed responsibility for dozens of acts of sabotage against companies and agencies they say are harming animals and the environment -- including fur farms, research facilities, fast-food restaurants and logging operations.

One of the most notorious operations carried out by the ELF was an October 1998 fire that swept through part of the Vail ski resort in Colorado. The group said it was protesting the resort’s expansion into lynx habitat.

The FBI defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce” the government or the civilian population.

Steele said that definition fits the acts for which ELF and the ALF have claimed responsibility over the years.

But Barbarash argues that militant environmentalists are not terrorists because their aim is not to harm people, but to protect animals and the environment.

ELF and ALF “are acting out of compassion for all life, including human life,” and can’t be likened to terrorists who crash hijacked planes into buildings or spread disease as a weapon, he said.

That doesn’t wash with the FBI, or with anti-terrorism expert Gary Perlstein.

“Even if it’s a cause you believe in, if you resort to violence, then it is terrorism,” Perlstein said.

The FBI has an active investigation into the ELF and the ALF. Congress also wants to know more about the two groups. Former ELF spokesman Craig Rosebraugh of Portland has been subpoenaed by a House subcommittee to testify on ecoterrorism. Rosebraugh said he won’t cooperate.

Rosebraugh stepped down as spokesman for the ELF about two months ago. His role has been taken over by Barbarash, who previously was spokesman only for the ALF.

Barbarash said the two groups send him anonymous communiqués when they want to announce they’ve carried out an illegal act. Barbarash then relays the information to the news media. The communiqués can come by fax, e-mail or phone, he said.

Barbarash served four months in jail for taking part in an ALF action -- the release of cats used in medical research at a Canadian university in 1992. He said he ceased taking part in ALF actions because he lost his anonymity when he was arrested. But that hasn’t stopped him from relaying the communiqués, or speaking out in favor of their acts.

Barbarash concedes the ALF and ELF run the risk of losing any sympathy for their cause by carrying out illegal acts during the nation’s terrorism scare. But he said they don’t care.

“Sympathy isn’t a factor high on the agenda of ALF and ELF,” Barbarash said.

Source: Associated Press

Activists keep hopeful eye on climate talks

By Danielle Knight

Washington, DC, Nov. 1 (IPS)— Environmentalists say they are encouraged by progress toward finalizing implementation of the Kyoto Protocol on climate change at ongoing talks in Morocco, despite the lack of participation by the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases.

The United States is merely observing negotiations due to end Nov. 9 in Marrakesh but the European Union (EU), Japan, and other countries “are moving forward,” says Jennifer Morgan, climate change program director at the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). “These countries are drafting domestic legislation to ratify and implement the 1997 treaty,” she adds.

The Kyoto Protocol, named after the Japanese city where it was drawn up, calls for the 38 industrialized nations to reduce, by 2012, their combined annual greenhouse gas emissions to an average of 5.2 percent below their 1990 levels.

President George W. Bush has refused to support the treaty, calling it unfair because it does not require developing nations to commit to binding reduction targets.

The European Commission, however, is calling on member states to ratify the Protocol by mid-June 2002, in time to commemorate the tenth anniversary of the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, where a voluntary version of the Protocol was first drafted.

Countries now are negotiating brass-tacks issues including how compliance with the treaty’s legally binding rules will be monitored and enforced. “That system will form the fundamental building blocks of the Kyoto Protocol,” says Ram Uppuluri, an attorney with Environmental Defense, a Washington-based advocacy group.

Negotiators also are discussing the mandate and regional make-up of the executive board that would oversee the accord.

“We’re encouraged by the parties’ determination to get things done,” says Nathalie Eddy, a climate campaigner with Greenpeace International.

WWF’s Morgan, however, acknowledges that despite their optimism, environmentalists are keeping a close watch on Russia, Japan and Canada to make sure they do not “back-track” on commitments to push through with the process.

Substantial differences persist, she says. Russia, for example, has said it must get additional credit for maintaining its vast forests -- a natural sink for the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide -- if it is to support the treaty; Germany opposes this.

At least 55 nations, including countries that account for at least 55 percent of the industrialized world’s 1990 level of carbon dioxide emissions, must ratify the agreement for it to be become binding. Without US participation, ratification hinges on Russian and Japanese support.

Japan has said that it wants to see the agreement enter into force by 2002 but its position on ratification remains unclear since it had insisted this would only happen if the United States also went along. Tokyo is staying in the game thanks to strong Japanese public support for the treaty, say environmentalists.

Even if the treaty is ratified, greenhouse gas emissions actually could rise 2.5 percent by 2010 if the Washington remains on the sidelines, according to Greenpeace International. This is because the United States, which accounts for 4.6 percent of the world’s population, produces about one-fourth of all emissions.

The irony of the treaty, adds Alden Meyer, director of government relations at the Union of Concerned Scientists, is that the United States strongly influenced the shape of the Protocol. The Clinton administration insisted, for example, that it include a scheme to allow countries to trade emissions allowances.

Meyer says he believes that nations involved in the current talks are trying to avoid decisions that would thwart future participation by Washington.

With high-level ministerial negotiations scheduled for the coming week, Uppuluri at Environmental Defense says the Marrakesh round of talks will only be deemed successful “if it paves the way for ratification.”

Sprawl is unhealthy, CDC researchers conclude

By Lyle V. Harris

Atlanta, Georgia, Nov. 2— Urban sprawl is not healthy for children and other living things. That’s the conclusion of a report authored by researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta and released Thursday by SprawlWatch, a nonprofit environmental group based in Washington, DC.

Instead of focusing exclusively on the bricks-and-mortar effects, the report examines sprawl’s impact on flesh and blood. Titled “Creating a Healthy Environment: The Impact of the Built Environment on Public Health,” the report states:

* While Americans make 6 percent of their trips on foot, 13 percent of all traffic fatalities involve pedestrian victims. Of the 10,696 pedestrians killed by automobiles in 1997-98, 1,500 were children.

* As people have adopted more sedentary, automobile-based lifestyles, the percentage of adults who are overweight or obese has risen from 47 percent in 1976 to 61 percent in 1999.

* About 850 people died in floods in the last eight years, most often in areas where weak zoning laws allowed developers to drain wetlands and build on floodplains.

Changes in behavior can make a difference. A local case in point was a dramatic reduction in asthma cases at Atlanta area hospitals during the 1996 Olympics when a restrictive traffic plan prompted motorists to find other forms of transportation.

Traffic on Atlanta roads fell by nearly 23 percent, and smog levels dipped by about 28 percent, according to the CDC report. At the same time, emergency room visits for asthma sufferers, who are especially susceptible to smog, dropped by almost 42 percent.

“We already knew that pollution caused respiratory problems, but I don’t think most of us understand that the way we build our cities contributes to other health problems,” said Grace Trimble of the Georgia Conservancy. “I hope this signals that people will start taking a deeper look at what sprawl really does.”

Chris Kochtitzky, an urban planner who co-authored the report with Richard J. Jackson at the CDC, said the report seeks to close the gap between public health officials, developers, and urban planners.

“There was a time when the whole idea behind planning and zoning was to protect people from harmful areas and industries that were health hazards, but somehow that connection was lost,” Kochtitzky said. “It’s been our experience in talking to both groups that they don’t know each other. Even if they do, they don’t tend to consult each other when making their decisions.”

The report calls for “smart growth” policies that take mental and physical health into account, designing communities around people instead of cars to increase “walkability,” and changing building codes to better accommodate people of different ages and the physically disabled.

Source: Atlanta Journal-Constitution