They’ll be back

At a U.N. conference in Bangkok this week, nations and NGOs are debating the merits of the Terminator. No, not the esteemed governor; the controversial biotechnology developed by the USDA and the agricultural industry in the late '90s that can make plants produce sterile seeds. As a result, farmers would be forced to buy seeds anew each year. They'd benefit from hardier crops and higher yields, proclaim the corporate giants; growers and their advocates -- especially in poorer countries -- beg to differ.

The U.N. has placed a moratorium on the Terminator, and governments in Asia and Africa have called for an outright ban. But Canada is making a splash this week by recommending case-by-case assessments instead. "The Canadian government is doing the dirty work of the multinational gene giants and the U.S. government," says a concerned Canadian foundation.

Follow the latest developments -- or just check out the scintillating action shots. Hey, Greenpeace: If you're not gonna wear a tie, could you at least button up?

Doomed to repeat the past?

Did the dinosaurs die out because of global warming? Well, sort of.

In an op-ed in Sunday's Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Peter Ward, a University of Washington professor of biology and earth and space sciences, takes a look at climate change through the unlikely lens of paleontology. Ward points out that prehistoric volcanic eruptions released enough carbon-dioxide into the atmosphere to radically alter the planet's climate, resulting in serious ecosystem disturbances and extinctions.

Whitman on the environment

Ex-EPA administrator (and N.J. governor) Christie Todd Whitman is somewhat of a mystery to progressives. She talks like a moderate, and even dares criticize the Bush junta, but she was complicit in the very hard right policies she now disavows -- and, conspicuously, didn't disavow them at the time. The question in the mind of many pundits is, "naive dupe or dishonest hack?" After reading Whitman's op-ed in the San Francisco Chronicle today arguing that we need "a new debate on the environment," I'm leaning toward hack.

Benign biotech

The environmental movement's opposition to genetically modified foods has always struck me as rather sloppy and knee jerk. While there are certainly evil corporations involved and real harmful effects possible, the issue seems to call for pragmatic approach, concerned with technique rather than good and evil. Perhaps the problem with GMO crops is not inherent in the very notion of genetic manipulation, but rather in the way they are developed, who owns the results, and who profits. (The same might be said of any number of technologies that enviros have typically recoiled from.)

For instance, I'm a big fan of open-source biotech.

The whole corporatized system [of biotechnology], however, rests on the ability to hoard information. The information and its dissemination have to be owned through government-granted patents and licenses, if the discoverer is to make big money on it. In one way, that's fine. The prospect of profits inspires research and our increasingly corporatized system has produced some notable medical breakthroughs and innovations....
...
But hoarding information clashes directly with another imperative of scientific progress: that information be shared as quickly and widely as possible to maximize the chance that other scientists can see it, improve on it, or use it in ways the original discoverer didn't foresee.
...
A small but growing number of scientists, most of them funded by the National Institutes of Health, are conducting cutting-edge research into the most complex problems of biology not in highly secure labs but on the Internet, for all the world to see. Called "open-source biology," this work is the complete antithesis of corporatized research. It's a movement worth watching--and rooting for.

Indeed. Not only are there considerable scientific and health benefits possible, but it also opens the way for local populations to develop solutions to their unique problems, particularly in developing nations.

Worldchanging has covered this before, and now they bring word of a concrete example: NERICA.

Developed by Dr. Monty Jones of the West Africa Rice Development Agency (WARDA), NERICA is a hybrid strain of rice, developed using biotech by West African researchers, which is on its way to bettering the health of West and Central African citizens, restoring agricultural sustainability, and improving the economics of food importation for the region.

Go check it out. This is something for future-minded enviros to keep their eyes on.

A review of the distorted plot and politics in Michael Crichton’s State of Fear

Michael Crichton's State of Fear is an attempt to meld serious politico-scientific critique with a modern techno-thriller. It's an ambitious undertaking, but to paraphrase Thomas Edison, success is 1 percent ambition and 99 percent not writing an awful book. Crichton's novel, alas, is unilluminating as a critique and unsatisfying as a thriller.

A review of the distorted science in Michael Crichton’s State of Fear

Michael Crichton's new novel State of Fear is about global-warming hysteria ginned up by a self-important NGO on behalf of evil eco-terrorists ... or by evil eco-terrorists on behalf of a self-important NGO. It's not quite clear. Regardless, the message of the book is that global warming is a non-problem. A lesson for our times? Sadly, no.

Rural renewables

Rural areas in America are hurting, losing people and vitality by the day. The extractive industries upon which many rural economies are based are either dying, being outsourced, or taken over by megacorporations who offer residents low-quality, unstable service jobs. What if greens had something to offer these red areas? As I keep saying, a rural future based on small-scale green industry is both substantively and politically a huge potential win for environmentalists.

A story in The Oregonian on rural Oregon's renewable energy potential illustrates both the opportunity and challenges involved.

Richard Brooks, Greenpeace campaigner, answers questions

Richard Brooks. With what environmental organization are you affiliated? I am a forest campaigner with Greenpeace Canada. What does your...

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. talk

This evening I saw Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speak at Seattle's Paramount theater, thanks to Foolproof's excellent "American Voices" program.

The guy is pretty amazing. For one thing -- and I'm not sure why this is the first thing that struck me -- he looks like a Kennedy! It's a little strange, like some PBS documentary or Discovery channel special come to life. And he speaks like a Kennedy too, obviously erudite but completely at ease with the kind of aspirational, inspirational rhetoric for which his father and uncle were known.

It's one of the more substantive one-hour public talks I've ever seen. His pleasantries lasted about 30 seconds (with a quick shout-out to local eco-hero Rep. Jay Inslee), and he was off and running full tilt -- few personal anecdotes or attempts at humor, no sugar, just fiber. That style might not be everybody's cup of tea, but I love it. There was no slack.

The basic theme of the talk was less environmental stuff than corporate power. Here are a few random notes and reflections, off the top of my head, in no particular order (all this stuff will, of course, be familiar to those who have seen him speak or read his book):