Oil
and gas giant Shell has reported record annual profits after energy
prices surged last year following Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Profits hit $39.9bn (£32.2bn) in 2022, double last year's total and the highest in its 115-year history.
Energy firms have seen record earnings since oil and gas prices jumped following the invasion of Ukraine.
It has heaped pressure on firms to pay more tax as households struggle with rising bills.
Opposition
parties said Shell's profits were "outrageous" and the government was
letting energy firms "off the hook". They also called for the planned
increase in the energy price cap due in April to be scrapped.
Energy
prices had begun to climb after the end of Covid lockdowns but rose
sharply in March last year after the events in Ukraine led to worries
over supplies.
The
price of Brent crude oil reached nearly $128 a barrel following the
invasion, but has since fallen back to about $83. Gas prices also spiked
but have come down from their highs.
How much windfall tax are oil giants paying?
BP profit jump sparks calls for bigger windfall tax
White House calls Exxon record profit 'outrageous'
It has led to bumper profits for energy companies, but also fuelled a rise in energy bills for households and businesses.
Last year, the UK government introduced a windfall tax - called the Energy Profits Levy - on the "extraordinary" earnings of firms to help fund its scheme to lower gas and electricity bills.
Despite
the move, Shell had said it did not expect to pay any UK tax this year
as it is allowed to offset decommissioning costs and investments in UK
projects against any UK profits.
However, on Thursday it said was due to pay $134m in UK windfall tax for 2022, and expected to pay more than $500m in 2023.
Image source, Getty Images
Image caption,
Gas prices spiked after Russia's invasion of Ukraine
This
may look small compared to its profits but Shell only derives around 5%
of its revenue from the UK - the rest is made and taxed in other
jurisdictions.
However,
critics point out that Shell is a UK-headquartered company and has been
paying more to its shareholders than it spends on renewable
investments.
The announcement has increased pressure on Rishi Sunak and Jeremy Hunt to raise more money from oil and gas profits.
A
Downing Street official said they "absolutely" understand anger at the
"extraordinary" profits but indicated there are no plans to increase the
windfall tax.
The prime minister's spokesman said questions about potential changes were "for the chancellor" when pressed by reporters.
The
government "is ready to take action" if falling wholesale energy costs
aren't reflected in lower prices at the petrol pump, the official added
without detailing specific measures.
The government is currently limiting gas and electricity bills so a household using a typical amount of energy will pay £2,500 a year.
However,
that is still more than twice what it was before Russia's invasion, and
the threshold is due to rise to £3,000 in April.
The
government's windfall tax only applies to profits made from extracting
UK oil and gas. The rate was originally set at 25%, but has now been
increased to 35%.
Oil
and gas firms also pay 30% corporation tax on their profits as well as a
supplementary 10% rate. Along with the new windfall tax, that takes
their total tax rate to 75%.
However,
companies are able to reduce the amount of tax they pay by factoring in
losses or spending on things like decommissioning North Sea oil
platforms. It has meant that in recent years, energy giants such as BP
and Shell have paid little or no tax in the UK.
'Fair share'
The
annual profit figure far surpassed Shell's previous record set in 2008.
The company also said it had paid out $6.3bn to its shareholders in the
final three months of 2022, and that it planned another $4bn share
buyback.
Shell
chief executive Wael Sawan said that these are "incredibly difficult
times - we are seeing inflation rampant around the world" but that Shell
was playing its part by investing in renewable technologies.
Its
chief financial officer Sinead Gorman added that Shell had paid $13bn
in taxes globally in 2022. It had also accounted for 11% of liquified
natural gas shipments into the EU, easing pressure on supplies caused by
sanctions on Russia.
Labour's
shadow climate change secretary Ed Miliband said: "As the British
people face an energy price hike of 40% in April, the government is
letting the fossil fuel companies making bumper profits off the hook
with their refusal to implement a proper windfall tax.
"Labour
would stop the energy price cap going up in April, because it is only
right that the companies making unexpected windfall profits from the
proceeds of war pay their fair share."
Liberal
Democrat leader Ed Davey said: "No company should be making these kind
of outrageous profits out of Putin's illegal invasion of Ukraine.
"They must tax the oil and gas companies properly and at the very least ensure that energy bills don't rise yet again in April."
TUC general secretary Paul Nowak called for ministers to impose a larger windfall tax, adding: "The time for excuses is over."
He
continued: "Instead of holding down the pay of paramedics, teachers,
firefighters and millions of other hard-pressed public servants,
ministers should be making big oil and gas pay their fair share."
This is so very wrong, how can governments keep on denying there is anything amiss? Maybe because as we are all finding out half of the MP's are shareholders in these companies.
The blog song for today is: "Anarchy in the UK" by the Sex Pistols
Jan 24, 2023broken-cfl, Lighting, Pollution, Well-Being
Compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) use 75% less energy than traditional incandescent bulbs and last about six times longer, but it’s no secret that CFLs contain a small amount of mercury (about 4 milligrams per bulb on average).
Like any glass product, CFLs tend to break occasionally, causing many homeowners to worry about potential mercury exposure and adverse health effects. So, just how dangerous is a broken CFL? Should you dig out the gas mask and Hazmat suit?
Earth911 sat down with John Rogers, a senior energy analyst for the Union of Concerned Scientists who specializes in clean energy, to get to the bottom of these pressing questions about CFL safety, cleanup, and disposal.
Oops … I Broke a CFL!
When CFLs first came out, there was a lot of news coverage about mercury in CFLs,
so an initial freak-out moment after breaking a bulb is understandable.
But clean energy expert John Rogers helped ease our minds. “This is a
manageable problem,” he assured us. “Most of the time they don’t break.
If they do break, there are procedures we follow.”
Any level of mercury exposure carries potential health concerns, but
due to the small amount of mercury and short duration of exposure, a
broken CFL is not likely to present a significant risk to you or your
family, Rogers told Earth911.
CFLs
save loads of energy when compared to incandescent light bulbs, but
they contain small amounts of mercury. Photo courtesy of Emilian Robert Vicol
“You’re talking under 5 milligrams of mercury,” he said. “That figure
won’t mean much to people, so to put it in perspective: if you think
about the mercury thermometers that I grew up with, it’s less than 1% of
the amount of mercury that was in one of those thermometers.”
Make note of the following cleanup steps in case you ever break a CFL bulb. Find the EPA’s detailed instructions here.
1. Before Cleanup
Have people and pets leave the room.
Air out the room for five to 10 minutes by opening a window or door.
Shut off the forced-air heating and cooling system, if you have one.
Collect the following materials to clean up the broken bulb: Stiff
paper or cardboard, sticky tape, damp paper towels or disposable wet
wipes (for hard surfaces), and an airtight container, such as a glass
jar with a metal lid or a resealable plastic bag.
2. During Cleanup
Do not vacuum. Vacuuming is not recommended unless
broken glass remains after all other cleanup steps have been taken, as
doing so may spread mercury-containing powder or mercury vapor.
Thoroughly scoop up glass fragments and powder using stiff paper or
cardboard. Use sticky tape, such as duct tape, to pick up any remaining
small glass fragments and powder.
Place the used tape in the glass jar or plastic bag. See detailed cleanup instructions from the EPA for more information, and for differences in cleaning up hard surfaces versus carpeting or rugs.
Place cleanup materials in a sealable container.
3. After Cleanup
Promptly place all bulb debris and cleanup materials, including any
vacuum cleaner bags used, outdoors in a trash container or protected
area until materials can be disposed of. Avoid leaving any bulb
fragments or cleanup materials indoors.
Use Earth911 to track down a recycling solution near you. CFLs are household hazardous waste and should not be disposed of with your regular garbage.
If weather and other conditions allow, continue to air out the room
where the bulb was broken and leave the heating and air conditioning
system shut off for several hours (a study conducted by the journal Science of The Total Environment found that the critical exposure period passes after four hours).
The Importance of CFL Recycling
Due to mercury content, it’s very important to dispose of CFLs properly. Whether they’re broken or not, they are hazardous waste and shouldn’t go in your regular waste bin. Some states actually ban the disposal of CFLs and other mercury-containing light bulbs in landfills. Luckily, CFL recycling
is readily available in most communities through retailer take-back
programs and local household hazardous waste (HHW) collection.
Use Earth911 Recycling Search to find a recycling solution in your ZIP code, and use caution when removing and recycling a burnt-out CFL.
The best solution is that we use [CFLs] until the end of
their life and then dispose of them in ways to capture that mercury,”
John Rogers said. “Part of what we need to do is educate people better
about the importance of recycling. That’s an easy thing we can do to
keep the mercury down to, essentially, zero.”
When it’s time to replace your old CFLs, increase your energy savings and reduce your environmental impact by choosing energy-efficient LED bulbs.
Originally published on January 11, 2013, this article was updated in January 2023.
Pin this for later!
Like all of their reports very interesting and informative. There is always a way to dispose of things properly,it is just that if it is not easy to do then I'm sorry to say that some people just cannot be bothered to take a little bit of time to do it.
The blog song for today is: "Strange Days" by the Doors
Ocean Robbins·Published November 25, 2022
· 8min read
Summary
There’s a new environmental trend in the food industry,
with a funny name: upcycling. Basically, it means taking ingredients
that would otherwise have been thrown out, and turning them into or
using them in new food products. But are upcycled foods safe? Are they
healthy? Can you actually make good food out of those scraps and
byproducts? And can it really help save the planet?
Have you ever made bread crumbs out of stale bread, and used them for
stuffing? If so, congratulations: You’re an upcycler! Ditto if you’ve
turned overripe bananas into banana bread, or vegetable scraps into soup
stock.
Your stuffing, banana bread, and soup may have been delicious, but
did you also pat yourself on the back for being environmentally
conscious and helping fight climate change? By keeping those items in your food supply, you didn’t have to buy more, and you kept them out of landfills.
While many environmental organizations focus on transportation and
energy consumption as the main contributors to climate change, the US food system is actually one of the most significant drivers of greenhouse gas emissions. So anything you can do to reduce the carbon footprint of your diet (like eating less or no meat) is a win for the planet.
Upcycling can be simple if you’re doing it in your own kitchen, but
it’s also happening at scale, in more and more industrial food settings.
Many companies are releasing upcycled food products carrying environmental claims
to address growing consumer concerns about planetary health. But
upcycling is a fairly new term when applied to food, first gaining
popularity in 2021, in the wake of increased concern for the planet that accompanied the COVID-19 pandemic.
So if you see an upcycled certification on a food item, does that
mean you should buy it? Is upcycled food good for you or the planet, or
just corporate greenwashing? And what are some ways to increase upcycling within your own home economics?
What Does Upcycled Food Mean?
Let’s start by defining the term. Upcycling basically means finding new, higher-value uses for items that would otherwise go to waste. It is distinct from recycling,
which is when something is broken down into base materials and then
turned into new products (like aluminum cans that are melted and go on
to become new aluminum cans, or plastic bottles that become fleece
fabric).
Examples
of ingredients that can be upcycled include sub-grade produce (i.e.,
bruised apples, carrots that look like horror movie monsters, and
misshapen tomatoes); scraps from food preparation (like onion skins and
potato peels); and byproducts from food processing.
The first two categories are pretty straightforward. A tomato that’s
too ugly to sell in a grocery store can still taste delicious in a sauce
or on a frozen pizza. The Ugly Company turns misshapen fruit into “Hello, I’m Ugly” dried fruit snacks.
And discarded scraps can be used as-is in formulations for soup and
sauces. But what about byproducts? What do they consist of?
Think of food products that contain ingredients that come from plants
— but aren’t the whole plant. For example, fruit juice comes from fruit
but leaves behind fiber. Tofu is made from soybeans but consists of
just curds. If you’ve ever made tofu at home, you’ve had to deal with
(toss or repurpose) the remaining fiber-rich pulp, also known as okara.
So what happens to the parts of those raw ingredients that don’t make
it into the product that ends up on the supermarket shelf? At worst,
they become garbage in a landfill. At best, until recently, maybe they
became compost for farms, ingredients for industrial processes, or feed for livestock.
But these remnants of food production can also live again as
ingredients in upcycled foods. The pulp that remains when juice is
pressed can add fiber to other foods. The okara left over from making
tofu can be turned into veggie patties and other types of faux meat.
Upcycling these byproducts can be a way to reduce food waste and help fight climate change by keeping food out of landfills.
What Does the Upcycled Certified Label Mean?
Upcycled Certified Labels from Upcycled Food Association
Driving this movement is the Upcycled Food Association
and their Upcycled Food Certified label. They award this certification
to food, beverage, and even personal care products that are made with
upcycled food ingredients. As the label gains public awareness and
acceptance, it’s hoped that consumers will embrace upcycled products by
choosing them instead of non-upcycled competitors.
Currently, there are three Upcycled Certified types: Ingredient, Product, and Minimal Content.
The “Upcycled Ingredients” label is reserved for ingredients that would
otherwise not have gone to human use or consumption, and consist of at
least 95% upcycled inputs. You probably won’t see this certification on a
consumer product; rather, companies sell these certified ingredients to
other companies to use in new products.
An example of a certified upcycled ingredient is FruitSmart,
which consists of upcycled fruit juices, purees, concentrates,
essences, fibers, seeds, seed oils, and seed powders. Another is SunOpta
(these companies apparently like sticking capital letters in the middle
of their names), which makes a powered oat protein ingredient called
OatGold from byproducts of oat milk production.
Once a product hits the market, it may be eligible for one of the
other two upcycled certified labels: Product and Minimal Content. Foods,
menu items, beverages, supplements, and pet foods, as well as cosmetic,
personal care, and household cleaning products can wear the Upcycled Certified Product label if at least 10% of their ingredients are upcycled.
You can tell which ingredients have been upcycled because they will
either be asterisked as upcycled (Bananas*) or described as such
(“upcycled bananas”) in the ingredients list.
Upcycled food examples include Chia Smash,
a jam made with superfoods and upcycled fruits, and snack foods like
Organic Banana Nubbins and Unsweetened Dried Mango sold by Imperfect Foods, using produce that would otherwise have gone to waste.
The third certification type, Minimal Content, indicates products with upcycled ingredient content of less than 10%.
Is Upcycled Food Sustainable?
So that all sounds great in theory — but does it work? Is upcycled
food truly sustainable? Well, of course, it matters to look at the
company it keeps. If a product was, say, 10% upcycled broccoli sprouts,
45% high fructose corn syrup, and 45% hydrogenated lard, and it was
shipped in a big styrofoam cooler, then with all due respect to broccoli
sprouts, you’d still have a hard time convincing me that the result was
either sustainable or healthy. But, in general, there are several
reasons to think that upcycling might be a big improvement over the
system as it currently operates.
First, organic matter in landfills releases potent greenhouse gasses,
including methane. Keeping these food ingredients out of landfills
means that we’re recycling the carbon they contain, which can help
mitigate climate chaos. In the US, at least eight states have laws requiring some reprocessing of food waste.
Second, food that’s upcycled replaces new food that would have to be grown, shipped, and processed. Decreasing food waste
decreases resource waste, including inefficient use of land and water,
and reduces carbon emissions from growing, transporting, and disposing
of food. Upcycling can allow our food system to get “more” out
of “less” by creating two or more products out of resources that
formerly produced just one.
Third, those thrown-away foods are often full of nutrients. Upcycling can harness the nutritional value of by-products that would otherwise have gone to waste.
The upcycled food certification process is still in its infancy, so
it’s hard to say what the true impact is on cutting emissions or
reducing food waste. However, the Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations concluded that if food waste were its own country
(can you imagine how hard it would be for their tourist industry to
attract visitors?), it would be the third-largest emitter of greenhouse gasses.
While buying upcycled products can contribute to reducing food waste
or combating climate chaos, it’s certainly not the only way, or even the
most impactful, to make a positive difference in the world. In fact,
the single biggest step you can take toward that goal is to adopt a more plant-based diet. That’s a powerful way to free up more food for a hungry world and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Is Upcycled Food Safe — or Healthy?
iStock.com/zoranm
Whether upcycled food is good for the planet is separate from another
issue that might be on your mind — is it safe to eat? Since upcycled
food isn’t necessarily food that would have gone to human consumption,
it’s natural to wonder if it’s safe. And if it’s technically safe, is it
healthy?
In terms of safety, upcycled certified foods should be fine. The Upcycled Certified label has premarket approval
by the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) of the US Department
of Agriculture. The FSIS provides labeling ingredients guidance and
inspection methods to protect consumers from misbranding and unsafe
food.
The FSIS also requires a third-party supply chain audit to ensure
that foods come from a verified source. In this case, verification is
performed by Where Food Comes From, which also certifies products for the Non-GMO Project, among others.
So safety, check.
But what about health? The upcycled label has nothing to say about that. It doesn’t indicate that ingredients are organic, non-GMO, or pesticide-free
(although it doesn’t preclude those attributes either). Many upcycled
foods are also processed foods with unhealthy ingredients like refined
sugar, natural flavors, and so on. Some upcycled foods may use upcycled
animal products, like Blue Circle, which makes fish-shaped fish sticks
out of upcycled salmon.
While a certified upcycled label may be an indicator of
sustainability, it’s still important to read the Nutrition Facts and
ingredient labels before purchasing these (or any other) foods.
How to Upcycle Food at Home
As we saw at the beginning of this article, whether you choose to
purchase Upcycled Certified foods or not, you can take inspiration from
the movement by upcycling your own food at home. Here’s our article on tips and tricks for utilizing food scraps.
And, here are some recipes that will make efficient and delicious use
of some of the cooking byproducts you might have been wondering what to
do with.
Upcycled Food Recipes
Have you ever been curious about what to do with leftover veggie
pulp? What about peels, stems, and various plant scraps? We have an
eco-friendly and nourishing solution — become an upcycled food master
and harness every last bit of plant power with these simple and tasty
no-waste recipes!
1. Nut Milk Pulp Granola
Nut Milk Pulp Granola is plenty crunchy, naturally sweet, and spiced
with fragrant cinnamon that creates an enticingly nutty aroma (and
flavor) while it bakes in the oven. This no-waste recipe is a tasty and
nutritious way to use up leftover pulp from homemade almond or other nut
milks. And not only is it no-waste, but there are lots of ways to
customize it (check the Chef’s Notes!).
2. Dehydrated Juice Pulp Crackers
Curious what to do with all that leftover veggie pulp after making a
big, delicious batch of fresh veggie juice? Our suggestion — make
crunchy and tasty Dehydrated Juice Pulp Crackers! Complete with
wholesome plant-based nutrition, lots of fiber, and a savory umami
flavor, these crackers are a perfect solution to your food scrap
conundrum. Plus, they make a fun (and nourishing) vehicle to scoop up a
variety of scrumptious plant-based dips!
3. Veggie Scrap Bouillon
Turn veggie peelings, ends, and pieces into something amazing with
this nutrient- and fiber-rich Veggie Scrap Bouillon. This easy-to-make
recipe requires just a handful of ingredients and a food processor to
transform vegetable scraps into a whole-food veggie paste that is ideal
for adding concentrated and robust veggie flavor (plus plenty of fiber!)
to any dish where you’d use vegetable broth.
Upcycling Food Is a Positive!
Upcycled food is an emerging trend in the food industry — and a step
towards being more environmentally responsible. The upcycled
certification label is a way for consumers to identify brands that are
committed to reducing food waste and helping to mitigate climate chaos.
But Upcycled Certified foods don’t necessarily equal healthy foods. And
buying processed foods with upcycled ingredients isn’t the only way to
put a dent in food waste. You can also take inspiration from the
movement and upcycle your own food at home with minimal processing. And
if you want to walk lighter on the Earth, one of the simplest steps you
can take is to base your diet around whole plant foods. Whether they’re
upcycled or not, that can be a great way to reduce your environmental footprint, and be part of the solution.
I would rather upcyle my own food than buy anything from the shops, but it was a really interesting article, which gave me some new ideas!
The blog song for today is: "Where do I begin?" by Shirley Bassey
If you wish your garden used
zero water, a xeriscape might be right for you. Xēros is the Greek word
for “dry.” So a xeriscape is a dry landscape. For a lot of people, the
word xeriscape evokes a harsh, barren image. But a dry landscape doesn’t
have to look dry. Even a true desert landscape can be much
softer and greener than just a scattering of cacti spiking out of a
swath of gravel or lava rock. In fact, a good xeriscape won’t always
look much different from any other garden to a casual observer. But it
will use a lot less water.
This article contains affiliate links. If you purchase an item
through one of these links, we receive a small commission that helps
fund our Recycling Directory.
Xeriscape
Xeriscaping is not an aesthetic style. Rather, it’s a water-wise
approach to maintaining a healthy garden with a minimum of supplemental
water. Ideally, a xeriscape would only require watering to help
establish new plants, during droughts, or during unusually hot and dry
weather. Whether you live in a perpetually dry climate or one with a
defined wet/dry seasonal pattern, occasional deep watering in rain-free
months will expand the available plant palette and allow for a much
lusher garden. Regardless of climate, xeriscaping relies on careful
planning and smart plant selection, supported by waterwise landscape
maintenance practices.
Complement Your Climate
The most important principle of xeriscaping is to understand your
local climate and work with, rather than against it. If you live in a
desert, most of the plants used in a traditional cottage garden will
struggle to survive even with lots of supplemental water. Instead of
fighting to grow moisture-loving plants in the desert or to keep
tropical plants alive in a dry summer climate, look for plants that match the conditions where you live.
Natives are the obvious choice, but nativars
can expand your palette. You can even look for exotics from areas with
similar climates. For example, the coastal Pacific Northwest’s rainy
winters and dry summers echo growing conditions in the Mediterranean and
New Zealand. If you truly love a particular garden style, you can still
utilize some of its design principles with locally appropriate species,
for example, planting native perennials in loosely pruned drifts to
evoke a cottage garden.
Smart Design
The principles of xeriscaping
go beyond plant selection to include design, soil care, irrigation, and
maintenance. Although your plant selection is site-specific, smart
design strategies will work in a variety of situations. Place plants
with similar requirements together so that any supplemental watering can
be concentrated in fewer areas. Hardscaping can be used to direct stormwater
to planted areas as well. Careful placement of rocks and decorative
features, as well as some plant combinations, can create windbreaks and
shading to develop microclimates that support plant growth with less
water. In most cases, it is not possible to maintain a lawn without
supplemental water. So no matter what climate you live in, xeriscaping
requires you to eliminate lawn. However, it is not always necessary to replace your entire landscape – incremental change can be the best choice.
Soil Solutions
Similar to dry gardening
and any other sustainable approach to gardening, soil health is
critical to xeriscaping. Healthy soil is capable of storing large
amounts of water for an extended period of time, eliminating the need
for supplemental irrigation. Although it’s very hard to change soil’s
texture with amendments, they can help clay or sandy soil hold water. No
matter what kind of soil you have, mulching is one of the best things you can do for your soil’s health. It also helps keep prevent evaporation from the soil.
Waterwise Maintenance
If you can’t give up your entire lawn, at least allow it to go gold
during the dry season – it will come back with the rains. If you do
need to water, do so rarely, but deeply. Saturate the soil to a depth of
inches, rather than simply wetting the surface. To water most efficiently, use soaker hoses rather than sprinklers or simply spraying from the hose.
To learn more about xeriscaping, books like the Xeriscape Handbook and Xeriscape Gardening for Starters are helpful resources. You can also check your local municipality’s website and county extension office for the specific plants and techniques that work best where you live.
This sounds really cool, I will try to give it a go! Although my hubby is better at gardening stuff than me!
The blog song for today is: " A whiter shade of pale" by Procol Harum
Dec 29, 2022bamboo, bamboo-based plastic, plant-based plastic, tableware
We’ve all heard reports about
how billions and billions of pieces of plastic are choking the world’s
oceans. If you’re worried, you’re not alone; surveys show that oceanic plastic pollution is a top consumer concern. In recent years, there has been a rise in the use of bamboo and other plant-based additives in plastics. Can these products help protect oceans and marine life?
It may seem like bamboo and other plant-based additives in plastics
are a good idea. However, research shows that they can be unsafe in
materials that come into contact with food. Using unapproved ingredients
in tableware for sale in the European Union is illegal. So now, the
European Commission and the EU Food Fraud Network are joining forces to stop the illicit import, trade, and advertising of these products.
Why are bamboo and other unapproved plant-based plastic additives banned in Europe?
Most plant-based additives, including bamboo, have not been
adequately assessed for safety in tableware. The concern is that these
additives can cause accelerated degradation of certain plastics. As a
result, substances used in the manufacture of plastic can migrate into
food. Bamboo plastic products have reportedly released large amounts of melamine and formaldehyde in some tests, exceeding what is considered safe levels.
Melamine can be toxic to the kidneys, and formaldehyde is carcinogenic. Leaching is more likely when the product comes into contact with heat or slightly acidic liquids including soda.
Although the European Commission has approved more than 900 substances
as monomers, additives, and polymer production aids in food contact
materials, plastics are being sold that contain bamboo and other
unapproved plant-based additives. Most of these products come from
China, and producers, distributors, and importers must remove these
products from the European market immediately. To date, the U.S. has
implemented no regulation of bamboo plastics, but research does expose
potential safety risks when such composite plastics are used in items intended for food contact.
Leaching of harmful chemicals is more likely when the bamboo-fiber plastic comes into contact with heat.
Are producers misleading consumers with greenwashing?
Greenwashing
involves making unsubstantiated claims that a product is more
environmentally friendly than it is. For example, there are cases where
the labels on plastic tableware containing bamboo additives indicate it
is “biodegradable,” “eco-friendly,” and “organic,” or misrepresent it as
“100% bamboo.” These claims can trick environmentally motivated
consumers into making uninformed purchases. Just because a plastic
product contains bamboo fillers doesn’t mean it is biodegradable or organic.
Although some bamboo products are inherently more sustainable, not
all products containing bamboo are green. While bamboo is fast-growing
and durable, manufacturers sometimes process it with harmful chemicals
or solvents. These products can leach into food or off-gas into the air,
creating health concerns for factory workers and consumers.
What can shoppers do to protect themselves?
Avoid plastic with bamboo and other unapproved plant-based additives
that may come into contact with food or beverages until they are
certified as safe for food or beverage use. Beware of greenwashing
when products that make claims such as “eco-friendly” or “plant-based”
yet aren’t verified as safe by a reliable third-party certification. For
example, if you want to purchase bamboo products from
sustainably-managed forests, look for Forest Stewardship Council-certified bamboo.
To reduce plastic pollution in oceans, avoid consuming single-use plastics whenever possible. When you do dispose of plastics, recycle them whenever possible. Also, participate in beach cleanup efforts, support legislation that reduces plastic production and waste, and avoid products that contain plastic microbeads.
So on the face of it (if you don't look too deeply) these other options seem great. However, I'm going to stick to"the plan" and buy less and less products that are in plastic. I am still amazed at the amount of plastic that our family has cut down on simply by a few lifestyle changes. I think that all these new alternatives, in the long run will have more disadvantages than good, and maybe we will also discover that the producers behind it are the same culprits resposible for the monster that plastic has turned out to be. We as consumers have more power than we realise. It is time to start using it.
By the way, the latest greenwashing by Coca cola is really something else, the lids to the plastic bottles are now attached with a piece of plastic to the bottle, so that the whole thing can now be disposed of responsibly. Now all they have to do is get the people to recycle it. Good luck with that, because most of us have been trying to get people to do it for years.
My advice, if you are going to change the packaging when you go shopping, stick to glass, tins and paper. The newest options have not been tried and remember what everyone thought about plastic when it appeared on the supermarket shelves (does anyone remember when that actually happened?) and look at the mess we are in now.
The blog song for today is: "Lucky You" by The Lightning Seeds
Errores: montes sucios, incendios se apagan en invierno, etc
Los montes
están sucios, los incendios se apagan en invierno o los bosques no hay
que tocarlos: respuesta de Greenpeace a algunos errores en el debate
sobre incendios.
La situación tan dramática de
incendios que estamos viviendo son resultado de muchos factores.
Nuestros montes sufren temperaturas extremas, olas de calor y del
agravamiento de los períodos de sequía fruto del cambio climático, que
tienen como resultado la sequedad de la vegetación. Aumenta la
inflamabilidad, es decir: arden más fácilmente. Estamos ante
un territorio más caliente, más seco, más inflamable y más abandonado
que sufre incendios más frecuentes y devastadores. Por tanto, es urgente
que se invierta en nuestros montes y en las actividades rurales para
conseguir paisajes más resilientes. Porque si no se gestionan lo
gestionarán las llamas de forma dramática y lo que perdemos es incalculable. Y más en un país con ¾ partes de su territorio en riesgo de desertificación (que no desierto, importante).
En estos días, se habla mucho de la importancia de limpiar
nuestros montes, de cómo ciertas posturas ecologistas no dejan tocar los
bosques y de que los incendios se apagan en invierno o de que somos
contrarios a las quemas. En este post me gustaría aclarar algunos de estos puntos:
“Hay que limpiar nuestros montes”
Se ha popularizado mucho esta
expresión pero recordemos que los bosques no son parques ni jardines y,
por lo tanto, no “están sucios”. Los ecosistemas forestales no solo
están formados por árboles sino que son ecosistemas complejos donde
también habitan especies herbáceas, matorral, arbustos, árboles muertos
en pié y ramas y troncos caídos en el suelo. Cuanta mayor es
esta diversidad biológica y estructural, más biodiversidad alberga,
mejor es el estado de conservación y mayor es su resiliencia.
Pero mientras que algunos bosques y
espacios protegidos deben ser gestionados para mantener esta complejidad
y diversidad, gran parte de nuestro paisaje forestal es producto de
muchas intervenciones humanas cuando no de su abandono. El resultado son
masas forestales poco naturales, muy alejadas de la madurez y muy
vulnerables ante plagas e incendios. Por eso, y ante el riesgo de
grandes incendios forestales, es importante establecer estrategias de
reducción de la densidad del arbolado, el matorral o el pasto en
determinados lugares para evitar el exceso y la continuidad del
combustible, de esta manera el incendio puede frenar porque no dispone
de alimento. Por eso, cuando se habla de “limpiezas”, en realidad se
habla de gestión e iniciativas como franjas de seguridad en
urbanizaciones y espacios habitados, de cortafuegos, iniciativas para
fomento de ganadería extensiva y pastoreo para reducir la carga de
combustible, del aprovechamiento de la biomasa con fines energéticos, de
la posibilidad de realizar quemas prescritas (controladas) que imiten
los incendios de baja intensidad, etc.
Greenpeace y una gran parte del
movimiento ecologista entiende la necesaria gestión forestal de gran
parte de nuestros ecosistemas forestales.
Sobre el uso del fuego
Una parte considerable de los
incendios forestales que se han declarado durante las últimas semanas
han tenido un origen natural, el rayo. Nuestros ecosistemas forestales
conocen el paso del fuego y están adaptados a un determinado régimen de
incendios naturales. Así, las especies vegetales mediterráneas han
evolucionado adoptando estrategias rebrotadoras o de germinación
post-incendio. El fuego es, pues, un modelador de nuestros paisajes. Y las comunidades rurales han
utilizado durante milenios el fuego como herramienta de gestión. Pero
hay que buscar alternativas al uso del fuego porque no se puede quemar
como se quemaba antes, ahora hay más peligro, por eso se autorizan menos
quemas.
También, el uso del fuego con
carácter preventivo (quemas prescritas) o durante el incendio (fuego
técnico), son herramientas y técnicas para reducir la biomasa y evitar
un comportamiento más virulento del fuego. En este sentido, esta técnica
solo puede ser ejecutada por personal experto formado para reducir
carga combustible generando estructuras de vegetación y poder predecir
el comportamiento de los incendios forestales (modelos de combustible
forestal). También se usa el fuego para extinguir el incendio
(contrafuego).
“Los incendios se apagan en invierno”
“Los incendios se apagan en invierno”
es una expresión que se ha utilizado para incidir en que no basta solo
los esfuerzos en la extinción de incendios, sino que hay que abundar en
políticas de prevención de incendios durante todo el año y la necesidad
de tener profesionales trabajando durante todo el año en los montes. Si
quisiéramos hablar de ausencia de prevención, sería más apropiado decir
que la falta gestión del monte español es un problema estructural que se
ha producido tras el abandono del medio rural durante la mitad del
siglo XX.
Los incendios se apagan cuando se producen, es decir, durante todo el año.
Cada vez más, los incendios forestales son un problema que afecta
durante gran parte del año y en todos los territorios. No solo en
verano, hay incendios en otoño, invierno y primavera;
en invierno y primavera en la montaña cantábrica y zona noroeste,
aunque no son tan mediáticos; y hay incendios en verano en gran parte
del territorio ibérico, incendios que debido a las condiciones
ambientales y meteorológicas adversas suelen derivar en grandes
incendios forestales que producen mucha mayor alarma social e interés
mediático.
“La única solución es repoblar”
Nuestro paisaje ha sufrido con los
cambios demográficos: el abandono del medio rural, de cultivos, falta
del aprovechamiento de recursos forestales, falta de gestión forestal,
etc que ha supuesto un aumento de la superficie forestal en España en casi 4 millones de hectáreas (1962 a 2019).
Estas hectáreas no suman como bosque sino que contribuyen a una masa
vulnerable, continuada, no gestionada, más inflamable que favorece la
propagación de grandes incendios forestales.
Como resultado, España es el tercer país de la UE en superficie forestal después de Suecia y Finlandia).
A pesar de que es cierto que los
bosques y los árboles son un elemento necesario para combatir el cambio
climático y mitigar sus peores impactos, la solución no es plantar
árboles ni sembrar semillas de manera masiva sin criterios claros (como
muchas iniciativas que surgen y que así justifican actividades muy
contaminantes) . Es necesario focalizar nuestras actuaciones en la
importancia de una gestión forestal de masas existentes, una
planificación de actuaciones, criterios definidos de selección de
especie (climáticos, edafológicos, orientación, etc.), de otra manera
contribuirán más al problema al sumar combustible para el fuego.
Entonces, ¿cuáles son las medidas urgentes cuando se extingue el incendio?
Tras el drama de un incendio forestal, nos surge la necesidad de restablecer la masa forestal lo antes posible, con muchas peticiones de replantar la zona quemada, sin embargo no es la primera medida que tenemos que tomar. Las primeras actuaciones de emergencia serán frenar los procesos erosivos actuales,
controlar las posibles avenidas y favorecer la regeneración natural de
la cubierta vegetal. También realizar construcciones provisionales en
arroyos, ríos, lagunas para evitar que los sedimentos. Otra actuación de
emergencia es la saca de la madera quemada
para evitar riesgo de propagación de plagas y enfermedades en
plantaciones forestales, teniendo en cuenta que la extracción no sea por
arrastre de troncos para evitar erosionar el suelo yno dañar la
regeneración natural. Posteriormente, se observará la capacidad
regeneradora de la zona afectada y se establecerán las actuaciones
precisas para recuperar la masa forestal (repoblación, siembras,
seguimiento de la regeneración natural, acotado de ganado). Recordemos
que el fuego es un elemento natural que forma parte de los fenómenos que
modelan el paisaje, especialmente en el área mediterránea. Por ello,
gran parte de las especies vegetales del área mediterránea tienen algún
tipo de adaptación al fuego Conociendo las adaptaciones de la vegetación
es importante esperar a repoblar para ver cómo evoluciona la superficie
quemada. Dar tiempo para ver cómo se abre paso la regeneración natural
de las especies con las estrategias que comentábamos antes.
Por otro lado, importante, si no se pide voluntariado tras un
incendio, no promover ni apoyar la salida de voluntariado a zonas
recientemente quemadas, porque se interferirá en las medidas urgentes de
protección de suelo y en las investigaciones en terreno sobre las
causas del incendio.
Entonces, ¿Qué propone Greenpeace?
Sí, el cambio climático agrava los
incendios forestales y es urgente reducir las emisiones para no superar
1,5 ºC, ya estamos viendo sus impactos. Impactos que sufren nuestros
bosques por lo que hay que gestionarlos de forma prioritaria.
En el escenario donde transcurre el
fuego, no podemos cambiar topografía, ni meteorología pero sí hacer
actuaciones en el paisaje para evitar estos días dramáticos. Incendios
va a ver pero no pueden llegar a este nivel. Por tanto, los incendios forestales se previenen y apagan cuando se negocian los presupuestos,
momento en el que se ve el interés real por implantar políticas de
gestión forestal y dinamización del medio rural que vayan más allá de
las políticas de extinción del fuego. Urge priorizar recursos
económicos para incentivar la economía rural de los pueblos, fomentando
actividades que generen paisajes fragmentados (mosaico) que ayuden a reducir el riesgo de propagación de grandes incendios forestales.
Los mundos rurales, nuestros pueblos y su actividad productiva
sostenible, son clave para nuestra supervivencia y la de nuestros
bosques. Apoyar los productos
rurales sostenibles de cercanía se traduce en el fortalecimiento del
medio rural, la fijación de población y, por tanto, en la mitigación de
la emergencia climática y la pérdida de biodiversidad que estos días
asolan nuestros bosques.
En este informe Informe Proteger el medio rural es protegernos del fuego. Hacia paisajes y población resilientes frente a la crisis climática» puedes ver las demandas.
Relativo a la España vaciada (despoblación rural)
Relacionadas con el sector primario
Relacionadas con la prevención de incendios forestales.
Relacionadas con el fomento del consumo de productos rurales.
Ingeniera
Técnica Forestal por la Universidad de Valladolid. Máster en Gestión de
Residuos (Instituto de Investigaciones Ecológicas). Diploma
universitario como Experta en Igualdad por la UNED. Responsable de
campañas del Área de Biodiversidad de Greenpeace España Twitter:
@MonicaParrill
Muy bueno este info.
El cancion de hoy este: " Have a cigar" de Pink Floyd
Ali
Hussein Juloud lives with his family in a town about 30 miles west of
Basra, inside the boundaries of one of the world’s largest oil fields.
Ali,
who spoke to BBC reporters in Iraq, is 19. He is thin and delicately
built. He wears a face mask most of the time when out and about, both to
protect his weakened immune system from the ongoing pandemic and to
give him some kind of shield from the pollution that surrounds him.
Ali Hussein Juloud in his living room in Rumaila. Photo: Jess Kelly / BBC
He
has recovered from leukaemia, which he and his family attribute to the
pollution from the oil industry they live alongside. The BBC filmed him
with friends in Basra, as he showed them photos from his time in
hospital.
“That's in Iran, look. This is after the chemo - I lost my eyebrows.”
“Even your eyebrows fell out?” a friend asked.
“Yes.” He flicked to the next picture, then another.
“This was when I played football for Zubair before I got sick. Here I was sick. I was so weak.”
“Look how much you've changed.”
Ali’s
home town of Rumaila shares a name with one of the world’s largest oil
fields. His neighbourhood is filled with speedily constructed
single-storey homes and businesses. Half the area is known locally as
“shadow town”, due to the intermittent supply of electricity. The air is
often thick with a blend of desert sand and fumes from the nearby oil
wells.
Rumaila, the oil field, produces the equivalent of
1.45 million barrels of oil a day (boe/d) — about a third of Iraq’s
total oil production — and holds estimated reserves of 17 billion
barrels. Driving from one end of the field to the other takes about
three hours, excluding time spent waiting at checkpoints guarded by
armed militias.
BP became the lead contractor at Rumaila
field in 2009. Some oil contracts entitle companies to a percentage of
all the money generated by a field. This is not the case in Iraq, where
BP is instead paid a fee by the government each year, which BP takes as
allocations of oil. BP still makes hundreds of millions of dollars from
Rumaila — in 2020 its post-tax profit from the field was $358m.
It
boasts on its website of its long history in Iraq and talks of “helping
to lay the foundations for long-term success” in the country. What it
does not mention is that gas flaring at Rumaila is staggeringly high,
despite repeated promises to fix the issue.
What is gas flaring?
In
much of the world, gas produced during oil production would be
processed and then used for power generation, or reinjected to force
more oil out of the ground. But in some places, a lack of infrastructure
means this gas has nowhere to go and so is set alight or vented into
the atmosphere. In Iraq, a country impoverished by conflict, the vast
majority of gas produced during oil production is flared.
On
a global scale, flaring is a major source of methane, a superheating
greenhouse gas 84 times more potent than carbon dioxide during its first
20 years in the atmosphere. Cutting methane emissions is seen as an
effective way to prevent runaway global warming.
President Biden has described stopping methane leaks and flaring as a way of “addressing two problems at once”
— hitting global warming and easing the current global energy crisis.
Methane is the main component of natural gas, a key energy source.
There
is no official, publicly available record of gas flaring at Rumaila.
That’s also true for the rest of Iraq’s oil infrastructure.
The
World Bank, as part of an effort to track worldwide flaring, uses data
from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which has
heat-detecting satellites that measure fires from lit flare stacks. Unearthed analysed the World Bank's figures and cross-checked them with independent organisations.
Rumaila flared 3.39 billion cubic metres (bcm) of gas last year, emitting 9.5 million tonnes of CO2e, according to our analysis of World Bank data.
BP’s
share of flaring emissions from Rumaila — based on its participating
interest in the field’s operating company of 47.6% — stood at 4.52m
tonnes CO2e in 2021. That’s close to double the emissions caused by
flaring from the entire UK oil industry the same year. It’s also
comparable to the annual emissions of over 970,000 petrol cars.
BP
claims to be making progress reducing flaring and has pledged to stop
the practice for everything but emergencies by 2030. But Unearthed
has learned that the company does not include Rumaila in its annual
flaring emissions figures because it classifies Rumaila as a
non-operated asset.
While
the field is owned by the state-owned Basra Oil Company, until June
2022 the field’s official operator was the Rumaila Operating
Organisation (ROO). ROO and BP were closely connected: BP held a 47.6%
participating interest in the company and the company counted several
current and former BP staffers among its senior team. This summer, a
company established and owned by BP and PetroChina, the Basra Energy Company, began to manage the field. Unearthed understands
that BP is the primary contact point with the Iraqi state about matters
related to the field, and workers at the field told the BBC that BP
called the shots at the project.
BP argues that as it is not
technically the operator of Rumaila, it does not have to include
Rumaila’s emissions in its annual climate impact reports. The company
pointed out to Unearthed that this stance is “in line with
standard practice across the oil and gas industry” and follows emissions
reporting guidelines drawn up by Ipieca, an industry trade body. If it
did count Rumaila, BP’s worldwide flaring emissions for 2021 would be
doubled.
A BP spokesperson said: “BP does not have any
ownership interest in the Rumaila field, or any right to the oil it
produces, and has never been its operator. Its flaring and operational
data are therefore not included in our reporting.”
Some
industry observers argue that the current rules on reporting emissions
leave investors with an incomplete picture of a company’s climate
impact.
Dominic Watson from the Environmental Defense Fund told Unearthed:
“The outdated industry practice of reporting revenue — but not climate
pollution — from joint venture assets is no longer acceptable. It’s time
that all companies extend their emissions reduction targets,
strategies, and reporting to 100% of their production volumes.”
Flaring expert and founder of Capterio Mark Davis
said: “Today’s reporting convention — which excludes flaring from
‘non-operated’ assets — limits the visibility into the actual emissions
associated with companies, meaning that investors are partly blindsided
about the full scale of greenhouse gas impact of their activities.”
BP’s global flaring emission figures for 2021 would double if they included Rumaila
BP’s declared emissions from flaring across its operated assets
4.04 million CO2e
What BP’s emissions would be if they included flaring emissions from Rumaila, based on its stake in the field’s operator
8.56 million CO2e
This
investigation also learned, via internal documents and leaked
materials, that flaring remains high at Rumaila despite BP signing
commitments to limit it.
A leaked internal ROO document
obtained by the BBC, signed by a senior BP official, stated that the
company would “take account of the need to design an efficient flare
system”.
The same document, dated 2013, pledged the firm
would take action to minimise flaring and venting and committed to
limiting emissions from flaring to less than 10,000 tonnes CO2e a year —
many times lower than actual flaring emissions from the field.
Iraq’s
oil minister Ihsan Abdul-Jabbar Ismail told the BBC: “We instructed all
the contracted companies operating in the oil fields to uphold
international standards and reduce methane emissions. The Western
companies should respect these standards more than most.”
In
a statement, BP said: “Flaring of the gas that is produced alongside
oil at Rumaila is a significant challenge that ROO is taking steps to
address. Progress has been made in recent years.”
This issue
is bigger than BP. There are other fields where, owing to this
“non-operated” loophole, international oil companies can earn hundreds
of millions of dollars without declaring the related emissions to their
shareholders or the wider public.
‘Poisonous gases’
Flaring
has been a feature of the Iraqi oil industry for decades but ramped up
when foreign companies re-entered the country after the 2003 invasion
and began increasing production.
Despite the country's
abundant fossil fuel reserves, most Iraqis struggle with power cuts and
the country is heavily dependent on neighbouring Iran for electricity
generation.
While
in southern Iraq, the BBC saw flare stacks at multiple oilfields
emitting black smoke. Experts said this indicates inefficient and highly
polluting flaring.
With the help of open-source specialists McKenzie Intelligence Services, Unearthed was
able to confirm that the facility shown in the video is a gas
compression station in north Rumaila. Active flares emitting thick
plumes of black smoke can be seen in satellite images at the site on
several days in 2022, meaning the scene in the video is by no means a
one-off event.
“Instead
of burning this gas it could be captured and used to power our homes,
like in other countries,” argued Dr Shukri Al-Hassen, an Iraqi
environmental scientist.
“Investing in this gas could be
worth billions a year to Iraq and would put an end to endless power cuts
we experience here, especially in summer when temperatures in Basra
exceed 50C.”
International organisations such as the World Bank have invested millions
in trying to help Iraq make better use of its gas. The government has
committed on several occasions to end “routine flaring” — or flaring in
non-emergency circumstances — and has signed up to a World Bank plan to
stop the practice, alongside several oil companies, including BP. No
progress has been made and today Iraq is the second highest flarer in
the world, behind Russia.
For people living near oil fields,
flaring creates intense levels of pollution, which locals link to
serious health problems, including cancer.
Iraqi
law states that oil and gas infrastructure, including flare stacks, can
only be established at least 10km from residential areas.
But satellite imagery shows many flare stacks dotted around the town within a 5km range of residential areas.
The
proximity of the flares to where people live becomes even more obvious
when you look at the area at night and focus on heat sources.
‘Nobody speaks out'
Flaring
gas produces dangerous chemicals known as volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), including benzene, a carcinogen also found in cigarettes.
It’s
partly for public health reasons that flaring is restricted in richer
parts of the world. Just five days of unplanned flaring at an
ExxonMobil-owned chemical plant in Scotland in April 2019 triggered national news coverage and a report by the local NHS health board.
Luay Al-Khateeb, Iraq’s former oil minister, told Unearthed that there is a belief that flaring is linked to health problems in southern Iraq.
“There's
a link, definitely. As for the awareness, there's very little. The link
is clear. You're talking about poisonous gases being flared in the
air,” he said.
“These particles and so on are penetrating
our lungs and our bodies… quite frequently when I monitor the local
news, it's clear the number of cancer cases in the south are on the
rise. The reason for that, I think, is because of the unregulated oil
operations.”
Ali, the teenage leukaemia survivor in Rumaila,
told the BBC: “We have many leukaemia cases in the area, and deaths.
But here in Rumaila, nobody speaks out.”
Dr Shukri
al-Hassen, the environmental scientist, said that in Basra and
surrounding communities, cancer is so common that it is “like the flu”.
There
is a lack of public information on cancer cases in southern Iraq and a
near-complete absence of environmental data. Poor diet, high smoking
rates, traffic, and even depleted uranium
left from munitions from both Gulf wars have all been suggested as
possible causes for high cancer rates in southern Iraq, though there is a
lack of clear evidence to support these connections. The Iraqi
government is understood to be sensitive to any suggestion that
pollution caused by flaring could be linked to health problems.
The
BBC obtained a confidential report from the Iraqi health ministry that
blames pollution from the oil industry, as well as other sources, for a
20% rise in cancer in Basra between 2015 and 2018. The report has never
been made public. A second leaked document, seen by the BBC, from the
local government in Basra shows that cancer cases in the region are
three times higher than figures published in the official nationwide
cancer registry.
Fatima
Fatima’s life became dominated by hospital visits as her condition worsened. Photo: Jess Kelly / BBC
Fatima Falah Najem and her family live close to Rumaila on another of Iraq’s large oil fields, Zubair.
Fatima's
home is surrounded by flare stacks — some less than 3km away, despite a
provision in Iraqi law stating that flare stacks should be a minimum of
10km from residential areas.
Italian oil giant Eni holds a
41% interest in Zubair, according to oil industry analysts. Eni argues
that it is technically a contractor for the Iraqi government, rather
than a joint owner or operator of the field. The company states that it
has no responsibility for flaring at Zubair, which falls on the field’s
owner, state oil firm the Basra Oil Company.
The
BBC met Fatima in the Basra Cancer Children’s Hospital in the summer of
2021. From her bed, the 13-year-old explained that she had been
diagnosed with leukaemia in 2020 and later lost the use of her legs.
Since
her diagnosis, her life had been dominated by trips to the hospital. By
summer 2021, her condition had deteriorated to the extent that she
needed to travel abroad for further care. Many cancer treatments are not
available in Iraq, meaning patients have to go to countries like India,
Turkey, or Iran.
“Fatima Falah is a star,” her doctor
Hossam Mahmood Salih told the BBC. “Right now chemo is no longer enough.
She needs a bone marrow transplant. Without this operation, it will be
difficult for her to get better. She needs to find a donor and they need
to be a 100% match.” He hoped that one of her brothers or sisters would
be a suitable match.
Sat on the edge of her bed, Fatima was
calm, stoic even, but became quiet as her doctor explained the next
phase of her treatment. “You’re responding well, don’t worry. Your news
is good,” he reassured her as she fought back tears, then buried her
face in his side as he patted her shoulder.
Later, propped
up in bed, a sketch pad in front of her, she painted a picture of her
family’s home. “These are the fiery flares, we can see them from our
farm. Smoke comes off them,” she said.
“I've drawn a bit of
the flare. I like to see them. This isn’t too bad. Let me just finish
and I'll show you,” she held up her painting, a house complete with
bright orange flames in the background.
Fatima shows a painting of her home surrounded by gas flares. Photo: BBC
Pollution monitoring
Frustrated
by the lack of publicly available data and determined to get an insight
into how ordinary people might be being affected by flaring pollution,
the BBC carried out its own pollution monitoring in communities near oil
fields in southern Iraq, with advice from independent scientists and
the Greenpeace Science Unit. Samples were analysed by independent labs
in the UK and Europe.
In January 2022, the BBC placed
passive diffusion tubes in 13 locations around Basra in areas between
100 metres and 6km from the nearest gas flare, to sample for VOCs,
including benzene, for a period of two weeks. This sampling followed a
method approved by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The
monitoring found high levels of benzene in all 13 locations, ranging
from 2.7 micrograms per metre cubed of air (µg/m3) to 9.7µg/m3. The
World Health Organisation states there is no safe level of benzene
exposure, while the Iraqi government sets a legal limit of an annual
average of 3µg/m3 benzene.
This limit was reached or
exceeded by monitoring in four sites near oil fields, including Rumaila,
Qurna, and two locations in Nahran Omar.
Urine samples were
also taken from 52 Iraqi children living near gas flares at different
oil fields in southern Iraq. The decision was made to monitor children
because they are less likely than adults to be exposed to other sources
of pollution such as smoking or industrial work.
The samples
were analysed at a toxicology lab in Belgium for Polycyclic Aromatic
Hydrocarbons (PAHs). This analysis measured the levels of the chemical
2-Naphthol (2-NAP), which is a metabolite of naphthalene. Naphthalene is
released during the burning of fossil fuels.
2-NAP is
associated with damaging health effects and is classed as a possible
carcinogen. Peer reviewed research — including a study published by Columbia University
— suggests that high levels of 2-NAP may lead to health problems
including chromosomal aberrations, indicating an increased risk of
cancer. In the Columbia paper, high levels were deemed to be those above
5.8µg/m3.
High
levels of benzene were found from air pollution across southern Iraq.
While urine sampling revealed that many children had high levels of
2-NAP in their bodies.
These
sampling efforts represent a snapshot: the air pollution monitoring
results are from two weeks of sampling in January, and the figures
represent an average of that period. There may have been days where
pollution was higher or lower, and pollution levels often change with
weather conditions and seasons.
It’s also possible that the
sampling picked up benzene from other sources, such as cigarette smoke
or passing cars. However, most of the locations chosen were rural and
far from busy roads, while the highest levels of benzene were found
closest to a flare stack.
It’s likely that at certain times
and in certain places around the oil fields, concentrations of benzene
are even higher than these results. These measurements were taken in
residential areas, ranging from 150m (in Nahran Omar) to 10km, or six
miles, away from the nearest flare. Monitoring by regulators in
countries like the US usually takes place at the fenceline of the oil
and gas facility.
Frank Kelly, an air pollution expert and
professor at Imperial College London, told the BBC: “I just look at the
benzene data and we're seeing values from 1.3 up to 9.6µg/m³ and
immediately that causes some worry to me. The World Health Organisation
has said that there is no safe level of benzene, no safe level at all.”
Kelly
noted that “longer term exposure has been linked to the development of
certain cancers, such as acute myeloid leukaemia”. He warned that
long-term exposure to pollution at this level would be extremely
damaging to children’s health and called for more monitoring, describing
the BBC’s work as “strong pilot data”.
Manuela
Orjuela-Grimm, assistant professor of epidemiology and paediatrics at
Columbia University in New York, who led the research on the previously
mentioned study, also said the urine sampling should be used as a
starting point for more monitoring.
“The children have
strikingly high levels of metabolites of PAHs in their urine. That’s
certainly concerning for their own health and suggests that they should
be monitored.”
When questioned over these findings by the
BBC, Iraq’s oil minister, Ihsan Abdul-Jabbar Ismail, claimed levels of
benzene were high “because of the types of engines in cars” in southern
Iraq.
He added: "Yes, the use of hydrocarbons is part of the
problem, because we have more than seven million cars but it does not
constitute the largest part.”
The minister also said that in
2017, Basra’s health department was commissioned by an unidentified
Iraqi oil company to look at the reasons for the increase in cancer in
some areas in Basra. This report “concluded that oil extraction has
nothing to do with the increase in cancer rates”, he said. The oil
ministry refused the BBC’s request to see the report.
Asked
about benzene levels at Rumaila specifically, Ismail said: “BP is
responsible for all environmental and health measures in this field. We
will request a report on this subject to confirm the percentage of
benzene.
“If this really poses a risk, then BP, the British
oil company, is responsible for managing this issue, and I will
investigate the matter.”
In
response to these findings, a spokesperson for BP said: “We are
extremely concerned by the issues raised by the BBC — we will
immediately review those concerns and work with our partners on any
necessary interventions. We are fully committed to supporting further
improvements at this vitally important field for Iraq.”
A
spokesperson for Eni said: “Eni monitors its activities in line with
best practices, and continues to be a major investor in wider healthcare
system improvement across Iraq. Eni strongly rejects the links that you
are making between its responsibilities as a contractor in the work you
are doing to assess the impact of flaring on human health.”
The
spokesperson added that Eni conducts its own air testing “related to
its strict area of operations”; its most recent survey, in November
2021, recorded levels “within acceptable ranges”.
Hidden emissions
At
Zubair, where Fatima and her family live, last year, 2.61 billion cubic
metres of gas was flared, according to our analysis, leading to
emissions of 7.31m tonnes CO2e, a significant rise on the previous year.
If
you took Eni’s 41% interest in Zubair to mean it is accountable for 41%
of the field’s emissions, its share of flaring emissions from the field
would stand at 3m tonnes CO2e in 2021.
Like BP, Eni counts
its Iraqi asset as non-operated, meaning it is excluded from the
company’s annual climate reports showing flaring emissions.
Eni’s
self-declared flaring emissions for 2021 for all its operations
worldwide stood at 7.14m tonnes CO2e. That means that if Eni had
included Zubair in its final flaring figures, the company’s annual
emissions from flaring would have increased by over 40%, according to
our analysis.
Eni has boasted in the past about its efforts to “improve the use of associate gas” at its project in Iraq.
In
response to this story, Eni stated that as it is not the operator of
Zubair and has no responsibility for the high levels of flaring at the
field. A company spokesperson said: “Eni’s declared flaring figure does
not include emissions from Zubair, according with international
accounting rules and in line with technical service agreement.
Responsibility for flaring is assigned to BOC (Basra Oil Company).”
Eni, BP and the Iraqi government are all signed up to an initiative by the World Bank
to eliminate routine flaring by 2030, an effort to address climate
change and “advance the sustainable development of producing countries”.
In BP's latest submission
to the initiative, the company stated that just 3% of its flaring in
2020 was routine, a number that would be blown out of the water if
Rumaila — where virtually all flaring is routine — was included.
A
spokesperson from the World Bank acknowledged that its Zero Routine
Flaring commitment does not include non-operated gas flaring. A
statement from the organisation read: “All parties involved in oil
production are encouraged to use their expertise and resources to
eliminate routine flaring at all sites, whether or not they operate
those sites”. The organisation also acknowledged that contractual
arrangements may mean that companies do not have direct control or
rights over associated gas at some fields.
BP has committed
to reach net zero emissions by 2050. As part of that it has pledged to
eliminate routine flaring by 2030 and install methane monitoring “at all
existing major oil and gas processing sites by 2023, publish the data
and then drive a 50% reduction in methane intensity of our operations”.
The company’s work in Iraq is not included in these commitments.
Mark
Davis from Capterio said: “Investors are increasingly realising that
companies should be striving for the same reporting and operational
standards across all their assets, and should be promoting greater
transparency.”
Companies signed up to the UN-backed Oil and
Gas Methane Partnership (OGMP), which includes BP, will have to report
non-operated flaring by 2025. Unearthed has learned that Rumaila will not be included in this disclosure.
Shell in Oman
It
is not uncommon for major oil companies to partner with firms owned by
national governments. Shell has a 34% stake in Petroleum Development
Oman (PDO), which is owned by the Omani government. Last year, PDO
fields in Oman flared 1.15bcm of gas, leading to 3.22m tonnes CO2e.
Shell’s
flaring across all its operated assets worldwide led to emissions of
4.5m tonnes CO2e last year. If a share of PDO’s flaring equivalent to
Shell’s stake were included in its numbers, its flaring numbers would
increase by 24%.
Unlike some of its rivals, Shell does record emissions from non-operated assets in its climate reporting, Unearthed understands,
but only as a total figure showing scope 1 and 2 emissions from for all
its non-operated assets worldwide. It provides no detail on which
emissions come from flaring or from other types of activities, and
offers no information about where in the world the emissions were
released.
Dominic Watson from the Environmental Defense Fund, an organisation that has published research
on emissions reporting, said: “Methane emissions and flaring from
non-operated joint ventures are an enormous climate shortcoming across
the global oil and gas industry, as over half of supermajor oil and gas
production stems from non-operated assets, many of which are run by
state-owned enterprises.”
He added that oil majors had
“largely failed in both convincing many of their joint venture partners
that methane and flaring are critical climate and business issues to be
addressed, and equipping them with the technical and financial resources
to address this challenge.”
A giant methane plume
In
2011, Shell struck a deal with the Iraqi government to collect gas from
Rumaila, Zubair, and West Qurna 1. The company formed a joint venture —
alongside Japanese firm Mitsubishi and an Iraqi company — called the
Basra Gas Company (BGC). BGC was supposed to revolutionise the Iraqi oil
industry, but the firm has struggled and flaring has remained high.
On
27 and 28 October 2020, a giant plume of methane measuring 120 tonnes
an hour was detected emanating from a gas compression facility run by
BGC.
To put that in context, if that level of emission
continued for a year, the methane coming from that single facility would
be equivalent to about half of all anthropogenic methane emissions from
the UK.
The discovery was made by scientists at the SRON Netherlands Institute for Space Research, using cutting-edge satellite technology, and shared with Unearthed and the BBC.
The
plume was not the only one SRON spotted, though it was the largest. In
2020 and 2021, the scientists spotted eight further “super-emissions”,
measuring at least five tonnes per hour — even though efforts to detect
emissions were hampered by the thick black smoke from flaring that coats
much of southern Iraq.
“The methane is just pouring out and
that’s incredible,” said Ilse Aben, a senior scientist at SRON,
discussing the October emission. “Particularly because these emissions
are avoidable.”
A spokesperson for Shell, referring to the major plume in October 2020, said the company “believesthat
the operator, BGC, is aware of the issue with its venting flare system
and is deploying operating controls to reduce methane emissions… Its
business plans include other projects focused on flare system upgrades
and repairs to further reduce venting and fugitive emissions.”
They
argued that the emission in October 2020 was exceptional and that new
technology, such as infrared cameras to alert the company of methane
leaks, was being installed to prevent such incidents in future.
‘What is the solution? What can we do?’
Hasan,
Fatima’s father, seen here with one his daughters, has seen the area
around his farm become ever more dominated by the oil industry. Photo:
BBC
Fatima died on 8 November 2021.
“Whenever
we asked her what she wanted, she said she just wanted to get better,”
her mother, Iman, told the BBC. “Every time I look at her pictures I
cry.
“She spent her last moments in the ICU. That’s where
she died. They took her there in the evening and I was the only one who
stayed with her in the room.”
Iman continued: “I was hugging her and then I saw that her heart monitor had stopped. It dropped off and her heart stopped.
“She
told the doctor she had pain in her heart, he comforted her and told
her not to worry. I wanted to turn her on her side but she said her
heart hurt and she could only lie on her back. Somebody came and helped
her pray to ease the pain."
Fatima’s mother and father,
Hasan, looked drained by grief; her siblings forlorn and prematurely
aged. Their home is filled with her belongings: her toys, drawings, and
clothes, including those that she was wearing when she died.
Later
the family learned from monitoring carried out by the BBC that high
levels of 2-NAP were found in the urine of children living in Zubair.
Again,
the results are a snapshot. Levels may change day by day. The only way
to know more is to do more monitoring. High levels of 2-NAP in childhood
means an increased risk of health problems — such as forms of cancer —
later in life, but such outcomes are not certain.
“What is
the solution?” asked Hasan, when he saw the results. “What can we do? We
are aware, we all know that the smoke and oil is harmful but what is
the solution?”
‘What have the Iraqi people got out of oil?’
Iraq is one of the world’s most vulnerable countries to climate change.
Temperatures
in Basra and other cities now regularly approach 50C in the summer.
Water scarcity and the loss of farmland to desertification are real
concerns. Diversifying the economy is another challenge — 99% of the
country’s export revenue came from oil in the last decade.
Azzam
Alwash is the climate and environment adviser to Barham Salih, Iraq's
president. He claims that he is one of just a handful of people in
government who understand the risks of climate change.
“The
flaring has increased because we don't have the capacity to capture the
associated gas. I've been told that we're burning something like $100m
worth of gas every day,” he said.
“What have the Iraqi
people got out of oil? They've got a war with Iran, years of sanctions,
more war, instability... we haven’t got shit from oil. In 1960, our
economy was the same size as South Korea. Look at South Korea today and
look at Iraq, and South Korea does not have a drop of oil.”
Iraqi
law suggests that those affected by pollution from flaring could be
entitled to compensation. Air quality legislation passed in 2012 states:
“the owner of a source of emissions causing pollution to ambient air
conditions shall bear the cost of damages to the environment and health
or costs of removing the pollution source and compensating the
aggrieved, if it was proved that pollution emitted from the source
exceeded specifications.”
People the BBC spoke with in
Rumaila and Zubair said they had never received an offer of compensation
from oil companies for the health problems they believe are due to the
oil operations they live alongside.
“After I recovered I
tried many times to get the companies to compensate me due to the fact I
got sick because of the oil,” Ali told the BBC. “My father went to BP,
but unfortunately I never got a response.”
Responding to this, BP informed Unearthed that
the Rumaila Operating Organisation has long-standing procedures in
place to receive and manage concerns or complaints from communities. BP
also highlighted ROO’s work with the local community, which includes
road building and the funding of community health clinics.
Eni
rejected the suggestion that it might be liable to pay compensation to
people who feel they have been affected by gas flaring from Zubair. A
spokesperson said the terms of the company’s contract in Iraq
“explicitly state that we do not have control of the strategy for the
field, or the responsibility for flaring, flaring reduction projects or
community compensation, all of which sit with BOC.”
The
company is aiming to improve Iraq’s health system, the spokesperson
added, including investing $32m in cancer diagnostics in Basra and
separate support for the Basra Cancer Children’s Hospital.
Back
in Rumaila, Ali likes to spend his free time gardening. He’s been able
to grow a palm tree in his backyard. He hopes to grow a white mulberry
tree too.
He runs his own shop in town, which has become a
hang-out spot for local kids. He’s made a life for himself, even if he
feels stuck in Rumaila. His illness interrupted his education at a
crucial stage.
His younger nephew Abbas follows him everywhere, accompanying him when he travels around his hometown on his moped.
“I’ve
parked here to look at this view that we’ve got so used to,” he pointed
out the flare stacks as he filmed on his phone. “These are the houses
of Rumaila. Look at all the smoke and the gases. It’s all coming towards
our neighbourhood.”
“I hope in the future that these companies go away,” he said later. “That the emissions stop, so children can live in peace.
Thought provoking report wouldn't you say? There is always more than meets the eye to any of these wars and problems that are happening in the middle east. Unfortunately,money seems to be always at the bottom of it. Those people are being shafted by their own government and the big oil companies, but then again that could be said for the rest of the world too.
The blog song for today is: "Tell all the people" by the Doors
