Podcast: Download (Duration: 23:36 — 32.4MB)
The Headlines:
Greenpeace activists break into Swedish nuclear plant
Sea Shepherd scuba divers free tons of tuna
Roundup resistant weeds could force farmers to use harsh herbicides again
Monsanto wins Supreme Court case lifting ban on genetically modified alfalfa
British newspaper apologizes to climate scientist
The Details:
Greenpeace activists break into Swedish nuclear plant
50 Greenpeace activists in Sweden broke into the Forsmark Nuclear Plant two weeks ago to make a statement to the Swedish parliament’s vote on June 17th against the building of nuclear reactors. The activists were dressed up as brightly colored renewable energy sources wind, water and sun. The police were called and 29 activists were arrested. Of those arrested, 27 of them will be tried in court for illegal trespassing.
On June 17th, the Swedish government voted to allow the building of new nuclear reactors to replace the current reactors when their life spans run out. “With a narrow majority, the members of parliament show they do not take the environmental risks posed by nuclear power seriously, and that they do not trust in the enormous potential there is for Swedish renewable energy,” Greenpeace spokesman Ludvig Tillman said in a statement.
In February 2009, the Swedish government announced it was going to reverse a 1980 decision to phase out its 12 nuclear reactors by 2010. Since 1999, 10 reactors have remained in use at three power plants and account for about half of Sweden’s electricity production.
Sea Shepherd scuba divers free tons of tuna
Marine wildlife activists from the Sea Shepherd group made popular by their Discovery network reality show “Whale Wars” have cut the nets on an undersea cage and released hundreds of bluefin tuna fish off the North African coast.
About 42 miles off the coast of Libya, the Sea Shepherd activists liberated the Bluefin Tuna fish from the grasp of Maltese fishing boats because the cages were full of very young fish and many of the fish had been poached illegally. But instead of trying to work through some governmental procedures, the activists took on the task of rectifying what they saw as a serious situation themselves.
Paul Watson, activist and captain of the Steve Irwin, said, “The risk of losing the Bluefin Tuna as a species is far more important than the risks to our own lives and freedom. And so we decided to free the tuna.”
In a radio address, the Maltese prime minister, Dr. Lawrence Gonzi, condemned the release of the fish. Three days after freeing the tuna, the crew of the Steve Irwin returned to the area but were fired on by Maltese fisherman using flare guns until they retreated. The fish they released were worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Roundup resistant weeds could force farmers to use harsh herbicides again
Thanks to evolution, today’s pesky weeds are no longer susceptible to the best herbicide of yesterday: Roundup. Since the 1970s, Roundup has been the primary weed killer for farmers because it is safer than most herbicides and requires less tilling of the soil, resulting in less soil erosion.
The corporation that created Roundup, Monsanto, even created crop seeds resistant to Roundup so farmers could spray their fields and then only plant Roundup-resistant seeds. Seeds containing Monsanto’s “Roundup Ready” traits are now used to grow about 90 percent of the nation’s soybeans and 70 percent of its corn and cotton.
But since about 10 species of weeds have evolved to resist Roundup, many farmers are returning to the harsh herbicides of decades past. Farmers and agricultural industry experts are turning to 2,4-D, a World War II era herbicide also used to produce Agent Orange and another herbicide called dicamba. Penn State University weed scientist David Mortensen estimates that in three or four years, farmers’ use of dicamba and 2,4-D will increase by 55.1 million pounds a year because of resistance to Roundup.
Both of these herbicides can easily spread beyond the area in which they’re sprayed, causing a dangerous threat to other crops, vegetation, wildlife and people.
Monsanto wins Supreme Court case lifting ban on genetically modified alfalfa
In a related case, the United States Supreme Court voted in favor of Monsanto by lifting the national ban on the planting of genetically engineered alfalfa seeds. Monsanto manufactures the Roundup-resistant seeds. The corporation claims that alfalfa, a livestock crop, is grown on about 22 million acres in the U.S.
A federal judge in San Francisco had barred the planting of genetically engineered alfalfa nationwide until the government could adequately study the crop’s potential impact on organic and conventional varieties. It was feared by environmental experts that the seeds could cross-pollinate with other plants, potentially causing environmental harm.
Rather than side with safety, the Supreme Court didn’t think it important enough to take the time to study the effects of genetically modified alfalfa. “We agree that the District Court’s injunction against planting went too far,” said Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the majority opinion.
British newspaper apologizes to climate scientist
British newspaper The Sunday Times apologized to climate scientist Dr. Simon Lewis for their portrayal of his opinion in a January article about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s use of an environmental group’s study as proof of the potential impacts of climate change on the Amazon River.
The IPCC used a study by the World Wildlife Fund that showed around 40 percent of the Amazon rain forest could be sensitive to future changes in rainfall, possibly resulting in droughts. The fact that the United Nations panel didn’t use independent scientists instead of environmental groups caused a lot of skepticism both of climate change and of the IPCC itself.
Originally, The Sunday Times described the authors of the W.W.F. report as “green campaigners” with “little scientific expertise”. Their article cited Dr. Lewis as being opposed to the science behind the report, but Dr. Lewis had criticized the United Nations panel for not fully citing the relevant peer-reviewed evidence in its assessment report. So he only wanted more of the report to be used, not to discredit the entire thing.
In its correction this weekend, The Sunday Times acknowledged that the conclusion about the Amazon was supported by peer-reviewed evidence. It also acknowledged that Dr. Lewis’s views had been reported in a way that suggested that he disputed the science behind the claims about the Amazon.
“A version of our article that had been checked with Dr Lewis underwent significant late editing and so did not give a fair or accurate account of his views on these points,” said the correction, which included an apology to Dr. Lewis.
“I welcome the Sunday Times’ apology,” Dr. Lewis wrote.
