Guerilla Monk (Pomarańczowa Alternatywa)

A recent article in The Age, stopped me in my tracks. A company in Canada (Nautilus Marine Inc.) has just signed a contract to have 2 huge machines built that they intend to use to extract minerals from the ocean floor, approximately one mile below the surface of the ocean. These machines operate like huge, abrasive vacuum cleaners. The minerals are copper, tin, gold and zinc, and are found in deposits that are called poly-metallic. The company that makes the machines is called Soil Machine Dynamics and they are based in England. They specialize in making equipment for the defense industry.

The goal is to place these machines at the edges of deep water trenches and remove these deposits by vacuuming the sea floor. They claim that they will crush all the rock that is removed. This may sound benign, but we need to take very careful look at what the environment is like down there.

These vents are just beginning to be studied by scientists, and what they have learned about the life forms has been astonishing. Before we sent unmanned submersibles to study these vents, all life forms on earth were thought to rely on photosynthesis for their food and energy sources. Then it was discovered that the life forms that live in these areas do not rely on the sun at all for their energy requirements, they have developed the means of obtaining their energy from a process called chemosynthesis. No light reaches these depths and it was only just discovered in 1970 that life forms near these deep sea vents can feed directly from the organisms that survive in these super heated waters (360 degrees F) where no sunlight penetrates. Shrimp, crabs and 8 foot long tube worms thrive where these vents belch out water that has picked up minerals from deep inside the earth’s crust. The vents are formed where tectonic plates collide.

Very little is known about the ecosystems around these vents and now Nautilus Mineral Inc. wants to send some machines down 1700 meters (5,570 feet) and vacuum up all the life forms along with some rocks that will then be hauled to the surface and crushed. There have been no peer reviewed studies done on this process of extraction, but Nautilus Mineral has already worked out a deal with Papua New Guinea to do an experimental operation off of their coast.

Papua New Guinea has a well documented history of environmental disasters from its onshore mining operations, now they want to allow an experiment in the deep ocean? Sea Shepherd would like to see a completely independent scientific study done on all aspects of this technology. How long does it take these animals to re-colonize once you kill them? What will be the results of a vast track of sea bed that has been ripped of life? What is the noise going to do for all the animal life that live down there, including the whales and giant squid?

Another recent article reveals a new discovery of microbes that are found around these vents. This is from the UnderWater Times:

“Initial research predicted that life could in fact exist in such a cold, dark, rocky environment,” said Santelli. “But we really didn’t expect to find it thriving at the levels we observed.”

Surprised by this diversity, the scientists tested more than one site and arrived at consistent results, making it likely, according to Santelli and Edwards,that rich microbial life extends across the ocean floor.

“This may represent the largest surface area on Earth for microbes to colonize,” said Edwards.

“These scientists used modern molecular methods to quantify the microbial biomass and estimate the diversity of microbes in deep-sea environments,” said David Garrison, director of the National Science Foundation (NSF)’s Biological Oceanography Program. NSF’s Ridge 2000 program funded the research. “We now know that this remote region is teeming with microbes, more so than anyone had guessed.”

Santelli and Edwards also found that the higher microbial diversity on ocean-bottom rocks compared favorably with other life-rich places in the oceans, such as hydrothermal vents.

In the article the company claims that this form of mining will be less polluting than land based mining. And we all know what a great success story strip mining, coal mining and mountain top removal mining have been. How can they state this when there have been no independent studies to prove that?

Human greed knows no bounds, but we need to demand that an environmental impact study is done, so we know how much damage will be sustained. It is only then that we can decide whether or not the benefits outweigh the costs. Our oceans are under assault from a variety of human induced stressors: overfishing, pollution, loss of bio-diversity, noise from commercial and military ships, invasive species, the oceans are becoming more acidified from the burning of fossil fuels, and of course global heating… These issues aren’t going away anytime soon, and as stewards of this planet we need to make sure we do all we can to preserve ecosystems for future generations.

Each one of these vents has their own unique life forms that are not duplicated anywhere else. Studies must be done at each potential site before any mining can be allowed. Otherwise we run the risk of wiping out a habitat before we even know how it works and what benefits could be derived for future generations.

References:

The Age: Marine battle looms as miners dig deep
http://business.theage.com.au/marine-battle-looms-as-miners-dig-deep-20080517-2ff2.html

UnderWater Times: Barren Sea Floor Teaming with Life
http://www.underwatertimes.com/news.php?article_id=10680537129

An Appeal for Cooperation from Captain Paul Watson

Okay, here we go again, but nothing ventured and nothing gained.

This is the official 2008 Sea Shepherd Conservation Society request to the Greenpeace Foundation to work in cooperation with each other to defend the whales of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary for the 2008 and 2009 Antarctic summer.

The targeted whales need all the help they can get when the Japanese whaling fleet returns to illegally slaughter endangered whales in the Antarctic Whale Sanctuary in December 2008.

During the last season we stopped them for 50% of the time and cut their quota by 50%. If only we had two ships and sufficient funding we could stop them up to 80% percent and perhaps to 100%. But we are a small organization with only one fast ship to deploy and we need to raise funds to finance the campaign.

But there is a solution. If both the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and the Greenpeace Foundation could cooperate in a joint coordinated effort to oppose the Japanese whaling interests we could stop the pirate whalers cold in Antarctica.

Every year Sea Shepherd has supplied Greenpeace with the Japanese coordinates when we have found the fleet although Greenpeace has refused to return the favor. And yes there have indeed been harsh words between Sea Shepherd and Greenpeace over the years but the word Greenpeace does include the word “peace” and therefore I am appealing to Greenpeace once again in the name of peaceful cooperation to work with Sea Shepherd to protect the whales.

Let the past stay in the past and let’s deal with the present with a focus on a constructive future. There really is no practical reason why Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd cannot work together.

After all, I am an original Greenpeacer and a co-founder, not just of the Greenpeace Foundation in 1972 but also of Greenpeace International in 1979.

Both Sea Shepherd and Greenpeace work towards our goals in a non-violent manner although our definition of non-violence is not harming sentient life. As Martin Luther King once wrote, “violence cannot be committed upon a non-sentient object.”

The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society has never caused a single physical injury to a single person in our entire 31 years of operations. Nor have we ever had any crew convicted of a felony crime anywhere in the world. And we have never been sued.

The Dalai Lama is a Sea Shepherd supporter and he describes the Sea Shepherd approach as being consistent with the spirit of Hayagriva or the compassionate aspect of Buddha’s wrath meaning that we should never injure anyone but sometimes we need to be intimidating to intervene against violence.

I don’t believe our tactics are really the reason for the refusal by Greenpeace to cooperate with Sea Shepherd. After all Greenpeace has worked cooperatively with Earth First! whose tactics against property are far more extreme than Sea Shepherd.

Sea Shepherd is even willing to accept and forgive the violence of Greenpeace that causes harm, suffering and death to sentient beings that the crew consume on the Greenpeace ships as food.

Our ships are vegan vessels and thus we have fully embraced Ahimsa in our tactics whereas unfortunately Greenpeace has not. We do not however judge Greenpeace for this and request only that Greenpeace not judge us in return for our destruction of machinery utilized in the illegal slaughter and exploitation of sentient life.

I have asked this before and I will ask it again but how can Greenpeace ever hope to promote peace between nations and between humanity and nature when Greenpeace refuses to embrace peace within its own family?

This ridiculous animosity between Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd has lasted for three decades, longer than most wars between nations. In fact no one seems to remember just what the reason for the animosity is. The hostility seems to have become institutionalized. Sea Shepherd would like to see an end to this disharmony to allow both organizations to work together.

It has never been my intention to destroy Greenpeace. I am responsible in many ways for the birth and rise of Greenpeace originally, and why would I want to destroy such an achievement?

It is of interest that Greenpeace incorporated the word “foundation” in 1972 because of the book Foundation by Isaac Asimov. In that story there are two foundations, the large one and the more flexible smaller one – the Second Foundation. The role of the Second Foundation was to keep the Foundation on track and that involves strategies that include some that are tough. I have criticized Greenpeace in the past because Greenpeace needed to be criticized and that was not a negative thing although a negative response to criticism can escalate into a feud.

But feuds can be ended and I have attempted to end our feud many times over the years. But ending a feud takes both parties and unfortunately the offers have never been received and accepted and Sea Shepherd, and in particular I, have become objects of scorn and derision amongst some in Greenpeace.

But we should agree that our petty human squabbles are trite and trivial in comparison to the violence assaulting the defenseless species of the planet. Strength lies in diversity and it also lies in unity. A movement that is both diverse and united is the most powerful of social movements.

Our ships all fly the same flag – the flag of the Netherlands. Some of my crew have served on Greenpeace ships and some Greenpeace crew have also served as Sea Shepherd crew. I myself served as 1st Officer on Greenpeace voyages between 1971 and 1977. Many of the original founders of Greenpeace like Robert Hunter, Lyle Thurston, John Cormack, David Garrick, and Rod Marining have sailed with Sea Shepherd.

So how about it Greenpeace? Together we can keep the Japanese fleet on the run. Let’s trade coordinates and relieve each other as the other ship refuels. Let’s deploy our crew and our tactics together in a united front on common ground.

You are not my enemy and I am not your enemy. The whalers and those who seek to destroy ecological harmony on this planet are our common enemy. We make them stronger when we are divided and we make them weaker when we unite.

This year presents us with a renewed opportunity to unite against the outlaw whalers of the Southern Ocean. Shall we do it? Shall we work together in cooperation with each other? Shall we both contribute to a stronger effort and a stronger movement? Shall we fly the Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd flags side by side as we point our bows southward?

I hope for the sake of the whales and for this planet that we can and that we will.

I think it would be amazing if Sea Shepherd and Greenpeace could host a joint media conference in Santiago, Chile at the annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission to announce a working cooperative alliance to oppose the outlaw whalers.

My fellow Greenpeacers, (I am a lifetime member) I await your reply.

Sincerely in the Spirit of Cooperation to Defend the Whales,

Captain Paul Watson
Founder and President of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society
Co-Founder of the Greenpeace Foundation (1972) and Greenpeace International (1979)

Sea Shepherd ship the Steve Irwin on patrol in the southern oceans February 2008

Humpback whales in the southern oceans

The European Union agreed on Thursday to take a unified stand against whaling in a statement issued just days before the International Whaling Commission (IWC) meeting this month.

“With this decision the European Union can now take a strong role at the International Whaling Commission and use all its political, moral and economic weight to ensure a more effective protection of whales worldwide,” said EU Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas.

The European Commission has been spearheading efforts to find a joint position but as the 27-nation bloc is not yet a party to the IWC, it cannot negotiate on behalf of member states. Environment ministers meeting in Luxembourg adopted a common position based on support for the current moratorium on commercial whaling, the setting up of whale sanctuaries and encouraging the use of non-lethal methods to collect scientific data.

“There is no need to kill whales to obtain scientific information about whales,” the EU’s executive Commission said in a statement. “Adequate data for management purposes can be obtained using non-lethal techniques,” it added.

“This is exciting and welcome news,” said Sea Shepherd Founder and President Captain Paul Watson. “With Australia’s Labor government backing down from its campaign promises to aggressively defend the whales, the united European position will help to take up the slack.”

Captain Paul Watson and a Sea Shepherd delegation that will include former Australian Environment Minister Ian Campbell and Sea Shepherd crew-members Shannon Mann from Canada, Kylie Herd from Australia and Laura Dakin from Bermuda will be in Santiago to unofficially attend the meeting.

The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is the only organization that is officially banned from attending the IWC meetings.

“This status of not being welcome at the IWC meetings by reason of being the only organization that actually enforces IWC regulations is a position that we are quite proud of,” said Captain Watson. “We are the conservation watchdogs nipping at their heels and hounding them both on land and on the sea. Most importantly we are the voice of our clients the whales and thus the most important voice at the IWC meetings because we speak for the victims of the cruelty and the cetacide advocated by the barbarous whaling nations of Japan, Norway, Iceland, and their purchased puppet nations that are pimping their votes like cheap Japanese geishas.”

On June 10, 2008, Dennis Kucinich introduced 35 Articles of Impeachment against George W. Bush.

On June 11, 2008, they were referred to the Judiciary Committee. According to NPR, the Associated Press and the like, they were sent there to die.That’s too bad. Because George Bush has committed “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Impeachable offenses. A lot of them.

He, and his administration, have also created a cloud of confusion and obfuscation around everything that’s happened in his administration. Every investigation has ground to a halt, lost in corporate lawyers tricks - refusal to hand over documents, lost documents, redacted documents, officials who can’t remember, or, at last resort, refuse to answer subpoenas.

According to the Articles of Impeachment:

• The administration consciously lied about the reasons to go to war.
• Conspired to create a secret propaganda campaign to go to war.
• Failed to meet the terms set out in the bill that allowed the president to go to war, thereby making the war illegal.
• Failed to meet the terms set by international law for war, therefore engaging in a “war of aggression,” a war crime.
• Engaged in Torture
• Illegal Detention: Detaining Indefinitely And Without Charge Persons Both U.S. Citizens and Foreign Captives
• Rendition: Kidnapping People and Taking Them Against Their Will to “Black Sites” Located in Other Nations, Including Nations Known to Practice Torture
• Imprisoning Children
• Failure, as the occupying power, to protect the civilian population of Iraq.
• Providing immunity for criminal acts by contractors, thereby condoning murder, rape and other crimes.
• Spied on Americans without warrants.
• Intentionally subverting and refusing to enforce laws through signing statements.
• Tampering with Free and Fair Elections,
• Corruption of the Administration of Justice
• Conspiracy to Violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965
• Obstruction of the Investigation into the Attacks of September 11, 2001
• Denial of Habeas Corpus

Among other things.

Many of these are on the record as true.

If congress says the hell with it, too much trouble to bring that up, and we don’t want to look vindictive, and just shrugs its shoulders, that makes them co-conspirators.

The man who will now make the decision to stash the charges on the shelf until after January, 2009, when Bush is gone, or to open up hearings, is John Conyers.

John Conyers phone number is (202) 225-5126.

Climate change campaigners hijacked a train carrying coal to Britain’s biggest power station this morning, swarming on to the roof of its 20 huge trucks.

The 40 protesters stopped the regular delivery service to Drax in Yorkshire disguised as railway workers in yellow warning jackets and waving red flags, having read up on standard railway safety rules.

See the video.
Hear the audio.

The ambush took place at an iron girder bridge over the river Aire between the villages of Gowdall and Hirst Courteney at 8am GMT. One group then used the bridge girders and climbing equipment to scale the 12ft high trucks.They hoisted a huge banner reading “Leave it in the ground” - referring to the coal destined for the power station’s furnaces. The protesters carried food, water and even a portable lavatory with the intention of being able to remain on board for several days.

As the driver of the EWS train radioed for advice, a second group of protesters used shovels which they had also brought with them to start emptying the gravel-like power station coal on to the track. Police arrived half-an-hour later and sealed off the area, after calls from motorists stuck at a level crossing which was closed as a safety precaution.

A lone police constable was initially instructed to stay at the level crossing 500 yards from the train, but he was soon reinforced by other North Yorkshire officers. They sealed off the bridge from both sides, while the driver stayed in his cab.

“We are ready to stay here for as long as Gordon Brown and the government keep burning polluting fuel in these power stations,” said one of the protesters before clipping climbing ropes to the train’s wheels and the bridge girders. Although flimsy, the web would risk damage to the train or bridge if any attempt was made to drive off.

The raiders initially lay concealed on the edge of track as two earlier trains took supplies into Drax, whose eight vast cooling towers are guarded by coils of barbed wire. The power station was the scene of a spectacular but unsuccessful siege two years ago by Climate Camp, the group behind today’s action.

The rooftop group included one woman protester dressed as a canary - the traditional warning of dangerous pollution down a coal mine. She said: “The government and the country needs a warning,” before fixing on an orange cardboard beak to go with her bright yellow feather coat.

Commuters in the early morning rush hour included an engineer at Drax who was cycling to work and had to stop at the Hirst Courteney level crossing. He said: “There are interesting arguments to be had, but at the end of the day, these people use electricity like the rest of us, don’t they.”

The Drax line is likely to be closed until the protesters leave, and safety checks including the removal of the shovelled coal are expected to disrupt supplies to the power station for several days afterwards.

Drax responded to the hijacking by defending their record, setting out details of emission cuts of an estimated 3m tonnes a year at a cost of £180m. The plant, which supplies 7% of Britain’s electricity, is improving burning efficiency, says the company, and increasingly using renewable biofuels.

Melanie Wedgbury, head of external affairs at the plant, said: “We are the largest power station but also the cleanest and most efficient. It’s only because we are the biggest that we produce the most CO2. For every unit of electricity we generate, we generate less CO2 than any other of the coal-fired stations.”

The campaigners promised more protests later this summer, when another power station will face an attempt to close it down, similar to the Drax Climate Camp in 2006. One of the coal-shovellers on top of a freight wagon said: “Last year was Heathrow, this year it’ll be a coal-fired power station because those are the two big things, aviation fuel and burning coal.”

© 2008 The Guardian