Does COP26 achievements reduce global warming?

 

WITHANAGE

This article is based on the FOEI analysis of the COP26 achievements  [Originally posted on January 20,2022]

Climate COP 26 just ended in Glasgow without much participation of the southern communities but with the heavy presence of the fossil lobbyists. According to the media more than 500 attendees from the fossil fuel industry were at the climate summit in Glasgow.

Overall the Glasgow Climate Pact does not get the world on track for keeping global temperature rise below 1.5 degrees, neither delivering the emission cut ambitions from global north countries, nor the finance needed for global south countries to do the same, and allowing for huge loopholes.

The Glasgow Climate Pact ‘recognises’ that 1.5 will require actions including ‘net zero’ by ‘around mid-century’. This isn’t in line with a 1.5 pathway and allows rich countries and corporations to keep polluting for decades, based on the fantasy of balancing out their emissions with offsets, carbon markets and other dangerous distractions. The door has also been opened to Nature Based Solutions for mitigation with a paragraph mentioning them in all but name – the nexus of carbon offsets, nature based solutions and net zero essentially creates a massive escape hatch for developed countries.  

After stalemate on international carbon markets rules for 5 years, Article 6 of the Paris Agreement has been agreed. Article 6 will make the Paris Agreement  operational and “will give certainty and predictability to both market and non-market approaches in support of mitigations as well as adaptation. According to the FOEI, the agreement on carbon markets will likely undermine any chances of staying below the 1.5 degree temperature limit as they are unlikely to reduce emissions and will instead likely act as a smokescreen for continuing or even increasing emissions from burning fossil fuels since the adapted decisions openly allow the use of carbon sinks (plantations, lands and other ecosystem-based sinks in another country) to offset emissions. Carbon markets allows rich countries and corporations off the hook, and it will interplay with weak net zero plans and the now open door to Nature Based Solutions, it will result in land grabbing and human rights abuses in the global South and likely condemns us to exceeding the 1.5-degree threshold.  

Although the Glasgow pact has been celebrated as the first time an explicit mention of phasing out fossil fuels has appeared in UNFCCC text, it allows continued fossil fuel use, only calling for phasing down of “unabated coal power,” leaving open the possibility of coal usage with carbon capture & storage. It also allows for continued fossil fuel subsidies, only calling for phasing down of “inefficient” subsidies.

By focusing only on coal and not including oil and gas, this text disproportionately impacts certain developing countries like China and India. India said in negotiations that all fossil fuels must be phased down, in an equitable manner. This is quite a reasonable response that is supported by a broad coalition of civil society groups.   A globally equitable fossil fuel phase-out is essential for the just, feminist and green transitions that countries need to make.

Leaders made a number of headline-catching announcements but while many of these sounded superficially good, they were often light on detail, with distant targets and little in the way of accountability. They have been described at ‘empty calorie’ announcements. Clearly some are better than others and give scope for further pressure and action, especially the ending fossil fuel finance pledge and the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance, but all require scrutiny. A further consideration is that these pledges and announcements often served as a distraction from what was happening within the negotiations themselves, and that some of the key countries announcing things were playing an actively unhelpful role within the talks on the very topics they were claiming credit for in the media.

Leaders representing over 85% of the world’s forests committed to halt and reverse deforestation and land degradation by 2030 at COP26, but is was “No more than a rebranding of previous flawed attempts to greenwash increased carbon emissions”

Further, over 190 countries pledges to end all investment in new coal power generation domestically and internationally, rapidly scale up deployment of clean power generation, phase out coal power in economies in the 2030s for major economies and 2040s for the rest of the world and make a just transition away from coal power in a way that benefits workers and communities. Again, this is a recycled announcements.  

39 Countries joined the statements to end new direct public support for the international unabated fossil fuel energy sector by the end of 2022, except in limited and clearly defined circumstances that are consistent with a 1.5°C warming limit and the goals of the Paris Agreement.  However FoEI state “COP26 end to fossil fuel financing – welcome but hypocritical as action is still missing at home”

45 governments pledge urgent action and investment to protect nature and shift to more sustainable ways of farming.  95 high profile companies from a range of sectors commit to being ‘Nature Positive’, agreeing to work towards halting and reversing the decline of nature by 2030. 

But FOEI says “These schemes are trying to open up vast areas of agriculture, forests and oceans to act as carbon offsets for polluting business as usual. That is completely unacceptable and not what we need to be seeing from COP26. Worse still, many of them are re-packaging false solutions like carbon markets, voluntary certification, and industrial farming as climate action. When these announcements are made, it is always with a view to making the money on offer look like a solution, but really it isn’t.

“Instead, this will unleash more land grabbing, displacement of indigenous peoples and local communities who are the real guardians of biodiversity and providers of climate solutions. The real solutions lie in ending fossil fuel extraction, getting binding regulations to stop deforestation and industrial farming, and instead fund real solutions like agroecology and community management of forests.”

In overall assessment COP 26 was not climate positive but corporate positive. It provided rich nations to pollute further with carbon markets. The civil society opined that we need real Zero at this juncture and no market solutions can abate serious climate catastrophes.

Sri Lanka Energy Crisis

HEMANTHA WITHANAGE 

[Originally posted on January 22,2022]

Energy security is one of the fundamental requirements for a country. Meanwhile having sovereign energy sources is utmost important. However, this was ignored by all the regimes in the past.

In January 2022, it was announced that Sri Lanka has no foreign reserves to purchase coal for the Norochcholai coal power plant. Power Ministry also don’t have money to purchase diesel and furnace oil for the thermal power plants. Immediate result is shorter power cuts across the country. Gasoline and diesel for the vehicles also follow the same fate. This means that Sri Lanka has lost its energy security in 2022.

Meanwhile several accidents related to LPG gas leaks occurred during the past 2 months are due to the change of the prophane and butane formula to make more profits for Litro gas. Unfortunately, few people already died, and many people spend hours in the queues to find safer gas tanks.

In 2019, President Gotabhaya Rajapaksa set the tone in his “Vistas of  Prosperity and splendor” produced to achieve 80% renewable by 2030. The national budget- 2020 brought down the target to 70%. However, CEB’s long-term generation plan can  meet only about 45% of Sri Lanka’s renewable electricity by 2030. This is because majority CEB engineers still believe on combustion sources such as coal and liquid gas. Meantime Sustainable Energy Authority so far has failed to meet the necessary speed to meet the target.  

Some people think LNG as the transition fuel. It is not true. It’s another fossil-based source. Responding to the peoples demand to meet the climate targets, G8 countries and the multilateral banks recently decide to cut their support to coal expansion. China also joined them in September 2021. Therefore, LNG prices are soaring in the region. Yet, Sri Lanka is still interested in promoting 900 MW LNG plants in the coming years.

At present, compared to the price of electricity generated in Sri Lanka, it costs more than 20 rupees to produce one unit of electricity from coal and about 17 rupees per unit to produce liquefied natural gas. But a unit of wind power, which is a renewable energy system, costs only about 9 rupees. Solar power can generate electricity for as little as 8 rupees. The 100 MW Mannar Wind Power Plant, built with the assistance of the Asian Development Bank, is currently generating wind power at a cost of Rs. 7/unit.

We must not forget that not all renewables are green. But, Mannar wind project shows how to make renewables greener. Fifty-six towers were to be erected when the power plant began, but due to protests from the Centre for Environmental Justice and other environmentalists, it was brough down to 30 turbines only. The environmental report  said that the plant could kill 10% of the pelicans and destructive to birds annually migrate from Europe to Sri Lanka. As a  solution an emergency radar system  was installed as a pilot project in the region to shut down the turbines to stop bird collision. It monitors the birds from a distance of up to 12 km and the movement of birds up to 400 meters in height. Even if the power plant is equipped with such high technology, it can produce clean wind power at around Rs. 7 per unit. We are yet to see the effectiveness of the Radar system.

But precariously Indian Adani corporation has now approached Sri Lanka to build another 500 MW capacity of wind turbines across Mannar which will be detrimental to the bird migration. Although this wind project is scheduled for 2030, they might speed up the approval process citing the current crisis.

Small hydro power plants in Sri Lanka also cause great environmental damage. The reason for this is that the power plants are being operated without proper environmental assessment and supervision. The Centre for Environmental Justice took legal actions to regulate the situation by requesting a Strategic Environmental Assessment for small hydro power plants. Sri Lanka Sustainable Energy Authority initially gave consent but later withdrew.

Not only Sri Lanka but the whole world is currently facing a serious crisis due to climate change. There is no escape for Sri Lanka from that crisis as an island nation. According to the 2017 International Climate Change Index, Sri Lanka was ranked as the  second country in the world affected by climate change. In 2018, Sri Lanka was ranked sixth in the index.  

In 2016, Sri Lanka submitted its NDC in accordance with the Paris Agreement signed in2015. Accordingly, it pledged to reduce carbon emissions by 4% and to reduce carbon emissions by 16% through all other activities. Unfortunately, Sri Lanka dishonour these promises when they propose LNG plants in Muthurajawela and a coal power plant in Puttalam.

According to the plan, the fourth coal power plant adjacent to the Norochcholai Lakvijaya power plant will generate 300 megawatts by 2023. Another 300 megawatts from natural gas in the same year and 300 megawatts in 2024 and 2025. It is also proposed to set up a 600 MW coal power plant in Trincomalee by 2026. And after 2030, coal and liquefied natural gas power plants will generate more than 3,000 megawatts of electricity until 2039. Therefore, CEB plan is undoubtedly a very  destructive long-term plan. However, in mid-January  2022, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa announced no more coal plants will be built.

Yet, increased burning of firewood will add further emission to the atmosphere. While indoor pollution is an immediate crisis, its climate contribution is also a serious issues begin with the gas shortage.

The latest IPC report state it is not possible to avoid temperature rise to 3 degrees Celsius. If we are to utilize the remaining carbon budget, all developed countries must be carbon-zero by 2030, if global temperatures are not to exceed 1.5 degrees Celsius to manage catastrophic climate change the world is currently facing. And all the countries in the world, big and small, must be carbon zero by 2050.

Unfortunately, Sri Lanka Electricity Board has so far not taken adequate measures to honor the targets set by the President. It is unfortunate that this corrupt system has jeopardized the national energy security which will lead to many other crises. In my view, other than immediate social and economic difficulties, current economic crisis in Sri Lanka will delay achieving NDC targets, increase forest destruction and increase unaccounted carbon emissions in the immediate future. (END) 

MAKE COVID FUNDS TRANSPARENT AND ACCOUNTABLE

 Hemantha Withanage, Centre for Environmental Justice

World is expecting some 8  trillions loss due to the Corona outbreak. ADB press release issued on 15 May 2020) state “The global economy could suffer between $5.8 trillion and $8.8 trillion in losses—equivalent to 6.4% to 9.7% of global gross domestic product (GDP)—as a result of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.”

Even before COVID has done its impacts the ADB has forecasted the impacts to the economy. Its press release dated April 3 state the Asian Development Outlook 2020, forecasts significant headwinds for Sri Lanka’s economy as it fights the spread of COVID-19, which comes less than 12 months after the terror attacks in April 2019.

Sri Lanka’s economic growth is projected to fall to 2.2% in 2020 and recover moderately to 3.5% in 2021. It further state “With the domestic outbreak of COVID-19, Sri Lanka’s growth projection comes with significant downside risks—growth could be lower by another 1.0 to 1.5 percentage points, depending on the severity and the duration of domestic infection. However, quick measures to contain the domestic spread of the virus and policy action to provide relief to those adversely affected could mitigate the fallout.”

The Asian Development Bank (ADB) has allocated a $600,000 grant from the Health System Enhancement Project to the Government of Sri Lanka to finance preventive and response efforts to fight a potential novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak in the country. 

The World Bank’s Board of Executive Directors approved the $128.6 million Sri Lanka COVID-19 Emergency Response and Health Systems Preparedness Project to help the country prevent, detect, and respond to the COVID-19 pandemic and strengthen its public health preparedness. The project includes a $35 million loan from the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) through the World Bank Group’s COVID-19 Fast-Track Facility and a $93.6 million credit from the International Development Association (IDA), the World Bank’s concessional credit window for developing countries. The Ministry of Health and Indigenous Medical Services will implement the project with support from United Nations agencies and other stakeholders engaged in emergency response, prevention, and readiness.( https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2020/04/01/world-bank-fast-track-support-covid19-corona)

Meanwhile,  China has  granted Sri Lanka a concessionary loan of $500 million, to combat COVID-19. They also announce that they will they will rescue the country and with the government request China first stepped up. The once who donated a large amount of masks, PPE, and test kits  are China Merchants Port Group (CMPort), the parent company of Colombo International Container Terminals (CICT) and Hambantota International Port Group (HIPG); CHEC Port City Colombo  etc. Of course, they have a special interest.

The United States has pledged to spend up to $100 million in existing funds to combat the COVID-19  and the European Union also provided some  EUR 22 million grant to Sri Lanka. Meanwhile the COVID – 19 Healthcare and Social Security Fund‘s balance has now surpassed Sri Lankan Rs. 1 Billion.

COVID funds doesn’t come free. China certainly will benefit from more businesses, and constructions. Last week Government of Sri Lanka  announced that they will bring the Colombo garbage to Aruwakkaru again which was abandoned after the technical faults  and public protests. It seems that more than GOSL, China is interested to get this going as they have a huge claim for the days project was hold due to public protests.

I believe there are other sources as well. Monitoring COVID funds doesn’t seems to have a mechanism in any country. There is no mechanism to find how they spend money.

According to World Bank Blog entitle  “Advancing accountability for special emergency funds to address COVID-19” dated May 6 2020, written by SURAIYA ZANNATH  and SRINIVAS GURAZADA May 06, 2020  “In some countries, these categories of funds are kept fully within the oversight of government systems, while in others they are kept as a trust or managed through other similar arrangements. Under the latter approach, the funds largely remain unrecorded. Since money into them does not constitute government revenues, it bypasses parliamentary budget oversight and government financial management controls and processes. And that opens opportunities for corruption.”  

“The World bank group has proposed few key principles that governments should consider when creating emergency relief funds that are outside the regular government budget.    

Ensure complementarity in expenditure across various sources: A high-level national or subnational decision-making body dealing with the COVID-19 crisis could ensure complementarity of funding between the budget and any emergency funds. Processes need to be in place to ensure that there is no double dipping of funding for the same transaction from multiple sources. For example, having a single budget allocation and release, financial report and audit for expenditure could both sources would help minimize the risk. 

When there is a need for exceptions, protocols also need to be enhanced: For transactions that do not follow regular government processes, appropriate protocols need to be in place for higher-level authorization to minimize risk of waste, fraud and corruption. The details of these protocols need to be communicated clearly.

Financial reporting arrangements should link to outputs and outcomes: The government must commit to publishing how the money from donations is spent.   It will be appropriate to establish mechanisms for reporting the amounts co-financed through the emergency fund at each spending agency level. The total expenditure on COVID-19 from both regular government budget and the emergency fund need to be reported along with output and outcomes.  

Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) and private sector auditors can establish credible oversight: There is concern over accountability when an SAI’s mandate does not explicitly require an audit of this category of funds. Appointing the SAI to be the auditor of the emergency fund, where possible, would significantly enhance the credibility of the oversight. Where SAI is not involved, the audit needs to be conducted by a credible external audit firm.     

Civil society can help improve accountability: Civil society organizations can play a crucial role, both as supporting actors as well as monitoring and information sharing bodies. Governments should encourage engagement and dialogue with civil society organizations and citizens openly and transparently, especially when decisions related to the government’s response to the pandemic are involved.”  (SURAIYA ZANNATH  and SRINIVAS GURAZADA May 06, 2020)

Such principles are important to maintain strong institutions to hold leaders and their management of the COVID-19 response accountable. It’s necessary for the government to declare the conditions laid by various agencies when making new fund or converting existing fund to COVID response funds. It requires a transparent and accountable process to spend public money.  If not COVID might end Sri Lanka further deep into the debt trap.(END)

------------------------

Reference: https://blogs.worldbank.org/governance/advancing-accountability-special-emergency-funds-address-covid-19

Large dams in Sri Lanka are a false solution to climate change and water scarcity

Originally Published in Forest Cover 61- Global Forest Coalition Newsletter on May 22, 2020, International Day for Biological Diversity

By Hemantha Withanage, Centre for Environmental Justice and GFC regional focal point for Asia, Sri Lanka

Photo Credit Dam construction in Sri Lanka. Gihan Jayaweera

Ideally, building a reservoir is an environmentally friendly thing to do. It can be a good “nature-based” solution for climate adaptation, too. However, this is not the case when it comes to large, modern irrigation projects in Sri Lanka.

The Yan Oya Irrigation Project in eastern Sri Lanka was completed in 2019. It cost Rs. 39,000 million (USD $210 million) and holds 149,000 acre-feet of water (184 million cubic metres). A loan from China provided 85% of the project’s funds, and the China CAMC Engineering Corporation constructed a 2.3 km-long dam across a section of the 130 km-long Yan Oya River. The dam will provide water to nearly 8,000 hectares of rice paddy cultivation.

Unfortunately, the project destroyed more than 26 small ancient water storage tanks and over 6,000 hectares of forests both for reservoir construction and new areas of cultivation. The project’s Environmental Impact Assessment was inadequate and developers could not even identify the total land requirement during the feasibility stage. Rebuilding the ancient tank system would have been more sustainable, avoiding the project’s negative impacts and providing a better climate change solution.

Similarly, the Malwathu Oya Irrigation Project is building a 3.5 km-long dam across a section of the 164 km-long Malwathu Oya River in the North Central Province of Sri Lanka. The project will cost Rs 12,000 Million (around USD $66 million) and will destroy over 5,000 hectares of forests and more than 24 small ancient tanks. The reservoir will hold 170,000 acre-feet of water (210 million cubic metres).

According to environmentalists, rebuilding the ancient tank system in Sri Lanka would be a far better climate adaptation solution than large dams. Sri Lanka is famous for its 3,000-year-old hydraulic civilization. There are over 40,000 small and large tanks covering the dry northern and eastern regions of the country. Our ancestors knew that the limestone bedrock in the dry zone is not suitable for storing rainwater underground and constructed a unique and elaborate system of tanks and reservoirs to provide villages with clean water year-round.

In a report to the Governor of British Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) in 1855, John Baily wrote: “It is possible, that in no other part of the world are there to be found within the same space the remains of so many works of irrigation which are, at the same time of such great antiquity, and of such vast magnitude, as in Ceylon. Probably no other country can exhibit works so numerous, and at the same time so ancient and extensive, within the same limited area, as this island”.

In 2018, Sri Lanka’s tank cascade system, locally known as “Ellanga”, was recognized as one of 14 newly designated “Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Sites” by the FAO. Yet Sri Lanka continues to destroy this ancient system in the name of modern irrigation.

The Yan Oya and Malwathu Oya irrigation projects and their water storage reservoirs are not based on the same principle as the ancient irrigation system. Under the ancient system, streams were first dammed to build small tanks to keep silt from entering the larger (but still small in comparison) reservoirs. The small tanks only fed the water table. The water released from the small tanks drained through areas containing aquatic plants such as lotus and kohila (Lasia spinosa) to absorb toxins and then fed the major tanks for storage and eventually irrigation and domestic use. At least three types of reservoirs can be found in the ancient tank cascade system. This system is an age-old solution based on natural principles. Restoring the system would provide a solution to climate change and water scarcity and enhance biodiversity at the same time.

In light of this, it is very sad to see how modern engineering financed by multilateral banks, China and other bilateral investors is destroying our ancient and far more sustainable system. This shows that so-called modern nature-based solutions are not the answer to the climate and biodiversity crises the world is facing.(END)

ONCE CORONA LOCKDOWN IS OVER

We should not go back to pre Corona situation once Corona lockdown is over. We have many learnings during Corona. This article proposes the need to address root causes of environmental degradation while respecting human rights and planetary limits, restore natural ecosystems including local initiatives for transformation, support sustainable agriculture and peoples responses to healthy food systems leading and supporting people responsive climate actions.

Hemantha Withanage,

Executive Director, Centre for Environmental Justice

Corona has infected 4.5 million people around the world and about 300,000 people are dead by mid-May 2020. Only 1.6 million people have been recovered. Millions of others so far safe from Corona are suffering from lockdown. Lack of food, access to livelihood, health facilities, discrimination,  human rights violations, domestic violations, loss of small businesses are few issues. Meantime digital world has a boom through online marketing, online education, online meetings etc. Some experts forecast that world online market giant Amazon will make their first  trillion and even Bill Gate will increase his wealth exponentially. Although world is going to lose few hundred thousand people, WHO forecast at least 7 million unintended pregnancies during the lockdown.

Learn from Spanish Flu

It is estimated that about 500 million people or one-third of the world’s population became infected with H1N1 Spanish flu or Influenza virus between 1918- 1919. The number of deaths was estimated to be at least 50 million worldwide with about 675,000 occurring in the United States. Corona could be equally harmful according to the medical experts.

Spanish flu killed that many people during the peak of the first world war. Although the environmental pollution was very low, poverty was very high during that time. More than 60 percent American lived below the poverty line then. The poverty incidents around the world was some 80 percent. Some research suggests that over 300,000 Sri Lankans died from Spanish flu although official figures are approximately 90,000 persons.

Since the second world war the industrialization began and the poverty situation got better in the Europe and other developed countries, but about 736 million people still live below the poverty line. As of 2018, 55 per cent of the world’s population have no access to at least one social protection cash benefit. Using the most recent data, the World Bank has predicted coronavirus is pushing 40-60 million people into extreme poverty. So called growth has not reached everyone and  Worldwide, 780 million people do not have access to an improved water source. Estimated 2.5 billion people lack access to improved sanitation which is more than 35% of the world’s population or 1 in 3 people.

Industrialization make some people rich. But it made many people poor and working class all the time. Some sustainable economies were disrupted by this industrialization by pollution and over exploitation. Spanish flu in 1918-1919  changed the business world too. Many small and big business lost and some new businesses emerged. Global coal production reduced by 20 percent. Companies such as Coca-cola boomed after this flu. There was no much discussion about the pollution and emissions during Spanish flu.

How Corona made environment cleaner?

During Corona, many people noticed the cleaning of the nature. BBC reported that in China, emissions fell 25% at the start of the year as people were instructed to stay at home, factories shuttered and coal use fell by 40% at China’s six largest power plants since the last quarter of 2019. The proportion of days with “good quality air” was up 11.4% compared with the same time last year in 337 cities across China, according to its Ministry of Ecology and Environment. In Europe, satellite images show nitrogen dioxide (NO2) emissions fading away over northern Italy. A similar story is playing out in across the world.

In Sri Lanka Central Environmental Authority claims Kelani river is more cleaner due to the non-operation of the factories. More than 7000 factories operate along the Kelani river with less than half hold an environmental  license.  In a survey CEJ conducted during Corona, 85% of the respondents perceive the environmental changes and impact caused by COVID-19 as moderate to high. Among them most people have noticed reduction of noise pollution, better air quality and regular clear blue skies and reduction of river pollution.

One can imagine the reduction of transport emissions once Sri Lanka’s  7.5 million vehicle fleet is out of the streets and over 20,000 industries are  not in operation for 2 months. But at least 1.4 million people work in these industries. We don’t know how many of them would lose jobs from Corona lockdown. It seems millions of jobs will lose by the time of ending Corona around the world.   In tourism sector alone, up to 75 million jobs are at immediate risk  due to the coronavirus pandemic, according to the World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC).

In April, Oil prices crashed due to Corona. More than 30 million US citizens filed unemployment benefits. US Senate passed a $2 trillion coronavirus aid bill to help workers and businesses. Chinese economy also lost due to the impact of the production sector. World governments started claiming China to pay for the losses. Governments around the world have urged employees to work from home where possible. Shares in technology companies such as Zoom have shot up.

Post COVID 19

According to the medical experts it will take some to regulate Corona. Some believe it will be endemic such as HIV/Aids. It’s a big question how the world will move once the Corona is over.

Most probably every production sector will go back to the pre-corona mode. They will do everything to gain the loses  during corona period. Industries will make more money exploiting natural resources and man power. More forest will be damaged to produce more food, more mining for energy and industrial material. People will forget Corona pandemic such as in the case of Spanish flu. There are 320,000 unknown viruses that infect mammals. Climate change, forest and wildlife destruction will result more future pandemics.

More organized industrial and production sector giants will get ready to such future risks. Sooner more people will lose jobs due to automatization of the production cycles to face those future pandemics. It is possible they will continue to promote 5G technology to operate industries, farming, mining and many other sectors to reduce human jobs. Boom in the IT sector during Corona is a good motivation for using new technologies. Perhaps unemployment will be a major issue in post corona period. Except in the IT sector, is hard to believe there will be  new jobs. Tourism sector jobs will take longer time to recover.

I believe the drop in the fossil burning will not grow much due to availability of alternatives including solar power.  Yet the nuclear power seems still in the rise. Although there is a resting time, Corona will not end over exploitation and pollution.

At the national level there will be more land grabbing as already seen even during the corona time in Sri Lanka or in the Amazon. There are some countries moving into the local production and consider about circular economy. At least for a short period local people will try to produce own food, but I don’t expect this will happen in the long run. It will be hard to maintain local production with high production costs. Unless the supermarket giants fail seriously, there will be no gain in the local economy. They produce cheaper food and other items due to the overexploitation.

Corona lockdown shows how the inequity affect people differently. It showed how the poor and lower middle income families are vulnerable to environmental, health shocks. It proved that lack of local sustainable  food and basic production can pressure the local population. It has also proved that big multinational food chains are not the solution for majority. This also proved that how the lack of social and economic security for majority can leads to discrimination.

Transform the world to make it more livable and sustainable

Corona is a moment to think how we can overcome these issues. It’s time to make our future plans. We have already identified the importance of sustainable development goals which encompasses every sector. We have identified, how strong our health system, but how hard to manage it with few undisciplined people. We have learned that drug addiction is beyond a heath and social issue. We saw that how people easily adapt to the situation and even started growing own food.

Making village units sustainable is a way forward to face future pandemics. Building cities and urban centers will be a mistake in the future. If we are serious about water the industrial pollution should be moved outside the river banks.  They should be moved to the highly regulated industrial zones. Ad-hoc industrial development will make us more vulnerable to the future shocks. Forest only can save humans from future virus pandemics  and climate change. We should let the wildlife to stay in their habitats as they balance the nature.  They should not be destroyed for human settlements or food production. Abandoned agricultural fields can serve food production with new technology. Of course small home gardens is the best way to support the local economy. Although people stared farming there are no local seeds available. Promotion of local seeds  and agoecology is a way forward for food production.

Corona proved that most products in the market are luxury items. It proved that people can easily survive without many of them. Stopping the production and importations of those unnecessary items is vital for the local sustainability and stop overconsumption and over exploitation.

Finally, Globally and locally we should address root causes of environmental degradation while respecting human rights and planetary limits. We have to respect nature unconditionally and restore natural ecosystems including local initiatives for transformation. Governments should support sustainable agriculture and peoples responses to healthy food systems leading. Governments also should support people responsive climate actions. |Photo Credit Ajith Etugala| (END)

USE DISINFECTANTS WISELY TO END CORONA. BEWARE, THEY CAN CAUSE YOU MORE HARM THAN SANITISING

Hemantha Withanage

Centre for Environmental Justice

We see that many people use Dettol  and Lysol as disinfectants for sanitising against COVID 19 virus without understanding the toxicity of the chemical. As written by P.K. Gupta, in Fundamentals of Toxicology, 2016 both Dettol and Lysol contain Carbolic acid also known as phenol. Following is the excerpts of his work.

Carbolic acid is a poison that can be identified by its smell, which is commonly referred to as a phenolic odor or hospital odor. Pure phenol has a colorless, short, prismatic, needle-shaped, crystalline form. On exposure to air, it turns pink and liquefies. It is fat-soluble; therefore, it can attack the nervous system. It is also soluble in glycerin, ether, and alcohol, and it is slightly soluble in water. It is known specifically for its antiseptic or disinfectant property.

Other members of phenol group: Phenol has several derivates, namely, cresol, creosote, lysol, and dettol. These are absorbed orally, through intact skin, by the GI tract, through inhalation by the respiratory tract, per rectum, and per vaginum. The toxicological actions of these compounds are similar to phenol but less severe.

Þ   Cresol is a methyl phenol with meta, ortho, and para isomers. It is used as a disinfectant and antiseptic.

Þ   Creosote is a mixture of phenols consisting mainly of cresol and guiacol. It is used as a household remedy for coughs and is found in many proprietary preparations.

Þ   Resorcinol is a colorless crystalline substance used for the treatment of various skin diseases, including ringworm, psoriasis, and eczema.

Þ   Lysol is a 50% solution of cresol (3-methyl phenol) in saponified vegetable oil.

Þ   Thymol is an alkyl derivative of phenol obtained from volatile oils of Thymus vulgaris, Monarda punctata, or Trachyspermum ammi. It occurs in colorless crystals with a characteristic pungent odor and taste. Previously, it was used as an antihelminthic (for ankylostomiasis), antifungal, and antiseptic.

**************************************************************

They are not to spray unwisely. They have

•      Low concern on Skin Allergy and irritation,

•      Moderate concern on Asthma, Cancer and environment while

•      High concern on developmental and reproductive toxicity. 

•      It’s potentially harmful for developmental, endocrine, reproduction health including damage to DNA.

**************************************************************

Please beware over usage and unprotective usage of Dettol, Lysol or other brand names in this family. It may slowly harm your body system unnoticed.

Centre for Environmental Justice

20A, Kuruppu Road, Colombo 08, Sri Lanka

info@ejustice.lk website www.ejustice.lk

How undemocratic Coast Conservation Department when filling the Mt. Lavinia Beach?

Hemantha Withanage, Executive Director, Center for Environmental Justice

Sri Lanka has over 1340 Km long coastal zone. 2 km from the Low tide level towards the sea and 300 meters from the high tide level to the land and 2 km inside a river or lagoon mouth considered as the Coastal Zone which comes under the jurisdiction of the Coast Conservation Department. Historically, the Coast Conservation Act gave discretion to the CCD Director General to decide the need of an Environmental Assessment for any development within the coastal zone.   It is due to that EIA regulation in Sri Lanka brought in 1981 under the CCD act No 57. The sense of public participation in environmental decision making was not developed by then. Forty years later, it would be a misunderstanding that as a public officer Director General would get such undemocratic control of such a vast area under this act.

There were many instances that this provision was abused including approving Norochcholai Coal power plant, Colombo Port city, etc. In 1987, the Environmental Foundation found that Karagan Lewaya in Hambantota  (which was  then a beautiful bird habitat later destroyed for building Hambantota Harbour)  was given to “Siddhalepa Mudalali” for conversion to a salt production facility.  Lalanath de Silva and others filed a case No. 555/87 against the CCD and argued that “in terms of section 16 of the Act, the Director-General may request an Environmental Impact Assessment report whenever a project or projects request approval. It is also within the discretionary power of the Director-General to determine what type of report to be called for granting such approval. However, this discretionary power must be exercised with a proper assessment of the facts and not on the whims and fancies of the office of Director-General. Interestingly the Court upheld that view. 

The Kalutara Calido beach disaster was a deliberate human error. During the designing of the Matara Expressway myself and P.C Senarathne of the Irrigation Department worked out that Kalu Ganga needed a more than 1.5 kilometer span to release upstream flood water. RDA did not respect our opinion perhaps due to the budget limitations too. But in 2017 Matara expressway was flooded in Dodangoda as well. Kalutara District Secretary was compelled to break the natural sand barrier between Kalu Ganaga and the sea when drowning houses in the upstream.

But  this human error made a serious disaster to the Kalu ganga water including drinking water supply in the subsequent years. The Ministry of Environment also got involved in designing Kalido Beach nourishment.  There was no new EIA was done in fact CCD used the same EIA conducted for the Rumassala beach which was damaged due to a hotel construction by a political supporter prior to 2015. The approval to do the sand extraction from the offshore in Ratmalana was granted in 2014 and extended until 2017. During that time CEA has given permission to use some of these sands for saving Calido beach. Anyway this area is beyond the Coastal Zone and CCD has no authority there. However, as DG Prabath Chandrakeerthi claims Angulana and Mt Lavinia beach nourishments were not part of this project. I have checked with the DDG of the Central Environmental Authority and confirmed that they were not aware of the two additions. The process for Kalutara Calido beach nourishment started in 2017 and according to the DG, approval was granted in January 2020. How come the Central Environmental Authority was not aware of the beach filing in Mt Lavinia unless he was lying in this video.

It’s a Rs. 890 million investment and extracting  800,000 Mt tonnes of sand from the ocean. As the DG Chandrakeerthi explains in his video with “Wana Arana Foundation” which is running a beach cleanup project funded by Colombo Port City, there is no CCD own sand deposit. The Eppawala Court decision is very clear that people own the natural resources and the government is only the trustee. Cabinet decision cannot replace the requirement of an EIA. There is no such practice in the past. Cabinet of Ministers do not have the expertise to make the environmental clearance for a project. It can only give a green light with subject to the relevant provision under the constitution and other laws. How do they spent Rs. 890 million public money without a valid feasibility and an EIA? We should know what damage it will be done or positive impacts in terms of costs and benefits and what percentage  of sand will go back to the ocean with the next rough season.

The Angulana and Mt Lavinia is a CCD own beach nourishment project. There were few other occasions such as Negombo beach nourishment etc. gone through the EIA process with the concurrence approval from the CEA.  How come this project does not follow the same principle. So, it is clear that there are conflicts of interest when the Director General determines whether an EIA must be conducted or not for this CCD own project.

How come DG argue that extracting eight hundred thousand cubic meters of sand between the second and third reef i.e. Palagala and Degalmeda reefs are not going to have environmental impacts?  According to Prasanna Weerakkodi  this would have filled the reef lagoon and deepened the adjoining sea floor making it risky for the swimmers and risk for the reef itself.

No need to say how important this reef is for coastal protection. This would result in the destruction of the natural coastal protection by overrunning and destroying the reef. Needless to say, this will destroy the fishing habitats, similar to what happened due to sand extraction for the Colombo Port City project.

These reefs provide a habitat for the endangered fish species. Therefore, it is not advisable to mine sand in this area without conducting a study on the sand budget.  In the said circumstance, sand mining in this area requires approval under the Geological Survey and Mines Bureau Act No 33 of 1992 and the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance. How come Mr. Chandrakeerthi claims that there is no impact without doing a proper EIA and getting the public opinion.

Ideally, this project should have been carried out after completing the EIA process. According to the legal status and reclamation of the coastal zone, any development work in the coastal zone except planting and cultivation must first obtain the prior written permission from the Director-General of Coast Conservation in terms of Section 14 of the Coast Conservation and Coastal Resources Management Act. Therefore, this approval is essential for all types of reclamation activities.

It’s a misconception that CEA has no authority over the coastal zone. NEA as amended states that CEA was established  “for the protection, management and enhancement of the environment, for the regulation, maintenance and control of the quality of the environment; for the prevention, abatement and control of pollution”. The Coast Conservation Act nor the NEA or any subsequent amendments and case law has no statement or determination that CEA has no authority over the coastal zone other than CCD can manage EIA function under its regulations within the coastal zone.

However, amidst environmental concerns, the nourishment of Mount Lavinia beach was completed with tight police security. It is so undemocratic, non-transparent and unethical to do while the country is under lockdown due to COVID 19. (END)

How is Colombo Port City of China impacting fishing communities in Sri Lanka?

Originally published  by the Global Forest Coalition-Forest Cover 60: How is the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) impacting women and forests? 

By Hemantha Withanage, Centre for Environmental Justice, Sri Lanka

Manoja is a 50-year-old woman with one son and two daughters and lives in Pitipana village. Her husband is a fisherman and she sells the fish he catches at a road-side market. Fishing is their only source of income and her husband earned Rs1500 (around US$8) a day. Before the sand dredging started to fill the ocean to build Colombo Port City, their income was sufficient for their small family. But during the dredging he caught very few fish, not even enough for one meal for their own family.

Pitipana village is located near Sri Lanka’s capital Colombo, and is known for its coastal fishing and fishermen. When the fishermen go out to sea the women and children wait until the boats come to shore with their day’s catch. They then sell the fish at the road-side market. Their life changed when the sand dredging destroyed the coral reefs by spreading fine silt over them, which also destroyed the fishing grounds. They could no longer find reef fish, shrimp or crabs and their catch become very small every day.

The dredging is over but their lives are still in danger. Now, coastal erosion threatens her little home as a result of the waves that the coral reefs used to protect them from, and her back yard has already been washed into the sea. Her family is one of more than 3000 fishing families living along the western coast that are now suffering from the same problems.

Construction of Colombo Port City (also known as Colombo International Financial City) started following a secret agreement signed in 2012 between Sri Lanka’s former president Mahinda Rajapaksha (brother of the newly-elected president, Gotabaya Rajapaksa) and China’s current president Xi Jingping. The 269 hectare land extension was created by filling in the ocean next to the Galle Face Green (an ocean-facing urban park) and will be developed as a financial hub, a business centre and an entertainment location. The project is at the centre of China’s “Maritime Silk Road” and is a globally strategic part of the overall Belt Road Initiative (BRI).

The BRI includes thousands of mini and mega projects implemented by Chinese corporations in different continents. These projects are funded by Chinese banks as well as multilateral banks such as the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). They have multiple environmental and social impacts and they bring economic problems too. For example, Hambanthota Port was built with a Chinese loan but was sold back to China in July 2017 when Sri Lanka was not able to repay it. Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) signed an agreement to lease the port to China Merchant Port Holdings for 99 years.

Hambantota Port was also constructed on a wetland once famous for migratory birds such as flamingos, and next to the harbor a 1000ha wildlife sanctuary had its status revoked in order to build other infrastructure related to the harbor. China’s lease agreement also includes control of another 15,000ha of land adjacent to the port designated for an industrial zone. The area includes forests and other important wildlife habitats, and is surrounded by five national parks which are also now in danger. Mattala International Airport is another BRI project that was constructed 18kms away from Hambantota Port. It was built across the Mattala Elephant Corridor, involving the destruction of almost 1000ha of forest and loss of habitat for over 500 elephants.

Colombo Port City is a multibillion project which will be built over the next 35 years and will still be under Chinese control even in the next century. The project has a number of socio-economic and environmental impacts, including the dredging of 65 million cubic meters of sea sand and the massive coastal erosion along the western beach that has been described above. The fishermen that have lost income because of it have not been compensated, but instead the leaders of fisherfolk organisations have been bribed to keep them quiet.

Unless they migrate internally it will not only be Manoja’s children but her grandchildren too who suffer from this Chinese investment. Her family has no money to buy other land. Even if they migrate to another location, Manoja and her husband only know fishing and cannot engage in other livelihoods. The political regime that approved these investments no longer takes responsibility for safeguarding her family. This is the fate of many women and families affected by this BRI investment in Sri Lanka.

WASTE MAFIA AND PLASTIC POLITICS

-->

WASTE MAFIA AND PLASTIC POLITICS 

* Hemantha Withanage* 

“There are plenty of people out there in the world who would like to see plastic go away. We know that’s not going to happen … We’re all going to be using plastic for years and years, right?” - Ben Jordan, Senior Director of Environmental Policy Coca-Cola  said. Don’t believe them. These are the guys behind toxic profits of the corporations.

Waste is a mafia. We know waste management is not just a service. It is a business. Waste collection, waste dumping, waste importation, Odour management, land filing, sanitary filling has many corrupt practices.  

Recycling is a beautiful word. But recycling is a word for fooling you. Only 2% goes to recycling. 86% goes to the landfills and oceans. As long as cheap plastics comes as a byproduct of the fossil industry, why companies bother to spend money for recycling. They tell you for hygienic reasons, quality maintenance you cannot use recycled material. True. But they can design a bottle for multiple use. They can use glass bottles. But they don’t spent money. Do you know that big plastic soft drink bottle charge you Rs. 50 to 75 extra when you buy such soft drink bottle. Plastic bottle will not cost them even Rs 2. It was suppose be collect back and recycling. But now it become toxic profit of these companies. They will be very happy as long as you are collecting their waste. But they won’t spend money for proper collection and recycling.

They say bring regulations. They know that bringing regulation is not easy. Even if regulations are there, violation is more easy. Implementation is not easy. They pollutes massive. But Authorities look for just few products to control, regulate, ban. When you see massive single use plastic dumps around us, they will focus little things. Authorities have been talking 2 decades to come up with a list of few single use plastics. Corporations are behind pushing back even those little steps.  

They say educate people. I challenge 90% of the people in Sri Lanka knows the problem. But no attitude change. Coca Cola, Pepsi Cola, Nestle, Unilever, Elephant House, Fonterra, CBL, Manchee won’t allow people to change attitude. We should not forget 57% plastics in the environment are unbranded. They will continue to bombard with TV advertisements with how good an safe their products in plastic packets.

Politicians are totally ignorant these issues. They benefit from the crisis. They have waste issue to make false promises during elections. Then get the support from waste mafia.  They fill the wetlands and sell them. They call its development.  Its true from local politicians to the top.  

Just don’t pick waste plastics. Understand this politics. Don’t get into their waste trap. They will offer you assistance as Corporate social responsibility. They will tell you plastic is consumer responsibility too. They will tell you that your effort is a contribution to the safe environment. Believe me! They don’t tell you how much they make toxic profits out of your genuine effort.  Use your effort every time to name and shame them. That will only change how they treat the plastic crisis. * Hemantha Withanage*