links about us archives search home
SustainabiliTankSustainabilitank menu graphic
SustainabiliTank

 
 
Follow us on Twitter


 
Futurism:

 

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 13th, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

From the Desk of Dr. James E. Hansen

to: pj@sustainabilitank.com
date: Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 2:52 PM

What Global Warming Looks Like…So Far

What Global Warming Looks Like discusses current global temperature anomalies in July 2010; see also summary and full paper accepted for publication in Reviews of Geophysics.

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 12th, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

Ramadan crescent expected on Tuesday evening

by Arabian Business staff writer

http://www.arabianbusiness.com/594308-ramadan-crescent-expected-on-tuesday

on Saturday, 07 August 2010

CRESCENT COMMITTEE: The committee will meet on Tuesday at the judiciary department headquarters. (Getty Images)

CRESCENT COMMITTEE: The committee will meet on Tuesday at the judiciary department headquarters. (Getty Images)

The UAE Minister of Justice, Dr Hadef Jouan Al Dhahiri, will form a panel of experts to confirm the sighting of a crescent moon reported government news agency WAM on Saturday.

The panel will comprise government officials, religious counselors and astronomers and will announce the beginning of the holy month of Ramadan in the UAE.

The committee will meet on Tuesday at the judiciary department headquarters.

Dr. Hadef Jouan Al Dhahiri confirmed that the lunar months verification committee is affiliated with the Abu Dhabi Judiciary Department and that any moon sightings would need to be verified in the central, eastern and western regions of the emirates.

After the committee members agree the sighting an official announcement about the beginning of Ramadan will be made.

Bookmark www.arabianbusiness.com for more news about the holy month of Ramadan.

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 12th, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

We posted the following as an announcement over three months ago. Since then the announced meeting for South East Europe is history and we are convinced that a similar meeting should be held at the UN. The more you tell about climate change the better it will be for our conscience – it is like the Jewish telling on Passover of the going out of Egypt. It just reminds us of the need to leave also areas of contemporary transgressions and of a “land of promise” that we define to ourselves.

It is this sort of “Yes We Can” and “Can Do”  that is able to prop up our imagination rather then the mush of global hope of “Seal the Deal” – what we need are the EVIE doers of that article rather then new committees or commissions. That is why we re-post it as a stale information that says more.

We are just back from our New Hampshire trip with all kind of ideas for postings and discovered in our stats that the following article still has readers today – so it is the easiest think for us to bring officially attention again to the article as part of our new series propelled by the New Hampshire fact finding trip.

“Teaching Climate Change and the United Nations System” event – May 17&18, 2010 in Belgrade. It is about Sustainable Development in the South East Europe Region. UN Headquarters will be represented by ASG Ambassador Thomas Stelzer. The car shown by Project EVIE is a Chinese E6.”

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on April 24th, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz ( PJ at SustainabiliTank.com)


 http://www.sustainabilitank.info/2010/04…

——————-

So, what about the potential?

This will come up when we get deeper into our visit yesterday, in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, with Michael Gray, CEO Global Relief.  www.GRT.com

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 12th, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

We found among our REFERRERS a terrific blog and in turn we recommend it to you – our readers:

http://witsendnj.blogspot.com/

Wit’s End.

Their posting today is as follows and please go see:

Thursday, August 12, 2010

This IS America

The blogger seems to be:

About Me

My Photo
Gail
New Jersey, United States
The summation of my motivation for starting this blog can be found at my WWF Witness Profile here:  http://www.panda.org/about_our_earth/abo…. Beyond that, I post random thoughts and musings from Wit’s End, a little farm I share with a dog, 2 indoor cats and 2 barn cats, a flying squirrel (Whippersnapper), Sun Conure (Bird), African Grey (Simon), a dozen chickens, a pair of peafowl, sundry koi in the pond, and various wildlife visitors, most notoriously among them, a voracious fox.

View my complete profile

googletracker – It’s Over -

First I got worried about trees. They all looked sickly, or even dead – and that’s what led me, much to my detriment, to learn more about climate change than I had dreamed in my worst nightmares could possibly be happening, in my backyard, in the lifetime of myself and my children…and extreme weather, and peak oil, and collapse of the ocean food chain from acidification, and mass extinction, and everything happening much faster than predicted, and, and…See please and think -

“Technological Progress is Like an Axe in the Hands of a Pathological Criminal”

- So said Albert Einstein.
- – - – - = – - – - – - – - – - -

“Telling the Truth

If we climate activists don’t tell the truth as well as we know it—which we have been loathe to do because we ourselves are frightened to speak the words—the public will not respond, notwithstanding all our protestations of urgency.

And contrary to current mainstream climate-activist opinion, contrary to all the pointless “focus groups,” contrary to the endless speculation on “correct framing,” the only way to tell the truth is to tell it. All of it, no matter how terrifying it may be.

It is offensive and condescending for activists to assume that people can’t handle the truth without environmentalists finding a way to make it more palatable. The public is concerned, we vaguely know that something is desperately wrong, and we want to know more so we can try to figure out what to do. The response to An Inconvenient Truth, as tame as that film was in retrospect, should have made it clear that we want to know the truth.

And finally, denial requires a great deal of energy, is emotionally exhausting, fraught with conflict and confusion. Pretending we can save our current way of life derails us and sends us in directions that lead us astray. The sooner we embrace the truth, the sooner we can begin the real work.

Let’s just tell it.”

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 7th, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

President Obama was supposed to go to Jakarta, but first postponed, then canceled the trip. Whatever the official explanation – Jakarta responded and was a no-show at the Washington meeting of the large economies (in effect we did raise the question with the US Department of State and on the record – we did not get a satisfactory answer and reported accordingly).

We saw a series of missteps that eventually will have to be corrected. We wrote about that earlier and moved Indonesia into the front page of our website with the understanding that the largest Muslim country that is a democracy with a growing middle class, will eventually live up to its potential of being a world leader. The following article strengthens us in above belief.

We also expect Indonesia to move on issues of Sustainable Development and Climate Change as it stands only to gain by becoming home to clean technologies. Indonesian leaders understand that much of their recent environmental disasters are global warming related – they also can be counted upon in efforts to restrain the forces of aggressive extreme Islam.

———————————————————-

After Years of Inefficiency, Indonesia Emerges as an Economic Model.

Enny Nuraheni/Reuters

After years of being known for inefficiency, corruption and instability, Indonesia is becoming an economic powerhouse in Asia.

By AUBREY BELFORD, an Independent journalist based in Indonesia. //

JAKARTA — After years of being known for inefficiency, corruption and instability, Indonesia is emerging from the global financial crisis with a surprising new reputation — economic golden child.

Adi Weda/European Pressphoto Agency
In Jakarta, worsening traffic and a proliferation of megamalls are seen as signs of the growing strength of the middle class.

The country’s economy, the largest in Southeast Asia, grew at an annual rate of 6.2 percent in the second quarter of this year, data released Thursday showed. That is an acceleration from 2009, when gross domestic product expanded 4.5 percent.

The stock market hit a record high last week and has been among the best-performing equities markets in Asia this year, rising more than 20 percent since Jan. 1. The country’s currency, the rupiah, has appreciated nearly 5 percent this year against the dollar, among the strongest showings in Asia besides that of the yen.

Foreign direct investment, which was held in check for years after the 1997 economic crisis in Asia, is also returning. The country had 33.3 trillion rupiah, or $3.7 billion, in foreign direct investment in the second quarter of this year, a 51 percent rise from a year earlier, the Investment Coordinating Board in Indonesia said last week. The country is on track to attract more foreign investment this year than it did in 2008, when it lured in $14.87 billion.

Such statistics have some here cautiously saying that the country, a Muslim-majority democracy and one of the world’s most populous countries, could soon merit the kind of attention that investors now lavish on China and India.

“Indonesia is one of the most interesting, most attractive destinations in the world,” said Lanang Trihardian, an analyst at Syailendra Capital, a fund management firm based in Jakarta. “Foreign investors have been flowing to Indonesia from maybe around mid-2009. We are seeing a lot of liquidity coming into Indonesia, and it is mostly going to capital markets, to bonds, to stocks.”

Undoubtedly, significant obstacles to sustained growth remain. Despite progress on corruption, investors complain of confusing regulations and labor laws that make it difficult to dismiss employees. Little infrastructure has been built since the Asian economic crisis in 1997, and rolling blackouts have plagued the country for years. While the education system has been successful in fulfilling basic requirements like literacy, the universities and colleges in the country are widely considered archaic.

But more than a decade after the chaotic overthrow of the Suharto dictatorship in 1998 — and subsequent fears of disintegration at the hands of separatist groups, as well as the threat of Islamic militancy — the country seems to have stabilized. It is rich in natural resources like palm oil, copper and timber, commodities that are in great demand in China.

The administration of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has won plaudits for reducing debt and has achieved some success fighting graft. Mr. Yudhoyono was resoundingly re-elected to a second five-year term in 2009, and changes aimed at introducing more democracy have seen power devolved to local governments, where elections have been largely peaceful, orderly affairs.

In one sense, Indonesia appears more attractive these days because much of the rest of the global marketplace looks so gloomy. Its low debt, high growth and a sense of optimism compare favorably with a mood of despondency in developed markets like the United States, Japan and Europe.

The huge consumer market in the country, accounting for more than two-thirds of G.D.P., has largely been credited for maintaining growth. Although the global economic crisis crimped confidence, Indonesia’s relatively young population of 240 million and government stimulus policies, as well as a popular program of direct cash transfers to the poor, have kept consumption humming.

In Jakarta, worsening traffic and a proliferation of megamalls are seen as signs of the growing strength of the middle class. At the center of the capital, the huge Grand Indonesia mall opened in 2007 and expanded during the global downturn, adding theme areas with mockups of New York, Japan, the Arabian Peninsula and Paris, complete with a miniature, spinning Moulin Rouge windmill.

“We’re selling international brands here so Indonesians don’t have to shop abroad for them,” said Teges Prita Soraya, a spokeswoman for the mall, adding that trade, largely in imported luxury brands, had surged ahead despite the global crisis.

The mall is home to the country’s first branch of Harvey Nichols, the upscale British department store, and has boutiques for luxury brands like Chanel, Armani and Dolce & Gabbana — which already have branches in other malls across the city.

Yet there is criticism that economic growth has had less effect than it should have for the majority. About 15 percent of the population lives below the country’s official poverty line of around $1 a day, but advocates for the poor say the percentage would be larger if Indonesia set the bar a little higher, say, at $1.25. Relatively sluggish growth in labor-intensive industries has meant slow progress in curbing unemployment, which is over 7 percent.

The New York Times

The government believes that one solution to moving to a higher level of sustained growth is foreign investment, particularly in industries like manufacturing. The government’s investment coordinating board, known as BKPM, is hoping to attract $30 billion to $40 billion in annual foreign investment by 2015 — three to four times as much as it achieved last year, said Gita Wirjawan, head of the agency.

In an economy currently worth $650 billion a year and expected to grow to $1 trillion in five years, that is not terribly much. But it is “optically” very important for establishing Indonesia as a serious investment destination, he said.

“It’s not a slam-dunk, but it’s achievable,” he said.

Indonesia gets the largest share of its foreign investment from within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, with non-Asean states like Japan and South Korea, as well as European countries, making up much of the rest.

Indonesia is working to change rules to make it easier to acquire land for infrastructure and is seeing interest in infrastructure investment, Mr. Wirjawan said.

The government recently eased investment rules in areas including health care, construction and electricity generation. At the same time, it is working to put the flow of “hot,” or speculative, money to better use, passing rules on government bonds requiring foreign investors to keep their money in the country for longer.

Such efforts seem to be paying off. The government announced this week that China’s sovereign fund, China Investment Corp., was hoping to invest $25 billion in infrastructure projects in Indonesia. Posco, the South Korean steel giant, signed a $6 billion deal on Wednesday to build a plant in Indonesia with the local producer Krakatau Steel.

While investment in manufacturing still lags behind other sectors, Mr. Wirjawan said that Indonesia, with its relatively low labor costs, was reaping the benefits of rising costs in regional competitors.

“We’re seeing an increasing relocation of factories by the Taiwanese, the Koreans and Japanese from Vietnam and China, given their rising labor costs and given the increased stability that people are seeing in Indonesia from an economic and political standpoint,” he said.

The Indonesian Footwear Association has said that major brands including Asics, Mizuno and New Balance have shifted part of their production to Indonesia this year because of rising costs elsewhere. Indonesia’s footwear industry employs 640,000 people and exported $1.8 billion worth of goods in 2009, said the association’s chairman, Eddy Widjanarko. Producers are hoping to increase that figure to $2 billion this year.

Katja Schreiber, a spokeswoman for Adidas — which has also been aggressively expanding production in Indonesia — said the country, its third-biggest supplier, offered “abundant labor availability, good quality, competitive prices and political stability.” Although production here is growing rapidly, she said, it is not happening at the expense of its top suppliers, China and Vietnam.

The local stock market has reflected the perceived strengths of the economy. Shares related to commodities, Indonesia’s main export sector, have been strong earners. Banking stocks have risen along with the generally upbeat mood on consumption and the relatively good health of the sector, which, for the most part, weathered the credit crisis reasonably well. Major consumer shares like Unilever Indonesia and the car distributor Astra International have been consistent leaders on the local index.

All this exuberance has raised some fears that inflation could become a big problem. The country’s central bank, Bank Indonesia, decided to hold its benchmark interest rate at 6.5 percent this week, despite a jump in annual inflation to 6.22 percent in July.

Regardless, many feel that Indonesia’s time has come again.

“In Asia there is a feeling that after you invest in China and after you invest in India, where are you going to invest? said Fauzi Ichsan, senior economist for Standard Chartered in Indonesia.

“It’ll have to be Indonesia. It’s a natural destination.”
 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/06/busine…

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 6th, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)


As we posted earlier, From 2-6 August 2010, delegates were meeting in Bonn, Germany, for the eleventh session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC AWG-LCA 11) and the thirteenth session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP 13). AWG-LCA 11 will consider the Chair’s revised text circulated in July.

As part of above meeting, at the opening session, the new Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, headquarterd in Bonn, made her maiden speech to the organization.

We have here her own words, the Press release from the Bonn office and the Press release of the UN headquarters in New York.

Our argument is that there is no perfect correlation between these three documents, and we will argue that seemingly the process to undermine the new Executive Secretary has already started. It was such activities, directed seemingly from the New York headquarters that sunk Yvo de Boer, and might be intended to sink now also Christiana Figueres.

What we read in Christiana’s statement is the recognition that the reality is such that the dream-world of the UN revolving around Kyoto was finished and Copenhagen was the start of a new era of attempts to find more realistic ways.

What the two Press releases show is an adherence to the dead world of Kyoto which translates into an adherence to continuation of the 11th – going to 12th year old stagnation. By disallowing interested press from participating at these press conferences, this disinformation becomes norm.

————————————–

The thirteenth session of the AWG-KP and the eleventh session of the AWG-LCA
Bonn, 2 August 2010

Opening speech by Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

Just over 500 years ago, Christopher Columbus set sail for uncharted waters, determined to
change the map of the world.  While he was a man of his times with all the faults of his times, he
certainly far exceeded his own expectations.

Like Columbus, we are people of our times with all the constraints of our times and yet we,
too, stand on the threshold of a new world.  Whether we succumb to the storms of climate change or
work together to reach the far shore is up to us to decide.

What is at stake here is none other than the long-term, sustainable future of humanity. Thus
as individuals, as governments, as a global community, we must all exceed our own expectations,
simply because nothing less will do.

We know the milestones science has set.  We know by when and by how much greenhouse
gas emissions must drop to have a chance of avoiding the worst impacts of climate change, devastating
for the most vulnerable and the poorest around the world.

Time is not on our side.  Decisions need to be taken, perhaps in an incremental manner,
but most certainly with firm steps and unwavering resolve.  We must progress in the full knowledge that we
cannot cross the ocean on a single gust of wind.
But, if we don’t raise the sails higher now, we may
never discover a safer, more stable world.

Friends, for 15 years, I worked with you in our shared task of delivering the solutions that governments must offer humanity.

Now, as your Executive Secretary, it is my honour to work for you.  It is my priority to
ensure that the secretariat continues to support the negotiations and enhance the implementation of your
decisions with its unflagging commitment, professionalism and integrity.

I approach this task with a deep sense of humility, honouring the achievements of these
negotiations, but also acutely aware of the rapidly rising scale and urgency of what must still be done.

Governments alone can not solve climate change, but only governments, working together, can help the
world pilot the course most effectively.

Like Columbus, citizens, societies and businesses everywhere today need the incentives and the resources
to set off confidently into uncharted waters.  It is the prime task of governments to set the sails ever higher,
to help humanity capture the powerful winds of change that are waiting to be released.

Transformations like this are made by grasping the politically possible at every step, by
turning countless, diverse and sometimes conflicting interests to a common purpose.

The governments of the world, represented by you here today, have been steadily building
that common ground since the UNFCCC began; in Rio, Kyoto, Marrakesh, Bali, and yes, Copenhagen.
And this year, in Cancun, the climate negotiations can further the cause of multilateralism.

In Cancun, my friends, you have both the responsibility and the opportunity to take the next essential step:
to turn the politically possible into the politically irreversible.

Five hundred years after Columbus sailed, another man from a very different world has
triumphed over his own long and difficult journey.

Nelson Mandela, very much a man of our times, tells us: “There is no passion to be found
playing small, in settling for a life that is less than the one you are capable of living.  We must use time
wisely, and forever realise that the time is always ripe to do right.”

Friends, the time is ripe. I trust you will do right.

Thank you.

========================================================================

AND HER PRESS OFFICER – THE REPRESENTATIVE OF HEADQUARTER UN DPI – SAID:

UNITED NATIONS
NATIONS UNIES

FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE – Secretariat
CONVENTION – CADRE SUR LES CHANGEMENTS CLIMATIQUES  – Secretariat

PRESS RELEASE

UNFCCC Executive Secretary: Governments meeting in Bonn have responsibility to take next essential step in fight against climate change

(Bonn, 2 August 2010)  The third round of UN climate change negotiations this year kicked off
on Monday with representatives from 178 governments meeting in Bonn, Germany. The Bonn UN
Climate Change Conference (2 to 6 August) is designed to prepare the outcomes of the UN
Climate Change Conference in Cancun in November and December.

Governments have a responsibility this year to take the next essential step in the battle
against climate change, said UNFCCC Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres. How
governments achieve the next essential step is up to them. But it is politically possible. In Cancun,
the job of governments is to turn the politically possible into the politically irreversible, she said.

The government delegates will discuss the second iteration of the text to facilitate
negotiations under the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the
Convention (AWG-LCA). The negotiating group is tasked to deliver a long-term global solution to
the climate challenge.

The Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto
Protocol (AWG-KP) is also meeting in Bonn in parallel to the AWG-LCA. The focus of this group is
on emissions reduction commitments for the 37 industrialised countries that have ratified the
Kyoto Protocol for the period beyond 2012.

The UN’s top climate change official Christiana Figueres pointed to the opportunity to
capture the promises, pledges and progress that governments have already made, in accountable
and binding ways. According to Ms. Figueres, governments now need to resolve what to do with
their public pledges to cut emissions. All industrialised countries have made public pledges to cut
emissions by 2020 and 38 developing countries have submitted plans to limit their emissions
growth.

“This needs to be captured in internationally agreed form,” the UN’s top climate change official said:
“More stringent actions to reduce emissions cannot be much longer postponed and industrial nations must lead,” she added.

{NO! WE DID NOT FIND THIS IN HER TEXT – THIS IS FALSE FEED TO THE PRESS! SHE AVOIDED SAYING WHAT INDUSTRIAL NATIONS OUGHT TO DO!}

Ms. Figueres pointed out that governments agree to a comprehensive set of  ways and means to allow developing countries to take concrete climate action. SHE DID NOT SAY THIS EITHER!!

Mailing Address: CLIMATE CHANGE SECRETARIAT (UNFCCC), P.O. Box 260 124,  D-53153 Bonn, Germany
Office Location: Haus Carstanjen, Martin-Luther-King-Strasse 8,  D-53175 Bonn, Germany
Media Information Office: (49-228) 815-1005  Fax: (49-228) 815-1999
Email:  press at unfccc.int  Web: http://unfccc.int
UNFCCC/CCNUCC

This includes adapting to climate change, limiting emissions growth; providing adequate
finance; boosting the use of clean technology; promoting sustainable forestry; and building up
the skills and capacity to do all this.

The new UNFCCC Executive Secretary also noted the urgent need for industrialised
nations to turn their pledges of funding into reality. Last year, these countries promised 30 billion
dollars in fast-track finance for developing country adaptation and mitigation efforts through
2012.

i?Developing nations see the allocation of this money as a critical signal that industrialised
nations are committed to progress in the broader negotiations,i? Christiana Figueres said.

Industrialised countries further pledged to find ways and means to raise 100 billion dollars
a year, by 2020.

i?Governments need to achieve clarity on how institutional arrangements, particularly
financial arrangements, lock into other issues,i? said Christiana Figueres. i?For example, how could
institutional arrangements for financing be linked most effectively to an operational technology
mechanism or action on adaptation?,i? she said.

Ms. Figueres said that countries wanted to see that what they agree with each other is
measured, reported and verified in a transparent and accountable way.

“It’s called  in the negotiations and it simply means that countries want to be confident that what they see is what they get,” she said. “Progress here will be a gauge that countries are moving towards common ground,” she said.

Finally, Christiana Figures pointed to the fact that governments agree that pledges need
to be captured in a binding manner but they need to decide how to do it. {YES  – SHE DID SAY THAT}

“Governments need to deliver this combination of accountability and binding action so
that civil society and business can be confident that clean, green strategies will be rewarded
globally, as well as locally,” the UNFCCC Executive Secretary said.

The Bonn gathering is being attended by around 3100 participants, including government
delegates, representatives from business and industry, environmental organisations and research
institutions.

The next UNFCCC negotiating session is scheduled to take place from 4 to 9 October in
Tianjin, China, before the UN Climate Change Conference 29 November to 10 December in
Cancun.

About the UNFCCC:

With 194 Parties, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
has near universal membership and is the parent treaty of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto
Protocol has been ratified by 190 of the UNFCCC Parties. Under the Protocol, 37 States,
consisting of highly industrialized countries and countries undergoing the process of transition to
a market economy, have legally binding emission limitation and reduction commitments. The
ultimate objective of both treaties is to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the
atmosphere at a level that will prevent dangerous human interference with the climate system.

AGAIN – HOW DOES A 192-Member UN COME UP WITH 194 PARTIES – GRANTED THE EU IS NUMBER THE FICTION OF A NUMBER 193?

=====================

AND EVEN MORE DIRECTLY – From the UN Daily NEWS of August 2, 2010 – we have:

NEW UN CLIMATE CHANGE CHIEF RALLIES GOVERNMENTS TO STEP UP ACTION.

With the future of humanity at stake, governments must continue
building common ground to further progress on climate change, the new
United Nations chief on the issue said in the latest round of
international negotiations which kicked off in Bonn today.

“Whether we succumb to the storms of climate change or work together
to reach the far shore is up to us to decide,” Christiana Figueres,
Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC), said, invoking the journey made by Christopher Columbus more
than five centuries ago. {OK – NOT EXACT QUOTE BUT THE SPIRIT IS THERE!}

This was her first address to UN climate change talks as head of the
UNFCCC since taking over from Yvo de Boer last month.

“As individuals, as governments, as a global community, we must all
exceed our own expectations, simply because nothing less will do,” Ms.
Figueres told delegates.

Science, she said, has shown when and by how much greenhouse gas
emissions must drop to avert climate change’s worst impacts.

“Time is not on our side,” Ms. Figueres stated. “Decisions need to be
taken, perhaps in an incremental manner, but most certainly with firm
steps and unwavering resolve.”

The week-long talks under way in Bonn are the third round of UN
climate change negotiations so far this year, ahead of the next
conference of parties to the UNFCCC in Cancun in November.

At that gathering in the Mexican city, Ms. Figueres told delegates
today, “you have both the responsibility and the opportunity to take
the next essential step: to turn the politically possible into the
politically irreversible.”

Speaking to reporters, she said that governments can build on progress
made so far in five main areas.

Firstly, the public pledges made by all industrialized countries to
slash emissions by 2020 and the plans put forward by more than one
third of developing nations to limit their emissions growth must be
captured in an internationally-agreed form, she said.

Secondly, governments must forge ahead with efforts to agree on ways
to allow developing countries to take action in areas including
adapting to climate change, limiting emissions growth, providing
adequate finance and enhancing the use of clean energy.

In another key area, “industrialized nations can turn their pledges of
funding into reality,” she said.

Last year, these countries promised to provide $30 billion in
fast-track financing for developing countries to adapt and mitigate
climate change through 2012, with pledges having been made to raise
$100 billion annually by 2020.

“Developing nations see the allocation of this money as a critical
signal that industrialized nations are committed to progress in the
broader negotiations,” Ms. Figueres said.

Further, “countries want to see that what they agree with each other
is measured, reported and verified in a transparent and accountable
way,” she pointed out. “Countries want to be confident that what they
see is what they get.”

Finally, the UNFCCC chief said, while governments agree that pledges
must be captured in a binding manner, “they need to decide how to do
it.”

Governments, she added, “need to deliver this combination of
accountability and binding action so that civil society and business
can be confident that clean, green strategies will be rewarded
globally, as well as locally.”

{The above UN mantra is known – and most probably in some form came up in a Bonn Press Conference, but I could not locate the verbatim of a Bonn Press Conference and had no-one to ask – so all I can say is that I have nothing on this on the UNFCCC/News website,} It continues then with the informative ending:

More than 3,000 people – including government delegates and
representatives of the private sector, environmental groups and
research institutions – are attending the Bonn gathering this week.

The next round of talks is slated to take place in Tianjin, China, in
early October, weeks before the start of the Cancun conference.

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 5th, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

Oldest university on earth is reborn after 800 years.

Nalanda, an ancient seat of learning destroyed in 1193, will rise again thanks to a Nobel-winning economist.

By Andrew Buncombe

Wednesday, 4 August 2010.

  • The Independent

The ruins of Nalanda, the 2,000-year-old Buddhist University near Rajgir in the northern part of India
GETTY IMAGES

The ruins of Nalanda, the 2,000-year-old Buddhist University near Rajgir in the northern part of India.

During the six centuries of its storied existence, there was nothing else quite like Nalanda University. Probably the first-ever large educational establishment, the college – in what is now eastern India – even counted the Buddha among its visitors and alumni. At its height, it had 10,000 students, 2,000 staff and strove for both understanding and academic excellence. Today, this much-celebrated centre of Buddhist learning is in ruins.

After a period during which the influence and importance of Buddhism in India declined, the university was sacked in 1193 by a Turkic general, apparently incensed that its library may not have contained a copy of the Koran. The fire is said to have burned and smouldered for several months.

Now this famed establishment of philosophy, mathematics, language and even public health is poised to be revived. A beguiling and ambitious plan to establish an international university with the same overarching vision as Nalanda – and located alongside its physical ruins – has been spearheaded by a team of international experts and leaders, among them the Nobel-winning economist Amartya Sen. This week, legislation that will enable the building of the university to proceed is to be placed before the Indian parliament.

“At its peak it offered an enormous number of subjects in the Buddhist tradition, in a similar way that Oxford [offered] in the Christian tradition – Sanskrit, medicine, public health and economics,” Mr Sen said yesterday in Delhi.

“It was destroyed in a war. It was [at] just the same time that Oxford was being established. It has a fairly extraordinary history – Cambridge had not yet been born.” He added, with confidence: “Building will start as soon as the bill passes.”

The plan to resurrect Nalanda – in the state of Bihar – and establish a facility prestigious enough to attract the best students from across Asia and beyond, was apparently first voiced in the 1990s. But the idea received more widespread attention in 2006 when the then Indian president, APJ Abdul Kalam set about establishing an international “mentoring panel”. Members of the panel, chaired by Mr Sen, include Singapore’s foreign minister, George Yeo, historian Sugata Bose, Lord Desai and Chinese academic Wang Banwei.

A key challenge for the group is to raise sufficient funds for the university. It has been estimated that $500m will be required to build the new facility, with a further $500m needed to sufficiently improve the surrounding infrastructure. The group is looking for donations from governments, private individuals and religious groups. The governments of both Singapore and India have apparently already given some financial commitments.

Mr Sen said the new Nalanda project, whose ancestor easily predated both the University of Al Karaouine in Fez, Morocco – founded in 859 AD and considered the world’s oldest, continually-operating university, and Cairo’s Al Azhar University (975 AD), had already attracted widespread attention from prestigious institutions. The universities of Oxford, Harvard, Yale, Paris and Bologna had all been enthusiastic about possible collaboration.

Some commentators believe a crucial impact of the establishment of a new international university in India would be the boost it gave to higher education across Asia. A recent survey of universities by the US News and World Report magazine listed just three Asian institutions – University of Tokyo, University of Hong Kong and Kyoto University – among the world’s top 25.

Writing when plans for Nalanda were first announced, Jeffery Garten, a professor in international business and trade at the Yale School of Management, said in the New York Times: “The new Nalanda should try to recapture the global connectedness of the old one. All of today’s great institutions of higher learning are straining to become more international… but Asian universities are way behind.” He added: “A new Nalanda could set a benchmark for mixing nationalities and culture, for injecting energy into global subject. Nalanda was a Buddhist university but it was remarkably open to many interpretations of that religion. Today, it could… be an institution devoted to global religious reconciliation.”

As Mr Garten pointed out, the new university will have much to live up to. The original, located close to the border with what is now Nepal, was said to have been an architectural masterpiece, featuring 10 temples, a nine-storey library where monks copied books by hand, lakes, parks and student accommodation. Its students came from Korea, Japan, China, Persia, Tibet and Turkey, as well as from across India. The 7th Century Chinese pilgrim, Xuanzang, visited Nalanda and wrote detailed accounts of what he saw, describing how towers, pavilions and temples appeared to “soar above the mists in the sky [so that monks in their rooms] might witness the birth of the winds and clouds”.

Yet the project is not without controversy. Mr Sen was yesterday asked about reports that claimed the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan Buddhist leader who has lived for more than 50 years in the Indian town of Dharamsala, had been deliberately omitted from the project to avoid antagonising potential Chinese investors and officials. He replied: “He is heading a religion. Being religiously active may not be the same as [being] appropriate for religious studies.”

The Indian authorities believe the establishment of the college would act as a global reminder of the nation’s history as a centre of learning and culture. Politician Nand Kishore Singh, who sits on the country’s influential federal planning commission and who is also a member of Nalanda’s steering group, said legislation would be placed before the parliament this week. He added: “I think there is strong bi-partisan support.”

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 2nd, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

 http://bianys.com/node/859

Apex Offshore Wind opens regional office at SUNY Fredonia Technology Incubator.

July 27, 2010

Apex Offshore Wind, a national developer of wind-energy facilities, has selected our supporting member the SUNY Fredonia Technology Incubator in Dunkirk for a new regional office.

Apex, which has another NYS office in Poughkeepsie, has completed more than $1 billion in wind-power projects nationally, including the 20 MW Steel Winds project on the site of the former Bethlehem Steel mill in Lackawanna. The company cited the incubator’s proximity to Dunkirk harbor on wind-friendly Lake Erie as a strategic advantage.

Apex will be the 10th tenant and key strategic anchor of the incubator. For more information, please see the university’s news release here.

Separately, the Dunkirk Observer website covered the graduation of three non-profit and social-venture tenants incubated under the university’s HUD-sponsored Dunkirk-Fredonia Partnerships and Center for Social Entrepreneurship.

The three organizations are moving across the street to the handsomely renovated and privately owned Chadwick Bay Lofts.

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 2nd, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

Eric Ehrmann

Writes on sports and global issues from Brazil. He is a member of PEN.

Posted: April 9, 2010, The Huffington Post.
 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-ehrma…

Brazil Seeks New Balance in US Relations.

Advertising posters on the sides of Manhattan bus shelters are part of a new campaign to help Americans understand Brazil. And with a new defense agreement and regional issues taking on greater importance Syracuse University’s Newhouse School of Journalism Wednesday hosted Brazil Corporate Communications Day. These events couldn’t have come at a better time.

Over the past year China replaced the United States as Brazil’s top trade partner, the World Trade Organization awarded Brazil the right to impose up to $830 million in sanctions in a cotton subsidies dispute and Hillary Clinton’s State Department launched a public diplomacy campaign critical of president Lula’s foreign policy. Against this backdrop, the Pentagon has characterized the new military to-military pact as being “aspirational.”

Brazil, by opting for negotiations rather than maxing out sanctions against a key ally, has projected a balanced, non-confrontational style for government and business to deal with foreign counterparts.

While details remain sketchy, the new defense pact is the first between the two nations since the 1970s and does not currently provide for US bases on Brazilian soil like Washington’s deal with Colombia does. Considering Brazil’s candidacy for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, the arrangement has more to do with shoring up military and security between the hemisphere’s two major democracies than with the commercial deals that free marketeers implore.

Brazil, where the state, not globalist business interests, remains the final arbiter of what’s fair in laissez-faire, is a net creditor nation and plans to stay that way. But with Washington deep in debt spending $7 billion monthly in Iraq and another $5 billion on Obama’s Af-Pak war, the military arrangements are a reminder of the high price sovereign nations pay to support globalism.

Because tight credit markets increase the risk of political instability the value of paper money is now being backed up by strong armies more than strong markets. As a result, the quality of the US brand of democracy as advertised to the world has become more difficult to control and more costly to finance.

In a world without borders Brazil is right next door. But shaping business issues is complicated because, wittingly or unwittingly, globalist media continue to link perceptions about Brazil and its BRIC partners with the pathology of underdevelopment. Promoting economic warfare instead of economic partnerships, some media interests tag Brazil with poor infrastructure and corruption, which promotes reasonable doubt in the minds of analysts and prospective investors.

This, in turn, has spun off a culture of complaint among managers, bureaucrats and commentators who spend considerable time focused on what’s wrong with Brazil and what’s right with the American model of free markets and less government regulation that has been in vogue since the “Reagan revolution” of the 1980s.

After all, these same traits, acted out by US business and political leadership triggered the crisis. In reciprocity, president Lula and others in Brazil have not been shy about going on the record to say that.

One Brazilian success story can be found in the “where’s the beef” department. No matter loud your 24 ounce t-bone fans yell out “don’t mess with Texas”, Brazil has become the world’s largest exporter of beef. Instead of taking Angus feeders to fats like they do in Dalhart, Brazil raises leaner Brahma cattle on open grass ranges. The Brahma breed also helps promote sustainability because it consumes less water than other breeds.

Becoming a key player in the global food chain required long term cooperation between the state, which, constitutionally, maintains the overarching superstructure of social organization, and business, to build infrastructure, develop technology, and invest in human capital.

The United States, meanwhile, under Reagan, the Bush family and now Obama, seems to be abdicating that role. The US social contract is shrinking due to the deemphasis of checks and balances and globalist influencers inside government.

Brazil’s model, often the brunt of critiques from US neoconservatives that the new Brazilian media initiatives seek to overcome, has more in common with the traditional liberal economic principles of Raymond Aron, the French philosopher. Aron emphasized that the health and identity of the nation-state requires a strong central government.

Brazilian citizens maintain a sense of national identity and direct connection with government because in Brazil’s construct of democracy the constitution makes voting mandatory. So while the United States, where in theory everybody is entitled to vote but nobody is required by law to do so, was reeling from hanging chads in Florida and voting machines with no paper trails, Brazil rapidly developed technology to make voting machines more transparent. ProComp, the Brazilian company that developed the improvements, was subsequently acquired by the US voting machine manufacturer, Diebold.

With 200 million citizens spread across 5 million square miles, Brazil is spending $1.4 billion on its 2010 census. About 250,000 census takers are using laptops and PDAs to gather the data according to IBGE, Brazil’s statistical agency. The US, meanwhile, is spending $14 billion and creating jobs for 4 million people and relying mostly on paper to grab the data.

If globalism is indeed the multipolar world the Davos crowd claim it is, then it’s time for those whose unbridled greed propagated the current economic malaise to stop characterizing Brazil and other BRIC nations as less than and start acknowledging them as being equal to some other key G-20 players who are still spinning from the effects of the crisis.

Two big countries. Two big cultures. One big new opportunity to move forward. Perhaps Brazil’s Cardinal Dom Helder Camara summed up the differences best… “When I give food to the poor they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist.”

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 1st, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

    “COMMON WEALTH:  Economics for a Crowded Planet.”

    by Prof. Jeffrey D. Sachs

    A New York Times Bestseller

    Penguin Books, 2008

    ISBN 978-1-59420-127-1  (hc.)

    ISBN 978-0-14-311487-1 (pbk.)

    386 p.

    ==============================================

    The obligatory textbook for any would-be policy maker in the Twenty-first Century.

    Don’t elect any one to Congress unless he testifies that he has read this book.

    ==============================================

    We have a crowded planet and there are common challenges – it does not matter where you live.
    We all get nourished from a source of common wealth that we must learn to honor as Environmental Sustainability.

    We tried to draw a system in our own “Promptbook on Sustainable Development For The World Summit in Johannesburg August 2002,” but Professor Sachs did a much better job then I was able to do and I tip my hat before him.

    Professor Sachs, with his knowledge, and with the tremendous resources of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, clearly achieved a much larger scope then we could have attempted – his book is full of data and still readable – even by policy makers that are not economists.

    “Lucid, quietly urgent, and relentlessly logical . . . this is Big think with capital B.” says the New York Times Book Reviewer quote on front cover – and he is right.

    ——————————————————————————-

    Let us start from the realization that the 20th Century saw the end of European dominance of global politics and economics and the 21st Century will witness the decline and end of American dominance.

    The world is passing to new powers – China, India and Brazil.

    Our own estimate is that Europe could have held on for a little longer had the European Union succeeded in creating a real Union – but in the form of the present cloud of competing States it is finished. The US, had it presented a united leadership, it could also have competed for a while longer, but as we heard today, from Senator Kerry on the Fareed Zakaria show, with the ongoing obstructionism in US Senate, we just watch how China has moved from 5% of the global production of solar panels – just two years ago, to the global production in 2010 of 60% of those panels, and this week’s announcement that the US Senate is incapable of gathering 60 votes for a Climate & Energy Bill this year – and hearing just one day after that the Chinese say that they are going to cap carbon emissions – this means that “WE WILL BE RIPPED OUT OF THE MARKET PLACE – WE ARE CUTTING OUR OWN THROAT HERE,” concluded Senator Kerry.

    And why does this happen? The established economies grow fat and complacent – the world turns to new ideas from large and hungry Nations that are ready to learn fast and innovate and grow. They push the old mush to the sideways. Can the obfuscating politicians understand this?

    ——————————————————————————

    The mush starts from the refusal to recognize that resources are scarce, there are environmental stresses, and there will be large areas that become eventually uninhabitable leading again to great mass migration, clashes of civilization, warfare and mayhem. The above will be reinforced by the human created climate change, that gets super imposed on the power change to new Mega-Nations of more then a billion people each, and we must note that the world population has risen by 4 billion people in the span of just 60 years since 1950 – the Korea War – that came after what was thought to be the start of a post WWII peace.

    For the world to save itself we must recognize the Anthropocene, when human activity became the dominant driver of the natural environment, and look for Global Solutions to Climate Change and Water Needs – to start a new strategy of Economic Development, end poverty traps, and create economic security in this changing Globalized World.

    Our leaders must rethink Foreign Policy in the light of Global Goals which Prof. Sachs ends up as defining as “The Power of One.”

    He points out that we are not only the subjects of history, carried along by blind forces, but agents of history.

    Further, we have to gird ourselves against the unholy trinity of reactionary rhetoric identified by the great development economist Albert Hirschman. He noted that every new idea for constructive change is met with three attacks.

    The first is futility: the course of reform cannot work because the problem is unsolvable.

    The second is perversity: any attempt at solution will actually make matters worse.

    The third is jeopardy: attempting to solve the problem will take attention and resources away from something even more important.

    This negativism is a state of mind, not a view based on facts.

    Relentless acceptance of the status quo is not acceptable in the face of the challenges we confront.

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 1st, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

Hugo Chaves, with rampant inflation in his country and a tanking economy, threatened that if Colombia pursues his friends of the FARC, he will stop exports of oil to the US.

So what? Did he think it over what he said? He exports 44% of Venezuela’s oil to the US which gets just 6% of its imports from Venezuela – this at a time there is plenty of oil in the world market and there will be ample competition to sell to the US.

15% of Venezuela GDP comes from the sales to the US that make up for 25% of its foreign currency in-flow that amounts to $80 million/day. Nothing to sneeze at!

So, will Venezuela tie itself for the long haul to China – the far away market – rather then ponder to the US – the next door buyer?

If he wants to do that – call his bluff now and let him dry on his own words. He just is no armed Ahmedi-nejad less he forgot that – and there is no chance he ever can become one!

1500 FARC rebels are in Venezuela.

——————

Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia
(Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia – FARC).

Established in 1964 as the military wing of the Colombian Communist Party, the FARC is Colombia’s oldest, largest, most capable, and best-equipped Marxist insurgency. The FARC was governed by a secretariat, led by septuagenarian Manuel Marulanda (a.k.a. “Tirofijo”) and six others, including senior military commander Jorge Briceno (a.k.a. “Mono Jojoy”). In March 2006, Alberto Gonzales, the Attorney General of the United States, announced in conjunction with Drug Enforcement Administration and United States Department of Justice officials that the US State Department had placed a $5 million dollar reward on Tirofijo’s head, or for information leading to his capture.[3] But ‘Marulanda’ was never apprehended, and died of a heart attack on March 26, 2008. He was replaced as commander-in-chief by ‘Alfonso Cano‘.

Cano, now chief of FARC said in a video posted this week on an affiliated website. “We are still dedicated to looking for political exits. We hope that the government will reflect, that it won’t deceive the country anymore.”

Cano’s message is his first public reaction to the election of Santos, who as defense minister under President Alvaro UribeRaul Reyes delivered some of the biggest blows against the FARC, including a 2008 air strike in Ecuador that killed Raul Reyes, the guerillas’ No.2 leader.

The FARC is organized along military lines and includes several urban fronts.

In February 2002, the group’s slow-moving peace negotiation process with President Andres Pastrana’s administration was terminated by Bogota following the FARC’s plane hijacking and kidnapping of a Colombian Senator from the aircraft. On 7 August 2002, the FARC launched a large-scale mortar attack on the Presidential Palace where President Alvaro Uribe was being inaugurated. High-level foreign delegations—including the United States—attending the inauguration were not injured, but 21 residents of a poor neighborhood nearby were killed by stray rounds in the attack. President Uribe never forgot this and will pursue them to the last day of his Presidency that ends in 2010. What if he indeed bombs the FARC that hide across the border in Venezuela?

If Chaves reacts as he says – that will be great for alternative energy as well – even with the Republicans howling in US Congress. Will they stand up for Hugo Chaves.

Go Uribe!   Go Chaves!   GREENS are with both of you!

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 1st, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

Fareed Zakaria on CNN/GPS – Sunday August 1, 2010 – suggests that this do very little US Congress – indeed do nothing when it comes to renewing the G.W. Bush Tax Cuts. Letting them lapse decreases the deficit by 30% annually – or $300 Billion/year!

He implores Congress – Please Let the Bush Tax-Cuts Expire this year – do not vote to renew them!

Half of Americans do not pay taxes and though the cuts went for what on paper seems like all – the effect was that the rich got most of the money anyway and rather then return the money to the economy put the money into savings. This is the main reason that led to the major crisis we and most of the world, suffered – because of the US of Bush!

The US expenditures are in Middle Class Programs. If one were to cut these social programs it will lead to further unemployment and misery. The UK under David Cameron is going for cuts in services and further taxation – the US could instead cut all the Bush tax-cuts and increase benefits like unemployment benefits. All what the US has to do is to turn the wheels back to the Clinton Presidency! That is when there was surplus and not galloping debt. Fareed had the graphs to prove his points.

The trick is that when the poor get money they go out and buy things like providing an engine to the economy. What Bush did was to allow further hording of money by the rich, and this took out money from the economy. This is so simple that even former President Bush could have grasped had he only reviewed the policies that the interests put before him.

So, let us repeat – Fareed says that doing nothing now on the Bush tax cuts will do a lot for the Nations Future.

———–

Fareed had also a panel of journalists on the program right – left and center - Ross Douthat, Columnist of the New York Times from the right, also film critic for National Review, he was senior editor of The Atlantic; Chrystia Freeland who is a global editor at large for Reuters and formerly she was U.S. managing editor of the Financial Times; and Hendrik Hertzberg, a senior editor and staff writer of The New Yorker Magazine.

The topic was: WALL STREET vs. OBAMA vs. MAIN STREET.

There was quite a consensus – it is incredible to hear the venom towards Obama on the Hill. After all – he went to Harvard and has credentials – he is just as smart as any of the Wall Street people.

The Obama problem is the fantasy people have about the Presidency. On foreign affairs he gets some leeway, but on the oil spill they wanted him to go and fix it. Then – all is covered by the filibuster.

Obama did already a health care bill, a financial regulation bill, but nothing is seen yet – clearly, the effects will not appear during his first term in office. The economy collapsed just when he came in, so the suffering is under him – the collapse was organized by his predecessor.

Criticism from Ms. Freeland – The White House has not put forward yet a clear vision for the economy.

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 1st, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

Rhizome Planting 1 Year old Crop Balers Biomass Energy Crop Fuel
Fresh Miscanthus Rhizomes Precision Planting Miscanthus Harvesting High Density Baling Biomass Energy Crop Fuel

News - 

Bioenergy
Biofuels Sugar cane leaves.jpg
Energy from foodstock
Non-food energy crops
Technology
Concepts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miscanthus

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 31st, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

“Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said Wednesday that the country’s economy would expand by 7% this year. ‘We project an economic growth of no less than 7% in 2010 and we intend to create 2.5 million jobs,’ the President said. According to him, such a high growth expectation is possible due to the growing domestic market, the country’s solid banks and the government’s anti-cyclic policies. The President reaffirmed the need for reforms of the international financial institutions in order to prevent another financial crisis. ‘It is necessary to end lenient standards and repress the financial speculation in the international commodities market,’ the President said.”
 The Banking & Capital Markets Committee of the Brazil-American Chamber of Commerce invites you to attend a panel discussion on:

Brazil: Midyear Economic and Political Outlook.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010

8:00 – 8:30 AM    Registration, Breakfast and Networking
8:30 – 10:00 AM    Panel Discussion, Question & Answer

Hosted By:

919 Third Avenue (at 55th Street), 35th Floor
New York City
Program Moderator:
Paulo Vieira da Cunha
,
Chairman, Banking & Capital Markets Committee, Brazilian-American Chamber of Commerce, Inc. and Partner & Head of Research – Emerging Markets, Tandem Global Markets Fund.

Speakers:
Chris Garman, Managing and Practice Head, Latin America, Eurasia Group
• Marcel Kasumovich, Founder and Partner, Woodbine Capital
Marcelo Salomon, Director and Brazil Chief Economist, Barclays Capital
• Paulo Sotero, Director, Brazil Institute at the Woodrow Wilson Center

———————————————————————————————————————————

Also an Afternoon Presentation the following day

by Eduardo Giannetti da Fonseca, Ph.D.,

Economic Advisor to Ms. Marina da Silva’s (Green Party) Presidential Campaign.


Special Events at the Brazilian-American Chamber of Commerce.


Event Time: 4:00 PM – 6:00 PM
Event Date: Thursday, July 22, 2010
Location: Crowell & Moring LLP    (map)
590 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
New York City
——————————————————————————————————————————————————
================================================

So what did we learn from the presentations?

We will not regard the presentations as separate – but rather as a pair of partially opposites – but not really. Nevertheless, we endeavor to say that we learned a lot about what might trip Brazil, if though nobody was brave enough to present it this way.

In fact, the best update to THE NEW BRAZIL we found in a special insert to The Financial Times of June 29, 2010 – something that also normal people can understand – not just Wall Street undertakers.   FT special report at http://www.ft.com/newbrazil is also a mixed bag with various interests pushing forward from their own angles but we will pick as starter for our report the one by Martin Wolf who says that Brazil may have achieved stability, but its economy lacks the dynamism of the other BRICS and then says that it is indeed an IC world – this for India and China not the BRICS.

——–

The New Brazil

Why Brazil must try harder.

By Martin Wolf

Published: June 28 2010.

Brazil is the country of the future – and always will be. So goes an old joke. But is it a joke on the world at last? Has Brazil – anointed by Goldman Sachs as the B in Brics – at last become a country of the present?

The answer is yes, but only up to a point. Brazil is still a long way from matching the performance of India and China. It can, and should, do far better.

From the among the other 11 articles of The Special Report, the FT EDITOR’S CHOICE are:

Brazil’s great achievements of the past decade and a half are those of stability – political and economic. Under the presidencies of Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-2003) and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (2003-), it has achieved stable democratic rule. The era of military rule, which ended in 1985, seems distant; so, too, do the days of inflation, which peaked at an annual rate of 2,950 per cent in 1990.

Under the “real plan” launched by Cardoso in 1994, inflation was at last tamed. After lowering inflation via a quasi-fixed exchange rate, a currency crisis in 1999 drove Brazil to adopt a floating exchange rate. Since then, the central bank has reduced the interest rate from 45 per cent to a low of 8.75 per cent in 2009. Buttressing this stability has been the accumulation of foreign currency reserves, which reached $235bn by February 2010, up from $33bn in January 1999.

Yet stability is not dynamism. Growth averaged only 2.9 per cent a year between 1995 and 2009. While the contraction in 2009 was modest, at a mere 0.2 per cent of GDP, the International Monetary Fund forecasts growth from 2010-13 at an average of 4.5 per cent, far below rates in China and India.

At least as important a failing is Brazil’s inequality of income. According to the World Bank, its distribution of income is among the most unequal in the world. Even if growth were to accelerate, most of the benefits are likely to go to the richest part of the population.

In 1980, China’s GDP per head (at purchasing power parity) was just 7 per cent of Brazil’s, while India’s was 11 per cent. By 1995, these ratios had reached 23 per cent and 17 per cent, respectively. By 2009, they had reached 63 per cent and 28 per cent. Between 1995 and 2009, the increase in Brazilian GDP per head was only 22 per cent, against 100 per cent for India and 226 per cent for China.

As a result, Brazil’s share of world output, at purchasing power parity, declined from 3.1 per cent in 1995 to 2.9 per cent in 2009. Over the same period, China’s jumped from 5.7 per cent to 12.5 per cent and India’s from 3.2 per cent to 5.1 per cent. This, then, is the rise of the “ICs”, not the Brics.

{But} Brazil is a paradigmatic example of countries that have fallen into what economists call the “middle-income trap”. Can it do better in future?

If the answer is to be yes, Brazil must overcome huge structural disadvantages. Most important is its extremely low level of savings. In 2008, according to the World Bank, its gross savings were a mere 17 per cent of GDP, against India’s 38 per cent and China’s incredible 54 per cent. Unless this is raised to at least 30 per cent of GDP, the chances of sustained and fast growth in living standards are low.

Moreover, only 45 per cent of Brazil’s merchandise exports were manufactured goods in 2008, against 63 per cent for India and 93 per cent for China: industrialisation through trade will be hard to achieve. Brazil has also suffered a massive appreciation of the real exchange rate, estimated by JP Morgan at 156 per cent between October 2002 and April 2010. In addition, the ratio of trade to GDP was 28 per cent in 2008, against India’s 51 per cent and China’s 65 per cent. The appreciation of the real exchange rate makes a rise in the economy’s openness to trade unlikely.

The challenge then is clear and daunting: to move from today’s stability to tomorrow’s growth. With a population of 192m in 2008, Brazil cannot become as big a player in the world as the two Asian giants, but it could still achieve something far more important than power and influence in the world – a prosperous society at home. Much still has to change if that dream is to become reality.

—————————-

As it is obvious that our website is very much in Brazil’s corner, as I had personal many past involvement in Brazil since the 70s,  and I saw that Brazil is capable of innovation and progress, it hurt me that in the two New York events it seemed that much more attention was paid to what is good for Wall Street then on what is actually better for the Brazilians.

————————–

The above was about the economy – and how is it with the politics going into the October 3, 2010, Presidential elections?

Who will lead Brazil?

By Jonathan Wheatley

Published: June 28 2010.

Charismatic leader: Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, president of Brazil, visits a building project of the government’s accelerated growth programme in Rio de Janeiro

If any one figure personifies the New Brazil, it is surely Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, President since January 1 2003 – and whose Presidency will end December 31, 2010.

His childhood journey from rural poverty in Brazil’s hard-scrabble north-east to the industrial rust belt around São Paulo is one that millions of his compatriots have made themselves. His ascendancy from shoeshine boy to lathe operator, from union leader to founder of one of Brazil’s biggest political parties and thence to the presidency, mirrors Brazil’s own extraordinary progress over the past decade and a half.

His charisma and popularity – his support in opinion polls has hardly dipped below 70 per cent during two four-year terms – are the perfect symbol for the exuberance and confidence of Brazil’s rising consumer classes.

But Lula da Silva’s time is almost up. Four months from now, in October, Brazilians must choose a new president.

The FT EDITOR’S CHOICE extends now to four additional articles from that report:

To some, the election makes little difference.

“Sincerely, I really don’t think markets are worried,” says Rogério Schmidt of CLP, a São Paulo political think-tank. “There is a sense that whoever wins, there will be a mix of orthodox and heterodox policies.”

That view is supported by the fact Brazil has enjoyed broad continuity in macroeconomic policies for the past 16 years. The inflation-busting reforms that laid the basis of today’s prosperity were introduced in 1994 by Fernando Henrique Cardoso, then finance minister and subsequently president from 1995 to 2002.

When Lula da Silva was elected to succeed him, Brazil’s borrowing costs soared as investors worried that the former firebrand leftwinger would lose control of public finances and lead Brazil into default.

But Lula da Silva moved quickly to calm such fears, by promising no rupture with the past and by installing trusted pro-market figures at the finance ministry and central bank (the former lost to a corruption scandal in 2006; the latter still in office today). Many observers expect similar or greater continuity when the president hands over to his successor in January.

Others are less sanguine. They worry that investors take too much comfort from the ease of transition last time around and risk becoming complacent about Brazil’s future prospects.

“It worries me that people think this election doesn’t matter,” says Jim O’Neill, chief economist at Goldman Sachs and one of Brazil’s most vocal champions over the past decade. “People are getting carried away.”

He says he has no view on who would make the best presidential successor, as long as that person ensures current macro policies stay in place.

Contender for the presidency: José Serra

The frontrunners in opinion polls are José Serra and Dilma Rousseff. He was governor of São Paulo state (Brazil’s biggest) and she was Lula da Silva’s chief minister until both stood down in April to qualify as candidates.It is often supposed that Serra is the more market-friendly candidate while Rousseff is more inclined to enlarge the role of the public sector in the economy to the detriment of the private sector. Serra was a highly successful health minister under Cardoso who has earned a reputation for managerial efficiency and fiscal austerity, not least as governor of São Paulo. If, as his centrist opposition party, the PSDB, has argued, what Brazil needs most is a dose of good management, he could be the man for the job.

But Rousseff is also billed as a master of management, although with the emphasis on central planning rather than a minimal state.

Lula da Silva calls her “the mother of the PAC [the government’s flagship growth acceleration programme]” and she is closely associated with what Brazilians call “developmentalism” – a drive for growth and income distribution above all else that pays less attention to the need for fiscal reform and an overhaul of Brazil’s tax system and labour laws.

This suggests a broad distinction: Serra more orthodox, Rousseff more populist. Yet this classification does not hold up to much scrutiny. The bastion of orthodoxy in the Lula government has been the central bank, led by Henrique Meirelles, a former head of Bank Boston and a former member of Serra’s PSDB.

Although the bank is not independent by law, it has been given operational independence, adjusting interest rates in pursuit of the government’s annual inflation targets, often in the face of fierce criticism from all sides, both inside and outside government.

Serra – who was moved to health from the planning ministry under Cardoso after disagreements with the finance ministry and central bank – is among the most vocal critics of Brazil’s high interest rates.

It could be argued that he would tackle the fiscal problems that have kept them high for so long. But he has a reputation as an interventionist and in recent interviews has done little to dispel a concern among many economists that he would attempt to reduce interest rates at the stroke of a pen. This, many observers fear, would not only undermine the credibility of monetary policy but also cause a mass walk-out of the central bank’s most competent directors. The impact on investor confidence could be disastrous.

Candidate: Dilma Rousseff

Rousseff has gone out of her way to emphasise that if she wins, the three pillars of stability – inflation targeting, a floating exchange rate and gradual reductions in public debt – will be untouched. She is also close to Meirelles and to Antonio Palocci, the Lula government’s first finance minister who, in terms of economic policy, is probably to the right of Serra.Does this mean that Rousseff is the investor’s choice after all? Perhaps, but perhaps not, for a number of reasons. One is that she is not Lula da Silva, and may lack the political clout to defend the central bank or to hold in check the statist instincts of other leaders of their leftwing party, the PT (and which some commentators say she also shares).

Another is that Serra, while erratic on monetary policy, shows every sign of being far more hawkish on fiscal issues – and a dose of fiscal hawkishness would be to Brazil’s benefit as evidence mounts that the economy is overheating, partly due to the exaggerated presence of the public sector.

Perhaps doubts such as these will be clarified as campaigning starts after the World Cup. But, again, perhaps not. Orthodox economic policies have been good for the Brazilian people but they have rarely gained much popularity, perhaps because of an enduring belief in the beneficial influence of the state.

If the opening salvos in the pre-campaign period have been any guide, the election will come down to a dispute over who is best suited to continue the work of Lula da Silva.

With the most popular president in Brazilian history making it the declared priority of his final year to get her elected as his successor, Rousseff has got to be the one to beat.

———————————-

What above article is missing is the candidacy of Marina da Silva, the Candidate of the Green Party and also a friend of President Lula. The issue is that though she does not have the votes it takes to win, she does have enough votes to influence who of the two above does win. It seems safe to accept that she will b part of a government established by whoever among the two front runners does win.

——————————-

Our last article on deepwater drilling for oil – http://www.sustainabilitank.info/category/latin-america/brazil/#17264 has obviously as well interest to our readers about Brazil.

Oil groups view the reality of upcoming tougher US rules on drilling. How will Canada, Brazil, the UK, Norway and Australia react? What will ExxonMobil, Chevron, Total, ConocoPhillips and Shell do?

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 22nd, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz ( PJ at SustainabiliTank.com)

—————————–

From the two days at the Brazilian-American Chamber of Commerce Inc. I will start with the second say – this was the presentation by Dr. Eduardo Giannetti da Fonseca, a San Paulo based economist of high standing who is also an Economic Advisor to Ms. da Silva’s Presidential Campaign – on a Green Party line.

Mr. da Fonseca is important and, we will not be surprised if Ms da Silva ends up in next government and so Mr. Gianetti da Fonseca.

Marina da Silva’s childhood spent in the rain forest taught her the most valuable lesson anyone can learn: the love for the environment. She says she gets lost in any city in the world, but never in the forest. Already, when she was very young she knew she wanted to save her home, the rainforest, from the destruction by illegal loggers .

2003-08 Minister of Environment Maria Osmarina Marina da Silva Vaz de Lima.
Normally known as Marina Silva, she was elected Senator in 1994. Presidential Candidate for the Green Party in 2010. (b. 1958-).

She has had to fight hard to reduce deforestation in the Amazon by 75 % and because of her, today, Brazil has the strictest environmental laws in the world. She resigned her position as Minister on May 14, 2008 after losing several key battles in her fight to rein in destruction of the Amazon rainforest. Her resignation was a blow to the Lula Government. If the government had any global credibility in environmental issues, it was because of Minister Marina,” Jose Maria Cardoso da Silva, vice president of Conservation International-South America, told Reuters.

She only learned how to read and write when she was 16 years old and moved to the closest town, 70 km away – to Rio Branco. In the forest she was part of rubber trees tappers and worked as a child as there was no school nearby. When she came to Rio Branco she worked all day as a maid, and studied hard at night. She graduated in history in 1985 and soon became involved as a leader in a syndicate, defending workers. She became in 1994 the youngest female senator ever to be elected.

When she resigned from her position of Minister of the Environment it was said that “Brazil is losing the only voice in the government that spoke out for the environment,” Sergio Leitao, director of public policy for Greenpeace in Brazil, was quoted as saying by the Associated Press. “The minister is leaving because the pressure on her for taking the measures she took against deforestation has become unbearable.”

In Brazil, and  internationally, she is a  recognized hero – small in stature but long in spirit. She has no chance to win in the elections, but is considered a potential coalition member by either of the two front runners. As we understood from Mr. Giannetti, she might be favored more by Mr. Serra for balancing purpose.

Mr. Giannetti himself is not a Paul Krugman, not even a Jeffrey Sachs or Joe Stiglitz. Nevertheless, in the Brazilian context he is is advanced, and we dare to say of exactly the mind-set that put together the Financial Times insert we mentioned above.

Mr. Eduardo Giannetti da Fonseca born in Belo Horizonte, in 1957, studied in Sao Paulo, received his doctorate in economics from the University of Cambridge, where he was also a professor from 1984 to 1987. From 1988 to 2001 he taught at the FEA/USP (School of Economics, Business and Accounting of the University of São Paulo). He is currently a full-time professor at IBMEC (Instituto Brasileiro de Mercado de Capitais) São Paulo. He came through as a basically enlightened conventional economist who has serious criticism of the Brazilian government.

He said that huge part of the private sector relies on protection, subsidies etc. This helps the government to neutralize opposition. Business leaders will thus not speak up against the government in order not to be excluded from the ongoing system. In this respect it is clearly worse then the US State Socialism as here the lobbies fight for the share of public funding but never stop criticizing the government that feds them.

Giannetti has helped shape the intellectual debate in Brazil by pointing at things as I just noted and this is what makes him important in the public discourse. His target is the Brazilian Complacency – and the effects of Growth with Imbalances.

In the 90s Brazil used to be hypersensitive to global shocks – now it absorbed the shock without any major effects. Much of this is credited to the fact that it has $250 billion in foreign reserves insurance – this up from $39 billion in 2003. In 1970 it was about zero.

How did it happen? This was thanks to a very dynamic export sector that led to the big turn around in current accounts. There is a positive balance also for the Public Sector – no debt. There was an increase in minimum vages and improvement of credit to the lower income masses.

The continuity of government public policy and monetary stability – this for 12 years – since the second Cardozo government – created the confidence that things are under control. For Brazil, during the recent crisis – it was a clear first. While the world was in crisis – Brazil reduced interest rates whereas in the past it would have acted the other way around and devalued the currency on top. Now, Brazil has a strong currency – maybe too strong.

Even though the public was buying less, there was an increase in expenditures by the public sector and an aggressive program to keep credit flowing – Brazil had a “good” crisis compared to others. Ergo – his optimism for the future of Brazil.

But not so fast – he wants us to remember that it was the same during the second half of the 50′s under the Juscelino Kubitschek government’s growth of 10% consistently – but that was not sustained! They tripled the monetary base in 5 years to build Brasilia – this could not be sustained.

Similarly – in the mid 70′s, when there was the oil crisis, Brazil was an island of prosperity in a sea of turbulence, but it also turned around This because the external debt that was fueled by OPEC money surplus and it ended in a 80′s-90′s collapse.

He is warning of this series of failed stabilization cycles and we must learn from the errors and he proceeded to talk of the threats and the problems.

He says we (Brazil) must learn from errors.  With 7.5% growth per year expectation of inflation is growing. We face now for the first time since 2007 a current account deficit. It can be managed if it is done correctly. The danger is Overheating the economy. The way the government makes money available as implicit subsidy to the public enterprise. The government does not provide consistent figures but the treasury charges a fraction on this debt. This support for business amounts to $8 billion – more then the expenditures on social problems. His criticism of the government is that the expenditures are obscure and he feels not answering democracy and transparency. That is serious criticism and any next government will have to take a long look at it.

On the other hand, the true driving force of growth was consumption. It is by families – this added to private investment and government investment – but we know you cannot do it all at the same time – that causes Overheating and Increased Imports. He went so far as to say that the Brazilian Government is like a brain with two hemispheres not connected – a Fiscal Side part and a Monetary Side part.

Then he moved to education. His complaint that there is no number for measuring human capital build up. His estimate is 1.8% in this area and says 5-6% of GDP are needed for the long run. This creates a distortion in ways of long term business in Brazil.

39% of GDP is mediated by the State and the investment capacity of the private sector is extremely low – there is only 2.1% that comes out of this as capital formation.

OECD countries statistics covering 57 countries, puts Brazil as 54th – and this is because of the human capital deficit.

From her he moved to the Business Environment and pointed out that the Underground Economy in Brazil is 1/3 of the total economy.

This is another big problem. In the World Bank estimates of 1`83 countries Brazil is 129th in the complexity of its tax system causing an absurd situation of the labor market. The government rellies on PAY-ROLL TAXES and 9% of GDP comes from this. The result is that hiring in the labor open market is dangerous to businesses in litigation terms. it takes 2600 hours/year to calculate and collect taxes while similarly outside Brazil it takes 138 hours. These labor and taxation laws become prohibitive and push businesses into the underground economy.

CONCLUSION – In the Short Term Prospects in Brazil are Good – In the Long Term More Difficult.

——-

The elections:

Marina da Silva, his candidate, only dreams.

Serra – has monetaristic views of the policy. Here, if it gets difficult – interest rates are risen. He thinks the currency is already absurdly overvalued – so you really cannot increase interest rates.

Dilma – here he sees as problem that she will just continue the policy as she gets at the end of the Lula Administration.

Giannetti thinks the State has infrastructure problems and is afraid that Dilma will start from the belief that the State can provide the way to attract private enterprise.

——-

The chair remarked that there is agreement that the tax system must be overhauled but there is no agreement on how to do it. He also mentioned that labor is ready to go along with elimination of the labor courts – how can these things be helped by change of Presidency?

A. The political consensus can help in the change. All see that there is a clear need to reduce payroll taxes in order to increase hiring – but then he said education and other things are paid for from these taxes. This is thus counterproductive!

You can improve things when you incorporate the informal economy. To achieve this you must mobilize support. The underground economy has no access to credit, to technology – there is need for leadership to reel this all in!

——

Question on the structural problems – lack of adequate infrastructure that was answered that the Central Bank has to do changes. The sad thing is that in Brazil – Words replace Acts, and we may have reached a state that a World double-dip helps Brazil. If that is salvation – what is damnation?

Question on the potential growth rate based on May data.

A. We again rely on external savings and to some extent they are welcome – but this must be done carefully.

——

NOW WE HAVE REACHED THE POINT WHERE I WAS ABLE TO PLACE MY OWN QUESTION, AND THIS WILL ALSO EXPLAIN WHY I STARTED MY REPORTING WITH MR. GIANNETTI FIRST:

Based on the presentations of the previous day, where to a question of mine I was told that Brazil need the income from Petroleum in order to pursue things like education, it is that the public in Brazil will not be ready to address the possibility of a blowout like it happened in the Gulf of Mexico. I was left feeling like I was the outside kid who simply said the King is naked.

Clearly, we will get back to the above, but let me say that here I started my question from the idea we heard that EDUCATION IS PAID FOR FROM LABOR TAX-ROLLS and mentioned that though Mr. Giannetti also did not touch even in passing the money-making of PETROBRAS, or the Environment, nevertheless, if the money is not really used for the causes he was talking about, then could we take an honest look at the potential damages from deepwater drilling for petroleum?

A. The idea is for using the oil money in a fund established outside Brazil to fund the development of Brazil.  What he is most afraid of for Brazil is that this money falls into the hands of a populist government that gets hold of Brazil – like it happened in other countries of Latin America. It could even turn Brazil to OPEC. In short – he described the well known “curse of oil.”

Giannetti agred with me that the production of oil will become much more expensive in the wake f the Gulf Coast blow-out.

——

To another question he answered that there is no clear analysis of the Brazilian economy by private enterprise because of the fact that most are being subsidized by government and they would not want to fall out of line because that would translate in their losing the subsidies – We have a very diligent bureaucracy that enforces its own codes of unanimous opinion-making.

There are 40 million pay checks that go to 120 million people dependent on them – and that is the real governing power in Brazil he implied.

To the idea of increasing savings in order to create funds for investment – he said it must be all voluntary – he dreads compulsory credit and wants voluntary credit.

==============================

June 10, 2008, Mr. Jose Sergio Gabrielli, President and cEO pf Petroleo Brasiliero S.A. – Petrobras -  was the speaker at a BACC breakfast at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel in New York City.

His line was then: “While some of the world’s largest oil producers, including Mexico and Iran, are struggling to remain exporters, Brazil is moving in the opposite direction. (?? – he said that.)

A huge underwater oil field discovered late last year has the potential to transform South America’s largest country into a sizable exporter and win it a seat at the table of the world’s oil cartel …” He was optimistic that the company could develop the oil — “We think we can develop the oil faster than we thought at the beginning,” Mr. Gabrielli said then. “We don’t think we have any insurmountable challenge on the technology side.”

At the time it was an oil company CEO making his presentation before a room-full of potential Wall Street investors.

We neither heard there the government of Brazil making a political case, nor any other case of national economic significance.
I remembered this episode when I heard from Professor Giannetti that some in Brazil might contemplate joining OPEC. So, here I found the right reference to Petrobras – a mainly government owned company that is supported fully by the government, though it was known in the past of going against Brazil government policy. On this I make reference to the Petrobras resistance to the original Proalcol – or National fuel-ethanol program.

Above, the Brazilian ethanol issue, has been swallowed up now by Petrobras which sees in it another good avenue for profits, and is in the process of turning ethanol into feed for large tanker-ships to be moved overseas.

Whatever, Petrobras rules by now over Brazilian energy and by its mere size, over the Brazilian economy as well. We are sure that they do not need anymore to come to Wall Street in order to advertise their potential – it is now Wall Street that chases after Petrobras. Nevertheless, it is a bit surprising that speakers on Brazil’s economic and political future manage somehow not to mention Petrobras in their presentations.

==============================

Brazil Update: Tight Race for the Presidency

Mateo Samper and Valeria Cruz
July 29, 2010, http://www.as-coa.org/articles/2566/Brazil_Update:_Tight_Race_for_the_Presidency/

Brazilians head to the polls on Sunday, October 3, to choose a new president who will lead the country for the next four years. The top contenders are Dilma Rousseff of the Worker’s Party (PT) and José Serra of the Brazilian Social Democratic Party (PSDB). A third candidate, Marina Silva of the Green Party (PV), trails third in the polls but could be a key player in the likely scenario that neither of the frontrunners wins the requisite 50 percent of ballots in the first round. If necessary, the runoff would be scheduled for October 31.

Rousseff began closing a 20 percent gap with Serra starting in December.

However, for the past three months, the two have been technically tied in the polls. One recent survey shows Rousseff ahead by eight points, but another places Serra on top by just one percentage point. Marina Silva, who has been gaining ground, polls at 10 percent.
The Candidates in Brief

President Luis Inácio Lula da Silva handpicked Rousseff as his successor. She worked as a member of his cabinet since the beginning of his presidency in 2002, first as minister of Energy and Mines and then as chief of staff starting in 2005. If elected, she will be Brazil’s first female president. Prior to serving in the president’s cabinet, Rousseff worked for the city of Porto Alegre’s Treasury Department and for the state of Rio Grande do Sul as state secretary of Energy. She was also active in the restructuring of the center-left Brazilian Labor Party after the end of the military dictatorship in the 1980s.

Rousseff has never been elected to public office, but she now rides high on Lula’s popularity and promises to continue his policies. As she said: “President Lula left me a legacy—to take care of the Brazilian people. I am going to be a mother for all the Brazilian people.” Observers expect her to maintain market friendly economic policies paired with continued federal intervention in the economy.


Internationally, she’s expected to pursue a left-leaning agenda, keeping close ties with Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez and the Castro government in Cuba, as well as to work closely with emerging markets.

Until March 2010, Serra was the governor of the state of São Paulo, the most industrialized state in the country, accounting for over 31 percent of the Brazilian GDP. A U.S.-trained economist with a doctorate, he has been a congressman and a senator, as well as the mayor of São Paulo (2004-2007). He also served as planning minister (1995-1996) and health minister (1998-2002) under President Fernando Henrique Cardoso.

Serra disputed and lost the presidency to Lula in 2002. Considered a center-right pragmatic administrator with pro-market views, the PSDB candidate would continue Lula’s subsidy programs targeting the poor but favors less economic intervention.
Serra has
Regionally, Serra is stronger in the south and southeast, while Dilma is favored in the northeast, north, and midwest of the country—where Lula is also more popular.
been stepping up his criticisms against the Lula administration, questioning Brazil’s alignment with countries such as Venezuela and Iran.

Given the state of the economy and the popularity of the current president, Serra could have a difficult time trying to convince voters   that he represents a better alternative to Rousseff’s continuity.

Green Party candidate Marina Silva is a former senator and world-renowned environmentalist. Silva, who stepped down as Lula’s environment minister in May 2008, proposes to cut taxes and social security benefits, urging a reform of the country’s costly pension system. The PV candidate also indicated that she would continue many of Lula’s policies, such as poverty reduction programs. Rather than promoting handouts, she has pledged to encourage mobility through better education and more job opportunities.

Lula’s Campaign?

In little over six months, Rousseff has surged in the polls, increasing the chances that the PT will remain in power. There are two explanations behind Rousseff’s rising support: the economy and Lula’s huge popularity, which is now close to 78 percent. Brazil has been steadily growing in recent years while keeping inflation low, allowing 13 million people to rise out of poverty from 1995 to 2008. In the midst of the global economic crisis, the country recorded only a mild slowdown. Its economy is expected to grow at around 7 percent this year, which could lead to the creation of thousands of new jobs. Moreover, expanded subsidy programs for low-income families, particularly in the north of the country, has made President Lula hugely popular and helped Rousseff boost her numbers as she promises to continue Lula’s policies and efforts.

An Ibope poll shows that, due to Lula’s strong social policies to fight poverty with programs such as Bolsa de familia, Rousseff has an 11 percent advantage over Serra among minimum-wage earners.
But Lula’s involvement in the presidential race has raised eyebrows. He has used his political influence to promote and openly campaign in favor of his chosen candidate, earning him several fines from the electoral authority. He is now under the investigation of the deputy electoral attorney general, Sandra Cureau, who is studying the possibility of an action before the Brazilian Federal Election Commission against Lula for abuse of political and economic power. In that case, President Lula would garner additional fines and face sanctions, such as the inability to pursue public posts for as many as eight years.

In Brazil, presidents can endorse candidates, but what seems less clear is to what extent. PT lawyer Márcio Luiz Silva argued that the president can campaign when the event is not financed or organized by the federal government. He has also said that, as an affiliated member of the PT, Lula has the right to participate in campaign events in support of his candidate.

What’s Next?

Although television debates and radio commercials do not start until August 17, many of the candidates have begun debating online, as well as hosting campaign rallies. However, Rousseff said she would only participate in four of several planned presidential debates on television, prompting opponents and other analysts to posit that she is ill prepared for debates with Serra and Silva. Rousseff countered that her tight agenda limited her availability for debates and she would be open to interviews in Brasilia.

In spite of the debate dispute, many analysts forecast that, barring a very poor performance in the debates or a major gaffe in what’s left of the campaign, Rousseff will emerge the victor in October.

See more in: Brazil, Democracy & Elections

————————————————————-==================================———————————————

Backing now into the July 21, 2010 Seminar on Brazil’s Economic and Political Outlook presented Midyear 2010, but in clear view of the October 3, 2010 Presidential elections, we listened to the following two panels:

A, The Post-Crisis Election Macro Economy: Policy Challenges and Investment Opportunities.

With Marcelo Salomon, Director and Chief Brazil Economist at Barclays Capital
and Marcel Kasumovich, Founding Partner at Woodbine Capital Advisors.

B. The Electoral Landscape, Platforms, Likely Outcomes: Lula’s Legacy and Shadow 2012-2016.

With Christopher Garman, Director and Head of the Latin America Practice Eurasia Group,
and Paulo Sotero Marques, Director Brazil Institute at the Woodrow Wilson Center.

The welcome remarks were by host Michael J. Gilespi, Partner of Debevoise & Plimpton, LLP our hosts.
and the Introductory Remarks by Paulo Vieira da Cunha, Chairman of the Banking and Capital Markets Committee of the
BACC Inc. and Partner & Head of Research – Emerging Markets Tandem Global Partners.

——-

From the above, we see that all except Paulo Sotero Marques are economists and as this was going on with a Wall Street audience in New York, it became quite clear from the start that this was more about what Wall Street would like to see happen in Brazil, then what is best for Brazil. The point was that if post crisis – The US, China and the EU all grow, Brazil will have to compete in this capital market. Then, if Brazil continues as now, it will have a two tier money lending market and the formal banking system will be more aggressive in order to be able to accommodate growth.


Kasumovich looked at the young population with good potential for new household formation that will lead to growth. He sees the continuation of Microbased policies to facilitate this. He evaluates the situation as being helped by the crisis in the developed world that helped Brazil to avoid superheating. It regulated the normal cyclic expansion mechanism. POORER COUNTRIES RAISE THEIR STANDARDS AND HELP FINANCE THE US – THAT IS THE TRANSITION IN THE GLOBAL ECONOMY.

THE CURRENCY CRISES OF THE PAST WERE I THE FINANCING OF THE US DEBT.  This does not impact the foreign investment in Brazil. The likelihood for a vicious cycle in Brazil is low. The above may change if US troubles go away.

He further said that Petrobras has growth potential and is hampered by management. I cringed thinking what if Petrobras might not want to grow fast? Actually thet are Brazil Government owned and what does the government think? I promis to get back to this point.

Salomon said the missing link is the challenge of growing with savings. He wants sustainable growth. He finds an excellent monetary policy in Brazil, that eliminated inflation, but does not see the effort to answer: “Where do we get the money for investment.” Will it come from foreign savings only? Internal savings is now 14% but 10% more are needed. He asked: “Where the Wild Things Are? – Who will finance the infrastructure investments for the 2014 World Cup, The 2016 Olympics, the Pre-Salt oil extractive business?      —-   IS KEYNES REALLY DEAD – OR HE JUST MOVED TO BRAZIL, he asked.”

Fiscal spending is increased by BNDES and he does not see things discussed during the present crisis as part of the election process.

Garman said there is more at stake: He sees no macroeconomic policy split between Serra and Dilma, but sector specific industrial policy differences. He specifically noted very different views on how to develop Brazil’s oil sector – with repercussion to growth he said. This will influence utilities, telecom, mining as well. He finds that the main difference between Serra and Dilma is in the industrial area. This gave me the clear feeling why the room was rather in Serra’s corner.

Sotero, as I said earlier, was different. He is a Journalist and had the longest resume of the four speakers.

Paulo Sotero was the Washington correspondent for Estado de S.Paulo, the Gazeta Mercantil, for the last seventeen years. He has been also a regular commentator and analyst for the BBC radio’s Portuguese language service, Radio France Internationale, and the Brazilian Rádio Eldorado.He started He is a native of Sao Paulo, stated his career at the Veja weekly in 1968, held positions in Recife, Paris, Lisbon, Sao Paulo, and Brasilia. He is a frequent lecturer on Brazilian affairs at US universities, and think tanks.

Since 2003 he has been an adjunct lecturer at Georgetown University, both in the Department of Spanish and Portuguese and at the Center for Latin American Studies of the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service.

Sotero has a BA in history from the Catholic University of Pernambuco, Brazil, and an MA in Journalism and Public Affairs from The American University in Washington, D.C. In 1987, he received the prestigious Maria Moors Cabot Award Special Citation from the Graduate School of Journalism, Columbia University. He is also the recipient of the 1993 Distinguished Visiting Lecturer award from the Foreign Service Institute of the U.S. Department of State. In Brazil, he was awarded the 1978 “Prêmio Abril de Reportagem” for Veja magazine’s cover story on Paraguay and for an investigative report on the assassination of Chilean General Carlos Prats in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington DC and at Princeton University, September 2006, appointed Sotero , as the director its Brazil Institute.

He is clearly the kind of person that could evaluate not just the US interest in Brazil, but also what the people of Brazil would want to see happen to them.

Dilma is clearly more ideological, and she has Lula’s backing in a country that loves Lula because he leaves the State in much better shape then he found it.

Under her, there will be a clear supervision of exchange rates as her advisors will not want to see the currency appreciate – so the make-up of the Central Bank will be at play. Serra on the other hand will rather watch expenditures.

2010 is a dream year to run on a platform of continuity and Lula’s legacy and shadow will extend to the 2012-2016 years.

It is clear – there is an enormously popular president, a satisfied population, an impressive economic achievements’ record and a prommissing economic outlook.

———–

At Q&A time, and having heard about the reliance on income from oil as a way to fund development projects, while the oil is indeed of deepwater drilling source, and these being the days of the US BP Gulf disaster I decided to ask if in Brazil people read the papers about what can happen with this sort of oil production?

From Mr. Garman I got a clear answer that it is of no concern to the Brazilians – specially as the economy is based on this income and people want education and education needs money … In this respect please see why I started the review from the following day’s presentation by Mr. Giannetti who said that education is paid from the taxes taken from labor. So – here goes out the argument that Brazil economy is based on that oil.

Further o – Mr. Sotero picked up my question also and said that 25% of all investments in Brazil will go to oil & gas – this is the BNDES (the National Bank) forecast. That would tie down Brazil in many respects.

In effect, the choice is to do it slower in order to develop other sectors of the economy – that will bring gains slower. But I clearly felt that this is more sustainable.

Further, in private, one of the participants told me that the water currents are such that if there is an accident – the oil will go south to Argentina and will not hurt the Brazilian beaches – Well that is nice to know. We hope the Argentinians read this also.

———–

The bottom line perspective of this end of July report of Brazil going to the October 3, 2010 elections, It seems the future may hold a presidency that will try to continue the achievements of the Lula eight years and it will be led by Ms. Dilma Rousseff with the support of Ms. Marina da Silva.

We hope that this Brazilian Administration will clamp down on Petrobras and hold back somewhat from the development of oil beyond what is best for the Brazilian economy. The best one can hope for is that they continue to do it by themselves, at low speed, and do not look for outside companies that might be more inclined to lead them to disaster. The government will have to supervise the Petrobras accounting and indeed get the income from this that the government needs in order to build up the consumer society to help in Brazil growth as justified by its effort to grow along China and India.

The official campaigning starts August 17th and provided there is no “September surprise” above is our estimate as of today.



###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 30th, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:40:54

United States-India Agreement for Nuclear Cooperation Conclusion of Reprocessing Arrangements and Procedures.

Office of the Spokesman
Washington, DC
July 30, 2010

Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Bill Burns and Indian Ambassador to the United States H.E. Meera Shankar today signed the Arrangements and Procedures Pursuant to Article 6(iii) of the Agreement for Cooperation Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy regarding the reprocessing of U.S.-obligated nuclear material in India. Upon entry into force, the Arrangements and Procedures will enable reprocessing by India of United States-obligated nuclear material at a new national reprocessing facility to be established by India dedicated to the reprocessing of safeguarded nuclear material under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards. These Arrangements and Procedures will facilitate participation by United States firms in India’s expanding civil nuclear energy sector.

This arrangement, negotiated and concluded under President Obama, reflects the Administration’s strong commitment to building successfully on the landmark U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Cooperation Initiative and is a prerequisite for U.S. nuclear fuel suppliers to conduct business with India. Previously, the United States had extended such reprocessing consent only to the European Union (EURATOM) and Japan. The Civil Nuclear Cooperation Initiative has facilitated significant new commercial opportunities across India’s multi-billion dollar nuclear energy market, including the designation of two nuclear reactor park sites for U.S. technology in the states of Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat. Increased civil nuclear trade with India will create thousands of new jobs for the U.S. economy while helping India to meet its rising energy needs in an environmentally responsible way by reducing the growth of carbon emissions.

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 30th, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

Open letter from Dr. James Hansen, published in Aftenposten, May 19, 2010


Dear Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg

As you know, I am fond of Norway, and have great respect for your country and its citizens, as well as for your personal ambitions to protect global climate. Your recent rainforest initiative is a splendid example of leadership the world desperately needs. And your commitment at the Copenhagen climate talks to reduce Norway’s emissions 40 per cent by 2020 was exemplary.

However, and especially in light of that, I am disappointed to learn that Statoil, Norway’s state-owned oil company, has taken such backward strides through its strategic decision to invest in Canada’s destructive tar sands industry. As the most energy-intensive source of oil, this project represents the worst of what humans are doing to the planet in a quest to prolong our global addiction to fossil fuels.

It is still feasible to stabilize the climate, but only if we leave the tar sands in the ground. The massive greenhouse gas amounts from the tar sands surely would cause the climate system to pass tipping points, while also trampling on the human rights of Canada’s First Nation communities and greatly damaging the Canadian boreal forest.

Prime Minister Stoltenberg, the world has reached a critical juncture in the climate debate. We can either move into the production of the most damaging fossil fuel, or we can begin to address our destructive addiction. We desperately need leadership at this time. I am confident that you could provide that leadership. Please do not prove me wrong.

In your capacity as owner or more than two-thirds of the shares in Statoil, I urge you to end Norway’s involvement in this dangerous, dirty and destructive project. I ask that you support the resolution at Statoil’s upcoming AGM on May 19th, that Statoil show environmental leadership and pull out of the Canadian tar sands. Statoil may pride itself on being a more responsible company than others, but that will not be enough in the tar sands. If we extract and use the tar sands, there can be no sustainable future for young people.

I look forward to my visit to Norway in June. I hope that it can be a time to celebrate Norwegian leadership in responsible environmental policies

Dr. James Hansen
James E. Hansen is member of the National Academy of Sciences, an adjunct professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia University and at Columbia’s Earth Institute, grandfather and winner of the Sophie Prize 2010.
James E. Hansen will visit Norway June 22 and 23 2010 to receive the Sophie Prize.

—————-

The answer from the Government:

Dear Mr. Hansen,

Thank you very much for your e-mail to the Prime Minister, which was forwarded to the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy as the governmental body responsible for Statoil ownership issues. Let me first take this opportunity to congratulate you on being awarded the Sophie-prize for 2010. I know a lot of people are looking forward to your visit to Norway, and I hope you will enjoy your stay here.

On behalf of the Government, I am pleased to say that we hold your work on climate change in high esteem, and further, that we appreciate your engagement and your views on Norway’s efforts to find good sustainable solutions to the global climate challenges.

As you now know from the results of the Statoil Annual General Meeting, we see Statoil’s oils sands investment as a commercial decision which is within the Statoil board’s area of responsibility. We are of the opinion that such decisions should not be overturned by the AGM. It is our opinion that this is in line with good corporate governance, a view that is also shared by a vast majority in the Norwegian Parliament. I can however assure you that we will continue our offensive stance on climate change issues both at home and abroad, and we look forward to your continued engagement.

Yours faithfully
Robin Martin Kåss
Statssekretær, Olje- og Energidepartementet
Deputy Minister, Ministry of Petroleum and Energy
Postboks 8148 Dep, 0033 Oslo, Norway

Fra: Jim Hansen
Sendt: 24. mai 2010 14:08
Til: Postmottak SMK
Kopi: Jim Hansen
Emne: Climate Change and the Tar Sands Development Vedlegg: Hansen text for ad and letter in both languages.doc

Dear Prime Minister Stoltenberg,

I understand that you may have missed my open letter to you published in Aftenposten, so for your convenience I have attached it here.

My wife Anniek and I are looking forward to visiting your beautiful country in June.
With kind regards,
James E. Hansen

————–

AND THE – Message from Sophie Prize Winner.

I am grateful to Jostein Gaarder and the Sophie Foundation for the opportunity to discuss the state of Earth’s climate, the implications for people and nature, and action that is needed.

Our planet today is close to climate tipping points. Ice is melting in the Arctic, on Greenland and Antarctica, and on mountain glaciers worldwide. Many species are stressed by environmental destruction and climate change. Continuing fossil fuel emissions, if unabated, will cause sea level rise and species extinction accelerating out of humanity’s control. Increasing atmospheric water vapor is already magnifying climate extremes, increasing overall precipitation, causing greater floods and stronger storms.

Stabilizing climate requires restoring our planet’s energy balance. The physics is straightforward. The effect of increasing carbon dioxide on Earth’s energy imbalance is confirmed by precise measurements of ocean heat gain. The principal implication is defined by the geophysics, by the size of fossil fuel reservoirs. Simply put, there is a limit on how much carbon dioxide we can pour into the atmosphere. We cannot burn all fossil fuels. Specifically, we must (1) phase out coal use rapidly, (2) leave tar sands in the ground, and (3) not go after the last drops of oil.

Actions needed so that the world can move on to the clean energies of the future are possible and practical. The actions would restore clean air and water globally, assuring intergenerational equity by preserving creation – the natural world — thus also helping achieve north-south justice. But the needed actions will happen only if the public becomes forcefully involved.
Citizens can help by blocking coal plants, tar sands, and mining the last drops of fossil fuels from public and pristine lands and the deep ocean. However, fossil fuel addiction can be solved only when we recognize an economic law as certain as the law of gravity: as long as fossil fuels are the cheapest energy they will be used.

Solution therefore requires a rising fee on oil, gas and coal – a carbon fee collected from fossil fuel companies at the domestic mine or port of entry. All funds collected should be distributed to the public on a per capita basis to allow lifestyle adjustments and spur clean energy innovations. As the fee rises, fossil fuels will be phased out, replaced by carbon-free energy and efficiency.
Governments today, instead, talk of “cap-and-trade-with-offsets”, a system rigged by big banks and fossil fuel interests. Cap-and-trade invites corruption. Worse, it is ineffectual, assuring continued fossil fuel addiction to the last drop and environmental catastrophe.

We need a simple honest flat rising carbon fee across the board. It should be revenue neutral – all funds distributed to the public – “100 percent or fight”. It is the only realistic path to global action. China and India will not accept caps, but they need a carbon fee to spur clean energy and avoid fossil fuel addiction.

But our governments have no intention of solving the fossil fuel and climate problem, as is easy to prove: the United States, Canadian and Norwegian governments are going right ahead developing the tar sands, which, if it is not halted, will make it impossible to stabilize climate.

Our governments knowingly abdicate responsibility for young people and future generations. I have been disappointed in interactions with more than half a dozen nations. In the end, they offer only soothing words, “goals” for emission reductions at far off dates, while their actual deeds prevent stabilization of climate.

The Sophie Prize provides a new opportunity to draw attention to the actions that are needed to stabilize climate. Norway may be the best place, with its history of environmentalism. I can imagine Norway standing tall among nations, taking real action to address climate change, drawing attention to the hypocrisy in the words and pseudo-actions of other nations.

So I wrote a letter to the Prime Minister suggesting that the government, as the majority owner of Statoil, should intervene in planned tar sands development. I appreciate the polite response, by letter, from the Deputy Minister of Petroleum and Energy. The government position is that the tar sands investment is “a commercial decision”, that the government should not interfere, and that a “vast majority in the Norwegian parliament” agree that this constitutes “good corporate governance”. The Deputy Minister concluded his letter “I can however assure you that we will continue our offensive stance on climate change issues both at home and abroad”.

A Norwegian grandfather, upon reading the Deputy Minister’s letter, quoted Saint Augustine: “Hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtue.”

The Norwegian government’s position is a staggering reaffirmation of the global situation: even the greenest governments find it too inconvenient to address the implication of scientific facts. Perhaps our governments are in the hip pocket of the fossil fuel industry – but that is not for science to say.

What I can say from the science is this: the plans that governments, including Norway, are adopting spell disaster for young people and future generations. And we are running out of time.

Stabilizing climate is a moral issue, a matter of intergenerational justice. Young people, and older people who support the young and the other species on the planet, must unite in demanding an effective approach that preserves our planet.

Because the executive and legislative branches of our governments are turning a deaf ear to the science, the judicial branch may provide the best opportunity for redressing the situation. Our governments have a fiduciary responsibility to protect the rights of young people and future generations. I look forward to working with young people and their supporters in developing the legal case for young people and the planet.

To the young people I say: Stand up for your rights, for your future. Demand that the government be honest, admit and face the consequences for you from their policies.

To the old people I say: we are not too old to fight. Let us gird up our loins and prepare to fight on the side of young people for protection of the world they will inherit.

I look forward to standing with the youth of the world as they demand their proper due and fight for nature and their future.

————————

Other Recent Publications by Dr. James Hansen:

2010. Obama’s Second Chance on the Predominant Moral Issue of this Century. Op-ed on Huffington Post, Apr. 5.

2010. Only a carbon tax and nuclear power can save us. Op-ed in The Australian, Mar. 11.

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 30th, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

The following is a year old (July 1, 2009) series of two articles by Matthew Russell Lee showing the way the UN Department, that is supposed to provide Information to the Public, does nothing more then glorify the Secretary-General. Frankly – this is the understanding the UN has of the concept of information – that is no different then in China or Egypt – but then, according to today’s article that is based on criticism from OSCE – to be fair – this is the structural problem also in France. We will undertake looking into these issues further, as the UN will release these days its final decision on who is a journalist. Will they allow for the eventuality that true journalism is entitled to criticize the UN, or they will continue on the path of obfuscation and cover-ups.

=================
 http://www.innercitypress.com/unrules1me…

UN Says and Shows It Won’t Cover Stories Countries Don’t Like, Critics Targeted.

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN: News Analysis

UNITED NATIONS, July 1 — The UN runs its own News Service, its own Video and Radio operations. The chief of these divisions, Ahmad Fawzi, was asked on July 1 what the UN does on the story if “a country regards it as not a good story.”

“We don’t do it,” Mr. Fawzi. The audience at the UN-TV showcase, mostly comprised of UN staff members, laughed. Inner City Press followed up, asking if the UN would cover news events that trigger criticism of the UN, like the slaughters in Rwanda or Srebrenica.

Fawzi replied that the UN commissioned a report on the failures of its member states and peacekeeping operation in Srebrenica. He added, “Are we going to produce a video about it? I don’t know.”

Inner City Press has previously interviewed Mr. Fawzi’s colleague Susan Farkas, now the head of UN TV and Radio and present at the July 1 screening, who told the Press, “I find it astonishing that you think there’s a story in the fact that we don’t investigate the UN… The UN pays us. The UN pays us to produce a program which promotes the issues that the UN cares about.”

Thus, the first of the videos shown on July 1 concerned children left behind in Moldova as their parents migrate for jobs. The second concerned the genocide in Rwanda, but merely mentioned without explaining that prior to the upsurge in killing, nearly all UN personnel left.

It certainly did not mention the UN Development Program staffer who used UN equipment to round up and target Tutsis to be killed. That is not the only story, but it is part of the story. And a stoytelling that is precluded from the beginning from including all pertinent facts cannot be called independent.

Inner City Press asked Fawzi about the UN News Service, which churns out relentlessly pro-UN stories, ranging from Ban Ki-moon’s popularity to the UN’s successes in the Congo. Appearing to take the question to be about the UN’s press release service, Fawzi said “we cover what happens in the building [but] it is not gloss, it is not promotional, it tells what goes on in the House.”

But UN News Service covers nearly every statement by UN agency, never quotes a critic or even raises a question. It is not unlike the state news agencies of some member countries. And any member state, it appears, can get a story removed from the Service. A story on Nagorno Karabakh, for example, fell under criticism and was quietly taken down. So too a story about Sri Lanka from the affiliated — but ostensibly even more independent — UN humanitarian Relief Web news service.

While in the previous interview Ms. Farkas went on to ask, “Do you work for the Heritage Foundation,” on July 1 Fawzi said, “there are others whose job it is to look at us critically and we accept that with a very open mind and an open heart.”

It is not clear what “we” he was referring to. Consider a “Dear Colleague” letter circulated to the 435 members of the House of Representatives earlier this week, the text of which is below.


In UN-TV, Fawzi (at right) monitors Ban Ki-moon’s image

“Angered by past and continuing media reports of corruption, mismanagement and inaction at the United Nations, the UN is again seeking to cover up evidence and stifle freedom of the press.

Meeting on May 8 about ‘reporting by the press,’ high level UN officials discussed sending threatening letters to several press agencies and other bodies, as well as complaining to Google News about a small, independent news agency that has uncovered numerous UN scandals. Last year, a similar complaint resulted in that agency’s temporary removal from Google News. In response to a question about that meeting, the Secretary General’s spokeswoman furiously retorted, ‘I don’t have to account to you for meetings I participate in.’

The UN’s Department of Management is also reportedly pushing to obstruct press coverage, seeking to charge media outlets $23,000 to maintain office space, and to move journalists covering the UN into open, un-walled offices — deterring whistleblowers from coming forth and preventing oversight.

These UN efforts to restrict press freedom and oversight directly contravene the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which recognized that ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression… and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.’ Once again, the UN is actually undermining the principles on which it was founded.”

The May 8 meeting, involving Under Secretaries General Angela Kane (Management), Kiyo Akasaka (Public Information — the boss of both Mr. Fawzi and Ms. Farkas) and Patricia O’Brien (Legal Affairs), as well as Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s speech writer Michael Meyer and Spokesperson Michele Montas, was memorialized in a memo from Ms. Kane to Ban.

Inner City Press was shown the memo, wrote and asked Ban’s spokeswoman Michele Montas about it by email, along with the three USGs, none of whom has yet to explain how their participation is consistent not only with the First Amendment, which they say does not apply, but even to the cited Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

While it has previously been claimed to Inner City Press that the UN would not, for example, even consider seeking to have a publication removed from Google News, Ms. Kane’s memo shows different. What was that again, that “there are others whose job it is to look at us critically and we accept that with a very open mind and an open heart”?  Some do and some don’t.

Footnote: the “Dear Colleague” letter circulated on Capitol Hill states that the UN is “seeking to charge media outlets $23,000 to maintain office space, and to move journalists covering the UN into open, un-walled offices — deterring whistleblowers from coming forth and preventing oversight.” Previously the Department of Public Information, where Mr. Fawzi works and which Mr. Akasaka heads, told UN journalist they would have the same walled free space during and after the fix-up on the UN building.

Now that first $23,000 was demanded, then wall-less “whistlebelower free” zones have been offered, no explanation of the change has been offerer, nor how it is consistent with the statement that “there are others whose job it is to look at us critically and we accept that with a very open mind and an open heart.” Watch this site.

* * *

UN E-mails Allege Plot to Deny Ban a Second Term, Trick for Supachai at UNCTAD?

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN: Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, June 24 — Weeks after the filing with the UN investigative unit of emails showing a dirty tricks campaign by staffers of UN Conference on Trade and Development chief Supachai Panitchpakdi to get a second term, on Wednesday UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon nevertheless announced he is supporting Supachai for another four years.

Inner City Press, which exclusively reported the filing on June 22, asked Ban’s spokesperson if Ban had considered its contents, and acknowledged any connection between them and the reappointment.

The most explosive part of the emails, being published for the first time today by Inner City Press, are the arguments made in a May 8, 2009 email by Supachai’s special adviser Kobsak Chutikul, that African and other countries were supporting Ivory Coast’s former trade minister to deny Supachai from Thailand a second term in order to set a precedent to deny Ban Ki-moon a second term as Secretary General, due to “his perceived Western backers.”

Ban’s spokesperson declined to comment on the filing, saying it is before the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services. Video here from Minute 10:45. But senior Ban officials including Management chief Angela Kane and Ethics Officer Robert Benson have had the complaint since June 4. Meanwhile, the complainant has reportedly been demoted.

Inner City Press asked Supachai if his UNCTAD has any whistleblower protection provisions. Yes we will follow those, Supachai answered. He claimed he “never campaigned,” despite what the emails show his special adviser Kobsak Chutikul doing. He claimed he only “responded to some countries’ remarks.” Video here, from Minute 56:18.

Given these statement, Inner City Press is today publishing some of the emails at issue, here.


UN’s Ban and UNCTAD’s Supachai: a snub of latter hurts former?
In a May 8, 2009 email marked Attachment E and headlined, “NAM Note Verbale,” Chutikul wrote to three senior UNCTAD staff, including the subsequent complainant:

“Gentlemen, please see attached NAM Note Verbale sent out to all NAM Missions today. In light of this new development, it is the assessment of Thai and some ASEAN Ambassadors that the picture has become clear — UNCTAD SG post has become an innocent bystander caught in the middle of a bigger struggle… The goal seems to be to insist on geographical rotation of posts, and undermining the practice / tradition of two continuous terms, with the real target being the UN SG (and his perceived western backers).”

This argument raises the issue, for some interviewed by Inner City Press so far: did Ban have something of a conflict of interest in overriding (after working to override and change) African Group resistance and giving Supachai a second term? In fact, that too is laid out in Supachai’s special adviser’s Mach 8 e-mail, referring to telling Team Ban “things like ‘you are the real target’ or ‘you are next.’”

The emails point to several other improprieties, and it is extraordinary that Team Ban wants or wanted to ignore them and simply reappoint Supachai.

Following Chutikul’s”all hands on deck” e-mail, the press was on to get Ban to announce his referral of Supachai’s renomination to the General Assembly. A Chinese staff member conferred with Beijing, and that asked for evidence of which way Ban was leaning (Attachment G). Another UNCTAD staffer questioned why the African Group targeted the second term of Supachai and not Frenchman Pascal Lamy at the World Trade Organization — “because he’s white”? The e-mails are replete with racial references.

Now what will happen?

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 30th, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

C2C Launch Conference! Building a Climate Network, Williams College 9/24/10.

|
from Eban Goodstein <nti.eban@gmail.com>
date Fri, Jul 30, 2010
subject C2C Launch Conference! Building a Climate Network, Williams College 9/24

C2C/The National Climate Seminar

Dear friends and colleagues,

Amidst the wreckage of climate legislation in DC, one thing is clear. This is not the fight of a day, of a year or of a decade. Even had the Senate acted, changing the future would still have required a vibrant, engaged global citizenry, pushing every day of every year, for the next 40 years, to decarbonize the planet.

American social movements—from abolition to civil rights—crest in legislation that changes the direction of the nation, and the world. We hoped this would be the year. We were wrong.

So let’s get back to it.  C2C is launching this fall, with a mini-conference at the Williams College Center for Environmental Studies on 9/24, from 3 pm-9 pm.
Join us for a brainstorm on how we can:

1. Every year, engage educators at 1,000 colleges, universities and high schools, and

2. Every year, involve 50,000 students in direct video and conference-call dialogue with Congress, with Corporations and with Cities, on clean energy solutions to global warming.

Economist Juliet Schor, author of Plentitude, will keynote.

To register for the conference, please contact jofrench@bard.edu.

There is no charge to attend.

Following the launch conference, on 9/29 at 3 PM Eastern, join us for a National C2C Webinar. We need your ideas on how we can build a permanent and growing national network, including tens of thousands of faculty, students and staff, in regular dialogue with key decision-makers on climate.

This is the fight of our lives. Thanks for the work you are doing.

Eban Goodstein
Director, Bard Center for Environmental Policy

www.bard.edu/cep

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

The National Climate Seminar, a twice-monthly discussion featuring top scientists, political leaders and policy analysts, is sponsored by The Bard Center for Environmental Policy, and made possible by a grant from The Clif Bar Family Foundation.
The Clif Bar Foundation is our longest-standing National Teach-in partner. Forty Percent of Car Trips are within two miles of your home: Take Clif Bar’s Two-Mile Challenge and ride or walk instead!
Books & Videos For the National Teach-In

***

C2C is the e-bulletin of the public policy initiatives of the Bard Center for Environmental Policy.

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 30th, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

An Entire Generation of India’s Brightest Students is Galvanized into Tackling Sustainability, Climate Change, Energy Security and the Environment.

IIT Madras to Host The 2010 Al Gore Sustainable Technology Venture Competition™, India, in Chennai, September 30 ? October 3, 2010.

——————

The The Al Gore Sustainable Technology Venture CompetitionTM 2010 to be held at IIT Madras
September 30 – October 3, 2010.

Founded in early 2007, The Al Gore Sustainable Technology Venture Competition™, Asia’s first and most prestigious sustainable/clean technology business plan competition, brings green and sustainable technologies to market through entrepreneurship, to fortify energy security, enhance sustainability on the planet, and tackle climate change.

Now in its third year, the competition is the brainchild of Prof. Oopali Operajita, CEO, Cicero, A Trans National Advisory, a Senior Strategic and International Affairs Adviser to several of India’s prominent political leaders in India’s Parliament, and a former Distinguished Faculty Fellow at Carnegie Mellon University,USA.

The Al Gore Sustainable Technology Venture CompetitionTM is a student-led business plan competition, which provides mentoring for, and exposure to, the development of sustainable technology ventures from around the world, to combat climate change and fortify energy security.  The competition supports the creation of real businesses that bring about positive change through new technologies in a sustainable manner.

The Al Gore Sustainable Technology Venture CompetitionTM consists of two rounds: a preliminary round of online submissions (the deadline is August 10, 2010), followed by a presentation round to venture capitalists, angel investors, industrialists and distinguished faculty at IIT Madras. The best entries from the preliminary round will be selected to participate in the finals at IIT Madras, September 30 – October 3, 2010. During the final round of the competition, students will present the environmental, financial and social values of their businesses, gaining valuable feedback from some of the best minds in the field.

Cash Prizes of Rs. 1,00,000 and Rs. 70,000 will be awarded to the winners and runners up.

The IIT Madras Finalist Team (Greenext Technology Solutions) from the 2009 Al Gore Sustainable Technology Venture Competition™ won the First Coveted ‘NYC Next Idea’ Prize from Mayor Bloomberg in New York City. Here’s a link to the story. Here‘s the coverage on the leading Indian television channel NDTV 24×7.

For further details, please visit  website:

http://www.cicerotransnational.com/agstvc.html

or send us email mail at: agstvc (at) shaastra (dot) org        or agstvc (at) gmail (dot) com

###

Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 30th, 2010
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)

What makes a good UN story? We hinted at the Kevin Rudd idea earlier but we were still waiting for further developments.

Are we seeing here rumors because of infighting in Australia on the way to their National elections August 21, 2010?

Are we on the trail of rumors intended to save the Ban Ki-moon reelection to a second term?

Are we watching an Obama approach to create a new environment to save negotiations on climate?

Kevin Rudd would be an excellent choice to extricate the UN from the hole it created in the “Seal the Deal” charade when every child could have seen that the G192 is no environment to talk about Sustainable Energy options.

Australia is no good example either – but Kevin Rudd was ready to step out of his nation’s “is” and aim for a better future.

He got punished for this and perhaps is now ready for revenge by working on a global level that will then sweep with him his own country as well.

With his experience as Australia’s Prime Minister with-vision that was cut short from bringing his own country into the group of real leaders for tomorrow, he can work with President Obama and perhaps the other four leaders that hammered out the Copenhagen platform that is not dependent on all climate mongers of the UN circuit. As a fresh figure, he could perhaps sit down with the ALBA folks and take the best ideas they have and incorporate them also in a new recipe under the SUSTAINABILITY big sky of the future.

Will the UN accept him as a new Super Czar of a combined  UNCSD and UNFCCC – or let him form a new structure so these older structures will just wilt away into oblivion slowly? Who knows? But let us follow this new world hype.

The subject having slowly boiled in the PRESS has reached also www.UNelection.org – so it is time for us to try out the waters ourselves also. This then reinforced the UNelections interest in the issue as per added -
http://unelections.org/?q=node/2056

=================================================
 http://unelections.org/?q=node/2052

 http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/special…

Click here to read “Kevin Rudd could be offered UN role before end of election campaign” – Herald Sun, July 29, 2010

Kevin Rudd could be offered UN role before end of election campaign

Kevin Rudd at the UN

Kevin Rudd talks with UN secretary-general Ban Ki-Moon / AP Source: AP

KEVIN Rudd’s new United Nations post could be announced before the end of the election in what looms as another major embarrassment for Julia Gillard.

The Herald Sun can reveal the UN body Mr Rudd is being considered for is being set up under the working title High-Level Panel on Global Sustainability.

Mr Rudd is believed to have been backed for the post by the UN’s chief climate adviser, Janos Pasztor, and is odds-on to be offered the job.

Diplomatic sources said the decision could be made within weeks, which raises the spectre of an appointment before the election.

“It’s on the cards,” a source said of a pre-election announcement.

The Herald Sun believes Mr Rudd is favoured in part because he will have direct access to resources paid for by the Australian taxpayer.

This is on the assumption that the former prime minister is re-elected to Federal Parliament on August 21, 2010.

Related Coverage

Climate change reform will be the centrepiece of the panel, virtually guaranteeing conflict with a Gillard government, assuming Labor is re-elected.

Sources said it would be created to look at climate change in the context of broader sustainable development, and would be part-time.

Mr Rudd has declined to say whether the appointment would be paid.

If he were to be paid, this could raise allegations he would be a part-time MP.

Mr Rudd’s spokesman directed questions to the UN, declining to say whether he already had accepted the position.

Mr Rudd has previously said he would serve a full term in Parliament and that any UN position would be part-time.

“It is a matter, of course, for the United Nations Secretary-General to clarify what roles would be played by any individual on such a panel,” Mr Rudd said on July 22.

The biggest political risk for the Government is that the UN body clashes on climate change policy backed by Ms Gillard.

Mr Rudd previously backed a 5 per cent emissions cut on 2000 levels by 2020 as well as a so-called cap-and-trade scheme, which involves setting limits on carbon emissions but allowing heavy polluters to buy permits to allow them to emit more carbon.

Mr Rudd dropped his legislation this year when it was blocked by the Coalition in the Senate and his handling of the issue was considered crucial to him being dumped as PM.


—————————————–

  1. News for “Kevin Rudd” at the UN?


    ABC Online
    UN role awaits Rudd? – 1 day ago

    KEVIN Rudd’s new United Nations post could be announced before the end of the election in what looms as another major embarrassment for Julia Gillard.

    Herald Sun1876 related articles »

  2. Kevin Rudd “in line for UN climate job” | Australian Climate Madness

    Jul 22, 2010 Our socially-disfunctional-verging-on-autistic ex-PM would fit right in at the UN, spouting platitudes about saving the planet and the evils
    www.australianclimatemadness.com/?p=4315AustraliaCached

  3. Kevin Rudd could be offered UN role before end of election

    Jul 29, 2010 KEVIN Rudd’s new United Nations post could be announced before the end of the election in what looms as another major embarrassment for
    www.heraldsun.com.au/…/kevin-ruddun…/story-fn5ko0pw-1225898207146

  4. [PDF]

    told – SPEECH BY PRIME MINISTER KEVIN RUDD TO THE UNITED NATIONS

    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
    SPEECH BY PRIME MINISTER KEVIN RUDD TO THE. UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY. Acknowledgement. Mr President. I would like to congratulate you on your
    www.un.org/ga/63/generaldebate/pdf/australia_en.pdf

  5. United Nations wants Kevin Rudd for top climate job | The Daily

    Jul 22, 2010 KEVIN Rudd has confirmed he has been approached to take up a job with the United Nations.
    www.dailytelegraph.com.au/…/united-nationskevin-rudd…/story-fn5zm695-1225895300050

  6. Kevin Rudd considering UN job as climate adviser

    Jul 22, 2010 Latest news, breaking news – Kevin Rudd considering UN job as climate Ousted Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is considering a UN
    www.indianexpress.com/news/kevin-ruddun-job-as…/650285/Cached

  7. Bangkok Post : Ex-Australian PM Rudd in talks over UN role

    Jul 22, 2010 Ousted Australian prime minister Kevin Rudd Thursday confirmed talks over a possible United Nations role but said he did not plan to quit
    www.bangkokpost.com/…/ex-australian-pm-rudd-in-talks-over-un-roleCached

  8. Kevin Rudd tipped for top UN climate job – Developmental Issues

    Jul 22, 2010 Australian ex-prime minister Kevin Rudd is angling for the post of a climate change adviser to the United Nations, news reports said
    timesofindia.indiatimes.com/…/Kevin-RuddUN…/6201236.cmsCached

  9. Kevin Rudd tipped for UN climate job | Perth Now

    Jul 22, 2010 KEVIN Rudd is being considered by the United Nations for a top-level job that would force him to leave Australia.
    www.perthnow.com.au/…/kevin-ruddun…/story-e6frg15u-1225895337247

  10. Rudd confirms UN talks – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting

    Jul 22, 2010 Kevin Rudd has confirmed he has been sounded out about the possibility of a job with the United Nations, but says he is still committed to
    www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/07/22/2961142.htmCached

  11. Kevin Rudd confirms talk with UN boss | News.com.au

    Jul 22, 2010 OUSTED prime minster Kevin Rudd has confirmed he has spoken with the United Nations Secretary-General about a possible appointment.
    www.news.com.au/…/kevin-rudd…talk…un…/story-e6frfku0-1225895627286

  12. Videos for “Kevin Rudd” at the UN?

    Kevin Rudd tipped for UN climate job | The
    Jul 21, 2010
    www.dailytelegraph.com.au

###

« Previous Articles
Next Articles »

RSS Feed

back to top