The New Nation - Internet Edition

Sunita Narain

Tigers or tribals? Tribals versus tigers. This is how the discussion on the tribal forest rights act is being framed. The law, which was enacted by parliament a while ago, is aimed at conferring land rights on people who already live in forested regions. The government says it wants to correct a historical wrong against people on whom rights were never settled when forest areas were earmarked for conservation. Quite right. But these homes of the poorest also house the country's magnificent wild animals, like tigers. It is critical that their habitat should be protected and future safeguarded. This is also quite right.

Is it possible to reconcile the interests of what seems to be two competing groups?

Two years ago the debate was stormy. The draft forest rights bill was being worked upon by a government just sworn into power.

Around this time, it was discovered-to everyone's horror-that all tigers from what was supposed to be a protected area, the Sariska National Park, had been poached. Opposition to the draft bill mounted; conservationists argued that this "populist" measure would be the last nail in the tiger's coffin.

I was asked to head a task force to suggest how tigers could be safeguarded. Over three months the specialists we met believed that it was important to reserve areas for wildlife.

These would need to be inviolate areas-exclusively earmarked for animals where human interference would have to be kept at its minimum. Otherwise, they said, the tiger would not survive. They believed that if the forest rights bill gave people ownership over these lands it would be disastrous.

I approached the issue from different perspectives. I had for long understood that the future of people and forests is entwined. I also knew from experience that regeneration of forests is not possible unless local people benefit. But I was willing to listen to the experience of those who believed in the tiger. If co-existence was not possible, we needed to find strategies to relocate people who lived in the tiger's territory.

The issue seemed simple, but the replies shocked me. After 30 years of wildlife conservation efforts, fronted by the country's most powerful, we had forgotten people. In these 30 years we had managed to relocate 80-odd villages from protected reserves. We estimated that another 1,500 villages existed in just 28 tiger reserves. Worse, relocation was done in the most ham-handed and inhuman manner. We met families who had decided to return to the harassment and poverty of their homes within the sanctuary as their resettled parcel of land was full of stones. The authorities had done just about everything to make people trespassers in their own land; everything to turn them against the tiger we want to protect. This would not work we concluded.

Our answer was two-pronged. One, we agreed that inviolate space was important for wild animals. But the people who were making space for the tiger needed to be given a good deal-not marginal forestland which would make them more destitute. Two, we said that we needed to be realistic. We suggested the need to identify and prioritize relocation of those villages that were in the most critical of wildlife habitats. This had to be done within a time-bound schedule. In the remaining villages, which would have to live in the reserves, we suggested a new bargain-sharing benefits of conservation with local communities-from preferential shares in tourism to collaborative management of our reserves.

This led to some developments. The government agreed to enhance the package for relocated families from Rs 1 lakh to Rs 10 lakh; it agreed to conduct a census of tigers in the country, which would pinpoint their presence in different habitats. The tiger census is the first step to identify the critical habitats that need to be protected and to list the human settlements that need to be relocated. With this done, the agenda of co-existence will need to kick in.

But unfortunately, the tribal versus tiger paradigm will keep the fires burning. It would seem that the two lobbies are bent on scoring points, not building consensus. First, the tiger lobby blocked the bill. Then, an uneasy truce was brokered to provide for relocation of people and maintain their rights.

In late 2005, the bill presented to parliament included a provision that temporary pattas (land deeds) would be given to people who were to be relocated from sanctuaries and national parks. This would ensure that their rights were protected, but also it would ensure that government would undertake their relocation within a time-bound schedule.

Then the tribal lobby, which has the upper hand in parliament upped the ante. In late 2006, the act, finalized by a joint parliamentary committee, dropped this clause. Inside, it inserted an altogether new term, critical wildlife habitats, which would need to be established as areas to be kept inviolate for wildlife. In the rules for the act to go into force, they have rubbed in this point. They want ministries to issue guidelines regarding the nature, process, validation and interpretation of data to be collected and roles of expert committees who will now designate critical wildlife habitats, virtually questioning the legality of all protected areas.

This has led conservationists to react. They want all wildlife areas (some 600-odd) to be re-designated as critical wildlife habitats and removed from the ambit of the act. Now they have the upper hand. For now, the act is stalled. The next round belongs to the tribal lobby. It is after all a wrestling match.

In all this, let us be clear, the losers are tribals and tigers. It is not tigers versus tribals. It is everyone against them.

(The writer is the editor, Down To Earth, New Delhi, India)

China will likely achieve-and may even exceed-its target to obtain 15 percent of its energy from renewables by 2020, according to a new report released by the Worldwatch Institute. If China's commitment to diversifying its energy supply and becoming a global leader in renewables manufacturing persists, renewable energy could provide over 30 percent of the nation's energy by 2050, says a message received from Washington, DC. That is the major conclusion of Powering China's Development: The Role of Renewable Energy, written by Beijing-based researcher Eric Martinot, a Worldwatch senior fellow, and Li Junfeng, Vice Chair of China's Renewable Energy Society in Beijing. "A combination of policy leadership and entrepreneurial savvy is leading to spectacular growth in renewable energy, increasing its share of the market for electricity, heating, and transport fuels," said Martinot. "China is poised to become a leader in renewables manufacturing, which will have global implications for the future of the technology."

More than $50 billion was invested in renewable energy worldwide in 2006, and China is expected to invest over $10 billion in new renewables capacity in 2007, second only to Germany. Wind and solar energy are expanding particularly rapidly in China, with production of wind turbines and solar cells both doubling in 2006. China is poised to pass world solar and wind manufacturing leaders in Europe, Japan, and North America in the next three years, and it already dominates the markets for solar hot water and small hydropower.

"Our ingenuity and manufacturing prowess are being harnessed to provide leadership to the world on renewables," said Li Junfeng. "China's position provides a strong example for other developing countries, while helping to drive down renewable energy costs to become competitive with fossil fuels for all countries the world over."

The report discusses China's advances in wind power, solar photovoltaics (PV), solar heating, biomass power, and biofuels. Impressive gains in these sectors include:

Wind power is the fastest growing power-generation technology in China, with existing capacity doubling during 2006 alone. By 2007, China was home to four major Chinese manufacturers of wind turbines, another six foreign subsidiary manufacturers, and more than 40 firms developing prototypes and aspiring to produce turbines commercially.

Solar PV production capacity in China jumped from 350 megawatts (MW) in 2005 to over 1,000 MW in 2006, with 1,500 MW expected in 2007. With high-profile initial public stock offerings for several Chinese companies, some valued in the billions of dollars, global attention has been riveted to China's solar PV industry.

Growth in solar hot water systems has been rapid, rising from 35 million square meters of installed capacity in 2000 to 100 million square meters by the end of 2006. China added 20 million square meters of new capacity in 2006 alone. Chinese companies now produce the solar heaters-an increasingly desirable consumer appliance-at costs one-fifth to one-eighth those found in the United States and Europe. Wastes from agricultural facilities in China could yield 80 billion cubic meters of biogas annually, well above the government's target of 44 billion cubic meters annually by 2020. In 2006, China had about 2 gigawatts (GW) of biomass power generation capacity, mostly from combined heat-and-power (CHP) plants with sugarcane waste as the primary feedstock.

Total ethanol production in China in 2006 was about 1 billion liters, compared with global production of 37 billion liters, primarily in the United States and Brazil. Higher corn prices and concern about competition with food supplies led to a moratorium on corn-based ethanol, leaving sorghum, cassava, and sugar cane as the current feedstocks of choice. Prospects for significant ethanol expansion in China rest primarily on the future of cellulose-to-ethanol technology, the viability of which experts expect will be proven within the next 10 years.

With its booming economy and rapidly expanding energy consumption-particularly its use of coal and oil-it is imperative for China to diversify its energy supplies. The country has suffered frequent power shortages due to its breakneck economic development. China's urban population, which uses nearly three times more electricity and commercial energy per person than rural residents do, increased from 375 million in 1999 to 577 million in 2006. The country's automobile fleet also continues to balloon, with an estimated 1,000 new cars appearing on Beijing's streets every day. Coal now provides 80 percent of China's electricity, and national electricity demand doubled between 2000 and 2006. As a result, China's economic development, environment, and public health are severely affected: for example, only 1 percent of urban Chinese breathe air that meets European air quality standards. Coal generation also leads to the build up of toxic metals, such as mercury, in water supplies and on agricultural fields throughout China.

China's carbon dioxide emissions are on the rise and are expected to exceed total U.S. carbon dioxide emissions shortly, although Chinese per-capita emissions remain about one-sixth those of the United States. Nuclear power provides just 7 GW of China's electric capacity, and even with the additional plants planned in the next few decades, it is unlikely to provide more than 5 percent of the country's electricity.

Worldwatch President Christopher Flavin praised China's growing commitment to renewables: "The combination of ambitious targets supported by strong government policies and entrepreneurial acumen may soon allow China's renewable energy sector to 'leapfrog' many developed nations," the message adds.

(Source: World watch Institute)

Senjuti Barua

The world is changing fast. Overall environment, beaches and forests are severely getting affected by pollution thanks to the growing population of the world. In the last 50 years, people have generated 80,000 types of chemicals. Of them, there are organic chemical pollutants known as 'dirty dozen', which is very harmful to human bodies. These pollutants constantly enter bodies through food and drink and cripple different limbs.

Environmentalists say the world environment and its population are now at stake due to the adverse impacts of these chemicals. Bangladesh too is gradually getting affected by the harmful pollutants.

In 1967, American Environmental Protection Agency banned 12 persistent organic pollutants (POPs) branded as 'dirty dozen'. Later, this ban got connected with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Of the 12 pollutants, nine are insecticides, such as, Dieldrin, Aldrin, Chlorden, DDT, Endrin, Heptachlor, Mirex, Toxaphane and Hexachloro Benzene. One is Polychlorinated Bi-phenyl, an industrial chemical. And, the remaining two pollutants are Dioxin and Furans created from incomplete burning.

The specific harmful characteristic of POPs insecticides (Aldrin, Dieldrin, AEndrin etc) is they have a long life. And from the sources, these elements can spread from one place to another even one country to another through air, water or other means. As a result, these can be found in places where they are not produced.

In winter countries, these elements are found in higher quintiles, as they are not dissolved in water. But, they are dissolved in fat or muscles of humans and other animals. So, they get deposited in fat of bodies and increase gradually. Due to long-term presence of these elements, people may suffer from thyroid or hormone-related problems, nerve weakness, birth defects, tumor, cancer and loss of anti-body.

Due to the attack of POPs chemicals, the normal growth of embryo is hindered, babies are born underweight and death rate gets higher. Besides, these chemicals cause infertility, bronchial problems and itching.

Attack by Dioxin and Furans causes Clorance disease. The symptoms of this disease are vomiting tendency, losing eyesight, short of hearing, respiratory problems, weight loss, headache, change in normal functions of liver, pancreas and kidney etc.

Rivers and coastal areas of Bangladesh are being dangerously polluted by these types of organic chemicals. According to a survey conducted in 1999 by Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, 3.109 milligram of PCB have been found in the country's river waters.

Sources at Environment Department say the pollution level of the Meghna, Dakatia, Karnaphuli, and Kushiara is very high. Besides, a study on eight points of the Karnaphuli shows there exists a high level of chemicals in the river due to dumping of waste from TSP Fertilizer Factory and Karnaphuli Paper Mill. The Bay of Bengal is also being polluted for that.

In Chittagong, over 5,000 villagers and labourers have been affected by poisonous gas reaction and secretion of PCB during ship breaking and repair at Sitakunda Ship-breaking Yard.

A survey by Environment and Social Development Organisation during 1995-1999 showed the pollution level of three rivers-Turag, Bangsi and Buriganga is very high. Besides, reliable sources say rivers like Shitalakhya, Pashur, Rupsha and Surma are being polluted greatly by chemicals coming from cement, soap, dyeing and leather factories, and paper mills.

In Bangladesh, incomplete burning is the main source of Dioxin and Furans, two of the organic pollutants. Burning of wastes, cooking in closed rooms or use of low quality cookers, chemical factories, two-stroke engines, liquid waste of tanneries and chemicals create these elements. Electric transformer, electric fan, capacitor and oil used in switch gear are the main sources of Synthetic chemicals PCB. Besides, the source of other nine POPs insecticides is the places where imported organic chemical pollutants are stored. POPs insecticides are not produced in Bangladesh. They are imported from countries like the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Myanmar, India and Pakistan.

In a convention in the Swedish capital of Stockholm on May 22, 2001, it was decided that all the POPs in the world would be destroyed. It is stated in clause 7 that each country should formulate a national implementation plan to eradicate these organic chemical pollutants known as POPs for protecting public health and environment.

Environment and Social Development Organisation (ESDO), an NGO, recently organized a workshop on POPs. At the workshop, ESDO director Dr Hossain Shahriar said, "These elements can stay in environment for a long time. Some POPs survive on earth for more than 10 years."

About the present situation in Bangladesh regarding POPs, he said, "Though DDT powder has been banned it is marketed in different names. Many people call it white powder. In Kuakata, high level of DDT powder is used on dry fish. Then again the dye used in textile sector has Persistent Toxic Substance (PTS), which not only harmful to clothes, but also to health. In tanneries, Aldrin is used in leather processing. We have seen in a village of Narayanganj farmers are using POPs insecticide Dieldrin to make tomatoes ripe. The same is happening in Chapainawabganj."

Though as a member of the United Nations, Bangladesh banned the 'dirty dozen' in 1997, the existence of these elements is still here to a great extent. So, it has become essential for the government to take effective measures to protect public health and environment from these long-term organic chemicals. And to address the issue, proper enforcement of laws and public awareness are needed.

(NewsNetwork)