From ggallon@ecolog.com Sun Feb  6 12:54:57 2005
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 13:14:57 -0500
From: ggallon@ecolog.com
To: cestvr@ces.iisc.ernet.in
Subject: Gallon Newsletter


    [ Part 1, Text/PLAIN (charset: ISO-8859-1 "Latin 1")  1,583 lines. ]
    [ Unable to print this part. ]

p { margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1px } body { font-family: "Times New
Roman", serif; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal }

THE GALLON ENVIRONMENT LETTER

Canadian Institute for Business and the Environment

Fisherville, Ontario, Canada

Tel. 416 410-0432, Fax: 416 362-5231

Email editorial: info@cialgroup.com

Email circulation: ggallon@ecolog.com

Vol. 10, No. 2, January 25, 2005

Honoured Reader Edition

 

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

HONOURED READER EDITION

 

This is the honoured reader edition of the Gallon Environment Letter and
is distributed at no charge. To add or delete your email from this free
edition send a note with Add or Delete and your email to Email
circulation ggallon@ecolog.com. Paid subscribers receive a more complete
edition without subscription reminders and with extensive links to
further information following almost every article.Organizational
subscribers also receive the monthly Sustainable Technology & Services
Supplement. If you would like to subscribe please visit
www.cialgroup.com/subscription. Individual subscriptions are only $30
including GST. Organizational subscriptions are $184 plus GST and provide
additional benefits detailed on the web site. If you feel you should be
receiving the paid subscriber edition or have other subscriber questions
please contact us at info@cialgroup.com .

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

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


ABOUT THIS ISSUE


In editing an electronic environment magazine, for which length is not
dictated by advertising revenue, one is always faced with the challenge
of how much to include. Some readers tell us that Gallon Environment
Letter is too long; others tell us that we should pay more attention to
the issues which interest them most. We try to strike a compromise but we
have to confess that this is one of the longest Gallon Letters ever,
especially for our organizational subscribers who receive the Sustainable
Technologies & Services Supplement. To help you navigate through it, we
are looking into providing an on-line table of contents as suggested by
some of our readers: we'll report on that approach in a future issue.


In the meantime, we invite you to learn who has won our Eco-Councillor
contest. Not only is the winning eco-councillor outstanding but the
runners up, to be entered into our Eco-Councillor Roll of Honour, have
also done some tremendous things for their municipalities.


This issue our theme is off-road vehicles: we cover the issues and
provide the data. If you are quick there is still time make proposals to
Environment Canada on how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from off
road vehicle; but it does not look like a ban is one of the options being
considered!


We have a very interesting Letter to the Editor from Prof. Bill Rees
commenting on a couple of items from our last issue; we have a report on
corruption at Monsanto, we draw your attention to a very interesting
e-dialogue process on sustainable development topics at Royal Roads
University, and we have a couple of food items, one of which applies Life
Cycle Assessment to imported food products and comes up with some
surprising conclusions. In Stuff the Teddy Bears we try to encourage
charities to give real thought to the contribution they are making, or
not making, to Sustainable Development. Organizational subscribers
receive our blue-green supplement which features a special review of
Environment Canada's National Sustainability Framework and Sector Tables
and many other articles of particular interest to the green and blue
business community. Anyone is welcome to take out an organizational
subscription.


Natural resources Minister John Efford attracted some flack recently when
he told the press that the government intends to roll back greenhouse gas
emission reduction requirements on large industrial emitters. Why he
chose to make the announcement last week has left many people inside and
outside government scratching their heads. Now we are witnessing full
damage control, with an unnamed 'well-informed' source promising a new
Climate Change Program for Canada just three months after Environment
Minister Stephane Dion told the media that Canada already has a plan
which only needs to be refined. The government may not know what it is
doing on climate change but the Gallon Environment Letter certainly does.
Next issue, arriving in your inbox in early February, will be our climate
change special, explaining everything about the Kyoto Protocol, pro and
con, in plain language. If the government sends us its plan by then we'll
also tell you about that. If not, we'll tell you why not.


Meanwhile enjoy this off-the-road issue.

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


THE GREMLINS DID IT


The last issue was dated January 13, 2003 when it should have been dated
January 13, 2005.

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


PROFITABILITY AND SUSTAINABILITY


Last issue we wished all our readers a Happy, Profitable, and Sustainable
2005 and we meant it! One of our readers, however, protested that
profitability should come after sustainability. We beg to differ, with an
explanation! Sustainable development is widely recognized as representing
the convergence of social, economic, and environmental considerations.
Increasingly, the concept is being broadened to include cultural
considerations. So far so good, but much less consideration has been
given to what the economic aspect of Sustainable Development actually
means, especially when the concept of sustainability is being applied to
an organization.


There are three ways to run an organization: at a loss, at break even, or
at a profit. These have nothing to do with the kind of organization it
is: even a non-profit organization or a government can make a profit or a
loss, though we sometimes use the term surplus rather than profit if the
ledger of a non-profit shows an excess of income over expenses. We are
inclined to see profit and surplus, at least in common usage, as
synonyms.


It is rare that an organization will be run at precisely break even for
an extended period of time. So the real options are profit or loss. GL
contends that if something consistently runs at a loss without a
long-term guarantee of funding, then it is inherently not sustainable.
Subsidies are often not guaranteed for the long term: the provider of the
subsidy could pull the plug and the organization will go down the pipe.


So we are left with one requirement for sustainability: the organization
must be profitable. Our world view includes 'if it's not profitable it's
not sustainable'. And profitability has to come before, or at least at
the same time as, sustainability.


Colin Isaacs, Editor

Canadian Institute for Business and the Environment

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


ECO-COUNCILLOR: WE ANNOUNCE THE WINNER


Last Fall, we invited our readers to nominate elected municipal and band
council members who have performed outstanding environmental service
connected to their role as a politician. Our idea was that municipal
politicians who are pushing for environmental and sustainable development
initiatives are often toiling in the dark, unrecognized and frequently
unwelcomed by their colleagues. By recognizing such individuals we hope
that light will shine on the work of these people and that many more will
be encouraged to join their ranks.


While we may have been right that eco-councillors are often toiling in
the dark, we were impressed by how many of our nominees were nominated by
their fellow councillors. The greening of municipal councils is clearly
underway in at least some parts of Canada. Our 2004 Eco-Councillor Roll
of Honour includes a truly impressive group of people. Congratulations to
all and many thanks to the nominators. A big thank you to our panel of
judges: Elizabeth May, Executive Director, Sierra Club of Canada; Mayor
Sylvia Sutherland, Mayor of Peterborough and Professor William Rees,
School of Community and Regional Planning, University of British
Columbia..


Finally we are pleased to announce that our panel of judges has selected
Councillor Clive Doucet, City of Ottawa, as the winner of the Gallon
Environment Letter Eco-Councillor Award for 2004. The text of his
nomination, submitted by Rebecca Aird, appears below. Councillor Doucet
will be invited to the Americana Pan-American Environmental Technology
Trade Show in Montreal April 6-8 to be formally recognized for his work.


The following are the municipal politicians who were nominated and who
will be listed in Gallon Environment Letter's Eco-Councillor Roll of
Honour


Councillor Donald Benham and Councillor Jenny Gerbasi, City of Winnipeg,
Manitoba

Nominated by Kaj Hasselriis

These two councillors fought hard for a Bus Rapid Transit system in
Winnipeg. Unfortunately they have not yet achieved success but their
efforts will continue.


Councillor Allen J. Dowhan, City of Dauphin, Manitoba

Nominated by the Mayor and Council of the City of Dauphin

Among other initiatives, Councillor Dowham has pushed for pocket park
enhancements along Main Street and the Cenotaph, has started a
comprehensive tree management program incorporating integrated pest
management and use of more organic products, has initiated an Urban
Forestry Program to replenish tree populations, and has introduced a
municipal composting program.


Councillor Virgil Hammock, Town of Sackville, New Brunswick

Nominated by members of the Tantramar Environmental Alliance

Mr. Hammock has pushed for a municipal ban on cosmetic use of pesticides
and is a constant voice for the support of environmentally responsible
and health-related activities in Sackville.


Councillor Ken Melamed, Village of Whistler, BC.

Nominated by Smart Growth BC

Councillor Melamed brings a strong environmental perspective to the
council table, playing a key role in the development of "It's Our
Future", Whistler's new sustainability initiative. He is a leading voice
to ensure that Whistler's environmental integrity is protected through
the upcoming 2010 Winter Olympics. His clear and consistent efforts on
the sustainability front have played a major role in broadening the
thinking of his council colleagues as well as staff and the public.
Whistler has moved from more simplistic environmental positions to the
adoption of a Natural Step framework for sustainability that balances
environmental and economic interests effectively. This was accomplished
largely through Ken's leadership and has led to Whistler becoming a world
leader among resort towns in the area of sustainability.


Councillor Johnny W.A. Michasiw, Town of Shoal Lake, Manitoba

Nominated by the Shoal Lake Regional Community Development Corporation

Councillor Michasiw has been relentless in the promotion of recycling.
Today over 95% of the town's population recycle. His advice is regularly
sought after by other communities and he has conducted over 100 tours of
the Shoal lake recycling centre.


Councillor Michael Phair, City of Edmonton, Alberta

Nominated by Roy Neehall

A consistent champion for environmental initiatives such as expansion of
the public transit system, strong urban design to increase quality of
life in the downtown, Edmonton's world leading waste management system
and development of green spaces.


Councillor Denise Savoie, City of Victoria

Nominated by members of Capital Regional District Roundtable on the
Environment

Councillor Savoie exemplifies sustainability: committed to her community,
and passionate about the 'environment', social and economic justice; she
is a classy and inspiring leader. She chairs the CRD Roundtable on the
Environment (RTE), and played a key role in the construction of the
Galloping Goose Trail, the pilot Canadian "rails to trails" initiative
leading to the Cross Canada trail. Highlights amongst the RTE
accomplishments under her leadership are sustainability planning and
reporting, pesticide use reduction, greenhouse gas reduction,
transportation demand management, and LEED (Leadership in Environmental
and Energy Design) Silver Status for the new CRD Headquarters project.
The next phase of construction targets Gold. She has also provided
leadership on The City of Victoria Greenways Plan and municipal
Integrated Pest Management.


Mayor: Barbara Sharp, City of North Vancouver

Nominated by Professor Don Alexander, Malaspina University College

Mayor Sharp was instrumental in the creation of the City's Environmental
Protection Program (EPP), and was the Council Liaison to the EPP
Committee from its inception in 1995 until the adoption of the
Committee's Action Plan in 2000. The Plan includes promoting habitat
enhancement projects, a Drainage System Protection By-law and an
environmental monitoring program for the City as a whole. She has also
supported greenhouse gas reduction initiatives, involving her community
in the Partners for Climate Protection program and serving as its
representative. The City has fulfilled the first two milestones,
completing its emissions inventory and setting reduction targets. She is
on the board of the International Centre for Sustainable Cities and
represented the Greater Vancouver Regional District at the Earth Summit
in Johannesburg and at the 2004 World Urban Forum in Barcelona. She has
been tireless in promoting greater density in her City, and the quality
urban design that needs to accompany it in order to make it successful.


            And the Winner Is . . . Councillor Clive Doucet, City of
Ottawa

            Nominated by Rebecca Aird as Follows:


Clive Doucet's profound understanding of sustainable development is
evident in his writing (including articles on sustainable urban issues
for the Globe and Mail ' e.g., The Oil Crisis 'R' Us, October 5, 2004,
Page A19), and in many activities and stands he has taken as councillor
for Capital ward in the City of Ottawa.


He has shown tremendous support for community-oriented neighborhoods and
sustainable infrastructure. He has effectively fought against the
widening of two main thoroughfares that cut through the ward (the 417
Highway and Bronson Avenue), and against a car-oriented future for the
Alta Vista Transportation Corridor. His creative approach to
participatory democracy is evident in such related activities as the Smog
Breakfast he hosted on a 417 overpass.


But Clive is much more than a naysayer on increased urban automobile
traffic. As an advocate for public transportation and light rail in
Ottawa, he can take a major share of credit for the development and
implementation of the successful O-Train pilot. As the Vice-chair of the
Transportation committee, Clive continues to work with Mayor Chiarelli on
plans to take the O-Train city-wide, with an East/West line.


Clive has implemented better bicycling and pedestrian routes, as well as
traffic calming measures, in both his communities and throughout the
City. He has successfully lowered the speed limit on many residential
streets in his ward from 50km/hr to 40km/hr. During the reconstruction of
Bank Street in Old Ottawa South, he insisted on the incorporation of many
pedestrian-friendly features such as wider sidewalks, permanent cross
walk markings, reconfigured intersections, corner bulb-outs, and
protective road pinching for students at the local elementary school.
Clive is now working towards greening Lansdowne Park, and on installing a
pedestrian bridge that would connect two of Capital Ward's communities.


Clive also clearly knows a lot about the economic dimensions of
sustainable development. He often speaks passionately, cogently and
concretely -- with examples from our municipal budget -- about the shifts
that need to be made from continued investment in urban sprawl towards
more life-affirming, environmental choices. His dismay at Ottawa's recent
budget-setting fiasco, which backed Councillors and citizens into battles
on such fundamental social infrastructure as libraries and services to
seniors, has also turned him into an advocate for participatory budgeting
processes.


Clive's understanding of the importance of identity, as well as his
enormous personal empathy for those who are empassioned to make and
sustain meaningful connections to place, shine through in his writing on
the history of the Acadians. His commitment and personal integrity are
evident in both the way he challenges his constituents to face the impact
of personal decisions and the need to take personal responsibility, and
in the 'lead by example' approach he takes in his own life. He cycles to
work for the better part of the year, and skates to work on the Rideau
Canal in the winter.


In short, we are blessed to have Clive working on our behalf to help
clear Ottawa's path to a sustainable future. The fact that voters in this
ward have elected Clive for three consecutive terms has been a great
boost to my civic pride!

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



MOTORIZED OFF-ROAD VEHICLES: A GALLON LETTER SPECIAL REVIEW

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


The issue of motorized off-road recreational vehicles creates a great
divide between those who like to roar around and those who prefer the
peace and quiet of nature. Landowners and conservationists are frequently
concerned about issues relating to land access and effects on wildlife.
Everyone, except perhaps the guy or gal on the snowmobile or all-terrain
vehicle, is concerned about the pollution.


Although much of the literature on harm done by ORVs relates to passive
damage, GL notes that in the small world here in Fisherville, active
damage is also common. ORV riders bring chainsaws and cut trees to make
trails in wetland woods and hammer up blinds for hunting. Some put up
trail markers as if the private land on which they are trespassing is
their own personal playground. The local constabulary has purchased some
snowmobiles and all-terrain vehicles for enforcement purposes but the
areas are too big and the riders too mobile.


When off-roaders trespass, trash a natural area, heedlessly create
pollution and noise, or kill themselves and others, responsible off-road
vehicle users pay a high price. Incidents are leading to a growing demand
for closure of trails, more restrictive rules to protect the environment
and natural soundscapes, and higher fees for trail use to cover the cost
of enforcement or repairing damage.


This is definitely a case illustrating the truth of the following
quotation: "Free human beings differ not only with regard to the
characteristics of the environmental settings which they find most
desirable, but also with regard to life-styles, aspirations and last but
not least their views of man's place in nature" (Only One Earth, 1972).
And some of the examples in this issue show examples of the controversy
which results when society tries to balance protection of environment
with people's lifestyles.


Ward, Barbara and Rene/ Dubos. Only One Earth: an unofficial report
commissioned by the Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on
the Human Environment. New York: W. W. Norton Inc., 1972. [hard copy]

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


SOME ORV ISSUES


The New Hampshire Off Highway Vehicle Association proactively works on
environmental issues, tries to educate its members and the public, and
maintains a Legal Defense Fund to keep trails open. Their issues include
some good ideas for other jurisdictions:


Identification of riders

ATVs and Trail Bikes must be registered by law if operated off the
owner's property. There are no trail fees in New Hampshire. The
registration certificate must be carried by the operator and the vehicle
must have registration decals. Registration monies are used by the state
to purchase land for ATV riding areas, some with campgrounds, access to
business districts and event areas.


Operation requirements

Ban on driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs; no riding on
roads or right-of-ways of roads, bridges, parking lots unless posted with
permission; valid driver's license or OHVA Safety Certificate; stop when
requested by landowner and give name and address. Conditions based on age
apply for those under 18.


Increasing restrictions and setbacks for ORV Clubs

Anti-ATV groups seek more legislation to take environment into account.
The New Hampshire OHVA says members should find out what the opposition
is lobbying for (know your enemy) and seek to be unified in lobbying of
legislators on the message: We advocate safe, responsible and sound use
of Off-Highway vehicles. A club Safety Awareness trailer educates users
of snowmobiles and ATVs. Irresponsible use leads to many setbacks for the
club due to trail closures.


Social issues and lack of community support for ATVs is leading to bans
in such areas as the White Mountain National Forest. The Forest Service
released a draft policy on ORV use in National Forests in July 2004.


A court ruling in 2004 indicated that local municipalities could put
state trails in their jurisdiction under the local planning board leading
to ORV bans.


Sound Monitoring

Jamborees, Snowmobile and ATV shows and other gatherings are a important
part of the activities of the OHVA. A mandatory sound check is done
before riders are allowed on the trails with the legal limit being 96 db.


Environmental Effects

Sources of studies and information on environmental effects such as sound
monitoring; wildlife and vegetation effects; soil and water effects and
other environmental impact studies are provided by the OHVA through its
office.


Member Volunteers as Stewards

Local clubs act as stewards by helping to develop and maintain trails and
educate local users through a Trail Patrol. The theme is ""Ride as if
everyone is watching...Talk as if everyone is listening."


Private landowners

Over 80% of the land used by ORVs in New Hampshire is private land.
Common complaints from landowners include operating without landowner
permission, excessive speed (speed limits are set in legislation), and
disregard for landowner privileges. Unposted land is automatically
off-limits to ORVs. Riders are permitted only on specially marked trails
or when they have specific landowner permission to enter and use an area.


Accidants and Insurance

The state law contains accident reporting requirements. Since 1996, 45
people have been killed on ORVs in NH due to excessive speed, riding on
thin ice, riding in unfamiliar areas at night and failing to wear
protective equipment. ORV insurance is not required but recommended. The
Club helps to obtain insurance for events and liability. Landowners are
specifically exempted by state law from legal action by a ORV rider
sustaining any injuries on their land.


Wetland and Wet Seasons

During mud seasons, ORV traffic can be particularly damaging. The club
asks riders to protect the legal riding opportunities by following the
motto, "Stay on the Trail or Stay Home."


Riding in wetland is against the law and subject to a fine of up to
$10,000 and may include costs of restoration. Wetlands provide critical
habitat for wildlife and damaging vegetation in or near stream, ponds and
wet meadows can pollute the water.


Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


ORV ACCESS HARMFUL TO BC BACKCOUNTRY


A fact sheet by the BC Chapter of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness
Society discusses the transformation of the British Columbia's wilderness
where off-road vehicles have gained access to traditionally unreachable
wilderness. Impacts include:

 *  Wildlife noise and disturbance cause animals to relocate to areas
    less suitable and more exposed to predators.
 *  Many animals and birds live on the edge in terms of matching the
    energy in to energy required for survival. Too much disturbance,
    especially in winter, can mean they run out of energy and die or fail
    to feed their young.
 *  Air and water pollution
 *  Vegetation and destruction possibly of threatened speices
 *  Wildlife mortality due to collisions
 *  Transport of invasive species
 *  Habitat destruction

Among the policies recommended are:

 *  Careful regulation or ban on snowmobiles, all-terrain vehicles and
    tour helicopters in critical habitat such as that of the red-listed
    mountain caribou.
 *  Pollution prevention in wilderness areas. Recreational motors
    discharge as much as one third of their fuel unburned, polluting
    soil, streams and lakes. Vehicles also create air and noise pollution
    and contribute to climate change.
 *  Sensitive habitat protection. Irresponsible ORV use results in
    driving over marshes, riverbeds, alpine and meadow habitats which are
    susceptible to damage. Erosion may result. Lichens which may have
    taken centuries to grow can be destroyed in a few minutes. Damage
    such as deep tire tread marks may take years to restore.
 *  Prevention of path creation for predators. ORVs leave trails which
    may become unnatural corridors for predators such as animals or human
    hunters.
 *  Protection of the ecological dynamics of the wilderness areas.
    Snowmobiles seem to be more benign but they compact the space between
    the snow and the soil which often serves as shelter for voles, mice
    and other organisms.
 *  Management plans which cover motorized use. Certain parks may ban ORV
    use while others allow it on a properly controlled basis.
 *  Keeping up with the changes in technology of ORVs. Reviews should
    take into account that new machines may have reduced air and noise
    pollution but may be faster and more powerful, thus able to go
    further into remote areas.

Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


FINAL REPORT ON ORVS IN NOVA SCOTIA


A Nova Scotia task force on off-highway vehicles issued a report with 39
recommendations in November 2004. Among these are safety training,
licenses for operators, restrictions of full licenses to those 16 or
over, establishment of a trust fund for a network of user-pay trails,
bans on use in protected wilderness and stricter conditions for access to
other land, ecologically sensitive areas and municipal water supply
areas. Third party liability insurance would be mandatory. The report
recommends the province work with other governments at the federal and
provincial level to develop standards for machines in regard to noise,
tires and design.


The highest priority is on enforcement since the mobility of off-road
vehicles means it is difficult to police their activity. Licensing of
operators and registration of vehicles help to identify ORV users. A
special enforcement task force would develop education and self-policing
strategies. Amended legislation should increase the range of offences,
apply driver demerit points on the driver's license and increase the
fines.


Infrastructure to accommodate ORVs such as dedicated trails would help to
accommodate the sport while at the same time protecting natural areas.


It is recommended that private landowner rights be protected by requiring
ORVs to obtain written permission before entering on private land and to
have third party liability insurance.


Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


CANADA'S COMMITTMENT ON OFF-ROAD ENGINE EMISSIONS


Under the Canada-United States Air Quality Agreement, Canada has
committed to stringent new NOx and VOC reduction standards for vehicles,
engines and fuels. These include off-road vehicles and small engines.
Canada plans to implement regulations with emission standards
corresponding to those of the US Environmental Protection Agency.


Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


NUMBERS OF OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES IN CANADA


According to Environment Canada, there are 1.4 million off-road
recreational vehicles in Canada. They are used for 156 million hours
(roughly 18 years) annually and include:


Off-road motorcycles: about 78,000 in number (used 6 million hours/year)

Snowmobiles: 733,000 (42 million hours/year)

All Terrain Vehicles: 433,000 (23 million hours/year)

Golf Carts: 75,000 (81 million hours per year)

Specialty Vehicle Carts: 58,000 (5 million hours per year)


Interestingly, the use of recreational vehicles is dwarfed by lawn and
garden equipment which totals almost 7 million in number of engines, used
for 281 million hours (32 years) a year.


Judging from the assiduous mowing of two acre lawns in the rural area
around Fisherville, many people regard their ride-on lawn mower as a
recreational vehicle too. But although GL's editor did once watch as a
farmer drove a tractor into the parking lot of the local IGA to get a few
groceries, most people on lawn tractors tend not to engage in the most
damaging behaviours of recreational vehicle.


Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


KEY AIR REGULATIONS FOR OFF-ROAD ENGINES


According to Honda Engines Europe, the world's leading environmental
regulations affecting ORVs are from the California Air Resources Board,
US EPA, and the future plans of the EU.


California was the first in the world to regulate off-road engines less
than 25 Horsepower. Tier 1, December 1990, required reducing hydrocarbon
and NOx emissions by 20% in engines of less than 25 HP for specified
classes of engines. Tier 2, in effect from 2000-2010, adds diesel
engines, reduces emissions from 30-67% depending on the class of engine,
and requires an endurance test. These standards apply only to California.


The US EPA adopted Phase I standards similar to CARB beginning in 1997.
Phase II standards are in force beginning for some classes in 2006 and
others in 2007.


In the EU, Stage 1 was scheduled in 2004 with some classes of engine with
Stage 2 taking effect in 2006. All engines to meet standards by 2011.


Honda has a number of classes of engines which meet later stages of the
EPA and EU 6 or 7 years ahead of schedule.


Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


ENVIRONMENT CANADA TO PROPOSE REGULATION ON ORV EMISSIONS


Environment Canada conducted a consultation on Marine Engine and Off-Road
Recreational Vehicle Emission Regulations in 2004. When published in the
Canada Gazette, the regulations will set emission standards for the first
time for the 2007 and later model years of snowmobiles, off-highway
motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles.


Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS OPTIONS FOR ORVS


Environment Canada has a consultation running until January 28, 2005, on
how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from off-road vehicles and
equipment. The category includes industrial and farming equipment. In
total transportation emissions, off-road GHG emissions are second after
on-road. Recreational off-road vehicles contribute 5% of off-road GHG
emissions compared to 3% for lawn and garden. Efforts to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions relate primarily to improved fuel efficiency.


Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


BOMBARDIER RECREATIONAL PRODUCTS - A CANADIAN LEADER


Bombardier Recreational Products, a private company with headquarters in
Valcourt, Quebec, spun off from Canadian aerospace company Bombardier, is
reducing its work force and closing plants and divisions such as the
Utility Vehicle section but is still making profit. Manufacturing plants
in Valcourt and Sturtevant in North America and Ciudad Juarez in Mexico,
Rovaniemi in Finland, Gunskirchen in Austria and Dong Guan in China are
expected to remain open.


BRP Annual sales in 80 countries total about Canadian 2.5 billion
annually. In addition to marine engines, BRP designs, manufactures and
sells snowmobiles, watercraft, all terrain vehicles including karts and
quads, sport boats, and Rotax engines. Engines are produced for other
manufacturers for vehicles such as motorcycles. The Power Sport section
raised year-to-date revenues of 1,420.5 million. The company states that
its snowmobiles, the Lynx(R) and Ski-Doo(R) brands are number one in
their markets in Europe and North America. Ski-Doo is a proprietary name
but skidooing has come to be a generic term meaning to ride a snowmobile
and a skidoo suit is defined as a snowmobile suit in the Canadian Oxford
Dictionary.


            BRP Knows No Boundaries


BRP's web site says it cares about the environment. There is an
Environmental Guide for Watercraft Operators and emission reductions on
some off-road engines are ahead of the US EPA deadline of 2006. But
mostly the theme is that these vehicles can take you whereever you want
to go: CEO Boisjoli comments "We have a unique opportunity to start anew
without having to start over, and we are determined to use it to lay
claim to every playing field - snow, water, off-road, on-road, or in the
air."


Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


ISMA SUPPORTS USE OF WILDERNESS FOR MOTOR SPORTS


The International Snowmobile Manufacturers Association represent four
snowmobile manufacturers: Arctic Cat (Thief River Falls, Minnesota),
Bombardier Recreational Products BRP (Valcourt, Quebec), Polaris
Industries (Medina, Minnesota) and Yamaha Motor Corporation, USA
(Cypress, California). President and Chief Executive Jose Boisjoli of
Bombardier Recreational Products Inc. is a member of the board of the
ISMA.


The manufacturers say that tourism is an economic driver and snowmobiling
is a big part of winter tourism. In 2003-2004, 2.3 million snowmobiles
were registered in North America, a 43% growth compared to the 1980s when
there were 1.6 million. Studies indicate that $25 billion worth of
economic benefit in Canada and the US are directly related to
snowmobiling and 10% of all tourist spending in the snowbelt is due to
the sport. An average snowmobiler spends $88.30 per day and an average
snowmobile trip is 2.5 days consisting of an average party of 5
snowmobilers.


The ISMA supports coalitions fighting to retain access to wilderness
areas in national parks and other lands.


Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


SNOWMOBILES CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE IN YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK


In January 1999, the National Park Service received a petition from a
coalition of environmental groups, the Bluewater Network, asking for a
ban on snowmobile use in the national park system.


According to the US National Parks Service Air Resources Division, one
snowmobile produces as much total air pollution per passenger mile as 39
automobiles. One snowmobile produces 98 times more hydrocarbons and 36
times more carbon monoxide than one automobile. Studies from both the US
EPA and the NPS indicated that banning snowmobiles would improve air
quality and protect habitat and wildlife. Just before its departure the
Clinton administration issued the ban the Bluewater Network was seeking.


                        Snowmobile Ban Overruled


The ban was challenged. One group, the BlueRibbon Coalition, which says
it represents 600,000 recreationists in US states, expressed a commonly
held view, "Preserving our Natural Resources FOR the Public instead of
FROM the Public." BlueRibbon and The International Snowmobile
Manufacturers Association acted as intervenor in support of snowmobile
access. In February 2004, a temporary lifting of the ban was ordered
because of undue hardship to the businesses relying on snowmobile
tourism. In October 2004, federal court judge Clarence Brimmer ruled
against the ban until the National Parks Service provided more scientific
data and did a better job of consultation with the affected states and
the public.


                        Temporary Winter Use Plan


On November 4, 2004, the National Part Service approved a Finding of No
Significant Impact for the Temporary Winter Use Plans and Environmental
Assessment for Winter Use in Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks
and the John D. Rockefeller, Jr., Memorial Highway. The temporary policy,
to be in effect to the end of winter 2007, will allow 720 commercially
guided snowmobiles per day (or about half the historic peak day entries)
into Yellowstone and 140 into Grand Teton and the Parkway where guides
are not necessary. The vehicles must stay on roads used in summer by
automobiles or in areas used by motor boats. Because roads are not open
to ordinary vehicles, snow coach or snowmobile is about the only way to
see Old Faithful, the famous geyser, or access interior cross-country
skiing or snowshoeing. With some exceptions, snowmobiles in the parks
must meet Best Available Technology requirements.



                        Best Available Technology BAT


A typical non-BAT two-stroke snowmobile emits 150 g/kW-hr of hydrocarbons
and 400 g/kW-hr of carbon monoxide. Sound emissions are supposed to be
less than 78 dBA.


The Best Available Technology standard lists specific brand names. To be
listed a product must meet standards of less than 15 hydrocarbon g/kW-hr,
less than 120 carbon monoxide g/kW-hr and 73 or less dBA. Among the
sixteen machines on the BAT list, the 2002 Polaris Frontier Touring has
the lowest emissions of hydrocarbon (3.19 g/kW-hr) and carbon monoxide
(79.15); the 2003 Arctic Cat 4-Stroke Touring had the lowest noise level
at 70.1dBA. In order to qualify for the BAT list, the only Bombardier
products that meet the low emission requirements must be equipped with
BAT upgrade kits to meet noise requirements.

 

Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


ANTI-ORVERS ARE ANTI-HUMAN?


For John Steward, Director of Environmental Affairs, United Four Wheel
Drive Associations, the ultimate issue is access to trails, whether they
are on private or public lands. He says that wilderness initiatives are
really a plan to displace people and return 50% of North America to the
habitat existing before Columbus arrived, "Do the math. Where do humans
and recreation fit into the scheme?" He says, "Our sport is in the
cross-hairs of wilderness zealots. It matters not whether you ride a
mountain bike, drive a 4x4, ride a dirt bike, use a wheel chair or any
other form of mechanical means for off-highway recreation. The use of
public lands for recreation and extraction of critical natural resources
is the target."

 

Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


LETTERS TO THE EDITOR


            Re: Biofuels and One-Tonne Challenge GL Vol. 10 No. 1


Colin,

As usual, I really enjoyed the latest Gallon Environment Letter (13
January 2005). Indeed, it inspired the following comments - one
cautionary about biofuels, the other to point out an error in the
'one-tonne challenge' campaign.


First the cautionary note:


Biofuels may become locally useful for particular purposes such as
improved air quality, but are unlikely to become a significant component
of the energy budget for thermodynamic reasons. The Jan 13 Letter
actually contains some of the reasons for this, but I think they need to
be highlighted and better understood by the public.


For example, you point out the controversy over the net energy gain from
ethanol. Even the most optimistic studies put it at 20-30%, but these
have been challenged by more comprehensive assessments both in the US by
Tad Patzek at UC Berkeley and David Pimentel at Cornell, and in Europe.
Both Patzek's and Pimentel's analyses suggest that corn ethanol
production is a net energy sink by a significant margin - it takes more
fossil energy to produce ethanol than is retrieved in the product. Patzek
also argues that in 2004 ethanol production from corn in the US generated
eight million tonnes of incremental CO2; that is, CO2 emissions over and
above the amount of CO2 generated by burning gasoline with 115% of the
calorific value of this ethanol. Clearly, from neither the energy supply
nor the climate change perspectives is ethanol a viable volume substitute
for gasoline.


Certainly ethanol producers know this. Fact is, there would be virtually
no fuel ethanol production without significant government subsidies.
Public funds are needed to level the marketplace playing field because of
the high production costs of ethanol. Indeed, the cost of the fossil fuel
alone needed to produce crop ethanol makes it economically unviable and
this will not change as fossil fuel prices rise with scarcity.


In this light, Canada has erred seriously in following the US
subsidy-based model for ethanol production. Subsidies distort the market,
disadvantaging non-subsidized technologies that might actually have
greater real potential and creating a new subsidy-dependent industry that
may never be viable due to the increasing costs of inputs. It seems that
the excitement over ethanol is fueled largely by self-interested lobby
groups, bad policy at NRCan (or agency capture by producers), and general
public ignorance.


At the root of the problem with ethanol (and other crop-based biofuels)
is the low average energy density per unit area. Sticking with ethanol
for the moment, it would take almost two hectares (about 4.5 acres) of
cornland to provide sufficient fuel for the average US automobile. This
is three to four times the land area required to feed the average
American, assuming current cropping methods and diet. Simple arithmetic
reveals that to fuel the entire US vehicle fleet on ethanol would require
the entire massive cropland inventory of the country. Meanwhile, the US
would have dug itself deeper into the energy deficit pit (and there's
still the little matter of zero food production!). In short, all the data
suggest that subsidizing ethanol may make for good politics, but for bad
economics and disastrous ecology.


The situation is not much more encouraging for other much talked-about
biofuels. In a recent sobering article on biofuel prospects for Europe,
George Monbiot reports that while recycled cooking oils in the UK could
contribute up to 100,000 tonnes of biodiesel fuel annually, this is
equivalent to only 1/380th of that country's road transport requirements!
He also notes that the most productive oil crop that can be grown in the
UK is rape (canola in Canada) with an average yield of 3-3.5 tonnes per
hectare. Since a tonne of rapeseed can produce 415 kg of biodiesel the
average hectare of arable land could provide 1.45 tonnes of transport
fuel. But road transport in the UK consumes 37.6m tonnes of petroleum
products annually, so that to run the UK's auto and truck fleet on
rape-based bio-diesel would require 25.9 million hectares. Problem: there
are only 5.7 million hectares of cropland in the UK.


All in all, it seems that we shouldn't hype biofuels just yet and perhaps
never, except as a local niche fuel source. Actually, the National
Farmers' Union position in the 13 January Letter sums things up pretty
well.


            ONE-TONNE CHALLENGE


As for the one-tonne challenge, contrary to the national adverts and the
data you present in the 13 Jan Letter, the average Canadian does not
produce 'an average of over five tonnes of greenhouse gases' per year.
Rather, the average Canadian consumes/oxidizes about five metric tons
(tonnes) of carbon in fossil fuels each year. Each tonne of carbon burned
produces in 3.7 tonnes of carbon dioxide, thus Canadians' annual per
capita production of carbon dioxide alone is actually about 18 tons
(i.e., this does not account for other greenhouse gasses). Hence, the
five tonnes of GHG per capita referred to in the ads for the 'one-tonne
challenge' and repeated in the newsletter'is off by a factor of almost
four (again, considering carbon dioxide alone). The difference is
important because if we are being asked to reduce our GHG emissions by
one tonne, it is a relatively trivial task - a 5.5% reduction in per
capita fossil fuel use. But if we are being asked to reduce carbon
consumption by one tonne, this is a full 20% cutback and a little harder
for the average citizen to contemplate let alone achieve.


I hope you can bring these points to the attention of at least your own
readership.


All the best.


William E. Rees, PhD

Professor, University of British Columbia, School of Community and
Regional Planning

6333 Memorial Road Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z2 Phone: 1 604 822-2937;
Fax: 1 604 822-3787 SCARP Website: www.scarp.ubc.ca/

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

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

HONOURED READER EDITION

 

This is the honoured reader edition of the Gallon Environment Letter and
is distributed at no charge. To add or delete your email from this free
edition send a note with Add or Delete and your email to Email
circulation ggallon@ecolog.com. Paid subscribers receive a more complete
edition without subscription reminders and with extensive links to
further information following almost every article.Organizational
subscribers also receive the monthly Sustainable Technology & Services
Supplement. If you would like to subscribe please visit
www.cialgroup.com/subscription. Individual subscriptions are only $30
including GST. Organizational subscriptions are $184 plus GST and provide
additional benefits detailed on the web site. If you feel you should be
receiving the paid subscriber edition or have other subscriber questions
please contact us at info@cialgroup.com .

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


CORRUPTION AT MONSANTO COMPANY


On January 6, the US Securities and Exchange Commission filed two settled
enforcement proceedings against Monsanto Company for making illicit
payments (bribes) in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act FCPA.
The first was a suit filed in the US District Court for the District of
Columbia seeking a civil penality. The second was an administrative order
finding Monsanto violated the FCPA, ordering the company to cease and
desist, and requiring Monsanto to submit to an independent review.
Monsanto neither admitted or denied the charges but consented to the
$500,000 civil penalty and the issuance of the administrative order.


            US MONSANTO OFFICIAL KEY TO BRIBE CHARGES


The charge was that, in 2002, a senior Monsanto company official located
in the United States authorized and directed an Indonesian consulting
company to make an illegal payment totalling $50,000 to an Indonesian
Ministry of Environment official to overturn a law seen to be bad for
Monsanto. The law, known as AMDAL, required that agricultural products
such as Monsanto's genetically engineered Bollgard Cotton undergo an
environmental impact assessment before the cotton could be grown in
Indonesia. The law was not overturned. The senior Monsanto official in
the US is said to have set up a scheme for false invoices which were then
approved for payment by him.


            LONG-TERM CORRUPTION IN INDONESIA BY MONSANTO


The Commission also charged that from 1997 to 2002, Monsanto paid out
about $700,000 in illegal or questionable payments to at least 140
current and former Indonesian officials and their families. The largest
payment was to the wife of a senior Ministry of Agriculture official for
land and a house. Accounting records kept by Monsanto hid the source, use
and nature of these payments.


From 1996 to 2001, Monsanto conducted no internal audits of its
Indonesian affiliates, even those required under Indonesian law. In 2001,
Monsanto reported some irregularities to the SEC in regard to its
affiliates but the company's reporting did not include the $50,000
payment.


In summary, the SEC claims are that:

1. Monsanto knowingly and corruptly authorized the making and made a
payment to influence a foreign official in violation of the anti-bribery
provision of the FCPA.

2. Monsanto failed to make and keep books and records which, in
reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflected Monsanto's
transactions and dispositions of its assets in violation of the Exchange
Act.

3. Monsanto failed to devise and maintain a system of internal accounting
controls in violation of the Exchange Act.

4. Monsanto knowing circumvented or knowingly failed to implement a
system of internal accounting controls or knowingly falsified any book,
record or account in violation of the Exchange Act.

5. Monsanto directly or indirectly, falsified or caused to be falsified,
any book, record or account in violation of the Exchange Act.


            Criminal Evidence for Possible Charges by US Dept. of Justice


In addition to the SEC action, the US Department of Justice entered into
an agreement with Monsanto Company to defer prosecution on a criminal
act. Monsanto will pay a $1 million penalty and will for a three year
period have an independent expert monitor new internal policies and
practices and audit compliance. If Monsanto fails to comply, criminal
charges may proceed.


GL doubts that US $1.5 million in fines has much of an impact on a
company with an annual revenue of $5 billion, but opponents have been
questioning governments' willingness to trust Monsanto's information
about the environmental safety of its products. The charges and the fines
add much credibility to Monsanto's critics.


Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


INDONESIA INVESTIGATES CORRUPTION RE: MONSANTO


In Indonesia, the Corruption Eradication Commission, set up just over a
year ago, is showing whether it can be a real watchdog in its
investigation of government officials alleged to be involved with bribery
by Monsanto. Anti-corruption measures are seen as essential to reassuring
foreign investors that Indonesia is a good place to invest. The former
agriculture minister, Bungaran Saragih, denied bribes were offered to
approve genetically modified cotton. The Commission is also talking to
the current Minister of National Development Planning and Minister of the
Environment.


ISubscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


E-DIALOGUE AT ROYAL ROADS


Ten sustainable development e-dialogues have been completed in a pilot
project led by Royal Roads University Professor Ann Dale. The topics have
included Nuclear Waste Management (January 2005), Climate Change
(September 2001), and Sustainable Community Development (September 2003).
Each e-dialogue has two discussion tracks: one with a panel of experts
and the other with audience members including Royal Roads students and
the broader community. The pilot is testing use of the Internet and
software to improve real time interactivity between panellists to
increase literacy on sustainable development issues. It will also
research whether knowledge shared in this process can influence Canadian
decision-makers to adopt better public policy on sustainable development.
In the future, RRU hopes to hold three e-dialogues a year. The e-dialogue
Steering Committee includes Nancy Averill, Director of Research &
Methodology, Public Policy Forum; Tony Boydell, Dean of Science,
Technology and Environment Division, Royal Roads University; David
MacIsaac, Transport Canada; and Jamie Smith, Treasury Board Secretariat.


To take part in the discussion, one has to register to obtain a login
name and password. Once inside, one can select a topic and the most
recent postings are at the top of the page. Options are to post a new
topic or to post a new comment. The screens are automatically refreshed
within some seconds so new posts are displayed to keep the participant
up-to-date on the discussion. Attachments up to 3 megabytes can be
posted.


The participant can see the dialogue of both the e-Panel and the
e-audience and post questions for the panelists from which the moderator
will select to give to the panel. A google search can be done on that
screen for relevant documents. The e-Audience is open a week before the
e-Dialogue for posting thoughts. Background reading is provided for each
e-Dialogue.


All the completed dialogues are available on the web site for review. GL
found several of the dialogues to be of considerable interest:
bureaucrats and industry partricipants in particular seemed to respond in
a much more open way in the e-dialogues than in typical structured public
consultation meetings.

 

Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


E-DIALOGUES(TM): THE ECONOMICS OF GREEN BUILDINGS IN CANADA



Held October 7, 2004 and moderated by Dr. Ann Dale and Rodney McDonald,
the Green Buildings e-dialogue covered in two hours more than most
documents cover in a hundred pages. The panel members were:

Alex Zimmerman, President of Canada Green Building Council.

Pierre Guevremont, Chief, New Buildings Program of the Office of Energy
Efficiency, Natural Resources Canada

Nils Larsson who said "In my mind I am tall, thin and all dressed in
black, just like a real architect" is an architect and executive director
of International Initiative for a Sustainable Built Environment

Paul Stevens, Senior Principle with Toronto-based ZAS Architects

Corin Floor, responsible for managing the building program for Mountain
Equipment Co-op.

Gordon Shymko, principal of G. F. Shymko & Associates Inc., an
engineering consulting firm specializing in energy and environmental
engineering.


Rodney McDonald participated from Winnipeg and the panel members were all
in their normal place of work. All the discussion involved keyboarding.
The panel was initially asked to address three questions:

What is a green building?

What are the economic barriers to green building?

How is the design process integral to the success of a green building
project?


The discussion gives a very worthwhile insight into the economics of
green buildings.


Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


ENERGY USE COMPARISON OF LOCAL AND GLOBALLY SOURCED FOOD


Energy saving is often given as a reason for reducing the global
transport of food. Energy use contributes to global warming and to air
pollution. For example, a 1995 study states that use of German-produced
redcurrant juice to replace orange juice from Brazil in Gereman
households would save 40 million liters of transportation fuel.


However a 2003 study questions the assumption that local food is always
more energy efficient. The authors say that previous conclusions lack
empirical data and have often not used a repeatable methodology. Elmar
Schlich and co-author Ulla Fleissner conclude that certain products can
be transported long distances and still use less energy overall than a
regionally or locally produced product. In fact, the distance to market
is such a small component of the energy used in production that it is
hardly a factor in the life cycle of the two foods studied. The study,
done over a five year period, covered fruit juices and lamb meat.


            Calculating Energy Use Throughout the Food Lifecycle


The energy used from the time the product is a crop/livestock through
processing, packaging, transport, and distribution is assessed to examine
what kind of effect the distance food travels has on energy use. Energy
turnover is calculated at kWh per kg or litre of food. Fruit juices from
Brazil and from European and German farmers are compared. Lamb meat from
New Zealand and lamb meat from German farmers are the second comparison.


The study is interesting in terms of the detail required. To assess the
energy used in the juice requires data on how the oranges are grown, the
trucking distance from plantation to squeezing and concentration
facilities, the sea transport, the capacity of the various carriers e.g.
16,000 ton vessels carry 40 containers with 400 tons of orange juice
concentrate each. Only about 8-10 vessels are needed to supply the entire
German population with enough juice for a whole year; the concentrate
keeps frozen for six months. Dilution and return of the refilling bottles
are included in the calculation. Similar data is also collected on apple
juice from European farmers and processers.


Companies with under 100 tons of fruit per year have an overall energy
turnover of 1.1 to 2.5 kWh/litre while companies with more than 2,000
tons per year have less than 0.5 kWh/l. Just in terms of transport and
distribution, small fruit companies need 0.5-0.8 kWh/l while even though
they are covering large distances, the large companies use only 0.1-0.3
kWh/l.


Smaller businesses did not have the investment in energy saving
technologies. For juices, German businesses made small-sized transports
of the crop and had inefficient distribution systems.


For lamb, the climate in Germany resulted in higher energy use because in
New Zealand the beneficial climate meant little additional feed had to be
given. Transporting frozen lamb meat from New Zealand to global markets
by sea transport using freezers and coolers takes less energy than local
transport and distribution and is an insignificant factor compared to the
energy savings achieved by large scale efficiency and logistics of
production and distribution.


The conclusion is that the larger the number of items or tonnage produced
the greater the Ecology of Scale, which is affected more by the
operational efficiency than by marketing distance itself. Note that the
results are only for the food items studied. The authors plan to review
wine shipped in bottles to determine if a less concentrated product which
has heavy packaging gives different results. They have also done an
analysis of non-food ecology of scale such as passenger transport and
housing.


There are many reasons besides food miles energy for sourcing food from
local suppliers in season. However, GL suggests that policy decisions
related to the environment need to take into account complexities as
illustrated in this study. Trade with the environment in mind may lead to
more sustainable food production in both the developing world and the
industrial world.


Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


BENEFITS OF VALUE-ADDED AGRICULTURE


A recent report by Canadian Senate Standing Committee on Agriculture and
Forestry, chaired by Joyce Fairbairn, promotes value-added agriculture.
Value-added is anything which enhances the product so the market will pay
a premium for it compared to commodity prices but the report suggests
that an increasingly important factor to consumers is "the origin of
their food, how it is grown, processed and prepared.' Food safety,
environmentally sensitive production practices such as organic farming,
animal welfare standards and non-genetically engineered foods are
identified as value-added by Michael Presley, Director General, Food
Value Chain Bureau, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.


According to the report, adding value on the farm can help to strengthen
the community and the country and serve to:

a. Increase employment.

b. Revitalize rural communities.

c. Reduce the economic risk associated with trade by reducing dependency
on world prices for commodities.

d. Diversify the economic base of farms and the rural communities which
support and depend on them.

e. Improve farmers' financial stability.

f. Provide opportunities for improvement by connect the farms to research
and innovation.

g. Provide markets for smaller farms and companies through niche markets.

h. Improve the quality and market demand for regional and Canadian
products;

i. Promote partnerships along the food value chain;

j. Help retain young farmers.


Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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


STUFF THE TEDDY BEARS FOR TSUNAMI CHILDREN


ADRA Canada, a relief agency operated by a religious group based in
Oshawa, Ontario is running a campaign for collecting teddy bears for the
orphans of the tsunami. Miss Canada International Nicole Kostrosky and
Miss Teen Canada International Amanda Klyn are travelling across Canada
collecting teddy bears from Canadian children to send to Asian children.
An editorial in the Red Deer Advocate says the idea probably comes from
businesses that run beauty pageants and manufacture toys. The editor
asks, "What is it about our society that makes the dispersal of plush
toys seem an appropriate response to disaster?... It's a waste of time,
money and energy."


Gallon Environment Letter agrees with the Editor of the Red Deer
Advocate: sending teddy bears, probably manufactured in Asia, from Canada
to Asian children is a poor response to the tsunami situation. The two
Misses should spend their time doing something useful such as mobilizing
funding and technical help to assist reconstruction of a home-based craft
toy industry in the areas hit hard by the tsunami. Send a teddy and it
will provide a child with a few minutes of pleasure; teach a parent to
make a teddy and provide a lifetime of economic well-being and pleasure
for everyone in the family.

 

Subscribers see a link here. Subscriptions cost only $30 per year for
individuals, $184.00 plus GST for organizations. To subscribe please
visit www.cialgroup.com/subscription

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

In the Sustainable Technologies and Services Supplement, prepared
especially for our organizational subscribers, you can find the following
articles


National Sustainability Framework and Sector Tables

CGA-Canada Surveys Corporate Sustainability Reporting

Sell, Donate or Recycle Used Electronics on Ebay

Environmental Standard for Corporate Members of QUANGOs

AgCanada Untendered Contract to AC Nielsen on GE Labelling

New Journal about Oceans

Applications for NB Environmental Trust Fund

Honda Debuts ULEV Pickup Truck

BioWillie

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

HONOURED READER EDITION

 

This is the honoured reader edition of the Gallon Environment Letter and
is distributed at no charge. To add or delete your email from this free
edition send a note with Add or Delete and your email to Email
circulation ggallon@ecolog.com. Paid subscribers receive a more complete
edition without subscription reminders and with extensive links to
further information following almost every article.Organizational
subscribers also receive the monthly Sustainable Technology & Services
Supplement. If you would like to subscribe please visit
www.cialgroup.com/subscription. Individual subscriptions are only $30
including GST. Organizational subscriptions are $184 plus GST and provide
additional benefits detailed on the web site. If you feel you should be
receiving the paid subscriber edition or have other subscriber questions
please contact us at info@cialgroup.com .

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

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Copyright (C) Canadian Institute for Business and the Environment

119 Concession 6 Rd Fisherville ON N0A 1GO Canada. Fisherville & Toronto

All rights reserved. Distribution managed by EcoLog Information Resources
Group

Readers are advised to check all facts for themselves before taking any
action. The Gallon Environment Letter (GL for short) presents information
for general interest and does not endorse products, companies or
practices. Advertising or sponsorship of one or more issues consistent
with sustainable development goals is welcome and identified as separate
from editorial content.

Subscriptions for organizations $184 + GST = $196.88 includes monthly
Sustainable Technologies and Services Supplement STSS ; for individuals
(non-organizational emails and paid with non-org funds-does not include
monthly STSS): $30 includes GST. Issues twice a month.
http://www.cialgroup.com/subscription

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx