Greenpeace East Asia - Feature Stories

Living with Danger

Zeno — Mon, 15 Apr 2013 16:30:00 +0200

Investigations made by Greenpeace East Asia have exposed the dumping of massive amounts of hazardous waste in the Southwestern Chinese province of Sichuan by the country's fertilizer industry. Phosphate mining in Longmen Mountain has also greatly exacerbated the risk of landslides and other geological disasters, threatening the safety of miners and residents downstream.

Read the full report.

Our damning new report reveals phosphate mining in Longmen Mountain, Sichuan greatly exacerbates the risk of landslides and other geological disasters in an area already severely stricken by the devastating 2008 Wenchuan earthquake. The industry is also aggressively encroaching on the habitat of a native giant panda population.

Miners from Longmen Mountain share their experiences working in one of China's most dangerous places. One miner told us, "find me a person who says he isn't afraid of the aftershocks and you'll have found a liar." Then read why five years after the tragic Wenchuan earthquake that killed many, dozens of reconstructed homes remain unoccupied. And the inspiring but heart-breaking tale of a group of villagers who refuse to take the pollution of their village lying down.

Read the full report.

Greenpeace campaigner Lang Xiyu: "Our discovery indicates an environmental time bomb created by an overblown phosphate fertilizer industry, producing far more fertilizer than needed. China has now accumulated at least three hundred million tons of phosphogypsum, or more than 200 kg for every citizen in China."

When thinking about food the first image that comes to our mind might be the so-called 'food porn' photography that the marketing industry relies upon when advertising food products. But there is also an ugly side of food the industry is not willing to portray and it involves chemical fertilisers.

Aftershocks: returning home

Zeno — Mon, 15 Apr 2013 16:00:00 +0200

Travelling the road into Longmen Mountain is filled with danger and unexpected obstacles. There's no asphalt, only rocky gravel, and it hangs over a jagged, vertical cliff. Here and there are piles of dirt and rocks due to frequent landslides in the area. As we drove along the road, abandoned houses and broken walls came into view. It was heartbreaking to look at all these houses lying in ruin after the earthquake.

We'd been driving for more than an hour before finally spotting the alternating colours of black, gray and white that makes up the mine entrances. This region is famous for its phosphate, with the state-owned Longmen Mountain producing one-tenth of China's phosphate rock. The mine also lies on a large fault line, and experts from the Sichuan Provincial Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources have stated this region's geological structure is particularly vulnerable to earthquakes and aftershocks. With aftershocks come heavy rain, and mudslides that fill the mine caves and endanger the lives of those living at the mountain's foothills, in a village called Hong Bai.

"Aftershocks? Yeah, we're still getting them," said one of the miners, using his chopsticks to pick at a piece of meat in his bowl. He ate his lunch as we chatted. "Everyone's terrified of them! Find me a person who says he isn't and you'll have found a liar. But what choice do we have? We have homes to pay off."

Because it was January a blanket of snow covered Longmen Mountain. The temperature there are much cooler than in the basin, so all the workers were sporting bright red noses. We joined them for lunch, just some greens and simply cooked meat. "Aftershocks and lunch are no different – both come every day!" joked the chef Lao Wang, who wore glasses, with his hair neat. Cooking, in fact, is just one, small part of his work; he's mainly in charge of production records so I paid special attention to what he had to say.

I said to him, "the road is in such poor condition! Such a bumpy ride, it almost made me throw up. What about you guys? How does it feel having to travel on it every single day?"

Lao Wang replied that every July the rainy season comes and causes a large amount of damage to the road. So every year there's no access until September, while workers attend to repairs. A kind of annual, forced “vacation”.

Then he went to fetch a basin of water from the kitchen. I followed and had just stepped out into the freezing cold, when all of a sudden heard a burst of crackling overhead. I barely had time to register what was happening before Lao Wan had dropped the basin and pulled me to safety.

A huge stone came tumbling down the cliff. Lao Wang said I should watch out and mentioned last year falling stones had injured a few of the workers. Then he continued washing dishes, as if nothing had happened. Such a calm reaction to the obvious danger amazed me. I wanted to know more about his story.

"Lao Wang, were you here during the 2008 Wenzhou earthquakes? What happened exactly?" I asked.

He was about to reach for the tap but instead pushed his glasses up on his nose, and replied with little sign of emotion: "I was on the crest of the hill. I witnessed the earthquake and had to bury 60 people."

He turned on the faucet, and continued to wash dishes.

I was about to ask more questions when the worker who'd been complaining about his mortgage suddenly came over and invited me to sit down. He said, "You've come all the way from Beijing to visit us, so come, sit and eat. Don't let your food get cold!"

Lao Wang then mentioned that next year this man's daughter would sit for her university entrance exam, so he's working twice as hard as everyone else. In that instance I felt I should share with them what our investigations had turned up: that the Wenchuan earthquake has deeply affected this mountain full of phosphate. That the fragile geological structures are like crumbling buildings, and every drill is like destroying a critical building block. Wearing a helmet cannot guarantee safety.

But I realised these men know far better than I do of the dangers they are facing – they see it for themselves every day. Yet they rise early in the morning, get on the bus, and turn up to do this work, in the hope that their daughters and sons won't have to.

Image: A worker at the entrance of the phosphate mine. © Greenpeace / Yong Yang

Empty cities: after the earthquake

Zeno — Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:00:00 +0200

In 2008 the tragic Wenchuan earthquake in Sichuan killed many and destroyed a vast number of homes. Five years later in the midst of reconstruction, and with dozens of unoccupied apartment blocks, villagers of Renhe, Jinhua near Shifang found themselves unable to return to their houses due to a nearby plant called Yingfeng Industries dumping huge phosphorus gypsum slagheaps into the nearby river.

There's a shantytown in Sichuan where many of the earthquake victims live, and an old lady was seen roasting meat on an open fire. Born and raised in the area, the 2008 earthquake destroyed the home that had been in her family for generations. Originally she planned to rebuild on the site of her former house, but yet five years have passed and she is still living in temporary accommodation.

In a nearby shantytown where many of the earthquake victims live, an old lady was seen roasting meat on an open fire. Born and raised in the area, the 2008 earthquake destroyed the home that had been in her family for generations. Originally she planned to rebuild on the site of her former house, but yet five years have passed and she is still living in temporary accommodation.

"I'm unable to move home due to the heavy pollution," said the old woman hopelessly. "Most of the villagers are the same. Of the eight families that resided here only one remains." She points to a nearby tree. "You see this tree? It has been dead for ten years. Since then, I've been trying to grow vegetables here but nothing ever grows in this polluted ground. The air is also terribly polluted, with smoke and dust always irritating our lungs," she said.

At this point her son interrupted to say since the operation of Yingfeng Industries began 24 years ago, they have been constantly living under the shadow of the plant's flue gas. The entire village has been forced to breathe in the factory exhaust. And on days with heavy rain or cloud, many locals experience a shortness of breath. "More and more people here are suffering bronchitis. The soot leads to colds, coughs and other chronic diseases," he mentions. Villagers also complain of soot that is being belched from the chimneys and reaches their housing, less than 100 meters away.

The old woman's son insisted that we go to the river to see for ourselves the pollution. Yingfeng Industries had dumped their gypsum slagheap without any reinforcement or anti-landslide facilities. We saw that it was more than 20 meters in height, and there were obvious signs it had been subject to landslides. "You see their slag heap is moving directly into the Shiting River, it's so close to the riverbed. Even before the earthquake on rainy days it would leech into the river," he said. Like sand, it was continuously shifting into the riverbed.

Five years on from the Wenchuan earthquakes, and though the houses have been rebuilt, these victims still wait for the day they can return home. Villagers reside in Renhe, if not in their houses at least on the land, in the hope they can one day rebuild their lives here, and see a reversal of the ecological damage done. But much like the roof tiles that are scattered everywhere along the pathways, there is a feeling that perhaps this village is irreparable.

Image: Earthquake resettlement housing next to Yingfeng Chemical Plant has been left vacant for several years as local residents do not want to move back to such a polluted area. © Wen Wenyu / Greenpeace

The "foolish" men and a phosphorus mountain

Zeno — Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:00:00 +0200

There is an old Chinese tale of a "foolish old man" whose home was penned in by two mountains, making access to and fro difficult. The man declared he would move the mountains, earning ridicule from his neighbours in the process. But the man persevered and suddenly the Emperor of Heaven appeared and moved the mountains away.

In Mianzhu City there is also a group of "foolish" men concerned about their living environment, desperately trying to move away "mountains" of phosphogypsum which were dumped by phosphorus chemical giant Lomon Group on the nearby river bank.

Bai village is located just 15 minutes from Mianzhu city, and not far from the river. The recent expansion of the city has begun to encroach on the village with a number of tall buildings under construction meeting the edge of pastoral fields. And yet it's difficult to ignore the stunning landscape – rolling hills and a gently flowing river.

Villagers tell us they've been burdened with this phosphogypsum mountain for years. On rainy days the water becomes a black colour having picked up the dust and the air turns dark. Even on the hillsides the water begins to stink, developing a thick viscous layer. The water used to bathe children cause irritation. They say drink the water and your legs being to feel pain, and lumps appear on your waist.

Six years ago when the remaining families signed a lease with the Lomon Group, they never expected that the company would bring with it a giant monster made of phosphogypsum.

Phosphogypsum is a byproduct from production of phosphate fertilizer, and contains a variety of harmful substances. About five tons of phosphogypsum is produced from every one ton of produced phosphoric acid. And across China, the nation has accumulated 300 million tons of such waste residues. Disposing of this hazardous waste has now become a major problem.

This repairman is called Mr. Zhao. He is driving with two neighbours back to his village – home of one of the country's largest slag heaps. With nowhere to turn, he has called his fellow villages to chip in for a digger that will help them transport the slagheap. Every day they line up cars to transport the waste, and though each day 20 trips are made the slagheap still seem gargantuan in size. They fear it will take decades to evacuate this mountain.

I dare not show him a map of China I have in my bag: it shows the three hundred million tons of waste estimated by the national stock of phosphogypsum that dot the country. To clean up such a mess you would need 10-ton trucks and 30 million trips before the job would be done. And this doesn't even take into account the fact that the phosphorus chemical industry is constantly producing thousands more tons per year. Endless piles of phosphogypsum, mountains that cannot be moved.

And yet, I admired the Bai villagers for refusing to be defeated by this slagheap, when elsewhere pollution victims feel themselves so powerless. The picture of these three villagers, busy under the shadow of the excavator, honest, stubborn and determined, stuck with me. Just as in the story of the foolish old man, it was his persistence that carried him through, and in the name of a better future for his descendants. This is all that Mr. Zhao wants, a better future for the next generation, who need not eat the bitter fruit planted by the generation before.

The question now is will these "old men" receive any assistance from the "gods above" who can aid them in their mission to move these mountains? And end the suffering caused by this toxic phosphorus?

Image: Greenpeace investigators estimate that this pile of phosphate slag heap is only 10 meters apart from the nearest field of Tingjiang Village, Shifang City, Sichuan Province. © Wen Wenyu / Greenpeace

China's clinging to coal an unnecessary contradiction

Monica Tan, Web Editor — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 19:00:00 +0100

The biggest dirty-energy project on the planet is the planned 20% expansion of China’s coal mining and production operations in five semi-arid western and northern provinces, where most of China’s remaining reserves of the dirty fuel are to be found. If the mines, coal power stations and factories planned for this area during China’s current five-year plan go ahead, they would spew 1,400 million tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere – adding more than double the amount of Germany’s total emissions in 2010.

A child at a fence looks at a power plant, located close to the grasslands. © Lu Guang / Greenpeace

Key facts: Increase in annual CO2 by 2015: 1,400Mt

Country with comparable annual emissions: Russia

Companies involved: China Datang Corporation, China Guodian Corporation, China Huadian Corporation, China Huaneng Group, China Power investment Corporation, Shenhua Group Corporation Ltd.

China is both the world’s largest producer and consumer of coal. The fuel supplies 70% of the country’s energy needs and 80% of its electricity. It is, therefore, no surprise that 80% of China’s carbon dioxide emissions come from burning coal.

In 2009, the World Energy Council reported that China had 114.5 billion short tons of recoverable coal reserves, the third-largest in the world behind the US and Russia, and equivalent to about 14% of the world’s total reserves. The five western and northern provinces are planning to increase production by 830 million tons a year by 2015. This expansion would be at odds with policy goals set out in the country’s five-year plan that calls for curbs on air pollution, a target to limit coal consumption growth by 2015 and reductions in CO2 emissions in relation to economic output.

Climate change that challenges China

China will not escape impacts caused by dangerous climate change. The most serious risks the country faces include a decrease in food production, more severe droughts, the shrinking of glaciers that are the source of the major rivers, and more frequent extreme weather phenomena. If there are no adaption measures, a 2.5°C rise in the average global temperature would lead to as much as a 20% decline in Chinese food production. It has been estimated that by the year 2050, four western provinces of China – Inner Mongolia, Xinjiang, Gansu, Ningxia – would face intense water scarcity with water demand exceeding the available water resource.

Water resources are already under heavy stress in some parts of the country. Taking the middle section of the Yellow River as an example, 35% of the decline in water availability between 1970-2000 has been attributed to climate change. Climate change will also lead to an increase in extreme weather phenomena, including droughts, floods, and high temperatures. Statistics show that in the 1950s storms on China’s coasts resulted in a direct economic loss of millions of renminbi (RMB). This increased to billions in the later part of 1980s. Now, the annual average direct economic loss is 10bn RMB ($1.6bn US dollars).

Where’s the water?

The provinces earmarked for new coal bases would face a serious water problem if planned coal expansion were to go ahead. By the end of 2015, the annual water consumption of the coal-power bases in Inner Mongolia, Shaanxi, Ningxia would either equal or exceed the entire area’s current total industrial water consumption (94.1% to 140.8% of current total industrial consumption). That would mean these coal power bases, if fully developed, would consume a significant amount of water currently allocated to farming, urban residential use, environmental conservation and other sectors. The fierce competition for water resources between industrial and non-industrial sectors would very likely cause conflict and unrest in those areas.

These provinces simply could not provide the massive water allocations required for increased coal mining, coal production, and coal chemical production, not to mention for the new infrastructure and transport projects which would come along with the expansion.

Coal production and use are already responsible for more than 10% of all water usage in China. Water is needed to mine and wash coal, as well as to cool coal- fired power plants. When coal mines are opened and the associated new heavy industry begins, water is secured by accessing local lakes and rivers, pumping groundwater, and constructing reservoirs to capture surface water, which diverts its normal flow and reabsorption into the soil. All three methods result in the water table sinking, leading to land degradation and desertification, damaging the livelihood of local farmer and herder communities. Before coal is mined, the groundwater is extracted to allow access to the fossil fuel, resulting in large-scale groundwater depletion. It is estimated that for every ton of coal extracted, 2.5m3 of groundwater is pumped out of the ground and contaminated.

Sheep grazing in a grassland engulfed by an expanding coal mine. © Lu Guang / Greenpeace

Iconic grasslands under threat

Pollution and the intense use of water have already caused desertification and degradation of some of Inner Mongolia’s iconic grasslands, which herders rely on to feed their livestock. From 2004 to 2009, according to the National Bureau of Statistics, Inner Mongolia lost 46.8 million cubic metres from its total reserves of freshwater, a drop of 15%. During the same period, Xinjiang lost 95.5 million cubic metres. Some parts of the grasslands have turned into dust bowls and now cracks in the mud appear where natural lakes used to be. People in the area report that the production of the Xilingol grassland has been lowered. The Wulagai wetland has all but dried up. The desert has started creeping into many other grasslands but there is still time to save many of these areas by limiting the expansion of coal mining.

Glaciers shrink under climate change

The Yellow River source region plays a vital role in supplying and regulating water to the entire water basin, with its length above Lanzhou providing 55.6% of the river’s total water flow. However, in the last 30 years, the region has lost 17% of its glaciers and the ice is melting at a rate that is now 10 times faster than it has been for the previous 300 years.

Old coal industry cities facing pollution problem

The coal industry is the backbone of cities such as Datong City in Shaanxi Province. The intense energy consumption and heavy pollution of the coal industry have brought significant environmental problems for Datong City, including, but not limited to, pollution of river water, the destruction of ground water, land sinking due to mining, and heavy air pollution. According to monitoring from 2005 by the Datong City Environmental Department, the water quality of most of the rivers in Datong City had become so poor that the water was essentially not usable. Coal contributes to 85% of China’s sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions, 67% of its nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions and 70% of particulate matter (PM).

Mother river struggling under industrial expansion

China’s new coal-mining bases would also place further strain on the already polluted and struggling Yellow River cradle of Chinese civilisation and the largest sandy river in the world. People in the cities and communities along the river depend on it for their livelihood. Removing too much water from the Yellow River would threaten ecosystems, cities and farming communities.

China-EU industry forum on safer chemical substitution

ebrooks — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 00:14:00 +0100

Greenpeace East Asia is working with the SUBSPORT project, a LIFE funded project of the European Union jointly conducted by four EU project partners, to organize a forum on chemical substitution.

Organizers: ChemSec & Greenpeace East Asia

Programme background:

In 2012, China’s 12th Five-Year Plan for Industrial Cleaner Production outlined that the nation would conduct the substitution of hazardous chemicals in materials and products, while promoting the use of low-hazardous and non-hazardous materials and reducing the concentration of hazardous chemicals in products. In parallel, the National 12th Five-Year Plan for Chemicals Environmental Risk Prevention and Control has for the first time stated that China will improve its prevention and control system for environmental risks of chemicals, and will phase out chemicals with high toxicity, high persistency and high environmental hazards under legislative regulations.

With ‘Chemical Substitution’ being a significant method to reduce the environmental, occupational and public health risks of hazardous chemicals, practical substitution methodology and safer alternatives availability are topics of interest for both the industry and the government.

Greenpeace East Asia is working with the SUBSPORT project, a LIFE funded project of the European Union jointly conducted by four EU project partners, to organize a forum on chemical substitution. The forum aims to provide a platform where industries and policy makers could communicate the method and approaches to conduct chemical substitution. Through the forum, participants will not only be introduced with the tools and guidance for substitution and substitution management, but to exchange information on alternative chemicals and technologies via substitution cases.

The format and content of the forum is based on the ongoing SUBSPORT training programme, which has been conducted in more than 15 sessions across Europe since 2012. Walking through the substitution process, SUBSPORT training helps participants establish a methodical way of practicing substitution in companies. Furthermore, the forum will take the case stories of SUBSPORT as examples to guide the industries to analyze the search process and safety assessment on substituted chemicals.

Participants of this forum:

The forum welcomes the participants of a diversity of stakeholders, both domestic and international, who are interested in the hazardous chemical substitution involved in products and manufacturing process, including governmental agencies, industry, trade unions, NGOs and other stakeholders.

Time of Forum: March 25^th(Monday), 2013

Location of Forum: Zhijiang Hotel, City of HangZhou, Zhejiang Province

Download:

1. Forum agenda

2. Forum registration form

Levi's shapes up to become a Detox leader

EoinD — Mon, 17 Dec 2012 19:00:00 +0100

Levi Strauss & Co. have committed to go toxic-free. Why? Because you and hundreds of thousands of other people demanded that Levi’s “Go Forth and Detox”.

The world's biggest denim brand joins ten other clothing companies that have made credible commitments to Detox, including the world's largest fashion retailer, Zara.

Levi's commitment comes just eight days after we launched our “Toxic Threads: Under Wraps” report in Mexico, and screened a documentary about a family struggling to hold factories in the region to account for the pollution they are causing, including suppliers of brands like Levi's.

The brand is living up to its claims of being a leader. Competitors that have so far failed to take responsibility for the pollution created along their entire supply chain are looking increasingly exposed. These include familiar big brands names such as Calvin Klein, GAP and Victoria's Secret.

A change of direction

The commitment from Levi's is great news for people power and the environment. Levi's will begin requiring its largest suppliers (each with multiple facilities) in China, Mexico and elsewhere in the Global South to disclose pollution data as early as the end of June 2013. This means that's those living near all these facilities gain crucial access to information about discharges into their local environment – a basic right that up to this stage they had been denied.

But rather than use hazardous chemicals in the first place, Levi's will look for non-hazardous alternatives. This is a bold move away from its previous position, which was focused on managing rather than eliminating hazardous chemicals.

And in addition, the company has embraced the precautionary principle, which will be fundamental to shift the entire industry towards the adoption of non-hazardous chemicals.

Toxic-free fashion is a trend to last the seasons

More than 400,000 people have joined the Detox campaign since we re-launched in November, demanding toxic-free fashion and clean water. Fashionistas, activists, designers and bloggers took action on Twitter and Weibo, spreading news about the industry's toxic addiction and reaching many millions of friends and followers.

First Zara committed to Detox, then Mango and Esprit, as people around the world made their voices heard. Levi's was next on the shopping list, and in just eight days hundreds of thousands of people had called on the brand to match its bold proclamations with real actions. Activists and volunteers also took to the street in over 20 countries to take the message directly to the brand's customers and to speak with the staff working in their stores, who sent the message back to Levi's HQ.

The rising tide of people power has again shown what it's capable of. But unfortunately the toxic discharges from clothing factories continue, and while 11 top brands have now committed to Detox, more companies must recognise and act upon the urgency of the situation.

Help spur on the next success

Help get our new video, Detox Fashion, on as many screens as possible.

We know brands like Calvin Klein, GAP and Victoria's Secret monitor social media as closely as they monitor traditional media, and every time you like, share, comment on, or promote this video, it increases the pressure on these companies to change their ways: to stop poisoning rivers in the countries where their products are made, and stop shipping hazardous chemicals all over the world in their clothes.

A toxic-free world is possible. Together we can help create it.

People! Zara commits to go toxic-free

EoinD — Thu, 29 Nov 2012 01:00:00 +0100

Zara, the world’s largest clothing retailer, today announced a commitment to go toxic-free following nine days of intense public pressure. This win belongs to the fashion-lovers, activists, bloggers and denizens of social media. This is people power in action.

Greenpeace campaigners began a dialogue with Zara (a brand within the Inditex group) in 2011 about eliminating releases of hazardous chemicals from its supply chain and clothes. But it wasn't until this week that the fast-fashion giant caught on to the urgent need to solve its toxic pollution problem.

Zara has now committed to eliminate all discharge of hazardous chemicals from its supply chain and products by 2020. And they're going to get rid of some of the worst chemicals, such as PFCs, even sooner. As a significant user of PFCs, Zara's commitment to eliminate this chemical group by the end of 2015 is a breakthrough.

The Detox commitment announced today covers Zara and the seven other brands in the Inditex group: Pull & Bear, Massimo Dutti, Bershka, Stradivarius, Oysho, Zara Home and Uterqüe.

The commitment is good news for the environment, but also a breakthrough for the public's right to know what is being released into our waterways. Zara says that by the end of 2013 at least 100 of its suppliers in the Global South (including at least 40 in China) will publicly disclose data about their releases of hazardous chemicals into the environment. The open data will be chemical-by-chemical, facility-by-facility and at least year-by-year.

Last Tuesday we launched the Detox campaign globally with a fashion show and press conference in Beijing. Related images and comments began to rise like a spring tide on social networks within hours of the story breaking. Zara's Facebook Page quickly filled with comments from fans calling on the company to Detox. Thousands of people began to share their desire for “fashion without pollution!” and demands for Zara to Detox on Twitter and Sina Weibo, China's leading microblogging site.

You can see who's commenting about the campaign on Twitter and Weibo in one place – people around the world speaking out in a dozen languages to a combined reach of more than 7.1m followers. On Twitter alone there were at least 43,800 mentions of Zara and the Detox campaign this week. More than 300,000 people signed up to join the campaign to Detox Zara, and many tens of thousands of people emailed and tweeted directly to the company for an ambitious Detox commitment.

More than 700 Greenpeace volunteers in 20 countries were out at Zara stores on Saturday. In the days before, climbers and other activists delivered the Detox message at Zara flagship stores and HQ buildings in Hong Kong, Budapest, Geneva, Hamburg and Madrid. Photos and videos of the actions have been trending on Twitter for days for searches like “Zara” and “Fashion”.

Zara's commitment to act more transparently is a milestone in the way clothing is manufactured. It's an important step in providing local communities, journalists and officials with the information they need to ensure that local water supplies are not turned into public sewers for industry. Zara's transparency revolution will be key to ensuring that as brands commit to Detox they then really follow through on achieving zero discharges by 2020. With so many businesses engaging in greenwashing, it's important for consumers to know who they can trust.

Zara now joins Nike, Adidas, Puma, H&M, M&S, C&A and Li-Ning who have also committed to Detox but other top clothing companies still need to respond to the urgency of the situation and Detox. We tested clothing items from 20 leading brands this year and found hazardous chemicals in them that break down in the environment to form toxic pollution. But by working with their suppliers and switching to non-hazardous alternatives, the clothing companies can become part of the solution.

The rising tide of people power has shown what it's capable of. But unfortunately the toxic discharges from clothing factories continue, and while Zara is a big fish, more companies must recognise and act upon the urgency of the situation before our work will be done.

Fashion-lovers, activists, environmentalists, bloggers and celebrities will be back for more - toxic brands be warned.

Take action

Help get our new video, Detox Fashion, on as many screens as possible.

Here's how: Watch, Like, and Share this animation aimed at getting the fashion industry to stop discharging hazardous chemicals.

Esperanza Save Our Oceans Ship Tour: Hong Kong Stop

Monica Tan, Web Editor — Wed, 12 Sep 2012 03:43:00 +0200

Greenpeace ship MY Esperanza is currently touring Asia to raise awareness of the major threats to the health of our oceans. Over-fishing is threatening our oceans, with around 80% of fish being caught by state-of-the-art, environmentally destructive industrial fishing methods such as purse seiner and fish aggregating device. And if the situation continues, we may run out of fish to eat in just 30 years' time!

The oceans are the source of all life on earth, and every day they continue to nurture us. Over 80% of the earth's creatures live in the oceans, and they provide half the oxygen we breathe. They regulate our climate and our rainfall. They give us a bounty of seafood; they revitalize us with their beauty and their splendor.

In return, many people treat the ocean as both landfill and a bottomless provider. Its creatures are harvested to the point of extinction, and pollution, trash and oil spills are thoughtlessly dumped back.

We need to protect our oceans because without them life on Earth would not –and cannot – exist.

The Esperanza Save Our Oceans Tour will highlight the number of impacts overfishing has had on our marine ecosystem. The Esperanza will visit Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong, three of the most important regions in the trade and consumption of marine species, in order to generate support for oceans protection and an end to over-fishing.

The ship will visit Hong Kong in mid-October as part of Greenpeace’s Pacific Oceans Ship Tour and will be in Hong Kong for a week to spread the message that we must protect our oceans.

Greenpeace is campaigning for a global network of marine reserves covering 40% of the world’s oceans and for a more sustainable fishing industry. Both are vital steps to restoring the health of our oceans.

We cordially invite you to visit the Esperanza in Hong Kong and be likewise inspired to protect the oceans. The Esperanza will be open for public visits on the following dates and venues:

Date: October 20th (Sat), 21st (Sun) and 23rd (Tue)
Location: China Merchants Wharf, 18 Sai Ning Street, Kennedy Town, Hong Kong
Time: 10:00-17:00 (Greenpeace reserve the right to change the visiting time according to crowd and weather. For details please visit our web.)
Transportation: Bus number 1, 10, 5B, 5P, 5X, 101, 104 for direct access. Or 5-minute walk after alighting from bus number 18, 18P, 113, 904.

Enquiry

Email: enhk@greenpeace.org
Tel: 28548300

A beginner's guide to nuclear power

Monica Tan, Web Editor — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 21:30:00 +0200

Nuclear power, once the domain of scientists in labs and far away from the thoughts of the rest of us, is fast becoming a debate held between every day people.

So before a nuclear reactor lands on your doorstep, let's start at the very beginning and take a quick look at 10 questions to get you clued up on just what nuclear power is.

Introduction

What is nuclear power?

Nuclear power is a form of energy that is produced from splitting a uranium atom. These atoms are split when they collide with a neutron. This split is called fission. It generates heat, which is used to produce electricity.

How is nuclear power produced?

When an atom is split, it releases neutrons (small sub-atomic particles). These hit other atoms. This split releases energy in the form of heat. The heat is then used to boil water. The hot water creates steam and the steam turns turbines, thereby creating electricity. So, nuclear plants create electricity by boiling water and creating steam to turn turbines.

Producing Nuclear Power

Where do companies get the uranium that makes nuclear
power?

Uranium ore is mined around the world. The ore is put through a process called milling, resulting in a product called uranium oxide concentrate (U3O8). This is the form in which uranium is sold.

Most nuclear reactors use uranium. The most common form of this is Uranium U 238. But this in itself cannot be used in a nuclear reactor and has to undergo an enrichment process to produce a useable fuel.

The following countries have uranium resources – Kazakhstan, Canada, Australia as the main suppliers of uranium to world markets followed by Russia, South Africa, Namibia, Brazil, Niger, USA, China, Jordan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine and India.

If most reactors use uranium, how is plutonium connected to
nuclear power?

Plutonium is considered a ‘man-made’ by-product of the process in a reactor. About one one third of the energy produced in most nuclear power plants comes from plutonium. Plutonium is also a key element to making nuclear weapons.

How exactly is plutonium made then?

We already mentioned that when a uranium atom is split, it releases neutrons. Some of these neutrons released by the fission process (the splitting process) convert uranium-238 nuclei (one nucleus, many nuclei) into plutonium. That is why plutonium is a by-product of the nuclear fission process that happens in a nuclear reactor.

Nuclear Power and Nuclear Weapons

How does nuclear power differ from nuclear weapons?

The two are made using the same process – mining for uranium and enriching the ore so that it can be used in a nuclear reactor. The only difference between nuclear power and nuclear weapons is the concentration of the various isotopes used in the fuel. It is up to the people controlling the process whether the fuel is used to create bombs or to generate electricity.

“Each year a typical 1000 mega-watt (MW) commercial power reactor will produce 300 to 500 pounds of plutonium -- enough to build between 25 - 40 Nagasaki-sized atomic bombs.”

Nuclear Power and the Environment

A lot of people say nuclear power is better for the
environment than coal power. Is this true?

The nuclear industry often claims that nuclear energy is needed to combat climate change because it generates fewer greenhouse gas emmissions than coal power. However, nuclear power is actually expensive and dangerous, and the above claim from the nuclear industry is distracting people from the real solutions to climate change.

Nuclear power could at best make only a negligible contribution to emission reductions: even if the entire global fleet of reactors was quadrupled, a completely far-fetched scenario, this would lead to at most a 6% reduction in global CO2 emissions, which would come too late due to long construction times, well beyond the deadline that climate scientists have set for avoiding catastrophic climate change.

So nuclear power is different to coal power, but is no better a solution to combatting climate change.

If a country runs off nuclear power, how does that affect its
citizens? The kitchen light shines with the same intensity
whether it’s burning nuclear or coal power, after all.

Nuclear power is dirty and unsafe.

There is no such thing as a "safe" dose of radiation and just because nuclear pollution is invisible doesn't mean it's "clean." If a meltdown were to occur, the accident could kill and injure tens of thousands of people, leaving large regions uninhabitable.

More than 50 years after splitting the first atom, science has still not devised a method for adequately handling long life radioactive waste.

Nuclear Power and the Economy

What is the cheapest way for citizens to get reliable
energy with the least harm to our environment? So that when
we want to turn on that kitchen light, we know there’s
always going to be electricity.

In contrast to nuclear power, renewable energy is both clean and safe. Technically, accessible renewable energy sources are capable of producing six times more energy than current global demand.

Motley Crew Arctic tour 2012

ehill — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 03:46:00 +0200

You don’t have to be from Russia or Norway to have a stake in what happens to the Arctic – we’re all affected. That is why we've set sail on the Arctic Sunrise with a truly international crew to demand a truly international response to the devastating threats facing the Arctic.

From Girl Guides to Chinese pop stars, from filmmakers to Cambridge University scientists, we have ambassadors on board from Peru, Ghana, Hong Kong, Brazil, Argentina, New Zealand, US and Spain among others, to bear witness to this disappearing world. Greenpeace is calling on the United Nations to create a global sanctuary to protect the uninhabited area around the North Pole.

Launched from Svalbard, Norway, 78 degrees north of the equator, the ship has begun a month-long expedition to the ice edge. Arctic sea ice has already disappeared by 75 percent in the last 30 years, and scientists on board the Arctic Sunrise will be working with 3D scanning experts and engineers to capture the true shape of Arctic sea ice for the first time. This cutting-edge research will help the world understand the rapid changes currently taking place at the very top of our planet.

Instead of seeing the sea ice retreat as a grave warning to humanity, industrial fisheries, oil companies and governments are trying to capitalise on this crisis. The 20th Century saw a devastating scramble for resources on every continent on earth. Now we have to stand together, from every corner of the world, young and old, to say enough is enough, we will protect the Arctic before it befalls the same fate.

Find out more about some of the passengers on-board:

Hu Haiquan - China

Haiquan is one half of Yu Quan; perhaps one of the most famous pop duos in mainland China. Born in the city of Shenyang, Hu Haiquan paired up with Chen Yufan in June 1998 to create Yu Quan. Together they have released 12 albums in total, with over 10 million pieces sold, and have built up a huge social media following in China.

Fredrick Lam - Hong Kong

Fred is a popular social activist from Hong Kong with numerous regular columns in Hong Kong newspapers. Fred is joining Greenpeace of the Arctic Sunrise to see this pristine region for himself, to learn about the ecology of the Arctic and to find out more about vital sea ice research.

Yvette Sena Blankson (known as Sena) - Ghana

At 19 years old Sena, from Agona-Swedru in the central region of Ghana, is the youngest passenger on the ship. Currently studying Information Studies and Sociology at the University of Ghana she has been a Girl Guide since High School. She loves singing, reading, dancing, making friends and of course guiding. She plans to train as a lawyer specialising in cases of abuse against women.

Miryam Justo - Peru

Miryam became a Guide when she was 9 years old and hasn't stopped being involved in guiding since. Miryam holds a bachelor's degree in Forestry Sciences and has a keen interest in conservation and education. She considers being selected to go the Arctic with Greenpeace as a once in a lifetime opportunity and she hopes to gain a deeper understanding of this special environment.

Dr John Fletcher - UK

Is a postdoctoral researcher in Polar Oceanography at the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics at the University of Cambridge. His work focuses in the use of satellites to determine the thickness of the Arctic sea ice. Roughly speaking, this is done by bouncing a radar pulse off the ice surface and timing how long it takes to return to the satellite. It is fair to say he is the geek on board; computer programming, mathematical modelling as well as conducting experiments on the sea ice are all in a day's work.

We caught APP red-handed. What's next?

cluk — Thu, 03 May 2012 09:30:00 +0200

Deep in Indonesia’s tropical rainforests, you'll find a kind of tranquil atmosphere like no other. The place is more or less untouched by humankind. And then, just a short distance away, the blackened roots of peatland forest still smolder from where they have been burned to a cinder. It really feels like a journey from heaven deep into hell.

Hello. My name is Yang Jie and I am with Greenpeace’s Forests campaign. It saddens me every time I think about how Indonesia’s paradise forests are being bulldozed to destruction, and how that is pushing the Sumatran tigers to extinction. (Read: Endangered Sumatran tiger dies in trap on APP concession in Indonesia) But it also makes me more determined to do everything I can in my power to save one of our planet’s last remaining green havens.

We carefully strategize our campaigns and saving the rainforest is no exception. For example, after our latest undercover investigation into APP, one of the world’s largest pulp and paper groups, which took a year, we released a shocking report, The Ramin Paper Trail, documenting how APP was illegally pulping a highly endangered tree species, ramin. After the report, we are keeping the campaign momentum going with these five follow-up steps.

1. Push companies to change!

This is our most important follow-up work. Every company relies on its customers and clients for survival. A single customer or client may only have a small amount of power, but added together, en masse, that power becomes a force to be reckoned with and can push big corporations to become environmentally friendly. Just like The Ramin Paper Trail attracted huge public interest, and in just two short months several key APP customers, even a subsidiary of APP itself, cut their ties with APP.

2. Shake the very foundations of investment!
Investors and financial assets are also the lifeblood of a corporation. We have a Sustainable Finance Team which goes out and lobbies banks and funds to stop doing business with companies that destroy our planet. This includes refusing new finance or pulling out existing investments. In the last few weeks, two of APP’s biggest investors, Norwegian Pension fund and Skagen funds both sold their holdings in APP in response to our report and subsequent lobbying.

3. Monitor companies making green pledges!
It’s easy for a company to make an environmental promise, but it’s our job to make sure it makes good on that promise by periodically monitoring their behavior. Most recently we spotted that the international document management company, , was still using paper that came from forest destruction, despite an earlier promise not to. We got Xerox to admit its mistake, reassess its practices, and promise to take stricter measures to make sure it would no longer buy APP paper.

4. Policy Initiatives!
To really protect the rainforest we need the Indonesian government to take concrete action. That’s why we present our carefully-collected evidence to government bodies, global regulatory organizations, and the international media to push for tighter supervision of forest management.
So far, Jakarta has been slow to make changes but we are confident that we will succeed just as we did in Canada: after 10 years of painstaking campaigning, we succeeded in getting the Canadian government to put one third of the Great Bear Rainforest under full protection.

5. Onsite monitoring!
Even after we publish our reports, our investigation team stays on the ground keeping track of APP. On the day the Ministry of Forestry notified us that it intends to visit APP’s mill, our ongoing monitoring indicates that the company has been engaged in a rapid clean-up operation, removing ramin from its logyards.

We couldn’t do any of this without you, that’s why your generous gift is invaluable to protecting the rainforests. We sincerely hope we will have your support in the years to come so we can win this victory for Indonesia’s beautiful forests and the Sumatran tiger whose very survival depends on them. Thank you!

Greenpeace Forests Campaigner
Yang Jie

We caught APP red-handed. What's next?

cluk — Thu, 03 May 2012 09:30:00 +0200

1. Push companies to change!

This is our most important follow-up work. Every company relies on its customers and clients for survival. A single customer or client may only have a small amount of power, but added together, en masse, that power becomes a force to be reckoned with and can push big corporations to become environmentally friendly. Just like The Ramin Paper Trail attracted huge public interest, and in just two short months several key APP customers, even a subsidiary of APP itself, cut their ties with APP.

2. Shake the very foundations of investment!
Investors and financial assets are also the lifeblood of a corporation. We have a Sustainable Finance Team which goes out and lobbies banks and funds to stop doing business with companies that destroy our planet. This includes refusing new finance or pulling out existing investments. In the last few weeks, two of APP’s biggest investors, Norwegian Pension fund and Skagen funds both sold their holdings in APP in response to our report and subsequent lobbying.

3. Monitor companies making green pledges!
It’s easy for a company to make an environmental promise, but it’s our job to make sure it makes good on that promise by periodically monitoring their behavior. Most recently we spotted that the international document management company, , was still using paper that came from forest destruction, despite an earlier promise not to. We got Xerox to admit its mistake, reassess its practices, and promise to take stricter measures to make sure it would no longer buy APP paper.

4. Policy Initiatives!
To really protect the rainforest we need the Indonesian government to take concrete action. That’s why we present our carefully-collected evidence to government bodies, global regulatory organizations, and the international media to push for tighter supervision of forest management.
So far, Jakarta has been slow to make changes but we are confident that we will succeed just as we did in Canada: after 10 years of painstaking campaigning, we succeeded in getting the Canadian government to put one third of the Great Bear Rainforest under full protection.

5. Onsite monitoring!
Even after we publish our reports, our investigation team stays on the ground keeping track of APP. On the day the Ministry of Forestry notified us that it intends to visit APP’s mill, our ongoing monitoring indicates that the company has been engaged in a rapid clean-up operation, removing ramin from its logyards.

Greenpeace Forests Campaigner
Yang Jie

The bitter story of the Chinese word for tea

mtan — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 02:30:00 +0200

The story behind the Chinese word for tea (茶) reveals two faces to a seemingly innocuous word. Next time you brew a pot, ask yourself, are you drinking pure tea, or something much more dangerous?

Dirty Laundry Reloaded into your washing-machine

Pat C — Wed, 21 Mar 2012 05:30:00 +0100

Global fashion brands are turning us into unwitting polluters. This is what we discovered in our latest research conducted on clothing and sportswear produced by big companies such as Abercrombie & Fitch, Ralph Lauren and G-Star.

We tested products that we knew contained residues of toxic substances by washing them under conditions that simulated domestic laundering. Then we measured how much of the chemicals remained in the clothing. In this way we could identify the percentage of "washed out" chemicals which end up being flushed into our rivers, lakes and seas, where they break down to form even more hazardous substances.

What are these substances?
These chemicals have some nasty properties. For example, NPEs breaks down into nonylphenols, chemicals which are persistent, bio-accumulative and hormone-disrupting. This means that they do not break down easily into the environment, build up in the food chain, and can seriously mess with some organisms' hormone systems.

Investigative work: Dirty Laundry part one, two and three.

Last year we published our investigation revealing how the suppliers of major clothing brands were discharging hazardous chemicals in their waste water directly into Chinese rivers.

We challenged the brands found to be in business with these suppliers to take responsibility for this pollution, and to use their considerable influence to work with their suppliers to eliminate these toxic discharges throughout their supply chain and products.

Some brands accepted the challenge and have begun working on a detailed plan to reach the goal by 2020. Others insisted that these chemicals were not used in their manufacturing their products.

We tested the products of a number of the brands linked to these suppliers and found residues of hazardous chemicals in their clothing proving that these hazardous substances had been used in the manufacturing of their products. The results of this investigation were published in the report 'Dirty Laundry - Hung out to dry'.

The residues we found might seem small in quantity if considered compared to the single piece of clothing. But there is no safe amount of toxic chemicals, and given the huge volume of garments produced by these global brands, the total quantities of these chemicals entering our water is far from insignificant.

Our latest investigation tested clothing we had found containing these hazardous substances to find out what happens during normal washing conditions.

The results implicate anyone who buys these brands and washes their clothes.

The textile industry is creating water pollution all around the globe, including those regions and countries where there are restrictions or bans on the use of these chemicals.

Zero discharge of hazardous chemicals within a generation
The entire textile sector needs to move to toxic-free processes. To reach this goal we need more brands joining the detox challenge.

For the companies which have already committed to the elimination of the use of these substances, the next step is for them to respond to the urgency of the situation by setting strict and ambitious elimination deadlines for the most hazardous chemicals used by this sector, including nonylphenol ethoxylates.

We know these chemicals are dangerous, and viable alternatives exist so these big brand names need to turn their words into actions.

What you can do
Many of you already joined together to put pressure on these brands to "Detox", and thanks to your efforts, Puma, Nike, Adidas, H&M, Li-Ning and C&A have all committed to eliminate the use of all hazardous chemicals from their supply chain and products by 2020 .

This is just the beginning.

You can take action today by:

- Sharing this story with your friends and family to help raise awareness of the issue
- Sharing the latest campaign video which shows the role of #PeoplePower in shaking up the fashion sector
- Submitting your photo to help star in the next #PeoplePowered campaign video while pushing your favorite brand to be the next to Detox

For e-mail updates on eliminating toxics: subscribe here.

List of toxic items gets a makeover

ebrooks — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 10:14:00 +0100

Following the release of our original report from December, we received a lot of requests for more testing on toxic toys and other children's products. We figured since we were doing more testing, we might as well add them to our already extensive list. Now you'll have more knowledge, and with more knowledge you can live a safer, less contaminated life.

In December (just in time for Christmas), Greenpeace and the International POPs Elimination Network (IPEN) jointly released an alarming report that found more than 30 percent of 500 samples of toys and other items contained at least one type of toxic heavy metal. About 10 percent of the samples contained lead above the Chinese regulation of 600 parts per million. The news first came out of Beijing and it was covered extensively by mainland reporters. Later, we took our show on the road and showed Christmas shoppers in Hong Kong the dangers they face in buying seemingly harmless Christmas gifts.

While in Hong Kong, our toxics campaigners, along with Joe DiGangi of IPEN, decided to get ambitious: They inspected an extra 82 items to add to our already extensive list of 500 toys, school supplies, clothing, cups and other products. Add in one pair of Winnie the Pooh slippers from Beijing and a Barbie pencil bag from Guangzhou, and that brings our list to 584.

The list gives detailed information on each of the products and the levels of six heavy metals hiding in different coatings. These heavy metals can be absorbed into the growing bodies of children and cause major issues with their development, especially mental development.

"Heavy metals in children’s products pose a serious threat to kids; even the slightest bit of lead can harm a child’s development," said Greenpeace toxics campaigner Wu Yixiu. "Children tend to put toys and products into their mouth, so they are more vulnerable."

(For more information on the dangers of heavy metals see this link.)

In some cases, the results of our testing were absurdly high. With the Winnie the Pooh slippers, for example, the lead content reached 5,580 parts per million. Oh bother.

Oh and the cute Barbie pencil bag? It had a lead content of 2,930 parts per million.

But perhaps the most shocking item was a cup that contained lead levels beyond 40,000 parts per million.

As scary as it sounds, you can avoid these dangerous items. We've given you the knowledge. Check our list for the things you should keep away from. Together we can get the industry to change if we don't buy their toxic products.

"The industry of children’s products should take responsibility in preventing children from being exposed to heavy metals, particularly for big brands," Wu said. "They must take the lead to make change rather than harming their consumers to make a quick buck."

Greenpeace calls on the government to take immediate action to clean up these toxic products and strengthen quality supervision. The government should also adopt more stringent regulations over lead limits in children’s products to keep this source of heavy metals completely away from children.

Durban result: A ten-year delay in global greenhouse pollution reductions

Evan Brooks — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 09:20:00 +0100

The agreement finalized at U.N. climate talks in Durban means that China still has almost a decade before it will significantly slow its rate of greenhouse pollution.

Kumi Naidoo, the Executive Director of Greenpeace International spoke to hundreds of activists who occupied the International Convention Center in Durban where COP 17 was taking place. Greenpeace joined scores of campaigners from across the world at a protest in the conference centre. Kumi, along with nine other Greenpeace activists, had his UN accreditation badge removed, meaning he could not re-enter the site during the remainder of the UN climate conference.

The Durban climate talks, which concluded at 5am Sunday, produced a deal for the 194 nations involved to agree to continue to negotiate on reversing climate change. For now, it lays out a loose plan for developing countries, like China, to fall under an international and legally binding treaty by 2020.

"We have mixed feelings about the final result," said Li Yan, head of the climate and energy team at Greenpeace East Asia. "We watched with interest China's flexibility in this round of talks, but, from a global perspective, it was an arduous round of negotiations to end up with a promise for a decade in the future."

Li added that Sunday's agreement marks the first time that major developing countries, like China and India, have been willing to talk about legally binding targets for their own economies. Disagreements over climate targets and equity between developed and developing countries have been an ongoing sticking point for progress.

"Having China and India willing to act is at least a small step forward," Li said. "Still, wealthy developed countries, like Canada, the U.S. and some European nations must push their own ambition levels over the next few years if we are to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. A decade is still a lot of time to wait for action."

China is now the largest emitter of greenhouse pollution in the world. Greenpeace is calling on all nations to live up to their commitments. It is also calling on the Chinese government to do much more work domestically to prepare for a development path over the next decade that does not rely so heavily on coal and increases its current renewable and energy efficiency targets.

Slideshow: Greenpeace and other protesters occupy the Durban climate talks

For e-mail updates on climate change: subscribe here.

But study indicates that making clean consumer products is technically and economically feasible

Monica Tan — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 03:34:00 +0100

The metals measured in this study can have a variety of harmful impacts. Infants and children have disproportionately heavy exposure to many environmental agents because they drink more water, eat more food and breathe more air per unit body weight compared to adults; children's metabolic pathways especially in fetal life and in the first months after birth, are immature; developmental processes are easily disrupted during rapid growth and development before and after birth; and children have more years of future life and thus more time to develop diseases initiated by early exposures.

About the metals

Metal

Impacts

Antimony

The USA State of California classifies antimony trioxide as a carcinogen.^{^[1]} Animal studies show that exposure to antimony causes skin irritation, fertility problems, and lung cancer.^{^[2]}

Arsenic

Inorganic arsenic is a known human carcinogen with links to lung, skin, and bladder cancers.^{^[3]} Arsenic exposure is correlated with lower IQ in children.^{^[4]}

Cadmium

Cadmium is a known human carcinogen and associated with cancers of the breast, kidney, lung, pancreas, prostate and urinary bladder.^{^[5]} The State of California recognizes cadmium as a reproductive toxicant.^{^[6]} ^{^[7]}

Chromium

XRF does not distinguish between the two common forms of chromium; chromium III and chromium VI. Chromium III is an essential element in humans but can display moderate toxicity in acute animal tests.^{^[8]} Chromium VI is a known human carcinogen.^{^[9]} Lab studies link chromium VI to birth defects and reproductive problems.^{^[10]}

Lead

Lead is a well-known neurotoxicant with no safe level of exposure.^{^[11]} The harms from childhood lead exposure are irreversible and persist into adolescence and adulthood.^{^[12]} Lead impacts include learning disabilities; attention deficits; disorders in a child's coordination, visual, spatial and language skills, and anemia.^{^[13]}

Mercury

Mercury is a well-known neurotoxicant. The developing nervous system is especially vulnerable to damage from mercury and exposure can lead to loss of IQ, abnormal muscle tone, and losses in motor function, attention, and visual – spatial performance.^{^[14]}

Regulations

China's 'Limit of harmful substances in toys' coating', which took effect in Oct 2010, limits the overall concentration of lead in toys to 600 ppm. A more protective total concentration standard of 90 ppm lead is used in the US and Canada. The Chinese regulation also provides 'soluble limits' for eight toxic heavy metals in toys. The limits are similar to the somewhat weak regulatory policies used in the US and the EU that also use the 'extractable elements' approach. This approach requires an extensive preparation procedure to extract metals from certain size particles of a children's product into an acid solution to attempt to imitate the acidic environment of the stomach.

However, the approach overlooks the possibility that children can be exposed to metals in consumer products via other exposure pathways and therefore underestimates the possible harm. In addition, the "extractable elements" approach requires more time and cost than testing total concentration, undermining the efficiency of regulators and private sector personnel. Currently, regulatory standards for lead in consumer products tend to use a "total concentration" approach which simply determines the mg lead per kg product.

Expanding the "total concentration" approach to other metals could help streamline the regulation of toxic metals in children's products and provide more safety if protective limits are used.

Additional contacts and resources

http://www.greenpeace.org/china/zh/publications/reports/toxics/2011/toxic-children-products-rpt/

www.ipen-china.org

www.ipen.org/toxicproducts

[1] State of California (2003), Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Chemicals known to the State to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity; http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/files/31403LSTA.pdf

[2] Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (1992) Toxicological profile for antimony and compounds, US Public Health Service http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/TP.asp?id=332&tid=58

[3] Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (1992) Toxicological profile for arsenic, US Public Health Service http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/TP.asp?id=22&tid=3

[4] Dong J, Su SY (2009) The association between arsenic and children's intelligence: a meta analysis, Biol Trace Elem Res 129:88 - 93

[5] Huff J, Lunn RM, Waalkes MP, Tomatis L, Infante PF (2007) Cadmium-induced cancers in animals and humans, Int J Occup Environ Health 13:202 - 212

[6] http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/Newlist.html

[7] http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/pdf/CD-HID.pdf

[8] http://www.epa.gov/ttnatw01/hlthef/chromium.html

[9] http://www.inchem.org/documents/iarc/vol49/chromium.html

[10] http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/TF.asp?id=61&tid=17

[11] US Centers for Disease Control (2005). Prevention of lead poisoning in young children: a statement by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Atlanta, GA USA: CDC; 2005, www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/publications/prevleadpoisoning.pdf; (2002) Managing elevated blood lead levels among young children: recommendations from the Advisory Committee on Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention. Atlanta, GA: CDC; 2002. www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/casemanagement/casemanage_main.htm

[12] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2006) Air Quality Criteria for Lead (September 29, 2006)

[13] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2006) Air Quality Criteria for Lead (September 29, 2006)

WHO (2004) Burden of disease attributable to selected environmental factors and injuries among Europe's children and adolescents http://www.who.int/quantifying_ehimpacts/publications/9241591900/en/index.html

Review of Scientific Information on Lead (2008), developed by UNEP in response to Governing Council Decisions 23/9 and 22/4 (draft November 2008)

[14] Landrigan PJ, Schecter CB, Lipton JM, Fahs MC, Schwartz J (2002) Environmental Pollutants and Disease in American Children: Estimates of Morbidity, Mortality, and Costs for Lead Poisoning, Asthma, Cancer, and Developmental Disabilities, Environ Health Perspect 110: doi:10.1289/ehp.02110721 http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/fetchArticle.action?articleURI=info:doi/10.1289/ehp.02110721

For e-mail updates on eliminating toxics: subscribe here.

Toxic heavy metals found in children's products on the Chinese market

Monica Tan — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 03:18:00 +0100

For many people around the world, particularly the little people under 12, Christmas is the best time of the year. Even in China where Christmas is not traditionally celebrated, Chinese New Year follows shortly after in January or February and is the country's most important holiday. Like Christmas, it is a time to return to your family home or hometown, and shower loved ones with gifts. For some of China's 120 million migrant workers it is the only time of the year they will have to spend with their parents and children.

The hidden problem

It is a holiday many would call sacred. And yet every day many Chinese citizens head into supermarkets and toy stores, and buy children's products without knowledge of what these products might contain. No product labels describe whether toxic metals or other hazardous substances are present. And among all those journeying migrant workers some are carrying in their big bundles and suitcases toys that may very well bring their children some short-term joy, but in the long run could be endangering their health.

What do these children's products contain?

The Greenpeace-IPEN study measured toxic metals in 500 children's products purchased in five Chinese cities: Beijing, Guangzhou, Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Wuhan. The products came from shopping trips to more than 40 retailers including shopping malls, street markets, and chain stores. Shoppers purchased a wide variety of products, ranging from school supplies to clothing to popular products for young children. Some were plastic, some were made of wood, and others included metal parts and jewelry. (Full test results are available at the IPEN website.) As far as we know this was the first publically available large-scale investigation of toxic metals in children's products in China.

To measure the metals, investigators used a portable X-ray fluorescence analyzer (XRF), testing for six toxic metals: antimony, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, and mercury. All six metals are well-known to cause serious harms to human health, especially in children.

Toxic metals in toys, school supplies, household products, and apparel

The results showed that one-third of tested products contained at least one toxic metal at levels of concern. Forty-eight samples (9.6% of the products) contained more than one toxic metal, increasing the possibility of harm. None of the tainted products contained warning labels to inform consumers about their toxic ingredients. The toys that tested positive for heavy metals, including lead, were found in every category of product, no matter whether it was branded or non-branded, cheap or expensive. In short, no matter who or where you buy your toy from in China, there is a possibility that a toxic metal is present.

Lead is extremely harmful to children, and yet we easily found products available for sale that tested positive for lead. In China, the regulatory limit for lead in consumer products is 600 ppm. However the study turned up 48 store-bought products with levels exceeding this level. These included dolls, balls, pencil boxes, toy cars, and backpacks. The top five lead-contaminated products contained truly shocking levels ranging from 12,467-120,960 ppm. These included a boy's ring, children's glassware, and a doll. A total of 82 products (16% of the products) violated a more protective lead standard of 90 ppm used in the US and Canada.

The study found other well-known toxic metals available in popular children's products including arsenic and mercury. Five children's products contained mercury at levels ranging from 39-78 times higher than the regulatory limit for mercury in cosmetics in China. Fifty-two products (10% of the products) contained significant levels of arsenic. These included dolls, toy cars, shoes and school supplies.

The Greenpeace-IPEN findings raises safety concerns for children (see further information on metals). Children's developing bodies are especially vulnerable to damage from heavy metals. Not to mention kids are more likely to chew objects and put their hands in their mouth thereby increasing their expose to any substances in these products. Put simply, toxic substances should not be present in children's products.

Industry responsibility

The primary responsibility for safe products lies with manufacturers who should ensure that toxic substances are not present. Fortunately, the high percentage of products (67%) with no, or low levels of metals indicates that elimination of metals in children's products is technically and economically feasible. The data in the Greenpeace-IPEN study shows that many companies already paying attention to the toxic metal content in their products. But now it's time for all companies to eliminate them.

Recommendations

Based on the results of this joint study, Greenpeace and IPEN recommend the following:

1. Brands and manufacturers should actively improve manufacturing processes and product design, and rapidly reduce and ultimately eliminate all hazardous substances, especially toxic heavy metals such as lead, from their products and production processes. The industry should also disclose information on chemical ingredients in products.

2. The government should strengthen its supervision over hazardous substances in children's products. It should adopt a more protective lead concentration limit in children's products and extend the concept of "total concentration limits" to other heavy metal substances using protective regulatory limits.

3. Consumers should carefully read product labels and try to identify chemical safety information before purchasing children's products. Through their inquiries about corporate environmental policy and product chemical information, consumers can help drive companies to progressively reduce and ultimately eliminate hazardous chemicals from their products and production processes. Consumers should also support rigorous regulatory policies to limit the presence of toxic substances in products.

For e-mail updates on eliminating toxics: subscribe here.

From Durban: "It's time for our governments to listen to the people"

Monica Tan — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 03:37:00 +0100

On the eve of the latest round of climate talks in Durban, Greenpeace declares that it is time for our governments to listen to the people, and not the polluters.

As communities around the world are facing real climate impacts on a daily basis, governments must now stop listening to the carbon-intensive polluting corporations who are holding us back from decisive action.

Instead they should be listening to the calls of people who want an end to our dependence on fossil fuels, and immediate action on climate change.

This round of the UN climate talks, the 17th Conference of the Parties, must be the point where our governments respond to the international climate crisis by adopting a clear roadmap towards a science-based, global agreement.

The deal must ensure that all countries take action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions dramatically, and that financial and technical support is delivered to the poor countries.

South Africa, as the continent's highest CO2 emitter and the host country must show climate leadership to help reach a meaningful outcome over the next two weeks in Durban.

"Africa is already bearing the brunt of the climate gone awry, but that does not seem to be enough to spur some countries to action, like the US. The US needs to step up now and help the world beat climate chaos. The talks in Durban need to be a new dawn for global climate change negations. One in which the interests of people everywhere are put before those of the polluters," said Kumi Naidoo, Greenpeace International Executive Director from Durban.

If the US still fails to engage in a global fight to stabilise the climate, its time for governments like the EU, and emerging economies including India and China to move on without the US. The entire global effort to reach agreement on tackling climate change must not be allowed to be held hostage by the US.

Non-negotiables

Greenpeace is calling on governments in Durban to listen to the people, not the polluting corporations, and:

Ensure a peak in global greenhouse gas emissions by 2015

Ensure that the Kyoto Protocol continues and provide a mandate for a comprehensive legally binding deal

Deliver the necessary finance to tackle climate change

Set up a framework for protecting forests in developing countries

Ensure global cooperation on technology and energy finance

Ensure international transparency in assessing and monitoring country commitments and actions

For e-mail updates on climate change: subscribe here.

Time for an intervention: Tesco must end their pesticide habit

Monica Tan — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 06:29:00 +0100

After three years of independent testing, produce sold at Tesco supermarkets in China continues to show levels of pesticides far above the legal limit. When is Tesco going to wake up and smell the chemically-doused produce? By Evan Brooks.

This latest round of tests came in response to claims by Tesco in September refuting Greenpeace's previous findings. It is the fourth test run by Greenpeace since early 2009. And unlike Tesco, science doesn't blur the cold, hard truth.

"Time and time again we've found illegal levels of pesticides in Tesco produce," said Greenpeace agriculture campaigner Wang Jing. "Ordinary Chinese people eat this food. It’s unhealthy particularly for children. When is Tesco going to change its standards for Chinese produce?"

Greenpeace filed a public interest law suit against the supermarket giant in early September because of its continuing violations of Chinese food regulations. We're calling on Tesco to take responsibility and ensure its produce doesn't harm people and the environment. Tesco should at the least raise its produce standards in China to the quality used at other Tesco stores around the world.

"These results raise the question of double standards for food sold in Tesco stores in China compared to food sold in their stores outside of China," Wang said. "We're talking about food safety, and more importantly, we're talking about people's health. Chinese customers should receive the same quality and safety of produce that European customers do."

To date, Greenpeace has tested 21 fruits and vegetables at different Tesco stores throughout China. In early October, Greenpeace campaigners sampled five vegetables randomly from a Tesco store in Tianjin. Results from an independent laboratory found from the samples residue of at least three types of chemicals – carbendazim, dimethomorph and chlorpyrifos – existing on spinach and leeks. The leeks had levels of chlorpyrifos residue that were two times higher than China's regulations allow.

We're calling on Tesco to immediately ban the use of most hazardous pesticides from its produce, as urged by both the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization. And we're also asking Tesco to control its supply chain and ensure that it is not selling any food with highly hazardous pesticides or that has been genetically modified.

Five soccer fields of solar cells installed in China per day, for 2011

Monica Tan — Fri, 11 Nov 2011 06:16:00 +0100

1.8 GW of solar electricity (PV) is expected to be installed this year in China. The area of solar cells installed will equal five soccer fields a day, more than tripling from last year. Feed-in tariffs for this year's installations are 130 EUR/MWh (1.15 CNY/kWh) and for next year 114 EUR/MWh. Project costs are reported to be around 1400 EUR/kW (12 CNY/W) and decreasing. These are cost levels that many studies assumed would take until the 2020s to reach! Meanwhile grid parity is expected in some provinces already in 2013. There are a total of 16 GW of non-residential projects in the pipeline.

More at Solarbuzz on this report:

Solarbuzz has identified 1,104 non-residential projects in China that are installed, being installed, or in development. Projects in the pipeline are located in 29 Chinese provinces. Qinghai, Gansu, Ningxia, and Inner Mongolia are the leading provinces in megawatt terms, followed by Sichuan, Jiangsu, Shandong, Shaanxi, Tibet and Anhui. These 10 provinces represent 86% of the total pipeline.
According to the report, 195 projects, with a total capacity of over 1.8 GW, will be installed within 2011. That installed capacity in China will closely match the installed capacity in the US this year. Stimulated by the Qinghai 930 program as well as unified national feed-in tariff (FIT) policy, 54% of the capacity in megawatt terms will be located in the northwest region. The top seven project developer groups account for nearly 1 GW of PV demand in 2011, including state-owned enterprises China Power Investment Corporation, China Guodian Corporation, China Huadian Corporation, China Guangdong Nuclear Power Holding Corporation, and China Energy Conservation & Environmental Protection Group. The CHINT Group is the only private enterprise among the top seven developers.
"China's FIT rates—1.15 CNY/kWh in 2011 and 1.0 CNY/kWh for 2012—used to be considered so low that project development activities have been mostly limited to high solar radiation regions such as Golmud," said Ray Lian, Analyst at Solarbuzz. "However, system prices fell so fast in 2011 that project profitability has been improved to reasonable levels in other locations."

Greenpeace East Asia communications officer Catherine Fitzpatrick had this to say:

Sitting in the pea-soup like pollution of Beijing, it is sometimes hard to believe the clean energy revolution is happening faster than many of us could ever have imagined.
Yet day after day those of us working in China are seeing the evidence. This year alone, 1.8 gigawatts of solar electricity (PV) will be installed in China. That is 1,800 MW which would power around 700,000 homes in the UK. In China, where household electricity consumption is lower, it probably means more than 1 million Chinese homes will now be powered by clean solar electricity instead of polluting coal.
And the cost of solar electricity in some provinces compared to conventional technologies such as coal-fired power stations is expected to be the same by 2013 - technically, we say that it has reached "grid parity" which is a reason to celebrate! Once renewable energy such as wind and solar is cheaper than coal, an important barrier for their rapid development has fallen away.

China announces a plan to achieve 17% cut in carbon intensity by 2015

Monica Tan — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 03:25:00 +0100

Yesterday China's State Council approved a plan to control the nation's serious greenhouse gas emissions. The aim of the plan will be to achieve the goal of a 17% cut in carbon intensity by 2015 from 2010 levels, as reported on a central government website.

While few concrete details have been released, what have so far been outlined are plans to:

Speed up energy savings and reduce consumption

Develop low carbon energy and increase the number of trees planted

Develop 'low carbon trial regions'

Build up a domestic carbon trading market

Build up a greenhouse emissions accounting system

Clearly define industry and corporate emissions standards and requirements

Enhance international cooperation

Define carbon emissions intensity targets for each province

Greenpeace climate and energy campaigner Li Yan had this to say about the plan:

This final plan to deliver a 17 percent carbon intensity target by China's most powerful political body is a clear signal that the world's most populated country is taking seriously the control of greenhouse emissions. But China can achieve a greater carbon intensity target than 17 percent. It is in the perfect position to become a global superpower of renewable energy and innovative energy efficiency.
The important next step is to make sure that strict implementation measures are in place at the provincial level to meet this agreed target. If successful, this move could mark a clear transition away from coal, which would rapidly reduce carbon emissions and pollution levels.
China also needs strong tools and a clear implementation process, as well as a regular monitoring system to hold local governors accountable; only when provinces are mobilized, can real change happen.
But at some point, all nations, including China, must take on binding targets that quickly reduce greenhouse emissions overall; not just at an intensity target that still allows for an overall emissions increase.
The big question remains whether this target and all the policies and measures put in place are ambitious enough to stop catastrophic climate change, and whether they are strong enough to deal with China’s rapidly increasing pollution problems.

The 2015 target date almost coincides with a recent Guardian report in which the International Environmental Agency claims the world is headed for irreversible climate change in five years.

Oceans defender Yu Fen Kao heads to court in Taiwan

Yu Fen Kao — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 06:00:00 +0100

Yu Fen Kao in Taiwan is a passionate oceans campaigners who has recently been involved in a court case following a peaceful protest conducted when the Rainbow Warrior was last in Taiwan this year. Here's her story.

My name is Yu Fen Kao, and I believe that here in Taiwan, the future of our oceans deserves a public debate.

As an oceans campaigner here, I am currently involved in a court case stemming from a peaceful protest conducted when the Rainbow Warrior was here in Taiwan earlier this year. In January, Greenpeace had informed the public and the authorities that a 3,431 ton flag of convenience refrigerated fish carrier ship was not yet registered to comply with the flag of convenience ordinance in Taiwan. The vessel, the MV Lung Yuin, was about 300 meter away from us onboard the Rainbow Warrior in port, and that would have been the perfect opportunity for the Taiwanese government to make good on its enforcement promises. As one of the world's largest fishing powers, Taiwan holds a huge responsibility to fish responsibly and create policies that will enable fishing industries to ensure healthy oceans and ample fish for future generations.

With the protest in January, we exposed management loopholes used by the Taiwanese Fisheries Agency to turn a blind eye to violations of simple ship registration laws. We identified over 235 flag of convenience vessels which should have registered with the government, but hadn't, and no action was taken against them. Lung Yuin is a flag of convenience vessel and it transports fish, which we believe meets the criteria of fishing activities described in the Taiwanese FOC regulation. This ship has a shady history of large scale illegal transshipments: in 2004, Lung Yuin's shady business was one of the reasons why Taiwan was forced to cut its tuna quota and vessel count. But Taiwan's Fisheries Agency kept saying that the Lung Yuin is just a cargo ship and does not need to register and so gave the Chang Soon Corp., Lung Yuin's owner, a chance to say that we have wrongly criticized them. And that is why I appeared in court last week.

The significance of this case is that it could force Taiwan's Fisheries Agency to fulfill their promise of supporting proper fisheries management to deliver sustainable Pacific tuna fisheries. Officials from the Fisheries Agency kept denying that there is an overfishing crisis impacting Pacific tuna and actively lobby against conservation measures at international meetings. Meanwhile, they can't even enforce the very law they created to have control over their vast fishing fleets.

Last week was my first appearance in court, accused of making wrong allegations against the owners of Long Yuin. There are still many flag of convenience vessels out there in the Pacific which are not properly registered and the fishery remains to a large degree poorly regulated meaning fish piracy is high. We hope that this case will be the beginning to let the Fisheries Agency know that Taiwan should do more to protect our oceans. Right now, Greenpeace's ship Esperanza is in the Pacific and confronting illegal fishing vessels. If fishing powers like Taiwan don't take action, we could eventually see the end of tuna populations as we know them - as we've already seen happen with Atlantic cod and Mediterranean bluefin tuna. Taiwan's fishing industry – among the largest in the world - is quite literally fishing itself out of existence. If we want healthy oceans, ample tuna and a fishing industry in the future, we need concrete steps from governments and more marine reserves to help our oceans recover from decades of destruction.

This case here in Taiwan has just begun and we will continue to tell the people who should be managing our oceans that they have to do their jobs - and manage them for the benefit of the billions of people around the world who need the oceans for food and jobs. After all, fishing industries, governments and most importantly ordinary people like you and me, all have a vested interest in our oceans. Sign here to add your voice to the movement for more marine reserves to rescue our oceans.

Yu Fen Kao is an oceans campaigner based in the Taipei office of Greenpeace East Asia.

Image © Paul Hilton

How LGE scored in our Greener Electronics Guide

Monica Tan — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 10:07:00 +0100

Do you own any LGE products, or planning to buy any? The company recently landed themselves on Greenpeace's 'Greener Electronics Guide'. Greenpeace's Guide ranks electronics companies on their environmental performance in three areas: use of green energy, how green their products are, and how green their manufacturing processes. Take a look at how LGE fared.

LGE, South Korea.
Ranking: 13
Score: 2.8/10

LGE scores 2.8 points and takes joint 13^th place on our re-launched Guide, together with Toshiba. It benefits from having a penalty point lifted, imposed for backtracking on its commitment to have all its products free of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic and brominated flame retardants (BFRs) by the end of 2010. All of LGE's mobile phones are now free from PVC and BFRs as well as phthalates, antimony trioxide and beryllium oxide; other products such as TVs and notebooks have many PVC/BFR free parts and LGE aims to phase these substances out from TVs monitors and PCs by 2012 and household appliances by 2014. On other Products categories LGE scores best for its product energy efficiency; it regains points that it lost in the last edition by making a strong statement in support of more stringent Energy Star verification standards. LGE reports on the quantities of post-consumer plastics that it uses and gives an example of a product with recycled content, but does not have a target to increase its use of recycled plastics. It does not yet score on the product life cycle category, as there is no information on product warranties or replacement parts availability.

It scores least points on the Energy criteria; it sets an weak target of 10 percent reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from its operations by 2020 which needs to be at least 30 percent by 2015. It has achieved a yearly GHG gas reduction of approximately 20,000 tons through various energy efficiency measures; however, although it has plans to increase its use of renewable energy this is not part of its low carbon strategy. It needs an ambitious target to dramatically increase renewable electricity use by 2020 and a strategy to implement this. It earns a point for its support for mandatory cuts of at least 30 percent in industrialised countries by 2020. LGE also reports on its GHG emissions for its operations and business travel but although it has verification for its emissions in Korea, it is still awaiting verification for its global emissions.

It earns most of its points on Sustainable Operations. It provides take-back in 52 countries for obsolete mobile phones, (although this page is no longer accessible from its main take-back pages), but needs to continue to expand its programme for all its products in non-OECD countries. LGE no longer reports its recycling rates as a percentage of past sales. Its policy on chemicals is based on the precautionary principle and its communication with its suppliers on chemicals management reflects its hazardous substance phase out plans. LGE does not yet publish data on GHG emissions from its supply chain but has begun to work with suppliers to gather this information. LGE is engaged in the process to address conflict minerals but has not publicly mapped smelters or suppliers and does not yet have a policy. It scores no points for paper sourcing and risks a penalty point in future Guide editions as it is listed as a client of Asia Pulp and Paper (APP), which is responsible for illegal logging and deforestation in Indonesia. LGE should immediately and publicly commit to stop sourcing any paper or packaging needs from APP.

View: Greenpeace Guide to Greener Electronics

Also take a closer look at how these other East Asian companies fared in our guide: Samsung, Lenovo, Acer.

How Acer scored in our Greener Electronics Guide

Monica Tan — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 10:03:00 +0100

Do you own any Acer products, or planning to buy any? The company recently landed themselves on Greenpeace's 'Greener Electronics Guide'. Greenpeace's Guide ranks electronics companies on their environmental performance in three areas: use of green energy, how green their products are, and how green their manufacturing processes. Take a look at how Acer fared.

Acer, Taiwan.
Ranking: 12
Score: 2.9/10

Acer takes 12^th position in the re-launched Guide with a score of 2.9. It is weakest on the Energy criteria, scoring nothing for its objectives to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, as although Acer intended to set these targets in 2010, this has not been done. Acer has drawn up an "energy reduction policy" with five major directions, including increasing energy efficiency and the purchase of carbon credits for renewable energy; it reports on energy efficiency savings. It supports cuts of 30 percent by 2020 from industrialised countries but needs to set some ambitious targets of its own, to reduce GHG emissions by at least 30 percent by 2015 for its operations and to dramatically increase renewable electricity use by 2020. It also does not provide external verification for the GHG emissions that it reports for its operations and business travel.

It does not do much better on Products; it scores no points on product life cycle and needs to publicly disclose the length of warranty and spare parts availability for its main product lines. However, it does report on the use of post- consumer recycled plastic in monitor casings of seven families of EPEAT Gold models. It has also launched many new models of products that are free from polyvinyl chloride plastic (PVC) and brominated flame retardants (BFRs) and it has informed Greenpeace that the majority of its products will be PVC/BFR free in the near future. A higher percentage of its products need to meet or exceed the latest Energy Star standards in order for it to score more points on product energy efficiency.

It scores most of its points on Sustainable Operations, doing particularly well on chemicals management for its lobbying for restrictions on organo-halogens and for its precautionary approach to chemicals, although it does need to update its chemicals management systems and make them more thorough. Acer scores well for reporting on emissions of GHGs from its first tier suppliers and is investigating the second tier; Acer's programme includes auditing and reduction targets. It publishes the results of a survey it did of its suppliers on use of conflict minerals but does not yet provide a map of its smelters or suppliers. It fails to score on paper sourcing as it doesn't specify the need to source FSC paper or aim to avoid the use of fibres from illegal logging or deforestation.

View: Greenpeace Guide to Greener Electronics

Also take a closer look at how these other East Asian companies fared in our guide: Samsung, Lenovo, LGE.

How Lenovo scored in our Greener Electronics Guide

Monica Tan — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 09:59:00 +0100

Do you own any Lenovo products, or planning to buy any? The company recently landed themselves on Greenpeace's 'Greener Electronics Guide'. Greenpeace's Guide ranks electronics companies on their environmental performance in three areas: use of green energy, how green their products are, and how green their manufacturing processes. Take a look at how Lenovo fared.

Lenovo, China.
Ranking: 8
Score: 3.8/10

Lenovo takes 8^th place in the re-launch of the Guide; it benefits from the removal of the penalty point that was imposed for backtracking on its commitment to eliminate PVC vinyl plastic and brominated flame retardants (BFRs) in all its products by the end of 2009. While its current goal for new products in 2011 to be PVC/BFR free has not been completely met, Lenovo has launched a number of PVC/BFR free products, including notebooks and a desktop and many components are PVC/BFR free. On other Products criteria it scores well for its use of recycled plastics, where a slightly higher percentage of post-consumer plastics use would earn Lenovo maximum points. However, to score any points on product life cycle it needs to publicly disclose the length of warranty and spare parts availability for its main product lines. It reports on the percentage of products that meet and exceed the Energy Star standard, although this needs to be a higher percentage for more points. Lenovo risks a penalty point in future Guide editions as it is a member of a trade association that has commented against stringent energy efficiency standards; it needs to distance itself from such regressive positions with a strong statement.

On Energy Lenovo achieved its targets on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for financial year 2011, with Scope 1 emissions reduced by 17 percent and Scope 2 by 10 percent; it aims to establish new reduction targets by the end of 2012. It needs ambitious targets to reduce its own GHG emissions by at least 30 percent by 2015 for its operations and dramatically increase renewable electricity use by 2020. It has reduced its energy consumption through energy efficiency projects and has contracted to increase its use of renewable energy, although it needs to outline a detailed clean energy plan. It scores maximum points for providing verified data on its GHG emissions and also scores a point on lobbying for a clean energy policy, for its support of a 30 percent reduction in emissions from developed countries by 2020.

Its best scores on Operations are for its e-waste take-back programme and reporting on the quantities recycled (although the amounts should be increasing rather than decreasing), and for its comprehensive chemicals management programme and policy. It is beginning the process of gathering data from its supply chain on GHG emissions and is collaborating to develop product carbon footprint protocols and tools that will promote energy reduction actions. On conflict minerals, Lenovo has not yet published or publicly mapped smelters or suppliers and does not yet have an internal policy, although it will support industry efforts in this area. Lenovo specifies the use of 'environmentally friendly packaging' but scores no points as it does not specifically exclude suppliers that are involved in deforestation and illegal logging or specify that its recycled fibres should be FSC certified.

View: Greenpeace Guide to Greener Electronics

Also take a closer look at how these other East Asian companies fared in our guide: Samsung, Acer, LGE.

How Samsung scored in our Greener Electronics Guide

Monica Tan — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 08:47:00 +0100

Do you own any Samsung products, or planning to buy any? The company recently landed themselves on Greenpeace's 'Greener Electronics Guide'. Greenpeace's Guide ranks electronics companies on their environmental performance in three areas: use of green energy, how green their products are, and how green their manufacturing processes. Take a look at how Samsung fared.

Samsung, South Korea.
Ranking: 7
Score: 4.1/10

Samsung takes 7^th position in the re-launched Guide. The penalty point which was first imposed in v.14 of the Guide for backtracking on its commitment to eliminate brominated flame retardants (BFRs) in new models of all products by January 2010 and PVC vinyl plastic by end of 2010 has been lifted. It now has notebooks, mobile phones and MP3 players that are free from these substances, but its commitment to phase out hazardous substances now only covers some product groups – TVs and household appliances are no longer included. Samsung does reasonably well on other Products criteria – it is one of the leaders on the new product life cycle criteria for providing information on its warranties and provision of spare parts as well as details of innovations. Samsung also scores well for the energy efficiency of its products, but it risks a penalty point in future Guide editions as it is a member of a trade association that has commented against stringent energy efficiency standards; it needs to distance itself from such regressive positions with a strong statement.

On Energy Samsung scores maximum points for providing verified data on its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Samsung has set a target to "reduce the GHG emissions by 24 percent compared to 'business as usual' by 2015" from its operations, but does not have a target for cutting absolute emissions, which needs to at least 30 percent by 2015. Its current use of renewable energy is low, at 0.1 percent of global electricity use; it plans to increase this in line with the Korean government's plans for 6.9 percent renewable energy by 2020, however this is not its own target; it needs to set an ambitious target to increase its own use of renewable energy globally by 2020. On lobbying for a clean energy policy, Samsung gets a point for its support for cuts in GHG emissions by industrialised countries of at least 30 percent as a group by 2020.

Samsung scores most of its points for Sustainable Operations for its relatively good e-waste take-back programme and information; it needs to extend this further to cover its whole product range and to report on its recycling rate beyond Korea. It also reports on the GHG emissions of most of its 1^st tier suppliers in Korea, and has plans to extend this to global suppliers in the near future. Samsung’s chemicals policy has mechanisms to identify future substances of concern; it describes its supply chain management for chemicals but does not have a restricted substances list for manufacturing. It is in the process of signing a compliance agreement with its suppliers that prohibits the use of conflict minerals and it needs to publicly map its smelters or suppliers. On paper, Samsung scores a point for reporting on its paper use and aiming to increase the use of FSC paper; it needs to develop a paper procurement policy which excludes suppliers that are involved in deforestation and illegal logging.

View: Greenpeace Guide to Greener Electronics

Also take a closer look at how these other East Asian companies fared in our guide: Lenovo, Acer, LGE.

Buying gadgets in China? Make them green!

Monica Tan — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 08:15:00 +0100

Shoppers are increasingly concerned about the impact of what they buy, and they're getting better at spotting corporate greenwash and spin too. After many of the world's leading electronics companies rose to the challenge of phasing out the worst hazardous substances, we are now challenging them to improve their sourcing of minerals and better managing energy use throughout their supply chain.

With enough public pressure, who's to say we can't make the electronics industry truly sustainable?

The Greenpeace Guide to Greener Electronics has prompted improvements within the electronics industry, such as phasing out hazardous substances like PVC and Brominated flame retardants from their products. In its sixth year, it is now part of Greenpeace’s wider Cool IT campaign to persuade IT industry leaders to become climate action leaders too.

We just released a new version of the Guide to Greener Electronics. This time ranking 15 gadget and electronics companies on energy, greener products and sustainable operations. HP takes the lead at 5.9 out of a possible 10 points, find out who follows them.

What you can do:

1. If you are purchasing electronics, bring our 'Guide to Greener Electronics' and ask questions:

Which are the most energy-efficient products for sale?

How long a warranty can you offer?

Is this product free of toxic chemicals and conflict minerals?

How can I return the device at the end of its use, to make sure it is recycled properly?

2. Share the guide with your employer or school: encourage them to source greener electronics as part of their purchasing policy.

3. If you are buying a gadget, buy from the companies that are the greenest.

4. Provide customer feedback to let companies know that you use Greenpeace's Guide to help you choose.

5. Share The Guide with your friends and family.

6. If you are asking Santa for a gadget, ask for it to come from the highest-ranked companies.

View: Greenpeace Guide to Greener Electronics

Also take a closer look at how these East Asian companies fared in our guide: Samsung, Lenovo, Acer, LGE.

Meet Beijing's 12-year-old air pollution inspector

Monica Tan — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 06:18:00 +0100

A recent news report on CCTV covered China's PM2.5 air pollution debate, featuring our climate and energy campaigner Zhou Rong, as well as a very cute 12-year-old volunteer air inspector in Beijing.

12-year-old Gao Jinglun borrowed an air pollution monitoring device from an environmental NGO and setup shop on a busy street in Beijing. According to the report, he would record data for 30 minutes twice a day. He began his project after watching a news report that commented on the discrepency between the air quality levels given by the local environment protection bureau from the data measured by the US embassy in Beijing.

As the report says, "the disparity in the results comes from the fact that different organisations measure different things. China measures large particles, whilst at the US embassy, the main gauge for air pollution are small particles. Gao uses a device to monitor particulate matter 2.5."

Here at Greenpeace we are urging the government to take active steps to both accurately measure small particles in the air, and disclose this information to the public. As Zhou Rong said in her interview:

"The pollution exists whether you disclose it or not. The elderly and children, when they are walking outside, they should be informed that the air is dangerous and take some measures to protect themselves."

Zhou Rong also points out that Beijing is only one city, and that air pollution concerns a wider area. China's mid-west and eastern regions, where lots of coal is burnt, are also frequently subject to waves of smog.

She says the recent dispute on whether China's air pollution index is reasonable, has attracted public scrutiny as well as a demand for a solution.

Zhou Rong said, "Everybody noticed it and has put it on their agenda. Our whole economy relies on heavy industry. It's time for us to restructure, to focus on energy efficiency and move away from coal to more renewable energies. This is also an opportunity."

The importance of including PM2.5 in the air pollution readings is that PM2.5 measures smaller particulates - the kind that is a greater threat to our health as they're more likely to pass into the human respiratory and blood circulation system.

And we already know one little guy who's going to benefit from more information transparency. From the report:

Gao Jinglun plans to write an essay on air quality with the help of his mother. But he says his own data isn't sufficient. If the government disclosed more information concerning air quality, he might find it easier to write.

Find out more about air pollution in China, including our list of "real-time apps, twitters tracking air quality levels in your Chinese city".

Local governments face non-renewable energy consumption ceilings

Monica Tan — Fri, 04 Nov 2011 08:41:00 +0100

Jiang Bing, Director of the Development and Planning Department of the National Energy Administration (NEA), said on October 23 that on top of the provincial energy cap that will be released soon, the central government is also setting a renewable energy deductible plan. According to Jiang, this plan will allow local consumption of hydropower, wind, solar, and energy to be deducted from each government's overall energy consumption total.

We see this news as a positive step forward in putting China onto the path of diminishing its reliance on coal while opening new windows for renewable energy. But it's worth noting that the effectiveness of this deductible plan is largely depended on whether the provincial energy consumption ceiling is strictly controlled. Therefore, we're asking for an ambitious local energy consumption target. This target, if carefully designed, will initiate healthy competition between coal and renewable energy and eventually bring China with a cleaner energy structure.

Our energy campaigner Li Ang comments: "for the deductible plan to work, the key is to have enough pressure over the energy consumption target."

Previously a Greenpeace report, China Energy [r]evolution, found that an increase in energy efficiency would reduce China's energy demand by 40% by 2050, and renewable energy could satisfy over 50% of the country's electricity consumption.

Currently coal-fired power plants are the biggest source of manmade carbon dioxide emissions. This makes burning coal the single greatest threat facing our climate. Eighty percent of China's carbon dioxide emissions come from burning coal. It supplies more than 70% of the country's energy needs and 80% of the country's electricity. If we are to stop climate change, then China must move away from coal to renewable energy.

Cutting through the haze in China's air pollution debate

Monica Tan — Fri, 04 Nov 2011 04:57:00 +0100

PM2.5 is a measurement of small particulate matter in the air, and until now its omission from official air quality readings has been a major hurdle in solving China's air pollution crisis. After all, how can you solve a crisis when according to the readings ... there isn't one. (With those readings standing in direct contrast to the experience of any Beijinger who can stick their head out the window and cough their way through a lungful of murky, grey air.)

But the small-particulate cat is out of the bag, and air pollution has becoming an increasingly hot topic in China, no doubt in part thanks to the heavy shroud of air pollution that has been weighing down on Beijing recently. And so many Chinese cities appear set to be married to asthma and hazy skies for a very long time unless some serious measures are taken.

On Tuesday our climate and energy campaign director Sun Qingwei was interviewed by the Global Times on the topic:

"The results from the PM2.5 index are closer to the feeling of the population about the air than those from the PM10," Sun Qingwei, the director of the climate and energy research department at Greenpeace, a non-governmental organization in Beijing, told the Global Times on Tuesday.
"The PM2.5 could expose more threats to the human respiratory and blood circulation system than the PM10 due to its smaller size, and can serve as a more effective way of warning the population," Sun added.
Nevertheless, Sun stated that the PM10 standard, which is more appropriate for large spaces, can be of greater value, as small sample sizes are not always representative of the whole.
Recently revealed large differences in air pollution degrees released by the Beijing Environmental Protection Bureau (BEPB) have generated a national heated discussion over the standards adopted by the Beijing authorities. The dispute originated in discrepancies between the BEPB and the US embassy in China, who had respectively described similar levels of air pollution as "slight" and "hazardous."
"Personally, I advise authorities to involve both PM10 and PM2.5 levels in the national environment evaluation standards and thereby let citizens themselves judge which standard to follow," Sun added.

Meanwhile in the China Daily, Zhou Rong, another member from our climate and energy team, was asked about the government's plans to begin regulating PM2.5 within five years and set binding targets to reduce the fine particles between 2015 and 2020.

"As these pollutants will have a direct impact on the public health, we hope this process can be accelerated," Zhou said.
Studies on the causes of PM2.5 have been under way in China for about a decade, she said. Coal consumption and vehicle exhaust are the major causes, but in different regions their contribution to the pollution varies.
Either way, there will be no easy solutions, although Beijing's municipal government is dedicated to limiting coal consumption and vehicle ownership. It has set a goal to cap annual coal consumption at 20 million tons by 2015. Last year, Beijing burned 27.5 million tons.
"But again, air pollution is a regional problem," Zhou said. "Even if Beijing takes care of its own emissions, it still cannot escape the pollutants discharged by power plants in the neighborhood."

Read our list of "real-time apps, twitters tracking air quality levels in your Chinese city".

Mercury rising: China takes part in mercury control talks

Evan Brooks — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 09:23:00 +0100

This week government representatives from all parts of the world, including China, are finishing talks in Nairobi for decreasing the use of mercury. China has a rather large stake in the talks; seeing that coal-burning power plants – the country's biggest source of power – spews large amounts of mercury into the air and water every day, and the threat of mercury poisoning is becoming greater by the minute. By Evan Brooks.

China is so involved, in fact, that Yingxian Xia, a deputy director of the Ministry of Environment Protection, is a member of the organizing bureau. This could mean good news for decreasing the use of mercury in Chinese manufacturing and energy production, which is even better news for the people of China, who breathe, eat and drink small amounts of mercury every day. Those small amounts eventually add up and can be dangerous, especially for unborn children.

Greenpeace climate and energy campaigner Wang Ying wrote an opinion piece for the November 1 edition of the Global Times to talk more about mercury in China and the talks in Nairobi. In the article, she says that much of mercury pollution comes from coal-burning power plants, which spew nasty chemicals into the air and even nastier chemicals into the water every day. In recent years, countless Chinese children and adults have been poisoned by mercury.

Mercury has nasty effects on the human body. It can cause ailments like brain damage, numbness, loss of motor functions, birth defects, and of course death. Mercury poisoning has manifested throughout history in several circumstances.

Perhaps the most egregious example, however, occurred during the 1950s and 1960s in Minamata, Japan. During that time, an epidemic outbreak of mercury poisoning, caused by mercury in the wastewater of a nearby chemical factory, led to the death of more than 1,000 people and ruined the lives of many more.

In Minamata, mercury from the chemical factory flowed into the drinking water and soaked into the fish near the city. Over time, hundreds of people in the area were found to have severe neurological disorders, such as gross loss of motor function and mental retardation. Mothers, who seemingly had no symptoms, gave birth to babies with severe mental and physical retardation. Truly depressing and horrifying.

Unfortunately, mercury is still far more prevalent than it should be. That's just the reason why the United Nations Environment Program has organized this inter-government negotiating committee to put a stop to the spread of this nasty substance.

The negotiating committee aims to devise and recommend to governments some legally binding mechanisms to decrease the use of mercury in industry and manufacturing. Ultimately, the aim is to increase awareness of its harmful effects on people and the environment and to convince governments to enforce stronger regulations.

Greenpeace indeed supports work to decrease the use and prevalence of mercury and hopes that events like those in Minamata never happen again.

Chromium waste dumpers in Yunnan taken to court

Evan Brooks — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 08:28:00 +0100

Two months after illegally dumping toxic chromium waste in eastern Yunnan province, likely causing cancer in local residents and attracting national media attention, Luliang Chemical Co. is still under the microscope. By Evan Brooks.

The company won't be left alone any time soon.

When Greenpeace heard of the incident, we sent a team to Longtan - dubbed the "cancer village" by Chinese press - to investigate and document the severity of the situation.

The team's findings led Greenpeace campaigner Ma Tianjie to write about his experience in the southwestern province. He said the villagers lacked proper awareness about the dangers of the chemical waste that had seeped into their soil, water and crops. Ma said villagers walked barefoot in their rice paddies. They told Ma that it wasn't a good idea to stand in the water long because it would burn after a while. Indeed the situation was severe. But media attention has slowly burned out since then.

It gained new life recently, however.

On October 19, China's oldest environmental NGO, Friends of Nature, filed a public interest law suit against Luliang Chemical for its unethical practices. The city of Qujing accepted the suit the following day. This is the first time a grassroots Chinese NGO has successfully brought a public interest law suit to court.

It's safe to say that Friends of Nature won't be taking their eyes off Luliang Chemical for several years to come. The move by Friends of Nature has also spurred the press to get involved again.

On October 21, two of China's largest news outlets - Xinhua and the People's Daily - reported that Luliang Chemical might have resumed operations, adding to its now infamous chromium toxic waste pile again. In fact, local residents said the company had resumed operations in September, not long after their scandal was revealed.

The brouhaha surrounding Luliang Chemical was given new life in the press. But it was short-lived. Other news organizations quickly put the fire out.

The China Daily on October 24 reported that the Luliang Chemical had not resumed operations; instead the company was busy with a clean-up operation.

The China Daily said the company definitely had not resumed operations.

Finally, in an attempt to relieve all doubt, China News Service reported October 25 that the government had performed "strict and in-depth" investigations to ensure the company had not resumed operations.

So, what is it? Have they stopped? Will they ever resume operations? What will they do with all their toxic chromium waste? Will Friends of Nature win their suit?

The future is as unclear as the present. But one thing's for sure: because of the work of Greenpeace, Friends of Nature, and the lawyers and villagers involved, the chances of Luliang Chemical dumping their toxic waste so illegally and so openly is much less likely to happen again. That's one more victory for the environment.

China says "no" to the commercialization of GE rice?

Ken Shiozawa — Sun, 25 Sep 2011 10:45:00 +0200

The Chinese government may be taking a bold new step by halting the commercialization of GE rice. It's a move that we at Greenpeace would widely welcome as the long-term effects of GE products on human health are still unknown.

China's major financial weekly the Economic Observer quoted on Friday, Sept 23rd, 2011, an information source close to the Ministry of Agriculture that China has suspended the commercialization of genetically engineered (GE) rice.

Greenpeace welcomes and supports this move by the government. "This step is a milestone in the process to end all GE rice commercialization in China," said Greenpeace Food and Agriculture campaigner Pan Wenjing.

GE crop's long-term risks on human health and the environmental are still unknown. It has also been found that many of the GE rice lines in China are embedded with non-Chinese patents, which poses a huge risk on China's food security should they become commercialized.

Greenpeace believes that the suspension of GE rice shows that relevant government departments have heard and respected public opinion.

"Rice is the main staple food for 1.3 billion Chinese people. Any decisions related to rice must be taken seriously and must include the people's opinions," said Pan Wenjing.

To protect food safety and food sovereignty, Greenpeace believes that the government should re-assess its GE policy and its massive GE investments, and instead invest more resources into modern ecological agriculture and other effective technologies. The goal should be to speed up the transition of China's agriculture to a sustainable, ecological model, for the sake of protecting the environment, ensuring food safety, and securing the economic livelihood of farmers.

__________________________

Media Contacts:

Myria Liu, Chief Media Officer
Tel: +86 (010) 6554 6931 ext. 118
Mobile: +86 139 1107 3894

Fading Arctic: Greenpeace tests sea ice thickness

Monica Tan — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 03:04:00 +0200

Hong Kong campaigns manager Gloria Chang recently ended a one week trip on Greenpeace's Arctic Sunrise which traversed Norway's Warbah Islands. The expedition included leading independent ice scientists from the University of Cambridge who were there to test Arctic sea ice thickness. The trip revealed the second-lowest sea ice minimum on record - a devestating consequence of global climate change.

Gloria arrived in the Arctic armed with a pair of boots with a long and colourful history. Their original owner is Catherine Fitzpatrick, a campaigner who first wore them in 1989 as part of Greenpeace's work to have Antarctica declared a world park. Take a look at some of the amazing things Gloria was able to see on her trip.

And read Gloria's blog coverage (in traditional Chinese) of her Arctic expedition:

Arctic: the past, present and future

Mid-Autumn festival in the Arctic Ocean

Day 6 on the Arctic Sunrise

Surveying the sea ice

Boarding the Acrtic Sunrise

Polar bear town

The melting ice

In preparation for the Arctic expedition

The Arctic sea ice is a key indicator of the state of our climate. The shrinking and receding sea ice has dire consequences. First, as the white ice that normally reflects sunlight away from Earth melts, more of the dark open water of the Arctic Ocean is is exposed, absorbing heat and causing more ice to melt. This is a positive feedback loop where ice melt causes more ice to melt.

Secondly, distinctive Arctic species such as the polar bear, walrus and ice seals depend on the sea ice; they cannot survive without it, so as the sea ice shrinks and thins, these animals' continued existence is jeopardized, as are the Arctic peoples whose cultures and ways of life have depended on the animals and the ice for millenia.

Watch this video to find out more about the melting Arctic sea ice:

And discover this incredible 'melting' artwork we commissioned. The massive 'Melting Vitruvian Man' - the size of which is four Olympic-sized swimming pools - draws attention to how climate change is causing the rapid melting of sea ice to outstrip predictions.

Subscribe via. email 2

Monica Tan — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 08:53:00 +0200

Subscribe via. email 2

Detox campaign hat trick: Adidas joins Nike and Puma

Monica Tan — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 10:10:00 +0200

Adidas is going toxic-free, the company has just announced! This is great news for our environment, our rivers and the millions of people in China and elsewhere who depend on rivers for drinking water and agriculture. Without the coming together of Greenpeace supporters and activists to challenge Nike, Adidas and other would-be champions to lead the way towards a toxic-free future, this decisive victory would have taken much longer to achieve.

The world's top three sportswear brands -- Nike, Adidas and Puma -- have now committed publicly to eliminate all discharges of hazardous chemicals throughout their supply chain and across the entire lifecycle of their products by 2020.

No 'safe' amount of hazardous chemicals
Importantly, Adidas's commitment to 'zero discharge' of hazardous chemicals means that the world's three leading sportswear companies have recognised that there is no such thing as a 'safe limit' when it comes these substances. This is a significant shift for the companies.

It's also a milestone for our campaign to stop industry poisoning our water with hazardous, persistent and hormone-disrupting chemicals.

Detoxing is back in fashion
There's movement among the laggards too. Since news of the tainted clothing has spread internationally in the fashion and business media, Lacoste, G-Star Raw, Uniqlo and Chinese sports brand Li Ning have begun to engage. Greenpeace campaigners will begin talks with them in the coming weeks to turn their initial engagement into strong and binding individual commitments for a toxic-free future.

Adidas is 'all in'
As part of its commitment, Adidas has included some very specific and immediate actions, including a Nonylphenol ethoxylates phase-out roadmap and a commitment to work with all tiers of their supply chain.

Crucially, Adidas has also agreed to further promote the principle of the 'right to know', ensuring full transparency about the chemicals being released from its suppliers' factories, facility-by-facility, year-by-year. It has also explicitly stated its commitment to developing a cross-industry approach in addition to its own individual implementation plan. The company has promised to deliver its action plan within seven weeks.

This is why we campaign
With these commitments, Nike, Adidas and Puma have broken away from the other big name clothing brands listed in our "Dirty Laundry 2" report, such as H&M and Abercrombie and Fitch. In the coming weeks we will be watching closely to ensure that the sportswear leaders turn their words into actions and provide a concrete and ambitious implementation plan.

To everyone who has taken part to make the Detox campaign work this far -- Thank you! There's still a long way to go, but with your support we are winning.

Greenpeace relies on donations from generous individuals to carry out our work. In order to remain independent, we do not accept funding from governments, corporations or political parties. We can't do it without your help.

Adidas needs to earn its stripes by championing a toxic-free future

Monica Tan — Tue, 23 Aug 2011 08:30:00 +0200

Our latest research reveals that there is a good chance that the clothes you are wearing may contain nonylphenol ethoxylates (NPEs), chemicals which can break down in water to form nonylphenol (NP) -- a toxic, persistent and hormone-disrupting chemical. 52 out of 78 garments from 14 global clothing brands tested positive for NPEs, including four Adidas articles.

This is a global problem that is pervasive across the entire textile sector. It is a challenge that demands strong and decisive leadership from major brands and innovators to pave the way for industry-wide change. It is an issue that is calling out for champions and change-makers -- for people who can make things happen.

What more proof do they need? The Detox campaign has inspired Puma and Nike to take the lead in detoxing their products and their supply chains, but Adidas is still on the starting blocks.

Nike and Puma are "all in" - but where is Adidas?

Thanks to the Detox campaign and your fantastic support, Nike and Puma (the world’s #1 and #3 sportswear brands) have already committed to work with their suppliers and eliminate all toxic chemicals from their supply chains and products by 2020.

Dirty Laundry 2

Our second Dirty Laundry report presents the results of a study that analyzed clothing and certain fabric-based shoes sold internationally by major clothing brands.

Clothing by leading brands including Adidas, H&M, Calvin Klein, Abercombie & Fitch and ten others are manufactured using nonylphenol ethoxylates (NPEs), which break down to form toxic nonylphenol (NP). Nonylphenol is a persistent chemical with hormone-disrupting properties that build up in the food chain, and is hazardous even at very low levels.

The clothing sampled was made from both natural and synthetic fabrics, and included items designed for men, women and children. A variety of items were tested including shirts, jackets, trousers, underwear and fabric-based shoes.

What do the findings mean?

By failing to take action to eliminate these chemicals, global brands like Adidas are expecting customers to do their dirty laundry for them. Every time clothes containing these chemicals are washed, hazardous substances are released into waterways across the world.

Even where wastewater treatment facilities are present, they are unable to fully breakdown NPEs, and instead only partially degrade them – often even speeding up their conversion into the toxic NP. In other words -- washing the chemicals out of your new gear before you wear it (for piece of mind!) will only spread the water pollution locally.

The findings provide a snapshot of the kind of toxic chemicals that are being released by the textile industry into waterways all over the world and are indicative of a much wider problem.

The clothing items where these chemicals were detected were bought and manufactured in locations all over the world, demonstrating that the use and release of hazardous chemicals is a widespread and pervasive problem that is having serious, long-term and far-reaching consequences for people and wildlife.

The world needs more champions

This research shines a spotlight on the issue of toxic chemicals and reveals the truth behind the marketing hype wrapped around many of these international clothing brands. People have a right to know about the chemicals that are present in their clothing and the harmful effects these chemicals can have when released into waterways in China and all over the world.

Brands must remove these chemicals from their products, and the best way to do this is to eliminate them from their production processes and to come clean about what chemicals their factories are using and discharging.

It's time Adidas earned its stripes

By committing to clean up their act, Nike and Puma are demonstrating their seriousness and resolve to solve this issue and create a better world.

Adidas have a lot of ground to make up. If they want to be considered contenders, they need to get in the game by committing to zero discharge and really take the lead by developing a new culture of transparency throughout the clothing industry.

As a company, Adidas needs to "come clean" and disclose to the public the hazardous chemicals used and released into the environment during its production processes and -- if it wants to be a real leader -- turn words into action and show us real change on the ground in countries such as China, where water pollution is such an urgent problem for people and wildlife.

The world needs champions. Are Adidas "all in" for leading the way towards a toxic-free future, or are they hoping to leave it to Puma, Nike and would-be champions to JUST DO IT for them?

Now get involved in our global Detox campaign, and email the CEO of Adidas today.

Sticker attack: Rebranding Adidas Hong Kong and globally

Monica Tan — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 04:11:00 +0200

Nike has joined first-mover Puma, but Adidas is still stuck in the starting blocks. Hong Kong activists hit the Adidas and Li Ning stores in Tsim Sha Tsui and Causeway Bay with Detox stickers in hand.

Within hours of Nike's announcement on 18 August to champion a toxic-free future, Greenpeace activists in cities around the world headed to their nearest Adidas Store with huge "Detox" stickers to rebrand the shop windows and doors. Hong Kong included.

Photos from this morning's rebranding actions are still coming in, and if you pass an Adidas Store today you might see our stickers in the window!

Beau, a toxics campaigner from Greenpeace South East Asia mailed me some photos from Manila this morning and wrote: "Three volunteers dressed in bright orange coveralls gave them the appearance of professional work crew so even security did not bother them. They calmly attached the sticker panels to the shop window and then left. Some of us stayed around the mall area to see what the reaction would be. Half an hour after the store opened, the store personnel still did not notice it. Now we are betting how many days it will take for them to notice that they have a new brand."

Take action online

Head straight to Google Maps to find an official Adidas store near you. (Just add your city to the search box.) Remember, only official Adidas stores! Click the map marker for the store, and if you see a "Write a review" link, click on that too.

Adidas are falling behind in the Detox Challenge. Leave them a rating and review that'll encourage them to pick up the pace, and address their toxic water pollution problem (and if you can't think of anything to say, rate other Detox comments you see as helpful by clicking the "Yes" link beside them).

Nike commits to champion a toxic-free future

Monica Tan — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:02:00 +0200

The world's #1 sportswear brand, Nike, has accepted our Detox challenge: today it has officially committed to eliminating all hazardous chemicals across its entire supply chain, and the entire life-cycle of its products by 2020. This is a major win for our campaign to protect the planet’s precious water, and create a toxic-free future.

Nike's announcement comes just five weeks into our Detox campaign, which began when we launched the "Dirty Laundry" report, revealing commercial links between major clothing brands - including Nike, Puma and Adidas - and suppliers responsible for releasing hazardous chemicals into Chinese rivers. We challenged these brands to champion a toxic-free future by committing to work with their suppliers and remove these toxic chemicals from their clothes and China’s rivers.

Check out our slideshows:
Sticking it to the Hong Kong Adidas store
Detox hits Shanghai's Zebra Music Festival

Nike sets a new pace
Puma was first to break away from the pack, opening up an impressive lead by announcing that it would go toxic-free. Puma’s commitment to remove all hazardous chemicals from its entire product-portfolio must have left their competition wondering how they were going to raise their game. Now, Nike and Puma are the front-runners, and Adidas is far behind.

Nike also agreed to address the issue of the public's “right to know” by ensuring full transparency about the chemicals being released from its suppliers’ factories. The more the public knows about the toxic chemicals spilling out of these factories, the more the pressure to stop them polluting will increase. The importance of this cannot be overstated.

The sportswear giant has also promised to use its influence, knowledge and experience to bring about widespread elimination of hazardous chemicals from the clothing industry.

Can Adidas top that?
By committing to clean up its act, Nike is showing hints of greatness - but we will be closely monitoring the company’s implementation plan, due to be published by 18 October. And just because Nike’s taking the lead shouldn’t mean Adidas or other clothing companies can simply throw in the towel. The game is still on and they should be hot on Nike's heels to become champions of a toxic-free future.
Adidas have a lot of ground to make up. If they want to be considered contenders, they need to get in the game by committing to zero discharge and really take the lead by developing a new culture of transparency throughout the clothing industry and helping others stop the release of hazardous chemicals currently used during manufacture.
It's like Green My Apple again
The driving force behind the Detox campaign comes from a year-long investigation into the textile industry's water pollution problem in China, where vital research helped us to connect the dots and link hazardous chemicals and their impacts in waterways like the Yangtze and Pearl River Deltas to textile factories and international clothing brands.

Of these brands, one group stood out as the most likely to become champions of a toxic-free future: Leading sports clothing companies like Nike and Adidas. Not only do they like to market themselves as leaders and innovators, they also have the size and influence to work with their suppliers to eliminate the use and release of these hazardous chemicals from the entire supply chain.

The enormous task of changing the toxic practices of an entire industry can be extremely daunting, so we went in search of a potential leader with the will to change itself and the influence to change others. Much as we did during our Green My Apple campaign a few years ago, it was vital to engage with innovative and proactive industry leaders - the sort of companies who are willing to put their slogans into action and demonstrate that "impossible is nothing".

In March 2009 Apple become the first laptop maker to eliminate toxic poly vinyl chloride (PVC) and brominated flame retardants (BFRs). For now we have only commitments from Nike and Puma, though they are on the right track.

Bearing witness works
The Detox campaign kicked off in July when our mysterious XM3N mannequins finally revealed their mission to clean up China’s rivers. Their message was spread by our video – watched and shared by 100s of 1000s of Greenpeace supporters and sports lovers all over the world.

Then people really started to get involved and the game was well and truly on. Actions from Argentina to the Netherlands and Spain – including a world wide striptease – made sure the world’s biggest brands couldn’t ignore the challenge.

Further pressure to perform was piled on by world’s media as the story ran far and wide, from New York to China and Brazil to the UK. In Hong Kong, our exhibit helped bring the message to the street where passers-by took a moment to put their demands for Detox in writing.

More than 50,000 people signed our petition to the CEOs of Nike and Adidas, many thousands of people tweeted and shared the campaign social networks and blogs, submitted logo designs, or campaign ideas.

There’s still a long way to go, but we’re getting there. Adidas have a tough act to follow, and everybody’s watching.

Greenpeace at the Spanish Super Cup match between FC Barcelona and Real Madrid.

TAKE ACTION:
Please share this story today, to remind people that pressure works, that together we can win, and that there's hope for a clean, toxic-free future.

Rainbow Warrior II retires, finds second life as floating hospital

Monica Tan — Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:00:00 +0200

Today Greenpeace said goodbye to an old friend. At a ceremony in Singapore today our iconic protest vessel the Rainbow Warrior was transferred to Friendship, a Bangladesh based NGO which will refit it for use as a hospital ship. It's the beginning of a new chapter for a vessel that’s been with us for 22 good years, traversing the world's oceans in defence of the environment.

The ship will be renamed “Rongdhonu”, Bengali for Rainbow. Serving the coastal belt of Bangladesh and the Bay of Bengal, the Rongdhonu will deliver primary and secondary medical assistance to some of the most vulnerable communities of the world, communities that have little or no access to basic health care facilities. The Rongdhonu will also serve as an emergency medical ship around the region, enabling Friendship to bring medical aid to those areas which are already experiencing the effects of climate change.

Greenpeace, however, will not be long without a Rainbow Warrior. Construction of a new Warrior, the third to bear the name, is nearly complete. The vessel will join the Greenpeace fleet in October as we celebrate our 40th anniversary.

The Rainbow Warrior II first sailed for Greenpeace in 1989 and replaced the original Rainbow Warrior, after it was bombed and sunk by French government agents in 1985. In over two decades the ship has challenged the legal system and won, confronted environmental crimes, blocked shipments of illegal timber from the world’s rainforests, opposed nuclear weapons testing and sailed against over fishing, whaling, war, global warming, and other environmental crimes on every ocean. More recently, the Rainbow Warrior travelled to the waters off the coast of Fukushima and was used to carry out radiation sampling.

Check out our slideshows:
Rainbow Warrior II: 22 Years of Sailing with Greenpeace
Rainbow Warrior II's emotional handover ceremony

Speaking at the handover ceremony, Mike Fincken, Captain of the Rainbow Warrior II, quoted the Cree Indian prophecy from which the ship got its name: “There will come a time when the Earth grows sick and when it does a tribe will gather from all the cultures of the world who believe in deeds and not words. They will work to heal it...they will be known as the "Warriors of the Rainbow’.” Adding, “This ship has carried people from around the world and has stood as an icon of hope over pessimism and as an emblem of action over complacency, it is time to pass that task on."

Greenpeace East Asia activist Lang Xiyu was also there to witness the handover. Earlier this year Lang Xiyu was in Hong Kong looking on the Rainbow Warrior from the pier when he met an Australian Greenpeace donor and volunteer of over 10 years. Together they walked the ship for one of the last times. Lang Xiyu said the Australian man was greatly moved. "He solemnly ran his hand over each section as if sensing the environmental history imbued in every part: the mast, the rigging, the wooden dolphin of the boat's bow. Rain was falling on him, but he seemed completely unaware and reluctant to leave."

...As the first purpose built environmental campaigning vessel the new Rainbow Warrior will be one of a kind. She will be a model of green ship construction, with A-frame sails that allow for minimal use of her highly efficient diesel engines, keeping her carbon ‘footprint’ low. Head here for an on board virtual tour, and help the Rainbow Warrior's proud legacy continue by making a donation to the new Rainbow Warrior and joining the Facebook group "New Hands on Deck".

Puma leaps ahead of Nike and Adidas in Detox Challenge

zshelley — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 03:34:00 +0200

Hats off to Puma, the third largest sportswear company in the world, for publicly committing today to eliminate all releases of hazardous chemicals from its entire product lifecycle and across its whole supply chain by 2020.

The move comes less than two weeks into our Detox campaign, and shows yet again what's possible when activists and consumers demand more from an industry.

Round one of the Detox challenge belongs to Puma who has sent a clear message to its competitors that allowing suppliers to use and discharge hazardous chemicals is simply not acceptable.

Bearing witness works

Pressure on Nike and Adidas jumped up a bar today thanks to Puma, following almost two weeks of Greenpeace actions at HQ buildings and highstreet stores, including a massive synchronized dance and striptease in 29 cities around the world.

The commitment made by Puma incorporates many of the elements outlined by us in our Dirty Laundry report as being crucial to bringing about systematic change in the textile industry: namely a precautionary approach to chemicals management, a clear timeline for zero discharges, and the elimination of all discharges of hazardous chemicals throughout the supply chain and product lifecycle -- including those coming from polluting production activities such as wet processing. Puma has committed to publishing an action plan detailing how they will deliver their commitment within the next eight weeks.

Greenpeace's Detox campaigners will be keeping a close eye on developments, as Puma still has room to improve by disclosing the hazardous chemicals being released by all of its suppliers.

The challenge continues

Both Nike and Adidas have responded to our Dirty Laundry campaign report, though they risk falling behind in the race to create a toxic-free future if they can't convert their bold claims of leadership into concrete commitments and credible actions.

They could still steal the lead by matching Puma, and then going further by coming clean about the hazardous chemicals released during the production of their products.

Are you all in?

It took a year of careful investigation to join all the dots from the hazardous water pollution in rivers like China's Yangtze River to the textile factories and the international clothing brands like Nike, Adidas, Li Ning and Puma they have commercial relationships with.

You can challenge Nike and Adidas to pick up the pace now by sharing this blog, sharing the detox challenge video or the detox striptease video, and signing our petition to Nike and Adidas.

Sign our petition to Nike to Adidas!

Endangered Sumatran tiger dies in trap on APP concession in Indonesia

zshelley — Mon, 25 Jul 2011 07:20:00 +0200

Recently word came to our Greenpeace office in Indonesia that a Sumatran tiger was stuck in an animal trap in an area being logged by Asia Pulp and Paper (APP). It was trapped for six days in total without food or water. After a week of suffering forest officers arrived to evacuate the tiger – but it was too late. The tiger died during the rescue attempt.

Zamzami, a Greenpeace media campaigner, traveled to the area with the rescue team as an observer and was present for the tiger’s last few hours. He describes the scene that met him: Despite its ordeal the “tiger still emitted a strong wild aura” and “greeted me with an angry roar”. Everyone present stood stunned and silent to see the “King of the jungle lying low, trapped and suffering in his own home”.

The spot where the tiger became trapped was on the border of PT Arara Abadi, an APP acacia plantation in the province of Riau. Video footage reveals that near the spot where the tiger wandered into the trap, there was a large area of recently destroyed forest where active clearing was ongoing.

That means a lot of disruptive activity was happening: Trees were being felled and heavy machinery, like excavators, were busy clearing the rainforest. Only 13 kilometres away from where the excavators were at work is the spot where this animal spent its last days trapped, injured and starving.

Unfortunately, more tragic moments like this are in store for these magestic animals. The Sumatran tiger is already endangered. There are only around 400 remaining in the wild – and now, there's one tiger less.

Yet APP operations continue to clear more rainforest, destroying the home and hunting grounds of the Sumatran tiger to feed APP’s pulp and paper operations. The future doesn't look any better: the company has ambitious expansion plans – including into even more tiger habitat.

As a result, we are losing rainforests and Sumatran tigers all so that APP can churn out ordinary, dispsoable goods – like throw-away toy packaging. Some of this packaging has been used by toy companies such as Hasbro, Disney and Mattel.

Someone once told me that roads in a forest are like veins – once opened they can eventually drain the forest of life. When APP builds a concession in tiger habitat, it not only destroys the forests in which the tiger would roam, sleep and hunt: The roads built to transport timber also let in all kinds of other disruptions. People come and lay traps to hunt other animals; even if they don’t mean to interfere with the tiger, they do. When their traditional habitat is destroyed, tigers must roam even further for food and shelter, which often brings them closer to forest communities and causes more conflict.

APP must stop relying on further clearance of rainforest for its business. Destruction of rainforests in Indonesia must stop to protect animals like the Sumatran tiger, minimize negative consequences for forest communities, and for Indonesia to cut its carbon emissions contributing to climate change, most of which come from deforestation.

This pulp and paper company adds insult to injury by portraying itself as a sustainable, responsible business that acts to protect biodiversity and animals like the Sumatran tiger. It runs ads on television and in print all over the world that presents itself like an NGO. Its ads often use the tagline ‘APP Cares’ next to an image like the imprint of a tiger paw, giving the impression. In reality, its operations destroy tiger habitat for profit, pushing these animals to the brink of extinction.

The impression that APP projects of being a caring company, committed to sustainability and conservation efforts, is revealed to be a lie as soon as it is compared with the reality of APP operations. In addition to removing APP products from their supply chain, toy companies like Mattel, Hasbro and Disney must put in place new policies to cover all their purchases of pulp and paper products. This is the only way to ensure they will not be complicit in forest destruction in the future.

The last moments of this single Sumatran tiger are just the latest example of the terrible costs of the ongoing destruction of Indonesia’s rainforests. If APP continues to operate this way, such moments will become commonplace – until there are no more tigers.

---

We are demanding that Mattel, Hasbro and Disney remove deforestation from their supply chains – that means removing APP products and creating new policies covering all their purchasing of pulp and paper products. Take action here!

Destroying rainforest for throw-away packaging is a heart-breaking environmental tragedy. Greenpeace needs your help now. Just 100 HKD a month will help us stop global corporations from buying paper made from critically endangered animal habitat. Please, donate today

Nike, Adidas and Li Ning: Detox the world's water

Brian Fitzgerald — Tue, 12 Jul 2011 11:32:00 +0200

Game on, Nike, Adidas and Li Ning. Greenpeace is calling you out to see which one of you is stronger on the flats, quicker on the breaks, turns faster and plays harder at a game we're calling 'Detox': Who'll be the first to take action and eliminate hazardous chemical discharges from their supply chain? Who will be the champion of a toxic-free future?

We turned up at your stores in Beijing today with the results of a year-long investigation into toxic water pollution from the textile industry in China. It doesn't look good for you. But we, along with millions of supporters worldwide, are hoping that you two, like any athlete that's had a bad lap or a stumble, are simply going to pick yourself up and try harder -- especially if your fans are cheering you on.

Challenge one: Work with your suppliers to eliminate all toxic chemicals

All of you (Nike, Adidas and Li Ning) turned up as having commercial links to facilities that we found to be discharging a range of hazardous and persistent chemicals with hormone-disrupting properties into the Yangtze and Pearl river deltas.

The Dirt

Our investigations found two textile facilities in China that were discharging a range of hazardous chemicals into the Yangtze and Pearl River deltas.

Alkylphenols (including nonylphenol) were found in waste water samples from both factories, and perfluorinated chemicals (PFCs) were present in the waste water from the Youngor Textile Complex. This was despite the presence of a modern wastewater treatment plant at the Youngor facility.

The alkylphenols and PFCs found in the samples are a cause for serious concern, as these chemicals are known hormone disruptors and can be hazardous even at very low levels. Both groups of chemicals are man-made substances that persist in the environment and can have potentially devastating effects as they accumulate up the food chain.

...Read more in the Dirty Laundry report

These chemicals don't play fair with human health or the environment. They mess with human reproduction. They harm development, damage the liver, impact the immune system, disrupt hormones and decrease sperm counts.

And these facilities and chemicals are just the tip of a toxic iceberg. Our investigations give just a snapshot of the kind of toxic chemicals that are being released by the textile industry into waterways all over the world -- every day.

You can be the champions of clean water: show us the vision, commitment and desire to smash the current second-rate policies towards hazardous chemicals out of the park and hit a home-run for a toxic-free future.

In our Hidden Consequences report, we showed with a few case studies how Switzerland, the US, Slovakia, and the Netherlands are still paying for the mistakes of washing toxic chemicals down the drain during their years of rapid industrialization.

Decades of effort have yet to entirely clean up PCBs from the Hudson river, and Dutch deltas are still contaminated with hazardous chemicals from the industrial expansion that followed the Second World War. We don't need to make those mistakes again in China and other parts of the world: safe alternatives exist for many of these chemicals.

Yet while concentrations of some of the chemicals we found have been falling in the US, they've been increasing in China. Developing and rapidly industrialising countries produce nearly 75 percent of the world's clothing exports, and China has been the world's leading exporter of textiles and clothing since 1995.

One of the rules of Detox is that you can't just move your manufacturing out of one country when the ref calls foul and get your game on in one where the ref isn't looking. This is a global problem, and it requires global solutions.

Water and China

A recent survey found that water scarcity and water pollution are the two top environmental concerns of the world's population.

The UN estimates that industry is responsible for dumping 300–500 tonnes of heavy metals, solvents, toxic sludge and other waste into our waters globally each year.

As much as 70 percent of China’s rivers, lakes and reservoirs are affected by water pollution.

One in four people in China do not have access to clean drinking water.

Shanghai’s 20 million residents are dependent on the Yangtze for drinking water.

This river has around 30 billion tonnes of wastewater dumped into it every year.

20 percent to 30 percent of all of China’s water pollution is a result of manufacturing goods for export.

Why Nike, Adidas and Li Ning?

We wish we could say you're alone on this playing field, but fact is you're not the only brands that are linked to these polluting facilities. There's a full list in the report.

We're calling you out because when it comes to sportswear, you're the front runners, the top dogs, the pace-setters; you have the greatest impact on the supply chain. We think you can take this race to a whole different place, and team-up with your suppliers to eliminate all toxic chemicals from your supply chain and products.

You've got the power to detox our sportswear, detox our water and ultimately, detox our future.

Here's how you can grab the gold medal:

COME UP WITH A GAME PLAN: Adopt clear company and supplier policies that drive the shift from toxic to non-hazardous chemicals, with clear and realistic time-lines.

LET YOUR ACTIONS DO THE TALKING: Respond to the urgency of the situation by demonstrating real and substantial action on the ground, prioritising the worst chemicals and eliminating these immediately.

BE A TEAM-PLAYER: Become more transparent by making data on the elimination of these hazardous chemicals publicly available so that you and your suppliers can be held accountable for your choices and actions.

Second prize: there is no second prize.

And you - yeah, you, the one in the cool sports gear

Whether you're "All in" with Adidas, want to "make the change" with Li Ning, or believe in the Nike motto to "Just do it", you can challenge the brand you wear to win the race to a clean finish. Which competitor is going to deliver the turnaround-jump-shot slam-dunk blitz record-time hole-in-one ace -- in the game of creating a green and toxic-free future?

Here's how you can make your favourite brand a winner:

Watch the Detox video and share it

Create your own version of the Detox video and share it with your friends

Challenge the brands to champion a toxic-free future

Stay in the game - sign up for action alerts (psst! We're planning on breaking a world record on July 23)

Winning formula

Over the past years you, our 11 million subscribers and supporters worldwide have been changing the face of earth-destructive industries by challenging their leading brands. You’ve helped reduce toxic chemicals in the computer industry with the successful Green My Apple campaign. You've convinced Coca Cola to remove climate-killing chemicals from their refrigerators. You've stopped a major cause of Amazon forest destruction by challenging the soy purchasing policies of McDonald’s and other fast-food brands. You've battled forest destruction by getting Unilever and Nestle to drop contracts with palm oil suppliers sourcing from deforestation through pressure on their Dove and Kit-Kat brands. You’ve recently convinced Lego to stop using packaging from the habitat of the sumatran tiger.Barbie, Facebook, and Volkswagen are all feeling the heat of current corporate campaigns to end deforestation and stop climate change.

You have the power to change Nike and Adidas, and with them, an entire industry. Clean water is not only a basic human right - it is the world's most threatened essential resource. We're asking governments to commit to zero discharge of hazardous chemicals within a generation. But governments are slow -- the real players in changing industry are the global brands and corporate decision-makers who set policies about what they buy and where they buy it. It's time to Detox our world. It's time to demand Nike and Adidas blaze the trail.

A Warrior's Welcome

cluk — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 06:18:00 +0200

What do you say when you are offered the chance to sail aboard the world’s most famous environmental campaigning ship? I replied with the only answer that would come out of my mouth: “Absolutely.”

The Rainbow Warrior II was making a last-minute trip around the peninsula of South Korea. She had just completed testing for nuclear radiation in the ocean off Fukushima, Japan, and there was just a small window of time before she was due back in Taiwan. The stars had aligned for the Rainbow Warrior to help launch the newest office of Greenpeace East Asia in Seoul, as well as Greenpeace’s anti-nuclear campaign there.

The trip would also be a bittersweet one - the final campaign of the Rainbow Warrior II before she retires from the seas in a little over a month to make way for the launch of the Rainbow Warrior III in the fall.

They had already secured a photographer for the voyage; now I would be joining the ship as a videographer to document her last campaign. I could not have been more excited to be part of this historical moment.

Two weeks later, as I made my way through port security at Gate 1 of the pier in Incheon, South Korea, weighed down with video camera gear, I caught my first glimpse of the famed flagship.

“Isn’t she beautiful?” asked Simon, the ship photographer from Singapore who had loved the Rainbow Warrior since his youth. He relieved me of my tripod as we made our way to the ship. And she was. Simon started to explain some of the things I would see and do on board, but my attention was focused on the ship itself, docked about 100 meters away. The early evening light played off the shiny green exterior, somehow perfectly illuminating her name so that it glowed. I tuned back into the conversation as Simon informed me, “Katie will show you your bunk. She’s the one with covered in piercings and tattoos.”

Katie, a lovely volunteer deckhand, is one of the 14 individuals that make up a crew as international and inspiring as the Greenpeace organization itself. Hailing from countries like Spain, South Africa, Ghana, UK, India, Thailand, New Zealand, Canada and the Netherlands, many crew members have been sailing with Greenpeace for decades. They are as dedicated to the actual ships themselves as they are to the environmental missions; for many of them, the Rainbow Warrior is very much “home.” Like any other home, the Rainbow Warrior’s walls not only protect against external elements, but contain more than 20 years of history: the history of a family at sea, a family with constantly changing faces but always the same heart.

Adorning the old walls are colorful paintings and other creative depictions of the ship, and the souvenirs from her global adventures beg for their stories to be told. But I always find my eyes gravitating toward the photographs of ships past and present that line the hallway leading from the deck entrance to the mess.

In fact, each walk through takes more time than it should. The urgency of whatever purpose I had is forgotten with a glance at the black and white photograph of a bearded man who once celebrated his January birthday with a bath on deck, somewhere off the coast of Antarctica. Photographer Fernando Pereira is remembered alongside images of the original Rainbow Warrior after the blast that killed him and sent her to a Maori burial at sea. A collection of snapshots of the Phyllis Cormack and the anti-hero hippies that chartered her on that fateful day in 1971 provides a philosophical anchor for a ship mandated to sail the world to “bear witness” to attacks on the environment.

Kira in action: documenting the first action of the campaign in Yeongwang

Less than 48 hours after I arrived, we set sail for our first destination. All hands were on deck as anchors were raised, lines were pulled in and we were guided out of port. The blue skies faded with the horizon, and a fog rolled in to wrap the ship in a thick blanket. Hans, a volunteer doctor from the Netherlands bundled in a warm winter coat and pants, stood watch outside the bridge in the wet grey haze. Inside the bridge, Captain Mike, who has sailed with Greenpeace for more years than can be counted on two hands, concentrated on a monitor tracking other ships. From all appearances it could have been mistaken for a celestial map, and the mistake would not have been so far-fetched – in the few hours since we had departed from shore, it felt as though we had entered our own little world.

With the fog hampering most plans for work, those off duty retreated to their own little corners, having long since learned to enjoy the downtime as it would become increasingly less frequent as the trip progresses. Some disappeared into their rooms, while others congregated in the mess, playing music and chatting. Later that night, we were rocked to sleep by the waves, as we continued to sail into the darkness.

As I settled in over the past few days and learned more about this floating marvel called the Rainbow Warrior II, something occurred to me. The ship’s glow I had seen upon my arrival was more than the reflection of the setting sun. It also came from within.

- Kira Leinonen

Greenpeace launches new office in South Korea

cluk — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 05:47:00 +0200

Greenpeace is excited to announce the launch of a new Greenpeace office in Korea. Established as part of Greenpeace East Asia, our new office will be campaigning on the issues of Climate and Energy and Oceans.

Established as part of Greenpeace East Asia, our new office will work on creating positive change for the environment in Korea. We will be campaigning on the issues of Climate and Energy and Oceans.

The crew and campaigners pose for a photo on the Rainbow Warrior in Incheon

Environmental challenges in the 21st century have required us to strengthen our global and regional coordination, while the Korean office will help us stay deeply rooted within Korea's national context and realities. Only through this balance will we be able to effectively address the environmental issues that know no boundary.

As its first official event, we are launching the Nuclear-Free Korea tour with the RainbowWarrior, Greenpeace’s flagship.

A Korean-speaking Greenpeace volunteer from Bangladesh, Parvez Juel (R), shows Korean visitors around the Rainbow Warrior during an open boat in Incheon.

The Rainbow Warrior will travel around Korea, visiting communities around nuclear plants, including candidate sites. Korea has some of the oldest nuclear power plants in Asia and is on its way to building more.

This will be the final voyage of the Greenpeace flagship, who has served the global organization for more than 20 years.

During the tour, the Rainbow Warrior will stop at the cities of Yeongwang, Kori, Wolseong and Uljin, where existing nuclear power plants are located, as well as the cities of Yongduk and Samchuk, where new nuclear plants are being proposed. Greenpeace will organize meetings with local groups as well as participate in local solidarity events.

As we establish our new office in Korea, we will soon create a new Greenpeace website in Korean, find office premises and recruit new Korean staff.

We hope that you'll stay with us for this remarkable journey!

You can follow us on our new Korean-language Facebook page or continue to follow our news on this site and on our English-language East Asia Facebook page.

Defending the Arctic against Oil Exploitation

cluk — Tue, 07 Jun 2011 05:18:00 +0200

While most people in East Asia enjoyed a long weekend holiday to celebrate the Dragon Boat Festival, Greenpeace has been fighting a battle to protect the high Arctic from oil exploitation.

Greenpeace activists scale the Leiv Eriksson, an oil rig operated by Cairn Energy, to stop the oil company's dangerous drilling operations in the high Arctic

In the last two weeks, Greenpeace has confronted Cairn Energy’s plan to drill for oil in one of the Earth’s most pristine areas, 180km off the coast of Greenland. In the high Arctic, when the world is facing up to the reality of climate change, oil drilling is difficult, dangerous and irresponsible.

That’s why Greenpeace has been asking Cairn for its oil spill emergency response plan. The public has a right to see this information. An oil spill in the fragile Arctic would be especially devastating, and also difficult to clean up, given the cold waters, remote location and short 3-month period of safe oceans.

Cairn’s refusal to relase its plans is not normal and can only mean one thing – they have something to hide.

On Saturday, 18 Greenpeace activists got past a Danish warship and scaled the controversial Cairn Energy drilling rig. The activists were on board to look for the company’s oil spill response plan – a copy of which should normally be kept aboard the rig. However, no plan was forthcoming.

Just before being arrested, Greenpeace oil campaigner Ben Ayliffe radioed the nearby Greenpeace ship Esperanza from the oil rig:

“We have met with the drill manager and requested a copy of the oil spill plan, which we assume he has on board, yet once again we have been refused even sight of it. What is Cairn Energy trying to hide? We have phoned, written, faxed, emailed and now even paid a visit to the rig to get a plan that should be in the public domain and should be subject to independent verification and public scrutiny."

Cairn Energy is seeking a legal injunction to stop us from protesting against its Arctic deep water-drilling rigs, as well as suing us for millions of euros in fines.

But yesterday a judge in Amsterdam, home to the Greenpeace head office, surprised the company by asking it to release the oil spill plan.

The judge further expressed concern about how Cairn would pay for any oil spill clean-up and was distinctly unimpressed with Cairn’s legal team reassuring him that they had a cap on their exposure. He said this was about the environmental impact and not the company’s finances.

It’s a reasonable request – wanting to see a company’s oil spill response plan. It’s obvious why Cairn won’t tell the world how it would clean up an oil spill on the scale of the Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico, and that’s because it can’t be done. Experts say the freezing temperatures and remote location mean a deep water blow-out in this stunning pristine environment would be an irreversible disaster.

We have to draw a line in the ice and stop the Arctic oil rush. And you can help us.

Write to Cairn Energy’s CEO today to demand to see their Greenland oil spill response plan.

Leading the only race that counts

cluk — Thu, 26 May 2011 05:11:00 +0200

We'd like to share with you this excellent profile of Kumi Naidoo, written by Sue Blaine and published in Business Day. Reprinted here with permission.

We'd like to share with you this beautiful, well-written profile of Kumi Naidoo, written by Sue Blaine and published in Business Day. Reprinted here with permission.

Leading the only race that counts
A threat from his daughter prompted Kumi Naidoo to take the top job at Greenpeace

By Sue Blaine
Published 23 May 2011

DURBAN-bred Greenpeace International executive director Kumi Naidoo has all but given up waiting for the US to sign up to a legally binding international agreement on climate-change mitigation.

"We all lose out, at the end of the day, if the world is not united on this, but I’ve reached a point in my own personal thinking where I believe we must encourage other nations to move forward. In the US there is a strong conservative push to keep the US apart from the rest of the world. The US and Somalia are the only countries that have not signed the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of the Child."

Naidoo, who lives in Amsterdam , is in and out of SA as the country gears up to host the 17th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in his home town.

The US, still the world’s largest economy, refused to sign the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that set binding targets for 37 industrialised countries and the European Community for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and has made it plain it will not sign any binding agreement unless China (the world’s second-largest economy) signs first.

China’s notoriety as the world’s largest polluter, with energy demands growing hugely each year along with the country’s impressive economic growth, is no longer apt. China boosted spending on low-carbon energy by 30% to $51,1bn last year , according to Bloomberg "by far the largest figure for any country".

"Forget about the arms race or the space race, the only race that will count in the future is the green race and the winners will be the ones who are leading now. Let’s face it, the green economy will come. It may take longer than Greenpeace wants, but it’s coming. China is seriously concerned about the effects of climate change and they have made a strategic, economic calculation on this. They want to be ahead of the curve. They want to be a big player in the future."

Former US president Bill Clinton has called the shift towards a green economy "the greatest economic opportunity we have had since we mobilis ed for World War Two", and more than 700 cities inhabited by about 75-million Americans have agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions 7% from 1990 levels by 2012, but it is acknowledged that the US is losing out in this race.
"China is showing significantly more leadership than the US. The world would be better served by the US signing at Durban, but the political realities in the US … mean that what we are doing now in the US is fostering leadership from below."

"Below" means garnering support from Hollywood ― UN chief Ban Ki-moon has asked Hollywood to promote the climate change message through international film and television ― and from non-celebrities too.

Naidoo expresses disappointment in US President Barack Obama’s reluctance to push his advantage on issues such as climate change and human rights, but acknowledges Obama has a tough opponent .

Obama has not used the US Environmental Protection Agency’s endangerment ruling, a formal finding for greenhouse gas es that enables the agency to regulate six different gas es as pollutants under the Clean Air Act, to his advantage, nor has he been as vocal about human rights abuses as his election campaign promised.

"I must confess Obama’s election campaign was one of the most hopeful things for US democracy … but I have a PhD in political science. I knew how hard it would be, but Obama has not been able to deliver what he set out to do. He did not use his political capital, as he did in his health reforms, on climate change. US foreign policy is simple. Yes, it’s great to speak out about Libya, Iran, Syria, but then things are the same in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and there’s a totally different approach. Double standards are why I call Obama’s foreign policy Bush Lite."

Naidoo’s passion for social justice runs deep, and underpins his Greenpeace work. Naidoo got involved in the fight against apartheid during the 1980 student riots. He was expelled from his Chatsworth school, reinstated and expelled again before joining a mass movement using civic organisations to promote the cause.

"Given the repression of the time we needed to start with people’s immediate concerns. I was not from a political family. My brother and I were the first in our family to go to university but, even though we were from a working class family that didn’t always understand our activism, they were always concerned for our safety."

Then Naidoo’s mother died. While this is obviously an event that still stings, it gave the young activist a freedom.

"Even though I don’t think about this consciously, it was a wei rd situation, with my mother gone. It meant I could take any amount of risk. So I am deeply respectful of those who chose to contribute in smaller ways. Even now we need to create possibilities for everyone to contribute to a cause in whatever way they can."

After years with civic organisations such as Civicus, the South African National NGO Coalition and SA’s Independent Electoral Commission , Naidoo sees his Greenpeace work as the logical next step.

"If we had human rights and genuine democracy across the world, we would not have the environmental degradation we have. We have it because it makes money for a small, rich lot. People always said Bush had the best environmental legislation oil money can buy."
Naidoo’s call to Greenpeace came in January 2009 during his hunger strike in solidarity with the people of Zimbabwe.

"It was the 19th day of my hunger strike. I couldn’t give it serious thought, but then my daughter phoned me. She said, ‘I won’t talk to you if you don’t seriously consider it. You adults have screwed up this earth. Greenpeace has courage’."

Concern for the environment is not something Naidoo thinks best left until basic needs are "sorted out" because he believes climate change is robbing the poor of their traditional livelihoods and is increasing global impoverishment.

Naidoo admits that activism subsumes his life. He spends his free time "doing volunteer stuff", and although he likes reading mystery novels, the books on his bedside table are mostly about leadership, or some other aspect of his work. "I lost close friends during apartheid. I feel like I am living on borrowed time. Gandhi said, ‘I expect to pass through this world but once. Any good, therefore, that I can do or any kindness I can show to any fellow creature, let me do it now. Let me not defer or neglect it for I shall not pass this way again’, and that’s how I live. I feel I was lucky. I got a scholarship and have an Oxford PhD. To honour the memory of those who were lost in the struggle I feel it is important not to send a message that fighting for democracy is part of a flirtatious moment in our time."

Reprinted with permission from Business Day. You can find the original story here:
http://www.businessday.co.za/Articles/Content.aspx?id=143535

Illegal GE rice found in baby food, rice noodles

shelley jiang — Tue, 19 Apr 2011 22:00:00 +0200

With milk scares such as melamine poisoning not so long ago, you might be forgiven for thinking that soy- or rice-based baby formulas are a safer alternative. But that may not be the case, according to recent testing by Greenpeace.

Beijing - With milk scares such as melamine poisoning not so long ago, you might be forgiven for thinking that soy- or rice-based baby formulas are a safer alternative. But that may not be the case, according to recent testing by Greenpeace.

Greenpeace tested 27 samples of baby food purchased from large Beijing supermarkets at an independent third-party laboratory. To our shock, we found that a rice formula made by Yili, one of China's leading dairy companies, contained the illegal genetically engineered rice line Bt63.

Genetically engineered rice is still in the research phases in China, and has not yet been approved for commercial planting. Thus, it is illegal for food producers to use GE rice in their products.

Nursoy, a soy-based formula made by Wyeth (parent company Pfizer), also tested positive for GE soy.

Aside from the illegality of GE rice, there are other good reasons for manufacturers to not use GE ingredients in food, especially children's food.

Most importantly, the safety of GE foods has not been determined. Research suggests that genetic engineering may result in other, unanticipated side effects to the organism. In research commissioned by Greenpeace, Dr. Xue Kun of the Minzu University of China found many differences on the protein level between the GE rice and its non-GE parent line.

These protein differences may have unintended health and environmental consequences, and without further research into their potential effects, GE ingredients should not be used in foods, especially not in food that may be consumed by children.

The Yili formula is designated for infants between 6 and 24 months in age, while the Wyeth formula is for babies 0 to 12 months.

"Infants and children are far more vulnerable to food toxins and allergens than adults," said Greenpeace Food and Agriculture campaigner Fang Lifeng. "The Royal Society has also recommended that any GE ingredients in foods for babies should be investigated most rigorously."

In other words, it’s better to be safe rather than sorry, especially when the health and development of one’s children is at stake!

Greenpeace also found illegal Bt63 rice in five Chinese food restaurants located near three elementary schools in Wuhan, the capital of Hubei province. It is highly likely that children visit these restaurants. In addition, illegal GE rice was also found in three samples of dried rice noodles purchased in Hong Kong, including one from the PARKnSHOP brand. Dried rice noodles are a very popular food in southern China, where they are made into stir-fries or soups.

Greenpeace calls for Halt to Commercialization

As the safety of GE rice has yet to be determined, Greenpeace is highly alarmed to find GE rice in baby formula and foods that are popular with children. Genetic engineering may impact the long-term safety of our children and our environment.

Greenpeace urges that the government to immediately stop the commercialization of GE rice, and take drastic action against GE rice seeds and fields, as well as GE already present in the food chain, to prevent further contamination. Indeed, two of the GE-positive GE rice noodles were clearly marked as being produced and processed in Guangdong province - suggesting that GE rice has already spread from its origin in Hubei province, where GE research fields are located.

As rice is the main staple food of China, GE rice cannot be taken lightly. Once commercialized, GE rice can contaminate the environment and interfere with conventional and local strains of rice. At that point, it would be too late to stop the spread of GE rice if related health problems were confirmed. Considering that Greenpeace has already found GE rice in Beijing, Hong Kong, Guangdong, and Hubei, it may have already spread even further in China.

Chinese people get 19% of their daily protein intake from rice, and eat rice almost every day of their lives: commercializing this staple crop would be gambling with the health of an entire country.

Download the related press release

Worried about food safety? Sign up for Greenpeace!