Questions about Greenpeace campaigns

Why is Greenpeace opposed to genetic engineering?

Greenpeace opposes all releases of gentically Engineered organisms into the environment. Such organisms are being released without adequate scientific understanding of their impact on the environment and human health.

This genetic pollution is a major threat because genetically engineered organisms cannot be recalled once released into the environment. Governments are attempting to address this threat by international regulations such as the Biosafety Protocol.

Because of commercial interests, the public is being denied the right to know about genetically engineered ingredients in the food chain, and the right to avoid them. Greenpeace advocates immediate interim measures such as labelling of genetically engineered ingredients, and the segregation of genetically engineered crops from conventional ones.

While scientific progress on molecular biology has a great potential to increase our understanding of nature and provide new medical tools, it is no justification to turn the environment into a genetic experiment. Biological diversity must be protected and respected as the global heritage of humankind, and one of our world's fundamental keys to survival.

Greenpeace also opposes all patents on plants, animals and humans, as well as patents on their genes. Life is not an industrial commodity. When we force lifeforms and our world's food supply to conform to human economic models rather than their natural ones, we do so at our own peril.

You can read an introduction to the issue of genetic engineering and an explanation of some of the risks in our genetic engineering area.

The Star Wars Missile Defence system is about defending against nuclear weapons - isn't that a good thing? Why is Greenpeace opposed to it?

Though the US government portrays Star Wars as purely defensive, key nuclear weapons nations such as China and Russia actually see it as an offensive initiative. They fear Star Wars would render their current nuclear arsenals obsolete; they would be unable to retaliate to a US nuclear attack. If Star Wars goes ahead they will feel compelled to increase their own arsenals as a counter measure.

"The more improvements that are made to the shield, the more improvements are made to the sword. We think that with these [anti-missile ] systems, we are just going to spur swordmakers to intensify their efforts."
French President Jacques Chirac.

There are many reasons why the Missile Defence programme is a dangerous plan. You can read more about the threat of Star Wars by clicking on the link below:

Isn't nuclear power better than burning lots of fossil fuels? Isn't it a solution for climate change?

Nuclear power creates poisonous waste, fuels the nuclear arms race, and threatens the health and well being of communities thousands of miles away.

It's also not a solution to greenhouse warming. Creating nuclear fuel is a hugely energy-intensive task. When you sum up the CO2 emitted by the mining, milling, processing, and transport of nuclear fuels, there's no significant savings on carbon output. This was why the framers of the Kyoto protocol rejected efforts by the nuclear power industry to allow carbon credits for nuclear power. You'll still see this fallacy trumpetted in advertising by the nuclear industry, but you won't find a reputable climate scientist who is convinced by the ads. (British Nuclear Fuels spends more on advertising than Greenpeace's entire annual budget, by the way!)

You can read about all the reasons Greenpeace opposes nuclear power at our nuclear campaign section.

Or learn more about clean energy at our climate website.

I heard that Greenpeace is a bunch of "tree huggers" and is opposed to cutting down trees everywhere. Is this true?

Greenpeace is concerned about protecting the greatest reservoirs of terrestrial biodiversity -- the last remaining ancient forests. We don't have any opposition to responsible, sustainable forestry practices outside those areas. Read more about our policies on forest protection in our forests section.