Archives: Press Releases

EU Commissioner Oettinger should give up his selective hearing in discussions on an EU Energy Security Strategy

Categories

Food

Brussels – With the growing concern about the reliability of Russian gas supplies to the EU in the wake of the crisis in Ukraine, Energy Commissioner Oettinger has consistently prioritised the voices of the fossil fuel industry in discussions on the EU’s European Energy Security Strategy. On May 5, Commissioner Oettinger hosted an “EU Energy Security Conference”, inviting only the up-, mid and downstream oil & gas industry to share their views. Representatives of the renewables and energy efficiency industries were not invited. Neither were representatives of civil society groups. In doing so, Commissioner Oettinger goes against the letter and the spirit of the European Council conclusions, which expressly state that “[m]oderating energy demand through enhanced energy efficiency should be the first step, which will also contribute to other energy and climate objectives”. Food & Water Europe fails to see how an exclusive focus on the EU’s oil and gas sector will deliver clean, secure and affordable energy to EU citizens and business. Moreover, promoting a bigger and more diverse gas supply – with more pipelines, LNG terminals and shale gas – risks locking the EU into a continued reliance on fossil fuels, particularly at a time of sagging gas demand. More renewables and energy efficiency, particularly in the heating & cooling sector, must be at the core of any strategy to reduce the EU’s import dependency.

“Import dependency depends on two variables, supply and demand. Steering the debate towards a focus on the supply-side only serves the corporate agenda of Big Oil & Gas”, said Food & Water Europe Director Geert De Cock. “Commissioner Oettinger is completely ignoring solutions that would reduce the demand for natural gas in the EU”.

About 40% of the EU’s annual gas consumption is used for the heating and cooling of buildings. By ignoring this fact, the European Commission has made it impossible to come up with meaningful and cost-effective answers on the EU’s growing import dependency in the long term.

An ambitious energy efficiency target of 40% for 2030 – as called for by the European Parliament – will result in a ~ 20% drop in annual gas consumption. Increased use of renewables, particularly in the heating & cooling sector, could further reduce the EU’s reliance on gas imports by another ~ 10%. Another 8-15% in additional gas savings can be expected from electricity savings, if renewables continue to increase their share in the energy mix. In conclusion, investing in renewables and energy efficiency can generate gas savings of ~ 40%, exceeding all gas imports from Russia. Such a strategy will also have added benefits in terms of climate targets, developing cutting edge-technology and jobs.

For Food & Water Europe, reducing the EU’s gas consumption is a more realistic and cost-effective strategy than replacing gas supplies from Russia with alternative supplies of gas, be it Norway, new pipelines, more LNG or domestic shale gas production. Developing these alternative supplies of gas will be extremely difficult and time-consuming, fail to address security of supply concerns and come at great expense. 

Contact: Geert Decock tel. +32 (0)2 893 10 45, mobile +32 (0)484 629.491, gdecock(at)fweurope.org 

Un informe de Estados Unidos confirma que los cultivos transgénicos ponen en peligro la agricultura ecológica

Categories

Food

 Organizaciones sociales piden a la nueva Ministra un cambio de rumbo urgente en la política española sobre transgénicos 

Bruselas, Madrid – Una encuesta realizada a agricultores ecológicos de EEUU demuestra el fracaso de la denominada “coexistencia” entre los cultivos transgénicos y los ecológicos o convencionales [1]. La experiencia en EEUU muestra que la prevención de riesgos y los efectos de la contaminación por transgénicos plantean una desventaja injusta para el resto de productores, y supone una clara advertencia para España, único país de la UE que permite el cultivo de transgénicos a gran escala. Organizaciones sociales solicitan a la nueva Ministra de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente, Isabel García Tejerina, que España se alinee con la mayoría de países europeos que rechazan el cultivo de transgénicos.

“La situación en EE.UU. debería servir de ejemplo para que España no incida en los mismos errores. La idea de “coexistencia” que nos quiere vender la industria es simplemente imposible, como se puede comprobar en ambos países. La introducción de cultivos transgénicos perjudica a quienes apuestan por una agricultura más sostenible, y va en contra de la voluntad de una amplia mayoría de la ciudadanía europea” afirmó David Sánchez, coordinador de campañas de Food & Water Europe.

La encuesta, realizada en EEUU por las organizaciones Food & Water Watch y OFARM [2] y publicada hoy en Europa, revela los costes extra a los que se ven sometidos los agricultores ecológicos. Estos costes se deben a la carga de trabajo adicional, al coste económico y el tiempo que conllevan las medidas preventivas para evitar la contaminación transgénica y de las consecuencias cuando ésta se produce. Las encuesta muestra que:

  • Las perdidas económicas de las medidas preventivas a las que están obligados los agricultores ecológicos en EEUU pueden llegar a suponer más de 6.000 euros anuales, entre zonas de barrera, retraso en la siembra, análisis y otras medidas.  
  • Un tercio de los encuestados había sufrido contaminación en su cosecha, con una pérdida media de más de 3.000 euros anuales por pérdida del valor añadido, búsqueda de otro comprador y transporte. De ellos, la mitad habían visto su cosecha rechazada varias veces.
  • Otras consecuencias incluyen abandono de cultivos en los que hay aprobadas variedades transgénicas, o tensión con los vecinos que cultivan estas variedades.

“Agricultores y agricultoras del Estado Español se enfrentan a los mismos problemas. La misma situación de inseguridad y desprotección, con tan solo un cultivo transgénico autorizado, el maíz MON810. La aplicación de las medidas de protección y el coste de las mismas no debe recaer en los productores que han elegido no cultivar transgénicos. Además éstos cultivos no deben condicionar al resto de los productores que han optado por el modelo de agricultura social y familiar europeo“ añadió Andoni García, miembro de la ejecutiva de la Coordinadora de Organizaciones de Agricultores y Ganaderos (COAG).

La ganadería ecológica en el Estado Español ya está también seriamente afectada por la presencia de transgénicos, ya que los operadores tienen que asumir importantes sobrecostes para garantizar la alimentación sin transgénicos de sus animales, debido a los numerosos casos de contaminación de piensos y cultivos. [3]

En vista de la situación de la producción ecológica y convencional en EEUU que muestra el informe, COAG, Ecologistas en Acción, Amigos de la Tierra y Food & Water Europe exigen a la nueva ministra de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente un giro de 180 grados en la política sobre transgénicos de su Ministerio.

“La agricultura y la ganadería ecológica son  sectores en constante crecimiento que generan empleo y dinamizan el medio rural. Y para no lastrar a estos sectores necesitamos prohibir de forma inmediata el cultivo en España del maíz MON810. No podemos permitir que el Estado Español siga siendo la puerta de entrada de los cultivos transgénicos en Europa” aseguró Gabriela Vázquez, portavoz de Ecologistas en Acción.

In English

Para más información

David Sánchez, coordinador de campañas, Food & Water Europe [email protected] +32 485842604

Andoni García Arriola, miembro de la ejecutiva de COAG, tlf: 636 451 569

Gabriela Vázquez, portavoz, Ecologistas en Acción, 635 170495

Blanca G. Ruibal, responsable de Agricultura y Alimentación, Amigos de la Tierra 691471389

Notas

[1] El informe resumen de la encuesta “Los agricultores ecológicos pagan el precio de la contaminación por transgénicos” se puede encontrar en este enlace

http://www.foodandwatereurope.org/briefs/contaminacion-por-transgenicos/

[2] Food & Water Europe es el proyecto europeo de la organización Food & Water Watch, una asociación de personas consumidoras con sede en EE.UU. que trabaja para garantizar que la comida, el agua y el pescado que consumimos es seguro, accesible y sostenible. www.foodandwatereurope.org

OFARM (Organic Farmer’s Agency for Relationship Marketing) coordina los esfuerzos de comercialización de cooperativas de productores para beneficiar y mantener la agricultura ecológica en EE.UU. www.ofarm.coop

[3] Implicaciones socioeconómicas de la introducción de OMGs en el mercado https://www.ecologistasenaccion.org/IMG/pdf_Informe_implicaciones_socioeconomicas_transgenicos.pdf

Alliance Calls for Halt to GM Crops in Spain: GM Contamination Threatens Non-GM Farming in Europe

Categories

Food

En Espagnol

Brussels and Madrid – While European decision makers argue over approving new genetically modified (GM) crops, a Spanish alliance of farmers and environmentalists led by Food & Water Europe demanded radical change in the European Union’s GM cultivation policy. The alliance says the results of a survey of organic farmers in the U.S. shows widespread GM contamination, proving that GM “coexistence” has failed and that the resulting costs and extra work are carried by non-GM farmers. [1] This is a clear warning for Spain, the only EU country growing GM crops on a large scale and where there are likely to be more GM crops soon if approvals in the pipeline for new GM maize varieties come through.

“The situation in the U.S. should be a clear warning for Spain and the rest of the EU not to make the same mistakes,” said David Sánchez, campaign officer at Food & Water Europe. “So-called ‘coexistence’ as promoted by the GM industry is simply impossible, as farmers in both the U.S. and Spain already know.”

The survey, published first in the U.S. by Food & Water Watch and the Organic Farmers’ Agency for Relationship Marketing [2] and released today in Europe, documents the added burden organic and non-GM farmers face, including the increased costs of trying to prevent contamination, extra labour, longer hours and financial insecurity due to economic losses when contamination occurs. The survey shows: 

  • Economic costs of preventive measures to avoid GMOs can reach more than €6,119 (US$8,500) per year, including buffer zones, delaying planting and testing among others.
  • One out of three responding farmers have dealt with GMO contamination in their farm. They reported a median cost of €3,240 (US$4,500). Of those contaminated farmers, over half have had crops rejected by their buyers.
  • Other consequences include abandoning crops with GM varieties approved or strained relations between neighbours.

“Farmers in Spain are already facing the same insecurity and lack of legal protection as U.S. colleagues, even though there is only one GM crop approved in the EU. Preventive measures and their costs should not be carried by the farmers that chose not to grow GMOs,” said Andoni García, member of the board of the Spanish Coordination of Farmers (COAG).

The Spanish organic cattle industry is also seriously affected by GM contamination. Forced to import maize from other countries that do not grow GM crops, farmers need to pay extra costs to guarantee GM-free feed. [3]

Considering the situation in the U.S., the COAG, Ecologistas en Acción, Friends of the Earth Spain and Food & Water Europe demand European authorities, including the Spanish Government, reverse current GMO crop policy.

“Organic farming is a growing sector that creates employment and puts new energies in rural areas. Protecting its development means we urgently need to stop growing GM crops in Spain. We cannot be the back door for GM crops into Europe any longer,” added Blanca G. Ruibal, food and farming campaigner at Friends of the Earth Spain. 

For more information:

David Sánchez, Campaign Officer, Food & Water Europe +32 485842604

Andoni García Arriola, member of the board of COAG, +34 636 451 569

Blanca G. Ruibal, Food Campaigner, Friends of the Earth Spain, +34 691471389

Gabriela Vázquez, spokesperson, Ecologistas en Acción, +34 635 170495

Notes 

[1] The report “Organic Farmers Pay the Price for GMO Contamination “ (“Los agricultores ecológicos pagan el precio de la contaminación por transgénicos”) can be downloaded in Spanish and English.

[2] Food & Water Europe is the European program of Food & Water Watch, a nonprofit consumer organization based in the United States that works to ensure the food, water and fish we consume is safe, accessible and sustainable. So we can all enjoy and trust in what we eat and drink, we help people take charge of where their food comes from, keep clean, affordable, public tap water flowing freely to our homes, protect the environmental quality of oceans, force government to do its job protecting citizens, and educate about the importance of keeping shared resources under public control. http://www.foodandwatereurope.org/europe/

Organic Farmers’ Agency for Relationship Marketing is a cooperative incorporated in the State of Minnesota as a marketing-agency-in-common to support organic producer and their group marketing efforts through cooperatives and farmer association. Current efforts include organic grain, livestock and dairy. Member associations/cooperatives have organic producer members in 18 states from Montana to Texas to Tennessee to Ohio and Michigan and all states in between. www.ofarm.coop

[3] Questionnaire about the socio-economic implications of the placing on the market of GMOs for cultivation. A diagnosis by Spanish organizations: COAG, Ecologistas en Acción, Friends of the Earth Spain, Greenpeace and CECU

www.eurovia.org/IMG/doc/COAG_Socio-Economic_Report_EN-2.doc

London Zoo Pressed: Withdraw Support for “Dangerous” Conference

Categories

Common Resources

Brussels—An international coalition led by Food & Water Europe wrote to the London Zoological Society today urging it to withdraw from hosting an international conference on biodiversity offsetting due to take place at the Zoo’s Regent’s Park facility in June.

UK think tank The Corner House, Italian pressure group Re:Common, Spain’s Ecologistas en Accion, the Indigenous Environmental Network in the US and Urgewald in Germany joined in calling on the Zoo to pull out of the conference, saying biodiversity offsetting does not work and other, better options are available to protect the world’s ecosystems.

“We’ve explained to the Zoo that there are many better options available, and we would expect LZS themselves to be making this point to others engaged in the ongoing discussion rather than perpetuating the dangerous myth that you can pick up an ecosystem and move it somewhere else,” said Eve Mitchell, EU Food Policy Advisor for Food & Water Europe. “The whole concept of offsetting is flawed; it even starts from the wrong place by seeking to find a way to make construction projects easier instead of making them better. It’s not surprising such a ‘solution’ is counterproductive.” 

Mitchell added, “If flawed economic models and the bad behaviour of participants in economic systems have caused the problems we now face, we just don’t see how extending and complicating these institutions can be the solution. Based on the evidence from existing offsetting schemes, we firmly believe proper governmental oversight and regulation, coupled with robust enforcement and meaningful sanctions for violations, are the only real way to protect our common natural heritage from those who seek to profit from it. We urge the Zoo to join us in seeking real environmental protection. Pulling out of this conference would be a good start.”

Read the official letter here.

Contact:

Food & Water Europe – Eve Mitchel, +44 (0)1381 610 740 or +44 (0)7962 437 [email protected]

Albuquerque Memorial Calls For Statewide and National Labeling of GMOs

Categories

Food

Albuquerque, New Mexico — This week, City Councilman Isaac Benton, District 2, and co-sponsor Diane Gibson, District 7, introduced a memorial in the Albuquerque City Council that would support labeling of genetically engineered foods (GMOs) on a statewide and national level. The memorial was drafted with the support of the national consumer advocacy group Food & Water Watch and is strongly backed by a diverse coalition of over 50 organizations and businesses in New Mexico including the La Montanita Food Coop, Dragon Farm, ProgressnowNM and Marchers Against Monsanto.

If passed, Albuquerque will join the city of Santa Fe in supporting giving people more transparency about whether or not their food contains GMOs. Since most processed foods contain some derivative of GMO corn, soybean or cotton, the city of Albuquerque would support labeling under this memorial.

“Labeling will give us the data we need to draw solid conclusions about GE foods, and it will give consumers the ability to make fully informed decisions about what we are eating and feeding our families,” said memorial sponsor Benton. “Right now, the companies that stand to profit from genetic engineering are making those decisions for us.”

GMOs are plants altered in a laboratory with foreign genetic material to create novel genetic combinations and exhibit traits that do not occur in nature. Although health risks associated with eating GMOs are not fully understood, these altered foods have become pervasive within our food system since they first became available in 1996. Companies submit their own safety testing data and independent research is limited because biotechnology companies prohibit cultivation for research purposes.

“It’s our right as citizens to know what is in our food,” said memorial co-sponsor Gibson. “In a democracy, corporations should not have special privileges that make it difficult for the average consumer to have transparency in what they consume. Labeling will give us the data we need to draw solid conclusions about GMO foods, and it will give consumers the ability to make fully informed decisions about what we are eating and feeding our families.”

Labeling GMOs is not a novel idea. Citizen-led campaigns have been successful getting legislation introduced in more than 20 states and ballot initiatives in California and Washington were narrowly defeated by multi-million-dollar campaigns waged by big food corporations. For years, polls have shown that the majority of Americans want genetically engineered foods labeled, just as it is in more than 60 other countries including the entire European Union, China, Japan and Russia.

“The impact of genetically engineered foods goes beyond consumer health. It also threatens the livelihood of farmers that grow non-GMO crops since GMO seed and the GMO-related pesticides can contaminate neighboring fields,” said Eleanor Bravo, Southwest Organizer for Food & Water Watch. “Consumers should be able to decide for themselves if genetically engineered foods should be fed to their families.”

The memorial will be heard in the Finance & Government Operations Committee on April 28. Once it passes this committee, it will head to the full City Council for a vote in May. The memorial can be viewed here: http://fwwat.ch/Q5nToN

Contact: Eleanor Bravo, ebravo(at)fwwatch(dot)org, 505-633-7366

Spate of New Research on Fracking Shows We (still) Know Very Little About its Impacts

Categories

Water

Brussels – Recent research results on the impacts of fracking show that the large-scale exploitation of shale gas and other unconventional fossil fuels has been allowed to move ahead without properly monitoring its impacts. Researchers – regardless of their discipline –  who want to study the impacts of fracking on the climate, water and air quality or public health are confronted with the reality that no systematic data-gathering has occurred where fracking is allowed to proceed. Scientists whose work was published in journals like Marine and Petroleum Geology, Climatic Change, The Lancet and The Medical Journal of Australia all come to similar conclusions, namely that publicly available data are scarce to non-existent. This lack of data allows the fossil fuel industry to maintain their speaking point of ‘no data, no problem’ and ‘no reported cases of groundwater contamination due to fracking’. For countries where fracking is allowed to proceed – despite the growing body of evidence of the negative impacts -, Food & Water Europe has long insisted that authorities need to establish strategic monitoring programmes to allow for the early identification of negative impacts on air, water and public health.

“The lack of publicly available data about the impacts of fracking from the US and the complete absence of a strategic monitoring capability in EU Member States for the fracking industry exposes European citizens and their environment to a broad range of risks”. said Food & Water Europe policy officer Geert De Cock. “The precautionary principle should compel the EU and its Member States to impose an immediate moratorium on fracking and unconventional fossil fuels”.

In January 2014, the European Commission launched a non-binding recommendation “minimum principles for the exploration and production of hydrocarbons (such as shale gas) using high volume hydraulic fracturing”. These minimum principles also emphasize the importance baseline data, continuous monitoring and transparency. Unfortunately, the European Commission’s recommendation puts the responsibility for monitoring the impacts of fracking mainly with the operator and shies away from obliging Member States to organise their own, frequent and unaccounted visits of the – typically, very numerous – well pads for unconventional oil and gas drilling. The recommendation also fails to outline credible sanctions for operators that fail to comply with these recommendations. Last but not least, it remains unclear how the European Commission will enforce this non-binding recommendation on recalcitrant Member States.

Contact: Geert Decock tel. +32 (0)2 893 10 45, mobile +32 (0)484 629.491, gdecock(at)fweurope.org