[News] from [guardian.co.uk]
[Business > BP]
Money spent on tar sands projects could decarbonise western economies
> Production from tar sands will rise to 4m barrels a day by 2025
> Shareholders seek review of environmental impact of tar sands
Terry Macalister
guardian.co.uk, Monday 15 March 2010 Article history
The £250bn cost of developing Canada's controversial tar sands between now and 2025 could be used to decarbonise the western economy by funding ambitious solar power schemes in the Sahara or a European wide shift to electric vehicles, according to a new report released today.
The same amount of investment would also help the world to hit half of the Millenium Development Goals in the 50 least-developed countries, says the research from The Co-operative and conservation group, WWF, which is released to coincide with a new film, Dirty Oil, being premiered in 25 cinemas around the UK today. It is a hard-hitting documentary narrated by Canadian actor, Neve Campbell.
The moves are all part of a concerted effort to put shareholder and public pressure on BP and Shell which are at the forefront of extracting oil from the carbon-intensive tar sands of Alberta.
The Co-op claims its task has gained urgency by BP unveiling plans last week to speed up new tar sands projects through a tie-up with Devon Energy.
"The sums of money being invested in tar sands developments are enormous and difficult for the average person to grasp," says Paul Monaghan, head of social goals at the Co-op.
"This report (The Opportunity of the Tar Sands) puts things into perspective and demonstrates not only the scale of the problem, which could take us to the brink of runaway climate change, but also the opportunity being lost. It is literally a matter of life and death that these enormous oil titans are re-steered to much more sustainable paths," he adds.
The production of tar sands is estimated by critics to emit three times more greenhouse gases than conventional oil production. It is estimated that tar sands production will increase from its 1.3m barrels a day to at least 4m barrels by 2025.
A resolution has been put down by the Co-op and other shareholders to be taken at the BP annual general meeting next month alongside a similar one for Shell asking for a review of the economics and environmental impact of tar sands.
The Co-op and WWF say the combined cost of all tar sands – £250bn – could be used for clean power projects such as the Desertec scheme linking solar plants in North Africa to a "supergrid" which could produce 15% of Europe's electricity by 2050.
[News > Science > Animal research]
Animal rights activist using FOI laws to target universities
Luke Steele, spokesman for Stop Animal Experiments at Bradford is forcing institutions to reveal vivisection details
David Adam
The Guardian, Monday 15 March 2010 Article history
A convicted animal rights activist is using freedom of information laws to force universities to reveal details of their animal experiments, raising fears that scientists involved could suffer renewed intimidation.
The requests for information, which have been sent to every university in Britain, ask for details of facilities and laboratories licensed for such experiments, as well as breeding centres and a list of different animals used, by species.
The requests were sent by Luke Steele, an animal rights activist based in Yorkshire. He was last year convicted of conspiracy to interfere with a contractual relationship, so as to harm an animal research organisation, after being arrested near an isolated Lincolnshire farm that supplies rabbits for research.
Several universities have already replied to the FOI requests. Steele said the information gathered would be used to publicise research and target demonstrations, some of which are planned for next month.
"We're putting the FOIs in just to find out what is happening with vivisection at the universities. If they've got nothing to hide, then it's not a problem for them to put the information out there," he said.
Groups promoting next month's planned protests against university research, such as Stop Animal Experiments at Bradford, for which Steele acts as spokesman, encourage people to carry out "filming inside these laboratories". Steele said he did not want people to break the law, and that protestors could find imaginative ways to get inside. "Obviously we can't control what everybody does," he said. The requests from Steele have triggered concern among some university researchers. "The way these questions are phrased, I don't think this is an exercise in openness," said Syed Khawar Abbas, veterinary officer at the University of Leeds. "This information can be used for intimidation. In the wrong hands, this information can cause problems for our scientists."
An information officer at a different university, who did not want to be identified, said: "This has caused a great deal of concern among our staff who are worried about receiving threats or worse. Most scientists faced with FOI requests are happy to put stuff into the open and welcome the scrutiny, but in this case they are having to second guess the motives of people who might use this information."
Some of the information requested by Steele is already published, in summaries of Home Office licenses and academic papers. Other details, such as specific laboratory locations, can be refused under FOI exemptions.
One university scientist said: "The most likely motivation here is that they want to catch somebody out. If they can find some bad wording in minutes from a meeting, then they can use that to claim we are up to no good."
[Business > BP]
Money spent on tar sands projects could decarbonise western economies
> Production from tar sands will rise to 4m barrels a day by 2025
> Shareholders seek review of environmental impact of tar sands
Terry Macalister
guardian.co.uk, Monday 15 March 2010 Article history
The £250bn cost of developing Canada's controversial tar sands between now and 2025 could be used to decarbonise the western economy by funding ambitious solar power schemes in the Sahara or a European wide shift to electric vehicles, according to a new report released today.
The same amount of investment would also help the world to hit half of the Millenium Development Goals in the 50 least-developed countries, says the research from The Co-operative and conservation group, WWF, which is released to coincide with a new film, Dirty Oil, being premiered in 25 cinemas around the UK today. It is a hard-hitting documentary narrated by Canadian actor, Neve Campbell.
The moves are all part of a concerted effort to put shareholder and public pressure on BP and Shell which are at the forefront of extracting oil from the carbon-intensive tar sands of Alberta.
The Co-op claims its task has gained urgency by BP unveiling plans last week to speed up new tar sands projects through a tie-up with Devon Energy.
"The sums of money being invested in tar sands developments are enormous and difficult for the average person to grasp," says Paul Monaghan, head of social goals at the Co-op.
"This report (The Opportunity of the Tar Sands) puts things into perspective and demonstrates not only the scale of the problem, which could take us to the brink of runaway climate change, but also the opportunity being lost. It is literally a matter of life and death that these enormous oil titans are re-steered to much more sustainable paths," he adds.
The production of tar sands is estimated by critics to emit three times more greenhouse gases than conventional oil production. It is estimated that tar sands production will increase from its 1.3m barrels a day to at least 4m barrels by 2025.
A resolution has been put down by the Co-op and other shareholders to be taken at the BP annual general meeting next month alongside a similar one for Shell asking for a review of the economics and environmental impact of tar sands.
The Co-op and WWF say the combined cost of all tar sands – £250bn – could be used for clean power projects such as the Desertec scheme linking solar plants in North Africa to a "supergrid" which could produce 15% of Europe's electricity by 2050.
[News > Science > Animal research]
Animal rights activist using FOI laws to target universities
Luke Steele, spokesman for Stop Animal Experiments at Bradford is forcing institutions to reveal vivisection details
David Adam
The Guardian, Monday 15 March 2010 Article history
A convicted animal rights activist is using freedom of information laws to force universities to reveal details of their animal experiments, raising fears that scientists involved could suffer renewed intimidation.
The requests for information, which have been sent to every university in Britain, ask for details of facilities and laboratories licensed for such experiments, as well as breeding centres and a list of different animals used, by species.
The requests were sent by Luke Steele, an animal rights activist based in Yorkshire. He was last year convicted of conspiracy to interfere with a contractual relationship, so as to harm an animal research organisation, after being arrested near an isolated Lincolnshire farm that supplies rabbits for research.
Several universities have already replied to the FOI requests. Steele said the information gathered would be used to publicise research and target demonstrations, some of which are planned for next month.
"We're putting the FOIs in just to find out what is happening with vivisection at the universities. If they've got nothing to hide, then it's not a problem for them to put the information out there," he said.
Groups promoting next month's planned protests against university research, such as Stop Animal Experiments at Bradford, for which Steele acts as spokesman, encourage people to carry out "filming inside these laboratories". Steele said he did not want people to break the law, and that protestors could find imaginative ways to get inside. "Obviously we can't control what everybody does," he said. The requests from Steele have triggered concern among some university researchers. "The way these questions are phrased, I don't think this is an exercise in openness," said Syed Khawar Abbas, veterinary officer at the University of Leeds. "This information can be used for intimidation. In the wrong hands, this information can cause problems for our scientists."
An information officer at a different university, who did not want to be identified, said: "This has caused a great deal of concern among our staff who are worried about receiving threats or worse. Most scientists faced with FOI requests are happy to put stuff into the open and welcome the scrutiny, but in this case they are having to second guess the motives of people who might use this information."
Some of the information requested by Steele is already published, in summaries of Home Office licenses and academic papers. Other details, such as specific laboratory locations, can be refused under FOI exemptions.
One university scientist said: "The most likely motivation here is that they want to catch somebody out. If they can find some bad wording in minutes from a meeting, then they can use that to claim we are up to no good."