Greenpeace UK blogs

Nestle try to censor our advert, get it pulled from Youtube

christian — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:31:56 +0000

Oops! Pulled from youtube after a 'copyright' complaint from Nestle.

Update: Want to put your own copy of our video on your favourite video sharing site? Download the file now and be our guest! The more copies out there, the more interesting it will be for Nestle.

Dear Nestle's PR department,

Hey! How are you doing? I know that when we highlight the damaging effect your business is having on the Indonesian rainforests, it must be a bit annoying. I hope you understand that we're only trying to get your attention because using unsustainable palm oil in your products is such a very bad thing. You see, we just can't afford to let the Indonesian rainforests go up in smoke to provide land for palm oil plantations.

When you told us that you cared about the problem just as much as us, sure, we had a few reservations.

For one thing, although you said that you'd no longer buy direct from Sinar Mas - the suppliers of unsustainable palm oil from deforested areas of Indonesian rainforest - you made no such promises about buying from people like Cargill who buy palm oil from the same company. Really, if you're buying the same stuff, but via an intermediary, and you're not able to rule out supplies from APP, that’s not enough progress is it?

I started to wonder if you really cared about this issue in the way that you claim to.

But I guess what made me really wonder about whether you really cared was when you had our video pulled off youtube, citing ‘copyright infringement'. Now, I'm not a lawyer, but I reckon that maybe the terms ‘fair use' and ‘parody' might be relevant here.

Hmm, actually now that I think about it for a moment, I don't think you really care about copyright at all. I think you just wanted to stop people seeing the video! That's pretty lame. Seriously, censorship is just so... last century.

I might also point out that we've already been flooded with offers to host the video elsewhere, and that your move has generated even more interest in the issue on the blogosphere and on twitter.

To me, trying to censor our criticism doesn't seem like such a smart PR move. But then, what do I know!

Anyway, hope you're all well!

All the best,

Christian
GPUK Web Team

Watch the ad here: (We stuck it on Vimeo)

Quick response from Nestle, but not much to report

jamie — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:57:32 +0000

You have to hand it to Nestle - they're quick off the mark when it comes to launching a PR offensive, and with orang-utans hanging around (and sometimes off) their premises around the UK and Europe, they've released a statement saying they're dropping contracts with one of the worst palm oil suppliers, Sinar Mas. However, there's a lot they're not talking about and would probably prefer not to talk about.

Where, for instance, is their commitment to cutting out Sinar Mas completely from their supply chain? They may now be cancelling direct contracts with forest trasher Sinar Mas, but SM palm oil will still end up in Nestle factories. Nestle also buys palm oil from third party suppliers like Cargill, and Sinar Mas palm oil still flows through their pipes. Until Nestle can guarantee that none of its other suppliers are buying from Sinar Mas, we're still on.

And there's no mention of their dealings with Asia Pulp and Paper (APP), one Sinar Mas' many subsidiaries. Their pulp and paper for instance, which is used in things like packaging, is also grown in areas of destroyed rainforest, and Nestle have been less than forthcoming about their relationship with APP. Categorical denials of any dealings with APP have suddenly today been replaced with a commitment to an investigation of their supply chain.

So, full marks for being quick off the PR block, but very few points for effort. In the meantime, enjoy our own Kit Kat advert and write to Nestle's CEO to demand a better response. And follow the fun we're having on Twitter.

100 year old spiny dogfish with your chips, anyone?

Willie — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:01:01 +0000

Spiny dogfish - renamed rock salmon for the fish and chip trade. Image © Creative Commons

In the UK fish and chips is an institution. We have other institutions too, of course, like the Royal family, and in Britain if you make it to your 100th birthday, the momentous occasion is marked by getting a telegram from the Queen.

But how would you feel if the fish in your fish and chips was eligible for such a telegram?

Because, it just might be.

No, I’m not talking about long-frozen fish fillets, but rather exploiting slow-growing, long-living species of fish, which frankly, can’t take it.

One such fish, which has been a regular feature of UK chip shops, is the spiny dogfish. That's a rather unpalatable name, so it was rebranded as 'rock salmon'. Spiny dogfish are actually small sharks, just a few feet in length, and they are one of the species up for discussion at the CITES meeting currently underway in Doha. Bluefin, elephants and polar bears may get the headlines, and spiny dogfish may even be overshadowed by their bigger shark cousins at this meeting, but they deserve a bit of our attention.

Globally shark populations are in dire trouble. An estimated 90% of big fish species have been fished out of our oceans in the past few decades and the sharks (and skates and rays) are more susceptible than most. They grow slowly, mature late, and have few babies. And yes, individual spiny dogfish have been known to live as long as 100 years! In short, they are very easy to overfish. And guess what? That’s exactly what we have done.

Spiny dogfish were once the most common shark on earth, but their numbers have crashed by a whopping 95%. As well as being fished for their meat, and their fins, they have also been turned into liver oil, fertiliser and pet food. They are fished around the world, in the US, Canada, Chile, Europe, and New Zealand… but mostly they are eaten in Europe. The Continental alarm bells have already been rung for spiny dogfish, and in for 2010 the EU fishing quota for the species has been slashed by 90% accordingly (the remaining 10% being a quota for bycatch). But on internationally-traded sp`ecies, there needs to be effective international control too which is why the EU and Palau want to have the species listed on CITES.

Increased protection for this species is urgently needed, and the governments at CITES now have a collective responsibility to do that.

In the meantime, do avoid having the rock salmon.

Fishy focus at CITES meeting in Doha

Willie — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:44:58 +0000

The CITES meeting is now well underway in Doha, Qatar. Greenpeace is there, as are many other NGOs, and it’s clear that there is a very fishy focus for this meeting. As well as proposals to protect sharks and corals, Atlantic bluefin is the species on everyone’s mind. For a meeting concerned with the international trade in endangered species, it’s amazing how much of it could boil down to simple horse-trading.

This meeting, of course, is the chance to get an international trade ban on Atlantic bluefin, a measure that should protect the species from imminent commercial extinction.

Make no mistake though. This is not a ‘done deal’. It’s not just conservation-minded folks assembled in Doha for two weeks and there are seriously-resourced efforts to oppose the listing of fish species generally, and bluefin tuna in particular. Just to put that in context, the Japanese delegation at this meeting is rumoured to be ten times bigger than it normally is. They, clearly, are on a mission. And that mission is evident already, they are trying to undermine the bluefin proposal at every opportunity: scaremongering lobbying of developing nations; proposing a ‘compromise’ of Appendix II listing (which is pretty much pointless), and; some angst about the impending end of sushi and Japanese culture as we know it.

There’s a huge irony staring Japan in the face of course, if bluefin truly is a fish you want to continue to be able to eat, why would you fish it to extinction?

The meeting in Doha runs until 25th March, and it could well be close to the end that we know whether the campaign to achieve an international trade ban on Atlantic bluefin has been successful. In the meantime we have seen a number of countries nailing their colours to the mast. The main fishing nations, US and EU support a trade ban, as do the proposers Monaco, and Norway (much to Japan’s displeasure). Lined up in opposition are Japan, China, Korea, Canada and Australia. As with many of these international meetings though, there is frantic lobbying underway, and equally-frantic tallying of numbers happening on an hourly basis by both sides. So far, not all the party countries have turned up. When it comes down to voting, who is ‘in the room’ can make a crucial difference.

Given that it’s the survival of species that’s at stake – there truly is all to play for.

We’ll keep you up to date with the news from Doha, and if you want to check out the blogs from journalist Charles Clover and others at the meeting – then keep an eye out here.

Click here to read Greenpeace's While Stocks Last CITES briefing on the key marine species proposals.

Nestlé and palm oil: the chain of destruction

jamie — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 08:01:09 +0000

Nestle, the makers of Kit Kat, are using palm oil from areas of destroyed rainforest, despite being aware that one of their suppliers, Sinar Mas, has a track record of appalling environmental and social practices.

The chain of destruction stretches right around the world, from the forests of Indonesia to the shops and supermarkets of Europe. Watch the animation to find out just where the ingredients for your favourite chocolate bars like Kit Kat come from.

Kit Kat: give the orang-utan a break

jamie — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 07:48:24 +0000

Email Nestlé's CEO Paul Bulcke to demand they stop using palm oil from trashed rainforests

We all like a break, but the orang-utans of Indonesia don't seem to be able to get one. We have new evidence which shows that Nestlé - the makers of Kit Kat - are using palm oil produced in areas where the orang-utans' rainforests once grew. Even worse, the company doesn't seem to care.

So the Greenpeace orang-utans have been despatched to Nestlé head offices in Croydon to let employees know the environmental crimes their company is implicated in, and begin an international campaign to have Nestlé give us all a break.

As we've noted many times before, Indonesian forests are being torn down to grow palm oil which is the vegetable fat of choice for companies worldwide, including Nestlé. But while many companies such as Unilever and Kraft are making efforts to disassociate themselves from the worst practices of the palm oil industry, Nestlé has done diddly squat.

By lining the route from East Croydon train station to their office with posters, leaflets and billboard adverts - not to mention orang-utans hanging off the side of the building - we hope to start raising questions within the building about the kind of companies Nestlé is doing business with. And we're asking them to have a break at 11am this morning to find out what else we have planned. Join us back here at 11am for a quick break too.

The palm oil Nestlé uses in products like Kit Kat is sourced from what used to be rainforest in Indonesia, forest which is being destroyed faster than anywhere else on the planet. One of Nestlé's suppliers, the giant Sinar Mas group, is responsible for a large part of this arboreal carnage and has a track record of appalling environmental and social practices, not only on its palm oil plantations but also, through its subsidiary APP, its pulp and paper ones. Just take a look at these photos for a small glimpse of what Sinar Mas companies are up to.

The evidence collected in our report, Caught Red Handed, shows how Sinar Mas is not only clearing forests but destroying carbon-rich peatlands. Burning and draining these peatlands releases vast amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, helping to make Indonesia the third largest greenhouse gas emitter in the world.

Meanwhile, the palm oil industry often comes into conflict with local communities over land rights and resources, and the already endangered orang-utans are being pushed closer to extinction. With the forests destroyed, they're left without their natural sources of food and so are forced to venture into the plantations to eat young palms, where they can be seen as pests.

If you've been following Greenpeace for a while, you'll know we've been working to halt the devastation in Indonesia for some time, and two years ago our orang-utans were out in force outside Unilever's offices. As a result of our work, Unilever has recently dropped Sinar Mas as a supplier and other companies like Kraft have done the same.

Yet despite Nestle's claims that it expects its own suppliers to uphold high green standards (as detailed in their Supplier's Code), the Kit Kat makers still continue to do business with Sinar Mas. With other companies not willing to be tarnished by the devastation Sinar Mas is creating, this leaves Nestlé - like the orang-utans - out on a limb.

The recent Fairtrade certification for some of its Kit Kat range shows Nestlé is keen to point to its ethical credentials, but the benefit brought by the Fairtrade ingredients is undermined by the palm oil loaded with wilful deforestation.

It's time Nestlé took a break from turning a blind eye to what its suppliers are up to.

Tar sands is the dirtiest oil there is - Are you investing in it?

christian — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:53:58 +0000

You probably won't be too shocked to hear that BP
and Shell are developing even dirtier ways to profit from oil extraction.

What you might not know is that our pension money is being invested in the companies that are developing 'tar sands' - the dirtiest oil available. But that's the surprising heads-up from top ethical investment campaigners FairPensions.

Getting oil from tar sands is staggeringly stupid for many different reasons. Extracting the oil requires massive environmental disruption. Forests are clear-cut, the landscape is strip-mined, watercourses and wildlife are poisoned, indigenous peoples are displaced.

On top of that, producing tar sands oil means up to three times the carbon emissions of normal oil extraction. BP and Shell's tar sands investments will accelerate and intensify changes in our climate that threaten us all.

Because of lax ethical investment criteria, many pension funds are investing our money into BP and Shell. In the next month both BP and Shell have their Annual General Meetings. It's time to kick up a fuss.

Working with Fairpensions, we want pension fund managers to vote for a shareholders resolution which challenges BP and Shell over their tar sands investments.

You can tell your pension provider to support the resolution. You'll need to know who your pensions provider is, then just click here to be taken to the Fairpensions website.

They'll help you contact your pension fund manager and ask them to support the resolution.If you don't have a pension, you can take action by emailing BP and Shell's largest shareholders.

Don't let BP and Shell act with impunity. It's bad for Alberta, bad for the planet, and bad for those of us who like our money to be invested ethically.

Dirty Oil: a new film about tar sands from the Co-op

christian — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:41:13 +0000

Before and after - from boreal forest to strip mining, that's tar sands. © Jiri Rezac / WWF-UK

Oil is rubbish. I mean, obviously it's been great - you know, they way that it underpins what we call 'advanced industrial civilisation' - that we can make it into petrol, plastic, pharmaceuticals, fertiliser. That's obviously brilliant, because in my opinion all that stuff has (by and large) been great. But now that we've got better, cleaner and smarter ways to power our cities, run our cars and heat our homes forgive me if I find the black stuff a bit... last century.

It's getting harder to find the stuff, for one thing. These days big oil companies like BP and Shell have to reassure their investors about their continued ability to find new oil fields to drill, rather than just sticking a pipe into the ground and watching money magically pour out of it, which is, I understand, what used to happen.

Experts argue over when, exactly, the global supply of oil will peak, leaving that entire 'advanced industrial civilisation' thing looking like a pretty stupid move. And of course, the main reason that oil is rubbish is that burning it on a massive scale is a big part of why we're now causing our climate to behave in new, unusual and dangerous ways.

Our burning desire to find new sources of oil and the accelerating carbon emissions of our global society come together in one place - the Canadian tar sands. The tar sands are the largest industrial project on the planet today - a massive industrial wasteland of opencast mines, pipes and refineries that has been constructed across the Albertan wilderness. It's all there to get low-grade oil out of the ground, but this oil comes at a horrific cost in terms of destroyed forests, poisoned rivers and lakes, and increased carbon emissions.

If you want to know more - and we will be talking about tar sands a lot over the coming months - a new film called Dirty Oil dramatically explores the battle between industry, government, local communities and environmentalists over the development of the tar sands. Through the eyes of scientists, big oil officials, politicians, doctors, environmentalists and aboriginal citizens, the film examines the damage caused by our ongoing quest for new sources of oil.

The film opens next week - check it out.

Army chief sees no need to replace Trident

louise — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 13:54:46 +0000

Trident: replacement costs are spiralling out of control

Former chief of defence staff, Lord Guthrie, said last night that the UK should consider cutting plans to replace the Trident nuclear missile system and build the UK’s largest ever aircraft carriers.

In a speech at the centre-right thinktank the Centre for Policy Studies, he said there was a gaping hole at the heart of Britain's military budget which was "too big to massage, to trim, to rely on efficiency savings and prayer". Britain, he added, faced a "moment of decision" in shaping a new defence strategy.

He is just one of a growing number of senior military figures, including General Sir Richard Dannatt, who are warning against spending vast sums on new weapons systems that are "irrelevant" to modern warfare.

Yet the Labour and Tory parties are still refusing to include the £97 billion cost of replacing Trident in the upcoming Strategic Defence Review. Labour have also indicated they want to exclude the £31bn supercarrier as well. Is this precisely because they know there is little support for it among senior military experts, who would rather spend the money on equipment that the services actually need.

The purpose of the SDR is (or should be) to identify the real threats this country faces and how best to counter them. At a time when funds are extremely tight and all three services face serious staff cutbacks, wasting tens of billions on a strategically unnecessary new nuclear missile system is totally irresponsible.

That's why we are calling on all political parties to commit to a full defence and security review after the election. One that fully reviews the military case for new nuclear weapons and the supercarriers, and addresses the real emerging threats of climate change and energy security.

Tokyo Two trial: stage two

jossc — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:57:36 +0000

Tension is rising as round two of the Tokyo Two trial starts today in Aomori, Japan, where Greenpeace activists Junichi Sato and Toru Suzuki are on trial in Japan for their role in exposing major corruption in the government funded whaling industry. This week they get to give evidence for the first time, and the whistleblower who alerted them to the embezlement scandal will also take the stand. Watch the video above for an update on the story so far...

There are still concerns over the fairness of the trial, however, as the members of the whaling crew who received the stolen whalemeat look as though they may be able to avoid giving evidence. Apparently there is no mechanism in Japan's legal system to enforce defence witnesses to attend!

It's decisions like these that caused a division of the United Nations Human Rights Council to rule recently that the Tokyo Two's human rights have been breached by the Japanese justice system. This is the first ever such ruling of its kind for Japan.

Junichi and Toru have put their freedom and rights on the line to defend whales - please pledge your support for them. Tell the Japanese government that it is whaling that should be on trial, not those who oppose it.

We will ensure that your pledge is communicated to the government of Japan as we show the strong level of support behind Junichi and Toru during their trial.

You can follow updates from the trial on our Facebook page, or by following the Twitter list @Greenpeace/whaletrial or #whaletrial.

Support Toru and Junichi: sign our petition »

Links for 2009-11-17 [del.icio.us]

Wed, 18 Nov 2009 00:00:00 PST

The changing face of China's coal industry
China's coal industry is becoming more efficient - and not in a good way.

Links for 2009-11-12 [del.icio.us]

Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:00:00 PST

Environmental lobby group accused of 'eco-snobbery'
It's "the eco equivalent of political correctness gone mad” according to aviation industry figureheads Flying Matters, as 10:10 refuses to let Manchester Airport sign up to its emissions reduction campaign.

Links for 2009-11-06 [del.icio.us]

Sat, 07 Nov 2009 00:00:00 PST

FT.com / UK - Heating up
A good summary of where we're at with the barcelona climate talks in the run up to Copenhagen from the FT.

Links for 2009-11-04 [del.icio.us]

Thu, 05 Nov 2009 00:00:00 PST

Climate Rescue Weblog: “Please save our home”
An update from out campaigner Bustar at the forests defender camp in Kampar.
Mèlanie Laurent joins the Climate Defenders Camp
Tarantino's latest muse drops in to the climate defenders camp.

Links for 2009-11-02 [del.icio.us]

Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:00:00 PST

Climate Rescue Weblog: The King of the Jungle
Rob, who's been setting up the climate defenders camp in Kampar, tells the tale of swamps, big banners, and 40 degree hikes through the jungle.
Greenpeace International: Dam - it's even harder than it looks!
A detailed guide to how to go about damming an Indonesian peat-draining canal, in case you were wondering how to go about it...
Greenepace International: Kampar Camp Construction
A detailed guide to building your own climate defenders camp in the heart of the Indonesian rainforest.

Links for 2009-10-28 [del.icio.us]

Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:00:00 PDT

When mummy is an activist - Times Online
Emma tells the Times what it's like balancing climbing up parliament with raising twins.

Links for 2009-10-27 [del.icio.us]

Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:00:00 PDT

Climate Rescue Weblog: Climate Defenders Camp
Our climate defenders camp is set up in Kampar - from Greenpeace International.
Climate Defenders Camp
Some background information about the climate defenders camp from Greenpeace International.