REVOLVE #14 - WINTER 2014/15

N°14 | WINTER 2014/15

€ 8 / £ 6,5

Energy Union 10 | Pipelines 18 | Fracking 26

Contributors Revolve Magazine:

JANE SMART (Editorial: “We Need to Invest in Nature”, p. 6) is Global Director of IUCN’s Biodiversity Conservation Group and Director of IUCN’s Global Species Program.

DIEDERIK PEEREBOOM (“Energy Union”, p.10) is leading Burson-Marsteller’s Energy Practice in the EMEA region. Previously he worked as a diplomat, a political advisor in the European Parliament and EU affairs manager for the oil and gas industry.

MÁXIMO MICCINILLI (“Energy Union”, p.10) is Manager at Burson-Marsteller’s Energy Team.

He supports companies and governments on PA/PR campaigns linked to renewables, gas, energy efficiency and sustainability.

ALEXANDER MÜLLER (“Pipelines”, p.18) was a policy analyst at the International Strategic Research Organization (USAK) in Ankara and holds a Master’s Degree in European Politics and International Relations from Maastricht University.

STEVE GILLMAN (“Fracking”, p.26) is Communications Manager at Revolve Media. He has worked as an environmental campaigner, journalist, chef and farmer – all of which have given him an insight into a range of global climate issues.

MARCELLO CAPPELLAZZI (Cover: “Seeds”, p.52) is Researcher at Revolve Media and has contributed to Revolve Magazine since 2013. His features have focused on agriculture and development in Italy, Tunisia, Israel and India.

LORENZO CORREA LLOREDA (“Water Management”, p.62) is the Vice President of the Catalan Association of Friends of Water. He works at the Catalonia Water Agency within the Institutional Relations Department of the Government of Catalonia.

Water Reports:

ANDY FIELD (“Lagoon”, p.74) is Head of Communications at Tidal Lagoon Power since 2013.

He previously led communications programs at Atlantis Resources and Tidal Energy and has worked on a wide range of renewable energy projects over the past decade.

FLORENCE QUIST (“Run with Revolve”, p.80) is co-founder and president of FGAR that aims to improve education for girls in Togo.

revolve.media Visit our new website and discover much more than the magazine!

Country Reports:

Events: Revolve partners with energy and water events around the world to highlight the latest technologies and projects leading the energy transition Water: A unique digital portal connecting water and energy with exclusive interviews, photo essays, regional features, the latest news and expert insights

Industry Reports:

Reports: Special industry publications for targeted audiences and classy country reports with unique views into developments driving regional hubs

Exhibits: Large photo exhibitions showing the different dimensions of sustainability Run with Revolve: An inspiring Revolve initiative to run in races around the world to raise funds for education projects that show real societal impacts Campaigns: Join the #EnergyPulse campaign and tell us what you do to be energy efficient, what does sustainable energy mean to you, and get published in Revolve Magazine!

SUBSCRIBE: Start every season with Revolve Magazine!

For only 50€ (international shipping included) and get our special reports and our new Visualizing Energy bags for FREE!

3

“The agenda of biodiversity conservation in the long term is the agenda of environmentalism sustainability itself.”

CONTRIBUTORS Marcello Cappellazzi Lorenzo Correa Lloreda Andy Field Steve Gillman Maximo Miccinilli Alexander Muller Diederik Peereboom Florence Quist Jane Smart

Jeffrey Sachs, Common Wealth, Economics for a Crowded Planet, 2008

EUROPE 10 | Diederick Peereboom and

PHOTOGRAPHERS Arnaud Abadie John C. Abbott Giovanni Bearzi Michel Candel Sarah Craig Tamas Deli John Dell Angelo Jose Martin Espartosa Miguel Angel Garcia Richard Griffiths James Harding Andreas Hartl Juan Rita Larrucea John Linnell Tiit Maran Giorgio Quattrone Pres Panayotov Pierre Rasmont Antonio Romano Brian Roy Rosen Chris van Swaay David Martinez Vicente Henk Wallays David Weller Roy Woodward COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER

10

Massimo Miccinilli from BursonMarstellar give an overview of Europe’s emerging Energy Union.

GEOPOLITICS 18 | Alexander Müller examines the different forces at play in the new great pipeline game between Russia and Europe.

26

ENERGY 26 | In the quest for cheaper sources of energy, fracking is going full speed ahead in the United States to the environment’s demise.

VIEWS 35 | A special photo essay based on the 35

Steve Gillman COMMUNICATIONS ASSISTANT

IUCN Red List of Threatened Species around Europe.

DEVELOPMENT

Alexander Muller GRAPHIC DESIGN

52 | Marcello Cappellazzi explains

Filipa Rosa

how the production, packaging and patenting of seeds are at the core of the battle for sustainable agriculture.

RESEARCHER | COORDINATOR Marcello Cappellazzi REGIONAL MANAGER | INDIA-ASIA Rajnish Ahuja

52

FOUNDER AND CEO

68 | Andy Field describes how the

Stuart Reigeluth

Revolve Media is a limited liability partnership (LLP) registered in Belgium (BE 0463.843.607) at Rue d’Arlon 63-67, 1040 Brussels.

Revolve Magazine (ISSN 2033-2912) is registered in Belgium (BE 0828.676.740) as a subsidiary fully-owned by Revolve Media.

Printed with vegetable-based ink on chlorinefree paper, Revolve uses FSC approved paper (for more on how Revolve is a sustainable magazine see p.82) Visit our new website: revolve.media

INNOVATION Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon in southern Wales is at the avant-garde of marine energy projects around the world

CULTURE 68

74 | On the last day of November, every year now, a Remembrance Day for Lost Species, takes place.

Cover image: Maize seed rolls off the conveyor belt in the seed processing plant at Bidasem, where it has been visually examined and manually sifted by workers, picking out material such as damaged or spoiled seed or pieces of cob. After initial cleaning and sorting, all seed that goes through the plant passes through quality control. Bidasem is a small seed company based in the central Mexican plains region known as the Bajío. It produces approximately 10,000 bags of maize seed a year, each holding 22.5kg, as well as producing wheat and oat seed and marketing seed of other crops. Source: X. Fonseca / CIMMYT.

5

N°14 | WINTER 2014/15

Jane Smart. Source: IISD

Special Guest Editorial

We Need to Invest in Nature Jane Smart is Global Director of IUCN’s Biodiversity Conservation Group and Director of IUCN’s Global Species Program. The Biodiversity Conservation Group comprises the Global Species Program, Global Protected Areas Program, World Heritage Program, as well as the Invasive Species Initiative and TRAFFIC.

Biodiversity is the planet’s life support system and key to addressing some of the world’s greatest challenges such as climate change, sustainable development and food security, and conserving biodiversity has been central to the mission of IUCN since its creation in 1948.

For more than 50 years, IUCN has compiled the world’s most comprehensive information source on the global conservation status of animal, fungi and plant species and their links to livelihoods: the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™. The IUCN Red List is much more than a list of species and their status – it is a powerful tool to inform and guide conservation action for biodiversity conservation and the policy change that is fundamental for protecting the natural resources we need to survive.

The European Red List of Threatened Species was established in 2006 thanks to funding from the European Commission. It is a

review of the conservation status of around 10,000 European species, identifying those species that are threatened with extinction at the European level. It has developed into a powerful tool to inform policy decisions on biodiversity conservation and the protection of Europe’s natural resources. It is also an instrument for policy-makers to measure progress towards achieving the targets set out in the EU Biodiversity Strategy, which aims at halting the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services by 2020.

The European Union has some of the world’s highest environmental standards, and its environmental policies help to protect Europe’s natural capital, green the economy, and protect the well-being of its citizens.

The EU Birds and Habitats Directives are the cornerstones of the nature legislation, ensuring both the physical protection of individual specimens across the 28 EU countries and the conservation of core breeding and resting sites for certain particularly rare and

About IUCN The International Union for Conservation of Nature is the world’s oldest and largest global environmental organization, founded in 1948. It is a leading authority on the environment and sustainable development with more than 1,200 member organizations, including 200+ government and 900+ non-government organizations, and almost 11,000 voluntary scientists and experts working in some 160 countries.

6

threatened species under the EU’s Natura 2000 network of protected areas.

Although these Directives have clearly delivered certain conservation successes in Europe, for instance they have helped bird and some large carnivore species to recover in Europe, they have not been fully implemented in all Member States, and to date we are still far from reaching the EU targets.

Instead, biodiversity loss continues at an unprecedented rate.

Currently, we are witnessing the greatest extinction crisis since dinosaurs disappeared from our planet 65 million years ago. Habitat destruction, land conversion for agriculture and development, climate change, pollution and the spread of invasive species are only some of the threats responsible for today's crisis.

Not only are these extinctions irreversible, the ramifications of such extinctions are a serious

threat to our health and wellbeing. The benefits that we gain from biodiversity go far beyond the mere provision of raw materials. Our food and energy security strongly depend on biodiversity and so does our vulnerability to natural hazards such as fires and flooding.

For example, pollinators such as bees, birds and bats affect 35% of the world’s crop production, and 87 of the most important food crops worldwide, as well as many medicines derived by plants. Plankton in oceans, seas and freshwater ecosystems produces as much as half of the world’s oxygen. And the list goes on and on.

Biodiversity conservation is not just about well-known iconic species such as pandas or tigers. Fish, for instance, may provoke little emotional reaction, but provide large parts of the global population with their daily protein.

Bees and other insects are needed for pollination. Many other species (including plants

and insects) living in and on the world’s soils provide essential biological functions for soil management and decomposition. A thorough assessment of the status of these species is thus equally important to guide conservation action and to achieve the global and European biodiversity targets.

The European Red List includes many of these small and lesser known species. Its findings clearly show that concerted effort is required to protected Europe’s fragile biodiversity and ecosystems. Decision-makers and leaders must understand that this is not an isolated issue, but that every decision we take that affects biodiversity, also affects human lives – in Europe and around the globe.

For millennia, nature has fed us, cured us, and protected us. But today the roles have switched.

We need to feed nature, we need to cure it and protect it if we want to secure a healthy and prosperous future for our children.

Image: Ischnura hastata (Citrine Forktail) – Vulnerable. The Citrine Forktail is a highly dispersive species, presumed to have reached as far as the Azores via wind storms all the way from its native America. Source: John C. Abbott See more images of Threatened Species in VIEWS on pages 35-50

The IUCN Red List is an invaluable health check for our planet – a Barometer of Life.

7

On the south-eastern shores of the Mediterranean, Gazans cannot go more than 10 kilometers out to sea without being shot at by the Israeli Navy. Reports of Palestinian fishing boats being hit by bullets or water hoses from the Israeli ships are frequent. Young men 'fish' in the shallow waters near the shores with hand-made nets and weights that they fling out in attempts to make a catch; fish by the coast are notoriously smaller than further out - about the size of your thumb or hand at most. The Gaza City port has constant activity of fixing nets, cleaning and repairing boats, but the port is very shallow and even if the siege of Gaza were lifted large vessels could not dock here. Massive investments need to be made to deepen the port waters by removing meters of sand bed that have accumulated over the years and decades.

Why does Israel still besiege the Strip?

The constant excuse used in diplomatic circles and the international press is that the security of Israel is at stake due to the 'terrorists' governing Gaza. True, the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) currently in power would rather fight Israel than negotiate, but then again Israel has made the situation so dire that there is really no room to negotiate. So this leaves both sides entrenched further and further in their increasingly extreme positions. But the real reason for occupying the Palestinian territorial waters is that Israel is exploring and exploiting the gas aquifers under the sea bed. As the news projects images of Palestinian fishermen being shot at, the Israelis have pipes going into the gas fields under the sea...

Learn more about what is really happening around the Mediterranean, and beyond, with Revolve Water!

This digital portal offers vibrant news updates every week, insightful interviews with leading water experts, a growing network of partner associations and companies dedicated to connecting water and energy.

Other coverage includes targeted features on regions around the Mediterranean, colorful photo essays about different innovative projects, and special reports distributed at top energy and water events around the world.

Content of this special report includes: - Industrial Waste Treatment in Lebanon - Water Competition in Morocco - River Basin Management in Europe - Desalination technologies in Arabia - Istanbul: City of Water Order your copies today!

Visit: www.revolve-water.com 8

Gaza City port on the Mediterranean coast, still under siege by Israel. Source: Revolve Media

9

The Energy Union Defining its DNA

The revival of Jacques Delors’ proposal to create an Energy Union is becoming a reality in Brussels. European Commission President, Jean-Claude Juncker has done just that by establishing an “Energy Union” portfolio. This has re-launched an open and important, but cluttered debate: Is this a coordinating portfolio to meet the Europe’s 2030 targets? Are the policies for these targets not already in place? Is this portfolio redundant? The questions abound and Vice-President of the Energy Union, Maros Sefcovic, must prove his skills in balancing politics and consolidating the core feature of the European Union – sharing energy.

Writers: Diederik Peereboom & Máximo Miccinilli

10

"We need to strengthen the share of renewable energies on our continent. I want Europe's Energy Union to become the world number one in renewable energies.

This is not only a matter of a responsible climate change policy. It is, at the same time, an industrial policy imperative if we still want to have affordable energy at our disposal in the medium term." – Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission

11

as outlined by Maros Sefcovic

the 5 pillars of the Energy Union 1) security of supply 2) internal energy market 3) moderation of demand 4) decarbonization 5) technology

What will be the role of the Vice-President of the Energy Union?

Geopolitics, climate change and concerns over the European Union’s competitiveness have made energy a top political priority for the new European Commission. President Juncker made it very clear when he said “I want to reorganize Europe’s energy policy in a new Energy Union.� The idea of an Energy Union has become a trending topic in Brussels and several EU capitals. Due to a lack of detail the Energy Union has thus far received a reserved welcome. The question therefore is: What can we expect from an Energy Union in view of the EU’s energy and climate challenges?

Image (pp.10-11): Jean-Claude Juncker at the Press Conference after the election of the new European Commission. On October 22, President Juncker presented his team of commissioners to the Parliament and discussed the incoming Commission's working program with MEPs. Source: European Union 2014 EP. Image (this page): Maros Sefcovic. October 20, 2014.

Source: EPP Group/Flickr

12

The Original Two-Scenario Proposal Made by Jerzy Buzek and Jacques Delors in 2010 : Creation of European Energy Community t " TFQBSBUF USFBUZ XJUI JUT PXO JOTUSVNFOUT and rules t 0OF FOFSHZ TUSBUFHZ GPS UIF FOUJSF CMPD t $PNNPO TUSBUFHJD SFTFSWFT t " TJOHMF WPJDF UP OFHPUJPBUF XJUI FYUFSOBM suppliers Enhanced Cooperation (Article 20 TEU) t 0JM BOE HBT QVSDIBTF HSPVQT UP GBDJMJUBUF procurement from foreign suppliers t 'VSUIFS DPPQFSBUJPO JO &6 XJEF FOFSHZ networks t "NCJUJPVT FDPOPNJD JOUSVNFOUT UP mOBODF R&D projects on alternative energies

But it was the current Vice-President, Maros Sefcovic, who gave the concept more shape during his parliamentary confirmation hearing. He has outlined the five pillars of the Energy Union as: 1) security of supply, 2) an internal energy market, 3) the moderation of demand, 4) decarbonization, and 5) technology. With this he rebrands and expands the so-called energy “trilemma” (security of supply, sustainability and competitiveness), thereby resisting the temptation to mainly focus on security of supply issues, pipelines and dynamic reverse flow policies.

Clearly Mr. Sefcovic, an experienced diplomat and respected politician, has a tremendous challenge. Each of the pillars has its already well-established set of strong sectoral interests. The EU decisionmaking process will have to reconcile different and often competing interests and strike a politically acceptable and practi-

cally workable compromise on individual issues, ranging from the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) to energy efficiency.

Mr Sefcovic will probably want to leave the responsibilities for these files with the competent energy and climate, industry, consumer, and research Commissioners.

So what will be the role of the Energy Union Vice-President?

There are two areas in which Mr. Sefcovic could play the role of integrator. First of all, he could take on the role of maintaining and improving the EU’s energy system as a whole. This will require him to carefully consider the impact of policy proposals and decisions on the overall functioning of the energy system, including the impact on availability and prices for consumers and industry. Just as First Vice-President, Frans Timmermans, needs to ensure the overall quality of EU legislation, so Mr. Sefcovic needs to protect and promote

Energy Grids & Climate www.nationalgrid.com

Energy transmission infrastructure holds the key to meet Europe’s low-carbon ambitions.

the development of a truly functioning and interconnected energy system that will ensure secure, affordable and low carbon energy for the entire EU 24 hours a day 7 days a week. It is estimated that the EU needs more than €150 billion per year to modernize energy networks, grids and pipelines. Today, the EU has a plethora of agencies, programs and financial institutions which can help to further promote infrastructure to modernize our energy system, but a more centralized coordination in the European Commission could help this important process along.

Secondly, Mr. Sefcovic could coordinate and strengthen the EU’s representation in the upcoming crucial international climate change negotiations. Following Lima (COP20) and going towards Paris (COP21), the EU needs to build its position in line with the EU Energy Package 2030 adopted by the Council in late October 2014.

The pillars and targets of the Climate and Energy Package 2030 :

40% reduction of GHG emissions by 2030 compared to 1990 level

At least 27% of renewable energy used at EU level

An energy efficiency increase of at least 27%, to be reviewed by 2020

An electricity interconnection target of 15% between Member States

ETS Reform — Market Stability Reserve Mr. Sefcovic has indicated that he is confident that the package is flexible enough to increase the EU’s ambition to raise its overall 40% GHG reductions by 2030. Indeed, the European Council conclusions contain an open clause that could facilitate a review of the EU’s new targets if other countries do not come forward with similar commitments in Paris. This open clause is not only a weak guarantee to revise the overall GHG goal but

14

it could also become a Pandora’s Box, fuelling short-term political battles.

Moreover, EU governments have already started to define different energy policies, targets and trajectories for 2030 and 2050 deadlines. It is unlikely to see the 40% GHG target alone as a driver to further EU internal market integration or even gradual convergence of EU energy mixes. To the

contrary, today the three largest economies (Germany, France and the UK) pursue different energy policies and their respective positions diverge on issues such as capacity payments mechanisms, the role of indigenous energy sources, the adaptation of renewables support schemes systems and energy efficiency policies. A more united energy policy requires additional initiatives and incentives.

World Sustainable Energy Days 2015 25 - 27 February 2015 Wels/Austria

6

+

3

=

1

6 Conferences European Pellet Conference European Nearly Zero Conference Young Researchers‘ Conference Energy Efficiency Watch Conference Energy-Efficient Commercial Buildings Conference European Smart Windows Conference

3 Hands-on Events

WWW.WSED.AT

ZVR 171568947

Tradeshow B2B Meetings Site Visits

Maintaining the 28 EU Member States united behind a common position on climate change and negotiating with international partners will therefore be a delicate political and diplomatic balancing act that will require a skilful operator. With a successful Vice-President of the Energy Union, the EU could benefit from a more holistic and institutionalized energy and climate position in relation with the United States, China and the emerging economies. The recent bilateral US-China agreement setting targets for CO2 emissions by 2030 is a huge deal and puts the ball in the court of the EU, which

will want to maintain its traditional role of global leader in combating climate change.

Will this translate into a more ambitious EU GHG reduction target? Will the EU enhance its cooperation with G20 to persuade India to embrace an ambitious GHG reduction policy before Paris meeting? The Energy Union, as a coordinated policy, seems the proper platform to prepare the answers to those questions.

All of this requires a lot of diplomatic and interpersonal skill as well as a clear vision and an ability to articulate it clearly. As a

A more united energy policy requires additional initiatives and incentives Image (pp.14 and this page): Hearings of candidate commissioners: Maroš Šefčovič under scrutiny at the European Parliament. Source: European Union 2014 EP.

16

former diplomat, Mr. Sefcovic appears to be the right person for the job and his initial external engagements give reason for moderate optimism. But the size of the challenge should not be under-estimated.

After all, national Member State governments cautiously protect the right to determine their own energy mix and nothing in recent history indicates that this is likely to change. Combined with a stalled economy, a considerable amount of EU-scepticism and a promise to deliver an agenda for jobs, growth, fairness and democratic change, Mr. Sefcovic is in a delicate balancing act in which he nevertheless has to be assertive.

A combination of vision, diplomacy and a fair amount of smart regulation will be his most valued assets in trying to persuade and mobilize Member States, members of the European Parliament and a wide array of sectoral interests – the majority of which ultimately have an interest in seeing the Energy Union emerge to consolidate the internal energy market and to ensure the energy independence of Europe.

The Great Pipeline Game Entering the winter season amidst Western sanctions for its involvement in the Ukrainian crisis, Russia suspended the South Stream gas pipeline to Europe sending shivers across the continent. Eastern Europe remains over 90% dependent on Russia for gas and electricity; Europe as a whole is desperately trying to gain greater energy independence; and Russia cuts another pipe bringing gas west.

This is the new great pipeline game and Europe is scrambling to find alternatives routes to meet its growing energy demands.

Writer: Alexander M端ller

18

On November 29, 2014, gas pipelines wait at Varna port in Bulgaria to transport Russian natural gas via the postponed South Stream corridor through the Black Sea to Europe.

Source: Pres Panayotov / Shutterstock 19

A Matter of Urgency The EU’s primary motivation to invest in new pipeline projects stems from its changing perceptions of Russia as a reliable supplier. Numerous disputes between Moscow and Kiev, prominent in 2009, served as a catalyst for renewed interest in expanding the pipeline network. These clashes were primarily concerned with the volume of gas trading and pricing, as well as transit costs and debts between Russia’s Gazprom and Ukraine’s Naftogaz. Ukraine was accused of not paying its bills and siphoning-off gas intended for the European market for its own domestic use. In response, Russia halted deliveries, inevitably resulting in major gas supply disruptions throughout Europe during a harsh winter season.

Eastern EU Member States reported severe drops or even complete cut-offs in gas supplies arriving via Ukraine.

Another cause for concern is the EU’s structural composition and the individual energy dispositions of its members. The 2004 and 2007 enlargement rounds incorporated countries with specific patterns of energy demand and supply. The energy patterns of Eastern European members were heavily based on their former orientation towards Russia and the issue has not been alleviated by EU integration. Most Eastern European members still remain largely dependent on Russian natural gas.

The evolving European energy market provides a further legal basis for new pipeline projects. Demand for natural gas is growing rapidly due to its widespread application for heating, electricity generation, and industrial output. According to the EUROGAS organization, European natural gas consumption is expected to increase from 526 billion cubic meters (bcm) to 815 bcm.

84% of this gas supply will be imported.

This forecast makes Europe’s task of reducing its dependence on Russian energy all the more challenging, while increasing the need for new energy suppliers. Russia, apart from its political tensions with Europe and current capacity, will not actually be able to meet this demand alone.

20

The current range of pipeline options available to Europe is limited. Alternative infrastructure linking Caspian producers directly with the European consumer market is lacking. In contrast, Russian-sponsored pipelines have achieved a significant degree of progress over their European counterparts with Nord Stream, for example, already delivering gas to Germany at half capacity.

Collectively, the EU-28 attains approximately 25% (150 bcm) of its gas needs from Russia, roughly 50% of which (80 bcm) transits through the Ukrainian territory prior to arriving in European markets.

In March 2014, the European Council requested that the Commission produce a plan for reducing energy dependence.

Enhancing storage capacity and extending interconnectors between Member States were top on the list of priorities. The plan also stressed the importance of strategic

gas reserves and improving energy efficiency. The political debacle is ongoing and the sanctions put in place in September 2014 rendered the EU more vulnerable to its heavy dependence on Russia as its primary energy supplier. Though EU sanctions do not extend to natural gas, the threat of disruptions and cuts throughout Europe is now real.

Gas is still flowing through Ukrainian pipelines but Russia had cut off gas exports to Ukraine in June 2014. Only through an EU-brokered deal in October 2014 has Moscow agreed to resume gas deliveries to Ukraine amid declining stocks and the encroaching winter. Brussels and Kiev have often accused Moscow of using energy as a political “lethal weapon”.

Storage reserves remain an answer to providing energy independence but

LATVIA

LITHUANIA

Latvia is exclusively dependent on Russia for its gas supplies. Total gas consumption amounts to approximately 5 billion cubic meters per year, according to the Energy Delta Institute. The situation is exacerbated by that fact that gas is employed to generate electricity.

Should Russia cease gas supplies, it would imply an additional shortage of electricity. In an attempt to gain a higher degree of energy security, the Latvian government envisages constructing an Underground Gas Storage (UGS) facility with a capacity of 2.3 bcm.

Latvia could then meet half of its gas demand in the event of a shut-off. Latvia’s Energy Attaché to the European Union, Mr. Dzintar Kaulins, stated that the incoming Latvian European Council Presidency in the first half of 2015 will seek to foster progress on completing the internal energy market and pressing for the formation of a European energy union.

Similar to Latvia, as a former Soviet satellite, Lithuania is nearly 100% dependent on Russia for gas. However, the new Klaipeda LNG terminal is designed to reinforce Lithuania’s energy independence. According to Statoil and Litgas, the Klaipeda terminal will deliver up to 4 bcm of LNG by 2015 with operations commencing in December 2014. The Lithuanian presidential press service stated that “the Klaipeda LNG terminal can serve and fulfill about 90% of the gas supply needs of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia.” Intent on integrating more with Europe, the Lithuanian government plans along to form a regional cluster with the European Commission, Finland, and its Baltic neighbors in order to share their energy resources. Lithuania has initiated discussions with Finland and Estonia to build a Baltic interconnector pipeline that will enable LNG trade between the countries.

such reserves vary widely across the EU. Improved interconnection is a viable solution so long as there is gas to feed the interconnectors. Should gas supplies cease flowing through Ukraine, alternative sources and pipeline transport would have to be sought rapidly to avoid a crisis.

Gas storage across Europe in autumn 2014 stood at around 16 bcm – higher than at the same time in 2013, and 5 bcm above levels recorded at the start of winter 2013, according to the energy research consultancy, Energy Aspects. However, the threat of shortages is indeed already hitting European consumers who have seen rapid price fluctuations prior to the winter months.

While Europe relies heavily on Russia, consumption also varies greatly among Member States. The Baltic States and Bulgaria are dependent on Russia for 90% of their gas needs, whereas in Romania Russian gas imports account for only 25%, given the presence of its own oil and gas reserves.

Germany imports almost 40% of its gas

from Russia while the UK and France are practically zero-reliant on Russian imports, meeting their demand with Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) or nuclear power respectively.

The Consequence of Interdependency The energy sector is governed by a growing interdependence between energy producers and energy consumers. Energy exporters such as Russia are extending their access to ever-wider markets in order to sell their energy. EU sanctions have only accelerated Moscow’s drive.

Heavy energy importers, such as the EU member states, remain preoccupied with allocating reserves and securing supply routes to ensure the stable delivery of energy resources at reasonable prices.

Visual Design & Public Acceptance www.nationalgrid.com

Innovating in visual design for a sustainable energy transition – the T-Pylon.

Given that Russian oil and gas makes up two-thirds of Russian exports, Western sanctions are hitting the country hard. The Russian energy sector may well be losing an estimated $140 billion per year if sanctions continue. The non-Russian energy majors, like Exxon and BP, are also losing out as they see their joint ventures and technology contracts suspended.

The situation has meant a heightened urgency to attain European energy security.

EU Member States are rushing to invest in new pipeline plans and fast-forwarding existing or postponed projects. European success on extending pipeline links ultimately depends on the ability of national governments to overcome their internal divisions. Political solidarity and coordination remain fundamental preconditions to achieve the EU’s energy policy objectives and to mobilize support for future pipelines. Meanwhile, Russia is pursuing its own diversification plans that will see a radical shift of resources and investments towards the Asia-Pacific region.

Energy exports constitute nearly 70% of Russia’s $515 billion annual export revenue and 52% of the federal budget.

(top/left) Deepwater pipeline construction for South Stream’s offshore stage near the port of Burgas. Source: Gazprom (top/right) German Landfall and Gas Treatment Facility for Nord Stream near Greifswald.

Source: Nord Stream AG (left) Pipe segments for the South Stream pipeline assembled at Europipe’s factory near Mülheim an der Ruhr/Germany.

Source: EUROPIPE (below) Section of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline during winter. Source: Heinrich Böll Stiftung (right page) Construction of the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline in Greece close to the Turkish border.

Source: Giunti TVP

22

A Maze of Pipelines The map of existing and planned pipeline routes is rather chaotic. Prevailing geopolitical dynamics and the complicated structure of pipeline terminals reflect the lack of European energy policy cohesion.

Most existing or planned pipelines are the result of intense competition between Russia and the West. Pipeline routes are thus politically motivated and in most cases state-sponsored.

Energy exports constitute nearly 70% of Russia’s $515 billion annual export revenue and 52% of the federal budget. The Russian government has invested in two specific Russian projects intended to reduce the country’s export dependence on the Ukraine route: “Nord Stream”, running under the Baltic Sea from Vyborg to Germany and the “South Stream” running from the Black Sea via Bulgaria to Austria and Italy.

Europe is set to focus on non-Russian projects such as the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline (TAP).

Russian North and South Pipeline Routes Launched in 2012, the Nord Stream pipeline runs for 1,222 km on the Baltic seabed and is designed to transport gas straight from Russia to Germany. It would allow Russia the option to cut off its immediate neighbours, such as Ukraine, while still serving its most important market. However, only 30 bcm of Nord Stream’s 55 bcm annual capacity is currently being used. This pipeline would bestow the EU with a route for additional supplies should Ukraine cease being a transit zone for Russian energy.

Russia’s South Stream pipeline has an even greater potential and an even higher profile. Similar to Nord Stream, the pipe-

line is intended to reduce Russia’s reliance on Ukraine as a transit country. Scheduled for completion in 2018, this pipeline project’s planned annual capacity is set at 63 bcm. The project is in its very early stages and is due to cost $50 billion. However, the pipeline has received sharp criticism.

It flouts EU competition rules and does not comply with the regulations of the “Third Energy Package”.

In April 2014, Russia filed a complaint at the World Trade Organization against the European Union’s energy market laws, claiming that they violate international rules. In June 2014, Bulgaria temporarily stopped construction of South Stream in response to the European Commission’s infringement procedure against the state

23

Another diversification option for Europe is to invest in the Trans-Anatolian Gas Pipeline (TANAP).

Image: The start of the South Caucasus Pipeline at the Sangachal Terminal outside Baku. Source: British Petroleum (BP)

for non-compliance with European rules on energy competition public procurements. Consequently, Russia cancelled the South Stream project in December 2014 amid increasing economic pressure from sanctions and the declining value of the ruble as well as a falling oil price. Without sufficient revenues, Russia will be hard pressed to allocate the cash necessary for the pipeline. Only time will tell if Moscow will revive the project in response to growing demand in Europe.

24

Caspian Sea Alternatives For Europe, the Ukraine crisis should ultimately revive interest in the Southern Gas Corridor (SGC) as a means to deliver gas from the Caspian to Europe. The Caspian has long been the target of both Western and Russian companies due to its untapped potential. Surveys conducted by energy companies BP and Shell, among others, show that the Caspian region may

well possess 30% of the world’s proven gas reserves – equivalent to 5 trillion cubic meters. Such reserves will prove vital for Europe’s diversification strategy and its energy security.

Contrary to the Russian pipeline expansion drive, the EU’s efforts to promote the Southern Gas Corridor have stagnated.

Most negotiations concerning new infrastructure projects are beset by political deadlock. To further complicate matters, the various pipelines planned by the EU and its partners are dependent on one another to ensure their economic feasibility. The Nabucco pipeline – part of the TransEuropean Network – was long viewed as the primary competitor to Russia’s South Stream. It was seen as a feasible means to bypass the Ukraine route but has since been dropped, superseded by an Adriatic pipeline project.

Nabucco initially foresaw the construction of a 3,900 km gas pipeline from Turkey via Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary to Austria.

It could have delivered 30 bcm of gas per year at an expected construction cost of $8 billion. However, the Nabucco project requires additional suppliers for it to become economically feasible. Azerbaijan cannot provide the required gas volumes independently and Azeri producers could only feed Nabucco with 10 bcm, one-third of its intended discharge capacity. Hence, it would be imperative to connect the pipeline to Turkmenistan, home to the bulk of Caspian gas reserves.

Consequently, the Trans-Caspian gas pipeline (TCGP) project set out to connect Turkmen gas with the Nabucco pipeline.

Originally conceived during the 1990s, this project proposed the construction of a submarine pipeline from Türkmenba y in Turkmenistan to Baku in Azerbaijan. At a relatively modest investment of $5 billion USD, the TCGP would transport 30 bcm per year and would be the first in a series of infrastructure projects aimed at transmitting natural gas to Europe via several interconnectors, thereby circum-

venting Russia. With the launch of the vital Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum (BTE) gas pipeline in 2006 between Turkey and Azerbaijan, the necessary infrastructure prerequisites have been developed to connect the TCGP with Nabucco and feed it with the missing 20 bcm capacity. The unresolved legal status of the Caspian and the discovery of the Shah Deniz gas field outside Baku condemned the TCGP’s future. In June 2013, Nabucco was abandoned by Azerbaijan in favor of the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline much to the consternation of Romania.

Trans-Adriatic and -Anatolian Routes Europe is set to focus on non-Russian projects such as the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline (TAP). Due for completion in 2018, the pipeline could supply European states with 10-20 bcm per year from the Caucasus via Turkey. Running for approximately 900 km, the pipeline begins in Greece and crosses Albania prior to arriving in Italy, with the possibility remaining to extend it into West-

Cities & Sustainability www.nationalgrid.com

Rewiring cities in order to meet increasing electricity demand and access low-carbon energy.

ern Europe. TAP is to be fed by the existing BTE pipeline now that Nabucco has been ruled-out. With the BTE now operational, the Trans-Adriatic pipeline possesses the required interconnector to deliver gas from the Shah Deniz II field. The Trans-Adriatic pipeline has subsequently become one of the EU’s so-called Projects of Common Interests (PCI).

Another diversification option for Europe is to invest in the Trans-Anatolian Gas Pipeline (TANAP). An intergovernmental agreement between Turkey and Azerbaijan was signed in June 2012 outlining construction plans scheduled to begin in 2015 and end in 2019. Upon completion, the pipeline would transport 16 bcm of gas across 2,000 km from Azerbaijan via Turkey to Europe, with the pipeline being connected to the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum pipeline in order to pump gas from the Caspian. An easing of sanctions and the normalization of relations with Iran could foresee more gas through the same route, especially if demand surges.

No Fracking Way! Can the Drill be Stopped?

‘Fracking’ injects massive amounts of chemically infused water deep into the earth’s crust to extract remote fossil fuels.

This process produces approximately 300,000 barrels of gas a day which can create massive health and environmental hazards. Campaigning against this destructive practice is widespread, with no great success stories to date – except maybe for one.

Writer: Steve Gillman

26

“There were pictures of what fracking did to the landscape and I just couldn’t imagine that destruction to my home” – Helen Slotjje, ex-corporate lawyer.

27

In 2010, a couple of ex-corporate lawyers living in Ithaca, New York State, pioneered an innovative legal framework that gave municipalities the right to make local land use decisions. Helen and David Slottje provided pro-bono legal assistance, helping towns across New York defend themselves from oil and gas companies by passing local bans on fracking.

Over 170 towns and cities across the state have now passed local laws prohibiting the destructive practice while Texas, Ohio, Virginia, California and Florida are all working to mimic the success in New York.

Communities across America are standing up against fracking – and winning – while oil companies have realized that they are not as untouchable as they once thought.

“They said we failed the bar exam; they said the Russians were funding us; they said it was all part of a liberal conspiracy to keep farmers in poverty,” says Helen Slotjje as she explains how gas companies reacted to her anti-fracking campaign.

“But it didn’t bother us because we were

corporate lawyers and we’re accustomed to people not liking us.”

Helen and David used to work for a large Boston law firm before they become active environmentalists. The green shift came when Helen saw an advertisement in the

Image (pp. 26-27): Gas wells, USA. Source: Max Phillips (Jeremy Buckingham MLC) / Flickr Image (top): Helen Slottje and her husband David in front of their home in Ihtaca NY. Source: Goldman Environmental Prize

Why Exactly is Fracking So Bad? The United States House of Representatives published a report in 2011 stating at least 750 chemicals were found in fracking fluid. These included endocrine disrupters, highly corrosive acids, and carcinogens. All of which can cause birth defects, severe organ damage and cancer.

Apart from the health risks, fracking and natural gas could prove worse for the environment than coal. The reason that natural gas is generally considered to be better is that it emits less carbon dioxide. However, methane is the main constituent of natural gas and if it’s left to escape, it can trap 21 times more heat than carbon dioxide.

Additionally, it can take anywhere from 1-8 million gallons of water to complete each fracturing with one third of the liquid returning to the surface and the rest remaining underground. This creates two problems – what happens with the contaminated water above and what happens to the contaminated water below?

28

The liquid mix produced from fracking has high saline levels, ten times higher than sea water, which makes it toxic for plants and aquatic life if it enters their ecosystems. A lot of the liquid does getting taken to municipal treatment facilities, but the highly dissolved solids can also overwhelm the machinery and contaminate local drinking supplies.

And yet, water treatment remains big business. Firms that supply chemicals, equipment and services are growing.

According to the Global Water Intelligence, the 2012 market for water treatment equipment used at North American oil and gas wells totaled $900 million, while investment in conventional equipment is expected to rise 10% per year by 2010 to 2025.

The reality is that big business is flocking to fracking for the simple reason that it is a growing industry.

local paper for a meeting that would discuss gas drilling in Ithaca. Her curiosity piqued; she went to the meeting—and left horrified at what she learned.

When a site is chosen for fracking, a well is drilled between 8,000-14,000 feet down into the earth. Huge amounts of water are mixed with chemicals and sand before being pumped into the ground to literally fracture the rock. Natural gases are released and collected in pipes ascending back to the surface where the gases are collected and refined in factories. The entire process requires huge transportation

demands to bring water to the sites and to move the harvested gas to the refineries.

During the process, a hazardous chemical mix is created that can contaminate nearby food, water and air supplies.

Taking this all on board, Helen and David started researching how to stop fracking in Ithaca. They learned that local zoning laws which determined how much light and noise is permissible from activities could also be used to ban fracking.

Thanks to the Slottje’s legal know-how, more than 170 towns and cities throughout

“We were told that this was a fool’s errand,” says Helen. “That didn’t sit well with us – we couldn’t believe that there was nothing we could do except watch this horrible thing happen to our community.”

The “Green Nobel” Currently celebrating its 25th anniversary year, the Goldman Prize is awarded annually to environmental heroes from each of the world’s six inhabited continental regions. With an individual cash prize of $175,000, it is the largest award for grassroots environmental activism. The Prize amount reflects an increase from previous years’ $150,000, and brings the annual total to more than $1 million.

Over 25 years, the Goldman Prize has awarded nearly $18 million to 163 winners in 82 countries.

Helen Slottje receiving prize.

Source: Goldman Environmental Prize

Illustration: The Dangers of Fracking. Source: Corporate Europe Observatory

29

“From the very beginning, we were concerned about methane emissions. We learned that if pipeline leakages exceeded more than 2% than the gas produced, it’s no better than coal,” says Helen.

Image (top): In areas where shale-drilling/hydraulic fracturing is heavy, a dense web of roads, pipelines and well pads turn continuous forests and grasslands into fragmented islands.

Source: Simon Fraser University/Flickr

New York State have passed local laws prohibiting fracking and many more were inspired to work on bans.

For her commitment and accomplishment in banning fracking, Helen was awarded with the Goldman Environmental Prize, sometimes referred to as the “Green Nobel”. The prize was established in 1989 and is selected by

30

an international jury from confidential nominations submitted by environmental organizations and individuals from around the world.

Awarding the prize to Helen not only recognizes her campaigning success, but also highlights that a worldwide network of environmental groups are concerned about fracking.

Fracking is a Global Problem Despite Helen’s success, fracking continues to establish itself as an important energy supply for countries. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, at the end of 2010, natural gas-fired generators constituted 39% of the country’s total electric generation capacity.

The U.S. shale gas bonanza has heightened speculation over the potential for shale gas to transform energy markets across the globe. In Europe, it is now believed that 14 countries have substantial shale resources with three quarters suspected to be in Ukraine, Poland, France and Russia.

Elsewhere in China, the government is aiming for eventual energy independence by establishing the first cooperative fracking venture. To achieve this, FTS International, the first and largest U.S. company to perfect the fracking technique, has formed a joint venture with China's Sinopec, a stateowned energy giant.

Future Battlefields According to Pete Stark, a geologist and analyst at IHS, Inc., production from the average shale oil well declines by 50-78% after its first year, and by 50-75% after the first year for shale gas wells.

It doesn't make sense to devastate small environments for such short-term gain, particularly when governments are at the crossroads of how they will deal with climate change. This begs the question – what

is preventing a significant stop to fracking?

“It started in the United States with NAFTA (The North American Free Trade Agreement) and that concept is expanding to the rest of the world,” says Helen.

“All these trade agreements advance what’s called ‘Investor-state dispute settlements’ (ISDS) where corporations can sue a nation if that particular state has enabled any laws or taken action that makes it harder for that corporation to make money.”

Trade agreements such as NAFTA, TTIP (Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) and TTP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) could also expand fracking by removing the ability of governments to control natural gas exports and by weakening environmental legislation.

Combine that with the ISDS and governments can be forced to pay millions in compensation to corporations for profits lost to regulation. This would ultimately

create a future where states are unable to address climate change for fear of a financial backlash.

It may seem odd that companies can sue governments for making a democratic decision, but it has happened already – several times in fact. A report published by Corporate Europe Observatory found that trade agreements like NAFTA have allowed energy companies to take action against countries whose decisions affected their profits.

The Swedish energy giant Vattenfall is seeking more than €4.7 billion from Germany in compensation after the country voted to phase out nuclear power; Pacific Rim, a Canadian-based mining company is demanding $315 million in compensation from El Salvador after the government refused permission for a potentially devastating gold mining project; and Lone Pine Resources is suing Canada for $250 million over a fracking moratorium in the Canadian province of Quebec.

Connecting Europe’s Networks www.nationalgrid.com

Building interconnectors across Europe to contribute to secure, sustainable and affordable energy supplies.

31

8 REASONS WHY FRACKING IS DETRIMENTAL

1.

There are 500,000 active natural gas wells in the US alone

2.

Each gas well requires an average of 400 tankers to carry water and supplies to and from the site

3.

1-to-8 million gallons of water is used for each site and is mixed with chemicals and sand to create fracking fluid

4.

~40,000 gallons of chemicals are used per fracturing, which equals for active wells in the United States, 72 trillion gallons of water and 360 billion gallons of chemicals

5.

Methane concentrations are x17 higher in drinkingwater wells that are near fracturing sites

6.

+1,000 documented cases of contamination next to gas drilling areas, including sensory, respiratory, and neurological damage due to ingested contaminated water

7.

Are Renewables at Risk?

Many countries have adopted comprehensive policy frameworks to support renewable energy, but meaningful carbon reduction will be difficult as long as fracking companies, and the fossil fuel industry at large, are allowed to influence legislation. Trade agreements like NAFTA, TTIP and TTP could devastate future investments into renewables by locking states into dirty energy.

Nations that want to increase subsidies for sustainable technology may think twice if a billion dollar lawsuit is dangled over head.

32

With everything considered the question still remains – can the drill ever be stopped?

Certainly, at some point… With biased trade agreements, gas companies will surely keep extracting, but with the likes of Helen and David Slottje, there’s a fighting chance that the drill will be dropped for good.

“We like to share our success story because people feel like there is nothing they can do and that’s what we were once told,” says Helen. “But our futures are at stake and people need to know they have the right to say no.”

30-50% of fracturing fluid is recovered, the rest of the toxic fluid is left in the ground and is not biodegradable

8.

Waste fluid is left in open air pits to evaporate, releasing harmful volatile organic compounds (VOCs) into the atmosphere, creating contaminated air, acid rain, and ground level ozone Source: www.dangersoffracking.com

Image (top): An activist leads a chant during an anti-fracking demonstration in Manhattan, New York City. Source: CREDO/Flickr Image (bottom): Fracking fluid and other drilling wastes are dumped into an unlined pit adjacent to the Petroleum Highway in Kern County, California. Source: Sarah Craig/Faces of Fracking

11-13 March 2015, Sofia, Bulgaria

EE & RE

With the Patronage of:

With the Support of:

Media Partner:

Sofia Municipality

ENEP European Network of Environmental Professionals

Organizer:

Parallel Events:

www.viaexpo.com

Waste Management & Recycling

Official Hotel:

Global Sustain announces the 8th Yearbook!

In a

globalised world,

partnerships

T O PI C S

are more than ever needed‌

Learn more:

www.globalsustain.org/en/story/10180 For participations:

info@globalsustain.org

Win-win partnerships Facilitating supplier collaboration Delivering long-lasting, mutual benefits with innovative strategic partnerships Joining forces for human rights and transparency issues Quantifying and measuring partnerships’ true value Collaboration between academics, companies, NGOs and governments The impact of business goals on engagement in social partnerships Encouraging and incentivising employees to engage into collaborative actions Transforming stakeholder dialogue into stakeholder collaboration Communicating collaborations effectively Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and partnerships

On The Red List

36

Throughout 2014, the international conservation community celebrated the 50th anniversary of the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species and its significant contribution to guiding global preservation action. The Red List is now the world’s most comprehensive information source on the global conservation status of animal, fungi and plant species.

European Red Lists have been completed for 6,000 species, including mammals, reptiles, amphibians, dragonflies, saproxylic beetles, butterflies, freshwater molluscs, freshwater fishes and vascular plants. The assessments of all bees, marine fishes, birds and of the most important medicinal plants will be completed at the beginning of 2015, which will bring the number of species assessed to 10,000.

Over the years, the European Red List has become a powerful tool to inform political leaders on biodiversity conservation and the protection of Europe’s natural resources. It is an instrument to measure progress towards achieving the EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy and the Strategic Plan of the Convention on Biological Diversity as well as to guide the allocation of financial resources and support priority setting for conservation actions.

(Page 35) Mustela lutreola (European Mink) – Critically Endangered. Over the last 150 years, the European Mink has declined severely and currently exists in northern Spain, western France and the Danube delta in Romania, Ukraine and Russia.

Source: Tiit Maran (This page) Canis Lupus (Grey Wolf) – Least Concern. Though the general European wolf population is listed as least concern, wolf populations in various parts of the original range vary from extinct to relatively pristine. The total number of wolves in the EU28 is likely to be around 4,000-5,000, while in all of Europe, that number likely exceeds 10,000. Source: John Linnell

37

Rosalia alpina (Rosalia Longicorn) – Least Concern. The Rosalia is threatened in several European countries. National measures are urgently needed in areas of its range where population and habitat are declining. Source: Michel Candel

Apium bermejoi – Critially Endangered. Apium bermejoi is a herb that grows in the acidic soils of dried out stream beds, reproducing from seeds and from horizontal stems called stolons which take root to form new plants. The total population numbers is less than 100 individuals. Source: Juan Rita Larrucea

38

Ischnura hastata (Citrine Forktail) – Vulnerable. The Citrine Forktail is a highly dispersive species, presumed to have reached as far as the Azores via wind storms all the way from its native America. Source: John C. Abbott

39

Gypaetus barbatus (Bearded Vulture) – Near Threatened. The Bearded Vulture appears in India and in parts of Africa and Europe. In 2010, the total population in EU countries was estimated at 175 couples. Source: Giorgio Quattrone

40

Bombus cullumanus – Critically Endangered. The population of Bombus callamanus has declined by more than 80% over the last ten years as a result of climate change and changes in farming practices. The Western Europe population is on the verge of extinction and is isolated as a sub-population in Spain. Source: Pierre Rasmont

Delphinus delphis (Short-beaked Dolphin) – Data Deficient. The Short-beaked Common Dolphin appears in different parts of Europe; the relative size of its sub-populations is not known and their overall status in Europe is data deficient. Source: Giovanni Bearzi

41

Soosia diodonta (Land Snail) – Near Threatened. The Land Snail contains 10-15 known sub-populations, which are native to Bulgaria, Romania and Serbia. Its range is far from being well studied. Increasing deforestation and forest disturbance are the main threats to the species. Source: Tamas Deli

42

Eschrichtius robustus (Gray Whale) – Regionally Extinct. The Gray Whale has been Regionally Extinct since the 1700s and is now only found in the North Pacific and adjacent waters. Source: David Weller

Pleurodeles waltl (Sharp-ribbed salamander) – Near Threatened. Also known as the Sharp-ribbed Salamander or the Spanish Ribbed Newt, this species is found mostly in southern Iberia and in the coastal plain of northern Morocco. Source: Henk Wallays

43

Thymallus thymallus (Grayling) – Least Concern. While no major widespread threats are known, the Grayling suffers from river pollution, dam constructions and river regulation and is increasingly vulnerable to climate change. Source: Andreas Hartl

Carcharodus lavatherae (Marbled Skipper) – Near Threatened. The Marbled Skipper appears mostly in Europe, but is extinct in Slovakia and Turkey. Source: Chris van Swaay

44

Bombina pachypus (Appenine Yellow-bellied Toad) – Endangered. The Appenine Yellow-bellied Toad is native to Italy, but has declined in almost all of its range over the past 10 years as a result of loss and fragmentation of its wetland habitat for agriculture and due to its susceptibility to a certain pathogen. Source: Antonio Romano

45

Salmo trutta (Brown Trout) – Least Concern. The Brown Trout is a widespread species, though parts of some populations have declined severely as a result of pollution.

Source: Andreas Hartl

Hyla intermedia (Italian Tree Frog) – Least Concern. The Italian Tree Frog, as its name would suggest, is found primarily in Italy, though there are small populations in southern Switzerland and western Slovenia. It is potentially threatened by local habitat loss through urbanization and water pollution. Source: Antonio Romano

46

Sciaena umbra (Brown Meagre) – Near Threatened. The Brown Meagre is found in the English Channel as well as the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov.

Source: Arnaud Abadie

Ceriagrion georgifreyi (Turkish Red Damsel) – Critically Endangered. In Europe, the Turkish Red Damsel can only be found on the Greek islands of Kerkyra, Thasos and Zakynthos, though their actual population size is unknown. The species could easily become extinct in the next decade. Source: Roy Woodward

47

Phengaris teleius (Scarce Large Blue) – Vulnerable. The Scarce Large Blue appears in widely scattered populations in Central Europe and is threatened by changes in agricultural management (drainage, improvement or abandonment). Source: Chris van Swaay

Alytes muletensis (Mallorcan Midwife Toad) – Vulnerable. The Mallorcan Midwife Toad is restricted to the Sierra Tramuntana of northern Mallorca in Spain. The population is approximately 500-1,500 adult couples appearing in fewer than 5 locations. Source: Richard Griffiths

48

Aesculus hippocastanum (Horse Chestnut) – Near Threatened. The Horse Chestnut is native to Greece and the central Balkan Peninsula, but has been introduced throughout Europe and even North America. The species has suffered from defoliation by an alien invasive species of leaf miner moth. Source: Brian Roy Rosen

49

Emys orbicularis (European Pond Turtle) – Near Threatened. Populations of the European Pond Turtle are widely spread but very fragmented in Europe – in the northern extremes of its range, populations are small, while in the Mediterranean and Caucasus regions, populations are more abundant. Urbanization, road construction and wetland drainage play a key role in the species decline. Source: James Harding

50

art brussels Sat 25 – Mon 27 April Vernissage Fri 24 April Brussels Expo

Photo: Nick Hannes

www.artbrussels.com Follow us #artbrussels

Seeds

The Battle for Sustainable Agriculture A key challenge in the quest for a more sustainable future is the way we produce food.

Even though food production is inherently complex and diversified across the globe, its sources have narrowed over time. The exponential diffusion of modern and highly uniform commercial varieties of seeds has reduced our food supply's source to a mere 120 species of cultivated plants. This has not been a natural process of agricultural specialization, but rather the result of an economic and political agenda pushed forward since the 1960s. Referred to also as the Green Revolution this political agenda comprises the promotion of an evolving set of agricultural practices and technologies applied to increase yields and boost production, especially through the combination of improved hybrid or genetically-modified organisms (GMO) seeds, agro-chemicals and infrastructural investments.

Writer: Marcello Cappellazzi

52

breeding of seed and livestock varieties has been done by farmers for centuries, and it is only in recent history that institutions such as companies or publiclyfunded universities began to take over that role.

53

While its goals and methods evolved over time, few private companies have consistently supplied the inputs necessary to trigger the Green Revolution. As the global uptake of Green Revolution practices spread, significant losses in sustainability ensued. Despite the negative impacts, the practices continue to garner support from governments and agencies worldwide, largely due to the growing political and economic power of the multinational corporations that supply the inputs. This has become especially evident in the international seed sector. The same corporations manufacturing the chemical inputs now own internationally recognized patents on thousands of plant varieties themselves, limiting farmers’ access to seeds worldwide. Our global resources for biodiversity are severely threatened as more power becomes concentrated in the hands of fewer corporations because they literally own the seeds of our food system.

54

The Seed Industry: More Profits, Less Biodiversity For thousands of years, the stewards of the agricultural system have been the world’s farmers. As Michael Sligh of the Rural Advancement Foundation International USA (RAFI-USA) explains, breeding of seed and livestock varieties has been done by farmers for centuries, and it is only in recent history that institutions such as companies or publicly-funded universities began to take over that role. When a seed is grown out in a field, it experiences climate changes, soil quality and other localized challenges.

As the farmer selects the best performing plants and saves their seeds for the next year, the variety is adapted over time to the unique circumstances of that location.

Farms may also cross varieties with others to combine good characteristics and

improve the performance. In general, this system of breeding is referred to today as the “informal” system of breeding. Most of the world’s seeds are still grown, saved, and bred on small farms today, especially in the global south, which is where most of the world’s plant diversity comes from.

However, recent history has revealed major changes in the global seed sector.

Most significantly, there has also been a progressive concentration of the companies providing the seeds. According to the Erosion Technology and Concentration (ETC) Action Group, ten companies have a worldwide market share of 62% in the seed industry; five of them also produce agro-chemicals such as fertilizers and

pesticides. “The obstacle to public ownership of plant and animal breeds is corporate concentration, it’s the private sector,” says Pat Mooney, Director of the ETC Group. “The biggest success of the private sector has been to move the public sector out of breeding.”

Fewer and fewer seed companies are supplying the international market, while the demand of agricultural inputs from farmers is constantly increasing. The combination approach of selling “improved” hybrid or GMO seeds with the necessary chemical inputs from the same company is a profitable scheme for the companies and Michael Sligh from RAFI-USA describes it as an attempt “to extend the window of the petrochemical era through the use of both patents and genetic engineering”. In fact, biotechnology has become a driver of market concentration, especially in the United States, due to the advanced technological infrastructure required for the breeding and the high level of protection granted by

patents on genetically engineered seeds.

The promise of higher yields to fight hunger has pushed indigenous communities away from locally available seeds that performed well, towards improved seeds that can only perform with high input level and an adequate infrastructure, thus requiring important capital investments.

The result is that increasingly farmers in the global South face dependency on the technical inputs provided by leading multinational companies. This constitutes a significant problem in terms of equity and social justice. Furthermore, the process of substituting locally diverse plant varieties with uniform commercial ones has eroded the biodiversity, cultural knowledge and the resilience of agriculture in these critical global South centers for biodiversity.

Turkey, especially its southern regions, has traditionally been wealthy in diversity of plant varieties, home to many unique in the world. However, “the traditional seeds have been switched for company seeds rapidly in the last 25 years,” says Mahmut Gurmen of Bugday Association in Istanbul.

“Today the use of local varieties has diminished to 3% in wheat species and around 2% in general covering all types of production in Turkey.” The seeds used in most of Turkish production have come from international companies, an approach generally supported by the Turkish government and seen as a boost for the export economy. In addition to the loss of farmers’ rights and choice in the marketplace, this transition has a drastic effect on available diversity.

As Michael Sligh explains: “if it’s not in

the field, it’s not being used, and if it’s not being used eventually it will not be viable.”

In other words, as farmers in the global South transition away from local varieties, many lose their useful characteristics because they are not continually selected, or they are simply lost forever.

In 1992, this risk was recognized at the international level and 168 nations, except for the USA, signed on to the Convention on Biological Diversity. This agreement aims to promote the conservation of biological diversity and the “fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources.” The seed companies, mostly based in Europe and the USA, have in fact benefited from improving plant varieties mostly originating from the global South. Then the 2011 Nagoya Protocol identified in the national governments the decision-makers for ensuring that the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources are shared with the indigenous communities; it is however not specified whether it is the national government or the indigenous community that have the power to grant others the use of that genotype, making the sharing of benefits an abstract principle with no means for enforcement. The lack of enforcement measures means the impact of the Convention and the Nagoya Protocol on the international seed market has been limited, while other international agreements are constantly being developed to permit private companies to continue patenting and manipulating genetic material with new technologies.

International Trade Agreements: Beyond the Acronyms The principle of regulating the seed sector is part of the World Trade Organization (WTO) agreement on property rights, stating that members are required to put in place a patent-like system to protect privatelyowned seeds. In the United States, ownership of biological material or processes can be protected by patents, but most other

countries do not allow biological patents.

In those cases, plant breeders’ rights are being recognized through the registration of a plant variety in compliance with international standards. The registration establishes that the variety is connected to one breeder, and gives that breeder the ability to establish a patent or other form of licensing

55

to obtain royalties for the use of that seed.

For a seed variety to be registered, international consensus had to be reached as to what constituted a “variety.” Criteria were developed establishing that a variety must be unique and distinguishable from other plants, and perform consistently with certain characteristics in the fields. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) elaborated principles called “Seed Schemes” that advocate the basic requirement of having official certificates for issuing import and export to facilitate seed

* Germplasm: is a collection of genetic resources for an organism. For plants, the germplasm may be stored as a seed collection (even a large seed bank) or, for trees, in a nursery. Animal as well as plant genetics may be stored in a gene bank or cryobank.

Source: Wikipedia Image (pp. 52-53): Soil. Source: Shutterstock (pp.54-55): Experimental field. (below and next page): Potato breeding.

56

trade. Another agency, the International Seed Testing Association (ISTA) has set standard procedures for seed sampling and testing in order to comply with the OECD Seed Schemes. And the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) provides intellectual proprietary protection to those breeders that are interested in benefiting from this liberalized international market that is estimated at $42 billion.

Given the high level of regulation and the interests at stake in the seed sector, the ineffectiveness of the Nagoya protocol is not surprising. The UPOV system plays an important role in protecting breeders’ rights, but in doing so fails to recognize the importance of farmers’ rights to save, select and exchange seeds, especially considering the latest version of UPOV signed in 1991. The previous version, signed in 1978, had a more limited scope in protecting plant varieties and allowed more freedom for both farmers and breeders to use privately-owned genetic material. In

the current legislation, which is now the only possibility for countries interested in joining UPOV today, national governments must decide whether farmers are allowed to collect, save and re-use registered seeds and whether breeders are allowed or not to improve privately-owned varieties. This is the reason why several countries in South America as well as Canada, Italy, South Africa, China and many others decided not to upgrade their seed laws to meet the UPOV-91 standards. The end result is a patchwork of legislation that allows different degrees of freedom to farmers and breeders for accessing “germplasm”* and developing new varieties.

UPOV also sets the domestic and international conditions for marketing which seed breeders are able to register. To be granted breeders’ rights, the plant must be proven to be unique and its genotype homogeneous and stable over time. The direct result of this requirement is that mostly commercial varieties and hybrids are registered,

because these can more easily be made to perform consistently in conventional agricultural conditions in combination with the use of fertilizers and pesticides. This not only keeps the vast majority of plant varieties out of UPOV’s scope, but also downplays the potential that the informal sector of breeding and seed development can

have. Furthermore, farmers have a hard time accessing the bureaucratic processes of registration, thus UPOV is predominantly accessed by the formal breeding system.

UPOV is thus a mechanism that excludes farmers and informal or traditional breeders from the seed market, and reinforces the power and profit of companies.

Alternative Plant Breeding: Organic, Public and Participatory The current system for breeding improved seed varieties just does not work for everyone‌ especially not for organic farmers.

An organic farmer planting commercially available seeds has a comparative disadvantage with farmers producing under conventional conditions because the seeds on the market have been tested in combination with the use of chemicals. For example, an organic grower has a higher tolerance for genetic diversity in his or her crop popula-

tion, but might also be interested in exploiting the dynamism of plant breeding rather than producing in a static system, traits which are not supported in the formal system of plant breeding. For this reason, the current dominant model of plant breeding limits the viability of organic farming and denies its critical role for agricultural biodiversity conservation. As noted by Roberto Ugas, Professor at the Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina, the gastronomic sec-

57

BEHIND THE SEEDS The story of seeds is one of thousands of years. Since the invention of agriculture farmers have selected and improved crops to produce more and better food. Only recently it has been possible, thanks to technological improvements, to further increase and stabilise the agricultural production through an intensive specialization and high input investments.

Has this made agriculture sustainable?

Only 120 cultivated species provide 90% of human food supplied by plants 70% of human food comes from 12 plant and 5 animal species Half of human nutrition is provided by 7 species

Most crops and breeds have been domisticated in centers of biodiversity in the global South

Meso-America

Andean uplands

West Africa

Mediterranean

East Africa

South Asia

Beans Cotton Maize Sweet potato Turkey

Llama Papaya Potato Pumpkin Tomato

Melon Pig Oil Palm Rice Yams

Cattle Grapes Lattuce Lentils Olives

Barley Coffee Millet Sorghum Wheat

Banana Chicken Eggplant Rice Tea

Public Plant Breeding Most of the seeds are still public domain, but their use is limited to a few varieties.

However, public involvement in plant breeding is in decline, while participatory models are emerging as an alternative for creating synergies between farmers and breeders in improving seed varieties.

PHILIPPINES - MASIPAG

2

Local adaptation of farmer-bred rice

UPOV 1991

CANADA - USC

UPOV 1978

Initiative for Canadian seed security

Non-Member

PERU - AGROECO Collective preservation of potatoes

Breeders’ rights to register a plant variety is recognized at the international level, but the way it is protected depends on the nations’ willingness to validate patents on life. The degree of protection also differs significantly according to the version of the Union for the Protection of New Plant Varieties adopted.

UPOV 1991 r $PWFST BMM QMBOU TQFDJFT r #SFFEFST DBO U VTF QSJWBUF varieties for research r /BUJPOBM HPWFSONFOUT DBO decide whether to allow farmers’ seed saving

UPOV 1978 r $PWFST OBUJPOBMMZ EFàOFE plant species r Breeders have access to private varieties r Farmers are free to save and reuse their seeds

GLOBAL SEED MARKET SHARE LEADERS KWS AG:

4%

Land O’Lakes:

4%

Limagrain:

5%

Syngenta:

9%

DuPont: 17% Monsanto: 27%

Infographic by Marcello Cappellazzi/Revolve Media

Protection of Breeds and Farmers’ Rights

tor has preserved and re-discovered the potential of traditional seeds. The recovery of traditional varieties and their improvement can benefit this sector, but “restaurants themselves can’t manage a large diversity in their kitchens.” Therefore, by finding other ways to promote a more diversified agricultural system, organic farming could lead this process and benefit from it.

There are several examples of pioneers in the organic sector that have created alternative channels for accessing seeds adapted to their needs. This has been the case of MASIPAG, a farmers’ network in the Philippines that collected and preserves more than a thousand varieties of rice. By training farmers to do their own rice breeding and work together in a network, they have developed new organic rice varieties tolerant to flood, draught, saltwater and pests. These achievements also demonstrate the key role that organic farming and participatory breeding can have to fight and adapt to climate change. The key for more

communities to experience the MASPIAG success is to have full to the germplasm.

The predominant approach to preserving genetic resources has been to collect samples in national or international gene banks and preserve them ex-situ under cold storage conditions. The limited amount of genetic material collected and the difficulty to grow it out due to the changing environmental conditions reduces the potential of biodiversity conservation to a purely seed saving initiative. Conserving traditional varieties can only be achieved through a continuous adaptation of the seeds to their environment and with full access to the germplasm stored in the seed banks.

These achievements demonstrate the key role that organic farming and participatory breeding can have to fight and adapt to climate change.

The European Union: A Seed Law Laboratory The European Union is leading the world in the direction of the recognition of breeders’ rights in its territories and abroad. In compliance with UPOV standards, commercial seeds to be marketed in the EU must be registered in the EU Common Catalogue of seeds and must be certified by OECD standards with official authorities in the Member States. Requisites for commercialization include the testing of the value of cultivation and use (VCU) on agricultural species. This test takes into account the productivity of a crop or plant and allows the commercialization of those that perform above the average. The result is a yield-based focus, and a process that generally accommodates the needs of seed companies, but curbs the potential of organic breeders.

In India, organizations such as the GREEN Foundation are leading the way with the development of community level seed banks that are participatory and farmercontrolled. Part of the success of this initiative is because India has decided not to sign on to UPOV, thus seed laws are more flexible and allow more rights to farmers.

Indian farmers can register a seed in their own name or in the name of their community, making it more difficult for others to profit from it without the consent of the farmers. Examples like this are reminders of the key importance for farmers not only to have access, but also to play a role in the restoration of the community ownership of seeds.

The legislation has allowed exception for old varieties, but has traditionally allowed their cultivation and use only in their territory of origin. This means traditional varieties have been restricted to use only in their local regions and it means farmers cannot legally exchange these seeds with other interested farmers. In 2013, a new legislation was proposed to reform the seed market in the EU. In its proposal, the European Commission envisioned a system for facilitating the registration of plant varieties that were previously considered exceptions. Several elements of the proposal recognized the need for a more flexible certification system that could have benefited organic producers, for example by allowing dif-

ferent standards for testing or exempting niche markets from the registration requirement. However, the proposed system implicitly denied farmers' rights to participate in plant breeding since it was geared towards ensuring the recognition of breeders’ rights on all the material entering the seed market. The seed companies, already in a dominant position compared to the other operators, would have been granted more control over the whole European agricultural sector, without having to share the benefit of using the genetic material preserved and improved by farmers over time. The European Parliament eventually rejected the proposal under the pressure from civil society organizations and seed-savers associations, but the process revealed the strong trends in the EU toward breeders’ rights and a profitoriented registration system, increasingly moving away from farmers’ rights.

59

Agriculture of the Future There is great discord between the different voices in the debate around seeds. “The seed-savers don’t want the plant-breeders to improve the heirloom varieties, the farmers want to save the seeds, and the breeders need some way to recoup the costs of doing the breeding work,” claims Michael Sligh. In the EU, the public debate following the Commission proposal for a seed law has strengthened the seed-savers’ agenda for biodiversity conservation. This, according to Monica Messmer from FiBL, Research Institute for Organic Agriculture in Switzerland, has led to the false belief that no new varieties are needed since traditional ones are already available to organic farmers. This is an oversimplified argument since old varieties often need to be improved through breeding in order to adapt to changed environmental conditions and new pests. Breeders are aware of this

60

potential and have all the interest in providing both conventional and organic farmers with a more diversified supply of seeds.

The regulatory system does not allow for the fair and participatory process of breeding that is needed to promote sustainable agriculture today. The UPOV regulatory framework is being pressured to allow for the use of registered plant material for breeding operations, thus making germplasm available for private companies to benefit. This scenario is different from that envisioned by the Nagoya Protocol since farmers and indigenous communities would be further marginalized and their rights to participate in the breeding of new plant varieties would be further neglected.

What is necessary instead is to reconnect farmers and breeders to reduce the tension that the seed sector’s predatory structure has created between them. There is now evidence that participatory breeding can be the solution since there are now an increasing number of voluntary initiatives that

prove the viability of this model. Michael Sligh identifies the key of its success in the merging of the informal knowledge of farmers, aware of their needs in the field, and the technical one of breeders, depositary of the technologies and scientific know-how.

To achieve this goal, even more important than the creation of a new legislative framework, is better allocation of resources. In the current model, farmers are rewarded for choosing expensive technologies over a lowinput farming system and organic producers are left with no alternative other than conventional agriculture. Funding and cultivating an alliance between farmers and breeders could be our only solution to prepare and adapt our food production systems to changing climate realities. Relying on just a few private companies to work towards this goal is a much riskier bet on our future.

Image: Minnesota farmer Martin Diffley in a field of ‘Who Gets Kissed?’ organic sweet corn.

Source: Organic Seed Alliance

Q&A: André Leu, President of the International Federation for Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) What makes the issue of plant breeding important for organic agriculture?

Today, most organic farmers have a lack of adequate seeds that comply with the certification requirements since there is a little organic plant breeding. If you ask the farmers to produce only using organic seeds, the effect is to push them out of the organic sector. There is in fact a very good network of seed-savers that can make traditional varieties available, but people are using them at the low scale and only farmers’ markets and box schemes are receptive to them.

In these cases, consumers expect to find a wide variety of vegetables with different appearances and qualities. But the food distribution system that relies on powerful retailers requires uniform products and the farmers supplying them have to sustain this consistent quality. This is not only a request of the retailers but of the costumers themselves.

For this reason, it is important to improve the communication with the consumers.

IFOAM can scale-up its communication department, but our limited budget makes it more difficult to have the means for getting these messages out.

“Seed laws look for complete uniformity, while it should be important to preserve diversity.”

- André Leu

Image: André Leu, United Nations Climate Change Coference, Warsaw, 2013.

Source: International Institute for Sustainable Development

breeders rights, but from the corporate perspective. Seed laws look for complete uniformity, while it should be important to preserve diversity. Seeds developed through participatory systems become illegal if they don’t respect uniformity principles. While for some farmers uniformity is important, for many others diversity is crucial for example for crops to adapt to climate change. What we need is a system that accommodates both. Around the world, as we speak, there is a revolution, in every continent without exception. But it is a quiet revolution.

The problem is that there are laws that make this revolution illegal and are prohibiting farmers from having their own varieties.

How could organic farmers have access for seeds to be recognized as their right?

Participatory breeding is probably the best example of what we can do instead of relying on the open market model where farmers just buy seeds. We should allow farmers to develop seeds that are the best for their specific conditions. Saving these is the best model for the majority of world farmers. The argument is whether to use patents to protect those seeds, but we don’t believe people should be able to patent seeds. On the other hand we support plant-breeders rights. They make consistent multi-annual investments, so we do believe that they should be allowed to ask for a certification to recognize their right but this should not stop other breeders or farmers from using that seed.

A problematic aspect today is the legislation, since it technically protects plant

What can be the role of IFOAM to promote a participatory seed system?

One of the things that IFOAM will start is a seeds group. Once the group is integrated in the IFOAM network, they can start looking at the issue, prioritizing, deciding and supporting what we can. Getting financed is something difficult and different across the world. In the EU there are different funding mechanisms. In the United States, it is different altogether and if we go to other parts of the world there is no public funding. We are doing our best to stop our governments from pushing for large agribusiness, but it is difficult to counter government and agribusiness. No matter what the law is, farmers can rely on civil disobedience. As farmers, we must say that these laws are unjust, and that we will not obey them. We can develop our own varieties, save our own seeds and exchange them. This is a fundamental right for farmers.

61

Water Management in the 21st Century How water is managed and by whom and for what purpose is the key to understanding the tensions between public and private ownership of water network and distribution.

Lorenzo Correa Lloreda questions the system and asks us to reflect on why we need water. This is a simple but deep question that contributes to the debate about water abundance and scarcity around the world.

Writer: Lorenzo Correa Lloreda

From the early 20th century, most developed countries followed a similar path in water management, but for countries where water was scarcer than others, certain actions needed to be taken. From 1906-1926, an engineer called Manuel Lorenzo Pardo worked in the Spanish national public water works Image (above): Manuel Lorenzo Pardo ( Madrid, March 5, 1881 - Hondarribia, August 26, 1953 ) was an engineer, politician, photographer and writer.

Source: Wikipedia Commons

62

where he questioned the long-term plans of its current system and proposed solutions in their place.

Pardo believed Spain was well equipped for irrigation despite its supposed water scarcity. He believed that if the Ebro River was irrigated properly, it could provide a copious flow of water which could meet all the needs of the surrounding areas.

He stressed that this water development should be financed entirely by the government and then run independently from the state – a system he believed would allow the organization to convert large areas of dry, uncultivated land into irrigated and wealthy territories.

His ideas where well received and his approach was soon adopted by the dictatorship of Primo de Rivera. Under Lorenzo Pardo’s direction, by 1930, this new national body had increased irrigation by 95,000 hectares through 14 projects as well as establishing numerous meteorological stations and reforestation projects. Then, after the end Primo de Rivera’s regime, Lorenzo Pardo’s fundamental idea was dissolved and disappeared completely as public opinion called for radical transformation.

Could Lorenzo Pardo’s ideas be applied today? Should his concept stay in the past or could it be the backbone of the new water culture of the future?

63

The Basic Principles of the Water Framework Directive European countries have feared the consequences of severe droughts for decades.

Mediterranean countries have increasing temperatures and growing agriculture demand to add to their woes, while growing tourism is always putting pressure on water supply. Countries in northern Europe have their own problems despite the apparent abundant amount of water. For example, London and the south east of England are already seriously water stressed due to population growth, changing demographics and hotter summers. This is the same case in Germany and Poland.

In Europe today, one can no longer speak of water policy as a ‘national’ resource. There are European laws that were created in an open consultation process involving parties from across the EU in order to help countries manage their water – it’s called the EU Water Framework Directive and the basic principles are:

1. Integrated management of water basins 2. Ecological status to guarantee optimal resources 3. Economic rationality (cost/efficiency, full cost recovery) 4. Public participation (proactive and bi-directional) The main view going into the consultation was a widespread consensus that, while considerable progress had been made to tackle individual issues, the current water policy was fragmented, both in terms of objectives and of means.

Should it still be an objective to give value to the land and intensify its production through irrigation? Or is our current objective to develop the land by intensifying production and attracting more habitants and tourists? Is there any political ‘creed’ concerning water management, oblivious to all pretense of political colors?

Image (pp.62-63): The Ebro River is the second longest river in the Iberian Peninsula.

Source: Miguel Angel Garcia/Flickr Image (bottom): Andalucia crop lands: the average capacity of reservoirs in Andalucia is between 74-90%, but current levels are significantly lower. Source: Jose Martin Espartosa/Flickr Image (top/right): Spain welcomed an excess of 60.6 million international tourists in 2013, recording a 5.6 % increase from previous years. Source: John DellAngelo/Flickr

Bound by Tradition The traditional area of operation and competence is extended with the EU Water Framework Directive and overcomes the traditional watershed. The delimitation of the district includes the area of land and sea composed of one or more neighboring river basins, coastal and groundwater. For this reason, water basin districts in many countries exceed national administrative borders and they also have different competency models.

But are these cross boarder basin organizations suitable to meet modern and new water demands?

In Spain, there are three types of water basins, inter-operating with various competent authorities through bodies with full sovereign power to practice water

64

management. Their inter-related services include refurbishment, maintenance and implementation of financial, environmental and cost recovery of resources.

National basin organizations plan the resources of waterworks by controlling public water systems, being managers of water channels and by intervening in promoting, financing and exploiting the operation of waterworks.

Changes in the Spanish Water Act in the summer of 2011 gave more power to the regions regarding the management of their water basins. Yet, we still do not know if privatization is approaching quickly or if current confederations have given their power to private companies.

Regions have less and less power with their role mostly seen as general managers, and therefore, no say in the more important water issues.

On the other hand, the European Water Directive defines the existence of these “competent authorities� as the instrument through which Member States apply rules and objectives straight into their sphere of work and competence.

To ensure our existing national basin organizations become competent authorities that meet both the demands of the Directive and of privatization, we will have to change many factors. To respect water heritage, regardless of the government in power, then we must give additional powers to existing basin organizations or create others to ensure there is no deterioration of our watersheds. Just like the integrated intervention and regulation of water management, from its beginning to its end of the process. Lastly, we need to address incentives and regulate the responsible use of water to recover the costs of the related services provided.

Basic Concepts of Change The involvement of stakeholders in decision-making related to the management of water resources has not yet been assumed by the existing water basin organizations.

Social conflicts worsen every time one intends to take measures that would have significant potential effects. This must change and it will take a lot time and effort for such change to happen.

Watershed organizations, from their creation and reestablishment, have always had their users in mind, including them in their governing bodies and involving them in the decision-making process by using a specific procedure in the Water Act. But they have not had in mind the object being

65

used – water. Water must become a public good to preserve and be independent of the borders of other government bodies.

To do so, the idea is to adapt a multidisciplinary and interactive model. One based on participatory activities, mutual trust, and thoughtful and respectful decision-making, making a transition from the one-way model, focused solely in the promotion of public works. In Spain, this one-way top-down model had to be changed 85 years ago, just like it must be reviewed now.

The future of water management lies in the assumption of new approaches such as providing the maintenance of rivers, decontaminating aquifers, reusing and restoring riparian vegetation with teams of experts; making resources compatible with the preservation of the aquatic environment and implementing water management criteria for the different resources used for a particular practice, according to the minimum quality required; plus providing information and monitoring for flood-

ing and droughts. All coastal communities must know what could happen to their lands/municipalities. We need risk assessment maps for various periods of return, these must be available to urban planners, architects, designers, technicians and municipal administrators.

a price for a scarce resource: water, which is becoming gradually scarcer and scarcer.

This all has a price and someone will have to pay. Let’s acknowledge what it will take to fund sufficient water in quantity and quality. This is an undeniable right of all citizens and we should act accordingly.

We are in an era of change that will require an effort to understand the need to cut back water demands. If management wants to manage properly, they must, above all, generate trust in the administrative team; this trust must be transferred through the corresponding leaders. This is the challenge for the 21st century: building trust in a quality service that preserves water heritage, a preservation that comes with a price.

Conclusion Newspapers devote increasing space and time to water management, which is considered one of the great problems of Spanish society today. The bad news is that costs will only go up. There is a debate of shortages, wastage, losses in networks, desalination and the inability to resolve issues and the conclusion will be: the Spaniards have to start getting used to paying

Let’s acknowledge what it will take to fund sufficient water in quantity and quality.

Image: Rambla Morales desalination plant (Almería – Spain).

Source: David Martínez Vicente/Flickr

Spaniards use in average of 171 liters per person per day, while developing countries do not reach 20 liters, and North Americans and Japanese triple us.

It seems that the newest modus operandi will be according to the EU Water Directive, just as similar changes were imposed 85 years ago. Water management in Spain during these eight decades has always been controlled by politics: the autonomous regions were created due to political change (the dictatorship of Primo de Rivera) and they weakened after another political change (the Republic of 1931), to reemerge formally from the hand of the victors of the 1936-39 civil war.

Now, the models of management of the two major parties are radically different, if you change the political party, you change the way water is being managed and for the change to be completed, Europe obliges that the specific party complies with a very strict set of rules that appear in the Directive. We are therefore witnessing new change that will be more radical once the winners of the last elections decide on their water management.

Any water management team has the challenge to build trust between governors.

These leaders must therefore create that confidence and this is still an unknown path for Europe and its leaders. Consequently, the two words that sum up the social lessons learned from water-resource management: “little” and “scarce”, could begin to be replaced by the two words that define the lessons of the future of water-heritage management: “expensive” and “reliable”.

66

Fund the future of wave and tidal energy.

Discover steps that developers can take to attract private investment.

Knowledge to Power

BOOK AND YOUR ST TODAY

#RUKWT15 www.RenewableUK.com/WT2015

Harnessing the Power of the Tides At 320MW installed capacity, with first power expected in 2018, the Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon will be one of the largest marine energy developments in the world.

Developed by Tidal Lagoon Power Limited, it will have an entirely predictable 495GWh output each year of clean, green electricity and will power more than 155,000 homes for 120 years – that’s about 11% of Wales’ domestic electricity requirement.

Tidal Lagoon Power plans to follow with five full-scale tidal lagoons in UK waters; generating up to 8% of the nation’s electricity requirements from the fleet. Andy Field, Head of Communications at Tidal Lagoon Power, explains how the Swansea Bay project could influence Europe’s future energy mix.

Writer: Andy Field

68

We have a fantastic opportunity to deliver clean, green and predictable electricity from a network of lagoons.

With differing high tide times around the UK, the fleet could provide a predictable and round-the-clock supply of renewable electricity.

69

In 2012, renewables provided just 11.3% of UK electricity generation and while this figure has since increased, we know that Britain’s electricity reserve generating margin could fall to as low as 2% by the winter of 2015/16. As is the case across much of Europe, we need to invest in new sources of low carbon generation at scale.

It’s not such a tricky puzzle to solve. The UK is an island nation with a largely untapped marine energy resource. Humankind has employed tide mills for centuries; find a reliable and responsible way to harness this resource for energy generation at scale and the picture changes dramatically.

That is why we think the Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon will be a game-changer. The UK has always had a wonderful tidal range resource.

It now has an economically, environmentally and socially viable way of harnessing it.

70

Tidal lagoon power is a renewable technology which uses the rise and fall of the tides to generate electricity. While no tidal lagoon has ever been built before, tidal range technology has been in operation in barrage schemes since the 1960s, demonstrating the reliability and resilience of low head hydro turbines in a marine environment.

The Crown Estate has identified theoretical UK tidal lagoon resources of 14GW of installed capacity, while the six projects our business intends to take forward, starting with the flagship scheme in Swansea Bay, could provide over 15GW of installed capacity, or approximately 30 TWh per annum. That’s 8% of the UK’s generation capacity taken care of by a fleet of tidal lagoons designed to last for 120 years.

But the emergence of tidal lagoons could

have a much wider impact, helping deliver on the European vision to secure up to 100GW of EU electricity supply from the oceans by 2050, while exploiting panEuropean supply chains to drive employment and economic growth.

Academic studies have noted the potential for tidal lagoons to diversify energy supply in other EU Member States, most notably France but also in Germany. As with a UK roll-out, early deployment could open up a potential global market of 80GW or more to specialist European hydro manufacturing, construction and civil/marine engineering businesses.

Energy sector analysts, industrialists, policymakers and entrepreneurs are beginning to train their eyes on a particular section of the South West Wales coast.

Establishing a Blueprint The Severn Estuary holds the second highest tidal range in the world and Swansea Bay benefits from an average tidal range during spring tides of 8.5m. This tidal range or ‘head’, the difference in sea level between high and low tide, offers significant potential for the extraction of renewable energy through the construction of tidal lagoons.

A tidal lagoon is a man-made enclose of ocean and, similar to a hydroelectric dam, generates electricity by releasing water through a series of turbines in combination with a pressure difference caused by the difference in water level between lagoon and sea.

Although the lagoon is the first of its kind, all component parts of the project have been proven elsewhere in the world, keeping technology challenges and risks low. The turbine technology has been proven in the field for almost fifty years and the seawall will employ the same construction techniques as many of the world’s harbour walls, coastal defence schemes and ocean road bridges.

The scheme will generate electricity in both ebb and flood conditions, employing turbines that can work efficiently in both flow directions to make the most of the natural resource available. There is no guesswork; up to 100,000 Olympic swimming pools of sea water will drive our turbines each and every day.

The general sequence is as follows: with flood generation the lagoon is empty and the turbines and sluice gates are closed. The sea level rises and when it reaches about 4 to

5 metres above the lagoon water level, the turbines are opened. While the lagoon is filled through the turbines, electricity is generated.

When the head difference drops down to about one metre, the power generation and flow through the turbines reduces, and so the sluices are opened to quickly fill the lagoon to a maximum level. When the sea level equals the lagoon level, the turbine and sluice gates are closed. This marks the start of ebb generation, where exactly the reverse sequence takes place.

Because the tidal water levels are entirely predictable, it is possible to compute the expected energy output for years to come.

Through an ongoing process of operational optimisation, we expect power output for the Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon to exceed 495 GWh per annum, enough to power more than 155,000 homes. That’s about 11% of Wales’ domestic use.

Studies suggest that the cost of power from larger tidal lagoons in the UK is comparable to nuclear and gas-fired generation.

An Industry is Born The commercial roll-out of tidal lagoons can be quick. The Swansea Bay scheme will take a little over three years to build and will present engineers, environmentalists, investors and politicians with the real-world evidence required to inform full-scale projects.

Larger lagoons with an installed capacity of approximately 2GW or more will require between three and six years to complete.

Within the space of a decade, a fleet of tidal lagoons could be making a significant contribution to energy security in the UK and in other European territories with access to the natural resource.

The energy output of a tidal lagoon is directly related to the tidal range and the area of water enclosed by the lagoon. Construction costs are driven by the length and height of the wall and the cost of the turbines and sluice structures. An important ratio to quickly assess the viability of a tidal lagoon in any given location with a suitable tidal range is the ratio of seawall length versus the enclosed area of the lagoon.

Larger lagoons therefore produce cheaper power, allowing countries with tidal range resource to manage the cost of decarbonisation. There is no assumption of technical advancement and innovation built into larger lagoons; they are simply larger. Meaning that the single step from proof-of-concept at Swansea Bay to full-scale lagoon elsewhere can be taken with a high degree of certainty.

71

Image (pp. 68-69): The Lagoon Wall will be used to help build community and tourism opportunities in sports, recreation, education, arts and culture. (previous page): Western landfall buildings at low tide, including sailing and boating centre. (this page): The offshore visitor, operations and maintenance building planned for Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon.

Larger lagoons will however need to demonstrate that, as at Swansea Bay, they can work with nature and not against it. The importance of environmental and ecological criteria in assessing the suitability of any tidal energy scheme should not be underestimated.

Indeed, 4000 pages of our planning application for Swansea Bay and many hours of subsequent discussion have been dedicated to this very detail. Coastal processes, water quality, fish and birds, on and offshore ecology and more: all potential impacts must be understood and, where necessary, managed and mitigated. But the Swansea Bay scheme has shown that this can be achieved and has underlined the inherent flexibility in a tidal lagoon’s siting, design and interaction with its surrounding environment.

More Than a Power Plant Tidal lagoons can generate power at a scale not really seen before in renewable energy. They can also redefine the role of the power plant.

The Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon will be a catalyst for social and economic growth, providing a diverse public amenity, a dramatic sporting and cultural venue, coastal flood protection and localised adaptation to climate change, and a magnet for tourism. It will generate jobs, local industry, biodiversity, education opportunities, regional wealth and, we hope, a pride of place. It will perform a variety of functions at the heart of the community.

Our plans include a watersports centre, fully equipped for disability sports, which will host a range of national and international events, from triathlon to sailing. And a unique Offshore

72

Visitor Centre that will work with local schools and colleges, as well as welcoming up to 100,000 tourists to the Bay each year.

the lagoon experience for local residents and tourists alike.

These facilities, and the homes and businesses within the footprint of the lagoon, will sit behind a structure that is optimised for long-term stability. They will be protected against coastal erosion and a rise in sea level, and will draw comfort from the knowledge that even in a 1 in 500 year storm event, the integrity of the lagoon wall will not be called into question.

We are also working with conservation and academic groups to make the most of opportunities to protect and simulate biodiversity.

The scheme includes the creation of new habitat, sea reefs and seabed sanctuaries where oysters, lobsters, mussels and fish can replenish themselves; the reintroduction of species through an onsite hatchery; and the protection of large chunks of coastline.

For the wall itself, we are running a number of competitions to bring forward ideas for public art and cultural installations that will enrich

An independent industry advisory group has worked tirelessly to prepare local industry to play a major role in turbine and construc-

tion supply chains. Helping to ensure that the project’s impact on the Welsh economy will be material; studies show up to £316m Gross Value Added during construction and a further £76m per annum GVA throughout operational life.

With such a variety of functions, our intent is for the power plant to mean something positive for everyone living in and around Swansea Bay. During consultation we found 86% of local people to be in support of the lagoon. Since then over 1,000 local residents have formed active supporters groups to try and ensure that the views of the ‘silent majority’ are heard.

The Final Mile After four years of careful preparation, we enter the final mile for Swansea Bay and the birth of an industry. The remaining pieces of the jigsaw are falling into place: Prudential has become the cornerstone investor in the project; we’ll shortly award the three main tenders, for turbines, marine works and offshore construction; a short list of potential sites for a local Turbine Assembly Plant has been pulled together; a final planning decision will

come in 2015 and with it, financial close and the start of construction.

Should the blueprint pass the test, the game changes: ocean energy at scale becomes a real possibility; the prospects for meaningful green growth in Europe are boosted; and the way in which a power plant is understood to interact with the people and the natural environment surrounding is redefined.

For more details, visit: www.tidallagoonswanseabay.com

73

Remembrance Day for Lost Species Since 2011, groups in the UK and from around the world have been meeting on the last day of November to hold memorials for extinct species.

Remembrance Day for Lost Species is driven by a growing coalition of artists, art educators, celebrants and writers, and is coordinated by the One Network for Conservation and the Arts (ONCA).

The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) reported in its Living Planet report that Earth has lost half its wildlife over the course of the last 40 years. However, worse is yet to come as the impacts of climate change and habitat loss may result in the so-called “Sixth Mass Extinction� of plants and animal species.

74

“Telling extinction stories on Remembrance Day for Lost Species is important not only as a way of keeping their memory alive, but as an opportunity to honor and grieve for what has been lost at our collective hands.”

– Persephone Pearl, ONCA Coordinator 75

2014 has marked a major centenary for war remembrance with the conclusion of the First World War. Sadly, the year also marked the 100th anniversary of the extinction of the passenger pigeon in 1914, which at one point was the most numerous birdspecies in existence.

76

77

In their 2014 series, the organizers aimed at establishing Remembrance Day for Lost Species as a well-known fixture in the cultural calendar, by creating rituals that mourned and commemorated lost species and by raising awareness on what remains.

78

79

RUN WITH REVOLVE In March 2015, Revolve will run in the Rome marathon to raise funds for FGAR’s work in Togo.

Learn more about what FGAR does in this exclusive Q&A with Florence Quist, co-founder and president of FGAR.

Help Revolve support FGAR! Following our successful fund-raiser this fall that went to Education for Sustainability (E4S)’s work in India, we invite you to participate in helping us make a positive impact in Togo.

All donations are tax deductible after 30€ and go entirely to managing the FGAR residence and to sponsoring scholarships for the education of more girls:

80

F

ondation

G A R race

bra

aven

FGAR BANK NUMBER: FR76 4183 9000 3650 9274 6901 091 BIC/SWIFT: BDAFGPGXXXX REFERENCE: REVOLVE FGAR TOGO

What does FGAR mean?

FGAR stands for the “Foundation Grace Abra Raven”. Grace Abra Raven is my grandmother’s name and this project is directly inspired from her and what she did during her life. My grandmother lived (she passed away in 1999) in a village called Tomebge, which is located in Togo, close to the border of Ghana (south western area). She used to take in students from the nearby college (CEG) and help them in their schooling as well as provide them with a place to stay during the week if they lived far away from the village. You have to know that some students have to walk a great distance to and from school every day. On top of that, they do not have at the college at home good working conditions: they lack books… there is no electricity, not enough food, etc.

When was FGAR created?

FGAR was created in 2000, following my trip to Togo for the one year memorial ceremony in honor of my grandmother.

The whole family participates in this association and this is our way to pay respect to her memory. At first, our actions were limited to collecting books for the college from different secondary schools around Martinique (where my parents live). As the project gained momentum, we created and registered the foundation officially in France and in Togo.

cially the seniors); 3) put together some learning workshops in order to teach graduating students that cannot pursue their studies technical skills. Of course, all those actions are in line with our will to promote girls education.

What have you achieved, concretely?

We have done quite a few things since 14 years. We have sent 2 containers filled with secondary school books from Martinique. In addition to books, we have also provided the college with maps, microscopes, sports equipment and other materials. We have permitted the college to receive electricity, first with a generator and then by hooking the college to the power network. This was a very important step and helped increase a lot the study conditions, as it allowed students to study at night (night falls around 5-6 pm in Togo). It also allowed us to provide professors with a computer and a printer, which helps them in the preparation of their classes.

What are the main objectives?

In addition to this material help, we have reinforced the teaching personnel by paying the salary of an extra professor, as there are not enough teachers.

To help senior students and their families, we have provided a 15 euros/year scholarship to all senior students. This scholarship helps them pay their tuition fees and a few school supplies. Ever since these simple actions have gone into effect we have noticed improvements in the success rate at exams.

The main objective of FGAR is education, and in particular, education for girls. Indeed, only 30% of the girls that start secondary school actually finish it. This is due to a number of reasons. One of the main reasons is purely economical and if there is a choice between educating a boy versus educating a girl in a family, the boy will very often be the priority.

In the past years, we had also instituted a scholarship system for the 10 best senior students in order for them to attend to high school and university.

Out of all the students we helped, three went on to get a master’s degree, one got into the school for Army officials and one became a teacher, after obtaining his bachelor’s degree.

We have several different actions: 1) increase the teaching capacities of the college; 2) give students the ideal conditions to obtain their secondary degree (espe-

We also finished building a “Foyer de Jeunes Filles” (a girl’s residence). The construction of this home was financed entirely through funds collected from fam-

ily members and the generous donations of our friends. This is an important part of our project. It will provide girls with ideal working and learning conditions as it is equipped with a well-furnished library and study room. It will also give the residing girls an experience with community life. The foyer was inaugurated in 2014 and has been operating since September 2014. Twelve girls have been selected to be the first interns. In addition to providing good study conditions, we will also regularly organize workshops and conferences. The first one was given in November 2014 by two German volunteers in Togo, who talked about where they were from, what they studied and what their ambitions are. These workshops should help broaden the student’s perspectives and give them tools for their future life.

What are your plans for FGAR? This is the first year that our Foyer will be open. Our short-term goals are therefore to get it running properly. Apart from that, we would like to increase our support for the education of girls. We would therefore like to offer all the girls from the college a 15 euros/year scholarship, so that financial reasons do not interfere with their education.

Finally, we would like to set up a learning shop inside the Foyer that could provide an apprenticeship to the female students.

This would provide girls some technical skills and will help them find a job, even if they do not pursue their studies beyond secondary school.

How can we help?

You can help in two main ways: give donations, either books or other school materials or give money that will go in to the funding of the foyer. You can contact us at quistf@yahoo.com and we’ll be happy to give you all the necessary info.

You should know that no money goes into the actual management of the project, all the received material and money goes directly into the daily management of the residence.

81

Choice of Paper & Printing Printing: Artoos A sustainable production chain: all offset presses use VOC-free inks based on vegetable oils.

-50% CO2 emissions since 2008 !

53520-1312-1007

Features: Printed on 90grs RePrint paper.

Paper Distribution: Antalis All paper used is 100% recycled FSC-approved and from ISO 14001 or EMAS certifed suppliers.

Cover: Printed on 170grs Cocoon Silk paper with matte laminate.

Views: Printed on 115grs Cocoon Silk.

Subscribe to a sustainable world

Start revolving today!

Get REVOLVE x 4 a year for only 50â‚Ź (international shipping included). + special reports + country supplements Make a quick transfer:

cities

REVOLVE MAGAZINE

water

IBAN: BE46 363 0761737 36 SWIFT: BBRU BEBB Reference: 1 year REVOLVE

energy environment

Fill and send back: Name ......................................................................................................

Company ................................................................................................

Address ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................

For more information, visit: revolve.media Founded in 2010, Revolve Magazine (ISSN 2033-2912), a subsidiary of Revolve Media, is registered in Belgium: BE 0828.676.740.

All inquiries can be sent to Revolve Media, Rue d’Arlon 63-67, 1040 Brussels, Belgium, or by email: info@revolve.media

photography innovation inspiration

For sustainable energy.

Join #VE15 !

Reserve your space today

REVOLVE'S NEW ENERGY FAIR European Parliament Esplanade, Brussels | Summer 2015 During the EU Sustainable Energy Week (15-19 June)

To participate in Visualizing Energy 2015 please contact: info@revolve.media | +32 2 318 39 84

revolve.media