Spiritual ecology is the knowing that we are all part of one living, spiritual being. It is the knowing of the connection of our soul and the soul of the world: The understanding that our fate is entwined with the fate of life on earth.

The rupture of this spiritual connection to the earth, and the resultant mind-set which sees the human experience as separate to life on earth, viewing nature as something external to our lives that can be controlled or managed, is fundamental in how we are to understand the breakdown of ecological systems around the world. We must move beyond the thinking that has created the problem. We must move beyond the logic of capital.

This home is on the site of an abandoned market garden, once agricultural land. Our protection of this land, to preserve it for agricultural use, means resistance, resulting in an antagonistic relationship with the landowners and the police. We do not recognise the private ownership of the land we live on. In this capitalist world system, where private property is enshrined by law over the rights of nature, we should confront the possession of land where we can. Within our spiritual ecology, we must begin to challenge the commodification of nature. This must be central in the ‘great turning’ (Macy 2007) we are to make.

Living at Grow Heathrow has been a spiritual experience. We are actively rebelling against the wasted values of materialism, the capitalist world view which seeks to objectify nature.

We attempt to have a relationship with our home amongst the Elder tree, viewing the land we live on as sacred; this means rejecting the old habits of objectifying land, claiming it for an investment or naming it for empire. In this city of London, we see this ‘extractivist mind-set’ in overdrive; land and property too often does not serve this city’s children, their families and communities, but is simply banked on, viewed as a relatively safe and secure investment.

At Grow Heathrow, we do not own the land, it does not belong to us, there is only a relationship with the land, with the Elder tree. This is a relationship we are only just discovering, one that can nourish us. We are learning how the calendula can heal our skin. We are learning how the elder berries can protect us from viral infections.

We have become more attuned to the workings of the earth, the shifts in weather patterns on this island and how this influences our daily activity. Sometimes one experiences this in simple ways, like whether we need to water our plants, whether we have enough energy gained from the wind turbine and solar panel to power tonight’s party.

Living here involves developing a greater understanding of earth’s rhythms. We mark the equinox and solstice with celebration. This is a reminder of our connection with nature, the rhythms of growing food. It is our attempt to honour and give respect to nature.

Our compost toilets reaffirm our cyclical relationship with resources; ‘humanure’ is used as a mulch for trees and flowers. Living in a community garden growing organic fruit and vegetables, one becomes more conscious of the health of the soil.

Whilst we learn organic food production on our occupied land, the objective is not to sustain ourselves solely from the land we live on. With the amount of land we have, and the number of mouths to feed, this is neither possible nor our primary aim. However, the sharing and giving of food is central in bringing people together; this gesture can be conceived as a spiritual component of our community work. Collecting waste food from wholesale markets and supermarket bins, we make use of this ‘waste’, serving to volunteers, those who visit us for the day or attend our workshops.

We aspire to replicate nature and the gift economy, offering our events and resources for free. Nature has a gift economy. One can see this in how an apple tree gives its fruit with unconditional love. We must aspire to provide food, knowledge, festivity and love without expecting anything in return.

Moving to Grow Heathrow has had its challenges for those who have been brought up with western comforts; heating our homes without burning fossil fuels has been a steep learning curve. There is much to learn here. A cold night can connect one to the harsher reality of living on the streets of London. Just as fasting can be a spiritual tool to bring one closer to those without food, being inflicted more acutely by a cold winter snap makes one empathise with those without shelter.

There is an emphasis on preserving the wildlife that surrounds our self-built dwellings and communal spaces. There is a tension between the need for shelter, the need to create infrastructure for a community numbering 40 to 50 at times, and cutting back wildlife. This is in the context of a housing crisis in London, with brutal evictions making people homeless. We’ve taken in many. There is a need for land, to house people. We have discussions attempting to overcome this issue. In the practise of our democracy, the care and respect for other species is present. But we are learning – we will make mistakes.

The straw-bale house could be described as a sacred building, the temple of our community. A building, which was constructed with a respect and reverence for nature, using locally sourced, organic materials. When meditating in the straw-bale house, one cannot erase this memory from the depths of the mind, the memory of love and care that went into the building. The house is surrounded by Elder trees, providing homes for a variety of birds; their singing surrounding us as we sit in stillness.

With the sometimes daunting challenge of facing up to corporate greed and state imperialism, meditation can help us find clarity and conviction. The state of peril that we find ourselves in, with 6 degrees of planetary warming a real possibility, spelling the widespread extinction of species on earth – if we are not to despair, we must ‘touch eternity in the present moment, with our in-breath and out-breath’ (Thich Nhat Hanh 2012).

If we are to truly acknowledge our intimate relationship between our bodies and the health of the soul of the world, how are we to persist obediently to the norms of modern society that are destroying our health? Understanding of this intimate relationship must translate into a fierce love to protect it, a love whose reach moves beyond the legal authority of any given land.

We must protect nature. We must protect ourselves. The love we have for each other and life on earth must result in a fierce resolve to protect us. Sometimes we will have to act in a way which sacrifices our legal rights for the rights of other humans, for other life to flourish. We must embrace an antinomian spiritual ecology, whereby our ecological responsibility demands a rejection of civil legal authorities and their laws. With a spiritual ecology, this act no longer is sacrificial, but a self-interested act; an eroding detached ego-self making way for an identity as one with nature. In our movements we can garner great strength and resilience with this understanding of oneness.

One indicator that the earth is degrading is the lack of empathy and love for those most vulnerable in society. This is a cause anyone concerned with our collective spiritual awakening should engage with. We can measure the greatness of a society by how it treats those most poor and marginalised. This is why we must wed any ecological resistance to struggles against austerity in the UK, and the oppressive, egotistical ideology which serves it. Struggles against patriarchy, racism and colonialism cannot be detached from our spiritual work. If we begin not to care for our own kind, how will we develop empathy for life as a whole? A lack of empathy for humankind is a signpost for the degradation of our ecology.

The change that is required of us, to become more fully awaken ecologically minded humans, cannot come from a top down approach. The change we need cannot come from government alone. We will rely on the local actions of all of us. We depend on all of us individually and in communities, making self-determination the centre of our activity, to weaken the tyrant of capital that enchains us.

We must no longer prop up capital, or any power structures which oppress human beings or exploit life on earth. Our driving momentum is not to convince those in power to change their direction. It is often very tempting to be lured into the logic of the state and its power. Instead we hope to transcend the logic of party politics, enhance a culture of DIY, encouraging others to take politics into their own hand.

We must engage with experiences which teach us how to commune together, how to live together as an interdependent community. There are emotional resources and wisdom one can acquire from living communally, or in Grow Heathrow’s case, living in a squatted eco community. This experience, that is both taxing and enriching, can help us develop the kind of compassion we will need to embrace each other in wider society and the ecology as a whole.

Part of our project as spiritual ecologists is to undermine the political narrative that justifies our exploitative economies. The ideology that believes we cannot act as ‘we’, but as self-centred individuals. This notion has to be undermined, we must be part of a political project which demonstrates that human beings can and are motivated by far nobler causes than financial gain; instead, being driven by mutual aid and cooperation, care and compassion for humans and other beings.

We must reawaken the identity which wishes to respect the ancient soul of the world, ensure this life giving force prevails over the competitive, industrialist psyche that has dominated capitalist economic production. We can hope that the struggle against corporate interests and the state can reinvigorate our spirit, allowing us to become more centred to the needs of the global ecology within our political framework. We can hope that by mobilising in solidarity against the objectification of nature, we can grow a greater ecological awareness amongst humanity.

Everything we achieve at Grow Heathrow is only with the comradery of trusted allies who inspire as much as they are friends. Living there has demanded everything of us, trials that have touched our whole humanity. I am continually moved and inspired by the individuals who move here. They have made a spiritual step, for they have recognised the emptiness of materialism, how the pursuit of financial gain bankrupts the soul. By moving to Grow Heathrow, one has placed greater importance on human bonds, the need to take care of human beings, and take care of nature. This is a step that I admire in everyone who has moved there, one that I admire in all human beings.

Edward Thacker

References

Thich Nhat Hanh. 2012. Thich Nhat Hanh: in 100 years there may be no more humans on planet earth.

Macy, J. 2007. The Great Turning. Berkeley: Centre for Ecoliteracy

The European Parliament today voted overwhelmingly to accept a highly critical report by the EU Development Committee on the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition (NAFSN) that calls on the EU and its member states to cease funding it.

The New Alliance is a controversial aid initiative, supported by major agribusiness enterprises, that has received $1.1 billion from the EU’s own aid directorate and £600 million from the UK international aid department DFID.

In its conclusion the report “severely questions the ability of mega-PPPs such as NAFSN to contribute to poverty reduction and food security, as the poorest communities risk to bear the brunt of social and environmental risks associated with it.

“Given the existing deficiencies, the rapporteur believes that the EU and its Member States should stop its current support to NAFSN.

“Instead, both donors and national governments should invest in a model of agriculture which is sustainable, pro-smallholder farming, pro-women, and which unlocks the potential of domestic and regional markets so as to benefit family farmers and provide quality food for consumers at accessible prices …

“Official Development Aid (ODA) should serve the goal of poverty reduction, not the interests of EU trade policy. The rapporteur believes that the EU should not use ODA to support transnational companies operating as monopolies or in cartels which contribute to undermining the local private sector, thus endangering family farmers and smallholders.”

By agribusiness, for agribusiness

Founded in 2012, the ‘New Alliance’ is aimed at the commercialisation of African agriculture. It seeks to open up the continent to agriusiness and to encourage small farmers to raise production using expensive inputs such as fertilizer, pesticides and high-yielding proprietary seeds, including GMOs.

The New Alliance brings together corporate investment with aid money from G7 countries and the European Union, with its stated aim to lift 50 million people out of poverty in 10 African countries. In exchange for aid investment, African countries undergo a number of policy reforms to ensure a more business friendly environment to benefit the investors – among them fertilizer giant Yara International, Syngenta, Monsanto, Coca-Cola and Nestle.

It is based on the assumption that corporate investment in agriculture will increase production and automatically improve food security and reduce poverty. But the initiative has been widely criticised by civil society organisations across the world.

Not only has it failed to address poverty or hunger, but the scheme has facilitated the grabbing of land and natural resources, undermined small-scale farmers and their right to adequate food and nutrition, and accelerated seed privatisation.

The report, which was commissioned earlier in the year, highlighted numerous concerns about the scheme, including:

• the introduction and spread of certified seeds in Africa increases smallholder dependence, makes indebtedness more probable, and erodes seed diversity;
• the need for EU Member States to invest in agro-ecological farming practices in developing countries;
• the need for independent grievance mechanisms for those communities affected by land dispossession;
• the lack of consultation with civil society groups from Africa before the launch of the scheme;
• the flawed assumption that corporate investment in agriculture automatically improves food security and nutrition and reduces poverty.

The plan: Green Revolution part 2

In its Explanatory Statement the EU report sets out the heart of the problem: “NAFSN aims to replicate in Africa the model of the 1960s/1970s Asian ‘Green Revolution’, based on monoculture, mechanisation, biotechnology, dependence on fertilisers, long distribution channels and the production of export crops. The limits of this approach are well known, particularly the associated environmental risks.

“Moreover, the agreed policies in host countries are meant to create a business-friendly environment through reforms of infrastructure, tax, land or trade policies; easier access to ‘idle’ land for long-term lease; and regulatory reforms in the area of seeds to strengthen intellectual property rights of plant breeders.

The report also draws attention to the New Alliance’s most fundamental contradiction: its total exclusion of the very people the initiative is ostensibly designed to help:

“Strikingly, smallholders were barely consulted in the creation of the CCFs although they are supposed to be the ultimate beneficiaries of NAFSN. Consequently, NAFSN has been heavily criticised by civil society, public figures like the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food and by African small-scale farmers themselves. They warn that NAFSN risks facilitating land grabs, to further marginalise small-scale producers and women, while supporting unsustainable farming …

“Family farmers and smallholders are the main investors in African agriculture, and provide over 60% of employment in SubSaharan Africa. They have demonstrated their ability to increase food production sustainably (often through agro-ecological practices), to diversify production, to contribute to rural development, to increase incomes and, in turn, to help reduce poverty.

“Instead of supporting NAFSN’s model of ‘modern’, ‘business-oriented’ agriculture based on large-scale industrial farming, your rapporteur, in line with recommendations of UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food and the 2009 International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD), calls on African governments to invest in family farming and agroecology.”

Not ‘aid’ but ‘a means of promotion for the companies involved’

The New Alliance has also been slated by Olivier De Schutter, the former special rapporteur to the UN on food security, who wrote his own highly critical review of its methods and performance.

And in 2015, an independent audit of the UK’s aid partnerships with corporate partners singled out the New Alliance as being particularly ineffective. The report suggested that the £600 million that the UK had poured into the scheme served as “as little more than a means of promotion for the companies involved and a chance to increase their influence in policy debates”.

Aisha Dowell, a food campaigner with Global Justice Now said: “This is the most high profile and damning report so far of the New Alliance, and proves that this is a scheme that has been cooked up to benefit big agribusiness companies rather than to help small-scale farmers or vulnerable communities.”

There needs to be an urgent inquiry as to why DfID is continuing to support such a fundamentally flawed initiative, she added: “There’s plenty of good reasons why the UK should be committed to contributing a fixed amount of GDP in aid money, but we need to be critically examining how that money is spent. The current fixation on corporate partnerships is based on an ideological vision of development that that is dangerously dated. 
 
“Small scale farmers across the globe produce 70% of the world’s food, often using techniques that are much more sustainable and climate-friendly than big agribusiness. There are plenty of ways that aid money could be used to improve the lives and livelihoods of these people. But the New Alliance is doing exactly the opposite by facilitating big agribusiness’ takeover of food systems in different African countries.”

The report: ‘Report on the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition‘ (2015/2277(INI)) Committee on Development is written by Maria Heubuch as Rapporteur and was today adopted as the official view of the European Parliament.

Oliver Tickell is Contributing Editor at The Ecologist.

Who are we?

The Resurgence Trust is a UK-based educational charity that has become the flagship voice of the environmental movement across the globe.

Our mission is to inspire each other to help make a difference and find positive solutions to the global challenges we now face.

To do this, we publish Resurgence & Ecologist magazine, run The Ecologist website and host regular events – not just to share our collective concerns about climate change, social justice and ethical living but find solutions.

Once a lone voice in the wilderness, Resurgence Trust has long campaigned for a greater awareness of the challenges of climate change and for a greater focus on solutions to these challenges. It has been proud to publish our leading writers on both this issue and the wider remit of social justice and ethical living.

And of course, we do all this on a shoestring with a very tiny but dedicated team of staff editors.

This year, the charity is 50 years old. Become a member and help us continue this important work:

Find out more about us here: www.resurgence.org

To support our work, donate or become a member of the Resurgence Trust: www.resurgence.org/take-part/support-us.html

For tickets to our 50th anniversary event, One Earth, One Humanity, One Future click here:

www.resurgence.org/take-part/resurgence-events/celebrating-50.html

Satish Kumar – Editor Emeritus

_

Satish has been the globally recognized ‘face’ of Resurgence and now Resurgence & Ecologist since he took over the editorship of Resurgence magazine in 1973. He has now announced he will step down from the role of Editor-in-Chief at his 80^th birthday this summer (2016) but he will continue to represent the charity and all its platforms both in the UK and overseas.

Access to safe water and sustainable energy are inextricably linked, and extremely important if we are to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030. More than 660 million people globally – or one in 10 – lack access to safe drinking water. This has devastating health consequences and causes more than 1.5 billion deaths every year. Most still rely on surface, well or spring water for their water supply and require energy to pump ground water or boil it using wood, kerosene or liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). However, water is often not boiled for long enough or stored properly afterwards, so it still contains pathogens and is often highly contaminated.

New for this year in the annual Ashden Awards – which celebrate sustainable energy trailblazers around the world – is an award exploring the nexus of energy and water.  Nazava Water Filters, the winner of the 2016 Ashden Award for Sustainable Energy and Water, is helping tackle the problem of access to safe drinking water in Indonesia, where women struggle to get safe drinking water for their families, and where around 15,000 children under the age of five die from diarrhoea and other water-borne diseases every year.

The company has developed a low cost water filter made using two locally-available transparent plastic containers stacked one on top of another with a ceramic filter candle in between. The filter candle blocks pathogens and solid particles from passing through and reduces chemical contamination, thereby improving both the taste and odour of the water. Safe drinking water is dispensed through a tap in the lower container, making the filter a functional and aspirational household item for rural households, available in different shapes, sizes and colours.

The most popular filter costs $20, which can be paid for in cash or in instalments, which means this household-level approach provides a cheaper and more reliable alternative to boiling or buying treated water, especially in isolated areas or on small islands. Eliminating the use of fuel to boil water cuts greenhouse gas emissions, saving about 10,000 tonnes/year CO2.

To date, over 50,000 filters have been sold through an effective network of more than 120 women resellers, including community health workers and midwives working with the Ministry of Health, benefitting 200,000 people with affordable access to safe drinking water.

Runner up in the 2016 Ashden Award for Sustainable Energy and Water, 1001 Fontaines is a French NGO that sets up water treatment kiosks in rural villages across Cambodia, where household income is less than $2 a day.

Using a community-scale, decentralised approach appropriate for supplying safe drinking water to rural and peri-urban areas, the kiosks – that cost around $25,000 to set up – filter and treat surface or ground water (from rivers, lakes, ponds or tube wells) using solar-powered UltraViolet sterilisation techniques.

At the same time this creates jobs and supports income generation for local entrepreneurs who are trained to run these kiosks as social enterprises that produce, distribute and deliver large 20 litre bottles of safe drinking water to homes and primary schools. To date some 140 kiosks have been set up, providing 70 million litres of water per year to over 250,000 people in homes and close to 100,000 children in schools.

Sometimes it’s the simplest of technologies that pay the greatest dividends.  In the Philippines, former Ashden Award winner the AID Foundation (AIDFI) has introduced ram pumps where the power of a river’s flow pushes water uphill, helping saving time and money for thousands of villagers. 

When you live on a steep hillside, it can be tough to access clean water. Long climbs up from the valleys mean that water use is limited to cooking and drinking with little left over for crops. Many villages farm land on plateaus that are intercut with river valleys, relying on rainfall for irrigation. But the ram pumps mean that up to 10 times more water is available than before so the villagers can cultivate their land much more effectively and produce crops like lemongrass for sale, or diversify into fish farming. As well as being able to grow more crops, the villagers are healthier due to better hygiene – all without the use of fossil fuels.

With the support of the community, AIDFI pumps can last at least twenty years. The success of the scheme has also helped to change the mind-set of local people who now see renewable energy as the best option for them. There is a huge need for this type of technology in areas where there is no immediate access to clean running water.

In addition to providing access to safe drinking water and investing in adequate infrastructure, an important goal for all three organisations is to educate communities on the importance of safe drinking water and hygiene and help change habits and behaviour over time, essential to ensuring universal access to safe and affordable drinking water and improving sanitation and health outcomes by 2030.

As one of AIDFI’s beneficiaries put it: “When water is near, life is easier.”

About this author:

Chhavi Sharma is International Programmes Manager with Ashden, a charity that rewards, supports and promotes sustainable energy leaders in the UK and developing and emerging economies. Since the Ashden Awards were founded in 2001, Ashden has rewarded 180 enterprises in the UK and around the world which so far have collectively improved the lives of 47 million people, saving more than 9 million tonnes of CO2 emissions every year.

EDF and China General Nuclear Corporation (CGN), the two companies set to build the UK’s Hinkley C nuclear power station, have just ‘sealed’ their twin reactors at Taishan, China – disregarding widespread fears that they are unsafe and may crack in operation.

The discovery has emerged in drone footage obtained by the Hong Kong-based China Free Press (see video, below), which found that the concrete shells surrounding the reactors have now been closed ruling out any future replacement of the vessels and heads. The news is causing alarm in Hong Kong which lies just 130km east of the Taishan plant.

The Taishan nuclear site near Chanxi is isolated and entry is strictly forbiden to all non-accredited persons. Little information on construction progress or safety is released by CGN and EDF, the two companies building the power station, or by Chinese authorities.

The two 1.75 GW reactors at Taishan are of the same ‘EPR’ design to be used at Hinkley C, and already installed at Flamanville in France, where both reactor vessel and head were found to suffer from severe metallurgical defects that could cause the reactor’s failure.

Areas of very high carbon in the Flamanville reactor vessel and lid, both forged at Areva’s Le Creuset works, have caused that reactor’s construction to be placed on what appears to be indefinite hold. France’s nuclear safety inspectorate, ASN, is demanding ever more tests to be carried out on these two key components.

The danger posed by the high-carbon anomalies is that the reactor vessel and head will become brittle, crack under pressure, and release large amounts of radiation into the environment.

The Flamanville project is already running at €10.5 billion, over three times its original €3.3 billion cost. Originally scheduled to be generating power in 2012, it is now scheduled to be operational only in 2020. The faulty components having already been installed, it is very possible that they would have to be removed and replaced adding further huge costs. So large, in fact, that the project would probably be abandoned altogether.

Do Taishan reactor vessels share the same problem?

It is widely believed that the twin EPR reactor vessels and heads at Taishan suffer from precisely the same defects as those in France. Following the discovery of the problems at Flamanville in April construction at Taishan was halted for an extended period – from mid-2015 until at least October.

The two reactors were expected to be operational in December 2013 and October 2014, according to a report in Power Technology, which stated: “The Chinese nuclear project is benefiting from the experience gained from the Finnish and French NPPs, with significant savings in cost and construction time.” Reports from the site indicate that the current completion target is 2018 “at the earliest”.

In April 2015 the South China Morning Post ran a report stating that the Taishan reactors had not been subject to tests before installation, and could therefore suffer from the same defect.

CGN Power spokesperson Wang Xiaofei stated on 18th May that Areva had performed a comprehensive review of the manufacturing process of the parts in the two units at the Taishan plant according to the requirements of the “relevant regulations”, and that nothing was found to be sub-standard.

However Wang said nothing of the non-destructive tests that the Chinese National Nuclear Safety Administration (NNSA) had ordered on the units last year – leaving open the possibility that some problems may have been detected.

Fears not yet dispelled

The Taishan EPR vessels and heads were not forged by Areva, but were instead made in China and Japan under Areva’s direction and using the identical manufacturing process, as reported by China Free Press.

The vessel for Taishan 1 was made by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (Japan), which delivered the unit to site in 2011. Dongfang Electric Corporation (China) began to make the vessel in December 2009, and delivered it from its factory in Nansha, Guangzhou to Taishan on 22nd October 2014. 

Professor Woo Chung-ho, a Hong Kong nuclear energy expert and former senior scientist at Atomic Energy of Canada, told CFP of his surprise that a Chinese factory had forged the reactor: “I didn’t know China was able to produce a pressure vessel. This component is quite special, it’s large. Every step in the manufacturing process requires strict control. The welding of the pressure vessel is highly complex because it is very thick and must be able to withstand high pressure, raising serious safety concerns.”

Lai Kwong-tak, policy convenor of the Professional Commons think tank, added his own serious safety concerns: “Areva has repeatedly had problems with product quality, even falsifying quality control tests, which China completely overlooked when they received the components. It shows that China lacks real regulatory power and has always relied on safety measures carried out by the French.”

And as an anonymous nuclear energy expert told CFP: “No one takes money out of their own pocket in this kind of company. All funds are borrowed, whether from banks or bonds, so there’s interest on everything. No profit means money lost on interest. You can work out the massive sum they’re losing daily if you go back to the average amount of electricity the plant is projected to generate each day.”

So while the sealing of the Taishan reactors in their concrete shell might demonstrate that the vessels and heads were found to be completely sound, it could also reflect an economic decision to press ahead regardless of known problems.

A French nuclear engineer with over 20 years’ experience and who specialises in nuclear reactors confirmed to CFP that the Chinese operators had been anxiously pushing for construction to speed up, so that the plant could come into service next year. “They want the plant to be the first in the world to use third-generation nuclear technology”, he said.

Hinkley C fears

The Taishan project is being carried out by Taishan Nuclear Power Joint Venture Co (TNPJVC), in which CGN has a 70% stake, while EDF has 30%.

The same two companies are also at the heart of the UK’s nuclear ambitions. The Hinkley C nuclear plant with its twin 1.6GW EPRs is to be shared between EDF and CGN with 66.5% of the joint venture company and 33.5% respectively.

CGN is to take the lead at nuclear sites at Bradwell in Essex and Sizewell in Suffolk, taking 66.5% of the two projects leaving 33.5% for EDF. Instead of the EPR, CGN is looking to use its own (never built) ‘Hualong’ reactor design at these two locations.

The big question raised for the UK is whether EDF and CGN are ‘fit and proper’ to be conducting major nuclear power projects here based on huge taxpayer guarantees and electricity market subsidies when their joint operation in China remains so questionable and opaque.

Areva, the company due to forge the reactors for Hinkley, also looks like failing the ‘fit and proper test’. Last month it was found to have ‘falsified’ the safety certificates on 400 key nuclear components. Now the French government is forcing EDF buying the near-bankrupt company.

Oliver Tickell is Contributing Editor at The Ecologist.

Survival International recently hosted a visit from Tonico Benites Guarani, one of the leaders of the Guarani Kaiowá people in southern Brazil. Few of us who work here have ever met a more measured, determined, or quietly courageous man.

Despite the sheer horror of the situation facing his tribe who, following the theft of their land, suffer constant violence, terrible poverty, and a growing sense of despair, Tonico remained calm when discussing his people’s plight.

“Our young people’s only choice is to work for pitiful wages in atrocious conditions in the sugar cane plantations that now occupy our ancestral lands”, he says.

“If we cannot plant, what is our future? Begging is no future. If people do leave the communities the only work they can get is on building sites or in sugarcane plantations. Our young people have no choice but to do degrading work.

“We suffer from racism and discrimination. Until 1988 indigenous peoples in Brazil were not considered human beings in the constitution. This created racism and prejudice. It suggested Indians could be killed, were a free target … If nothing changes many more young people will kill themselves, and others will die of malnutrition.”

A dark and bloody history

The Guarani have had to endure a lot over the past five centuries. They were one of the first tribes in what would eventually become Brazil to be contacted by Europeans, suffering all the violence, enslavement, plunder of their land and infectious disease that that entailed.

But being far from the coast, on land that was difficult to exploit on a large scale in the early stages of colonization, the Guarani Kaiowá were saved from the wholesale genocide inflicted on other peoples. Until the 20th century, they had a relatively tranquil relationship with mainstream Brazilian society.

In the 20th century all that changed. Eager to seize the rich red soil of the Guarani’s land, ranchers moved in, cleared the tribe’s forests and opened it up for cattle ranching and agri-business. Now rather than nourishing the tens of thousands of Guarani people, as it did for generations, the land is turned over to profit. Vast quantities of soya, sugar cane, and other cash crops are forced out of it every year.

Despite the wholesale destruction of their environment, the Guarani remain, though their lives are more difficult than ever before. They are forced to live in overcrowded reserves, in makeshift encampments on roadsides, or on tiny patches of surviving forest, drinking water that is polluted by pesticides, and scratching out a living any way they can.

If they try to return to their ancestral land, which they are cruelly partitioned off from by wire fences, they are attacked by mercenary gunmen. That any of them remain on the land at all is testament to their courage and resilience, and to their profound sense of connection to the land.

A profound connection

Land is more than just life to the Guarani, it is central to their entire conception of themselves. Their history revolves around it, and it is a central tenet of their religion. They call it “the land without evil“ and their ancestors wandered for centuries searching for it.

Generations of their people are buried there, and they cannot countenance the idea of leaving. As far as they are concerned, there is no future without their land, no matter what condition it has been left in by outsiders.

From what was once millions of hectares of dense forest in the central core of South America, the Guarani are now reduced to tiny patches of land, islands they have claimed in a sea of chemically-enhanced plantation agriculture.

A strong sense of connection to the environment is a common feature among many tribal societies around the world, and this is particularly true of the Guarani. Land is not just a food source, a home, or a commodity to them, it is a totality, a universe to which they belong and towards which they have a deep responsibility.

Sadly the loss and destruction of their land has translated accordingly. Depression is rife among the Guarani, and Tonico’s people, the Guarani Kaiowá, suffer the highest suicide rate in the world. Faced with the prospect of a life of poverty and perpetual struggle on the margins of a society they did not create and which offers them less than nothing, hundreds have tragically taken their own lives.

Terrible threats, simple solutions

The solution is clear. Map out the Guarani’s land and return it to the tribe, as Brazilian and international law demand. But waiting for Brazil’s government – wracked by political chaos – or the country’s courts, in which Guarani land cases are paralysed, to rule in their favor, has taken its toll on their morale. A deep sense of misery has set in.

Tonico spoke candidly about this terrible problem: “So many young Guarani people commit suicide. It’s around one a week. The time comes when you have had enough of waiting [for change]. You work yourself up with hope, then the courts dash your hopes. Your family suffers with hunger and malnutrition, the despair increases, there is no security, no hope, you are not sure of life improving. It is very sad.”

For speaking out and campaigning for their people’s basic right to dignity and self-determination, Tonico and other Guarani leaders are harassed, intimidated, and attacked. He continued:

“A slow genocide is taking place. There is a war being waged against us. We are scared … They kill our leaders, hide their bodies, intimidate and threaten us. Me, too, many times. Last month they telephoned me and warned me there would be consequences if I carried on showing a film about the Guarani to politicians.”

An ongoing struggle

Far from being sympathetic to the tribe’s plight, the local government of Mato Grosso do Sul state is, in many ways, actively hostile to the Guarani.

Many local politicians and journalists are on the side of ranchers and soya barons who despise the Guarani and would love to see them wiped off the face of the earth. Tonico and other activists have found they must look beyond their home region for support, to the world’s media, and to international NGOs like Survival International.

“We are always fighting for our land. Our culture does not allow violence but the ranchers will kill us rather than give it back. Most of the land was taken in the 1960s and 70s. The ranchers arrived and pushed us out. The land was of good quality, with rivers and forest. Now it is very valuable. The Guarani were living there for hundreds of years and we never suffered.”

Despite the threats to his own life, Tonico hopes to at least reduce the level of violence being meted out almost daily against his people by making their struggle as visible as he can to the world. His real objective though is to exert pressure, on the Brazilian government and on agri-business to push towards a humane solution and a viable future for his people.

The situation may be bleak, but as long as the Guarani have brave leaders like Tonico to raise their voice, there is always hope that they can defend their lives, protect their lands and determine their own future.

Lewis Evans is an author, and campaigner at Survival International, the global movement for tribal peoples’ rights.

Thailand’s famous ‘tiger temple’ is finally being closed down, after nearly two decades of controversy.

The popular tourist attraction near Bangkok allowed visitors to handle and pose with the animals.

If you’ve seen one of your Facebook friends (or Tinder matches) cuddling up to a tiger, it was probably there.

A raid by Thai police discovered 40 tiger cub carcasses preserved in freezers, while one monk was caught trying to flee with skins and fangs. Certain adults that had previously been micro-tagged were missing.

Authorities are currently removing and resettling more than 100 tigers to safe locations across the country, amid allegations that the temple was only ever a front for the lucrative but illegal trade in tiger parts – which the temple’s managers deny.

I first visited the site back in 2008, as part of a wider project tracking the expansion of tiger farms across China and South-East Asia. I wanted to investigate what captive tiger breeding meant for the dwindling population of the big cats in the wild.

Claims of conservation value were everywhere. Multilingual signs said the ‘temple’ was rescuing tigers from a poaching epidemic that was targeting Thailand and its last remaining wild spaces. Tourist money was supposedly vital for the tigers’ Buddhist monk guardians to care for their wards.

Some of the tigers were paraded each day before being chained in an open-air display area, often in sweltering conditions, to indulge a growing tourist fad for selfies and intimate encounters with captive wildlife. Cubs were bottle-fed by monks, creating lucrative photo opportunities. Other tigers, unsuited to display, were kept out of sight in their cramped and unsanitary concrete enclosures.

Investigations by NGOs claim the selfie-friendly tigers have gone through a rigorous form of ‘training’ regime, employing a range of circus techniques, including beatings and punishments. One alleged method involved urine spray collected from other tigers. This is a particularly brutal practice when dealing with territorial animals – a rival’s urine is the ultimate tiger repellent.

Allegations also persist that those animals selected for display were sedated and heavily chained in order to ensure the safety of tourists. The temple denies drugging its tigers.

What are these tigers really for?

The temple was founded in the 1990s as a sanctuary for rescued animals, but soon expanded after setting up a tiger breeding programme. These ‘tiger stocks’ have no real conservation value however, as we can’t be sure what subspecies they are and many will be hybrids.

There’s basically zero potential for reintroduction into the wild. Tigers are notoriously difficult to ‘rewild’ and even if it were possible, any habituation to humans would mean they’d pose a significant danger to people. Therefore, as its big cat numbers have grown, so too have rumours as to the true nature of the facility.

Tiger parts and their derivatives have long been valued by the lucrative traditional Chinese medicine industry. Their bones can reach £300 per kg, while an entire skin is worth tens of thousands of dollars. A tiger penis costs around US$1,300.

Tales of missing, unaccounted-for animals, have persisted. In April 2015 authorities raided the site following a tip-off by a whistleblowing vet who claimed at least three had recently gone missing.

Earlier this year National Geographic and the NGO Cee4life alleged that, beneath its thin veneer of respectability, the tiger temple is merely a front for a more insidious and illegal trade in wildlife – a claim perhaps validated by the gruesome discoveries on the latest raid. However, the monks who run the temple deny the allegations.

Turning tigers into cash cows

Although the removal of the tigers has been widely applauded, the ‘tiger temple’ is but one of many, encompassing hundreds of tiger farms across the region that collectively contain untold thousands of big cats. Conditions in this wider network are equally barbaric, if not more so, although the rationale behind their existence is similar: conservation.

Proponents of tiger farms argue that a legal supply of skins, bones or claws actually reduces the pressure on wild populations. It’s a fairly simplistic supply-side economic argument – flood the market with cheap farmed goods and there would apparently be no need for poachers.

Opponents of tiger farms point out the legal trade simply legitimises the products and means people also want cheaper skins from wild animals. Opponents want to directly reduce demand for these tiger parts and advocate zero tolerance for any form of illegal trading.

The ‘tiger temple’ has consistently drawn most of its criticism over animal welfare. However, should the trade angle be proven, it would clearly contravene domestic law introduced to comply with international obligations under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).

This closure should be the first of many. Pressure can now be exerted on other ventures across Asia that turn tigers into exploitable commercial resources. Such facilities have no real conservation value and their sort of tourism is far from the responsible, educational experience that could make us truly appreciate wildlife – as wild animals.

The task now is to ensure that Thailand’s tiger crackdown is the beginning of a more concerted effort to outlaw animal cruelty and illegal trade wherever and whenever it exists. Otherwise, the entire episode may well turn out to be a wasted opportunity.

Simon Evans is Principal Lecturer in Ecotourism, Anglia Ruskin University.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

EDF and China General Nuclear Corporation (CGN), the two companies set to build the UK’s Hinkley C nuclear power station, have just ‘sealed’ their twin reactors at Taishan, China – disregarding widespread fears that they are unsafe and may crack in operation.

The discovery has emerged in drone footage obtained by the Hong Kong-based China Free Press (see video, below), which found that the concrete shells surrounding the reactors have now been closed ruling out any future replacement of the vessels and heads. The news is causing alarm in Hong Kong which lies just 130km east of the Taishan plant.

The Taishan nuclear site near Chanxi is isolated and entry is strictly forbiden to all non-accredited persons. Little information on construction progress or safety is released by CGN and EDF, the two companies building the power station, or by Chinese authorities.

The two 1.75 GW reactors at Taishan are of the same ‘EPR’ design to be used at Hinkley C, and already installed at Flamanville in France, where both reactor vessel and head were found to suffer from severe metallurgical defects that could cause the reactor’s failure.

Areas of very high carbon in the Flamanville reactor vessel and lid, both forged at Areva’s Le Creuset works, have caused that reactor’s construction to be placed on what appears to be indefinite hold. France’s nuclear safety inspectorate, ASN, is demanding ever more tests to be carried out on these two key components.

The danger posed by the high-carbon anomalies is that the reactor vessel and head will become brittle, crack under pressure, and release large amounts of radiation into the environment.

The Flamanville project is already running at €10.5 billion, over three times its original €3.3 billion cost. Originally scheduled to be generating power in 2012, it is now scheduled to be operational only in 2020. The faulty components having already been installed, it is very possible that they would have to be removed and replaced adding further huge costs. So large, in fact, that the project would probably be abandoned altogether.

Do Taishan reactor vessels share the same problem?

It is widely believed that the twin EPR reactor vessels and heads at Taishan suffer from precisely the same defects as those in France. Following the discovery of the problems at Flamanville in April construction at Taishan was halted for an extended period – from mid-2015 until at least October.

The two reactors were expected to be operational in December 2013 and October 2014, according to a report in Power Technology, which stated: “The Chinese nuclear project is benefiting from the experience gained from the Finnish and French NPPs, with significant savings in cost and construction time.” Reports from the site indicate that the current completion target is 2018 “at the earliest”.

In April 2015 the South China Morning Post ran a report stating that the Taishan reactors had not been subject to tests before installation, and could therefore suffer from the same defect.

CGN Power spokesperson Wang Xiaofei stated on 18th May that Areva had performed a comprehensive review of the manufacturing process of the parts in the two units at the Taishan plant according to the requirements of the “relevant regulations”, and that nothing was found to be sub-standard.

However Wang said nothing of the non-destructive tests that the Chinese National Nuclear Safety Administration (NNSA) had ordered on the units last year – leaving open the possibility that some problems may have been detected.

Fears not yet dispelled

The Taishan EPR vessels and heads were not forged by Areva, but were instead made in China and Japan under Areva’s direction and using the identical manufacturing process, as reported by China Free Press.

The vessel for Taishan 1 was made by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (Japan), which delivered the unit to site in 2011. Dongfang Electric Corporation (China) began to make the vessel in December 2009, and delivered it from its factory in Nansha, Guangzhou to Taishan on 22nd October 2014. 

Professor Woo Chung-ho, a Hong Kong nuclear energy expert and former senior scientist at Atomic Energy of Canada, told CFP of his surprise that a Chinese factory had forged the reactor: “I didn’t know China was able to produce a pressure vessel. This component is quite special, it’s large. Every step in the manufacturing process requires strict control. The welding of the pressure vessel is highly complex because it is very thick and must be able to withstand high pressure, raising serious safety concerns.”

Lai Kwong-tak, policy convenor of the Professional Commons think tank, added his own serious safety concerns: “Areva has repeatedly had problems with product quality, even falsifying quality control tests, which China completely overlooked when they received the components. It shows that China lacks real regulatory power and has always relied on safety measures carried out by the French.”

And as an anonymous nuclear energy expert told CFP: “No one takes money out of their own pocket in this kind of company. All funds are borrowed, whether from banks or bonds, so there’s interest on everything. No profit means money lost on interest. You can work out the massive sum they’re losing daily if you go back to the average amount of electricity the plant is projected to generate each day.”

So while the sealing of the Taishan reactors in their concrete shell might demonstrate that the vessels and heads were found to be completely sound, it could also reflect an economic decision to press ahead regardless of known problems.

A French nuclear engineer with over 20 years’ experience and who specialises in nuclear reactors confirmed to CFP that the Chinese operators had been anxiously pushing for construction to speed up, so that the plant could come into service next year. “They want the plant to be the first in the world to use third-generation nuclear technology”, he said.

Hinkley C fears

The Taishan project is being carried out by Taishan Nuclear Power Joint Venture Co (TNPJVC), in which CGN has a 70% stake, while EDF has 30%.

The same two companies are also at the heart of the UK’s nuclear ambitions. The Hinkley C nuclear plant with its twin 1.6GW EPRs is to be shared between EDF and CGN with 66.5% of the joint venture company and 33.5% respectively.

CGN is to take the lead at nuclear sites at Bradwell in Essex and Sizewell in Suffolk, taking 66.5% of the two projects leaving 33.5% for EDF. Instead of the EPR, CGN is looking to use its own (never built) ‘Hualong’ reactor design at these two locations.

The big question raised for the UK is whether EDF and CGN are ‘fit and proper’ to be conducting major nuclear power projects here based on huge taxpayer guarantees and electricity market subsidies when their joint operation in China remains so questionable and opaque.

Areva, the company due to forge the reactors for Hinkley, also looks like failing the ‘fit and proper test’. Last month it was found to have ‘falsified’ the safety certificates on 400 key nuclear components. Now the French government is forcing EDF buying the near-bankrupt company.

Oliver Tickell is Contributing Editor at The Ecologist.

Survival International recently hosted a visit from Tonico Benites Guarani, one of the leaders of the Guarani Kaiowá people in southern Brazil. Few of us who work here have ever met a more measured, determined, or quietly courageous man.

Despite the sheer horror of the situation facing his tribe who, following the theft of their land, suffer constant violence, terrible poverty, and a growing sense of despair, Tonico remained calm when discussing his people’s plight.

“Our young people’s only choice is to work for pitiful wages in atrocious conditions in the sugar cane plantations that now occupy our ancestral lands”, he says.

“If we cannot plant, what is our future? Begging is no future. If people do leave the communities the only work they can get is on building sites or in sugarcane plantations. Our young people have no choice but to do degrading work.

“We suffer from racism and discrimination. Until 1988 indigenous peoples in Brazil were not considered human beings in the constitution. This created racism and prejudice. It suggested Indians could be killed, were a free target … If nothing changes many more young people will kill themselves, and others will die of malnutrition.”

A dark and bloody history

The Guarani have had to endure a lot over the past five centuries. They were one of the first tribes in what would eventually become Brazil to be contacted by Europeans, suffering all the violence, enslavement, plunder of their land and infectious disease that that entailed.

But being far from the coast, on land that was difficult to exploit on a large scale in the early stages of colonization, the Guarani Kaiowá were saved from the wholesale genocide inflicted on other peoples. Until the 20th century, they had a relatively tranquil relationship with mainstream Brazilian society.

In the 20th century all that changed. Eager to seize the rich red soil of the Guarani’s land, ranchers moved in, cleared the tribe’s forests and opened it up for cattle ranching and agri-business. Now rather than nourishing the tens of thousands of Guarani people, as it did for generations, the land is turned over to profit. Vast quantities of soya, sugar cane, and other cash crops are forced out of it every year.

Despite the wholesale destruction of their environment, the Guarani remain, though their lives are more difficult than ever before. They are forced to live in overcrowded reserves, in makeshift encampments on roadsides, or on tiny patches of surviving forest, drinking water that is polluted by pesticides, and scratching out a living any way they can.

If they try to return to their ancestral land, which they are cruelly partitioned off from by wire fences, they are attacked by mercenary gunmen. That any of them remain on the land at all is testament to their courage and resilience, and to their profound sense of connection to the land.

A profound connection

Land is more than just life to the Guarani, it is central to their entire conception of themselves. Their history revolves around it, and it is a central tenet of their religion. They call it “the land without evil“ and their ancestors wandered for centuries searching for it.

Generations of their people are buried there, and they cannot countenance the idea of leaving. As far as they are concerned, there is no future without their land, no matter what condition it has been left in by outsiders.

From what was once millions of hectares of dense forest in the central core of South America, the Guarani are now reduced to tiny patches of land, islands they have claimed in a sea of chemically-enhanced plantation agriculture.

A strong sense of connection to the environment is a common feature among many tribal societies around the world, and this is particularly true of the Guarani. Land is not just a food source, a home, or a commodity to them, it is a totality, a universe to which they belong and towards which they have a deep responsibility.

Sadly the loss and destruction of their land has translated accordingly. Depression is rife among the Guarani, and Tonico’s people, the Guarani Kaiowá, suffer the highest suicide rate in the world. Faced with the prospect of a life of poverty and perpetual struggle on the margins of a society they did not create and which offers them less than nothing, hundreds have tragically taken their own lives.

Terrible threats, simple solutions

The solution is clear. Map out the Guarani’s land and return it to the tribe, as Brazilian and international law demand. But waiting for Brazil’s government – wracked by political chaos – or the country’s courts, in which Guarani land cases are paralysed, to rule in their favor, has taken its toll on their morale. A deep sense of misery has set in.

Tonico spoke candidly about this terrible problem: “So many young Guarani people commit suicide. It’s around one a week. The time comes when you have had enough of waiting [for change]. You work yourself up with hope, then the courts dash your hopes. Your family suffers with hunger and malnutrition, the despair increases, there is no security, no hope, you are not sure of life improving. It is very sad.”

For speaking out and campaigning for their people’s basic right to dignity and self-determination, Tonico and other Guarani leaders are harassed, intimidated, and attacked. He continued:

“A slow genocide is taking place. There is a war being waged against us. We are scared … They kill our leaders, hide their bodies, intimidate and threaten us. Me, too, many times. Last month they telephoned me and warned me there would be consequences if I carried on showing a film about the Guarani to politicians.”

An ongoing struggle

Far from being sympathetic to the tribe’s plight, the local government of Mato Grosso do Sul state is, in many ways, actively hostile to the Guarani.

Many local politicians and journalists are on the side of ranchers and soya barons who despise the Guarani and would love to see them wiped off the face of the earth. Tonico and other activists have found they must look beyond their home region for support, to the world’s media, and to international NGOs like Survival International.

“We are always fighting for our land. Our culture does not allow violence but the ranchers will kill us rather than give it back. Most of the land was taken in the 1960s and 70s. The ranchers arrived and pushed us out. The land was of good quality, with rivers and forest. Now it is very valuable. The Guarani were living there for hundreds of years and we never suffered.”

Despite the threats to his own life, Tonico hopes to at least reduce the level of violence being meted out almost daily against his people by making their struggle as visible as he can to the world. His real objective though is to exert pressure, on the Brazilian government and on agri-business to push towards a humane solution and a viable future for his people.

The situation may be bleak, but as long as the Guarani have brave leaders like Tonico to raise their voice, there is always hope that they can defend their lives, protect their lands and determine their own future.

Lewis Evans is an author, and campaigner at Survival International, the global movement for tribal peoples’ rights.