Environmental Encyclopedia

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Green politics

controversies that can impair the development of policies

that would achieve balanced levels of environmental protec-

tion. Single-issue policies often result in regulation through

short-term objectives and standards that focus on individual

issues, such as the concentrations of particular

chemicals

or the abundances of certain species. This can result in

actions that focus on compliance with narrow regulatory

criteria, rather than the more comprehensive, longer-term

environmental goals that are pursued by green plans.

Green plans can be implemented by agencies of gov-

ernment at all levels (that is, federal, state or provincial,

county, and city or town), and by companies of any size.

Green plans can be designed by any of these organizations,

but this is done in close consultation with the public, non-

governmental organizations, and environmental specialists.

In fact, multi-sectoral and multi-organizational discussions

are one of the most important aspects of green plans. This

process allows a broad degree of understanding to be reached

among the spectrum of interest groups, allowing green plans

to bridge political and ideological differences concerning

environmental issues.

Green plans have already been implemented by the na-

tional governments of Canada, the Netherlands, New

Zealand, and Singapore. Green plans are also being developed

or seriously considered by the national governments of Aus-

tria, Denmark, Germany, Norway, Sweden, and the United

Kingdom, and by the European Community as a whole. In

addition, many state and provincial governments, municipali-

ties, and companies in some of those countries have imple-

mented green plans. Non-governmental environmental orga-

nizations are also advocating that green plans be designed by

federal and state governments and companies in the United

States. Unfortunately, significant actions in this regard have

not yet been undertaken in that country. It is likely, however,

that green plans will also be developed in the United States,

once their benefits become more broadly recognized.

[Bill Freedman Ph.D.]

ESOURCES

OOKS

Johnson, H. D. Green Plans. Greenprint for Sustainability. Lincoln, NB:

University of Nebraska Press, 1995.

THER

“A Green Plan Primer.” Green Plan Center. May 1997 [cited July 2002].

<http://www.rri.org/gparchive/gp-primer.html>.

Green politics

Green Politics is a relatively recent political movement that

places a concern for

nature

and its myriad

species

at the

667

top of its agenda. New social and political movements arise

in response to crises that are perceived to be both long-term

and

systemic

. The crisis out of which the broadly based

Green movement has emerged is the environmental crisis,

which is actually a series of interconnected crises caused by

population growth

, air and

water pollution

, the destruc-

tion of the tropical and temperate rain forests, the rapid

extinction

of entire species of plants and animals, the

green-

house effect

acid rain

ozone layer depletion

, and other

now familiar instances of

environmental degradation

Many are by-products of technological innovations, such as

the internal

combustion

engine. But the causes of these

environmental crises are not only technological but are also

broadly cultural and political. They stem from beliefs and

attitudes that place human beings above or apart from nature.

Despite their differences, the major mainstream political

perspectives–liberalism, socialism, and conservatism—are

alike in viewing nature as either a hostile force to be con-

quered or a resource base to be exploited for human purposes.

All, in short, share an anthropocentric, or human-cen-

tered, bias.

Against these views, the modern environmental or

Green movement counterpoises its own perspective. Many

Greens

prefer not to call their perspective a political ideol-

ogy, but an environmental ethic. Earlier ecological thinkers,

such as

Aldo Leopold

, spoke of a “land ethic.” Others, such

as Christopher stone, speak of an ethic with the earth itself

at its center, while still others, such as Hans Jonas, speak of

an emerging “planetary ethic.” Despite differences of accent

and emphasis, however, all are alike in several important

respects. An environmental or Ecological ethics, they say,

would include several key features. First, such an ethic would

emphasize the web of interconnections and mutual depen-

dence within which we and other species live. From the this

recognition of interconnectedness a second feature follows:

a respect for all life, however humble humans may believe

it to be, because the fate of our species is tied in with theirs.

And since life requires certain conditions to sustain it, the

third feature follows: we have an obligation to respect and

care for the conditions that nurture and sustain life in its

myriad forms. Since nature nourishes her creatures within

a complex web of interconnected conditions, to damage one

part of this life-sustaining web is to damage the others,

and to endanger the existence of the creatures that depend

upon it.

Green thinkers hold that the enormous power that

humans have over nature imposes on our species a special

responsibility for restraining our reach and using our power

wisely and well. Greens point out that the fate of the earth

and all its creatures now depends, to an unprecedented de-

gree, on human decisions and actions. For not only do we

depend on nature, but nature depends on our care and re-

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Green politics

straint and forbearance. Humans have the nuclear means to

destroy in mere minutes the earth’s inhabitants and the

ecosystems that sustain them. From this emerges a fourth

feature of a “green” political perspective: Greens must oppose

militarism and work for peace.

But the earth is in danger not only from global thermo-

nuclear war but from the slower destruction of the natural

environment

. Such destruction is a consequence not only

of large-scale policies but of small-scale, everyday acts. And

each of us bears full responsibility for our actions and also,

since we live in a democracy, some share of responsibility

for cumulative effects and collective outcomes. Each of us

has, or can have, a hand in making the laws under which

we live. It is for this reason that Greens give equal emphasis

to our collective and individual responsibility for protecting

the environment that protects us. The fifth feature of the

Green political perspective, then, is to emphasize the impor-

tance of informed and active democratic citizenship at the

grass-roots level. Hence the Green adage, “Think globally

and act locally.”

On this much most Greens agree. But there are also

a number of unresolved differences of approach, emphasis,

and political strategy. The internal ideological spectrum

ranges from “light green” conservationists to “dark green”

radicals, and includes assorted anarchist beliefs,

deep ecol-

ogy

ecofeminism

social ecology

bioregionalism

, New

Age Gaia worship, and other groupings, each differing in

various ways form the others. Among these are differences

regarding the basic beliefs underlying and motivating the

green movement. Some New Age Greens envision an envi-

ronmental ethic grounded in spiritual or religious values.

We should, they say, look upon the earth as a benevolent

and kindly deity—the goddess Gaia (from the Greek word

for “earth")—to be worshiped in reverence and awe. In this

way we can liberate ourselves from the restrictive rationalism

that characterizes modern science. Other Greens disapprove

of such a spiritual or religious orientation, contending that

such beliefs are politically pernicious and inimical to the

rational scientific thinking required to diagnose and solve

environmental problems.

Other differences have to do with the political strate-

gies and tactics to be employed by the environmental move-

ment. Some say that Greens should take an active part in

electoral politics, perhaps even following the lead of Greens

in Germany and organizing a Green Party. Aware of the

formidable obstacles facing minority third parties, most have

favored other strategies, such as working within existing

mainstream parties (especially the Democratic Party in the

United States), or hiring lobbyists to influence legislation.

Still other Greens favor working outside of traditional inter-

est group politics, believing the earth and its inhabitants

hardly constitute a special interest. Others, such as social

668

ecologists, tend to favor local, grass-roots campaigns which

involve neighbors, friends, and fellow citizens in efforts to

protect the environment. Some social ecologists are anar-

chists who see the state and its pro-business and pro-growth

policies as the problem, rather than the solution, and seek its

eventual replacement by a decentralized system of communes

and cooperatives. Greens of the “bioregionalist” persuasion

add that such social and political organization ought to be

based on biological or natural, rather than artificial or politi-

cal, boundaries and regions.

Although all Greens agree on the importance of in-

forming and educating the public, they disagree as to how

this might best be done. Some groups, such as

Greenpeace

favor dramatic direct action calculated to make headlines

and capture public attention. Even more militant groups,

such as the Sea Shepherd Society and

Earth First!

, have

advocated

monkey-wrenching

as a morally justifiable

means of publicizing and protesting practices destructive of

the natural environment.

Such militant tactics are decried by moderate or main-

stream groups, which tend to favor subtle, low-key efforts to

influence legislation and inform the public on environmental

matters. The

Sierra Club

, for example, lobbies Congress

and state legislatures to pass environmental legislation. It

also publishes books and produces films and videos about a

wide variety of environmental issues. Similar strategies are

followed by other groups, such as the

Environmental De-

fense

Fund. Another group,

The Nature Conservancy

solicits funds to buy land for nature preserves.

Differences over strategy and tactics are, however, dif-

ferences about means and not necessarily about basic as-

sumptions and ends. Despite their political differences,

Greens are alike in assuming that all things are connected—

ecology is, after all, the study of interconnections—and they

agree that complex ecosystems and the myriad life-forms

they sustain are valuable and worthy of protection by political

and other means. See also Abbey, Edward; Bioregional Proj-

ect; Bookchin, Murray; Brower, David Ross; Environmental

attitudes/values; Environmental Defense Fund; Foreman,

Dave; Green advertising and marketing; Green products;

Sea Shepherd Society; Sierra Club

[Terence Ball]

ESOURCES

OOKS

Bahro, R. Building the Green Movement. London: G.R.P., 1978.

Biehl, J. Rethinking Ecofeminist Politics. Boston: South End Press, 1991.

Bookchin, M. The Modern Crisis. Philadelphia: New Society Publishers,

1986.

Capra, F., and C. Spritnak. Green Politics. New York: Dutton, 1984.

Foreman, D. Confessions of an Eco-Warrior. New York: Harmony Books,

1991.

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Green Seal

Jonas, H. The Imperative of Responsibility. Chicago: University of Chicago

Press, 1984.

Leopold, A. The Sand County Almanac. New York: Oxford University

Press, 1948.

Manes, C. Green Rage: Radical Environmentalism and the Unmaking of

Civilization. Boston: Little Brown, 1990.

Milbrath, L. W. Envisioning a Sustainable Society. Albany: State University

of New York Press, 1989.

Paehlke, R. Environmentalism and the Future of Progressive Politics. New

Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1989.

Porritt, J. Seeing Green: The Politics of Ecology Explained. Oxford: Basil

Blackwell, 1984.

Seed, J., et al. Thinking Like a Mountain. Philadelphia: New Society Publish-

ers, 1988.

Worster, D. Nature’s Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1977.

Green products

Some companies have thrived by marketing product lines

as environmentally correct or “green.” A prime example is

Body Shop, a cosmetics company that is strongly and explic-

itly pro-environment with regard to its products. It strives,

for instance, to develop products made with substances de-

rived from threatened tropical rain forests so that they can

be preserved.

The American ice cream manufacturer, Ben and Jer-

ry’s, has adopted a similar approach to using

rain forest

products in what it sells. Mercury- and cadmium-free batter-

ies have been marketed by Varta, a German company.

Ecover, a small Belgian company, made major sales gains

when it began to market a line of phosphate-free

deter-

gents

. Wal-Mart is another company that provides its cus-

tomers with green products. Loblaw, a Canadian grocery

chain, has introduced a “green-line” of environmentally-

friendly products and has sold more than twice the amount

than it had initially projected. Seventh Generation, a mail-

order company based in California, has successfully marketed

its own line of recycled toilet paper,

biodegradable

soaps

and cleansers, and phosphate-free laundry and dishwashing

detergent.

Many factors comprise a green product. The product

has to be made with the fewest raw materials and produced

with the least amount of contaminants released into the

environment

and with the smallest effect on human health.

Consideration must also be given to how consumers

will use the product and how they will dispose of it when

they are finished. To reduce its waste potential, a product

must often last a significant amount of time or be reusable

or recyclable.

As consumers become more aware of environmental

issues, they will likely look to producers and governments

to provide more products that will permit them to maintain

669

a life-style that is less harmful to the environment. Therefore,

the very nature of products will have to change. They will

have to be lighter, smaller, and more durable so that they

can consume fewer resources in their production and use

and take up less space when they are disposed of.

Ultimately, a real revolution in the use of green prod-

ucts would mean replacing or substantially modifying virtu-

ally the capital stock of society—appliances, automobiles,

housing, highways, etc.—with a different type of product.

In contrast to old smokestack industries, new technologies

and emerging industries—such as telecommunications,

computers, and information—should be able to offer prod-

ucts that are less environmentally harmful. They should be

able to produce many new types of green products and

modify existing products so that they are less damaging to

the environment.

[Alfred A. Marcus]

ESOURCES

OOKS

Buchholz, R., A. Marcus, and J. Post. Managing Environmental Issues.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1992.

Cairncross, F. Costing the Earth. Boston: Harvard Business School Press,

1992.

Green revolution

see

Agricultural revolution; Borlaug,

Norman E.; Consultative Group on

International Agricultural Research

Green Seal

An independent, non-profit group that encourages the pro-

duction and sale of consumer products that are environmen-

tally responsible, Green Seal allows the use of its certification

mark on products that meet its strict environmental stan-

dards. The mark has a green check over a blue globe.

A growing number of people are becoming aware that

consumer demand for certain products causes great harm to

the

environment

and provides an economic incentive for

activities that damage the planet. Some examples are prod-

ucts that contain

chemicals

such as

chlorofluorocarbons

(CFCs), which deplete the earth’s protective

ozone

layer;

mahogany and other kinds of wood from rapidly-disap-

pearing tropical rain forests; fur coats made from rare and

endangered species

; tuna caught using techniques that kill

dolphins

; and products that waste energy or water, are over-

packaged, cannot be recycled, or are harmful when dis-

posed of.

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Green taxes

Green Seal symbol. (Photograph by Tom Pantages.

Reproduced by permission.)

By avoiding these products and buying those that do

not cause harm to

wildlife

or degrade the environment,

consumers can encourage corporations to make and sell

goods that are environmentally responsible. With the pub-

lic’s growing commitment to protecting the environment,

store shelves are now full of products that claim to be earth

friendly, environmentally friendly, recycled,

biodegrad-

able

, natural, organic, or are labeled in such a way as to

take advantage of

green advertising and marketing

The Green Seal certification mark helps consumers

choose those products that actually are less harmful to the

planet and are not simply marketed in a clever way. Green

Seal uses the highly respected Underwriters Laboratory (UL)

for most of its product testing and certification. Through

its certification process and its educational activities, Green

Seal encourages people to think about how they can help

protect the environment in their everyday activities and their

daily lives.

Green Seal points out that its research shows that four

out of five consumers are more likely to buy a product

with its certification mark when choosing between similar

products. A Gallup survey found that the Green Seal certifi-

cation would have more impact on consumers than would

government guidelines. Thus, consumers, guided by Green

Seal, have the opportunity to influence the actions of major

670

corporations and their impact on the environment through

their purchasing decisions.

Green Seal is headed by Arthur B. Weissman, who

serves as its President and Chief Executive Officer. Its Chair-

man of the Board is Denis Hayes, the well-known environ-

mentalist and

solar energy

advocate who organized the

1970 and 1990

Earth Day

celebrations.

[Lewis G. Regenstein]

ESOURCES

RGANIZATIONS

Green Seal, 1001 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 827, Washington, D.C.

USA 20036-5525 (202) 872-6400, Fax: (202) 872-4324, Email:

greenseal@greenseal.org, <http://www.greenseal.org>

Green taxes

The search for alternatives to legislation and enforcement of

environmental policy

led a 1988 bipartisan Congressional

study group (Project 88) to call for the use of market forces,

including taxes, to protect the

environment

. Project 88’s

advocacy of these “green” taxes and other economic incen-

tives for reducing

pollution

is actually an old idea. Charles

Schultze, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers

under President Jimmy Carter, maintained in the 1976 God-

kin Lectures delivered at Harvard University (later published

as a book titled The Public Use of the Private Interest) that

detailed laws and bureaucratic requirements were a costly

and ineffective way to control pollution. Instead, reliance

should be placed on taxes and subsidies that would make

private interests more congruent with public goals.

The economists’ argument, posed by Project 88,

Schultze, and others, is that the harm pollution causes to

health, property, and aesthetics is not paid for by business.

Industries have no reason to consider this harm in their

production decisions. By taxing pollution, the government

would make polluters pay for the damage they inflict. Exter-

nal production costs would be incorporated into ordinary

production decisions. This would correct a market defect

and the market would become more efficient. Green taxes

would not lower environmental standards; they would pro-

vide more protection at the same level of expenditure, or

the same protection with less money.

The present regulatory system is expensive and ineffi-

cient. The amount of litigation is excessive, and relations

between business and government suffer. The uniform stan-

dards often do not make sense, because different companies

have different removal costs depending on their production

process and other factors. For example, a study in the St.

Louis area found that removing a ton of

particulate

matter

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Greenhouse effect

from a paper factory cost $4, while removing the same mate-

rial from a brewery cost $600.

Industries that can easily reduce pollution should be

encouraged to go beyond the standard and not stop at mere

compliance. Businesses for whom pollution reduction is a

great burden should be able to pay a fine equivalent to the

damage caused. To impose the same requirements on all

businesses regardless of cost is unfair. Moreover, regulations

do not permit pollution-reducing experiments. Companies

should be allowed to choose the lowest-cost method whether

it means treating wastes, modifying production processes,

substituting less-polluting raw materials, or other innova-

tions. By shifting away from uniform standards, pollution-

control costs can be cut drastically. According to one study,

an equivalent

air quality

can be achieved at 10 percent of

existing costs.

Why have governments been so slow to implement

green taxes? The primary reason is because taxes have never

been popular with legislators or their constituents. Nor do

interest groups support them. Businesses prefer court delays

and lobbyists, to the certainty of taxes. Environmentalists

argue that pollution must be eliminated and that companies

should not be given the right to pollute for a fee. Bureaucrats,

moreover, have been comfortable with the existing system.

Pollution-tax proposals proposed by Presidents Lyndon

Johnson and Richard Nixon were almost immediately dis-

missed.

During the Clinton administration there was new in-

terest and support for pollution tax proposals. However,

the necessary Congressional support did not materialize.

Moreover, industry spokespersons and lobbyists promoted

the idea that definitive scientific proof for global warming

had yet to be established.

However, in 2002, during the Bush administration,

which had previously stated that there was not enough evi-

dence to link industrial emissions to global warming, the

Environmental Protection Agency

released a report that

endorsed what many scientists had argued, i.e., that oil refin-

ery,

power plants

, and auto emissions were important

causes of global warming. In 2001, President Bush had

caused international outrage when he said that he would

not join other nations in ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, a

United Nations plan to cut emissions of green house gases,

because he claimed it would be too costly to the American

economy.

Yet by 2002 at least nine European nations had imple-

mented environmental taxes as a means of reducing air pol-

lutants, the growing shortage of

landfill

space, and to pro-

mote the

conservation

of water and electricity. But in spite

of the growing concern over global warming and pollution,

efforts to implement environmental taxes have not found

the needed support in this country due in large part to a

671

general anti-tax sentiment. At this point there still remains

a majority interest in preserving the status quo as opposed

to addressing needed environmental concerns through such

measures as environmental tax reform. With the growing

body of evidence supporting the need for action, and pressure

from other nations, that sentiment may change in the future.

However, the issue at that time will more likely be whether

or not it is too little reform, too late. See also Corporate

Average Fuel Efficiency Standards; Environmental econom-

ics; Externality; Internalizing costs; Pollution control; Pollu-

tion control costs and benefits

[Bill Asenjo Ph.D.]

ESOURCES

ERIODICALS

Franz, D. “The Environmental Tax Shift.” E/The Environmental Magazine,

May 10, 2002.

———, and B. W. Whitehead. “Dealing With Pollution: Market-Based

Incentives for Environmental Protection.” Environment 34 (September

1992): 7–42.

THER

Stavins, R. N., ed. Project 88—Harnessing Market Forces to Protect the

Environment. A Public Policy Study Sponsored by Senator Timothy E.

Wirth and Senator John Heinz. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Print-

ing Office, 1988.

Greenhouse effect

The greenhouse effect is a natural phenomenon that traps

radiation within the earth’s

atmosphere

. Natural

green-

house gases

include water vapor,

carbon dioxide

nitrous

oxide

methane

, and

ozone

, all essential to support life.

The enhanced greenhouse effect, the direct result of human

activities, increases concentrations of these gases in the atmo-

sphere, and leads to

pollution

of the lower atmosphere and

contributes to global warming. These gases let in sunlight

but tend to insulate Earth against the loss of heat, as do the

glass walls of a greenhouse. A higher concentration of the

greenhouse gases means a warmer

climate

. For example,

the twentieth century was been 1° warmer on worldwide

average than the nineteenth century—warming at a rate 20

times faster than average.

Carbon

dioxide (CO

) is considered the predominant

greenhouse gas and has the greatest impact on global heat.

From April 1958, when monthly measurements of CO

from atop the Mauna Loa

volcano

began, through June

1991, the CO

concentration in

parts per million

went

from 316 ppm to almost 360 ppm. The peak concentration

is due to the destruction of tropical rain forests and the

burning of

fossil fuels

, which accounts for half of the green-

house gases added to the atmosphere. CO

is dumped into

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Greenhouse effect

the atmosphere at a much faster rate than it can be withdrawn

or absorbed by the oceans or living things in the

biosphere

;

since 1765, its presence in the atmosphere has increased by

over 27%. CO

buildup in the next few decades to centuries

could be one of the principal controlling factors of the near-

future climate.

Methane, another greenhouse gas, is produced when

oxygen is not freely available and bacteria have access to

organic matter, such as in swamps, bogs, rice paddies and

moist soils. Methane also is produced in the guts of termites

and cows, in

garbage

dumps, landfills, emissions from

coal

mining,

natural gas

production and distribution, and

changing

land use

. Methane concentrations have increased

over 100% since 1765.

Nitrous oxide concentrations have increased in recent

years due to

fertilizer

use and chemical production, such as

in the manufacture of nylon. Nitrous oxide is also dispersed

during fossil fuel

combustion

biomass

burning and chang-

ing land use.

CFCs (

chlorofluorocarbons

), also implicated in

ozone layer depletion

, act as greenhouse gases. While

useful and widely used as refrigerants, their total effect is

significant because compared to a molecule of carbon diox-

ide, each molecule of CFC absorbs much more radiation,

thereby

trapping

heat in the atmosphere.

Other greenhouse gases are ground-level ozone (sun-

light reacting with

automobile emissions

). and water va-

por. Water vapor represents about two% of total atmospheric

composition, and is the most abundant greenhouse gas. With

methane and carbon dioxide, it plays an important role in

regulating the temperature of the planet through the produc-

tion of clouds.

Rain forest

destruction also contributes to global

warming. When the canopy of leaves is removed through

clear-cutting

or burning, the sudden warming of the forest

floor releases methane and CO

, in a kind of biochemical

burning. The massive increase in the number of dead tree

trunks and branches leads to a population explosion of ter-

mites, which themselves produce methane. Dead trees can

no longer store CO

or convert it to oxygen.

Two factors which appear to mitigate the effect of

enhanced greenhouse gases are aerosols and dust. Aerosols,

minute solid particles, are finely dispersed in the atmosphere

and have become an influence on the greenhouse effect.

Aerosols are produced by combustion, but they also come

from natural sources, primarily volcanoes. By blocking light,

aerosols and dust can offset warming from greenhouse gasses.

For example, a significant cooling trend in the spring and

summer of 1992 seemed to correlate with the eruption of

Mount Pinatubo

in the Philippines. The fall and winter of

1992 were fairly mild on worldwide average. As all the

particulate

matter from the Mt. Pinatubo eruption settled

672

out of the atmosphere, the surface cooling effects abated

and the global warming trend resumed.

Anthropogenic

(human-caused) greenhouse gases

now appear responsible for increasing the global average

temperature. According to current projections, global tem-

peratures may rise as much as 35.6–37.4° F (2–3° C) above

the pre-industrial temperatures by the year 2100. To place

this change in perspective, the temperature rise that brought

the planet out of the most recent

ice age

was only about

37.4–39.2° F (3–4° C).

The top 10 warmest years of average global recorded

temperatures were in the last 15 years of the twentieth centry

and saw devastating fires in

Yellowstone National Park

flooding

in Bangladesh, record number of hurricanes and

tornados, and a deadly heat wave and

drought

in the south-

eastern United States. It is probable, based on computer

models, that a resumption in warming will accompany

changes in regional weather. A 40-year trend of increased

precipitation in Europe and decreased precipitation in the

African

Sahel

(Ethiopia, the Sudan, Somalia) may be an

early consequence of global warming due to the greenhouse

effect. Longer and more frequent heat waves would result

in public health threats as well as inconveniences such as

road buckling, electrical brownouts, or blackouts.

Precipitation is likely to increase regionally because as

the temperature increases, more evaporation takes place,

leading to more precipitation. The average precipitation

event is likely to be heavier: wetter monsoons in coastal

subtropics; more frequent and heavier winter snows at high

altitudes and high latitudes; an earlier snowmelt, and a wetter

spring.

Increases in rain- or snowfall are not expected to offset

the effects of higher temperatures on

soil

, however. Higher

temperatures are expected to dry the soil in North America

and southern Europe, among other places, by boosting the

rates of evaporation and

transpiration

through plants. More

favorable agricultural conditions in high latitudes could move

the center of agriculture farther north into Canada and Sibe-

ria and out of the United States.

Other consequences of global warming from the en-

hanced greenhouse effect include the reduction of sea ice,

coastal sea level rises of several feet per century, more fre-

quent and powerful hurricanes, and more frequent and severe

forest fires. In the United States, the frequency of tornadoes

is near or above record levels for the years 1990–1994.

The rise of sea level is the most easily predicted conse-

quence. The one-degree increase in temperature over the

past century contributed to a 4–-in (10–20-cm) rise in mean

sea level. This could lead to severe and frequent storm dam-

age, flooding and disappearance of

wetlands

and lowlands,

coastal

erosion

, loss of beaches and low islands,

wildlife

extinctions, and increased

salinity

of rivers, bays and aqui-

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Greenhouse effect

The greenhouse effect. (Illustration by Hans & Cassidy.)

fers. However, because the global atmosphere operates as a

complex system, it is difficult, even with today’s sophisticated

computer models, to predict the exact nature of the changes

we are likely to cause with increased greenhouse gases. Scien-

tists have predicted that low-lying areas and islands, includ-

ing the Seychelles, the Maldives, the Marshall Islands, and

large areas of Bangladesh, Egypt, Florida, Louisiana, and

North Carolina will disappear over the next few decades.

The earth’s natural atmospheric cleanser — rain —

may wash excess greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere.

But until rates of greenhouse gases slow their rapid increases

or actually begin to decrease, the planet will get warmer. In

response to climate projections, the United Nations Frame-

work Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), adopted

and signed by 162 countries in 1992 at the Rio Earth Sum-

mit, sets country-by-country standards to reduce the emis-

sions of greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide.

Policy-makers in the United States, including Vice

President Albert Gore Jr., propose stricter requirements for

more fuel-efficient cars, “environment taxes” that penalize

heavy polluters and help pay for cleansing the atmosphere,

and trading technological advances for rain forest protection

Third World

countries. However, because global warming

often is made a political ping-pong ball, changes in political

administrations worldwide can extend to policy makers and

climate researchers, who depend on government assistance

for research.

673

The greatest controversy over slowing the rate of

greenhouse gases injected into the atmosphere seems to be

how to do it. Some scientists advocate increased use of

nuclear power

to reduce dependence on fossil fuels, but

that carries its own controversies. Nuclear

power plants

are

so energy-intensive just to build, the trade-off is negligible.

Conservation

and a switch from a dependence on fossil

fuels to dependence on renewable resources such as wind and

solar energy

, slows the rate of increase of carbon dioxide

emissions into the atmosphere. See also Environmental eco-

nomics; Environmental policy; Global Tomorrow Coalition;

The Global 2000 Report

[Linda Rehkopf]

ESOURCES

OOKS

Bates, A. X. Climate in Crisis. Summertown, TN: The Book Publishing

Co., 1990.

Houghton, J. T., and L. G. Meira Filho, ed. Climate Change 1995: The

Science of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group I to the Second

Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cam-

bridgeUniversityPress,1996.

ERIODICALS

“Indices of Climate for the United States.” Bulletin of the American Meteoro-

logical Society 77, no. 2 (February 1996): 279–292.

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Greenhouse gases

THER

Changing by Begrees: Steps to Reduce Greenhouse Gases. U.S. Congress, Office

of Technology Asessment, 1991.

Greenhouse gases

Greenhouse gases are gases in the

atmosphere

that absorb

and re-emit energy from the sun. They are believed to cause

the global climatic changes known as the

greenhouse

effect

The earth’s

climate

depends on a wide variety of gases,

vapors, and aerosols, and many of these contribute to global

warming.

Carbon dioxide

is the most abundant; the atmo-

sphere contains about 700 billion tons of this gas, and the

oceans contain about 50 times this amount. Water vapor

also contributes to global warming, and other important

greenhouse gases include

ozone

methane

nitrous oxide

and

chlorofluorocarbons

. Halogenated gases and a variety

of volatile organic

hydrocarbons

are also important trace

gases. Volatile compounds can absorb solar and infrared

radiation directly; they can also affect the photochemistry of

ozone, increasing the transmission of heat and thus indirectly

affecting the climate. While not gases, small long-lived am-

bient particles, such as particulates, agricultural fields,

wet-

lands

, and oceans. Industrial emissions of greenhouses gases

consist largely of

carbon

dioxide; these arise from burning

fossil fuels

such as

coal

, oil, and

natural gas

Increases in the concentrations of carbon dioxide

and methane in the atmosphere during this century have

been attributed in part to rapid increases in the utilization

of fossil fuels. Efforts to reduce greenhouse gases have

focused on limiting and controlling the burning of these

fuels. There have been programs to encourage the utiliza-

tion of other sources of energy such as

nuclear power

alternative energy sources

such as

solar energy

or hydropower. Technologies for controlling fossil fuel

emissions and sequestering ambient carbon dioxide have

also been developed, and researchers have emphasized the

importance of improving

energy efficiency

and

energy

conservation

. See also Air pollution; Air pollution control;

Flue gas; Pollution control

[Stuart Batterman and Douglas Smith]

ESOURCES

ERIODICALS

Dickinson, R. E., R. J. Cicerone. “Future Global Warming from Atmo-

spheric Trace Gases.” Nature 319 (1986): 109–115.

Hansen, J., A. Lacis, and M. Prather. “Greenhouse Effect of Chlorofluoro-

carbons and Other Trace Gases.” Journal of Geophysical Research 94 (1989):

16417–21.

674

The Greenpeace ship,

Rainbow Warrior

, sailing

up the St. George’s Channel offthe west coast

of England. Photograph by Noble. Greenpeace. Repro-

duced by permission.)

Greenpeace

Founded in 1971, Greenpeace is an international environ-

mental organization dedicated to protecting the global

envi-

ronment

through non-violent direct action, public educa-

tion, and legislative lobbying. With a worldwide membership

of over 2.5 million (approximately 250,000 in Greenpeace

USA), Greenpeace operates offices in some 30 countries and

maintains a scientific base in

Antarctica

Having mounted successful campaigns on a wide vari-

ety of environmental issues, Greenpeace is perhaps best

known for its direct and often confrontational crusades

against nuclear testing and commercial

whaling

. The group

has also garnered wide publicity for protesting various envi-

ronmental abuses by hanging enormous banners from

smokestacks, buildings, bridges, and the scaffolding used in

the renovation of the Statue of Liberty.

Greenpeace is presently active in four broadly defined

environmental issue areas—Atmosphere and Energy; Ocean

Ecology and Forests;

Toxins

; and Disarmament. In the area

Atmosphere

and Energy, Greenpeace works to eliminate

widespread dependence upon

fossil fuels

and lobbies for

laws and policies encouraging

energy efficiency

and

re-

newable energy

sources. The group is also working to

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Jacques Grinevald

halt the spread of

nuclear power

and the dumping of

radioactive waste

as well as to ban ozone-depleting

chemi-

cals

such as

chlorofluorocarbons

(CFCs).

With regard to Ocean Ecology and Forests,

Greenpeace seeks to protect both habitats and threatened

species

, including

whales

, harp

seals

dolphins

sea tur-

tles

elephants

, and birds of prey. It works to discourage

overfishing

and other wasteful fishing practices, particularly

the killing of dolphins in tuna nets. Greenpeace was instru-

mental in protecting Antarctica by persuading 23 nations to

sign an accord banning all mining in Antarctica for at least

50 years. Supporting the principle of

biodiversity

, the group

also works to protect tropical and temperate forests around

the world. In 2002, the ships MV Esperanza and Rainbow

Warrior stopped illegally logged timber from Africa and the

Amazon from being imported.

In the area of Toxins, Greenpeace is especially con-

cerned with stopping the use of unneeded

chlorine

in the

bleaching of paper and with preventing the dumping of

hazardous waste

Third World

nations. Particularly con-

cerned in recent years with

dioxin

, polychlorinated biphenyl

(PCB), CFCs, and pesticides, the group regularly investi-

gates, publicizes, and lobbies against chemical

pollution

Greenpeace also conducts research on the effects of toxic

substances on human beings and the environment and en-

courages

recycling

as a means of reducing pollution. In

1998, Greenpeace activists prevented a PVC plant from

opening in Convent, Louisiana.

Also concerned with Disarmament issues, Greenpeace

conducts research into the effects of warfare on human beings

and the environment and advocates the global elimination

nuclear weapons

. More immediately, the group also

urges the cessation of all nuclear and chemical weapons

testing and is trying to persuade the major powers to agree

to a global ban on naval nuclear propulsion.

In an effort to avoid compromising its goals and activi-

ties, Greenpeace does not seek corporate or government

funding. Nor does it become directly involved in the electoral

process in any of the nations in which it is active.

Greenpeace’s frequently confrontational tactics have on oc-

casion provoked angry responses from various governmental

authorities, including the bombing and sinking of

Greenpeace’s flagship vessel Rainbow Warrior by agents of

the French government in 1985. The Rainbow Warrior had

been in New Zealand preparing to protest French nuclear

testing in the South Pacific when it was sabotaged. In Octo-

ber 1992 one of Greenpeace’s ships was seized by the Russian

coast guard while investigating Russian nuclear waste dump-

ing in Arctic waters.

[Lawrence J. Biskowski]

675

ESOURCES

RGANIZATIONS

Greenpeace, 702 H Street NW, Washington, D.C. USA 20001 Toll Free:

(800) 326-0959, , <http://www.greenpeaceusa.org>

Greens

The name given to those who engage in

green politics

The term originated in Germany, where members of the

environmentally-oriented Green Party were quickly dubbed

die Gru

nen, or “the Greens.” In the United States, greens

refers not to a particular political party, but to any individual

or group making environmental issues the central focus and

main political concern. Thus the term covers a wide array

of political perspectives and organizations, ranging from

moderate or mainstream “light green” groups such as the

Sierra Club

and

Greenpeace

to more militant or “dark

green” movements and direct-action organizations such as

the

Sea Shepherd Conservation Society

and

Earth First!

as well as ecofeminists, bioregionalists, social ecologists, and

deep ecologists. Greens in the United States are divided over

many issues. Some, for example, are in favor of organizing

as interest groups to lobby for environmental legislation,

while others reject politics in favor of a more spiritual orienta-

tion. Some greens (for example, social ecologists and ecofem-

inists) see their cause as connected to questions of social

justice—the elimination of exploitation, militarism, racism,

sexism, and so on—while others (deep ecologists, for in-

stance) seek to separate their cause from such humanistic

concerns, favoring a biocentric instead of an anthropocentric

orientation. Despite such differences, however, all greens

agree that the preservation and protection of the natural

environment

is a top priority and a precondition for every

other human endeavor. See also Environmental ethics; Envi-

ronmentalism

Jacques Grinevald

French university professor

Jacques Grinevald is recognized as a key expert on

bio-

spheres

His studies and publications regarding the concept’s

initiator,

Vladimir Vernadsky

who published his work on

the subject first in 1926, have comprised the substance of

Grinevald’s work as a scientific historian and philosopher.

Grinevald has been on the faculty of the University

of Geneva (Switzerland) since 1987, serving as a part-time

lecturer. He received a science degree in policies from the

University Institute of High International Studies in Geneva

in 1970; and his doctorate of 3rd cycle of philosophy, Paris

X-Nanterre, in 1979. His early career included positions at

the University of Geneva as an assistant in charge of research

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Grizzly bear

and teaching to the faculty of law, in addition to duties as

the person in charge of press information; part-time lecturer

position at the federal polytechnic school of Lausanne, serv-

ing as program man technique

environment

beginning in

1981; and, serving as an invited professor at the Federal

Universidade of Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) in 1980 and 1984.

His active schedule has taken him all over the world for

conferences and seminars. Grinevald retains membership in

several professional societies, including International Society

for Ecological Economics; European Association for Bioe-

conomic Studies; and, World Council for the

Biosphere

Grinevald has been published extensively. His writ-

ings—among them chapters and articles in various books

and journals—include, The Greening of Europe in 1990; “The

Revolution Carnotienne: thermodynamics, economy and

ideology,” from the European Review of Social Sciences, 1976;

and, “There is holistic total concept for deep and

ecology

the Biosphere,” for Fundamenta Scientiae, 1987. He has lec-

tured and written on subjects that include the biosphere, the

greenhouse effect

, and famous scientists such as Stephen

H. Schneider, a native New Yorker, whose research has

focused on the greenhouse effect on civilization. He has

been a regular contributor to a journal established by a group

at the University of Geneva in 1990, Strategies Energetiques

Biosphere et Society (Energy Strategies, Biosphere and Com-

pany) (SEBES). What began as a special volume became a

publication devoted to the biosphere.

Writing for the publication Etat De La Planete (State

of the Planet), Grinevald discussed the key issues of the

biosphere. “This concept underlines the fac that the Life

exceeds the individuals and is an ecological phenomenon

of solidarity on various scales, microbial communities on a

planetary scale of the

Biosphere

. It is the observer which

decides scale of observation, so much [more] at the geo-

graphical level than at the temporal level. It is our world

civilization which discovers the Biosphere as a phenomenon

characteristic of the face of the Earth in cosmos. That implies

a certain responsibility. The interdisciplinary and holistic

concept of Biosphere associates astronomy, geophysics,

me-

teorology

biogeography

, evolutionary biology, geology,

the geochemistry and, in fact, all science of the ground and

the living.”

[Jane Spear]

ESOURCES

OOKS

Freeman, William. The Biosphere. San Francisco: Scientific American, 1970.

ERIODICALS

Grinevald, Jacques. “Biodiversity and Biosphere.” Etat De La Planete. No. 1.

Grinevald, Jacques. “On Holistic Aconcept for Deep and Global Ecology:

The Biosphere.” Fundamenta Scientiae (1987): 197–226.

676

THER

University of Geneva. “The Effect Greenhouse of the Biosphere Thermo-

industrial Revolution with Total Ecology.” 1990 [cited July 2002]. &

lt:http://unige.ch/sebes>.

University of Geneva. “Stephen H. Schneider.” SEBES. 1995 [cited July

2002]. &lt:http://unige.ch/sebes>

University of Geneva Faculty Web Page. [cited June 2002]. &lt:http://w3.un-

ige.ch>.

RGANIZATIONS

University of Geneva, 24 street Rothschild, Geneva, Switzerland Email:

Jacques.Grinevald@iued.unige.ch, www.unige.ch

Grizzly bear

The grizzly bear (Ursus arctos), a member of the family

Ursidae, is the most widely distributed of all bear

species

Although reduced from prehistoric times, its range today

extends from Scandinavia to eastern Siberia, Syria to the

Himalayan Mountains, and, in North America, from Alaska

and northwest Canada into the northwestern portion of the

lower 48 states. Even though the Russian, Alaskan, and

Canadian populations remain fairly large, the grizzly bear

population in the northwestern continental United States

represents only about 1% of its former size of less than 200

years ago. Grizzly bears occupy a variety of habitats, but in

North America they seem to prefer open areas including

tundra

, meadows, and coastlines. Before the arrival of Euro-

peans on the continent, grizzlies were common on the Great

Plains. Now they are found primarily in

wilderness

forests

with open areas of moist meadows or

grasslands

Female grizzly bears vary in size from 200–450 lb (91–

204 kg), whereas the much larger males can weigh up to

800 lb (363 kg). The largest individuals—from the coast of

southern Alaska—weigh up to 1,720 lb (780 kg). Grizzly

bears measure from 6.5–9 ft (2–2.75 m) tall when standing

erect. To maintain these tremendous body sizes, grizzly bears

must eat large amounts of food daily. They are omnivorous

and are highly selective feeders. During the six or seven

months spent outside their den, grizzly bears will consume

up to 35 lb (16 kg) of food, chiefly vegetation, per day. They

are particularly fond of tender, succulent vegetation, tubers,

and berries, but also supplement their diet with insect grubs,

small rodents, carrion,

salmon

, trout, young deer, and live-

stock, when the opportunity presents itself. In Alaska, along

the McNeil River in particular, when the salmon are migrat-

ing upstream to spawn in July and August, it is not unusual

to see congregations of dozens of grizzly bears, along the

riverbank or in the river, catching and eating these large fish.

Grizzly bears breed during May or June, but implanta-

tion of the fertilized egg is delayed until late fall when the

female retreats to her den in a self-made or natural cave, or

a hollow tree. Two or three young are born in January,