StarSportsBlog

A handy summation of humankind’s “rampant human ecological dysfunction” from William Rees, the originator of the “ecological footprint” concept.

… in the 20th century alone the human population quadrupled to over six billion, energy use (mostly fossil fuel) increased by a factor of 16, fish catches (but not fish) increased 35-fold, industrial production expanded 40-fold, agricultural output exploded, etc., and all corresponding waste streams ballooned by equivalent multiples. Result? Soils erode 10 to hundreds of times faster than they develop, the oceans are emptying and acidifying, biodiversity is imploding, natural gas and petroleum are being depleted, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are a third higher than in pre-industrial times and the climate is going into convulsions.We also know at least the crude dimensions of the solution: for example, our best science tells us that to avoid a potentially catastrophic 2 (degree) C increase in mean global temperature, the world community needs to reduce carbon dioxide emissions 80 to 90 per cent by mid-century.

Source.Paul Raskin, initiator of the Great Transition essay series offers this:

On the one hand, we inherit the harbingers of a future that is rife with conflict, crisis, and misery—a dangerously damaged biosphere, extreme social and economic inequality within and among nations, deep geopolitical and cultural fissures, and a culture of consumerism that erodes meaning and well-being. On the other hand, we are bequeathed immense aggregate wealth; the power of science and technology; an ethos of equality and freedom; democracy, constitutional frameworks, and law-governed institutions; and the liberation of the human imagination. These assets are the preconditions for a global future based on human solidarity, human fulfillment, and ecological sustainability—a vision we refer to as a Great Transition.

“UK Bans U.S. Cotton Ads Over Green Claims”

The Guardian reports that the U.K.’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has banned a Cotton USA campaign that ends with the tag line “soft, sensual, and sustainable“.

Skeptical consumers — three complainants, apparently— argued that cotton is a “pesticide- and energy-intensive crop” that “depletes groundwater supplies”.

Responding to the decision, Cotton Council International — the export promotion arm of the National Cotton Council of America — contends that (1.) there is no universally accepted definition of the term sustainability and (2.) that modern U.S. cotton production meets the basic principles of sustainability defined by the U.N.:

Those principles are: economic viability, protection for the environment and social responsibility that together lead to improved quality of life for ourselves and also for future generations. (15 kb .pdf)