The water would be used to spread intensive dairy across huge swathes of Canterbury.

The proponents talk vaguely about about mitigating environmental effects. This is simply greenwash.

Every study of water quality issues in NZ shows that the key driver of water pollution over the last decade has been the spread of intensive dairy. The science is black and white.

If you spread more intensive dairying you will pollute the rivers and aquifers even more than they are already polluted. 90% of the pollution comes from the cows in the field not in the milking shed, so even if they meet the conditions of their dairy shed effluent discharge consent, the intensive stocking rates will still result on massive non-point source pollution. The science around this is quite settled.

Those with dollar signs in their eyes are trying to use a bit of greenwash to cover up the science.

What if I was to tell you this company, which has strong New Zealand links – including a former Prime Minister on the board –, is still breaching air quality standards?

You’d probably be appalled.

Richina, a company that owns Mainzeal construction, has been operating out of Shanghai since 1996. It produces leather and has been the supplier for a wide range of well known brands.

For one thing you just need to imagine how hard it is to breach air pollution regulations in China. Having been to China and blown my nose and seen black boogers come out I imagine that air quality is not one of their strong points – so these guys must really be doing something wrong.

Another reason is a New Zealand company thinks since we have tight regulations here it is okay to go pollute someone one else’s back yard. Is this part of our free trade agreement with China, we can pollute there and they can buy our strategic assets?

Richina has also been a bit ethically dubious with the way it has hidden the fact that it is the main driver behind the pollution. It has set up seven subsidiary companies, three (Shanghai Richina Leather, Shanghai Hongguang Leather and Shanghai Leather Chemical Factory) of which are routinely noted by locals as the worst polluters.

Thankfully some of the companies which were buying Richina leather have realised they need to be better corporate players. Brands like Timberlands have stopped buying from the company which has lead to an almost 80 percent drop in production for the leather producer.

Perhaps we should start asking questions of their NZ operation, Mainzeal, to see if they have the same cavalier attitude to the environment and public health in New Zealand.

You can read the full story by a Chinese blogger here and here.

Click here for detailed reports and photos from each trip.

Plus check out media coverage of Russel on the Manawatu, the Hutt, the Taumarere, and the Waihou.

This morning Russel’s been at Lake Ellesmere (the first lake on the tour) which has been closed due to toxic algal blooms since late Feb. I sincerely hope he didn’t swallow any!

Got any particularly dirty rivers or lakes in your area? How many times have your favourite swimming spots been closed this summer? Let us know in the comments.

You can find it here: www.goodfarmstories.org.nz

There’s a wealth of material, so grab a cup of tea and enjoy!

It’s very timely, given the headline of the DomPost today: “Manawatu River ‘among worst in the West’”. As Russel’s response notes, much of the pollution of the Manawatu comes from farming effluent, nutrient run-off, erosion and damage to tributaries that do not have fences and riparian strips. This photo was taken last year and shows an example of the problems.

Russel quite rightly says: “Many farmers are taking it upon themselves to improve the situation, but the large-scale changes we need to return the Manawatu to an acceptable level will require Government leadership.”

So the Greens are keen to highlight Good Farm Stories, shine a spotlight on pollution from all sources – Russel notes the contibution of industrial factories like Fonterra and Tui, and town sewage – and push the Government into action.

Because if we don’t, we’ll lose the ecology of our great rivers, the right of the public to enjoy them, our clean and green image and with it our export markets. So what are we waiting for?

Does he stand by his statement that “the Pike River underground coalmine near Greymouth was an example of modern mining practices that had a minimal impact on the landscape”; if so, is he proud of the fact that Pike River coalmine has received not one but two fines for environmental pollution just in the last few months – and they haven’t even started producing coal yet!

Does he stand by his statement that “Modern mining is quite different from what we’ve seen in the past. Old-fashioned mining techniques did leave a scar on the landscape, modern mining techniques are quite different”; if so, is he proud of the fact that OceanaGold’s new gold mine on conservation land regularly receives fines for environmental pollution?

The PM’s answer was simply that the fact they’re getting fined for pollution is proof the system is working!

By analogy, does that mean that just because violent offenders are caught, that the system is working and we don’t have to worry about violence in society – as long as the cops catch them?

Russel also tabled infringement notices showing Pike River has twice illegally discharged coal-fines into a local river, and OceanaGold in Victoria Forest Conservation Park has been fined for polluting a local stream – indeed the latter records a sediment load 20 times worse below the mine’s discharge than above it!

Not good enough John. As I’ve blogged before “surgical modern mining” looks more like “trench warfare” in reality.

The pulp mills have changed hands a few times but the contamination of the waters, sediments, wild foods, fisheries and ultimately human health remains an issue of deep concern to manawhenua and other local residents.

Up until now the companies have used Section 107(exceptional circumstances) of the RMA to pollute the river. “Exceptional circumstances” usually means something highly unusual and of a temporary nature as opposed to 53 years and then another 35 years. I would like to get Section 107 defined in law as 4 years maximum but given the direction of current Government reforms on the RMA this is not looking hopeful.

Possibly the most disturbing aspect of the new applications from the pulp mills is the statement that the effluent cannot be significantly improved so they want consent for the status quo.

It is said in many rohe “ko au te awa, ko awa ko au”. The manawhenua are the river in terms of whakapapa and identity. This continued abuse of their identity, food sources and rights is a breach of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. The black drain has been a stain on the Bay of Plenty since the 1950s and another 35 years is not acceptable when far cleaner technology exists for pulp and paper production.

Paper can be bleached without the use of chlorine (e.g. enzymes and oxygen) and waste from mills can be re-used. But it costs money to change and corporates need regulation. The river cannot wait forever to regain its well being. See you in court.

We recently asked Landcorp how it was doing with compliance on effluent consents.  Their General Secretary informs us that they had one infringement notice in 2008 and two in 2007. Landcorp has 37 dairy farms, so its non-compliance rate in 2008 was 3%. They have also ensured that the earlier breaches are not repeated.

That is significantly better than the 11% nationwide non-compliance rate amongst the 10,000 Fonterra dairy farms as reported in the Clean Streams Accord report. The compliance rate of other companies’ suppliers, such as Westland Dairy, Tatua and Synlait, are unknown, but frog readers may wish to write to them and ask. Compliance by itself is not enough to clean up our polluted waterways, but it is an important baby-step to a grown-up solution.

I’d also note that other Landcorp efforts to protect waterways and wetlands have drawn praise from DoC in Southland. So, well done farmers at Landcorp.

So this is a nod to what is possible, and proof positive that we can do better.  There’s a significant minority of farmers who are irresponsible. These farmers aren’t pulling their weight, these farmers give the diary industry a bad name, these farmers pollute the waterways so that cattle downstream can’t drink the water and our kids can’t swim in our rivers. They need to be prodded into action and that’s a role for government.

We also need to remember two other factors in this equation, the first is that our regional councils are charged with keeping up standards.  They often struggle for the will and resources to do the job thoroughly, but some are leading the way – the Horizon’s One Plan in particular.

Unfortunately, the new Government seems set on weakening the laws on which the councils’ and responsible farmers’ efforts are based.  The idea that we have ‘too much’ regulation misrepresents the issue. The question is not how much or how little government we have, but ‘does it work?’

Landcorp is showing it can work. We just need Government to require the others to follow.

The return to Beijing’s traffic- and smog-heavy status quo will mark the end of what may have been the world’s largest pollution control experiment: a restriction on cars, factories and construction that lasted for two months and resulted in the clearest skies Beijing has seen in a decade and raised vehicle speeds 10 percent to 43 kph.

All of which, to me, seems like another reason why it’s important to design cities, towns and transport systems in such a way that maximises people’s freedom to choose alternatives to the car if they want.  Because once you get to the stage Beijing is at the solution seems to become bans and limits on people’s ability to drive rather than making it easier to choose less polluting and healthy alternatives.

Car Free Day on Monday will be an important reminder that our towns and cities will be better if we invest now in building fast, efficient public transport and design that encourages walking, skating and cycling.

If you are in Wellington you can celebrate Car Free Day by joining Living Streets Walk Home to Hataitai (and maybe the Realm)

Sadly, as we’ve been discussing in recent weeks, peak oil is threatening people’s lives in the context of international security, war and militarism in the Middle East and other fossil fuel extracting countries.  But it seems here in New Zealand there are less people dying as the cost of burning a limited resource rises:

As of last night, 241 people had died on the roads this year, 37 fewer than at the same time last year and 22 fewer than at the same time in 2006 – the safest year since records began in 1965.

One theory for the drop is high petrol prices, which have some motorists driving less and others driving slower to conserve fuel.

I talked about this a couple of months ago. And of course that doesn’t take into account the healthy air benefits to everyone including non-drivers of fewer cars on our roads.

Detailed measurements from a Greenland ice core showed pollutants from burning coal–the toxic heavy metals cadmium, thallium and lead–were much higher than expected.

Luckily things have improved from the beginning of the last century when some really dirty coal was being burnt. But that’s still a lot of heavy metal potentially finding its way into our food chain. Well, not my food chain, because I don’t eat food from the Arctic, but all those North Americans and Europeans. But guess it will make our clean Antarctic food chain look more appealing?

Hat tip – Treehugger

However, Mr Parker said the FTA was a realistic platform for New Zealand to have an influence on China’s pollution.

“It is, particularly in areas where we’ve got strengths compared with them, for example we are the world leader in reducing emissions from livestock,” Mr Parker said.

I will be looking forward to the Minister’s advice on reducing livestock emissions given that New Zealand’s emissions from agriculture have risen 27% since 1990.

Perhaps the advice that Mr Parker will be giving Chinese officials might include how to convert forests and grain-based farms into dairy farms.  Or maybe he will be showing them how to irrigate their rivers in way that reduces the water quality of their aquifers and the water flow in their rivers. Or perhaps he will be advising how to increase the levels of oil-based fertilisers and pesticides on their livestock farms as well as the oil and coal associated with production and transport of their dairy industry.

To save ourselves the worry and effort of cleaning up our Southland rivers, we just need to think about them in a new way. Let’s call them drains, not rivers – the Aparima drain, the Oreti drain, the Mataura drain.

Problem solved. No more polluted rivers in our region.

Mallard’s press release yesterday calling for more measurement of water takes is laudable, but hardly a bold step in sorting out the appalling state of water in this country. In this morning’s interview, Russel slammed Labour’s glacial progress on water policy, saying that “after eight and a half years in government, it’s not good enough.”

Russel asked why Mallard is unwilling to review Benson-Pope’s decision to give ‘requiring authority’ to a private company in Canterbury that allows them to take land in order to build a massive irrigation scheme. All this at a time when water issues have local blood pressure running high. No real answer was given.

Russel asked why the MfE doesn’t make converting to dairy notifiable under the RMA, given that the MfE (and Mallard) acknowledge that such land use intensifications are the biggest source of the problem. Mallard hinted that this might happen, but hedged on timing or mechanism. Cowardice, I say!

Mallard said it would take at least a generation or two to clean up NZ’s disgustingly filthy waterways. No, really? Then why 8 years of delay and the promise of more delays? That’s half a generation gone already. Personally, I’d like to live to see the day we can once again swim safely in our rivers and lakes. Wouldn’t you?

Central Plains Water Trust has applied for a number of resource consents relating to the construction and operation of a large scale irrigation scheme. The applicants propose irrigating 60,000 hectares of land between the Rakaia and Waimakariri Rivers, an area stretching from the Malvern foothills to State Highway One.

The residents (human and otherwise inclined) who live downstream from the rivers on the aquifer of the Canterbury Plains can presumably expect more fertiliser, cow manure and urine in return for less water.

Those upstream don’t all come out better off either.

The scheme will however allow more cows to move into the neighbourhood, which won’t be so good for our environment or green house gas emissions, but great for any industrial cows who were getting lonely.

The latest (2007) estimate of the total cost of the scheme appears to be $N682 million or $6,826 per hectare irrigated.

Mr Moore, a former sailor, came across the sea of waste by chance in 1997, while taking a short cut home from a Los Angeles to Hawaii yacht race. He had steered his craft into the “North Pacific gyre” – a vortex where the ocean circulates slowly because of little wind and extreme high pressure systems. Usually sailors avoid it.

He was astonished to find himself surrounded by rubbish, day after day, thousands of miles from land. “Every time I came on deck, there was trash floating by,” he said in an interview. “How could we have fouled such a huge area? How could this go on for a week?”

I’m amazed by the sheer, blind lethargy that would let this new floating continent of plastic build up (‘The UN Environment Programme estimated in 2006 that every square mile of ocean contains 46,000 pieces of floating plastic’).  But also I’m left wondering what the impact of this might be on the environment’s health, and our own.  That’s a lot of plastic soup floating about near the bottom of our food chain.

For the last 14 years 30,000 indigenous people and Amazonian settlers have been trying to take a class action against one of the world’s biggest oil companies, Chevron for dumping 18 billion gallons of toxic waste into swamps creeks and rivers around the remote Ecuadorian oil town Lago Agrio between 1964 and 1992.   The amount of oil and toxics spilled has been described as 30 times greater that the amount spilled during the Exxon Valdez disaster and possibly the second worst environmental catastrophe in history after Chernobyl

“Four indigenous groups claim they are on the verge of extinction due to the contamination, and several peer-reviewed academic studies in evidence at the trial have found skyrocketing rates of cancer in the region in Ecuador where Chevron operated.”

Interestingly the claimants are not suing for damages, just to have their corner of Amazon cleaned up (at an estimated cost of US$ 6 billion).

Chevron is however denying the claims.  This from Vanity Fair earlier this year:

“It denies that the judge is fair, denies that the plaintiffs have legitimate complaints, denies that their soil and water samples are meaningful, denies that the methods the company used to extract oil in the past were substandard, denies that it contaminated the forest, denies that the forest is contaminated, denies that there is a link between the drinking water and high rates of cancer, leukemia, birth defects, and skin disease, denies that unusual health problems have been demonstrated—and, for added measure, denies that it bears responsibility for any environmental damage that might after all be found to exist. If Chevron can convince the court of the validity of even a few of those points, it will win the case and leave town.”

This, as Vanity Fair notes, is a valid financial strategy given that cleaning up the mess could cost US$6 billion. So delaying any payment by slowing the court down for a few years, with over 200,000 pages of evidence, means that $6 billion can earn a very tidy sum of interest, even if the case is lost. A judicial decision is expected in a few months.