End of the Line & Fish4Tomorrow

On Wednesday we will be screening "The End of the Line" at University (KSU Common Room) as part of Environment Fair from 13:00 and 15:00. The screening is free, so come and watch this interesting, inspiring and intense documentary on the state of the world's fisheries.

We will also be introducing the Fish4Tomorrow Campaign, a project we are working on with other local NGOs (Nature Trust, Sharklab, Din L-Art Helwa and Get up Stand up) and volunteers. The campaign is an attempt at building public awareness on sustainable awareness and an attempt at nurturing a culture of sustainable consumption in this country of ours!

Come to find out more about what YOU can do to help solve this global problem!

International Women's Day Film Festival: Screening of "Pushing the Elephant"

Greenhouse would like to invite you to the screening of Pushing the Elephant which is part of International Women's Day Film Festival. The screening will be followed by a discussion facilitated by Dr Marceline Naudi from the Department of Social Policy and Social Work, FEMA.

Date: Monday, 7th March

Time: Noon

Location: Common Room, University of Malta.

STOPoverty in partnership with CAMYouths, Ceratonia Foundation, Greenhouse, KKG and SKOP is organising a Film Festival on the occassion of the 100th Anniversary of the International Womens' Day.

Film Synopsis:

In the late 1990s, Rose Mapendo lost her family and home to the violence that engulfed the Democratic Republic of Congo. She emerged advocating forgiveness and reconciliation. In a country where ethnic violence has created seemingly irreparable rifts among Tutsis, Hutus and other Congolese, this remarkable woman is a vital voice in her beleaguered nation’s search for peace. Now, Rose is confronted with teaching one her most recalcitrant students how to forgive—Nangabire, the daughter who remained behind.

When war came to Rose’s village, she was separated from her five-year-old daughter, Nangabire. Rose managed to escape with nine of her ten children and was eventually resettled in Phoenix, Arizona. Over a decade later, mother and daughter are reunited in the US where they must face the past and build a new future.

We follow Rose and Nangabire over the course of a year as they make up for lost time. Rose struggles to find balance in her life as a mother of ten and a full-time advocate for refugees. She is the co-founder for Mapendo New Horizons. Her speaking engagements have her traveling around the world from the White House to the UNHCR in Geneva to peace talks in Goma, Congo.

Meanwhile Nangabire, now seventeen, must adapt to America and discover how she fits into the sprawling Mapendo family. As mother and daughter get to know one another, they must come to terms with a painful past, and define what it means to be a survivor, a woman, a refugee and an American.

Through this intimate family portrait unfolding against the wider drama of war, we will explore the long-term and often hidden effects of war on women and families, particularly those in traditional societies—financial despair, increased susceptibility to rape, and social ostracism.Pushing The Elephant will capture one of the most important stories of our age, a time when genocidal violence is challenged by the moral fortitude and grace of one woman’s mission for peace.

http://www.artsengine.net/pushing_the_elephant/

Biodiversity concern on the rise in the European Parliament

Lately, the European Parliament passed a Motion for a Resolution which wasn’t given enough emphasis and perhaps rightly because it is rife with rhetoric. Nonetheless, this motion which centered around biodiversity, had some points worth mentioning and it would be good if we reproduce some of the things agreed by the MEPs on this motion namely:

1. The European Parliament (EP) slammed Japan for its prevention of protecting the blue fin tuna at a high-level meeting it hosted to discuss the Convention on Biological Diversity.
2. The EP was of the view that decisions to be taken at the next COP (the high-level meeting between heads of state to discuss the way forward with regards to climate change) must reflect the findings of the TEEB (a study which is giving monetary equivalence to ecosystem services, species, habitats etc.) and that the costs of biodiversity loss and the value of biodiversity need to be reflected in national accounts;
3. By 2020, subsidies harmful to biodiversity are eliminated, there is zero net deforestation, pressure on marine ecosystems through overfishing is halted, the introduction and establishment of invasive species are halted, at least 20% of land, fresh water and sea areas are protected, 15%of degraded ecosystems are restored;
4. Business engagement should include not only voluntary commitments but also obligations;
5. Member States should develop innovative systems for payment of ecosystem services and mobilizing private financing;
6. IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS SUSTAINABILITY OF THE PRODUCTS BEING TRADED IS A KEY ELEMENT AND THEREFORE THERE IS THE NEED TO INCLUDE PRODUCTION METHODS AND RESPECT FOR BIODIVERSITY IN ANY FUTURE WTO AGREEMENT.

ALL MALTESE MEPs VOTED IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION FOR RESOLUTION.


The majority of MEPs voted in favor and thus was adopted by the Parliament.

The Green Summer Bash

Exams were over and the time for chilling out began! It’s summer 2010!

But while many a student was victoriously celebrating the end of another scholastic year in some loud, crowded and smoky discotheque, Greenhousers set off for Buskett.

Together with That’s Rubbish- a group of volunteers who organize clean-ups usually at the Ghajn Tuffieha beach- Greenhouse decided to clean up an area of Buskett to start off their summer season.

After obtaining the necessary permits from a government department, a police station and MEPA a group of around 15 people gathered on a sunny Sunday afternoon equipped with garbage bags, gloves and water bottles.

The area which was to be cleaned was filled with all sorts of stuff. We carefully put all recyclable material in grey bags while the rest was disposed of in the black garbage bags. Volunteers scrambled all over the place with protective gloves on to clean the place of glass bottles, packaging waste, shotgun shells, beer cans and a plethora of other stuff that was thrown away by some people who thought the ground would swallow up the waste they would throw at it.

Thirty three full bags were collected!

After the cleanup, sweaty but satisfied, Greenhouse organized a relaxing couple of hours. With salads and water to replenish the drained volunteers and acoustic music to up the spirits of those around, people gathered and chatted the night away. When night time came, we packed up everything careful not to leave any waste behind.

And so ended a very fruitful afternoon- happy with our taking away over thirty bags of rubbish from Buskett and relieved that summer is with us and we can all enjoy the company of our friends in good spirits.

As I was picking up the various waste from the ground, I realized that the commonest waste was packaging waste. Everything from wrappers, water bottles and food packages were fluttering all over the place. So I thought I can share with you some suggestions as to how you can reduce packaging waste. Remember, everything you buy from a supermarket is packaged in some sort of material which is only used for a brief period of time and solely for transporting the product from one place to another. It is immediately thrown away as waste once you take what’s inside. So we can spare an extra thought before buying something and choose those things which have little packaging or, at least, avoid those products which are uselessly packaged in excess material.

These are some hints that would be good to keep in mind:

• Buy in bulk. It’s better if you buy a packet of 500g, for example, rather than two of 250g. This also applies for bottled liquids.
  
  

• Carry your own bags while shopping.
  
  

• Try to buy loose products were available. This applies for fruits and vegetables and things you can buy over the counter rather than those which are pre-packaged.

  

• Try to avoid products which have various layers of packaging. For example, try to opt for cereals which have only one outer layer of packaging rather than those having a plastic bag placed inside a cardboard box. Sponges which are individually wrapped in a plastic bag and then placed in a cardboard box together with numerous other sponges use an exaggerated amount of packaging.

• Choose packaging that is made from recycled material, and preferably, is recyclable.

• Choose paperboard boxes instead of plastic bags.

Life in a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone

The Ministry for Resources and Rural Affairs (MRRA) recently published the Consultation Document on the second Nitrates Action Programme for Malta. The MRRA asked for NGOs and other stakeholders to review this document and to pass on any recommendations to the ministry - Greenhouse has discussed the changes in the Action Programme and passed them on to the Ministry. Before delving into the details of the Action Programme and the recommendations brought forward by the Greenhouse team, letʼs look into what nitrate pollution is and why people in Malta should care about a Nitrates Action Programme, in the first place.

The main concerns regarding Nitrate Pollution involve the contamination of water by large concentrations of nitrates. There are three main reservoirs which are typically polluted by nitrates. The first two are the marine environment and inland freshwater habitats, where an excess of nitrate leads to algal blooms and c resulting in a potentially catastrophic changes in the biodiversity of the habitats. [1] Now this might be alarming enough but the effects of nitrate pollution on groundwater supplies are far more frightening for the man in the street who may not care so much for fragile marine ecosystems. High concentrations of nitrates in drinking water can lead to methemoglobinemi and gastric and intestinal cancer [2]; considering Malta gets around half of itʼs drinking water from groundwater sources [3], it is quite important that we protect these sources from nitrate pollution.

The recommended maximum of nitrates in groundwater, set by the EUʼs Nitrates Directive is at 50mg/L [3,4], however out of Maltaʼs 15 Groundwater bodies (GWBs) 11 are above the limit (8 of them are over double the limit). It is worth mentioning that out of the four bodies not over the limit, one is only 0.6mg/L short of the limit, while the concentration for another body (the Marfa GWB) has not been calculated yet and is expected to be above the limit. So really, only two ground water bodies can be considered to be not polluted by nitrates.[3] This is all outlined in detail within the second section of the Action Programme.

In 2008, the MRRA commissioned a study to determine the source of nitrates in Maltaʼs Groundwater bodies, which was carried out by the British Geological Survey (BGS). This interesting study, involving isotopic signatures of oxygen and nitrogen found that most of the nitrates found in GWBs originate from cultivated areas and also from manure dumps. [5] It has long been supposed that agricultural practices were the cause for nitrate pollution of local water bodies, in fact the whole scope of the first Nitrates Action Programme started in 2004 was based on agricultural management practices and the setting up of the Code of Good Agricultural Practice (CoGAP) (another major aim of the action programme was to set up rugged monitoring schemes to ensure scientific data is available).

As the main document suggests Malta has a massive problem with nitrate pollution, especially in our Groundwater bodies, which has no doubt been caused by poor agricultural practices (using too much fertiliser, illegal dumping or poor storage of manure, etc). Here are the solutions (in summary) as put forward by the MRRA, built on the original Nitrates Action Programme (2004) with some practical amendments:

• Application of fertiliser (both organic and inorganic) is prohibited between 15th October and 15th March.
• Application of fertiliser is prohibited on land which is close to watercourses or where the soil condition or slope suggests that there is a significant risk of the fertiliser being swept away by runoff.
• Application of slurry is prohibited
• Application of fertilisers is prohibited within a 5m radius of fresh watercourses of any kind and 50m from a borehole in use for public water supply.
• Application of fertilisers shall be based on fertilisation planning taking into consideration the balance between the foreseeable nitrogen requirements of the crops and the nitrogen supply to the crops from the soil, water and from fertilisation.
• Inorganic and organic fertilisers shall be applied close to sowing and splitting of fertiliser application is recommended whenever possible.
• The amount of “total nitrogen” applied from livestock manure, including excreta by animals themselves, shall not exceed 170 kg N/ha per year.
• The capacity of storage facilities for livestock manure of a holding shall be sufficient and adequate to provide for the storage of all the livestock manure which is likely to require storage between the 15th October to 15th of March.
• Manure shall be stored in a leak-proof, covered storage clamp which is connected to a cesspit. The Cesspits must be leak-proof, covered and must be sufficient to collect all urine and washings for at least 15 days (both cesspits and manure clamps must be certified by a warranted architect).
• Crop rotation shall be practised where necessary.
• Farm holdings with an area >1 ha and under intensive irrigated cultivation shall have a Nutrient Management Plan.
• Users of organic and/or inorganic fertilisers shall be registered with the competent authority responsible for nitrates.
• Users of organic or inorganic fertilisers shall be required to attend a compulsory course on the use of fertilisers.
• All sales and purchases of organic and inorganic fertilisers shall be notified to the competent authority responsible for Nitrates.
• All importers, distributors and resellers of fertilisers shall be registered with the competent authority.

Greenhouse gave five recommendations for the ministry to consider:

1. The banning of ammonium nitrate fertilisers; ammonium nitrate is very soluble and is often washed away before the crops can absorb it leading to a high degree of nitrate pollution.
2. Encouraging the use of Slow-release fertilisers, such as methylene urea, which are less susceptible to being washed away and into the water table.
3. Encouraging and providing incentives for proper crop management with crop rotation utilising leguminous plants to provide natural sources of nitrates.
4. The removal of the point banning fertiliser application during the rainy season; although this ban would be beneficial it is most probably quite impractical especially since farmers could apply an excess of fertiliser prior to the ban, causing just as much damage. We are inclined to believe that such a ban would result in an unnecessary burden on the farmer.
5. Awareness on the damage of excess-irrigation and monitoring the water consumption for irrigation could help reduce nitrate pollution by slowing down the rate at which fertiliser dissolves. Metering and other enforcement measures could be used along with educational campaigns.

It was found, by the BGS, that the time that water spends in the aquifer in Malta is very long (15-40 years in Malta and 25-60 years in Gozo) which, when coupled with the long time it takes for nitrates to reach the water table, means that even if even all nitrate-producing activities could be stopped tomorrow, it would take decades to flush out nitrate to an acceptable level.[Stuart, Marianne (BGS). Going Underground. Planet Earth (Summer 2009) - National Environment Research Group (UK)]

In other words, we will be living in a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone for many years to come.

MEP Watch - Food Labelling: Know What You're Buying

‘Food labelling must be easily recognisable, legible and understandable for the average consumer’(Amendment 67).

When we go shopping for food from our supermarkets, we may look at a particular product and ask ourselves: ‘Is this good for me?’ ‘Should I pick something healthier than this?’ ‘Maybe this is not too bad afterall?’

Well, the European Parliament tried to make this frequent moment in our life easier. Food labeling was discussed and some very important results came out of it.

It is important to note that this vote covered almost every aspect of labeling- from the position of the labeling to what should be written, in what language etc. etc.

I went over the amendments and it wasn’t an easy task at all-there were over 300 of them! I picked up what I think are the most relevant for us as consumers and those that were either interesting to give a second thought about or those which created a bit of a heated debate.

Firstly, it is useless to read the nutritional information on a food item without having any idea of the difference between proteins and carbohydrates, that there are different types of fats and the limit above which salt can become dangerous. Thus amendment 4 states that

“Education and information campaigns are an important mechanism for improving consumer understanding of food information.”

This amendment was adopted by the majority of the European Parliament.

Amendment 6 excludes a set of parties which are involved with the food sector from following the regulations set out. These are farmers which market directly their own products and providers of mass catering services. The reason for the former is that farmers would be overstretched if they had to go through all the process of labeling their own products- and since farmers do not use extra ingredients or other additives this is understandable. The mass catering services are not obliged to follow these regulations because there are no standardized procedures for them and ingredients change all the time. This amendment was adopted by the majority of the European Parliament.

Amendment 13 requires products which claim they have some particular physical benefits- for example cereal flakes claiming that they lead to weight loss- to have these claims accompanied by a diet plan explaining the conditions under which these results may be obtained. This amendment was adopted by the majority of the European Parliament.

There is no need to comment on amendment 16 which states that “It is possible to envisage consumers obtaining additional information via terminals placed in supermarkets. Those terminals would, by reading the barcode, furnish information about the product concerned. Likewise, it is possible to envisage consumers accessing additional information via a web page on the Internet.” This amendment was adopted by the majority of the European Parliament.

Article 37 of the text specifies that

“To appeal to the average consumer and to serve the informative purpose for which it is introduced, and given the current level of knowledge on the subject of nutrition, the information provided should be simple and easily understood. Research has indicated that consumers find the information in the principal field of view or ‘front of pack’ is useful when making purchasing decisions. Therefore, to ensure that consumers can readily see the essential nutrition information when purchasing foods such information should be in the principal field of view of the label.”

A very important amendment is amendment 251 which refers to GMOs. With the advent of GMO cultivation behind the door for Europeans, consumers have the right to know if the product they’re consuming is genetically modified. This amendment states that

“Operators in the catering sector and anyone providing food products shall inform consumers whenever the product intended for consumption is a GMO product and/or contains derivatives and substances that may be classified as GMOs.”

FROM THE FIVE MALTESE MEPS ONLY JOHN ATTARD MONTALTO VOTED IN FAVOUR OF THIS AMENDMENT. THIS AMENDMENT WAS DEFEATED OVERALL.

Another amendment which may be very interesting to ponder about and which is the first in its field is amendment 266. This amendment combines food production with its source and its potential social impacts by letting consumers know if their food has been produced under conditions such as child labour, forced labour, discrimination etc. by including a percentage value which would be set to 0 if a guarantee can be given on the absence of these practices. Related with this is amendment 271 which states that

“it shall be admissible to provide information on environmental, social and ethical considerations regarding foodstuffs.”

BOTH THESE AMENDMENTS WERE VOTED AGAINST BY THE MAJORITY OF PARLIAMENT.

Amendments 272, 288 and 314 were perhaps the most hotly debated. They provided for the possibility of including a coloured scheme for nutritional information to give consumers a better schematic representation of what ingredients they should be cautious about and make the information more understandable to consumers. In amendment 314 it was suggested that

“the text "Low", "Medium" or "High" in combination with the colours green, amber and red”.

SIMON BUSUTTIL AND DAVID CASA VOTED AGAINST THIS COLOR-CODED SCHEME WHILE JOHN ATTARD MONTALTO, LOUIS GRECH AND EDWARD SCICLUNA VOTED IN FAVOUR. THIS SCHEME WAS DEFEATED OVERALL AND NEITHER OF THE AMENDMENTS MADE IT THROUGH TO THE FINAL ADOPTED TEXT.

Through these texts the European Parliament even rejected these coloured schemes applied at national levels.

Some other amendments which one would do well to notice include:

• Amendment 10 states that “mandatory food labelling should be confined to basic information which is demonstrably of great interest to the majority of consumers” and this is done “to avoid unnecessary packaging waste” and “to enable food information law to adapt to changing consumers' needs for information”.

ADOPTED

• In line with amendment 4 discussed above, amendment 26 states that” The mandatory provision of nutrition information on the front and back of the packaging should be supported by actions by Member States such as a nutritional action plan as part of their public health policy, which will provide specific recommendations for nutrition education for the public and support informed food choice.”

ADOPTED

• Amendment 33 calls on a ban on artificial trans fatty acids- the consumption of which are directly related to overweight and obesity. Until such a ban enters into force, the labeling of this ingredient should be mandatory.

THIS AMENDMENT WAS VOTED AGAINST BY THE MAJORITY OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT.

• Amongst other amendments focusing on the country of origin of foods, amendment 65 states that “For meat and foods containing meat, the country of origin shall be defined as the country in which the animal was born, reared for most of its life, and slaughtered. If different, all three places shall be given when reference is made to the country of origin.”

THIS AMENDMENT WAS VOTED AGAINST BY THE MAJORITY OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT.

• If the product contains an ingredient which is an ‘imitation’, for example cheese made from vegetable oil, amendment 78 states that ‘the packaging must prominently bear the marking 'imitation' or 'produced with’.

ADOPTED

• Deceiving clauses on packaging should be reduced through amendment 79 which doesn’t allow packaging to highlight normal properties of food as specific characteristics. For example, fruit gums cannot bear the slogan ‘fat-free’ because fruit gums contain no fat by nature.

ADOPTED

• Article 16 of the text adopted explicitly states that ‘… mandatory food information shall appear in a language easily understood by the consumers of the Member States where a food is marketed.’ You cannot have information appearing only in Arabic if you live in Malta.
  

• The word ‘nano’ must be indicated for products containing nanomaterials according to amendment 130.

ADOPTED

• The term ‘vegetarian’ should not be applied to foods that are, or are made from or with the aid of products derived from animals that have died, have been slaughtered, or animals that die as a result of being eaten. The term ‘vegan’ should not be applied to foods that are, or are made from or with the aid of, animals or animal products (including products from living animals)- Amendment 175.

ADOPTED

Votes were also passed to ask producers of processed foods, such as biscuits and prepared meals, to indicate on the front packaging the content of energy, salt, sugar, fat and saturated fat together which should be accompanied by the guideline daily amounts and expressed with values per 100g or per 100ml.

This vote was preceded by huge pressures from the food and drink industry. The industry invested more than 1 billion euros to lobby to block the coloured scheme for products- a figure denied by the Confederation of the Food and Drink Industries of the EU.

Corporate Europe Observatory said:

“Food industry lobbyists have bombarded MEPs with information about the labelling scheme, in the biggest lobbying campaign seen in Brussels in recent years,” and that industrial lobbyists managed to "drown out the message from public health campaigners on a scale of 100 to 1."

Status: Refugee PR

During the last week, 21-23rd April , Greenhouse organized a series of raise awareness events on African irregular migrants. This was achieved by screening a film, organizing an information meeting and through debate presented by Studenti Harsien Socjali.

When working on Status: Refugee, as the series of events were dubbed, Greenhouse felt that the Maltese community lack information about why these people flee, embarking on such perilous journeys in search for a better place

Thus, Greenhouse decided to hold an information meeting -Exodus from Africa,- which took place in the University Quadrangle. Many were the students who stopped and listened to what was being said. The guests from JRS, UNHCR and the Refugee Commissioner’s office were well prepared to answer the various misconceptions. This complimented the film screened a day before- God Grew Tired of Us- which touches on the different and difficult situations of immigrants when they start a new life in another country.

Coincidentally a week before Status: Refugee Greenhouse came across a Facebook group,- Against Islam and African Refugees in Malta- disseminating xenophobic messages towards the refugees. Such groups epitomizes the sentiment of discomfort that Greenhouse tried to address through its events.

Although programs for the asylum seekers are important, Greenhouse believes that educational programs and information should be given to the Maltese. The geopolitics of Africa are rather complex, post colonial effects may still be felt in these troubled countries and the local government cannot just send back the people who come to seek protection here as that puts these people’s lives at risk.

Greenhouse is a non-governmental, non-political organization set up by a group of university students which hold common together common values; social justice, respect for environmental sustainability, animal welfare and participatory democracy.

Status: Refugee

Greenhouse are back with another event on campus. This time working together with SHS we are organising a 3 day programme in which we shall be raising awareness and insight on irregular migration. The programme is divided daily to give time for reflection on the day event.

Programme of Events

On Wednesday a film screening aims at showing the journey of what an asylum seeker faces in becoming a refugee and starting a new life.

Wednesday 21st April, 2.30pm Common Room

Film screening by Greenhouse: God grew tired of us

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On Thursday a debate is set to build up on the topic as an insight into the journey is given by people directly involved with irregular migrants from diverse geographical regions.

Thursday 22nd April, 12.00pm Quadrangle:

Debate by Greenhouse: Exodus from Africa.

Panel: JRS representative, Andrew Galea Debono from UNHCR, Nathalie Zerafa and Sarah Attard from the Refugee Commissioner's office.

Moderator: George Bugeja

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On Friday a debate will be focused on what facilities for integration are present in Malta for refugee status migrants.

Friday 23rd April, 10.00am Quadrangle:

Debate by SHS: Migration today and tomorrow.

Panel: Kristina Zammit from JRS, Goitom Yosief from Eritrea, Hasan Muhummad Seleban from Somalia.

Greenhouse and SHS would like to invite you all to share your views and give contributions to all events.

Dispose.... until there's nothing left to dispose of

As you may know Greenhouse collected a number of small plastic bottles from students for us to fill up and place two in each flushing unit of each University toilet to conserve the equivalent volume of water that would otherwise be flushed down the sewers.

But where would these plastic bottles ended up? If they were thrown in a bring-in site or a waste separating skip, they would have ended up at Sant’Antnin. So Joseph and I decided to pay the place a visit to see what the place is all about.

And we were impressed.

We found huge warehouses filled with waste. Large excavators (gafef) shoving mounds of our containers and other packaging.

Look at that! That is one pile of many that were there staring at us. And it really says something about our lifestyle. I don’t want to put words in your mouth…but does it convey any message at all?

The picture above is one of the plastic piles. The most abundant items in this pile were detergent and water bottles. Easter egg wrappings and all sorts of fancy packaging lied there. How many of these containers did we really need? How long did we use them? Could we have done without them?

Transparent and colored plastic items are separated and treated differently. At the end plastic is shredded and the final shreddings exported.

A kind worker showed us around and he explained what happened in this waste treatment plant.

Paper waste is also astronomical. Paper is separated from carton; white paper is separated from colored ones, glossy paper from non-glossy.

Huge carton boxes filled with all sorts of paper lied there- junk mail of all sorts, old and worn out books and papers, magazines, leaflets and boxes of the ‘Government Gazette’- I couldn’t believe my eyes.

These papers are then packed into large batches and exported. They are then treated with a special dye to remove the ink and the paper re-used. This process is what makes recycled paper more expensive.

There was also a mound of box files but these are not easy to recycle as they have to be dismantled and the metal treated differently than the plastic covering.

Our guide also showed us a box full of transparent plastic tubes.

This is what your plastic bottle looks like before it is moulded into what we know as a plastic bottle. Bottling companies receive these tubes and, using their machinery, give them their proper shape. Apparently, some of these tubes are received damaged and they have to be thrown away.

Our guide concluded by pondering on some things: how very few people attend their Open Days, how many people still decide to mix their waste and how University students are not sensitive to the issue and decide to also mix their waste (Note: he was talking about skips and bring-in sites. The tri-bin system that was in place in the quad has nothing to do with this.)

As we left the place, passing by a mound of broken deckchairs some thoughts came rushing to my mind.

We are extracting the planet’s resources, turning them into things and then throw them away.

We are using very precious material to turn into useless, stupid things we can do without.

We are filling our landfills with waste and exporting an enormous amount of more waste.

I want to share with you two quotes:

“We don’t throw things “away,” we simply put them someplace where they defile the land, foul the water, pollute the air or change the earth’s atmosphere.”

-Brian Walsh & Sylvia Keesmaat, Colossians Remixed: Subverting the Empire, 2004

“Source reduction is, on the face it, perhaps the most appealing of all the possible approaches to solid-waste management. “

-William Rathje and Cullen Murphy, Rubbish!, 1992

Film Screening and exchanges on Organic Produce & Products

Next Sunday, as most of you might already have noticed, Greenhouse will be supporting and particiapting in the running of the event 'Kissed by the Grape: Organic Wine Documentary and Free Wine Tasting'. This event will go into the theme of the Kieku L-ikel Jitkellem Camapign of which the main organisers Food First Malta and us are involved in. Details to the event are as follows:

Date:
18th April

Time:
1st Screening @ 14:00
2nd Screening @ 18:00

Location:
Snoopy's, Sliema

Given the limited spaces available we encourage you to book at: events@snoopysmalta.com

Rediscovering natural medicine

Some time ago, (yes this is a long awaited blog!) Malcolm and I (Monique) attended a talk on natural medicine, which was hosted by Ayur Veda Wellbeing in St. Venera. Greeted with either herbal tea or Acai berry juice, we settled down quietly for an hour long talk which was delivered by Ruben Bartolo who works as a naturopath.

Naturopathy is a medicinal system based on the healing power of nature. The approach of the naturopath is rather a holistic one, by which he tries to understand the body, mind, and spirit when dealing with a disease. The naturopath does not treat the disease but the person. Naturopaths use herbal medicine, acupuncture, iridology and clinical nutrition.

The naturopath helps the person in supporting one’s own healing abilities and empowering him to make the necessary changes for a healthier lifestyle. Naturopathy is a broad treatment system which is free of drug use, which came about as a medical system over time. It was present in different cultures and places all over the world, becoming very popular in Europe especially in the 19th century Germany. It was further developed in late 19th and early 20th century in the United States.

Central to naturopathy is the vis medicatrix naturae, nature’s healing power followed by primum non nocere and tolle causam. Nature’s healing power is inherent self-organizing and the healing process of the living systems. It establishes, maintains and restores health. The naturopath’s role is to support the creation of a healthy internal and external environment. Primum non nocere refers to first do no harm; this is a fundamental principle in naturopathic practice. Tolle causam refers to the treatment of causes of disease rather than the symptoms contrary to conventional medicine.

Mr Bartolo then spoke about clinical nutrition, iridology, traditional herbal medicine, and homeopathic medicine which I shall be describing briefly below. Clinical nutrition is based on the relationship between the disease and the nutrition. The naturopath helps the person improve one’s diets and changing them according to one’s lifestyle. Nutritional counselling and support is one of the major components of Mr Bartolo’s treatments.

Iridology is an alternative medicinal practice studying the iris of the eye by examining the patterns, colours and other characteristics. Scientific evidence for this practice is very limited; the link between aspects of the iris and patient’s state of health is not yet established scientifically. Iridologists or naturopaths trained in iridology, highlight organs or systems which are healthy and ones that are inflamed. Their general equipment is a flashlight and magnifying glass, cameras or slit lamp microscopes. The patterns are compared to a chart that is used to correlate specific zones of the iris with specific parts of the body.

Traditional herbal medicine or phytotherapy, comes as a tincture, syrup or capsules. The therapeutic properties of a plant can be extracted from any part of the plants. Fans of green tea, might not know that green tea and green tea extracts have been used to prevent and treat a variety of cancers. It is also used for improving mental awareness and lowering cholesterol levels. Scientifically, studies have suggested that it may help protect against or slow the growth of certain cancer. It also suggested that its caffeine content can contribute to improving mental awareness. The data with regards the lowering blood cholesterol levels is not reliable yet.

Homeopathic medicine which is produced from plants, animals and minerals fall under the practice of homeopathy. Samuel Hahnemann standardized the practice in 18th century Germany. It is based on the Principles of Similars, where like treat like. By using infinitesimal amounts of substances which cause similar symptoms to that which is being treated results in a treatment free from side effects and increased therapeutic effect. This process of diluting is referred to as potentization. The homeopaths use only the homeopathic approach unlike the naturopaths which train in several forms of diagnosis and treatment, including homeopathy.

Unlike alternative medicine, conventional western medicine treats diseases and not people. The drugs are designed to prevent cells of the body from performing some function that is it carrying out abnormally. The drugs have a number of undesired side effects and may be fatal. By saying this I would not like to imply that one should use only alternative medicine. Alternative medicine has been controversial since it is sometimes very limited when it comes to scientific back up. Thus it has been renamed to complimentary alternative medicine. As it complements the conventional western medicine.

References:

Iridology. Retrieved online from http://www.crystalinks.com/iridology.html

Guild of Naturopathic Iridologists International. About iridology. Retrieved online from http://www.gni-international.org/about-iridology1.htm

Herbs at a glance: Green Tea. Retrieved online from http://nccam.nih.gov/health/greentea/index.htm.

Russo Tarascio, J. Naturopath Vs. Homeopath. Retrieved online from http://www.ehow.com/about_5417341_naturopath-vs-homeopath.html

Principles of Naturopathic Medicine. Retrieved online from http://www.naturodoc.com/cardinal/naturopathy/nat_principles.htm

University of Maryland Medical Centre (2009) Naturopathy. Retrieved online from http://www.umm.edu/altmed/articles/naturopathy-000356.htm

Ayur Veda Wellbeing on FaceBook

What Sovereignty is all about... Food and Nutrition!

Recently I attended a conference in Gozo with the subject: ‘Organic Agriculture and Eco-Gozo’ organized by, amongst others, MOAM (Malta Organic Agricultural Movement), IFOAM (International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements) and the Ministry for Gozo.

I must say that it was an incredibly informative and interesting conference with some top speakers delivering very educational and provoking talks. These included Olafur R Dyrmundsson from Iceland which discussed the challenges faced by a small island state, Leen Laenens (Belgium) which explored the topic of seed diversity and the farmers’ rights to them, Anamarija Slabe (Slovenia) which gave a thorough insight into a low-carbon Slovenia, Eva Acs (Hungary) which spoke about organic agriculture in Hungary and Dr. Alex Beck (Germany) which provided the attendees with a brief introduction on EU Regulation on Labeling of Organic Products.

But I want to focus on the first talk which was delivered. Christopher Stopes from the UK is the President of the IFOAM UK and gave a very provoking insight into food sovereignty. This is a resume of what was discussed.

Agriculture is an important economical sector. Tourism, rural development and environmental stewardship are all dependent on this sector. The farmer has many very crucial roles in society including the provision of food and safeguarding the environment.

We are currently facing an enormous amount of problems not least among them are biodiversity decline, health problems especially with cardiovascular diseases and obesity and climate change.

Organic agriculture in particular tries to solve many of these problems through its approach and these are varied. In fact the approach is a ‘multifunctional’ approach. Organic agriculture is considerate of culture, well-being, nature, diet, taste, yield, nutrition, soil, water, animal welfare, greenhouse gasses, energy and more.

We cannot continue with a productionist mindset which pulls the supply chain with it. In fact, this can be seen in light of ethics- the good/bad- which currently defines production. We need to move away from ethics and more towards ethos- the way we live. By focusing on the latter, ethics will fall into place and production will be seen in its correct context.

Greenhouse gasses are driving climate change and this is especially driven by meat consumption. There are approximately 5 billion chickens we can’t afford to eat, which are dumped into other markets especially those of developing countries with very low prices, ruining the local supply chain and economical incentive for the locals’ production. For chicken farming, Brazil clears huge swathes of land to provide soya to the EU to feed its chickens. Not only that but the chickens produced are fed so much food to fatten their muscles that their legs usually do not support the weight and collapse.

We are now facing a resource crisis with peak oil fast approaching (or perhaps past it already?), economic uncertainty that the risks of indefinite growth brings with it and a social blurring of culture.

We must now differentiate between food security and food sovereignty. Food security is having enough food to eat which is still in the hands of existing powers. Food sovereignty on the other hand gives a human right to adequate food devolving power to the people. We must move towards food sovereignty if we are ever to have an equitable and fair share of our resources and no famine in the world.

We must move towards…. so that we avoid….

People’s right to food.... to avoid Export

Valuing farmers.... to avoid looking at farmers as simply those who farm the land

Local food systems.... to avoid Global Trade

Local control.... to avoid remote global competition

Build real knowledge... to avoid relying on alien technology e.g. GMOs

Work with nature.... to avoid Harming ecosystems

We now move to another very interesting concept which was discussed in the same talk which is that of eco-nutrition: eating and drinking with ecology, animal welfare, community and social justice and equity in mind. In brief, this is what is recommended for this purpose:

1. Eat less but better- go for quality
2. Eat simple
3. Do NOT diet
4. Eat no more than you expend in energy
5. Eat equitably- don’t take food out of another’s mouth
6. Feast for celebration
7. Eat seasonally where possible
8. Support local suppliers
9. Learn to cook
10. Pay full costs of producing and transporting food- if you don’t others will
11. Celebrate varieties- get diversity into field and plate: aim for 20-30 plant species a week
12. Think fossil fuels embedded in the food (transport etc.)
13. Drink water not soft-drinks
14. Be aware of hidden ingredients- unnecessary salts, sugars and additives
15. Enjoy food but think long-term impact
16. Eat a plant-based diet
17. If you eat fish or meat choose those that have run/swam as wild and free as possible

Food sovereignity coupled with eco-nutrition are surely food for thought. What we have in our plate has a history- it can be one of bondage, struggle and degradation possibly with adverse health impacts when consumed or a history of equity, harmony with nutritious benefits when eaten. The food you eat is one of the very few things you decide for your own. You can stop at KFC or catch a bus home to make a salad. Your choice…

Bottle up the flush. Challenge 100!

To view this blog with pictures press here.

We have set up a blue tank at the Quad. No it got nothing to do with election time. The colour is merely a coincidence!

Malcolm suffering from slave labour

With is (hoping students will understand its purpose) we hope to collect a 100 empty bottles of plastic. Not for any fancy recycled art exhibition even if we had the human resources and facilities to do it we could. But, rather to simply stuff each one with stones, fill it up with water and place it in flushing tanks at the University. Something like what you are told on the discovery channel of people trying to either save some more or as we are doing to reduce the consumption at the university... How far can it go?.. good question.

Joseph realising its his turn now!

Let me draw the assumptions first.

Assume:

There are 9,000 students full-time at university. Excluding staff

That these each use the bathroom facilities once a week (excluding holidays and days of exams) for 195 days. Therefore, 27.8 weeks

Putting two 500ml Kristal bottles in each flushing.

The figures made are enough to make one realize that the figure of water saved from this simple 'Blue tank' exercise may save up to 250 thousand litres. Not bad for a flush a week per student case study.

Now try make it once, 7 days a week, for every person in a year in Malta.

1 x 7 x 410,290 x 365... well the (small)calculator I have brings about an error.

The original layout for the tank

So the scope is really not what we do at University! But, what we should do in every space we inhabit. We have to minimize the impact we are having on the resources around us NOT only because it makes perfect economic sense, but ALSO because it defines us as people and our relation to the environment we inhabit.

End result

Try to follow this tutorial into introducing this and other similar systems at your home. Educate your family and friends and see what changes you register in the meter by the end of the year. Its with small changes that we can change the quality of life we are living. Think small and incremental and take it as a learning experience.

Tutorial:

http://www.wikihow.com/Save-Water-While-Flushing-(Soda-Bottle-and-Pebble-Method)

Tank location for the coming days