Home Town Heroes

It made me proud to learn that a hometown company, the Delaware North Companies, with offices above the new Westin Hotel in BUFFALO, NEW YORK, is listed by Forbes Magazine as one of the richest US privately held companies.

And my friend Joe tells me:

Well, it turns out that just about every name in Yosemite has been changed due to a trademarks dispute. Yosemite, like most national parks, uses private management companies to operate the hotels and campgrounds and provide food service. When the Park Service was not paying attention, the former private management company, Delaware North, proceeded to trademark under their name virtually every historic place in the park; and when they were replaced by Aramark, they offered to return the trademarks to the Park Service for a mere $52 million. (Does this sound like something Trump would do?) In fact, there is no such thing as Yosemite National Park anymore because Delaware North trademarked that name as well; so it is now just “Yosemite.”

And these guys aren’t even Big Pharma!

So the next time you happen to see them slithering around the lounge of the new Westin in Buffalo, give my regards to these scions of the Jacobs family of Buffalo — Chairman Jeremy actually lives in East Aurora, according to Wikipedia.

Current Delaware North Chairman Jeremy Jacobs, the son of founder Louis Jacobs, represents the second generation of the Jacobs family to own and lead the company. His three sons – Jerry, Lou and Charlie – are chief executive officers of Delaware North and are leading the company’s long-term business strategy.

We invite you to learn more about the Jacobs family.

  • JEREMY M. JACOBSChairman, Delaware North
    Owner/Governor, Boston Bruins

  • JERRY JACOBS JR.Co-Chief Executive Officer, Delaware North
    Alternate Governor, Boston Bruins

  • LOU JACOBSCo-Chief Executive Officer, Delaware North
    Alternate Governor, Boston Bruins

– See more at: https://www.delawarenorth.com/about/family-leadership#sthash.wN5l1yQW.dpuf

Would it surprise you to know that these fine fellows run a lot of gambling casinos and racetracks all over the world? … along with Ralph Wilson Stadium in Orchard Park!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Success: Why Strong Stormwater Regs, Rigorously Applied are Important.

… after three inches of rain, the silt fence and hay bales held.

Posted in Erosion & Sediment Control, Watershed Management | Leave a comment

New Edition of the Ramsar Handbooks

The Secretariat of Ramsar Convention has just announced the launch of the first Handbook in the 5th Edition Ramsar Handbook Series. It is entitled “An Introduction to the Convention on Wetlands” and replaces “The Ramsar Convention Manual”.

http://www.ramsar.org/sites/default/files/documents/library/handbook1_5ed_introductiontoconvention_e.pdf

“An Introduction to the Convention on Wetlands” is aimed at a diverse and extensive audience and explains the role of the Convention and how it works. The Handbook is currently being translated into French and Spanish.

The 5th Edition Handbooks will be organized under three sub-series, covering International Cooperation on Wetlands; Wise Use of Wetlands; and Wetlands Conservation and Management.

Handbook 2, “The Ramsar Strategic Plan 2016-2024”, is scheduled to be released in July.

The 5th Edition Series includes:

SUB-SERIES I: INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WETLANDS

Handbook 1: An Introduction to the Convention on Wetlands

Handbook 2: The Ramsar Strategic Plan 2016-2024

Handbook 3: International cooperation

Handbook 4: Ramsar Regional Initiatives

Handbook 5: Partnerships

SUB-SERIES II: WISE USE OF WETLANDS

Handbook 6: Wise use of wetlands, sustainable development and poverty eradication

Handbook 7: Freshwater-related guidance

Handbook 8: Wise use of wetlands in the coastal zone and small islands

Handbook 9: Wetland cities

Handbook 10: Wetlands and health

Handbook 11: Wetlands, including peatlands, climate change and disaster risk reduction

Handbook 12: Implementing CEPA with participatory skills

Handbook 13: Strategic environmental assessment

Handbook 14: Wetlands and culture

SUB-SERIES III: WETLAND CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT

Handbook 15: National wetland policies, laws and institutions

Handbook 16: Designating Ramsar Sites

Handbook 17: Addressing change in wetland ecological character

Handbook 18: Managing wetlands

Handbook 19: Avian influenza and wetlands

Handbook 20: Inventory, assessment and monitoring

Handbook 21: Wetland education centres

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

IRF Scholarships to Two Caribbean Scholars Who Attended ISISA XIV

Thank you!

Gen

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

On Thu, 23 Jun, 2016 at 6:15 pm, Bruce G. Potter
<bpotter@irf.org> wrote:
In reviewing the documentation from the International Society of Island Studies Association (ISISA), Islands of the World XIV Conference in Lesvos last month, I learned that two Caribbean Scholars received 500 Euro awards sponsored by Island Resources Foundation and funded by the Kincey and Bruce Potter Environmental Fund.

Congratulations to all the winners. . . . .

Winner Country Award Email
Rosie Alexander Scotland ISISA Rosie.Alexander@uhi.ac.uk
Guillermo Brink Chile Baldacchino gpbrinck@gmail.com
Angelica Erazo-Oliveras Puerto Rico Island Resources Foundation erazo.angelica@hotmail.com
Genève Phillip Trinidad Island Resources Foundation geneve.phillip@yahoo.com
Gitanjali Pyndiah France/England ISISA g_pyndiah@yahoo.fr
Maria Reyes-Perez Netherlands ISISA m.reyesperez@unesco-ihe.org
Giang Tran Vietnam ISISA trangiangus@yahoo.com
Tabitha Espina Velasco Guam ISISA tvelasco@triton.uog.edu
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

IRF Scholarships to Two Caribbean Scholars Who Attended ISISA XIV

In reviewing the documentation from the International Society of Island Studies Association (ISISA), Islands of the World XIV Conference in Lesvos last month, I learned that two Caribbean Scholars received 500 Euro awards sponsored by Island Resources Foundation and funded by the Kincey and Bruce Potter Environmental Fund.

Congratulations to all the winners. . . . .

Winner Country Award Email
Rosie Alexander Scotland ISISA Rosie.Alexander
Guillermo Brink Chile Baldacchino gpbrinck
Angelica Erazo-Oliveras Puerto Rico Island Resources Foundation erazo.angelica
Genève Phillip Trinidad Island Resources Foundation geneve.phillip
Gitanjali Pyndiah France/England ISISA g_pyndiah
Maria Reyes-Perez Netherlands ISISA m.reyesperez
Giang Tran Vietnam ISISA trangiangus
Tabitha Espina Velasco Guam ISISA tvelasco
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Inside the Shadowy World of America’s 10 Biggest Gunmakers

from Mother Jones

Fully Loaded: America’s 10 Biggest Gunmakers

Meet the moguls making a killing from gun sales in the United States.
By Josh Harkinson | Tue Jun. 14, 2016 6:00 AM EDT
[See links/footnotes at the bottom.]

They are all white, all middle-aged, and all men. A few live openly lavish lifestyles, but the majority fly under the radar. Rarely is there news about them in the mainstream media or even the trade press. Their obscurity would seem unremarkable if we were talking about the biggest manufacturers of auto accessories or heating systems. But these are America’s top gunmakers—leaders of the nation’s most controversial industry. They have kept their heads down and their fingerprints off regulations designed to protect their businesses—foremost a law that shields gun companies from liability for crimes committed with their products.

With this investigation, Mother Jones set out to break through the opacity surrounding the $8 billion firearms industry and the men who control it. While the three largest companies disclose some financials, the rest are privately held. Some are further shrouded by private-equity funds or shell corporations based in overseas tax havens. We mined manufacturing data and import statistics from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). We also examined obscure press clippings, court documents, private industry reports, and tax records from the Treasury Department. Together, the 10 companies we investigated produce more than 8 million firearms per year for buyers in the United States, accounting for more than two-thirds of the total market. (None of the companies responded to our requests for further information.)
Do you own part of a gun company? [1]Maksym Dykha/Shutterstock [2]
Many of these companies’ top executives have donned the jacket bestowed to members of the Golden Ring of Freedom [3], an exclusive club for $1 million-plus donors to the National Rifle Association. Several have been the focus of criminal investigations and lawsuits over everything from arms trafficking and fraud to armed robbery and racketeering.

As the debate over gun laws has grown louder, sales have soared. In the year following the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, the three largest gunmakers—Sturm Ruger, Remington Outdoor, and Smith & Wesson—netted more than $390 million in profits on record sales. Shares in publicly traded Sturm Ruger and Smith & Wesson jumped more than 70 percent that year, benefiting institutional investors such as Vanguard, Blackrock, and Fidelity. The hedge fund that owns Remington Outdoor—maker of the assault rifle used in Newtown—saw the annual return on its investment grow tenfold.

And the picture looks no different today, on the heels of the deadliest mass shooting in US history. President Barack Obama once again mournfully addressed the nation after the attack in Orlando—which was carried out with a Sig Sauer assault rifle designed for US special operations forces [4], the civilian sales of which have helped make Sig Sauer the fifth largest producer of firearms for the US market. In what has become a typical pattern after gun massacres, the stock prices of publicly traded Sturm Ruger and Smith & Wesson on Monday both jumped more than 6 percent (on a day when all the broader market averages dropped).

The upshot is that even as gun ownership has declined from approximately half to one-third of American households, those who do own guns are stockpiling them in record numbers. As the head of one investment firm put it, “Mr. Obama is the best gun salesman on the planet.” [5]

1. Sturm Ruger

“No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun,” a Sturm Ruger co-founder, the late William Ruger Sr., told Tom Brokaw in 1992. “I never meant for simple civilians to have my 20- or 30-round mags or my folding stock.” By 1994, with even Ronald Reagan voicing support, Congress banned [6] high-capacity magazines as well as assault rifles. But a decade later, lawmakers let the ban expire amid pressure from the National Rifle Association. By then the elder Ruger was deceased, and the Connecticut-based company resumed civilian sales of 30-round magazines. Since 2007, the company has sold more guns in the United States than any other manufacturer.

As the business grew, Sturm Ruger CEO Michael Fifer lobbied personally against a Connecticut ban on high-capacity magazines, commonly used with the company’s semi-automatic rifles. “The regulation of magazine capacity will not deter crime, but will instead put law-abiding citizens at risk of harm,” Fifer wrote to state lawmakers [7] in early 2011. The legislation died in committee that April. At the NRA’s annual Corporate Executives Luncheon the next year, Fifer presented a check to the group for more than $1.25 million [8]—$1 for every Sturm Ruger gun purchased the prior year. Eight months later, 20-year-old Adam Lanza used a semi-auto­matic rifle and a 30-round magazine to gun down 20 children and six adults at Newtown’s Sandy Hook Elementary School, located just 27 miles from Sturm Ruger’s headquarters.

In the year following the shooting, Sturm Ruger’s profits increased 56 percent. Fifer’s compensation that year was more than $2.6 million. He sits on the board of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a lobby group based in Newtown and run by former Sturm Ruger executive Steve Sanetti. Sturm Ruger’s largest shareholders are mutual fund giant Vanguard Group and a private investment firm, London Company of Virginia, which has assets worth $10.6 billion, including holdings in ammunition, cigarettes, missiles, and caskets.

2. Remington Outdoor

Shortly after Newtown, Stephen Feinberg, CEO of the $29 billion private-equity fund Cerberus Capital Manage­ment, pledged to sell off [9] Remington Outdoor, the maker of the Bushmaster XM-15 used in the massacre. The company soon indicated it couldn’t find a buyer, but notably Remington’s profits increased nearly thirtyfold over the next year, with the biggest jump in sales coming from assault rifles. The company attributed the spike to “consumer concern over more restrictive governmental regulation [10].” With stakeholders such as the California teachers’ pension fund threatening to divest, Cerberus distanced itself from the politics. “Our role is to make investments on behalf of our clients,” the company stated [11]. “It is not our role to take positions or attempt to shape or influence the gun control policy debate.”

In May 2013, the NRA inducted three Remington executives—CEO George Kollitides, Vice Chairman Wally McLallen, and President Scott Blackwell—into its Golden Ring of Freedom, reserved for those who’ve given the NRA at least $1 million. Kollitides has also served on the nominating committee that controls who sits on the NRA board. “It’s very easy to blame an inanimate object,” Kollitides said [12] of the Bushmaster rifle used in Newtown.

After New York state enacted stricter gun laws in 2013, Remington laid off workers at its 200-year-old factory there and moved production to Huntsville, Alabama, where it gets $69 million in state and local subsidies—or about $14 for every Alabama resident. On a tour of the new plant, Remington and NRA executives were joined by GOP Sen. Richard Shelby—a co-sponsor of the 2005 law shielding gun companies from liability—who was running for reelection. The NRA executive endorsed Shelby’s campaign as Remington’s current CEO, Jim “Marco” Marcotuli (formerly a Cerberus executive), stood smiling at Shelby’s side. [13]

3. Smith & Wesson

In August 2013, upward of 150 Smith & Wesson employees descended on a hearing with Massachusetts legislators to denounce proposed gun restrictions. The following year, CEO James Debney, already a member of the NRA’s Golden Ring of Freedom, presented NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre with a check for an additional $600,000. “Through its various programs, pro-gun-reform legislation, and grassroots efforts,” Debney said, [14] “the existence of the NRA is crucial to the preservation of the shooting sports and to the entire firearms industry.”

America’s third-largest gunmaker has come a long way from a deal it cut in 2000 [15] with the Clinton administration. Back then, Smith & Wesson received immunity from product liability lawsuits in exchange for agreeing to install safety devices, not to sell to unscrupulous dealers, and to limit bulk handgun sales. It also pledged to make “smart gun” technology available within three years.

[16]
Money Shots: Six guns that got a barrage of free advertising from the entertainment industry [16]AF Archive/Alamy Stock Photo
The deal enraged industry bigwigs. “Boycott Smith now and forever. Run them out of the country,” an executive at rival Kimber America wrote to fellow firearms leaders. “You guys need to make sure that no one else is going to join the surrender.” After a boycott led by the NRA sent sales plummeting [17] more than 40 percent, Smith & Wesson’s British parent company sold it at a $100 million loss to Saf-T-Hammer Corp., a startup run by Robert L. Scott, a former Smith & Wesson VP. Scott reneged on the Clinton deal. “It was important that we be an active part of the industry again,” he said in a 2002 deposition. (Today, Scott chairs the board of the National Shooting Sports Foundation.)

The company soon drew attention in other ways. In 2004, the Arizona Republic reported that 74-year-old Chairman James Joseph Minder had once been a serial armed robbe [18]r known as the “shotgun bandit” who’d committed eight holdups in Michigan. (Minder soon resigned.) In 2010, a VP of sales was indicted for attempting to bribe [19] an FBI officer posing as an African emissary taking bids on a $15 million arms deal. And in 2014, Smith & Wesson agreed to pay $2 million to settle charges [20] that it had bribed foreign officials in Pakistan and Indonesia.

4. Glock

Gaston Glock, an Austrian curtain rod manufacturer, designed the Glock 17 in his garage outside Vienna in the early 1980s. Soon it was a global bestseller. Alarmed by aspects of the pistol’s revolutionary polymer design—including the lack of a conventional safety mechanism—Congress held hearings on the Glock in 1986 and New York City banned it. Yet the Glock remains by far America’s most popular pistol [21]—carried by two-thirds of police officers, immortalized by hip-hop and Hollywood, and wielded by the perpetrators of the Virginia Tech, Tucson, Aurora, and Charleston massacres.

Gaston Glock resides in an opulent Austrian villa. He has two corporate jets worth eight figures and a $3 million helicopter to shuttle him around Europe. In the 1980s, some of Glock’s biggest law enforcement contracts were allegedly won with the help of Gold Club strippers near the company’s US headquarters in Smyrna, Georgia. “For a lot of guys coming in from out of town, this was the best time they were going to have all year, or maybe their entire life,” a former police official told journalist Paul Barrett for his book Glock: The Rise of America’s Gun [22]. “You go to Smyrna, get laid at the best strip club in town, drink champagne—you are not going to forget the experience when it comes time to choose between Glock and Smith & Wesson.”

By the 1990s, Gaston Glock was a billionaire and had hired New Jersey attorney and gun rights activist Paul Jannuzzo to help combat a rash of claims by shooting victims. Jannuzzo, who eventually became the CEO of the US subsidiary, convinced Glock to donate $1 to the American Shooting Sports Council for each gun shipped from Smyrna. But ties between Jannuzzo and Gaston Glock began to fray over an amorous rivalry for the company’s young human resources manager. Jannuzzo was convicted in 2012 of diverting profits into his own bank account; an appeals court later found the statute of limitations had expired and overturned the verdict.

[23]
In 1999, at the age of 70, Glock survived a hit job in a Luxembourg parking garage carried out by a mallet-wielding former French legionnaire nicknamed Spartacus. Glock knocked out several of his attacker’s teeth before rendering him unconscious. The police linked the attack to an embezzlement scheme by Glock’s business associate Charles Ewert, who’d earned the nickname Panama Charlie for helping Glock set up foreign shell companies to evade Austrian and US taxes. Investigators hired by Glock later alleged that Ewert had misappropriated $103 million in corporate funds.

According to a lawsuit filed against Glock by one of those investigators, Glock knowingly participated in the scheme—allegedly paying himself royalties for nonexistent trademarks and laundering money with phony payments, rents, and loans. When the investigators confronted Glock, he convinced state and local officials in Georgia to indict them instead, on charges that they’d overbilled him for legal services. The charges, later dropped, “were fabricated based on falsified evidence, influenced witnesses, and evidence either destroyed or withheld,” according to the suit.

Glock also faces allegations stemming from his 2011 divorce, in which he left Helga, his wife of 49 years, for Kathrin Tschikof, a 31-year-old nurse who’d helped him recover from a stroke. Tschikof now directs the Glock Horse Performance Center, overseeing the couple’s 50 dressage horses and jumpers. In May 2014, Glock bought Tschikof a $15 million Olympic silver-medal-winning show horse, one of the most expensive ever. Six months later, Helga Glock filed a $500 million lawsuit [24] accusing her ex-husband of bamboozling her and their three adult children out of a stake in the company and concealing hundreds of millions in profits. Gaston Glock called the suit a shakedown scheme. Helga’s attorney insists she, not Gaston, is the victim.

“He’s got a lot of skeletons,” former Glock executive Peter Manown said in court after pleading guilty to stealing from the company. “He’s done, in my mind, a lot of things that are much worse than what Jannuzzo and I did. He makes roughly $200,000 a day—he personally. He spends money on mistresses, on houses, on sex, on cars. He bribes people. He’s just a bad guy.”

5. Sig Sauer

“We have clearly defined our path to growth as being in emerging markets and developing countries,” Ron Cohen, the CEO of Sig Sauer’s US subsidiary, told Management Today in 2014. Later that year, German investigators searched the home of Sig Sauer co-owner Michael Lüke seeking evidence of illegal arms deals. Lüke allegedly sent German-made guns through Cohen’s office to bypass European restrictions on arms exports to conflict zones in Iraq, Colombia, and Kazakhstan, according to the German paper Suddeutsche Zeitung.

In March 2015, German officials discovered that key evidence in the case had been stolen from the prosecutor’s office before it could be introduced at trial. Citing the ongoing investigation, German officials have blocked Sig Sauer from exporting guns outside the European Union. Sig Sauer fans in the United States need not worry: 477,000 of the company’s guns are made each year in Newington, New Hampshire.

Sig Sauer dates to the mid-1800s, when it became a weapons supplier to the Swiss army. To get around Swiss arms export restrictions, in the 1970s the company merged with a German firm, opening an office in 1985 in Virginia. In 2000, the company spun off its arms division to Lüke and fellow German investor Thomas Ortmeier, who focused on the US market and now claim to supply nearly 1 in 3 guns used by American law enforcement officers. In 2014, Sig Sauer announced it would slash its German workforce by two-thirds and produce more guns in the United States.

Cohen commanded a combat unit in the Israeli military during the Lebanon War. “You lead by example,” he told Management Today. “You learn how to overcome anything, and there is a drive to constantly move forward. There is a sense of, ‘If we don’t move, we die.’ That’s a big part of who I am.” (Cohen did not respond to a request for comment about the use of a Sig Sauer rifle in the Orlando massacre.)

Last December, presidential candidate Ted Cruz joined Sig Sauer representatives for a shooting demonstration at an Iowa gun range. In February, Donald Trump’s sons Eric and Donald Jr. paid a visit to Sig Sauer’s New Hampshire factory, earning praise on the company’s Twitter account for “taking time to understand #whoweare #whatwedo #LiveFreeorDie.”

6. O.F. Mossberg & Sons

America’s oldest family-owned gun manufacturer is based in North Haven, Connecticut, 25 miles from Newtown. The day of the massacre, some employees worked the assembly line with tears in their eyes. Mossberg Senior Vice President Joseph Bartozzi criticized the NRA’s defiant response to the mass shooting as insensitive. “The funerals were still going,” he told Bloomberg [25]. “Parents were burying their children.”

Two months later, however, the company pulled out of a major Pennsylvania gun exhibition because the sponsors, out of deference to Newtown’s families, had banned semi-automatic rifles and high-capacity magazines. “Mossberg’s position on the Second Amendment is unwavering and steadfast,” the company said. “Therefore, the company will not support any organization or event that prohibits the display or sale of legal firearms.”

After Connecticut passed new gun laws, Bartozzi accused Gov. Dannel Malloy of being “slanderous” and “using the industry as a straw man.” In 2014, CEO Iver Mossberg announced that most production would move to an existing factory in Texas. “It’s a state that is not only committed to economic growth,” he said, [26] “but also honors and respects the Second Amendment and the firearm freedoms it guarantees for our customers.”

Founded in 1919 by Swedish immigrant Oscar Mossberg as a purveyor of a low-cost “pocket pistol,” O.F. Mossberg & Sons eventually focused on shotguns; today it is the world’s largest producer of pump-action models, including a line of Duck Dynasty-branded ones. But assault rifles drive the company’s growth. As Bartozzi has put it, “that’s what people want.”

The family keeps a low profile. Iver Mossberg lives in a relatively modest house in Branford, Connecticut. His father, former CEO Alan I. Mossberg, has retired to a Florida home originally built for the Swedish pop group ABBA. The Mossbergs may be more politically moderate than they let on. “I have had discussions with people who work for Mossberg, as well as [from] every other major gun company, who have actually indicated to me on a personal basis that they don’t have a problem with universal background checks,” Gov. Malloy told the New Haven Register [27] in 2014, “but they are afraid of the NRA and they won’t stand up to it.”

Back in 1999, one of Alan Mossberg’s other sons, Jonathan, developed the iGun [28], a microchip-equipped shotgun that can only be fired by its owner. Though the company and other manufacturers later abandoned smart-gun technology under political pressure, Jonathan Mossberg recently revived the project as a separate enterprise and is courting Silicon Valley investors.

7. Savage

America’s largest maker of bolt-action rifles is owned by Vista Outdoor, a $2.9 billion holding company that also makes ammunition and gun accessories. After Newtown, Savage ran around-the-clock shifts to keep up with demand. Profits at Vista that year rose from $10 million to $64 million [29].

Mark W. DeYoung, who is CEO of both Vista and Savage, may be the nation’s highest-paid gun company executive, earning $13.2 million in 2015 [30]. He chairs the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, which lobbies on behalf of “America’s hunters and anglers,” and whose banquet was keynoted by soon-to-be Speaker of the House Paul Ryan [31] in 2015. That same year, Vista Outdoor spent $390,000 on federal lobbying, mostly on bills concerned with defense appropriations and fishing and hunting. It also lobbied on the Toxic Substances Control Act, perhaps because in 2013 Massachusetts regulators fined Savage $6,000 for illegally dumping at least 50,000 gallons of industrial wastewater from its gun manufacturing operation into a sewer.

“I think 2016 is gonna be a strong year,” DeYoung told an NRA leader at a recent gun industry conference. “Election years always create some additional demand in our industry…So I suspect that will benefit us all, right?”

8. Springfield Armory

Current NRA President Allan Cors has boasted that of all the guns he owns, his favorite is the 1 millionth Springfield Armory M1 rifle, originally presented to its designer, John Garand, upon his retirement from Springfield Armory in 1953.

The company’s namesake dates to 1777, when George Washington approved the ammunition plant and arms depot as an arsenal for the Revolutionary War. The nationalized factory produced guns for American soldiers through World War II.

In 1974, the Springfield Armory name was licensed to Robert Reese, a surplus-store owner in Geneseo, Illinois. Despite the company’s slogan, “The First Name in American Firearms,” it now sources many of its guns from Croatia. Reese’s sons Dennis and Tom, the company’s current owners, nevertheless managed to help beat back a proposed Illinois ban on assault weapons by threatening to move the company’s factory across the river to Iowa.

[32]
A brief history of America’s NRA-fueled gun-buying [32]spree [32]AP Photo/Mark Wilson
In 1989, Dennis Reese admitted to offering bribes [33] to US Army Colonel Juan Lopez de la Cruz—including $70,000 in cash and a Rolex watch—in exchange for help selling $3.7 million worth of firearms to the Salvadoran government. Reese was allowed to plead guilty to lesser charges in exchange for testifying against de la Cruz. But according to the Associated Press [34], the colonel walked after the jury decided Reese was not a trustworthy witness.

Over the years, Springfield has donated at least $1 million to the NRA [35].

9. Beretta

The 15-generation Beretta family claims to be the world’s oldest industrial dynasty. Their nearly 500-year-old company sits in a stone fortress surrounded by topiary gardens in a village near the Italian Alps. Napoleon and Mussolini were both big customers.

Patriarch Ugo Beretta and his wife, Monique, are members of the NRA Golden Ring of Freedom and have long cultivated political ties in the United States. At a 2010 dinner, their son Franco Gussalli Beretta presented George W. Bush with a $250,000 shotgun [36] engraved with “43,” the presidential seal, and a picture of Bush’s Scottish terrier. The custom-made firearm was a thank-you for a US military order for half a million pistols. In 2014, Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam flew to Italy to meet with the Berettas. The company soon announced it would close its manufacturing headquarters in Maryland—where new gun control laws were fresh on the books—and relocate to Tennessee [37], where it got $14 million [38] in subsidies [39].

Beretta markets guns as part of living the high life. There are Beretta-branded hunting lodges and a line of luxury clothing and home accessories. In cities including Dallas, Memphis, and New York, the Beretta Gallery offers après-field wear and specialty weapons, which have included $100,000 pistols decorated with diamonds.

Ugo Beretta in Italy in 2001. Beretta and other foreign gunmakers live openly lavish lives—safely removed from the controversy of American gun violence. Guido Harrari/Contrasto/Redux
At the family home in Italy, a liveried butler and cook oversee a mansion decorated with Venetian glass chandeliers, water buffalo heads, and elephant tusks. Franco Beretta drives a Maserati Quattro­porte to visit the family’s commercial vineyards at their nearby 16th-century estate. Photos of his wife, Umberta, often appear in Italy’s society pages and on her fashion-obsessed Instagram account, where she recently appeared clutching a teddy bear made of cash [40].

10. Taurus International

In February 2015, Donald Simms, a ship captain in Alabama, was reloading his Taurus pistol at home when it unexpectedly fired. The bullet went through the palm of his hand and into the chest of his 11-year-old son, killing the boy. Simms sued the company [41], claiming a flaw in the gun’s internal safety mechanisms caused his son’s death. The suit is one of numerous cases alleging that Taurus pistols are dangerously defective. The company has recalled nearly 1 million pistols and settled a class-action lawsuit [42] by setting aside $30 million for damages, court costs, and recall campaigns.

Taurus was founded 77 years ago as a tool manufacturer in Porto Alegre, Brazil; today, it earns roughly two-thirds of its gun revenue in the United States, where it offers free NRA memberships [43] to purchasers. Nearly 87 percent of Taurus shares are owned by the Brazil­ian Cartridge Company, a gun and ammo manufacturer that was part of Remington before it was taken private in 2007 by investment funds tied to Daniel Birmann, one of Brazil’s most notorious securities fraudsters. In 2005, Birmann was fined the equivalent of $91 million by Brazilian regulators for bilking shareholders of an investment company he ran; in early 2015, Brazilian authorities seized a $23 million yacht that it claimed Birmann owned through shell companies based in overseas tax havens. Birmann’s family is believed to still control the Brazilian Cartridge Company’s Delaware-based holding company. Questions about quality control and a falloff in purchases from the Brazilian military and police have contributed to a 95 percent drop in Taurus’ share price since 2013.

Birmann, who splits his time between Porto Alegre and Rio de Janeiro, has been described in the Brazilian press as carrying a gun wherever he goes and paying cash at expensive restaurants. In 2005, the Brazilian pop singer Lobão filed a police report alleging Birmann assaulted him after he refused to play certain songs at the financier’s birthday party.

FIVE OTHER NOTABLE GUNMAKERS:

Keystone Sporting Arms

This Pennsylvania-based company markets the .22-caliber Crickett under the slogan “My First Rifle.” The blue and pink guns [44] are proportioned for youth shooters and according to critics can appear toylike. In 2013 in Kentucky, a five-year-old playing with a Crickett [45] accidentally shot and killed his two-year-old sister. A resulting flurry of national press put a spotlight on gun deaths of young children, which a Mother Jones investigation [46] found are in the hundreds annually. Keystone also drew ire for online marketing to youth, including a “kids corner” page that featured photos of its guns being fired by tykes and cradled by babies. The company continues to publish cartoon “storybooks” and sells kid accessories such as a Crickett-wielding stuffed animal.

It’s all part of an industry effort to reverse a decline in shooting sports by exposing kids to guns at an early age. Sig Sauer now offers junior shooters a .22-caliber version of its AR-15. The National Shooting Sports Foundation encourages members to “help hunting and target shooting get a head start over other activities” by aiming “programs toward youth 12 years old and younger.” The NRA appeals to kids with stuffed animals and hunting video games at its annual conference, where gun companies have been known to hand out candy.

Kahr Arms

At the Shooting Industry Masters tournament in Kansas last year, participants dubbed the “Zoot Suit Shooters” dressed up like mobsters and blasted steel targets with Tommy Guns. It was a publicity stunt on behalf of Kahr Arms, maker of the Prohibition-era machine gun. The rights to the Tommy Gun were acquired in 1999 by Justin Moon, who started Kahr Arms in 1994 with a $5 million loan [47] from his father—Unification Church founder Sun Myung Moon.

Kahr Arms capitalized on the rising demand for powerful yet small handguns when concealed-carry laws began sweeping the nation in the 1990s. Its K-9 pistol was small enough to fit into a pants pocket. Emergency room physicians blamed the spread of this type of gun from Kahr and other companies for a dramatic rise in fatal gunshot wounds.

Growing up in the suburbs of New York, Justin Moon “would always philosophize about the world ending and how great his father was,” Tim Porter, the son of high-ranking church members, told Condé Nast Portfolio [48] in 2007. “That’s why he did all this stuff with guns. He believes that [the Unification Church] is going to take over the world. He would say this all the time.”

[49]
Related: What does gun violence really cost? [49]
Barrett Firearms

In April 2013, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie called for a ban on the .50-caliber Barrett M82 and M107 sniper rifles—and then vetoed the bill four months later. He claimed it went further than he’d intended by prohibiting current owners from keeping the weapons, which are powerful enough to down helicopters, pierce bulletproof glass, or kill from a mile away. In the middle of debate over the bill, Christie’s campaign accepted $3,000 from an NRA lobbyist [50].

Barrett’s CEO, Ronnie Barrett, sits on the NRA’s board of directors. Once a professional wedding photographer, he resides on a 17-acre plantation-style estate in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, that features an 11,000-square-foot mansion and a formal English garden. According to the Government Accountability Office, Barrett’s .50-caliber rifles have been used by drug cartels, militia groups, outlaw motorcycle gangs, and terrorist organizations. The Branch Davidians wielded one during the 1993 Waco siege in Texas, forcing federal agents to use armored Bradley fighting vehicles. California and Washington, DC, have banned the guns, but they remain legal everywhere else. In February, the Tennessee Senate passed a resolution designating the Barrett M82 the official state rifle.

Norinco

Headquartered in Beijing, Norinco makes shotguns sold mostly through online dealers such as CheaperThanDirt.com [51]. It imports tens of thousands of guns into the United States each year. Owned by China’s Communist Party, the company provides weapons to the People’s Liberation Army and military clients that have included the government of South Sudan. The company also produces hydroelectric equipment, subway cars, and raw copper. In 2003 it was accused of transferring missile technology to Iran, prompting a two-year US import ban [52].

Hi-Point Firearms

When Hi-Point founder Tom Deeb learned in 1999 that one of his company’s semi-automatic rifles had been used in the Columbine mass shooting, he closed his factory for a day. “I was just sick over it,” he told the Buffalo News. “I thought about quitting.” But then he changed his mind, deciding, “I’m not going to be defeated by evil.” (The company began to expand its use of serial numbers.)

Hi-Point, whose handguns have retailed for as little as $79, was long one of the most notorious suppliers of so-called “Saturday night specials.” In 2000, Hi-Points were the third most common type of gun seized at crime scenes in 44 cities, according to the ATF [53]. On average, Hi-Points reached criminals within a year of their original purchase, making them among the quickest guns to flow into the black market.

In 2005, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence sued the company [54] on behalf of Daniel Williams, a 16-year-old who was mistaken for a gang member and shot while playing basketball. The suit alleges that the company and its sole distributor were negligent in selling the pistol—along with 86 other guns—to a straw purchaser at a gun show. A judge tossed out the case under the 2005 shield law. In 2012 an appeals court reinstated the case, which remains in a New York court.

Additional reporting by Bryan Schatz and Dave Gilson

Source URL: <http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/04/fully-loaded-ten-biggest-gun-manufacturers-america&gt;
Links:
[1] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/05/do-you-own-part-of-a-gun-company
[2] http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-143931109/stock-photo-gun-and-money.html?src=vKZWeAquK4jO_MWonwZvfQ-1-3
[3] http://www.nragive.com/membership/list/membership-levels
[4] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/06/assault-rifle-used-by-orlando-mass-shooter
[5] http://www.cnbc.com/2016/01/05/obama-best-gun-salesman-on-earth-stock-picker.html
[6] http://articles.latimes.com/2004/sep/10/nation/na-guns10
[7] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-12-16/ban-on-30-round-gun-magazines-in-connecticut-died-after-pressure
[8] https://www.nraila.org/articles/20120425/sturm-ruger-company-raises-over-12-million-to-benefit-the-nra-institute-for-legislative-action
[9] http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/cerberus-to-sell-gunmaker-freedom-group/?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FFeinberg%2C%20Stephen%20A.&amp;action=click&amp;contentCollection=timestopics&amp;region=stream&amp;module=stream_unit&amp;version=latest&amp;contentPlacement=8&amp;pgtype=collection&amp;_r=0
[10] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/16/business/dealbook/cerberus-unable-to-sell-remington-will-buy-back-its-shares-from-investors.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FFeinberg%2C%20Stephen%20A.&amp;action=click&amp;contentCollection=timestopics&amp;region=stream&amp;module=stream_unit&amp;version=latest&amp;contentPlacement=3&amp;pgtype=collection&amp;_r=0
[11] http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/cerberus-capital-management-statement-regarding-freedom-group-inc-183889361.html
[12] http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/14/bushmaster-ceo-reflects-on-newtown/?page=all
[13] http://whnt.com/2016/01/18/u-s-senator-richard-shelby-tours-huntsville-remington-plant-touts-future-growth/
[14] http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/04/17/can-bloomberg-take-on-the-nra/beyond-the-nra-an-industry-stands-in-the-way
[15] http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/html/20000317_2.html
[16] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/05/money-shots
[17] http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/06/business/worldbusiness/06iht-guns.html?pagewanted=all&amp;_r=0
[18] http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB107870298403448693
[19] http://www.fcpablog.com/blog/2010/1/19/massive-fcpa-indictment-unsealed.html
[20] https://www.sec.gov/News/PressRelease/Detail/PressRelease/1370542384677
[21] http://www.npr.org/2013/02/01/170752391/how-the-glock-became-americas-weapon-of-choice
[22] https://www.amazon.com/Glock-Americas-Paul-M-Barrett-ebook/dp/B004X6PRXC?ie=UTF8&amp;btkr=1&amp;redirect=true&amp;ref_=dp-kindle-redirect
[23] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map
[24] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-18/ex-wife-of-gun-magnate-glock-gets-new-ammo-for-rico-suit
[25] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-03-14/why-gun-makers-fear-the-nra
[26] http://www.forbes.com/sites/frankminiter/2014/07/11/americas-largest-shotgun-maker-shifts-more-jobs-to-texas/#2b22b6ac1e55
[27] http://www.nhregister.com/government-and-politics/20141013/malloy-stands-by-call-for-background-checks-on-gun-purchases
[28] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/02/smart-guns-mossberg-igun-venture-capital-conway
[29] http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/gun-violence-good-business-firearms-manufacturers-article-1.2464147
[30] http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=3750967&amp;privcapId=262788142
[31] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXw-pk7agns
[32] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/05/arming-america
[33] http://http://www.upi.com/Archives/1989/03/16/Salvador-based-Army-colonel-indicted-on-bribery-charges/5406606027600/
[34] http://www.apnewsarchive.com/1989/Colonel-Cleared-of-Conspiracy-Bribery-Charges/id-393a6f5ef0c35a8a91874af1fc8237c0
[35] http://springfield-armory.blogspot.com/2007/07/springfield-gives-1-million-to-nras.html
[36] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/highland-park-texas-gop-stronghold
[37] http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/blog/2014/07/beretta-moving-all-of-its-u-smanufacturing-to-new.html
[38] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/01/gun-manufacturers-subsidies-southern-states
[39] http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/print-edition/2014/02/21/whiskey-guitars-and-guns.html
[40] https://www.instagram.com/p/_zg6DyM6sH/
[41] http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2015/11/alabama_man_files_lawsuit_agai.html
[42] https://www.tauruscartersettlement.com/
[43] http://www.taurususa.com/pdf/NRA/Taurus-NRA-Free-Membership-2015.pdf
[44] http://www.crickett.com/crickett_rifles.php
[45] http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/05/crickett-rifle-marketing-kids
[46] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/12/children-killed-guns-newtown-anniversary
[47] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/march99/moon10.htm
[48] http://upstart.bizjournals.com/careers/Features/2007/09/17/Unification-Church.html?page=all
[49] http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/04/true-cost-of-gun-violence-in-america
[50] http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/christie-takes-nra-cash-as-rival-attacks-him-on-guns
[51] http://blog.cheaperthandirt.com/top-selling-gun-interstate-arms-hawk-model-982/
[52] http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-05-22-norinco-usat_x.htm
[53] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/2841368-ATF-Report-2-3
[54] http://www.bradycampaign.org/content/williams-v-beemiller

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

“Luck” Is Not An Oil Train Disaster Plan

from the Waterkeeper Alliance — terrific foto if not photoshopped . . . . and incidentally, who thinks shipping highly volatile oil like the Bakken crude is a good idea, anyway?

We cannot accept the inevitability of oil train derailments.
View this email in your browser

7f20d23f-edbc-4c89-8a6d-56bc9e293ea2.jpg
Photo courtesy of Columbia Riverkeeper.

On Friday, June 3, a train carrying Bakken crude oil, which was fracked in North Dakota and bound for refinery in Puget Sound, derailed and exploded in Mosier, Oregon. The derailment spilled 42,000 gallons of Bakken crude oil, some of which leached into the nearby Columbia River. Mosier’s wastewater treatment plant was shut down due to damage and contamination and its water reserves were quickly exhausted to fight the flames and cool the overheating train cars. A nearby school, filled with 200 children, was quickly evacuated and the students were unable to return for the final days of their school year. Due to the heroic effort of firefighters, and some good fortune, there were no fatalities, and of the 96 train cars hurtling down the tracks, only 16 derailed, with 4 cars igniting and leaking oil.

Many are saying that Mosier is lucky to have not seen more extensive damage and injury. According to Mosier Fire Chief Jim Appleton, a windy day, which is the norm in the Columbia Gorge, could have burned down the town and the neighboring forests. “Only extraordinary luck spared us from a devastating calamity,” he said. While Mosier was fortunate in this instance, it is frightening to think that a situation involving a massive fire, evacuations, sewage system and drinking water shut downs, and oil contamination could be considered “lucky.”
72287a44-206d-415c-8175-6c89dfe111d7.jpg

Waterkeeper Alliance President Robert F. Kennedy Jr. joined leaders of the Yakama Nation, Umatilla, and Warm Springs tribes, along with the Mayor of Mosier, Arlene Burns, to call for an end of dangerous fossil fuel transport on the Columbia River. Photo by Liv Smith.

Every time one of these oil trains rolls through a town, along a river, or over a bridge, there is a risk of disaster. Just three years ago, an oil train derailed in Lac Megantic, Quebec and killed 47 people. The federal government has predicted that these types of oil trains will derail an average of ten times per year over the next two decades, causing more than $4 billion in damages and threatening lives. The government seems to accept that these catastrophes are going to happen and they are crossing their fingers that they will be “lucky” like Mosier rather than “unlucky” like Lac Megantic.

Shortly after the derailment, Appleton voiced his deep concern, saying, “I hope that this becomes death knell for this mode of shipping this cargo. I think it’s insane. I’ve been very hesitant to take a side up to now, but with this incident, and with all due respect to the wonderful people that I’ve met at Union Pacific, shareholder value doesn’t outweigh the lives and happiness of our community.”

We cannot accept the inevitability of these derailments. We must call on our elected leaders to stand with communities like Mosier, and use all of their authority to stop reckless oil trains. Waterkeepers have been fighting dangerous oil trains and advocating for better rail infrastructure for years. Lucky or unlucky, these disasters are a threat to communities across the country and they must be prevented.

To clean water,

Marc Yaggi
Executive Director
Waterkeeper Alliance

DONATE NOW
Facebook
Facebook
Twitter
Twitter
Instagram
Instagram
YouTube
YouTube
Donate
Donate
outline-dark-facebook-48.png Share
outline-dark-twitter-48.png Tweet
outline-dark-forwardtofriend-48.png Forward
Copyright © 2016 Waterkeeper Alliance, All rights reserved.

You are receiving this email because you opted in at our website, gave a donation, or signed on to an advocacy action.

Contact Us:
Waterkeeper Alliance
180 Maiden Lane, Suite 603
New York, NY 10038
212.747.0622
info

Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list

Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc. is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization with Top-Rated status from Charity Watch and a Four Star rating from Charity Navigator.

open.php?u=a9af8670090f134f6168ccfdc&id=5f42dfb930&e=d3b14281c2

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Who’s downloading pirated papers? Everyone

Another case of untrammeled greed mascarading as business acumen, even virtue (“returning investment” to the stockholders — even if it is 100’s of times more than no-risk funds put in up-front.)

Who’s downloading pirated papers? Everyone
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/04/whos-downloading-pirated-papers-everyone

By John BohannonApr. 28, 2016 , 2:00 PM

Just as spring arrived last month in Iran, Meysam Rahimi sat down at his university computer and immediately ran into a problem: how to get the scientific papers he needed. He had to write up a research proposal for his engineering Ph.D. at Amirkabir University of Technology in Tehran. His project straddles both operations management and behavioral economics, so Rahimi had a lot of ground to cover.

But every time he found the abstract of a relevant paper, he hit a paywall. Although Amirkabir is one of the top research universities in Iran, international sanctions and economic woes have left it with poor access to journals. To read a 2011 paper in Applied Mathematics and Computation, Rahimi would have to pay the publisher, Elsevier, $28. A 2015 paper in Operations Research, published by the U.S.-based company INFORMS, would cost $30.

Related content:

He looked at his list of abstracts and did the math. Purchasing the papers was going to cost $1000 this week alone—about as much as his monthly living expenses—and he would probably need to read research papers at this rate for years to come. Rahimi was peeved. “Publishers give nothing to the authors, so why should they receive anything more than a small amount for managing the journal?”

Many academic publishers offer programs to help researchers in poor countries access papers, but only one, called Share Link, seemed relevant to the papers that Rahimi sought. It would require him to contact authors individually to get links to their work, and such links go dead 50 days after a paper’s publication. The choice seemed clear: Either quit the Ph.D. or illegally obtain copies of the papers. So like millions of other researchers, he turned to Sci-Hub, the world’s largest pirate website for scholarly literature. Rahimi felt no guilt. As he sees it, high-priced journals “may be slowing down the growth of science severely.”

The journal publishers take a very different view. “I’m all for universal access, but not theft!” tweeted Elsevier’s director of universal access, Alicia Wise, on 14 March during a heated public debate over Sci-Hub. “There are lots of legal ways to get access.” Wise’s tweet included a link to a list of 20 of the company’s access initiatives, including Share Link.

read more: http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/04/whos-downloading-pirated-papers-everyone

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

ICIJ Corporate Database

The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists database of Offshore Corporations from the files of Mossack-Fonseca is here.

There are 39 offshore corporations registered in the British Virgin Islands with PARADISE in the name.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

AEROSOLS: A New Climate Change Challenge

[From the March/April edition of Foreign Affairs (page 135). I am surprised by the breadth and complexity of the aerosol issues, which add a major dimension to my understanding of the climate change dilemma.]

The Next Front on Climate Change

How to Avoid a Dimmer, Drier World

Veerabhadran Ramanathan, Jessica Seddony, and David G. Victor

After dithering for decades, governments finally seem to be pay ing serious attention to the problem of global climate change.

Late last year, at the Paris climate conference, they adopted a major new agreement to limit global warming, beginning a process to strengthen commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions over time.

For many observers, the promises of the Paris conference offer too little, too late, because emissions are high and still rising and because there will be major disruptions to the climate even if countries meet their emissions reduction pledges. Nevertheless, it had been 18 years since the world’s governments left a major climate summit with an agreement in hand, so just getting to yes in Paris has offered climate diplomacy fresh credibility.

Until now, governments have focused on limiting the greenhouse gases that cause global warming and its attendant hazards, such as rising sea levels and stronger storms. But there is more to climate change than higher temperatures. Many of the activities that cause greenhouse gas emissions—burning coal for power, diesel for transport, and wood for cooking, for example—also yield ultra-small particles known as aerosols, which blanket vast areas in a haze that blocks and scatters sunlight. By reducing the solar energy that reaches the earth’s surface, aerosols reduce evaporation and slow the water cycle that governs where, when, and how much rain falls.

For years, climate scientists have believed that a warmer world would be wetter, because higher temperatures hasten evaporation and increase rainfall. But even when these higher temperatures are accounted for, a world dimmed by aerosols will in fact be drier in many places—including some areas, such as the Sahel and other regions in sub-Saharan Africa, that have long suffered from drought because they rely on rainfall to sustain subsistence agriculture. According to many of the most reliable models, such as those produced by the National Center for Atmospheric Research and Princeton University’s Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, China, North America, and South Asia are also in danger of more frequent and severe droughts owing to aerosols. Indeed, for much of the world, aerosol-induced dimming and drying are among the most immediate dangers posed by pollution.

The good news is that swift action on aerosols is possible, with huge potential benefits. Many of the tools needed to make rapid cuts to aerosol emissions are already available, and policymakers around the world—notably in Europe and the United States, and also in East Asia—have shown how to use them. Since aerosols have a short atmospheric life span, the climatic benefits of emissions cuts would appear quickly, within only a couple of decades. What is more, speedy action on aerosols would bring huge global health benefits: roughly seven million people die each year from causes related to particulate pollution, and cutting down on aerosols would dramatically reduce the death toll. In light of these potential benefits, governments around the world should ensure that aerosols play a central role in their environmental policies by encouraging the development and deployment of cleaner technologies for power generation, transportation, and household cooking, heating, and lighting.

Measures to limit aerosol pollution tend to receive less public attention than the broader campaign against greenhouse gases, but they, too, should be an essential component of global action against climate change.

DIMMER AND DRIER

Climate scientists have known about the dimming effect of aerosols since at least the 1970s, but most research has focused on their effects on temperature. Darker aerosols, such as diesel soot and other kinds of black carbon, absorb sunlight and accelerate warming. But lighter aerosols, such as the sulfates and nitrates formed from coal, gasoline, and other fuel emissions, cool the planet by reflecting sunlight back into space. That explains, in part, why the world hasn’t seen more of a temperature increase from the greenhouse gases already present in the atmosphere. (This masking effect is powerful enough that some advocates of geoengineering have proposed injecting more reflective aerosol particles into the atmosphere in order to cool the earth.)

Focusing on how aerosols affect temperature, however, has distracted policymakers from the important and distinct effects that aerosols have on the water cycle. These effects are most pronounced in the Northern Hemisphere, which is the source of most of the world’s aerosols and thus suffers the most dimming from these pollutants. But because air currents tend to carry pollution, water droplets, and water vapor far from their origins, aerosols produced in one region can also affect rainfall far afield.

Since the 1880s, when reliable record keeping began, global temperatures have increased by about 0.9 degrees Celsius. And as the planet has warmed, rainfall at latitudes above 45 degrees has generally increased. But twice since the mid-twentieth century, surges in aerosol emissions have significantly disrupted this pattern, reducing rainfall in a number of regions.

The first disruption was the result of the sulfur dioxide emissions produced by the massive combustion of coal and other fuels across Europe and North America in the mid-twentieth century, driven by rapid industrial growth after World War II. From the 1950s to the late 1980s, global emissions of sulfur dioxide (which in the atmosphere becomes sulfate, a reflective aerosol) nearly doubled, reducing the amount of sunlight reaching the earth’s surface by about two percent on average. As a direct result of this dimming, average rainfall in the Northern Hemisphere declined by between three and four percent over the same period. Indeed, there is strong evidence that sulfur dioxide emissions in the United States and western Europe contributed to the Sahelian megadroughts that began in the 1960s and continued through the 1990s, a period during which precipitation in the Sahel and some other parts of sub-Saharan Africa fell by between 25 and 50 percent relative to twentieth-century averages.

Thanks to stringent air pollution laws introduced in the 1970s and strengthened steadily in the following years, the blanket of aerosols over Europe and North America has thinned since the 1980s. From 1980 to 2000, the average amount of sunlight that reached the earth’s surface in these regions increased by about four percent-enough to lift average annual precipitation on land areas in the Northern Hemisphere by a similar magnitude.

[In 2010, China and India received between 10 and 15 percent less sunlight than they did in 1970.]

A second surge in aerosols is now playing out in East Asia and South Asia. These regions, which have rapidly industrialized over the past four decades, have seen a two- to fourfold increase in sulfur dioxide and black carbon emissions since the 1970s. As a result, in 2010, China and India received somewhere between ten and 15 percent less sunlight than they did in 1970. As the wind has carried sulfates and black carbon over thousands of miles, the dimming effect has extended to the atmosphere over the Indian Ocean, reducing the evaporation of seawater and thus weakening the monsoons that bring much-needed water to East Asia and South Asia every year. From 1950 to 2002, the most recent period for which estimates are available, there was a seven percent decrease in average annual rainfall over the Indo-Gangetic Plain, the fertile belt of land crossing eastern Pakistan, northern India, and Bangladesh that is home to more than one billion people, many of them dependent on rain-fed agriculture. Over the same period, summer monsoon rainfall in parts of northern China decreased by more than ten percent.

The desiccation of China’s north and the region’s recent drought, in 2010 and 2011, have affected not only agriculture but also other water dependent activities, such as hydroelectric power generation. The consequences have worried Chinese authorities to such a degree that they are building canals and pipelines that will eventually divert some 1.6 trillion cubic feet of water to the region each year. Some of China’s repressive policies toward water-rich Tibet are motivated by the Chinese government’s desire to maintain control over the nation’s fragile water supplies and their hydropower potential.

China has the capacity and the financial means to protect itself from erratic precipitation by investing in water infrastructure. So do other relatively wealthy countries, which can also respond to droughts by importing more water-intensive products and refocusing domestic economic activity on crops and industries that are less dependent on precipitation. Strategies such as these, along with aggressive measures to improve water-use efficiency, have allowed California, for example, to grow its economy even as it suffers its worst drought in modern history.

But things are different in much of the developing world, where water infrastructure and state capacity are more limited and a higher proportion of the population depends on locally sourced food produced on rain-fed land. In South Asia, for example, 60 percent of the agricultural land is rain-fed. That proportion reaches 90 percent in Latin America and 95 percent in sub-Saharan Africa. Many countries in these regions can’t easily turn to infrastructure and trade to solve their food production problems because of limited budgets and because they lack the capacity to rapidly shift production to new crops and industries. And many of these countries are particularly dependent on agriculture: nearly half of all employment in India is in farming, and even in richer Brazil, agricultural laborers account for 15 percent of the work force. All told, more than 400 million farmers, along with their dependents, count on rain-fed agriculture for their livelihoods. Countries such as Brazil, Colombia, Sudan, and Zimbabwe, which rely on hydropower for between 60 and 80 percent of their electricity generation, face additional risks from the dimming.

Forty percent of the world’s population is already expected to live J under severe water stress by 2050. That proportion will likely increase as aerosol-induced dimming further disrupts the water cycle. And as governments around the world are beginning to realize, water scarcity is not only an economic and humanitarian challenge but also a geopolitical one: as supplies of fresh water dwindle, states will begin to jockey for access to them, as they already have, for example, in north eastern Africa, where Egypt has squabbled with Ethiopia over its construction of a massive hydroelectric dam on the Blue Nile.

CLEANING THE AIR

Although the costs of aerosol-induced dimming are high, the policies needed to reduce the pollution that causes it are relatively clear. Cutting aerosols will require action in three main sectors: electric power generation, transportation, and household energy services for the poor.

With regard to electric power generation, most of the concern about aerosols centers on burning coal, which is responsible for more than 70 percent of the world’s sulfur dioxide emissions. Given its environmental and health impacts, conventional coal power is increasingly hard to justify. So if coal is to remain part of the global energy mix in the coming decades, coal-fired power plants will need to become more efficient and include equipment to remove sulfur dioxide and other pollutants from their emissions. As the technology to do so improves, new coal plants will also need to capture and store carbon dioxide emissions—an expensive prospect. At the same time, governments and firms will have to invest more in other energy sources. Natural gas, which emits much lower levels of most pollutants (including aerosols) than coal does, is one option, and in North America, the shale boom has dramatically cut the cost of supplying it. Making gas friendlier for the climate and the water cycle will require more work to plug leaks in the natural gas supply and transmission system (since those leaks release methane, a potent green house gas), and it will require greater frugality in the use of water to drill and frack shale gas wells. Of course, there are also many options beyond natural gas, such as nuclear, solar, and wind power.

Regulators in California and the European Union, meanwhile, have already pioneered policies that cut aerosol emissions from transportation. They have mandated cleaner fuels and combustion technologies, such as low-sulfur diesel and exhaust systems equipped with efficient particulate filters and catalytic converters. Officials elsewhere should follow their lead, and they should pair these regulations with rigorous compliance regimes, which are currently lacking in many countries.

 

Eliminating combustion altogether, perhaps through electric vehicles, could be a next step. In the meantime, subsidy reforms can help limit the use of some of the dirtiest fuels. Changes to India’s fuel-pricing regime, for example, have encouraged car buyers there to shift from diesel to gasoline engines, which emit far fewer aerosols. Transitioning large commercial and public-transportation vehicles to natural gas could also help.

Cutting aerosol emissions produced by burning dirty fuels in the world’s poorest households is another way to reduce global dimming. Just over one billion people, most of them in the developing world, rely on kerosene to light their homes, and three billion use solid fuels, such as crop residue and dung, for cooking and heating. Burning these fuels with traditional technologies generates aerosols that damage lungs along with the climate: the particulates emitted by biomass based cooking and heating are responsible for about a third of the dimming in South Asia. Cleaner technologies for cooking, heating, and lighting, such as energy-efficient cookstoves and solar lanterns, are readily available, and making them universally accessible would offer huge health and environmental benefits to the world’s poor. Ensuring such access by 2030 would cost up to $50 billion per year—a high price, but one that should be manageable if it is shared among a number of states, including rich countries, which would themselves benefit from lower aerosol emissions in the developing world.

Since aerosols have a short atmospheric life span, pursuing policies such as these could significantly reduce global dimming within ten or 20 years. That would dramatically limit the risk of droughts and irregular monsoons. It would also heat up the planet by reducing the atmosphere’s reflective aerosol “mask,” however, so any effort to reduce global dimming must be accompanied by significant cuts to carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions.

ACT FAST

As governments build on what they achieved at the Paris climate conference, they must set politically feasible targets for future action. Focusing on aerosols could help. Whereas greenhouse gas emissions will bring about relatively distant and diffuse dangers, aerosols cause immediate and localized harm. That should raise the incentives for governments to  act against them, and it should raise the willingness of their constituencies to accept such action. Indeed, in the case of aerosol reductions, the parochial interests that have so often stymied broader climate diplomacy need not hinder progress. That is why some countries that have long been reluctant to do much about global pollution—from China and India to Brazil and the United States—have pursued bolder policies when it comes to pollutants that have localized effects, such as aerosols.

As states sharpen their pledges to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the coming years, they should also make distinct pledges to cut aerosols. (So far, few states have done so: of the 186 emissions-reduction pledges submitted before the Paris climate conference, only a handful, including Chile’s and Mexico’s, mentioned aerosols.) And they should broadcast the promise of these reductions to build public support for the policies needed to achieve them. As such policies take hold, they will generate rapid, tangible benefits, encouraging even more progress on the changing climate’s other challenges.

Unfortunately, even the most effective climate diplomacy will leave the world’s poorest states exposed to the higher temperatures, rising sea levels, and disruptions in rainfall caused by industrial pollution. As a result, governments will have to work to adapt. Today, the countries with the highest emissions—among them, China, Japan, the United States, and the members of the European Union—are on track to raise around $100 billion per year by 2020, much of which will be used to help vulnerable states adjust to the dangers of a changing climate.

As for how to spend these funds, a variety of efforts will be needed, and states should be willing to experiment to determine which programs work best, sharing the know-how they gain with one another. As they do so, they should invest in infrastructure and technologies that address the effects of both warming and dimming, such as irrigation methods that can better protect farmers from erratic rainfall and new kinds of drought-resistant crops. Indeed, innovation in water conservation technologies remains massively underfunded, despite their huge promise. Finally, governments should remove protectionist policies in their countries’ agricultural sectors, which limit the ability of consumers to access foreign sources of food when erratic rainfall and higher temperatures harm local production.

The dimming caused by aerosols has already made the world’s water supplies less secure. It is both economically and technologically feasible to reverse this process. Doing so will require a concerted global effort, but failing to do so will compound the risks of drought and poverty already in store as a result of the world’s changing climate.

Authors:

VEERABHADRAN RAMANATHAN is Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric and Climate Sciences at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego.
JESSICA SEDDON is Founder and Managing Director of Okapi Research and Advisory and a Senior Fellow at the Centre for Technology and Policy at the Indian Institute of Technology Madras.
DAVID G. VICTOR is a Professor at the School of Global Policy and Strategy at the University of California, San Diego, and the author of Global Warming Gridlock: Creating More Effective Strategies for Protecting the Planet.
© Foreign Affairs
Posted in Climate Change, Governance | Leave a comment