OMI logo
Translate this page:

Recent News

News Feed

News Archives

Latest Video & Audio

More video & audio >

News Archives » global warming

Moving Planet was amazing! September 26th, 2011

Moving Planet was a worldwide day to move beyond fossil fuels, with over 2000 events in more than 175 countries! Learn more…

Alberta Tar Sands: Dirty Oil May 9th, 2010

The recent oil-related ecological disaster in the Gulf of Mexico raises questions about the sources of the energy on which we are so dependent.  An increasingly important source of oil for the United States is the tar sands of Alberta, Canada.

The Alberta Tar sands, an extremely dense and viscous form of petroleum called bitumen, have been referred to as the most damaging project on the planet. According to Greenpeace, emissions from tar sands extraction could grow to between 127 and 140m tonnes by 2020, exceeding the current emissions of Austria, Portugal, Ireland and Denmark. If proposed expansion proceeds,it will result in the loss of vast tracts of boreal forest and peat bogs of a territory the size of England.

Click here to read more »

Earth Day 2010! April 22nd, 2010

Picture-153April 22nd marks the 40th anniversary of Earth Day. Forty years after the first Earth Day, the world is in greater peril than ever. While climate change is the greatest challenge of our time, it also presents the greatest opportunity – an unprecedented opportunity to build a healthy, prosperous, clean energy economy now and for the future. Consumption patterns also pose a threat. Today’s consumption is undermining the environmental resource base and exacerbating inequalities.

Daniel LeBlanc, OMI – now in Bolivia for the Alternative Climate Summit sent the following for our contemplation and action on Earth Day:

Click here to read more »

World Bank Approves $3 Billion Loan for Controversial Coal Plant in South Africa April 12th, 2010

On April 8th 2010, the World Bank approved a controversial $ 3 billion loan for a coal-fired power station to ESKOM, the South Africa-based, state owned electricity utility, despite serious concerns from environmental organizations and the faith community. United States, Britain and Norway, Italy and the Netherlands abstained from voting for the coal loan due to unresolved environmental concerns and economic impacts on local communities.

More than 200 organizations across the world have endorsed a critique of the loan saying it will be a burden to poor people who will likely see their household bills increase, while international extractive corporations will continue to receive subsidized energy due to special pricing agreements with Eskom

Eskom is the world’s fourth-largest power company and Africa’s largest carbon emitter, and accounts for 40% of South Africa’s total emissions. The loan raised serious environmental concerns such as pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, and raised questions about the World Bank’s commitment to renewable energy sources.

Click here to read more »

Broad Coalition Asks Senate for Climate Change Legislation March 19th, 2010

CO2The Missionary Oblates JPIC Office joined184 businesses and organizations, and 77 individual activists, calling on the Senate to legislate action to curb global warming. The letter, which was sent to all members of the Senate, argues that “greenhouse gas emissions can be cut swiftly and in an economically and environmentally sound way by means of a national emissions cap that is realized through a combination of aggressive energy efficiency and renewable energy standards.”

The organizations noted that “by focusing on this three-pronged strategy (i.e., carbon cap + efficiency + renewables), it may prove unnecessary – for the moment at least – to tackle either of the two most controversial options for addressing climate change: creating a “trading system” for emissions credits or imposing carbon taxes.”

The letter also stressed that “climate legislation that promotes continued or expanded use of fossil fuels and/or nuclear power, or which rolls back existing environmental safeguards, could result in a bill that might actually be worse than no bill at all.”

Click here to read more »

Return to Top