Topic

climate change

179 petitions

Started 3 days ago

Petition to 5G , Southampton City Council, Vodafone

Stop 5G coverage being launched in Southampton

Vodafone is planning to launch 5G in 19 towns and cities across the UK during 2019/2020 which includes Southampton. Vodafone engineers have already installed 5G antennas in Birmingham, Glasgow and London which will give customers connection speeds of up to 10 gigabits per second to allow video streaming without buffering.  4G networks use radio waves to broadcast data, however 5G uses millimetre waves to allow for higher frequency and therefore transmitting more energy.  Southampton would be covered with thousands of high energy millimetre waves, which means residents of the city, and surrounding areas will never be far from a strong signal. Trees, buildings, rain and potentially ourselves will absorb the short waves which could lead to adverse biological effects such as; oxidative damage (crucial factor in the development of chronic diseases), melatonin reduction, generation of stress proteins, effects to the skin and sweat glands and decreased bacteria resistance.  Not only is 5G damaging to human health, the effect it could have on the environment are unimaginable. The millimetre waves are susceptible to being absorbed by plants and rain which not only damage the plant, but may also be consumed by humans. Bird species in particular are affected by low level, non-ionizing microwave radiation as well as bees, with the declining bee population being linked to the radiation and reduces the egg-laying abilities of the queen. An Ofcom response to the environmental and health impact of 5G networks stated, 'We have published information on our website Enabling 5G in the UK about what is being done to make 5G available in the UK. We do not, however, hold risk analysis data of the impact on the environment from 5G technology deployment and consultations concerning the consequences of blanket coverage of non-ionising radiation. This is because we have no statutory duties in this area, it does not fall within our remit and other bodies such as the World Health Organisation (“WHO”) and Public Health England are better placed to address such issues''.  We don't want to see 5G coming into Southampton and cannot see a significant benefit to the coverage that is not outweighed by the potential fatal consequences to not only the planet, but our personal health.  If you agree please sign the petition so we can show it is not wanted in our city. 

Chloe Rudderham
11 supporters
Started 3 days ago

Petition to National Transport Authority, bus eireann, City Direct

€1 public transport for Christmas in Galway

People Before Profit Galway have written to the National Transport Authority, Bus Éireann and City Direct to propose that for the Christmas shopping period Leap card fares be reduced to €1 on all Galway City bus routes. People Before Profit Galway rep Joe Loughnane explained: "We have written to the NTA and the relevant bus companies to propose that Leap card fares in Galway are reduced to €1 for the month of December. We believe there are a number of good reasons for them to consider our proposal. We expect the general Galway public will be strongly in favour of it too. Firstly, serious traffic congestion is increasingly a problem in Galway City and is bound to peak during the Christmas shopping period, unless something is done to reduce the number of cars coming into the city and encourage people to switch to public transport. People swapping their cars for the bus will reduce carbon emissions and air polution in Galway. Reduced €1 Leap card fares were trialled in Galway in July and there was a huge uptake in people using the bus. Our local shops, restaurants, cafes, pubs, markets, cultural events etc will all benefit from people being more easily able to get into the city centre for the busy Christmas period. Thanks to not having to pay for parking and fuel people will also have more money in their pockets to spend in our local businesses. We believe our proposal makes a lot of sense for all parties involved. The benefits are clear to see for the public, the environment, local businesses and Galway's economy. We look forward to hearing back from the National Transport Authority and the bus companies on our proposal," Loughnane concluded. https://www.advertiser.ie/galway/article/110826/loughnane-calls-for-leap-card-fares-to-be-reduced-to-1-for-december

People Before Profit Galway
25 supporters
Update posted 4 days ago

Petition to YAB Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, YB Dato' Seri Wan Azizah, YAB Chow Kon Yeow, YB Tuan Khalid Samad, YB Yeo Bee Yin, YB Dr Xavier Jayakumar, YB Zuraida Kamaruddin, YB Loke Siew Fook, YB Mohamed Azmin Ali, YB Salahuddin Ayub, YB Rina Harun

Save Penang! Reject the 3-Islands Reclamation!

BM / English / 中文 /  தமிழ் / 日本語 / BI / ภาษาไทย  We object to the proposal to reclaim 3 massive islands to the south of Penang Island, as announced by the Penang Chief Minister YAB Chow Kon Yeow (The Star, 6th May 2019). The lack of public consultation and detailed information about the project is shocking in view of the size of proposed reclamation which is 4,500 acres or 7 square miles – the size of Johor's Forest City! We call upon Tun as the chairman of the National Physical Planning Council to reject the Penang South Reclamation (PSR) megaproject for the following reasons: This reclamation will destroy the richest fishery in Penang. In view of rapid fish depletion worldwide, this coastal fish bank is our food security. It supplies local needs as well as Penang’s food and tourism industry. Once destroyed, seafood prices will hike beyond what the average Penangite can afford. The livelihoods of 4,817 inshore fishermen are at stake. These fishermen have staged repeated protests, the biggest being 1,500 fishermen from 14 associations in Pantai Sungai Batu, Teluk Kumbar (Berita Harian, 13.12.2015), the most recent in early 2019. Fishermen’s experience with the STP2 northern reclamation shows that they have not been well protected by the Penang government, despite reassurances. The impacts of sand-mining will also be felt in Perak. The deep seabed (benthic zone) will be dredged and destroyed. As in the northern reclamation, the fishermen in Penang and an additional 6,080 fishermen in Perak will be pulling out mud and rocks, tearing holes in their fishing nets. Penang’s pristine southern beaches will be ruined. The coastal environment of Permatang Damar Laut, Gertak Sanggul and Teluk Kumbar will be wrecked by reclamation and pollution. Locals will lose their recreational beaches and seaviews. Penang’s eco-tourism reputation will be tainted by this irresponsible project. Coastal habitats and Life Below Water (SDG 14) will be devastated. The nesting patterns of the IUCN-listed "vulnerable" Olive Ridley Turtle (Penyu Lipas) and the playground of the Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphin and the Indo-Pacific Finless Porpoise will be disrupted. Contamination is likely to reach the coral-rich Pulau Kendi. Marine biodiversity for miles around will be stressed and depleted. The project is environmentally reckless in the face of climate crisis. While claiming to target 40% reduction, the reclamation project will generate an additional 3.2 million tons of carbon emissions annually (source, 18 Nasihat, 18 April 2019). The RM46 billion Penang Transport Master Plan (PTMP) is a poor excuse for reclamation. The reclamation and land sales are purportedly a means to pay for the implementation of the PTMP to ease traffic congestion. But the present version of the PTMP is fundamentally flawed, consisting of a slew of expensive projects rather than viable, integrated solutions. The additional reasons for the reclamation are doubtful. The proposed Penang airport extension has been superseded by the Kulim International Airport (LTAK) plan. The location of the mooted administrative centre and public spaces would not be convenient for most Penang people. Furthermore, the future urban expansion is based on an unrealistic projected population forecast of 2.45 million, versus 1.98 million calculated by the Department of Statistics! The apparent need for land reclamation is not caused by land shortage, but by bad planning.The Penang Development Corporation owns 4,500 acres of land in Seberang Perai. In his Vision 2030, the Chief Minister promised to bring the much-needed development to the people of Seberang Perai. This can be achieved by investing in proper infrastructure and a good public transport link across the Second Bridge, not through reclamation. The Penang government has not been transparent about the project. From the start, the display of the 20-volume SRS proposal was severely restricted, where visitors cannot make copies, bring in cameras or even handphones. To date, no cost breakdown of any component of the PTMP including the reclamation has been made available. This speculative development is based on greed, not on need. Despite the ubiquitous empty condos, serious property overhang, and ongoing northern reclamation (almost 900 acres), the state insists on reclaiming 3 islands (4,500 acres), which will surely exacerbate the property glut! Island reclamation will burden the state with maintenance costs. We are not against reclamation per se but we are against this particular type of reclamation – island reclamation for resort-type development. Due to siltation, the channels between the islands will have to be perpetually maintained at public expense. Malaysia does not need another “Forest City”. The projected population on the 3 islands will be 446,300 souls (source, 18 Nasihat), but who will the inhabitants be? With only 6–20% housing land in the “affordable” category, will the bulk of the properties be targeted at high-end foreign buyers? Will this development give rise to glaring social inequalities? The state should take care of existing residents not future buyers. Penangites have repeatedly highlighted our urgent vulnerability to flooding problems on both the island and Seberang Perai, and exposed hill slopes at Tanjung Bungah, Botak Hill, Paya Terubong and the Bukit Kukus landslide area. Why is the state obsessed with creating a “Smart and Green” 3 islands for future buyers, but neglecting to rehabilitate the environment for existing residents? The lack of transparency in planning and management processes implies hidden agendas. Could the real objectives of the reclamation project be linked to plugging the state’s budget gaps, inflated reclamation costs and property play in the island’s south? A mega-project which will extend beyond the present Chief Minister’s term can easily become a platform for manipulated land values, international money flows and undeclared political financing. The risky project might put the state in financial jeopardy. With barely RM1 billion in annual revenue, the state is seeking a RM1 billion loan to undertake the RM16 billion reclamation, despite the hazards of cash flow and timing mismatch in a volatile property market. Uncertain bridging and holding costs will be borne by the state, while the developers’ consortium (as Project Delivery Partner) is assured of its 6% fee. Could the state’s overreach result in a financial disaster? Too much at stake for too little public gain. A failed reclamation project will burden Penang with debt and abandoned projects, while the present and future generations would have lost valuable opportunities for timely climate adaptation and robust, balanced development. A better, cheaper, faster (sooner) solution can be put in place. If the state invests in improving public transport and connectivity, and encouraging public transport usage (targeting 40% modal share), our existing roads would be adequate until 2030. Smart, shared mobility is on the way! The solution should serve the majority of Penangites. An analysis of the alignments of the RM9.6 billion Pan-Island Link, and the RM9 billion LRT shows they will disproportionately and ultimately serve the 3 islands. Yet, it is existing Penang residents who have to suffer the environmental costs. The solution must be socially just. If the aim is to ease traffic congestion, why should the state reward car users and create losers? Why should the fishermen and rural communities give up their sustainable lifestyle, just because some drivers are too selfish to give up road space for a bus lane?  Penang is blessed with hills, seas and UNESCO-listed George Town, but we are now at a crossroads. What vision do we want for Penang? The expansion of our present car-dominated concrete urban sprawl until it devours our hills and seas? Or a smart, green, car-lite, connected and liveable Penang for all residents?  Sustainable development strategies which are financially prudent and socially inclusive will bring strong economic growth. We have a responsibility to leave a better planet for present and future generations! Save Our Fishermen! Save Our Coastal Environment! Reject Reclamation! #SavePenang   #PenangTolakTambak Shortlink: http://chng.it/JbJsQJsB

Salma Khoo
63,899 supporters