Climate change is a global crisis. Its implications will impact every global citizen, with the most disastrous consequences being felt by the impoverished. As stakeholders of Stellenbosch University, we as students must require the university's administration to invest in our future, and the future of our children, by divesting the university's endowment funds from fossil fuels and reinvesting them into sustainable funds. As members of the Stellenbosch community, we must ensure that the town's university - which has a substantial impact on Stellenbosch's development - administrates its funds sustainably, to ensure its long-term financial health. And as citizens of South Africa - a region threatened by extensive drought due to global warming - we must hold one of the wealthiest public universities in the country to account for funding climate change.

Since its formation in 1988, South Yorkshire Pensions Authority has worked hard on behalf of its nearly 140,000 members to provide them with a safe and secure future in retirement. Yet while ever it invests in unethical companies or industries, including fossil fuels and tobacco, the Authority is putting these achievements at great risk, by undermining long-term commitments to maximise pension fund investments and to provide good service to fund members. (The over 300 employers contributing to the Authority's schemes are also at risk, as it is they who will ultimately meet any shortfall in the cost of providing scheme benefits to retired members.) The South Yorkshire Pensions Authority (SYPA) which manages the Local Government Pension Scheme has £259m invested in companies with fossil fuel and fracking connections such as Shell, BP and Glencore, 4.25% of its £6.1bn holdings (as at Mar 2016). It also holds investments in companies which fail to balance their focus on profit with the social and environmental responsibilities expected in the modern day. We believe it is morally indefensible to invest in companies that destroy our climate and so leave to our children a world where life as we know it is unsustainable. And that it is financially irresponsible to invest in such a high risk sector where the experts agree that the assets are currently wildly overstated and where share prices are certain to plummet.

De onde vem e para onde vai a água utilizada na exploração do gás de xisto? Essas questões geram frequentes polêmicas e debates, uma vez que produtos químicos são utilizados nesse tipo de extração. De acordo com o conselheiro da Sociedade Brasileira para o Progresso da Ciência (SBPC), o pesquisador Jailson de Andrade, ainda faltam estudos criteriosos sobre o assunto. Andrade alerta, sobretudo, para a carência de informações que identifiquem onde as jazidas de gás natural estão localizadas e se estão perto de aquíferos importantes. “Os estudos realizados até agora são contestados. Não se sabe para onde vai a água contaminada por produtos químicos utilizados na exploração do gás. Ainda não há uma experiência no Brasil que possa se tomar como base. Falta informação”, diz. Apesar de os dados ainda serem imprecisos, existem companhias ansiosas por entrarem em processos licitatórios de exploração do gás de xisto no Brasil, e outras vislumbrando lucros para despoluir a água e as áreas porventura afetadas pela sua extração. O pesquisador observa, no entanto, que não há tecnologia para despoluir os aquíferos, caso eles sejam atingidos. Para Andrade, esse é um dos pontos cruciais a serem resolvidos. “A exploração do gás de xisto sem critério afetará a água sob nosso solo, já que a rocha a ser fraturada (o folhelho Irati) encontra-se a algumas centenas de metros abaixo do aquífero Guarani, na bacia geológica do Paraná”, detalhou. O Guarani é uma das maiores reservas subterrâneas de água doce do mundo. Tem a capacidade de abastecer, de forma sustentável, muitos milhões de habitantes, com trilhões de metros cúbicos de água doce por ano. No Brasil, está no subsolo dos estados de São Paulo, Goiás, Minas Gerais, Mato Grosso, Mato Grosso do Sul, Paraná, Santa Catarina e Rio Grande do Sul. Na visão de parlamentares, estudiosos e pesquisadores, essa riqueza pode estar ameaçada por uma enorme pressão econômica, a exemplo do que já ocorre nos Estados Unidos. A exploração de xisto utiliza o método de fraturação hidráulica, chamado em inglês de “fracking”. Trata-se de injeção de toneladas de água, sob altíssima pressão, misturada com areia e produtos químicos, com o objetivo de quebrar a rocha e liberar o gás nela aprisionado. Nos EUA, 90% dos poços de gás de xisto são perfurados com a utilização dessa técnica. Esse tipo de extração utiliza vinte vezes mais recursos hídricos do que as técnicas convencionais. Com isso, as pequenas cidades norte-americanas nos arredores dos poços de gás de xisto enfrentaram problemas de falta d’água para consumo e agricultura, além da contaminação dos aquíferos subterrâneos e das reservas de água potável. Mas a falta de água não é o único problema. Destacam-se ainda, a excessiva circulação de caminhões, a injeção de fluidos que provocam pequenos abalos sísmicos, a ausência de regulamentação, a presença na água de pequenas quantidades de produtos químicos e metais pesados cancerígenos, bem como a acumulação de metano, que pode provocar explosões. “Há um estudo da National Academy of Science, nos Estados Unidos, que mostra que, em 141 poços de água potável na Pensilvânia, quanto mais próximo de áreas de exploração de gás não convencional, maior a quantidade de metano (tóxico e inflamável) na água”, informou Jailson. “A controvérsia na literatura é se isso já existia antes ou se é resultado da perfuração para obtenção de gás”, observou Andrade. Nomenclatura equivocada – Há uma longa e equivocada tradição brasileira de se chamar o folhelho (shale) de xisto (schist). Apesar disso, os especialistas esclarecem que é incorreto chamar o gás de folhelho de gás de xisto: “O xisto é uma rocha metamórfica que sofreu grandes transformações geológicas, não possibilitando a geração de gás; o folhelho, por sua vez, é uma rocha sedimentar com grande quantidade de matéria orgânica que dá origem ao gás”, explica Jailson Andrade. O gás de folhelho, encontrado em áreas de permeabilidade relativa e também chamado de “gás de xisto”, é um dos três tipos de gases não convencionais cuja ocorrência não está associada a bolsões de gás armazenados a partir das camadas de petróleo. Estas produzem o gás fóssil convencional, encontrado na plataforma continental e em outras regiões do Brasil. Os demais gases não convencionais são o confinado (tight gas), com ocorrência em rochas impermeáveis ou de baixa permeabilidade, e o metano associado a camadas de carvão. Camila Cotta, especial para o Jornal da Ciência/SBPC EcoDebate, 14/08/2014

Those we have elected are failing the Australian people and they are failing the natural world. They are allowing the cruel and unnecessary slaughter of sea creatures and the ruin of undersea habitats. We demand our Governments manage natural resources and the global commons solely in the best interests of present and future citizens. Our oceans should not be exploited by individual nations or corporations but held in trust for the benefit of all and for future generations.

Our electric utility, SDG&E, plans to replace the shut down San Onofre nuclear power plant with massive amounts of new gas power – through an insider deal that doesn’t allow clean energy options to compete. This rush for more fossil power would come at a major cost to energy customers, public health and our climate. Help us urge state regulators to reject this reckless plan and send a clear message to all the utilities that California is committed to clean energy. We can meet California’s energy needs reliably and affordably with clean energy, yet SDG&E is pushing a proposal that would lock in huge amounts of unnecessary, expensive and polluting fossil power for years to come. This natural gas bonanza carries a big price tag for our climate. We've already seen an increase in climate pollution from natural gas generation in the wake of San Onofre closing. Permanently increasing our dependence on fossil power would put California even father behind on our carbon reduction and clean energy targets. Sign the petition to stop this dirty energy proposal in its tracks, and send a clear message to all California utilities that energy consumers demand clean affordable energy options.

The escalating tensions between Ukraine and Russia should not be used as an excuse for increased liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. Gas exports cannot help the current situation in Ukraine, because it would take years for our export facilities to be able to process the volumes of gas proposed for overseas sales. And S. 2083 and H.R. 6 would fast track exports of U.S. LNG to 158 World Trade Organization member countries, not just Ukraine. Increasing U.S. oil and gas exports to other nations will only accelerate fracking at home, transforming rural and impoverished communities into sacrifice zones and endangering public health, natural resources and local economies. The oil and gas industry claims that fracking for gas can lead to energy independence, but that is simply not the case, especially if we're exporting that resource abroad. Ultimately, approving and building infrastructure is a lengthy, expensive process, and the limited oil and gas reserves available under U.S. soil will not support the money and energy needed to ship it overseas. Instead, we should invest in renewable energy.

We, the people of Oregon, recognize that we face a climate crisis that threatens the well-being of the people and nature of the state we love. The decisions we make today will dictate the quality of our lives together and those of generations to come. Divestment will help to protect not only a safe future for our children and grandchildren, but also our state’s financial portfolio. Carbon pricing will encourage energy efficiency in transportation, businesses and homes. From the Bottle Bill and Land Use Planning to Public Beach Access and the Eight-Hour Work Day, Oregon has been a national leader. We call on Oregon to lead once again on this critical issue. It’s good for the climate, it’s good for the economy, it’s good for our families.

Australia should set an international example by implementing the plan designed and fully costed by Beyond Zero Emissions environmental organisation and The University of Melbourne Energy Research Institute. In the absence of any agreed plan to rapidly phase out the burning of fossil fuels, greenhouse gas emissions are set to go on increasing for decades. This will prevent any chance of restricting global temperature rise to two degrees Celsius. As James Hansen of NASA bluntly states "The target that has been talked about in international negotiations for two degrees of warming is actually a prescription for long-term disaster." The current Australian target of 5% reduction of emissions by 2020 is dangerously inadequate. A target of 40-60% by 2030 is needed and may still be within reach if we begin construction of a national renewable energy grid over a ten year time frame without more loss of time. With accelerating release of methane from permafrost and the ocean floor, a positive feedback effect we could do nothing to slow could lead to runaway and irreversible warming, causing temperature rises of three to four degrees or more above pre-industrial. This would be disastrous for all life on the planet. We must stop burning fossil fuels. A national and international wind and solar transition scheme is urgently needed, technically achievable, and humanly possible. Ref: Zero Carbon Australia Stationary Energy Plan – http://bze.org.au/ I believe Australia’s great resource of sunlight should be the opportunity for the country to lead the world in exploiting this renewable energy. – David Suzuki “The time has come, once and for all, for this nation to fully embrace a clean-energy future.” - Barack Obama, President of the United States of America, June 2010 Image: SOLUCAR PS10 afloresm

The year of 2013 has witnessed 3 MAJOR STRIKES on the climate front. ONE - passing the mark of 400 parts per million of atmospheric carbon, in MAY 2013. TWO - a study was released in AUGUST 2013, revealing the fastest acceleration yet, of acidification in the ocean, marking ten times the norm, which was substantiated by a Columbia Univ study in March 2012, indicating the pace of ocean acidification has no parallel in 300 million years. THREE - at the writing of this petition, a major city - San Francisco - is currently threatened by wildfire, potentially shutting down its water and power supply - AUGUST 2013. World cities are showing constant threat now from wildfire, floods and hurricanes.

The last mile mobility should not be by Fossil Fuel powered vehicles. The rate of growth of cars and 2 wheelers powered by petroleum products is contributing to the dangerous raise of green house gases and fast raise of global temperatures. More immediate effect is urban heat Islands that is making life in cities unbearable during summer months. So a shit to pedal power and walking is to be encouraged by design of the roads.

The BBC has a responsibility to licence fee payers to report items of interest to the general public. Arguably, the single most important newsworthy item both now, and into the foreseeable future, is global warming and climate change. Now, more than ever, national -- and international -- education on the facts of human-induced climate change is ever more relevant for informed debate on action. The BBC is perfectly placed to take a leadership role in this important area. Featuring a climate change report in the BBC's standard programming schedule would be immensely useful in counteracting the ongoing, and very damaging, effects of myths and misinformation.