By Audrey Wood

New reports of corruption at the highest levels of government never fail to surprise, especially when cases of profiteering are coming from within a democratic, constitution-based administration. Still, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has pointed to official corruption as one of the biggest challenges his country faces since being elected in March. President Medvedev makes big talk about eliminating corruption from his government, but the most recent report out of Siberia illustrates exactly how pervasive systemic bribery is in Russia and how very much is yet to be done:

On December 9, director of the Siberian Federal District Office of the Russian Federal Service for Ecological, Technical and Atomic Supervision, Leonid Baklitsky, was arrested on extortion charges by the Novosibirsk FSB office as the result of an undercover investigation. The investigation revealed that Baklitsky had organized a racketeering system with directors of factories in Siberia that emit a lot of pollution. Baklitsky allegedly received a bribe in the amount of 465,000 rubles ($16,666) while sitting at his office desk (fittingly, December 9 is International Anti-Corruption Day). The sum was handed over by the head of a government agency seeking to illegally acquire the right to conduct inspections and expert examinations that the institution is not licensed to do. Searches of the indicted official’s office uncovered undisclosed sums of cash and bank cards. The list of charges is long: an FSB investigator disclosed that during 2008 alone, Baklitsky received similar bribes from other organizations to for the illegal right to conduct technical examinations of buildings and equipment, inspections of dangerous industrial facilities, and to train and certify industrial safety specialists.

Among other things, Baklitsky was responsible for environmental regulation enforcement on the Boguchanskaya Hydroelectric Dam project that has been under construction in the Krasnoyarsk Krai for more than 20 years. In 2006, Ust-Ilismk city Duma deputies appealed to the President with the request to lower the dam’s height from 208 to 185 meters, citing that environmental expert reviews indicated a high likelihood that that the resultant reservoir would be contaminated by industrial runoff from facilities in the Irkutsk Region.

Baklitsky, however, protested this change. It is unknown whether his opposition to the measure was backed by actual scientific data or, perhaps, a different type of currency.

By Doug Norlen

This month I joined over 11,000 others at the 14th United Nations Climate Change Conference of Parties (COP-14), in Poznan, Poland.  Reactions from the enormous conference ranged from disappointment at the lack of progress in negotiations to enthusiasm and hope. We’re hoping that the incoming Obama Administration will bring new international leadership and end the eight years of obstructionism that has characterized the Bush Administration’s approach to climate change.

In Poznan, Pacific Environment focused on the funding needed for countries to meet their obligations under the climate change convention (especially for climate change mitigation and adaptation).  Most environmental organizations and developing countries want to see the mechanisms controlling funding remain controlled by the climate change convention’s Conference of Parties, which reflects the wide and more democratic membership of the UN.  However, some developed countries support funds under the control of the World Bank Group, over which they have more control.  This is despite the fact that the World Bank has a record of financing projects that worsen climate change and that otherwise do social and environmental harm.

Pacific Environment participated in two statements on this topic that were released at COP-14:

http://members.foei.org/en/campaigns/climate/kyoto-protocol/world-bank-out-of-climate-change-finance

http://www.ifg.org/events/copenhagen2008/Global_Climate_Fund_Poznan.pdf

Meanwhile, governments world-wide continue to subsidize harmful fossil fuel projects that undermine their own commitments under the climate change convention.  It reminded me that continued grass-roots resistance to these projects by Pacific Environment and its partners, wholly outside of the massive and cumbersome climate change convention processes, is as crucial as ever.

Castelanelli Brothers Dairy cows stand patiently while their barn is cleaned - their manure heads to a sealed lagoon, where it turns into methane gas and high quality fertilizer.

By Galina Angarova

What a great experience I had in the past few days. Unforgettable! I have probably learned more information in the past ten days than I normally do in two months. On November 8th Pacific Environment brought a group of Siberians from Lake Baikal area to the Bay area to learn about renewable energy and energy efficiency. Tatiana Molchanova, the Deputy Head and Tatiana Tivikova, the Chief Ranger of the Pribaikalsky region of Buryatia, and a well known journalist in Ulan-Ude, Sergey Basaev, participated in the exchange.

The purpose of the exchange stems from the current rate and type of development plaguing the Baikal region: privatizing public property in the area has resulted in the saturation of both legal and illegal dwellings in the area, which have escalated the cost of electricity for the local people. Now the Russian government plans to invest more in infrastructure in the region in order to increase the quantity of hotels, restaurants and other recreational establishments on the lake’s shores. This – if not monitored correctly and not using environmentally-efficient methods – could cause tremendous cultural, social and environmental tension in the area, including between tourists and the local residents. California and, particularly, the San Francisco region, which is considered to be the second greenest city in the U.S, have a lot to offer in terms of learning about green technologies. We hoped to give our Baikal participants the opportunity to learn from government offices, businesses and other organizations about renewable energy and planning.

We visited a ‘green’ hotel, a renewable energy and sustainable living demonstration site, a geothermal power plant, a wind farm and a dairy that uses methane digesters to generate electricity. The group also met with local legislators to learn about California’s renewable energy policies, renewable portfolio standard, and energy efficiency standards.

Overall, I think the exchange was a real success and that our participants got a ton of useful information that can potentially lead to real projects in Pribaikalsky region. They are now back in Buryatia, full of ideas and eager to jump into projects in their own communities. That success had a lot to do with the valuable information and tips they got from meetings or tours.  I think it was especially valuable to show them the entire spectrum of various technologies – wind, solar, geothermal, methane, and complement this knowledge with what they learned about energy efficiency. Results will be long-term, and I am looking forward to organizing a follow-up exchange and working with communities back in Siberia.