Thursday, August 21, 2008

Opposition to Dhamra port

Greenpeace activists blockade TATA HQ, demand that the Company
demonstrate corporate environmental responsibility

Mumbai, 20th August 2008 – In the absence of evidence that the TATAs
will honour their commitment to ensure no harm to Orissa's Olive
Ridley turtles, Greenpeace activists intensified their campaign to
stop the Dhamra Port today, by taking the issue back to Bombay House,
TATA Group headquarters. Activists dressed in turtle costumes
blockaded the building and vowed not to move until they received a
commitment from the TATA Management. Present also were Greenpeace
volunteers distributing fliers and carrying laptops, from where,
concerned members of the public signed onto an ongoing online
campaign, and join 90,000 other cyber activists, who have asked Mr.
Tata to relocate the port (1).

Greenpeace has been campaigning for several years now to demand that
the TATAs drop their plans to build a controversial port at Dhamra,
Orissa. The port is in the close proximity of the Gahirmatha Marine
Sanctuary and the Bhitarkanika National Park (India's second largest
mangrove forest and home to the saltwater crocodile). Gahirmatha is
one of the largest and last mass breeding and nesting sites for the
Olive Ridley Turtles in the world (2). Its location, for years has
been a matter of serious concern to conservationists, hundreds of
scientists and academics, including turtle experts, as well as fisher
groups such as the National Fishworkers' Forum and the Orissa
Traditional Fishworkers Union (3).

Speaking to the media, Areeba Hamid, Oceans Campaigner, Greenpeace
India said, "The TATA's track record on this issue is far from good.
In 2004-2005, when they got involved, they repeatedly voiced the
opinion that turtles are not found near the port site, and hence it
poses no threat. They had even stated that they would reconsider their
involvement if there was evidence of environmental or ecological
significance of the area. Now that the evidence of turtle movement and
ecological significance of the port site has grown (4), the company's
stance has shifted to mitigation, with earlier promises forgotten, a
convenient and not very ethical shift in goal posts".

Despite repeated requests, TATA officials refused to an on-the record,
in-camera meeting with Greenpeace, insisting that any meeting be in
the absence of the media/cameras. Greenpeace was insistent that any
meeting be recorded in full transparency, given the past history of
verbal promises and assurances made by various TATA officials that
have not been fulfilled.

Meanwhile, PR consultants hired by the TATA have been asking for a
meeting with Greenpeace. While Greenpeace has continued to maintain
its readiness to meet, Ashish Fernandes, Oceans Campaigner stressed
"TATA needs to act on its prior commitments and immediately halt
construction of the port project, and this is non negotiable. It is
only too easy for the TATA to host meaningless discussions, while
simultaneously continuing construction and creating a fait accompli."

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Study, done in 1997,
considered a port with significantly different specifications from the
project currently being built. The initial proposed capacity was 20
million tonnes per annum (mtpa) where as the proposed capacity is now
83 mtpa. The original project was to handle bulk carriers up to
120,000 deadweight tonnage (dwt); the revised plan proposes handling
ships up to 180,000 dwt. As if this isn't bad enough, the EIA has no
accurate baseline ecological data. And shockingly the 1997 EIA
considered a different port site, on the nearby Kanika Sands, whereas
the port is now being built on the mainland, north of the Dhamra river

Despite its ecological significance, the Dhamra area was purposely
excluded from Bhitarkanika and Gahirmatha Sanctuaries to facilitate
the Dhamra Port (5). In March 2007, the Department of Forest –
Wildlife, Government of Orissa, proposed the notification of an
eco-sensitive and eco-fragile area around Bhitarkanika, which includes
the Dhamra port area. Predictably, the top brass of the State
Government has once again ignored this proposal.

In April 2008, international banking giant BNP Paribas had confirmed
to Greenpeace that it is not considering refinancing a part of the
Dhamra Port. This announcement came after the bank had commissioned an
unnamed independent expert to look into environmental and social
aspects concerning the project.

Shockingly, despite the public furore, Tata Steel's corporate
sustainability report boasts that, "…there are no national parks/wild
life sanctuaries/CRZ/other sensitive and notified areas within 10 kms
of any current or proposed sites..." This, despite the fact that the
Dhamra port is less than 15 kms away from the nesting site in the
Gahirmatha Sanctuary and less than 5 km. from Bhitarkanika National
Park (6).

"Scientists are opposed to the port, conservationists are against it,
international lending institutions clearly want to protect their
reputations, and now nearly one lakh Indians – most of them TATA
customers – are asking Mr. Tata to place the survival of this species
above increasing TATA profits. What more does Mr.Ratan Tata need? If
the TATAs want to maintain their reputation for being sensitive to
social and environmental concerns - they have no choice but to
withdraw from this ecologically disastrous project. Only this can keep
the TATA legacy intact", added Areeba.

For more information, please visit or contact:

Ashish Fernandes, Greenpeace Oceans Campaigner, +91 99801 99380,
Sama Adil, Greenpeace Communications, +91 99009 70627,

(1) Log onto
(2) Under India's Wildlife Protection Act, all species of marine
turtles, including Olive Ridleys, are accorded with a Schedule I
status of Protection, on par with the tiger.
(3) Refer to
(4) In 2007, a survey commissioned by Greenpeace and conducted by
Dr. S.K. Dutta of the North Orissa University established the presence
of rare species of amphibians and reptiles at the port site. The study
also revealed the presence of over 2,000 turtle carcasses on, and near
the area (
Moreover, the Wildlife Institute of India conducted a study in
2001with 4 turtles fitted with satellite transmitters. Of these, one
is reported in the waters off the Dhamra Port. To date, this is the
only concluded telemetry study carried out on turtles in coastal
Orissa for which the results are publicly available (refer to
(5) The Orissa State Govt. in December, 1997 issued a fresh
proclamation under Section 21 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act to
exclude the proposed port area from Bhitarkanika Sanctuary. When the
final notification for Bhitarkanika was issued in September 1998, the
area was reduced from 367 sq km to 145 sq km. Further, when the
proposal for the Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary was being drawn up by the
Wildlife Department in 1997, the Orissa state government ordered (vide
letter 11693 dated 20/6/97) that the proposed Dhamra Port area be
excluded from the draft notification of the sanctuary.
(6) Refer to


Anonymous said...

Environmental issues are often brushed off as a matter of taste: some people relish a thriving economy, while others prefer protecting obscure little animals on inconsequential wetlands.TATA and the dpcl have assured that the safety of the turtles and their aribadda,i dont know why green peace is making so much fuss about the dhamra port,they should know that human values is as important as turtles , i sincerly support the dhambra project,

Anonymous said...

Everyone shall have the right to live in a healthy environment and to have access to basic public services.basically human have their rights they cant live in poverty ,greenpeace should sit with dpcl and negotiate and settle the matter amicably to safegaurd the people as well as construction of the port,and the turtles since the port is coming 25kms from the breeding place i dont think the port construction will affect the breeding,moreover it is going to help the people of orissa ,TATA should go with this construction of the dhamra port

Anonymous said...

Thankyou Tobi!

I wish there were more young people like u in this country.

The Nesting happened in march this year and it seems like some people were so busy in their quest to prove their theories right that they forgot to mention it.

Hence the point made by tobi is absolutely correct that the port construction 25kms away from the port site can't get affected

ankur said...

Some people thrive on having something to protest. It's a compulsion that makes them feel alive and useful. Their opinions are usually based on a mixed bag of rationalization, idealism, ideology, fantasy, and a smattering of fact. We saw them protesting the Viet Nam war, corporate profits, and now environmental issues. They're all the same crowd, and they still don't really stand for anything--they're just against some things.

A more productive way to live is to propose and implement solutions to problems--solutions that can be realistically and economically implemented.

TATA is constructing the dhamraport which is going to help the people of orissa by way of economy infracture and tourism,and they have taken necessary clearance from the concerned authorities,
greenpeace should not object of constructing the dhamra port,since the port is coming 25 kms from the breeding place ,it is not going to affect the breeding ,so green peace should settle the matter amicably to safeguard the human value as well as the turtles i sincerly support the dhamraport

Anonymous said...

Be as beneficent as the sun or the sea, but if your rights as a rational being are trenched on, die on the first inch of your territory.Greenpeace is adopting the pressure tactics to stop the construction of dhamra port to get political mileage,they are not making any sincere effort to negotiate and settle the matter amicably ,they should understand that this dhamra port is going to help the people of orissa to a larger extent ,it will provide tourism, employment,and good infrastructure ,this is boon to the people of orissa ,so i fully support the dhamra port.

lovelena said...

The two false premises, this, the "finite resource" and, the "pristine nature" from your 'Climate Change Delusion', when taught to an individual with an altruistic moral code, will cause an evasion or result in mental problems in the person who tries to apply principles to life.
No human being can develop an intact ego holding a believe, that their every action is harmful to their fellow man. The guilt is simply too corrosive and inevitably such a person will hate themselves for destroying other or hate all others for destroying their quality of life.
I think that is why the leaders of the environmental movement tend to be both criminal and irrational. It is their only defense as, if they became honest they would have to kill themselves and if they became rational they drop environmentalism.
greenpeace should understand that dhamra,they port is going to help poverty stricken orissa to greater extent. they should sit with tata settle the matter amically about the turtles,instead of making so much hue and cry,i want everyone to standup,and support dhamraport for the people of orissa.

srinivasan said...

Aware of the interdependence of the major elements of the world ecosystem - an interdependence evident also at the social, economic and political levels - we are beginning to see that integration of life on the planet requires unified action on a scale we have not yet achieved. Partial solutions seem only to prolong the difficulties; yet we hesitate to adopt a new and workable system of values for the world. For until there is unity at the most fundamental level - that of human values - social problems, simple or complex, will remain unresolved.we should respect human values,NGOs should noy cry foul for the dhamra port tata are doing the best by taking the help International Union for Conservation of nature. dhamra project will be a boon to the people of orissa.i support the dhamra project.

Anonymous said...

In cycles gone by, though harmony was established, yet, owing to the absence of means, the unity of all mankind could not have been achieved. Continents remained widely divided, nay even among the peoples of one and the same continent association and interchange of thought were well-nigh impossible. Consequently intercourse, understanding and unity amongst all the peoples and kindreds of the earth were unattainable. In this day, however, means of communication have multiplied, and the five continents of the earth have virtually merged into one.... In like manner all the members of the human family, whether peoples or governments, cities or villages, have become increasingly interdependent. For none is self-sufficiency any longer possible, inasmuch as political ties unite all peoples and nations, and the bonds of trade and industry, of agriculture and education, are being strengthened every day. Hence the unity of all mankind can in this day be achieved. Verily this is none other but one of the wonders of this wondrous age, this glorious century. Of this past ages have been deprived, for this century - the century of light - hath been endowed with unique and unprecedented glory, power and illumination. Hence the miraculous unfolding of a fresh marvel every day. Eventually it will be seen how bright its candles will burn in the assemblage of man,human are not treated like human,he is forced to do things which is good for the people.tata is doing the right thing by constructing the dhamra port .

Aditya said...

The real issue that is being ignored is the people of Orrisa, they deserve a fair chance to development like the rest of us. Just so we have all our comforts, doesn't mean we deprive others of the same

PrakashKulkarni said...

Olive Ridley are globally distributed in the tropical regions of the South Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans. In the South Atlantic Ocean, they are found along the Atlantic coasts of West Africa and South America. In the Eastern Pacific, they occur from Southern California to Northern Chile. In the northern Indian Ocean, arribadas occur on three different beaches along the coast of India.

The olive Ridley a sea turtle, but has been known to inhabit coastal areas, including bays and estuaries. Olive Ridley mostly breed annually and have an annual migration from pelagic foraging, to coastal breeding and nesting grounds, back to pelagic foraging. Trans-Pacific ships have observed olive Ridley over 2,400 miles (4,000 km) from shore. With regard to the Dhamra port side it is not possible for the turtles to nest here as the sand is not conducive for the turtles to lay their eggs. The sand is silted and muddy which is unsuitable for habitation and nesting of turtles.

Aditya said...

Well successful nesting this year is a sigh of absolutely no hindrance of the construction of the port on the annual visit of the turtles to the coast of Orissa.Also design mitigation measures are being kept in mind for the construction of the port.

Neeti said...

the corporation will also promote improvement in other aspects of environmental management like terrestrial habitats affected by access roads,railway lines etc.

taran said...

Greenpeace I would like to understand what are u guys planning on doing now. As u were proven wrong about nesting of the turtles. I hope this time u do ur research properly so that u don’t have to face this kind of situation again.

PrakashKulkarni said...

After traveling thousands of miles all sea turtles generally employ the same methods when making a nest. A mature nesting fem possibly thousands of miles the female Olive Ridley hauls herself onto the beach until she finds suitable sand on which to create a nest. Using her hind flippers, the female proceeds to dig a circular hole 40 to 50 centimeters deep. After the hole is dug, the female then starts filling the nest with a clutch of soft-shelled eggs one by one until she has deposited around 100 eggs. The nest is then re-filled with loose sand by the female. The whole process takes around thirty minutes to a little over an hour. After the nest is laid, the female then returns to the ocean. Of the 100 eggs perhaps only one will survive, after two months of incubation they find their way to the sea. As they are partially blind the industry around the area switch of their lights at night. Even the Dhamra Port authority has commited itself to SA 8000, Social Accountability Systems. Stringent measures have been taken to ensure that lighting doesn’t spill over to off shore waters. IDA (International Dark Sky Association) parameters would be implemented to ensure the same.

Disha said...

Tata is a old company having a very potential experience since many years, I don’t feel that Tata will take any such type of decisions which will affect environment or may be turtles, even then GreenPeace or any such NGO's are unhappy with this port construction they can tackle this matter in even more mannered and respectful way which also helps to maintain the real standards and purpose of such NGOs. Otherwise its very much ridiculous to approach in a disgraceful manner.

Anonymous said...

Society's double behavioral standard for women and for men is, in fact, a more effective deterrent than economic discrimination because it is more insidious, less tangible. Economic disadvantages involve ascertainable amounts, but the very nature of societal value judgments makes them harder to define, their effects harder to relate,GREENPEACE which has head office in bangalore does not make any comments are protests when there is felling of trees in bangalore,because no body is paying them to protest,but at the same time there is dhamraport coming in orissa they are making all out effort in saving the turtles even though they know that the port is coming 25 kms away from the breeding place and it is no way going to affect the breeding, and also greenpeace does not take any money from the corporates but they take the money from the foundation run by the corporates,no doubt that 40 members of parliament wanted green peace to be banned,people of double standard never experience happiness all there falsified effort will go the drains

PrakashKulkarni said...

Why Target the Nano?

In all this I just can’t understand if Greenpeace has a problem with the development of the Dhamra Port why are they attacking the NANO, lets face it, the Nano is a great achievement for India and we are all proud of the development. Now, Greenpeace has an issue with the Dhamra Port Company Ltd. (DPCL) and Tata is only one of the stakeholders in the project which is actually being developed on behalf of the government.

The advertisement published by Greenpeace is an embarrassment not only for TATA but also India as a country. In absolute poor taste they have just misrepresented the truth and targeted the credibility of one of India’s most respected business houses. I feel Greenpeace needs to reassess its strategy and focus on real issue than create theatrics. It is a large enough organization to exercise moral responsibility and tackle protests in an ethical manner.

PrakashKulkarni said...

Why Target the Nano?

In all this I just can’t understand if Greenpeace has a problem with the development of the Dhamra Port why are they attacking the NANO, lets face it, the Nano is a great achievement for India and we are all proud of the development. Now, Greenpeace has an issue with the Dhamra Port Company Ltd. (DPCL) and Tata is only one of the stakeholders in the project which is actually being developed on behalf of the government.

The advertisement published by Greenpeace is an embarrassment not only for TATA but also India as a country. In absolute poor taste they have just misrepresented the truth and targeted the credibility of one of India’s most respected business houses. I feel Greenpeace needs to reassess its strategy and focus on real issue than create theatrics. It is a large enough organization to exercise moral responsibility and tackle protests in an ethical manner.

Indresh said...

In my opinion, TATA has undertaken a big task of improving the status of Orissa through
Dhamra port construction. And it should not discontinue this magnificent endeavor because of some worthless obstructions. So I strongly support the construction of Dhamra port.
On the other hand I also feel that the NGOs such as Greenpeace or others should recognize the importance of this construction keeping the improvement of Orissa state in their consideration.

Amresh said...

At this point of phase I really don’t understand the real objective of these NGOs,
Is it to protect the environment or to barricade the development of our Indian industry?
If it is really to protect the environment without any awful intention, then
·Why don’t they raise their voice where actually environment is being harmed, like in Banglore, plenty of trees are being cut by reason of Metro Plans.
·Why these NGOs don’t take a chance of remonstrating against that?
·Why are they behind this Dhamra Port construction, which seems to be harmless to environment and much helpful for the people?

HariKrishna said...

I agree that we cant continue to exist if we harm environment, or if we go against the nature, but it does not mean that the reason of protecting the environment or other creatures, should stop the development of mankind. Man has always achieved something best out of the resources of nature, and it should go on and of course without harming the nature, so both the organizations should together unravel this issue without causing loss to both mankind and enviroment

Sheela said...

Organizations like Greenpeace are making people to believe some fake reports which is really spoiling the identity and standards of NGOs. Everyone should come to know about the realities and facts behind their arguments so that as a final point, public can decide over such big issues.

Varun said...

I sturdily shore up for the construction of dharma port since it is not harming turtles or
not crafting any other tribulations as mentioned by Green Peace, I sense it as a cunning trick of GP to attain its triumph by holding back the development of Indian industry, God knows, why it has taken such an absurd mission of corrupting public and indirectly our country.

Gouri shankar said...

Dhamra Port construction is not a matter of just conflicting and discontinuing without any precise reason behind the struggle or dispute; I don’t understand why Green Peace is not coming with true facts and figures. It is of no meaning just to gripe against any big company without proper point or reason, if it so stable on its decision, it should let the public know about the real intension behind its struggle.

Raghuram said...

"Orissa strongly wants this construction of port, so by bearing in mind the need of upgrading of fishermen and also Orissa the venture should go on. At any time if some good development or projects has to be started, there will be lot many disputes and objections from different ends, but when the project makers are confident on what they are doing, they should not agonize about these kind of storms..........."

srinivasan said...

Circumstances may cause interruptions and delays, but never lose sight of your goal.TATA is doing the great job by building the dhamra port for the poverty stricken orissa ,since it is following the guidelines strictly imposed by the government to protect enviorment and other aspects,and also dpcl is committed to enhance the rural improvement,.GREENPEACE approach towards the dhamraport is disgusting and pathetic.since the dhamra port construction is coming 25 kms away from the breeding place , i dont think dhamraport is going to affect the breeding of turtles.therefore greenpeace should sit with the tata and and concerned authorities settle the matter amicabally, to safe guard the turtles and more importantly people of orissa.we should support the TATA for the construction of dhamra port.

Neeraja said...

I request Mr.Ratan Tata not to stop Dhamra port construction. People or public will surely accept his plan once it gets constructed and gets started.
Until unless we experience the taste of success we won’t believe anything, so it should be constructed and started to prove itself as great plan.

sandeep said...

Till date I was believing that NGOs never go erroneous or they until the end of time fight for evenhandedness and authentic reasons. But this time I am traumatized to make out that even Planet protectors like GP have also got corrupted.

richa said...

We are fortunate enough to live in india at the beginning of the 21st century and enjoy all the benefits of modern science and technology. Human life is now longer, healthier and richer than ever before. But not everybody is happy about it. Some people would rather have us go back in time and sacrifice it all. They are the advocates of Environmentalism.

Environmentalism is not, as many naively think, a movement to protect the environment for man. It is rather a movement to protect the environment from man. But man could not have risen from the caves without exploiting the environment: without burning wood for light and fire, mining metals for tools, cutting trees for shelter, or draining swamps for farming. And man cannot survive today without industry and technology, both of which run on energy.Environmentalists are also fiercely opposed to mining. But without mining we would not have iron or steel to make plumbing, tractors, bridges, railroads or skyscrapers. We would not have copper wires to transmit electricity, or surgical instruments to save our lives. We would not have any kind of tools or machines: no household appliances, no cars, no computers, no nothing. We would literally go back to the Stone Age, if they ever let us use the stones, that is.

And this is the true evil nature of Environmentalism: the obsession to see us all reduced to the level of animals, barefoot and naked, filthy and sick, miserable and helpless.

But the Environmentalist movement will not succeed, hard as it may try, to take us back to savagery -- not without our help. Let us not sanction Environmentalism's evil, or pretend it is anything other than a movement for human misery on Earth.

Let us proudly defend the value of our industrial civilization and the technological progress that makes our lives ever better, healthier, and longer.

.GREENPEACE approach towards the dhamraport is disgusting and pathetic.since the dhamra port construction is coming 25 kms away from the breeding place , i dont think dhamraport is going to affect the breeding of turtles.therefore greenpeace should sit with the tata and and concerned authorities settle the matter amicabally, to safe guard the turtles and more importantly people of orissa.we should support the TATA for the construction of dhamra port.ratan tata should not stop the dhamra port at any cost.

pooja said...

The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens.god created earth to be used for the benefit of human,so many prestigous people like tata are doing great things for the people of india and enviroment,at the same they are looking at the poverty line of orissa ,the dhamra project will definitely help the people of orissa,tata is not destroying the enviorment,its safe guarding the enviroment and helping the people of orissa to fight poverty by building the dharma port . i fully support the tata and the dhamra port.

pooja said...

The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens.god created earth to be used for the benefit of human,so many prestigous people like tata are doing great things for the people of india and enviroment,at the same they are looking at the poverty line of orissa ,the dhamra project will definitely help the people of orissa,tata is not destroying the enviorment,its safe guarding the enviroment and helping the people of orissa to fight poverty by building the dharma port . i fully support the tata and the dhamra port.

Charan said...

Every lock will have its own key, likewise even in Dharma port construction, problems have cropped up and both the groups should unravel this issue on communal understanding, and should reflect on the more lucrative plan.

Anonymous said...

The TATA project is going to give opportunity for further employment. Orissa needs that kind of help for its own growth. The TATAs have taken the necessary measure as a result of which the nesting continued last year.

Dwarikaprasad said...

I sense the human rights are more imperative in this issue, and also, Dhamra port construction will not harm Gahirmatha turtle breeding which is nearly 25 to 30 kilometers far-off from the place of port construction. So, it is an imprudent thing being done by Greenpeace that it is opposing the DPC for no proper reasons

Manohar said...

I muscularly support the construction of Dhamra port as it lends a hand for the upgrading of rank of Orissa , in fact our India needs this type of expansion, TATA can undertake to give an opportunity for these NGOs to unravel this issue in a genuine way, if still it is not solved then TATA should just go on with its construction

Priya said...

Olive ridley turtles are totally safe from the construction of Dhamra Port. As this port has got all the environmental clearence. Moreover Dhamra port is 25 kms. far from Gahirmatha. The Greenpeace should know that Dhamra Port doesn't harm the olive ridley turtles. But, infact stands as a backbone for the growth of Orrisa state.

Shilpa said...

Till date agriculture is the main occupation of orissa's cittizens and hence, Orissa state's economy was also dependent on agriculture. But, the production of food grains has considerably fluctuated over the years due to natural calamities. Now, the growth and production of the Food and other agricultural products have come down affecting economy of Orissa State. In such a state, TATA has come forward to help, develop and build a New orissa state, which promises many jobs and livelihood to the local citizens also helps to build orissa a strong economic state. I stronglt support Dhamra port construction.

Pooja said...

Green peace after protesting against TATA as enemies of Olive Ridley Turtles for last few years, it is ridiculous to know that they are still protesting in the name after turtles after turtles recently arrived for nesting in Orissa. It's a shame on Greenpeace for misusing the cause and trying to stop TATA from building the port. It is Greenpeace who are real enemies of India, staying inside India trying to stop the development, Infrastructure and Economical growth of Orissa State and the country. Greenpeace should be banned from India.

Raashi said...

Orissa has a rich land but, many people from orissa after their schooling migrate to different states of the country hunting for jobs. The reason, to earn daily daily bread, support their families back in orissa and the unemployment in Orissa state. The two key reasons for the state’s poverty is due to repeated natural calamities and lacking of high quality infrastructure and improper utilization of its vast mineral resources. Now, TATA has come forward to give a new look to Orissa state by providing jobs, infrastructure and help growth of of Orissa state economy. It's a great job indeed. I whole heartedly support the port construction.

Vikas said...

The stories of Olive Ridley Turtles and Dhamra Port project in Orissa have been much spoken topics in Orissa and other major cities of India. This could be due to the considerable attention given to endangered species of Olive Ridley turtles and their nesting grounds in Orissa. But, why don’t NGOs like Greenpeace also think about the humans living in Orissa? Indeed, saving turtles from dying is a heroic act but, stopping the development, Infrastructure and economy growth of Orissa on which thousands of Orissa locals would make their living in future, well what do you call this act as? Can we call it as human sacrifice to save turtles? This is ridiculous; Greenpeace should also give the equal importance to the human feelings and developments. TATA is doing a great job, I support the Dhamra port construction.

Karand123 said...

Hey, it’s nice to know that you know what you are talking about and have done your homework..
YOU should go through this site ( for further clarifications.
And NO I’m not an employee of TATA … BUT am an Oriya… meaning I and my entire clan has been there for generations… so I KNOW what you are JUST talking about…
Maybe you should also check out this site ( To know the TRUE picture of all the happenings

Anonymous said...

We must understand the role of human rights as empowering of individuals and communities. By protecting these rights, we can help prevent the many conflicts based on poverty, discrimination and exclusion (social, economic and political) that continue to plague humanity and destroy decades of development efforts. The vicious circle of human rights violations that lead to conflicts-which in turn lead to more violations-must be broken. I believe we can break it only by ensuring respect for all human rights, It is really good to know that atleast TATA has taken an initiative to develop Orissa State. I hope this would bring in a balanced livelihood, employment and at par infrastructure and business for overall development development of Orissa Citizens and state

Neha said...

If an NGO is talking about the ridley turtles, generally all animal lovers would come forward to help, but,before that person could gain some knowledge about turtles and the facts, he would have been attended/approached by various means,in the name of education or saving animals and would have been brain washed to an extent that he would stop thinking about knowing things on his own and would blindly accept what is said to him as real facts. Greenpeace should stop playing such tricks and help support build a strong nation.

Anitha said...

I am an environmentalist and I also know the fact about this campaign is that, the port in question is 25 kilometers or more than away from the nesting place of ridley olives, but, Greenpeace and their campaigners do not mention that and other fact is, thousands of turtles have come and gone in the last couple of years, even after the construction started, but, Greenpeace also doesn't mention this nor ready to
agree on this. Here the question is why? let facts be facts why does Greenpeace wants to hide these facts and divert and make a big issue on what is actually not required?

Riya said...

I love turtles. I am also well aware that TATA constructing a port would help the poor and would also raise a little status of the Orissa locals. I support Dhamra port construction.

Smitha said...

When a question comes about the Choosing turtles and Port construction, I would choose both. In recent times, it is learnt that Turtles had come for nesting even when Port was under construction, then there is no question about the fact that the port is constructed at a far away place which is actually not disturbing the the turtles and due to this reason they have come. So, now it is for us to decide whether we can support TATA to build a port which would provide jobs, business, infrastructure and helps locals and orissa state government to improve their economic status... I strongly support the TATA for Port construction.

Megha said...

I want to bring one thing into the notice of Green peace that TATA is actually trying to make Orissa people to be more kind and generous towards Olive Ridleys by constructing Dhamra port, otherwise people try to work illegally for their living at the place
Of Nesting of Turtles, So if Green peace really wants to save the turtles it shouls support Tata.

Dilip said...

Nature has always created things with interdependence, on each other that may be of man on nature or between varieties of creatures. But in this issue of Dhamra port constructions, is seems like interdependency is not among man & nature, but it is among the Green peace and the other political matters by which the NGO’s will be benefited.

Karthikeya said...

What these NGO's are trying to achieve? Whether they want to save environment or
they want to create big names by cropping up such controversies.
In this issue one can plainly notice that this is not a struggle for environmental protection,
this is a big game created by this Greenpeace or other such NGO's with some self-seeking motto behind that.

harish said...

If we turn back to our bygone days we can perceive that, from the day one, man is all the time in the rear of inventing some new things which made him to succeed in his path, this is solely for the reason that he had tough desire of experimenting new things to get the best out of it, & his same struggle is on till today, for which Dhamra port construction is another example, and it should not stop because of any kind of obstructions.

Samrat said...

Around 1.7 Lakhs turtles had nested in Gahirmatha Beach, Orissa during Mar 21 - 24, 2009

Mass Turtles Nesting in Gahirmatha Beach in 2009

Saman said...

Animated youtube video about turtles nesting in India. ENJOY!

Turtles are back!

pooja said...

You gain strength, courage, and confidence by every experience in which you really stop to look fear in the face. You must do the thing which you think you cannot do.TATA should go with the dhamra port ,not to bothered about the ngos ,since the tata is showing the sincere effort to safeguard the turtles ,it is following all the norms and regulations and with the necessary guidance from the dpcl it wont have any problem for the breeding of the turtles.we all should support dhamra port for the people of orissa.

Ashok said...

Gahirmatha is utterly distant from the place of Dhamra port construction. Turtles will be safe and sound even after the port construction. Green peace is trying to drag the public in erroneous path. I vote for Tata & construction of port.

Ganesh said...

Green peace is using the Olive Ridly Turtles as their weapon to succeed in their immoral plan.
Because if we study the facts of this dispute, Turtles cannot at all be involved in this issue as they are no where harmed by the construction of Dhamra port. Green peace which is recognized as an international organization should not make these kind of cheap tricks.

veena said...

I strongly shore up for the construction of Dhamra port, which helps for the expansion of Orissa State. The construction gives employment for the fisherman and other people.
And on the otherside, turtles are not at all concerned to this issue.

mohit said...

Our people should focus on the expansion of our country rather than believing the self-centered catchphrases of NGO’s like Greenpeace.
These kind of NGO’s are corrupting people by fake evidence, which will lead our public in immoral pathway.

rashmi said...

I request our people to understand the real intension of Green peace which is forcing everyone to oppose Dhamra port construction, and our youth should support the establishment of Orissa and our country.

richa said...

We all know that human rights cannot just be transplanted as external principles into individuals or their communities. Human rights principles must be internalized by each individual, women and men, and must be absorbed and expressed in their own ways and within the positive aspects of their cultural values and beliefs. In order for this to happen, we must believe that these rights will protect them and not expose them in a battle against the society. They do weigh the social costs of entering into conflict as opposed to the benefits coming from the status quo.
taking into the context of the matter of dhamraport,GREENPEACE should not make such a hue and cry infact they should work with the TATA to safe guard the turtles amd more than anything else the people of orissa.i concur and support the dhamra port,

shruti said...

Olive Ridley turtles are coming every year to Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary for nesting in the warm eastern sand. In the same way they came this year and nested between March 21st to March 24th. Already this year’s nesting has been completed . Even now why this Greenpeace is dragging this issue with the same reason of turtles

tejas said...

Its high time now, Tata should not wait because of Green peace.
If Tata group is confident in its path, it should just go on with its construction work.
I shore up for Tata and Dhamra port construction.

pracheta said...

After knowing all the facts & figures of this issue, I am seriously worried about our Nation. Foreign Organizations like Green peace are planning to suppress the development of our country. Our people should understand this and should support to improve our country.

nithin said...

Even now people support NGO’s believing that they work for some genuine reasons or to protect our planet. But NGO’s like Greenpeace are making a fuss of standards of these NGO’s. I really feel sad for that. Any how it should not be successful in the issue of Dharma port construction

sushmita said...

We are built to conquer environment, solve problems, achieve goals, and we find no real satisfaction or happiness in life without obstacles to conquer and goals to acheive.gahirmatha is very far away from the dhamraport.its really ridiculous on the part of GREENPEACE to object the construction of dhamra port,they should sit with Tata negotiate the matter with the concerned authorties and help the TATA to construct the dhamra port,since the port is coming 25 kms from the breeding of the turtles it wont affect the the nesting.greenpeace also should look into the life of people of orissa. we all support the dhamra port construction,

sapna said...

It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes short again and again, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause, who at best knows achievement and who at the worst if he fails at least fails while daring greatly so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.TATA should go with the construction of dhamra port,since it is the infrastructure project critical for the development of orissa ,and since so many people are involved to safeguard the marine lifes and breeding of theturtles ,GREENPEACE should also work with government and the tatas to develop the port,human lives is as important as the life of turtles.i support the dhamra port.

divya said...

By constructing the Dhamra port, lot many Fishermen will dig up with the employment for their life which helps to save the fishes and also turtles, otherwise the fishing trawlers continue to sail even, during the time of nesting
So the best way to save these creatures is supporting the construction of port

mansi said...

Greenpeace is not having any intensions to save the turtles, it is just pretending in front of public to save turtles, or else it would not have stopped the development of orissa by the name of Turtles which are not at all harmed by the port construction

mukesh said...

NGO’s are the organizations which have to struggle for the sake of saving the planet. But how can they forget their main aim or motto and involve in some industrial issues which is nowhere related to their complaints

Anonymous said...

In life, many thoughts are born in the course of a moment, an hour, a day. Some are dreams, some visions. Often, we are unable to distinguish between them. To some, they are the same; however, not all dreams are visions. Much energy is lost in fanciful dreams that never bear fruit. But visions are messages from the Great Spirit, each for a different purpose in life. Consequently, one person's vision may not be that of another. To have a vision, one must be prepared to receive it, and when it comes, to accept it. Thus when these inner urges become reality, only then can visions be fulfilled. The spiritual side of life knows everyone's heart and who to trust. How could a vision ever be given to someone to harbor if that person could not be trusted to carry it out. The message is simple: commitment precedes vision.TATA has a vision to built the dhamra port,for the people of orissa,greenpeace who is objecting to the port that they should balance between enviorment and development since the port is going to be handed over to the government once when it is completed,green peace should work with the government of orissa and solve the problem with proper negotations,instead of making so much fuss.we fully support the dhamra port.

chirag said...

Tata is actually trying to solve the employment problem of orissa in a legal way, by giving the employment for the fishermen who make their earnings through illegal fishing. If Tata stops the port construction, the illegal activities will be more and the threats for Turtles will be even more

ram said...

The only way to save our country from these kinds of NGO’s is to make the public to understand about the selfish intension behind the comments of these NGO’s and public should judge them stop supporting them.,

ankur said...

The conception of worth, that each person is an end per se, is not a mere abstraction. Our interest in it is not merely academic. Every outcry against the oppression of some people by other people, or against what is morally hideous is the affirmation of the principle that a human being as such is not to be violated. A human being is not to be handled as a tool but is to be respected and revered.In the same way we should respect the TATA for undertaking the prestigious dhamra port ,its not only going to improve the infrastructure of orissa its also going to help the people of poverty stricken orissa.Greenpeace should suppport this dhamraport for the people of orissa,since the dpcl has taken necessary steps to safeguard the marine life,and even the government is going to take over the port after its peace should settle the matter in the intrest of the people o f orissa.

Shubhankar said...

According to Greenpeace, Dhamra port project will directly affect the Olive Ridley turtles, their mating, nesting etc. however found this video worth sharing.

Greenpeace Lie - Olive Ridley Nesting Video at Gahirmatha Beach

Even after huge Greenpeace propaganda, turtles came back for nesting at Gahirmatha beach, which is located near Dhamra port project.

Like to share few more stories:

-- > Olive Ridley Turtles Begin Early Nesting in Orissa
-- > Olive Ridley turtles hatchlings emerge from sandy pits

I think Greenpeace problem lies here: "After all, Tata has grown from a national giant into an international player"

shilpa said...

I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.this enables the people to move with the times as per as the requirement of the people.TATA has coming out with the prestigious dhamraport in orissa in view of the adverse affect of the people of orissa for the changing times.greenpeace should support this project instead of making so much hue and cry.since after completion of the project government of orissa is taking over the will definitely safeguard the safety of the marine i concur and fully support the dhamra port.

nagesh said...

It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes short again and again, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause, who at best knows achievement and who at the worst if he fails at least fails while daring greatly so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.TATA has a vision to built the dhamra port,for the people of orissa,greenpeace who is objecting to the port that they should balance between enviorment and development since the port is going to be handed over to the government once when it is completed,green peace should work with the government of orissa and solve the problem with proper negotations,instead of making so much fuss.we fully support the dhamra port

potham said...

The essence of democracy is its assurance that every human being should so respect himself and should be so respected in his own personality that he should have opportunity equal to that of every other human being to show what he was meant to become.Can anything be sadder than work left unfinished? Yes; work never begun.There is no security on this earth. Only opportunity.TATA is using this opportunity to built the dhamra port in orissa,Green peace after protesting against TATA as enemies of Olive Ridley Turtles,they are trying to get the political mileage for their vested intrest,tata should unduly worry about the greenpeace it should construct the dhamraport for the people of orissa under the proper guidelines from the government.

kiran said...

Everyone has a right to peaceful coexistence, the basic personal freedoms, the alleviation of suffering, and the opportunity to lead a productive life.TATA is doing a wonderful job by constructing the dhamraport for the people of orissa,it will definitely improve the infrastructure and naturally there will be a growth in the economy for the people of orissa .green peace is taking a unjust stand by opposing the project,green peace should understand that the people of orissa specially living the coastal areas live well below the poverty line this dhamra port is a boon to them,since the TATA is taking necessary guidelines to safeguard the marine life and the breeding of the turtles.and also the dhamraport is coming 25kms away from the breeding is no way going to affect the breeding od the turtles .so we all should support the dhamra port.

karuna said...

State of affairs will be affecting the goals and bring a pause in the achievements, but this cannot stop the progress of the country. Any times this happens in the journey of success, but ultimate joy is in getting triumph over these obstacles. So, TATA, never lose sight of your goal.

pavan said...

The strike, the boycott, the refusal to serve, the ability to paralyze the functioning of a complex social structure-these remain potent weapons against the most fearsome state or corporate power.TATA is coming up with the prestigious dhamra port,GREENPEACE which is globally recognised NGO is trying to hamper the development. Dhamra port construction will not harm Gahirmatha turtle breeding which is nearly 25 to 30 kilometers far-off from the place of port construction. So, it is an imprudent thing being done by Greenpeace .TATA should not stop the construction of dhamra port

Jess said...

Have a look at

Its says:

"It may be noted that IUCN and the MTSG (Marine Turtle Scientific Group) scientists working with the group have clearly stated that dredging operations for Dhamra does not and will not affect the Olive Ridley Turtles in Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary and its periphery area. For more details log on to -"

shriyaasai said...

Criticism of Greenpeace
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. (July 2008)
This article contains weasel words, vague phrasing that often accompanies biased or unverifiable information. Such statements should be clarified or removed. (March 2009)

During its history, Greenpeace has been criticized by a number of groups. These include governments such as Germany, industries such as BP and political groups such as the US republican party . The organization's use of non-violent direct action has also caused controversy.

Contents [hide]
1 Criticisms
1.1 Anti-DDT Campaign and Resurgence of Malaria
1.2 Anti-GMO campaigns
1.3 Nuclear power
1.4 Greener Electronics campaign
2 Blunders
2.1 Coral destruction
2.2 Removal of ancient tree
2.3 Mistaken deforestation
2.4 Press release blunder
3 References

[edit] Criticisms
Some critics have said the organisation is too mainstream. Paul Watson, who was pushed out of Greenpeace in the 1970s and later founded Sea Shepherd, once called Greenpeace "the Avon ladies of the environmental movement," because of their door-to-door fund-raising that relies on the media exposure of deliberately orchestrated and highly publicized actions to keep the name of Greenpeace on the front pages. Bradley Angel, who organized communities in California and Arizona for Greenpeace, split to found Greenaction in 1997. Greenpeace had summarily shut down its community-building operations, terminating more than 300 employees in the US alone, in what Mr Angel called "a betrayal".[1]

A prominent critic of Greenpeace is Icelandic filmmaker Magnus Gudmundsson, director of a documentary Survival in the High North. Gudmundsson's criticisms have focused largely on the social impacts of anti-whaling and anti-sealing campaigns which have had disastrous affects on the native people of Iceland, Greenland and Canada who depend on these activities to make a living. Due to extensive efforts on the part of Greenpeace[clarification needed], Gudmundsson's documentary was judged libellous by a Norwegian court in 1992 and he was ordered to pay damages to Greenpeace. Similarly, a Danish tribunal held that the allegations against Greenpeace about faking video materials were unfounded. Many media that published Gudmundsson's allegations have subsequently retracted and apologized (e.g. the Irish Sunday Business Post and TVNZ).
please post your opinion after going through the link

sapna said...

green peace are more interested to gain popularity for their vested interested .instead of protecting the enviorment on the behest of funders they try to manipulate things in their favour,i wish green peace be banned

sapna said...

green peace are more interested to gain popularity for their vested interested .instead of protecting the enviorment on the behest of funders they try to manipulate things in their favour,i wish green peace be banned

janetmisoram said...

janetmisoram said...
In 1971 an environmental and antiwar ethic was taking root in Canada, and I chose to participate. As I completed a Ph.D. in ecology, I combined my science background with the strong media skills of my colleagues. In keeping with our pacifist views, we started Greenpeace.

But I later learned that the environmental movement is not always guided by science. As we celebrate Earth Day today, this is a good lesson to keep in mind.

At first, many of the causes we championed, such as opposition to nuclear testing and protection of whales, stemmed from our scientific knowledge of nuclear physics and marine biology. But after six years as one of five directors of Greenpeace International, I observed that none of my fellow directors had any formal science education. They were either political activists or environmental entrepreneurs. Ultimately, a trend toward abandoning scientific objectivity in favor of political agendas forced me to leave Greenpeace in 1986.Sadly, Greenpeace has evolved into an organization of extremism and politically motivated agendas. Its antichlorination campaign failed, only to be followed by a campaign against polyvinyl chloride.

Greenpeace now has a new target called phthalates (pronounced thal-ates). These are chemical compounds that make plastics flexible. They are found in everything from hospital equipment such as IV bags and tubes, to children's toys and shower curtains. They are among the most practical chemical compounds in existence.The European Union banned the use of phthalates in toys prior to completion of a comprehensive risk assessment on DINP. That assessment ultimately concluded that the use of DINP in infant toys poses no measurable risk.

The antiphthalate activists are running a campaign of fear to implement their political agenda. They have seen success in California, with a state ban on the use of phthalates in infant products, and are pushing for a national ban. This fear campaign merely distracts the public from real environmental threats.

We all have a responsibility to be environmental stewards. But that stewardship requires that science, not political agendas, drive our public policy.

Mr. Moore, co-founder and former leader of Greenpeace, is chairman and chief scientist of Greenspirit Strategies.
pls post your opinion after going to the web link.

reo said...

International green peace movement can be more benificial to the mass if the resources are directed to the poor and needy in 3rd world countries. What is it to save the world when millions are dying at peace have become more of a political agenda

saishriyaa said...

Criticism of Greenpeace.
Does anyone know if this report is accurate ?

"Activists Attack Greenpeace over Anti-GM Tactics," Reuters (news
service), July 31, 1999, by Simon Gardner

Greenpeace came under fire from fellow environmental groups on July
29, accused of damaging the credibility of anti-GM campaigns by
destroying a genetically modified crop earlier in the week.

Both Friends of the Earth and organic farming group the Soil
Association were cited as condemning Greenpeace's attitude towards GM
crops, saying the group was not giving science a chance.

Greenpeace protesters wrecked half a test crop of genetically modified
maize in Norfolk on July 26 by flattening the crop with a tractor.

Helen Browning, chairman of the Soil Association, was quoted as
telling the British Broadcasting Corporation [BBC] current affairs
program Newsnight that, "You cannot go around trashing crops and
breaking the law. We can protest in other ways. Being destructive is
only going to turn the farming community in on itself."

A Friends of the Earth spokesman was quoted as saying, "What
Greenpeace has done here is wrong. The principal reason for
supporting or opposing the use of GM crops must be scientific. The
price that we will pay for not allowing proper science to underpin the
decision making process is a very high one indeed. I don't believe
Greenpeace has taken into account the loss of credibility [to] the
environment movement as a whole."
visit and post after viewing the web link.

romeo said...

Green peace is just a waste of resources monetarily and human. Its purpose can be done by investing in school level and college level studies curiculum rather than in NGO

pothamshetty said...

U.S. takes hard line on Greenpeace
Bush critics say use of obscure law smacks of retribution
Nov. 14, 2003 - When Greenpeace activists illegally scrambled aboard the cargo ship APL Jade, it was the start of a pretty typical day. Convinced the ship was hauling contraband mahogany from Brazil, the environmentalists aimed to draw attention to it by unfurling a banner with this message: “President Bush, Stop Illegal Logging.” Their arrests by the Coast Guard were also part of a day’s work. But the later use of an obscure 19th century law to charge the entire organization with criminal conspiracy has Greenpeace defenders claiming that they are the target of U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft’s attempts to stifle political criticism of the government.

The Greenpeace demonstration off the coast of Florida on April 12, 2002, was one of a series of similar “direct actions” taken by the international organization near ports around the world as it attempted to draw attention to the mahogany shipment, which violated a Brazilian moratorium on mahogany lumbering in the Amazon, and violated the international treaty controlling trade in endangered species, CITES.

It was standard practice for the international organization, which for more than three decades has used this in-your-face method to fight for causes it deems just. It is a method of civil disobedience that has been used by activists on both ends of the political spectrum, from civil rights campaigners to anti-abortion groups. In Florida, as in the mahogany protests elsewhere, a handful of individuals were charged with minor crimes and released shortly thereafter.
Greenpeace, say the case is of “profound importance” because it “imperils the core values of the Constitution.”

‘For 200 years, the United States government has refrained from prosecuting advocacy groups whose members occasionally engage in peaceful civil disobedience to convey a constitutionally protected message.’


“For two hundred years, the United States government has refrained from prosecuting advocacy groups whose members occasionally engage in peaceful civil disobedience to convey a constitutionally protected message,” they wrote in their brief. “The prosecution of Greenpeace indicates a sea change in that policy.”

Greenpeace, which has led an aggressive pro-environmental campaign since its founding in 1971, has been at odds with the Bush administration since its earliest days in office, decrying the president’s position on the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, staging protests against the National Missile Defense Initiative and the opening of roads on national forest land. Just a few months after Bush took office, Greenpeace activists climbed a water tower near his ranch in Crawford, Texas, and unfurled a banner that read: “Bush the Toxic Texan, Don’t Mess with the Earth.” They were arrested after a two-hour stand-off during which they refused to climb down, ignoring demands by the mayor, the county sheriff and the Secret Service.

“We have been critics across the board,” says John Passacantando, executive director of Greenpeace.

He says the organization has never before been challenged at this level in the United States, and characterizes it as the way the Justice Department operates under Ashcroft.

“The parallel I see is with the McCarthy era — the overreach by the government to stifle its critics,” he says. “It is a fight we are willing to take on ... a fight for our right to dissent peacefully in this country in areas we think society is wrong.”

Greenpeace will seek additional discovery to lay out what went into the decision to charge Greenpeace, says legal counsel Tom Wetterer. “We have found no previous examples of where the government has charged an organization for a political protest,” he says.

“The prosecution, if indeed it is selective, amounts to nothing more than an act of intimidation by the government, apparently directed at silencing political speech,” says the ACLU/PAWF brief

ramchela said...

The need of present India is a sustainable investment in infrastructure and social well being. There is too big gap between the elite and the mojority poor. Focusing more in this issue will bear more result as carbon credit is now implemented to many industries in India. Unlike the developed country6 India carbon emission is quite vety low. Greenould focus developed nation

dayakar said...

Greenpeace recently released their "Guide to Greener Electronics," rating fourteen consumer electronics vendors. Following in the same tradition as the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, Greenpeace issued a press release that specifically called attention to Apple and assigned the company a failing grade. Do the claims have any merit?
The Claims
Unlike the SVTC’s Toxic Trash Attack on Apple, Greenpeace focused less on where e-waste might be ending up, and drew more attention to the toxic chemicals used in manufacturing, since these would tend to make any recycling efforts more dangerous. The report explained:

The ranking is important because the amounts of toxic e-waste is [sic] growing everyday and it often ends up dumped in the developing world. Reducing the toxic chemicals in products reduces pollution from old products and makes recycling safer, easier and cheaper.

The stated goal of the report was to encourage manufacturers to:

1) clean up their products by eliminating hazardous substances; and 2) takeback and recycle their products responsibly once they become obsolete.

Greenpeace ranked Nokia and Dell near the top, but essentially gave failing grades across the industry, ranking Lenovo last, and Apple in eleventh place out of the fourteen brands. The report singled out Apple for its low rank, saying:

It is disappointing to see Apple ranking so low in the overall guide. They are meant to be world leaders in design and marketing, they should also be world leaders in environmental innovation.
Reality Check
While the Greenpeace report attempted to rank vendors based upon useful and practical criteria, the actual scorecard and the methods used to collect information for their report were sloppy and incompetent. This should come as no surprise to anyone aware of Greenpeace activities.

Greenpeace has worked to create awareness of important environmental issues since the 1970's, but their methods, accuracy, and effectiveness have ranged from controversial to comical to scandalous.

Greenpeace activism is based upon the simplification of complex political issues into epic battles between good and evil. Rather than devoting a lot of resources into educating the public, Greenpeace, like most political activist groups, tries to create sensationalist drama to grab attention and put simplistic issues in the headlines.

This is pretty commonplace in politics; however, Greenpeace has an established history of playing fast and loose with facts in order to intensify their stories, and in some cases their pursuits' careless disregard for the truth has caused more damage than the evil they attempted to target.

This happened quite literally last fall, when Greenpeace divers aboard the Rainbow Warrior II entered the Tubbataha Reef Marine Park, off the coast of the Philippines, in order to assess the effect of global warming.

While discovering that the protected coral reef appeared to be healthy, Greenpeace managed to run their ship into the reef, damaging over a thousand square feet (100 sq m) of the protected coral.

More famously, in 1995, after Shell oil obtained UK permits to sink their Brent Spar oil platform in the North Sea, Greenpeace activists boarded the platform and demanded Shell move the ocean platform to shore for dismantling, rather than dispose of it into deep ocean waters.

visit the below site and post u r comment

srinivas said...

green peace are the bunch of liars view the youtube and know more about the clandestine activities of green peace

sandeep said...

Greenpeace fined for reef damage

Greenpeace divers were inspecting Tubbataha's reefs for damage
Environmental group Greenpeace has been fined almost $7,000 (£4,000) for damaging a coral reef at a World Heritage site in the Philippines.
Their flagship Rainbow Warrior II ran aground at Tubbataha Reef Marine Park, in the Sulu Sea, 650km (400 miles) south-east of Manila.

Park officials said almost 100 sq m (1,076 sq ft) of reef had been damaged.

Greenpeace agreed to pay the fine, but blamed the accident on outdated maps provided by the Philippines government.

"The chart indicated we were a mile and a half" from the coral reef when the ship ran aground, regional Greenpeace official Red Constantino told AFP news agency.

"This accident could have been avoided if the chart was accurate," he said, adding, however, that Greenpeace felt "responsible" for the damage.

'Immediate action'

The accident happened while the Rainbow Warrior was on a four-month tour of the Asia-Pacific region to promote environmentally-friendly energy sources.

Greenpeace divers were at the Tubbataha park, off the coast of Palawan island, to inspect the effect of global warming on the coral reef.

The Rainbow Warrior escaped serious damage
Mr Constantino said the reef appeared to be healthy, with no evidence of bleaching which is believed to be caused by warmer sea temperatures.

The Rainbow Warrior II escaped serious damage and was towed into deeper water by its own rubber boats.

Tubbataha park manager, Angelique Songco, praised the work Greenpeace was doing to protect the environment.

"We also appreciate the immediate action they took to get the full assessment of the damage," she said.

naina said...

Greenpeace protest e.g. high sea drama's and stand in pritest inindia of TATA contruction site for Olive turtle is mostly motivated for publicity stunts. It's an activist against law and order.

jason said...

Are we against Greenpeace?
Until a few years ago, we were admirers of Greenpeace, until we discovered that even if their targets are legitimated, in all cases they use lies, halftruths and exaggerations to reach their target. And in the case of chlorine and PVC, even the target is wrong.
By saying that Greenpeace uses lies, we are in good company: Paul Crutzen, recent Nobel Prize winner for his work on the ozone layer, has cancelled his membership of Greenpeace:
"They have cheated the case and I am angry about that, because that will come to our account. They use bad data, as well as for the Brent Spar as for the French nuclear tests. I am against nuclear tests, but one should use scientifical sound arguments... ...No, Greenpeace has harmed the environmental case."

The actions of environmental groups, including Greenpeace, of which many Chlorophiles are (in the case of Greenpeace: were) members, were necessary in the past to awake the managements of factories and the government, that pollution was going too far. But nowadays, most factories are polluting much less than traffic or agricultural or domestic activities.

Some environmental groups, like Bellona in the Nordic countries, have done actions at PVC-factories, but they didn't ask for the closing down, they worked out how to reduce the pollution to acceptable low amounts. This was followed by investments at the factories and now PVC is an accepted product for them. This is not the case for Greenpeace, they are against PVC, only because it contains chlorine, even if they lose a lot of credibility for themselves and, even worse, for the environmental ideas in general.
We think that environmental groups are still necessary to be a watchdog for factories and government to keep them aware of the consequences of what they are doing. But that must be groups that use sound science and valuable arguments, not this Greenpeace.

padmalatha said...

Exposure Of The Greenpeace Lies About GM Foods
Letters To The Editor
The Courier-Mail, 16th February,2005
Ed Newbigin, School of Botany, University of Melbourne, Victoria.
Greenpeace's Jeremy Tager (Letters, Feb 15) refers to the myths of the genetic engineering industry, but then produces his own myth by saying that animals that eat GE [Genetically Engineered] food "frequently show serious effects". Wrong. Numerous studies attest to the fact that animals that eat GE food as part of a normal diet do as well as animals that eat conventional food. Greenpeace does the community a great disservice by spreading such myths.

Tony Coulepis, executive director, AusBiotech, Richmond, Victoria
Greenpeace will lose any claim to represent consumers if it continues to misinform them. GM [Genetically Modified] crops and foods, derived from biotechnology, are the most rigorously tested foods in history. Any GM crop on the market, and many have been available for 10 years, has been shown by independent government regulators to be safe for animals and humans alike

shilpi said...

Greenpeace Reacts to Ecoterrorism
Ecoterrorism is an outrage to groups like Greenpeace, who promote environmentally healthy practices without the arson.

Greenpeace USA does not endorse the Earth Liberation Front. National director John Passacantando says they oppose violence in any form whether it's directed towards people or property.

Passacantando doesn't think the public or government will lump Greenpeace with other more radical groups. He says they've never had that happen, but they're very careful to make sure people know the difference. He says they're very public in stating they oppose all forms of violence whether it's foreign wars by the US government or destruction of property by people with agendas here in the US.

Could the people of Greenpeace reach out to ELF and act as a sort of mentorship for peace? Passacantando says there's no occasion for reaching out and he wouldn't even know who to contact.

Passacantando believes educating people about the environment is the best tool of persuasion. He says the greats have taught us that love is the force more powerful, so burning down someone's house for any reason is not going to advance anyone's cause.
visit the site below to know more about it.

martina said...

Economy versus Enviroment. Let us be aware that environment is not stable, Its on changes and natural compitition and section. Economy is one of everyone right to live a good life. Therefore a group like one of greenpeace may serve more a way of employment rather than save the future.

udaya said...

Terrorism in the Name of the Earth
Flush out eco-terrorism money

On Sept. 22, the charitable oversight group Public Interest Watch filed a complaint with the IRS charging Greenpeace with making such illegal transfers. In a report entitled "Green-Peace, Dirty Money: Tax Violations in the World of Non-Profits," Public Interest Watch found that Greenpeace Fund, a 501(c)(3) transferred more than $10 million in exempt funds to nonexempt Greenpeace organizations such as Greenpeace, Inc. , between 1998 and 2000. Greenpeace, Inc., and other nonexempt Greenpeace entities benefiting from these transfers have committed numerous acts of eco-terrorism. They have blockaded a U.S. naval base, broken into the central control building of a nuclear power station in England, overrun the Exxon-Mobil corporate headquarters in Texas, and rammed a ship into the French sailboat competing in the 2003 America's Cup,

permanently damaging the vessel.

In April 2002, Greenpeace activists forcibly boarded a cargo ship in Florida carrying Brazilian wood. In connection with this incident, federal prosecutors indicted Greenpeace in July for violating an 1872 law prohibiting the unauthorized boarding of "any vessel about to arrive at the place of her destination." (The trial is scheduled for December).

Greenpeace isn't alone in funneling tax-exempt dollars into eco-terrorism efforts. According to the Center for Consumer Freedom, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has donated at least $70,000 from its tax-exempt coffers to the ALF. Assistant U.S. Attorney Timothy Verhey, who prosecuted the 1992 ALF firebombing of a Michigan State University laboratory, has noted the challenge of prosecuting eco-terrorists because of "a lack of witnesses and the group's 'cell' structure that lacks centralized leadership or a membership roster."

The difficulty in nabbing individual eco-terrorists is precisely why it is critically important that the IRS do its part to immobilize eco-terrorism groups by investigating the illegal use of tax-exempt funds to bankroll their crimes. Eco-terrorism is a scourge on society and a sordid stain on the wholesome causes of nonviolent environmentalists. Let's put the peace back into Greenpeace and protect the environment through vigilance, not vigilantism.
visit this below site for further details.

riya said...

movement of any kind require motivation and implementing its goals and not just highlighting issues of miniscule proportion when there are far vital ones to be addressed around the globe. Each organization should learn to introspect and learn of thier limitations.

Aakansha said...

Check this press release which is worth reading.

"Press Release from North orissa University

It has come to our notice that Greenpeace India have placed in their website a report under the title "Bio-diversity Assessment of Dhamra Port Site and Surroundings Areas, Orissa". The cover page of the report says that the report has been prepared by the North Orissa University. We would like to clarify that no report under the above mentioned title has been prepared by the North Orissa Unversity.

North Orissa University had prepared a report under the title "Rapid Bo-diversity Assessment of Dhamra Estuary, Orissa-India" and the same was submitted to Greenpeace India who were the funding agency.

A comparison of the report as it appears in the website of Greenpeace India and the authentic report of North Orissa University reveals that the Greenpeace India have doctored the authentic report by way of changing the title and its contents for motives best known to them.

We wish to further clarify that the impact of Dhamra Port on the environment and bio-diversity of Dhamra Estuary was not within the scope of our study.

For the sake of convenience we are enclosing herewith a copy of the authentic report of the University and the report as placed by the Greenpeace India in their website along with a comparison in a tabular form which would clearly indicate the changes/deletions/additions and interpolations made by Greenpeace India.

To conclude we take serious exception to such unethical conduct by Greenpeace India.

Prof. Sudarsan Nanda,
Vice Chancellor,
North Orissa University"

Meghna said...

Greenpeace to see exclusive olive ridley turtles video shared by DPCL:

Hatched Sea Turtles approaching towards sea water at Gahirmatha

Tina said...

Know more about Dhamra Port Project

Jessica said...

“Greenpeace has been variously criticized for being too radical, too alarmist, or too mainstream, for using methods bordering on eco-terrorism, for having itself caused environmental damage in its activities, for taking positions which are not environmentally or economically sound, and for valuing non-human causes over human causes. These criticisms have been made by governments, industrial and political lobbyists and other environmental groups.”

Greenpeace Lies About Apple

Greenpeace Lies About Dhamra Port

Is that like Greenpeace always targets big corporate giant to keep them under pressure and earn money from them ultimately?

I wonder why a non-governmental organization for the protection and conservation of the environment do not like to protect the human beings. I have found in few countries innocent & poor people require protections, importance more than animals.

Why they have been kept ignored and leave behind by this type of so called good organizations.


Tina said...

"It is sad that we first decide a villain and then find the proof to crucify them, when our concern could be about the turtles and people of Orissa and finding out ways so that both prosper." - Cyber activist blogger's viewpoint on Greenpeace and the turtles

RMegha said...

Dhamra Port Project is not only concern about the Orissa's economy or the society’s betterment but they are also concern about the environmental protection. A very nice video which you will definitely like to share with others

Aakash said...

Light and lighting are crucial for any industrial project, both during construction and the operational phase. IUCN lighting experts and DPCL are also taking care of implementing lighting safeguards, which would also be turtle safe lighting and would be low pressure sodium vapor lights which have been proven by research to be the least disorienting to turtle hatchlings.


Jessica said...

"Expressing anguish over the Green Peace movement's single point agenda on stopping work on Dhamra Port project in Orissa, Tata Steel Chairman Ratan Tata reiterated that the company would in no way take up any project hazardous to Olive Ridley Turtles"

Mr Ratan Tata Chairman of TATA Steel to Greenpeace activists: "I invite you for a discussion and a visit to the port site in Dhamra."

Tata proved that Tata was always willing to have a best solution for country's industrial & economical development and they were always ready for solutions.

Vikas said...

Greenpeace and the Hidden Truth about Dhamra
Greenpeace is a well known Non-Government Organization across the Globe. For the last couple of years, there has been talks and attempts made by Greenpeace with TATAs on the issue of Dhamra Port construction. Though there had been a speculation that the Turtles which come for breeding once in a year to Orissa would get affected by building this Port, Scientists, Researchers and Government bodies have made a thorough analysis on this issue and have come to a clear conclusion that there is no harm for Turtles due to the Port construction.
When we look back to the last years focusing the talks Greenpeace had with TATAs office regarding Port and Turtle issue, following are the actual facts in chronological order, we can judge Greenpeace –
In the year 2004, after discussing with WWF- India, BNHS, Mr. Kartik Shankar, Mr. Bittu Sehagal and others, Tata Steel signed the Joint Venture agreement with L&T to build the port at Dhamra. In this regard, Tata Steel also agreed upon a proposal to make a further study on the impact of the Port on turtles and monitoring the impact of the Dhamra Port of the marine and island eco-system.
In the year 2005, BNHS and WWF-India agreed to study on the above issues. But, since there were no reasons specified to make this study they expressed their inability to do this without assigning a specific reason.
In March 2006, Chairman of TATA Sons replied to Executive Director, Greenpeace India, stating commitments have to be honored from both ends. As per the earlier discussions, construction of the port was withheld which was suppose to start in November 2005 and completed in March 2006. But, since Greenpeace didn’t come forward to jointly do this research, the study never saw light. Infact, The Managing Director of TATAs had met Greenpeace officials in their Bangalore office.
In January 2008, a meeting was organized between Greenpeace and TATA Steel and the list of concerns regarding Dhamra Port and Turtles were listed. On 8th March 2008 DPCL gave a detailed point wise reply to the list of concerns raised by Greenpeace and subsequent points were also clarified on 3rd May 2008.
On 23rd October 2008, MD, Tata Steel along with senior executives of Tata Steel, L&T and DPCL met Greenpeace, BNHS, WPSI, Wild Life Society of Orissa, Sanctuary Asia and other environmental organizations to discuss the concerns related to Turtles and Dhamra Port and discuss how to take this issue further.
On 20th Feb 2009, a fourth meeting was organized in Kolkata. Tata Steel, L&T and DPCL agreed to conduct the additional biological impact assessment in close collaboration with NGOs and environmental organizations. This team was lead by mutually agreed upon scientists.
On 27th August 2009, 102nd Annual General Meeting of Tata Steel was organized in Mumbai. During the meet Greenpeace succeeded to bring in Retd. Admiral Ramdas and his wife Mrs. Lalita Ramdas to discuss issues related to Turtle and Dhamra Port.
Earlier in 2008, around 40 Indian Parliament Members (MPs) had written a letter to MOEF and Orissa Assembly to bring in a resolution to stop Greenpeace from doing any anti-Government activities and ban Greenpeace in the State of Orissa as false allegations were made on construction of Dhamra Port. Soon after this incident, Greenpeace started blaming TATAs without having any scientific data as evidence.
TATA Group and TATA Steel are always ready to openly discuss with Greenpeace or any other Non-Government/Environment Organization on any issue related to Environment and their company. Since, Greenpeace didn’t have any authentic document/evidence to prove against Dhamra Port issue, they were not ready to go forward to discuss with TATAs. Instead, Greenpeace started posting anti-TATA write-up on their blog and twitter postings
Hope the visit of Admiral Ramdas and Mrs. Lalita Ramdas to the site and understanding of the ground situations will facilitate constructive progress on this matter.

Tina said...

Greenpeace, the professed global environment campaign organization, in an instance of unmatched brazenness, falsified the report prepared by North Orissa University on Biodiversity Assessment of Dhamra Estuary. As a result, a group of forty MPs wrote to the Ministry Of Environment and Forests to call on the bluff of Greenpeace. The Orissa Govt. therefore initiated action against Greenpeace proposing a ban on all its activities in the state.

However, after the 102nd Annual General Meeting of Tata Steel in Mumbai, Greenpeace unabashedly has started their tricks once again. This time it has managed to rope in Retd Admiral Ramdas and his wife Mrs. Lalita Ramdas on the issue of Dhamra port but as far as scientific reasoning goes, the issues raised are totally unfounded. We can just hope that the visit of the Ramdas’ to the site will help to stop meaningless agitations and clear the situation once and for all.

Meghna said...

Tata Steel has always maintained a strong focus on environment sustainability and environment management in all its operations. We have seen that in the issues regarding the construction of a deep-sea port at Dhamra in Orissa, the Company has been forthcoming in sharing the concerns of activists and ever willing to implement practical means of mitigating any adverse impact of port construction on the marine eco-system in that area. The Company has held at least eight to nine sessions of meetings with Greenpeace and other environmental organizations in the matter of Dhamra Port. Tata Steel has made it abundantly clear that it is willing to have further discussions in order to alleviate any unnecessary doubts that the dissenters may yet nurture against the project.

Here is an outline of events as they happened till date.

The JV agreement with L&T to build a port at Dhamra was signed by Tata Steel in 2004. At the very onset, discussions were initiated with WWF- India, BNHS, Mr Kartik Shankar, Mr Bittu Sehagal and others.

The company was duly concerned with the objections raised by different environmental organizations and agreed not to begin construction work till a detailed study was complete. Responding wholeheartedly to the demands of activists, Tata Steel agreed for a proposal for a further study of the impact of the port on turtles and on the marine and island eco-system.

In 2005, BNHS and WWF-India, with an unprecedented suddenness, reversed their stand and refused to conduct the assessment study as they had promised. However, the organisations did not provide any reasons for their turncoat attitude.

In March 06, in an address to ED, Greenpeace India, the Chairman of TATA Sons made it clear that commitments were meant to be honoured at both ends. The Company had fulfilled their promise by withholding construction work for the proposed study, which never actually took off. The MD of Tata Steel also met Greenpeace officials in their Bangalore office.

In January 2008 a meeting was subsequently conducted between Greenpeace and Tata Steel and a list of concerns was presented by Greenpeace with regard to Dhamra Port. DPCL on 8th March 2008, gave a detailed and comprehensive explanation to all the points raised by Greenpeace. Subsequent objections were allayed on 3rd May 2008.

Further on 23rd October 2008, MD, Tata Steel along with senior executives of Tata Steel, L&T and DPCL met Greenpeace, BNHS, WPSI, Wild Society of Orissa, Sanctuary Asia and other environmental organizations to discuss the concerns and the way forward on the subject with regard to Dhamra Port.

A team of Company Executives and environment experts visited Bhitarakanika National Park, Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary and the Dhamra Port site on February 2009, supervising the ongoing dredging operations.

Meghna said...

On fourth meeting on 20th Feb 2009 in Kolkata, Tata Steel, L&T and DPCL agreed to conduct the additional biological impact assessment in close collaboration with NGOs’ of environmental organizations team led by a mutually agreed upon Scientists team. However the NGOs’ in a further instance of unreasonableness, insisted upon complete cessation of on-going dredging operation of Dhamra Port even before the commencement of study. However DPCL, Tata Steel and L&T team showed it preparedness to adjust the schedule of works including dredging to facilitate the study after due recommendation by the Scientists team.

The 102nd AGM of Tata Steel had been attended by a number of Greenpeace activists who happen to be shareholders of the Company as well. The AGM highlighted Tata Steel’s interests in further conference with Greenpeace in the matter of the port in addition to an invitation to activists to visit the port site yet again.

From the sequence of events, it is absolutely clear that the only thing that Greenpeace wants is to prolong the situation of deadlock in the matter of Dhamra Port. Perhaps, due to a lack of other valid issues on their agenda, Greenpeace is carrying on with a stance of stiffness, lest they have to give in to valid scientific reasoning. The only deduction that may be drawn from Greenpeace’s lack of willingness in discussion is that they have lost their own conviction long before and fear that they will have to admit it as such in an open forum. It is indeed a very sorry state of affairs in which progress is kept at stake and the environment is being used as a pawn by people who profess themselves to be friends of the environment.

Aakansha said...

Some shareholders of Tata Steel brought up the concerns raised by Greenpeace about the impact of the Dhamra Port on the nesting habitat of Olive Ridley Turtles at Tata Steel’s 102nd AGM in Mumbai on the 27th August’09 and requested the Chairman of Tata Steel, Mr Ratan Tata, to discuss the Dhamra Port issue with them.

Mr Tata responded immediately to their concerns and said that my invitation is “ to you Admiral Ramdas” and anybody else who would be interested and Mr Muthuraman would make the arrangements for you all to take the time to satisfy yourselves in terms of what we are doing.
Know more: Response to GPs activity on Websites

Anonymous said...

With Palm and Windows PPC, there are a lot of people out there writing huge amounts of support and enhanced apps for those phones. Will the iphone enjoy the same popularity?

[url=]unlock iphone[/url]

Anonymous said...

I have a really new useful idea for a iPhone app, and i don't know where to start in the creation process. But its easily brilliant and needed?

[url=]unlock iphone[/url]