Connect with us

Published

on

A US biofuels producer that exports “green” aviation fuel to Britain and the European Union has purchased beef tallow from a Brazilian supply chain tied to illegal deforestation in the Amazon, shipping data and a court document show.

Diamond Green Diesel (DGD), a major provider of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) and renewable diesel, has sourced hundreds of thousands of tonnes of beef tallow from Brazil, alongside waste fats from other sources, over the last three years, as global demand for biofuel feedstocks soars.

Reporting by Unearthed and nonprofit investigative outlet Repórter Brasil reveals DGD’s connection to a rendering plant that has sourced supplies from a meatpacker fined for buying cattle from an illegally deforested Amazon reserve. A previous investigation by Reuters and Repórter Brasil found DGD had bought animal fat from two other rendering factories linked to supplies of cattle from illegal ranches.

The newly identified factory, Pacífico Indústria e Comércio de Óleos e Proteínas Ltda, which is based in Cacoal, a small city in the far-western Amazon state of Rondônia, has been supplied by Rondônia meatpacker DistriBoi, a 2022 court document shows.

DistriBoi was fined two years ago for illegally purchasing cattle from the state’s Jaci-Paraná conservation reserve, which has been ravaged by illegal ranching.

There is no suggestion that the companies involved were aware of deforestation at farm level. But the findings suggest a traceability gap in the supply chain of feedstocks for sustainable fuels, where cattle by-products are subject to less oversight than the primary commodities of the cattle industry, such as meat and leather.

A drone view of the entrance to Diamond Green Diesel, LLC, a joint venture between Valero Energy Corporation and Darling Ingredients Inc., in Port Arthur, Texas, U.S., July 30, 2025. REUTERS/Adrees Latif

A drone view of the entrance to Diamond Green Diesel, LLC, a joint venture between Valero Energy Corporation and Darling Ingredients Inc., in Port Arthur, Texas, U.S., July 30, 2025. REUTERS/Adrees Latif

Pristine rainforest blanketed the Jaci-Paraná reserve when it was created 30 years ago to protect traditional forest activities such as rubber tapping and nut harvesting.

Today, illegal ranching has devoured nearly 80% of its forest cover and it has become a notorious example of the devastation wrought by land grabbers in the world’s largest rainforest.

“The damage to biodiversity has been devastating,” said local Indigenous activist Neidinha Suruí, who featured in the 2025 Emmy Award-winning documentary “O Território”.

“It is sad to see what has been lost,” she said.

Greener air travel?

The “renewable diesel” and sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) that are being exported by DGD – a joint venture between US oil refiner Valero Energy Corp and Texas-based Darling Ingredients – are classed as “green” because they are made from feedstocks classified as waste, including tallow, which consists of fat separated from cattle carcasses.

Many governments and airlines are pinning their hopes for greener flying on SAF made with organic waste materials, including Britain which introduced a compulsory blending requirement last year.

Top green jet fuel producer linked to suspect waste-oil supply chain

Air travel accounts for about 2.5% of global carbon emissions and in contrast to other transport sectors that can be electrified, shrinking aviation’s carbon footprint is much more difficult.

Waste products such as beef tallow and used cooking oil (UCO) are considered the greenest of viable SAF feedstocks on the grounds that they do not create competition with foodstuffs such as soy oil or palm oil, nor increase deforestation pressure.

An Air France aircraft, operated with sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) produced by TotalEnergies, is refueled before its first flight from Nice to Paris at Nice airport, France, October 1, 2021. REUTERS/Eric Gaillard

An Air France aircraft, operated with sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) produced by TotalEnergies, is refueled before its first flight from Nice to Paris at Nice airport, France, October 1, 2021. REUTERS/Eric Gaillard

But there is concern that the global rush to ramp up SAF use could indirectly exacerbate deforestation pressure by increasing demand for feedstocks such as tallow and UCO.

That could increase the profit margins of cattle ranches – including illegal ones – and have other unintended consequences, such as encouraging fraud in supply chains, as Climate Home News has reported.

An investigation published in March by Climate Home News and Swedish broadcaster SVT found that Finnish biofuels giant Neste is sourcing key ingredients for its SAF from an opaque supply chain that enables fresh palm oil to be passed off as used, waste oil.

Because tallow is classified as waste by regulators in markets including the UK and EU, the green fuel industry’s most widely used certification scheme – International Sustainability and Carbon Certification (ISCC) – does not assess whether forests were cleared to rear the cattle that produced it in the first place.

    This allows tallow from cattle to qualify as a sustainable feedstock for green fuels, even if they were raised on illegally deforested land.

    “There is clearly an oversight within the rules if the products, in this case animal tallow, are originally coming from deforested land,” said Cian Delaney, a campaign coordinator at the clean transport and energy advocacy group Transport & Environment.

    That means government SAF mandates aimed at stemming air travel emissions could help boost the earnings of cattle ranchers linked to illegal deforestation in Brazil, where ranching and other forms of agriculture have been the main driver of forest loss.

    Land grabbers clear way for ranchers

    Once covered by an unbroken rainforest canopy, Rondônia’s Jaci-Paraná reserve has been decimated by illegal deforestation driven by cattle ranching – a major cause of tree loss in the Amazon.

    Land-grabbers have seized – often violently – and cleared more than three-quarters of its forest for pasture, as ranching has steadily advanced into the southern Amazon.

    Suruí, the local Indigenous activist, said companies that buy products derived from illegal activities perpetuate environmental crimes in the rainforest.

    “If there were no meat processors buying illegally sourced cattle, there would be no land grabbing and no deforestation,” Suruí told Repórter Brasil, which partnered on the new investigation with Unearthed, and a team of journalists supported by JournalismFund Europe. 

    Lawsuits and linked supply chains

    Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has pledged to end all deforestation in the country by 2030, in part by strengthening environmental enforcement in the world’s biggest rainforest.

    In Rondônia, authorities have launched more than 50 lawsuits related to land-grabbing and deforestation in the Jaci-Paraná reserve alone. Local slaughterhouse DistriBoi is named in 31 of the lawsuits, including the 2024 case in which it was fined.

    According to the 2022 court document, which concerned an unrelated labour dispute, lawyers for Pacífico refer to DistriBoi as the rendering plant’s “largest supplier of raw materials”.

    US-based DGD received almost 15,000 tonnes of tallow from Pacífico from 2023 to 2025 at its Texas refinery, as well as used cooking oil from various countries and sources, according to trade database Panjiva.

    A herd of cattle is seen at the Marupiara ranch in the city of Tailandia in the state of Para, Brazil March 17, 2020. Picture taken March 17, 2020. To match Special Report BRAZIL-DEFORESTATION/CATTLE REUTERS/Pilar Olivares

    A herd of cattle is seen at the Marupiara ranch in the city of Tailandia in the state of Para, Brazil March 17, 2020. Picture taken March 17, 2020. To match Special Report BRAZIL-DEFORESTATION/CATTLE REUTERS/Pilar Olivares

    Darling Ingredients is also a parent company of Pacífico since its 2022 acquisition of Brazilian rendering company FASA Group.

    A spokesperson for Darling Ingredients denied that Pacífico had sourced beef residues from DistriBoi’s Ji-Paraná slaughterhouse – one of two that the meatpacker operates in Rondônia.

    “The rendering plant Pacífico does not source any materials from the slaughterhouse Distriboi in Ji-Paraná,” the spokesperson said in an emailed response, without providing evidence or commenting directly on the content of the 2022 court document.

    Darling did not respond to a follow-up question about Distriboi’s other slaughterhouse in the region, which, according to cattle transfer documents, has also bought from a farm that has illegally cleared forest within the extractive reserve.

    “Our relationships are typically with the slaughterhouse, several levels removed from cattle ranchers. Regardless, we are committed to ensuring our raw materials are deforestation free. We expect our raw material suppliers to abide by our supplier code of conduct. In addition, we are in the process of requiring all [the] raw materials to attest that their material is deforestation free,” the spokesperson said in a statement.

    DistriBoi said in an apparent reference to the pending Jaci-Paraná lawsuits that “the matters mentioned … are already under review, including by higher courts”. It has previously denied wrongdoing. The company’s statement did not address a question about its commercial ties to Pacífico.

    Valero Energy, the major refiner that co-owns DGD with Darling Ingredients, did not respond to requests for comment, nor did DGD itself.

    From slaughterhouse to SAF

    In an effort to rein in carbon emissions from air travel, regulators in Britain and the EU have mandated progressively increasing SAF blending quotas in the years ahead, creating a new market for feedstocks including beef tallow.

    Brazil’s exports of tallow to the US have risen sharply in recent years, up from less than 10,000 tonnes in 2021 to almost 400,000 tonnes last year, according to Panjiva, reflecting growing demand for biofuels like SAF.

    In the UK, Europe’s biggest aviation market by seat capacity, jet fuel was required to contain 2% SAF by the end of 2025, rising to 10% by 2030 and 22% by 2040.

    DGD shipped 134,000 tonnes of SAF worth nearly $90 million from Texas to the UK in 2025, according to trade data from Panjiva. The company also exported smaller amounts of renewable diesel to Britain.

    The EU received biofuels, including small quantities of SAF, worth over $1.1 billion from DGD’s Texas refinery last year, figures show.

    Is the world’s big idea for greener air travel a flight of fancy?

    Unearthed’s investigation could not identify which airlines or airports buy DGD’s SAF once it arrives in Britain.

    Valero, DGD’s other parent company, is positioning itself as a key player in the transition to lower-carbon fuels in the UK, where it markets its renewable diesel under the Texaco brand.

    It has been an active participant in SAF policy discussions and has criticised the government’s planned cap on waste fat sources in SAF, calling them “the world’s most cost-effective production route for SAF” in a submission to parliament.

    Helping to cut emissions?

    Even tighter oversight over SAF feedstocks is crucial to ensure that blending mandates such as Britain’s are effectively lowering emissions, said Anna Krajinska, a director at Transport & Environment UK.

    Forests store vast amounts of carbon; when they are cut down or burned this carbon is released into the atmosphere.

    “If there’s tallow coming from land that’s been deforested, then those emissions might be so high that you might not be getting to the greenhouse gas reduction threshold,” Krajinska said.

    A staff member is pictured as he fills up the Emirates Airlines Boeing 777-300ER with Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF), during a milestone demonstration flight while running one of its engines on 100% (SAF) at Dubai airport, in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, January 30, 2023. REUTERS/Rula Rouhana

    A staff member is pictured as he fills up the Emirates Airlines Boeing 777-300ER with Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF), during a milestone demonstration flight while running one of its engines on 100% (SAF) at Dubai airport, in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, January 30, 2023. REUTERS/Rula Rouhana

    But as the world’s appetite for flying keeps on growing, some experts say SAF is the only viable means to reduce aviation emissions at present.

    Referring to the deforestation links identified in Unearthed’s investigation, Wouter Dewulf, an aviation economist at Belgium’s University of Antwerp, said it “would be important to assess how large this infraction is”.

    “I’m quite sure you have aberrations,” Dewulf added. “But biofuels are the best alternative for the moment.”

    T&E’s Delaney said there needs to be less opacity and better oversight from regulatory authorities. “Right now, there are just too many blindspots,” he added.

    The post UK imports of “green” jet fuel linked to Amazon deforestation appeared first on Climate Home News.

    UK imports of “green” jet fuel linked to Amazon deforestation

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Marine Parks Explained

    Published

    on

    Australia’s network of marine parks is the largest in the world, covering more than half (52%) of Australia’s Commonwealth waters. You could be forgiven for assuming that a marine park is much like a national park on land: a highly protected place where people can enjoy nature while conservation efforts help habitats recover and wildlife thrive. You wouldn’t expect someone to bulldoze a national park, so why should they be allowed to bottom trawl in a marine park?

    The reality is that not all marine parks are equally protected. Australia’s Marine Parks Network is divided into different zoning categories, with each zone determining which activities are permitted and the level of protection provided.

    More than half of the Commonwealth Marine Parks Network allows industrial activities like oil and gas mining, and industrial fishing.

    Our survival, and the survival of our planet, depends on the ocean. The ocean produces more oxygen than all of our forests combined, sustains communities and regulates the earth’s temperature. It’s home to wondrous wildlife and important ecosystems like coral reefs and kelp forests.

    We love our big blue backyard

    Australia’s ocean is teeming with life that is found nowhere else on earth. Schools of colourful fish, vibrant coral reefs, endemic shark nurseries, pods of dolphins, families of whales, playful seal pups and threatened Jurassic-era turtles call Australian waters home.

    Since time began, from the turquoise waves to the deep blue, the ocean has connected our shorelines and communities, fed us, guided us and grounded us. We are intrinsically connected to our big blue backyard – more than 85% of us live within 50km of the shoreline. For tens of thousands of years, people have lived in harmony with the ocean and the wildlife within it, caring for and being sustained by its rich waters. Australia’s waters are some of the most unique and abundant places on Earth but our Marine Parks Network is falling short to properly protect them. 

    Australia’s marine parks aren’t living up to their name

    © Greenpeace / Harriet Spark

    The Australian Commonwealth Marine Parks Network covers commonwealth waters 5.5km from the coast. The network is divided into 7 regional management areas, overall the network contains 60 marine parks. Zoning types determine what activities are allowed in each area. Over half of the network allows industrial activities, risking our most precious and threatened ocean wildlife.

    Within many of our marine parks, destructive industries are allowed to fish, trawl, dig and mine using barbaric and cruel methods. Here are some of the zones explained:

    • Bottom Trawling: Special Purpose (trawl) zones allow bottom trawling. This covers 10 marine parks totalling almost 13 million hectares. Bottom trawlers bulldoze the seafloor with weighted nets, deforesting our underwater forests; a cruel, indiscriminate and inefficient way to fish.
    • Other Industrial Fishing: Includes “Habitat Protection Zones, ““Multi Use Zones” and “Special Purpose Zones.” Fishing methods vary from park to park but many marine parks in these zones allow industrial fishing like longlining. Longlining involves setting lines that can be 100km long, bristling with deadly hooks designed to catch a specific fish species. But longlining is not a selective method of fishing – significant numbers of sharks, rays, turtles, dolphins and seabirds can be harmed or killed as bycatch in the process.
    • Oil and Gas Mining: Many “Special Purpose” and “Multi Use” zones allow seismic blasting and oil and gas mining. 30 marine parks or 65 million hectares of Australia’s highest conservation value areas for ocean wildlife are open for mining and exploration of oil and gas.
    • Ocean Sanctuaries: National Park and Sanctuary zones are fully and highly protected marine parks designed to conserve wildlife and their habitat, where fishing, mining, and other industrial activities are not allowed.

    Industrial fishing is one of the biggest threats to the ocean

    Marine parks on the east coast that allow bottom trawling. 10 marine parks across the whole network allow bottom trawling totalling almost 13 million hectares of ocean habitat for precious wildlife.

    In May, Greenpeace Australia Pacific sailed our campaigning vessel Oceania through some of Australia’s most beautiful and threatened marine parks. Our crew visited Jervis and Hunter marine parks to document their beauty, showcase what’s at risk and aim to expose the industrial fishing activities in these protected waters. Both of these marine parks allow bottom trawling and longlining methods of industrial fishing.

    Industrial fishing is ripping the ocean apart across the planet. Longlining, also known as longline fishing, is an industrial fishing method that involves the use of a fishing line with thousands of baited hooks. These fishing lines can stretch over 100 kilometers in length and are set to capture a fish species, often tuna or billfish species. But it is not a selective method of fishing  and often results in significant bycatch. This includes a range of non-target species like sharks, rays, sea turtles, marine mammals, and seabirds which are often injured or killed as bycatch.

    Bottom trawling involves dragging heavy weighted nets along the ocean floor. This fishing method is popular with commercial fishing companies, because it makes it easy to catch large quantities of fish in one go. But it also damages the seafloor, releasing carbon and can kill or injure non-target ocean life like coral, fur seals, dolphins and seabirds. You may have watched the reality of bottom trawling (and the benefits of ocean sanctuaries) in Ocean with David Attenborough, if not, add it to your watch list!  

    Fully protected ocean sanctuaries that ban industrial fishing and mining can protect ocean wildlife and underwater wonderlands for generations to come. Vast, robust sanctuaries create blue havens where ocean wildlife are safe from nets and hooks, and can truly rest, recover, thrive and replenish out into the surrounding waters. Ocean sanctuaries ensure a healthy ocean full of life.

    A once-in-a-decade chance to fix what’s falling short

    We have a unique opportunity to turn the tide.

    The Australian Government is asking for your feedback on how our Commonwealth Marine Parks Network is managed. This is our once-in-a-decade chance to protect ocean wildlife, ban industrial fishing and create more ocean sanctuaries.

    As part of the review the Government is asking for submissions from the public to hear from you on what improvements are needed to better protect our vast network of marine parks. Writing a submission is a powerful way to influence government decisions and create real change.

    This is the moment to ban industrial activities like bottom trawling and oil and gas mining. But only if they hear from YOU. Add your name!

    Greenpeace is calling on the Australian government to:

    1. Ban industrial activities from Australia’s Marine Parks Network: Ban industrial activities, such as industrial fishing, seismic blasting and oil and gas mining, from Australia’s marine parks.

    2. Create more ocean sanctuaries: Increase fully protected sanctuaries in Australia’s marine parks based on science principles.

    3. Connect Australia’s Marine Parks Network to the High Seas: mCreate seascape connectivity by linking Australian marine parks to new high seas ocean sanctuaries.

    References

    Substantiation that more than half of the Marine Parks Network permits industrial activity comes from a peer-reviewed systematic literature review (Phillips et al. 2025, PLOS One, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307324). The study found that within the Commonwealth Marine Parks Network specifically, “all zones are considered partially protected areas, meaning areas where extractive activities are permitted, except ‘Pink zones’ (Preservation Zones; IUCN Ia) and ‘Green Zones’ (IUCN II).” In other words, every Commonwealth marine park zone type other than the network’s strict no-take sanctuary and national park zones (IUCN Ia and II) permits some form of extractive industrial activity. Since no-take zones are the minority zone type across the network by area, this supports the conclusion that the majority of the network’s area is zoned to permit industrial activity.

    DCCEEW Australian Marine Parks spatial dataset (https://fed.dcceew.gov.au/datasets/erin::australian-marine-parks/explore), filtered by zone type. This confirms that 38.43% of the network’s area is zoned as Sanctuary or National Park zones (IUCN Ia and II). These are the no-take categories excluded from the peer-reviewed study’s definition of partially protected/industrial-permitting zones. The remaining 61.57% of the network falls within the zone categories the study classifies as permitting industrial activity (per The MPA Guide definition of “industrial” applied in Phillips et al. 2025), directly corroborating the peer-reviewed finding with current Commonwealth-specific spatial data.

    For further information on activities permitted within the Marine Parks Network Zoning, you can refer to the Management Plans zoning and rules for each Marine Parks Network area, for example: Temperate East, Coral Sea, North.

    Marine Parks Explained

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Report: Trawling the Bottom Line

    Published

    on

    A new report from Greenpeace Australia Pacific advocates for the closure of bottom trawling in Australia’s Commonwealth Marine Parks Network. Bottom trawling continues to be a pervasive threat to ocean life in Australia, with 10 marine parks totalling almost 13 million hectares, allowing bottom trawling.

    Australia’s network of marine parks, which is the biggest in the world, covers more than half (52%) of Australia’s Commonwealth domestic waters, but not all parks are created equal. Australia’s Marine Parks Network is divided into different zoning categories, with each zone determining which activities are permitted and the level of protection provided. More than half of the Marine Parks Network allow industrial activities like industrial fishing and oil and gas mining. This includes zoning types that allow destructive fishing by longliners and bottom trawlers, who pillage underwater wonderlands, rip up coral and indiscriminately and violently catch any animal in their path, including turtles, seals and dolphins, all within areas labelled a marine park.

    The Federal government has commenced a review into the majority of Australia’s Commonwealth Marine Parks Network management plans. This presents an opportunity to ban industrial activities from our marine parks and create more ocean sanctuaries.

    Australia’s waters are some of the most unique and abundant places on earth, and are a global hotspot of biodiversity. Vibrant coral reefs and wondrous wildlife like endangered turtles, dolphins, and whales, some found nowhere else on earth, call Australia’s waters home. 

Australia’s network of marine parks is the biggest in the world. It covers 52 per cent of Australia’s domestic waters, but more than half of the network allows destructive, extractive industries like seismic blasting, industrial fishing and oil and gas mining. Longliners and bottom trawlers frequent these marine parks, looking for fish but catching everything in their path. 

In May 2026, Greenpeace Australia Pacific’s campaigning vessel Oceania traveled to Jervis Bay Marine Park and Hunter Marine Park to document their beauty, the wildlife under threat and aim to expose the industrial fishing activities in these so called protected waters.

Greenpeace is calling on the federal government to ban industrial activities from the marine parks network, create more fully protected ocean sanctuaries and connect the network to new high seas ocean sanctuaries.

    Report: Trawling the Bottom Line

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Sewing and Painting the Future

    Published

    on

    The iconic Greenpeace ship hosts community and family activities over the weekend from 27-30 April, including banner-making workshops and tours of the ship, culminating in a community paddle out for the climate and ocean at South Beach.
    © Harriet Spark / Grumpy Turtle Film / Greenpeace

    The banner drop is a distinctive part of the Greenpeace repertoire.

    The moment of the unfolding is intrinsically dramatic. It is the reveal; when the moral and scientific truth of a situation is unveiled to the world. The wrong is being labelled—not through a written submission, or a social media post, or a statement in a meeting—but in words emblazoned in real physical space, chosen and occupied with precision, for all to see. There is jeopardy and transgression. And there are consequences—for the activists and for Greenpeace, as well as for the target of the communication. One of the reasons the banner remains such an effective tool in our toolbox is because of its undeniable clarity in cutting through, driving change and accountability in a way that few other tactics can. It is naming the wrong: in giant, clear letters.

    We’ve hung these massive messages at environmental crime scenes, corporate headquarters, and iconic landmarks; on government buildings, ships and planes—in locations all around the world, for years.

    My own memories unfurl even as I write this, but because the campaign to stop Woodside at Scott Reef is so pressing, what immediately springs to mind are two of our banners in that campaign: one on a crane outside their Perth HQ, and another on some of their corroding industrial junk at sea. What about you? Is there a particular banner that you picture when you think of Greenpeace?

    The banners can attract global attention, but they have quiet beginnings. Each one is made by hand, often by volunteers. It is the invisible labour behind each spectacular public moment. One of the key pieces of equipment in our workshop at Rainbow Warrior House is the sewing machine. Sometimes our workshop is full of people and noise; at others it is quiet, the only sound being the gentle, purposeful, whir and buzz of a banner being sewn. It is usually our warehouse manager, Kieran Holmes, on the tools, head over the machine, carefully pouring over the raw canvas or tarp as the banner takes shape. Kieran’s one of those people who seems to be able to turn his hand to almost anything, but you wouldn’t know it because he’s old-school modest. In addition to being incredibly skilled, Kieran’s an all-round beaut human to have in the heart of our headquarters; never too busy to take the time to show a newcomer, or curious visitor, around his domain. 

    Once the banner is sewn up, the lettering needs to be outlined. This is done on a magnetic wall—a fit-for-purpose feature at Rainbow Warrior House, where the banner is held up with magnets, and the edges of the letters neatly traced from a projection.

    Next comes the painting. It usually starts late in the afternoon, sometimes going into evenings and weekends, with volunteers, staff, mates crowded around, brushes in hand. It is a calming meditative feeling of shared purpose, giving each letter its visual heft, the colour building power and presence with each stroke.

    Then you stand back, stretch, and look at the message, now ready.

    S A V E S C O T T R E E F

    Throughout history, every great push for social change has required some form of invisible labour; preparation in the form of quiet things seldom seen, but vital. It is the enabling work of love instantiated in action. And of course, so much of the time it has been women who have done this labour, so that the men could get the chance to make the speeches and stand on the podiums. The inaugural Greenpeace voyage to stop nuclear testing in 1971 had a male-only crew, but wouldn’t have happened without the ideas and work of women behind the scenes.

    It is what we do together, after all, that changes the world. Sometimes that work happens on a stage, a ship on the wild seas, or up the side of a building. But mostly, it is the hidden diligence of those who care and contribute to all the enabling work that makes a change once thought impossible, inevitable. It is Kieran at his sewing machine. It was Dorothy Stowe doing the administrative work of the ‘Don’t Make A Wave Committee’ that became Greenpeace.

    When we think of social change, it is the sturm and drang that we remember. The drop of the banner, the chant of the crowd, the raising of the new flag. But look behind the curtain, and there’ll be a crew of people who are taking responsibility for the administration, the sewing and the painting, making the food, checking the bus timetables, getting stuff done. And behind them are even more handsinvisibly donating time and trust; the financial, material and expert resources that make it all possible. There’s love, camaraderie and know-how at every stage.

    We are social and cooperative creatures by nature. And we human beings have been stitching for millenia, sewing the possibilities of our common future. Political and corporate bullies and algorithmically manipulative platforms would have us forget this, and abandon who we are. But we should be in no doubt that the brighter prospects for ourselves and life on earth continue to be stitched and painted; collaboratively and with love, by the diligent hands of millions of people who care, each day, in every community and city across the world.

    With Love,

    David


    Q & A

    I always get great questions when interviewing prospective new team members. One that came up again recently was: “Is Greenpeace actually one organisation?”

    Around the world, people know Greenpeace by our one global name, united by a shared mission: securing an Earth capable of nurturing life in all its magnificent diversity, with a particular focus on climate and biodiversity. Behind the scenes, though, we’re organised as a network of 25 legally autonomous national and regional offices, including Greenpeace Australia Pacific, working alongside Greenpeace International.

    That structure gives us the best of both worlds: we work together leveraging the power of a global network on the issues that matter most, while each office remains legally independent and deeply connected to the communities, cultures and political realities where we’re embedded. Local knowledge informs global action, and global collaboration strengthens and supports local campaigns.

    It’s a model that has enabled Greenpeace to take on some of the world’s biggest challenges for over five decades–while withstanding challenges and attacks from governments and corporations. Global enough to tackle global problems, local enough to understand our communities and the natural places we love.

    If you’re curious to learn more, you can read about the Greenpeace Global Network structure here.

    Sewing and Painting the Future

    Continue Reading

    Trending

    Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com