Greenpeace controversy, Greenpeace China

Greenpeace China was established in Hong Kong in 1997 and has a project liaison office in Beijing. As a large developing country, China's impact on the global environment is crucial. Over the past 20 years, China's development has attracted worldwide attention, but the environmental crisis has been increasing day by day.

Greenpeace believes that economic development should not come at the expense of the environment. Based in China and looking at the world, they are committed to opening up a green development path with practical actions.

Environmental protection projects in China.

Climate & Energy.

Greenpeace's climate and energy programme works to mitigate climate change caused by burning fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas.

1.Promote the energy revolution, advocate the vigorous development of renewable energy and improve energy efficiency;

2.Call on enterprises to take effective measures to improve the energy structure and respond to climate change;

3.investigate and expose the dangers caused by the burning of fossil fuels to the climate, the environment and people;

4.Encourage everyone to save energy, use renewable energy, and participate in the energy revolution together. Pollution PreventionGreenpeace Pollution Reduction Project is committed to eliminating toxic pollutants.

1.Promote cleaner production, advocate the elimination of all kinds of toxic pollutants from the source, so that the next generation will no longer be poisoned by pollutants;

2.Enterprises are required to take environmental responsibility and replace potentially harmful chemicals with the safest and cleanest substances throughout the production process;

3.Call for the passage of legislation requiring companies to reduce the use of toxic substances, bear the consequences of pollution, and let the public understand and monitor the environmental behavior of enterprises;

4.Investigate and expose the dumping of toxic substances from developed countries to developing countries**.

Food & Agriculture.

Greenpeace's Food and Agriculture programme works to promote agriculture that is good for the environment, farmers and consumers, so that all people can have sufficient, safe and healthy food.

1.investigate and expose the threats of industrial agriculture to the natural environment and food security;

2.Promote the use of policies and measures by enterprises to support ecological agriculture that is beneficial to the environment and farmers;

3.promote scientific research and its extension in agriculture that is beneficial to the environment and farmers;

4.Consumers are encouraged to buy food that is good for the environment and health.

Protecting forests. Greenpeace's Forest Conservation Project works to protect the planet's last remaining primary forests, as well as the people, flora and fauna that inhabit them.

1.investigate and expose deforestation-destroying logging and timber trade;

2.Call for the establishment of protected areas and the establishment of corresponding regulations to prohibit all destructive logging of forests;

3.Promote the purchase of environmentally friendly products, such as recycled paper and Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)-certified wood products;

4.Support the rights and interests of forest dwellers and protect the homes they depend on for survival.

The organizers of the signings wondered why Greenpeace was talking about science on topics such as climate change, but not on GMO. That's why he held this signature campaign, hoping that Greenpeace would change its stance on GMO.

In fact, this is similar to seeking the skin of a tiger, and it is of little use to Greenpeace.

The reason is simple: Greenpeace takes a position first. Hail guesses don't care whether it's in line with science or anti-science, they just want to do it to appear to be environmentally friendly, so sometimes it's quite scientific, sometimes it's anti-scientific. It's like a multiple-choice question that always only chooses C, of course, right and wrong.

Students who want to engage in environmental NGOs should not learn from Greenpeace.

By the way, it's not just "green" organizations that will always choose only C. Some people once cared about popular science, but later they were disappointed in popular science, and I have seen a comment on this: "I originally wanted to use science to oppose the party, but I didn't expect that sometimes the party and science wear the same pants." ”<