What will the climate be like in future? How will our society change? How will people around the world react, and how will they cope with all this? Equally wide-ranging are the artistic statements and messages that the artists seek to communicate: they include documentation, even meditation, as well as quiet criticism and vociferous activism. Besides the fine arts, it is above all films and performances that explore questions of climate change. Architecture and urban planning produce results that have a concrete impact on our everyday lives; they react to change processes and to calls for sustainable concepts, and attempt to use innovative solutions to achieve a new “greener” way to build.Apparently, I'm not the only person wondering what the future will look like.... What will our society look like if we begin to deal seriously with the issue of climate change? What would a velvet climate revolution look like?
Let's assume that the heads of government in Copenhagen should resolve incisive measures to minimize greenhouse gas emissions. Then, we would not only need to drastically lower consumption of energy from fossil fuels, but we would also need to tremendously change our daily habits. I call this our daily Copenhagen: a culture of wasting resources is coming to an end. To respond to climate change, we need to develop a culture of participation in our societies as well as completely new global alliances. In the southern hemisphere, local knowledge is very important. This can teach us how to deal consciously with scarce resources.
As a political radical, Gramsci wanted to change people's thinking and priorities, but this also required an engagement with the shared mode of thinking and acting, since for our communication we have to be ....'conformists.' ....This is a kind of dual task, using language and imagery that communicates effectively through the use of conformist rules, while trying to make this language express non-conformist proposals. The object was to formulate and discuss ideas taht are signifcantly new but which would neveretheless be readily understood in terms of old rules of expression. (Amartya Sen, The Idea of Justice, 2009)Are we climate change activists not engaged in the same process? In the developed world, we try to change people's way of thinking and their priorities each time we hold a rally, write a letter to the editor, lobby the government, shame the government, blockade a road, go to jail, et al in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Are we effective? Perhaps - recent polls in Canada demonstrated that people care about climate change and want the federal government to do more.
A small yet growing body of evidence suggests that how people think and feel is being influenced strongly by ecosystem transformation related to climate change and industry-related displacement from the land. These powerful stressors are occurring more frequently around the world.
Albrecht’s stunning insight? That there might be a wide variety of shifts in the health of an ecosystem—from subtle landscape changes related to global warming to desolate wastelands created by large-scale strip mining—that diminish people’s mental health.The end of the last century was marked by an increase in depression and other mental illnesses. Is it possbile that, when we damage our ecosystem, we also damage our mental health?
In 25 years in politics, Charest says, he's never seen a federal government rely so heavily on the White House before taking a position on an issue, with Ottawa now saying it will model its climate policy on Washington's. Charest says the Harper government has displayed hostility toward environmentalists. Charest cited an on-camera argument between Harper press secretary Dimitri Soudas and Canadian environmentalist Steven Guilbeault.Quebec, British Columbia and Ontario are far ahead of the federal government on this issue. Environmental issues are a shared responsibility of the provinces and the federal government. The provinces named above, along with Manitoba, are members of the Western Climate Initiative, a collaboration if states and provinces working to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and grow a clean energy economy.
That spat featured Soudas accusing Guilbeault, with cameras rolling next to them, of being behind a spoof designed to embarrass the Canadian government. That accusation enraged Guilbeault, and American pranksters later claimed responsibility for the stunt.
"You saw it like I did," Charest told TVA. "His press secretary attacking an environmentalist — on the basis of false information."
We had a fantastic harvest in 2009, thanks to warm dry weather through summer andOne can purchase seeds of currant tomatoes, wild tomatoes, yellow tiger striped tomatoes, Balinese tomatoes, green zebra tomatoes, purple tomatoes, and yellow tomatoes. Of particular interest in a recession is Radiator Charlie's Mortgage Lifter tomatoe. (Try it and see if it works!) They also sell beans, sweet and hot peppers, eggplant, all kinds of salad greens, oats, barley , wheat, peas, watermelon, corn ...... YummmMMMMM! I'm going to have to dig up more of our lawn and replace it with vegetables. If you do the same, you will enjoy incomparable flavour at harvest and a zero mile diet. One cannot do better than that in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
fall. We are eager to start sharing our seeds with you! Until January 1/2010, all our regular seed packets are $3.25 each instead of $3.50.
So what happens now? That depends on the other non-player at Copenhagen: you. For the past few years good, liberal, compassionate people – the kind who read the Guardian – have shaken their heads and tutted and wondered why someone doesn't do something. Yet the number taking action has been pathetic. Demonstrations which should have brought millions on to the streets have struggled to mobilise a few thousand. As a result the political cost of the failure at Copenhagen is zero. Where are you?I'm not going to sit on the Titanic waiting for someone else to do something. I will continue to write the PM (I must be his favourite correspondent by now,) I will lobby our municipal government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and I will persuade, cajole, and motivate every perosn I meet. What about you?
Is this music not to your taste, sir, or madam? Perhaps you would like our little orchestra to play something louder, to drown out that horrible grinding noise.
Water is used for extracting, refining, processing, and transporting all forms of energy, from coal to solar. Large volumes of water are used as cooling water in conventional thermal generating plants. Energy production can also cause signicant water pollution. A much less recognized connection between water and energy are the vast amounts of energy used to treat, distribute, and use water. Water is heavy . . . .Energy needs are particularly high for places where water is .... piped over long distances and steep terrain.Climate change will increase water demand due to droughts; reduce the quality of available because of sea level rises and extreme flooding (does anyone remember the lack of drinking water in Haiti after Hurricane Jeanne dumped two meters of water in 36 hours?;) and melt the glaciers that supply water to China, Pakistan, Indian , and western Canada .
seek opportunities for collective action as water and energy are connected to social, cultural, and environmental issues ... by pooling resources and bringing together a wide range of expertise and knowledge through partnerships for a common goal.A velvet climate revolution will require us all to pool our knowledge and expertise in pursuit of the common goal: survival. And presumaly, we all wish for more than a mere Hobbesian survival: we all want a socially and environmentally just culture living within limits imposed by the environement. Cooperation is and will be absolutely necessary - between people, nations, and businesses.
The biggest culprit in the massive mistreatment of the earth by humankind is business and industry, which happens to be where I have spent the last 52 years. Thanks to Interface Carpet, I have become a recovering plunderer. I once told Fortune magazine that someday people like me would go to jail [since] theft of our children's future is a crime. Tomorrow's child has spoken to me with this message: 'We are each and everyone a part of the web of life and we have a choice to make on our brief visit to this beautiful blue and green living planet. To hurt it or to help it.'Ray Anderson is the CEO of Interface Carpet. Those words above were part of his TED talk. (Please note that Interface Carpet is an extremely successful business.) You can find his speech at:
If two or more of the five categories of people described above - saboteurs, eco-terrorists, mainstream environmentalists, Treaty 8 First Nations, and Metis - came together in a single movement, they could become a serious obstacle to development [of the tar sands], given that innumberable roads, piplelines, and physical isntallations are widely spread across the huge, thinly settled, lightly policed territory of Nothern Alberta and adjacent areas...I suggest that First Nations, the Metis, and Greenpeace should take Mr. Flanagan up on his suggestion and make common cause after brushing up on Gandhi's principle of satyagraha. Per Gandhi, satyagraha was
love-force or soul-force. In the application of satyagraha, I discovered in the earliest stages that pursuit of truth did not admit of violence being inflicted on one’s opponent but that he must be weaned from error by patience and compassion. For what appears to be truth to the one may appear to be error to the other. And patience means self-suffering. So the doctrine came to mean vindication of truth, not by infliction of suffering on the opponent, but on oneself.A modest suggestion .......
there remains a profound skepticism on the part of industry to embrace new technology. It's visible in spending patterns – energy companies spend half as much on research and development than the Canadian industrial average.An inventor having difficulties raising enough money to build a prototype to test his technology stated:
“I'll be blunt, part of the problem is Alberta,” he says, blaming government-owned research facilities who control the flow of some research dollars. “I think part of the issue is that we may represent competition to the steam status quo. … I don't understand that myself. The industry has so much to gain and so little to lose.”Does the industry reluctance to innovate have anything to do with the federal government?
Canadians will still have a lengthy wait before Ottawa rolls out its climate change plan, despite a tentative political accord at the Copenhagen summit. The delays will make it more difficult, and potentially more costly, for Canada to meet its target to reduce emissions by 20 per cent from 2006 levels by 2020. Companies are continuing to invest – particularly in the emissions-intensive oil sands sector – without knowing what emissions limits they will face. If regulations are put in place in 2010, the country will have to reduce emissions by 17.3 megatonnes a year to meet the target; by delaying until 2012, the annual effort increases to 21.6 megatonnes.Perhaps the Canadian government should implement greenhouse gas emissions regualtions soon so that tar sands miners have an incentive to invest in better technology. Please send the PM a letter on the subject ...
A coalition of environmental groups at the Copenhagen climate change conference gave its "Fossil of the Year" award to Canada on Friday.We're number one ! Splendid!
The citation called Canada "the absolute worst country at the talks."
Canada's military police have been quietly investigating allegations for more than a year that the country's troops abused Afghan detainees.New Canadian values defined: torture, a blatant disregard for environmental justice, and a disregard for the truth. Makes one proud to be Canadian, doesn't it?
Canadian soldiers captured the detainees sometime in 2008 and the investigation into their conduct has been ongoing for at least a year....MacKay apparently never told the House there were allegations against Canadian troops, at least one of which is still being investigated.
That is in addition to the ongoing court martial of a Canadian captain charged earlier this year with murdering a wounded Afghan fighter in his custody.
At no point has the injustice at the heart of multilateralism been addressed or even acknowledged: the interests of states and the interests of the world's people are not the same. Often they are diametrically opposed. In this case, most rich and rapidly developing states have sought through these talks to seize as great a chunk of the atmosphere for themselves as they can – to grab bigger rights to pollute than their competitors. The process couldn't have been better designed to produce the wrong results.
Even before this new farce began it was beginning to look as if it might be too late to prevent two or more degrees of global warming. The nation states, pursuing their own interests, have each been passing the parcel of responsibility since they decided to take action in 1992. We have now lost 17 precious years, possibly the only years in which climate breakdown could have been prevented. This has not happened by accident: it is the result of a systematic campaign of sabotage by certain states, driven and promoted by the energy industries. This idiocy has been aided and abetted by the nations characterised, until now, as the good guys: those that have made firm commitments, only to invalidate them with loopholes, false accounting and outsourcing. In all cases immediate self-interest has trumped the long-term welfare of humankind. Corporate profits and political expediency have proved more urgent considerations than either the natural world or human civilisation.
Imagine the world being shuffled like a deck of cards and redealt. Canadians suddenly no longer know who they are, where they live, how much money they have, what their status is – they exist behind what U.S. philosopher John Rawls termed a veil of ignorance.No, of course they wouldn't condone the gHG emissions of the developed world.....
Thus separated from the biases of their former selves, they can consider the morality of a given issue. Would they condone the carbon emissions of the tar sands if they found themselves living in an impoverished society on the equator, struggling for a sliver of industrialization while temperatures rise and bake their land?
A study forecasts 9 m sea-level rise if temperatures meet 2C threshold. Hundreds of millions of people around the world would be affected as low low-lying coastal areas became inundated.And yes, the author of the study is publishing it in a peer reveiwed journal: Nature to be exact. Global temperatures may rise by an average of 3 C under the current emissions cuts at Copenhagen... and sea levels may rise by 9 metres at 2 C? Why aren't we applying the precautionary principle? After all, in the words of
A confidential UN analysis obtained by the Guardian reveals that the emissions cuts offered so far at the Copenhagen climate change summit will lead to global temperatures rising by an average of 3C. The analysis seriously undermines the statements by governments that they are aiming to limit emissions to a level ensuring no more than a 2C temperature rise over the next century, and indicates that the last 24 hours of negotiations will be extremely challenging.
A rise of 3C would mean up to 170 million more people suffering severe coastal floods and 550 million more at risk of hunger, according to the 2006 Stern economic review of climate change for the UK government - as well as leaving up to 50% of species facing extinction. Even a rise of 2C would lead to sharp decline in tropical crop yields, more flooding and droughts.
What values do we espouse? Do we really want our leaders to sign a treaty leaving the poorest vulnerable to stavation? The picture above wasn't taken by a time traveler - climate change is impacting people and ecosystems as I type. Do we wish it to get worse?
From the awarding of “fossil of the day” trophies, to calls from provincial premiers for more ambitious national emissions-reduction targets, to reports that the government is cutting a special deal for the oil sands, the activity away from the negotiating table has been deeply embarrassing to the Harper government.
Critics in Copenhagen say the dismay over Canada's stand extends well beyond environmentalists, and includes United Nations officials and delegates from other countries who hope to fashion an agreement that will commit developed countries to substantial reductions in emissions from 1990 levels – something Canada refuses to do.Canada is destroying our grandchildrens' future. PLEASE write to the PM and tell him Canadians wish to commit to a substantial emimssions reductions from 1990.
Scientists, meanwhile, ponder what the dramatic range expansion of a species usually confined to lower latitudes implies about the Pacific Ocean in general. Although natural cycles are probably behind some of the changes in the Pacific Ocean that scientists are observing, climate change seems to be pushing the ocean beyond the limits of natural variability. The jumbo squid invasion of California and beyond is one symptom of these larger oceanographic changes.But climate change isn't happening.....
An independent analysis of the emails, however, show that they did not, in any way, undermine the scientific foundation for our understanding of how and why the climate is changing. Even Hayward acknowledges that "Climate change is a genuine phenomenon, and there is a nontrivial risk of major consequences in the future."I keep wondering who funded the hack.......
Britain's transformation to a low-carbon society will be delayed by a lack of people trained in the right skills unless the government significantly increases its investment in the sector, a group of MPs have warned. They said that hundreds of thousands of jobs could be created if the government doubled its funding of green technologies, making the UK a world leader in a market worth £3tr worldwide.And what are Canada's plans for funding green technologies and clean energy? It seems we are defending the tar sands instead .... another missed opportunity.
"The government has missed a big opportunity to kick-start a green industrial revolution with its £3bn fiscal stimulus. Germany, the US, Japan and China have invested billions in their low-carbon industries," said Tim Yeo MP, chair of the House of Commons environmental audit committee (EAC).
In the US, the government has spent about £50bn to create half a million new green jobs, while Germany, Japan and Korea have also announced major plans to grow their domestic environmental sectors. China's economic stimulus plan includes £142bn for environmental measures
Dimitri Soudas, spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, stated in an e-mail, "More time should be dedicated to playing a constructive role instead of childish pranks."http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/how-us-pranksters-hoaxed-the-world-at-canadas-expense/article1400519/
Canada yesterday won yet another "Fossil of the Day" award handed out by a coalition of environmental groups to the countries "doing the most to obstruct progress in the global climate change talks." The award brings Canada's tally so far to six.http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/climate-change/ontario-quebec-assail-emissions-targets/article1398952/
Climate-change scientists and environmental groups have accused Canada of being part of the problem, not the solution, in CopenhagenJust who is indulging in childish pranks instead of engaging in constructive action? The real joke at Copenhagen is Canada's actual postion on climate change.
The Conservative government has considered abandoning some of the greenhouse gas reduction goals set out in its 2007 green plan and allowing weaker targets for the oil and gas sector. The government draft documents make the argument that the U.S. bill gives smaller targets to trade-sensitive sectors, such as manufacturing. It suggests the Canadian oil and gas sector, including the oilsands, deserves the same treatment.Amazing. Bloody amazing. How on earth would Canada meet its greenhouse gas emissions targets if it weakened the standards for the oil and gas industry? Were they thinking of abandoning all reason and science?
The environment ministers of Ontario and Quebec used a press conference to declare Canada's emission-reduction targets inadequate and wholly unambitious compared with the two provinces' own targets. “It's absolutely imperative that Canada take a tougher position regarding greenhouse-gas emissions,” Ontario's John Gerretsen said. Quebec, which is rich in clean hydro power, recently set an emissions target at 20 per cent below 1990's level by 2020 and slapped a carbon tax on fossil fuels. Ontario, which wants to promote itself as a clean-technology centre as traditional manufacturing gets walloped by the recession and the high dollar, has a target of 15 per cent below 1990's level.Internal and external critics seem to have no efffect on the Canadian federal government....but - surely, instructions from the voters matter to them. Please send them a letter instructing them to committ to a "real deal" at Copenhagen. (Please feel free to use my earlier letter posted on this blog if you wish.)
He said that fear paralysed individuals, corporations and governments from making the choices needed to affect real and lasting change. "We are afraid because we don't know how we can survive without the comforts of our existing lifestyle. We are afraid that new policies will be unpopular with a national electorate. We are afraid that younger and more vigorous economies will take advantage of us – or we are afraid that older, historically dominant economies will use the excuse of ecological responsibility to deny us our proper and just development." But humans were not "doomed to carry on in a downward spiral of the greedy, addictive, loveless behaviour" that had brought mankind to this crisis and he urged people to scrutinise their lifestyles and policies and how these demonstrated care for creation. He called on people to consider what a sustainable and healthy relationship with the world would look like.Amen.
.... Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, head of the IPCC. Dr. Pachauri confirmed what I have seen as best science: that we need to ensure GHGs stop rising and start falling by 2015, or it will be too late. He called for large scale grassroots mobilization and citizen movements to push governments.
Greenpeace's huge message: "Politicians talk. Leaders Act."
The private sector arm of the World Bank today launched the first ever eco-friendly stock market index that allows investors to track the carbon efficiency of companies doing business in emerging economies.
In partnership with the giant financial services corporation Standard and Poor’s (S&P), the International Finance Corporation (IFC) established the S&P/IFC Investable Emerging Markets Index expecting it to mobilize more than $1 billion for carbon-efficient companies over the next three years.
The pioneering index is meant to encourage carbon-based competition among emerging-market businesses, give carbon-efficient companies access to long-term investors and result in lower carbon emissions in developing countries, as well as reducing the carbon footprint of investors’ portfolios.
“With growing pressure on investors to diversify and maintain returns by increasing exposure to emerging markets, and with more and more investors keen to demonstrate a preference for sustainability… IFC hopes that the launch of this index will help ensure that carbon efficiency is rewarded,” said IFC Vice-President for Business Advisory Services Rachel Kyte.
I have an "idealogical" problem with the project. That is, I believe that all of the good efforts of a million citizens in terms of water conservation can be wiped out in one minute by the government giving -- as it has, rights to mining companies to dump their tailings and other toxic wastes into what have previously been pristine, untarnished lakes and streams. This, to me, is the bigger battle. I find this in every element of the enviromental movement. The "common man/woman" is willing to go to terrific effort to improve the quality of air, water, and land. But, without government leadership -- and WITH government "sabotage" of those efforts, the benefit of the "small steps" are wiped out.I agree with my friend in many ways: for example, I was annoyed when the Liberals issued a "One Tonne Challenge" to Canadians without taking any steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from industries - especially industries such as the tar sands.
A draft proposal published at the climate-change summit Friday for the countries in the Kyoto Protocol, the only international greenhouse-gas reduction treaty, calls for five years to be added to Kyoto, taking it to 2017. Canada fiercely resists any extension of the treaty.Gee - we haven't even tried to meet our targets . And now we're fiercely opposed to extending the Kyoto Protocol because someone might notice we haven't evern tried - and slap us with non compliance penalties. Hasn't the Canadian government noticed that it is possible to meet those targets? Some countries have done so....
Canada ratified the protocol in 2002, when Jean Chrétien's Liberals were in power. But the Conservatives under Prime Minister Stephen Harper have argued for years that the targets agreed to by Canada are impossible to meet. In common with many developed countries, Canada wants Kyoto to lapse in 2012, partly for fear of having to pay non-compliance penalties if it remains intact.
You have to help us because it is a problem you have brought to us. When you have a quarter of humanity who are going to face a serious shortage of water, then that is not just about climate change and environment, that is a humanitarian crisis . That's also security. When 1.3 billion people see, because of the actions of the west historically they are being disenfranchised, then there is going to be a lot of hostility towards them in the future.Dawa Steven Sherpa explains that climate change is visible in Nepal right now in the video at the above link. He does not mention that some of the 1.3 billion people who depend upon glacial melt water from the Himalayas live in countries that possess nuclear weapons. China, India, Pakistan ...... Do you really think the leaders of those countries will watch their populations die of starvation without doing something? Do you thin I'm being overdramatic? No water in the rivers equals no crop growth equals anger ....
The hot rumour in Calgary this week - and there's always a hot rumour or two in the oil patch - has one or more public sector pension funds negotiating with ConocoPhillips for the oil sands holding the U.S. energy giant put on the block last month. The Syncrude stake could be worth anything up to $4-billion, and ConocoPhillips wants to deploy this capital on new reserves.Check the investments your pension fund holds: if it contains tar sands companies (like Suncor, Syncrude or others mentioned in the article,) let your pension fund know you don't want your pension funded by the destruction of the boreal forest and by greenhouse gas emissions. Check out the coporate triple bottom line link on this blog to find alternate investments your pension fund could make - or better yet, send your pension fund administrators the link . The adminstrators could then check out all prospective investments for their triple bottom line statements. This is an alternate way of slowing tar sand development: pension funds invest big bucks.
The federal government has moved more aggressively to assert sovereignty in the North as the Arctic sea ice retreats under rising global temperatures. "As global climate change continues and traffic through the Northwest Passage is expected to increase, our government is committed to safeguarding Canada's Arctic and protecting its most special natural features," Mr. Prentice told a news conference in Ottawa.So, on the one hand, the Canadian government admits climate change is occurring. Ordinarily, hearing Mr.Prentice make this concession would pleae me. However, in my opinion, this admission and the government's anxiety to exert a claim over the Arctic may have something to do with the Unites States Geological Survey's estimates of oil and gas reserves in the Arctic basin. And I would be far more impressed if the Canadian government reduced greenhouse gas emissions - and stopped trying to win the Fossil of the Day award in Copenhagen each and every day.
The record speaks for itself on what the Canadian government knows, or should have known, about the torture of Afghan detainees. It speaks far louder than the falsehoods from the government that have by now become routine.Sitting Conservatives are going "Ouch!!!!!!"
Canada’s top soldier has reversed himself on testimony he gave this week, with Chief of the Defence Staff Walter Natynczyk now admitting that a prisoner severely beaten in 2006 by Afghan interrogators had earlier been taken into custody by Canadian soldiers.Hmmmnnnnn - isn't Mr. Natynczyk Mr. Hillier's successor? And wasn't Mr. Hillier attacking Richard Colvin's credibility in the nastiest manner? Didn't he even suggest that Mr. Colvin was parroting Taliban propaganda? Moreover, the Defence Minister, Peter MacKay has denied for years that Afghan detainees were tortured. Mr Hillier and Mr MacKay should apologize to Mr. Colvin. And perhaps the Conservative government should explain to Canadians how not upholding the Geneva convention wins hearts and minds in Afghanistan. Or how allowing prisoners to be tortured sows democracy in a foreign land. Or how covering up torture enhances Canada's reputation.
Although Mr. MacKay has repeatedly insisted that not a single case of torture could be proven, he acknowledged through a spokesman yesterday there is "credible evidence" that detainees transferred to Afghan security forces have been tortured.Peter Mackay is toast. And, if the Conservative government may be as well..... if they keep backfilling and attacking.
The Obama administration delivered a much-needed jolt of optimism on the opening day of the Copenhagen climate change summit by declaring greenhouse gases a health hazard, strengthening the President's hand to push for deal at the make-or-break meeting. Environmental groups said the ruling will help give U.S. President Barack Obama the moral authority to push hard for a successful global carbon-reduction deal at the Copenhagen summit, which is to end Dec. 18 when 192 countries are due to lend their political endorsement to a new climate-change accord.If Prime Minister Harper was counting on the US Senate to delay, disparage, and discourage greenhouse gas emissions reductions, he must now wonder if he will be committing to much more stringent targets than he wants. He has consistently stated that Canada would follow the lead of the Americans. He must be chagrined tonight for two reasons. The first - that President Obama appears to be willing to go to great lengths to reduce America's GHG emissions. The second - that the President is a crafty, intelligent pol.
The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations. It is understood to:So much for social justice.... the countries that created the problem will punish the poorest who are already suffering.... This will work out well.....
• Force developing countries to agree to specific emission cuts and measures that were not part of the original UN agreement;
• Divide poor countries further by creating a new category of developing countries called "the most vulnerable";
• Weaken the UN's role in handling climate finance;
• Not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050, while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes.
Developing countries that have seen the text are understood to be furious that it is being promoted by rich countries without their knowledge and without discussion in the negotiations. "It is being done in secret. Clearly the intention is to get [Barack] Obama and the leaders of other rich countries to muscle it through when they arrive next week. It effectively is the end of the UN process," said one diplomat, who asked to remain nameless.
The past 10 years have been the warmest in recorded history, according to the UK Met Office. The Met Office also released the raw data from around 1,500 global monitoring stations in an effort to satisfy critics who have demanded that researchers be more transparent with their data in the wake of the email hacking row at the University of East Anglia. In a separate announcement, the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) in Geneva said today that 2009 will be one of the 10 warmest individual years recorded.Please read the entire article: it makes clear that, unless you are a diehard conspiracy theorist intent on grimly ignoring reality, global warming is happening right now ...and punishing the poorest nations most. Reducing our greenhouse gas emissions is a matter of social and environmental justice.
Claim 5: Climatologists conspire to hide the truth about global warming by locking away their data. Their so-called "consensus" on global warming is scientifically irrelevant because science isn't settled by popularity.Can ClimateGate be true? aRe the deniers correct? Are Climatologists conspiring to tax and enslave the world? The answer from Scientific American after the jump.....
If you look at the kind of offers that are now on the table we are just a few billion tonnes short per annum of the kind of emission cuts we need to get on target for 2020. "That means there is a significant way to go but it is possible to get there." Lord Stern said a "strong, outline, political agreement" at Copenhagen could lead to a dynamic industrial revolution. He said the "extra bit" that needed to be done would require increased commitments from some countries which had already made emissions-cutting offers, as well as a bigger fight against deforestation. "Both those things could take us there and I trust they are both possible."If Canada agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions, instead of burying its head in the tar sands, that would help the world achieve the 2020 tragets. Please send Prime Minister Harper a letter suggesting that he commit Canada to significant targets.
In this light, climate change deniers defend a position that will kill millions of people, destroy critical ecosystems and undermine prospects for global civilization. Common sense and social justice demand that the world's nations move forcefully to prevent the anticipated wave of eco-violence. Failing to act renders foot-dragging governments guilty of moral negligence . What is missing in international law is acknowledgment of the offense and the capacity to create and enforce a legal duty to act.He is suggesting that international law add a crime to its books called "death by envioronmental negligence and egregious footdragging. If this ahppens, George W. Bush and Stephen Harper should think twice about travelling abroad. Impossible as this sounds today, think of what happened to Pinochet .... cetainly the generaations to come after us are going to ask all of us why we did nothing.
In Hansen's view, dealing with climate change allows no room for the compromises that rule the world of elected politics. "This is analagous to the issue of slavery faced by Abraham Lincoln or the issue of Nazism faced by Winston Churchill," he said. "On those kind of issues you cannot compromise. You can't say let's reduce slavery, let's find a compromise and reduce it 50% or reduce it 40%." He added: "We don't have a leader who is able to grasp it and say what is really needed. Instead we are trying to continue business as usual."It is a very interesting article........and thought provoking. Should we be as uncompromising as James Hansen?
Harper, a diplomatic source said, was "unhappy" that the UN Secretary General, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Danish Prime Minister Lars Loekke Rasmussen were invited to the Commonwealth's annual heads of government meeting and allowed to turn it into a staging ground to build momentum for Copenhagen, which runs from Dec. 7 to 18. Canada was essentially blindsided on the weekend by a joint French-British proposal to establish a $10 billion climate-change fund to help developing countries.Perhaps Canada would not be "blindsided" if we had actually taken any steps to lower our greenhouse gas emissions.( Portland, Oregon, among many other cities, have demonstrated that it is possible to lower emissions substantially.) And now, I predict, Mr. Harper will be unhappy with an analysis of his proposed cuts to Canada's greenhouse gas emissions:
Expert analysis shows the U.S. plan will go much further in cutting emissions when additional measures are factored in like tougher fuel efficiency rules for cars, renewable electricity standards and investments in "green" development in poor countries, known in climate change parlance as clean development mechanism projects.So - Canada still isn't committing to cutting greenhouse gas emissions. What will it take? Expulsion from the Commonwealth? Help convince Mr. Harper that cutting greenhouse gas emissions is a good idea - please send him a letter instructing him to do so - not just talk about it!
The hole in the Earth's ozone layer has shielded Antarctica from the worst effects of global warming until now, according to the most comprehensive review to date of the state of the Antarctic climate. But scientists warned that as the hole closes up in the next few decades, temperatures on the continent could rise by around 3C on average, with melting ice contributing to a global sea-level increases of up to 1.4m.The original report is at http://www.scar.org/ .
This country's government is now behaving with all the sophistication of a chimpanzee's tea party. So amazingly destructive has Canada become, and so insistent have my Canadian friends been that I weigh into this fight, that I've broken my self-imposed ban on flying and come to Toronto.
So here I am, watching the astonishing spectacle of a beautiful, cultured nation turning itself into a corrupt petro-state. Canada is slipping down the development ladder, retreating from a complex, diverse economy towards dependence on a single primary resource, which happens to be the dirtiest commodity known to man. The price of this transition is the brutalisation of the country, and a government campaign against multilateralism as savage as any waged by George Bush.
Until now I believed that the nation that has done most to sabotage a new climate change agreement was the United States. I was wrong. The real villain is Canada. Unless we can stop it, the harm done by Canada in December 2009 will outweigh a century of good works.
In June this year the media obtained Canadian briefing documents which showed the government was scheming to divide the Europeans. During the meeting in Bangkok in October, almost the entire developing world bloc walked out when the Canadian delegate was speaking, as they were so revolted by his bullying. Last week the Commonwealth heads of government battled for hours (and eventually won) against Canada's obstructions. A concerted campaign has now begun to expel Canada from the Commonwealth.
The purpose of Canada's assault on the international talks is to protect this industry. This is not a poor nation. It does not depend for its economic survival on exploiting this resource. But the tar barons of Alberta have been able to hold the whole country to ransom. They have captured Canada's politics and are turning this lovely country into a cruel and thuggish place.
Canada
Influence rating ★★★
In stark contrast to its cuddly international image, Canada is the dirty old man of the climate world – missing its Kyoto emissions reduction target by a country mile (by 2007, it was 34% above its target) and showing no signs of reigning in its profligacy. Friends and foes Roundly criticised by developing countries for being way off the pace, now there are calls to suspend it from the Commonwealth. What they're offering A pathetic 3% cut on their 1990 emissions levels by 2020 – an offer mired in thick black tar. What they most want No curbs on its ability to mine those lucrative tar sands in Alberta for oil (a far more carbon-intensive process than regular extraction). Least likely to say "Look, when you set a target, you've got to stick to it, OK?"
MaldivesSome days I wish I had been born in the Maldives. I might be worried about the prospect of my country vanishing under water - but I wouldn't be ashamed of its position on the crisis of the 21st century.
Influence rating ★
Talk about punching above your weight. Thanks in no small part to the colourful and PR-savvy president Mohamed Nasheed, the Maldives have become a key voice for soon-to-be climate victims around the world. The island nation is the Vince Cable of the talks – no real power but solidly on the moral high ground (if not the literal high ground). Friends and foes A member of the G77 group of developing nations, and pals with anyone wanting some good PR. W hat they're offering To go totally carbon neutral by 2020. A frog with solar panels would look less green. What do they most want Large cuts by all the developed nations. Most likely to say "I bet you've never had a cabinet meeting under water."
The United Nations secretary general added his voice Friday to the chorus of activists trying to prod Canada into taking greater action on climate change. Ban Ki-Moon said Canada, as the next country to host the G8 and G20 meetings, must pick up the pace in setting a mid-range goal to curb emissions. "Many countries, developed and developing countries, have come out with ambitious targets," Ban said. "And Canada, as one of the leading G8 countries, and G20, Canada is going to soon chair G8. Therefore, it is only natural that Canada should come out with ambitious targets as soon as possible."
Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh hold a meeting at the Commonwealth heads of government summit in Port-of-Spain, Trinidad, on Saturday. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)I look forward to seeing a comprehensive agreement in Copenhagen where we'll actually get on with actually reducing emissions as opposed to setting abstract targets," said Prime Minister Stephen HarperWell!!!!! Apparently having scientists call for Canada's expulsion from the Commonwealth, the UN Secretary General lecture him, and rhe Queen of England and Canada stress the need for action on climate change was all it took to get Prime Minister on board. Peer pressure works ...now let us add to it by writing the Right Honorable Stepen Harper and telling himm however admirable his words have been, we want to see ACTION.
Canada has agreed to write a cheque for a $10-billion (U.S.) fund that would help poor nations cope with the consequences of climate change but Prime Minister Stephen Harper isn’t budging on calls for his government to offer deeper and faster cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.If Mr Harper isn't budging on greenhouse gas emissions, just what is the point of helping poorere countries cope with climate change? Or are we only investing in an ark?
One of Canada's top northern researchers says the permanent Arctic sea ice that is home to the world's polar bears and usually survives the summer has all but disappeared. Experts around the world believed the ice was recovering because satellite images showed it expanding. But David Barber says the thick, multiyear frozen sheets crucial to the northern ecosystem have been replaced by thin “rotten” ice which can't support the weight of the bears. “It caught us all by surprise because we were expecting there to be multiyear sea ice – the whole world thought it was multiyear sea ice,” said Dr. Barber, who just returned from an expedition to the Beaufort Sea.http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/indias-shift-to-cut-back-emissions-raises-hope-for-climate-agreement/article1381167/
Word that India will soon roll out emission reduction targets signals an emerging consensus toward a climate-change agreement next month at Copenhagen, despite the Canadian government's much-noticed ambivalence. India, one of the last holdouts in the fight against global warming, will announce the move within the next few days, French President Nicolas Sarkozy revealed yesterday. United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon placed added pressure on Canada yesterday, chiding Ottawa for its inaction on climate change at a Commonwealth meeting of heads of government, in which climate issues are dominating the agenda.
The push for action in Trinidad reinforces recent progress toward a climate-change agreement ahead of the summit in Copenhagen.The permanent sea ice is gone - faster than the IPCC models predicted -but, perhaps, the world is finally taking this issue seriously. Now, if we can get Canadian politicians to commit to action on climate change.....I live in Hope.
Climate change will hit Africa – a continent that has contributed virtually nothing to bring it about – first and hardest. Africa will not only be hit hardest, but it will be hit first. Indeed, the long dreaded impact of climate change is already upon us.
Climate change, which was largely brought about by the activities of developed countries, has made it difficult for poor and vulnerable countries to fight poverty. It has created a more hostile environment for development. No amount of money will undo the damage done. But adequate investment in mitigating the damage could partly resolve the problem.
Developed countries are thus morally obliged to pay partial compensation to poor and vulnerable countries and regions to cover part of the cost of the investments needed to adapt to climate change.http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/27/gordon-brown-unveils-climate-fund
Gordon Brown has unveiled a $22bn (£13.3bn) global fund to respond to the world's "climate emergency" by fast-tracking funds to poorer countries from next year. The prime minister said Britain would contribute £800m to the Copenhagen Launch FundWhat will Canada contribute? Or will Canada bury its head in the sand and ignore the problem?
Canada was a global leader in environmental issues - the main broker, for example, of an international ban on ozone-depleting chemicals - up until the 1990s. In recent years, however, the country has fallen from the front ranks to become one of the world's most conspicuous laggards in greenhouse gas reduction and a virtual nonentity in the clean-tech boom. This isn't just bad news for the planet; it's bad business for Canada.In what pinko environmental rag did I find this obviously biased quote? Glad you asked - the quote is from an article called Now, More Than Ever. It was published in the December 2009 issue of that commie magazine Report on Business. Page 62, to be exact.
a whole new industrial economy....has emerged primarily in those places where climate change has been acknowledged not just as a fundamental fact of life and the defining crisis of the 21st century but also as an opportunity. ...the nations and compamies leading this second wave will continue with installations and innovations ....because building this new generation of infrastructure is a smart business move, based upon sound economics.And Canada is pinning its 21st century hopes to the tar sands........this is gonna work out well - I can tell.
