Jobs & Economy
-
Film Review: "The Yes Men Fix the World"
-
Obama Administration Moves to Slash Industrial Emissions
-
Gov't Fossil Fuel Subsidies More Than Twice Those to Clean Energy
Developing World Stands Up To Developed Nations
Published October 16, 2009 @ 11:00AM PT
I'm currently on the Greenpeace ship Esperanza in the South Pacific. We're on the Defending Our Pacific tour, which is a campaign to establish a global network of marine reserves, stop overfishing of Pacific fisheries, and support Pacific island nations efforts to stop Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing in their waters.
Crewman aboard the Japanese vessel Koyu Maru 3, fishing in Cook Islands waters illegally, haul a tuna onboard. Like climate change, overfishing of the world's fisheries is threatening the livelihood of developing countries who are not contributing significantly to the source of the problem. Image © Paul Hilton/Greenpeace
Last week, we caught the Japanese ship Koyu Maru 3 fishing in Cook Islands waters without a license, which is obviously illegal. When I blogged a bout it on the Greenpeace website, I made the point that this was not just illegal but also immoral. So why is it immoral?
Last week, a new study was released by The Commonwealth that underscores the drastic need for government action on overfishing and climate change in order to stave off a collapse of global fisheries. The report warns that the oceans could soon become “deserts” and goes on to say:
The study reveals that those least responsible for the state of the oceans are most likely to suffer the consequences of poor management and climate change. Small island states in particular are vulnerable to illegal and unfair fishing by foreign fleets and to migration of fish away from warming seas.
The Esperanza has been in the Pacific region since May to support Pacific Island countries on issues ranging from climate change to fisheries collapse and marine conservation. But of course Greenpeace’s history in the Pacific Ocean goes back much further than that — all the way back to the early 1970s when we were protesting the French nuclear blasts at Moruroa. The fallout from these blasts also disproportionately affected those Pacific islanders living downwind from the blast sites — another instance of those not responsible for a problem suffering the most. While there was nothing technically illegal about these blasts, the total disregard for human health and welfare is egregious.
The industrialized commercial fishing vessels that are literally stealing fish from Pacific island nations' waters is just another example of the developed world doing as they please and disregarding the well-being of the people affected by their actions. That's why it’s very encouraging that eight Pacific island nations have come together and are standing up for their rights against these invading international commercial fishing fleets.
Pacific island states are not the only developing nations that are banding together to force the developed world to live up to their other moral obligations: “Africa will demand billions of dollars in compensation from rich polluting nations at a UN climate summit for the harm caused by global warming on the continent, African officials said Sunday.”
Lest we doubt that there is any need for this stand by African nations, even the World Bank, generally no friend to the developing world, is warning of the threats those nations are facing as the climate crisis looms: “The World Bank estimates that the developing world will suffer about 80 percent of the damage of climate change despite accounting for only around one third of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.”
So the real question we must be asking ourselves is: Will the developed world stand up and do the right thing in regard to these moral obligations?
Eight Responses to Senate Climate Change Bill
Published September 30, 2009 @ 11:38AM PT
Senators Boxer (D-Calif.) and Kerry (D-Mass.) unveiled the Senate version of a climate bill late this morning. Called the "Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act of 2009," it's exciting some comment around the web even in these wee few hours since it went officially public.
Early impressions of the bill run the gamut from hope, to dismay, to pragmatic realpolitik:
Friends of the Earth President Erich Pica: "We commend Senators Boxer and Kerry for their dedication to combating the important problem of climate change but we cannot support a bill that fails to solve the problem. Overall the draft is riddled with loopholes and does not go far enough to protect the planet."
Frances Beinecke, President of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC): "This bill will help curb climate change, strengthen our economy, and make our country more secure. It will help generate jobs, reduce our reliance on foreign oil and create a healthier future for all of us. And it will put Americans back to work, making our country the world leader in the green technologies that are driving growth in the global marketplace."
Senate climate bill stricter on emissions, Washington Times: "Sen. Inhofe, an opponent of the cap-and-trade plan, said Tuesday that the bill will almost certainly pass Mrs. Boxer's committee, which is dominated by Democrats who back the approach. But he said Democrats cannot yet muster the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster threat on the Senate floor without deals that address the concerns of individual senators."
Kerry 'convinced' climate bill has a shot, The Hill: "[Sen. John] Kerry, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and coauthor of the Senate climate bill -- along with Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) -- framed the need for the legislation as a national security issue...But after a razor-thin vote to get the climate bill out of the House, some observers have expected an even steeper uphill climb for the climate bill in the Senate, a charge Kerry rejected...The Massachusetts Democrat said it was 'no accident' that former generals and other national security experts would be on hand to support the climate bill ..."
Senate Climate Bill Will Aim at 20 Percent Greenhouse Gas Cuts by 2020
Published September 29, 2009 @ 03:31PM PT
The introduction of a Senate climate bill appears to still be on track for tomorrow. The measure will target a 20 percent emissions cut below 2005 levels by 2020, and 83 percent by 2050 -- sharper than the House bill. It will also keep the price of carbon allowances at or below $28 per ton of carbon.
This and more from The Washington Post, which has posted what it calls a "close-to-final version of the bill." The legislation is still under revision, reports the Post, but "will make it easier for businesses to compensate for their carbon pollution by expanding the available pool of domestic offsets by 40 percent compared to the House-passed climate bill."
No specifics on how those allowances will be allocated, however; perhaps Sens. Kerry and Boxer are leaving that space open for the inevitable battle to come.
The bill will also contain provisions to protect the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to regulate greenhouse gas pollution -- recently targeted for elimination by Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) -- as well as getting communities of 200,000 or greater population to work toward energy-efficient transportation, by undertaking planning for public transportation and bicycle paths.
Videos to Watch: Climate week highlights, what's next in int'l talks
Published September 27, 2009 @ 02:43PM PT
Above: Climate advocates are striving to contain growing worries that the December climate talks in Copenhagen will be a bust. In this video made just as the G20 summit wrapped up, Kumi Naidoo, chair of the Tck Tck Tck climate mobilization campaign (and incumbent director of Greenpeace), encourages people to get active in their communities, churches, mosques, temples, and clubs. Naidoo and others believe it's crucial that citizens to contact their leaders and demand that they reach a "fair, ambitious and binding" climate treaty agreement in December.
It has been an inconclusive "Climate Week." The world's major economic powers made few significant moves on curbing global warming, and produced no major public breakthroughs in deadlocked climate treaty negotations.
On the activist side, things were a good deal more inspiring:
The Global Wake-up Call saw thousands of people worldwide performing creative, cheerful street actions and calling their political leaders to support a strong climate treaty. This "Human Countdown" in New York City last Sunday kicked off the week's activist events:
The film "The Age of Stupid" had a star-studded evening opening in New York City. The film takes a black-humored backwards look at our era, when no one acted fast enough to stave off global warming. Gillian Anderson! Moby! Heather Graham! Stephen Baldwin!
[[There, my SEO for the week is accomplished.]]
The Yes Men pranked New York City and the media with their mock "climate change edition" of the Rupert "Fox News" Murdoch-owned tabloid, The New York Post:
"SPECIAL EDITION" NEW YORK POST from The Yes Men on Vimeo.
More activist moments, and the anti-climatic policy roundup, after the jump.
Climate at the G20: Obama to press cuts in fossil fuel subsidies
Published September 24, 2009 @ 09:10AM PT
After three days of an all-climate schedule in New York City, featuring Tuesday's all-day United Nations Climate Summit, I'm now in Pittsburgh to cover the meeting of the Group of 20 (G20) major economies. My thanks to Grist and G20Voice for helping me to be here.
Given that the heads of state chewed over global warming at the United Nations Climate Summit on Tuesday, where will climate figure into tomorrow's G20 agenda of meetings?
According to reports, it's on the list of confab issues -- "Fresh from the UN general assembly in New York, heads of government and a vast diplomatic entourage will descend on Pittsburgh today to kick off two days of talks on economic stability, financial regulation, climate change and bankers' bonuses," reports the Guardian.
President Obama is expected to put a stunner of a demand on the G20 table, as my Grist colleague Dave Roberts notes: that nations stop subsidising fossil fuels, which could cut 12% of global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Since fossil energy subsidies dwarf those going to renewables, such a move would also likely transform energy prices, better reflecting the true costs of dirty energy while making clean more competitive.
There's also the not-small matter of how much aid wealthy nations will provide to poorer nations to help them mitigate and adapt to climate disruptions -- buzzworded as "climate financing." "Wealthy nations promised in 2001 to provide the 49 least developed countries $2 billion for immediate climate change adaptation, but they only funded about a 10th of that," reports Solve Climate. "Since then, the UNFCCC has estimated the cost of global adaptation to be between $40 billion and $170 billion a year through 2030, and more recent studies now suggest the costs will be far higher — with the price growing each year the world delays action on climate change."
An Open Letter From Van Jones: 'What you can do'
Published September 17, 2009 @ 06:03PM PT
Van Jones e-mailed this message to friends and supporters on Tuesday, Sept. 15. It's his first public comment since resigning from the White House on Sept. 6:
Dear Friends:
My family and I want to thank everyone for the outpouring of love and support that we have received over the past week or so. I resigned from the White House on Sept. 6, and I have remained silent since then—in keeping with my promise not to be a distraction during a key moment in the Obama Presidency.
Over the past several days, however, many people have been asking how they can help and what they can do.
The main thing is this: please do everything you can to support both President Obama and the green jobs movement. Winning real change is ultimately the best response to these kinds of smear campaigns.
I ask everyone to:
NY Senate's Bipartisan Vote Jump-starts $5B Green Jobs/Bldg Plan
Published September 15, 2009 @ 06:23PM PT
Start spreading the news: A newly-passed law in New York State will use the proceeds from auctions of carbon emissions credits to fund a massive statewide weatherization-and-green-jobs-creation program.
And a Republican state senator bucked the party line to help pass the bill.
Last Friday, the State Senate passed Green Job/Green New York Act. The legislation will channel $112 million in proceeds from auctioning carbon emissions credits (at the market created via the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative) into starting up a $5 billion energy-efficiency program -- which will lower energy costs for New York households, cut the state's greenhouse gas pollution levels, and create thousands of jobs.
Republican State Sen. Thomas Morahan co-sponsored the bill with Democratic colleague Darrel Aubertine. Morahan's support led to a resoundingly bipartisan vote to pass the bill.
