Posts by mike @change.org
-
Did Rural Farmers Kill The Chance Of a Copenhagen Protocol?
-
Al Gore: 'Civil disobedience has a role to play'
-
Why is Newsweek Lobbying for the Oil Industry?
Failing On Tar Sands and Climate Leadership, Canada Has Lost All Credibility
Published November 20, 2009 @ 07:54AM PT
Why is Canada going to Copenhagen with no real plan to combat climate change, no money on the table, and severely lagging behind the rest of the world? Being responsible for producing some of the world's dirtiest oil may have something to do with it. Agit Pop have created an awesome video (below) that explains how Canada's tar sands project is the largest and most destructive project on earth with a "toxic sacrifice zone" the size of England. A video explains how destructive the project is to wildlife, to the environment, to native people, and to Canada's reputation around the world.
Exploiting the world's dirtiest oil, and causing so much environmental damage, must not stand whilst countries around the globe are trying to unite to fight climate change. As if that wasn't enough to damage Canada's reputation, it's "You First" stance is further eroding its credibility. As an op-ed in the Winnipeg Free Press notes, "On climate change we have no moral authority at all." Not only has Canada reneged on its Kyoto promises but its lack of leadership sees Canada burying it's head deep in the tar sands, not prepared to take action on climate change.
Angry Mermaid Award Nominates Worst Climate Lobbyists
Published November 19, 2009 @ 04:11PM PT
The Angry Mermaid Awards is highlighting and promoting the worst company or business lobby who have done the most to prevent real change taking place by promoting false solutions to climate change. So who exactly is sabotaging effective action on climate change?There's everyone from American Petroleum Institute's (API) astroturfing campaign, faking a grassroots campaign against the US Climate Bills to Monsanto and the Round Table on Responsible Soy (RTRS) who claim soy to be climate-friendly when in fact it has severe social and environmental impacts. And let's not forget Royal Dutch Shell who the Angry Mermaid Awards explain are "actively investing in the energy-intensive tar sands, at the same time as pushing unproven Carbon, Capture and Storage." Having spent $2.4 million lobbying politicians, they're working to weaken climate legislation and are worthy nominees for the Angry Mermaid. They are exactly the people it's worth getting angry about at Copenhagen.
We'll have two bloggers from Change.org covering COP15, the UN Climate Change Conference, keeping you up to date on the policy decision being made (or not being made) and all the activism happening on the ground, as it happens. There are a lot of people trying to derail a global deal, but we'll continue to fight for a comprehensive and effective Copenhagen Protocol.
Photo: Jazonz
There's Still Hope for a Climate Deal at Copenhagen
Published November 18, 2009 @ 10:42AM PT
It may seem like anything less than a replacement to the Kyoto Protocol will make the Copenhagen climate conference an absolute failure. With years of negotiation behind us, and Kyoto needing updating, it's the perfect time to make an agreement. But some fear that Obama was last week signaling that there would be no binding agreement made, instead some vague political agreement. Most took that to mean: no progress, and more delays.
However, President Obama stated a political agreement wouldn't be so weak, but be "an accord that covers all of the issues in the negotiations, and one that has immediate operational effect." Putting something into 'operational effect' is important, indicating that Copenhagen won't be all talk, and some action will result. Obama further explained: "We must rally the world." The climate campaign manager for Greenpeace China isn't so convinced, explaining that this pre-conference talk of making an agreement about making a future agreement provides "a lot of room for different interpretations, ranging from a real ambitious climate rescue deal to another meaningless declaration." He think there is still a chance: "The real test is still at Copenhagen."
So the conference hasn't failed yet, and significant progress may still be made. David Turnbull, writing at Grist notes that "there is nowhere near consensus on such a delay approach; in fact, dozens of countries oppose it and are still wishing—and fighting—for more." There is hope that a range of positive and serious measures will arise from talks at Copenhagen, don't write it off just yet.
EU Shows Cap and Trade Works, Exceeding Emission Reduction Targets
Published November 16, 2009 @ 03:22PM PT
Cap and trade works. An up-and-running EU scheme is proving how effective it can be, reports TNR. After Kyoto Protocol promises, the EU stepped up and agreed to cut emissions by at least 8% of 1990 levels, promising to do so by 2012. Part of this scheme involved the Emissions Trading Scheme which after some initial missteps is succeeded in pricing carbon and encouraging cuts. The effect of this? Way above the 8% target, EU nations are expected to cut emissions by 13% of 1990 levels, exceeding Kyoto demands. It's still not enough, but it's encouraging progress.
There has been some creative accounting — financing clean-energy projects in the developing world, and purchasing carbon credits from countries that are below their targets for emissions — but overall the policies enacted have been successful. However, as TNR report, Chinese imports haven't helped things, as they've created higher emissions that the EU is responsible for. This only emphasizes how important it is to secure a binding global deal.
Do the UK Government's Climate Change Commericals Go Too Far?
Published November 13, 2009 @ 10:29AM PT
The UK government has taken some serious steps to mitigate climate change, but have they now gone one step too far? Alongside setting legally binding emission reduction targets in recent years, they've also started to air PSAs which have come under attack for being too scary. Apparently, explaining the seriousness of the huge-threat to mankind, and presenting the reality of the situation, isn't cool if it's scary.
Reporting on the adverts, the Christian Science Monitor asks: "Is frightening the public into changing their behavior really the world’s last hope?" The UK government has paid $10 million to air the minute long "bedtime stories" in which a father reveals the "horrible consequences" of climate change, with a monster representing climate change flooding and destroying homes.
Some fear that making people feel guilty for their actions makes them shut down and not take in the message, but the message is a clear one: This isn't just a little problem that we need to clear up, this is a problem that the next generation are going to feel the full force off. Indeed, 75 per cent of people explained that they would "make lifestyle changes now if they knew climate change was going to affect their children." In motivating the public to take action, presenting the true reality is required, no matter how frightening. Perhaps we need to remember to return the scare to our government, and remind them that their jobs are at risk unless they use their time in power to set serious and binding targets, encourage other countries to do the same, and ensure developing countries are well funded to make changes themselves.
Since it's Friday the 13th, go and give you self a little scare and watch the advert.
Brazil Pledges Dramatic Cuts to Emissions, Sets Example
Published November 11, 2009 @ 10:44AM PT
Brazil is having a good year. In fact, it has been having a few good years with poverty decreasing, literacy increasing, and the 2016 Olympics in Rio potentially crowning another nine years of achievement. But when it comes to setting carbon emission reduction targets the country isn't playing catch up, but leading the way. Brazil's government pledges to reduce emissions by around 40 per cent of the projected emissions levels in 2020 emissions were no action were taken.
But even cutting emissions by 40 per cent of 2020 levels may not be enough, "Scientists say rich nations with long polluting histories, like the US, need to cut emissions by 25-40% by 2020 on 1990 levels," report the Guardian. So cutting emissions based on 2020 levels may miss the target to help reduce atmospheric levels of Co2.
But Brazil are doing much more than other nations, and is expected to soon announce plans to cut deforestation by 80 per cent. The country's Chief of Staff was honest and upfront about their announcement which comes less than a month before Copenhagen; he said "What Brazil is doing is a political gesture ... We still believe that the responsibility belongs to the developed countries." Fearing impasse, they are hoping to lead the U.S. into making significant cuts. The director of public policies for Greenpeace Brasil explained that the progress was good, but that concrete targets would be needed to guarantee the commitment.
Photo credit: Leszekwasilewski
Ban-Ki Moon Wants Religious Leaders to Join Fight Against Climate Change
Published November 06, 2009 @ 07:41AM PT
Visiting Windsor Castle in England, UN Secretary General Ban-Ki Moon explained to the gathered crowd of religious leaders from a wide variety of faiths that "you are the leaders who can have the largest, widest and deepest reach." Running half of the world's schools, and being among the world's biggest investors and opinion makers, he explained that religious leaders have the opportunity to make a huge difference in combating climate change, around the world, and in every culture.
The Church of England is already promising to cut carbon emissions by 42 percent by 2020, whilst there are Muslim initiatives to make the Hajj pilgrimage more environmentally sound. But perhaps we're not looking sufficiently far into the nature of belief. A man was recently sacked from his job in England due to his beliefs about climate change. He appealed and will now be allowed to contest the sacking on grounds of discrimination due to “religion, religious belief or philosophical belief.” Religion leaders can help fight climate change and would be a huge ally to have onside, but many already have the feel strongly enough in their beliefs to fight it themselves, even when it puts their job and livelihood at risk.
