Monday, December 7, 2009

56 Papers in 45 Countries: Climate in "profound emergency", and a Blog

Hi. The top article is the priority. I've added the blog so you can
at least see that such exists, maybe worth while logging on to. I
personally found it fascinating, per se, and as indication of a vast,
diverse gathering around the summit. As you like it.

Ed

From: "RICHARD MENEC" <menecraj@shaw.ca>


http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1004051277

56 Papers in 45 Countries Publish Joint Editorial

By E&P Staff

Published: December 06, 2009 7:10 PM ET

NEW YORK

Tomorrow 56 newspapers in 45 countries take the perhaps unprecedented step
of speaking with one voice through a common editorial. Many if not most will
publish it on the front page, warning of a "profound emergency." (as this
was written yesterday, the editorials came out today. -Ed)

The Guardian of London, which helped draft the editorial, published it
today, with a note at the end. Here it is.

Unless we combine to take decisive action, climate change will ravage our
planet, and with it our prosperity and security. The dangers have been
becoming apparent for a generation. Now the facts have started to speak: 11
of the past 14 years have been the warmest on record, the Arctic ice-cap is
melting and last year's inflamed oil and food prices provide a foretaste of
future havoc. In scientific journals the question is no longer whether
humans are to blame, but how little time we have got left to limit the
damage. Yet so far the world's response has been feeble and half-hearted.

Climate change has been caused over centuries, has consequences that will
endure for all time and our prospects of taming it will be determined in the
next 14 days. We call on the representatives of the 192 countries gathered
in Copenhagen not to hesitate, not to fall into dispute, not to blame each
other but to seize opportunity from the greatest modern failure of politics.
This should not be a fight between the rich world and the poor world, or
between east and west. Climate change affects everyone, and must be solved
by everyone.

The science is complex but the facts are clear. The world needs to take
steps to limit temperature rises to 2C, an aim that will require global
emissions to peak and begin falling within the next 5-10 years. A bigger
rise of 3-4C — the smallest increase we can prudently expect to follow
inaction — would parch continents, turning farmland into desert. Half of all
species could become extinct, untold millions of people would be displaced,
whole nations drowned by the sea. The controversy over emails by British
researchers that suggest they tried to suppress inconvenient data has
muddied the waters but failed to dent the mass of evidence on which these
predictions are based.

Few believe that Copenhagen can any longer produce a fully polished treaty;
real progress towards one could only begin with the arrival of President
Obama in the White House and the reversal of years of US obstructionism.
Even now the world finds itself at the mercy of American domestic politics,
for the president cannot fully commit to the action required until the US
Congress has done so.

But the politicians in Copenhagen can and must agree the essential elements
of a fair and effective deal and, crucially, a firm timetable for turning it
into a treaty. Next June's UN climate meeting in Bonn should be their
deadline. As one negotiator put it: "We can go into extra time but we can't
afford a replay."

At the deal's heart must be a settlement between the rich world and the
developing world covering how the burden of fighting climate change will be
divided — and how we will share a newly precious resource: the trillion or
so tonnes of carbon that we can emit before the mercury rises to dangerous
levels.

Rich nations like to point to the arithmetic truth that there can be no
solution until developing giants such as China take more radical steps than
they have so far. But the rich world is responsible for most of the
accumulated carbon in the atmosphere – three-quarters of all carbon dioxide
emitted since 1850. It must now take a lead, and every developed country
must commit to deep cuts which will reduce their emissions within a decade
to very substantially less than their 1990 level.

Developing countries can point out they did not cause the bulk of the
problem, and also that the poorest regions of the world will be hardest hit.
But they will increasingly contribute to warming, and must thus pledge
meaningful and quantifiable action of their own. Though both fell short of
what some had hoped for, the recent commitments to emissions targets by the
world's biggest polluters, the United States and China, were important steps
in the right direction.

Social justice demands that the industrialised world digs deep into its
pockets and pledges cash to help poorer countries adapt to climate change,
and clean technologies to enable them to grow economically without growing
their emissions. The architecture of a future treaty must also be pinned
down – with rigorous multilateral monitoring, fair rewards for protecting
forests, and the credible assessment of "exported emissions" so that the
burden can eventually be more equitably shared between those who produce
polluting products and those who consume them. And fairness requires that
the burden placed on individual developed countries should take into account
their ability to bear it; for instance newer EU members, often much poorer
than "old Europe", must not suffer more than their richer partners.

The transformation will be costly, but many times less than the bill for
bailing out global finance — and far less costly than the consequences of
doing nothing.

Many of us, particularly in the developed world, will have to change our
lifestyles. The era of flights that cost less than the taxi ride to the
airport is drawing to a close. We will have to shop, eat and travel more
intelligently. We will have to pay more for our energy, and use less of it.

But the shift to a low-carbon society holds out the prospect of more
opportunity than sacrifice. Already some countries have recognized that
embracing the transformation can bring growth, jobs and better quality
lives. The flow of capital tells its own story: last year for the first time
more was invested in renewable forms of energy than producing electricity
from fossil fuels.

Kicking our carbon habit within a few short decades will require a feat of
engineering and innovation to match anything in our history. But whereas
putting a man on the moon or splitting the atom were born of conflict and
competition, the coming carbon race must be driven by a collaborative effort
to achieve collective salvation.

Overcoming climate change will take a triumph of optimism over pessimism, of
vision over short-sightedness, of what Abraham Lincoln called "the better
angels of our nature".

It is in that spirit that 56 newspapers from around the world have united
behind this editorial. If we, with such different national and political
perspectives, can agree on what must be done then surely our leaders can
too.

The politicians in Copenhagen have the power to shape history's judgment on
this generation: one that saw a challenge and rose to it, or one so stupid
that we saw calamity coming but did nothing to avert it. We implore them to
make the right choice.
* This editorial will be published tomorrow by 56 newspapers around the
world in 20 languages including Chinese, Arabic and Russian. The text was
drafted by a Guardian team during more than a month of consultations with
editors from more than 20 of the papers involved. Like the Guardian most of
the newspapers have taken the unusual step of featuring the editorial on
their front page.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E&P Staff

===============================
Support the alternative online news service "Fresh Ink" by forwarding this
article and subscribe link below to a friend. To view previous postings or
subscribe: http://booksinternationale.info/mailman/listinfo/freshink
===============================

_______________________________________________
Rad-Green mailing list
Rad-Green@lists.econ.utah.edu

***

From: "dorinda moreno" <fuerzamundial@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 11:21 AM
Subject: Climate change meetings in Copenhagen blog

Original source: Neil Tangri <neil.tangri@gmail.com>

Hi folks,

I wanted to let you know that I am blogging from the climate change
meetings in Copenhagen. I am part of a large delegation of waste
pickers and their allies who are fighting off false solutions (such as
waste incinerators) and trying to persuade governments to redirect
climate funds to some of the Earth's poorest people -- informal sector
recyclers. You can see our posts and some great videos here:

http://frontlineagainstclimatechange.inclusivecities.org

cheers,

Neil

Waste pickers are on the frontlines of the fight against climate change,
earning livelihoods from recovery and recycling, reducing demand for natural
resources, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Los Recicladores son en los avances de la lucha contra el cambio climático,
ganando su sustento de la recuperación y el reciclaje, reduciendo la demanda
de recursos naturales, y reduciendo las emisiones de gas del efecto
invernadero.
Contributors

- Julian <http://www.blogger.com/profile/16359569204580333552>
- Rhonda WIEGO and Inclusive
Cities<http://www.blogger.com/profile/08703180053767415066>
- Neil Tangri <http://www.blogger.com/profile/14551531719025851636>
- Demetria
Tsoutouras<http://www.blogger.com/profile/08178784706679283682>
- Lucia Fernandez <http://www.blogger.com/profile/09011413985439687966>


Friday, December 4, 2009 Here come the experts! I'm in day two of power
point presentations, parallel sessions and conference-speak. I have endured
disparaging remarks about public opinion and unscientific, sentimental
opposition to incinerators. My head is swimming with engineering equations
and flow diagrams. But I can't help feeling that somewhere we lost sight of
the forest for the trees.

My suspicion is confirmed as one engineer arrives at the end of his
presentation. After a long, technical discourse on the thermal and
electrical efficiency of waste incinerators, lower and higher heating
values, he arrives at a startling conclusion: we should stop landfilling,
mechanical-biological treatment and even composting – and instead send all
our municipal waste to incinerators for energy recovery!

This woke me with a start. How in the world had he arrived at this
conclusion? (He did have the decency to note that re-use and recycling were
still good ideas). As Enzo Favoino rose to protest (to applause), I looked
back through his presentation notes. It took me several minutes to unpack
the formulae and assumptions. Ultimately, I realized, his presentation was
about energy efficiency: how to generate the most usable energy from waste.
Yet compost creates no usable energy directly. So he ignored the many
non-energy virtues of compost: returning organic matter and micronutrients
to the soil; reducing the need for petroleum-based fertilizer; improving
soil structure; the fact that composting operations create ten times as many
jobs as incinerators…all of it. He was only interested in energy production.

It was a good lesson in perspectives. Each of us sees the world through our
particular set of lenses: we see what we are trained and conditioned to see.
I always ask, how would this work in Bombay, my former home? But a
combustion engineer, who looks at everything produced by humanity and nature
as fuel, sees things differently. He asks, how can I make energy from this?
Of course, the answer is: burn it in a modern incinerator.

I wondered how many city officials or policy-makers, hearing this
presentation, would unpack the assumptions and perspectives that lay behind
it. And how many would simply be bowled over by his complicated equations,
his evident mastery of thermodynamics, and simply accept his recommendations
at face value.

And where does that leave us, the advocates for justice and a healthy
environment? Do we have to become engineers to argue with the engineers and
their blinders? Or can we pry open the conversation to include a wider
perspective of what benefits humanity? And if we do, can we still win the
argument?
Links

- Red Recicladores <http://www.redrecicladores.net/>
- Protect the Climate through
Recycling!<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/1843/t/8473/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=605>
- Waste Pickers and Climate
Change<http://www.inclusivecities.org/climatechange>


Thursday, December 3, 2009 The Smell of Greenwash
It hits you as soon as you step off the plane. Copenhagen airport is covered
in climate ads from well-funded NGOs. Grim-faced leaders of the future admit
their responsibility for disaster; polar bears plead earnestly for a patch
of ice.

Corporate greenwashing is in full force, too. Coca-Cola, notorious for the
destruction of groundwater resources in India and its complicity in the
murder of trade union leaders in Colombia, is selling Hope. Petroleum
companies advise us that every imaginable fuel source – even the dirtiest –
will be needed in the future. If you believe the hype, there are no bad
guys. Climate change is a problem without a culprit and everyone wants to be
a part of the solution.

So it is that I am sitting in an industry conference on waste management and
climate change. Yes, waste management. Behind the well-known polluters like
coal, petroleum, logging and airlines are a host of other dirty industries
which are geared up to engage in the climate summit. They recognize that a
truly successful climate agreement would force them out of business, or to
change beyond recognition. But a sham agreement – ah, there's money to be
made.

Whether or not Copenhagen produces an agreement that will ensure climate
stability and climate justice, one thing is certain: climate is a growth
industry. Governments and consumers alike are channeling increasing funding
towards green industry. Carbon trading alone is already a US$16 billion a
year industry. With that kind of money on the table, it behooves every
industry to reinvent itself as a climate solution.

But which technologies and practices are truly climate-friendly, and which
are simply business-as-usual, dressed up in a green disguise? As a society,
and as governments, we are ill-equipped to separate the culprits from the
saviors. After a decades-long, concerted attack on independent science, the
mavens who should advise us are embattled and compromised. And that leaves
the door open to just about anyone who has something to sell.

At the waste management conference, there's a lot of reassuring talk about
composting and recycling. But it's clear that the big money is to be made
elsewhere – the sponsors are mostly big incinerator companies. Their devices
sell at US$400 million apiece and up – so they're not going to go away
quietly. No, they have brought their salesmen here to talk up incinerators
as "renewable energy."

Don't stop to think about that too much. Don't ask if it makes sense to try
to burn our way to climate stability. Don't ask how we can reduce carbon
emissions by burning more. Don't ask which planet we're going to mine to
replace all those destroyed resources. Just leave that to the experts. After
all, they're on the industry payroll – they surely know best.
posted by Neil Tangri at 4:02 AM
<http://frontlineagainstclimatechange.inclusivecities.org/2009/12/smell-of-greenwash.html>|
1
Comments<http://frontlineagainstclimatechange.inclusivecities.org/2009/12/smell-of-greenwash.html#comments>
Previous

- Here come the
experts!<http://frontlineagainstclimatechange.inclusivecities.org/2009/12/here-come-experts.html>
- In
Transit<http://frontlineagainstclimatechange.inclusivecities.org/2009/12/in-transit.html>
- The Smell of
Greenwash<http://frontlineagainstclimatechange.inclusivecities.org/2009/12/smell-of-greenwash.html>
- Videos from KKPKP - waste pickers discuss climate
...<http://frontlineagainstclimatechange.inclusivecities.org/2009/12/videos-from-kkpkp-waste-pickers-discuss.html>
- Waste pickers heading to
Copenhagen<http://frontlineagainstclimatechange.inclusivecities.org/2009/12/global-alliance-of-waste-pickers-and.html>

Archives

- December
2009<http://frontlineagainstclimatechange.inclusivecities.org/2009_12_01_archive.html>

--
Dorinda Moreno, Fuerza Mundial
Elders of 4 Colors 4 Directions
Hitec Aztec Collaborations/FM Global
We Are the Ones We Have Been Waiting For!
<fuerzamundial@gmail.net>

Corazon Del Pueblo Cultural Center
4814 International Blvd.
Oakland, CA 94601
510 532-6733

No comments:

Post a Comment