The End of COP15, and the end of the Fast. So how do we all feel?

Cross-posted from www.climatejusticefast.com

===

Distress, confusion, hurt, anger? Hope, passion, energy?

Emotion! Let it all out, people!

Personally, I am feeling a very strange and beautiful feeling today, as we concluded the fast, after 43 days entirely without food, coinciding with the disappointing end of COP15. It is a mix of feelings – disappointment at politics mixed with hope for the future, met expectations (regarding the politicians’ lacklustre performances) mixed with passion and love, excitement and inspiration (for the peoples’ climate movement), and finally, a very strange sensation of taste in my mouth and nutrition in my belly once more.

For COP15, the tension and the expectations were high. A ‘fair, ambitious and binding’ deal was called for by 12 million people across the world. We got none of it. Instead we got a huge disappointment. COP15 will not go down in history as the moment when the world, humanity, people of all nations and creeds, came together and united for the common good of all future generations.

What a pity. It is actually pitiful. A complete shame.

So what the hell happened, and what do we do now?

Deepa Gupta, one of the founders of the Indian Youth Climate Network, who has been solidarity-fasting with us on one meal a day throughout the COP, summarised it well: “For those of you who don’t yet know, last night 5 countries – US, China, India, Brazil and South Africa brokered a deal – the Copenhagen Accord, and then proposed it to the rest of the world to accept. It has no legal committments, it aims to target 2 degrees (but their actions are setting them to 3 degrees rise) [ed: while the most vulnerable nations are calling for 1.5 degrees, because 2 degrees is a death-sentence for them, and 3 degrees is runaway global warming, a death-sentence for all of us], and the money on the table is not only lacking, but it has many strings attached. Essentially it’s an easy way for countries who didn’t want to make strong committments, to get away with it. It has completely disregarded the UN framework that attempts to far more democratically put all countries on an equal footing, and shut out the voices of majority of the world.”

The best blow-by-blow that I’ve seen of what happened in the plenary sessions after Obama left Denmark, somewhere around 2am, after signing this weird ‘Copenhagen Accord’ is here and here and here. Pretty much everything that comes out on www.itsgettinghotinhere.org is awesome anyway, and it will offer a variety of insights from a number of different perspectives. It covers some of the things that were said in plenary between 3am and 7am on Saturday morning. The whole conference wrapped up a few hours after that. What a god-damn mess.

In the time since the summit concluded, I’ve received these messages (these are just a selection) via facebook, twitter, email, and blog-comments etc:

“I am sad and I am angry.”

“Why are we always waiting on Obama?”

“I just cannot believe what came out of the talks, in a state of shock and disbelief that it has come to nothing. Prevention demands foresight and our sorry excuses for leaders suffer a dire lack of foresight.”

“Obviously deeply distressed and disappointed about what happened in Copenhagen yesterday/over the past fortnight.”

There is obviously a whole lot of emotion flying around at the moment. But I urge everyone not to slip into despair – because the movement is growing, it is powerful, and because we will win.

Instead of despairing and feeling frustrated, use your frustrations and your despair and express it to create change. If you are emotional, use it in a constructive way, channel it to where you feel it will have most effect. Make your emotion felt. Rock somebody’s core.

Whether it is your family, a friend, or a politician, and whatever type of action it is – a phone call, a protest, a letter, I have learnt from the Climate Justice Fast that our emotions, our heart-actions, are some of the most powerful actions that we can take.

Another comment:

“US Senate just approved $626 billion defense bill; 3.4% pay raise 4 military; just like that, but drag feet on planet survival & health bill at Copenhagen. Says it all!”

This last point is right on – this is pretty much the 3rd ~US$600 bn bailout for the US military alone since 2008. The total amount required for climate adaptation and sustainable energy/mitigation in developing countries every year is US$400bn annually, maximum, worldwide.

Personally, despite all of this crap that has come out the end of COP15, I am feeling more hopeful and more powerful than ever, because in spite of political failure and inaction, I can see the wheels off change turning and greater public dicontent churning up everywhere.

Political turmoil is what we need right now.

The world needed a shake-up and it got one with the failure of COP15.

This stuff – the ‘Divided Nations’ instead of the ‘United Nations’ – is way better than some nice-looking political declaration that makes people across the world believe that politicians are going to save them. If we’d had that sort of outcome, it would have given the world’s population false hope. Maybe now the general public will start to find this interesting, and will start to pay attention.

Even better, maybe they will start to get really pissed off and actually get off the couch and do something about it. Maybe now we will start to activate our ‘participatory democracies’ again – and beyond just the usual activist core. Maybe now people will participate and realise that if their global democracies aren’t functioning, it is up to them as citizens to hold their governments accountable.

Ultimately, this is why I have decided to come off the fast – because I have a whole lot more to give to the climate change movement yet. There is a whole lot of work to be done. And I need to get stuck into doing it – as does each and every one of us.

So what do we do from here?

Do we give up? Do we take a break post-Copenhagen and come back to campaigning in 6 months time? No! We regroup, we refresh our souls, strong in the knowledge that we have a powerful movement that will not give up – a movement that will keep fighting until we win.

So what do we do? We ACT, of course!

I wanted to share these other messages that I have received in the last day. They demonstrate our call to action now, and are a pointed reminder that in times of despair, the only path to hope is THROUGH action:

“If you hold love for me, your child, friend, sibling or your future, you will need to participate in this fight for freedom. … Please work with me – each one of you – to secure it.”

“The fight continues and somehow we will, all of us together, make the changes necessary. It was incredible to have taken part in the worldwide fast that began on the 17th. It proved (again) that the world wants to change asap.”

“I have also come to the conclusion that the idea our elders are wise, is false. In fact you and your (younger) generation are the “elders” with a deeper wisdom and compassion that must be heeded!”

And while it is poor practice for a blogger (me) to reference a blog (Ted’s) that references another blog by the original blogger (me), I wanted to post a link to from Ted Glick – evidently someone who feels the exact same way that I do! Check it out: http://www.climatejusticefast.com/blog/entry/day-44-day-1

Why I got "Climate Justice" tattooed on my neck.

Cross-posted from "Its Getting Hot In Here" and "Climate Justice Fast!"
--

Three reasons:

1. The principle
2. The permanence
3. I like tattoos.

From the least important to the most important, these three reasons explained…

Reason 3 – “I like tattoos”

Tattoos are showy, extraverted and individualistic, all of which match my personality well. I have to admit that these traits have brought criticism in some activist circles, but hey, I grew up on the performance stage, dancing, in a circus, and public speaking. I enjoy attention and the chance that it gives for me to express my ideas and principles. Hence this blog-post too, I suppose.

My mother worries that this tattoo is somewhat strange and psychologically unhealthy, but I feel that it is totally sane to wear my principles not only ‘on my sleeve’ but on my actual body. It is a non-violent action, a sign of my commitment to the Climate Justice movement.

After all, the cultural history of tattoos goes along with them being a sign of membership of some ‘club’, or a sign of rebellion. Therefore, I think that it is perfectly appropriate to use a tattoo to signify my membership of this rebellious, reforming, and beautiful movement!

Does anyone else have any activist or climate-activist tattoos? Post in the comments with links to your pictures!

Reason 2 – “The permanence”

A tattoo is for life, clearly. You can’t just put it on and take it off like a uniform or a style – it is part of you, forever. I enjoy thinking that one day a grandchild of mine might ask me what “climate justice”, written on my wrinkly old neck, means.

The permanence of it means a recognition that the struggle for Climate Justice will be a lifelong one – not ending in Copenhagen this December, or at some other arbitrary date – and I will work to achieve it throughout my whole life.

By the time we hit 2050, when I turn 65 (How old will YOU be?), I expect that the last 40 years of work by our movement(s) will have contributed to some incredible changes – the phasing out of fossil fuels, a rediscovery of our human values and the demise of GDP-growth-at-all-costs thinking.

The thought of that sustainable future is so tasty, so delicious, that I have no problem committing myself to decades of work to achieve it.

Reason 1 – “The principle”

Climate Justice means so many things to so many people, and to me it has two components parts – international justice, and intergenerational justice.

Internationally, the rich and over-consuming world has largely been blinded (or has chosen to turn a blind eye…) to the distant effects of its own overconsumption. The ecological, economic, cultural, security, and atmospheric effects of overconsumption have tied those in the developing world – those who have contributed least to the problem, and with the least resources to address the issues – to a harsh reality of resource shortage, poverty, colonialism, violence and now, ever-increasing climate disasters. This is unjust, and needs to be made right. An admission of fault, an acceptance of responsibility, and true global collaboration, trust and goodwill will be required to achieve justice – and hopefully we can get the World Bank out of the way too! Climate finance is key to achieving justice – see the post here.

The other part of ‘international’ climate justice comes not at the large-scale financial level, but at a much more local and personal level – achieving equity in our personal levels of consumption, across the world – the reduction and rejection of overconsumption, wherever it exists, is crucial to achieving justice. We only have one planet, so what gives any individual the right to live with an ecological footprint that exceeds their fair share?

When we deeply interrogate our values, when we give up the notion that we have the ‘right’ to over-consume (to fly, to drive, to constantly update our wardrobes, to build huge mansions, to eat meat or imported fruit shipped across the world – to do any of these things to excess), and when we start to actively reduce our overconsumption while permitting those who need it to increase their consumption to adequate, safe levels, then we start to achieve climate justice.

The final part of the principle for me is ‘intergenerational justice’. What sort of world do we want to hand to today’s youth and to future generations? To allow our greed, lust, gluttony, and sloth (From the ’seven deadly sins’, which now seem to be the ’seven key marketing principles’) to cause future generations suffering is far from ‘just’.

So, that is why I had “climate justice” tattooed on my neck!

As part of my commitment to this principle, I have also committed myself to Climate Justice Fast! – A hunger strike in the Gandhian tradition, in the lead-up to and at Copenhagen itself. Today, October 2, is actually Gandhi’s birthday, and so it seems appropriate to close this post with a quote of his:

“Under certain circumstances, fasting is the one weapon God has given us for use in times of utter helplessness”"

www.climatejusticefast.com

At the G8 - a spectacular missed opportunity

First published on Its Getting Hot In Here:

http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2009/07/09/laquila-g8mef-and-false-solutions

>>>

This afternoon in l’Aquila, I just had the displeasure of sitting in the front row of the press conference for US President ‘Oh-Bummer’, Australian Prime Minister ‘Krudd’ and Climate-Sceptic Italian PM Berlusconi.

Coverage of the conference is, predictibly, fairly positive:

But from a climate perspective, basically, it sucked. This is a blog post full of regret – regret for doing nothing, and letting something crap happen.

I knew that Obama was speaking there, and so I prepared a fun, media-worthy 30 second intervention to yell out during question time from the journalists. But suddenly, when ‘my’ Prime Minister Kevin Rudd finished speaking, the leaders all shook hands and quickly exited the stage, being ushered off out of the building and to ’safety’, away from the press. There was no question time, and no chance for questioning or commenting on what was announced. Reporters could only ‘report’ on the leaders words, and received no alternative criticism.

It was all over so quickly, and from the moment that it finished, until now, I’ve been regretting just sitting there in the front row and listening passively to their announcements, patiently waiting for my turn that never came.

The press conference followed the conclusion of today’s MEF (Major Economies Forum), a meeting of the 17 highest emitting nations, collectively responsible for more than 75% of global emissions. This month’s MEF was held in conjuction with the G8, in Italy.

If you haven’t already heard from the media machine, Kevin Rudd today ‘officially launched’ the GCCSI – the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute – now officially backed by MEF nations. Australia has ‘kick started’ the initiative with a $100 million yearly investment into ‘clean coal’ research, and it’s already begun functioning.

The central objective of the GCCSI is:

to accelerate the commercial deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects, to ensure their valuable contribution in reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

Frankly, the last thing that we need right now is more investment in coal – whether ‘clean’ or not. We need to be phasing out fossil fuels, as fast as possible.

I’m seriously kicking myself. Why didn’t I stand up and yell? I found out afterward that it was being live-streamed on the BBC. There were 50 other cameras there, the room was full with 300 reporters. All the G8 heads of state were in the room, plus Australian climate Minister Penny Wong. Any expression of dissent would have gone worldwide instantly, if I had followed through.

But I just wasn’t angry enough, and I wasn’t thinking straight. I was exhausted from overworking myself the last three days, due in large part to the two-hour transit to and from the conference centre each day. I’ve never seen a better argument for being a sustainable activist – because you never know when your fullest mental capacities will be required. I only knew one hour beforehand that the conference would happen, and was totally underprepared.

Since it finished, I’ve been running over what I would have said if I’d had my wits about me and judged the situation well. It is all so clear in hindsight. I should have jumped up and yelled something like this:

“Kevin Rudd, that’s bullshit! Clean coal is not a real solution to climate change. The only reason that you’re is investing in CCS is because of the huge amounts of coal to be mined in Australia, for profit! More coal investment is the last thing that we need right now. What we need to solve climate change is a global institute for solar and wind. Renewable energy has never seen that scale of investment. This is clearly a case of vested interests influencing government policy. And Obama, surely you know that this is the truth. How can you stand there and just let him say this?”

If only I had actually done it. I would sacrifice a lot to have a time machine go back a few hours and try it again.

As Rudd started to speak, other G8 leaders – Gordon Brown, Taro Aso, Sarkozy etc – walked out on the stage and Obama remarked to Rudd ‘It looks like you’ve got backup.’ And he needed it. The bombshell of more investment in fossil fuels as a ’solution’ to climate change was cemented by those leaders shaking hands on stage afterward. It was surreal to be in the presence of it. It all seemed so fake and unreal – inaccessible, like watching TV.

In a haze, I walked back to the G8 media centre, passing by a group of Australian government bureaucrats handing out GCCSI propaganda to all the journalists. Disappointed with myself and gradually getting more enraged. When I got back, I ran around the press centre to all the media outlets, saying that I am Australian and that I’d like to provide comment to any stories that they’re filing about Kevin Rudd’s announcement. But they weren’t interested. The media cycle was wrapping up for the day and the announcement was over.

Evidently, my opinions just aren’t that important at the G8. There was no space to express them, and I felt totally powerless.

But I suppose, that isn’t so surprising, as I was just an individual, attending the G8.

So very true to the criticisms often expressed of it, the G8 succeeded in shutting down debate and creating the illusion of progress. The barrier of the stage and the formal, for-power-holders-only atmosphere – not to mention the fact that I was one of few activists actually inside the G8, due to the opaque accreditation process – meant that I lost my nerve and couldn’t find the courage or space to tell it like it is to the global media there. My heart is very heavy, and this blog post is the next best way that I have to express my views.

With only a few months until Copenhagen, this MEF announcement may have been one of the last high-profile chances to demonstrate the failure of developed nations to actually address climate change. I was there, I had the chance, and I blew it. From now, the only media comment that we can get on this CCS Institute is national-level at best. Now, the GCCSI and the G8 have cemented a false appearance of climate leadership, in the eyes of the global public.

To conclude, today I learnt a three valuable activist lessons:

1. Express dissent at every opportunity. Never hold it inside. Always tell it like it is.

2. Get enough sleep to think straight

3. Don’t expect governments to do the right thing – we’ve got to push for the solutions ourselves.

A vision of the future - the fundamental values shift

I was recently in Bonn, Germany, for the UNFCCC talks, sitting on a panel of young people at a conference side event where we talked about 'Re-defining pragmatism'. (We felt the need to re-define 'Political Pragmatism', as it's the USA's new excuse for not doing enough on climate change. For more on the topic, see this excellent post by Jennie Hatch (SustainUS) on ItsGettingHotInHere.org)

During the questions, I was asked one of the toughest questions that I've had to publicly respond to in a long time... "What is your vision for the sustainable world you want by 2050?"

We spend a lot of time in the environment/climate/justice movement talking about how we need to "take urgent action now". We're very good at talking about the changes that we want to see - more renewable energy, an end to coal and fossil fuels. We want to decrease wasteful, unnecessary consumption and have 'cyclical' production systems, recycling, instead of linear extract-use-waste systems. We want an end to materialism. We want an end to deforestation. We want people in the least developed countries to have clean water to drink and access to healthcare. We want bicycles, buses and trains, not cars. And if cars, fully electric. We want polluting activities to cost more so that there is a financial incentive to be environmentally friendly. We want a fundamental shift in the way that our society, industry and economy operate. We want local food production and an acknowledgement that we're currently overpopulated and need, somehow, to address this. We don't want biofuels that destroy livelihoods or which compete with food production. But limited amounts of biofuel, from agricultural wastes, if they would otherwise be wasted are ok. We want you to eat less red meat.

We say that we - today's youth - are the generation who are willing to make these changes reality over the next four decades, during our working lifetimes. (On this topic, youth in Bonn ran a ridiculously-successful T-shirt campaign called 'How old will you be in 2050?' Personally, I'll be 65, just retiring after dedicating my working life to the sustainability transition.)

But when all of these changes are in place, in 2050, how will the world be different? What sort of society will we have? What is the key difference between now and then? We know that we need 'a fundamental shift', but what to?

This was the question that I was confronted with (and surprised by) at the side-event last week. While I know the answer in my heart, and have thought about it in countless 'visioning sessions, I have rarely had to articulate it.

I started to list the things that I outlined above... "We want a world where all the electricity comes from renewables, no more fossil fuels, a world where people ride their bike instead of driving cars." It was about this moment that I realised that this was fairly predictable, and not what the Texan reporter was looking for.

"But all that is the obvious stuff. What we need between now and 2050 is a fundamental revolution in our social values. Where we understand and focus on what really makes us happy, instead of how much money we make."

Without wanting to waffle for too long in responding to the question, I pointed to an end to wasteful materialism and the capitalist growth-at-all-costs economy, and referred to the study of happiness and the happiness economics that they do at Harvard, and other places. (Sorry about the poor links... Sadly, there is no single repository of happiness information on the inter-webs, at least that I can find.)

I also managed to briefly outline a few aspects of my vision - a world where we no longer 'work jobs we hate to buy shit we don't need' (A great Tyler Durden quote from Fight Club), where we entertain ourselves with arts, music, sport, community, cooking and sharing meals with friends, instead of going to the shopping mall to 'consume'.

There's obviously a lot more work to be done here. Communicating a positive vision of the sustainable future - and not just the stuff/technology/practices that it has in it, but the values which underpin it - is crucial to our success. I'd like to start collecting these visions and over the next few months, synthsise them into something that is widely communicable. Then we can make this vision not just personal, but political too.

Two experiences that I've collected in the past five months of travelling give me some indication of the world that I want to head towards

1. It's Easter Sunday in Amsterdam today, and everything is shut. People are staying in their houses and not out on the streets as they usually are in Amsterdam. (This isn't part of the vision, I'm just setting the scene for what comes next - we still need shops and businesses to be open in a sustainable world!) So it's been quiet all day. I'm standing on the balcony listening to some birds and sipping tea. Then, suddenly, emerging from around the corner, an eclectic four-piece band (Trumpet, Saxaphone, Tamborine and Accordion!) bursts into my quiet reality playing sweet Samba music. They're colourfully dressed, appear totally impromptu, and are a mix of ages and races. There is no choreography. I watch for a few minutes as they make their way down my street - windows are opening, people stepping onto their balconies to see what is going on. Some are even dancing. The street is alive! When the song finishes and the band disappears around the next corner, a polite round of applause comes from the balconies, and people return to whatever they were doing before. Such random acts of beauty and kindness are something that I envisage being not just 'random' in 2050, but a focus of our existence.

2. In January I had the immense pleasure of living at London's Temporary School of Thought. Just today I came across a notepad where I had recorded some reflections on the school, which I've never had the opportunity to share. I think that this goes some way towards the vision that I am trying to articulate.

"From day one in this society we are made to conform, to be less free, with less choice - through indoctrination by our school systems, through fear of authority, through rigid moral rules imposed on us by closed-minded religions, and through the false ideals that advertising causes us to pursue. In direct opposition to this conformity, the community here [at the Temporary School] is totally free - we educate ourselves how and when they want to, we explore the nuances of existence and life, and we are constantly discovering new ways of thinking.

An authority unto itself alone, with no recognition or even acknowledgement of systemic powers, the moral code of the School and it's friends is based only on mutual respect, trust and community. The ideals shared here have nothing to do with what advertising has told us to aspire to.

Unplugged but switched on.

Truly alive. Safe, beautiful, fun, welcoming. Coommunity.

Independent. Free. Temporary.

Always expressing love as the joyful recognition of each other's existence,
even on the quieter, harder days.

This is the joyfully cobbled together, temporary, school of thought.

We drink lots of tea."

~* A sustainable world is a creative world. *~

Please share your thoughts and comments.

UN talks in Bonn - the USA is back, but not good enough

I am currently blogging regularly on 'ItsGettingHotInHere.org' (a global youth-movement blog site, third most read climate blog in the world) reporting from the UN climate conference. This blog, being a relevant discussion on 'climate movement' thinking, I have re-posted here.

The original blog on IGHIH is available at: USA is back - but still not good enough (Sunday 29th)

--

THE USA IS BACK! But still not good enough.

Well, that was refreshing.

A few hours ago, the new US administration made their first public input into the UNFCCC process! It was yet another pleasurable reminder that G.W. Bush is gone, and that his legacy is slowly dying.

Todd Stern, the new, much-celebrated, US Special Envoy on Climate Change, opened his speech with a message that he transmitted ‘direct from President Obama’:

“We’re very glad we’re back. We want to make up for lost time, and we are seized with the urgency of the task before us.”

This was received with a rapturous, enthusiastic round of applause - the sound of hope ringing in the room.

“You will not here anyone on this very skilled US team cast doubt upon the science of global climate change,” said Stern, again demonstrating how substantive a shift occurred on November 4. Every climate campaigner in the room, when reflecting back to the dark days of climate scepticism in the US administration, seemed to breathe a sigh of relief at that moment.

Stern even said that ‘the US acknowledges their responsibility as the largest historical emitter of greenhouse gases’. Another big step forward. Another sign of hope. With all this hope, it would have been so easy to get carried away.

Thankfully though, Tuvalu, an AOSIS member, brought the room back town to earth after America spoke, warning us to take the words of the US with a grain of salt:

“It is beholden on me as a representative of the most vulnerable country in the world to speak out. We welcome the United States remarks… but we hope the rhetoric is matched by reality.”

With this in mind, I’d like to offer some advice to US activists - don’t pause your campaigning to celebrate the government’s rhetoric. Let’s not be stupid about this. Don’t ‘give them time’ without criticism, naively hoping that they’ll do the right thing, translating good words into real action. If you don’t push them, hard, then you won’t be rewarded. We learned this the hard way in Australia, after the election of Kevin Rudd, November 24 2007. Let me tell a story to illustrate…

Consider the parallels with the current ‘Obama situation’:

One week after his election, our new PM Kevin Rudd publicly ratified the Kyoto protocol, as his first act of government. It was publicly acclaimed as great leadership. The nation celebrated. I was proud to be Australian again. However, in 20-20 hindsight, it wasn’t anything more than a symbolic act, and it certainly wasn’t ‘international leadership’ – it didn’t step out ahead of the pack and lead, it just brought Australia into the ‘Kyoto club’ that they had been out of for so long. Our praise of the government’s action went on for a little too long.

Following ratification, the Rudd government announced a year-long plan of reports, drafts and papers, which now seems to have been designed to placate the Australian environment movement, create the illusion of progress, and distract us from ‘the big picture’. The Garnaut interim report, draft report and review; the green paper and then the white paper on emissions trading, the targets. Australia’s targets were originally scheduled to be announced well before Poznan, but were instead delayed until the day after COP14 closed – and then they were only 5-15% below 2000 levels – a total disaster.

The ‘Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme’ – government-speak for Australian emissions trading – is now so poorly designed and gives out so much compensation to polluters, that the climate movement in Australia is now saying that it must be scrapped in its current form. One year after the ‘inspiration’ of ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, Kevin Rudd and Penny Wong have demonstrated that in fact, they are still laggards, not leaders on climate.

And all this because many of us in the climate movement naively trusted them, placing our hope in government to bring us the solutions that we wanted, and ‘giving them the space’ to make progress through the bureaucracy. It didn’t work.

America – don’t make the same mistake. Don’t trust Obama to save your nation’s climate policies without serious pushing from the people. You of all nations know that healthy public criticism is what makes democracy great.

I am personally extremely concerned - especially after today’s press conference in Bonn of American climate NGOs - about the polite restraint within the NGO sector from criticism of the new administration.

Isn’t it clear to the US movement that Obama’s target of 1990 by 2020 is entirely inadequate, and needs to be shifted? Even the old, conservative IPCC science says ‘at least 25-40% below 1990 levels’ is what is required by 2020. Al Gore’s ‘We’ campaign is talking about 100% renewable energy by 2020. That sort of thing is visionary, and that is where government policy needs to go.

In Todd Stern’s presentation in plenary today, he referred to the possibility of agreeing on a global reduction target of ‘more than 15% by 2020′. Sorry, America, but that’s the wrong answer. The global target needs to be at least 40% by 2020. 15% is strongly likely lead to runaway climate change, and destroy our future. Not good enough, Obama.

Additionally, they new administration is still focused on the ‘economic growth’ paradigm, and on ‘capitalising’ on the solutions to climate change – which is a long way from the total paradigm-shift that many in civil society are now calling for, as an opportunity emerging from the financial crisis. Also, Obama is persisting with Bush’s ‘Major Economies’ process – having renamed it from the ‘Major Economies Meeting’, or ‘MEM’ to the ‘MEF’ instead. That’s ‘F’ for ‘Forum’. By including 16 ‘major economies’ in parallel talks to the UN climate process, they are effectively removing the voices of the smaller, poorer, and more climate-vulnerable nations from their discussions. It is not morally correct.

So what should the movement do about this? While it’s great that Obama is not Bush, and we should smile about that – let’s not allow this to create an illusion that the new administration is somehow a ‘leader’ on climate. Because they certainly aren’t. The real leadership is from the most vulnerable nations – AOSIS and LDCs. And it is with them that our solidarity and focus should lie.

Strengthening the US climate movement is crucial. The next four decades to 2050 will be a people-led but government-supported sustainability revolution. The USA, even after today’s progress, still doesn’t support the growing movement. The government is still a block to action.

If Obama’s reputation as ‘a movement man’ – a man who listens to the people – has any substance to it, then the path to removing their block and replacing it with support is clear.

As the climate movement, we need to not pause, but to keep criticising, encouraging and pushing the USA in the right direction, in negotiations and in the public sphere, until their political walls give way.

–

For more Bonn coverage on IGHIH, click these links :

1. The pre-sessionals (Friday 27th)

2. AOSIS rocks it on mitigation targets (Saturday 28th)

3. USA is back - but still not good enough (Sunday 29th)

Climate Change in the Queensland Election

Please allow me to take this blog on a brief excursion from general climate-movement discussions right down to the local politics of my state...

==
Great void in voters' choice


Climate change has not been addressed by either side of politics in the election campaign, writes Anna Keenan
–

Welcome to Queensland: home of the Great Barrier Reef, the Daintree rainforest, the Torres Strait Islands and the pastoral Darling Downs.

Sadly, each of these Queensland icons is at serious risk from climate change – whether by drought, cyclones, ocean acidification, rising sea-levels, or, as our North-Queensland communities will testify, floods.

Given the importance of addressing climate change to our state's future, you'd think that it would feature more highly in the 2009 election debate.

But the climate change elephant – the most important issue of our time – doesn't even appear to be in the room. It's been crowded out by the global credit crisis, the police force, and payroll taxes.

Meanwhile, in our so-called 'sunshine state', renewable and sustainable initiatives are going offshore because they can't find support here.

Welcome to Queensland, the coal state: home of the Bowen basin, Macarthur coal, and what is set to become be the world's largest coal export terminal at Gladstone.

We've got certainly a lot to change, and the public is ready for it.

Shifts in our climate policies would yield not only massive environmental dividends, but also political dividends for whichever major party proposes them.

Thus far, however, the election campaign hasn't hasn't mentioned 'sustainability' or 'climate change' in a statement from either side.

It's no wonder they are avoiding talking about it – the climate policies of both the ALP and the LNP are decidedly lacklustre.

On the ALP's watch, Queensland Rail is set to invest $654 million – not on the ailing suburban train network in Brisbane, but on expanding the capacity of regional coal export lines.

They introduced the 'ClimateSmart' package which could be more accurately renamed 'ClimateStupid', handing out over twice the amount of public money to rich coal companies than to start-up renewables. Bligh and her government are masters at the fine art of spin over substance.

Could 'The Borg' and the LNP be a better option? Let's explore...

They do rightly oppose the Traveston Dam, which the ALP – aided by recent rainfall – conveniently 'postponed' until after this election. They could do some serious damage in north-Brisbane ALP marginals by talking up their water management credentials.

Another saving grace, aside from Traveston, is the LNP campaign website – vastly superior to 'Anna4Qld'. Perhaps that's where they directed the massive donations from mining magnate Clive Palmer – one of the biggest vested interests in Queensland coal.

It's no wonder Palmer wants to help get Springborg into power – The Borg is a climate change denier who thinks that global warming is caused by volcanoes. The LNP doesn't even have a climate change policy.

These are facts that Bligh would do well to highlight – the 2007 federal election showed that the electorate no longer tolerates climate sceptics like John Howard.

To make matters worse, the Nationals wing of the LNP still wants to reverse Queensland's restrictions on broadscale landclearing.

So a change of government wouldn't help the climate, or future generations, at all.

With no confidence in either major party on this crucial issue, the best election outcome that I am left to hope for is that enough people vote for independents or minor parties to produce a hung parliament.

Perhaps such a result would be consistent with what seems to be the prevailing view of Queensland politics – that we dislike the mess that the ALP is making of our state, but that the LNP, our only major alternative, is totally incompetent.

Maybe with a hung parliament, both main parties would start listening to community concerns, competing with each other to determine which policies – on climate, healthcare, education, crime or industry – are the most representative of public opinion.

After all, isn't that the way that democracy is meant to work?

On climate, I suspect that the vast majority of Queenslanders – especially those who've recently been flooded out or hit by worsening cyclones – would put their vote behind a major party that came out with an inspiring, Obama-style, science-based climate policy.

The right policies could build a sustainable state, with renewable industries, public transport, and green jobs that Queenslanders could be proud of. Policies like that are just such an easy sell in an election campaign, and look a hell of a lot better than becoming the world's largest coal exporter.

Sadly, I sincerely doubt that such a seismic shift could happen in the next two weeks. Nonetheless, I issue the challenge to Bligh and Borg: give us – the citizens who you work for – a climate policy that we could vote for with pride.

Go find the climate elephant, and make it your pet issue.

==

Anna Keenan is a youth climate advocate and a presenter with Al Gore's Climate Project – Australia.

http://freepdfhosting.com/493f84b7c9.pdf

Hope is resurgent

For some reason, it seems that at every turn in my current travels, I see the word 'hope'...

With growing numbers of people refusing to succumb to the roles of 'over-consumer' and 'ladder-climber' that our current society would have us automatically take up, perhaps 2009 is the year that democracy becomes democracy again, the year that we choose to take our future path into our own hands, and the year that we change the course of history...



Coming next week: 'How to Smash Apathy', and 'Other Definitions of Hope'