The Copenhagen Diagnosis, published 24 Nov 09, is a badly-needed 60-page scientific review article summarizing hundreds of peer-reviewed research papers that have appeared since the last official IPCC report (AR4). The authors, 14 of whom are IPCC members. are climate scientists I. Allison, N. L. Bindoff, R.A. Bindoff, R.A. Bindschadler, P.M. Cox, N. de Noblet, M.H. England, J.E. Francis, N. Gruber, A.M. Haywood, D.J. Karoly, G. Kaser, C. Le Quéré, T.M. Lenton, M.E. Mann, B.I. McNeil, A.J. Pitman, S. Rahmstorf, E. Rignot, H.J. Schellnhuber, S.H. Schneider, S.C. Sherwood, R.C.J. Somerville, K.Steffen, E.J. Steig, M. Visbeck, A.J. Weaver. Published by The University of New South Wales Climate Change Research Centre (CCRC), Sydney, Australia. The CCRC published a similar overview before the 2007 Bali conference.
US first nations urge people of good will to rely on indigenous knowledge and ancient wisdom to save the planet. The Declaration (below) was written at a 4-day workshop by indigenous peoples of North America, whose forebears lived 14,000+ years in a "green economy" in harmony with nature. It demands full respect of aboriginal rights and an end to false solutions such as geo-engineering, nukes, CCS (so-called "clean coal') and carbon trading.
“It wasn’t our culture, our economies that created this problem, but we are facing the disproportionate and deadly effects of this incredible climate crisis...The way out of this mess is for us is to look at our own intellectual heritage, our indigenous ingenuity to address the problems,” says Daniel Wildcat, director of the Haskell Environmental Research Studies Center and co-chair of the Workshop. The Declaration will be taken to COP-15 at Copenhagen.
THE MYSTIC LAKE DECLARATION
From the Native Peoples Native Homelands Climate Change Workshop II:Indigenous Perspectives and Solutions
At Mystic Lake on the Homelands of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, Prior Lake, Minnesota
November 21, 2009
As community members, youth and elders, spiritual and traditional leaders, Native organizations and supporters of our Indigenous Nations, we have gathered on November 18-21, 2009 at Mystic Lake in the traditional homelands of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Dakota Oyate. This Second Native Peoples Native Homelands Climate Workshop builds upon the Albuquerque Declaration and work done at the 1998 Native Peoples Native Homelands Climate Change Workshop held in Albuquerque, New Mexico. We choose to work together to fulfill our sacred duties, listening to the teachings of our elders and the voices of our youth, to act wisely to carry out our responsibilities to enhance the health and respect the sacredness of Mother Earth, and to demand Climate Justice now.
We acknowledge that to deal effectively with global climate change and global warming issues all sovereigns must work together to adapt and take action on real solutions that will ensure our collective existence. We hereby declare, affirm, and assert our inalienable rights as well as responsibilities as members of sovereign Native Nations. In doing so, we expect to be active participants with full representation in United States and international legally binding treaty agreements regarding climate, energy, biodiversity, food sovereignty, water and sustainable development policies affecting our peoples and our respective Homelands on Turtle Island (North America) and Pacific Islands.
We are of the Earth. The Earth is the source of life to be protected, not merely a resource to be exploited. Our ancestors’ remains lie within her. Water is her lifeblood. We are dependent upon her for our shelter and our sustenance. Our lifeways are the original “green economies.” We have our place and our responsibilities within Creation’s sacred order. We feel the sustaining joy as things occur in harmony. We feel the pain of disharmony when we witness the dishonor of the natural order of Creation and the degradation of Mother Earth and her companion Moon.
We need to stop the disturbance of the sacred sites on Mother Earth so that she may heal and restore the balance in Creation. We ask the world community to join with the Indigenous Peoples to pray on summer solstice for the healing of all the sacred sites on Mother Earth.
The well-being of the natural environment predicts the physical, mental, emotional and spiritual longevity of our Peoples and the Circle of Life. Mother Earth’s health and that of our Indigenous Peoples are intrinsically intertwined. Unless our homelands are in a state of good health our Peoples will not be truly healthy. This inseparable relationship must be respected for the sake of our future generations. In this Declaration, we invite humanity to join with us to improve our collective human behavior so that we may develop a more sustainable world – a world where the inextricable relationship of biological, and environmental diversity, and cultural diversity is affirmed and protected.
We have the power and responsibility to change. We can preserve, protect, and fulfill our sacred duties to live with respect in this wonderful Creation. However, we can also forget our responsibilities, disrespect Creation, cause disharmony and imperil our future and the future of others.
At Mystic Lake, we reviewed the reports of indigenous science, traditional knowledge and cultural scholarship in cooperation with non-native scientists and scholars. We shared our fears, concerns and insights. If current trends continue, native trees will no longer find habitable locations in our forests, fish will no longer find their streams livable, and humanity will find their homelands flooded or drought-stricken due to the changing weather. Our Native Nations have already disproportionately suffered the negative compounding effects of global warming and a changing climate.
The United States and other industrialized countries have an addiction to the high consumption of energy. Mother Earth and her natural resources cannot sustain the consumption and production needs of this modern industrialized society and its dominant economic paradigm, which places value on the rapid economic growth, the quest for corporate and individual accumulation of wealth, and a race to exploit natural resources. The non-regenerative production system creates too much waste and toxic pollutions. We recognize the need for the United States and other industrialized countries to focus on new economies, governed by the absolute limits and boundaries of ecological sustainability, the carrying capacities of the Mother Earth, a more equitable sharing of global and local resources, encouragement and support of self sustaining communities, and respect and support for the rights of Mother Earth and her companion Moon.
In recognizing the root causes of climate change, participants call upon the industrialized countries and the world to work towards decreasing dependency on fossil fuels. We call for a moratorium on all new exploration for oil, gas, coal and uranium as a first step towards the full phase-out of fossil fuels, without nuclear power, with a just transition to sustainable jobs, energy and environment. We take this position and make this recommendation based on our concern over the disproportionate social, cultural, spiritual, environmental and climate impacts on Indigenous Peoples, who are the first and the worst affected by the disruption of intact habitats, and the least responsible for such impacts.
Indigenous peoples must call for the most stringent and binding emission reduction targets. Carbon emissions for developed countries must be reduced by no less than 40%, preferably 49% below 1990 levels by 2020 and 95% by 2050. We call for national and global actions to stabilize CO2 concentrations below 350 parts per million (ppm) and limiting temperature increases to below 1.5ºc.
We challenge climate mitigation solutions to abandon false solutions to climate change that negatively impact Indigenous Peoples’ rights, lands, air, oceans, forests, territories and waters. These include nuclear energy, large-scale dams, geo-engineering techniques, clean coal technologies, carbon capture and sequestration, bio-fuels, tree plantations, and international market-based mechanisms such as carbon trading and offsets, the Clean Development Mechanisms and Flexible Mechanisms under the Kyoto Protocol and forest offsets. The only real offsets are those renewable energy developments that actually displace fossil fuel-generated energy. We recommend the United States sign on to the Kyoto Protocol and to the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
We are concerned with how international carbon markets set up a framework for dealing with greenhouse gases that secure the property rights of heavy Northern fossil fuel users over the world’s carbon-absorbing capacity while creating new opportunities for corporate profit through trade. The system starts by translating existing pollution into a tradable commodity, the rights to which are allocated in accordance with a limit set by States or intergovernmental agencies. In establishing property rights over the world's carbon dump, the largest number of rights is granted (mostly for free) to those who have been most responsible for pollution in the first place. At UN COP15, the conservation of forests is being brought into a property right issue concerning trees and carbon. With some indigenous communities it is difficult and sometimes impossible to reconcile with traditional spiritual beliefs the participation in climate mitigation that commodifies the sacredness of air (carbon), trees and life. Climate change mitigation and sustainable forest management must be based on different mindsets with full respect for nature, and not solely on market-based mechanisms.
We recognize the link between climate change and food security that affects Indigenous traditional food systems. We declare our Native Nations and our communities, waters, air, forests, oceans, sea ice, traditional lands and territories to be “Food Sovereignty Areas,” defined and directed by Indigenous Peoples according to our customary laws, free from extractive industries, unsustainable energy development, deforestation, and free from using food crops and agricultural lands for large scale bio-fuels.
We encourage our communities to exchange information related to the sustainable and regenerative use of land, water, sea ice, traditional agriculture, forest management, ancestral seeds, food plants, animals and medicines that are essential in developing climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies, and will restore our food sovereignty, food independence, and strengthen our Indigenous families and Native Nations.
We reject the assertion of intellectual property rights over the genetic resources and traditional knowledge of Indigenous peoples which results in the alienation and commodification of those things that are sacred and essential to our lives and cultures. We reject industrial modes of food production that promote the use of chemical substances, genetically engineered seeds and organisms. Therefore, we affirm our right to possess, control, protect and pass on the indigenous seeds, medicinal plants, traditional knowledge originating from our lands and territories for the benefit of our future generations.
We can make changes in our lives and actions as individuals and as Nations that will lessen our contribution to the problems. In order for reality to shift, in order for solutions to major problems to be found and realized, we must transition away from the patterns of an industrialized mindset, thought and behavior that created those problems. It is time to exercise desperately needed Indigenous ingenuity – Indigenuity – inspired by our ancient intergenerational knowledge and wisdom given to us by our natural relatives.
We recognize and support the position of the International Indigenous Peoples Forum on Climate Change (IIPFCC), operating as the Indigenous Caucus within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), that is requesting language within the overarching principles of the outcomes of the Copenhagen UNFCCC 15th Session of the Conference of the Parties (COP15) and beyond Copenhagen, that would ensure respect for the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples, including their rights to lands, territories, forests and resources to ensure their full and effective participation including free, prior and informed consent. It is crucial that the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) is entered into all appropriate negotiating texts for it is recognized as the minimum international standard for the protection of rights, survival, protection and well-being of Indigenous Peoples, particularly with regard to health, subsistence, sustainable housing and infrastructure, and clean energy development.
As Native Nations and Indigenous Peoples living within the occupied territories of the United States, we acknowledge with concern, the refusal of the United States to support negotiating text that would recognize applicable universal human rights instruments and agreements, including the UNDRIP, and further safeguard principles that would ensure their full and effective participation including free, prior and informed consent. We will do everything humanly possible by exercising our sovereign government-to-government relationship with the U.S. to seek justice on this issue.
Our Indian languages are encoded with accumulated ecological knowledge and wisdom that extends back through oral history to the beginning of time. Our ancestors created land and water relationship systems premised upon the understanding that all life forms are relatives – not resources. We understand that we as human beings have a sacred and ceremonial responsibility to care for and maintain, through our original instructions, the health and well-being of all life within our traditional territories and Native Homelands.
We will encourage our leadership and assume our role in supporting a just transition into a green economy, freeing ourselves from dependence on a carbon-based fossil fuel economy. This transition will be based upon development of an indigenous agricultural economy comprised of traditional food systems, sustainable buildings and infrastructure, clean energy and energy efficiency, and natural resource management systems based upon indigenous science and traditional knowledge. We are committed to development of economic systems that enable life-enhancement as a core component. We thus dedicate ourselves to the restoration of true wealth for all Peoples. In keeping with our traditional knowledge, this wealth is based not on monetary riches but rather on healthy relationships, relationships with each other, and relationships with all of the other natural elements and beings of creation.
In order to provide leadership in the development of green economies of life-enhancement, we must end the chronic underfunding of our Native educational institutions and ensure adequate funding sources are maintained. We recognize the important role of our Native K-12 schools and tribal colleges and universities that serve as education and training centers that can influence and nurture a much needed Indigenuity towards understanding climate change, nurturing clean renewable energy technologies, seeking solutions and building sustainable communities.
The world needs to understand that the Earth is a living female organism – our Mother and our Grandmother. We are kin. As such, she needs to be loved and protected. We need to give back what we take from her in respectful mutuality. We need to walk gently. These Original Instructions are the natural spiritual laws, which are supreme. Science can urgently work with traditional knowledge keepers to restore the health and well-being of our Mother and Grandmother Earth.
As we conclude this meeting we, the participating spiritual and traditional leaders, members and supporters of our Indigenous Nations, declare our intention to continue to fulfill our sacred responsibilities, to redouble our efforts to enable sustainable life-enhancing economies, to walk gently on our Mother Earth, and to demand that we be a part of the decision-making and negotiations that impact our inherent and treaty-defined rights. Achievement of this vision for the future, guided by our traditional knowledge and teachings, will benefit all Peoples on the Earth.
Tebtebbavideo from Indonesian Borneo (Kalimantan)- see more here See also Wikipedia on Dayak peoples and their Kaharingan religion.
A Philippines-based NGO has opened a new Indigenous Climate Portal to bring the voices of native peoples to public attention during COP-15 and REDD negotiations.
Tebtebbta.org says, "The last remaining tropical forests in the developing countries are those which indigenous peoples control or own." They have often had to fight against greedy multinationals, lumber pirates, mining companies, poorly conceived conservation and park projects, corrupt governments, military, police, and private death squads to displace them from their territories. Their strength is not in weaponry, but in "deeply rooted historic, cultural, and spiritual relationships."
"The lands, forests and resources which indigenous peoples' traditionally owned and used are the very basis of their livelihoods, social organization, identities and cultures. Thus, it is to their own interest that these forests are conserved and protected. If REDD is done properly, which means indigenous peoples are involved in designing, implementing and monitoring this and they will equitably share in the rewards and benefits from REDD projects and programmes, then [it will be] a win-win situation for the environment and for development."
Ngaju Dayak see the goddess of the earth and the god of heaven as separate but interdependent beings: in prayer they say, 'the snake befriends the hornbill' (tambon haruei bungai). Divine unity is shown by the sacrificial pole (sanggaran) erected at mortuary festivities (tiwah) in the centre of the village. It shows a snake with lances and above it a hornbill, symbolizing the fusion of underworld and upperworld in total divinity. -- A.H.Klokke. Picture of the tiwah inscribed on a bamboo tube:the sanggaran is at centre right under an upside-down tree of life - click to see clearly
“Faced with the widespread destruction of the environment people everywhere are coming to understand that we cannot continue to use the goods of the earth as we have in the past. . . a new ecological awareness is beginning to emerge - the ecological crisis is a moral issue.”
Pope John Paul II, Jan. 1, 1990, Peace with God the Creator, Peace with all of Creation (paras 1 & 15)
“Alongside the ecology of nature there exists what can be called a “human” ecology, which in turn demands a “social” ecology. All this means that humanity, if it truly desires peace, must be increasingly conscious of the links between natural ecology, or respect for nature, and human ecology. Experience shows that disregard for the environment always harms human coexistence and vice versa.” Pope Benedict XVI, Jan. 1, 2007, The Human Person, the Heart of Peace (para 8)
Connie Hedegaard, Danish Climate Minister set up WWViews to hold a worldwide citizen survey and discussion forum, on actions that need to be taken at Copenhagen. Their answers put political elites to shame.
4,000 participating citizens from 38 countries were chosen, reflecting the demographic diversity of their respective countries and regions. They were provided with unbiased information about climate change and the COP15 negotiations, and asked to discuss it with their friends.
Across nations, income groups and geographical regions, citizen responses are remarkably consistent: · Seal the deal at COP15: an obligatory Copenhagen treaty to replace Kyoto · Keep global warming below 2 degrees C · Developed (Annex 1 countries) should cut emissions 25-40 % or more by 2020 · Fast-growing economies should also reduce emissions by 2020 · Low-income developing countries should limit emissions · Establish an international financial mechanism for mitigation aid · Punish non-complying countries · Make technology available to everyone [no patent payments, corporate kickbacks, capture and control of export market share] · strengthen and add to United Nations [not World Bank, giveaways and sales of offsets]
See also the WWViews experts blog, Connie Hedegaard's biography, her June 2009 Greenland Dialogue, and the C40 "green city network" founded by Clinton Climate Initiative. We do not recommend the WWWviews official video wrap-up, which shows a bundle of boring bureaucrats, among a handful of citizens. Its preparatory info videos are visually exciting but accompanied by numbing "father knows best" commentary. For real grassroots opinions see Global Voices Online, and our previous posts on youth , online videos, and networking.
Cartoon by Anthony Piraino, Greensboro NC - see his blog click on cartoon for clearer view Sprawl (13m 42 s, NFB 2009) by Montreal actress, journalist and videographer Tamar Kozlov Two views of Montreal: Dr. David Suzuki at a 2009 youth conference held by C-Vert, an environmental program for youths founded by Stephen Bronfman. They speak about urban sprawl, the dangers of meddling with natural systems (e.g. GMOs) and the state of the planet. David Côté and his chef Chris Eschleman launch Crudessence, a raw / living food restaurant, and speak of a younger generation's hopes of greening the city. ***** See previous post on results of urban sprawl in Duncan BC. Other Citizenshift videos and podcasts at http://citizenshift.ca/categories/environment En français http://parolecitoyenne.org/categories/environnement
She is an award-winning journalist, consultant to UNESCO and other international development agencies, one of the 48 authors of the Philippine Constitution. Her 13 Nov 09 column in the Manila Bulletin is shown here with her permission.
*****
From the findings of several scientists regarding the state of global warming and prospects for the future, some of us would probably just give up and do nothing as we await the arrival of doomsday. A global change analyst, Julian Stargardt, notes that there is no place to hide from climate change. In our interconnected world climate change is related to problems of resource depletion, deforestation, economic crisis, competition for water, pandemic, environmental degradation, all of which are making tremendous impact on the global economy and our entire society. Another writer, Clive Hamilton raises the question: "Is it too late to prevent catastrophic change?" [RSA lecture, Australia 21 Oct 09] as he noted the acceleration of the world’s greenhouse gases emissions.
In the 1970’s and 80’s, global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) from burning fossil fuels increased at 2 percent each year, then trebled to 3 percent after 2000, and is expected to double every 25 years. Both point to China as a country where for the past 10 years the GDP doubled, and with it a greenhouse gas emission of about 23 percent of the world’s total. This is expected to grow to 33 percent by 2030. China and India (with over 6% percent of the world’s emissions and rising) did not achieve their GDP and pollution growth in isolation.
China’s phenomenal increase in foreign investment and demand for its products [by developed countries] can be blamed for its present state.
At the Copenhagen summit next month, the relationship between the economic growth of these countries and other large economies with carbon emission will be on the top of the agenda. China has implemented policies to cut its emission but the expansion of its economy has swamped efforts to lessen its carbon pollution. They and several developed countries may not be ready to commit to massive cuts in greenhouse gas emissions as this would mean loss of economic competitiveness. There will be skeptics (and these have been quite visible in talk shows) and arguments based on surveys which would influence the crafting of a consensus on a global plan of action.
Shortly after Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth graphically portrayed a grim scenario (floods, droughts, melting glaciers, coral destruction, etc.) as a consequence of global warming, three kinds of deniers and skeptics dominated the environmental debate: The first are those who tell us that the climate isn’t changing in unusual ways, or if it is, human activities are not the cause. Then there are those who tell us that we are right, but it does not matter – or OK, it is changing, but it won’t do much harm. And finally, those who would tell us that it matters, but it is too late to do anything about it (It is going to do some real damage, but it is too difficult, or too costly to avoid that, so we will just have to suffer).
Many predict that it might be difficult to arrive at a consensus during the [Copenhagen] summit as world leaders will be divided – between those who think that it is too difficult to do something, and those who are committed to achieving a consensus on a resolution on drastic cuts in carbon emissions.
The assumption of the latter is what most international treaties are anchored on – that we can stabilize the climate at some level, that reducing emission level is feasible, or that we can accommodate 2 or more degrees of warming by adapting to it. The former say it is too late and that this is laughable.
But the less pessimistic observed that the summit must go beyond merely hoping to attain the target of 25-30 percent reduction in emission -- that it must focus on the overload of heat energy and carbon dioxide that is already in our biosphere, and investing in renewable energy resources – organic wastes, treatment of polluted dumpsites, and converting wastes into energy resources.
The Cassandras present a scenario of a runaway climate change challenge – that we cannot regulate the climate; the climate regulates us. The Earth may demonstrate that ultimately, it cannot be tamed and that the human urge to tame nature has only aroused a slumbering beast. [example: Lovelock, The Revenge of Gaia]
Yes, there may not be much time, that we are now almost at the point of no return, but like the optimists, we believe that through skillful strategies in adaptation, mitigation, innovation, and communication, we may still avoid the worst of the damage that climate change can bring about.
The 4,000 year old Somenos Creek site in Duncan BC that is mentioned in Stephen Hume,'Shameful hypocrisy threatens our ancient shared heritage' Vancouver Sun 11 Nov 09, is one that I have been trying to protect from development and restore for over fifteen years.
It is a crime when housing developments are plopped on top of archaeological sites that are, for aboriginal culture, the equivalents of the sacred cities* of Jerusalem, Benares (Varanasi) or Athens. Though we have been able to protect a small portion of this land, the archaeological site is still threatened.
We are trying to buy it from the developer. I am sure if it comes to it there will be folks here who will lie down in front of bulldozers if all else fails.
The protected area is home to the largest Canadian population of a rare violet, viola praemorsa.
Somenos floods due to uncontrolled development Canadian Press photo: on Cowichan First Nation reserve Duncan BC 21 Nov 2009 report by David Polster ----- Understanding why flooding is occurring is the first step in ensuring it doesn't happen again.
It is the floodplain of the Cowichan River and Somenos Creek (that nice flat land where houses and sports fields have been built) and the Somenos Marsh area where infilling has been done to build schools, shopping areas and recreational facilities. Look at a Google Earth image of the Cowichan River below the White Bridge (upper bridge in Duncan) you can see the unnatural straightness of the channel as well as the gravel deposits in the area of the confluence of the Cowichan River and Somenos Creek. You can also see the forest clearing and urbanization of the Cowichan watershed, including the new Cowichan Commons shopping centre and the large bare area on Mount Tzuhalem known as the Cliffs over Maple Bay. I point all these things out because they have all contributed to the flooding that happened last night and today.
When we fill in our marshlands we take away the water storage capacity of this land. When we build dikes around floodplain areas, it squeezes the water into a narrower area, causing it to go higher. When we straighten a river we increase the flow velocities and thus the scouring potential, causing gravel to be moved from the area of straightening to the first open area available. In the case of the Cowichan River this happens to be at the mouth of Somenos Creek. When we create impervious surfaces through the development of storm sewers and shopping centres we increase the speed with which the water runs off the land. Clearing forests from the land also increases peak flows. All of this has combined to cause the flooding we see.
When we play with nature, nature always has the last word. Our failure to respect natural processes is what really caused the flooding, not the heavy rains and high tides.
The Obama-China deal announced 16 Nov 09 gives new life to the Copenhagen process. China is also a lever to move the recalcitrant Senate and G20. Andrew Revkin of the NYTimes gives us the US-China statement and details of its joint plan.
Reading between the lines, we see: 1. The Copenhagen treaty must be "comprehensive" and "immediate" -- this means setting by 19 Dec 09 binding emissions targets for major polluting countries (Annex 1 and BRIC), and promising adequate mitigation funding to poor countries. There is bound to be a lot of slipping and sliding. I will update my summary frequently.
2. Obama's Plan A is ACES legislation, but if blocked by red&bluedog Senators + lobbyists, his Plan B is unilateral Clean Air enforcement by EPA under the SCUS Massachusetts ruling. His deal with China removes one of the favourite Senate excuses, that a China without emissions controls would suck energy intensive industries out of USA. Anyway, the excuse is obsolete: GM and General Electric (and doubtless others) just announced expansion plans there that dwarf their current US operations. Corporate decisions have already been made. Corporate feet have moved, no matter what lips say.
3. There will be subsidies and boondoggles to make US fossil and nuke lobbyists* drool; their "China market" is estimated to grow to $1 trillion a year:
$150 million/5 yr for a bilateral US-China Clean Energy Research Center, including CCS and syngas by Peabody, GE, AES
Electric Vehicles Initiative: joint fuel emission standards, demos in 12 Chinese cities, electric vehicle production & export (probably joint projects with US automakers). Revkin sayspowering EVs with dirty-fuel electicity is the great danger.
new nuclear generators: the gold rush is on with Bechtel, Areva, GE, Hitachi and others (see my list of participants)
Energy Efficiency Action Plan: joint green-building codes, tests and inspector training, joint Forum yearly [=exports]. For details see CSEP. A comment on Revkin's report blames inaction within USA on mortgage lender rules not building codes.
joint Renewable Energy Plan: tech transfer to states and regions, smart grids, joint Forum yearly [=exports]
*Here's an incomplete list of major US players in the above: Bechtel, Goldman Sachs, General Motors, General Electric, Duke Energy, Peabody Coal, American Electric, AES, Aqua International, VantagePoint Venture Partners, Lexecon, Bradbrook, Applied Materials, First Solar, CISCO, Westinghouse, Weyerhauser, American Wind Energy Association, ACORE, Gore's Repower America, Pew Center Climate Tech (and its Feb 2009 Roadmap report by Pew with Asia Society’s Center on U.S.-China Relations, Brookings Institution, Council on Foreign Relations, National Committee on U.S.-China Relations, and Environmental Defense Fund), NRDC, ACCORD, China-U.S. Energy Efficiency Alliance, and Duke U's Nicholas Institute.
4. huge renewables subsidies (labelled "mitigation") from US cap-and-trade will flow apparently to poor countries, but flow right back (via patents, tech transfer, project management, etc) to US-China manufacturers who hope to dominate world market share**, squeezing out Europe which so far leads the field in renewables. This also marks a strategic move away from oil dependency, so the Chinese Peoples' Army, CIA and Pentagon will be onboard. ** cf. Anna Fahey in Grist 17 Jul 09; GE on export strategy 22 Oct 09.
5. a fight for control of $trillions in world "green" financing among Wall St (via bilateral agreements), World Bank carbon funds, over-the-counter offsets, EU-ETS, or a reformed GEF to replace CDM. My guess is that they will cross the finish line in that order. Very bad news. Worse news: part of the pie will be REDD with little MRV -- for example the "conservationist" offsets promoted by CELB in its CCBA Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance.
6. GHG emissions by China are now the world's highest, exceeding US. Also, China's and India's rate of GHG increase is the most rapid in the world, says the latest scientific study by Corinne Le Quéré et al. (see her 17 Nov 09 abstract, and a more readable resume by Bristol U). In a personal interview Le Quéré says 6 degree warming is now possible, because sinks are failing, emissions rising ever faster, tipping points come sooner. This Business As Usual (BAU) path will lead to a "die-off" of 6-8 billion people, 85% of humanity (says James Lovelock, Revenge of Gaia, p.141).
Click on this graph for more visible text and full-screen display
Environmental groups will be happy with the "renewables" in the US-China deal, but not with the (oxymoronic) "clean coal" and nukes, and cap-and-trade boondoggles. NGO watchdogs must bark loudly at the worst of these. If ecojustice groups want to have any influence at all they will have to understand the details, where the devil is, and be willing to sup with the "better" corporate interests, using a long spoon. Are they willing and able to make the effort?
Yunus is the Nobel prize-winning economist from Bangladesh who developed the microcredit system. When he wrote this on 25 Dec 07, Grameen Bank had 7.31 million borrowers, 97% percent of them women. The article is reprinted from his foundation’s website.
*****
Social business is a cause-driven business. In a social business, the investors/owners can gradually recoup the money invested, but cannot take any dividend beyond that point. Purpose of the investment is purely to achieve one or more social objectives through the operation of the company, no personal gain is desired by the investors. The company must cover all costs and make profit, at the same time achieve the social objective, such as, healthcare for the poor, housing for the poor, financial services for the poor, nutrition for malnourished children, providing safe drinking water, introducing renewable energy, etc. in a business way.
The impact of the business on people or environment, rather the amount of profit made in a given period measures the success of social business. Sustainability of the company indicates that it is running as a business. The objective of the company is to achieve social goal/s.
Clarifications on Social Business I am not opposed to making profit. Even social businesses are allowed to make profit with the condition that profit stays with the company, owners will not take profit beyond the amount equivalent to investment. Social business is a new category of business. It does not stipulate the end of the existing type of profit-making business. It widens the market by giving a new option to consumers. It does not intend to monopolise the market and take the existing away option. It adds to the competition. It brings new dimension to the business world, and a new feeling of social awareness among the business people.When we approach the concept of social business from the philanthropy side it looks very convincing and logical. Why everything in philanthropy should be given away. After all our purpose is to achieve the social goal. If some of these goals can be achieved more efficiently and sustainably in a (social) business format why not take that route ?But when you approach it from the orthodox business side, it tends to look a bit out of tune. Why on earth give up profit ? Why should any one run a business without profit ? I understand the surprise perfectly.
Let me clarify : I am not asking any businessman to give up any of their businesses. Nor am I asking them to convert some of their businesses into social business. The idea of "giving up" something creates this shock wave. I am not asking anybody to "give up" anything. All I am saying, if you are worrying about a social problem (while totally engaged in your routine business) I have a message for you, you can make a significant contribution in resolving the problem. If you put your mind seriously into it, you may even open the door to eliminate the problem globally. You can do both : conventional business and social business.It is all up to you to decide whether you want to do a such thing or not. Nobody will raise an accusing finger at you if you do no such thing. But you may feel happy if you do it. I am suggesting a way which may make you a happier person.
A Learning Process It is a great learning process. You are doing things which you never did before. You are thinking in a way which you never did before. You are surprised to see you are enjoying it a lot. You start digging into your experiences to see what is relevant for the task. You check through the reservoir of technology that you are familiar with start contacting the pool of experts that you got to know in your business, to achieve your new goal. You start exploring a new world which was totally unknown to you. You realise that you are now wearing "social business glasses" on your eyes, you see things which you never saw before. You start sensing that your eyes were fitted with "profit-maximizing glasses" all along, while you thought these were your natural eyes in your economic world.
Now when you turn your eyes to your own profit-making businesses you start noticing things which you never noticed before. You bring new-gained experiences from your new business to your old businesses. Slowly you move towards becoming an multi-dimensional person, rather than a robot-like person.
Some people ask me why can't you run businesses with some profit and some social benefit — "doing well by doing good", as it is popularly described.Of course, it can be done. I am never against it. But I am trying go to the ultimate point where you don't make any profit for yourself at all. This is easy to identify, easy to handle in day to day decision making.
When you mix profit and social benefit it gets complicated for the CEO. His thinking process gets clouded. He does not see clearly. More often this CEO will take decision in favour of profit, and exaggerate the social benefit. Owners will go along with it. Social business gives a clear unambiguous mandate to the management. There is no balancing act involved. If you can agree to take a "small" profit, you can also persuade yourself to take zero profit. Once you get there you get rid of all old ways of thinking. You prepare yourself to explore a new world, a new way of seeing things, and doing things in a different way. When you were in the world of a "small profit" you were still operating in the old world, with old ways of doing things, only restraining yourself here and there. Another way to put the same question is : Why can't you allow the investors in social business to get a small fixed profit — say, 1% dividend. My answer is the same. I may describe by saying something like this : you are in a "no smoking" building, you are arguing "Why can't I be allowed to take just one small puff ?" Answer is simple — it destroys the attitude. In Ramadan, Muslims are not allowed to eat or drink until the after the sunset. Why not take a sip of water during the day ? It destroys the strength of the mental commitment. You lose a lot for a small favour. Social business is about making complete sacrifice of financial reward from business. It is about total delinking from the old framework of business. It is not about accommodation of new objectives within the existing framework. Unless this total delinking from personal financial gain can be established you'll never discover the power of real social business.
Sometimes you can set up a technically correct social business with the purpose of making profit through your other companies by selling products or services to this social business company. This will be a clear sabotage of the concept. There may be many other subtle ways by which one can weaken the concept and practice of social business. A genuine social business investors must make all efforts so that he does not walk into this trap unwittingly.
Capitalism has created poverty by focusing exclusively on profit. It built a fairy-tale of prosperity for all. This never happened. That's why Europe decided to entrust the government to take care of poverty, unemployment and health. They were smart enough to figure out the emptiness of capitalism in solving these problems.
*****
See also Wikipedia on Yunus and microfinance. Gandhi on the values shift: "Great nations can hardly be expected in the ordinary course to move spontaneously in a direction the reverse of the one they have followed and according to their notion of value..."
"To avoid major CO2 emission increases in India why don't you (and for that matter Tata) produce mass market electric vehicles? Power plants and power outages are an issue in India, but because pollution from power plants is centralised, it is easier to deal with than emissions from millions of vehicles. Could India lead Asia in electric transport ?"
Our ensuing discussion made four points: 1. electric vehicles are the way of the future. 2. Mahindra has some electric vehicles in production and others in prototype. 3. Mahindra produces the only non-Japan hybrid. 4. "highly efficient" light diesel is likely in the near future.
The other guest, Australian financier Shane Oliver of AMP, added:
Electric vehicles have a much much smaller carbon footprint than petrol or diesel -- even allowing for the "dirty" electricity needed to run them, generated by coal and oil-burning fired power plants.
China, India and other industrialising countries' carbon emissions are increasing exponentially but they are using less polluting technologies than Europe and the US did.
Speaking as an Asian, I pointed out responsibilities for CO2 levels:
The developed world gave us the first 50ppm rise above "normal" 284 ppm
The subsequent 70 ppm (rising fast) comes substantially from the developing world.
Current production methods are more "energy efficient" (less polluting per unit of GDP) but their scale and growth in Asia are making a difference in kind, not just in degree.
The greatest danger is attitudes and policies such as those in the India World Economic Forum. [See the previous post in this blog.]
*****
See also numerous ideas by India's green capitalists in India Microfinance.
India's Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh (above) is being severely criticized by scientists after he questioned that global waming is melting Himalayan glaciers. Ignoring a mass of IPCC reports (whose lowball predictions must be approved by governments), he quoted "junk science" from climate deniers.
His stand is influenced by state-owned Coal India and major polluters. Last year the private Tata Power company got $4 billion from World Bank, Asia Development Bank and other sources for a single mega-plant; India plans to build more than 200 coal-burning plants (some pictures).
She is one of a number of young people all over the world engaged in a Climate Justice Fast. See other stories and videos on that website. Also read about her climate pilgrimage from Korea to Barcelona.
They aim to send a non-violent but powerful message -- "to members of the public who are as yet unaware of the urgency of climate action -- to our leaders, reminding them of the importance and moral consequences of their decisions -- and to inspire those who are already aware of climate change to become more politically active."
*****
My name is Sara Svensson, and I'm from Sweden. Tomorrow is my 25th birthday, but I won't be eating birthday cake this year.
I’ve been involved in different kinds of climate activism for most of my life. I studied International Project Management for Social Movements and NGOs, combined with environmental science. I have committed to participate in Climate Justice Fast, an international hunger strike for climate justice. From today and until we meet again in Copenhagen, I will be eating nothing and drinking only water.
The end date of the fast is still open. When I break the fast depends on what happens in the climate negotiations and in the world. The only thing I can guarantee is that I will end the fast if our demands are met.
Climate change is the defining issue for my generation. Previous generations did not understand the problem, and for future generations it will be too late to do something about it. It is up to us.
I'm undertaking this fast out of love. Love for life, for our beautiful planet with all its species and future generations. There's nothing more important I can do in my life than to contribute in the strongest possible way, with full devotion, to set an end to climate change and injustice and be part of the movement that will lead us to a sustainable future.
I'm showing how much I care. How much I'm willing to risk, how much I'm prepared to offer. How deeply devoted I am to this cause. I hope that it will inspire others and help the necessary shift to happen.
I love life and health, but I'm willing to risk it to secure the survival of others. Food is good, chewing is fun and I will miss jumping around full of energy. It will not be easy to abstain from something as essential as food.
Still, my personal sacrifice is nothing compared to the suffering of the hundreds of thousands of people who already die from climate change each year, and the many millions of people who would be suffering in the years to come if we would fail to solve climate change. Voluntarily abstaining from food is not easy, but it's possible. Solving climate change is also not an easy task, but it's possible, and we will.
This is the right thing to do at the right time. Turn to essentials, turn to emotions. The pure, the true, the real. Touch hearts. Push the limits, move on to the next level.
I will enjoy this peaceful time to reflect while others are busy. We will focus on the big picture while COP15 gets lost and stuck in a thousand details.
Now is the time to mobilise the movement for change.
We call on all people to get involved in the climate movement. We know the science. Educate yourself. Think about what's most important? Change your mindset. Your goal in life can't be a comfortable life where you consume everything you want. Widen your perspective. Think of the invisible consequences behind your actions. Challenge yourself.
No specific person is to blame. There's no single enemy responsible for causing the problem. Yet climate change is happening, and it’s deeply unjust and immoral. With knowledge comes responsibility. We ask every single person on this planet to seek for solutions within themselves, and find the courage to act with global consciousness.
Hunger striking is a positive act of humble nonviolence that we are undertaking as extremely concerned citizens. Judging from the support we are getting, a lot of people feel the same way. We're not only in a climate crisis, but also a democracy crisis. We must highlight the failure of our democracies to reflect the best interests and opinions of their population.
Many species throughout history have polluted, consumed or overpopulated themselves into extinction. But if we as humanity fail to solve the climate crisis, we may well become the first species who has done so in full knowledge and awareness of its own actions. I believe in humanity, we can't be that stupid.
Climate change is an opportunity to redefine our common values, and to create the just and sustainable world that most people everywhere want. The world is ready for change. This is the start of the sustainability era.
To move into that era, we have to do all what we can, right now, when there's still the smallest amount of time left. We must be able to look back and know that we did all what we could do. Maybe I’ll have children one day, and I must be able to look them in the eye.
We call for contributing towards building a movement of movements for climate justice by three broadening activities at the Klimaforum09 in Copenhagen in December:
1. To build a constructive programme for solving the climate crisis by changing production and consumption models providing jobs or access to resources for everyone.
2. To strengthen cooperation among movements based in communities and daily life experiences as well as political struggles at the national and international level, aiming at transforming society. by means of ecojustice solutions.
3. To build a movement of movements for climate justice beyond the Copenhagen Summit, by planning for actions in 2010 and afterwards.
We seek the broadest possible cooperation [with other civil society groups] in preparing these activities; we see as a contribution to the declaration process initiated by Klimaforum09. This political strategy will be based on:
We need a constructive program for sustainable patterns of production and consumption in industrial, urban and rural contexts. Contributions to this program will come from Klimaforum seminars on food sovereignty... [proposals for] alternative industrial production, reforms of agriculture, forestry, fisheries and urban planning ... and a consumption model based on global justice.*
2. To strengthen cooperation
There is a need to strengthen the cooperation between environmental, peasant, women's, indigenous, pacifist, trade union, urban and other civil society groups -- to promote a common struggle for climate justice and against repression and criminalisation of popular movements. We hope to exchange experiences and discuss future strategies at the Klimaforum.
3. Action: to build a movement of movements 2010+
This will be a core aim of the Klimaforum, with regional discussions and discussions among different movements -- to contribute to a plan for a movement of movements for climate justice.
France is trying to break the logjam of Copenhagen negotiations, according to Agence France Presse and Reuters. On 30 Oct president Sarkozy, and on 31 Oct environment minister J-L Borloo, announced a "plan justice-climat" in which France, Germany, and Austria are trying to convince the EU to make common cause with Mexico, Brazil, small island states (SIDS) threatened by climate change, and poor African and Asian countries, among the 175 haggling parties in COP-15 to save the climate treaty from failure. Main points of the French plan, which has been prepared over many months:
A "wafer-thin" Tobin tax of 0.01% on financial speculation, already proposed in August by the UK's re-regulation chief Lord Hudson. The City and Wall St were "appalled" by his suggestion which means, as seasoned financial journalist Eric Reguly concludes, that it might actually be effective in slowing the computer-driven speculation that has led to repeated market meltdowns. The tax would be a pin-prick in the side of the financial elephant but yield an estimated $20b yearly. About a quarter of this would be for reforestation.
It would provide mitigation funds for solar, wind, hydroelectric, biomass and reforestation projects in the poorest countries. A telephone-book-sized overview of such projects country by country (prepared over the last year by Bernard Kouchner's Foreign Ministry*), fills the gap of skimpy or non-existent action plans (NAMA) that poor countries were supposed to prepare. Many have no funds to prepare such plans, let alone carry them out. [*This overview is not yet available online.]
[A warning note about mitigation: Even if the French plan is agreed to, NGOs will have to be extremely watchful that carbon trading and REDD do not permit boondoggles by finance speculators and "free permits" to corporate polluters. Carbon trading and REDD are immense bribes to the corporate world. They should not be giveaways. Most of all, they must reduce real GHG emissions according to science-based targets. France is not renowned for international philanthropy. We must read the fine print. - DM]
It is an end-run around the refusal of rich countries to finance mitigation funds and technology transfer. Their repeated promises in NEPAD, MDGs, PRSPs and LICUS, G20 green stimulus, UNEP's green new deal, reformed CDM, and World Bank carbon finance have proved to be so much hot air. The money to match the promises has never appeared. The G8 plead taxpayers' pockets are empty, but that is just this year's excuse. Trillions were found to bail out banks, stockbrokers and auto companies, and to make "war on terror" while nothing has been forthcoming for global needs or the working poor at home.
[A possible alliance with the G2 (the US and China), who have been working on a secret climate deal in backroom talks that have already lasted several years. The sticking point seems to be US corporate demands for huge profits on "tech transfer". See TRIPS, comments by the French Journal du Dimanche, US ecologists in SEED, and the Sep-Oct 2009 issue of Foreign Affairs.]
Emission reduction targets of 25-40% by 2020 for the rich countries. Real reductions, measured from the Kyoto base of 1990.
A World Environment Organization (with what powers is not yet clear), similar to the World Trade Organization to ensure national actions are "measurable, reportable and verifiable" (MRV).
The English-language media have been strangely silent. Watch this space for updates. ---------------------------
St Andrews, Scotland 9 Nov 09: -- G20 fails on financial reform, climate action, and green economy. The"fossils" win again. The meeting of G20 Finance ministers just ended. The "crisis of capitalism" is officially over, so it's business as usual. No penalties for financial speculators. The US and Canada vetoed a Tobin tax. No mitigation funds for climate change. US-China "coordination" is an empty promise. All of which, the Swedish finance minister bitterly remarked, means “a very difficult situation in Copenhagen.” See the G20 ministers' rogues' gallery and the Nae tae G20 youth protest.
FAO World Food Summit, Rome, 11 Nov 09 -- Billions for banks and automakers, none for the hungry. France, Germany, UK, Italy and Japan are backing out on their $20 billion promise for world food aid made earlier this year. Beijing 18 Nov 09: US-China deal gives new life to Copenhagen. Paris 19 Nov 09: -- Environment Minister Borloo has just tabled his "Plan Justice-Climat" (its English title is "A Project for the World". Here is a summary in English by WWW France. The official French plan should be compared with the model Copenhagen Climate Treaty compiled by WWF and other NGOs, 8 Jun 09. 23 Nov 09: British PM Gordon Brown supports Tobin tax; IMF head will "study" it; US opposes it.
The Copenhagen Diagnosis, published 24 Nov 09, is a badly-needed 60-page scientific review article summarizing hundreds of peer-reviewed research papers that have appeared since the last official IPCC report (AR4). The authors, 14 of whom are IPCC members. are climate scientists I. Allison, N. L. Bindoff, R.A. Bindoff, R.A. Bindschadler, P.M. Cox, N. de Noblet, M.H. England, J.E. Francis, N. Gruber, A.M. Haywood, D.J. Karoly, G. Kaser, C. Le Quéré, T.M. Lenton, M.E. Mann, B.I. McNeil, A.J. Pitman, S. Rahmstorf, E. Rignot, H.J. Schellnhuber, S.H. Schneider, S.C. Sherwood, R.C.J. Somerville, K.Steffen, E.J. Steig, M. Visbeck, A.J. Weaver. Published by The University of New South Wales Climate Change Research Centre (CCRC), Sydney, Australia. The CCRC published a similar overview before the 2007 Bali conference.
