Expectations and realities in Copenhagen

By Wangari Maathai

December 9, 2009

Regions, blocks and individual countries have many, if different expectations, in Copenhagen. Africa, which scientists say will be the most negatively impacted by climate change, is expecting that rich developed countries will commit to a legally-binding agreement. That agreement is expected to ensure that the rich countries provide finances so that the poor countries can mitigate and adapt to climate change. Finances would allow the poor countries to access technology improve their capacity and sustain their livelihoods.

The group of 77 and China negotiate cooperatively and push pressure on the rich countries to agree to an ambitious and fair deal. This is because the rich countries are largely responsible for the emissions, which come from their lifestyles, which largely depend on burning of fossil fuels.

Non-industrialized countries, many of which are in Africa, have contributed a negligible amount of greenhouse gases precisely because they are not developed and therefore, use little that is generated from fossil fuels. It is not a position one would rather be in!

It is therefore, necessary for the poor countries to appreciate that they have to also develop, and that their destiny is not to remain underdeveloped forever. They would, however, have to adopt a development path that will also make it possible to make economic progress in the way their colleagues in China, India, Brazil and South Africa have done, albeit using high-carbon energy source. They too are being urged to reduce their emissions and shift to cleaner energy sources.

Unless the poor countries commit to development, they will continue to be under-developed and they will not be able to improve the quality of life of their people. Yet, any path that continues to encourage growth and use of fossil fuels will generate disquiet. It is for this reason that these poor countries need financial help, capacity building and transfer of not only available, but also affordable technology.

The developed countries have a big job convincing their citizens, including the legislators, that supporting poor countries so that they mitigate and adapt to changes in climate is important. Many citizens appreciate the need to do things at domestic level, but may not appreciate doing it in a big way at the global level. For that reason education of citizens is very important both in rich and poor countries and resources will be needed to carry out such education.

Ordinary citizens can do much to implement simple initiatives that would contribute to mitigation and adaptation and also make a difference in their lives. Here in Copenhagen the use of the bicycle seems to be a matter of choice and up to 35% of Danes use bicycles to move about. The government has created beautiful cycle ways to encourage citizens to use them, without risking their lives. I wish the Kenya government could do the same for the cyclists and those who walk in cities and towns of our country as part of the strategy to low-carbon development pathway.

The other initiatives that are do-able even in developing countries are effective public transport that would take care of millions of people who otherwise have to use their cars. Kenya could ensure that cars imported into the country have efficient engines. This could be achieved by rewarding through tax reduction on cars that whose engines are more efficient. Those who can should start using organic foods and cut on inorganic fertilizers.

Other activities could include mandatory planting of indigenous or fruit trees on farms as recently suggested by Minister Michuki of Environment and Mineral Resources. Also, rehabilitating and protecting indigenous forests, protecting rivers and wetlands. The shamba system, cultivation of food crops and grazing of livestock in forests should be abandoned.

Discussions here in Copenhagen are a matter of life and death for the poor countries, which are drifting towards devastation and death. However, the rescue must start with them, starting with what is do-able and affordable. The international community will help, but people must learn to be self-reliant and reduce dependency syndrome. There are so many things that citizens can do right now without any help from the international community. However, they need to be lead by their governments and leaders. That is why I strongly support the leadership that the Prime Minister has demonstrated over the Mau forest in particular.

© The Green Belt Movement International

I've been asked by my followers to post an update on the latest developments. So today's Plenary Session was focused on the procedures of COP15. The G77, headed by China, had just met earlier in the morning. COP15 president, Connie Hedegaard resided over the session. The Representative of Tuvalu proposed an amendment using Article 20:

1. Any Party may propose amendments to this Protocol.

2. Amendments to this Protocol shall be adopted at an ordinary session of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to this Protocol. The text of any proposed amendment to this Protocol shall be communicated to the Parties by the secretariat at least six months before the meeting at which it is proposed for adoption. The secretariat shall also communicate the text of any proposed amendments to the Parties and signatories to the Convention and, for information, to the Depositary.

3. The Parties shall make every effort to reach agreement on any proposed amendment to this Protocol by consensus. If all efforts at consensus have been exhausted, and no agreement reached, the amendment shall as a last resort be adopted by a three-fourths majority vote of the Parties present and voting at the meeting. The adopted amendment shall be communicated by the secretariat to the Depositary, who shall circulate it to all Parties for their acceptance.

4. Instruments of acceptance in respect of an amendment shall be deposited with the Depositary. An amendment adopted in accordance with paragraph 3 above shall enter into force for those Parties having accepted it on the ninetieth day after the date of receipt by the Depositary of an instrument of acceptance by at least three fourths of the Parties to this Protocol.

5. The amendment shall enter into force for any other Party on the ninetieth day after the date on which that Party deposits with the Depositary its instrument of acceptance of the said amendment.

asking that it bring a contact group at this session of COP to consider beyond the Kyoto Protocol.

There was talk of a two track process supported by China and Brazil, supported by Pakistan and Egypt among others. China strongly opposed to fundamentally change the Kyoto Protocol as Chair of the G77 and thought best to stay with

Article 3.9 (Commitments for subsequent periods for Parties included in Annex I shall be established in amendments to Annex B to this Protocol, which shall be adopted in accordance with the provisions of Article 21, paragraph 7. The Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to this Protocol shall initiate the consideration of such commitments at least seven years before the end of the first commitment period.)

Sweden, on behalf of the EU and its members, strongly supported the Kyoto Protocol keeping in mind that improvements had to be made to include the CMDs and LLUC. Sweden left it up to Madam President to decide.

Tuvula, supported by Papa New Guinea, the African states, AOSIS and Haiti among others said that we must clear up process now so we can work on negotiations next week.

COP President, Madam Hedegaard decided to leave this discussion for Saturday's plenaray session

I can go on and on...the negotiations are tedious and full of acronyms, member statements, long pauses and in-between the line remarks. It is a fascinating process for me but I would expect it to be quite laborious for my readers.

So I ask that if anyone wants details, I will be more than happy to share the minute details. The intention of this blog is to create awareness; that no matter what happens in these negotiations, we have come together in a collective consciousness as responsible global citizens to do our part.

Greetings from Hopenhagen!

A Chinese Minister, Bella's Access and the Tale of Nuclear Energy

It's pretty hard to get into COP15. You first need an affiliation with a party delegation (Country), media accreditations (journalists) or civil society (non-governmental organizations). This is Denmark where pedestrians cross at designated crosswalks, bicyclists stop for red lights and you must have proper identification badge to get into the Bella Center where most of COP15 events and negotiations are taking place. No badgie, no get innie.

When the Environmental Minister of China is refused access to the meeting place, it is brought up at the morning plenary session in the Tycho Brahe room. This is no small matter for China who comes to the table with the fact that they will be doubling their nuclear energy capacity by 2020. Chineses EU Ambassador Zhe Song reports, "In the 21st century, China will be one of the world's fastest-growing nuclear energy producers with the biggest installed capacity."

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), several hundred scientists and contributors, all recognised internationally as experts in their field, was brought together by the UN and World Meteorological Society to assess climate change. The IPCC has considered several scenarios into climate change mitigation responses, of which one includes the global expansion of nuclear power.

The nuclear industry's disingenuous claims to a role in alleviating climate change must be rejected for what they are: dangerous and self-serving fantasies which would create a serious legacy of deadly radioactive waste, increase the risks of catastrophic nuclear accidents and also vastly increase the threat of nuclear weapons proliferation.
Oh and by the way, China is not the only country looking at nuclear energy; India among other countries is coming to COP15 with nuclear energy as an an "alternative energy" that is "climate-friendly".

We don't want to upset the Environmental Minister of China; he will be given the royal treatment from now on at the Bella Center. Who knows who gets to push the little red button.

References:

http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/no.nukes/nenstcc.html#6
http://en.cop15.dk/Frontpage/Search+result?query=what+countries+who+want+to+increase+nuclear+energy

Opinion: Why Copenhagen Matters

Anja Niedringhaus, AP

Lars Loekke Rasmussen, prime minister of Denmark

This week's news will be dominated by headlines about the international climate talks in Copenhagen. It's one of the most important environmental gatherings in history, and while many will wonder what progress will be made, others may not be aware of just how important these climate talks are.

We are on the edge of a dangerous precipice. Every nation in the world must take action to avoid the worst of global warming's effects. Already some areas are seeing its effects – the changing climate is causing more droughts, floods and other catastrophic weather events. As those events increase over time, our world will see more climate refugees – masses of people forced to move, causing clashes over borders and dwindling resources such as water.

That is the reality of global warming, and the reality of why global action must take place during the Copenhagen talks. Unfortunately, many are standing in the way of progress.

*sphere.com

Copenhagen has become Hopenhagen... a modern city full of green ideology put into practice; a city where 50% of its residents ride bicycles to work and play! It is hopeful that COP15, the largest Climate Change Conference this world has ever seen, will take its cue from the city of Copenhagen --- hopefully.

Thousands of delegates from nations across the world have come together to negotiate climate change. And how did they get here? The COP15 blog reported:

400 delegates arrived in Copenhagen from Brussels in CO2-neutral style last night.06/12/2009 13:20

At 11 pm last night, the green and white Climate Express train steamed into a wintry Copenhagen Central Station.

“This train is a symbol that railway can be the backbone of a new more CO2-friendly transport policy” said the first passenger to step off the train, Jean-Pierre Loubinoux, Director General of the International Union of Railways (UIC).

Next out the door was Achim Steiner, director of the UN Environment Programme

“We want to give a visual expression to the fact that a low carbon economy is already possible, we just have to invest in it. Let’s make public rail travel more attractive and more convenient, then people will use it” said Mr. Steiner, who is part of the UN delegation at COP15.

But how did all the other delegates and private sector get to COP15?

Copenhagen climate summit: 1,200 limos, 140 private planes and caviar wedges

Copenhagen is preparing for the climate change summit that will produce as much carbon dioxide as a town the size of Middlesbrough.

By Andrew Gilligan

Visitors watch a visual display about the environment before the opening of the summit in Copenhagen Photo: REUTERS

On a normal day, Majken Friss Jorgensen, managing director of Copenhagen's biggest limousine company, says her firm has twelve vehicles on the road. During the "summit to save the world", which opens here tomorrow, she will have 200.

"We thought they were not going to have many cars, due to it being a climate convention," she says. "But it seems that somebody last week looked at the weather report."

Ms Jorgensen reckons that between her and her rivals the total number of limos in Copenhagen next week has already broken the 1,200 barrier. The French alone rang up on Thursday and ordered another 42. "We haven't got enough limos in the country to fulfil the demand," she says. "We're having to drive them in hundreds of miles from Germany and Sweden."

And the total number of electric cars or hybrids among that number? "Five," says Ms Jorgensen. "The government has some alternative fuel cars but the rest will be petrol or diesel. We don't have any hybrids in Denmark, unfortunately, due to the extreme taxes on those cars. It makes no sense at all, but it's very Danish."

The airport says it is expecting up to 140 extra private jets during the peak period alone, so far over its capacity that the planes will have to fly off to regional airports – or to Sweden – to park, returning to Copenhagen to pick up their VIP passengers.

As well 15,000 delegates and officials, 5,000 journalists and 98 world leaders, the Danish capital will be blessed by the presence of Leonardo DiCaprio, Daryl Hannah, Helena Christensen, Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Prince Charles. A Republican US senator, Jim Inhofe, is jetting in at the head of an anti-climate-change "Truth Squad." The top hotels – all fully booked at £650 a night – are readying their Climate Convention menus of (no doubt sustainable) scallops, foie gras and sculpted caviar wedges.

At the takeaway pizza end of the spectrum, Copenhagen's clean pavements are starting to fill with slightly less well-scrubbed protesters from all over Europe. In the city's famous anarchist commune of Christiania this morning, among the hash dealers and heavily-graffitied walls, they started their two-week "Climate Bottom Meeting," complete with a "storytelling yurt" and a "funeral of the day" for various corrupt, "heatist" concepts such as "economic growth".

The Danish government is cunningly spending a million kroner (£120,000) to give the protesters KlimaForum, a "parallel conference" in the magnificent DGI-byen sports centre. The hope, officials admit, is that they will work off their youthful energies on the climbing wall, state-of-the-art swimming pools and bowling alley, Just in case, however, Denmark has taken delivery of its first-ever water-cannon – one of the newspapers is running a competition to suggest names for it – plus sweeping new police powers. The authorities have been proudly showing us their new temporary prison, 360 cages in a disused brewery, housing 4,000 detainees.

And this being Scandinavia, even the prostitutes are doing their bit for the planet. Outraged by a council postcard urging delegates to "be sustainable, don't buy sex," the local sex workers' union – they have unions here – has announced that all its 1,400 members will give free intercourse to anyone with a climate conference delegate's pass. The term "carbon dating" just took on an entirely new meaning.

At least the sex will be C02-neutral. According to the organisers, the eleven-day conference, including the participants' travel, will create a total of 41,000 tonnes of "carbon dioxide equivalent", equal to the amount produced over the same period by a city the size of Middlesbrough.

The temptation, then, is to dismiss the whole thing as a ridiculous circus. Many of the participants do not really need to be here. And far from "saving the world," the world's leaders have already agreed that this conference will not produce any kind of binding deal, merely an interim statement of intent.

Instead of swift and modest reductions in carbon – say, two per cent a year, starting next year – for which they could possibly be held accountable, the politicians will bandy around grandiose targets of 80-per-cent-plus by 2050, by which time few of the leaders at Copenhagen will even be alive, let alone still in office.

Even if they had agreed anything binding, past experience suggests that the participants would not, in fact, feel bound by it. Most countries – Britain excepted – are on course to break the modest pledges they made at the last major climate summit, in Kyoto.

And as the delegates meet, they do so under a shadow. For the first time, not just the methods but the entire purpose of the climate change agenda is being questioned. Leaked emails showing key scientists conspiring to fix data that undermined their case have boosted the sceptic lobby. Australia has voted down climate change laws. Last week's unusually strident attack by the Energy Secretary, Ed Miliband, on climate change "saboteurs" reflected real fear in government that momentum is slipping away from the cause.

In Copenhagen there was a humbler note among some delegates. "If we fail, one reason could be our overconfidence," said Simron Jit Singh, of the Institute of Social Ecology. "Because we are here, talking in a group of people who probably agree with each other, we can be blinded to the challenges of the other side. We feel that we are the good guys, the selfless saviours, and they are the bad guys."

As Mr Singh suggests, the interesting question is perhaps not whether the climate changers have got the science right – they probably have – but whether they have got the pitch right. Some campaigners' apocalyptic predictions and religious righteousness – funeral ceremonies for economic growth and the like – can be alienating, and may help explain why the wider public does not seem to share the urgency felt by those in Copenhagen this week.

In a rather perceptive recent comment, Mr Miliband said it was vital to give people a positive vision of a low-carbon future. "If Martin Luther King had come along and said 'I have a nightmare,' people would not have followed him," he said.

Over the next two weeks, that positive vision may come not from the overheated rhetoric in the conference centre, but from Copenhagen itself. Limos apart, it is a city filled entirely with bicycles, stuffed with retrofitted, energy-efficient old buildings, and seems to embody the civilised pleasures of low-carbon living without any of the puritanism so beloved of British greens.

And inside the hall, not everything is looking bad. Even the sudden rush for limos may be a good sign. It means that more top people are coming, which means they scent something could be going right here.

The US, which rejected Kyoto, is on board now, albeit too tentatively for most delegates. President Obama's decision to stay later in Copenhagen may signal some sort of agreement between America and China: a necessity for any real global action, and something that could be presented as a "victory" for the talks.

The hot air this week will be massive, the whole proceedings eminently mockable, but it would be far too early to write off this conference as a failure.

This is where Copenhagen is critical. The world has changed since Kyoto and Climate Change threatens rich and poor countries alike.

Climate Change