and more opinions on COP 15

Me handing over the AOSIS Youth Declaration over to Ambassador Lima (Vice-Chair of AOSIS)

1) What did you think about the outcome of COP 15?

There was no outcome at COP 15. The Copenhagen Accord was not acknowledged by all of the 191 countries. There was no Deal. The Copenhagen Accord is a piece of paper where 25 countries decided to write down what they think is best for the world. The accord was not negotiated—it was jammed down the throats of the rest of the world. I did not expect great things to happen at COP 15, but I really did not expect such an undemocratic, non-transparent, and unjust negotiation process to take place. Maybe it is me who was naïve in thinking that our world leaders are better than this, but I was sadly mistaken. The only good thing that happened at COP 15 was that the island nations stood up for themselves. Some say we blocked the process. The vulnerable countries were the only ones who really had anything to lose, so if we were being handed death sentences, of course we should be fighting for our survival. We did not block the process, but were left out of the process as were many other countries. The last 36 hours or so of the negotiations was a sham. How the UN could let something like that happen—I am still at a loss of understanding. This cannot be the way we decide for the world—the countries cannot be left out of the decision-making process. We need to re-prioritize. COP 15 was another trade negotiation meeting where real people were forgotten.

2) Do you think the concerns of young people were adequately addressed by decision-makers attending COP-15? Explain.

How can we even be asked this question when from the second week, the NGO’s and civil society were at first restricted, and then removed from the Bella Center and the process? How could our concerns have been adequately voiced when our futures were being decided for us, but without us? No, the decision-makers did not provide adequate space within the negotiations for young people. Ban Ki Moon even cancelled his high level session with youth, and we were not even warned, but we were waiting patiently for him. He did not show up. So no—youth were not valued at COP 15.

3) What do you hope for from COP 16?

This depends on what the agenda for COP 16 is. Will the leaders, in light of Haiti, take a stronger stand on climate change in Mexico, or will it be another trade negotiation meeting? If people like Stern keep on harping on about how it is about numbers and not people, then we will never be able to make it anything but that. The reality is that though there are real people suffering, in real countries, and they are not responsible for what is happening, nor can they alone stop it. I really do wish we could do this without the rest of the world, but we cannot. So, with some optimism, I hope that by the time we get to Mexico, the global movement against climate change has grown so much, that the leaders cannot ignore us. I hope that the global people’s movement flows out into the streets and pushes governments into action. Results will come from people acting—not from our political leaders. Most leaders have no gumption.

4) Did you enjoy yourself in Copenhagen?

In light of the results, I did not enjoy COP 15. However, I value the experience and enjoyed working with the youth movement—being at the forefront of this fight. I enjoyed learning from my colleagues at 350.org—absolutely amazing and talented people.

What The Rest of The World Thinks

I have been called many things in my life time (which really isnt a very long time), have had fantasies of being with associated with certain ideals and personas, but never in my wildest dreams thought I would ever be associated with the terror that was Hitler!

World War II is decades back in history but that is what Young Opinionated Environmentalists have been labelled as; "Nazi Youth", though we share none of the ideals so fondly propagated by his regime.

Below you can go through opinions of non mainstream media educated individuals (or so they claim is the problem) who really dont mince their words or feelings about the production of Help the World.

"What a pathetic piece of garbage. My son is being fed this enviro crap at school, and one day someone is going to sue the education system for polluting the kids brains with deception and lies.For Christ's sake,global warming is a complete pack of lies!"

"My God, what is happening to us? This video must of cost millions to produce, millions of dollars that could have gone to people suffering now in Africa from starvation due to the lack of crops or Haiti where they are starving due to global warming alarmism."

"If the debate is over then why does Richard Lindzen (and many others) disagree? Why did 3100 scientists sign a petition disputing Global Warming? Why has the earth not warmed over the last ten years? Why did the CRU cook its books? This is about politics, not science."

"This NWO scumbags really know how to deceive and scare people.
For the people those get their news only from controlled mainstream media it must be scary to watch this propaganda trash."

I put these up here to remind us (so called "Nazi Youth"), that the battle is just beginning, till we are able to break through such narrow minded opinions and demonstrate in the simplest ways fact from fiction, that Climate Change is a very real reality that millions around the world live with, day in and day out, our work is not done.

We know we are nothing like Hitler, on the contrary we hope to awaken Mankind to path of destruction that we are walking on fulled by our non content souls. So while some may think there is nothing wrong with another skyrise replacing acres of forest, flora and fauna and then take exotic vacations to places where nature is untouched to recharge their spirits; I will beg to differ.

Someone once told me, standing on the side that has majority of the people is not important, standing on the side that is right, even if it is just you, that is important!

I am lucky, that today I knowingly stand on the side of right but not alone; we may not be the majority (YET), together though we are getting the Vulnerable Islands and States and their plight the attention they so deserve.So i dont care if my videos get these hideous comments, atleast those who need to, are watching them, atleast they are being informed that there is a choice they need to and can make, even if they think its the advice is generally flawed and wrong.

So when you leave the 31st floor to your apartment and take that plane to some far away beach in some remote and exotic destination, and see the lives people are living here, dont feel sorry for us, but be ashamed of the lives you want to live and refuse to make compromises on, so that we can atleast try and avert the disaster heading our way.

CHANGE is a word we all hate, but sometimes despite reservations CHANGE is necessary. Can you imagine the world we would be leaving in if we didnt CHANGE the way in which we lived decades ago (racial marginalisation, Apartheid, Segregation, discrimination against women and the list goes on).

We overcame these challenges, we had great leaders to help us fight these battles and now we need great leaders to step up to the mantle. So help your leaders make the right choices.

Visit 350.org to understand the science in a very simple way if you dont think Climate Change is real. If you dont think mainstream media can be trusted then go through the data yourself, be objective, do the research, see the way lives have been affected in the islands and vulnerable states, then make up your mind. How much more real can we make it for you?

Countdown

The clock stopped and there i was sitting amidst the decision makers..WOW...so this is what one of these UN conferences feels like. Here they were, the men and women that countries had nominated to work on the "deal" before the heads of state landed and negotiated their own deal.(This is POST COP - So I guess I can assume certain things with certainty)

So there we were, NGO's and observers all sitted and on time and here were our leaders, still trying to get their act together. Twenty minutes past the scheduled start time and we were still waiting.

One of my friends commented on how disorganised the leaders themselves were....i guess these were hints from the very onset at the direction the talks would be heading towards in the next two weeks.

As every other speech for the two weeks, the opening ceremony was also marked by strong words from the Prime Minister, The (then)Chair for COP 15, the Secretary for UNFCCC and the Chairman of IPCC, all suggesting and commiting to driving forward the negotiations and sealing a real deal. All claimed Climate Change to be a significant threat to the way we live that had to be addressed now.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Denmark) showcased their video titled "help the world" to start things of with and if you were a spectator, watching this video, sitting in that arena with our "world leaders" who were also sitted doe eyed, in that moment you too would have believed (despite huge reservations) that maybe our leaders WILL step up to this Magnum Opus of a challenge.

As I sit here and think about those hours the only thing that comes to mind is that if nothing else the video is worth watching.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVGGgncVq-4&feature=PlayList&p=433D8FE26B7269CA&index=0

...Because as the world already knows the rest were just empty words and empty promises.

How this all Started-United States Institute on the Environment

Six weeks in the states, most of it spent in Hawaii was an oppotunity to learn about the environmental movement in the US and more so ask the leaders in the field important questions; the answers to which our futures hinge on. The last week of the Programme saw us travel across to D.C. I went to Capitol Hill to ask the policy makers why they are not concerned about the environment?, why do they not consider the impacts being felt in places like the Pacific, why does the bottom line matter more then the quality of life my people will have to endure?.

The answers as stated by Tom Hassenboehler, is that the so called impacts of climate change just is not felt on continental America, that America as a continent is very divided in its politics due to the geo-political nature of the different states. A representative from the oil and coal dependent states will not vote for the climate change bill because it will hurt his constituency. A representative needs to keep the electorate happy if a second term is desired. The political defragmentation is a direct result of the geo-economy differences between the states. It will cost far too much for some states to go green that they are just not willing to try and because they do not directly feel the impacts they do not feel the urgency we else where do or even that of Hawaii. A capitalist view exits in many Republican corners and there is much talk of “letting the market take care of it”, none of which is going to help solve our problems.

At the same time democrats like Honourable Mazie Hirono are fighting the good fight in trying to expedite the climate bill through the house. Coming from an island ecosystem she understands the urgency and feels the vulnerability. I hope that people like her at Capitol Hill are able to oppose nuclear energy plans being discussed. Going nuclear is not about to solve any of our problems either, especially with North Korea ready to launch at their liking

What policies has the U.S. put in place to cut back on their carbon emissions and what strategies are being developed to help combat the global temperature increase and how are these policies/strategies going to trigger action on combating this phenomenon (on a global scale but with respect to the impact it will on small developing states like Kiribati and Tuvalu in the Pacific)?

1)What is your overall assessment of the U.S. environmental movement?
I have been known to describe the US environmental movement as the great white shark. I make the reference due to the nature of both to work independently (dis-fragmented nature of US environmental movement) of the others in the pack and yet able to be a force in the policy making scene (in the case of the great white, the ability to hunt with great success).
There is effectiveness in the way the environmental movement coordinates itself; despite the dis-fragmentedness. Point to consider is, then how much greater would be its effectiveness be there was more cohesion between the different groups. There is energy, passion and zeal in the environmental movement unlike any other. I am saddened at how little of this we have in Fiji. The PEW Centre and its likes started off with idealists willing to be the change the world needed, we lack such visionary people in the region.

However I am hopeful that these leaders, which the region needs, will emerge from my generation. That the power and energy of the American movement will transcend into the Pacific. What ever may be said about America, it must be duly noted that the NGO movement in America has been for a long time, been the driving force behind the social changes (both institutionally and on the ground) in America. Be it the civil rights movement of the 60’s or the environmental lobbying for Waxman-Markey bill. Change is coming to America and the environmental movement is at the forefront of it.

2)What surprised you about the U.S. environmental movement?
Given the bad track record the American administration had over the last eight years in terms of environmental initiatives, I was surprised to find such a robust and “happening” environmental movement. I realized that the environmental movement was quite powerful in the way they were able to affect change in policy through lobbying (PEW Centre) and good old fashioned diplomacy.

I was surprised by seeing in action, the lobbying process and its affect on the climate bill. I have never before experienced such power of persuasion in any movement in the country I am from, and I think before this trip I did not believe that people could make such an impact. Seeing a thriving and forceful environmental movement was a pleasant surprise. The American environmental movement is made up of people; passionate and hard working people who share a common vision and understand the need to protect the planet. If this is the criteria for duplication with success, then all, other countries need are some people with passion and understanding to take a stand.

3)What are the greatest challenges to environmental initiatives in the U.S.?  
One of the challenges I feel environmental initiatives in the U.S. face is actually from its own State- Federal system. For example if one looks at the initiatives California is trying to legislate (car emissions etc), it can not do so without Federal government approval. However the Federal Government can not approve it at Sate level because it would affect car manufacturer’s country wide, especially if they are to do business with the State of California.

So the initiative has to wait till there is some break through either by the appointment of an “environmentally friendly” President or by legal declaration as is the case with carbon dioxide being classified as a pollutant by the Supreme Court recently. This ruling will force car manufacturers to design cars with lower emissions, and it will force all other States to follow in California’s example.

Challenges also come in the form of opposition to the environmental initiatives from businesses that will lose out if the initiatives get the go ahead, including Oil tycoons, car manufacturers etc and also from States that are oil or coal based. This opposition is an equal and opposing force and one of the greatest challenges that the environmental initiatives face in the U.S.

4)What are the greatest assets? (geographic, cultural, social, political, financial, etc)
I really think the greatest asset that the environmental movement has, is actually the people who are driving the movement and are the power behind it. The U.S. movement is blessed to have these champions of nature, who have made the envrionment into a career.

The U.S. is also lucky to have a political system that allows space to lobby and negotiate, this definitely does not happen everywhere. It is important to have space where the common man can voice their opinions, to have a system of accountability and transparency. The “think thanks” keep the checks and balances and try to ensure that the Government acts resposibily.

5) What were the most effective examples of environmental leadership, either in an individual or group, you observed?
The centre for Eco-literacy believes in education for sustainability and takes a very hands on approach to it. Their program gets everyone from school management right down to the parents involved in learning and practicing sustainable environmental approaches. Their success in inspiring students and getting communities to participate willing is an encouragement to all interested in promoting eco-literacy in their communities. The Centre is an example of effective leadership in which the role they play is of educators.

Ed Kenny owner of TOWN and DOWNTOWN as an individual is making the decisions as a businessman that most other businesses would not likely do so.  To support the community he buys organic produce from a local farm at double to triple the price of non-organic produce and hence promotes the consumption of organic. He is showing the business community that the three legged stool approach (economics, environmental and social) is achievable and economically feasible. He is the everyday environmental Hero, being an effective leader by the policies he puts in place in his business and sticking to them.

Gary Forth-Maunakea is a common man also who has turned his passion into a business. His business more importantly focuses on environmental sustainability and eco-literacy. Not only is he investing in a very important venture (Organic farming); he also practices social responsibility by getting the students of Wai’anae involved and supporting their educational needs. Effective leadership is not about how many people you know or what the nature of your work is; it is about how much change you can induce in your community (or at any level) and Gary in his small way is doing just that very successfully. He may not be a nationwide franchise but that is not why he got into Organic farming and he is happy making the difference in the community of Wai’anae.

6)What specific ‘take aways’ will you return home with that are useful?
A very important lesson to take back home is, that you do not always need the government to lead, a group of passionate people are enough to make the difference, and sometimes even one will do to start the chain reaction. We have to be ready to be that catalyst, we can not wait for others to step up, and the planet does not the luxury of time. The time to act is now, there is still much we can do.

“It is too late to be pessimistic”
Yaan Arthus Bertrand

So while the planet hinges on what we do now, the question then is, what can we do? If I look at the University of Hawaii and the state of Hawaii’s sustainability initiatives, the answer is clear, A LOT! Start small and expand one problem and one solution at a time.
Taking cue from this, it is why I decided to have my action plan concentrate on recycling. Waste management is a problem in Fiji and there is a need to start educating the communities about the necessity to change our old ways and move towards a more environmentally friendly solution to our waste problem.

Answer your Research Question using specific examples from the Institute

“...Today’s Easy Options Could Prove to be tomorrow’s Regrets…”
P.V. Narashima Rao

I use the above quote often to remind people that the short term profits can not over ride the long term consequences. I am happy to be able to say that I feel the U.S. government has finally understood this and the recent Supreme Court decision on carbon dioxide as a pollutant and the passing of the climate change legislation in the House of Representatives are very good shift in policy.

However there is much work to do in terms of regulating Cap and trade and carbon tax. Developed countries can not (and should not be allowed to) depend on buying offsets to meet their commitments to emission reduction and the U.S. again needs to take the lead in the dialogue and lay down “the law”. At the same time the countries buying offsets should be made to invest in environmentally sustainable measures at home and the countries they buy offsets. Carbon trading is not a real solution, it is a band aid, like geo-engineering it should not be invested in without also investments in real clean technology and solutions to the climate change problems.

The 6 weeks spent in the states were no picnic. It was full of life and enthusiasm and a lot of work. In the end most of us were left with a sense of urgency and responsbility that Climate change was a problem, where the onus had fallen upon us to take the fight to the policy makers and show them that the island nations are not just tiny dots, they have people on them, who live, breathe and bleed like everyone else.

This is where my journey began, what I saw, the empowerment that I received by being able to go to Capitol Hill and ask the hard questions and be part of the process that gave me the inspiration and energy to take this fight even further....Copenhagen-COP15. This is the beginning of the battle...the road ahead is long and arduous...and the road less taken....but like every big battle of the era needed rebellion, so does this one...so go GREEN, Go against the norm!

What is the relevance of the Copenhagen negotiations to the Pacific?

The Copenhagen Conference of Parties will be where world leaders will try and negotiate a new deal to tackle Climate Change and this will be by way of binding green house gas emission reduction targets. The negotiations will focus on amongst other things “who reduces how much” (voluntary reductions vs. polluter pays), and “how these reductions are achieved?”(Clean development mechanism, REDD projects, carbon credits/trading etc)

Copenhagen is in earnest the “where to now” point for the world. In 1997 when the Kyoto protocol was agreed upon, leaders were very much sceptical about climate change (at that time global warming) and hence their hesitance to ratify the protocol. In fact it took a good 8 years for the Kyoto Protocol to come into force and till February 2009 only 184 countries had signed on and ratified the protocol. The most notable exclusion from the countries that have ratified the protocol is the Unites States of the America.

However Copenhagen is being looked at with renewed spirit. America has a new leader in power that has during his term seen to the passing of the Climate Change bill in the House of Representatives and the clean air act certifying carbon dioxide as a pollutant by law. Looking to Scandinavia, Norway has announced 40% reductions in GHG’s by 2020 and to the East and South-East, both India and Indonesia have softened their stance on emission reduction targets.

Hence the future of this region can still be salvaged if enough pressure is applied during the negotiations and the “tragedy of commons” is avoided. Tragedy of commons is an analogy used to describe how independent individuals acting out of self-interest contributes to the eventual destruction of a shared limited resource. In this case how anthropogenic actions (GHG Emissions) have contributed to the phenomenon we now know as Global Climate Change. Any change in the global climate change puts at risk the livelihoods of small island developing states including the Pacific Island Countries (PIC’s).

PIC’s have been the most vulnerable to these changes. Rising sea level rises and tides cause salt water intrusion, spoiling the already limited supply of freshwater for consumption, wash away shorelines, causeerosions and infrastructural damage to .low lying islands and the unpredictable weather conditions (flash flooding, depressions in the weather systems, alternating extremes of hot and cold climates and earthquakes-yes even earthquakes are now being attributed to climate change) If sea levels continue to rise, some of the low lying PIC’s will disappear while others yet will become uninhabitable.

Apart from the economic loses; there will be a high environmental and social cost for this. While our island people may be relocated, their culture, song and traditions will be lost. There is an intrinsic value associated with this that can not be measured in economic terms. The flora and fauna endemic to our islands can never be replaced or brought back to life after this catastrophe comes to pass. This is a big price to pay for being a region that contributes to only 0.03 per cent of the global emissions (Hay 1999)

The islands have real, living, breathing people living on them; we are not poker chips in international trade relations. Our voices have to be heard, need to be heard and our concerns recognised. For if Copenhagen does not deliver an equitable deal that will stabilize the atmospheric concentration to safe levels (below current levels to 350ppm), and if our islands disappear and become uninhabitable then is this not a crime against humanity? To reiterate the point, the lives and lifestyles of the people of the Pacific does not come with a price tag attached and our concerns can not be bought. Our lives and the ways of our people are just as important as anyone else’s in the world and fair consideration must be given to the dangers that our island nations face in light of climate change.

So yes Copenhagen will give birth to the International agreement that will determine the emission reduction targets for the world. This deal can either protect or neglect or future. We need to get the message across that neglect is not an option. All in all Copenhagen represents the power of democracy in action, with the hope that the deal it brokers will be equitable and will provide equal access to adaptation technology and funds. The survival of the pacific as we know it hinges on what direction negotiations take in Copenhagen.