Greenpeace

One of the many advantages of being a Greenpeace Field Organizer for Northern California is the incredibly diverse region I am responsible for. Not only do I get to work out of the sweet San Francisco office, but I get to travel from the ocean to the mountains, and everywhere in-between, for the sake of fighting for the future of our planet. One place I was particularly thrilled to work in is the famous wine country just north of the Bay Area. It is here that I met Ted Lemon, his dog Bo, and got a peek into the life of a Californian winemaker.

Lemon began his career by studying in France where he apprenticed at several highly esteemed estates in Burgundy. In 1993, Ted Lemon and his wife Heidi founded Littorai Wines to produce Chardonnay and Pinot Noir wines on the north coast of California. Lemon has worked as a winemaker and consultant to many prominent wineries and he owns or leases several small-scale vineyards throughout Sonoma and Mendocino counties.

I recently got the chance to visit one of his Sonoma County vineyards in the quaint town of Sebastopol. This biodynamically farmed vineyard serves as a self sustaining, integrated and diversified farm because Lemon follows a holistic approach to winemaking known as terroir. This concept posits that the quality and taste of wine depends entirely on the soil and climate conditions in which the grapes are grown. The pinots produced by Lemon and other winemakers depend on the climate of Sonoma's famed coastal influence. It lies just north of the San Francisco Bay and benefits from its moderating ocean breezes.


For centuries, the West Coast has been an ideal climate for grape growing and California alone makes up about 92% of the entire U.S. wine industry, with more than 90% of the profit in premium wines.  However, these homegrown wines face a serious threat from global warming. Scientists predict that global warming will bring higher temperatures, more heat waves and less precipitation - changes that could destroy the state's $15 billion wine industry. Furthermore, a study conducted by Purdue University’s Climate and Earth Systems research group projects that there will be over an 80% reduction in total premium wine production due to climate change . Lemon’s pinot noir is particularly susceptible to the consequences of a changing climate. If left unaddressed, global warming could make it impossible to grow Pinot Noir in California.

While concern for the impacts of global warming on his life’s work is not new to Lemon, he is now taking action beyond sustainable growing practices. He is calling for the necessary leadership from President Obama to meet this challenge of our generation head-on. Recently, world leaders met in Copenhagen, Denmark for the most important United Nations Climate Negotiation to date. Unfortunately, President Obama did not listen to the calls for real climate solutions from scientists, heads of developing countries and the tens of thousands of protesters that flooded into Copenhagen for the Negotiations. Leadership from President Obama is essential for both a global climate treaty and locally protecting the longevity and prosperity of the Lemon’s wine business.

 

Anne Mulkern wrote an interesting article in today's New York Times/Greenwire about Big Oil's efforts to greenwash their dirty image with misleading advertisements.  As the article details, giant oil companies like BP, Shell, Exxonmobil, and their industry trade group, the American Petroleum Institute, are spending millions to convince Americans and policymakers that they are investing in clean energy, even though in reality, "...for all three companies, the alternative energy investments still are a small part of their overall business. BP, for example, puts $1.3 billion to $1.6 billion a year into alternative energy projects. That's about 1 percent of the company's total $20 billion investment this year in future business prospects."

Last week, we looked at some of Shell's ads, some of which were so misleading that they were forced to stop using them in the UK.

In Mulkern's article, Chevron attempts to explain their PR push:

Chevron's ads are aimed at getting people to think about conservation while also expanding their view of the company, said Helen Clark, Chevron's manager of corporate marketing.

"Oil and gas is a majority of our business, but there's a lot else we do that's important," Clark said.

"We want people to see past the rhetoric and past the view of 'Big Oil,'" she added. "We want to make sure it's showing all sides of the corporation."

All sides of the corporation? OK, let's check out some sides that you might not hear about on a giant billboard or full page ad in the Washington Post.  How about the side that's been accused of extortion on Capitol Hill for their lobbying efforts to avoid responsibility for dumping billions of gallons of toxic wastewater in the Amazon? Or the side that just settled a lawsuit requiring them to cough up millions of dollars for unpaid lease royalties to state, federal and American Indian governments? 

No amount of focus group-tested advertising is going to fool the people living nearby Chevron's massive polluting refinery in San Ramon, California, hundreds of whom marched on the facility this summer:

But maybe that's not the point.  As marketing expert Bob Kenney points out in Mulkern's article, it's important to look at just who Big Oil is trying to fool:

Many of the ads have run in Washington, D.C. Those are less about reaching customers and more about reaching Congress,

"It's concerned with contributing information in the public debate at a governmental level," Kenney said. "It may look like a public campaign sometimes, but sometimes it's not."

As Big Oil pollutes local communities from the Bay Area to the Amazon, their massive PR and lobbying efforts pollute the understanding of what they are doing to this planet, and they're especially focused on policymakers here in Washington DC. You can find Chevron's ads all over our nation's capitol, at bus stops, on the sides of buildings and in the newspapers and magazines read by our legislators and their staff.

In fact, there's a Chevron banner ad right on Mulkern's article itself, inviting us to "Join the Discussion" about the UN Climate summit in Copenhagen:

 

As the US Senate takes up energy and climate legislation, we'll be watching what kind of "discussion" polluter lobbyists are really interested in.

Was Copenhagen historic or a failure (or both)? To discern the value of the Copenhagen deal through the din of spin, look no further than the 9% drop in the European carbon market on Monday, where confidence vanished following President Obama's "historic accord."

Last week, President Obama made an audacious effort to save what was a floundering process in Copenhagen. Unfortunately, his administration's claim of "historic accord" is little but spin. What the world was waiting for — the sinking island nations, the 300,000 that the World Health Organization says die each year from global warming, and the carbon markets — were binding agreements to cut carbon pollution, end tropical deforestation by 2015, and provide financing to assist developing countries in leap-frogging dirty development with clean energy.

What they got was business as usual. Earlier this year the House passed a deeply flawed climate bill that falls short of what the science says is needed to roll back climate change. The bill's contents were what the president promised in Copenhagen, and his words were met with disappointment the world over.

There is spin from all sides about just what happened in Denmark. Let me share my observations from someone with a global, not just U.S., perspective. The European Union, already actively engaged in the Kyoto Protocol, offered to cut its pollution by 20% and said they would go up to 30% if the U.S. put more ambitious goals on the table. The EU also pledged 30 billion euro per year for financing clean technology and other initiatives in the developing world. China, already outpacing the U.S. in the development and deployment of renewable energy technologies, offered to decrease the energy intensity of its emerging economy. India pledged the same.

The U.S. pressed China to allow its efforts to cut global warming pollution to be independently measured. China resisted the U.S. proposal to allow the U.S. to come in and inspect its industry, but felt that the negotiations with the U.S. were making progress on this point when it accepted an EU proposal on reporting and occasional checks. Meanwhile, the U.S. was punching loopholes into the pact.

The deal could possibly be sealed if the U.S. offered financing for developing countries and resolved the issue of transparency with China.

Enter Hillary Clinton, offering to somehow figure out how to give an unstated contribution of money from an unknown source to a $100 billion fund. In the process, she offended the Chinese premier, who was in such a fury that his negotiating staff was in a panic.

Enter President Obama. His speech, clearly written for one audience — the U.S. Senate — said three things to the Heads of State in the room: hey foreign leaders, we don't want foreign oil; hey China, even though we've been building trust and negotiating all year, I'm going to scold you for the benefit of domestic politics; and hey world: even though these are negotiations, I have nothing to offer. It's my way or the highway.

The President laid out what the U.S. had offered the world for the last eight months, budging on nearly nothing. He put forward a goal of cutting pollution by 4% below 1990 levels — about one tenth of what the EU offered. In fairness, he had little to offer. The combination of the President's hesitance to lead to overcome special interests to achieve his own stated objectives — whether on a public option in health care or pollution reductions of any respectable size — and the power of the coal and oil lobbies put the his negotiators in the awkward positoin of negotiating without very much to give.

The Chinese premier stormed out of the room and refused to meet with the President. Finally, the President secured a meeting and hammered out a deal that has the value of the carbon markets today: very little.

So few people had a clue about the "deal" that when President Obama later announced it the EU negotiators were still forging a deal and G77 delegates were talking in the halls about the perilous state of the Summit. Ultimately, most signed on, because if they did not, then their countries would not get a cut of a $30 billion package for clean energy and adapting to current global warming. A few brave countries, not wanting to be bought, said "no" to the deal. The historic accord was "noted" by the process, a nod to its existence.

The world still expects great things of President Obama and the US, but we cannot expect him to save the world on his own. We can expect — and must demand — that the president leads in recommitting the U.S. to the democratic UN process, doubles his efforts through the EPA and other methods to cut global warming pollution without the loopholes, clean air act rollbacks, impending nuclear disasters, and green light for coal that we see in current legislation, and approaches the negotiations as what they are — negotiations to save millions of lives, dozens of countries, 70% of the world's species, and a future that is worth passing on to our children.

This article was cross-posted on the Huffington Post.

The Southern California wildfires of October 2007 were some of the most devastating fires the state has ever seen.  The fires burned over 500,000 acres from Santa Barbara County to the U.S.-Mexico border.  Nine people died,  eighty five(including fire fighters) were injured, and over 800,000 people were forced to flee their homes in what has been labeled as the largest evacuation in California’s history to date (larger than Hurricane Katrina)..  

The Witch Creek Fire, the largest fire of them all that October, tore through 197,990 acres of northern San Diego County. Over a thousand homes were destroyed with hundreds more damaged, and  two people lost their lives.  Of the forty one  people injured in the Witch Creek Fire, thirty nine of them were fire fighters faced with the task of fighting the blazes head-on.  

The increasingly hot and dry conditions we could see year after year as a result of climate change could bring more severe fires that will be even more threatening to people and property, and a massive drain of resources on our local, state and federal government.  Fires like the Witch Creek Fire could become common for Southern Californians, and now is our opportunity to demand real leadership on climate change to protect our communities.

A Closer Look

Eric Johnson, an information security specialist in the electronics industry, moved to Rancho Bernardo, a community about 20 miles northeast of downtown San Diego, in November of 2005.  His wife (then girlfriend) Megan, who works in media and marketing, moved in with him in spring of 2006. Eric and Megan’s apartment in Rancho Bernardo was their first home together.

The Johnsons had been camping a few hours north up the coast in Morro Bay, San Luis Obispo when the Witch Creek Fire started. They decided to stop for coffee before their long trek back home when they saw a headline in the Los Angeles Times about the fires.  They were overwhelmed with concern for the safety of their home, and particularly for their African Grey Parrot, Ivy, who they had left there.

The couple rushed back to San Diego, and Eric decided to risk the journey to Rancho Bernardo to see if he could rescue Ivy.  Many roads were blocked off, and Eric parked his motorcycle on a cul-du-sac overlooking their home and ran down a smoldering hill to their still-standing apartment complex.  Fortunately, Ivy was safe, but Eric had little time to sneak her into his pocket before leaving again, as the fires were still not contained.

Eric describes the first time they were permitted to return to their apartment as “foreign.”  Tragically, several buildings in Eric and Megan’s apartment complex burned down in the fires.  While the Johnson’s building did not burn down, they lost many belongings and their apartment was damaged so badly that it was declared uninhabitable.

“The place was a wreck, everything was caked in soot,” Eric recalls.  “We had to be escorted in by a police officer and had 10 minutes to get what we needed and then had to leave.  We weren't allowed to go back for good for another two days.”

Two years later, Eric, Megan and Ivy have rebuilt their lives and have settled in nearby Cardiff-by-the-Sea, part of North County San Diego’s coastal community.  They are happy and resilient people, and while they have moved on, it is clearly an experience that they will carry with them the rest of their lives, and as non-natives to San Diego, they have learned many lessons for coping with future fire seasons.  Most of all, Eric and Megan understand that they were lucky, as many in their situation have not been.  In a future ravaged by climate change, not as many will be as lucky as the Johnsons and more people and property will be put at risk year after year.  

The future of Southern California is not to be gambled with - we need strong action for the climate, and the “solutions” that our leaders in Copenhagen put on the table last week are not enough to protect us from the worst impacts of climate change here at home.  In the coming year, Californians need to speak up now more than ever for the real solutions to the climate crisis, otherwise we’re leaving our future up to chance.

The brave activists who crashed the Danish Queen's dinner for Heads of State last week in Copenhagen are being held for three weeks, according to the last report I heard. They managed to gain entry to the dinner and held up two banners calling on the world leaders assembled at that posh dinner to lead at the UN climate summit.

We need to let the Danish government know that we're watching how they (over)react to this situation, so can you please fan this Facebook page? More importantly, you'll be showing our activists that you support them (there's also an email address availble to send a personal message, if you choose).


Juantxo and Nora, pictured above, plus two other activists, are still being held by the Danish government.

While our activists remain in jail, the real climate criminals — so-called world "leaders" who failed miserably to move the world forward in dealing with the climate crisis — all flew home in style in their comfy private airplanes. If you just go fan this Facebook page it is a quick and easy way to show your support and keep pressure on the Danish government. Thanks.

Though shell has been punished twice in recent years for greenwashing in the British media (here and here), the company seems to have little concern about greenwashing in American media. Check out the ad it has been running frequently in all the most influential papers and magazines, including the Economist and Washington Post on a regular basis.

You would think that Shell would learn from mistakes in the past. Last year, Shell was told to stop using the ad to the right in the UK. The text says:

 

“... we need to find new ways of managing carbon emissions to limit climate change. Continued investment in technology is one of the key ways we are able to address this challenge, and continue to secure a profitable and sustainable future.

“The challenge of the 21st century is to meet the growing need for energy in ways that are not only profitable but sustainable... In Canada we're harnessing our global network of technical and financial expertise to unlock the potential of the vast Canadian oil sands deposit. In the USA we're helping to build what will be the nation's largest refinery.”

The UK Advertising Standards Authority disapproved of the ad:

“We noted that the large scale of the oil sands developments had considerable social and environmental impacts, including those on water conservation, greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), land disturbance and waste management.

"Because we had not seen data that showed how Shell was effectively managing carbon emissions from its oil sands projects in order to limit climate change, we concluded that on this point the ad was misleading.”

The ASA concluded that the ad must not appear again in its current form.

But despite this lesson, Shell apparently has no qualms about making similar misleading claims in the US, for example the “less CO2” claim depicted above.

Shell also has no problem contributing funding to a large-scale anti-climate legislation campaign being run by the American Petroleum Institute.  That campaign was not only caught astroturfing, but also uses scare tactics and misleading, biased information to make the public and policy makers believe that climate legislation would kill jobs or drastically rise gas prices. For example, the API ad below is featured in many of the same media outlets as Shell greenwash ads. 

 

Two years of planning, two weeks of negotiating, and all we get is a worse-than-nothing deal slapped together in the last two hours.

The UN climate summit has just reached its anti-climactic close. The details of the deal reached here in Copenhagen are still being hammered out by ministers, but Heads of State are already on their way home, their photo opps and press conferences over. Even by their own admission, they have struck a deal that will not do what's necessary to stop global warming. I'm not sure that qualifies as even a half-measure. Also not really sure what else I care to say right now other than that.

But Greenpeace International executive director, Kumi Naidoo, has plenty to say:

Not fair, not ambitious and not legally binding. The job of world leaders is not done. Today they failed to avert catastrophic climate change.

The city of Copenhagen is a climate crime scene tonight, with the guilty men and women fleeing to the airport in shame. World leaders had a once in a generation chance to change the world for good, to avert catastrophic climate change. In the end they produced a poor deal full of loopholes big enough to fly Air Force One through.

We have seen a year of crises, but today it is clear that the biggest one facing humanity is a leadership crisis.

During the year a number developing countries showed a willingness to accept their share of the burden to avert climate chaos. But in the end, the blame for failure mostly lies with the rich industrialized world, countries which have the largest historic responsibility for causing the problem. In particular, the US failed to take any real leadership and dragged the talks down.

Climate science says we have only a few years left to halt the rise in emissions before making the kind of rapid reductions that would give us the best chance of avoiding dangerous climate change. We cannot change that science, so instead we will have to change the politics — and we may well have to change the politicians.

This is not over, people everywhere demanded a real deal before the Summit began and they are still demanding it. We can still save hundreds of millions of people from the devastation of a warming world, but it has just become a whole lot harder.

Civil society, the bulk of which was locked out of the final days of this Climate Summit, now needs to redouble its efforts. Each and every one of us must hold our leaders to account. We must take the struggle to avert climate catastrophe into every level of politics, local, regional, national and international. We also need to take it into the board room and onto the high streets. We can either work for a fundamental change in our society or we can suffer the consequences of one.

Those of us who live in Southern California are geographically blessed with a Mediterranean climate that brings us gorgeous weather year-round, well-loved beaches and marine life, sprawling mountains and woodlands, and breathtaking desert scenes.

Unfortunately, climate change places much at stake for Southern California as we face a future with more severe droughts and heat waves. The California Energy Commission estimates average temperatures in California could rise 8-10 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100 if we don’t act now to curb our emissions. With warmer temperatures, California could see up to 70-90% decrease in the spring snowpack of the Sierra Nevada, the source of up to half of the state’s water supply in the warmer months.  

With increased temperatures, droughts and a shrinking water supply, we could see conditions that make fires throughout the state more challenging for firefighters and more threatening to people and property.  While Southern Californians are no strangers to the fires that are a part of natural ecosystems, without real action on global warming, growing populations living in fire prone areas could be subject to fires in the wildland-urban interface that are increasingly dangerous and more difficult to control.  If the United States does not act now to implement the solutions to climate change, we could be putting more Southern California residents and firefighters at greater risk in the future.

In order to understand better what the future may hold for so many in the region, I started talking to Southern Californians who already know too well the challenges that wildfires bring.  Karen Telleen-Lawton, is an environmentalist, economist, writer, and mother of two who has been a resident of Santa Barbara since 1980. Well-versed in local ecology and fire preparation, Telleen-Lawton and her family were well prepared with an evacuation checklist for the Jesusita Fire of spring May 2009.  It was only months earlier that her family was forced to evacuate their home in the November 2008 Tea Fire.

 

When Karen received a phone call from her neighbor alerting her to the oncoming Jesusita Fire, her family immediately sprang into action protecting the areas surrounding their home, packing family valuables and keepsakes in the car, and assisting their neighbors.  After law enforcement showed up at their home and ordered them to evacuate, the Telleen-Lawtons traveled to stay with nearby family where they tensely waited overnight to hear news of the fire tearing through their community.  The next morning, Karen and her family returned to their neighborhood to find to their relief that their house had been spared by the blazes, and to their dismay that some of their neighbors were not so fortunate.  

After a week, the family was finally able to safely return to their home and found their backyard severely burned.  Additionally, a yurt that had sat in their backyard and had been a home to Telleen-Lawton’s son and other guests for years was completely destroyed.  Karen and her family have been working to repair and revitalize their property since the Jesusita Fire.  The whole ordeal has been tremendously challenging for Telleen-Lawton, both in her efforts to mend her own home, and in her sadness for her neighbors who lost their homes entirely in the fire.

Karen’s story is a story that is shared by many Southern Californians year after year.  While wildfires are a part of life here, we could be putting more people at greater risk in the future if we do not act now to implement the solutions to climate change. We know that the actions taken by President Obama and other world leaders in Copenhagen last week were inadequate for protecting our climate.  California has a track record of taking strong action for the climate, and we must work harder to take our message to the rest of the US, and the rest of the world.

President Obama gave a short speech at the UN climate summit today, and it was, well… it was a bummer.

At a time when the world needed bold leadership perhaps more than ever, we didn't get it from the very guy who was elected because he promised exactly that.

The talks aren't over, of course. Maybe he's behind closed doors at the negotiations right now working some magic. But his speech certainly didn't give me any hope that that's what he came to do.

Update: We're hearing reports (unconfirmed) that Obama and China's Premier Wen Jiabao are in closed-door meetings right now trying to hammer something out. Call the US climate envoy right now and let them know that you support Obama taking bold, decisive action and showing some leadership: 202-647-9873. Leave a message if no one answers. Go here for a suggested script.

Obama didn’t put anything new on the table in terms of US emissions targets, commitments to help the developing world deal with the effects of global warming, or other US actions to ensure these talks result in anything resembling a fair and ambitious deal.

The full video of his 10 minute address can be viewed here, text here.

Obama’s speech took place one day after a leaked document from the UN Secretariat showed that the commitments on the table at Copenhagen would leave us with a "gigaton gap" leading to at least 550 parts per million of CO2 equivalent in our atmosphere and an average world temperature rise of 3 degrees Celsius (about 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit) or more.

There's a reason we talk about "350" and not "550."  The science is clear that levels of climate pollution at 550 or higher put us into a danger zone where feedback loops kick in (burning of Boreal forests, melting of tundra, etc.), making catastrophic climate change a reality and dooming millions of people in least-developed countries around the world to suffer the ever-worsening impacts of climate change even though they did little to nothing to create the problem.

Instead of change we can believe in, we’re getting climate change the whole world will be forced to live with. So, not to be flippant, but, like I said before: Bummer.

Our executive director, Phil Radford, had this to say:

The world was waiting for the spirit of yes we can, but all we got was my way or the highway.

President Obama can still save Copenhagen by doing what he called on other leaders to do and give some ground by increasing his commitment to cut global warming pollution. But as it is he crossed an ocean to tell the world he has nothing new to offer, then he said take it or leave it.

Read the rest of Phil's response here.

I’ve been asked if I still had hope going into this last day of the Copenhagen International Climate Negotiations. Definitely. Yes. I did.

President Obama and all the other heads of state would not be attending these negotiations if it were not to decide on something big. Rumor was that Obama would have some new updates on US commitments and surely, his presence alone has the potential to move nations just as it did last November when the global community celebrated his election.

 

The President’s 10-speech this morning, however, left me severely disappointed in his lack of leadership.

In the speech, Obama still only commits the US to a lousy 4% emissions reduction from 1990 levels by 2020 (the science calls for 25-40% below 1990 levels by 2020). I was hoping President Obama would bring news today that he is pushing the U.S. commitment to higher levels. Why isn’t he showing leadership on this issue?

If I were President Obama, I would be extremely ashamed to bring such a low level of ambition to these  negotiations. We need to be communicating our disappointment now.

One thing I know for sure is that we, as activists in the environmental movement, are doing our part. If world leaders come out of Copenhagen with a poor deal, they need to know it is because they have failed us.

 

 

If you haven’t called President Obama’s administration yet, PLEASE DO!  We must create even more pressure today and hold these talks accountable to the demands of our movement!

The action is not over. We need an escalation. In the US, you still have the voice and we need to be loudest today.

 

Tomorrow is the last day of the UN climate summit and, by all accounts, the negotiations have descended into complete chaos. The voice of civil society has been increasingly marginalized. There has been no leadership from the developed countries that created the climate crisis. The pleas for survival by developing countries have been ignored. So we've taken action to demand leadership in the final 24 hours in order to save these talks and establish a real deal in Copenhagen.


Just moments ago, Greenpeace’s very own Head of State arrived at the Queen’s gala dinner for real Heads of State, 120 of whom are now here for the climate talks. Our distinguished faux-world leader and her entourage entered the dinner and held up two banners reading “Politicians Talk, Leaders Act.” We're sitting here watching coverage of the action on Danish news as I type.

They were there to represent the millions of people around the world who want a fair, ambitious and legally binding treaty. World leaders risk condemning the world to climate chaos if they don’t take decisive action to steer the climate negotiations in the right direction on the final day of talks.

We also projected the message " Don't betray our children's future" onto the Parliament building where the dinner was held.


The climate negotiations are on the verge of massive failure, but Heads of State still have just under twenty-four hours to turn the situation around. The rich world must commit to deeper emissions cuts and funding for developing country to lower their own emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change that are already being experienced. Demand leadership from rich countries by joining the over 13 million people who have already signed this petition calling for a real deal here in Copenhagen.

As a bonus, here's a video the activists shot in their car on the way to the dinner (apparently, their car was just ahead of Hilary Clinton's in the motorcade). This was livestreamed from a camera-phone they had with them, but it's also kinda arty in a way.

Yesterday, a student activist and I went to the White House to deliver the names of the more than 50,000 Americans who have signed a Greenpeace petition calling on President Obama to secure a fair, ambitious, and binding climate treaty at the UN Summit in Copenhagen.

Sorting some of the 50,000 petitions calling for climate leadership from President Obama

We already made sure that President Obama saw your call for leadership when his helicopter flew over our banner made of the names of those 50,000 people as he arrived home from receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo last week.

But with the President about to depart for the final day of the Climate Summit in Copenhagen on Friday, we stopped by to meet with his staff and show them that so many hope for his leadership.  One of those people is our own Kumi Naidoo, the executive director of Greenpeace International.  He has written an open letter to President Obama on the eve of his visit, which we also delivered.  I recommend reading the full letter; here’s a selection;

I end by reminding you of something you said often during your campaign. You frequently invoked the powerful words of Martin Luther King: "The fierce urgency of now".

Sadly, according to the science the urgency of now has become even more fierce. I humbly appeal to you to reject the voices of short-term interest, of political expediency and of compromise.

Listen instead to the call of history. Listen to the voices of those most at threat. Listen to the voices of future generations, of our children and grandchildren. Of your children. Of your grandchildren, as yet unborn. Then, please, take the action that you know is needed.

 

Delivering a letter from Greenpeace Executive Director Kumi Naidoo to President Obama

So many people are ramping up the pressure today, from climate justice advocates outside the Bella Center in Copenhagen to activists here in Washington DC, and amazing actions all over the planet.

It’s our climate, President Obama; it’s your decision.

The Department of Commerce was declared a climate crime scene this morning. Greenpeace activists descended on its DC headquarters to try and free the climate talks, which were being held hostage by the Chamber and its clients. Chamber lobbyists work for the very industries that create and profit from criminal climate destruction.

Even if you weren’t in DC to witness the action as it progressed, thousands of people tuned in to Twitter to get updates live from the field as the events unfolded.

The Greenpeace twitter kept followers engaged in all the activities. The Chamber of Commerce decided to use twitter to try to discount everything Greenpeace was saying. This is where things started to heat up.

My favorite reply of the Chamber (@chamberpost) was how the activities disrupted a holiday concert for a local charter school. At first glance, it would seem as if the Chamber really cares for the youth of our country. It’s a clever way for the Chamber to make Greenpeace look like the bad guys. We disrupted a concert. But, let’s take a look at what the Chamber is doing to the future of all the youth in America.

As a parent, I’m very concerned with the effects of global warming on my son’s future. I want him to have a bright future and a healthy planet to live on. And, thanks to the Chamber and all their polluting clients, his future may be tarnished forever.


Companies that contribute to global warming (oil, coal) create a huge profit. The Chamber of Commerce lobbies for what’s in the best interest of these companies, their profits remaining huge. The Chamber doesn’t lobby for my son or the children at the charter school that were visiting the building today.

Currently, our future is in the hands of world leaders over in Copenhagen. They are in the final days of negotiating a climate treaty that has the potential to either save the day or keep us on a path to dangerous climate change.

I hope our world leaders will do the right thing and protect our future and not the bank accounts of polluting companies. It would be a crime, indeed, if world leaders gathered for two weeks and didn’t come out with strong, binding treaty to combat the effects of global warming.

We need YOU! Please take action today.

--Michelle

 

In what’s being hailed by some as “a truly remarkable tour de farce,” the US has earned first place in the Fossil of the Day award for the third day straight.

This time, the award was bestowed upon the esteemed delegation from the US for inserting “X %” as an alternative to the science-based targets currently in the draft text of a climate deal. This “X” is meant to represent voluntary pledges by countries, replacing concrete binding emissions reductions targets.


We’re at a critical point here, and nothing less than concrete, science-based targets will achieve the emissions reductions we need to avert catastrophic global warming. But the US is trying to move us in the direction of letting countries do whatever the hell they feel like, not what’s necessary.

Triggering unpleasant flashbacks of the Bush era, the US is also promoting a plan to abandon science-based targets altogether and instead wants a ‘pledge and review’ system, where everyone puts a voluntary target on the table, those targets are added up, and that number is used as the overall target. So my money says the US can keep the streak alive — but for the sake of us all, let's hope I'm wrong.

When French president Nicolas Sarkozy arrived in Copenhagen, a Greenpeace welcoming committee was there to meet him with the message, “Politicians talk, leaders act.”

We deployed our banner, but it turns out Sarkozy might not have ever seen it. Why? Because, we’ve heard, he might have hid in the airport rather than drive by our big bad banner.



I’ve seen our executive director, Kumi Naidoo, speak several times the past couple weeks (the man is everywhere, it’s as impressive as it must be exhausting!), and he has a line he likes to use about our leaders all suffering from the same medical condition: They’re all hard of hearing, he says. At least, they are when it comes to calls for leadership and climate action.

But I guess in this case that’s not even true. Sarkozy isn’t hard of hearing at all, he’s just sticking his fingers in his ears and going “lalalalala” to avoid hearing us. Which means our message is still reaching him all the same.

President Obama is due in Copenhagen this week for the UN Climate Summit, where he'll join over 100 other Heads of State to hopefully hammer out an effective, fair, and binding climate pact. But there is another delegation here from the US, and although they have no official capacity, they are leaving their mark. We could call them the "Flat-Earthers," but they are really a collection of Congressional Republicans bent on preventing the US from committing to a global treaty and from having the US change its energy infrastructure from one that's fueled by dirty fuels to one powered by clean and green technologies.

About a half-dozen climate deniers are here in Denmark, according to Politico "to oppose plans for cap-and-trade legislation, express their discontent with the scientific community that researches climate change and call for the United Nations to halt any negotiations until the academic scandal known as "Climate-gate" is resolved."

They’re lead by House Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence of Indiana who said:

In the worst recession in 26 years, in the midst of an academic scandal and questionable science revealed in 'Climategate' and in the absence of a national consensus about policies that would bear upon the category known as climate change, we gather here to say, Mr. President, don't make promises in Copenhagen that we cant keep.

Rep. Pence would do well to read the United Nation's Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTD), which finds that a pathway to a low carbon economy can lead to big economic benefits.

According to the report:

There is no inevitable trade-off between climate change mitigation and development. On the contrary, climate change mitigation is a process of global structural change which offers huge economic opportunities for developing countries.

Pence and his allies could also listen to their party’s 2008 vice presidential candidate, who, when she was governor of Alaska, wrote her to constituents:

Alaska's climate is warming. While there have been warming and cooling trends before, climatologists tell us that the current rate of warming is unprecedented within the time of human civilization. Many experts predict that Alaska, along with our northern latitude neighbors, will warm at a faster pace than any other areas, and the warming will continue for decades.

The stakes here are too high for deniers to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that they can’t see what’s really happening to our planet. By committing to strong emissions reduction targets and by creating the cleaner technologies to power our world, the US can again lead the world. The US, traditionally the world leader in innovation because of our unmatched university and research institutions, is poised to show the way, but without Congressional leadership progress will be almost impossible. There's still time for the Flat-Earthers to listen to reason. Congress will again take up climate in 2010, and Pence and his allies can get on the right side of history.

All week long, the Fresh Air Center has been a really valuable place for me and Jamie to come work, especially now that we're not allowed into the conference center. Run by Tcktcktck.org, the FAC is a space for NGO and independent bloggers to work and coordinate messages.

I'm writing this as our executive director, Kumi Naidoo, addresses the crowd (he's also the chairman of Tcktcktck). He got a very warm welcome, and the speaker before him actually said he was glad not to have to follow Kumi on. But I dare say the crowd is really here to see the main event: a panel hosted by Kevin Grandia of Desmog Blog and featuring Naomi Klein, author of No Logo and The Shock Doctrine (check her out at NaomiKlein.com); Andy Revkin of the New York Times; George Monbiot, author and columnist for The Guardian; and Katherine Goldstein, green editor for the Huffington Post. The panel discussion is about how coverage of the climate talks in the media will effect the final two days of negotiations.

Before the panel took the stage, I asked Naomi Klein (of whom, I freely admit, I am a rabid fan) to tell us what, in her estimation, the impact of activism outside of the conference center can have on the negotiations going on inside. Here's her response:

As Jamie reported yesterday, nongovernmental organization (NGO) delegations inside the Bella Center may have been dramatically reduced, but that doesn’t mean they can exclude our voice. We’re running lean, mean operations both inside and outside the conference center.

In my post yesterday about REDD, I mentioned that the US and Colombia had received a “Fossil of the Day” award for moving talks backwards. So we put together a little rapid response direct communication outside of the Colombian embassy calling on President Uribe to “Save the forests, don’t kill the climate.”



We also did a direct communication aimed at the US delegation yesterday morning:


I’m sure you got enough of the technical details about REDD negotiations in my post yesterday, but I was just reading an update from a member of our political team and thought it was perfectly illustrative of the type of really detailed policy wonk work they’re doing. Allow me to simply quote:

The critical issue of national vs. subnational must be resolved by ministers and we are depending on the EU, Brazil, and others to maintain a strong position on this. Our ask on this is very simple. In Section 5 [of the draft REDD agreement text] (natl v subnatl) we want: "the 3 Ands." I.e. having subnatl only as supplemental to national, not as a substitute for it. This means leaving "and" in 5a, replacing "or" with "and" in 5b, and replacing "with" with "and" in 5c (and deleting the phrase "optional interim measure" ).

For more on the distinction between national vs. subnational REDD projects and why we’re pushing for the national approach, check out my post, “Code REDD.”

By demanding a deal to save the climate both inside and outside the conference center, we have multiple means of leveraging our voice into the conversations happening right now about the future of our planet. So it’s like Jamie said, they can try to shut us out but they can’t shut us down.

It has come now to the police beating protestors. Tensions are extremely high at the Copenhagen climate talks. Security in the conference center apparently is afraid that their safe bubble will burst if they allow Friends of the Earth to remain inside. How ironic is that? I’m tempted to make this a rant post, but I will try to focus on one theme: negotiating.

Since before Barcelona, over a few weeks ago now, it seems there has been virtually no movement on the most important aspects of a climate agreement. How much will countries commit on paper to reduce their emissions? How much money will wealthy countries commit to help developing countries make sure global emissions reductions are sufficient to avoid catastrophe?

The purpose of ‘negotiating’ is to determine who should do how much – the idea being that negotiating Parties come to the table with at least some flexibility. Hence, one problem in most people’s minds. Some Parties (e.g., US) have come to the table with zero flexibility on how much global warming pollution they will reduce.

Complete inflexibility actually means that Parties are not negotiating at all – they are in Copenhagen just to convince all the other Parties to accept their position. So, the other Parties (e.g., EU), who have already stated some flexibility in their position (20 or 30% emissions reductions by 2020), effectively remain inflexible as well because the conditions for changing their positions rely on the flexibility of other Parties.

But the talks in Copenhagen should not be negotiations anyway. ‘Negotiating’ has a similar connotation as ‘bargaining,’ where everyone tries to get the best deal even if it hurts the other person. We cannot solve global warming with this approach. In actuality, it’s even worse than this! The predominant attitude is that a ‘deal’ can be reached where nobody has to sacrifice anything. This relates to our US climate legislation, which commits to spend zero public dollars on the worst problem of human existence. US policymakers have negotiated away any possibility that the legislation will work.

A saner attitude toward developing climate policy in Copenhagen is for countries to come to the table explaining how they can help solve this crisis. Think of it like your little brother has just fallen into a frozen pond. Who can run the fastest to go find help? Who has a rope? Who is the strongest and can try to pull little brother out? Who has ideas for making sure little brother doesn’t fall in again?

The EU is offering to cut 30% emissions, but only if others will do more? The US will not commit to reduce one whit unless China agrees to complete transparency? Right now countries are using lack of action as leverage to get other countries to do more. But let’s be clear that lack of action means more pollution, and therefore is a decision to cause harm. The approach that ‘I will if you will’ in this case is blackmail, hostage taking, and a game of chicken all at once.

This is not a climate bazaar, where everyone is trying to get the best deal. This is a global problem that everyone needs to come together to solve. Either we all get a good deal, or there is no deal.

 

 

Jamie Woolley is a web editor for Greenpeace UK who is in Copenhagen helping cover the UN climate talks. He wrote this blog after news broke that access to the conference center would be dramatically restricted for nongovernmental organization's (NGO's) delegations.

My COP15 badge. Bit useless now...

Since early last week, rumours have been flying round the Copenhagen negotiations about what would happen as we got closer to the arrival of the heads of state. Then a couple of days ago it was confirmed: access the conference centre would become more and more restricted for non-governmental organisations such as Greenpeace, and today was the start of those restrictions. We only have a few ID badges to go around the team and we'll have fewer with each passing day.

Over-subscription (it's been getting really crowded) and security have been used to justify the move, and I can't deny it's frustrating that our team is split between the Bella Centre and offices in the city centre. But the real concern is what it will allow the world leaders to do (or rather, not do) come the end of the negotiations on Friday.

Restricting access to huge chunks of civil society is not far removed from closing the door on a smoky gentlemen's club, and the transparent negotiation process we've been demanding will become shrouded in secrecy. With a nod, a handshake and a photo call, these guys (and they are mostly guys) could seal a deal which is a long, long way from the fair, ambitions and binding one we need.

Worse would be if they came out of their private rooms and span a great line about the wonderful deal they've struck but in reality, if you read the small print, it does little bits here and there, but the bigger picture will be missing and it'll be pretty much business as usual. If that's the case, they need to know we won't accept their spin and their greenwash will be exposed.

It's a concern but they're on their way to Copenhagen because we demanded they attend. The Global Day of Action at the weekend showed the worldwide support for that FAB deal and we have to keep pushing them for exactly that. We don't need to be inside the Bella Centre to do that.

 

Discussions at these climate talks are often in a highly specialized language that some of us like to call “Alphabet Soup” – because it is conducted almost entirely in acronyms. One such cup o’ soup we’ve been hearing a lot about lately is REDD, which stands for “Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation.” So I thought I’d give you an as-brief-as-possible update on where the negotiations on REDD are at, and what we’re pushing for.

Stopping the deforestation and degradation of tropical forests is one of the quickest and most effective ways to reduce emissions quickly. And REDD can achieve a very substantial amount of emissions reductions.

As much sense as REDD makes, however, there are of course those countries who are undermining efforts aimed at writing a strong and effective REDD program into the climate deal being worked on here at the UN climate summit. And as is unfortunately true on far too many issues, the US is one of the major roadblocks. In fact, the US just won a “Fossil of the Day” award (which it shared with Colombia) for its obstructionist stance on the REDD issue (one of three Fossils it was awarded in the past two days, no less).


Over 50 Greenpeace activists from the Climate Defenders Camp on the Kampar Peninsula in Indonesia take action against deforestation — unfurling a 20 x 30 meter banner in a freshly destroyed area of rainforest that read ‘Obama you can stop this’, urging him to take strong leadership and work closely with other Heads of State to help avert a climate crisis by ending global deforestation, responsible for about a fifth of global greenhouse gas emissions. © Greenpeace / John Novis

The US and Colombia received this “slightly sarcastic yet highly prestigious” honor for moving REDD discussions in the wrong direction and delaying a draft text delivery to ministers, who will hammer out the final text to be presented to heads of state when they arrive later in the week. Both the US and Colombia are also supporters of what’s known as the sub-national or project approach to REDD.


We’re pushing hard for a national approach to REDD. The problem with managing REDD on a project-by-project or sub-national basis is that if you stop forest destruction in one place, it could just move to another part of the country. A national overview of all REDD projects and the emissions reductions achieved through them could prevent that from happening. The US is pushing for the project-by-project approach because it would benefit US corporate polluters who expect to receive cheap offset credits for investing in forestry projects abroad so they can continue to pollute at home.

On Monday the Rainforest Coalition led by Papua New Guinea opposed this approach and joined with the EU and Brazil in their demand for a national approach. We’re still waiting to see how this plays out and of course throwing as much support behind the national approach as we can (and lest you doubt that support will make a difference, check out who’s number four on this list of the most influential players here at the UN climate summit – ahead of President Obama, even!).

Another issue reaching a critical juncture in the REDD negotiations is the global goal for deforestation. We’re calling for zero deforestation by 2020, but as you might imagine there are attempts to water this target down by countries looking to avoid taking real action. The EU supports a goal of halving deforestation in developing countries by 2020 and stopping all deforestation in developing countries by 2030. Yet even this inadequate goal was recently undermined by an announcement from the UK, who proposed financing to halt only 25% of emissions by 2015.

Financing of forest protection is yet another issue coming to a head here. To achieve the full emissions reductions that are possible through REDD, the rich countries that are most responsible for causing the climate crisis must set up a global fund of USD 42 billion (30 billion euros) annually and make it immediately available to all countries with tropical forests. They must also make sure that the forest protection plans are set up in ways that protect wildlife and the rights of indigenous and local people.

These are just some of the key issues being worked on here as negotiators attempt to hammer out a plan for using REDD to tackle climate change. There are several more, but these are some of the main issues and this post has already gone on long enough, so I’ll stop there.

California, the third largest and most populous state in the US, is the place that we call home.  As residents of the Golden State, we're lucky to live in a state with some of the richest and most diverse ecology in the entire world: beautiful coastlines and world class beaches, snow capped mountains, bountiful farms and vineyards, spectacular deserts, and some of the oldest known trees in the world.  In addition to the state's natural wonders, California is home to world class cities, a rich history, hubs of creativity, progressive movements,  and a population as diverse as its environment.  It's our love for California and our work as organizers on climate change that inspired our project to take a closer look at the ways that climate change already is, or will, threaten life in our beautiful state.

California is at risk of severe climate impacts that could affect millions of people in the state: drought, wildfires, sea level rise and beach erosion, seasonal changes affecting the wine industry, decreased Sierra snowpack, and landslides.  The diverse landscape and demographic of the state means that many places and people will be affected if world leaders do not act to reduce global warming pollution according to scientific recommendations.  We've spent the past month talking with farmers in the Central Valley, wine growers in Northern California, and Southern CA residents living in fire-prone areas, who have experienced the impacts of wildfires.

 

We’re taking a closer look at climate change impacts here at home in these upcoming weeks while world leaders are meeting in Copenhagen for the UN climate negotiations to make decisions that will impact the future of our climate.  Ted Lemon, a winegrower in Sonoma County and Christopher Locke, a walnut farmer in the Central Valley, are already seeing the effects of a changing climate on their crops.  Karen Telleen-Lawton in Santa Barbara and Eric and Megan Johnson of San Diego have had their lives impacted by Southern California wildfires, which could become more challenging for firefighters and more threatening to people and property with continued droughts and a shrinking water supply.

The stories of these Californians represent a glimpse into the future of what climate change could look like for our beautiful state.  Californians are calling on President Obama to protect their future by taking action this week in Copenhagen. Efforts being made across the state can only go so far, and if our President does not commit to science-based global warming solutions, he will be compromising our businesses, our homes and the identity of California as the state that we've grown to love.  You can follow the stories of these individuals throughout the week right here on the Greenpeace USA blog.

-- By Jenny Binstock and Lauren Thorpe, Greenpeace Field Organizers in California

 

 

Having spent my entire trip here with activists from around the world has really clarified how incredibly diverse, yet united our movement is. Today I stood next to a 60 year old Irish woman making signs for the march tomorrow, I painted banners with a young girl from Finland, and I ate lunch with a man from Ecuador. I have heard that there are over 40 nationalities represented in this warehouse tonight. Isn't that amazing?

I spoke with a Swedish student this afternoon and when I mentioned that I was from the United States, he suddenly got a huge smile on his face. He said that he loved meeting activists from the U.S. because we were "badass." He explained more, saying that he had just been in Japan with the GOT (Greenpeace Organizing Term) students and that he was extremely impressed by the Greepeace Student Network. He was basicially jumping up and down as I was telling him more about what our student network has been doing over the past year and the passion and high level of involvement of our students in the network.

I usually get a little embarrassed when I say I'm from the U.S. to a foreign activist because I feel guilty for our country's poor leadership in environmental issues. But when I had this conversation today, I felt extremely proud of us and what we are doing in our country. I am so thankful for all the hard work our students have been doing and feel confident in knowing we are doing absolutely everything we can to influence our President to make the right decisions at this conference. If he doesn't follow through on his commitments, we will know that it was out of our hands. And he will know that he has let down hundreds (thousands) of students. I know that he wouldn't want that to happen. Let's continue hoping for the best and doing what we know how to do very well: keep up the presha! http://members.greenpeace.org/survey/start/234/

The Four Horsement of the Apocalypse rode through downtown Copenhagen today to remind world leaders of the consequences of inaction on climate change.

I know this sounds especially dour, whereas I think we all like to keep a positive attitude and believe that we can get through to world leaders and impress upon them the urgency of the moment we find ourselves living in, thereby inspiring them to act. That’s why our message isn’t that the arrival of the Four Horsemen is inevitable, but that we can change the future.

I put together this video of behind-the-scenes footage as well as footage of the Horsemen in Copenhagen’s Parliament Square so that you could have a full picture of this direct communication. Greenpeace’s Finnish climate campaigner, Sini, was kind enough to tell us what was going on.



Famine, Pestilence, War, and Death are especially good harbingers of the future we will face should we fail to keep global temperature rise below 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius), as these are all likely impacts of runaway climate change.

Climate change threatens to have a devastating effect on food supplies across the world, some of which are already in scarce supply. Some areas of the tropics would see massive crop failures from even a 1 to 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise (about 1.8 to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit).

This would of course bring on malnutrition for millions of people worldwise, while heat waves, floods, storms, and fires would intensify outbreaks of diseases such as dengue and malaria.

An estimated 300,000 people are already dying due to climate change every year, and those deaths are projected to increase to half a million people by 2030 if we don’t act now.

The death toll could rise even higher as resource scarcity and mass migrations bring the displaced and disempowered into violent conflict with other societies.

But it doesn’t have to be this way. We can change the future, if our politicians take bold and decisive action now.

Yesterday was the first time I've seen the sun since arriving in Copenhagen over a week ago. Literally. But that was not even close to the most exciting thing about the day.

The Greenpeace contingent of the December 12th "The World Wants a Real Deal" march was huge, lively, and — if you'll allow me to indulge in a bit of hyperbole — damn inspiring. I felt extremely fortunate to be there with so many passionate fellow activists. Despite the exhaustion from averaging 4 hours of sleep a night and the malnourishment from crappy convention center vegetarian food, their energy was so infectious that I was feeling great. And naturally I shot some video to share.

The march kicked off in Copenhagen's Parliament Square, where Kumi Naidoo spoke after the crowd had been warmed up by several other speakers, including "Mr. Green" and Vandana Shiva.


Once the march was underway, Greenpeacers stretched as far as the eye could see. We had three floats, several banners, a drum corps, and hundreds of shouting, dancing, marching activists. We'd made a few thousand yellow signs to hand out sporting various messages to world leaders, as you'll see. My favorite was "Bla bla bla - Save the climate."


I'd say the coolest part, though, was the "puppet master" float, which had a slick-looking, cigar-smoking business man controlling Obama, Merkel, and several other world leaders. I asked one of the activists pulling the float, Fidel, to explain it to us while he was pulling.


I shot short video blogs of a few other folks at the march, but I'll post those separately later.

Today was a total adrenaline rush. Ok, no, I wasn't hanging off a bridge or risking my life, but for a web geek like me, it was pretty amazing.

That's because we unfurled an enormous 80x40 foot banner with 50,000 signatures to President Obama DIRECTLY under his helicopter as he returned home from Oslo today.

In fact, his helicopter even slowed down and briefly hovered over the banner, so I'm SURE he could clearly see our message to him: LEAD, Save the Climate. The banner included an image of him that's made up of all of the signatures supporters like you sent in.

 

 

So you see, for me to get a chance to watch something we (50,000 of us!) did online get delivered in such an amazing way - THAT really was an adrenaline rush!

 

 

President Obama will head to Copenhagen in exactly a week, and I hope he takes our message to him to heart. We need him to lead the world to a fair, ambitious, and binding treaty.

If you weren't already part of this banner, I hope you'll sign up for our email list, follow us on Twitter, and fan us on Facebook to be part of everything we do in the future . And if you were one of the 50,000 people who were a part of this - THANK YOU!

 

A globe here in the Bella Center in Copenhagen left off several of the Pacific island nations through an "oversight." Unfortunately, the globe also provides a glimpse of how the South Pacific might look if we don't get a strong and legally binding deal here at the UN climate summit.

Yesterday, the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) released a proposal for a two-protocol, legally binding outcome for the Copenhagen climate summit. In their press release, the group described the proposal as “designed to safeguard the Earth’s climate system and to secure the future survival of its 43 members.”

That’s well and aptly put, but far too modest. The members of AOSIS are some of the least-developed nations on Earth, including places like the Maldives, Tuvalu, and Papua New Guinea – nations that had virtually no role in creating the climate crisis but will suffer the most if global warming goes unchecked. It’s certainly true that safeguarding the Earth’s climate is key to these nations’ survival – but it’s equally true that it’s key to the survival of each and every nation on this planet.

The need for a legally binding agreement, as opposed to a politically binding agreement (which has lately been much touted by the US and other rich countries hoping to stall on making real commitments to take climate action), is evident enough, I think. But let me explain the “two-protocol” bit, because I realize that’s a bit technical.

What the AOSIS proposal would do is essentially two things: amend the Kyoto Protocol to extend it until 2017 (it currently is set to expire in 2012) and set new emissions targets for all parties; and simultaneously create a new “Copenhagen Protocol,” a legally binding agreement that would “enhance implementation of the [United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)] in a balanced and comprehensive manner by addressing mitigation, adaptation, technology, financing and capacity-building support.”


6 August 2009 - Greenpeace activists scaled the 50-meter high coal loader at Hay Point Coal Terminal in Mackay, Australia and locked themselves on to the structure to stop its operation. The action took place during the Pacific Islands Forum in Cairns, to demand the Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd stop risking the future of Pacific Islands by undermining real action on climate change and expanding Australia’s coal industry. © Greenpeace / Hamilton

Perhaps the most important element of the Copenhagen Protocol proposed by AOSIS, however, is that it would bring the US – the country that has contributed the most to climate change and continues to have the highest per-capita carbon emissions levels in the world – into the legally binding agreement.

In other words, the AOSIS proposal lays out the real deal that the world needs. Climate chaos does not respect national borders and does not discriminate between rich and poor nations. It will affect us all. Establishing a fair, ambitious, and legally binding treaty here in Copenhagen is a matter of survival for us all.

A few days ago I gave a presentation here in Copenhagen on why President Obama should not extract his talking points for the international negotiations from the House-passed climate bill.

As we know, their weak stated target of 3% under 1990 by 2020 cannot ensure the planet sees peak emissions by 2015. Scientists tell us this is what we need to avoid reaching a tipping point to runaway climate disruption. However, the President and his delegates here in Copenhagen so far refuse to commit to a serious 2020 target or to say the US will sign something legally binding.

The administration so far has acted as if they are powerless in the face of a vacillating Congress. This despondence has led them to already speak as if it is a foregone conclusion that the serious work will continue in “about 6 months.” There can be no doubt they want to wait for the Senate to finish, but waiting for the Senate is a serious problem for two big reasons.

First, the developing Senate bill may become worse than the House-passed bill with respect to the weak 2020 target. (Both bills already cripple the Clean Air Act’s potential to address global warming pollution.)

Second, the Senate may fail to pass a bill altogether in 2010. The administration cannot and need not wait for new legislation. If the Senate fails to pass a bill, does the world have to experience the same stalling strategy from the US administration next year?

Let’s be completely clear: this decision to wait for Congress is completely political. It’s not because the President is legally bound to wait for Congress. In fact, he could rightly say that Congress already gave him the power to sign an effective climate agreement and to implement it.

Once I finished my presentation here in Copenhagen, Kassie Siegel from the Center for Biological Diversity gave a good explanation of why the President can act now. You can see her paper here.

In 1987 the Congress passed the Global Climate Protection Act (GCPA), which gave the President the power to negotiate and sign an international climate agreement. More importantly, the GCPA gave the president “congressional executive authority,” which many trade bills have utilized to bring the US into subsequent binding international obligations without requiring Senate ratification.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court in 2007 decided that, through its passage of the Clean Air Act, Congress also gave the administration the ability effectively to implement the obligations that would come with an international agreement.

So the question is: Why does the President insist on pretending he doesn’t have the authority to act on the climate?

 

Yes He Can: http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/assets/binaries/yes-he-can-president-obama-s

Biz As Usual: http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/assets/binaries/business-as-usual

Presentation: http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/assets/binaries/business-as-usual-presentation

Image: Climate change demonstrations in Oslo, during the Peace Prize Ceremony. © Christian Åslund / Greenpeace

This week the Western Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC), an international treaty body charged with tuna, billfish and shark management for the western Pacific is meeting in Papeete, Tahiti. Like most fishery management meetings progress for conservation moves at a glacial pace. Scientists here, like everywhere else in the world, have been sounding the warning about ongoing overfishing, the depletion of both Yellowfin and Bigeye tuna populations and the need to take immediate action to rebuild these stocks.

It’s a very contentious situation as the world’s huge fishing interests simply don’t want to slow down their plunder – they’re still making boat loads of money and the small Pacific Island nations want a sustainable future. We’re keeping our fingers crossed that by the end of the meeting progress will be made in reducing fishing effort  and at least some small steps toward sustainability are achieved.  

In today’s session Japan gave a nod to shark conservation and also reiterated their concerns about a CITIES listing for any tuna species. On the shark issue during the discussion about adding Silky sharks to the list of species of concern deserving special attention Japan brought to the Commission’s attention the plight of Hammerhead sharks in this region. They asked and the Commission agreed to add Hammerheads to the list of sharks needing special consideration thus making data collection on Hammerheads a priority issue.

It’s not often Japan leads the discussion of needed conservation measures for any ocean animal they actively target. They did cite the high value of Hammerheads and their depleted status as their reason for speaking out about Hammerheads. I personally took this as a good sign of Japan’s changing attitude about their role in the future of Pacific fisheries. 

The other interesting thing to come out of the Japanese delegation today was their expression of concern about the possibility of another tuna species qualifying for a CITIES listing. The Commission’s scientific committee had just finished their review of the stock status for the different tuna populations in the region where the Commission was informed that Yellowfin tuna population, in region 3, was only 10% of their unfished level.

Japan then referenced the low population level of Atlantic Bluefin tuna as qualifying for a CITIES listing and that the WCPFC needed to take action before Pacific Yellowfin were also proposed for a CITIES listing. It was very interesting to hear Japan cite the stock status of Alantic Bluefin tuna as meeting the criteria for listing on CITIES, because of low population levels and that this Commission can’t allow that to happen again. All I can say is, small steps are better than nothing, inspiring our Greenpeace team to keep on fighting for the Pacific ocean’s health and the island nations that depend on her. 

 

President Obama has officially arrived in Oslo and is entering the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony as I write this. Since the moment he arrived he has pretty much been inundated with messages from concerned citizens of all kinds, including a large contingent of Greenpeace activists with several direct communications for him.

We’ve been urging Obama to earn his Nobel Peace Prize by leading the world to a fair, ambitious, and legally binding climate treaty in Copenhagen when he attends the UN climate summit next week. 

Seriously, my Greenpeace Nordic colleagues and the crew of the Rainbow Warrior here in Oslo have been very busy.


Yesterday I posted a video of this “snow banner” they did out by the Oslo airport so that when President Obama’s plane landed here in Oslo, he was be greeted by a reminder that it’s “Our climate, your decision.”



This was but the first of many Greenpeace direct communications to Obama here in Oslo.

Several other messages were waiting for Obama as he traveled through Oslo: reverse graffiti made by pressure-washing stencils reading “Change the Politics, Save the Climate” on public structures:





We were also out there with signs and a physical version of that projection I posted last night, the one with Obama and Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg. Here’s a quick video of us greeting Obama as he arrives at the Prime Minister’s office and again later as he arrives at his hotel:



In the past few days, the Greenpeace Oslo team has made plenty of other attempts to communicate our message to Obama. They launched Greenpeace’s earth-shaped hot balloon right by City Hall, where the award ceremony will take place:




Speaking of City Hall, the director of Greenpeace's Norway office, Truls Gulowsen
, was inside the ceremony itself — check out this pic of him and Obama!



The Rainbow Warrior had a couple messages for him, as you saw in my video blog from yesterday. And then of course we held the candle light vigil last night. Here’s a video I shot of that (sorry it’s kinda dark, but my video camera doesn’t have a light on it):



I'm up here in Oslo, Norway to help our local Greenpeace activists and the crew of the Rainbow Warrior congratulate US President Barack Obama on winning the Nobel Peace Prize, which he'll be awarded in a ceremony at City Hall tomorrow. Our message for Obama is simple: You won it, now earn it. Which is to say, in order to live up to the prestige of the Peace Prize, he needs to go down to Copenhagen next week and help establish a fair, ambitious, and legally-binding climate treaty at the UN climate summit so that this doesn't become reality:


© Christian Aslund/Greenpeace

I shot this quick and dirty video to give you a glimpse of the Rainbow Warrior with its banner messages for Obama:


Traditionally, the people of Oslo hold a candle-light vigil the night before the ceremony for the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, but Obama isn't coming until tomorrow. We're having the vigil tonight anyway, and expect hundreds of concerned citizens to show up to help us call for leadership from the US president.

My colleagues here in Oslo have already been extremely busy sending messages to Obama in some very clever ways, as you can see in the pic above. When he gets here tomorrow he'll be welcomed Greenpeace-style as soon as he arrives at the airport, while he drives through town, and when he gets to City Hall to accept his award. Stay tuned, I'm going to have lots of video and photos for you.

The photo at the top of this post is a projection my colleagues here in the Oslo office did on the building where the prime minister's office is. In other words, the very same building where Norway's Jens Stoltenberg and Barack Obama will be meeting tomorrow to talk politics. The projection repurposes one of our airport adverts, but puts the Norwegian prime minister on there along with Obama to call on both of them to lead the way on climate change. I think it looks fabulous.

I've been in Copenhagen since November 28th and the streets have become increasingly crowded this week. Perhaps some of the crowds are Christmas shoppers, come in from the surrounding Danish towns. Some are negotiating teams and governmental staff from the 190 some nations that began official talks on Monday. A whole host of Copenhagen’s growing and lively morass, however, are neither Danes nor accredited negotiators, but paid representatives for companies with a stake in this meeting’s outcome.

Around every corner seems to be some mention of the COP15 (the UN’s official name for the international negotiations on climate change). Often it's a poster pasted onto a trash barrel, street light, or construction wall advertising the upcoming December 12^th international day of action. Gangs of activists, like your very own Greenpeace Youth, have set up informational stations around the city and many more are patrolling the streets with petitions and fliers for upcoming rallies and demonstrations.

Just as frequently, however, another kind of advertisement will catch your eye. Corporate branding of the COP15 talks is proving to be very popular, with companies spending real cash to make sure their name is out in force as thousands of government officials and media hit the town. Massive banners and billboards sponsored by Coke, Siemens, and Unilever have been hung and installed at most major intersections and metro stops – their messages range from entirely and intentionally vague to blatantly and ironically self-promotional.

Coke’s “Hopenhagen” billboards are generally non-offensive – they’re bright and playful illustrations of bunnies and flowers emerging from a Coke bottle. We are, I believe, to feel buoyed that the COP15 talks will bring forth a new day...just like Coke? (In all fairness, Coke has timed a big decision around their use of climate-altering chemicals in their vending machines and coolers to coincide with the start of the climate talks). 

 

 

Energy companies are another major player, though from what I’ve seen, most have hired Danish PR firms to do their talking for them – smiling faces with matching green coats on pedestrian walkways handing out stickers that say “energy alternatives” have been a new phenomenon here. I chatted with a couple of these green-coated champions today and they were curiously non-committal about their work.  For one, they were lacking in explicit information about energy, renewable or otherwise, and second, they didn’t have a lot to say about who they’ve been hired by; just a general statement of purpose: “We’re here to promote alternatives for our world’s energy needs...” A suspicious ellipses, point indeed! Methinks I smell the Nuclear Lobby!

Call these kinds of promotional stunts the hijacking of civic negotiations, call them corporate cover-ups, call them Greenwashing.  But one thing I will say about the escalated presence of climate-themed publicity here in Copenhagen is that it all at least connotes a determination, a will to do well, and a feeling that we are on the cusp of something big.

 

Trader Joe's recently sent out a mass e-mail to all members subscribed to their newsletter. It seems the popular grocery store is fishing for compliments from its loyal customers. They are essentially asking for a product ego-boost, requesting that all recipients vote for their favorite Trader Joe's products.

However, within the seafood aisles, hidden between the lines of misleading ingredient lists,Trader Joe's inconspicuously sells over a dozen red-list species. For example: "Trader Joe's Lightly Breaded Fish Sticks" are made with Alaskan Pollock. This billion dollar fishery is the largest in the United States, however, the Pollock population is currently at a record-low. Steller sea lions, which feed on the Pollock, have also been decreasing as overfishing continues to deplete their food source.

So, rather than comply with Trader Joe's request for product praise, Greenpeace USA suggests we instead remind them that they continue to stock their shelves with our LEAST favorite products, despite our efforts to persuade them to change their ways.

TAKE ACTION: E-mail Trader Joe's at favoriteproducts@traderjoes.com and send them the following message:

"Trader Joe's Lightly Breaded Fish Sticks"

These fish sticks are my LEAST favorite Trader Joe's product because they are made with Alaskan Pollock, a fishery under the threat of collapse. Stop selling red-list seafood species and adopt a sustainable seafood buying policy now!

"Trader Joe's Lightly Breaded Fish Sticks" are unsustainable, but so are the following list of Trader Joe's products, all tainted with red-list seafood species. You can personalize your message by choosing your LEAST favorite and telling Trader Joe's all about it!

"Wild Seasoned Turbot" (which contains red-list Greenland halibut.)

“Barbeque Cut Fresh Salmon Fillets," “Pecan & Hazelnut Crusted Norwegian Farmed Salmon," “Fresh Salmon Boneless Skinless Fillets," “Salmon Stuffed with Feta & Spinach," “Cajun Salmon," “Salmon Stuffed with Couscous & Dill," and “Pacific Supreme Smoked Salmon."(All contain Farmed salmon raised in a way that pollutes the ocean)

"New England Wild Jumbo Scallops" (Contain Atlantic scallops which are bing overfished)

"Trader Joe's Albacore Solid White Tuna"(Contains South Atlantic albacore tuna caught by the use of longlining which results in the bycatch of threatened or endangered sea turtles, sharks and seabirds in large numbers)

“Tempura Shrimp with Dipping Sauce," "Coconut Shrimp," “Medium Cooked Shrimp," “Large Cooked Shrimp," “Jumbo Cooked Shrimp," “Colossal Cooked Shrimp," “Uncooked Wild Blue Shrimp," “Colossal Butterflied Shrimp," and "Trader Joe’s Seafood Blend.” (All contain Tropical shrimp which are caught using fishing methods that are destructive to seafloor habitats)

Update: You can't watch it online any more, obviously, but you can watch the whole thing right here.

At 8:00PM Copenhagen time — 2:00PM Eastern, 11:00AM Pacific — you can watch our "side event" live online. It’s rather descriptively entitled, “Yes He Can! How President Obama Can Deliver Stronger Emissions Reductions.”

Though the UN climate summit is alredy upon us and it is now the 11th hour, Obama can still get it right. He can still inspire the whole world to take the necessary actions that will avert a total climate catastrophe. We’ve assembled a panel for our side event to layout just how he can do that. The speakers include:

• Greenpeace USA's very own Kyle Ash, global warming policy advisor;
• Kassie Segal, a lawyer from the Center for Biological Diversity;
• Marcelo Furtado, executive director of Greenpeace Brazil, who will give us the international perspective.

Keep in mind that this is a livestream from a conference center with over 20,000 people inside of it, all of whom are probably furiously tweeting, blogging, and emailing the folks back home. So there might be intermittent delays in the webcast. Just bear with us.

Also bear in mind that while this is a very exciting time, as we’re literally here witnessing negotiations on the future of the planet, this is going to be an in-depth policy and legislative discussion. There will be some powerpoint presentations, but otherwise nothing you’d call visually stimulating. Still, it should be very interesting if, you know, you’re into this kind of thing.

Starts in about an hour, tune in!

Here's a quick update from Brinkley, Student Network Activist on the ground in Copenhagen.  She'll be keeping us posted throughout the negotiations in Copenhagen, so stay tuned to www.greenpeacestudents.org to follow along.

Today, I will go to the Bella Center and see more people in one space than I have ever seen together in my entire life.  Thirty-four thousand people have sought entry to the negotiations, and Copenhagen, a city of 2 million, ran out of its 17,600 hotel rooms this weekend.  This morning, Greenpeace youth, we will be engaging the crowd that approaches the Bella Center to take photos with speech bubbles for leaders, hot coffee, and our vibrant, demanding presence.  I expect that today will be crazy and unlike anything I can imagine. People will be everywhere; all kinds of NGO’s, climate and social justice activists, climate skeptics, nationalities and ages in the same place for a conference the likes of which the world has never seen. I’m stoked!

Let's make sure that as many Americans as possible are paying attention to these very important climate talks. You can go here to get a sample letter to submit to your newspaper.

To a just climate future,
Brinkley

 

What happens once you sign a petition or take action online? If you're like me, you've signed up for lots of group's email lists and get newsletters, donation requests and calls to action. But, what happens to my name when I sign a petition? Is it used? Does it help?

Today, we got creative at Greenpeace. We used all YOUR names to create an actual Greenpeace banner. When we started the online petition to President Obama we couldn’t tell you all the details, but we hinted that it would be something big, really BIG! More than 50,000 amazing activists signed our petition urging President Obama to sign a legally binding treaty in Copenhagen to stop a climate catastrophe and unleash a clean energy revolution.

Our graphic designer took all 50,000 names and created a beautiful banner. I can tell you, first hand, that the banner is HUGE! It’s 80x40-feet and weighs about 100 pounds. We thought the eve of President Obama’s departure for Copenhagen would be a great time to unfurl the banner, right across the street from the White House.

It wasn’t easy, but we did it! About two dozen of us bundled up (it actually snowed here over the weekend). We opened up the banner and situated it just perfectly so we could get the message out to President Obama and the rest of the world.

 

President Obama: LEAD and Save the Climate

Simultaneously, while we were displaying the banner we were also faxing all 50,000 names to the President. He got the message, in more ways that one.

I was also tweeting with one hand, while my other hand was holding the banner. If you’re not signed up for Greenpeace twitter updates what are you waiting for? You can get real-time updates from us and stay in the loop and cool activities as they unfold.

President Obama and many world leaders are heading to Copenhagen for climate talks. They need to do a lot more than talk. They need to sign a legally binding treaty with sharp teeth.

We’ll be watching our world leaders to see if they can achieve a strong, binding treaty on climate change.

Thank you to everyone who signed the petition! Take a look at the banner images and pat yourself on the back for a job well done. Our banner will leave a lasting impression on the President as he heads over to Copenhagen.

--Michelle

Kumi Naidoo, GPI executive director and head of the GCCA, just handed a petition signed by 10 million people calling for an ambitious climate treaty to the prime minister of Denmark, Lars Løkke Rasmussen. The petition hand-over took place at an event held inside the Bella Center here at the Copenhagen climate summit.



Along with the petition, Kumi also presented Rasmussen with a pen he could use “to sign a fair, ambitious, and binding treaty.”



Legendary activist and 2004 Nobel Peace Laureate Wangari Maathai also spoke at the event. I have to say, it was a real treat to see her in person. Check out these pics of Kumi and Wangari with several of the youth delegates who were there to help drive home the message that there are more than 10 million people calling for climate action.

Another day has dawned cold and gray here in Copenhagen, but there’s plenty of reason for excitement and optimism.

Greenpeace of course has a delegation on the ground representing the millions of activists worldwide who have taken action to call for a deal that will do what the science says we must do to avert an utter climate catastrophe. I’m lucky enough to be part of the web team that will be updating you on what's happening both inside and outside the UN climate summit.

I’ll be working alongside some other fabulous Greenpeace webbies. We shot this video to introduce ourselves:


The pieces are all in place for a fair, ambitious, and legally-binding climate deal here in Copenhagen. All that’s lacking is the political will to make it happen.

But, as our executive director, Kumi Naidoo, told a packed house at Copenhagen University last night, our leaders all seem to suffer from a “common medical condition:” they’re hard of hearing when it comes to calls for bold action on climate change. The Greenpeace delegation is here to remind the people negotiating the future of the planet here in Copenhagen that millions of you are calling for them to live up to their moral obligation.

Today over 56 newspapers from all over the world are joining the call “because humanity faces a profound emergency.” These papers are all printing the same editorial – in 20 languages – which states, in part:

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

But there is more than enough reason to have hope that these negotiations could be the turning point. Just yesterday, for instance, South Africa became the latest country to announce the emissions reductions targets they were putting on the table: 34% below business as usual over the next 10 years, peaking at 42% by 2025. This makes South Africa “one of the stars of the negotiations.” Let’s hope the other delegates at the conference are decent enough at astral navigation to follow their lead!

Stay tuned for more updates.

President Obama has announced that he will now come to Copenhagen on December 18th, the same day as other heads of state. This is most certainly welcome news. All the elements are now in place for world leaders to move forward and agree to a legally binding treaty in Copenhagen to stop climate chaos.

Now that Obama has moved the date of his trip, however, he needs to move the US's emissions targets and financial commitments to be in line with what climate science demands so that this doesn't become reality:

On the eve of the Copenhagen climate summit, we have some positive news from a US company: today The Coca-Cola Company announced that it will stop using HFCs in their coolers and vending machines.

For those that aren’t familiar with HFCs, they are the worst greenhouse gases you’ve never heard of. They’re used in refrigerators and air conditioners, and the most common one is 1,430 times more powerful at warming the climate than CO2.

Greenpeace has been encouraging companies to move to climate-friendly natural alternatives, like hydrocarbons and carbon dioxide – and Coca-Cola has been listening.

Coca-Cola’s transition to HFC-free refrigeration will reduce the equipment’s direct greenhouse gas emissions by a whopping 99 percent. The company and its bottling partners have approximately 10 million coolers and vending machines in place today around the world, and they are responsible for the largest part of Coca-Cola’s total climate impact. As a result of today’s commitment, they’ll reduce emissions by more than 50 million metric tons over the life of the equipment – the same as taking more than 11 million cars off the road for a year.

In addition, since Coca-Cola is such a large global company, its demand for HFC-free technologies will help to accelerate the transition to this type of equipment throughout industry, reducing costs through economies of scale.

This is especially good news as more and more scientific research emphasizes the enormous threat of HFCs. New research by NASA and Purdue shows that HFCs and other “F” gases that contain fluorine are the most effective warming agents out there. And, a recent report by the National Academy of sciences shows that HFCs will be responsible for 28-45% of carbon emissions by 2050 if society reduces carbon dioxide while leaving HFCs unchecked.

Coca-Cola’s announcement demonstrates that phasing out HFCs is a tangible and near-term action that can be taken to protect the climate. Let’s hope other companies – and participants in Copenhagen – are listening.

I just got to Copenhagen a few hours ago, and this being my first visit to the city I was of course looking out the window of the plane as we approached Kastrup airport. And lo and behold, there was the Greenpeace ship Beluga II with a 15x20 meter banner (about 50x65 feet) attached to its stern, welcoming delegates to the UN climate summit with the message "Stop Climate Change Here."




Images © Christian Aslund/Greenpeace

Once delegates get into the airport, they're greeted with these signs portraying a possible future that we're hoping they work to avert while here in Copenhagen:

Coming to you live from Copenhagen, a city totally abuzz with anticipation, excitement, and lately - ACTION. Courtesy of the 40 plus Greenpeace youth of over a dozen nations assembled here, Copenhagen has seen a lot of activity in its streets and squares.

 

To add to the 10 million signatures that Greenpeace, in coordination with the tck tck tck campaign, has collected internationally, we've fanned out across downtown Copenhagen to gather an additional 2,000 petitions. When we asked passerbys "Will you add your name to millions of others calling on world leaders to commit to a fair, ambitious, and binding treaty?" The answer quite emphatically is "Yes!" and in big numbers. You can support an ambitious treaty too -- take action today to send a message to our leaders in the States. http://members.greenpeace.org/survey/start/233/

 

To spice up the constant petitioning, the team from Greenpeace USA kicked off a series of visits to the embassies of battleground climate nations. The US makes this list in a big way - we are far and away the biggest contributor to global warming pollution as well as the make or break voice at the United Nations' COP talks that begin next week. US students drove this action, coordinating a mass youth demonstration in the streets of Copenhagen. The movement for climate justice is truly one of the largest and most diverse in our nation's history. To take that movement to the doorstep of our decision-makers in the run-up to the most critical negotiations for our planet's future was a huge responsibility, opportunity, and...SUCCESS. 

The student activists' words matter most, so I'll give 'em to you straight. Jess Serrante, a Senior at University of Vermont and one of the negotiators inside the embassy wrote this run-down of what the US Embassy visit was all about:

"As a priority country in the upcoming climate summit, yesterday we lead the US national day at the international youth vigil, and I have to say that I’m so proud of the whole group because the whole day went off without a hitch!

To kick off the day we had a march from the vigil site in Kongens Nyrtov square to the US embassy and it was so energetic!

 

In true American fashion, we had a loud ‘n rowdy march. We taught our international crew of Germans, French, Russians, and Dutch some American protest chants, which involved a lot of hilarious accents where a lot of meanings were lost in translation. We had prepped banners – some we made here in Copenhagen and others flew across the Atlantic with us in our luggage – and put together drums out to make a scene in the streets on the way to the American Embassy. We arrived and the guards of the Embassy rushed out to usher the group away from the entrance – a little too lively for them, I’d bet.

Ruthie, my fellow Greenpeace Student Network leader, student activist leader Brinkley Hutchings, and I stepped up to meet our host at the embassy, First Secretary of the Regional Envioronmental Office, Erik Hall.

We asked Mr. Hall to deliver a message to President Obama from the youth-led climate movement in the United States: OUR movement. It’s a massive and dynamic movement, and unlike anything that US has ever seen before in its rich social history. We wanted to be sure that Secretary Hall and, through diplomatic communication, the rest of the American negotiating team in Copenhagen felt the sheer scope of this movement – from Environmental Justice to Green Jobs to all of the work we are doing individually on our campuses and in our home states.  This is a movement that is demanding a fair, ambitious, and binding treaty and we will not being backing down any time soon.

We talked about how a little over a year ago, as young people we put all our environmental work on hold to ensure that Barack Obama would be our next president. We fought to get him into office because he gave us hope and he promised us change. NOW, a year later, we are holding him accountable to the campaign promise that he made us about ‘restoring science to is rightful place’.

Another point that we discussed was that the US is in a position where our government can truly make the difference that all nations are waiting for. Being in this international youth team has been eye-opening. As hard as these other students work in Turkey or in Fiji or in Switzerland, their leaders can’t lead the world in the way that President Obama can. As big and as passionate as their movements are, their voices just aren’t as loud on the international stage. Ours are. So, to meet with Secretary Hall was really important not just for Brinkley and I and rest of the Greenpeace Student Network, but it was important for the world. 

Secretary Hall gave us his word that he would do what he could to get our message to President Obama. We made it clear that he’d be hearing from us back home as well. So, it’s importantthat you take action today. Obama needs to be HERE, in Copenhagen on December 18^th to push a binding and science-based treaty this year. We’re doing our best here in Denmark. Keep it up back home so that the US fulfills its responsibility to the world.  

 

With the start of the Copenhagen Summit set to start in early December, Greenpeace and the rest of the world watches and waits to see if this really “is a new day... a new era" on climate change and if Obama is the leader he has promised he would be.

Released today, a Greenpeace briefing highlights some of the key areas where the climate legislation in Congress falls short and outlines how Obama and the US can do more to deliver deeper emission cuts by harnessing the potential of renewable energy and energy efficiency. 

Read more...