The Climate Change Editorial

56 Papers across the world joined forced this week to mark the opening of The Copenhagen Conference by printing an identical editorial on Climate Change. Here it is:



Today 56 newspapers in 45 countries take the unprecedented step of speaking with one voice through a common editorial. We do so because humanity faces a profound emergency.   

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. 

Climate change has been caused over centuries, has consequences that will endure for all time and our prospects of taming it will be determined in the next 14 days. We call on the representatives of the 192 countries gathered in Copenhagen not to hesitate, not to fall into dispute, not to blame each other but to seize opportunity from the greatest modern failure of politics. This should not be a fight between the rich world and the poor world, or between east and west. Climate change affects everyone, and must be solved by everyone. 

The science is complex but the facts are clear. The world needs to take steps to limit temperature rises to 2 degrees Celsius, an aim that will require global emissions to peak and begin falling within the next five to 10 years. A bigger rise of 3–4 degrees — the smallest increase we can prudently expect to follow inaction — would parch continents, turning farmland into desert. Half of all species could become extinct, untold millions of people would be displaced, whole nations drowned by the sea. The controversy over emails by British researchers that suggest they tried to suppress inconvenient data has muddied the waters but failed to dent the mass of evidence on which these predictions are based.
Few believe that Copenhagen can any longer produce a fully polished treaty; real progress towards one could only begin with the arrival of President Obama in the White House and the reversal of years of US obstructionism. Even now the world finds itself at the mercy of American domestic politics, for the president cannot fully commit to the action required until the US Congress has done so.
But the politicians in Copenhagen can and must agree the essential elements of a fair and effective deal and, crucially, a firm timetable for turning it into a treaty. Next June's UN climate meeting in Bonn should be their deadline. As one negotiator put it: "We can go into extra time but we can't afford a replay." 

At the deal's heart must be a settlement between the rich world and the developing world covering how the burden of fighting climate change will be divided — and how we will share a newly precious resource: the trillion or so tonnes of carbon that we can emit before the mercury rises to dangerous levels. 

Rich nations like to point to the arithmetic truth that there can be no solution until developing giants such as China take more radical steps than they have so far. But the rich world is responsible for most of the accumulated carbon in the atmosphere — three-quarters of all carbon dioxide emitted since 1850. It must now take a lead, and every developed country must commit to deep cuts which will reduce their emissions within a decade to very substantially less than their 1990 level.
Developing countries can point out they did not cause the bulk of the problem, and also that the poorest regions of the world will be hardest hit. But they will increasingly contribute to warming, and must thus pledge meaningful and quantifiable action of their own. Though both fell short of what some had hoped for, the recent commitments to emissions targets by the world's biggest polluters, the United States and China, were important steps in the right direction. 

Social justice demands that the industrialised world digs deep into its pockets and pledges cash to help poorer countries adapt to climate change, and clean technologies to enable them to grow economically without growing their emissions. The architecture of a future treaty must also be pinned down — with rigorous multilateral monitoring, fair rewards for protecting forests, and the credible assessment of "exported emissions" so that the burden can eventually be more equitably shared between those who produce polluting products and those who consume them. And fairness requires that the burden placed on individual developed countries should take into account their ability to bear it; for instance newer EU members, often much poorer than "old Europe", must not suffer more than their richer partners.
The transformation will be costly, but many times less than the bill for bailing out global finance — and far less costly than the consequences of doing nothing. 

Many of us, particularly in the developed world, will have to change our lifestyles. The era of flights that cost less than the taxi ride to the airport is drawing to a close. We will have to shop, eat and travel more intelligently. We will have to pay more for our energy, and use less of it. 

But the shift to a low-carbon society holds out the prospect of more opportunity than sacrifice. Already some countries have recognised that embracing the transformation can bring growth, jobs and better quality lives. The flow of capital tells its own story: last year for the first time more was invested in renewable forms of energy than producing electricity from fossil fuels. 

Kicking our carbon habit within a few short decades will require a feat of engineering and innovation to match anything in our history. But whereas putting a man on the moon or splitting the atom were born of conflict and competition, the coming carbon race must be driven by a collaborative effort to achieve collective salvation. 

Overcoming climate change will take a triumph of optimism over pessimism, of vision over short-sightedness, of what Abraham Lincoln called "the better angels of our nature". 

It is in that spirit that 56 newspapers from around the world have united behind this editorial. If we, with such different national and political perspectives, can agree on what must be done then surely our leaders can too. 

The politicians in Copenhagen have the power to shape history's judgment on this generation: one that saw a challenge and rose to it, or one so stupid that we saw calamity coming but did nothing to avert it. We implore them to make the right choice.

 

Copenhagen 09

It's here folks. Will we end up with some kinda binding-wordy-semi-agreement? Or will it be a big waste of time and hope?

I am following the ABC's new Climate Change News Page for the event (full disclosure - I work @ the ABC - but find the aggregated site very handy for Copenhagen news).

Whatever the outcomes of Copenhagen, it's also up to us to be the change we want to see in the world.  A now that the Federal Opposition in Australia is full of Climate Change skeptics (a scary thought indeed), we need to act more than ever.

x

What the F#*k is the ETS?

Woah! What a day we've had in Canberra, and it's only 11:30am.

The liberals have had a leadership spill and now TONY ABBOTT has emerged as the fresh new face of the old right wing faction. God Help Us. It appears to me that Abbott's predecessor, Malcolm Turnbull, was simply too progressive for the Libs - something I think they needed as their old conservative guard becomes less relevant in a more tolerant society (impossible to imagine during the Howard Dark Ages). But anyway, we've still got beef against Refugees and apparently the environment, so I am sure the liberal party is not dead in the water yet...no pun intended.

But where did all this brouhaha begin? Is the liberal party really split between the Climate Change Skeptics on one side, and the believers on the other? Or was the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS)  just a catalyst for a much needed party shake up?

The ETS is so confusing, but to the layman, it kinda looks the government puts a 'cap' on how much carbon can be emitted. And big businesses can 'trade' among themselves to see who can emit what. So for example, a company may want to green their entire production line (The Government is also attempting to reward innovation in this area, and make green business more attractive with regulation and rebates and such) can do so and TRADE their emissions quota with a big fat ugly coal company, who will then be able to emit more carbon.

But then there is this: Big Companies are being GIVEN carbon permits (1 tonne of Co2 = 1 permit) to stave off those pesky rumours that they will be ruined by the ETS and won't be able to compete with non-ETS nations.

So - that is a brief rundown of the ETS that was presented to parliament by The Rudd Government. The Liberals went ape shit and struck a deal. According to World News Australia 

• Agriculture was excluded from the compromise deal.
•  The assistance to the coal industry has been doubled to $1.5 billion.
• The Government has also offered $270 million to to help coal mines reduce emissions.
• A transitional electricity cost assistance program of $1.1 billion will be established to assist medium and large manufacturing and mining businesses with scheme-related increases in electricity prices.
• The Government says it will ensure the ETS takes into account voluntary action by households.
• There is increased assistance of $4 billion to the electricity sector.
  

Sounds like some kinda bullshit to me. For a party that is all Laissez-Faire Capitalism, there sure is a lot of government intervention in industry. Is this why the conservative liberals were in uproar?

Anyway, it all looks dead dead dead now that Tony Abbott has taken over the Liberal leadership, and K Rudd's dreams of success in Copenhagen are all but shattered. But the most important thing that I can take from this is: Household Voluntary Action will be taken in to account and will be counted under the scheme. So I say Fuck Big Business - let's put a cap on ourselves.

Ladies - log on to 1 Million Women and cut 1 tonne of Carbon from your day to day life starting today. Dudes - if you don't have a similar campaign - start one!

Anyway, this time it is literally up to us. While the government remains in bed with the coal industry, we need to commit to the co2 levels decided upon in Copenhagen, if we make it there after this week in politics.

xx

Holy Dream Home

 

 

I have been fantasising about moving to The Southern Highlands in NSW of late. Still close to the city, but far enough away to get that fresh air and country feel. Having grown up in country NSW, it is what feels like home to me. If (and when) it happens, can I please have a home like this?

Although Upstate New York is a little different than NSW, I like the vibe of this place, owned by model Shannon Click and her Photographer partner Dan Martensen. All images VIA The Selby.

Ideas For Cities

GOOD mag are doing a segment on their blog titled Ideas for Cities. They've come up with some crackers, including The Edible Schoolyard where kids work with local farmers and volunteer to create self sufficient lunch rooms. See the full rundown here.

Wipe It Out with Digital Eskimo

Check out the lastest video from Digital Eskimo:

Wipe it out from Digital Eskimo on Vimeo.

Keep up the good work kids!

xx

Beds Are Burning Cover for Climate Change

Here is a look at the cover of the CLASSIC Oil's song, Beds are Burning:



Although it's for a good cause, it's got nothing on the original, amazing Garrett dancing and all. I still remember when John Howard said this was his favourite Midnight Oil song during the 2007 Election, without a hint of irony.

And anyway, the original song is about Indigenous Rights, it seems kinda sad it's meaning has been lost with this glossy new version.

(I wanted to embed the original clip, but apparently The Oil's don't want their videos all over the internet, so here is a link)