The GOOD Guide to COP15http://www.good.is/What is the COP15, who's invited, and can it really stave off climate change? GOOD explores the most important meeting in history.Tue, 14 Feb 2012 20:16:12 -0800CakePHPhourly1en-us <![CDATA[The GOOD Guide to COP15: Now What?]]> http://www.good.is/post/the-good-guide-to-cop15-now-what/ http://www.good.is/post/the-good-guide-to-cop15-now-what/

Even if you flew to Copenhagen, they probably wouldn't let you in to the conference. But don't despair: You don't have to be a delegate to help stave off catastrophe.

BEFORE-THE-CONFERENCE-COP-15


Keep track of the treaty: Negotiators are working on a draft treaty-raising objections, making changes, and shaping the fate of the world. Keep track of it at 350.org/treaty-tracker.

Get to know the negotiators: Find out who will represent your country in Copenhagen and what they think. Adoptanegotiator.org has  "trackers" from 11 countries following the meetings leading up to Copenhagen "so you can stay up to date and either support or put pressure on your country's climate negotiator to aim for a safe and fair deal."

Petition important people: Send a letter to your local representative, or schedule some face time with a staff member (yes, you can actually do that). Urge them to support a climate treaty that will manage and reduce carbon emissions over the next 30 years. Learn how at wecansolveit.org/content/advocate.

Get involved with Hopenhagen: The United Nations has teamed up with an all-star roster of ad agencies on a campaign to spread awareness about the opportunities COP15 presents. Join the campaign at hopenhagen.org.

Participate in the International Day of Climate Action: An International Day of Climate Action on October 24 was organized by 350.org to make sure decision-makers knew where the public stands. Find activities in your area, or set up your own at 350.org/actions.

after-the-conference-cop-15


Make sure the treaty gets ratified: After the conference, the treaty won't be binding unless the U.S. Senate ratifies it. That'll take 66 votes, and they could be hard to come by. Find out how to contact your senator at senate.gov.

any-time-cop-15

Do something on your own: The outcome of the conference will make a big difference, but it's not the only thing that matters. Ride a bike, eat less red meat, or support sustainable local policies wherever you live.

want-more-cop-15

Read the raw documents: The Kyoto Protocol is the current international agreement on climate change. It's hardly a page-turner but it's actually not that long. Read that, and the draft version of the Copenhagen treaty, at unfccc.int.

read more]]>

Even if you flew to Copenhagen, they probably wouldn't let you in to the conference. But don't despair: You don't have to be a delegate to help stave off catastrophe.

BEFORE-THE-CONFERENCE-COP-15


Keep track of the treaty: Negotiators are working on a draft treaty-raising objections, making changes, and shaping the fate of the world. Keep track of it at 350.org/treaty-tracker.

Get to know the negotiators: Find out who will represent your country in Copenhagen and what they think. Adoptanegotiator.org has  "trackers" from 11 countries following the meetings leading up to Copenhagen "so you can stay up to date and either support or put pressure on your country's climate negotiator to aim for a safe and fair deal."

Petition important people: Send a letter to your local representative, or schedule some face time with a staff member (yes, you can actually do that). Urge them to support a climate treaty that will manage and reduce carbon emissions over the next 30 years. Learn how at wecansolveit.org/content/advocate.

Get involved with Hopenhagen: The United Nations has teamed up with an all-star roster of ad agencies on a campaign to spread awareness about the opportunities COP15 presents. Join the campaign at hopenhagen.org.

Participate in the International Day of Climate Action: An International Day of Climate Action on October 24 was organized by 350.org to make sure decision-makers knew where the public stands. Find activities in your area, or set up your own at 350.org/actions.

after-the-conference-cop-15


Make sure the treaty gets ratified: After the conference, the treaty won't be binding unless the U.S. Senate ratifies it. That'll take 66 votes, and they could be hard to come by. Find out how to contact your senator at senate.gov.

any-time-cop-15

Do something on your own: The outcome of the conference will make a big difference, but it's not the only thing that matters. Ride a bike, eat less red meat, or support sustainable local policies wherever you live.

want-more-cop-15

Read the raw documents: The Kyoto Protocol is the current international agreement on climate change. It's hardly a page-turner but it's actually not that long. Read that, and the draft version of the Copenhagen treaty, at unfccc.int.

read more]]> GOOD Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:00:09 PST <![CDATA[The GOOD Guide to COP15: The Fire this Time: Copenhagen and the War for the Future]]> http://www.good.is/post/the-good-guide-to-cop15-the-fire-this-time-copenhagen-and-the-war-for-the-future/ http://www.good.is/post/the-good-guide-to-cop15-the-fire-this-time-copenhagen-and-the-war-for-the-future/

That which is unsustainable cannot go on. Unsustainable things that are propped up too long snap and collapse suddenly. Our way of life is unsustainable. The sooner we transform our economy into one that can generate sustainable prosperity, the better off we'll be, and with every passing day, the risks of catastrophe grow larger and more certain. We need change now.

These shouldn't be radical statements; they're all demonstrably true. Yet they cleave right down the middle of what is fast becoming the largest generation gap in at least 40 years, a growing split between people under 30 and people over 60.

When confronted with generational conflict, we naturally tend to see the elders as seasoned and realistic, and the youth as passionate and ethical, and to seek a middle ground of tempered realism. Middle ground is going to become increasingly hard to find in this debate, though. That's because realism now means very different, incompatible things to the two generations.

And this is what most older observers seem to refuse to understand: The world looks dramatically different if the year 2050 is one you're likely to be alive to see. To younger people, Copenhagen isn't some do-gooder meeting; it's the first major battle in a war for the future. Their future. I'm in my middle years, in between the two groups, yet even I can see that this war is about to get a lot more heated-far more heated than anything we've seen in half a century. To younger people, this isn't just policy, it's personal.

To be young and aware today is to see your elders burning our civilization down around our ears. To hear scientists tell us we're in the final countdown, with the risk of runaway climate change (along with the ecosystem collapses and horrific human suffering it will bring) mounting with every day we run business as usual. To hear nearly a chorus of credible voices-from doctors and scientists to retired generals and former bankers- warning that to lose this fight is to lose everything that makes our world livable and gives the future hope.
You wouldn't think a war could start over such simple ideas.

To be young and aware is to see old people-from the U.S. Senate to Wall Street, from newspaper editorial desks to corporate boardrooms-stalling action on every front, spouting platitudes about "balance," committing themselves wholeheartedly to actions to be undertaken long after they've retired and died. To be told that the world's scientists are participating in a giant hoax; to be chided for not understanding how the real world works; to be warned that doing the right thing will bankrupt us; to be told that not wanting to melt the ice caps and circle the equator in deserts makes you too radical to take seriously.

To be young and aware is to know you're being lied to; to know that a bright green future is possible; to know that we can reimagine the world, rebuild our cities, redesign our lives, retool our factories, distribute innovation and creativity and all live in a world that is not only better than the alternative, but much better than the world we have now.

To be young and aware is to suspect that, in the end, the debate about climate action isn't about substance, but about rich old men trying to squeeze every last dollar, euro, and yen from their investments in outdated industries. It is to agree with the environmentalist Paul Hawken that we have an economy that steals the future, sells it in the present, and calls it GDP. It is to begin to see your elders as cannibals with golf clubs.

Myself, I worry: not that the young grow radical-hell, if I were 10 years younger, I'd be on the barricades myself-but that they grow despondent. Because what the world needs now, more than ever, is what the young have always given most: their optimism.

So if nothing else happens in Copenhagen, I pray that all of us who have years and a voice and a conscience will say at least this to the world's youth: Your fight is ours, too. Don't give up.

good-guide-to-cop-15-footer]]>

That which is unsustainable cannot go on. Unsustainable things that are propped up too long snap and collapse suddenly. Our way of life is unsustainable. The sooner we transform our economy into one that can generate sustainable prosperity, the better off we'll be, and with every passing day, the risks of catastrophe grow larger and more certain. We need change now.

These shouldn't be radical statements; they're all demonstrably true. Yet they cleave right down the middle of what is fast becoming the largest generation gap in at least 40 years, a growing split between people under 30 and people over 60.

When confronted with generational conflict, we naturally tend to see the elders as seasoned and realistic, and the youth as passionate and ethical, and to seek a middle ground of tempered realism. Middle ground is going to become increasingly hard to find in this debate, though. That's because realism now means very different, incompatible things to the two generations.

And this is what most older observers seem to refuse to understand: The world looks dramatically different if the year 2050 is one you're likely to be alive to see. To younger people, Copenhagen isn't some do-gooder meeting; it's the first major battle in a war for the future. Their future. I'm in my middle years, in between the two groups, yet even I can see that this war is about to get a lot more heated-far more heated than anything we've seen in half a century. To younger people, this isn't just policy, it's personal.

To be young and aware today is to see your elders burning our civilization down around our ears. To hear scientists tell us we're in the final countdown, with the risk of runaway climate change (along with the ecosystem collapses and horrific human suffering it will bring) mounting with every day we run business as usual. To hear nearly a chorus of credible voices-from doctors and scientists to retired generals and former bankers- warning that to lose this fight is to lose everything that makes our world livable and gives the future hope.
You wouldn't think a war could start over such simple ideas.

To be young and aware is to see old people-from the U.S. Senate to Wall Street, from newspaper editorial desks to corporate boardrooms-stalling action on every front, spouting platitudes about "balance," committing themselves wholeheartedly to actions to be undertaken long after they've retired and died. To be told that the world's scientists are participating in a giant hoax; to be chided for not understanding how the real world works; to be warned that doing the right thing will bankrupt us; to be told that not wanting to melt the ice caps and circle the equator in deserts makes you too radical to take seriously.

To be young and aware is to know you're being lied to; to know that a bright green future is possible; to know that we can reimagine the world, rebuild our cities, redesign our lives, retool our factories, distribute innovation and creativity and all live in a world that is not only better than the alternative, but much better than the world we have now.

To be young and aware is to suspect that, in the end, the debate about climate action isn't about substance, but about rich old men trying to squeeze every last dollar, euro, and yen from their investments in outdated industries. It is to agree with the environmentalist Paul Hawken that we have an economy that steals the future, sells it in the present, and calls it GDP. It is to begin to see your elders as cannibals with golf clubs.

Myself, I worry: not that the young grow radical-hell, if I were 10 years younger, I'd be on the barricades myself-but that they grow despondent. Because what the world needs now, more than ever, is what the young have always given most: their optimism.

So if nothing else happens in Copenhagen, I pray that all of us who have years and a voice and a conscience will say at least this to the world's youth: Your fight is ours, too. Don't give up.

good-guide-to-cop-15-footer]]> Alex Steffen Tue, 17 Nov 2009 08:00:18 PST <![CDATA[The GOOD Guide to COP15: Dispatches from the Future, Today]]> http://www.good.is/post/the-good-guide-to-cop15-dispatches-from-the-future-today/ http://www.good.is/post/the-good-guide-to-cop15-dispatches-from-the-future-today/

The conference is still a few months away, but we asked several activists to predict what they will be talking about after the conference wraps up. Here is what they think they're going to be saying next January:

Richard Graves, founder of Fired Up Media, blogger for the TckTckTck campaign, and editor of ItsGettingHotinHere.org:


What surprised me was the startling diversity of groups, beyond environmentalists, that got involved-from youth groups to union leaders to the Dalai Lama to the Pope. People realized that this is bigger than polar bears and icebergs.

I am disappointed, though, by how little actual work got done. Negotiators dragged their heels all year, and when the wave of civil society crashed onto them, we got some great goals and targets, but a lot of the procedural work still has to be done. The financial mechanisms and the binding provisions need to be worked out and negotiated later.

I am damn glad that a people-powered movement was ignited this fall, because so many organizations spent their war chests and best people on this agreement. Now we still need to make this treaty binding and get it ratified at home.


Matt Dernoga, campaign director for University  of Maryland for Clean Energy:


I have mixed emotions. COP15 was better than analysts were anticipating six months ago-President Obama arrived toward the end, committing America to targets for which the Senate had just voted. Western Europe did well (aside from Italy). Canada was an embarrassment. China committed to certain reductions in energy intensity, and to emissions peaking no later than 2020. This was earlier than the 2035 they were rumored to be pushing, and helped hold talks together. Interestingly, the real unsung hero was Japan. Fresh off elections in late August, it set a target of 25 percent below 1990 levels. This brought China along, as it wasn't about to lose the clean energy race to a regional rival. It reminds me of the debate over the bill the United States passed. Most politicians and some environmental organizations are calling it a win. Greenpeace, 350.org founder Bill McKibben, and NASA scientist James Hansen say the framework in place doesn't reduce emissions fast enough to avoid runaway climate change. My take is that we didn't get enough to declare victory, but we won enough to keep on fighting.

William Becker, executive director of the Presidential Climate Action Project:


It was nearly a disaster. The governments failed, but the people didn't. Delegates bickered and bartered, only to deadlock on the final day.

It was the business community, along with millions of young people, that came to the rescue. Youngsters from all over the world marched through the streets in protest, inundating the delegates with emails and tweets. Two dozen of the world's largest corporations pledged to fund the U.N.'s Global Green New Deal. More pledges followed. By day's end, corporations and investment firms had committed hundreds of billions of dollars for energy-efficiency and renewable-energy projects.

That final day broke the stranglehold of fossil fuels on the global economy. It was a narrow escape, a historic test of our intelligence as nations and as a species. We barely passed. But we did.

good-guide-to-cop-15-footer]]>

The conference is still a few months away, but we asked several activists to predict what they will be talking about after the conference wraps up. Here is what they think they're going to be saying next January:

Richard Graves, founder of Fired Up Media, blogger for the TckTckTck campaign, and editor of ItsGettingHotinHere.org:


What surprised me was the startling diversity of groups, beyond environmentalists, that got involved-from youth groups to union leaders to the Dalai Lama to the Pope. People realized that this is bigger than polar bears and icebergs.

I am disappointed, though, by how little actual work got done. Negotiators dragged their heels all year, and when the wave of civil society crashed onto them, we got some great goals and targets, but a lot of the procedural work still has to be done. The financial mechanisms and the binding provisions need to be worked out and negotiated later.

I am damn glad that a people-powered movement was ignited this fall, because so many organizations spent their war chests and best people on this agreement. Now we still need to make this treaty binding and get it ratified at home.


Matt Dernoga, campaign director for University  of Maryland for Clean Energy:


I have mixed emotions. COP15 was better than analysts were anticipating six months ago-President Obama arrived toward the end, committing America to targets for which the Senate had just voted. Western Europe did well (aside from Italy). Canada was an embarrassment. China committed to certain reductions in energy intensity, and to emissions peaking no later than 2020. This was earlier than the 2035 they were rumored to be pushing, and helped hold talks together. Interestingly, the real unsung hero was Japan. Fresh off elections in late August, it set a target of 25 percent below 1990 levels. This brought China along, as it wasn't about to lose the clean energy race to a regional rival. It reminds me of the debate over the bill the United States passed. Most politicians and some environmental organizations are calling it a win. Greenpeace, 350.org founder Bill McKibben, and NASA scientist James Hansen say the framework in place doesn't reduce emissions fast enough to avoid runaway climate change. My take is that we didn't get enough to declare victory, but we won enough to keep on fighting.

William Becker, executive director of the Presidential Climate Action Project:


It was nearly a disaster. The governments failed, but the people didn't. Delegates bickered and bartered, only to deadlock on the final day.

It was the business community, along with millions of young people, that came to the rescue. Youngsters from all over the world marched through the streets in protest, inundating the delegates with emails and tweets. Two dozen of the world's largest corporations pledged to fund the U.N.'s Global Green New Deal. More pledges followed. By day's end, corporations and investment firms had committed hundreds of billions of dollars for energy-efficiency and renewable-energy projects.

That final day broke the stranglehold of fossil fuels on the global economy. It was a narrow escape, a historic test of our intelligence as nations and as a species. We barely passed. But we did.

good-guide-to-cop-15-footer]]> GOOD Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:00:43 PST <![CDATA[COP15: The Issues]]> http://www.good.is/post/cop15-the-issues/ http://www.good.is/post/cop15-the-issues/ cop-15-the-issues-header

What's on the table at Copenhagen?


TARGETScop15

End Goal


The long-term goals of preserving a habitable planet will effectively be boiled down to a single number: the target concentration of CO² in the atmosphere, measured in parts per million. For the past few years, conventional wisdom has called for a target of 450 ppm. But the most recent science points to something more conservative: A 350 ppm ceiling is required if, as the NASA climatologist Jim Hansen puts it, "humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted." More than 80 developing nations and small island nations support the 350 target, as do many international environmental, human rights, and justice organizations.

What should happen: 350 ppm.

What will happen: It depends on grassroots pressure.

Grade for Predicted Final Compromise: B



Emissions Reductions


How much will nations agree to reduce their emissions by? Will developed countries agree to deeper cuts than developing countries? The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has suggested that industrialized nations should commit themselves to 25-to-40-percent reductions from 1990 levels by 2020 (with longer-term goals of 80 to 85 percent by 2050). This is ambitious. In the United States, the American Clean Energy and Security Act currently in Congress aims for a mere 4-percent reduction. If developed countries do agree to cut their emissions more than the developing world-a vicious debate, to be sure-targets would be set to limit the future growth of emissions, and not to cut back from already minuscule 1990 levels.

What should happen: Industrialized nations should cut CO² 30 percent by 2020, and 90 percent by 2050.

What will happen: Non-E.U. rich nations will balk at deep cuts, and agree to a meager 10 percent by 2020.

Grade for Predicted Final Compromise: C-




TOOLS-AND-TRIPPING-POINTS

Financing



How to finance a global climate deal is the fundamental debate that runs through every other issue. Developed nations will be pressured to live up to their historical responsibility-having grown rich by burning fossil fuels-and help fund mitigation and adaptation initiatives. The big question is, Where will the money come from?  It's no small purse we're talking about: Developing countries are calling for hundreds of billions of dollars every year. Exactly how much will have to be determined, as will who is chipping in what, and what body or agency is doling it out.

What should happen: Appoint an independent bursar who will distribute contributions from rich countries.

What will happen: Vague market mechanisms, details to be hashed out later.

Grade for Predicted Final Compromise: C-



Technology Transfer


Technological advances and the spread of existing clean-energy technologies are the core of a global climate solution. With the exceptions of China and India, most clean-tech innovation comes from the developed world. Negotiators will wrestle with the question of how to best transfer these technologies to developing countries. Financing, of course, will be a big issue. But a more nuanced discussion of intellectual property rights is needed. Proposals from developing countries suggest a relaxation of IPR and better incentives for patent-holders on clean-energy technology to grant free transfers of their patents internationally. Countries in which businesses hold such patents have thus far balked at these proposals.

What should happen: Rich countries should make concessions and allow IPR transfers.

What will happen: Poor countries will get a decent deal.

Grade for Predicted Final Compromise: B+



REDD


Nearly 20 percent of the world's greenhouse-gas emissions are the result of deforestation and forest decay. Mechanisms for what's known as REDD-reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation-essentially involve rich countries paying poor ones to prevent the loss of forests. The problem is, nobody knows how exactly these mechanisms would work. How they'd be designed will be long debated, even after COP15 adjourns.

What should happen: Start a comprehensive REDD program, administered by an independent body.

What will happen: A pencil sketch of a system followed by years of further negotiation.

Grade for Predicted Final Compromise: C+





Adaptation


Even if COP15 results in the immediate stabilization of greenhouse-gas emissions (it won't), we will still be locked into significant warming. The need for adaptation measures is now broadly accepted, and most countries are working on plans or programs to combat the actual effects of climate change. But distinguishing "adaptation" programs from "development" initiatives gets cloudy, and will likely hold up discussions.

What should happen: A comprehensive framework should be developed to address adaptation globally, including a financing structure.

What will happen: Vague agreement to fund some "adaptation" measures.

Grade for Predicted Final Compromise: N/A



Enforcement


The current Kyoto agreement has no formal enforcement. That hasn't worked. This treaty will need some teeth with clearly defined and binding penalties for countries that fail to honor their commitments. Negotiators will somehow have to agree on who will monitor and enforce the treaty. Emissions audits, progress reports, and penalties can't reliably be left in the hands of the countries themselves.

What should happen: The creation of an international agency to monitor and enforce the treaty.

What will happen: Unresolved or lax enforcement measures.

Grade for Predicted Final Compromise: D




good-guide-to-cop-15-footer]]> cop-15-the-issues-header

What's on the table at Copenhagen?


TARGETScop15

End Goal


The long-term goals of preserving a habitable planet will effectively be boiled down to a single number: the target concentration of CO² in the atmosphere, measured in parts per million. For the past few years, conventional wisdom has called for a target of 450 ppm. But the most recent science points to something more conservative: A 350 ppm ceiling is required if, as the NASA climatologist Jim Hansen puts it, "humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted." More than 80 developing nations and small island nations support the 350 target, as do many international environmental, human rights, and justice organizations.

What should happen: 350 ppm.

What will happen: It depends on grassroots pressure.

Grade for Predicted Final Compromise: B



Emissions Reductions


How much will nations agree to reduce their emissions by? Will developed countries agree to deeper cuts than developing countries? The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has suggested that industrialized nations should commit themselves to 25-to-40-percent reductions from 1990 levels by 2020 (with longer-term goals of 80 to 85 percent by 2050). This is ambitious. In the United States, the American Clean Energy and Security Act currently in Congress aims for a mere 4-percent reduction. If developed countries do agree to cut their emissions more than the developing world-a vicious debate, to be sure-targets would be set to limit the future growth of emissions, and not to cut back from already minuscule 1990 levels.

What should happen: Industrialized nations should cut CO² 30 percent by 2020, and 90 percent by 2050.

What will happen: Non-E.U. rich nations will balk at deep cuts, and agree to a meager 10 percent by 2020.

Grade for Predicted Final Compromise: C-




TOOLS-AND-TRIPPING-POINTS

Financing



How to finance a global climate deal is the fundamental debate that runs through every other issue. Developed nations will be pressured to live up to their historical responsibility-having grown rich by burning fossil fuels-and help fund mitigation and adaptation initiatives. The big question is, Where will the money come from?  It's no small purse we're talking about: Developing countries are calling for hundreds of billions of dollars every year. Exactly how much will have to be determined, as will who is chipping in what, and what body or agency is doling it out.

What should happen: Appoint an independent bursar who will distribute contributions from rich countries.

What will happen: Vague market mechanisms, details to be hashed out later.

Grade for Predicted Final Compromise: C-



Technology Transfer


Technological advances and the spread of existing clean-energy technologies are the core of a global climate solution. With the exceptions of China and India, most clean-tech innovation comes from the developed world. Negotiators will wrestle with the question of how to best transfer these technologies to developing countries. Financing, of course, will be a big issue. But a more nuanced discussion of intellectual property rights is needed. Proposals from developing countries suggest a relaxation of IPR and better incentives for patent-holders on clean-energy technology to grant free transfers of their patents internationally. Countries in which businesses hold such patents have thus far balked at these proposals.

What should happen: Rich countries should make concessions and allow IPR transfers.

What will happen: Poor countries will get a decent deal.

Grade for Predicted Final Compromise: B+



REDD


Nearly 20 percent of the world's greenhouse-gas emissions are the result of deforestation and forest decay. Mechanisms for what's known as REDD-reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation-essentially involve rich countries paying poor ones to prevent the loss of forests. The problem is, nobody knows how exactly these mechanisms would work. How they'd be designed will be long debated, even after COP15 adjourns.

What should happen: Start a comprehensive REDD program, administered by an independent body.

What will happen: A pencil sketch of a system followed by years of further negotiation.

Grade for Predicted Final Compromise: C+





Adaptation


Even if COP15 results in the immediate stabilization of greenhouse-gas emissions (it won't), we will still be locked into significant warming. The need for adaptation measures is now broadly accepted, and most countries are working on plans or programs to combat the actual effects of climate change. But distinguishing "adaptation" programs from "development" initiatives gets cloudy, and will likely hold up discussions.

What should happen: A comprehensive framework should be developed to address adaptation globally, including a financing structure.

What will happen: Vague agreement to fund some "adaptation" measures.

Grade for Predicted Final Compromise: N/A



Enforcement


The current Kyoto agreement has no formal enforcement. That hasn't worked. This treaty will need some teeth with clearly defined and binding penalties for countries that fail to honor their commitments. Negotiators will somehow have to agree on who will monitor and enforce the treaty. Emissions audits, progress reports, and penalties can't reliably be left in the hands of the countries themselves.

What should happen: The creation of an international agency to monitor and enforce the treaty.

What will happen: Unresolved or lax enforcement measures.

Grade for Predicted Final Compromise: D




good-guide-to-cop-15-footer]]> Ben Jervey Tue, 17 Nov 2009 06:00:27 PST <![CDATA[The GOOD Guide to COP15: The Treaty]]> http://www.good.is/post/the-good-guide-to-cop15-the-treaty/ http://www.good.is/post/the-good-guide-to-cop15-the-treaty/

The Copenhagen Climate Treaty is a proposal for what an ideal vision of a COP15 agreement might look like. The treaty was drafted by Greenpeace, World Wildlife Fund, IndyACT (the league of independent activists), Germanwatch, the David Suzuki Foundation, the National Ecological Centre of Ukraine, and experts from around the world. The prospective document was distributed to negotiators from the 192 attending nations with the hope that it would influence what happens at the conference. Here is a summary of the key points:

The Copenhagen Climate Treaty

The window of opportunity for limiting climate change is closing, and unprecedented international cooperation and commitment is required. This treaty puts protection of the climate-and therefore the planet and its people-at its heart. We should expect and demand no less of our governments.

Carbon budget:

We need to keep the global temperature rise to no more than 2 degrees Celsius (and as much less than that as possible), which means staying within a maximum "carbon budget." Global emissions must peak between 2013 and 2017 and then decline to 1990 levels by 2020.

Industrialized countries:

The largest share of responsibility to stay within the global carbon budget rests with industrialized countries.They should take on binding commitments to reduce their own emissions and to support action in developing countries with finance, technology, and capacity building.

As a group, they should commit to emissions reductions of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and at least 95 percent by 2050. They should also commit to gathering the minimum $160 billion per year needed in terms of public funding.

So-called zero carbon action plans should be prepared by industrialized countries, outlining the actions needed to achieve emissions-reductions targets and show how support obligations will be met. These plans would be subject to international review and a strict compliance regime.

Newly industrialized countries like Singapore, South Korea, and Saudi Arabia should also take on these binding commitments.

Developing countries

While developing countries would not be required to take on legally binding targets for the moment, they should start to reduce emissions. As a group they should aim to limit their emissions to 84 percent above 1990 levels by 2020, and reduce emissions by 51 percent by 2050. The crucial transition to a sustainable development pathway that this will require should be supported by the industrialized world.

Advanced developing countries such as China or Brazil should prepare low-carbon action plans, detailing how they will move to a low-carbon sustainable path, including adaptation strategies as well as a strategy to reduce deforestation where appropriate and outlining the support needed from the industrialized world. Adaptation funding needs to be massively scaled up, to at least $63 billion.

]]>

The Copenhagen Climate Treaty is a proposal for what an ideal vision of a COP15 agreement might look like. The treaty was drafted by Greenpeace, World Wildlife Fund, IndyACT (the league of independent activists), Germanwatch, the David Suzuki Foundation, the National Ecological Centre of Ukraine, and experts from around the world. The prospective document was distributed to negotiators from the 192 attending nations with the hope that it would influence what happens at the conference. Here is a summary of the key points:

The Copenhagen Climate Treaty

The window of opportunity for limiting climate change is closing, and unprecedented international cooperation and commitment is required. This treaty puts protection of the climate-and therefore the planet and its people-at its heart. We should expect and demand no less of our governments.

Carbon budget:

We need to keep the global temperature rise to no more than 2 degrees Celsius (and as much less than that as possible), which means staying within a maximum "carbon budget." Global emissions must peak between 2013 and 2017 and then decline to 1990 levels by 2020.

Industrialized countries:

The largest share of responsibility to stay within the global carbon budget rests with industrialized countries.They should take on binding commitments to reduce their own emissions and to support action in developing countries with finance, technology, and capacity building.

As a group, they should commit to emissions reductions of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and at least 95 percent by 2050. They should also commit to gathering the minimum $160 billion per year needed in terms of public funding.

So-called zero carbon action plans should be prepared by industrialized countries, outlining the actions needed to achieve emissions-reductions targets and show how support obligations will be met. These plans would be subject to international review and a strict compliance regime.

Newly industrialized countries like Singapore, South Korea, and Saudi Arabia should also take on these binding commitments.

Developing countries

While developing countries would not be required to take on legally binding targets for the moment, they should start to reduce emissions. As a group they should aim to limit their emissions to 84 percent above 1990 levels by 2020, and reduce emissions by 51 percent by 2050. The crucial transition to a sustainable development pathway that this will require should be supported by the industrialized world.

Advanced developing countries such as China or Brazil should prepare low-carbon action plans, detailing how they will move to a low-carbon sustainable path, including adaptation strategies as well as a strategy to reduce deforestation where appropriate and outlining the support needed from the industrialized world. Adaptation funding needs to be massively scaled up, to at least $63 billion.

]]> GOOD Sat, 14 Nov 2009 11:00:27 PST <![CDATA[The GOOD Guide to COP15: The Players]]> http://www.good.is/post/the-good-guide-to-cop15-the-players/ http://www.good.is/post/the-good-guide-to-cop15-the-players/ map-thumb-cop-15

When the United Nations holds its international get-togethers, countries are traditionally sorted into five regional groups: African states, Asian states, Eastern European states, Latin American and Caribbean states, and Western European and other states (incidentally probably the only time the United States gets listed as "other").

In theory, these groupings give smaller countries a chance to speak as part of a louder, unified voice. In practice, though, the groupings have far less of an impact on negotiations than the preexisting alliances between different nations. These are some of the better-known examples.

]]> map-thumb-cop-15

When the United Nations holds its international get-togethers, countries are traditionally sorted into five regional groups: African states, Asian states, Eastern European states, Latin American and Caribbean states, and Western European and other states (incidentally probably the only time the United States gets listed as "other").

In theory, these groupings give smaller countries a chance to speak as part of a louder, unified voice. In practice, though, the groupings have far less of an impact on negotiations than the preexisting alliances between different nations. These are some of the better-known examples.

]]> GOOD Sat, 14 Nov 2009 09:00:08 PST <![CDATA[The GOOD Guide to COP15: A Primer]]> http://www.good.is/post/the-good-guide-to-cop15-a-primer/ http://www.good.is/post/the-good-guide-to-cop15-a-primer/ cop-15-a-primer-part-1

Copenhagen, ho!


There's a famous Danish proverb that roughly translates to, "He who is afraid of asking is ashamed of learning." So, lest you get caught in a cycle of fear and shame in anticipation of the world's convergence on Copenhagen, we offer this primer on all things COP15-and all things Copenhagen.

Point of Clarification: The COP in COP15 doesn't stand for Copenhagen. It stands for Conference of the Parties, and it's the 15th such event. You're probably most familiar with COP8, which took place in Kyoto, Japan, in 1992.

When is it? December 7 to 18, 2009

section-divider

Who's involved:


Representatives come from the 192 countries that have ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change since it was created in 1992.

Annex 1 Countries: Industrialized nations (including the United States and members of the European Union) and transitioning economies.

Annex 2 Countries: Less wealthy developed nations that have agreed to pay for some of the developing nations' costs associated with reducing emissions.

Non-Annex 1 Countries: Developing nations that have ratified the convention.

Click here to see a breakdown of the alliances the world's countries have formed in order to negotiate the treaty.

section-divider

A brief history of carbon:


brief-history-of-carbon-charts


The atmospheric carbon count (in parts per million) has increased from 310 in 1958 to 380 today; 350 is thought to be an acceptable level.

section-divider

Impact:


Total attendance: Between 12,000 and 15,000 official participants are expected to attend, plus thousands of other visitors (not accredited by the U.N.) in town for media coverage, environmental meetings, business promotion, and protests.

Total cost of the event: At least $7.6 million.

Total revenue it will generate for the city: $5.6 million.

Carbon footprint: To be determined, but all emissions generated by the event will be accounted for and offset through Clean Development Mechanism investments.

section-divider

Room and board:


Where people are staying: The Nordic Hotel Group has been appointed to manage hotel accommodations. Participants can also choose to rent an apartment, room, or sofa for a day or stay for free with a local Danish family.

Average hotel prices: From $132 for a single at Ansgar Hotel to $305 for a suite at the Tiffany Hotel. The average hotel room price is $292–$380 per night, including breakfast.

What people are eating: Food served at the event will be at least 65-percent organic and, fittingly, Denmark's famously excellent groundwater will flow straight from the taps-no bottles at this event. Catering services will serve traditional and local Danish food like Smørrebrods (open-faced sandwiches), salads, desserts, and vegetarian dishes. There will also be one "exclusive dining" restaurant that will be serving higher-priced dishes.

section-divider

Facts:


Population: 518,574 (as of January, 2009) of Denmark's 5.5 million.

Demographics: Copenhagen has long been one of the world's richest cities, with the average pay
for workers about 40 percent higher than in New York City. But the cost of living-and taxes-is also quite high.

Languages spoken (in descending order of prevalence): Danish, English, Faroese, Greenlandic (an Aleut dialect), German.

Landscape: Flat, lots of waterways.

Major export worth mentioning: Windmills. Could be a pretty important component of the
post-COP15 global economy.

]]> cop-15-a-primer-part-1

Copenhagen, ho!


There's a famous Danish proverb that roughly translates to, "He who is afraid of asking is ashamed of learning." So, lest you get caught in a cycle of fear and shame in anticipation of the world's convergence on Copenhagen, we offer this primer on all things COP15-and all things Copenhagen.

Point of Clarification: The COP in COP15 doesn't stand for Copenhagen. It stands for Conference of the Parties, and it's the 15th such event. You're probably most familiar with COP8, which took place in Kyoto, Japan, in 1992.

When is it? December 7 to 18, 2009

section-divider

Who's involved:


Representatives come from the 192 countries that have ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change since it was created in 1992.

Annex 1 Countries: Industrialized nations (including the United States and members of the European Union) and transitioning economies.

Annex 2 Countries: Less wealthy developed nations that have agreed to pay for some of the developing nations' costs associated with reducing emissions.

Non-Annex 1 Countries: Developing nations that have ratified the convention.

Click here to see a breakdown of the alliances the world's countries have formed in order to negotiate the treaty.

section-divider

A brief history of carbon:


brief-history-of-carbon-charts


The atmospheric carbon count (in parts per million) has increased from 310 in 1958 to 380 today; 350 is thought to be an acceptable level.

section-divider

Impact:


Total attendance: Between 12,000 and 15,000 official participants are expected to attend, plus thousands of other visitors (not accredited by the U.N.) in town for media coverage, environmental meetings, business promotion, and protests.

Total cost of the event: At least $7.6 million.

Total revenue it will generate for the city: $5.6 million.

Carbon footprint: To be determined, but all emissions generated by the event will be accounted for and offset through Clean Development Mechanism investments.

section-divider

Room and board:


Where people are staying: The Nordic Hotel Group has been appointed to manage hotel accommodations. Participants can also choose to rent an apartment, room, or sofa for a day or stay for free with a local Danish family.

Average hotel prices: From $132 for a single at Ansgar Hotel to $305 for a suite at the Tiffany Hotel. The average hotel room price is $292–$380 per night, including breakfast.

What people are eating: Food served at the event will be at least 65-percent organic and, fittingly, Denmark's famously excellent groundwater will flow straight from the taps-no bottles at this event. Catering services will serve traditional and local Danish food like Smørrebrods (open-faced sandwiches), salads, desserts, and vegetarian dishes. There will also be one "exclusive dining" restaurant that will be serving higher-priced dishes.

section-divider

Facts:


Population: 518,574 (as of January, 2009) of Denmark's 5.5 million.

Demographics: Copenhagen has long been one of the world's richest cities, with the average pay
for workers about 40 percent higher than in New York City. But the cost of living-and taxes-is also quite high.

Languages spoken (in descending order of prevalence): Danish, English, Faroese, Greenlandic (an Aleut dialect), German.

Landscape: Flat, lots of waterways.

Major export worth mentioning: Windmills. Could be a pretty important component of the
post-COP15 global economy.

]]> GOOD Sat, 14 Nov 2009 08:30:37 PST <![CDATA[The GOOD Guide to COP15: An Introduction]]> http://www.good.is/post/the-good-guide-to-cop15-an-introduction/ http://www.good.is/post/the-good-guide-to-cop15-an-introduction/

The Most Important Meeting in History


In 1997, delegates from all over the world met in Japan to create a worldwide framework for reducing carbon emissions. The resulting treaty, which took effect in 2005, aimed to reduce global emissions by 5.2 percent below 1990 levels. Since then, the Kyoto Protocol has been the watchword of environmentalists everywhere-a shorthand for the kind of international cooperation needed to fight climate change (and a reminder of the U.S. Senate's embarrassing refusal to get on board).

Since 1997, we've come to realize that the climate-change problem is far more dire than we thought. The problem is so large, in fact, that only major government action can solve it. But Kyoto, which expires in 2012, is far too lenient to be that solution.

So when delegates meet in Copenhagen at the United Nations Climate Change Conference this winter to negotiate Kyoto's replacement, they will face a daunting but important task: finding a consensus that ensures that the world's developed countries curb their emissions while at the same time allowing developing countries to expand their economies without relying on cheap fossil fuels.

A passable understanding of history and human nature doesn't inspire much optimism for what will come out of Copenhagen, but there might be reason for hope. There is a groundswell of media attention and excitement for what under any other circumstances would be a dry piece of diplomatic procedure. That might just mean that the world's citizens are becoming aware of the importance of the juncture at which we find ourselves. And if enough people care, eventually our governments will have to follow.

Illustrations by Leandro Castelao

]]>

The Most Important Meeting in History


In 1997, delegates from all over the world met in Japan to create a worldwide framework for reducing carbon emissions. The resulting treaty, which took effect in 2005, aimed to reduce global emissions by 5.2 percent below 1990 levels. Since then, the Kyoto Protocol has been the watchword of environmentalists everywhere-a shorthand for the kind of international cooperation needed to fight climate change (and a reminder of the U.S. Senate's embarrassing refusal to get on board).

Since 1997, we've come to realize that the climate-change problem is far more dire than we thought. The problem is so large, in fact, that only major government action can solve it. But Kyoto, which expires in 2012, is far too lenient to be that solution.

So when delegates meet in Copenhagen at the United Nations Climate Change Conference this winter to negotiate Kyoto's replacement, they will face a daunting but important task: finding a consensus that ensures that the world's developed countries curb their emissions while at the same time allowing developing countries to expand their economies without relying on cheap fossil fuels.

A passable understanding of history and human nature doesn't inspire much optimism for what will come out of Copenhagen, but there might be reason for hope. There is a groundswell of media attention and excitement for what under any other circumstances would be a dry piece of diplomatic procedure. That might just mean that the world's citizens are becoming aware of the importance of the juncture at which we find ourselves. And if enough people care, eventually our governments will have to follow.

Illustrations by Leandro Castelao

]]> GOOD Sat, 14 Nov 2009 08:00:39 PST