Feeds:
Posts
Comments

In a recent interview, Naomi Klein delivered a scathing commentary on those who are blindly hopeful that a forward-thinking climate change deal will emerge from the COP15 talks.

Only 3 days in, the COP15 conference has already been marred in controversy and numerous efforts to derail talks.  Before the conference even began, many environmentalists were saying that a progressive and binding agreement would not emerge from Copenhagen, but that what would occur was an opportunity to discuss issues, exchange ideas, and align unlikely forces. In her interview, Klein said that what may emerge from COP15 is a new kind of environmentalism – a partnership between those with economic interests and those with environmental interests.

Like Klein or not, agree with her or not, here’s another perspective.

Interview Source: Interview by Jacob Wheeler. Produced by Chuck Olsen for The UpTake: http://theuptake.org

This editorial calling for action from world leaders on climate change is published today by 56 newspapers around the world in 20 languages
Copenhagen climate change summit – opening day liveblog

Editorial  The Guardian, Monday 7 December 2009

Editorial logo

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.

• How the Copenhagen global leader came about
• Write your own editorial
• The papers that carried the Copenhagen editorial
In pictures: How newspapers around the world ran the editorial

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 2C, an aim that will require global emissions to peak and begin falling within the next 5-10 years. A bigger rise of 3-4C — 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 recognized 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.

This editorial will be published tomorrow by 56 newspapers around the world in 20 languages including Chinese, Arabic and Russian. The text was drafted by a Guardian team during more than a month of consultations with editors from more than 20 of the papers involved. Like the Guardian most of the newspapers have taken the unusual step of featuring the editorial on their front page.

This editorial is free to reproduce under Creative Commons
Creative Commons License

‘Fourteen days to seal history’s judgment on this generation’ by The Guardian is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
Based on a work at guardian.co.uk.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/sep/02/guardian-environment-team

On November 25, CBC Radio One’s show Q featured an interview with Dr. David Suzuki and former U.S. Vice-President Al Gore. Suzuki and Gore discussed everything from the roots of the environmental movement, environmental activism, climate change, the upcoming United Nations Conference on Climate Change in Copenhagen (COP15), and the anticipated outcomes for COP15.

To listen to the podcast, click here or here

Art is a very specific mode of communication, and the way that photographs can communicate images, themes, events, and so on, can be incredibly powerful. I came across Heidi Leverty’s photography the other day by way of an ‘eco’ design show. Although her art is somewhat reminiscent of Chris Jordan’s work and his views on consumption, Leverty focuses more acutely on particular moment in the life-cycle of a product. The photographer has a unique eye and takes ordinary objects like stacks of recycled cardboard boxes, a mass of cat food tins, and crushed pop cans and photographs them in transformative ways. I never thought I would consider hanging a picture of old cat food tins on my wall until I saw her images.

Leverty’s bio on her website best describes her work.

In her current body of work, Outbox, the focus is on one particular moment in the life-cycle of everyday objects -  the passage firm refuse or trash to recycled material. These materials of paper, metal, plastic, and fabric, shaped by the treatment they have undergone become unique works through her perspective, sculptural forms with an intense beauty. What appears to be without value is in fact a source of inspiration, the unique and extraordinary in the seemingly ordinary. Her images are a product of chance, caught in the transient moment in her life, an ephemeral state between original use and new purpose. When most would consider and appreciate these objects anew, thus adding another layer of recycling to their lives.

From Heidi Lerverty – Fine Art Photography Website “Biography”

What Leverty and Jordan manage to accomplish through their creative eye(s) and their vision is a way of expressing that many objects can be reinvented and the way we see the world; in so doing we can begin to re-examine our consumption habits.

Most people are put off by complicated wording, phrasing, convoluted language, and jargon. As I’ve been reading more and more about the upcoming United Nations Conference on Climate Change in Copenhagen (COP15) the language is not only becoming more convoluted, but it’s also becoming bleak. Recent reports have suggested that it is unlikely that a binding deal on climate change will emerge this December in Copenhagen.  So should we give up hope on the upcoming conference? No, the conversations that will take place at the conference will be foundational for what will happen next in the realm of climate change.

We hear term like “legally binding agreement” and “politically binding agreement”, but what do these terms mean in this context?  BBC Environmental Correspondent Richard Black wrote an article that addresses some of the nuances associated with the discourse on climate change and COP15. Rather than reiterating what he has already clearly stated, please click here to read his post.

Although COP15 is geared toward World leaders and NGOs, it is imperative that “ordinary” citizens feel that they have access to what happens at the conference. This first step to ensure that everyone has equal access to information and that barriers like convoluted, awkward, and complex language are either removed or at the very least defined throughout the conference. This is especially important since this information gleaned at the conference will likely be repeated in news broadcasts and articles.

The bottom line is that we all have a stake in climate change and we should all have access to information that is clear, concise, and accurate. Here’s hoping that whatever may emerge from COP15 is at least delivered to us in an easily understandable manner.

Image from : www.telegraph.co.uk/…/YM-Jargon_1008292c.jpg

cop15_logo_imgIn a little less than a month’s time, some of the World’s most influential people in the realm of climate change will be meeting in Copenhagen for the United Nations Conference on Climate Change (COP15). Why is this summit significant? Well, although most nations agree that climate change is a threat to our way(s) of life as we presently know it, many disagree on the best approach to address this issue.  The main objective of the conference is to establish a plan to succeed Kyoto when it expires in 2012. The COP15 conference will be attended by 192 nations, NGO, and other environmental organizations. There have been large grassroots movements in countries around the world that aim to have their voices heard about the need for significant change.

There are varying opinions on what kind of consensus should be reached, but according to the COP 15 Website, Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), hopes that four key questions will be addressed and agreed upon in Copenhagen.

1. How much are the industrialized countries willing to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases?
2. How much are major developing countries such as China and India willing to do to limit the growth of their emissions?
3. How is the help needed by developing countries to engage in reducing their emissions and adapting to the impacts of climate change going to be financed?
4. How is that money going to be managed?

Source: http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=876

There are many sites out there where you can find out more about the conference before it begins on December 7, 2009. Here is a small sample of what you can find.

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change website: link

The David Suzuki Foundation on Copenhagen: link

Hopenhagen (a movement dedicated encouraging world leaders to take serious action to address climate change) : link

Sierra Club Canada on Copenhagen and Canada’s role: link

tcktcktck – a movement that has brought  hundreds of millions of people together to call for a progressive, fair, and binding climate change agreement: link

WWF – Canada on the needs for a new climate change agreement: link

Climate Action Network Canada: link

Back in August, the website Social Alterations provided a very informative article on the use of forced child labour for cotton harvest in Uzbekistan. Nadira Lamrad, contributing writer for the site, highlighted issues surrounding the use of such labour and the implications that it for the apparel industry. In her follow-up article, posted early this October, Lamrad continues to explore the issues associated with the situation Uzbekistan and the actions that industry and corporations are and are not taking to stop the use of forced child labour. Please click here to read the follow-up article from Social Alterations.

If you would like to add your name to a petition to stop the use of forced child labour in Uzbekistan please click here.

As I sat down to eat my made in Canada, organic breakfast cereal it occurred to me that I ought to be splashing organic milk on my flakes. It seemed counterproductive that I would be drowning my breakfast in milk that I can only assume contains hormones and random chemicals that my body doesn’t really need. I mean, if I’m going to eat organic cereal, it only makes sense to eat it with organic milk, right?

I had no problem finding organic milk at one of the chain grocery stores near me, but what astounded me was that all the only organic milk that I found (Dairyland) there was packaged in plastic bottles. I had assumed that my organic milk would be packages in re-usable and recyclable glass bottles like the ones that used to be delivered to my front door when I was a kid. The Dairyland website does state that the plastic containers are 100% recyclable, but the problem is that packaging concerns me, especially plastic packaging.

It’s a strange contradiction when organic products are packaged in one of the most “un-organic” materials that exists today, plastic. It’s no secret that the use (and overuse) of plastic has seems to have all kinds of implications  for the environment and for personal health. Scientist have been cautioning about the toxicity in plastics for years and more recently the chemical in plastics have been discussed in books like Slow Death by Rubber Duck. Whether you agree that the authors’ data collection and testing methods are adequate or not, what can’t be ignored is that we need to be thinking not only about what we are putting into our bodies, but what our food and other consumer products are packaged in. We’ve been hearing about how plastics in containers can leach toxins into the product that it contains and may eventually cause serious health issues. Even if you doubt the legitimacy of reports that claim that plastic containers leach hazardous chemicals, you might have to acknowledge that plastic is almost impossible to get rid of without causing further harm to the planet.

Perhaps it’s time for a shift in our thinking. We need to think about the ramifications of our consumption habits. We need to think beyond our own health but also acknowledge that our personal health is intrinsically linked to the health of our planet. Companies are doing their customers and themselves a disservice by not thinking about the long-term ramifications that their products may cause and consumers are doing themselves a disservice by selectively choosing to address only certain issues associated with their own consumption.

Incidentally, today I visited a smaller, more specialized grocery store and found organic milk sold in returnable glass bottles. This milk company, Avalon, is much smaller and doesn’t have the same reach than the company than Dairyland does and subsequently is slightly pricier. If you live in the Metro-Vancouver area and would like to find out more about organic milk in glass bottles, please click here.

organic

Have some spare time on October 26th and are interested in the ins and outs of third-party verification for packaging? Well, you might want to check out the Greener Package 1 hour Webinar How to Avoid Greenwashing and Pass the Greener Package Database Third-Party Review Process.

Here’s a bit out the webinar:

In this free, one-hour Webcast, learn how to submit your data and pass the new third-party review process for the Greener Package Database. Learn to make credible, supportable and bulletproof sustainability claims for your sustainable packaging product.

Victor Bell, President of Environmental Packaging International (EPI), will show you how to avoid making a claim that would be considered greenwashing; what environmental benefit you can and cannot legitimately claim; how to comply with Greener Package’s new Guidelines to Sustainability Claims and more! David Newcorn, Vice President of eMedia for Summit Publishing, will explain why third-party review is being used; the benefits to suppliers for participating and having data reviewed by a third-party; the connection between third-party-reviewed data and ECRM’s Wal-Mart Stores Inc. Sustainable Packaging Scorecard Modeling Software and more!

This Webcast is ideal for packaging raw material suppliers, packaging converters, suppliers and distributors of converted packaging, and consumer packaged goods companies who want to understand what to demand of their suppliers in the way of sustainability claims accountability.

I’m curious to see what this brings to the greenwashing and sustainability debate. For more information, or to register, click here.packaging1

A few months dairy milkback, Cadbury UK announced they were introducing fair-trade chocolate to their UK market during the summer of 2009 and suggested that it the endeavor proved profitable that the company would expand the program to its other markets. Yesterday, Cadbury announced that their Dairy Milk Chocolate bars would also be going fair-trade in Canada, New Zealand, and Australia by the summer of 2010. This move is a major step for the mainstream chocolate producer and is a move to address some of the human rights issues associated with the cocoa industry. In West Africa, where 70% of the world’s cocoa supply is produced1, there have been well documented instances of forced child labour and hazardous working conditions on cocoa plantations. The tenants of fair-trade prohibits these types of human rights violations and therefore when a consumer purchases fairly traded cocoa product, they can be sure that the product they are enjoying has been produced and sourced in an ethical manner.

In a press release, Cadbury has stated2:

“The certification of Cadbury Dairy Milk will improve the lives and communities of over 40,000 cocoa farmers and 6,000 sugar farmers, ensuring a guaranteed income, viable growth and hope for a prosperous future,” says Rob Clarke, Executive Director of TransFair Canada, the national Fair Trade Certification body and Canadian member of the Fairtrade Labelling Organization (FLO) International. “Cadbury Dairy Milk going Fair Trade also provides Canadians with an unprecedented opportunity to share in the success of these farmers and the presence of the Fair Trade Certification mark on every bar provides independent assurance that Fair Trade standards were met.”

The company also states2:

Cadbury’s commitment to Fair Trade in Canada will mean that approximately 11 per cent of all chocolate products Cadbury sells in Canada will be Fair Trade Certified. This announcement applies to the entire pure chocolate Cadbury Dairy Milk range: Cadbury Dairy Milk 42g, 100g and 200g; Cadbury Dairy Milk Thins, the first 100-calorie bar in Canada and Cadbury Dairy Milk treat size for Halloween. Cadbury intends to ship the first Fair Trade certified bars in Summer 2010.

For the full press release, please visit marketwire.com for the full story and press release from Cadbury.

Sources:

1. Parenti, C. (2008, February 4). Chocolate’s bittersweet economy. Fortune International (Europe), 157(2), 24-31.

2. http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/Cadbury-North-America-1035139.html

Older Posts »