The official COP site reports the surprising news:
Just hours after the world leaders had hammered out a deal, Prime Minister of Bangladesh Sheikh Hasina expressed satisfaction over a "reasonable conclusion" to the UN Climate Change Conference.
Speaking at Lund University in Sweden, the Prime Minister stated that the agreement takes in most of the country’s concerns, AFP reports.
"I am pleased to say that we have been successful in arriving at a reasonable conclusion," she said, adding that "there are certain areas that would be finalized in the coming days."
Monday, December 21, 2009
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Curious scenes: will we all look back and shake our heads in wonder?
A tip of the hat to Lindsay and Emmy at Business Outlook in Victoria - this was the basis of their Xmas card this year...if you have a worthy photo - send it in.
Seven thoughts on Copenhagen
Now perhaps the world does not need yet another set of opinions about the Copenhagen deal, but too bad:
1. The diplomatic discussions will continue for years: the fissures that were opened over the last few weeks - especially within G77 - will continue because they are essentially irreconcilable. The interests of small island states, vulnerable emerging states and large industrialised or industrialising states are very clearly running in different directions. The evidence of Copenhagen is that these interests are at last becoming articulated.
2. Pushing these talks along will be various crises: just as the Global Financial Crisis sparked unprecedented co-operation between states on stimulus spending, so major extreme weather events will do the same, though to differing degrees.
3. The domestic pressures for each country will continue to out-weigh the needed collective pressure to act together: the approach of China and the US at Copenhagen showed that though there is enormous pressure to do a deal - and then spin it mercilessly - but it is not sufficient to change their essential approach.
4. So, over the next decade there will be three needed tasks: to maintain a sense of hope in a global community badly scarred by the Copenhagen experience, to manage (as best we can without formal regulations and market mechanisms) carbon emissions reductions and to adapt to a changing climate.
5. Hope comes from practical experience and I think that cities have a major role in this: a massive escalation of the practical activities that are essentially good business anyway (especially energy efficiency and new technologies) will help to give our communities a sense that all is not lost.
6. And additionally, we need to continue to reduce emissions where we can - our energy systems, our waste management and our transport networks. The literature over the past decade or two shows the various levers for cities to manage emissions. An even more focused approach is called for.
7. And finally, cities will move to the forefront of climate adaptation work: not just for the vulnerable coastal cities around the world, but for suburbs dealing with increased transport costs, rural communities coping with drought and bushfires and inner-city areas facing large energy cost increases and potential energy security concerns.
So, out of Copenhagen has come a new decade's worth of work for cities and local governments. Can we deliver?
1. The diplomatic discussions will continue for years: the fissures that were opened over the last few weeks - especially within G77 - will continue because they are essentially irreconcilable. The interests of small island states, vulnerable emerging states and large industrialised or industrialising states are very clearly running in different directions. The evidence of Copenhagen is that these interests are at last becoming articulated.
2. Pushing these talks along will be various crises: just as the Global Financial Crisis sparked unprecedented co-operation between states on stimulus spending, so major extreme weather events will do the same, though to differing degrees.
3. The domestic pressures for each country will continue to out-weigh the needed collective pressure to act together: the approach of China and the US at Copenhagen showed that though there is enormous pressure to do a deal - and then spin it mercilessly - but it is not sufficient to change their essential approach.
4. So, over the next decade there will be three needed tasks: to maintain a sense of hope in a global community badly scarred by the Copenhagen experience, to manage (as best we can without formal regulations and market mechanisms) carbon emissions reductions and to adapt to a changing climate.
5. Hope comes from practical experience and I think that cities have a major role in this: a massive escalation of the practical activities that are essentially good business anyway (especially energy efficiency and new technologies) will help to give our communities a sense that all is not lost.
6. And additionally, we need to continue to reduce emissions where we can - our energy systems, our waste management and our transport networks. The literature over the past decade or two shows the various levers for cities to manage emissions. An even more focused approach is called for.
7. And finally, cities will move to the forefront of climate adaptation work: not just for the vulnerable coastal cities around the world, but for suburbs dealing with increased transport costs, rural communities coping with drought and bushfires and inner-city areas facing large energy cost increases and potential energy security concerns.
So, out of Copenhagen has come a new decade's worth of work for cities and local governments. Can we deliver?
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Wait, you mean you RIDE on those things?
You have got to admire those tough Danes...thousands of snow-covered bikes around Copenhagen tonight are quite a sight.
Can I have that by COB this Friday?
My take so far on the COP is now up at the ABC online environment site. Includes:
"George Orwell famously defined sport as war minus shooting. UN events such as the Conference of Parties in Copenhagen fit this definition. It is as though the heightened jet-lag, scurrying between meetings, freezing cold weather and furtive looks at blackberries and iPhones create a view of life in extremis."
"George Orwell famously defined sport as war minus shooting. UN events such as the Conference of Parties in Copenhagen fit this definition. It is as though the heightened jet-lag, scurrying between meetings, freezing cold weather and furtive looks at blackberries and iPhones create a view of life in extremis."
Oh elusive and much loved proof of worth
For the record, this is the registration that proves that I did not just go to Copenhagen but - braving the immense chaos of the Bella Center - actually got registered and entered the fabled building. The grim-looking photo is the one they have on record from my last COP in Bali (2007), a time-travelling feat that I could have done without...
Monday, December 14, 2009
Bleary eyed and jet-lagged...
Less than a minute of a larger video piece that was played at Federation Square in Melbourne on Monday... following jet-lagged thoughts on the divisions (developed-developing countries etc) that were obvious at COP on the first day or so.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
I have moved from a cast on my left foot to a "moon boot" - actually a cam walker (but not to be confused with Cam Walker from Friends of The Earth in Melbourne)... and moon boots have a Facebook support group you will be appalled to hear. I have a small walking stick which I hope to use stylishly to disguise myself in spohisticated Copenhagen.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
But you can still get lost in the forest
The Huffington Post reports on a new iphone app: "Compiled from the city tree census, this free app identifies your iPhone's location and displays all the surrounding trees on a map. Opening the app here at HuffPost reveals that within a five block radius of the SoHo office, there are 407 trees, creating approximately $83,000 in benefits to the city each year. The 36 species of trees reduce CO2 emissions by 120,380 lbs and prevent 446,256 gallons of storm water run off every year"
Sounds like a great tool for an urban biodiversity campaign...
Sounds like a great tool for an urban biodiversity campaign...
Curious scenes: will we all look back and shake our heads in wonder ?
An ice rink in a Bangkok shopping mall, middle of June 2008: average temperature is 33C... it doesn't get much more surreal than this.
Monday, December 7, 2009
If you build it...
Great to see a creative use of the public-private partnership approach...
Nissan, San Francisco Collaborate to Develop Bay Area EV Charging Network:
prnewswire.com reports that "Nissan and the City of San Francisco ... are working to advance zero-emission mobility by promoting the development of an electric vehicle (EV) charging network in the nine-county region. The cities of Oakland and San Jose, county governments in the Bay Area and other public and private stakeholders are participants in the regional EV Corridor program."
Nissan, San Francisco Collaborate to Develop Bay Area EV Charging Network:
prnewswire.com reports that "Nissan and the City of San Francisco ... are working to advance zero-emission mobility by promoting the development of an electric vehicle (EV) charging network in the nine-county region. The cities of Oakland and San Jose, county governments in the Bay Area and other public and private stakeholders are participants in the regional EV Corridor program."
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Curious scenes: will we all look back and shake our heads in wonder?
Sent to me by a friend so I am not sure of its provenance, except a left-hand drive makes me suspect a certain large superpower...
On the one hand, and then again...six differing perspectives on climate change
In preparation for COP 15 in Copenhagen, I have been thinking about the twofold nature of many of the perspectives that we are likely to address:
1. Climate believer versus sceptic. This is even hard to label, as I do not count myself a "believer" at all but simply someone convinced by the large amount of evidence - though others say the same on the other side. Nevertheless, the CRU scandal has made this much more prominent that in previous years.
2. Developed countries versus developing. This terminology is even more loaded and in certain fora I would be roundly castigated for this language. But the split is real and probably the major battle lines in COP are drawn on this one. Developed countries need to reduce their emissions and account for their historical role in loading the atmosphere over the past two centuries but require developing countries to lock in with reductions. Developing countries insist on deeper reductions and are wary of legally-binding requirements.
3. Poverty-reduction versus climate action. Yes, I know, everyone says that they can work together (and they can) or indeed that they can not be done separately (a recent Times of India post said as much) but in the battle for budgets, political air-space and on-the-ground activity, these two play off against each other in reality in many places.
4. National governments versus regional and local governments. Well, this had to be in there. In the midst of all of the endless negotiations, cities like Ann Arbor just keep on doing the work. How could this play out in the COP? I see little evidence of real impact but I hope that if we are to continue to have a stand-off, then we at least ensure that cities that can act right now are resourced to do so.
5. Business development versus turbo-charged aid. There are many business opportunities in the climate changed world and market mechanisms such as emissions trading schemes can encourage them (and for example create new Chinese global groups in turbine manufacturing). But many others focus on the political or moral dimensions of the challenge and criticise the role of capitalism as bringing us further problems.
6. Nuclear versus non-nuclear. This takes us to a growing battle - one that has simmered for some time in previous COPs but is becoming more pressing as the nuclear industry ramps up globally. Few now talk about nuclear as THE answer (as in: power too cheap to meter) but it is increasingly talked about as one of the strategies that needs to be used.
So there we have it. A testing time for us all coming up...
1. Climate believer versus sceptic. This is even hard to label, as I do not count myself a "believer" at all but simply someone convinced by the large amount of evidence - though others say the same on the other side. Nevertheless, the CRU scandal has made this much more prominent that in previous years.
2. Developed countries versus developing. This terminology is even more loaded and in certain fora I would be roundly castigated for this language. But the split is real and probably the major battle lines in COP are drawn on this one. Developed countries need to reduce their emissions and account for their historical role in loading the atmosphere over the past two centuries but require developing countries to lock in with reductions. Developing countries insist on deeper reductions and are wary of legally-binding requirements.
3. Poverty-reduction versus climate action. Yes, I know, everyone says that they can work together (and they can) or indeed that they can not be done separately (a recent Times of India post said as much) but in the battle for budgets, political air-space and on-the-ground activity, these two play off against each other in reality in many places.
4. National governments versus regional and local governments. Well, this had to be in there. In the midst of all of the endless negotiations, cities like Ann Arbor just keep on doing the work. How could this play out in the COP? I see little evidence of real impact but I hope that if we are to continue to have a stand-off, then we at least ensure that cities that can act right now are resourced to do so.
5. Business development versus turbo-charged aid. There are many business opportunities in the climate changed world and market mechanisms such as emissions trading schemes can encourage them (and for example create new Chinese global groups in turbine manufacturing). But many others focus on the political or moral dimensions of the challenge and criticise the role of capitalism as bringing us further problems.
6. Nuclear versus non-nuclear. This takes us to a growing battle - one that has simmered for some time in previous COPs but is becoming more pressing as the nuclear industry ramps up globally. Few now talk about nuclear as THE answer (as in: power too cheap to meter) but it is increasingly talked about as one of the strategies that needs to be used.
So there we have it. A testing time for us all coming up...
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
But the phone still rings out every time....
Local Government Chronicle reports that Sutton LBC in the UK is looking into the possibility of creating its own version of map-based social platform Rippll, which would allow it to present users with a range of council services based on their exact location involving services such as libraries, leisure facilities, and youth centres.
Meanwhile it is also reported that Brighton & Hove City Council is claiming to be the first UK local authority to launch an iPhone application - a free real time bus time information app created by one its residents.
The Brighton & Hove Bus Real Time Infoboard app updates automatically to show live bus times across the city’s network.
Fast Company reports that San Francisco has released a free EcoFinder iPhone app to help residents recycle and dispose of unwanted materials. The location-based app, produced by Haku Wale, uses San Francisco's XML data feed to guide residents towards drop-off points for items like mercury-filled compact fluorescent bulbs, gas tanks, printer cartridges, and furniture. Info used in the EcoFinder app will also go into Earth911's national recycling database.
An iPhone application in the Pittsburgh USA (claiming to be the first "major city" to do so) allows users to directly report problems such as potholes to the authority, along with precise map locations and photographs.
Early days yet, but some promising moves.
Meanwhile it is also reported that Brighton & Hove City Council is claiming to be the first UK local authority to launch an iPhone application - a free real time bus time information app created by one its residents.
The Brighton & Hove Bus Real Time Infoboard app updates automatically to show live bus times across the city’s network.
Fast Company reports that San Francisco has released a free EcoFinder iPhone app to help residents recycle and dispose of unwanted materials. The location-based app, produced by Haku Wale, uses San Francisco's XML data feed to guide residents towards drop-off points for items like mercury-filled compact fluorescent bulbs, gas tanks, printer cartridges, and furniture. Info used in the EcoFinder app will also go into Earth911's national recycling database.
An iPhone application in the Pittsburgh USA (claiming to be the first "major city" to do so) allows users to directly report problems such as potholes to the authority, along with precise map locations and photographs.
Early days yet, but some promising moves.
A different type of climate crisis
Tony Abbott has now taken over the Opposition Leader's position in Australia - and immediately opposed (successfully) the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.
Beyond all of the other political waves that have gone into this change - the ongoing battle between the moderate and hard right factions, the large lead in the polls by PM Rudd and the usual period of disharmony after over a decade in power - the role of climate change is front and central.
Mr Abbott is suggesting that it will be through voluntary efforts that we can address an issue which - at least publicly - he insists needs to be dealt with. But it seems to me that it is the last decade that has been the time for such efforts - building confidence in the community that we can take positive action, identifying simple actions such as energy efficiency that can have a deep impact.
Indeed, ICLEI's Cities for Climate Protection was a good model for this approach.
But, sadly, the time is now clear that we need to price in the costs of carbon so that we can use the energy of market forces to create new ways and build new momentum for reductions.
If Mr Abbott is determined to avoid such mechanisms (remarkably for a conservative), then I fancy that he is unlikely to come up with a compelling or convincing alternative.
Beyond all of the other political waves that have gone into this change - the ongoing battle between the moderate and hard right factions, the large lead in the polls by PM Rudd and the usual period of disharmony after over a decade in power - the role of climate change is front and central.
Mr Abbott is suggesting that it will be through voluntary efforts that we can address an issue which - at least publicly - he insists needs to be dealt with. But it seems to me that it is the last decade that has been the time for such efforts - building confidence in the community that we can take positive action, identifying simple actions such as energy efficiency that can have a deep impact.
Indeed, ICLEI's Cities for Climate Protection was a good model for this approach.
But, sadly, the time is now clear that we need to price in the costs of carbon so that we can use the energy of market forces to create new ways and build new momentum for reductions.
If Mr Abbott is determined to avoid such mechanisms (remarkably for a conservative), then I fancy that he is unlikely to come up with a compelling or convincing alternative.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
The view from my window
In homage to Andrew Sullivan and his amazing collection of these views from people's workplaces all around the world - and the new book which collects them all.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Sceptics - a Bex and a good lie down
As the debates continue to play out in the Australian political scene over climate change (the Liberal Party threatens to implode), the role of the re-born sceptics within the Federal Opposition and beyond is a key element.
The hacking of the CRU emails recently - to the frenzy of sites like Climate Depot and Andrew Bolt's blog - has simply given more information to a disturbing trend that I have noticed for some time (and George Monbiot posted on recently). When we began our climate program (Cities for Climate Protection) over a decade ago with local governments in Australia, we regularly had debates on the climate science: mainly because people had simply not heard the arguments before.
At some point - perhaps five years ago - this stopped. We quickly moved from agreement for the need to do something to the practicalities of action - how could we effectively save energy, what options existed to manage waste more cleverly and how could we plan our transport systems more effectively. Councils responded and have saved over 18 million tonnes of CO2 over that period of time.
But in the last few years there has been a renewed debate in Town Halls - generally there will be one person at least in the Council who thinks that climate change is a "scam". Note, we are not talking about a debate here. A debate is something that we want to continue - and the debate, in any public policy formulation, will always include cost-benefit discussions (pay back periods for new technologies), alternative priorities (investing in other budget needs), different political perspectives (size of government etc) and so on.
The accusation of a "scam" is not part of a debate - it is on the same level (sadly) as the 9/11 coverup or conspiracy theories on other major events over the past few decades. It is that somehow scientists, politicians and other decision-makers have either been duped collectively or agreed consciously to promote something false. Many many people. All around the world.
In liberal democracies, we need to maintain the difficult tension of ensuring debate continues without the "scam" politics of conspiracy. It is a small minority view (though magnified by the internet) and - in the end - if that one person in the Town Hall insists it is all a "scam", we need to just press on and hope that they have a Bex and a good lie down...
The hacking of the CRU emails recently - to the frenzy of sites like Climate Depot and Andrew Bolt's blog - has simply given more information to a disturbing trend that I have noticed for some time (and George Monbiot posted on recently). When we began our climate program (Cities for Climate Protection) over a decade ago with local governments in Australia, we regularly had debates on the climate science: mainly because people had simply not heard the arguments before.
At some point - perhaps five years ago - this stopped. We quickly moved from agreement for the need to do something to the practicalities of action - how could we effectively save energy, what options existed to manage waste more cleverly and how could we plan our transport systems more effectively. Councils responded and have saved over 18 million tonnes of CO2 over that period of time.
But in the last few years there has been a renewed debate in Town Halls - generally there will be one person at least in the Council who thinks that climate change is a "scam". Note, we are not talking about a debate here. A debate is something that we want to continue - and the debate, in any public policy formulation, will always include cost-benefit discussions (pay back periods for new technologies), alternative priorities (investing in other budget needs), different political perspectives (size of government etc) and so on.
The accusation of a "scam" is not part of a debate - it is on the same level (sadly) as the 9/11 coverup or conspiracy theories on other major events over the past few decades. It is that somehow scientists, politicians and other decision-makers have either been duped collectively or agreed consciously to promote something false. Many many people. All around the world.
In liberal democracies, we need to maintain the difficult tension of ensuring debate continues without the "scam" politics of conspiracy. It is a small minority view (though magnified by the internet) and - in the end - if that one person in the Town Hall insists it is all a "scam", we need to just press on and hope that they have a Bex and a good lie down...
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Where next for Australia?
Australia is a good case study for the way in which climate change policy is reaching a major decision point brought on by COP 15. After a decade of difficulty at a national level - with a pragmatic Prime Minister eventually supporting an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) - the Rudd Labor government is forcing a vote in Parliament on a proposed Bill this week.
And all hell has broken loose!
The rural-based conservative National Party doesn't want to vote for it (even though it is likely that agriculture will be excluded forever from the scheme) and their coalition partners, the Liberal Party, are close to splitting on the issue because of the resurgence of climate sceptics. The Greens don't think it goes far enough, rewards current "polluters" and are therefore pushing that it "locks in failure".
The Rudd government has stated that it wants the ETS to be passed before COP 15 - the rationale is that this will give Australia greater potential for influence and encourage others to deal. But the added chaos in the opposition ranks is a pretty nice bonus as well.
And all hell has broken loose!
The rural-based conservative National Party doesn't want to vote for it (even though it is likely that agriculture will be excluded forever from the scheme) and their coalition partners, the Liberal Party, are close to splitting on the issue because of the resurgence of climate sceptics. The Greens don't think it goes far enough, rewards current "polluters" and are therefore pushing that it "locks in failure".
The Rudd government has stated that it wants the ETS to be passed before COP 15 - the rationale is that this will give Australia greater potential for influence and encourage others to deal. But the added chaos in the opposition ranks is a pretty nice bonus as well.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Copenhagen dreaming
This is a little comforting given that I recently broke my fibula and am limping around on a cast and crutches. The doctor assures me that all will be well for the trip...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)