START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x
2,570,396 people care about Environment & Wildlife

Cancun Climate Summit: Activists Consider Long View

Cancun Climate Summit: Activists Consider Long View

A year ago, it seemed possibly — likely, even — that President Barack Obama would sweep into the international negotiations on climate change at Copenhagen and make serious progress on the tangle of issues at stake. The reality was quite different. This year, the expectations for the United Nations Climate Conference in Cancun are less exuberant.

The conference will be held from Nov 29 to Dec 10 and the same issues from 2009 are up for debate. Countries like the United States, Britain, and Germany are still contributing an outsize share of carbon to the atmosphere. Countries like India and China are still rapidly increasing their own carbon output. And countries like Bangladesh, Tuvalu, and Bolivia are still bearing an unfair share of the environmental impacts brought on by climate change.

A very different set of expectations are building in the climate movement this year. If last year was about moving forward as fast as possible, this year, climate activists seem resigned to the idea that politicians just aren’t getting it. Change, when it comes, will have to be be built on a popular movement, not a political negotiation.

Climate change from the bottom up

Last year, climate activists put their faith in international leaders to make progress. This year, they believe that it’s up to them, as outside actors, to marshal a grassroots movement and pressure their leaders towards decreased carbon emissions.

“There’s a recognition that the insider strategy to push from inside the Beltway to impact what will happen in DC, or what will happen in Cancun has really not succeeded,” Rose Braz, climate campaign director at the Center for Biological Diversity, told Making Contact’s Andrew Stelzer.  ”What we’re doing in conjunction with a number of groups across the country and across the world is really build the type of movement that will change what happens in Cancun, what changes what happens in DC from the bottom up.” (This entire episode of Making Contact is dedicated to new approaches to climate change, at Cancun and beyond, and is worth a listen.)

Fighting the indolence of capitalists

Here’s one example of this new strategy: as Zachary Shahan writes at Change.org, La Via Campesina, an international peasant movement, is coordinating a march that will begin in San Luis Potosi, Guadalajara, Acapulco, Oaxaca, and Chiapas, then converge on Cancun. The march will include “thousands of farmers, indigenous people, rural villagers, urbanites, and more,” Shahan reports.

After they arrive in Cancun, the organizers are planning an “Alternative Global Forum for Life and Environmental and Social Justice” for the final days of the negotiations, which they say will be a mass mobilisation of peasants, indigenous and social movements. The action extends far beyond Cancun, though. Actually, they are organizing thousands of Cancuns around the world on this day to denounce what they see as false climate solutions.

These actions echo the strategy that environmentalist and author Bill McKibben and other climate leaders are promoting to push for climate change policies in the U.S. All this talk about building momentum from the bottom up, from populations, means that anyone looking for change is now looking years into the future.

The U.S. is not leading the way

Of course, ultimately, politicians will need to agree on a couple of standards. In particular, how much carbon each country should be emitting and how fast each country should power down its current emission levels. The U.S. is one of the biggest stumbling blocks to agreement on these questions, especially due to the recent mid-term elections. As Claudia Salerno, Venezuela’s lead climate change negotiator wrote at AlterNet:

Unlike what many suggest, China is not the problem. China, along with India and others, have made considerable commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and are already working to realize them. Other developing countries have done the same, although we only generate a virtual drop in the bucket of global carbon emissions. The key player missing here is the U.S.

China, the U.S. and Clean Coal

The most interesting collaborations on clean energy, however, aren’t happening around the negotiating table. This week, The Atlantic’s James Fallows wrote a long piece about the work that the U.S. and China are doing together on clean coal technology, the magic cure-all to the world’s energy ills.

In the piece, Fallows recognizes what environmentalists have long argued: coal is bad for the environment and for coal-mining communities. But, unlike clean energy advocates who want to phase coal out of the energy equation, Fallows argues that coal must play a part in the world’s energy future. Therefore, we must find a way to burn it without releasing clouds of carbon into the atmosphere. That’s where clean coal technology comes in. So far, however, researchers have had little luck minimizing coal’s carbon output.

A few progressive writers weighed in on Fallows’ piece: Grist’s David Roberts thought Fallows was too hard on the anti-coal camp, while Campus Progress’ Sara Rubin argued that the piece did a good job of grappling with the reality of clean energy economics. And Mother Jones’ Kevin Drum had one very clear criticism — that the piece skated over the question of progress on carbon capture, the one real way to dramatically reduce carbon pollution from coal. He wrote:

All the collaboration sounds wonderful, and even a 20% or 30% improvement in coal technology would be welcome. But that said, sequestration is the holy grail and I still don’t know if the Chinese are doing anything more on that front than the rest of us.

On every front, then, the view on climate change is now a long one.

This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about the environment by members of The Media Consortium. It is free to reprint. 


Read more: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

photo credit: thanks to cnphch via flickr
by Sarah Laskow, Media Consortium Blogger

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it

45 comments

+ add your own
9:36PM PST on Nov 26, 2010

Thanx for this article.

7:43PM PST on Nov 24, 2010

Greenhouse gases are accumulating more and more. You will spend billions and still not a fact that can find the correct technical solutions to problems in energy and transport to transfer it to the alternative, does not pollute the atmosphere and the earth, renewable energy sources such as water and sea salt. I found a technical solution to a series of engines on the water and energy of wind and river-generating plants. Their introduction in industry, energy and transport will cost several million dollars, and the effect of the introduction is impossible to estimate!


Dear!

Do not listen to the seniors - to step on the rake again and again! Learn from their mistakes only fools. Britain will only become great again, when will the world class in power, moving to renewable, environmentally perfect and beneficial in terms of performance energy sources such as water, sea salt. No problems with funding, there is a problem in the safeguards that my machine will work for peace, and not become a terrible weapon in the hands of idiots! I look forward to your wisdom and love for the Brits, and indiscriminately on skin color and prosperity! I hope you and promise to make Britain the greatest of world powers, and all for a year!
Your engineers can invent a car on alternative energy sources and spend billions on development and not find simple and quick payback solutions. I have all had long worked and you just need to innovate in production. Fo

10:34AM PST on Nov 20, 2010

Very discouraging.

9:32AM PST on Nov 16, 2010

"No easy solution to the power problem.
As long as solar and wind farms are created they will be controlled by big business and as a result prices will remain high."

How about;
"Mini Nuclear Power Plants Could Power 20,000 Homes (Update)" (25 MW output) {http://www.physorg.com/news145561984.html} or,
"Toshiba Builds 100x Smaller Micro Nuclear Reactor " (200kW output) {http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news-toshiba-micro-nuclear-12.17b.html}

7:36AM PST on Nov 16, 2010

No easy solution to the power problem.
As long as solar and wind farms are created they will be controlled by big business and as a result prices will remain high.
Governments / manufacturers need to encourage each household to become self sufficient by making home units more affordable. This will inturn bring power prices down and reduce the need for coal, water and nuclear generated power.

Make a difference, Plant a Tree.

4:37PM PST on Nov 15, 2010

Change must come to America, and the world!

12:47PM PST on Nov 15, 2010

I love it,capitalists procrastinate until climate warming destroys their markets.
I do not think drowning and starvation is a desirable way to reduce population.

9:42AM PST on Nov 15, 2010

"That's where clean coal technology comes in. So far, however, researchers have had little luck minimizing coal's carbon output."

Actually, they have managed to reduce CO2 emissions per weight of coal fairly considerably from what I've read. It's just that it means they have to burn up to 40% more coal to generate the same amount of electricity. Which costs more, making clean coal not FINANCIALLY viable for the profit making businesses that control our energy supply. Obviously, in an environmental context it also means more mining, and faster usage of the coal reserves which means that the actual CO2 emissions from Coal Fired Power Stations remain about the same, but that they will be burning more fuel.

I think it's time to accept that there really is NO SUCH THING as clean coal and either say "this is a necessary evil upon which we will place strict regulations" OR "this is an unnecessary evil which we will ban as of X date"

I tend toward the latter because of the poisoning of watercourses, the devastation of ecosystems, and the loss of lives involved in the mining.

4:45AM PST on Nov 15, 2010

Thanks for the info.

10:21PM PST on Nov 14, 2010

Thanks.

add your comment



Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

ads keep care2 free

Recent Comments from Causes

I had no idea that you didn't allow dogs onto patios & into gardens in the US. Here in the UK almost…

Yes, we love our guns (not me), but stupid people make stupid choices and laws can only do so much. …

@Paul B. "99+% of all gun owners are responsible. You can't allow the need to regulate the 1% to destroy…

meet our writers

Julie M. Rodriguez Julie M. Rodriguez is an arts, green living, and political writer based in San Mateo, CA. Her work... more
Story idea? Want to blog? Contact the editors!
ads keep care2 free

more from causes

Animal Welfare

Causes Canada

Causes UK

Children

Civil Rights

Education

Endangered Wildlife

Environment & Wildlife

Global Development

Global Warming

Health Policy

Human Rights

LGBT rights

Politics

Real Food

Trailblazers For Good

Women's Rights




Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.