“More meetings does not mean success,” de Boer, who steps down from his UN post on July 1, said today at the Carbon Market Insights conference in Amsterdam. “We need to get down to business.”

The Copenhagen summit in December 2009 was a failure even though it was preceded by many meetings, de Boer said. While about 150 nations agreed to submit plans or targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the meeting failed to produce a global treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which lapses in 2012.

“Going back from Copenhagen, I was extremely disappointed,” de Boer said. “My first feeling was it had been an absolute disaster.”

via UN Climate Process ‘Needs a Good Spanking,’ Yvo de Boer Says – BusinessWeek.

Biochar has multiple potential environmental benefits, foremost the potential to sequester carbon in the soil for hundreds to thousands of years at an estimate. Studies suggest that crop yields can increase as a result of applying biochar as a soil amendment. Some contend that biochar has value as an immediate climate change mitigation strategy. Scientific experiments suggest that greenhouse gas emissions are reduced significantly with biochar application to crop fields. Obstacles that may stall rapid adoption of biochar production systems include technology costs, system operation and maintenance, feedstock availability, and biochar handling. Biochar research and development is in its infancy. Nevertheless, interest in biochar as a multifaceted solution to agricultural and natural resource issues is growing at a rapid pace both nationally and internationally.

via Environmental Legislation: Biochar: Examination of an Emerging Concept to Mitigate Climate Change.

Contrary to popular perception, indigenous or local communities have intimate knowledge of their environment (soils, water, forest, flora, fauna, etc), and most of their decisions and actions are informed by this knowledge-base.

The landscape within which indigenous knowledge can efficiently be used to support adaptation and mitigation action is heavily degraded, this is a reality we all need to wake up to

Indigenous or local knowledge is the basis for local-level decision-making in many rural communities. It has value not only for the culture in which it evolves, but also for scientists and planners striving to improve conditions in rural localities.

Over time, human relationship with nature has produced complex knowledge systems, which are responsive to change, self regenerating as well as being multidimensional in nature. The close knit association between this knowledge systems and ecosystems offers us the greatest opportunity to understand how humans respond to change. This is crucial especially now that we are faced with a major environmental crisis related to climate change.

Incorporating indigenous knowledge into climate change policies can lead to the development of effective adaptation strategies that are cost-effective, participatory and sustainable (IPCC). However, the papers in this publication point out that the ecological space within which indigenous knowledge can effectively be used for adaptation has severely been degraded. They also highlight the continued and existing threat from development practices including those meant to assist in the processes of adaptation and mitigation.

The papers explore the role of the indigenous knowledge from two extreme ecological systems; the wet ecological systems of Vietnam and Bangladesh to the dry to semi arid ecosystems of Kenya. The three country case studies show that, often linear solutions have been designed to resolve issues or problems that are multidimensional in nature. This approach has more or less tended to shift the temporal problem and transferring the inherent risks to solitary ecological units or to whole ecosystems. This in turn degrades the active role of indigenous or local knowledge systems.

There is an emerging trend on how the role of indigenous or local knowledge systems has been systematically marginalised through developmental interventions over time in the Global South.

It is true that democracy based on majority view is also a form of oppresion especially against minorities.  The same can be said about knowledge.  Knowledge consolidated in the hands and minds of a few,  can result in a legitimised form of oppression.  This is becoming evident in the area of climate change  within the promoted  complex mechanisms and processes meant to comprehensively deal with this global phenomenon.

A few terms have become synonymous with “climate change”- REDD, COP15, Adaptation and Mitigation- especially linked to local communities and how they can be integrated into the climate change framework. A few well placed leaders, NGOs, CBOs etc have been at the forefront of calling for action and demanding for resources to facilitate the engagement with these “terms”.

The biggest gainers at the present moment are those armed with the knowledge about where resources can be accessed (for training, workshops, meetings, conventions etc), and this happens to be a minority of leaders among the disadvantaged and marginalised local groups and communities (real or imagined).  There is nothing wrong with the crop of leaders attending and being part of the “global party”, but there is everything wrong when this is being done in the name of the marginalised, but with a clearly misplaced agenda- accumulating resources for a few individuals. We need to draw an ethical line when dealing with climate change…….where is that line?

Developed countries must address global warming to prevent disease, hunger in developing world

7. July 2009 20:54

Pollution from the world’s wealthiest countries is spreading disease and hunger in developing countries, according to a new Oxfam International report, which calls on developed countries to address global warming when G8 leaders meet in Italy, the Globe and Mail reports.

The report, titled “Suffering the Science: Climate Change, People and Poverty,” says, “It is in the tropics where the bulk of humanity lives – many of them in poverty – that climate change is hitting now and hitting hardest” (Bailey, 7/6).

via Developed countries must address global warming to prevent disease, hunger in developing world – Udongo.

PAN AFRICAN CLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANCE

Nairobi, Kenya, 29 May 2009

by Mithika Mwenda, PACJA Coordinator

Your Excellency the President of the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment;

Distinguished Delegates;

The able Secretariat of UNEP/ROA;

Ladies and Gentlemen;

The Pan African Climate Justice Alliance is delighted to have the opportunity to address this important Forum in such a historic and important year as we marshal our troops to win a climate change deal in Copenhagen that assures vulnerable people in Africa descent livelihoods.

Achieving a deal that is fair, equitable, ecologically just and adequate will not be easy, but it is almost indispensable. Copenhagen, thus, must be a key turning point for climate justice – a crucial milestone on the journey to stabilizing the Earth’s climate and securing the rights and aspirations of all people.

The injustice of climate change in Africa

The global impacts of, and responsibilities for, climate change are unequally shared. The tragic irony is that those with the least responsibility for climate change stand to suffer most from current and future consequences. Without intervention, climate change is likely to exacerbate existing global inequalities. The developmental gains secured in Africa are at risk of being wiped out and the challenge of achieving sustainable development, particularly the Millennium Development Goals, will become even more difficult and urgent.

The 53 African countries are responsible for less than 4% of global emissions and have over 15% of the global population. The developed countries have emitted almost three quarters of all historical emissions but they represent less than one fifth of the world’s population. Africa is not historically responsible for climate change, but must all take responsibility for responding to its impacts and demanding climate justice from developed nations.

Gender

Climate change impacts men and women differently. The majority of the poor in Africa are women, and we believe that women are the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. It is our submission that climate change response strategies need to take the specific needs of women into account – this must go beyond rhetoric and become a fundamental and practical element of all African climate change response strategies and actions.

Calling on Annex 1 Mitigation action

PACJA believes that the proposals by developed countries in the climate negotiations, on both mitigation and adaptation, are inadequate. They seek to pass on the costs of adaptation and mitigation, avoiding their responsibility to finance climate change response efforts in Africa. As the basis of a fair and effective climate solution, we call on Annex 1 countries to acknowledge and repay the full measure of their climate debt to African countries. We also call on Annex 1 countries to collectively agree to cut their emissions to at least 45% below 1990 levels by 2020 and at least 90% by 2050 – with all reductions to be achieved within those countries, not through carbon offsetting.

We note with concern that the draft declaration for this AMCEN meeting only refers to emissions cuts that are “towards the upper end of the 25-40% range”, once more leaving a loophole to be exploited by those who are not interested in taking action.

Adaptation

PACJA would like to highlight the following points:

• Adaptation finance must be additional to existing ODA commitments and in the form of grants and not loans.
• Adaptation should foster the realisation of fundamental human rights and should build social, economic and environmental resilience.
• The financial governance of adaptation funds must be representative, robust and accountable and under the auspices of the UNFCCC. The governance structure should include civil society representation.

Furthermore, Africa is one of the world’s most important reservoirs of soil and other terrestrial carbon, estimated to account for at least 20% of the world’s entire stock of forest carbon and a  great share of its agricultural carbon with very large potential for additional sequestration and other mitigation efforts.

We recommend that the programmmes and the structures currently being developed, including the proposed mechanism for crediting reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) be suited to the conditions that prevail in Africa. It is essential to ensure synergy between REDD and the full range of agriculture, forestry and other land uses (AFOLU). Further more, deforestation and other land uses change are currently estimated to account for over 30% of green house gas emissions.

The Global Environment Facility (GEF)

PACJA realises that while new funding mechanisms are being put in place, some interim measures will have to exist. If the GEF is to be used as one of the interim financing mechanisms, its governance must be given a significant and rapid overhaul to make it more efficient and easier to access. There is widespread frustration with, and distrust towards, the GEF in Africa. One member of our alliance related that in his country, people joke that it is easier to get a camel through the eye of a needle than it is to get money out of the GEF.

African Governments’ support for climate change negotiations and national action

The recent global financial crisis and enthusiasm with which the developed nations responded with generous bail outs and other rescue measures demonstrate their capacity to deal with emergencies. However, their reluctance to exhibit similar response to the climate-induced catastrophes in Africa clearly shows their lack of good faith. Our negotiators must not fail to bear that in mind while dialoguing for a post-2012 climate change agreement.

Recognizing that African governments are the primary duty bearers for our peoples, PACJA urges them to demonstrate leadership on climate change by:

• Developing an international engagement strategy that puts pressure on the industrialized countries primarily responsible for historic emissions to repay their adaptation debt to developing countries by committing to full financing and compensation for the adverse effects of climate change on all affected countries, groups and people;
• Ensuring that our climate change negotiation teams are well supported and resourced, both financially and in terms of skilled experts.
• Ensuring consistency and continuity of skilled African negotiators at UNFCCC meetings.
• Urgently establishing and implementing national climate change strategies in a consultative, multi-stakeholder manner, ensuring buy-in from all ministries. These strategies must be gender sensitive.
• Ensuring that climate change is mainstreamed in all national developmental agenda.

Madam President, distinguished delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen, PACJA thanks AMCEN and the African Group of negotiators for their continued effort and leadership in consolidating a common negotiating position, which, no doubt, will tilt the scale towards a pro-people agreement once the community of nations gather in Copenhagen later in the year. We have the numbers, and this is the time to put them into use. The African civil society, and indeed the people of Africa, will be watching the run up to Copenhagen and the work of our delegations and Governments with keen interest and expectation. PACJA is willing to constructively engage with you, and continually contribute to this effort wherever possible, and wherever called upon to.

Thank you.

Anila, the smokeless stove that uses agro-waste to burn and makes charcoal as a by-product. Photo/CORRESPONDENT

Labour Day is a day that people from across the world do exactly the opposite, they dont labour.  But, as the debate on climate change continues to gain momentum, those of a curious mind are left somehow confused when faced with the current scientific data and the political debate, so us who are keen to go to the heart of this matter, we labour on Labour day digging for news and interesting thoughts on how to deal with the climate change globally.

In our dig this week, we feature an article that was first published by American Progress.  The write up was in their idea of the day. Below is a snap shot of the Idea.

As the world’s largest historic emitter of greenhouse gases—and with one of the highest levels of per capita emissions—the United States has a responsibility to help the least developed countries face the threats brought on by global warming. And providing financial assistance for these countries to use in adapting to global warming’s effects would be a responsible and sensible course of action that would also promote stability and prosperity abroad.

In the rapidly unfolding debate of international climate policy, “adaptation” refers to the ability of communities to prepare for and respond to the consequences of climate change. Adaptation is one of the four priorities of international climate negotiations, in addition to mitigation (reducing global warming pollution), clean technology transfer, and finance.

The idea is  to support adaptation;  is this a good or bad idea? Personaly I dont think it is a bad idea, but it would help if we did break it down a little!

Carbon dioxide emissions amongst five other greenhouse gases may endanger human health and well-being according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) based on a review of scientific evidence.

The EPA cites a number of impacts that may impact significantly on US citizens, including:

• (1) an increased risk of droughts and floods
• (2) sea level rise
• (3) more intense storms and heatwaves
• (4) harm to water supplies, agriculture and wildlife

STOP: Okay, these are the same impacts that have been predicted as the likely outcomes of climate change and in some cases, these are not future events, these are occurrences that are being recorded on a daily basis all over the world, America included.

In Africa according to a recent report- there has been megadroughts lasting for centuries when the earth has entered a warming phase, which is part of the normal pattern in sub-Saharan Africa.  However, the stress of a warming world will make these dry periods more severe and more difficult for the people who live there, the temperatures are expected to rise by 5 to 10 degrees F (2.77 to 5.55 degrees C) this century, the scientists said, even if there is some curbing of the greenhouse emissions that spur climate change. Does it mean that it is too late to do something?  Maybe, there is still hope.

Lets find out what other gases are culprits to the EPA judgement before we move to the mathematics; the other gases that are contributing to the warming of the earth- Methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).

Obviously most of us do not know where the other gases come from but at least everyone knows where Carbon Dioxide comes from; primarily the burning of fossil fuels.  Carbon Dioxide is an easy gas to target, and since it is linked to commerce, the Cap and Trade is specifically looking at taking care of that problem.