Tag Archives: Climate Change

Welcome to Cancun: Police State Anyone?

By Anne Petermann, Global Justice Ecology Project

On November 25th in Denmark, Stine and Tannie, friends of GJEP Co-Director/ Strategist Orin Langelle and myself, were sentenced to four months of probation for violating Denmark’s anti-terrorism laws. Their crime: organizing for climate justice under the auspices of the international Climate Justice Action alliance.

They were arrested and convicted for being effective spokespeople and organizers.  For being strong women who stood up against the threats of state repression on behalf of the billions of voiceless people shut out of the UN Climate Negotiations in Copenhagen.  The people already suffering the impacts of the climate crisis—floods, droughts, the very ground beneath some communities melting away before their very eyes.

I had first met Stine in Copenhagen in September 2008 at the meeting where Climate Justice Action was founded.  More than 120 activists from around the world had come together to lay the groundwork for massive protests at the Copenhagen climate talks in December 2009. Orin and I got to know her better at subsequent CJA meetings in Poznan, Poland, Belem, Brazil and again in Copenhagen in March 2009.  Then, on December 3rd, when Orin and I emerged exhausted and bleary from our international flight to Copenhagen for the climate talks, Stine and Tannie met us with hugs at the airport, video camera in hand, and kindly led our exhausted selves from the airport to our hotel.  We spent the next several days in public spaces finalizing plans for the Reclaim Power action and playing “spot the undercover cop,” which most times was not difficult as they were straining so hard to hear us that they nearly fell off their chairs.

Stine, being Danish, was one of the foremost spokespeople for Climate Justice Action.  Over the months leading up to the Copenhagen Climate COP, she explained the logic of the “Reclaim Power” action that was to take place on December 16th—the day the high level Ministers arrived.  At this action, observers, delegates and Indigenous Peoples marched out of the failing climate talks at the Bella Center in protest not only of their ineffectiveness, but of their outright corruption by industry and the market.  At the same time that the halls of the Bella Center echoed with the booming voices of those reclaiming their power on the inside, Stine and Tannie were leading a contingent of demonstrators on the outside who were marching toward the Bella Center with the intent of meeting those marching out at the security fence that divided the sanctioned or “accredited” participants from those who were not.  The concept of the action was that those disaffected participants from the inside would meet the excluded from the outside and hold a “Peoples’ Assembly” at the fence where participants could discuss real solutions to the climate crisis and strategize ways to make real change.   Security, however, had other ideas and forcibly stopped both contingents before they met at the fence—using truncheons, pepper spray and whatever other “less lethal” weapons they happened to have on hand.

At that moment, the UNFCCC exposed its true self.  It had for years become increasingly undemocratic and repressive and now it was showing the world through this over zealous heavy-handed response to the simple demand of people to meet and talk.  Exposing the UNFCCC was one of the intentions of the action.  We knew the UNFCCC would show its true colors if confronted with people powerfully demanding justice and free speech.

Though she led the march on the outside, Stine was, in fact, accredited by Global Justice Ecology Project and had participated on the inside of the COP—in particular the day before the march out where she spoke at a Climate Justice Action and Climate Justice Now! joint press conference that GJEP had helped arrange.

We knew the “Reclaim Power” action would be a success when Stine walked into the packed press conference room and the cameras began flashing.

But for the action, Stine chose to be part of the group marching to the Bella Center from the outside.  She and Tannie stood on the sound truck and spoke to the crowd about the importance of the action and of standing up for climate justice in the face of oppressive climate negotiations where business and the markets reigned supreme.  When they approached the fence surrounding the Bella Center, they were violently yanked off of the truck by Danish security and arrested under terrorism charges for the heresy of insisting that people have a say in the increasingly urgent issue of the climate crisis.

The timing of the sentencing—nearly a full year after the so-called “crime” was committed, was undoubtedly to warn any ne’er-do-wells at the 2010 Cancun Climate Conference of the consequences of messing with the UN.  The UNFCCC does not want the image of being seen as a target for major protests by “civil society” groups and people around the world who are fed up with their inaction.

I first saw them demonstrate this uneasiness at the Climate Conference (COP-14) in December 2008.  During this climate conference, Climate Justice Now!—the alliance of organizations representing social movements, small farmers, fisherfolk and others on the front lines of the climate crisis—held a press conference.  At this press conference it was announced that Climate Justice Now! was joining together with Climate Justice Action to mobilize protests around the world on the opening day of the Copenhagen Climate conference (COP-15) the next year.  Coincidentally, this COP was timed to open on November 30, 2009—the ten-year anniversary of the “Battle of Seattle” where the meetings of the World Trade Organization were shut down by massive street protests.  This was where “Teamsters and Turtles” united to demonstrate the power that could be wielded when movements united to confront their common root causes—in that case, the WTO—the vilified symbol of corporate globalization, or neoliberalism.  CJN announced at the press conference in Poznan that we would be using that auspicious anniversary to organize protests around the world that would expose the similarities between the World Trade Organization and the UNFCCC—which had become the “World Carbon Trade Organization.”

The very next day, the UNFCCC Secretariat announced a change in plans.  COP-15 in Copenhagen would begin exactly one week later—on December 7th.

We had shown them our intentions and they had backed down.

The build up for the actions in Copenhagen created a rowdy spirit of resistance during the negotiations.  The African delegations walked out of the plenary chanting, “Two degrees is suicide!” when developed countries stated they would be unable to agree to any action that would limit overall global warming to less than two degrees.  Indigenous activists marched against the lack of respect given to the rights of Indigenous Peoples—especially with regard to the REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) scheme.  The Youth contingent protested almost daily.  When Obama waltzed into the talks to announce his secretly negotiated “Copenhagen Accord,” even the press booed.  The Secretariat could see the writing on the wall when they would have to face off against Latin America’s brand of resistance the next year at COP-16, which was scheduled for Mexico City.

Their response was to move the talks to Cancun, ironically the place where the WTO had met fierce resistance in 2003 and where Lee Kyung Hae, a South Korean farmer, committed suicide by plunging a knife into his heart atop the barricade protecting the WTO from the people.  His act of martyrdom helped kill the talks that year, which fell apart largely over agriculture.

Cancun, overall, is much more defensible than Mexico City and the location chosen by the Secretariat for COP-16 has multiple benefits.  First it is very small, allowing them to reduce the number of observers by around 40% and the number of press by over half.  Second, it is on the beach south of the hotel zone in Cancun, and has a four kilometer radius perimeter.  It will be heavily patrolled and almost impossible to approach without official sanction—aka the UNFCCC accreditation badge.

Before we even got onto the plane to head to Cancun, we were told by allies on the ground that the city is already under siege with military force visible everywhere.

Once more we threatened the UNFCCC with our collective power, and again they chose to hunker down behind fences and military.

Civil society participation at this COP has become almost impossible.  The Secretariat has organized the logistics so that the important delegates are all staying on site at the Moon Palace—site of the negotiations.  The rest of the activities take place at the Cancun Messe, a 20 minute bus ride farther away—when there is no traffic.

In order for the rest of us to access the Moon Palace without taking a $300P taxi is to take the shuttle bus which bypasses the Moon Palace and takes its cargo further south to the Cancun Messe.  From there, one must catch Bus #9 (Number nine, Number nine, Number nine…) back to the Moon Palace.  On the day that I am writing this (from the bus), I have been on the bus for almost two hours and we are not even to the Cancun Messe yet.

AND we have been warned by some of the country delegates that Observers may lose their access to the buses from the Cancun Messe at any time if we misbehave.  They could just shut down bus access for non-Parties (that is NGOs, Indigenous Peoples’ Organizations, social movements, media…people, that is, as opposed to governments).

Business and the market control the UNFCCC and now they have shown their true colors.  We have exposed them.  Now it is time for us to take the power to act against climate change back into our own hands.  They cannot do it.  They will not allow us to participate.  We must find other means.

There is no other choice.

Comments Off on Welcome to Cancun: Police State Anyone?

Filed under Posts from Anne Petermann, UNFCCC

Cancún: Stories of climate-impacted people amplified

Español debajo

Voices of Climate-impacted People and Communities Amplified at UN Climate Conference in Cancún

Oakland, CA (U.S.)Global Justice Ecology Project‘s New Voices on Climate Change announced today that they are working with other Non-Governmental Organizations, Indigenous Peoples Organizations and social movements to amplify the voices of people and communities impacted by the climate crisis during the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The UNFCCC meets in Cancún, Mexico from 29 November through 10 December 2010.

Global Justice Ecology Project is sending a media team to Cancún to work closely with the Indigenous Environmental Network, Global Forest Coalition, Climate Justice Now!, ETC Group, Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA), Grassroots Global Justice Alliance, Global Exchange and La Via Campesina.

These and other allied groups will draw attention to the root causes of the climate crisis and present ecologically appropriate climate solutions based in equity, human rights and community action.

Global Justice Ecology Project will also provide extensive coverage of the climate conference on their Climate Connections blog.

Contact:

Jeff Conant jc@globaljusticeecology.org +1.575.770.2829 [English and Spanish]

Hallie Boas hallie@globaljusticeecology.org +1.203.247.3756 [English]

Orin Langelle orinl@globaljusticeecology.org +1.802.578.6980 [English]

(Above contacts will have local mobile phones in Cancún.)

—————————————————-

Voces de los pueblos y las comunidades afectados por el cambio climático en la cumbre de la ONU en Cancún

Oakland, CA (EEUU) -El programa Nuevas Voces sobre Cambio Climático de Global Justice Ecology Project (Proyecto Justicia Ecológica Mundial) informó el día de hoy que está trabajando con otras Organizaciones No-Gubernamentales, las organizaciones de los Pueblos Indígenas y los movimientos sociales para resaltar las voces de los pueblos y las comunidades afectados por el cambio climático durante la conferencia de la Convención Marco del as Naciones Unidas sobre Cambio Climático (CMNUCC). La conferencia de la CMNUCC realizará en Cancún, México del 29 de noviembre al 10 de diciembre de 2010.

Global Justice Ecology Project está enviando un equipo de medios de comunicación a Cancún para trabajar estrechamente con Indigenous Environmental Network, Global Forest Coalition, Climate Justice Now!, ETC Group, Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA), Grassroots Global Justice Alliance, Global Exchange y La Vía Campesina.

Éstos y otros grupos aliados enfatizarán las causas verdaderas de la crisis climática y propondrán las soluciones ecológicamente apropiadas en base de la equidad, los derechos humanos y la participación comunitaria.

Global Justice Ecology Project también proporcionar cubertura extensiva de la cumbre sobre cambio climático en su blog Climate Connections.

Contactos:

Jeff Conant jc@globaljusticeecology.org +1.575.770.2829 [inglés y español]

Hallie Boas hallie@globaljusticeecology.org +1.203.247.3756 [inglés]

Orin Langelle orinl@globaljusticeecology.org +1.802.578.6980 [inglés]

(Estos contactos tendrán celulares con números telefónicos locales en Cancún.)

Comments Off on Cancún: Stories of climate-impacted people amplified

Filed under Media

Interview with Anne Petermann on Vancouver Co-op Radio

Aired on July 21st, 2010. Anne discusses a variety of topics including GE trees, wood-based bioenergy and false solutions to climate change.

To listen to the interview click here!

Comments Off on Interview with Anne Petermann on Vancouver Co-op Radio

Filed under Bioenergy / Agrofuels, Climate Change, GE Trees, Media

Bioenergy: Bad for Forests, Climate, Biodiversity and Communities

New Study Warns Use of Trees for Bioenergy Production Will Worsen Climate Change

by Anne Petermann, Global Justice Ecology Project

The U.S. Social Forum in Detroit last week ended with an action challenging the world’s largest trash incinerator–located in the heart of one of Detroit’s poorest neighborhoods.

While the toxic legacy of incinerating trash is coming under intensifying scrutiny, however, plans are ramping up across the US and Europe to incinerate trees for so-called “bioenergy” production.  This practice of turning standing forests and living trees into electricity, which also pollutes communities in the vicinity of the incinerator, is also being challenged by groups that foresee the impacts of exponentially increasing the global demand for wood for bioenergy production.

A new report was released today by Birdlife International, European Environmental Bureau and Transport and Environment titled “Bioenergy: A Carbon Accounting Time Bomb”.  This report’s summary explains, “The carbon debt created when woody biomass is burned takes centuries to pay off.  The result is that biomass can be more harmful to the climate than the fossil fuels it replaces.”

It continues, “While recovering waste biomass can have short term emission reduction benefits, increasing the harvesting of standing forests will mostly lead to worsening of the climate crisis–and that is before even starting to look at other impacts such as biodiversity loss or increased erosion.”

The report also warns about the impacts of converting forests to biofuel crops, “Growing biofuels on agricultural land results in the conversion of forests and other natural areas into cropland to replace those agricultural lands lost to biofuel production.  This results in related emissions that can completely negate any climate benefits.”

The summary of this report can be downloaded by clicking here.

Meanwhile, the U.S. government is rushing headlong into support for production of bioenergy from trees with financial subsidies–awarding $4.2 million to various projects that will harvest wood for bioenergy production from U.S. national forest lands.  This continues the trend of the U.S. Forest Service which has historically subsidized logging operations and timber harvests from our public forest lands.  Since its founding in 2005, the Forest Service Woody Biomass Utilization grant program has awarded a total of $30.6 for biomass projects.

The World Economic Forum is also not surprisingly singing the praises of bioenergy.  The WEF is promoting the myth that biorefineries have a major role to play in tackling climate change, in their new report “The Future of Industrial Biorefineries” that was launched today. The report was produced in collaboration with Royal DSM N.V., Novozymes, DuPont and Braskem.  You can find the WEF release by clicking here.

Comments Off on Bioenergy: Bad for Forests, Climate, Biodiversity and Communities

Filed under Posts from Anne Petermann

Photo Essay: Detroit Incinerator Action

Following the U.S. Social Forum in Detroit environmental justice advocates from across the U.S., the Teamsters Union, and neighborhood residents marched together to the world’s largest waste incinerator to demand its closure.

Sandra Turner-Handy of the Michigan Environmental Council photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

Rhonda Anderson of the Sierra Club Environmental Justice Program photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

Guerrilla gardening photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Petermann/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

Michael Martin of the Michigan Teamsters Union photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Langelle/GJEP

photo: Andalusia Knoll

Comments Off on Photo Essay: Detroit Incinerator Action

Filed under Actions / Protest, Climate Change, Photo Essays by Orin Langelle

USSF: Tar Sands and the Boreal Forests

Clayton Thomas-Muller of IEN begins the Tar Sands Peoples Movement Assembly. Photo: Petermann/GJEP

Report from the Tar Sands Peoples’ Movement Assembly (PMA) at the USSF, Wednesday, June 23, 2010

By Anne Petermann, Global Justice Ecology Project

The Tar Sands Gigaproject represents the future of fossil fuel exploitation.  As petroleum becomes harder to access, business as usual dictates that the petroleum industry go to greater and more extreme lengths to suck out the final remains of global oil reserves.  From the depths of oceans to the petroleum trapped in the soil of the tar sands of Alberta, literally no stone should go unturned.  This means that in the name of oil extraction the boreal forests unfortunate enough to grow over the tar sand deposits will have to be removed.

We’re talking about forests over an area the size of Florida.  Forests that are part of the second largest forest carbon sink in the world.  We’re talking about the unimaginably toxic impacts on the aboriginal communities that have lived in and with these forests since time immemorial.  As person after person testified during the Indigenous Environmental Network’s Tar Sands PMA, the tar sands have killed people slowly and painfully in the tar sands project areas, in the communities where the oil is refined, and in the communities where the pipelines are located.  The tar sands, as one grandmother explained, “are a monster.”  And the pipelines are planned to head all the way to the coast of New England for export around the world.

Per barrel of synthetic tar sands oil:

4-6 barrels of water poisoned

4 tons of earth removed

And just to add insult to injury, much of this tar sands oil is being used to fuel the U.S. war on Iraq. (the US military, by the way, is the largest single user of fossil fuels on the planet)

I think at this point, we’re all clear that climate change means we need to end the use of fossil fuels….like, yesterday.  The horrific oil spill in the Gulf and the highly disturbing  footage of its toll which rolls in daily, are merely the latest and most extreme wake up call.

But instead, the trend of business as usual refuses to budge.  It is moving in two distinct, yet intertwined directions: extreme fossil fuel development (such as the tar sands and deep water ocean drilling) and large-scale development of fossil fuel alternatives—both of which massively threaten communities and ecosystems, and both of which will devastate forests and worsen the climate crisis.

Keeping forests standing, as it turns out, is both key toward stabilizing the climate, and a key part of the transformation toward the better world we’re all working for.  And yet these forests are under more threat than ever.

To understand this and put it into context, let me first take you to the World Forestry Congress which took place in Buenos Aires in October 2009.

The World Forestry Congress is a major gathering of timber industry executives, foresters and their non-governmental organization (NGO) lackies that happens every six years to evaluate trends in forestry and how best to exploit forests and maximize profits.  Indigenous Peoples have very little role here.  This is where the ruling class whites figure out the future of forests… and in turn, the role of those forests in filling their bank accounts.  And what came out of this, the thirteenth World Forestry Congress, was positively chilling.

The twin strategies of the WFC were: REDD (the UN and World Bank scheme to supposedly “Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation”) and wood-based bioenergy promotion, both to be sold to an unwitting public as components of climate mitigation.  Whoa, you say, how can an industry designed to clearcut forests profit from a scheme called “reducing emissions from deforestation”?  And how can they possibly promote it at the same time as trying to exponentially increase the demand for wood through wood-based bioenergy development?  And how could that be considered good for climate change? And why on earth would big NGOs like The Nature Conservancy and World Wildlife Fund and Conservation International support this nonsense?  And why is the Forest Stewardship Council—which supposedly carries the banner of sustainable forestry—behind it too?

Weelllll…

The newest trend in marketing is Green.  Green, green, green.  Everybody’s gotta be green.  British Petroleum became “Beyond Petroleum”—whoops…not quite.  So if ya wanna continue business as usual, you have to paint it green.  Doesn’t matter if the paint is toxic…

But the climate crisis and the Gulf oil spill have opened the doors to enable the timber industry, through a bizarre and twisted logic, to claim the front lines of the renewable energy debate and climate mitigation strategies.

And if the global public is demanding action on climate change and the U.S. public wants to have its cake and eat it too (in other words continue our unsustainable lifestyle but pretend we’ve done our part), then the dual strategy of the timber industry makes perfect sense.

You heard Obama in the Oval Office talking about the Gulf oil spill.  We need alternative energy.  Well, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but he ain’t talkin’ windmills and solar panels.  He’s talking nukes, “clean coal” and cutting down trees—for electricity, for liquid fuels, for butane, and whatever else they can come up with.

And this finally brings us back to Canada’s boreal forest—by way of the Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement.

In this agreement, timber corporations and big NGOs got together to decide the fate of large expanses of boreal forest on Indigenous lands.  Hailed as a great victory for the forests and especially the dwindling herds of woodland caribou, the agreement, in reality, is not worth the paper on which it’s printed.  Riddled with loopholes big enough to drive logging trucks through, the agreement is designed to reframe the Canadian forest industry as climate-friendly.

It is designed to shift the boreal forest into bioenergy production, and to provide the groundwork to claim carbon offsets for the forests that don’t—for the moment—get cut.

One of the loopholes that pops up repeatedly is the fact that industry will be allowed to break the agreement for the sake of “forest health”.  In other words, they will use the excuse of pine bark beetle infestation to clearcut at will.

This agreement is loaded with forest industry-speak.  It goes on and on about how their “sustainable forest management” will be governed by the guidelines of “all three certification schemes” (including those created by and for corporations like International Paper). This means these guidelines will be crap.

So to sum up, industry is using this agreement to greenwash their plans to log the boreal forest for woodchips for bioenergy and “bioproducts” (i.e. replacing fossil fuels to make plastics, chemicals, textiles, etc) and to make it sound “climate friendly”.  And I can pretty well guarantee that they will also try to fit this under REDD or a similar forest carbon offset scheme to make money on both ends—as was heavily promoted to timber industry execs at the World Forestry Congress.

Which brings us back to the Tar sands Gigaproject.  The tar sands project is causing the country of Canada to have some of the fastest growing greenhouse gas emissions in the world.  How convenient if there is simultaneously development of an agreement that supposedly protects vast expanses of boreal forest.  Which, quite coincidentally, could be claimed as offsetting those very unfortunate emissions being caused by the Tar sands.

But this, my friends, is just the tip of the iceberg.  They’re all one cascading market mechanism….forest offsets, biodiversity offsets (yes, you heard me right), the wood-based “bioeconomy” and  “bioenergy”…like one great ‘bailout’ for the climate, but with no real benefits.  And this market mechanism force is snowballing in the UN Climate process, the UN Biodiversity process and in no other than the World Bank and of course at the powerful urging of industrialized nations, as well as wannabe countries like Brazil.  It is one scary future scenario.  But more on that later.

To learn more about this bizarre future for the world’s forests, come to our workshop “Forests and Climate Change” which has merged with the workshop on biomass and the bioeconomy in cobo hall, d3-21, Thursday, June 24, 1-5pm.

To learn more about the tar sands gigaproject, go to: http://www.ienearth.org

Comments Off on USSF: Tar Sands and the Boreal Forests

Filed under Climate Change, Climate Justice, Indigenous Peoples, Pollution, Posts from Anne Petermann, Tar Sands

There is No One Magic Bullet Solution… So Get Over It!

By Anne Petermann

Blog Post June 7th, 2010

Back home to our little cottage on the lake—back to the sanity of being surrounded by native forest instead of megalomaniacal bureaucrats intent on capitalizing off the rape and plunder of the earth under the auspices of climate mitigation.

First, of course, we had one last stop prior to boarding our respective planes and trains back to sanity—a presentation at the European Parliament in Brussels.

This time it was one of the Ministers of Parliament (MEP) responsible for implementing the European Union’s “renewable energy” target of 20% by 2020 that took issue with our analysis.

Once again it was Deepak’s presentation that was most hotly debated—perhaps because it best showed, through graphic photographs, the wholesale devastation of primeval rainforests for woodchips for export—the direct and indirect result of the EU’s desire to fulfill its renewable energy commitment by burning trees for electricity.

The MEP explained that we had limited choices—wood-based fuels (liquid and electric) or even worse options like nuclear power or large-scale hydroelectricity.  To me this is a false dichotomy.  It is not either burn trees or build nukes or flood rivers.  The solution is to transform the way we live on this earth.  The solution is to find the small-scale truly sustainable alternatives that make sense for each bioregion.  The solutions for Vermont are not going to be the same as the solutions for Belgium.  And the big magic bullet solutions do not exist.  Forget about it.  Technology and the markets are not going to save us from this mess—especially since they have contributed so significantly to it.

The faster we get over the idea of the imaginary single magic solution, the sooner we can dig in to the work at hand.

Here in the United States, the crisis of burning trees for electricity is a little closer to home—especially in those regions that still have some intact forest left—whether primary forest or second growth native forest, these forests are now under the gun.  With plans for new biomass electricity plants popping up all over the place, and with the EU demand for trees leading to increased woodchip exports from the U.S., our forests are under threat like they haven’t been since the continent was first invaded by those white folks who’d already trashed their own forests.

And don’t forget the threat from genetically engineered trees!  Eucalyptus and poplar trees are being avidly engineered to provide better agrofuels (liquid transport fuels) and faster growing biomass.  And it’s the Gulf Coast states where these Franken-eucalyptus plantations are planned to be developed.

So, while it was good to spend time with allies in Europe, and we had many important meetings about international forest policy and GE trees, it was really good to finally get back home to our office in Vermont where we are developing strategies to take on ArborGen and defeat their plans for vast industrial plantations of non-native, invasive, water depleting and flammable eucalyptus trees.

GJEP Co-Director Orin Langelle and I have collectively been working to protect forests and the rights of forest-dependent peoples for close to 50 years.  This is one forest fight that we cannot, we will not, lose.

Comments Off on There is No One Magic Bullet Solution… So Get Over It!

Filed under Climate Change, Climate Justice, GE Trees, Indigenous Peoples, Posts from Anne Petermann, REDD

Markets and Forests and Profits, oh my!

One of the many bizarre and telling displays at the UN Climate Talks in Bonn, Germany. Photo: Petermann/ GJEP-GFC

Climate Negotiations Descend into Lunacy

By Anne Petermann

I’m now on the train from Cologne to Brussels after finally leaving that hellhole of a conference center for the last time last night after our official “side event” presentation on the threats of wood-based bioenergy and GE trees to UN delegates, scientists and other participants.  I have to say that stepping out of the building into the fresh cool German air was indeed a relief, and boarding the subway car for the ride back to the hotel felt like a huge weight lifting off.

But before we leave it completely, allow me to entertain you with yet another amazing yet true story of utter lunacy.

The absolutely nonsensical negotiations from Tuesday were—to my amazement—topped on Wednesday evening during our side event by a question from one of the participants following the presentation of Deepak Rughani of BiofuelWatch.

Deepak gave a very compelling powerpoint explaining the impacts that are already being caused to forests and forest peoples globally as a direct and indirect result of the rising demand for wood to fuel bioenergy facilities in the EU.  He showed graphs and charts explaining that the EU directive for 20% of their energy to be “renewable” by 2020 was projected to have grave impacts on the world’s forests and forest dependent peoples because caused the vast majority of the ‘renewable energy’ is to be met through the burning of ever greater numbers of trees—almost all of which will have to be imported.  He demonstrated the scientific projections that predict that this level of demand will, by the year 2065, require all of the lands currently covered in native forests or grasslands to be converted to bioenergy plantations.

He further explained that the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) defines this madness as “carbon neutral” since the trees that will be burned will eventually be replaced by new ones.

The very first question he got after completing his powerpoint was from a member of the IPCC who questioned his citations of IPCC definitions (which Deepak gladly offered to send him, and which are referenced in the report on the topic).

He said (and I am still a bit incredulous about this) that Deepak was wrong in stating that the goal of reducing emissions from deforestation and the goal of increasing demand for wood for biomass are not compatible.  He said that, yes, of course we can increase the demand for wood 5 or 6 fold and still reduce our carbon emissions from logging, all we need are sustainability criteria and certification schemes.

Indeed.  And if everyone on the planet would only lay down their weapons and hold hands, then the world would be an eden-like paradise where everyone gets along and no one or nothing is ever harmed…

But seriously.  Massively increasing the demand for trees means more of them will be cut down.  Period.  And economics dictates that the so-called “low-hanging fruit” will be plucked (that is, logged) first—that means the forests without proper oversight, without clear land title, without people to defend them.

But that’s not the only contradiction of the reducing emissions from deforestation scheme (REDD).  The really twisted thing about REDD is that it has actually been resulting in exactly the opposite of its stated intent.

As Deepak pointed out in his presentation, when the UN and the World Bank started talking about paying countries to stop cutting their forests—with the amount of money paid directly proportional to the amount of logging going on—guess what happened.  Countries that had decreased their logging all on their own saw suddenly that they were going to miss out on this new gold rush, and reversed their anti-logging positions, allowing forest destruction to go ahead.  And those that were already destroying their forests started to destroy them faster.  And because REDD will be based on rates of logging ending in 2012, countries have another year and a half to ramp up those logging rates to be sure they can cash in on the prize.

And while the official UN process has not been able to come to a decisive agreement about REDD, it is moving forward quite nicely outside of the UN process.  And as Camila Moreno, our contact in Brazil, explained, the slogan coming out of the Oslo, Norway conference on REDD (which occurred totally outside of the UN climate process), was, “just do it!”

In other words, take the lesson from the US and just go for it.  Screw the participatory process. Establish bilateral agreements that circumvent the negotiations.  Create WTO (World Trade Organization)-style “green rooms” that are accessible by invitation only to keep out those obnoxious ne’er-do-wells who talk about silly things like rights and justice and biodiversity and such.

It’s time we draw the line in the sand.  And what better place than Cancun.

(Tune in Monday for wild and crazy stories from the European Parliament.)

Comments Off on Markets and Forests and Profits, oh my!

Filed under Climate Change, Climate Justice, GE Trees, Indigenous Peoples, Posts from Anne Petermann, Water