Climate Justice Times

8/8/2019 Climate Justice Times

1/8

Mere end 5.000 aktivister fraover 20 forskellige landedemonstrerede lrdag d. 12. decem-ber sammen med NOAH ogFriends of the Earth International i

Flood for Climate Justice. Dekrvede klimaretfrdighed og etstop for falske lsninger somafladskb.

Den spektakulre, bl flodblge afmennesker strmmede gennemKbenhavns gader med en klarbesked til beslutningstagerne om, atvi i en global klimaaftale ikke n-sker afladskb, eller offsetting somdet ogs kaldes.

Mr. Nnimmo Bassey, formand forFriends of the Earth Internationaltalte om de globale konsekvenser afklimaforandringerne og det faktum,at der i Kbenhavn netop nu for-handles og trffes beslutning omliv eller dd for en stor del af ver-dens mindre udviklede lande.

Det er opmuntrende og nd-vendigt - at se s mange menneskerfra hele verden str sammen modfalske lsninger i den globale kli-maaftale og krver klimaret-frdighed nu og her, udtaler PalleBendsen, klimatalsmand forNOAH.

Demonstrationen Flood for ClimateJustice har tydeligt vist, at der erfolkelig opbakning til en klimaaf-tale, der anerkender de industrial-iserede landes ansvar for den kli-magld, vi i industrilandene nuskal betale tilbage. NOAH Friendsof the Earth Denmark krver, at englobal klimaaftales indhold ogsafspejler udviklingslandenes kravog behov.

Rich countries must drop theirsupport for carbon offsetting.

www.foei.orgA Friends of the Earth International publication demanding climate justice

Friends of the

Earth i Danmark se bagsiden

More than 5,000 activists fromaround the world joined theFriends of the Earth InternationalFlood for climate justice inCopenhagen to demand climate

justice and an end to offsettingcarbon emissions.

The spectacular, blue-colouredcrowd flooded through the streetsof the city with a clear message todecision makers that offsettingcarbon emissions the practicewhereby rich industrialised coun-tries pay developing countries tocut emissions rather than makingcuts at home is unfair, and willnot lead to the cuts in greenhouse

home which is the only real solu-tion to climate change.

Many offsetting projects havenegative social or environmentalconsequences in developing coun-tries, and some may lock develop-ing countries into an increased useof fossil fuels for years to come.Furthermore, offsetting projects do

not transfer money or technologyto developing countries in a fairmanner.

The Flood for climate justice wasmade up of Friends of the Earthactivists from all over the world,as well as allies of Friends of theEarth from a wide range of socialand environmental movements,and a large number of Danish peo-ple. Participants, the majority ofthem dressed in blue ponchos,flooded through the streets of

gas emissions the world desper-ately needs.

Friends of the Earth Internationalbelieves that carbon offsets, which

currently form part of the interna-tional climate regime, will not leadto any overall reduction in green-house gas emissions. Offsetting hasno benefits for the climate or devel-oping countries it only benefitsdeveloped nations who want tocontinue emitting, and it seriouslydelays the just transition to a sus-tainable economy urgently neededin industrialised countries. Offset-ting is an excuse for developedcountries not to cut emissions at

More information at www.copenhagenflood.org

Thousands flood for climate justice

Friends of the Earth Internationalis the world's largest grassrootsenvironmental network, uniting 77national member groups and some5,000 local activist groups onevery continent. With over twomillion members and supportersaround the world, we campaign on

today's most urgent environmentaland social issues. We challenge thecurrent model of economic andcorporate globalization, and pro-mote solutions that will help tocreate environmentally sustainableand socially just societies.

Printing information:This newspaper was printed on 100% recycled, Danish paper. For furtherinformation about any of the articles, or if you have comments pleasecontact [email protected] availableat www.foei.org/climatejusticetimes

Hundreds of messages sent bycommunities and affected peoplearound the world asking for cli-mate justice now!

Copenhagen, in a colourful, pro-cession carrying flags and banners,chanting Demand Climate Jus-tice and No Offsetting. Theevent ended in front of the DanishParliament, with a symbolic flood-ing of a giant offsetting centrespecially constructed in the square.The final moment was the creationof a massive banner reading No

Offsetting.

Palle Bendsen from NOAH Friendsof the Earth Denmark, and one ofthe organisers of the flood, stated:It is amazing to see so many peo-ple from around the world comingtogether to form a flood of publicopinion against offsetting and todemand climate justice in Copenha-gen. The flood for climate justicesends a clear signal to decisionmakers that the world is watching,and we expect them to find fair andstrong solutions to the urgent cli-mate crisis.

Nnimmo Bassey, one of speakers atthe event and Chair of Friends of theEarth International said: To thosewho want to pollute at home andplant a tree somewhere we say no.

Page 8 >>>

Page 5 >>> Page 3 >>>

To those who want topollute at home andplant a tree somewherewe say no

NOAHs venneroversvmmerKbenhavn

Flood of people from around the world demands climatejustice and an end to offsetting

Christoffer Askman / FoEI


2/8

A Friends of the Earth International publication demanding climate justice | www.foei.org2 |

After years of denial, the worldis today confronted by thereality of climate change. And timeis running out. Sadly, world leadersare playing politics with the futureof humanity on the only habitat thatwe have.

The world is out of balance, not justeconomically but also environmen-tally. On one hand, the rich, devel-oped countries are the major con-tributors to climate change, whileon the other it is low-incomecommunities in the developingcountries that are already now beinghit by the effects.

Environmental injustice is not anew phenomenon it has beenhappening for at least 250 years. Toadd insult to injury, countries such

as my own Nigeria have borne, andare still bearing, the toxic burden offossil fuel extraction conducted bymulti-national oil companies, aswell as being on the frontline of theimpacts of climate change.

Climate change and its devastatingimpacts are global problems, call-ing for global solutions. Puttingmillions of people in impoverishedcountries at risk as a result of the

rich part of the worlds growingpower and consumption is simplynot right. Its unfair. Thats whyFriends of the Earth activists allover the world are demanding cli-mate justice.

At the moment, the countries in theEuropean Union (EU) and the USAare collectively responsible formore than half of the carbon emis-sions in the Earths atmosphere.This is compared with the fact thatthe EU and USA have only onetenth of the world's population.This imbalance becomes glaringwhen contrasted with the fact thatthe poorest 10% of the world'spopulation have contributed to lessthan 1% of these emissions.

In Nigeria we have experiencedthis blatant injustice first hand, andso have I personally, during nearly20 years of fighting against oilcompanies and human rights abuses

in the Niger Delta. The oil indus-try continues to operate in Nige-ria, causing environmental dam-age as well as oppressing peoplethat speak up against the exploita-tion. There are over 300 oil spillsevery year, most of them unre-ported. There is huge deforesta-tion taking place, and gas flaresfrom over 100 sources releasingtoxic fumes.

Gas flares are nothing short ofcrimes against humanity. Theyroast the skies, kill crops and poi-son the air. These evil gas stackspump greenhouse gases into theatmosphere, impacting the climateand placing everyone at risk. Gasflares go on because it is cheap tokill, as long as profits keep rising.That is the logic of Shell, Chevron

and their cohorts.The world is out ofbalance, not justeconomically but alsoenvironmentally

A world out of balance

Editorial: Leavenew oil in the soil,

coal in the holeand tar sands inthe land.

Even though oil has generated anestimated $600 billion for Nigeriasince the 1960s, the majority of theNiger Delta's 31 million people stilllive in poverty, without access toclean water or proper health care.

We hope that leaders of nations ofthe world will wake up, listen to thepeoples of the world and stop danc-ing to the tunes of climate entrepre-neurs seeking profit from the crisisrather than curbing emissions at thesource. This is the time for realaction: deep cuts in emissions athome in industrialised countries,finance mitigation measures in theunjustly impacted countries andregions and a move away fromnon-renewable energy sources,especially fossil fuels. It is time toleave new oil in the soil, coal in the

hole and tar sands in the land.

For comparison it is useful to know that in 2005:USA's per capita CO2 emissions were 19.6 tons.Australia's per capita CO2 emissions were 18.4 tons.Japan's per capita CO2 emissions were 9.5 tons.

In contrast:China's per capita CO2 emissions were 3.9 tons.India's per capita CO2 emissions were 1.1 tons.Nigerias per capita CO2 emissions were 0.5 tons.

By Nnimmo Bassey,

Chair of Friends of the Earth

International and Executive and

Director of Friends of the Earth

Nigeria

Romel del Vera

Its time to ACT NOW! Michelle Ferris, Friends of the Earth Costa Rica

Achieving climate justice inEurope can go hand in hand

with a happier, healthier society.Vastly improved public transport,more cycle and pedestrian-friendlystreets, cleaner air, better publicservices, and at least 40% domesticemission cuts are possible by 2020.But it will require a brave moveaway from the inadequate busi-ness-as-usual policies Europeangovernments have offered for deal-ing with climate change to date.These are the findings of re-search by Stockholm EnvironmentInstitute in partnership withFriends of the Earth Europe.

The researchers set out to show thatat least 40% domestic reductions ingreenhouse gas emissions are possi-ble by 2020. This is the type ofdeep cuts science says are needed

to avert a climate catastrophe. Andthey wanted to prove it can be donewithout resorting to nuclear power,agrofuels, offsetting or carbon cap-ture and storage. These false solu-tions divert efforts from safe,proven alternatives and do not ad-dress the root problem of the over-consumption of the worlds re-sources by rich countries.

The study proves that 40% reduc-tions by 2020 and 90% reductionsby 2050, compared to 1990 levels,can be done. It also assesses theEuropean Unions (EU) fair share

of the finances needed to supportthe developing world to tackle itsclimate challenge and address pov-erty. Aggressive actions to cutemissions at home coupled withadequate financing for developingcountries are the two-fold obliga-tion which Europe must fulfil toachieve climate justice.

Europes share of the finances fordeveloping countries for mitigatingand adapting to climate changeamounts to between 150 billionand 450 billion per year by 2020according to the study, or 1% to 3%of the EUs GDP.

The scale and speed of changesrequired may seem daunting, andindeed it will require a mobilisationof Europes economies, but thepotential costs of inaction are so

large that doing nothing presents afar more implausible and dangerousfuture pathway for Europe, saidCharlie Heaps, lead author of thestudy and senior scientist at Stock-holm Environment Institute.

To get to at least 40% emissionsreductions within 10 years and 90%by 2050, the research points toradical improvements in energyefficiency, the fast phase-out offossil fuels, a dramatic shift towardsrenewable energy, and lifestylechanges. Europe could get nearly aquarter of its energy from renew-

able sources by 2020, and almostthree quarters by 2050 this com-pares to only 10% in 2010.

Significant changes to the waypeople in Europe live their livesand organise their communitiescould bring about a big drop in theaverage emissions per person. By2050 the average emissions perperson in Europe could be onemetric tonne of CO2 equivalent.This is around eight times lowerthan today, and is comparable tothe average emissions of someoneliving in India. The types of life-style changes described in thestudy can be overwhelmingly posi-tive and allow Europe to reduceconsumption whilst increasingwellbeing.

Energy efficiency measures inEuropean housing could decreaseenergy use by 2.5% every yearwithout a loss of comfort. By 2050,Europes rail network could bemore than doubled and there couldbe a shift to public transport withless than half of trips being madeby car compared to 75% in 2005.

Public transport could be muchmore convenient and higher qual-ity. Virtually all cars could be elec-trified by 2050 contributing to a32% reduction in emissions fromtransport, which is currently thesector with the fastest growingemissions. At the same time thiswould make streets more pleasant,safer and easier to navigate forpedestrians and cyclists.

Other benefits would include new jobs in construction and engineer-ing to build this new low carbonsociety, and energy savings result-ing in lower bills. Europe wouldalso become a more equal placewith a closing of the gap betweenthe richest and poorest countries asnations would work together totackle the challenge of climatechange.

People living in this Europe of thefuture would enjoy a higher qualityof life, inspired by the fact that thedanger of climate change can beaverted without compromising onhappiness measured in terms oflife satisfaction rather than GDP.

The scenario described in the reportis one possible pathway amongstmany for achieving a Europe that ison track to meet its commitments toavert climate catastrophe and isalso cleaner, healthier and moresocially just than today.

The message of the research is clear emissions reductions of at least40% below 1990 levels withinEurope by 2020, and 90% by 2050,can be achieved. Economic costsand technical feasibility can nolonger be excuses for politicians tostand still.

But the changes needed will nothappen spontaneously. We requirebrave political leadership. Accord-ing to Magda Stoczkiewicz, direc-tor of Friends of the Earth Europe,European politicians can have nomore excuses for not living up totheir historical responsibility anddoing what is necessary to protectthe planet for future generations.

Europe and the developed worldare still very far from doing what isneeded although the technological

opportunities are waiting to be ex-ploited and the economic costs areeminently bearable. It appears to beonly the lack of political will thatprevents Europe from rising to thechallenge of achieving climatejustice, she said.

Read more about Friends of the Earth Europe and Stockholm Envi-ronment Institutes study Europesshare of the climate challenge atwww.thebigask.eu

40% domestic reduc-tions in greenhousegas emissions arepossible by 2020

A pathway to climate justice in Europe

By Francesca Gater, Friends of theEarth Europe


3/8

A Friends of the Earth International publication demanding climate justice | www.foei.org | 3

By Karen Orenstein, Friends of theEarth US

I have a dream of a world in which every newborn child will have the same opportunities, will be free from hunger, thirst and insecurity,and where the worlds ecosystems are respected and allowed to thrive. Eva Ressel, Young Friends of the Earth Germany

Carbon offsetting schemes comein many shapes and sizes power plants in India, wind farmsand coal-fired power plants inChina, the capture of flared gas inNigeria, or the purchase of rainfor-est in Amazonia. The thing that allthese projects have in common isthat they dont work; theyre theworst magic trick in history.

In the Amazonia region, the tradi-tional way of life of indigenouscommunities in the rainforest isunder threat as industrialised coun-tries are allowed to offset their

emissions by buying forest carboncredits from developing countries.Offsetting schemes in the shape ofgas power plants in India, and coal-fired power plants in China, willlock these developing countriesinto the path of high fossil-fueldevelopment, rather than low car-bon futures.

The latest climate science clearlyshows rich countries need to cuttheir greenhouse gas emissions byat least 40% by 2020 (based on1990 levels) at home, with no off-setting. Investing in carbon offset-ting in the belief that this willtackle climate change is a falsesolution as it will not deliver thereal cuts in the emissions of devel-oped countries that are desperatelyneeded to protect people aroundthe world.

Furthermore, as part of the CleanDevelopment Mechanism (CDM),

carbon offsetting cannot guaranteethe same level of carbon cuts in thedeveloping country as would havebeen made in a developed country.It is almost impossible to provethatmost offsetting projects would nothave happened without the offsetfinance. Without this guarantee thenet effect is that greenhouse gasemissions are increasing becausethe CDM credit allows the devel-oped country to continuepolluting.The climate loses.

Offsetting is also dangerously de-laying the switch to low-carbonsocieties in rich countries, becauseit weakens incentives to implementstrong climate policies or preventhigh-carbon investments. A switchto a low-carbon model in devel-oped countries in time to preventcatastrophic climate change re-quires that they make major invest-ments now and over the next 10years. Yet, offsetting means thatthose countries with most historicalresponsibility for climate changecan delay taking strong action untilat least 2020. Locking in their high-carbon infrastructure will have

severe consequences for the globalclimate and developed countryeconomies for much longer.

Perhaps most shockingly, in manycases offsetting is not helping de-veloping countries take a low-carbon path. In fact a large propor-tion of CDM revenues are subsidis-ing carbon-intensive industries, orprojects building fossil-fuel powerstations. For example, offsettingfunds are supporting the develop-ment of a mammoth coal-firedpower generation complex in Indiawhich will emit 700 million tonnesof carbon dioxide in its lifetime almost the same amount by whichthe UK has pledged to reduce itsemissions over the next 15 years.The Kwale gas project in Nigeriaintends to obtain CDM credits forcapturing illegally flared gas.

Governments of the global Northare trying to justify offsetting as a

cost effective way to prevent run-away climate change even though itsimply cannot work. It has no bene-fits for the climate or developingcountries, and only benefits devel-oped countries, private investorsand major polluters who want tocontinue business as usual.

Carbon offsetting means that cutson the scale required will not hap-pen and that climate change wontbe stopped exacerbating the ef-fects of climate change on, pre-dominantly, those who are leastresponsible for causing it. Instead,developed countries must makeurgent and deep emission cuts athome. Carbon offsetting has no partto play in a just international agree-ment to fight climate change.

Offsetting: the worst magic trick in history

Rich countries must drop their support for carbonoffsetting. Now is the time for them to take real actionat home

More information on the problems of offsetting carbon emissions can be

found in the publication: Carbon Offsetting: A dangerous distractionwww.foe.co.uk/resource/briefing_notes/dangerous_distraction.pdf

Offsetting, offsetting, its not fair. Makes sure the richdont do their share!

5,000 people on the flood for climate justice, Copenhagen

FoEI

By Mike Childs, Friends of theEarth England, Wales and Northern Ireland

Banking on the climate crisis

Money and climate change areinextricably linked. Moneyfuels climate change: the dominant

economic model drives global com-petition for energy and other re-sources which is at the root of theclimate crisis. This leads to degra-dation of the environment andabuses of human rights, and this inturn reduces human and ecologicalability to adapt to the impacts ofclimate change. At the same time,lack of money inhibits the creationof low carbon societies and grass-roots resilience around the world.

Governments engaged in climatenegotiations are concentrating theirefforts on the design and develop-ment of new climate finance mecha-nisms. Certain countries hope tobenefit from private finance whichwill cover some of the escalatingcosts of mitigating and adapting toclimate change. The costs countrieswill face as a result of climate change

include investment in energy effi-ciency and renewable energy tech-nologies, methods to reduce defores-tation, changing food production andwater management practices, and theimplementation of disease controland prevention systems.

With all this attention being givento climate finance issues, the WorldBank has become intent on making

itself the world's climate banker. Itwants to gain control of the lion'sshare of these funds. This is despitethe fact that the World Bank is thelargest lender for oil and gas pro-jects and a major actor in deforesta-tion. Both of these practices fuelclimate change. Climate financechannelled through the World Bankis increasing the debt burden on theglobal South, as developing coun-tries are being obliged to take outnew climate-related loans to coverthe costs of climate change, evenfor dealing with its impacts.

Why should countries that are notresponsible for climate change beburdened with more debts to dealwith it? And why should lendingcountries be permitted to countthese loans, which will have to berepaid, as new climate finance for

developing countries?

The deepest irony of all is that thedeveloped countries owe develop-ing countries a much larger andlonger standing debt. Their exces-sive use of fossil fuels has resulted

in the emission of excessive quanti-ties of greenhouse gases into ourshared atmosphere. This is the so-

called climate debt. It is rich na-tions that have created the climatecrisis, but it is being felt mostsharply in impoverished countriesand will be borne by future genera-tions.

Climate finance mechanisms put inplace so far, such as the KyotoProtocols Clean DevelopmentMechanism (CDM) and the EUsEmissions Trading Scheme, havebeen remarkably ineffective. Yetthey remain popular in the global

North precisely because they offera way for wealthy countries, elitesand companies, including banks,investors and financiers, to buy orprofit from the transition to lowcarbon development. These institu-tions are not addressing the root

causes of climate change industri-alisation, the over-consumption offossil fuels by the worlds wealthyminority, and the increasing com-moditisation of life.

Tackling climate change will in-volve dismantling the current cor-porate-led economic model. Meas-ures to address climate change haveto be based on a fundamental tran-sition to equitable and sustainablesocieties if they are to succeed.Climate finance should be used toenable communities to managetheir local resources sustainably,including energy, forests and water.

It should prioritise local technolo-gies and knowledge, and empowerIndigenous Peoples, women andother vulnerable populations.

In order to truly repay the climatedebt, climate finance must come

from public sources in developedcountries and be new and addi-tional to existing aid commitments.Financial flows from the CleanDevelopment Mechanism are al-ready being counted once to com-pensate for lack of action in devel-oped countries, and therefore mustnot be allowed to also count to-wards developed countries' finan-cial obligations to developing coun-tries. Private sector money shouldnot be accounted under public cli-mate finance. Governments mustcommit to creating a multilateralfund for climate change financingunder the United Nations instead of

the World Bank. The UNFCCC,which is guided by internationallyagreed principles based on histori-cal responsibility, must be the maininternational framework for ad-dressing climate change.

The World Bank hasbecome intent onmaking itself theworld's climatebanker

Developed countries

must make urgent anddeep emission cuts athome

FoEI

Public money to fight climate change must go throughthe United Nations, not the World Bank

Christoffer Askman


4/8


Every year, 300,000 people are dying due to the consequences of climate change. Politiciansneed to act, urgently and drastically. Mauro Pintos, Friends of the Earth Uruguay

I grew up in Kiribati, a tiny islandnation in the Pacific Ocean. Inow live in Sydney, Australia, butin April this year, I went back tovisit my family and I wasshocked by what I saw. Many ofthe trees are dying out, includingthe breadfruit which is so importantto the local diet, and wells havedried up. The mangroves which Iremember so well from my child-hood are almost gone. There was afavourite place I used to go withmy dad when I was growing up, but

this has disappeared under the sea.

What has happened? Kiribati, likemany Pacific states, has been suf-fering from severe drought as rain-fall patterns become more variable.Those with long memories dontrecall it ever being like this. WhenI was young the weather was notlike this at all, says Iorim Tabuae,a Kiribati elder. It was not as hotas this. The heat is killing us. Theweather changes a lot and nowa-

days you cannot predict it any-more.

Rising sea levels are also taking theirtoll. The highest land on the islandsthat make up Kiribati is only threemetres above sea level. High springtides are contaminating farmland andsaltwater is finding its way into thewells that remain, making the drink-ing water brackish.

Homes and a hospital have beenflooded and people have had nar-

row escapes. Last year, I and otherfriends were playing cards, saysIorim. We noticed the tide wasmuch higher than in previous sea-sons, and then all of a sudden wesaw huge waves coming towardsus. We all jumped, grabbed suit-cases, boxes and other importantthings and ran away from the seawater.

I really thought it was the end ofthe world, says Katarina Tirio,

My island in the sunChanging weather patterns and rising sea levels are causing havoc among low lyingstates of the Pacific. Maria Tiimon reports from Kiribati, one of the groups ofislands already affected

People say we have a problem with the rising sea. But, now I see that is not the problem. Its the money.We do not have the money and we do not have the technology to solve the problem. I will accept the factthat the water is rising; I have to. But, just because the water is rising does not mean I have to turn andrun; we need to find a solution. We need to face the problem.

Ok, the water is rising. But the people in Kiribati have a strong connection to the land, and the sea, wewont just get up and leave. We need solutions: number one, cut emissions, number two, provide themoney and technology.

Pelenise Alofa Pilitati, born in Fiji, currently lives in Tarawa, the capital of Kiribati. She is currently Manager of theKauaoki Foundation Enterprise, and Chairperson for Churches Education Directors Association in Kiribati, andadvocates for the Pacific Islanders and their rights and lands.

who was playing cards with Iorim.The waves came right to the houseand didnt stop there but went rightto the main road which stands in

the middle of the island.

Last century, sea levels rose 17cmsimply due to the increasing vol-ume of warming water. But disinte-grating glaciers and ice sheets willadd further to sea level rise. Al-ready, the Pacifics Carteret Islandsare being abandoned in what isthought to be the first evacuationdue to climate change.

What will happen to my country ifthe water keeps on rising? As Iorimputs it: There are places where wehave had to move houses inland.Our islands are so tiny we are afraidthat well fall off the other side intothe sea.

There are more than 100,000 peo-

ple living on Kiribati and my peo-ple dont want to move out. Theylove their country. And anyway,where will they go?

An in-depth study by Oxford Uni-versity predicted that, at a conser-vative estimate, the number of peo-ple displaced by climate changewould increase over the next 50years to 200 million. This is aglobal problem and not just relatedto my part of the world.

Maria Tiimon works for PacificCalling Partnership at the EdmundRice Centre for Justice and Com-munity Education in Sydneywww.erc.org.au/pcp

The Centre aims to ensure keypolluters in the developed worldrecognise their responsibility forclimate change and highlight whythey should lead in cutting emis-sions first a key strand of Friendsof the Earth Internationals cam-paign for climate justice.

There are countriesthat have benefittedfrom polluting theatmosphere. We arepaying the ultimateprice for this

Hector Pistache

FoE EWNI

FoE EWNI

I am now traveling the world aspart of the Pacific Calling Partner-ship to tell people what is happen-ing to low lying islands in the Pa-cific. The people of the Pacificislands have contributed little toglobal warming and the industrial-ised countries need to recognisethis. As Anote Tong, president ofKiribati has said: There are coun-tries that have benefitted frompolluting the atmosphere. We at theother end of the scale are payingthe ultimate price for this. Industri-alised countries need to treat uslike human beings and do some-thing about climate change now.Right now.

Hello world!This is Young Friends of the Earthspeaking. We are a grassroots net-work of young people and youthorganisations working together onsocial and environmental justice,made up of young people from allover the world, both from theglobal North and the global South.Were concerned about our futureand the future of our children.

Alongside local communities, In-digenous Peoples and women,youth are a vulnerable group ourfuture is at stake here. We need the

international community to agree totake sufficient action to protect theglobal climate for young people now and in the future. We wantinternational and intergenerationalclimate justice.

In the year 2050 we dont want tobe living in an unjust and pollutedworld. This is why we are demand-ing that rich, developed countriestake responsibility for the climatechange that they have caused, andstart to repay their climate debt entitling developing countries,affected communities and youngpeople their right to a sustainable

future. We cannot delay action andsimply pass the problem on to theyounger generation of today and theyoung people of the future. Wecannot afford to let the ecologicaldebt grow further.

We totally reject false solutions.They will only lock young peopleinto living in a fossil-fuel depend-ent future. We say no to nuclear, noto large-scale hydro, and no toagrofuels. We say no to offsetting.We say no to business as usual atthe expense of the interests of peo-ple and the planet. We say yes toaction now!

All across the world young peopleare standing up for justice and tak-ing action to reclaim their futures.Young Friends of the Earth bringstogether youth to work together to

mobilise, train and enable youngpeople to share knowledge andideas to form one united voicedemanding action to secure ourfuture and the future of generationsto come.

This is about our future. This isabout reality. We need to talk aboutwhat is necessary, not about what ispolitically easy. And we need to doit for the youth and for the future.

Act now!

Young Friends of the Earth

Leaders and negotiators must move beyond what is politicallyviable and do what is required by science. We need real and radi-cal global change and we must ACT NOW.

Jasmin Lauwaert from Belgium, Young Friends of the Earth Europe

Young people dont see climate change as a fight for economicinterests; we see it as a fight for our future, our survival! And thesurvival of future generations is not negotiable.

Susi Hammel from Germany, Young Friends of the Earth Europe

FoEI

FoEI

A letter from Young Friends of the Earth

FoEI


5/8

A Friends of the Earth International publication demanding climate justice | www.foei.org | 5| 5

Hundreds of messages, in many languages and forms, have been collected by communities andaffected people around the world demanding climate justice now! Friends of the Earth Interna-tional has built a Climate Capsule with all these voices: an installation and an interactive game will

show the communities' mandates for climate justice and will allow people to add their voices to thisglobal claim. Here are just some of those messages.

You can see the climate capsule online: www.foei.org

Climate capsule

A collection of human banners from schools in Malta,

collected by FoE Malta

Clockwise from top left: FoE Finland, FoE Scotland, FoE

Scotland, Young FoE Netherlands, FoE Japan

An eco-mural from FoE Columbia. Background letters from schools in Auchtertyre,

Loch Duich and Inverness, in Scotland.


6/8


It's a question of justice, we must cut carbon emissions at home instead of buying carboncredits elsewhere. Susann Scherbarth, Friends of the Earth Europe

The 'big melt' climate change

and the Himalayas

The glaciers and ice fields of theHimalayan mountains and theTibetan Plateau (the GreaterHimalayas) store the third-greatestvolume of fresh water in the world,after the Arctic and Antarctic polarregions. They are warming at two-to-four times the global averagerate, and if warming continuesalong the current path, theHimalayan glaciers will melt at anaccelerating rate until they

eventually disappear. Many will begone before mid-century and it ispossible they will be entirely lostby 2100.

The consequences are wellunderstood and include short-termincreases in run-off into the majorriver systems, followed by long-term decreases, with catastrophicimpacts. The potential loss of thiswater resource constitutes one ofthe greatest threats to humanityfrom global warming.

The eight largest river systems inAsia have their sources in theGreater Himalayas. Glaciersincrease in volume during winter

and shrink in summer, ensuring aregular seasonal pattern of melt-water flow into these rivers,especially during spring. Duringsummer and autumn they provide avital backup water supply if themonsoon fails. This makes theGreater Himalayan ice fields acritical resource for more than onebillion people.

But, the Himalayas straddle some

of the worlds poorest regions, withthe plains below them denselypopulated. Average income per-capita across the region is aroundUS$1,000 per year. These nationsand communities have limitedcapacity to cope with the severeimpacts of floods, followed byreduced water supplies.

These impacts on the GreaterHimalayas will undermine waterand food security across much ofAsia, and contribute to large-scalehuman displacement, yet thosesame nations who will experiencethe worst effects are amongst theleast responsible. It reinforces thecall of developing countries for

climate justice.

Developed countries which repre-sent less than one fifth of theworlds population have emittedalmost three quarters of all emis-sions to date, and they need to ac-cept their historical responsibilitytowards the developing world.Climate justice will be achievedwhen the countries that have themost responsibility historically for

causing climate change do the mostto prevent further damage. This canbe achieved through substantiallyreducing their own emissions athome. But even deep cuts in emis-sions in rich countries will leavevery little atmospheric space forpoorer countries to safely develop,so the industrialised world mustalso recognise the rights of devel-

For more details the Friends of the Earth Australia High Stakes:Climate Change, the Himalayas, Asia and Australia report can be foundhere: www.thebigmelt.org

Global warming is already having a big impact on Mount Everest and the Himalayas.Glaciers are melting creating floods that endanger the local people. But the big meltalso means a big dry as these 'water towers' of Asia lose their capacity to provide wa-ter to the giant rivers in the summer months

FoE Australia

"We demand climate justice. Many countries in Asia are the least responsible forglobal warming yet rich countries pollution is already harming our economy,

environment and societies.

Prakash Sharma, executive director of Pro-Public Nepal

(Friends of the Earth Nepal).

The glaciers around Everest are disappearing and our way of life isbeing threatened.

Pemba Dorje Sherpa, the worlds fastest Mount Everest climber whose

home is changing because of global warming.

oping countries to develop as sus-tainable societies and provide fi-nance and technology for theirtransition to low carbon economies.And alongside this they must sup-

port them in their challenge ofadapting to the impacts of climatechange including the challenge ofthe big melt faced by people of theGreater Himalayan region of Asia.

Politicians negotiating globalaction to fight climate changeare under a lot of pressure to act:thousands of activists, bloggers,campaigners and concerned citizensfrom all continents are demandingclimate justice real emissionscuts, real assistance for developingcountries, and real changes to the

way our society is run.

But its not just a one-way flood:climate negotiators are also pres-sured by hundreds of lobbyists fromthe corporate sector trying to ensurethat any agreement promotes theinterests of big business before theinterests of people and climate jus-tice. Corporations are spendinghundreds of millions of dollars onuntransparent lobbying to prevent astrong and just international climateagreement. These groups and lob-byists have a strong financial inter-est in maintaining the status quo atthe expense of those who will suf-fer most from climate change. Theyhave the economic power and po-litical connections to make theirvoices heard.

Examples of successful businesslobbying on climate change areplentiful. In the European Union,the Fuel Quality Directive wasvigorously opposed by oil industrygroup EUROPIA, whose membersinclude BP, ExxonMobil and Shell.The Directive would have required

oil companies to cut their emissionsby 10% between 2010 and 2020 aconservative target, the majority ofwhich could be met through a re-duction in gas flaring. Even so,EUROPIA argued that the oil in-dustry was not responsible for thegreenhouse-gas intensity of fossilfuels, and that they should be al-

lowed to meet all their emissionstargets through the use of agrofuels.

At the UN, the Clean DevelopmentMechanism (CDM) has causedcontroversy. It was designed toallow western companies and gov-ernments to offset their pollution byinvesting in climate change mitiga-tion projects in developing coun-tries. Actual emissions reductionshave proved impossible to calcu-late, as many of the projects mighthave happened even without theCDM funds. However, these invest-ments have generated huge profitsand pollution permits for corpora-tions. And still the InternationalEmissions Trading Association,made up of Rio Tinto, Total, Shell(again!), Mitsubishi and Barclays,

amongst others, is calling for moreflexible CDM rules and lowerstandards for polluting industryprojects.

Across the world, power companiesare calling for governments to sup-port them in developing carboncapture and storage (CCS) technol-

ogy, from E.On in the UK, to Sasolin South Africa, to...yes, Shellagain, this time in Canada. Thistechnology, which attempts tocapture CO2 emissions and pumpthem underground, is untested on alarge scale. It is not known whetherit can be commercialised rapidlyenough given the urgency of phas-ing out existing fossil fuel plants,but is being used by companies andgovernments as an excuse to con-tinue pumping out greenhousegases and even to build a new gen-eration of so-called CCS readycoal-fired power plants which oncebuilt will lock society into carbon-intensive power generation.

The ability of corporations to pushfalse solutions and challenge realsolutions is helped by the closerelationship that has developedbetween business leaders and poli-ticians.

Even the UN climate conferencesthemselves receive support fromcompanies like BMW, Honda,Volvo, Mercedes-Benz and Scan-

dinavian Airlines, whose core busi-ness involves the creation of mas-sive amounts of greenhouse gasemissions. Corporations look toclimate change negotiations toachieve the same thing that theywant from all their other activities profit. Proven and effectivemethods for tackling climatechange are ignored, as are the im-pacts of rising sea levels or chang-ing weather patterns on people inthe global south. The only thingsthat matter are market shares andprofit margins.

Friends of the Earth Internationalwants to see an end to the privi-leged access and influence over

decision makers that is granted tocorporations and business lobbygroups. Major corporations andpolluters will continue lobbying toundermine negotiations for a justclimate agreement, and will con-tinue to advance their own interestsat the expense of the interests of

people and the planet. But, theirdesire for business as usualshould not be considered moreimportant than the desire of mil-lions of ordinary people around theworld to live in a safe environment.Decisions on climate change needto be made in the interests of peo-ple and the planet, not corporationsand their profits.

Politicians should face pressure,but not behind closed doors bycorporations seeking to protecttheir profits and promote false cli-mate solutions. The power andinfluence of corporations needs tobe resisted and their lobbying at-tempts need to be exposed, so that

just and fair solutions to the climatechallenge can be found.

Undermining climate justice theinfluence of corporate interests

Major corporations and polluters are lobbying to undermine negotiations for a justclimate agreement. They advance their own interests at the expense of the interests ofpeople and the planet

Climate negotiationsare attended byhundreds of lobbyistsfrom the corporatesector

By Steven Heywood, Friends of theEarth Europe

For more information visit:www.foeeurope.org/corporates

FoEI

FoEI


7/8

A Friends of the Earth International publication demanding climate justice | www.foei.org | 7

Those who are responsible for climate change should be the first to take action. Ricardo Navarro, Friends of the Earth El Salvador

I was shocked when I read thenews last year that two palm oilsmallholder farmers from Sumatra,Indonesia, had committed suicide.Palm oil, increasingly produced tomeet the growing international

demand for agrofuels, had slumpedto its lowest ever price. The hopesof farmers, who grew palm trees tomake a better life for themselves,were collapsing. These hopes werebased on the promise of the futuremarket of agrofuels driven by themisguided belief that rich countriescan continue their over-consumingways and simply replace fossilfuels with fuels from crops. Thatday, alarmingly, the price of foodwas rising, while the price of com-modities was falling. Farmers whohad shifted their crops from food tofuels cried out: the fear of hungerwas upon them.

What will you eat if you live in anocean of palm trees? When I trav-elled to regions of Colombia whereoceans of palm trees exist, I saw

the same picture. Land-grabbing isrampant. Land traditionally used bylocal communities is being leasedor sold to outside investors fromcorporations and governments whosee an opportunity to get rich onagrofuels. The ability of people toprovide food for themselves isvanishing all the arable land has

been grabbed for palm plantations.When farmers want to keep theirland, they are forced to plant palm.Palm industries even drain wet-lands to expand their monocultureplantations.

When the food price crisis occurredin 2008, international agencieswarned that competition for landbetween food and fuels would soonbe problematic. On many locallevels, it is no longer a warning ithas already happened. Those peo-ple who live in areas where palm iscultivated suffer because of the risein food prices, yet, there is no moreland remaining to cultivate foodcrops even for subsistence.

Reports by recognised internationalagencies mean nothing in the field:land-grabbing, deforestation andforest conversions for agrofueldevelopment continue, particularlyin developing countries. A reportby the International Food PolicyResearch Institute in April 2009

described how millions of hectaresall over the world have beengrabbed for palm oil production.Remarkably, governments of south-ern countries support colossal land-grabbing. Indonesia targeted anexpansion of up to 20 million hec-tares for palm oil to add to existingnon-fuel production by 2020;

Madagascar designated 1.3 millionhectares of land for agrofuels in 2008.

Despite the body of evidence, themajority of policy-makers stillbelieve that agrofuels are a solutionto climate change. But, agrofuelsare a false solution. Supporters stillbelieve agrofuels can be producedsustainably, without considerationfor their negative social and envi-ronmental effects, deforestation andthe loss of biodiversity caused bymonocultures, the correspondingdecrease in the capacity of localecosystems to cope with climate

change, and the problem of compe-tition for arable land.

Additionally, agrofuels need a lotof water, making competition forwater unavoidable.

They push out local food produc-tion essential to sustainable liveli-

hoods. Sustainability at a local levelmeans the ability to cope with so-cial, environmental, and economicshock. Once monoculture planta-tions occupy the land the capacityfor food-crop production drops.

Agrofuel development is a globalparadox. It is promoted as a solu-tion to climate change, because it isassumed to reduce carbon emis-sions and offer a replacement todirty fossil fuels, yet in reality it hassevere impacts on the social andecological capacity of many parts ofthe world to tackle the effects of

climate change.

Agrofuels development only bene-fits rich industrialised countries,private investors and major pollut-ers who want to continue businessas usual, while millions who havehad their land taken suffer.

Rather than false solutions thatviolate peoples rights and will notsolve the climate crisis we needtruly sustainable, community-basedsolutions. Agrofuels generate prof-its for developed countries andprivate investors, and keep controlof global land and energy resourcesin the hands of a privileged minor-ity. Rather than pushing this falsesolution, developed countries needto recognise and repay their climatedebt the debt that rich nationshave to developing ones becausethey have emitted the vast majorityof the greenhouse gases currently inthe atmosphere, far more than theirfair share.

To repay this climate debt, rich

countries must implement immedi-ate and rapid emissions reductions, just and effective financial flows,measures to address deforestationcombined with policies and initia-tives to protect forests and appro-priate technology transfer exclud-ing false solutions like plantationsand agrofuels.

Agrofuels and climate

change: the globalparadoxAgrofuels are a false solution to climate change. Theirproduction often violates peoples rights and threatensthe capacity of local people and ecosystems to copewith the effects of climate change. We need trulysustainable, community-based solutions

A recently cleared area for oil palm plantations in Sumatra, Indonesia,

where only 3% of the original rainforest remains.

David Gilbert

By Dominic Murphy, Editor of Earthmatters at Friends of the EarthEngland, Wales and Northern Ireland

REDD alert in Costa RicaTrading in forests has no part to play in a justinternational agreement to tackle climate change

The rainforest teems with wild-life as Javier Baltodano makeshis way along the treacherous roadswhich lead into the mountainousinterior of Costa Rica. As the co-ordinator of Friends of the EarthCosta Ricas forests campaign,most of Baltodonos time is spentdeep in the rainforest, visiting oneof the five remaining forest com-munities who he is working with toprotect their way of life againstencroaching pineapple plantationswhich have made Costa Rica theworlds largest producer.

Yet the traditional way of life ofthese indigenous communities isunder threat not just from the ex-pansion of pineapple plantations,but also, ironically, a scheme beingpromoted to tackle climate change.

One of the biggest threats of theinitiative Reducing Emissionsfrom Deforestation and Degrada-tion in Developing Countries(REDD) is that it would allowindustrialised countries to offset

their emissions by buying carboncredits from developing countrygovernments like Costa Rica. Withdeforestation responsible for nearlyone fifth of global greenhouse gasemissions, REDD is designed tostop deforestation in its tracks andprevent more carbon dioxide beingreleased into the atmosphere which, at 1,000 tonnes a hectare, iscrucial to tackling climate change.

Furthermore, REDD will not pro-

tect forests, and will not deliverclimate justice. It will simply allowdeveloped countries to continuepolluting as usual when what isneeded is urgent domestic emis-sions reductions at least 40% by2020 on 1990 levels if were to

avoid the very worst effects ofclimate change.

Here in Costa Rica we are totallyopposed to carbon offsetting, saysJavier Baltodono. It will do noth-ing to tackle climate change or

protect indigenous people here.He adds, We are already seeingheavier downpours during the rainyseason which are causing land-slides. At the other extreme, cli-mate change is contributing to drierconditions in Northern Costa Rica,which is now so intense it is nowkilling cattle. Small farmers areliterally losing their livelihoods.

Even worse, the scheme wouldenable pineapple plantations, whichare putting at risk the way of life ofIndigenous peoples in Costa Rica,to encroach on more of the coun-trys rainforest. Written into thesmall print of the proposal is aclause which would allowmonoculture plantations to count,for the purposes of buying forestcredits, the same as pristine rainfor-est. This is despite the fact they

store only 20% of the carbon, not tomention the hundreds of tonnesreleased when destroying the forestand the destruction of forest peo-ples homes and livelihoods. It alsorewards those engaged in deforesta-tion, and undermines local commu-

nities territorial and cultural rights.

Instead, Friends of the Earth CostaRica is campaigning for indige-nous peoples to have the right togovern their own communitieswithin the forest a practiceknown as community forest gov-ernance. This ensures it is man-aged responsibly and preventsfurther inroads being made bymultinationals. The communitieswork to conserve the forest, recog-nising they coexist with it ratherthan seeing it as simply a resourceto be plundered for profit.

This approach works for the benefitof all. It enables Indigenous peoplesto guarantee their livelihoods forgenerations to come, without thefear of their land being turned overto plantations; their knowledge andtraditional use of the forest is pre-served and the rainforest remainsintact. It also ensures that any com-mercial exploitation does not de-stroy the forest and is proof thatIndigenous groups can and should be entrusted with protecting apriceless resource for the benefit ofus all.

REDD will not protectforests, and will notdeliver climatejustice

Plantations are not forests: demonstrating against REDD in Bonn

Testimony of Friends of the Earth Internationals agrofuels campaigncoordinator, Torry Kuswardono, Indonesia

FoEI


8/8

Vi har kun en jord, og det er p tide, vi begynder at handle derefter. Line Kirk, talsperson for NOAH Energi og Klima

For at vide, hvor meget vi skalreducere udledningerne med,skal vi vide, hvor meget vioverhovedet kan tillade os atudlede. Videnskaben er blevet

mere og mere klar p, hvor lille detbudget er. Den korte historie er, atde globale udledninger skal toppe ilbet af ganske f r.

Figuren herunder fra CopenhagenDiagnosis illustrerer forskellen p,

om udledningerne topper i 2011, i2015 eller i 2020. Forudsat at vinsker at have en 75 % chance forat undg temperaturstigninger pmere end 2 grader!

Hvis udledningerne topper i 2011,skal vi reducere med 3,7 % om ret.Hvis vi venter bare til 2015, skal vireducere med 5,3 % om retoghvis vi venter til 2020 skal vireducere med 9 % om ret.

En klimalov skal sikre rligereduktioner i udledningen afdrivhusgasser p mindst 6 %.

Klimaloven skal sikre, atlovgivning og planlgning foregrunder hensyntagen til dennemlstning.

Udviklingen af den vedvarendeenergi har stet i stampe i enrrkke. Men den kan sttes i gangigen. Danmark kan blive fossilfri i2030.

NOAH Energi og Klima harudarbejdet et forslag til en

energihandlingsplan, som viser enmde, hvorp det kan ske.

Klima SOS er en af 17 samtidige

kampagner i lige s mange lande iEuropa.

I Storbritannien frte kampagnen -The Big Ask - til vedtagelsen afverdens frste klimalov med rligeemissionsreduktioner - og Skotlander fulgt efter med en lov, der skalsikre 42 % reduktion i 2020.

Skotterne siger: If we can do it -so can you!

www.klima-sos.dk

Tid. CCS vil ikke blive udviklet fr2020 - og kan ikke leverendvendige reduktioner i tide.

Energieffektivitet og klimaeffekt.Det vil krve 40 % mere energi atfange 85 % af CO2en. Hertilkommer et betydeligt energibehov iforbindelse med bygning af anlg,t r a n s p o r t o g i n j e k t i o n iundergrunden.

Alt i alt vil kun to tredjedele afudledningerne kunne undgs. Dentredjedel som ikke indfanges vilalene kunne overskride dettilbagevrende budget, der er tilrdighed, hvis temperaturstigningenskal holdes under 2 grader.

Milj. Hvis man begynder atinvestere kmpesummer i CCS-anlg (de er lige s store som dekraftvrksanlg de skal virke

sammen med!), s er detensbetydende med, at manforlnger kulalderen med mangertier. Kul er skyld i omfattendeskader p menneskers helbred og pmiljet gennem brydning, transport,afbrnding og affaldsprodukter.

CCS vil forge behovet forklevand med op til 130 %, og detegentlige vandforbrug vil stige medop til 90 %. Det vil vre et stortproblem alle de steder, hvorferskvand bruges til kling.

Finansiering. Der vil vre brug forenorme offentlige tilskud, for atCCS kan blive udviklet. I Danmarkhar bde DONG og Vattenfallopgivet at g videre, da der ikke erudsigt til statstilskud - og da ingena f E U s t i l s k u d t i ldemonstrationsanlg gik tilDanmark.

Energiplanlgning. CCS er kunrealistisk i forbindelse med store

punktkilder, isr kraftvrker. Dvs.at CCS vil cementere encentralistisk energiforsyning, derspiller drligt sammen medudbygning af vedvarende energi,der naturndvendigt svinger medvind og sol.

L a g e r a n s v a r . K o m m e n d egenerationer vil arve ansvaret forlagrene og de udgifter der erforbundet med vedligeholdelse,overvgning og evt. forholdsregler iforbindelse med udslip.

CDM. Hvis CCS bliver tilladtunder CDM som en aktivitet, derkan generere kreditter, vil de rigelandes hjemlige reduktioner aftage.

Det vil vre de teknologisk mestu d v i k l e d e b l a n d tudviklingslandene, der vil f defleste projekterog den allerede

eksisterende skvhed i CDM vilblive get.

NOAH has been monitoring plansto apply controversial CarbonCapture and Storage technology inDenmark. Power utility Vattenfallhas been planning to equip a part ofthe coal fired power plantNordjyllandsvrket with CCS.Plans that are presently shelved dueto lack of public funding (from theEU). These plans met with strongresistance from local residents inthe area where the storage wasplanned.

NOAH has published an Englishversion of its CCS-critical website:www.ccs-info.org

NOAH blev stiftet i 1969. I firertier har tusinder af aktivebrugt deres tid og energi, deresfantasi og viden, engagement ogsolidaritet til at bringe vsentligesprgsml ind i den offentligedebat - tit fr andre, som regel meden radikal synsvinkel. NOAHskendemrke har altid vret at sep helheden, bde nr det glder

Solar energy on Danish soil150.000 PJ/year.

Energy consumption in Denmark680 PJ/year.

Drivhusgasbudgettet er ...... meget stramt

Det skal ses i lyset af, at verden harhaft umdelig svrt ved at leve optil mlene i den frste Kyoto-periode p 5 % globale reduktioner

- over en periode p 15 r!

Hvis kurven frst topper i 2015,bliver opgaven alts at reduceremed mere end det hvert r i 35 r.

det glder milj og samfund.

Vand, luftkvalitet, vedvarendeenergi, trafik, madforurening,a t om kra f t , bre dyg t i ghe d ,gensplejsning, miljmssigtrderum, agrobrndstoffer, CCS ognu behovet for en strk klimalov.Det er nogle af de omrder, hvorNOAH har sat sit prg.

I 1986 blev NOAH medlem afFriends of the Earth International -et fantastisk grsrodsnetvrk!www.noah.dk

NOAH Friends of the EarthDenmark - 40 rs engagement

CCS endnu enikke-lsningSyv argumenter mod CCS

A Friends of the Earth International publication - demanding climate justice | www.foei.org8 |

Klima SOS kampagnen for enstrk klimalov i Danmark.

NOAH is campaigning for a strongclimate legislation in Denmark thatcan deliver annual cuts ofat least6% in greenhouse gas emissions.

Read about the new EU-27 40%study from Friends of the EarthEurope and Stockholm Environ-ment Institute on page 2

Christoffer Askman / FoEI

Documents

Climate Justice Times