An important result of the 2011 Climate Change Conference in Durban http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference
is the "Durban Platform for Enhanced Action." This framework for international climate negotiations eliminates the distinction between Annex I and Non-Annex I countries. Instead, its goal is to draft an international climate agreement by the year 2015, to go into effect in 2020, which ensures "the highest possible mitigation efforts by *all parties*." I always thought the Durban framework has two shortcomings: (a) 2020 is too late. (b) by ignoring the historical debt of the rich countries it places too much burden on the poor countries. But I'd like to start a discussion here whether activists world wide, environmentalists, socialists, and ecosocialists, should support the Durban framework anyway. As part of its preparations for this climate agreement, the European Union organized a so-called "stakeholder conference" on April 17, 2013. The Conference Web site http://ec.europa.eu/clima/events/0073/index_en.htm has a link to the videos and slides of all talks. The first speaker is John Schellnhuber, giving an overview of the latest science and a preview of what is going to come in the 5th Assessment Report of the IPCC which is due next year. Climate deniers try to make a big deal from the empirical fact that world-wide atmospheric mean temperatures have not risen much since 1996. This does not mean global warming has stopped. But right now all the excess heat goes into the oceans. Schellnhuber said that this pause in atmospheric warming may last another decade. Although the heating of the oceans is dangerous itself, I have the impression this gives us a little more time. This is relevant for my objection (a) to the Durban process. Perhaps it is not too late but has some chance of success. I try to be realistic. Being realistic not only means seeing the dangers but also seeing the opportunities. Regarding point (b), Schellnhuber says here, but in much more detail in a teaching video http://www.wbgu.de/en/trafoseminar/1-interview/ that soon, the majority of the affluent people, whose consumption of meat and cars wrecks the climate, will live in the global South. Therefore it is no longer going to be OECD countries against poor countries, but affluent consumers everywhere against poor people everywhere. If this is the real issue, then ignoring the historical debt of the OECD countries does not do terminal harm to international negotiations. The second speaker, Connie Hedegaard, the EU Commissioner for Climate Action, gives an overview of the political issues. Then there is a panel discussion and also audience questions. A young person in the audience asked whether the Durban framework was going to represent the interests of the youth. Schellnhuber answered that, in order to have their interests heard, the youth has to organize. Although the majority of the youth affected by climate change are still in diapers or are not yet born, those who are old enough should indeed organize. I think this video shows that there are people in responsible positions who see the danger and are trying to save the climate. They need support from a world wide mass movement. Due to the internet, such a mass movement is possible. The elephant in the room which nobody really could talk about was of course the US. Criticizing the US would have been counterproductive, because it would have given the US an excuse not to cooperate. Therefore the US was mentioned very little. If the younger Bush wrecked the UNFCCC process, Obama may become known in history as the president who wrecked the Durban process. The pressure is on us, citizens and activists in the United States, that this is not going to happen. This video stream is several hours long but very informative, I can recommend it highly. Hans G. Ehrbar _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
