![The irony that is the Hambach Pit Mine]()
by admin | Nov 19, 2017 | #MYD, MYD2017
On the 8th of November, Lhavanya and I embarked on a tour to see the Hambach open pit mine, the largest man-made hole in Europe. It is said to be so large that it can fit the whole city of Cologne and in fact, remains the deepest man-made hole on the Earth’s surface, descending around 400m below sea level.
The excavators biting into the soil to extract lignite, more commonly known as brown coal, are just as haunting as they are impressive feats of engineering. Not only does it tower like a 30-storey building, the length of these ‘monsters’ span two football fields! What makes it even more ironic that Germany possesses the largest brown coal mine in the world is the fact that it’s perceived as a leader in renewable energy, with the country generating more solar energy than any other nation.
For a country that’s supposed to be a model of green growth and clean energy, one has to wonder about the existence of such a monstrous site that used to be the home of the Hambach forest. Said to be around 12,000 years old, the forest is rich in biodiversity as it has over 100 species of flora and fauna. One would think that efforts would have been made into making the area a conservation site, considering the historical significance of the location.
The Hambach open pit mine. (PC-Lhavanya)
In fact, that’s what some environmentalists think, and in this case, do, as they’ve left the comfort of their homes to live in the forest that was bought over by RWE, a German electric utilities company, in 1978. As of 2017, only 10% of the forest remains and it’s expected to be gone between 2018 and 2020 to make way for more excavation work.
As we walked deeper into the forest, accompanied by one of the residents, we were brought to a meagre community where people lived in make-shift treehouses, used portable self-made toilets (that is if they didn’t just dig a hole in the ground) and live off stale bread and produce from dumpster-diving. It was one thing to have heard about such communities living in forests as a symbol of protest against a greedy profit-driven large corporation, but having been toured around in an actual site that is the epitome of the aforementioned scenario, I couldn’t help but to have felt a powerful pang of being at a loss. It would make sense if the presence of these self-proclaimed anarchists would hinder RWE from cutting down the rest of the forest and excavating the soil, but we heard from the guide ourselves that what’s little left of the forest will be gone in the next couple of years.
Pondering in hindsight about the whole scenario has made me realise that the efforts of these supposed overzealous people would bear some fruit after all. I say overzealous because at the time, it seemed like that whole act was meaningless because the forest is going to be lost anyways.
Now that I think about it again, this act of ‘anarchy’ goes beyond trying to prevent greedy corporations from decimating ancient land. Rather, I look at this occupation as a symbol of apathy from now on. I look at it as a symbol of apathy because when I picture human flesh being pulverised as excavators bulldoze through the forest along with the human settlements, I would feel sadness and to an extent, shock, at not only the loss of a fellow human but at the manner in which he had gone.
I believe that’s how everyone should feel when these excavators decimate the forest. A great deal of sadness, shock and pain… because not only is nature a part of us, but it is that we are a part of nature too.
Written by Syaqil
Edited by Varun
![The rise of non-party stakeholders and the American resistance]()
by admin | Nov 17, 2017 | #MYD, MYD2017, UNFCCC
Climate change can be a depressing topic to discuss. And from what I’ve seen and heard, COPs aren’t the most optimistic environments. But there’s a story at COP23 that I think contrasts the negotiations here in Bonn. While Parties have been on agenda items at COP, CMP, APA, and SB meetings, the US Climate Action Center has been hosting events just outside the UN jurisdiction of the Bula Zone.
The US Climate Action Center are essentially huge inflatable domes, just outside the UN jurisdiction of the Bula Zone.
Typically, the US sets up a prominent US Center at COPs – hosting side events on climate research and renewable technology from agencies such as NASA. Unfortunately, in the first year of the Trump administration, it is the first time there will not be an official US Center. Instead, there will be a side-event officially promoting the use of “clean coal”, natural gas and nuclear energy. The reaction has obviously been of disgust and opposition. Some of the strongest response has been from the We Are Still In movement at the US Climate Action Center. The movement is a signal to the world that America’s citizens, cities, states, and businesses are still moving forward with climate action and committing to the Paris Agreement when President Trump won’t.
Of course, it wouldn’t be American if it wasn’t over the top
At the launch of America’s Pledge, a coalition of cities, states and businesses committed to the Paris Agreement, Michael Bloomberg who is the UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for Cities and Climate Change, said, “The American government may have pulled out of the Paris Agreement, but the American people are committed to its goals – and there is nothing Washington can do to stop us.”
While the US is very rarely a good example at COPs, it illustrates the role of non-party actors in the fight against climate change. In a separate event featuring the US People’s Delegation, comprising individuals and CSO’s fighting climate change on the ground, I saw many passionate and emotional pleas for immediate action and opposition to the American federal government’s position.
Former New York City Mayor, Michael Bloomberg, delivering his speech at the launch of his foundation’s project called America’s Pledge.
The importance of non-party actors in the fight to get to the goal of 1.5°C cannot be overstated. Yes, the UNFCCC and COP are Party-driven meetings, however, individuals, coalitions, cities and states have the power to act on climate change and make a difference. At the end of the day, the language around the texts that come out of COPs are loose and don’t draw a hardline on countries to act. On several occasions, we have seen the aspect of Nationally Determined Manner introduced and reiterated, especially in relation to NDCs in the Paris Agreement. This means that a country can act in response to climate change in any way it sees appropriate and is not strictly mandated to act in a certain way. This results in the ability for countries to get away with loose actions on climate change.
Varshini Prakash from SustainUS and the US People’s Delegation takes the stage.
Non-party actors are clearly mentioned in the Paris Agreement and I believe they will continue to play a huge part in our collective drive for 1.5°C. Individuals, businesses, cities and states are the foundations of countries where emissions are produced, which means some of the power to curb the emissions and act on climate change. The UNFCCC process and COPs are huge conference at the highest of international levels, which can make you feel very small and inconsequential, but just remember that each person in the fabric of society can play a part, no matter how small or large, no matter how local or international.
Written by Mike
Edited by Varun
![To enter or not to enter: it depends on your ticket]()
by admin | Nov 16, 2017 | #MYD, MYD2017, UNFCCC
As I was entering the closed meeting I was supposed to go, I noticed that several observers were blocked outside. After the parties were ready, the co-facilitators asked them if they would like to allow observers to enter the room. Although none of the sessions I went banned the entrance for observers, it was still astonishing to witness the limited access civil service organization conference, which had a vision to be inclusive.
The view from the observer’s seat at the last row.
On 10 November 2017, the APA Co-chair had a dialogue with the observer organizations. The dialogue was supposed to allow representatives from different constituencies to bring up their concerns pertaining to the negotiations that have been going on for the past week. The co-chair started the session by reiterating the need of observers being in the negotiation room as they were experts in their respective field. The co-chair then stresses that all meetings of the APA continue to be open to all observers, which from my experience so far, was true. I have never been blocked access or seen anyone with a yellow badge and ticket being blocked. However, I do believe that the ticketing process was a buffer system that limited the participation of the observers.
For the same reason, during the session, a representative from TWYCC brought up the problem of ticketing system on behalf of YOUNGO (representatives from RINGO and the Women and Gender Group also brought up similar issues). Currently, the observers will be blocked outside until parties have been seated and the session started. To that, the co-chairs responded by saying that they want to ensure that there is sufficient space for the parties while also allowing space for experts. Although I understand where they are coming from, I don’t see how this was a sufficient reason to make the observers wait until the delegates who were late (since they need to run in from other meetings) to enter the room.
Also, the ticketing system limits the number of representatives that could be sent to a certain meeting. For example, YOUNGO only has two tickets for each agenda items (those that are open for observers only). These arrangements often create disagreement within the constituencies when there are more than two people who are interested in the same topic. YOUNGO tries to give everyone a chance to attend by diversifying the people who get the ticket. But this only creates another issue of the lack of specialization in the negotiation tracking process. The co-chairs also acknowledged that this is an issue, but no concrete solution was provided during the session. I was rather disappointed by that because it is a contradiction of what they were stressing in the beginning of the session.
The co-chairs did reassure the importance of an observer’s role by stating “You may not be negotiating the words but you are the interface between the negotiators and the rest of the world,”. But beautiful words itself is inadequate, decisions need to be made to increase the accessibility of observers. And as of today, observers still face a lot of systemic barriers in the negotiation room.
Written by Xiandi
Edited by Varun
![Are oceans being talked about at COP?]()
by admin | Nov 16, 2017 | #MYD, MYD2017, UNFCCC
Are oceans being talked about at COP?
The link between ocean acidification and climate change is one that is scientifically proven, where the former is happening due to oceans absorbing an excessive amount of atmospheric CO2. Not only does this lead to oceans’ decline in its capacity to function as a carbon sink, marine ecosystems such as coral reefs are severely affected as they remain unable to withstand an environment with reduced pH levels.
That’s only scratching the surface, and I haven’t even brought in coastal societies into the picture. Pacific Islands, or small island developing countries (SIDCs) in general, stand to be the first victims of climate-induced rising sea levels, yet when the time comes (I pray to god that isn’t any time soon) for the islanders to migrate, who’s going to accept them? Where will they go? Perhaps an even more critical question to ask is who’s to blame?
The first ever United Nations summit on oceans took place between 5th to 9th June in New York, whereby conservation and sustainable use of the oceans and marine resources were sought after. But 2017 isn’t the first time the ocean agenda was talked about in the realm of UNFCCC. An outcome of the Paris Agreement was the Strategic Action Roadmap on Oceans and Climate: 2016-2021, discussed on Oceans Day. From there, a multi-stakeholder initiative was born – the Roadmap to Oceans and Climate Action (ROCA), involving governments, international agencies, NGOs, scientific institutions, scientific advisors and private institutions etc.
Introduced last year in Marrakech, the Roadmap consists of 6 key areas, ranging from the central role of oceans in regulating climate change to financing and capacity development, in the next 5 years. Hence, how fitting it is that the Fijian Presidency of COP23, dubbed the Pacific COP, has included an ocean-related initiative.
This initiative, called the Ocean Pathway Partnership (OPP) aims for oceans to be a part of the UNFCCC agenda by 2019. Also, it is such that the OPP requires Parties to include oceans in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) as the first step to recognise that the link between climate change and ocean acidification is having an adverse effect on marine ecosystems and biodiversity. Furthermore, as a result of ocean-inclusion in NDCs, the environmental and social costs of climate change on oceans would be included in mitigation actions. I believe that this is the right step, albeit late, considering that prior to the Paris Agreement, the only mention of oceans was in Sustainable Development Goal (SDG14), which states “conserve and sustainably use the ocean, seas and marine resources for sustainable development”, and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which defines the right and responsibilities of Parties with respect to the use of marine resources, with both of them being very vague.
Role of YOUNGO Oceans Working Group
The duty of YOUNGO Oceans Working Group at this COP has been to galvanise youth in supporting the Fijian Presidency to submit the ocean agenda to the UNFCCC Secretariat. Such was the case on the 10th of November where the YOUNGO Oceans Working Group organised the ‘Talanoa – Agreeing on an Ocean Pathway Partnership’ event, a platform “for exchange of opinions and ideas on how an effective OPP should look like and how it can be implemented.” As a result of this platform, a statement was produced on the participants’ views of OPP. Besides this document, an open letter will be written to the Fijian Presidency to show that YOUNGO is in support of the ocean initiative.
As of now, the suggestion document and the open letter are still a work in progress. The Fijian Presidency aims to have the OPP signed by Thursday (16/11/2017) and regardless the Fijian Delegation pay heed to the view of YOUNGO in driving through the Ocean Pathway Partnership or not, let us hope that the submission of this proposal is accepted by the UNFCCC Secretariat. Hence, if and when 100 signatories are obtained, perhaps the small island developing states would not have to find a new place to call home after all.
Written by Syaqil
Edited by Varun
![My thoughts on Loss and Damage]()
by admin | Nov 15, 2017 | #MYD, MYD2017, UNFCCC
When comes to climate change, not every impact can be minimised or avoided through reduction of GHGs emissions (mitigation) or proper planning and adjustment (adaptation). Some adverse effects have already reached to a point where there isn’t any turning back, which would affect all 3 dimensions – the past, the current and the future. Thus, the word “Loss and Damage” (abbreviation: L&D).
Debris lines the streets of Tacloban, Leyte island. This region was the worst affected by the typhoon, causing widespread damage and loss of life. Caritas is responding by distributing food, shelter, hygiene kits and cooking utensils. (Photo: Eoghan Rice – Trócaire / Caritas)
Let me give you a glimpse of what is L&D before providing my views on it.
Long story short, the idea of L&D was brought forward during COP16, as part of the Cancun Adaptation Framework to address L&D associated with climate change impacts in developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change.
3 years later in COP19, The Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (WIM) associated with Climate Change Impacts was established as the main vehicle under the Convention to promote the implementation of approaches.
Although it has been a formal agenda in UNFCCC back then, it was not until COP21 that WIM got fully institutionalised and L&D finally contained some “meat”. The Paris Agreement dedicated an entire article (Article 8) to L&D. However, there was no “skeleton” on the liability and compensation for loss and damage since it was a ‘red line’ for industrialised countries.
COP19 and The Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (WIM)
L&D is a fairly ambiguous principle that involves multifaceted dimensions such as legislature, politics and ethics. Developing countries, especially those vulnerable to the effect of climate change, have been highlighting the importance of equity and the need of compensation. In contrast, developed countries are trying to limit discussion on liability, compensation, framing loss and damage as a matter of adaptation/ risk reduction and insurance.
Even in the ongoing conference, which is framed as a Pacific COP, L&D should have gotten a considerable amount of limelight. Developed countries seem to skip out on it and feel that the current timeframe isn’t suitable for discussing on this matter. Thus, generating finances and capital for WIM persists to be indisposed. Instead, they prioritise risk financing during the negotiation table, in other words, INSURANCE.
InsuResilience , basically the insurance for L&D, is an international initiative aimed at providing insurance to 400 more million poor and vulnerable people by 2020. And now they get more funding and partnership by bringing together the G20 countries in partnership with the Vulnerable 20 (V20) nations. (Maybe private sector?!)
PLEASE DON’T BRING THE BAD BOY FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY IN
Insurance is not something as easy as choosing a meal by looking at the menu. Even I occasionally take time on selecting my food, having a range of options. (#FirstWoldProblem). It’s just an assumption that poor people are going to pay for climate insurance when most of them still need to worry on what to eat for the next day. Without proper knowledge on this kind of climate risk scheme, it’s not really as reliable as we what we think it is as some losses may not be insured.
Besides, the issue of L&D also bring concerns to the developed countries, especially those wealthy countries that highly depend on Oil and Gas industries. There is a saying that high recognition of L&D will lead to more litigation (lawsuit) and this will create obligation for the developed countries to compensate more in the future. Furthermore, I’ve also heard that they want to include insurance as a pre-2020 action.
What I hope to see in COP23 is to have a robust financial mechanism. Once we have an appropriate quantitative and qualitative mechanism, the money would eventually find its way. Regarding finance, it’s advisable to seek on equitable and innovative sources that are able to meet CBDR-RC’s principles, or In laymen terms, PLEASE DON’T BRING THE BAD BOY FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY IN.
Written by Thomas
Edited by Varun
![Talanoa Spirit: We are not Drowning, We are Fighting!]()
by admin | Nov 15, 2017 | #MYD, MYD2017, UNFCCC
COP23 is hosted by the Fiji island nation, which urges the world for immediate action. During the third day of the Pacific COP, an event was held by the Pacific Island Warriors from the 350.org Pacific program at the beautiful Talanoa Space in Bonn Zone. The event was specifically made to inform and educate the public on the actions and situation of the Pacific Island.
Blessing ceremony by the Pacific Islanders
President Bainiramara, the leader of Fiji, said that “The scientists are now telling us that with the disappearance of the summer ice around the North Pole, and the eventual melting of the Arctic and Greenland, the global average sea rise would be a terrifying seven meters,”. This is why the slogan of the Pacific Island Warriors can be attributed to the “We are not Drowning, We are Fighting!” symbols.
The event started with a blessing ceremony based on the Christian beliefs. It was a heartwarming moment as they asked for God’s blessings to preserve the Pacific Island culture, heritage, land and their beliefs from the likes of climate change
Next came the sharing session from various Pacific Island nations such as Tokelau,Tonga, Marshall Islands, Fiji etc. All of the sharing sessions gave us the idea of how they are desperately needing negotiations to ensure that Parties to the Paris Agreement hold to their promise in limiting global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees. Here are a few Islander stories to share with:
Tokelau is the first Nation to use 100% renewable energy by 2014. With the population of less than 2000 residents, they have shifted towards using solar panels as a source of electrical energy. They are proud of it and hope that other countries can also take the initiative.
The people from Marshall Islands shared how they will stay rooted to their culture regardless of the changing times. They stress that indigenous people require knowledge on climate change. While the island nation of Fiji shared on how they have experienced the worst cyclone to ever hit the Southern Hemisphere, cyclone Winston was a category 5 cyclone that struck the Pacific Island in 2016 that caused major destruction along its path. And it is no doubt that climate change has played a major role in contributing to this abnormal disaster.
The Pacific Island Nations came together in solidarity to travel over 15,000 km to Bonn Germany to fight climate change and ensure that Parties to the Paris Agreement hold on to their promise to limit temperature rise to 1.5 degrees
The way how Fiji islands took the world stage and hosted COP23, communicating to the world of a large message how we the people, we the world, need to stand in solidarity with these beautiful people to get ourselves together and not just talk the talk, but walk the walk. Emphasis on the later.
To support their work and be part of the Pacific Climate Warriors you can help them fight climate change by signing their declaration at www.haveyoursei.org. “We are not drowning, We are Fighting!”
“We cannot build a Pacific Climate Movement without engaging our faith communities. Faith is pivotal to our people, and like the ocean, it connects us. In the face of the climate crisis, we need prayer to carry our people and faith to build resilience.”
– Koreti Tiumalu, 350.org Pacific Coordinator
Written by Azam
Edited by Varun & Emily
