climate camp

This morning at 08:30am around 25 private bailiffs, supported by 10 police, began their dawn assault to evict the Mainshill Solidarity Camp in South Lanarkshire. The bailiffs are acting on behalf of landowner Lord Home (1) who is set to profit from allowing Scottish Coal to extract 1.7 million tonnes of coal from Mainshill Wood near the village of Douglas.

Despite the formidable police and bailiff operation, camp members are staying put down their tunnels and behind their barricades, fortified towers and tree houses. Numbers at the camp have swelled over the weekend with people arriving from across the country. The eviction could take weeks and cost the land owner millions (2) and it is hoped that the delay to the mine and the price of eviction will deter those who want to develop new coal projects in the UK.

The camp was occupied 7 months ago in solidarity with communities in the Douglas Valley who have been fighting the plans for ten years. As such it was well received with many supplies donated by the camp’s neighbours including a full Christmas dinner. The setting up of the camp has heralded a campaign of direct action against the mining of Mainshill, a necessary step after the 650 letters of objection to the mine were disregarded when South Lanarkshire Council which granted permission to the application.

The communities have been blighted by the detrimental health impacts of the 4 existing open casts in the immediate area (3). Harry Thompson, former chairman of the Douglas Community Council (4), said:
“Despite massive community opposition to the mine at Mainshill, Scottish Coal and South Lanarkshire Council continue to disregard the interests of those living in proximity to the mines. The particulate matter released in the open cast mining process in this area has caused unusually high rates of cancer and lung disease. Granting permission to a new mine 1000 metres from the local hospital is the final straw”.

Mining in the Douglas Valley is intended to feed Britain’s increasing reliance on coal as an energy source. Coal taken from the proposed mine at Mainshill will result in the release of 3.4 million tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere if burned. If this and the other 18 proposed mines in Scotland go ahead it will be a massive contributor to climate change, and prevent Scotland’s climate bill from succeeding.

With the recent failure of the UN Framework on Climate Change in Copenhagen to reach a deal, communities worldwide will continue to be displaced and suffer from the mining and combustion of coal. One camper, Anna Key, expressed her determination to create positive change in the face of redundant political processes:
“I can’t do anything directly about the ocean becoming more acidic or melting icebergs but those things will only continue if we keep burning fossil fuels and accepting a culture that insists on the pursuit of profit through the exploitation of people and the environment. By acting in solidarity with community struggles we can stop this – there’s nothing else to be doing but digging up roads and building barricades.”

Those occupying the site have vowed to stay as long as possible, and resist any attempts to remove them. Doug Well, who is resisting eviction in a fortified tunnel, said:

“We’ve been here for so long now, and we really don’t want to leave. If this mine goes ahead it really will be a tragedy for the local people and for the climate. I’m going to do everything I can to make it as hard as possible for them to remove me.”

The eviction will take a few days, and there is still lots to do. The camp still needs your support, so try and make it to mainshill if you can. Contact site phone 07806926040 .

For interviews from the camp including people in defences please ring: 07500163480
Website: www.mainshill.noflag.org.uk

Notes:

(1) Lord Home is Chairman of Coutt’s bank, the corporate wing of RBS, and is currently being investigated for alleged fraud. See http://www.nowpublic.com/world/coutts-bank-chairman-lord-home-named-carr…
(2) A protest camp at Dalkeith in 2006 cost £1.9 million and took 11 days to evict.
(3) Information on the health impacts of open cast mines can be found in the Douglasdale Edition of the Coal Health Study online: http://coalhealthstudy.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/douglasdale_v42.pdf
(4) The Douglas Community Council has been staunchly against the open cast and has supported the Mainshill Solidarity Camp since the start, http://www.douglascommunitycouncil.info.

by Ben Zolno

Why the hell talk about coal mining on a Permaculture site?  Especially a solutions-oriented blog?

Because you can’t permify land that’s no longer there.

The first step to Permaculture is observation of a site — TAPO or PATO, aka Thoughtful and Protracted Observation.  Imagine observing that the water on your new land is unusable because of coal mining pollution from up stream.  Imagine getting cancer from the toxic chemical floating through the air that lands on your tomatoes.  F all that — Imagine your land ripped away by coal mining companies with politicians in their pocket.  Imagine your land exploding, your soil being dumped into the creek.

How’s your Permaculture working now?  The answer is “not at all,” because you didn’t join the fight to stop one of the biggest environmental atrocities of our time — Mountain Top Removal.

Rainforest Action Network’s theatrical, viral action (like below)  gets the word out.  Huge banks do not have to be convinced to stop funding.  Just the right people at those banks, and this is a small chip in embarrassing those people.  Get your hands dirty — spread the word via your facebooky twittery thingies.

See more about the event at Yes Men’s site and more about MTR Action Day on October 30.

More about Mountain Top Removal.

KlimaForum09

KlimaForum09

Klimaforum09 is your climate summit, the global civil society counterpart of the official UN conference in the Bella Center.

While the UN conference will be a platform for political decision making, Klimaforum09 gathers citizens from all corners of the world to create a socially just and sustainable future.

The idea behind Klimaforum09 is to create an open space, where people, movements and organizations can develop constructive solutions to the climate crisis.

Klimaforum09 is based on the belief that meeting the climate challenge requires more than just new technologies fixes and ‘business as usual’ practices. New ways of thinking, new cultural values, and new ways of organizing society are called for.

Thousands of participants from all continents are expected to take part in Klimaforum09. Special efforts are being made to invite people from regions in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and Oceania who will suffer most from climate change.

The klimaforum09 programme offers a wide variety of workshops, debates, exhibitions, and cultural events focusing on climate change from a global perspective.

Klimaforum09 opens 7 December and ends 18 December. The summit takes place in large, modern facilities at DGI-byen close to the Central Station.

Klimaforum09 is organized by a broad coalition of Danish and international environmental movements and civil society organizations.

Klimaforum09 is free and open to all

Source: Klimaforum09


At Climate Camp UK, in London, we kept getting asked “where we going to Copenhagen (for COP15 and to get involved in the network of Climate Justice Action ?”. The answer eventually was “we would like to, if we could afford it and had something serious to do!”. We developed a couple of ideas, one was a Climate Social Forum, in the World Social Forum principles and process.

After a little enquiry was informed there is government funded civil-society forum: Klimaforum09, which sounds rather like the European Social Forum, Malmo 2008 in its left-establishment (vertical-left) support. On the surface its structured like a World Social Forum, but under-the-hood, its a government funded conference for NGO’s, an extension of Nordic soft-power public-diplomacy.

However the Kilmaforum2009’s 9 themes and the attending organisations are right-on and would love to work-out how to go and work on Gaia Permaculture and the Permaculture Worker Cooperative Movement projects. The Klimaforum2009 creator is a Danish permaculturalist: Tony Anderson. So, its an amazing opportunity, will try to reconnect with Malmo solidarity accommodation types and contact  the Nordic permaculture contingent, and the Klimaforum online forum.

Glocalisation of climate

My major unresolved question with solutions, revolves on this reflexive obsession with localisation. It’s a kind of allergic reaction to the Washington Consensus modality of globalisation. Pure localisation just wont work. Globalisation is real; climate, weather, migration of organisms including people, trade etc. We live on a planet with a global climate.

Are we going to localise climate? It's a nonsense.

The mindless business mantra of “Think Globally, Act Locally” is largely to blame. Corporations and the rich don’t limit themselves to this, they Think Globally and Act Globally. They Think Locally and Act Locally. Everyone knows the edge between the global and local is the most corrupt level of government, its the place where organised crime operates, dodgy planning occurs, corporations do things, see The Power Elite. Indeed there is a term; Glocalisation

Organisation needs to come from below but continue to the global level. We saw very large worker cooperative industrial democracy at Mondragon: from team to very large groups of 100 000s. It is possible to organise modern, industrial society with democratic decision-making and ownership. We need more highly organised social and economic arrangements. The anarcho-syndicalists also did it in Spain before betrayal by the liberal democracies, Socialists and Communists.

Democracy is a fractal. It can work on all scales and all systems.

One very promising discovery, which could be a lead-in to Gaia Permaculture is the plan developed by Tony Anderson and the Scandanavian Permaculture network for the Øresund Bioregion and the global plan for 10 000 trees.

Animals migrate yearly, organisms move. So do people. We need technology, transport, communications etc. While COP15 progresses inside, Kilmaforum09 runs outside. COP15 is top-down, and Kilmaforum09 is bottom-up. But where do they meet ? The place where globalisation meets localisation is where corporations, the rich and the powerful control the present and the future. One of the reasons localisation is so popular is that its is so harmless and diffuses energies away from real political economic change into gardening. As Mollison said, ad nauseum, permaculture is more than a gardening system. Again, keep coming back to Gaia Permaculture wiki project. Me thinks the Rose Room will be good for developing the wiki.

Source: GaiaPermaculture.com

Climate Camp TV

Lunatic scientific schemes to stop climate change which help corporations evade effective action.

Author: Hugh Warrick, ecologist and author
Source: Climate Camp TV

The Emperor’s New Climate: Geoengineering as 21st century fairytale

Etc Group, Canada: The Emperor’s New Climate: Geoengineering as 21st century fairytale

Media Blitz: Increase in PublicationsImage Source: The Emperor’s New Climate: Geoengineering as 21st century fairytale

The idea of re-engineering the entire planet (geoengineering) used to be the stuff of science fiction, but in the past few years a small group of geoengineering enthusiasts has worked hard to give it a veneer of respectability. On 1st September, they will have succeeded in getting the world’s oldest scientific academy, the UK’s Royal Society, to legitimize dangerous planet-tinkering schemes with minimal transparency and even less public participation.

The Royal Society’s Geoengineering Study

The Royal Society, 28 Aug 2009, Stop emitting CO2 or geoengineering could be our only hope

The future of the Earth could rest on potentially dangerous and unproven geoengineering technologies unless emissions of carbon dioxide can be greatly reduced, the latest Royal Society report has found.

Geoengineering the climate: science, governance and uncertainty (Adobe PDF File, 3855kb)

Geoengineering the climate: Science, governance and uncertainty (published today,1st September, by the Royal Society) found that unless future efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are much more successful than they have been so far, additional action in the form of geoengineering will be necessary if we are to cool the planet. Geoengineering technologies were found to be very likely to be technically possible and some were considered to be potentially useful to augment the continuing efforts to mitigate climate change by reducing emissions. However, the report identified major uncertainties regarding their effectiveness, costs and environmental impacts.

Image: Geoengineering the climate, The Royal Society

Image: Geoengineering the climate, The Royal Society

Professor Shepherd added, “None of the geoengineering technologies so far suggested is a magic bullet, and all have risks and uncertainties associated with them. It is essential that we strive to cut emissions now, but we must also face the very real possibility that we will fail. If “Plan B” is to be an option in the future, considerable research and development of the different methods, their environmental impacts and governance issues must be undertaken now. Used irresponsibly or without regard for possible side effects, geoengineering could have catastrophic consequences similar to those of climate change itself. We must ensure that a governance framework is in place to prevent this.”

Land use and afforestation

Land use and afforestation the report found that land use management could and should play a small but significant role in reducing the growth of atmospheric CO2 concentrations. However the scope for applying this technique would be limited by land use conflicts, and all the competing demands for land must be considered when assessing the potential for afforestation and reforestation.

Biochar doubts

Biochar (CDR technique) the report identified significant doubts relating to the potential scope, effectiveness and safety of this technique and recommended that substantial research would be required before it could be considered for eligibility for UN carbon credits.

Source: The Royal Society, London

International Biochar Initiative – corporate geoengineering

147 environmental organizations are protesting the danger of biochar megaprojects (see ClimateArk). Negotiators at Bonn talks in April leading up to Copenhagen COP-15 were urged by IBI lobbyists to allow industrial biochar projects under CDM — part of the new round of “casino capitalism” that cap-and-trade threatens. Ecologists warn that
(1) vast areas of land could be converted to new plantations, repeating and deepening the agrofuel vs food crisis,
(2) small farmers would be driven off their lands, and
(3) major polluters will continue their earth-threatening activities, while collecting carbon credits.

The “industrial-biochar” lobby includes IES, GLOBE-EU, GLOBE-EUROPE, the European Economic and Social Committee and EurActiv, Biochar Europe (which includes Shell, JP Morgan Chase, a carbon offsetting company, and the Centre for Rural Innovations), Dynamotive, Best Energies, Eprida, Heartland Bioenergy. Friends among the COP-15 states are the business-friendly Australian Liberal opposition. governing NZ Nationals and Canada’s Conservatives, Brazil’s Embrapa, the Indonesian palm oil association (GAPKI), and the Bolivian Agribusiness company Desarollos Agricolas.

Unfortunately, university researchers (with eyes on large corporate funders) as well as climate scientists James Hansen, Johannes Lehmann, Peter Read, and Tim Flannery also support the International Biochar Initiative IBI), which cleverly uses small projects to camouflage its mammoth geo-engineering plans.

Source: Quaker Earthcare Witness

McGaia – corporate family friendly geo-engineering

The WSJ – once a bastion of climate change deniers – recently published a feature lift-out explicitly acknowledging the threat of global warming and environmental crisis: The Need for Geoengineering.

The authors solution is global, corporate, geo-engineering. The problem isn’t that we have not “engineered” too much, we have not “engineered” enough. You can hear the same arguments from the far-right – and increasingly liberals and blue-greens – on all kinds of issues. The problem isn’t with capitalism, or conservatism. The problem is that we haven’t engineered the planet enough. We haven’t been conservative enough, capitalist enough. The problem isn’t that we shouldn’t be fighting in Iraq of AfPak, the problem is that we are not fighting harder with more troops.

The corporate geo-engineers are co-opting the momentum created by the climate change campaigners (with Al Gore the self-appointed saviour) and justifying a further expansion of human domination of the living planet.

Radical historian of science David F Noble calls this the Corporate Climate Coup (audio from Vancouver Cooperative Radio and and text from ZNET in a mashup at Permaculture TV)

  1. Corporate Climate Campaigns: Denial vs Trade – Corporate Climate Coup – Part 1
  2. Anti-Globalisation – Corporate Climate Coup – Part 2
  3. Climate Commisars & Community Climate Campaigns – Corporate Climate Coup – Part 3

RAND corporation had a military analyst research and publish a couple of papers on the potential for perennial polyculture to be used to save the environment and create employment: Seeds of Another Agricultural. Revolution?.

His conclusion was that it might be difficult to find a place for perennial polyculture in todays market place.

However, with the growth of corporate “fair-trade” branding such as Mc Donalds fair-trade coffee, and the awareness raising of such movies as Food Inc, perennial polyculture will become a value-add for corporations looking for environmental sustainability and better branding. A recent book, by University of Davis couple, have managed to “marry their separate fields to argue logically for the use of GM technologies to improve organic agriculture” Tomorrow’s Table: Organic Farming, Genetics, and the Future of Food

So the elements are being assembled for a McGaia future. A family friendly, geo-, genetic & socially engineered organic perennial polyculture planet.

Unless resistance and alternatives are created, such as worker-cooperatives, popular inquiries, community associations etc, a nested, fractaline organisation of work and community democracy, we will find that corporations are perfectly able to adapt and co-opt the techniques that have been nurtured by the permaculture and associated movements.

As Mollison says, permaculture is more than a gardening system. Its about fair share, people and earth care.

Chomsky recently spoke Noam Chomsky on the Past 10 Years: Seattle ‘99 to WSF to Climate in ‘09 and said that it is up to us to decide if that extends to international solidarity and a global system of management that integrates and coordinates democracy in the community and the workplace from the bottom-up.

We can choose between a hellish ecocide (ecological disaster), a McGaia sustainment (military-industrial sustainability) or a global framework of Gaia Permaculture. A framework which gives rights to all of nature, including the poor, and especially the living ecologies.

Source: Climate War

Kirstie, Nick and Jake where interviewed for Climate Camp TV (a colloboration between the Climate Camp documentation team and VisionOn.TV) regarding the Scottish Camp for Climate Action, the Mainshill Solidarity Camp and also the Coal Health Study (Scotland Edition)

Last night at the Climate Camp UK plenary, there where a number of excellent speakers and an animated and informed discussion about neoliberal capitalism and its resistance and alternative social economies such as cooperative networks etc.

It made me think there needs to be a Permaculture Worker Cooperative Movement. A 72 hour intensive permaculture worker cooperative course, body of knowledge etc. As Arizmendi, the priest founder of Mondragon said “its an education movement with an economic model, not an economic movement with an education component” (paraphrased, check quote)

One of the most salient points by a speaker from the audience was that in 1381 when the Peasants Revolt met on the same site in Blackheath (one of the last Commons in the UK), the peasants/serfs demanded the protections of wage labour. This demand set the stage for capitalism. The speakers point was that now, wage slavery (whereby most people are so poor that they must rent themselves to the system to survive) must be abolished for a system of free labor. Chomsky and many others point out that free labor is only afforded by those who can pay for their own work, that Lincoln, Jefferson and many others wanted free labor rather than a factory system of wage labor.

The Whitechapel Anarchists (Annoying Peasants) have some interesting and amusing critique of the Climate Camp UK 2009: Annoying Peasants

In short, it was a session that hit the key points of most of the Permaculture Worker Cooperative ideas.

It seems that the social economies of south America are way ahead in this. No wonder Chomsky’s newest book is on this topic: Hopes and Prospects. So too are the Radical Routes worker cooperative.

Regarding Climate Camp UK 2009, check-out the Blackheath Bugle and if you are really stuck the Climate Camp UK website

Source: Permaculture Cooperative project on Gaia Permaculture

Video Source: Climate Camp UK 2009


VIDEO STATEMENT from anonymous activists: Douglas Coal Conveyor Sabotage Commentary from Mainshill Solidarity Camp and the Scottish Camp for Climate Action

By careful, non-violent direct-action, activists have drawn attention to the plight of the people and countryside who are suffering under the neglect of the felonous lord David Home.

Prince Charles has declared a “war” on climate change, and a world war style mobilisation. “Perhaps we should see this as a war we simply have to win – and in wartime it is remarkable how solutions can be found to challenges that were previously considered insolvable.”

In the 21st century non-violent direct-action spirit of Black Douglas and William Wallace, the Scottish Camp for Climate Action and Mainshill Solidarity Camp are answering the call by Prince Charles and other world leaders for mobilisation to fight the climate war.

The activists have mobilised like true patriots – educating and informing through non-violent direct-action – while The Ghost Lord David Home has become the climate war enemy.

Chief amongst the local and global climate war enemies are the felonous lord David Home.

David Home has triggered the ancient laws of forfeiture; to titles, estates and property. For treasonous actions against the people, country, earth and future. Encyclopedia Britannica, 1911 Edition

When Prince Charles and other royals visit David Home this week for the start of the hunting season, will Prince Charles threaten David Home with the forfeiture for treason ? To avoid the status of felonous lord, Prince Charles ought instruct David Home to resign his peerage and seek election in the House of Commons as did David Home’s Prime Minister father.

David Cameron, related to royalty, son of a Scottish financier and leader of The Conservative Party should be accept environment advisor Zac Goldsmiths advice and seek David Home to return Mainshill to the people and lands of Douglasdale and cease further open-cast mining on his estates.

The camp and direct-actions received endsorsement from George Monbiot of The Guardian who says that “Scottish climate policy is hypocritical, contradictory and counter-productive“.

The Scottish government boasts of stringent targets to cuts emissions while squeezing North Sea oil reserves and approving new opencast coal mines. No wonder people are taking into their own hands to highlight this hypocrisy.

But while the government undermines its own targets, some people in Scotland are putting its climate change policy into effect. The Scottish camp for climate action has declared war on opencast coalmining. Yesterday people associated with it did what the government should have done years ago, and cut the conveyor belt used to carry coal from the Glentaggart pit in Lanarkshire to the local rail terminal.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/aug/07/monbiot-scotland-climate-policy

QUESTIONS about David Alexander Cospatrick Douglas-Home, 15th Earl of Home

Should The Ghost Lord be stripped of his titles, lose his estates, and go to jail for crimes against humanity, nature, the future ? by ancient laws of forfeiture Lord Home may be a felonous Lord as he is destroying the aristocratic lands, the health and welfare of his vassals (the people of Douglas), the future of the people of the United Kingdom through the widely recognised dangers of abrupt climate change ?

Forfeiture: is there a case for forfeiture of Lord Home’s titles, property and freedom for the high treason he is committing against the common people of his feudal fief, which by morality and law he is lord and protector

Will Prince Charles – the green and organic prince – continue to bank and socialise with a man that prefers profit over his people, his lands and his aristocratic responsibilities ?

Will Lord Home follow the foot-steps of his father and resign his titles and seek election for public office, or he far too unpopular for such a democratic action ? is David Home not only shaming Black Douglas but also the democratic credentials of his father ?

would his ancestors be turning in there graves? Would Black Douglas and Robert the Bruce be David Home’s ancestors be turning in their graves in the church in Douglas if they knew what Lord Home is doing to the good people and place of Douglas today ?

The ascendent Conservative’s have been winning local election in the south of the UK in England under the leadership of David Cameron with The Ecologist’s Zac Goldsmith as environmental advisor. Will Conservative Leader David Cameron, whose father was a Scottish financier continue to welcome Lord Home in the Conservative Party ? The Conservatives have been winning local council elections with a platform of Vote Blue Go Green. Will Zac Goldsmith of The Ecologist advise The Conservative’s to force Lord Home to reverse his decision to continue and expand open-cut coal mining ? How can the Scottish Conservatives expect to win more Scottish seats in the next general election when Lord Home continues to make a mockery of the Vote Blue Go Green platform ? According to Margaret Thatcher, New Labor was her greatest achievement, will the probable Conservative government continue and expand the corruption, hypocrisy

Lord Home is son of former Conservative Party Prime Minister and Conservative Party Life Peer in the House of Lords. The Times of London is investigating House of Lords expenses scandals and serious questions are being raised about suppressed investigations in Lord Homes.

Prince Charles, Prince William and Prince William are regular visitors to Lord Homes estate in Douglas for shooting and “conservation”. Visits to open-cast coal mines are not provided to blood-sport visitors at David Home’s estates.

The first campaign, dominant throughout the 1990′s, suffered somewhat from exposure and became relatively moribund early in the Bush II era, albeit without losing influence within the White House (and the Prime Minister’s Office). The second, having contributed to the diffusion of a radical movement, has succeeded in generating the current hysteria about global warming, now safely channeled into corporate-friendly agendas at the expense of any serious confrontations with corporate power. Its media success has aroused the electorate and compelled even die-hard deniers to disingenuously cultivate a greener image. Meanwhile, and most important, the two opposing campaigns have together effectively obliterated any space for rejecting them both.

In the late 1980′s the world’s most powerful corporations launched their “globalization” revolution, incessantly invoking the inevitable beneficence of free trade and, in the process, relegating environmental issues to the margins and reducing the environmentalist movement to rearguard actions. Interest in climate change nevertheless continued to grow. In 1988, climate scientists and policymakers established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) to keep abreast of the matter and issue periodic reports. At a meeting in Toronto three hundred scientists and policy-makers from forty-eight countries issued a call for action on the reduction of CO2 emissions. The following year fifty oil, gas, coal, and automobile and chemical manufacturing companies and their trade associations formed the Global Change Coalition (GCC), with the help of public relations giant Burson-Marsteller. Its stated purpose was to sow doubt about scientific claims and forestall political efforts to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. The GCC gave millions of dollars In political contributions and in support of a public relations campaign warning that misguided efforts to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions through restrictions on the burning of fossil fuels would undermine the promise of globalization and cause economic ruin. GCC efforts effectively put the climate change issue on hold.

ccs-sticker

Meanwhile, following an indigenous uprising in Chiapas in January, 1994, set for the first day of the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement. the anti-globalization movement erupted in world-wide protest against market capitalism and corporate depredation, including the despoiling of the environment. Within five years the movement had grown in cohesion, numbers, momentum and militancy and coalesced in designated “global days of action” around the world, particularly in direct actions at G8 summits and meetings of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the new World Trade Organization, reaching its peak in shutting down the WTO meetings in Seattle in November, 1999. The movement, which consisted of a wide range of diverse grass-roots organizations united in opposition to the global “corporate agenda,” shook the elite globalization campaign to its roots. It was in this charged context that the signatories of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. which had been formulated by representatives from 155 nations at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, met at the end of 1997 In Kyoto and established the so-called Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through carbon targets and trading. The Kyoto treaty, belatedly ratified only in late 2004, was the sole international agreement on climate change and immediately became the bellwether of political debate about global warming.

Corporate opposition anticipated Kyoto. In the summer of 1997 the U.S. Senate passed a unanimous resolution demanding that any such treaty must include the participation end compliance of developing countries, particularly emerging economic powers like China, India, and Brazil, which were nevertheless excluded in the first round of the Kyoto Protocol. Corporate opponents of Kyoto in the GCC, with the swelling global justice movement as a back-drop, condemned the treaty as a “socialist” or “third-world” plot against the developed countries of the West.

kyoto-protocol-jj-001

The convergence of the global justice movement and Kyoto, however, prompted some of the elite to rethink and regroup, which created a split in corporate ranks regarding the issue of climate change. Defections from the GCC began in 1997 and within three years had come to include such major players as Dupont, BP, Shell, Ford, Daimler-Chrysler, and Texaco. Among the last GCC hold-outs were Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, and General Motors. (In 2000, the GCC finally went out of business but other like-minded corporate front organizations were created to carry on the “negative” campaign, which continues.)

Those who split off from the GCC quickly coalesced in new organizations. Among the first of these was the Pew Center for Global Climate Change, funded by the philanthropic offering of the Sun Oil/Sunoco fortune. The board of the new Center was chaired by Theodore Roosevelt IV, great grandson of the Progressive Era president (and conservation icon) and managing director of the Lehman Brothers investment banking firm. Joining him on the board were the managing director of the Castle-Harlan investment firm and the former CEO of Northeast Utilities, as well as veteran corporate lawyer Frank E. Loy, who had been the Clinton administration’s chief negotiator on trade and climate change.

At its inception the Pew Center established the Business Environmental Leadership Council, chaired by Loy. Early council members included Sunoco, Dupont, Duke Energy, BP, Royal Dutch/Shell, Duke Energy, Ontario Power Generation, DTE (Detroit Edison), and Alcan. Marking their distance from the GCC, the Council declared “we accept the views of most scientists that enough is known about the science and environmental impacts of climate change for us to take actions to address the consequences;” “Businesses can and should take concrete steps now in the U.S. and abroad to assess opportunities for emission reductions. . . and invest in new, more efficient products, practices, and technologies.” The Council emphasized that climate change should be dealt with through “market-based mechanisms” and by adopting “reasonable policies,” and expressed the belief “that companies taking early action on climate strategies and policy will gain sustained competitive advantage over their peers.”

Early in 2000, “world business leaders” convening at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland declared that “climate change is the greatest threat facing the world.” That fall, many of the same players, including Dupont, BP, Shell, Suncor, Alcan, and Ontario Power Generation, as well as the French aluminum manufacturer Pechiney, joined forces with the U.S. advocacy group Environmental Defense to form the Partnership for Climate Action. Like-minded Environmental Defense directors included the Pew Center’s Frank Lay and principals from the Carlyle Group, Berkshire Partners, and

market-valuest_trends09_presentation_final

Morgan Stanley and the CEO of Carbon Investments. Echoing the Pew Center mission, and barely a year after the “Battle of Seattle” had shut down the World Trade Organization in opposition to the corporate globalization regime, the new organization reaffirmed its belief in the beneficence of market capitalism. “The primary purpose of the Partnership is to champion market-based mechanisms as a means of achieving early and credible action on reducing greenhouse gas emissions that is efficient and cost-effective.” Throughout its initial announcement this message was repeated like a mantra: “the benefits of market mechanisms,” “market-oriented rules,” “market-based programs can provide the means to simultaneously achieve both environmental protection and economic development goals,” “the power of market mechanisms to contribute to climate change solutions.” In the spring of 2002, the Partnership’s first report proudly stated that the companies of the PCA are in the vanguard of the new field of greenhouse gas management.” “The PCA is not only achieving real reductions in global warming emissions,” the report noted, “but also providing a body of practical experience, demonstrating how 10 reduce pollution while continuing to profit.”

The Kingsnorth Defence – A Time Comes

This new film by internationally acclaimed director Nick Broomfield celebrates the spirit of direct action. It focuses on 6 Greenpeace volunteers who in 2008 were tried and acquitted for shutting down Kingsnorth power station in the UK, in protest at the government’s plans to build a new generation of dirty coal-fired power plants. Their thoughtfully staged defense included testimony from a NASA Director and leading climate scientist, and from environmentalist Zac Goldsmith.

Source: BrtGrnPic

ccs-sticker

The Camp for Climate Action in Scotland starts Next Week!

Join us for a week of low-impact living and high-impact direct action!
From the 3rd to the 10th of August bring yourself and your friends to put
a stop to the root causes of climate change and ecological collapse.

Together we will take action to shut down polluting industry, while living
sustainably in a horizontally organised camp.

What’s happening at the camp:

The camp will provide a base for people to meet, train and take action. If
you’re coming with a group of friends that’s great – we’ll help you choose
targets and actions, and if you’re coming alone there will be plenty of
opportunity to meet other people and work out a plan.

The camp will be horizontally organising, and be as sustainable as
possible so expect compost toilets, grey water systems and micro-renewable
energy. There will be kitchens to make vegan food, and there will be
workshops, skill shares, and more.

Bring what you want to see! If you want to put on anything at the camp let
us know, and we’ll try and support you with any materials or info that you
need.

How to get to the camp:

The location of the site will be announced just before the start of the
camp – check the website (http://www.climatecampscotland.org.uk) or phone
the info number: 07755 3215473

If you are coming by public transport get yourself to Edinburgh Waverley
or Glasgow Central train stations and be prepared to travel – info-points
will tell you where to go next. There will be shuttle buses from the
nearest train/bus station to the camp.

What to bring to the camp:

A tent, sleeping bag and carry mat and anything else you’d take camping.
Be prepared for rain, sun and biting insects! Sun cream and mosquito
repellent will make life much more enjoyable. But most importantly, bring
all of your friends!

What not to bring to the camp:

Pen-knives – the cops love using them as an excuse to harass us so let’s
not let them. Anything you don’t want found on you if searched.

If you want more information or to get in touch, go to
http://climatecampscotland.org.uk/ or email us on
climatecampscotland@riseup.net

See you there!

Climate Camp Scotland

http://climatecampscotland.org.uk/ or email us on
climatecampscotland@riseup.net

Leading climate scientist arrested in coal protests

“I am not a politician; I am a scientist and a citizen,” said Dr. James Hansen. “Politicians may have to advocate for halfway measures if they choose. But it is our responsibility to make sure our representatives feel the full force of citizens who speak for what is right, not what is politically expedient. Mountaintop removal, providing only a small fraction of our energy, should be abolished.”

James Hansen statement via the Rainforest Action Network

Democratic process is undermined by lobbying of corporations — direct action and protest the only solution

Protest and direct action could be the only way to tackle soaring carbon emissions, a leading climate scientist has said.

James Hansen, a climate modeller with NASA, told the Guardian today that corporate lobbying has undermined democratic attempts to curb carbon pollution. “The democratic process doesn’t quite seem to be working,” he said.
Source: James Hansen, The Guardian

James E. Hansen (born March 29, 1941 in Denison, Iowa) heads the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City, a part of the Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, Earth Sciences Division. He has held this position since 1981. He is also an adjunct professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia University.

G20 Climate protests – European Carbon Exchange

First the city traders speculated with our homes, jobs and money – with disastrous results. Now they are speculating with our climate and the very future of life on earth – and once again our governments are cheering them on.

By creating a brain-bending system of carbon pollution licenses, fossil fuel companies and trading firms have found a way to keep on churning out global warming gases and to reap huge windfall profits at the same time. Meanwhile, the UK government is justifying a third runway at Heathrow and a coal-fired power station at Kingsnorth by saying that these new “carbon trading” schemes will magically make all their emissions vanish.

They are handing control of our climate over to the same people and systems that caused the financial collapse. All the workable and fair alternatives aren’t getting a look-in.

Source: Climate Camp UK 2009

Carbon Subprime ? Friends of the Earth


Michelle Chan, Friends of the Earth: Rethinking the World’s Largest Derivative Market
Source: Friends of the Earth

The newest climate lobby — and potentially one of the most powerful in years to come — is the financial industry. If ACES is signed into law, the global carbon market could become the largest commodity market in the world. According to Bart Chilton, Commissioner of the U.S. Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), “The potential size and scope of a structured carbon emissions market in the US is unequivocally vast. It is certainly possible that the emissions markets could overtake all other commodity markets.”

A growing number of analysts are expressing concerns about the emergence of a new financial climate lobby and the potential for gaming in a new U.S. carbon market. A recent report by Friends of Earth (FOE), “Subprime Carbon,” argued that cap and trade proposals like ACES could create a system with similar financial and political interests to the housing market bubble. Just as financial practices during the housing bubble caused deteriorating standards in mortgages, cap and trade could create “subprime” carbon offsets — offsets that do not represent actual emission reductions and carbon derivatives based on future carbon reductions with high risk of not being fulfilled.

Source: Terryn Norris, Huffington Post

Corporate Climate Coup

Meanwhile, following an indigenous uprising in Chiapas in January, 1994, set for the first day of the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement. the anti-globalization movement erupted in world-wide protest against market capitalism and corporate depredation, including the despoiling of the environment. Within five years the movement had grown in cohesion, numbers, momentum and militancy and coalesced in designated “global days of action” around the world, particularly in direct actions at G8 summits and meetings of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the new World Trade Organization, reaching its peak in shutting down the WTO meetings in Seattle in November, 1999.

The movement, which consisted of a wide range of diverse grass-roots organizations united in opposition to the global “corporate agenda,” shook the elite globalization campaign to its roots. It was in this charged context that the signatories of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. which had been formulated by representatives from 155 nations at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, met at the end of 1997 In Kyoto and established the so-called Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through carbon targets and trading. The Kyoto treaty, belatedly ratified only in late 2004, was the sole international agreement on climate change and immediately became the bellwether of political debate about global warming.

The first campaign, which took shape in the late 1980’s as part of the triumphalist “globalization” offensive, sought to confront speculation about climate change head-on by denying, doubting, deriding, and dismissing distressing scientific claims which might put a damper on enthusiasm for expansive capitalist enterprise. It was modelled after and …  Read Moreto some extent built upon the earlier campaign by the tobacco industry to sow skepticism about mounting evidence of the deleterious health-effects of smoking. In the wake of this “negative” propaganda effort, any and all critics of climate change and global warming have been immediately identified with this side of the debate.

The second positive campaign, which emerged a decade later, in the wake of Kyoto and at the height of the anti-globalization movement, sought to get out ahead of the environmental issue by affirming it only to hijack it and turn it to corporate advantage. Modelled on a century of corporate liberal cooptation of popular reform movements and regulatory regimes, it aimed to appropriate the issue in order to moderate its political implications, thereby rendering it compatible with corporate economic, geopolitical, and ideological interests. The corporate climate campaign thus emphasized the primacy of “market-based” solutions while insisting upon uniformity and predictability in mandated rules and regulations.

At the same time it hyped the global climate issue into an obsession, a totalistic preoccupation with which to divert attention from the radical challenges of the global justice movement. In the wake of this campaign, any and all opponents of the “deniers” have been identified – and, most importantly, have wittingly or unwittingly identified themselves – with the corporate climate crusaders.

If President Barack Obama wants to stop the descent toward dangerous global climate change, and avoid the trade anarchy that current approaches to this problem will invite, he should take Al Gore’s proposal for a carbon tax and make it global. A tax on CO2 emissions — not a cap-and-trade system — offers the best prospect of meaningfully engaging China and the U.S., while avoiding the prospect of unhinged environmental protectionism

The row over the working of the European Union’s emissions trading scheme intensified last night when EDF Energy warned that speculators risked turning carbon into a new category of sub-prime investment.

Vincent de Rivaz, the chief executive of the UK arm of the French-owned gas and electricity group, said politicians and regulators needed to revisit the way the ETS was working and whether it was bringing the results they wanted. “We like certainty about a carbon price,” he said. “[But] the carbon price has to become simple and not become a new type of sub-prime tool which will be diverted from what is its initial purpose: to encourage real investment in real low-carbon technology.”

Green campaigners have long been critical of the way the emissions trading scheme was set up, but it is unusual for a leading industry figure to cast doubt on it, as power companies lobbied hard for a market mechanism to deal with global warming.

Europe’s carbon trading scheme has proved to be “disastrous” and a “scam” in which companies have profited with no effect on emissions, a leading politician and a scientist said yesterday.

The environmentalist James Lovelock — who developed the Gaia theory of the planet as a “living organism” — and the former environment minister, Michael Meacher, said that market approaches to green issues, such as the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), were destined to be distorted by business pressures. Lovelock described similar market mechanisms that attempt to put a price on “services” provided by the natural world as akin to “slavery”.

More on Corporate Climate Coup

© 2010 Permaculture TV free video cooperative Suffusion WordPress theme by Sayontan Sinha