On November 28th, another round of climate negotiations started and so far, the prospects are bleak. Canada, has received international attention for rejecting Kyoto and refusing to sign onto another commitment period. On the first day of the negotiations, Canada earned the First Place Fossil of the Day for failing to support a Second Commitment Period for the Kyoto Protocol, and abandoning its current participation in Kyoto. It also took Second Place Fossil due to Environment Minister Peter Kent’s open refusal to make a ‘guilt payment’ to poorer countries, despite the  role of Canadian tar sands oil in rising greenhouse gas pollution. The United Kingdom received Third Place for helping to move tar sands oil into Europe.

A new Occupy movement has just started up for COP17 in Durban. They are seeking to protest against the further entrenchment of the carbon market and trading as a solution to climate change. They have poignantly stated  that ” [the] very same people responsible for the global financial crisis are poised to seize control of our atmosphere, land, forests, mountains and waterways. They want to institute carbon markets that will make billions of dollars for the elite few, whilst stealing land and resources from the many. We need to organise to protect the planet and safeguard those who depend on and defend our ecosystems.” Follow them or join their occupation of the COP by visiting http://occupycop17.com/

The Adaptation Fund of the UNFCCC has placed a call out for photos on adaptation. Anyone can apply and the winners will be announced in Durban at COP17. York University will have a delegation at COP17, so please let us know if you have a photo you’d like to submit.

The Competition focuses on adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change, which is defined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), as the adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities (IPCC Third Assessment Report, Climate Change 2001)

The deadline for submission is November 22nd, 2011. Late entries will not be accepted. An entry is considered only if received by the photos must be submitted electronically to the Adaptation Fund Board Secretariat secretariat@adaptation-fund.org.

For more information on submitting your entry, please visit:

http://www.adaptation-fund.org/sites/default/files/AFcompetitionRules.pdf or contact our delegate Rachel Hirsch at rhirsch@yorku.ca.

This article originally appeared in the Science for Peace Bulletin, Fall 2011

Introduction

For nearly 20 years the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has been the international body responsible for addressing the global problem of climate change.  In 1990, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution formally launching negotiations towards an international climate change agreement and, on May 9, 1992, the United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was adopted (IPIECA, 2008: 2). Currently, the Convention has been signed by 191 nations. Historically, the United Nations has been the highest decision making body that nations turn to in order to come to an agreement on how to reduce global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. At the core of the UNFCCC process is the ideal of international cooperation and democratic pluralism leading to collective action to solve the problem of climate change.

This week, a number of prominent writers in the climate justice movement including James Hansen, Naomi Klein, Maude Barlow, David Suzuki, and Bill McKibben, wrote an open letter calling for civil action against the Keystone XL Pipeline. This summer, the State Department and the White House will decide whether or not to grant a certificate of ‘national interest’ to key fossil fuel producers thereby allowing the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline. The Keystone XL Pipeline will move oil from Canada’s tar sands to Texas refineries. This move would enable faster transport and increased volume of tar sand oil production. However the burning of these reserves would add approximate 200 ppm of CO2 into the atmosphere. Considering that as of October 2010,  emissions were at 389 ppm, and that 350 ppm has been advocated as the safe upper limit for CO2, this improved production capacity could lead to ‘run away’ climate change.