theClimateers

Today, I had a debrief with SustainUS to reflect on personal and organizational experiences in Copenhagen. At one point, I was asked why I went to Copenhagen and if I had specific goals for my involvement there.

I was able to answer the question, but not as eloquently as I would have liked. It is often easier for me to answer questions by telling someone else’s story. During the debrief I was also asked why the China-US Youth Forum on Climate Change that SustainUS helped organize was a highlight of my time in Copenhagen; I couldn’t find the words to explain why or how the event moved me, so I said, “watch the film I put together.” Sometimes I find that even someone else’s creation conveys my feelings better than I can: just this morning, I told friends on Facebook that this video from the UK youth explains my experience in Copenhagen better than I’ve been able to so far.

But my friend Morgan’s post on It’s Getting Hot in Here today reminded me of the importance of being able to tell my own story (and not just through video, though I find that method important in its own right). Ironically, this concept of sharing our personal stories – between US and Chinese youth and then back to our home communities about the power of doing so – is probably what made the China-US Youth Forum so special to me.

So while I take some time to find the words to tell my story, my question to you is, what is your story? Why are you involved? When did it all start? What drives you? What initially sparked you and what renews your spirit in the movement? Why are you a climateer?

Many of us who were at the UN climate negotiations in Copenhagen from December 7-19 went through a period of hibernation in week following the conference. I, for one, slept for more than 32 hours in the 48 hours that began at 12:00 p.m. on December 20th. I’d been burning the midnight oil for fifteen straight days at that point, constantly jumping from one task to the next throughout the 18-hour workdays. It was actually no great hardship to sustain such working hours during the conference; the bubble that we lived in – that of the UN conference and, more so, that of our own international youth climate movement within the conference – was teeming with energy. We fed off the energy, passion, intellect and creativity of one another to make up for lack of sleep or caloric intake.

Youth Energy Reverb during COP Prep

This is nothing new. Our movement and social movements in general have acquired great strength from the way inspiration bounces around from activist to activist, sparking or re-igniting motivation. But to experience this at COP-15 in a tiny microcosm of the greater movement was eye-opening for me, particularly in the final hours as we walked away from the negotiations without the fair, ambitious, and legally binding treaty that we’d been pushing so hard for.

A fitting and galvanizing quotation just came through on my Twitterfeed: “Many of the great achievements of the world were accomplished by tired and discouraged people who kept on working.”

While I believe it to be true that we can trudge through the lowest of lows and achieve great highs, I know it is a difficult task. Some of the farewell conversations I had with brilliant, effective young activists in Copenhagen were filled with a such a preponderance of negative emotion that, at least in the initial shock of the blow taken at the end of the negotiations, these new friends seemed to be leaving with a debilitating sense of defeat.

We are all working hard for a sustainable future, but how do we move forward using our own energy sustainably? How do we make sure we aren’t losing power as people fall out of the movement as they become too tired or too discouraged?

In the wake of COP-15, there are many facets of the international climate movement that need to be re-examined, strengthened or freshly innovated, and many great ideas have already been put forth. As we power back on after Copenhagen, let us take this opportunity to consider not just how to grow this movement but how to do so healthfully. The strategy to cultivate a healthy movement will provide the foundation for our strategies to deliver what the world needs on the US Senate floor, in Mexico City, and on the ground in communities around the world.

Generally in my blogs, I throw a set of bullet-points in right about here with my thoughts on the next steps. To be honest, I’m still a little lost and I don’t have a strong background in organizational psychology to make up for it. So let’s make a deal: I put in my 2 cents and you respond with some more ideas in the comments. Consider this a brainstorming session about some things we might want to reflect on as we burst into 2010.

1. Let’s be vocal in giving one another encouragement. The day-in-day-out fight for climate justice has its darker days (and not just in Copenhagen in December!). We not only need to highlight positivity through messaging around solutions and encouraging our leaders who are taking the right steps as Phil Aroneanu and Meg Boyle suggested, but we also must remember to share heartening words with each other. Look at the hundreds who came out of the woodwork to voice their support of the youth sit-in at the Bella Center on December 16. Showing one another that kind of love on a regular basis, after triumphs of all sizes, lifts the souls of the participants and organizers of each action. This indeed lifts the collective soul of the movement.
2. Let’s continue to recognize that everyone in the movement, whether they’ve attended one local 350.org action or three COPs, is an important player. Not everyone in the climate movement can dedicate his/her whole life to climate work. Not everyone concerned by climate change is even part of the climate movement (yet). These current and future members of the movement, however, should not just be numbers to be counted on one-off days of action, online petitions, or small fundraising drives. Our movement relies on our energy and inclusiveness; our work is not for minority rights but for the rights of all people and all life on this planet. We need to reach out, embrace the fresh ideas and engage the capacity of everyone who shares our concern for the climate.
3. Let’s remember to take care of ourselves. As COP15 prep ramped up this fall, I found myself shedding other commitments and hobbies and putting most of the rest of my life on hold until January. With the urgency of the need for global action on climate change weighing over us, it is easy to feel like climate work must always take priority. But hey, there’s still going to be work to be done after Mexico City, no matter how great the outcome. Diversity of interests and activities is healthy, and healthy members make a healthy movement. Plus, participating in other activities and taking up new hobbies opens us up to new networks (see “future members” referenced in 2). Win-win… and third win.

After writing it all out, all of these things strike me as fairly obvious, but clearly sometimes I forget to take note of them. If that’s the case for you, I hope these points were welcome reminders; if not, I hope to read your ideas on how to foster a healthy movement in 2010 in the comments.

Helicopters. Danish Police. UN Security. EVERYWHERE.

Most of the SustainUS delegation are currently inside the Bella Center, where the UN climate change negotiations, COP-15, have been taking place despite increasing limits on civil society involvement at the talks.

Outside, the Reclaim Power march reportedly has 5,000 or so marchers headed towards the Bella Center. Accredited NGOs Friends of the Earth, AVAAZ, and TckTckTck have had their accreditation suspended and were removed from the Bella Center. This may be related to a peaceful demonstration that was carried out in the Bella Center yesterday without the approval of the UNFCCC Secretariat, but the details are unclear.

Meanwhile, some folks leaving the Bella Center reportedly have been arrested pre-emptively in case they are planing to join the Reclaim Power protest. And there’s rumor that the Youth Convergence space, a workspace for accredited youth outside of the Bella Center, has been visited/raided/??? by the Danish Police. What!?

I don’t know what is going on, but this is all ridiculous.

I just wanted to blog this photo. I was sleeping in (until 8:30) for my birthday, so sadly I missed this fun SustainUS-organized event. “Don’t leave us out in the cold,” yelled US youth as delegates and others waited in security lines to get into the Bella Center. We need science-based targets – ahem 350ppm – for survival of all the world’s peoples and for a habitable planet for future generations.

Cross posted from It’s Getting Hot in Here

As 27 of my fellow SustainUSers are in Copenhagen are attending plenary sessions and planning actions with international youth from around the world, I’m holding down the fort in Washington, DC by bridging the news from Denmark to actions at home.

A friend of mine earnestly remarked today that he thought grassroots and youth organizing for COP15 was a lost cause because the real negotiating at Copenhagen, and that legislative change in the U.S. Senate happens behind closed doors between high-level decisionmakers and powerful lobbyists; that protests, petitions, and rallies are tiny blips on the political radar. And I suppose he has a point – the COP15 outcome depends highly upon decisions of key leaders, and the deep pocketbooks of special interest groups and corporations resonate at higher decibels than kids with hand-painted banners and street actions.

But he’s wrong to conclude that it’s a waste of our time. After a brief afternoon existential crisis of the importance of our collective work, I stopped to look around at all the inspiring work coming from delegates in Copenhagen and my friends all over the country. It’s easy to become apathetic or discouraged, but it takes a lot more to keep fighting the fight.

Don’t underestimate the value of expressing your two cents to your leaders – it’s money well spent! We’ve already seen a positive change in political climate from our tireless campaigns – from Obama’s willingness to engage with youth climate leaders to the growing support for 350 ppm as our new global CO2 stabilization target – and though our gains may seem incremental, they are certainly pointing in clear direction: forward.

“I have cast my lot with those who, age after age, perversely, with no extraordinary power, reconstitute the world,” writes poet Adrienne Rich. We may not have money or extraordinary power on our side, but we have our youth, creativity, energy, enthusiasm, and dedication, and no astroturf effort can buy that kind of genuine passion. Sure, even a visible Ark on the National Mall isn’t alone going to convince my Senator to vote for the Climate Bill, but it’s the combined effect of all sorts of actions happening worldwide that show our collective force.

As youth delegate Caroline points out in her dispatch from Copenhagen, it’s important for us at home to build on the momentum from our friends in Denmark to push for domestic action.  Join a rapid response team! Call your senators to voice your support for the Climate Bill!  Talk to your friends and neighbors to raise awareness about these issues to people who might not otherwise know about them! Attend a 12/12 candlelight vigil!

Tomorrow, youth activists in Copenhagen are holding a Bed-In to commemorate the assassination of John Lennon by singing a climate-adapted version of “Give Peace a Chance.” The message? Give youth a chance.

It’s an interesting time to be living as a student in Berlin, though certainly not as interesting as it was 20 years ago today when the Berlin Wall was suddenly opened. The various retrospectives and anniversary events all around the city celebrate not just the end of Communism, but also the beginning of a new era of economic and social interconnectedness. This interconnectedness that has evolved since 1989 does not stop at Berlin’s city limits or at Germany’s borders.

The Berlin Wall was the first of many obstacles to be torn down between peoples of this world. The rise of globalization in the economy, in civil society networks and in ideological groups engendered a host of new transnational issues that reshaped the security landscape. No longer could national leaders focus security efforts only on threats from other nation-states.

A new conceptualization of security began to underscore the importance of human security – the safety and well-being of people within states – as a major shaper of national security. Low standards of safety and well-being in a particular country or region can lead to instability. This instability is today perceived as an international threat to security, because of its capability, even tendency, to cross borders through increased participation in international terrorism and drastically amplified migration flows.

Today, twenty years after the fall of the wall that sparked this paradigm shift, the biggest threat to human security, and thus to national security, is climate change.

Heat-trapping gases from fossil-fuel-driven economies are leading to an unnaturally fast rise in average global temperature. If we don’t change course immediately, it’s not a hotter world alone that we have to worry about (in fact, some regions would see dramatic drops in average temperature), but rather disruptive changes in the flow of water around the globe as a result of warmer ocean currents.

Subsequent increases in frequency and intensity of natural disasters, changes in arable land and potable water distribution, and rising sea-levels swamping coastal cities would create pockets of instability that threaten to erupt into mass migration, armed conflicts, and public health calamities – all potentially grave security concerns.

It is hard to predict the exact timing and placement of such changes, in part because of complex feedback loops. This uncertainty, however, does not detract from the threat to security, but rather amplifies it as it makes specific threats harder to anticipate.

Due to its overarching nature and potential catastrophic effects on international social, political, and economic structures, climate change has been noted as one of the greatest threats to American security by the Pentagon, the State Department and eleven retired three- and four-star admirals and generals.

The risk is real and the time for action is now. World leaders will be meeting in Copenhagen, Denmark, in December to negotiate greenhouse gas emissions reductions targets and funding for adaptation to climate change impacts that are already threatening the well-being of people around the world. In the next year, the agreement reached in Copenhagen will have to be fleshed out into a legally binding treaty to minimize the impacts of climate change in the most just manner.

In the case of the fall of the Berlin Wall, international negotiations and political leadership were major players, but the heavy Iron Curtain could not have been pushed down without the pressure from citizens on all sides. Everyday people like you and me have a responsibility to future generations to hold our leaders accountable by keeping international focus on the most fundamental issue of our time.

A short exchange I had with Louise over GChat on Tuesday about more or less ignoring my school work in my masters of environmental management program here in Berlin:

Me: November = Climate Activism Month
Louise: I know, but really, every month is climate activism month.
Me: Yea, but theres a million things to do before COP. There’s no time for other stuff. This is it.
Louise: Yea.

It’s November. The pressure is on. It’s on all of the negotiators in Barcelona. It’s on US Senators. It’s just all around on. I keep seeing countdowns and hearing tcktcktck in my head. With all this pressure, I’ve been feeling pressed for time. I started logging my time, to make sure I am spending an appropriate amount of time on any one area (be it socializing, doing school work, writing blogs/op-eds, or filming/editing climate videos). Time is definitely on my mind… all the time.

So I wanted to carve out just a tiny bit of time to reflect on some important time/timing aspects influencing climate change negotiations. Let’s break it down into past, present, and future.

Past

The most important timing factor to consider here is the length of time that industrialized have been pumping man-made greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. About seventy percent of the current stocks of greenhouse gases can be attributed to historical emissions from industrialized countries. China took the title for the greatest yearly emissions about two years now when it surpassed the US. But if we look at cumulative emissions over time (or per-capita emissions), the US is still a clear leader (U-S-A, U-S-A). Sadly this is nothing to cheer about; but it is something to rally around. I’m reminded of my years of playing soccer: everyone put their hands in the middle and we chanted, “Be Agressive, B-E Aggressive, Got to B-E A-G-G-R-E-S-S-I-V-E, Aggressive, Let’s go!”

Present

That leads me to present time. It is now time for all of us – in the sense of countries or individuals – to come together, to put our hands in the middle, and be aggressive. Countries have got to be aggressive in Copenhagen to get a bold, binding, and just climate deal (even if it is first finalized in the year after COP-15). While leaders in the Senate and around the world have pushed off the time pressure, it is still time time for us, as individuals or collectively as civil society, to be aggressive in relentlessly hounding our politicians to go for the fair and binding treaty. We can lament that a legally binding deal likely won’t come out of Copenhagen, or we can look beyond COP, and see that now we just have more time to keep building pressure. We’ve been working to build that pressure in the US for the past few years, but we’ve got to keep working to make sure that everyone knows that, given our past, it’s time for the US (again, both as a state and as individuals within that state) to step up as true leaders, as the team captain leading the rallying cry to be aggressive. We’ve got to be aggressive if we’re to eek out a win for the future of our world.

Future

To pull in a cliché here, we could say children are our future – that we’ve got to be aggressive for the sake of our children. Beyond new generations, it’s hard to say what the future will bring. One thing is fairly certain, though: what we do today affects the kind of future we will one day see and the future, past our own lifetimes, that we will never see. Our actions today affect the future of the world ecologically, our future socially as a human race, our economic future, and beyond. That’s why we can’t set a fixed discount rate to determine whether climate change mitigation action is economically worthwhile. Rather, we’ve got to move on the science-defined risks and on an ethical belief that we can’t put the world at such a high level of risk, even if we ourselves will no longer be around to see the potential, dreaded outcomes of inaction or insufficient action.

As Lord Nicholas Stern said at the Technical University of Berlin yesterday, we can’t wait ten or twenty years until today’s students, who Stern called “better educated” on climate change issues, are the world’s policy-makers. We just don’t have the time to put off securing our future against dramatic climate change.

*buzzer*

And so our little time-out has expired. To tackle climate change, we’ve got to

• diffuse the threats we can already foresee by providing adequate funding for adaptation (with concrete commitments of at least 50 billion USD/year starting by 2015 and at least 100 billion USD by 2020);
• take control of the game by setting binding targets;
• create a system to transfer technology, know-how, and funding (another 100 billion USD/year by 2020) to make sure that developing countries are also valued players in the team’s mitigation efforts.

Just because world leaders (ahem, US) are pushing off a legally binding climate treaty to 2010, does not mean that our work in Copenhagen (once again, referring here both to state delegates and to youth and other climate activists) is any less important. Now it is time to carry this game plan into the last minutes of the fourth quarter to ensure we’ve got the momentum and plans necessary to secure an overtime win in 2010 for the home team – for our home, the earth.

Ready, break!

October 24, 2009, was an amazing day in Berlin and, from what I can tell, around the world at over 5200 events in 181 countries.

There were a few major events in Berlin.

1. 350, the Show. Put on by the Klimapiraten (Climate Pirates) and the Kampagne Klimakanzlerin gesucht (Climate Chancellor Sought Campaign of the Klimaallianz, GermanWatch & Avaaz), this short theatrical show in front of the Brandenburg Gate was highly successful despite some last minute changes to the program.

   The initial idea that we had was to have a casting show (like American Idol) to seek out the true Climate Chancellor, a title Angela Merkel likes to give herself despite doing little for the climate, amidst 350 people with Merkel masks on. At the end, a Climate Pirate from 2050 would deliver the true Climate Chancellor 350 roses and a note thanking her for all the right steps she took at Copenhagen in 2009 that led to a sustainable, beautiful world in 2050. I was always a bit uncertain of whether we could pull this final messaging off – how could we make it clear that we were thanking a Merkel that we’d like to see and not the real, current Merkel; how could we be sure to convey the 2050/time-traveler aspect? Luckily, in the last few days before the event, others made the decision to overhaul the program despite already sending out the press releases and mobilization emails. (I was unable to make the final planning meetings due to class and a trip to Bonn for a scholarship retreat.)

   Our new show, which I first caught word of AT the event on Saturday morning, was much easier to handle. We had our 350 volunteer Merkels as the studio audience and split inner-conscience of Angela Merkel during a studio interview. The messaging changed to “The time for uncertainty is over” and we left Merkel saying “Jein” (yes/no) at the end followed by the rest of us saying “Act! Now!” The 15-minute show was perhaps still a bit long for most reporters to take note of all the details, but the masks were great and got us in as one of the nine featured events in the New York Times slideshow. I call that success.

2. Deletion of 350 tons worth of emissions credits. At the end of the 350 show, we tagged on another action put on by the Compensators, in which they popped a balloon labelled “350t CO2″. Once popped, 350 slips of paper, each representing one ton of CO2 pollution that the Compensators and donors had purchased out of the European Union Emission Trading Scheme, flew out like confetti.
3. Carrotmob. After some tear-down and clean-up, a bunch of the Climate Pirates headed over to Eve & Adam’s organic salad and smoothie bar to enjoy a refreshing lunch. The little restaurant committed 45% of proceeds to energy efficiency improvements and boy did it pay off! Carrotmobbers enjoying any of the tasty menu items including a special carrot and ginger soup for 350 cents more than doubled the restaurant’s record daily income.
4. Silent Climate Parade. Honestly, going into this event, I was a bit skeptical and I only intended to show up, take a bit of video, and go home. I was given one of the 350 wireless Sennheiser headphones, though, and was quickly sucked in to the awesomeness of this event! The idea here was that 350 ravers listening to live techno music being played by Dr. Motte, the man behind Berlin’s famous Love Parade in the 90s, would dance and party through the streets of Berlin, from Potsdamer Platz to Alexanderplatz.

   Honestly, this was the most fun protest/action/whatever that I’ve ever participated in. Basically, it was bunch of youth partying in the middle of the main streets in downtown Berlin. Like getting into a very underground or elite club, we with headphones were rocking out to sweet jams that no one else could hear. Passers-by were quite perplexed, so we handed out 5,000 fliers explaining the event: greenhouse gas emissions are a mostly silent problem, but if we listen to the scientists, it is clear that our politicians have been too silent on the issue of climate change.

   Many of the people on Unter den Linden are tourists, so I volunteered to help deliver the German fliers and had one ear out to try to identify non-German speakers who might want an explanation in English. I talked to dozens of people, giving a full 2- or 3-minute explanation to maybe 20 people, and they were all captivated by and supportive of the Silent Climate Parade and broader 350.org message.

   A chance meeting with an old friend who lives in another part of Germany and the adrenaline rush from dancing through the streets certainly helped make this one of the best days of my life. However, I think it was seeing all the volunteers behind their Merkel masks at the Show, all the hungry activists at the Carrotmob, and all the energized youth and interested bystanders at the Silent Climate Parade – at least a thousand of us, all behind the call for 350ppm – was really what made this day a day to remember.

I was lucky enough to have had access to a wonderful new HD camcorder and edited this little highlights video together before hitting up the 350 After-party on Saturday night (also a fun time, hah). Click to view the video at Vimeo.com to see it in HD.

Berlin 350 International Day of Action Highlights from Valida Prentice on Vimeo.

Did you organize or participate in a 350 International Day of Climate Action event? How did it go?

Today, apart from going to a planning meeting for 350 October 24th Day of Action event in Berlin and preparing this post for Blog Action Day 2009, I also bought my ticket to Copenhagen. This has been a long time coming, as I’ve been considering the dual implications of my travel to COP-15 on climate change and on my pocketbook.

Image credit: http://www.magic-mural-factory.com/

Knowing that flying accounts for 2-3% of global CO2 emissions, I’ve been rather anti-flying in recent years.  To get to Germany, of course, I had no other choice (smuggling myself onto a freight boat or getting up to Alaska and then taking the trans-Siberian train across two continents weren’t really feasible… and molecular transport does not yet exist). Once I got here and had a bit of vacation time, though, I reverted to my anti-flying ways and I decided not to fly to visit a friend in Bosnia, but to carpool to Poland for a short trip instead.  Carpooling with a guy who was going to drive from Berlin to Krakow no matter what was fine:  I was just cutting out a share of his emissions.

Last week, in planning my trip up to Copenhagen for COP-15, I wanted to undertake some more serious analysis of my travel options since there seemed to be no easy answer regarding the best way to get to COP.

Here’s the dilemma:

• I wanted to spend as little money as possible;
• I wanted to minimize my CO2 footprint, as always, with a little added fervor since I’m going to Copenhagen for just that reason; it would be rather self-contradictory to not consider the greenhouse gas emissions of my travel.

This of course mirrors pretty much all problems we have with transitioning away from our dirty energy economy: $$$ vs. Environment/Ethics.  I wish I could always go with the option that made me feel the best, but alas, I too live in a world limited by the money I possess. (Side note: hopefully someday in my lifetime, solar flying is real and affordable.)

From Berlin, Copenhagen is just about 300 miles away or so, depending on the route you take. My options for getting from Berlin to Copenhagen (and back) with initial time & cost estimates were

1. Carpooling, 6-8 hours, $60-100 (In Germany, you can search for “carpool opportunities” online and then pay the driver a fee to ride with him/her to your final or intermediate destination.)
2. Flying, 3 hours (incl. transport to airport & check-in time etc.), $80-100 (incl. checked bag fee)
3. Training – 7 hours, $200-350
4. Busing – 7.5 hours, $60-95
5. Hitchhiking – 8-10+ hours, $0
6. Biking – unfortunately I’m not that fit and couldn’t miss any more days of class before the 4th of December

To be honest, when I was preparing this post last week by beginning to calculate CO2 costs, I was hoping that the math would help me justify a cheap, fast plane trip, or at least fortify my commitment to not flying with some hard numbers.

Luckily, today I found a great deal on a train ticket, just $128.44 at today’s exchange rate. This saved me from dealing with the “fuzzy math” of trying to adding up the global warming potential of radiative forcing from NOx and vapor trails from flying or the full CO2e emissions of charter buses compared to personal cars. I’m quite pleased with this outcome; train travel is widely heralded as the best form of rapid transit when it comes to environmental and climate friendliness. I don’t have to feel bad about my rather unnecessary carbon emissions from flying 300 miles and I don’t have to feel bad about not having any money for food in the world’s third most expensive city. A win for cost-consciousness and environmental-consciousness! Not to mention train travel is far more comfortable than any other form of travel that I’m familiar with.

P.S. In my search for comparative GHG emissions data for the various forms of transport, I found this great website, www.ecopassenger.org.  (Unfortunately it is only really handy for trips within Europe at this time.) Here is the info they gave me regarding energy resource consumption and CO2, particulate matter, NOx, and non-methane hydrocarbon emissions.

The graphs above assume European average number of fill seats on European train and plane trips and two passengers in the car; if I up the number of passengers to three, the CO2 and Energy Consumption figures of car travel begin to be more comparable with train travel and become smaller than train travel at four or more passengers. 30 miles of ferry travel is not included in the car mileage, helping make this car trip a bit more competitive with train travel than on other routes.

Really big side note on additionality

The question here is, if I select one of these options, will the CO2 emissions from the other choices disappear? Or would my travel with those options not really be “additional” – that is, if I chose not to travel with any of the above choices, will those same CO2 emissions still exist?

Whether I fly, hitchhike, train, or bus, these people are going to be sending their vehicles off to Copenhagen no matter what and the CO2 of all options will almost certainly exist whether I’m there or not (carpool being the only possible exception). At first glance, I should not be too concerned with my CO2 impact. Sadly, it’s not so simple. I also have to consider if my choice to take (or not to take) one form of transport will increase or decrease future emissions. It’s all conjecture, but I think my decision probably has a larger impact on commercial firms (airlines, trains) than on someone who picks up a hitchhiker spontaneously. Actually, those who are driving regular carpools as a profit-seeking endeavor are likely the most affected by my decision. Since they are smaller operations, one rider makes a bigger difference; they might not make a trip at all if they don’t get a carpooler (me).

Still, you might not think that my one decision can really make a difference in cutting carbon emissions. If I don’t fly, the plane will still go to Copenhagen and still pollute approximately the same amount (very slightly less without the weight of my body and bags). When I excitedly told people yesterday about having purchased my train ticket at a price almost comparable with flying, several people asked my why I didn’t just fly, since it was still cheaper. Their reaction was based on a belief that my impact, the purchase of one seat on a train instead of one seat on a plane, wouldn’t really make a difference in the grand scheme of climate change. So why not fly and reduce the pro capita emissions? Well, I’d be giving my money (as little as it is, grr!) to the commercial airline, helping them continue to profit off of highly polluting practices. If we all say, “screw it, the plane is flying, so am I,” we find ourselves faced with a tragedy of the commons.

From the opposite perspective – the the bright side, collective action implies that if enough of us take our environmental ethics to heart and steer clear of short flights, we could perhaps reduce the demand enough to economically stimulate the airline to cut down from two Berlin-Copenhagen flights a day to just one. Such a 50% reduction in supply might raise the price of a flight to something more fitting with the amount of pollution it produces. This would likely further cut the demand as consumers look more towards other means of transport, this time out of cost-consciousness rather than environmental-consciousness. And that, dear friends, is why I chose not to fly to Copenhagen.

Last month at the UN Climate Summit in New York, President of China Hu Jintao announced a promise to reduce the rate of carbon intensity, marking the first time that China has directly addressed carbon emissions policy. Keep in mind that this still means total CO2 will continue to increase, but still, a bigger commitment than we’ve seen from China so far.

There’s always a lot of debate about how much China (and other developing countries) should be putting into carbon mitigation efforts.  The traditional arguments, briefly:

• Developed countries have contributed to the majority of cumulative CO2 in the atmosphere from decades of industrialization. China is still developing, can’t afford to take a hardline stance on climate change, and deserves the chance to raise the standard of living so that its people can enjoy the same quality of life as we do in North America and Europe. Plus, as the Central Party likes to emphasize, China’s per capita emissions are significantly lower than America’s.

• As of 2006, China surpassed the U.S. in total yearly CO2 emissions, and now stands as the number one emitter of CO2. Climate change requires global cooperation and China has a responsibility to be a part of those efforts. Without China’s participation, the rest of the world will probably not be able to stabilize the concentration of CO2 at a safe level (which is now generally agreed to be 350 ppm; see James Hansen.)

Both of those are valid points, but I am always hesitant to take too much of a comparative attitude when it comes to climate policy. That often leads to finger-pointing and inaction until someone else does something, which is the kind of atmosphere we have right now. I think it’s more important – and productive – to look at what each country can do given its own set of parameters.

So let’s just look at China for a second:

It’s in China’s best interest to act on climate change now.

Aside from general world doom if we let global warming go on unabated, there are a lot of economic and security issues at stake. Domestically, desertification is rapidly reducing the availability of quality land for agriculture and development.  Disputes over loss of livelihood, land use, and land distribution already comprise a sizable percentage of Chinese incidents of social unrest, and are only predicted to increase in the future because of global warming’s effect on the land. Effectively dealing with social unrest is a major weakness of local governments and a sore spot for high-level officials.   The potential threat that such social conflicts pose to domestic security would be an unwanted burden.

Internationally, water rights issues between China and its neighbors pose potential national security problems. Pretty much all of China and Southeast Asia’s freshwater sources originate in the Himalayas. China places high importance on maintaining absolute autonomy over its internal affairs.  Because climate change issues are transnational, however, surrounding countries may place increasing demands on the country’s domestic resource management, which may lead to regional tensions.

It’s true, China has several great things going for it now: solar heaters are pretty widespread and wind is taking off in the northwest. The city of Beijing has a program to replace coal stoves with electric heaters in old hutong houses in Beijing. The CCP announced new electric car subsidies earlier this year. I don’t need to itemize everything.

But there is ample room for China to tackle climate issues beyond the more direct and obvious steps, such as making coal plants more efficient and mandating more energy from renewables. Like China’s entry into the World Trade Organization, which initiated several economic reforms, climate security might serve as a catalyst for restructuring China’s energy sector or for expanding policy  implementation and enforcement at the local and provincial level. Structurally, China’s government and tax systems reward regions based on the revenue they generate. Enforcement mechanisms are weak; local officials turn the other cheek if industry isn’t following the rules, so long as it boosts GDP. Establishing a firm rule of law and mainstreaming environmental protection and other qualitative requirements into evaluation criteria of government officials is one way to take the emphasis off of profit alone.

Let’s hope that climate change can be a platform to ease ever-growing tensions between China and the U.S. I hope that China will embrace these climate talks positively, using them as a forum to engage in more international cooperation to do more to be green at home.