Having just come back from a short holiday I wanted to share some ways I have found to reduce your ecological footprint.

-    Offset your trip
Getting to your destination often involves a large amount of travel, which creates a lot of carbon. One way to minimise the effect of this carbon is to offset it. Here in Australia I used climatefriendly but you can also go here to find out more info http://www.cdmgoldstandard.org/

-    Holiday locally
Often there are great holiday places locally and we don’t even know it. So next time I’m going to go for a holiday locally, it will save on travel time, costs and my carbon footprint.

-    Conservation holidays
Making a difference while your on holidays can give you a rewarding experience, make new friends and learn new skills. I’ve always tried to tie in some type of conservation work into my holidays. A few helpful sites are: http://www.earthwatch.org/, http://www.blueventures.org/, http://www.responsibletravel.com/, http://www.ecologyproject.org

Post photos of your eco holiday.

Kasia from the Connect2Earth team

I recently completed the WWF footprint calculator (I used the Australian version because of my location). Being part of Connect 2 Earth I am aware of the changes that could be made and some of the outstanding efforts that some of the members in this community make. So i wanted to see how i compare and walk the talk.
After completing the footprint calculator I was a little amazed, and embarrassed, that I used nearly 2 Earths or 3.5 global hectares to support me. It has given me the drive to make some changes in my life. Im in for the long haul, so rather than going cold turkey Im going to make incremental changes. First change is the basics: recycle, reuse and by less packaging.
What will i be doing?
- recycling ALL plastic, paper and metal
- reusing bottles, jars, etc. This will also save me some cash.
- I'm going to make sure I buy food with less packaging. No one needs cheese on a plate and wrapped in plastic!
What do i hope to achieve?
I want to bring my footprint down to 1.5 earths.

I recommend everyone have a look at what their footprint is and join me on the journey to a more sustainable lifestyle.

Wish me luck!

Kasia

P.S. If you want to find out more on the Footprint Calculator or how calculations are made please visit
Here are a few WWF offices with their own footprint calculators:

• Global
• Australia
  
• Belgium Dutch | French
• Germany
• Greece
• Hong Kong
• New Zealand
• Switzerland
• United Kingdom

Happy new year to all of you connect2earth members, old and new! Let's make this brand new decade  sustainable and strong; I pledge, do you?

We 've just started a new discussion theme on connect2earth, it's about how we can live within our means.. In other words how we can make sure that we do not over-exploit our earth's resources to leave our children and grand children a beautiful planet in which  to grow and prosper.

Participate in the discussion, say what's on your heart, answer the questions if you wish, it's up to you... But make your voice heard! In addition to being part of this great community, you'll enter the competition to win a solar charger or a conservation field trip at the end of March...

See you soon online

Magali

The last day and the all-night session…

Friday was the day of the Heads of State and Government (the High Level Summit). Several of them had already given their speech on the previous day – the list is too long to name them all but just a few: Kevin Rudd of Australia, Gordon Brown of the UK, Susilo B. Yudhoyono of Indonesia, Shimon Peres of Israel , Evo Morales of Bolivia, Alvaro Uribe of Colombia, Luiz Lula da Silva of Brazil, Angela Merkel of Germany, Nicolas Sarkozy of France, Gloria Arroyo of the Philippines,  Fredrik Reinfeldt of Sweden …you can find the full list at
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/cop15/od10p01.pdf

This continued on Friday, with a limited number of Heads speaking before the plenary. Lula of Brazil spoke again, announcing what was to be the only ‘news’ brought to Copenhagen by a Head of State: Brazil would contribute to the Fund to be set up to assist poorer developing countries to adapt to climate change and to reduce their emissions- so far, only developed countries are expected to contribute, so Brazil’s contribution is a novel step. The Chinese Prime Minster, Wen Jiabao gave a speech, and so did Manmohan Singh, India’s Premier.

The most awaited speech was that of Barack Obama- it was relatively short, curt, action oriented (‘we must act now’) and emphasizes that the US expected the emerging economies not only to contribute to mitigation, but also to accept monitoring, reporting and verification.  The speech was obviously intended as much for the audience at home as for the one in Copenhagen: the US President faces a struggle to see climate change legislation voted in the Senate and wanted make reassuring noises about having the US’s best interests at heart- he mentioned security and economic stability as reasons for acting. Unlike other world leaders, Obama never sat in the plenary, he came in via a side door and disappeared via the same immediately after he had spoken.
  
The US President confirmed the pledge made by Hillary Clinton earlier in the week to join those providing financial assistance to poor countries. As from 2020, these funds should amount to an annual $100 billion (€70 billion). However, it remained unclear how much of that money would come from the United States. As for greenhouse gas emissions, Obama reiterated what he had pledged before. i.e. reductions in “in the range of 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020,” which is about 4% compared to 1990 emissions. This is in line with the legislation passed by the House of Representatives in June. Although the figures may seem disappointing, it would have been unwise for Obama to go further than that as that would have risked a repeat of what happened in 1997 when the US administration signed up to the Kyoto Protocol and the Senate subsequently refused to allow its ratification.

The rest of Friday was chaotic. Participants became once more aware that the Presidency had gathered a group of 25 or so ‘main players’ to draft a possible text embodying the expected ‘political agreement’. Although this is not an unusual way of operating in UN negotiations, this COP assembly was particularly sensitive to ‘transparency and inclusivity’ in the process, something the Danish hosts had so far not given sufficient attention to. In the course of the day, several drafts of such a text were produced and discussed, but always within the selected group of negotiators- albeit at the highest level: on Friday afternoon, Obama, Brown, Sarkozy, Reinfeldt, Merkel, Singh, Jinbao, Lula and other Heads of States and ministers participated directly in the talks.  This had never happened in the climate negotiations.

Around midnight, the Draft Copenhagen Accord was distributed to all delegations. It was pretty weak: although it contained the 2⁰C limit for temperature increase, it did not specify a long term goal of 50% global reduction by 2050. The Accord also contained appendices on mitigation commitments by developed countries and on mitigation actions by developing countries (except for the Least Developed Countries and the Small Island Developing States) by 2020; provisons for ensuring transparency of actions; the financial pledges mentioned and the establishment of a Green Climate Fund. The accord did not set a deadline for translating its provisions into a legally binding instrument.

At 2 am. Chaos broke out in the plenary: a number of G77 countries rejected the draft put forward by the “20 odd group of countries”. Most thought the process had been opaque and not inclusive (which was indeed the case) and nearly all said that the lack of strong mitigation commitments spelled disaster for the vulnerable developing world. Hours of discussions ended around 11 am on Saturday morning with the COP ‘taking note’ of the accord rather than endorsing it. What does this mean for the future? Difficult to say. The Copenhagen Accord lies now firmly outside the UNFCCC process. It will exist in an institutional vacuum until it is replaced by a legally binding instrument. Given the reactions of the G77, it is by no means certain that that will be achieved in the short term. The positive side to the situation is that for the first time in the history of the climate change negotiations, major developing countries accepted to register their actions and to report about them at regular intervals.

The UN process has been dented: the fact that, in the presence of the Secretary General, an agreement had to be made outside its remit, and was only ‘taken note of’, amidst considerable recrimination (which sometimes veered into insults) leads many observers to conclude that at the moment, that process is dysfunctional.

Wednesday 16 and Thursday 17 December

The past two days have been quite tumultuous here at the UNFCCC COP.  Unfortunately, this Conference not reaching a deal at the end of the week is now talked about as a real possibility.

On Tuesday afternoon, both the Danish President of the Conference, Ms Hedegaard, and the Executive Secretary of the UNFCC had warned delegations that there were only 48 hours left before the summit meeting on Friday 18th when leaders would have to make decisions on the key issues still on the table: mitigation commitments by developed countries; mitigation action by developing countries and financial aid for climate change adaptation and mitigation in the developing world.  As none of these issues had progressed towards consensus, they said that extreme focus was now needed.

Wednesday morning it was announced that the President of the COP had resigned, and that she would be replaced as from that day by the Prime Minster of Denmark, Mr Rasmussen. She would, however, continue to lead some of the negotiations. 

Procedural issues emerged on Wednesday morning and held up the negotiations for all of that day. The Danish Presidency had informally announced that it was preparing two new negotiating texts to try and streamline the process. This was not accepted as a way forward by the large group of developing countries (the G77/China group) whose perception is that the Presidency has the tendency to work in a non-transparent manner, consulting with a select group of the ‘main players’ and leaving the vast majority of developing countries out of the loop.  The Presidency was therefore forced to go back to the traditional (and much slower) contact group structure, under which the negotiations resumed on Thursday.
 
Wednesday afternoon also saw the start of the High Level Segment of the COP (Conference of the Parties to the Convention) and the CMP (Conference of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol). Scores of Ministers and Heads of State or Government had arrived to deliver their statements at the plenary session; to hold bilateral and consultation meetings behind the scenes and also to put their weight behind the negotiations.

Thursday was a calmer day, with negotiations taking place on all main issues and the High Level Plenary continuing to hear statements from Ministers and Heads of State. If you would like to see some of these statements, you can access the webcast following this link:
http://www6.cop15.meta-fusion.com/kongresse/cop15/templ/ovw.php?id_kongressmain=1&theme=unfccc

scrolling to ‘on demand webcast’ and choosing Plenary and 16 or 17 December 17, 2009

The first two days of week 2

The second week of the Climate Conference started in a atmosphere of distrust between the main negotiating ‘blocks’ and general concern on whether a deal would emerge by the end of it.  In addition, access to the centre was again made difficult by long queues, extensive security and a registration system that broke down at one point. Delegations and observers were left standing in freezing conditions amidst confusion about who was allowed in, when etc. From Tuesday onwards, observers needed a ‘secondary pass’ on top of their registration badge, these passes being rationed.

China and the US were locked into an impasse over how transparency and compliance could be ensured in a new regime: from the start, the US has insisted that it not only wanted major emerging economies to take on mitigation (i.e. emission reduction) commitments, but that it wanted a system established for monitoring, reporting and reviewing reductions of every Party that has agreed to mitigate. China announced last month that it would reduce its carbon intensity, a measure of carbon dioxide emissions per unit of gross domestic product, by 40 to 45 percent by 2: 020, compared with levels in 2005. As it is planning to carry out these reductions without any financial assistance from the developed countries, China refuses any attempt to have them externally monitored or reviewed: it says that this is a matter of principle. The US say that the Chinese undertakings are insufficient; they also point out the world needs to be informed at regular intervals of exactly by how much global emissions have been reduced, and to ensure that a tone saved in one country is equivalent (i.e. measured in the same way) as a tone in another. There is also of course the question of creating an economic ‘level playing field’ – i.e. ensuring that all countries do what they have undertaken.
 
Monday saw a brief ‘walk-out’ by African countries, supported by the group of G77/China. The African countries decided to withdraw from the negotiating process because they perceived the presidency to be giving unfair precedence to the negotiations under the ‘Convention’ stream- towards a ‘new global agreement’ under the Convention over those related to the Kyoto Protocol. These countries (like all developing countries here) want a two track approach (Convention plus Kyoto) and are wary of attempts ‘to kill off Kyoto’.  Furthermore, they view the mitigation pledges from developed countries currently on the table as far too low. They were reassured and resumed their cooperation. But a precious day had (again) been lost in the negotiations.

On Monday evening, Ministers had arrived and had begun informal consultations in small groups each led by two Ministers: as is the tradition, one from a developed and one from a developing country. This, one hoped, would give a much needed boost to the negotiations.

Amidst all this gloom, there was a bit of good news: Japan announced that it would contribute $10 billion between now and 2013 towards the fast track financing initiative to assist developing countries start on their adaptation and mitigations plans. This came just after the EU had agreed to contribute $7.4 billion during the same period. No doubt, further pledges will follow.

Claire

The first week of the Climate Conference

At the end of the first week of the Copenhagen talks, the assessment made by many delegations and observers was that although progress had been achieved on a number of the more ’technical’ issues -such as the adaptation framework, technology transfer, capacity building-   process had stalled on some of the crucial issues such as mitigation commitments by developed countries and financial support for developing countries. 

Mid-week, during a COP Plenary chaired by the Danish President Connie Hedegaard, Tuvalu for the alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) made a strong plea for the consideration of two proposals it had already submitted in June: the adoption of two legally binding protocols at the end of this meeting, one a slightly amended Kyoto Protocol and the other a new ‘Copenhagen’ Protocol under the Convention. The proposed new Protocol sets a goal of limiting the increase in average global temperature to 1.5⁰C and the concentration of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at 350ppm CO2 equivalent; it also contains the goal of global emissions peaking in 2015 and being reduced by at least 85% below 1990 levels by 2050. Just as importantly, they made provision for the participation by developing countries in the mitigation efforts, by adopting low GHG-emissions development strategies.  Minister Hedegaard said that she would ‘informally’ consult Parties (which means in private talks with them) about these proposals. However, when the COP plenary  reconvened on Saturday, no results of these consultations were reported and Tuvalu, who claimed to have gathered support from a hundred or so countries for its proposals, expressed a good deal of  frustration.

The other important event in the second part of the first week was the release by the two chairmen of the negotiating streams under the Convention (AWG-LCA) and the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP) of their first draft negotiating text. The Plenary of the Parties to the Convention (COP) and that of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (the CMP) discussed these drafts on Saturday morning.

The proposed AWG-LCA text on an agreement under the Convention got a mixed reception: the developed countries said that the proposals did not bring certainty about the 2⁰C limit; only provided a loose framework for action by developing countries and predicated the continuation of the Kyoto Protocol rather than legal commitments or a timeframe to conclude a legally binding commitment under the Convention track- which is what the developed countries want. The developing countries were less critical, and re-emphasied that they want the continuation of the Kyoto Protocol as well as another track of agreement(s) to encapsulate their action. The same arguments were heard in the CMP Plenary, plus the demand from developing countries for stronger commitments from the Kyoto Protocol Parties.

The week ended with the strong feeling that the process was now heading towards considerable divisions and that Parties were counting (perhaps too much) on their ministers, who had started arriving) to resolve them.
Claire

The first 2 days of the Climate Conference

The UN’s Copenhagen Climate Conference saw streams of people converging on the huge Bella Conference Centre in Copenhagen on Monday 7th of December. There were long queues for registration, and some of us IGO and NGO participants had to stand outside in the cold more than 3 hours in order to finally get our badges. Security is tight outside as well as inside the Centre.
Over 18.000 participants are expected over the coming 2 weeks; the majority of them are not negotiators but ‘observers’ who are here to host and attend side events, mount exhibits, lobby country representatives and meet colleagues as one does at ‘normal’ conferences.  The media are also here in force. This not a ‘normal’ conference of course: it has variously been described as ‘the most important climate change conference’ to ‘the last chance to save mankind’ and many things in between.  There is a huge amount of expectation in the air.

Monday started off with a ‘welcoming ceremony’ addressed by the Prime Minister of Denmark, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, the Mayor of Copenhagen, Ritt Bjerregård, the Chairman of the IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri and the Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, Yvo de Boer. All emphasized how critical the outcome of the present summit was, and Dr Pachauri emphasized that in order to keep the increase in average global temperature to 2 to 2.4 ⁰C, emissions must peak no later than 2015. Dr Pachauri also referred to the recent theft of e mails and data for a research institution in the UK, some of which climate skeptics were using to undermine climate science. Dr Pachauri reminded the meeting that IPCC reports were the product of peer reviewed results from many institutions from all over the world, and that the warming observed during the past half century was not in doubt. The rest of Monday saw the various negotiation ‘streams’ being launched.

On Tuesday, most of the negotiations on the post 2012 regime had gone into ‘drafting groups’ closed to observers. Nonetheless, there was enough activity to keep us interested. The standing working groups under the UNFCCC, the SBI (Subsidiary Body on Implementation) and the SBSTA (Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice) held their first meetings- which were open. Important issues were, for the SBI, the (present) financial mechanism of the Convention (how efficiently does it work, to what extent is it a ‘good’ model for a future, much enlarged, financial mechanism) and for the SBSTA the technical aspects of the REDD-plus mechanism (reduction of emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries).    
Tuesday also saw the leaking (by the UK Guardian newspaper) of a draft Copenhagen Agreement’ that Denmark, as host country, had prepared for a high level consultation meeting –convening the ‘most important players’ in the process-  that took place in the week preceding the Conference. The proposed text had been deemed unacceptable by the developing country participants at that meeting and was therefore no longer on the table as such. However, its existence confirmed the suspicion held by many developing country delegates that the process was being led by the hosts in a ‘secretive’ and ‘non transparent way’ and that the developed countries were seeking to secure a deal with the ‘big’ emerging economies, ignoring the vast majority of the others. In addition, the terms of the draft agreement seemed to reflect the developed countries’ aspirations for the Copenhagen outcome.  The incident did nothing to increase trust in a process that badly needs it.

Where do individual countries stand with their pledges to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

A number of developed countries have since long put numbers on the table for their emission reduction targets. However, by mid- November, the US’s were still eagerly awaited, as  was any ‘voluntary action’ by developing countries.   

On 17 and 18 November some countries: the Republic of Korea, Brazil and Indonesia announced plans to reduce emissions below business-as-usual (all by around 30 %). Russia announced that it may reduce by 25% instead of the earlier announced 15%. Then, on 25 November, the US announced that Mr Obama will go to Copenhagen, where he will offer to cut US greenhouse gas emissions by 17 per cent from 2005 levels by 2020, a 30 per cent reduction by 2025 and a 42 per cent drop by 2030. This was a “pathway” to cutting American emissions 83 per cent by 2050.

China almost immediately reacted by on the 26th of November pledging to cut "carbon intensity," a measure of carbon dioxide emissions per unit of gross domestic product, by 40 to 45 percent by 2020, compared with levels in 2005. Beijing also said Premier Wen Jiabao will take part in the Copenhagen meeting.  According to the International Energy Agency, with these cuts China alone would be responsible for more than 25 percent of the reductions the world needs to limit planetary warming to 2.0 degrees Celsius.

On 1 December, Mexico announced that it will propose to slash its greenhouse gas emissions by 50 percent by 2050 so long as it receives international aid; these goals are called "voluntary", in line with the overall G77/China position.

On 3 December, India pledged to slow the growth of emissions by reducing its levels of carbon intensity — roughly the amount of carbon dioxide emitted per unit of economic output — by 20 to 25 percent by 2020, compared with 2005 levels, "if given support from the international community".

If you wish to know more details about the reduction pledges on the table now from a wide range of developed and developing countries please visit the site

http://www.climateactiontracker.org/

Where does the process stand 4 days before kick-off…

Representatives of Parties to the UNFCCC, the IGOs, NGOs and other ‘stakeholders’ in the climate change process are preparing to assemble in Copenhagen on 7 December for a fortnight of negotiations  that have been called ‘critical for the future of mankind’.  Intense activity is still going on to try and pin-point what a possible deal might consist of. 

Speculation has been going on since the last session of talks early November in Barcelona yielded disappointing results: Parties and the major negotiating ‘blocks’ remained entrenched in their respective positions. There was a continuing lack of clarity and considerable controversy about the continuation of Kyoto Protocol. The US and its allies (Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand and Russia) had proposed a regime that not only would replace Kyoto, but would move away from its architecture of a legally binding reduction target for developed countries to one where individual countries (developed and developing) pledge national emission cuts as part of national low carbon strategies.  Under the proposed international regime, these cuts would be centrally monitored, reported and verified, and would be reviewed regularly.

The EU seemed willing to contemplate such a regime, but want ‘the main Kyoto Protocol principles’ retained. The developing countries’ negotiating block, the G77/China, was firmly opposed to proposal US et al.; they want to keep KP; they reiterate the ‘historical responsibility’ of the developed countries  and stress the Convention principle of ‘no binding commitments’ by developing countries. Most importantly of all, the G77/China emphasised that as long as there was no significant progress on (a) mitigation commitments (or ‘pledges’) by developed countries and (b) a package of financial assistance for all developing countries to adapt and reduce their emissions, the process could not move towards a deal.

For the past month, the Danish hosts of the Copenhagen summit have been trying to find ways to bridge these differences.  They have held a number of ‘high-level’ consultations (in some case, with Ministers attending). The are preparing a negotiating position to offer as a starting point next week.

Claire

Our Jury selected the lucky connect2earth member who will represent our community in Copenhagen. We contacted the winner who was overjoyed with the news! Well done winner..

But who is it, will you ask? Shhhh.. We will officially announce her or his name in an award ceremony in Copenhagen.. stay tuned...

All I can say is that our Jury had it tough! They had to choose among 10 highly eligible participants: Rubi, gn.paez145, Alejandro Izcoa, miguel.umana, Jennyjst, santiago.paez, Luispe, Michelle , Chely, Pro Oxygen. These members were all ranked at the top 10 on November 1st when we closed the competition. So the winner is one of them!

The winner will be with IUCN and WWF, in Copenhagen, for the UN Climate negotiations on the 14, 15 and 16 of December. She/he will participate in a variety of events in Copenhagen and will share her/his experience with us on connect2earth.

So make sure to visit the site often to have the insider view on the exciting and crucial developments of this historical conference.

See you soon online

Magali
On behalf of the whole connect2earth team

The Copenhagen competition closed on  31 October and we're currently hard at work to select the lucky member who will go to the UN climate negotiation with our delegations.

The top 10 best-rated members on 1 November in the morning were:

Rubi, gn.paez145, Alejandro Izcoa, miguel.umana, Jennyjst, santiago.paez, Luispe, Michelle , Chely, Pro Oxygen

We'll be reviewing contributions from these members and will be announcing the winner very soon!

In the meantime, the discussion on climate change continues until the end of December when we'll award the mobile phone solar charger...

There will be lots of exciting developments until and during the climate talks and we'll be sharing what is happening with you on connect2earth. So visit the site often!

Magali
On behalf of the whole team

11 October 2009 - The two weeks of negotiations aiming at the adoption of a new global climate change in Copenhagen ended today amidst serious disagreements between rich and poor nations, developed and developing states. At the closing sessions of the two ‘negotiating streams’ (one under the UNFCCC Convention and one under the Kyoto Protocol) most statements made by delegations  underlined the fact that ‘failure in Copenhagen is not an option’.  However, most speakers recognised that the pace of the negotiations would need to substantially increase if a deal was to be struck in December.   Only five negotiating days remain, in early November in Barcelona, before the Copenhagen 15th Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC, or COP15.

The situation is deemed ‘critical’ by observers and analysts alike. On the one hand, scientists warn that without urgent and rapid action, the planet faces more short term disasters such as the ones witnessed in the past months in South East Asia, and long term catastrophe in the form of recurrent patterns of drought, flooding, famine and forced migration. On the other hand, major issues that form the backbone of a climate change treaty remain unresolved: the emission cuts developed countries are willing to commit to and the financial assistance they are willing to give; what type of action the major developing countries are prepared to undertake within a global framework (as opposed to purely nationally). Only Norway announced a new target at the meeting, saying it would reduce by 40 percent, up from a previous commitment of 30 percent, by 2020.

The Bangkok talks achieved progress in that they slowly moved from procedural argumentation to substantive dialogue; however, the ‘major issues’ are the ones blocking real progress and there was a feeling, in the last few days, that only strong political inputs at Heads of State level would have a chance of unblocking the situation. The UNFCCC Executive Secretary, Yvo de Boer, commented that the awarding of the Nobel Peace prize to US President Barack Obama would be "an encouragement for him to bring a strong commitment to Copenhagen". However, President Obama is dependent on the US Congress for any domestic legislation, without which the US is not prepared to take on international commitments, not wishing to repeat what happened with the Kyoto Protocol.
The issue of whether to retain the Kyoto Protocol for its Parties (all developed countries minus the US) or to replace it altogether with a new treaty (using some of its provisions into that) has bedevilled the last days in Bangkok, creating a huge rift between the developing countries- firmly opposed to abolishing Kyoto- and the developed countries who see a single instrument as more coherent and of course a away to include the US in a ‘level playing field’ of commitments. At Bangkok, the US proposed a "bottom-up" approach, in which all major emitting countries submit emission targets, national plans of measures to address climate change and long term strategies towards a low carbon economy – all of which accompanied by a strong and transparent system of outside verification.

On to Barcelona, which will pick up the negotiating texts where Bangkok left them. It is very much hoped that in the meantime, various and high-level political inputs will be made into the process.  

Claire

7 October 2009 - The negotiations are now mainly taking part in ‘informal contact groups’ on the various issues.  These informal groups involve only Parties to the Convention (Observers are not allowed to attend any longer) and are attended by a smaller number of delegates. This is supposed to achieve two aims: speeding up the further consolidation of the negotiating text on an issue-by-issue basis and (2) allowing compromises to be made. This, of course, makes it more difficult for us IUCN Observers to follow what is going on: we have to rely on corridor talk, on press briefings and on anything some people in the know are willing to tell us.

There has been a lot of talk on finance in the last two days; the developing countries are expressing frustration at the lack of concrete proposals- meaning numbers- from the developed countries. The EU is not yet in a position to make such proposals, as its Council is to debate them at the end of this month; this is seen very late in view of the Copenhagen deadline. The US has made a proposal on finance, but it covers the establishment and governance of a fund rather than the amounts that would go into it. No other developed country has come up with the amounts it would be prepared to pledge. There are numerous proposals from the developing countries on finance; some of those contain the requirement that developed countries would commit amounts ranging from 0.5 to 2 % of their GDP. It is unlikely that this issue will be resolved until the very end, when all the pieces of the puzzle on the new regime will have fallen into place.

Yesterday, a report from the International Energy Agency was launched here, which showed that because of the economic slump in the past year, and the decreased industrial output, global greenhouse gas emissions are down by 3% this year, and the forecast to 2020 has been reviewed, 5% down. The latter also has to do with the fact that China is taking measures to reduce its emission, by investing in nuclear power and in wind energy.

However, the report warns that the right policies, and a global deal in Copenhagen, are crucial to avert a high risk scenario on climate change. The richer emerging economies like China, Russia and the Middle East should halt their CO2 growth by 2020. In order to secure a clean energy future, investments in renewable energies, biofule and nuclear power are needed of around $10 trillion.

The IEA report can be found at
http://www.iea.org/weo/docs/weo2009/climate_change_excerpt.pdf

I'm in Bangkok at the UN climate change talks and I'll be giving you the gist of what's happening here every few days...

The U.N. climate change talks which opened on Monday 28th in the Thai capital are drawing some 1,500 delegates from 190 countries in further efforts to prepare a post 2012 global climate change agreement to take over from or to complement the current Kyoto Protocol. It is still hoped that such an agreement can be adopted in Copenhagen in December of this year.  That agreement-to-be is widely seen as the last chance to save the planet from the huge impacts of global warming.

During the next two weeks, the delegates will need to reduce a 200-page negotiating text  to something more manageable; in its present form, it has been called long, confusing and contradictory. The text includes sections on the controversial issues that have delayed progress on climate change so far, prompting the need for a new and hopefully more effective agreement: by how much are developing countries able and willing to reduce their emissions? What are the biggest emitters among developing countries willing to do to cut theirs? How much finance will the developed world make available to the developing countries for adaptation to climate change and technological support to reduce emissions?

The meetings started in an atmosphere of relative pessimism: first, because there are few signs that the developed world is prepared - as yet - to agree to reductions which overall would match the 25-40% by 2020 recommended by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Second, because it became clear in the past week or so that the US would most probably not pass climate change legislation before the end of 2009, so not in time for its delegation to put forward firm proposals in Copenhagen; this in turn could deter commitments from other developed nations. Developing countries are unwilling to make any undertakings unless they are guaranteed substantial financial assistance — something rich countries have so far refused to do.

This pessimism was in spite of both President Barack Obama and President Hu Jintao of China — whose countries are the world's two biggest emitters, each accounting for about 20 percent of greenhouse gas pollution — vowing tough measures to combat climate change at U.N. talks in New York last week.

At the start of the Bangkok talks, many delegates were of the view that Copenhagen was more likely to be a way station to a final agreement, where each country posts the best that it can do, leaving the details and the legal embodiment of a new agreement until sometime in 2020.

Claire

3 October 2009 - After a week of ‘UNFCCC climate change talks’ (as the negotiations are called) here in Bangkok, there is no sign of a political breakthrough yet on a new agreement to which all parties to the present UNFCCC Convention would sign up to. Work has concentrated on ‘consolidating’ (i.e. reordering and shortening) the negotiating text, which was still around 200 pages long at the beginning of these sessions.  The next week of negotiations will begin with a set of working documents with ‘consolidated’ text on almost all issues. Among those, mitigation is still widely open, spanning reduction targets for developed and developing countries; reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developed countries (REDD+); sectoral approaches; market mechanisms and potential economic consequences of mitigation action.

Although more circumscribed, adaptation is deemed by many countries, in particular the most vulnerable, as equally important: what will be decided here and up to a final agreement will determine how much financial assistance developing countries will get for their adaptation plans and actions- we are talking about a lot of money here: the estimates vary widely but $50 billion per year is a conservative figure. Delegations have also been discussing finance that will be made available to developing countries to help them acquire low carbon technologies and cover their adaptation costs. How will money be raised and disbursed, and under what form of ‘governance’: i.e. who will decide and disburse, what will be the rules. As can be expected, also a heated topic!

Meanwhile, the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (all developed countries minus the US) are also discussing, in a parallel ‘stream’ of talks, on a possible new commitment period after the current one runs out in 2012. Understandably, most of these Parties would prefer to wrap up the Kyoto Protocol into a single new global agreement, covering the issues mentioned above, and to which all parties to the Convention would sign up. This is met by resistance from developing countries, as they are wary being pushed (some slowly, some more immediately) in taking on mitigation commitments of their own. They also fear that the developed countries may be given an easier ride that way. The structure, or ‘legal nature’ of  the new agreement is therefore a highly political question.

At the stock taking sessions at the end of this first week, all delegations deplored the slow pace of the negotiations- there are only 2 negotiation weeks left before Copenhagen: one here, one in Barcelona in early November.

Claire

5 October 2009 - This second week of negotiations started amidst continuing speculation as to whether a comprehensive deal can be reached in Copenhagen in December.

President Obama’s adviser on energy, Carol Browner had delivered a pessimistic message to the process when she said in Washington late last week that the administration did not expect the Senate to vote on a climate change bill before the UNFCCC Copenhagen meeting. As the US’s emission reduction targets are widely seen as one of the key elements for reaching an international agreement there, this was unwelcome news. It came shortly after a Senate bill was tabled that seeks to cut US emissions by 20% on 2005 levels by 2020. The US administration does not want to put forward targets internationally as long as it has no legal basis to implement them at home. 

Some negotiators are now talking about an alternative plan which, instead of creating a global set of binding limits, might give credit for domestic programs that would be nationally binding and subject to international review. This would in effect discard the architecture of the Kyoto Protocol, which –they point out- has been less than fully successful so far. Whether or not to keep the Kyoto Protocol alongside another, wider agreement including all Parties to the UNFCCC (i.e. with the US and the developing countries) will be the hot topic this week.  

Work is progressing relatively well in the various groups dealing with adaptation, finance, technology transfer and capacity building. New consolidated texts are emerging, which are shorter and usually better focused.

On adaptation, the developing countries are pointing out that so far, their developed country partners are focusing a lot on planning mechanisms and not enough on adaptation actions.  IUCN has been actively lobbying for the negotiating text to recognise the value of ecosystems in assisting people to adapt to climate change and has been promoting Ecosystem-based Adaptation.

Claire

Thanks to everyone who participated in "What a Difference a Day Makes" yesterday 23 September! Over 24 hours, WWF had thousands of interesting, fun and informative tweets from around the planet as people discussed what they do to live a more sustainable life.

connect2earth was well represented during the day and it was great to recognize some members tweeting about our community. So thanks to all of you!

Let's hope we managed to spread the word about the community even more! Make sure you tell all your "physical" and "digital" friends about the discussion on climate and invite them to join in. Now is the time!

Magali
On behalf of the whole connect2earth team

Around the world on any given day, millions of people take actions –
big and small – that contribute to making their community and their
world a more sustainable place to live. On 23 September we invite you
to join connect2earth and WWF staff around the world for a global
online event and show what a difference a day makes!

Join in... Tell us about the environmental issues that you care
about and the action that you are taking to address them. Do you take
shorter showers? Recycle? Bike to work? Volunteer for a local
environmental group? And don't forget to tell others about your
involvement on connect2earth!

So, to take part, post a message to Twitter with the tag
#wwf24 about the things you do in your day and we'll add you to the
map. www.panda.org/24hours

Remember, this global event takes place tomorrow, 23 September. Join me
and we'll show the world what a difference a day makes on
connect2earth!

See you on Twitter,

Magali

On behalf of the whole connect2earth team 

She was by far the best rated contributor at the end of our last theme "Species, the extinction crisis" on 31 August. So we decided to award the prize to  Jennyjst based on her stunning score and active participation.  We hope you'll agree since you gave her this good rating...

Congratulations Jennyjst, you win a solar charger for your mobile phone.

You see, ratings are key. So make sure to play a part in the winner selection and rate the posts that you find interesting!

We're now talking about climate change and have started the counters over. Go ahead participate in the discussion and you could be the next winner.... And don’t forget to vote!

And of course at the end of October we'll review the best contributors since April and will select the grand winner that will have the unique opportunity to come with us to the UN climate negotiations in Copenhagen in December.

Quick tip: I’m sure you’ve noticed that posts are sometimes not formatted very well… It is because the post editor is a bit peculiar. So to make sure your post looks as good as it should, write it directly in the editor, or paste it from notepad if your using Windows…

Join the debate now and change the world!

Magali
On behalf of the whole team

This is the subject to talk about in 2009 and we're joining in on connect2earth... Why?

Because time is of the essence, because the world needs to react now if we are to continue our life on planet earth... World leaders meet in Copenhagen in December, and they need to agree on a strategy and action plan. There is still time, but just...

In the meantime, the floor is yours.. and if you participate and get well rated, you may also win a trip to the talks in December... Add your voice to the debate now...

 The Species extinction crisis discussion just closed last night and we'll be uploading a summary of what was debated very soon.. We'll also be announcing the winner in the next few days...

And did you notice? We have a new home page... Do you like it? Let us know by adding a comment here or through the contact us link...

See you online

Magali
on behalf of the whole connect2earth team

You have the power to decide! On 31 August we’ll award the next mobile phone solar charger.. We’ll choose her/him among the 10 best rated Species Crisis discussion contributors…

And it’s your votes that decide who goes in the top 10 contributors list! You see, you need to participate…

Sign in and vote now!

Currently, the winner will be chosen among these members: Jennyjst, prajwal, Mother of Danone, The_Naturalist, John Romeo, nivasadhi, gquimbayo, lari, pimezon, venkatdileep9

Do you think one of these connect2earth members deserves to win or would you rather see somebody else in this list? Make your voice heard and cast your vote

And 31 August is also our last day to talk about the Species Extinction Crisis; make sure you participate in the discussion this week…

..............
Magali
on behalf of the whole connect2earth team

Participating is fantastic.. voting is even better!

It's great to see the discussion on species taking shape, thanks to all of you for your engagement and ideas!

But did you know that ratings are essential to participate in the competition? Why? Because we choose our winners among the 10 best rated members..

So how do you vote?
To the left of each post you will see two little thumb up thumb down icons... It's simple, if you like something, give it a thumb up, if you don't then either leave it or give it a thumb down. Each vote is a point, and all points are summed to give a rating per member. You can see the top 10 rated members on top contributors box on the right hand side.

What happens then?

1. At the end of August we'll look at the top 10 members contributions for the current theme - the species extinction crisis -  and we'll select
   the best. This member will win a solar charger...
2. On September 1st, we'll reset the counter for our next theme - climate change..
3. And at the end of October we'll choose the theme winner among the top 10 theme contributors
4. And.. a grand winner among the top 10 overall contributors... This lucky member will be invited to Copenhagen with IUCN and WWF

..............
Magali
on behalf of the whole connect2earth team

Plato!  He was among the site's 10 best rated members at the end of our last theme "Renewable energy" on 30 June. We reviewed all these members contributions and decided that Plato deserved to win. He participated in the discussion from the start in April, interacted with others on the site, and had interesting thoughts... And most of all, you gave him good ratings as well so you appreciated his participation.

Congratulations Plato, you win a solar charger for your mobile phone.

We're now starting fresh with our new theme "The species extinction crisis". Go ahead participate in the discussion and you could be our winner at the end of August. Remember that ratings make the competition... so rate others and tell all your friends to vote for you on connect2earth...

And of course at the end of October we'll review the best contributors since April and will select the grand winner that will have the unique opportunity to come with us to the UN climate negotiations in Copenhagen in December.

Join the debate now and change the world!

Magali
On behalf of the whole team

Last night was a big night for connect2earth!

We changed our discussion theme on the site, closing our "Renewable energy" focus and inaugurating our "Species extinction crisis" debate.

For 2 months we have the pleasure of having Sarah Janicke with us. She is one of the species expert at WWF International and will closely monitor the debate.. So don't hesitate ask her questions, challenge her, that's what she is here for!!

And our previous theme, Renewable energy, can now be found in the all theme section with all the great posts that it generated.

We're currently contacting the top contributors to this theme and we'll announce who has won the mobile solar charger very soon!

Talk to you soon

Magali
On behalf of the whole team

A new format, a new competition, more cool ways of interacting and sharing your views… Take a look, play around, register (or use your existing account details) and join the debate!…

We’ve just gone live so you may find the site a bit empty for a few days… But go ahead, take this opportunity to be one of the first ones to voice your opinion and start the debate off!

If you’ve visited connect2earth before you’ll notice some changes to the site…
This new version let’s you interact directly with community members from around the world and experts to discuss specific topics such as renewable energy, the species extinction crisis, climate change and sustainable living…. These topics will be featured for a set amount of time, usually 2 months, but the first topic “Renewable energy” will stay on for 3 months.

The other big change is that it is now even easier to upload videos and images to the site. You can just add a link to a video hosted on another site or you can access your existing Flickr and Youtube accounts and choose to share pictures and videos from there.

We are in the process of bringing in some of the great videos, images and text that were uploaded to the previous version of connect2earth, so bear with us if your contribution is not there yet. It may take a bit of time!

And if you are a member already, your "username" has already been transferred. Just make sure to request a new password before you can log in to this version of the site. As passwords are a very personal thing, we could not transfer them…

Talk with you soon!

Magali

On behalf of the whole connect2earth team