Dateline: Copenhagen

September 2007 photo of summer ice breaking up in the Northwest Passage. Courtesy New York Times

The security concerns around the Arctic are quickly becoming hot topics in Washington but it was still a little jarring to hear Dr. Robert Huebert, a professor at the University of Calgary in Canada, speak so bluntly about the military implications of melting ice in one of the few truly placid regions remaining on the planet.

“We are already in an Arctic arms race,” said Huebert, during a panel discussion at the Center for National Policy on February 2. “We’re just not aware of it.”

Even more ominously, Huebert compared the current situation in the Arctic to Europe in 1935, implying that it is a powder keg ready to explode with dire implications for the entire world.  “Everybody is preparing for the worst-case scenario,” Huebert says.

By “everybody,” Huebert is mainly referring to the nations ringing the Arctic—the United States, Canada, Russia, Norway, and Denmark. Norway and Denmark have focused their security efforts on the Arctic, Russia famously planted a flag on the North Pole seabed in 2007 and has been more assertive in its Arctic policy, the United States is increasing its presence in Alaska, and Canada, Huebert said, is “talking a lot, but not doing anything.”

China, Japan, and South Korea also have interests in the Arctic, though these nations do not border the region. China and Japan have their eyes on the Arctic’s resources while South Korea has recently emerged as the world’s leading developer of Arctic commercial vessels.

The Council on Foreign Relations’ Dr. Scott Borgerson, who moderated the panel, said the Arctic has been losing 1,000 kilometers in ice volume each year since 1995. The ocean could be ice free during the summer months at some point between 2016 and 2030 and this would open up many new shipping routes and increase the military significance of the region.

Gary Hart, the former Democratic senator from Colorado, echoed Huebert’s concern about security concerns in the Arctic. Hart compared the Northwest Passage, which could become a major shipping passage in the next decade or so, to some of the most militarized areas of the last 60 years. He likened the Passage to the Fulda Gap, which, during the Cold War, was a strategic corridor separating East and West Germany, and the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway between Iran and Oman, which today is a major choke point for the oil trade and a focus for the world’s military planners.

“Quite often geography symbolizes how we see our security,” said Hart.

One of the main issues surrounding the Northwest Passage and a strong point of contention between Canada and the U.S. is under whose jurisdiction does the waterway fall. Canada says it is their water, while the U.S. maintains that it is an international passage.

Still, United States Coast Guard Rear Admiral Gene Brooks, who has served in Alaska, said the Canadian and American militaries share intelligence in the Arctic and the forces have worked together seamlessly. The larger problem is simply getting the average American to realize that the U.S. is, indeed, an Arctic nation. This goes beyond military security, he said, and extends to issues of culture and economics.

“We need a national debate on what to do as an Arctic nation,” said Brooks.

Demonstrators form a Circle of Hope in front of the White House

I was in Lafayette Square—the park in front of the White House—and the rain seemed to be hitting me from every angle. A couple of event organizers from the Chesapeake Climate Action Network (CCAN) and I were setting up a stage and a sound system, preparing for the arrival of demonstrators who were marching from the Climate Action concert and rally up the road.

Although the weather had been clear and warm for most of the day’s events, the rains swept in just as the march to the White House was beginning. The CCAN folks worried that much of the crowd would disperse back to their warm, dry homes rather than join the march. But lo and behold, as the police escort arrived at Lafayette Square, followed by a big green Solar Bus, we could see an impressive mass of umbrellas following behind a banner that read: “Stop pollution and poverty – 350 now!!”

The demonstrators rolled into the park, chanting and waving rain-soaked banners. The inclement weather had clearly united them beyond their common cause: to bring public attention to the climate goal of a 350 parts-per-million concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Rally chants ranged from “Three, Five, O!” to “We’re here, we’re wet, it’s no sweat!” The demonstration culminated in the forming of a big “0” in front of the White House.

Across the world on October 24, demonstrators formed the numbers ”3,” “5,” and “0” in settings that included the pyramids in Egypt, the steps of the Sydney Opera House, and the face of a cliff in New York. These actions have been in the works for more than a year, coordinated by the international group 350.org and implemented by millions of local activists.

In Washington, D.C., the events of the International Day of Climate Action were spearheaded by a special partnership between CCAN and the Hip Hop Caucus. The rally banner reflected the partnership’s dynamic: “Pollution and Poverty.” Thus, the D.C. action focused especially on the linkages between climate change and environmental justice. The mission of the Hip Hop Caucus is: “to organize young people in urban communities to be active in elections, policymaking, and service projects, as a means to address and end urban poverty for future generations.” Many of their rallies include performances by popular hip hop artists, bringing their messages to large, urban, and sometimes unengaged crowds.

Climate activists, too, can be disengaged in their own ways, focusing on broad global goals such as 350 ppm and forgetting that climate resiliency also means building the capacities of local communities—especially the urban poor—to adapt to changes that are already unavoidable. Michele Roberts, with Advocates for Environmental Human Rights, was met with cheers when she spoke in front of the White House saying “Mr. Obama, we must remember that we have our own communities right here at home that are vulnerable to climate change.”

The Hip Hop Caucus brought a stellar lineup of D.C. musicians to the stage on Saturday. A CCAN organizer commented that it was some of the best music that has ever accompanied a climate rally in the nation’s capital. One rapper performed songs with explicitly environmental lyrics and had the crowd chanting “There’s no such thing as waste” and “reduce, reuse, recycle!”

This elaborate fusion of media and messages reminded me that getting to 350 will require a movement much more robust than one of high-level professionals working to reduce carbon emissions. It will require the engagement of all sectors of society. And for many of those sectors, especially the wealthiest, it will require a transformation of culture. The rally in D.C. showed me that we’re on our way—and that even in bad weather, we can’t be stopped.

Increasing scientific evidence, urgent calls to action, heated debates over burden-sharing and financial mechanisms…  Sounds familiar? Actually, these words best describe the proceedings of the ninth Conference of the Parties (COP9) to the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) which recently finished in Buenos Aires with mixed results. But of course, they could also sum up recent gatherings under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Consider iisd reporting services’ recap: “Despite expectations that a COP 9 decision might lead to a new shared understanding of the structure and mandate of the Convention’s bodies, polarized positions on these issues resulted in a late night impasse and decisions that largely left resolution on this issue to a future COP.”

The UN Convention to Combat Desertification recently wrapped up their ninth Conference of the Parties

Not all decisions were delayed however.  The parties to the convention agreed on a set of indicators that all countries would monitor in order to build a solid understanding of drought and desertification across the world.  In an interview with us last month, UNCCD Executive Secretary Luc Gnacadja expressed the importance of establishing such indicators, especially for financing efforts at combating desertification.  As he put it, “Well-designed indicators allow you to know what you’re measuring and can direct investment to areas of need.”  Beginning in 2012 all affected countries will now be required to report on at least two minimum statistics: First, the proportion of the population in affected areas living above the poverty line – chosen because land degradation can be both a cause and effect of high poverty levels – and second, land cover status – rated in terms of changes to net primary productivity (a measure of vegetation levels). Even if the methodological details and data-gathering procedures for this required information have yet to be worked out, the agreement was touted as a major accomplishment.

There is an important lesson to be learned for the December climate summit in Copenhagen from UNCCD’s insistence on developing a range of consistent indicators: The range of indicators that the UNFCCC deals with includes the findings of the IPCC as well as the specifics of how carbon emissions are reported. There are major questions such as: What’s a more just measurement, per capita emissions or total emissions? And where are carbon emissions allocated, in the country importing or exporting a particular commodity?  Answering these questions definitively will be essential to the global governance on climate change.  As Gnacadja put it in his closing speech of the conference, “to describe an elephant, you have to agree on what an elephant looks like.”

From 21 September to 2 October, the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) will hold its Ninth Conference of the Parties (COP-9) in Buenos Aires, Argentina. UNCCD was one of three major multilateral environmental agreements created at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. This interview with Luc Gnacadja, UNCCD Executive Secretary, addresses the many linkages between land degradation and climate change and between COP-9 and the upcoming United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen. Interview conducted by John Mulrow, MAP Sustainable Energy Fellow with the Worldwatch Institute.

Luc Gnacadja is the Executive Secretary of the UN Convention to Combat Desertificat

What proposals have the [UNCCD-commissioned] Independent Body of Scientists made [concerning measures to monitor and assess changes in desertification, land degradation, and drought]? Do their proposals include financing for developing countries?

It is not the role of the Body of Scientists to call for more funding. Their concern is how to monitor indicators—ecological and economic—of desertification. This will have a major impact on investment because well-designed indicators allow you to know what you’re measuring and can direct investment to areas of need. There are currently eleven impact indicators that have been through an almost two-year process with a group of scientists.

At this stage and at this time, the science allows us to agree on indicators. Given that common ground of indicators, we [can] discuss [potential solutions]. Not every indicator has to be reinvented, as we share many concerns with other issues that have their own indicators. For example, poverty indicators are shared with the [Millennium Development Goals] process.

Are there countries that are championing the effort to combat desertification?

We have successful stories on almost every continent. You have heard about the greening of the Sahel. We have noticed the improvement of land cover in the Sahel thanks to a combined effort of improved investment and policy. We have also noticed in China and in India, in their stimulus packages, room has been made for land management. These decisions were made especially out of concern for national security.

The issue is how to scale up and scale out these successes. By compiling satellite data from 1991 to 2006, we found that 16 percent of the land has been improved, mainly in the dryland, and 35 percent has been degraded, mainly in tropical zones.

Read the rest of this entry

Ama Dablam rises 6,812 meters to the southeast of Mount Everest. Its name, literally, means “the mother’s pendant,” describing a glacier that for thousands of years has hung from the rugged peak like a pearl from an ancient mother’s neck.

Revered as one of the most beautiful and sacred mountains in the Himalayas, Ama Dablam was until recently off limits to climbing expeditions. In 2006, however, the majority of the glacier broke off, crashing to the valley below and killing six climbers who were camping at the mountain’s base.

Ang Tshering Sherpa, president of the Union of Asian Alpine Associations, believes that aside from being a tragic and isolated incident, the event symbolizes more disturbing changes that are hitting the region. And he is not alone.

Mr. Sherpa comes from a long line of mountain people; his great-grandfather was one of the leading Himalayan guides for the first Mount Everest expedition in 1922. Earlier this month, Sherpa described the changes occurring in his homeland when we met at the Kathmandu-to-Copenhagen conference in Nepal, the first formal meeting of Himalayan nations on climate change.

As I noted in a recent article for Worldwatch’s Eye on Earth news service, Sherpa explained that in 1960, Nepal was home to 3,000 glaciers and no high-altitude lakes, some of which threaten to burst and flood downstream areas. Now, he says, “every glacier is melting and we have between 2,000 and 3,000 lakes.”

Read the rest of this entry