climate

Members of the FoEI delegation carry a 'no carbon trading' banner on the streets of Durban during the Global Day of Action.  We're calling on developed countries to tackle climate change by urgently making real changes at home.

Carbon offsetting – when developed countries buy carbon credits from developing countries to avoid cutting emissions themselves – has no part to play in a just international agreement to fight climate change.

We believe in climate justice which means emission cuts in developed countries, and money for developing countries to grow cleanly and adapt to the effects of climate change – but it also means a change in our consumption patterns.

coverage of the talks and further reading

press releases

• Disastrous "durban package" accelerates onset of climate catastrophe

• Read all our press releases relating to the talks
  

Take action

• Call one of South Africa's largest polluters to get out of the climate change negotiations
  
• Stop land grabbing for palm oil in Uganda

FoEI Chair Nnimmo Bassey blogs for the New Internationalist

• Durban became a procrastinators' paradise
  
• There is no planet b
  
• The Kyoto Protocol is in grave danger
  
• Challenging climate apartheid
  
• Are Durban climate talks worth the bother

updates from Durban: inside and outside the talks

• The silver lining to a terribly dark cloud - the Green Climate Fund and Durban
  
• Civil society takes action in Durban for a fair agreement
  
• 3,000 people demand EU leadership at climate talks
  
• The youth take a stand
  
• Profiting from pollution: an introduction to carbon trading
  
• Fighting climate change on the frontline
  
• 10,000 people demand climate justice
• Keep corporations out of the Green Climate Fund
  
• Durban in Brussels: European youth convergence for climate justice
  
• Exposing climate killers
  
• FoE US: Climate talks begin with tragic deaths
  
• REDD in the real world
  
• Will they listen?

publications

• How corporations rule: a series of case studies exposing corporate influence in climate negotiations
  
• In the REDD: Australia's carbon offset project in central Kalimantan
  
• Briefing: Changing the system not the climate
  
• Carbon markets briefing: our climate is not for sale

• Factsheet: Our climate, our say

Young Friends of the Earth

Radio

video

• Watch video of FoEI's activities in Durban 
• What video of Young Friends of the Earth in Brussels

photos

• View photos from the events taking place inside and outside the talks
• View a more extensive selection of high resolution photos on our Flickr account
  

Civil society events in Durban

Members of the Canadian Youth Delegation turn their backs on Canada. Credit: CYD DJC
At around midday, members of the Canadian Youth Delegation took a stand against their Environment Minister, Peter Kent, for his shameless drive to promote tar sands oil throughout the talks - one of the world's dirtiest and most destructive fuels.

As the Minister was about to deliver his opening address to delegates in the talks, six Canadian Youth stood up and turned away from the Minister revealing the message “Turn your back on Canada” prominently displayed on their t-shirts.

Shortly afterwards the individuals involved were ejected from the talks.

In a statement issued after their eviction the Canadian Youth gave their justification:

“Our so-called Environment Minister entered these talks by going on record that he would be defending the tar sands. I have yet to hear him say that he’s here to defend my future” said James Hunt.

Canada has been severely criticised for their continued push to get countries to buy tar sands oil from them. Meanwhile it deliberately downplays the climate impact of tar sands and continues to cast doubt on independent scientific studies.

stand strong for africa

An impromptu action calls for people to 'stand strong for Africa' at the UN climate talks in Durban. Later, in the dining area, youth from various civil society delegations took part in an impromptu action in support of Africa. Several people sang a popular South African folk song substituting one of the lines with the words "stand strong for Africa."

The purpose of the action was to urge African negotiators to stand strong and not give in to the demands of the developed countries to kill the Kyoto protocol.

Two African members of FoEIs delegation later added to the calls of solidarity and critised the developed countries and corporate lobbyists:

“Many civil society groups are calling Durban a conference of polluters. We cannot let the polluters win and lock in a decade of inaction on the climate crisis. Africa must stand strong on behalf of the people of Africa and the people of the world,” said Bobby Peek of Friends of the Earth South Africa.

Nnimmo Bassey, of Friends of the Earth Nigeria and the Friends of the Earth International Chair, added that: 

“Rich countries must hear loud and clear that Africa won’t pay for their crisis. Developed countries are trying to kill the Kyoto Protocol. They want to turn back the clock to 1997 and shift responsibility for the climate crisis they created onto the developing countries already bearing the brunt of climate change."

Further reading

Press release: Durban inaction a recipe for climate catastrophe

The afternoon began with Nnimmo Bassey, chairman of Friends of the Earth International, leading a discussion of how our fossil-fuel based system fails people and the planet.

Fossil fuels destroy local environments and communities, drive dangerous climate change and fail to provide sufficient energy to 40 per cent of the world's population.

There are solutions though. In the session 'An energy sector we want to see', Pascoe Sabido from Friends of the Earth England, Wales and Northern Ireland looked at small scale renewable energy, often managed by communities, as a way of reclaiming power.

Pascoe talked about the need for a global feed in tariff (GFIT) that would provide upfront financing from public sources for universal access to renewable electric power and non-electric energy services such as solar water heaters and biogas. The collection and dispersal of funds would take into account the climate debt owed by the north to the south and by the rich to the poor.

The sources of funding for such a mechanism could include the diversion of fossil fuel subsidies, diverting military spending, imposing a levy on aviation and maritime fuels or imposing a financial transaction tax on speculative international money flows.

On the cost of renewables Pascoe believes that economies of scale would also play a part in driving down prices.

"As more people around the world invest in solar and other renewables the price would come down for everyone, in both the north and the south.

"Once the cost of renewables fall below the cost of fossil fuels, they will be the default energy choice" he said.

Friends of the Earth believes that such a radical transformation of the energy system will be handing back power to the people. Not just in the literal sense but it will also mean a shift in power relationships.

"Energy companies would be the consumers, buying surplus energy from the people. This transformative effect could also change communities, promoting true democracy and self organisation" Pascoe concluded.

Further information

Patrick Bond, Centre for Civil Society, speaks in front of the giant octopus at the climate finance rally.

The day started with the issuing of a letter exposing an attempt led by the US, the UK and Japan to turn the Green Climate Fund into a “Greedy Corporate Fund”. The letter was signed by 163 civil society organisations from 39 countries and included Friends of the Earth International.

• Read the press release
  

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) was created to support people in developing countries – people who are the most affected by the climate crisis but are the least responsible for it.

But developed countries are trying to allow multinational corporations and financiers to directly access GCF financing.

Karen Orenstein from Friends of the Earth US gave her take on the situation:

"Led by the US and the UK on behalf of Wall Street and The City, this attempt to hijack developing countries’ funding is outrageous. Communities need this money to address climate change and to finance their own development – without repeating the same mistakes that the rich countries have made."

• Call on corporations to keep out of the Green Corporate Fund
  

A demonstrator likens the plans for the Green Climate Fund as an attempt to turn it into a 'Greedy Corporate Fund'.

In the afternoon the protest was a more vocal affair as people descended on Speakers Corner, with the help of a giant octopus symbolising the fact that Wall Street, the World Bank and multinational corporations have their tentacles all over climate finance. 

Several speakers addressed the crowd to talk about the dirty energy being produced in their country's and the need for urgent investment in renewable energy.

In Kosovo, Indonesia, India, Nigeria, South Africa and Brazil the story was the same - the World Bank continues to fund dirty energy.

From the Bank's relationship with South Africa - it's latest US$ 3.75 billion loan is helping to build one of the world’s largest coal plants - to its forays in Kosovo - where it is urging the government to invest in coal despite studies highlighting the fact that Kosovo could meet all its energy needs with renewable energy - the World Bank can't get enough of coal.

Lisa, a midwife from the US, summed up the feelings of many people in the crowd as she pointed to the conference centre:

"They are the 1% creating debt and poverty…I am a midwife and I don't feel safe bringing children into the world whilst the World Bank is in charge" she said.

• Call on corporations to keep out of the Green Corporate Fund

The production was launched on the first day of the COP 17 climate meeting in Durban. The video and tour allow viewers to explore why dams are not the right answer to climate change, by learning about topics such as reservoir emissions, dam safety, and adaptation while visiting real case studies in Africa, the Himalayas and the Amazon.

Find out more about the project and take action

Members of Friends of the Earth International show COP 15 delegates that carbon offsetting is the greatest con trick in history. Copenhagen, 2009.We are reaching a historic culmination of events in the fight for radical cuts in greenhouse gas emissions and systemic change in the unjust and unsustainable economic system which underlies the climate crisis. 

Corporate and financial elites and multinational corporations are intensifying their efforts to serve and protect their interests through false solutions like carbon markets.

This injustice is being met with resistance by movements, organisations and activists that are calling for the transformation of societies to take back our futures.

Friends of the Earth International demand that governments at COP 17:

What can you do?

Your contribution counts. You can join the movement for climate justice. You can pressure your government to take a stronger stance in the international negotiations and help ensure a safer climate and protect the lives and livelihoods of ordinary people and communities around the world.

The movement for climate justice is growing and becoming stronger, as we are seeing in Durban with organisations and social movements mobilising for climate justice and planning to continue to struggle against false solutions like carbon trading.

Real solutions to climate change are available, for instance reducing consumption, improving energy efficiency, choosing sustainable locally-produced food, and switching to clean, green power. We, take action together to build a new society and transform the current unjust and unsustainable economic system. This is the only chance we have of being heard and stopping the further decline of the world’s climate and the possibility of catastrophic climate change.

Take action online now!

At the conference I had the chance to put forward FoEI's views on the green economy and to exchange and learn from very committed social researchers, sometimes burdened by the green agendas of donors and agencies, but with a clear call for independent research on real social change in these times of colourful changes.

Scientists are engaged in the challenge to break down the wall of the false dichotomy between social and ecological dimensions in modern science, that have split unnaturally peoples from nature in our industrial society. I have many stories and insights from the conference to share, but the statement I liked the most was a reference to my speech made during the presentation by a UNEP representative.

The representative said: "No comparison can be made with structural adjustments of the '90’s, as a green economy is not about an adjustment of macro economy as it was then, it is only an ‘adjustment of the structure’ (read: of the policies in developing countries)”.

Ah…do you feel any better? I don’t! So the economic system is fine, what needs to adapt to the new capitalist phase are governments, policies, peoples and the environment!

Further information

Lucia Ortiz

How we see Rio+20 in Brazil

We've been a part of the Brazilian civil society facilitator committee for Rio+20 since November 2010, representing Rede Brasil on Financial Institutions along with twenty other national networks and social movements with diverse perspectives. In this process we have been developing our views from exchanges and collective thinking with our allies, while monitoring the Brazilian government's positions.

There is no real official process to cope with the three main and noble objectives of the conference: to secure renewed political commitment for sustainable development, to assess the progress to date and the remaining gaps (and why not their structural causes?) in the implementation of the outcomes of the major summits on sustainable development since Rio92, and to address new and emerging challenges.

The Conference will also focus on two themes: the first, any guesses? Green economy! And the other one, Global Governance (or control?) of the environment. The most recent UN climate talks related to the issues of sustainable development, and the totally insufficient preparation process for Rio+20, can give us a clue on how controversy it can be.

Currently our main concerns do not lie in the outcomes or possible agreements at the conference itself, as a “zero draft” will be known only by January 2012.

As the official United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD) “Road Map to Rio+20” clearly states, while some organisations, as well as corporations, keep busy with these official contributions, the ongoing process consists of "recommending domestic strategies (national policies) that developing countries (not industrialised countries) need to put in place to meet the challenges of transitioning to the green economy”.

The pressure to move to a "green" economy

The pressure to speed up these initiatives are already being felt by peoples in the South. 'Structural adjustment of environmental and land tenure policies', also known as land grabbing, is now taking place on a massive scale at an alarming pace. This is similar to the neoliberal adjustment of national policies in the 1990’s to liberalise public services, or to the rules imposed by TLCs/FTAs to open access to land and minerals by corporations. We are told we must now must adapt domestic laws to the new green capitalist phase which means to liberalise the environment for the markets.

So the transition to the green economy comes in a series of steps described very clearly by a community leader from Amazonia. The dismantling of forest laws, then the approval of so called climate change laws (that do not mention any decrease in fossil fuel consumption but centrally the creation of imaginary caps and carbon markets whose rights are assured by the state), then the new laws on REDD that allow certificates known as green titles to be traded in stock markets to offset pollution by industrialised countries (that do not need any transition to green economy), and finally the laws about Payment for Environmental Services (PES), or the domestic internalisation of The Economy of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB).

Instruments of the green economy, REDD and PES, mean the concrete interpretation of the results of the UN climate summit in Cancun, 2010 (COP16) and of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Nagoya, 2010 (COP10). This threatens the sovereignty of communities over their territories.

By generating green papers out of common goods, such as carbon, water, biodiversity and even cultural values, they are aimed at saving a discredited financial system rather than the people or the planet.

The difference of the Rio+20 tentative global green deal and the neoliberal consensus of Washington is that the last came before the structural adjustments, while Rio+20 will come after and put a green UN label on the false consensus that is green capitalism.

As Nnimmo Bassey, Chair of Friends of the Earth International, once said: "If Rio92 was known as the Earth Summit, Rio+20 can be known as the summit of the commodification of nature."

The problem is it's already happening!

Further information

On 6 and 9 August we will commemorate the 66th Peace Memorial Day of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We express heartfelt condolences for the victims who died in radiation, heat ray, and hellish flames 66 years ago, and those who died of radiation exposure afterwards. We also express our sincere solidarity with the people who are still suffering and fighting radiation-caused illnesses.

This year, however, we have to give our serious thoughts to the grave situation the people in Fukushima are exposed at the risk of radiation poisoning due to the Fukushima Daiichi accident. 

Radioactive materials still continue polluting our ocean, atmosphere, and ground, driving the people who lived in the surrounding area of the nuclear plant away far from their home towns. A lot of people who live in the polluted area in Fukushima and neighbouring area are exposed to high radiation dosages every day without sufficient measures taken for their protection.

We the Japanese people have promoted nuclear power generation and the nuclear fuel cycle use as "peaceful" use knowing risks posed by radiation. Even though it was clear to many of us that nuclear power generation was expensive, had high risk and had potentially enormous negative environmental impacts, huge funds have been invested in the repeated propaganda re-assuming "Nuclear power is safe and clean." They weren't telling the truth. 

Many troubles, accidents, and the plant-workers’ health issues surfaced one after another, were deliberately understated and the policy to promote nuclear power continued.

However, this accident in Fukushima has revealed that nuclear power has gone totally out of our control. It was the government and the industry that craved for nuclear power and we citizens allowed that policy. We owe the future generation the grave responsibility.

We make our resolution on this Peace Memorial Day in 2011, to stand up and face the grave threats of nuclear power and radiation as a country that has experienced devastating radiation exposures and the worst nuclear plant accident in the world’s history. 

We again appeal to our government that the suffering of Fukushima is not in any way underestimated, and that all the available measures are taken to protect people and the environment. We work for a drastic reform of social structure and the way we use energy.

Moreover, we share the reality we’ve learned with international community and work to prevent proliferation of the utilization of nuclear energy. We citizens must change the policy NOW and the whole society. Our childrens' future depends upon our choice today. 

Let us our voices heard and make our own future by ourselves.

Take action

Please consider donating to Friends of the Earth Japan's anti nuclear campaign.

The Bangkok talks were focused on setting the agenda for the negotiations for the rest of the year and were setback by divisions between countries over the scope of international climate talks. In Bangkok some rich developed countries insisted on limiting the negotiations to implementing the narrow range of issues agreed at Cancun; in contrast most countries supported continuing under an agreed workplan from 2007 (the Bali Action Plan).[1]

Read our Bonn blog

The Bonn talks are to be based on the broad agenda advocated by most countries in Bangkok, but the clash in the 'paradigm' for the negotiations will underline further disagreements in Bonn. 

These fault-lines include:

1. Setting binding emissions reduction targets through the Kyoto Protocol
2. Insufficient emissions reduction targets currently on the table
3. The Green Climate Fund
   

1. Setting new binding emission reduction targets in 2011?

The Kyoto Protocol represents the current model of international climate law – it requires developed countries to set binding emission reduction targets and to meet them over a 5 year period. The first five-year period ends in 2012 and time is running out to agree on targets for the next ‘commitment period’ (2013-2017/2020) in accordance with the mandated negotiations, which have been running since 2005.

Developing countries, particularly the Africa Group, have made clear that a continuation of the Kyoto Protocol is essential, as it provides a paradigm of legally binding emission reduction targets. Some developed countries, including Russia and Japan, have indicated they will walk away from their international legal obligations to agree commitments for the period after 2012. The United States is similarly opposed to binding emissions reduction targets. Instead of negotiating science-based targets reflecting their fair share of the global effort, they are now proposing a “pledge-based” system in which each country does whatever it determines domestically.

Bonn represents a pivotal moment for the future of the Kyoto Protocol. The Bonn climate talks need to pave the way for agreement in Durban on the next phase of legally binding emission reduction targets. Durban is the last chance to agree, as the first phase of commitments ends in 2012. If there is no agreement in Durban, the world may be faced with climate anarchy, without an international regime in place.

2. Will those new pledges be enough?

The latest science shows that negotiators at Bonn will be out of touch with what the latest science clearly requires if the world is to avert dangerous climate change. The current pledges risk warming of 2.5 to 5 degrees according to the United Nations Environment Programme. The problems with developed countries’ proposed targets are manifold: they are too low to meet what the science requires but they are also accompanied by ‘creative accounting’ proposals which result in emissions reductions only on paper. Furthermore the extensive use of offsets will see rich countries shift the burden for reducing emissions to developing countries – while doing almost nothing at home.

Analysis revealed in Bangkok showed that when emission reductions were converted into gross amounts – rather than percentages – it was clear that developing countries’ pledges for emission reductions were even higher than those from developed countries (3.6 Gigatonnes to occur in developing countries with only 1.9 Gigatonnes to occur in developed countries).[2] Together, these pledges fell well short of the 14+ Gigatonnes the UN says is necessary to be on path to remain below 2 or 1.5 degrees C.

In addition, the emissions reduction targets proposed by developed countries are ridden with loopholes. The rules currently being considered do not take into account emissions from shipping and aviation, overestimate emissions reductions by forests and land use in developed countries and allow the carry-over of unused pollution permits and offset credits . This means that the total emission of developed countries could actually increase even if their ‘official’ targets say they are making reductions[3].

The debate over these rules, how they shift the burden of reducing emissions to developing countries and whether they are in line with the science will be of central importance in Bonn – particularly as the agenda sets particular time for addressing this issue.[4]

3. Creating a ‘Green Climate Fund’

In Cancun one of the few areas of agreement was the establishment of a ‘Green Climate Fund’ (GCF) to oversee the collection and disbursement of ‘climate finance.’ Currently the details of the GCF are being negotiated by a ‘Transitional Committee’ (TC) which has already met in Mexico in April and again in Bonn from May 30.

Flashpoint issues in the negotiations of the GCF have already included the role of the World Bank as its trustee, given concerns regarding its potential conflicts of interest due to its role in financing fossil-fuel based projects, and its practice of mixing roles as a banker, financial advisor and project implementer (known as the “Arthur Anderson syndrome” following the financial crisis). This conflict may be compounded by proposals relating to secondments and staffing of the new fund, which draw heavily on the World Bank as a source.

Similarly, many observers are concerned that the process of the GCF is off-track. It is currently heavily focused on technicalities and structure – without having agreed to what the priorities of the fund should be or the actual scale of public funding. In Cancun, countries agreed to a “goal” to “mobilize” $100 billion by 2020 from “a wide variety of sources”. However, developed countries are yet to commit to any specific level of public funding.

A further critical question here is what a “balanced” allocation of finance between adaptation and mitigation really means.[5] It is to be expected at Bonn that developing countries, who are the most vulnerable to climate impacts, will push the GCF to identify the needs and priorities of recipients before designing structures to best meet those needs.

Finally there is concern that the GCF is too focused on ‘private finance’ options (through loan guarantees, publicly-provided insurance, or other risk sharing instruments) and thus risks putting too much power into the hands of profit-driven interests. Market failures and distortions by private interests are a significant structural cause of the climate crisis and many countries fear a continued focus on the ‘private market’ could have the effect of financing projects that are ineffective at confronting climate change but are very effective at transferring public monies into private coffers. These countries and observers will be pushing for the GCF to be primarily funded through public sources (including innovative mechanisms such as Special Drawing Rights and the ‘Robin Hood Tax’).

1] See recent affirmation of the importance of the Bali Action Plan and the Kyoto Protocol at the India-Africa forum, 25 May 2011, (para 7), http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=72319

[2] Stockholm Environment Institute, “The Implications of International Greenhouse Gas Offsets on Global Climate Mitigation” (March 2011), www.sei-us.org/Publications_PDF/SEI-WorkingPaperUS-1106.pdf

[3] Stockholm Environment Institute, “Assessing the current level of pledges & scale of emission reductions by Annex I Parties in aggregate, AWG-KP In Session Workshop, Bonn, 2. August 2010; and, Kartha, S. “How Accounting Tricks, Loopholes, and Strategic Carbon Banking Could Negate Developed Countries’ Copenhagen Pledges”, Tellus Institute Brown Bag Lunch Series, 10 November 2010.

[4] On Thursday 9 June 2011 according to preliminary schedule.

[5] This is a reference to the objective of the fund from the Cancun outcome document – see Annex III of 1/CP.16, http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2010/cop16/eng/07a01.pdf#page=2.

The changes to the planning law will give local councils a greater role in deciding the location of wind farms, regardless of the size of the project.

"We are happy to support the primary decision making powers going back to councils on the proviso that they can opt out and refer an application to the Minister, and that there are time limits decisions." said Cam Walker, Campaigns Co-ordinator at Friends of the Earth Australia. 

"Without a set time line, a council could chose to sit on a proposal indefinitely and delay to the point the project is no longer viable," he said.

"We remain deeply concerned that the overall intent of the Coalition’s pre-election wind farm policy is to create broadly defined ‘no go’ zones, which would exclude wind farms from areas with some of Victoria’s best wind resources.

"At a time when both the effects of climate change and the economic benefits of the renewable energy industry are well known, the government’s wind policy is very much the wrong direction for Victoria to take," said renewable energy campaigner Ellen Roberts.

"Just this week Victorians have learnt of plans for a dramatic increase in coal exploration in our state.

"There is clearly a double standard at play here. While the government seems intent on placing excessive restrictions on wind energy, local communities are not offered the same protections when it comes to coal exploration and production.

"The only conclusion to be drawn from the amendments is that the Coalition government intends to make it easier to open a coal mine than start a wind farm in the state of Victoria," concluded Ms Roberts.

View the letter of protest signed by over 40 groups on the issue

Photo credit: Friends of the Earth Australia

As part of an international day of action to oppose false solutions to the climate crisis on December 7, 30 young people from across Europe targeted European institutions and corporations which support and fund nuclear energy. The message was simple: nuclear power is unsustainable and unacceptably dangerous.

"Nuclear energy is promoted as a clean technology but the mining of uranium has massive social and environmental impacts and the problem of safe nuclear waste disposal is yet to be solved. Young people are being locked into an uncertain future where they will have to shoulder the burden of this false solution." Susi Hammel, Young Friends of the Earth Europe.

As part of a series of actions, youth demonstrated outside the European Commission to highlight its ongoing support for this dangerous technology. They also took action outside the Foratom offices, a powerful pro-nuclear lobby group, and BNP Paribas whose significant financial contributions enable the ongoing development of the nuclear industry.
 
"What we need are real solutions. If the negotiators in Cancun care about our future, they will choose renewable resources and opt for decentralised production and distribution of energy. This will empower communities to directly produce their energy from local, sustainable resources." said Sebastian Power from the Federation of Young European Greens.

The action took place as part of the ‘1000 Cancun’s action day’ called for by the International peasant farmers network La Via Campesina. Participants in the action are youth who have gathered from all over Europe for a two week long Climate Justice Convergence in Brussels, in parallel to the UN Climate talks in Mexico. For two weeks, over 60 young people have gathered to take action and demand climate justice.
 
Find out more about the Youth Climate Justice Convergence

The global delegation consisting of Friends of the Earth, Via Campesina, 350.org, Hemispheric Social Alliance, Third World Network, Council of Canadians as well as the Indigenous Environmental Network aimed to be representative all the peoples of the world as well as every continent of the world.

At this historic and unprecedented meeting with the Secretary General (he doesn’t usually hold meetings with civil society groups) President Morales introduced the delegation from the global movements and gave the floor to FoEI Chair Nnimmo Bassey and, member of the FoEI Executive Committee, Meena Raman. They had been selected as spokespeople to present the conclusions of the Peoples Summit to Ban Ki-Moon. The presentations were forceful, direct and reiterated our demands for a strong and fair global agreement within the framework of the multilateral process.

Later in the afternoon a press conference was held at the UN with Meena and Nnimmo and other representatives of global civil society. At the press conference we spoke about the Peoples Summit, the inadequacy of the Copenhagen Accord as well as the ongoing international climate negotiations. Following the press conference we joined President Morales in presenting the outcomes to the formal meeting of the G77 plus China (the UN Ambassadors of 132 countries).

The outcomes of the Peoples Summit have also been included in a formal submission to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) requesting that they be negotiated in the next round of climate talks in Bonn this June.

• Watch the press conference held by Evo Morales and the FoEI delegates.

The 30-second television advertisements will run in South Carolina, where the state Supreme Court is set to hear a Friends of the Earth appeal related to two proposed nuclear reactors in the state; and in Georgia, where the first of the Obama Administration’s loan guarantees are slated to go to the construction of two nuclear reactors.

Find out more on the Friends of the Earth US website

The spectacular, blue-coloured crowd flooded through the streets of Copenhagen with a clear message to decision makers that offsetting carbon emissions – the practice whereby rich industrialised countries pay developing countries to cut emissions rather than making cuts at home – is unfair, and does l not lead to cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.

We believe that carbon offsets, which currently form part of a UN climate agreement, do not lead to any overall reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

The "flood for climate justice" was made up of Friends of the Earth activists from more than twenty different countries, as well as allies of Friends of the Earth from a wide range of social and environmental movements, and a large number of Danish people.

The flood began outside the Klimaforum09, civil society climate conference, with speeches from our Chair Nnimmo Bassey, Henry Saragih, General Coordinator of La Via Campesina and Amparo Miciano, World March for Women to highlight the social and environmental impacts of climate change, and the struggle against false solutions such as carbon offsetting.

The participants, most of them dressed in blue ponchos, then 'flooded' through the streets of Copenhagen, in a colorful procession carrying flags and banners, chanting "Demand Climate Justice" and "No Offsetting". The event ended in front of the Danish Parliament with the creation of a massive human banner reading 'Offsetting is a false solution'.

The flood also carried messages from people who are directly affected by climate change, or who are struggling against false solutions such as carbon offsetting.

Nnimmo Bassey, Friends of the Earth International chair, stated:

"Carbon offsetting has no benefits for the climate or for developing countries – it only benefits developed countries, carbon speculators and major polluters who want to continue business as usual. Friends of the Earth International denounces carbon offsetting as a false solution to the climate crisis, and urges governments to search for fair and sustainable solutions.”

Palle Bendsen from NOAH / friends of the Earth Denmark stated:

video

Watch a video of the Flood here

The talks were the fourth gathering of the year in preparation for the climate summit in Copenhagen this December.

The official discussions were focused mainly on what efforts the newly industrialising countries; such as China, India and Brazil; are prepared to curb the increase of their emissions.

Also discussed was the extent to which industrialised countries are prepared to support developing countries to reduce emissions in future years.

Friends of the Earth International and other civil society debaters took part in daily mobilisations outside of the summit, demanding the repayment of climate debt, the exclusion of the World bank and other financial institutions from the climate debate, and the rights of indigenous peoples, fisherfolk and women to be protected.  The civil society forums held by FoEI and others focused on how to achieve real solutions to climate justice without risking people or the planet.

The talks did not meet the hopes and expectations of the civil society debaters - instead of real solutions and displays of innovation, discussion was centred on trying to get the United States to enter into an agreement, even proposing to dispose of the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, arguing this would be the only way to effectively tackle climate change.

There was also no agreement on developing countries' role in combating climate change, and the developed countries refused to accept the proposal that they finance the mitigation, adaptation and technology needs of developing countries through new democratic financial institutions other than the World Bank.

The next talks ahead of the Copenhagen climate summit will be held in Barcelona from November 2-6. 

blogs

Read the introductory blog from Bangkok.

Read the closing blog post wrapping up the summit

Watch video blogs

photos

See pictures of the summit

further information

Find out more about the talks on the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change website.

The drama-documentary follows an old man living in the devastated world of 2055, asking himself the question, "why didn't we stop climate change when we had the chance?".  The incredibly provocative and powerful film has helped bring about important discussion around climate change ahead of the Copenhagen Summit in December of this year.

• Find out where you can watch the film in your country
  

The premiere of The Age of Stupid took place worldwide on September 21/22 on the International Day of Climate Action. Friends of the Earth groups that took part in the screening included Argentina, Brazil, Costa Rica, Cyprus, France, Hungary, Romania and many more.

Celebrities and politicians from all over the globe put their weight behind the film. The New York premiere alone was attended by Kofi Annan, Gillian Anderson, Moby, The Age of Stupid's Oscar-nominated star Pete Postlethwaite and filmmakers Franny Armstrong and Lizzie Gillett. 

Many other celebrities arrived in New York by sailing boat, bike, rickshaw, electric car or skateboard before walking down the green (not red!) carpet.

Let's hope the film will inspire people in developed countries to cut down on their carbon emissions and call for a just agreement at the UN climate summit in Copenhagen this December.

For information about the film and how you can still see it go to The Age of Stupid website.

Watch the trailer here:

BRUSSELS, 24 June 2009 - Friends of the Earth Europe has warmly welcomed the ground breaking Climate Change Bill passed in Scotland today.

Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) today voted for a target to reduce greenhouse gases by 42 percent by 2020 – the most ambitious statutory target in the world.

The vote followed an overwhelming display of support for early action to cut emissions from scientists, Scottish celebrities and campaigners who travelled to the Parliament in Edinburgh, Scotland’s capital, to lobby their MSPs.

Friends of the Earth Europe's climate campaign coordinator, Sonja Meister said: “With this law Scotland is leading the world in the fight to tackle dangerous climate change. The emission cuts now required by law in Scotland are the first in the world to be in line with what science tells us is needed.

“The EU should now follow Scotland’s lead and set equally ambitious targets to help get the international climate negotiations on the right path.”

The Chief Executive of Friends of the Earth Scotland, Duncan McLaren, said: “Scotland played a leading role in the Industrial Revolution, and now we can play a leading role in the transition to a low carbon economy with new green jobs for the next generation.

“Climate justice and climate science tell us we urgently need to make emission cuts of at least 42 per cent by 2020. The technology exists to deliver them. The Scottish Government must now exercise the political will to make it so.”

Scotland's Climate Change Bill comes in the same week that the Hungarian parliament took a major step towards the realisation of a climate law. On Monday evening Hungarian MPs adopted a resolution on the preparations of a climate law initiated by the Friends of the Earth Hungary and the Hungarian National Council for Sustainable Development.

Around Europe, Friends of the Earth groups are asking governments to commit to annual cuts in climate changing emissions as part of the European Big Ask. Friends of the Earth's Europe-wide climate campaign aims to get governments and the European Union to commit to legally binding annual cuts in emissions to fight climate change. The Big Ask calls on the European Union to commit to at least 40 per cent reductions in greenhouse gas emissions within Europe by 2020 and 100 per cent by 2050.

The meeting was held in La Canoa del Bajo Lempa community which is in a region frequently affected by floods and droughts.

More than 100 environmental and community leaders from countries such as Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama and Chile among others, discussed issues such as the seriousness of climate change from the social and economic impacts to the political causes.

One reason for the event was also to create partnerships with the various groups that attended the meeting. There were movements against mining, dam construction, groups working for food sovereignty and indigenous leaders looking to identify and learn from each others' struggles.

The Movement of Victims Affected by Climate Change (MOVIAC) is an initiative of Friends of the Earth International  and aims to give affected peoples a voice. This is of particular importance in Central American where each year the region is battered by hurricanes and floods displacing communities and resulting in many deaths and injuries.

El Salvador was on the receiving end of Hurricane Mitch in 1988 when 400 people lost their lives and more recently Hurricane Stan in 2005 when 32 people lost their lives. Tropical storms also cost many lives each year and the resulting floods can destroy whole communities.

change from above

Friends of the Earth El Salvador believes that in the last few years their government has not assumed responsibility to face environmental problems and has no policies to fight the phenomena produced by climate change.

The group is calling on the new Government to halt the execution of mega projects that destroy ecosystems and displace communities, creating more poverty and environmental vulnerability.

The government cite the global economic crisis for their inacction on climate change, in response to this Ricardo Navarro, President of Friends of the Earth El Salvador said:

"In the scheme of things the current economic crisis is not significant and can't be compared to the environmental crisis to come."

Photo: Ricardo Navarro, President of Friends of the Earth El Salvador/CESTA addresses attendees at the Movement of Victims Affected by Climate Change meeting.