Thursday, September 14, 2017

  • Share

Citizen Events to Focus on Senate and Copenhagen

November 3, 2009 by · 1 Comment 

focusnationIn these pressure-building weeks as the Senate considers new legislation climate and before world leaders converge on Copenhagen, Focus the Nation has begun a campaign to help communities get their voices heard on issues of climate change and clean energy. It’s called Community and the Road to Copenhagen, and all across the country young organizers are hosting climate dialogues in their communities.

The campaign started on October 23 in Durango, CO. Local politicians, business leaders and representatives from the Navajo Nation attended, as well as about 150 area residents. “It was the type of event that energizes the people there,” says Mark Kimbrell, communications and actions manager at Focus the Nation. “There’s a creation of momentum that leads into taking the next steps.” Those steps might include lobbying Senators and calling and writing the White House, asking for action on climate protection and clean energy legislation. “It’s all about communities getting active.”

Following each event, Kimbrell will collect and synthesize the attendees’ comments and turn them into Clean Energy Action Lists to be delivered to Senate offices and also to Copenhagen in December, showing leaders that the people want action on climate change.

Other events across the country are planned for the coming weeks. These currently include:

Nov. 6— New York City

Nov. 7 – Santa Cruz, CA

Nov. 12—Jonesboro, AR

Nov. 12—Southfield, MI

Nov. 14—Tallahassee, FL

Nov. 20 – Akron, OH

Nov. 21 – Philadelphia, PA

Nov. 21 – Tempe, AZ

Nov. 21 – Charlotte, NC

Dec. 1 – New Orleans, LA

Kimbrell expects that list to grow as he gets events organized in other states; he encourages people to create their own events. “If you go to the Web site and click on the link that says ‘Organize,’ it walks you through what you need to do,” he says. “There’s an organizing guide and an event model, and you can connect with people in your state so you can share resources and skills.”

— Suzanne Bopp



One Response to “Citizen Events to Focus on Senate and Copenhagen”
  1. Angel says:

    The Copenhagen process had 2 main deneciifcies, which conducted all the misunderstandings.1.A conference of such a High level should be properly prepared. That means that a great amount of preliminary work should be done: to clearify the scientific basis of the question; to co-ordinate the project of the decision with all sides. I feel that such a work was not a success that time.2.A conference of such a High level should work out mostly main strategic questions – the main mechanisms of maintaining our Planet clean and safe. All the other questions that are connected to this issue could be easily solved because of the worked out mechanism could give answers to any connected questions. As to COP 15 results I could find no key mechanisms – only decisions on private questions based on different approaches.That is why it is more important now not to criticize the COP 15 Accord, but to make our “work on mistakes”, correct all the defects and make up for the deneciifcies.As I consider the issue, there are 2 simple approaches that flew away from the negotiator’s attention.1.It is not fair to limit the greenhouse gas emission by choosing a percentage of reduction according to a base year. The base year emissions in different countries widely vary. Even if a certain country would choose a high percentage of gas reduction, it could happen that this certain country will have the right to emit more CO than another country, which even didn’t declare any gas reduction.Why not use well known and widely spread in the world practice establishing emission allowances (quotas) that depend on the population and GDP (per capita emission, per GDP dollar emission). In that case all the countries would have equal rights. If a country would have less emissions, it could sale it on a “carbon market”. If a country exceeded the emission allowances (quotas), it should buy “carbon credits” on a “carbon market” or pay for it.2.To preserve forests there is also a simple and well known approach. It is based on concepts of the “natural” rent and the assimilative potential of a territory. It is known about the amount that a certain forest area can absorb. A country with a certain forest area can have the corresponding additional “carbon credits”. If the forest is cut off, the country would have to pay in accordance to the reduced area. The tax fee in such a case could be much higher than “carbon credits” for the same area.If such basic mechanism would appear, all the following from them questions could be easily decided. Especially questions concerning financing. Every country would know how much it could get and how much it could loose. There should be an accurate mechanism and accurate criteria of distributing the finances.As for the decisions that were not legally obligatory (not only for COP 15 Accord, but for Kyoto protocol and IPCC as well).The UN is the only international organization, which is aimed to make vital decisions for all the planet (Earth). If some countries would not join the mankind’s efforts to survive, how could we all live in one World? It would be impossible. From the other hand the UN should transcend its efforts to meet all the country’s demands.And of course if everyone agrees that a certain list of countries can join some actions voluntarily – it’s OK too.