|
|
| |
Home  Blog |
|
| |
Blog
|
Erin Kenzie
/
Wednesday, 02 May 2007
|
|
 Today the Citizen Science paper competition winners presented their work at a side event at CSD. It was great! The presentations went off without a hitch and the audience was very engaged. Pictured are presenters Aneri Patel and Alex Mizenko, Citizen Science Coordinator Katelyn Keefe, SustainUS Board Member Julie Larsen, Chairperson Cat Manzo, and presenter Lindsay Campbell.
|
|
|
Meg Boyle
/
Wednesday, 02 May 2007
|
In our first day here at the UN CSD on Monday, some Agents had the
opportunity to attend a briefing/discussion by the US delegation to the
Commission, which includes a face new to the CSD, thought not new to
the world of UN Negotiations and those of us who met with him at the
2005 UN Climate Negotiations in Montreal: Daniel Reifsnyder, new Deputy Associate Secretary for Environment and Sustainable
Development for the US State Department.
Our encounter with Dan and the rest of the US Delegation
is blogworthy (even belatedly) because we encountered best practices of
a different kind than the kind (energy/climate/development/air quality)
we usually discuss at the CSD: In this case, how to successfully
broach a potentially contentious topic with a national delegation.
A few of the organizations represented in the meeting were particularly
concerned with bringing the Delegation's attention to mountain top
removal (MTR), a relatively new form of surface coal mining (heavily
practiced in Appalachia) that takes profound tolls on community and
ecosystem health. In addressing the topic to the US Delegation, a
representative of these organizations made all the right moves:
--Appeared generally polite, relaxed, and professionally dressed.
-- Appealed to the Delegation's shared values (MTR's impacts on "our nation")
--Articulated a clear and specific position/area of concern ("I'm not here to comment on coal more broadly")
--Used brief local case studies of MTR's impacts (and emphasized the
historic importance of Appalachia), as well as graphic comparisons
("the explosive force of MTR is equivalent to...") to illustrate their
points
--Repeated a clear key stance several times ("MTR removes jobs,
communities, and headwater source streams. It's not being addressed in
the CSD, and it should be." Help us by raising MTR as an issue within
the CSD to raise awareness in all delegations.)
--Anticipated the US Delegation's responses, and demonstrated that
they've already tried to use other channels to address their concerns.
(Upon being encouraged to instead address their concerns domestically
by talking with their Congresspeople, they explained that they're
bringing the issue to the CSD because they've run out of places to go;
their politicians are receiving monetary contributions from coal
companies and are therefore compelled not to address their concerns as
constituents.)
The end result? An expression of genuine concern from the US
Delegation, coupled with a request for more information and further
discussion. Not bad for a first encounter!
We'll let you know how our MTR friends fare over the next week or so,
and also keep you updated as we use similar stylings as new negotiating
texts hit the floor and the youth caucus heads to the hallways, cafes,
plenary sessions and delegation meetings to bring our primary issues of
concern--including the problem of nuclear energy for developing
countries and the CSD's unfortunate lack of attention to the issue of
climate change adaptation--- to the forefront of these meetings.
|
|
|
Yochi Zakai
/
Wednesday, 02 May 2007
|
|
Hey Everyone! Sadly, I had to leave CSD last night, and its just not the same being back here in DC.
I wanted to share with the blogworld the event that I felt was most valuable to me during my time at CSD. (And it wasn't just because the delegate's dining room includes free food and drinks, I promise.) The Biofuels side event, hosted by the Dutch delegation, included an awesome facilitated dialog between the participants and presenters. The 4 presenters each made quick presentations on their topic and then sat down a table. Then all the participants were invited to join a table and engage in a conversation with the experts. After 15 mins of conversation, we got up and switched to another table to engage another expert. I got to explore the topics that I found the most interesting with the presenters and topics, and in a small enough group so that I was able ask questions directly to the presenters.
Now for the cross post from IGHIH:
Biofuels, crops which can be converted into a source of energy, are
a hot topic in the renewable energy community. Over at itsgettinghotinhere.org we’ve covered biofuels’ potential a few times.
There is a lot of excitement around the possibility of mainstreaming a
source of energy that can be grown by farmers, who are increasingly
facing tough economic times.
As detractors point out, biofules have the potential to ruin dreams.
One of the most drastic problems is the destruction of peatlands, a
type of wetland common in Southeast Aisa that is a major carbon sink.
An alternative fuel created from palm oil is a major culprit in this
destruction. As a result of increased demand for palm oil, many new palm oil plantations are proposed in Malaysia and Indonesia, the majority of which will be sited on peatlands.
The main problem covered by the media to date is related to the use
of food crops to produce energy. The most notable are the protests in
Mexico over the rise in the cost of tortillas, which has been blamed on increased corn use for ethanol production.
In order to address these and other concerns, Andre Faaj at Utrecht
University in the Netherlands has proposed criteria for sustainability
certification for biofuels. Read on to learn about this innovative set
of standards.
The main criteria include:
- Greenhouse Gas Reduction Potential
- Competition with Foodcrops / Land Use Distribution
- Biodiversity Levels
- Labor Standards / Living Wage
- Environment: Waste, Toxins, Soil and Water Quality
This certification is a really forward thinking way of evaluating a
product because it includes considerations of economics, equality and
environment - the three pillars of sustainability. In order to evaluate
all three aspects of sustainability according to existing certification
mechanisms, one would need to use multiple certifications, such as the
Organic, Shade Grown, Fair Trade triple certification scheme for coffee.
What do you think about biofuels? Are certification systems the answer? I’ll watch comments on the cross-post at itsgettinghotinhere.org for your thoughts.
|
|
|
Stephanie Kwan
/
Wednesday, 02 May 2007
|
|
It's only Day 2 of CSD-15 and it already feels like I've learned so much! The highlights from my day include creating the Youth Caucus statements in the Air Pollution and Climate Change sessions and meeting with the UN Youth Unit. Today's events were much more fast-paced than yesterday, which mostly consisted of attending plenary sessions and becoming familiar with the CSD process. Additionally, I'm extremely happy that I am here with such amazing SustainUS delegates, and there truly is a unique group dynamic that has proved beneficial in our work thus far.
A little something from yesterday...
|
|
|
Caitlin Hedberg
/
Wednesday, 02 May 2007
|
|
Hello!
My name is Caitlin Hedberg and I am an Agent of Change to CSD1-15. I will be staying the full two weeks of this conference, and I am extremely excited to be here!
I live and work in Denver, CO, for an organization called Micro Business Development that engages in microenterprise development for underserved populations in the state and U.S. I will be blogging about the entire CSD experience as it related to microenterprise development. Please check out the blog and throw your cents in at www.microbusinessdevelopment.blogspot.com
Hope to see you on the blog!
In Sustainability,
Caitlin
|
|
| << Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
| | Results 26 - 30 of 48 |
|
|
|
Comments: webmaster@SustainUS.org
|
Top of page
|
|
|
|
|
