FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 7, 2010

As the UN Secretary General’s High-level Advisory Group on Climate Change Financing (AGF) works to complete a review of sources of climate funding by the end of October, climate justice groups are voicing increasing concern over the focus of the AGF and the process through which its report is being developed.

Ilana Solomon, Policy Analyst for ActionAid USA, said, “Constituencies advocating for climate justice fear the Advisory Group’s report will be framed in the context of the Copenhagen Accord. This is inappropriate, particularly as the Accord, which has not been adopted by the Conference of Parties, is extremely limited in its scope on finance.”

The Copenhagen Accord sets out a goal of mobilizing only $100 billion in public and private sources for adaptation and mitigation in developing countries. “This is far short of what is really needed to support those already experiencing the effects of climate change,” Solomon added.

continue reading…

Towards a Jubilee South Platform on Climate Change, Ecological Debt and Financial Sovereignty
Jubilee South shares with you the electronic version of a document it has produced on the relation between climate change, finance and ecological debt and false solutions. We invite you to continue reflecting and contributing to this debate. http://www.jubileesouth.org/files/cambioclimatico_en_baja_calidad.pdf

New report from Focus on the Global South: Carbon Offsets & Climate Finance in India: The Corporate-driven Climate “Solutions” of the World Bank, Asian Development Bank & United Nations

by Konrad Fisher

India is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, yet it has played a central role in a counterproductive global climate agenda pushed by the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, and large corporations. India now hosts more registered greenhouse gas emission reduction projects – via the United Nations Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) – than any nation except China. In theory, these CDM “offset” projects – a form of “carbon trading” – supposedly reduce global emissions when developed nations avoid emission reductions at home by funding less expensive emissions reductions in developing nations. In reality, offset projects produce large quantities of greenhouse gases, pollute the local environment, and displace local livelihoods.

The World Bank and Asian Development Bank have become leading proponents of offset projects in India by committing their own resources, and by controlling international funding sources that would otherwise be managed within the more democratic, albeit flawed, United Nations climate framework. Moreover, these two institutions have repackaged their existing corporate-friendly agenda as a solution to the climate crisis, while creating new climate governance programs intended to replace those of the United Nations.

Although it must overcome corporate influence and eliminate existing carbon trading programs, the United Nations – not International Financial Institutions – remains the most viable multilateral body available to manage climate-related finance and international agreements.

To download the pdf copy, click here

Waste management practices are an important, although oft-neglected, contributor to climate change. Waste disposal drives climate change directly through the release of greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO₂) and nitrous oxide (N₂O) from incinerators and methane (CH₄) from landfills. Waste disposal also drives climate change indirectly by depriving the economy of reused, recycled and composted materials, thus requiring increased extraction of raw materials, an extremely energy-intensive process.

A climate-friendly alternative, known as Zero Waste, radically reduces greenhouse gas emissions by increasing the efficiency in managing materials. This reduces the need for extraction, processing, and transport of raw materials, while also avoiding emissions from disposal (incineration, landfilling, open dumping and open burning). However, rather than investing in Zero Waste, the waste industry continues to promote disposal technologies. It is currently engaged in greenwashing these technologies to take advantage of subsidies available to “climate-friendly” technologies – thus accelerating climate change and simultaneously depriving truly climate-friendly technologies of needed financing.

GAIA recommends that:

• Governments should adopt Zero Waste as an essential strategy to combat climate change.
• Mitigation funds which are to be used in the waste sector should support Zero Waste projects.
• Incinerators, landfills, and other “waste-to-energy” projects which undermine Zero Waste should be ineligible for mitigation funds, offset credits and other forms of climate-related financing and subsidies.

Download the full statement.

Descarga aqui:Basura Cero para Calentamiento Cero: Declaración de GAIA sobre desechos y  cambio climático (en castellano)

http://www.no-burn.org/cc

Contact info: Neil Tangri <neil@no-burn.org>
Global Anti-Incinerator Alliance (GAIA) www.no-burn.org
US mobile: +1.510.684.5476
Europe mobile: +49.15206121214

Spanish version also attached and also available at:
http://www.no-burn.org/article.php?id=608

Wastepickers are workers in the informal economy who recover recyclable materials from waste. They are invisible entrepreneurs on the frontlines of the fight against climate change, earning livelihoods from recovery and recycling, reducing demand for natural resources, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Yet their successes are being undermined by “waste-to-energy” technologies.

wastepickers-CC-EN.pdf

http://www.no-burn.org/bonn

Contact info: Neil Tangri <neil@no-burn.org>
Global Anti-Incinerator Alliance (GAIA) www.no-burn.org
US mobile: +1.510.684.5476
Europe mobile: +49.15206121214

Download factsheet on wastepickers and climate change

Spanish version also attached and also available at:
http://www.no-burn.org/article.php?id=730