A few years ago, experts came together to discuss potential scenarios for the Arctic.  They discussed what the Arctic would look like in 50 years in the face of climate change and intensified resource development.

The experts developed several scenarios, ranging from a race by countries to extract natural resources to armed military conflict, from protecting the Arctic for its natural wonders to a vision of sustainable development that brought economic wealth to local peoples.  After Russia planted its flag on the North Pole, news outlets trumpeted the likelihood of a new “cold war” with conflict brewing in the Arctic.

This week, Russia held a conference to try to dispel this myth.  The conference, called “The Arctic:  A Territory of Dialogue,” Diplomats and scientists from around the Arctic talked about the importance of working together to address the challenges facing the Arctic.  Speeches by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, Prince Albert II of Monaco, and Icelandic President Olafur Ragnar Grimsson provided an official air to the discussion.

I was fortunate enough to be invited to the conference by the Russian Geographic Society, which organized and hosted the event.  In many ways, the conference was organized to showcase Russia’s long-term commitment to exploration and research of the Arctic.  Although hosted by Sergei Shoigu – Russia’s Minister for Emergency Situations and the President of the Russian Geographic Society – the most visible participant was Artur Chilingarov, Russia’s colorful Arctic explorer who planted the Russian flag on the bottom of the North Pole. (more…)

This week, just days after BP finally capped the hemorrhaging well in the Gulf, President Obama issued an Executive Order delivering a first-ever National Ocean Policy (NOP). Instead of 20 different agencies administering more than 140 unique laws, often with conflicting purposes, in a piecemeal fashion, we will now have a guiding vision for all federal agencies with a mandate for protection and restoration of our coasts, oceans, islands and Great Lakes.

While the new policy can’t prevent a blow-out like the Deepwater Horizon it can prepare us much better to address such accidents, before they occur.  The NOP is the result of a yearlong public process that considered input from many stakeholders including commercial fisherman, conservationists, scientists, the recreational community, business owners and thousands of citizens. In San Francisco, over 500 people packed the hearing to weigh in on the question of how to best manage our shared ocean resources.

(more…)

Alexander Vrishch from Russia’s Phoenix Fund at the Rio Vista wind farm

During preparation for last month’s alternative energy exchange, and during the exchange itself, which took place in the Bay area and Sacramento, and with all the hassle and bustle that usuallyaccompanies the process of setting up meetings, finalizing itineraries, booking tickets, and taking care of other logistics, I could not but notice how individuals from all different walks of life – be it the government, businesses, or just individuals – were  genuinely interested in energy issues in Russia and incredibly willing to help out. I wondered why this was the case. What was in it for them to spend their time and energy on individuals who came halfway from around the world? (more…)

The 40^th anniversary of Earth Day provides a great opportunity to look back at the progress of the environmental movement – and how we are doing meeting the growing environmental challenges of the day.

As luck would have it, I am spending the 40^th anniversary of Earth Day in Moscow.  Since I have spent a significant amount of time the last 20 years working with grassroots environmental groups throughout Siberia and the Russian Far East, reflecting from Moscow seems somehow appropriate.

What have we learned in the last 40 years?  First, the environment is about people.  To protect the environment, we have to work with people.  We have found that building an effective, widespread environmental movement is critical to our success.  The environmental movement has been criticized for not reaching out broadly enough.  Time and again, we have proven that the environmental movement is not narrow.  The environmental movement is not limited to scientists and bird-watchers.  The environmental movement is made up of poor people, rich people, everyday people, people from labor unions, journalists, teachers, kids, parents, and many more. (more…)

While working with communities is core to Pacific Environment, we also need to build from those efforts and strengthen our support of critical environmental laws such as the Clean Air Act and Endangered Species Act — both of which are currently under threat.

The EPA, which enforces the Clean Air Act (CAA), is under attack from special interests and their representatives in Congress.  Special interests are advocating removal of the EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the CAA, which they won in the Supreme Court in 2007. Currently, there are two bills in Congress that would slow or kill the EPA’s new regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Two West Virginia Democrats, Sen. Jay Rockefeller and Rep. Nick Rahall, have co-authored a bill that would freeze the agency’s move for at least two years and “protect clean coal state economies.” Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska introduced a bill that would undo the EPA’s ruling that greenhouse gas emissions pose public harm. The state of Texas is also challenging the EPA’s attempts to regulate greenhouse gases claiming that the agency’s finding that “gases blamed for global warming threaten public health” is “based on flawed science and would harm the state’s economy.”

(more…)

Global climate change needs to be addressed on many fronts.  Looking globally in scope, international efforts to stop or slow down global warming are essential.  Communities in Alaska and around the Arctic are being impacted by bigger storm surges, thin or no ice which is impeding seal and whale hunts and creating extremely dangerous conditions for people to practice their subsistence way of life.  Additionally, global warming threatens many species of wildlife including polar bears, Pacific walrus and seals.  We must work together to get commitments from the US and other countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 350 parts per million, meaning greenhouse gas pollution from the United States and other developed countries should be reduced by 45% or more below 1990 levels by 2020.

(more…)

Like many of us around the world, I am keenly watching events unfold in Copenhagen.  I keep wondering whether our diplomats will be able to pull themselves together to come out of Copenhagen with a strong, binding agreement that truly reduces greenhouse gas emissions.

Today’s big news focused on developing countries walking out of the talks due to concerns about developed countries abandoning the binding targets of the Kyoto Protocol.  This reminds me of the famous WTO negotiations in Seattle ten years ago.  At those negotiations, developing countries brought down the talks because they saw too much back-room dealing.  Oh, and they also saw the incredible protests on the streets calling the entire WTO into question.

Developing countries have every reason to be concerned.  Watching U.S. senators introduce “climate” legislation that allows more offshore oil drilling – such as Senators Kerry, Lieberman, and Graham did last week – does not instill me with confidence that the U.S. can be a leader on climate change issues.  It appears as though we are allowing Senator Imhofe – a notorious climate change denier – to control U.S. legislation and, through it, the outcome of the negotiations in Copenhagen.  We need the U.S. and other developed countries to step up to the plate and commit to significant, binding reductions in emissions.

Developing countries also need to do their part to reduce emissions.  This is why we are helping to build a grassroots environmental movement in China.  Grassroots voices can change China towards a low-carbon path.  We need these voices to speak up loudly and clearly.

I worry that while governments are trying to move forward new language for a treaty – a text from the Danish government was just released that has been roundly criticized by delegates from developing countries – we are losing time to move forward real initiatives that will actually reduce warming.

For example, governments can agree now to take serious action to reduce “short-lived climate forcers.”  These pollutants include black carbon (soot), methane, and tropospheric ozone.  These pollutants are having a large impact on the warming of the Arctic and could be causing the Arctic to warm faster than originally predicted.

(more…)

On the first day of climate talks in Copenhagen, I have been thinking a lot about rhetoric vs. reality.  The last few days have been abuzz with rumors that the climate talks will result in a deal.  Obama changed his plans to attend the final day of the conference, befitting his role as a major world leader.  The pressure will be on U.S. negotiators to make sure that Obama’s trip is not in vain.

I hope that they are right and that we will get a real, enforceable, meaningful international agreement that leads to reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.  Our planet is crying out for this.  Kudos to the newspapers around the world that banded together to prove that an international agreement is, in fact, possible (at least among newspapers) by printing the same editorial calling for a meaningful agreement:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/dec/06/copenhagen-editorial

(more…)

One of the best things about the Arctic Council is information sharing and learning about some of the impressive scientific work going on around the Arctic.  Today’s meetings were dominated by scientists and working groups reporting on the diverse variety of projects that they have taken on.