Rio+20 failed, plain and simple. Few are surprised, and many are grasping at straws within the weak, toothless text, searching for something to grab onto to claim victory, but -- as one friend said in a final email on Rio -- we need to call a cat a cat.
Now I don't really know where that phrase comes from, but its pretty on-point. While the failure of Rio is certain, the question that organizers, youth and change makers fighting for a more just and sustainable planet need ask ourselves is "Why?" Why were negotiators unable to find common ground above the weakest possible positions? Why were world leaders little more than props for a glorified photo op? Why did this supposed historical conference produce an agreement better used as toilet paper or kindle in the post-climate apocalyptic wasteland we're headed towards?
I could keep going, but I think you get the point. Something is wrong, there is a proverbial floater in the punch of international climate politics. At its core, the problem is simple: There are a small group of corporations making obscene profits for whom protecting our planet and taking the steps towards addressing climate change is bad for business. If fossil fuels cause climate change, and you make your billions on oil, gas and coal, you aren't going to want there to be a solar boom or a wind power windfall because you can't put a tap, a pipeline, or a gas tank on the sun.
Climate activist Tim DeChristopher said it best once: "We've tried to make our ideas palatable to those in power but it's never really worked, because shifting away from fossil fuels is actually a threat to our current economic system and to our current political system."
Rio failed because the if it had succeeded, it would have fundamentally undermined some of the most powerful forces on the planet: big polluters.
A just transition to a clean energy society would create meaningful, long-term jobs by the thousands, it would clean up our air and water, it would stop us from driving out planet towards climate catastrophe, but what's more is that it would democratize the production and consumption of energy.
The simple fact is that there is no way that someone could install a tiny coal-fired power generator on the side of their house, mine some coal in the centre of town and make energy. Yet coal is the primary source of electricity for most of the world. On the other hand, I can think of ways that, were it made affordable and accessible to people around the globe, I could power my home, my block or even my city and community with a combination of small-scale, renewable energy and energy conservation systems.
Think about that. What if all the electricity in your city was made by the people, and not by a power company? Energy democracy would revolutionize our planet, they way we live, and it would fundamentally alter our economic system. Real, sustainable energy for all would put dirty energy out of business, and Petrobras, Shell, Chevron, BP, Exxon and the rest are not going to work with governments to put themselves out of business.
There is no fortune to be made by the corporate elite solving climate change. Instead there are jobs to be had, cleaner air to be breathed, safe water to be drank and a better future. What makes more sense to you?
So now we have the why, the next step is to figure out the how.
We know that in principle the solutions that the people and the planet need exist. We know that there is a strong, wealthy and powerful lobby standing in the way of this, and we know that we will never be able to match them in wealth, access to world leaders, or any conventional resource.
But we have one thing they don't: We have numbers. Together we represent a force more powerful than any dollar amount, the currency we have to trade in is our bodies, our minds and our creativity.
This fall in Canada we are taking the first step to building that movement that our planet needs, holding the second Power Shift Canada gathering. Bringing together hundreds of youths from across Canada, Power Shift will be a decisive moment in the fight to end dirty energy and build a just and sustainable future.
Power Shift is organizing to push forward a bill in the House of Commons to stop polluter handouts, and to empower youth from across Canada to build the solutions we need. The Earth Summit may have been a #RioFail, but this can be our chance build a movement that makes it impossible for world leaders to continue putting polluters ahead of people.
Follow Cameron Fenton on Twitter: www.twitter.com/CamFenton
In Canada in 2008, Stephane Dion, leader of the Liberals, based his campaign on green policies (he called it the "Green Shift"). Voter support was tepid. The Liberals lost seats.
And the Green Party of Canada has, despite two decade of trying, managed to vote in exactly one member of parliament.
Vox populi.
Until oil becomes more expensive (authentically so, not leftist-morally) than wind and solar the good and smart people of the earth will continue to use oil. Now, in your favor, they WILL use it up. So hold your horses, your "moral" energy is coming. My educated guess (I have a Master's in Physics, a minor in Biophysics and a voracious reading appetite) is 50-80 years and wind and solar will be economical.
So please calm yourselves you silly twits. The Earth has been going around the Sun with lots and lots of life on it for billions of years, with hominids for millions of years, and in 50-80 years, a drop in a bucket in an ocean compared to those time scales, it will be much like it is now even with continued oil use.
Sapere aude! (to quote Immanuel Kant)
On a related note, the argument that life on Earth has survived for billions of years so it can only continue is also an irrelevant non-sequitur that those opposed to taking action on climate change often employ. No one is arguing that all life will cease due to climate change. Yes, the Earth and life on it will continue in some form regardless of what we do. But the point is that we can inflict and we are inflicting horrendous damage on ourselves and others species, and yes this can all happen within the next few decades. The 50 year timeline is indeed very relevant. Sure the world will go on but what kind of world will it be?
The Brainiacs in Japan would also figure out a way to run without fossil fuels as they don't have them and have to rely on Nukes that poison them. If wind/solar /thermal is the way, they would do it.
Also, why do media always list oil before coal? Shouldn't you Green worriers be talking Coal and Methane (cows pigs and chickens) all the time instead of the 15% of GHG that is caused by mostly Oil powered Transpo? Seems absurd to me. COAL, METHANE, CO2 from oil in that order. Don't forget the Mass flooding of water systems too.