Surrey Greens

I have blogged before trying to chase the shifting (and constantly weakening) climate targets of the Harper government.

Our news release from Sunday will tell you some of what just happened -- a dodge based on using the US target as Canada’s target.  Canada has shifted from our legally binding Kyoto target (6% below 1990 by 2012) to Harper’s first target, breaking the law, (20% below 2006 levels by 2020) to the second Harper target, claimed by Prentice to be the US target: 17% below 2005 levels by 2020.  European nations, meanwhile, are committed to 20% below 1990 levels by 2020 (Scotland is committed to 40% below 1990 levels by 2020, and others have a range of more ambitious targets).

But do we really have the same target as the US?

We do not.  

IF we hit the new 17% below 2005 levels by 2020 (and I say IF because the Harper government has no plan to get to that target), we would have emissions above 1990 levels, while when the US hits its targets (and I say WHEN  because the US has in place plans to over-achieve and get more than 17% reductions), US emissions will be below 1990 levels.

All of this confusion is created by Canada’s contribution to global climate negotiations – the base-year fudge.  Until Harper picked 2006 as the base year, all nations in the world operated from the same base year: 1990 -- the year climate negotiations began within the UN system.  Sadly, Canada made it possible for other nations, notably the US, to start fiddling with base years.

When we shifted from 20% below 2006 levels by 2020, to 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, most eyes focused on the reduction in the percentage cut -- a 3% weakening.  But the big fudge is in the base year.

This is because 2005 emissions were above 2006 and so the final target is weaker by 6%, not three. 

Stick with me and let’s walk through the numbers.  (Thanks to John Streicker, Green candidate in the Yukon and northern issues critic on Green Cabinet, for this analysis)

According to UNFCCC, Canada's emissions are/were:

1990 = 592 mega tonnes CO2e
2005 = 734 mega tonnes CO2e
2006 = 721 mega tonnes CO2e

This makes our Kyoto target:  1990 - 6% = 557 mega tonnes CO2e
The first Harper target:  2006 - 20% = 577 mega tonnes CO2e
The new Harper target: 2005 - 17% = 610 mega tonnes CO2e

By choosing this new baseline year they have weakened the target not by 3% but by nearly 6%!

So, if we ever hit this target, we will be above 1990 levels in 2020.  This represents a gross level of irresponsibility.  The Harper government pretends it is committed to avoiding a 2 degree global temperature increase.  To do that, the industrialized world must reduce to 30% below 1990 levels by 2020.   If world governments followed Canada, we would lock the world's climate into meltdown.

There are not words.  To hear our Governor General speak of her family, to know so many Canadians cannot reach their brothers and sisters, to know that the misery of poverty in Haiti is not a natural condition of one end of Hispaniola Island, but relates to long-standing political post-colonial injustice, but to somehow feel this is not the time to look for anyone to blame, all this rushes through my brain.  I am very grateful to Stephen LeFrenie, Green candidate in Trinity-Spadina (see his updates) for his work in keeping the issue of Haiti in our minds at all times, for calling for Canada to take responsibility for our role in repression, and now for providing immediate updates on the situation in a country where he has so many links..
 
We must try to hang on to the new glimmers of recognition of the political struggles and desperate need for poverty alleviation in Haiti to continue the work, but….Now a few things can help.  We can get out the credit cards, trying to find one not maxed out after the holidays, and make a donation.  I just went to the Humanitarian Coalition site.  You can find them and other great groups like Médecins sans frontières on our site by clicking onto the map of Haiti.
 
We can afford to be generous.  Think about our lives.  Then think about Haiti.  Pray. Donate. Help however you can.

Since I posted my last blog on New Year's Eve, urging Canadians to demand respect for democracy and accountability from their government, I have been heartened to see so many actions launched.  People who have never been political in their lives are organizing.

January 23 has been chosen as a day for rallies for democracy.  I am going to post all those sites where actions are proposed.  These efforts are not those of the Green Party. I want to be clear that we are not trying to claim "credit" for this grassroots movement, neither do we necessarily support every call for action.  But the word needs to spread and greens from across Canada should support local actions in their area.  The list grows daily, so let me know if we have missed any.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=260348091419

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=380925270572

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=225434253378

The Prime Minister's latest move, to pick up the phone and ask the Governor General to shut down parliament until early March, proves once again his extreme cynicism and mastery in political calculation.  As commentators, from Jeffery Simpson, to John Ibbitson, to Andrew Coyne have pointed out, there is no excuse for this affront to democracy.  But as Ibbitson noted, Harper is probably right in guessing that in the week between Christmas and New Year, on New Year's Eve, not enough people will be outraged.  As Kady O'Malley pointed out, you cannot even dream up the talking points for this one.  Parliament gets in the way of Olympic games?  Athletes will find Question Period an artificial performance enhancer?

There is no precedent for this.  Amazingly other nations have managed to have government continue during the Olympics. PMO flak Dimitri Soudas, last seen in Copenhagen  haranguing and wrongly accusing Stephen Guilbault of a prank that embarrassed Canada, announced that prorogation was necessary as the government's economic approach required "recalibration." "Recalibration"--  there's a word to conjure. Obviously having Parliament in session would exude vibrations  interfering with the total stillness required for recalibration.   As Coyne said, this is "bilge."

What now?  We need to expect the unexpected. We need to kick and scream at this insult to democracy -- because that is what it is.  We need to support each other, efforts by other parties, non-political leadership. Wherever a clear and compelling call for democracy emerges, that voice must be supported.

When I wrote my last book ("Losing Confidence- Power, politics and the crisis in Canadian democracy") I thought we had seen the most outrageous abuse of our system of government. But this is worse. Harper's move this week is premised on the assumption that enough Canadians simply do not care about democracy or the role of Parliament.   It presumes that Parliament can be shuttered for trivial political reasons;  that legislation, committees, government accountability, a climate plan, progress on pensions, the investigation of the alleged cover-up in the treatment of Afghan civilians and other detainees --- that none of that matters enough to have consequences for Mr. Harper.

In the interests of democracy, let's hope this time his cynicism has miscalculated.

The negotiations in Copenhagen did not produce what the planet and, more particularly, what humanity needs.  What did it accomplish?

The Kyoto Protocol remains operational through to 2012.  That is unchanged.  The Copenhagen Accord is unclear as to the future of the Kyoto Protocol past 2012.  Some claim it will replace Kyoto, but that is not yet clear.  One reason is that it is open to many interpretations is that the full conference managed to accept the importance of the document (the "take note" route) without adopting it as a full decision of the COP.

I saw Norman Spector's blog was already ridiculing such language, which surprised me as I thought he had more international experience. Just to give a sense of the significance of "take note," the Earth Charter process has tried for years to get a UN document "taking note" of the Charter. While endorsed by a number of nations and UN Agencies, we couldn't get "take note" into the final statement out of Joannesburg in 2002 despite Kofi Annan's help. The US blocked it.  So this language is not without meaning.

What the COP did after nearly being hijacked by a very non-UN, shot-gun wedding kind of negotiation, was hang on to the limited progress in the Copenhagen Accord, without sacrificing what is needed to avoid GHG rising past 2015.  Progress is primarily found in a framework for mutual trust and verification of carbon cuts into the future.  This trust is critical between the US and China, and especially for President Obama's benefit in getting both domestic legislation and any future protocol through Congress.

The "take note" route also solidifies the trajectory for those countries in the group of 5 and then 20-something nations that signed on.  While their promised cuts are not good enough, and while they are not legally binding, the final COP decision makes it harder for those countries to drop their pledges.  As UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon clearly hopes, this puts pressure on the world's biggest polluters (and that includes Canada) to start emission reductions immediately.

The "take note" route also makes it harder for the promised financing to be ignored.  The US and UK, who pushed this, now have to find the money.  Hillary Clinton said "public and private sources.". Clearly the $100 billion/year pledge by 2020 is not going to come from either existing aid monies, nor is it going to come through existing aid sources.  Something innovative is needed.  The Tobin Tax would fit the bill.  A tax on speculative currency transactions, applied universally and globally, would accomplish two things --  stabilize national currencies and help economies around the world (Nobel Prize winner in economics, James Tobin, saw this as the proposal's main benefit), while raising the funds to meet the Copenhagen Award pledge.

The COP15 summit thus had something to show for the frantic negotiations, but, thanks to a lot of developing country push-back, did so without creating a COP decision that would weaken our chances.  It did not take the heat off the process to develop a legally binding treaty. And, it raises the possibility of aligning to avoid 1.5 degrees, instead of 2 degrees, which is not a level of increase to keep the world's peoples safe.

There remains much about the accord that is dangerous (the review in 2016 being actually terrifying, as if GHGs do not peak and fall by 2015, 2016's review becomes a post-mortem), but with non-stop meetings continuing between now and COP16 in Mexico City, we have the possibility of getting to where we need to be in time.

Take heart. Be brave. Fear not.  The global movement for climate justice has a long road ahead. Enjoy family and friends over the holidays. (I will, so not likely to be blogging as I get some post-COP15 recuperation time).

For anyone for whom this holiday break is a celebration of faith, have a very Merry Christmas. Enjoy Chanukah. And for everyone else, enjoy the sense of peace the holidays bring. Recharge your energies. Hug your loved ones. Enjoy.

The New Year will be dedicated to making the difference that protects our world.

I have been to quite a few Conferences of the Parties of the Framework Convention on Climate Change (COPs).  Some have been brilliant, like COP11 in Montreal.  Some were dismal, like COP14 in Poznan.  But, Copenhagen takes the cake as a bad COP.

We were welcomed to a city postered in the encouraging slogan "I live in HOPE enHagen." By the time we left, one clever friend was calling it "Hopeless Hagen."

It was rough at a couple of levels --  some substantive, some just atmospheric (no pun intended).   The impact of the bad logistics, crazed and paranoid security and abusive treatment of civil society participants did impact on the substantive.  Delegations whose members had been trapped in security cordons (some for as long as 8 hours in bitter cold) were not in a good mood to negotiate.  When the UN has a venue that holds 15,000, it should not register 40,000 to attend..  Clearly the reduced access to some level was needed. But then they over-did it reducing NGO participation from 20,000 to 300. The halls and chairs in Bella Forum were empty.  But why?

The exclusion of civil society turned out to be just the beginning. On Friday, once President Obama arrived, a very non-UN approach took over.  Brokering a deal between the US, India, China, South Africa and India would have been a brilliant starting place to the negotiations, had it been accomplished in advance.  As it was, the arrogance of ignoring so many nations resulted in another 12 hours, through the night, of negotiations.

What is the result?  The two page Copenhagen Accord is a political statement, non-binding. It leaves targets for GHG reductions to be filled in later.  It pledges to keep global average temperature below 2 degrees C, promises to consider 1.5 C but would, on current commitments take the world past 3 degrees.

The same nations will meet again for COP16 in Mexico. Meanwhile the June G-8 and G-20 would be an excellent place to push for more and stricter commitments.  Too bad those meetings are in Canada.

A spring election could help, but only if climate and the responses to the climate crisis could play a role.

In the meantime, we cannot let up the pressure for a nanosecond.  Mexico City's COP16 had better be a very good COP.

...it appears that Bolivia and Venezuela just walked out of the COP.

Rumours flying but appear confirmed that the Danish organized a meeting of the "most important" leaders and forgot to invite China. The level of distrust and anger between the G77 and China and the Danes is so large now, even this political fig leaf may not get support now.

The UK Guardian has published an excellent summary of why no deal is better than a bad deal (in the words of Desmond Tutu). It is all about the science. On current carbon reduction commitments, the stated G-8 goal of keeping temperture to no more than a 2 degree temperature rise would be overshot by a full degree. The article doesn't mention that a global average temperature rise of 3 degrees puts us into a scenario of self-accelerating, unstoppable run-away global warming.

In any event, meaningful and deeper GHG cuts are urgent. If Obama has some of those in his back-pocket we might be able to see a meaningful deal here. But the rich countries offering money and leaning hard on the poor and most vulnerable to take a bad deal is an ugly picture. I know the meek are supposed to inherit the earth. Soon, please.

Sarkozy and Lula are not giving up.  Working the phones.  Sarkozy to Obama. Is it possible?

Yes.

There were some brave speeches, claiming there is still a chance of a legally binding and transparent agreement in Copenhagen.  But it is increasingly hard to believe them.

Gordon Brown has tried to save the negotiation. He said that Copenhagen will be "blessed or blamed" by future generations. He argued against narrow self-interest. The only new bid was more money - starting at $10 billion/year working to $100 billion/ year.


HiIlary Clinton repeated the US target.  -17% below 2005 by 2020…but she topped it up with the US goal to jointly mobilize $100 billion/year by 2020 - from public and private sources....(Same target as Gordon Brown). What this amounts to is a pledge to find or raise the money.

Chancellor Angela Merkel was correct, speaking from Germany before headed to COP15, noting that the US target was not "ambitious."

And she is right.  The US should offer to reduce emissions more rapidly, but it does not seem likely.  The health care crisis and that legislation in the US Congress has impacted this meeting, with US Senators who had planned attend COP15, have stayed in Washington.  The Waxman Markey bill is linked in terms of political priorities. It has not passed, but it is also not good enough.  It means Barack Obama comes here without the key ingredient to unlock the deadlock and save these negotiations. A 20% cut against 1990 levels by 2020 would be enough (I think) to get China to agree to leveling off emissions and other pieces would fall in place.  But it is late, with President Obama coming tomorrow, and Hillary Clinton repeating today what everyone had heard of the US target, only offering more money, it is unlikely Obama will bring anything new.  Of course, he still could. And others could do more as well.  But at this writing the police repressive tactics, the unbelievable exclusion of NGOs from the negotiations, the combination of arrogance and incompetence from the Danish government have all contributed to a sense of inevitability about looming failure.

Nauru, Marcus Stephen.

We want a fair, legally binding agreement.  Negotiations very contentious and we have failed to reach a good outcome. It is clear that not all countries understand the severity of the issue.  I am under intense political pressure to abandon my principles.

We are told to be realistic. We have been offered $10 billion, for all the world. How is that realistic?

We have nowhere to go. I cannot compromise my commitment to my people.

We must be realistic and practical. We must follow the science.

We face a serious problem. What we need are serious solutions.

The large emitting countries must take responsibilities for their actions. There can be no political agreement when there is no political will.

[I have heard from Green colleagues that Kevin Rudd and Gordon Brown are twisting arms to get the African nations and low-lying island nations to cave]

Kenya; Kibaki. Equity means an approach that is fair.  Committing to a 10% forest cover by 2028, up from 2%, and investments in wind and solar. $25 billion by 2020 in investments and needs help.

There was a break in the leaders' speeches.

I went to a side-event from ICLEI, now chaired by an old friend from BC, David Cadman.   In a discussion of local cities initiative, Sir Nicholas Stern opened.  He pointed out that at current rates of emissions, continuing and shooting past 2015, we would not be able to avoid 5 degrees celsuis averge global temperature increase...making the planet as hot as it was 30 million years ago....when no humans lived here.

Hard to keep up. Right now it is the Pres of Micronesia as climate crisis is a threat to existence.

I ask your help to save my people. I ask your help to save our planet. We are not here by accident, we are here for a purpose, let us seal the deal...

Maldives: PM Nasheed. This is the "end game" in more ways than one.  Negotiations have been fraught, time consuming and difficult....I am still optimistic that we can still leave this meeting with a planet-saving deal.  As of now, we have discovered the text we negotiated all night is now not agreed upon.  We will have no text to share with the leaders.  For us this is more than just another meeting. This is a matter of life and death. Any GHG above 350 ppm, and temperature higher than 1.5 degrees is not acceptable.  If we go over that, it will submerge our nation, turn our oceans to acid,--  you cannot imagine I could agree with the idea that 350 is impossible. If it were, we would be saying, saving our countries is impossible.  We must ensure that GHG levels peak and start dropping by 2015.

It is not carbon we want, but development. Not coal that we want, but energy. Not oil that we want, but transportation.  I urge China to take a lead. We urgently need to move forward. Giving us intensity targets that are close to business as usual is not acceptable.

The Maldives have pledged to be carbon neutral by 2020.

To the industrialized world ... you have the financing and the technology. Please make it available for others.
Climate has nothing to do with money.  We have never taken aid from the EU countries.  We have fended for ourselves.  I want to be able to have grandchildren. It has nothing to do with money.  Impressed with what some sub-national governments are doing, like California and Quebec.

We must come to an agreement. It is a matter of life and death.

Comments from the President of Venezuela:

• Back to the earlier concerns over the lack of transparency.  Bolivia said earlier, the text presented is not democratic or inclusive.  A new document? Top Secret!  It is not democratic, it is not inclusive. Well, ladies and gentlemen is that not the reality of this world. There is an imperial dictatorship in this world. This is a reflection of this.  There's a group of countries who think they are better than us in the developing world.
• There is no democracy in this world.  There were two young people in here earlier.  The police were kind. They pushed them but not very much.  There are lots more people out there.
• Let's say hello to all the people out there in the streets. And they are mostly young. And they have a right to be concerned. We could say there is a ghost lurking. That ghost is silent somewhere in this room that ghost, a terrible ghost, capitalism is that ghost.
• The rich countries of the north helped the bankers and. One of the signs I saw in the street.."If the climate was a bank, they would have saved it."  Obama isn't here yet.  He got the Nobel Peace Prize pretty much the same day they sent 30,000 people to Afghanistan.

And those were introductory comments.

• Climate change most devastating environmental treats of the last century.  Endangering life on this planet. 7% of the world population (500 million) responsible for 50% pollution. The 50% poorest only responsible for 7%....
• You cannot really ask the same of the US and China.  

I missed a bit of this crowd pleasing entertainment, but he threw in "capitalism is the road to hell " and used Jesus (and the camel thru the eye of the needle...) as support.

The system of national governments negotiating is a "Fundamentally dysfunctional political system."  Prime Minister Zenawi of Ethiopia speaking on behalf of all countries of Africa.

"Not here as victims of the past....but as stakeholders of the future..."

"A commitment to develop Africa in a way that is not carbon intensive. Ethiopia to be Carbon neutral by 2025." (Bill Clinton told me about this goal of Ethiopia.)

Tillman Thomas, PM of Grenada on behalf of low lying island states...the entire world comes together. Demands that industrialized countries cut by 45% reductions below 1990 by 2020. First reference to 2015, peak and decline. No more than 1.5 degrees. "One point five to stay alive."

Lesotho PM Bethuel Mosisili on behalf of least developed countries.  Decline in agricultural production, increased disease...rising sea levels, or as in case of Lesotho, fragile mountain environments.

Very limited capacity to cope with these threats.

I have never seen anything like this.  The meeting was adjourned for Environment Minister Connie Hedegaard to be replaced by the Danish PM to introduce leader after leader for speeches.

BUT before leaving the Chair, Connie said there would be new proposed language soon on Kyoto Protocol text...not available now. So as the PM tried to gavel in the high level session, speaker after speaker has denounced the process as not transparent.  China spoke of a "matter of trust with the host country." (Strong language in UN deiplmatic-speak) and then Brazil agreed -- where is the text? And India (still visibly shaken from whatever happened to him in Security) agreed...Ecuador agreed and developing countries . The PM now insists they go on with leaders' speeches.

Another point of order from Brazil.  They negotiated all night long. I ran into delegates leaving at 6:45 am when I got off the metro, they were getting on having worked all night.  They know there is a new text.  They have it. They want to know if it is the basis of further work.

Now South Africa Minister Mabhudafhasi has taken the floor to support India, China, Sudan etc...

There is clearly deep distrust that the text agreed to overnight may disappear.  The PM Rasmussen is totally unprepared and keeps saying "we have to move forward." But his measures of progress are not shared. He is watching the clock on getting speeches from leaders going.  These delegations want to ensure they have a text.

Now China takes the floor on a point of order. China's lead is now speaking English. (He usually has a female voice over of a translater.) He is sticking to his point that the Danish presidency has not properly consulted...

It is in the air. The sense of imminent defeat, fake success photos ops and a clamp down as a street demo is making police extra nervous.  Kids on the street this AM were being asked by police for identification. At 6:30 am, outside the downtown train station. Miles from Bella Centre.

At Bella Centre, more barriers, more security, helicopters overhead in the pre-dawn darkness.  Glad we got to Bella Centre before 7.  We took the Metro and (as always) had the long queue in the cold and drizzle.  But we were lucky and got in by 8.  Less lucky were those who took the Metro slightly later.  It was announced at a stop before Bella Centre that in aid of crowd control, the Metro would not stop at the Bella Centre.

On top of restricting NGOs with special white cards, now getting into plenary requires a red badge. And government delegations only get 4 passes for plenary --silver.  Mass confusion reigns.

I made it to the Canadian government briefing.... A greyer than grey recitation of our non-cooperation delivered in soporific fashion. I asked our lead negotiator when I could hand deliver hundreds of personal messages from Canadians to the Prime Minister or Environment Minister Jim Prentice (primarily from southern Vancouver Island and Nova Scotia and our "Countdown to Copenhagen " events) and he suggested I trust him to deliver them.  I did, but I don't.

One of the youth reps, my dear friend Rosa Kouri, asked what Canada's target was in parts per million.  He said that hadn't changed and he'd answered it before. So I asked two things -- answer Rosa's question and is Canada prepared to accept the penalties for violating the protocol from the first commitment period of Kyoto.

Non-answer to the second part. Answer to the first, "we agreed to yhe G-8 statement of two degrees" which he then stated to be 450 ppm. I asked if he was informing the Prime Minister and Minister Prentice that there was no way to avoid 3 degrees C if GHG levels keep rising, that Dr. Pachauri had confirmed that, to avoid runaway global warming, emissions must peak globally no later than 2015 and fall from there.  And, of course, our targets (even before the watering down for the tar sands) do the opposite and keep GHG levels climbing...no answer.

The plenary session is a nightmare.  Reports on the text for Kyoto Protocol and the Chair of the working group reported no agreement was possible. Brazil was to speak and had to reply that the head of their delegation had not been able to clear security. He was shaking with anger.  President Connie Hedegaard said they would look into it right away.  India took the floor, also angry, to say treatment at security had also been unacceptable.

Tuvalu said we are disappointed. These negotiations are like the Titanic.  We are sinking. It is time to launch the lifeboats but we cannot because one of the crew has decided the ship is not sinking. These negotiations need rescue and we have to launch the lifeboats.  We have to save these negotiations and keep working.

Meanwhile, members of the Canadian delegation do not anticipate a long working session to get to some agreement. They expect to go home on Friday. A bad sign.

The story today is Canada and the real leak. Not the spoof press release of yesterday. (Today a group called the "Yes Men" took responsibility for the hoax press release in which Canada reversed itself and took a good position! Amazing impact that had. Countries praising us and then realizing our position was still the worst.)

Today's news was the CBC story of Canada's plans to deliver even less than our so-called targets.

We have gone from being the object of anger and hostility to being the butt of jokes.  I kept getting the "blague du jour" from other countries and NGOs..."We may be bad, but at least we are not Canada!" or "Thank goodness for Canada. It makes us look good."

Today I met one of Jim Prentice's advisors for the negotiations. Mike Holmes from "Holmes on Homes." Definitely a nice guy and an ethical carpenter. I guess it is important for Prentice to have advisors who don't know more than he does about climate science or UN process or the history of Kyoto.

The other weird strand of this meeting continues in the abuse of civil society.  It is a truism that the UN is capable of mind-blowing inefficiency, but the systematic abuse of NGOs makes it hard to believe it is not deliberate.  It puts me in   in mind of a line from the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago where my mum was a delegate and I went along at 14. She thought it would be great for me to see "democracy in action."  So after the "police riot" (official inquiry finding) and the abuse of delegates for Gene McCarthy, one such victim said "I was not convicted and sent here. I was elected and sent here." Well, true enough, no one elected the 20,000 or so legitimate and accredited NGO representatives  (a term that includes labour unions, indigenous groups, universities, environmental groups, religious organizations and so on), but the essential elements of the experience apply.   This morning Jacques and I set out. The only Canadian Green Party reps with full credentials and the new extra pass required under new rules.  We took the official COP15 delegate bus which (up until today) had dropped delegates near the front door.  Today it dropped us a half mile from the site, funneling hundreds of people between concrete barriers.  A heavy police presence forced us into a bottle neck in which we were yelled at and shoved into another long procession of humanity and we were told to get to the back of the line.  Another half mile later we found the back of the line.  They had run out of concrete barriers and we were herded between strips of police tape.  Gradually we began to exchange notes and figure out that some in the line had just arrived and had no credentials. Some had credentials and hoped to have the white access card later. And some of us, oh lucky ones, had credentials and the MAGIC pass.  And all in the same line. Which didn't move. For three hours.

Any efforts to get a sensible answer were rebuffed by Danish police. UN officials stay inside giving instructions... Meanwhile the army, wearing camouflage, took pity on us and started delivering cups of hot tea through the mesh in the fence.  The army here are a kindly lot.  (They all seem a bit old, a nice group of seniors. An old buddy of mine noted this and asked a local about the advanced age of their army. "Oh," he explained, "that's our reserves. The army is in Afghanistan."

Finally a policeman who seemed to be a higher up took note of the fact that hundreds of delegates were trapped, despite having both forms of credentials and we were sorted and allowed to make our way toward the hall.  From a 9 AM arrival, I got in at noon.

So, does progress get made? Not in today's negotiations.  Too many working groups and contact groups have finished what they can accomplish leaving much undone -- square bracketed texts meaning too many countries are holding to their own fragments of text. Now what can be agreed upon must be negotiated by heads of government and their ministers.

Governor Schwarzenegger spoke today in a side event. Jacques Rivard attended and told me that Schwarzenegger says it is time to give up on national governments. He suggested the UN convene a treaty process for states and provinces and cities to cut Greenhouse gases while we have time.... Maybe he's got a point.

My day started forcing myself out of bed with the aim of being at the front of the line for credentials when the process was set to resume at 8 AM.  We had tried on Saturday, waiting in line an hour before realizing waiting for credentials would make me late for a meeting. Credentials are a must, so after a bus and Metro ride in the pre-dawn chill, my daughter and I made it to the convention centre before 7 AM.  But we were not the first in line...about 50 people were aead of us. It was a cold morning and nothing intensifies cold like standing in line. The UN officials seem not to have enough staff any day and we did not get into the building until 10 AM.

It took another 40 minutes or so and by 11 am, I had credentials. In some ways, this was the challenge of the day. One young woman wrote me later in the day that she had waited for over 9 hours only to be turned away.

George Monbiot was having trouble getting his credentials when I last saw him....

Getting into the building was a nightmare today, but it will be much worse tomorrow.  The UN secretariat has accredited 40,000 participants and 5000 media for a space that holds 15,000. Starting tomorrow they will start rationing admission.  Each non-government delegation has to reduce itself by about 50%.  Admission cards are required in addition to accreditation badges.  And, by Thursday, only 90 observers will be allowed in the building.  90 out of  over 10,000 who came here with advance confirmation they could attend.

So the squeeze on space, on transparency, on credibility is quite like the debate on carbon. We will be experiencing cap and trade in the ngo world, while governments are not asked to take on any reduction.

The highpoint in my day was meeting with the 35 young people here with the Canadian climate youth movement.

Young people from NB, Nunavut, BC and all over Canada are working tirelessly to make a difference in these negotiations.

Getting into the conference centre was hugely difficult. A ring of Danish police kept anyone without a reason to be in the centre OUT...and since the centre is closed today for security sweeps....preparing for 100+ world leaders. Bomb sniffing dogs, barriers and barbed wire and I am trying to get in for CTV and Question Period!  I got in.

Waiting to hear US Secretary of Energy Stephen Chu and talking with a Scottish government rep, while a major Danish band entertained (Outlandish- that's the name of the band). The Scottish rep told me their target is 42% below 1990 by 2020.  Pretty amazing.

Stephen Chu is hugely impressive --  Nobel Prize winner in Physics and Obama's Secretary of Energy.  He began by quoting President Obama -- "the days of the US dragging its feet are over."

Made me wonder if this is the first time in history two Nobel Prize winners have been in a US cabinet.

Chu reviewed the major programmes in the US to maximize energy efficiency - appliances, homes and buildings (to save up to 75% of energy used in buildings).  Then he outlined an aggressive US programme in renewable energy.

Crystalline silicon and thin film technology for solar power, he believes, are near a huge price drop. As little as one dollar/watt. He sees it taking off soon without government subsidies.

His biofuel discussion focused on cellulosic ethanol.  Sadly, Chu is keen on nuclear and sees the only obstacle being the threat of nuclear weapons proliferation. He also talked about carbon capture and storage, something he admitted might never be commercially viable. In reviewing countries doing work in this area, he made no reference to Canada. He also discussed the investments in new technologies, such as giant new liquid batteries. As a prototype in research, such a battery worked at the scale of a swimming pool. Storage of energy from renewables, from wind and solar, is very important.

He was keenest on the high risk-high value research they are doing in the US such as his battery description.

He was followed by Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, head of the IPCC. Dr. Pachauri confirmed what I have seen as best science: that we need to ensure GHGs stop rising and start falling by 2015, or it will be too late. He called for large scale grassroots mobilization and citizen movements to push governments.

Neither speaker focused on what must happen here. The best banner of the day was Greenpeace's huge message opposite the Bella Centre. "Politicians talk. Leaders Act."

The first thing to strike a Canadian en route to COP15 is the dominance of the climate talks in billboards and public spaces well before you reach Copenhagen.  Starting in London at Heathrow, billboards call for climate action and companies -- from the evil empire of Exxon Mobile (evil not because they trade in oil, evil because they have thrown millions into anti-science propaganda campaigns) to "Hopenhagen" ads to sign on for climate action, are everywhere evident.  Once in Copenhagen, the climate  message dominates at the airport with the most offensive being COKE- the "bottle of hope" and the best being tck tck tck-  ads of greyer and older world leaders speaking in 2020 "we had a chance and we didn't act..."

As soon as people hear I am from Canada, everyone says "oh, are you upset Canada keeps being the fossil? It must be embarrassing for you.". The only positive buzz about Canada is the level of awareness that Toronto Mayor David Miller accepted one of the two fossil awards Canada received yesterday.  He is, apparently, the first government official to be present to accept his nation's fossil.  People are stunned our chief negotiator said our targets are "science-based.". "What science?" I am asked.  "Does your government know any science?"

The demonstrations were huge. Over 100,000 people!

At our assembly point in front of the Danish Parliament, a series of speakers including Vandana Shiva, gave us a rousing send off for our march.

As far as I could see the march was peaceful and celebratory.  All along the line of march, local people were leaning out their windows to cheer us on. Our favourite banner , hanging from a fourth floor window; "we are taking the hobbits to Isengard"

Following the march I attended an evening service at Trinity church led by the Archbishop of Canterbury. Many who read this blog won't know -- nor why would you? -- that Dr. Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury is the head of the Anglican Church for the world.  Meeting him was a huge honour for me and he seemed pleased an Anglican is leader of the Green Party of Canada.  His homily was inspiring and called on humanity to recognize our place in creation.

More tomorrow.