It’s Getting Hot In Here

Last night was the first of a series of conference calls for leaders of the movement to discuss using these next few months to Define Our Decade and create a plan to move forward in realizing a clean energy future. With over fifty people on the call, and lots of ways to engage, this conference call — not usually known to be an especially enthralling forum — was high energy and inspirational.

Laying out a vision

We started with a discussion on how we are each working to define our decade in our own community.  Aided by a chat room, we created an online visioning session, a brilliant display of the hope and creativity of our generation — and I have to admit, I haven’t been as excited about a chat room since middle school…. — We shared ideas to strengthen our local projects and showcase the movement to the general public. Continue reading ‘Let the Visioning Begin: It’s Time to Define Our Decade’

It’s been incredible to read many of the reflections during this month’s Climate Generation series, and I’m honored to have a chance to think about the movement and where we stand now. I’m so grateful that so much of my history in the movement has already been shared in the telling of our history in this series – from meetings in college basements to meetings on Capital Hill; from the hundreds at the Northeast Climate Conference to thousands at PowerShift; from Stepping it Up on campus to stepping it up worldwide on October 24; from first singing “It’s Hot in Here” while marching in Montreal to a vigil of thousands in Copenhagen. I am so grateful to have shared the growth of the movement with you.

It’s also been wonderful to read about what the movement here in the US has been mulling over the past two years, while I’ve been on the other side of the planet, working in India with the Indian Youth Climate Network and the early stages of so many other international youth movements on climate change. I have been so lucky to learn so much from my peers globally and to have been forced to rethink all assumptions, particularly about how change happens. In many ways, our theories of change differ dramatically worldwide, as do the tactics that feel most natural to create change. If we want to continue to build a global movement, we must continue building our respect for these diverse approaches and diverse tactics.

Continue reading ‘Climate Generation: Diverse Tactics Driving Change’

Who would have thought that the two most important climate developments of 2010 would, on the surface, have nothing to do with climate change? First, on Tuesday, Republican Scott Brown won the election in Massachusetts to fill Senator Kennedy’s former seat and became the “41st vote” against not only health care, but cap-and-trade legislation in Congress.

Today, in an even more important development, the Supreme Court overturned two precedents and swept aside a “century-old understanding” to allow corporate spending in elections. In the words of Barack Obama,

“With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans.”

That doesn’t sound good at all, does it? In a time when anti-corporate/anti-big bank fervor has never been higher, I think this decision is a watershed moment: not only a sign of how powerful our opposition is, but also an opportunity for the climate movement to think hard about how to tap into American’s mistrust of big-business and corporations to further a clean energy and climate agenda.

What do you think? Are we targeting big coal and big oil enough? Is an oppositional strategy the wrong way forward? How can we counter what will be a massive influx of special interest money in the 2010 elections? Or is this all a bunch of malarkey and we should really just go back to changing light bulbs?

www.climategroundzero.org

This morning, five individuals took direct action against Mountaintop Removal (MTR) by halting work at an MTR site. Sitting in barren oak trees and a poplar are Eric Blevins, 28, Amber Nitchman, 19, and David Aaron Smith, 23.  On standby at the trees’ base are the direct supporters Josh Graupera, 19, and Isabelle Rozendaal, 22. The trees’ location on Coal River Mountain directly impedes on Massey Energy’s attempt to build an access road to an impoundment where the toxic leftovers from coal processing (or, “slurry”) are being held back from the communities below. Their banners state: “EPA: Halt the Blasting”, “Windmills Not Toxic Spills”, and “Save Coal River Mountain.” Blevins expressed disbelief at this careless action, pointing out that “Massey Energy is a criminal corporation with over 4,500 documented violations of the Clean Water Act, yet the government has given them permission to blast next to a dam full of toxic coal waste that will kill 998 people if it fails.”

Continue reading ‘Youth Occupy Trees, Blasting Halted on Coal River Mountain’

Cross-posted at the Leadership Campaign.

Students from the Leadership Campaign hoist a wind turbine in front of the Massachusetts State House at the start of Copenhagen.

This morning, as predicted, we awoke to the news that the most liberal state in the nation has elected a tea party Republican to represent it in Congress for the next two years.  It’s a stunning turnaround for what was until recently Ted Kennedy’s seat; a seat that for 46 years was a champion for justice and for the least among us.  This pattern isn’t new, however: it is the predictable outcome of the Democratic campaign strategy.  This strategy parallels the losing strategy of the climate movement, and there’s a lot to learn from Massachusetts as we move forward after Copenhagen.

From the Boston Globe to It’s Getting Hot In Here, the stark difference between the two candidates, Scott Brown and Martha Coakley, on climate change, and an appropriate response have been detailed before.  For anyone looking to make a choice in this race on the merits of averting a climate crisis, the choice was clear.  But who was looking to make that choice?

It may seem like the obvious, but elections are won by the candidate who gets the most people out of bed, out of the house and to the polls to vote for them.  Working on an issue such as climate is not as clear cut as an election, but elections are where the rubber meets the road.  If the climate movement hopes to win, we must think as strategically as those who win elections.  So what does it take?  Victory takes two mutually enforcing pieces; a compelling narrative and a mobilization strategy. Continue reading ‘Shot Heard Round The World’

By Shreya Indukuri – ACE Youth Advisory Board member. Cross posted from Hot and Bothered

Copenhagen is OVER – so 2009. But, I have to share my opinion, from the perspective of a high school student that cares about climate and couldn’t be there in-person!

So the Copenhagen Accord = EPIC FAIL. Now, that’s a slightly exaggerated statement, but Copenhagen was definitely a huge disappointment. How big? Check it out:

For those of you who were unable to attend (including myself) I found this quite entertaining, again everyone is poking jokes at our climate leaders. But I honestly can’t blame them.

Only REAL result of the Copenhagen Accord 2009:

Brazil, China, India, South Africa, and the United States drafted the accord. They agreed that stabilizing atmospheric greenhouse gas levels is absolutely necessary in meeting the primary target to have been agreed upon: that “the increase in global temperature should be below 2 degrees Celsius.” The details to achieve this are not outlined in the accord. Developed nations must “commit to implement individually or jointly the quantified economy-wide emissions targets for 2020, to be submitted…to the [United Nations] secretariat by 31 January 2010.”
The Copenhagen Accord emphasizes the importance of these emissions cuts being greater than those imposed by the Kyoto Protocol. Developing nations, on the other hand, must “implement mitigation actions.” (whatever that’s supposed to mean =P) Continue reading ‘Copenhagen Accord = EPIC FAIL’

Lots of U.S. activists I know are targeted by ridiculous federal legislation like the Animal Enterprise Terror Act, are watched and infiltrated by Joint Terror Task Forces or watched by corporate private security keeping “tabs” on anti-corporate campaigns.  And while this targeting can have serious repercussions, it’s rare in recent U.S. history that you see activists targeted for assassination by anti-activist forces (although I do fear escalating violence in Appalachia around mountaintop removal.)  In the past few months, anti-mining activists in El Salvador and Chiapas have been threatened, attacked and assassinated by reactionary groups in their communities.

Dora Alicia Recinos Sorto, a Salvadoran anti-mining activist, was the third victim of such violence the Cabañas Region of El Salvador where communities are campaigning against Canadian mining company Pacific Rim. She was eight months pregnant and the shooting also wounded her two year old son.

Dora’ murder comes six days after the fatal shooting of Ramiro Rivera Gomez, Vice President of the Cabañas Environmental Committee, who had survived being shot eight times in August this year. In June, another environmental campaigner, Gustavo Marcelo Rivera Moreno, had been tortured and killed. Many other members of the community have received death threats, including youth workers and journalists for the local community radio station Radio Victoria, and the local priest Father Luis Quintanilla narrowly escaped an attempted kidnapping. Continue reading ‘Escalating Violence Against Anti-Mining Activists in Chiapas and El Salvador’

>>>Update: Read the live-blog of the event here<<<

>>>Update: Watch the debate live here.<<<

So, is coal part of West Virginia’s future? This Thursday evening at 6:30pm Robert F. Kennedy Jr will debate Don Blankenship on the future of coal, mountaintop removal and economic opportunities for Appalachia. Kennedy, chief litigator for the Waterkeeper’s Alliance and Blankenship, CEO of WV’s largest coal producer Massey energy, are both titans on this issue.

Convened by the University of Charleston president Ed Welch, the debate has already garnered significant attention from the media and people across coal country. With the bright spotlight focused on dirty coal, the debate will likely have a big impact on public opinion. We can help shape that public opinion. Watch Colbert’s brilliant segment on mountaintop removal last night, and then read on for how you can help. Continue reading ‘Kennedy and Blankenship to Debate Mountaintop Removal Coal Mining’

My journey in the movement has been one of critical engagement with the status quo, my peers, and my assumptions. Strategy sessions, marches, actions,  speeches, lobby meetings, countless emails and googledocs, rallies, conversations, books, and periods of reflection have constructed the vantage point from which I write today. This is a lengthy post. In it, I will recount personal experience and observations, present the bones of a theoretical framework for redirecting our movement, offer a critique of current strategies, and begin a conversation on what would constitute an effective strategy. It’s probably a bit much for one blog post, but I hope that you will take the time to read it and offer your perspective on the topics at hand. I write out of love and respect for the many amazing people who have shaped me and my work to this point.

Introduction
In August 2007, I participated in the Sierra Student Coalition’s annual leadership gathering, Shindig. At Shindig, I connected with dozens of inspiring youth leaders from around the nation. Leaving that week I saw myself as one person in a network of groups and individuals leading the way to a carbon-free future. I knew that by organizing our fellow students and communities to demand clean energy from the powers-that-be we could secure a sustainable and prosperous future. It was with this conviction that I returned to Michigan and threw myself into my new role as student coordinator of the Michigan Student Sustainability Coalition on the eve of Power Shift 2007. Continue reading ‘Climate Generation: Reshaping the Flow of Power’

It’s the day after MLK Day, and the eve of Obama’s inauguration.

In light of insufficient progress on national climate and energy policy, and a disappointing outcome in Copenhagen, it’s clear as a movement that we need to stop and reflect on our path forward.  It’s been great to see this discussion on IGHIH with a number of really thoughtful posts.  We got an idea of where we came from, learned about the importance of ambition and going big, and reflected on what we can learn from Martin Luther King Jr. and the civil rights movement. I’d like to continue the conversation, and have us reflect on what it means to be entering a new decade.

In this decade, the Millennial generation will come to power, becoming the largest voting constituency and entering the workforce.  How do we want to define our decade?

We need a movement wide discussion, and a movement wide vision. A vision built from the ground-up with the numbers to stand behind it to make it powerful. Continue reading ‘How Will We Define This Decade?’