Photo Credit: Dakota Fine

American adults under the age of 35 have come of age in the decades since the “discovery” of man-made climate change as a major societal problem. The oldest of this cohort was twelve in 1988, when NASA climate scientist James Hansen testified at a Senate Energy Committee hearing that global temperature rise was underway and that human-produced greenhouse gases were almost certainly responsible. For this reason, the conventional wisdom holds that young Americans, growing up in a world of ever more certain scientific evidence, increasing news attention, alarming entertainment portrayals, and school-based curricula, should be more engaged with and concerned about the issue of climate change than older Americans.

However, contrary to this conventional wisdom, Americans between the ages of 18 and 34 are, for the most part, split on the issue of global warming and, on some indicators, relatively disengaged when compared to older generations.

Overall, the survey data offer no predictable portrait of young people when it comes to global warming: While less concerned about and preoccupied with global warming than older generations, they are slightly more likely to believe that global warming is caused by human factors and that there is scientific consensus that it is occurring. They are also somewhat more optimistic than their elders about the effectiveness of taking action to reduce global warming. And, while they are less open to new information about global warming than older generations, they are much more trusting of scientists and President Obama on the issue.  However, they also share older generations’ distrust of the mainstream news media.

Of note, young evangelicals, an increasingly important group politically, place strong levels of trust in religious leaders as sources of information about global warming, though they are also trusting of scientists and President Obama.

Nationwide, liberals and conservatives exhibit wide differences in their beliefs about global warming, with conservatives more skeptical and less engaged than liberals, and this ideological divide is no different among young Americans.

Members of the current college-age generation (18-22 year-olds), who have grown up with even less scientific uncertainty about climate change, are somewhat more concerned and engaged than their slightly older 23-34 year-old counterparts; however, this does not hold across the board. Still, the data suggest untapped potential to engage young Americans on the issue of global warming. Two important caveats, however:

1) These results are limited to Americans 18 years or older. The Center is currently collecting data on teenagers aged 13-17, but won’t have this analysis completed for a while.

2) It is also possible that there has been a surge in young people getting politically involved in climate action, but this has not (yet) translated to the entire age cohort. We have certainly heard (and seen) anecdotal evidence to support this hypothesis, but the Center wouldn’t be able to observe such a trend in their national survey data.
The full report is available here: http://environment.yale.edu/climate/

• 88 percent of Americans say it is important to recycle at home, but only 51 percent “often” or “always” do;
• 81 percent say it is important to use re-usable shopping bags, but only 33 percent “often” or “always” do;
• 76 percent say it is important to buy locally grown food, but only 26 percent “often” or “always” do;
• 76 percent say it is important to walk or bike instead of driving, but only 15 percent “often” or “always” do;
• 72 percent of Americans say it is important to use public transportation or carpool, but only 10 percent say they “often” or “always” do;

On the positive side, large majorities of Americans think these actions are important. Yet there is also plenty of room to improve. It is important to recognize, however, that each behavior confronts its own set of barriers. For example, public transportation may not be locally available or convenient. Policies to lower these barriers will make it much easier for people to act in ways consistent with their values.

The survey also found that, in the past year, approximately 1 out of three Americans have rewarded companies that are taking steps to reduce global warming by buying their products, while slightly fewer report that they have punished companies that have opposed steps to reduce global warming by not buying their products. Finally, in the past year 12 percent of Americans have contacted government officials about global warming. Of these, 72 percent urged officials to take action to reduce global warming.

A copy of the report can be downloaded from http://environment.yale.edu/uploads/BehaviorJan2010.pdf

• Funding more research on renewable energy, such as solar and wind power (85 percent)
• Tax rebates for people buying fuel-efficient vehicles or solar panels (82 percent)
• Establishing programs to teach Americans how to save energy (72 percent)
• Regulating carbon dioxide as a pollutant (71 percent)
• School curricula to teach children about the causes, consequences, and potential solutions to global warming (70 percent)
• Signing an international treaty that requires the U.S. to cut emissions of carbon dioxide 90% by the year 2050 (61 percent)
• Establishing programs to teach Americans about global warming (60 percent).

Surprisingly, majorities of Republicans and Democrats support many of these policies, including renewable energy research, tax rebates, regulating carbon dioxide, and expanding offshore drilling for oil and natural gas. Further, majorities in both parties support returning revenues from a cap-and-trade system to American households to offset higher energy costs, perhaps opening a pathway for Congressional action.

Sixty percent of Americans, however, said that they have heard “nothing at all” about the cap and trade legislation currently being considered by Congress. Only twelve percent had heard “a lot.”

When cap and trade is explained, 58 percent support the policy, but this support drops to approximately 40 percent if household energy costs increase by $15 a month, or 50 cents a day. Sixty-six percent support cap and trade, however, if every household were to receive a yearly bonus of $180 to offset higher energy costs. In addition, 59 percent of Americans said they would likely spend the bonus on home energy efficiency improvements. Support increases to 71 percent if the bonus is doubled and spent entirely on energy efficiency improvements.

It may at first glance seem strange that public support for many of these policies remains high, despite the drops in public belief and concern about global warming reported last week. These results are from the same survey respondents, however, and it is important to remember that different people support these policies for different reasons. For example, some do so because they want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, others because they want to strengthen national security, or make the US less dependent on foreign sources of energy. Some of these policies have had solid majority support for years (e.g., renewable energy research), while for others (e.g., cap and trade) public opinion is still fluid and could go either way depending on how well advocates and opponents make their arguments.

A copy of the report can be downloaded from: http://environment.yale.edu/uploads/PolicySupportJan2010.pdf

That aside, negotiators had feared from day one of the talks that the documents and the process of negotiating would not mature to the point required in order to allow negotiations to move into the high level segment where over 100 Heads of States would come to sign a just climate deal. Their fears were realized. The process has been deeply flawed and the voices of nations regarding lack of transparency, conspiracy to kill off the Kyoto protocol has been true. I often found myself being witness to the injustice within the UNFCCC process (where had I not gone to certain meetings, I would have missed out on joint drafting sessions which I assumed were only scheduled G-77 coordination meetings). Text messages were sent, rooms were changed, information was not available to all.

All of this, in the wake of the greatest climate conference the world has ever seen since the birth of the Convention some 18 years ago. Why did it take us so long? How did we get so bitterly entrenched in this process? I have seen and learned more about the process as a negotiator in the last 2 weeks than I could have my entire life. As a result, I have become deeply disillusioned. Two nights ago, at the launch of the Maldives “Survival Kit” for nations, President Nasheed had all but given up on the process and called on youth to take to the streets and make this the absolute issue in politics. For nations like the Maldives that lie 1.5 meters above sea level at their highest point, this is an issue of their survival. I would agree.

After a bitter impasse, and stalling of the talks due to the flawed process, negotiators had still not made progress on many of the key issues. In the group discussing “enhanced action on mitigation” I found myself transported back in time as if no progress had been made between the developed and rapidly developing countries on any of the points on emissions reductions. On the issue of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions by developing countries, the parties talked in circles and could not arrive at any concrete conclusions. Finally the Heads of States arrived adding further confusion to an already impossible situation. Having lost a day and half due to the boycott of the talks by members of the African Group and other major developing countries didn’t help but probably was the only thing that kept the two track process (the Kyoto protocol) alive. Late last night, the heads of 25 nations were invited as part of a “friends of the chair” group to help broker a deal: United States, United Kingdom, Sweden, Spain, Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, India, Brazil, South Africa, Mexico, Maldives, Grenada, Ethiopia, Lesotho, Algeria, Denmark, Germany, Korea, Bangladesh, France, Gabon, and three others. The leaders of this group tried to hammer out a rough document to provide the basis for further negotiations. This is the “Copenhagen Accord“.

The deal is far from perfect. It is non-binding for starters and has a range of base years from which the many countries putting up targets can choose. If one looks closely, there is probably no way that it meets the 2 degrees guard rail target that we need at the MOST in order to avert a run-away climate disaster (even though it claims to use 2 degrees as the upper limit). It is far from what the islands need, far from what the Least Developed Nations require and still leaves many questions to be resolved. Yet it is the only thing that can salvage the absolute and utter lack of trust and faith that has been built up over the last two years between parties of the United Nations. Climate poses the biggest question to humanity as to whether or not we are going to be able to save ourselves. That is after all, what we are trying to do here. At this time, what we need is trust, faith, and greater understanding to move forward. I am only 25 years old. I fear bringing children into this world and as I sit here listening to nation after nation make statements in favor of or against supporting the passing of the Copenhagen Accord, I am now as uncertain as ever as to the future of humanity.

We have not attained “climate justice” here today. Nor have we secured our future. Outside over 200 protesters mobilized to arrive at the conference center to organize a “Shame Vigil.” Mind you civil society suffered the most fatal defeat during these talks by having been forcibly locked out in the final days. However, with an unprecedented over 45,000 registered delegates to the talks I think we have indeed arrived at a crucial point where the movement is unstoppable and will only continue to grow. It is 7:00 am on December 19th and I am unsure as to what the outcome will be. I leave you with this:

“In my anger, I am not blind, and in my fear, I am not afraid to tell the world how I feel.” –Severn Suzuki (age 12), Rio Earth Summit 1992

Among the 12 of us tracking the delegations here at Bangkok , I’m really tempted to go out in the evenings after a hard day’s work in the negotiations. I think after running after 60 year old negotiators from my country I require some youthful energy to enthuse the atmosphere!

From the perspective of a Non Annex 1 girl ,I feel that it would be literally impossible for me to find love among my team of 12 (keep in mind, there are no non annex 1 guys) due to the following very very STRONG reasons:

1. He is not willing to COMMIT

I am thinking Leela, I will think about it, I have loads of domestic responsibilities (read: girls back home) to undertake said the American Tracker. Whereas all the others supported him ,obviously ,collectively coming to a decision as the European Union , but nevertheless made their individual statements.

Instead they all say: Lets start all over again, lets try and get to know each other (read: shift baseline from 1990 to 2005)

What is keeping you from committing? Is it the reason that you feel I’ll dominate the relationship in the long run? (read: I’ll develop more than you over the years).

2. He takes more SPACE in the relationship

Adam- the Canadian Tracker

He takes more of the space in the relationship (read: has a massively higher proportion of pollution than us) and still demands he needs more space!

This is so totally NOT FAIR!

3. He refuses to FINANCE dinners

Although they have so much more money considering the dollar to baht exchange rate is amazing , they fail to fund my dinners. So I end up paying for myself, but considering that I don’t have the capacity to buy special desserts and exotic cakes, it becomes difficult to try and eat my share! (read: we can fund local missions like solar but in case we need to scale up activities we require your help!

4. Hates my mother (READ: tries to kill the KYOTO PROTOCOL)

Does not agree to any principles and conditions  my Indian mother puts before him as far as getting back earlier than midnight etc etc and definitely hates my mother for them ! (read: doesn’t like the conditions imposed and will not ratify them at any cost).

Florent- The French tracker

My mother is the most special and essential part of my life, how can you neglect her like this? (read: I have signed onto the KP and my commitment period is coming to an end not the protocol!)

5. Doesn’t let me use the TV remote or the computer (read: no transfer of technology)

I am deprived of using any sort of advanced technologies. Do you think that I don’t know how to use them? I come from India , we literally live with software and knwo the C to S of computers.

6. Wouldn’t save me If I fall off a cliff / Earthquakes hits us/flash floods take place

READ: We are already losing lives and their inaction could push us over the cliff towards run away climate change…..

He’s not going to come in a helicopter to save me like a Bollywood movie hero (read: countries are already feeling the effects and they are not reaching out enough with support for adaptation)

7.Doesn’t follow through and is indecisive

READ:  One second Obama is at the UN  high level summit promising big things and yet here in Bangkok there is little to no action to meet those high remarks. Why do we hear different views all the time?

- Don’t share a blanket

Just don’t have any concept of sharing is it?? and then let you freeze outside in the cold at the middle of the night.

Andrea the Italian Tracker and Ole the German Tracker

8.Possessive and wants daily reports

READ:  They want measurable , reportable and verifiable nationally appropriate mission reductions.

Why do you keep tracking us, when you never has an answer to where you are ?

9. Have such a consumption oriented lifestyle

Waste most of their money buying goods that they don’t use! We need to shift to a more sustainable lifestyle.

10. Would not make a good father

Read: clearly doesn’t care about protecting the environment for future generations and has no concept of making a better world in general.

So what say guys , are you willing to change or not?

Two years ago at the UN Climate negotiations in Bali, Indonesia, I happened to have the opportunity to attend as a member of the US youth delegation (because I was studying in the US). Upon arriving at the negotiations and after countless hours spent submitting our policy proposals to the UN Convention I realized that there is a growing and vibrant youth movement dedicated to the cause. These youth are actively trying to influence the negotiations. I became conscious of the fact that there were not any Indian youth in this growing international youth caucus present on the sidelines of the conference. I decided to introduce myself to the Indian Government negotiators as a “youth representative.” I was met with a cold and blank stare and then asked, “youth? Shouldn’t they have the same view as their elders?” I knew then that my life would never be the same again.

To be fair, I respect my elders and I know that there are many out there who are on the “far side of fifty” (age 50 that is) who have worked hard to make the world a better place. Generations have come and gone and nearly all of them have had a defining issue to tackle. My generation, labeled the “silent generation” by Thomas Friedman, is caught behind our computers and on facebook, having struggled to come to terms with the seemingly perfect world with an uncertain future of which we are not in control.Many in the climate movement are aware of the political deadlock between developed and developing nations over the issue of climate equity and historical emissions and responsibilities. Though we claim to be talking climate for the sake of future generations, nothing that we are doing is actually putting future generations in a better environment than that enjoyed by generations passed. So let’s get serious about generational equity because those in control sure aren’t.

While the climate crisis looms, we are currently consumed by a financial crisis that has gripped the planet.Just as financial institutions played with the public’s money, we are playing with the global commons that is our climate. We already know the impacts of unabated borrowing of money that does not exist. Can we play the same game with the lives of future generations as we borrow for our unsustainable growth today?

Global leaders are meeting at the summit in Pittsburgh and on the agenda is rebuilding the planet’s economy and hopefully, cooling down the planet. Let us turn this economic crisis into an opportunity of global proportions and usher a new era of genuine, sustainable development. I come from a young country—75% youth–that is facing many challenges. My own ancestral home in the desert sands of western Rajasthan only received electricity a year ago—electricity promised to my grandfather 25 years ago. Yet it is a land bursting with opportunity. Sure enough there is an army of youth in India that are ready to take that stand and that are dreaming of a clean, green country – one which will take this opportunity to build a green economy and support the growth of a green jobs movement. With 500 million people still in the dark, there are millions to be trained in sustainable energy enterprises alone. Let us not forget that this is a country that has half a million engineers graduating annually—a potentially potent force to engineer the country into the paragon of sustainable development.

While youth are 48% of the global population they are not an official part of the negotiation process at the international level. Though many of us are silent, many more are launching revolutions to transform our local communities. I was transformed by my experience in Bali and knew that in the labyrinth process of the negotiations all sense of urgency—of our future—is lost. This hopelessness was transcended through the creation of the Indian Youth Climate Network (IYCN) which has grown in waves and caught the attention of young people, civil society, companies and the same government that questioned the role of youth on the topic two years ago. Similarly youth movements for the cause are rising across the planet—daring governments to break the deadlock. We envision a future which ensures the survival of all peoples and all nations. The debate is old and it is time for some fresh air. A bail-out for the planet is a bailout we will not regret.

The Environmental Defense Fund in collaboration with IETA and the Pew Charitable Trusts hosted an event today at the 14th Conference of giving an “update on Federal Affairs.”  Those present included representatives from several high-level committees within the US Congress including Sarah Levinson from the office of Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, Alexandra Teitz from the office of Congressman Henry Waxman, Peter Rafle-Senagte from Senate Environment & Public Works Committee, Jo-Ellen Darcy, representing the Senate Finance Committee, Jonathan Black representing the Senate Natural Resources & Energy Committee and Chris Adamo representing Michigan Senator Stabenow.  Though all signs point to hope of the US mobilizing in a positive direction (how could they not?), there is a sense that there will be a lot on the new administration’s plate as far as financing of projects is concerned.  The question then is, will the bold ambitions of the Obama Administration live up to their promises as the US debt and financing for massive projects like Healthcare also hang in the balance?  Or will the climate agenda finally, get the priority? 

Sarah Levinson assured the audience that Speaker Pelosi’s “flagship” missions was climate change and sited that she had been a major proponent of legislation HR6, which focuses on fuel efficiency and she has done her part to reach out to world leaders in discussiong the climate agenda.  Aside from that there was general agreement amongst her staff that President-elect Barak Obama is going to make it easier for the democratic majority in Congress to pass legislation.  This is the time for “creating a new economy based on green jobs” stated Levinson.

Teitz, representative of Congressman Waxman stated that the latter had experience in the first Air Pollution Control Act in the nation and was a major proponent of the mobilization of support around the time of the 3rd Conference of Parties–all good indicators as Congressman Waxman will soon be chairing the Commerce Committee.  Currently, the Safe Climate Bill, which has been reintroduced into Congress in 2007 has over 150 supporters (the most of any climate bill proposed yet) which aims to see 80% reduction in Green House Gases (GHG) by 2050 with a 1990 baseline.  A comment of note from Congressman Waxman, “we must assist communities and biodiversity that would face harm due to global warming.“

Jo-Ellen Darcy, a representative of the Senate Finance Committee, stated that the cap-and-trade finance mechanism is something that the finance committee will be looking closely at and that this will need to be balanced by the urgent need to restructure the US Health care package.   “
I don’t think we can wait anymore, we’ve been doing this (negotiating climate change) a lot and its time to do it!” She said as she finished off by agreeing by the all-Democrat panel that “President Obama is a good thing for all of us.”

Jonathan Black stated that things like transmission of electricity, energy efficiency standards, Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS), and the required percentage of electricity derived from renewables are things that the Energy & Natural Resources Committee will be looking at quite closely for finalizing targets.  He made mention of the “Low Carbon Economy Act” but acknowledged that it did not have that much support from the environmental community in the US.

Chris Adamo, representing Michigan Senator Stabenow compared Michigan as the microcosm of all of the US now with the economy in recession and agreed that any new deal would have to be structured firmly around injecting life into the economy.  That being said, he noted that gaining support from some Democratic Mid-Western states (who will have their own interests to protect) will be difficult but key to getting any sort of cap-and-trade legislation passed.

As the session was opened up to the audience for question & answer, issues of the process of implemantation, financing, and engaging movments were raised.  Amongst the panelists, no one was 100% sure that cap-and-trade legislation was a done deal for fear of having to retract that statement later if it should not pass, and for lack of authority to speak on behalf of whom they were representing.  But they did agree that it will be a challenge as over $100 billion a year will need to be spent on healthcare as currently planned, and the US debt is also heavy.  Overall, it was agreed upon that fruitful negotiations at Copenhagen did not have to hinge upon firm committment from the US government, rather could be based on positive signs from the US Congress which will take its time to mobilize leading up to and beyond Copenhagen.  With the world hanging in a balance, lets hope that the Congress mobilizes fast.

All are in agreement that Kyoto did not work and the world cannot risk having another deal come out of the United Nations Conference in Copenhagen which is as ineffective (in the US) if not weaker than the Kyoto Protocol.  Representatives of CAN-Europe have recently stated that they’d like to see this as a more positive dialogue and are calling it “effort sharing” as it is a shared effort to protect our common future.

Can we put all our development issues in the climate basket?  Are we being inclusive of all voices in the climate dialog?  How can we get over the hurdle of who is at fault for climate change and therefor who must take action? Are we running around in circles in the debate on how to finance adaptation?  Is two degrees more important or a separate debate from the “right to development” for developing nations?

One after another, delegates from Kenya, Malaysia, Australia, India, the Netherlands, the United States, and many other nations voiced their opinions.  The aims of this CAN Summit are pure and simple:  getting beyond the known areas of consensus to the real “problem areas” and figuring out how as a network of international civil society groups we can achieve consensus on those areas.  For if we cannot be united as civil society, how can we help achieve consensus at the United Nations?

A presence not gone unnoticed during this conference thus far are youth from the Indian Youth Climate Network.  A network that is barely seven months old is providing the platform to engage eager youth from the subcontinent to get engaged in this international debate and provide a youthful non-governmental angel to the visitors from abroad.  This is part of a larger vision to take Indian youth representatives to the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP14) in Poznan this December as part of the “Agents of Change” program.  Most importantly, this is an attempt to train the next generation of climate leaders from India to become engaged in this debate.

With a few more days left the question on the back of everyone’s minds is whether or not the group of civil society groups from around the world will manage to put up a more united front to take on the challenges the governments convening at the UNFCCC will throw at them.

Fuel guzzling cars hit the road in Delhi with fuel efficiency having dropped for post-2005 models even with engine sizes having remained the same. This in the back drop of 1,000 vehicles a day being added to the streets of the capital and a strong negative media campaign to scrap the much needed Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system launched this April. The BRT when completed would cater to approximately 80% of the city’s commuters (including pedestrians and cyclists). For the first time, connections are being drawn between the rise in the number of cars and not just particulate emissions, but also carbon emissions.

May 28th, 2008: Delhi’s youth and young professionals convene for the first ever, Delhi Youth Summit on Climate (DYSoC) to debate the fate of the city’s developmental future in the backdrop of a climate constrained world. Here everything from water supply to waste management, and energy & transportation to new urbanism were discussed. Solutions from the youth were drafted into a Delhi Youth Charter on Climate. Youth and young professionals from all over the National Capital Region (NCR) and from many other cities including as far away from Hyderabad and Chennai descended on the capital and broke out into working groups to debate the solutions. Insights were also given on the role of youth in policy making and how to move forward with the charter for effective action. Over 150 participants including observers from various NGOs were present and the atmosphere was charged with positive “can-do-ism.”

The real question is whether or not youth can take effective action for change in a society so riddled with a “youth should have the same views as their elders” attitude. This is something the nascent youth movement on climate change in India will hopefully be able to indirectly address. After all, with the nation being 75% below the age of 35, it is the future of the youth that is being negotiated by the elders. It’s time their say is taken into account. One thing is for sure: increasingly the connections between rapid development and climate change are being made in a nation that is still struggling to come to terms with per-capita emissions (1/20th of the US per-capita emissions) and its own growing responsibility in this global challenge.

The draft Delhi Youth Charter on Climate can be found here: draft-delhi-youth-charter-on-climate

A few months back, two young Indian environmentalists felt the immediate need to bring together the youth and youth based groups all over India - working on the issues of climate change, environmental equity and on the path to development in a climate constrained world. They went around figuring out the best ways to do this, attended seminars-workshops-conferences, got trained by Al Gore and Dr. R.K. Pachauri, went out of their way to learn, teach themselves and get involved with a lot of people and organizations all across the country. They also teamed up with other like minded youth, notably with an Indian residing in Australia and went on to launch the Indian Youth Climate Network (IYCN)!

The IYCN now, has called for one of its first – the Delhi Youth Summit on Climate (DYSoC) on the 28th and 29th of this month at the residence of India’s first Prime Minister Pundit Jawahar Lal Nehru, less than a mile away from both the President’s House and the Parliament of India.

With the ”Come Create History, By Writing the Future” tag-line, DYSoC 2008 attempts to bring together the youth of Delhi (between 18-30 age group), from different backgrounds and from all parts of the city to discuss, debate, share concerns, raise issues and find innovative solutions to the pressing problems being faced by the city at present, that would only get worse owing to climate change.

DYSoC was envisioned for the fact that Delhi, the seat of power of the world’s largest democracy makes little mention to climate change in its Master Plan 2021. At the same time, the city is very much under construction in an attempt to become a “world class city”, and a lot needs to be done to incorporate mitigation and adaptation to the changing climate today, lest it maybe too late tomorrow. And the youth, the future citizens and leaders of the country and its capital, need to have their voices heard to ensure their policy perspectives are incorporated in the plans of the decision makers of the city. For it is the youth that will inherit the city (and the Planet) from the present generation.

People from all over the country are moving into the capital for the Summit. The event is itself being sponsored by a lot of organisations viz., Fountain of Development Research & Action, LEAD India, Nehru Memorial Museum & Library The Climate Project – India, South Asian Youth Environment Network (SAYEN)/UNEP, Delhi Greens and the YP foundation. Every attempt is also being made to keep the event’s Carbon Footprint to a minimum. Shortly after the event, on 5th of June: the World Environment Day, Delhi Greens – the Delhi Wing of IYCN will be carrying out tree plantations in an attempt to make the event Carbon-neutral. The two day DYSoC event will conclude with a draft Delhi Youth Charter on Climate that will be presented to the Environment Secretary, Govt. of NCT of Delhi at the end of the second day.

The next IYCN event will be the Indian Youth Summit on Climate Change (IYSoCC) in the city of Hyderabad. IYCN has members from all over the country and has been highlighted by the Indian media on more than one occasion. The thumbnail on the left is the news clip from the Hindustan Times: a leading Indian newspaper.