I’m talking about the first ever bona fide tar sands extraction project in the United States of America–right here, in my own backyard!

You might have heard about the tar sands extraction happening in Canada. This nightmarish debacle has transformed countless acres of priceless Canadian biodiversity into a sticky black cesspool, for primarily America consumption. Don’t take my word for it; do a simple Google image search for “Canadian Tar Sands.” After you’ve done that, imagine the effect these proposed tar pits would have on the land immediately adjacent to the sites. Now picture that land as Canyonlands National Park. I’m not making this up.

The citizens of the areas where the proposed pits would be created have had absolutely no say in the permit acquisition and decision-making surrounding this project—and the pits might potentially break ground this year. Did I mention the entire operation would be run by Canada-based Earth Energy Resources? The company made their excited announcement in November of 2009, although Grand County citizens weren’t made aware of the impending project until this month.

Utah Clean Energy, an independent organization devoted to exploring Utah’s potential for alternative and renewable energy resources, recently released a study that explains, in detail, how exactly Utah could create hundreds of new jobs and bring in millions of dollars in new GDP by exploring alternative energy and beefing up our energy efficiency standards. And yet, here in Utah, while 95% of our electricity depends on coal-fired power, our geographical uniqueness is fundamental to our state pride and one main source of tourism revenue, and water scarcity is fast becoming a frightening illustration of some of the foreseeable impacts of climate change, we (and by “we”" I mean a wealthy-but-desperate handful of powerful and shady Utah businesses) want to welcome an industry that would use between twice and five times as much water per barrel to produce oil–oil that wouldn’t even be ready for use before undergoing  an expensive and emissions-rich cultivation process.

Using tar sands, also known as oil sands, as a “cheap” source of fuel is a joke. According to the Pembina Institute, mining tar sands requires between 750 and 1500 cubic feet of natural gas for each barrel of oil. I’m not great at math, but that doesn’t seem terribly economical to my mind. The tar sands mining and extraction process produces three times as many CO2 emissions as regular oil production; the Alberta tar sands project is Canada’s number one source for CO2 emissions. As far as I can see, the only positive thing about introducing tar sands mining into the United States it that it might (and this is a BIG might) reduce our dependence on, and merciless exploitation of, Canada’s tar sands resources, which we are currently reaping without remorse to fuel our morning commute. Why import Canadian tar sands fuel, and the technology to destroy our own land and water for American tar sands?

When you assess the fact that it takes five liters of water to produce one of usable petrol via tar sands extraction, this starts to seem blatantly criminal in a desert state. The privatization of water is a scary dream that is slowly folding itself into our reality, and when you realize that water is required every step of the way with tar sands extraction—to move gas, to build new tar pits, and to provide a waste receptacle for the filthy pits once they are up and running—you start to wonder where all this water will come from, in Utah. Colorado and Nevada are not too excited about sharing their drinkable water with us, of late.

So, what will it be, America? Should we urge Utah to become a leader on the alternative energy frontier, securing our economic and environmental future for our children—or shall we allow her to regress a decade or three, and become the nation’s very first home to tar sands extraction—and its subsequent leader in toxic emissions and contributions to global climate change? My decision is made. We are exploring every avenue for ways to stop this project, and we will update you on how you can take action to help. The tar sands nightmare will not be allowed into my beloved home state and our fine nation, if I have anything at all to do with it.

[Note: We are still trying to figure out the best ways to take action, so as soon as we have a good outlet, we will let you know.]

Other resources:
www.nodirtyenergy.org/
http://oilsandstruth.org/
http://www.tarsandswatch.org/

In recent weeks James Cameron himself has been calling Avatar a catalyst for environmental action saying he now wants to “use the spotlight that’s been put on him by Avatar’s success to bring attention to environmental causes“. This caught the eye of Rainforest Action Network’s Becky Tarbotton. On yesterday’s San Francisco Chronicle website Tarbotton started a call to Mr. Cameron to help expose the “real-life Avatar” that Chevron continues to enable in Ecuador.

In the article Tarbotton asks:

“What if in his acceptance speech James Cameron mentioned the real-life Indigenous Ecuadorean heroes who are battling the real-life evil oil corporation Chevron?

She then continues:

If Director James Cameron accepts an Academy Award next month, he should let his faithful fans know that while Pandora is fictional, what is happening to communities in Ecuador because of Chevron’s actions is as real as it gets.”

Now THIS seems like something worth watching on Oscar night, help us spread word on Facebook and Twitter (where it’s already gaining) by retweeting and posting “I want Avatar director James Cameron to mention real-life Ecuador struggle against #Chevron at #Oscars: bit.ly/9Rvut8 #realavatar RT Please”.

My personal two cents is that, after taking his narrative from the all-to-familiar struggles of indigenous communities and their fights against resource extraction, colonialism, and the corporations that perpetuate the destruction of these communities, James Cameron has a responsibility to use the global venue of the Oscars to highlight communities that are more real than any 3d glasses.

Last month Josh Schrei wrote a great piece on how Avatar’s dialog mimics the rhetoric of so many corporate hacks and unfortunately there are all too many real-life Avatar plots, from India to Peru. However the case against Chevron resonates with me for two reasons. One is has the potential to share some commonalities with the films ending in the very near future. Chevron and CEO John Watson are facing a potential guilty verdict in the next 6 months for their dump and run in the Ecuadorean Rainforest. Granted this battle will not be won with majestic trees, or flying dragons; it will be won with a communities unending will for survival, and a global rally for justice. While the means may be different, the result will be the same in that one of the world’s most powerful corporations (Chevron) will be held accountable to their crimes. Which leads to my second reason to why the Chevron/Avatar connection resonates with me.

The Chevron case is already sending ripples through the oil industry on how they are operating in communities, don’t get me wrong they are still destroying communities for the black gold but they have taken notice. Now we need these corporations to move beyond “taking notice”. As the Chevron case builds to a crescendo, and if Chevron is found guilty of the over $27 billion in damages, oil corporations worldwide will be forced to take measures to rethink their operations and their consequences, and communities will have an unprecedented momentum to fight back against the likes of John Watson who enable some of the most atrocious operations and crimes in the world.

This trial is a legal catalyst and Avatar has the potential to be the pop-culture catalyst. Something as simple a mentioning the ongoing fight in the Ecuadorian Amazon would be an enormous act of solidarity with communities that inspire his narrative, and bring the real-life stories of corporate corruption and colonization to an entirely new audience waiting to take action after being inspired by Avatar.

Help ask James Cameron:
Repost this blog, the SF Chronicle, or better yet write your own blog and post on Facebook.
Help spread the word about this group
Retweet “Avatar director James Cameron should mention real struggle of Amazonians against #Chevron at #Oscars http://tinyurl.com/ybd6d72 #realavatar” on Twitter.

Additionally, Public Radio International traveled with indigenous communities in Ecuador as they bused to Quito to see Avatar. Here is there reaction to James Cameron’s film.
You can find the full PRI article here.

Dear Friends,

The epic fight to ward off global warming and transform the energy system that is at the core of our planet’s economy takes many forms: huge global days of action, giant international conferences like the one that just failed in Copenhagen, small gestures in the homes of countless people.

But there are a few signal moments, and one comes next month, when the federal government puts Tim DeChristopher on trial in Salt Lake City. Tim—“Bidder 70”– pulled off one of the most creative protests against our runaway energy policy in years: he bid for the oil and gas leases on several parcels of federal land even though he had no money to pay for them, thus upending the auction. The government calls that “violating the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act” and thinks he should spend ten years in jail for the crime; we call it a noble act, a profound gesture made on behalf of all of us and of the future.

Tim’s action drew national attention to the fact that the Bush Administration spent its dying days in office handing out a last round of favors to the oil and gas industry. After investigating irregularities in the auction, the Obama Administration took many of the leases off the table, with Interior Secretary Ken Salazar criticizing the process as “a headlong rush.” And yet that same Administration is choosing to prosecute the young man who blew the whistle on this corrupt process.

We cannot let this stand. When Tim disrupted the auction, he did so in the fine tradition of non-violent civil disobedience that changed so many unjust laws in this country’s past. Tim’s upcoming trial is an occasion to raise the alarm once more about the peril our planet faces. The situation is still fluid—the trial date has just been set, and local supporters are making plans for how to mark the three-day proceedings. But they are asking people around the country to flood into Salt Lake City in mid-March. If you come, there will be ample opportunity for both legal protest and civil disobedience. For example:

#Outside the courthouse, there will be a mock trial, with experts like NASA’s Jim Hansen providing the facts that should be heard inside the chambers. We don’t want Tim on trial—we want global warming on the stand.

#Demonstrators will be using the time-honored tactics of civil disobedience to make their voices heard outside the courthouse in an effort to prevent “business as usual”—it’s business as usual that’s wrecking the earth.

#There will be evening concerts and gatherings, including a “mini-summit” to share ideas on how the climate movement should proceed in the years ahead. This is a people’s movement that draws power from around the globe; for a few days its headquarters will be Salt Lake City.

You can get the most up-to-date news at climatetrial.com, including schedules for non-violence training, and information about legal representation. If you’re coming, bring not only your passion but also your creativity—we need lots of art and music to help make the point that we won’t sit idly by while the government tries to scare the environmental movement into meek cooperation. This kind of trial is nothing but intimidation—and the best answers to intimidation are joy and resolve. That’s what we’ll need in Utah.

We know it’s short notice. Some of us won’t be able to make it to Utah because we have other commitments or are limiting travel, and if you’re in the same situation, climatetrial.com will also have details of solidarity actions in other parts of the country. If you can contribute money to help make the week’s events possible, click here. But more than your money we need your body, your brains, and your heart. In a landscape of little water, where redrock canyons rise upward like praying hands, we can offer our solidarity to the wild:  wild lands and wild hearts.  Tim DeChristopher deserves and needs our physical and spiritual support in the name of a just and vibrant community.

Thank you for standing with us,

Naomi Klein,

Bill McKibben,

Terry Tempest Williams,

Dr. James Hansen

• 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

Amtrak's Acela High Speed Train photo courtesy Wikimedia Commons

The U.S. youth climate movement has rightfully been dissecting Obama’s State of the Union speech and its aftermath – the good, the bad, the really? – and taking action of our own.

But this week, Obama did more than just talk, he acted, putting a big down payment on a high speed rail network that will cut pollution, save energy, and provide good jobs in the clean energy economy.

On Thursday, President Obama and U.S. Transportation Secretary (and former Illinois Republican congressman) Ray LaHood announced $8 billion in economic recovery money dedicated to building high speed rail and otherwise improving rail transportation across much of the country.

That’s good for cutting climate change and improving air quality, since rail transportation is more energy efficient and overall less polluting than cars or planes. That’s assuming people actually use it, though, and long travel times compared to flying have hurt Amtrak’s public acceptance, even as it’s fastest routes grew their ridership (page 6).

It’s good for creating American manufacturing and other blue collar jobs, too. The administration estimates it will add and protect tens of thousands by the time the money is fully spent.

It’s also a big change from the last administration. In 2007, when the independent, congressionally mandated National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission released its final report on funding and improving our road and rails, recommending $7-$9 billion per year in passenger rail investments (sound like a familiar number?), then-Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters was one of only three commissioners to object (page 65) to passenger rail funding, and President Bush showed little interest in the issue.

Some of my history

I worked with many others at the University of North Carolina to create a student-funded renewable energy account, which has since funded solar hot water panels and geothermal projects on campus.  It was one of the first Southern student initiatives for clean energy.  Then some of us from UNC joined with others from Duke and NC State University to put on a Southeast regional conference to help spread similar initiatives for renewable energy and energy efficiency to campuses around the region.  The South as a region uses some of the highest energy per capita and the dirtiest energy in the nation.

I was first inspired to take action at a student energy and climate conference in early 2002 at the University of  Colorado at Boulder, where I met a number of  students like Kassie Rohrbach, who had led a successful campaign at Connecticut College for renewable energy (and who I met up with later to start the Energy Action Coalition). I was further stirred to action by the fact that none of the students I met from the South and I eventually went on to start the Southern Energy Network and support regional networks around the US.

Through encouragement from my advisor at UNC, I ended up winning the Morris K Udall Scholarship in 2002 & 2003.  It was in 2003, at the Udall scholars gathering, where I met folks like Billy Parish, Jared Duval who I worked really closely with over the next four years or so on creating EAC.  A number of us decided that the biggest thing we could do to help the environment was to get someone other than George Bush elected in 2004, so we stayed up late one night trying to figure out how we could best do this.  I had never met Billy, but he looked at me and said “you know you want to do this.”  I agreed to help start Students for an Environmentally Responsible President (SERP).  SERP may not have been successful, but I learned a lot of helpful skills about organizing with others around the country.  I also counted on the support of many of the SERP folks around the country to help keep me committed and passionate about working to make change.

And there’s so much more including national days of action, the creation of the Energy Action Coalition, the creation of this blog at the UN Climate Negotiations in Montreal in 2005, climate fast in front of the White House, four more Southeast conferences and . . .

Some Observations and more history

My experience with EAC also brought me to my first anti-oppression (working against oppression) trainings where I started to understand my privilege and the privilege or lack of privilege of others in my life and in the context of my work.   This has made it a lot easier for me to understand different perspectives and to work in diverse coalitions.  I think the continued anti-oppression trainings and readings for all coalition partners participating in the funded work of the coalition helped keep the coalition together.  It wasn’t easy, though; once we spent a whole meeting that was supposed to be focused on budgeting on trying to work with one organization that refused to participate in doing one reading and discussion on anti-oppression per semester.  The coalition work also funneled down into some organizations.  The Southern Energy Network, for example, implemented anti-oppression trainings at most of our state and regional summits and many of our steering committee gatherings.  The steering committee also drafted anti-oppression principles and policies to better carry out these principles.  It has been a long, challenging journey, but I think it is well-worth it and I encourage everyone to continue learning about and exploring anti-oppression.  School of Americas Watch has some good resources on anti-oppression.

Being a white person from a middle-class family, I don’t feel like I experienced much oppression, but as a woman, I do feel that I’ve experienced oppression.  I’ve experienced that people are more likely to listen to and respect male voices than female voices and females often fall into roles doing logistics and behind the scenes work (versus males who are more likely to be seen and heard).  For example, I have been a youth climate conference where there were lots of male and few female youth leaders speaking, even though there were lots of strong women leaders involved in the work.  I’m writing about this not to call anyone out, but because I think most men and women are not aware of these issues, and I think we all need to be more aware of this especially in our work within the climate movement.  [On a side note, let me know if you’d be interested in helping me put together a longer piece on this in the future.]

Quick Thoughts on the future

In 2006, I made a gamble on a keynote speaker that I’d never heard of for the 4^th annual SSREC in early 2007.  Van Jones was that speaker and he blew everyone away with his vision of a diverse green movement.  Young leaders kept talking to Van and asking him questions until hours after his talk when the building had to be locked.  And in the years since, I’ve seen the youth climate movement help propel the green jobs movement to the national stage and vice versa. With our world now deep in a recession and on the brink of climate destabilization, there is a necessity to bring together labor, environmental, and social justice interests to create solutions.  We have the opportunity to create of tens of thousands of good green jobs that will improve environmental quality, pay living wages with good benefits, and empower people to create positive change in their communities!

So, my advice is: tell your stories (you’re likely to inspire others), keep doing what you’re doing, support and mentor other leaders as much as possible, learn more about anti-oppression, fight oppression in your work, and help create good, green jobs!

It’s Getting Hot In Here: Climate Generation is a month-long series reflecting on the state of the youth climate movement.  As we pivot into 2010, the series will provide a forum for discussion on the history of the youth climate movement, recent victories and setbacks, potential for growth in capacity and influence, and how to orient the movement in the post-Copenhagen landscape.  Please join youth leaders for posts on Monday, Tuesday and Thursday afternoons and early evenings.

The Clean Up Ecuador Campaign has launched a global petition to Mr. Watson, with an accompanying video-message (below) from the affected communities of the Ecuadorian Amazon.

Watson is stepping into a mess that former CEO Dave O’Reilly left behind when he skipped out on the reeling company on 12/31. Unfortunately, judging the reaction by Chevron today in Houston where marathon runners had their free speech silenced, and comments attacking Amazon Watch’s global petition in yesterday’s Sphere article it seems that Watson is committed to enabling the same negligence towards human rights as his predecessor. Watson may choose to define his tenure by continuing down the O’Reilly path that just last year had Chevron publicly aligning themselves with known felons, losing precedent setting refinery battles, being wholly rejected by the US Trade Representative, and being a lightning rod for a thriving climate justice movement at their front door.

However, dealt such a rotten hand Mr. Watson stands at the most opportune time for an oil giant’s CEO to actually step it up…or just step in it. RAN’s newest campaign Change Chevron see that Watson holds an unmatched opportunity to right past wrongs and transform an industry from criminal to catalyst. Yet, there is a long way to go. Prior to this moment Chevron has not only ignored the communities they impact, they blatantly insult them. Chevron relies on lobbying and a brutal PR campaign to evade responsibility of, what experts call, the “Amazon Chernobyl”. As a recent Independent article points out Chevron seems to be standing firm in it’s refusal to pay any damages, even if ordered in a court.  In fact a Chevron spokesman has promised a “lifetime of litigation.”

Will Watson build a tenure on human rights or legal fights?

“It’s Human Right’s my Dear Watson”

In the above video, community members hope Watson’s tenure stands human rights, asking him to visit Ecuador and address the oil company’s toxic legacy. The video and petition lead the calls being made for John Watson to take this new approach as CEO and to rectify the human rights and environmental disaster experts call the “Amazon Chernobyl.”

Emergildo Criollo, a leader from the Cofan tribe, and rally cry for this weekend’s Chevron Houston Marathon where activists are running on his behalf, says in the video, “We don’t want to continue dying from cancer.” Criollo lost two sons to fatal illnesses after coming into contact with toxic waste-water dumped into Amazon waterways by Texaco. Mariana Jimenez, another community member living with Chevron’s lifetime litigation strategy invites CEO John Watson to Ecuador and says that he “will be received well” and that they are only “hoping for a rational person”. Seems like a reasonable request. However, considering the last guy, rational has never been one of Chevron’s (or any oil companies) strong point.

Around the contaminated region, an area roughly the size of Rhode Island, there are thousands more cases like Emergildo and Mariana’s. Joining with 30,000 other indigenous people and campesinos, they are plaintiffs in the landmark lawsuit against Chevron in Ecuador that has the potential to change the landscape of the oil industry and catalyze a new era of accountability to the communities big oil operates in.

I’m pretty confident real solutions to the human rights violations and climate crisis are not going to come easily from Watson and Chevron. However I am confident that as pressure continues to boil over, the oil giant will be held accountable to their past, present, and continuing attempts to sell out communities and the climate for a cheap barrel of crude.

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

On the eve of the Copenhagen climate talks, communities and individuals around the planet are thinking about survival.  In a world of rapidly destabilizing climates, this word means different things to different people.  To the citizens of the Maldive Islands survival may mean a keeping global temperatures low enough to prevent the permanent flooding of their homeland, while to the inhabitants of African nations that repeatedly have expressed frustration with the unwillingness of industrialized countries to listen to what our own climate scientists are telling us, the main threat to survival may be catastrophic drought threatening to engulf huge regions. 

One key to survival for human beings everywhere, though, is food.  A couple of weeks ago for Project Survival Media, I wrote about the struggles of farmers to build communities based on sustainable food in my own home state of Oregon.  In the Northwestern United States we’re lucky that most people have relatively easy access to healthy, locally grown food; meanwhile, in West Oakland, Project Survival Media team members have been documenting the difficulties of maintaining a healthy diet in the “food deserts” of the inner city.  In the end, our reliance on processed, packaged and fast food produced through industrial agriculture is hurting human health as much as an input-heavy oil-based agricultural system is hurting the Earth and the climate.

As the world seeks to stabilize the global climate and provide for the food needs of a growing population, it would be a mistake to assume the only or best way to feed the starving is through the same model of industrial agriculture that’s helped bring us to the point of environmental disaster.  Recent research indicates that sustainable farming practices and a shift in industrialized countries to more sustainable diets hold the potential to feed the world without wrecking the climate.  Indeed, a healthy planet and a healthy human population may each hinge on a diet less dependent on meat and oil-intensive agriculture, and more reliant on locally based food production systems.

One of the most environmentally resilient food productions systems I’ve ever observed exists in the forest villages that line the Amazon River outside of Iquitos, Peru.  In these small, traditional villages, farmers grow an astonishing variety of crops using methods that have sustained them for hundreds of years, and virtually no fossil fuel inputs.  Walking along a path through a village banana plantation, it’s occurred to me that there is no place I’d rather be during a global petroleum shortage or climate catastrophe that wreaks havoc with our import-oriented food supply chain.  Agricultural systems grounded in small-scale local food production not only contribute less to global warming, but may prove to be more resilient to a changing climate as well.

A continent away from the villages outside Iquitos, I have watched what seems to be a genuine trend, at least amongst Oregon farmers; the owners of small farming establishments are growing increasingly conscious of the unique role their industry will play in sculpting a world resistant to global warming.  For decades, the number of farms in the US has shrunk as family farms died out and industrial establishments gobbled up what was left over.  Yet today, small farmers have a new reason to take pride in their work, and society has renewed incentive to value its farmers.  Home gardens and local farms can bring relief to the food deserts of our large cities, while breaking the oil industry’s grip on our food production system.

In a time of global danger, nothing says “survival” like the ability to purchase healthy food that’s independent of a fossil fuel-based import system, and contributes to creating sustainable economies.  As the world’s most powerful people gather in Copenhagen this month, let’s hope they take note.