The end of the fossil fuel era is being signalled loud and clear here at the Paris climate conference as ministers enter the final hours of negotiations.

It's crunch time and everyone is saying the elements needed for an ambitious deal are still on the table. An essential part of this includes establishing a clear long-term goal to guide investor confidence toward a low-carbon society.

And with a 1.5C degree target option currently alive in the text, along with words such as ‘decarbonisation’ and ‘carbon neutral’, the signal couldn’t be clearer.

“The message that we expect this conference to send investors in the fossil fuel industry is get out now,” said Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club. “There is no future in fossil fuels.”

Pointing to the 1.5C target, Kasia Kosonen from Greenpeace added: “We are now for the first time really having a serious debate around strengthening the temperature target to 1.5C and recognising that 2C is already too much. This de facto means that we are talking about moving away from fossil fuels in a short period of time.”

Policy Framework

And it’s not just those inside the negotiations that are looking for clarity. Businesses have also been calling for a clear long term goal, stressing its importance for investors.

As Michael Jacobs, senior advisor at the New Climate Economy project, explained: “Emissions will be cut through the application of investment and technology in a whole series of infrastructure projects… that’s how you actually do this. And the piece of paper that will be signed is a push to those processes but it doesn’t guarantee them."

“The way it pushes them is it requires government to respond to goals by putting in place policies which will then help drive investment, and demand creation, and technological innovation.”

Alden Meyer, strategy director at the Union of Concerned Scientists, agreed – and he’s been to virtually all the major climate talks since 1995.

He explained that a Paris deal must send a clear signal to the global industry that investments can shift from high-polluting industries towards clean energy – a trend he said we were already witnessing. 

“That will affect their decisions on trillions of dollars of asset investments,” Meyer told The Guardian. “If they think that governments are serious about going where the science says we need to go, then they will respond in kind. If they think that governments are wishy-washy, and are wobbling or uncertain, then they will hedge their bets.”

It seems the oil and gas industry is at the very least hearing what’s being said. But will it listen?

The Industry's Future

We’re already seeing dramatic shifts in the energy market signalling the end of coal. According to estimates by commercial intelligence company Wood Mackenzie more than 65 per cent of the world’s coal production is unprofitable as prices decline for the fifth year in a row.

Last Friday at a side-event inside the COP21 delegates’ space, oil executives from Shell, Total, and Statoil, along with industry trade bodies, sat down to discuss the future of their industry. While there was little talk of renewables, the industry figures recognised that there was strong global pressure to cut fossil fuel emissions.

Elliot Diringer, executive vice president of Virginia-based non-profit C2ES – and who was described as being close to negotiators – explained: “Paris has already sent many signals… The [pledges], the presence of world leaders, the agreement itself… [and] the debate on long term goals such as the decarbonisation of the economy.”

He continued: “If all of that comes together what we’ll have is a reshaped, reframed political and policy context. The question for all stakeholders is how do we engage coming out of Paris to achieve the transformation we keep talking about?”

Jean-Francois Gagne, head of technology policy division at the International Energy Agency, told industry figures in the room: “We have to realise the rate at which we decarbonise is going to have to increase, so we need to think about [what we invest in] in the future.”

Solutions which “would give credibility” to the industry, he said, included energy efficiency and renewables, as well as ending coal and reducing methane emissions from gas.

As Margaret Mistry, sustainability communications leader at Statoil, added: “We need to relate to the climate goals that people are talking about outside of our industry. Whether it’s two degrees or net zero emissions. It’s important to speak the same language.”

“From our point of view,” she continued, “the stronger the agreement the better. What we’re seeking is predictability and investment signals. The more certainty… the better it is for us to plan our business.”

Photo: UN Climate Change via Flickr

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

The issue of loss and damage has emerged as one of the top issues for negotiators at the Paris climate talks.

Swedish and Bolivian ministers have been leading the discussions on loss and damage, trying to iron out the issues.

But big polluters and wealthy nations refuse to be held liable for compensating climate-vulnerable nations for future impacts of climate change.

So what exactly does ‘loss and damage’ mean and why is everyone talking about it? And most critically, will we see a deal that everyone can agree to by the end of the week?

What is loss and damage?

There are some impacts of climate change to which it will not be possible to adapt – instead, we will be faced with residual ‘loss and damage’. This is when the efforts to try and mitigate or adapt to the impacts of climate change are not enough. Examples include Peoples and communities obliged to leave their countries and homes permanently; or the losses associated with destroyed ecosystems.

Those countries facing such impacts argue that there should be a specific stream of work to deal with them, referenced within the Paris agreement. Resistance comes from big polluters, who fear that establishing such provisions will open the door to future compensation claims.

So what’s the status of loss and damage going into the second week?

For small island states and some of the least developed countries, the question of loss and damage has become one of the most important aspects of the climate negotiations.

Tied into this discussion are other key elements of the Paris deal including climate finance for mitigation and adaptation as well as trying to keep the mention of an ambitious 1.5C global warming target in the text. The logic is that, if addressed, these issues on ambition and finance would mean countries hopefully wouldn’t suffer as much loss and damage.

At the end of the first week of climate negotiations one of the key issues was where loss and damage will be placed in the Paris package.

Developing countries want it in the binding agreement that is expected to form the core of this package. But some rich nations have been pushing for it to be included in a set of accompanying decisions that will not have legal force.

In a recent version of the text submitted on Saturday December 5th there were two proposals laid out for loss and damage.

The first option, proposed by the G77 – which has been described as a strong proposal – outlines a process mechanism for how to deal with issues such as displacement as well as permanent and irreversible loss and damage.

The second option is weaker “but if we have [both] on the table they’re both good to move forward on” described Julie-Anne Richards, international policy manager at Climate Justice Programme.

Sven Harmeling, CARE International’s climate change advocacy coordinator, described the text as “something technically manageable” adding that there have been improvements throughout the first week.

The issue of loss and damage has in the past provoked heated arguments and walkouts at previous conferences. For example, at COP19 in Warsaw in 2013, discussions over the issue broke down and the poorer countries walked out. An international mechanism on Loss and Damage did however emerge out of the Warsaw talks and it’s hoped this will be included in the Paris deal in some way.

“In terms of substance, this proposal would put the Warsaw international mechanism more at the centre and not establish a new one… It would provide a framework for going forward without defining what exactly needs to happen,” Harmeling explained. “If parties start to engage on that basis then I’m more optimistic we’ll get something useful.”

So what do the wealthy nations think?

The idea that developed nations bear a responsibility to compensate vulnerable nations for those extreme climate events which they cannot adapt to is very controversial for wealthier nations.

Many such as the US and EU are concerned that if liability and compensation were linked to this, it could become a massive legal and financial headache.

Both the UK and US have confirmed here in Paris that they will not accept the notion of ‘compensation and liability’ to be included in a climate deal

However, as with the nature of negotiations, compromises are struck. Ahead of the Paris summit, developing nations agreed to drop contentious words like compensation and liability. “The idea was to engage very constructively,” said Harjeet Singh of ActionAid.

This helped Washington and the European Union to recognise the importance of including loss and damage in the outcome of the Paris talks – but how to do that remains a sticking point.

Todd Stern, US special envoy on climate change, told reporters in Paris last week that the US accepts the concerns of vulnerable nations on this issue.

“We’re a supporter of dealing with loss and damage in an effective way,” he said. “We are working in a very co-operative and constructive way right with both the islands and the G77 on developing an outcome and a solution here, there are many players in this but we have been very engaged on this issue.”

“There’s one thing we don’t accept and won’t accept in this agreement,” he added, “and that’s the notion that there should be liability and compensation for loss and damage. In that regard we’re in the exact same place as virtually all developed countries.”

What can we expect going forward?

As the second week progresses many are optimistic that loss and damage will be inserted in the main body of the agreement.

Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy for the Union of Concerned Scientists, described the “landing ground” as “some reference in the core agreement so it’s clear this is a core part of the agreement going forward.”

Meyer added that there is also a process underway to get the Warsaw mechanism reviewed and expanded upon during the next COP22 meeting in Morocco 2016.

Given that the issue of loss and damage is “younger” compared to discussions on mitigation and adaptation as E3G describes, any mention in the text is likely to be “brief and to the point”.

But we’re “at a very very critical moment” warned ActionAid’s Singh on the morning of Tuesday December 8. “This is a real life issue it is not a bargaining chip.”

Singh criticised the US for bringing the issue of ‘compensation’ back into the discussions after developing countries agreed to let that go in September.

“We don’t have time for any bargaining tricks, he said, adding it’s time to “engage really meaningfully” on issues such as displacement and permanent loss and damage.

“We’ve seen the Syrian refugee crisis and we have heard how it was [partly] fuelled by climate change. That was just a preview. We are going to see a lot more such realities and we need to prepare for that.”

Maina Talia, part of Vaitupu Island Youth and Tuvalu CAN emphasised the existential risk faced by the most vulnerable nations whose land is being devoured by the sea.

“I want to stress the connection between us and the land,” he said at a side-event in Paris. “There is a concept back home called ‘Fanua’. That same word we give to the land is the same word we give to the placenta to a mother.”

“If you give birth on the island we bury the fanua and plant a coconut tree on top signifying our connectivity to the land…this is how important it is for us not to go, not to leave…because we are connected, we are rooted to the land.”

“If we are to leave Tuvalu, it will become very different for a nation like Tuvalu to exist within another nation.”

He continued: “The loss of cultural heritage for us simply equals to death…losing someone’s culture and losing someone’s tradition simply equals to death.”

This post also appears on Energydesk.

Photo: UNESCO Jakarta via Flickr

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

BY BRENDAN MONTAGUE AND KYLA MANDEL IN PARIS

Coral Bleach, from the Billionaire United Mining Services, arrived this morning at the Heartland Institute's much vaunted Day of Examining Data repleat with an emerald-studed hard hat, high-viz jacket, and furs. But her excitement soon turned to dissapointment.

The fearless champions of freedom of speech at the Chicago-based free market think tank were quick to call the security at the California Hotel in Paris – and two undercover police officers touting walky-talkies were not far behind.

For Ms Bleach was a fraud, a prankster, a troublemaker – of the most curteous and humourous kind. Deborah Hart, 45, from Australia is co-founder of the ClimActs protest group and author of the popular children's book on climate, Guarding Eden.

She was protesting the Heartland Institute press event with activists from the Climate Games because of concerns that the oil and tobacco funded think tank was successfully spreading disinformation about climate science.

"We use satire because that is the most effective form of straight talking," she told DeSmog UK. "They are misleading and deceptive and well funded. They are extremely effective. They have industry behind them, and the Australian media behind them."

Extremely Disingenuous

She added: "This small group of people are extremely disingenuous and evil."

Jonathan Adams, 25, from Minneapolis in Minnesota, is an activist from Rising Tide North America. He attended the Heartland event briefly before being ushered out by security.

He asked the Heartland staffers whether they really believed that 97 percent of the world's scientists were lying about their research, and challenged whether white, older, wealthy Americans should be telling people in Africa how to run their countries.

"We were asked to behave. People were telling us we were being childish, that we were behaving like five-year-olds. And then we were pushed out."

Sam Castro, 45, a full time activist and mother of three from Australia was performing Greg Hunt – the "minister for killing everything."

She said: "The Heartland Institute in the US work closely with the Institute of Public Affairs in Australia. There is no way they can meet in Paris without being challenged. This is our children's future.

"These people are producing anti-science propaganda and this is used by the Australian government to justify inaction."

The Heartland press conference was advertised as open to the public but DeSmog UK reporters were told to leave before the event had even begun.

Jim Lakely, the hapless press officer, explained the ban was in place because the reporters had distributed printed materials at an earlier event in Rome.

After the banned press and public left there were just two women in attendance prior to the event starting. 

The formerly open to the public Heartland climate denial conference just cut number of women present by a third pic.twitter.com/8uUZzRDcyu

— Kyla Mandel (@kylamandel) December 7, 2015

Will Morano be arrested for being 'Climate Criminal' in Paris?! Movie premiere set for tonight! pic.twitter.com/LSKyaqfpzJ

— Marc Morano (@ClimateDepot) December 7, 2015

Wanted posters with the faces of Heartland attendees Myron Ebell and Chris Horner had been pasted outside the hotel. 

Among those due to give presentations at the Paris event were Dr Willie Soon, who has been funded by ExxonMobil for decades; Dr S Fred Singer, the grandfather of climate denial who shilled for the tobacco industry, and Ebell from the ExxonMobil-funded Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Lord Christopher Monckton was also in attendance. Last week he explained his theory to DeSmog UK that Barack Obama was among a group of "totalitarians" who were trying to use the UNFCCC climate talks as a mechanism to install a Communist-Fascist State. 

@brendanmontague

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

BY KYLA MANDEL AND BRENDAN MONTAGUE IN PARIS

Oil rich Saudi Arabia is leading a campaign to sabotage attempts by countries on the front line of climate change to include an ambitous 1.5C target for global warming in the COP21 agreement currently being negotiated in Paris. 

Wealthy nations – including Germany, France and now the United States – have all signalled support for including references to the lower target in the final text, as negotiators reach the end of the first week of negotiations.

The oil producing giant last night blocked efforts to include references in the Paris deal to a UN report that says it would be better to limit global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels rather than the current 2C target.

Saleemul Huq, director of the International Centre for Climate and Development, argues that the difference between a temperature increase of 1.5 degrees and two degrees “is roughly 1.5 million people who will fall through the cracks and most of them will be in vulnerable and developing countries.”

Thoriq Ibrahim, the Maldives envoy and chair of the alliance of small island states (AOSIS), said the 1.5C was a “moral threshold” for his country.

Arab Block

Emmanuel de Guzman, head of the Philippines delegation, said: “The momentum for raising the level of ambition in Paris now opens the exciting possibility for a truly historic and transformational summit. We salute France and Germany and call for more countries to join in the call for 1.5C to protect human rights globally.”

Todd Stern, the US special envoy for climate change, told reporters today that concerns raised by island nations over passing a 1.5C global warming temperature rise threshold are “legitimate”.

“We are in active discussions with the islands and others about finding some way to represent their interests in having 1.5C referenced [in the Paris text] in some way,” Stern said. “We haven’t landed anywhere yet but we hear the concerns of those countries and we think these concerns are legitimate.”

Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has also come out in favour of a strong target. When asked about the 2C target today at the COP21 conference, Bloomberg said: “I don’t know if that’s the right target. The target should be zero [emissions] or reducing.”

But Saudi Arabia is now being accused of prioritising its oil-based economy over the survival of vulnerable nations. This goes efforts by a coalition of vulnerable countries to push the global community to adopt a new 1.5 degree global warming target.

The Climate Action Network tonight named Saudi Arabia "Fossil of the Day". A spokesman said: "The Saudi delegation here in Paris is doing its best to keep a meaningful mention of the 1.5 degree global warming limit out of the agreement. 

"The Saudi’s are trying to torpedo three years of hard science, commissioned by governments, that clearly shows 2 degrees warming is too much for vulnerable communities around the world. Saudi Arabia is fighting tooth and nail to ensure the Paris agreement basically says, 'thanks, but no thanks' to 1.5 degrees warming."

Substantive Discussions

Sven Harmeling, CARE International’s climate change advocacy coordinator, explained: “Saudi Arabia is blocking these very substantive discussions going forward and [from] allowing ministers to understand what’s going forward.”

"Overall we see increasing support for including the 1.5 limit in the Paris Agreement, with more than 110 countries in support, although some countries see it only in connection to below 2 degrees language. That adds pressure to those who see their fossil future threatened by a truly ambitious target," Harmeling told DeSmog UK.

"However, Saudi Arabia may also want to use this to bargain on other issues which the vulnerable countries might not, e.g. in relation to other issues of the mitigation ambition package (such as long-term emission reduction goal), or response measures which is about the impacts of emission reduction i.e. reduction of fossil fuel consumption."

Meanwhile, OPEC oil producing countries are also attempting to block language on turning economies away from fossil fuels – something generally agreed by everyone else in the negotiations.

Saudi Arabia is the 13th richest country in the world yet it refuses to make any financial contribution to the fight against climate change – this is despite claims to represent the poorest developing nations and support the end of fossil fuels.

In contrast, countries with smaller economies than Saudi Arabia – including the UK, EU, France, Canada, Australia, Sweden and Germany – have already contributed climate finance and will continue to do so.

King Salman bin Abdulaziz, the Saudi leader, did not speak at the COP21 opening on Monday. But Ali bin Ibrahim Al-Naimi, the Saudi Minister of Oil, has said: “In Saudi Arabia, we recognise that eventually, one of these days, we are not going to need fossil fuels. I don’t know when, in 2040, 2050 or thereafter.

“The kingdom [plans] to become a ‘global power in solar and wind energy’ and could start exporting electricity instead of fossil fuels in coming years."

Saudi Arabia says it will make some investment in renewables and slowly reduce its dependence on fossil fuels. The country is the world’s 10th largest CO2 emitter – more than the UK, Canada, Brazil, Australia, Indonesia and France – and it has failed to make any emission reduction pledge.

What's more, there is a strong caveat within Saudi's climate pledge, which points out the country still relies on a “robust contribution from oil export revenues to the national economy”. 

Saudi is also looking to water down language about aligning broader financial flows to be compatible with climate objectives – ensuring that revenues raised by oil do not go back into polluting investments – which will be essential if there is to be a managed and orderly clean economic transition.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Some corporate sponsors of the COP21 Paris climate talks are failing to properly report their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions a new report reveals.

The Paris climate conference is sponsored by over 60 companies including big polluters EDF, Engie and BNP Paribas. And while countries continue to negotiate a deal on tackling climate change, what have these corporate sponsors brought to the table?

A new study published this week by French social research group BASIC and the Multinationals Observatory shows that very few of the COP21 sponsors are declaring their GHG emissions in a transparent way.

The report looked at the GHG emission reduction policies of ten COP21 sponsors: Accor, BNP Paribas, Carrefour, EDF, Engie, Kering, LVMH, L’Oréal, Micheline and Renault.

Of these, only one company – EDF – has actually reduced its overall carbon footprint in line with EU targets.

Corporate Transparency

Olivier Petitjean of Multinationals Observatory told DeSmog UK: “There has been a growing trend, especially when you listen to what the French government says, to suggest that corporations have all the solutions to deal with the climate crisis, and that they are the ones that will deliver on the objectives set in Paris.”

“But as we show in our report, private companies are not as exemplary as they'd like to pretend. Only a minority of them report on their emissions in a transparent, accessible way,” Petitjean said.

Only four of the ten companies examined actually publish their GHG emissions data: BNP Paribas, Carrefour, Kering and LVMH. However, none of these companies take into consideration the full impact of its business’ value chain – from raw materials to waste disposal.

And while half of the companies in the study – Accor, Kering, L’Oréal, Michelin and Renault – did commission a full assessment of their emissions over the value chain, none of them have shown any GHG emission cuts at this scale.

The failure to address a companies’ upstream and downstream emissions is troubling given that for these COP21 sponsors, the majority of their emissions are located in these areas which represent up to 85 percent of their global GHG footprint.

Where companies do make GHG reductions, many times this is done through carbon offsets elsewhere rather than investing in emission cuts at their home-operations in Europe.

EDF and Engie

In particular, Petitjean highlighted the contradiction between EDF and Engie’s prominence at the climate talks compared to their environmental performance.

“The French government has always been very explicit about its intention to use COP21 to promote the French ‘national champions’, Engie and EDF,” said Petitjean, noting that both companies have large-scale advertising campaigns going on which highlight their sponsorship of the climate talks.”

He continued: “When you look at the reality of their investments and their portfolio, the share of renewables is still really minimal, and it mostly comes from gobbling up smaller companies.”

Both also continue to invest in coal and have also just signed contracts with Cheniere to import liquefied natural gas from the U.S. starting in 2017.

Photo: UNFCCC via Flickr

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

A lot of people today have been asking whether the ‘French gamble’ paid off. Did having over 150 heads of state in Paris for the first day of COP21 set the bar for ambitious, meaningful and successful negotiations, or was it just a chaotic mess creating unrealistic expectations?

Never has an international summit seen this many world leaders all show up at once. And yesterday was manic, there’s no other way to describe it. But I think it worked.

Now it’s just a matter of waiting to see whether substantive offers are brought to the table.

Riots

But before I get into all the craziness, let me start at the beginning. One of the first things I wanted to do when I got here was to visit the Place de la Republique. Firstly, to pay my respects to the lives lost during the November 13 attacks. Flowers, candles and letters to loved ones continue to be added each day to the bronze Marianne statue surrounded by sombre onlookers.

Due to the heightened security measures the French authorities cancelled the big climate march in Paris that was scheduled for Sunday.

This brings me to the second reason why I visited Place de la Republique. In a symbolic march, thousands of shoes were donated – including by Pope Francis himself – and arranged in the pedestrian square by the statue. Seeing the two displays side by side was really quite moving. The atmosphere was extremely peaceful, quiet and hopeful.

But the seemingly never-ending line of police gearing up along the nearby rue du Temple felt ominous. And then, later in the day, a group of demonstrators turned violent, throwing objects at the police and the police retaliating with tear gas. According to the BBC 100 people were arrested. Walking past the aftermath I saw the streets littered with broken glass, trampled flowers, and abandoned shoes.

Clouds and Storms

Both of these issues – the November 13 attacks and the climate marches – were touched upon during the opening ceremony yesterday.

In a powerful speech, French President Francois Holland said: “I’m not choosing between the fight against terrorism and the fight against global warming because we must leave our children more than a world free of terror, we owe them a planet free from disasters.”

“It is in the name of climate justice that I am speaking today and in the name of climate justice that we must act,” he continued. “Climate change will bring conflicts just like clouds bring storms.”

“It is causing migration which is causing more refugees to take flight than wars. States face no longer being able to meet the basic needs [of their people],” he said highlighting access to water as one example of this.

He concluded: “What is at stake with this climate conference is peace.”

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon followed, saying: “The peoples of the world are also on the move.  They have taken to the streets, in cities and towns across the world, in a mass mobilization for change.”

So now campaigners hope delegates will  take a cue from yesterday’s many speeches and pursue a strong deal. And, strangely for a climate conference, seems not a moment has been lost. Negotiations began yesterday evening and went well past midnight – and remember, this is just the first day of the first week.

Al Gore Selfies

It was a hectic day yesterday for all. Amidst people chasing Al Gore for selfies a photographer lost the flash to his camera. A mere victim of the mob, the flash was left on the ground as the throng of photographers stayed glued to the American “climate hero”.

Then, standing outside the La Seine plenary hall – inside which all the leaders were gathered – I witnessed the Mauritanian delegates, all donning green scarves, line up to shake hands with their president as he left the hall to celebrate what, incidentally, was also their national independence day.

In comparison, today is quieter. It is much less ‘spectacle’ and much more ‘getting down to business’. Media are no longer fighting for desk space and I’ve found where they’re serving the good French cheese for lunch. Every now and then you’ll see a group of delegates hurriedly-walking from one hall to the next. Lone journalists are seen running across the media block as if their life depends on it. Important stuff is clearly happening.

So far there’s been lots of talk about a 1.5C degree target vs 2C, loss and damage, and climate finance.

Everyone is keeping an eye on what China and India are doing along with known disruptors the ‘ALBA countries’ (a group of Latin American nations known as the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas). Nations’ red lines have yet to be revealed and everyone knows compromises must be made. But it’s just day two. There is so much more yet to come.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Two twenty-something climate scientists are currently running and cycling their way from the Antarctic and Arctic all the way to Paris.

Travelling a combined distance of 20,000 kilometres, the two scientists – plus team members joining them along the way – are working to raise awareness about climate change ahead of December’s Paris climate conference.

Meet Dr Daniel Price, UK specialist in Antarctic climate, and Dr Erlend Moster Knudsen, Norwegian specialist in Arctic climate.

Since the spring, the two have been hosting events with local communities along their journeys – Price, bringing a flag from the Antarctic as he makes his way up from New Zealand, covering some 17,000km by bike, and Knudsen, taking the lead on the 3,000km Northern Run beginning at the tip of Norway.  

And on the rare occasion that travel by land isn’t possible – say when going from Norway to the UK – carbon offsets from one of their partners, MyClimate.org, are used to compensate for the climate impacts of flying.

Erlend Moster Knudsen on the Northern Run.

DeSmog UK recently spoke with the two scientists over Skype as Knudsen was preparing to make his way from Norway to Cambridge, and Price, sitting in an Austrian hostel, was about to start his final leg through the Alps.

Knudsen and Price talk about their many experiences, from trying to close the gap between the scientific community and society when it comes to knowledge about climate change, to witnessing first-hand the number of people at risk from the impacts of climate change in the developing world.

Read the full interview below:

KM: How did this all come about? What inspired this idea of running and cycling from the poles to Paris?

EMK: As we were getting closer towards the end of our PhDs we realised more and more that we’re spending a lot of time conducting research that is only read by our fellow scientists whereas the big potential for improving our climate understanding is really among the general public.

I did my PhD in Arctic sea ice and Arctic climate whereas Dan did his PhD in Antarctic climate and Antarctic sea ice. So this kid of explains why we’re starting in the poles… But it’s also because those are the regions where climate change is occurring at the fastest rates.

DP: It was majorly driven by frustration. I sat down at my desk one day finishing up my PhD and I realised that even my parents didn’t know about COP21, even my parents who I babble on, complaining about my PhD to… didn’t even understand it. My closest friends weren’t even getting it, so there’s just this massive gap between science and society, which is really the problem, which I’ve come to realise even more during this as to how key it is that the more people that get this the faster we’ll move forward. So, that was kind of the driving factor for it all.

I decided I wanted to dedicate the rest of the year to public outreach because that’s the really key thing now, right? Doing all the science and no one understanding it is pretty pointless.

EMK: This is really an initiative to try and bridge the gap between academia and the general public, the understanding of climate change. So we’re trying to raise awareness of climate change and especially focusing on this climate summit that will take place this year in Paris.

DP: I think the gap is absolutely profound between the professional science level and the general public. And it’s exactly like you said what your main focus is [at DeSmog], sort of clearing this noise and disinformation. It’s just so important because it’s delayed us 20 years this active misinformation campaign by the fossil fuel industry… So that’s something I am super passionate about, just getting the facts straight because it’s painful and it’s so dangerous. I don’t know how we’re going to look back on these guys in an historical context. You can’t really do anything more evil than do that. It’s pretty painful.

Daniel Price speaking with local media about climate change.

KM: What has been the reaction so far when you engage with the public?

EMK: People I meet are very positive and I find also that most people have questions. They’re not denialists; they’re not climate denialists saying ‘Hey, I don’t believe in human induced climate change, it’s all a hoax’. People don’t say that. People have questions, they may have heard something from a neighbour, they might have read something in the newspaper, and so they’re like ‘oh, is this something related to this?’

DP: Definitely setting the facts straight and getting the key messages across is really important to tell the general public… Generally people are just, not necessarily in shock, but kind of had their eyes opened when they realised some of these basic facts in understanding how it all works. So that’s been really amazing to see.

KM: On a day-to-day basis what have your travels been like?

EMK: I didn’t do this only running on roads. I chose as much as I could to stay in the mountains and stay on paths and in forests, so I have covered a lot of elevation, been doing a lot of up and down… The reason why I chose to do this was that, first of all, I [want] to avoid injuries. When one person is running this far and I was running with a backpack… so you have a lot of stress on your knees and your legs… It also provides me with a lot of motivation running in nature.

DP: [For me,] it’s been pretty varied. It’s normally eight to ten hours of cycling a day on average… It was a bit tough to get used to at first [with 30 or 40kg of gear on your bike]. Typically [I’m] covering about 100km a day. Through segments in China and Mongolia, one of my friends joined me there, and we were averaging about 160km a day, so those were massive days. We tried to cycle from Beijing to Ulan Bator in Mongolia as fast as we could and managed to do it in eight days. That was an amazing experience going up through the Gobi there was really cool.

But once you get in, and Erlend I’m sure has the same experience, you’ve still got the project to run as well, so getting into your emails, planning down the line, and trying to get all those things sorted.

KM: Dan, you’ve cycled through many different countries and cultures, what’s that been like?

DP: For me, from a scientific perspective data on climate change is the only way to assess it really… Climate is just sort of 30 years of something happening, and it is really difficult to pick out these [local] stories and attribute current climate change to what’s going on in certain cases.

It was quite tricky for me as well because of the language barrier. People kept asking me to find out local stories, because obviously they’re much more powerful because they’re personal… But one that does stick out to me is that they are having problems with desertification in Mongolia. We met countless herders in the desert but of course I can’t communicate to them what’s changing but it is very apparent in those regions that there is this extra stress in their lives because it’s becoming more difficult to have a livelihood.

Bangladesh is a pretty clear example as well. I was working with the UNDP [the United Nations Development Program] there and we had translators, [so] that’s a much clearer story to establish… It’s a deltaic country, there’s 160 million people there and 30 million of them live within one metre of sea level… but then the situation on the ground is just so complicated, it’s not necessarily a case that the water is going to rise in one area by one metre, because it’s just such a naturally evolving landscape anyway.

And then, to see the stress that’s already in that country. The Bangladeshi people are absolutely incredible, I was just blown away. [Climate change] is going to add extra stress to this country that’s trying to sort of get ahead of the game, it’s pretty upsetting to see… Shrinking a country [due to sea level rise] with a population that’s expanding is obviously not going to end well.

The real clincher for climate change is the extra stress it’s going to put on society.

KM: Right, it’s not just about the environment, it’s about people too.

DP: It’s been absolutely, massively eye opening for me just to appreciate just how many people are at risk with this. It sounds totally mundane I guess, you kind of sit at home and think ‘Oh yeah, lots of people’ but going through places like Indonesia and Bangladesh, just the amount of people is insane. And a lot of them are already living on the fringe so it is pretty worrying how these communities are going to adapt and how far they can adapt.

So, that really clicked with me at one point that the human development, and the whole human rights side of it, is just so strong. And the amount of people that are susceptible to these changes, that’s something that really clicked with me while travelling through.

Daniel Price

KM: What’s been the most challenging part of the journey so far?

EMK: I think in general the most challenging part is being able to motivate yourself no matter how your legs feel, no matter how the weather is… you might be staying in a little cabin up in the mountains which I did a lot, the wind outside sounds like it’s going to lift the whole cabin and take it off to somewhere else, and the little cabin is warm, you have your food, you have shelter, you have a fire going, you have pretty much everything you need and you know you have to get out and cover 30km until the next time you’re safe.

That to me is a challenge, you have to be pretty strong mentally to prepare yourself and just take it on because I could never fall behind the schedule because I have so many presentations along the way, so I could really not wait and stay and relax for a day. There was no chance to do that.

DP: It’s been much more of a mental challenge than physical. I guess a lot of people say that. When you do something physical it’s all mental really. The body keeps going. But just trying to run the project at the same time as trying to cover kilometres can be quite challenging.

And trying to keep our message clear. It becomes very difficult once you’re completely immersed in a project to understand what it looks like from the outside. That’s been a massive learning lesson for me.

Erlend Moster Knudsen

KM: And the most enjoyable part?

EMK: Since the biggest challenge is mental, not really physical, just mentally [trying] to motivate yourself day in and day out, then having people who really salute the project, that really support it, [helps].

People have been giving me food along the way, some people giving me perhaps a bed for the night or a warm shower, some people just gave me some nice words along the way, which is just so, I can’t stress how important that is, especially since I’ve been running so much alone. Just meeting these random people, they say go for it, they give me a thumbs up and saying I’m doing a great job, that really means a lot to me because it’s a bit of a journey in solitude for a while there, it makes more sense when you have those thumbs up and slap on your back and just keep going kind of thing, it’s really, really supportive.

KM: In addition to helping communicate climate change to the public what message do you hope to send to decision makers in Paris?

EMK: That there are so many people that now see changes. They hear our politicians talking about it, but there is such little change when it comes to policies. It’s very politically correct nowadays to talk about climate change and environmental stuff, that’s very important, but when it comes to it, it’s always being looked at as something that is costly… And so, I believe that when you send a signal that, first of all, a lot of people are joining in an initiative like this, and supporting it in so many different ways, but [it’s] also saying that this is possible.

In the same way that Dan and I are capable of biking and running across half the globe, it is also possible to use the options we already have, the tools we already have, because we have so many tools available… [From] renewable energy all the way to the way we design our cities.

DP: I see this project as a small part in this whole global effort that is going on from everyone to try and build the movement and try and just put momentum ahead of Paris, so that, the key thing is that the policy makers feel the pressure to pursue what we need to do with enough ambition.

This is a condensed and edited version of two interviews held with Price and Knudsen. All photos courtesy of Pole to Paris. You can follow their journey on Facebook and Twitter. And for more awesome pictures check out their Instagram @Poletoparis.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Women from around the world are mobilising today to call for action on climate change as international leaders meet in New York at the United Nations General Assembly.

"There is no climate justice without gender justice," the movement argues. Solutions and policy demands will be presented in New York City as part of the Global Women’s Climate Justice Day of Action in an effort to highlight the reality that while women are among those most severely vulnerable to the effects of climate change, women are also the "key to creating climate solutions."

The aim is to get political officials to agree “equitable, immediate, and bold action on climate change" as we enter the final two months before the COP21 climate change negotiations in Paris in December. At this time, the Women’s Climate Declaration will be presented to world governments.

Connecting Women

“Women around the world are facing the impacts of the climate crisis every day,” said Osprey Orielle Lake, co-founder and executive director of the Women’s Earth and Climate Action Network, which helped organise the event. “We are issuing a wake-up call to the world that the time has come for bold action to address the roots of the climate crisis, with women’s leadership at the forefront.”

Among the women speaking at the event in New York are Mary Robinson, the UN special envoy on climate change, and May Boeve, head of climate campaign group 350.org. Other leading international women speaking include Jacqui Patterson, director of the NAACP Environmental and Climate Justice Program, Melina Laboucan-Massimo, First Nations and anti-tar sands activist, Jody Williams, American political activist and Nobel Prize laureate, and Patricia Gualinga, international relations director for the indigenous community of Sarayaku in Ecuador.

As Orielle Lake explained, the day of action is “about connecting women working on vital climate projects around the globe. It is about bringing our passion and determination to the surface and manifesting our vulnerabilities and fierce strengths.”

According to the UN, women form a disproportionately large share of the poor. In rural areas and developing countries women are typically the ones responsible for securing water, food and energy for cooking and heating – this dependence on local natural resources makes them highly vulnerable to climate impacts, including drought, uncertain rainfall and deforestation.

And, compared to men in poor countries, women face historical disadvantages such as limited access to decision-making and economic assets, and this further increases the challenges of climate change.

Global Action

This is why it is not just in New York City that women are mobilising. Throughout September, women in over 30 countries have been holding events calling for change.

For example, in the Niger Delta region of West Africa, women held a summit on gender and oil. Meanwhile, in the Amazon Rainforest indigenous women protested fossil fuel extraction in their territories. And, in Canada documentary photography depicts women from across the country seeking to protect water from pollution.

As the UN argues, it is “imperative that a gender analysis be applied to all actions on climate change and that gender experts are consulted in climate change processes at all levels, so that women's and men’s specific needs and priorities are identified and addressed.”

Melissa S. United States

Hala Alhaffar. Damascus, Syria

In addition to asking for a transition away from fossil fuels, protection of our forests and oceans, and increased funding for adaptation, the Women’s Climate Declaration lays out a series of gender-conscious demands. These include: a gender-responsive climate change policy and programme; recognising that gender-sensitive climate policy benefits men, women, children and the planet; and respecting and learning from the traditional ecological knowledge, wisdom and experience of the world’s indigenous peoples.

It argues: “Unsustainable consumption and production reverses development gains in the global North and the global South: Women and men of industrialized nations have a responsibility to educate themselves, examine their worldviews, commit to action, and lead by example.

“No one person, organization, community, province, region, or nation is capable of solving the challenge of climate change alone. This is a time for collaboration at a global level as never before required.”

Photo: 350.org via Flickr / Omnia Abdallah, Khartoum Sudan

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

A frequently used talking point from Prime Minister Stephen Harper is that Canada will only tackle the issue of climate change if countries like China agree to take action as well. 

Looks like that time has come.

A new study released this week that examines nearly 500 pieces of legislation in 66 countries finds Canada lags behind many countries, including China, when it comes to advancing a plan to reduce climate change pollution and fossil fuel usage. 

According to Globe International, the organization behind the study, Canada currently "has no comprehensive federal climate change legislation."

In China on the other hand, "it was announced in 2010 at the GLOBE International legislators’ forum in Tianjin that China would begin work on [climate] legislation. A first formal draft of the law is expected to be produced in early 2014, after which a comprehensive formal consultation will begin with government ministries, industry and other stakeholders, with passage likely by 2015."

Image taken from a "Canada extract" of the larger study showing Canada has "no flagship legislation."

Globe International also reports new investments in energy efficiency to reduce China's use of coal:

"Since 2012 China has invested CNY 4.9 billion (USD 804 million) within the central government’s budget and CNY 2.6 billion (USD 427 million) of the central fiscal bonus to support 2,411 projects on high-efficiency, energy-saving technologies, model products and industries, contracted energy management, developing energy-saving monitoring institutions, energy-saving buildings and green lighting."

While China clearly has a long way to go, this report shows that government leaders in that country are taking the issue seriously, beginning to invest funds and put in place long term goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 

We are coming into a new round of international negotiations on climate change, kicking off with a world leader summit in September of this year hosted by the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon, in New York. This sets of a series of major negotiations that will culminate December, 2015 in Paris, where leaders have committed to finalizing a new global framework on climate change. 

China is clearly ramping up to have something significant on the table at the Paris talks. As the Globe International report shows, Canada isn't immune to the international spotlight and Prime Minister Harper is fast running out of excuses for the country's failure to address the climate change file. 

Image Credit: Kris Krug via Flickr

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.