According to a recent climate action analysis from the bipartisan World Resources Institute (WRI), the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority to aggressively reduce greenhouse gas emissions has substantial long and near term benefits.

Yet even still, the EPA faces unprecedented resistance from climate change nay-sayers who seem to want to thwart progress at every turn. Last year, EPA made final its determination that global warming pollution constitutes a public danger. Since then, several pieces of legislation have been introduced that would short circuit EPA’s authority.

Need for comprehensive legislation

If the federal government and states move aggressively, through 2016, it could successfully use existing authorities to put the country on a trajectory to meet the Obama Administration’s reduction target of “in the range of” 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020.

But, we can do even better than that.

According to the Center for Climate Strategies, new climate and energy policies bear the potential for creating 2.5 million American jobs (while helping to curb energy costs) as well as produce around $134 billion in economic activity.

The report, based on economic impacts of climate policies developed by 16 separate and impartial states, calls for the adoption of 23 specific policy approaches, including the creation of new clean energy sources for heat and power, improved energy efficiency and industrial processes, transportation and land use improvements, agriculture and forestry conservation and expanded recycling and waste energy recovery under a national framework.

These policies have the potential to reduce pollution, are cost-effective, and improve energy, health, environment, and economic development. If every U.S. state would implement the full scale of all 23 actions, the resulting greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions would surpass national GHG targets proposed by President Obama and congressional legislation, and would reduce U.S. emissions to 27% below 1990 levels in 2020 – equal to 4.46 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (BMtCO2e).

“Several states have pioneered creation of comprehensive state climate action plans in recent years,” said Tom Peterson, President and CEO of the Center for Climate Strategies. “Our analysis provides the first clear indication of what would happen to the economy if such programs were adopted at the federal level.”

Fighting a public danger

“The WRI study shows that we have tools that can start us on the road to achieving significant greenhouse gas reductions but still more needs to be done,” said Joe Mendelson, global warming policy director for the National Wildlife Federation (NWF) . “EPA action can take us significantly down the path of averting the climate crisis but we will need aggressive climate and energy legislation to ultimately end our addiction to fossil fuels.”

The policy director takes specific aim at one of the planet’s worst lobbying sector against climate change legislation: Big Oil.

“Of course Big Oil doesn’t want to be held accountable for their pollution and will dig into their wallets and mobilize their army of lobbyists to fight EPA at every turn,” continued Mendelson. “WRI has made it acutely clear why we’ll fight tooth and nail against Big Oil backed challenges in Congress to EPA action.”

Whilst air travel remains the most common way of getting to mainland Europe, increasing environmental awareness, improved high-speed rail networks and the superior comfort of train travel is luring many down from the skies and back onto rails. “Inghams and Inntravel have introduced even more train travel destinations due to the popularity of rail travel” says Keith Francis, Product Director at Inghams.

With climate change now a leading issue, rail is enabling people to travel without the carbon guilt trip that comes with flying. Certainly, when it comes to the CO2 footprint, trains tread far lighter than planes. Though calculating carbon output is not yet an exact science, it’s estimated that by taking a train instead of a plane from London to Paris, carbon dioxide emissions are reduced by as much as 90%.

But it’s not just the environment that benefits from rail travel. Trains come with many other perks that are not found on planes. The absence of invasive security checks, long waits in departure lounges or restrictive baggage allowances all help trains to outshine their airborne rivals.

Then there’s the view; rather than looking at the headrest in front, train passengers can enjoy watching the landscape unfold as they travel, allowing them to really connect with places they pass through.  Spacious legroom, a restaurant car and a large table are other little luxuries you won’t find on aircraft and are especially appreciated by families with young children who have the space to move around and sit together.

It’s not difficult to see why many people are opting for trains over planes.  As Keith Francis puts it, “Onboard, the journey begins and you can sit back and enjoy the spectacular scenery, providing a relaxing way to start your holiday. Not only is it environmentally friendly but it is also stress free”. Lakes and mountains holidays in Switzerland, France, Austria and Italy are all easily reachable by rail from the UK and for a small fee it’s possible to upgrade from plane to train travel for Inghams’ summer tours in Switzerland. The journey begins at St Pancras station where passengers board the Eurostar to Paris, before catching the TGV to Lausanne, Geneva or Basel, then joining the ever-efficient Swiss rail network to reach their final destination. Typically, trains depart London at 08:00 and arrive in resort between 17:00 and 21:00 the same day.

So what are the down sides? It’s fair to say that rail travel is normally more expensive than air travel, and of course, it does take longer. But in an era where air travel has lost its glamour and has simply become a means to an end, train travel, and especially luxury class train travel, brings back the pleasure of the journey itself, meaning  that the holiday begins the moment you step aboard the carriage.

Participants in the public announcement included Nike, Weyerhaeuser and Inovus Solar – each calling for immediate congressional action to enact climate and energy legislation.

“Healthy public lands that support the nation’s $730 billion outdoor recreation economy are imperiled by a warming climate,” said Frank Hugelmeyer, president of OIA. “The outdoor recreation industry and those who pursue outdoor activities are among the first to experience the impacts of climate change on our public lands. We believe our industry is in a unique position and has a responsibility to offer leadership on this important issue.”

Outdoor Industry Association is a national trade association that serves 4,000 retailers, distributors and suppliers in the active outdoor recreation industry. Its members include recognized brands and retailers such as REI, Patagonia, The North Face, Levi Strauss and L.L. Bean. OIA is the 18th BICEP member and joins consumer giants Best Buy, Nike, Symantec, Target, eBay, Starbucks and Timberland among the coalition’s members.

“With the Gulf of Mexico disaster staring us in the face and clean energy legislation pending in Washington, there couldn’t be a timelier moment to welcome such a prominent business voice to BICEP,” said Mindy Lubber, president of Ceres, a leading coalition of investors and environmental groups that coordinates BICEP. “American businesses across the economic spectrum know that tackling energy independence and climate change now is imperative, and the outdoor recreation industry sees climate change directly threatening its business model every day. It’s time for Washington and specifically the United States Senate to act.”

The U.S. House passed comprehensive energy and climate legislation last June, and a Senate coalition headed by Democrat John Kerry of Massachusetts and Independent Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut is considering similar legislation for the Senate. The Obama administration has also been active in pushing for a comprehensive bill this year.

More about BICEP’s nine core principles for energy independence and climate policy can be found at: ceres.org/bicep.

Initially spearheaded by the French Government, the Global Partnership for Sustainable Tourism was designed to identify and disseminate successful initiatives from anywhere in the world and make them applicable elsewhere. The initiative will support implementation of policy recommendations and lessons learned in integrating sustainability in tourism, and develop new tools and projects where no existing solution has been found.

“The partnership is aiming high. The goal is to transform the way tourism operates around the world by seeking out and replicating successful, sustainable policies, projects, and investments,” said Achim Steiner, Under-Secretary General for the UN and Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). “The impacts of poorly managed tourism can be profound, damaging perhaps even destroying the natural and cultural attractions that tourists come to experience in the first place while contributing to global and regional challenges such as climate change and water scarcity.

“However, there are many potential, positive impacts. Well-managed ventures can play a key role in assisting countries towards the low-carbon, resource-efficient, Green Economy urgently needed in the 21st century. In doing so they can deliver not only environmental, but significant social and economic benefits,” added Mr. Steiner.

Tourism a key player in a green economy

The tourism sector is a massive job creator, representing 5% of the global GDP as well as accounting for over 10% of current annual investment worldwide, and as much as 50% in some developing countries.

Based out of UNEP’s Paris-based Division of Technology, Industry and Economics, the program is joined by 35 other countries, organizations, UN programs and agencies and professionals, among them the United Kingdom and the UN World Tourism Organization.

The partnership’s mission and efforts will be based on the work of the International Task Force on Sustainable Tourism Development, a three-year United Nations initiative led by France, and whose members are the founders of this new partnership.

The task force developed a series of policy recommendations to guide governments, destination managers, financial institutions, and tourism businesses towards good business models while conserving nature, culture, and society.

Developing a best practice standard

Partner members also developed the Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria – global guidelines for tourism businesses derived from more than 4,500 industry best practices from around the world. The policy recommendations, the successful task force projects, and the criteria form part of the framework for guiding the work of the partnership.

The new entity will focus on policy, projects, tools, and networks for all tourism stakeholders, at all levels, by addressing and working on: policy frameworks, climate change, environment and biodiversity, poverty alleviation, cultural and natural heritage, private sector sustainable practices, and finance and investment.

For more info, visit www.unep.org.

“Putting a serious price on carbon will both get us closer to the serious energy reductions we need to make but also accelerate the domestic development and adoption of these technologies,” he explained.

Reicher suggests that exposing the hidden costs of dirty fuels will set off a rush of investment in new energy innovations. He says carbon pricing is an “essential signal we have to get to.” Right now, “money is sitting there to make significant investments,” he says, but the cash flow is sidelined because the incentives aren’t there.

The bigger picture

“In general terms,” said Reicher, “a carbon price will do a lot to advance the competitiveness of these technologies that offer serious climate reductions, help for our energy security, increase our domestic fuels, and can create all sorts of jobs.”

As Reicher puts its, if a company has to actually dish out cash to cover the price of carbon emissions, said company would be forced to change toward cleaner energy as well as less energy consumption altogether. Then, it would make good business sense for companies to invest in new technology.

And similar ideas would follow us home, too. With accurate carbon pricing, households would actually save money by reducing their electricity loads, while the demand for cheap, energy efficient technology would skyrocket – again, as a method of helping our wallets.

Google is particularly interested in this low hanging fruit of energy efficiency which Reicher says “grows back” as we switch from incandescent to compact fluorescents and now to LED. At each step we save more energy and promote more innovation, making the area particularly ripe for investment dollars.

When Google says “Jump”….

So, what’s in it for the web giant? A whole lot, actually. Google already has products on the market that help consumers save electricity, such as Google Power Meter – an online tool that helps you monitor and reduce your energy consumption while offering tips on the cheapest and easiest ways you can reduce energy.

“Putting a serious price of carbon will both get us closer to the serious energy reductions we need to make but also accelerate the domestic development and adoption of these technologies,” added Reicher.

With government support and incentive via carbon pricing, private investment and competitive innovation will allow green development the opportunity to flourish within a mainstream market.

For the second consecutive year, hundreds of Starwood Hotels & Resorts will participate in the global event created by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), to send a powerful global message about the importance of environmental sustainability and caring for the planet.

On the evening of March 27, Starwood hotels entire portfolio – including St. Regis, The Luxury Collection, W, Westin, Le Méridien, Sheraton, Four Points by Sheraton, and the recently launched Aloft, and Element – will turn off their lights and take other energy-saving measures for one full hour, underscoring the company’s dedication to environmental sustainability.

This year, in more than 90,000 hotel rooms, guests staying in participating Starwood properties will be encouraged to turn off the lights. Additionally, as they did last year, participating Starwood hotels will take the steps of turning off exterior signage lighting; last year, the darkened hotels offered striking visual imagery that provided an apt symbol of Earth Hour. Properties will also participate by dimming or turning off non-essential interior lighting, using candlelight in appropriate public areas such as restaurants and bars, and using in-room voicemail messages and in-room television messages to inform guests about Earth Hour observances.

Starwood is joining other industry leaders such as Fairmont, Kimpton and Shangri-La Hotels and Resorts in participation in this year’s call to action.

Guests take action

Starwood properties are coordingating Earth Hour awareness events, including community walk-a-thons, public candlelight “unplugged” concerts, and guest receptions featuring signature green cocktails.

“The enthusiasm we saw from our guests and associates last year made it clear how much they share our passion for sustainability and environmental stewardship,” said Sandy Swider, vice president of global citizenship, Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. “Considering that Starwood does business in every corner of the world, we have a terrific platform for sharing messages about the impact each one of us can have if we work together.”

Starwood itself made history when it launched Element Hotels, Starwood’s green trailblazer and the first major hotel brand to mandate that all properties pursue the U.S. Green Building Council’s (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification for high-performance buildings. Across its entire portfolio, Starwood is rolling out initiatives that aim to conserve energy and water, reduce waste and enhance indoor environmental quality for Starwood guests and associates alike.

The “Low Carbon World” website was designed to serve as a web-based communications platform tol assist knowledge transfer and simplify access to information and tools that can be difficult to trace.

www.LowCarbonEconomy.com will list every country’s carbon policies, commitments, historical performance, future projections and opportunities, as well as country-specific marketplaces, networks, associations and standards which are relevant to government departments and investment agencies.

“Everyone agrees that the transition to a low carbon economy is an environmental and economic imperative, and will require increased collaboration globally – particularly between public and private sectors. Until now, access to the necessary low carbon information has been extremely restricted and very time consuming. With this project we have changed that and we look forward to continuing to work with UNEP and other major partners over the coming months and years,”said Toddington Harper, TLCE’s Managing Director.

Annual global greenhouse gas emissions should not exceed 40 to 48.3 Gigatons (Gt) of equivalent C02 in 2020, if a rise in global temperatures is to be curbed at 2 degrees C or less, whilst between 2020 and 2050, global emissions ideally need to fall by between 48 per cent and 72 per cent.

“The solutions for the transition to a low carbon economy already exist, and it is a question of removing barriers for rapid and mass uptake. These barriers include technical, financial and informational aspects. I look forward to seeing this project develop further”,said Achim Steiner UN Under-Secretary General and Executive Director of UNEP.

The Climate Neutral Network (CN Net) celebrated its second anniversary at UNEP’s 11th Special Session of the Governing Council in Bali, Indonesia by hosting a side event titled “High hopes, low carbon – making it work!” The side event showcased work and success stories undertaken between CN Net and The Low Carbon Economy Ltd (TLCE) over the past 12-months.

The home page for the ‘Low Carbon World’ initiative is available on http://www.lowcarboneconomy.com/Low_Carbon_World/Data/Home and will soon also be available on UNEP’s Climate Neutral website www.unep.org/climateneutral.

According to the study, an expected sea level rise of 11 inches above 2000 levels may cause the remaining tiger habitat in the Sundarbans to decline by 96 percent, pushing the total population to fewer than 20 breeding tigers – a far cry from the (albeit dismal) 3,200 remaining in the wild.

The threats facing these Bengal tigers and other iconic species around the world underscore the need for urgent international action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Unless immediate action is taken, the Sundarbans, its wildlife and the natural resources that sustain millions of people will simply disappear within 50 to 90 years.

“If we don’t take steps to address the impacts of climate change on the Sundarbans, the only way its tigers will survive this century is with scuba gear,” said Colby Loucks, WWF’s deputy director of conservation science and the lead author of the study Sea Level Rise and Tigers: Predicted Impacts to Bangladesh’s Sundarbans Mangroves.

“Tigers are a highly adaptable species, thriving from the snowy forests of Russia to the tropical forests of Indonesia;” added Loucks. “The projected sea level rise in the Sundarbans will likely outpace the tiger’s ability to adapt.”

Disappearing World

The Sundarbans, a UNESCO World Heritage Site shared by India and Bangladesh at the mouth of the Ganges River, is the world’s largest single block of mangrove forest and home to more than 50 reptile species, 120 commercial fish species, 300 bird species and 45 mammal species.

Mangroves are found at the inter-tidal region between land and sea, and not only serve as breeding grounds for fish but help protect coastal regions from natural disasters such as cyclones, storm surges and wind damage.

Using the rates of sea level rise projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its Fourth Assessment Report (2007), the study authors said an 11-inch sea level rise may be realized around 2070, at which point tigers will be unlikely to survive in the Sundarbans. However, recent research suggests that the seas may rise even more swiftly than what was predicted in the 2007 IPCC assessment.

“The mangrove forest of the Bengal tiger now joins the sea-ice of the polar bear as one of the habitats most immediately threatened as global temperatures rise during the course of this century,” said Keya Chatterjee, acting director of WWF’s climate change program. “To avert an ecological catastrophe on a much larger scale, we must sharply reduce greenhouse gas emissions and prepare for the impacts of climate change we fail to avoid. In 2010, the Chinese Year of the Tiger, there is no better time for the US to pass domestic climate legislation and to reach an effective international agreement.”

In addition to climate change, the Sundarbans tigers, like other tiger populations around the world, already face tremendous threats from poaching and habitat loss. Tiger ranges have decreased by 40 percent over the past decade, and tigers today occupy less than seven percent of their original range. Scientists fear that accelerating deforestation and rampant poaching could push some tiger populations to the same fate as their now-extinct Javan and Balinese relatives in other parts of Asia.

Tigers are poached for their highly prized skins and body parts, which are used in traditional Chinese medicine.

“It’s disheartening to imagine that the Sundarbans – which means ‘beautiful forest’ in Bengali – could be gone this century, along with its tigers,” Loucks said. “We very much hope that in this, the Year of the Tiger, the world will focus on curtailing the immediate threats to these magnificent creatures and preparing for the long-term impacts of climate change.”

World Wildlife Fund is running a Year of the Tiger campaign to coincide with the Chinese New Year and culminating in a Global Tiger Summit in Vladivostok, Russia. The 2010 Year of the Tiger will mark an important year for conservation efforts to save wild tigers, with WWF continuing to play a vital role in implementing bold new strategies to save this magnificent Asian big cat.

Find out more at: www.worldwildlife.org/tigers

In 2009 alone, the travel and tourism economy will make up 9.3 percent of the global GDP, while having generated over 210 million jobs (7.4 global employment).

The previous year, 922 million international tourist arrivals were recorded, contributing $944 billion in international tourism receipts.

With such a far-reaching economic span, travel and tourism has been positioned it as a leading player in a strong, united, global effort at combating climate change. With such a huge economic “footprint”, the industry needs to proactively adopt industry-wide best practices to combat climate change.

Mutual dependency

The sustainability of the travel and tourism industry and that of the environment are mutually dependent. While travel and tourism are often lauded as global conduits for peace and prosperity, as well as social and environmental awareness, economic and environmental adaptation simply cannot happen without them.

Travel and tourism, as evident on this site every day, actively engages in the protection of fragile ecosystems and indigenous communities – allowing the industry to contribute towards the successful advancement of poverty alleviation in developing countries – a major topic of discussion in climate change litigation.

The travel and tourism industry needs to continue to develop sustainable solutions that are at the forefront of efforts to combat climate change, especially those that foster the exchange of innovative technology to advance carbon reduction.

Global sectoral approaches, supported by a level econmic playing field, will allow the industry to efficiently pursue the scale of change for progressive transformation to occur.

Commitment to change in a green economy

In order to give travel and tourism companies necessary transparency to make informed green business decisions – many of which can strongly influence a nation’s economic development -  a sound framework is critical.

A solid Copenhagen Agreement can and should provide a unique opportunity to set the foundation upon which a resilient green economy can be developed. However, in order to make this happen, public and private sector partnership is essential.

Moving forward fast are private and public sector industry groups the World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) and the World Tourism Organization. Jointly, the two world bodies are aligning efforts to unify a fragmented travel and tourism industry, speaking with one voice on the critical issue of climate change.

Both organizations are hosting a side event during the COP-15 negotiations on December 18th -  Addressing the Challenges of Climate Change – Perspectives from the Travel and Tourism Sector – that will highlight innovators from the private and public sector from across the world and all sectors of the industry.

“UNWTO’s Davos Declaration Process on climate change response paved the way to position the tourism industry as a relevant player of global climate neutrality,” said UNWTO Secretary-General ad interim Taleb Rifai. “Joining forces for tourism to speak as one in Copenhagen responds furthermore to a key recommendation of the UNWTO Roadmap for Recovery, highlighting the importance of building a strong public-private dialogue and boosting strong partnerships.”

Under the leadership of WTTC and UNWTO, examples of best practice will be presented in order to communicate to policy-makers and the rest of the industry travel and tourism’s proactive approach to carbon emissions’ mitigation and adaptation.

“The great cross-cutting impact of our industry makes it necessary to establish and maintain this close collaboration,” added Rifai. “I am confident that together we will contribute to a better positioning of travel and tourism in the global climate response agenda.”

“The travel and tourism industry urges global leaders in the wake of the Copenhagen Agreement – regardless of its final form – to actively engage the private sector in translating the internationally-agreed framework into transparent, supportive, and progressive national and regional policies,” said Jean-Claude Baumgarten, WTTC president and CEO. “The travel and tourism private sector has always sought a deeper working relationship with governments, and the anticipated Copenhagen Agreement will provide an excellent opportunity to further develop this relationship.”

Natural weather patterns will play less of a role than they did in 1998, the current warmest year, as El Niño, the cyclical heating of the Pacific Ocean, will be far weaker than it was 12 years ago.

The Met Office predicts that the warming effect of greenhouse gas emissions will more than make up for El Niño’s shortcomings – while cautioning that a record year in 2010 will depend upon whether or not the current El Niño began to decline earlier than normal or there was a large volcanic eruption.

Numbers rising

At the COP15 summit, the Met Office announced that it expected the global average temperature next year to be almost 0.6C warmer than the 1961 to 1990 average. It also forecasts an annual average of 14.58C compared with 14.52C in 1998.

If correct, the predicted temperature increase will be a huge blow to climate change skeptics, many of whom, armed with the still-argued “Climategate” emails, base their arguments on the fact that the temperature has not returned to the 1998 peak.

The Met Office also predicts that half the years between 2010 and 2019 will also be warmer than 1998.

“If 2010 turns out to be the hottest year on record it might go some way towards exploding the myth, spread by the climate conspiracy theorists, that we’re experiencing global cooling,” said Ben Stewart, of Greenpeace.“In reality the world is getting hotter, possibly a lot hotter, and humans are causing it.”

The Global Warming Policy Foundation, which claims man-made climate change has been exaggerated, accused the Met Office of making a “political intervention” in the international negotiations taking place in Copenhagen. It said: “Suggestions by the Met Office that a warming trend will resume in the next year or two should be treated with reserve in light of the recognized difficulties in making such confident predictions.”

Do changes in travel practices that benefit the environment negatively affect the economies of top, non-industrialized destinations?

The connection between climate change and international tourism presents a host of challenges, with a number of varying perspectives that identify how the role of tourism affects both the physical and political sides of the international climate debate.

Like all the other industries, international tourism has the responsibility to substantially reduce its greenhouse gas emissions; through transportation, accommodation and various activities in the destinations, the tourism sector causes about five percent of global carbon emissions.

However, to be fair to the entire world, the costs and structural changes associated with these emission reductions must not be at the expense of the world’s poorest people.

While international decision makers in tourism seem to agree on this principle, there are major differences with regard to implementation and priorities, as well as severe opposition from “rightwingers” who fear that American money will be used to support economies beyond our borders.

High sensitivity to change

The travel industry is classified as “highly climate sensitive”. For example, changes in climate have direct and immediate impacts on the length and quality of the seasons, which each affect travel behavior.

On a long term scale, climate change alters natural landscapes used by tourism; changing the infrastructure and services that can lead to economic setbacks or mass migration as well as political instability in the destinations.

And while tourists of the developed world will (hopefully) always have the freedom to choose, their adaptability to change will grow. If a particular destination goes from economic boom due to high tourism levels to political and social strife due to drought, natural disaster or famine, tourists will simply stop going there. There is very little the actual destination can do to fight this without the means and funds to properly combat the affects of climate change.

Lifestyle a key role

In modern society, travel has become a large part of our daily lives, both personally and professionally, with tourism generally considered a “right of passage” for the privileged; people finding and experiencing new places, cultures and lifestyles outside of their own. This sounds great ion the surface, yet, the ramifications of irresponsible travel behavior come with a high cost.

For instance, transportation emissions alone contribute to climate change – with about two thirds of tourism related emissions attributed to air and car transport. So, an easy fix would be to curb the transport process, right? Wrong. Non-industrialized countries – often top destinations for “experiential travel” and well off the beaten path – are highly dependent on the global tourism economy.

Yet to date, the tourism factor has not been properly represented.

Taking responsibility

Come 2012, the Kyoto Protocol will be replaced by a new international agreement  – one which will hopefully come to light during the COP15 meetings that presents a clear set of targets for the tourism industry. This responsibility for real change lies with the industrialized nations of the world.

While climate change is in large part due to over-consumption of resources by a small part of the world‘s population (industrialized countries), the effects are far-reaching.

Industrialized nations need to drastically reduce global greenhouse gas emissions in order to still prevent the worst consequences of climate change, while implementing comprehensive adaptation measures in the regions most affected by the already-negative impacts of climate change.

For instance, for over ten years, the aviation sector of the travel industry has been exempt from mitigation-related regulations, even though it is the primary source of carbon emissions within the industry.

Fast forward to 2012, and we have a deep-rooted need for political pressure on the travel and aviation industry to pay a fair share of the climate-related costs, including the costs of mitigation to curb global warming by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the costs of helping poor people to adapt to those consequences of climate change that cannot be prevented, such as natural disasters, food shortages and loss of land due to rising sea levels.

Further reading

Luckily (and timely), a new and free e-publication has been created to heavily detail the effects of climate change on tourism.

Presented by the Institute for Integrative Tourism and Development, Naturefriends International, Naturefriends Austria, Climate Alliance Austria and the German Church Development Service EED, the presentation is available for download at: http://respect.at/media/pdf/pdf1300.pdf.

Here is a quick refresh of some of the things I wrote:

“The Climate Research Unit (CRU) scientists whose emails were “leaked” online made a huge mistake: being stupid. Regardless of the intent, no one, on either side of the aisle, will take them on their word again. The global warming feud is bitter and cold (that pun was slightly intended), and the actions of said scientists are entirely unacceptable. Immense pressure from an entire politically-driven industry intent on crushing their every effort is no excuse for bending the facts, or hiding them completely.

“Although I am typically the antagonist against any and all climate change deniers and/or skeptics – as they are generally either a mislead or misleading bunch devoted to greed and political gain – taken on the surface, said skeptics do have a point as well as a valid argument with regard to the statements made in these leaked emails.

“While whether or not the statements within the stolen emails were taken out of context is debatable, undeniable is the fact that their very presence has raised questions over whether or not the argument for global warming is valid.”

Now, I stand firmly with everything I wrote, especially that last sentence, but I would like to add a brief amendment in light of some recent “news” that has since hit the media.

As like many who are concerned with the plight of the world’s future in the face of climate change, I was perhaps overly assertive on placing negative blame on the scientists in question, while not having full insight into the depth of the naivete of the anti-global-warming crowd.

As it turns out, “whether or not the statements within the stolen emails were taken out of context is debatable” is now the topic of the day.

While the naysayers literally jumped at the chance to debunk all scientific study pertaining to the effects of climate change, yanking literally three sentences out of over 1,000 items of correspondence and deeming them a smoking gun, we proponents for the environmental movement side-stepped that debate entirely in a rush to defend the real science. Now, the debate is settled. At least, for the intelligent people out there. The idiots are still buying Hummers.

I won’t bore you with my own take of the evidence – as I recently came upon a brilliantly done video by way of the good folks over at EarthFirst.com (via The Huffington Post) that lays it all out completely.

Here is what they say:

“RealClimate debunked the claims, as did the Union of Concerned Scientists. DeSmogBlog smacked them down, too. But apparently, reading through all the articles that explain exactly how conspiracy theorists are wrong about the hacked emails that supposedly prove global warming to be a scam is too hard for most skeptics. So, we’d like to present this idiot-proof video: it’s easy to follow, even if you’re not the sharpest tool in the shed.”

Some highlights of the video:

• Amateur skeptics took 3 sentences of “scandal” entirely out of context without understanding the scientific terminology applied. Yes, “trick” and “decline” were actual proven scientific jargon that did NOT mean what they thought it meant.
• Had these amateur skeptics bothered to read (or publicize) the sentences before and after the sentences in question, they would have gotten the full story in FAVOR of scientific proof of climate change.
• “Lack of warming at the moment” references last year’s solar cycle, NOT climate change effects. Again, a tidbit explained dutifully in the rest of the email.
• Right wing-nuts citing the same three sentences again and again, without bothering to examine the rest of the documents for the full explanation.

At one point in the video, a climate change skeptic video-blogger smugly suggests that the use of word “decline” was suggesting the actual cooling of global temperatures. However, as evidence in the rest of the email and the subsequent studies it cited, “decline” was in reference to tree-ring data, NOT global temps.

Apparently, FOX News and Rush Limbaugh did not think that was worth sharing, and the video blogger never knew the difference.

As the video’s narrator states: “If I had little understanding of climate science, and little time to do any research, that’s probably what I would think too.”

Take a look at the video below – it is just under 10 minutes long, but I promise it is a very easy and often funny viewing.

According to the Nobel Laureate and veteran climate campaigner whose name has become synonymous with global warming, Mr. Gore suggests that the targets to be outlined at COP15 are not nearly enough to combat the gloom and doom of climate change facing the planet today.

“Even if a deal is reached at the UN climate change talks in Copenhagen…it will only be the first step towards the far more radical cuts that are needed in global carbon emissions,” said Gore.

According to Gore, world leaders need to enact far more drastic measures in order to avoid the worst ramifications of global warming.

“Even a final treaty will have to set the stage for other tougher reductions at a later date,” he said. “We have already overshot the safe levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.”

At present, the set goal for the summit is to stabilize CO2 emissions at or below 450 parts per million. This reduction is supposed to be enough of a change to prevent a rise in average global temps of 2 degrees Celsius. Gore, however, suggests that his goal is not sufficient to get the job done, and that a much surer bet would be a reduction to 350 parts per million.

“Are we doing enough?” he asked. “The answer is obviously no — 450 is not the right target. But it is presently seen as beyond the capacity of governments around the world. We are stretching the capacity of governments even to hit a 450 target.”

“We are gambling with the future of human civilisation in accepting odds that by any definition make our present course reckless . . . But it’s still the most likely path to success.”

Pressuring Obama

Gore, an advocate for President Barack Obama during the 2008 campaign, is challenging the President to include more stringent cuts in carbon emissions than the current ofering of a 17% reduction by 2020.

With the US being the planet’s second-largest carbon polluter, Gore states that country’s reduction figure is “weaker than it should be”. However, he suggests that the real roadblock for Obama is getting tough carbon regulation through the House of Representatives.

“I’m glad that he is putting reduction targets on the table. I wish that they were stronger but I recognise the difficulties he faces in the Senate.”

Playing the carbon markets

Gore supports an international carbon taxation system as a means to cut fossil-fuel emissions, yet is cautious that current political struggles will get in the way for a meaningful resolution.

With perhaps years to go until such a system can be put into place, the former Vice President suggests, for the interim, a carbon emissions trading system as a more realistic “first step”.  He has been criticized for this viewpoint by many on both sides of the aisle who do not view carbon markets as a solution to climate change.

“The correct policy response will include both of these powerful tools,” he added. “But the degree of political difficulty associated with a carbon tax is a degree of difficulty much higher than the cap and trade approach.”

First, the obvious: generally, lying is bad. And anyone who lies in the pursuit of monetary or political gain in the face of a global debate should be called out on the spot and, if necessary, stripped of any power over process they may possess.

The Climate Research Unit (CRU) scientists whose emails were “leaked” online made a huge mistake: being stupid. Regardless of the intent, no one, on either side of the aisle, will take them on their word again. The global warming feud is bitter and cold (that pun was slightly intended), and the actions of said scientists are entirely unacceptable. Immense pressure from an entire politically-driven industry intent on crushing their every effort is no excuse for bending the facts, or hiding them completely.

Although I am typically the antagonist against any and all climate change deniers and/or skeptics – as they are generally either a mislead or misleading bunch devoted to greed and political gain – taken on the surface, said skeptics do have a point as well as a valid argument with regard to the statements made in these leaked emails.

Over 1,000 emails and 2,000 other documents were hacked from the CRU and then posted on a Russian file-sharing server late Thursday, referencing in some cases the concealment of data arguing against global warming claims. Once leaked, the university did not help the matter, offering no response or rebuttal beyond simply implying “Hey, you’re not allowed to read those!” while critics lambasted them.

While whether or not the statements within the stolen emails were taken out of context is debatable, undeniable is the fact that their very presence has raised questions over whether or not the argument for global warming is valid.

“This is horrible,” said Pat Michaels, a climate scientist at the Cato Institute in Washington who is mentioned negatively in the emails. “This is what everyone feared. Over the years, it has become increasingly difficult for anyone who does not view global warming as an end-of-the-world issue to publish papers. This isn’t questionable practice, this is unethical.”

With less than a month to go until the climate-change summit in Copenhagen, this is not good for climate change activists.

“Climate Gate” – Confusing the real issue

Let’s forget, for a moment, the fact that these emails were obtained in a highly illegal manner. Although I typically do not make a habit of aligning myself with The Right, I believe that the notion supported by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. – that the leaked e-mails are “theft” and “crime” that should be investigated regardless of the emails’ contents – is entirely missing the point.

“You call it Climate-gate. I call it E-mail-theft-gate,” said Senator Boxer. She claims that a criminal conspiracy might even be at play.

Senator Boxer is simply arguing the wrong point. Yes, it is unethical to steal emails. But, it is also unethical and even criminal to actively attempt to mislead the public on such an important topic – one that could change the course of human history and survival over the next few decades.

While the hacked emails have the ability to weaken global resolve to curb greenhouse-gas emissions, they offer no real and tangible arguments for either side. We now need to take the higher road and put forth the right argument: the content of these emails, regardless of how they were obtained, needs to be looked at in a comprehensive and responsible manner.

The emails are greatly exaggerated beyond all recognition. The claims which climate change deniers have consistently made throughout their campaigns are simply not supported by any findings in the exposed correspondence.

Yet, words can hurt.

I personally find it ironically sad that the scientific and environmental response has been utter denial and finger-pointing. The emails help fuel the fact-less propaganda surrounding climate change denial, while they instantly revoke the credibility and expertise of those involved.  The only real way to move passed this in a positive direction toward truth is for people to regain a firm grasp on reality.

“I simply can’t believe that there is a kind of mafia that is trying to inhibit critical papers from being published,” said Mojib Latif, a climate researcher at Germany’s Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences. Mr. Latif firmly believes that global warming is, in fact, man-made, and relates current cooling to temporary natural trends.

According to the Copenhagen Diagnosis report – a collection of over 200 scientific papers BEYOND that of the hacked emails -  climate change has rapidly accelerated beyond all previous predictions and humans are to blame. The report shows that global warming emissions in 2008 were nearly 40 percent higher than those in 1990, while sea level rise is 80 percent above past previous predictions.

No real, substantial data supporting global warming has been disproven or dismantled by these stolen emails. Only a few sentences out of context spun completely out of control are doing the damage – and it is PR damage at best.

Finding facts in fiction

The majority of climate scientists today argue that the earth’s temperature is in fact rising, with nearly all in agreement that human activity is the prime suspect.

Climate change skeptics and deniers are leaping onto this “email scandal” with torches and pitch forks in hand, without stopping to understand that not only has their very context been cherry-picked for their own argument’s sake, but that a small handful of scientists sending emails back and forth does not dismantle an entire scientific institution; that climate change is real, it is caused by human activity, and the need to counteract its impacts is beyond crucial.

Yes, the world’s temperature was decreasing, as unbiased studies have shown; over the last 2,000 years, temperatures were steadily going down, mostly due to decreased solar insulation associated with the earth’s orbit.

HOWEVER, just under 200 years ago, the temperature -  scientifically measured by ice cores, tree rings and lake sediments – began a sharp increase and has been steadily rising ever since. This time frame coincides with, obviously, the birth of the industrial revolution; a.k.a. human activity.

These evidences are of course based on science that right-wing climate change deniers simply refuse to believe in, citing faith and man-made notions of world dominion as proof.

Take a look around

But let’s not make any mistakes here: climate change deniers and skeptics have lied and obscured real “data” for years, catalyzing the cause for climate change “rationalists” and believers to adhere to high scientific standards.

Fossil fuel industries have employed “experts” to lie, cheat and manipulate on their behalf – atrocities far greater than anything contained in these emails. And despite years of outright deceit and fraud on their part, it is now the climate scientists who look bad.

Now, because of this one-time “scandal”, the side of truth in the climate change debate needs to work that much harder in order to distinguish itself above the opposition.

In questioning motivations, let’s examine those of the climate change skeptics and deniers; and take a hard look at the oil and gas and coal industries. Each has billions of dollars at stake, and a deep and vested interest in maintaining the status quo; spending millions on lobbying, advertising and funding slanted research to distort the truth and keep as many skeptics ont heir side as possible.

I mean, who are their “superstars”? How about Steve Milloy, Fox News’ “Fair and Balanced” anchor and host of Junk Science who spends most of his time arguing against the medical effects of secondhand smoke and claiming that climate change is fake, all while being a paid advocate and funds-recipient from both Philip Morris and ExxonMobil.

How about resident science “expert” and climate change denier Professor Pat Michaels of the Cato Institute, who has recently been exposed as accepting at least $100,000 by companies involved in coal-fired power production. Michaels himself withdrew as an “expert witness from a court case about climate change” after this funding went public.

And there is Sarah Palin. Ah, Sarah, how you entertain us! Palin, a very public advocate for oil drilling and former Governor of Alaska (a heavily-dependent oil economy), stated during the 2008 campaign: “I’m not one though who would attribute it [climate change] to being manmade.” She then went on to sign executive orders to commence Arctic Sea oil drilling, an up-til-now untapped reserve covered by ice, due to the rapid depletion of ice in the Arctic Sea.

The lost goes on and on, and so do the erroneous claims. Daily Mail columnist Melanie Philips claims that believing in global warming is just plain anti-American, stating that “the theory that global warming is all the fault of mankind is a massive scam based on flawed computer modelling, bad science and an anti-western ideology…” and that “carbon dioxide forms a relatively small proportion of the atmosphere, most of which consists of water vapor.”

Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe, who receives more campaign money from fossil fuel companies than any other Senator in the Republican Party, has compared environmentalists to the Third Reich and the US Environmental Protection Agency to the Gestapo. He maintains that climate change is all a big hoax.

And these, ladies and gentleman of the planet, are who we actually become comparable to when such a thing as data manipulation or outright lying takes place – even on the side of the good guys – regardless of cause or reason. Let’s not lose sight of the real goals at hand and stick to the highest of principles, and maybe we will actually get somewhere. Perhaps if done right, we will finally earn the right to call Earth “home”.

This move is one more step toward the Starwood-owned brand’s huge initiative to establish itself as THE premiere environmentally-friendly hotel chain.

The eco-chic brand recently tested a pilot of this program at its Element Lexington property, which turned out to be a tremendous success. The program is a first for the hotel industry.

“At Element, we aim to provide greener options for our guests, and the charging stations are a perfect next step,” said Brian McGuinness, Senior Vice President, Specialty-Select Brands, Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. “Even guests who don’t yet drive electric cars tell us that the charging stations are encouraging them to think about more sustainable alternatives, and that’s very gratifying.”

With six Element hotels open to-date, Element is the only major hotel brand to mandate that its properties pursue the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification.

The ChargePoint Networked Charging Station was developed by California innovator Coulomb Technologies.

ChargePoint has partnered with Carbon Day Automotive to make the stations available at all current Element properties, as well as properties that the brand plans to open over the next several years.

Catering to a universal appeal

A few months back, President Barack Obama called for a million plug-in vehicles on the road by 2015. Since then, utility companies across the country have pledged to increase efforts to expand the use of plug-in electric vehicles, while policymakers are increasingly turning to electric cars as a way to cut the emission of heat-trapping greenhouse gas linked to climate change.

Using Google Maps, travelers can locate the charging station and determine whether it is in use or unoccupied. Sleek and slim, ChargePoint devices are equipped with a universal plug-in for all kinds of electric vehicles, from cars and buses to electric bikes.

Plug-in hybrid cars, expected to roll out over the next few years, are also compatible. To use the stations, guests will simply swipe a key fob, plug in, and charge up. Guests who pull up in electric or hybrid cars will also get VIP green carpet treatment with “Hybrid Preferred” parking spots closest to Element hotels’ front doors.

Element will also be allowing non-guests to use the charging stations, similar to regular gas stations across the country.

Sounds crazy? Of course it does – thank you, Kevin Costner. But the basic idea of entire cities across the world becoming well beyond waterlogged is, in fact, a reality. And a scary one at that.

According to measurements by the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR), rising sea levels will be a huge threat to even the most advanced cities -  not to mention small, island nations – with predicted levels twice as high as originally thought.

If global temperatures continue to increase at the current rate, by the year 2100 island nations such as the Maldives in the Indian Ocean and Tuvalu in the Pacific would be entirely engulfed by ocean waters, while rising levels will devastate coastal cities such as Calcutta and Dhaka.

Modern-day metropolises New York, Shanghai and London would need to literally spend billions in order to even attempt to hold off flood waters from rushing onto city streets.

A threat beyond measure

Back in 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicted a rise of merely .59 meters toward the end of the century. This was bad on its own, but now the SCAR panel of 35 leading climate research institutions has reported an expected rise of 1.4 meters – almost double the original report.

So, why such a discrepancy? SCAR scientists suggest that the IPCC underestimated how much the melting of the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets (ice on land, NOT in the ocean) would contribute to total sea-level rises.

While the IPCC originally thought melted ice sheets would contribute around 20% to rising sea levels, the new study by SCAR suggests the ice sheets’ contribution at over 50%. SCAR is using more up-to-date climate observation technology to deliver these new results.

In time for this month’s COP15 conference, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the IPCC and one of the world’s leading experts on climate science, has called for the world to intensify efforts to control global warming.

Discrepancies damage credibility

With all the drama surrounding the “climate chanhe hoax” claims, skeptics did not wait long to jump on the new SCAR report.

“It’s 50cm, 60cm, 100cm — 60m if you ask James Hansen from Nasa,” said Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation. “The predictions come in thick and fast, but we take them all with a pinch of salt.”

Obviously, such large contradictions can hurt the overall believability of the individual reports as well as others like them.

“We look out of the window and it’s very cold, it doesn’t seem to be warming,” continued Peiser. “We’re very concerned that 100-year policies are being made on the basis of these predictions”

This December, the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference is supposed to ratify a new global climate change treaty – to essentially replace the soon-to-expire Kyoto protocol. Labeled “COP15″, the Copenhagen summit is a tremendous opportunity to take action on climate change.

Yet, the blogosphere has been on fire lately regarding the upcoming event – with only weeks to go and with so much on the line, governments from 192 nations around the world are beginning to send out signals suggesting that no lasting-treaties will be formed.

Through the “Don’t Tell Us It Can’t Be Done” campaign, Timberland hopes to rally the power of individuals and consumers around the world to affect this process positively by challenging government leaders to set standards for emissions.

The popular clothing and apparel brand is essentially challenging world leaders in attendance at COP15 to commit to reducing global emissions – even if that means a cap and trade system. Even with the restrictions that such a model could produce, Timberland is confident that it would force innovation in industries everywhere and that businesses, as problem solvers, would find a way to adapt without passing the cost to the consumer.

No stranger to responsible business, Timberland has worked to improve lighting design, using renewable energy sources at Timberland facilities and building all new US stores to LEED specifications. The company has also reduced its direct carbon emissions by 27% since 2006 – all while achieving cost savings.

Take action

Visit www.donttellusitcantbedone.com, Facebook.com/timberland or Earthkeeper.com to make your voice heard via an online petition that asks world leaders to come to an agreement on fair and binding climate legislation that clearly sets a limit for greenhouse gas emissions; and then asks them to step aside and let businesses innovate and lead the way to finding solutions to achieve those limits.

“Businesses will find a way to make environmentally conscious products and profits at the same time,” reads the site. “But government needs to act now. They need to set the standards. If you agree, join us. Your voice will be heard at December’s Copenhagen conference on climate control.”

In addition to signing the petition, visitors can learn about other ways to address climate change or stay up-to-date with happenings at the conference from December 7 – 18. An on-the-ground correspondent will be providing daily updates and exclusive interviews at www.donttellusitcantbedone.com.

According to reps for the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), climate change is a major factor in the newest hurdles to bringing aid to recent disasters.

In a new survey, entitled “Believe in Humanity”, the IFRC states: “World powers expect humanitarian actors to face continuing or increasing humanitarian needs driven by climate change-related natural disasters.”

The survey’s release coincides with the upcoming climate change conference in Copenhagen, and was released just as hundreds of delegates from the 186 national societies of the Red Cross/Red Crescent gathered for their week-long General Assembly in the United Nations compound in Nairobi, Kenya.

“Here in a country like Kenya one can already see the signature of climate change in terms of droughts and most recently floods – challenges which your organization has to respond to with ever more frequency and urgency,” said Achim Steiner, Under-Secretary-General and UNEP Executive Director. “Climate change unchecked is likely to trigger increasing tensions over scarce natural resources.”

The Nairobi meeting marked the 60th anniversary of the Geneva Conventions, as well as the 150th anniversary of the battle of Solferino; a battle that left tens of thousands of soldiers dead and prompted Swiss businessman, Henry Dunant, to found the Red Cross.

Today, the Red Cross is the world’s largest humanitarian network with millions of volunteers.

Disasters and conflict

As a major priority for the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), disaster relief and conflict resolution is a high-risk factor in over 40 countries.

UNEP often works alongside the IFRC to bring relief to stress-worn countries in the wake of an eco-disaster; deploying teams of experts using state-of-the-art science and technology to assess environmental damage and determine risks for human health, livelihoods and security in post-conflict and disaster situations.

One example is a recent assessment of the country of Sudan, where UNEP linked environmental problems such as land degradation, deforestation and the impacts of climate change as threatening the Sudanese people’s prospect for long-term peace, food security and sustainable development.

“There are many other examples where, with environmental planning, the situation might have been sustained or improved, rather than having declined,” added Steiner.

“No country has barred IFRC staff from accessing victims of war and disasters on account of sovereignty,” said Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga. “Such influence could be used to rally people to care for the environment to prevent disasters.”

Next month, the Copenhagen Climate Change conference could potentially define the humanitarian efforts throughout the world for many years to come.

“In just a few weeks’ time governments will gather in Copenhagen, Denmark, for the crucial UN climate convention meeting,” said Steiner. “The decisions taken there may shape the future of this century in terms of human vulnerability and disaster management as a result of the impacts of global warming.”

Perhaps the most influential figure in all of it is U.S. President Barack Obama, who is actively working to loosen the global deadlock in negotiations by announcing a target for cutting US greenhouse gas emissions.

So far, the United States is the only developed nation that has not committed to an emissions target. Poorer nations are threatening to stage a walk-out of the UN summit in Copenhagen next month unless President Obama commits to an ambitious carbon reduction.

Making good on promises

On the campaign trail in 2007 and 2008, then presidential-nominee Barack Obama proposed that the United States, under his influence as Commander-in-Chief, would reduce carbon emissions by 14% (as compared to 2005 levels).

Fast-forward less than one year into his presidency, a new climate bill spearheaded by former prez-nominee John Kerry is promising a greenhouse gas reduction of 20%.

Many Copenhagen-watchers expect that President Obama will wait until the final stages of the negotiations in Copenhagen to announce the U.S.’s emissions cuts, perhaps in an effort to achieve maximum political impact will giving other countries little-to-no chance to demand deeper cuts from the U.S.

President Obama is reportedly considering offering a range of possible reductions rather than a single number, making it easier for him to persuade Congress.

According to Jonathan Pershing, a leading US negotiator at the Barcelona climate talks, the U.S. will in fact announce a provisional target before the end of the Copenhagen summit.

“Developing countries, including the US, need to make robust mid-term reductions from a set base year.” said Pershing. “In the US we are moving to make a substantial contribution to a robust Copenhagen deal. We are very interested in seeing that deal move forward and we recognize that others are seeking numbers from us.”

He went on to add that President Obama could possibly a target commitment without Senate approval. “The executive body has authorities which are not exclusively reliant on Congress and that is a decision which has to be made.”

According to Yvo de Boer, the UN’s senior climate change official, the summit would achieve very little if President Obama does not announce a target.

“Copenhagen can and must be the turning point in the international fight against climate change – nothing has changed my confidence in that. A powerful combination of commitment and compromise can and must make this happen.”

No more business as usual

Until now, very little progress has been made with regards to the proper finances that would allow developing countries to limit their emissions growth and adapt to the inevitable effects of climate change.

According to Yvo de Boer, developed countries will need to expedite funding in the amount of at least $10 billion to enable developing countries to immediately develop low emission growth and adaptation strategies and to build internal capacity.

Additionally, developed countries will need to indicate how they intend to raise predictable and sustainable long-term financing and what there longer-term commitments will be.

The U.S. is planning a “substantial contribution” to a global fund aimed at helping developing countries adapt to climate change and pursue low-carbon economic growth. While the Obama administration is not expecting developing countries to cut their overall emissions entirely, it prefers to receive specific commitments from them on reducing their growth in emissions compared with the “business as usual” position.

“It is essential that practical action is swiftly implemented after Copenhagen to assist developing countries in their fight against climate change,” added de Boer.

Finding clarity

Earlier this year, heads of state and government pledged to “Seal the Deal!” in Copenhagen; providing clarity on: ambitious emission reduction targets of industrialized countries, supporting developing countries and scaling-up both financial and technological resources.

“I look to industrialized countries to raise their ambitions to meet the scale of the challenge we face,” said Yvo de Boer. “And I look to industrialzed nations for clarity on the amount of short and long-term finance they will commit.”

The UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen will take place from December 6-18, 2009.

Update on 11/11/09:
Former Vice President and Nobel Laureate Al Gore posted this on his blog:
“I was asked last week, ‘would it be helpful for President Obama to go to the United Nations conference on climate change in Copenhagen in December?’

“The answer is, of course, yes, and I think he probably will. I certainly hope he will. Given how high the stakes of this international meeting are, I think it would make a big difference. Because we’re the strongest economy, one of the two largest emitters of global warming pollution, and recognized as the natural leader of the world community, it’s important for us as Americans to fully appreciate the role we play.

“Since this is the most dangerous challenge the world has ever faced, and since the scientists have given us fresh warnings that we don’t have a lot of time to reduce global warming pollution, it’s really important for the United States to play the leadership role the rest of the world expects us to play.

“President Obama’s attendance in Copenhagen would be a clear signal of our leadership.”

The Train to Copenhagen will roll across the globe through the vast wilds of Russian Siberia and into Europe as part of the UN Seal the Deal! campaign. Aboard, environmental experts and climate change campaigners will send eye-witness accounts of global warming signs under way while working to raise awareness of the impact of the transport sector, which already accounts for over one fifth of global CO2 greenhouse emissions.

These emissions are projected to double within only 40 years and railways are crucial in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and developing sustainable transport systems.

Redirecting the “road to nowhere”

Launched by UNEP, WWF and the International Union of Railways (UIC), the Train to Copenhagen aims to galvanize political will and public support for reaching a comprehensive global climate agreement in December.

“We are on the road to nowhere if existing policies and economic models prevail with their over-emphasis on private cars and on shifting shipments of goods to the roads,” UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner said. “The Train to Copenhagen project is a showcase of sustainable transport solutions that will be part and parcel of a resource-efficient, low-carbon Green Economy of the 21st Century.

“By Sealing the Deal on an ambitious climate agreement in Copenhagen, governments will get into gear to propel the world to a low-carbon future so that societies may also finally embark on a journey to more sustainable transport.”

Trekking through climate change “hotspots”

The Train to Copenhagen departs Kyoto station on November 5th – leaving behind the Japanese city where the Kyoto Protocol that sets binding greenhouse gas reduction targets for 37 industrialized countries and the European Union (EU) was adopted in 1997 – and make its way by ferry to Daejeon, Republic of Korea (ROK).

There it will board another ferry for Vladivostok in Russia’s Far East for that vast transcontinental journey to drum up support for a new compact with much stronger cuts to replace the Protocol on the expiration of the first commitment period at the end of 2012.

Rumbling across Siberia – a global climate change hotspot -  it will be hauled along the famous Trans-Siberian Railway and go by ferry across Lake Baikal, the most voluminous freshwater lake in the world, and stop in Moscow, the Polish city of Poznan and then Berlin before arriving in Brussels on December 5th.

From Brussels, The Express will take on board more than 400 climate change negotiators, campaigners and other high-profile personalities going to Copenhagen, for a 12-hour on-track conference focusing on how to solve the challenges posed by the transport sector with regard to global warming.

On arrival, the Climate Express will remain at Copenhagen Central Station throughout the two-week conference, serving as a mobile exhibition open to the public about low-carbon transport solutions.

“It is clear that business as usual is not an option if we want to reverse current trends and prevent catastrophic climate change,” UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Executive Secretary Yvo de Boer said. “If we can really integrate the costs of pollution into the price of transportation, rail will be a big winner.”