Climate activists in BangkokWWF Climate via FlickrFlooding in the Philippines yesterday displaced over 600,000 people. As if we didn’t need more of an urgent call to solve the climate crisis.

Increased intensity of flooding is among one of the may well-documented impacts of global warming. The implications have hit our organizing here at the UN in Bangkok too – as some activists had to go to support their families amidst crisis.

But Filipino groups are still here in full force, emboldened to call for the solutions their communities need – this morning The Peasant Movement of the Philippines and the National Federation of Peasant Women in the Philippines held a demonstration in front of the United Nations Climate Change Negotiations in Bangkok.

With vivid street theater, the groups called to abandon false solutions to climate change – such as biofuels.

Demonstrators this morning said “Climate change is not only jeopardizing our future but is being used by multi-national and trans-national corporations who are the main contributors to global warming to rake in more profit from our misery…vast tracts of agricultural lands around the world are being controlled and converted by plunderers into cash-crop plantations such as biofuels and other corporate schemes that forcibly drives us out from our land.”

Their calls for climate equity in negotiations were echoed by even more demonstrators today from Jubilee South and many others, calling on rich countries to pay their ecological and climate debt to the rest of the world. Activists from Thailand, Nepal, Philippines, Malaysia, Pakistan, Indonesia, Africa, and Latin America mobilized to push Northern countries to recognize their historical and disproportionate contributions to climate change, and the disproportionate negative impacts suffered by the Global South.

This concept of climate debt is increasingly gaining traction among international civil society, flipping on its head the idea of the debt owed by the South to the North from loans from international finance institutions.

As civil society groups call for financing and compensation for the averse affects of climate change for affected peoples, delegates inside the UN continue to debate on our 3rd day of the climate talks. The pressure is on, and the 600,000 people displaced in the last day only add to the urgency.

Related Links:

Fair, ambitious & binding: Essentials for a successful climate deal

City preps and countries posture ahead of Copenhagen talks

A Gristy guide to the COP15 climate talks

Related Links:

Why buying cheap energy certificates worsens climate change

Is there a tradeoff between economics and the environment?

‘Heretic’ battles straw man

Oil spills from Japanese and Philippine tankers

It's been an oil-spillarific few days. A Japanese tanker, en route from Jordan, collided yesterday with a distressed cargo ship and spilled about 1.4 million gallons of crude into the eastern Indian Ocean. The ship's owner claims the spill has been contained and there's no need to clean it up, as the oil will naturally disperse into the sea. Um? A Philippine tanker sunk Friday, and the over half-million gallons of oil it was carrying have already created an oil slick over 17 miles long, the worst spill in Philippine history. The crud has reached the coastline of the island of Guimaras, which declared a "state of calamity"; a marine sanctuary on another island was tainted by crude oil four inches thick. Meanwhile, Lebanon will today begin mopping up the biggest spill in its history, which leaked into the Mediterranean Sea from a power plant bombed in mid-July and has tainted 87 miles of coastline. Oil. Love it!

Related Links:

E.U. pushes China further after pledge to slow carbon intensity

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

Illegal logging in Philippines contributes to flood devastation

Recent storms in the Philippines have wreaked havoc on the country, with hundreds killed or missing in landslides and floods, and enviros and government officials are both taking aim at what they call a principal culprit: illegal logging. Though unusually high rainfall and the geography of the region contributed to flooding, it didn't help that forest cover on the islands has gone from 64 percent in 1920 to less than 18 percent today, making the hilly land vastly more prone to erosion, mudslides, and flash flooding. "Illegal logging must now be placed in the order of most serious crimes against our people," said President Gloria Arroyo in a statement. Problem is, the country's people are driven to logging by persistent poverty, and with the population (84 million) expected to double in the next 50 years, some enviros predict that primary forest cover could be effectively eliminated within 20 years if logging continues at current rates.

Related Links:

U.N. Climate Talks Bangkok day 3: Filipino activists call for justice as Manila floods

Oregon group fights national forest logging near Crater Lake

Prince Charles introduces his rainforests project

Philippines turn to volcanoes and wind for energy

The Philippines is positioned to become a significant producer of renewable energy -- which is a good thing, as the country is currently saddled with a $61 billion national debt, a growing oil-importation bill, and an increasing appetite for energy. Currently, geothermal and hydropower provide a third of the nation's electricity output, but there's potential for geothermal and wind to provide a lot more, as the Philippines straddles a string of volcanoes and is subject to frequent typhoons. This week the Filipino government pledged to double its renewable energy output by 2013 by becoming the world's leading producer of geothermal energy and upping use of wind, solar, hydro, and biofuels. Still, the plan has been met with some skepticism from both the financial and environmental communities, given the Philippine government's history of financial mismanagement and other problems.

Related Links:

Why buying cheap energy certificates worsens climate change

Is there a tradeoff between economics and the environment?

‘Heretic’ battles straw man

The industrialized world is fond of exporting its problems: its toxic waste, its low-paying jobs, its most incorrigible mining and logging companies. Von Hernandez, the coordinator of Greenpeace International's Toxics Campaign in Asia, says "dirty technology" -- especially large-scale waste incineration -- is also being shipped away to developing countries. On April 14, Hernandez was awarded one of six 2003 Goldman Environmental Prizes for his battle against waste incineration in the Philippines.

Von Hernandez.

Photo: Goldman Environmental Prize.

Hernandez, 36, a native of Manila and a former literature professor at the University of the Philippines, has spent nearly a decade fighting a slew of proposed waste incinerators in his home country. In the mid-1990s, he and others organized a nationwide public education program, informing communities about the dioxins, heavy metals, and other toxic compounds released by waste incineration. The program also enlisted supporters ranging from congressional spouses to the Catholic Church. Thanks to this concerted campaign, the Philippines became the first country in the world to adopt a nationwide ban on incineration.

Hernandez is now working to make sure the incineration ban is enforced, and battling new proposals for giant landfills -- not an easy task when most incinerator and landfill projects are backed by powerful multinational corporations. He's also pushing for implementation of the 2001 Ecological Solid Waste Management Act, a Philippine law that requires local governments to invest in alternative waste-disposal programs.

"Waste doesn't really require a technological solution," he says. "The solutions lie more in education, in organizing the community to do waste segregation and recycling and composting." To further his cause, Hernandez has even stolen mayors' garbage and exposed the sad state of their plastic and glass segregation. Hernandez spoke to Grist from his home in Quezon City.

Prize Fighters

Odigha Odigha

Julia Bonds

Von Hernandez

Eileen Wani Wingfield

Pedro Arrojo-Agudo

Maria Elena Foronda Farro

How did you become an environmental activist?

In 1991, in Ormoc City [on the island of Leyte in the central Philippines], there was a flash flood and landslide that claimed thousands of lives. At the time, I was doing some volunteer work for an NGO [non-governmental organization] that delivers health services, and we went to the site of the disaster and did some rehabilitation work. That was really shocking to me. It opened my eyes to the fact that the environment really is a survival issue -- literally, in that case. I got involved with a group called the Green Coalition, which was the local partner of Greenpeace. In 1995, I was hired as the toxics campaigner for Greenpeace. Greenpeace had no office in all of Asia at that time, so I was basically operating alone without an office or any infrastructure.

When did you first realize that waste incineration was a problem in the Philippines and other Asian countries?

When I joined the Greenpeace toxics campaign, I was doing a lot of research on the hazardous-waste trade. I found that all kinds of things were being sent to the global South under the guise of recycling and economic recovery, and I found that a lot of dirty technology was moving our way, too.

In the mid-90s, there were no new incinerators being built in the United States, and it was also becoming controversial in Europe. There were at least 10 proposals for municipal incinerators in the Philippines. Jancom [a waste-management consortium based in Australia] wanted to build a facility in Manila that would have burned 4,500 tons a day. It would have been the biggest incinerator in the world if it had been built.

Manila generates 6,000 tons of waste per day -- that's an official figure -- so [city officials] thought the incinerator would extend the life of the landfill. The people in these communities often think incineration is a good thing: The proponents come to them with a magic wand, and say they're going to build the facility for free and solve all their problems.

So we organized a coalition, and we took advantage of a political opening provided by the Clean Air Act that was then pending in Congress. Through our allies in Congress, we were able to put in a provision that, in 1999, became a nationwide ban on incineration.

In 1998, you helped organize mass protests against incineration. What do you think inspired people to take to the streets?

One of the reasons we insisted that incineration be included in the Clean Air Act was that the government has no capacity to regulate the emissions [from incinerators]. I think the people understood that. They realized that the power to give permission must be matched with the power to protect people from emissions. It was a health issue, first and foremost, but it also became an economic issue. Local governments, when they realized how much they were going to pay to operate the incinerators, realized they could go bankrupt. It also became a corruption issue, because we exposed anomalies in Jancom's business practices.

Hernandez at an illegal dump north of Manila.

Photo: Jimmy Domingo, Greenpeace.

You've worked with activists around the world. What unique challenges does an environmental activist face in the Philippines?

I've worked with waste activists in other developing countries, and I think we're confronted with many of the same problems. Decisions are constantly made behind closed doors, and the communities are always the last to know. In the Philippines, we do have a very strong tradition of taking direct action. We toppled the dictator [Ferdinand] Marcos through the People Power revolution, and we did it again in 2001 when we deposed [President Joseph] Estrada.

Of course, we find that this is not really enough. You change the faces, but the system is still very corrupt. So our campaign is also a campaign to make democracy work, to expose the machinations of the bureaucracy, to expose who benefits. We think this [campaign] can be a real cleansing process, both literally and figuratively.

It seems that many environmental restrictions in the U.S. have a dark side -- that they encourage polluters to move to other countries. What can U.S. activists do to help reverse this trend?

There are some things that can only be stopped from the U.S. side. For example, obsolete U.S. Navy ships are sent to India for destruction. India is interested in the steel, but they also get the poisons. If you visit the ship-breaking yards in India, they're like hell on earth. One person dies every day there. The Basel Convention prohibits this practice, but the U.S. has refused to ratify the convention. [Editor's note: The convention bans the exporting of hazardous wastes from industrialized countries to developing countries. The other two holdouts to the convention are Afghanistan and Haiti.] I know of some U.S. groups, not many, that are campaigning for the U.S. to stop exporting this kind of hazardous waste.

How do you keep yourself going?

Constantly there are challenges, like right now we're facing a mega-landfill proposal. The other week I was at a dump site where there was rampant open burning, and the community was completely covered with black smoke. That really angers me, and that anger gives me the drive to keep going. By constantly connecting with people, I'm able to sustain that anger. Hopefully we'll see some improvements soon and I'll be less hypertensive.

How do you think this award might change your work?

It gives our campaign a boost, gives us validation that we are doing the right thing. Many congressmen, many politicians make fun of our work, talk about how stupid the country was to be the first to ban waste incineration. The award gives us recognition; it tells us we're on the right track. It's also an affirmation for communities fighting incineration in other places.

How do you plan to use the money?

Two weeks ago, I was at this huge dump site [in Manila] called Smoky Mountain -- it's closed now, but it's still an icon of poverty in the Philippines -- and there's this priest there who has organized a small part of the community to begin segregating waste, to recycle. They have a craft center, where they make crafts from the trash they find, and they have a small garden. So amid this poverty and squalor, in this really dirty environment, there is a garden. I'd like to support programs like that.

Related Links:

More power, less roadkill: How one professor’s landscape has shifted

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

A video interview with Bill Moyers

Eighteen months ago, throngs of Filipinos gathered at a religious shrine for a rally that ended in the resignation of corrupt then-president Joseph Estrada. The massive turnout was widely attributed to mobile texting, with hundreds of thousands of Filipinos passing along messages encouraging people to attend. Now, the cell-phone-happy people of the Philippines are turning to text messaging to fight a different enemy: air pollution. The nonprofit organization Bantay Kalikasan, or Environmental Watchdog, has launched a campaign to get dirty trucks and buses off the streets of Manila, among the most polluted cities in Asia. People with cell phones are encouraged to report, via mobile text, any vehicles they see emitting black smoke; BK then sends lists of vehicles that have five or more complaints filed against them to the government agency responsible for issuing licenses to trucking and commercial vehicle companies, and the agency summons the owners for emissions testing. In the first two weeks of the campaign alone, 123 vehicle owners were called in. BK's ultimate goal is to get the government to enforce its Clean Air Act, enacted in 1999, so that cell-phone owners can go back to texting their friends.

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

U.N. Climate Talks Bangkok day 3: Filipino activists call for justice as Manila floods

Ask Umbra on anti-idling campaigns