Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Take Action on Oct. 24: Join One of the Largest Global Protests in the Fight Against Climate Change

By Tim Kingston, AlterNet. Posted October 20, 2009.


On Oct. 24, tens of thousands of people will be in the streets and on mountains, rivers and glaciers around the world demanding action to reduce CO2 emissions.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

What started out a couple of years ago as a idea promoted by author/climate-change activist Bill McKibben and a few students at Vermont's Middlebury College has morphed into the biggest environmental, and possibly the most extensive worldwide protest, ever.

On Oct. 24, tens of thousands of people will be in the streets and on mountains, rivers and glaciers around the world demanding action to reduce CO2 emissions to 350 parts per million (ppm).

With just five days to go, 3,422 events are planned or under way in 160 nations on every continent, including Antarctica. More are coming online daily at 350.org, a small (seven staffers) organization based in Berkeley, Calif., that is coordinating the international day of action.

Organizers of the event are targeting the United Nations Climate Change conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, in December. They hope the international day of action will apply pressure on the assembled heads of state and governments to reduce global greenhouse gas CO2 emissions to below 350 ppm, the number that scientists say is the safe upper limit for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

This is an impressive task given that emissions already stand at 387 ppm. That demand has created a wired worldwide movement with a just over two dozen very busy coordinators based in offices, apartments and Internet cafes from Bujumbura, Burundi, to Berkeley, reaching out to other activists and organizations and planning global actions in conjunction with local communities.

McKibben, author of The End of Nature, the first widely read book on global warming, explained via e-mail to AlterNet why he co-founded 350.org: "The U.S. and China and governments and corporations change when pressure is applied to them. There is only one place that pressure can come from, which is a movement of people. Hence 350.org."

Planned climate-change actions for Oct. 24 run the gamut from impressive to odd, hopeful to heartwarming. The entire Cabinet of the government of the Maldives held a meeting underwater to display what will happen to the Maldives if nothing is done to halt climate change. Planning for the underwater event has even received U.S. media coverage, which has largely ignored the efforts of 350.org despite widespread international interest in the protests.

Australia will see more than 160 actions, including 350 tall ships that will glide by the Sydney Opera House, St. Mary's Cathedral bell will toll 350 times and 350 wind turbines will be on display in Wagga Wagga. 

Three hundred fifty people will bungee jumping off old power station towers in Soweto, South Africa. A huge outdoor concert and aerial photo shoot in Mexico City is planned. An expedition is under way to Chacaltaya in Bolivia, site of the first Andean glacier to disappear forever. When the expedition arrives, the indigenous Aymara will conduct a blessing ceremony to try to protect the glaciers that are left.

A bicycle ride against global warming will take place in Hanoi, Vietnam. Ceremonies will take place at Machu Picchu, Peru, and a banner parade will wind past the pyramids in Egypt. Over 170 actions are expected in China alone. There will even be small events in Kabul, Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq, areas where people already have plenty on their minds.

Then there are small-scale oddities: Horses in Mexico stenciled with the number "350"; a children's bicycle race in a Guatemalan where each participant gets to take a piglet home. Closer to home, a huge rally is expected in San Francisco organized by 350.org, the Mobilization for Climate Justice, Greenpeace and Global Exchange and a variety of other groups to demand strong action on climate change. Other events are slated in Berkeley, Oakland and San Jose, including a hands-around-the-summit of Mount Diablo organized by Save Mount Diablo.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: global warming, climate change, bill mckibben, 350.org

Tim Kingston is a freelance investigative reporter in Oakland, Calif.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Take Action! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Don't waste your breath
Posted by: Conway on Oct 20, 2009 11:06 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The science has left you alarmists behind. Richard Lindzen has proven that CO2 is irrelevant to significant climate change.

Google: Richard Lindzen CO2 report 2009.

Also, time to start looking for a new religion.

Google: "Climate Depot Losing Their Religion"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Don't waste your breath Posted by: peacefullaim1
» RE: Don't waste your breath Posted by: ChicagoWay
sustainable designer
Posted by: pdrich on Oct 20, 2009 2:10 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Actually, Lester Brown of Earth Policy Institute has on his website, www.earthpolicy.org, that since 2007, the US has reduced carbon emissions by 9%. I believe this means we are now at the 373 level, down from 410 (if in 1990 we were at 350, and increased 17% by 2007, I believe these numbers are correct - source: EPA). We are on the downslope, and 'walking the walk' as this brilliant man determines, but we need to continue this work, in whatever way we can all participate. One of the best ways, is reducing our use of carbons in our homes and businesses. If we can reduce our carbon emissions another 9%, that would be a terrific accomplishment. Lester Brown cites this reduction probably comes from the combination of efficiency measures being undertaken, which has lowered our use of oil and coal, and the increase in use of alternative energy. Let's continue this remarkable feat. Thankfully, China and India are stepping up to the plate too. Read Lester Brown's most recent book, Plan B, 4.0, for the latest on that. Also available on his institute's website.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

sustainable designer
Posted by: pdrich on Oct 20, 2009 2:11 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Actually, Lester Brown of Earth Policy Institute has on his website, www.earthpolicy.org, that since 2007, the US has reduced carbon emissions by 9%. I believe this means we are now at the 373 level, down from 410 (if in 1990 we were at 350, and increased 17% by 2007, I believe these numbers are correct - source: EPA). We are on the downslope, and 'walking the walk' as this brilliant man determines, but we need to continue this work, in whatever way we can all participate. One of the best ways, is reducing our use of carbons in our homes and businesses. If we can reduce our carbon emissions another 9%, that would be a terrific accomplishment. Lester Brown cites this reduction probably comes from the combination of efficiency measures being undertaken, which has lowered our use of oil and coal, and the increase in use of alternative energy. Let's continue this remarkable feat. Thankfully, China and India are stepping up to the plate too. Read Lester Brown's most recent book, Plan B, 4.0, for the latest on that. Also available on his institute's website.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Same Old Tires BS From the Far Left and Eco-religionist
Posted by: ChicagoWay on Oct 20, 2009 3:36 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It makes one want to scream. I have been seeing this same tired BS from eco warriors for 25 plus years or more.

The truth is MANY enviro-activist do not give a rat's ass about really solving the problem of GH gases. Many of them only use "climate change" as a phony argument to totally re-make society or are nothing but radical anti-capitalist. Those social goals and sentiments are far more important to many of the largest activist groups if you really follow their rhetoric and proposed solutions (like Green Peace and Sierra Club).

I've said it before and will say it again. *IF* the far left and eco warriors were really serious about dramatically reducing CO2 and other GH gases one would see MASSIVE protests in FAVOR of expanding nuclear power, which really could go a long way in solving the actual problem.

Instead the far left - especially groups like Green Peace - have been responsible for vigorous protest to shut down the nuclear industry, while at the same time we see the same lame and unworkable solutions offered over and over again for at least 25 years... meaning "solar and wind."

These "solutions" are NOT based on science or current economic reality, but rather RAW emotion and wishful thinking (primarily). After 25 years of this BS solar and wind together still account for less than 1% of total electricity generation in America.

And no matter how much the far left whine and "protest," solar and wind are NOT reliable enough sources to ever be a real solution because there is no viable or efficient way to store the energy on a large scale for times when the sun doesn't shine or the wind doesn't blow. We can certainly increase the percentages by small amounts of solar/wind (especially wind) as part of the overall grid, but the unreliability and cost factors can NOT be overcome with current technologies. THAT is hard scientific fact like it or not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think I'm busy that day...
Posted by: Bearzerker on Oct 20, 2009 11:17 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... but the best cure for C02 emmissions would be to stop the destruction of the planets rain and temporal forests, and start the reforestation/planting of new forests everywhere... especially in africa!

CO2 is a threat without a doubt but lets recognize the source of the problem first, then work on a remidy.
That threat is the destruction of rainforests and polution of our oceans to the point where they can't do there jobs properly.

try to remember that the coldest winters recorded where during WW1 and WW2
...which coincidentally was the most destructive wars we've ever known...

so... I say ban fishing globally for a decade or two, and immediately start replanting and protecting rainforests around the world. This would be postive steps in correcting another man made problem that i could get behind and support!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
Some perspective, and an alternate approach
Posted by: bobl1234 on Oct 21, 2009 10:36 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First, some perspective. Remember Time magazine's story on worldwide opposition to US invasion of Iraq? If I recall correctly, it referred to us all as "The Second Superpower". And look how much impact our being so-designated had on Bush policy.

I'm not saying that we should expect to fail; nor that we shouldn't hit the streets even if failure were guaranteed. Rather, I am saying that we must act, irrespective of our prospects for success. Along the way, we are likely to learn things, ad it behoove us to remain receptive to updating our actions and the strategies we've developed to guide them to incorporate such learning. As Don Michael advised,we need to learn how to learn how to do so. His approach centered on "tentative commitment". He wasn't confident that we humans could succeed at such a task, but he this as the only approach that even might succeed.

Second, some observations about science and public policy.... There are a lot of people who are willing to make self-validating statements, particularly with regard to whether "climate change" is real or not, whether claims about "science" are well-founded or not. BUT, most of us aren't scientists in the first place. That has both bad and good implications. The bad side is that not knowing precisely the mechanisms and parameters associated with them means that predictions are difficult, even for people who DO understand the science. The good side arises from the fact that "science's" self conception prevents it's practitioners from even knowing what THE science of any situation is; the most they can do is state that [1] their understanding of mechanisms has not YET been falsified, and [2] their understanding has actually predicted something. Many commentors appear to have forgotten that science can never generated certainty.

BUT... An alternate formulation of global warming casts it as a decision about what to do in the face of the uncertainties involved, not a decision about what is certainly correct, scientifically speaking. In this "decision theoretic" approach, questions should be formulated in terms of 2 X 2 table, with one dimension bringing in the so-called "state of affairs" (in this case, anthropomorphic climate change or normal fluctuation) and the other dimension brings in policy options, estimates of outcomes, probabilities and confidence levels.

I realize that none of this would make this challenge a whole lot easier o could be done without introducing its own uncertainties, but it does offer its own sense of integrity, as the spotlight shifts from implicitly interest-driven assertions made about science by non-scientists, to explicitly interest-driven assertions about the world informed by "science". The reduction of everything to money terms (without which this approach could not even be started bothers me immensely. But the possibility that it might "work" politically makes the effort seem worthwhile to me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

dontbelieve
Posted by: didntvote4o on Oct 22, 2009 2:54 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Global warming is one of the biggiest crocks of b.s. invented by the "earth lovers" of this world to force ppl into buying green

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: dontbelieve Posted by: bobl1234
» RE: SO WHAT? dontbelieve Posted by: Crimsonwolf23
» RE: dontbelieve Posted by: grn1
Mo Truth
Posted by: FreeAmerica on Oct 22, 2009 3:57 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yeah them global warmers are somethin' else.

CO2 is at 388 according to the climate widget on my web site. It is not coupled with temperature, and the global temperature anomaly is +0.42ยบ for September. El Nino is in decline in 3 of 4 regions, and the PDO is negative.

I wonder how many of these protests will get snowed or frozen out. When they protested global warming in a blizzard in DC it was hilarious.

The Copenhagen global governance effort was written by the WWF and Greenpeace, along with similarly aligned NGOs. I know. Unlike my congressman or obama, I read it.

It is a real profitable deal for the guys getting 160 billion a year plus taxes on carbon. It is no surprise that the sky is falling. It is most urgent that these guys immediately join the Gulfstream G6 class of climate warrior.

The enviros think that there are too many people. Energy is prosperity, and prosperity leads people to breed. Therefore all forms of energy must absolutely be demonized. Oversimplified, but true.

As far as 350 Saturday, I think I'll fire up the smokey old 350 in my big rusty Chevy 4x4 truck, run through a little fresh mud, and cut some firewood with my two-stroke chain saw out in the forest. That way I'm carbon neutral when I heat the house.

The oceans outgassing CO2 from the warming in the 1000-1500s is the source of CO2 that is unstoppable. Usually CO2 rise lags temp rise by about 800 years.

Speaking of long term climate cycles, aren't we about due for a Bond Event? If you look at he glacial cycles in the Volstok ice cores and do a " you are here", add in other factors like a solar minimum and other cycles, you might find that global warming will be the least of your children's worries.

As long as you are looking at proxies, note that the cO2 and temp are not even remotely correlated. You might also note that much of early life on earth was forming about the time that CO2 was in the 3,500-7,000 range.

I am all for being cleaner in a market based approach. Global warming and CO2 are pure bullshit. Unfortunately if the climate goes the other way and we actually need to act, no one will believe the NGOs and socialists that cried wolf for fun and profit only a few years prior.

Just say no.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Mo Truth Posted by: richholland
» RE: Mo Truth Posted by: bobl1234
Environmentalism as Religion--Michael Crichton
Posted by: raginghormones on Oct 22, 2009 6:45 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Read this devastating critique of the modern environmentalism movement by Michael Crichton:
http://www.michaelcrichton.net. Go to the link on Speeches and then choose the one on Environmentalism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

climate "change or plain old climate "control
Posted by: wolvedrive on Oct 22, 2009 7:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the weathers'(wheather'z)on it(')s way,one way or another,besides what lizard doesn't like a nice thermodynamic heat lamp over in the corner,watch it live as "it slithers on over,doesn't it just make ya feel all warm and snuggly under thair reptile incorperated skin,i'll be leaving the offices soon ,free gas guzzling SUV's for the crass and vain,we must have filth cheap semi-exsclusive energies to perserve the illusion of vitality and movement,to perserve the stash of the nested bitch hordes,freedom to not change,show me an eagle that doesn't feel like being a bird of prey and i'll show you a turkey that adapts pretty damn quick considering their brain is about the size,unlike the instinct of a snake,about the size of a pin or pea, that's what the twisted swastaka is all about,considering the summit soon conveined in the den of the mark(smells like tuna,must be tuna)rotten cores legends and bad reputations preceeded only by the implacation of thair culpability & guilt)from copping with the haggen ya can just about see the "UN nations in the foreground of the NEW NW passage,just a coincidance,yeah right,that and resource mis-management i mean overpopulation stampeded and emmigratted ever since well,any other previos civilazation,trust surrendered,foreign alein and queer,climate control,cnange or just the incidental accident aka coincidence,the weather is on it's way wheather or knot yer part of the clouded storm front or just the fog banks'wind

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Protests are a huge waste of time and ENERGY
Posted by: PrinceRobert on Oct 22, 2009 9:14 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The problem with "protests", aside from the huge output of personal and collective resources, is the self-deception that comes from believing that, if you get a bunch of people assembled at one place, carrying signs and placards that say nearly the same message, that you have actually made a difference, that you have actually accomplished something beyond the big, temporary social gathering. Simple, orderly, polite protests accomplish nothing, never have, never will.
Lasting change and any hope of continuing life on this planet will only come about through drastic change in our lifestyles. It will not come from new fuels or from changing our way of using fuels themselves. That change will not come about without some level of chaos, but it will come about whether we want it to or not. Every, and I do me EVERY, alternative source of energy now known to man, every means intended to keep the machine running as it runs now, brings with it its own set of environmental insults. There is no free lunch.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Climate Change Deniers: so sure of yourselves?
Posted by: Ronaldo on Oct 22, 2009 11:12 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fortunately, the overwhelming majority of us understand what the truly independent, no-vested-interests scientists are telling us. The ever-dwindling minority of climate change deniers are very vocal, especially on this blog! It is a shame to see they have been successfully duped by vested interests and the "captured" scientists doing their bidding for them.

A question I would like to ask each and every global warming denier is: Are you so sure of the case against manmade global warming that you are prepared to do nothing to reduce carbon emissions or even stop the rest of us from doing something about it? Despite the huge risks to all life on this planet? Do you ever acknowledge the possibility that if you're wrong the consequences for life on this planet are catastrophic ????

Fortunately these deniers are in a minority and the rest of us have got on with the task of trying to reduce carbon in the atmosphere without waiting for everyone, every last redneck, to be convinced we have a real global crisis that needs collective action.

It is time the health of the planet (more specifically, the biosphere) trumped all considerations for effects on the economy. Without a habitable biosphere there IS no economy!

The problem we are dealing with here, IMHO, is not the science of Climate Change/global warming but the irrationality of humans when confronted by the need to change what they're doing, to assimilate new information, science & research and act on it. I, for one, will certainly be attending a 350.org event over here in New Zealand and being part of the biggest global public action in history. I hope the world's leaders are watching and listening as the depth of worlwide opinion is made clear to them that we want strong political action. The political will needs to catch up with people's demand for action AND the science.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I wish we could take names of you disbelievers
Posted by: marletat on Oct 22, 2009 12:37 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Its obvious you are not doing your own investigations into global warming. Doesn't JUST the fact glaciers have disappeared scare the hell out of you??? Sean Hannity and his cult are such a bunch of ignorant bastards its hard to realize sane people buy into it. The trouble is those of us who want to save the planet have to save your asses too.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Stop at LL Bean on Your Way to the Protest
Posted by: johnwinthrop on Oct 22, 2009 3:07 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Given our falling temps, you might want to get a nice insulated jacket, boots and stocking hat on your way to the "global warming" protest. Yeah. I'm against global warming. Until the Ice Age hits in a few years. Here comes Santa!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hurray for CO2! Save the Oxygen!
Posted by: Prinzowhales on Oct 22, 2009 4:01 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Plants need CO2...and plants manufacture oxygen...O2 levels have been declining...Now, that is something to worry about.

Unless there is some science that indicates carbon emissions are leading to a decline in O2, there is no real point in reducing them... but there is every reason to increase the green in the world and produce more O2. Increasing levels of CO2 would help speed this along.

What I would be asking is, "Is there any relationship between declining O2 levels, increasing animal population, decreased plant life, change in plankton population and/or O2 use in carbon combustion?"--I'm guessing there is such a relationship...assuming this could be verified, I would begin a crash program of alternative energy programs...pruducing solar panels, windmills, etc. as well as electric transportation and eliminating wasteful carbon burning while promoting plant life. The plants win, we win.

Now, I don't know how much of this O2 waste comes from wood cooking fires in China and India, but there is a real good place to begin.
Unfortunately, they are increasing their coal fired plants instead of looking to alternatives because of cost factors and coal supplies at hand. China's economy is set to surpass ours in a few years (I'm sure it already has, but we use the GDP as the measure and that doesn't take into account work that is not monetarily rewarded or accounted for in some way, I think.)...our economy has topped off. The best thing for the planet is to help China and India transition to alternative energy so that the cost of their expansion in terms of O2 loss is not as pronounced. If China were to go it along on this, for instance, it would put her at a competitive disadvantage due to the increased cost per unit of energy...though this is rapidly becoming less of a factor as solar panel and films decrease in cost due to technical advances and efficiencies of scale come into play.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

maybe you
Posted by: donotworry on Oct 24, 2009 9:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I need the Rip Blu Ray to do something with my blu-ray dics.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

indications are that CO2 levels are declining without the tax
Posted by: Prinzowhales on Oct 26, 2009 3:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...and Rockefellar scum are bankrolling the 'climate change' scam for global taxation.

Charming, first the capitalists set up the most convoluted, energy-wasting economy on the planet and then their minions in government and the tax-exempt foundations and trusts sell a climate apocalypse to the neurasthenic yahoos of the touchy-feelly pseudo-Left... a large part of whom probably still want to kill everyone in Afghanistan for the women,' while paying $400 a gallon for the gas to do it.

Don't get me wrong, I support natural products...I want the rope that hangs a goodly portion of investment bankers of the world to be 100%-made-in-America-natural hemp rope.

http://alethonews.blogspot.com/2009/10/internat ional-day-of-climate-change.html#

If you cut and paste this, remove a space in "international" that I had to add to make the string less than 60 letters long.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement