(Al Jazeera English: 0726 PST, March 29, 2011) World leaders have met at a summit in London to discuss the ongoing conflict in Libya, and possible outlooks both for the military intervention, and humanitarian and development aid going forward.

Here are excerpts from comments made by David Cameron, the British Prime Minister, Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, and Ban Ki-moon, the UN Secretary-General.

Obama Defends Libya Action

(ITN News: 0037 PST, March 29, 2011) President Obama appears on US television to defend the military action being taken in Libya.

Jamie Henn from 350.org stated in an interview on Tuesday with OneClimate.net that he believes there are two difference strategies by which one could approach the UNFCCC climate talks in Cancun and other Conferences of the Parties (COPs). He says the first and most prevalent strategy is to try and make small steps of progress each year towards building a larger treaty. The other and more important strategy, in Henn's opinion, is to use the COPs as opportunities to create "outrage" on the lack of progress that are made at these negotiations by key countries who aren't "stepping up to the plate."

Today, on the final day of formal negotiations of COP16, Greenpeace and TckTckTck, along with volunteers from several other NGOs, showed their support for the latter strategy by carrying out an extravagant stunt on the beach outside the Crown Paradise Club resort in Cancun. Well over a hundred people showed up to participate and cover the event, which involved creating a bird's eye image (using the help of renowned human banner aerial artist John Quigley) of climate negotiators being rescued from the sea by a giant inflated life ring. 

The stunt venue was a nice departure from the cold, civilized rooms of the Cancunmesse and Moon Palace, and quite possibly the first time many of the hard working attendees had set foot on the beach during their time in Cancun.

Dozens of barefoot volunteers were given suits and business attire to put on for their roles as negotiators, and then were marched out to sea to start treading water. The remaining participants wearing green and blue shirts represented the civil society and used their bodies to spell out the word "HOPE?" on the sand. Then, the civil society leaped up to drag an enormous orange life ring (15 meters in diameter) into the water where the negotiators were floundering and simulating drowning. Fortunately, no one actually drowned (though their acting was very convincing!), because the civil society came to the rescue and pulled all of the flailing negotiators onto the ring and back to shore.

The symbolism of the event was very clear: Negotiators aren't making sufficient strides towards effectively mitigating green house gases and helping vulnerable communities who are already being impacted by climate change. Today is their last chance at this COP to make crucial compromises and commitments, and the civil society is here to help them do it.

Speaking after the stunt with some of the sandy, dripping wet participants, the tone of reactions was one of hope in these final hours. Local NGOs and folks from all over the world had come to the beach to join together and send a clear message to negotiators who once again hold the fate of the world in their hands. The act was not subtle, or forgiving, but it showed the great responsibility of COP16 participants to come to an agreement, and the urgency to do so. As talks wrap up today, we will find out if this outrage was heard.

Click here for more pictures from COP16.

According to Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, here in Cancun, Mexico we are in the land of the ancient Mayan goddess Ixchel, who, along with reason and weaving, is the goddess of creativity. I believe that the latter of these three virtues, creativity, is certainly a key to success at these negotiations and beyond if we hope to solve the global climate crisis. 

One of the most important outcomes from last year’s negotiations in Copenhagen was that developed countries pledged to provide “new and additional resources” to fast track and long-term climate financing in support of mitigation and adaptation, approaching $30 billion by 2012 and $100 billion by 2020. Obviously, it is not easy to raise these large amounts of money, but a new report shows that while challenging, it is feasible to raise $100 billion, if not more, by 2020. 

In his welcoming remarks at a December 8th press briefing about the findings of his high-level Advisory Group on Climate Change Financing, Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon stated that, “climate change financing is not about charity… but ultimately an investment in a safer, more stable, more prosperous world for us all.” 

The advisory group was tasked with identifing additional sources of funding to meet the goal of $100 billion by 2020, and a creative inventory of financing mechanisms was the result. The group did not look at the delivery of the mechanisms in detail-- that is for the countries to determine-- nor did they suggest what the balance of public vs. private funding might look like. Their intention was not to make policy decisions but rather, “to provide a toolbox for the decision making process,” said panel member Ernesto Cordero Arroyo, Mexican Minister of Finance. 

According to panel co-chair Jens Stoltenberg, Prime Minister of Norway, the report findings are, “a kind of menu where we as decision makers and governments can choose.” There is not one single solution to generate these funds, rather, it will need to come from a variety of sources, and private funding will need to be combined with traditional and new public funding. 

Instruments in the report include auctioning emission allowance (a not-so-new idea, which could raise $30 billion), C02 taxation for international transport (aviation and shipping industries, coming in at $10 billion), and the redirection of funds allocated for subsidizing fossil fuels (raising a possible $10 billion).

Carbon pricing appears to be an important item on the panel’s menu of financing options. Panel co-chair Meles Zenawi, Prime Minister of Ethiopia, began by noting that it would be difficult to generate these funds in an environment where the cost of carbon is too low, and Stoltenberg reminded that carbon pricing will not only raise revenue, but also give the right incentives to the developed world to reduce emissions.

While the long list of financial instruments offered by the panel is impressive, also worth noting is that such a varied group was able to come to agreement. Aside from the fact that so few women were involved (not a minor oversight as pointed out by Mary Robinson, former president of Ireland, during the Q&A), the 21-person panel included members from the developed and developing countries, and the private and public sectors.

This brings me to the second key to success: flexibility. Several comments at the briefing alluded to the challenges that this diverse group faced while coming to agreement on the report’s findings. But while each member may not have been 100% satisfied with every detail, they exercised flexibility and respected the views of other members ultimately coming to an agreement. Those at the press briefing were openly pleased with the final report and proud that such a diverse group had produced it.

Informal hallway conversations with conference attendees today provided a mixed review regarding which countries have been flexible vs. which have not. Many shared the opinion that the U.S., China, and Japan were among the least willing to compromise, and others noted that Bolivia, Chile and India showed willingness to negotiate outside their comfort zone. With the 16th Conference of the Parties formally closing tomorrow evening, time will soon tell what countries have or have not acknowledged creative new ideas and found the flexibility to reach around political obstacles. After all, as the Secretary-General has reminded, “Nature isn’t waiting while we negotiate.”

Watch an interview from OneClimate.net with UN Fair Play's Charlie Young on the inequalities of negotiations:

Tuesday, December 7th, in downtown Cancun, thousands of locals, NGOs and community groups took to the streets, mobilizing for climate justice in the wake of the UNFCCC negotiations. People carrying large banners, beating drums and chanting in unison, marched through busy streets filled with curious onlookers for almost two miles to draw attention to various issues surrounding climate change and its impacts. Countless local and state groups from Mexico and other parts of Latin America joined together, including the Mexican Action Network on Free Trade, the Indigenous Group Tepehuano of UNORCA (National Union of Autonomous Regional Peasants Organizations), and the Indigenous and Ecological Federation of Chiapas. Mexican chapters of organizations like Friends of the Earth, 350.org, Oxfam, and Greenpeace were also present and adding to the commotion.

While the nuances of their causes varied, the tone of the people gathering was clear: urgent action on climate change is vital. Perhaps the most vocal of the groups present at the march were the Mayan community members, who were teamed up with the International Forum on Globalization (IFG) and the Organization of Forest Producers' Cooperatives of the Zona Maya (OEPFZM), to express their dissatisfaction with the Mexican government for withholding compensation owed to them for an extreme decade-long drought, which has devastated corn crops, food security, and Mayan livelihoods.

The Mayan community is calling for drastic cuts in greenhouse gases by industrial countries, and immediate assistance for adapting to impacts of climate change, like the drought. Some feel it is possible that come Friday, when the UNFCCC talks come to a close, negotiations will establish a fund that will adequately help vulnerable communities cope with their changing climate. State Secretary Emiliano Ramos, felt fairly optimistic that progress could be made on issues that affect the world's poorest (he gauged his level of optimism at a "5" on a scale of one to ten), but others were not so hopeful. A man representing an indigenous group of UNORCA, had lost all faith in negotiations and just wanted emergency help of some kind for his climate-related hardships.

Victor Menotti, Executive Director of IFG, felt what was needed most from developed countries was real commitments, not just pledges. He expressed hopes that there would be "goodwill and cooperation [in talks] and that governments would come to their senses" but that it would take "a lot of noise on the street to make that happen."

As we marched with the people through the avenues of downtown Cancun under the hot midday sun, the energy of the group seemed endless. Our final destination was the Palacio Municipal where we expected people to disperse, or at least sit down to rest. But upon arriving, there was a stage set up complete with live music and MC, and giant house-sized corn cob structures illustrating (with a touch of humor) the plight of the indigenous Mayan farmer. The crowd was instantly reinvigorated and the mobilization continued on for hours.

With Friday's outcome still hanging in the balance, the fate of the Mayan farming community and many other vulnerable areas around the world that are most heavily affected by decreases in rainfall and other environmental changes, is unknown. Hopefully Tuesday's noise on the street caught the attention of negotiators not far down the road at the Moon Palace conference center.

Developing countries are hardest hit and not yet served by funds that should be helping them.  

On the first day of week two of the UNFCCC climate negotiations, things are busy at the Cancunmesse exhibition hall, which is filled with hundreds of booths staffed by NGO, IGO, and national representatives. Among them are antipoverty development organizations such as Oxfam, WEDO, and CARE who are calling for the establishment of a fair global climate fund that will meet the needs and rights of the world’s most vulnerable communities. They, and scores of other attendees at the conference, believe that climate change poses an unprecedented threat to poor people who are already struggling to sustain their livelihoods and maintain food security, and that women and other marginalized groups are most vulnerable.

UK Ambassador to Mexico speaks at Funding the Future press conference

• Be established under the authority of the UNFCCC, a legitimate forum where all countries are represented. 
• Have equitable representation for developing countries on the board and not be donor country dominated. 
• Ensure consideration is given to gender and multicultural balance on the board.
• Guarantee at least 50 percent of the resources of the fund are channeled to adaptation.
• Be a one-stop shop with the vast majority of climate financing passing through the fund.
• Ensure that vulnerable communities, especially women and indigenous populations, participate fully in decisions on uses and monitoring at the national level.

"There's a problem with the current system," explained Gore. "We think that the current arrangements for managing climate finances are really broken. They're not delivering the money to those that need it most and can spend it best."

Cate Owren, Program Director for WEDO, noted that, while climate financing is politically challenging, it should not be economically challenging because investments now save money in the future. She also reiterated that design, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of the fund will be crucial and will help prevent a negative impact on women and marginalized groups. Stories of climate adaptation needs and successes were shared by Alcinda Abreu, Mozambique’s Minister for Coordination of Environmental Affairs. 

The briefing began and ended with the message that the establishment of this fund in Cancun will not only help developing countries adapt to the changing climate and adopt low-carbon development pathways, but also help rebuild trust in the negotiations. While a legally binding climate agreement seems almost certainly not on the cards for this round of negotiations, a fair global climate fund will hopefully produce tangible, concrete outcomes by Friday that addresses the need for both mitigation and adaptation assistance.

After almost 12 hours of traveling due to flight delays, my colleague and I completed our journey from San Francisco to Cancun, Mexico. We were greeted by a warm ocean breeze, friendly helpful locals, and banners for the COP16 UN Climate Change Conference decorating every inch of the city. We instantly knew we were in the right place.

Our studio is situated on the west end of the hotel zone, closer to the Cancunmesse and Moon Palace conference centers than the infamous discoteca nightlife. But, famished, we ventured toward the bright lights in the hopes of finding an authentic Mexican dinner. Despite humble requests to our cab driver to take us someplace "tranquilo," we found ourselves dropped off in the heart of Cancun among giant, warehouse-sized designer shops (Louis Vuitton, Chanel), American chain restaurants (Outback Steakhouse, Applebees), and gargantuan night clubs with bumping baselines audible from miles away. This was not the Mexico either of us had ever been to -- or imagined. In fact, it bore a greater resemblance to Las Vegas.

Fearing our search for authentic Mexican food would end at a Taco Bell, we asked a nearby club promoter for advice, and after some labored thought, he pointed us to our only option: a pricey, upscale restaurant complete with Mariachi band, white linens, and an indoor fountain. After dinner (which was delicious), we were saddened to see among the glitz and scantily clad club-goers, several child beggars, and mothers with infants in tow, selling trinkets to tourists. The stark contrast, though not so different from that of many large cities, hinted at an interesting parallel to the conference in town. I was instantly reminded of an article I read on the trip over here that described Cancun as the "suicide capital" of Mexico. Climate change is contributing to the migration of many people out of rural areas of Mexico where crops have become harder to manage and resources harder to gather. But, as people have moved into the city, the divide in urban areas between locals and tourists has led to a culture of extreme poverty, hopelessness, and depression.

As week one of the conference wrapped up, the divide between rich and poor, and inequalities within negotiations were also apparent in many ways. Talks appear to favor the rich, as developed countries have a much greater number of participating delegates and negotiators than developing countries, thus stacking the cards against poorer countries with fewer resources to attend meetings and interpret information.

Also, the Kyoto Protocol has become the subject of heated debate, as Japan, Russia, and Canada have all rejected a second commitment period under the agreement. This move has sparked objections from developing countries who feel major emitting countries should continue to be held accountable for the targets set under Kyoto.

The impacts of climate change, as we know, disproportionately affect the poor, who are more reliant on natural resources and less able to cope with environmental changes and natural disasters. And the impacts are growing. As was reported in talks this week, an estimated 1 million deaths a year by 2030 and $157 billion in damage will result from climate change. Also reported, was the likelihood that 2010 would rank among the three hottest years in recorded history, according to the World Meteorological Organization.
 
Speaking with a few locals during our first days here, we received mixed responses to the conference which has invaded the town. One cab driver didn't actually believe that climate change was happening, but more importantly he didn't appreciate the inflated security around Cancun which was making it hard for the locals to "party" -- and thus harder for him to run his business. Apparently, groups of machine gun-toting policemen are a deterrent for the normally hassle-free recreational drug use in Cancun's Party Central. We're looking forward to gaining further insight to the local views of the conference this week ... outside of Party Central.

As the UN Climate Change Conference in Tianjin comes to a close this week, the gridlock between the U.S. and China reached a fever pitch in the final negotiations before year-end talks in Cancun. While there has been a general consensus around the need for a "balanced package" (the conference catch phrase), the definition of this phrase varied between conference delegates. The U.S. wants a transparent deal that includes Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV), while China maintains that the U.S. and all developed nations must make binding commitments before it will join an international agreement. The two nations have emerged from talks as major players in the climate change impasse.

Despite U.S. criticism that China is not making serious commitments, hosting the current round of talks has given China a bigger platform to proclaim its impressive clean energy advancements. China has made tremendous progress in wind and solar energy, taking the lead on investment, use and production of renewable energy, and mobilizing to cut carbon intensity in half by 2020. The problem? China may prefer to make technological advancements and set emissions reduction targets on its own terms. China recognizes the opportunity of a green future, but doesn't necessarily feel the need to take on a leadership role in saving the climate.

China is a developing country, but it is also the world's greatest polluter. So while it stands to make the most progress, it also has the greatest responsibility. And so does the U.S. Touting global leadership status and producing the most emissions per capita also comes with great responsibility. According to Karl Burkart of the Global Campaign for Climate Action (GCCA) and Tck Tck Tck, U.S. pledges pale in comparison to China's:

• Per capita CO2 emissions 2008: U.S. 19 tons, China 5 tons
• Pledged emissions reductions: U.S. 0.8 gigatons, China 2.5 gigatons (UNFCCC)
• National gas standard:  U.S. 27 MPG, China 34 MPG
• Investment in clean energy 2009: U.S. $19 billion, China $35 billion

During a Climate Action Network (CAN) press conference on Day 1 at Tianjin, a Chinese Greenpeace activist may have said it best when she asked the question, "What kind of role does China want to play in [raising] the international ambition in the international process? Does China want to be part of the driving force, or get a free ride? It's impossible that an elephant as big as China will get a free ride."

To learn more, watch daily reports from the UN Climate Change Conference in Tianjin and tune in for the remaining LIVE coverage from our partners at OneClimate.net.

Despite the recent slew of natural disasters and extreme weather plaguing various parts of the world, optimism about the impact of this winter's annual climate change conference is scarce. Set to take place in Cancun, Mexico this November 29 - December 10, 2010, the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 16) is evoking eye-rolls and sighs over what's expected to be yet another failed attempt at securing a global treaty on combating climate change. This apprehension is a stark contrast to the passionate buzz surrounding last year’s talks in Copenhagen. The vigor with which many world leaders, organizations, and activists attended the uniquely accessible event in Denmark was truly inspiring, and could have instilled hope into the hearts of even the most skeptical of commentators -- if not for the disappointing outcome. Ultimately, only five nations, including the U.S. and China, had any real say in the document that emerged from Copenhagen, which left many unsatisfied with the resulting level of ambition and jurisdiction.

While the U.S. Congress was unable to pass legislation prior to last year's talks (which would have added much-needed clout to President Obama's resolve on combating climate change), the U.S. did pledge to help raise $100 billion in global climate aid for vulnerable countries, as part of the non-legally binding Copenhagen Accord. To date, however, little progress has been made towards raising these funds.

The Accord, described as flimsy and inadequate, did not elaborate on the “how”, so much as the “what”, particularly regarding the $100 billion pledge, and accountability for industrial nations setting limits on emissions to prevent a global temperature rise of 2 degrees Celsius. Thus, the focus of this year's conference will likely be on financing: who will be responsible for what, and how funds will be raised and allocated.

But will the talks result in significant emissions cuts and an effective pay system to compensate low-emitting countries who are hit hardest by climate change? Or will they remain just that…more talks? It's time rich and high-emitting countries, particularly those who tout their leadership roles, walk the walk, too. Last year, an unprecedented number of world leaders came to the table, which proves the urgency of climate change has been acknowledged.  Perhaps now that business leaders are starting to direct the conversation towards the economic opportunities that climate change affords (a language those rich and high-emitting countries standing in the way can understand well), that urgency can finally translate into a binding agreement.

Or, perhaps China will save the day as they host their own summit in Tianjin this October. These final preparatory sessions leading up to the Cancun talks present a unique opportunity for China to step up as a leader in achieving a binding climate treaty. China is already the biggest global player in clean energy, but unfortunately, it’s also the largest carbon emitter. Tune in to see what happens, when Link TV brings you live web coverage of the UN Climate Change Conference this October 4 to 9 in Tianjin, China, at LinkTV.org/Tianjin.

The weekend was anything but quiet around Copenhagen's Bella Center and in the world at large, with protestors and activists taking to the streets from Sydney to San Francisco demanding a real deal on climate change. The mass action, which prompted hundreds of arrests, included marches, vigils and church bell ringing by groups like Oxfam and 350.org.

At the negotiations, aggressive action took place as well. Tuvalu's negotiator reached out in an emotional plea to the UN, the U.S. Senate and President Obama, asserting that the survival of his country and other small island nations depends on decisions made this week. Meanwhile, Bolivia's UN Ambassador issued a bold response to the U.S. refusal to pay any "climate debt" by saying, "We are not assigning guilt, merely responsibility. As they say in the U.S., if you break it, you buy it."  And today, African countries of the G77 have walked out of negotiations, temporarily suspending talks, in a move to protect gains made through the Kyoto Protocol.

All of this and more, as always, is continuously covered on our LIVE page, Copenhagen 24/7, so stay tuned for more up-to-the-minute news straight from the source. I'll leave you with our latest spot from Link TV's Climate Change Hits Home series, which discusses the impending impacts of a warming world on recreation in the U.S. Some of America's favorite (and most prosperous!) pastimes are in danger of disappearing:

With the close of week one of climate negotiations in Copenhagen, parties are beginning to come forth with proposals of what their countries are prepared to do...or not do, depending on who you ask. Japan's targets, for example, while ambitious, come with conditions. The Japanese Prime Minster has declared he would not sign an agreement extending the Kyoto Protocol that did not hold big emitters like the U.S. and China accountable. The EU, on the other hand, made what some call a bold leadership move by pledging 7.2 billion euros over the next three years in international adaptation funding. Developing countries, however, claim it's simply not enough.

Meanwhile, U.S. President Obama received his Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, which was partly awarded to him based on his work on climate change. In his acceptance speech, Obama identified climate change as an international security issue due to the threats of forced migration and further instability within already volatile areas that face diminishing natural resources, famine, and disease.

To wrap up the week, a "draft final text" was released, raising questions about nuclear power funding, global temperature targets, and plans for long term adaptation support. This was followed by yet another draft which appeared as a rebuttal to the controversial Danish Text leaked earlier in the week. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out next week!

In the meantime, keep following LIVE coverage of the events on Copenhagen 24/7 and check out this video on the effects of climate change on "Dead Zones" in American waterways. These are very real places!