Yesterday I had the opportunity to talk to those with the power over what I think is one of the the most important things in the world: education for sustainability. The day of lobbying was the beginning of the Australian Education for Sustainability Alliance (AESA)’s campaign to ensure that all Australians have the opportunity to receive effective education that instils knowledge, skills and values of sustainability, through the formal education system and through ongoing information and training throughout life.

As a youth organisation that works with climate change our movement is made up of people that were educated and inspired enough throughout their childhood to care for our future. Care so much that they would one day join a movement to make sure its the one we dream of.  This is why the AYCC has worked so hard to create AESA - an alliance of education, union and environment organisations who are advocating for sustainability education.  Our vision is to build a sustainable Australia by ensuring all Australians have access to sustainability education through school, tertiary education and professional development.

After a year of hard work, it was amazing to launch AESA publicly in Canberra.  We met over 20 politicians with our platform for increased leadership for sustainability education, particularly focusing on getting the Australian Sustainable Schools Initiative (AuSSI) program re-instated.

AuSSI is a highly successful sustainability program developed in 2003 to provide practical sustainability education to schools across Australia.  Since then, it has reached over 3200 schools, supporting teachers to embed sustainability lessons in their classrooms and giving students hands-on experience in sustainability, by reducing the school’s waste, water use, energy and increasing biodiversity. In the last year, all Federal funding for the AuSSI program has been cut.  

We spoke to many politicians, including, Environment Minister Tony Burke, Education Minister Peter Garrett and Shadow Environment Minister Greg Hunt about reinvesting in AuSSI in this year’s budget.

We also had 7 AuSSI school students, from primary and high schools around Canberra, join us at the press conference to tell their stories about sustainability.  It was really inspiring to hear about their  vegetable patches, recycling and re-use programs and how they take the sustainability lessons they learn in schools home to their parents and community.  Our launch was covered on range of media including the Age, SMH, Canberra Times, Brisbane Times and Canberra ABC.

Thank you to all of the volunteers who made this possible. If you want to join the mailing list for updates on AESA, sign up here and to volunteer with the AESA team you can email me on ahri.tallon@youthclimatecoalition.org

Tweet

At 6pm last night, Parliament voted on whether or not to count burning native forests as ‘renewable energy’. And guess what? They voted ‘no’!

Thanks to AYCC members all across the country, money will now go to where it’s needed most: solar and wind. We’ll also protect the important carbon stores in our native forests. In his speech to Parliament, Rob Oakeshott directly mentioned AYCC has running a campaign against his motion (meaning: we had an impact!)

How did this happen?

Just one month ago we heard that Independent MP Rob Oakeshott wanted to introduce a motion that would allow burning of native forests to get special monetary incentives and count as ‘renewable energy’. In usual fashion, AYCC jumped to action straight away. We were the first organisation to send out an email to all our members, asking them to Tweet at Oakeshott and call their MPs  (especially Tony Windsor and Andrew Wilkie, whose votes would be crucial). The Greens and GetUp! also used their influence to push politicians to do the right thing and vote against it.

For this campaign, we tried something we’d never done before…

… asking AYCC members to chip in to put an ad in Oakeshott’s local paper. Over 100 people donated, from $2 to $100, and we were able to put this ad in the paper the very next day. This ad showed Oakeshott and other politicians that we were a strong force in their communities, and that we could quickly and powerfully get our message out to the public.

Oakeshott hit back quickly – sending a letter to AYCC members and all MPs saying AYCC was misleading people. However, we knew we were in the right, so just an hour later, we responded with our own letter dispelling his misinformation.

We also sent our letter to all MPs and got this response from Andrew Wilkie:

“Dear Ellen. Thank you for contacting me regarding Robert Oakeshott’s Motion… Having now consulted with stakeholders I’m pleased to be able to confirm I will not support the Motion.
Kind regards, Andrew.”

Tony Windsor also replied to AYCC members saying that he decided to vote against the motion.

This win is thanks to you – the AYCC members and volunteers who tweeted @OakeyMP, called MPs offices, and donated your hard earned money to put an ad in Oakeshott’s local paper.

Our pressure on MPs made sure they voted ‘no’. Now money will be put into solar and wind, where it’s needed.

But our fight doesn’t end here. We are still a long way off from getting Australia powered by 100% renewable energy. That’s why AYCC is running the Repower Australia campaign. It shows our politicians how committed we are to renewable energy, by making tangible changes in our local communities.

It’s about running an event at a local pub, cafe, sports club or school that raises money to reduce emissions of that venue – but by inviting media, politicians and community members to the event, it enables us to also spread the message that we want to live in an Australia powered by 100% renewables. If you haven’t yet signed up to run an event, please do so here.

Thanks to all those AYCC members who sprung into action to make a real different to our forest carbon stores and to renewable energy.

Today is a day to celebrate!

Cheers, Ellen.

Tweet to @sunriseon7

An example tweet: #sun7 @JoeHockey doesn’t speak for me on #CEFC & #renewables. Give @AYCC an interview for youth voice on climate http://aycc.org.au/2012/03/09/joe-hockey-doesnt-speak-for-us-on-renewables/

On Friday, Coalition MP Joe Hockey publicly slammed renewable energy, calling the Clean Energy Finance Corporation a “totally futile waste of taxpayers’ money”.1 We need to publicly undermine Joe Hockey’s credibility, so that every time he says something this ridiculous, people know he is full of hot air. From 7am until 9am Saturday, AYCC volunteers were outside the window of the Sunrise studio with a message for Joe Hockey: “Joe Hockey doesn’t speak for us. Build renewable energy now”. We got two mentions but we want an interview. Tweet to Sunrise now – asking them to let us into the studio to give the youth perspective on climate or better yet, let us debate Joe Hockey!

Tweet to @sunriseon7

Not sure what to tweet, try this: #sun7 @JoeHockey doesn’t speak for me on #CEFC & #renewables. Give @AYCC an interview for youth voice on climate http://aycc.org.au/2012/03/09/joe-hockey-doesnt-speak-for-us-on-renewables/

More information about this campaign: Joe Hockey and his colleagues have no credible policy to invest in renewable energy – yet they continue to slag off the CEFC, which could invest a much-needed $10 billion into renewable energy in Australia. Over the past three months, over 25,000 AYCC members have signed a petition in support of the CEFC. We can’t let Joe Hockey get away with undermining something as important as clean energy for our future. We know the hosts of Sunrise care about climate change, and we also know they respond regularly to tweets during their show. We’ll be outside the window of their studio tomorrow morning with a banner that says: “Joe Hockey doesn’t speak for us. Build renewable energy now.” We’re asking people to tweet @Sunrise today and tomorrow morning, so they come outside and talk to us, so we can show the public that Joe Hockey is wrong on this issue. Thanks! Ellen, Lily, Kirsty, Gemma, Jem, Rufus, Charlie and the whole AYCC team. 1. Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/ofarrell-under-fire-from-within-about-energy-fund-hq-20120307-1ukkp.html#ixzz1oUra3FXj

Over the past three months, over 25,000 AYCC members have signed a petition in support of the CEFC** because it could invest $10 billion in renewable energy. We know that renewable energy is a key part of the solution to climate change, and the majority of Australians support clean energy.

On Saturday morning, AYCC volunteers were outside the Sunrise studio with a strong message for Joe Hockey – young people want renewable energy investment now. We got two mentions on Sunrise but we really want an interview, so we can say why MP Hockey doesn’t speak for us.

Please give young AYCC volunteers an interview on Sunrise.

Their future is at stake and they have an important voice that needs to be heard in this debate. Even better, why don’t you invite them on Sunrise to debate Joe Hockey?!

Thanks, from the 70,000 members of the Australian Youth Climate Coalition.

* Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/ofarrell-under-fire-from-within-about-energy-fund-hq-20120307-1ukkp.html#ixzz1oUra3FXj

** Check out the petition here: http://repower.aycc.org.au/petition

Today Mr. Robert Oakeshott MP circulated a letter outlining the reasons for his moving a disallowance motion on the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Regulations 2011 (No.5).

The Australian Youth Climate Coalition 60,000 members are deeply concerned about this, for the following two reasons:

1. It displaces renewable energy such as wind and solar, which we need to invest in to get us on a path to a nation powered by clean, safe energy.
2. It incentivises the continued and increased destruction of native forests, which are important carbon stores.

Finally, we are concerned that Mr Oakeshott is going back on his deal to pass the entire carbon price package as it was agreed in the Multi-Party Climate Change Committee last year. Removing native forest burning from the RET was a key part of the package, and this should be upheld.

Please find attached our full response to the letter circulated by Mr. Oakeshott MP.

Kind regards,
Ellen Sandell
National Director
Australian Youth Climate Coalition

Point 1
Rob Oakeshott refers to a recommendation to the Government (from the ‘Standing Committee on Agriculture, Resources, Fisheries and Forestry). They recommended that bioenergy from native forests should qualify as renewable energy where it is a true waste product, not where it’s a driver for the harvesting of native forests.

Our response:
We agree that we should definitely not cut down native forests in order to burn them for ‘renewable energy’ – but that waste products might be OK.
However, the problem is, this is exactly what the native forest industry said about woodchipping over the last few decades. They said “we’re only going to woodchip the waste products, we won’t be chopping down old growth trees specifically for woodchips” – however, what happened in reality was that woodchipping became a driver for destroying our native forests, particularly in Victoria and Tasmania.

Also, it’s been found that over 90% of logs are woodchipped, with hardly any going to ‘high value’ products like furniture. See: http://weblog.greenpeace.org/tasmania/styx_background.html

http://www.oren.org.au/logging/woodchips/12ninety.htm

This means we are chopping down our native forests for a low-quality product like woodchips. This doesn’t make sense when native forests have a range of benefits: biodiversity, carbon, fresh air, which are much more valuable than woodchips.

Now, unfortunately the woodchip industry has collapsed, and the native forest industry seems to be looking for the next thing that will earn money. We cannot allow this to be burning our native forest trees for energy. We should be using solar and wind for renewables, and leaving our native forests to be carbon stores and habitat for native animals.
Secondly, if it is economically feasible for waste products to be used as energy (and the carbon price will help make it more feasible), the industry will do this – we’re not trying to stop that. However, the industry shouldn’t be given extra money (from Renewable Energy Certificates), because this money is really supposed to be earmarked for investing in reliable renewable technology like solar and wind, which are much more in need of a leg-up if we’re going to transition to a renewable energy economy.

Point 2
Mr Oakeshott reiterates that he would allow burning native forests under the Renewable Energy Target only if it was waste and in accordance with the principles of ecologically sustainable management.

Our response:
Unfortunately, we have seen this is often not the case, such as the example of woodchipping (above in point 1).
However, even if we’re only talking about using waste products, our main concern is that if we give native forest harvesting an extra leg-up, by allowing them to make even more money from their waste products, it makes logging native forests more profitable overall, and will incentivise native deforestation and degradation. At the moment, we need to be keeping our forests as carbon stores – because we need to be doing everything we can to address climate change.
Money set aside for renewable energy should be invested in technologies that are likely to provide us with large-scale, reliable energy into the future – such as solar and wind – not in burning wood, which is inefficient and won’t end up providing a significant source of our energy needs. Sure, it might be better than coal, but it’s not going to be a large-scale solution to our energy needs as a nation – and we should be using the RET to promote energy that will be part of this large-scale solution.

Point 3
Mr Oakeshott states that not one more tree will be cut down because of this motion. He says this is only a debate to do with the waste. He also says that approximately 5% of a pulp-log, and at most 15% of a saw-log is waste.
waste?

Our response:
For a start, his figures are a bit wrong: up to 65% of a native-forest sawlog can be counted as waste and pulp logs (ie. woodchip logs) are all waste (because the industry says they only pulp/woodchip stuff that is defined as ‘waste’). All of this could now be burnt for energy as it’s classified as ‘waste’.

Secondly, if we give native forest loggers more income (because they can now get extra profit from selling Renewable Energy Certificates for burning their waste) – it means native forest logging becomes more profitable overall, so of course more of it will happen!
It may not increase native forest logging, but it seems like this would be a pretty logical outcome (of course if something becomes more profitable, more people will start doing it – that’s the free market)
Also, again, we reckon it’s not true that only waste will be used.
Also, again, we’re not banning the use of waste products as biomass energy – we’re just saying the Renewable Energy Target should be reserved for renewable energy that is going to be part of the large-scale renewable energy solutions we need – like wind and solar.

Point 4
Mr Oakeshott asks why plantation forests are allowed to burn their waste as renewable energy, but native forests can’t – and says this is inconsistent.

Our response:
This is because plantations are very different from native forests. Native forests are habitat for important species, and studies show they store lots and lots of carbon (much more than plantations), and when we log them, this carbon is released.
(See a study from ANU on this here: http://epress.anu.edu.au/titles/green-carbon)
We’re not against using plantation waste as renewable energy, we’re just against using native forest logging as renewables, for the reasons listed in points 1 to 3 above.
He also makes an error here – Australia does not import logs.

Point 5
Mr Oakehsott says that native forests are not the same as ‘old growth’ or ‘pristine’ forests. He says all old growth forests in Australia today are protected and logging in native forest is mostly re-growth, with all trees less than 30 years old.

Our response:
This is unfortunately incorrect – we still log our old growth forests today in Victoria and Tasmania – cutting down trees that are much older than 30 years old.

Here’s some of the evidence:

1. Last year, the Climate Commission released a report showing how stopping logging our Old Growth Forests would save tonnes of carbon: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/conservation/forest-logging-a-big-carbon-culprit-20110523-1f0vv.html

2. Here’s evidence that a local group in Tasmania found, that the forest industry was planning on logging a tree that was 250 years old!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-02-06/20120206-green-groups-claim-evidence-of-old-growth-logging/3813488

3. Here’s a campaign that forestry groups in Tasmania ran in 2010 saying we can’t stop logging old growth forests (if we didn’t log them already, why would they run this campaign?).

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-02-25/forestry-warns-of-old-growth-logging-halt/343258

Point 6
Mr Oakeshott says, out of interest, that Australia has 147 million hectares of mapped and ecologically sustainable native forests under management, and 1.87 million hectares of plantation forest.

Our response:
We don’t disagree with this – but it isn’t really relevant here. The fundamental point is that we are still logging native, old growth forest, and giving forestry industries an incentive to log them and burn the products, rather than keep the trees in the ground as carbon stores, seems a bit silly to us.

Point 7:
Mr Oakeshott says that Australia has a trade deficit in wood and paper products of $1.9 billion, exporting $2.48 billion, and importing $4.4 billion. In 2010-2011, we imported 846,000 cubic metres of sawn timber, 487,000 cubic metres of wood based panels, 1.89 million tonnes of paper and paperboard, and 233,000 tonnes of wood pulp.

Our response:
This point implies that we should be aiming to expand our forestry industry to increase Australia’s supply of wood and paper products. This point is only relevant if you remove the false assumption that Oakshott’s entire argument rests upon: including waste biomass from native forestry as renewable energy does not incentivise further harvesting.
The reality is, this is false. Including waste biomass from native forests as renewable energy will further increase deforestation and degradation in Australia, because it will provide greater economic incentives to harvest native forests. This is in direct opposition to what the science is telling us is necessary to address the climate crisis: shift energy investment away from fossil fuels to renewable sources and utilise the world’s greatest carbon sinks, native forests, to reduce emissions rapidly.

Point 8:
Mr Oakeshott says: as an example for consideration, I attach a media release from local NSW Mid-North Coast timber flooring processor named Australian Solar Timbers (AST). This business currently uses about 20-25% of the town of Kempsey’s electricity supply and is looking to invest in the use of existing wood waste to reduce costs and reduce the supply demands on the electricity grid for Kempsey. Through the use of waste that would otherwise just be buried or burnt, it is a sensible investment in lowering energy demands on the Mid-North Coast, and encouraging a business to be creative in its use of waste. For me, the very point of an emissions trading scheme and the associated renewable targets is to facilitate business choices and investments such as this one.

Our response:
Reducing carbon emissions at a business and national level is something we all need to be active in. We know that the most cost-effective way to do this is to undertake energy efficiency measures (which will reduce energy demand by up to 50%) and invest in solar and wind energy, which can power Australia with 100% renewable energy.
There is nothing stopping any small timber business in burning excess wood to reduce their heating or other energy demands. It does not make economic sense, however, to provide monetary incentives to do this, while simultaneously reducing incentives to transition to real renewable energy sources – solar and wind – which would allow thousands of small business owners to reduce their carbon emissions.
As we’ve said before – the RET should be used for energy solutions that will contribute to our large-scale future renewable energy needs – like wind and solar.

Lastly, today’s letter stated:

“The Australian Youth Climate Coalition, and others, have been widely circulating emails
suggesting this disallowance will lead to an increase in native forests being burnt, will
lead to more woodchips being made, and generally arguing that this will lead to more
forest destruction in Australia. In response, please read the above eight reasons why
such statements are all factually incorrect.”

We feel that based on our responses to Mr Oakeshott’s 8 points above, it is clear that AYCC members are right to be concerned that this motion will lead to a bad outcome for the climate and for our native forests. We believe none of the eight reasons presented by Mr Oakeshott provide evidence to the contrary.

Over 100 members of the AYCC chipped in today to buy an ad in the Port Macquarie News, encouraging him to withdraw his motion. These donations ranged from $2 to $50, and this shows how committed young Australians are to seeing good outcomes for the climate and our future.

We still strongly believe that Mr Oakeshott wants to do the right thing by the climate, and do the right thing by young and future generations. We know he’s a man of integrity and principle – and we applaud him for his advocacy on strong action on climate change.
We encourage him to withdraw his motion.

Yours sincerely,
The Australian Youth Climate Coalition.

When Rob Oakeshott opens his local paper on Wednesday, he’ll see messages from young Australians, urging him to withdraw his motion that would allow burning native forests to be counted as ‘renewable energy’.

We have a full-page ad slot ready to go in the Port Macquarie News – can you chip in now to get the ad in the paper?

More information:

On Friday, we asked you tell Rob he’s making a big mistake, because burning out native forests not only destroys habitat, it also releases tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere.

Now we want to put your messages where everyone in his electorate will see them and where he can’t ignore them. We know he gets a copy of the paper every morning. Imagine as he opens the paper on Wednesday and sees that thousands of young Australians are asking him to protect our forests and invest in real renewable energy instead.

We can’t do this unless AYCC members chip in to buy the ad.

We know Rob is sensitive to pressure in his local community, and he wants to do the right thing on climate change.

If we create a huge outcry, we can force him to withdraw the motion before the vote, which will happen in the next few weeks.

Why is Oakeshott’s motion so bad?

When Rob agreed to pass the carbon price, he agreed that burning native forests wouldn’t be a part of ‘renewable energy’. Now he’s going back on his word.

His motion does the following things:

1. It incentivises the destruction of native forests by treating it as a renewable energy source, when we know that burning native forests releases tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere, and destroys habitat for native animals.

2. It ruins the integrity of the Renewable Energy Target, by allowing generation from native forest biomass, instead of truly renewable sources like wind and solar.

Tweet

Yesterday, Independent MP Rob Oakeshott introduced a motion in Parliament that means burning our native forests could be counted as renewable energy.

If we create a huge outcry, we can force him to withdraw the motion before the vote on Monday.

Tweet Rob Oakeshott now.

Tweet to @OakeyMP

Can you also call his office and send him an email?

Parliament House Office (02) 6277 4052

Port Macquarie Office (02) 6584 2911

Email: robert.oakeshott.mp@aph.gov.au

We also need to make sure other Independent MPs don’t vote for this motion, This includes Tony Windsor. Give him a call too! 02 6721 0144 or http://www.tonywindsor.com.au/contact.html

Not sure what to say?

Here are some suggested points to cover when you make your call:

• Hi, My name is [Name]. I know that Mr Oakeshott introduced a motion into Parliament yesterday that would mean burning our native forests could be counted as renewable energy under the RET (renewable energy target).
• Mr Oakeshott signed up to a deal with the carbon price last year, and part of that deal was to NOT make burning native forests count as renewable energy. I supported Mr Oakeshott when he voted for the carbon price. I would be very disappointed if he went back on his deal.
• I know Mr Oakeshott has been under pressure from timber mills in his area, however we need to think about the future. Burning native forests for power relies on the destruction of native forests and threatened species habitat. Instead we should focus on real renewable power – like wind and solar.

Registration is first come, first served, starting half an hour before the event. Time is limited to around 50 minutes, so please ensure questions are focussed and to the point.

Date: Thursday, 1 December 2011

Time: 10:00, GMT Time (London, GMT), 12:00 South Africa time, this is 9pm Sydney/Melbourne time.

Included below are the joining instructions for the event. Please ensure you start to log in early, at least 15 minutes before the event as it can often take up to 10 minutes to log in, and preferably around 30 minutes before. Registration will open at 9.30am GMT (8.30pm Sydney/Melbourne time). Once you are logged on successfully then you can leave the screen (or your room) and do other things, and come back when it is time to start. you will not ‘time out’. Hopefully this will ensure we get a prompt start to the session and make the most of the limited time available.

We would also welcome questions in advance, so if you have any questions you’re keen to put forward, please email them to: Christopher.palmer@sa.britishcouncil.org and we’ll try to start the session with a few of them.

INVITATION

British Council invites you to participate as an attendee in the following online training session:

Topic: In Conversation with Christiana Figueres UNFCCC Executive Secretary

Host: British Council

Date: Thursday, 1 December 2011

Time: 10:00, GMT Time (London, GMT)

Session number: 738 397 523

Session password: 1234

——————————————————-

To join the training session

——————————————————-

1. Go to https://climategeneration.webex.com/climategeneration/k2/j.php?ED=161945702&UID=1013494802&HMAC=cea309a85f1ad1526bd529cdc9bc95a9b3569cab&RT=MTgjMjE%3D .

2. Enter your name and email address (or registration ID).

3. Enter the session password: 1234

4. Click “Join Now”.

5. Follow the instructions that appear on your screen.

To view in other time zones or languages, please click the link

https://climategeneration.webex.com/climategeneration/k2/j.php?ED=161945702&UID=1013494802&ORT=MTgjMjE%3D&HMAC=cea309a85f1ad1526bd529cdc9bc95a9b3569cab  
——————————————————-

To join the session by phone only

——————————————————-

Use VoIP only

——————————————————-

For assistance

——————————————————-

You can contact British Council at:

bcclimatechampions@gmail.com

To update this session to your calendar program (for example Microsoft Outlook), click this link:

https://climategeneration.webex.com/climategeneration/k2/j.php?AT=down&ED=161945702&EF=EMA&UUID=1013494802&SHA2=O89bek6mXq2nYmX-1kDkK%2FLH8CbQUkmV7yxE2HCRJiU%3D&RT=MTgjMjE%3D

http://www.webex.com

I’m writing this from a hostel room in Durban, where the AYCC International team has just landed for the UN climate talks. There are hundreds of young people here, all for the same reason – action on climate change is increasingly urgent, and it will only be successful with a strong global effort.

In Australia we’ve made some great steps in the right direction this year, with a price on carbon being passed and a commitment to greater investment in renewable energy. But this progress can’t be left at home in Australia. We need our Government to show ambition and leadership here in Durban, and help inject momentum into the negotiations.

When we meet with Greg Combet in the next two weeks, we want to show him that Australia’s actions in Durban are under scrutiny. That’s why we’re asking you to write a quick message, letting our Government know that you’re watching – and you want to see Australia lead, not sit back and watch.

Leave a comment at the bottom of this blog telling our Government what you’d like to see them do in Durban.

Your message will help us keep up the pressure on two key issues:

1. The second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol

The first phase of the Kyoto Protocol ends in 2012. That means Durban is our last chance to make sure countries commit to a second phase. A second phase of the Kyoto Protocol is a crucial element of a global deal, and developing countries aren’t likely to take on binding commitments if developed countries don’t first commit to a second phase of Kyoto.

Last year in Cancun, Australia said they would commit to a second phase, but if we don’t hold them accountable, there’s a chance they won’t formalise that commitment under the UN Convention here in Durban. We also need to make sure Australia is putting pressure on our allies, such as the USA and Japan, to also commit to a second phase of Kyoto.

2. Limiting global temperature rise to no more than 2 degrees

If we want to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, we need to keep global temperature rise well below a 2 degree increase on pre-industrial levels. In Cancun last year, Australia signed the pledge to limit global temperature rise to no more than 2 degrees. But Australia’s current target is to reduce emissions 5% by 2020 – and that’s far too low to help the world reach the goal of 2 degrees.

It’s inconsistencies like these that hold up global progress. Right now, with the Government on the international stage, it’s time to shine the spotlight on their lack of ambition.

If you were negotiating on behalf of the Australian Government in Durban, what would you do? Add your message to this blog now, so we can show that Australia’s youth are watching!

We’ll be sending through another update soon, including a video summary of the Conference of Youth. In the meantime, you can follow @aycc on Twitter for all the news from Durban.

With hope,
Gemma, on behalf of the whole AYCC International team.

http://www.nationaltimes.com.au/opinion/politics/im-an-actor-and-im-worried-about-climate-change-20111013-1lmnd.html

My name’s Jess Tovey, I’m an actor, and I’m here to write an article about climate change.

I know what you’re thinking: here’s another bloody actor trying to get attention for their opinion. It’s been only five months since Cate Blanchett’s name was splashed across the front page of the Daily Telegraph for “sparking outrage in the community” for supporting action on climate change. She was dubbed “Carbon Cate” and copped a lashing on talkback radio for her decision to appear in a “Say Yes” ad in support of pricing pollution.

Yet here I am, another actor, not even 24 years old, weighing into the same subject. I can only imagine what some journalists might be thinking. I tried to imagine what catchy headline they could use to ridicule me, but the letter J is hard to alliterate with. Judgmental, Jerk and Juvenile were the best I could come up with.
Advertisement: Story continues below

So why am I writing this? I am not a scientist, nor a politician, I haven’t even got a degree. I’m just an actor. I went straight from school to working on Home and Away. I was there for three years, and since then have done a bunch of other Aussie shows, including Paper Giants earlier this year. Like Cate Blanchett and Michael Caton I am prepared to cop flack from those who think I have no right to weigh in on the subject of climate change.

On first glance I may not look like I have had any experience with the effects that global warming and climate change are inflicting on this earth. But do you have any idea what it is like to live in Summer Bay, where Home and Away is set?

Every week, we’d have a fire, a cyclone, a storm, my character died from a cancer caused by toxic chemicals being buried in the caravan park. Life in Summer Bay is one environmental disaster after another, not to mention the daily emotional crises!

Putting jokes aside, if the sea rises to its predicted level, 50 years from now there will be no surf club and no Summer Bay.

You don’t have to be a climate scientist to gain knowledge and form an opinion on this issue. You just have to be a human being listening to the warnings that the professionals keep telling us over and over again.

I write this as a young person, as an actor, as a beach lover, as an earth lover, and as an informed adult who truly believes that the majority of scientists are correct in saying that climate change is the single most important issue of our time.

I grew up with scientist for a father. He works in respiratory medicine, not climate science, but he was still someone who taught me the importance of inquisitive behaviour. From an early age we would do experiments in the kitchen and my dad instilled in my two sisters and I a respect for science and the facts.

Therefore, I get quite frustrated at people’s refusal to look at the evidence. Not just evidence that there is a dramatic shift in climate patterns, but the evidence around us. The number of natural diasters that have occurred in the past decade, rising temperatures, the severe droughts seen in both this country and the devastating one occurring in Africa now. The coral bleaching in the the Great Barrier Reef, glaciers and ice caps melting, sea levels rising. The fact I got a tan in August. (Sorry, bad joke).

It doesn’t take a genius to start putting the pieces together.

The other lesson that was instilled in me from a young age was to stand up for what I believe in. I was that kid who went to protests with their parents. When I was really little I fell asleep under trees and got bribed with ice cream to hold the sign a little bit higher.

I come from a generation that was taught that it was our responsibility to save the planet. Thanks to Sesame Street, from as soon as my generation could talk we could also sing the “Don’t waste water” song. Most Australians in their 20s can still recite all the lyrics to the Captain Planet theme song.

As I grew up, I realised for myself just how important it was to be an active member of the community; that when you see some kind of injustice, it is important to find your voice and make a stand.

So while acting serves my creativity and my livelihood, I have more than enough room for another passion. And I will use whatever power, whatever avenue I have, to make the slightest bit of change.

I’ve been very much outraged by the misinformation and scare campaigns that have been propagated by certain politicians and tabloid media in the recent months.

I’ve heard Liberal MP Bronwyn Bishop and 2GB presenter Chris Smith talk about the anti-carbon tax protesters as “grassroots”, “the little people” and “the people who will be most affected”.

They are entitled to their opinion, but in my opinion, the people who are most likely to be affected are young people who will have to deal with the consequences of climate change as they come to bear.

That’s why I’m speaking to more than 1000 young people at the Australian Youth Climate Coalition’s Power Shift conference this weekend in Brisbane. These are the real “little people”, and the AYCC is the very definition of a grassroots movement .We have more than 65,000 members who support the carbon price legislation.

That’s why I am writing this today, despite the fear that some shock jock or politician is going to come out and bop me on the head for speaking up. This is a really important issue, and we all need to make our voices heard to encourage change. The political squabbling needs to stop. We need action now. Even someone who barely graduated Summer Bay High, surely one of the most dysfunctional places on earth, can see that much.

Jess Tovey is an Australian actor.