Dead Letter and the Infinite Yes

Wintersleep - a fantastic east coast band from Newfoundland. They have this new song out now, that reminds me of how I feel at times about our selfish impact on the world's climate. I've attached the permalink for the song so you can hear it, but the lyrics are below. (Note the Wall-E photo on the left ...poor little robot trying to clean up the mess we've made...he looks so sad)

Dead Letter and the Infinite Yes
Wintersleep
http://radio3.cbc.ca/play/band/Wintersleep/Dead-Letter-the-Infinite-Yes/

I found a letter it read
"Our existence has serious side effects"
Turned on, turned on the television
It's telling me the world is collapsing
I think it's coming and it comes so fast
I'm hearing whispers of an infinite yes
And I don't know why it is
Our bodies are dead, why you look so sad?

And my therapist said
"We've evolved through a series of accidents"
There's been talk of chemical imbalances
Restless sense of detachment, nausea and or violence

I think it's coming and it comes so fast
I'm hearing whispers of an infinite yes
And I don't know why it is
I feel it coming, I think it's real and significant
I think I think I think a little too often
That's what my therapist said
We're alone in this wilderness
Left to choke on the pills and to feed on the viruses
I think it's coming and it comes so fast

I think it's coming and it comes so fast
I'm hearing whispers of an infinite yes
Our bodies are dead, why you look so sad
Our bodies are dead, why you look so sad

This Blog Has Moved!

Friends and followers;

I have decided to publish my climate blog under a less personally-named website. You can read all my previous blog postings, and all climate-related new ones now at www.below2degrees.blogspot.com. This blog will now become a private travel blog for family and friends only.

Thank you for your understanding, and please check out the new link!

Sincerely,

Jennie.

Seeing Double

Today, Canadian youth were granted not one, but two short meetings with the Canadian Minister of Environment, Jim Prentice. The originally-planned morning meeting was scheduled to last for 45 minutes, but was cut drastically short due to a requirement for him to attend the morning plenary (though you think they would have known this in advance?). Contrary to John Baird's tactics in Bali last year, Prentice endeavored - and followed through on his word - to meet with us again later in the day. Having just come out of this second meeting, I can't help but feel like once again, we didn't get a firm committed answer for any of our questions.

Prentice acknowledged the science guiding the need for remaining below a 2 degree C rise in global average temperature, but did not agree that the 25-40% emissions reductions should be based on the 1990 base year. This is startling and very concerning, as Canada's choice of a 2006 baseline results in only a 3% decrease from 1990 levels, and this will hardly get us to the targets to remain below 2 degrees C.

Prentice also argued that he was unaware of how Canada would be able to meet the range of emissions reductions based on 1990 levels, given our current industrial and consumer structure. He suggested that these emissions reductions would have to be consumer-driven, though how he expects every Canadian to change behaviour at the snap of a finger without any incentive or top-down signal is beyond me. Being employed in the field of social marketing, I can certainly tell you that behaviour change REQUIRES both disincentives to stop the wrong behaviour, and incentives to drive the behaviour change.

We followed up on Canada's lack of ambition in our second meeting. Prentice continually referred to our sources of electricity generation as being a major source of emissions, but failed ot recognize the role of natural gas and oil in driving up these emissions. He identified closing coal generated electricity providers as the only real mitigation measure, replacing these with nuclear and hydro-electric power generation. I'd argue that nuclear is hardly a "renewable" resource, and hydro of the scale he referred to would have such incredibly devastating impacts on the ecosystems, local and indigenous communities, and would create signficant emissions from plant decay from flooding. Where's the committment to new energy sources, wind and solar, and new fuel sources for vehicles? No mention.

We also picked on their lack of leadership, and their repeated "wait and see" approach to what the US will do come January, and what the other "major emittors" will put on the table, such as India and China. This is not leadership, as it is and will continue to lead to a stalemate. India and China are equally stubborn in waiting for a signal of leadership from the Industrialized countries before committing to reductions themselves. As I see it, and as almost every G77 +China country will state, they are entitled to develop to the same standards as we enjoy, and have a priority to invest their own funds into poverty eradication, health, and development before siphoning off funds for climate change. Developed countries must take the lead - they have well-established economies, low poverty rates, and strong health care systems that do not require significant additional funding. They have a historic responsibility to support - financially, and otherwise - less developed countries before ever expecting them to take on binding emissions.

Overall, I was encouraged by Prentice's openness and committment to hearing our concerns, and his patience in addressing our questions. However, I came away feeling as though Prentice may not fully acknowledge how significant and frightening this challenge is to our generation, nor does he fully admit to the responsibility he and his colleagues must bear to put right Canada's wrongs in this process. How will our generation be guaranteed well-paying sustainable employment if Canada is behind the times on green technology R & D, production, and dissemination? Where will Northern communities go when they relocate their entire town because permafrost heaves or severe arctic storms have destroyed their infrastructure? What will happen to our economy if Canada is left behind in the race to the top of climate-friendly investment, financing, and technology?

But there is hope. I think he listened, and I think he took to heart our message. We'll know later this afternoon if he adjusts his speech to include any of our recommendations or demands. I also think we can look forward to - or at least push for - a transparent consultative process following Poznan, and leading toward Copenhagen on these issues. Time will tell. I'll keep you posted.

Canada and the Seedling

Just back from a special 1.5 hour debrief with the head negotiator for Canada's delegation again. This was an extra lengthy session to update us on where Prentice may be headed in negotiations next week. I liken it to this analogy:

If one were to give the Canadian negotiators a small plant to keep alive for one year, this would be the small plants' fate. First, Canada would burn the plant to see how much emissions it could potentially emit and sequester. Then, they would write a wordy, but completely vague report on the outcomes, analyzing means by which this could contribute 'meaningfully' to Canada's climate change plans. Following the report, they would use an international forum to "constructively discuss" how these results may be considered under national circumstances to help them wiggle out of taking on further committments under any climate change agreement. This would go on for many months, and there would likely involve further tests and further discussions, but in the end, Canada would wait to see how the US's little plant fared, and what proposal they put down before laying any concrete proposal on the table themselves. Meanwhile, Canada's little plant didn't last more than a few days. Does this make them monsters?

This is basically how the negotiations are going here in Poland. Lots of talk, lots of vague roundabout answers, lots of discussion, little action, no committments, no ambition. Russia and Japan love it. Countries that are underwater already, or soon-to-be, are less than thrilled. Canadian youth are becoming increasingly frustrated and discouraged. But we're not giving up. Pizza and Policy tonight should yeild some new enforced strategies for upping the ante in the coming week.

Saying a lot about nothing

Yann Tierson's soundtrack for the movie Amelie is playing at the front desk of the hostel, and a few of us stragglers are staying back here this morning, recuperating from a long celebratory night out (or in some cases, commiserating), catching up on emails, thoughts, and letting the past week's events sink in. I chose to take the morning to reflect on how Canada's performance has been thus far, now that we are halfway through the conference.

But first, I'll summarize what last week was about. The first week of the meeting is always about information-sharing, political posturing, and discussing draft statements and reports. The main topics for discussion are the four pillars of the Bali Action Plan: adaptation, mitigation, technology transfer and finance. The Bali Action Plan was decided last year in Bali as a framework to guide nations toward an agreement in Copenhagen on what would replace the Kyoto PRotocol upon its 2012 expiry date. It is absolutely critical to have the new agreement finalized by this time next year in order to ensure there is no implementation gap of the new agreement and the Kyoto Protocol, otherwise the ball of yarn begins to unravel and it becomes very difficult to get everyone back to the table.

Unfortunately, talks this week did not reveal much promise for staying on our strict timeline. Countries such as Canada, Japan, and Russia are deliberately calling for further discussion, speculation, and studies on issues that have already been studied and discussed to death. Perhaps this is an attempt to see what the new US government puts on the table, or perhaps more pessimistically, to throw off the whole process. Canada in particular has said absolutely nothing of merit in any of its statements. Our daily meetings talk in circles with no concrete information ever laid on the table. For example, yesterdays' debrief with the Canadian negotiatiors centred around what is called Aggregate Emissions Reductions Targets. This is a term used to describe a group of countries that each take on their own domestic reduction targets within a certain rannge such that the average emissions reductions fall within a pre-determined range for the group of countries.

We suggested that this may be an idea for Canada and the US, similar to what the EU has done. Our delegation totally missed the point, and began comparing us to Spain as an example of why this system doesn't work. According to Harper's appointed negotiators here in Poznan, Canada, as a country is remarkably like Spain. I mean, it's hot, we're cold. It's small, we're huge, and it has a similar population evenly distributed throughout, while ours is mostly concentrated in a few major cities separated by hundreds of kilometers (if not thousands). The similarities are uncanny!

During the official meetings, Canada rambled on in their statements with many thanks to other countries for their contributions, thanks to the Chairs for their efforts, and thanked some more, than blabbed on about nothing in particular, leaving listeners confused and perplexed as to what they really said. Contradictory to this earlier this week, they stated that their incredible emissions growth was the result of canada's cold climate and vast geography (both traits which I'm pretty sure haven't changed since ratifying the Kyoto Protocol in 2005). They even went so far as to suggest that Canada should get a break for the fact that they have tar sands operations that contribute greatly to their ghg emissions. Ha! That's right in line with Saudia Arabia requesting compensation for the cost of reducing emissions in their vast oil-producing economy! (Which is a long-standing laughing matter at these conferences among the vast majority of participants). Needless to say, Canada won all three places for Fossil of the Day on Thursday for their remarkably incoherent or incredulous statements that did nothing constructive toward the process.

Seeing the Canadians waffling about like this, dragging everyone down with them like a ball and chain, is driving us all a little nuts. I think this weekend we are all feeling a little less optimistic about the process and our ability to effect the change that is required to ensure a stable and safe climate for the future. Next week, the high-level ministers arrive, and the tone and urgency of the meeting usually picks up substantially, so we're changing our strategy slightly, in hopes of finding a stronger message and a louder means of getting our message through.

CYD meets the Canadian Delegation

Today, the Canadian Youth Delegation met with the official Canadian government delegation to spark discussion on Canada's climate change policies and negotiation strategy in Poznan. The packed meeting room held almost all the Canadian youth delegates, as well as the head of the climate change negotiation task force, and the head negotiator for the Poznan climate talks.

Overall, the meeting provided an excellent opportunity for youth to engage our negotiators in a discussion on our concerns about climate change, our desire to see stronger leadership and action by the Canadian government, and our request to have an official voice among the government delegation for youth. We also had opportunity to open up a discussion on a few key points we had concerns about, including Canada's lack of leadership, the state of adaptation funding in Canada, and Canada's lack of ambition on emission reduction targets.

The Canadian delegation was friendly, open, and respectful. Though they evaded direct answers to most of our questions, youth appreciated the opportunity to meet with them and express our views.

When asked how Canada defined its perception as a world leader on climate change, he response was that they saw their role as "being constructive" in the negotiations, instead. Needless to say, they also admitted that when it comes to a position on mid-term emission reduction targets, it all depends on what actions others are prepared to put on the table (ie China or India??), and what that adds up to in terms of emissions reductions. Holding the cards close, and waiting for others to make the first move doesn't strike me as leadership, or being constructive.

The youth also asked questions about adaptation funding. Canada recently announced $100 million for adaptation funding for climate change, but did not specify where the money would go and how it would be managed. It is likely they would select the World Bank, which is completely managed and staffed by developed world figures, and has been criticized by developing countries for its lack of transparency and democratic operations. We recommended that Canada direct the funds through the newly-instituted UN Framework Convention on Climate Change Adaptation Fund under the Kyoto Protocol, so that it can be managed transparently, equitably, and sustainably for climate change. Canada suggested that they would wait and see what the best option is, but didn't discount channeling it through the World Bank anyway.

The youth also pointed out that it must be difficult to maintain Canada's integrity in the negotiating room when it is so far from meeting its Kyoto commitments. The delegates argued that Canada remained quite well respected (but I think they meant they personally were still respected in a professional sense - not the same thing!). I guess they weren't around in Bali last year for our record number of Fossil of the Day awards for being obstructionist, and also were somehow isolated from the bad press Canada received internationally for its pathetic action on climate change.

Nonetheless, I honestly believe they are acting in their best capacity under the (mis)guidance of our Prime Minister. Deep down, they appear to be compassionate, kind, and considerate individuals who are just doing their job. It's just too bad they are getting such lousy direction from their advisors.

(P.S. I'm sorry for the lack of photos, but until my laptop decides to smarten up, I'll be using UN computers with no photo uploading programs - soon, I promise!)

COP14 begins, and Canada's government is about to fall

Incredible. Just when we think we have our messages for our government in hand, and we have a grasp of what we think Canada might do in the negotiations, we find out that back home, Parliament Hill is in chaos. It seems that Canada is headed for election #4 in 5 years - what other government has had so many elections as this? It's mildly embarassing, if not humourous! Once again, Canada is a subject of ridicule and snarky remarks here at the UN conference - only this time it isn't YET about being obstructionist idiots in the negotiations...but that remains to be proven otherwise.

Moving on, today has already been intensely busy. Last night my laptop took a nose dive in the productivity department, and I have decided to ditch it and rely on cell phones and the computer lab at the UN. Yet another challenge to completing this blog with any kind of regularity! But so far, so good.

This morning, the international youth policy team reached consensus on a document that outlines our positions on various key issues including deforestation, emissions reductions, adaptation to climate change, our shared vision for the next phase of the Kyoto Protocol (which is what this meeting is largely about), and a few other issues we think are critical in this year's negotiations. The international youth are extremely skilled at co-operating, and I sense we will be a very powerful force. It's very exciting!

Following that, I joined other Canadians to attend a meeting with the Canadian Environmental NGO's (non-government organizations). These include the brainiest of the bunch from Pembina Institute, WWF Canada, Greenpeace Canada, David Suzuki Foundation, etc. They have been very welcoming of the large Canadian youth contingent, and we are very excited to be able to contribute meaningfully to their strategies and tasks. We will be helping to develop messaging, translating media releases into French, and contributing to the intel we acquire from attending various meetings, negotiations, and conversations with government delegates.

And to wrap up the morning - yes, just the morning! - the Canadian Youth policy team held our first meeting here at the UN conference to discuss how we'd like to approach a meeting with our government if, in fact, they come. Everything is very much up in the air regarding whether Prentice will arrive, how the coalition and potential government fall might affect negotiations here, and what we should expect in terms of meetings with our Canadian government officials here.

The next two weeks promise to be light on food and sleep, and heavy on meetings, running around to find people, scrambling to write press releases and policy positions, and of course, finding the odd side event with free food! I will try to get more photos to upload soon.

Youth set the bar high on effective international co-operation

While international negotiators are finalizing their position statements, and pressing their shirts for the start of the conference, the International Youth delegates were already hard at work.

Today, almost 200 youth from over 50 countries joined together to develop our shared vision, strategy, and positions as we head into the 14th UN climate change conferences. Beginning with some inspiring messages about why we have been brought together in Poland, participants learned the history of youth involvement, the basics of the policies involved, and the opportunities for making a difference here in Poland, as well as next year in Copenhagen.

After lunch, the youth split into various working groups, including communications, media, actions, and policy. Being of the policy bent myself, as any readers can probably now guess, I joined in with this working group. I was in disbelief over how much the interest in policy has grown since last year! We went from a group of about 10 international youth, to over 50 since last year. We were able to develop subgroups on 6 key issues, which include Forestry issues, Clean Development Mechanism issues, Mitigation, Adaptation, Finance, and Technology Transfer.

I'm very excited at how well the group is working together, and how well-organized we will be this year. Our objectives will be to follow these 6 areas, translate the policy developments into plain language for the media, communications, actions, and other groups, and develop a unified youth voice on our position on these issues.

I have been wonderfully amazed at how well such a large group of young people from such diverse backgrounds and cultures seem to cooperate seamlessly. We are able to agree on issues effortlessly, and share a strong, unified vision of reversing the climate change trends. A look around the large room at all these passionate, dedicated faces suggests that these are my teammates, and my partners in this quest to slow or end the destruction to our climate. Mal, a UK youth delegate, said it best when he said, "we are setting an example for how the international community should be cooperating on this issue". I couldn't agree more.

...And they're off!

This is it, everyone! Tonight, I take a bus to Toronto to meet most of the delegation for the first time, do an interview with The Weather Network, and finalize the Canadian Youth Delegation's positions on the top five major issues to be discussed in Poznan.

I cannot wait to finally interact face-to-face with the incredible, motivated, and inspiring young people I have been on the phone with weekly for the past 4 months. Tonight will be a celebration, a launch, a deep breath, and a sigh.

Getting any work done today at the real job is going to be tough!

Next time I write, it will be from Poland!!

(NB: regarding the picture, replace the word "Bacon" with "CYD" and that's pretty much an accurate picture of my feelings at the moment...although, admittedly, I sometimes get that excited about Bacon)

CCS in Canada not all its cracked up to be

In an email sent out from one of our policy team members today, we learned from the CBC the following:

To summarize: according to Secret Ministerial Briefing Notes prepared by the
Canada-Alberta Task Force on Carbon Capture and Storage (obtained through a FOIP request by the CBC), Carbon Capture and Storage is a technology ill-suited to
most oilsands projects. You read that right, the technology being touted abroad
by countless Canadian and Albertan politicians as a pancea for mitigating
oilsands GHG emissions will not actual result in significant reductions, because
most oilsands operations do not meet the criteria for an effective CCS
operation. Please see the link below:http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/11/24/sands-trap.html

Taking the fizz out of Carbon Capture and Storage

This week’s final fabulous policy presentation was on the topic of questionable technologies such as carbon capture and storage and nuclear energy, and their role in the Clean Development Mechanism.

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a technique that removes CO2 from large point sources of emissions, and either pipes it underground or underwater to prevent it from entering the atmosphere. It does not remove existing CO2 in the atmosphere (although a fairly new discovery suggests that basaltic rock has co2 absorbing properties). CCS is capable of capturing 85-95% of CO2 in some cases. The CO2 is often transported along pipelines and either stored underground using well-established geologic technology, or piped to the bottom of a large and deep lake or ocean where the pressure keeps the gas from escaping. A new technique called mineralization is currently being researched, but is at the moment far more energy intensive than the geologic or oceanic sequestration techniques mentioned previously.

The oil and gas industries have been using CCS to help bring these fuels to the surface for easy extraction; however, the storage capacities of geologic sequestration are not well understood. This mechanism is also at risk from seismic activity, crack or fissure developments, or ruptures into undetected wells. There are significant biological problems with the ocean sequestration techniques, as any high school chemistry teacher will tell you. This is because CO2 has an acidifying property, and acid can dissolve calcium. Acidifying water guarantees significant species loss (think corals, shellfish) in our oceans – as if that isn’t already a huge problem!

The challenges surrounding the inclusion of CCS in the CDM process include such uncertainties as: how to deal with underground reservoirs that cross political boundaries, how to measure or quantify seepage, and how to select suitable sites. CCS is also an extremely pricey mitigation tool at the moment, and financing would be a significant challenge. (Keep in mind the astronomical estimated cost of adaptation to climate change, in addition to any technology and mitigation funds that may arise).

Quite honestly, I think CCS as a technology has great potential for minimizing emissions from these sectors as an interim measure while we figure out how to bust out of this oil-driven economy. Nonetheless, numerous uncertainties make it completely unsuitable for the Clean Development Mechanism. Countries such as Canada, Norway, Russia, and other major oil-producing economies should continue to contribute to the research and design of improved systems, and are encouraged to apply them to their own emission mitigation strategies. They should not be encouraged to support including CCS as a CDM mechanism – focus on renewable energy technologies instead! CCS should never replace or take away from investments in renewable energy technology, as this represents our only option for truly returning to a stable climate, and minimizing the risks of extreme climate change. And no, Nuclear energy is not a renewable energy…which will lead me to my next posting. Until then, invest in them there windmills!

Turning the Corner, or running away from responsibility?

As promised, the following is a summary of Thursday's presentation on Canadian climate change policy. It starts with the Turning the Corner Plan. PM Harper promised a "Made In Canada" approach, and came out with the Turning the Corner Plan in 2007 when John Baird was appointed Minister of Environment. The plan is actually only a proposal with no regulatory legal spine. It outlines a target of reducing Canada's greenhouse gas emissions by 20% below 2006 levels by 2020 - which amounts to a 3% increase above 1990 levels. [When we ratified Kyoto, our voluntary committment was for 6% below 1990 levels - a difference of 9%!)] The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) insists that 1990 must remain the baseline year if we are to reduce emissions enough to stay below a 2 degree C rise in global average temperature. This target is almost impossible now - we have already gone too far. Experts are saying we are already committed to a 2.4 degree C increase in temperature, meaning loss of biodiversity, significant changes in weather patterns, and increased sea-level rise.

Turning the Corner also outlines intensity targets, which means for every increase in production of a given emission, there is lower greenhouse gas emissions. This means emissions will continue to increase, at a decreasing rate. There will be a net gain. The plan was updated in March, but no details have been released yet.

The Plan treats the Oil Sands with special consideration. New industries in the Oil Sands are given a grace period to 2011 when they will be required to use Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology (as yet under development, and unproven) to stash away some of their emissions. Existing industries will have until 2018, leaving only 2 years for Canada's largest source of emissions to contribute to Canada's reduction targets.

The Plan also includes a carbon offset program, where industry can pay as little as $15 /tonne of CO2 for up to 70% of their emissions. An additional 10% of emission credits can be bought from the Clean Development Mechanism. The Plan outlines a gradual increase on the price of carbon until it reaches $65/tonne in 2012; but any mistake or errors in the price increases (political or otherwise) will mean it will be cheaper for industry to simply buy off their emissions rather than reduce them.

Obama's election to the Presidency in the United States will have considerable impact on Canada's climate change policy. Due to the free trade agreements for goods between Canada and the US, our two countries will have to maintain policies that are very closely coupled; carbon taxes or other measures could potentially raise the costs of materials and goods being traded, rendering them less attractive for import. However, Obama is citing much more ambitious targets of 80% below 1990 emissions levels by 2050, using cap and trade and 'polluter-pays' policies, and investing in renewable energy. These will be very difficult targets to meet, and may be adjusted over the coming years, but it puts the pressure on Canada to smarten up a bit.

Obama also is fortunate to have strong pressure from many progressive states to adopt stricter policies on climate change. Some Canadian provinces are also trying their best. British Columbia is the first to come to mind with their recently-implemented carbon tax, and an ambitious emission reduction plan. Ontario had set reasonable targets of 6% below 1990 by 2015, 15% by 2020, and 80% by 2050, but there are no strong policies or strategies to acheive these targets. Quebec has managed to curtail emissions growth since 1990, and has actually reduced emissions by 5.5% below 2006 levels. And then there's Alberta. But I'll save Alberta for it's own posting later in the week.

The bottom line is that the federal goverment has set itself up for failure intentionally, by creating weak targets and regulatory frameworks riddled with cop-outs for the industries. If we are to have any hope of reaching the internationally-agreed targets of 25-40% below 1990 levels, then Canada will have to act immediately and with robust regulations and policies in place. I try to remain optimistic that there is still a chance of this happening, but with ever passing conference I attend, and with each consecutive "fossil of the day" award that Canada wins for being obstructionist or delaying progress, my hope dwindles. Success will require enormous public pressure, an about-face of the energy industry and major businesses, and a new perspective within the federal government.

editor's note: The book cover illustrated above is an excellent book for summarizing Canada's climate change policy, the history behind it, and how it may be possible to still reach our targets (or impossible?) . Recommended reading!!

Coming soon...

Yesterday's Policy Team enjoyed an excellent presentation from two of our members on Canadian climate change policy, and the various factors that shape what is today one of the world's weakest government attempts at greenhouse gas emissions reductions. How do the Provinces fit in? Who in Canada is leading the charge? What does Environment Minister Jim Prentice's appointment mean for Canada's climate policy? How will Canada's policy change to reflect the stronger policies proposed by the new President-elect in the United States? Stay tuned, and I'll summarize yesterday's call for you.

Why does any of this matter?

My words alone cannot begin to convey the depths of emotion and passion and desperation behind my motivation for doing everything I can to mitigate climate change. So instead, please watch this short video. This say it all.

Start with this one:
UNDP Youth Climate Change Project Key Message Seven: Climate Change - The United Nation is well placed to lead on action. from Peace Child on Vimeo.

Imagine what it is like to be in this room at this moment:

Imagine staring out over a sea of suits and ties adorned by emotionless faces who seem to have lost perspective. Do they care nothing for the millions of impoverished and marginalized people of this world who are being forced from their homes and cultural roots into slums and camps? Are they mere androids driven by politics and economy, who can't see beyond the next fiscal quarter, or election term? They continue to forget that their decisions will impact millions upon millions - including their own children.

Now imagine being a young person in the room during this speech. You are surrounded by your contemporaries for support - people you have become close friends within a matter of two short weeks, bound together by this common cause, this plea for a brighter future. Tears are streaming down our faces. We hold hands, hug one another, stand and watch while one of our own sends our plea to take action and stop deliberating. The world is melting away from under us. We are running out of time.

Imagine how this feels. Wouldn't you want to do anything within your power to change it?

New Website is Live

Exciting news! The Canadian Youth Delegation's new website is up and running! There are still a few kinks and bugs to work out, so please be patient with us. In the meantime, check it out and visit some of the delegate profiles to see for yourself what an incredible team we have!

www.cydpoznan.org