12/9 Live Chat From Cancun –- Submit Your Questions!

Written by David Connell on . Posted in Learn

On December 9 at 2:00 p.m. Eastern time, just as the UN climate change conference is hitting its apex, Andrew Deutz, The Nature Conservancy’s director of international government relations, and Frank Lowenstein, the Conservancy’s climate adaptation strategy leader, will be taking your questions on the successes, failures, and surprises of the negotiations.

Andrew, Frank and the rest of our team have been on the ground throughout the negotiations and will be able to offer some key insights on the talks and where we go from here in the fight against climate change.

Submit your questions now in the comment field below, then come back here on December 9 at 2:00 p.m. Eastern time to participate. We’ll be taking a mix of submitted questions and live questions.

(Image: Cancunmesse. Courtesy of the UNFCC photo pool.)

Tags: , , , , , ,

Trackback from your site.

Comments (21)

  • Miki Thompson

    |

    Why is it that they keep saying climates are changing, due to the effects of people and if you look back through history we have had these changes before the things that are changing the weather existed?

    Reply

  • Alex from NE PA

    |

    Is natural gas, particularly the use of hydraulic fracturing to procure gas from shale like the Marcellus Shale, being promoted as a “clean” alternative? That’s the decision-making that most affects our future in Pennsylvania, not how the climate is doing in 50 years. In 50 years, we won’t have a Pennsylvania left to protect at the rate drilling is proceeding.

    Reply

  • name Randy Schietzelt

    |

    The solutions to climate change are the same as the energy choices we will be using in the near future as fossil fuels deplete. How do we get rid of the undue influence of the fossil fuel lobby that is ruining our chance to be a major player in producing the renewable energy hardware? We don’t want to be left behind.

    Reply

  • deedee

    |

    Ask them to please stop Geo Engineering Spraying. The chemtrail are getting us sick. And are all over the things in my yard.

    Reply

  • Claire Anderson

    |

    What level of energy consumption would everyone in the world have to adopt right now to make it possible for everyone to be on the same energy page? Though this is highly theoretical, isn’t it germane?

    I get annoyed when I hear that if we made (x) change, it wouldn’t make a difference in global warming, as if that’s the question. The point is we need to make a change.

    What is our target energy consumption for all 7 billion of us to survive and have more or less the same energy usage and a decreased carbon footprint? Isn’t that the description or prescription we all need to be made aware of?

    Reply

  • jack parow

    |

    When will you investigate the people who are lining their pockets with this junk science.

    Reply

  • JOÃO MIRANDA

    |

    E por incrível que pareça estamos no século XXI,! mas a ganancia, capitalismo, poder,…., ainda continuam a controlar o Homem. Eu um simples mortal penso que enquanto houver a obsessão pelo poder e a falta de respeito pelo próximo, nada vai mudar. Com os avanços da ciência não acredito que ainda não tenham descoberto energias alternativas e limpas!, por outro lado também penso que existe cura para as doenças tais como,( VIH, CANCRO, DIABETES,E OUTRAS), e porque ?, os grandes laboratórios iriam perder biliões de dólares.
    Quando temos empresas que controlam a economia mundial, só ai pode-se ver a estupidez do homem, há valores que longo prazo vão fazer a diferença, e que se tem vindo a perder, mas como se diz em Portugal: só se lembram do sol quando está de chuva,.

    Reply

  • Henrique Antunes

    |

    My question is about transport in cities. The devoping of light rail networks in cities is a mass transit transport that have most advantages of a traditional subway system, but is much less costly, provides road traffic discipline and it is a fashionable thing in most habitants minds. How can this form of urban transportation, polution-free, can be promoted to cities mayors, in a way to generalize this atractive and efective systems to all large and medium cities, serving principal nods of other transport systems, businesses, universities, hospitals and public services?

    Reply

  • Richard Whiteford

    |

    I want to know why Senator James Inhofe gets audience at the COP sumits? How does he get to show up and spew his skeptic hyperbole and get away with it? Does anyone expose him on the spot and reprimand him for the damage he has done to make progress on cutting CO2? Why isn’t he bared from the summit and sent packing?

    Reply

  • Ruba

    |

    Two years ago, in addition to this year has become our country suffered greatly from lack of rainwater, which is the primary source of groundwater in our country, which led to lack of drinking water in addition to that quality has become poor.
    Is it lack of rainfall due to climate change?
    And what is the solution to the problem of lack of groundwater and how we contribute to improving the quality of water ?

    Reply

  • Kelly Samantha Louise Hammond

    |

    It seems governments are only interested in the short-term prospects of a country, I mean, the time in which a political party will be in government. This means that previous governments are not held accountable for previous actions or not required to help with the next and new governments can un-do or do what they like. It seems logical that if there more collaboration between MPs and not parties as such trying to gain dominance with their views, there would be more hope for collaboration on such issues as the environment as it impacts us all. This could also work between countries, could it not? Isn’t that what the idea of a UN is all about? Where is their collaboration on it all, working towards the long-term future of the world. Why is it that it is still the case of ‘each to thier own’? We ‘all’ come from the belly of the enviroment; it is what sustains us ‘all’. I know that geographically and culturally each country has its different drives, but surely in this day and age, we have so much proof of the damage that we do to the environment, that we can all get together and find mutually agreeable alternatives. Enough with greed which blinds them all. It’s very sad really because if there is anything stopping progress in this area or anything for a matter of fact, it is that. My question is, will we ever agree?

    Reply

  • lisa stone

    |

    In Australia, particularly on the south coast of NSW, emissions from logging are massive and must be counted and reduced if global warming is to be seriously tackled.

    New Kyoto rules for land and forests in developed countries would allow a 500 Mega tonne increase in greenhouse emissions from logging and fail to close an existing 500 Mega tonne loophole on destruction of wetlands.

    That loophole represents 10 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions.

    The Australian government will further undermine a global agreement cut greenhouse pollution levels if it attempts to exploit this loophole and supports an increase in forest and wetland destruction in its own backyard and in other countries.

    Australian could cut its greenhouse pollution levels cheaply and easily by protecting its native forests from further logging.
    Surely Australia is obliged to help close this proposed loophole by showing leadership, and encouraging all developed countries to agree to two new guiding principles: that implementation of LULUCF results in an absolute reduction in net emissions; and that it result in the protection of carbon reservoirs in natural ecosystems.
    Australia is only now, slowly, coming in from the cold. After eleven years of ridicule from international
    quarters the government has the chance to gain international respect if the right decisions are made. The
    governmental practice of decrying Indonesia’s illegal logging while sanctioning illegal logging in
    Australia has not gone unnoticed by the rest of the world. Thus it appears that the governmental
    sanctioning of native forest logging endorses the huge amounts of GHG emissions released.

    PLEASE SIGN THE TRUTH IN TARGETS STATEMENT.

    Reply

  • OTony

    |

    Why not to put a life ban to those motor vehicles that don’t have catalytic converters?
    This problem is especially encountered in the developing countries.

    Reply

  • Blythe

    |

    A lot of people were skeptical going into Cancun. Are things turning out better than expected or is it still going to be a mess in the end?

    Reply

  • Danny Bruce

    |

    As all we think climate change is not about common man’s problem its the problem for the Mother nature created by the miraculous composition’s of elements in the solar system, the problem now lies in the hands of 6th sensed Homosepians(us) living in the current world, as we are in a competition now, we are over extracting the natures resources & completely destroying the Eco-system which is necessary for prevailing life in this earth. Its time for the governments across the globe to get closer leaving all their dissimilarities & work together in going green

    Reply

  • Walt from NJ

    |

    Since the USA has many scientists who work on the issues of climate change which are probably funded by USA dollars, why is the USA so reluctant to join the advice of these same USA funded scientists? Many of the climate change satellites views are monitored by NASA another highly respected authority. These NASA researchers continue to study our global changes not only from above but also by monitoring Sea Surface Temperatures (SST) which have impacts across the warming oceans as well. President Obama and his team of advisors should listen carefully to these respected scientists.

    Reply

  • tiriwa kassim

    |

    cant these green house gases be trapped in any way, or be reacted with other compounds to reduce their concentration, cause climate is real changing pretty fast.
    how do we do this.

    Reply

  • Gadencio E babiera

    |

    We are now in the initial stage of implementing multimillion worth of rubber planting in Southern Philippines. We know very much that rubber tree is an excellent industrial crop to reforest denuded lands however, I would like to know if rubber will or will not be a contributor to the subject “climate change” since its main product is its latex that indirectly coming from the ground and from the atmosphere.

    Reply

  • Altaf Hussain

    |

    Education & awareness in developing countries is required. First , education & Awareness to the government and then to the peoples.
    Regarding implementation on above, corruption is the prime obstacle.
    Plan & implementation to protect the forest.
    Stop the WARS, the additional tool for climate change.

    Reply

  • Saugata Dutta

    |

    The IPCC agrees that reducing the consumption of meat (specially beef) will go a long way in reducing global warning. In fact, there is data to prove that if just 10% of the meat-eating population goes vegetarian, climate change can be reversed. Why is action not being taken along these line?

    Reply

  • Sandra Snider

    |

    Burning trees and clear cutting is a one time use of trees which are one of the main producers of oxygen on this planet. Is it possible for World leaders to recognize this fact and understand that Harvesting forest by-products, media education programs, and tourism give financial rewards repeatedly? A little common sense goes a long way-for everyone.

    Reply

Leave a comment

About Planet Change

Planet Change is a Nature Conservancy blog site designed to share stories about actions the Conservancy and others around the world are taking to fight carbon pollution and the impacts of climate change, and to help people feel the connections between climate change and their daily lives and understand actions they can take.

The Nature Conservancy