Cities tackle climate change adaptation

Including subnational governments like cities in the UNFCCC discussions has been on the front burner since COP19 in Warsaw.  While only sovereign countries may enter treaties, State Parties recognize that achieving Article 2′s goal of climate stabilization will take effort from other governmental jurisdictions, as well as civil society and private businesses.

st kjeld beforeAnd so this article about the first climate change-adapted neighorhood stood out.  Not only is the engineering and landscape design feat recently unveiled in St.Kjeld intriguing, it is striking that this neighborhood is in Copenhagen, Denmark, site of the 2009 COP15, which launched the idea of nationally determined contributions that now forms the backbone of negotiation for the new Paris Agreement at COP21.

“Climate change is a reality and we have to be prepared for floods, storms and rising sea levels,” says René Sommer Lindsay, the city official in charge of St. Kjeld’s transformation. “The [2011] cloudburst was really a wake-up call. We said, ‘Instead of doing pinpoint projects, let’s develop a rainwater master plan.’ Rainwater is only a problem if it goes where you don’t want it to go.”

City planners tore up neighborhood squares and replaced the asphalt with a hilly, grassy carpet interspersed with walking paths. When the next big storm hits, these mini-parks will become water basins, able to collect run-off water from surrounding buildings’ roofs as well. Streets with raised sidewalks will become “cloudburst boulevards,” serving as canals that channel rainwater away from the city to the harbor.  In the meantime, the new greenery cools the air as summer temperatures rise in northern Europe.  “Climate change is a huge opportunity to build greener cities,” Flemming Rafn Thomsen of Tredje Natur, the Danish architecture firm chosen for the project, explains. “We should stop pushing nature away and stop pretending that we can push the weather away. It’s a whole new paradigm.”

Noting that a city like Mumbai, which the World Bank ranks as the world’s fifth most exposed to floods, may not be able to afford Copenhagen’s climate-change adaptation strategies, this article points out how many cities actually can. Seven of the 10 most exposed cities, including New York and Tampa, Florida, are located in developed countries. New York, which has committed $20 billion to climate-change adaptation, is opting for floodwalls, while the Dutch delta city of Rotterdam has gone even further, designing a plan for floating neighborhoods. Several others are experimenting with mini-parks, which Morten Kabell, Copenhagen’s deputy mayor in charge of environment and technology, credits to people liking “blue and green, not gray. Countries talk,” he adds, “but cities know they have to act.”


New poll results indicate U.S. political will on climate change

CC voterThe New York Times, Stanford University, and the non-governmental organization Resources for the Future released poll results today that show “an overwhelming majority of the American public” (2/3) supports government action to curb global warming. This includes 48% of Republican voters, who replied that they are more likely to vote for a candidate who supports fighting climate change.  Professor Jon A. Krosnick of Stanford University, one of the survey’s authors, views this last result as “the most powerful finding.”

Beyond voter behavior, this new poll also indicates that a growing number of people in the U.S. believe that climate change is caused by human behavior.  A 2011 Stanford poll showed that 72% of respondents thought that climate change was caused at least in part by human activities. Today’s poll results show that number has grown to 81% (88% of Democrats, 83% of independents, and 71% of Republicans).  These trend lines comport with recent poll data published by the Yale Project on Climate Change Communications.

One independent voter polled summed up the basis for his reply: “If someone feels it’s a hoax they are denying the evidence out there. Many arguments can be made on both sides of the fence. But to just ignore it completely indicates a close-minded individual, and I don’t want a close-minded individual in a seat of political power.”

For more analysis of these poll results and their potential impacts on the 2016 presidential campaign, view these graphics here.


Climate diplomacy

thediplomat_2015-01-28_13-37-24-386x253Scott Moore, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, published a thoughtful op-ed on current U.S. climate diplomacy in yesterday’s Diplomat.  On the heels of the recent mission to India, and last November’s US-China bilateral announcement on GHG emission reductions, he asserts that “[b]y reclaiming the leadership role that it effectively surrendered by refusing to ratify the Kyoto Protocol some fifteen years ago, the United States has a rare opportunity to simultaneously cement its relationships with emerging powers, address a critical threat to stability in fragile states, and position itself at the center of the low-carbon economy that can and will power prosperity for the rest of the twenty-first century.” Read more about his suggested ”three basic pillars” of a U.S. climate diplomacy.

This piece also briefly points out that “[t]he U.S. should also coordinate this activity with its European allies, many of which have significant experience in climate diplomacy.”  Exhibit A:  This “diplomatic offensive” approved by the EU last week to send “90,000 diplomats in over 3,000 missions lobbying to win new pledges on carbon cuts from countries ahead of a crunch UN climate summit in Paris this December.”


A new climate change narrative

To provide perspective on the quotidien of the climate change debate regularly chronicled in this blog, watch this Ted Talk by Naomi Klein, read her latest book, This Changes Everything, and consider these recent quotes:

“There are no non-radical options left …  If we stay on the road we are on, then our leading scientists as well as some of our most conservative institutions like The World Bank, the International Energy Agency, PriceWaterhouseCooper tell us that we are headed directly towards four to six degrees Celsius of warming from pre-industrial levels – and at that level, all bets are off … “

Naomi Klein“The idea was there was only one way to run the world – free markets, free trade, privatisation, deregulation, low taxes, investor rights, the cult of consumerism, the cheapest possible everything. But tackling climate change demands the reverse – collective solutions, more regulation, restrained consumption, carbon taxes, and so on.”

“Climate change detonates the ideological scaffolding on which contemporary conservatism rests. A belief system that vilifies collective action and declares war on all corporate regulation simply cannot be reconciled with a problem that demands collective action on an unprecedented scale and a dramatic reining in of the market forces that are largely responsible for creating and deepening the crisis.”

“Over 400,000 people came together to march for climate in New York under a banner of ‘Change everything – we need everyone’. Only a broad-based movement can take on the fossil fuel lobby and win. Our problem is that we have been treating this as a carbon problem when the truth is, it’s a capitalism problem.”

“I wrote my book on the premise that what we are doing is failing – and a broad, justice-based agenda represents our best way of winning. A good chance? I don’t know. But we have a chance. What matters to me is that there is any kind of chance, however slight.”


“Well, I’m not a scientist either, but . . .”

In his State of the Union address last night, President Obama picked up climate change deniers’ well-used “I’m not a scientist, but” phrase, and turned it on its head.

obama 2015 SoU“I’ve heard some folks try to dodge the evidence by saying they’re not scientists; that we don’t have enough information to act. Well, I’m not a scientist, either. But you know what — I know a lot of really good scientists at NASA, and NOAA, and at our major universities. The best scientists in the world are all telling us that our activities are changing the climate, and if we do not act forcefully, we’ll continue to see rising oceans, longer, hotter heat waves, dangerous droughts and floods, and massive disruptions that can trigger greater migration, conflict, and hunger around the globe. The Pentagon says that climate change poses immediate risks to our national security. We should act like it.”

The President’s nod to U.S. scientific bodies like NASA and NOAA is well timed.  In addition to their recent announcements about 2014′s record setting heat, a trove of academic studies have appeared in Nature and Science in just the last two weeks.  For example:

  • This paper in Nature reconciles gaps between models and observations of ocean levels since the 1990s and concludes that sea level rise is happening even more rapidly than thought. 
  • This paper in Science chronicles how global warming, ocean acidification, aquaculture, and miningNAS “pose extreme threats to ocean life,” and proposes creating ocean reserves and managing unprotected spaces akin to land conservation.
  • This paper in Science reports that climate change and species extinctions indicate the the planet is entering a “danger zone,” with human activity degrading the environment “at a rate unseen in the past 10,000 years.”
  • This briefing in the Proceedings of the Institute for Civil Engineering (ICE) warns that the West Antarctica ice sheet collapse will cause over 11 feet of sea level rise that will disproportionately affect North America.
  • The U.S. Global Change Research Program reports in this National Climate Assessment on the direct human health impacts of climate change, including increased disease and food insecurity.

In the non-academic realm,the World Economic Forum’s 2015 edition of its Global Risks Report ranks extreme weather, water crises, natural catastrophes, the failure to adapt to climate change, biodiversity loss, and ecosystem collapse among the Top 10 risks to human security.

With this data in hand, our non-scientist-in-chief stated last night:

“That’s why, over the past six years, we’ve done more than ever before to combat climate change, from the way we produce energy, to the way we use it. That’s why we’ve set aside more public lands and us-climate-change-300x225waters than any administration in history. And that’s why I will not let this Congress endanger the health of our children by turning back the clock on our efforts. I am determined to make sure American leadership drives international action. In Beijing, we made an historic announcement — the United States will double the pace at which we cut carbon pollution, and China committed, for the first time, to limiting their emissions. And because the world’s two largest economies came together, other nations are now stepping up, and offering hope that, this year, the world will finally reach an agreement to protect the one planet we’ve got.”

UPDATE: On Wednesday, January 21, 2015, the U.S. Senate voted 98-1 on a Keystone XL bill amendment declaring that climate change is real and not a hoax.  That’s the good news on congressional understanding of the climate change science.  The bad news?  The failure of a second amendment acknowledging the human causes of it - specifically, that “climate change is real and human activity significantly contributes to climate change” – because the causation language of “significantly” troubled many Republicans.  Despite the good work of “a lot of really good scientists” at NOAA, NASA, and the inhofeIPCC (and despite the five Republicans, Lindsay Graham,Kelly Ayotte, Susan Collins, Mark Kirk, and Lamar Alexander, who voted for it).  Oh, and one more tally in the two-steps-backward column: Sen. James Inhofe signed on as a co-sponsor to that first amendment, saying for the record that “climate has always changed” and that it’s “arrogant” to think humankind can change climate. Sigh. Nonetheless Vermont’s Senator Bernie Sanders called the climate change votes “a step forward” for Republicans: “I think what is exciting is that today we saw for the first time - a number, a minority – but some Republicans going onboard and saying that climate change is real and it’s caused by human activity.” For more, read here.

 


Inside out: U.S. domestic political will and bilateral negotiation with India

Bill Clinton was famous for saying during his 1992 presidential campaign, ”It’s the economy, stupid.”  In the realm of international climate change negotiations from Lima to Paris, it’s fair to say “it’s the nationally determined contributions, mon ami.”  Deliberately intended to connect the UNFCCC goal (of keeping global warming below 2 or 1.5 Celsius) more concretely with national political and economic agendas, the inclusion of NDCs in the upcoming Paris agreement necessarily puts national climate change policy and politics in the spotlight.

Hence these two articles jumped out at me this morning.

The first one, out of Yale’s Project on Climate Change Communication, reports a split among U.S. Republican voters’ views on climate change, Yale Republican pollfinding “a more complex – and divided – Republican electorate.” The Center concludes that “solid majorities of self-identified moderate and liberal Republicans – who comprise 30% of the party – think global warming is happening (62% and 68% respectively). By contrast, 38% of conservative Republicans think global warming is happening. At the extreme, Tea Party Republicans (17% of the party) are the most dismissive – only 29% think global warming is happening.” For analysis of Republican voter reactions to specific questions about EPA climate change regulation, read more here.  It’s thought provoking to read this new research in light of the poll data we blogged about last week (that found more than two-thirds of likely 2016 voters support the EPA’s power plant rule, including 87% of Democrats and 53% of Republicans).  Likewise, the recent news that Tom Steyer – a “billionaire environmentalist” and creator of the NextGen Climate superPAC - is strongly considering a run for retiring Barbara Boxer’s California Senate seat.  It makes one bullish about the potential for U.S. domestic political discussion on climate change to move closer to the front burner. Put together, they signal bonnes nouvelles for the national political will needed for ambitious U.S. NDCs, due to be communicated internationally as the UNFCCC negotiations reprise in Geneva in less than a month.

The second article looks outside the U.S. to India’s current role in the international climate change negotiations and its domestic preparation for NDCs.  The Guardian reports on President Obama’s upcoming visit to India and trips that Secretary of State John Kerry and other U.S. senior officials plan to make with an intention to woo India as a strategic partner in the climate change negotiations.  Sound familiar?  As we blogged last week on the back story of the U.S.-China climate change announcement made in November, the U.S. appears to be taking a page from this playbook. We look forward to hearing more news from Delhi by the end of January, well before the U.S. and EU are due to report their NDCs to the UNFCCC Secretariat.

January 13 updateScientific American reports that “when Obama and Modi meet in India on Jan. 26, few are expecting the type of landmark bilateral agreement of the type the United States struck in Beijing last year.  . . . India, like any other country, doesn’t want to look like it’s simply playing catch-up with what the U.S. and China did. They would want to make it their own, not a U.S.-China redux,” said Peter Ogden, a senior energy fellow at the Center for American Progress.  SA also points out that Kerry’s trip last weekend focused on solar development deals, given India’s ambitious clean energy goals. This focus is reinforced in the India press as well, here and here.  Also, keep an eye on the Center for American Progress’s India 2020 Initiative for timely info and analysis of  its “dream that in 2020 the two closest nations in the world will be India and the United States. If that occurs, the world will be a safer place.”


For the climate change record book

According to a variety of news sources, several important records were broken in 2014.

2014 hottest year graphHottest year on record.  The Japan Meteorological Association (JMA) reports that 2014 was 0.27°C warmer than the average from 1981 to 2010, and 0.63°C warmer than the 20th century average. NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the US, and the UK Met Office, also keep track of these climate stats and confirm the JMA’s conclusion.  NOAA just reported that 2014 was 0.5°F above normal, making it the 34th-warmest year for the continental U.S.  As Climate Central titled this news, “the U.S. hot streak is now officially old enough to vote for president as 2014 makes it 18 years of temperatures above the 20th century average.”

As the NYT described it: ”Last year was the hottest on earth since record-keeping began in 1880, scientists reported on Friday, underscoring warnings about the risks of runaway greenhouse gas emissions and undermining claims by climate change contrarians that global warming had somehow stopped. Extreme heat blanketed Alaska and much of the western United States last year. Records were set across large areas of every inhabited continent. And the ocean surface was unusually warm virtually everywhere except near Antarctica, the scientists said, providing the energy that fueled damaging Pacific storms.In the annals of climatology, 2014 surpassed 2010 as the warmest year.”

Wind energy increases. Britain’s wind turbines generated enough electricity to power more than 25% of its homes, up 15% from 2013 (comprising 9.3% of the total grid). Germany’s wind power generated more in December than in any previous month.

solar recordsNew solar energy too.  Globally, utility-scale solar installations increased for a fifth, consecutive year. Solar markets in South America and Africa had notable growth, but the largest shares remained in Asia and North America.

Coal demand in China declines.  Chinese coal consumption dropped by around 2.3% in the first eleven months of 2014, compared to the same period in 2013 (and 9% average annual growth between 2000 and 2010). Notably, electricity growth in China has slowed to around half the pace of its economic growth, indicating success at energy efficiency and a transition to less electricity-intensive industrial sectors.


Behind the scenes of the US-China negotiations

Rolling Stone recently published this intriguing backstory of the US-China climate change announcement made just two weeks before COP20 kicked off in Lima, Peru.  Obama and Xi Jinping

The bilateral conversation started last February with a phone call from U.S. Special Envoy on Climate Change Todd Stern to his Chinese counterpart, followed up by a private letter to President Xi from President Obama a month later. (Xi had already traveled to the U.S. in the summer of 2013 just after becoming China’s president, to meet with Obama for two days of informal talks that resulted in an agreement limiting HFC emissions.) In early June, the EPA formally announced the Clean Power Plan, aimed to cut carbon dioxide from power plant emissions by 30% by 2030. This development showed the Obama Administration’s seriousness about using its executive branch power to limit GHG emissions.  According to Rolling Stone, “a few weeks later, a swarm of U.S. diplomats, including Kerry, Podesta and Stern, flew to Beijing for the Strategic and Economic Dialogue, a high-level diplomatic meeting between the United States and China.”  Despite private, data crunching meetings with Chinese officials, they left without a deal.  President Obama then sent President Xi “a focused two-page letter on what could be delivered during the November APEC visit to Beijing, and it emphasized the climate joint announcement.” In September, when Xi turned down Ban Ki-Moon’s invitation to the UN Climate Change Summit (going to India instead, where he and Prime Minister Modi signed new trade deals) and sent his VP in his place, little was expected from China in New York.  But behind the scenes, VP Gaoli told Obama that Xi wanted to do the deal and announced it at the upcoming APEC meeting.  This development set off a flurry of negotiation on the details that still weren’t set when Obama traveled to Beijing for the regional economic meeting.

In addition to providing a somewhat breathless account of these secret negotiations, this gripping article analyzes a number of pragmatic points about the deal.

COP20 decisionFirst is the potential political payoff from closer climate change relations between the world’s current highest GHG emitter (China) and the country it unseated for the top spot.  For the U.S. (and other developed countries), it means a breach in the UNFCCC/Kyoto Protocol wall between developed (Annex 1) and developing (nonAnnex 1) countries.  As Jairam Ramesh, a member of Indian Parliament and climate negotiator, was quoted, “In one move, Obama and Xi broke the logjam of climate politics. Until now, China has insisted that the U.S. and the EU are largely responsible for climate change. But this raises the bar for other nations.”  Of note is China’s influence on other advanced developing countries, like Brazil, South Korea, India, Mexico, and Indonesia. The deal also provides a retort to the U.S. climate change skeptic argument that any U.S. GHG reductions would be for naught given China’s high emissions.  As Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island was quoted saying, “now China is doing something pretty significant, while Republicans are still huddled in the dark castle of denial.” For China, with the dramatic announcement on the eve of COP20, President Xi had proven his diplomatic skill by cutting a deal with a world superpower while simultaneously attending to the national need to reduce China’s infamous air pollution.**  Second is the economic pay off of this deal for both countries. The stated focus on renewable energy while weaning themselves off carbon-based fuels provides clear signals from the U.S. and China to the business community about where to invest money.

john podesta in greenMost interesting for this blogger is the central role that John Podesta is credited for playing in bringing the deal to fruition.  Recall our opening question when he was hired by the Obama Administration last December?  While he may not have had an impact on last March’s special ADP meeting in Bonn, there is no doubt that he will at this February’s special ADP meeting in Geneva. And more to come in the long term, if Rolling Stone’s conclusion about his role in the next administration proves true!

 

**This news update: With asthma cases alone on the rise, the Asia Asthma Development Board says that China has the world’s highest mortality rate from asthma, with 36.7 out of 100,000 patients failing to survive.


California’s role in the US INDCs

Lima’s “Call for Climate Action,” as the COP20/CMP10 decisions have been termed, is one for the 196 UNFCCC state parties to heed when preparing their intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs) before next December’s COP21. Given that only sovereign countries may be parties to treaties like the UNFCCC, and that most of them rely on a centralized government model of governance, COP discussions on climate policy typically occur between national capitols. Even with the expanded recognition of subnational governments that took root at COP19, this continues to be the case.

jerry brownClearly Governor Jerry Brown didn’t get this jurisdictional memo. Yesterday, in a speech to inaugurate his final term as California’s governor, he called for ”a bold energy plan” (according to the NYT) that would reduce the state’s energy consumption beyond its already ambitious 2020 goals. Building on AB32, California’s landmark greenhouse gas emission statute enacted in 2006 when federal climate change regulation was at a low, Brown proposes three new state energy goals:

  1. sourcing 50% of California’s electricity from renewable sources by 2030;
  2. reducing gas consumption by cars and trucks by as much as 50% (via electric cars, thus reverting back to the importance of #1); and
  3. doubling new building energy efficiency.

To meet them, the Governor listed a number of specific strategies in his speech, including more distributed power, expanded rooftop solar, increased micro-grids, an “energy imbalance market,” improved battery storage, full integration of information technology and electrical distribution, and adding millions of electric and low-carbon vehicles.

As Governor Brown urged in his speech, “Taking significant amounts of carbon out of our economy without harming its vibrancy is exactly the sort of challenge at which California excels. This is exciting, it is bold and it is absolutely necessary if we are to have any chance of stopping potentially catastrophic changes to our climate system.” (On the catastrophic reference, see the NYT’s embedded video on drought in CA.)

Now that’s a call to action.  And one that will certainly help the Obama Administration make good on its proposed INDC pledges post COP19, recent announcement about joint China-US reductions, and use of national executive authority to achieve them — at a time when the incoming Republican Senate and House are challenging all of the above (despite a recent poll that found more than two-thirds of likely 2016 voters support the EPA’s power plant rule, including 87% of Democrats and 53% of Republicans).


Pope Francis adds his voice to religious leaders calling for climate change action

When Pope Francis gave a speech last month about the importance of collective action on climate change, it was heralded as an important step in moving the 196 UNFCCC parties from COP20′s “call to action” in Lima to inking COP21′s new agreement in Paris. Stressing that climate change’s disproportional impacts on the world’s poor present ”a serious ethical and moral responsibility” and that “we can find solutions only if we act together and agree,” the Pope declared an urgent ethical imperative to act collectively. In doing so, he pointed out the key missing ingredients for taking effective globalpope francis action: overcoming mistrust and promoting a culture of solidarity.

With an eye toward promoting solidarity, Pope Francis has committed the Catholic Church to three concrete steps. (For a more insider’s perspective on the Pope’s strategic actions for influencing the outcome of COP21 in Paris, the NYT’s Andrew Revkin recommends carefully reading this November 2014 speech by Argentinian Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, who is Chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and Social Sciences and a close friend of Pope Francis.)

First, the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, along with the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, held a workshop last May called Sustainable Humanity, Sustainable Nature: Our Responsibility.  It produced this concluding declaration signed by over 50 international and interdisciplinary experts (including US professors Edith Brown Weiss, Naomi Oreskes, and Dan Kammen). This collective statement sets out the arguments for directly tackling the dangers of our Anthropocene Age - namely, the “inequality, unfairness, and corruption” that undermines “our ethical values, personal dignity and human rights” - and lists straight forward strategies for doing so.  Among these are:

  • targeted investments in sustainable energy access, education, health, housing, sociPASS reportal infrastructure and livelihoods for the poor;
  • making energy systems more efficient and less dependent on coal, petrol and natural gas
  • focusing on human rights, the rule of law, participatory democracy, and universal access to public services; and
  • improved effectiveness of fiscal and social policies, ethical finance reform, large scale “decent work” policies, integration of the informal and popular economic sectors, and national and international collaboration to eradicate forced labor and sexual exploitation.

Next, in March the Pope will visit Tacloban, the Philippine city devastated by Typhoon Haiyan in 2012, and publish a rare encyclical on climate change and human ecology, which will be sent to the world’s 5,000 Catholic bishops and 400,000 priests, who will then distribute it to parishioners. Finally, at next September’s annual gathering of the U.N. General Assembly, Pope Francis will address world political leaders while also convening a climate change summit of religious leaders.

Since December, a lot of media attention has been paid to Pope Francis’ climate change campaign.   Much of it has focused on pushback by conservative Catholics (like U.S. politicians John Boehner and Rick Santorum, and Vatican treasurer Cardinal Pell) and U.S. Evangelical Christians.  It is true that the Pope’s climate change initiative could have a decided impact on moving people to act on their moral beliefs, even when they’ve shown reticence to act politically on climate change:  as the leader of the world’s 1.1 billion Catholics, he had a 60% global approval rating of Catholics and non-Catholics in this recent ppope francis pew grapholl, with the highest concentrations in Europe (84%), U.S. (78%), and Latin America (72%).  Given that COP20′s activities in Peru (and the social pre-COP, held in nearby Venezuela) focused attention on this region’s increased climate change policymaking and actions, that Europeans have engaged in serious climate change mitigation and adaptation commitments since the 2005 Kyoto Protocol, and that the U.S. has stepped up its international climate change engagement under the Obama Administration, the Pope’s popularity bodes well for COP21′s odds of success.

green lantern

Christiana Figueres’s assistant bringing the green lantern into the COP20 venue for the first time.

But a missing piece of this story is that the faith-based community is already well at work influencing the UNFCCC negotiations as they progress toward Paris.  In Lima, the World Council of Churches  participated at the COP as an NGO Observer Delegation and participated in COP20 side events and at the nearby People’s Summit.  Its work, based on the Interfaith Summit on Climate Change held last September in New York, produced a final statement of the Interfaith Summit that was officially presented to the UNFCCC on December 11th. On the day before – singled out as the U.N.’s Human Rights Day - a panel hosted by several faith-based organizations (the WCC, Religions for Peace, Quaker United Nations Office) featured Reverend Henrik Grape of the Church of Sweden. Starting it all off, the green lantern that we witnessed arriving at the venue on November 30 marked the end of fasting by religious and environmental groups in Fast for the Climate.  So the Catholic Church’s full-court press from Lima to Paris presents an additional and potentially high impact strategy that will add to an already experienced ecumenical climate change team and playbook.