The Conference of Parties has chosen a somewhat ironic setting; aside from not being an ideal party hotspot, prime ministers and lawmakers are to gather and discuss international climate law in the most greenhouse gas emitting country in the world.

Qatar’s booming economy, recently accredited to the wave of events that they’re hosting (2022 World Cup, Exxon Mobil Open, Arab Games, and the current bid for the 2020 Olympics) isn’t to blame for keeping Qatar comfortable in first place on the table of greenhouse gas emissions as Qatar has had the same position since the drafting of the Kyoto Protocol started in 1992.

The other, perhaps less obvious piece of irony in the destination is the fact that what will be debated at the COP18 – international legally binding climate law, with concentration on greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption, will not affect Qatar in any way, shape, or form as Qatar is considered to be a ‘developing nation’ by the United Nations, and is thus exempt from climate law currently imposed by the Kyoto Protocol.

At such high-level events transport is on everyone’s mind as getting to the conference is often seen as a necessity for success. But with only one public transport company (whose buses are almost never on time), one wonders whether the visitors and legislators will see Qatar as it is, or as it should be: an Earth-loving eco-haven with an impeccable transport system of chauffeured private cars and shuttle-buses

It’s worth noting, that despite Qatar’s status as a ‘developing country’, it wins the gold in development. It should be noted that Qatar also comfortably wins another gold medal when it comes to international tables, as it boasts the highest GDP/capita (Purchasing Power Parity) in the world, according to the IMF.

This is the point in time where the word ‘development’ must be redefined. Although former Secretary General of the UN has been quoted to say “A developed country is one that allows all its citizens to enjoy a free and healthy life in a safe environment.” , there is no established designation for the term ‘developed country’. Is the situation in Qatar really comparable to the situation in Somalia? Women’s rights, education, literacy rates and health care quality in Qatar greatly surpass that of Somalia. It is this very clause that also exempt China, a G8 nation, a member of the UN Security Council, and the third largest economy in the world, from abiding by the Kyoto Protocol until 2011.

Governments can make countless statements about their commitment to tackle climate change, and the Qatari government has echoed these international commitments. Developments have been made, and regulations have been introduced, especially in the construction sector, but I’m yet to see any in the transport and energy sector. In fact, I rarely see buses in this country, the sole form of ‘public’ transport. My series, Memoirs of a Greensha, follows these developments. But who watches the watcher? Without legal binding to clear, concise cuts, these regulations mean nothing. Without a clear target, there’s no way we can hit the bulls-eye and save our planet.

There are many things that divide us as humans – religion, beliefs, thoughts, and ideologies. These things somehow always cause culture shock when I travel. Luckily, there’s one thing that always feels like home: the universal plastic addiction. From sporks to chopsticks, plastic bags to plastic hair extensions, we have somehow managed to integrate this evil leach into every inch of our lives, and Doha is no exception.

Doha, however, shines in the realm of plastic addiction. It seems that the eco-messages plastered around the city that I mentioned in my first post  are also plastered on plastic. During one of my exploration trips at Souq Waqif, the local traditional market here in Doha, I was given a bag that had a funny little stamp on the bottom of it: BIODEGRADABLE PLASTIC.

This shocked and puzzled me – since when does the country with the highest greenhouse gas emissions per capita in the world use biodegradable bags at its local market? I continued my excursion throughout the local malls. What I found was astounding: whether it was Carrefour, Express, or the local supermarket around the corner from where I’m staying, all the plastic bags were in one way or another plastered with a message that makes them seem environmentally friendly.

I fail to understand how plastic, a derivative of crude oil, an unsustainable resource, is friendly in any way, but I could be wrong. Saying that plastic is ‘environmentally-friendly’ just because it’s biodegradable is like saying that living under the poverty line can be good for you because it teaches you to be frugal, or that having cancer is perfectly fine because it may or may not go away after a few dozen rounds of chemo therapy. Sure, you’ll be traumatised, hurt and in pain, but it might be gone after a while. Except it’s not; you can’t control getting sick or being poor, but you can control your use of hostile plastic.

I tried so hard to silence the cynical voice in my head. Qatar is still a developing country; I cannot in my right mind expect it to completely phase-out any and all things plastic. So I stopped and went back to what many believe are the core environmental values, our three R’s: reduce, reuse and recycle.

As I grabbed my reusable canvas bag one day to pick up a few things for work, I aimed to reduce my usage of plastic bags, and reuse my canvas bag. I thought that aiming for two birds with one stone was never this easy, but life has a way of proving me wrong. I got the craziest looks from the shopkeeper when I politely refused that soft crunchy plastic bag. “But it’s biodegradable! Look!” she exclaimed, pointing her acrylic nails at the green print. Knowing this would be a never-ending argument, I smiled and walked I way. When I got home, I found out that she had sneaked in a plastic bag anyway.

So I moved on to the third pillar of environmentalism: recycling. After a chat with one of the locals, I found out that Qatar was looking at recycling their million dollar football stadiums that they’re building for Qatar 2022.  Props to them, much respect. In the words of Russell Peters, I will ‘take it and go’, something I don’t usually do, but this situation is special. After all, I questioned every person I met in Doha about recycling plants in the city, only to receive the same look that the shopkeeper had given me. The calls to the three companies I found online went unanswered.

Maybe my research skills need polishing, maybe the people I met hadn’t lived in Doha long enough to know where the recycling corners are, but this experience emphasises a fundamental flaw in our production line – we advocate for the three R’s, when we can take a lesson from the first R (Reduce) and suffice ourselves with one word: rethink. Rethinking the way in which we operate, the way we design, build, create, and live will create this new realm that is naturally green. In this realm, we won’t have to print ‘biodegradable’ on our plastic bags because we won’t need them in the first place. Our products can naturally have handles that allow us to carry them. – It’s a hell of a lot easier than finding recycling plants.

Update: Qatar aims at 36% waste recycling capacity by 2016 (http://www.qatar-tribune.com/data/20110505/content.asp?section=exclusive1_1)

Memoirs of a Greensha is a joint project between Khaleejesque magazine and The Green Initiative.

2012 will bring a lot of new challenges and opportunities, including many firsts in the region. The good news is that you don’t necessarily have to reside in the region to join us! All you need is interest, passion, dedication, and a stable Internet connection.

Click here for the Arabic version of the application

Click here for the English version of the application.

If you have any questions, mail them to: info@TheGreenInitiative.ME

In the smouldering heat of Doha’s summer, I interned with Oryx Advertising Group. Oryx is a leading publishing house and is also the only publishing company in Qatar to come out with four monthly magazines. Whilst working here, I was given the chance to work on a project that interested me. It is for this reason I chose Green Programme for Schools – GPS.

GPS is an initiative by Msheireb Properties, in association with Qatar Today Magazine; it’s the largest and most engaging school programme in Qatar and will commence in September 2011. The mission of GPS is to reach, inspire and reward both students and schools based on their eco-consciousness. GPS aims to reduce the carbon footprint of schools in Qatar whilst simultaneously educating the youth about the importance of engaging in eco-friendly practices. This will be achieved by strategically placing pledge boards, suggestion boxes, and creative stickers all over the school which would reinforce the importance of conservation. Each school will be required to create a GPS team comprising faculty, students and parents; a student and faculty member will be further nominated as a GPS ambassador. For a year, these schools will be carefully monitored by GPS involving officials from Qatar Green Building Council, Msheireb Properties, Qatar Today Magazine and other technical members. The school which reduces water and electricity consumption the most will be awarded the ‘Eco School of the Year’. That’s not the only way to win a prize! Other environmental initiatives will be rewarded such as the ‘Best Eco-Idea’, ‘Most Energy Efficient’, and more.

The feedback so far has been brilliant; with the expected success of the competition, it is likely likely be an annual event, benefiting both the youth and the environment.

I have been researching Green Schools around the world and some schools have been extremely innovative. A personal favorite is Fezeka High School in South Africa, who built their own wind turbine from recycled materials. In the West, it is found that Green technology is heavily depended upon. Many schools use high tech solar panels for electricity, rain water to flush the toilets and hydroelectricity to power appliances. Whilst this is admirable and efficient, is it realistic for Qatar? Though it is financially viable, I do not believe it is sufficient to rely on technology alone. Technology is not the solution to all our environmental problems, it is simply an aid. This is why I believe it is important to be educated about the impact your actions have on the environment and how you can lead a more sustainable and eco-friendly life. GPS aims to teach youth practices that have the potential to be carried out beyond school. Once youth learn how to conserve water at school, they can go home and repeat the behavior. They might even tell siblings about the importance of conservation and who knows what that might lead to? Qatar’s very own Green-volution perhaps.

To make your own pledge, or for more information, please go to www.facebook.com/GPSQatar or email greenprogrammeforschools@gmail.com We would love to hear your thoughts.

Water is beautiful. It guards our land, it helps us tan, it nourishes us and it tastes great. Sadly, water statistics makes me cringe, and there are plenty of them. The GCC region is one of the most water-deprived regions in the world. Somalia’s recent drought, which has been described as the ‘worst in Africa’s history’ has grabbed headlines in recent weeks, but what about our GCC’s own water and marine-life crisis?

I’ve been a long-time advocate for raising awareness about the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, an artificial (non-touristic) island twice the size of Texas made from plastic debris and other pollutants that just floats freely in the Pacific Ocean. As such, I was extremely excited to visit The Pearl, Doha’s own artificial island, The Pearl.

The Pearl (image via 'nexthomeqater.net')

The views, the aroma, the feeling – it was all breathtakingly beautiful. However, I couldn’t help but feel guilty for the duration of my visit-  thinking of all the natural coral-life ad marine life that had to migrate and move away to make room for all the designer boutiques on this artificial island. Marine life has already suffered greatly since Desert Storm in 1991, where thousands of barrels from Kuwait’s oil wells were leaked into the ocean. Since then, mangrove coastal areas and sea grass habitats have been depleted by more than 35%. With The Palm Islands (in Dubai), The Pearl, and all the other artificial islands planned, compounded with the already-existing ocean pollution, one can only wonder the atrocities that marine life is suffering.

I’ve written before about the liquid electricity phenomenon which the GCC relies on heavily to obtain their drinking water (desalination plants). For such an energy-intensive process, one would think that regular tap water would be perfectly safe to drink. Sadly, The Qatar Tourism Authority advises visitors to boil tap water before they drink it, “if in doubt”. However, the general consensus from interviewing people seems to be that tap water isn’t safe, and many rely on bottled drinking water for all their water needs, even cooking. This further adds to our dangerous plastic addiction. I guess the fact that Qatar is aiming to recycle 38% of its waste by 2016 makes it all right.

It’s worth noting, however, that the citizens and residents of Qatar are in fact eco-conscious. I started my job at MercyCorps this week where we’re planning the Global Citizen Corps’ international summit. Instead of relying one single-use plastic water bottles, the office discussed providing the participants of the summit with reusable water bottles that they can refill from the water drinking taps as they’re on-the-go.

For the next week, I’ll be drinking tap water. Let’s hope I live long enough to write next week’s post.

Memoirs of a Greensha is a joint project between Khaleejesque magazine and The Green Initiative.

This is part one of a three-part seris about life as an environmentalist in the most greenhouse-gas emitting country in the world, Qatar. For the rest of the series, click here.

 

Ever since I started The Green Initiative 2 year ago, I’ve taken a number of exciting challenges, but nothing as exciting as this: for the coming six weeks, I’ll leave the country that has been my home for the past ten years (Kuwait) to live in the most greenhouse-gas emitting country in the world – Qatar.

Having just finished high school, I wanted an exciting summer. Living in what is arguably the hardest place for an environmentalist sounded like a deal, and having been to Europe, hiked a mountain along the French-Swiss border, and experienced the sacred shopping trip at Oxford Street in London, it was time for change.

Eco-promotion in Doha

  

In 2007, Qatar topped the world tables of greenhouse-gas consumption with a staggering 58.01 tonnes per capita. This number is more than double that of the country the country that sits comfortably in third-place at 25.09 tonnes (down from 35 tonnes in 2005), Kuwait. Figures show that the majority of this is due to over-dependence on fossil-fuels, natural gas and the ‘liquid-electricity’ phenomenon (obtaining water from an energy-intensive desalination process), but surely something else has got to give.

Qatar has been making headlines for the past few years due to their impressive recession-defying economic development, but if our resources suffer at this rate in the name of development, then is the country (and region) really developing? Is economic development the driving force behind this frightening number? How much is marine life suffering with Qatar’s recently ‘opened’ artificial Pearl Island? These are the questions enticed to move and explore.

After a brief delay of my flight due to the marvellous dust, I landed at Doha International Airport. Indeed, it felt like Europe – not only because of the friendliness of the staff, but because it was cold. Really cold. But what struck me was that as I strutted around in my thick wool polar bear hat, is that airport personnel took leisurely strolls, clearly accustomed to this ‘weather’.

A.C's poking out of walls

  

 

My fascination with the air-conditioning system of Doha only grew larger as I made my way home. As I observed the beautiful architecture of the buildings which combined the vintage and modern aesthetic, I couldn’t help but notice wooden blocks poking out of windows. Apparently, they’re split air-conditioning units, and they poke out of the newest buildings in the best areas too.

Why am I fascinated? Because air-conditioning is an energy-intensive phenomenon that has plagued the GCC region for years, and is responsible for over 20% of our electricity usage. Central air-conditioning systems, as I was accustomed to in Kuwait, are 40-60% more efficient that singly unit systems, and thus may account for the wide gap in emissions between Kuwait and Doha. However, why is a country that is developing as rapidly as it is, using such an outdated method for something the people rely on so much? Beats me.

What baffles me even more is that Qatar has topped the world tables since 1990, and thanks to the windows open in the Kyoto protocol, they haven’t been set any emission-reduction targets. Although Qataris are considered the richest in the world, Qatar is still considered a ‘developing nation’ and thus is not subject to emission cuts under climate law.

I cannot deny that there are a number of eco-friendly businesses and government initiatives taking place right now. Qatar even bid to host the 2012 UNFCC conference, where governments decide a global agenda to fight climate change, such as the Kyoto Protocol aforementioned. Two months ago, the conference for the Sport and the Environment opened in Doha, under the auspices of Sheikha Moza. I read through a couple of the catalogues and books from the conference, which were ever so impressive. Too bad the last book I read, the Qatar Sustainability Assessment System’s annual report, was a 200-page single-sided book: a symbol of waste. However, billboards promoting green-living are plastered all around the city of Doha. Classic case of two steps forward, one step back.

Got any tips? Tweet them to @YaraWazir

 

Memoirs of a Greensha is a joint project beteween Khaleejesque magazine and The Green Initiative.

The truth is that no one should have to go through what I’m going through now. Not now, not never. The UNHCR estimates that there are 15 million refugees right now. Sadly, we’re looking at a new generation of refugees: climate refugees. The American Association for the Advancement of Science predicts there will be 50 million climate refugees by 2020.

Knowing first and foremost what being a refugee feels like, I feel responsible for every single negative thing that will happen to them in their future, and in the future of their children. It is simply not fair that those who cause the least damage suffer the most. There is no way that our actions and irresponsible thinking which lead to this situation can be justified.

There’s a certain dichotomy between climate refugees and political refugees; the situation in Palestine which drove my grandparents out of their country was a war instigated by infinite wants and finite resources: the Israeli government continued to occupy Palestinian villages, breaking their own words and the borders which were agreed upon in 1978. Unfortunately the mindset of ‘not enough’ is still employed to this day in our consumerist society. In contrast, the issue of climate refugees is an interesting mix of over-dependence of fossil fuels, mixed with a little of the industrial revolution and the natural expanding of the universe. However, there’s no denying that both situations could have been stopped by strong, serious international intervention, saving millions of lives.

Climate refugees already began fleeing their countries (there’s even a film about it). The good news is that we have the chance to curb this situation. By addressing this international issue today, we can change the situation tomorrow.

The solutions for avoiding stripping thousands of people from their countries and their identities mirror the solutions for the global financial crisis: higher efficiency, smarter energy sources, less waste and more thought in design, manufacture, and implementation would not only stimulate the economy by creating thousands jobs,  but it would also help our environment greatly These hefty investments would ensure a more sustainable future for our children, and curb the number of climate refugees. Who knows, we could even prove the UN wrong.

I’m not attempting to reverse the current situation of climate refugees because I want to avoid overpopulation, overfishing, the devastating effects the issue would have on the global economy, or the strain it would put on the Earth’s resources - I want to stop this because there is no reason that any person in this world deserves to go through what I go through every single day. There is no reason that a person should have to hear about how unbelievably beautiful their land is, read poetry about how it smells, its beauty, and pure well-rounded general awesomeness, and not be able to see it with their own eyes, not be able to feel it with their own touch, and not be able to eat their countries’ olive trees.

I started The Green Initiative over two years ago with a solid mission: to raise awareness about climate change through art. For the past two years, people have been asking me the golden question: why? My would often be a joke about how I want to find a solid job once I graduate with my Chemical Engineering and Environmental Protection degree, or that I’d like to be able to discuss climate change politics more frequently, but deep down I always knew that the reason I wanted to transform apathy into action was to protect future generations from feeling what the Palestinian refugees, and all refugees in general feel today: lost.

The power of the people and self incineration has been proven by Bouzizi of Tunisia, who by sparking a match-stick on his clothes sparked revolutions across the Middle Eastern region. It’s time for people to stop waiting around for governments to take action, and to take action into their own hands

I’m not asking you to set yourself on fire. In fact, please don’t; combustion releases a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere, which is a greenhouse gas and therefore would render this article counter-productive. Instead, I want you to stand up and admit that there are enough wars in this world displacing people, enough people killing people, and enough fear and threat of death being bread within our communities for us to displace even more human beings with our war on nature. We’re dying at the cost of our own pollution and we need to change that. Sustainable living and green-thinking is no longer an action that changes your life; it’s an action that saves lives.

We have to carry each other now.

This piece was first published oh Khaleejesque magazine.

I’ll admit, when I first quit meat it wasn’t about animals rights or the environment or anything even remotely inspirational; I simply didn’t like the smell or the taste. Eating meat was the equivalent to water boarding and torturing all 5 of my senses at once, and so I quit. But as time passed and I started working on environmental causes, I found out that the meat and poultry industry emits more greenhouse gases than the automobile industry, at which point, I quit anything and everything related to meat, poultry, and fish.

What’s even more shocking is the ridiculous amount of energy it takes to produce these slaughtered animals; over 32,000 calories are required for each 920 calorie steak. That is 32 times the amount of energy you receive, compared to vegetarian options, such as tofu or soy meat, it only takes 8 times as much energy to produce these healthy alternatives.

The inefficient use of non-renewable energy isn’t the only damage caused to the environment by the n

otion of meat, but water use is equally wasteful. Cows, as you probably know, eat grass and grains. Both require water, and plenty of it. With the impending water crisis affecting our nations, especially a country like Kuwait that faces extreme water shortages due to our obsession with washing our Porche’s daily, even if we know a sandstorm is coming our way, it is vital that we think twice about water. Over 1 billion people in the world live in extreme water shortage; it is ridiculous that 13% of o

ur water resources are taken up by the livestock industry. You can change this.

Although research shows that vegetarians are less likely to suffer from obesity, coronary heart diseases, high blood pressure or type II diabetes, I’ll be the first to admit that being a vegetarian is not the easiest decision one can make, especially considering we live in a society whose moto when it comes to food is ‘a meal with no meat is no meal at all’, but it grows on you, just like vegetables grow on the ground

There are also countless vegetarian support mediums out there, including Meatless Monday’s and Fish-Free Fridays. You could always start by cutting your dead animal-intake slowly, then go cold turkey – no pun intended.

Will you stop being a chicken, not eat cows, and take the pledge? Will you support ending extreme poverty, hunger, disease, climate change, violence, war and animal suffering, or will you chicken out? Take the pledge and let us know by using the hashtag #coldturkeyED on twitter.

This piece first appeared in Khaleejesque magazine to commemorate Earth Day 2011 

This House Believes That Refugees from effects of Climate Change should be assigned to countries that emit the most CO2.

The British Parliamentary style of debating is a format in which four teams, of two members each, debate against each other. There are two teams on either side of the table – i.e. The Proposition (proposing the motion) and The Opposition (opposing the motion). The first proposition speaker starts the debate by defining the motion and setting the stage for the debate by giving the other teams a clear idea of what is being proposed. Then speakers from opposite sides of the table speak, in turn, and give reasons in support of their side. In addition, they are also required to rebut the opposing side by questioning their arguments giving reasons for why their arguments may be invalid.

I happened to be on the Proposition – i.e. arguing in favour of the motion. As it is clear, the debate sought to punish countries emitting large and excessive amounts of carbon dioxide that harms the environment and contributes to Global Warming. But from our side of the table, it also aimed to put pressure on such countries to reduce carbon emissions. We argued that Climate Change refugees, who usually happen to be small-scale farmers, have no work left to do because of the actions of industrialised nations. Excessive rain or famine due to Global Warming leaves them without an income to support their family. It is therefore the duty, we argued, of those countries that are responsible for these emissions to bear the burden of these refugees and provide food, shelter and benefits to their families. In turn, this would put pressure on responsible countries to reduce carbon emissions in order to avoid the large-scale entry of refugees.

But this was just the beginning of the argument. The opposition started by questioning whether we can even identify the effects of Climate Change to such precision. Famine is a phenomenon known for centuries and it is in fact not possible to point to CO2 emissions as the cause of such calamity. And even if we can identify the effects of carbon emissions, which country can we point the finger towards? In addition, the growing number of countries that emit large amounts of CO2 happen to be nations like India and China – where governments are unable to support their own poor population. How would they, if forced to do so, support refugees from other countries? There is also the question of hatred towards Climate Refugees by locals of whichever countries they are assigned to. There is a danger of spreading anger against these refugees and of initiating uproar against them in developed countries such as the United States, for example. This would mean that moving to another country would only make their lived worse.

And the arguments went on. Points were made, and points were countered. The proposition argued that in this age we are in fact capable of identifying precisely the effects of carbon emissions and global warming. But do we really want to send people to countries where they will have a worse quality of life? Would such steps speed up the adoption of treaties such as the Kyoto Protocol and the Copenhagen Summit by pressuring carbon emitters?

Whatever the conclusion, I think it is important for us all to think about the issue of carbon emissions and the effects it has been having on people around the world. Hundreds of people are left without livelihood and thousands may follow. Profit-making businesses are often untouched by these changes and continue to emit gases that harm the environment. Governments, on the other hand, are left without progress due to bureaucracy and powerlessness of international diplomacy.

It is, in the end, in the hands of common people like you and I to step up to the challenge and take actions to protect our ecosystem. Relying on governments to come up with satisfactory solutions to the issue is no longer a feasible option. It is upon us to pressurise both businesses and governments alike, and do our what we can to combat Climate Change.