We have a long way to go if we are to protect the planet from climate change, the great environmental battle of our age

Forty years ago today a small band of activists who had hired a fishing boat in Vancouver set sail for a small island off the coast of Alaska. Their aim was to halt a planned underground nuclear test by the Nixon administration, and although the attempt to prevent the explosion was thwarted by the US coastguard, something else was detonated as the crew of pacifist ecologists captured the imagination of people across the world and Greenpeace was born.

Over four subsequent decades Greenpeace has deployed a mix of non-violent direct action, investigations and mobilisation to highlight environmental threats and offer imaginative and effective solutions to protect the planet. We’ve been on the oceans putting our bodies between harpoons and whales, our campaigns against the dumping of toxic waste at sea have seen the introduction of international laws that now prevent it, and our rainforest campaigns have slowed the mass commercial exploitation of forests across the globe. More recently we were central to the successful campaign to block a third runway at Heathrow. Our campaign against new coal-fired power stations saw six activists who climbed the smokestack at Kingsnorth in Kent acquitted in court after they convinced a jury that their attempt to block carbon emissions were justified. Soon afterwards the UK government announced an end to new unabated coal plants in Britain.

But while we’re happy to mark our successes on today’s anniversary, this is no time to celebrate. We’ve done much, but sometimes it feels like the past 40 years have been a preparation for the greatest environmental challenge we humans have yet faced, the one that will define success or failure for our movement: climate change.

This week scientists from several leading institutes are reporting on the state of the Arctic sea ice – that white cap at the top of the world that acts as a global air conditioner by reflecting most of the solar radiation that hits it, keeping the planet cooler than it otherwise would be. In the lifetime of Greenpeace the summer volume of that vital sheet of floating ice has fallen from around 17,000 cubic kilometres to just 4,000. If Greenpeace exists four decades from now it is likely we will be campaigning for a planet that looks radically different from space, one with open ocean surrounding the north pole in the summer months.

I was in the Arctic this year. I was jailed for climbing on to an oil rig off the coast of Greenland and demanding an end to the drilling of exploratory wells by UK-based Cairn Energy, which is hoping to hit some of the billions of barrels said to lay untapped under the Arctic. It is a sign of how far we environmentalists still have to go that governments and businesses see the disappearance of the sea ice not as a grave warning to humanity, but as an opportunity to extract more of the very fuels that got us into this mess in the first place. My climb on to that rig, with 20 other men and women from around the world, forced Cairn to publish its deeply flawed plan for cleaning up an Arctic oil spill, but with Shell preparing to send its rigs to the same region next year we have on our hands one of the great environmental battles of our age.

By scaling that Arctic rig I wanted to make an important point. I am an African, my hometown of Durban could not be much further from Greenland, but the warming at the top of the world is of as much relevance to the lives of my countrymen and women as it is to the people of Scandinavia. The same can be said of deforestation in the Amazon, coal-burning in India or industrial overfishing in Europe. The consequences of our exploitation of the Earth’s limited resources do not respect borders. Our world is now interconnected, but our biosphere always has been. When it comes to protecting the global environment for the next generation we really are all in it together, so unless we act together in places where Greenpeace has not long existed, this battle will be lost.

That means changing the way we operate, it means shifting our resources southwards so we’re no longer so heavily represented in North America, where we began, and in Europe where we came of age when the French government sunk our flagship Rainbow Warrior, when our colleague Fernando Pereira drowned. Today we have expanded our campaign teams to China, Senegal and South Africa which is helping us co-ordinate our work so we can pressure the same targets across several continents at the same time. The threats we face are global, our opponents are often global corporations, the media that carries our message is changing rapidly and no longer marries up to the lines on a map. So we too need to be truly global.

But ultimate success will be achieved when we are no longer necessary. I have no more idea of what we will look like in 40 years than did our founders in 1971. But I fear the fight to defend the Earth and its inhabitants against mindless exploitation will be as relevant and necessary as it is now.

• Kumi Naidoo is the executive director of Greenpeace International

Scientists with different politics press politicians to talk straight on greenhouse risks.

Felicity Lawrence suggests people should reduce meat consumption in favour of soya and meat substitutes but notes this has never been a popular idea (A never-ending love affair?, 10 September). Although she touches on price, sustainability and health, she misses one important point about why people eat and will continue to eat meat – it tastes great. Meat is a delicious and integral part of a varied diet which should also include fish, fruit and vegetables. The NFU wants people to eat more fruit and vegetables – we support the five-a-day campaign – but we also want people to understand the merits of eating a well-balanced diet.

The article also looks at intensive farming but fails to acknowledge that some British agricultural land is unsuitable for arable or vegetable crops. This grazing land can only be productively managed with livestock. We are a grass-producing nation so livestock will always have an important role in allowing our pastures to produce healthy, tasty and sought-after products which remain very good value for money.
Peter Garbutt
Chief livestock adviser, NFU

• In the hills of Northumberland, and in hillier, wetter areas of the UK, the crop that grows best is grass. People can’t eat grass, so we rear animals which can, and then eat them. Many of these sheep and cattle are reared outdoors, for all or much of their lives, and this system of farming helps to maintain the countryside as we know it. Local farmers are starting to turn back to traditional British beef shorthorn cattle, which can be finished off on grass and don’t need to be fed indoors on expensive cereal-based fodder for the last few months of their lives. Animals reared humanely, and eaten locally, are important. By all means eat meat in sensible quantities, but better still pay more for the best product, keep farmers farming, and keep the animals in our fields.
Bridget Gubbins
Morpeth, Northumberland

Pulling an elaborate prank, the CYCC highlighted Canada’s shifting climate education strategy  - and then launched one of our own. Starting at 7:00 this morning, organizers with the CYCC orchestrated an elaborate hoax by re-releasing an Environment Canada Climate Change education program from the 1990′s. The prank drew attention to shifting government priorities on climate change … Read more

Alta Bicycle Share has been chosen to run the program, which officially begins next summer.

Hoax highlights climate inaction, launches youth led education project Ottawa, Ont. – September 14 2011 — A group of concerned youth successfully impersonated representatives of Environment Canada this morning by announcing the relaunch of a discontinued climate change education program. What a Difference a Degree Makes, a module delivered to elementary school students during the 1990′s, … Read more

“Jesus Christ! Let’s not argue about the sex of angels.” I stared across the table at Guy Saint-Jacques, not believing what I’d just heard Canada’s chief climate change negotiator say. Up until now our meeting had been tense but we’d all kept our emotions under control. Now Saint-Jacques was angry, “I will meet with you … Read more

Climate is central to business strategy of 68% of the world’s 500 largest companies, compared with 48% last year

A majority of the world’s largest firms are taking action on climate change as part of their business strategy for the first time, a survey has found.

The 10th annual Carbon Disclosure Project, which analysed responses from 396 of the 500 largest companies in the world, found more than two-thirds (68%) now say they put climate change central to their business, compared with 48% last year.

Almost half (45%) are now reporting they have cut their greenhouse gas emissions as a result of steps they have taken to tackle carbon, up from less than a fifth (19%) in 2010.

The Carbon Disclosure Project report, written by PwC, also said there was a link between higher stock market performance and action on climate change, with those that have a strong focus on the issue providing investors with approximately double the average return over the period 2005 to 2011.

Tesco was the only big player from the UK which made it into the top 10 for both disclosing information and taking action on climate change, joining the likes of Bank of America, BMW, Sony and Philips Electronics.

But UK companies British American Tobacco, natural gas business BG Group and GlaxoSmithKline also made it into the list of major corporations which performed well on addressing climate change, entering the 2011 Carbon Performance Leadership Index which includes just 29 top businesses.

Major companies which are still not disclosing climate change information include Amazon.com, Apple, Bank of China and Russian government-owned oil giant Rosneft.

The CDP report suggests that rising oil prices, risky energy supplies and growing recognition of the returns on investment in cutting emissions have made climate change a more important issue in the boardroom.

It says that 59% of companies reported that the cost of schemes to reduce emissions such as energy saving projects in buildings, installing low-carbon power and changing the behaviour of staff, were recouped within three years.

Almost three-quarters of businesses (74%) who responded to the survey now have emissions reductions targets, up from two-thirds (65%) in 2010.

Utilities companies have the best average climate change performance while energy companies lag behind other sectors, with fewer setting targets, taking action or disclosing information.

Paul Simpson, chief executive of the Carbon Disclosure Project, an independent organisation which tracks corporate information on climate change, said: “The improved financial performance of companies with high carbon performance is a clear indicator that it makes good sense to manage and reduce carbon emissions.

“This is a win-win for business – the short returns on investment many emissions-reducing activities have, can help increase profitability.

“Companies yet to take action on climate change will have to work hard to remain competitive as we head towards an increasingly resource-constrained, low carbon economy.”

David North, global climate change champion at Tesco, said: “We have been cutting emissions for years, and as a result have reduced our energy costs by more than £200m annually – a win-win for business and the environment.”

The report found that the vast majority (93%) of companies who responded with information have senior executives or board members responsible for climate change.

And almost two-thirds (65%) offer financial rewards to staff for taking action on climate change.

Alan McGill, PwC sustainability and climate change partner, said: “We’re seeing the highest levels of board oversight and engagement on climate change strategy ever, with significant increases in the levels of monetary incentives linked to achieving targets.

“Companies are linking action on climate change to their employees’ work and wallets, from the boardroom to the office floor. It’s a shift we could not have imagined 15 years ago.”