Maybe we've seen "The LEGO Movie" too many times.
But we couldn't help breaking into an enthusiastic rendition of "Everything is Awesome" when we came across these Hong Kong-themed Lego photos by 36-year-old photographer Ric Tse.
Made by combining Lego minifigures, props and images, Tse's "Legography" series captures the spirit of Hong Kong in toy form, whether it's Louis Vuitton-toting shoppers, a Chinese lion dance or punters checking out the betting prospects at the horse track.
Some come with a side of social commentary that perhaps only a local would recognize, such as "Rubber Duck Fever" or "June Fourth Vigil," both featured in the above gallery.
Tse, a freelance photographer with a full-time gig in property management, says inspiration usually strikes when he's out shooting photos of daily life in Hong Kong.
"During the shoot, whenever I capture something interesting I think, 'Would it work with Lego?' If that's a yes, I'll just do it."
Turns out, Tse wasn't even a big Lego fan when he started out.
"It was during an annual cleanup that my girlfriend, now wife, found an old box of Lego," says Tse, who produced his first Lego-based photograph in 2010.
"I had never played with Lego bricks before and found it interesting. I held a tiny figure and thought, if I could use this in my photography it would be interesting as well. That's where the concept came from.
"Since then, it's evolved to focus on people, incidents and things with a unique Hong Kong flair."
Four years on, he's created 30-some Leography images.
If you're thinking about befriending Tse in the hopes of getting invited over to play with his massive Lego stash, bad news. Your kids likely have a more impressive collection than he does.
"I probably only have five or six boxes of Lego. But because of Legography, I've quite a library of figures -- about 80 of them."
Tse says getting the background of his photos to look realistic takes time and experience.
"The ones that are taken in an actual outdoor scene with Lego figures -- it takes about a week to plan, prepare and buy props," he says.
"The second type are taken at home with a background image taken by me.
"The production process includes taking photos from the actual location, buying the props and setting up the shooting scene at home.
"As it is more complicated, it usually takes about two weeks."
For example, his "Sweet Memories" image features a Lego van that he's covered in signs and menus from a photo of an actual Hong Kong Mister Softee truck.
Piece of your heart? Ric Tse's "Sweet Memories."
The photo is sure to hit locals with a vanilla-flavored cone of nostalgia, as these once popular moving ice cream purveyors have been around since the 1970s.
His "June Fourth Vigil" image, a recreation of the annual commemoration of those killed in Tiananmen Square, was his most challenging work to date.
"It took me three weeks," he says.
"I wanted to create the special candle vigil effects, so I bought some tiny LED light bulbs and parts. Then, I studied how to light them up from the Internet.
"It was also a lot of work to set up the scene as I had to find ways to hide the wires."
MORE: Is "Affordable Art" really all that affordable?
"We had a crowd around his photos all weekend"
Tse's Legography photos are currently on display at the city's Picture This gallery.
Founder Christopher Bailey says it was an easy decision to exhibit the pics, as the venue seeks to promote young Hong Kong photographers who may otherwise struggle to find outlets for their work.
"We feel that Ric is very clever and insightful and captures in a very unusual and creative way the essential spirit of Hong Kong," says Bailey.
In "Victory!" Tse commemorates the annual Chairman's Sprint Prize.
"He is of that 1980s generation who are concerned about the direction Hong Kong is taking and often feel unable to make their voices heard properly.
"Ric's photography and Legography is his very creative outlet to show his views."
The response to Legography has been huge, he adds.
"At the recent Affordable Art Fair, held last month, we had a crowd around his photos all weekend and sold them extremely successfully. We were pleased that the buyer profile was so broad, from kids to retirees and of all nationalities."
Bailey says the gallery doesn't limit how long a photographer's work is on display so there are no plans to remove Ric's exhibition any time soon, though it's a popular series and prints are selling fast.
"They are limited editions and we anticipate that some of them will sell out quite quickly. One image has already sold over 20 pieces from an edition of 30."
Picture This, 212, 2/F, Prince's Building, Central, Hong Kong; +852 2525 2803; open Monday-Saturday, 11 a.m.-6 p.m. Tse's 20" x 13" Legography prints (edition of 30) cost HK$3,000 ($386) each. Smaller works of 12" x 8" (edition of 100) go for HK$1,200 ($154).


text:
Same-Sex Marriage: Equal Dignity in the Eyes of the Law, US Supreme Court Rules.
President Obama Calls Lead Plaintiff in Same-Sex Marriage Case, Jim Obergefell
A day after a landmark ruling cementing the foundation of Obamacare, the US Supreme Court handed yet another victory to
President Obama's administration by ruling that same-sex marriage is a civil right that states cannot ban.
Until recently, legalizing same-sex marriage was unthinkable in the United States. This did not deter gay rights advocates who have
continued their struggle, supported mostly by Democrats and Civil Rights activists. Several prominent business executives, such as
Patient Protection and Affordability Care Act, PPACA or Obamacare here to stay.
US Supreme Court ACA ruling celebration
Patient Protection and Affordability Care Act, PPACA or known as Obamacare, has once again survived the challenge from Republicans, after a 6-3 decision ruling by the US Supreme Court, or SCOTUS. Obamacare will be the health care law that will solidify President Barack Obama's legacy for generations to come.
The ruling was about the provision in the PPACA authorizing federal tax credits for eligible Americans, whether they live in states
"I am proud to be gay", says Apple CEO Tim Cook; Cites Martin Luther King
Tim Cook - Apple CEO
"I'm proud to be gay, and I consider being gay among the greatest gifts God has given me, " Apple CEO Tim Cook has said in a letter written for Bloomberg Businessweek, while publicly coming out as gay and declaring his support for equality.
Tim Cook, though the CEO of perhaps the most prominent company in the World today, has managed to keep a low profile on his personal life. In the letter he says that his decision to publicly acknowledge his sexuality was intended to "bring comfort to anyone who feels alone" and to "inspire people to insist on their equality."
Equatorial Guinea Teodoro Nguema Settles Kleptocracy Case in US
The United States (U.S) Justice Department announced on Friday 10, 2014 that Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue, the son of the African dictator of Equatorial Guinea Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo has settled the embezzlement, corruption, money laundering case. According to the United States Justice Department, Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue, who is the Second Vice-President to his father, has agreed to a $30 million settlement to resolve the U.S. government's accusations that he used money plundered from his country to acquire massive assets in the Unites States, including private jets, Ferrari, a $30 million mansion in Malibu, California, and Michael Jackson memorabilia such as a crystal-encrusted glove.
What Are We Proud Of?

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
GSHS
The Student News Site of Glenwood Springs High School
How do we Decrease the Rising Suicide Rates?
Kyley Fishman, Editor/Reporter
Suicide is the second leading cause of death among young people in the United States and represents a significant public health crisis worldwide. The national response has been little more than a shrug, apart from a slightly raised awareness whenever celebrities – such as lead singer of the band Linkin Park, Chester Bennington, or renowned chef Anthony Bourdain – are tragically found dead by their own doing. The current situation of rising suicide rates needs to be confronted and to do so, we need to address the biology of suicide and understand what causes it.
The lack of empathy for those who are suicidal or have committed suicide creates a negative stigma. Today, many view suicide as being selfish, an easy way out, and to some, a sin, rather than a failure of proper help, acceptance, and understanding. The same goes for mental health disorders.
"People are afraid," the Colorado Health Director Dr. Robert Werthwein said. "They're afraid to speak up and say 'I'm struggling with this mental health issue, I'm thinking about hurting myself', they're afraid they are going to be labeled… we have a long way to go before we can treat mental health the same way we treat physical health."
In Colorado, websites have been released to target mental health, hoping to not just slow down the rates of suicides but to also help the person or persons suffering. Thanks to organizations such as the Colorado Crisis text line (text 38255), Below the Surface, Nami, In our own Voice
,and Ending the Silence, Colorado is helping combat stigma and bring mental illnesses out into the open.
Although Colorado and other states are doing their part, mental health is still the leading cause of suicides. Up to one in 10 people that are affected by mental illness attempt to take their lives.
In 2017, the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention released statistics stating that each year, an estimated 5899 youth, aged 15-24, kill themselves, 90% of whom have a diagnosable psychiatric disorder. We can argue that this is a crisis of mental health care, that people are not getting the service they need; and that the proposed solutions are better therapies, more effective drugs, and more widespread access to medical treatment.
These are understandable solutions to the epidemic and they do help, however, even as more and more people seek treatment, suicide rates continue to increase. This is due to the lack of vigor some of us address towards it, and the negative stigma surrounding it.
If you ask the average teen to talk about theirs or others mental health, chances are they either don't know too much or they are uncomfortable to talk about it. Considering the fact that one in five teens suffer from mental health, according to the Child Mind Institute, this absence of conversation becomes a problem.
"It's one of those things you don't want to bring up," said Johnathon Webster, a sophomore at Glenwood Springs High School who suffers from severe anxiety/selective mutism, as well as bipolar depression. "I don't want to make my parents less proud of me, and it relates to the stigma of it. Mental health and suicide are both like, say, smoking cigarettes. You don't want to tell your parents but you know you should, so it's just a constant internal battle. There's no way to get help."
In 2015, Mental Help released a survey questioning whether older generations and teens understand mental health. Breaking down the data, 63% of people 18-24 felt informed, and just 48% of those older than 55 felt the same way. Despite being the same group that rated themselves the least informed about mental health, individuals 55 and older are most likely to talk to friends and family about their own health, while 58% of respondents ages 18-24 are the least likely to do so. That alone is a head-scratcher. Why would teens feel so uncomfortable about talking to their own family?
In her study, Abera Mubarak along with Jimma University College of Health Sciences interviewed parents about their conceptions of mental health and their choice of treatments for it. An astounding 73.9% mentioned magic, curses, and sins were causes of mental health problems. These parents beliefs towards their children's health would not only negatively impact their relationship with the child, but would also impact their behavior towards seeking help. Many, if they did decide to communicate with their parents about their struggles, were met with resistance or dismissal. Many thought that their child's hyperactivity, anxiety, or depressive thoughts were instead just normal psychiatric issues in a child, instead of illnesses such as ADHD or depression.
"I feel alienated whenever I mention things," said an anonymous student from Glenwood Springs who suffers from depression, anxiety, and ADHD, "I feel like a problem that they think is solvable. They think that because they're older than me, they understand what's going on, then refuse to see it a different way because they're right. In reality, they just make me feel ashamed for even talking about it in the first place. It honestly just makes me feel more depressed and scared to say anything."
Published in 2016, The University of Toronto, over a period of 1.7 years, collected data from 596,712 people worldwide, asking the question 'Could Mental Health be Overcome'. An underwhelming 7% of respondents believed that it could be. The misconception of mental illness is continued to be seen when 15% of respondents also labeled people with a mental illness of either depression or anxiety to be a "burden to society".
With these kinds of negativity, it's no wonder that the stigma surrounding mental illnesses continues, and the lack of exaltation towards it is only increasing the rate of suicide for teens.
"There's a stigma about having society accept you for no matter who you are," said Dr. Werthwein, "Whether if you're straight, gay, no matter what your race is, feeling ashamed is not a great thing to feel. It really drives people who feel like they can't talk to their loved ones or friends or anyone really too dark thoughts. The more society is acceptable to people for who they are and what they have, the less we'll see people driven towards feeling shame."
It's important to have an open relationship, not just with the child, but with the parents as well. It creates building blocks of trust, bonding, as well as making a family closer knit. By choosing to push away their own child, along with their struggles and opinions, it not only makes the person struggling struggle even more but also causes more problems to arise. A parent's top priority should be the well-being of their child, no matter what their own viewpoints may be. This isn't only the parent's responsibility, but others as well. If someone says that they want to kill themselves, harm themselves, or want to talk about their mental health, the person they are choosing to counsel with should listen. One should not push them away and wipe the topic aside, pretending everything is ok when it really isn't. It is a cry for help, even as little as it seems, and by brushing it aside, they are also telling that person that they are not important enough to be allowed to talk.
The fact that a person, who wants to talk and get help, has been reduced to a state of unimportance is unacceptable. By continuing the negativity and stubborn views of suicide and mental health, people are not only discriminating against acceptance but also disregarding it altogether. People should be able to live having the knowledge that their own friends and family will not turn against them for voicing their struggles, and frankly, that fact that many can't is ridiculous.
The stigma around both mental health and suicide gets even more toxic and complicated when you throw Social Media into the already jumbled pile of issues.
Social Media is a relatively new phenomenon that has swept the world off its axis in the past decade. During the swift rise of technology, there was also another thing rising right along with it: suicides. The question as to why hasn't yet been answered but a recent study does suggest one factor that is largely connected to social media use. As more and more posts on social media have been depicting people's "perfect bodies" and "perfect lives", these unrealistic standards begin to take a negative toll on a teen's perception of themselves.
"I think a big part as to why suicide rates have increased so rapidly is social media," said Webster. "We're constantly surrounded by body standards that most of us can't fit, along with people saying crude things. Sometimes people just don't want to live in a world filled with so much hate and expectations."
Although many know that images are both photoshopped and toned, the trends for body shape and images is still a thing isn't only in females minds, but males as well.
"We need to understand that just because the tv shows and movies and magazines show perfect people and perfect lives, we don't have perfect anything, "said Gabi Bartnik, a sophomore at Glenwood Springs High School. "We really just need to accept ours and others differences."
Social media has also begun to romanticize suicide, an example that of Netflix's 13 Reasons Why series. Research published by Jama International Medicine showed that Google searches relate to suicide (such as "how to commit suicide" "suicide hotline number" "teen suicide" etc) had increased, the most common being "how to kill yourself". The suicide-focused show was blamed for more than five teens suicides/suicide attempts in 2017.
Intrusive thoughts and anxiety are normal human emotions. However, just like physical illness, mental illness can worsen if left untreated. There is no reason for a person who's struggling to feel alone. People are, and always will be, different, and these differences are what truly bond us with each other and what will help create a better future.
By focusing not only on reducing negative standard in social media but also making both society and the home a more comfortable place to live and talk in, suicide rates and mental health will begin decreasing. Whether or not we personally have our own mental issues or suicidal thoughts, we can all be part of the fight that helps brings mental struggles more into the awareness.
Despite one's best efforts, however, it won't happen overnight, and people struggling with mental health will continue to face adversities. But the reality is, we are all subjected to being allowed to feel safe and accepted in our own skin. What a person struggles with does not label them, and as a society, we need to learn to accept and adapt. This is, after all, what humanity does best.
If you or a loved one are having suicidal thoughts, please call:
Or text:
If you would like to raise money, speak of your own experiences, or learn more, go to:
Below the Surface
I'm Alive
Glenwood Springs High School
What team are you rooting for in the Superbowl?
I don't watch football
I don't really care, I'm watching the commercials
I'm rooting for the half time show
Glenwood Springs High School 41 - Conifer Lobos 20
Prom: is it Worth it?
Impressive Showings for GSHS Baseball
A Uneasy Specimen Comes to GSHS
GSHS Mock Team Brings Home the Win at Regionals
February Announcements 2019
Super Bowl 'Entertainment' Review
This is not a Cartoon. This is the Real World.
Demons Find Success on the Road
Student to watch: Nolen Johnson
To Change, Or Not To Change?


text:
Partnership Builder (Common Voice)
Remote US, San Francisco Office, Remote Canada, Toronto Office, Berlin Office, Remote Germany, Remote UK
Half a million people around the world have contributed to Mozilla Common Voice. They are language activists, software engineers, researchers and artists and they speak more than 100 global languages. MCV is part of a wider effort within Mozilla to mitigate bias in Artificial Intelligence by building open tools and innovative, practical resources. The Common Voice datasets have been downloaded hundreds of thousands of times by technologists around the world in all kinds of organizations.
We are supported through multi-sector investments from government, foundations and technology companies.
We are looking for an exceptional partnership builder to support the Common Voice team. Your role will be to identify partners from across the ecosystem, with a particular focus on technology organizations of all scales. You will work closely with the Product Lead and Technology Community Manager to map the speech AI ecosystem, and build relationships with high potential partners. Your work will be guided by our ethos of movement building, and you will be accountable for significant funding goals - targeting at least $1.5 million to be spent on the platform over 3 years - alongside understanding our particular governance needs as an open-source community project.
You will initially be engaged for 12 months, at 2.5 days per week, with the possibility of extension and/or expansion subject to performance review & organizational priorities.
Build a pipeline of partners for the project, with a particular focus on supporting data consumers to invest back into the project (especially: for profit technology organizations, research entities with substantial grants etc)
Engage internally with collaborators around the organization, ensuring there is alignment and clarity
Engage with the Product Manager around any MCV platform needs to support efforts - for example changes to partnership pages, or tapping into Donate stacks through the Foundation microsite
Deepen partnerships with said organizations and guide them through to fruition
Identify other aligned funding opportunities, for example tenders and CFPs
Spot opportunities beyond financial investment for collaboration and ecosystem building (for example, events, training, mobilisation, competitions or grant-making)
Structure insights for the Product Lead to deeply understand enterprise partner needs, in order to shape platform capabilities and the wider project roadmap
Work with the Technology Community Manager to identify new data partners, and raise our profile with them
Deeply listen to, and grapple with, the governance and community issues entailed by particular engagements - we are a community-first project
Represent MCV in spaces of interest, including conferences, networks and events
You must
Be tenacious, self-motivated and difficult to daunt - you will be the first person doing this job
Have the confidence and credibility to represent and advocate for MCV with senior external collaborators and high impact partners
Have fantastic communication and interpersonal skills - easily adapting to very different cultures and processes
Be ferociously organized, with great attention to detail - ensuring a great exploration and on-boarding experience for partners
Be credible with technologists and technical partners who want to talk in detail about MCV's platform and dataset
Have 3+ years of senior experience in sales, partnerships, fundraising and/or account management
Technology experience would be a significant advantage
Salary and Benefits Information:
The Mozilla Foundation is dedicated to fair and equitable compensation for our staff. We aim to pay a competitive and market-based salary that takes into consideration the responsibilities and requirements of the role. We aim to offer at the midpoint of our salary ranges for the purposes of inclusivity and fairness of our offer process and ensuring internal equity. We do not ask for, or take into account, salary histories in our offer process.
The base salary ranges, along with mid-point, for this role in each of the key countries in which we employ staff is listed below. We also welcome applications from all backgrounds to this role
We target the 75th percentile of market pay as a salary band midpoint for all levels, with 10% either side of the midpoint to create a salary range.
Germany: €38,987 - €47,650 (mid-point: €43,319)
UK: £23,442 - £28,651 (mid-point: £26,047)
Canada: $44,833 - $54,796 (mid-point: $49,815)
US: $42,154 - $51,522 (mid-point: $46,838)
Depending on the successful candidate's location, we may also add in a geographic differential to this base salary that accounts for local job market weighting. This differential is applied to the above ranges. Below are some of the common cities in which we hire staff along with representative examples of salary ranges, mid-point, and the geographical differential applied:
Inner London: £25,552 - £31,230 (mid-point: £28,390)
Toronto: $48,375 - $59,125 (mid-point: $53,750)
New York: $46,706 - $57,086 (mid-point: $51,896)
The range for your specific location will be discussed in screening conversations if your application is successful.
We offer the following benefits:
Health, Dental, and Vision Insurance
Life Insurance + Accidental Death & Dismemberment
Short-Term Disability and Long-Term Disability
Retirement Plan contributions
20 Paid Time Off days per year (prorated) + your birthday
Company Holidays + Shutdown
Wellness budget
Professional Development budget
Top up program for Parental leaves
Benefits are subject to change at any time at the discretion of Mozilla Foundation.
Mozilla Foundation Hiring Practices:
Mozilla understands that valuing diverse creative practices and forms of knowledge are crucial to and enrich the company's core mission. We encourage applications from everyone, including members of all equity-seeking communities, such as (but certainly not limited to) women, racialized and Indigenous persons, persons with disabilities, and persons of all sexual orientations and gender identities and expressions.
We are an equal opportunity employer and value diversity. We do not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, age, marital status, veteran status, or disability status.
We will ensure that individuals with disabilities are provided reasonable accommodation to participate in the job application or interview process, to perform crucial job functions, and to receive other benefits and privileges of employment. Please contact us to request accommodation at accommodation@mozillafoundation.org.
Group: C
About Mozilla
In the early 2000s, the Mozilla community built Firefox. We toppled the browser monopoly, gave users choice and control online, and helped create a healthier internet.
Twenty years later, Mozilla continues to fight for a healthy internet — one where Big Tech is held accountable and individual users have real agency online.
Mozilla's work is guided by the Mozilla Manifesto. Founded as a community open source project in 1998, Mozilla currently consists of two organizations: the 501(c)3 Mozilla Foundation, which leads our movement building work; and its wholly owned subsidiary, the Mozilla Corporation, which leads our market-based work. The two organizations work in close concert with each other and a global community of tens of thousands of volunteers under the single banner: Mozilla.


Voters could decide to ban the cutting of any California tree that began growing before the state entered the union in 1850 if a coalition of social, religious, civic and conservation organizations succeeds in putting the initiative on next year's ballot.
The measure would apply to all state-owned forests and private land, but could not restrict logging on federal land. It is opposed by the state's logging industry.
The coalition estimated that less than 3% of native forests in California are still standing, and said most of them are protected in state parks. The initiative would safeguard the remaining ancient and old-growth trees.
The Citizens Campaign for Old Growth Preservation said supporters include singer Bonnie Raitt and actor Woody Harrelson.


Retail $227.00 Amp up Regimen results with this revitalizing system.
The REDEFINE AMP MD™ Derma-Roller features micro-exfoliating tips that safely and gently maximize the effectiveness of applied products to amp up your results and visibly firm skin. REDEFINE Intensive Renewing Serum empowers skin's own renewing process for more refined, firmer-looking, smooth skin with less visible lines and wrinkles.
Intensive Renewing Serum merges powerful Peptides with Retinal-MD™ Technology, offering the highest potency Vitamin A available without a prescription. Its Calcium buffer system minimizes the potential for irritation, making the serum gentle enough for all skin types.
For best results, use the REDEFINE AMP MD System on face and/or neck at least three times a week. The Derma-Roller is not meant for sensitive skin or for use on active acne, and should not be used with SOOTHE, UNBLEMISH or REVERSE Lightening Regimens.
Step 1: Use REDEFINE AMP MD Derma-Roller after cleansing and toning your face in the evening. Gently roll over skin with four to 10 passes, changing direction with each pass. Your total rolling time should be no more than one minute. For best results, use the roller on one section of your face at a time (forehead, left side, right side, chin and neck), completing each section before moving on to the next.
Learn more about using the AMP MD Derma-Roller.
Step 2: After using the AMP MD Derma-Roller, open a capsule of REDEFINE Intensive Renewing Serum by twisting off the tail and smooth the serum over your entire face and neck, avoiding the eye area. Do not wash off. Avoid contact with fabrics, which may turn yellow by using this Retinoid product.
Fill Cleansing Vial with very warm (not hot) water to marked fill line. Drop one AMP MD Purification Tablet into water and immediately immerse AMP MD Derma-Roller in purification solution, making sure that the roller handle is locked securely into the cap of the Cleansing Vial and that the roller head is fully submerged.
When blue color fades, after approximately 15 minutes, remove the AMP MD Derma-Roller and rinse thoroughly under very warm running water. Do not allow AMP MD Derma-Roller to remain in purification solution overnight.
WARNING: When using Intensive Renewing Serum avoid contact with fabrics, which may turn yellow by using this retinoid product.
Cyclopentasiloxane, Dimethicone, Polysilicone-11, Ethylhexyl Hydroxystearate, C12-15 Alkyl Benzoate, Retinal, Palmitoyl Hexapeptide-14, Retinyl Palmitate, Hydroxyapatite, Bis-Ethylhexyl Hydroxydimethoxy Benzylmalonate, Ethoxydiglycol.
Potassium Monopersulfate, Sodium Perborate, Sodium Sulfate, Sodium Carbonate, Sodium Bicarbonate, Pentasodium Triphosphate, Sodium Lauryl Sulfoacetate, PEG-180, Corn Syrup Solids, Magnesium Stearate, Tetrasodium EDTA, FD&C Blue #2, FD&C Blue #2 Aluminum Lake (CI 73015).
This product contains persulfates, which are a known allergen.
Can I use the REDEFINE AMP MD System on my neck and décolletage?
Yes, these areas show the signs of aging as well: loss of firmness, increased pore size and visible fine lines and wrinkles. Use the REDEFINE AMP MD System as directed and be aware that the neck and décolleté area may be more sensitive than other areas. We recommend that you follow directions and use as tolerated.
My skin is sensitive, but I am concerned about aging skin. Can I use the REDEFINE AMP MD System?
The AMP MD Derma-Roller is not recommended for use on very sensitive skin. Sensitive skin, by definition, has a compromised barrier and needs to be strengthened with the OTC skin protectant ingredients Dimethicone and Allantoin, as found in SOOTHE Sensitive Skin Treatment.
However, after using the SOOTHE Regimen for two to four weeks, you can patch test Intensive Renewing Serum after using the SOOTHE Sensitive Skin Treatment (Step 2) as part of your evening Regimen. Begin using it twice a week and increase to every night as tolerated. A broad-spectrum sunscreen is the most important weapon in your anti-aging arsenal. SOOTHE Mineral Sunscreen SPF 30 is optimally formulated to protect sensitive skin from accelerated aging due to the sun.
How often should I use the REDEFINE AMP MD System?
For best results, we recommend using the REDEFINE AMP MD System as directed at least three nights a week, and up to nightly as tolerated.
Can I use the REDEFINE AMP MD System in the morning?
For best results, we recommend you use the REDEFINE AMP MD System in the evening because sleeping increases the receptivity of its beneficial ingredients. In the morning, always use sunscreen because the Retinal in our REDEFINE Intensive Renewing Serum may increase photo-sensitivity. Also, sun exposure diminishes the efficacy of Retinal.
Can I use the REDEFINE AMP MD System with other products?
Can you share the AMP MD Derma-Roller with someone else?
The AMP MD Derma-Roller is recommended for use on one person.


Eagle Gate College is committed to safeguarding your privacy online. Please read the following policy to understand how your personal information will be treated as you make full use of our many offerings.
What personally identifiable information does Eagle Gate College collect from me?
Eagle Gate College collects information in several ways from different parts of our Web sites. Some personal information is gathered if you request information online. Eagle Gate College may ask for personal information such as your name, email address, gender, zip/postal code, occupation, industry and personal interests.
In addition to requesting information, we may ask you for personal information at other times, including (but not limited to) when you download a file (such as a .PDF file) from us; when you ask us to contact you; when you join our mailing list; register for a campus event, and when you report a problem with one of our sites or services. If you contact Eagle Gate College, we may keep a record of that correspondence. Eagle Gate College may also occasionally ask users to complete surveys that we use for research.
What are cookies and how does Eagle Gate College use them?
Automate certain areas of the Eagle Gate College web sites or online forms.
Measure certain traffic patterns, which areas of the Eagle Gate College web site you have visited, and your visiting patterns in the aggregate. We use this research to understand how our users' habits are similar or different from one another so that we can make each new experience on the Eagle Gate College website a better one. We may use this information to better personalize the content, and promotions that you and other users will see on our sites.
Eagle Gate College also collects IP Addresses, browser information and other computer information to report aggregate information to our marketing department.
By modifying your browser preferences, you have the choice to accept all cookies, to be notified when a cookie is set, or to reject all cookies. Please refer to your browser's help for further information about your options for controlling or monitoring cookies.
How does Eagle Gate College use my information?
Eagle Gate College's primary goal in collecting personal information is to provide you, the user, with the information you are requesting. The College does research on our users' demographics, interests, and behavior based on the information provided to us upon registration, or from our server log files. We do this to better understand and serve our users. This research is compiled and analyzed on an aggregated basis.
With whom does Eagle Gate College share my information?
Eagle Gate College will not disclose any of your personally identifiable information except when we have your permission. Eagle Gate College may disclose account information in special cases when we have reason to believe that disclosing this information is necessary to identify, contact or bring legal action against someone who may be violating Eagle Gate College's Terms of Service or may be causing injury to or interference with (either intentionally or unintentionally) Eagle Gate College's rights or property, other Eagle Gate College users, or anyone else that could be harmed by such activities. Eagle Gate College may disclose or access account information when we believe in good faith that the law requires it and for administrative and other purposes that we deem necessary to maintain, service, and improve our products and services.
Eagle Gate College does not sell or rent user information to anyone.
Please keep in mind that whenever you voluntarily disclose personal information online, you may receive unsolicited messages from other parties in return.
Unfortunately, no data transmission over the Internet can be guaranteed to be 100% secure. As a result, while we strive to protect your personal information, Eagle Gate College cannot ensure or warrant the security of any information you transmit to us or from our online products or services, and you do so at your own risk. Once we receive your transmission, we make our best effort to ensure its security on our systems.


@aperez Good point, makes sense to me. Thanks!
@dewyatt Thanks for the suggestions! I have applied them now that I pushed the update to 0.9.1 — except for the "pkgconf" one because I think it's more correct to always install the ".pc" file in case third party programs which prefer to use pkg-config want to link in the library. The ".pc" file won't be installed when pkg-config is not present, if I am understanding the CMake files correctly. Anyway, it's only a build-time dependency, so shouldn't be a big deal.


Performance Studies Focus Group is seeking proposals for our pre-conference, SPECTACULAR LABOR, to take place Wednesday, August 10, 2016, 9am to 7pm and Thursday, August 11, 2016, 8am to 12pm at a TBD location in the Chicago area.
Our keynote speaker will be Joshua Chambers-Letson, Assistant Professor of Performance Studies at Northwestern University.
We seek proposals for academic papers, live performances, and experimental formats.
Proposals are due 4 May 2016.
For more information, contact pre-conference planners Steve Luber and Jasmine Mahmoud, sluber and j-mahmoud.
Announcing again, VASTA's 30th annual conference, Dynamic Dialogues and Connections, to be held in Chicago, on August 8 to 11, 2016. Our conference directly precedes ATHE's, so members from both organizations can enjoy a dynamic variety of panels, workshops, and speakers. Visit our website for the exciting offerings from featured presenters at www.vasta.org.
Also this year, many of our sessions will be eligible for Speech-Language Pathology CEUs, so connect with your colleagues on the science side of the professional voice to spread the word.
Based on Acting and Singing with Archetypes (Rodgers and Armstrong, Limelight Editions), this innovative work uses mythical and legendary journeys as the basis for opening doors to unexplored vocal, physical and imaginative expression. In addition to the journeys, participants will apply the discoveries to text and explore ways to integrate the work in the classroom.
Participants will receive 40 hours of training with six certified university teachers.
Certification in the work is available.
For more information, visit JanetRodgers.
As educators, scholars, and artists, we work in a variety of formats, so we invite proposals for a variety of presentation formats, including (but not limited to) presentations, workshops, round-table discussions, panels, or performances.
Following significant discussion and interest at the 2015 ATHE conference, the theme "Directors' Work: Directing Alternatives to Psychological Realism" emerged. This Pre-Conference seeks to offer a venue for participants to share, question, and engage with strategies, methods, issues, and questions surrounding the work a director undertakes when approaching texts and productions that move beyond traditional psychological realism. These styles – whether they be in regard to Brecht, Beckett, devising, and others aesthetic modes – often require the director to approach a text differently, and this Pre-Conference seeks to explore those approaches.
Listing in conference mobile app, with link to website and contact information.


text:
Saint of the Day - Saint Nicholas of Flue
St. Nicholas of Flue (1417-1487) was born in Switzerland, a devout child of pious parents. At the age of 21 he joined the army and fought in local battles. In his mid-twenties, at the advice of his parents, he married a similarly pious woman and had five sons and five daughters. He served the public by holding various civil offices, and was esteemed by all for his moral integrity. After 25 years of marriage, upon discerning a special call from God, and with the consent of his wife, he went to live in a nearby valley as a hermit. He built a dwelling out of branches and left it only for daily Mass. He wore a tunic and kept his head and feet bare, spending his days in prayer and penance on behalf of the local people. With permission from the parish priest he abstained totally from food and drink, without any negative effect on his health, which was confirmed by the Church as a miracle. He lived in this manner for 20 years and became known as a visionary and a prophet. Distinguished persons from all over Europe came to him for counsel. The civil authorities built him a cell and chapel and assigned him a chaplain. The saint intervened as an arbiter when a civil war was imminent, resulting in the enduring union of the French and German-speaking parts of Switzerland. His hermitage became a place of pilgrimage after his death. St. Nicholas of Flue is the patron saint of Switzerland. For more information please see morningoffering.com/2021-03-21/.


text:
Photo by IISD/ENB | Kiara Worth
COP24: Key outcomes agreed at the UN climate talks in Katowice
Multiple Authors
Simon EvansJocelyn Timperley
COP24 KatowiceCOP24: Key outcomes agreed at the UN climate talks in Katowice
This year's COP24 annual UN climate conference concluded late on Saturday evening in Katowice, Poland, after two weeks of tension-filled talks.
Nearly 23,000 delegates descended on the coal-tinged city with a deadline for hashing out the Paris Agreement "rulebook", which is the operating manual needed for when the global deal enters into force in 2020.
This was mostly agreed, starting a new international climate regime under which all countries will have to report their emissions – and progress in cutting them – every two years from 2024.
But as countries wrestled with the "four-dimensional spaghetti" of competing priorities – as one delegate put it to Carbon Brief – they clashed over how to recognise the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) special report on 1.5C and whether to clearly signal the need for greater ambition to stay below this temperature limit.
The final outcome included hints at the need for more ambitious climate pledges before 2020, leaving many NGOs disappointed at the lack of more forceful language. Meanwhile, new research released at the COP showed global emissions were going up, not down.
With tension mounting across the fortnight of the talks, UN secretary-general António Guterres had to visit the COP several times to force progress. Despite settling on large parts of the Paris rulebook, countries failed to agree the rules for voluntary market mechanisms, pushing part of the process onto next year's COP25 in Chile.
Here, Carbon Brief provides in-depth analysis of all the key outcomes in Katowice – both inside and outside the COP…
Polish COP
'Welcoming' the IPCC 1.5C report
Paris rulebook agreed
Rulebook – Climate pledge guidance (Article 4)
Rulebook – Market mechanisms (Article 6)
Rulebook – Climate finance reporting (Article 9)
Rulebook – Transparency (Article 13)
Rulebook – Global stocktake (Article 14)
Rulebook – Loss and damage
Rulebook – Other matters
Protests at the talks
Financial pledges
Poland's role as host of the UNFCC's annual talks for the third time in 11 years proved significant.
Its choice to hold the COP in Katowice, in the heart of the coal-dominated region of Silesia, was poignant, particularly as several coal-sector companies were chosen as partners for the talks.
Poland also announced the opening of a new coal mine in the region shortly before the conference began. Around 80% of the country's electricity currently comes from coal.
Delegates arriving at the talks were met by the taste of coal in the air and high levels of smog, as well as an accolade from the Polish Coal Miners Band. It was very quickly noted that the Katowice pavilion inside the COP venue featured walls, floors, soap and even earrings all made from coal. "There is no plan today to fully give up on coal," Poland's president, Andrzej Duda, told the opening plenary.
You couldn't make it up: Poland's pavilion at the global *climate change* annual meetings it's currently hosting in Katowice, is decorated with *coal*#COP24 pic.twitter.com/Z7Kl6s5oGE
— Assaad Razzouk (@AssaadRazzouk) December 9, 2018
However, Poland's presidency also sought to highlight the issue of a "just transition" for workers away from fossil-fuel jobs. Bert De Wel, policy officer at the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), told DeSmog UK:
"[N]ever, ever, before had climate negotiators debated so much about the impacts of the energy transition on workers and their communities."
One element of this was the Polish presidency's launch of the "Silesia declaration", signed by some 50 countries, during the first week of the COP. It was notable that this total was only around a quarter of the nearly 200 countries present, with the document adopted by acclamation rather than consensus. It was only "noted" in the final COP text.
The declaration emphasised the need for emission-reducing policies to ensure "a just transition of the workforce" that creates "decent work and quality jobs".
The Polish presidency also launched a declaration on "forests for climate", highlighting the important role of forests in reaching Paris Agreement goals. However, some NGOs expressed concern that the declaration showed signs that Poland hopes to use carbon offsets from forests to delay efforts to reduce emissions. Others noted the declaration didn't include any concrete near-term targets.
A further declaration, released jointly by the Polish presidency and the UK, targeted low-emission transport. Joined by 38 countries and 1,200 companies, it urged cooperation to "renew efforts" to help achieve "an e-mobility revolution".
A further controversy came when Poland reportedly denied entry at its border to at least a dozen COP24 participants. Poland was also criticised by Human Rights Watch ahead of the talks for introducing a new law this year which would "hamper the rights of environmental activists to protest" at the climate talks.
'Welcoming' the IPCC 1.5 report
The special report on the impacts of 1.5C global warming, published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in October, became a major source of tension at the talks.
At the end of the first week, four countries – the US, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Kuwait – delayed the conclusion of a technical plenary by refusing to "welcome" the report. Instead, they only wanted to "note" it, which led furious climate-vulnerable countries to trigger a clause which means the resolution has been postponed until the next SBSTA session in 2019.
The 1.5C report had been originally formally requested by countries at the 2015 climate talks in Paris, and the dispute on whether to welcome it came despite the majority of countries speaking in favour of the report.
In an exclusive interview with Carbon Brief, Saudi Arabia's senior negotiator Ayman Shasly sought to explain why his country was hesitant to welcome a report that had, as he claimed, "scientific gaps [and] knowledge gaps".
The wording was somewhat fudged in the final COP decision text. It did not "welcome" the report, but did welcome its "timely completion" and "invited" countries to make use of the report in subsequent discussions at the UNFCCC.
Another report also helped to set a sense of urgency at the talks. During the first week, the latest annual estimates of global emissions from the Global Carbon Project (GCP) found that output from fossil fuels and industry will likely grow by around 2.7% in 2018, the fastest increase in seven years.
At the heart of talks in Poland was the Paris "rulebook", which was mandated in 2015 to be finalised by the end of COP24. This is the detailed "operating manual" needed for the Paris Agreement to enter force in 2020.
The rulebook covers a multitude of questions, such as how countries should report their greenhouse gas emissions or contributions to climate finance, as well as what rules should apply to voluntary market mechanisms, such as carbon trading.
Two common threads ran through each area of these areas. First, whether to agree a single set of rules for all countries – with flexibility for those that need it – or to maintain the current divide between rules for rich and poor. This is referred to as "differentiation", or sometimes "bifurcation".
The second thread was the provision of climate finance to help developing nations adapt to the impacts of global warming, mitigate their emissions and participate fully in the Paris process.
Ahead of the COP, the "co-chairs" and "co-facilitators" of the technical talks had tried to improve on the 307 pages of draft rulebook text that emerged from talks in Bangkok, Thailand, in September. They had whittled this down by mid-October to a series of nine "addendums" covering 236 pages.
This left negotiators with a far larger and more technical task than they faced before the Paris COP21 in 2015. Indeed, heading into the talks at Katowice, the climate diplomats coordinating the process warned: "Time will not be on our side…there are still far too many options on the table."
Heading into #COP24, what is the state of play?
The climate diplomats coordinating the show wrote a 6pp "joint reflections note" with their take on how things stand…
"Time will not be on our side…there are still far too many options on the table".
3/https://t.co/jgpUMQFG68 pic.twitter.com/jNFyp25iMI
— Simon Evans (@DrSimEvans) November 30, 2018
Despite this time pressure, negotiators repeatedly missed deadlines for new versions of their texts during the first week at COP24. This meant technical talks spilled into week two, continuing alongside high-level ministerial sessions after having officially closed late on the middle Saturday.
Carbon Brief tracked the negotiating texts throughout the session in an open-access spreadsheet. This records the number of pages of text in each iteration, as well as the number of square brackets – indicating areas of disagreement – and the number of different "options" still on the table.
Starting with nearly 3,000 brackets before the talks began, negotiators faced an uphill struggle to move towards "clean" text – with zero brackets or options – on which all could agree.
Part way into week two the talks reached a crunch phase, with COP president Michał Kurtyka telling delegates: "The current approach to negotiations is exhausted. Many texts are stuck. From now on we will move under the authority of the Polish presidency."
In practice, this change of gears meant that the presidency took ownership of the texts – a tricky balancing act between making progress and angering those countries or blocs whose language was lost. The resulting shorter texts can be seen from 11 December in the chart, below.
Number of square brackets in negotiating texts for the Paris "rulebook" before and during the UN's COP24 climate summit in Katowice, Poland. Each column is divided into chunks for text covering separate Articles of the Paris Agreement, including Article 4 guidance on climate pledges and Article 13 reporting rules for greenhouse gas emissions and progress in tackling them. Source: Carbon Brief analysis of successive negotiating texts. Chart by Carbon Brief using Highcharts.
The chart, above, also shows some of the rulebook sections that proved most difficult to resolve. For example, these included provisions for voluntary market mechanisms under Article 6, standards for climate finance reporting under Article 9, and the rules on transparency under Article 13, which cover reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and progress in tackling them.
The Polish presidency produced a second iteration of texts during Thursday of week two. These drafts dramatically reduced the number of outstanding square brackets from more than 600 down to around 180, but left many groups unhappy.
Likely much more to say on Article 6.2 & "corresponding adjustments" to avoid "double counting" of emissions reductions, but this section is v complex / devil in detail.
One NGO source tells me: "From a very quick glance, [latest] text is bad. Very bad."
Expect noise on this. pic.twitter.com/3hCTZvNX45
— Simon Evans (@DrSimEvans) December 14, 2018
Finally, a much-delayed late-night plenary on Saturday, 15 December, signed off the rulebook with zero brackets and options remaining.
Overall, the deal tends towards single sets of rules for all countries, with wide latitude for those that lack the capacity to meet them. The 133-page rulebook text uses legally-binding language ("shall") in 260 places, compared to only 110 uses of the looser "should".
On finance, the rules are nevertheless relatively permissive, giving flexibility to rich nations in what and how they report their contributions. (See below for analysis of the key sections of the text.)
One casualty was the complex and technical Article 6 rules for voluntary carbon markets. This had been effectively held hostage by Brazil, which tried to water down rules to stop "double counting" of emissions cuts by the country where they were generated, as well as the country buying the offsets.
Unable to reach agreement, the talks instead passed the matter to next year's COP25 in Chile. The COP24 decision on Article 6 reads: "Draft decision texts on these matters in the proposal by the president were considered, but…parties could not reach consensus thereon."
Climate pledge guidance – Article 4
Countries' climate pledges ("nationally determined contributions", NDCs) are mandated by Article 4 of the Paris Agreement. The rules around what should be in them are supposed to make it easier to compare pledges and to add them up as a global aggregate.
To this end, the final decision says that all countries "shall" use the latest emissions accounting guidance from the IPCC, last updated in 2006, but now in the process of being refreshed next year.
One significant difference between the 2006 guidance and earlier versions is an update to a higher "global warming potential" for methane, says Dr Robbie Andrew, senior researcher at Norway's CICERO climate science institute. His colleague Dr Glen Peters tells Carbon Brief that a shift to all countries using the same accounting rules would be "brilliant" for researchers.
However, Dr Joeri Rogelj, a lecturer in climate change at Imperial College London's Grantham Institute, tells Carbon Brief: "Some aspects do raise concerns about the environmental integrity of NDCs [climate pledges]." He points to leeway over the choice of accounting rules:
"Under the Paris Agreement, emissions and proposed emissions reductions will be regularly compared, added up, and assessed in light of their adequacy for limiting warming well below 2C and 1.5C. This requires common rules for emissions reporting. But instead of requiring countries to adhere to scientifically robust methods, the final Katowice text now allows countries to use 'nationally appropriate methodologies', which, in all likelihood, will only be used to do some creative reporting and portray emissions of specific countries in a better light than they are. This is particularly an issue in the land-use sector."
Additionally, countries agreed that their pledges will be recorded in a public registry, based on the existing interim portal. This will continue to include a search function, despite attempts to have it removed.
There was also agreement that pledges should cover a "common timeframe" from 2031, with the number of years to be agreed later. Some current pledges cover five years while others cover 10.
*** late addition ***
Text has just gone online on the public registry. It has 3 options:
1) interim registry to be permanent
2) as above but remove search bar
3) interim reg remains interim until a decision at COP25 next year
Such a weird battle!https://t.co/Qh2Q1TDXBe pic.twitter.com/QiSqolpke1
— Simon Evans (@DrSimEvans) December 6, 2018
Market mechanisms – Article 6
The most technical area of text was on rules for voluntary market mechanisms under Article 6. This includes Article 6.2 where, for example, countries can trade overachievement of their climate pledges, as well as Article 6.4, under which individual projects can generate carbon credits for sale.
Discussions struggled to move forward throughout the two weeks in Poland, with the number of bracketed sections remaining stubbornly high (see chart, above). As the days passed, more and more details of the Article 6 rules were added to the to-do list for 2019.
Towards the end of week one, co-facilitator of the talks Kelley Kizzier told a side event: "I think we are starting to see some landing zones [for agreement], but it's still cooking." In the end, it was not to be and the whole section was deferred to COP25.
The most contentious point was on basic accounting rules to prevent "double counting" of emissions reductions by the buyer and seller of offsets. The draft text set out how each party should make a "corresponding adjustment" to their emissions inventories to reflect the trade.
"It was Brazil versus the rest of the world and they wouldn't back down," one business source following the talks tells Carbon Brief. "Brazil wanted to have its cake and eat it", the source adds.
One additional subtlety to the arguments around double counting relates to emissions cuts taking place in sectors not covered by a country's climate pledge ("outside" the NDC, as opposed to "inside" it). This matter appears to have been unresolved as of the end of COP24.
Article 6.4 is intended to replace the Kyoto Protocol's "Clean Development Mechanism" (CDM) for carbon offsets. Discussions in Poland included how or whether to carry forward the offsets, schemes and methodologies drawn up under the CDM – and whether to place limits on their use for meeting pledges under the Paris Agreement. Talks will continue next year.
This failure at COP24 will create a headache for CORSIA, the trading scheme being set up for aviation emissions. The UN's aviation body ICAO is due to start agree CORSIA rules next spring and is expected to have to remove any reference to Article 6 markets, at least initially.
One final issue under discussion within Article 6 was "overall mitigation in global emissions" (OMGE). This language was introduced by the Paris Agreement to explain the idea that carbon trading should generate a net benefit for the climate, rather than being a zero-sum game.
Early drafts included options that would have automatically cancelled up to 30% of all offsets generated. Analysts, climate vulnerable countries and many NGOs said automatic cancellation was necessary to ensure OMGE. However, later versions of the draft text made cancellation voluntary.
V significant shift in Article 6.2 voluntary mkt mechs…
NGOs / vulnerable nations were pushing hard for a % of CO2 offsets to be automatically cancelled to ensure "overall mitigation in global emissions" (left image).
Latest text only points to "voluntary cancellation" (right) pic.twitter.com/a6aaMKSXaQ
The failure to agree rules for Article 6 was "disappointing", says Gilles Dufrasne, policy officer at Carbon Market Watch, an NGO. However, he tells Carbon Brief this was a better outcome than "adopting the unacceptable position which Brazil was pushing".
According to Nat Keohane, head of climate at the Environmental Defence Fund in the US, countries will be able to move ahead with voluntary carbon trading, despite the failure to agree Article 6 rules.
The Paris Agreement says such trading should be "consistent with guidance", but does not disallow it if no guidance exists, Keohane argues. He adds that this was worded deliberately to "Brazil-proof" voluntary market mechanisms against attempts to sabotage agreement on the rules.
It is not yet known how the incoming Jair Bolsonaro-led government in Brazil will approach this issue.
Climate finance reporting – Article 9
Ahead of COP24, the rules governing climate finance reporting under Article 9 of the Paris Agreement were expected to be contentious. Yet negotiators made surprisingly rapid progress.
The rules cover Article 9.5 (reporting on the projected availability of climate finance in future), as well as Article 9.7 (reporting on money that has already changed hands). The final rules say developed countries "shall" and developing "should" report on any climate finance they provide.
With that caveat, Article 9.5 reporting of projected future climate finance is at zero brackets…
…and it is pretty loosely worded.
"an indication of new & additional resources"
etc pic.twitter.com/4QMqd7GA53
The language under both parts of Article 9 is relatively permissive, with countries allowed to report the full value of loans as climate finance, rather than the "grant-equivalent" portion of the total. Countries can voluntarily report grant-equivalent values, the rules say.
This leeway renders "meaningless" the collective goal to provide $100bn of finance by 2020, argues Brandon Wu, director of policy and campaigns at ActionAid USA.
Art 9.7 on finance acctng (incorporated into transparency) is the same as before. Opens door for counting face value of commercial loans, equity etc as climate finance. Worse than OECD methodology we've refuted since 2015. Makes collective goal meaningless. Very very bad. #COP24
— Brandon Wu (@brandoncwu) December 15, 2018
However, Joe Thwaites, an associate at the World Resources Institute (WRI), says that some countries are wary of grant equivalent reporting because the methodology for determining grant equivalence isn't clear and because it could blur the differences types of climate finance. He tells Carbon Brief:
"The fundamental thing, since some of these provisions are voluntary, is it will be important for everyone – other countries, observers, researchers, civil society groups – to be pushing and to be scrutinising the reporting, to make sure it's as fair and robust as possible."
Developed countries are instructed to report information from 2020 on projected future finance "as available", with the rider assuaging concerns that reporting might otherwise be seen to pre-judge the budgetary decisions of future national parliaments. The UN climate secretariat is asked to compile this information from 2021 to inform that global stocktake (see below).
The rules say countries should give: "An indication of what new and additional financial resources have been provided, and how it has been determined that such resources are new and additional."
This language means that climate finance is not required to come from new funding streams. These reporting rules will be reviewed in 2023.
Responding to the final decision on how countries report climate finance already handed out, Thwaites tells Carbon Brief:
"Essentially it's more granularity in terms of sectors, in terms of [types of financial] instrument used, and also contributors are being asked to say how they're ramping up their efforts – how they've progressed over time. And I think all of that is quite useful, because a lot of the reporting right now is fairly vague.
"For example, it makes it more difficult for countries to count fossil fuels as climate finance, because it'll be much easier for analysts such as ourselves and for other countries to look at this reporting and say 'oh, this is what it's ultimately for'."
Another outcome from the rulebook discussions is the decision to continue high-level ministerial dialogues every two years after 2020 and continue workshops on long term finance every two years as well. There had been "a lot of uncertainty about," this Thwaites tells Carbon Brief.
Transparency – Article 13
A key section of the rulebook covers transparency under Article 13. This describes what, how often and with which details countries should report back on their climate efforts.
It covers seven types of information, including emissions reporting, progress towards meeting climate pledges, adaptation, climate impacts and climate finance provided or received.
This was one of the main areas where countries fought over whether to differentiate the rules for rich versus poor countries.
The final rulebook applies a single set of rules to all countries – a key red line for the US and EU, which had wanted to hold the likes of China to the same reporting standards as they face. This single set of rules is to be applied with flexibility for "those developing country parties that need it in the light of their capacities", language that comes from the Paris Agreement itself.
One of the main debates had been how to decide which developing countries needed this flexibility. The final rulebook allows countries to "self-determine" whether they need flexibility or not, using a compromise approach proposed in early 2018 by veteran former US negotiator Sue Biniaz.
Those making use of this flexibility have to say why they need this flexibility and for how long they expect to continue needing it. The US and some others had hoped to put a time limit on this flexibility, but ultimately lost out, even as they secured the common reporting rules they wanted.
The rules add that countries using this flexibility should say how they will improve over time. They "should…to the extent possible identify, regularly update and include" information on improvement.
Emissions must be reported no more than two years in arrears – for example, reporting in 2018 would cover the years at least up to 2016. Countries will have to report using "common reporting tables" and a "common tabular format" to be developed by the technical body SBSTA.
The new-style reporting rules kick in for all countries from 2024, one year after the first global stocktake of progress (see next section). This means the first stocktake will have to be based on less complete and comparable information.
Nevertheless, the new rules bring a "massive intensification" of biannual reporting requirements, says Yamide Dagnet, project director on international climate action at the World Resources Institute. Previously, biannual reports have only been required of the 44 developed nations listed under Annex I and Annex II of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Dagnet tells Carbon Brief:
"The rules on transparency can be seen as quite transformative, in the sense that we move away from a bifurcated approach where you had different rules, different requirements for developed countries, different for developing countries. And the level of robustness and stringency was very different, and the clarity was not as good. Now everybody has agreed to have one reference document, guidelines – and these guidelines should call for best practice. And if developing countries cannot because of the lack of capabilities, they can explain why, and highlight the gaps and needs, and figure out an improvement plan to do better, with better data, better decisions, better action."
CO2 equivalent: Greenhouse gases can be expressed in terms of carbon dioxide equivalent, or CO2eq. For a given amount, different greenhouse gases trap different amounts of heat in the atmosphere, a quantity known as the global warming potential. Carbon dioxide equivalent is a way of comparing emissions from all greenhouse gases, not just carbon dioxide.
CO2 equivalent: Greenhouse gases can be expressed in terms of carbon dioxide equivalent, or CO2eq. For a given amount, different greenhouse gases trap different amounts of heat in the atmosphere, a quantity known as… Read More
One apparently minor, but potentially important detail commits countries to report emissions in "CO2 equivalents", using Global Warming Potentials over 100 years. Dr Michelle Cain at the University of Oxford's Environmental Change Institute tells Carbon Brief this is "a backwards step".
In a statement, Cain and colleagues explain that long- and short-lived greenhouse gases affect the climate in "fundamentally different" ways. Reporting them together using the single metric of CO2 equivalent "seriously misrepresents" the climate impacts of methane, they add. "If you lump it all together you can't say what warming will be [caused by those emissions]," Cain says.
Cain adds that this could be done without new metrics as long as reporting separates out short and long-lived pollutants. Another scientist agrees that separate reporting would be useful, telling Carbon Brief that using new metrics could risk changing the meaning of existing targets.
Global stocktake – Article 14
A key part of the Paris Agreement is its five-yearly pledge-and-review cycle, a process described more poetically by former UN climate chief Christiana Figueres as its "beating heart".
The idea is that every five years, countries come together and take stock of progress towards the long-term Paris goal of avoiding dangerous global warming. Then, with this global stocktake in hand, countries go home and return with enhanced climate pledges to fill gaps in ambition.
The final rulebook says: "[The stocktake] is crucial for enhancing the collective ambition of action and support towards achieving the purpose and long-term goals of the Paris Agreement."
These goals, set out in Article 2 of the Paris deal, include keeping warming well-below 2C and ideally 1.5C, increasing adaptation capacity and "Making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development."
Talks at COP24 were tasked with setting the ground rules for the stocktake, the first of which is set to take place in 2023.
Questions included whether stocktakes should look only at progress in cutting emissions, adapting to climate change and providing climate finance – per a strict reading of the Paris Agreement – or whether to add matters, such as the "loss and damage" caused by unavoidable climate impacts (see below).
The rules also set the structure for the stocktake process, which is to be divided into three stages: Information collection, technical assessment and consideration of outputs.
The technical assessment is an important feature, says Rogelj. He tells Carbon Brief:
"The COP24 outcome puts in place a 'technical dialogue' process that will inform the global stocktake. This process is very similar to the 'structured expert dialogue' that was conducted from 2013-2015 [on the 1.5C target] and was instrumental in raising the ambition of the Paris Agreement. This is encouraging."
Loss and damage
Loss and damage caused by the unavoidable impacts of climate change was a touchstone issue for vulnerable countries, such as small island developing states. In the end, the rulebook mentions this question in several places, though with less weight than many hoped.
The global stocktake rules do add loss and damage to the mix, having at one point in the talks relegated the issue to a footnote. The stocktake rules now say it "may take into account, as appropriate…efforts to avert, minimise and address loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change".
The transparency rules also say countries "may, as appropriate" report on loss and damage:
Yamide Dagnet from WRI tells Carbon Brief:
"We knew that [loss and damage] is a very sensitive issue for developed countries…It was a big fight for three years. And it's good to see that…loss and damage is allowed into the global stocktake. It is also…included into the transparency report to be provided every two years. That was not easy as well."
Rules were finalised in a number of other areas, including how compliance with the Paris Agreement is to be monitored. COP24 agreed to set up an expert compliance committee that is "facilitative in nature…non-adversarial and non-punitive". It will not impose penalties or sanctions.
The committee will be able to investigate countries that fail to submit climate pledges. Regarding transparency reports covering climate finance or emissions and progress in cutting them, the committee "may, with the consent of the party concerned, engage in a facilitative consideration of issues in cases of significant and persistent inconsistencies of the information".
COP24 also agreed on how countries should report their efforts to adapt to climate change. And the COP decided that the "adaptation fund" – a financial mechanism set up under the Kyoto Protocol – should continue under the Paris Agreement.
Outside the rulebook discussions, many of debates centred around another key issue: how countries should raise the ambition of their climate pledges in order to collectively meet the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement.
Countries are set to re-submit or update their climate pledges (known as "nationally determined contributions", or NDCs) in 2020. The Paris Agreement says successive pledges should "represent a progression" on the previous one – the so-called "ratchet mechanism" – and "reflect its highest possible ambition", while also acknowledging different national circumstances. It does not concretely say new pledges should be more ambitious, however.
The Paris Agreement only becomes "operational" in 2020, but countries agreed in 2015 to "take stock" in 2018 of progress on climate action to date. The idea was that this would help boost collective ambition at the next round of NDCs in 2020.
This process was originally called the "facilitative dialogue", but was renamed the "Talanoa dialogue" under last year's Fijian COP presidency, after the Pacific tradition of collective problem-solving using stories.
Naoyuki Yamagishi, climate and energy lead for WWF Japan, tells Carbon Brief:
"On one hand, you have a rulebook. The rulebook is, basically, a design of the function of the Paris Agreement – a blueprint for the machine to function. The Talanoa dialogue is how much fuel you're going to put in it – we always call [this] the ambition."
The Talanoa dialogue began in January 2018, shortly after last year's COP, and concluded in a political phase during the second week at Katowice. It consisted of 21 (simultaneous) high-level roundtable discussions and a high-level closing plenary.
This led to a call to action issued by the presidents of COP23 and COP24, which urged "everyone" to "take forward a clear signal" from the dialogue, "act with urgency" and "recognise that we are in a race against time".
At the closing plenary, Fiji's prime minister Frank Bainimarama asked countries to increase their climate pledges "fivefold: five times more ambition, five times more action" in a bid to meet the 1.5C target by 2100 – a reference to the recent UNEP emissions gap report.
But the real battle on a Talanoa outcome was how it would be included in the final decision text, Yamagishi told Carbon Brief before the final text emerged.
In a statement issued early on in the conference, five former COP presidents called for the Katowice outcome to send an "unequivocal message" for enhanced ambition by 2020. But civil society groups became increasingly concerned that there would be a lack of concrete ambition emerging from the Talanoa.
In the end, the final text simply "invite[d]" countries to "consider" the outcomes of the Talanoa dialogue in preparing their NDCs and in efforts to enhance pre-2020 ambition.
However, another section of the text not dealing strictly with NDCs "stresses the urgency of enhanced ambition in order to ensure the highest possible mitigation and adaptation efforts by all parties". Reacting to the final text, Yamagishi tells Carbon Brief:
"I'm slightly disappointed because it's not clear from that decision that the parties are supposed to increase their ambition by 2020. There are bits and pieces in the entire decision which as a package conveys the message of enhancing ambition by 2020, but the key paragraph doesn't say that in one package."
The reason the paragraph was not strengthened in this respect was "simple", says Yamagishi: not enough parties supported it. While the least developed countries and some European countries did support it, countries such as the US, Japan, China, India did not, he adds.
However, during the COP, several countries indicated a willingness to submit increased climate pledges in 2020, including India, Canada, Ukraine and Jamaica.
A key moment came when several dozen countries from the "High Ambition Coalition" – including the EU, UK, Germany, France, Argentina, Mexico and Canada – pledged to "step up" their ambition by 2020. This will be done through enhanced climate pledges, low-emission development strategies and increased short-term action, the countries said.
There were also signs of progress in other areas. For instance, the Powering Past Coal Alliance, launched at last year's COP by the UK and Canada, announced a round of new members, including Scotland, Israel, Senegal, Sydney and Melbourne, bringing its total to around 80.
And the Talanoa dialogue did manage to introduce a positive spirit into the negotiations, says Yamagishi:
"It was actually not a negotiation per se, it was more about dialogue with a style of storytelling, and also sharing positive ideas. So that spirit didn't [previously] exist in the UNFCCC negotiations, so that was great, and it avoided the finger pointing exercises.
"…[B]ut then again it also poses the challenge, even if you had a great discussion, at the end of the day it comes down to the question whether you will act on it or not."
The so-called "pre-2020" commitments – which was first agreed by developed countries in 2010 in Cancun – remained a source of tension at the talks, albeit less so than last year.
This part of the outcome text pushes for developed countries who haven't yet done so to ratify the Doha Amendment so that it can enter into force. This would extend the Kyoto Protocol on developed country emissions out to 2020.
The decision text also "strongly urges" developed countries to increase their financial support in line with the promise to jointly mobilise $100bn per year in climate finance to poorer countries by 2020. It acknowledges that "the provision of urgent and adequate finance" will help developing countries in order to up their own pre-2020 action.
The text also "welcomes" the 2018 stocktake on pre-2020 implementation and ambition, and reiterates its decision to convene another stocktake next year. These stocktakes were part of the compromise made last year to acknowledge developing countries' frustrations on what they see as a lack of action of developed countries before 2020.
Some developing countries pushed in the talks for the global stocktake in 2023 to address implementation of the pre-Paris commitments made for 2020, if they are not met by then. However, this did not make it into the final rulebook.
COP24 video: How can the Paris Agreement stay on track in a world with Bolsonaro and Trump? A range of delegates respond, including rumoured US presidential hopeful Tom Steyer.
Civil society and protestors had a strong presence during this year's talks. As discussions began on Sunday 2 December, some 65,000 people marched in Brussels calling for more ambition on climate change.
Meanwhile, the need for energy policies to provide a "just transition" was highlighted before and during the talks by the ongoing "yellow jacket" protests in France sparked by a controversial fuel tax introduced by president Emmanuel Macron.
Another march in Katowice on the Saturday in the middle of the talks drew around 3,000 people onto the streets, overseen by hundreds of police. Participants urged negotiators to "wake-up" and carried banners saying, among other things, "clean coal is a dirty lie".
Protestors also interrupted the Trump administration's only side-event, which promoted the expanded use of fossil fuels, with chants of "shame on you" and "keep it in the ground". They then walked out of the room, leaving it largely empty.
This was the moment during the Trump administration's side-event at #COP24 when protestors interrupted to urge the panel to #KeepItInTheGround pic.twitter.com/KusY3KkjhI
— Leo Hickman (@LeoHickman) December 10, 2018
Others had the opportunity to call for action from the main plenary. Sir David Attenborough generated headlines around the world when he addressed world leaders and urged them to tackle "our greatest threat in thousands of years". He warned that "the collapse of our civilisation" is "on the horizon" without further action.
Sir David Attenborough speaking at #COP24 today ⤵ https://t.co/uREw0apnro pic.twitter.com/XfQqVvJDKw
— Carbon Brief (@CarbonBrief) December 3, 2018
Greta Thunburg – a 15-year-old Swedish activist who began a school strike that spread to hundreds of other towns – also addressed the plenary several times and, thus, became the face and voice of the COP.
"You say you love your children above all else – and yet you are stealing their future in front of their very eyes," she told leaders midway through the second week of the talks, adding:
"Until you start focussing on what needs to be done rather than what is politically possible, there is no hope. We cannot solve a crisis without treating it as a crisis."
Thunburg also called for an international climate strike on the last Friday of the summit in order to let politicians know that "we demand climate action".
"You are not mature enough to tell it like it is. Even that burden you leave to your children."
Here's my full speech in front of the UN plenary at #COP24 .https://t.co/f0gxp0h3i2#ClimateStrike #FridaysForFuture #SchoolStrike4Climate #ClimateJustice pic.twitter.com/aDhqNrlSIp
— Greta Thunberg (@GretaThunberg) December 14, 2018
A growing sore spot for developing countries was the setting of a new climate finance goal. The Paris Agreement says this should be set by 2025 and go above the $100bn per year "floor" promised to developing countries by 2020. In the end, parties agreed to start discussing this new goal at COP26 in November 2020.
Meanwhile, rich countries' contributions remain some way short of the $100bn target for 2020. Several announcements at the COP showed at least some scaling-up of finance, however.
Germany said it was making a €70m contribution to the Adaptation Fund, while smaller pledges from the likes of France, Sweden, Italy and the EU raised the total to $129m – a record annual fundraising for the fund.
Germany also became the first country to announce a concrete amount for the Green Climate Fund (GCF)'s replenishment round, offering €1.5bn – double the amount of its previous contribution in 2014. Norway also pledged $516m to the GCF, while Japan said it would consider more funding once the replenishment process officially starts in 2019. Japan also put forward diplomat Kenichi Suganuma to be the next head of the GCF, due to be selected in February.The GCF has so far received only $7bn of the $10bn promised to it in 2014 due both to the US reneging on part of its $3bn pledge, as well as changes in exchange rates from donor country currency to US dollars.
The World Bank, meanwhile, announced $200bn for its 2021-2025 climate investment programme, which doubles the $100bn given to its previous five-year investment plan up to 2020. Half the total will come directly from the bank, it said, with equal shares of this going to mitigation and adaptation. The remaining $100bn will come from other parts of the World Bank group and "mobilised" private capital, the bank said.
The World Bank was also one of nine multilateral development banks who made a declaration at the COP to "align…their activities" with the goals of the Paris Agreement.
Meanwhile, five other banks – ING, BBVA, BNP Paribas, Société Générale and Standard Chartered – with a combined loan book of €2.4tn committed to measuring the climate alignment of their lending portfolios with the aim of steering them towards the "well below 2C" target.
The UK also made several announcements at the COP. Firstly, a £100m increase in funding for renewable energy projects in sub-Saharan Africa. Secondly, £170m of funding to support the creation of a "net zero" cluster of heavy industry in the UK by 2040. The government's climate advisors welcomed this announcement, but said 2030 would be a better fit with the UK's 2050 climate target.
Finally, amongst the many business statements made at the talks several major announcements stood out. Maersk, the world's largest shipping company, said it plans to cut its net carbon emissions to zero by 2050, while Shell said it will begin to link short-term carbon targets to executive pay from 2020.
There is increasing recognition internationally about how climate change may affect the number of people migrating, both within their own country and to different ones.
The Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) says 18 million people were displaced in 2017 due to weather-related disasters, while the World Bank recently said up to 143 million people in Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and Latin America could be forced to migrate internally by 2050 due to climate change.
At the Paris talks in 2015, countries agreed to establish a taskforce to provide recommendations on averting, minimising and addressing climate-related displacement. Harjeet Singh, global lead on climate change at Action Aid, tells Carbon Brief:
"All three [of these] aspects are important, but the 'address' part is a little more hanging in the air because there are no legal protections available to climate displaced people."
The recommendations of this task force were submitted and discussed in September at a meeting of the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM), the formal mechanism at the UNFCCC for addressing the loss and damage caused by climate change. They were then endorsed at this year's COP as an annex to the WIM's final text, which "invites" countries to consider the recommendations.
The recommendations touch on many issues related to both internal and cross-border migration. Singh says:
"This is about recognising that displacement has become a very important issue for us. Basically, what [the recommendations] do is put a spotlight on this issue."
Singh adds that the recommendations provide "fantastic work" in terms of understanding the issue, bringing different bodies together and setting the direction. However, he says that little has been achieved regarding the provision of finance and resources – always a thorny topic at the WIM.
While the mandate of the taskforce was technically supposed to end after giving its recommendations, the WIM also decided to extend its mandate – although exactly how long for is yet to be decided.
Much of the news coverage of the COP24 outcome focuses on the "lack of urgency" in what was agreed. There is disappointed at its failure to align climate pledges with the goals of the Paris Agreement, even though this was not an expected outcome of the process.
An editorial in the Guardian says the deal reached by delegates at COP24 "offers hope". It adds:
"The first thing to say about the compromise struck at climate talks in Poland at the weekend is that it came as a relief. Ever since President Trump's announcement in 2017 that the US would withdraw from the Paris Agreement, the question has been whether the UN process could continue to work…Minds will now turn to the next deadline: 2020, when countries must demonstrate that they have met old targets and set new, much tougher ones."
An article in the Conversation by Prof Raphael Heffron, a researcher in energy law and sustainability from the University of Dundee, says the deal "shows global warming treaties can survive the era of the anti-climate 'strongman'". The New Yorker carries a long read on how the US "squandered its leadership" at the talks.
Meanwhile, as soon as the gavel went down on COP24, many NGOs issued press releases. Here is a selection…
Mohamed Adow, international climate lead, Christian Aid:
"This was the first opportunity since the IPCC report for countries to prove to the world that they were taking this seriously. They've just about scraped a C minus when the scientists of the IPCC showed that they needed to get straight As. Countries such as the USA, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Australia and Brazil have clearly not shown up prepared to do what they said they would. Without more homework nations are not going to solve the climate crisis."
Gilles Dufrasne, carbon-pricing policy officer, Carbon Market Watch:
"The last-minute article 6 standoff showed that financial interests still trump environmental integrity in some countries, despite the indisputable evidence of the climate crisis. A few countries prevented the most essential accounting requirements to be adopted, while in parallel defending the future of the flawed Clean Development Mechanism. This could blow a hole in the Paris Agreement by allowing NDCs to be met through credits with little environmental integrity, and double counting them."
Manuel Pulgar-Vidal, leader of WWF's Climate and Energy Practice and COP20 president:
"They've made important progress, but what we've seen in Poland reveals a fundamental lack of understanding by some countries of our current crisis. Luckily, the Paris Agreement is proving to be resilient to the storms of global geopolitics."
Harjeet Singh, global lead on climate change, ActionAid International:
"The climate crisis simply cannot be fixed without financing. It's hugely frustrating to see a Paris Rulebook that goes backwards on delivering real finance and real action."
Helen Mountford, vice president for global climate and economics, World Resources Institute:
"After two bruising weeks of negotiations, the world made just enough progress to set the Paris Agreement in motion. Countries emerged from the Katowice climate talks reaffirming their collective decision in Paris to submit national climate commitments by 2020. This important outcome was buoyed in the final days by an upsurge in support from developed and developing countries committed to step up their ambition within two years."
Now COP24 is over, a key moment next year will be a UN climate summit set to take place in September in New York. This is seen as a place where frontrunners could begin to submit more stringent pledges. In the opening plenary of the COP, UN secretary-general António Guterres said:
"We need more action and more ambition…I am convening a climate summit in September next year to raise ambition and mobilise the necessary resources."
COP25 is due to take place in Latin America and the Caribbean, and Brazil was the decided location until it withdrew its candidacy last month. (Brazil's future environment minister recently said that the country will remain party to the Paris Agreement, however.)
This left members of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries (GRULAC) to decide between them on a new host for the 2019 conference. Several countries including Costa Rica said they were interested, but lack of funds in other countries led to Chile being selected, with Costa-Rica instead hosting the "pre-COP" and helping with organisation.
It is official next #COP25 in Chile and pre COP in Costa Rica. Two great countries (and ministers) working together! 😍
🇨🇷🇨🇱 pic.twitter.com/REmu2lVXFW
— Monica Araya (@MonicaArayaTica) December 14, 2018
Meanwhile, the UK and Italy have both signalled their interest in hosting COP26 in 2020, which is set to take place somewhere in the "Western Europe and others" group. This is seen as a crucial COP as it is when countries have been asked to submit their next round of climate pledges for 2030. UK climate minister Claire Perry formally announced the UK's bid at the COP, saying:
"I would very much like the UK to be the place where we come together in 2020 and see if we can get those NDCs and rulebooks together."
In the table below, Carbon Brief has compiled the key meetings and milestones leading up to COP25.
7-8 February 2019 World summit on "leaving no one behind" in Geneva, Switzerland
13-15 February 2019 World symposium on climate change and tourism in Bariloche, Argentina
18-22 March 2019 Africa climate week in Accra, Ghana
20-22 March 2019 Second UN high-level conference on south-south cooperation in Buenos Aires, Argentina
14-18 May 2019 49th session of the IPCC in Kyoto, Japan
May 2019 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
17-27 June 2019 UNFCCC intersessional in Bonn, Germany (the "49th session of the subsidiary bodies")
16 August 2019 IPCC special report on climate change and land
20 September 2019 IPCC special report on Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate
23 September 2019 UN 2019 climate summit in New York, US
24-25 September 2019 UN high-level political forum on sustainable development in New York, US
26 September 2019 UN high-level dialogue on financing for development in New York, US
23-26 October 2019 International Renewable Energy Conference in Seoul, Korea
4-8 November 2019 31st meeting of parties to Montreal Protocol
October 2019, tbc Pre-COP in Costa Rica
11-22 November 2019, tbc COP25 in Chile
Speaking to Carbon Brief shortly after the gavel went down on the COP24 decision text, WRI's Yamide Dagnet said next year's COP – and the following ones – are "about ambition, ambition, ambition". Capacity building and loss and damage will be also issues to watch for, she said, adding:
"Countries now have a rulebook that equips them to plan, implement and review. They cannot have any excuse [not] to start and accelerate all of this. And they need to work hard over the next two years to really advance ambition and transparency. The world needs to see that."
View Comments (15) Close Comments


I am James Ibechi, the Editorial Director of jamesibechi.com; an online news blog since the past seven years. As one of our avid readers, I hope you have gained from our thought-provoking, incisive, educative and expository contents in news, interviews, features and opinion, among others.
As a trained journalist I am obliged to report the society in good or bad seasons. My bit is to mirror the society, shape and put issues in proper perspectives. By so doing, I give back to the society that bred me, my eyes on development and my attention on the Igede-speaking people of Benue State, Nigeria.
I do this deliberately, not merely because I am Igede but more importantly because Igedeland is the centerpiece of my editorial focus. I do not see how this should offend anybody. My apology if it does. How this decision was taken dated to my days with the premier Igede community magazine, "The Congress," floated many years ago with Lagos as the production base.
The Congress magazine was out to highlight the plight of the marginalized Igede people for national and global attention. I have since left the magazine but not my Igede people with whom I have a lifelong contract. With the 2019 General Elections around the corner, it is natural, therefore, that I give priority attention to evolving events in Igedeland.
As a society watchdog, I am determined to contribute to leadership in ways that Nigeria, especially Igedeland would be better. I hope that by so doing, the collective resolve to build the society of our dream would be easily achievable. This defines the social contract of jamesibechi.com with Igedeland and I hope you find this inspiring.
Our fair and unbiased investigations of electoral and political matters in Igedeland are widely applauded. A case in point was our recent probe of the House of Representatives primary elections of the APC in Oju-Obi Federal Constituency. Our findings contradicted the rumor of gunshots that was widely peddled of the election. According to the rumour mill, gunshots scared delegates and marred the primary elections.
This was far from the truth. There had not been a more peaceful election in Igedeland. Our findings reveal that there was an orderly conduct of elections with delegates casting their votes peacefully. However, the poll extended into the late night due to the late arrival of electoral officials and the NWC of the APC from Abuja on the Election Day.
This was not peculiar as most primary elections in Nigeria this year had a similar experience. What is important is the conduct, not the time as such, therefore, the transparent exercise that produced Nick Eworo as the standard bearer of APC for the 2019 Oju_Obi federal constituency race cannot be faulted. The insinuation of an ostensible attempt to precipitate rigging at night canvassed by critics is therefore, baseless. Those in doubt can avail themselves of Jamesibechi.com's video footage of the election showing that delegates queued up to cast their votes.
In an interview, Ogbu Mac Itachu, an aspirant who got 1 vote at the election admitted it was a free, fair and peaceful exercise. Here is the full result of the primary election.
Based on the result the APC NWC officials who conducted the primary election declared Nick Eworo the winner. The rest is left for the electorate at the 2019 polls when Eworo shall lock horns with other contestants in what is clearly the clash of the titans. You can count on Jamesibechi.com for a credible account of this and lots more. We are rooted in credible journalism for all round development. We commit to excellence even at our own expense. Join us in the crusade to change the conversation and narratives in Igedeland.