The Climate Summit in Copenhagen ended without a binding agreement on how to cut CO2 emissions. Frustration is widespread. But amid the debris, positive things remain.
 | COP15The Copenhagen climate change summit — the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC): Once a year environment ministers from 192 countries meet to discuss climate politics. |
"Stop whining", read one of the posters protesters held up during the Climate Summit in Copenhagen. With the conference ending in failure, this message has become more important than ever.
Even a last ditch late night session between U.S. President Obama, Chinese Premier Jiabao, and leaders from Brazil, India, and South Africa couldn’t save the day. All that Obama could present on Saturday morning was a non-binding agreement labeled the Copenhagen Accord. The text’s most important feature is that it recognizes that global warming should not exceed 2°C.
The document doesn’t impose any specific emission cuts. It has been "recognized" not formally adopted by the Conference, but it remains unclear whether there will be a ratification process in national parliaments. But why should anyone boycott it? The U.S. Congress never accepted the Kyoto Protocol’s carbon limits, but the new accord contains no such provisions.
Climate holocaust?
Well, some Latin American countries and Sudan threatened to boycott it, complaining of a stitch-up by the small group of major polluting nations. Venezuela and Bolivia refused to endorse it. The Sudanese chief negotiator even compared it to the Holocaust. This didn’t go down well with many delegates, but frustration over the weak deal was widespread.
Here is how the WWF's head of climate negotiations sees the accord. (Video: http://cop15.panda.org).
Does this mean, Copenhagen was a total disaster? A few things have been gained. The text contains a reference to the 2°C target. If China approves the deal it would for the first time accept this threshold.
There has also been some advance on climate finance. Rich nations now pledge 30 billion dollars for 2010-2012 to help poor countries mitigate their carbon emissions and adapt to global warming. There is also a stated goal to "mobilize" 100 billion dollars a year by 2020.
There is also a reference to special funding for adaptation, technology development and transfer, and to prevent deforestation. So far, the Kyoto protocol offers no mechanism to pay rainforest nations for not cutting down their wooden assets.
Time to move on
On the downside, the Copenhagen deal contains no specific date on when a post-Kyoto treaty has to be ready. It doesn’t say where the money for the long-term climate fund should come from, nor who will manage it.
It also doesn’t state whether a new treaty will replace the Kyoto Protocol or exist in parallel. One of the big issues throughout the conference had been the attempt to ‘kill’ the old treaty to get rid of the separation of industrialized countries with mandatory carbon cuts and developing nations with no such limitations.
All these open questions will have to be addressed in 2010. The mother of all deadlocks might be the feud between China and the U.S. America demands mandatory carbon cuts and more transparency from countries like China and India. China thinks that America’s promised 17 percent reduction in emissions by 2020 compared to 2005 levels is far too little.
What government leaders would need for a more tangible deal is an improved mandate from their electorates. But that would mean convincing them that fighting global warming will need fundamental changes in lifestyle and consumption. A tough job.
But it is clearly the wrong time for fatalism, and whining. “I think it is important that instead of setting up a bunch of goals that just end up not being met, that we get moving,” said President Obama. “We just keep moving forward.”
Finally, WWF's Kim Carstensen reflects on the way ahead. (Video: http://cop15.panda.org).
editor: Thilo Kunzemann
publishing date: December 19, 2009
Do you have something interesting to add? Write a comment and discuss this topic with other readers. Comments should be on-topic, non-commercial, and not contain abuse of any kind.
Comment Policy
