Climate Meet at Copenhagen

K S VENKATARAMAN

Delegates from 192 countries had two weeks to broker a globe-saving treaty at
a crucial climate conference that opened on December 7, 2009 in Copenhagen.

Denmark's Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen said1, at the opening

ceremony in Copenhagen "Global warming knows no borders, it does not
discriminate, it affects us all and we are here today because we are all
committed to take action."

Representatives of 192 countries gathered in Copenhagen, Denmark, for a Dec.

7-18 meeting intended to find a deal to succeed the Kyoto Protocol, which runs
out in 2012. Officials hoped the deal would include binding carbon dioxide
emissions reduction commitments from the world's major emitters, including the
United States, India and China; as well as dozens of billions of dollars in financial
aid to poor nations ill-equipped to deal with a problem they did least to create.

Former US Vice-President Al Gore had

told2 POLITICO in an interview earlier,
had pointed out that it was important at
Copenhagen to have a binding political
agreement that both developed and
developing countries sign on to, and
countries like India and China willing to
act on climate change.

Hurdles Crossed

There were deal-busters and deal-makers and the proceedings went on with
alternating hope and despair.

There were varied opinions about the significance of the summit meet. Not all
were well wishers of the global exercise.
 James Hansen, one of the world's most
respected climate scientists, had told3
British daily The Guardian, "The whole
approach is so fundamentally wrong that it
is better to reassess the situation. If it is
going to be the Kyoto-type thing then
(people) will spend years trying to
determine exactly what that means… I
would rather it not happen if people accept
that as being the right track because it's a disaster track." Hansen heads the
NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York.

Hansen, who has been one of the most outspoken scientists when it comes to
warning politicians of the dangers related to man-made climate change, is
vehemently opposed to the carbon markets proposed as a new trading scheme
to introduce a clean economy.

Hansen had said, "This is analogous to the indulgences that the Catholic Church
sold in the Middle Ages. The bishops collected lots of money and the sinners got
redemption. Both parties liked that arrangement despite its absurdity. We've got
the developed countries who want to continue more or less business as usual
and then the developing countries, who want money and that is, what they can
get through offsets sold through the carbon markets.”

He had also been critical of world leaders, who were treating the issue like any
other diplomatic conflict. For Hansen, it was much more than that; and that
meant there was no room for horse-trading.

In the first week itself, Africa led a boycott by developing nations of working
groups; returned only after securing guarantees the summit would not sideline
talks about the future of the Kyoto Protocol. The walkout delivered another blow
to the summit, which had already been marred by spats between China and the
United States.4

The US Representative James Sensenbrenner, who headed the Republican

House delegation to Copenhagen, had said that Obama should "lower the
rhetoric" on what the United States will do under the next global agreement. He
had added, "America lost a lot of credibility when then-vice president Al Gore
promised the international community in Kyoto something that he knew could
never be passed by the Congress. I would hope that President Obama will not
repeat Al Gore's mistake."

There were also campaigners who were even vociferous and blunter. Greenpeace
had urged that the summit had five days "to avert climate chaos". The group
had observed, “Emissions targets so far offered by Western leaders such as
Obama amounted to peanuts."

In the meantime the stakes were underlined by a new UN report, which said that
some 58 million people had been affected by 245 natural calamities this year,
more than 90 percent of them weather events amplified by climate change.

There was an unsubstantiated allegation that the Danish hosts were trying to
sideline the concerns of the developing countries. There were wrangles over the
texts on which the talks were to be based.5 A dispute arose leading to a hold-up.
Formal negotiations have reopened at the UN climate summit in Copenhagen
after a delay of nine hours.

China rejected American calls for its emissions to be independently monitored,

and was also resisting plans for a worldwide agreement to halve emissions by
2050.

Some Accord

The Nobel laureate and last leader of the

Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev had
said in an interview on December 3, 2009
had said6, "The 'business-as-usual' mindset
and incremental approach that dominates
the world thinking today is the source of
our multiple crises -- economic, financial
and environmental. He had pointed out,
"We are currently in a genuine global
emergency that requires a new way of thinking."

Such strong opinions did not go waste. Some silver linings too emerged. At the
fag end of the summit, on the morning of December 18, 2009 leaders and
ministers from about 30 countries hammered out an outline climate accord; i.e.
just hours before some 130 world leaders were to gather in a summit.

The three-hour session ended about 2:30 a.m., leaving top advisors to work out
the final language of the draft agreement on how to tame global warming and
help poor countries cope with its impacts.

Advisors resumed work almost immediately to craft a document that could be

presented to heads of state and government at 8:00 a.m.

So far as India is concerned, on December 3, 2009 an announcement had been

made that it would reduce its emission intensity by 20-25 percent by 2020 from
the 2005 level.

A few days before India's announcement, China had announced a 40-45 percent
cut in its emissions intensity by 2020 compared to 2005; and, Brazil had
announced 38-42 percent and Indonesia 26 percent.

India's emissions intensity is already lower than other emerging economies, and
the minister said it had decreased 17.6 percent between 1990 and 2005.

From the point of view of India there was another non-negotiating position.
Emission reduction actions India took on its own would not be open to
international scrutiny, but 'depending on concessions we can get from western
countries, and in consultation with China, Brazil, South Africa and other
countries in G77, we can consider opening to international review all our
mitigation actions supported by international finances'.

Though there were significant differences in the approach of various countries,

the standpoint of the major countries like the US, China, India, Brazil etc., were
well known. In spite of this, no common approach acceptable to all the countries
could be shaped. There was, however, a positive wave after the US President
Obama came in person.

As the fifth speaker, President Barack Obama took the floor in the plenary. He
stressed that he did not come to talk, but to act.7

Being the world largest economy and second largest emitter of greenhouse
gases, America has a responsibility, he said, and added that America would
continue to move toward a green economy – "but we will be stronger if we act
together."

Obama clearly told the heads of state and governments that it is imperative with
a "mechanism to review whether we are keeping our commitments, and to
exchange this information in a transparent manner." Without such
accountability, any agreement would be "empty words on a page".

Finally he urged world leaders to "choose action over inaction; the future over
the past - with courage and faith, let us meet our responsibility to our people
and to the future of our planet".

Though the officials were putting up a show of optimism, before the arrival of
Obama, the climate meet was on the brink of ending without any result. But
matters improved after his participation.

Copenhagen deal: Key points8

A US-led initiative called the Copenhagen Accord emerged at UN climate talks in

Copenhagen, despite some countries' opposition.

AL STATUS
The Accord, reached between the US, China, India, Brazil and South Africa,
contains no reference to a legally binding agreement, as some developing
countries and climate activists wanted.

Neither is there a deadline for transforming it into a binding deal, though UN

Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said it needed to be turned into a legally binding
treaty next year.

The accord was merely "recognized" by the 193 nations at the Copenhagen
summit, rather than approved, which would have required unanimous support. It
is not clear whether it is a formal UN deal.
TEMPERATURE RISE
The text recognizes the need to limit global temperatures rising no more than 2C
(3.6F) above pre-industrial levels.

The language in the text shows that 2C is not a formal target; just that the
group "recognizes the scientific view that" the temperature increase should be
held below this figure.

However, the accord does not identify a year by which carbon emissions should
peak, a position resisted by some richer developing nations.

Countries are asked to spell out by 1 February next year their pledges for
curbing carbon emissions by 2020. The deal does not spell out penalties for any
country that fails to meet its promise.
FINANCIAL AID
The deal promises to deliver $30bn (£18.5bn) of aid for developing nations over
the next three years. It outlines a goal of providing $100bn a year by 2020 to
help poor countries cope with the impacts of climate change.

The accord says the rich countries will jointly mobilize the $100bn, drawing on a
variety of sources: "public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including
alternative sources of finance."

A green climate fund will also be established under the deal. It will support
projects in developing countries related to mitigation, adaptation, "capacity
building" and technology transfer.
EMISSIONS TRANSPARENCY
The pledges of rich countries will come under "rigorous, robust and transparent"
scrutiny under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

In the accord, developing countries will submit national reports on their

emissions pledges under a method "that will ensure that national sovereignty is
respected."

Pledges on climate mitigation measures seeking international support will be

recorded in a registry.
REVIEW OF PROGRESS
The implementation of the Copenhagen Accord will be reviewed by 2015. This
will take place about a year-and-a-half after the next scientific assessment of
the global climate by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

However, if, in 2015, delegates wanted to adopt a new, lower target on global
average temperature, such as 1.5C rather than 2C, it would be too late.

Conclusion

After the climate summit in Copenhagen agreed on December 19, 2009 morning
to "take note" of the Copenhagen Accord, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon
(photo above left) concluded9 that "finally, we sealed the deal."
He added that he was aware this was just the beginning of a process to craft a
binding pact to rein in greenhouse gas emissions, but pointed out that the
agreement would have "an immediate operational effect."

Ban has said, "It may not be everything we hoped for, but this decision of the
Conference of Parties is an essential beginning ... The importance will only be
recognized when it's codified into international law ... We must transform this
into a legally binding treaty next year."

Yvo de Boer, Head of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change

secretariat, (photo above right), was not that enthusiastic. He has said, “We
must be honest about what we have got. The world walks away from
Copenhagen with a deal. But clearly ambitions to reduce emissions must be
raised significantly if we are to hold the world to 2 degrees.”

Yvo de Boer has said, “We now have a package to work with and begin
immediate action, However, we need to be clear that it is a letter of intent and is
not precise about what needs to be done in legal terms. So the challenge is now
to turn what we have agreed politically in Copenhagen into something real,
measurable and verifiable.”

The next annual UN Climate Change Conference will take place towards the end
of 2010 in Mexico City, preceded by a major two week negotiating session in
Bonn, Germany, scheduled 31 May to 11 June.

Maybe, the Copenhagen Accord does not satisfy all the countries. There may be
many things to be done to reinforce it with legal strength. But when viewed in
the light of the magnitude of the issues involved, what has been achieved should
give us some satisfaction. As all the major countries relevant to Global Warming
have put down on record that they are together in dealing with issue, it may be
hoped that other countries would follow suit.
Sources

1.
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Climate_summit_under_way_in_Copenhagen
_999.html

2. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30063.html

3.
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Top_climate_scientist_wants_Cop15_to_fail_
999.html

4.
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Walkout_heightens_failure_fears_for_climate
_marathon_999.html

5. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8417305.stm

6.
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Failure_in_Copenhagen_would_be_catastrop
hic_risk_Gorbachev_999.html

7. http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=3054

8. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8422307.stm

9. http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=3073