In December 2009 leaders and delegates
from 192 countries met in Copenhagen, Denmark, to try and reach an
agreement that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions to a limit recommended
by many scientists and facilitate a transfer of funds from rich to
poor countries to deal with the worst outcomes of climate change.
Although the meeting closed with a general agreement that global temperature
should not be permitted to rise above 2 deg C, the final outcome did
not match up to the most modest expectations and was generally regarded
as a failure by NGOs.
There was an agreement to the establishment
of a fund with an initial outlay of $30 bil, rising to $100 bil by
2020, to help the poor countries adapt to the threat of climate change.
This agreement was worked out at a meeting of delegates from the USA,
China, India, Brazil and South Africa. Prior to the meeting it was
estimated that poor countries would in fact need $200 bil per year.
There was no global target set for emissions cuts and no incentives
for countries to pollute less and no sanctions on those that pollute
more. EU attempts to introduce targets to reduce global emissions
by 50% by 2050 were blocked. The world is using a base of 1990 for
assessing its percentage cuts in emissions and this would mean that
the US commitment amounts to a mere 4% reduction. However, the USA
has used a baseline of 2005 to make it appear that it is committed
to a 17-20% reduction.
What appeared to be lacking was a proper
framework for general agreement and it is therefore no surprise that
the meeting ended with such an inadequate agreement. Whether the gathering
of delegates from so many countries in recognition of a global threat
can in itself be considered a remarkable achievement, is open to question.
At best Copenhagen can be considered as merely a possible beginning
of a process - one that must now intensify day by day.
FIOH UK believes that Contraction and
Convergence (as recommended by the UK All-Party Committee on Climate
Change) and its modifications incorporated in the Cap
and Share and Cap and Dividend schemes provide the most realistic
framework for general agreement. Current Cap and Trade schemes operating
under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
and similar schemes being considered in the USA, are unlikely to gain
support from developing countries. Cap and Share is described briefly
in the Campaigns section of this web site.
