What hope for Copenhagen now?
A US refusal to commit to carbon emission cuts and developing countries' demand for greater cuts by rich nations leaves a legally binding deal at Copenhagen looking unlikely. What's next?
David Adam | guardian.co.uk | Thursday 5 November 200
The dream
President Obama's team takes a giant risk in Copenhagen and pledges ambitious US cuts in carbon emissions, in the hope that it can sell them to a sceptical domestic audience in the New Year. The move shocks China and India into pledges of action, with short-term targets morphing into longer-term commitments. Japan, Canada, Russia, Australia and others are carried away on the subsequent wave of optimism and join Europe in agreeing the kind of greenhouse gas reductions that scientists say could still limit temperature rise to 2C. As beaming world leaders jet in, Copenhagen delivers a deal to save the world.
Plausibility: 1/10
The hopeful fudge
Copenhagen sees warm words and positive rhetoric, with a sympathetic world granting Obama the time he will need to turn US opinion around. Progress is made on lesser elements of a scaled-back deal, such as ways to prevent forests being destroyed and long-term emissions targets to 2050. Countries agree to leave the thorny issues of carbon targets over the next decade and finance for developing nations until 2010, as the Copenhagen talks effectively head for extra time.
Plausibility 7/10
The dangerous road
Copenhagen is dominated by recriminations and accusations as age-old divides between rich and poor countries dominate. With no movement from the US, the talks stall as all players keep their cards close to their chests. The demand for unanimity on all decisions renders the talks impotent and the negotiations drift to a close with no agreement in sight. A last-minute compromise and some nimble legal footwork gives the chance to repeat the talks next year, but sets no timetable for a deal.
Plausibility 4/10
Collapse
Pressure on the US from Europe and the developing world backfires as a massive gulf opens between the US and the rest. The talks are dominated by infighting, ultimatums and walkouts as back-channel diplomacy spills into public acrimony. The final hours come and go with no agreement on anything. The UN is forced to declare the talks a failure, throwing two decades of negotiations into chaos and leaving the world unprotected against the ravages of global warming.
Plausibility 2/10
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment