News: Who cares about the Earth?

Copenhagen Climate Change Agreement

40 misters from around the world meet up at Copenhagen to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, and to set-up a new global action plan to stem the effects of global warming. The UN wants any deal that will limit increase in world temperatures since industrialization began to 2 degree Celsius. Developed nations are most at risk form heat waves, floods, disease and rising sea levels and that’s the main reason why they are pressing for action most urgently. Denmark envisages a political deal that will deep 2020 for the cuts in emissions by all developed countries and actions to help the poor countries, with the funds and technology for reaching the primary goal, limit the greenhouse gas emission.

I have read several different articles from Reuters, Telegraph, Guardian, LA Times, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Time, BBC, Bloomberg and Voice of America.

The only result of the two days conference was the agreement that finally dates the next meeting that will take place on Dec. 7-18 in Denmark. Danish Climate and Energy Minister Connie Hedegaard said that December summit should result with a clear deadline for emission cuts. Denmark wants all participants to ratify “political agreement” backed up with annexes outlining commitments about emission cuts by each nation.

As much as it could be seen from the articles, the failure of the first meeting can be repeated because U.S. haven’t been prepared for this meeting and it is very likely that this situation will remain the same, considering that one month is a really short period for the U.S. to get prepared.

More than 200 countries had accepted to participate in the next meeting but even so, most of them are sharing opinion that a legally binding deal will have to wait until a Bonn meeting in mid-2010. The main reason for six months delay is to give time to the U.S. Senate to pass carbon-capping legalisation– said Yvo de Boer, head of the U.N Climate Change Secretariat. The Guardian noted that China and America, two world’s biggest polluters, failed to agree a target for reducing gas emissions and that they are seeing a Copenhagen meeting only as a “staging post” rather than an end point. This was more than a diplomatic statement, but how it will fit to next meetings agenda where all countries commitments have to be supported with numbers? By Reuters environmentalists criticised the U.S. secretary of State Hillary Clinton for trivialising summit by saying on Nov. 11 in Singapore, Copenhagen should be a “strong outcome…that would be a stepping stone toward full legal agreement”. Guardian is also noting that Danish Prime Minister Lars Loekke Rasmussen said: “Copenhagen should neither be a stopover nor a tiny stepping stone, as some proclaim”.

Even all headlines were similar “Copenhagen climate talks, conference” all articles have left this topic in the shadows and have put all the focus on American and president Obama. He showed support to a Danish plan but at the same time he didn’t hide his weakness for giving the U.S. commitment for this “political agreement”, because it depends on the Senate. The blockage is the Senate, where a climate bill is making it a complicated progress. The main reason for this blockade is the fact that many of the Senate members are representatives of states that are producers of oil, coal and car industries. Swedish Environment Minister Anders Carlgren told to Reuters “In the end, an agreement in Copenhagen will depend on an America number. Without a clear and ambitious number the whole agreement will be in danger”.

The UK government’s former chief scientist Sir David King told that Copenhagen has come a year too early, and that there wasn’t a way that Obama could act in December. But in my opinion planet can’t wait, can it?

Before the meeting it was unclear will China support the two-stage plan but the world biggest emitters showed their willingness to enforce the plan. Chinese president Hu Jinato committed to reducing future emission but he hasn’t yet come up with a figure.

On another hand, leading American newspapers as LA Times, The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal over the weekend published that the world will have to wait at least until next year for a legally binding treaty to curb global warming. They are not hiding that president Obama dramatically lowered expectations for second climate negotiations in Denmark but it doesn’t mean that the U.S. is not willing to participate but with delay of one year. “This kind of comprehensive agreement would be an important step in the effort to rally the world around a solution to our climate change, and we agreed that each of us would take significant mitigation actions and stand behind these commitments” Obama said. They also are noting that even America could not set-up the plan in December, that doesn’t have a direct impact on other participants to set-up their individual targets. Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, the ranking Republican on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee said “You know what, we’d get blamed at Copenhagen if we acted or if we didn’t act. It is what it is.” by The New York Times. From the angle of The Wall Street Journal there will always be one excuse or another, given that developing countries like China and India will never be masochistic enough to subject their economies to the West’s climate neuroses. They dare even to publish that “If Obama and we are lucky, the Senate will fail to act, the EPA will get tired up in court, and the economy will recover faster without the looming burden of higher energy taxes”. It is more than obvious that Copenhagen deal has widen the gap between Democrats and Republicans in America. But even the gap is much wider now, it seams that all Americans media agencies no matter of their orientation (independent, republican or democrat) stand up into a united guard position to the rest of the world.

So, I as a reader get the impression that most of Europeans newspapers in manner of diplomacy are blaming USA Senate for failure at this summit, and Americans medias for the first time act united under the statement “Don’t blame the U.S. for standoff in climate talks”.

In my opinion, the main reason why spotlight was put on Obama and the U.S. is the fact that America, even if it is world’s historic polluter, put the planet problem behind their individual. De facto is that America has a big economies problem but the crisis is the worlds and all of us are more or less in the same situation and we all feel consequences of it, but still care for the future of the Earth because that is the only planet that we have. It is pretty strange that neither one of newspapers haven’t reminded the public on the fact that the U.S. rejected Kyoto protocol since it made no demand of rapidly growing countries had been forgotten.

The fact that U.S. rejected to Kyoto protocol and its non-preparation for Copenhagen summit brought me to an idea of is the strategy of the USA to avoid its obligations. If America rejects to participate in Copenhagen agreement this problem can make even bigger issue. As it is worldwide known Chinese economy depends on America and a quite large number of investments in China came form America what puts China in matt position. It can be expected that China will follow Americas decision, what for all citizens of the planet can be fatal considering that they are the biggest greenhouse gas emitters. As song says, it’s all about the money, but who will need the money and the power if we don’t have a place to live in?

Sources:

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSLH602416

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSLH683340

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSLG401631

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSTRE5AE1I720091115

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthcomment/geoffrey-lean/6594771/Copenhagen-climate-conference-more-a-planting-than-a-burial.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8364492.stm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/15/copenhagen-climate-deal-obama

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/17/q-and-a-copenhagen

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=aiYupHKUaJv0

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg--obama-climate-qa16-2009nov16,0,6041967.story

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/11/17/17greenwire-dont-blame-us-for-standoff-in-intl-climate-tal-44165.html