Nunatsiaq Online
NEWS: Climate Change December 18, 2009 - 12:38 pm

No relief for Arctic in minimalist climate deal

Copenhagen Accord non-binding; more talks to follow next year

JANE GEORGE
U.S. President Barack Obama at a late-evening press conference held inside Copenhagen's Bella Centre Dec. 18, which was re-broadcast on the Bella Centre's internal television network. (PHOTO BY JANE GEORGE)
U.S. President Barack Obama at a late-evening press conference held inside Copenhagen's Bella Centre Dec. 18, which was re-broadcast on the Bella Centre's internal television network. (PHOTO BY JANE GEORGE)
Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, described the deal reached by the United States, China, India, South Africa and Brazil as
Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, described the deal reached by the United States, China, India, South Africa and Brazil as "modest." (PHOTO BY JANE GEORGE)
During the early hours of Dec. 19, protesters gathered outside an entrance to the Bella Centre chanting “shame, shame” and “bad deal, no deal,” while brandishing a larger-than-life-size image of U.S. president Barack Obama. (PHOTO BY JANE GEORGE)
During the early hours of Dec. 19, protesters gathered outside an entrance to the Bella Centre chanting “shame, shame” and “bad deal, no deal,” while brandishing a larger-than-life-size image of U.S. president Barack Obama. (PHOTO BY JANE GEORGE)

(Updated 12:30 a.m. Dec. 19)
COPENHAGEN — A last-minute agreement on climate change worked out Dec. 18 between the U.S., China, Brazil, India and South Africa at the COP15 climate change conference in Copenhagen offers little hope for improving dire scientific forecasts for a warming Arctic.

A draft of the agreement, to be known as the “Copenhagen Accord,” includes the following provisions:

• the increase in average global temperatures must be limited to 2 C;

• rich countries will give $30 billion to poor countries before 2012, to help them adapt to climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions;

• action to help small island countries, African countries and the world’s poorest countries, but not Arctic regions, is “urgently required;”

• rich countries set “a goal” of $100 billion to be given to poor, vulnerable countries by 2020, to be put into a “Copenhagen Green Climate Fund;”

• reporting systems under which countries must communicate how they plan to limit and measure greenhouse gas emissions;

• a second set of climate talks in one year, aimed at creating a legally, binding agreement.

This is the first time that the world’s two biggest greenhouse gas emitters, the U.S. and China, have worked face-to-face on a climate change agreement.

But the deal contains no legally-binding emissions targets.

Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and U.S. President Barack Obama each described the deal, reached after talks moved into overtime late in the evening of Dec. 18,  as “modest.”

At a news conference, Obama defended the agreement by pointing to its flexibilty, saying it lets nations adjust their emissions targets according to science. The fact that the accord isn’t legally binding didn’t appear to be problem for Obama, who said treaties are only as strong as the commitments that countries make.

He also said that,  for the first time, developing nations like India have agreed to make cuts to greenhouse gas emissions, that it’s a first step in building trust between rich and poor nations, and that all nations, whether rich or poor, must do something.

The 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which will continue for now, required that only developed countries make cuts to greenhouse gas emissions. This means, Obama said, that the Copenhagen accord breaks the “fundamental deadlock” that has plagued climate change talks in the past.

The accord will likely include Canada’s previous commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 20 per cent below 2006 levels by 2020, and abandon its previous commitment under the 1990 Kyoto Accord for reductions to 6 per cent beneath 1990 levels — a goal Canada never came close to meeting.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper kept a low profile at the talks, letting Environment Minister Jim Prentice speak on behalf of Canada at a plenary session.

But at a press conference Dec. 18, Harper said he was “comfortable” with the five-nation deal, which was brokered by U.S president Barack Obama and Chinese premier Wen Jiabao.

Harper defended the controversial Alberta tar sands, saying they account for only four per cent of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions.

But he had little to say about what Canada will do to meet its stated emissions targets.

And there’s little in the document that offers any hope of preventing big temperature increases in the Arctic that exceed global averages.

The 2 C global increase set out in the Copenhagen Accord would still see Arctic temperatures rise by at least 3 to 6 C higher by 2100.

The accord is not likely to please Arctic leaders.

“To be effective, the process emerging from this conference must recognize the impact of climate change on Inuit by pursuing targets that will eliminate further climate change impacts on the Arctic,” Mary Simon, the president of Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami said in an email.

None of the $100 billion committed by the rich nations of the world by 2020 would go to Inuit and other indigenous peoples of the Arctic — because they already live within some of the richest nations of the world: Canada, the United States, Greenland, the Nordic nations and Russia.

There’s no specific acknowledgment of the vulnerability of Arctic peoples in the accord which mentions “least developed countries, small island developing states,” and “the need of countries in Africa.”

Arctic and indigenous negotiators also wanted to see acknowledgment of human rights and the rights of indigenous peoples in the text and Inuit wanted an acknowledgment of Arctic peoples affected by the loss of snow and ice.

Speaking to press shorty before midnight, Lumumba Stanislaus-Kaw Di-Aping, a Sudanese diplomat who was chief negotiator for the G77 group of developing nations, slammed the accord, saying it won’t keep small island nations from drowning and that the money offered for mitigation and adaptation isn’t enough.

Protesters also gathered outside an entrance to the Bella Centre chanting “shame, shame” and “bad deal, no deal,” while brandishing a larger-than-life-size image of Obama.

But, when he spoke to the conference shortly after noon Dec. 18, Obama urged rich and poor governments to support the deal on climate change — even if it is “not perfect.”

“You would not be here unless you — like me — were convinced that this danger is real. This is not fiction, this is science. Unchecked, climate change will pose unacceptable risks to our security, our economies, and our planet,” Obama said.

One by one, the leaders of India, South Africa, Russia, Korea, and other nations, speaking after Obama, threw their support behind Obama’s call for compromise.

But Juan Evo Morales of Bolivia slammed the proposed 2 C temperature rise, saying it doesn’t do enough to save people whose lives are endangered by climate change.

The leftist leader of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez then spoke, calling Obama’s financial commitments a “joke” and “fraudulent.”

Quoting Cuba’s Fidel Castro, Chavez said the final day of the climate change conference would be “an inglorious closing.”

Chavez said his country, along with Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua and several Caribbean island nations, would not accept any deal promoted by the U.S., and walked out.

But German chancellor Angela Merkel, British prime minister Gordon Brown and other European and Asian leaders have indicated they will support the watered-down accord.

The next step comes a year from now, in 2010, when officials from around the world will try to craft a legally-binding agreement on climate change at a meeting in Mexico City.

NDP leader Jack Layton said that Canada failed to show leadership at the Copenhagen talks.

And Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff said Harper went to Copenhagen with no plan other than to follow the lead of the U.S.

“We need an aggressive, made in Canada, climate-change plan now,” Ignatieff said.

Email this story to a friend... Print this page... Bookmark and Share Comment on this story...

(7) Comments:

#1. Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 18, 2009

There was a recent announcement that warming is inevitable. No matter what we try and do the planet is going to get warmer. I believe the human race is very adaptable and resilient and will survive.

Climate change is the least of our problems…..our real problem is we are so wasteful and pollute like there is no tommorow. We need clean air, safe water sources and food that will not kill us. Unfortunately we are destorying our enviorment faster than even in the name of profit and in doing so dooming our future generations chances of survival.

#2. Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 18, 2009

That just blows me mind away, boggles me, vexes me. $100 billion dollars in a decade and none of it going to the arctic territories ANYWHERE in the arctic.. wow.. Yea, we have to do it on our own, let’s get deep in debt and ask for handouts from the feds for the next 20 years. They will understand eventually that we did this because we were ‘cornered’ and ‘scared’ because of the threat of our land melting away. Let’s get on with it.

ALL humans are very adaptable. Doesn’t mean that we should adapt, it takes decads even centuries for our bodies, childrens bodies, grandkids bodies to even start to adapt to such things. Come on, be real. WE HAVE TO make changes NOW. NOT TOMORROW, NOT NEXT WEEK, NOT NEXT YEAR. Money is printed, let’s print off billions of dollars and make it work. LETS JUST GET ON WITH IT.

#3. Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 18, 2009

You see, we as indiviuals can start now! A lot is personal choice.

There are many things you can do to leave a smaller foot print on the planet. It is just that it is an inconvenience to many.

If you know anything about economics, printing money is very bad for the economy as it raises the inflation rate and makes everything cost a lot more. A prime example is Zimbabwe where their inflation rate surged to 231 million percent. So over there if a loaf of bread costed 1 Zimbabwe dollar before they started printing money, as of November 2009 the price of that same loaf of bread costed over 2.3 Million Zimbabwe dollars.

#4. Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 20, 2009

Copenhagen was basically a contest between long term and short term thinking.  That the environment doesn’t come out on top of either of these calculations is a source of some despair for me.  Species loss has accelerated some 1000% from pre-industrial times.  There are moral questions to this (since it is human actions leading to such declines), and also very practical considerations for human health and ecological sustainability and integrity.  Waiting another year or 10 means only so much more death and loss of genetic diversity (and spiritual harm for the planet and humanity).

#5. Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 21, 2009

Well than, to not wait, start today.

start up a compost make your own soil and plant a vegtable garden, stop importing vegitables from California.

Bring your own reusable bags when shopping.

Recycle everything you can

Walk to work 2 a few days a week, try and move as close to your work as possible.

How about turning off the computer and lights when you leave the rooom for 1/2 hour.

Wear a set of cloths twice before you wash them, take a shower every 2 days instead of everyday.

There are many things we can do as indiviauls that will make a big difference, do we really need our government to tell us to start protecting our enviorment like little childern?

#6. Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 23, 2009

I worked for a short while some years ago in Pond Inlet,and I loved the north. It would be a tragedy to loose the culture and sovereignty to greed and foreign corporations whom have very likely never been north of the 49th,or 48th,or the equator. Crazy Eskimo I agree we all need to be more conscientious. Peace, Seasons Greetings, and all the best for a safe, healthy, and prosperous New Year

#7. Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 28, 2009

No amount of $ solves problems in our present day and age. I bring to your attention the sunaami that erased out whole villages a few years ago in the SE Pacific and the relief effort that followed. Donations upon donations where given and those were enough to provide all the resources that was required. But our aid organizations like the Red Cross wound up with in-fighting that left many remote areas in distress for weeks and months, in some cases a year later little had been accomplished.

What we need is to appreciate what we have, take care of one another…  and the planet.

And - the elephant in the room - we are reaching the carrying capacity of our planet, make family planning the issue!

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below:


 THIS WEEK’S ADS

 ADVERTISING


        


Custom Search