Vanakam to all you beautiful people in the Sadhana Forest universe-

As most of you are surely aware, December’s United Nation Framework on Climate Change (UNFCCC) COP15 meeting in Copenhagen, originally intended to hammer out a sweeping international treaty on greenhouse gas reductions, failed to produce just that. Yet, a document known as ‘The Copenhagen Accord,’ albeit not legally binding in nature, was produced from the two-week maelstrom that was the U.N. Conference of the Parties and helped to hopefully set the stage for the world to reach an international agreement by the end of this year. Although I would not advise you to hold your breath just yet (especially if you, and the rest of the global community are looking towards the hopelessly dysfunctional United States Congress for major climate change legislation to emerge this year), all is not completely lost as the major players/greenhouse gas emitters are now on board to some extent. Ohh, the complexities we humans create for ourselves, even when Mother Nature is clearly telling us something is very off!

Nitty Gritty Details

The Copenhagen Accord (actual text here) was drafted by 28 countries, including the United States, China, India, South Africa, and Brazil, who are the largest current and future carbon polluters in the world.  Though the deepest and most dramatic cuts, based on historical responsibility for atmospheric greenhouse gas emissions, should and will be put forward by the wealthiest nations, the Copenhagen Accord did bring large, recalcitrant Global South nations who had previously resisted being subjected to any international oversight into the fold. The Accord, though obviously well-short of a legally binding measure, was ‘noted’ by 188 of the 193 UN member countries.  Among the notable points of the agreement:

• It asked nations that accepted the agreement in some form to begin listing their commitments to mandatory greenhouse gas emission reductions (in the case of wealthier, “Annex 1” countries) or mitigation efforts (in the case of poorer, “non-Annex 1” countries) by 31 January 2010. This date, according to UNFCCC director Yvo de Boer, was merely a “soft deadline” (yay for jargon and diplomat-speak as the world burns!). As of this month, 110 countries representing over 80% of worldwide greenhouse gas emissions have associated with the Copenhagen Accord.
• The Copenhagen Accord mandated that future warming of the planet be kept to 2 ° C above pre-Industrial Revolution levels by 2100, with a reviewing of the scientific literature in 2015 (where an eye will be turned to the consideration of adjusting the global temperature cap downwards to 1.5°C. Presumably, this theoretical target is a nod towards island nations such as the Maldives and Tuvalu who called for a 1.5°C rise only. There are credible fears that beyond this point, sea level rises could be triggered which would submerge low-lying, island nations such as these). According to climate scientists, actually capping worldwide average temperatures at a 2°C rise would leave the Earth’s atmosphere with a concentration of 450 ppm of CO2 from today’s current 390 ppm. There is some thought that catastrophic events such as increased flooding, droughts, quickened glacial melt, crop devastation, and ever-larger methane releases from drying permafrost in the Arctic could begin occurring with much higher frequency beyond 2°C. A 1.5°C rise, on the other hand, would allow the world to stabilize at the much lower concentration of 350 ppm, which prominent climate activists such as Bill McKibben advocate for: http://www.350.org/
• A worldwide commitment, through a so-called “Copenhagen Green Climate Fund” mechanism, that would provide $100 billion dollars a year by 2020 to the poorest and most vulnerable nations in the world for global warming mitigation and adaptation efforts. Nearly $30 billion in foreign aid would also be disbursed by 2012.
• Worldwide forests need to be protected for their abilities to absorb and sequester carbon dioxide- amongst their other fantastic qualities- and countries with large stocks of vulnerable forests should be rewarded through efforts such as REDD/REDD-Plus .
• Technology mechanism for the transfer of global warming mitigation and adaptation technology knowledge amongst nations

Oh, and about that whole science thing…

Those who are disappointed that the Copenhagen climate talks did not produce a successor or continuation to the Kyoto Protocol have every right to be. According to the latest scientific evidence, global greenhouse gas emissions need to peak within the next few years and then draw down very sharply after that point. Climate scientists, most prominently through the IPCC, say that we need to cut our worldwide greenhouse gas emissions 50% from 1990 levels by 2050 (80% of the cuts would have to come from ‘developed’ and major ‘developing’ countries) and 25-40% from 1990 levels by 2020 if we are to stay below 2° C. Unless countries start to put into place their national emission reduction plans as soon as possible, even in the absence of a binding international treaty, the world won’t meet that target and the more frequent natural disaster-scenario will be a near-certainty by the middle of the 21^st century.

It is very frustrating that the vast majority of the scientific community agrees on the general limits humanity should place on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, but governments nonetheless plod along and reach abstract, albeit better-than-nothing, ‘solutions’ like the Copenhagen Accord.  The United States, no doubt, has been the biggest foot-dragger in terms of global warming policy over the last couple decades that climate change has become a major global concern. But say what you will about President Barack Obama, he is at least making a valiant attempt to bring the United States back onto the international climate stage after years of inaction by the George W. Bush administration.

Humans and their Optimism

Surprisingly and pleasantly enough, the 17 biggest carbon polluters on the globe have proposed climate change policies independent of the U.N. process that if enacted to their fullest potential, would bring the world only five gigatons of carbon reductions away from meeting the temperature cap of 2° C (more here)! With the limitless potential of- renewable energy solutions- the sun, the wind, the oceans, cleaner-burning wood stoves, and good old-fashioned energy conservation- eliminating those five gigatons of emissions is possible with enough will. The United States, the EU, Japan, South Korea, China, and India among others have planned legislative actions that would slash emissions to levels that bring us within striking distance of atmospheric stabilization of 450 ppm (with enough global resources, 350 ppm could also be met). Though this does not get us exactly to the climate stabilization point, we are also not impossibly far away.  Worldwide consensus on global warming emission reductions can be seen as much closer than many media outlets might lead you to believe. And, as use of renewable energies and energy efficiency measures increases dramatically over the next several years due to national/international greenhouse gas reduction laws and private investment, the health benefits and access to cleaner environments will become apparent.

As well, China and India- the world’s #1 and #4 greenhouse gas emitters respectively- have now agreed to be subjected to ‘international consultation and analysis’ of their greenhouse gas emission measures. Though the Chinese and Indian governments will not be obligated to make mandatory cuts by the international community- at least initially- both nations did put forward domestic plans to cut carbon output before the Copenhagen Climate Conference (in fact, India has plans to install 20,000 MW of solar energy by 2022: Good Day, Sunshine.) These voluntary, national measures have now been put on the table for international viewing. I did not expect a full-blown international treaty to come out of COP15, and I don’t think many who followed climate negotiations prior to the meeting did either. But to get the largest future emitters in China and India, as well as Brazil and South Africa, on board to some sort of building-block agreement is something that had not been able to be achieved previously and lays the seeds for future, more concrete measures to cut emissions. As an American citizen who came of age under the eight-year administration of George W. Bush- a man who worked to weaken and destroy any potential international climate treaty- any sort of far-ranging agreement that includes China and India is a step forward.

Finally, no international agreement on climate change will be reached without the consent of my resource-sucking, flawed (yet beautiful, to me!) country of residence, the United States. As every single country in the U.N. must agree to allow a treaty to come up for a majority vote, America not only has to be part of the agreement but must be, as it is the world’s second-biggest greenhouse gas emitter.  If America does not pass a greenhouse gas reduction and clean energy/reforestation/energy efficiency investment bill, then it will not sign a U.N. treaty. The Copenhagen Accord, as it has corralled on board the major developing nations (read: China!), seems to meet one major requirement that many United States Senators say would allow them to vote for a domestic climate change bill and thusly, to sign off on an international treaty. There is a lot of work to do- much, much work to do on getting an American bill signed into law- but the Copenhagen Accord lays an important initial foundation.

These are just a few of the reasons why I think the U.N. Copenhagen Climate Summit does not have to be considered a death knell for climate change policy across the globe. A new consciousness, shown very vibrantly in Copenhagen at the end of the ‘00s, has begun to awaken around the global heating harm inflicted on Earth and its myriad breathtaking organisms by human activities. We have the resources and ability, though it will require some level of sacrifice on the part of everyone, to make the changes to our societies, to our economies, to our ways of life that bring us all back in balance with our surroundings. Gaia is already melting her glaciers and Arctic and Antarctic ice, burning large swaths of her forest lands, and flooding and withholding rains in ever more- recurrent fashion. Why not try to cool her down a bit?

Humanity is a part of nature and cannot be apart from nature.

-Josh

P.S.: A couple links to give you a couple interesting perspectives on the Copenhagen Accord:

NRDC: Yay

Bill McKibben: Nay