If you still have hope about the ability of the UN process and of our leaders to take action to face climate change, you should stop. Such a hope is unfortunately useless…

COP15 was a genuine political failure. The summit ended with only the adoption by thirty countries of a non binding political accord full of intentions, but without any proper constraints on the major polluters of the planet. This Copenhagen Accord does not provide any mechanism for sanctions or even international and independent verification. The signatory states are entirely free to comply or not to this final declaration. Worldwide each country had until January 31 (even if it was a soft deadline) to announce whether they would comply with the Copenhagen Accord, and what reductions they would be proposing. However as already mentioned the commitment is voluntary and verification is done nationally, once every two years by the country’s administration sending a report.

Our global leaders seem to be satisfied on what they agreed. According to them, there were two major steps forward. First, the inclusion in the agreement of the goal to “hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius by 2100” without considering that the 2-degree goal had previously been agreed to by G8 leaders in Italy in July 2009. Secondly, the promise to give 30 billion dollars over three years (2010 to 2012) to allow adaptation of the countries most vulnerable to climate change and 100 billion per year from 2020 to allow the countries most vulnerable to climate change to adapt themselves, albeit that nothing is said about the mechanisms of how such funding will work. Most likely, this will just constitute the recycling of development aid.

Moreover, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) says the Accord was negotiated with 30 countries representing 80% of the Greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) which was fair and democratic enough ! But so far, only about 60 countries out of 192 have “joined” this agreement which is no more than an attempt to bury the Kyoto Protocol which obliges rich countries to have stronger targets than the poor countries (more info here). We can suspect that some countries did join in order to prevent themselves from being excluded later in the process.

More worrying is the fact that the announcements from the countries who have sent their reductions proposals to the UNFCC (see here and here) are almost the same as before COP15 began. The conclusion is alarming : according the following announced reductions, it is indeed clear that world leaders have little respect for the science of climate change.

While the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stresses the need to reduce emissions of greenhouse gas emissions by at least 25% to 40%, commitments by the countries of Annex I (rich countries) would amount to a total reduction of 12% to 19% of emissions (other sources speak of 10% to 15%) from a 1990 baseline, according to the recent report from the World Resources Institute (read it here). This level of ambition points towards a temperature increase of 3.5 to 4 degrees Celsius by the end of the century. It is compelling evidence of the limits of a voluntary approach based on a minimum political agreement.

Thus, the United States pledged to reduce GHG emissions to less than 4% below 1990 levels by 2020.

Unsurprisingly, the EU reiterated its goal of a range of 20 to 30% reduction in emissions by 2020, with a shift to 30% conditional on the actions of other countries. It’s surprising to see that whereas the EU was ahead of the game during the Kyoto talks, in Copenhagen they were nowhere to be seen and that Europe has not moved an inch since March 2007. Note that the only slightly serious northern country is Norway with its pledge to reduce emissions by 30% to 40% if a legally binding agreement is reached.

Australia pledged to reduce its emissions to 4% below 1990 levels by 2020 and to 15%-25% depending on the action of the others countries.

Canada, which is far beyond the 1990-2020 levels, submitted an emission reduction target of 17% below 2005 levels. This will actually allow Canada to increase its emissions to 3% above 1990 levels.

Japan re-iterated its goal of reducing GHG emissions to 25% below 1990 levels by 2020 but its commitment is made on the condition that all major emitters commit to ambitious targets.

New Zealand maintained a conditional target of 10 to 20 % reductions below 1990 levels.

Other major countries such as China or India which have published their goals, although they do not mention the Copenhagen Accord in theirs letters. They include "carbon intensity" in their figures. Carbon intensity is the measure by which we calculate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions needed to produce one unit of gross domestic product (GDP).

India and China are thus commited, respectively, to reduce their carbon intensity by 20% to 25% and 40% to 45% by 2020 compared to 2005 levels. Similarly, Brasil and South Africa are engaged to reduce their carbon intensity by 36% to 39% and 34%, respectively, compared to 2005 levels.

But reductions in carbon intensity cannot accurately be represented in terms of 1990-baseline reductions, due to the wide variation in GDP projections.

If we use the existing projections for these countries, at a minimum China and India will increase their emissions by as much as 200%-300% compared to 1990 levels. Brazilian and South African intensity reduction pledges may represent, respectively a 1.7%-6.4% and 50% increase in emissions versus 1990 levels.

In this tragic political landscape, one country (not counting some countries of the Bolivarian Alternatives for the Americas [ALBA] which didn’t submit any pledges as they consider the whole process as illegitimate) seems to stand out.

The Maldives, one of the countries most threatened by climate change, has announced an unequivocal goal of carbon neutrality by 2020 (no more CO2). And guess what ? President Nasheed was one of the very few world leaders who visited Klimaforum09. We believe that he took something back with him after his visit to the people’s summit in December. He may feel alone amongst the world leaders, but Klimaforum09 stands by him.

Ronack Monabay (IPAM/AITEC – UCJS)

French translation is available here