Not the conference that saved the planet

I was tempted to write “the conference that failed to save the planet”, but I’m trying not to be too negative (or is this just semantic nit-picking?). Am I very disappointed? Well you can only be very disappointed if you have high expectations. I must admit I would have been (pleasantly) surprised if Copenhagen had really come up with a substantial agreement, but the final debacle could and should surely have been avoided.
So now we appear to have agreement(although the countries only took note and didn’t officially accept the document) that we need a 2° maximum rise limit. But the way we are going, we appear to be heading for up to 4°. The industrialised world has opted out of binding targets. The funding arrangements are linked to development aid that would have been given anyway.
Here in Germany, the industry lobby is using Copenhagen to argue against emissions limits which they say would put German industry at a disadvantage. The sceptics – both tue “fundamentalists” who deny any link between human behaviour and climate change or even the existence of the latter – and those who don’t believe in mega-Conferences are rubbing their hands and saying “I told you so”. The big states are trying to tell us it was really a success or at least a step in the right direction. So where do we go from here and is there still hope?
Well, I’m not ready to give up yet, although I find it hard to give rational reasons for that.
Confidence in the power of the UNFCCC negotiations is at an all-time low. The differences between the developing countries facing disaster and the wealthy industrialised nations who think they still have time seems wiser than ever.
2010 is not getting off to a good start from the climate point of view. Can it only get better or is there worse to come?