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?

It’s not hard to understand the frustration of the developing countries who have been boycotting some of the Copenhagen sessions to try to pressure the industrialised world into committing to binding emissions limits. We all know who’s been spouting out the greenhouse gases – and who is going to be hardest hit, or even already suffering most.
Meanwhile, the conference organisers are having trouble getting participants into the conference venue. It seems 45,000 peole have applied to participate – three times more than the actual capacity, according to the UNFCCC. If a record number of negotiators, ngos, journalists etc. attending were a guarantee of success, Copenhagen would have to be the best conference ever. If…

One of the main things that gives me hope that all might not be lost in the battle to avert climate catastrophe is the sight of all those people demonstrating on the streets of Copenhagen at the weekend. Even the danger of being handcuffed by mistake by police looking for troublemakers (1.000 people detained?), and having to wait it out in the frost didn’t put them off.The politicians in the conference rooms have to take the decision. But grassroots pressure – or support, depending on how you look at it – can’t do any harm. (The British art of understatement).
For one reason or another I am not in Copenhagen, but there’s no shortage of journalist colleagues on the streets, in the conference halls and at the numerous side-events, keeping the world abreast of what’s happening. And some of us have to tie the threads together at home.
Here in my Bonn office, the email system is being bombarded by press releases, briefings and reports. “Mega-hype”? And will something come out of it?
People keep saying the fact that so many world leaders are turning up in Copenhagen this week is a positive sign. Well, I’m glad they’re showing an interest – or is it a question of being interested in the show?
The proof of the pudding…in this case is whether they can actually agreed on BINDING targets and funding for affected
developing countries.

Well,we’re approaching the first week of the Copenhagen summit. Are you already getting tired of it? Or do you think it’s starting to get exciting and wonder what the world’s leaders will come up with at the end of next week? Georg Windisch commented on the Ice Blog that he finds it sad we need to worry about overkill on this topic, because he says it’s a matter of our very existence.
“What ever comes about this crucial sumit we must continue to voice our concerns about the future of our children. It is very selfish from us just to keep on taking and not willing to give. To many people have to die because of our life style, its time we give our best efforts to help everyone and every living speceis to exist on our beautiful planet. With hope for a better world as we have the talent and power to change the world for the better” says Georg.
I agree with you wholeheartedly, Georg, I wish more of our influential politicians and business-people would do the same, and be prepared to put their money where their mouths are.
There have been some signs of hope. The US Environment Protection Agency’s decision that greenhouse gases represent a health threat, for instance. Might seem to you like stating the obvious, but if it gives the President more scope to reduce them, it’s a big step forward.
Then again we had the escalation in the dispute between the wealthy industrialised and the developing nations. EU leaders are supposed to come up with a figure for funding today. Let’s see what that brings. Somehow I fear it will fall short of what’s needed.
I’ve been pleased to note the media are really giving full attention to the subject. And people around me are actually talking about it. Let’s hope it stays that way until December 19th – and beyond.
Ice-Blog readers might be interested in a flash picture gallery I made on Climate Change in Greenland. And a 25-minute radio feature to listen or download on the same topic.
Climate Change in Greenland – in sound and pictures
Click on the “climate” section on the right-hand side.
There are some other interesting stories on the page too.

Apologies for blog-silence. For one reason and another I wasn’t able to blog for the last couple of weeks.
The question is – did you miss it? Or have you been reading, watching, listening to so much about climate change you are getting tired of the subject?
I am very concerned that the international community is accepting that there will be no legally binding agreement in Copenhagen. I am even more concerned that a lot of people are getting tired of the climate change topic and simply don’t care. Is there a danger of “overkill” in our media coverage? I was giving a training session to some young journalists yesterday and some of them told me about a project they were planning dealing with that very subject. They have the feeling that there is so much attention to the topic that global warming is starting to leave people cold. (Sorry!) People like me were pleased that climate change came onto the “mainstream” political and public agenda. But unless there is a big disaster – and a clear link to climatic factors – people are tending to “switch off”.
I’ve been speaking to friends in the UK about the latest floods in northern England. People are happy to blame politicians, local authorities or private companies for inadequate drainage or flood protection. Some say “it’s just nature”. But few are willing to even consider a possible link to scientists’s predictions of an increasing number of extreme weather events because of climate change.
Yvo de Boer from the UNFCCC is giving a major press conference today about the Copenhagen meeting. I don’t envy him his job. Trying to keep interest alive in view of the apparent concensus that Copenhagen will not “seal the deal” has something of the Sisyphean about it.