The UN climate negotiations are getting more tense by the day.  Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC Yvo De Boer, reflecting on his work today, noted that “you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink” in reference to the Heads of State who will be arriving over the next 48 hours with a view to a political agreement being reached.

As most everyone knows the major stumbling block in the negotiations is how best to compensate the poor, developing countries if carbon emissions limits are placed on them.  This issue has caused a very tense situation since mid-last week and has threatened to derail any further talks in Copenhagen.

But earlier today, Hillary Clinton arrived and presented the conference with a strong commitment from the US by announcing that the United States would contribute toward a long-term fund worth $100 billion a year by 2020.   In such circumstances, “the United States is prepared to work with other countries toward a goal of jointly mobilizing $100 billion a year by 2020 to address the climate change needs,” she said.

But she tied the money to guarantees from China, India, and Brazil—though she didn’t name them—for ambitious voluntary measures on curbing greenhouse-gas emissions that would be tied to tough scrutiny provisions.

The U.S. delegation came to Copenhagen with no money and poor targets, and these talks have gone nowhere,” said Ricken Patel, executive director of global campaign network Avaaz.org. “Today, they’ve announced a decent commitment on money. If they move on targets as well, we could still see a breakthrough in Copenhagen.”

So, now the US had made the first major move in terms of solving the problem and tackling the major hurdle before the talks end tomorrow.  Let’s see how the European Union responds as well as China, Brazil and India.

Stay tuned.

Read more at Grist.org

Over the past few weeks, remarkable progress had been made on the two most difficult issues facing the summit -– rapidly reducing the world’s emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, and providing finance for the world’s poorest countries to help them cope with the devastating effects of climate change.

On Tuesday, a number of different proposals had been presented to the 1,500 member committee - and a UN Panel concluded that the best offers by rich countries to cut emissions and by industrializing ones to reduce their rate of growth already amounted to up to 80 percent of what was needed to meet the lower end of what scientists say will be required.  Much of the difference, it added, could be made up of measures to reduce the felling of forests and to reduce pollution from shipping and aviation.  Great news, right?

And Yvo de Boer, the top official in change of the negotiations, reported “encouraging” progress on agreeing on a $10 billion a year emergency fund to help poor countries. The United States, Australia, Japan, and the EU have all supported it.  Perfect.

However, on Wednesday this all fell apart, and it was directed at the very foundations of the agreement itself.  The catalyst was the leak of a draft text for the agreement drawn up by the Danish government in consultation with other rich countries and gradually being circulated among industrializing developing ones.

The text contains provisions that the Third World does not like—downplaying the existing Kyoto Protocol, to which they are attached, and giving powers to the World Bank (which rich countries control) at the expense of the United Nations. But these were less important than the fact that it brought to a head growing frustration among poorer nations that a deal was being made behind their backs.

Any deal would aim to keep global warming below two degrees centigrade, a goal agreed by rich and rapidly industrializing countries at a special summit in L’Aquila, Italy, last summer. But the poorest countries have been becoming increasingly convinced that only a much lower increase (1.5 degrees) would give them a chance of avoiding disaster.

To add more fuel to the fire, Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping, chief negotiator for the Group off 77, which represents developing countries, said the two-degree target “exposes over 100 countries to suffering and devastation,” leading to the disappearance of low-lying island nations and “certain death” for Africa.

He added that, in supporting the deal, President Obama was condemning “the cousins and extended family of his own daughters to be destroyed to preserve the interests of the few.” And he said that the $10 billion-a-year fund, promoted by UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown, would not be enough “to buy the poor nations the coffins.”

His remarks resonate so strongly because scientists say the world is already on course for a rise of 1.5 degrees. Meeting his demand, therefore, would mean a rapid phase out of emissions, plus active measures to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. There is no way that rich countries—or even the industrializing ones—will agree to that in Copenhagen.

No doubt, hopes will rise again in the next few days; the summit is still at the stage when initial negotiating positions are being staked out. There will be many ups and downs on the roller coaster before the hair-rising ride comes to a conclusion next weekend.

(With excerpts from Grist.com  12.9.09)

“The world is depositing hope with you for a short while in the history of mankind,” Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen told delegates at the opening ceremony of the talks, seeking to agree the first U.N. climate pact in 12 years.

But the news was good that President Obama is going to attend closing ceremonies next week, which indicates that he wants to be there for some type of agreement being signed.  What specific agreement that might be still needs to take shape, but a good sign nonetheless.

In advance of the conference, the US needed to show some type of tangible support as a sign of global leadership.  So, Mr. Obama pledged last week that the US will reduce emissions 17% by 2020 - unfortunately, not aggressive enough to solve the problem but he had to show up with something.  “The world is very much looking to the U.S. to come up with an emissions reduction target” as well as financial aid to help developing countries cut emissions and adapt to global warming, said Yvo de Boer, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention of Climate Change said.

To back up the US pledge, today we learned that the US EPA ruled that greenhouse gases endanger human health, allowing it to regulate planet-warming gases without legislation from the Senate, where a bill to cut U.S. emissions by 2020 is stalled.   So, if the Senate fails to act on the climate change bill currently before them, the EPA has the right to step in and regulate carbon under a different mandate, but with the result being the same.  This of course, has the US business community freaked out:  Read More Here

The Obama administration has been encouraged by recent announcements by China and India, two other major carbon emitters, to set targets to rein in emissions and the growing consensus on raising cash to help poor nations cope with global warming, seen as a major stumbling block to a new U.N. deal. Read more here.

But with all the good news, here is a rather sobering essay by Bill McKibben of 350.org. Just for another perspective, but let’s hope hes wrong.  Here

Lots of good stuff happening, at least today!

More to come tomorrow. Stay tuned.

A new study out this week suggests that the United States could reduce its greenhouse emissions by nearly 8 percent in the next decade if Americans undertook a short list of behavioral changes, like carpooling, insulating their homes and drying clothes outside instead of in a tumble dryer.  Read here

A study released today outlined a potential snow scenario for Park City over the next 100 years.  If climate change continues unabated, Park City could lose one-third of its season by 2075.  Read more.

Check out this article about how climate change is effecting the Baishui Glacier in western china.  Much of the focus has been on Eastern European, Arctic and North American glaciers, but we should be aware of how climate change is effecting the Himalayas as well. Losing it would have serious consequences, both from an economic perspective and even possibly a national security one too.  Hopefully China’s leaders will follow through with their promises made at the UN Climate Change Summit last week.  Read more HERE.

The US Environmental Protection Agency is going to declare carbon a “dangerous pollutant” is Congress doesn’t act soon.  This will essentially place carbon dioxide under the focus of the Clean Air Act and will then need to declare tight regulations on it.  This is great news as it effectively forces Congress to stop dragging their feet on this issue or the EPA will take charge.  Read more

The U.N. chief is urging the world to “seal the deal” on climate change ahead of a major conference on global warming in December.
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says the threat posed by greenhouse gas emissions underscores how the world’s nations must all take action. Ban says the outcome of the Copenhagen conference “will impact the planet for generations to come.”  Ban says he also plans to visit the North Pole soon — and he hopes that will send an important message to the international community about the need to tighten pollution controls.  He says “the future of humanity and planet Earth are at stake.”  READ MORE

Yvo de Boer, the man responsible for leading the charge to map out a global climate treaty this December in Copenhagen, is concerned. And rightfully so–there’s a huge mess left to be sorted out before nations should be considered ready to even come to the table for the fast-approaching historic climate talks. Huge, developing countries disagree on whether they should have to make emissions reductions. Rich countries are torn over how much they’re willing to help fund developing ones’ struggles against climate change. Nobody’s happy. And time is running out.   Read more here.

Check this op-ed piece out:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/opinion/29krugman.html?_r=2