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)