Skip to content
Subscribe

The Climate Change Discussions Fail Once More

Published:

Photo: UNFCCC

Discussions about climate change in the United Nations have been going on for 20 years, without much success. The fact that negotiators failed to deliver even the minimum requirements of the Doha summit this year is another example of the incapacity of the world nations to address an issue of which the consequences are more and more tangible.

The Doha Summit was set to close Friday, but discussions drew out into Saturday and resulted in the adoption of a hurried series of texts, the scope of which remains highly disappointing. Indeed, the only agreement that came out of the two weeks of negotiations was an extension of the Kyoto protocol until 2020 for the European Union, Australia and 10 other developed nations, countries only representing 15% of global carbon emissions.

Despite pressure from civil society and scientists to reach an agreement on a variety of other issues, the negotiations remained at a stalemate on Friday night. Even the emotional speech made by the official delegate of the Philippines, which was hit by a typhoon on Tuesday resulting in more than 500 deaths, did not convince the major players to make the necessary concessions.

"The outcome of our work is not about what our political masters want. It is about what is demanded of us by 7 billion people. I appeal to all, please, no more delays, no more excuses. Please, let Doha be remembered as the place where we found the political will to turn things around. Please, let 2012 be remembered as the year the world found the courage to find the will to take responsibility for the future we want. I ask of all of us here, if not us, then who? If not now, then when? If not here, then where?"

Going over the allocated time has become a tradition in the climate change negotiations (the conference in South Africa last year lasted 36 hours longer). By Friday, delegates increased their efforts to reach agreements before morning, particularly as food and water ran low.

https://twitter.com/pwatkinson/status/277122672062758913

However, even with one more day of negotiation, two main areas of contention remained unsolved by the time the conference closed.

Tension ran high between developed countries and least developed countries about a funding agreement for emissions reductions. At the Copenhagen summit in 2009, rich nations pledged to give $100 billion annually to developing nations by 2020.The developing countries argued they need $60 billions from 2013 to 2015 in order to deal with "climate change-induced rise in droughts, floods, rising sea levels and storms." With the US and the EU still struggling economically, they did not agree on any concrete figures, a major fallout of the Doha summit.

Another important topic was the future of "hot air," the 13 gigatone of unused trade-able carbon emission permits that were given to Eastern European nations when they entered the Kyoto protocol. The nations of the Pacific, as well as less developed countries, consider the elemination of this surplus an essential condition for an agreement in Doha. Eastern countries, on the other hand, especially Poland, do not want to give up such a benefit.

The final text does not cancel these permits but the EU, Australia, Japan, Noway and Switzerland committed themselves to not buy any of these permits in order to reach their goals under Kyoto II. This means that in reality these permits will not be exchangeable until 2020.

The disappointing outcome of the negotiation has been criticized by developing countries, the Philippines and NGOs have been particularly vocal about their discontent.

https://twitter.com/ecoflo/status/277465056348876800

https://twitter.com/WWF/status/277478997665918977

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

The Climate Change Discussions Fail Once More

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us