Cuts and Money

After all the acronyms and details are stripped away, the international negotiations at Copenhagen come down to two things: cuts and money.

Cuts are reductions in global warming pollution. Money is needed for poorer countries to both reduce their emissions and to adapt to the climate change already happening.

The rich countries arrived at Copenhagen largely set in their proposed cuts. There were varying degrees of ambition - with Canada pretty much the weakest - and they did not add up to what scientists say is needed to stop runaway climate change.

The poorer or developing countries showed up more willing than in the past to make some cuts of their own, but still largely arguing that most of the greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere, since they dissipate only over many decades, were put up there by the rich countries. The poorer or developing countries therefore believe the burden of cuts belongs to others.

On the money front, now the richer countries are rallying around a proposal to up the fund for poorer and developing countries to $100 billion a year. It's unclear whether the developed countries will go for it, or go for the conditions that come attached - including "meaningful" pollution reductions and transparency in reporting.

One can't escape the feeling that Copenhagen hasn't been so much a negotiation as a forum where the richer countries have put their cards on the table and said "take it or leave it." You don't get the sense there has been any meaningful back and forth, nor a spirit of compromise. There is also little trust.

Canada has played its own part in undermining that trust through revelations that it cannot meet even the weak cuts it put on the table due to its obsession with dirty oil growth in the tar sands. It will therefore join the $100 billion push and hope it can buy off those who would call foul.

Matt Price
Program Manager
Energy and Climate