Benito Mueller is a clued-up guy. I have only skimmed the first few pages of what looks like a pretty comprehensive document, called Copenhagen 2009 Failure or final wake-up call for our leaders?
It’s 35 pages, and looks very comprehensive…

“The overarching lesson of what happened in Copenhagen, however, remains the need for real political leadership on the road to Mexico in December. Copenhagen will have redeemed itself if it will have served as the final wake-up call for our collective leadership.”


Pledged to death…

The people at Climate Interactive (no, I’d not heard of ’em either, I think), have sent out this-

So what is the scoop on all the proposals coming out of Copenhagen? There was a January 31 deadline for country proposal – did we make any more progress?

Short answer: No.

The Climate Interactive team has updated our analysis of “current proposals” in light of the proposals and targets numerous nations have submitted to the UNFCCC as a part of the process laid out in the recently adopted Copenhagen Accord. Our analysis shows essentially the same results that we reported December 19th at the close of the Copenhagen Summit: if current proposals were fully implemented average global temperature would overshot the 2° goal and would in fact and increase by approximately 3.9°C (7.0°F) by 2100.

You can learn more about our results by taking a look at our press release, blog post, and data and analysis page.

For more hopeful news, check out the cool way that Tactable integrated the C-ROADS simulation into a touch-table science museum exhibit on climate change.

Haven’t read this, but IIED do good work…

Copenhagen’s climate finance promise: six key questions

One of the promises emerging from the confusion of the Copenhagen climate talks focused on climate finance. Ramping up to US$100 billion a year starting in 2020, the promised finance would support developing countries in adapting to climate impacts and adopting low-carbon pathways. This briefing explores the wording in the Copenhagen Accord to unearth six big questions about the promise – any one of which could seriously challenge the trust these funds were designed to build.

To Download: http://www.iied.org/pubs/display.php?o=17071IIED

The Copenhagen analysis continues apace, with some foolish people looking to Mexico as a repeat. Far more likely that this whole sorry mess will get strung out till 2011 and South Africa- and beyond…

The Ecoequity lot have got “After Copenhagen: A wiser movement, a justice challenge, a response to the China bashing”

It’s been a while since Copenhagen, but not too long, perhaps, to send out another reflection on its significance. So here’s After Copenhagen, wherein Tom Athanasiou spends most of his time considering Copenhagen as a turning point for the climate justice movement, and replying to the new vogue for China bashing. Mark Lynas in particular.

Climateethics has published a paper-A Comprehensive Ethical Analysis of the Copenhagen Accord.

It is an attempt to identify what happened in Copenhagen , address the controversy about whether the Copenhagen Accord was a step forward or a disaster, and finally examine the Copenhagen outcome through an ethical lens. It is available at:


And there’s this from the Guardian-
On their take on a deal being im-possible

and the experts they asked

“The Europeans are still feeling bruised, and think Copenhagen was pretty much a disaster. The Chinese and Americans tend to be pleased about avoiding a total breakdown in the talks and think it was useful to get a statement of principles to build on. The point of the meeting was to get a deal that might stand some chance of meeting scientific advice on climate change, not an outcome that could be spun to save politicians’ faces.”

Gideon Rachman “In Stockholm, thinking about Copenhagen”
Financial Times January 23rd 2010

“The United Nations has dropped the 31 January deadline for countries to submit their climate change targets as agreed in December’s Copenhagen climate summit. The UN climate change chief, Yvo de Boer, announced yesterday that the deadline is now “soft”, meaning countries can sign up to the Copenhagen accord whenever they want.
The change comes as only 20 out of 192 countries have submitted official targets with 10 days left to the deadline. The Copenhagen accord seeks to bind nations to a goal of limiting global warming to 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial times. It also proposes that developing countries receive 100 billion US dollars per year to reduce emissions and adapt to climate change after 2020.”

See here too

So, Earthscan publish some pretty interesting books (declaration of interest- MCFly has requested some review copies and gotten ’em).

And this looks interesting

Earthcast – After Copenhagen: the tactics and the treaty
this is a live web event on 27 January 2010 at 5pm. Anyone can register and participate. Contributors will include Michael Grubb, David Satterthwaite and Richard Smith. They will dissect the agreement and ask whether future negotiations can establish a binding treaty that sets ambitious limits for the large emitters while supporting developing nations financially and technologically.

To register go to http://www.earthscan.co.uk/?tabid=101760