New year, new challenges for global warming solutions

I didn’t go to Copenhagen for the climate talks but I followed the last two weeks of international negotiations here at home and gleaned enough from my colleagues who were there to know that the final outcome was not an unqualified success. It would be hard even to call it a qualified success. Although some, such as NRDC’s Executive Director Frances Beinecke are putting on a brave face and calling the new accord a step forward, others are less tactful; Jeffrey Sachs, Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University called the process nothing less than “a farce.”

There are of course two sides of every coin and what happened at Copenhagen is no exception. On the one hand for the first time in 8 years the U.S. actually came to the table and participated in negotiations. Commitments to limit greenhouse gas emissions were made by the world’s largest polluters, the U.S. and China. A goal was set for channeling badly needed funds to poor and vulnerable nations for clean development and adaptation to a rapidly changing environment. Most importantly, the outpouring of support for solutions to climate change was clearly stronger than it has ever been, with calls for action from the global business community, labor, young people and communities all over the world.

On the other hand although the U.S. came to the table, it wasn’t until President Obama showed up at the eleventh hour and with China, India, Brazil and South Africa strong-armed a deal that the remaining 187 participants for the most part accepted as a fait accompli, that critical progress was made. The final agreement isn’t likely to result in actual greenhouse gas reductions; the accord itself is non-binding and it fails to set a goal for concluding an international treaty, which means the actual implementation of several key provisions are at best uncertain. The financial aid promised to developing nations, unaccompanied by a plan to achieve it, is likely to remain a promise. The few billion dollars that just might reach poor nations falls far short of what is actually needed to spur new clean development and help citizens of countries like the Maldives find a new home.

All things considered, I have to admit to feelings of deep disappointment, anger and frustration and a sense that at a time when real leadership has never been more important, real leadership was nowhere to be found. If after two years of climate negotiations all we have to show is a non-binding agreement and the dim possibility of yet more negotiations starting again, where does that leave us? A friend of mine posted on Facebook this weekend that “after the failure of Copenhagen we are now entering a decade of hope and opportunity.” On first reading his post, I thought that he’d gone mad. On the second reading I mulled it over and decided that while I wouldn’t have put it quite like that myself, he was headed in the right direction.

The success or failure of Copenhagen rests largely on U.S. shoulders; indeed, the rest of the world is now waiting to see if the U.S. will make good on its commitment and deliver real emissions reductions. The only way for that to happen is for President Obama to come home and push harder than he’s ever done for a Senate agreement on climate. And the only way he’ll do that is if it’s clear that we—and by we I mean climate advocates across the country—have his back. I hope that our support will only grow louder and stronger, and I hope that we will take every opportunity to demonstrate the art of the possible through carbon reduction in our homes and businesses, and through strong actions taken at the state and regional levels.

I happen to have the great fortune to live in a state where solutions to climate change are all around me. Over the last two legislative sessions Oregon has adopted a series of policies all aimed at clean energy development and carbon reduction thanks to the diligence of advocates, policy makers and allies in the business, low-income, labor and local government communities. While our failure to advance comprehensive statewide GHG reduction planning and concrete targets is mirrored in the U.S. Senate’s stalemate over a climate bill, and more recently in the Copenhagen talks, I’m disinclined to stop trying and I suspect that I’m not alone. Leadership may have gone on an untimely vacation for a couple of weeks, but the break is over and with a new year ahead of us it’s time to roll up our sleeves and get back to work.