It’s time for the final blog in our Copenhagen series, and for this last report both our guest-bloggers will be giving us their thoughts on the past two weeks. Anya reports from the last days of the conference whilst, back home in South Africa, Kim reflects on the impact of the COP15 outside Denmark…

Closing notes from Copenhagen

by Anya Boyd for Green Energy Republic

NGO side:- Two large screens were put up in the Klimaforum so that those who couldn’t get in to the Bella Center were able to watch live-streaming of the final plenary sessions going on inside.

- Lack of Chinese and African representatives noticed at the Klimaforum. When asked about why there were no Chinese grassroots representations, a spokeswoman said," We honestly don’t know. We tried to reach Chinese groups in every way we could via official Chinese government channels […] We would love to have ordinary Chinese people here. China is crucial to ALL efforts to implement any global ecological solutions."

Nitty Gritty: - Apparently, Obama was due to be in Copenhagen for the conference for all of nine hours before flying off to a holiday in Hawaii…

- In his speech to the assembled leaders, Obama said: "We are running short on time. We are ready to get this done today, but there has to be movement on all sides." And yet he arrived in Copenhagen with no new proposal from the U.S. side
(From yahoo news)

- The U.S. commitment to reduce greenhouse gasses mirrors legislation before Congress. It calls for a 17 percent reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 — the equivalent of 3 percent to 4 percent from the more commonly used baseline of 1990 levels. That is far less than the offers from the European Union, Japan and Russia.

-A 'Copenhagen Accord' was eventually agreed upon and the motion passed in the early hours of Saturday. This text, which is just over two pages long, 'recognises' the scientific evidence stating that a 2C reduction is needed to prevent the most catastrophic effects of climate change. There are no concrete steps on how the 2C will be achieved. The 80% emission reduction by 2020 has been taken out.
Further key points (www.unfccc.int):

- A commitment has been made to list developed country emission reduction targets and mitigation action by developing countries for 2020;
-USD 30 billion in short-term funding allocated for immediate action until 2012 and USD 100 billion annually by 2020 in long-term financing; and
- Mechanisms implemented to support technology transfer and forestry.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban-ki Moon told journalists, "Finally, we sealed the deal." He said this was an "essential beginning" but the agreement must be made legally binding next year. To be accepted as an official U.N. agreement, the deal needs to be endorsed by all 193 nations at the talks. However, many countries are already irritated that they were left out of last minute negotiations.

Read more

So, what’s the verdict? Well, while commentators like George Monbiot remain unenthusiastic, I am optimistic that this Accord is at least a first step in the right direction.

In terms of a civilian actually 'participating' in a COP, this COP15 has been somewhat disappointing – mainly due to the utter shambles of the logistics – too many delegates invited for too few places. However, being in Copenhagen as the negotiations took place it was a great experience - the side events, the Klimaforum, the displays across the city. I found it fascinating to be more exposed to climate change activists. I realise that when used in the right way, the public voice is a very strong and important force to be reckoned with.

In terms of the actual 'deal' - well that’s a tricky one to comment on as there are such a huge number of interests that need to be satisfied. It’s mind-boggling to think how this will actually be achieved. What is sad though, as George Monbiot emphasises, is that countries aren’t seeing this 'climate crisis' as a competetive opportunity to challenge each other and take an innovative lead - whether it be through  national incentives, high emission targets, technology applications or  adaptation measures.

--------------

A view from outside

by Kim Coetzee for Green Energy Republic

Having been back in South Africa for a week, this time watching the COP from afar like everyone else, I'm more depressed than ever by the lack of penetration that climate change has made into the general public discourse in South Africa.In my first blog I wrote that the COP at the Bella Center was like a small self-contained city, but now I think a more apt metaphor would be that of a space ship. Delegates, ministers and leaders crowd together in a self-contained bubble structure to hammer out a deal that affects us all, without the true inconvenience of having to really grapple with the daily struggle faced by ordinary people as climate change wreaks havoc on the natural world. Those in power, particularly from industrialised nations, are cocooned and protected from the vagaries of the weather by heating, air-conditioning, water in bottles. Perhaps it’s easier to live with yourself for making this ‘non-deal’ when your life is relatively removed from nature. I think the so-called leaders of the world have, by and large, ended up depriving its people of a fair chance of long-term survival by proving to be seriously unable to LEAD.  Which leads me to agree with John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK, who said that: "[I]t is now evident that beating global warming will require a radically different model of politics than the one on display here in Copenhagen".

For me, this all highlights one of the fundamental problems facing the worldwide effort to mobilise people: essentially, we have a 'product' that ordinary people in western, industrialised nations just don't want to 'buy'. We have to sell the unpopular idea that large-scale changes to our (and I include myself here) way of life are necessary. It’s very telling that on Thursday, the penultimate day of Copenhagen, the top news story was the good news that everyone can fly BA over the Christmas period and not the climate conference.

So, as much as I berate the leaders in Copenhagen for failing to lead (and spectacularly so, I'd add) I have to agree with Guardian writer Polly Toynbee who wrote that, whilst many leaders understand the problem better than the people they represent, they also know that the path they need to forge will require much more sacrifice than their citizens are willing or ready to accept. Not only is it an unpopular idea in theory, but what it actually means on a day-to-day basis is still, I think, a fuzzy concept for most people.

That’s why I think this little book I was introduced to at the conference is great idea - http://thebiggerpicture2009.org/festival/ration-me-up. Ration Me Up is a ration book that shows you your fair share of the world’s resources, revealing just how simple it is to minimise your impact on the planet by reducing the amount of stuff you consume.  A brilliant idea, but one I don't expect to see Obama, Brown, Wen Jiabao or anyone from the EU supporting any time soon - what a shame.