Durban climate talks - the verdict

On Sunday morning, at about 3am Durban time, a deal was struck to try to prevent catastrophic climate change.  While most of the headline writers this weekend have been focusing on the fall out from the European Summit, the implications of the climate deal are beginning to be understood.

For much of Saturday night I was receiving email bulletins from my two RSPB colleagues who have spent the past two weeks (and much of the past three years) trying to influence these negotiations.  There is no glamour in this.  Stuck in hotel rooms for days on end, isolated from their families and whatever else is going on in the world, John Lanchbery and Mel Coath have been leading NGO efforts (organised through the Climate Action Network) to secure a fair and ambitious global deal. 

While there is little they could do in the final hours, I can understand why they stayed to the bitter end - decisions made this weekend will have huge consequences for us and the planet.

We need a deal that secures global reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to prevent temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees Centigrade above pre-industrial levels.   If we fail,  those on the front line of climate change - wildlife and the poorest people of the world - will suffer. 

So what did we get?

- Global agreement for a roadmap to a legally binding deal
- Second commitment period of Kyoto Protocol to be agreed next year
- Green Climate Fund to be set up

The Energy Secretary, Chris Huhne, is reported to have worked incredibly hard to help secure the deal and he has heralded the UN climate talks a success.  The Decc release states:

In a major realignment of support, well over 120 countries formed a coalition behind the EU's high ambition proposal of a roadmap to a global legally binding deal to curb emissions. African states together with the least developed countries such as Bangladesh and Gambia, and small island states vulnerable to rising sea levels, like the Maldives, joined with the EU to put forward a timetable which would see the world negotiate a new agreement by 2015 at the latest.

The talks resulted in a decision to adopt the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol next year in return for a roadmap to a global legal agreement covering all parties for the first time. Negotiations will begin on the agreement early next year.  Energy and Climate Change Secretary Chris Huhne said:

"This is a significant step forward in curbing emissions to tackle global climate change. For the first time we've seen major economies, normally cautious, commit to take the action demanded by the science.  The EU's proposal for the roadmap was at the core of the negotiations and the UK played a central role in galvanising support. This outcome shows the UNFCCC system really works and can produce results. It also shows how a united EU can achieve results on the world stage and deliver in the UK's best interests. There are still many details to be hammered out, but we now need to start negotiating the new legal agreement as soon as possible and there are still many details to be hammered out."

Also the conference agreed to get the Green Climate Fund up and running, this will help deliver financial support to developing countries to reduce emissions and adapt to the effects of climate change.

While waiting for planes to take them home, John and Mel have reported the good and bad elements of the deal. 

The good news is that the Kyoto Protocol (secured in 1997 and expires in 2012) has been extended while negotiations on a new legally binding deal will start (to include the USA and China).  The start of talks on a new binding treaty including all countries is very, very important - next year would have been too late for the USA who need to secure domestic legislation to proceed.  And, negotiations for tackling tropical forest destruction are still in play. 

The bad news is that the new treaty starts in 2020.  This is just too late.  Science suggests that global emissions need to peak and decline by then.  Current emission cuts promised mean that we are on track for, at best, a 4 degrees rise.  We need more ambition. Unfortunately, serious loopholes in the Kyoto Protocol undermine even the cuts which have been agreed.   For example, rules on accounting for emissions from land use and from forestry, mean that countries are able to INCREASE emissions from logging their forests without having to take any debits i.e. without getting any penalty.  Essentially, the cap is too loose to stop countries not getting lots of free credits.  The fear is that this enables greenwashing of the Kyoto Protocol.

So, as exhausted negotiators, politicians, journalists and NGO advocates fly home, we should take a glimmer of hope.  It does still seem that the world is prepared to just about do what it takes to stop the world from frying.  And that is the sort of pre-Christmas message that I want to hear.

What did you think of the outcome in Durban?  How optimistic are you that world leaders can act together to stop catastrophic climate change?

It would be great to hear your views.