The talks that began yesterday in Copenhagen have been heralded by many around the world as a defining moment in the huge debate over climate change. These high expectations may soon be crushed as leaders at the conference are becoming increasingly pessimistic as to their ability to reach an agreement.
The evidence of climate change is everywhere, from rising sea levels to melting glaciers to increasing temperatures right here at Tufts. On Dec. 3 the people of Boston warmed themselves in record−high temperatures that reached 69 degrees. The warm spell was brief, followed within 48 hours by a winter storm that dumped between three and five inches of snow on the city. The timing of the weather swings provided the perfect backdrop for a conference on climate change.
"Copenhagen is upon us, or we are upon it," said Professor William Moomaw, director of the Center for International Environment and Resource Policy at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and the energy and climate director of the Tufts Institute of the Environment.
The inflated optimism surrounding the summit was due in large part to the election of President Obama. Countries around the world that had been disheartened by the United States' refusal to accept the Kyoto Protocol's carbon emissions guidelines hoped that Obama would change direction.
Though the world's focus is on Obama's policies, there has been a shift in how climate change is viewed in the United States. Moomaw noted that addressing the issue of climate change became a goal of all three frontrunners in the elections last year. Though Sens. John McCain (R−Ariz.), Hillary Clinton (D−N.Y.) and Obama may not have agreed on the implementation of strategies regarding any sort of work on climate change, all three acknowledged it to be a problem.
"It's a huge moment in the development of climate change [policy] both internationally and in the United States," said Odette Mucha, a second−year student at the Fletcher School. "The Kyoto Protocol was the first international attempt to address climate change around the world. [Copenhagen] is a really momentous occasion because it's going to set the future for climate change around the world going forward, and it represents an opportunity for the United States to join the game again."
Mucha is attending the Copenhagen conference with the group SustainUS, a youth organization supporting sustainable development.
"Because the U.S. didn't sign Kyoto, it's finally an opportunity for the U.S. to show its leadership and address climate change along with the rest of the world," she said.
The likelihood that a binding treaty will emerge from the conference hinges on whether countries can overcome the tensions between rival factions. Balancing the different emission levels, financial needs and policies of developed and developing nations are some of the debates at the top of the list.
This conflict, however, represents only a portion of the massive tug of war over how to implement a policy that many would agree to. Differences also exist among countries like Brazil, whose rainforests and indigenous peoples are at risk, and countries like Saudi Arabia that have an economic stake in oil production.
Such differences of opinion will likely be difficult to resolve in the 12 days that have been allotted to the issue at Copenhagen.
"For every idea that is proposed there is going to be a countervailing force that says, ‘This is a bad idea; this will do harm to my people, my organization, my interest,'" Moomaw said.
With so much pessimism and a binding agreement nowhere to be seen, some activists have modified their hopes.
"The best outcome would be a binding agreement but it's been made pretty clear that that is unlikely to happen. So the next best thing is that a deadline is set for a binding agreement and leaders leave inspired to take real action in their own countries," senior Erin Taylor said. Taylor is a member of the Leadership Campaign, which hosted the recent climate sleep−outs on the residential and academic quads.
"One thing that's really critical coming out of Copenhagen is seeing the U.S. Senate also do something meaningful. In my mind, if Copenhagen does nothing else than get the Senate to pass climate legislation then it will have been a big success," Mucha said.
"There are going to be a lot of disappointed people coming out of Copenhagen; a lot of disappointed governments that will be looking for good ideas" Moomaw said.
One of the fresh ideas that might come out of the summit is a paradigm shift in the way the public views the climate change issue as a whole. In a recent lecture Moomaw noted that focusing on alternate issues, such as fixing the hole in the ozone layer, has actually done more to curb emissions than any effort that has focused solely on climate change.
In addition, he mentioned that many developing countries were clinging to an outdated notion that linked emissions directly with development. Moomaw suggested that one way to move away from this outlook would be to focus on providing "energy services," or what people actually need energy for, to people in the developing world rather than only focusing on providing energy itself.
"Fear doesn't work, and guilt doesn't work, but hope might work," Moomaw said.
Making a visible dent in emissions by utilizing alternate methods and mindsets might inspire people to do something more for the climate than fear or guilt have in the past.
