Blame For Copenhagen's Lack Of Success

Personally according to what I know from my personal experience, the www.gaurdian.co.uk newspaper, and the www.huffingtonpost.com as well as many other sources.

I am blaming the lack of success on China primely, then the United States of America, India, and the EU. The developed nations are not solely to blame on the lack of success, China the worlds biggest emitter, and most likely the main power in this century was the biggest problem. No I am not cutting Obama, or developed countries any slack. The current initiatives by protesters, and most news articles have a lack of focus on the emerging developing nations like China and India's move to block this climate treaty.

Although being from Canada I'm still very mad at my government for it's horrible stance and negative impact at this climate summit.

Day 6: Plenary (Actual UNFCCC Proceedings)

Today because of what was being talked about, CDM's, and adaptation policy I spent about 3 hours in the actual UN proceedings observing the countries questions, rebuttals, suggestions and etc. For a while it was quite interesting, especially right before lunch.

Tuvalu announced that they wanted what ever treaty is created here to be legally binding, and mostly that it should be ammendments to strengthen the Kyoto Protocol. Not that a new Copenhagen Protocl is needed, according to my knowledge of what happened. The African Nations supported it, Japan agreed, as did Australia (I think), the U.S. is kind of on the fence about supporting it, but I think they might have agreed. Small Island nations also supported it. India and China are against it. Most OPEC nations were very against it as well, notably Saudi Arabia, as well as South Africa.

The language of the actual UN meetings is remminicent of watching the film Clockwork Orange, after a while you learn to extract a meaning from the gibberish.

The Clean Development Mechanism:

General breakdown of proceedings, suggestions:

Developed Countries: Regional Distribution, more CDM credits, and no cap on credits, keep forestry credits temporary.
Africa (Non-OPEC): More Regional distribution, make forestry credits non-temporary.
OPEC: Include Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS).
Africa (OPEC): More regional distribution, include CCS, make forestry credits non-temporary.
China and India: No regional distribution (let the developed countries choose where to invest their money, otherwise it is unfair)
Brazil: Forest credits should be non-temporary.
ALL: Streamline the process, make it easier to understand, and more transparent.

The above took about three hours by the way.

Now I am having a break, and deciding what fun activity I shall enjoy tonight, probably sleep...