about | centers | visit | membership | support | asiastore | tickets | video




HomePolicy & PoliticsEnvironmentClimate Change

Discuss: Copenhagen Climate Change Conference 2009

Share your thoughts on a new climate deal for the Copenhagen conference.

People walk past a banner reading 'Countdown to Copenhagen' during a protest organised by Christian Aid in Coventry, West Midlands on March 19, 2009. (Carl de Souza/AFP/Getty Images)

People walk past a banner reading 'Countdown to Copenhagen' during a protest organised by Christian Aid in Coventry, West Midlands on March 19, 2009. (Carl de Souza/AFP/Getty Images)

The leaders of the world's 180 countries are attending a United Nations conference in Copenhagen to hash out a deal on climate change. World leaders are meeting to address global warming and emissions reductions. The new updated agreement is set to replace the Kyoto Protocol which expires in 2012.  All eyes are on US President Barack Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao --both China and the US are major players, needed for a deal.

A draft calls for the world to “halve greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 from 1990 levels,” Reuters reported, and stipulates wealthy nations “account for 80 percent of the global emission cuts.” Noticeably absent from the draft was poorer countries’ request for short-term emissions goals for wealthy nations. China and India have said they oppose agreeing to the halved emissions goal unless wealthy world powers “take the lead by setting far tougher reductions by 2020.”

Are Asian nations doing enough to combat climate change? Should developing or poorer nations have to cut greenhouse gas emissions at the same rate as wealthier, industrialized Western countries? Join the discussion below.



Users' Comments

Sarah Belford | 02:04:10 09:01pm

From the perspective of those who wanted the U.S. to sign on to comprehensive measures to address global warming, Copenhagen was a major setback. But for those who fear that costly global warming solutions are far worse than the problem, Copenhagen is good news. Copenhagen failed for very legitimate reasons, in particular the exorbitant cost and lack of meaningful developing world participation. A very bad deal for America and the world was avoided.

Dalai Fazio | 12:15:09 05:32pm

Most of Asia is already much more energy efficient than the U.S. - China excluded of course, but why does the question matter anyway? Nobody is going to meet their carbon reduction goals anyway. We can no doubt count any number international aid, environmental or developmental agreements that were loudly celebrated when they were signed, but never fulfilled. We need a different model. Why did Kyoto fail, but the Montreal Protocol succeed? (The Montreal Protocol was implemented to limit CFC emissions that were leading to the creation of a gaping hole in the ozone layer.) Visit politics3.com to find out

Paul Joy | 12:08:09 07:45pm

It is my firm belief that Copenhagen will fail, in the same way that Kyoto failed. We will not be able to integrate global carbon markets, boost investments in energy efficiency, or move to renewable energy fast enough to reverse climate change, which is already starting to take affect. The political consequences of inaction are still not that high for politicians and public servants. And we only have five years to achieve a peak in total carbon emissions, just as emissions continue to grow at an increasing rate year after year. We have run out of time to stabilize temperatures below 2 degrees Celsius. Only substantial investments in technological advancements, not fancy political agreements that are impossible to enforce, will make a difference.

vikash mittersain | 12:08:09 07:07pm

Hi We are at a extraordinary juncture and crossroads (to say the least) for our world. Its the last chance we have to save it and ourselves and future generations. Having said that, I think we are certainly moving towards an agreement of sorts. It may not be the ideal one we all want but a move in the right direction. Lets not forget, President Obama will be there, and he would only go if there was a good chance to arrive at a decision. and USA will therefore commit to much greater reductions than the rest of the world expects. Dont forget that Bush never agreed to anything at all so already the US has moved forward a lot. China and India, the protagonists who also sat through much of the last decade denying any thing to do about Carbon Reduction, have now changed track and have moved forward substantially. Every country will have worked out their final positions which will be finally get anounced based on what they see other countries doing. I expect a much better result than what we have been led to believe so far. One prediction: Kyoto will get extended by at least a year. Vikash

Add Your Comment

Your comments are welcome, please adhere to our guidelines

Be respectful.  Personal attacks will not be tolerated; nor will profane, abusive or threatening posts.

Keep it short (150 words or less), Stay on topic.

Asia Society reserves the right to moderate all comments and remove or edit for guideline violations. Thank you.
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Inline assets are allowed.
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options