Views and debates on climate change policy
Home | Panelists | Staff Blog | RSS

THE QUESTION

Is the Copenhagen Accord a real deal?

Is the Copenhagen Accord a real deal? Are there any beneficiaries of this decision? What responsibilities do nations have going forward?

Posted by Washington Post Editor on December 23, 2009 12:00 AM
FROM THE PANEL

Copenhagen a step backwards -- toward reality

To fully appreciate what a step backwards the final Copenhagen accord is, one has to recall the buildup to it. For the last two years, global warming activists and UN officials had circled December 2009 on their calendars as the watershed moment for creating a new carbon-constrained global economy for decades to come.

Posted by Ben Lieberman, on January 4, 2010 10:40 AM

Being realistic

At the close of the Copenhagen Conference, I commented that the Copenhagen Accord reflected a lost opportunity, largely because the negotiations between two largest greenhouse gas emitters, the U.S. and China, were too little too late. With a holiday respite to clear the mind and a return of realism to balance my disappointment, this is how I now see it.

Posted by Donald F. Boesch, on December 30, 2009 10:56 AM

World still better with the Accord

The Accord takes us some way along a path towards what the world needs - a stretching, binding agreement that will lead to a low carbon future. A very large number of countries, over a hundred, have aligned themselves with the Accord's goals and commitments.

Posted by Nigel Sheinwald, on December 24, 2009 8:58 AM

Benefits for the youth movement

The Copenhagen negotiations did not yield the fair and binding deal the world hoped for, but once we recover from our disappointment we can begin to build on the foundation the Obama Administration and Congress has laid out for us in 2010.

Posted by Jessy Tolkan, on December 23, 2009 1:35 PM

Surely not the real deal

Developing countries got an empty promise of a lot of money which they probably will never see. Given the governance of many developing countries, whatever money flows their way will probably end up in the pockets of corrupt rulers.

Posted by William O'Keefe, on December 23, 2009 7:18 AM

Measuring political success

Through the lens of science -- against the scale of the climate threat and the urgency of action to transform the world's energy systems -- the outcome of the UN negotiations was disappointing indeed.

Posted by Reid Detchon, on December 23, 2009 7:00 AM

On a dead end path

The near-empty treaty that emerged from the Copenhagen climate summit shows that promising to cut carbon emissions is a dead-end strategy. There was really little more in the deal than face-saving by world leaders.

Posted by Bjorn Lomborg, on December 23, 2009 6:50 AM

Trust, but verify

The Copenhagen Accord is neither a continuation of the status quo or a new deal, but a hybrid of the two. Whilst it maintains the core elements of the Kyoto Protocol, it also introduces the United States into the international framework whilst at the same time bringing developing country emissions into the picture in a meaningful way.

Posted by David Hone, on December 23, 2009 6:45 AM

FEATURED COMMENTS

Make a Comment  |  All Comments (2)

 
Contact Us
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company