Analysis of the reasons for the failure of the Copenhagen Climate Conference and future trends

The following are the attitudes of various countries

European Union: "If President Obama flew across the Atlantic (600558, stock bar) and came to Copenhagen, but just repeated the emission reduction targets previously announced by the United States, then It will be quite surprising.” This was the statement of Swedish Environment Minister Andreas Karlgren, who negotiated on behalf of the EU at the Copenhagen Climate Conference, when he spoke on the first day of the conference (December 7).

After the Danish Prime Minister Lars L. Rasmussen, the host country of the meeting, made a high-profile statement that "it is entirely possible to reach an agreement," Karlgren's above statement immediately heightened tensions on the negotiating table in the next two weeks. Revealed.

Carlgren also claimed that the EU is ready to increase its emission reduction target from 20% to 30%, but this will require further efforts from other parties participating in the meeting.

Germany: Seeking to play a leading role in emission reduction

Key points: Hope to promote the export of its clean energy technology through climate protection

Germany attaches great importance to climate change and environmental protection. In the early 1990s, China took the lead in formulating a national plan to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. In addition to reducing greenhouse gas emissions through vigorous development of renewable energy, Germany also seeks to play a leading role in the global response to climate change.

In terms of international emission reductions, Germany believes that industrial countries led by the United States should bear the main emission reduction obligations, but emerging industrial countries such as China and India must also take corresponding measures. It hopes to promote exports of its world-leading clean energy technology by advocating for climate protection.

When German Chancellor Merkel delivered a speech in the U.S. Congress on November 3, she called on the international community to take concerted action to eliminate the harm caused to mankind by climate warming. Merkel expressed the hope that the United Nations Climate Change Conference to be held in Copenhagen in December can reach consensus on achieving the goal of achieving the goal of the earth's average temperature rise not exceeding 2 degrees Celsius. Merkel said: "We need a new agreement, and the whole world is watching the United States and Europe." She emphasized that the opportunity to protect the human living environment cannot be missed, and overcoming global challenges can only be achieved through the cooperation of the international community. Merkel urged the U.S. Congress to take practical actions and pass a greenhouse gas emission reduction bill to contribute to the results of the Copenhagen Conference.

In the early 1990s, Germany took the lead in formulating a national plan to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. At that time, the Bundestag decided that by 2005, based on 1999, Germany would reduce total carbon dioxide emissions from industry, households and transportation by 25 percentage points. Under the constraints of this plan, Germany's greenhouse gas emissions were reduced by 21.3% in 2007 compared with 1990.

In June 2008, the German Bundestag passed the "Climate and Energy Package" proposed by the government, with the goal of reducing Germany's greenhouse gas emissions by 40% by 2020 compared with 1990. To achieve this goal, Germany is vigorously developing renewable energy, mainly wind power and solar power, increasing the contribution of renewable energy to national energy demand, and striving to increase the proportion of clean energy power generation in Germany from 15% to 30% by 2020. %. Germany will also spend huge sums of money to promote clean energy vehicles and new building insulation materials.

Russia: Has the strength to achieve the 40% emission reduction target

Key points: Proposing to establish a multilateral or global environmental protection fund

A few days ago, a reporter interviewed Russia on climate change issues Alexei Kokolin, expert and head of the global climate change project of WWF Russia. He said that Russia is less affected by climate change and the Russian government does not believe that it is urgent to solve the problem of climate change. Russia is fully capable of becoming a leading country in international emission reduction.

Kokorin said that the Russian government has done a lot of work in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and has formulated plans for energy conservation and the development of renewable energy. The implementation of these plans will effectively curb greenhouse gas emissions. growth, in turn helping to lower Russia’s emissions levels. But he believes that the Russian government’s motivation for these actions is more to get rid of the economy’s over-reliance on energy.

Kokorin said that Russian President Medvedev elaborated on Russia’s international emission reduction obligations before the G8 summit in June this year, which mainly included two aspects: First, Russia plans to The second is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30 billion tons before 2020. Second, Russia plans to reduce emissions by 10%-15% by 2020 compared with 1990. Kokolin believes that this needs to be revised because this indicator does not take into account the factor of forests. Forests can absorb about 10% of greenhouse gases. In addition, Russia’s economic growth rate exceeds the emission growth rate. For example, from 2000 to 2007, Russia’s With rapid economic growth and annual emissions only increasing by 1%-1.5%, Russia can actually achieve its 40% emissions reduction target. It can be seen that Russia is fully capable of becoming a leading country in international emission reduction. Of course, this requires Russia to make efforts in energy conservation, energy efficiency improvement and afforestation.

Kokolin believes that Russia can provide financial support to developing countries conditionally.

The plan being discussed in Russia is to establish a multilateral or global fund, similar to the Global Environment Facility, which will engage in green technology transfer, assist developing countries in reducing emissions, adapt to climate change, and prevent large-scale commercialization of tropical rainforests. felling and other related work. This type of fund should not be operated under the mechanism of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, because it will limit the number of countries that provide funds, but it cannot be completely separated from the Convention and can accept the supervision of relevant agencies of the Convention. In this case, Russia will provide a certain amount of funds.

Australia: Actively promote emission reduction legislation

Key points: Want to use climate change issues to play a greater role on the international stage

Australia’s Kevin Rudd government has been Make climate change a priority policy goal. The Australian government urges the country to pass a greenhouse gas emissions trading bill before the Joint Climate Change Conference in December, hoping to play a leading role in the South Pacific region through climate change affairs and play a greater role on the international stage.

Global warming will affect Australia's biodiversity, and rising sea levels will directly threaten the survival of Australia's surrounding islands. However, due to differences between domestic interest groups and the pressure of economic development,

Australia has been hesitant in its response to climate change. Until December 3, 2007, the new Prime Minister Kevin Rudd signed the "Kyoto Protocol". This was the first major thing that Kevin Rudd and his government did after being sworn in that day. He issued a statement at the time, saying, "This is the first major event of the new government. "A formal action that demonstrates the new government's determination to address climate change is of great significance for Australia to continue to address global climate change domestically and with the international community."

The greenhouse gas emissions trading bill actively promoted by the Rudd government is hailed as "one of the most ambitious emissions reduction plans", with the goal of reducing Australia's greenhouse gas emissions by 25% by 2020. The bill also restricts Australia's nearly 1,000 large pollution-emitting companies to purchase carbon dioxide emission quotas. The emissions of these companies account for more than 75% of Australia's total greenhouse gas emissions.

Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions only account for about 1.5% of global emissions, but due to its heavy reliance on coal for power generation, per capita greenhouse gas emissions have exceeded those of the United States. The latest report released by the Australian Department of Climate Change and Water Resources on August 9 pointed out that from September 1998 to March 2009, Australia's greenhouse gas emissions increased by an average of 1.6% per year. If greenhouse gas emissions are not controlled, Australia's carbon pollution levels will be 20% worse by 2020 than in 2000.

The Australian government originally planned to implement greenhouse gas emissions trading next year, but the bill was blocked after being submitted to Congress and suffered repeated setbacks. Currently, the Australian government and opposition parties are still negotiating and continue to push for the bill to be passed before the United Nations Climate Change Conference.

Brazil: "Voluntarily made" decision to reduce emissions

Key points: Brazil still has huge potential for emissions reduction

Brasilia News from this newspaper, the Brazilian Government 11 Announced on March 13, it plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 36.1% to 38.9% by 2020 based on expectations. Brazil will submit this emissions reduction plan to the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December.

According to Brazilian media reports, Brazilian President Lula convened a meeting of heads of relevant departments such as the Civil Affairs Office, the Ministry of Environment, and the Ministry of Science and Technology in Sao Paulo on November 13 to reach an agreement on emission reduction targets. Dilma Rousseff, director of the Brazilian Civil Affairs Office, said at a press conference that she hopes this "voluntary" emission reduction commitment will show the world the Brazilian government's clear position on addressing climate change.

Rousseff said that the most optimistic estimate is to achieve the 38.9% emission reduction target by 2020, of which the agriculture and animal husbandry industry will reduce emissions by 6.1%, the energy industry will reduce emissions by 7.7%, and the steel industry will reduce emissions by 0.4%. . Some analysts say that if this goal can be achieved, Brazil's greenhouse gas emissions will be close to its 1994 emission levels in 2020, which is equivalent to a 20% reduction based on 2005.

As the largest developing country in the Southern Hemisphere, Brazil has a clear stance on the issue of climate change. President Lula has repeatedly asked developed countries to fully realize their historical responsibilities and make stronger efforts to reduce emissions. commitment.

A preliminary report compiled by the Brazilian Ministry of Science and Technology pointed out that Brazil’s current total forest farm area is 360,000 square kilometers, which is similar to that of Germany. As long as Brazil reaches the goal of reducing deforestation by 80% in 18% of forest farms, it will be equivalent to reducing the emission of 121 million tons of carbon dioxide. Brazil is also a major country in the research and development of biofuels. If the application of biofuels is further promoted, it can reduce the emission of 50 million tons of carbon dioxide every year. In addition, if the government funds the conversion of farmland into forests in the agricultural sector, 11 million hectares of grassland for grazing will be restored.

Carlos Nobre, a meteorological expert at Brazil's National Institute of Broadband Research, said: "This is only a preliminary estimate, but it is enough to show that Brazil has huge potential to reduce emissions.

”

Africa: Speak with one voice

Key points: Seeking US$65 billion in environmental compensation

African countries unified their position before the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen , seeking US$65 billion from industrialized countries as compensation for the victim countries with the smallest carbon dioxide emissions and the greatest impact.

In August this year, African countries held successive ministerial meetings and special summits of 10 countries. In September, 14 member states of the Southern African Development Community held a summit in Kinshasa, the capital of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, to further coordinate their positions on climate change. African countries held a meeting in Ouagadougou, the capital of Burkina Faso, and determined a plan to seek environmental compensation of US$65 billion from industrialized countries, and required industrialized countries to reduce emissions to the level of the 1990s before 2020. At least 40%.

There are 53 countries in Africa that have a greater say in the Copenhagen Conference. Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles said in early September that African countries should take advantage of "numbers" to seek favorable conditions. Otherwise, any agreement will be vetoed. He also revealed that Africa will send a unified team to the meeting to negotiate with the African Union and will never allow another agreement that is not beneficial to Africa.

African countries are also preparing to form an 80-nation alliance with island countries and other poor countries to seek a goal of limiting the global average temperature increase to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius by 2020 compared with pre-industrial levels. This actually requires industrialized countries to achieve at least a 45% reduction. emissions.

Earlier this year, Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles pointed out that pollution in the northern hemisphere had a lot to do with the famine the country suffered in the 1980s, and rich countries should provide compensation.

According to a report released in May by the Geneva-based Global Humanitarian Forum, the world's 50 poorest countries account for less than 1% of their total emissions, but they bear more than 90% of the adverse impacts of climate change. < /p>

The United States: Still has a negative attitude towards climate negotiations

Key points: Set up obstacles to the transfer of advanced energy technologies

After taking office, the Obama administration actively pushed Congress to pass legislation to impose restrictions on the United States The United States has made mid- and long-term plans for its climate policy, but this legislative process is far behind expectations. Currently, as the country with the largest per capita greenhouse gas emissions, the United States still performs passively in addressing climate change, leaving the prospect of a comprehensive climate agreement at the Copenhagen Conference. Not optimistic.

The United States withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol during the period of former President Bush, which disappointed the international community. The United States has been the target of criticism for its negative attitude on climate change.

After Obama took office, the United States took a more active stance on the issue of climate change. In his first speech to the United Nations General Assembly in late September this year, Obama admitted that climate change is caused by human activities and believed that climate change is caused by human activities. It can only be solved by humans themselves. Obama admitted that climate change is mainly caused by developed countries, and that developed countries have an obligation to take the lead in the global response to climate change. The United States will achieve its emission reduction goals by investing in clean energy, improving energy efficiency, and reducing emissions.

According to the "American Clean Energy Security Act" (also known as the Climate Act) passed by the U.S. House of Representatives at the end of June, U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in 2020 will be reduced by 17% on the basis of 2005 (equivalent to 4% compared with 1990) and 83% by 2050. The bill also introduces a greenhouse gas emissions trading mechanism called "Cap and Emissions Trading" to promote the formation of a domestic carbon trading market in the United States.

In the climate bill announced by Senate Democrats at the end of September, based on 2005, the emission reduction targets for 2020 and 2050 are set at 20% and 80% respectively, and the short-term emission reduction targets Set it higher. However, analysts believe that it will be very difficult for this bill to pass.

On November 3, the unanimous declaration issued by the US-EU summit stated that the United States hopes to achieve the goal of reducing global greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by 2050 based on 1990 levels.

At present, clean energy technology in the United States is mainly in the hands of private enterprises, and commercial transactions between enterprises are the main channel for technology transfer. The U.S. government believes that technology transfer between enterprises involves commercial interests and intellectual property rights, so it must abide by market rules and strive to achieve the best results. For this reason, the U.S. government has been less active in promoting technology transfer, and sometimes even sets up obstacles to the transfer of advanced clean energy technologies to developing countries. The U.S. House of Representatives also passed a resolution in June, claiming to formulate policies to prevent the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference from undermining U.S. intellectual property rights in wind energy, solar energy and other clean energy technologies.

Japan: Emissions reduction targets trigger domestic debate

Key points: Worry that emission reduction targets will affect its international competitiveness

Japan’s Democratic Party government has expressed concerns over the issue of greenhouse gas emission reductions The attitude is relatively positive. Yukio Hatoyama proposed the goal of “reducing emissions by 25%” soon after he became Prime Minister. However, this move has triggered controversy in Japan, and the economic community is highly resistant to the "25% reduction in emissions". It remains to be seen whether this goal can be implemented in detail.

On the other hand, out of self-interest considerations, the Hatoyama government has a positive attitude towards providing emission reduction assistance and technology transfer to developing countries.

In the previous Liberal Democratic Party era, although the Fukuda cabinet proposed a long-term goal of reducing emissions by 60% to 80% in 2050 compared with 2005, it did not take a position on the mid-term goal for 2020. Aso's cabinet only stated a mid-term target of reducing emissions by 15% in 2020 compared with 2005 levels as late as June this year. The international community, especially developing countries, generally believes that this emission reduction target is too negative.

After Hatoyama was elected Prime Minister of Japan, he announced in late September a mid-term goal of reducing emissions by 25% in 2020 compared with 1990, and received favorable reviews from Western media.

Although Hatoyama left room for Japan in his statement, he emphasized that the above-mentioned emission reduction targets must be built on the premise of building a fair and effective international framework that includes all "major emitters" of greenhouse gases in the world. However, this goal still triggers fierce debate in Japan.

Japan’s economic circle is mainly worried that excessively high emission reduction targets will affect its international competitiveness, especially in steel, electricity, oil, etc. At present, economic organizations such as Japan's Keidanren and heads of some large companies have publicly asked the government to reconsider this goal. Many business leaders claim that the "25% emission reduction" goal will further lead to the hollowing out of Japanese industries and increased unemployment. . According to calculations during the Aso cabinet era, even an 8% emission reduction target will cause Japan's real GDP to decrease by 0.6% on average annually, increase the unemployment rate by 0.2% percentage points, and increase the average annual household burden by 77,000 yen; if 25% is used as Target, Japan's unemployment rate will increase by 1.3 percentage points, and household burden will increase by 360,000 yen. At the request of the opposition forces, the Hatoyama Cabinet decided at the end of October to recalculate the impact of the 25% emission reduction target on household burdens.