“Compared to what’s needed, a failure; compared to what’s possible, decent”

It gets a bit tedious writing about climate policy, since every single development warrants some variant of the same verdict: compared to what’s needed, a failure; compared to what’s possible, decent. And so it is with Durban.

Grist’s David Roberts hits the nail on the head, but still goes on to offer a great evaluation of the agreement reached at the UN climate conference in Durban last week. To summarise the summary:

• the policies agreed so far still leave us set for 3.5 degrees C climate change by 2100, far more than the 2C figure labelled (problematically) ‘safe’;
• the agreement on working towards a successor to Kyoto is vague and fuzzy, but still more of an agreement than was predicted after the collapse of talks in Copenhagen last year;
• Useful  breakthroughs were made on more technical issues like deforestation.

Advertisement