Jan
2010
Copenhagen fall out – so what happens next?
Just over a month has passed since the end of the Copenhagen Summit on Climate Change and ostensibly at least it is difficult to grasp what has really changed. In fact, the recriminations and accusations over the lack of commitment to a comprehensive political and legally binding deal started almost the moment the conference finished. Fingers have been firmly pointed at the Chinese and a few other nations who eschewed concrete legal commitments to reducing carbon emissions in favour of a weaker deal that make it unlikely that temperature rises will be kept below 2° C above pre-industrial levels (the limit for preventing catastrophic climate change). Indeed, the final agreement resulted in a short accord that set no specific limits beyond that proposed by its signatories.
Going beyond the bluster of the media frenzy and finger pointing it seems important to ask the obvious question: what does Copenhagen mean for us? After all, we, the public, are the biggest consumers of energy – the common perception that industry is the biggest user of energy is simply incorrect. For a start I’d strongly argue that the huge media focus on Copenhagen has made individuals much more aware of their personal responsibilities towards the environment. If countries are to meet commitments to reduce emissions, it will take a collective effort from energy consumers. People are already much more ready than ever before to question where their energy comes from and how sustainable it is alongside usual concerns over cost.
The issues discussed and agreed upon at Copenhagen will mean that houses, offices and public buildings will have to be super insulated and energy usage more carefully evaluated with the aid of ‘smart meters’ that manage energy consumption. Whilst hydrocarbon energy sources will still be used for many years to come, there is a growing recognition that renewable sources are only way to mitigate climate change, produce sustainable and secure energy as well as stimulate the global economy. This was certainly the consensus at the World Future Energy Summit held in Abu Dhabi last week, which I was fortunate to attend for the full four days, see here. The Summit attracted over 20,000 participants from around the world to discuss the future of alternative energy and sustainable technologies.
It is clear that individual communities will need to take the initiative and are taking the initiative – one of the best examples I’ve seen of this is the Baywind Energy Cooperative in Cumbria that owns six wind turbines and produces its own energy which it can sell back to the national grid. See: baywind.co.uk or foe.co.uk
Building public awareness of these opportunities is key to Copenhagen’s ultimate success.
Thus, whilst Copenhagen has already been marked down as a failure – not reaching a politically and legally binding agreement is highly disappointing – the discord over the agreement has highlighted that there is a pressing issue in which we all have a vested interest. Moreover, on a fundamental level Copenhagen has succeeded in getting the developing world to agree to an international role towards monitoring their cuts in CO² emissions for the first time.
In essence, the shift towards a more questioning and sustainable approach to energy will be Copenhagen’s legacy, something happening more quickly and fundamentally than current events indicate.
