Uncertainty over climate deal

Preparations so far for drawing a climate charter meant to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol are far from ideal. The latest week-long talks in Geneva participated by as many as 190 nations have produced an official negotiating text but the draft has been uninspiring. Repetitive options replete the 86 pages of the draft document, according to a senior European Union (EU) delegate. Indeed, the EU's firm stand on making the proposed deal in Paris in December next legally binding is appreciable. Its decision to cut at least 20 per cent greenhouse gas emissions from all primary energy sources by 2020 should be considered a strong commitment. Then setting a target of minimum 10 per cent use of bio-fuels is an expression of an equally positive mindset. Where the EU is way ahead is its push for an international agreement that will succeed the Kyoto protocol in order to achieving a 30 per cent cut in greenhouse gas emissions by all developed nations by 2020.

But an indirect attempt is on to make such cuts in greenhouse gas conditional. Until recently China bore the stamp of a developing nation but its phenomenal progress along with its ranking as the leading polluter of all has to some extent diverted the argument to a different channel. Clearly, a middle road is being followed in which all nations - irrespective of developed or developing - will have to share their responsibilities in arresting the global warming. But there are complexities involving the nations sitting on huge fossil fuel reserves and those most vulnerable to climate change and consequent sea rise. While the latter are pushing for zero emissions from such sources, the oil-rich countries consider such a proposal simply impractical, if not outlandish. Now the challenge is to strike a balance between these two and allowing the environment to be sustainable enough for man and other forms of life.

The argument that the 20-year-old divisions between rich and poor nations cannot be maintained smacks of a myopic vision. The second largest polluter, the United States of America that is, and others supporting it are failing to appreciate the virtue in opting for voluntary slashing of fossil fuel use. Nor are they very interested in contributing to the climate fund aimed at bailing out troubled nations. The bargain over the part to be played separately by the rich and the poor nations along with the contributions to be made is getting tough; it will get still tougher when the nations meet for the last preparatory talks at Bonn in June. The signs are not quite optimistic but environmental experts and bodies like the EU and the United Nations will have to stick to their guns. The EU in particular will be in a better position if it enforces its energy legislation. It will set an example by leading the way and throw a challenge to the nations still reluctant to go for tougher actions in order to fight climate change.