“Climate Colonialism”: a new term that is here to stay. During the climate negotiations in Copenhagen last December, some developing nations claim that the draft agreement would allow people in developed countries to emit twice as much carbon per head than those in poorer countries, who have not caused the rise in emissions. Angelika Navarro, Bolivian Ambassador to the UN “  “We think that 20 per cent of the population have created a crisis for humanity. They have a historic responsibility for more than two thirds of emissions and more than 90 per cent of the increase in temperature. We think there is a climate debt they owe to all humanity and to Mother Earth.”

Is the term here to stay? Most certainly, at least in history.

Have developing nations any chance of succeeding in their demands? No one is stopping them as long as they self-finance their development, which for the poorest nations is almost impossible as they depend too much on the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund which channel funds for investments.

The Clean Development Mechanism fails short of offering a country like Bolivia who emits 1.2 tons of CO2 per capita (compared to US’ 19.1) and has seen its glaciers receding dramatically, a source of investment for developing clean infrastructure (to our knowledge, only 2 projects have been funded through CDM: hydropower and reforestation projects).

Finally, if a country like Bolivia can eventually survive and even adapt to global temperature rising by 2 degrees, it is not the case of many African nations that will face rising temperature of 3.5 degrees causing droughts, famines, flash floods and millions of climate refugees. Island nations will simply disappear, and coral reefs will become extinct by 2025 causing a cataclysm in the food chain.

Dear Marc

I just read your post on Copenhagen – where I actually am at the moment – at COP15. I thought I’d inform you about an environmental social media campaign called ‘I do 30’. The campaign encourages people across the world to turn down the temperature on their laundry to 30 degrees in order to save CO2. These days during the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen (COP15) we are letting all of our ‘I do 30’ fans who can’t make it to the conference have a voice of their own. We move around the streets of Copenhagen with a speech bubble, hoping the ‘I do 30’ statements will reach the leaders of the world.

Put aside the latest diversions – ya know the climate deniers’ rants, the emails leak, the dummy rhetoric that we can’t take action in time of a major recession – and let ask bluntly the hardball question: Can these world leaders agree on the necessity to reduce CO2 emissions and by how much?

I am skeptical about their ability to agree. And given the ongoing burst of protests going on, I am not the only one. It’s a complicated Noire story that David Corn calls adequately “Double Jeopardy at Copenhagen”. I feel it is a triple one.

China, Russia, India and the US on one side … or the countries that are not required by the Kyoto Protocol’s obligations but are big CO2 polluters and are to resist any obligation that can slow down their development.

The signatories that have engaged into reducing their CO2 emissions, most notably the EU, that now would like other nations to accept some obligations – especially the ones above.

The small nations that are already suffering from the effects of climate change, most African and Pacific nations, Latin America’s socialist governments, … who have been asking for compensations from the countries that are the largest CO2 emitters.

So it is left to the people to force them to agree …

Other websites to visit:

Climate L (you can access the IISD web site from there)

Seal the Deal

Environment Defense Fund’s Copenhagen web site