In truth, there was little expectation that this year's summit would be groundbreaking. Many of the issues on the docket had been long-discussed in previous meetings and the conference was repeatedly described as transitional before, assumedly, the real work gets under to set up a global treaty by 2015 to go into place by 2020 (a year some scientists say will be too late to avoid a global rise above 2 degrees Celsius).
Given this, many observers were also surprised as how acrimonious and contentious the conference was—and many hoped for a stronger, even in it limited capacity, agreement.
"This outcome represents a failure of ambition and yet another failure of political will—the latest in a long line of pledges to take real action someday, but not today," said the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) President Carroll Muffett. "Governments have now squandered decades that could have been spent averting climate disaster."
Given this, many observers were also surprised as how acrimonious and contentious the conference was—and many hoped for a stronger, even in it limited capacity, agreement.
"This outcome represents a failure of ambition and yet another failure of political will—the latest in a long line of pledges to take real action someday, but not today," said the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) President Carroll Muffett. "Governments have now squandered decades that could have been spent averting climate disaster."
Your new post is loading...
