Opinion
Down but not out
Politicians let us down at the Copenhagen climate change
summit, but other pressures will provide momentum for
major carbon cuts, argues Richard John
S
o what came out of Copenhagen back in outcome. This is because both the UK government
December? Well, a non-binding Copenhagen and the opposition see the need for these things – not
Accord, ‘recognised’ rather than agreed by just to reduce carbon, but also to secure our energy
the 192 nation states. This is more than the supplies and, longer term, to keep down energy prices
pessimists had suggested (a complete breakdown of in the face of what many suggest will be a world where
talks), and much less than what is needed to keep the oil and gas prices at least will increase substantially,
Earth with a climate that is no more than 2C above and become more volatile.
pre-industrial levels. Perhaps, on balance, it was what What remains, despite the recession, is the
we should all have expected – for some time, there has challenge and skills gaps associated with:
been a gap between the science of climate change and • Meeting the government’s target of having 20 per
the politics of what is actually feasible to achieve. cent of all energy provided by renewables by 2020;
Politically, how easy was it ever going to be to • The move to ‘zero carbon’ buildings (albeit that we
forge a consensus among 192 nations around await the final definition of the term); and
which exist the thorny issues of who will finance the • The electrification of
move to low carbon, and who will police its effective transport.
implementation? A formal agreement at
Perhaps the
The Copenhagen Accord is not legally binding, Copenhagen would have
neither is there a deadline for transforming it into triggered the need for
politics of energy
a formal treaty. The language in the text also shows even stronger EU and UK
security and price will
that 2C is not a formal target, just that the group targets, and these in turn
‘recognises the scientific view’ that the temperature may have necessitated a
help move us in the right
increase should be held below this figure. huge stimulus plan for the
direction until the world can
The deal promises to deliver $30bn of aid for construction industry to
developing nations over the next three years, and deliver the targets. Even as
come to its senses and set
outlines a goal of providing $100bn a year by 2020 to the targets stand it is likely
legally binding
help poor countries cope with the impacts of climate that, whatever the make-
change. However, it is unclear where the $100bn will up of the administration in
and enforceable
come from, or how it will be administered. the UK after the upcoming
targets
So where does this leave us? Well, globally, still in general election, the
the absence of a global treaty – or even a roadmap measures required to decarbonise our energy supply
of how we get there – and the climate scientists will and improve energy efficiency measures will require
argue we are on course to exceed the 2 deg C figure huge investment in any case.
unless we decide to do the least-best option in tackling So the politics around climate change have been
climate change and attempt to engineer our global too intractable at Copenhagen. Perhaps the politics
climate – so called geo-engineering. of energy security and price will help move us in the
In terms of the UK, and the short to medium right direction until the world can come to its senses
term, so long as the various EU/UK commitments to and set legally binding, and enforceable, greenhouse
reducing carbon emissions are retained – and there gas emission targets. l
is good reason to believe that they will be – we still
face a huge challenge in moving towards a low carbon
Richard John is director, sustainability, AECOM. He will
economy.
be one of the speakers on day two of the CIBSE national
Nuclear stations, renewables, energy efficiency, and
conference in London, which takes place on April 27-28. For
the switch from fossil fuels are still likely to be the
information, visit www.cibse.org/nationalconference
22 CIBSE Journal February 2010 www.cibsejournal.com
CIBSEfeb10 pp22 opinion_John.indd 22 28/1/10 16:26:39
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76