freediver wrote on Dec 12^th, 2010 at 9:23pm:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference The outcome of the summit was an agreement, not a binding treaty, which calls on rich countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions as pledged in the Copenhagen Accord, and for developing countries to plan to reduce their emissions, to limit global warming to less than 2 degrees celsius above pre-industrial levels. The agreement includes a proposed $100 billion a year fund to assist poorer countries finance emission reductions and adaptation. The New York Times described the agreement as being both a "major step forward" given that international negotiations had stumbled in recent years, and as being "fairly modest" as it did not require the changes that scientists say are needed to avoid dangerous climate change.

The good thing that seems to have come out of Cancun is the  Pareto approach. The major cause is emissions from developed countries (and countries like China/ India). The non developing countries are irrelevant and add to the noise. (Although that may be considered callous, it's true)

I have made the analogy that in a flight emergency you fit your own oxygen  mask first before helping infants and children. The same applies with Climate Change. Get renewable energy projects running in the developed world first. To start them off elsewhere is destructive.

It wouldn't make one iota of difference to emissions if that $100 billion dollars didn't end up being provided.  It probably won't. It's a total waste of funds.

muso wrote on Dec 13^th, 2010 at 11:01am:

freediver wrote on Dec 12th, 2010 at 9:23pm: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference The outcome of the summit was an agreement, not a binding treaty, which calls on rich countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions as pledged in the Copenhagen Accord, and for developing countries to plan to reduce their emissions, to limit global warming to less than 2 degrees celsius above pre-industrial levels. The agreement includes a proposed $100 billion a year fund to assist poorer countries finance emission reductions and adaptation. The New York Times described the agreement as being both a "major step forward" given that international negotiations had stumbled in recent years, and as being "fairly modest" as it did not require the changes that scientists say are needed to avoid dangerous climate change. The good thing that seems to have come out of Cancun is the  Pareto approach. The major cause is emissions from developed countries (and countries like China/ India). The non developing countries are irrelevant and add to the noise. (Although that may be considered callous, it's true) I have made the analogy that in a flight emergency you fit your own oxygen  mask first before helping infants and children. The same applies with Climate Change. Get renewable energy projects running in the developed world first. To start them off elsewhere is destructive. It wouldn't make one iota of difference to emissions if that $100 billion dollars didn't end up being provided.  It probably won't. It's a total waste of funds.

List of countries by 2007 emissions
Rank, Country, Annual CO2 emissions
(in thousands of metric tons), Percentage of global total
 World 29,321,302 100%

1  China 6,538,367.00 22.30%
2  United States 5,838,381.00 19.91%
-  European Union  4,177,817.86[11] 14.04%
3  India 1,612,362.00 5.50%
4  Russia 1,537,357.00 5.24%
5  Japan 1,254,543.00 4.28%
6  Germany 787,936.00 2.69%
7  Canada 557,340.00 1.90%
8  United Kingdom 539,617.00 1.84%
9  South Korea 503,321.00 1.72%
10  Iran 495,987.00 1.69%
11  Mexico 471,459.00 1.61%
12  Italy] 456,428.00 1.56%
13  South Africa 433,527.00 1.48%
14  Saudi Arabia 402,450.00 1.37%
15  Indonesia 397,143.00 1.35%
16  Australia 374,045.00 1.28%

52 Qatar 63,000.00 0.22%
18 Brazil 368,317.00 1.26%
72 New Zealand 32,662.00 0.11%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions

China, the USA, Europe, India & Russia are 67% of annual CO2 emissions, if they are not in, then we are all out, on a limb that is about to break!  

Yes,  and they can all stand on their own merit.  The wasted effort  I was talking about was in funding projects in non developing countries.