Her er essensen af klimaforhandlingerne ovenpå den megen gratis sprut i Cancun, som Sify News fortæller

The UN climate summit reached the Cancun Agreement here early Saturday - but there was no mention of the extent to which industrialised countries would commit to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions after 2012, when the Kyoto Protocol’s commitment period ends.

Nor was there any agreement on a second commitment period of the protocol, only a decision to keep talking about it. The Kyoto Protocol is currently the only legally binding agreement on tackling global warming.

After the fiasco of last year’s Copenhagen summit, the fortnight long summit at this Caribbean beach resort brought back 193 countries and saw tortuous negotiations. Among them was India.

Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh declared that ‘India’s interests had been fully protected and enhanced’ in the Cancun Agreement and pointed to paragraphs in the agreement that had been drafted by the ministry, as well as clauses that had been dropped at the Indian delegates’ insistence.

India’s environmental NGO Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) was not satisfied with either the agreement or the position in which it had placed the country.

‘The agreement is bad for climate change action,’ said a CSE spokesperson. ‘There is no global emission reduction target for 2050; nor is there a target for peaking year.’

‘There is no mention of equitable access to carbon space, instead a weak and meaningless language of ‘equitable access to sustainable development’ has been inserted, which will compromise India’s right to development.’

Ramesh had insisted that India’s right to development had been safeguarded by the deletion of the clause which wanted global GHG emissions - which cause global warming - to be reduced by half by 2050.

Overall, he said, ‘the BASIC countries (Brazil, South Africa, India, China) are very happy with the agreement.’

“You Cancon some of the people some of the time but you Can’tcon all the people all the time.” kommenterer en læser på en BBC artikel. I Politiken kan man som billist ærge sig over at vejsaltet er ved at slippe op i den globale varme

»Situationen er dybt kritisk. Vi troede, at det var slemt sidste vinter. Men det er værre nu.«

Det mener Per Nygaard, der er chef i et af Danmarks store vejsalt-firmaer, Brøste.

Og det er jo pointen i at det ikke hedder Global Opvarmning, men Klimaforstyrrelse. Alt vejr er i tråd med teorien.