It was a bad day for the fight against climate change. The G8 has met and published their deal (pdf) and, despite the spin, it wasn't the deal the world needs.
This summit was all about trying to secure meaningful, binding emissions reductions targets – and especially the US's commitment to them. Did it succeed? Far from it. Instead, the deal is full of weasel words like "seriously consider". As our Executive Director John said in our press response, "that's like saying aid to Africa is a good thing then refusing to actually commit to donating a single dollar".
Here's how the deal lines up, when compared to our checklist (pdf) of a what a successful deal would have been:
1. Climate change must be kept as far below a two degree increase as possible, compared to pre-industrial levels.
Verdict? The G8 reached no agreement
2. Therefore, global emissions have to start falling within the next 10-15 years, and global emissions must be cut by 50 per cent by 2050 (compared to 1990 levels).
Verdict? No binding target was set
3. Industrialised countries must take the lead and commit to 30 per cent cuts by 2020, and 80-90 per cent cuts by 2050 (compared to 1990 levels).
Verdict? No target was set
4. The G8 must clearly agree that the next climate negotiations in December will agree a formal mandate and timetable to secure the next round of binding and radical emission cuts under the Kyoto Protocol, by 2009 at the latest.
Verdict? Yes, the G8 committed to serious negotiations in Bali in December (and, significantly, the US had to concede that the UN was the proper forum for this discussion. Their attempt to set up their own parrallel process was foiled). There is also now an end-date for the negotiations: 2009, which will provide extra drive to the negotiations over the next two years.
5. The G8 must recognise that protecting intact forests is crucial for preserving biodiversity and combating climate change. With up to 25 per cent of all greenhouse gas emissions coming almost exclusively from tropical forest clearance, they must commit immediately to stop the loss and degradation of intact forests by 2010 and of all forests by 2020.
Verdict? No target was set
So, another year, another unforgivable delay - at a time when the world just can't wait.