FIRST PLACE: UNITED STATES of AMERICA
The USA wins its first Fossil of the COP for two reasons: first, for making absolutely no commitment on long-term financing for developing countries to cope with the impacts of climate change and reduce their own emissions even further, a failure that could sink the talks. Second, because the US--far and away the biggest cumulative emitter of global warming pollution in world history--has among the weakest mid-term emissions targets of any major developed country, a laughable 4% below 1990 levels by 2020. Will US negotiators ignore the interests of their own children and the poorest nations on the planet? Or will they bring the US into the community of nations, rich and poor alike, rising to the biggest challenge humanity has ever faced? US, all eyes on you: is it Hopenhagen or Brokenhagen?
SECOND PLACE: EUROPEAN UNION
The EU wins second-place Fossil dishonors for failing to address a gaping loophole that undermines its targets: hot air and forest management. Allowing full carry-over past 2012 of Europe's hot air--that is, targets based on 1990 levels that in fact allow huge increases in emissions--could allow 11 gigatonnes of carbon emissions. Europe's flagging credibility as a climate leader could crumble completely if this hot air loophole is not closed -- and all of the EU member states are responsible.
THIRD PLACE: CANADA and SAUDI ARABIA
Saudi Arabia and Canada receive the third place fossil of the day for their respective last and second-last finish in the Climate Change Performance Index released today by Germanwatch and Climate Action Network Europe. The Index evaluates 57 industrial and developing countries who release 90% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions.
Saudi Arabia’s record speaks for itself. Canada only finished second-last because Saudi Arabia received a zero rating for its climate policy! Canada is in the world’s top ten emitters, has one of the world’s highest per capita rates of emissions at 23 tonnes per person, and is 34% above its Kyoto target (which is just a modest 6% cut from 1990). Simply put: on climate change, Canada has performance issues.