My second question concerns the scope of Copenhagen. Copenhagen is looking to secure a deal on reducing carbon emissions, and other carbon-related issues that come into play (eg deforestation), but no-one ever mentions the ever increasing population of the world. A lot of the world’s problems are coming directly from this, including the fact that more carbon emissions are required to maintain power and heat levels for more people (essentially increased demand for finite resources). When will this (overpopulation) be bought to the table?

So what is a political agreement? It doesn’t have to be a woolly statement of intent or a nicely worded communiqué. A political agreement can still be a COP Decision, which in itself is legally binding (well, as binding as international law can be, but that’s an issue for another time). It can still have just as much bite as a new Treaty.

So the question is, what can we agree at Copenhagen? What can we bank and what do we need?
And what happens next? Does Mexico City have to be the next milestone? I don’t think so – a subsequent treaty could be agreed sooner.

Some thoughts…
To me, this is an issue of timing – the pieces are there: re-engagement of the US, positive moves by leading developing countries (not least Brazil today http://bit.ly/ozPG0), high level political interest and reputations on the line…

However, US negotiators have learnt their lesson and are determined not to get ahead of Congress on this one – unfortunately that means we’re not in a position to have nailed down all the details in Copenhagen (in many ways, this is a far better position than we were at Kyoto – where we ended up with a deal that wasn’t ratifiable).

Annex 1 KP Parties are not willing to sign up to a new commitment period under the KP (or a Copenhagen Protocol) until the US makes a clear pledge. Non-Annex 1 countries refuse to engage constructively on the rest of the issues until the numbers are resolved (the Africa group demonstrated this frustration by somewhat misguidedly stalling KP discussions at Barcelona).

Yes, the rest of the pieces (finance, developing country actions) need to be in place, but ultimately we won’t be able to get a new Treaty until the US can take the unblocking step (i.e. Congress passes a Bill).

Putting aside the question of whether or not Congress will actually get a Bill (I’m still perhaps irrationally positive about that), if the US can’t get ahead of Congress, and Congress won’t deliver anything before December, then what can we get at Copenhagen? Even if we do get a number, I doubt it will be ambitious enough.

But does that matter? The value of getting the US into a deal, even with low ambition (or ambition not agreed at Copenhagen), should not be underestimated. Once they’ve actually started taking action, I’m confident that they’ll see that it’s actually not as costly or difficult as they first thought – similar to the EU’s experience – and could be the key to a stronger US offer in future.

The US wants a deal – not least because it is in their interests to sign up to a deal now as over time, the balance of power will continue to shift Eastwards. So I think it is possible that we can get the key elements of a Treaty in place at Copenhagen (e.g. architecture, compliance mechanisms, use of mechanisms), in a way that State Department can present to Congress as a US victory, then we’re in with a chance. I hate to make this whole negotiation so US-centric, but it’s probably the key dynamic at the moment.

That’s an overly simplified take and they are plenty of other issues that need to be resolved (not least adaptation finance, and will anyone sign up to anything without numbers) – but I for one am confident that the pieces are there for a decent political agreement at Copenhagen and that we could agree a treaty in the months following. Regardless of the inevitable post-Copenhagen spin, there’s the potential for this to be a real turning point, even if it’s not the one we expect. To get there, it will take the continued efforts of negotiators, political bravery and a little bit of good fortune. But perhaps most of all, it will take optimism, positive energy and a desire to find workable solutions.