
COP21: Climate deal final draft 'agreed' in Paris - Jerry2
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35079532
======
RcouF1uZ4gsC
Looking at this, and also at the New York Times article[0] it appears that

1) The plans that the nations put forward are about 1/2 the reduction in
emissions required to prevent a 2 degree C rise in temperature.

2) There are no legally binding targets for emission reduction

3) There is no enforcement

How can anyone see this conference as a net positive? We spent a lot of money,
and emitted a lot of CO2 flying hundreds if not thousands of people to Paris,
to come up with the equivalent of a change.org petition in terms of actual
legal value. I think this is a net negative. It seems that after all the pre-
conference hype about this being the last chance, the delegates actually
couldn't agree to something substantial and just signed a feel good document
that actually doesn't require anything concrete of the countries other than
good intentions and then are making a big deal how they signed a treaty to
save the world. This is grandstanding, inefficiency, and waste with no benefit
for anybody (except for the frequent flyer miles of the journalists covering
the conference).

0) [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/world/europe/climate-
chang...](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/world/europe/climate-change-
accord-paris.html?_r=0)

~~~
eli_gottlieb
Goddamnit. Couldn't we have _tried_ , as a species, _not_ to commit suicide?

~~~
malka
No. We are too addicted to cheap energy to go back.

------
huuu
I was a litle confused, but I asume the article is talking about °C instead of
C? Or is C another unit used for a range or something?

~~~
bradfeehan
Almost certainly degrees Celsius. Has the "°" symbol in the "too hard basket"?
(to be fair I did copy and paste it from your comment, that's the fastest way
I could get it done).

~~~
jackweirdy
° is shift+alt+8 on mac

