Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Transcript of ANALYZING COP21
Neither a treaty nor a binding agreement
November 30th to December 12th, 2015
Vol XCIII, No. 311
The Paris Summit
195 countries met for two weeks starting on November 30th
Negotiated the global agreement on the reduction of Climate Change
Going into it leaders were confident of success but critics weren't
-Obama vs McKibben
"The goal for Paris in December is pretty clear-cut: to achieve a legally binding agreement, with universal participation among all nations...Anything resembling Copenhagen in 2009, where some limits to greenhouse gases were agreed upon but no treaty was ultimately signed, would be deemed a failure."
-Brandon Miller, CNN
No matter whether you think this was a good or bad deal some things can't be forgotten
Revitalizes the conversation
NY Times and NASA's Gavin Schmidt hope that enthusiasm will lead to concrete measures
Most if not all sources appreaciate this
"I believe this moment can be a turning point for the world... to save the one planet that we've got"
But is the Paris Climate Deal really a "deal"?
Rich countries aren't being held accountable
"I've come here personally as the leader of the world's largest economy and the second largest emitter, to say that the United States of America not only recognizes our role in creating this problem, we embrace our responsibility to do something about it" Barack Obama
Before closing deal EU alliance with 79 African, Caribbean and Pacific countries for a binding document
EU climate commissioner Miguel Arias Canete.
Move made by US because of fear of Senate
Countries that have grown rich from burning fossil fuels are not legally responsible for the effects of climate change
"Climate change can act as a threat multiplier for instability in some of the most volatile regions of the world"- Joshua Busby
national security issues
What does that say about the success of Paris?
Other aspects that make this deal less of a "deal"
"we are talking here about trillions of dollars that need to flow into the transformation at a global level"- Christina Figueres
only $10.2 mill have been pledged plus Republicans don't want to pay for US
solutions are too broad and theoretical, besides being not enforceable
like Foreign Policy's Jedediah Purdy suggests we are depending too much on businesses rather than government
Is this global agreement a step forward?
Did we achieve what we hoped to?
Does the good outweigh the bad?
So was this deal a "deal"?
Civil disorder, damaged critical infrastructure, refugee flows, unpredictable foreign policy
It's in the Best interest of Both parties