In case you’ve been too busy “merrying” yourself at this particular time of the year he’s a rather mini sum up of the events over in Denmark. (And yeh, it’s the same cartoonist I’ve used 3 times, Chris Riddell from the Observer, but he’s certainly the best one I know of).

Well, it didn’t go great, the Enviromental Secretary, Ed Miliband, said that the Copenhagen summit was the “most chaotic show on earth”. There were a good few countries, including Sudan and Venezuela, that were threatening to overturn the whole summit with the Sudanese delegate comparing the proposals to the holocaust. Evidently, it is true that many of the 3rd world countries present would have struggled to cut their emmissions, however, it is clear that it is down to us to help those without the means to help the world. There were some agreements though through a deal reached between the USA, China, Brazil, India and South Africa:

• A commitment from wealthy and key developing nations to limit global warming to 2C

• Between $25bn and $30bn in climate funds for poorer nations over the period 2010-12, with an annual sum of $100bn envisaged by 2020

• A mechanism to verify each state’s compliance with its commitment to curb greenhouse gas emissions

However, the fact that, for the time being, the summit is not legally binding shows something of an apparent flaw in the procedings despite the PM, Gordan Brown, argued for such an arrangement. (I told you it’d be a brief sum up)

While (personally) this is certainly better than nothing, do you think is enough, what could be done to built upon this and is this the most world leaders could achieve given the presence of prominent climate change deniers?

Max