Compromise

Consensus means compromise. Compromise means give and take. But how far can we compromise with science when the future of our one and only planet is at stake? "Science is not negotiable" has already become a key Copenhagen slogan. But is consensus over a low common denominator preferable to a higher common denominator among only a select group? To answer this question properly, you need to watch the devil in the details, of course.

According to the “number crunchers” at the Climate Action Tracker, the proposals on the table add up to a 3.5º Celsius increase in global temperature and concentrations of 800 Parts per Million of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Not good: the IPCC says that in order to avoid catastrophic climate change we need to reduce concentrations to 350 Parts per Million and prevent a global temperature increase of more than 2º Celsius.

Similarly, the C-Road simulator says the proposals add up to a 3.8º Celsius increase by 2100.

An authoritative report issued by the US Government (a "bipartisan report" in a way: it was commissioned by President Bush, written by scientists picked up by the Bush Administration and approved and released by the Obama Administration) says that 800 PPMs will bring annual climatic chaos to the US.

But despite all of this, I think it is important to try not to lose our sense of humor. So, pay a visit to the Climate Circus website which says more or less the same thing in a different way.