Grading Obama's Copenhagen Speech

While most Americans slept, President Obama spoke to delegates Friday morning in Copenhagen on the final day of the U.N. climate conference. We reported yesterday that Obama’s speech would matter, not just because of the symbolism of the U.S. head of state addressing the world but also because until now U.S. negotiators have been unable to reach an agreement with other countries that have demanded larger steps on emissions cuts and mitigation funding.

Obama’s address was brief, an eight-minute declaration that bold action is needed and that the U.S. would be part of that action. And it went over decently—it was neither stellar nor awful—because of the incredibly high tension that has built up at the end of talks. How did Obama do? We grade the different parts:

Taking the lead. No U.S. president has ever squarely confronted the U.S.’s impact on global climate, currently responsible for about a quarter of the world’s emissions. Obama humbly took his knocks, admitting that his country is the world’s largest economy and second-largest emitter, and that the burden of a sweeping solution falls in large part to U.S. leaders. “America bears our share of responsibility in addressing climate change, and we intend to meet that responsibility,” he said. Angry delegates from small developing countries have wanted an apology since the talks began. Could it have been stronger? Perhaps, but they still got one. Grade: A minus.

Specifics. An apology is empty without a promise to do better, and many heads in the room waited for Obama’s offer. He didn’t up the ante from the broad reduction limits that U.S. negotiators had taken to the talks: a cut of emissions by 17 percent by 2020, and by 80 percent by 2050. Not only is that too broad, it also wouldn’t be enough to avoid what scientists have labeled a perilous 2 degree Celsius rise in global temperature. Obama offered nothing more, nodding to the legislative process at home. He didn’t have to say it, it was implied: his hands are tied by what Congress will approve and how much funding it will offer for enforcement. Although Kate Sheppard at Mother Jones wonders if the president has more authority than he thinks to make concessions and sign a treaty. Grade: C.

Calling out the other polluters. The U.S. can be as altruistic as it can, but the fact remains that top polluter China has also been unwilling to agree to sweeping reduction targets and to opening its doors to allow the rest of the world ensure they're meeting them. There’s a logical and valid case to be made that massive U.S. cuts won’t mean a whole lot for the planet unless China jumps in the pool, too. Obama’s swipe at China was veiled. “All major economies must put forward decisive national actions that will reduce their emissions and begin to turn the corner on climate change,” he said. French President Nicolas Sarkozy was more blunt, saying that the endgame at Copenhagen depends on what China decides. But the credibility behind Obama’s jab only goes so far. Several environmental groups after the speech remarked that Obama’s words would carry more weight if the U.S. were to lead by example. Grade: B plus.

Mitigation funding. The only real plea small countries made this week was “Show us the money.” Most were on board with anthropogenic climate change years ago, and most have agreed to domestic cuts on their own, treaty or not. The level of mitigation funding Obama offered on behalf of several large countries—$100 billion by 2020—is significant, but many were hoping for far more. Over a decade, $100 billion spread over the world doesn’t go that far, especially if regional environmental challenges are expected to compound. Still, it wouldn’t be free money or a sure thing. The money would only come “if—and only if—it is part of the broader accord that I have just described,” Obama said. In other words, as if to say again: your move, China. Grade: B minus.