2 for a first period between 2008 and 2012 the year 1990 standard

French politicians have interest in potasser rapidly their records on climate change. Scientists from around the world are given in Rendez-vous in Paris from 29 January, to publish the latest official forecasts on the scientific aspects of the global warming and make the point about the dangers that threaten us. After four years of research, the report of the Group of experts on the climate change intergovernmental, placed under the aegis of the United Nations, promises to be explosive. The first leaks suggest that very broad predictions of the last reports (between 1 and 6 degrees by 2050 if nothing is done) will be compressed. Above all, changes could intervene faster and stronger than expected.

In the menu, the discovery of amplification phenomena, previously minimized, as the melting of the permafrost. Frozen earth of Siberia contains materials organic, thousands of years old. Once broken down by bacteria, billions of tonnes of methane, a gas more potent than CO2, would be released into the atmosphere.

Barely recovered from the reading of the first volume of the report of the IPCC on the status of science, the Terrans, who still have in memory the estimate of the cost of our inaction by the British Nicolas Stern, will have to wait the mid-November 2007 to take cognizance of the synthesis of other documents of the IPCC on the economic consequences and necessary adaptation policies. Last November, the Economist had compared the danger that threatens us with the crisis of 1929 and advanced a cost of 5.5 billion euros if nothing is done to stem the increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

On the front of the international negotiations, since the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol in February 2005, diplomats are struggling to engage the heads of Government. Despite the decision of some US States such as California, to engage in active policies to reduce the consumption of hydrocarbons, George w. Bush remains inflexible. The US administration submitted last month before the Supreme Court that CO2 is not a pollutant, and is therefore not be regulated by the States. The victory of Democrats should nevertheless change the turn of the discussions on the "post-2012". In Kyoto, industrialized countries (with the exception of the United States and the Australia) are committed to reduce their emissions of 5.2 for a first period between 2008 and 2012, the year 1990 standard. Others must carry out the inventory of emissions each year and report to the United Nations.

Originally, the Protocol provided that negotiations should begin at the latest in 2005 to allow ratification of the second period leaving not orphan the CO2 market. But the American refusal to accede to and the lack of motivation of developing countries have delayed discussions. The issue of the year 2007 will be to convince the industrialized countries to remain in the process, while stepping up their efforts.

Basis of the Protocol, the principle of common but differentiated responsibility requires that Westerners have polluted since the industrial revolution to make the first effort. To emergency 2006 was the sixth warmest year in the world since 1861 according to the Meteorological Organization World must also convince the largest emitters such as the India, the Brazil and China to start. The most crazy proposals are advanced. Some speak of a medium-term horizon (2030) which would be less afraid. Others prefer flexible commitments based on the evolution of the domestic product gross. Finally, the idea of setting a quota per capita is based on the assumption that the atmosphere is a public in which every human being has the right of way equal. A proposal difficult to accept for Americans that emit more than 8 tonnes equivalent CO2, against 2.5 tonnes for a French and 0.3 tonnes to an Indian.