It is no secret that we would have wished for a better deal in Copenhagen. The deal the world finally could agree on will not solve the climate issue. There was a lack of political will from some parts and with the current structure of the climate convention, where consenus is needed to come to a decision, the possibilities to delay the discussions are noticeable. Together with several African countries and small island states, the EU pushed for a more ambitious outcome, but those with the lowest ambitions set the agenda.

Among the positive results from Copenhagen is the recognition of the two degree target. The commitment to pay for adaptation and mitigation in the developing countries is also important. The commitment from the industrialized countries amounts to about 30 billion dollars for the period 2010-2012, of which the EU and Japan will contribute with more than 10 billion dollars each, while the US puts in 3,6 billion dollars.

The commitments to emissions reductions, however, remain too weak and no long-term goal is set. Many unclear points remain, for example the fundamental issue how we could come to a new legally binding agreement for those not included in the Kyoto protocol.

It is also disturbing that the deal does not clearly state that we now strive for a global, legally binding agreement during 2010. A lot of work remains to be done if we are to build on this deal and reach an agreement that would put the two degree target within reach.