By Catherine Jacob, Environment correspondent, Bali.

For a fortnight, 10,000 delegates had struggled with what seemed like the impossible. But it took the arrival of the UN Secretary General to reach a final breakthrough.

To a packed hall of delegates from 189 nations in Bali, Ban-Ki Moon delivered a stern warning designed to spur the delegates on to action:

"I come to you very reluctantly. I am very disapointed by the lack of progress. You have in your hands a chance to deliver a successful outcome."

He went on: "Seize the moment for the good of humanity. I am sure you will make the right choice."

The UN Secretary General was given a standing ovation by the packed negotiating hall.

But the feel good atmosphere soon turned to despair, when Paula Dobriansky, the head of the US Delegation announced they wouldn't accept the new wording over developing countries' emissions reductions.

However, after harsh warnings from other nations, South Africa, Costa Rica and Papua New Guinea among them, America capitulated.

"We will go forward and join consensus" said Paula Dobriansky, to cheers and applause from the exhausted delegates.

The rest was easy.

For days now, there's been a stand-off between the EU and the United States here in Bali, which has stalled any completion of a global emissions agreement.

The sticky issue: whether to include binding emissions reduction targets for industrialised countries and what kind of cuts the developing world should make.

Today, that stalemate gave way as a Bali roadmap was given the go-ahead. The Americans, it seemed had got their way.

Earlier in the day, the EU said they'd reached a compromise. The enraged environmental lobby though insisted, the document was a fudge.

So how did it come to this?

Well, overnight, a small group of 20 countries had been tasked with finding a way though the contentious paragraphs of the draft agreement which the Americans, along with the Canadians and Japanese, found so offensive.

In the early hours, a draft document emerged to be put forward to everyone else for approval.

But a quick flick through the first few paragraphs revealed some key points had been removed, all of them relating to the findings of the thousands of scientists who advise the UN: the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Previous drafts of the text had included key targets, recommended by the IPCC to prevent the worst impacts of climate change:

A 25% to 40% reduction in emissions from industrialised countries by 2020.

And the fact that global emissions need to peak and decline by the next decade, in order to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.

These crucial scientific nuggets had disappeared from the main body of the document. The science bit had been relegated to a footnote at the bottom of page one, as a reference to the IPCC's most recent report.

These percentages and targets were the very ones the US delegation had objected to. They'd said all along they didn't want numbers. Bali was only about opening negotiations, they said, not about detail.

Many here believe the EU had never believed a final agreement would contain targets. They were just trying their hand, sources told us, to see how far they could push the Americans. Hence the EU's swift submission. The Americans' motives are less clear.

Two weeks ago, many agreed, international momentum had never moved so quickly. The science was clear, even the world of business sent its support to the UN delegates to achieve a strong agreement.

Now, they have an achievement, but there's much talking to do over the next few years, to determine the detail.

The delegates can now head home having achieved what will be known as the Bali roadmap.

Whether it leads towards the neccessary reductions in global emissions to avoid the worst impact of climate change is now a matter for another day.

Comments

[Ben Palmer 29 Dec 2007 01:45:18]

The IPCC is a political organisation seeking political ends and cares not a jot that the science is anything but settled.
I wwould like to hear their explanation for 1934 which was the warmest in recent history. How about the medieaval warming or how about when Greenland was actually green.
We hear little about the recent report by 400 scientists to the US senate debunking the IPCC and Al Gore followers

[Justin, Buckinghamshire 18 Dec 2007 13:35:23]

Something is happening to the environment and if we accept the premise that we humans are contributing vastly (from pollution, CO2 emissions and methane) to drastic climate change (storms, melting ice, floods, drought, rising temperatures) which is starting to have a devastating effect on many around the world, then we had all better do something about it. Even a small temperature rise would be a catastrophe for some countries. It needs a concerted global effort, from big companies and energy producers right down to individuals, if we are going to turn things around. Consider: how am I and the company I work for going to contribute to a cleaner environment. Think low and zero carbon technologies. Think green. Think recycling. Think Eco-friendly. Think Carbon Footprint.

Investigate - solar panels (photovoltaic and hot water), wind generators, tidal power, nuclear power, fuel logs, wood chip, wood pellet from sustainable forests, air and ground source heat pumps, natural light pipes to reduce use of artificial lighting, use of rainwater in buildings, recycling everything possible (supermarkets and packaging companies have a big responsibility), alternative fuels, reducing electricity demand by turning off all unwanted lights and appliances (Christmas lights are festive and fun but don’t keep them on all the time), energy efficient lighting and heating, lights operated by sensors as you enter and leave a room, insulating buildings to a high standard to reduce heating requirements, turn down/off heating to individual rooms when appropriate, natural ventilation, green travel with cleaner cars and transport….

Some figures (tonnes CO2 released / year)-
typical house: lights and appliances - 1-2 TCO2
typical house: heating and hot water - 3-5
driving car 25,000 annual mileage - 4
haulage lorry 100,000 annual mileage - 125
typical secondary school - 300
100,000km air flight - 800
typical prestige office - 1500

tonnes CO2 released / day :
500MW gas power station - 10,000
UK household standby appliances - 20,000
UK total emissions - 1.6million TCO2/day

[Sonia, Colorado USA 18 Dec 2007 07:33:16]

It is a joke! This "Global Warming Paranoia" is just nuta!! I can't believe so many people believe in this hoax. According to scientists, "Global Warming" is not "MAN MADE", like they would have you believe. It's all cyclical. We're not responsible for it, the cooling and warming of the planet is a cycle, that was here before and will be here after.

[Carter 15 Dec 2007 23:55:08]

Is a joke in this world, that single countries and people are so selfish, where is humanity when the so called better off can not lead the way to a better world. Why are people so short sighted?

Why are people not to protect the world and the future? What is wrong with the US or the EU and even the developing polluters like China. If they want to have a place for their childrens, children why not take not of the scientists report.

It is a joke and all normal and decent global citizens will pay with a planet that ends up killing itself.

Well done politicians another mess and destructive policy. Lucky for all people reading this, it wont affect them in their life times, it is for our childrens childrens.

Why are people in power such morons?
Why do we even bother to vote for them, they dont do what the people want, but follow self interest and destructive policies.

[Khalid 15 Dec 2007 15:16:28]

Indeed "Grace Jones-Walking In the Rain" will never be the same again, as a sigh of relief will be felt across the globe, that long last, clear air is not far away.
For climatic scientists amongst the many a negotiating journalist to expect immediate results, was not only a tall order, but I'm afraid near impossible.
Long last the Bali Treaty has paved the foundations for all, and it is now up to those that participated to, (if they are serious) put a target figure so as to focus the mystified minds of the minority. Common sense prevailed again no doubt.

[Tim, Cornwall 15 Dec 2007 13:27:02]

It's progress, of a kind, but I learned long ago that it's more about the INTENTION of the people in an agreement that matters than whats written in that agreement.

Alas, the intentions of the USA are all too clear.