Barack Obama stepped into the chaotic final hours of the Copenhagen summit today saying he was convinced the world could act “boldly and decisively” on climate change.

But his speech offered no indication America was ready to embrace bold measures, after world leaders had been working desperately against the clock to try to paper over an agreement to prevent two years of wasted effort — and a 10-day meeting — from ending in total collapse.

Obama, who had been skittish about coming to Copenhagen at all unless it could be cast as a foreign policy success, looked visibly frustrated as he appeared before world leaders.

He offered no further commitments on reducing emissions or on finance to poor countries beyond Hillary Clinton’s announcement yesterday that America would support a $100bn global fund to help developing nations adapt to climate change.

He did not even press the Senate to move ahead on climate change legislation, which environmental organisations have been urging for months.

The president did say America would follow through on his administration’s clean energy agenda, and that it would live up to its pledges to the international community.

“We have charted our course, we have made our commitments, and we will do what we say,” Obama said.

But in the absence of any evidence of that commitment the words rang hollow and there was a palpable sense of disappointment in the audience.

Instead, he warned African states and low island nations who have been resisting what they see as a weak agreement that the later alternative — no agreement — was far worse.

“We know the fault lines because we’ve been imprisoned by them for years. But here is the bottom line: we can embrace this accord, take a substantial step forward, and continue to refine it and build upon its foundation,” he said.

“Or we can again choose delay, falling back into the same divisions that have stood in the way of action for years. And we will be back having the same stale arguments month after month, year after year – all while the danger of climate change grows until it is irreversible.”

He also took a dig at China, drawing attention to its status as the world’s biggest emitter and reinforcing America’s hardline on the issue of accountability for greenhouse gas emissions.

The lacklustre speech proved a huge frustration to a summit that had been looking to Obama to use his stature on the world stage – and his special following among African leaders – to try to come to an ambitious deal.

The president was drawn into the chaos within minutes of his arrival at Copenhagen, ditching his schedule to take part in a meeting of major industrialised and rapidly emerging economies.

Responding to Obama’s speech, a British official said: “Gordon Brown is committed to doing all he can and will stay until the very last minute to secure a deal… but others also need to show the same level of commitment. The prospects of a deal are not great.”

Tim Jones, a spokesman for the World Development Movement, said: “The president said he came to act, but showed little evidence of doing so. He showed no awareness of the inequality and injustice of climate change. If America has really made its choice, it is a choice that condemns hundreds of millions of people to climate change disaster.”

Friends of the Earth said in a statement, “Obama has deeply disappointed not only those listening to his speech at the UN talks, he has disappointed the whole world.”

The World Wildlife Fund said Obama had let down the international community by failing to commit to pushing for action in Congress: “The only way the world can be sure the US is standing behind its commitments is for the president to clearly state that climate change will be his next top legislative priority.”

The extent of crisis in the talks has taken leaders by surprise. The Brazilian leader, Lula da Silva, told the conference that the all-night negotiating sessions took him back to his days as a trade union leader negotiating with his bosses.

Suzanne Goldenberg and Allegra Stratton in Copenhagen

guardian.co.uk, Friday 18 December 2009 12.53 GMT

(CNN) — U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived in Copenhagen early Thursday morning amid concerns that time is running out at the climate change summit for world leaders to agree a deal to combat global warming.

Yvo de Boer, the U.N.’s top climate official, admitted Wednesday evening that negotiations had unexpectedly stalled and said that the next 24 hours would be crucial.

The conference’s Danish hosts had been expected Wednesday to table a text intended to establish a basis for further negotiations. But de Boer said he did not know if the Danish text had been tabled.

“The cable car has made an unexpected stop,” De Boer told journalists. On Monday he had said that the “cable car” was halfway up the mountain and that the rest of the ride would be “fast, smooth and relaxing.”

Clinton is among dozens of senior-level figures joining the negotiations in the final days in an effort to push the summit towards a global deal limiting carbon emissions to replace the Kyoto Protocol. U.S. President Barack Obama is expected to join the talks Friday.

“The Secretary and the President decided that she could play a useful role in helping close gaps in our climate talks there by traveling to Copenhagen and personally participating,” a spokesman for the U.S. State Department said.

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao was among world leaders to arrive at the summit Wednesday. He told reporters aboard his flight to Denmark that he intended to assert China’s “sincerity and determination” to work with the international community to tackle climate change,” according to the official Chinese government Web site.

“I hope the meeting, with joint efforts made by various parties, will yield fair, reasonable, balanced and achievable results,” he said.

Japan became the latest country to pledge climate aid to developing nations Wednesday, offering $15 billion by 2012 to help vulnerable states mitigate against the impact of global warming. Earlier in the week the European Union pledged $9.4 billion for the same purpose.

Climate change activists attempted to disrupt the summit Wednesday, resulting in around 250 arrests. Protesters had hoped to get inside the Bella Center, where the talks are being held, to set up a “people’s assembly” but police used pepper spray and dogs to contain the demonstrations.

A spokesman for the Copenhagen police told CNN that the majority of arrests had taken place outside the center but there had been no serious injuries.

While the protests were going on outside, inside it was being announced that Danish minister Connie Hedegaard had resigned as president of the U.N. climate change summit.

“The resignation is essentially procedural,” CNN’s Phil Black said, “and she’ll be replaced by the Danish prime minister. It’s a reflection of the fact that the talks are now at the high-level phase, and it was deemed appropriate that the PM should now take over.”

By Aubrey Ann Parker
Free Press guest blogger

When it comes to wind power, Americans have all kinds of excuses not to use it. “It’s too expensive” or “Not in my backyard” (NIMBY: referencing that they don’t want a tall, skinny, white turbine obstructing their beautiful view of the ocean or the mountains.) Let me begin by saying this is all a sham, in my opinion.

Recognized around the world for the last century of leading the manufacturing industry, Detroit is rusting from the inside out. Michigan is currently experiencing a 15% unemployment rate. Although some jobs have been created since the government incentive to manufacture affordable cars with good gas mileage, the jobless people of our state are still left waiting for the dawn of the second industrial revolution.

Why aren’t we using our technical expertise and warehouses full of machinery equipment to help optimize wind turbines that could be used throughout the world? This morning I attended a three-hour tour to Middelgrunden Wind Farm, just off the coast of Copenhagen. Luckily this tour didn’t turn out like Gilligan’s, because the temperature was below freezing.

The tour highlighted several speakers from the wind energy industry, all of which mentioned the need for better turbine design so that wind energy can become more affordable for consumers. They stressed the importance of new technology to overcome the learning curve in an industry that is still fairly young (only 30 years old for onshore turbines, and less than 10 years for offshore). But the potential is there, and estimates say the demand is growing fast.

The tour boat circled 20 turbines at the offshore Middlegrunden wind farm —- contributing three percent of the Copenhagen energy grid -— and we could see 100 Swedish turbines spinning in the distance. There are 11 offshore wind farms just like this scattered along the Danish coastline, but it still manages to retain its beauty. There are plenty of sailboats docked for the winter in the harbor, and I’m sure their owners still get plenty of use out of them — they might even use the turbines as a sort of obstacle course. The coastline at Middelgrunden is marred with carbon emitting stackhouses in addition to the windmills, and to my way of thinking, I’d rather have 20 skinny, white turbines “ruining” my view of the water than sooty, gray smog.

Denmark has 5,100 wind turbines total —- 78% of which are onshore, 22% offshore -— contributing to 20% of Danish electricity production. Jan Hylleberg, CEO of the Danish Wind Industry Association, projects that by 2020 this will increase to 50%.

I believe that Michigan could lead the green revolution —- supplying wind turbines to the world instead of automobiles —- if we could only think outside the dinosaur graves buried beneath the Middle East. The laws of economics apply here: As fossil fuels become scarce and supply decreases, demand (and therefore price) of these industries will increase to an amount that no one can afford to pay; thus a crash like the recent auto industry.

So why are we giving false hope to workers in Detroit by filling jobs manufacturing high mileage cars that we know are only temporary fixes? Why are we proposing to use our industrial knowledge and resources to build six new coal plants, if we know that the price of this energy is only going to increase? Why, instead, aren’t we seeking our own, domestic solution to this very foreseeable problem in the near future? Shouldn’t we be producing and manufacturing our own wind turbines, as well as supplying them to the rest of the globe?

Simply put, because nobody wants a shiny white turbine obstructing their view of crystal clear Lake Michigan. Absurdity! We get some amazing winds off the bluffs along the coast and we should be taking full advantage of them. And even if you argue that this isn’t enough to meet the energy demands of Michigan, that’s fine -— at least we can sell the technology to other places like Denmark where wind is more favorable.

The Danish wind industry started after the first oil crisis in the 1970s. Denmark was looking for domestic solutions to foreign fossil fuel dependence, and began to develop a plan featuring wind as a long-term, renewable alternative. Although the market began with onshore wind turbines, offshore development—which produces 30% to 40% more energy per turbine -— has experienced a steady increase, expected to grow 45% annually in coming years. This means that in 2015 6% to 7% of the world’s wind energy will be offshore, and the European Union will increase to 20% offshore suppliers, says Anders Soe Jensen, offshore president of Vestas Wind Systems.

Each turbine is 100 meters tall and 76 meters in diameter, producing two MWh per hour, totaling to four million KWh per year —- enough to power around 1,200 households (for onshore turbines), says Jensen. Middlegrunden, with 20 offshore turbines, produces enough energy for about 35,000 households —- this compared to the 20 to 25 thousand households if the same 20 turbines were onshore.

The other wind leaders in the European Union are Spain, with 15% wind power, and Denmark’s southern neighbor Germany, with 8%. Last year the EU as a whole had a 40 percent increase in wind installations.

“We can industrialize this industry at a lower price, building a foundation,” Jensen said. The only thing missing is technological advancement, who is currently hiring for the position of a manufacturing leader.

Christian Kjaer, CEO of the European Wind Energy Association, says the European Union legislation is expected to set a binding target for renewable energy at 20% —- a 5% increase from the current set point. By 2012, the EU will meet its Kyoto obligations because they are already delivering on carbon reductions, says Kjaer. This in stark contrast to Canada, which I heard the other day at the Bella Center is at negative three percent of its Kyoto obligations.

Spain alone plans to intensify this regime, however, ratifying an agreement in June 2010 to have 40 percent of Spanish energy coming from renewable resources, says Carlos Gasco of Ibertrola Renewables in Spain.

“Scientists say we need to act soon,” Kjaer said. “Developed countries need a 25 to 40 percent reduction in carbon emissions. We need a legally binding target by 2020, not by 2050 …” Kjaer not only recommended bumping up renewable energy systems, but also a complete fuel source switch, such as from coal to gas.

Steve Sawyer, the secretary general for the Global Wind Energy Council, has 20 years of experience with negotiations like those seen at the United Nations Climate Summit in Copenhagen this week. He told the tour that by the end of next week 130 heads of state will be here, “and the deal isn’t done yet. Usually they only show up to congratulate themselves on a job well done.”

Sawyer confirmed what I’ve been feeling all week. As far as the negotiations go, there are pessimists and there are optimists here in Copenhagen when it comes to the question of whether or not the United Nations will sign a “real deal” by this time next week. “But as far as I can tell,” Sawyer said, “the game is still in play.” However, he adds, the majority of the negotiations on the table right now are “nowhere near ambitious enough … (despite that) potential is huge all over the world.”

Currently, there are wind projects totaling 33,000 MW under construction now, 22,000 of which are in China alone. Almost 29,000 MW of wind power are currently generated in the United States as of April 2009, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.

“We’ve learned from Europe,” said Denise Bode, CEO of the American Wind Energy Association. The EU set hard renewable energy targets and then each country had to develop their own energy portfolio to reach those goals. “In the U.S., we have no hard targets, so it is up to the individual states to come up with their own objectives,” which is much less actionable in terms of carbon reductions.

I hope as we go into the next week of negotiations that the U.N. does decide to implement strict renewable energy goals. And I hope that the Michigan manufacturing industry will be watching.

The world has arrived at a moment of decision.

As long as we continue to depend on dirty fossil fuels like coal and oil to meet our energy needs, and dump 90 million tons of global warming pollution into the atmosphere, we move closer and closer to several dangerous tipping points—points which scientists have repeatedly warned would, if crossed, threaten to make it impossible for us to avoid irretrievable destruction of the conditions that make human civilization possible on this planet.

I’ve said it numerous times already, but right now we are trapped in a dangerous cycle—borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf, and then burn it in ways that destroy the planet. Every bit of that’s got to change.

Right now, here in the US and all over the world, people are demanding action. There is a much broader consensus than there was when President George H.W. Bush negotiated—and the Senate ratified—the Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992. And there’s much stronger consensus than when we completed the Kyoto Protocol in 1997.

The road to the signing of an agreement in Copenhagen will not be easy, but the world has traveled this path before. More than twenty years ago the US signed the Montreal Protocol, a treaty to protect the ozone layer, and strengthened it to the point where we banned most of the major pollutants that created the hole in the ozone over Antarctica. And we did it with bipartisan support: President Ronald Reagan and Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill joined hands to lead the way.

We can do it again and solve the climate crisis, protecting our planet for future generations.