GreenPeace, Sierra Club at odds over Copenhagen deal

If the nation’s most connected, respected environmental organizations can’t even agree on Copenhagen, how do countries around the world with centuries of politics stand a chance?

A more powerful statement would be if each of these powerful environmental groups came together with their own united front against climate change, showing the world it is in fact possible to agree.

Instead, we get a hodgepodge of opinions. It comes off as either a good cop, bad cop routine or worse yet, it looks like some of these leaders know what they’re talking about and others are clueless.

While the folks at GreenPeace call the agreement forged at Copenhagen a cop-out and a shame, the Sierra Club takes a much more middle ground approach. Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope called the agreement “historic, if incomplete.”

The National Resources Defense Council went as far as to praise the deal. It’s president, Frances Beinecke, said “The world has said enough is enough. We have taken a vital first step toward curbing climate change.

Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org, had some of the harshest words, even putting the word “deal” in quotes. “This is a declaration that small and poor countries don’t matter, that international civil society doesn’t matter, and that serious limits on carbon don’t matter,” he said

With such a variety of opinion coming from the private-sector environmental front, it’s no wonder 190 nations have yet to join the deal with the U.S., China, Brazil, South Africa and India.

So which is it? An important first step or a shame? The deal itself asks for an 80 percent reduction in greenhouse gases by 2050. Each country must release how it plans to lower emissions by this January. Many countries also signed up to give money to help developing nations meet their goals.

The real success is impossible to gauge through Copenhagen. Rather, it lies in how many countries will join the deal and whether Obama can work his Copenhagen magic with the U.S. Senate.