It is ironic and quite appropriate that Bella Center has no sufficient space to accomodate 34 thousand delegates. COP15 organizers were waiting for 15 thousand people. It is a good metaphor of what we have being doing for our planet in the last two centuries. Digression finished, lets see what happened in first day of UNFCC Climate Change conference.

Conference president Connie Hedegaard of Denmark said the key to an agreement is finding a way to raise and channel public and private financing to poor countries for years to come to help them fight the effects of climate change, according to an AP report.  A masterpiece of COP15 website quoting Financial Times Duetschland says "European Union to be ready to put money on the table during the ongoing UN climate summit in Copenhagen as a sign of good faith. The sum will be earmarked for climate change mitigation and adaptation in vulnerable third world countries during the next three years". The expectation: 3 billion euros. For the short run, it sounds reasonable, but this amount is "peanuts compared to the three digits sums that are required in the long run.” says FT Deutschland.

But the scenario is not so beautiful as it seems. Papua New Guinea delegate asked for an important change in discussions: decision would not be aproved by unanimity but by simple majority. For me it is a necessary change in the voting process. World has no time to waste. But this propposal was rejected by Saudi Arabia, Congo, and Brazil  - for my shame. By COP13 occasion, at Bali, COP15 was choosen as the Conference for SIGNING an agreement. It is action time.

Image: Bella Center with rain and cold in Copenhagen (taken by @jubrcop15 - Brazilian negotiator tracker)

COP15´s first day made clear three negociation tendencies:

1 – Short-term focus: Once we must act now, some financing lines are emerging, but with no assurance of continuity. if you don´t have a long-term agreement, mitigatiom, adaptation plans, technology transfer and all actions needed to fight against climate change will not happen.

2 – Public x Private financing: Some financing lines depends on private money. We can not be dependent on "market humours" to assure climate change financing.

3 – Negociation/Promisses x Action: Despite EU declare itself "climate change leader", there is few action about financing mitigation programs for developing countries. Until this moment, the money has come from the most affected countries -those with few resources to do it.

But, to finish, the biggest risk is an "legally binding agreement". It is a text with no juridical strength inside United Nations regulations. It is defering a real agreement and pretend that COP15 achieved its goal. There is a good definition for it: greenwashing - after all, nobody will assume that Conference will fail. Does anybody here believe that United States will cut 30% of its emissions?