主题：【原创】绿色的阴谋 -- 晨枫

哥本哈根协议关于资金的原文：

8. Scaled up, new and additional, predictable and adequate funding as well as improved access shall be provided to developing countries, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention, to enable and support enhanced action on mitigation, including substantial finance to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD-plus), adaptation, technology development and transfer and capacity-building, for enhanced implementation of the Convention. The collective commitment by developed countries is to provide new and additional resources, including forestry and investments through international institutions, approaching USD 30 billion for the period 2010 2012 with balanced allocation between adaptation and mitigation. Funding for adaptation will be prioritized for the most vulnerable developing countries, such as the least developed countries, small island developing States and Africa. In the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency on implementation, developed countries commit to a goal of mobilizing jointly USD 100 billion dollars a year by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries. This funding will come from a wide variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources of finance. New multilateral funding for adaptation will be delivered through effective and efficient fund arrangements, with a governance structure providing for equal representation of developed and developing countries. A significant portion of such funding should flow through the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund.

发达国家：

1. 2010-2012年（过渡期）每年300亿，到2020年达到1000亿USD，不是从明年起每年1000亿。

2. 承诺的1000亿，无法保证是new additional resources，很有可能是原来的发展援助包装一下改头换面。再有就是这个资金机制不全是发达国家政府出钱，还包括市场机制、私营部门来的费用等，如可能收碳关税、国际海运空运排放税、CDM机制收益等，相当于从发展中国家拿钱又用于发展中国家；

3. 发达国家的援助经费，很大一部分用于发达国家援助人员工资、咨询费用、在发达国家用高于国际市场的价格购买产品，真正能用到发展中国家的钱要大打折扣的。

4. 援助到位很慢。我举个例子，UNFCCC公约（1992）就规定了要对发达国家适应提供资金，适应基金的管理条款是去年波兹南刚确定的，钱还没谱呢；京都议定书（1997）确定了CDM机制，真正开始运作是2005年。

5. 这种援助，因为是单方出资，发达国家肯定要想单方说了算。管理机制如何（是交发达国家占优的世行，还是新成立机构？）是否最符合发展中国家的需要？

例如在技术开发与转让议题，发达国家就不谈买知识产权给发展中国家，希望搞点确定技术需求，共享信息的虚的事务；发展中国家希望根据本国需求和优先定技术需求，发达国家出钱买再送给发达国家，两方没有共同点。

但是发达国家把这个援助看成是分裂发展中国家的“不和的金苹果”，特别是G77+CHINA在最后一天会上对哥本哈根协议已形不成统一的立场：

-小岛国希望是1.5度，甚至更低，全球峰值和绝对减排要有确切的数字，越早越好。要被淹了的图瓦卢对钱不在乎（“不会为30个银币出卖国家的生存”），只希望绝对减排；马尔代夫等还是希望能达成协议的；

-最不发达国家从能得到援助的角度出发看问题；非洲集团更是希望能得到其中的lion share

-中国只承认2度

-面对南美革命国家反对“密室政治”的呼声，BASIC四国只能闷声大发财

......

很尴尬啊

中国在一些问题上都从底线上退了半步......