Once upon a time, circa 2001, Snow White struck a deal with eight dwarves who shared the forename “G”. The troop had been so busy making their fortune that they had neglected the little cottage they called home. But now they promised to tidy up a tad. Poor Snow White, blameless for the sooty fireplace, the broken off-switch on the radiator and the overflow from the bathtub, did some chores of her own accord. But could her image as the innocent waif survive when she threw a tantrum, demanding payment and storming out of dinner when she didn’t get her way? And could they ask her to work without wages to clean up their mess?

See where I’m going with this? I could place America as “Bully”, Russia as “Gassy” and Britain as “Wimpy”, but let’s not get carried away. The moral of forgoing prosperity for environmental good still stands. Idealists insist that nations should all go green for the sake of the unborn, but despite reeking of unrealistic romanticism, the case for united action has watertight foundations. If the developing world continues producing emissions unchecked, they will negate reductions elsewhere. But they are not avoiding responsibility altogether: between 1997 and 2000, China reduced its emissions by 17%, and every hour two wind turbines are installed in the nation. All they want is a sustainable approach that considers their need to develop. It’s not destructive self-interest, it’s the compromise missing from COP15 – compensating the clean-up efforts of the poor with financial support from the rich.

True, the accord agreed requires $100 billion of transfers by 2020, but consider the $153 billion the IMF extended to the industrialized world during the recent economic crisis and the insufficiency of this figure is obvious. And financial incentivizing is not just for the worse-off. A less publicised element of the Green debate is the exploitation of the Kyoto mechanisms. Rather than simply creating market incentives, the Clean Development Mechanism is becoming, to the environmental market, what borrowing charges on misplaced room keys are to college Porters – a pointless money-making exercise that leaves victims bitter. Many private firms allegedly clean up operations in the developing world and claim carbon credits, making a cushy profit. The underlying concept I have no qualms with; in an economic downturn few will act without financial reward. But it is near impossible to prove that these carbon credits are deserved, and sometimes whether they do even reduce emissions.

It’s not just private money-makers. The palm oil industry, synonymous with deforestation and waste, faces reputational pressures so great that the world’s largest consumer, Unilever, suspended a $32 million contract with an Indonesian supplier last month for unsustainable practices. Yet the EU, promoting the use of biofuels, aimed for palm oil to constitute 10% of fuel sales in the region by 2010. Put simply, the EU are reducing consumption of fossil fuels and filling the void with an alternative fuel that destroys our environment too, just in its production rather than combustion. Ironic? Nonsensical? Or the perfect way to meet international emissions targets?

And, despite committing to “sustainable social and environmental practices”, the World Bank funded palm oil projects in some of the world’s most delicate ecosystems until an outraged letter from NGOs reached their inboxes last summer. How can one arm of the UN play referee in ‘Hopenhagen’ whilst their dubious sibling is off supporting one of the most environmentally unfriendly industries of modern time? 

Then there’s the second obstacle. Without Snow White’s total and utter belief in the power of her Prince’s kiss to cure her coma, the magic won’t work. The human mind can not fabricate from scratch and conceive of things the eye has not witnessed, so even if we pronounce climate change an imminent reality, deep down we can’t imagine our world obliterated by global warming. But we, the voters that steer our government, need whole-hearted fear of global warming.

Over 300,000 deaths in Africa are attributed to climate change annually. As the tentacles of the Climate Change monster touch our lives, we’re forced to believe it exists. So, even if the £130 million spent on COP15 bought only a promise to “take note of” tired principles, and even if the detailed plans promised this month never materialize, the number and prestige of those present at Copenhagen clarify one thing: no one’s buying what scepticism is selling.