have to change. maybe things are moving faster than they would like, but at the end of the day they breathe the same air that we do, and there is realization that something significant has to be done. >> thank you very much. we'll have a speech in a moment. hang on we just want to recap what is happening here. you're watching al jazeera, and we are potentially at a historic moment. the signing of the first universal climate change deal here in paris. we've been watching pitchers of al gore, who was behind "the inconvenient truth," the film that rallied so many to the cause of climate change. we watched the delegates filling the plenary hall, the he had of the final examination, if you like, of the text that was issued earlier today. this is the text that lace the foundation of the deal. if it is approved, the

agreements will be in place. the paris agreements will be in place. what happened earlier today it's around 12:30 that the text was released. it was the third draft text, and then we were expecting this plenary to take place around quarter to 3:00, quarter to 4:00, i forget thou, in the afternoon. that was postponed. we believe that more procedural matters that were contentious had to be resolved, then it was delayed to now. what you're watching right now is delegates and politicians and negotiators, and those who have been around this whole climate movement for a long time like al gore and mary robinson, who we were just talking about, are now assembling in the plenary hall ahead of the french foreign minister and president of this climate conference taking control of proceedings, at which point he will ask if anybody

objected to the text. then we'll have to wait and see what happens. as emma was saying, we'll hear from blocks of countries like the e.u. the g7, the small island states. some of whom may express some dissatisfaction with what they're seeing, but they're happy to put the deal through for the sake, and for the cause of climate change and fighting climate change. let's speak with emma once again as we wait for leaders to take the stage and take control of the proceedings. >> these things are slow. people are greeting each other. they're walking in, they're grabbing their seats. history does not move quickly most of the time.

>> do you think they're still adjusting the text? >> no, i think right now it's about getting everyone's entrance, and i think it's about gathering everyone in the right room. it doesn't seem that they're in a huddle necessarily, but it's more the significance of each of these dig anothers greeting each other, greating ready, and preparing to hear from countri countries. >> if there are on justs that will delay things. >> yes, it will. everything i'm hearing there are no serious objections. the saying of our children will never forgive us if we don't act now, this is a defining moment in our human history, they really ratcheted up the cost. ban ki-moon put the multi lateral system on the line when he spoke about what is at stake in this conference. the whole world is watching.

everyone has momentum behind this deal. it has been approved by many sectors in society. it would be tough to stand up and say no. >> which countries are we looking at there do you think have the most problems with the deal as it stands? that they will be the least happy? >> i think it's definitely china and saudi arabia. they weren't been the biggest blockers all the way through and they've had the most problems with the text. it's not surprising. saudi arabia, again, an oil country. they have a lot to lose in this deal. and china, lots of concerns about national sovereignty. every time they enter an international deal like this that has some binding elements to it, especially parts about how it has to report, this country now has to report their emissions and what they're doing to try to curb them those national concerns come back. i think that's been a big part of what they've been worried about, and there has been a lot of back and forth about that. >> what about the legally binding nation of this agreement? there has been a lot of confusion about that, and it is

not terribly easy to understand the day forward because as far as the united states is concerned it cannot be called a treaty because then it would not get through congress. how do we constant with all that? >> you have to think about legally binding in the international context. forget everything you learned about what a contract was. this process is legally binding, but the targets within it are not. countries are legally bound to come back every five years. they're bound to open their books and show each other what they've done. they're not bound to hit the target. that's where it comes down to the people, up to us to make sure that they do this, and they manifest in all the national laws and policies. >> then who accomplice polices it. >> you're asking an important question about international politics. but there is a tendency for these countries to show up at these events, and they police each other. the u.n. plays a role in that. the use of the word "police" is

strong, but there are multi lateral incentives to play nice, especially when they're playing nice about honesty, rather than how you run your country. >> what will drive us towards a carbon free culture. >> there is only one way that we know of to get to net zero emissions. that's going 100% clean energy. there are going to be companies and governments that are going to say, don't worry, let's keep burning fossil fuels, and we'll create a magic machine that will pull carbon from the air. it would be cheaper just to be better at renewable energy. also renewable energy is better for developing countries. easier to install than some magic ca carbon-withdrawing machine. and it will fuel their

economies. countries are already he investing in renewables than the united states ever has. they've got the manufacturing plants and technology expertise to be real drivers. >> it's a big move. many people think that renewables won't be efficient. the wind does not always blow and the sun does not always shine. and nuclear. >> many say that nuclear will be part of a bridging moment. especially those countries who regulate it well, that they'll use existing nuclear plants to get them to a place where they're 100% renewable energy. it's when the wind blows can we harness it, keep it in batteries that are affordable, and then redistribute it at night when there is no wind and i want to watch television. >> yes, how close are we to

that? >> very close. the computer is doubling its capacity every month because of investment, and then we take a little bit of the trillion of dollars investmented in fossil fuel and shift them into learning how to build a better battery you're very close to a very newible future. right now there is one rupee difference between paying for solar power and paying for coal. that's almost no investment. >> that's why the financial aspects of this deal is so important. $100billion a year which is realtively tiny amount. >> it's $100 billion a year, and they strongly urge to give that amount post 2020. that's the public money. it does not determine the

subsidies that are investing in dirty energy sources. and not helping renewable energy grow as fast as it should. >> we're at the plenary hall at the conference center. they're waiting for them to take control of proceedings and bring the draft text to the center of affairs, then we'll see how we go from there. tell us more about the french presidency and their role in all this and making it happen. >> one of the amazing things is they took a process that everyone thought they understand, there have been other climate processes, and they redesigned it completely. which was crazy at first when all of us looked at the schedule and then thought wait, the leaders are coming at the beginning? don't you know they come in the end to make the deal happen? instead she started these two weeks with rousing aspirational speeches from leaders, including from india and from china, talking about how we had to an emerge with a deal. it was this moment of hope that came off the back of

unprecedented marchs, very big action in paris an. and then we moved from there into negotiations. the french presidency said okay, you're not in charge of the text any more. we're taking it over. >> that was a dangerous game. >> totally dangerous game. someone could have rebelled. instead they produced these drafts that were so subtle and amazingly complex, and also really understandable to the outside world. they didn't lose momentum and they didn't get negotiators get mired in the small stuff. this was the ideal draft. it was putting out your best fighter first knowing you might lose them so when you get back to where you are, you've lost the very best, you end up winning on the second best. it was an incredible idea and a

really bold move to throw all your chips on the table and know what you're shooting for is just a little bit lower than that. >> next year, the next conference, what will be the role there? what will be the function of this process then? >> i think that's going to be a lot about--definitely the agreement about really reviewing what's been done pre-2020 and getting better understanding where we are in the science and where we are in the national standards. it's also going to be a lot about--we now have got this wording in the agreement about net sear emissions, but no one has really taken stock where countries sinks and floors are. that's how much countries have to absorb carbon at this point. i think reviewing what has been done, reviewing the implementation the promises the governments have made. we probably won't see movement on ambition until 2018. that's referenced in the climate agreement.

in 2018 that's when we first get a chance to come back and do better. >> how do you keep the pressure up? how do you ensure that this is forced through, that it happens? >> that's a very good question for someone like me whose entire job is at very--advocacy. >> i'll set it up for you. >> on an every day basis you have little moments where a be piece of legislation passes or it's up for debate, and members will come in and support that piece of legislation. it could be something small like we want to shift some of our budgetary investment towards renewables or a regulation of how coal is developed or actions to close down coal plants. those things on a national level done in many countries in concert lead us to a place where what we get to is a continued global movement with a lot of strength. >> the other thing here we're

talking about all these people here, these delegates and some of them are middle age and beyond, but it's really about our children, isn't it? >> ban ki-moon made a speech to civil society who said that he's here for all the babies and babies to come. that's something that is very front of mind. we're going to see that played out in this plenary, but there is a generation that is just emerging that i feel is going to be the first generation with climate hope. they're going to be the generation that saves the world. our job is to set up the best conditions possibly for them to be able to do that work. that's what we started doing here today. >> of course, that 2 degrees is always said to be the very limit, and we're already beyond the point--i know it's only 1 degrees at the moment, but we're already seeing catastrophic climate change. >> yes, our climate will not be able to stay like it is now. there is nobody who thinks that we're in a stable place, but we are in a place where we have the

chance to limit the worst effects. that's the difference between climate change and climate tipping point. climate tipping point is a crazy idea that we're close to, for example, the ice melts which releases methane gas, which makes more ice melt with more methane gas. and we're on this crazy spin where we're completely out of control. although we can't stop climate change, we have to stop the climate tipping point. that's the moment where our planet stops being recognizable and human beings can't survive. >> most scientists say we're too late. >> most scientists say if we follow this agreement we won't hit those tipping points. if we're ambitious about it. >> it all seems to have gone fairly quiet as far as the plenary is concerned. we'll leave it for the time being. let me hand back to you and we'll come back here just as soon as there is more movement.

>> just one point. we've been talking about the details and just remind all the viewers of what exactly is in the--i don't think nick clark can hear us any more, but we will, of course, cross live back to him and to paris. any moment now we're expecting the french foreign minister, and the president of this climate change conference to take to the stage and discuss the deal that is on the table. we're expecting countries to voice any concern they might or might not have and then vote on it, which would be the first universal climate change deal, really an historic moment. and it could be just minutes away. we'll cross back live to paris as soon as we have an indication that anything is about to happen. in the meantime we're here in the studio with niall ma

macdouble, anmacdowell. we've been speaking about split responsibility, the cumulative affects of fossil fuel. this has been the stumbling blocks. we have seen developed nations have been responsible for many ever their carbon dioxide emissions and the developing nation who is are catching up with them very quickly. the whole point of the deal was to how to make it fair. were what you have seen, is it fair? >> given the level of enthusiasm, not just from the various people on the ground, but the negotiators themselves from the different countries and endorsements coming from countries like saudi arabia and india, it would appear that people are generally very happy with what has been agreed to. >> i think one of the main sticking points is the transition of fossil fuels.

some countries are more ready an those. and some countries are oil producers, and are not keen--do you feel that the world has reached a point where that transition is now taken for granted? >> i think its important to bear in mind what we're trying to get to. in order to get to a world whereby the end of the century we've limited warming to no more than 2 degrees, we need to be actively carbon negative in terms of what we take out of t the--we insure the utilization of these fossil fuels are themselves.

>> the negotiators have been discussing this deal for at least four years. they'll vote on this deal and the table. let's remind the viewers of what the he key points are of the deal. first of all, an ambitious goal to keep a rise in global temperatures below 2 degrees celsius. that's the key number that we've heard for the past two weeks, for years, really, two degrees celsius. they also greed to a fund of $100 billion a year to help developing nations reach those goals. niall, back to you. this fund of $100 billion a year

to help developing nations, is it just to happen? >> it's difficult to tell. $100billion is a lot of money in any context, but deploying a single power station will cost half a billion. so $100 billion is 200 power stations. we'll need more than that over the course of the century to bring power to people in, for example, western china or much of india, latin america and africa. it's a lot of money, but it's relatively small. >> obviously, you're from the center for environment. it is your passion as well. do you feel that right now you're watching, and you'll be teaching it. >> i have no doubt that i'll be

talking about this with my students tonight. we chat on facebook and things like that all the time. i think this is something that people are watching now. also what it means in commitment from stake holders all over the world to try to go 2 degrees but to go beyond that to 1 degrees. it's history in the making and exciting to be part of it as it happens. >> it seems that we've been getting very optimistic vibes. such a contrast to the last meeting, it had been admitted that it was a disaster, and nothing had been achieved. what has changed to to get to this point? >> i don't think it's any one thing. something that does stand out in my mind in 2014 the inter

governmental panel of climate change, the committee that provides evidence to the negotiators. they're using words manmade to climate change. >> up until then, even now some will say there is climate change, can you prove that the world is getting hotter. but you can't really prove that it is manmade. there is that argument floating around, but you say about two years ago-- >> so this view of well, it's still up for debate. it's no longer tenable. so maybe 10 or 15 years ago from the various core academic perspective you could reasonbly be skeptical about this. could you potentially say well, there are many uncertainties in

the climate system, and there is a lot we don't know about. but a decade later the science has moved on. the evidence is in, and it's is infeasible to have that opinion any more. perhaps more awareness. you're on facebook with your students, and students have studied the issue so they're going to be passionate. do you get a sense that the younger generation are more aware and feel more of a responsibility? >> yes, again, i hate to keep bringing it back to what we saw last week, with the flooding in the u.k. it would be impossible not to be aware of that. so there was flooding a couple of years ago in that part of england. the government then went lady and built some flood defenses that were meant to be proof to

resist flooding events that would happen except once in a century. those barriers were used the nec next year. this is a clear and present threat to how people live their lives in the developed world and developing world. in beijing the smog that is arising as part of this issue, it is actively killing people. >> they had a red alert just yesterday. >> an example. this is shifting weather patterns. this is something that has been coming up in the agenda in all parts of the world. >> niall macdowell, you'll be staying with us. i just want to remind the viewers of what we're seeing.

the climate change has been meeting for the past two weeks, and now most of the delegates have taken the seat. we'll remind you of what the key points are of that draft meeting. and then a plan to review each nation's pledges to take action on greenhouse gas emissions every five years. while we're waiting for that session to start there in paris we can speak to our environment editor nick clark, who has been following the debate.

i guess this is a fancy way of saying, poll licing tha policing that the nations will do what they've signed up to doing. >> yes, it is about insuring all these voluntary carbon reductions that the individual countries have come up with are implemented, and the targets they have set are not legally the process has to be transparent. the word transparency causes problems as time went on. looking at what is going on at the moment. everything seems to about to happen. 45 minutes ago. but things have slowed up. what we have is a huddle on the stage. and the camera is not cutting to a tight shot. youan't see who is in that

huddle. i suspect the u.n. climate env envoy, and there is a huddle on the stage something in the wording of the text is wrong, and not entirely sure of what is happening here. we're trying to get the agreement, and trying to get to that point. there are all sorts of legal issues and trying to get 190

countries to agree on a way forward. >> this is the latest of the delays. they meeting was set to start roughly an hour ago, but tha to have something on a saturday morning, that in itself is an extension. no one was going to leave paris without having come to some kind of an agreement. this is going to happen. it may take all night. it may go into the early hours. in lima there was an event that was similar. they thought it would be over by friday. it was delayed until saturday, and then it wasn't until 3:00 sunday morning as we sleep on the floor waiting for the big moment when the gavel comes down. that could be that this is the case here. it's surprising what is happening.

this final plenary was called, everyone attended, and all the dignitaries were almost lined up ready to go, and then suddenly at the last minute there was a huddle on the stage. clearly there is some sort of problem that they need to resolve, and hopefully they'll do it soon. but it has already taken 45 minutes or so. >> we'll let you take a little rest. you've been very busy over the last two weeks, and we'll cross live back to you and to paris as soon as we get an indication that we are going to see the details that there is going to be a decision on that draft agreement for the moment. nick clark, editor in paris, nick, thank you. as we said we'll go back to that, but let's take a look at the day's other studies. police in switzerland say they've arrested two people of syrian origin under the suspicion of making and ex-transporting explosives. the two suspects allegedly violated bans on groups like

al-qaeda and isil. >> we have to live with this threat. paris is not far from geneva, and we have 100 kilometers borders with france. we're as effected as the french. >> we have a statement from the prosecutor, so what kind of detail do we have about these two men? >> barbara, well, the general prosecutor sitting along side the head of the judicial police, as it is called, has spoken the last hour. and has been quite circumspect but has given a few more details with the two syrian who is were arrested on friday. he collected press reports, which were saying that they might have had toxic gasses in their vehicle. they said it was simply traces of explosives and indicated they weren't huge amounts of explosives not enough to carry

out a huge blast, but still something of concern. he said that they were carrying real syrian passports. they weren't fake. they didn't speak french, and the authorities believe they had actually just arrived in switzerland. a matter of hours before they were arrested. >> what reaction has is there been in these arrests in geneva. >> in switzerland itself people want more answers about what has happened in the last few hours. since friday evening. because although the prosecutor made it clear there is no established links between those arrests and what happened in the middle of the week where