A principal função do texto é:

This year's round of United Nations climate talks opened in Poland with nations attempting to set the terms of a new deal on all aspects of climate change. The talks, in the city of Poznan, marked the halfway point in a two-year process agreed at last year's UN conference.

During the discussions, however, scientists and environmentalists would seem to be sharing the general sense of hopelessness regarding two of the crucial factors involving climatic change, namely, clean energy resources and forest preservation.

The optimism of global leaders for clean energy technologies appears to be slipping somewhat in the face of the global financial situation and the sheer scope of the climate problem — at least as it is reflected in a survey released this week at the same.

The survey, conducted by privately owned Globescan, among leaders and stakeholders, collected feedback from about 1,000 climate change decision makers, throughout the month of November. The study, which had backing from several key global organizations, shows that climate experts have less faith in alternative energy than they did 12 months ago. It also shows less support for wind energy, solar power, biofuels, biomass and hydrogen energy as technologies with "high potential" to reduce carbon levels in the atmosphere over the next 25 years.

There was also less support for carbon capture and storage, new nuclear build, small-scale hydropower and natural gas stations, as viable ways to hit targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Although in most cases, the decline in optimism for any particular technology — from solar power to wind farming — was a matter of a few percentage points, almost every category saw a drop.

What did the experts see as having the highest potential for curbing CO₂? Energy conservation and more efficient technology overall. That accounted for 88 percent of respondents. In terms of forest preservation, the idea that the rich world would pay the poor world to save a type of natural commodity from which all benefit — trees, seems simple enough. Forests and jungles absorb carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, which is stored in trees. Cutting trees down releases CO₂ and triggers the emission of additional greenhouse gases from denuded soils. Forest loss and land degradation could be responsible for 20 percent of the planet-warming gases attributable to human activities, some experts suggest.

That has made the question of what to do about forests central to talks underway this week that aim to shape a new global agreement to fight global warming. Scientists and environmentalists want mechanisms to reward the developing world for saving its forests incorporated into any such treaty. Even champions of the idea, however, admit they have reservations.

All in all, nevertheless, among the outcomes from Poznan it can be anticipated that there will be further agreement to tackle deforestation and the provision of resources to support it; secondly, the launch of an adaptation fund to help developing countries begin to deal directly with the impact of climate change; and thirdly, agreement that serious post-Kioto framework negotiations should now begin in earnest in the run-up to next year's Copenhagen summit.