Anteros
You write:
Surely there is a per capita emissions level that everybody should be heading towards – with some adjustments for the ‘sins’ of history
I would agree with the direction, but would modify that slightly.
Rather than a “per capita emission level” as a target, I would suggest a ”carbon efficiency” level.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5011/5500972088_54742f12be_b.jpg
This is defined as the wealth generated by an economy (GDP in $) divided by the CO2 emitted by that economy (in metric tons).
This indicator would reflect the desire for all nations to improve the standard of living of their populations, at the same time using a minimum of fossil fuels to do so.
As you can see, the industrially developed economies (EU, USA, Japan, etc.) have a considerably higher “carbon efficiency” than the developing ones (China, India, Brazil, Russia, etc.).
It is interesting that this indicator has increased for most nations over time, and it is reasonable to assume that it will continue to do so, particularly as fossil fuels become more costly and new cost-effective energy sources, not dependent on fossil fuels, are developed.
As for “the sins of history”: I’d say that the availability of low cost energy (based primarily on fossil fuels) has been a major factor in the improvement of the human condition in a good part of the world, so this should not be classified as a “sin of history”.
We should just make sure that we do not commit the “sin” of blocking the populations of the underdeveloped economies from having the same access to low-cost fossil fuel based energy as we had, by arbitrarily tying them to carbon caps or enforcing draconian taxes on carbon.
Max