Adding to this what was asked by Paul on the mailinglist: is the G8 deal any good? And he also wonders about the merits on moving ahead with strict targets without the involvement of the USA. Sjoerd then said deals are quite useless as it's up to the people to change their behaviour.
I agree with both, and therefor disagree with both. I happened to be in the USA last winter, in redder than red state Utah. Bush' stubborness regarding environmental treaties has now resulted in several individual states and cities signing up to Kyoto or just setting themselves quota. The mayor of Salt Lake City which is in the middle of Republican country is from the Green party, and greener than any mayor in the world. He has made really big changes regarding the city's environmental policies and it's really paying off, both environmentally and economically. So even though the big boss refuses to sign anything, the little mayors and many many many citizens are because of that much more aware of the environment than here in Europe. Among the US very rich, hybrid cars are already quite common. I haven't seen any around here yet, but that might be because I'm in the wrong circles
So yes, if the world keeps moving forward without official support of the US, the people will start changing their behaviour. It might not be as effective as Europe but at least it's something...
I guess it's up to fancy politicians to set agendas, more practical policy makers, industrials and citizens should then get inspired to actually do something with it. Just because the topic was high on the agenda this G8, I consider it a success. Dispite vagueness.