An official report released at the conference states that China's food output could be hit by 10% between 2030 and 2050, and a report from the WWF that "goes one step further than previous studies by analyzing the impact of increased extreme weather events on nature" stating that the results will be worse than previously thought.
A lot more debate over how much role the major new developing economies will have to play in the post-Kyoto cuts has been covered in the news. During the first minor cuts that were planned during the conference at Kyoto developing nations have been exempt as their per-capita output is very low. However as the director of the U.S.-based Union of Concerned Scientists said "If India, China and Brazil replicate our pattern of fossil-intensive development, the game is over." A good article explaining where Brazil and China's CO2 comes from is here. In Brazil's case, 75% is from rainforest destruction.
The US are even less willing to look at the 2012 post-Kyoto period according to the French Press Agency: "US senior climate negotiator Harlan Watson said Friday in Buenos Aires that Washington was open to holding "informal gatherings" to discuss climate change, as long as they do not pave the way to post-Kyoto negotiations. Friends of the Earth have called for the EU to sanction the US over climate change: "[In Buenos Aires, the EU] must get rough with the United States, including threatening to introduce import taxes on energy-intensive US products as long as the US refuse to fight climate change"
BBC has a few articles on it too. This one worries that it might be a little linguistically inaccessable and go on to display fears that it's just a talking shop rather than action being taken. Another on the Hadley report I covered yesterday - although rather than just read another article about it, if you haven't already I recommend you read full report (pdf) yourself, it's quite short and easy to understand. We've also got yet another article covering the completely flawed Bjorn Lomborg argument that money is better spent on other things. I really wish the press would stop giving him more space than he deserves.
If you read one link from this entry, read this. It describes how the law is being prepared to be used against polluters by those suffering the worst effects of climate change, such as the Inuit people. In the dock could be ExxonMobil, known everywhere outside the US as Esso - the organisation at the top of the list for funding bad climate science to be used in much the same way as the tobacco companies funded bad science in an attempt to claim smoking didn't kill you. You can read more at www.climatelaw.org, The Climate Justice Programme.