US reassures on Global Climate Change Commitment in Honolulu
Surya B. Prasai
February 02, 2008
With the curtain closed on 31 January 2008 at the end of the two day meting in Honolulu on global climate change, the participants from 16 major global economies plus the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) seemed to agree that the U.S. had taken new initiatives to improve its image and convey the right facts on global climate change based on past US commitments.
The Hawaii meeting proved to be a constructive opportunity particularly as the United Nations was also present to express its views for the first time after the historic UN climate conference in Bali, Indonesia. Although this second Major Economies Meeting on Energy Security and Climate Change ended without reaching any formal agreement, participants did agree to move forward on the Bali Action Plan on Climate Change.
The meeting was a very good opportunity for Washington to mend its international fences after it faced sharp criticism at Bali for what was earlier perceived as a less cooperative stance on global climate change. According to Philip Clapp, deputy managing director of Pew Environment Group, a research and advocacy group, "In the final session of Bali, we were abandoned even by our closest allies". France which had stood up against the US in the Bali Summit side line negotiations expressed through Brice LaLonde, France's ambassador for climate change, "The new U.S. attitude is a good start, though we want more from the United States". This time, the Bush administration played good environmental diplomacy in Hawaii to show that it cared as much as any other developed country in addressing global warming, a hot issue among candidates running for the US presidential race in 2008.
The UNFCCC´s Bali Roadmap, agreed by over 180 countries included a mixed agenda on key issues to be negotiated by 2009, including action on adapting to the negative consequences of global climate change, new ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, ways to provide better CDM monitoring mechanism and environmental caps, deploy climate-friendly technologies and finance both adaptation and mitigation measures.
Immediately after the Bali meeting, Yvo de Boer, executive secretary, UNFCCC noted, "We now have a roadmap, we have an agenda and we have a deadline. But we also have a huge task ahead of us and time to reach agreement is extremely short, so we need to move quickly. What we need is a climate change Marshall Plan, a plan that will spur green, low-carbon economic growth worldwide, particularly in developing countries".
The climate change conference in Bali had achieved three major objectives, according to UN Secretary Genera Ban Ki Moon, "It helped forge negotiations on a global climate change agreement, agreed to an agenda for the negotiations, and agreed to complete them by 2009".
In September 2007, President Bush in addressing the Major Economies Meeting on Energy Security and Climate Change urged a new path forward to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a way that would not undermine economic growth or prevent nations from delivering greater prosperity for their people. The US urged this on the basis of it being a global economy to work with all of the world's largest users of energy and largest producers of greenhouse gas emissions, including both developed and developing nations to establish a new international approach on energy security and climate change in 2008 that can contribute to a global agreement by 2009 under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
The US was, in fact, the first country to state that the world community must produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions and must do so in a way that promotes economic growth and helps nations deliver greater prosperity for their people. Ten years back it had called for a similar summit like Bali but then the nations of the world were not prepared for such a meet since they did not take contemporary environmental signs and symptoms as cancerous. The truth is the US also leads by example. From 2000-2005, the population of the United States grew by 5 percent (14 million people) and GDP grew by 12 percent (about $1.2 trillion) while its Green House Gas (GHG) emissions increased by only 1.6 percent. Latest estimates show that from 2005-2006, the US economy grew by 2.9 percent, but greenhouse emissions decreased remarkably at only 1.5 percent! This compares more favorably than other countries that have cap and trade programs.
The US also pursued a diverse portfolio of policy measures including dozens of mandatory, incentive-based, and voluntary programs to address its domestic emissions including the ENERGY STAR program which reduced emissions by 135 MMTCO2E in 2006, the Domestic Methane Programs which reduced its 2005 methane emissions to 11% below 1990 levels; the newly launched Fuel Economy Increase from Light Trucks which will save103 MMTCO2E over the life of vehicles subjected to the new rules; and the US President's proposed "20 in 10 Plan" which will slow and potentially stop the growth of CO2. Emissions from cars, light trucks, and SUVS by using alternative and renewable fuels.
The US has to tread the post-Bali road map carefully so that mandatory support does not account to a loss in domestic jobs or curtailment of US economic growth. The EPA already has some of the world´s leading industrial caps and also maintains routine inspection throughout major American cities and industrial townships. In October 28, 2001, President George W. Bush had made his opposition to the 1997 Kyoto treaty on global warming in the condition that it might be "against U.S. economic interests and unfair". He ha also stated the following June that he would work with other G-8 leaders to find out how much of global warming is caused by humans and pledged to use science and diplomacy to fight it. The G-8 governments in fact did support the US position to the extent that their individual growth would not be affected by supplanting themselves blindly to the Kyoto Protocol unless the figures were quantifiable for all, particularly the developing world. India, China, and Brazil are considered other large scale polluters.
Thus the Honolulu meeting was aimed at actually endorsing UN negotiations for an international climate agreement by 2009 so a pact will be ready when the carbon-capping Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012. According to de Boer "It's important to bear in mind that the most vulnerable communities in the poorest countries, those who have contributed nothing to climate change, will be the worst affected by its impacts. I'm convinced it can be done, but only if all forces pull together and the major economies represented in this room have to take the lead among those forces."
In context President George Bush had stated earlier on September 28, 2007 during the first meeting, "Energy security and climate change are two of the great challenges of our time. The United States takes these challenges seriously. The world's response will help shape the future of the global economy and the condition of our environment for future generations. The nations in this room have special responsibilities. We represent the world's major economies, we are major users of energy, and we have the resources and knowledge base to develop clean energy technologies".
America´s guiding principle is clear: it must lead the world to produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions, and we must do it in a way that does not undermine economic growth or prevent nations from delivering greater prosperity for their people. America certainly put up a strong and exciting fight in Bali, which was for a good cause.
While the agreement, by consensus among some 190 nations in Bali, might be hailed by the UN as a turning point in the world's struggle to come to grips with global warming, UNFCCC environmental scientists are already forecasting that widespread drought, floods, higher sea levels and worsening storms will be the looming events course in the future. The Honolulu meeting however affirmed the US stance that these issues are being seriously considered by the US.
What is most important to note given recent interest surge among Americans on the global environment preservation issues is that the agenda has become an all important forerunner to US presidential candidates. America must work closely with the entire global environmental community according to US presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton recently making a point to her opponent Sen. Barak Obama in Los Angeles. The US Republican candidates for the American Presidency believe the global environment issue is a bi-partisan one and that President George Bush has made some significant progress by treading the path carefully particularly on clean and alternate energy and fuel use.
Despite all the opposition from the developing countries, America did express the feeling at Bali that everyone needs to think creatively and learn from one another's experiences and the key to this effort will be the Advance of Clean Energy Technologies. By developing new, low-emission technologies, the world's major economies can meet the growing demand for energy while reducing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.
For many years, those who worried about climate change and those who worried about energy security were on opposite ends of the debate. But these challenges share a common solution: technology. Achieving the vision of an age of clean energy will require significant investments from all major economies.
Today, the United States and Japan fund most research and development of clean energy technologies. Nations must also work to make clean energy technologies more widely available by eliminating tariff and non-tariff barriers on clean energy goods and services. This is why President Bush has proposed the creation of a new international clean technology fund to help developing nations harness the power of clean energy technologies. This fund will help finance clean energy projects in the developing world. The President has asked Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson to coordinate this effort with other G-8 counterparts.
In retrospect, the Bali summit was not an environmental winner for everyone including the US. In fact, world leaders had to overcome bitter divisions on the final day of the two week long summit to adopt a blueprint for a new accord on global warming by 2009. The blue print in the form of the Bali roadmap was viewed by the American media as a watered down version of the ambitious targets that were originally called for. After all, it does not commit any signatory country to specify actions against global warming nor does it guarantee any level of emission reductions or any international commitment. But at least for the US with its environmental commitment, it is getting there sooner than most.
However, one should not forget that the Bali Summit only commits all to negotiate further on the Kyoto Protocol which is due to expire in 2012 and a new agreement must be concluded by the end of 2009 to give countries time to ratify it and ensure an uninterrupted transition. This at best is very difficult. America´s leadership within the G-8 is called for in this important endeavor.
The author is an independent global strategic communications, media and international development consultant from Nepal currently based in Silver Spring, Maryland, US. He can be reached at just_1_idea@hotmail.com).
The Hawaii meeting proved to be a constructive opportunity particularly as the United Nations was also present to express its views for the first time after the historic UN climate conference in Bali, Indonesia. Although this second Major Economies Meeting on Energy Security and Climate Change ended without reaching any formal agreement, participants did agree to move forward on the Bali Action Plan on Climate Change.
The meeting was a very good opportunity for Washington to mend its international fences after it faced sharp criticism at Bali for what was earlier perceived as a less cooperative stance on global climate change. According to Philip Clapp, deputy managing director of Pew Environment Group, a research and advocacy group, "In the final session of Bali, we were abandoned even by our closest allies". France which had stood up against the US in the Bali Summit side line negotiations expressed through Brice LaLonde, France's ambassador for climate change, "The new U.S. attitude is a good start, though we want more from the United States". This time, the Bush administration played good environmental diplomacy in Hawaii to show that it cared as much as any other developed country in addressing global warming, a hot issue among candidates running for the US presidential race in 2008.
The UNFCCC´s Bali Roadmap, agreed by over 180 countries included a mixed agenda on key issues to be negotiated by 2009, including action on adapting to the negative consequences of global climate change, new ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, ways to provide better CDM monitoring mechanism and environmental caps, deploy climate-friendly technologies and finance both adaptation and mitigation measures.
Immediately after the Bali meeting, Yvo de Boer, executive secretary, UNFCCC noted, "We now have a roadmap, we have an agenda and we have a deadline. But we also have a huge task ahead of us and time to reach agreement is extremely short, so we need to move quickly. What we need is a climate change Marshall Plan, a plan that will spur green, low-carbon economic growth worldwide, particularly in developing countries".
The climate change conference in Bali had achieved three major objectives, according to UN Secretary Genera Ban Ki Moon, "It helped forge negotiations on a global climate change agreement, agreed to an agenda for the negotiations, and agreed to complete them by 2009".
In September 2007, President Bush in addressing the Major Economies Meeting on Energy Security and Climate Change urged a new path forward to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a way that would not undermine economic growth or prevent nations from delivering greater prosperity for their people. The US urged this on the basis of it being a global economy to work with all of the world's largest users of energy and largest producers of greenhouse gas emissions, including both developed and developing nations to establish a new international approach on energy security and climate change in 2008 that can contribute to a global agreement by 2009 under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
The US was, in fact, the first country to state that the world community must produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions and must do so in a way that promotes economic growth and helps nations deliver greater prosperity for their people. Ten years back it had called for a similar summit like Bali but then the nations of the world were not prepared for such a meet since they did not take contemporary environmental signs and symptoms as cancerous. The truth is the US also leads by example. From 2000-2005, the population of the United States grew by 5 percent (14 million people) and GDP grew by 12 percent (about $1.2 trillion) while its Green House Gas (GHG) emissions increased by only 1.6 percent. Latest estimates show that from 2005-2006, the US economy grew by 2.9 percent, but greenhouse emissions decreased remarkably at only 1.5 percent! This compares more favorably than other countries that have cap and trade programs.
The US also pursued a diverse portfolio of policy measures including dozens of mandatory, incentive-based, and voluntary programs to address its domestic emissions including the ENERGY STAR program which reduced emissions by 135 MMTCO2E in 2006, the Domestic Methane Programs which reduced its 2005 methane emissions to 11% below 1990 levels; the newly launched Fuel Economy Increase from Light Trucks which will save103 MMTCO2E over the life of vehicles subjected to the new rules; and the US President's proposed "20 in 10 Plan" which will slow and potentially stop the growth of CO2. Emissions from cars, light trucks, and SUVS by using alternative and renewable fuels.
The US has to tread the post-Bali road map carefully so that mandatory support does not account to a loss in domestic jobs or curtailment of US economic growth. The EPA already has some of the world´s leading industrial caps and also maintains routine inspection throughout major American cities and industrial townships. In October 28, 2001, President George W. Bush had made his opposition to the 1997 Kyoto treaty on global warming in the condition that it might be "against U.S. economic interests and unfair". He ha also stated the following June that he would work with other G-8 leaders to find out how much of global warming is caused by humans and pledged to use science and diplomacy to fight it. The G-8 governments in fact did support the US position to the extent that their individual growth would not be affected by supplanting themselves blindly to the Kyoto Protocol unless the figures were quantifiable for all, particularly the developing world. India, China, and Brazil are considered other large scale polluters.
Thus the Honolulu meeting was aimed at actually endorsing UN negotiations for an international climate agreement by 2009 so a pact will be ready when the carbon-capping Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012. According to de Boer "It's important to bear in mind that the most vulnerable communities in the poorest countries, those who have contributed nothing to climate change, will be the worst affected by its impacts. I'm convinced it can be done, but only if all forces pull together and the major economies represented in this room have to take the lead among those forces."
In context President George Bush had stated earlier on September 28, 2007 during the first meeting, "Energy security and climate change are two of the great challenges of our time. The United States takes these challenges seriously. The world's response will help shape the future of the global economy and the condition of our environment for future generations. The nations in this room have special responsibilities. We represent the world's major economies, we are major users of energy, and we have the resources and knowledge base to develop clean energy technologies".
America´s guiding principle is clear: it must lead the world to produce fewer greenhouse gas emissions, and we must do it in a way that does not undermine economic growth or prevent nations from delivering greater prosperity for their people. America certainly put up a strong and exciting fight in Bali, which was for a good cause.
While the agreement, by consensus among some 190 nations in Bali, might be hailed by the UN as a turning point in the world's struggle to come to grips with global warming, UNFCCC environmental scientists are already forecasting that widespread drought, floods, higher sea levels and worsening storms will be the looming events course in the future. The Honolulu meeting however affirmed the US stance that these issues are being seriously considered by the US.
What is most important to note given recent interest surge among Americans on the global environment preservation issues is that the agenda has become an all important forerunner to US presidential candidates. America must work closely with the entire global environmental community according to US presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton recently making a point to her opponent Sen. Barak Obama in Los Angeles. The US Republican candidates for the American Presidency believe the global environment issue is a bi-partisan one and that President George Bush has made some significant progress by treading the path carefully particularly on clean and alternate energy and fuel use.
Despite all the opposition from the developing countries, America did express the feeling at Bali that everyone needs to think creatively and learn from one another's experiences and the key to this effort will be the Advance of Clean Energy Technologies. By developing new, low-emission technologies, the world's major economies can meet the growing demand for energy while reducing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.
For many years, those who worried about climate change and those who worried about energy security were on opposite ends of the debate. But these challenges share a common solution: technology. Achieving the vision of an age of clean energy will require significant investments from all major economies.
Today, the United States and Japan fund most research and development of clean energy technologies. Nations must also work to make clean energy technologies more widely available by eliminating tariff and non-tariff barriers on clean energy goods and services. This is why President Bush has proposed the creation of a new international clean technology fund to help developing nations harness the power of clean energy technologies. This fund will help finance clean energy projects in the developing world. The President has asked Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson to coordinate this effort with other G-8 counterparts.
In retrospect, the Bali summit was not an environmental winner for everyone including the US. In fact, world leaders had to overcome bitter divisions on the final day of the two week long summit to adopt a blueprint for a new accord on global warming by 2009. The blue print in the form of the Bali roadmap was viewed by the American media as a watered down version of the ambitious targets that were originally called for. After all, it does not commit any signatory country to specify actions against global warming nor does it guarantee any level of emission reductions or any international commitment. But at least for the US with its environmental commitment, it is getting there sooner than most.
However, one should not forget that the Bali Summit only commits all to negotiate further on the Kyoto Protocol which is due to expire in 2012 and a new agreement must be concluded by the end of 2009 to give countries time to ratify it and ensure an uninterrupted transition. This at best is very difficult. America´s leadership within the G-8 is called for in this important endeavor.
The author is an independent global strategic communications, media and international development consultant from Nepal currently based in Silver Spring, Maryland, US. He can be reached at just_1_idea@hotmail.com).
Print
Email
