Home
Lisa Jackson, head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, told
delegates at the Copenhagen conference that the Obama administration
will use its executive authority and also push for climate legislation
in an effort to place the nation on a path to slash greenhouse gas emissions by 90 percent by 2050.
Jackson said her announcement that the EPA would begin regulating
greenhouse gases as a threat to human health was not meant to supplant
climate legislation working its way through Congress but to work in
tandem with it.
“This is not an either/or moment,” said Jackson, who received a
standing ovation Tuesday night when she addressed a meeting of
environmentalists. “This is a both/and moment.” Jackson said that
Congress needs to pass a cap-and-trade bill to make it clear to
business and industry what sort of costs they can expect to bear as the
government limits CO2 emissions. In addition to legislation, Jackson
said, the EPA needs to take “meaningful, common-sense steps” to curtail
emissions of greenhouse gases.
As the 192-member conference entered its third day, delegates from
industrialized and developing nations continued to try to bridge the
gap between them over the level of emissions reductions targets that
wealthy nations will pledge to make, as well as the amount of money
that developed nations will provide to poor nations for adapting to
global warming and producing renewable energy. Four nations — Britain,
Australia, Mexico, and Norway — said they are working on a proposal to set up a structure for a fund to aid developing nations.
But delegates from some poor nations said that a proposed plan by
industrialized nations to create an initial fund of $10 billion was
woefully inadequate and that hundreds of billions of dollars were
needed to help developed nations adapt to climate change. “If this is
the greatest risk that humanity faces, then how do you explain $10
billion,” said Lumumba Di-Aping of Sudan, the head of the 135-nation
bloc of developing countries. “Ten billion will not buy developing
countries’ citizens enough coffins.”
The BBC reported that a split had developed between some of the nation’s poorest states,
including those in Africa, and richer developing countries, such as
China. While African states and small island nations support a tough
treaty requiring countries to commit themselves to binding emissions
reductions, China is reluctant to sign on to such an agreement, fearing
it would limit economic growth. The Chinese have been circulating a
draft agreement that would mandate new, larger CO2 emissions reductions
targets for industrialized nations for the next five to eight years,
while developing nations would be covered by a second agreement that
encourages emissions reductions but not in a binding way. China’s top
climate envoy, Xie Zhenhua, said his country could accept a target to halve global emissions by 2050 if developed nations pledged more aggressive CO2 cuts by 2020
and agreed to help the developing world deal with climate change. Xie
also said he hoped that when President Obama visited Copenhagen next
week, he would pledge a sharper emissions cut than the offer of
reducing emissions by 4 percent below 1990 levels by 2020.
The New York Times analyzes what it would cost to implement a global treaty
that weans the world off fossil fuels, spurs development of renewable
energy, and funds efforts to adapt to global warming. The answer? Many
trillions of dollars, though such a massive expenditure would largely
be offset by new economic activity, the creation of more jobs, more
secure energy supplies, and a reduced danger of climate catastrophe.
Meanwhile, new data show that the economic recession has already put the U.S. on track to meet at least half of the emissions cuts
pledged by Obama by 2020. The Energy Information Administration said
the country’s CO2 emissions will decline by 6 percent this year,
although as the economy rebounds emissions are expected to grow by 1.5
percent in 2010.
