A WAY THROUGH THE CLIMATE CONFLICT

Are E.U. Climate Ambitions Being Sidelined?
James Kanter, July 8, 2009 (NY Times)

"…For Europe, the prospect of marginalization in climate talks is a serious concern…Europeans may be yielding their global leadership on climate policy as the United States and China – the world’s two largest carbon-dioxide polluters – display signs of seeking a bilateral deal the rest of the world might be obliged to accept.

"…[T]he prospect of marginalization in climate talks is a serious concern. European climate policies have been predicated to a far greater extent on sharing the work of reducing greenhouse gas emissions through a United Nations-brokered agreement…[They] could be forced to downgrade the importance of their flagship policies – including their system for capping greenhouse gases and trading emissions permits – if they lose control of the negotiating agenda over the coming months."

Will this...(click to enlarge)

"To bolster their Emissions Trading System, which has suffered bouts of volatility and has been criticized for ineffectiveness since its creation four years ago, the Europeans want all rich-world nations like the United States join a global carbon market by 2015, and for fast-emerging economies like China to join by 2020.

"But…President Obama faces significant constraints…[and] the Chinese are fiercely averse to capping their emissions…Europeans [fear] that the Americans and Chinese would reach a lowest-common-denominator agreement with widely divergent goals for reducing greenhouse gases…That, in turn, could jeopardize European efforts to link its carbon trading system with other cap-and-trade systems…"

...Give way to them? (click to enlarge)

"A key concern for European negotiators is that comparatively higher demand for permits to emit carbon in Europe would push up their price, giving other regions little incentive to join an expensive system…[but] tussling over comparability may actually be clouding the talks…Climate experts warn that the tussling will become worse and that it may ultimately undermine efforts to reach a deal unless negotiators refocus the debate in the coming weeks on what countries can achieve — rather than on what is comparable…[and] major economies should not be distracted from reaching a deal in Copenhagen by negotiations that bog down in numbers…

"…[I]t would be possible to achieve about 70 percent of the emissions reductions by 2020 that are necessary to prevent runaway climate change, using readily available technology and implementing measures that are in nations’ economic self-interest…[B]uilding consensus around universal standards for using clean energy would be far more productive…[E]ach major polluter [could] reduce emissions in sectors where it would be easiest to do so and in many cases where national efforts are already underway…China would deliver the single biggest reduction by improving industrial energy efficiency and building up its renewable energy… Brazil would deliver the second largest reduction in emissions by reducing the amount of trees it cuts down…The United States and the E.U. would put most of their effort into fostering new standards for efficient buildings and appliances…"