[Blue Olives] Boy, You're Going to Carry That Weight

[David Biddle]

Yesterday, our local paper, The Philadelphia Inquirer, reported on a little skirmish at the U.N. climate conference in Copenhagen between the U.S. and China over climate change policy. In essence, the U.S. wants China to open its books in order to determine whether the world's most populous nation is adhering to the voluntary greenhouse gas reductions they are committing to (as a so-called developing nation, China is not confronted with the same requirements as the U.S., European Union countries, Japan, Australia, etc.).

According to the article, both countries are in stalemate mode with China scoffing at verification demands and the U.S. stressing the need for clear definition and an "international agreement." The face-off is about money and China's concern over international sanctions. While China is deemed a developing nation, the U.S. and other industrialized countries are not offering financial support for climate change assistance. More to the point, China's fear of penalties for not meeting it's goals is a classic case of cognitive dissonance, kind of like saying: "Yes, we agree climate change is a problem and we are planning to do something about it, but don't hold us to our plans and don't whatever you do expect us to share with you whether we're doing well or not. We don't trust you to not hold it against us -- the world's leading carbon dioxide emitter -- if we aren't successful."

Today there is no mention of this ruckus in the paper. Instead we get an article letting us know that Barack Obama, who arrives tomorrow, is the last hope for a meaningful set of agreements. Indeed, it would seem that any significant resolutions are out the window and have been since the conference opened. Binding, formal commitments are being put off until 2010. This is being called a "political agreement."

Besides the stalemate between China and the U.S., plans to slow and then stop deforestation in developing nations are still up in the air (20-percent of global carbon dioxide emissions are created when forests are clear-cut to make cattle ranches and plantations); and it's still not clear what kind of funding the U.S. is willing to pledge to developing nations in overall climate change aid -- not just for greenhouse gas reductions but for remediation and protection from the effects of climate change.

According to the Associated Press, early goals of a 50-percent reduction in deforestation by 2020 and a full end to it by 2030 have been set aside. As much forest is leveled each year as to be equal to the area of New York state (32 million acres -- that's 3,653 acres an hour, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week).

These are big issues with huge quantities of money at stake. Africa is asking the developed nations for $30 billion a year for now, moving up to $100 billion annually by 2020. Japan has pledged $15 billion for short-term support to developing nations. All of this makes the U.S. pledge of $1 billion for deforestation seem rather paltry, to say the least.

So, Obama arrives tomorrow with a heavy-duty job. Fred Krupp, head of the Environmental Defense Fund, said yesterday: "If the pieces are here, President Obama is the only person who can pull them together into an agreement." Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton arrives today, presumably to pave the way for her boss with negotiations. We'll see.

Whatever this Nobel Prize-winning president accomplishes, real numbers for the U.S. and a serious financial mechanism to achieve them are still up to Congress. There's nothing like the American democratic process to solve a massive, incomprehensible problem like global warming and climate change. The only thing worse, possibly, is global democracy. Can someone say, "Chaos?"

The photo? Well, that's Copenhagen of course!



--
Posted By David Biddle to Blue Olives at 12/17/2009 08:40:00 AM