Asia-Pacific, Climate Change, Development & Aid, Energy, Environment, Global Governance, Headlines, North America

POLITICS: U.S.-China Deal Crucial for New Climate Treaty

Danielle Kurtzleben

WASHINGTON, Jun 5 2009 (IPS) - Cooperation between the U.S. and China was at the forefront of discussions this week in Washington at two events focusing on the possibilities of a bilateral relationship between the two countries on cutting emissions.

Next week, U.S. officials will travel to China to boost cooperation on climate change. The delegation includes Department of State special envoy for climate change Todd Stern, White House science adviser John Holdren, and assistant energy secretary David Sandalow.

Stern spoke Wednesday at the Centre for American Progress (CAP) about cooperation between the U.S. and China towards combating climate change. On Thursday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing on U.S.-China Climate Change Cooperation, with the testimony of climate change experts.

The immediate need for real progress by both countries was heavily emphasised at both events. The statistics are staggering. Together, China and the U.S. are responsible for 40 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions.

Though the U.S. is the world’s largest polluter historically, China’s contribution to greenhouse gas emissions has skyrocketed in the past 20 years. In 1992, China was producing 2.5 gigatonnes of CO2 per year. That number has grown to more than seven gigatonnes annually, surpassing U.S. levels.

The International Energy Agency predicts that, at current levels, China’s output will grow to 12 gigatonnes per year by 2030. Additionally, 16 of the world’s 20 most polluted cities are in China, with Beijing producing six times the particulate pollution of New York.

However, in the last decade, China has also become the world’s largest generator of wind energy, and led new investment in renewable energy sources in 2008 with an 18 percent increase over 2007 to 15.6 billion dollars, according to the U.N. Environment Programme.

Meanwhile, the world’s richest countries reduced their investments by 1.7 percent compared to 2007.

In his remarks at CAP, Stern called climate change a “quintessentially global issue that demands a global solution.” On this front, he noted three broader Department of State initiatives towards climate change: engagement in a framework convention process, invigorating dialogue among the largest world economies, and engaging in key bilateral relations, most notably with China.

There is a growing consensus that there is an immediate necessity for the U.S. and China, as the world’s two biggest polluters, to move forward with a bilateral relationship for combating climate change. One major reason is the sheer magnitude of both countries’ contributions to global emissions.

But the need for an agreement is all the more urgent, given the global climate change treaty negotiations to take place in December in Copenhagen, Denmark, and to be attended by 192 countries.

U.S. and Chinese participation in combating climate change is seen as a necessary precursor to such talks. Kerry noted that the other nations in Copenhagen would be “taking their cues” from the U.S. and China.

“The reality is, a robust American partnership with China will do more than anything else to ensure a successful global response to the urgent threat of climate change,” said Kerry.

Furthermore, such a bilateral agreement looks more possible now than ever, as both China and the U.S. – both of which have notably rejected binding emissions caps in the past – both have made changes domestically toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The U.S. is indeed making meaningful steps toward climate change legislation, with the American Clean Energy and Security Act, known more informally as the Waxman-Markey bill.

The bill was passed by the House Energy and Commerce Committee on May 21 and awaits a full House vote. It includes targets for renewable energy standards, cap-and-trade provisions, and 190 billion dollars of investments in energy technologies and efficiency, among other programmes.

Stern called the Waxman-Markey bill “tremendously ambitious”, with its targets for an over 80 percent reduction in U.S. emissions from 2005 levels by 2050.

Kerry stressed that China is also making progress on environmental initiatives, contrary to popular belief. “It’s time to retire, once and for all, the old, outdated myth that China doesn’t care and won’t act. They do care, and they are acting.”

The country is now a leading producer of solar and wind energy and has also increased its production of energy-efficient buildings, and solar power. It has also set for itself the ambitious goal of being the world leader in the production of electric cars.

Kerry also added that Chinese leaders have signaled to him that “China is eager to embrace low-carbon development pathways and is ready to be a ‘positive, constructive’ player in negotiations going forward.”

Still, there are diplomatic hurdles to overcome. At Thursday’s hearing, William Chandler, director of energy and climate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, pointed to a mutual mistrust between the two powers.

“Mainstream Americans fear that China is gobbling up oil and driving up the price of gasoline. Chinese fear that the Americans control Middle East oil and shipping lanes to China,” he said.

Chandler also emphasised the mutual blame in which the countries have routinely engaged. “American leaders point to emissions growth in China and demand that Chinese leaders take responsibility for climate change. Chinese leaders counter that American greenhouse gas emissions are five times their own on a per capita basis,” he said.

The economic side of the climate change fight is seen as key to convincing parties in both countries of the necessity for new climate change policy.

The Chinese economy has grown at astounding rates in recent years. Over the past 50 years, the Chinese per capita GDP has increased by 10 percent per year, from 40 dollars to 5,000 dollars. It has become the world’s second-largest economy and trading power, and currently accounts for half of all global construction.

This economic growth is one reason why China has rejected binding international caps on emissions. “Many in China fear that limits on emissions would constrain economic growth,” said Stern. The goal, he says, is for the U.S. to meet China halfway, and to encourage and help them “not to stop growing but to grow smarter”.

Stern also added that we need to communicate to China that “It is not sustainable economically” for China to continue on its current emissions course.

Elizabeth Economy of the Council on Foreign Relations agreed, speaking at Thursday’s hearing. “In addition to the ‘watch out!’ message, there should be an opportunity presented.”

Chandler phrased the cooperation as “an act of mutual self-preservation, helping both the United States and China to avert climate disaster and the eventual sanction of other countries if they do not act, and laying the basis for successful global action.”

Still, discussing climate change and implementing measures to combat it are two very different undertakings. Thursday’s hearing saw a more detailed debate on the particulars of the implementation of emissions reductions in both countries.

The question of how to track and quantify emissions is one such detail that the hearing addressed. When asked by Kerry about the possibility of Chinese emission-measurement capacity by December, Economy flatly responded that it would not be possible.

“The kind of measurement that takes place in this country doesn’t take place there,” she said, adding, “There is always a problem with Chinese data.”

Kerry also emphasised the need for a “real economic model” showing the costs and benefits of clean, renewable energy to consumers.

Kerry pointed to a Jun. 1 Washington Post op-ed by Martin Feldstein, which stated that “the Congressional Budget Office recently estimated that the resulting increases in consumer prices needed to achieve a 15 percent CO2 reduction – slightly less than the Waxman-Markey target – would raise the cost of living of a typical household by 1,600 dollars a year.”

Kerry countered that such numbers do not reflect the savings to households from the subsequent lower costs of fuel.

Ken Lieberthal, visiting fellow in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution, concurred: “We have to communicate to the American public that they are already paying a high price for carbon emissions,” he said, adding that that price is simply not readily apparent, present instead in prolonged fire seasons in California and droughts in the southeast.

Kerry noted that there is a like need to motivate the Chinese people to accept an emissions agreement, saying that while Chinese leaders are less concerned about U.S. constraints on the Chinese economy, the Chinese people remain sceptical.

Still, though the future goals are ambitious, next week’s trip is seen as merely a first step in a long-term series of talks. “We are looking to deepen the dialogue,” said Stern of the trip’s goals. “I’m not expecting to have a big deliverable or a big agreement that we’re waving around at the end of this trip.”