U.S. ready to embrace greenhouse gas cuts -- if China and India do, too

The Associated Press

A robust coal mining industry is fueling China's economic growth.

Featured Topic | Posted 27 weeks 3 days ago

U.S. ready to embrace greenhouse gas cuts -- if China and India do, too

Surprising news from a White House with a reputation for slighting evidence of global climate change: A Bush administration spokesman on Wednesday said the United States would embrace a "binding international agreement" to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. But the emphasis is on "international."

"It is highly likely we will establish an economy-wide goal," said James Connaughton, the chairman of the White House's Council on Environmental Quality. "But we are not dogmatic here. If China and India want to do a series of goals that cover most of our emissions, that's acceptable."

So should the United States embark on widespread greenhouse gas reductions? Or are such policies sure-fire economy killers?

Ben likes: Mad vanities

David Warren/Ottawa Citizen

Noting the goal, “seriously” stated by the Group of Eight, to cut world CO2 emissions in half by the year 2050, a couple of techies at the Tokyo Institute of Technology sat down with their calculators, and coolly worked out what will be required to meet this goal, on an equal per capita basis, around the planet. The 88 percent is the figure for North America. The Europeans get off relatively easily: they only have to shut down 83 percent of their economy; the Japanese 85 percent.

Only 35 percent of the Chinese economy will have to go. And good news for India, much of which is still living in the Arcadian low-carbon past. The Indians get to gun their carbon emissions by 137 percent over the next four decades.

Joel likes: US officials clarify climate policy -- or do they?

Jeff Tollefson/Nature

The BBC focused on three words -- “binding international obligations” -- uttered by Daniel Price, a national security advisor to President George W. Bush. Although it remains unclear what, exactly, this means, it is perhaps telling that such statements could grab headlines around the world. The administration seems eager to clarify what it considers misunderstandings about its position on global warming (namely the general perception that it will stop at nothing to quash or at least cripple any international treaty to protect its industry friends).

The problem here is that there isn’t much new.