Copenhagen Climate Update: How’s It Going?

by Zach Hiatt

As world leaders converge on Copenhagen this week in an attempt to forge a binding global commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and combat global warming, the answer to the question, “How’s it going?” seems to vary widely depending on who’s being asked. Now entering its fourth day, the Copenhagen climate summit has seen its share of ups and downs (or challenges and opportunities), which should really come as no surprise given the recent history of United Nations climate talks and the enormity of the challenge faced by conference negotiators. On one hand, the new United States administration and its increased presence at these climate talks seems to have energized at least some conference participants, spurring new hope that a meaningful, global climate change treaty – this time including the U.S. – can be reached sometime in the next year. On the other hand, the strong divide between industrial powers and the least-developed nations that dominated the Barcelona climate talks earlier this year has continued to be a major challenge during the Copenhagen conference.

United States, meet world; world, meet United States

The world’s eyes have been on the United States entering the Copenhagen climate talks as the international community seeks to understand how this leading emitter of GHGs will approach the global climate problem differently under the Obama administration. (As andedoctal evidence of this, see our post about the question from a visiting lawyer from Afghanistan.) While the new administration has clearly signaled a major shift the U.S.’s willingness to both recognize and address the problem, the signal has been met internationally with some skepticism. The skepticism stems not only from the U.S.’s role as a leading GHG polluter, but also from its past performance – or lack thereof – on the international climate front (remember the Kyoto protocol) and the U.S. Congress’s failure to pass major climate change legislation going into the Copenhagen conference. Nonetheless, there seems to be a growing sense that the new U.S. commitment to combating global warming is for real, and that if the U.S. does its part, others will follow.

Against that backdrop, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson took the podium at the Copenhagen conference on Wednesday to make the case that the U.S. is now assuming its share of the responsibility to reduce GHG emissions and stop global warming. According to Jackson, "2009 cements the place in history when the United States seized the challenge of dealing with greenhouse gas pollution." In a strong sign that this is more than just talk, earlier this week Jackson signed EPA’s finalized endangerment findings for greenhouse gases, which is necessary under the Clean Air Act for EPA to regulation emissions of greenhouse gases from mobile and stationary sources. (In 2007 the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouses gases, provided such a finding had been made, in Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497.)

EPA’s endangerment finding is not the only sign that the new administration is getting serious about climate change. Last month, President Obama announced that the U.S. was prepared to make a commitment to reduce greenhouse emissions in the "range of 17 percent" below 2005 levels by 2020. His announcement marked the first time the U.S. has issued such targets. Earlier this year, the EPA issued new vehicle emissions and efficiency standards, along with a new rule requiring large polluters to report their greenhouse gas emissions. In February 2009, the economic recovery bill signed by the President included around $80 billion to $110 billion (depending on how you count) for climate gas-reducing clean energy technology, energy efficiency, public transit, and research investments. All of these steps are independent of the various climate change bills slowly working their way through the U.S. Congress.

As evidence of the notion that if the U.S. leads others will follow, President Obama met with leaders from China and India this fall after months of behind-the-scenes climate talks. After the President announced America’s own emissions target, China and India announced new targets of their own, for the first time ever.

The Climate Change Blame Game

The gap between rich and poor countries over a global climate change agreement appeared insurmountable earlier this year during United Nations climate talks in Barcelona, leading the U.S. and others to conclude that finalizing a treaty during the Copenhagen conference was unlikely. Now four days into the Copenhagen climate talks some developing nations are reporting little progress on all issues. Representatives of the G77 group of developing nations have suggested that rich nations need to move further to cut GHG emissions and finance poorer nations’ effort to address and adapt to climate change. As of Wednesday, negotiators had reportedly yet to decide on the final drafts for issues including mitigation, adaptation, technology transfer and climate financing, all of which are to be discussed in the remaining days of negotiations.

Perhaps more importantly, little has been agreed upon regarding long-term emission cut targets, which are considered vital to slow global warming and avoid the resulting impacts to vulnerable nations. While developed powers such as the U.S. and E.U. have proposed an average 16% reduction in GHGs emissions by 2020, developing nations – particularly small island nations – have suggested that a 40% reduction is needed to prevent catastrophe in their countries. On the financial front, some conference participants (including American billionaire George Soros) have suggested that the $10 billion per year proposed thus far by rich nations to help the poor adapt to climate change is not sufficient.

Not surprisingly, the U.S. and its new administration have been singled out in the effort to bridge the gap between rich and poor nations. Lumumba Di Aping of Sudan, the top African negotiator at the Copenhagen summit and chair of the G77 group, said that the world “cannot achieve and equitable and just deal that would save the planet without the participation of the United States.”

In spite of the differing positions between rich and poor nations on key climate issues, U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change Executive Secretary Yvo de Boer is more positive about the progress being made in Copenhagen. He said today that “there is real seriousness now to negotiate,” and that “good progress is being made in a number of areas, especially in the area of technology.”

Stay tuned for an update on the outcome of the Copenhagen climate summit, which wraps up on Dec. 18th.