View From Down Under

The agreement reached in Copenhagen falls far short of the goal of a binding treaty limiting greenhouse gas emissions.  It is a ‘statement of intent’ to try to limit global warming to no more than 2°C, and a plan to help developing nations deal with climate change over the next 10 years.

Despite the President’s assertion that this is a step towards a legally binding treaty, it is more a recognition that a binding treaty to limit emissions is politically impossible – and likely always will be.

A binding treaty has a number of difficulties, not the least of which is that it is impossible to have a global binding treaty without global enforcement, and most governments are reluctant to relinquish any part of their sovereignty (just ask Chinese Premier Win Jiabao).

There are also some complex economic issues with developed vs developing countries.  How much should developed countries pay to developing countries to make up for the greenhouse gases they (developed countries) have already emitted?  How much will reducing emissions restrict economic development?  How can the US or Europe ask to limit new power plants in other countries when their own power production is emitting so heavily?  Should developed countries ‘share’ green technology with developing countries?  Because any compromise will be a political negotiation, it is certain to allocate these costs unfairly.  Even if fairness is somehow achieved, it will be perceived as unfair.  It is very difficult to ask Americans to send money or technology to India or Indonesia so that they can effectively become more competitive in the world economy.

But even a ‘binding’ treaty will be less than binding.  There will continue to be incentives to cheat, and the political reality is that many countries will do so if it is in their interest.  In that environment, a ‘statement of intent’ is a good outcome.

So it looks as though global warming will continue, and probably accelerate, for at least the next decade.

There is hope that things will change.  Europe, the US, and even China are putting large chunks of R&D investment into clean energy technologies.  Over time, it is likely that some of these will become cost competitive, particularly if carbon emissions are taxed or regulated to account for the externality of global warming.

The biggest emitters are China, USA, EU, Russia, India, Japan, and Brazil.  Concerted efforts by this group to reduce emissions is likely – all of them are publicly proclaiming this commitment.  If the rhetoric is indeed followed by reality, I am optimistic that we will see a reduction in emissions in the next ten years.

Whether it is enough to limit warming to another 2° remains to be seen.