China Insists That Its Steps on Climate Be Voluntary:

As a Sunday target date approaches for countries to submit to the United Nations their plans for fighting climate change, China is banding together with other major developing nations to stress that only the wealthier countries need to make internationally binding commitments.

So while China, the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases, might put down in writing its targets for slowing the growth of emissions, it will make clear that those efforts are voluntary steps it plans to take domestically that should not imply a binding international commitment.

The distinction reflects China’s strong desire to cast climate change policy as a sovereignty issue in the aftermath of rancorous negotiations last month at the environmental summit meeting in Copenhagen. It says developed nations, which emitted carbon dioxide without restriction over many decades of industrialization, cannot force developing countries to submit to international policies or regulations.

China is standing by targets it announced before Copenhagen, but previous climate change treaties say targets of developing countries are not internationally binding, said Pan Jiahua, an economics professor who advises the Chinese negotiating team. “On this China will stand firm.”

This position could draw further criticisms from Western politicians who already blame China for weakening the final accord at Copenhagen. In the United States Congress, the chances that lawmakers will pass climate legislation this year are slim, in part because some lawmakers say China and India, where carbon emissions are rising the fastest, are giving much higher priority to maintaining economic growth than to fighting climate change.

So, China is sticking to their absurd “intensity reduction” pledge, and it can’t be binding. India is also going the intensity route[1], but I’m not sure where they stand on the binding nature of any pledges. And the US is pledging a pathetic, inadequate reduction (17% from 2005, or 4% from 1990), with no guarantee that it will get within three time zones of becoming law and actually happening.

Somebody remind me again why we’re supposed to be optimistic.

Someone.

Anyone.

Hello?

Is this thing on…?

You can track who’s promising what via the U.S. Climate Action Network’s page Who’s On Board With The Copenhagen Accord?

[1] Just to be clear: I think it will take a very surprising turn of events for either China or India to realize a net reduction in CO2 emissions by 2020.


Visit Lou's Graphs Page.

TCOE is on Twitter, too


Link to original post