Sponsored Links

U.S. to keep emissions goal

Related Topics

CANCUN, Mexico | Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:41pm EST

CANCUN, Mexico (Reuters) - The United States will keep a pledge to cut greenhouse gas emissions made last year perhaps with help from a domestic boom in cleaner-burning natural gas, Washington's lead negotiator said at the U.N. climate talks.

At last year's climate talks in Copenhagen, U.S. President Barack Obama pledged the United States would cut emissions in a range of 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020.

"We must stand behind the underpinnings of what our leaders agreed to last year," Jonathan Pershing, the head of the U.S. delegation, told reporters on the first day of the annual two-week talks, held in Mexico this year.

"The United States is standing behind the commitments we made in Copenhagen."

Developed countries also committed to providing $100 billion annually, starting in 2020, to help developing countries deal with the worst effects of climate change.

But hopes are low for significant progress at the talks as the United States and China, the world's top two emitters, are at odds on how to share the burden of fighting climate change.

Washington wants rapidly growing countries like China and India to accept firmer emissions obligations in any global pact that would succeed the Kyoto Protocol, which will end in 2012 unless a new round is negotiated.

But it faces an uphill battle as it was the only developed country that never joined the Kyoto pact. Obama's emissions pledge has also been considered meager by many countries.

The failure of Congress to pass a climate bill and big Republican gains in this month's congressional elections have also led many to ask whether the United States can reach Obama's goal.

A boom in U.S. natural gas production from shale rock could help the country reduce dependency on coal, Pershing said. Coal emits twice as much carbon dioxide as natural gas when burned.

"One of the things that appears to be coming along is significant improvement in our supplies of shale gas, which could perhaps (replace some) coal and further reduce U.S. emissions," Pershing said.

The percentage of natural gas used to generate U.S. electricity has risen to 23 percent from 20 percent two years ago, as shale gas comes to market.

Shale gas also has its opponents. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is studying the hydraulic fracturing process used to produce gas from shale after environmentalists and residents have complained that it pollutes water supplies.

Pershing said EPA regulations on greenhouse gases, actions by states, and executive orders by Obama could also help reduce emissions.

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
CTF wrote:
While I applaud the President’s commitment to stemming the tide of climate change, I beleive that this administration must consider other approaches, specifically, a revenue-neutral carbon tax.

Nov 30, 2010 11:17am EST  --  Report as abuse
ECOPOLITICS wrote:
Decades of hysterical fear mongering and out right science fraud concerning global warming and climate change have created a sort of “green fatigue.” Climate has become a goldmine of scary propaganda to fatten eco-group fundraising. Al Gore would become the world’s first “carbon billionaire.” Global government regulators have spent (or proposed to spend) hundreds of billions of dollars to control climate based primarily upon U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports and policies.

Last year’s “climategate” scandal began with the publication of thousands of U.N. climate scientist e-mails that revealed their eco-biases. These biases may be mitigated by the Inter Academy Council (IAC) reforms that would end the chronic exaggerations about global warming coming from the U.N.

What remains as disturbing about the U.N.’s climate culture is the socialist governance that has now been openly advocated by members of the IPCC. Several members meeting this week in Cancun at the annual conference to replace the 2012-expiring Kyoto Protocols have spoken in pure Marxist-socialist principles – wealth redistribution.

A Chinese member said that multi-billion dollar Western developed-nation payments would be the key to success of the Cancun meeting. And, co-chairman of the IPCC’s third working group, Ottmar Edenhofer, has stated, “One must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy…. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy.”

The IPCC meeting in Cancun is not expected to accomplish much more than to subtly shift the operative regulatory language from “climate change” to “global biodiversity,” and attempt to shakedown developed countries for billions in order to fund underdeveloped countries under the guise of environmental and social justice. Karl Marx would be most proud.

It is clear that socialist ideologies and cultish environmentalism have replaced prudent science and economics in U.N. climate policy. Militant environmentalism and green-obsessed bureaucrats have become an “axis of antagonism” that we can no longer afford.

Dec 01, 2010 10:29am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.