Q+A: How will U.S. climate negotiators approach Copenhagen?
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - When U.S. negotiators show up in Copenhagen next month to work on a deal to tackle global warming, they probably won't have in their pockets what they most wanted: a law enacted by Washington committing the country to carbon pollution reductions.
With legislation hung up in the Senate, developed and developing countries alike might be skeptical of the United States' commitment to addressing climate change problems.
Here are some of the questions facing U.S. negotiators as they approach Copenhagen and attempt to allay those concerns:
* CAN THE U.S. PUT ON A BRAVE FACE?
The world's second biggest polluter of carbon dioxide will be in the difficult position of trying to cajole China, India and other major polluters to promise to cut their emissions. Nevertheless, the United States will likely try to downplay its own shortcomings and accentuate the positive.
After eight years of relatively few accomplishments on the climate front during the Bush administration, President Barack Obama's negotiators can argue there's been a major shift.
In less than a year, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a climate bill; a similar one is pending in the Senate and the Environmental Protection Agency is requiring domestic automakers to significantly reduce tailpipe carbon emissions.
Furthermore, the EPA has taken steps toward regulating smokestack emissions of carbon for the first time.
* WHAT ELSE CAN THE U.S. PROMISE?
Even if Congress can't pass legislation next year, U.S. negotiators can tell Copenhagen the EPA is waiting in the wings. By March or so, the agency could produce initial regulations for limiting carbon emissions.
The regulatory route is not Obama's desired path; he wants more comprehensive legislation. But the EPA has made clear it would proceed without Congress if need be.
Negotiators also could stress that there's still hope for Congress to pass a comprehensive bill. If "cap and trade" won't work for U.S. lawmakers, they might try an alternative.
They also could point out that the United States has a long history of approving major environmental laws in an election year, which 2010 is.
* CAN THE U.S. BUY ITS WAY OUT OF TROUBLE?
Experts think Washington could go a long way toward building confidence for a global deal if the United States put forth a specific proposal on how much money it would throw into an international pot. Continued...
