International cooperation on climate change

Contents
Copenhagen.....................................................................................................................................................................2
The world must act at Copenhagen to prevent climate change..................................................................................2
The U.S. must make a serious commitment...............................................................................................................2
The world must mobilize against climate change.......................................................................................................2
Future security depends on addressing climate change..............................................................................................2
The United States is critical to any global climate agreement....................................................................................2
US domestic policy is important for any global policy..............................................................................................3
Developing nations.........................................................................................................................................................3
Chile is working to be environmentally sustainable...................................................................................................3
Actions Chile is taking................................................................................................................................................3
India............................................................................................................................................................................4
China...............................................................................................................................................................................4
The Status Quo............................................................................................................................................................4
Chinese cooperation is imperative for any international deal.....................................................................................4
The US has contributed more to emissions historically than China...........................................................................4
China is working on environment...............................................................................................................................4
China is going green...................................................................................................................................................4
China is acting to address environmental concerns....................................................................................................5
China is committed to renewable energy....................................................................................................................5
Business says China leads in clean energy.................................................................................................................5
China more concerned about the economy than the environment..............................................................................5
China wants concessions from US..............................................................................................................................5
China is the world’s largest emitter............................................................................................................................5
China wants developed nations to commit to giving up economic growth................................................................6
China believes the West bears most of the responsibility...........................................................................................6
Without China, any Western actions are worthless....................................................................................................6
Chinese leaders care more about their economy than the environment......................................................................6
China is not enforcing environmental laws that negatively affect the economy........................................................6
Economic concerns trump environmental concerns...................................................................................................7

Copenhagen
The world must act at Copenhagen to prevent climate change
Miriam Pemberton (Research Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, PhD University of Michigan), July 30,
2009, “OPINION: U.S. Climate Funds Increase, Future Levels in Doubt,” World Watch Institute,
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6211

The world's nations will gather in Copenhagen, Denmark, this December to negotiate a landmark agreement to
prevent full-blown climate change. If they fail, large landmasses around the world will be vulnerable to weather
extremes, droughts, flooding, food insecurity, spreading disease vectors, and sea-level rise.

The U.S. must make a serious commitment

Miriam Pemberton (Research Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, PhD University of Michigan), July 30,
2009, “OPINION: U.S. Climate Funds Increase, Future Levels in Doubt,” World Watch Institute,
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6211

The United States, as the largest emitter of greenhouse gases historically, will have to make a serious commitment if
the Copenhagen conference is to succeed. The U.S. government's most important tool for reducing emissions is to
set clear limits on them. Congress is in the throes of debating a comprehensive framework for doing so, in the shape
of the American Clean Energy and Security Act. A second tool is money, including investments in R&D for new
clean energy technologies as well as in such measures as clean public transportation infrastructure and tax incentives
that leverage private emission-reducing expenditures.

The world must mobilize against climate change

Miriam Pemberton (Research Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, PhD University of Michigan), July 30,
2009, “OPINION: U.S. Climate Funds Increase, Future Levels in Doubt,” World Watch Institute,
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6211

In accepting the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, former U.S. Vice President Al Gore said that the world's nations will need
to mobilize against climate disaster "with the urgency and resolve that has previously been seen only when nations
mobilized for war." China has now overtaken the United States as the single largest emitter of greenhouse gases.
Both nations are pivotal in the fight against climate change. Future generations may judge them not by their military
prowess, but by how well they responded to the challenge laid out by Gore. 

Future security depends on addressing climate change

Miriam Pemberton (Research Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, PhD University of Michigan), July 30,
2009, “OPINION: U.S. Climate Funds Increase, Future Levels in Doubt,” World Watch Institute,
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6211

Future security will be found less in mobilizing for war than in stabilizing the climate. Government budgets in the
United States and China-and around the planet-need to reflect this fact.

The United States is critical to any global climate agreement

Eileen Claussen (President of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, former Assistant Secretary of State for
Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs), August 12, 2009, “The Future of U.S. Climate
Policy,” Council on Foreign Relations, http://www.cfr.org/publication/20026/future_of_us_climate_policy.html?
breadcrumb=%2F

(Claussen is being interviewed by Stephanie Hanson of the CFR.)

How important do you think the United States is in that Copenhagen process? If what you felt to be the best-case
scenario for U.S. climate policy unfolded in the next year, how much effect will that have on global climate talks?
The United States is crucial. There cannot be and there will not be another global agreement without the United
States. I mean there just won't. We are too big a contributor to the problem and we're a big economy. I don't think
any other country would agree to anything unless the United States was a full participant.

US domestic policy is important for any global policy

Eileen Claussen (President of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, former Assistant Secretary of State for
Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs), August 12, 2009, “The Future of U.S. Climate
Policy,” Council on Foreign Relations, http://www.cfr.org/publication/20026/future_of_us_climate_policy.html?
breadcrumb=%2F

(Claussen is being interviewed by Stephanie Hanson of the CFR.)

We have to work very hard to see if we can pass legislation in the United States, which means working very hard on
the Senate to see if you can find a piece of legislation and sixty votes that are a good step for the climate. I don't
think it's impossible to do that, but we have to work very hard on it, to figure out what the compromises are and
whether you can do it. If health care is really difficult, there's a question of whether the Senate wants to take up
something else that is really difficult after they do that, assuming that they actually come to a conclusion on that. But
[U.S. climate change legislation] would be the highest priority. Everything globally is dependent upon that step
before all the other pieces can fall into place, which might take a considerable amount of time. But until you at least
get this, it's not clear that you can get any of the other pieces. To me the most important thing is getting a domestic
policy in place.

Developing nations
Chile is working to be environmentally sustainable
Robert M. Speiser (an environmental and energy analyst currently working as an independent consultant on the
carbon markets, environmental impact assessments, and on GHG quanitification issues in Santiago, Chile), July
29th, 2009, "Chile fighting climate change — role model for the (developing) world," Clean Techies,
http://blog.cleantechies.com/2009/07/29/chile-fighting-climate-change-role-model-for-the-developing-world/

Although Chile is officially considered an Annex B, “developing” country under the dual classification of the Kyoto
Protocol, the smaller country of 16 million inhabitants has been no stranger to addressing the climate change issue in
recent years. In addition to private companies’ activities noted above, Chile has also completed some 40 projects via
the Kyoto Protocol’s CDM market since 2004. These 40 projects have ranged from landfill methane gas capture, to
a nationwide energy efficiency CFL lightbulbs installation project, to agricultural methane capture, and to a wind
energy project – yielding a total of US$300 million in traded carbon credits for Chilean enterprises.

Actions Chile is taking

Robert M. Speiser (an environmental and energy analyst currently working as an independent consultant on the
carbon markets, environmental impact assessments, and on GHG quanitification issues in Santiago, Chile), July
29th, 2009, "Chile fighting climate change — role model for the (developing) world," Clean Techies,
http://blog.cleantechies.com/2009/07/29/chile-fighting-climate-change-role-model-for-the-developing-world/

Moreover, in early December 2008, President Bachelet, alongside her Environment Minister, unveiled Chile’s
official “National Climate Change Action Plan” for 2008-2012. The plan includes activities for

1) studying impacts and vulnerabilities,

2) funding adaptation measures, and
3) strong support for mitigation endeavors, including the creation of a Center for Renewable Energy,
 establishing an increase of funds for a national energy efficiency program, further studies into harvesting
biofuels, and increasing bicycle lanes for transport.

India
India is a developing country with a mixed record on the environment. See Free Trade harms the environment brief
for evidence about India’s environmental record.

China
The Status Quo

Chinese cooperation is imperative for any international deal

Orville Schell (the director of the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the Asia Society and the primary editor of "A
Roadmap for U.S.-China Cooperation on Climate and Energy" published by the Asia Society and the Pew Center on
Global Climate Change), June 8, 2009, “The Challenge of Copenhagen: Bridging the U.S.-China Divide,” Yale
Environment 360, http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2159

Until now, the key missing players in this increasingly urgent drama of negotiation have been the two great powers
that personify this chasm in development — the United States and China. Without these two countries in the climate
change game, there is, in effect, no game at all, and Copenhagen cannot succeed. As Todd D. Stern, the top U.S.
climate negotiator, said as he arrived in Beijing this weekend for high-level talks, “Certainly no deal will be possible
if we don't find a way forward with China.”

The US has contributed more to emissions historically than China

Orville Schell (the director of the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the Asia Society and the primary editor of "A
Roadmap for U.S.-China Cooperation on Climate and Energy" published by the Asia Society and the Pew Center on
Global Climate Change), June 8, 2009, “The Challenge of Copenhagen: Bridging the U.S.-China Divide,” Yale
Environment 360, http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2159

In assessing what China has already done in response to the threat of climate change and what it will bring to the
table in Copenhagen, it is important to remember that even though China’s annual aggregate emissions have now
surpassed those of the U.S., China’s energy-related per capita emissions are still 4.5 times less than the U.S. average.
And while China has only contributed 8 percent of the world’s historic carbon burden, the U.S. has contributed a
whopping 29 percent.

China is working on environment

China is going green

Thomas Friedman (author of Hot, Flat, and Crowded: Why We Need a Green Revolution--and How It Can Renew
America, New York Times foreign affairs columnist, winner of the Pulitzer Prize for commentary), July 4, 2009,
“Can I Clean Your Clock?” New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/05/opinion/05friedman.html

Yes, you might think that China is only interested in polluting its way to prosperity. That was once true, but it isn’t
anymore. China is increasingly finding that it has to go green out of necessity because in too many places, its people
can’t breathe, fish, swim, drive or even see because of pollution and climate change. Well, there is one thing we
know about necessity: it is the mother of invention. And that is what China is doing, innovating more and more
energy efficiency and clean power systems.
China is acting to address environmental concerns
Thomas Friedman (author of Hot, Flat, and Crowded: Why We Need a Green Revolution--and How It Can Renew
America, New York Times foreign affairs columnist, winner of the Pulitzer Prize for commentary), July 4, 2009,
“Can I Clean Your Clock?” New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/05/opinion/05friedman.html

“China is moving,” says Hal Harvey, the chief executive of ClimateWorks, which shares clean energy ideas around
the world. “They want to be leaders in green technology. China has already adopted the most aggressive energy
efficiency program in the world. It is committed to reducing the energy intensity of its economy — energy used per
dollar of goods produced — by 20 percent in five years. They are doing this by implementing fuel efficiency
standards for cars that far exceed our own and by going after their top thousand industries with very aggressive
efficiency targets. And they have the most aggressive renewable energy deployment in the world, for wind, solar
and nuclear, and are already beating their targets.”

China is committed to renewable energy

Christina Larson (journalist focusing on international environmental issues, expert on China, a contributing editor
at Foreign Policy magazine and a fellow at the New America Foundation), August 17, 2009, “The Great Paradox of
China: Green Energy and Black Skies,” Yale Environment 360, http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2180

China’s installed wind capacity has doubled in each of the past four years. Many experts seem reasonably optimistic
that China could meet its ambitious renewable energy plans to derive at least 15 percent of all energy from
renewable sources by 2020. The country also is striving to reduce energy intensity per unit of GDP by 20 percent
over a five-year period. These two targets represent some of the most ambitious green goals in the world, and are
expected to make China — in just over a decade — the world’s largest producer and consumer of alternative energy.

Business says China leads in clean energy

Christina Larson (journalist focusing on international environmental issues, expert on China, a contributing editor
at Foreign Policy magazine and a fellow at the New America Foundation), August 17, 2009, “The Great Paradox of
China: Green Energy and Black Skies,” Yale Environment 360, http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2180

China watchers worldwide have taken note. Earlier this month, a prominent American venture capitalist and the
CEO of General Electric published a joint op-ed in The Washington Post, enthusing, “China’s commitment to
developing clean energy technologies and markets is breathtaking” — even outpacing the U.S. and putting Beijing
“in the lead today.”

China more concerned about the economy than the environment

China wants concessions from US

Orville Schell (the director of the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the Asia Society and the primary editor of "A
Roadmap for U.S.-China Cooperation on Climate and Energy" published by the Asia Society and the Pew Center on
Global Climate Change), June 8, 2009, “The Challenge of Copenhagen: Bridging the U.S.-China Divide,” Yale
Environment 360, http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2159

Yet closing the gap between the two nations is a huge challenge. China is in no mood to have its own long-awaited
development curtailed in order to compensate for the burden of the greenhouse gases already emitted by developed
nations during their industrialization. The Chinese come to Copenhagen with expectations that developed countries,
especially America, will offer cuts in greenhouse gases that far surpass anything the industrialized world is likely to
offer.

China is the world’s largest emitter

Orville Schell (the director of the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the Asia Society and the primary editor of "A
Roadmap for U.S.-China Cooperation on Climate and Energy" published by the Asia Society and the Pew Center on
Global Climate Change), June 8, 2009, “The Challenge of Copenhagen: Bridging the U.S.-China Divide,” Yale
Environment 360, http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2159

Meanwhile, the United States expects China — now the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases — to agree to
some limits on its carbon dioxide emissions, which doubled from 1996 to 2006.

China wants developed nations to commit to giving up economic growth

Orville Schell (the director of the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the Asia Society and the primary editor of "A
Roadmap for U.S.-China Cooperation on Climate and Energy" published by the Asia Society and the Pew Center on
Global Climate Change), June 8, 2009, “The Challenge of Copenhagen: Bridging the U.S.-China Divide,” Yale
Environment 360, http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2159

China believes the West bears most of the responsibility

Orville Schell (the director of the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the Asia Society and the primary editor of "A
Roadmap for U.S.-China Cooperation on Climate and Energy" published by the Asia Society and the Pew Center on
Global Climate Change), June 8, 2009, “The Challenge of Copenhagen: Bridging the U.S.-China Divide,” Yale
Environment 360, http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2159

But Chinese leaders still steadfastly hold that since the West is primarily responsible for the problem, it must bear
most of the costs of remedy. Even Premier Wen Jiabao has weighed in on the issue, noting that developed countries
“should alter their unsustainable lifestyle.”

Without China, any Western actions are worthless

Orville Schell (the director of the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the Asia Society and the primary editor of "A
Roadmap for U.S.-China Cooperation on Climate and Energy" published by the Asia Society and the Pew Center on
Global Climate Change), June 8, 2009, “The Challenge of Copenhagen: Bridging the U.S.-China Divide,” Yale
Environment 360, http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2159

The reality is that, even if the U.S. and Europe did accept a 20 percent reduction of 1990 emission levels by 2020 —
which in Washington’s case is not likely — there is no way that global warming’s seemingly ineluctable upward
trajectory will be arrested anytime soon without a commitment by China to begin to reduce its own aggregate levels;
China’s growing share of greenhouse emissions is simply too large.

Chinese leaders care more about their economy than the environment
Orville Schell (the director of the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the Asia Society and the primary editor of "A
Roadmap for U.S.-China Cooperation on Climate and Energy" published by the Asia Society and the Pew Center on
Global Climate Change), June 8, 2009, “The Challenge of Copenhagen: Bridging the U.S.-China Divide,” Yale
Environment 360, http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2159

While China is aware of this global dilemma, it feels far more pressed by the realities of its own domestic
imperatives than the global climate crisis. What leaders in Beijing fear is that any strong Chinese effort to limit
greenhouse emissions could compromise China’s economy, which could in turn lead to unemployment and social
and political instability. So much of the Communist Party’s political legitimacy has come to be based on delivering
economic success, that if the choice is between domestic instability and global warming, Party leaders will
invariably lean towards the former.

China is not enforcing environmental laws that negatively affect the economy
Christina Larson (journalist focusing on international environmental issues, expert on China, a contributing editor
at Foreign Policy magazine and a fellow at the New America Foundation), August 17, 2009, “The Great Paradox of
China: Green Energy and Black Skies,” Yale Environment 360, http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2180
The reality is that, even as investment to stimulate new green industries is thriving in China, enforcement of green
regulations that may limit industrial and economic activity is not. As Charles McElwee, a Shanghai-based
environmental lawyer explains: “Most actions aimed at energy will have some impact on local environment, but
China has not shown willingness to commit the same level of resources to enforce existing environmental laws,
which would have the most immediate impact on citizens.” And as The Washington Post has reported, tough
economic times have brought even laxer environmental enforcement for factories in southern China. Peng Peng,
research director of the Guangzhou Academy of Social Sciences, a government-affiliated think tank, told the Post:
“With the poor economic situation, officials are thinking twice about whether to close polluting factories, whether
the benefits to the environment really outweigh the dangers to social stability.”

Economic concerns trump environmental concerns

Christina Larson (journalist focusing on international environmental issues, expert on China, a contributing editor
at Foreign Policy magazine and a fellow at the New America Foundation), August 17, 2009, “The Great Paradox of
China: Green Energy and Black Skies,” Yale Environment 360, http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2180

While China’s national priorities have shifted, its politics haven’t. When economic and environmental priorities
align, astoundingly rapid transformation is possible. But when interests compete, the economy still trumps the
environment.