Fears of a continuing 鈥渃old war鈥� on climate between China and the US, the world鈥檚 two largest emitters of greenhouse gases, were replaced this week by sunnier diplomacy.
In Washington, the US government鈥檚 Environmental Protection Agency .
The ruling may not be carried out. Barack Obama鈥檚 officials would prefer Congress to pass new climate laws so the government can auction emissions permits, which can then be traded. This formula is known as 鈥渃ap and trade鈥�. The revenue from the auctions would help fund Obama鈥檚 鈥済reen new deal鈥�.
Advertisement
鈥淭he EPA move鈥檚 greater significance may be that it will put more pressure on Congress to pass [cap and trade] legislation,鈥� says Bob Ward of the at the London School of Economics.
Certainly the move raises hopes that, one way or the other, the US could have climate laws in force in time for the in December, when a new global deal to replace the Kyoto protocol is set to be signed, says Ward.
鈥淭here is no longer a question of if and when the US will act on global warming. We are doing so now,鈥� said David Bookbinder, chief climate adviser at the , the US鈥檚 oldest environment group.
Eastern promise?
Meanwhile in Beijing, Chinese climate negotiators indicated on Monday that they may be prepared to offer Copenhagen a declared limit on future emissions 鈥� at least indirectly. (pdf), which ends next year, includes a target to reduce by 20% the 鈥渃arbon intensity鈥� of the Chinese economy.
That means it is reducing the amount of carbon burned for every dollar the economy makes.
The target has been a from large industries like cement to personal carbon footprints. The next five-year plan is likely to include a further reduction, and China鈥檚 top climate negotiator Su Wei said they could 鈥渧ery easily translate our energy reduction targets to carbon dioxide limitation.鈥�
That won鈥檛 mean a reduction in emissions, . 鈥淐hina hasn鈥檛 reached the stage where we can reduce overall emissions, but we can reduce energy intensity and carbon intensity.鈥�
Certainly it has plenty of scope. China鈥檚 inefficient coal-burning industries currently produce about , compared with $1900 in the US, $3700 in the UK and $8900 in Switzerland.
