SEARCH
What’s the Timeline for Reducing Greenhouse Emissions? |
|
 |
||||
|
||||
Roxanne D. Brown, assistant legislative director of the United Steelworkers (USW), is among union delegates taking part in the 12-day United Nations Climate Change Conference (UNCCC) in Poznan, Poland. The meeting is building upon the framework negotiated last year in Bali, Indonesia. Of the nearly 100 union delegates, Brown is among the more than 20 from North America and sends us this report.
What Comes First?
That’s the question everyone is asking in Poznan, Poland. Does the United States take actions to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by passing legislation in 2009, or do we wait for a new international agreement on climate change to be finalized in Copenhagen, Denmark, at the end of 2009? It’s the classic chicken and egg question. Which should precede the other? Which is most necessary to occur first? Like the chicken and egg question, no one has an answer (or at least a real good one), but one thing is clear: All eyes are on the United States.
I attended a briefing last night held by the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA) that centered on “U.S. action in Copenhagen and beyond,” at which staff from various congressional offices (Sens. John Kerry [D-Mass.], Richard Lugar [R-Ind.)] and Olympia Snowe [R-Maine], and Rep. John Dingell, (D-Mich.) tried to paint a picture of what may be coming down the road on climate policy in the Democrat-led 111th Congress in 2009. Unfortunately, there were no guarantees of what is to come, especially on the issue of U.S. action vs. international action.
What congressional staffers are certain about is that global climate change is a real issue that needs to be addressed, but needs to be done in an manner that carefully and thoughtfully takes into account all of the concerns and issues that have surrounded climate policy: Carbon leakage and the effect that will have on the competitiveness of U.S. businesses and workers, mitigation, technology transfer and financial flows. All of which are issues that are critical to U.S. labor and the U.S. labor delegation in Poznan, which includes the USW, Communication Workers of America (CWA), Boilermakers (IBB), Mine Workers (UMWA), Utility Workers (UTU), Transport Workers (TWU), AFSCME, Electrical Workers (IBEW) and SEIU. We’re here to make sure our views on these issues are heard and discussed, as the negotiators begin shaping the next international climate agreement, which will replace the expiring Kyoto agreement in 2012.
The extremely high attendance at the EDF/IETA event (read: room bursting at the seams) by participants from all over the world, including the nations of Denmark, Japan and China, certainly highlighted not only the interest from the rest of the world on U.S. action on this issue, but also the importance of our nation in the climate change negotiations and on the issue of global climate change as a whole.
While there are many uncertainties about what action is to come on climate change either in the United States or at the international level, a significant shift in both our presidential and congressional leadership has occurred, and with that comes the renewed possibility of action on climate change of some kind in 2009. President-elect Obama has signaled “a new chapter in America’s leadership on climate change” and has stressed his commitment to developing policies to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, and the importance of tying these policies to economic investment that will create 5 million new green jobs.
It is not clear what form this action will take. It could come in the form of a comprehensive cap-and-trade bill. It could be energy efficiency policies and tax incentives for renewable energy production that would aid in the reduction of greenhouse gases, help revitalize U.S. manufacturing (which has seen a loss of 60,000 jobs per month since May of this year) and create new jobs in the emerging “green” economy by driving investment in clean energy technologies. And ultimately, it could come in the form of the United States agreeing to sign-on to a new climate agreement as President-elect Obama has said the United States “will once again engage toward a new era of global cooperation on climate change.” Whether the United States takes one or all of these vigorously in the negotiations once Obama takes office, we can all be sure that it will affect how nations around the world develop their own climate policies.
2 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
The U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works will be releasing a report this week.It contains testimony from over 650 scientists who are criticizing the man-made climate claims of this UN conference. That is 12 times the UN scientists (52) who authored the media hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers.
“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.
Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.
As long as people are making a profit from fossil fuels, they will be critical of global warming claims. Facts are, though, that environmental changes are occurring at a rapid rate causing higher temperatures world wide, particularly in hotter climates where vegetation is sparse. The polar ice caps are melting, and it is now certain that the North Pole will be completely melted in the summer of 2009. Skin cancer is increasing, especially in areas where the ozone layer is thin or has already disappeared. There are several such “holes” surrounding the planet now. The weather has definitely gotten more unpredictable with hotter than usual summers, warmer winters, more violent, stronger hurricanes, more tornadoes, and more destruction overall, especially in coastal areas. HOWEVER, even if you do not want to believe a word of this, you should responsibly believe and understand that the continued polluting of our planet will certainly have grave consequences beginning with the simplest life giving properties of clean air, clean water and uncontaminated soil. Even if it is for these reasons alone, one must understand that greenhouse gases are destroying this planet and our lives. You must get your head out of the sand!