Setting a new course on climate change

GLOBAL CLIMATE POLICY affects the world's economic, energy, "and environmental policies. Climate change does not recognize borders. It is a shared responsibility for all nations. Global climate policy requires a level of diplomatic intensity and coordination worthy of the magnitude of the challenge.

The scientific community is not uniform in its assessments of the causes or solutions for dealing with this situation. There is no doubt that human society is having an impact on the environment. There have been numerous studies looking at how man's actions may be affecting the climate. That impact is subject to different interpretations, but human society has contributed to pollution and, evidence suggests, a global warming trend. We also know that these trends have occurred in cycles throughout the Earth's history.

There always will be uncertainties and incomplete information in any climate policy, but that should not inhibit our commitment to developing policies based on sound science. The climate change debate is not about who is for or against the environment. No one wants dirty air or water, prolonged drought, or declining standards of living for their children and grandchildren. We all agree on the need for a clean environment and stable climate. The debate is about solutions. The question we face is not whether we should take action, but what type. Climate change initiatives should include commitments to research and development, technology, and a more efficient and productive use of energy and resources.

I have introduced comprehensive climate change legislation that authorizes new programs, policies, and incentives to address the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. It focuses on the role of technology, private and public partnerships, and developing countries.

Any policy initiative must include clear metrics that recognize the links among energy, the economy, and the environment. It is a global issue. Too often these policies are considered in vacuums. Bringing in the private sector, as well as creating incentives for technological innovation, is critical to real progress.

I believe that greenhouse gas intensity, or the amount of carbon emitted relative to economic output, is the best measurement for dealing with climate change. It captures the links among energy efficiency, economic development, and the environment. My plan includes three pieces of legislation: Climate Change Technology Deployment in Developing Countries Act; Climate Change Technology Deployment Act; and Climate Change Technology Tax Incentives Act.

The first act provides the Secretary of State with new authority for coordinating assistance to developing countries for projects and technologies that reduce greenhouse gas intensity. It supports the development of a global climate strategy to expand the role of the private sector, develop public-private partnerships, and the deployment of house gas reducing technologies in developing countries. This bill directs the Secretary of State to engage global climate change as foreign policy issue. It directs the U.S. Trade Representative to negotiate the removal of trade-related barriers to the export of greenhouse gas intensity reducing technologies, and establishes an interagency working group to promote the export of these technologies and practices from the U.S. The legislation authorizes fellowship and exchange programs for foreign officials to visit the U.S. and acquire the expertise and knowledge to reduce greenhouse gas intensity in their countries.

Current international approaches to global climate change overlook the role of developing nations as part of the problem or solution. Earlier this year, the United Nations Global Climate Treaty signed in Kyoto, Japan, entered into force, mandating emission reductions in the developed nations that ratified it. In July, 1997, months before the Protocol was signed, the Senate unanimously passed the Byrd-Hagel Resolution, which called on the president not to sign any treaty or agreement in Kyoto unless two conditions were met. First, the U.S. should not be party to any legally binding obligations on greenhouse gas emission reductions unless "Developing Country Parties" are required to meet the same standards. Second, the president should not sign any treaty that "would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States."

Kyoto does not meet either of these conditions. Developing nations are exempt from the Kyoto obligations, leaving 31 developed countries to address greenhouse gas emissions. A recent Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report explains that developing countries are projected within the next 20 years to account for two-thirds of the growth in carbon dioxide emissions as their populations and economies expand. There are reasons for this. Developing nations cannot achieve greenhouse gas reductions until they attain higher standards of living. They lack clean energy technology and they cannot absorb the economic impact of the changes necessary for emissions reductions. New policies will require recognition of the limitations of developing nations to meet these standards and the necessity of including them in any successful future initiative.