esponding to recent criticism of the commitments made under the Framework Convention on Climate Change, GCC adopted a position in March af?rming the ade- quacy of the current plan and recom- mending a course of action as the Unit- ed States prepares for the Tenth Inter- governmental Negotiating Committee meeting (INC 10) in August. Concern over the adequacy of cli~ mate treaty commitments arose at INC 9 in February, when the U.S. delega- tion called the existing Framework Convention 'inadequate' because it does not address emissions reduction measures to be taken beyond the year 2000. The claims drew some calls for amendments or protocols to strengthen the treaty. In March, criticisms were heard again as the Framework Convention of?cially took effect. For example, the Warld Wide Fund for Nature (formerly the World Wildlife Fund) called the con- vention a 'solid framework' on which L?l GCC ASSAILS CLAIMS THAT CONVENTION IS COURSE OF ACTION FOR INC 10 to "begin" addressing climate issues, but, as one WWF spokesperson said, 'It is still too weak.? The GCC position strongly cautioned against judging the adequacy of the commitments under the convention before it has had an opportunity to work. National Action Plans, which will spell out the speci?c actions signa- tory nations will take to achieve the goals of the convention, are not even due until September 1994. ?All of these plans must be evaluated as part of the determination of ?adequacy," GCC said. Commenting speci?cally on the U.S. Climate Change Action Plan, GCC warned that arbitrarily stepping up corn- mitments under the convention will almost certainly result in measures that gobeyondthoseoutlined intheU.S. plan. 'Such measures would have a sig- nificant negative effect on the U.S. and international economy with the poten- tial loss of hundreds of thousands of American jobs,? GCC said. In addition, GCC noted that a process already has been established for the review of the adequacy of commit- ments. The Framework Convention pro- vides for such a review at the first Con- ference of the Parties in March 1995 in Berlin. Finally, the GCC position noted that science must be central to considera- tions of adequacy, and that current sci- ence does not support an increased concern over the possibility of human- induced climate change that would jus- tify an accelerated determination that the convention commitments are inade- quate. Looking ahead to INC to, GCC said, 'The U.S. government should support the full process specified by the treaty. The government should not make any predetermined conclusions as to the outcome of that review. And the U.S. should oppose any recommendations for treaty amendments or protocols regarding commitments during the pre- sent decade or post-2000! hDay mean-mt" U.S. businesses $185 billion annually, or 3 percent of GDP, by the year 2000. Because of the magnitude of these potential expenditures and the compet? ing demands on limited resources, it is imperative that regulatory requirements be driven by scientifically based priori- ties and objective cost criteria. On top of this, just one year ago Pres- ident Clinton, responding to the newly adopted U.N. Framew0rk Convention on Climate Change, challenged U.S. industry to engage in a 'cost effective? business-government program to reduce greenhouse emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. In October, the president issued his Climate Change Action Plan, detailing nearly 50 indus- try-government voluntary initiatives to reach his goal. This is surely the pre- ferred approach, given the complexities of climate science, the growing skepti- among scientists over earlier apoc- predidions. the current regula- burden being absorbed by the U.S. economy, and increased economic globalization and competition. Since I last fall, many industrials, including electric utilities, motor manufacturers and others, have entered into voluntary programs to reduce greenhouse gases. In response to the president. Earth Day 1994 will once again have U.S. industry "front and center," as they pre- sent with government the of the next signi?cant round of environ- mental innovation, and perhaps new concepts in business-government part- nerships. Since the inception of Earth Day, U.S. industry has been a 'senior partner? in the nation's environmental progress. Even while meeting ever mere stringent controls on worldwide emis- sions and growth, industry remains committed to continued environmental progress and to being a constructive participant in the process of setting future goals. However, the world has changed since Earth Day 1970. Markets have become increasingly global and competitive. So, while U.S. industry will do its part, additional improve- ments in the world's environment also will depend on actions taken in China, India and the former Soviet Union. On EarthDay l994,weshouldstartlook~ ing in that direction. 0 ?DWuMonoiblt- qunn? Cannes FIREWORKS BETWEEN TbeVerdBanksaidltwas'disap- humanode DECLASSIFIED DATA ANSWER Cuwmz QUESTIONS sing once-restricted U.S. Defense Department data from a dozen submarine tracks, Iormer nuclear submariner Alfred McLaren is about to publish a studv revealing that there has been no climate induced change in Arctic ice thickness. McLaren?s study represents a new era in climate change research. With the improvement of U.S.-Soviet relations in recent years and the declassifying of some Defense Department records, civil- ian scientists In the United Stats are making an effort to bring valuable global change data to bear on the problem. indeed, the extraOrdinary wealth of sci- enti?c data gathered as intelligence to aid the U.S. military may hold the keys that unlock the answers to many ques- tions about the Earth?s climate, the Feb- ruary 4 issue of Saence reported. The data, such as records from spy satellites, typically midi back long beforecivilian researdiersbegantracit- which new isconsidered essential tocli- matechangeresearch, includirg meta- thickness. Theonceofi-lrmitsiniormationis McLareerhowantedtostudychanps inlhethiclmesofArctx? rceoverthe MdarenobtainedtheNavymeasure- ?Billie-namwrmedin MWbamdm-Irep- Madman?