CLIMATE WATCH THE BULLETIN OF THE GLOBAL CLIMATE COALITION Volume 1 Issue 4 GCC COMMENTS ON U.S. NATIONAL ACTION PLAN ON GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE Department released the U.S. National Action Plan (NAP) on Global Climate Change. The plan was prepared pursuant to the "prompt start" resolution adopted by the Intergovern- mental Negotiating Committee (INC) and does not represent the official U.S. submission under the Framework Convention on Climate Change. GCC comments on the plan were submitted to the Council on Environmental Quality on In December 1992, the U.S. State tarch 8. Michael Baroody, chairman of GCC and senior vice president of the National Association of Manufacturers, testified before the U.S. Senate on March 1 on the U.S. plan. Baroody testified that "There is neither an obligation nor a compelling reason for the administration to restructure the U.S. NAP at this Global Climate Coalition believes that command and control mea- sures, such as targets and timetables, are unnecessary and should be avoided in any national action plan." In its current form, the plan estimates that implementation of the proposed actions would reduce projected carbon dioxide (C02) emissions in the year 2000 by 93-130 million metric tons of carbon, compared with projected levels without these actions. Even so, CO2 emissions projected for the year 2000 increase 6 to 9 percent over 1990 levels. GCC supports the U.S. NAP. The plan is comprehensive, ?exible and interna- tional in scope. Most important, the Itfan takes a "bottom-up" approach that idcuses on actions, rather than a ?top down? approach based on specific, rigid targets and timetables. This is a critical distinction, because the estimates of eenhouse gas emission reductions are good-faith estimates, rather than specific, legally enforceable requirements. The plan clearly demonstrates contin- ued U.S. leadership on the issue of cli- mate change. The GCC comments noted that while the plan is an excellent start, there are a number of areas where the plan can be improved and strength- ened. The following are the most signifi- cant issues: 0 Need for a detailed economic assessment. A detailed analysis of the economic impacts, including the impacts on economic growth, jobs and intemation- al competitiveness is needed. In the cur- rent debate over the Clinton administration economic packages, global climate change policies should enhance job creation and growth. The impacts on trade and compet- itiveness are critical. U.S. leadership on global climate change should promote the U.S. competitive position in world mar- kets, not work against it. 0 Full implementation 0! the Energy Policy Act. The Energy Policy Act of 1992 will have a signi?cant impact on greenhouse gas emissions, but all the rel- evant provisions of the act have not been incorporated fully into the U.S. National Action Plan. 0 lmportanceofvolmu'yac?om. The community, includingactions bymember organizationsofthe GCC. Majorvolurm imminen- dentlyand incoopera?onwithpvern- Caliphate-imam?. March 993 GCC RELEASES STUDY COMPARING ENERGY EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE OF THE Ga? COUNTRIES he Global Climate Coalition has Treleased a new study comparing energy efficiency performance in the G-7 countries. The study was prepared for the GCC by the EOP Group, Inc., a Washington-based consulting ?rm that specializes in scienti?c, economic. legal and political analyses of environmental, energy and technology issues. The study compares past trends and current levels of energy ef?ciency in the seven major industrialized countries: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, U.K. and the United States. The report analyzes separately the transportation. residential and manufacturing sectors of the G7. The EOP Group report challenges con- ventional wisdom that the United States is relatively energy inefficient because it is the world's largest energy consumer and enjoys relatively low energy prices. The report documents the historical trends showing that the United States has made the greatest improvement in energy performance over the past two decades. For example, US. energy consumption per unit of GDP declined by 30 percent, which is morethan mostother industrial- ized countries and comparable to Japan. The report also reviews current levels of energy energy consump- tionpercapitaorperunitofGDP), which shows that indeed the United Sm mlly has the highest levels of energy intensity among the major indus- triaIized countries. For example, energy consumption per dollar of value-added in is about one-third higher Canadanm" gr? TECHNOLOGY COOPERATION CORPS: MEETING THE CHALLENGES OF SOUND ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT he Global Climate Coalition and its members have long encouraged the US govemment to develop a partnership with busmess by developing a Technology Cooperation Corps. The Climate Convention. signed last spring and ratified by the United States in the fall, calls for developed countries to work with developing countries and countries With economies in transrtiOn to assist in assessing their energy and envrronmental needs. Close cooperation must occur to ensure the development at sound, effective energy and enwronmental policres in these nations. As early as February 1991 in Chantilly, Virginia, addressed the United Nations Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee, stating. business and Industry will be expected to have the mayor role in Implementing any necessary response polic ies, and we believe that our practical knowledge in these matters is relevant and Our organizations have expertise in our scientists, engineers, economists, and planners.? The coalition further expressed its views at subsequent meetings In Nairobi in September 1991 and in New York in February 1992, as well as in Rio in lune 1992. In presenting its views on the US. National Action Plan, GCC pointed out that to begin the process at effectively moving technology from industries in the developed countries to others one must: 1. Identify conditions within a country thatwouldcreatebanierstomrbe conducive to, improivement of technology in both the private and public sectors. 2. Identify speci?c technological requirements or technologies available for direct reduction at . . . in ByJohn Shlac: CLIMATE WATCH efficienc v, enhant ements ot greenhouse gas sinks or tor other adaptation or mitigation requirements i. identity systems that will support training, management Systems. maintenanc and repair systems. and finant ing requnements. 4 Address the issues ot protection of (rips right, patent and intellectual prurieny m. unveil inthe -- antitrust implications oi private firm collaboration. The Tet hnology Cooperation COrps would be an innovative and positive step toward encouraging cooperation between the US business and technical communities and the government. It would be a way to initiate a new international framework for addressing the complicated issues of moving ingenuity, knew-how and systems to those countries that are looking for ways to meet the development needs of the future. Further. the corps would provide a means for those who have expertise, analytic .il skills and ready access to ter hnology to Viork in partnership host ountry representatives to determine a ountry?s needs and the appropriate systems that are available or adaptable to at ommodate those needs. The TH hnology Cooperation Corps conc ept requires extensive coordination and ooperation within the US. govemment; its programs must bring together in one place amen to. and coordination of all the resources necessary to support the Tet hnology Cooperation Corps. The initial stages may call for engaging in pilot projects to refine the program and relationships among business representatives, the host countries and governments. The full development of the Technolo- gy Cooperation Corps concept would be an important first step in developing national and international environment technology cooperation . Eneme in the United Statesthan inGermanyand Japan. Residential energyusepercapita lntheUnied LSIimesa?s highasinlapan. isrelativelyenergyinetlicient. l-lowaer, oorripan- theleadersinenergyeliciency. For WAFEWUSW andrisbetterthenmaherGJm tries. Diffuericeshpuaphonruunp- greateruseot central heating. Theunit? verysimilaracrosstheG?7. Differences rnentandothertaaors. ?immunime Mimicsth basis. the vast number of agreements Oand decisions to ome out of last year's Earth Summit, one of the most tnicial was the selection of a met hanism to fund international programs aimed at achieving the ambitious goals of sustainable development. The Global Envrronment Facility a three-year pilot scheme that began in 199 was given this responsibility, and the World Bank, which administers the GEF, was given a new mission. The World Bank works with the United Nations Development Programme and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) through the GEF to assist developing countries in exploring new ways to ensure environmentally sound economic development. Economic development in developing nations will be a crucial factor in controlling future nearly $700 million has been earmarked for protects to help at hieve these goals. Money for the protects comes from the CEF's Global Environmental Trust Fund, which is administered by the World Bank. The primary contributors to the trust fund have been industrialized nations, which already have put up more than SI billion of the BANK ASSUMING NEW ROLE As Prolec is eligible for World Bank/Off funding must be aimed at ac hieving one of the GEF's four goals and must he in developing countries in Whtt'h per capita incomes are less than $4,000 tin 1989i and in which a UNDP program is currently in place. Managing the LIPS investment oper- ations, the World Bank will employ its broad experience in project financing, $1.3 billion design and imple currently in the mentation. With fund. ad? GLOBAL mm? rental supervising funds istobe ENVIRS a large ponfolioot committed by the Ll development loans end of the pilot and a large supervi- phase in mid-1994. - sory staff, the Bank While no ml? til! DRU. \t It I Tit ivs provides both a exist for allocation knowledge of coun- of GEF funds, it is expected that 40 to 50 try proiects and the ability to harmonize percent will be used to address global new GEF grants with existing ettorts. climate change concerns. Specifically, TheBankhopestomakeuseot i .ittheGEFarecenteredaroundfour proiects. In December,GEFotlicials goals: (1) reducing and limiting renewable energy technologies in met with the Business Council for emissions of greenhouse gases; (2) power generation, mining and industry; I Sustainable Development to discuss . waystocoudinateprivatesector maintaining natural habitats; (3) haltirg reducetheflarlngofgasin oil fields; and involvement in Bankproiectsin protectirgtheozonelayer. Thustar, miningoperations. I sustainabledevelopmentgoals. Pia. FACILITY OPENS Wham-ii. i actions inothercountriesneedbbe :Wyc?egfe'asllmae! . a point contact ?Wm. 'mmwb??. TechnologyCooperationCorpslong .. . um hille will Whyhocc' ololeototlier Tinsectiortsinthe deal wl mm mm mm?- (madam-Woman: Wood-enactime Mllpiornoteabalanoedapproechto mac mummwm ww?mww mendatronsandhoputoengagelna mothmaisw bpiowdeonyeenhouseguesandiielr kaanm Wmdobeldinatedwp.? ma" Gcruamim-Jm I JOINT IMPLEMENTATION AND EMISSIONS OEESETS on (.liniate hangc- rec og- nizes that the I hallenges posed hv a global issue. suc as liniate I hange, require global solutions Aiming to re- ate an environment that will lOSlt't global responses to climate change. the Frame- vsork onvention grants industrial coun- tries reclit for their actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in other parts or the world. This concept is known as 'jornt implementation." The rationale behind joint implementa- tion as a climate change response strate gy is that the cost of removing a given quantity of emissions te.g., one ton of carbon dioxide! in a developing country Is often muc lower than the cost of removing that same amount in an indus- trialized country. The net effect on atmospheric levels of greenhouse gases is the same. of course, but the reduction has been ac hieved at a lower cost. Proponents of joint implementation say it could offer other benefits in addition to reducing global greenhouse gas emrs- sions. For industrial nations. it could offer a number of cost-effective options for reducmg emissions. And for develop- ing countries, joint implementation will likely attract foreign investment, which will help developing economies grow in a more enwronmentally sound manner. The joint implementation concept is not without its critics. Some observers believe the availability of cheap emis- sions offsets could distract some indus? tries frorn efforts to make improvements domestically. Also the monitoring of projects and the granting of credits will certainly generate a massive bureaucra- cy, which could discourage some com- panies from engaging in such efforts. Finally, some fear that developing countries may try to lure foreign invest- ment by intentionally maintaining high emissions levels. These questions will confront the Inter- governmental Negotiating Committee (INC) when it moves todevelop interna- tionally accepted criteria far joint imple- mentation. Under the Framewodc Con- vention, criteria are to be established beforetheliisi Conferenceofthe Parties. is intheearlieststagesofthis Vl?lhe United Nation's on- process Some governments. industries and environmental groups, already are resI?arI hing anIl ing With joint implementation strategies Their work will likely in?uence the iN( 's efforts. The (TITO, tor esample, recently I orn- missioned three papers addressing |()lltl Implementation. in an mtemew Global Em ironmental 'hange Report, the direc tor ot the i) (?enter for Inter- national Iimate and Lnergy Researc said (.ermanv, the Netherlands. Sweden, Japan, anada and the United States are all researching jomt implementation cri- teria and intemational emissions offsets. In addition to requiring the develop- ment of j0int implementation I riteria, the Framework Convention also called for the establishth nt an intemational WT clearinghouse tor ottsi-ts and other iinplr-niI-iitaticin ()itering rI-sourI and on joint issIIi-s, house Will help Interested I oiintriI-s. as as I onipanies, Identity .incl opportunities to partiI ipatI' Most ltkt?lv, thI- (ilolial IrwironmI-nt lac ilitv t(.l i, of the World Bank, Will serve this tunI tion The (ill would he a depository for joint implementation agreements. A more controversial possdiility Is that the (it could serve as a broker for joint implementation projects, provrcling port- iolios ol pie-approved joint iniplernI-nta . . tion protects to I ountries looking to invest. Because the (.FF is managed through the World Bank, some fear that the GEF may not be trustworthy as an impartial party. 0 q..l heErwironirieritalProtedlon pipes.- hordatobeoorrieamodelfadly, ornphuisonoomplianoe. EPAwoold Wham- clvil,alrrihaloraarilniamlvo wily,th muman altarla. mame InMafacitlmho??A wildplaocmodalmon aalmbeloielaundiingitndlon- wide. porn Wish-wi- oipoclodtoiovemodun Midthoae awiioriirien? dioddbo. mallow-ii. Corn- aswalludui?iand ?Madam? WMMGOM wmoc MW Wamdm 7099. URICE STRONG ON VERNMENT ACIION IN THE WAKE 0F RIO be following are highlights from an Tank In by Mauric 0 Strong, sec retary- general of the 1992 Earth Summit, lrom The [.mh Times, January 20, 1993. 'There is no question that the Earth unprecedented and historic as a political event. But its ultimate importance will depend more on what governments and others do now to follow up and implement its results than on what at the Conform "While Rio provides a mandate for the transition to sustainable development at the highest possible political level, there is as yet little evidence that governments will intact carry out these agreements. There has been a natural tendency to lapse back to ?business as usual,? particu- larly in light of the more immediate politi- cal and economic pressures competing (Tl WATCH strengthening the institutional and protes sional I apac itii-s ot developing I oIintriI-s through suppcut for thr-( .IpaIitv '21 im- tiative anrl the Sustainable Development Networks ot the United Nations Develop ment Programme . 'The princ ipal sourc i- of added value and I ompetitivc- advantage in the emerg- ing global economy is hlit?tM?. applied through in hnoiogy, through Iii-sign, marketing and management The resourc I- industries whic have lsi'Il the mainstay of developing I ountry ecnnomres most become more and more knowledge oriented. But the main new industrial opportunities will he in the knowledge-han industries suc as inlor- rnation processing, telec nmmunications, production of 'green' consumer goods, industrial processes whic reduce or eliminate pollution and make more effi- cient use of energy and raw 'The ?nancial resources needed to implement 21, including the additional assistance required by devel- oping countries, cannot be expected to come through mere additions to already foreign aid in traditional terms. Rather they require a radical reorientation of ?Moriarty CHINA: INDUSTRIALIZATION EFFORTS CARRY HEAVY PRICE TAG hina's efforts to transform its economy are severely threatening the nation?s air and water quality, according to a recent report by the World Bank. China's drive to become sell- sd?licient is creating ?economic inef?ciencies that hamper environmental according to the report. The report chad country?s poor envrronmental report card In addition' to causmg? air and water pollution, thesame problems are also emissions in China and in many other mm with economies in ini i-ntives for sustainable develop ment 'Thc- global partnership tor sshic Agenda It establishes the tramewrnk must not lie limited to relationships amongst governments and inter ngI-rnmI-ntal organizations. A whole series oi partnerships must novs dim-lop amongst individual ornniunities. amongst voluntary organilations, professional assoc iations. universities and, of course. industry . EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AT A STANDSTILL OVER CARBON TAX he ('linton admmistration's proposal toraU.S.energytaii hasbeen encouraging to those in the European Community pushing for a car- bon-based energy tax But EC Environment Commissioner loannis Paleokrassas in an article in the Financial Times (Feb. 8, W93) still called measures to control carbon emrssions 'a very long- term will certainly not be im- ished by the end ofthe year," he said. The tax, proposed by the Euroman . Commission to reduce emissions of car- bondioxide, would bedirected at car- basedonthecarboncontentofthe sources. Thetax,howc-ver,is condition- Einope'scormethorsandhasncendy met with growing opposition. Paleokrassas said that reaching an theiswe. LesproaperoumembersoftheEC havepushodforthetanesbbelevied onlyontheindunna? theemiasions. ?Edi-levelot?cialsin theBriishgovommerlhaveindicued ?Britainhasnotacceplediietaxua myorapproplatempomebcli- MMW Themnmisaoner' hasdacrliodhis onset-358W! COOPERATION MORE EFEECTIVE THAN COMMAND AND CONTROL MEASURES 'kh (mm "Mr maml and ("mm reunlalwuyh ml <> <> Emmi. dank mndun "hon" nouhcv mum. chmvemems nur Handarda 00% u; help mm. gummy mm m- Mm auxhor says seh-regulahun Am be enenme'y \mpk-menlvd mm some Mam He mum on lhe Federal dee |u drall an mduslry gum mr nodes on Conduct "veo (hc mahhm of|hc new, gun Enonumy The gmde, he m1, a "neo mm prelzquml 4m Ihc \nneased an>> Mann 0" (mlrcu'ornve, sulfirn'gulalmn Vl'm>> Mumm hamhm CLINIATE CALENDAR Upcoming lefemuccx 4m Global Climate Change mumummr "mpuxmm vm m-mun>> m1 Hum! hm my ummnum Km hm mm mu (mum! new My <>: m. (mlilion. WdWM-'km. Mu: Mac-mu. Mm one: mum-anew>>! wanna)", Dc moo" 703 5- un bin--an. and: Shhs, Emma mm, mm 537.3153. (Elnhal Clumle lemun Im NW mn- 1m hunk anrr \vmunwm Ix; MAW I703