. Albn'ght or?! Inm' pier represented bx Dan (ioldlx-rg oi the (enter tor International Tnsironi?nental Lais. The primary tor us or the Man INC meeting was the .lobal Tm ironment Facility and its relationship to the Con- tt?rent or the Parties to the i omention. hile signitit ant progress was reported questions still linger as to who has the authorits to deter- mine priorities tor proiet ts. bat the level or funds is ill be, and who will receive the funds. This thorny North- South issue vs ill be debated again at the eighth session of the NC in August. ()ther noteworthy at tivity at the March INC meeting int luded a state- ment by the new US. ambassador to the United Nations, Madeleine Albright. the selection of the new INC leadership and efforts to tighten the INC relation- ships with the IPCC and the GET. Mr. Raul from Argentina, a gentleman of qurck intellect and strong manner, was elected to succeed lean Ripert as INC president. In her opening-day comments, Ambassador Albright indicated that the new administration welcomes a review mate change, and said that action should be taken based on this review. Referring to the content US. National Action Plan, Albright said, ?The plan will be signi?cantly revised to take care fully into account the comments received from the public and the results of a comprehensive review of our policy options." The U5. review of policy options is already in progress. Climate change will be a major part of the analysis, which is to be led by the State Department Also receiving significant attention are such issuesasoceans, forestsandtheCom- mission on Sustaindale Development. All agencies, includirg the EPA and DOE, will provide input. According to Ambassador Albright. this proces is By John Shlaes i. i CLIMATE WATCH UPDATE FROM THE EC members are divided over how the burden of reducing car- bon dioxide (C02) emissrons. as set out under the Framework Conven- tion on Climate Change. will he shared among them. Britain has reiected calls for the northern EC states to accept a greater share of the burden of reductions. The northern states have agreed to wodt to meet emissions reductions require- ments. but only it southern states are illing to drop their to an EC-wide energy tax. Unwilling to turn its authority to tax over to the EC. Britain has rebuffed the notion of an EC-wide energy tax. German Chancellor Helmut Kohl reached an agreement in March with the oppositicm Social Democrats to hold any tax increases until 1995 (the year following his reelection) This agreement, along with the $200 bil- . European Commission suggests that 1990 levels by the year 2000. Even if lion annual price tag for supporting former fast Germany, will dampen Germany?s enthusiasm for an EC ener- gy tax. say observers. Morerwer. a report circulating in the the community will not achieve its goal of stabilizing C02 emissions at all I) members meet individual tar- gets, the community is expected to fall about 4 percent short of its goal. The figures are being called preliminary. but nonetheless arr.- causing concern in the community. The GCC is working with industry in EuropetoencouragetheECmreview, and perhaps to restate, emissions tar- gets in light of new uncenainties con- cerning computer model forecasts of future temperature increases. 0 necessary to ?reassess all options for reducrng greenhouse gas emissions.? The GCC released a statement in New York welcomrng the pledge by the Clin- ton to reevaluate actions to address climate change. GCC believes that all proposed actions must be carefullv examined close atten- tion to their consequences for economic growth, employment and U.S. competi- tiveneu in the global martini. out- lined in GCCs comments on the National Action Plan (see Climate Watch, March 1993), the Unhil Sides must its lead on tedtnology coop- eration initiatives to promote more effi- cient environmental and energy tech- nologies. Todow, itwill hawtolrmp in policies focused on capital formaion and economic growth. The GCC strongly believes it is important to have an open enchant approached the Sta economic and regulatory impactson U.S.busines. TheUnited Stateshasbeenanintema- tionai leaderontheclimatediange issue. TheUnitedStateswasnotonly andbsubmita NationalAaion Plan, comprehensiveprogramtodevelop studiesandspeci?c recormrendations ondinaediarioaisaiesallofwhidi areprovidedfrxinthemorethanloo theNationalEnergyPolicyAct. Themaiorchallenge facingtheUS. maticeoonomicandpolicyfrarmork WsaidinNewYorkwiththe ship. TheUnitedStatesmusterm wetnvealroadyutablidiedonthe 'p?aalono'o ARBON TAXES WOULD CLOBBER ECONOMY, NOT PROBLEMS, SAYS REPORT would severely dampen eco- rnonm growth in the United States, to a point that would threaten Amerit a's ability to invest in the envr- ronmental technologies that hold the greatest promise for the future, actording to a new report released by the Center for the New West. The report looked closely at the impact of a carbon tax on the coal industry and the ripple effed it would have arbon anti other energy taxes throughout the economy. The report showed that a carbon tax ($50 per tori) would increase the price of coal 50 itv produt ers and onsiiniers .is well. the center's report warned, .is higher coal prices would forte producers to change the mix of fuels used to gener- ate power. urrently, more than halt lhe nation's elec - .5 ity comes trom coal- burning power .0 plants. Rising costs of electricity, reflect- ed in higher energy bills and in the price no of new goods and servrr es, would 5 contribute to a 3 sharp dec line in zo 5 Gross Domestic Product, the report to 60 percent. is said. Other rec ent According to the studies support this report, such a to conclusion. ?ce hike Econormc austerity Id cost I in the United States. undreds of however, will not thousands of . mean global environ- iobs in the coal mo mo mental improve- industry alone. Pm merits, according to the A carbon tax Ml. CAM study. ?Carbon dioxide would hit electric- is a world-wide prob- lem Most ot the rest or the world is i? i ontinue to burn oal to generate r-lei lTIt ll\. and toal's share or the total world primars energy liltels Will in( tease More than 80 pert ent oi the prorei ted int tease in greenhouse gas- es oser the nest ltlti years Will tome from the deseloping world, not from the United States lapan or the turn pean onimunrty (See graphic I The report emphasized that the Unit- ed States leads the world in the researt and development or onversron ter hnology. is Tll( pro- vides leaner and more effic rent coal combustion This technology is crucial to addressing the emissions problems in the deselopmg world. The enter for the New West is a non-profit, non-partisan institution tor policy research, et onomit dex elop- merit and Him atinn based in Denver. Colorado. Copies oi the report are available by calling the center at i 103) 572-5400. 0 Coptnofthenudy'ludushiptn Mnedeios'whidiw-pro parodbydieEOPGrowlorthoGlob- Keptonuh Winston" Conventionshould Hecitedthe I WardeconomicNGOs. Butlreworking draft rules of procedure. He tionstoyourmevwrk. Wepledaetoymourbene?orts. The eutectiothardeoforustodoso.? . GLOBAL COMMISSION PLANS REPORT ADDRESSING ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION BEYOND Rio Timemationa? l?gureswhosupport sustainabledevelop? oornolidaedmderoemied.? 'l?lieoornmissiori, whichmetin February in Geneva. includes BouakoftheAfrican National Congress. Thecommision's approachestosecurityf With Rio Accords glol'mI environmonla' 0u| ipennr HEW Inr Ironma-nm and IInII-Iopmcm: (11 mum I the Ilow 0| msourtes ImpIemenIImnn n: Framework I on Changeunified l0 prohablv In I I 11 (affirms- been upon Ipallon oI and the huslr II I MI 9K1 Io many as 1 The has been I I CONFERENCE TO EXPLORE SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY AND PUBLIC POLICY HIIH II II II I II I Umu'hm Tht' sI I- I Iimhaie (Onimumh I II Iho I I II ['10 ""Ilium" . I II w; II Climate (Imule mm. An mm: aimJUIYINJ For mm (Mud . mu HIV