GLOBAL CLIMATE COALITION

H IN A

July 19, 1993

Mr. Thomas F. McLarry
Chief of Staff to the President
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington. D.C. 20500
Dear Mr. McLarty:
Over the next several weeks you and other officials of the Administration will be
making decisions regarding policies to meet the goals announced April 21 by President
Clinton when he said:
'Today, I reaffirm my personal, and announce our nation's commitment, to
reducing our emissions of greenhouse gases to their 1990 levels by the year
2000.*
"I am instructing my administration to produce a cost-effective plan by August
that can continue the trend of reduced emissions. This must be a clarion call,
not for more bureaucracy or regulation or unnecessary costs, but instead, for
American ingenuity and creativity, to produce the best and most energy-efficient
technology.*
This is indeed a challenge as the decisions that you will make will effectively drive
energy and economic policy in our country for years to come. Members of the Global
Climate Coalition have been pleased to participate in the series of workshops which have
been held to discuss options available to meet these goals and want very much to
continue to work with you as you develop the plan and prepare to implement it.
We urge you to include options in the plan only after a careful analysis of their costs
and possible effects on our domestic economy and employment. And, we urge you not to
foreclose an option which could, if properly defined without overly restrictive parameters,
prove to be the most cost effective and best option available, the option of joint
implementation.
This concept — as yet to be precisely defined — was included in the Framework
Convention on Climate Change as a means to facilitate economic development in
developing countries while containing the growth in elobal greenhouse emissions by the
most cost effective means. The way that joint implementation will work domestically
cannot be determined at this point as it will depend in large part on the way that the

1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW • Suite 1500 - North Lobby • Washington, DC 20004-1703
Telephone: (202) 637-3162 • Fax: (202) 638-1032 • Fax: (202) 638-1043

 Mr. Thomas F. McLarty
July 19, 1993
Page 2
international definitions are constructed by parties to the framework convention. This
will not be resolved for some time. The drafters of the convention, however, clearly
recognized that pursuit of joint implementation programs to achieve net greenhouse gas
emissions reductions in developing countries would be regarded as just as significant as
domestic reductions of emissions and should be given equal consideration.
Properly defined, joint implementation can meet several goals as it can:
help address environmental and economic challenges that already exist in developing
countries (including countries with economies in transition), where the opportunities
for reducing the rate of growth in greenhouse gas emicsions far exceed that in the
mature, efficient economies of developed countries;
• reduce greenhouse gas emissions globally at a lower cost than domestic controls;
• create new job opportunities for U.S. industry by deploying technological and
managerial expertise in countries where it is desperately needed;
• lead to long-term economic development by accelerating the advancement and
utili7ation of more efficient energy technologies with reduced environmental
impacts.
We understand that there is a debate within the Administration as to whether joint
implementation should be a part of the August National Action Plan and the options- put
forth at thatlime. We hope that you do not foreclose this option which could be
effective in the short term as well as over a longer term in reducing global emissions.
Because of population growth the legitimate and understandable desire for economic
progress in the developing countries will lead to rapid growth in greenhouse gas
emissions in these nations, and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions made in the U.S.
or other OECD nations will be quickly overwhelmed. This rate of growth could be
reduced by a program of technological cooperation between OECD nations and
developing countries. Alternatively, if this option is foreclosed the financial capability of
OECD nations to assist these countries in their quest for a better economy could be
hampered.
The benefits that can accrue to this nation and the world by a well structured policy of
joint implementation cannot be underestimated. A national action plan focused solely on
domestic programs could threaten the continued economic growth and competitiveness
of the U.S. economy. A plan that combines cost effective domestic measures, including
voluntary measures, with a properly defined joint implementation program, could foster
this nation's economic growth and international competitiveness while providing the

 Mr. Thomas F. McLarty
July 19, 1993
Page 3
means for the developing countries to enjoy a level of prosperity and environmental
protection that has heretofore eluded them.
There is still substantial scientific uncertainty regarding whether global climate change
is occurring and if so how fast and what impacts might be. The members of the Global
Climate Coalition support actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or to increase
greenhouse gas sinks that are justified for other economic or environmental reasons. If
properly defined joint implementation can be one of those actions. We stand ready to
assist you in your efforts.
Sin?rely,/

)John Shlaes
'Executive Director
cc: Interagency Climate Change Mitigation Group
Interagency Analysis Team