Battle of the developed vs. the developing

Climate change justice is contentious

Posted by Joseph Romm (Guest Contributor) at 11:56 AM on 04 May 2007

As this round of the IPCC unfolds, developing countries are scurrying to relieve themselves of any major responsibility for historic emissions and, consequently, aggressive mitigation policies.

For example, China has requested inserting language that formally recognizes the percentage of emissions for which developed countries are responsible -- 95 percent from the pre-industrial era until 1950, and 77 percent from 1950 to the start of the millennium.

China is also trying to earn reduction credit for social policies that have unintentionally curbed emissions -- in other words, the one-child policy. Elsewhere, efforts to reduce air pollution from factories and cars has slowed emissions growth.

And yet China is poised to pass the U.S. in annual emissions this year or next, so it will need to join emissions-reductions efforts soon after we do, whenever that will be ...

This post was created for ClimateProgress.org, a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

For story: Battle of the developed vs. the developing
5 Comments | Post a Comment

Developed World Responsibiltiy

I think China has 3/4 of a point. Yes of course they have to reduce their emissions. But their figures are essentially true. The rich world has pretty much the responsibility for historic emissions that they say Meaning that we rich countries are the reason poor countries should not take the same path we did to development--using fossil fuels.

In essence, the rich nations have used up all the atmospheric space for development. Any agreement treaty to mitigate climate chaos has to take that into consideration. If China is to stop putting up coal plants, and put up wind generators, solar electric generators, and other low carbon sources (including coal plants with sequestration if you wish) then the rich nations are going to have to pay the difference. Without that, you don't get a reduction. Because the poor nations are not going to settle for being screwed again when for once they have a negotiating lever.

by Gar Lipow at 12:43 PM on 04 May 2007

Stalling on both sides

Both the US and industrial developing countries (China) are using this issue to stall the process in attempt to buy time from those nations who are actually pushing the issue (Europe, etc.). The easy solution would be to "pay the difference" by forgoing the intellectual property rights associated with alternative energies. However, China has a shady history in terms of intellectual property. This same situation will unfold in any climate change negotiations until new leadership emerges in the US that is willing to make a sacrifice of sovereignty and property.

by degal at 12:07 PM on 05 May 2007

Learn from mistakes

The developing countries have got to learn from the developed countries' mistakes. Yes, of course it isn't fair, and I agree that the majority of the economic burden for dealing with climate change should lie with the countries that made the biggest contribution, seeing as it's the developing countries that will suffer the most.

However, countries that don't have as much of the fossil fuel infrastructure already in place don't have an excuse to go in that direction. It's a bit like Latin American countries saying "well, you wrecked your own forests/wildlife, and a goodly bit of ours, so why can't we finish the job?" China is just stalling for time.

In any case, living in a developing country myself, it makes a lot more sense to move in the direction of renewable energy sources, for one. It helps avoid becoming too dependent on foreign imports (such as fossil fuels).

If I share initials with 'Global Warming', is that a sign?

by tico89 at 2:14 PM on 05 May 2007

Excuses.

Everyone's got one, and this is China's. If you really wanted to play the civilisation game, you could point out that the technology that underpins the lifestyle that China now claims as its birthright...as a higher priority than the climate...is about 95% from the Western World. But this sort of thinking is a trap. It's the type of thinking that makes the Chinese flat-out refuse to learn from the mistakes we made in the West. Cycling, anyone? We should all be concentrated only on achieving sustainable development. We can discuss "who deserves what" later.

by Jones at 10:12 PM on 06 May 2007

Blame to be Shared

Hey, all:

When we have our own U.S. house in order, we will be in better standing to pressure China. For example, the U.S. cannot export cars to China because we cannot meet Chinese fuel economy standards with our domestic CAFE standard, due to Big Auto blocking improvements. In addition, our per capita CO2 production is still highest in the world. And, even though we invented them, China is manufacturing many more PV panels than we do, since the Big Oil/Big Coal corporate oligarchy still holds sway in the U.S.

When sustainability is our mantra, we will have made world-changing progress. Consider this: go outside in the daytime, hold your face up, and feel the abundant free energy in the Wind and the Sun. Consider the great value of existing and currently available collection, conversion, and storage devices to process this free, infinitely sustainable energy source. Implement these steps and then the government of China will look like the bureaucratic, autocratic, repressive bunch of narcissists that they are.

We have a long way to go.

David
Sustainability For Life

Messages done with sustainable energy, with Wind and Sun!

by SustainableGreen at 11:06 PM on 06 May 2007

ADVERTISING POLICY

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.