COPENHAGEN COMMITMENT: The U.S. formally submitted its commitment to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 4 percent below 1990 levels--pending legislation being passed.
Image: Official White House Photo by Pete Souza
More In This Article
Listen to this Podcast
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
The U.S. officially committed in writing yesterday to the greenhouse gas emission cuts proposed by President Obama in Copenhagen—4 percent below 1990 levels by 2020. The letter to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) commits the nation to combat climate change, but with a caveat: any such commitment must be backed by legislation, which has not passed the U.S. Senate.
"The U.S. submission reflects President Obama's continued commitment to meeting the climate change and clean energy challenge through robust domestic and international action that will strengthen our economy, enhance our national security, and protect our environment," said U.S. climate negotiator Todd Stern in a prepared statement announcing the commitment. "We expect that all major economies will honor their agreement in Copenhagen to submit their mitigation targets or actions."
Already, four major developing countries—Brazil, China, India and South Africa—have indicated they will also submit their national plans by the January 31 deadline as part of the Copenhagen Accord. China will cut its carbon intensity (the amount of greenhouse gas emitted per widget produced) by at least 40 percent; India has promised a similar intensity cut of at least 20 percent. Brazil, meanwhile, has passed a law that requires the country to cut greenhouse gas emissions by at least 36 percent below present values by 2020, whereas South Africa will slow the rise of its greenhouse gas emissions from coal by 34 percent by the same year. Also, the European Union will cut its overall emissions by at least 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2020.
At least 29 countries have indicated they will join the accord, representing more than 70 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to the U.S. Climate Action Network. "The Copenhagen Accord reflects a political consensus on the long-term, global response to climate change," said UNFCCC Executive Secretary Yvo de Boer at a January 20 press conference. "If countries follow up Copenhagen's outcomes calmly, with eyes firmly fixed on the advantage of collective action, they have every chance of completing the job."
The Copenhagen Accord, however, is not a legally binding treaty, de Boer noted—something the world now hopes to have in place for the next global climate summit in Mexico City this fall. That means the accord's provisions may or may not be honored.
But the federal government will cut its own greenhouse gas emissions—at facilities ranging from the U.S. Department of Defense to the Post Office—by 28 percent by 2020, regardless of legislative action, per plans released today to fulfill an Obama administration executive order. The U.S. currently operates more than 600,000 vehicles, purchases more than $500 billion in goods and services, and occupies nearly 500,000 buildings—all of which will now be subject to a series of goals, such as a 30 percent reduction in petroleum use by 2020.
For example, the Internal Revenue Service will revamp its facility in Andover, Md., to reduce energy use by more than 25 percent through light monitors, rooftop photovoltaic solar cells, efficient electrical devices, and a geothermal heating and cooling system.
"As the largest energy consumer in the United States, we have a responsibility to American citizens to reduce our energy use and become more efficient," Obama said in a prepared statement to announce the programs. "Our goal is to lower costs, reduce pollution, and shift federal energy expenses away from oil and towards local, clean energy."
Rights & Permissions
See what we're tweeting about
18 Comments
Add CommentThe devil is in the ratification by congress of course.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd we can expect the Republicans to do their best to continue to destroy thier own nation and the the rest of the world.
On this issue, BinLaden is right.
Seriously, I do think people should realize that how important that what we have done is really effective to the environment.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAll we need to do is try to manipulate our behaviors everyday, every minute. less cars, less fly, less cosmetic,less disafforestation. I think the world will be better and better.
The point is, can everybody does that?
Using scientific spin in an attempt to make global warming real to the general public is not ethical as I see it. To state that, as a nation, we must become much more independent of foreign sources for our energy requirements and improve our energy efficiency is sound science based ethics. For those of us who have scientific backgrounds, the "global warming hoax" is far too easy to see and therefor deem it to be unethical to support. There are far too many factors involved in our planet's weather, moment by moment, to be able to apply sound and irrefutable scientific evidence in support of any past, present, or future trends. As I see it, the weather changes in nanoseconds and leaves scant evidence of the changes that have been made. I believe that any honest, ethical, and reliable scientist would agree. The attempts to profit from the claims of "global warming" is, also as I see it, very unethical and those that let themselves get caught it this will wish they had admitted the truth. We, as a nation must endeavor to become energy efficient and self-sufficient. This hoax is about as bad if not worse than the profiteering done during the "ozone depletion hoax" in the past. Odd that few have mentioned that. Now, with no other measurable atmospheric pollutant, ozone is ALWAYS present. To have the EPA declare Carbon Dioxide a pollutant or noxious gas is totally unethical and downright stupid. I believe that they should make a retraction and I believe that Scientific American should call them on it. I would like to see Scientific American begin a gradual process of saying that "professionally, we may have been a little hasty in total support of any global warming and as a quality publication, look at both sides of this question".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisembraced by Osama Bin Laden as he sees it as another vulnerability to exploit for his own destructive agenda.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd fools such a Vendicar9 now fall under OBL's siren spell in a last ditch deal with the devil to salvage their warped view of the world. Sick and disgusting.
Vendicar9:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYour comments serve as chilling warning as to the depths of desperation that the MMGW True Believers are willing to sink.
So now the myth of Man Made Global Warming is embraced by Osama Bin Laden as he sees it as another vulnerability to exploit for his own destructive agenda.
And fools such a Vendicar9 now fall under OBL's siren spell in a last ditch deal with the devil to salvage their warped view of the world. Sick and disgusting.
This commitment is meaningless as the there will be no legislation. Also, China and India will not be fooled by the AGW proponents and their dubious science. There will be no cutting of CO2 and there will be no man-made global warming.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisdrgray: No one is talking about "Weather" its CLIMATE change. long term climate is much easier to predict than day to day weather.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"To have the EPA declare Carbon Dioxide a pollutant or noxious gas is totally unethical and downright stupid." - Non DrGrey
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow about raw sewage? Is that a pollutant? It is perfectly natureal isn't it? Plants love the stuff.
"And fools such a Vendicar9 now fall under OBL's siren spell in a last ditch deal with the devil to salvage their warped view of the world. Sick and disgusting." - Shoshin
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYour whining compalint sounds like desparation to me.
Americans can already feel their state being crused due to their non-compliance with reality.
BinLaden is right.
Hoax? For at least a century humans have been polluting our environment at an exponentially increasing rate. Global temperatures might have risen and fallen naturally throughout the history of the planet, but never so quickly due to one species' actions. I do not have a background in environmental science, but I don't think you need one to notice with the naked eye that we're having a dramatic effect on the planet and it's negative. Less clean water, more dirty air, less resources, polluted resources . How could anyone see sense in promoting business and the monetary gain of the few, over preserving the resources we need to sustain life for all? It doesn't seem like a liberal vs conservative thing. Seems more like the greed and shortsightedness of the few vs a desire for a better place to live, for everyone.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs for ethics...private profiting by polluting resources we all require for life is pretty unethical in my book. Profiteering from reducing and cleaning up pollution may not get you on the list Mother Teresa and Gandhi are on, but I think promoting a view that supports the private-profiteering of gross polluters is unethical. Especially coming from a learned man or woman of science Dr. Grey.
drgray, I think you confuse science with scientology.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"As I see it, the weather changes in nanoseconds and leaves scant evidence of the changes that have been made. I believe that any honest, ethical, and reliable scientist would agree."
I might possibly disappoint you, but scienetists disagree to this, even if those who call themselves scientologists might find your claims acceptable.
Yes, Obama is likely to use the Kyoto strategy employed by Gore. You can sign your name to an agreement that will never be ratified, taking credit without having to suffer the consequences of a "correct" but foolish idea.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI judge men by their actions. I judge Obama by the action he has taken to reduce global warming, and I will judge the members of Congress by theirs. Specifically I will judge Republican congressmen for their Refusal to support the required changes.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd I will take whatever legal action I can against the collapsing American state for it's failure to comply with reality.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Resistance is futile; you will be assimilated" - Vendicar9
You are hilarious. I can hardly wait until you show up on "The Simpsons" or maybe you, Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and Satan can sing some showtunes on "South Park". I'd pay money to see that.
Way too funny. Thanks for brightening up my cold dreary, non-Globally Warmed day!
Absolutely nothing - Shoshin
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisScience always wins, and I couldn't care less of that upsets Irrational, Lying, QuackFarts such as yourself.
"And fools such a Vendicar9 now fall under OBL's siren spell in a last ditch deal with the devil to salvage their warped view of the world. Sick and disgusting."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is often illuminating to note when those whose rational arguments have failed resort to ad hominem and other fallacies.
"It is often illuminating to note when those whose rational arguments have failed resort to ad hominem and other fallacies." - Chryses
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is impossible to have a rational discussion with Lying Conservative Denialists like Shoshin. They are so detached from reality that he actually thought he could manufacture a quote out of thin air, assign it to me, and then criticise me for having said it.
I have never encountered a Conesrvative who wasn't a congenital and perpetual liar. Like George Bush, Shoshin is no exception to that observation.
vendicar9,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"I have never encountered a Conesrvative who wasn't a congenital and perpetual liar."
Patience. In the fullness of time, I expect that, and its inverse, to change.