Eight years ago at the first United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the U.S. promised to take "a leadership role" in reducing carbon emissions worldwide. In eight years the U.S. economy has grown at record speed, creating not only an enormous new release of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, but also an enormous amount of wealth, enabling the U.S. to commit to fighting global warming. The richest nation on earth, the U.S. is home to only one-tenth of the world's population and is responsible for one-third of its emissions. But at the most recent Conference of the Parties in the Netherlands (COP 6), the U.S. not only failed to lead other nations, it failed to take even the most basic step in mitigating climate change by signing the COP 6 treaty.
Is climate change real? Ten years ago when the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (a multinational organization of scientists tasked explicitly with addressing issues related to climate change) released its first assessment report, the text of the report stated that there existed a "discernible human influence" on the world's climate. In the intervening years, more research has been conducted, better models have been constructed, and more data has been released leading to the publication of the IPCC's third assessment report, which changed discernible to significant. Dr. Robert Watson, chairman of the Panel, addressed the nations present at the last conference of the parties with the news that the science of climate change was all but conclusive " and that global warming was real. So evident was the reality for policymakers that for the first time in the history of the conference, open negotiations included no arguments in favor of waiting to see whether climate change was a real phenomenon or not.
But is climate change bad? The same IPCC report indicates that sea-level rise could literally sink many small island nations before the end of the century, pollute more than 45 percent of Bangladesh with crop-killing seawater, and wreck havoc on coastal cities like Amsterdam and St. Petersburg. Even worse, a moderate rise in sea level could change the cycle of deep ocean currents that are responsible for creating rainy and dry seasons in regions of Africa and Southeast Asia. Disruption of these seasons creates room for profound habitat alterations and large-scale displacement of humans and other species. The creation of new arid and semi-arid regions could cause worldwide food production to fall with implications for a worldwide rise in famine. Tropical diseases, spread by changes in humidity and temperature, could infect hundreds of millions in new regions resulting in skyrocketing medical costs and a higher incidence of mortality. What is worse is that the bulk of these disasters will be born by third-world nations, many too poor to ameliorate even their current economic ills, much less new climate-induced disasters.
In spite of this evidence, the U.S. refuses to act. Controlling more of the world's wealth than any other nation and responsible for the world's largest per capita carbon emissions, the United States is the lynchpin of international climate negotiations. If the United States chooses not to act to reduce emissions, the efforts of other countries to reduce will be overwhelmed and futile. In setting an example, many nations of the EU and even the developed world have already made voluntary changes to electric power networks and transportation industries in order to reduce their impact on climate. Finding ways to become less-carbon intensive has even produced economic growth by spurring technological development in the energy sector and investment in new capital stocks. Similar changes could be made in the U.S. at little or no cost.
In an effort to mitigate the risk of global warming on behalf of its own interests and the rest of the world, the U.S. should adopt the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol, which are to reduce total carbon dioxide emissions to seven percent below 1990 levels. Reduction to seven percent below 1990 levels will not avert the possibility of climate change, but it is a crucial first step towards building confidence among nations that global warming can and will be fought. With evidence now profoundly in favor of efforts to reduce global warming, it is high time that the U.S. honor its pledge to "a leadership role," and make a binding commitment to emissions reduction by signing and ratifying the treaty at the next Conference of the Parties.
