THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume VII, Issue # 191, August 31, 2005
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
GLOBAL SHIFTS ON GLOBAL WARMING
By David Rothbard & Craig Rucker
MOVING AWAY FROM POLITICAL ENVIRONMENTALISM & SOCIALIST IDEOLOGY TOWARD COMMON SENSE REGARDING THE
ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE CHANGE: MOVEMENT OF WORLD LEADERS AWAY FROM THE "GLOBAL WARMING" &
"CATASTROPHIC CLIMATE CHANGE" ASSUMPTIONS OF THE UNITED NATIONS KYOTO PROTOCOL TOWARD SUPPORT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL, CLIMATE, & ENERGY POLICIES INVOLVING COST-EFFECTIVE, FREE-MARKET SOLUTIONS, BASED ON SOUND
SCIENCE -- THE G-8 ACTION PLAN, THE METHANE TO MARKETS AGREEMENT, & THE ASIA-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP ON CLEAN
DEVELOPMENT & CLEAN CLIMATE
FULL STORY:
In the weeks leading up to the July G-8 meeting in Scotland, environmental activists and analysts predicted the heat would be turned
up on U.S. President George W. Bush to sign the UN Kyoto Protocol on climate change.
It didn’t turn out that way. The G-8 meeting and new initiatives such as the Methane to Markets (M2M), and the Asia-Pacific
Partnership on Clean Development and Climate strongly suggest world leaders appear to be moving away from Kyoto and towards
President Bush’s climate change position.
Long before the Kyoto Protocol came into force in February, 2005, the M2M agreement was signed in July, 2004, by the United
States, the United Kingdom, India, Ukraine, Mexico, and Italy. The agreement between these six nations alone would reduce the total
global greenhouse gas emissions by one percent and is estimated to remove 50 million metric tons of methane by 2015.
By contrast, Kyoto will not remove any methane from the atmosphere. By the United Nations own admission, Kyoto would reduce
global warming by less than 0.015oC by the 22nd century. It would cost hundreds of billions of dollars annually to achieve this
insignificant result.
M2M would be the equivalent of taking 33 million cars off the road annually, eliminating 50 coal-fired electric plants, or foregoing the
energy use of 7.2 million homes a year. In the United States this is estimated to cost only $53 million over five years. Reducing
methane emissions is far more effective than reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions because methane is 20 to 30 times more potent
a greenhouse gas than CO2. Moreover, methane is relatively easy to control and offers financial paybacks to factories by eliminating
lost production.
The geopolitical significance of the M2M initiative wasn’t apparent until July's G-8 meeting. The joint statement issued at its
conclusion acknowledged, "uncertainties remain in our understanding of climate change." Although the statement diplomatically
re-affirmed the goals of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the work of the United Nations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it did so with irestrained moderation.
The G-8 leaders pledged "to put ourselves on a path to slow and [to] stop, and then [to] reverse the growth of greenhouse gases,"
but only "as the science justifies." This is in sharp contrast to previous proclamations of the immediate need to implement the Kyoto
Protocol, regardless of cost.
Even more striking, the G-8 joint statement doesn’t mention the scientifically dubious predictions of worsening weather conditions
that have included catastrophic claims of drought, increasing storm frequency, famine, and other "catastrophes" global warming
adherents have cited.
Instead, the joint statement emphasized the promotion of “innovation, energy efficiency, conservation; [improving] policy,
regulatory and financing frameworks; and [accelerating] deployment of cleaner technologies, particularly lower-emitting
technologies.”
This is precisely what President Bush emphasized when he removed the U.S.A. from the Kyoto Protocol in 2001 and focused our
nation’s attention, instead, on free-market approaches like the M2M initiative.
Another shift from the Kyoto Protocol by the G-8 is its position on the need to stress adaptation technology. "Adaptation to the
effects of climate change, due to both natural and human factors, is a high priority for all nations," the statement reads.
Finally, the G-8 acknowledged that no climate policy would be successful if it does not include the rapidly growing nations of China
and India. These nations are currently second and third in the world in terms of greenhouse gas emissions today and will soon be
the leading emitters of greenhouse gases as they seek economic growth that will keep pace with population growth.
Efforts are already underway to include China, India, and other nations in a more coherent, science-based climate change program.
M2M already includes India, and more nations will likely join the agreement.
The full magnitude of the geopolitical shift away from Kyoto did not come, however, until July 26, 2005, when the U.S.A. led a
six-nation partnership of Pacific states in a new agreement on global warming.
The U.S., Australia, China, India, South Korea, and Japan comprise the group. Called the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean
Development and Climate, the six-nation plan emphasizes the need for increased access to affordable and reliable energy in the
developing world, and flexibility in reaching its environmental goals. The “vision statement” for the new initiative reflects the G-8
Action Plan.
The Partnership’s vision is to cooperate and share “existing and emerging cost-effective, cleaner technologies and practices.”
These technologies include, but are not limited to: “energy efficiency, clean coal, integrated gasification combined cycle, liquefied
natural gas, carbon capture and storage, combined heat and power, methane capture and use, civilian nuclear power, geothermal,
rural/village energy systems, advanced transportation, building and home construction and operation, bio-energy, agriculture and
forestry, hydropower, wind power, solar power, and other renewables.”
The emphasis, as it should be, appears to be on “cost-effective” solutions. M2M, of course, fits perfectly within this vision.
Although the statement diplomatically states that the Partnership effort runs in “parallel” with Kyoto, it is, in fact, a radical
departure from Kyoto.
Many thought the Kyoto Protocol was dead several times in the past, only to have it resurrect itself like the fabled Phoenix.
Although Kyoto is diplomatically included in the language of the G-8 Plan of Action and the Asia-Pacific Partnership, the new
approach differs radically, suggesting that Kyoto may finally be left to wither on the vine.
It is encouraging that positive, free-market alternatives, based on sound science, are actually making their way into the public
policy arena, particularly at the international level.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Policy Issues Relating to Energy, Environment,
& Natural Resources
David Rothbard is President, and Craig Rucker is Executive Director, of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), a
public interest organization headquartered in Washington, D.C., and focusing on policy issues relating to the environment, public
health, energy needs, technological progress, and economic growth and development. CFACT maintains that the solutions to our
concerns about the environment and development are to found in political and economic freedom, protection of private property
rights, encouragement of competition, free markets, and technological advancement.
The foregoing article by David Rothbard and Craig Rucker was originally published on www.cfact.org,
the Internet website maintained by the Committee for a Construtive Tomorrow.
Republished with Permission of CFACT
P. O. Box 65722
Washington, D.C. 20035
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume VII, 2005
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues