UN climate chief: US carbon cuts could spark ‘revolution’
The head of the UN body charged with leading the fight against climate change has conceded that Barack Obama will face a "revolution" if he commits the US to the deep carbon cuts that scientists and campaigners say are needed.
Rajendra Pachauri, head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said domestic political constraints made it impossible for the US president to announce ambitious short-term climate targets similar to those set by Europe. And he questioned the value of a new global climate deal without such a US pledge.
His words come as scientists at the Copenhagen conference said that modest IPCC estimates of likely sea level rise this century need to be increased. Extra melting in Greenland could drive sea levels to more than a metre higher than today by 2100, they said.
Obama has said the US will work to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Europe has pledged to cut them by 20-30% on 1990 levels by 2020. The IPCC says developed nations should aim for 25-40% cuts by then to avoid dangerous climate change.
Speaking on the fringes of a high-level scientific conference on climate change in Copenhagen, Pachauri told the Guardian: "He [Obama] is not going to say by 2020 I’m going to reduce emissions by 30%. He’ll have a revolution on his hands. He has to do it step by step."
Pachauri’s remarks echo those of Todd Stern, the US president’s new chief climate negotiator, who said last week that it was "not possible" for the US to aim for 25-40% cuts by 2020.
Such a stance could threaten attempts to agree a new global deal to regulate carbon emissions to replace the existing Kyoto protocol, the first phase of which expires in 2012. Campaigners say a new treaty must be agreed at UN talks in Copenhagen this December.
Obama has called for 80% carbon cuts by 2050, but insiders say that such long-term pledges will do little to convince developing nations such as China to sign up to a new climate deal. British officials say meaningful US involvement in the short term is crucial to agree a new treaty.
Pachauri told the Guardian the US needed to do more in the short term. But he questioned whether there would be sufficient domestic movement for the US to agree stricter targets in December. He said it was "hard to say" if a new deal would be meaningful without such a step.
The Guardian | David Adam | Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Last 5 posts in Global Warming
- U.S. "cap and trade" rebranded "pollution reduction" - March 10th, 2010
- EU's 'carbon fat cats' get rich off trading scheme: study - March 5th, 2010
- Scientists Taking Steps to Defend Work on Climate - March 3rd, 2010
- India forms new climate change body - February 5th, 2010
- Carbon Market Could Grow 33% This Year - January 30th, 2010
Last 5 posts in Obama Administration
- US-Israeli relations hit new low over settlement plan - March 11th, 2010
- Romney: Obama’s words support 9/11 truthers abroad - March 8th, 2010
- Obama’s ‘Chicago mafia’ blamed for paralysis at the top - February 21st, 2010
- Hillary Clinton: 'Iran is moving towards a military dictatorship' - February 16th, 2010
- Civilian Killings by US Cast Pall on NATO’s Marjah Offensive - February 15th, 2010
