You can do a lot of things when December
rolls around and temperatures plunge. But would you hold an
international conference on global warming?
The United Nations did. It recently hosted a gathering of all the
countries that have signed on to the Kyoto Protocol, a treaty aimed
at preventing global warming. Some 10,000 people traveled to
Montreal for the conference. It was predictably cold outside, but
there was plenty of hot rhetoric indoors. Unfortunately for the
delegates, the speakers never could quite agree what we're up
against.
While most Kyoto enthusiasts have long argued the planet is getting
warmer, a recent report in the journal Nature hints that a
new ice age may be coming. The report says the ocean current that
keeps Europe warm may be shifting, which could make the continent
cooler.
But no matter what, the worrywarts have the future covered. Steven
Guilbeault of Greenpeace explained, "Global warming can mean
colder, it can mean drier, it can mean wetter, that's what we're
dealing with." No wonder humanity is having trouble addressing the
problems -- we can't even decide what the problems are.
However, activists can agree on who's to blame: The United
States, of course.
Another Greenpeace spokesman, Bill Hare, told reporters, "When you
walk around the conference hall here, delegates are saying there
are lots of issues on the agenda, but there's only one real
problem, and that's the United States."
It makes a nice soundbite and plays to the anti-American crowd, but
nothing could be further from the truth.
Yes, the U.S. refused to ratify Kyoto. President Clinton never even
submitted the treaty to the Senate, perhaps because senators had
already voted 95-0 to reject any pact that would reduce economic
growth -- something Kyoto certainly would do. President Bush
eventually put the treaty out of its misery in 2001.
But that hasn't kept Washington from leading a serious
international effort to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Just last
summer, the U.S. announced the Asia-Pacific Partnership for Clean
Development and Climate Change. This group includes Australia,
China, India, Japan, South Korea and the United States. The State
Department says the group will "cooperate on the development,
diffusion, deployment and transfer of longer-term transformational
energy technologies that will promote economic growth while
enabling significant reductions in greenhouse gas
intensities."
That's critical for two reasons. First, because China and India are
among the world's biggest polluters, any treaty that aims to reduce
pollution is going to have to include them. Yet both were exempt
from Kyoto.
Second, any attempt to control global warming will fail unless it
also encourages global economic growth. As British Prime Minister
Tony Blair put it in September, "the blunt truth about the politics
of climate change is that no country will want to sacrifice its
economy in order to meet this challenge."
Most European Union countries that signed the treaty are seeing
carbon dioxide emissions increase and realize they have no way to
meet their obligations under Kyoto. Some, including host nation
Canada, have seen emissions climb more quickly than they are in the
United States.
That doesn't seem to bother some participants. "We need much deeper
cuts beyond 2012," the European Union Commission's director general
for the environment said after the conference ended. But most
European countries are already failing to live up to Kyoto. How
could they make deeper cuts than the ones they're not
making now? Blair's approach, and the one the U.S. advocates, is
the correct one. We can do good by doing well.
A certain amount of humility is in order here. With all our
scientific advances, we can barely predict what the weather will be
tomorrow, let alone forecast what will happen 50 years from
now.
What we do know is that as a country becomes more
affluent, it becomes cleaner. So the best way to protect the earth
is to skip the big U.N. conferences -- which certainly produce a
concentrated mass of hot air -- and focus on keeping the global
economy hot.
Ed
Feulner is president of The Heritage Foundation
(heritage.org), a Washington-based public policy research
institute.
COMMENTARY
Keeping Our Cool
Dec 13, 2005 2 min read