Thanks to the hard work of leaders and specialists in both countries, a U.S.-China climate deal is now within reach. William Chandler, director of Carnegie's Energy and Climate Program and the lead U.S. facilitator of the U.S.-China Track II climate dialogue, discusses the prospects for ongoing cooperation.
Is a U.S.-China climate deal feasible?
I think that a deal is in reach, and that we’ll see something substantive and serious in the fall. This moment is a historic opportunity to forge a climate partnership with China, as a result of the convergence of three key factors: new climate leadership in the United States, China’s recognition of the serious threat that climate change represents for its future, and the hard work of specialists and leaders in both countries to make climate change cooperation a reality.
The Chinese government takes the science of climate change seriously, and they are very practical. If we make it in their interest to cooperate with us, they will do so.
Why is a U.S.–China agreement important?
Together China and the United States produce 40 percent of emissions and their actions will determine whether efforts to stop climate change succeed or fail. If they continue to blame each other and insist that the other act first, any plan adopted by the rest of the world will fail to prevent the catastrophic damage climate change threatens. U.S. and Chinese cooperation will create momentum from which the rest of the world can more easily coalesce on a global plan.
What has prevented U.S.-China climate cooperation thus far?
Until recently, the United States and China have been locked in what energy analyst Joe Romm has aptly called “a mutual suicide pact.” Neither has made binding commitments to reduce emissions and each has waited for the other side to take responsibility for climate change; American leaders point to emissions growth in China, while Chinese leaders counter that American greenhouse gas emissions are five times their own on a per capita basis.
What would a potential U.S.-China agreement address?
It would address the most promising areas for productive bilateral cooperation, including:
- Building human capacity to accelerate market deployment of technologies that can help mitigate climate change;
- Conducting joint research, development, and demonstration of carbon capture and storage technologies and of low-carbon automotive technologies;
- Evaluating policies such as the creation of low carbon economic development zones;
- Creating incentives for clean energy investments; and
- Developing a framework for equitable U.S. and Chinese participation in a global greenhouse gas emissions reduction agreement.
As far as emissions cuts go, over the course of the Track II dialogue, it became clear that Chinese experts believe that China could cut its current emissions growth rate by half through 2020, and from that level reduce absolute emissions by one-third by 2050. This scenario would put within reach a global goal of stabilizing atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide below 500 parts per million. Such a commitment would represent a profound shift in China’s position, and could be pivotal in reducing the worst risks of climate change.
As the country struggles to balance sustainability and economic development, China is not likely to agree to a hard cap on emissions in the next few years. But the country may be willing to accept a cap by 2025, with a major inflection point and a shift toward more aggressive emissions cuts around 2020.
What were the major goals and outcomes of the U.S.-China Track II Climate Dialogue?
In 2007 the Chinese government initiated a series of off-the-record talks between Chinese and American energy experts and political leaders, jointly facilitated by the Carnegie Endowment and the Global Environmental Institute of Beijing. The goal was to move beyond discussions of what the two countries could do to address climate change and beginning addressing how to do it, and to reach an understanding between the two countries, so that official negotiations could hit the ground running once a new administration took office in January 2009.
The resulting U.S.-China Climate Track II Dialogue afforded leaders from each country the opportunity to speak frankly and discuss the types of collaboration likely to produce results. Both teams agreed global emissions must be cut by 60 percent by the year 2050, and that both China and the United States must take action. The dialogue helped leaders identify many areas of mutual interest and improved leaders’ understanding of what each country is already doing to combat climate change. Ultimately, the Track II dialogue helped lay the groundwork for official negotiations that may result in an official U.S.-China climate deal, now that the Obama Administration is in office.
How might a U.S.-China deal improve the prospects of a successful global agreement?
If the world’s two largest emitters were able to sign a bilateral agreement and commit to significant action on climate, it would provide much-needed leadership and could go a long way toward laying the basis for successful global action. U.S.–China collaboration should not be envisaged as a threat to the climate leadership of any nation or to global cooperation. It would not challenge existing or planned emissions cap-and-trade systems. Rather, it would be, and should be, considered an act of mutual self-preservation, helping both the United States and China to avert climate disaster and the eventual sanctions of other countries if they do not act.
What policy steps should China take?
China should focus on the policy changes that matter most:
- Encouraging investment in more efficient industry;
- Easing foreign exchange restrictions and providing tax holidays for clean energy companies and services; and
- Making it easier for Chinese banks to do risk-based lending for clean energy projects.
We should recognize that China has already made significant efforts to reduce emissions growth. China’s energy efficiency effort, including shutting down many inefficient factories and power plants, is without precedent in the world. Yet we can ask China to take further action—not necessarily to cap their emissions, but to set an ambitious emissions target, and to impose enforceable policies to achieve the goal. For example, we could ask the Chinese government to require stronger standards on industrial energy use, automobile fuel economy, and reforestation.
What can the United States do to help the Chinese meet these ambitious targets?
We can help build human capacity, which will play a key role in accelerating market deployment of cost-effective, proven energy-efficiency technologies. One way to develop this capacity is for the United States and China to expand existing peer-to-peer cooperation at the state and provincial levels. The disconnect between national and local leaders is a flaw in China’s otherwise-admirable sustainable energy policy. While clean energy development produces national benefits that cannot be fully captured by a city or province, the time and cost of promoting efficiency falls on local leaders, who often lack the resources and capacity to implement policies created at the national level.
Chinese provincial leaders need the expertise developed in some U.S. states, like California, to choose priority technical measures and design behavioral incentives necessary to achieve energy efficiency goals. State-to-province cooperation will help develop the legal, economic, technical, and financial skills necessary.
We should also increase financial support for clean technology, and encourage China to do the same. It is striking how few resources are devoted to energy efficiency and power sector de-carbonization within both China and the United States, given the urgency of climate change. Technology deployment gets little support within either nation. Official funding for clean energy cooperation between the countries amounts to only about $1 million per year. Increased funding, along with joint research and development projects, could help both countries move toward a clean energy economy.
What should the United States’ top priority be in the run-up to Copenhagen?
Our own top priority should be to enact cap and trade legislation to control greenhouse gas emissions. Draft legislation in the House of Representatives (the Waxman-Markey bill) has already made a strong impression on China, indicating to them that we are serious about climate change.
What will happen if the United States and China do not cooperate to mitigate climate change?
If either the United States or China fails to act, mitigation or adaptation strategies adopted by the rest of the world will fall far short of averting disaster on large parts of the earth.
Failure to act will also expose us to sanctions from a global community increasingly alarmed by the speed of climate change. The European Union recently considered sanctions on trading partners lacking greenhouse gas emissions policies—reflective of the geoeconomic risk of continued inaction.
.jpg)
