Sun, Aug 23, 2009 - Page 9 News List

Why smaller steps in Copenhagen make more sense

By Richard N. haass

Coal is one place to begin, as it will continue to generate the lion’s share of the world’s electricity for decades to come. Greater sharing of existing cleaner-coal technologies is needed, as is continued development of next-generation clean-coal plants.

Nuclear power is another area requiring attention. So, too, are renewable forms of power, such as solar and wind. Here, too, mechanisms are needed for sharing new technologies and helping poorer countries pay for them in exchange for adopting policies that reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.

Moreover, stopping the destruction of forests is essential, given how much carbon is trapped in them. One objective for Copenhagen should be to create a well-endowed global fund to support policies that discourage the cutting and burning of trees, help countries such as Brazil and Indonesia protect their rainforests, and provide alternative livelihoods to those who currently benefit from destroying them.

Focusing on steps such as these would go a long way toward attaining the often-discussed goal of halving global carbon emissions by mid-century.

But reaching an accord that sets binding ceilings for what each country will be allowed to emit is not an option in Copenhagen. The consensus simply does not exist.

Smaller steps, however, can and should be taken.

Those who want to master the challenge of climate change now will reject such realism. But, as is often the case, those who insist on getting everything risk getting nothing.

Richard N. Haass is president of the Council on Foreign Relations and author of War of Necessity, War of Choice: A Memoir of Two Iraq Wars.

COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE

This story has been viewed 1080 times.
TOP top