|
Posted by: thepinetree on 12/09/2009 09:40 AM
Updated by: thepinetree on 12/09/2009 09:51 AM
Expires: 01/01/2014 12:00 AM
:
What The U.S. Chamber of Commerce Would Like to See in Copenhagen ~by Steve Eule
Washington, DC...I’ll be heading off to Copenhagen later this week, but before I go I wanted to take some time to explain what it is the U.S. Chamber and its Institute for 21st Century Energy would like to see coming out of Copenhagen. It’s appearing more and more likely that in two weeks’ time, we’ll get a political deal that will set the stage for further rounds of negotiations leading up to Mexico City in December 2010 where countries will sign off on a new post-2012 agreement. As always, the devil will be in the details...
So in the spirit of the season, here’s our wish list of what we hope we’ll see—or won’t see—emerging from Copenhagen and beyond:
1. Realistic and achievable goals—Unrealistic goals create unrealistic demands and expectations. We need goals that take into account technology readiness and diffusion and do not undermine economic growth or harm U.S. competitiveness.
2. A focus on technology—Technology development and deployment will be one of the most important factors determining how quickly and at what cost greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced. An agreement that focuses on accelerating technology development offers a path forward that developed and developing countries can embrace. And if we really are serious about reducing global emissions significantly, we can’t ignore nuclear, natural gas, and clean coal.
3. Global participation—Developing countries will be the source of over 80% of future emissions out to 2050, so for any agreement to be credible, they have to be part on the solution. Therefore, large developing economies, like China, India, and Brazil, must join with developed countries in committing to realistically ambitious and binding emission goals.
4. Flexibility—The top-down approach taken in the Kyoto Protocol has been a flop. A bottom-up approach that is sufficiently flexible to permit countries to adopt new ideas and approaches to be introduced as they emerge is one that could garner a broad range of support.
5. Integrity—To ensure the integrity of the agreement, we need mechanisms that ensure that all activities are “measureable, reportable, and verifiable.”
6. Intellectual property rights—A new agreement must respect IPR. Period. Otherwise some of the most innovative companies will just sit on the sidelines.
7. Free trade—These talks should not be used as an excuse to erect trade barriers. Instead, governments should be working in the World Trade Organization to reach a deal that would eliminate tariff and non-tariff barriers to clean energy goods and devices.
So those are the messages I’ll be stressing in Copenhagen to government officials, academics, economists, media, and other business leaders alike. I’ve been contributing to Politico’s daily debate with policymakers and opinion shapers on Copenhagen and on the National Journal’s Copenhagen Insider page.
You can also read more about the Energy Institute’s outlook for Copenhagen including a recent paper on the Road to Copenhagen available on our webpage: www.energyxxi.org. And don’t forget to check back here periodically for the latest from Copenhagen!
|
| What's Related |
| These might interest you as well
Calendar
Local News
phpws Business Directory
Photo Albums
|
|
|
