been advances in the scientific basis for concern. As our understanding of the atmosphere has improved, we have become more aware of how our actions affect it. It is clear that human activities are increasing atmospheric concentrations of "greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide). While there are uncertainties about the magnitude, timing and regional patterns of effects of increased greenhouse gas concentrations, there is sound scientific evidence that the rate of climate change in the next century could far exceed any natural changes that have occurred in the last 10,000 years, and that the Earth would be warmer than it has been in millions of years. Furthermore, the change in atmospheric composition will persist for decades and possibly centuries because of the long atmospheric lifetime of some of these gases. The Climate Convention Last year, the international community acknowledged this scientific concern and took the first steps to address this significant challenge for the world. More than 150 nations signed the Framework Convention on Climate Change at the Earth Summit last June and to date it has been signed by more than 160 countries. The United States, along with sixteen other nations, have now ratified the treaty. - As you and this committee are aware, Mr. Chairman, the Climate Convention was the subject of considerable discussion and debate last year. Let me take a moment to discuss what specifically is in the treaty. The Convention's ultimate objective is to: "[A]chieve, in accordance with the relevant provisions of This is a major undefined challenge perhaps requiring massive reductions in emissions. As a first step to agreeing on the international action required, the Convention set forth a series of commitments in Article 4. While the language of these commitments is rather confusing, let me quote the critical lines from paragraph 2 (a) and (b) of this Article. Article 4.2(a) states: ... parties shall adopt national policies and take corresponding measures on the mitigation of climate change, by limiting ... anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases and protecting and enhancing ... greenhouse gas sinks and reservoirs. These policies and measures will demonstrate that developed countries are taking the lead in modifying longer-term trends in anthropogenic emissions consistent with the objectives of the Convention, recognizing that the return by the end of the present decade to earlier levels of anthropogenic emissions ...would contribute to such modification..." Article 4.2(b) goes on to say: ... "In order to promote progress to this end, each of these Parties shall communicate .. detailed information on its policies and measures referred to in subparagraph (a) above, as well as its resulting projected anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases ... with the aim of returning individually or jointly to their 1990 - including While the language contained in these paragraphs is non-binding in terms of emissions reductions requirements, the intent of the negotiators was to have countries move toward the Convention's ultimate objective through the preparation of inventories of their net greenhouse gas emissions both sources and sinks of all greenhouse gases, and the adoption by developed countries of national policies and measures to mitigate climate change and to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Furthermore, the Convention calls for developed countries to provide resources to help developing countries meet their obligations under the Convention. And, finally, it calls for countries to report on the actions they are taking to meet their commitments. The Conference of the Parties which the United States anticipates will meet for the first time in mid-1995, will review these reports, and the adequacy of the commitments under the Convention. Subsequent reviews will take place at regular intervals, with the second review coming no later than December of 1998. Clinton Agenda Since assuming office, President Clinton has directed his Administration to conduct a broad review of international environmental concerns, including global climate change. Through this process, the President has determined that the United States should provide leadership to help guard against undesirable global climate change. President Clinton clearly set forth the direction of our climate policy in his Earth Day speech. He said: "We ... must take the lead in addressing the challenge of global warming that could make our planet and its climate less hospitable and more hostile to human life. Today, I reaffirm my personal, and announce our nation's commitment, to reducing our emissions of greenhouse gases to their 1990 levels by the year 2000. "I am instructing my administration to produce a cost-effective plan by August that can continue the trend of reduced emissions. This must be a clarion call, not for more bureaucracy or regulation or unnecessary costs, but instead, for American ingenuity and creativity, to produce the best and most energy-efficient technology." The Administration is committed to seeing the Convention promptly implemented, and, if necessary, strengthened. To this end, the Administration is taking a two-pronged approach: a domestic effort to reduce emissions and enhance sinks of greenhouse gases; and an international effort, including working to implement the convention, and to support developing countries, and countries moving toward free market economies, in meeting its goals. The Domestic Effort To realize the domestic requirements of the President's commitment, preparations have begun to develop a plan that will identify steps we can take to return U.S. emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. This will be the focus of our efforts in developing the August Plan. Under the Climate Convention's Article 12, developed Country Parties must report on their actions within six months of the Convention's entry into force, which is expected by late 1994. The August Plan will be the cornerstone of that report, but we anticipate that the next full version of the U.S. National Action Plan will be developed after August in time to meet our Convention commitment. In developing the August Flan, the Administration intends to identify and pursue what we believe are numerous cost-effective actions which may bring us close to our commitment of returning U.S. emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. The government has received a host of these kind of measures as part of the public comment period established for the Bush Administration's draft Action Plan, issued last December. But these measures alone may not be enough to meet the longer-term goal of continuing the downward trend in emissions. If we are to accomplish that, we will need to look more broadly at a wide array of actions. Most importantly, we will need to establish a framework for identifying new options for our action agenda as we come to grips with the long-term nature of addressing global warming. As we do so, we will need to identify those actions that are the most cost-effective. Very shortly, the Administration will announce how we will develop the plan to fulfill the President's commitment. This policy development will involve the Executive Office of the President and all relevant agencies. We will encourage constructive suggestions from stakeholders and expect to hear some new ideas and fresh thinking about how federal policy can help enhance markets for energy efficient technology and make our economy more competitive while reducing our emissions of greenhouse gases. The Clinton Policy on Climate: A Break from the Past The essential difference between the Clinton Administration and the previous Administration on climate change is that we are developing a domestic climate change policy, and will use that policy to play a leadership role in promoting an effective global response. Our policy development process will represent a significant departure from that undertaken by the Bush Administration when it produced a draft Action Plan in December. Let me briefly speak to the problems with that first iteration particularly through the public comment process. - Although the Bush Plan met the letter of the requirement established by the "Prompt Start" Resolution of the convention negotiators, it was not adequate to the task before us meeting a national commitment to reduce our emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000 and continuing our efforts over the long term. Here are a few examples: the first draft extensively discussed our national circumstances, but it did not set forth how we can best tailor our actions to reduce emissions to take account of those circumstances. The first draft had a section on emissions inventories, but it did not set forth clearly and concisely the baseline numbers, or provide detailed descriptions of which gases are produced in which sectors -all critical information for reducing emissions. The draft addressed at length the question of adaptation to climate change but created the impression that all climate impacts will be manageable at no net cost to the economy. The draft was incomplete on the measures that can be taken to mitigate the effects of climate change. It failed to state clearly what projected U.S. emissions levels would be either with or without the actions identified in the draft. The draft addressed emissions by the year 2000 -- but avoided any mention of trends beyond that date. In fact, there was virtually no discussion of steps that will be critical to develop a longer term strategy in particular, to develop low-emitting technologies and engage the private sector. - In the more than 40 sets of comments received on the Bush draft Plan, one prominent theme was the number of activities underway in the private sector to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For example, in 1992, Pacific Gas and Electric, the nation's largest utility company, through its more than 50 conservation programs, was able to prevent the release of 280,000 tons of carbon. Yet in the first draft, the discussion of programs like PG&E's (including how to develop more programs like it) are inadequate -- much more was being done in the private sector, and should be acknowledged and credited. If we are to deal seriously with the threat of global warming, we must find ways to harness the dynamism and creativity of our private sector and put market forces to work in support of environmental goals. It is the Administration's expectation that the new Plan will address these critical needs more fully. U.S. Efforts Internationally Our actions alone, even as large as we are, will not be enough to reverse the overall upward trend in atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases. We must establish a partnership with other countries. Sources of emissions are spread globally, and action to reduce emissions undertaken anywhere on the planet has global significance. The United States currently contributes about 20 percent of global net emissions, although our share is declining. Developing countries represent an increasing share of the total emissions, about 40 percent today and perhaps rising to 60 percent by 2030. To make a significant contribution to protecting the climate, the United States must first demonstrate its own resolve and then leverage our example in encouraging efforts to reduce emissions the world over. Within the scope of our limited resources, the United States must promote a "partnership" approach between developed and developing countries. Such an approach must reconcile different but compatible interests in environment and development. That there are compatible interests is clear assistance we provide to developing countries will meet both our needs: ours, |