The "China excuse" to punt on climate

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry gave a speech on Wednesday at the National Press Club reminding us of the importance of the U.S.-China relationship to solving climate change:

Undeniably, all of us must do more to meet it. But China and America—the world’s largest emitter today and history’s largest cumulative emitter—have a special responsibility. 192 nations will gather this December in Copenhagen to hammer out a new global climate treaty. Two will set the tone and define what is possible. The crucial question is: can America and China forge a partnership capable of acting boldly enough to prevent a climate catastrophe? Science tells us, the answer had better be “yes.”

When we talk about climate change in a global context, China is the proverbial 800-pound gorilla in the room. Since 2006, China has emitted more CO2 per year than any other country in the world, including the U.S. In fact, according to a new study by Greenpeace, China's three biggest power firms produced more greenhouse gas emissions last year than the whole of Britain. With volume like that, curbing Chinese emissions is critical to dealing with global warming.

This is not to say that China isn't taking steps to cut emissions. Just this week we learned that China is taking advantage of a drop in electricity demand to shut down coal power plants ahead of schedule. In fact, Kerry gives China credit in his speech for taking steps to cut carbon. But despite these measures, Kerry still finds China's efforts and commitments lacking, especially as we look forward to Copenhagen in December:

It’s an impressive turnaround, and I wish that, by itself, it were enough. But clearly, it isn’t. Aspirational statements cannot stand in for legal commitments on the international stage. That’s why I went to China this spring– to communicate that America understands that we have an obligation to lead, and we will. But China needs to understand that we will not enter into a global treaty without a meaningful commitment from China to be part of the solution.

The Obama Administration has been holding talks with Chinese officials with hopes of reaching an agreement on CO2 reductions by December, but so far no agreement has been reached. One of the most unwelcome byproducts of China's resistance to embrace CO2 reduction targets is that it has enabled the do-nothing-on-climate crowd to wave it as an excuse for inaction. I lost count of how many times I heard members of Congress use China's resistance as an excuse to embrace the status quo -- or worse, to drill, baby, drill! This line of argument conveniently ignores the fact that setting strong U.S. CO2 reduction targets is good in and of itself, but it might actually help prod China to get with the program. As Bill Becker says in his excellent piece The top ten bogus statements (BS) in the climate debate:

With this statement, international climate negotiations assume the stature of an Alphonse and Gaston routine. The modern version – “I’m not going to do the right thing until you do the right thing” – would be comical if it weren’t so childish and potentially tragic.

Does China need to do a lot more to cut carbon emissions? Yes. Should we (and the international community) keep prodding them to do so? Absolutely. Should we let their resistance to do so stop us from taking strong climate action here at home? No freaking way.