Almost everyone is familiar with "Kyoto." But in due time, the name "Bali" will eclipse that 1997 global warming pact. While the Kyoto Protocol set the stage to curb greenhouse gas emissions through 2012, the next phase of negotiations will carry on until 2050. The initial discussions will begin this December in Bali, India.

The United Nations has set the stage, having just released its findings on climate change. The study, written by more than 2,500 scientists from around the globe who were appointed by their respective governments, is definitive in its determination that humans are causing rising temperatures that could lead to environmental devastation. It lays the blame on excessive use of fossil fuels by power plants and major industry.

When the U.N. published its first research in the 1990s, it left open the question as to whether people were the main culprits. At that point, it said that the science was still unclear - a theme that those who are skeptical of global warming and whether humans are at fault still maintain. Critics of the present U.N. study say that only a handful of scientists actually participated in the writing of the report and that the exact verbiage used in it is not necessarily supported by all of experts who weighed in.

They say that the current warming trend is part of a natural cycle and not man-made. Toward that end, a new international global warming treaty that uses mandates would impose excessive and unnecessary solutions that will perpetuate the impoverishment of those in the developing world. Beyond the exorbitant cost, they say that Kyoto has failed in its attempt to cut global warming emissions, adding that Bali could well follow in those footsteps.

The Bush administration has softened its tone. It now says that global warming is real and it is a definitely a threat to the environment. But, it argues that until the technologies are developed that can capture and store heat-trapping emissions, mandatory restrictions on those releases would be meaningless. The U.S. position is that a gradual phase-in of emissions cuts is better than required and rapid reductions. Such an approach would assure greater success without creating economic disruptions.

"A future framework must be flexible and accommodate a diverse range of national circumstances," says Paula Dobriansky, before a Senate committee. She will be one of many who will represent the United States in Bali.

Those who argue global warming is an indisputable fact say that immediate and mandatory limits are needed to avert the worst possible consequences of the phenomenon, which include rising sea levels and droughts that would lead to famine. If such a scenario were to occur, the economic consequences would run into the trillions and make the current cost to mitigate the damages seem cheap by comparison.

Likely Path

As it now stands, global temperatures are anticipated to rise by 5-7 degrees Fahrenheit by 2050. In their report, U.N. scientists say that jump must be slowed to 3-4 degrees Fahrenheit. That would require a cut in greenhouse gases of 50-80 percent by 2050. According to climatologists, greenhouse gases warm the earth's surface and cause greater water evaporation. That leads to higher temperatures.

"The (U.N.) sent a very clear message that global warming is here and is largely caused by man-made pollution," says Angela Anderson, vice president of climate change programs for the National Environmental Trust in Washington. "But it has also concluded that if we act now we can avert worst-case scenarios and manage the realities of a warmer world. Effective solutions are within our reach."

Kyoto is step one. Bali is step two. It will pick up where the former leaves off in 2012. Talks will be prolonged, extending until 2010 when a roadmap for reducing greenhouse gases will take effect. According to Yvo de Boer, the executive secretary of the U.N. Framework on Climate Change, the initial Bali meeting will need to outline the points of discussion as well as what timeframe all possible solutions will be resolved.

In practical terms, negotiators will have to determine what level of greenhouse gas emissions cuts is acceptable and whether those targets will be fixed or flexible. They will also have to figure out how technologies can be shared and transferred across international boundaries. And, they need to say how those results would be paid.

One school of thought suggests that each nation can determine for itself just what its commitment to the cause would be. The developed and developing nations are each at varying stages of their economic progression and it would be unrealistic to place the same burden on both segments. China, for example, could go at its own pace. Already, it has established energy efficiency goals and renewable energy targets - steps that could be acceptable under a future Bali treaty. The global community would benefit as would China, which needs diverse and cleaner fuels.

"I think we need something that establishes fair and effective commitments for all the major emitting countries," says Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Center on Global Change, in a teleconference held by the United Nations Foundation. "From my perspective, that requires a flexible framework allowing different types of commitments because there's a broad spectrum of capabilities among the major emitters."

The international community accepts the proposition that global warming is real and that the potential implications would be unimaginable. It appears, however, that aggressive and mandatory reductions are unrealistic in the short term. Instead, the global community is likely to gravitate toward a gradual and flexible approach. But as new pollution-cutting technologies are commercialized, the policies will become more ambitious.


 

Copyright © 1996-2006 by CyberTech, Inc. All rights reserved.