Skip to comments.Bush calls for global emissions goals
Posted on 05/31/2007 9:55:41 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - President Bush, seeking to blunt international criticism of the U.S. record on climate change, on Thursday urged 15 major nations to agree by the end of next year on a global target for reducing greenhouse gases.
Bush called for the first in a series of meetings to begin this fall, bringing together countries identified as major emitters of greenhouse gases blamed for global warming. The list would include the United States, China, India and major European countries. After setting a goal, the nations would be free to develop their own strategies to meet the target.
The president outlined his proposal in a speech ahead of next week's summit in Germany of leading industrialized nations, where global warming is to be a major topic and Bush will be on the spot.
The United States has refused to ratify the landmark 1997 Kyoto Protocol requiring industrialized countries to reduce greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by 2012. Developing countries, including China and India, were exempted from that first round of cuts. Bush rejected the Kyoto approach, as well as the latest German proposal for what happens after 2012.
"The United States takes this issue seriously," Bush said. "The new initiative I'm outlining today will contribute to the important dialogue that will take place in Germany next week."
Environmental groups were quick to criticize Bush's plan.
Friends of the Earth president Brent Blackwelder called the proposal "a complete charade. It is an attempt to make the Bush administration look like it takes global warming seriously without actually doing anything to curb emissions."
National Environmental Trust president Philip Clapp said, "This is a transparent effort to divert attention from the president's refusal to accept any emissions reductions proposals at next week's G-8 summit. After sitting out talks on global warming for years, the Bush administration doesn't have very much credibility with other governments on the issue. "
And, Daniel J. Weiss, climate strategy director for the liberal Center for American Progress, said the Bush administration has a "do-nothing" policy on global warming despite U.S. allies' best efforts to spur U.S. reductions.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair called Bush's plan "a big step forward."
"For the first time America's saying it wants to be part of a global deal," Blair said in Johannesburg, South Africa, speaking to Sky News. "For the first time it's setting its own domestic targets. For the first time it's saying it wants a global target for the reduction of emissions, and therefore for the first time I think the opportunity for a proper global deal."
Along with his call for a global emissions goal, Bush urged other nations to eliminate tariffs on clean energy technologies.
Germany, which holds the European Union and Group of Eight presidencies, is proposing a target allowing global temperatures to increase no more than 2 degrees Celsius the equivalent of 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit before being brought back down. Practically, experts have said that means a global reduction in emissions of 50 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.
Instead, Bush called for nations to hold a series of meetings, beginning this fall, to set a global emissions goal. Each nation then would have to decide on how to achieve the goal, White House officials said.
"The United States will work with other nations to establish a new framework for greenhouse gas emissions for when the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012," the president said.
"So my proposal is this: By the end of next year, America and other nations will set a long-term global goal for reducing greenhouse gases. To develop this goal, the United States will convene a series of meetings of nations that produce the most greenhouse gasses, including nations with rapidly growing economies like India and China.
"Each country would establish midterm management targets and programs that reflect their own mix of energy sources and future energy needs," he said. "In the course of the next 18 months, our nations will bring together industry leaders from different sectors of our economies, such as power generation, and alternative fuels and transportation."
James Connaughton, chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, rejected charges that the U.S. was dragging its feet in the fight against climate change.
"This is actually accelerating it," he said. "If we wanted to put things off further, you'd have annual meetings at the U.N. for the next five years. If you want to accelerate it, we do a lot of groundwork in between the U.N. meetings so we can bring the work product to the U.N. meetings."
The U.S. last year experienced a drop in emissions of carbon dioxide, the heat-trapping gas most blamed for global warming. The 1.3 percent decline from 2005, the first drop in 11 years, was due to a mild winter and a cool summer, along with other factors including greater industrial efficiency and increased capacity of nuclear power plants.
Carbon dioxide is produced from burning fossil fuels, including natural gas and coal, which are used widely to produce electricity.
While Bush announced his new proposal, the administration registered its opposition to the idea of a global carbon-trading program allowing countries to buy and sell carbon credits to meet limits on carbon dioxide levels. The White House also expressed opposition to the energy efficiency targets advocated by the EU.
President Bush outlines his proposal for major nations to agree on a global emissions goal for greenhouse gases, during a speech ahead of next week's summit in Germany of leading industrialized nations, Thursday, May 31,2007, at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
When does the President announce the change in his party affiliation to Democrat?
There they go, getting our hopes up. :)
When does the President announce the change in his party affiliation to Democrat?
Some fail to see any difference.
Well, well ... the mask has come all the way off now. He’s morphing into a DUmmie to get this immigration deal passed.
You guys took the words right out of my mouth. What is up with this guy? Bush can’t run for re-election, so why cave to the liberals? I guess the Repubs, including Bush, are starting to believe the NBC, CNN and USA Today Polls and think that’s what mainstream Americans want. What a ho!
Every day Bush putresces before our eyes.
He who stands for everything, stands for nothing.
He has lost my support. I say throw him to the wolves and start over in 08. I never understood why he didn’t fight the Dims, now I do.
No kidding. This guy is morphing into Mr. Hyde at an alarming rate.
I have stood by this guy time and again. . . no more. I will be so glad when Jan. 20, 2009 rolls around.
Bush is really losing it!!!
After 6+ years he still hasn’t learned that trying to appease the other side just encourages them to kick him harder. In the process he loses even more support and respect from those that used to be on his side.
Watch for new low approval numbers!!!
I think George must have an evil twin. Just how would electing Algore have been any worse than this?
I would be eternally grateful if he would just curb his liberal emissions lately. He is very irritating.
Normally, Bush would be regarded as a lame duck. However, he now qualifies as a plucked chicken. If he really wants to do something about Global Emissions, he should shut his pie hole.
presuming that attending there are representatives of the Sun, and that they take a big role in contributions to global warming decreases.
I couldn't believe this quote. What kind of arrogant fool thinks we as humans have to power to "allow" the earth to do anything?
Here, Here!. Can you hear me clapping?
It’s ironic how liberals are disgusted with Bush because they think he’s a conservative, and we conservatives are disgusted with him because we know he’s liberal. He’s everything I feared during the 2000 primaries that he would be.
Of the Georges, it’s thought that the first
Although bad was by no means the worst.
..The second seems mad
..His judgment so bad,
Revolution redux is rehearsed.
I think Bush should phone in the last year and 1/2 as President, just as his father did. These elitists dont have much in the tank I guess.???
Either he's been lying all along, or he's surrounded by demons. Either way, 1/20/2009 can't come fast enough.
And I never want to see Karl flipping Rove within five miles of 1600 Pennsylvania again.
"Wow. George Bush!!!! Is there ANYTHING Democrats demand he won't give away?"
When being a moderate doesn’t work, take a sharp turn left. What a moron!
When will this love affair with junk science end???
A Fred Thompson Presidency can’t come soon enough, I have no respect for the intellectually lazy who sign on the junk science bandwagon looking for the approval of those who hate them.
Electing Gore would have simply accelerated the demise of this country, and would have allowed old codgers like me an opportunity to make a difference in the upcoming civil war. This country is disintegrating before our eyes.
First Aids and now Kyoto. Yep, Bush is in full bore, full time legacy mode.
With Bush, full insanity was reached in 6 years. Al had it from the start.
Micheal Savage is starting to make sense.
No More Bushes.
Why am I beginning to feel like the victim of a gang beating?
Bipartisanship seems to be another way of saying “Sacks on!”
Global warming, more money for AIDS, and letting any criminal who has the desire to walk across our borders. Nice.
Take that gas pump hose out of your hand and try again.
While those he cares most about demonstrate their support....
PROTECTING NATIONAL SECURITY. That reminds me of that terrible economic speech he gave in front of the boxes with the fake "made in the USA" labels on them.
What’s that supposed to mean?
Maybe a photochopper could morph a Alfred E Newman head on the kid waving the flag.. ;-)
I hate that I was right about this guy.
The blame supposedly lies with us, the consumers, Bush is just facing reality.
Let me help. Your next car will have a sticker price in the mid-$30,000 range for a stripped down, basic vehicle. When I was in 6th grade (1966), a VW bug sold for $2,000 new. By the time I was graduated from high school, the 1973 Old Omega (inline 6, manual 3-speed, manual steering) was offered for $4,600. Big increases due to air pollution control devices. My "no frills" 1985 T-Bird left the showroom for $13,000. More inflation and emissions control. I just purchased a 2008 Mercury Mariner Hybrid. $32,000 out the door. About $4,000 of that was fancy navigation, leather seats, "moon" roof. The non-hybrid V6 without the extra trim package leaves the showroom at around $23,000.
The new rules are going to significantly jack up the price and the auto manufacturers will strip away everything possible to keep the price "affordable".
Bush is losing touch with reality. I am not. Unlike Bush, my stand on the issue hasn't changed to the liberal view in order to gain approval.
Actually, I think this is a brilliant move. If people REALLY care about the environment, they’d support any “move” by the US and enourage more.
However, based upon the reactions of the Gore-fold it becomes abundantly clear that they do not stand for actual real-world solutions. It’s all about social control.
If they cared about “global warming” they would demand China participate as well as the US, in any way, shape, or form. Fighting against this, their hypocrisy is quickly exposed.
Presumably, the Republicans would have fought against Gore’s agenda, which they have failed to do in several cases with Bush. You can never know what that future would have been like, but we probably would have retained both houses. I don’t know that the Senate would have fought hard against his horrible Supreme Court choices. It’s scary to think of Gore in charge during 9/11, but I believe the road would have taken him to Iraq just as it did Bush. The only benefit there would be that the Democrats and the MSM would actually be supportive of the action, but having Gore-picked people in charge is too much to contemplate. Finally, I don’t think illegal immigration would have been pushed so hard under Gore, because I don’t think it’s his issue like it is with Bush. Bush has been talking this crap since he was governor, and it alarmed me even then. I didn’t see much choice at the time, but I wasn’t happy to cast a vote for a guy who proclaimed, “The children of illegals WILL be educated in MY state as long as I’M governor,” in that vindictive tone we’ve unfortunately come to know so well. Of course, Gore’s issue is global alarmism, and I’m sure he’d be ramrodding that through with the same gusto and the same disastrous result as Bush and this immigration nightmare.
SOB ought to just call himself a dhimmicrat and get it over with. Why the hell did we vote GOP again?
Plus this man has dictorial power now making him king......
Cool. The President is including China and India on this.
This ensures that reforms will happen at a snail's pace which gives the good scientists time to rebut the global warming theory.
The President is doing the right thing IMO. Not ignoring the issue, but not aggressively pushing it either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.