Skeptics Say U.S. Plan To Cut Greenhouse Gases Not Binding And Could Undermine T

The Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, also announced overnight in Washington, aims to create cleaner technologies for energy-hungry economies such as China and India, meeting long-term energy needs while reducing pollution and addressing climate concerns. “We view this as a complement, not an alternative” to the Kyoto treaty, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick said at a joint news conference by the six countries at an annual Asia-Pacific security conference in the Laotian capital Vientiane. A ministerial meeting to hammer out programs for the pact will be held in Adelaide, Australia in November. Canadian Foreign Minister Pierre Pettigrew said the new initiative shows its authors acknowledge the problem. But now they should produce results, he said. “I still have to wait for the meat. This is an improvement. This is progress. I don't say it in a cynical way. I hope there will be meat,” he said. Canada is a signatory to the Kyoto accord. Emissions of carbon dioxide and five other gases are believed to be behind rising global temperatures that many scientists say are disrupting weather patterns... ...The United States, which accounts for one-quarter of the world's greenhouse gases, and Australia refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, saying it would harm their economies by raising energy prices, and cost five million jobs in the U.S. alone. Their other objection is that pact mandates greenhouse gas emission reductions only among industrial countries and not developing countries like India and China, which is second only to the U.S. in emissions... ...Environmental group Friends of the Earth was skeptical about the pact because it contained no legally binding requirements to cut emissions. “It looks suspiciously as though this will be business as usual for the United States,” said the U.K.-based group's member, Catherine Pearce. “A deal on technology, supported by voluntary measures to reduce emissions, will not address climate change,” she said. Mr. Zoellick defended the non-binding clause, saying “one can't just command other parties to do things. You need to try to develop interests and incentives.” Original article: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050728.wwarming0728/BNStory/International/

Note: http://www.theglobeandm...