Sunday , December 5 2021
Home / Project Syndicate / Climate Change vs. the Sino-American Cold War

Climate Change vs. the Sino-American Cold War

Summary:
In the absence of meaningful policies from both China and the United States, this year’s climate-change summit, COP26, was never going to deliver what the world really needs. Ultimately, getting both countries on the same page and cooperating on the issue will require public pressure from their own people. CAMBRIDGE – The last-gasp effort at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26) to keep global warming below 1.5° Celsius, relative to preindustrial levels, was destined to fall short, regardless of how many heads of state and business leaders flew to Glasgow. For the world to meet even a 2°C target requires collaboration between the United States and China. A Casablanca for

Topics:
Daron Acemoglu considers the following as important:

This could be interesting, too:

Tyler Cowen writes Not the final word, but could be worse…

Scott Sumner writes QE, or not QE?

Tyler Cowen writes Saturday assorted links

Tyler Cowen writes Context is that which is scarce

In the absence of meaningful policies from both China and the United States, this year’s climate-change summit, COP26, was never going to deliver what the world really needs. Ultimately, getting both countries on the same page and cooperating on the issue will require public pressure from their own people.

CAMBRIDGE – The last-gasp effort at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26) to keep global warming below 1.5° Celsius, relative to preindustrial levels, was destined to fall short, regardless of how many heads of state and business leaders flew to Glasgow. For the world to meet even a 2°C target requires collaboration between the United States and China.

Climate change represents a unique opportunity for the two countries to cooperate, and their surprise announcement of a plan to work together on curbing methane emissions provides some hope. But the current geopolitical environment stacks the cards against broad cooperation.

To have even a fighting chance of achieving the Paris climate agreement’s objectives, the world must reduce consumption of coal, oil, and gas to almost zero in the next decade, implying that most available fossil-fuel reserves must remain in the ground. That outcome is not in the cards, despite all the recent decarbonization pledges.

China, for example, is still investing in new coal plants, building more than one per week in 2020. India has nearly doubled its coal consumption over the last decade, while refusing to commit to a meaningful net-zero emissions target. And Russia is doing almost nothing, claiming that its forests, tundra, and swamps will absorb enough carbon to render it carbon neutral by 2060.

The US, too, is proving unequal to the challenge, and it cannot rely on the same excuse as India – or even as China. It can afford to invest much more in renewable energies, and to support the broader global transition to cleaner technologies. Yet it is still subsidizing the fossil-fuel industry, rather than taxing carbon emissions and regulating the big energy companies that bear most of the blame for the problem. (That said, Iran, Russia,...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *