Business as usual
The US will have to do more on climate change
The two-day virtual climate summit, hosted by US President Joe Biden and attended by dozens of leaders from across the world, performed at least one important function: It revealed that the obstructionist attitude of the previous US administration when it came to global cooperation on climate change was indeed a thing of the past. Mr Biden’s predecessor had taken the US out of the Paris Accord and gutted various domestic regulations aimed at controlling carbon emissions. Mr Biden and his climate ambassador, former secretary of state John Kerry, did at least manage to convey that things have changed. They also set out a clear goal for emission cuts in the US over the years to 2030, when they are now projected to be 50 per cent of what they were in 2005.
Several other countries also set targets for 2030: Japan said it would reduce emissions by 46 per cent as compared to its 2013 levels, and Canada by 40-45 per cent relative to 2005. Yet action from many other countries was disappointing. Australia, for example, which has one of the highest levels of emission per capita, continued to be something of a hold-out. Brazil and Russia are also problematic — the former in fact went into the summit further reducing environmental spending. The People’s Republic of China, which accounts for half of all the coal-powered electricity generated in the world, has set a “net zero” target for itself unpredictably far in the future — and also carefully avoided any further commitments at the summit. President Xi Jinping did say that it would reduce coal consumption — but only from 2026. This was already broadly in line with what has been expected for the past few years.
This lack of action will have eased some of the pressure on India. It will also be noted that the US, in spite of its claims, continues to underperform in ambition as compared to the European Union. While the former hopes to invest heavily in green technology as a short cut to emission reductions, the latter recognises that demand shifts are also necessary, and has been using regulatory tools and carbon pricing to make it a reality. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in his remarks about the fight against climate change requiring lifestyle changes, may have been making a related point about the need to manage demand in the affluent world as well.
While the US’ new energy on climate change is welcome, it will not be taken seriously across the world unless it is matched by legally binding frameworks that cannot be easily dissolved by some successor to Mr Biden who shares Donald Trump’s views on the environment. Nor will a framework that does not seek to control the demand side of emission, including through carbon pricing, be effective in creating a global consensus. Federal taxes on automobile fuel in the US, for example, have not been raised since 1993. This is not the sign of a country serious on climate change, whatever the US administration may claim. India must make it clear that any further commitments from the rest of the developing world will also require equivalent energy from the US and countries like Australia.