Popular Political Claims About Kyoto : Truth or Mythology?

1. Popular Political ClaimsAbout Kyoto:Truth or Mythology? Christopher C. Horner Prague 31st May 2007

2. This is America’s Kyoto PositionStrange, I don’t see the name Bush anywhere… • The US will not seek Kyoto ratification without China, India, et al; because otherwise one merely exports emissions, even further transferring wealth • Well…Guess Who Established this Test? • First, a unanimous US Senate (11th July 1007, 95-0) • Then, none other than Al Gore: “‘As we said from the very beginning, we will not submit this agreement for ratification until key developing nations participate in this effort,’ Gore declared.” CNN, 11th December 1997http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/12/11/kyoto/

3. Some Legalisms AboutUS Treaty-making Policy • The President merely signs treaties • The Senate must approve them, by a 2/3 vote • Protocol has it that the President asks the Senate to sign those signed treaties that he actually does want to join • Still, there is nothing prohibiting the Senate from voting on – approving, or rejecting – a signed treaty without being asked • In short, if the US signed Kyoto, it would be the Senate responsible for approving or blocking it

4. We did sign Kyoto.On 12th November, 1998. This has nothing to do with George Bush. • Having agreed to the treaty on 11th December 1997, 801 days of the Clinton presidency passed with no suggestion that the Senate vote on it • The reason: The “Gore Test” was not met • Bush simply continued the Clinton-Gore policy against seeking Senate ratification • The US didn’t withdraw, as claimed, either but continued sending huge delegations to the talks

5. UN Administration and Budget UN Reform Political and Security Affairs U.S. Mission Homepage Issues in the News USUN PRESS RELEASE #206 (98)November 12, 1998 CHECK TEXT AGAINST DELIVERYStatement by Ambassador A. Peter Burleigh, Chargé d'affaires, a.i. of the United States Mission to the United Nations, on Signing of the Protocol to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (Kyoto Protocol), at the United Nations, Nov. 12, 1998.On behalf of the United States, I have just signed the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. By signing the Protocol, the U.S. Government reaffirms its commitment to work with countries from around the world to meet the challenge of global warming. We are guided by the firm belief that signing will serve our environmental, economic, and national security goals. We recognize that further work needs to be done in a number of areas, including participation by key developing countries and defining the rules and guidelines of measures such as international trading and the clean development mechanism. By signing the Protocol, we ensure our ability to continue playing a strong role in completing the work in these important areas. Yesterday in Buenos Aires, Argentina announced that it would voluntarily take on a binding emissions target in the same time frame as the United States and other developed countries. We applaud Argentina's leadership as the first developing nation to make such a pledge. If you have further questions, I would refer you to the delegation in Buenos Aires, headed by Undersecretary of State Stuart Eizenstat. Thank you. * * * * *

6. The Senate could have ratified Kyoto pre-Bush, and it could vote on the treaty tomorrow.It won’t. Ever. • Bush merely acknowledging reality was all that changed, and what led to the bombastic EU rhetoric, threats of trade wars, etc. • It didn’t help that most journalists are apparently unable or unwilling to actually look beyond rhetoric and into the facts of the matter. • No president will seek ratification of Kyoto, or a more stringent Kyoto II • And no US Senate will approve such a pact. • Maybe it is time for Europe to come to grips with this, stop mischaracterizing things, and stop telling its Member States to hold on, the US will join the misery once that mean Bush leaves office. • This is only leading to the EU unilaterally demanding a continuation of the failed Kyoto scheme, post-2012. This will prove costly to you.

7. Now, Europe’s Realities • Since Kyoto was agreed (1997), EU emissions have risen 6 of the 9 years for which we have figures (further, it serially revises its 1990baseline emission level upward, 15 years after the fact!…one assumes that this is in order to lessen its looming violation) • EU promised emissions would be down and dropping • Instead, EU emissions are up, and rising • The EU now demands a new, post-2012 “Burden Sharing [sic] Agreement”…by December • This would end the free-ride for most, and it seems certain that the cuts required will prove politically untenable, that the demands will cause disruption

8. “Europe is the World Leader!”The claim made is actually re: “reducing emissions” (!), not buying credits • …In making that particular claim, absolutely • Since Kyoto was agreed, EU carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are up, andmuch faster than the US’s • And the gap is growing: EU CO2 emissions have grown > 3x as fast as US’s since 2000 • Ask the time, get the history of the watch: • “But since 1990…!” • Fine. But promise was made in 1997, and…(see next slide) • In addition to the baseline games, the EU rejected the effort to make Kyoto “binding and enforceable” [and the US should decide to join in a treaty to be the only ones bound?]

9. EU PerformanceHere’s what “Global Leadership in Reducing Emissions” Looks Like

10. Latest Czech Projection to EUAs throughout Central/Eastern Europe, reduction only came via economic collapse

11. Emissions are Rising throughout the WorldThe few exceptions are largely those still trying to get their economy moving

12. Somehow Czechia Projects Massive Emission ReductionThe EU countries with the most historically flawed projections do not even try this anymore

13. Comparative Rates of IncreaseSo, Maybe Name-calling and Rhetoric Aren’t Enough?…

15. “The US is going it alone!” • Absolutely…along with 155 others representing the majority of the world’s present and future population, emissions and economic activity • All expressly reject Kyoto’s rationing • These countries are pursuing a technology path • Those who purport to accept Kyoto-style rationing actually show by their actions that they, too, reject actual emissions reductions • No Party is reducing emissions since Kyoto

16. Kyoto Realities: “Pride Goeth Before a Fall…” • No one new has joined, nor will they, barring offers of even greater wealth transfer which further exposing the treaty as being only that • With no new Parties “post-2012”, there are few to no sources from whom Parties may buy “credits” • This forces the EU post-2012 to make actual emission reductions – both costly and for which the political will has yet to be found – as renewables, JI and CDM aren’t enough

17. 'I don't think it's within the power of human beings to assure that the climate does not change' – NASA chief Michael Griffin, yesterday • Nothing ever proposed would according to anyone have, under any scenario or set of assumptions, a detectable climate impact • Clearly it is promises not performance that matter • So long as restrictions on economic and individual activity are imposed, that’s fine • In short, this isn’t about climate • If it were, then proposals made in the name of we-must-act-now would actually rise to the level of acting, not simply restricting and coercing

18. Post-2012 all countries expect they will get special treatment to be spared paying the tab • Addressing the need for a post-2012 “Burden Sharing Agreement” that assigns real cuts to countries previously given a free-ride, German Chancellor Angela Merkel “admitted that tough negotiations are still ahead. The compromise would be a tough task. The beauty is, Merkel said smiling, that each member state thinks they're a special case. ‘That makes us all equal’”. -- Der Spiegel, 9th March 2007 • This increasingly looks like politicians seeking to put off an embarrassment until a later date when someone else must admit to it and repair the damage. • This is a game, not responsible policymaking or leadership.

19. Which Path? It’s Czechia’s Decision “The EU is presently investing abhorrent sums in expanding natural gas generating capacity and the infrastructure. However, the reserves of (non-Russian) natural gas in Europe will be exhausted within the next 10 years. Thus in 10 years' time we will be 100% reliant on the dependability of Russia and North Africa as energy suppliers.”

20. END

21. We Must Act Now!It’s real-bad-here-now-a-moral-issue-we-must-act-now!!!! • Query: although every proposal out there has been offered in the name of this claim, why has no one espousing it ever dared offer anything that would under any scenario, under any set of assumptions, according to any champion, have a detectable influence on climate? That is, that would rise to the level of “acting”? • Kyoto is the most aggressive proposal ever tabled • Kyoto’s proponents acknowledge no detectable impact • Clinton Administration said Kyoto would cost US up to 4% of GDP – 5 times the cost of the Iraq War – every year • What to tell the cynic who says this appears simply to be about attaining long-held policy goals at best, and wildly expensive gesture politics at worst?

22. “Amerikanische Verhältnisse” • The Senaterefuses to ratify the Kyoto rationing scheme • 1998-2001 Republican controlled: NO • 2001-2002 Democrat controlled: NO • 2003-2007 Republican Controlled: NO • 2007-? Democrat controlled: Do not hold your breath • New EU line: “Bush’s successor would sign a new treaty!” • Even if true…so? Clinton signed Kyoto…it’s the Senate • In fact, no candidate – Clinton, McCain, or other – support Kyoto, let alone a more stringent version than that Senate already refused. • “But California has agreed to do this!” • No. California agreed to muchless (1990 levels, by 2020), with no specifics but only telling an agency to “make it so”, with nothing more to date. • “The law would be accurately labeled the Global Warming Wishlist Act of 2006”, Prof. David Schoenbrod (frmr. NRDC), Wall Street Journal 5th April 2007

23. “Amerikanische Verhältnisse”“Only 5% of the world’s population produces 25% of its (Man-made) GHGs!” • Query: does the US pay 5%, or 25%, of the UN’s budget? • Truth be told about this claim, with 5% of the world’s population, the US produces somewhere below 25% of its anthropogenic emissions …and above 25% of its wealth. • Compared to Europe, US produces more jobs with higher wages, and enjoys an economy that is 42.5 percent wealthier per person. Year after year, the US leaves Europe farther behind not just economically but, now, in rate of C02 increase: EU-15 emissions rising much faster. • While the US continues to emit more CO2 per person than Europe – partly attributable to economic, geographic, demographic and climatic differences – per dollar of economic output, the US is improving much faster.

25. Signs to look for before leaping onglobal warming regulation • The price of beachfront property falls significantly (markets do work, you know) • Politicians and movie stars stop flying in helicopters and private jets (Snowball, meet Hell…) and, finally, when • Environmental activists recommend policy changes to combat global warming that they weren’t already in favor of

26. Czech emissions, from its April 2006 Report to the UNFCCC

27. Truth: No one wants to join this scheme It is Europe that is “going it alone”, expensively and futilely The Four Stages of EU Kyoto Policy Rehabilitation Anger Denial Bargaining Acceptance „We are here“, between Denial and Bargaining

28. US vs. EU 1990 1997 2000 2004 US 5013.45 5547.9 (+10.6%) 5815.5 (+16%) 5912.21 (+18%) EU-15 3250.42 3263.13 (+.04%) 3376.41 (+3.9%) 3572.24 (+9.9%) EU-25* 4132.79 4059.69 (-1.8%) 4039.57 (-2.3%) 4234.86(+2.5%) * This figure is less Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania 1990 4132.79 + Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania (working backward est. at 62Mmt) 1997 4059.69 + 18.11, 8.31, 16.21 (42.63) 2000 4039.57 + 16.15, 7.26, 13.19 (36.6) 2004 4234.86 + 18.23, 8.40, 13.23 (40.46)

29. Amazing how shutting some cold-weather temperature stations can heat the planetHere’s a plan: cool the planet by re-opening them

30. The Kyoto Emperor Has No Clothes

31. “Bush Squandered Post-9/11 Goodwill by Rejecting Kyoto!” • Pick your calendar – Julian, Gregorian –March 17 comes before September 11, every year. Including in 2001. • Bush 43 merely reiterated the Clinton-Gore position, which received no such lambasting. • This act cannot have somehow, a year later, squandered the mythical “we’re all Americans now, mon ami, with you in spirit and purpose!” • This, like so many similar canards, is merely an excuse for anti-Americanism and certain behavior. And a pretty poor one at that.

32. Total EU-15 greenhouse gas emissions in relation to the Kyoto target(source: European Environment Agency, 2006)

33. “The Senate already voted Kyoto down”Invoked to absolve the Senate, and demand Bush create something different • On July 11, 1997, the Senate unanimously instructed the Clinton-Gore Administration to not agree to Kyoto or such a pact • This was unsolicited Art. II, Sec. 2 “advice” • On December 11, 1997 the Administration did so anyway, ignoring the advice • They signed it 11 months later • So, this is a great symbolic vote, but OTBE

34. Key Kyoto/Climate Change Political MythsThe cognoscente will insist upon fealty to and repentance for the following truths we simply must confront in a world without Bush.Instead of me-tooisms and a race to the bottom, a candidate should embrace this issue, as neither too complex nor politically dangerous: • Bush made such a mess with his radical policy departure • The US “squandered post-9/11 goodwill by rejecting Kyoto” • The US is going it alone, is isolated, a rogue climate state • As climate criminals we are being left behind, we must follow the lead of our moral superiors in Europe, etc. • “We must re-engage, and restore our image overseas…” • “We must act now, and my proposal does that”