CNE Climate News March 2001

Greens call for a boycott on US oil multinationals

Immediate: Thursday 29th March 2001

"If Bush will only listen to big business then we must make big business listen to us."

"George W Bush is flying in the face of growing scientific consensus on
the
reality of global climate change," says Dr John Devaney, Green Party
International Spokesperson. "Most Americans [1], believe climate change is
a
serious threat but their leader prefers to swallow the lies of the fossil
fuel lobby.

"Bush's reasoning for ignoring the Kyoto agreement range from dumb through
ignorant, to patronising. To say that the world's poorest countries should
not be allowed any increase in emissions is tantamount to saying they
should
be kept in poverty.

Greens across Europe have rallied to the call for a boycott of US oil
multinationals, namely, Exxon (Esso), Texaco and Chevron. Leading the cry
is
the Green Group/European Free Alliance, the fourth largest political
grouping in the European Parliament.

Alexander de Roo, (Green) Vice-President of the Environment Committee in
the
European Parliament, said in reaction to a declaration by the US
administration that it considers the Kyoto Protocol as dead: "Obviously,
the
American oil giants are one of the driving forces behind this spectacular
reversal of US environmental policies by George Bush, who himself was
working for the Texan oil industry.

"The US oil companies are pushing for a U-turn in environmental policies
by
opposing any reduction in green house gas emissions. It is no co-incidence
that they are at the same time pushing for new drilling licenses in
environmentally protected areas in Alaska."

Caroline Lucas, Green MEP for the South East added: "Europe must stand up
to
irresponsible US policies by rejecting them at the petrol pump. A polite
request, such as that by the EU Summit in Stockholm, obviously will not
change the Americans' mind. Unless the US rethinks its position, direct
boycott is the only language they will understand."

NOTES
[1] Opinion polls from 1997 onwards have consistently shown that more than
50% of the US public is concerned about climate change.

Ends

For further details contact:

John Devaney on 0117 974 4591 (eve), 0117 930 1258 (day), or
johndevaney@ukonline.co.uk

Alan Francis, Press Officer for UK Green MEPs - 0776 997 0691

back to CNE latest news

Schroeder in US
Associated Press
Times
Associated Press 29th March

Thursday March 29 3:27 AM ET
Schroeder Taking Concerns to Bush
By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - The White House calls it a get-acquainted session, but German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder is bringing a list of grievances and concerns to President Bush.

With the Bush administration signaling it will not implement a global warming treaty, Schroeder planned to urge Bush not to back off the accord, a German government official said.

Schroeder was conveying European dismay at Bush's recent announcement that he would not seek curbs on carbon dioxide emissions from U.S. industry, which reversed a position Bush took during last year's presidential campaign. The emissions are thought to contribute to global warming.

"We hope the Americans will change their mind, because we Europeans think we have the better arguments,'' said the German official, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity before Schroeder's trip.

Schroeder was meeting Bush on Thursday at the White House.

Germany's environmental Green Party is in a governing coalition with Schroeder's Social Democrats. The ranking Green member is Joschka Fischer, the foreign minister.

Schroeder also was to use his first meeting with Bush to raise European misgivings about American plans for a national missile defense system and about U.S.-Russian tensions, the German official said. Specifically, Schroeder was troubled by the recent tit-for-tat U.S. and Russian expulsions of alleged spies.

The White House offered only a broad preview of the meeting. "The president expects to talk about the strong lasting bilateral relationship we have with Germany,'' White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said.

"They're going to discuss regional and global issues and have substantive talks,'' said another Bush administration official who asked not to be identified by name. As a first sit-down, it was largely a get-to-know-you meeting, the official said.

The German leader nevertheless was raising some of the thorniest issues between the two nations.

Schroeder wrote to Bush this month urging him to rethink his stand on pollution but has received no reply, the German official said.

Europeans are upset mainly over Bush's attitudes toward the Kyoto agreement, negotiated in 1997 to lower levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Many scientists think greenhouse gases are heating up the Earth's atmosphere dangerously. The agreement, never ratified by the United States, specifies that industrial nations must reduce emissions by 2012 to below 1990 levels. The United States would be required to cut emissions by 7.2 percent of its 1990 level.

Christie Whitman, head of the Environmental Protection Agency, said Tuesday the administration has no plans to implement the accord because Congress would never ratify it.

The White House said Wednesday that Bush would seek an alternative to the Kyoto global warming pact that would ``include the world'' in the effort to reduce pollution. Fleischer told reporters that Bush wants to work with U.S. allies on a plan that would require developing nations to meet certain standards.

"It is important that the U.S. accept its responsibility for the world climate,'' Schroeder said in an interview in Wednesday's Los Angeles Times. ``They are the biggest economy in the world and the heaviest energy consumers.''

Japanese officials also expressed dismay about the Bush administration's view of the Kyoto treaty. In Tokyo, Yasuko Shiraishi, an Environment Ministry official, said the government would continue working with the European Union and other nations to persuade the United States to implement the accord

And Teiichi Aramaki, the Kyoto governor, said, "It is truly unfortunate and regrettable because (Bush's decision) would nullify efforts taken so far by the international community.''

On security topics, Schroeder wanted to ask for details on U.S. missile defense plans that have sparked opposition from Russia and European nations.

At the same time, the German official said, Schroeder would defend European plans for a military role within NATO.

Schroeder also will seek reassurances from Bush that he will abide by a Clinton administration agreement to urge American courts to close class-action lawsuits by Nazi-era slave laborers and accept a new German foundation as the sole channel for settling claims.
Wednesday, March 28, 2001
LA Times (extracts of article. For full article see http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/updates2/lat_gerhard010328.htm)

back to CNE latest news

Germany Seeks to Sway U.S. to Uphold Emissions Goals Diplomacy: In talks with Bush, chancellor plans to broach White House attitude toward global concerns.

By CAROL J. WILLIAMS, Times Staff Writer

BERLIN--With all due respect, Mr. President, planet Earth is not a U.S. plaything to be saved or sullied depending on popular mood swings driven by fears of recession and rolling blackouts.

That, in spirit, is the message German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder will deliver to President Bush on Thursday when the two leaders meet in Washington to ponder an expanding chasm between Western powers no longer unified by the common menace of the Cold War.

In a wide-ranging and exclusive interview with The Times, Schroeder repeatedly emphasized the concerns of his country and the rest of Europe that the U.S. is cavalierly ignoring air pollution standards defined in the 1997 Kyoto, Japan, environmental protocols and scuttling a global climate treaty.

The leader of Europe's most populous nation also outlined Monday night his concerns about aerospace and agricultural trade issues, U.S. plans for a national missile defense system, the necessity of supporting reform in Russia and the threat of a U.S. pullout from Balkan peacekeeping missions that he said Europeans are still unable to manage alone.

Although his opinions and worries were cradled in the polite, measured language of allied diplomacy, Schroeder echoed the concerns of other European nations and said the continent will not remain silent if the new administration disregards the wider world's interests.

"There is fear in Europe that the administration will pay no attention to the aims defined in Kyoto," the chancellor said.

The Bush administration announced this month that, because of California's energy crisis, the U.S. will ignore carbon dioxide emission standards set at the world climate conference in the Japanese city. The U.S. decision drew criticism from Europeans. The most recent round of the climate conference, held in the Netherlands in November, also failed to produce a global accord because of U.S. refusal to accept proposed limits.

"It is important that the U.S. accept its responsibility for the world climate. They are the biggest economy in the world and the heaviest energy consumers," Schroeder said, adding that he will stress to Bush the moral imperative of protecting the environment for future generations.

"This is one of those issues where one can say from a basis of real friendship: 'Dear friends, we are of the opinion that if you abandon Kyoto, you are in the wrong,' " Schroeder said.

(...)

On the positive side, he noted, California's Silicon Valley is home to many spinoff companies of major German manufacturers, and the information technology field holds good prospects for "magnificent cooperation."

"I would mention also that we could learn from each other concerning energy policy, [such as] that liberalization can be taken too far," Schroeder said of the recent California blackouts, a problem Europeans are spared because of continuing heavy regulation. "Supply guarantees are something to which Europeans are paying proper attention."

back to CNE latest news

Thursday March 29 2:07 PM ET
German Leader Questions Bush Plan
By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder raised questions Thursday about President Bush's plans for a missile defense system and his opposition to a global-warming treaty. But Bush said he was heartened by their first meeting, declaring Schroeder ``at least interested in our point of view.''

The two leaders met in the Oval Office for more than two hours, discussing a range of ticklish issues, several of which they disagree on. But Bush said, "We can disagree and still be friends.'' Schroeder described the session as "frank.''

"We agreed on practically everything except obviously one thing, and that was, no surprise, the Kyoto protocol,'' Schroeder said through a translator, referring to a global-warming pact that the United States has rejected.

"We have different opinions and we are happy to admit to you that we hold different opinions,'' Schroeder said. "We were also happy to admit to one another that we have different positions.''

Bush gave no indication his view of global warming or the Kyoto agreement changed after their session.

The president said he explained to Schroeder that a domestic "energy crisis'' made capping carbon dioxide emissions from power plants - thought to be a contributor to global warming - unfeasible. Bush had promised during his campaign to limit such emissions.

Schroeder pointed out that Germany will host a conference on the Kyoto agreement this summer, and said the U.S. government will have to explain its decision there. "This is an issue for the president and his country to decide,'' Schroeder said.

Schroeder said he raised several questions about Bush's plan for a missile defense shield, including who would be covered by it, whether it is technically feasible and what the repercussions would be for nuclear disarmament.

Bush told reporters he made his case for the system, saying it was meant to protect against "extremists'' who might want to attack the United States or Germany. He said he was pleased ``somebody at least is interested in our point of view, and for that I'm grateful.''

Germany's environmental Green Party is in a governing coalition with Schroeder's Social Democrats. The ranking Green member is Joschka Fischer, the foreign minister.

Christie Whitman, head of the Environmental Protection Agency, said Tuesday the administration has no plans to implement the accord because Congress would never ratify it.

"It is important that the U.S. accept its responsibility for the world climate,'' Schroeder said in an interview in Wednesday's Los Angeles Times. "They are the biggest economy in the world and the heaviest energy consumers.''

And Teiichi Aramaki, the Kyoto governor, said, "It is truly unfortunate and regrettable because (Bush's decision) would nullify efforts taken so far by the international community.''

back to CNE latest news

US aims to pull out of Kyoto Protocol
White House Press Briefing which clearly sets out the President's views on the Kyoto Protocol
LA Times
ENDs report
Japanese react with dismay (Washington Post)
Worldwatch Institute Press release
Reuters
Australian reaction
Swedish reaction
Wallstroem reaction
Asian Reaction
New Zealand Reaction
Pakistan -WWF press release
Japanese reaction (Japan Times)
Japanese NGO press release
Carter urges Bush to act
Pacific Islands regret Bush action
NYT article summarising European anger
Russian reaction
South African reaction
Council of European Churches reaction
World Council of Churches Reaction
US Church leaders' reaction
Transport and Environment Federation reaction
Brazilian reaction
China, South Korea, Japan joint response
Swiss response (letter from President to Bush)
African NGOs' reaction
Spanish Trade Union reaction

back to CNE latest news

U.S. Aims to Pull Out of Warming Treaty By Eric Pianin Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, March 28, 2001; Page A01

The White House recently sought advice from the State Department about how the United States can legally withdraw its signature from a landmark 1997 global warming agreement, signaling its intent to pull out despite efforts by European and Japanese leaders to try to keep the agreement alive, an administration source said yesterday.

The global warming treaty -- negotiated and signed in Kyoto, Japan -- marked the first time that the world's industrial nations committed to binding limits on the heat-trapping gases that scientists believe threaten catastrophic changes in the planet's climate. Under its terms, the United States would have to reduce its emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and certain other pollutants by 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012.

However, the Senate has refused to ratify the treaty, and President Bush wrote to four conservative senators March 13 that he opposed the agreement because it exempts developing countries and would harm the U.S. economy.

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Christine Todd Whitman told reporters yesterday that the Kyoto protocol was dead as far as the administration was concerned and that if the Europeans and Japanese wanted to reach an agreement, they would have to abandon the outlines of the accord and take a different approach.

"No, we have no interest in implementing that treaty," Whitman said. "If there's a general agreement that we need to be addressing the global climate change issue, [the question is] how do we do it in a way that allows us to make some progress, instead of spending our time committed to something that isn't going to go."

The efforts by the administration to further distance the United States from the global warming accord seemed certain to stun European Union officials, who have been urging Bush to help restart stalled talks on implementing the agreement.

Whitman's comments angered environmental groups, which already are upset by Bush's decision March 13 to reverse himself on a campaign pledge to seek major reductions in U.S. power plant carbon dioxide emissions. Environmentalists and Democrats have condemned that decision as a major setback to efforts to combat global warming.

EU leaders sent Bush a letter last week saying that the United States and Europe "urgently needed" talks on a follow-up to last year's failed efforts in The Hague to try to reach accommodation on a global warming treaty. Until yesterday, Whitman had kept a dim hope alive that the administration might try to negotiate a deal this summer, despite Bush's opposition to the Kyoto protocol.

In light of Bush's March 13 letter, a White House official contacted the State Department inquiring what the administration was required to do to indicate that it would not ratify the Kyoto agreement, according to the source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The White House was told that it could withdraw by having Secretary of State Colin L. Powell send a letter to the United Nations notifying it that the United States has no intention of ratifying the agreement, the source said.

A senior State Department official said last night that his department was asked to help determine "where do we go from here" as part of a review of the climate change accord. But the official insisted that how to "unsign" the Kyoto treaty "was not one of the questions tasked out under the review."

Whitman said that the president continues to believe global warming is a serious issue and that the administration will remain engaged in international negotiations on ways to address climate change.

Whitman noted that no other major industrial country has ratified the Kyoto agreement. "We are not the only ones who have problems with it," Whitman said.

The next round of Kyoto talks is slated for July in Bonn, where some expect the Bush administration to present alternatives.

A week before Bush decided he would not seek limits on carbon dioxide emissions by power plants, Whitman warned him in a memo that he must demonstrate his commitment to cutting greenhouse gases or risk undermining the United States' standing among its allies.

"Mr. President, this is a credibility issue for the U.S. in the international community. It is also an issue that is resonating here at home," she wrote in the March 6 memo. "We need to appear engaged."

Yesterday's developments angered environmental leaders, who in the immediate aftermath of Bush's inauguration in January had thought the administration might prove willing to take steps to address global warming. Industry groups that have long opposed the Kyoto protocol cheered the administration's steps.

Philip Clapp, president of the National Environmental Trust, said the White House position dangerously erodes U.S. credibility in Europe. "The president has walked away from yet another campaign promise on global warming, and infuriated our allies in the process," he said. "Declaring the Kyoto negotiations dead rather than proposing changes which would make it acceptable will delay action on global warming for years and years."

Glenn F. Kelly, executive director of the Global Climate Coalition, an industry group, said, "One of the things the administration should be applauded for is early recognition that the Kyoto protocol is significantly flawed and that continuing to invest efforts and resources into fixing it will simply be futile."

Staff writer Steven Mufson contributed to this report.

back to CNE latest news

USA deals further blow to Kyoto climate deal
ENDS Daily - 28/03/01 ------------------------- The American government has given the clearest sign yet that it will not participate in the UN Kyoto climate protocol, reducing the chances of the instrument ever entering into force and leaving the EU - as the chief supporter of the protocol among industrialised countries - politically exposed.

The news was broken yesterday by head of the US environmental protection agency Christy Whitman. "We have no interest in implementing that treaty," she told journalists, suggesting that there was no point "spending our time committed to something that isn't going to go".

Ms Whitman's statement dramatically confirms recent indications that the new administration of president George Bush is considerably more hostile to the Kyoto protocol than its predecessor (ENDS Daily 14 March). Urgent pleas from EU leaders for the US to re-think its position (ENDS Daily 26 March) appear to have fallen on deaf ears.

EU environment commissioner Margot Wallström led European reactions to the announcement today: "It is very worrying if it is true that the US intends to pull out of the Kyoto protocol. The EU is willing to discuss details and problems - but not to scrap the whole protocol," she said.

European environmental groups were not so much worried as distraught. "The world is tottering on the brink of climate disaster," warned Friends of the Earth Europe today, before urging the EU to "fight to make the climate treaty work, with or without the USA".

Whether the protocol will ever be able to enter into force without US participation is now the key question. Not only must 55 parties to its parent climate change convention ratify, but these must include industrialise (annex 1) states accounting for at least 55% of 1990 carbon dioxide emissions from that group. Since the USA alone accounted for 34% of annex 1 1990 emissions, this leaves little room for manoeuvre.

According to a paper just released by Brussels-based think-tank the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), however, the gap can be bridged if the EU "abandons its strategy of concentrating on the USA". The EU must "put aside its internal squabbles," "summon up the courage of its convictions" and ratify the protocol unilaterally. It should then focus on alliance building, particularly with Russia and CIS countries. "Eventually," predicts CEPS, "Japan and other Umbrella Group countries might become interested in joining rather than staying outside the club".

Follow-up: US EPA (http://www.epa.gov), tel: +1 202 564 4455; European Commission (http://europa.eu.int/comm), tel: +32 2 299 1111; Friends of the Earth Europe (http://www.foeeurope.org), tel: +32 2 542 0189; CEPS (http://www.ceps.be), tel: +32 2 229 3911.

Japan Dismayed by Bush's Stance on Global Warming Accord

By Doug Struck Washington Post Foreign Service Wednesday, March 28, 2001; 11:57 AM

TOKYO, March 28 – The Bush administration's declaration that it has "no interest" in implementing a milestone 1997 international agreement to combat global warming stunned Japan, which had helped broker the accord and is still hoping for its ratification.

"If this is true, Japan will be dismayed and deeply disappointed," said Japan's ambassador in charge of global environmental affairs, Kazuo Asakai. "I'm hoping this isn't true." The agreement, he said, "is very serious and important."

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Christine Todd Whitman said Tuesday the administration has "no interest in implementing that treaty," referring to the "Kyoto Accord" signed in Japan.

The accord was the first in which industrial nations pledged to reduce their emissions of damaging gases that are suspected of causing an alarming increase in temperatures around the Earth. It was hailed as a first step to slow global warming.

"This will jeopardize all the efforts and progress made until 1997. The Kyoto Accord will be a waste, and three years of efforts by many people after the accord to enact a new treaty will be broken," said Mie Asaoka, executive director of the Kiko Forum, a network of Japanese environmental groups that worked on the historic accord.

"This is a serious, sinful statement. It will hit the Japanese government hard," she said.

In fact, Japan and the other parties to the accord have yet to ratify the agreement and are still arguing over how to meet the ambitious goals, which call for reductions ranging from 5 to 7 percent of so-called "greenhouse gases" by 2012. The Japanese government itself is squirming at the prospect of imposing stiff emissions reductions on its industries during the current economic downturn.

But as the chairman of the summit when the accord was signed, Japan has taken the lead in pushing for its successful implementation. Japan was hoping a compromise on the mechanics of those reductions would be worked out in time for ratification at a meeting in Germany later this year.

The announcement came even as countries in the region are reverberating over what many here see as another instance of Washington backing out of a global commitment. President Bush earlier this month cast doubt on a key U.S. agreement with North Korea, provoking a stream of heated threats from the Stalinist government and startling Japan and South Korea.

The Bush administration's position on the Kyoto Accord is distressful to Japan because it caught Tokyo, a close ally, by surprise. Whitman's comments were reported in the media even as Japanese officials were being assured that the policy was still being studied by the new American administration.

"The understanding of the Japanese government is that the United States is conducting a review of its policy toward the Kyoto Protocol," said Asakai. "I hope the U.S. is still doing that."

Japan has scheduled an international conference next month to brainstorm on how to make the Kyoto Accords work. And just a day before Whitman made her comments, the head of Japan's Global Environmental Bureau, Hironori Hamanaka, said he was hoping the United States "will not make our efforts of many years in vain."

"We believe the position of the Bush administration will hold the key to future climate negotiations," Hamanaka said Monday.

Under the terms of the accord, it could be ratified if Japan, Europe, Russia and several other countries agree, despite the U.S. abstention. But the United States is the world's biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, and one source acknowledged "politically and environmentally, that may not make sense."

Hiroshi Ohki, who was Japan's environmental minister in 1997 and now heads the global environmental policy group within Japan's ruling party, said it appeared President Bush has favored industrial interests over combating global warming.

"I do not understand the background of this sudden change in position of the United States," he said. Despite concerns about the cost of reducing emissions, "we thought we could come up with some agreement. I was not very pessimistic," he said. And he had been encouraged by statements from Whitman, he said.

"We had the impression she was trying to work for the Kyoto Protocol, but the industries weren't," he said.

President Bush on March 13 reversed a promise he made while campaigning for the presidency, saying he would not seek major reductions in U.S. power plant carbon dioxide emissions.

Whitman told reporters the White House still sees global warming as a serious problem. "If there's a general agreement that we need to be addressing the global climate change issue, [the question is] how do we do it in a way that allows us to make some progress, instead of spending our time committed to something that isn't going to go," she said.

THE WORLD CAN'T WAIT FOR ANOTHER CLIMATE TREATY

The U.S. administration's decision to abandon America's commitment to the Kyoto Protocol has created the most serious international environmental policy crisis in years, says President of the Worldwatch Institute, Christopher Flavin. Today's development puts at risk a decade of efforts to craft an agreement to protect the world from climate change.

"The world cannot afford to wait for another climate protocol to be drafted," said Flavin. "The Kyoto Protocol isn't perfect - largely because of loopholes insisted on by the previous U.S. administration - but it's all that's standing between us and a future of more severe storms and rising sea levels. It is time for Europe and Japan to call the U.S. bluff and adopt the Kyoto Protocol, perhaps abandoning some of the problematic elements insisted on by the United States"

The U.S. is a key player in the climate problem, accounting for one-quarter of global carbon dioxide emissions and nearly half of the increase in emissions since 1990, according to the Institute's latest figures. However, the best way to bring the U.S. into the climate treaty process at this point is for other countries to proceed with Kyoto, with the U.S. joining later when political circumstances have changed.

Although President Bush has argued that the Kyoto Protocol could damage the economy, not implementing the treaty would actually be more damaging. Outside the U.S., many countries are moving rapidly to pursue a new generation of 21st century energy technologies such as fuel cells, wind turbines, and solar electric generators. The attempt by the Bush administration to return to reliance on coal, a dirty fuel that is a relic of the 19th century, would be a costly economic mistake.

"In the end," says Flavin, "those countries that address climate change earliest will dominate the massive new energy technology markets of the new century-and create millions of jobs in the process".

END

Note to journalists: From April 2-11 Christopher Flavin will visit Germany (Berlin), Austria (Vienna) and Spain (Barcelona and Mallorca). For information on press events and interview opportunities, contact Leanne Mitchell (details below).

For more information, contact:

Leanne Mitchell, Public Relations Specialist. Tel: (1 202) 452-1999 ext. 527; email:lmitchell@worldwatch.org

*************************************************************************** The Worldwatch Press Information list is maintained by the Worldwatch Institute for the global news media. Postings to this list will include advance copies of news releases and notification of press conferences. The Worldwatch Institute is a nonprofit research organization that analyzes global environmental and development issues. Worldwatch's expert researchers are available to provide journalists with the latest data and thinking on global environmental and development trends. To remove yourself from this mailing list, send the following command in email to <Majordomo@crest.org>: unsubscribe worldwatch end To contact the press office at Worldwatch directly, send email to <owner-worldwatch@crest.org>

US KYOTO SECOND NIGHTLEAD
By Michael Christie
WASHINGTON, March 29 Reuters - US President George W Bush walked into a hail
of protest today after ditching the 1997 Kyoto treaty aimed at staving off
global warning, with Pacific islands warning rising seas could wipe them off
the map.

The European Union said it was "very worried" by the US decision, Japan
urged Washington to reconsider and Australia reminded the world's most
voracious resources consumer it had a responsibility to cut the globe's
emissions of greenhouse gases.
In the Pacific Ocean, island states already suffering devastation because of
rising sea levels and severe storms and droughts said their very survival
was at stake.

"It is very worrying if it is true that the US intends to pull out of the
protocol," EU Environment Commissioner Margot Wallstrom said in a statement.
"The EU is willing to discuss details and problems -- but not scrap the
whole protocol."

British Environment Minister Michael Meacher said in a BBC television
interview the US decision was extremely serious.

"(Global warming) is the most dangerous and fearful challenge to humanity
over the next 100 years," Meacher said.

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said yesterday President Bush had been
"unequivocal".

"He does not support the Kyoto treaty. It is not in the United States'
economic best interest," Fleischer told reporters.

The UN pact was signed in the Japanese city of Kyoto by ex-president Bill
Clinton and leaders of other industrialised countries, but it has not been
ratified by the US Senate.
Under the treaty, the major powers agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions,
which result mainly from burning coal and oil, by an average of 5.2 percent
below 1990 levels by 2012.

Scientists believe that greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide, trap
heat in the atmosphere and contribute to global warming, which can cause
disastrous weather changes.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, bringing together research by
around 2,000 scientists, said this year the consequences could include big
floods, long droughts and the extinction of countless species.

Fleischer said Bush opposed Kyoto because it does not bind developing
nations to curb emissions and he believes the costs outweigh the benefits.

Coming on top of a decision by Bush not to ask US power plants to cut
emissions of carbon dioxide, Washington's stance on the Kyoto pact was seen
by some as its kiss of death.

"The Kyoto protocol wouldn't work without the United States," Australian
Environment Minister Robert Hill told reporters.

While sympathetic to Bush's desire to review US energy policy after taking
office this year, Hill said the collapse of the Kyoto protocol would be "a
major step backwards".

The country responsible for 30 percent of global greenhouse gases "cannot
easily walk away from that responsibility", he said. "Time is against us, we
are already starting to experience the consequences of climate change."

Among those most threatened by climate change are low-lying atolls in the
Pacific.
The tiny nation of Kiribati said it was already experiencing coastal
erosion, droughts and severe storms as sea levels rose.

"It is a terrible economic problem, it is our very survival," said Baranika
Etuati, acting director of the Department of Environment and Conservation in
Kiribati.

Japan, the world's second largest economy, urged Bush to reconsider.

New Zealand said it shared the "grave concern and disappointment" of other
countries.
Energy Minister Pete Hodgson told parliament Foreign Affairs Minister Phil
Goff would be in Washington next week.

"He will be setting out New Zealand's concerns very clearly and asking the
Bush administration to stay fully involved to develop an effective response
to climate change," Hodgson said.

Environmentalists wept and fumed.
Greenpeace climate campaigner Angie Heffernan, based in the Fijian capital
Suva, said Bush's decision was driven "by oil, coal and gas interests".
"Greenpeace is disgusted and appalled at the United States," Heffernan said

US KYOTO AUST
PARLY 009
CANBERRA, March 29 AAP - The federal government today vowed to try and
persuade the US to back down on a bid to crush the Kyoto Protocol while
admitting it was not content with the treaty.

Environment Minister Robert Hill held out hope for ratification of the
treaty to curb global warming and said he would travel to the US in the next
fortnight for talks on climate change.

He planned to meet with US officials and representatives from developed and
developing nations trying to reach agreement.

The head of the US Environmental Protection Agency, Christie Todd Whitman,
yesterday said the government would not comply with the Protocol in its
present form.

The Australian Greens and Australian Conservation Foundation today demanded
the government clarify its stance on the Kyoto Protocol, slamming the US
decision devastating for the economy and environment.

Senator Hill conceded the Protocol would fail without the support of the US
while also saying he believed it needed more work for Australia to ratify
it.

"Whether we will be able to persuade the United States of the merit of the
Kyoto Protocol as an instrument I obviously don't know," Senator Hill told
parliament.

"The Kyoto Protocol was an historic accord in that it for the first time set
a targeted reduction of greenhouse gases for the developed world, five per
cent off 1990 levels."

But Australia was interested in a better global outcome for climate change
and wanted all countries to contribute their fair share to achieving such a
goal, Senator Hill said.

Australia and the US were largely blamed for collapsed climate change talks
last November in The Hague when parties to the Protocol gathered to reach
agreement on its contents.

The Kyoto Protocol is an international treaty signed by 84 countries in 1997
under which developed countries are aiming to limit greenhouse gas
emissions.

The US wants developing countries to greater contribute to emission
reductions before the Protocol comes into effect.

To become legally binding the protocol must be ratified by at least 55
countries.
Greens Senator Bob Brown said the US decision would send shockwaves around
the world.

"Prime Minister Howard should call President (George) Bush and ask him to
reverse the decision," Senator Brown told reporters.

The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) said the decision was a
disaster for Australia's economic and environmental future.

"Australia must reaffirm support for the Kyoto Protocol and leave the
umbrella group (of developed countries undertaking climate change
negotiations)," campaigner John Connor told AAP
AAP lm/daw

Subject: (BN ) Sweden Condemns U.S. Decision to Scrap Kyoto Climate
Date: Thu, Mar 29, 2001, 10:38 AM

Sweden Condemns U.S. Decision to Scrap Kyoto Climate Plan
2001-03-28 12:14 (New York)

Sweden Condemns U.S. Decision to Scrap Kyoto Climate Plan

     Stockholm, March 28 (Bloomberg) -- Sweden condemned as
``appalling'' U.S. President George W. Bush's decision to walk
away from a plan to limit global warming, saying European nations
will have to consider working alone on the problem.
     Environment minister Kjell Larsson, whose nation currently
holds the rotating European Union presidency, said he wanted to
meet with U.S. officials in Washington as soon as possible,
hoping there was still a chance to revive the nation's support
for the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which mandates industrial nations to
cut emissions of gases blamed for damaging the climate.
     His comments, in a telephone interview, follow remarks by
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency chief Christie Whitman who
told reporters ``we have no interest in implementing that
treaty,'' the Washington Post reported. Sweden and other EU
nations want to implement the Kyoto accord, which Bush
administration officials say will be too costly for industry.
     ``It is a situation which is not satisfactory at all,'' said
Larsson. ``The American administration seems unready to accept
its huge responsibility to the environment.''
     Larsson said EU environment ministers meeting this weekend
in Sweden would discuss ways to draw the U.S. back to the
negotiating table. Even so, he said ministers had to consider
whether the EU and other nations would work to implement the
Kyoto plan without U.S. support.
     ``It would be a worst-case scenario,'' Larsson said. ``We
have to have more discussions on that issue.''

November Talks

     Talks to spell out the fine print to the Kyoto accord
collapsed in November in The Hague, with the U.S. and European
Union at odds about just how nations should make cuts.
     The U.S. wanted more market-friendly mechanisms to cut the
cost of complying with the accord for industry and consumers,
while the EU wanted to restrict those measures, believing them to
be loopholes. Larsson said the EU still is willing to negotiate
on the issues.
     ``We have all the time tried to be as flexible as possible
and to find solutions that are agreeable to all parties, but we
want to guard the integrity of the protocol,'' he said. ``Those
limits are not put forward by ourselves. They are put forward by
the science.''

--Reed V. Landberg in the London newsroom 44-20-7330-7862 or at
landberg@Bloomberg.net.

EU to confront Bush over climate retreat
ENDS Daily - 29/03/01
-------------------------
The EU will next week send a high-level delegation to
Washington in a bid to "clarify" the USA's position on the
Kyoto climate protocol. The move was announced by
environment chief Margot Wallström as European condemnations
of the Bush administration's apparent rejection of the Kyoto
protocol multiplied.

"It's extremely worrying, we don't like what we hear," the
commissioner said. Ms Wallström will travel with Swedish
environment minister, Council of Ministers' president Kjell
Larsson and a representative of the Belgian government, next
in line for the EU's rotating chairmanship. The visit is
being organised despite the fact that the EU has received no
official confirmation of the US position, nor a reply to a
letter sent last week urging early dialogue on the issue.

Meanwhile Dutch environment minister and chairman of the
Kyoto protocol negotiations Jan Pronk has already travelled
to Washington for talks. A spokesperson said he was
concerned by the new signals coming from the USA. She added
that Mr Pronk hoped to issue new proposals for a possible
compromise agreement early next month.

White House and state department spokespeople yesterday
confirmed that the USA was "not looking for" ratification of
the protocol, but denied newspaper reports that the
government had taken steps to "unsign" it. They insisted
that the USA would attend resumed negotiations in July. The
position would not change until an ongoing review of US
climate policy was complete, they said.

EU politicians have nevertheless reacted with outrage,
including a call by the European Parliament's green group for
European consumers to boycott American oil companies, "namely
Exxon, Texaco and Chevron".

UK environment minister Michael Meacher said the situation
was "exceptionally serious" but insisted the EU should still
ratify Kyoto even if the Americans did not. According to his
Danish counterpart Svend Auken: "The USA may be the world's
greatest country, but it must not be permitted to dictate to
the rest of us that we are not to do something on which there
is otherwise broad agreement." "We shall continue despite
the problems [and] we in the EU will work urgently to bring
Japan and Russia in particular into the agreement."

Ms Wallström said it was particularly serious that Mr Bush
had questioned the growing scientific consensus on the causes
and dangers of climate change.

Follow-up: European Commission (http://europa.eu.int/comm),
tel: +32 2 299 1111. See also statement by Svend Auken
(http://www.mem.dk/auken/kommentar/Kampenomklimaet.htm).

Thursday, 29 March 2001 Media Statement
NZ concerned at US signals on Kyoto Protocol

New Zealand shares the grave concern disappointment of many other
nations at recent statements from the Bush Administration indicating
that the United States is considering abandoning the Kyoto Protocol,
Pete Hodgson said today.

Mr Hodgson, the convenor of the New Zealand Ministerial Group on
Climate Change, said New Zealand was still working towards
ratification of the Kyoto Protocol in mid-2002, in consultation with
sector groups and the wider public. It would be premature at this
stage to consider a revised approach.

"Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Phil Goff will be in Washington
next week to meet senior members of the Bush Administration, many
of whom are closely involved with United States policy on climate
change," said Mr Hodgson. "He will be setting out New Zealand's
concerns very clearly and urging the United States to stay fully
involved with international attempts to develop an effective response
to climate change."

Mr Hodgson said he had personally made New Zealand's position
clear to the senior American delegate at a meeting of the climate
change 'Umbrella Group' of nations in Wellington last week. The
group, which includes both New Zealand and the United States, is an
informal network of nine developed countries that works on various
aspects of climate change negotiations.

"Climate change cannot be dealt with by ignoring it," Mr Hodgson
said. "The world needs the United States to engage with the
international effort to find an effective response. This is an issue of
global importance, which is why there has been no support to date for
the latest statements from the US, but strong expressions of concern.

"If US oil interests are currently in the ascendancy, many other sectors
of the US economy will be damaged by any moves to abandon the
Kyoto Protocol. The insurance industry, the agriculture and forestry
industries and any industry involved with innovative energy solutions
will be disadvantaged. It will be interesting to see whether
countervailing pressure emerges from those sectors."

Mr Hodgson is due to represent New Zealand at a gathering of key
climate change negotiating parties in New York in April. The meeting
is a preliminary to the resumption in Bonn in July of the World
Conference on Climate Change that ended without agreement at The
Hague last October.

Graeme Speden, press secretary: 04 471 9707 / 025 270 9055

Press Release
World Wide Fund for Nature - Pakistan
_________________________________________________________
Date: 30 March 2001

WWF – Pakistan flays US on withdrawing
from Kyoto Protocol

WWF - Pakistan strongly condemns President Bush's recent decision of going back on its commitment of cutting green house emissions under the Kyoto Protocol- believed to be causing global warming. In addition to heating the earth’s surface, climate change does a lot of other things as well. Changes in water vapour, clouds and ice cover, affect on plant species, rising levels of oceans, alteration in atmospheric and oceanic circulation can either reinforce or offset the original impact.

“How can President Bush ignore the fact that 5% of the world’s population in the US is contributing more than 25% of the globe’s carbon dioxide,” remarks the concerned Director Environmental Pollution, WWF – Pakistan, Hammad Naqi Khan. “Other industrialised nations should step forward to ratify this protocol to put pressure on the US administration,” he added. While appreciating the recent statements from the European Union, governments of Japan, Australia, and the UK he remarked, “ I wonder why Pakistani government is still silent on the issue?” In 1997 the Clinton administration, European Union member states and Japan signed the agreement on Climate Change in Kyoto, but it has not been ratified so far. However, the treaty will only come into effect when 55% of the industrialised nations have ratified it by 2002.

“The impacts are more serious for developing countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh and India because of an unstable and underdeveloped infrastructure, which is quite weak to bear the hazards, created by climate change. The likelihood of additional warming, inundation of low-lying coastal areas and extreme weather patterns are of great concern”, said Hammad Naqi Khan.

· Available for interview on this subject: Hammad Naqi Khan, Director, Environmental Pollution Unit, WWF - Pakistan, Ferozepur Road, Lahore. Tel: 5882069, 5862360, 5869429, Fax: 5862358, Mobile: 0300 8466690
e-mail: hnaqi@wwf.org.pk

Japan to keep pressing U.S. on global warming

Japan will continue to urge the United States to ratify a 1997 treaty
designed to prevent global warming, even though Washington has announced
plans to withdraw from the landmark pact, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo
Fukuda said Thursday.

"We believe it is extremely important for the United States, the world's
largest emitter of carbon dioxide, to conclude the Kyoto Protocol," the top
government spokesman said. "What the Japanese government must do is continue
to call on the United States (to ratify the treaty), and keep up diplomatic
efforts to ensure the Kyoto Protocol will take effect."

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer told a Wednesday news briefing in
Washington that President George W. Bush has instructed his administration
to review the U.S. stance on the Kyoto Protocol.

The treaty, negotiated and signed in Kyoto, would require the world's
industrial countries to impose binding limits on emissions of heat-trapping
gases, which scientists believe are causing significant changes in the
Earth's climate.

Under the treaty, the U.S. would have to reduce its emissions of carbon
dioxide, methane and certain other pollutants by 7 percent from 1990 levels
by 2012.

The Japan Times: Mar. 30, 2001

Kyoto Protocol Is Not Dead!

Japan should take a leadership to entry into force Kyoto Protocol Now!

- Comments to the announcemnt on Pull Out of Global Warming Treaty
by The Bush administration -

30 March 2001
Mie Asaoka
President, KIKO Network, Japan

On 29th, Mr. Fleischer, White House spokesman, announced the US will pull
out of Kyoto Protocol, Global Warming Treaty.

The announcemnt is totally unacceptable
-Bush administration denied they are the World leader

Recognizing the impact of global warming, it is totally unacceptable
for all of the Japanese citizens and we believe it was a big mistake to the
US.
By ignoring the only international agreement, the US is objecting the
moral obligation which is crucial to solve the threat of Global Warming.
We reckon that new Bush administration is throwing away their leadership
in international community by claiming they, the world largest polluter,
can be a free-rider of world environment.

We strongly urge President Bush to recognize the seriousness of climate
change and withdraw their announcement. They should repent of American way
of selfish unilateralism.
We also urge Japan and the other governments in developed countries to
affect US to back to the reality of Kyoto negotiation.

o Japan should be a world leader to save Kyoto Protocol through
ratification

US officials incredibly misunderstand the voting for entry into force,
saying "the treaty cannot even possibly be in effect". However, already 33
countries ratified it within 55 nations' requirement. And even though the
US and coal exports depending Canada and Australia don't ratify, other
developed nations could cooperatively lead the Kyoto Protocol' entry into
force.
Thus EU and Japan could lead those ratification process, then we can
wait for the US to follow-up after the enforcement.

Regrettably by now, The Japanese government have avoided to state
that "we will ratify independently to the US" (queries by Mr. Tetsuro
Fukuyama, DPJ at Environmental Council of the House of Counselors on 22,
27 March). As the host country of Kyoto COP3 negotiation, Japan should
take the leadership with the EU by declaring the political will to ratify
independently to the US NOW, as well as urge the US back to the seat of
Kyoto negotiation.

Climate change cannot wait for us and there's no future in wait & see
tactics. It is now crucially important for Japan and other nations not to
follow the US and not to stop making domestic policies and measures for
the ratification.

We, Japanese NGOs will gather the vast majority of support voice to the
Kyoto Protocol in our grassroots Campaign.

TEL 03-3263-9210?FAX 03-3263-9463
E-Mail: kikotko@jca.apc.org
http://www.jca.apc.org/~kikonet/index-j.html

Forum disappointed with U.S refusal to sign Kyoto Protocol

30 MARCH 2001 (Pacnews) -- The Secretary General of the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, Noel Levi is disappointed with the announcement by the United States not to support the Kyoto Protocol on climate change.

“Forum Leaders at their summit last October in Kiribati reiterated their deep concerns about the adverse impact of human-induced climate change on all Pacific Islands, especially low lying atolls,” said Levi.

“The Leaders recognised that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol provided a significant first step forward, on the path of ensuring effective global action to combat climate change.”

“The Leaders also highlighted the importance of the early entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol, preferably by 2002, and that its implementation will result in real and measurable reductions in greenhouse gas emissions," Levi said.

“The announcement by the US not to support the Kyoto Protocol is disappointing, given its influential role. However, there is still room for all countries to continue working towards addressing the concerns we all share on climate change.”

The Secretary General said the Kyoto Protocol was one of a number of useful avenues to achieve these aims, adding that climate change ultimately affected everyone.

“It is very important that we see meaningful progress and effective measures by all countries, on the international and domestic fronts, to help counter the adverse impacts of climate change,” Levi said.

The Kyoto Protocol is an agreement under which developed countries have agreed to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, which contribute to some aspects of climate change and sea-level rise. The Protocol enters into force if it is ratified by at least fifty-five countries, which must include the largest greenhouse gas emitters such as the United States…PNS (ENDS)

Sunday, New York Times -

Bush Angers Europe by Eroding Pact on Warming

By EDMUND L. ANDREWS

FRANKFURT, March 31 - European leaders frequently bristle about
American behavior, but President Bush's abrupt decision this week
to abandon a treaty on global warming has provoked even more than
the usual level of anger and frustration.

"Irresponsible," "arrogant," even "sabotage" are just a few of the
charges that Europeans have leveled at Mr. Bush since he announced
his refusal to follow through on the treaty, the Kyoto Protocol.
And European Union representatives will take their case in favor of
the accord to Washington on Monday, though their arguments are not
expected to prevail.

The response is so intense in part because the decision has
aggravated a mixture of grudges that have gnawed at Europeans for
years.

They are angry that the United States appears oblivious to
widespread environmental concerns across most of Europe.

They are frustrated that the United States, by virtue of its size,
can undermine a treaty that was negotiated by more than 100
countries.

Most of all, they are depressed that there is not much they can do
about it.

The United States produces about 25 percent of the gases
associated with global warming, and its refusal to meet goals set
by Kyoto to reduce those emissions makes it difficult for
competitors to stick with their goals.

"To suggest scrapping Kyoto and making a new agreement with more
countries involved simply reflects a lack of understanding of
political realities," said Margot Wallström, Europe's commissioner
for environmental affairs. "We could lose years of work if we were
to start from scratch."

Ms. Wallström will lead the delegation that meets on Monday with
Christie Whitman, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency.
The group is also expected to include Environment Minister Kjell
Larsson of Sweden, whose country currently holds the rotating
European Union presidency, and representatives of Belgium, which
takes over from the Swedes in July.

The meeting is part of a diplomatic push that is also supposed to
include visits to China, Russia, Iran and Japan to assess whether
it would be possible to carry through on the Kyoto treaty without
the United States.

Today, environment ministers from European Union countries
discussed the Bush decision at a previously scheduled meeting in
Sweden, where the reaction was one of indignation.

"Kyoto is still alive," said Mr. Larsson, who was host of the
meeting in Kiruna, 60 miles north of the Arctic Circle. "No country
has the right to declare Kyoto dead."

The anger at the United States is spread evenly across Europe.

Dominique Voynet, France's minister for the environment, called Mr.
Bush's decision "completely provocative and irresponsible" and
warned the United States against "continuing the work of sabotage"
if other countries decided to embrace the goals of the Kyoto
agreement on their own.

Le Monde, the French daily newspaper, called Mr. Bush's decision
"a brutal form of unilateralism." In London, The Independent
reported that "history will not judge George Bush kindly."

When Mr. Bush met with the German Chancellor, Gerhard Schröder, in
Washington on Thursday, Kyoto formed a central disagreement. "We
will not do anything that harms our economy, because first things
first are the people who live in America," Mr. Bush said.

This kind of America-first sentiment prompted sharp criticism from
the European Union Commission president, Romano Prodi. "If one
wants to be a world leader, one must know how to look after the
entire earth and not only American industry," the former Italian
prime minister told La Repubblica newspaper.

But nobody has any illusions about changing American policy, and
the real question European leaders are asking is whether they can
or should press ahead without America.

"It is a catastrophe," said Gerd Billen, executive director of
Germany's biggest environmental group, Naturschutzbund Deutschland,
which has 350,000 members. "Everybody knows how hard it is to reach
an international agreement on environmental issues like this, and
this could destroy it."

Mr. Billen and other environmental leaders are pushing for a
boycott against American companies, particularly oil companies that
have extensive gas-station networks in Europe.

"It would be a citizens' action, and if it is done right, it could
really put pressure on the oil companies," said Alexander de Roo,
deputy chairman of the European Parliament's environmental
committee. "I don't think that begging will be very effective. I
think they will only listen to powerful arguments."

As in many other international issues, from the decision to send
peacekeeping forces to the Balkans to coordinating international
currency rates, Europeans know from experience that it is difficult
to accomplish anything without American collaboration.

Under the Kyoto Protocol, which was approved in 1997 after years
of negotiation, 37 other industrial countries agreed to reduce
their emissions of greenhouse gases by 2012 to 5.2 percent below
the levels in 1990.

But the United States is by far the biggest producer of greenhouse
gases, both per capita and in total. The average American consumes
twice as much energy as the average European, and the emission of
greenhouse gases is also about twice as high per capita in the
United States as in Europe.

If European countries press ahead with their own goal, European
companies run the risk of incurring higher expenses while American
companies benefit from easier rules.

Ms. Wallström, the environmental commissioner, noted at a news
conference in Brussels on Thursday that Europe did not want to end
up rewarding the United States for its refusal to go along.

But abandoning the goals is politically treacherous, because they
enjoy strong popular support in most countries. Despite the anger
that many Europeans feel toward high gasoline taxes, support for
environmental regulations remains much stronger than in the United
States.

In the months leading up the Kyoto meetings in 1997, the European
Union proposed a remarkably ambitious goal of reducing greenhouse
emissions to 15 percent below the levels of 1990.

Reflecting the enormous difference in the political and social
climates in the United States and Europe, European business groups
merely tried to moderate those goals and many industrial
associations committed themselves to steep reductions in emissions
as a way to escape direct government regulation.

Many European environmental leaders argue that Europe needs to
press ahead.

"If 55 countries representing 55 percent of worldwide CO2
emissions ratify the Kyoto protocol, then it begins to function,"
Mr. de Roo said.

On a broader level, many Europeans are convinced that Mr. Bush is
leading the United States into greater isolation. Many commentators
seized upon Mr. Bush's comment last week that he would not do
anything to weaken the American economy. The announcement was
front-page news across Europe, and it quickly prompted a storm of
criticism.

"We are back to Ronald Reagan and America First," said Noel Mamer,
a leader of the French Green party and a member of Parliament. "I
think the decision is completely mad, and it is a reason for more
isolation for America."

But even some of the fiercest European critics admit that they
have little leverage. In Brussels, European leaders carefully
avoided making any threats and said they merely planned to
"explain" their position to the Bush administration.

"The United States will probably come out of this crisis of
trans-Atlantic relations as the winner," said Libération, the
left-leaning French newspaper. But, it added, "Those who spew gases
run the risk of reaping, long before the climate has heated up, an
explosive hostility in public opinion and diplomatic isolation."

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/01/world/01GERM.html?ex=987153226&ei=1&en=331fadbae2888c75

Russia takes shot at Washington over Kyoto pact

RUSSIA: April 2, 2001

MOSCOW - Russia fired a shot at Washington on Saturday for rejecting the 1997 Kyoto pact, condemning "one-sided" action over the treaty aimed at curbing global warming.

The foreign ministry, in its first comment on the rejection of the treaty by President George W. Bush, said in a statement that careful work was needed to get a treaty to satisfy all.

"Attaining this goal cannot come from one-sided steps, but by the continuation of careful and constructive work to find solutions which would in full measure suit all the participants in the framework convention on climate change," it said.

"We support a successful conclusion to the negotiating process on working out mechanisms for the realisation of the Kyoto protocol and consider that they should have an all-embracing character," it added.

The European Union has criticised Bush for rejecting the Kyoto treaty, which calls for targeted cuts of carbon dioxide emissions to reduce the risk of global warming.

But Canada has said the rigid European stance forced Bush to reject the treaty, which calls on industrialised nations to cut carbon dioxide emissions by on average 5.2 percent below 1990 levels by 2012. Bush said the pact was not in U.S. interests.

Russia is among the world's top polluters after the United States, which is the biggest producer of man-made carbon dioxide emissions.

Russia had hoped to benefit from allowances in the Kyoto pact for countries which meet emission targets to sell credits to nations that do not. Russia's emissions have fallen sharply amid economic collapse since the end of communism.

REUTERS NEWS SERVICE

SOUTH AFRICA: MINISTER RAPS INDUSTRIALIZED NATIONS" OVER
GREENHOUSE EFFECT
BBC Monitoring Service/Financial Times
Mar 29, 2001
Internet:
http://globalarchive.ft.com/globalarchive/articles.html?id=010329006600&
query=%22climate+change%22

Text of report by South African news agency SAPA web site

Parliament, 29 March: Environmental Affairs Minister Valli Moosa
used the occasion of a debate in the National Assembly on the
South African Weather Service Bill to sound a strong warning on
global warming and its disastrous consequences. He also strongly
criticized industrialized nations for their failure to "get their
act together" on the reduction or control of greenhouse gas
emissions. "A major, major matter of concern...[ellipsis as
received] is the breakdown in the developed world on the question
of climate change. "For many years the world has been trying to do
something about reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases, which
gave the greenhouse effect around the globe."

The biggest polluters were the United States, followed by Europe
and Japan. Yet the developed world was unable to agree on a
programme towards, if not just reducing, at least controlling the
emission of the greenhouse gases which caused global warming,
Moosa said. Negotiations on this matter had broken down. "To those
of us who are not a part of the polluting globe, this is a matter
of grave concern. "We need to bring the big polluters of the world
to book, because they are not just polluting their own countries,
but the atmosphere as a whole." In a few decades, the consequences
- particularly for the smaller island nations - would be
disastrous.

"Some of these could be completely flooded over within a few
decades. I would like to register our own deep concerns on this
matter, and I think that I can say with confidence that the South
African government urges the developed nations to get their act
together," Moosa said. The House unanimously passed the South
African Weather Service Bill, which aims to transform the current
weather bureau into an agency which will charge for its services.
"Agentization of the weather service provides us with the unique
opportunity to generate revenue to sustain its operation beyond
what the public purse can fund," Moosa told members. There was
scope for implementing a sophisticated cost recovery operation in
certain areas - such as the aviation industry - and for market-
related business activities in others. "(It) also provides us with
an opportunity to prioritize the transformation of the racial and
gender human resources composition," he said.

Top management of the current weather bureau is understood to be
100 per cent male, 80 per cent of whom are white. The bill will
now be referred to the National Council of Provinces for
concurrence.

Source: SAPA news agency web site, Johannesburg, in English 1439
gmt 29 Mar 01

PRESS RELEASE
29 March 2001

CEC URGES STRONG EU RESPONSE TO AMERICAN KYOTO DECISION

Keith Jenkins, the Director of the Conference of European Churches' Church and Society Commission has written to Sweden's Deputy Prime Minister, Ms. Lena Hjelm-Wallén urging a strong response by the European Union to the Bush administration's decision not to implement the Kyoto Treaty on greenhouse gas emissions which, he says, "puts the narrowest national interest before global responsibility". Ms. Hjelm-Wallén is responsible for co-ordinating the Swedish government's role as the President of the Council of Ministers of the European Union during the current six months.

The letter urges "that the European Union and its Member States condemn the short-sighted approach of the United States government, reaffirm their common commitment to the aims of the Kyoto Treaty, maintain their own commitment to reducing emissions and take every step possible to convince the United States government that it is in the long-term interests of all, including the people of the United States, to control emissions before they do irreparable damage to the earth".

Keith Jenkins reminded the Deputy Prime Minister that the question of climate change and the resumption of negotiations had been raised in the meeting which she held with representatives of Swedish and European churches in November 2000. The participants in that meeting had been encouraged by the firm line taken by the then incoming Swedish Presidency. Mr Jenkins indicated that the churches believed that the Kyoto Treaty was "the best practical hope of undertaking a shared and proportionate responsibility for the effects of global warming". He added that "a particular burden in this respect must rest on the most industrialised and wealthiest nations".

Looking ahead to the Göteborg meeting of the European Council at the end of the Presidency in June 2001, he suggests that the credibility of the strategy on sustainable development to be adopted at that meeting "must in part depend on firm action on climate change and the building of alliances for effective action between the European Union and other concerned states".

For further information please contact Keith Jenkins on + 32 2 234 6838 or +32 496 280 766

WCC encourages countries to continue working towards the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol despite its rejection by the Bush administration

World Council of Churches Press Release 30th March 2001

"The rejection of the Kyoto Protocol by the Bush administration is a betrayal of their responsibilities as global citizens", said Dr David Hallman, the World Council of Churches (WCC) climate change programme coordinator, today in a first reaction to the decision of the US government to reject an international treaty designed to combat global warming. The United States, with 4% of the world's population, emits 25% of the global emissions that are leading to climate change.

The WCC Central Committee, meeting in Potsdam, 29 January-6 February 2001, reaffirmed its position that "industrialised countries bear the major moral responsibility for precipitating climate change and therefore must exercise leadership that results in real action to reduce the causes".

Hallman, a member of the United Church of Canada, noted that there is increasing evidence that vulnerable peoples, especially in the poorer countries, are already suffering from the impacts of human?induced climate change. He pointed to the past two years of devastating floods in Mozambique, rising sea levels in the Pacific Islands, and persistent years of drought in Africa.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, scientific body which advises the UN, reported earlier this year that "there is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities”.

Hallman stated that the climate change issue will continue regardless of the recent rejection: “If the US walks away from the Kyoto Protocol, it just means that another treaty with even more ambitious targets will have to be negotiated in the future as evidence of the devastating impacts of climate change mounts. We encourage all other countries to continue working towards the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol regardless of the US action.”

For further information, please contact Karin Achtelstetter, Media Relations Officer Tel: (+41.22) 791.61.53 Mobile: (+41) 79.284.52.12

150 rte de Ferney PO Box 2100 1211 Geneva 2 Switzerland
Fax: (+41 22) 798 1346; E-mail: ka@wcc-coe.org; Web: www.wcc-coe.org

Religious Leaders' Statement on Climate Change

March 29, 2001

President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We reach out as senior leaders of major American faith communities eager to discuss with you a challenge of paramount religious significance: the condition of God's creation at the hands of God's children, the climate of planet Earth as being altered by the activity of the Earth's people.

Many of us have carefully followed the inquiry into climate change and global warming. While we interact with them regularly, we are not scientists, policy-makers, leaders within the economic sector, or architects of global treaties. We do not comment on complex data or technological responses. Nor do we wish to encourage narrow partisanship about an issue which so clearly affects the well-being of all humankind.

We believe there is a point, however, at which scientific consensus is sufficiently established to require consideration of long-standing religious and moral principles of prudence and precaution. If credible evidence exists to indicate our present course could threaten the quality of life for God's creation and God's children, this becomes an issue of paramount moral concern.

We are persuaded that this point of prudence is now upon us. Projected impacts of global warming on the most poor and vulnerable are ethically unacceptable. Domestic and international action is urgently required. The United States has a moral responsibility to lead the world's nations and to serve its people. In recent days, we have been reading reports of what the administration is not prepared to do to address climate change. We are eager to learn what our government will enact here: in a credible, binding program to honor international commitments, successfully prevent destructive impacts on humankind and habitat, and embody equity.

Our scriptures are plain about the religious dimension of this challenge. When it is all creation on Earth that is being affected, we freshly appreciate the principle that, "The Earth is the Lord's." (Ps.24:1) Our climate and seasons are God's handicraft, "Yours is the day. Yours is also the night. You made summer and winter." (Ps. 74:16-17) All life is embraced by God's covenant and with particular instructions regarding our children and children's children. "This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations." (Gen. 9:12)

Because human purpose in the greater web of life is a central issue here, this inquiry is expanding beyond the laboratories of science and the halls of diplomacy to the pulpits and pews of the American heartland. We believe you should be aware that many of our denominations have passed resolutions on climate change and that local activity is growing in churches and synagogues across a broad spectrum of religious life. We can confirm what EPA Administrator Whitman reported to you on March 6th: "For the first time, the world's religious communities have started to engage in the issue." And while there are diverse perspectives on policy, many still evolving, it is our view that this activity will grow exponentially, from genuine religious and moral conviction.

We in the faith community are in a process of open dialogue and inquiry here. We are heartened by your early commitment to civil, moderate, bipartisan dialogue and, particularly, by your willingness to hear the voice of the faith community. We hope you will follow this path on the issue of climate change. We are eager to meet with you for further reflection, perhaps in a small gathering in June.

Meanwhile, we believe an historic challenge is before us all here, foreseen by our scriptures, and freshly vivid in these signs of the times, "I have set before you life or death, blessings or curse. Choose life, therefore, that you and your descendants may live." (Dt. 30:19)

Signatories:

Ismar Schorsch
Chancellor, Jewish Theological Seminary

Dr. Bob Edgar
General Secretary
National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA

The Reverend Clifton Kirkpatrick
Stated Clerk
Presbyterian Church (USA)

Bishop Melvin G. Talbert
Senior Ecumenical Officer, United Methodist Church

The Reverend Richard L. Hamm
General Minister and President
Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)

Bishop McKinley Young
Bishop of the Tenth Episcopal District
African Methodist Episcopal Church

Letter from Federation of Transport and Environment
http://www.t-e.nu/

Dear President Bush

We, the Members, Board and Staff of the European Federation for Transport
and Environment*, meeting at our Annual General Assembly in Brussels, are
writing to express our dismay at your recent pronouncements on US climate
change policy. We are particularly astonished that the US appears to be
seeking to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol to the UN Framework Convention
on Climate Change, citing costs as a major reason for this action.

We consider this proposal irresponsible, immoral and extraordinarily
short-sighted. The USA is the wealthiest nation in the world, and also
generates one quarter of all anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions. No
other country therefore has as great a responsibility for the dramatic
ecological consequences which now threaten all parts of the globe, nor as
great a capacity to reduce these threats. We would also remind you that,
since the USA signed the Protocol, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change has greatly increased its estimates of the likely scale and impact
of
global warming, and with growing certainty as to the expected effects of
anthropogenic climate change.

US inaction is doubly unaccountable. On the one hand, additional jobs and
greater economic efficiency would result from domestic action on energy
efficiency in the US. On the other, the USA like other countries will
suffer
severe disruption and economic losses through increased incidents of
drought, flooding, and other extreme weather events if climate change is
not
tackled as a matter of urgency.

T&E therefore denounces in the strongest possible terms the course of
action which you appear to have decided upon. We urge all responsible
institutions, corporations, the scientific community and all concerned citizens of the
US to press the US administration to reverse its current course of action,
and to face up to its environmental responsibilities as the most powerful
nation on earth.

Signed on behalf of T&E
Beatrice Schell
Director
Brussels, 31 March 2001

1 April 2001

BRAZILIAN POSITION ON THE DEADLOCK IN THE INTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATIONS ON
GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE

"PREVAILING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE CONFIRMS THAT GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE IS AN ESSENTIAL, DANGEROUS ISSUE FOR THE FUTURE GENERATIONS OF ALL NATIONS.

ADDRESSING THIS MAJOR CHALLENGE WILL REQUIRE INCREASING ATTENTION BY ALL WORLD LEADERS.

IN THE OPINION OF BRAZIL, THE MAIN ISSUE NOW IS KEEPING THE
NEGOTIATING PROCESS UNDER THE FRAMEWORK OF THE UNITED NATIONS, THE CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE, AND ITS KYOTO PROTOCOL.

SUCH PROCESS MUST SOLVE THE THORNY PROBLEM OF A FAIR SHARING OF THE BURDEN ASSOCIATED WITH THE REQUIRED CHANGES IN THE ENERGY SECTOR AND OTHERS.

THE FAIR SHARING OF THIS BURDEN MUST BE BASED ON THE RESPONSIBILITY OF EACH COUNTRY IN PRODUCING GLOBAL WARMING.

THIS PRINCIPLE OF A COMMON BUT DIFFERENTIATED RESPONSIBILITY IS ENSHRINED IN THE CLIMATE CHANGE CONVENTION, RATIFIED BY ESSENTIALLY ALL GOVERNMENTS.

THE PROBLEM OF CLIMATE CHANGE IS GLOBAL, AND CAN ONLY BE ADDRESSED IN A GLOBAL SYSTEM. INTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATIONS MUST CONTINUE UNDER THE CONVENTION. EVERY EFFORT MUST BE MADE TO PRESERVE ITS KYOTO PROTOCOL, AS THE BASIS FOR PROGRESS IN THIS AREA.

WE ARE WILLING TO PERSERVERE IN THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH ALL OTHER COUNTRIES, WITH A VIEW TO OVERCOMING THE PRESENT DIFFICULTIES AND TO ACHIEVE THE COMMON GOAL OF ENSURING THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS IN THE WHOLE WORLD.

Asia environment ministers urge U.S. to stay with accord
The Japan Times: Apr. 10, 2001
Environment ministers from Japan, China and South Korea have urged the
United States to stay within the framework of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol and
strive to ratify the pact on curbing global warming.

In a joint communique issued Sunday after their two-day meeting in Tokyo,
the ministers said they "sincerely hope that the U.S. government will
actively work with all the parties" for a successful outcome to the U.N.
climate-change conference and the implementation of the Kyoto accord.

The statement by Environment Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi, China's State
Environmental Protection Administration Minister Xie Zhenhua and South
Korean Environment Minister Kim Myung Ja follows U.S. President George W.
Bush's recent decision to pull out of the Kyoto pact.

The 1997 Kyoto treaty obliges industrialized countries to cut greenhouse gas
emissions by an average of 5.2 percent from 1990 levels between 2008 and
2012 to avoid disastrous global weather changes.

The trio agreed the sixth Conference of Parties (COP6) to the U.N. Framework
Convention on Climate Change, scheduled to resume in Bonn in July, is "vital
for bringing the Kyoto Protocol into force as early as possible."

Talks at the previous COP6 round in The Hague in November collapsed when a
dispute arose over the role of forest absorption in cutting gas emissions.

U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage on Friday said Washington
will propose by July, in time for COP6, an alternative plan to the Kyoto
Protocol by seeking the participation of developing countries including
India and China as well as the industrial nations.

Speaking to the press after the Tokyo meeting, Xie reiterated China's stance
that responsibilities differ between industrialized and developing countries
in achieving reductions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

Aside from global warming, the three ministers agreed to cooperate over
ecological conservation in northwest China, which is suffering from severe
desertification, and to promote systematic studies of sandstorms which have
become an increasing problem in the northeast Asian region.

The ministers also reaffirmed their cooperation in dealing with such areas
as acid rain, air pollution, water management, marine environment protection
and wetland conservation.

The tripartite annual talks were the third of their kind. Next year's
meeting will be held in South Korea, Xie said.

Letter from Swiss President to Bush
The President of the United States of America
Mr. George W. Bush
Washington D.C.

2 April 2001

Dear Mr President

I have taken note with concern of your recently expressed intention to reconsider the approach of the United States of America in tackling the threat posed by the accelerating climate change, and in particular of your plan to abandon the support of the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change.

As has been clearly shown by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its recently published Third Assessment Report, climate change poses a real risk for the well being of our planet. Mitigation efforts are needed and the time at our disposal to effect real changes is limited.

Switzerland believes, that the common efforts of the international community within the framework of the Kyoto Protocol are the appropriate way to address this challenge at the global level.

To that end, we have, over the last decade, closely worked together with many countries, notably the United States of America. The conclusion of the UN Framework Convention on climate Control and the Kyoto Protocol reflect the broad international consensus to find common and equitable solutions. While acknowledging the fact that these legal instruments are only a first, albeit significant step to cope with the threat of global warming, they do take into account the multifaceted interests of the international community, including economic interests and the potential of technological developments to reduce the emission of green house gases. We also believe that these new technologies offer opportunities for our economies, not only to contribute to the mitigation of the climate threat but also render them more efficient and competitive.

To grasp these opportunities, joint efforts will be necessary to be undertaken in the international negotiations. To this end, the successful conclusion of the Kyoto process will provide an important step forward. The challenges remaining are manifold in order to ascertain a sustainable future for the world today and for generations to come. To meet these challenges, our common international effort needs to continue. In this regard, I do hope that your will reconsider your position and that the United States of America will continue its cooperation within the framework of the Kyoto Protocol, to which my country remains fully committed.

with kind regards Moritz Leuenberger

THE U.S. LACKS POLITICAL WILL TO RATIFY THE KYOTO PROTOCOL

By: Grace Akumu

President George Bush of the U.S. recently said that his government will not ratify the Kyoto Protocol to the Climate Change Convention because of economic reasons. However, apart from being economically and technologically the most powerful country on earth today, the U.S. is the single largest emitter of greenhouse gases (ghgs) causing global warming on a per capita basis. Historically and presently, they have spewed into the atmosphere, nearly two thirds of those dangerous gases. They are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and chlorofluorocarbons or CFCs. Meanwhile, the U.S. has signed and ratified the Climate Change Convention whereby it agreed along with other industrialised countries to take the lead in combating climate change. Reneging on this commitment is dangerous to the world because the severity and frequency of the impacts of climate change are on the increase and the social and economic costs to developing countries are becoming unbearable.

A number of developing countries are currently experiencing either severe droughts or flooding as a result of the La-Nina and El-Nino phenomena, the frequency and intensity of which, has challenged even some viable economies on the continent. It is still fresh in our memories the energy crisis that Kenya has just gone through occasioned among others by a prolonged and severe drought. 80 per cent of Kenya's energy is hydro-generated. We have also not forgotten the El-Nino floods of 1997/98 and their devastating impacts on our infrastructure, health, agriculture, food security, etc. Climate change will increase our vulnerability to some of these natural phenomena yet we do not have adequate resources for adaptation. We shall experience more frequent and severe famines, dislocation and migration of rural populations, increase in slums, inadequate supply of clean water and sanitation, pollution of rivers and coastal zones. Climate change will also enhance sea-level rise threatening the livelihood and infrastructure along the coastal regions. Political disputes, e.g. civil strife, may increase as a result of conflicts over scarce shared water resources, especially for livestock grazing. Diseases such as malaria, cholera, typhoid, dysentry, pneumonia, asthma, bronchitis, menigitis, conjuctivitis, menigitis, etc, associated with dust and drought conditions will be on the increase. Our national development planners as well as medical institutions should be alert. As climate change will increase, so will desertification and hence the rise of poverty in continents such as Africa. The above are just some examples of how continents such as Africa may be affected by climate change. The biggest challenge for African governments will be adaptation to these impacts. Do we have the financial, human and technological resources?

The Climate Change Convention is clear with regard to the implementation of commitments contained therein. It states that developed countries "shall assist developing countries that are vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change in meeting costs of adaptation to those adverse effects. It also states that developed countries shall provide new and additional financial and technological resources to developing countries to implement the Convention". Developing countries will still have to emit in order to develop. Industrialised countries have reached their current levels of development by emiting greenhouse gases.

What the U.S. government needs to know is that damages associated with climate change are on the increase. Sooner or later, this may become a security issue. It is therefore prudent for the U.S. to act now by joining the rest of the international community to try to
solve the climate change problem. Staying out of the Kyoto Protocol which the U.S. helped to negotiate is not going to help but only aggravate the problem at hand. It is also not in good faith, for the U.S. to turn around and claim that it will not ratify the Kyoto Protocol unless developing countries are brought on board. The Convention states that developing countries are still allowed to emit in order to develop and that economic and social development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities of developing countries. It also states that industrialised countries should “stabilise their ghg emissions at a level that will prevent dangerous interference with the climate system and such levels should be achieved with a time-frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner”.

Threatening to walk out of the Kyoto Protocol under the pretext that it will hurt the U.S. economy therefore smacks of a superpower wanting to walk away out of its leadership responsibilities and role model positions. The U.S. should take the lead to combat climate change as the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases. It has the wherewithal to combat climate change. It is endowed with financial, human and technological resources - all what it takes to combat climate change. The only thing America lacks is political will to take action. However, we hope the U.S. will realise that it is cheaper to take action now than later as even some of the biggest insurance companies such as Suisse-re, Munich-re and Llyods, have predicted that damage costs related to climate change will soon exceed the world's GDP and the risks will also rise beyond the capacity of the insurance industry and even governments to absorb.

The US government should therefore re-engage itself immediately in the climate negotiations as the survival of some cultures and civilisations, especially those in small islands, is threatened with extinction.

______________________________
The contributor is the Executive Director,
Climate Network Africa
P. O. Box 76479
NAIROBI

Tel: 56.40.40
Fax: 57.37.37
Email: cna@lion.meteo.go.ke

European Council, Stockholm, 23-4 March 2001 ANNEX II (of the Presidency Conclusions) EUROPEAN COUNCIL DECLARATION ON CLIMATE CHANGE The European Council, recognising climate change as a global threat to future well-being and economic progress, recalls the necessity of efficient international action to reduce emissions. It reaffirms its strong commitment to the Kyoto Protocol as the basis for such action and expresses its deep concern at the fact that this Protocol is being called into question. The European Council urges all its negotiation partners to engage constructively in reaching agreement on modalities for implementing the Kyoto Protocol and to facilitate a successful outcome of the resumed COP-6, which will create the conditions for ratification and entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol by 2002.

Finnish CO2 emissions fall in 2000 ENDS Daily - 21/03/01 ------------------------- Finnish carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions amounted to 54m tonnes in 2000, Statistics Finland revealed on Monday. The total is 3m tonnes down on 1999 levels and means emissions are currently virtually the same as they were in 1990, the baseline year of the UN Kyoto protocol. Under the EU's burden sharing arrangement, this is also Finland's target level for emissions of six gases, including CO2, in the period 2008-12.

The fall in emissions in 2000 is linked to an overall reduction in primary energy consumption of 1.6%, in spite of economic growth of 5.7%. The present draft for the government's climate strategy nevertheless assumes that total energy consumption will be driven up by economic growth, requiring investment in increased electricity generating capacity. A fifth nuclear power station and increased imports of natural gas are the main options under consideration (ENDS Daily 9 February). Electricity consumption was about 2% higher in 2000 than in 1999.

These trends suggest that it may not be easy for Finland to maintain its current emissions freeze. In addition, Leena Timonen of Statistics Finland told ENDS Daily, "The year 2000 was quite exceptional due to unusually mild weather and high imports of cheap hydroelectricity from Norway and Sweden, so conditions were in these respects similar to the Kyoto benchmark year of 1990."

Follow-up: Statistics Finland (http://www.stat.fi), tel: +358 9 17341. See also Finnish national greenhouse gas inventory (http://www.vyh.fi/eng/environ/state/air/emis/ghg/ghg.htm). -------------------------

Sweden restarts EU energy tax talks ENDS Daily - 19/03/01 ------------------------- The prospects for agreement on long-stalled EU-wide energy tax rules have improved after government officials held talks on the plan last week for the first time in two years. Swedish presidency officials say they are now "very optimistic" that the Commission's proposal can be agreed, though the question of how high minimum tax rates should be set has not yet been broached.

The European Commission released its "Monti proposal" for minimum excise duty rates on various energy products in 1997, but discussions have long been frozen, chiefly due to staunch opposition from Spain. As the importance of cutting fossil fuel emissions to meet EU climate commitments has grown, however, calls to reach a deal on the tax have multiplied. In the absence of agreement of a full directive, some European commissioners have urged sub-EU groups member states to go it alone (ENDS Daily 6 February).

Friday's meeting, however, has revealed a stronger likelihood of unanimous EU action. "We have 15 member states willing to discuss the structure of a tax. We had a positive reaction from all of them. That is an improvement," a Swedish official told ENDS Daily today. No agreement was reached on specific details, however, she said.

The meeting was limited to considering the structure of the tax, with discussions focusing on the definition of energy-intensive industries and the role of electricity taxes in a rapidly liberalising market. Tax rates were not discussed. "Some member states have been very opposed to the minimum rates proposed [by the Commission]...the only possible approach was to leave the rates behind for the time being," the official said.

The meeting follows an apparent softening in the Spanish line on the energy tax. "What Spain has said is that...it would be acceptable for us to begin discussing this directive provided other measures were contemplated that would guarantee the functioning of the internal market in electricity," Spanish economy minister Rodrigo Rato told Reuters news agency at a finance ministers' meeting last week.

The Swedish official said a formal agreement was not expected under its presidency, but that ministers would discuss progress in early June. Belgium, which takes over the EU presidency in July, is working closely with Sweden on the new talks and is expected to continue the push for an early accord.

Follow-up: Swedish presidency of the EU (http://www.eu2001.se/eu2001/main/default.asp?3195036).

------------------------- Danish CO2 emissions fall again in 2000 ENDS Daily - 16/03/01 ------------------------- Danish carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions fell for the fourth year in succession in 2000, according to national energy agency figures released on Wednesday. The agency predicted that Denmark would now hit its ambitious national target of a 20% emissions cut from 1988 levels by 2005. Previously it forecast that the objective would be missed by up to four percentage points (ENDS Daily 21 April 1999).

The figures also suggest that Denmark should have little difficulty meeting its commitment under the UN Kyoto protocol. This requires emissions of CO2 and five other gases to be reduced by 21% between 1990 and 2008-12. A caveat is that Danish CO2 emissions were lower in 1990 than 1998, making it a tougher baseline year from which to make further cuts.

In parallel to the cut in CO2, 2000 data confirmed a similar downwards trend in national energy consumption, the agency reported. Even after adjusting for warmer temperatures in 2000 than in 1999 and other one-off factors, consumption still fell by 0.7%, it said,.

Follow-up: energy statistics 2000 (http://www.ens.dk/statistik/2000/forlb_stat.htm).

Big CO2 cut seen for EU housing and services ENDS Daily - 16/03/01 ------------------------- The EU could cut greenhouse gas emissions from its households and service industries by some 30% from 1990 levels by 2010, according to a new study ordered by European Commission's environment directorate. It also reveals that half to two-thirds of the reduction could be achieved at no cost. Most of the remaining reductions potential could be achieved by measures costing less than euros 50 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-eq).

The study estimates EU household and services emissions at 1,184m tonnes of CO2-eq in the Kyoto protocol baseline year of 1990. It suggests that this figure could rise without specific initiatives to reverse the trend, but that with actions a 2010 emissions level of 837m tonnes of CO2-eq is achievable.

Key measures to achieve the full reduction potential, says the study, are improving cooling systems and energy performance in buildings. Further indirect savings can be achieved through changes in the electricity supply system, it suggests.

The study is part of a series advising on policy choices for cutting greenhouse gas emissions in the EU economy at least cost, and has been published alongside a second report focusing on emissions from the extraction, transport and distribution of fossil fuels.

This concludes that methane (CH4) is the most important greenhouse gas for the sector. Even without abatement measures, it predicts, emissions are expected to fall from 95m tonnes CO2-eq. in 1990, to 61m tonnes in 2010, due to a projected fall in EU coal production.

It adds, however, that further cuts in methane emissions with a global warming potential of 34m tonnes of CO2-eq could be achieved by 2010 by minimising fugitive emissions and release of ventilation air from deep coal mining. As with the first study, estimated costs for this reduction are up to euros 50 per tonne of CO-eq.

Follow-up: Both studies are posted here (http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/enveco/climate_change/sectoral_targets.htm).

Bush Backs off from CO2 emissions reductions Text of Bush's letter to Senators Greenpeace Press release BBC report CNE press release Friends of the Earth Press Release WWF Press release Swedish Presidency reaction German Environment Ministry reaction Australian reaction Klaus Toepfer, Director UNEP Michael Zammit Cutajar, UNFCCC, Secretariat Letter from Swedish Prime Minister, Gorran Persson and President of the EU Commission, Romano Prodi New Scientist Editorial Time Magazine Japanese response French response European Parliament Greens - press release European Greens Press release in French

13th March 2001, WASHINGTON (AP) -- Backing off a campaign pledge, President Bush is telling Congress he will not regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.

The decision, outlined in a letter being sent to a Republican senator Tuesday, was a blow to conservationists who see curbing emissions of such ``greenhouse gases'' as key to reducing global warming.

The letter cites skyrocketing energy costs, particularly in the West, as one reason for Bush's about-face, according to GOP sources in Congress and the administration who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Bush promised in the campaign to treat carbon dioxide emissions as pollutants, and Christie Whitman, his Environmental Protection Agency administrator, said last month that the administration was strongly considering such regulations.

Vice President Dick Cheney told a weekly policy gathering with senators that the administration was preparing a letter that would say carbon dioxide was not a pollutant, said one official on Capitol Hill. The letter was being sent to Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., late Tuesday, said an administration official briefed on the letter.

Bush pledged during his presidential campaign to require electric utilities to ``reduce emissions and significantly improve air quality.'' The legislation Bush proposed would have established ``mandatory reduction targets for emissions of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide.''

The letter to Hagel said Bush is committed to a balanced energy policy that improves air quality by curbing nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide and mercury but that Bush no longer believes the government should impose mandatory emissions caps on carbon dioxide.

Explaining the shift, Bush noted that the Clean Air Act does not include carbon dioxide as a pollutant. Bush aides said they did not realize there was a contradiction when the president's energy policy was released during the campaign.

The White House also is citing a December study by the Department of Energy that said regulating carbon dioxide would lead to higher electricity prices, particularly in the hard-hit West.

Bush's energy task force, chaired by Cheney, is trying to develop a national energy policy.

Carbon dioxide is emitted whenever fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas are burned. It also is found in everyday products such as cola and is emitted when people breathe.

Bush has argued that the nation's energy woes can largely be addressed by tapping domestic supplies of coal and natural gas.

The Bush administration has been lobbied aggressively by energy industry officials who vehemently oppose regulating carbon dioxide. They contend it does not lead to global warming.

In the campaign, Bush said he would move to ``phase in the reductions'' of all four products ``over a reasonable time period.'' Cheney said the campaign position was in error.

He told senators that Whitman was being ``a good soldier'' in repeating the campaign pledge.

Whitman said last month that Bush recognizes the importance of the challenges posed by climate change, a subject she said has been discussed as part of the administration's emerging energy plan.

``There's no question but that global warming is a real phenomenon, that it is occurring,'' Whitman said after a Senate hearing on other environmental issues.

Bush pledged in the letter to continue seeking ways to reduce global warming through market incentives and other techniques.

As a possible response to global warming, Whitman raised the possibility of the administration supporting legislation that would for the first time regulate carbon emissions.

Text of March 13, 2001 Letter from the President to

Senators Hagel, Helms, Craig, and Roberts

Thank you for your letter of March 6, 2001, asking for the Administration's views on global climate change, in particular the Kyoto Protocol and efforts to regulate carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act. My Administration takes the issue of global climate change very seriously.

As you know, I oppose the Kyoto Protocol because it exempts 80 percent of the world, including major population centers such as China and India, From compliance, and would cause serious harm to the U.S. economy. The Senate's vote, 95-0, shows that there is a clear consensus that the Kyoto Protocol is an unfair and ineffective means of addressing global climate change concerns.

As you also know, I support a comprehensive and balanced national energy policy that takes into account the importance of improving air quality. Consistent with this balanced approach, I intend to work with the Congress on a multipollutant strategy to require power plants to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and mercury. Any such strategy would include phasing in reductions over a reasonable period of time, providing regulatory certainty, and offering market-based incentives to help industry meet the targets. I do not believe, however, that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a "pollutant" under the Clean Air Act.

A recently released Department of Energy Report, "Analysis of Strategies for Reducing Multiple Emissions from Power Plants," concluded that including caps on carbon dioxide emissions as part of a multiple emissions strategy would lead to an even more dramatic shift from coal to natural gas for electric power generation and significantly higher electricity prices compared to scenarios in which only sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides were reduced.

This is important new information that warrants a reevaluation, especially at a time of rising energy prices and a serious energy shortage. Coal generates more than half of America's electricity supply. At a time when California has already experienced energy shortages, and other Western states are worried about price and availability of energy this summer, we must be very careful not to take actions that could harm consumers. This is especially true given the incomplete state of scientific knowledge of the causes of, and solutions to, global climate change and the lack of commercially available technologies for removing and storing carbon dioxide.

Consistent with these concerns, we will continue to fully examine global climate change issues - including the science, technologies, market-based systems, and innovative options for addressing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. I am very optimistic that, with the proper focus and working with our friends and allies, we will be able to develop technologies, market incentives, and other creative ways to address global climate change.

I look forward to working with you and others to address global climate change issues in the context of a national energy policy that protects our environment, consumers, and economy.

Sincerely,

GEORGE W. BUSH

US about-face on climate change challenges EU to lead Climate Network Europe Brussels, 14 March 2001

President George Bush of the United States reversed a campaign position on Tuesday, stating that he would not support controlling carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. Just a week ago, US Environmental Protection Agency chief Christine Whitman reiterated that the Bush Administration considers climate change to be one of the greatest environmental threats we face, and that a policy limiting CO2 emissions from power plants was one way of getting results. However, in a letter dated 13 March to several US senators, President Bush backed away from this view, withdrawing support for CO2 controls, stating that he opposes the Kyoto Protocol, and calling the science of climate change into question.

CNE director Karla Schoeters reacted, saying "This policy reversal is flat out irresponsible. Just weeks ago the IPCC released a summary of its findings on the science of climate change, stating they're more certain than ever that we're heading for serious impacts due to our emissions of greenhouse gases. The Kyoto Protocol is the vehicle we have for coordinating international action in response, one that all nations, the US included, have worked hard on for years. Rejecting Kyoto and doubting the science in one statement is just sticking your head in the sand, and reveals George Bush's true colours."

"Bush's statement is extremely cynical-he claims to be concerned about climate change, while undermining not only the international process, but the first serious attempt at the national level to take on CO2 emissions," said CNE energy specialist Jason Anderson. "In trying to justify boosting energy production and ignoring CO2 emissions, President Bush refers to the electricity crisis in California, where the real culprit is mishandled market restructuring, not higher demand. He has also called for opening up the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge to petroleum exploration, threatening one of the most wild places in the country and flying in the face of public opinion. This kind of attitude doesn't bode well for our environment."

Although negotiations at the last round of UN talks on climate change in the Hague broke down, the session will resume 16-27 July. "The EU will have to take on a more active leadership role in the face of a US administration that's turning its back on years of negotiations. Also, developing nations, where climate impacts will be hardest felt, and Northern countries like Japan, which use energy efficiently, will likely recognise that the US is proving not to be a credible partner in the fight against climate change," said Schoeters.

Jason Anderson Climate Network Europe 44 Rue du Taciturne 1000 Brussels, Belgium tel: +32 (0)2 231 0180 fax: +32 (0)2 230 5713

Kyoto Protocol may have to be ratified without US, German Ministry says GERMANY: March 15, 2001 LEIPZIG -

Countries committed to ratifying the Kyoto Protocol on climate change in 2002 may have to proceed without the U.S. if Washington continues to stall progress on global carbon dioxide emissions reduction, the German Environment Ministry said late on Monday. "Maybe it will be necessary to ratify the Protocol without the U.S. and to instead pave the way for them to join later," Rainer Hinrichs-Rahlwes, director general at the environment ministry told Reuters at a conference in Leipzig. Talks between the European Union and the United States on implementing the agreement were suspended in November because of intractable differences between the two sides. One sticking point is the United States wants to use its forests as "sinks" to soak up pollution to meet its emissions reduction targets. "One alternative would be to accept their requirement for sinks on a short-term basis so they can ratify by the next Kyoto target of 2008," he said. Germany opposes sinks, arguing they are little more than temporary absorbers of carbon dioxide and are a way for nations to avoid cutting pollution. Once ratified, the deal will set legally binding targets on the world's richer nations to cut "greenhouse gases" which are blamed for global warming. The new Bush administration, seeking to ally fears it would withdraw from the Kyoto process, said earlier this month it aims to finalise a deal when talks resume in Bonn in July. Kyoto talks - the so-called COP 6 negotiations - are scheduled to resume on July 16-27 in Bonn, while COP 7 will be held in Morocco in late October. US IS WORLD'S WORST POLLUTER Stephen Singer, of the World Wildlife Fund, said the U.S. was the worst polluter not simply in terms of total emissions but also with the highest level per capita. China and India, for example, have total annual emissions of 200 and 300 million tonnes respectively, but emissions per capita of 2.5 and 0.9 tonnes. This contrasts with the U.S. that emits 720 million tonnes and has a per capita figure of 20.5 tonnes "I believe we should start to ratify without the U.S. After all the Protocol has been signed already by 85 parties and ratified by 33 of them, with Romania the latest a few weeks ago" Singer added. REUTERS NEWS SERVICE

--- FRIENDS OF THE EARTH EUROPE --- Press Release March 14th 2001

======================================= EU STANDING ALONE ON CLIMATE CHANGE ? =======================================

>>>Problems foreseen for the next international climate talks after negative announcement by President Bush

Friends of the Earth Europe today welcomed the judgement delivered by the European Court of Justice yesterday on the former German electricity feed-in law but sees black clouds on the horizon when comparing this development with recent moves by President Bush on the other side of the Atlantic.

While the ECJ ruled that the German renewables law did not constitute state aid under the EU treaty nor contravene the bloc's internal market rules, the new US President blew hopes that the USA might be moving towards acting on climate change. While he and his administration have been telling the public that global warming is taken seriously by the new team, he has now renounced plans to regulate carbon dioxide emissions form power plants. His short-term reasoning is the threat of rising electricity prices, while ignoring impacts of unmitigated emissions of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide on the global climate.

Roger Higman, Senior Climate Campaigner at Friends of the Earth England, Wales and Northern Ireland said: "This comes as a major blow to hopes that EU and US thinking on climate might be reconcilable. We have always said that Bush is willfully blind to the threat of global warming. Now we are proved right. Regulation of carbon dioxide from power plants would have been a serious instrument to fulfil the US targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It would have showed that the US is actually willing to do something about the largest threat we all face today: climate change."

The regulation of carbon dioxide would have been part of the so-called multi pollutant strategy, but now, the regulators will only address classic air pollutants such as nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide and mercury, but not the main greenhouse gas carbon dioxide.

Roda Verheyen, Friends of the Earth Europe climate change expert: " This announcement really brings out the difference between the EU and the US on climate policies. The European Courts said yesterday that regulation is necessary to meet out climate targets. So necessary that it can even override principles free power trade in the EU. The US President does not even mention global warming when talking about energy policies."

"If we compare the ECJ judgement with the news from the US it is getting clear that the EU must have precise plans how to salvage the Kyoto Protocol with other Parties than the US. Otherwise the US will succed with its strategy to kill any serious global efforts to save our climate."

The last global climate talks in November 2000 in The Hague failed to deliver an agreement on rules for implementing the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. The next round of talks is scheduled for July 16-27 in Bonn. Under the Kyoto Protocol, the US has agreed to reduce emissions of greennhouse gases by 7% below 1990 levels, the EU has agreed to cut by 8%.

================ Further information: ================

>> Roger Higman, Senior Climate Campaigner at FOE in London: Tel: 00 44 171 566 1661 Mobile: 00 7780 661807 E-mail: rogerh@foe.co.uk

>> Howard Mollett, Press & Information at FOE Europe in Brussels: Tel: 0032 [0] 2 542 0189 E-mail: howard.mollett@foeeurope.org

WWF press release For immediate release 14 March 2001

President Bush Backtracks on Climate

Washington, DC - In a landmark retreat on climate change, President Bush last night bowed to the interests of America’s coal and power plant lobbies, according to WWF, the conservation organisation.

Replying to Republican Senator Hagel, who has been critical of taking action against climate change, President Bush has come out against making mandatory reductions of carbon pollution from power plants. President Bush also stated, "I oppose the Kyoto Protocol" - the agreement intended to shave 5 per cent of industrialised nations' global warming gases in the coming decade. His letter cites arguments of "serious harm to the US economy", "the incomplete state of scientific knowledge" on global warming and "the lack of commercially available technologies" as the main arguments for deciding against reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the US.

"President Bush is wrong on the costs, wrong on the science, and wrong on the technologies," said Jennifer Morgan, Director of WWF's Climate Change Campaign. "His stance ignores the welfare of those who are increasingly suffering the day-to-day effects of humanity's interference with the climate that's being caused by carbon pollution."

On Mr. Bush's flawed economics, WWF points to a variety of studies for the US as a whole and for the States of Florida, Texas, Michigan and New England that show how prudent and proven policies could cut emissions while reducing consumers' energy bills.

On science, President Bush's letter comes only weeks after U.S. officials helped approve a new global scientific consensus on climate change during meetings in Shanghai, Geneva and Accra. In the strongest consensus to date, the IPCC concluded that most of the global warming observed over the last 50 years is due to human activities - primarily burning coal, oil and gas for energy - which have increased atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases. They also agreed that climate change impacts are already "occurring in all environments and on all continents" but that there is no shortage of available technologies to reduce global warming gases.

"Other, more progressive governments should not wait for the US. WWF is urging governments that are already moving ahead and reducing their emissions to also redouble their efforts to engage President Bush on this problem. This is key to heading-off the worst impacts of climate change on the world's coral reefs, polar bears and countless citizens around the world," said Jennifer Morgan.

WWF had been cautiously hopeful that the new US Administration might be serious about tackling climate change following the moderate tone adopted by US representative and head of the US Environmental Protection Agency, Christie Todd Whitman, at the meeting of G8 environment ministers in Trieste, Italy, ten days ago. The constructive tone of the G8 communiqué appears to have alarmed US coal and power plant industries that are the main emitters of CO2 and which have in recent days engaged in heavy lobbying of the White House.

For more information: Kara Rinaldi, Climate Change Press Officer, tel: +1 202 257 9959 (mobile) Andrew Kerr, Public Affairs Manager, WWF Climate Change Campaign, tel: +31 6 5161 9462 (mobile) Robert Kihara, Press Officer, WWF International, tel: +41 22 364 9553 EU CARBON AUST NIGHTLEAD By Linda McSweeny

CANBERRA, March 15 AAP - The federal government will hold high-level climate change talks in New York next month after US President George W Bush's greenhouse gas policy backflip.

Environment Minister Robert Hill will travel to New York for meetings with US officials ahead of further talks with representatives from developing countries desperate to fast track the Kyoto Protocol.

The government is under pressure to cut ties with the US going into climate change talks in May after President Bush did a turnaround on US greenhouse policy. Australian environmentalists have urged the government to step away from the US on greenhouse and move to seal a world agreement to cut emissions at talks in Bonn.

The European Union is worried the US decision not to impose carbon dioxide emission restrictions on the power industry would sink a vital world climate change agreement.

A US senator this week released a letter from Mr Bush which said the government should not impose mandatory emission reductions for carbon dioxide on power plants. Senator Hill said today it was too early to anticipate outcomes from the Bush decision but he was planning a trip to New York next month.

"It's too early to say what to expect in relation to President Bush's comment," a spokeswoman for Senator Hill told AAP.

"The minister will be meeting with the US officials next month in New York and that will be followed by further climate change meetings."

The meeting would take place alongside a Commission for Sustainable Development meeting before key parties working for climate change again met.

"The first informal meetings of the key parties will be held next month in New York and a clearer picture should emerge then."

Last November the Australian government was blamed, along with the United States, for collapsed world climate talks in The Hague.

Environmentalists had hoped the parties would ratify the Kyoto Protocol to legally bind countries to curb greenhouse emissions.

Today, Climate Action Network Australia said the latest US moves highlighted the need for Australia to separate itself from the US.

"If we want to see action on the Kyoto Protocol we're going to have to break our alliance with the United States in the international climate negotiations," CANA spokeswoman Anna Reynolds told AAP.

"It means for nations that are currently aligned with the United States in the international negotiations have got two choices - either they follow the US lead and do nothing or they break from the US and say we are going to play a positive role.

"We'd certainly be calling on the Australian government to actually leave the US's side and start really negotiating a lot more in Australia's interest rather than following the US."

As part of the 1997 protocol, Australia agreed to limit emissions to eight per cent above 1990 levels by 2010.

STATEMENT ON CLIMATE CHANGE BY KLAUS TOEPFER, UNEP EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

COPENHAGEN / NAIROBI, 15 March, 2001

"Without US leadership, effective global action on climate change may not be possible," said Klaus Toepfer, Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). "The United States of America has much to gain from leading the way into the new low-emissions economy of the 21st century."

Mr Toepfer was speaking today in Copenhagen after discussing climate change issues with Svend Auken, Denmark's Minister of the Environment, who shares the concern of UNEP over the lack of US leadership. Mr. Toepfer, who is in Denmark to celebrate the 10th anniversary of UNEP's collaborating centre on energy and the environment (RISO), was commenting on the news yesterday that President Bush said his administration would not seek to regulate power plants' emissions of carbon dioxide.

"Earlier this month the UNEP/WMO Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) finalized its three volume Third Assessment Report," said Toepfer. "The message is clear: Intensive climate research and monitoring give scientists much greater confidence in their understanding of causes and consequences of global warming. The Assessment presents a compelling snapshot of what the Earth will probably look like in the late 21st century, after global warming of 1.4 - 5.8°C (2.5- 10.4°F) changes weather patterns, water resources, the cycling of the seasons, ecosystems, extreme climate events, and much more."

"While developing countries are at greatest risk," Toepfer continued, "climate change will also pose challenges for rich countries such as Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States. In North America, the IPCC projects increasing frequency, severity and duration of weather disasters including floods, droughts, storms and landslides. In all sectors - water, health, food, energy, insurance, governments and human settlements - the risk exists that impacts of climate change will over-stress existing institutional structures and engineered systems designed for a more stable world."

"Clearly, all share an interest in minimising global warming. And, the Kyoto Protocol offers the best prospect for an orderly transition to a climate-friendly economy. The resumption of the climate change talks in Bonn in July will provide a critical opportunity for all governments to finalize the details of the Kyoto Protocol so that it becomes operational and effective as quickly as possible."

"While there will be winners and losers in the marketplace, significant economic and technological benefits can be achieved by reducing emissions," said Toepfer. "This is the conclusion of IPCC Working Group III which recently met in Accra, Ghana, (and included representatives of the US government) based on assessing the extensive technology and economics literature. Researchers confirm that well-designed, market-oriented policies can reduce emissions and the costs of adapting to unavoidable impacts of climate change while simultaneously generating significant economic benefits. These benefits include more cost- effective energy systems, more rapid technological innovation, reduced expenditures on inappropriate subsidies, and more efficient markets."

"The Danish example presented by Minister Auken shows that strong economic growth can be obtained with a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. This will be presented Friday in a new National Strategy for Sustainable Development," said Toepfer.

"Cooperation between developed and developing countries is vital if the full impacts of climate change are to be avoided. The most advanced nations have the technologies to help reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and these technologies need to be transferred to the developing world to help them reduce pollution as their economies grow."

"We know that the U.S. is the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases and is therefore an important part of the problem. "But," Toepfer stressed, "the U.S. is also our best hope for a solution. Simply put, the U.S. is the world's most technologically innovative country. Its industries are most likely to develop the climate-friendly products and services that must one day soon set the world onto a clean energy path."

******* For more information, please contact: UNEP Spokesman Tore Brevik in Nairobi on +254-2-623292; in Europe: Robert Bisset on +33-6-2272-5842, email: robert.bisset@unep.fr or in Geneva, Michael Williams on +41-22-9178242, michael.williams@unep.ch

The Climate Protectors Need U.S. Leadership and Ingenuity Michael Zammit Cutajar International Herald Tribune Tuesday, March 20, 2001

BONN The debate surrounding the recent decision by the president of the United States not to treat carbon dioxide as a pollutant to be regulated under the U.S. Clean Air Act has been accompanied by criticisms of the Kyoto Protocol and its scientific foundations. .The 1997 protocol, which is not yet in force, assigns targets to the United States and other developed countries for limiting their emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Three concerns expressed in this context invite comment. .The Kyoto Protocol is unfair because it does not assign emission limitation targets to developing countries, including populous industrializing countries such as China and India. The developing countries, which are not covered by the first round of emission limitation targets under the protocol, account for some 40 percent of current global emissions of carbon dioxide from fuel combustion (the main source of greenhouse gases). This amounts to some two tons of carbon dioxide per head, whereas the developed countries average some 12 tons and the United States alone emits more than 20 tons per head. Fairness suggests that the latter countries act first to limit emissions. Equity and differentiated responsibility are among the principles that guide the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and also underpin its Kyoto Protocol. .The protocol would cause serious harm to the economy of the United States. .The economic impact of emission limitation has to be carefully evaluated. The protocol does not prescribe domestic limitation measures; each state party is free to choose the approach that makes most sense in its national circumstances. In some circumstances, shifting from carbon-intensive coal to cleaner fuels can make good economic sense. Moreover, the protocol provides a great deal of flexibility to parties for meeting their emission targets, notably through the use of emissions trading, other "offshore" mechanisms and accounting for the absorption of carbon by sinks such as forests and farmland. This flexibility is intended to lower the costs of compliance. .The state of scientific knowledge of global climate change - causes, effects and responses - is incomplete. .Scientific knowledge of climate change has been improving steadily. The precautionary principle, which was embraced by the framework convention, states that lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing action to combat serious threats. .Recent reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have found stronger evidence than before of the impact of human activity on the stability of the global climate, and of the adverse effects of climate change, especially on poor and vulnerable people in all countries. These reports provide a sound scientific basis for precautionary measures. .The 1992 convention is accepted by virtually all states. It was signed for the United States by President George Bush and ratified during his administration. Its principles offer a unifying platform for an equitable and effective global strategy to address climate change, progressively engaging all countries. The Kyoto Protocol is designed to be a step in this strategy. .It is to be hoped that the current review of climate change policy by the U.S. administration will lead to a renewal of the constructive engagement of the United States in the climate change negotiations that are due to resume formally in July. .America has the world's biggest economy, is by far the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions and bears the greatest responsibility for dealing with their consequences. It also has the greatest capacity to find innovative and profitable technological responses to this challenge. This is an opportunity for it to demonstrate political and industrial leadership and ingenuity. .The writer heads the secretariat of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. He contributed these personal views to the International Herald Tribune.

Letter from Goran Pearsson, Prime Minister of Sweden and Romano Prodi, President of the EU Commission to President Bush 22 March 2001 http://www.eu2001.se/eu2001/main/

----------President George Bush We write this letter in order to express the deep concern of the European Union for the risks connected with climate change. We also wish to underline our commitment to urgent action to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. As you know, the great majority of climate experts, members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, have already indicated that they see clear evidence of a human impact on climate. In the Third Assessment Report they are warning for even more tangible negative effects than previously expected. The consequences of climate change may have a detrimental impact on a great many countries. Storms and other dramatic weather phenomena may become more abundant and cause considerable damage and injuries. The Kyoto Protocol, adopted in 1997, gave a forceful signal that all major Governments were taking climate change seriously. This has led to important research and development of new and renewable sources of energy and of innovative steps in the transport sector, including the automobile industry. But since a reduction in our dependency on fossil fuels goes straight to the heart of the functioning of our industrial societies, there is no doubt that this transformation will be difficult to achieve. However, looking at the challenges of climate change, the transformation also offers many opportunities to modernising our economy which often lead to overall economic advantages and which help to safeguard old and/or create new employment. It will require a clear vision, political courage, and an extraordinary effort of international cooperation. The European Council will, when it meets in Stockholm on March (24), address the concern related to climate change with a view to reaffirming its strong commitment to the Kyoto Protocol as the basis for international action to reduce emissions and to urging all its negotiation partners to engage constructively in reaching agreement on modalities for implementing the protocol at the resumed COP-6. We would therefore like to emphasize that to the Union an agreement at the resumed session of COP 6, on the basis of the Kyoto Protocol and leading to real reductions in green house gas emissions, is of utmost importance. The global and long-term importance of climate change, and the need for a joint effort by all industrial countries in this field makes it an integral and important part of relations between the USA and the EU. A dialogue between the USA and the EU on how to facilitate a successful outcome of the resumed COP-6 is therefore urgently needed and we would like to express the wish of the Union to initiate such a dialogue at the highest level as soon as possible. Göran Persson / Romano Prodi

New Scientist 24 March

Home of the brave?

Even if Bush has jumped ship we can still save the world

THEY said it would be like negotiating with Exxon. And so it is proving. With the redneck sultans of fossil fuel in charge at the White House, George W. Bush has pulled back on even the hedged commitments to control emissions of greenhouse gases that he made during his election campaign.

Last week, he announced that a new Clean Air Act would not, after all, include controls on carbon dioxide. He blamed fears of rising fuel prices and more blackouts, as well as pleading continuing scientific uncertainties about climate change (see p 4).

Forget the excuses. Bush is doing the bidding of his funders and friends, and the world be damned. His statement does not formally count the US out of the Kyoto Protocol talks on cutting greenhouse gas emissions. But it does mean Bush has vetoed use of the most effective mechanism for the US to meet its promises.

How serious a blow is this? Privately, American negotiators have been saying for some time that it could already be too late for the US to meet its Kyoto commitments for 2010, because of the time it would take to get a Clean Air Act through Congress and into force. Now it's clear that Bush isn't even going to try.

At least the rest of the world knows where it stands, and can stop the elaborate game of trying to keep the US on board the climate train. True, the US is responsible for a quarter of the world's CO2 emissions, but that still leaves the three-quarters that comes from everywhere else. The world can get on with the task at hand--saving the planet's climate--and is quite capable of implementing the Kyoto Protocol without the US.

What we need now is a series of declarations from governments that they will do just that. And there should be a campaign to persuade large corporations, including energy companies, to join in. Many companies realise that, as the BP slogan has it, their future lies "beyond petroleum". And the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports that new sources of energy are advancing technically and becoming economically competitive faster than most people predicted. The world should embrace them, and leave the US to cower in its bunkers of coal and oil until it sees sense.

Why U.S. environmentalists pin hopes on Europe

Activists hope President Bush will find European leaders more persuasive than Christie Whitman on global warming (Time Magazine) BY DICK THOMPSON

Monday, Mar. 26, 2001

After returning from a meeting with the environmental ministers of the G-8 industrialized nations this month, EPA Administrator Christie Whitman wrote a private memo to President Bush informing him that the U.S. has a credibility problem when it comes to climate change. "The World Community," wrote Whitman on March 6, "[is] all convinced of the seriousness of this issues and the need to act now." She "strongly recommended" that Bush "recognize that global warming is a real and serious issues" and said "we need to appear engaged." 'Kyoto is dead' President Bush energetically ignored that advice when he did a U-turn on his campaign pledge to control carbon dioxide from power plants. His questioning of the science behind global warming didn't do much to overcome the administration's credibility problem, either. After a series of reports issued by the UN this year, most observers believe the science is a lock. Many European officials expressed their concern about Bush's decision. And European ambassadors were shocked when National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice told them at a private lunch at the Swedish embassy in Washington last week that "Kyoto is dead." The Kyoto Protocol is the only tool on the table to control the greenhouse gases that are driving global warming. But that treaty has been rejected by the Bush administration as unfair because, initially, it does not require developing countries to cut their emissions. However, many observers believe Bush opposes it because the US is by far the greatest greenhouse-gas polluter, and controlling fossil fuel emissions might injure the economy. "The Kyoto Protocol is the only game in town in their eyes," Whitman also wrote the president. "There is a real fear in the international community that if the U.S. is not willing to discuss the issue within the framework of Kyoto the whole thing will fall apart." Educating W With the doors to the White House now apparently closed to them, U.S. environmentalists are now pinning their hopes that European heads of state will be able to educate Bush about the scientific consensus that human activity is warming the planet, and that the problem may reach catastrophic levels by the end of the century. German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, who is visiting Washington this week, has put climate change in the second spot on his agenda for discussions with Bush, following the conflict in Macedonia. American environmentalists are also hoping that all the other industrialized countries will ratify Kyoto by the end of 2003, even without the U.S. on board. This would present a complex business environment for multinationals who then might be enlisted into supporting the treaty in the U.S. U.S. and Euro environmentalists play pass the potato While American environmentalists now see foreign governments as their best hope for saving the world from global warming, European environmentalists want more action from greens in the U.S. "Rather than hanging out in D.C., waiting for a dinner invitation from someone from the White House, they should to into the country and work with people" to build grassroots support for Kyoto, says Stephan Singer, a World Wildlife Fund official in Brussels. "They should go explain to farmers who are opposed to Kyoto and to unions opposed to Kyoto that there cannot be coal mining forever."

Bush Position on COP-6 'Confusing' To Participants, Top Japanese Official Says

TOKYO--A top Japanese government environmental official March 26 said the U.S. administration's approach to the upcoming July meetings on climate change is confusing to conference participants.

Hironobu Hamanaka, director-general of the Global Environment Bureau of the Ministry of the Environment, also repeated Tokyo's assertion that it will not meet the greenhouse gas reduction targets laid out in the Kyoto Protocol on its own by 2010.

Hamanaka dubbed "unclear" the approach taken by the administration of President George W. Bush to the upcoming climate change talks scheduled for July 16-27 in Bonn.

In remarks delivered during a March 26 press luncheon at the Foreign Correspondents Club of Japan, Hamanaka noted what appeared to be the Bush administration's opposition to finalizing details of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Kyoto Protocol calls on industrialized nations to cut their greenhouse gas emissions to 5.2 percent of 1990 levels by 2008-2012.

If the targets and the timetable for achieving the greenhouse gas reductions set under the Kyoto Protocol are to be renegotiated at the Sixth Conference of the Parties' (COP-6) session in Bonn, "this will cause confusion," Hamanaka said.

In early March, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Christine Todd Whitman said the Bush administration would not base its climate change negotiating stance on positions taken by former President Bill Clinton.

During a Group-of-Eight environment ministers' meeting in Trieste, Italy, Whitman said that, while the United States will participate in the COP-6 meetings in Bonn, its participation does not suggest acceptance of positions taken at the November 2000 failed climate change talks in The Hague.

Less than two weeks later, Bush said he does not support mandatory carbon dioxide reductions for power plants, a stance that rattled the U.S. Congress, European nations, and environmental groups both at home and abroad.

In a March 13 letter to Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), the president said the U.S. government must be careful not to take actions that could harm consumers at a time when Western states are suffering from energy shortages and already high energy prices.

On Japan's approach to the COP-6 meeting, Hamanaka repeated Tokyo's stance that it will not be able to reduce greenhouse gas emissions further by 2010 via domestic means only; Japan will need to rely on emissions trading, the so-called clean development mechanism, carbon sinks, and other methods adopted at Kyoto.

The clean development mechanism would allow developed nations to provide "clean development" technology aid to developing countries in exchange for purchasing emissions rights.

At the same time, Japan is striving to implement other methods, such as carbon taxes and development of hybrid and other energy efficiency improvement technologies, to meet its Kyoto Protocol emission targets, he said.

By Toshio Aritake

Le climat creuse le fossé atlantique Mardi 27 mars 2001 (LE MONDE)

EN RÉAFFIRMANT, le 13 mars, son opposition au protocole de Kyoto sur le changement climatique, le nouveau président des Etats-Unis n'avait sans doute pas prévu la vivacité des réactions qu'il provoquerait. La tempête de protestations émises par les associations écologistes américaines a catalysé les critiques de nombreux élus démocrates, tandis que les Européens ont réagi vivement : le chancelier allemand, Gerhard Schröder, qui rencontrera M. Bush le 29 mars, lui a écrit pour lui rappeler la "responsabilité des Etats-Unis", tandis que Jacques Chirac a jugé, vendredi 23 mars, la position de M. Bush "décevante et inquiétante".

La veille, la présidence suédoise de l'Union européenne avait écrit au président américain pour lui indiquer sa "vive préoccupation". Le climat s'ajoute au contentieux américano-européen, qui, du bouf aux hormones aux OGM, en passant par le bouclier antimissile, s'allonge continûment.

Le dépit européen est d'autant plus grand que, lors de la réunion des ministres de l'environnement du G 8 à Trieste, début mars, l'envoyée du président Bush, Christine Todd Whitman, chef - "ministre "- de l'Agence américaine sur la protection de l'environnement, membre du cabinet, avait rassuré les Européens en affirmant que George W. Bush voulait limiter les émissions de gaz carbonique des centrales électriques et que les Etats-Unis restaient attachés à finaliser les négociations internationales sur le climat.

Las ! Le 13 mars, M. Bush écrivait à quatre sénateurs républicains, parmi lesquels Chuck Hagel, un opposant farouche à la théorie du changement climatique. "Je m'oppose au protocole de Kyoto, indiquait-il, parce que 80 % de la population du monde en sont exemptés, dont la Chine et l'Inde, et qu'il causerait un dommage sérieux à l'économie américaine." De surcroît, il précisait que les émissions de CO2 des centrales électriques ne seraient pas contenues - contredisant une promesse faite dans un discours de campagne le 29 septembre 2000.

Cette promesse était le fruit d'une confusion entre le CO2 et d'autres gaz, a tenté de corriger la Maison Blanche le 14 mars. Il n'empêche : le président a démenti le candidat, et les écologistes sont montés au créneau avec un impact impressionnant.

L'épisode est important. D'une part, il révèle que la question de l'énergie est au centre de la stratégie de l'ancien industriel du pétrole qu'est M. Bush. D'autre part, il place l'Europe au pied du mur dans son approche du problème climatique. Le nouveau président a des idées bien arrêtées sur l'énergie, qu'il ne cesse ces temps-ci de rappeler en s'appuyant sur l'exemple de la crise en Californie, où ont eu lieu de nombreuses coupures d'électricité.

Dans son important discours du 29 septembre, prononcé dans le Michigan (voir www.georgewbush.com), celui qui n'était alors que candidat estime que chacune des trois récessions connues par les Etats- Unis dans l'époque récente "fut liée à un choc énergétique". Or "la nouvelle économie nous a rendu plus dépendants des sources d'énergie. (...) Aujourd'hui, les équipements nécessaires à Internet consomment 8 % de l'électricité consommée aux Etats-Unis". Conclusion : pour éviter une nouvelle récession, "le pays a un besoin majeur et urgent d'une politique énergétique globale, menée par le président lui-même".

Pour M. Bush, il n'est pas question de diminuer la consommation d'énergie : tout son effort sera d' accroître l'approvisionnement en énergie, "en faisant de la sécurité énergétique une priorité de ma politique étrangère" et en augmentant la production énergétique sur le sol américain - notamment en charbon, le combustible fossile le plus émetteur de gaz carbonique

UNE CONTRAINTE INJUSTIFIÉE

Augmenter l'offre d'énergie, en maintenir le prix bas, affirmer le lien entre la croissance économique et la croissance de la consommation énergétique : ces trois éléments du credo de M. Bush, clairement affirmés, vont déterminer sa diplomatie.

M. Bush va logiquement s'opposer au protocole de Kyoto - ce qu'il avait maintes fois annoncé pendant sa campagne, par exemple lors du débat télévisé avec Albert Gore le 11 octobre 2000 - et à toute contrainte sur les émissions de gaz carbonique ; il va rappeler aux pays du Moyen-Orient que la bienveillance et la protection des Etats-Unis ont pour contrepartie un prix du baril modéré ; il va relancer la prospection pétrolière et charbonnière sans souci majeur de l'environnement.

Celui-ci est d'ailleurs considéré comme une contrainte injustifiée : l'administration de M. Bush est favorable à l'exploitation pétrolière dans une réserve naturelle de l'Alaska. Elle a déjà assoupli la réglementation sur le taux d'arsenic dans l'eau de boisson, suspendu l'interdiction de la construction de routes dans des forêts du domaine public et le durcissement des normes dans les mines d'uranium, d'or et d'argent.

L'analyse de M. Bush est sans aucun doute étonnante - pour ne pas dire irréaliste - appliquée à un pays dont la consommation énergétique (2,2 milliards de tonnes équivalent pétrole) représente 25 % de la consommation mondiale, et s'accroît de 1,6 % chaque année. Elle n'en crée pas moins une situation difficile pour des Européens qu'animent, pour l'essentiel, des idées opposées.

Ils sont fermement attachés au protocole de Kyoto, signé en 1997, et qui engage les pays industrialisés à réduire de 5 % leurs émissions de gaz à effet de serre d'ici à 2010. La mise en ouvre de ce protocole est difficile et bute sur l'opposition entre Etats-Unis et Union européenne. A La Haye, en novembre dernier, les deux partenaires ont échoué à s'entendre sous le regard ironique des pays du Sud. Les négociations doivent reprendre en juillet prochain à Bonn.

Que doit maintenant faire l'Europe ? Dans le but de sauver le protocole, céder aux Etats-Unis qui, s'ils viennent à la table des négociations, demanderont à vider de son sens le texte en insistant par exemple sur le rôle des forêts pour absorber le gaz carbonique ? Ou aller à la rupture, au risque de ruiner le protocole, ce qui faciliterait la tâche de M. Bush, qui pourrait alors rejeter sur l'intransigeance européenne l'échec qu'il désire ?

Une troisième option est possible : réaliser le protocole de Kyoto par une alliance avec la Russie, le Japon et les pays du Sud, sans les Etats-Unis : cet acte d'une portée politique inouïe demanderait à l'Europe un courage et une cohérence dont elle est loin de témoigner aujourd'hui. La position de M. Bush devrait cependant pousser les responsables européens à se poser sérieusement la question de son opportunité.

A moins que, dernière option, la récession ne vienne d'elle-même régler le problème : le ralentissement économique ne serait-il pas le meilleur moyen de répondre au problème des émissions de gaz à effet de serre si les pays sont incapables de s'y atteler volontairement ?

Hervé Kempf

THE GREENS/ EUROPEAN FREE ALLIANCE IN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

PRESS RELEASE

Brussels, 26 March 2001

Follow-up of the EU Summit in Stockholm

EU-Declaration on Climate Change: Practice what you preach

Following the EU summit in Stockholm, the Green/EFA Group have welcomed the firm stance taken by EU leaders on the question of climate change. Heidi Hautala, President of the Green/EFA Group said:

"One of the most positive elements of this summit, which otherwise excelled by its indecisiveness, was the clear commitment the EU leaders have given to climate change. The Greens/EFA support the letter sent by Romano Prodi and Göran Persson to George Bush calling upon the US-President not to abandon efforts to meet the targets of the Kyoto Protocol. The EU should not continue to do business as usual with the USA as long as the Bush Administration does not live up to its international responsibility. We also welcome the declaration of the 15 EU Heads of Government and State in which they recall the necessity of efficient international action to reduce emissions and reaffirm their strong commitment to the Kyoto Protocol as the basis for such action.

"The EU leaders must now practice what they preach. Of course it is good to remind the USA of their global obligations, but it is less credible if you look at the Member States' current climate policies which would lead to an increase of 8 % in the emissions of green house gases by 2010 rather than to a 8 % reduction as agreed in Kyoto. Now words must be followed by deeds. A first important step would be the phasing out of subsidies to coal and other fossil fuels, which would also be in line with the aim of an overall reduction of state subsidies in the EU.

"The EU should also establish a set of environmental indicators along the same lines as those adopted in Stockholm for economic and social policy. We also demand that the environmental dimension be included as a third pillar in the Lisbon process, alongside the economic and social pillar. Future Spring Councils should also become "Sustainability Councils", which deal with all aspects of sustainable development, thus including the environment.

"We are disappointed that EU leaders did not hold an in-depth discussion on agricultural policy and food safety, which after all is the most contentious issue for EU citizens currently. They missed an important opportunity send out a strong signal that they are willing to reform the Common Agricultural Policy which has led to the BSE catastrophe and to the rapid spreading of the foot and mouth disease."

For more information: Press Office of the Green/EFA Group

Helmut Weixler:

Communiqué à la presse du 20 mars 2001

Effet de serre : chronique d'une catastrophe annoncée.

Les Verts constatent que l'actualité a parfois des raccourcis surprenants, comme en témoignent ces deux informations.

A l'aide de satellites et en prenant des mesures au même endroit avec le même type d'appareil, des scientifiques viennent de démontrer, courbes à l'appui, le réchauffement de la planète. Nous connaissions l'accroissement des gaz à effet de serre dans l'atmosphère, c'est leur " efficacité " sur le réchauffement qui est ainsi mise en évidence.

Simultanément Bush, qui n'a jamais cru au réchauffement planétaire, vient de céder aux lobbies de l'énergie - qui l'avaient bien aidé à gagner la Maison Blanche - en affirmant qu'il n'imposerait aucune réduction sur les émissions de gaz à effet de serre.

Les Verts ne peuvent que dénoncer cette irresponsabilité totale de la plus grande puissance planétaire qui représente 5 % de la population et émet 25 % des gaz à effet de serre. Les Verts soulignent les voix toujours plus concordantes des scientifiques sur la " chronique d'une catastrophe annoncée ". Ils demandent à l'Europe et au Japon d'intensifier la pression sur les Etats-Unis pour les faire revenir à des positions plus raisonnables. Ceci est d'autant plus urgent que les premières victimes de ce réchauffement seront les pays pauvres, dont certains risquent même de disparaître, et qu'il est impossible de maîtriser le réchauffement de l'atmosphère, quels que soient les efforts des autres pays, si les Etats-Unis poursuivent leur fuite en avant.

Maryse Arditi Porte-parole ATTENTION : NOUVELLE ADRESSE E-MAIL DU SECRETARIAT NATIONAL DES VERTS secretar@les-verts.org

Carter urges Bush to Act on Global Warming
Martin Kettle in Washington
Monday April 2, 2001
The Guardian

The United States must develop an urgent plan to reduce its emissions of greenhouse gases, which account for a quarter of the world's total, former president Jimmy Carter told the Bush administration yesterday.
Along with nine other influential US and international figures, Mr Carter has signed a letter to President George Bush pressing for "consensus and action", just days after his government announced that it was ditching the Kyoto protocol on global climate change, signed in 1997.

Mr Carter acted as an opinion poll showed that three-quarters of Americans regard global warming as a serious problem and two-thirds want the administration to develop a plan to deal with it.

Mr Bush's announcement that the US would not abide by the Kyoto agreements to cut emissions by 5.2% from the 1990 levels by 2012 caused a worldwide outburst of anger against US energy policies, making the first big dent in the administration's international standing, especially in Europe.

European Union officials, headed by the environment commissioner, Margot Wallstrom, are due to meet the head of the US environmental protection agency, Christine Todd Whitman, in Washington today to protest against the decision.

Mr Carter's statement does not align itself precisely with European protests, since it stops short of calling on the White House to abide by Kyoto, but it mirrors the alarm which the president's pay-off to the Republican party's big corporate backers has created, even in the US.

"No challenge we face is more momentous than the threat of global climate change," the open letter says.

"The current provisions of the Kyoto protocol are a matter of legitimate debate. But the situation is becoming urgent and it is time for consensus and action.

"There are many strategies for curbing greenhouse gas emissions without slowing economic growth. In fact the spread of advanced cleaner technology is more of an economic opportunity than a peril.

"We urge you to develop a plan to reduce US production of greenhouse gases. The future of our children - and their children - depends on the resolve that you and other world leaders show."

The letter, which is published in the new issue of Time magazine, is signed by Mr Carter and the former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev.

Other signatories include the film star Harrison Ford, the Cambridge University cosmologist Professor Stephen Hawking, the former astronaut John Glenn, the financier George Soros, and the doyen of American television news, Walter Cronkite.

The new poll shows that Americans are more supportive than their government of action to cut emissions, but the closeness of some of its findings is a reminder that Americans are less environmentalist than Europeans, especially about their cars and trucks.

Just over half of of them think the US should take measures to control global warming, even if other countries do not - the reverse of the position adopted by Mr Bush.

Nearly two-thirds, including half of Mr Bush's Republican voters, identify carbon dioxide as a cause of climate change, which is a position Mr Bush explicitly rejects.

And 55% say that the administration should require improvements in the fuel efficiency of cars and trucks, even if the result is more expensive and smaller vehicles.

Against that, more than 40% disagree with the fuel efficiency proposal, and only 48% are willing to pay an extra 25 cents a gallon for petrol - which costs about $1.60 (about £1.12) a gallon in most of the US - to help reduce pollution.

Ten years ago, when petrol was cheaper, just over 60% were willing to pay extra.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Towards a single energy market in 2005

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DN: IP/01/356 Date: 2001-03-13

TXT: FR EN DE ES IT PDF: FR EN DE ES IT Word Processed: FR EN DE ES IT

IP/01/356

Brussels, 13 March 2001

Towards a single energy market in 2005

The European Commission today proposed a set of new measures to open up the gas and electricity markets fully by 2005 for the benefit of European consumers. These measures include bringing forward the schedule, reinforcing the conditions which encourage real and fair competition, and introducing a genuine single market. "These new proposals constitute a decisive step towards providing the people of Europe with the most advanced and integrated electricity and gas system, offering the best guarantees of security of supply and consumer protection: they will bring real benefits in terms of competition, prices and competitiveness," announced Loyola de Palacio, Vice-President responsible for Energy and Transport. In response to the Lisbon European Council's call for the energy markets to be opened up more rapidly, these proposals will be presented to the Heads of State and Government at the forthcoming European Council in Stockholm, on 23 and 24 March 2001, and sent to the Council and the European Parliament to be examined as rapidly as possible. "The future European energy market will offer greater choice while providing all Europeans with a guaranteed, high-quality, universal service," Mrs de Palacio emphasised.

The Commission's aim is to provide the European Union with the most effective, secure and competitive energy market. Thanks to these new measures, the European Union, unlike the United States, will have a truly integrated market, which means, for instance, that Europe will avoid the type of problems currently faced by California, which have resulted from an inadequate legal framework and inadequate production capacity.

"Based on clear rules and effective regulation, this single energy market needs to take full account of the key requirements of security of supply, quality, consumer protection and the environment," said Mrs de Palacio. "Accordingly, the Commission will see that links are maintained and developed with all the main players: producers, network managers, market operators, consumers and unions."

The package adopted today is geared towards achieving three goals:

1. Full opening-up of the gas and electricity market for all consumers throughout the Union

By amending the Directives governing the internal market in gas and electricity, the Commission is now proposing the following schedule:

2003 :freedom for all non-domestic customers to choose their electricity supplier

2004: freedom for all non-domestic customers to choose their gas supplier

2005: all consumers, without exception, should be able to choose their gas and electricity suppliers.

By 2005, the gas and electricity markets, with a total annual turnover of ?250 billion, should be fully open to competition. European consumers will thus be able to make choices on a market even larger than the telecommunications market (around ?200 billion annual turnover), which has been open to competition for a few years already.

For competition to be genuine, consumers and competing producers need to enjoy non-discriminatory access to the gas and electricity transmission and distribution grids. The Commission is therefore proposing that:

management of these grids be legally separate from production and sales activities, and that they operate entirely independently. This requirement will not apply to small-scale distribution companies;

network access tariffs be set, published and approved by national regulators before entering into force;

each Member State have such a regulator. Regulators will need to be independent of Member State administrations. They will be given the requisite basic competence. They will inter alia set the tariffs and conditions for access to the gas and electricity transmission grids. They will thus play an important role in preventing distortions of competition. They will bring continuity and transparency to the market. 2. A gas and electricity market providing the best guarantees to the people of Europe

To provide the people and businesses of Europe with a gas and electricity market which is not only open, but also gives them the best protection, the Commission is proposing specific additional measures regarding security of supply and public service.

- A secure and affordable energy supply

As the Commission emphasised in its Green Paper,(1) it is vital that the European Union continue to improve the security of its energy supply. The fact is that this security could be jeopardised if the market is not opened up properly. Thus it is, for instance, that California, which has opened up its electricity market, is now facing escalating energy prices, along with power cuts resulting from insufficient generation. The Union has deliberately avoided the Californian model, which is based on the creation of an obligatory electricity pool and a largely isolated market. Nonetheless, it is important to guarantee that no such problems can occur in Europe.

Accordingly, the Commission is today proposing a series of new measures to add to the safety nets already provided by the existing Directives. These measures are designed inter alia to oblige the Member States and the Commission:

to carefully monitor the balance between supply and demand;

if and when necessary, to launch public tenders for the creation of new electricity and gas production capacity. Public service: a universal right to energy

To make quite sure that the opening-up of the gas and electricity market serves the interests of all the people of Europe, the Commission has decided to add to the Directives' existing provisions on the quality of public service. The aim is to provide the highest level of consumer protection, in all the Member States of the Union.

The new proposals require Member States inter alia:

to guarantee a secure supply for all consumers;

to take steps to protect vulnerable persons, such as the elderly or disabled;

to take steps to protect the rights of energy consumers: energy supply contracts governed by strict rules; transparent information on prices; simple, low-cost and transparent procedures for dealing with consumer complaints. 3. Moving from 15 open national markets to a genuine European market in gas and electricity

For the internal market in gas and electricity to become a reality, intra-Community trade needs to be facilitated. The aim is to create not 15 open national markets, but one real internal market. Yet completion of the internal market is continuing to be hampered by the low level of intra-Community trade in electricity, which still represents only 8% of electricity production. In this context, the Commission is proposing the following measures:

- Adoption of rules on cross-border tariff-setting and congestion management for electricity: the Commission is proposing a regulation which will enable it, in close Cupertino with the national electricity regulators, to adopt such rules, based on the principles of simplicity, non-discrimination, transparency and reflection of costs.

- Development of a European infrastructure plan for electricity and gas. The plan will need to tackle the physical shortcomings of certain trans-national networks and remove the - often local - obstacles to interconnection. Its objective will therefore be to remove the bottlenecks in the European network and identify any missing interconnections of European interest. It will be supported by the financial instruments of the trans-European networks.

- Negotiation of reciprocal electricity-market-opening agreements with the European Union's neighbours. These agreements would allow the European market to be opened up to them, provided they give equal access to EU companies on their territory and that they comply with the Union's fundamental environmental and nuclear safety standards.

de Palacio will be retransmitted from Strasbourg in the press room, Breydel, at 16h00. It will be also diffused on EBS at 20h00.

Moreover, the audio-visual service places at the disposal of the press a information-clip entitled "LIBERALISATION OF GAS AND ELECTRICITY" which will be available by the audio-visual Planning of the European Commission (Breydel building, 45 avenue d'Auderghem, room 4/164 (Please, request by fax (02/230.12.80) by specifying the number of desired copies and the format

(1) Towards a European strategy for the security of energy supply, COM(2000)769 of 29 November 2000. Available on the Internet at the following address: http: //europa.eu.int/comm/energy_transport/fr/lpi_fr.html New opposition to Finnish nuclear power plan ENDS Daily - 13/03/01 ------------------------- Finland's environment ministry today came out firmly against plans for a fifth nuclear power station in the country, in a strongly worded statement directed at the industry ministry. New nuclear capacity "would not be to the overall advantage of Finnish society," the ministry says, before making a series of detailed criticisms of a proposal launched last year by energy firm TVO (ENDS Daily 16 November 2000).

The statement could open up a rift in Finland's coalition government. The controversial nuclear project is thought to be supported by the industry ministry, though environment minister Satu Hassi, a Green, has already made clear her opposition. The government is due to decide this summer whether to back the proposal, which is backed by Finnish industry but strongly opposed by environmental groups (ENDS Daily 17 November 2000).

Looking at the big picture, the environment ministry says more nuclear plant will fail to assist Finland in developing its climate strategy (ENDS Daily 9 February). Greenhouse gas emissions will not be reduced without improvements in energy efficiency and energy-saving, as well as investment in renewable energy sources, it says.

It criticises TVO's cost estimates, particularly with regard to the cost of waste management and its assessment of the plant's economic viability. TVO is over-optimistic on its own costs, the ministry alleges, while failing to use up-to-date comparative costs for alternative energy sources following liberalisation of the national electricity market and an increasing shift towards smaller-scale combined heat and power plants and renewable energy sources.

TVO's proposals are not specific enough regarding the planned location, size and design of a new plant, the ministry adds. Some suggested reactor designs are untested, while the proposed 60-year operating period is unusually long and the predicted 90% operational capacity unusually high.

The ministry further criticises a lack of consideration given to environmental impact assessment for possible plant sites. It calls the Finnish nuclear accident insurance system inadequate and suggests it be brought into line with Germany's new system (ENDS Daily 15 June 2000).

Follow-up: Finnish environment ministry press release (http://www.vyh.fi/ajankoht/tiedote/ym/tied2001/ym0136.htm).

"Third way" proposed for German CHP support ENDS Daily - 13/03/01 ------------------------- A coalition of German unions, trade associations and municipalities has proposed a new route to ensuring growth in the use of combined heat and power (CHP) in the national energy market. The initiative offers a middle way between an environment ministry push for legal quotas for increased CHP and a power industry counter-proposal for voluntary agreements.

The compromise proposal has been made by the country's public sector and transport workers, machine tool manufacturers, municipalities and cities in a letter to German chancellor Gerhard Schröder. The coalition is calling for a new CHP subsidy of euros 0.015-0.05 (DM0.03-0.10) per kilowatt hour of electricity, combined with strengthened environmental criteria.

In line with the environment ministry's predictions on the impact of its proposed quotas, the coalition says its suggestion could also achieve the 23m tonnes saving in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 2010 targeted in last year's national climate protection strategy

The new proposal adds further complexity to an already confused political situation. Last week, economics minister Werner Müller, a political independent, cautiously welcomed the power sector's offer of voluntary agreements (ENDS Daily 13 February), to the chagrin of the co-governing Greens.

Meanwhile, CHP producers association BKWK has also written to Mr Schröder reiterating its demand for mandatory targets. It continues to strongly oppose voluntary agreements, which it claims will fail to ensure "genuine structural change" in the power sector.

In a related development, the German federation of industrial energy consumers, VIK, has complained to the European Commission's competition directorate about the emergency cogeneration law brought in last April (ENDS Daily 29 March 2000). A spokesperson told ENDS Daily that it had no environmental benefit but merely "enlarged public subsidies".

Follow-up: Frankfurter Rundschau (http://www.fr-aktuell.de) +49 69 21991 and article (http://www.fr-aktuell.de/fr/101/t101015.htm); VIK (http://www.vik-online.de) +49 201 810840 and press release (http://www.vik-online.de/aktuell/default-inhalt.htm); BKWK (http://www.bkwk.de) -------------------------

German green power law "in the clear"
ENDS Daily - 13/03/01 ------------------------- The European Court of Justice today ruled that Germany's controversial electricity feed-in law, which supported renewable power producers until last January, did not constitute state aid under the EU treaty nor contravene the bloc's internal market rules. Senior German government figures have immediately called on the European Commission to halt legal investigations into its successor, the renewable energy law (EEG), which offers similar fixed rate premium payments to renewables operators.

Long alleged to be anti-competitive by power firms and some other EU member states, Germany's feed-in law spawned Europe's largest boom in wind energy, attracting stout defence from renewable energy interests and Green parties. The legal action now ended in Luxembourg was originally started by German power firm Preussen Elektra (now EoN), one of the utilities forced by law to pay extra to wind turbine owners.

For German economics minister Werner Müller, today's court ruling was "a success for the federal government's energy policy, which is playing a leading role in the expansion of renewable energy within the EU". He said that he was convinced that the European Commission's reservations about the renewable energy law (EEG), which took over from the feed in law on 1 January last year (ENDS Daily 28 February), will have been dealt with by the judgement and appealed to it to halt further investigations.

Initial European Commission reaction suggest this might happen. Speaking in the European Parliament in Strasbourg today, EU energy commissioner Loyola de Palacio said: "The Luxembourg court's judgement is an extremely important one. It goes over and above the electricity industry [in terms of its significance]. The court has handed down a narrow interpretation of article 87...we shall have to look at it...it will have a bearing on how we look at a whole range of things, such as transport and energy policy."

Back in Germany, environment minister Jürgen Trittin expressed his satisfaction with the result. The judgement "supports the tools for expanding renewable energy in Germany," he said, adding that it gave investors legal certainty, created jobs and made a significant contribution to climate protection.

Meanwhile, the Green group in the European Parliament issued their own statement welcoming the ruling, describing it as a welcome "slap in the face" for EU competition commissioner Mario Monti. Germany's big utilities had been made "a laughing stock," added MEP Claude Turmes.

Follow-up: European Court of Justice (http://curia.eu.int), German economics ministry press release (http://www.bmwi.de/Homepage/Presseforum/Pressemitteilungen/2001/1313prm1.jsp); German environment ministry press release (http://www.bmu.de/presse/2001/pm600.htm); Green group in the European Parliament, (http://www.europarl.eu.int/greens-efa)

German climate policies "will boost jobs" ENDS Daily - 12/03/01 ------------------------- Fears that German climate policies are on a collision course with the government's commitment to reduce unemployment are unjustified, according to a study published last week by the environment ministry. Instead, the government should expect almost 200,000 new jobs to be created if it implements measures to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) by 40% by 2020, say Swiss consultants Prognos.

Prognos' findings also suggest that the government's decision last year to phase-out nuclear power by the mid-to-late 2020s (ENDS Daily 15 June 2000) will not lead to aggregate job losses in the utilities sector, but that even there employment will increase. The employment impact of the nuclear phase-out has been hotly debated, with Greenpeace arguing that the shift away from nuclear will create jobs (ENDS Daily 7 April 2000) and the nuclear industry arguing the opposite.

This is the first national case study to forecast employment impacts of climate policies, according to Prognos. It stresses that the "common assumption" has been that additional climate protection would have negative employment effects, whereas its study concludes the opposite. Publicising synergies between employment and climate protection "might significantly increase the political and societal acceptance of further climate protection measures," it adds.

The study suggests that the construction, transport and machinery manufacturing sectors should reap the biggest rewards of German climate policies. Construction should see 91,700 new jobs by 2005, rising to 106,730 by 2020. The majority of these will result from greater demand for thermal insulation in buildings and development of local public transport and rail infrastructure.

Job creation in the transport sector will hit 97,820 by 2020, according to the study, mostly in local public transport and rail transport. Machinery manufacturing will experience job losses due to lower demand for private cars, says the study, but these will be more than offset by higher employment in businesses manufacturing high-efficiency heating equipment, renewable energy systems and gas turbines. A net increase of 51,230 jobs in the sector should be expected.

Follow-up: German environment ministry (http://www.bmu.de), tel: +49 30 28 55 00; Prognos (http://www.prognos.com), tel: +41 61 327 3200; and summary of the report in German (http://www.prognos.com/html/klimaschutz_uba.pdf), and in English (http://www.ends.co.uk/subscribers/envdaily/prognos1.pdf).

Advance for German biomass energy law ENDS Daily - 09/03/01 ------------------------- German biomass electricity production is set to boom after a draft standards-setting law this week moved a step closer to finalisation. The government is hoping that the measure will help biomass emulate the meteoric rise of German wind power to world championship status (ENDS Daily 17 January). Officials claim that the sector's long-term potential is as large as one-fifth of national power supply.

The draft biomass ordinance will help to implement last year's renewable energy law (ENDS Daily 29 February 2000) by creating legal definitions and standards so that producers can claim premium rates of euros 0.09-0.10 (DM0.17-0.20) per kilowatt hour.

Nearly a year after it was first proposed by the environment ministry, official approval by the economics ministry means the ordinance is now cleared for a second parliamentary reading. It should take effect before the end of the year, according to officials.

The ordinance sets out technical and environmental standards and requirements for biomass power production, including limits on the use of wood contaminated by toxic materials and exclusions of certain materials. Peat burning, for example, will not qualify for financial support under the renewable energy law, the environment ministry stresses.

The main biomass fuels likely to be used for power generation in the short term are wood chips and waste from the forestry and wood processing industries. Large quantities are currently landfilled or exported and very little used to generate electricity. Environment minister Jürgen Trittin yesterday claimed that the ordinance would help lift biomass power production sufficiently to save 5-10m tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions annually by 2010.

Follow-up: German environment ministry (http://www.bmu.de), a press release (http://www.bmu.de/presse/2001/pm592.htm), and text of the ordinance (http://www.bmu.de/download/dateien/entwurf_biomasseverordnung.pdf).

back to CNE latest news

EU Environment Council 08/03/01 Climate Change Section only. For the full provisional conclusions go to

http://ue.eu.int/newsroom/main.cfm?LANG=1 (only available in English for the moment) CLIMATE CHANGE - CONCLUSIONS

1. The Council takes seriously the emerging conclusions of the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC, which confirm and reinforce the need for urgent action to tackle climate change, and it calls on all Parties to do the same. The Council recognises that the first commitment period of the Protocol is only the first step, and that further steps need to be taken for the periods after 2012 to ensure the stabilisation of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous antropogenic interference with the climate system. The Kyoto protocol is an important and necessary first step through which we can achieve the necessary turn-around in industrialised countries’ emissions. It also constitutes an important learning process for further commitment periods.

2. It recalls that the world community recognised the importance of addressing climate change at Rio in 1992. The international momentum after Rio led to the Kyoto Protocol, the means to give effect to the commitments that all Parties to the Convention accepted to help meet its ultimate objective.

3. The Council reaffirms its commitment to the successful implementation of the Buenos Aires Plan of Action and to reaching an agreement at the resumed COP-6 which will create the conditions for ratification and entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol by 2002. The Council reiterates that any agreement must safeguard the environmental integrity of the Protocol. In this regard, the implementation of the Kyoto protocol must lead to real reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, supported by a credible compliance and liability system.

4. Although it was not possible to reach a final agreement in November 2000, the Council recognises the considerable progress made on many issues in The Hague. It further underlines the need for consultations among all parties in preparation for the resumed COP-6, expressing its firm support for the COP President in this endeavour. The Council also reaffirms its openness to a continued dialogue with other Parties and regional groups in the run up to the resumed COP-6, with a view to reaching an agreement.

5. The Council emphasises that the Kyoto protocol was the outcome of many years of negotiation and offers an effective framework for global action to reduce emissions. The Kyoto protocol provides many opportunities to modernise economies and significant advantages for early movers. The EU therefore urges its negotiating partners to engage constructively in negotiations on modalities for implementing the Kyoto Protocol and to formulate negotiating positions as soon as possible, to facilitate a successful outcome at the resumed COP 6.

6. The Council recalls its previous conclusions on environment and development, in particular those from 22 June and 7 November 2000 (Environment) and 10 November 1999 and 10 November 2000 (Development). It emphasises that concrete action needs to be taken in order to effectively support the developing countries in their efforts to address climate change on their path to sustainable development, including the integration of climate change aspects into the EU developing co-operation agenda.

7. The Council recalls that the EU aims at achieving ratification and entry into force by 2002 and that preparations need to be intensified to enable rapid action after the resumed COP-6. In this context, the Council urges the Member States and the Commission to take timely and appropriate action and invites the Commission to present a proposal as soon as possible for the ratification of the Protocol by the Community, and to make a report on progress to the Council at its June session.

8. The Council emphasises that the EU is firmly determined to strengthen its efforts to combat climate change through policies and measures both at the Community- and national levels. In this perspective, the on-going work by the Commission, such as the European Climate Change Program (ECCP) and the work based on the "Green Paper on Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading within the EU", is of particular importance. The Council underlines the urgent need for concrete action on Community level. The Council also urges Member States to put in place domestic policies and measures, in order to ensure that they meet their Kyoto targets.

9. The Council also stresses the importance of rapid progress of the 6th Environmental Action Programme. Crucial decisions aiming at inter alia reducing greenhouse gas emissions will have to be made in various sectors. Hence the on-going work on developing strategies for the integration of sustainable development aspects into sector policies should have climate as a major component. The EU is thus committed to intensify its efforts to bring climate considerations to bear on work of the Council in its various formations in the coming months. This also means that climate change considerations should be an important component of the conclusions to be taken at the Göteborg European Council in June, where sustainable development will be a priority issue.

10. The Council underlines the importance of the EU relationship with the candidate countries and reaffirms its commitment to close co-operation with them in the field of climate change. It encourages the candidate countries to give priority to climate change as part of their pre-accession programmes to implement the EU acquis and to integrate climate change considerations into all relevant policy areas.

back to CNE latest news

21.02.2001.

STATEMENT BY ION ILIESCU, PRESIDENT OF ROMANIA, upon signing the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol into law

(Romanian NGO contact, Lavinia Andrei) Today, following the signing of a Promulgation Decree, the ratification by the Romanian Parliament of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has become effective.

Romania thus becomes the first country in Central and Western Europe to accede to that important international legal instrument. It is worth reminding that Romania was also the first country to sign up to the NATO-sponsored Partnership for Peace, in January 1994.

Ratifying the Kyoto Protocol was by no means a routine decision. We had to examine a large body of scientific evidence that clearly links the global warming and other related phenomena to human activities in the industrial and post-industrial age. We had to consider the fact that some of the proposed ways to mitigate the environmental effects of greenhouse gases emissions worldwide are still subject to controversy. But we also realized that the very magnitude of the problem requires concerted action combining enlightened political vision with the dynamic drive of the market forces. The Kyoto Protocol opens such a prospect.

The Parliament's mature decision reflects the commitment of Romania, as a responsible member of the international community, to take an active part in seeking constructive solutions to the major issues that confront humankind today. It is also in line with Romania's well-conceived national interest.

A lot of hard work will have to be done in the next few months to put in place the necessary institutions and procedures for the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol and the full application of the flexible financial mechanisms provided by it. Romania has the determination and the ability to make it happen.

Non-CO2 greenhouse gases. Call for Papers Paper abstracts are being accepted until 15 May 2001 for the Third International Symposium on Non-CO2 greenhouse gases, to be held in Maastricht, the Netherlands on 21-23 January 2002. This is an important forum for this issue and we encourage the CAN network to explore the possibility of submitting, or encouraging the submission of, relevant papers. The three themes are: emissions inventories/scientific understanding, technological options policy aspects.

Contact Jason (jason@climnet.org) for more information. A web site will be available in April at www.vvm.to Netherlands gives green energy a head start ENDS Daily - 08/03/01 ------------------------- The Dutch economics ministry yesterday confirmed plans to further encourage the country's burgeoning consumer renewable energy market by liberalising green electricity in July, some two years ahead of full opening of the consumer power market.

Under the initiative, Dutch households will no longer be limited to buying green electricity products offered by their local utility. The almost 1% of Dutch households already purchasing green electricity will therefore be able to switch suppliers in search of cheaper prices or even particular forms of renewable energy production.

The primary reason for the staggered start to consumer market liberalisation is to "provide an extra impulse" to green energy, a ministry spokesperson told ENDS Daily. The Dutch market has already been identified as one of the largest in Europe and likely to experience strong growth (ENDS Daily 13 July 2000). The spokesperson added that the move also responded to concerns among some consumers that some types of renewable sources - such as energy from waste - are not as green as others.

Competition between products is expected to lead to falls in the price of green electricity, a trend already observed over the last couple of years as hikes in Netherlands' tax on conventional energy products have closed the price gap with renewables. Currently, there are at least three companies offering green power at the same price as conventional.

The consumer power market will be fully liberalised in 2003 or 2004. The government wants 10% of electricity generated in the Netherlands to come from renewables by 2020. The current figure is 2.4%.

* In a related development, the ministry of economic affairs has announced more funding for industrial carbon dioxide (CO2) reduction projects. The third in a series of four funding rounds will contribute euros 50.4m (DF110.9m) to 43 projects, most aiming to improve companies' energy efficiency. Once the final funding round is completed later this year, the scheme, which is the government's largest anti-climate change initiative, will have provided euros 426.1m. It is expected to deliver 6m tonnes CO2 savings, or half the country's Kyoto protocol target of a 12m tonnes reduction from 1990 levels.

Follow-up: Dutch economics ministry (http://www.minez.nl), tel: +31 70 379 8820.

back to CNE latest news

Germany to boost housing energy efficiency ENDS Daily - 07/03/01 ------------------------- A law for more energy efficient housing approved today by Germany's cabinet should reduce the sector's energy consumption by 30% and carbon dioxide (CO2) emission by 10m tonnes by 2005, the government claims. The ordinance forms a "central element" in the administration's climate and energy policies, according to economics minister Werner Müller.

Due to replace two existing laws on building insulation and heating systems when it enters into force later this year, the ordinance will mandate higher planning and construction standards for new buildings. Every new building is to be issued with an energy consumption certificate.

For existing buildings, there will be new obligations to replace inefficient appliances and take other energy efficiency measures. The government is expecting 2m older heating boilers to be replaced with more efficient models, plus an increase in roof insulation and window renewal.

The new law will operate in parallel with a euros 5.1bn (DM10bn) fund for low interest loans to cut housing CO2 emissions announced in January by the construction ministry and state-owned bank for reconstruction (KfW).

Both Mr Müller and construction minister Kurt Bodewig stressed today that extra spending required by the law would be economically justifiable since investments would be amortised through lower energy costs within the lifetime of buildings.

The ordinance had been held up at consultation stage because of its controversial method of calculating energy consumption based on primary energy use which electricity producers and appliance manufactures saw as an effective ban on electric heating (ENDS Daily 24 October 2000).

Follow-up: German construction ministry (http://www.bmvbw.de), tel: +49 30 20080; German economics ministry (http://www.bmwi.de) tel: +49 30 20140 and press release (http://www.bmwi.de/Homepage/Presseforum/Pressemitteilungen/2001/1307prm1.jsp).

back to CNE latest news

Blair's Pre-election speech on environment Text of the Speech Friends of the Earth Press Release See also BBC news

ENDS Daily - 06/03/01 ------------------------- UK prime minister Tony Blair called today for Britain to become a showcase for "duty of care" to the environment but warned that there would be short term pain in achieving long-term sustainable development. This was Mr Blair's second speech on environmental issues in a little over four months (ENDS Daily 24 October 2000), marking preparation for national elections expected this spring, according to most commentators.

The prime minister stressed that global warming predictions could not be ignored and that efforts to protect the global environment had to go beyond implementation of the Kyoto protocol. "Because of our role in the EU and our links to the US", Mr Blair told an invited audience in London, "Britain has a special responsibility. We have invested too much in [Kyoto] to see it fail".

Mr Blair reaffirmed the UK's commitment to reducing CO2 emissions by 20% by 2010 (ENDS Daily 17 November 2000). He also promised an additional UK£100m (euros 158m) for supporting renewable energies. The announcement was greeted by Friends of the Earth as a "welcome down payment for green energy".

Highlighting the business opportunities in developing renewables, Mr Blair continued: "The global market for environmental goods and services is projected to rise to UK£440 billion by 2010.... I want Britain to be a leading player in the coming green industrial revolution.... I believe the role of government is to accelerate...these new technologies until self-sustaining markets take over."

In the wake of a string of food scares in Europe, Mr Blair also addressed the need for reform of the EU common agricultural policy towards "sustainable food production". "Other [EU] member states are calling for greater emphasis on environmental good practice, quality food and high standards of care for farm animals," he noted.

Follow-up: UK prime minister's office (http://www.number-10.gov.uk) Friends of the Earth England Wales and Northern Ireland (http://www.foe.co.uk), tel: +44 20 74 90 15 55 and press release (http://www.foe.co.uk/pubsinfo/infoteam/pressrel/2001/20010306120047.html).

back to CNE latest news

IPCC Working Group III http://www.ipcc.ch/press/pr28-3.htm IPCC Press Release

IPCC WGIII assesses scientific, technical, environmental, enconomic and social aspects of the mitigation of climate change. WGIII Summary for Policymakers

Greenpeace Press Release on WGIII report

back to CNE latest news

------------------------- G8 green ministers keep climate ball rolling ENDS Daily - 05/03/01 -------------------------

See also Reuters Full communique available Environment ministers from the world's eight most powerful countries have reaffirmed their desire to reach a global accord on implementing the Kyoto climate protocol. Meeting in Trieste over the weekend, ministers from Germany, the UK, France, Italy, Japan, Russia, the USA and Canada adopted a statement of intent attempting to bridge their differences on how negotiations should be taken forward.

"We express our concern about the seriousness of the situation," a communiqué says in response to recent scientific reports giving more pessimistic assessments of the extent of climate change (ENDS Daily 22 January). "We [will] strive to reach agreement on outstanding political issues and to ensure in a cost-effective manner the environmental integrity of the protocol."

The environmental community had looked to the meeting to provide a first indication of the new US government's policy on climate. "All ministers delivered today a clear desire for an agreement. I am particularly pleased that the new US administration endorsed this path," German environment minister Jürgen Trittin said yesterday. Former German capital Bonn will host resumed talks on the protocol from mid-July (ENDS Daily 28 February).

But the US representative at the talks, Christine Todd Whitman, stressed that the new administration was undertaking a full review of US climate policy and would not be bound by informal concessions granted by US negotiators in frantic last-minute negotiations to achieve a deal in The Hague (ENDS Daily 27 November 2000) .

The communiqué hints at the continuing strains between the EU and the US-led "Umbrella group" over the timing of the protocol's entry-into-force. It says this should happen no later than 2002 "for most countries," reflecting strong doubts that the American senate will agree ratification on this time scale, if at all.

In other issues tackled, ministers called on the global business community to take on a greater role in achieving sustainable development in the run-up to the Rio+10 world sustainability summit in Johannesburg next year. "The private sector has emerged as a global actor that has a significant impact on environmental trends...a more active involvement by business...as well as a greater commitment to a new culture of environmental stewardship, should be pursued." They also urged the rapid development of binding environmental guidelines governing export credit guarantee agencies.

Follow-up: Italian environment ministry (http://www.minambiente.it)

back to CNE latest news

G-8: Ministers Renew Commitment To Kyoto Protocol Reuters Environment ministers from the world's seven most industrialized countries plus Russia yesterday renewed their commitment to combat global warming and promised to reach consensus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Group of Eight country representatives met for three days starting Friday in Trieste, Italy. "Trieste was not the place to reopen the negotiating table, but we sent out a strong political message and we found common ground for dialogue," Italian Environment Minister Willer Bordon, who hosted the G-8 meeting, said. Representatives attending the meeting came from the United States, Italy, Canada, Germany, France, Japan, the United Kingdom and Russia, as well as the European Commission. Talks on implementing Kyoto Protocol targets collapsed at the UN climate change summit at The Hague in November. The main dispute between the United States and the European Union focused on whether countries should be allowed to count carbon dioxide absorbed by forests and farmland toward emission reduction targets, a measure favored by the United States. "We commit ourselves ... to strive to reach an agreement on outstanding political issues and to ensure in a cost-effective manner the environmental integrity of the Kyoto Protocol," the G-8 countries' final document said yesterday (Alessandra Rizzo, Associated Press/Boston Globe, 4 Mar). The ministers unanimously expressed "concern about the seriousness" of the global warming phenomenon and said they would use this summer's planned continuation of climate change negotiations to forge an agreement (BBC Online, 4 Mar). Formal negotiations on climate change are to resume in Bonn in July. Greenpeace spokesperson Steve Sawyer said the results of the meeting were "the best that could be done at this stage," adding, "From here, it seems that the rest of the G-8 has given the clear signal that while they're willing to wait for the [U.S. President George W.] Bush administration to speed up the issue, they are not willing to wait very long" (Rizzo, AP/Boston Globe). BBC Online reports that Sunday's agreement failed to commit all G-8 nations to ratifying the Kyoto Protocol before a 2002 summit on environmental issues. US Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Christie Whitman, chief US delegate at Trieste, said the Bush administration needs time to assess its policy on global warming, although it does not intend to turn its back on the treaty, which Bush opposed while campaigning for the US presidency (BBC Online). While Whitman maintained that nothing has changed in terms of US support for treaty goals, some environmental groups criticized the US stance. "The United States has to take a position over the Kyoto Protocol," said Jennifer Morgan, director of the World Wildlife Fund's climate change campaign. "They have to make up their mind very soon because countries can't negotiate with someone who doesn't have a position" (Alessandro Rizzo, AP/Nando.net, 3 Mar). The Bush administration has pledged that the United States will attend the July climate change talks in Bonn (Reuters/CNN.com, 3 Mar). The Trieste meeting marked the first time senior environmental policymakers have gathered since the November talks. Before the conference, Italy's Bordon said, "We won't be taking any definitive decisions on climate change because not all the relevant countries will be present. But with the G-8 ministers, the EU's environment representative and hopefully, the chair of the Hague summit present, we should be able to make some progress" (Reuters/PlanetArk, 2 Mar). Several thousand demonstrators held protests outside the conference during the ministers' meeting over the weekend. On Saturday, the demonstrations were loud but seemed to remain peaceful except for some smoke bombs hurled at security forces. More than 3,000 police and special bomb and marine units were stationed in the area to prepare for possible violence (Reuters/CNN.com).

back to CNE latest news

Greenpeace Press Release on the G8 Environment Ministers meeting in Trieste No Time to Waste!

Trieste, Italy - March 4th, 2001: Greenpeace today welcomed the result of the G8 environment ministers’ three day meeting in Trieste to resume talks to tackle global climate change as probably the best that could be done at this stage, until the new USA administration’s position is clear.

The meeting resulted in a communique which signals a welcome agreement of the large industrialised countries to resume climate change negotiations in earnest, but did not set a clear timetable for ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. The main feature of the meeting was the first appearance of the new US administration - EPA administrator Christine Whitman - at an inter-governmental meeting on climate change.

Greenpeace Climate Campaign spokesperson Steve Sawyer said, “Mrs. Whitman’s statements are a dramatic improvement over Bush’s campaign rhetoric, and we welcome the active role that she is taking in shaping the new administration’s position on the urgent global threat of climate change. She seems to have made an open and honest presentation of the US situation, and it gives some signs of hope. But the proof will come when the position is finally made clear, which needs to be soon; definitely prior to the pre-COP6 sessions in New York in April.”

“From here, it seems that the rest of the G8 has given the clear signal that while they are willing to wait for the Bush administration to get up to speed on the issue, they are not willing to wait very long. If the US backs away from Kyoto, they are going to be doing it alone. The rest of the world cannot wait. But an agreement which includes the US is much better than one that does not.”

“We see this as a small, but positive step; putting last November’s difficult climate talks in The Hague behind us and moving forward. But we must reserve judgement until the Bush administration declares itself,” said Sawyer.

Contacts: In Trieste: Steve Sawyer mob phone: +31 653504715; In Brussels: Michel Raquet mob phone: +32 496 163365 In Amsterdam: Susan Cavanagh mob phone: +31 621296910

back to CNE latest news

Friends of the Earth highlight the failed G8 policy on nuclear power plants in Eastern Europe

New Report Published: Limited Safety/Unlimited Risk

When G8 environment ministers meet Friday March 2nd in Trieste, Friends of the Earth activists will launch a new report 'Limited Safety/Unlimited Risk'. In a demonstration outside the summit building, FOE campaigners will call on the G8 to face the issue of nuclear risk. The report criticizes the G8's failure to shut down high-risk reactors and demands that the G8 stop squandering tax-payers' millions in subsidies to its ailing and discredited nuclear power industry.

At the 1992 G7 meeting in Munich, governments promised that decrepit Soviet-designed nuclear plants in Central & Eastern Europe would be shut down to prevent another disaster like Chernobyl, but so far none of these high risk reactors [1] have been closed.

Dodgy fix-it contracts in Central and Eastern Europe for the West's desperate nuclear industry (i.e. Siemens/Framatom) have resulted in the operational lives of dangerous reactors being extended. Experts in European governments [2] and NGOs are highly critical of the dubious safety assessments and methodologies carried out to justify so-called 'safety improvements' in old plants already officially declared 'non-upgradable'.

Patricia Lorenz from Friends of the Earth Europe explains: "Kozloduy in Bulgaria was declared non-upgradeable. Bohunice in Slovakia was declared non-upgradeable. Vague talk of 'safety improvements' is nothing more than a PR strategy. An evaluation must be made, clear goals must be set and the final closure of high risk reactors assured."

Every penny spent on extending the operational life of high risk 'dinosaur' reactors diverts investment from other opportunities - CEE countries have a massive potential for energy efficiency projects.

Laura Radiconcini, Friends of the Earth Italy: "Lower safety standards in the East constitute a threat on two fronts: the very real threat of dangerous reactors in operation, with Krsko 140 km from Triest and Temelin 30 km from the Austrian border, and the risk that lower standards in the East become a justification for low levels of safety in the West. No country can say that nuclear safety is a national issue - radioactivity knows no borders."

The G8 currently discuss plans for the disposal of plutonium from nuclear weapons: financing the production and use of MOX, a plutonium-based fuel. These plans would result in recklessly expensive and technically unsound projects, constituting the birth of a new plutonium industry. Friends of the Earth calls for a complete revision of nuclear policy at G8 and EU levels [3].

Patricia Lorenz, FOEE: "Friends of the Earth calls on the G8 to stop hijacking the disarmament issue to justify MOX fuel production. The G8 plutonium plans would require yet more tax-payer money being poured into the bottomless pit that is the nuclear industry and more dodgy modifications to nuclear plants in the former Soviet Union and so further delay the closure of high risk reactors."

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Friends of the Earth is organising two events in Trieste: ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

On the eve of the G8 summit March 1st 4 pm Sala Eurostar, Central Railway Station of Trieste Press conference & presentation of a new report "Limited Safety/Unlimited Risk"

March 2nd, 17:30 & March 3rd 09:30 Palazzo della Regione, in front of the G8 meeting FOE activists from Austria, Croatia, the Czech Republic and Slovenia demonstrate against nuclear risk and the continued inaction of EU governments to honestly and comprehensively address the safety problems of nuclear power.

======================================================== Further information and the report Limited Safety / Unlimited Risk available from: ========================================================

Patricia Lorenz, Friends of the Earth Europe Energy Campaigner: Tel: +32 2 542 0184 Email: Patricia.Lorenz@foeeurope.org

Howard Mollett, Friends of the Earth Europe Press & Information: Tel: +32 2 542 01 89, Email: howard.mollett@foeeurope.org

========================================================

Footnotes [1] In its Agenda 2000, the EU´s blueprint on enlargement, the need for high nuclear safety was confirmed and closure timetables were established. Eg. Kozloduy in Bulgaria was to be closed by 1998.

[2] An Austrian study found that, with regards to the K2/R4 reactors in the Ukraine: "safety issues (are) not dealt with adequately" and that the problems were so severe that they "call into question the concept of the modernisation program". The report went on to state that claims that "K2R4 (is) reaching an 'internationally acceptable safety level' or 'a safety level similar to that of similarly aged but recently re-licensed Western plants' as forwarded by Energoatom, are in no way substantiated." (Report to the Austrian Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Environment and Water Management by the Risk Research Institute of the Academic Senate of the University of Vienna.)

[3]

Friends of the Earth sets out the following guidelines in Limited Safety/Unlimited Risk:

- No double standards. Projects in the East must not be of lower standard than those financed in the West. - No case-by-case approach to safety assessments. There must be a clear methodology and clear safety targets. - International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) standards are insufficient. - Nuclear safety standards must be up-to-date. Safety standards from the 1960s and 1970s are not acceptable. - Information must be made public without exceptions

-- ---------------- Patricia Lorenz Antinuclear Campaigner FoE Europe Rue Blanche 29, B - 1060 Brussels, Belgium Tel.: +32 2 542 01 84 Fax.: +32 2 537 55 96 E-mail: patricia.lorenz@foeeurope.org Website:www.foeeurope.org

back to CNE latest news

G8 green ministers keep climate ball rolling
ENDS 05/03/01

Environment ministers from the world's eight most powerful countries have reaffirmed their desire to reach a global accord on implementing the Kyoto climate protocol. Meeting in Trieste over the weekend, ministers from Germany, the UK, France, Italy, Japan, Russia, the USA and Canada adopted a statement of intent attempting to bridge their differences on how negotiations should be taken forward.
"We express our concern about the seriousness of the situation," a communiqué says in response to recent scientific reports giving more pessimistic assessments of the extent of climate change (ENDS Daily 22 January). "We [will] strive to reach agreement on outstanding political issues and to ensure in a cost-effective manner the environmental integrity of the protocol."

back to CNE latest news

UNEP PRESS RELEASE

Climate change talks to resume in Bonn in July

Bonn, 28 February 2001 Mr. Jan Pronk, the Chairman of the climate change talks that were suspended last November in The Hague, has announced that the negotiations will resume in Bonn from 16 - 27 July 2001. The meeting venue will be the Maritim Hotel.

"I am confident that these new dates will give governments the time they need to prepare themselves for the decisions that must be taken," said Mr. Pronk, who is also Environment Minister of The Netherlands. "It is essential that we maintain political momentum so that all key players are committed to taking early action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."

The two-week meeting will consist of the resumed sixth session of the Conference of the Parties as well as short, parallel meetings of the Convention's two subsidiary bodies.

Mr. Pronk reached the decision to resume negotiations only after wide-ranging consultations with governments earlier this year. On 12 February he was asked by the Convention's Bureau to identify a suitable and affordable venue during the period mid-June to end-July. The Bonn location home of the Convention secretariat was the most economical option available.

Officials at the resumed climate talks will have the benefit of the newest five-year scientific and technical assessment from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The IPCC has confirmed that the evidence for humanity's influence on the global climate is now stronger than ever before and has presented the most detailed picture to date of how global warming will affect various regions. The IPCC is now finalizing its assessment of the policies and technologies that could be used to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Key issues that must still be resolved at the resumed talks include a package of financial support and technology transfer to help developing countries contribute to global action on climate change, including measures for adapting to climate change impacts; the establishment of an international emissions trading system and a "clean development mechanism"; the extent to which targets should be achieved through domestic action (vs. emissions trading and CDM); the rules for counting emissions reductions from carbon "sinks" such as forests and farmland; and a compliance regime.

Note to journalists: For more information, see www.unfccc.int or contact Michel Smitall at +49-228-8151005 or msmitall@unfccc.int, or Michael Williams at +41-22-917-8242, +41-79-4091528 (cell), or michael.williams@unep.ch.

Washington Post 27th Feb

back to CNE latest news

EPA Mulls Limits for Power Plant Emissions

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Christine Todd Whitman said yesterday that the Bush administration is considering imposing limits on carbon dioxide emissions from the nation's power plants.

As a sign of the White House's concern about global warming, administration officials have begun discussions among themselves and with congressional leaders about adopting a policy designed to limit the emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases that trap heat in the atmosphere and contribute to the Earth's rising temperature.

Whitman would not define precisely what she and the White House would support, but she raised the possibility of adding carbon dioxide to the existing regulatory mix that includes emission levels of nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide and certain sources of mercury.

While President Bush will not be bound by an international global warming agreement reached in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997 that he criticized during the campaign, Whitman said, "This president is very sensitive to the issue of global warming."

"There's no question but that global warming is a real phenomenon, that it is occurring," Whitman said after an appearance before a Senate committee. "And while scientists can't predict where the droughts will occur, where the flooding will occur precisely or when, we know those things will occur."

Democrats and Republicans introduced legislation last year to reduce the emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, carbon dioxide and mercury from power plants. Sen. Robert C. Smith (R-N.H.), chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, intends to introduce similar legislation this year, according to aides, and has discussed the measure with Whitman.

Whitman emphasized that limits on carbon emissions would have to be considered as part of a broader proposal to also regulate other pollutants coming from the burning of fossil fuels. "It's putting it into the process and recognizing that we have to deal with it, whi! ch would be to put a cap of some sort, a target anyway," she said.

Environmental groups that have been skeptical of the president's commitment to cleaning the air and reducing greenhouse gases praised the administration's expression of support for a "multi-pollutant" approach as an important first step. "It's a real indication this issue has moved significantly in the eyes of the public and industry leaders," said Jennifer L. Morgan, director of the World Wildlife Fund's climate change campaign.

Bush advisers had considered including a mention of the proposal in the president's address to Congress last night, but a reference to it was dropped in response to a last-minute lobbying effort by the coal industry. More than half the nation's power is generated by coal-burning power plants.

Whitman leaves today for Trieste, Italy, to attend a meeting of the environmental ministers of the Group of Eight -- the seven major industrialized countries and Russia. Bush and his adviser! s have made increasing domestic energy production a top priority but have had little to say about the related issue of cleaning up the environment.

Bush opposes the Kyoto Protocol for reducing greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, charging that it is "unfair to America" and exempts most Third World countries. At the administration's request, United Nations officials agreed recently to delay the next round of formal global warming treaty negotiations, which had been set for May, until this summer.

back to CNE latest news