Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
702408
label
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
702408
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
29158-005
collections
Records of the White House Office of the Chief of Staff to the President (George H. W. Bush Administration)
John Sununu Issues Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
702408
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
56c58f49a4b504b9
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
1998-0004-F[1]
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
OA/ID Number:
29158
Folder ID Number:
29158-005
Folder Title:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
15
25
2
3
global
war
Statement by the thess Secretary
DRAFT NEWS RELEASE
FOR
THE CHIEF of STAFF
THE PRESIDENT'S WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
ON
has seen
SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH RELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE
DRAFT 2/26/90
President Bush today has invited the heads of state from
a number of
seventeen countries, the European Community, and the OECD to send official
ministerial level delegates to a White House Conference on
Science and Economics Research Related to Global Change. The
Conference will be held in Washington, D.C., April 17-18, 1990.
The President He announced his intention to host this Conference both during
his with President Gorbachev and mere recently in a speech
to the United Nation S Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
a meeting recently held here in Washington The Conference
will be devoted to science and economics issues relevant to
policy on global change, including climate. The President stated Q
that The White House Conference is designed as an important
step towards substantially enhancing and broadening
international understanding of the critical science and
economic research issues, framing a strategy for implementing a
joint international science and economics research effort, and
linking that knowledge to the policy process both nationally and
internationally The President said "I believe that by working
together we can enhance international cooperation in these vital
areas He further stated the this Conference is a vital next
step in a joint international approach to address changes in the
global environment
The Administration considers
The Conference will convene a delegation of three ministerial-
level officials from a representative group of nations. The
officials willyrepresent three essential disciplines: science,
economics, and the environment. The President S invitations were
sent to
participants have been invited to send delegations of ministerial land
1. Australia
2.
officials representing the areas of science,
economics, and environment,
3.
4. Federal Republic of Germany
related to
5.
global change.
6.
The will conferenced in
7. Indonesia
8.
Mexico Japan Italy India France Canada Brazil
9.
10.
11. Netherlands
12. Nigeria
13. Norway
14. Poland
15. Soviet Union
16. United Kingdom
17. Zaire
18. Buropean Community
19. OECD
The President has appointed designated his Science Advisor and Director of
the
Q
no
the Office of Science and Technology Policy, Dr. D. Allan
Bromley; the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, Dr.
Michael Boskin; and the Chairman of the Council on Environmental
Quality, Mr. Michael R. Deland, to serve as Co-chairmen of this
Conference.
End of Release
(File=PRESS225.DFT)
2
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 1-25-90 ; 4:40PM ;
2023953462-
2024566218:# 2
01/26/90 18:09
9819 797. 7.07.
UPA
4 ene
of
-UNITED
Global
Warming
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
JAN 1 8 1990
OFFICE or
THE ADMINISTRATOR
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: IPCC Speech Material
-
FROM:
Daniel C. Esty DCE
Special Assistant to the Administrator
TO:
Robert E. Grady
Associate Director
Natural Resources, Energy and Science
Attached is a copy of the proposed Presidential speech
outline, as revised through consultations with the Energy
Department. Also attached are several sets of "raw material" to
help flesh out the outline.
The draft speech outline has been sent to Dr. Bromley as a
joint product of Secretary Watkins and Administrator Reilly. The
State Department (Zoellick) has also reviewed the draft.
Let me know if you would like anything else.
Attachments
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
01. Memo
From Daniel C. Esty to Robert Grady
1/18/90
P/5
Re: Raw Input for Presidential Speech (3 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
(Document Follows)
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
By If (NLGB) on 10/28/05
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 1-25-90 ; 4:40PM ;
2023953462-
2024566218:# 3
01/20/00
10:09
15202 262 0180
UPA
X 003
Raw Input for Presidential speed
U.S. Supports the IPCC Prosess
1. Congratulations to its sponsors, UNEP and NMO, and to Dr.
Bolin (Sweden) its chairman.
-
In May, 1987 the Tenth World Neteorological Congress asked
the Executive Council of the World Neteorological Organization
(WMO), in cooperation with the U.N. Environment Programme (UNEP)
"to arrange appropriate mechanisms to undertake further
developments of scientific and other aspects of greenhouse
gases.
-
In June 1987, the WMO Executive Council (which consists o
representatives of WMO member countries) and the UNEP Governing
Council (which is made up of representatives of essentially the
same countries) responded by asking the Secretary-General of WMO,
Professor Obasi, and the Executive Director of UNEP, Dr. Telba to
cooperate in the establishment of an intergovernmental mechanism
to carry out the intentions of the Tenth Congress.
-
The IPCC was established after subsequent discussions.
-
The first session of the IPCC was held in Geneva,
Switzerland, on November 9-11, 1988. It was attended by
representatives of 30 countries and 18 international
organizations.
-
Dr. Bert Bolin of Sweden, a senior science advisor to the
government of Sweden, was elected Chairman. Dr. Bolin is
generally recognized as an outstanding chairman -- even handed,
adroit, with an excellent, understated sense of humor.
2. U.S. saw a need for an orderly, intergovernmental process to
assess scientific understanding, evaluate potential impacts and
develop appropriate response strategies.
-
The issue of global climate change began to emerge as an
important public policy issue during early and mid ninetsen
eighties as the earth experienced some of the hottest years in
NO
the last century (5 of the 10 hottest years in the last 100 have
occurred in the 1980s) and as evidence of a significant build-up
in the atmosphere of certain "greenhouse gases" became more
widely known.
-
During the early and mid 1980s, discussion of the issue took
place largely in the context of a number of loosely resulted,
albeit important conferences.
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 1-25-90 ; 4:41PM ;
2023953462-
2024566218:# 4
01/25/80
10:10
3202 252 0100
UPA
@504
-
As the implication of the issue becaus clearer, the ,U.S, and
a number of the countries began to perceive the need to address
the issue through an on-going, international process that spann
the broad range of relevant issues and expertise.
-
This led to the proposals by the Tenth World Neteorological
Council. Congress, the WMO Executive Council, and the UNEP Governing
3.
IPCC has filled that role.
-
Participation in the IPCC has increased continuously and new
includes over 50 nations, hundreds of scientists and policy
makers, and many non-governmental and international
organizations.
-
The work of the IPCC is carried out through three major
working groups:
The Working Group on Science, chaired by the United
Kingdom, is reviewing and assessing the existing scientific
information on, and understanding of, global climate change.
The Working Group on Impacts, chaired by the USSR, is
assessing the potential environmental and socio-economic
impacts of global climate change.
The Response Strategies Working Group, chaired by the U.S.,
is identifying and assessing possible strategies for
responding to global climate change -- both by limiting
greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to climate change.
4.
Welcome the IPCC reports due in August.
-
The three working groups will complete their reports to the
IPCC late this Spring. The overall IPCC report will be prepared
during the Summer and considered by the full IPCC at a meeting in
Stockholm at the end of August. It will then be forwarded to
UNEP and WNO and considered by the U.N. General Assembly next
Fall and at the Second World Climate Conference (SWCC) during the
last week of October and first week of November.
5. U.S. is committed to playing a leadership role and
supporting the IPCC as the best forum for global climate change
policy development.
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 1-25-90 : 4:41PM ;
2023953462-
2024566218:# 5
01/20/90
10:11
9219 707 707.52
UPA
0000
$
-
The IFCC is the best forum for global climate change policy
development because: (a) it is focused exclusively on the
issue; (b) its program of work addresses the broad range of
relevant issues, not just e.g. emission reduction, (c) it has
successfully involved the bread range of necessary expertise;
(d) it is not overly politicized, and (a) it is truly
international, with over 50 countries currently involved and more
becoming involved. Essentially, it has proved a productive and
increasingly popular forum for international analysis and
discussion of the issue.
-
The President is committed to playing a leadership role in
the international community's efforts to address global climate
change. The U.S. is playing a major leadership role in the IPCC
and has provided substantial financial and analytic support for
all major IPCC activities.
6.
Support the UK proposal at the UN to continue the IPCC
-
In her speech on November 9, 1989, to the UN General
Assembly, Prime Minister Thatcher proposed the continuation of
No
the IPCC after it submite its interim report next Fall so that it
can provide an authoritative scientific basis for the negotiation
of protocols to a framework convention. We should strongly
support this proposal and broaden its rationale to include the
need for a sound analytical basis, broadly construed to include
analysis of the administrative and technical feasibility, costs
and economic consequences of future protocols. There will be a
NC)
need for years to come to (a) continually improve and
periodically assess our scientific understanding of global
climate change and its impacts, and (b) develop and evaluate
response measures.
MackSoftro
SENT, BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 1-25-90 ; 4:42PM ;
2023953462-
2024566218;# 6
01/20/80
10:11
2202 202 0700
UPA
И 005
RAW MATERIAL FOR A PRESIDENTIAL SPEECE TO THE IPCO
Section 5:
1. The Clean Air Act
I have submitted to Congress extensive revisions to the Clean
Air Act which should result not only in cleaning the nation's air,
but in reducing greenhouse gas emissions as well. Powerful
incentives exist in our acid rain program for conserving energy.
These will reduce carbon dioxide emissions from electric utilities
by about 75 million tons. The alternative transportation fuels
program in the bill also offers the potential for reductions in
emissions, up to 60 million tons, depending on what fuels make it
to the market.
2. Energy Conservation Program.
Since taking office, my Administration has proposed or
promulgated energy efficiency standards for refrigerators,
dishwashers, washing machines, and dryers. Together, these will
reduce emissions by around 15 million tons. In addition, I have
submitted a request to Congress to increase the size of DOE's
Conservation Program by $150 million.
3. Alternative Energy Sources
to be provided by DOE
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 1-25-90 ; 4:42PM ;
2023953462-
2024566218;# 7
01/20/80
10:16
2010 707 707.fl
UFA
1001
Reforestation
The U.S. is firmly committed to positive action in response
to threats imposed by global climate change. one immediate and
tangible action which I have called for is a major reforestation
program within the U.S. I am calling upon all Americans to join
in a twenty-year program to plant and maintain twenty billion
trees. We expect to provide up to $175 million per year to support
programs ranging from urban tree planting, to sharing the cost of
large tree plantations, to enhancing the quality and ultimately the
biological yield of existing timber stands.
Complimenting these public investments, I have called for a
private, non-profit foundation called the "America the Beautiful
Foundation", which would capitalize a fund of potentially billions
of private dellars, the yield of which will be used to support tree
planting and maintenance throughout the United States. The
objectives of these tree planting programs will be to absorb from
5 to 10 percent of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions, as well as
enhance water quality and wildlife habitat.
5. Chloroflourocarbons (CFCs)
These currently account for 25% of the current U.S.
contribution to global warming. In addition to possibly affecting
the climate system, these substances also are responsible for the
depletion of the ozone layer. I fully support the international
efforts to fully phaseout production of these substances by the
year 2000. In addition, the US is aggressively working with
developing countries to assist them in making the transition to
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 1-25-90 ; 4:42PM ;
2023953462-
2024566218:# 8
- cor DO 10:12 3206 202 0100
UPA
$ 000
$
substitute chemicals. For example, we are working with the
refrigeration industry to facilitate CFC substitution in China and
we are sending technical missions to Brazil, Egypt and Mexico.
6. State Initiatives
The States deserve significant credit for their contributions
to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Their efforts include
programs -to increase energy efficiency in homes, offices, and
industries, to expand the use of alternative fuels in the
transportation sector, and to plant trees. Several states have
even mandated general greenhouse gas emissions reduction efforts.
For example, the Governor of New Jersey recently signed an
executive order requiring state agencies to implement measures
designed to reduce energy and CFC use and to maximize the number
of trees in New Jersey. The oregon legislature has mandated that
the state reduce emissions of greenhouse gases by 20% by 2005.
Almost every state has implemented energy efficiency programs.
An example of a program that has successfully reduced energy
consumption in industry is the Energy Advisory Service to Industry
in New York. In 1988, CO2 reductions attributable to this program
were approximately 682,000 tons, while consumers saved more than
$60 million in energy costs. In California, the South Coast Air
Quality Management District is implementing stringent air quality
standards that will eventually require substantial use of
alternative fuels. (However, this plan calls for the use of
methanol fuel, which, if derived from natural gas, is only slightly
less carbon intensive than coal, and, if derived from coal, is 50-
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 1-25-90 ; 4:43PM ;
2023953462-
2024566218;# 9
01/25/80 16:13 202 252 0780
UPA
4 and
:
75% more carbon intensive than coal.)
In addition to individual programs, a number of states are now
undertaking "Least-Cost Utility Planning" which requires utilities
to undertake the least cost alternative to providing power, which
is also often the option with the lowest greenhouse gas emissions,
i.e., energy efficiancy. A few states, such as Wisconsin, New York
and Oregon, are taking this a step further by applying an
environmental weighting factor in competitive bidding procedures
for private power supply options. This tends to encourage natural
gas and non-fossil sources of energy.
States are also undertaking their own tree planting programs
geared toward reducing carbon dioxide. The States of North Dakota
and Missouri, for example, have established tree planting programs.
oh
The former has set a target of 100 million trees by 2000.
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 1-25-80 ; 4:40PM ;
2023953462-
2024566218:# 1
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20508
DATE:
1-25-90
TO:
Mark Lange
ADDRESS: Speechwriting
TELPHONE NUMBER: 2130 2903
FAX NUMBER:
6218
FROM:
hancy trayaand
TELEPHONE NUMBER: (456) 6202
FAX NUMBER:
(202) 395-
9
NUMBER OF PAGES, INCLUDING COVER SHEET:
SPECIAL INSTRUCTION:
This is what we have
01/23/90 10:08
&
P.10
Global 9.
PRESS
Warming
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
PR NO. 11
January 30, 1989
REMARKS BY
THE HONORABLE JAMES A. BAKER III
SECRETARY OF STATE
BEFORE THE
RESPONSE STRATEGIES WORKING GROUP
INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
JANUARY 30, 1989
Thank you Fred Bernthal, Professor Bolin, ladies and
gentlemen. I am very pleased to have the opportunity to join
you this morning, however briefly, and to welcome you to the
Department of State. You are the first official group that
I've had the pleasure of welcoming to the Department.
I would also like to welcome Bill Reilly, who is here with us
this morning -- President of the World Wildlife Fund and the
Conservation Foundation. Bill has let President Bush talk him
into becoming the nominee for the post of Administrator of the
United States Environmental Protection Agency, and it's my
fervent hope, Bill, that nothing you hear at this conference
this morning will cause you to change your mind.
The truth is, though, as I don't need to tell those of you who
are here, we face some very difficult problems. It is also
true, though, that we now recognize them to be problems, and in
my experience in government that is at least half of the battle.
Some months ago President Bush said, "We face the prospect of
being trapped on a boat that we have irreparably damaged --- not
by the cataclysm of war, but by the slow neglect of a vessel we
believed to be impervious to our abuse."
The establishment of the Intergovernment Panel on Climate
Change and this meeting of the Panel's Response Strategies
Working Group, I think, shows beyond a doubt that this is a
transnational issue. We are all in the same boat. And as I
put it in my testimony to the Senate recently, "The tides and
the winds can spread environmental damages to continents and
hemispheres far removed from the immediate disasters."
For further Information contact:
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
02. Remarks
By James Baker re global climate changes
1/30/89
P/5
Margin notes redacted (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
(Document Follows)
Subseries:
Issues Files
By
If
(NLGB)
10/28/05
on
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
01/23/90 10:09
=
P.11
10
PR NO. 11
--2-
So, if I may borrow a phrase from the environmentalists, the
political ecology is now ripe for action. We know that we need
to act, and we also know that we need to act together. That is
what this meeting is all about.
But I would take it even a step further. One of the big
advantages of being Secretary of State is that because I am not
a scientist, I am, therefore, not called upon to assess the
evidence, especially on global climate change. Yet it is also
clear, I think, that we face more than simply a scientific
problem. It is also a diplomatic problem of when and how we
take action. And here, if I might, 1 would like to make four
points.
Not
The first is that we can probably not afford to wait until all this
of the uncertainties have been resolved before we do act. Time
will not make the problem go away.
The second is that while scientists refine the state of our almost
knowledge, we should focus immediately on prudent steps that
are already justified on grounds other than climate change.
oh
These include reducing CFC emissions, greater energy efficiency
and reforestation.
The third is that whatever global solutions to global climate
change are considered, they should be as specific and
cost-effective as they can possibly be.
The fourth is that those solutions will be most effective if
they transcend the great fault line of our times, the need to
reconcile the transcendent requirements for both economic
development and a safe environment.
Without in any way downgrading the difficulty of the task, I
would conclude, ladies and gentlemen, by noting that progress
generally results when common interests are joined to a common
understanding. This meeting and others like it will play a
crucial role in moving us all toward that common understanding
of what we must do to protect and to preserve our environment.
Thank you very much for having me this morning, and Godspeed.
30-50grs webse the sci are should do stript
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
03. Memo
From James Watkins to D. Allan Bromley
1/18/90
P/S
Re: Presidential Speech at IPCC (7 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Open on Expiration of PRA
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
(Document Follows)
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
By If (NLGB) on 10/28/05
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA].
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
01/23/90 10:05
a
P.03
2
MAN.1 8 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Dr. D. Allan Bromley
DR. MAUNARD
Assistant to the President
FROM:
Admiral James D. Watkins D. wark.
Secretary of Energy
William K. Reilly
Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency
SUBJECT: Presidential Speech to the IPCC
The meeting of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change during the first
week of February offers the President an important opportunity to reaffirm his
leadership on international environmental issues. Attached is the outline of a speech
that he might give (Tab A).
We believe that it is a positive statement of: (1) his concern for the
environment in general and about global warming in particular, (2) his commitment to
lead international efforts in these areas, (3) the significant U.S. efforts to fulfill this
commitment and (4) U.S. support for the IPCC as the proper forum for addressing the
climate change issue. We also believe that the statement is fully consistent with
existing Administration policy.
Also attached is an issue paper outlining options for carrying forward and
expanding in the IPCC the cost and economic impact analysis of measures to limit
greenhouse gas emissions (TAB B). Although not linked to the speech, the issue needs
to be carefully considered. Such work must be continued in the IPCC or the
international debate will continue to be based more on bold rhetoric than solid
information.
We have shared this outline with the State Department and believe it is, in
essence, supported by them. We would like to explore these ideas, with you and our
colleagues in the rest of the Administration. To this end, we would appreciate your
circulating these documents in preparation for a discussion which you might lead. We
would welcome your advice on how to move the inter-agency review process forward
expeditiously given that the date of the speech is fast approaching.
Attachments
cc: Frederick M. Bernthal, Assistant Secretary,
Oceans & International Environmental & Scientific Affairs Bureau,
Department of State
01/23/90 10:05
2
P.04
FRI@11:30
DPC
TAB A
3
Proposal for Presidential Speech
before the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Control (IPCC)
1.
General statement of commitment to and concern for the
global environment and economic development.
--
Reiterate determination that the President will take
active role in addressing concern about global climate
change.
Reiterate Secretary Baker S approach (spelled out
in
January 1989)
NO
--
Reiterate Noordwijk commitment to greenhouse gas
stabilization as soon as possible, consistent with the
requirement for global economic growth that can enhance
the quality of life for people everywhere.
--
Stress strong U.S. commitment to environment; e.g.,
domestic programs, leadership in forging international
agreements on environment, assistance to and
cooperative efforts with developing countries and
current or former centrally planned economies.
2. U.S. Supports the IPCC Process
--
Stress need for international cooperation.
:
Congratulations to IPCC sponsors, the United Nations
Environment Program (UNEP), the World Meteorological
Organization (WMO) and to Dr. Bolin of Sweden, IPCC
Chairman.
--
Establishment of the IPCC has filled the need for an
orderly, intergovernmental process to assess scientific
understanding, evaluate potential impacts and develop
appropriate response options.
--
Welcome IPCC reports due in August.
--
U.S. is committed to playing a leadership role through
our chairmanship of the Response Strategies Working
Group (RWSG) and supporting IPCC as best forum for
global climate change policy development.
:
Support for UK proposal at UN to continue IPCC.
?
O
01/23/90 10:06
DB
P.05
4
3.
Past and Ongoing U.S. Contributions and Views on Key Issues
of Convention and EmissionsqLimiting Agreements
-- Science
o
U.S. budget is the largest in the world and is
rising, nearly $500 million in FY 1990 and to
increase to almost $1 billion in FY 1991.
Importance of all countries, no matter what their
level of development or economic system,
contributing to understanding of the science.
This cooperation needs to take several forms:
-
cooperation in assessment of state of the
science; and
-
cooperation in monitoring and analysis of
climate change.
Periodic international reassessment of the science
at fixed intervals to aid in our decision making.
--
Technology Development
o
U.S. has active technology development programs to
improve the efficiency of both supply and demand
side technologies, and reduce greenhouse gas
emissions.
-
More efficient fossil fuel generation
technologies.
1
Renewable and energy efficiency technology
initiative.
-
Conservation technology: end-use efficiency
-
Nuclear: new generation with enhanced safety
features under development.
O
Any framework convention should provide for
regular-assessments of the state of technology
development to determine the availability and
of technologies.
2
01/23/90 10:06
=
P.06
-- U.S. is sensitive to the need for technology transfer
to other countries.
€
o
Clean coal, renewable, conservation, end-use
services for technology transfer, and nuclear.
0
A.I.D. appropriation bill.
*
O
EPA/Peace Corps agreement.
X
O
Change in World Bank policy.
to
0
EPA's IETTAB and DOE's CORECT program to examine
X
technology transfer.
0
Policy aid package.
--
Economics
0
Follow-up on Administration commitment to develop
real data on costs of various response strategies
and assess new response measures.
o
Challenge others to do the same.
O
Offer technical support to those who need it.
-- Policy
o
President should encourage consideration of truly
innovative responses including:
-
comprehensive approach: all major greenhouse
gases are included; and
trading of emission permits.
President should define general criteria for
future agreements to limit greenhouse gas
emissions:
!
market mechanisms such as "integrated
resource" planning and consistency with
economic growth in all countries; and
3
01/23/90 10:07
DD
P.07
1
need to work with industry to ensure that
response actions do not adversely affect
economic growth around the world.
-- U.S. Clean Air Act Legislation
Encourages emissions trading.
O
Use of efficiency energy supplies; e.g., new clean
coal technology and conservation technologies.
--
National Energy Strategy
o
Comprehensive blueprint for addressing future
energy needs with consideration to climate change
and other environmental issues.
As first step, take those steps which contribute
to other goals, but also reduce greenhouse gas
emissions; e.g., clean coal technology, DOE
conservation programs.
My
-- Energy efficiency programs: lighting, appliance
efficiency standards, model building codes, industrial
process improvement, encouraging utilities to provide
the service of electricity demand reduction,
transportation research and development, etc.
-- Alternative energy sources are being developed.
o
Renewables: hydro, solar, biomass, geothermal.
0
Nuclear: new reactor design.
--
Reforestation: Trees for U.S.
--
Phase-out of CFCs by 2000 providing safe substitutes
are available.
o
U.S. contribution to: development of safe
substitutes, assessments of needs by other
countries.
4.
Reiterate Malta Offer to Host Convention Negotiations when
IPCC is Ready
-- Express commitment to finding global solutions.
4
01/23/90 10:07
=
P.08
7
-- Demonstrate U.S. williagness to facilitate the process.
-- To further the debate, U.S. will host international
environmental meeting composed of senior science,
Happen
economics and environmental officials from all nations.
on
5
01/23/90 10:08
&
P.09
8
TAB B
1
Issue: How to carry forward and expand in the IPCC the cost and
emissions? economic impact analysis of measures to limit greenhouse gas
Discussion: The IPCC's Response Strategies Working Group (RSWG)
must conclude its work in the next couple of months for its
report to be written on schedule. Consequently much of the cost
and economic analysis that is beginning to emerge will not be
included in the report. Without an ongoing analytical effort,
the international discussion of emission targets and timetables
will be dominated by the countries who are prepared to make
substantial political commitments without much information on how
they will fulfill those commitments.
To move the debate over commitments to limit greenhouse gas
emissions away from bold rhetoric to a realistic assessment of
what is possible over different timeframes, the IPCC's work on
cost and economic impact analysis must be continued and expanded.
Furthermore, because targets and timetables, especially for co₂
are likely to be a major focus of attention at the fourth IPCC
plenary next August and at the Second World Climate Conference
(SWCC) next October-November, a means must be found for an
ongoing effort over the next 5-7 months.
There are three major options for proceeding. The first is
to request individual countries such as the U.S., Japan and the
FRG to conduct studies and continue to provide results to the
IPCC even after the conclusion of the RSWG's report. A second is
to instruct the RSWG's Energy and Industry Subgroup (EIS) led by
Japan to continue its analyses beyond the Spring and prepare a
supplemental report. The third is for the U.S. to offer to lead,
under the auspices of the RSWG and perhaps in collaboration with
EIS, a special effort and produce a supplemental report in time
for the fourth IPCC plenary. The latter option might entail a
significant commitment of resources but may be most likely to
result in substantive output. The latter option also offers the
possibility of bringing a number of developing countries more
fully into the process, because of a cooperative project already
underway in ten developing countries.
Position: The U.S. should promote an ongoing effort to analyze
the costs and economic impacts of a variety of targets and
timetables for limiting greenhouse gas emissions. This should
include the production of a supplemental report for consideration
by the fourth IPCC plenary. The U.S. should favor a leadership
role for EIS but be prepared to offer to lead the effort if
discussions at the February IPCC meeting suggest it would be
necessary to ensure meaningful output.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 5, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR GOVERNOR SUNUNU
FROM:
ROGER B. PORTER
RBP
SUBJECT:
Global Climate Change Articles
Following your telephone call this morning, I asked our
staff to look for any articles they could find in addition to the
Warren Brookes piece in the Washington Times. They could not
uncover any additional news accounts, but have pulled together
the attached package of materials regarding memorandums between
Assistant Attorney General Stewart's office and the White House.
If you need anything else on this, please let me know.
Attachments
U.S. Department of Justice
Land and Natural Resources Division
Office of the
Washington, D.C. 20530
Deputy Assistant Attorney General
January 5, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Paul Roellig
Senior Policy Analyst
Office of Policy Development
FROM:
Barry Hartman BN
Deputy Assistant Attorney General
SUBJECT: Memoranda on Global Climate Change
As requested, we are transmitting copies of the
substantive memoranda on international approaches to global
climate change sent by Assistant Attorney General Richard Stewart
to Boyden Gray and Dr. Allan Bromley in the past weeks, and
related items. Please find attached:
A - Memorandum of November 20, 1989 to Dr. Bromley,
suggesting several areas of possible analysis on issues
of global climate change.
B - Memorandum of December 14, 1989 to Boyden Gray,
describing the issues and our proposed approaches in
greatest detail.
C - Memorandum of December 18, 1989 to Dr. Bromley and
Members of the DPC Working Group on Global Change,
presenting materials on our proposed approaches.
D - Memorandum of December 18, 1989 to Boyden Gray,
suggesting next steps to be taken on these issues.
E - December 29, 1989 final version of United States
submissions to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC)
F - Article by Warren Brookes in the Washington Times,
January 3, 1990, page F1.
Item B, the memorandum of December 14, sets forth in their
fullest form our proposed approaches to international agreements
on global climate change, and it is presumably the document
referred to in the Brookes article.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
04. Memo
From Richard Stewart to D. Allan Bromley
11/20/89
P/5
Re: Analysis of Legal Frameworks for Institutional Responses
to Global Change (4 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
(Document Follows)
Subseries:
Issues Files
By If (NLGB) on 10/28/05
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
U.S. Department of Justice
Land and Natural Resources Division
Office of the Assistant Attorney General
Washington. D.C. 20530
November 20, 1989
MEMORANDUM
TO:
The Hon. D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for Science and Technology
Chairman, Working Group on Global Change
FROM:
Richard B. Stewart
RBS
Assistant Attorney General
SUBJECT: Analysis of Legal Frameworks for Institutional
Responses to Global Change
As requested, we have been examining the question of
legal frameworks for institutional responses to global change,
with particular reference to any contributions which the
Department of Justice may be able to make to existing efforts.
We believe that the legal structures for addressing
global climate change should seek to:
- include all of the factors which can affect change
(including, for example, greenhouse gas sinks as well as
sources) or mitigate its effects;
- encourage innovative private as well as public responses;
- achieve environmental goals at least cost; and
- retain flexibility to respond to new information, changing
circumstances, and diverse local conditions.
In addition, these structures should be practical and
enforceable. This is the approach reflected in the
Administration's Clean Air Act proposals for acid rain. We
propose the following steps to promote use of this approach in
dealing with global climate change:
2
A. Review of Existing United States Agency Authorities
and Alternatives.
An Executive Order could be issued to require each
federal agency to review (on a programmatic rather than project-
specific basis) which of its activities potentially affect
climate change, and which, properly focussed or altered, has
promising potential for reducing greenhouse gases, retaining and
expanding sinks, or encouraging adaptive measures.¹ Such an
effort could:
1. Provide a baseline analysis of current federal programs
and their implications for contributing or adapting to climate
change.
2. Assist the development of a broad portfolio of possible
policy responses to climate change, both domestically and
internationally.
3. Identify opportunities for specific administrative or
legislative proposals to help prevent undesirable changes in
global climate or mitigate its consequences.
This review should emphasize innovative market-based
and other alternatives to existing command-and-control
strategies. It should advance our ability to ascertain the costs
and benefits of alternative policies, and focus future research
initiatives on the areas of greatest need and promise, as
identified by the Administration.
1Precedent for such a programmatic, administration-wide
review of environmental impacts can be found in Executive Orders
dealing with wetlands and regulatory "takings" of private
property. Such a review might be supervised by CEQ with the
assistance of the Justice Department.
An alternative means of promoting such review would be
reliance over time on the normal Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) process under the National Environmental Policy Act. CEQ
is currently considering how EISs should address global warming
issues. The EIS process, however, is project-specific. It would
probably not be well suited for the relatively prompt,
programmatic, administration-wide. review proposed here. In
addition, an assessment mandated by Executive Order would be
formulated and implemented by the Administration as a matter of
managerial discretion, whereas EISs would be challenged by
private litigants and reviewed by the courts under the evolving
law of NEPA.
3
B. Structure of International Agreements.
International agreements will be proposed to deal with
the causes of climate change and perhaps also with adaptations to
change. The Vienna Convention and the Montreal Protocol on ozone
depletion have been frequently cited as relevant models. The
problem of global climate change is, however, enormously more
complex than that of CFCs and stratospheric ozone. The legal
framework for dealing with global climate change and its
consequences should, insofar as practicable, deal with all of the
relevant factors -- including the various greenhouse gases,
sinks, and adaptive measures -- in order to retain and encourage
flexibility in private and public initiatives to address the
matter. The following steps could be taken to develop such a
framework:
1. Review and evaluate experience under the Montreal
Protocol, other international conventions (e.g. the Sofia
protocol and bilateral or regional agreements on transboundary
air pollution), and the initiatives within the European
Community, in order to determine in what respects they do or do
not provide suitable models for dealing with global climate
change.
2. Review and evaluate existing domestic experience with
innovative approaches in dealing with environmental problems,
including water pollution effluent charges and the trading
program under the Clean Air Act, to identify similar approaches
that might be suitable for dealing with climate change and its
consequences.
3. Identify, on the basis of such reviews, potential
international legal frameworks for dealing with climate change
and its consequences that would accommodate and encourage
innovative and flexible approaches.
C. Enforceability of International Agreements.
The issues of compliance monitoring and sanctions are
being discussed by the parties to the Montreal Protocol on ozone
depletion, and will be of concern in any future agreement on
climate change. The United States has a well-developed structure
of regulatory and administrative law to ensure that specific
undertakings made by the government are actually carried out.
The legal systems of some nations are similar to our own, but
those of many other nations do not provide equivalent assurance.
The Justice Department is familiar with this general problem in
the context of state implementation and enforcement of federal
environmental laws. The Department could:
4
1. Undertake a review of domestic environmental laws and
enforcement mechanisms in selected nations who are likely to play
a major role in any international agreements.
2. Participate in an international working group of
environmental enforcement officials convened for the purpose of
exchanging information and experience on enforcement of domestic
pollution control laws and the means of implementing global
climate agreements.
3. Review experience with state implementation of federal
environmental laws, with specific attention to the special issues
posed by market-based approaches such as air pollution offsets,
in order to assist the development of implementation assurances
in global climate change agreements.
4. On the basis of these efforts, advise our negotiators on
the likely implementation by others of their commitments, and
suggest methods for structuring an international agreement on
climate change to include effective and efficient implementation
assurances.
CC: C. Boyden Gray
Counsel to the President
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
05a. Memo
From Richard Stewart to C. Boyden Gray
12/14/89
P-5
Re: International Approaches to Global Climate Change (13
pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Open on Expiration of PRA
Subseries:
Issues Files
(Document Follows)
WHORM Cat.:
By
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
If
(NLGB)
on
10/28/05
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
U.S. Department of Justice
Land and Natural Resources Division
Office of the Assistant Attorney General
Washington, D.C. 20530
December 14, 1989
MEMORANDUM
TO:
C. Boyden Gray, Esq.
Counsel to the President
FROM:
Richard B. Stewart
Assistant Attorney General
SUBJECT: International Approaches to Global Climate Change
As requested at the December 6, 1989 meeting in your
office, an informal group of representatives of EPA, Justice and
State have developed materials to promote discussion and adoption
of a comprehensive, performance-based approach in international
agreements dealing with global climate change. This memorandum
is submitted to transmit these materials to you, and to highlight
some of the issues raised by such an approach.
SUMMARY
Under a comprehensive, performance-based approach, all
greenhouses gases, sources and sinks are addressed together.
Each international legal instrument produced -- whether
convention or protocol -- deals, to the maximum extent possible,
with the entire array of gases, their sources and sinks. 1 This
approach employs the concept of a "global warming potential
index" to compare gases, their sources and sinks along a
standardized spectrum, and the concept of "net emissions" to
adopt performance targets that would not be limited to any one
gas or source or sink, but would permit attainment of the target
through policies aimed at all scientifically understood
¹As explained below, limitations in data and scientific
understanding may preclude use of a truly comprehensive approach,
incorporating all sources and sinks, at the outset.
- 2 -
greenhouse causal factors. Such net emissions performance
targets would be set, at least initially, for each nation, and
would leave to each nation the choice of internal policies
desired to attain the target. Thus, using the "global warming
potential index," each nation could devise a set of policies that
would reduce "net emissions," through restriction of sources or
expansion of sinks or both.
Such an approach would provide maximum flexibility for
developing diverse, innovative, cost-effective measures for
dealing with global warming. It would encourage, but not
require, internal use by participating nations of emissions
reduction or contract credits and trading programs, on the model
of the Administration's Clean Air Act proposal for acid rain.
In addition, international trades² (on a bilateral,
regional or multilateral basis) could be authorized as a method
for attaining national net emissions targets in order to achieve
further environmental and economic benefits from the use of the
trading principle.
This approach is reflected in the following attach-
ments:
-
Comments to be submitted for addition to the
"Legal Measures" section of the most recent Report
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
("IPCC") Response Strategies Working Group
("RSWG"), due by January 1, 1990. (Tab A)
-
A concept paper to be submitted for attachment as
an Appendix to the "Legal Measures" section of the
RSWG Report, due by January 1, 1990. (Tab B)
-
A revised Draft Framework Convention embodying
these approaches. This document is an internal
State Department draft, not cleared through
interagency review and not for distribution.
(Tab C)
-
An itinerary of significant upcoming meetings and
deadlines. (Tab D)
2 The term "international emissions trading" is used
throughout this memorandum in its general sense, to refer to
trades across national borders without regard to whether the
trade is conducted by governmental or private actors.
- 3 -
These materials contemplate the following actions in
the international community:
-
Proposal by the United States that the
comprehensive, performance-based approach and a
system of international emissions trading be
analyzed and discussed by the RSWG and by the full
IPCC.
-
Inclusion of obligations in a "framework
convention" on climate change requiring the
parties to develop the comprehensive approach and
the trading approach .
-
Implementation, through a protocol to the
framework convention, of the comprehensive
approach for all scientifically understood
greenhouse gases, their sources and sinks.
-
Further authorization, either in the initial
protocol or in subsequent documents, of
international emissions trading.
-
Protocol amendments to include additional
greenhouse gases, their sources and sinks (or to
exclude previously included items) as scientific
understanding advances.
There is an important question whether international
agreement on responses to global climate change should take the
form of one or more than one legal instrument. We recommend
flexibility on this question, permitting the use of more than one
instrument, SO long as each instrument incorporates the
comprehensive, performance-based approach outlined here. The use
of more than one legal instrument -- a framework convention,
followed by one or more protocols -- is not itself inconsistent
with our "comprehensive" and "trading" approaches. The pace of
scientific research may require some time between the signing of
a convention and the adoption of substantive protocols. 3 As
discussed below, many nations may view our proposals --
particularly the proposal for a system of international trading -
- with suspicion, and it may be to our advantage to propose a
trading system in a later document after the comprehensive
³The United States could propose that the international
community continue to work on developing the scientific basis for
the comprehensive, performance-based approach while the
convention is being negotiated, with the possibility of signing
the first protocol at the time the framework convention is
signed, or as soon as possible thereafter.
- 4 -
approach has been adopted. Further, there is value in gaining
signatories to the framework convention even if those nations do
not all sign the subsequent protocols, because the framework
convention includes participation in research and monitoring
activities that will prove useful to those seeking the data base
from which to make policy in the protocols and in national
legislation. How far to attempt to tilt the framework convention
toward our preferred approaches remains a difficult tactical
question.
DISCUSSION
A. "Comprehensive" Approach.
A comprehensive performance-based approach stands in
contrast to a piecemeal pollutant-by-pollutant approach, such as
that proposed at the November 1989 conference in Noordwijk,
Netherlands, which focused on adopting targets for one greenhouse
gas, carbon dioxide (C02), alone. 4 The comprehensive approach
would set a target for "net emissions" of greenhouse gases, for
achievement by each nation or by multinational groups such as the
European Community. This target could, for example, consist of a
phased-in cap, possibly followed by subsequent reductions. The
contributions of various sources and sinks to the achievement of
this target would be measured by a "global warming potential
index. "5
4The Noordwijk conference urged pollutant-by-pollutant
control rules, starting with CO2. It did suggest possible
development of a method for comparing the effects of other gases
to the effects of CO2, similar to the "global warming potential
index" recommended in this memorandum, but did not attempt to
employ that concept in a collective approach to all greenhouse gases.
5 The "global warming potential index" is a system for
computing the contribution to total climate change of any
alteration in the emissions of any particular greenhouse gas. It
assigns a value to each greenhouse gas describing the
contribution of each additional molecule of that gas to the total
warming of the atmosphere. The value depends on variables such
as the molecular composition of the gas, the lifetime of such
molecules in the atmosphere, and the existing atmospheric
concentration of the gas and related gases at the time the
additional molecule reaches the atmosphere. All the greenhouse
gases can then be characterized and compared by their "global
warming potential index" values. This method is discussed
further in the EPA's attached Concept Paper.
- 5 -
The advantages of this approach are several. First, it
allows each nation to use that combination of source and sink
controls and other measures that is best adapted to its economic
and other circumstances, achieving greenhouse environmental
protection at significantly lower cost than a pollutant-by-
pollutant strategy. This approach maximizes the opportunity for
and encourages the adoption of diverse, flexible, innovative, and
cost-effective solutions to global warming. 6 The economic and
social costs of dealing with global warming are likely to be
great. It is thus particularly important in this case to use
institutional strategies that will maximize the incentives and
opportunities for development of new technologies and other
innovative responses that will reduce these costs. Performance-
based standards, a comprehensive approach, and net emissions
trading will each contribute to achieving this goal.
Second, this approach reserves to each nation freedom
to employ whatever institutional mechanisms it wishes to use to
achieve its target objective. This flexibility takes account of
the widely varying legal and cultural systems present in
different nations, and avoids the obstacles to international
agreement among sovereign states that would be raised by
dictating to each nation how it must institutionally manage its
climate-related policies and industries. A free market economy
is not required to employ strict command and control regulations.
By the same token, a centrally planned economy is not required to
employ market measures.
6 For example, an approach that mandated specific percentage
reductions in each gas -- such as a 20% reduction in CO2 and a
30% reduction in methane -- would be more costly than an approach
that required a reduction in each nation's contribution to total
warming (as measured by the "global warming potential index") and
permitted each nation to adopt its least-cost mix of choices
achieving the target overall. Some nations might be able to
reduce CO2 emissions much more than 20% through substitution of
non-fossil fuels, but be unable to reduce methane output (e.g., a
nation importing oil and dependent on rice crops, but endowed
with untapped solar power opportunities). Those nations would
meet their net targets by reducing CO2 more rapidly than methane;
reducing each the same amount would prove much more costly
(perhaps in terms of higher taxes, or reduced rice production)
and would leave available CO2 reductions unexploited. Other
nations might find themselves in the opposite situation, able to
reduce methane but not C02. A similar analysis applies to
approaches mandating specific changes in sources alone or sinks
alone, rather than combining them in a "net emissions"
requirement that leaves the domestic policy mix to each nation.
- 6 -
Third, dealing with all greenhouse gases, sources and
sinks at once will achieve substantially better environmental
protection. Past experience indicates that attempts to control
one cause of an environmental problem while leaving others
unregulated often results in shifting residuals or other forms of
degradation to the unregulated mode. For example, attempts to
reduce water pollution have induced industry to convert liquid
pollutants into sludge, creating toxic waste disposal problems. 7
Similarly, attempts to regulate one greenhouse gas at a time
might induce shifts to practices that create other greenhouse
gases, possibly contributing more to climate change per unit of
economic output than the ones they replace. A comprehensive
approach is necessary to ensure proper protection of the
environment.
Fourth, a comprehensive approach is more equitable, and
greatly reduces the potential for nations to manipulate the
design of international regulatory measures in order to achieve
competitive or other economic advantage. An approach that set
targets first for certain sources or sinks and progressed to
others later would unfairly burden those nations whose economies
are comparatively more burdened by the initial measure.
8
Moreover, a pollutant-by-pollutant command and control approach
makes it more difficult to arrive at international consensus,
because each nation will attempt to "game" the standard-setting
agenda, in its favor. Nations' efforts to "game" the design of
international regulatory controls are also likely to distort
trade and reduce global welfare as well as impede environmental
improvement.
There are, however, possible drawbacks to a comprehen-
sive approach that should be reviewed. First, there may be
difficulties in arriving at "global warming potential index"
⁷In the United States we have traditionally followed a
medium-by-medium and pollutant-by-pollutant approach, recognizing
many of its problems, but the EPA is now attempting to devise a
more integrated strategy to address what have come to be "cross-
media" defects in our system of environmental control. Although
a "comprehensive" approach to greenhouse gases is focused on the
single medium of atmospheric temperature change, it is a vast
improvement over pollutant-by-pollutant control.
8 For example, an approach that first mandated 20% reductions
in CO2 emissions would pose much greater burdens for those
heavily committed to using fossil fuels, and for those whose
economies depend on exports of fossil fuels; alternatively, an
approach that first mandated 20% reductions in methane emissions
would pose much greater burdens for those heavily dependent on
rice crops and ruminant animal husbandry.
- 7 -
values. These difficulties include the scientific problem of
determining consensus values, 9 the practical problem of assigning
values sensitive enough to yield efficient environmental
policy, 10 and the political implications of the fact that
assigning different values to different gases will effectively
alter the costs to different nations of achieving their
performance targets. The committee conducting this work could be
engaged in a highly politicized enterprise. It should therefore
be staffed with the best scientists, and must produce a
legitimate conclusion in the eyes of the world.
Second, the problem of the environmental "second-best"
may persist even in our "comprehensive" approach, the adoption of
a comprehensive agreement, which would not deal with the non-
greenhouse environmental impacts of restricting greenhouse
gases. 11 The IPCC or other appropriate body could be directed to
monitor these problems and report back to the international
community at regular intervals.
Third, the "comprehensive" approach might be branded a
stalling tactic, because some nations believe that the best
approach is to adopt protocols quickly for substances we can
9As mentioned above, the index values depend on a variety of
complex and sometimes interrelated variables. As described in
the attached EPA Concept Paper, current efforts to define the
index have reached different results. There are also likely to
be differences of opinion as to the proper list of greenhouse
gases. Further work will be necessary before consensus results
are produced.
¹⁰The "global warming potential index" measures could be
expressed as functions -- instead of constant values -- to
incorporate the several variables on which they depend, such as
ambient atmospheric concentrations of that gas and related gases,
other atmospheric phenomena, expected lifetime of the gas in the
atmosphere, and so forth. As sources and sinks are, in turn,
assigned performance values for their contributions to total
warming, those values must also be adjustable to take account of
variables such as diverse combustion techniques, scrubbing
methods, and the varying regional characteristics of forests, or
else the value set will discourage investment in advances that
could reduce net greenhouse gas emissions. The source and sink
values must, furthermore, be flexible enough to take account of
long-term investments in emissions-affecting policies, such as
sink development, which may have inherently long lead times.
11 For example, the generation of nuclear waste. An analog
is the history of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) : developed to
replace highly toxic chemicals, they ultimately proved to have
serious effects on the stratospheric ozone layer.
- 8 -
agree on now, and proceed to thornier issues as we go. Our
approach might be seen as proceeding at the pace of the "slowest
common denominator." We might respond that our approach will in
fact proceed more quickly, because it raises the potential for
broad consensus by eliminating the inequitable effects of single-
pollutant protocols. In addition, we might answer that our
approach will achieve better results (even if it takes slightly
longer to achieve than the first single-pollutant protocol would
take) because it will prevent cross-pollutant shifts. 12 In order
to make our commitment to action credible to the international
community, we might consider unilateral domestic initiatives,
such as energy conservation, tree-planting programs, and the like
to deal with global warming in advance of the adoption of a
comprehensive agreement. A later agreement could give "credit"
for such efforts through use of appropriate baselines.
Fourth, the comprehensive approach might not actually
end up favoring U.S. interests. We might find ourselves party to
a treaty restricting all of US industry instead of one allowing
us to shift to other unrestricted fuels. We recommend that the
relevant federal agencies be requested to prepare an economic
analysis showing the likely impacts on the United States and the
world 13 of several scenarios, including no action, adoption of a
CO2 protocol alone, adoption of a comprehensive approach as
described here, and other relevant possibilities, in order to
provide the Administration with effective means for evaluating
these options.
¹²we might also attempt to blunt the "stalling" criticism
by focusing efforts now on developing scientific consensus on the
comprehensive approach, with an eye toward completing the first
protocol at the same time as the convention, or soon thereafter.
We might further blunt this criticism by considering including in
the convention, depending on the status of development of the
first protocol, a requirement that within a specified period
after the convention enters into force the parties will agree on
the scope and timetable for the first protocol. It may, on the
other hand, be impractical to ask parties to bind themselves to
future agreement; and specifying too early a date might hinder
our efforts to gather all greenhouse gases, their sources and
sinks into a comprehensive approach.
13 The analysis might also estimate costs for other major
nations and blocs in order to inform our negotiating strategy.
This calculation should also include the cost to the United
States and others of not regulating other greenhouse gases, i.e.,
the costs of consequent added global warming. And as discussed
above, even under a comprehensive approach, the calculation of
the global warming potential index values could have important
implications for U.S. performance under the treaty.
- 9 -
Fifth, a multi-pollutant agreement complicates the task
of monitoring compliance, because it covers many more gases and
sinks which must be watched, lest countries assert reductions
without actually achieving them. This concern points to the need
to ensure a scientifically credible method of monitoring
emissions of various sources, changes in sinks, and their effects
on global climate. In this respect, a comprehensive approach
reinforces our interest in basing response agreements on sound
science and data. The effects of some gases, sources and sinks
may not be sufficiently well understood to include them in an
initial agreement limiting net emissions. The ideal of total
comprehensiveness may thus be limited by gaps in knowledge. As
scientific knowledge advances, however, additional gases, sources
and sinks could be included in the basic agreement.
B. "International Trading."
The second approach emphasized in our submissions is
the development of "international trading" in greenhouse gas
emissions. As explained below, the trading concept is not well
understood by many nations, who have viewed U.S. proposals for
trading with considerable suspicion. It may therefore not be
advisable to press for adoption of international trading at the
outset, reserving it for a later protocol, after the
comprehensive approach has been launched and more nations have
used trading domestically. International trading in
environmentally related commodities is already a feature of the
world economy, with "debt-for-nature" swaps being perhaps the
best known example. The Montreal Protocol on Substances
Depleting the Ozone Layer contains "industrial rationalization"
provisions allowing limited substance trading among the parties.
Domestically, we have instituted trading in the new source
"bubble" offset program and the lead phasedown program under the
Clean Air Act, and the Administration has proposed a more
ambitious trading program in the acid deposition reduction title
of the Clean Air Act reauthorization. The concept of "trading"
has already been placed before the RSWG by the United States, as
part of the subgroup discussion of "Economic (Market) Measures."
The proposal discussed here is to expand the use of
this approach by promoting a international trading program in net
greenhouse gas emissions, for consideration by the "Legal
Measures" subgroup of the RSWG.
In sum, one nation might find it less costly to exceed
its net emissions target by N units and to purchase a
commensurate N unit reduction from another nation -- the latter
able to reduce further than its target at less cost than the
price the first nation is paying it. The "purchase" might
involve debt being forgiven in return for afforestation, or cash
- 10 -
paid for investments in energy efficiency, or for lower-warming
potential fuels (such as Europe paying the Soviet Union to pipe
in natural gas), or technological trade secrets offered in return
for investments in scrubbing technology, or other similar and
innovative techniques. There would be no requirement that every
nation "take part" in the trading avenues permitted; those who
see no economic need to engage in international trades, or who
are philosophically opposed, could demur. Such trades could be
arranged on a bilateral, regional, or multilateral basis.
The primary advantage of this approach is that it
extends to the international arena all of the benefits which a
comprehensive, performance-based approach affords domestically.
These include maximum incentive and opportunity for diverse,
flexible, innovative, least cost solutions to global warming.
The economic advantage of trading may serve as an inducement or
palliative to nations concerned about the cost of restricting
their emissions. As with the Administration's acid rain
proposal, the trading system would permit faster reductions in
net emissions at lower cost, potentially easing the way to
adoption of significant reduction targets.
There are, however, important concerns regarding an
international trading system. First, it may be difficult to
monitor the trades -- a problem distinct from the difficulty of
monitoring compliance with the emissions targets actually set or
arrived at through trades. There is a considerable question as
to whether an international institution could keep track of who
had traded what rights to whom. Possible options include a
"World Climate Bank" to keep track of credit accounts, or even to
make credit loans itself; or an annual auction of emissions
credits. Existing institutions, such as the UNEP or the WMO,
might undertake this monitoring function.
Second, international trading may be limited or
distorted by various forms of market failures. For example, a
large nation or power company might quickly purchase the rights
to large quantities of land in a poor nation, with the goal of
planting trees on the land to generate net emissions credits; if
other bidders are not on the scene, the farmland may be sold at
an undervalued price; and even with multiple bidders, there may
be other relevant social concerns, such as the provision of food
to the residents, that may not be incorporated in the price of
the land. Some of these problems might be alleviated by allowing
only nations to trade, by requiring nations to approve all trades
made by their nationals, or by requiring a period for open
bidding after each offer is made and announced. Such measures
are, however, likely to reduce the extent of trading.
Third, some nations at the RSWG meetings have attacked
trading ideas as evil "licenses to pollute," because nations
- 11 -
could pay others for permits to allow their own emissions to
grow. We might respond that a single-pollutant approach is an
even larger "license" because it begins by permitting
unrestricted emissions of the as-yet-unregulated gases, which
might increase even faster as industry shifts to systems
producing them. Also, we could dispute the "license to pollute"
philosophy. All regulation involves a "license to pollute;"
trading is a morally superior form of regulation because it
increases human welfare in both environmental and economic terms.
The best responses may involve demonstrations that trading is not
a "trick": it promises real benefits to all nations, with
safeguards against coercive deals or cheating. Past experience
indicates that considerable education may be required before some
participants are persuaded of the value of a trading system. The
conference of climate experts to be held in Washington next
spring could provide an opportunity to showcase trading systems
and share experience with their operation.
The concerns expressed by other nations over trading imply
an important tactical decision for the United States: how closely
to link the "comprehensive" approach to the "international
trading" approach. If international sentiment is unswervingly
opposed to international trading, it may be advisable to propose
the two ideas in a way which treats them as conceptually separate
(which in fact they are). On the other hand, combining the two
approaches in one proposal may help demonstrate their respective
attractive features, and might increase the chances of successful
adoption of both ideas.
C. Additional Issues.
of course, there are numerous other issues to be
resolved in any international climate agreement, whether or not
it is "comprehensive" and permits "trading." These issues are
potentially serious and deserve careful consideration.
First, net emissions targets for each country must be
arrived at through a process that is perceived as fair and that
produces economically efficient and internationally and
intergenerationally equitable outcomes. This process raises the
questions of how high to set a global net emissions target, how
to set national net emissions targets, timetables and baselines,
and how to deal with the special concerns of developing nations,
for example by permitting them to proceed on a deferred
timetable, or giving them targets significantly above present
levels.
The issues regarding setting national targets are not
fundamentally different under a "comprehensive" as opposed to a
piecemeal approach. Indeed, the expanded focus and greater
flexibility of the "comprehensive" approach may make it easier to
- 12 -
deal with them. On the other hand, national standards may be
complicated by the need to take account of nations' past
activities reducing greenhouse gas emissions, such as planting
trees, restricting CFC use, and developing nuclear energy
generation.
Similarly, promoting the international emissions
trading approach could ease adoption of national emissions
targets by promising nations the flexibility of attaining their
targets through cost-saving trades. On the other hand, such an
approach could also complicate the setting of national emission
targets by enabling or encouraging some nations to seek added
resource transfers through trades by pressing to reduce the
targets assigned to other nations.
Second, arrangements for financial assistance and
technology transfer to developing economies must be addressed, in
order to respond to developing countries' concerns that global
warming measures will limit their economic growth, and proper
arrangements for financing and technology transfer could
alleviate some of those concerns. Financial árrangements and
technology transfer are also central to the environmental
objective of preventing undue global climate change. For
example, financing may be important because some current
developing nation debt is repaid through sink-destroying
activities such as timber cutting and grazing of forest lands,
because investments in new technology or in sustainable
agriculture may require initial capital outlays, and because
developing nations may lack the resources to undertake the
requisite monitoring of their greenhouse gas sources and sinks.
Similarly, technology transfer may be climate-related: it may
assist developing nations in shifting to non-fossil fuel energy
sources, in reducing greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural
sources such as rice paddies, and in monitoring greenhouse gas
emissions. Conceivably, financial assistance and technology
transfers could be linked to an international trading system by
giving donor nations credit for a percentage of the reductions in
net greenhouse gas emissions achieved as a result, although any
such proposal would likely receive a hostile response from many
in the international community.
A third issue involves the structure of implementation
assurances. Past environmental treaties have employed a variety
of options, and possibilities include national reporting;
periodic international auditing; routine international monitoring
by an international agency; a standing body of representative
experts to monitor and report noncompliance; reliance on non-
governmental organizations; and national complaints followed by
adjudication before an arbitrator, an advisory "conciliation
commission," the International Court of Justice, or the U.N.
Security Council. A climate treaty might employ one or more of
these methods, or create new ones. One suggestion is to require
- 13 -
national or international monitoring of emissions, coupled with
publication of the emissions information and the nation's
performance target, and review of the result at an annual
conference of signatory representatives. The vast array of
sources and sinks of greenhouse gases will make monitoring
compliance especially difficult, and may necessitate methods of
assuring implementation that avoid resort to extended litigation.
A fourth general issue involves the identification of
new or previously undiscovered greenhouse gases, new sources of
greenhouse gases and sinks, and new routes of greenhouse gas sink
destruction. International and national institutions and
constant scientific vigilance will be required to prevent natural
and technological loopholes from defeating the goals of a global
climate agreement.
Fifth, there is the question of relating a climate
agreement -- in particular a "comprehensive" approach to
greenhouse gases -- to earlier international agreements covering
specific gases, sources or sinks. For example, the Montreal
Protocol on Substances Depleting the Ozone Layer regulates the
production of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which are also powerful
greenhouse gases. Other agreements may affect other greenhouse
gases, rates of deforestation, and the like. Questions may be
raised -- especially by developing nations who have not needed to
reduce emissions of substances used primarily in industrialized
nations, such as CFCs -- about whether reductions achieved (or
foregone) under other agreements may count toward compliance with
greenhouse gas emissions targets.
Sixth, the issue of investments in adaptation to
climate change has not been considered in our approaches to
international agreements. Although the local effects of climate
change are likely to vary and therefore to require local
adaptation responses, there may be some adaptation techniques
applicable to numerous locales or to an industry that spans many
nations. In addition, some nations may require financial,
technical and informational assistance in predicting climate
impacts and developing effective adaptive responses. These kinds
of problems and opportunities could be addressed in international
contexts, but we do not expect them to play a central part in the
international effort to limit climate change by reducing net
emissions. 14
14 One possible area of overlap is suggested by the use of
adaptation investments as "payment" for emissions credits under
an international trading system; but this example is simply a
particular instance of the general idea that anything of value,
whether climate-related or not, could serve as currency for
emissions credits.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
05b. Paper
Tab "A": Comments on IPCC Response Strategies Working
12/14/89
P/5
Group Legal Measures Paper (2 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
(Document Follows)
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
By If (NLGB) on 10/28/05
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Comments on IPCC Response Strategies Working Group
Legal Measures Paper
The U.S. proposal might be reflected in the IPCC Response
Strategies Working Group Legal Measures Paper as follows:
1) Add the following ticks to section 1. (Preamble):
- Recognition of interrelationship among all greenhouse
gases, their sources and sinks, and the consequent utility
of treating them collectively
- Importance of developing response measures that operate
in an equitable and economically efficient and effective
manner, and that encourage innovation and diversity in the
technological and institutional means of addressing global
climate change
2) Add the following paragraph to section 3. (General
Obligations):
- Development of a protocol, as soon as possible,
addressing all adequately scientifically understood
greenhouse gases, their sources and sinks, in a
comprehensive approach to controlling net emissions of
greenhouse gases through national performance targets,
leaving to each country the choice of domestic policy
responses to achieve its net greenhouse gas emissions
target, development of equitable and economically
efficient implementation measures, including a system of
international emissions trading (see Economic Measures
paper, section 5.2); keep under continuing review the set
of greenhouse gases, their sources and sinks, and revise
the set, according to evolving scientific understanding.
(This approach is further elaborated in Appendix
)
3) The second and third ticks on page 4 refer to "emission
limitations/reductions". Either add "net" before "emission" in
each of these ticks or repeat both these ticks with the word
"net" before "emission".
4) Add the following ticks to section 11. (Annexes and
Protocols) :
- treat all greenhouse gases, their sources and sinks,
comprehensively, in a single protocol
- international emissions trading
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
05c: Paper
Tab "B": U.S. Concept Paper, Comprehensive Greenhouse
12/14/89
P-5
Gas Approach to a Framework Convention on Climate
Change (5 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Open on Expiration of PRA
Subseries:
Issues Files
(Document Follows)
WHORM Cat.:
By of (NLGB) on 10/28/05
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
DRAFT
U.S. CONCEPT PAPER
COMPREHENSIVE GREENHOUSE GAS APPROACH TO
A FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE
Proposal:
The RSWG should seriously: 1) consider the merits of combining
a framework convention on climate change with one or more protocols
that would treat greenhouse gases collectively on the basis of a
warming potential index, and 2) evaluate alternative implementation
procedures including international tradeable emission reduction
credits.
Summary:
Global emissions of greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, N20, CFCs, CO,
and other trace gases) are currently increasing in every country
because of man's activities. Addressing the problem requires a
comprehensive and flexible approach that will enable countries to
find economically efficient measures to stabilize or reduce
emissions while achieving economic growth. The U.S. government
believes that a framework convention on climate change should
establish a process focusing on the collective warming potential
of greenhouse gases rather than on individual greenhouse gases.
Countries should be free to select between emission reduction or
sink enhancement strategies and among gases as long as these are
consistent with a negotiated "collective" greenhouse gas target.
Trading emission reduction credits between countries could be an
option in implementing this approach. Under this approach, the
Convention would set forth a general goal of stabilizing or
reducing greenhouse gas emissions at levels and dates to be
established in a protocol or protocols to the convention to be
developed as soon as possible.
Concepts and Definitions:
Greenhouse gases differ in both their ability to trap heat
and their atmospheric lifetimes. For example, methane traps heat
approximately 30-40 times more effectively than CO2, but has a
lifetime of 8-12 years, while CO₂ has an effective lifetime of
several hundred years. The concept of a Global Warming Potential
index has been proposed as a means of accounting for these
differences. Recent papers by B. Assarsson and by Lashof and Ahuja
propose two similar approaches for defining such an index. For
example, the second paper suggests that the Global Warming
Potential of methane relative to CO2 is 3.7. In economic terms
this suggests that one could spend up to 3.7 times for reducing
methane emissions relative to CO2 emissions.
The concept of having the government set broad national
emission standards, but having flexibility to achieve the goals has
been used in the U.S. For example, the trading of emission
DRAFT
2
reduction credits has been used as a means of achieving real
emission reductions of lead in an economically efficient manner.
Further, under the proposed Clean Air Act Amendments, a national
SO₂ emission target has been identified and each utility company
has the choice of achieving SO₂ reductions by either directly
reducing emissions at its own facilities or by purchasing
allowances from another company, whichever is more economical.
The application of such a concept, while never attempted on a
cross-pollutant or global scale, would enable each country to
achieve emission targets using a least cost approach.
Advantages of the Proposed Approach:
The proposed approach has the following benefits:
It would encourage economically efficient approaches
within countries and possibly among countries. This is
especially important for developing countries that are
constrained economically.
By addressing greenhouse gases collectively, it would
reduce the number of separate protocols, thereby
accelerating comprehensive international action.
It may serve to facilitate the process of developing a
convention even though uncertainties remain over the
economic impacts of a protocol. Trading could act as a
safety valve, if it turned out that reductions within a
country were more expensive than anticipated.
It provides flexibility to each country to manage
emissions in a manner consistent with its own social and
political needs. It allows tradeoffs between sources and
sinks, to the extent feasible.
It provides incentives to develop and use cost-effective,
energy-efficient industrial and consumer products,
emission control technologies, reforestation and
agricultural practices.
0
It may especially benefit developing countries where low
cost emission reductions may be possible and where there
is the greatest need for economic support.
Issues to be Addressed:
In developing a convention/protocol (s) along the lines
suggested, the following factors would need to be considered:
Defining an appropriate Global Warming Potential index.
Initial consideration should be given to including at a
minimum CO₂, CH4, and CO. Also, the approach should allow
DRAFT
3
other gases to be added at a later date as new scientific
information is developed. The issue of whether CFCs
should be included must be addressed.
Establishing global and equitable national targets in
terms of the index. This will require estimating each
country's emissions by major gas for a baseline year. It
will also require careful consideration of when the
treaty should enter into force and the need for interim
objectives. Each country would be free to allocate
current and future emissions in any manner.
Evaluating whether and how credits should be given to
national governments for actions taken prior to when the
convention enters into force, e.g., nuclear power,
reforestation, CFC reductions and others.
Evaluating alternative administrative, implementation,
and enforcement mechanisms, including possibly a system
of international emissions trading. International
emissions trading could leave the primary burden for
arranging trades to the private sector, but national
governments will have to provide guidance, monitoring and
enforcement. In addition, an international tracking
system will be needed to record data and assess trends
as a complement to current UN efforts to compile fuel use
and other data.
Assessing the special needs of developing countries
including their specific technological needs, financial
requirements and the most appropriate manner for them to
participate in such a convention.
Evaluating the interrelationship of other complementary
global initiatives such as the call to reforest 12
million hectares of forest land per year.
Evaluating how to determine credits for sinks, such as
reforestation and agricultural practices.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
05d. Paper
Tab "D": Significant Upcoming Meetings/Deadlines (2 pp.)
12/14/89
P/S
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Open on Expiration of PRA
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
(Document Follows)
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
By of (NLGB) on 10/28/05
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile
Significant Upcoming Meetings/Deadlines
Jan 1
Comments due on IPCC Response
Stategies Working Group Paper on
Implementation Mechanisms
Feb 2
IPCC Response Strategies Working
Group meeting (officers only)
Feb 5-8
IPCC meeting hosted by U.S. in
Washington
March 23-25
Preparatory meeting for July G-7
Economic Summit (tentative)
April 29-May2
U.S. Senate-sponsored Inter-
parliamentary Conference on the
Global Environment, Washington
[spring]
Meeting hosted by the President
on the Environment
May
UN Environment Programme
Governing Council Special
Session, Nairobi (tentative)
May 8-16
ECE Ministerial Conference on
the Environment, Bergen
May 18-20
Preparatory meeting for the July
G-7 Economic Summit (tentative)
June 4-8
Meeting of IPCC Response
Strategies Working Group to
adopt its report, Geneva
June 11-23
World Meteorological
Organization (WMO) Executive
Committee, Geneva
June 15-17
Preparatory meeting for the July
G-7 Economic Summit (tentative)
June 18-20
IPCC Report Drafting Committee
meeting, Geneva
August 27-30
IPCC meeting to approve interim
report
Oct.29-Nov.7
Second World Climate Conference,
Geneva
post-November
U.S. has offered to host first
negotiating session of framework
climate change convention
U.S. Department of Justice
Land and Natural Resources Division
Office of the Assistant Attorney General
Washington, D.C. 20530
December 18, 1989
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Hon. D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for Science and Technology
Chairman, Domestic Policy Council Working Group
on Global Change
Members of the Domestic Policy Council
Working Group on Global Change
FROM:
Richard B. Stewart
IS
Assistant Attorney General
SUBJECT: International Approaches to Global Climate Change
In an effort to develop a new approach to possible
international agreement on global climate change, representatives
of the Environmental Protection Agency, the State Department, and
the Justice Department have met with each other and with the
Counsel to the President. This memorandum transmits to you the
materials produced by those meetings, and identifies certain
issues to which the DPC Working Group may need to give special
attention.
Timetable
In the first week of February 1990, the United States
will host a meeting of the Response Strategies Working Group
("RSWG") of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
("IPCC"), followed by a plenary meeting of the IPCC. At its
February meeting, the RSWG will consider additional submissions
to its October, 1989 Report. Such submissions must be made by a
deadline of January 1, 1990.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
06. Memo
From Richard Stewart to D. Allan Bromley
12/18/89
P/S
Re: International Approaches to Global Climate Change
Paragraph on pg 2 redacted; pg 3 restricted (2 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
(Document Follows)
Subseries:
Issues Files
By of (NLGB) on 10/28/05
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile
2
Follow-up actions in the coming months include further
deliberation by the RSWG and the full IPCC over the spring and
summer, the President's spring conference on the science and
economics aspects of global environmental change, the IPCC
conference in the autumn, possible related activities by the
United Nations Environment Programme ("UNEP"), and the
international conference on a "framework convention" on climate
change to be hosted in Washington, D.C. in the fall of 1990.
These meetings and others are listed in the last attachment to
the memorandum dated December 14, 1989, described below.
Materials Attached
Attached please find the following materials:
- Memorandum from Richard B. Stewart to C. Boyden Gray,
dated December 14, 1989, describing and analyzing the
proposed new approaches for international agreement.
(Tab 1)
Related to this memorandum are the following attachments:
- Comments to be proposed for inclusion in the RSWG
Report. The deadline for adding such comments is
January 1, 1990.
(Tab 2)
- "Concept Paper" briefly summarizing the proposed
approaches for international agreement, to be submitted
for inclusion in the RSWG Report, also by January 1,
1990.
(Tab 3)
- List of significant meetings and conferences in the
coming months.
(Tab 4)
- Memorandum from Richard B. Stewart to C. Boyden Gray,
dated December 18, 1989, outlining the next steps that
should be taken to develop the proposed approaches.
(Tab 5)
Issues for DPC Working Group Consideration
We respectfully suggest that the DPC Working Group on
Global Change consider the proposed approaches contained in the
above documents, and the discussion of the strategic questions,
advantages and drawbacks related to our approaches contained in
those documents. It should be noted that the impacts on the
3
United States of international adoption of the proposed
approaches have not yet been analyzed in detail, and no
quantitative predictions of such effects are yet available. Our
recommendations are therefore tempered by the need for further
research.
In particular, we recommend special attention to the
following concerns:
1. Should the United States favor the traditional approach
to environmental regulation when addressing potential global
climate change, involving a framework convention followed by
successive protocols each directing nations to limit their
emissions of a separate specific pollutant? That approach
has been employed, with some variations, by the Vienna
Convention and the Montreal Protocol on Substances Depleting
the Ozone Layer, and was proposed by other nations for
dealing with global climate change at the Noordwijk
Ministerial Conference on Atmospheric Pollution and Climate
Change.
or should the United States actively promote a
"comprehensive" approach to collective treatment of all
greenhouse gases, their sources and sinks, in which each
nation must meet a national performance-based target, but is
left to choose its mix of domestic policies to meet that
target? This approach is described in the attached
materials, and it is the one we recommend.
2. Assuming the United States Government adopts the
approach we recommend, should the proposed approach outlined
be presented to the RSWG and/or the IPCC as the official
United States position, or should it be put forward more
tentatively, as an issue for consideration by the RSWG
and/or the IPCC?
3. Should the "international trading" approach, as
described in the above materials, be proposed as an integral
part of the United States submission, firmly linked to the
"comprehensive" approach, or should it be treated as an
important and useful idea which may nevertheless be deferred
for further consideration? This question is discussed more
fully in the memorandum dated December 14, 1989, listed
above, particularly at pp. 3-4.
?
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
07. Memo
From Richard Stewart to C. Boyden Gray
12/18/89
P/5
Re: Next, Steps on International Approaches to Global
Climate Change (3 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Open on Expiration of PRA
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
(Document Follows)
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
By
If
(NLGB)
on
10/28/05
Subseries:
Issues Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA)
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
U.S. Department of Justice
Land and Natural Resources Division
Office of the Assistant Attorney General
Washington, D.C. 20530
December 18, 1989
MEMORANDUM
TO:
C. Boyden Gray
Counsel to the President
FROM:
Richard B. Stewart DS
Assistant Attorney General
SUBJECT: Next Steps on International Approaches to Global
Climate Change
As undertaken at this morning's meeting in your office,
this memorandum outlines the steps that should be taken to
develop further the proposed United States approach for
international agreements dealing with global climate change.
This list of steps represents the items considered significant by
the representatives of EPA, Justice, State and your office in
attendance this morning.
1. Clearance for new U.S. submissions to the RSWG.
Clearance must be obtained in the next two weeks for the
materials to be submitted to the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change ("IPCC") Response Strategies Working Group
("RSWG") for inclusion in the RSWG papers by the January 1,
1990 deadline. The proposed materials for submission to the
RSWG -- a set of "Comments" on the RSWG "Legal Measures"
paper, and a "Concept Paper" discussing the U.S. proposal --
were attached to the memorandum sent to you yesterday.
2. DPC review. The Domestic Policy Council's Working Group
on Global Change, chaired by Dr. Bromley, should take up
these matters at its next meeting. If it were held next
week, it could be the vehicle for the clearance described in
paragraph 1.
3. Pamphlet on comprehensive approach and trading. A
pamphlet should be developed, for dissemination in mid-
January to RSWG participants, explaining our position on the
2
benefits of the "comprehensive" and "international trading"
approaches to international agreements on greenhouse gases,
their sources and sinks, and the drawbacks of other
approaches, such as pollutant-by-pollutant and command-and-
control methods. The pamphlet should draw on U.S. and
international experience with each regulatory method.
4. Response to UNEP initiative on draft convention. This
week Dr. Tolba, on behalf of UNEP in Nairobi, requested that
all nations suggest language, by January 15, 1990, for a
draft framework convention on global climate change. This
request appears to compete with the normal IPCC procedures,
and to accelerate the schedule for drafting such language.
In addition, there may be growing pressure to address this
question in the United Nations General Assembly instead of
in the IPCC forum. The U.S. should develop a strategy for
dealing with this pressure, including consideration of how
far to insist on the IPCC's jurisdiction over these matters,
and whether to present our substantive proposals to the U.N.
if it takes up these matters.
5. Additional needed background work.
Relevant federal agencies should work on the following
matters relevant to our proposed approach:
(a) Economic impacts. Assessments should be developed
of the economic impacts, on the U.S. and other
principal negotiating nations or blocs, of several
scenarios for international agreement, including
different timetables, baselines, and variances for
developing nations within our "comprehensive" approach.
(b) Global Warming Potential Index. A "global warming
potential index" should be developed to relate the
contribution of each greenhouse gas to total global
warming.
(c) List of greenhouse causal factors. The list of
greenhouse gases, their sources and sinks, should be
developed for inclusion in a "comprehensive" approach
to international agreement on climate change.
(d) Monitoring and implementation assurances. Analysis
and recommendations should be developed regarding
mechanisms for monitoring and implementation assurance
provisions in international agreements on climate
change. This work should survey and analyze mechanisms
used in past international agreements, and recommend
the most appropriate mechanisms for both a
"comprehensive" approach and an "international trading"
approach.
3
6. Spring 1990 science/economics conference. Work should
commence to develop the materials, key speakers, and
exhibits that could be assembled at the President's spring
science/economics conference on the global environment, in
order to educate those attending as to the benefits of our
comprehensive and international trading approaches, the
drawbacks of traditional command and control regulatory
mechanisms, and U.S. and international experience with each
system.
United States Department of State
Bureau of Oceans and International
Environmental and Scientific Affairs
Washington, D.C. 20520
December 29, 1989
Dr. N. Sundararaman
Executive Secretary
Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change
c/o WMO, Case Postale No. 5
1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland
Geneva, Switzerland
Dear Dr. Sundararaman:
Enclosed are additional comments of the United States on
the economic and legal measures papers which were discussed at
the October 2-6, 1989 meeting of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) Response Strategies Working Group. We
would appreciate your providing these comments to the topic
coordinators for the economic and legal measures papers.
Sincerely,
Electron
Sana
Eleanor Savage, Acting
Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources
Enclosure:
As stated.
December 29, 1989
U.S. Comments on the Economic Measures Paper
Given that the paper is inclusive rather than exclusive of
differing viewpoints, we hope that the following perspectives
can be reflected in the body of the final paper. Suggested
insertion points are provided alongside each item.
Page 2, paragraph 1 (substitute for or expand on last sentence) :
The ultimate purpose of policy measures to slow climate
change is to enhance overall welfare. Overall well-being
depends on both the socio-economic and environmental
effects of climate change and the socio-economic effects of
emission targets and the policy measures implemented to
reach them. Whether or not a strict cost benefit approach
is applied, it seems clear (to some?) that both kinds of
socio-economic impacts must be taken into account in
setting policy targets.
Page 5, enumeration of criteria for convention or protocol
(additions) :
The international policy regime should recognize that the
interests of the international community relate to global
climate objectives, not the means by which they are
achieved.
International measures should recognize any arrangements
between individual countries that maintain an overall
greenhouse contribution within the sum of their individual
obligations as an acceptable compliance strategy.
Page 7, paragraph 1 discussion of right to pollute (points to
weave into the discussion) :
Both regulation and economic instruments effectively allow
for the same right to pollute: the only difference is in
the transferability of this right. Regulation does not
banish the profit motive, since profit opportunities in
regulatory systems are often directly dependent on securing
favorable regulatory treatment. The waste of resources in
lobbying for favorable regulatory treatment represents a
drawback to the regulatory approach.
-2-
Page 9, paragraph 2 discussion of sinks (addition) :
An international policy regime that focuses on global
climate objectives, rather than the means by which they are
achieved, would treat sink creation and emissions reduction
as one for one substitutes.
Page 9, enumeration of benefits (additional point) :
opportunity for low income rights holders to sell rights to
others in exchange for compensation of greater value.
December 29, 1989
U.S. Comments on the Legal Measures paper
1) Add the following ticks to section 1. (Preamble):
- Recognition of interrelationship among all greenhouse
gases, their sources and sinks, and the consequent utility
of treating them collectively
- Importance of developing response measures that operate
in an equitable and economically efficient and effective
manner, and that encourage innovation and diversity in the
technological and institutional means of addressing global
climate change
- Need to consider the possible socio-economic impacts of
policies that might be taken to address climate change
- Recognition that the interests of the international
community relate to global climate objectives, and that
each country should have maximum flexibility to devise its
institutional and other means of achieving these objectives
- Recognition that two or more countries should have the
flexibility to meet their aggregate global climate change
objectives through joint arrangements of their source and
sink policies
2) Add the following ticks to section 3. (General Obligations)
-- Development as soon as possible of a protocol
addressing all adequately scientifically understood
greenhouse gases, their sources and sinks (with
appropriate treatment of substances subject to control
under the Montreal Protocol), in a comprehensive approach
to controlling net emissions of greenhouse gases through
national performance targets, leaving to each country the
choice of domestic policy responses to achieve its net
greenhouse gas emissions target; keep under continuing
review the set of greenhouse gases, their sources and
sinks, and revise the set, according to evolving
understanding of the science, economics, and technological
advancement. (This approach is further elaborated in
Appendix )
-- Development of equitable and economically efficient
implementation measures, including a system of
international emissions trading (see Economic Measures
paper, section 5.2). (This approach is further elaborated
in Appendix
)
-2-
3) The second and third ticks on page 4 refer to "emission
limitations/reductions". Either add "net" before "emission" in
each of these ticks or repeat both these ticks with the word
"net" before "emission".
4) Add the following ticks to section 11. (Annexes and
Protocols) :
- treat all greenhouse gases, their sources and sinks
(with appropriate treatment of substances subject to
control under the Montreal Protocol) comprehensively, in a
single protocol
- international emissions trading
Appendix
U.S. CONCEPT PAPER
COMPREHENSIVE GREENHOUSE GAS APPROACH TO
ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE
Proposal:
The RSWG should seriously: 1) consider the merits of
supplementing a framework convention on climate change with one or
more protocols that would treat greenhouse gases and their sources
and sinks collectively, based on a comparative index of their
contributions to global climate change; and 2) evaluate
alternative implementation procedures, including international
emissions trading.
Summary:
Global emissions of greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, N20, CFCs,
CO, and other trace gases) are currently increasing in every
country because of man's activities. Any effort to curtail these
emissions will require a comprehensive and flexible approach that
will enable countries to find economically efficient measures to
stabilize or reduce net emissions while achieving economic
growth. The RSWG should consider whether a framework convention
on climate change should establish a process focusing on the
collective potential of greenhouse gases to change the climate,
rather than on individual greenhouse gases. Countries would be
free to select between emission reduction or sink enhancement
strategies and among gases, as long as these were consistent with
a negotiated "collective" greenhouse gas target. Under this
approach, the framework convention would set forth a general goal
of stabilizing or reducing net greenhouse gas emissions at levels
and dates to be established in a protocol or protocols to the
convention to be developed as soon as possible.
A system of international emissions trading could be an
option in implementing this approach.
Concepts and Definitions:
Collective treatment of all greenhouse gases will require
some method for aggregating and comparing the impacts of each gas
on climate variables. Greenhouse gases differ both in their
ability to trap heat (more precisely, infrared radiation) and in
their atmospheric lifetimes. For example, methane traps infrared
radiation approximately 30-40 times more effectively than CO2, but
has a lifetime of 8-12 years, while CO2 has an effective lifetime
of several hundred years. The concept of an index has been
proposed as a means of accounting for these differences by
providing a comparison of the effects of different greenhouse
gases on the climate. Recent papers by B. Assarsson and by Lashof
and Ahuja propose two similar approaches for defining such an
index. For example, the second paper suggests that the "global
-2-
warming potential" of methane relative to CO2 is 3.7. In other
words, a one unit reduction in emissions of methane achieves the
same potential environmental benefit as a 3.7 unit reduction in
emissions of CO2, according to the Lashof and Ahuja paper. A
comprehensive approach to greenhouse gas net emissions targets
would employ an index of the global climate impacts of each
greenhouse gas. Sources and sinks of greenhouse gases could then
be assessed and compared in terms of the index.
The concept of emissions trading has been used successfully
in environmental regulation in the United States. For example,
the trading of emission reduction credits has been used as a means
of achieving real emissions reductions of lead in an economically
efficient manner. Further, under the proposed Clean Air Act
Amendments, a national S02 emission target has been identified and
each utility company has the choice of achieving S02 reductions by
either directly reducing emissions at its own facilities or by
purchasing allowances from another company, whichever is more
economical. The application of such a concept, while never
attempted on a cross-pollutant or global scale, would enable each
country to achieve net emissions targets using a least cost
approach.
Advantages of the Approaches:
The comprehensive greenhouse gas approach has the following
potential benefits:
-- It would encourage economically efficient approaches
within countries by permitting each country to meet its net
emissions target through the best internal mix of policies
addressing the various greenhouse gases, their sources and
sinks. This is especially important for developing
countries, which are constrained economically.
-- BY addressing greenhouse gases collectively, it would
reduce the number of separate protocols, thereby accelerating
comprehensive international action.
-- It provides flexibility to each country to manage net
emissions in a manner consistent with its own social and
political needs. It allows tradeoffs between sources and
sinks, to the extent feasible.
-- It provides incentives to develop and use cost-effective,
energy-efficient industrial and consumer products, emission
control technologies, reforestation and agricultural
practices, thus avoiding the obstacles to technological
innovation that typically accompany individual pollutant
regulation.
-3-
-- Addressing greenhouse gases collectively would improve
environmental protection by helping to avoid cross-pollutant
shifts.
-- It avoids placing inequitable burdens on the nations whose
economies rely on activities that emit the particular gas
regulated in a first single-gas protocol.
A system of international emissions trading has the following
potential benefits:
-- It would encourage economically efficient approaches among
countries.
-- It would bolster economic growth and development in
developing countries, as they exchange low cost emission
reductions for much needed financial assistance.
-- It may serve to facilitate the process of developing a
convention even though uncertainties remain over the economic
impacts of a protocol, Trading could act as a safety valve,
if it turned out that reductions within a country were more
expensive than anticipated.
Issues to be Addressed:
In developing a convention/protocol(s) along the lines above,
the following factors would need to be considered:
-- Defining an appropriate index for comparing the effects of
the different greenhouse gases on the climate. Initial
consideration should be given to including at a minimum CO2,
CH4, and CO. Also, the approach should allow other gases to
be added at a later date as new scientific information is
developed. The index would then be used to assess and
compare the contributions made to global climate change by
different sources and sinks of the various greenhouse gases.
The issues of whether CFCs should be included, and the choice
of an appropriate discount rate to be used in aggregating the
potential of gases with varying atmospheric lifetimes to
affect the climate, must be addressed.
-4-
-- Establishing global and equitable national targets in
terms of the index. This will require estimating each
country's emissions by major gas for a baseline year. It
will also require careful consideration of when the agreement
should enter into force and the need for interim objectives.
Each country would be free to allocate current and future net
emissions among the various greenhouse gases, their sources
and sinks, in any manner.
-- Evaluating whether and how credits should be given to
national governments for actions taken prior to when the
convention enters into force, e.g., nuclear power,
reforestation, CFC reductions and others.
-- Evaluating alternative administrative, implementation, and
enforcement mechanisms, including possibly a system of
international emissions trading. (International emissions
trading could leave the primary burden for arranging trades
to the private sector, but national governments will have to
provide guidance, monitoring, and enforcement.) In addition,
an international tracking system might be needed to record
data and assess trends as a complement to current UN efforts
to compile fuel use and other data.
-- Assessing the special needs of developing countries
including their specific technological needs, financial
requirements and the most appropriate manner for them to
participate in such a convention.
-- Evaluating the interrelationship of other complementary
global initiatives such as the call to reforest 12 million
hectares of forest land per year.
-- Evaluating how to determine credits for sinks, such as
reforestation and agricultural practices.
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 3, 1990
The Washington Times
P.
F1
EDITORIALS
PAGE F2
COMMENTARY
WARREN BROOKES
White House effect vs. greenhouse effect
A the nation shivered
through one of the
coldest Decembers
in North American
history, White House
advisers were seek-
ing ways to cool down President
Bush's exposure on global warming,
without reneging on his rhetorical
1980 campaign flourish:
BEWARE OF
"Those who charge we are power-
less to do anything about the 'green-
house effect' are forgetting about
GLOBAL
the 'White House effect.' " So far, the
main "White House effect" has been
damage control, keeping environ-
WARMING
mental hotheads from signing the
United States up to potentially disas-
trous international agreements, long
before any scientific evidence even
remotely supports them.
But that changed Friday. The
State Department, under pressure
from the White House, quietly filed
with the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) the ultimate
strategic weapon: an unassailably
sound, but bold new market-based
approach to the international reg-
ulation of greenhouse gases that
should put the Bush administration
back in charge of this debate.
While the purpose of this new ap-
D
proach is to avoid the kind of
COLD
HECORD
command-and-control environment-
alism that has made the Clean Air
<<<03
Act-such a costly and ineffective di-
mental hotheads from signing the
United States up to potentially disas-
trous international agreements, long
before any scientific evidence even
remotely supports them.
But that changed Friday. The
State Department, under pressure
from the White House, quietly filed
with the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) the ultimate
strategic weapon: an unassailably
sound, but bold new market-based
approach to the international reg-
ulation of greenhouse gases that
should put the Bush administration
back in charge of this debate.
While the purpose of this new ap-
proach is to avoid the kind of
HELDED
command-and-control environment-
alism that has made the Clean Air
Act such a costly and ineffective di-
saster, it also will slow down the ideo-
logical rush to put greenhouse pol-
icy way out ahead of real science,
and hard evidence.
Most of all, it will drive the inter-
national environmental bureaucrats
right up the wall, because it hugely
undercuts their potential turf and
power to meddle in domestic na-
tional affairs.
separate, specific targets - on car-
world environmental problem, it
while they, in turn, have a head start
A Dec. 14 confidential memoran-
bon dioxide, methane, agricultural
The upside of Mr.
does not dictate strategy to individ-
on producing more environmentally
dum by a brilliant environmental
practices, nitrous oxide, tropo-
Stewart's approach is
ual nations. That lessens the great-
benign substitutes.
lawyer in the Justice Department,
spheric ozone, forestation, etc., etc.
est danger of all: Anti-democratic
Such manipulation would become
Assistant Attorney General Richard
Stewart, supplied Mr. Bush with ex-
Instead, Mr. Stewart argued for
that it will finally
central planning by unaccountable,
moot under an overall performance
actly the intellectual construct he
the development of an overall per-
power-hungry, global-greenie bu-
and trading strategy. Also moot are
needed to strike a blow for environ-
formance goal or "global warming
force the kind of real
reaucracies.
the five incredibly crude Global Cir-
potential index," allowing nations to
Those bureaucracies won't take
culation Models (GCMs), which
mental sanity.
decide individually the best ways to
science we need,
this lying down. State's Mr. Nitze,
can't even explain the last five dec-
Mr. Stewart, one of the nation's
leading environmental law theo-
meet it.
either to make more
who has routinely wounded the Bush
ades let alone predict the next 100
administration with manipulative
years. They would be unacceptable
rists, has long been a-supporter of
The major advantage of this ap-
sensible policy or to
leaks, reportedly weighed in with a
in setting comprehensive indices
the market-based "bubble and off-
proach, aside from efficiency, is that
parting shot, damning the Stewart
called for in the Draft Framework
set" approach to controlling pollu-
development of such an index will
dismiss the problem.
approach with the faintest possible
Convention filed to the IPCC Friday.
tants.
force the kind of comprehensive and
praise, and with arguments sure to
Thus will the global greenies have
Under that strategy, instead of
detailed science that has so far been
be played back by his IPCC col-
to go back to the drawing board, and
setting discrete emission-reduction
missing in the climate-change mod-
leagues.
the climate modelers back to their
targets, pollutant by pollutant, com-
els with their deliberate preoccupa-
tion with carbon dioxide while ignor-
"sink potential" from forestation or
Ironically, another potential
computers. While this is a major vic-
pany by company, total "bubble" tar-
land-use change.
threat to this comprehensive ap-
tory for the "White House Effect"
gets are set for a region, letting all
ing all other variables:
proach will come from multi-
over the Reilly hothouse fervor, it
players use the trading process to
Under Mr. Stewart's proposals, all
In addition, Mr. Stewart argues
national corporations both in the
still is too large a concession to the
find the best way to achieve them.
aspects that either contribute to
for a system of both intranational
United States and in Europe, who see
whole notion of global warming as a
That's in stark contrast to the
(sources) or reduce (sinks) global
and international trading to allow na-
specific emissions targets as a way
real problem. There has been no sig-
greenhouse approach promoted in
warming would be "scored" in set-
tions to cooperate on mutually ad-
of inflicting competitive harm-Eu-
nificant warming trend since 1890,
the Netherlands last November (and
ting an index both for the world and
vantageous strategies. For example,
ropeans against the United States,
either in the best land-based records
supported by Environmental Protec-
for each country - and each nation
the United States might be willing to
and both Europe and the United
(the United States) or the exhaustive
tion Agency Administrator William
could then decide for itself which
pay Brazil for preserving the Ama-
States against Japan and the Pacific
ocean-based records recently pub-
Reilly and State Department depart-
components to emphasize.
zon rain forests, and use those "sink
Rim nations.
lished by the Massachusetts Insti-
ing greenie William Nitze) of sign-
For example, some nations might
credits" to allow more carbon-
For example, Dupont and the
tute of Technology. But the upside of
ing up the United States to at least 13
find it easier to cut more carbon di-
dioxide emissions from the United
United Kingdom's Imperial Chem-
Mr. Stewart's approach is that it will
oxide by substitution of non-fossil
States.
ical Industries have a direct stake in
finally force the kind of real science
fuels, but be unable to do as well on
The advantage of this approach is
immediately phasing out CFCs, now
we need, either to make more sensi-
Warren T. Brookes is a nationally
methane. Other nations might be in
that while it introduces the effi-
that their Asian and Latin American
ble policy or to dismiss the problem
syndicated economics columnist.
an opposite situation, or have more
ciency of market mechanisms to a
competitors can make them cheaper,
altogether.
Memo
DRAFT.
12/6/89
To:
D. Allan Bromley
From:
Nancy G. Maynard
Subject:
Draft Summary of 12/6 Meeting on White House
Science/Economics/Environment Conference
Issue:
A decision on the timing, participation, objectives, and
structure of the White house Science/Economics/Environment Research
Conference is needed.
Background:
Following the last meeting of the DPC Working Group on
Global Change and prior to his departure to meet with President
Gorbachev in Malta, the President was briefed on the Working
Group's deliberations and presented with the environmental
conference options identified by the group. After his
discussions with Gorbachev, the President chose to announce two
initiatives. One of those is an international meeting at the
White House next spring, to be attended by each government's
chief science, economics, and environmental official. The
general prupose of the meetings will be to advance the quality
and understanding of the analytical tools necessary to confront
international environmental problems, including global change.
The conference will have the specific goal of sharing analytical
techniques and research in an effort to develop a common
integrated approach for response to global change that takes into
account the best information on the scientific, economic and
environmental aspects of the issue.
Meeting Summary:
On 12/6/89, Dr. Bromley convened a small task force on the
White House Conference to develop proposals on the objectives,
timing, participants, and structure of that meeting for
consideration by the Global Change Working Group A summary of
that meeting follows.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
08. Memo
From Nancy Maynard to D. Allan Bromley
12/06/89
P-5
Re: Summary of 12/6 Meeting w/WH
Science/Economics/Environment Conference
Options and analysis paragraphs redacted (4 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
(Document Follows)
Subseries:
Issues Files
By
WHORM Cat.:
SP
(NLGB)
10/28/05
on
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM Removed as a personal record misfile
The following points were agreed upon at the meeting:
1. The conference should be in the spring of 1990, preferably
as early in April as possible, and should be set up so that it
does not conflict with other meetings, Presidential events, etc.
2. It is important to invite the right combination of
countries. F. Bernthal is reviewing this for the group.
Of particular importance is the establishment of clear defensible
selection criteria for use in discussion with countries that are
not selected and wish to join.
3. It is important to focus on the specifics of the analytical
tools available for addressing the issue of global change - and
the interdependance of the sci/econ/enviro factors. Specifically,
this conference should, from its outset, eschew discussion of
policy.
4. This conference should not duplicate any other conferences
such as IPCC/Bruntland/Hague - must have its own clear purpose
and products
There was considerable discussion on many of the specific aspects
of the conference. A summary of these discussions follows below
together with actions required in each of the major categories.
(actions are starred):
Major Issues Addressed:
1. DATE: As early in April as possible - specific date to be
determined by group
Discussion:
Other international meetings already scheduled:
February 5-8: IPCC Plenary - Washington, DC
June 18-30: Bush-Gorbachev Summit
April 22: Earth Day (note: 20th anniversary)
May 8-16: Conference on Bruntland Report, Bergen
July 9-11: G-7 Economic Summit, Houston, TX
Sept-Dec: UN General Assembly
Nov: 2nd World Climate Conference, Geneva
***
Action:
Final review of the President's schedule (OCA)
Final review of the international meeting schedule
(FB)
Finalize the dates of conference
Is this cm funce intended to satisfy The
Presedents commitment to hosta international
2. COUNTRY PARTICIPATION: To be determined
Discussion:
Since one of the main objectives of this conference is
to build leadership and good will for the President and
US in the international global change arena, it will be
essential to avoid mistakes and diplomatic blunders
in the initial selection of countries for participation.
Several lists of countries were considered but, in each
case, there appeared to be important nations omitted.
Initial lists included G-7 countries, USSR, E. European
reps, developing country reps (China, Mexico, Brazil,
e.g.), Korea, Poland, Indonesia, Australia, Japan,
Zimbabwe, Egypt, Scandanavian reps
*** Action:
Analysis by F. Bernthal of apropriate list of countries
Have clear understanding/statement of selection criteria
3. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES AND DELIVERABLES OF CONFERENCE
Discussion:
Agreed that should focus on specifics of analytical
tools available for addressing issue of global change
Should attempt to get real data/models on table
Could be a way to obtain agreement on what
(common) assumptions should be used when making decisions
regarding responses to global change (e.g., CO2
equivalencies, emissions trading)
Should provide important input to G-7 Summit and toward
2nd World Climate conference
Should not duplicate IPCC/Hague/Bruntland/etc conferences
- i.e., should have unique and clear purpose/product
Suggestions for increasing focus of conference:
(1) after the President's letter of invitation to the
conference has gone out, a questionnaire containing
requests for specifc information could be sent to all
participants
e.g., what are major uncertainities, major gaps in
info and what is new in each field, what is level of
activity in each country. Identify chief scientist,
chief economist, chief environmentalist
(2) Assign certain people to prepare short papers and
to present talks
***
Action:
Decide on specific products/deliverables to be obtained
from conference
Do we work toward a conference concensus report
or,
Do we prepare a chairman's summary as at Noordwijk, and
ask for a general approval
Who is audience for the product?
What can be derived from combination of sci/econ/envt
"tools" to address global change
What would be most useful for input to:
G-7 Summit
2nd World Climate Conference
Prepare questionnaire to be sent out in advance
Assign selected people to prepare short papers and
to present talks
4. CONFERENCE ARRANGEMENTS/STRUCTURE
Discussion
Agreed that it was essential to put in place a full-
time, experienced conference coordinator as soon as
possible to coordinate and oversee all preparatory work
for the conference
Need intellectual content coordinator
Need logistics coordinator (suggested that
contractors could be hired as with IPCC Plenary in
Feb by DOS)
Agreed that conference would involve:
1. Day 0
a. Registration of participants at conference hotel
Which one
In or out of Washington
Should we consider a conference center
b. Reception for delegates
2. Day 1
a. Opening plenary session
b. Three separate working groups
science
economics
environment
Each with a keynote address to set the stage for
discussion
C. Lunch - where?
d. 1st Day Plenary Session - 4 pm
Review presentations from each working group
Focus on unanswered and unresolved questions
f. Reception and Banquet at State Dept.
Use questionnaires topics/info as basis for initial
discussions
3. Day 2
a. Mixed working groups - Set 1 - 0900-1100
b. Mixed working groups - Set 2 - 1100-1300
d. Lunch - 1300-1500 Where?
e. Plenary Session - 1500-1700
f. Reception and Banquet at Air and Space Museum?
*** Action:
Decide on specifics of conference coordination
scientific/intellectual content
logistics
Decide on specifics of all conference-associated
activities (see above)
Set up specific outline of conference organization and
procedures
5. OTHER TOPICS REQUIRING DISCUSSION AND AGREEMENT
Reserve State Dept and Am & Space prems and begin arrange, ments
**
A. Method of invitation
(suggested letter from President inviting Their
to Heads A State
sci/econ/enviro ministen)
**
B. Length of conference
**
D. President's speech and involvement in briefings
***
E. Funding of Conference
*****
How do we finance
Coordination
Conference
Do we charge a conference fee
Attendees: D.Allan Bromley, Thomas Ratchford, Wiliam Reilly,
Fred Bernthal, Steve Danzansky, Mike Boskin, Bob Grady, David
Bates, Nancy Maynard
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
09. Paper
Issue paper on WH Science/ Economics/ Environment
12/11/89
P/5
Conference
Options and analysis paragraphs redacted (5 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
(Document Follows)
Subseries:
Issues Files
By SP (NLGB) on 10/28/05
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Global
Global
LIVE
Narming
December 11, 1989
I. ISSUE
A decision on the timing, participants, objectives and structure
of the White House Science/Economics/Environment Conference is
needed.
II. BACKGROUND
Following the last meeting of the DPC Working Group on Global
Change and prior to his departure to meet with President
Gorbachev in Malta, the President was briefed on the Working
Group's deliberations and presented with the environmental
conference options identified by the group. After his
discussions with Gorbachev, the President chose to announce two
initiatives. One of those is an international meeting at the
White House next spring, to be attended by government science,
economics and environmental officials. The general purpose of
the meeting will be to advance the quality and understanding of
the analytical tools necessary to confront international
environmental problems, including global climate change. The
conference will have the specific goals of sharing analytical
techniques and research in an effort to develop a common
integrated approach that takes account of scientific, economic
and environmental factors.
III. PROPOSALS
Decisions must be made in four areas: dates of the conference;
participation; objectives to be achieved; and structure for the
deliberations. A representative task force convened by Dr.
Bromley has developed the following proposals for consideration
by the Working Group.
A. Timing
In his announcement of the conference, the President
specified that the meeting would be held next spring. The
following events on the international environmental calendar
must be considered in making a decision on the dates for the
meeting:
February 5-8 - Plenary session of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in Washington.
April 22 - Earth Day 1990 (its 20th anniversary; events are
also scheduled for several days before and after that day in
Washington and throughout that nation).
May 8-16 - Bergen Conference on Action for our Future ( the
follow-up session to a conference previously held under the
auspices of Norwegian Prime Minister Bruntland).
June 18-30 - Summit meeting between Presidents Bush and
Gorbachev.
July 9-11 - G-7 Economic Summit in Houston, Texas.
Proposal
To avoid conflicts with the events noted above, hold the
meeting [in early April, most likely April - ].
B. Participants
The meeting was described by the President as international
in nature, without any elaboration as to invitees. Rather
than inviting all nations, a smaller group of invitees[,
specifically those nations that have identifiable government
science, economic and environmental officials, will be
invited. These nations are also those that have been most
involved in developing models for dealing with global
environmental problems. It will also be important to
include representatives from the developing world.]
Proposal
Invite the following nations: [State Department to provide
list].
C. Objectives
The conference will have several specific objectives:
(1) To produce specific products or deliverables, such as
real data and models, in science and economics, taking
account of the interrelationships in environmental policy-
making;
(2) To seek agreement on common assumptions that can be
used when making decisions regarding responses to global
change, such as CO2 equivalencies.
(3) To provide input for the G-7 Economic Summit and the
Second World Climate Conference, scheduled for Geneva in
November.
(4) To ensure that the conference does not duplicate the
work of the IPCC, particularly the working groups dealing
with science and effects, or other international bodies,
such as the Bergen conference or the Noordwijk process; the
conference must have its own very clearly formulated purpose
which is not issue-specific (i.e., solely devoted to global
change) and produce defined products that will not be
developed by any of the other forums.
In interrelating scientific, economic and environmental
factors and concerns, the objectives in each area are as
follows:
(1) Science
The scientists will focus on the largest gaps and
uncertainties in current understanding of global
warming and greenhouse phenomena and on such topics as:
(a) The range of predicted temperature changes from
the current major world climate models, the
uncertainties in these predictions, and the primary
sources of these uncertainties; this will make
possible greater awareness of these uncertainties among
the participant economists and environmentalists;
(b) The relative sensitivity of the climate models to
their input parameters and the most critical new
experimental measurements required to address gaps and
uncertainties in current understanding and predictions;
(c) The global impacts to be expected for different
global warming scenarios in such areas as agricultural
and oceanic productivity, sea level change, vegetation
patterns and migration, changes in storm patterns and
severity, occurrence of droughts, etc.;
(d) The availability and inter-comparability of
national data bases pertinent to environmental
research;
(e) Improvement of current climate and weather models
to at least begin to address regional changes on a
larger time horizon than is currently possible;
(f) The possibility of developing an integrated,
coherent international plan of research that would
build upon the expertise, experience and relevant data
available in the participant countries. Such a plan
could form a structure within which the contributions
of all interested nations could be used with greatest
effectiveness and form the basis for coordinated
resource allocation and implementation;
(g) The development of greater awareness on the part
of participating scientists of the economic aspects of
global change and the relative economic value of
improved understanding and predictive capability in
different areas.
(2) Economics
Three
The participation of economists should enhance four
useful information flows:
benefits or
mdgth
(a) Best-practice methods of estimating the costs of extended
analysis
inaction and of various sorts of action, along with the
latest estimates of costs; discussions of this topic
should serve to advance the state of the art, to lead
to a greater standardization of methods and to enhance
awareness of robust results.
(b) Greater familiarity on the part of economists with
the actual state of scientific knowledge, increasing
their ability to render it more faithfully in their
modeling.
(c) Greater awareness on the part of environmentalists
of the benefits to both the economy and the environment
of adopting flexible, market-based response strategies;
this typically grows slowly but does grow when
cultivated.
(3) Environment.
The sole objective with respect to the environmental
officials at the conference will be to expose them to
the scientific and economic issues discussed, thus
providing them with greater familiarity with and
sensibility to those factors when considering
environmental issues. This is consistent with the need
for this conference to have a clear purpose and defined
products distinct from policy decisions considered in
other forums.
D. Structure
The actions prior to the conference and the structure of the
event itself should serve the objectives discussed above.
Proposal
(1) Pre-Conference Actions.
(a) To give greater visibility to the conference, the
invitations to government officials will come directly
from the President.
(b) To refine the scope of the conference, a
questionnaire requesting specific information (e.g.,
major uncertainties in the areas, major gaps in
existing information and new developments) will be sent
to all participants.
(c) Assignments for the preparation of a limited
number of short papers will be made among the
participants, with the authors presenting the papers at
the conference as keynote talks to initiate discussion.
(2) Conference Activities.
(a) To ensure full discussion of the issues, the
conference will extend over [ ] days.
(b) The conference will begin with an opening plenary
session, with the participants then breaking into
groups of science, economic and environmental
officials. The results of the questionnaires
circulated prior to the conference will serve as the
basis for initial discussions. To ensure cross-
pollination (one of the essential purposes of the
conference), the groups will be mixed to expose each of
the groups to members from the other disciplines. At
the end of the conference, all participants will
reconvene for summary discussions.
(c) Presidential involvement will be another key
factor in heightening the visibility of the conference,
and will also serve to fulfill his campaign pledge.
[The President will address the opening plenary session
and participate in the concluding session and perhaps
one or two sessions during the conference.]
(d) To ensure that the conference is a success, a
full-time White House coordinator will be designated
through detail or otherwise; another person to
coordinate the logistics of the conference is also
needed, either through detail or contract.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
10. Memo
From Roger Porter to John Sununu
11/29/89
P-5
Re: Global Environmental Conferences (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
(Document Follows)
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
By If (NLGB) on 10/28/05
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C.2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM Removed as a personal record misfile
f
Global Warming
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 29, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR GOVERNOR SUNUNU
FROM:
ROGER B. PORTER RBP
SUBJECT:
Global Environmental Conferences
Following this morning's meeting in your office regarding
global environmental issues and Malta, the following occurred to
me as useful in thinking about our options:
1. The President made a commitment during the campaign for
the United States to host a global environmental conference.
This can be satisfied in any number of ways. Indeed, there is no
reason merely to hold another environmental conference given the
large number that are already scheduled. Our agreeing to host a
framework convention on global climate change satisfies this com-
mitment.
2. We want to look like we are driving the engine rather
than riding in the caboose on global environmental issues. The
reality is that we have a strong commitment to a sustained
program of environmental improvements. Furthermore, very little
of real value is likely to occur without U.S. leadership.
3. Environmental issues will play a prominent role, or at
least should, in my view, at the International Economic Summit
Conference that we will host in Houston next July. Everytime we
host a conference it is important that something useful, other
than discussion, emerge.
4. Given that we are hosting the February IPCC meeting,
offering to host the Global Climate Framework Conference later in
the year, and hosting the International Economic Summit
Conference in July, it is worth pondering carefully the purpose
that would be served by yet another, more broad-based global
environmental conference.
5. If we are going to go ahead with such a conference we
should have a clear idea of its purpose -- to focus more
attention on scientific issues, to attempt to secure commitments
regarding what other nations are prepared to do, to showcase the
efforts we are making, to generate global enthusiasm for
conservation or reforestation, etc.
6. In any event, if we are going to do such a conference it
is a appropriate candidate for announcement in the State of the
Union. A post-Malta announcement should be limited to our
offering to host a Global Climate Change Framework Conference.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
11a. Memo
From D. Allan Bromley to POTUS
11/15/89
P-5
Re: The Noordwijk Conference on Atmospheric Pollution and
Climate Change (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
(Document Follows)
Subseries:
Issues Files
By If (NLGB) on 10/28/05
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - 15 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
file
November 15, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
D. ALLAN BROMLEY
Anam
SUBJECT:
THE NOORDWIJK CONFERENCE ON ATMOSPHERIC
POLLUTION AND CLIMATE CHANGE
I thought that you might be interested in the enclosed list
of conclusions that I jotted down following my participation
in last weeks conference in Noordwijk, The Netherlands.
I believe that our delegation had a very positive impact on
the outcome of the conference -- despite some media comments
to the contrary. Should you wish further information on any
of the points listed I would be happy to provide it.
Enclosure
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
11b. List
From D. Allan Bromley to POTUS
11/8/89
P-5
General Conclusions from the Noordwijk Meeting (7 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Open on Expiration of PRA
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
(Document Follows)
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
Subseries:
Issues Files
By If (NLGB) on 10/28/05
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information I(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P.-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile
D. Allan Bromley
November 8, 1989
General Conclusions from the Noordwijk Meeting
1.
For many reasons, many not yet fully understood in the
participating countries -- particularly in the Third
World but also in Europe -- environment has moved
rapidly to the top of the political agenda.
2.
Active measures to separate industrialized from
non-industrialized countries -- forced primarily by EC
countries -- act to isolate the U.S., Japan and the
USSR from natural allies in the Third and 2.5 Worlds
(i.e., China, Brazil and India).
3.
Relatively few of the 60-70 participant countries have
any quantitative idea of how they would reach the
discussed 20 percent CO2 reduction in 2000 or of what
it would cost them to do SO but are carried along by
considerable emotion and a degree of mob psychology.
4.
Scientific facts are largely irrelevant to current
discussions. Recognizing that current models and their
uncertainties do not provide compelling grounds for
2
immediate large scale amelioratory action, environmental
activists have stopped referring to their predictions
precipitously and now focus instead on historical,
multi-thousand-year ice core records that show a
striking correlation between atmospheric co² content
and temperature. The still open question as to which
is cause and which effect is usually not discussed.
5. There is a strong -- and in some areas not entirely
straightforward -- move by the U.K. to wrest world
leadership from the U.S. in matters of the environment.
The U.K. should hereafter be viewed as a less than
reliable partner in this area. Japan, on the other
hand, has been very reliable and, although for.
different reasons, so also have been the Soviets.
6. The U.S. delegation to Noordwijk was a well integrated,
coherent and effective one. Without extensive and
intensive work on many persons' parts, the declaration
would have been damaging to the U.S. and to U.S.
leadership.
7.
It remains true that in terms of actual progress toward
understanding the scientific foundations of global
change and responding to it in concrete fasion, the
U.S. leads the world by at least an order of magnitude.
3
8.
It is critically important that well before (one
month minimum) the February 1990 plenary IPCC
meeting in Washington, we must develop a clear,
well articulated U.S. policy regarding global
change -- with specific reference to stabilization
of greenhouse gas emission, based on the best
economic analyses possible in the intervening time
interval. We also need to look, as quantitatively
as possible, at what 20% reduction in CO2 emission
early in the 21st century would require of the
U.S. and what its impacts would be.
9.
We must continue to emphasize our leadership in
the related science and response areas and,
particularly in the science areas, invite others
to join with us. The proposed Earth Observing
Satellite systems (EOS) provide a particularly
good base for such invitations. And we must
continue to focus on the fact that many countries
still have no real idea of what they are prepared
to commit themselves to in this area.
10. We must expect that many countries that are now
enthusiastic about achieving ambitious greenhouse
gas emission goals will find that they are unable
to meet their stated commitments. Many
delegations look on the Noordwijk declaration and
4
its goals as rather optimistic political
statements intended, as much as anything, to
leverage public support for environmental
activities and expenditures in their own
countries, rather than any firm commitment to
actual results. One delegation leader from a
major EC country told us, "They can't take you to
the World Court in The Hague if you don't actually
comply with it. "
11. It is essential that we in the U.S. keep a
substantially broader focus on global change than
just the greenhouse effect that dominated the
discussions at Noordwijk. Matters such as clean
air, pure water, biodiversity and ocean pollution
received, at most, token mention.
12. This supports our idea of convening the G-7
science as opposed to environmental ministers
early in 1990 to at least attempt to structure a
coherent international scientific program aimed at
integrating all participant countries in an attack
on current gaps and uncertainties in our
understanding of the underlying science.
Preliminary and informal response to this idea,
from countries such as the UK, Canada, Italy,
France and Japan, has been enthusiastic.
5
13. With input from such a meeting, from what we are
doing in the DPCWG, and from the IPCC, we should
be prepared to host a Framework Convention in late
1990, and the President should announce this
intention at the earliest reasonable time --
in the State of the Union speech at the latest --
to retain world leadership in the environmental
field. There is a widespread belief that the
President is committed to hosting such a meeting
in 1990 given both pre- and post election
statements.
14. Under the DPCWG, we should bring in both a
representative cross-section of the most
distinguished scientists in the environmental
area, as well as an equivalent cross-section of
the most visible environmental activists, to at
least search for some common ground and moderate
some of the more extreme positions.
15. We should not forget that many of the Third World
countries are already in serious environmental
trouble and are looking to us for guidance and
help.
6
16. And we must also recognize that some of the Third
World countries will continue to ask for
increasing amounts of funding to help them -- with
as few strings as possible. It would -- in my
opinion -- be most unwise of us to agree to the
establishment of any general fund -- as has been
proposed -- in which we were not able to know in
advance, and specify, what kinds of projects and
which projects in particular our funding would
support. We need to be realistic about the fact
that the demands will very probably always
exceed our capacity to respond. However, we
should begin now to consider some offer of help
-- both financial and technological -- that would
be feasible for us within our constraints.
Judicious U.S. investments early on can yield
some handsome dividends, both political and
environmental.
17. Having evolved a coherent national -- and our part
of the international -- strategy, it is essential
that we take a proactive role with the U.S. media
who are, in general, antagonistic in this area.
Otherwise, the IPCC meeting aftermath in February,
1990 could be extremely negative and could hurt
the President. We should consider what
7
announcement of significant environmental
activities, both national and international, the
President could make prior to the February
meeting. In my view, if we are to retain a
credible leadership position we have to be
seen as being prepared to undertake some
specific new initiatives in this area -- insisting
in all cases, however, that there be strong
scientific bases of understanding for our actions
and, at the present time, arguments beyond simply
greenhouse emission ones for the proposed actions.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date:
11/16/89
TO:
THE CHIEF OF STAFF
FROM: JAMES W. CICCONI
Assistant to the President and
Deputy to the Chief of Staff
The attached has been forwarded
to the President.
UNITED
STATES.
AGENCY
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
PROTECTION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
November 17, 1989
file
THE ADMINISTRATOR
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Governor John H. Sununu
Chief of Staff
The White House
SUBJECT:
The Dutch Ministerial Conference on
Atmospheric Pollution and Climate Change
We were able to contain much of the damage at the Dutch
Ministerial and avoid having to disavow the Communique. In the
end it was a consensus document but just barely. Privately, I
pulled out all the stops, reminding the Dutch of the President's
own good faith in sending me and warning of his personal
disappointment if the conference were to embarrass the U.S.
At numerous private meetings with ministers, I tried to line
up support for deferring any commitments to CO₂ reductions by a
specified amount or date. We were successful in heading off
agreement to reduce CO₂ by 20% by the year 2005 but only we and
Japan excepted to a commitment by the other industrial nations to
stabilization of CO₂ by the year 2000. My colleagues among the
G-7 ministers seemed a bit startled by how aggressively I tried
to head them off, beginning at a lunch at our Ambassador's house
on the Sunday preceding the conference. But while they were
sympathetic and helpful, and have a large reserve of respect for
the President's environmental commitment, they are unlikely to be
with us unless we have a specific reduction strategy with a
timetable. That was true in Noordwijk and it will be true at
future such meetings. Only Japan will be resistant to reductions
and, in my opinion, if the Japanese were to find themselves
isolated without us, they would agree to reductions and simply
move more industry off shore to developing countries, so wary are
they of having to become even more energy efficient than they
already are.
I want to set out some impressions of the situation and also
suggest a response to short-term criticism that we're
stonewalling the number one environmental issue. That was the
theme of the European press reaction, a heavily negative barrage
that we, Japan and the U.K. were sabotaging the conference. As
you know, the U.K. dropped out and left us and the Japanese, with
the British minister proclaiming loudly at the final press
conference, "Let us all be perfectly clear that the U.K. was in
the majority here, not the minority." (When asked about that, I
2
said that if anyone really was concerned about who was in the
majority, then it was the U.S. for we stood with the vast
preponderance of the world's nations in rejecting commitments to
CO₂ reductions for ourselves at this time, along with the USSR,
China, India, Brazil and the rest of the developing world. Only
by defining the developing countries out and asking little or
nothing of them was unanimity possible on stabilization of CO₂ by
2000.
Then, of course, I was asked how our position was consistent
with the President's promise to provide leadership on the
international environment. My answer was essentially as follows:
"It is the very essence of leadership when confronted by a very
serious problem to take careful stock of options, to assess their
costs and benefits and technological feasibility, to consult
closely with those sectors of the society likely to be most
adversely affected, and finally to make commitments whose
consequences you understand and promises you intend to keep.
When we, who have done more scientific research, more analyses of
both effects of climate change and also stabilization options
complete our assessments -- and develop our position, we will be
ready to make real and not fantasy commitments." The Europeans
privately respected that position, and took it as a consequence
of our having been in office only ten months. But they do not
regard it as leadership.
In my formal statement to the conference, I complimented the
faith shown by other countries that have committed to decisions
to stabilize without waiting for any analysis of how they intend
to do it. I was later told that environmentalists watching on
closed circuit TV had a good laugh over that remark. They know
full well that most countries don't have any idea how they're
going to achieve stabilization, and some nations who do know how
difficult it would be (e.g., Canada, Switzerland) privately
express great doubt about whether they'll get there.
In all my public comments I carefully avoided saying
anything that would complicate a future U.S. position either pro
or anti-reductions. I did note how difficult stabilization would
be for us but indicated that if the global environment required
it the U.S. would more than do its part. At the press
conferences I referred all the scientific questions to Allan
Bromley. We had a very harmonious and united delegation.
I regret that we were not able to advocate from the
beginning stabilization without deadline and that we could not
invite the parties to the U.S. to begin negotiations on the
"Washington Convention on Global Warming." That would have
allowed us to capture the high ground publicly and I still hope
we can do it. It would assure us a large measure of control.
But it would also require us to advance a stabilization and/or
reduction policy.
3
We also succeeded, in the Netherlands, in killing a proposed
commitment to make specific CO₂ reduction commitments -- beyond
stabilization -- at the World Climatological Conference in
November 1990. I assumed that was necessary so as not to lock us
into a specific timetable for making public our long-term
position on reductions. But most other nations agreed that the
Conference, following on the report of the IPCC, will be the
moment when such positions will be revealed.
Given the Noordwijk experience, a number of conclusions can
be drawn.
1.
The train is moving very fast, at least in the
industrialized countries. At least three countries are
dead serious about stabilization and then reduction of
CO₂: West Germany, France and the Netherlands. The
Germans particularly don't understand how we, who emit
21 tons of CO₂ per capita per year, cannot make
reductions, while they, who emit 12.8 tons, can. The
French, of course, have their nuclear capacity and are
selling it to everybody -- the Italians, Swiss,
Austrians and Germans -- while many of their customers
warn of the perils of nuclear power and promise to
allow no more reactors in their own countries. The
Canadian minister told me that Canada must be with the
U.K. and France on this. And the U.K. wants to be with
the European Community, as do Austria and Switzerland.
The Scandinavian countries are enthusiastic. So France
and Germany will swing the European Community and
Canada and the Scandinavians will be right with them.
2.
There is an Alice-in-Wonderland quality to much of the
global climate debate. The French environment minister
said to me, "Why not agree to the majority position?
It's really a political statement. You can't be sued
in the World Court of Justice on it."
Sweden is committed to dismantling all 12 of its
nuclear reactors. It seems inconceivable to me that
Sweden could, during the same period, stabilize CO₂.
Spain has the highest growth rate in Europe; surely
they're not headed toward early stabilization. Nor is
Greece. Italy is buying more gas from Libya and the
USSR and may be in a position to make reductions.
Pollution is so severe in Italy and Greece that they
will no doubt want to be progressive on global climate
issues, but I don't believe they've done any analysis.
That's a fourth of the European Community yet the EC
was extremely forceful in advocating stabilization.
4
Austria and Australia both took a whack at the U.S. as
rich and profligate in energy use. Both their
ministers told me they will stabilize. (I suggested to
environmental groups in both countries that they press
hard for the details and the necessary legislative
commitments.)
3.
Virtually all our allies, minus Japan, believe that a
protocol to limit or reduce CO₂ emissions should be
negotiated simultaneously with the negotiation of a
framework convention. This was in several of the
country statements. I had not realized this would be
their position. It will require the U.S. to develop
our position much earlier than I had assumed; it is one
of the contributions of the Dutch conference to flush
this out. We may well be isolated if we insist on
deferring any discussion of targets and timetables
until after a framework convention is negotiated.
4.
U.S. leadership would be welcomed although I detected
more than a hint of pleasure in our discomfort. The
Germans were particularly generous in avoiding any
confrontational rhetoric with us. They probably will
lead on this if we don't, but they consider our
commitment essential. Helmut Kohl's principal advisor
on global climate issues, Baldur Wagner, told me they
very much hope our position in the Netherlands merely
reflects our short time in office, and that we will be
with them eventually. He has far less confidence that
the Japanese will ever be aboard.
5.
I continue to suspect that the real action on global
climate will be in the developing countries.
Presently, they generate very little CO₂ but the
prospect exists for huge increases in China (a two-fold
increase in coal use is planned by the year 2000) and
India (a three-fold increase in coal is contemplated).
No one has any idea what to tell the Chinese to avoid
their cancelling out all the gains that the
industrialized nations might make. I was not at
liberty to meet with the Chinese minister. The Indian
minister simply reaffirmed that India will do nothing
unless they are compensated by developed countries.
Mexico takes a decidedly different position, forcefully
rejecting the implication that they will only take what
measures they are compensated to take. They want to
begin working with us on assessing their options.
6.
Nuclear energy is one of the few near-term options for
places like China and India. And the fact that France
has a surplus of energy capacity due to its nuclear
reactors is an important part of both France's and
5
Germany's willingness to commit to CO₂ stabilization
and later reductions. As Germany reduces its subsidies
to soft coal, it will step up its purchases of French
nuclear generated power, which it needs to do to reduce
the size of Germany's current trade surplus with
France. Natural gas from the Netherlands and the USSR
also figures importantly in German plans.
7. The U.S. needs to engage in a serious debate about
global climate change and U.S. options to address it.
For the U.S. stabilization of CO₂ by the year 2000
would require big changes in indoor and outdoor
lighting (possible), insulation practices (possible),
reforestation (possible), significant automobile fuel
efficiency improvements (possible but would be strongly
resisted by the auto industry), electric utility
efficiency improvements (there will be significant
conservation in response to the President's acid rain
bill), big gains in energy efficiency in industry
(highly unlikely without sharp energy price increases
or large new taxes), major realignments in fuel use
from oil and coal to gas (some of this is likely anyway
but would probably require policy intervention to
accelerate and increase in scale), and new nuclear
reactors to provide needed capacity in areas like the
Northeast (unlikely in the time frame of ten years due
to public attitudes).
In conclusion, I emphasized in the Netherlands that the
conference, while an important event was not the main event. The
main event, for which we will need a fully developed position, is
the IPCC process. It's going to be on us soon, beginning in
February. In my opinion it will be difficult for us to put off
our formal position on stabilization and possible reductions of
CO₂ beyond the Summit of the G-7 countries next summer.
Bie
William K. Reilly
File
S
THE WHITE HOUSE
THE CHIEF of STAFF
WASHINGTON
has seen
October 23, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR GOVERNOR SUNUNU
FROM:
D. ALLAN BROMLEY, ASSISTANT TO THE
CHAIRMAN, DPC WORKING GROUP ON GLOBAL
CHANGE
PRESIDENT FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 152A AND
DAVID BATES, ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND
SECRETARY TO THE CABINET
SUBJECT:
Decision on the Hague Ministerial and
Related Issues
The DPC Working Group on Global Change met on Friday,
October 20 to discuss issues related to U.S. participation
in the upcoming Hague Environment Ministerial Conference,
November 6-7.
The attached is a discussion of the three issues for
decision. Please give us some guidance on how you would
like to proceed with this decision.
OPTIONS
1. The issues can be presented to the full DPC for
consideration and recommendations to the President.
2. The issues can be presented to the President in the
attached paper from us.
3. You can convene a small Cabinet group to make
recommendations to the President.
DECISION
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
13. Paper
Re: Decisions on The Hague Ministerial Conference (6 pp.)
10/23/89
P-5
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
(Document Follows)
Subseries:
Issues Files
By of (NLGB) on 10/28/05
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile
October 23, 1989
ISSUE
I. Should the United States be represented at the Hague
Ministerial Conference, November 6-7, at the ministerial
level (EPA Administrator Bill Reilly) or at a lower
observer level?
II. Should the United States offer to host the first
negotiating session of a framework convention on global
climate change, and if so, when should the President
announce it?
BACKGROUND
The DPC Working Group on Global Climate Change, chaired by
Dr. Allan Bromley, met on Friday, October 20 to discuss
issues relating to U.S. participation in the upcoming
Hague Ministerial.
The Netherlands will sponsor an international conference
of Environment Ministers, November 6-7, to consider and to
sign a declaration on global warming.
There is consensus among the relevant Federal Agencies and
Departments that the United States cannot support the
declaration because it is inconsistent with U.S. policy in
several areas. It calls for action to stabilize carbon
dioxide (CO2) emissions by the year 2000 and to reduce CO2
emissions by 20% by the year 2005, to reduce CFC emissions
beyond the President's stated pledge, to create an
international climate change fund, and possibly to create
a permanent international secretariat to institutionalize
the "Hague process" --- none of which can be supported by
the United States, for obvious reasons, at the present
time.
The Hague Ministerial also competes with a parallel
process to address international global climate change
under the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) --
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The
United States was aggressive in advocating the creation of
the IPCC and insisted on chairing the policy subcommittee
(the Response Strategies Working Group) in order to
consolidate the consideration of global warming into one
international arena, in which we would have significant
influence and control. We are, as a matter of policy,
bound and committed to the IPCC process as the sole
2
international process for consideration of global warming
issues.
For these reasons, the DPC Working Group agrees that the
U.S. cannot support the draft Hague declaration and that
there are significant risks for the U.S. to be represented
at the ministerial level. It should be noted that EPA
Administrator Reilly believes that a commitment for his
participation was signaled to the Dutch Prime Minister in
the presence of President Bush during the Dutch bilateral
meeting, which followed the G-7 Paris Economic Summit. At
that time, Administrator Reilly informed the Dutch that
his attendance at the Hague Ministerial would be dependent
on progress on the President's Clean Air Act proposal in
Congress.
The DPC Working Group also discussed the related issue of
a framework convention on climate change under the IPCC
process. The issue of a framework convention has surfaced
many times over the past year. At the first meeting of
the U.S. -chaired Response Strategies Working Group (RSWG)
in January, 1989, the United States successfully avoided
the creation of a separate group to examine the issue of
"legal instruments" or a framework convention. At the May
RSWG meeting, after considerable press attention alleging
that the United States was recalcitrant in moving forward
on a framework convention, the United States invited
countries to participate in a "workshop" to begin
discussions of the elements of a framework convention.
This workshop was held in Geneva on October 6, and
discussion of a framework convention began.
It is now proposed by both EPA and the State Department
that a decision be made, to be announced by the President,
that the United States will host the first negotiating
session of the framework convention after the final
reports of the IPCC are completed.
This decision should be made within the context of the
IPCC process and U.S. strategy in aggressively seeking
its creation in 1988. The purpose in creating the IPCC
was to avoid having to respond on many international
fronts to the global warming issue, particularly in light
of the scientific uncertainties. U.S. policy was to seek
creatión of a single global entity to address the issue.
The IPCC was empowered to make a definitive international
statement about the scientific analysis and uncertainties
that currently exist, the actual effects of any global
warming, and the potential policy options for responding.
At U.S. urging, Great Britain became the Chair of the
Science Working Group, the Soviet Union became the Chair
of the Effects Working Group, and the United States became
3
the Chair of the Response Strategies Working Group. The
Working Groups are to make reports, to be completed by the
end of 1990, leading up to a World Climate Conference. At
such time, after international consensus had been
achieved, a decision on the need for a framework
convention could be made on much more certain scientific
and safer political grounds. Some in the Administration
are concerned that if the United States does not offer now
to host the first negotiating session, another country may
issue the invitation and assume control of the process.
It should be noted, however, that the Washington
Representative for UNEP, representing the UNEP Director
General, Dr. Mostafa Tolba, insists that the negotiations
for a framework climate change convention will not be
assigned to any country before Spring, 1990, and that the
United States is the UNEP's preferred host for the
framework convention, given the expected difficulty in
negotiating any such convention. According to this UN
official, any announcement for a negotiating session for
the framework convention is premature, given the IPCC's
current timetable.
The United States is currently functioning well within the
IPCC. RSWG is meeting its obligations and is encountering
little dissent. It should be noted, however, that RSWG is
moving much faster than either the Science or the Effects
Working Groups, on which the response policy was to have
been based. So the process is somewhat inverted.
DISCUSSION
I.
Should the United States be represented at the Hague
Ministerial by its Environment Minister, EPA Administrator
Reilly, or at a lower observer level?
PRO
A. Ministerial participation in the Hague Conference
will show U.S. environmental leadership. Failure to
participate at the ministerial level could be
misconstrued as pulling back from commitments made at
the G-7 Economic Summit.
B. The EPA Administrator could attempt to guide the
Dutch declaration in a direction more consistent with
U.S. and IPCC policy and could use the opportunity to
stress the scientific uncertainties associated with
global warming. Failure to send the EPA Administrator
may represent a loss of U.S. influence in the "Hague
process."
4
C. Failure to send the EPA Administrator may be
misconstrued as lack of United States policy on
global warming or unwillingness to articulate its
policy in the international arena.
D. Failure to send the EPA Administrator may risk
short-term political losses with the international
and domestic environmental community.
CONS
A. The Hague declaration is antithetical to U.S.
policy and our strategy in creating the IPCC.
B. If the EPA Administrator attends, he has no choice
but to be negative toward both the substance and form
of the meeting. The press and public perception will
inevitably be that the United States opposes any
progress on the global warming issue.
C. The EPA Administrator will be needed at the time
of the Hague Ministerial to steer through Congress
the President's most important domestic environmental
initiative, the Clean Air Act. The EPA
Administrator's absence at a crucial time in the
Clean Air Act could cause significant domestic
difficulties for the President. The risk of a double
negative is high - international backlash for failure
to support the Dutch declaration and domestic
backlash for failure to be on-scene for the Clean Air
Act negotiations.
D. The EPA Administrator's presence at the Hague
Ministerial, regardless of the U.S. position on the
declaration, may lend credibility to the concept of a
permanent secretariat to institutionalize the "Hague
process."
It was suggested that a graceful way to avoid many of the
negative effects of failure to participate at the
ministerial level would be for the President to send a
letter to the Dutch Prime Minister making the following
points: congratulating him on his leadership on the
climate change issue; explaining U.S. policy and research
goals for climate change; reiterating support for the IPCC
process which we expect will eventually lead to the
negotiation of a framework convention; and explaining that
Mr. Reilly's presence is badly needed for a domestic Clean
Air Act initiative which will be a model for the use of
market mechanisms in service to environmental protection.
Such a letter could be released prior to the Hague
5
Conference and would be the basis for the statement of the
U.S. observer.
II. A) Should the United States offer to host the first
negotiating session of a framework convention on climate
change, B) and if so, should the President announce it
before the Hague Ministerial or at a later date?
A. PROS
1. Hosting the first negotiating session on a
framework climate change convention would place the
United States in an international leadership role on
the global warming issue. It would signal U.S.
intention for international action, put the U.S. on
the cutting edge of international environmental
politics, and be popular with the domestic and
international environmental community.
2. Hosting a U.S. negotiating session would allow the
United States to have significant control and
influence over the negotiating process and, possibly,
the ultimate framework convention.
3. A U.S. decision to host the first negotiating
session prior to the conclusion of the IPCC process,
which is scheduled for November, 1990, would
accelerate the IPCC process and would enhance U.S.
influence within the IPCC.
4. A U.S. negotiating session would not be
inconsistent with U.S. policy: the President made a
statement in May, 1989 that he expects the outcome of
IPCC to be the negotiation of a framework convention
and the G-7 Paris Economic Summit communique
advocates the negotiation of a framework convention.
CONS
1. The definition, form, and substance of the legal
instrument for the framework convention is not yet
determined. A decision to host a U.S. negotiating
session assumes that the framework convention will
not follow precedents for international legal
instruments that we cannot support. We should know
what kind of legal instrument is contemplated before
the United States agrees to initiate the negotiation.
2. A decision to host a U.S. negotiating session
assumes that the final IPCC report and international
consensus will be consistent with U.S. policy, which
is not at all certain at this time.
6
3. A decision to host a U.S. negotiating session will
seriously reduce U.S. leverage to ensure that the
IPCC deliberations are consistent with U.S. policy by
prematurely supporting its conclusions, which will
not be final until the end of 1990.
4. A decision to host a U.S. negotiating session
undermines the reports of the IPCC Science Working
Group, chaired by Great Britain, and the Effects
Working Group, chaired by the Soviet Union, by
suggesting that there is a need for a framework
convention regardless of their conclusions. It
distorts scientific analysis by presuming the
scientific conclusions; in short, it places
international politics before science.
B. PROS (Announce before the Hague Ministerial)
1. Announcement of a U.S. negotiating session prior
to the Hague Ministerial Conference would ameliorate
criticism for U.S. opposition to the Dutch
declaration and, if Reilly does not attend, for
failure to be represented at the Dutch conference at
the ministerial level.
2. Announcement of a U.S. negotiating session prior
to the Hague Ministerial Conference would preempt
other countries from asserting a leadership role.
CONS
1. An announcement of a major environmental
initiative, such as a U.S. negotiating session,
should be tied to an important domestic event for a
domestic audience for maximum domestic political
benefit.
2. This announcement, should there be a consensus for
a U.S. negotiating session, is more appropriate to
the State of the Union, the February, 1990 Washington
IPCC plenary session, or the President's
International Conference on the Environment, should
it be something other than the February IPCC.
3. Announcing a major U.S. initiative related to the
IPCC prior to the Hague Ministerial would compound
U.S. opposition to the Dutch declaration and the
"Hague process.' It could doubly embarrass the Dutch
for the U.S. to announce a major initiative on a
competing process shortly before their conference.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
14. Memo
From Michael Boskin to D. Allan Bromley
12/13/89
P/5
Re: U.S. Position on Climate Change Convention (3 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Chief of Staff, White House Office of
Open on Expiration of PRA
Series:
Sununu, John, Files
(Document Follows)
Subseries:
Issues Files
WHORM Cat.:
By If (NLGB) on 10/28/05
File Location:
Global Warming (2 of 2) - 1990 [5]
Date Closed:
12/17/2004
OA/ID Number:
29158-005
FOIA/SYS Case #:
1998-0004-F[1]
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2005-0426-S
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would-disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM Removed as a personal record misfile
THE CHAIRMAN OF THE
COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS
WASHINGTON
December 13, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR D. ALLAN BROMLEY
FROM:
MICHAEL J. BOSKIN
miss
SUBJECT:
U.S. Position on Climate Change Convention
I have recently had some disturbing conversations about the
ongoing international discussions aimed at the development of a
framework climate change convention and subsequent protocols, as
well as the position that U.S. representatives have taken in
those discussions. I am writing to let you know that it is
imperative that a major shift in our position be made.
The U.S. has apparently not challenged the view (which is
reflected in Fred Bernthal's memo to you of October 24 and, even
more clearly, in the legal and institutional measures portions of
the October RSWG Workshop draft report now being circulated for
comment by EPA) that the convention should be drafted in
anticipation of a large number of gas-specific and policy-
specific follow-on protocols. This many-protocol approach
ignores important regulatory lessons that have been painfully
learned in the U.S.; it would place us and the world as a whole
on a path toward unending negotiation and detailed regulation
that would be both ineffective and expensive. This approach is
philosophically inconsistent with the President's approach to
regulation in general and with his stated position on the need to
reconcile the environment and economic growth.
A far superior approach, which the U.S. should adopt
forthwith, would be to draft the convention in anticipation of
negotiating only country-specific limits on total net greenhouse
emissions (or, more plausibly, a formula for computing those
limits), along with protocols on baselines, funding mechanisms,
enforcement, research, monitoring, technology transfer, and
related implementation issues. This approach, which explicitly
rules out gas-specific protocols and international agreements on
specific control measures, would allow each country to find the
best way to reduce its impact on global climate, taking into
account its own economic, political, national security, and
lifestyle conditions and concerns. Most nations, we should hope,
would adopt flexible, incentive-based approaches, but those who
choose to rely on other methods would be free to do SO. All the
world as a whole legitimately cares about is the change in the
global atmosphere, not the method by which the U.S. or any other
nation makes its contribution to that change.
2
The many-protocol approach would lead us instead to attempt
to replicate on a world scale the sort of detailed command and
control regulation (epitomized by scrubbers on powerplants) that
we have tried and found wanting in the U.S. The inflexibility
that would be induced by a large number of specific protocols
would dramatically raise the costs of whatever actions were
ultimately taken to mitigate global change. (We should also
reconsider the need for multilateral protocols on adaptation,
which are now envisioned, since, research and technology transfer
aside, the adaptation measures that have been widely discussed
have at most regional effects.)
The many-protocol approach may be a recipe for inaction.
Strong actions to control emissions of any particular greenhouse
gas or operation of any particular source category would impose
very different costs on different nations. We might be willing
to take drastic steps to reduce methane emissions from our rice
paddies, for instance, but it is hard to imagine much enthusiasm
in East Asia. If those nations don't go along with a strong rice
paddies protocol, however, methane emissions from rice
cultivation will not be noticeably decreased, even if such
decreases would represent the most cost-effective way for East
Asia to reduce its net greenhouse emissions. Bundling issues
(gasses, sources, and sinks) makes an effective agreement to
control net emissions more likely.
At the same time, the many-protocol approach may be a recipe
for singling out the U.S. and other advanced nations for
disproportionate burdens, since we might well find it hardest
politically to resist any proposed protocols. Under this
scenario, the first protocol would call for the equivalent of 50
m.p.g. CAFE standards for all new cars, the second would set
absurd efficiency standards for home appliances, and so on. We
could easily find ourselves nibbled to death by a large number of
protocols aimed at rich nations but having, in aggregate, little
effect on ambient greenhouse gas concentrations.
I thus consider it vitally important that the U.S. firmly
and quickly reject the many-protocol approach in the IPCC
process. That approach is inconsistent with the President's
stated view, which is solidly grounded in U.S. experience, that
flexible and incentive-based regulation best harmonizes
environmental concerns with economic growth, and is particularly
unlikely to produce sound policy in this multi-national setting.
On the other hand, I do not mean to suggest that a crusade
on your part will be necessary to bring this about. Last week
Boyden Gray met with representatives of EPA, State, Justice, CEA,
and other interested parties, and he made the case for a position
shift of the sort I have described. There was no visible
resistance, so that this shift may occur without your
participation. On the other hand, appearances can be deceptive,
3
and meditation may produce opposition. I thus urge you, if the
occasion arises, to support movement away from the many-protocol
approach to drafting a climate change convention and to a simpler
and more rational approach based on changes in what matters: net
greenhouse emissions.
I would, of course, be most interested in your reactions to
all this.
An independent newspaper
THE TRIBUNE
serving the Greater Bay
Area from Oakland
since 1874
ROBERT C. MAYNARD
Editor and President
PAUL R. GREENBERG
Vice President
LEROY F. AARONS
NANCY HICKS MAYNARD
FRED O. WETTON
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President
Vice President
News
Sales & Marketing
Advertising & Business Development
ROY GRIMM
ERIC NEWTON
BELINDA TAYLOR
WILLIAM WONG
Senior Editor
Assistant Managing Editor
Assistant Managing Editor
Associate Editor
Administration
News
Sunday/Features
JONATHAN MARSHALL
Editorial Page Editor
A-10
Monday. November 13, 1989
Oakland, California
Global warming - — or hot air?
Earthquakes. hurricanes, massive floods:
Today begins a five part series on the widen-
These terrifying natural disasters seem al-
ing gap between science and popular fears.
most trivial beside the potential destruction
of nature itself by mankind.
The Earth: warming or cooling?
Dire warnings of such a cataclysm echo
The long, hot summer of 1988 brought
almost daily in the media as politicians and
with it more than droughts, forest fires, ur-
environmental activists sound the alarm
ban smog and good beach weather. It also
over what Vermont Sen. Robert Stafford
brought heated alarm from the public over
termed "the very real and imminent threat
the startling assertion by NASA climate ex-
to humanity's survival posed by the linked
pert Jim Hansen that global warming was
dangers of global warming, stratospheric
finally an established fact. "It's time to stop
ozone depletion and
acid rain."
waffling," he declared.
The prophets of global cataclysm argue,
along with Secretary of State Jim Baker.
THE IMPERILED GLOBE:
that the world can "not afford to wait" for
FACT OR HYPE?
more scientific evidence before taking steps
to avoid "being trapped on a boat that we
Only a decade ago, some scientists an-
have irreparably damaged."
nounced with equal certainty that an oppo-
Indeed, policy-makers are not waiting.
site disaster was in the making. In 1974, the
President Bush has endorsed the goal of
CTA issued two major reports on the impli-
banning all chemicals known to attack the
cations of what it called "the global cooling
Earth's ozone layer and proposes cutting
trend." It cited a "growing consensus among
emissions that form acid rain by half. A
leading climatologists" that the world was
coalition of national environmental groups
growing colder, noting evidence of an ex-
demands that he further mandate a 20 per-
panding arctic ice-pack and shorter growing
cent reduction in the output of "greenhouse
seasons. The reports predicted "worldwide
gases," especially carbon dioxide, by 2000.
agricultural failures" and changes in "the
Every one of these proposals carries
world balance of power."
staggering costs, from tens to the hundreds
Today's forecasts of environmental doom
of billions of dollars. Are such drastic reme-
sound almost the same. Only this time they
dies needed? Do better alternatives exist?
depend on scenarios of rapid global warming
How much do experts really know about
caused by the pumping of carbon dioxide
possible threats to the global environment?
and other gases into the air.
CO2 acts like a blanket surrounding the
Earth, trapping radiant heat emitted from
Earth will warm quickly. If they are nega-
the Earth's surface and warming the atmos-
tive, the greenhouse effect will be swamped
by other forces.
phere. Without it. the Earth would be a froz-
en, possibly lifeless planet like Mars.
CO2 is a relatively weak greenhouse gas:
water vapor traps heat much more effec-
But too much CO2, the theory goes, will
tively. The greenhouse models assume that
overheat the Earth. The polar ice caps may
slight warming caused by CO2 will in turn
melt, causing flooding of coastal settle-
pump more water vapor into the air, multi-
ments. Rainfall patterns will change, possi-
plying the effect to damaging levels.
bly causing droughts in regions where most
of the Earth's food is grown. Forests might
Yet water vapor forms clouds. which re-
shrink, accelerated by raging fires.
flect more heat than they trap. A 1987 study
Everyone has heard the scary scenarios.
in the British journal Nature. which has
Fortunately, most scientists don't believe the
since been confirmed, concluded that "the
warming has yet happened - if it ever will.
net cloud effect is a cooling of the planet.'
By clearing forests and burning fuels,
humans have undeniably dumped a huge
"It is becoming apparent that uncertain-
amount of CO2 into the atmosphere, helping
ties in the, treatment of clouds severely un-
to increase its total by about 25 percent over
dermine model predictions of climate," Tony
the past hundred years.
Slingo, a global climate specialist at the
National Center for Atmospheric Research,
But the Earth seems hardly any warmer
wrote in September. "The fact that 14 mod-
for it. Reid Bryson of the University of
els give 14 different answers for the cloud
Wisconsin, one of America's pioneer clima-
feedback, show that we are far from the
tologists, declares that talk of a perceptible
goal of accurate predictions of future cli-
warming trend over the past century "is
mate change."
based on flawed data."
Scientists at the National Oceanic and
Many greenhouse models ignore another,
Atmospheric Administration in Boulder,
no less important feedback effect. As sur-
Colo., published results in January indicating
face warming increases evaporation from
no detectable warming or rainfall trend over
the oceans, columns of water vapor carry
the continental United States since 1895:
the heat upward to great heights. The water
Similar studies of global trends show lit-
then condenses out as rain. The heat is re-
tle if any warming, well within the range of
leased into space, bypassing most of the
the Earth's natural variability and far below
greenhouse blanket.
the predictions of greenhouse models.
Over much of the globe, argues Hugh
Ellsaesser of Lawrence Livermore Labora-
"On the basis of the available records,"
writes Richard Lindzen, a meteorologist at
tory, "the feedback from water vapor is
MIT, "our best estimate for the global tem-
likely to be negative rather than positive."
MIT's Lindzen estimates that this effect
perature change that has occurred over the
alone "could diminish estimates of CO2
industrial period does not significantly vary
warming by a factor of about six."
from zero, and this certainly suggests that
current models are greatly exaggerating ex-
New discoveries, new questions
pected warming."
These and other empirical objections
The more scientists learn about the me-
haven't dampened the enthusiasm of global
chanics of global climate change, the more
warming advocates. If the Earth hasn't
they confront their own ignorance. Past as-
shown signs of heating yet, they say, it soon
sumptions of the stability of solar radiation
will; the greenhouse properties of CO2 leave
have recently given way to evidence that the
no room for any alternative.
sun's output varies over time and may be a
major cause of shifts in climate. Volcanic
Cloudy models
and man-made aerosols may play a much
greater role than climate models now allow.
But the models depend at their core on
And scientists are only now coming to
feedback effects. If these are positive, the
grips with biological processes that may
temper the physical dynamics. For example,
as the CO2 level rises, ocean plankton tend
to multiply and absorb the gas in ever
greater amounts. carrying carbon to the bot-
tom as they die. At the same time, they
release into the air a chemical that seeds
more clouds, thus cooling the planet.
The risk of abrupt climatic shifts caused
by human intervention certainly deserves
great scientific attention - but not the cyni-
cal demagoguery of politicians and interest
groups that put other agendas ahead of the
truth. Humanity's future will not be served
by the attitude of greenhouse guru Sen. Tim
Wirth, who said, "What we've got to do in
energy conservation is try to ride the global
warming issue. Even if the theory of global
warming is wrong, to have approached glob-
al warming as if it is real, means energy
conservation SO we will be doing the right
thing anyway
Let the proponents of energy conserva-
tion make their case without concocting du-
bious scenarios to scare the public. If and
when scientists do confirm the greenhouse
models. the public must have no doubt about
the objectivity of their claims. And if those
models fail, the world deserves to know in
order to save the expense of a drastic cure.
Tomorrow: How CO2 benefits the Earth.
An independent newspaper
THE TRIBUNE
serving the Greater Bay
Area from Oakland
since 1874
A-10
Tuesday, November 14, 1989
Oakland, California
CO2: the Earth's friend
Countless doomsday warnings of global
ly a third. Productivity continues to rise
warming give the public only one possible
with CO2 beyond that level.
impression: Carbon dioxide, the major cul-
By a fortunate stroke of luck for humans,
prit in the "greenhouse effect," threatens to
food crops tend to show relatively more
poison the Earth's entire biosphere.
improvement than weeds.
Yet without CO2, most or all life on earth
CO2 also makes plants more resistant to
would vanish. The invisible gas contributes
the stresses of air pollution, saline water and
to a greenhouse blanket that traps heat and
unusual heat or cold.
prevents the planet from freezing over.
No less important, plants exposed to
more carbon dioxide tend to lose relatively
No less important, carbon dioxide forms
less water to the atmosphere. The water use
the basic chemical building block in a long
efficiency of most plants actually doubles
food chain. Plants grow by using the sun's
when CO2 levels are doubled.
energy to convert CO2 into more complex
Plant species would probably proliferate
organic chemicals by photosynthesis. Ani-
under such optimal conditions. In past geo-
mals in turn depend on plants for their own
logic eras, when the atmosphere was much
energy and growth.
richer in carbon dioxide, complex ecosys-
Yet CO2 supplies cannot be taken for
tems of mutually supporting plant life were
granted. Its concentration has plummeted
more common than today.
over geologic time, until now it makes up
Spreading plant life would also stabilize
only 0.03 percent of the Earth's atmosphere.
fragile top soil against wind and water ero-
That decline has enormous biological im-
sion. The quality of soils would in turn be
plications. According to research physicist
Sherwood Idso, whose new book "Carbon
Dioxide and Global Change" documents the
THE IMPERILED GLOBE:
case in massive detail, if CO2 levels were to
FACT OR HYPE?
decline much further, "we could well see
many plants struggling to survive" from a
improved by increasing organic material
combination of cold climate and inadequate
from their plant cover. Aside from fostering
nutrition.
better plant growth, such soil would also act
The reverse side, Idso maintains, is that
as a more effective filter to prevent ground-
mankind's output of CO2 "may well play a
water contamination.
significant role in forestalling the demise of
Carbon dioxide stimulates tiny bacteria
the biosphere' and, additionally, delay or
that grow on roots and "fix" nitrogen, draw-
prevent the onset of a coming ice age. In-
ing it from the air to fertilize their host
deed, the distinguished Soviet climate scien-
plants. As Idso notes, "enhanced nitrogen
tist Mikhail Budyko predicts a new "Eden"
fixation due to atmospheric CO2 enrichment
if present trends continue.
may also play a major role in the rejuvena-
Every greenhouse operator knows what a
tion of fragile tropical ecosystems where
miracle nutrient CO2 is for enhancing plant
vast reaches of land lie barren due to poor
growth. Plants raised in an enriched atmos-
soil conditions and lack of rain."
phere generally grow taller, with thicker
Consider then the enormously beneficial
leaves, more branches and larger and more
effect that rising CO2 levels will likely have
numerous flowers and fruits.
on the Earth's biosphere. Deserts may begin
For most plants studied by biologists,
to recede as grasses grow back into dry,
doubling the level of carbon dioxide in the
once inhospitable zones. Forests should
atmosphere raises harvestable yields by ful-
spread. Crop yields will improve, helping to
feed the Third World. Elaborate and costly
irrigation works may become less essential
as plant water efficiency rises.
Some evidence suggests that ecosystems
are already responding well to the 25 per-
cent increase in CO2 over the past century.
One group of researchers reported in 1987
that soybean yields "may have increased by
13 percent from about 1800 A.D. to the
present due to global carbon dioxide increas-
es." A study of Australian wheat production
attributed a significant improvement in
yeilds over time to carbon dioxide enrich-
ment. A recent analysis of tree rings from
bristlecone pines correlated faster growth
with rising atmospheric CO2. And several
studies of global plant production have found
clear increases over the past several dec-
ades, almost surely caused at least in part
by CO2 fertilization.
All this research suggests than a mas-
sive, global campaign to drive down carbon-
dioxide levels in the atmosphere on the basis
of unverified greenhouse models would be
the height of folly. Humanity, quite by acci-
dent, may actually be improving the world's
ecosystems by returning to the atmosphere
some of the carbon locked up in coal and oil
back when the Earth enjoyed a more pro-
ductive biosphere.
To risk human economic progress as well
as these potential environmental gains on
the basis of dark prophesies. misleading
models and incomplete information would be
a crime of incalculable proportions. The
risks and uncertainties cry out for more
research and better science. Such a call in-
evitably suggests to impatient politicians
and members of the public a campaign to
stall while doom approaches. In this case,
however, the costs of taking the wrong steps
are so high that humanity cannot afford to
get it wrong.
Tomorrow: holes in the ozone scare.
An independent newspaper
THE TRIBUNE
serving the Greater Bay
Area from Oakland
since 1874
A-10
Wednesday, November 15, 1989
Oakland, California
Holes in the ozone scare
"It's terrifying," one government scien-
ried. But just how certain are the experts
tist told The New York Times. "If these
that the ozone layer is vanishing? And how
ozone holes keep growing like this, they'll
badly will the Earth's biosphere suffer?
eventually eat the world."
Dwindling ultraviolet
The discovery of the Antarctic "ozone
Forget ozone for a moment; the ultimate
hole" in the mid-1980s revived with a venge-
threat, if there is one, comes from powerful
ance a global catastrophe scenario that had
ultraviolet rays that can burn living organ-
lain dormant since the debate over the Su-
isms. Have UV levels climbed over the past
personic Transport a decade earlier: the
couple of decades?
prospect that man-made chemicals will eat
away the high-altitude layer of ozone that
Quite the contrary. Last year a team of
protects the Earth's surface from harmful
scientists reported in the journal Science
ultraviolet rays.
that ground-level UV detectors in the United
States registered "a negative shift at each
Scientists found to their surprise and
station" between 1974 and 1985, "with de-
alarm that ozone concentrations now fall off
creases ranging from 2 to 7 percent." The
drastically over the South Pole for a few
researchers suggested that various physical
months each year. Strong evidence suggests
and meteorological factors, including in-
chlorine atoms do much of the dirty work.
creased cloud cover, "may play a greater
Much of the chlorine comes from compounds
known as CFCs, used in everything from
THE IMPERILED GLOBE:
refrigerators and air conditioners to foam
insulation and industrial solvents.
FACT OR HYPE?
Last year, NASA went further and re-
ported that long-term studies of the Earth's
role in attenuating (UV) radiation than was
ozone blanket detected a reduction of any-
previously suspected."
where from 1.7 percent to 3 percent between
A British scientist, Stuart Penkett ex-
1969 and 1986 in the temperate northern
plains the decrease in UV on the rising con-
latitudes where most people live.
centration of ozone in the lower atmosphere,
The stage was thus set for dire predic-
below the normal ozone belt. "This in-
tions of a skin cancer epidemic, waves of
crease," he noted in a recent issue of the
people blinded by cataracts, shriveling of
journal Nature, "could counteract the effect
major crops and mass die-offs of ocean phy-
of the stratospheric depletion on the amount
toplankton leading to a disruption of world
of radiation reaching the Earth's surface,
food chains.
especially in the northern hemisphere."
This March, after agreeing earlier to cut
These remarkable findings should have
use and production of CFCs by 50 percent
recast the whole debate, but instead they
over the next decade, the United States and
have been swallowed up by a hole in the
12-nation European Community recommend-
media coverage of ozone.
ed phasing out the chemicals entirely by the
Even if UV isn't a problem, just how bad
turn of the century, a drastic step that could
is the ozone situation? The gross numbers
cost tens or hundreds of billions of dollars.
supplied by NASA - up to a 3 percent drop
The atmospheric observations have sci-
in the most populous latitudes - mask the
entists and policy-makers legitimately wor-
key fact that nearly all the decline took
place in the winter months, when the sun is
ical effects of the ozone hole, says "it's not
much dimmer. The decrease in late summer
easy to resolve" what difference the loss of
amounted to less than 1 percent.
ozone there has made, given the enormous
A 1 percent reduction in ozone, other
natural variations from season to season.
things being equal, increases UV by 2 per-
cent. A person would get the same increase
"On a clear day in October with an ozone
in skin cancer risk by moving about 24 miles
hole you will get roughly the same UV flux
to the south.
as you get in December with no ozone hole,"
he observes. Much of the UV reflects off the
Do the trends mean anything?
ocean surface and the rest hardly penetrates
beyond 20 meters, above the level where
NASA's numbers suggest a worrisome
many phytoplankton grow. Recent discover-
trend, but they cover much too short a time
ies of UV-absorbing compounds in phyto-
to prove it statistically, according to Guy
plankton indicate they may have natural
Brasseur at the National Center for Atmos-
defenses against the harsh rays. A large
pheric Research in Boulder. And its numbers
increase in UV "won't lead to the collapse of
start in 1969 - one year away from 1970,
phytoplankton" but could favor some species
the largest ozone year on record. Other
over others, Mitchell says. "Scientists need
studies going back to the late 1950s show big
to temper our statements because of our
ignorance," he concludes.
increases before that peak. A study by me-
teorologists J. Angell and J. Korshover found
Dr. Frederick Urbach, one of the nation's
an 8 percent increase in stratospheric ozone
leading photobiologists, points out that hu-
from 1962 to 1973, suggesting that any
mans have the least to worry about: They
chemical attack on the ozone layer "is being
can move out of the sun or wear protection
overwhelmed by natural processes."
if UV increases. The rapid rise in skin can-
MIT ozone expert Alan Plumb says such
cer over the past few decades "is vastly
greater than anything one could expect
studies "undermine our ability to get excited
based on what ozone decrease has occurred,"
about a few percent decrease since 1970.
he notes, suggesting that people have invited
There's no real consensus view on what the
risk by spending too much time in full sun.
decrease really means. If it really is caused
"One thing is certain," he underlines, "the
by CFCs, we don't know."
change in ozone hasn't caused any great
Normal seasonal concentrations of ozone
increase in UV and cannot conceivably be
can vary hundreds of percent, dwarfing any
the cause of the increase in skin cancer."
small decline. "One of the things we'd like to
know more about is natural variability,"
What about plants, which can't move?
Plumb adds.
Huge increases in UV damage crops and
other organisms. More moderate increases,
The real source of worry comes less
in line with projections of ozone decline,
from the observations than from the models
seem to have little effect; plants protect
that indicate matters could get worse as
themselves against the radiation. But knowl-
CFCs continue to invade the upper atmos-
edge is skimpy because federal support for
phere. But as with global warming, the mod-
research in the area has been almost non-
els have a long way to go before reflecting
existent for a decade.
reality; they failed even to predict the Ant-
MIT's Plumb concludes that the ozone
arctic ozone hole, for instance. "The models
issue is "serious but it's not an issue of
are basically useless," Plumb complains.
survival. A thinner ozone layer means fairly
small beer." He, like most other specialists
The Antarctic ozone hole
in the field, also emphasizes how much re-
One reassuring fact is that the gaping
mains to be learned about the problem.
ozone hole over the Antarctic seems to be "a
That's an assessment the world should keep
local phenomenon," according to NASA ex-
in mind as it confronts the possible $100
pert Robert Hudson. The processes at work
billion cost of replacing CFCs over the next
over the South Pole depend on unique meteo-
decade - money that could go to meeting
rological conditions. Scientists who surveyed
other social or environmental needs. The
the North Pole found no comparable deple-
cost of acting in ignorance could be as high
tion of ozone, he explains.
as the cost of waiting for the facts.
Tomorrow: How deadly is acid rain?
Gregg Mitchell at the Scripps Institution
of Oceanography, who has studied-the biolog-
An independent newspaper
THE TRIBUNE
serving the Greater Bay
Area from Oakland
since 1874
B-6
Thursday, November 16, 1989
Oakland, California
Is acid rain the problem?
Acid rain: The very term conjures up
Mahoney tempered the fury over acid rain
terrifying visions worthy of a horror movie.
and emphasized that many of the ills attrib-
For politicians riding the wave of public
uted to it remain in dispute.
alarm about acid rain, the phenomenon also
Mahoney noted that although acid rain
spells doomed lakes, dying forests, ruined
has killed some Eastern lakes, only a few
crops and even threats to human health.
percent of the total lake area is too acid to
But for scientists engaged in an unprece-
support fish or other life. (All the lakes are
dented exploration of its causes and conse-
safe for swimming.) The soils surrounding
quences, acid rain continues to produce new
most lakes seem to "buffer" the waters
mysteries and confound old assumptions.
against acid. "There are significant uncer-
tainties," he admitted, "about the role that
The single largest cause of acid rain is
watershed mineral processes, organic acids
the emission of sulphur from coal-burning
and nitrates (in the soil) may play in the
power plants, especially in the Midwest. An-
acidification and recovery process."
other major source is nitrogen oxide, spewed
into the air by cars, utilities and other indus-
Those uncertainties arise in part because
tries. Reacting in the atmosphere, they form
some lakes seem to have been acidic in
dilute sulphuric and nitric acid.
In its clean air bill this year, the Bush
THE IMPERILED GLOBE:
administration proposed slashing sulphur
FACT OR HYPE?
emissions by about 50 percent over the com-
ing decade to mitigate the effects of acid
ancient times, apparently because of decay-
rain. The EPA put a price tag of $4 billion a
ing organic matter in the local soils. (Human
year on this measure.
prevention of forest fires in the Northeast
Humans aren't the only polluters, how-
may have made matters worse by letting
ever. Natural sources, from volcanos to
such debris build up.) Florida has little acid
bogs, also contribute to acid rain - thus
rain but the highest proportion of acid lakes,
limiting the effectiveness of industrial emis-
according to Mahoney's figures.
sions control strategies.
Mahoney raised eyebrows when he ac-
Acid rain, moreover, is only one of many
knowledged that a major reduction in acid
airborne pollutants. Scientists are discover-
rain would probably revive only about 75
ing that other substances, especially ozone,
lakes over the course of 50 years throughout
may cause even more damage. If they are
the entire Northeast - at a cost of $4 billion
right, proposals for fighting acid rain may
a year. Sen. Daniel Moynihan of New York,
need major retuning.
who helped commission NAPAP, exclaimed,
Following warnings in 1980 from the En-
"We could, with that money, give every wel-
vironmental Protection Agency about the
fare family $12,000 to vacation in the Adi-
hazards of acid rain, Congress set up a 10-
rondacks on some of the 95 percent of the
year National Acid Precipitation Assessment
lakes that are not acidic."
Program (NAPAP) to guide-the response of
policy-makers. Ironically, Congress may
As for forests, Mahoney testified, aside
commit the country this year to a massive
from some red spruce stands on mountain
and costly attack on sulphur emissions be-
tops in the Northeast, "extensive surveys of
fore all the facts are in - and even as
forest conditions have indicated no evidence
experts are recommending caution.
of widespread forest decline in North Ameri-
ca related to acidic deposition."
Acid lakes: the exceptions
Fears about threats to the nation's food
In testimony before a Senate subcommit-
supply are unsupported. "(T)here is no mea-
tee this October, NAPAP Director James
surable and consistent adverse crop yield
response from the direct effects of acid
rain," Mahoney declared, and there even
problem," says Hertel. "The air pollution by
seem to be "indirect benefits" from "de-
itself is not killing red spruce trees."
creased fertilizer requirements."
Indeed, he notes, "trees are pretty tough
Finally, although acid rain can harm
characters if they have the water and tem-
statues, paints and exposed metals, there are
peratures they need."
"no generally accepted regional or national
estimates" of the damage. Other kinds of
His point is borne out by the fact that
urban air pollution, he stressed, probably
most of the affected spruce were badly
play a bigger role. And acid damage often
weakened by the severe drought and winter
of 1962; newer trees in the region are gener-
doesn't show up before structures are re-
ally healthy. Northeastern forests are bigger
placed anyway for other reasons.
than they have been anytime this century
Is ozone the culprit?
and have enjoyed as high a rate of growth as
In the past few years, scientists who
forests in any region of the country since
might once have blamed environmental
1952, despite the acidity of their rain.
damage on acid rain have shifted gears.
Causes for concern
"Such things as insects, pathogens, droughts
and fires are a much greater problem in
Despite these important caveats, acid
themselves," says Gerard Hertel, national
rain is definitely not harmless. And major
program manager for the Forest Response
scientific questions remain. Will the acids
Program, a joint effort of the U.S. Forest
cause long-term problems for forests by
Service and EPA.
leeching nutrients out of poor soils? Will
they interfere with plant growth by making
Among atmospheric pollutants, ozone, a
certain problem metals, like aluminum,
chief ingredient of urban smog, now looms
more active chemically?
as a bigger threat to forests. "It may be the
monster out there," said Thomas Saviello, a
As NAPAP's Mahoney told The Tribune,
scientist with International Paper Co. In
"there is a reason for legitimate conserva-
Southern California, for example, high levels
tism" since the effects of acid rain, if they
of ozone have seriously weakened the defen-
prove more serious than now known, "aren't
ses of pine trees against bark beetles.
easily or quickly reversible. A prudent per-
In the Black Forest region of Germany,
son would say we don't observe regional
where environmentalists once warned of a
effects and that's reassuring, but not reason
total loss of this magnificent natural re-
for having no concern."
source to acid rain, trees are coming back
On the other hand, with limited dollars to
strongly with favorable weather conditions.
spend on environmental mitigation, most sci-
What damage remains, according to British
scientist Kenneth Mellanby, was "certainly
entists agree that money should be targeted
to do the most good. Mounting a crash cam-
not caused by sulphur dioxide, as lichens are
very abundant, and these are good indicators
paign against sulphur dioxide might do only
of low sulphur levels. The most likely cause
limited good if ozone, for example, proves
of the damage is ozone, the end product of a
the bigger threat. If policy-makers get too
far out in front of scientists, the environ-
reaction in which the output of automo-
ment could come out a loser.
biles is a starting point. In this case the
drastic efforts of the German government to
As the acid rain expert A. G. Everett
reduce the output of sulphur dioxide in that
warned in a recent scientific paper, "expedi-
"
country will clearly have little effect
ent political actions, taken in the absence of
(emphasis added).
understanding about what will produce ac-
tual ameliorative effects, are doomed to be
Even where acidic clouds do seem impli-
wasteful and ineffective. Should such action
cated in damaging forests, like certain high-
also be accompanied by decreased research
elevation red spruce stands in the Northeast,
emphasis on still unknown relationships of
other factors play a major role.
acid deposition and surface water response,
"You need a combination of extreme
it is probable that the long-term situation
winter conditions and acidity to have the
will be worsened rather than improved."
Tomorrow: What should be done?
An independent newspaper
THE TRIBUNE
serving the Greater Bay
Area from Oakland
since 1874
B-8
Friday, November 17, 1989
Oakland, California
What is to be done?
Popular warnings of global environmen-
dioxide emissions ignore the vital import-
tal catastrophe pose a terrible dilemma.
ance of this gas to sustaining plants that
If, as Sen. Al Gore of Tennessee insists,
form the basis of the world's food chain.
the Earth is in "imminent and grave dan-
Rushing to save the ozone layer by ban-
ger" of "ecological collapse," the price of
ning non-toxic, non-flammable CFCs used in
doing nothing would be staggering. But if
refrigeration and insulation could disrupt
such fears are more the products of dema-
goods and services worth $30 billion a year
goguery than science, rushing to act without
in the United States alone.
cause would threaten human well-being and
possibly even the environment itself.
Scientific concerns over ozone strongly
support better recycling of CFCs and the
Fortunately, the choices are not limited
search for alternatives, but hasty use of new
to inaction or crash programs. The responsi-
chemicals could create unforeseen problems
ble course lies in between. With evidence not
that may take years to discover. The U.S.
yet pointing to any near-term disaster from
General Accounting Office warns that for
the greenhouse effect, ozone depletion or
most uses "substitute chemicals or products
acid rain, most scientists rightly urge fur-
are either not yet available or not as effec-
ther study of the complex processes that
tive" and "toxicity data" are "still incom-
govern global dynamics. With better under-
plete." Less efficient substitutes would make
standing, people and nations will be much
better equipped to detect, ameliorate and
THE IMPERILED ID GLOBE:
adapt to changes to the environment.
FACT OR HYPE?
In the meantime, programs to boost en-
ergy conservation don't need to wait for, or
refrigerators and air conditioners use more
be sold as an answer to, global threats; they
energy - thus pumping out more green-
make sense economically on their own.
house gases.
Doing good can do harm
Radical environmental policies, proposed
Ignoring science or dismissing the need
in the heat of perceived crisis without the
for further research could put people in
benefit of good science, too often ignore, the
worse peril. The rule, "better safe than sor-
complex relationships between each of the
ry," doesn't support premature action.
alleged threats. For example, ozone is a
Cutting carbon dioxide output by 20 per-
greenhouse gas that warms the Earth. So are
cent over the next decade, as demanded by
CFCs that break down ozone. Nitrogen 0x-
many environmental groups to limit global
ides, precursors to acid rain, help preserve
warming, might require doubling the price
ozone in some parts of the atmosphere by
of oil and gas. Given all the doubts about
blocking CFCs but can also attack ozone.
greenhouse models, NASA climate specialist
Urgent moves in Washington to combat
Albert Arking remarks, "If you take steps
acid rain by slashing sulphur dioxide (SO2)
you don't need to and they cost 3 percent of
emissions ignore their possible benefits. Sul-
GNP, that's a heavy price to pay."
fate aerosols reflect solar radiation and seed
Indeed, lives could be lost by unnecessar-
clouds. The British climatologist T. Wigley
ily killing off the fruits of economic growth:
observes, "If we were successful in halting
improved food production, health care and
er reversing the increase in SO2 emissions
safer technology.
we could as a byproduct accelerate the rate
of greenhouse warming." The eminent Soviet
Similarly, proposals to curtail carbon
scientist Mikhail Budyko even proposes
spraying the upper atmosphere with SO2 to
retard global warming at "incomparably
implicates ozone - a product of both indus-
less expense" than "drastic reductions in
trial and car emissions - as the greater
carbon fuel consumption."
danger to forests and crops.
Dwindling money for science
Programs to curb sulphur dioxides at a
At a time when the public cries out for
cost of $4 billion a year must be weighed
against alternatives. Every dollar spent on
more answers, policy-makers have let their
that approach is a dollar that could have
commitment to science slip. MIT's Richard
Lindzen rightly decries the fact that, despite
been spent some other way.
all the hype over global warming, "funding
The United States could restore acid
for atmospheric sciences has been declining.
lakes far more quickly with limestone treat-
Much more money is going instead to policy
ments - a method used successfully in Swe-
studies (of what to do about warming).
den - for a mere $4 million a year. It could
There is little attempt to improve the sci-
then use the savings to upgrade national
ence since the argument is made that it
parks (total annual budget: $800 million), do
more to fight ozone production and have
takes too long to settle. That's very curious
plenty left over for other worthy ends.
since the problem arises in the first place
only because of science. Yet the basic phys-
Pushing for a quick fix may produce the
ics could be settled in a few years. We don't
worst possible outcome. Utilities, under the
have to wait 30 years for an answer."
gun to cut sulphur dioxide, will have to in-
stall expensive "scrubbers" that hog elec-
Experts on the effects of ozone depletion
tricity (thus increasing greenhouse gas emis-
make the same point. After a flurry of inter-
sions), do nothing to stop nitrogen oxides and
est from Washington in the mid-1970s, when
leave behind "great volumes of toxic slurry
the SST debate raised questions about
which may be difficult to dispose of without
threats to the ozone layer, funding for
further damage to the environment," in the
studies of the impact of ultraviolet light on
words of British scientist Kenneth Mellanby.
plant and animal biology dried up almost
totally. Amid all the furor over ozone holes,
Waiting just a few years, on the other
scientists still can't say what effect they will
hand, should let inexpensive new "clean-
have on living organisms.
coal" technologies come on line. These
produce little or no toxic waste and cut both
Acid rain is a different story. Since 1980,
sulphur and nitrogen oxide emissions far
Congress has appropriated hundreds of mil-
below current levels.
lions of dollars for research on acid rain, a
The environment and the country's econ-
worthy program called NAPAP. Yet Con-
omy will do better to wait. Recent sharp
gress and President Bush propose to ignore
declines in SO2 emissions "and the slowing
that investment by enacting hugely expen-
of lake acidification suggest that some
sive emissions control laws before the
breathing space remains," observed Volker
studies are completed and contrary to some
Mohnen, professor of atmospheric sciences
recent findings.
at the State University of New York, in
"It would have great merit," NAPAP
Scientific American. "The nation can proba-
Director Dr. James Mahoney reminded Con-
bly forgo the short-term solution of retrofit-
gress last year, "to wait and to examine
ting existing plants in favor of the gradual
very carefully the question of effective and
but more comprehensive and economical ap-
efficient strategies on a continuing basis as
proach of repowering."
this develops over the next two years or so."
Science, even at its best, can't prescribe
NAPAP's final report, summarizing the best
public policy. But bad science inevitably
expert opinion, will be out next fall. Is that
produces bad policy. Wild claims, unsup-
really too long for the environment to wait?
ported projections and misleading models
Or is it just too long for the politicians?
used to stampede the public into action rep-
Don't rush on acid rain
resent pseudo-science at its worst. There lies
Consider the costs and risks of jumping
perhaps the greatest cost of all: damaging
the gun. One danger is missing the real
the effectiveness of humanity's most power-
culprit. Current clean air proposals, reflect-
ful tool for self-preservation and advance-
ing old hunches about acid rain, put most
ment. To sully the credibility of science for
emphasis on sulphur dioxide emissions from
political ends today could put the Earth at
power plants, even though growing evidence
risk of a real catastrophe tomorrow.