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.
Source Description
Records pertain to the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
285792019
label
Global Change: Working Group Meeting - 11/17/89
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
285792019
contentType
document
title
Global Change: Working Group Meeting - 11/17/89
description
Records pertain to the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
citationUrl
identifierLocal
62059-005
collections
Records of the White House Office of Science and Technology (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Allan D. Bromley Files
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
285792019
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
f8b4b5a274c5b655
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
2005-0336-F
2005-0336-F
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:
Science and Technology Policy, Office of (OSTP)
Series:
Bromley, D. Allan, Files
Subseries:
Global Climate Change Files - Conferences/Meetings
OA/ID Number:
62059
Folder ID Number:
62059-005
Folder Title:
Global Change: Working Group Meeting - 11/17/89
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
0
0
0
0
Namay
FYI
THE WHITE HOUSE
1
WASHINGTON
November 20, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR THE FILES
FROM:
KEN YALE
SUBJECT:
GCWG Task Force on Economic Costs
The first meeting of the task force was held this past
Friday November 17. It was chaired by Richard Schmalensee,
member of the Council of Economic Advisors.
CEA will produce an outline of the subjects that will be
considered in a survey of current knowledge on the economic
costs of global change, and to determine specific areas that will
be tasked out for further elaboration and study. The outline
will be circulated for comment. A rough draft of the final
report is expected to be completed by mid-January.
Prospective economic costs are closely associated with the
science and assumptions on global change. Bob Corell, vice
chairman of the Committee on Earth Sciences, made a presentation
on the science of global change. A paper outlining his
presentation will be distributed to meeting participants.
Meeting participants were asked to send in any information
on activities underway to study economic costs associated with
global change. The next meeting will be scheduled for shortly
after Thanksgiving.
yesterday
you rcv'd
the info
Isn't this
For your
DPC
11/21/89
WGGC
Dr. Bromley:
files
11/22
Admiral Watkins missed most of the discussion on the Presidential Conference
on the Environment at the last DPC WGGC meeting.
SUGGESTION:
Have Juanita from DPC go over and brief his assistant, Polly Gault, on the
various options for the conference as well as the ramifications and background, SO
she can then brief him before the meeting.
pros:
He will go into the meeting with as much background as everyone else on the
meeting
He is one of your strongest allies and can help back you if he is well-informed
cons:
none that I can think of (if Juanita takes it directly to Polly, there will be no
leak)
Can I ask them to do that???
yes
Must happen this afternoon by 2pm.
CHA
no
N. Maynard
11/21
nm for yourrecords
us
dh
11/2t
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Global Change Working Group Meeting
November 17, 1989
AGENDA
1.
Noordwijk Debriefing
2.
Policy Council or Working Group Briefings
3.
Administration Policy Development
4. Task Force Status Reports
5. Future Issues/Activities:
-- Reforestation
-- G-7 Science Minister's Meeting
-- President's International Conference
-- Briefing on the overall status of global change
-- Suggested Administration Talking Points
-- Other business
Global Change Meeting
Roosevelt Room, Friday November 17, 1989, 1:00 PM
Chairman
OSTP D. Allan Bromley
395-7116
Invitees
DOE
Admiral James Watkins
586-6210
CEQ
Michael Deland
395-5080
NASA
Admiral Richard Truly
453-1010
WHO
Andrew Card
456-2533
OCA
David Q. Bates
456-2174
OPD
Roger Porter
456-2705
WHC
C. Boyden Gray
456-2632
OCA
Stephen Danzansky
456-6630
WHO
Steve Hart
456-2100
OMB
Robert Grady
395-4484
CEA
Dick Schmalensee
395-5036
DOS
Robert Zoellick
647-2257
DOS
Fred Bernthal
647-1554
DOI
Lou Gallegos
343-6182
EPA
J. Terrence Davies
382-4870
DOC
John Knauss
377-3436
TRS
Sidney Jones
566-2551
USDA
Pat Kearney
447-3631
DOJ
William Myers
633-2268
DPC
Kenneth P. Yale
456-6722
OSTP
Nancy Maynard
395-3637
OCA
Juanita Duggan
456-7084
November 17 Global Change Working Group Meeting
Briefing Paper for D. Allan Bromley
I. Issues
1. Noordwijk debriefing (Dr. Bromley)
a. Summary of the meeting and observations
b. Next steps, including creation of a timeline of
domestic and international events and workplan to
address policy issues.
President's Timeline
0
International Timeline
0
IPCC Timeline
o
DPC GCWG Timeline
2. DPC GCWG: Briefings/Concerns by representatives of:
a. Best scientists in environmental area
b. Environmental Activists
(perhaps at same meeting -- dialogue/debate)
public meeting?
3. Administration Policy: Development of clear U.S.
policy on and specific steps to accomplish:
a. Stabilization of greenhouse gases
b. 20% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2000, 2005, etc.
o
quantitative analysis of costs
o
specific steps needed to achieve
impacts of these actions
--- assign homework (DOE & NAS?)
4. Task Force Status Reports
1. Private Sector (due end of November)
2. Legal Precedents (due end of December)
3. Economic Costs (due end of January)
5. Future Issues/Activities
Allen: willspeavl
ON President
A. Reforestation briefing (Grady, Kearney Pinkerton) 3im
TRee
initative
-- The issue has a strong climate change element.
-- This is a general briefing on the issue.
-- The policy options advanced by different agencies
will be discussed in the DPC.
-- A full DPC meeting is anticipated December 4 or 5
on reforestation.
B. G-7 Science Minister's Meeting
--- Explore possibility of expanding to include other
nations
C. President's International Conference
-- Much work has gone into existing paperwork, new
options should be added (send to Office of Cabinet
Affairs).
-- Should be ready for a working group meeting the
week after Thanksgiving.
-- Full DPC meeting anticipated in early December to
come to closure on the issue.
-- Current options in the paper are:
a. In conjunction with February IPCC Plenary
b. Focus on economics.
C. Focus on reforestation.
d. Focus on conservation of nature and biodiversity.
e. Methodologies to approaching international
environmental issues.
f. Science ministers meeting
D. Briefing on the overall status of global change
(to be requested)
-- Science (NAS)
-- Federal programmatic activities (CES)
E. Suggested Administration Talking Points (Mr. Hart)
-- Compiled with the assistance of the White House
Press Office, which has played a key role in
keeping the Administration speaking with one voice
on the issues.
-- It is anticipated that the Press office will
continue to compile and update these talking
points as needed.
F. Other business.
TALKING POINTS FOR D. ALLAN BROMLEY
All of you are experts in different ares of these issues.
However, this is the President's decision making process.
We will be using the Domestic Policy Council to take issues
to the President for his decision.
The President is the Chairman of the Council.
You are developing policy for the President.
Discussions and papers are protected by Executive Privilege.
You should not discuss working group matters with anyone not
involved in providing information for use in refining the
policy issues and options.
Premature release of information could significantly alter
the use of the material produced.
It is inappropriate to speculate on the outcome ofany issue
under consideration.
Its the President's call:
-- When to announce policy decisions, and
-- Where to announce them.
November 17 Global Change Working Group Meeting
Briefing Paper for D. Allan Bromley
I. Issues
1. Noordwijk debriefing (Dr. Bromley)
a. Summary of the meeting and observations
b. Next steps, including creation of a timeline of
domestic and international events and workplan to
address policy issues.
O
President's Timeline
0
International Timeline
0
IPCC Timeline
O
DPC GCWG Timeline
2. DPC GCWG: Briefings/Concerns by representatives of:
a. Best scientists in environmental area
b. Environmental Activists
(perhaps at same meeting -- dialogue/debate)
public meeting?
3. Administration Policy: Development of clear U.S.
policy on and specific steps to accomplish:
a. Stabilization of greenhouse gases
b. 20% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2000, 2005, etc.
O
quantitative analysis of costs
O
specific steps needed to achieve
O
impacts of these actions
-- assign homework (DOE & NAS?)
4. Task Force Status Reports
1. Private Sector (due end of November)
2. Legal Precedents (due end of December)
3. Economic Costs (due end of January)
5. Future Issues/Activities
A. Reforestation briefing (Grady, Kearney, Pinkerton)
-- The issue has a strong climate change element.
--- This is a general briefing on the issue.
-- The policy options advanced by different agencies
will be discussed in the DPC.
-- A full DPC meeting is anticipated December 4 or 5
on reforestation.
Pamli Scientite
Panels J
Do both
Paml of -Paliymaters
Clean Air
CO2 invetor
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.
B. G-7 Science Minister's Meeting
-- Explore possibility of expanding to include other
nations
C. President's International Conference
-- Much work has gone into existing paperwork, new
options should be added (send to Office of Cabinet
Affairs).
-- Should be ready for a working group meeting the
week after Thanksgiving.
-- Full DPC meeting anticipated in early December to
come to closure on the issue.
-- Current options in the paper are:
a. In conjunction with February IPCC Plenary
b. Focus on economics.
C. Focus on reforestation.
d. Focus on conservation of nature and biodiversity.
e. Methodologies to approaching international
environmental issues.
f. Science ministers meeting
D. Briefing on the overall status of
(to be requested)
-- Science (NAS)
Prevate global Sector change Examits
-- Federal programmatic activities (CES)
E. Suggested Administration Talking Points (Mr. Hart)
-- Compiled with the assistance of the White House
Press Office, which has played a key role in
keeping the Administration speaking with one voice
on the issues.
-- It is anticipated that the Press office will
continue to compile and update these talking
points as needed.
F. Other business.
DRAFT
The U. S. has taken a leading role from the beginning in the
creation and the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC). This international panel is a means to reach a
common international understanding about everything that is
needed to address the climate change issue. It is intended to
coordinate a continuing long-term effort to assess and to
understand:
- The science of climate change,
The science and evaluation of the impacts of climate
change on human activities and well-being,
- The definition and evaluation of potential human
responses to the climate change situation from the
viewpoint of effectiveness, cost, and other economic
and social implications.
Unless a common international understanding and agreement about
these matters are reached through the IPCC or some similar
mechanism, effective global actions will not occur in a timely
fashion.
The President has said that he expects the IPCC process to
develop that needed understanding and to lead to formal
negotiations on a framework convention on global climate. The U.
S. approach is that such a convention should be designed to gain
the adherence of all countries and therefore should provide
institutional mechanisms for research and monitoring, for
discussion and developing of common understandings, and for such
matters as encouraging technological transfer. More controversial
and difficult issues should be left to Protocols which will
develop out of the convention. The Vienna Convention for the
Protection of the Ozone Layer and the Montreal Protocol on
Substances instruments. That Deplete the Ozone Layer are analogous
The U. S. is taking vigorous actions to reduce the uncertainties
associated with climate change.
1. It is supporting all of the assessments and evaluations of
the IPCC, chairing the Response Strategies Working Group,
and participating in a major way in the Science and the
Impacts Working Groups.
2. It is funding and carrying out a major research program, the
Global Change Research Program, which addresses all global
change, including climate change. Funding in FY1990 is more
than $500 million. The U. S. is coordinating this effort
with international scientific activities and is seeking
broad international participation.
DRAFT
3.
Federal agencies are doing a number of studies of climate
change related matters.
-
The Environmental Protection Agency has done an initial
assessment of potential effects of climate change on
the U. S. and an inventory of potential policy options.
-
The Department of Energy is assessing and evaluating
the potential costs and other implications of possible
reductions in CO2 emissions, making an inventory of
sources of CO2, assessing the current situation on
greenhouse gas data, and assessing research and
development on alternative energy sources.
-
The Department of Energy is developing a National
Energy Strategy which will take climate change issues
into full account.
- Other efforts are also under way in other agencies,
relating to forestry, agriculture, water resources, and
other climate change questions.
The U. S. is vigorously pursuing a variety of immediate actions
which can be justified, despite climate change uncertainties, on
the basis of their benefits for other reasons.
1. The U. S. in the late 1970s banned the use in spray cans of
CFCs. CFCs account for about 20% of the potential climate
change effect. The U. S. signed the Montreal Protocol which
commits the majority of CFC users worldwide to a 50%
reduction in CFC production and use by 1998. The President
has also called for a worldwide phaseout of CFCs by the year
2000, if safe substitutes are available.
2. The President's proposed Clean Air Act cap on S02 emissions
and the associated incentives for energy conservation could
reduce U. S. CO2 emissions by an estimated 5 %.
3. The Administration's increase in the Corporate Average Fuel
Economy (CAFE) standards for automobiles will reduce fossil
fuel use and emissions of greenhouse gases.
4. The National Energy Strategy will assist in acheiving
greater energy conservation and development of alternative
technologies to produce lesser greenhouse gas emissions.
5. Past efforts for energy efficiency have held CO2 emissions
in the U. S. essentially flat with no significant growth
compared to a decade ago.
PROF. DR. DR. H.C. EUGEN SEIBOLD
FREIBURG 1. BR.
November 7, 1989
TELEFON 0761/2032356 (D.)
07 61/553368 (PR.)
Professor D. A. Bromley
Presidential Science Adviser
The White House
Washington D. C.
USA
Dear Professor Bromley:
During our conversation in your office in Washington, July 1989, you told
me that I could contact you directly in important and urgent matters.
Therefore I would like to inform you that we have some informations from
Moscow that the USSR Academy of Science is continuously interested to join
the Ocean Drilling Program. Our Sovjet colleagues seem to be very dis-
appointed that the negative decision of President Reagan could not be re-
vised up to now.
As a former member of Deep Sea Drilling Project Committees, as co-chief
scientist aboard "Gloma Challenger" and having signed the Membership
Agreement ODP - European Science Foundation I would be very grateful, if
you could propose a possible reintegration of Sowjet scientists in Deep
Sea Drilling activities as a topic of the next summit meeting conversations
in the Mediterranean.
I am convinced that many colleagues in Europe, but certainly in America,
too, would support this letter.
Dr. Bloch - National Science Foundation - is aware of my continuing efforts
to reconstruct the bridge to allow Sovjet scientists again to cooperate -
with mutual benefit. Therefore I shall inform him about this letter.
Sincerely enjures. yours,
GEOLOGISCHES INSTITUT DER UNIVERSITAT - ALBERTSTRASSE 23B 7800 FREIBURG
PRIVAT: RICHARD-WAGNER-STRASSE 56 7800 FREIBURG