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
323152904
label
Global Change-Background [n.d.] [OA 8311]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323152904
contentType
document
title
Global Change-Background [n.d.] [OA 8311]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13714-004
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Backup Chronological Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323152904
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
c84c93401e5ca918
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
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:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Backup Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13714
Folder ID Number:
13714-004
Folder Title:
Global Change-Background [n.d.][OA 8311]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
20
5
2
04/10
'90
17:26
09 357 9629
AD GEO
+++ BROMLEY
V 002/002
Action? read
Posted: Tue, Apr 10, 1990 9:07 AM EDT
Msg: MGJA-4223-7617
From: E.SHEA
To:
R.CORELL
ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, I WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME YOU
TO THE UNITED STATES AND THIS MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE ON SCIENCE
AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH RELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE. OUR
DAN!
PARTICIPATION IN THIS CONFERENCE REFLECTS OUR SHARED COMMITMENT
TO EFFECTIVE STEWARDSHIP OF THIS PLANET AND ITS VALUABLE
RESOURCES.
LIFE IMITAVES
TODAY, MORE THAN EVER, WE HAVE THE FREEDOM TO RECOGNIZE THAT
SECURING PROSPERITY FOR THIS AND FUTURE GENERATIONS IS AS MUCH
A FUNCTION OF MANAGING THE EARTH'S RESOURCES WISELY AS IT IS
ART!
ENSURING PEACE AMONG NATIONS. MAINTAINING THE QUALITY OF THE
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH WE LIVE IS AS VITAL TO OUR
mark
SURVIVAL AS IS SAFETY FROM MILITARY THREATS.
TODAY, MORE THAN EVER, WE RECOGNIZE THAT MEETING THE NEEDS OF
THE PRESENT GENERATIONS MUST NOT MEAN MORTGAGING THE FUTURE;
WE MUST MAXIMIZE OUR POTENTIAL FOR GROWTH NOW WHILE EXPANDING
THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS. BECAUSE THOSE FUTURE
GENERATIONS WILL, BY THEIR VERY EXISTENCE, PLACE ADDITIONAL
"PLANET EARTH.
STRESS ON THE PLANET WE CALL HOME, GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL
STEWARDSHIP WILL BECOME THE DOMINANT SCIENTIFIC, ECONOMIC AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE OF THE 21ST CENTURY.
I'll PROBABLY SPAY."
TODAY, MORE THAN EVER, WE UNDERSTAND THAT HUMAN PROGRESS AND
ECONOMIC PROSPERITY DEPEND ON SUCCESSFULLY ACCOUNTING FOR OUR
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND USING THEM WISELY.
DEVO, 1976
TODAY, MORE THAN EVER, WE RECOGNIZE THAT OUR ACTIONS MAY BE
BECOMING A DOMINANT FORCE IN THE EVOLUTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT
WHICH SUSTAINS OUR LIVES.
TODAY, MORE THAN EVER, WE ARE IN SEARCH OF A MORE EFFECTIVE
PARTNERSHIP WITH NATURE--A PARTNERSHIP WHICH RECOGNIZES THAT WE
CAN NO LONGER VIEW OURSELVES AS ISOLATED INHABITANTS OF A
STATIC ENVIRONMENT BUT RATHER AS FULL PARTICIPANTS IN A DYNAMIC
EARTH SYSTEM WHICH CAN BOTH LIMIT AND SUSTAIN OUR PROGRESS.
TO ESTABLISH AND SUSTAIN SUCH A PARTNERSHIP, WE MUST
SIGNIFICANTLY ADVANCE OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURAL AND
HUMAN PROCESSES WHICH CHARACTERIZE THIS EARTH SYSTEM. WE MUST,
BASED ON THAT KNOWLEDGE, CREATE SOLUTIONS THAT JOIN ECONOMIC
GROWTH WITH SOUND MANAGEMENT OF OUR ENVIRONMENT. THE CHALLENGE
OF INTEGRATING SCIENCE, ECONOMICS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
IS GREAT BUT THE REWARDS OF GLOBAL STEWARDSHIP ARE MORE
PROFOUND THAN WE CAN EVER KNOW-FOR THEY REPRESENT OUR ONLY
OPPORTUNITY FOR SUSTAINING AND IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF LIFE
FOR A GROWING WORLD POPULATION.
AND so WE MEET HERE FOR THE NEXT FEW DAYS. COMMITTED AS
INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL LEADERS TO ESTABLISHING SUCH A
PARTNERSHIP WITH ONE ANOTHER AND WITH THE SINGLE EARTH
SYSTEM WHICH WE ALL CALL HOME. WE COME TOGETHER TO SHARE OUR
EXPERIENCES AND OUR HOPES; OUR CONCERNS AND OUR MUTUAL PROMISE
TO ENTER THE 21ST CENTURY AS COMMON STEWARDS OF OUR GLOBAL
RESOURCES.
FOR THE NEXT TWO DAYS, I ASK THAT WE PUT ASIDE THE POLITICAL
CONSIDERATIONS THAT TRADITIONALLY RULE OUR LIVES. I ASK THAT
WE JOIN TOGETHER IN DISCUSSIONS THAT WILL HIGHLIGHT OUR
SIMILARITIES AND LEAD TO A FIRM COMMITMENT TO ADDRESS THE
SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTIES WHICH CURRENTLY
CHARACTERIZE THE CURRENT DEBATE OVER GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL
ISSUES.
TODAY, MORE THAN EVER, WE ARE, SCIENTIFICALLY, TECHNOLOGICALLY,
AND, AS FELLOW CITIZENS OF EARTH, PREPARED TO ACCEPT THE
CHALLENGE AND REAP THE BENEFITS OF A FULL PARTNERSHIP WITH
NATURE. I COMMEND YOU FOR YOUR COMMITMENT; I THANK YOU FOR
YOUR PARTICIPATION; AND I LOOK FORWARD TO A CONFERENCE THAT
MOVES US FORWARD TN THIS
Action?
read
Posted: Tue, Apr 10, 1990
9:07
AM
EDT
From: E.SHEA
Msg: MGJA-4223-7617
To:
R.CORELL
Science Advisor
ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, I WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME YOU
TO THE UNITED STATES AND THIS MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE ON SCIENCE
AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH RELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE. OUR
PARTICIPATION IN THIS CONFERENCE REFLECTS OUR SHARED COMMITMENT
TO EFFECTIVE STEWARDSHIP OF THIS PLANET AND ITS VALUABLE
RESOURCES.
TODAY, MORE THAN EVER, WE HAVE THE FREEDOM TO RECOGNIZE THAT
SECURING PROSPERITY FOR THIS AND FUTURE GENERATIONS IS AS MUCH
A FUNCTION OF MANAGING THE EARTH'S RESOURCES WISELY AS IT IS
ENSURING PEACE AMONG NATIONS. MAINTAINING THE QUALITY OF THE
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH WE LIVE IS AS VITAL TO OUR
SURVIVAL AS IS SAFETY FROM MILITARY THREATS.
TODAY, MORE THAN EVER, WE RECOGNIZE THAT MEETING THE NEEDS OF
THE PRESENT GENERATIONS MUST NOT MEAN MORTGAGING THE FUTURE;
WE MUST MAXIMIZE OUR POTENTIAL FOR GROWTH NOW WHILE EXPANDING
THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS. BECAUSE THOSE FUTURE
GENERATIONS WILL, BY THEIR VERY EXISTENCE, PLACE ADDITIONAL
STRESS ON THE PLANET WE CALL HOME, GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL
STEWARDSHIP WILL BECOME THE DOMINANT SCIENTIFIC, ECONOMIC AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE OF THE 21ST CENTURY.
TODAY, MORE THAN EVER, WE UNDERSTAND THAT HUMAN PROGRESS AND
ECONOMIC PROSPERITY DEPEND ON SUCCESSFULLY ACCOUNTING FOR OUR
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND USING THEM WISELY.
TODAY, MORE THAN EVER, WE RECOGNIZE THAT OUR ACTIONS MAY BE
BECOMING A DOMINANT FORCE IN THE EVOLUTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT
WHICH SUSTAINS OUR LIVES.
TODAY, MORE THAN EVER, WE ARE IN SEARCH OF A MORE EFFECTIVE
PARTNERSHIP WITH NATURE--A PARTNERSHIP WHICH RECOGNIZES THAT WE
CAN NO LONGER VIEW OURSELVES AS ISOLATED INHABITANTS OF A
STATIC ENVIRONMENT BUT RATHER AS FULL PARTICIPANTS IN A DYNAMIC
EARTH SYSTEM WHICH CAN BOTH LIMIT AND SUSTAIN OUR PROGRESS.
J
TO ESTABLISH AND SUSTAIN SUCH A PARTNERSHIP, WE MUST
SIGNIFICANTLY ADVANCE OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURAL AND
HUMAN PROCESSES WHICH CHARACTERIZE THIS EARTH SYSTEM. WE MUST,
BASED ON THAT KNOWLEDGE, CREATE SOLUTIONS THAT JOIN ECONOMIC
GROWTH WITH SOUND MANAGEMENT OF OUR ENVIRONMENT. THE CHALLENGE
OF INTEGRATING SCIENCE, ECONOMICS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
IS GREAT BUT THE REWARDS OF GLOBAL STEWARDSHIP ARE MORE
PROFOUND THAN WE CAN EVER KNOW-FOR THEY REPRESENT OUR ONLY
OPPORTUNITY FOR SUSTAINING AND IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF LIFE
FOR A GROWING WORLD POPULATION.
AND so WE MEET HERE FOR THE NEXT FEW DAYS. COMMITTED AS
INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL LEADERS TO ESTABLISHING SUCH A
PARTNERSHIP -- WITH ONE ANOTHER AND WITH THE SINGLE EARTH
SYSTEM WHICH WE ALL CALL HOME. WE COME TOGETHER TO SHARE OUR
EXPERIENCES AND OUR HOPES; OUR CONCERNS AND OUR MUTUAL PROMISE
TO ENTER THE 21ST CENTURY AS COMMON STEWARDS OF OUR GLOBAL
RESOURCES.
FOR THE NEXT TWO DAYS, I ASK THAT WE PUT ASIDE THE POLITICAL
CONSIDERATIONS THAT TRADITIONALLY RULE OUR LIVES. I ASK THAT
WE JOIN TOGETHER IN DISCUSSIONS THAT WILL HIGHLIGHT OUR
SIMILARITIES AND LEAD TO A FIRM COMMITMENT TO ADDRESS THE
SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTIES WHICH CURRENTLY
sense optimatic, and leadership
CHARACTERIZE ISSUES. THE CURRENT DEBATE OVER GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL
AND, AS FELLOW CITIZENS OF EARTH, PREPARED TO ACCEPT THE
TODAY, MORE THAN EVER, WE ARE, SCIENTIFICALLY, TECHNOLOGICALLY,
CHALLENGE AND REAP THE BENEFITS OF A FULL PARTNERSHIP WITH
NATURE. I COMMEND YOU FOR YOUR COMMITMENT; I THANK YOU FOR
YOUR PARTICIPATION; AND I LOOK FORWARD TO A CONFERENCE THAT
/
Ch. 3 BUDGET,
91 BUDGET: R+D and inv. m futures
impt. that young
BAsie Research - 12%
Seis + engineers
6% inc. for DoD.
get support they
need to besin work...
\
(handor to them get fundrig)
87% of all sues.
$1B.
Comm. on Earth Sciences '
who ever lived in us !
are alive today
Condinates 7 Agencies arrh
on Global Change
.
Human Her
Life Scis.
B
BIOTECHNOLOGY.
Phugs. Scis a
INT. AFFS? G
COMPUTING.
INDUST TECHNOL 4
Material Science + Engineering
WHCUS.2
4/2/90 12:00(NOCN)
THEME 1: UNCERTAIN CHANGE:
THE SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH CHALLENGE
WHAT SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH RELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE IS
BEING CONDUCTED OR IS NOW PLANNED IN YOUR COUNTRY?
PLEASE PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN OF THIS WORK INTO THE
FOLLOWING CATEGORIES:
-
GLOBAL/REGIONAL FORECASTS OF HUMAN ACTIVITIES
LEADING TO POSSIBLE GLOBAL CHANGE;
-
GLOBAL/REGIONAL MODELS OF GEOPHYSICAL GLOBAL CHANGE
PROCESSES;
-
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT OF POSSIBLE GLOBAL CHANGE
WITH OR WITHOUT ADAPTIVE STRATEGIES; AND
-
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF SPECIFIC ACTIONS
THAT MIGHT BE TAKEN TO ARREST POSSIBLE GLOBAL
CHANGE.
RESPONSE:
The U.S. Global Change Research Program was initiated to
improve our understanding of the global Earth system, reduce
major scientific and socio-economic uncertainies and ensure
a long-term National commitment to continually re-evaluate the
effectiveness of policy in the light of new scientific
insights. A brief summary of the history, goal and scientific
nature of the U.S. Global Change Research Program is included
as Attachment A to this Questionnaire.
With an ultimate focus on the provision of policy-relevant
information about the current and anticipated state of the
global environment, the USGCRP supports three scientific
priorities:
ESTABLISH AN INTEGRATED, COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM OF
DOCUMENTING THE EARTH SYSTEM ON A GLOBAL SCALE THROUGH
OBSERVATIONAL PROGRAMS AND DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS;
CONDUCT A PROGRAM OF FOCUSED STUDIES TO IMPROVE OUR
UNDERSTANDING OF THE PHYSICAL, GEOLOGICAL, CHEMICAL,
BIOLOGICAL, AND SOCIAL PROCESSES THAT INFLUENCE EARTH
SYSTEM PROCESSES AND TRENDS ON GLOBAL AND REGIONAL
SCALES; AND
DEVELOP INTEGRATED CONCEPTUAL AND PREDICTIVE EARTH SYSTEM
MODELS.
Of particular relevance to the questions raised here, are the
current and proposed activities under the Human Interactions
science element. Current and planned activities under this
science element recognize that adequate models of the physical
and biological processes of change must incorporate an
understanding of the relationship between those processes and
the human activities that stimulate and mediate changes in the
global environment. USGCRP/Human Interactions studies address
high-priority observational, research and modelling
requirements associated with the following questions:
What data are needed to verify models of interaction
between human and natural systems and to assess the
likelihood of changes in those processes?
How do population dynamics contribute to global
environmental change?
How do institutions influence environmental processes
and respond to changes in global environmental
conditions?
How do technological and economic development contribute
to global environmental change, and how will changing
environmental conditions affect future technological and
economic development? and
How do changing patterns in the use of land, water,
energy resources and other natural resources affect
global environmental change?
In all cases, these research activities are driven by the need
to establish a sound empirical basis upon which to ultimately
assess the feasibility and likely results of various policies
options. [NOTE: most of this text drawn from existing
USGCRP documents]**
In addition to the fundamental science program embodied in
the USGCRP, major studies of mitigation and adaptation
policies are underway throughout the Federal Government (e.g.,
in DOE, EPA, DOI, OTA) and in the private and non-profit
sectors (e.g., Electric Power Research Institute-EPRI,
Harvard, MIT and Stanford). Some of the issues addressed by
these studies include:
determining the economic obligations and responsibilities
to future generations and how to allocate costs for
reduction in the rate of global environmental change;
global analysis of the impact of rising energy costs from
global carbon dioxide emissions reductions; and
assessing options for mitigating or reducing tropical
deforestation (including methods for sustainable
agriculture).
In many cases, these and similar studies contribute directly
to the deliberations of the Response Strategies Working Group
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC). The Committee on Earth Sciences recently established
a Mitigation and Adaptation Research Strategies Working Group
charged with, among other things, the identification of an
explicit research agenda for this important area.
The Adaptive Strategies Program of the Environmental
Protection Agency is worth specific mention in this regard.
The Adaptive Strategies Program is designed to identify
resource impacts on both domestic and international level and
to examine policy options to mitigate domestic impacts. The
Program builds on the recent EPA Report to Congress entitled
POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE IN THE UNITED
STATES. The Adaptive Strategies Program sponsors
international studies to examine the social and economic
impacts of climate change on agriculture, water resources,
coastal resources, forests, biodiversity, fisheries,
infrastructure, and human health. Through this program, the
implications of global warming will be assessed as well as
the effectiveness of policy alternatives, such as taking no
action, planning, or taking immediate action. EPA hopes that
these studies will more clearly define national
vulnerabilities and provide for the exploration of adaptive
strategies with natural resource managers, states and local
governments.
WHAT POTENTIAL CONFLICTS, IF ANY, BETWEEN YOUR INTEREST IN
CONTINUED ECONOMIC PROGRESS AND YOUR INTEREST IN ARRESTING
POSSIBLE UNDESIRABLE GLOBAL CHANGE HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED BY
YOUR EXISTING RESEARCH? WHAT SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMICS
RESEARCH IS MOST CRITICAL TO IMPROVING OUR UNDERSTANDING OF
RELEVANT TRADEOFFS AND POSSIBLY IMPROVING THE TRADEOFFS
THEMSELVES?
RESPONSE:
Sound policy must be justified on the basis of a strong
scientific understanding not only of physical and biological
processes but also the social, economic and environmental
consequences of action or inaction.
The uncertainties associated with the timing and magnitude of
possible global change mean that policies will vary in their
appeal as uncertainties are reduced. Thus an appropriate
strategy to address possible global change in today's economic
environment may be wholly inappropriate within a decade.
Economics research should focus on evaluating the benefits and
costs of policies under a broad range of outcomes that reflect
the scientific (and related economic) uncertainties of
possible global change. **[NOTE: MUCH OF ABOVE TEXT DRAWN
FROM CEA TASK GROUP REPORT]**
The U. S. believes that an effective response to potential
environmental changes requires the consideration of market
mechanisms, including: (i) the development of thorough cost-
benefit analyses of possible response options and (ii) the
important role of the private sector in the development of new
practices and technologies to reduce sources, enhance sinks
and adapt to possible global environmental changes. **[NOTE:
drawn from Delegation Guidelines to Hague Ministerial
meeting]**
Two particular areas of study within the U.S. Global Change
Research Program address the scientific and economic aspects
of relevant tradeoffs:
How do institutions influence environmental processes
and respond to changes in global environmental
conditions?
How do technological and economic development contribute
to global environmental change, and how will changing
environmental conditions affect future technological and
economic development?
Perhaps the most important characteristic of an effective
global change research effort is the commitment to continually
re-evaluate policy decisions in the light of new scientific
insights. **[NOTE: Drawn largely from the current draft of
the CES FY 1991 Research Plan]**
WHAT IS YOUR GOVERNMENT'S CURRENT AND PROJECTED BUDGET FOR
SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH RELEVANT TO GLOBAL CHANGE
ISSUES? HOW ARE YOUR RESEARCH EFFORTS COORDINATED ACROSS
AGENCIES AND DEPARTMENTS WITHIN YOUR GOVERNMENT?
RESPONSE:
The President's FY 1991 budget proposes to spend $1.034
billion for global change research by Federal agencies. This
represents a 57% increase over the current funding level of
$659.3 million for the U.S. Global Change Research Program.
The U.S. Global Change Research Program is coordinated at the
highest levels of government through the interagency Committee
on Earth Sciences (CES) which reports directly to the
President's Science Advisor. The Committee on Earth Sciences
was formed in April 1987 to:
INCREASE THE OVERALL EFFECTIVENESS AND PRODUCTIVITY OF
FEDERAL R&D EFFORTS DIRECTED TOWARD UNDERSTANDING OF THE
EARTH AS A GLOBAL SYSTEM.
Additional details on the history, membership and activities
of the Committee on Earth Sciences with respect to the U.S.
Global Change Research Program are provided in Attachment A
to this Questionnaire. The coordination of global change
research activities by CES is primarily focused in: (i) the
Working Group on Global Change which addresses the fundamental
science embodied in the U.S. Global Change Research Progrm and
(ii) the newly created Working Group on Mitigation and
Adaptation Strategies. The Committee on Earth Sciences
provides the integrating focus in the United States for
scientific input to national and international global change
deliberations. [NOTE: Drawn from existing USGCRP
documents
WHAT IS THE INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE FOR CONDUCTING
SCIENTIFIC ECONOMICS RESEARCH RELEVANT TO GLOBAL CHANGE IN
YOUR COUNTRY?
RESPONSE:
U.S. global change research activities are primarily supported
through the work of seven Federal Government agencies in close
collaboration with the academic scientific community and the
private sector. Federal agencies and laboratories,
universities and private sector research institutions operate
in a partnership which allows each to bring their unique
talents and capabilities to bear on the scientific challenge
associated with documenting, understanding and predicting
changes in the global environment and their regional impacts.
The principal Federal funding agencies for global change
research are: the Department of Commerce (primarily through
its National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), the
Department of Energy, the Department of the Interior, the
Environmental Protection Agency, the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration, the National Science Foundation, and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Investigators at academic
institutions across the country collaborate with their
Government counterparts routinely and the private sector is
encouraged to bring their expertise to bear on such problems
as the development of new practices and technologies to
mitigate and/or adapt to potential environmental change.
WHAT STUDIES HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED IN YOUR COUNTRY ON METHODS
(AND POSSIBLE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES) OF LIMITING
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS?
RESPONSE:
Several studies have been completed on methods and
consequences of limiting greenhouse gas emissions, both within
the Federal Government and in the private and non-profit
sectors. The primary focus of these investigations has been
on three methods: (i) the use of a carbon tax as a means to
limit emissions; (ii) the shift from fossil fuels to energy
that is more environmentally benign; and
(iii) reforestation.
WHAT STUDIES HAVE BEEN CONUCTED IN YOUR COUNTRY REGARDING THE
SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL COUNSEQUENCES OF GLOBAL WARMING THAT
MAY OCCUR? HOW SENSITIVE ARE THESE ESTIMATES TO THE ASSUMED
RATE OF WARMING AND THE APPLICATION OF ADAPTATION MEASURES?
RESPONSE:
Several studies have examined the social and economic
consequences of potential global warming. This work has been
supported within the Federal Government, at universities, and
in the private and non-profit sectors. Completed research has
centered on several areas: agriculture, the implications of
a rise in sea level, and human health. Far less research has
been completed that examines the social and economic
consequences arising from potential effects of global warming
on forestry, fisheries, water resources and biodiversity.
Most studies of global warming assume a doubling of carbon
dioxide by the middle of the next century. Sensitivity of
results is very dependent on the rate of warming assumed as
well as feedback mechanisms which are difficult to incorporate
in models, and which could affect the timing, magnitude and
regional nature of any given increase in the concentration of
greenhouse gases on observed surface temperature.
While several of the studies outline or explore adaptation
strategies, the results of the analyses are generally
presented as if no adaptation occurs. For example, estimates
of changes in agriculture do not include factors such as farm
management response with existing technology, development of
new crop varieties better suited to the new climate and
ambient carbon dioxide conditions, irrigation costs and
options, and changes in the distribution of agricultural pests
and diseases.
WHAT ARE THE PRESENT SOURCES, BY PERCENTAGE, OF ELECTRICAL
ENERGY IN YOUR COUNTRY? WHAT ARE THE PROJECTED SOURCES, AND
OVERALL USAGE LEVELS, IN 2000, 2010 AND 2020? WHAT
TECHNOLOGIES ARE CURRENTLY UNDER CONSIDERATION OR BEING
PLANNED TO INCREASE ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN GENERATION AND
UTILIZATION IN YOUR COUNTRY?
RESPONSE:
The United States draws its energy supplies from an array of
sources. Based on 1988 statistics, petroleum provides the
largest single share, accounting for 43 percent of the total
supply. Coal and natural gas make virtually identical
contributions to energy supply, each accounting for an
additional 23 percent of the Nation's total. Nuclear power
and hydroelectric power account for another 7 percent and 3
percent respectively, with other forms of enrgy making up a
balance of less than 1 percent. [NOTE: Taken from final
draft of the Interim Report on the Development of a National
Energy Strategy]
[NEED INPUT--DOE?--ON PROJECTIONS OF FUTURE USE]***
The United States is committed to a strong program of
strategic research to improve energy efficiency. Advances in
energy-conservation technology accounted for two-thirds of the
recent improvements in energy productivity by U.S. industry,
and for three-fourths of those in transportation from 1973 to
1987. As a result of these improvements, the United States
used virtually no more energy (and less oil) in 1987 than it
did in 1973--although our population continued to expand, and
products and services steadily increased. Additional
improvements are expected from continued support for strategic
research in the areas of: combustion, heat transfer,
materials, tribology (the study of friction, wear, and
lubrication), superconductivity and electrochemistry.
The primary goal of U.S. strategic research for energy supply
is to provide additional fundamental knowledge that can be
used in: fossil energy, renewable energy, nuclear fission,
and nuclear fusion technologies. In the area of fossil energy
(petroleum, natural gas, and coal), the principal challenges
relate to enhancing supplies, exploring the basic processes
of converting fossil fuel into liquid and gaseous fuels,
improving combustion efficiency, converting one energy form
to another, and reducing hazardous emissions.
In the area of renewable energy, strategic research efforts
are expected to focus primarily on: (i) capturing and
converting the Sun's incident radiation into usable solar
energy at competitive costs; and (ii) identifying and tapping
usable heat below the Earth's surface in regions of the
country beyond those where geothermal energy is already an
economic reality.
Strategic research in nuclear engineering is expected to
contribute to the development of a new generation of advanced
nuclear fission reactors. Research in plasma physics,
materials science and engineering, and chemical-process
technology are expected to contribute to efforts to determine
the scientific feasibility of controlled nuclear fusion as a
potentially inexhaustible source of heat for electricity
generation.
NOTE: ABOVE MATERIAL TAKEN FROM THE FINAL DRAFT OF THE
INTERIM REPORT ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NATIONAL ENERGY
STRATEGY]
THEME II: INTEGRATING SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMICS
RESEARCH IN THE POLICY PROCESS
WHAT MECHANISMS EXIST IN YOUR COUNTRY FOR PROVIDING ECONOMIC
AND SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CONCERNING GLOBAL CHANGE ISSUES TO
DECISION MAKERS?
HOW IS THE SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMICS INFORMATION CONCERNING
GLOBAL CHANGE USED BY DECISION MAKERS IN YOUR COUNTRY TO
ADDRESS THE ENVIRONMENTAL RAMIFICATIONS OF ECONOMIC POLICIES
AND THE ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES?
RESPONSE:
In the Executive Branch of the Federal Government, the Office
of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) serves as a source of
scientific, engineering and technological analysis and
judgement for the President with respect to major policies,
plans and programs of the Federal Government. OSTP advises
the President of scientific and technological considerations
in several areas, including the environment; evaluates the
quality and effectiveness of the Federal effort in science and
technology; and assists the President in providing leadership
and coordination for the research and development programs of
the Federal Government.
Under OSTP's Federal Coordinating Council on Science,
Engineering and Technology (FCCSET), the interagency Committee
on Earth Sciences (CES) is responsible for coordinating the
U.S. Global Change Research Program. The CES was created
under the auspices of the White House Office of Science and
Technology Policy in 1987 as a means to ensure the improved
Government-wide coordination required if the United States
were to position itself to effectively address the
environmental, economic, and social issues raised by changes
in the global environment. Additional details on the CES and
the U.S. Global Change Research Program are included in
Attachment A. This Attachment also includes an abbreviated
U.S. Government organizational chart which identifies those
Executive Branch agencies and offices with a primary interest
in global change science and economics. Through the
development and coordination of the U.S. Global Change
Research Program, the Committee on Earth Sciences provides an
integrating focus for scientific input to national and
international policy deliberations.
In order to ensure the effective coordination of global change
policy development at the highest levels in the United States,
the President has established a Working Group on Global Change
within the Cabinet. This Working Group is chaired by the
Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology
Policy, Dr. D. Allan Bromley who is also responsible for
oversight of the Committee on Earth Sciences. This joint
responsibility on the part of the Chairman, as well as the
participation of the senior leadership of CES agencies, along
with Cabinet-level officials responsible for global change
policy (e.g., energy and environmental policy), on the
Working Group helps to ensure that new scientific insights are
readily available to decision makers and that policy will be
continually re-evaluated in light of those new scientific
insights.
In the fall of 1989, this Cabinet Working Group established
three Task Forces designed to address the some of the most
significant obstacles to an effective U.S. response to the
social, environmental and economic challenges posed by changes
in the global environment. Of particular significance to this
Conference is the Task Force on Economics, chaired by the
Council on Economic Advisors, which has provided the Office
of the President with a draft report in early 1990 which
provides a thorough review and inventory of all work being
conducted at universities, think-tanks, U.S. Government
agencies, and other nations on the social and economic impacts
of possible global change.
WHAT SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMIC MODELS ARE USED BY YOUR
GOVERNMENT IN ESTIMATING ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC
CONSEQUENCES OF GOVERNMENT ACTIONS RELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE?
RESPONSE:
Global climate models used today have their roots in weather
prediction models used since the 1960's to make operational
global forecasts a few days in advance. They are based on the
fundamental laws of physics. Of the different possible
methods of estimating potential greenhouse-gas induced future
climates and climate effects (laboratory simulation, warm-
world analogues from paleo-reconstructions, and theoretical
climate/climate effects models), the theoretically-based
mathematical climate and climate effects models offer the best
practical approach. The primary climate models, called
general circulation models (GCM's), predict a variety of
climatic variables such as temperature, precipitation, winds,
snow mass, and soil moisture. The GCM's are the only models
that provide geographic distributions of these variables and
hence, regional predictions.
To be used for global change predictions, an atmospheric GCM
must be integrted with models of the ocean and land surface
and the biotic changes inherent to them. Various combinations
of coupled ocean-atmosphere models have been applied to
greenhouse gas-induced warming predictions. Most have been
atmospheric GCM's coupled to simpler, mixed-layer ocean
models. Although it is possible to couple atmospheric and
oceanic GCM's, until now it has been impractical because of
the long time required to achieve an equilibrium (steady
state) model climate.
Integrating with the terrestrial sector and the biosphere in
general is yet more primitive. A few coupled atmosphere-
biosphere GCM's are in the early stages of development and
none has been applied to carbon dioxide-doubling predictions.
Land boundary and general biota interactions are represented
only in a rudimentary fashion. New models of biotic systems
are required to describe fundamental processes related to
changing climate and other variables.
Most model predictions used to date have been studies in which
a control simulation, with present-day atmospheric carbon
dioxide concentrations, is compared to an experimental
simulation with double the carbon dioxide concentrations.
Both are run until the model's climate equilibrates; the time
required to attain the new equilibrium climate not being a
factor. Recently, non-equilibrium or transient, predictions
have been made with significant new results but the computer
time required for these 100-year simulations has limited the
number of model runs to date. [ABOVE TEXT TAKEN DIRECTLY
FROM THE CURRENT DRAFT OF THE USGCRP FY 1991 RESEARCH PLAN--
"SPRING DOCUMENT"
Several models are used by the Federal Government to estimate
the environmental and economic consequences of policy actions
related to global change. EPA maintains and applies the
Atmospheric Stabilization Framework (Edmonds and Reilly), for
evaluating the global consequences of policy options that
might be implemented by individual countries or groups of
countries. This modelling system has been used extensively
to support the IPCC efforts currently underway. A recently
completed draft of a study by CBO used the Dynamic General
Equilibrium Model developed by Jorgenson to explore the
implications of a carbon charge on reducing emissions and
economic effects. CBO also used the ASF/Edmonds-Reilly model
as well as Global 2100 (developed by Manne and Richels) to
explore the long-term implications of policies restricting
carbon dioxide emissions.
WHAT SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH QUESTIONS ARE THE MOST
IMPORTANT TO ANSWER IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF DOMESTIC
AND INTERNATIONAL POLICIES TOWARD GLOBAL CHANGE?
RESPONSE:
To support the development of policies toward global change,
critical economic research questions must address the broad
spectrum of knowns and unknowns associated with the timing
and magnitude of possible global change. In responding to
the Domestic Policy Council, the Task Force on Economic Costs
recommended that an interagency, coordinated economic research
program be undertaken that would evaluate the economic effects
of possible global change and the benefits of slowing such
change, the costs and effectiveness of various adaptive and
emissions reduction measures, and the effects of such
measures on U.S. and world trade and capitol flows. In
addition, such a research agenda should incorporate
opportunities for the private sector in the development of new
adaptation and mitigation practices and technologies.
Specifically, sound and rational economic research on the
benefits and costs of proposed policy actions must be
evaluated under a broad range of outcomes that reflect the
uncertainties that pervade the global change issue, so that
decision makers are afforded the highest degree of flexibility
in policy options. ***[TEXT DRAWN LARGELY FROM CEA TASK GROUP
REPORT]***
In the context of the seven science elements which
characterize the U.S. Global Change Research Program, and
recognizing the Program's ultimate goal of providing
scientific information most relevant to policy formulation,
the U.S. has identified the following high-priority questions
which, when addressed, will reduce major scientific
uncertainties and significantly enhance our ability to predict
both natural and human-induced changes in the global Earth
system. These questions are:
CLIMATE AND HYDROLOGIC SYSTEMS
What is the role of clouds in the Earth's radiation and
heat budgets?
How do the oceans interact with the atmosphere in the
storage, transport and uptake of heat?
How will changes in climate affect temperature,
precipitation, soil moisture patterns, and the general
distribution of water and ice on the land surface?
How can the reliability of global- and regional-scale
climate predictions be improved?
What is the role of polar regions in global climate
change?
BIOGEOCHEMICAL DYNAMICS
How are the oceans and terrestrial biosphere responding
to increases in the introduction of fossil fuel carbon
to the atmosphere and how will these responses change
with time?
Why is methane currently increasing in the atmosphere at
a rate which may make this the most important greenhouse
gas of concern in the future?
Is the ability of the atmosphere to cleanse itself
changing as a result of changing chemical composition?
Can changes in the natural or anthropogenic sulfur
emissions to the atmosphere ameliorate or enhance global
warming?
What are the global consequences of stratospheric ozone
depletion in polar regions resulting from increased
concentrations of chlorine and bromine in the
stratosphere?
ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS AND DYNAMICS
What natural and managed systems are most sensitive to
global change?
What are the direct effects of carbon dioxide
fertilization on natural and managed ecological systems?
What are the likely changes and rates of change in
natural and managed ecosystems due to global changes
other than the direct effects of carbon dioxide
fertilization?
Can current natural and managed ecological systems adapt
to rapid rates of change?
How do ecological systems themselves contribute to
processes of global change?
How can ecological responses to global change be
distinguished from natural variability, and other
anthropogenic sources of change?
EARTH SYSTEM HISTORY
What are the natural ranges and rates of change in the
climate and environmental systems?
How rapidly have ecosystems adapted to past abrupt
transitions in climate?
Do past warm intervals in Earth history provide
appropriate scenarios to test model predictions of future
global warming?
What unidentified mechanisms of sea-level fluctuation
may impede our ability to predict future sea-level
change?
Are there more than one stable mode of atmosphere-ocean
circulation?
HUMAN INTERACTIONS
What data are needed to verify models of interaction
between human and natural systems and to assess the
likelihood of changes in those processes?
How do population dynamics contribute to global
environmental change?
How do institutions influence environmental processes
and respond to changes in global environmental
conditions?
How do technological and economic development contribute
to global environmental change, and how will changing
environmental conditions affect future technological and
economic development?
How do changing patterns in the use of land, water,
energy resources, and other natural resources affect
global environmental change?
SOLID EARTH PROCESSES
How do different coastal regions respond geologically
and ecologically to higher sea level and how can the
contributions from changes in climate (e.g., glacier
melting and ocean warming) be differentiated from those
due to tectonic processes?
What are the magnitude, geographic location, and
frequency of occurrence of volcanic eruptions and their
effect on regional and global climate?
How do permafrost regions of the northern hemisphere
respond to climate warming?
How and at what rate do climatically sensitive transition
regions respond to climate change and human activities?
What are the causes and consequences of crustal
deformation?
SOLAR INFLUENCES
What aspects of solar variability are influencing the
stratospheric ozone layer?
What impact do other solar inputs, e.g., particles, have
on the upper atmosphere and how are they coupled to other
atmospheric regions?
How does the sun's output vary and what is the impact on
terrestrial climate?
What do current upper atmosphere models predict for the
impact of greenhouse gases?
****[NOTE: ABOVE QUESTIONS ARE DRAWN FROM THE CURRENT DRAFT
OF THE CES SPRING DOCUMENT]
THEME III: BUILDING PARTNERSHIPS FOR
SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH
WHAT LESSONS CAN BE LEARNED FROM YOUR COUNTRY'S EXPERIENCE IN
INTEGRATING SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMIC ENERGY-RELATED RESEARCH
OVER THE PAST TWO DECADES?
RESPONSE:
Addressing the environmental, social and economic issues
associated with possible changes in the global environment
demands a well-coordinated, national and international effort
organized and supported at the highest levels of government.
National leaders and their science, environment and energy
ministers must commit to a long-term scientific program to
improve our understanding of the global Earth system, reduce
major uncertainties in the decision process, and continually
re-evaluate the effectiveness of policy in the light of new
scientific insights.
The U.S. experience has demonstrated that no single agency,
or for that matter, no single country, has the breadth of
expertise or resources required to effectively address the
issues associated with global environmental change. Effective
stewardship of our global resources demands: coooperation
among nations; effective government-wide integration within
countries; and a deliberate effort to entrain the broadest
possible participation of government, academia and the private
sector. When a scientific program encourages each of these
groups to bring their unique talents and expertise to bear on
the problem, the collective result is far greater than the sum
of the parts.
The effective integration of earth system science, economics
research and, ultimately policy, requires the establishment
of government-wide mechanisms or institutions which ensure:
(i) a clear statement of the problem being addressed;
(ii) development of programs which are, from their inception,
designed to provide the scientific basis for decision-making
related to that problem; (iii) a clearly-identified focus for
scientific input to national and international policy
deliberations; (iv) full and equal participation by all
relevant government bodies with clearly stated individual
roles and responsibilities; (v) close ties with similar
efforts in other countries; and (vi) the effective involvement
of the full suite of intellectual resources available in
scientific projects which demand multi-disciplinary and multi-
institutional collaboration.
FORECASTS OF TECHNOLOGY ADVANCES, THEIR COSTS, AND MARKET
PENETRATION NECESSARILY INVOLVE BOTH SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMIC
CONSIDERATIONS. HOW CAN SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMIC RESEARCH BE
INTEGRATED TO PROVIDE THE MOST ACCURATE AND CLOSELY-BOUNDED
TECHNOLOGY FORECASTS POSSIBLE? HOW CAN THIS RESEARCH
CONTRIBUTE TO TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT?
RESPONSE:
The Mitigation and Adaptation Research Strategies (MARS)
Working Group of the Committee on Earth Sciences is charged
with identifying an explicit research agenda which will
address the issue of technology development to either adapt
to or mitigate possible global changes. In defining this
research agenda, the CES will pay close attention to the
effective linking of earth systems science and economics
research to identify appropriate and effective technological
options from an environmental standpoint as well as their
costs and benefits from an economic standpoint. Central to
the effective transfer of technology developed through such
a research program is defining the appropriate involvement of
the private sector from the earliest stages of development.
WHAT ARE YOUR GOVERNMENT'S CURRENT FORECASTS OF FUTURE
TECHNOLOGIES RELEVANT TO MITIGATION OF OR ADAPTATION TO GLOBAL
CHANGE?
RESPONSE:
A broad effort is currently underway in the United States to
examine technology and practices relevant to mitigation and/or
adaptation in a number of environmental areas, including:
o
efforts to achieve a "no net loss" of our valuable
wetlands;
protection of biodiversity and the preservation of
endangered species;
evaluation of the concept of low-input sustainable
agriculture (the subject of a recently-completed National
Academy of Sciences report which examined the potential
to maintain and improve agricultural productivity with
changing input and management practices);
resource conservation and management efforts in a number
of Federal agencies;
[COULD USE A COUPLE MORE EXAMPLES HERE]**
In the area of global change, the Mitigation and Adaptation
Research Strategies (MARS) Working Group of the Committee on
Earth Sciences has been charged with identifying an explicit
research agenda which will, among other things address the
issue of technology development to either adapt to or mitigate
possible global changes. In the area of climate change, for
example, this research agenda is likely to contribute to: (i)
efforts to evaluate methods and consequences of limiting
greenhouse gas emissions including the use of a carbon tax,
shifting away from fossil fuels, and reforestation; (ii)
improvements in energy efficiency and conservation
technologies; (iii) technological advancements for increasing
the use of renewable energy sources such as solar and
geothermal; (iv) development of new generation nuclear fission
reactors; and (v) determining the scientific and technological
feasibility of controlled nuclear fusion as a potentially
inexhaustible source of heat for electricity generation; (vi)
the development and evaluation of new crop varieties and
agricultural practices; (vii) methods for adapting to or
mitigating the effects of sea level rise on both natural
ecosystems and human infrastructure; and (viii) the
development of new technologies and practices required to
mitigate possible human health effects.
WHAT INTERNATIONAL MECHANISMS WOULD BE MOST EFFECTIVE TO CARRY
OUT ECONOMIC AND SCIENTIFIC RESARCH ON GLOBAL CHANGE?
DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT NEW ENTITIES WILL BE REQUIRED TO CARRY
OUT JOINT RESEARCH EFFORTS? IF EXISTING ORGANIZATIONS CAN
FILL THE NEED, WHICH ONES SHOULD BE USED? WHAT CHANGES WILL
BE NEEDED IN THESE ORGANIZATIONS TO PRODUCE INTEGRATED
RESULTS?
RESPONSE:
The United States believes that the following precepts should
characterize an effective international global change research
effort:
Countries must give futher impetus to scientific research
on environmental issues, to developing necessary
technologies and to evaluating the economic costs and
benefits of specific response options.
Countries must combine their efforts in order to improve
observation and monitoring on a global scale. Prime
examples of the need and opportunity for such
collaboration include: the World Meteorological
Organization's World Weather Watch; global ocean
monitoring efforts such as those currently being
coordinated by the IOC; the global monitoring of
atmospheric constituents being coordinated through UNEP
and WMO; the compilation of standard gridded geophysical
data through the UNEP GEMS/GRID program; international
cooperation in satellite-based monitoring programs; and
data communication and archiving.
International cooperation to improve the knowledge base
regarding the science and prediction of global change
(particularly climate change) will require a commitment
to technology development and transfer which will
strengthen indigenous capacity and infrastructure in
LDC's and will heighten the awareness of decision-makers
and the public to the issues.
Existing mechanisms and institutions should be used
wherever possible to foster, coordinate and implement
global change efforts. For example:
-
individual nations should continue to support the
activities of the World Climate Research Program
jointly sponsored by the World Meteorological
Organization and the International Council of
Scientific Unions (ICSU) as well as enhance support
for the evolving ICSU/International Geosphere-
Biosphere Programme;
-
the WMO/UNEP Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change should continue to be viewed as the most
appropriate forum for consideration of the issues
related to global climate change;
-
recognizing the role of satellites in global
environmental monitoring, the Committee on Earth
Observations Satellites, a coordinating mechanism
for national and regional agency satellite programs,
should be strengthened to more effectively
coordinate data management of earth observations
from space;
-
individual nations should continue to support the
activities of the International Development
Association of the World Bank as well as the OECD;
** [ARE THERE OTHER EXAMPLES WE SHOULD MENTION???]
Existing bodies such as the WMO, UNEP, and ICSU should be
encouraged to pursue enhanced mechansisms to ensure greater
communication and cooperation among the participants in the
many existing and planned global change scientific programs.
NOTE: MUCH OF THE ABOVE MATERIAL IS DRAWN FROM THE
DELEGATION GUIDELINES FOR THE HAGUE MEETING]
WHAT ARE THE MAJOR BARRIERS TO CARRYING OUT INTEGRATED
ECONOMIC AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ON GLOBAL CHANGE?
RESPONSE:
The greatest barrier to carrying out global change research
also offers the greatest opportunity for success -- no single
agency and no single nation is equipped to address the problem
of global environmental change alone. The effective
collaboration of all interested parties, each bringing their
own special expertise and programmatic contributions, will
ensure scientific progress that no single group could hope to
achieve on their own. The real challenge is to effectively
entrain these numerous participants in a manner that takes
advantage of their individual strengths in collectively
addressing the goals, objectives and scientific priorities of
a well-defined program.
Global environmental problems, and research efforts in this
area, are complicated by the fact that the individuals
involved live in many nations. Because one nation cannot
impose its wishes on another, international cooperation is
required to solve problems. But differences across countries
-- in income, natural resource endowments, population,
sensitivity to particular environmental changes, and the
political strength of environmental movements -- mean that
countries inevitably have different views on these issues.
Hence, countries' abilities and willingness to devote
resources to research in the area of global change will also
be dependent on these differences. [FROM CEA]**
Another potential barrier to an effective resarch program is
the need to ensure long-term stable support for what will
undoubtedly be an expensive effort. The significant economic,
social and environmental benefits that will accrue from a
successful global change research effort, however, make such
an investment not only sound but essential.
The earth system is too complex for us to perform direct
experiments on it that would yield the information required
to make reliable predictions of future environmental changes.
Our only hope is to construct simplified models of this system
upon which experiments can be performed through simulation to
yield these predictions. To be useful, such models must
accurately represent the primary physical, chemical and
biological processes governing the behavior of the real system
we wish to predict. The current lack of existing computers
with sufficient capacity and speed to simulate the entire
Earth system as a single system forces us to construct
submodels to help predict future environments and responses
to those environments on global and regional scales. The task
then is to integrate the predictions from this hierarchy of
models to provide decision-makers with the best possible
scientific information to support environmental policy
decisions.
Encouraging existing government and academic institutions to
actively pursue research projects that cross disciplinary and
institutional boundaries also presents a significant challenge
not previously encounterd on such a massive scale in
environmental science efforts. Scientists, institutions and
nations must learn to be innovative not only in the way they
look at earth system science but also in the way that they
organize to conduct research.
Another critical element of a successful effort involves the
free and open exchange of monitoring and other data related
to global change and other environmental issues. The United
States is dedicated to pursuing whatever mechanisms are
necessary to ensure such open data and information exchange.
The challenge of technology development and transfer also
represents a potential barrier that must be overcome if global
change scientific efforts are to be successful. A strong,
truly international scientific and technological
infrastructure is essential.
The availability of human resources could also prove to be a
barrier to success unless deliberate efforts are made to
actively increase the intellectual talent pool through
education and technical training programs. Shortages in
trained personnel, both as scientists and educators, appears
to be particularly acute in the social sciences.
[WHAT ELSE SHOULD WE MENTION??]**
WHAT DATA BASES RELEVANT TO GLOBAL CHANGE DO YOU HAVE IN YOUR
COUNTRY WHICH MIGHT BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR SHARING WITH THE
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY?
RESPONSE:
The United States believes that an essential ingredient of a
successful global change science effort is the free and open
exchange of relevant data and information among all
participating parties. This includes observations from global
monitoring networks (whether space-based on ground-based), the
results of field experiments and similar research into Earth
system processes, and predictive information products derived
from numerical modelling efforts. The concept of free and
open data exchange, along with discussions of data system
improvements and enhanced communications to support global
change science should be a key element of discussion at this
Conference.
U.S. agencies, in collaboration with the academic community,
have been conducting research related to global change for
several decades. These efforts are producing derived data
research products such as global analyses of critically
important global change paramater, e.g., clouds, sea level,
ocean color, vegetation indexes, trace gas sources and sinks,
etc. These data and information products are available to the
broader scientific community. The following examples provide
a brief description of some of the existing ground- and space-
based data currently being used by U.S. agencies in global
change research:
NASA - Analysis of many different types of existing satellite
data bases, including Nimbus, Landsat, Seasat, TIROS, ERBE,
ISCCP, and AVHRR, are underway in NASA to assess the current
state of the global environment and its variability.
Satellite data are used, for example, to better understand:
(1) the chemistry and dynamics of the upper atmosphere; (2)
the climate effects connected with clouds and radiation; (3)
processes affecting global ocean circulation and the
interactions between the atmosphere and ocean; (4) the
dynamics of terrestrial vegetation in the context of global
change; and (5) the role of the ocean in the global carbon
cycle.
Department of Commerce/NOAA - The use of existing data sources
for studies of climate and global change has a prominent
position in NOAA. For example, NOAA has assembled a data base
of surface marine observations extending back to 1854. These
marine data have been crucial in the compilation of the global
mean temperature record upon which many of the global climate
change issues rest. Vast numbers of deep ocean observations
from 1900 to the present have also been synthesized by NOAA
into a climatology of the ocean basins, providing the basis
for ocean model integrations and establishing a benchmark for
observations in the global ocean. Satellite data are another
valuable source of information. Using the satellite data
archive, a program to develop historical measures of cloud
parameters has been sponsored by NOAA and NASA since 1983.
Some near-term improvements in representation of cloud
processes in general circulation models can be expected as a
result of this effort. NOAA-sponsored investigators are also
active in the use of historical satellite microwave and IN
SITU sea ice measurements to assess past fluctuations and
trends in polar sea ice extent. Looking backward in time,
NOAA is sponsoring an analytical program for the conversion
of historical ocean nd atmospheric data, spanning several
decades, into a homogeneous climate data set for studies of
long-term climate change.
Department of Interior - Space-based and ground-based data
are being extensively used by the Department of Interior.
For example, Landsat Thematic Mapper data are being used to
develop a capabilitity for predicting the hydrologic and water
resource responses to climate change. Some operational
capabilities exist in DOI and others are being developed for
classifying land cover and vegetation types on a regional
basis using Landsat data. Changes in land cover and
vegetation are also being monitored operationally over time
using Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) data.
Research on characteristics of irrigated lands, snow cover,
glaciers, and sea ice as they pertain to climate change are
being conducted using remote sensing techniques. In many
cases, these ongoing activities have produced data sets that
will be useful as baseline reference data against which to
assess the impacts of global change.
Department of Energy - DOE is using meteorological data from
various sources to evaluate General Circulation Models.
Specifically, data from ERBE are used to determine the
agreement between the simulated and observed radiation balance
at the top of the atmosphere. DOE is also participating in
the International Satellite Cloud Climatology (ISCCP) program
to establish cloud climatologies necessary to understand
relative heat fluxes to and from the Earth. Pilot studies
have used satellite data from AVHRR, Landsat, and the French
SPOT sensors in studies of deforestation, land use changes,
and the exchange of carbon dioxide between the atmosphere and
oceans.
National Science Foundation - Various divisions of NSF also
support the use of satellite data extensively for studying
ocean circulation patterns, monitoring geodetic changes
related to tectonic activity and sea level change, determining
atmospheric structure, radiation budgets and cloud-radiation
feedbacks, making ozone measurements to detect and study ozone
depletion in polar regions, and studying agricultural drought.
Environmental Protection Agency - In support of the U.S.
Global Change Research Program, EPA is using AVHRR, SPOT and
Landsat Thematic Mapper data to study seasonal dynamics of
vegetation in ecosystems across large regions. Data from
these sources are analyzed to provide measurements of
vegetation canopy spectral reflectance, temperature, and
"greenness" as functions of leaf area and biomass
distribution. These characteristics determine the rate of
evapotranspiration and trace gas emissions. EPA is also
working with the U.S. Geological Survey in studies of the
hydrologic cycle and water resource responses to global
change.
Department of Agriculture - The U.S. Department of Agriculture
is using satellite data from Landsat and AVHRR to map snow
cover in selected areas of the western United States. The
resulting information on snow cover is used as input to
hydrologic models to simulate and forecast streamflow. When
data bases are developed on particular river basins, the
existing or average conditions can be perturbed in the models
to approximate the effects of potential global warming or
other climate changes.
The above limited examples demonstrate the contributions which
existing data and data collection systems are already making
to global change research in the United States.
NOTE: ABOVE TEXT TAKEN FROM MARCH 19, 1990 LETTER FROM
DALLAS PECK TO SENATOR ALBERT GORE ON THE USE OF EXISTING
DATA IN SUPPORT OF GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH]
NOTE: NEED SOME EXAMPLES OF THE KIND OF ECONOMIC DATA
AVAILABLE TO INTERESTED PARTIES AS WELL]
Attachment
4/2/97
12:-Noon
ATTACHMENT
The U.S. Global Change Reseach Program
General Background
The U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) represents an
integrated, Government-wide scientific effort designed to document,
understand, and predict changes in the global environment as the
foundation for national and international policymaking.
In March 1987, the White House Office of Science and Technology
Policy (OSTP) established a new Committee on Earth Sciences (CES).
To a great extent, CES was created in response to the
recommendations of a Cabinet Working Group on Climate Change which
concluded that improved mechanisms for Government-wide coordination
were rquired for the U.S. to effectively address the significant
economic, social, and environmental issues raised by changes in the
global climate system. Thus, the CES was created to:
Increase the overall effectiveness and productivity of Federal
R&D efforts directed toward understanding the Earth as a
global system.
Membership of CES includes the principal earth sciences funding
agencies (NASA, NSF, Commerce, Energy, EPA, Interior, and USDA) as
well as other Departments, Agencies, and Executive Branch offices
with interest in the policy implications of such research (State,
Transportation, CEQ, OSTP, and OMB). Figure 1 shows the
organizational structure of U.S. Government agencies with interest
and participation in global change science and economics research.
Although the CES has a number of specific areas of responsibility,
including coordination of Federal activities in groundwater
research, natural hazards reduction, atmospheric research, and the
academic oceanographic fleet, the primary focus of CES efforts to
date has been the development of the U.S. Global Change Research
Program and providing a focus for scientific input to national and
international change policy deliberations.
The U.S. Global Change Research Program
The USGCRP was formally announced in the January 1989 CES Report:
Our Changing Planet: A U.S. Strategy for Global Change Research.
That report defined the goal, objectives and scientific framework
for the USGCRP. It is important to note that the individual agency
research efforts identified in that Report had been developed prior
to the explicit definition of goals and objectives for the overall
National effort. In some cases, agencies had initiated "earth
system science" programs even before CES was created. Thus, while
1990 represents the official start of the USGCRP as a Presidential
initiative, 1991 will mark the first time that CES agencies can
develop and present a truly integrated national program.
Proposed activities within the USGCRP must first demonstrate their
responsiveness to the overarching goal of the USGCRP:
To gain a predictive understanding of the interactive
physical, geological, chemical, biological, and social
processes that regulate the total earth system, and hence,
establish the scientific basis for national and international
policy formulation and decisions relating to natural and
human-induced changes in the global environment and their
regional impacts.
Thus, a proposed project must clearly be a part of a broad national
and international scientific endeavor aimed at developing a
capability to not only understand but predict both natural and
human-induced changes in the global environment in an effort to
profice decision-makers at all levels with a strong scientific
foundation for policy formulation. In some cases, projects will
be designed to provide near-term results by focusing an aggressive,
limited-duration attack on some key aspect of the earth system--
stratospheric ozone depletion for the role of ocean-atmospheric
internations in the tropical Pacific in determining year-to-yera
climate variability over North America. In other cases, projects
will be designed as part of a long-term national commitment to the
documentation of changes in the earth system on a global scale.
NASA's Earth Observing System and NOAA's ocean observations and
global sea level proposals are examples of such initiatives.
Once having passed this first filter, a proposed project must then
demonstrate the nature of its contribution to one of the three
scientific objectives or integrating priorities of the USGCRP:
Establish an integrated, compreshensive program of
documenting the earth system on a global schale through
observational programs and data management systems;
Conduct a program of focused studies to improve our
understanding of the physical, geological, chemical,
biological, and social processes that influence earth
system processes and trends on global and trends on
global and regional scales;
Develop integrated conceptual and predictive earth system
models.
Again, the ultimate focus is on providing policy-relevant
information about the current and anticipated state of the global
environment.
Finally, the priority framework provides a relative ranking among
the seven interdisciplinary science elements which characterize the
USGCRP and within those science elements, identifies the most
pressing scientific undertainties in the context of the Program's
ultimate goal of predicting significant changes in the global
environment. Improving our ability to anticipate, assess and
address the issues associated with climate system changes are given
the highest priority in the Program although CES recognizes the
need to maintain an appropriate level of effort in all seven
science elements including adequate support for the data and
information management activities required by the Program. The
individual science priorities in the current research plan probably
represent the most dynamic feature of the USGCRP. As new insights
in earth system processes are gained, and new problems and research
needs are identified in response to that new understanding, the
details of the science priorities will change. In essence, the
evolution of the science prioritie will be a measure of the success
of the U.S. Global Change Research Program.
9
8
Figure
1
U.S. Global Change Research
Program Priority Framework
STRATEGIC
PRIORITIES
Support Broad U.S. and
International Scientific Effort
Identify Natural and Hu
man -Induced Changes
Focus on Interactions
and Interdisciplinary Science
Share Financial Burden,
Use the Best Resources,
and Encourage Full
Participation
INTEGRATING
PRIORITIES
Documention of
Earth System Change
Observational
Programs
Data Manage
ment Systems
Focused Studies on
Controlling Processes
and Improved
Understanding
Integrated Concep
tual and Predictive Models
SCIENCE PRIORITIES
Ecological Systems
Human
Solid Earth
Climate and
Biogeochemical
Earth System
Solar
Interactions
Processes
Dynamics
and Dynamics
History
Influences
Hydrologic Systems
Role of Clouds
Bio/Atm/Ocean Fluxes
Long-Term Measure-
Paleoclimate
Data Base Development
Coastal Erosion
EUV/UV Monitoring
Paleoccology
Models Linking:
Volcanic Processes
Atm/Solar Energy
Ocean Circulation and
of Trace Species
ments of Structure/
Heat Flux
Atm Processing of
Function
Atmospheric
Population Growth
Permafrost and Marine
Coupling
Response to Climate
Composition
and Distribution
Gas Hydrates
Irradiance (Measure/
Land/Atm/Ocean
Trace Species
Increasing Priority
Water & Energy
Surface/Deep Water
and Other Stresses
Ocean Circulati on
Energy Demands
Ocean/Seafloor Heat
Model)
Biogeochemistry
Interactions between
and Composi tion
Changes in Land Use
and Energy Fluxes
Climate/Solar Record
Fluxes
Terrestrial Biosphere
Physical and
Ocean Producti vity
Industrial Production
Surficial Processes
Proxy Measurements
Coupled Climate System
Sea Level Chan ge
Crustal Motions and
and Long-Term
& Quantitative Links
Nutrient and
Biological Processes
Carbon Cycling
Models of Interactions,
Paleohydrology
Sea Level
Data Base
Occan/Atm/Cryosphere
Interactions
Terrestrial Inputs to
Feedbacks, and
Marine Ecosystems
Responses
Productivity/Resource
Models
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES
This chart 50003 to show
only the more important
THE CONSTITUTION
agencies of the Government
See taxt for other agencies
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
JUDICIAL BRANCH
THE CONGRESS
THE PRESIDENT
The Suprome Court of the
United States
Senate
Hease
Executive Office of the President
United States Courts of Appeals
Archiect of the Capitol
United States District Courts
United States Botanic Garden
White House Office
National Critical Materials Counce
United States Claims Coun
General Accounting Office
Office of Management and Budget
Office of the US Trade Representative
United States Court of Appeals for
the Federal Circuit
Government Printing Office
Council of Economic Advisers
Council on Environmental Quakly
United States Count of International Trade
Library of Congress
National Security Council
Office of Science and Technology Policy
Terntonal Courts
Office of Technology Assessment
Office of Policy Development
Office of Administration
United States Coun of Molitary Appeals
Congressional Budget Office
United States Coun of
Copynght Royanty Tribunal
Office of National Drug Control Poucy
National Space Counce
Veterans Appeals
United States Tax Court
Administrative Office of the
United States Courts
THE VICE PRESIDENT
Federal Judicial Center
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH AND HUMAN
HOUSING AND URBAN
AGRICULTURE
COMMERCE
DEFENSE
EDUCATION
ENERGY
SERVICES
DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
THE INTERIOR
JUSTICE
LABOR
STATE
TRANSPORTATION
THE TREASURY
VETERANS AFFAIRS
INDEPENDENT ESTABLISHMENTS AND GOVERNMENT CORPORATIONS
ACTION
Federal Communications Commission
National Aeronautics and Space
Panama Canal Commission
Administrative Conference of the US
federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Administration
Peace Corps
Aincan Development Foundation
Federal Election Commission
National Archaves and Records
Pennsylvania Avenue Development
American Batte Monuments Commission
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Administration
Corporation
GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES CHART
Appalachian Regional Commission
Federal Home Loan Bank Board
National Capital Planning Commission
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
Board for International Broadcasting
Faderal Labor Relations Authority
National Credit Union Administration
Postal Rate Commission
Central Intelligence Agency
Federal Mantime Commission
National Foundation on the Arts and
Radroad Retirement Board
Commission on the Becantennial of the
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service
the Humanities
Securities and Exchange Commission
United States Constitution
National Labor Relations Board
Selective Service System
Federal Mane Safety and Health Review Commission
Commission on Civil Rights
National Mediation Board
Small Business Administration
Federal Reserve System Board of Governors of the
Commission of Fine Arts
National Science Foundation
Tennessee Validy Authority
Federal Retirement That investment Board
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
National Transportation Safety Board
US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
Federal Trade Commission
Consumer Product Safety Commission
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
US information Agency
Environmental Protection Agency
General Services Administration
Occupational Safety and Health Review
US International Development
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Inter American Foundation
Commission
Cooperation Agency
Export-import Bank of the U.S
Interstate Commerce Commission
Office of Personnel Management
U.S International Trade Commission
Farm Credit Administration
Ment Systems Protection Board
Office of Special Counsel
US Postal Service
21
(2:-1000m)
ATTACHMENT
The U.S. Global Change Reseach Program
General Background
The U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) represents an
integrated, Government-wide scientific effort designed to document,
understand, and predict changes in the global environment as the
foundation for national and international policymaking.
In March 1987, the White House Office of Science and Technology
Policy (OSTP) established a new Committee on Earth Sciences (CES)
To a great extent, CES was created in response to the
recommendations of a Cabinet Working Group on Climate Change which
concluded that improved mechanisms for Government-wide coordination
were rquired for the U.S. to effectively address the significant
economic, social, and environmental issues raised by changes in the
global climate system. Thus, the CES was created to:
Increase the overall effectiveness and productivity of Federal
R&D efforts directed toward understanding the Earth as a
global system.
Membership of CES includes the principal earth sciences funding
agencies (NASA, NSF, Commerce, Energy, EPA, Interior, and USDA) as
well as other Departments, Agencies, and Executive Branch offices
with interest in the policy implications of such research (State,
Transportation, CEQ, OSTP, and OMB). Figure 1 shows the
organizational structure of U.S. Government agencies with interest
and participation in global change science and economics research.
Although the CES has a number of specific areas of responsibility,
including coordination of Federal activities in groundwater
research, natural hazards reduction, atmospheric research, and the
academic oceanographic fleet, the primary focus of CES efforts to
date has been the development of the U.S. Global Change Research
Program and providing a focus for scientific input to national and
international change policy deliberations.
The U.S. Global Change Research Program
The USGCRP was formally announced in the January 1989 CES Report:
Our Changing Planet: A U.S. Strategy for Global Change Research.
That report defined the goal, objectives and scientific framework
for the USGCRP. It is important to note that the individual agency
research efforts identified in that Report had been developed prior
to the explicit definition of goals and objectives for the overall
National effort. In some cases, agencies had initiated "earth
system science" programs even before CES was created. Thus, while
1990 represents the official start of the USGCRP as a Presidential
initiative, 1991 will mark the first time that CES agencies can
develop and present a truly integrated national program.
Proposed activities within the USGCRP must first demonstrate their
responsiveness to the overarching goal of the USGCRP:
To gain a predictive understanding of the interactive
physical, geological, chemical, biological, and social
processes that regulate the total earth system, and hence,
establish the scientific basis for national and international
policy formulation and decisions relating to natural and
human-induced changes in the global environment and their
regional impacts.
Thus, a proposed project must clearly be a part of a broad national
and international scientific endeavor aimed at developing a
capability to not only understand but predict both natural and
human-induced changes in the global environment in an effort to
profice decision-makers at all levels with a strong scientific
foundation for policy formulation. In some cases, projects will
be designed to provide near-term results by focusing an aggressive,
limited-duration attack on some key aspect of the earth system--
stratospheric ozone depletion for the role of ocean-atmospheric
internations in the tropical Pacific in determining year-to-yera
climate variability over North America. In other cases, projects
will be designed as part of a long-term national commitment to the
documentation of changes in the earth system on a global scale.
NASA's Earth Observing System and NOAA's ocean observations and
global sea level proposals are examples of such initiatives.
Once having passed this first filter, a proposed project must then
demonstrate the nature of its contribution to one of the three
scientific objectives or integrating priorities of the USGCRP:
Establish an integrated, compreshensive program of
documenting the earth system on a global schale through
observational programs and data management systems;
Conduct a program of focused studies to improve our
understanding of the physical, geological, chemical,
biological, and social processes that influence earth
system processes and trends on global and trends on
global and regional scales;
Develop integrated conceptual and predictive earth system
models.
Again, the ultimate focus is on providing policy-relevant
information about the current and anticipated state of the global
environment.
Finally, the priority framework provides a relative ranking among
the seven interdisciplinary science elements which characterize the
USGCRP and within those science elements, identifies the most
pressing scientific undertainties in the context of the Program's
ultimate goal of predicting significant changes in the global
environment. Improving our ability to anticipate, assess and
address the issues associated with climate system changes are given
the highest priority in the Program although CES recognizes the
need to maintain an appropriate level of effort in all seven
science elements including adequate support for the data and
information management activities required by the Program. The
individual science priorities in the current research plan probably
represent the most dynamic feature of the USGCRP. As new insights
in earth system processes are gained, and new problems and research
needs are identified in response to that new understanding, the
details of the science priorities will change. In essence, the
evolution of the science prioritie will be a measure of the success
of the U.S. Global Change Research Program.
8
9
Figure
1
U.S. Global Change Research Program Priority Framework
STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
Support Broad U.S. and
International Scientific Effort
Identify Natural and Hu
man -Induced Changes
Focus on Interactions
and Interdisciplinary Science
Share Financial Burden,
Use the Best Resources,
and Encourage Full
Participation
INTEGRATING
PRIORITIES
Documention of
Earth System Change
Observational
Programs
Data Manage
ment Systems
Focused Studies on
Controlling Processes
and Improved
Understanding
Integrated Concep
tual and Predictive Models
SCIENCE PRIORITIES
Climate and
Biogeochemical
Ecological Systems
Earth System
Human
Solid Earth
Solar
Hydrologic Systems
Dynamics
and Dynamics
History
Interactions
Processes
Influences
Role of Clouds
Bio/Atm/Ocean Fluxes
Long-Term Measure-
Paleoclimate
Data Base Development
Coastal Erosion
EUV/UV Monitoring
Occan Circulation and
of Trace Species
ments of Structure/
Paleoecology
Models Linking:
Volcanic Processes
Atm/Solar Energy
Heat Flux
Atm Processing of
Function
Atmospheric
Population Growth
Permafrost and Marine
Coupling
Trace Species
Response to Climate
Composition
and Distribution
Gas Hydrates
Irradiance (Measure/
Increasing Priority
Land/Atm/Ocean
Water & Energy
Surface/Deep Water
and Other Stresses
Ocean Circulati on
Energy Demands
Ocean/Seafloor Heat
Model)
Fluxes
Biogeochemistry
Interactions between
and Composi tion
Changes in Land Use
and Energy Fluxes
Climate/Solar Record
Terrestrial Biosphere
Physical and
Ocean Producti vity
Industrial Production
Surficial Processes
Proxy Measurements
Coupled Climate System
& Quantitative Links
Nutrient and
Biological Processes
Sea Level Chan ge
Crustal Motions and
and Long-Term
Occan/Atm/Cryosphere
Carbon Cycling
Models of Interactions,
Paleohydrology
Sea Level
Data Base
Interactions
Terrestrial Inputs to
Feedbacks, and
Marine Ecosystems
Responses
Productivity/Resource
Models
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES
This chan seeks to show
only the more important
THE CONSTITUTION
agencies of the Government
See Md for other agencies
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
JUDICIAL BRANCH
THE CONGRESS
THE PRESIDENT
The Supreme Court of the
Sensie
House
United States
Exacutive Office of the Premient
United States Courts of Appears
Activited of the Capitor
United States District Courts
United States Botanc Garden
White House Office
National Critical Materials Council
United States Claims Court
General Accounting Office
Office of Management and Budget
Office of the US Trade Representative
United States Court of Appeals for
Government Printing Office
Counce of Economic Advisers
the Federal Circurt
Library of Congress
Council on Environmental Quanty
United States Count of International Trade
Office of Technology Assessment
National Security Counce
Office of Science and Technology Poncy
Termonal Courts
Congressions Budget Office
Office of Poacy Development
Office of Administration
United States Count of Mistary Appears
Copynges Royalty Inbunal
Office of National Drug Control Puncy
National Space Counce
United States Court of
United States Tax Court
Vaterans Appears
Administrative Office of the
Unded States Courts
THE VICE PRESIDENT
Federal Judioas Center
DEPARTMENT OF
Y.
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE
COMMERCE
DEFENSE
EDUCATION
EMERGY
HEALTH AND HUMAN
HOUSING AND URBAN
SERVICES
DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
THE INTERIOR
JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT OF
DEPARTMENT OF
LABOR
STATE
TRANSPORTATION
THE TREASURY
VETERANS AFFAIRS
INDEPENDENT ESTABLISHMENTS AND GOVERNMENT CORPORATIONS
ACTION
Federal Communications Commission
National Aeronautics and Space
Panama Canal Commission
Administrative Conterence of the US
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Administration
Peace Corps
Aincan Development Foundation
Federal Election Commission
ACTIVES and Receives
Pennsylvania Avenue Development
American Bathe Monuments Commission
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Administration
Corporation
Application Regional Commission
GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES CHART
Federal Home Loan Sana Board
Capital Planning Commission
Pension Benetits Guaranty Corporation
Board for International Broadcashing
Federal abor Retations Authority
National Crede Linion Administration
Postal Rate Commission
Central intelligence Agency
Federal Maname Commission
National Foundation on the Arts and
Rairoad Assrement Board
Commission on the of the
Federal Medission and Conception Service
the Humanises
Securities and Exchange Commission
United States Constitution
Commission on Com Pagnts
Federal Mine Salety and Mean Review Commission
National Labor Relations Board
Serective Service System
Mahona Mediation Board
Commission of Fine Arts
Faderal Reserve System Board of Governurs of the
Small Business Administration
Nameral Scance Foundation
Federal Reterement Than investment Board
Tennessee Valley Authority
Commonity Futures Trading Commission
National Transportation Salety Board
Consumer Product Salety Commission
Federal Trade Commission
US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
US Information Agency
Environments Protection Agency
General Services Administration
Occupational Salety and Health Review
US International Development
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
mar American Foundation
Commission
Cooperation Agency
Export import Bare of the US
interstate Commerce Commission
Office of Personnel Management
U.S. International Trade Commission
Faira Credit Administration
Ment Systems Protection Board
Office of Special Countries
US Postal Service
21
Givaty
paily
Wathers
Deland, etc.
Opening
The United States is strongly committed to environmental
protection: the best protection policies are those which
are based on sound science and economic principles
consistent with economic growth and free markets
The stakes are too high, the consequences too significant
for anything less
We are doing serious analytic work to advance the state of
our scientific understanding:
--US Global Change Research Program: $1 billion
--Mission to Planet Earth: will initiate the US Earth
Orbiting System to advance the state of knowledge about the
planet we share
On the economic side, we are intensively studying the
economics of possible strategies and developing real data
on the costs of various approaches
Even as we continue our research, we are taking further
steps to protect the environment, steps that have economic
as well as environmental benefits:
--Clean Air Act Legislation:
-encourages emissions trading, using market driven
solutions to enhance air quality
-energy efficiency
-clean coal technology
--National Energy Strategy
-comprehensive blueprint for addressing future energy
needs in environmentally sound manner by increasing
energy efficiency and the use of renewable resources
--Environmentally sound technology development
--Energy Efficiency Program
--Alternative Energy Sources
??
--Forestry: America the Beautiful program
--Phase-out CFCs and development of safe substitutes
This is a high priority for my administration, and
together, have we can explore the problems and concerns posed
by environmental issues
Closing
learned
We have heard much about global climate change these past
two days
We understand what drives our atmospheric system yet we do
not fully understand how man $ actions may affect this
system
natural and human activity
We have shared our scientific knowledge and debated our
assumptions; and we have begun to explore the economics
Much remains to be done. Many questions remain to be
answered.
We must continue to seek hard data, accurate models and new
ways to improve the science
We must intensify our efforts to improve our economic models
Nothing presented here indicates that we are facing an
imminent crisis: we should not proceed with unnecessary
haste - the potential for severe economic and social
disruption is too great
We must match policy commitments to emerging scientific
knowledge and reconcile environmental protection with the
benefits of continued economic development
This is not to say we should sit idly by: we must fulfill
our stewardship obligations
But we also have a responsibility to do it right
Believe we should proceed:
With respect to our understanding of all aspects of climate
change, look forward to reviewing the IPCC Interim
Assessment.
From our discussions here, it is clear that we must
continue and expand our research and monitoring; believe
existing IPCC structure provides a sound framework for this
We believe a framework convention provides the best means
to continue this important analytic work
Such a framework convention would commit us to cooperate in
continuing our research and monitoring efforts
-2-
Actions, if needed, could be developed subsequently, but
only as part of a comprehensive approach that addresses the
system, sources and sinks, as a whole
Reiterate invitation to host first session of the
negotiations in the US
In the interim, have an insurance strategy: take those
actions that have benefits distinct from climate change,
such as energy efficiency and conservation, phasing out the
use of CFCs and forestry programs
These actions have economic as well as environmental
benefits and it is unlikely that we would ever regret
having taken them
Dale
DEPARTMENT
PRESIDENT
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20500
SECUTIVE
STATES
April 10, 1990
Michael R. Deland
(202) 395-5080
Chairman
Mr. Matt Wald
New York Times
229 West 43rd Street
New York, NY 10036
Dear Matt:
I never before have been afforded the luxury of responding to
written questions from the press. While in theory it should have
provided me with moments to reflect, in practice it means that
once again I'm "shooting from the hip," this time into my
dictaphone rather than your recorder! My instinctive reactions
to your thoughtful questions are as follows:
1. What is the most promising change of the last
20 years?
In 1970, we as a nation were grappling with the
fundamental question: Do we need to act to protect the
environment? Today the question is much different:
What is the most effective way to protect our
environment? That is an enormous -- and positive --
change. An "environmental ethic" has emerged both
nationally and internationally. Environmental quality
is no longer a "fringe issue, " but rather is
"mainstream." More and more families and communities
are starting to recycle, just as more and more
businesses are investing in pollution prevention
programs. They are doing so, not only because they
would like to be viewed as responsible corporate
citizens, but because they have found that pollution
prevention not only protects the environment, it
"pays."
In short, the environment is now an integral part of
the political and economic agendas of the major global
powers and is increasingly ingrained in individuals
consciousnesses. When viewed in a historical
perspective, environmental issues have become integral
to the societal agenda in a remarkably -- perhaps
unprecedented -- short period of time.
More specifically, success stories abound. For
example, this country has taken the initiative to ban
Recycled Paper
2
the use of environment-degrading and health-threatening
materials. While lead is a cheap octane booster, the
United States has banned lead from gasoline.
Consequently, in 1987 the total amount of lead emitted
into the air nationwide was 60 percent lower than in
1970. DDT, asbestos, and PCBs are other examples.
2. What is the most ominous change of the last
20 years?
The most ominous change is the dramatic acceleration of
extinction of both plant and animal species. The
destruction of rainforests, the loss of biodiversity
and widespread environmental squalor in developing
countries, all suggest that people living in those
areas face a difficult future. There are grave
implications for the developed world as well.
3.
What change do we need most in the next 20
years? What can we realistically expect to
achieve?
We need to make some fundamental changes in
"lifestyles" here at home -- mine and yours -- and
worldwide as well. We need to prevent pollution at the
source rather than trying to control it at the end of
the pipe or stack. We need to reduce -- and
dramatically so -- the amount of waste, both hazardous
and solid, that we produce.
We need to ingrain energy efficiency into our business
and private lives. Individual homes, communities of
homes, and industries need to be designed so energy use
is minimized. Happily, we are increasingly finding
that just as "pollution prevention pays,' so too does
energy efficiency pay. For example, utilities in this
country are now subsidizing energy efficient lighting
in buildings and the installation of insulation because
it is in their economic interest to do so.
A sound and safe environment and a flourishing economy
are two sides of the same coin. As more and more
people realize that changes in lifestyle do not result
in less enjoyment or less leisure, but in cleaner air
and water and better health, we will realize remarkable
progress over the next 20 years as well.
4.
What single fact, anecdote, trend or set of
statistics best illustrates environmental
progress or degradation over the last 20
years?
Recycled Paper
3
The Montreal Protocol, signed in September 1987, is the
first multi-lateral agreement to control a global
pollutant that was negotiated in anticipation of an
environmental problem. It is also one that recognizes
the importance of special considerations for developing
countries. Similarly, the Paris Economic Summit in
July 1989 elevated environmental issues to the
forefront of international diplomatic concerns.
On the negative side, the global loss of species and
the drastic shrinking of genetic possibilities stand
out as the most ominous degradation.
I hope these thoughts are of some help. I would be delighted to
discuss them further with you if that would be helpful.
Good luck and, as always, very best regards.
M
Sincerely,
MiL
Michael R. Deland
Recycled Paper
we could make 20% CO2 reduction
relatively quickly.
Extended Page
7.1
Secretary Baker
Current
Policy
Diplomacy for
No. 1254
the Environment
United States Department of State
Bureau of Public Affairs
Washington, D.C.
Following is an address by Secretary
Yet, by century's close, it had
Baker before the National Governors
of unending supply. We must give
already become evident to many
back to the Earth if we are to continue
Association, February 26, 1990,
Americans-from the developed East
to draw from it.
Washington, D.C.
and the developing West alike-that
From the history of the conser-
America's bounty was not inexhaust-
I'm pleased to have this opportunity to
vation movement in the United States,
ible. It had become apparent that we
we have learned that state and federal
talk to you today about the environ-
needed to take responsibility for pro-
ment. It is a subject that is important
governments, business and labor,
tecting and replenishing our natural
national organizations, and individual
to me personally and also very impor-
resources so that future generations
tant for the 50 states, the territories,
citizens must work together if we are
could enjoy them.
to craft effective environmental
and for our foreign policy.
In 1908 at the White House,
policies.
A little history may be in order. In
President Theodore Roosevelt con-
Finally, we know from our own
1852, Chief Seattle responded to a
vened a conference on the conservation
request of the U.S. Government to
experience in this interdependent
of natural resources-the first of its
world that we must "think local and act
purchase some tribal lands for the
kind not only in the United States, but
global." We cannot serve America's
arriving pioneers. The chief replied:
in the world. It was known as the
"The Earth does not belong to man,
environmental interests effectively
Conference of Governors. And it is fair
unless we address worldwide environ-
man belongs to the Earth. All things
to say that the conference was the
are connected like the blood that unites
mental concerns. That is where foreign
single greatest stimulus to the creation
us all: man did not weave the web of
policy enters the picture. And that's
of a responsible national environmental
life, he is merely a strand in it." And
what I'd like to talk about today.
policy for the United States.
the chief warned, "Whatever he does to
Now, as we plan ahead for the next
the web, he does to himself."
The Environment and
century, we must remember the
The settlers kept moving West-
U.S. Foreign Policy
lessons of the 19th and the 20th
my great-grandfather among them.
centuries.
The foreign policy objectives of the
These independent, hard-working, and
From America's native peoples, we
United States are grounded in our
courageous people helped to make our
have learned that we cannot take
basic values. We seek to encourage
great nation what it is today. Even for
nature for granted. We must cherish it
democracy, foster prosperity through
those of us whose ancestors did not
and respect its God-given dignity.
economic liberty, ensure security, and
take part in the westward saga, the
From our forefathers, we have
improve effective international
pioneers still epitomize the essence of
learned that nature is not a cornucopia
cooperation that addresses our
the American spirit.
common interests. What is not well-
04/06/90
14:25
202 647 1579
US STATE DEPT
008
known, however, is that our environ-
environment, we are offering our whole
the concept of sustainable develop-
mental concerns have a major role to
experience in dealing with these issues.
ment.
play in the achievement of each of
We are offering to the emerging
Providing market-based incentives,
these objectives: democracy, pros-
democracies grants and concessional
eliminating structural impediments,
perity, security, cooperation, the
loans; joint projects, training and
and ending international trade prac-
environment-they are all inter-
technology; as well as guidance in
tices that distort global markets-all
connected. That is why the President
drafting laws and regulations.
will generate an economic dynamism
and I are committed to ensuring that
For instance, we have proposed a
that benefits the developed and
environmental issues are fully
joint U.S.-Czechoslovak study to
developing world alike.
integrated into our diplomatic efforts.
determine the most cost-effective way
This is the greening of our foreign
to deal with Czechoslovakia's serious
policy.
Bilateral and Multilateral Efforts
air pollution problems. We are provid-
ing clean-coal technology to Poland, in
Let me cite a few examples of how we
Democracy and the Environment
part to arrest the tragic defacement of
are making the concept of sustain-able
Krakow's historic architectural
development work through our
So first, I would like to discuss how our
treasures-treasures literally being
bilateral assistance efforts. In
efforts to consolidate democracy are
linked to our environmental efforts.
eaten away, day by day. For the
Rwanda, we are sponsoring a project
region as a whole, we have promoted
linking the economic benefits of
Democracies-dependent as they are
on an informed citizenry, an open
participation in the Budapest Regional
tourism with the conservation of two
Environmental Center, first announced
unique, species-rich protected areas.
society, and accountability in
by President Bush last July. With the
In other developing countries around
government-afford the greatest scope
Soviet Union, Foreign Minister
the world, we are fostering biodivers-
for responsible environmental action.
Shevardnadze has agreed to my
ity. By so doing, we can increase the
The conservation movement is one of
request to add to our meetings a fifth
availability of natural products for
the greatest success stories for
grassroots democracy in the United
major agenda item on transnational
commercial purposes. Life-saving
States. When we defend and promote
concerns. Environment is the most
pharmaceuticals and other marketable
democratic and environmental values,
prominent issue in these ongoing
goods such as food and dyes can result.
discussions.
An ongoing AID [Agency for
we express the essence of what We
believe is essential for all nations to
The sum total of all these projects
International Development] project in
will reinforce the trends toward
Indonesia focuses on the management
make progress-developed and
developing nations alike.
democracy in the East-that is,
and conservation of exotic native fruits,
governments responsible to the people
which may prove marketable. This
Let me give you a vivid example of
how democrats and environmentalists
and the concerns of the people.
project also promotes the management
make common cause. In Eastern
That brings us to our second major
practices needed to stem the wanton
Europe, environmental concerns were
objective: promoting prosperity and
destruction of tropical forests.
economic liberty. Just as political
Innovative efforts, such as debt-for-
championed by democratic opposition
freedom and economic liberty go hand
nature swaps, are also important.
groups long before the people power
in hand, so, too, do sustained growth
These, like all other debt reduction
revolutions of last fall. In fact, environ-
mental issues helped galvanize the
and a healthy environment. Strong
efforts, must involve basic structural
push for democracy. It was an inter-
economies provide the material means
reform if they are to succeed. Debt
national environmental conference in
with which to protect the environment.
swaps are not the panacea for debt
Sofia, Bulgaria, which helped to spark
These relationships are symbiotic.
reduction, nor can they single-handedly
solve environmental problems, but
the popular revolution. "The Ecoglas-
They are expressed by the concept
nost Association," formed in antici-
called "sustainable development."
debt swaps can help with both.
pation of that conference, is now one of
Sustainable development, to put it
On the multilateral level, the
Bulgaria's largest grassroots organi-
simply, is a way to fulfill the require-
development banks can play a key role
ments of the present without compro-
in promoting environmentally
zations and democratic opposition
groups. So in Bulgaria, Ecoglasnost
mising the future. When policies of
sustainable growth. We will continue
gave the term "Green Revolution" a
sustainable development are followed,
to encourage the multilateral
whole new meaning.
our economic and our environmental
development banks to strengthen their
The environment is clearly one of
objectives are both achieved. In fact,
policies, staff, and training. We hope
America's entire approach to bilateral
other donor countries will join our
those points of mutual advantage
between East and West that the
and multilateral assistance is based on
efforts to integrate environmental
President and I are pledged to seek as
assessments into all 01 erations of the
development banks.
we try to leave the cold war behind. To
I know that there are dramatic calls
help the East Europeans help
by some for the establishment of new
themselves in the crucial area of
financial institutions or mechanisms to
2
04/06/90
14:26
202 647 1579
US STATE DEPT
009
provide environmental assistance. But
Forty years ago, we and our NATO
a major financial commitment to
before we spend our scarce resources
partners pledged to "safeguard the
analyze these scientific issues,
on creating new bureaucracies, it
common heritage and civilization" of
increasing our funding for the U.S.
makes good sense to make maximum
Europe against our common enemies.
Global Change Research Program to
use of the multilateral tools already in
As the President pointed out, Europe's
over $1 billion. And we mean that we
existence and to reinforce existing
environment is the common heritage of
are prepared to take actions that are
institutions.
all Europeans, and we all must work to
fully justified in their own right and
Similarly, before we dedicate
protect it. As we have seen, defending
which have the added advantage of
additional resources toward inter-
Europe's environment from the threat
coping with greenhouse gases. They're
national environmental efforts, we will
of pollution is just another way for the
precisely the policies we will never
need to know how much is required.
West to help the peoples of the East
have cause to regret. Specifically:
Substantial funding for environmental
realize their dream of a Europe whole
projects is already available. We fully
and free.
We are committed to phasing out
recognize, however, that developing
Our fourth objective is enhancing
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) by the
countries may need some additional aid
effective international cooperation that
year 2000 to protect the ozone layer.
in order to meet the incremental costs
addresses our common interests. As
CFCs also contribute significantly to
associated with fulfilling their inter-
we have seen, many of today's
the "greenhouse" effect.
national environmental obligations.
problems-environmental problems
Next, the President has launched
Our third key objective is ensuring
especially-have worldwide
a major reforestation initiative called
global security. Solid democracies and
consequences. They demand global
"America the Beautiful." Under this
sound economies cannot grow in unsafe
solutions. All nations share
multiyear program, our citizens will
surroundings. We have long worked in
responsibility for the protection of the
plant I billion trees each year in
partnership with friendly nations to
international community.
partnership with the government and
protect ourselves against traditional
No nation alone, however great, can
busines. The trees will provide
security threats from hostile
dictate fully the course of human
habitats for wildlife, stem soil erosion,
governments. But in today's world,
events nor fully protect its natural
provide recreational facilities, offer
traditional concepts of threats to the
resources. And no nation, however
employment, and generate forest
security of our citizens need to be
small, is without the power to act for
products. At the same time, the trees
updated and extended to include the
the health of the global community. All
will help absorb carbon dioxide, a
new transnational dangers-environ-
countries must act responsibly and
major "greenhouse" gas.
mental degradation among them.
work together.
Finally, we are dedicated to a
I am glad to say that more than
Environmental Threats Are
ever before, nations all over the world
program of energy conservation and
Everyone's Concern
are working together on global
energy efficiency. This contributes to
Environmental threats respect no
environmental problems. Let me give
efficient use of scarce energy supplies,
border. They threaten human lives
you two examples. One is global
reduces our dependence on foreign
climate change. Just a few weeks ago,
energy sources, and saves us all money
and violate the territorial integrity of
the President addressed the Inter-
-citizens, government, and industry
states from both within and without.
governmental Panel on Climate
alike. Moreover, decreasing the use of
Chernobyl-a classic example of the
ills of the stagnant Brezhnev era-
Change. He was the first head of state
the fossil fuels will reduce "green-
house" gas emissions.
showed how lives can be needlessly
to speak before the panel. And his
endangered when governments fail to
presence demonstrated the seriousness
If the results of international
act quickly and responsibly to protect
with which our government regards
scientific research demonstrate that
their own citizens and the people of
this question as well as our dedication
climatic conditions will not change in a
neighboring countries.
to finding appropriate scientific,
significant way, we will have "no
Not surprisingly, the drug cartels
economic, and environmental solutions.
regrets" for these actions because they
that threaten the health of the world
The President reiterated our policy
provided other benefits. If, on the
community also damage the
toward climate change. We call it the
other hand, the findings of our research
environment. As I pointed out at the
"no regrets" policy, and we encourage
turn out to be more troublesome, we
UN Special Session on Narcotics last
other nations to adopt a similar
will have taken prudent steps toward
week, traffickers in the Andes are
approach.
solving the problem in a cost-effective
destroying vast tracts of forest for
Just what do we mean by "no
way. We urge other nations to join us
their drug labs and are dumping
regrets"? We mean that while we are
in our "no regrets" efforts.
millions of gallons of precursor
pursuing the serious scientific research
A final example of global
chemicals into rivers.
that is critical to any responsible
cooperation involves a denizen of the
approach, we're also hedging our bets
animal family-a party animal. Some
in an economically sound way. We
might say he is a partisan creature, but
mean that the United States is making
3
04/06/90
14:27
202 647 1579
US STATE DEPT
010
he has bipartisan virtues. Sadly, he is
adopted unanimously by the United
complex and sometimes slow to
listed among the severely endangered
Nations. Nor have I touched upon
develop. And sometimes, we are even
species. Even the Democrats among
another major environmental initiative
slower to recognize them.
us agree that if we let our old friend
of this Administration: crafting a
Yet despite the intense debates,
the elephant pass from the earth, we
revised Clean Air Act with incentives
despite all the uncertainties, despite
will all be diminished. Therefore, last
for our private sector to find creative,
the sheer complexities involved, there
summer the United States led the way
market-driven solutions to enhance air
remains before us, as before all
in banning the international trade in
quality. And I am very hopeful that we
peoples, the unquestioned respons-
ivory. Now, a global effort is under-
will soon be able to sign the Basel
ibility to act. Emerson, the 19th
way. Most other nations have joined
convention, which controls exports of
century American essayist and poet,
us. And although some trading in ivory
hazardous wastes.
put it this way: "We do not inherit the
continues, I believe we can all work
The United States is doing all of
Earth from our ancestors, we borrow it
together to develop an enforcement
these things because it serves our
from our children."
system that saves the African
national interest to do them. We are
This is a sacred debt that must be
elephant.
also doing them because they are
honored. The splendor of nature
fundamentally the right thing to do.
enfolds and unites all of humankind.
Conclusion
The great early pioneers of American
Now, together, the earth's peoples
The environmental efforts that I have
conservation recognized these truths,
must work, so that this precious web of
described here today are illustrative of
and they found effective ways to act
life shall embrace, in beauty and in
the many ways the Bush Admini-
upon them. Their views didn't always
peace, all the generations to come.
stration is acting to protect the
prevail with the officials of their era,
environment nationally and inter-
and they certainly didn't always agree
Published by the United States Department
nationally, This morning, I have not
with one another. Controversies that
of State
Bureau of Public Affairs
Office
even begun to touch upon our no-net-
raged around the Governor's Con-
of Public Communication
Washington, D.C.
ference back in 1908 continue down to
February 1990 Editor: Jim Pinkelman
loss of wetlands policy, our opening of
formal discussions with Canada on acid
this day. Indeed, environmental issues
This material is in the public domain and may
rain, or our driftnet resolution that was
have never been simple; they never
be reprinted without permission; citation of
will be. Environmental problems are
this source isappreciated.
OAP, Rm. 5815A
United States Department of State
BULK RATE
Washington, D.C. 20520-6810
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
U.S. Department of State
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
Permit No. G-130
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE $300
Address Correction Requested
FORWARD STEPS: CONF. PROPOSALS /OUTCOMES
REPORT.410
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON, D.C.
The White House Conference
on
Science and Economics Research Related to Global Change
DRAFT OF CO-CHAIRMEN'S CONFERENCE REPORT
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE CONFERENCE:
A White House Conference, initiated by President George Bush, on Science and Economics Research Related
to Global Change was held in Washington, D.C., April 16-18, 1990. Conference Co-Chairmen were, the
Chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers, Dr. Michael J. Boskin, the Assistant to the
President for Science and Technology, Dr. D. Allan Bromley, and the Chairman of the White House Council
on Environmental Quality, Mr. Michael R. Deland. Seventeen nations and the leadership of the E.C. and the
OECD sent ministerial-level delegations to the Conference (See Appendix I for a List of Delegates). The
Conference sought to add a integrating focus for international thought on Global Change, by introducing the
concept of "Global Stewardship", and by adding a new dimension to the international dialogue on Global
Change -- the proposition that economics, both analysis and research on broad economic policy and on
economic consequences of policy options, is an essential link between the science of Global Change and policy
alternatives.
the "Frangtoree" Binding
GLOBAL STEWARDSHIP
(INSERT GLOBAL STEWARDSHIP TEXT HERE)
THE CONFERENCE AGENDA
To address the substantive Conference goals, the agenda focussed the presentations and discussions on:
Science and economics research issues relevant to policy on global change,
Important next steps that substantially enhance and broaden international understanding of
science and economic research issues that relate to global change,
The special role that economics plays in integrating the science of Global Change with the
policy process,
Demonstrating linkages between science and economics research results and both domestic
and international policy processes, and
Framing the initial steps towards strategies for implementing joint international science and
economics research efforts.
Tuesday
April 10, 1990
1
9:08 am
The Conference focussed on "Global Change," a scope of research interests that evolved out of the sciences
that are concerned with understanding the fundamental processes that govern the way the global Earth system
functions. Global Change encompasses such diverse and interrelated issues as ozone depletion, greenhouse
gases, climate change, food security, water supply, sea level changes, wetlands, deforestation, biodiversity,
population changes, and energy demands.
The Conference was conceived as an integral part of the on-going international process to understand the
science of and policy options relating to global environment issues. The need to substantially improve
understanding of both the science and economics of global change has been noted by virtually all world
leaders. The Conference, therefore, focused on scientific and economic research issues as a complement to
the on-going Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other international forums that seek
to address the research agenda for Global Change.
The Conference provided a forum of international leaders to address a variety of complex science and
economics research issues central to the policy process, for example:
How well can we predict temperature trends in the decades ahead?
How "good" are our global-scale models, such as models to predict temperature changes?
How well can we predict the interconnections between global environmental change and the
resulting social and economic impacts?
What are the economic costs of adapting to or mitigating global change?
How "good" are the economic models used to compute these costs?
By having ministerial-level discussions of such questions, it was hoped that nations might join together to
enhance cooperative international research programs that focus on rapid improvement of both scientific and
economic knowledge.
To address these complex and interrelated issues, ministerial-level delegations were invited to the Conference
from a representative group of nations. The Conference was conceived with the idea that a small representative
group of countries would participate. Their selection was based on the simple criteria that the meeting should
be modest in size and include countries or organizations of countries that have substantial populations, large
land masses, industrialized economies or heavy future energy needs, major research infrastructures, or have
provided international leadership on issues related to climate and global change. A representative group of
countries was selected, including:
1. Australia
2. Brazil
3. Canada
4. Federal Republic of Germany
5. France
6. India
7. Indonesia
8. Italy
9. Japan
10. Mexico
11. Netherlands
Tuesday
April 10, 1990
2
9:08 am
12. Nigeria
13. Norway
14. Poland
15. Soviet Union
16. United Kingdom
17. Zaire
18. European Community
19. OECD
CONFERENCE PLENARY AND WORKING GROUP SESSIONS
The Conference Plenary and Working Group Sessions provided an opportunity for delegates to address the
critical science and economics research issues related to Global Change. The agenda was designed to provide
a forum to:
Substantially increase collective understanding of the critical scientific, economic, and environmental
research agenda central to the needs of future global change policy development.
Identify the uncertainties in both scientific and economics knowledge critical understanding changes
in the global environment of the planet,
Increase mutual understanding of and sensitivity to scientific and economic research efforts between
both of those research communities.
Increase sensitivity by the two research communities to the policy needs in the environmental and
energy arena, and visa versa.
Foster the concept of the importance of a solid and well implemented scientific and economics
research effort, as a pre-requisite for and parallel complement to, the evolving efforts by nations to
address the international policy questions of global environmental changes.
Enhance communications and establish a broader "network" of among national leaders, concerned with
and responsible for, the research and policy agenda related to global change. The Conference sought
to provide a forum to forge partnerships between the scientific and technical research communities
and the policy-makers.
To provide a vehicle to focus on these vital issues, the Conference Program was designed around a balance
between several Plenary Sessions and concurrent Working Groups that addressed three major themes:
Theme I: The Science and Economics Research Challenge
Theme II: Integrating Science and Economics Research in the Policy Process
Theme III: Building Partnerships for Science and Economics Research
PLENARY SESSIONS
Tuesday
April 10, 1990
3
9:08 am
The program for the Conference was divided into three broad components: (i) One half day of Opening
Plenary Sessions, (ii) two half days of Working Groups Sessions, and (iii) a half day of integrating and
Summary Plenary Sessions.
OPENING PLENARY SESSIONS
Opening: The Conference was opened with a presentation by Secretary of the Treasury, Nicholas F.
Brady. The welcome addressed focussed on
Include Summary of Brady's Remarks.
Address by President George Bush: The President of the United States, George Bush spoke to the
Conference and his central messages was
Include a Summary of President Bush's
Speech. Full Text of the President's Speech is appended in Appendix A.
Remarks by
, Delegate from
. The Honorable
, from
, provided the Conference with a visiting delegation perspective on the Conference, during
which
Include a Summary of his remarks. Include full text if available in the Appendices.
Central Themes of the Conference: The Three Conference Co-Chairmen gave major addresses on the
three Conference Themes, the purpose of which was to outline the central issues of the Conference
and to provide a focus on each Theme for the Working Group Sessions. The full text of these three
speeches is appended in Appendix B.
Theme I: The Science and Economics Research Challenge. Dr. D. Allan Bromley
Include a Summary of Bromley's Speech
Theme II: Integrating Science and Economics Research in the Policy Process.
Dr. Michael J. Boskin
Include a Summary of Boskin's Speech
Theme III: Building Partnerships for Science and Economics Research.
Mr. Michael R. Deland
Include a Summary of Deland Speech
Visiting Delegations Perspectives on the Themes. Three delegates formed a Panel to discuss
the Themes and to give several visiting delegations views on the Themes of the
Conference.
o Foreign Delegate - Include Short Summary Here
o Foreign Delegate - Include Short Summary Here
o Foreign Delegate - Include Short Summary Here
(Include full text if available in Appendices)
MAJOR ADDRESSES
There were two major addresses given during the Conference Luncheons.
o Admin. William Reilly - Include a Summary of that Address
o Sec. James D. Watkins - Include a Summary of that Address
Tuesday
April 10, 1990
4
9:08 am
The full text of both of these address is included in Appendix C.
WORKING GROUP SESSIONS
The Conference agenda was organized so that delegates were divided into three Working Groups (Working
Groups A, B, and C), each of which consisted of a mix of ministerial-level delegates from science, economics,
and the environment agencies of government, and in some cases from energy agencies. All countries were
represented in each Working Group. The list of Working Groups is contained in Appendix D. Four Working
Group Sessions met sequentially, two on Tuesday afternoon of April 17 and two on Wednesday morning of
April 18. The first sessions were devoted to the three Conference Themes and the fourth was designed as a
session to integrate the discussions and to prepare a written summary of the Working Group deliberations as
a contribution to the Co-Chairmen's Conference Report. Those reports are summarized herein.
Working Group A: Summary Report of Working Group "A"
Working Group B: Summary Report of Working Group "B"
Working Group C: Summary Report of Working Group "C
SUMMARY PLENARY SESSIONS
SUMMARIES OF CONCLUDING ADDRESSES AND PRESENTATIONS
1.)
Foreign Delegations Summary of Conference: Three visiting delegates reviewed the results
of the Conference from their perspective, a summary of those remarks follow. Include the
comments here. (Include full text if available in Appendices)
2.)
Working Group Leader Summaries of the Conference: The three Working Groups gave
summaries of their deliberations, a summary of which follows.
Include it here.
(Include full text if available in Appendices)
3.)
Conference Co-Chairmen Summaries of the Conference: The three Conference Co-Chairmen
outlined their summary views on the Conference, a summary of those comments follow.
Include those here. (Include full text if available in Appendices)
4.)
Closing Remarks by President George Bush: The President of the United States, George
Bush presented his closing remarks to the Conference.
Include a Summary of President
Bush's Speech Full Text of the President's Remarks is appended in Appendix A with the
Opening Address.
SUMMARIES OF PROPOSALS FOR ACTION OFFERED DURING THE CONFERENCE
The delegates of the Conference concluded that several specific actions, developed during the
Conference should be addressed in the period immediately after the Conference. These include:
1.)
The Working Groups considered a proposal by the U.S. to endorse the principles contained
in a "Charter for Cooperation in Science and Economics Research Related to Global
Change", the draft of which is contained in Appendix E. The general consensus of the
Conference was
Include the specific results of discussions on
5
including any recommended action steps.
2.)
The U.S. proposed an initiative designed to initiate international and jointly sponsored
research "centers" that focus research on the science and economics of global change. The
purpose of these centers, which might be called International Institutes for Research on the
Science and Economics of Global Change, is to develop internationally recognized "Center
of Excellence" where both resident and visiting scholars address key research topics that
contribute research results to the international policy process. A draft of the U.S. proposal
is contained in Appendix F. The Working Groups discussed this proposal and concluded
Include the results of those discussions here
3.)
The U.S. proposed an initiative to increase communications among nations engaged in
research on global change. The U.S. proposal suggested that nations join together in what
might be called a "Global Change Communications Network". The proposal suggested that
a joint effort be undertaken that builds on the available technology for data and information
transfer, electronic mail, and other telecommunications technologies. A draft of the concept
is enclosed in Appendix G. The Working Groups discussed this matter and concluded
that
Include the results of those discussions here.
4.)
The U.S. proposed that the Conference consider endorsing a "Statement of Principle" for
developing an international Strategy for Cooperation in Scientific and Economic Research
in Global Change. The draft "Statement" is attached in Appendix H. The "Statement of
Principles" outlines the basis for developing a strategy among nations for a cooperative
international effort to implement joint scientific and economics research programs, including
sharing of scientific and economic data, coordinating the development of international global
observing systems, and facilitating joint research efforts to substantially
improve the capabilities of models to predict controlling global and regional environmental
process (i.e. GCM's). The "Statement" outlines the essential ingredients for an overall
strategy to implement cooperative research internationally. The focus would be on research
efforts that can be substantially enhanced by joint efforts that build on the expertise,
experience, and data available of each participating country. The U.S. suggested that if the
"Statement of Principles" is endorsed by the Conference, then a Task Team of interested
nations would prepare a Draft Strategy, within a few months, for consideration by
government agencies responsible for implementing Global Change research programs and
projects. The proposal suggested that such a Strategy then could lead to what might be
called, an "International Global Change Research Program". The proposal suggested that
such a more fully coordinated international research effort could substantially assist the on-
going policy debate and could support other up-coming international meetings, such as the
IPCC and the Second World Climate Conference. The proposal builds upon existing
discussions initiated by the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) during its
recent Annual Meeting in Lisbon, in October, 1989. The proposal is intended to fully
facilitate the implementation of the research programs of the World Climate Research
Program (WCRP), the International Geosphere-Biosphere Program (IGBP), and others. The
Working Groups considered the proposal and concluded
Include the results of the
Working Group discussions here.
5.)
Other proposals - include here.
File = REPORT.410
6
APPENDIX A
PRESIDENTS TWO SPEECHES
(To be Added at Conference)
Tuesday
April 10, 1990
7
9:08 am
APPENDIX B
THREE CO-CHAIRS THEME SPEECHES
(To be Added at Conference)
Tuesday
April 10, 1990
8
9:08 am
APPENDIX C
LUNCHEON SPEECHES
(By Wm. Reilly and James Watkins)
(To be Added at Conference)
Tuesday
April 10, 1990
9
9:08 am
APPENDIX D
WORKING GROUPS MEMBERSHIP LISTS
(To be Added at Conference)
Tuesday
April 10, 1990
10
9:08 am
APPENDIX E
CHARTER FOR COOPERATION
in the
Science and Economics Research Related to Global Change"
Government officials of Science, Economics, and the Environment from eighteen nations, the European
Community (EC), and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) gathered in
Washington, D.C. on April 16-18, 1990, to attend a White House Conference on Science and Economics
Research Related to Global Change. The Conference was designed to address important next steps for
substantially enhancing and broadening international understanding of science and economic research related
to Global Change. The delegates to the Conference noted that;
WHEREAS:
Scientific evidence demonstrates that the Earth and its environment are changing on time
and spacial scales unknown to humankind,
Scientific uncertainty remains as to the contributions made by natural variability in Earth
system processes and those made by impacts from anthropogenic sources, hence limiting the
ability of science to predict, with acceptable accuracy, the future behavior of the Earth system,
Gaps in scientific understanding substantially limit the abilities of nations to determine the
economic and societal impacts of global changes in the environment,
World leaders are considering unprecedented postures and actions to address the potential
?
economic and social implications of these changes, and
These national and international developments, taken in total, have placed global
environmental issues central on the agenda of international affairs.
THEREFORE:
The nations gathered at the White House Conference on Science and Economics Research Related to Global
Change will seek to:
Increase and coordinate their science and economics research programs with internationally
planned research efforts,
Work together to develop national science and economic research programs that complement
and contribute to a coherent international effort,
Work to enhance existing international mechanisms for planning and implementing science
and economics research programs, and to foster, when necessary and appropriate new
mechanisms to foster cooperation among the world's governments and international agencies,
Work toward full participation of all nations in the formulation, refining, and implementation
of the science and economics research agenda,
Encourage the nations of the world to contribute resources and personnel to the research
agenda in measure and kind reflecting national capabilities,
Tuesday
April 10, 1990
11
9:08 am
o
Collaborate with other nations in support of education, training, and human resources
development that is focussed on the research agenda and that supports full participation by
developing countries, and
Work toward developing cooperative access to pertinent research facilities and research data
and information by all nations and toward developing indigenous research activities relevant
to the global environment change research program in all participating nations.
FILE = CHARTER.410
Tuesday
April 10, 1990
12
9:08 am
APPENDIX F
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE CONCEPT PAPER
Tuesday
April 10, 1990
13
9:08 am
APPENDIX G
GLOBAL CHANGE COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK CONCEPT PAPER
Tuesday
April 10, 1990
14
9:08 am
APPENDIX H
STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES
FOR
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES FOR COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS
Tuesday
April 10, 1990
15
9:08 am
APPENDIX I
LIST OF DELEGATIONS
(To be Added at Conference)
Tuesday
April 10, 1990
16
9:08 am
THE WHITE HOUSE
10 april 1990
Dear ambassader Lake,
Please accept my pincere thanks
for your gracious hospitality. It was
good to meet you and Paul spencer
and to learn even more about my
family's home.
Please stay in touch. Warnest I look
forward regards. to seeing you soon
Sincerely,
Joe watkins
see Bahe's what speech on
wive already done....
McGroarty/Dooley
auto-lead.
CFC'S phine out.
April 5, 1990
CFC cubbacks.
5:00 pm
reforestation
[climate] change
Global
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON
CHANGE
J.W. MARRIOTT
3rd Wi can the door it close on growth...
APRIL 17, 1990
X:XX A.M.
ozone depletion
bio diversity
Thank you. [Introductory acknowledgements.]
enviro.
ocean
Environment//// Here in the United States, we've moved (mpacts one
pollution
step closer to a landmark Two weeks ago, our package of
amendments to the Clean Air Act cleared the Senate -- with
coal
overwhelming support. Last week, the House Committee
//
carbon
As always, where there's compromise, there are critics.
chiefide Hargets.
Some say we've gone too far XXX//// others And for the
first time in 13 long years, we will before the end of 1990.
Tougher tailpipe standards -- and stronger regulations on
toxic chemicals. Provisions to expand the use of alternative
fuels, and the best-available pollution control technologies.
Strong steps to cut emissions that cause acid rain. And of
course, a full range of penalties for polluters who fail to clean
up their act.
Technol.,
And I don't have to tell this audience what it means to cut
an carbon
dioxide emissions by XX million tons by the year 2000.
We've made headway on this key environmental issue. I want
to speak this morning about what we can do -- what all of you can
do over the course of the next two days to advance our
understanding on this critical question of climate global change.
04/06/90
14:20
202 647 1579
US STATE DEPT
002
Secretary Baker
Current
Policy
New Horizons in Europe
No. 1154
United States Department of State
Bureau of Public Affairs
Washington, D.C.
Following is an address by Secretary
ual freedoms protected, and their dem-
velopments in human rights and in the
James A. Baker, III, at the Vienna
ocratic governments responsible to
emphasis upon the rule of law. Econ-
ministerial meeting signaling the
those people.
omies once rigidly fixed in the grip of
March 9 opening of two new security
We believed, and we continue to
centralized control are being loosened
negotiations in Europe, talks on confi-
believe, that freedom of speech, and of
and a role for individual initiative has
dence- and security-building measures
religion, freedom from fear and free-
been decreed. Recently, [Soviet] Gener-
(CSBMs) and separate talks on con-
dom of opportunity, were and are the
al Secretary Gorbachev has declared,
ventional armed forces in Europe
natural rights of free men everywhere.
"World politics, too, should be guided
(CFE), on March 6, 1989.
We were certain, and we continue to be
by the primacy of universal human val-
certain, that free markets and individ-
ues." The rhetoric of Soviet foreign
We meet here today in a historic set-
ual initiatives are the surest routes to
policy is being reshaped with less
ting. Vienna, of course, is a living
social and economic progress.
emphasis on the use of force; [Foreign]
monument to the creativity of Western
We sought, and we continue to
Minister Shevardnadze affirmed that
culture. This city is also a crossroads of
seek, our security in a coalition of free
again today and, that's very good.
civilization. It reminds us that Europe
nations drawn together by common val-
No one can foretell where this
and the achievements of Europe have
ues, not only mutual interests. And we
process will lead or even whether it
always gone beyond the limits of geog-
envisioned then, as we envision now,
will endure. Yet we cannot deny the re-
raphy to influence the wider world.
a Europe at peace-its nations free
ality of what is actually happening in
But Vienna also bears witness to
to develop in diversity but united
Europe today. Dostoevsky, in his novel
vanished hopes. Negotiations and
against war.
The Possessed, wrote that "The fire is
agreements intended to bring enduring
Our vision was not the only vision.
in the minds of men, not in the roofs of
peace to Europe have been discarded
There was another view opposed to the
buildings." The revolutionary changes
too often in war. Too often the lack of
values most cherished by the West.
in that part of Europe still behind a
security in Europe has meant a lack of
And the competition between the two
rusting Iron Curtain are changes above
security for the entire world. That is
visions gave us the difficult legacy with
all in the minds of men, in their vision
why we are meeting here to negotiate.
which we live today: a Europe, forcibly
of the future. People want freedom:
Our purpose is to improve the security
divided against the will of its peoples; a
freedom of the mind; freedom in the
of Europe thereby also strengthening
Europe. the most heavily armed conti-
home: freedom in the workplace and
the foundations of world peace.
nent in the world.
free governments. And these freedoms
I believe that we need a larger per-
Now, as we approach the end of
will heal the wounds inflicted by stag-
spective, a common vision of where
this decade, new horizons are beckon-
nation and tyranny.
we are headed and why, if we are to
ing, horizons that offer us the oppor-
succeed.
tunity to go beyond the conflicts of the
past. The other vision is changing. It is
A Europe of Freedoms
East-West Visions
changing because we in the West have
I propose that we dedicate ourselves to
been faithful to our own vision. And it
creating a new Europe-a Europe
After the Second World War, Europe
is changing because realism has begun
based on these freedoms:
and the world were confronted by two
to triumph in the Soviet Union.
distinctly opposing views. The United
Perestroika, glasnost, and democ-
The freedom of all Europeans to
States and its allies in Western Europe
ratization are the slogans of the "new
have a say in decisions which affect
held the vision of free peoples, living
thinking." There are encouraging de-
their lives, including freedom of the
under the rule of the law, their individ-
workplace. The legality of Solidarity,
04/06/90
14:21
202 647 1579
US STATE DEPT
003
for example, should really be the norm
Economic and Environmental
new thinking to make sure that it
and not the subject for negotiations.
Initiatives
means new policy and, above all,
The freedom of all Europeans to
Economic change is also a marked fea-
changes in military deployments. We
express their political differences,
when all ideas are welcome and human
ture of the new Europe. The creation of
have sought to discover whether East
rights are truly inviolable. Monitors of
a single market by 1992, looking out-
and West could take steps together
ward to benefit all who wish to trade,
irreversible steps-that lead toward
the Helsinki agreements, for example,
would surely fulfill the hopes of those
the Europe of the freedoms. And we
should be honored and not hunted by
postwar visionaries who rightfully saw
have also sought to reduce the level of
their governments.
The freedom of all Europeans to
economic union as a buttress of peace
military confrontation.
exchange ideas and information and to
and freedom. Centralized economics
Here, too, there is progress to
exercise their right to freedom of move-
are slowly divesting the straitjacket of
report. Responding to an American
ment. The researcher in Prague, for
outmoded Marxist-Leninist theories.
proposal, the Soviet Union joined
example, should be able to find the
And the desire for increased commer-
the United States in achieving an
books he needs. Barbed wire should not
cial contact is strong and growing ever
intermediate-range nuclear forces
stronger. There is also a genuine possi-
treaty that provides for the elimination
separate cousins in Hamburg from
cousins in Dresden. And a wall should
bility for all industrialized nations,
of an entire class of nuclear-capable
not divide Berlin, continuing, as we've
both East and West, to work together
missiles. The treaty contains impor-
seen just in the past month, to cost the
on newly recognized transnational
tant precedents, especially in the areas
lives of people seeking freedom.
problems.
of verification and asymetrical reduc-
Dangers to our environment, for
tions to equality. We have also made en-
Finally, the freedom of all Eu-
ropeans to be safe from military intim-
example, risk the most fundamental se-
couraging progress in the START
idation or attack. Those in the West
curity of all the earth's citizens. Just
[strategic arms reduction talks) talks
should be free of the fear that the mas-
last week, to protect the globe's ozone
toward reducing strategic forces. And
layer, the European Community and
we look forward, once our review is
sive forces under Soviet command
might invade them. Those in the East
the United States decided to end the
completed, to further steps on the road
should be free of the fear that armed
use of all chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)
toward arms reduction and arms
Soviet intervention, justified by the
by the year 2000, assuming adequate
control.
Brezhnev doctrine, would be used
substitutes can be found-as we believe
again to deny them choice.
they can. We hope the Soviet Union
Chemical Weapons Elimination
will consider joining us in the spirit of
"New thinking" and the Brezhnev
"new thinking."
President Bush has declared that the
doctrine are in fundamental conflict.
control and elimination of chemical
We call today upon General Secretary
weapons is a high priority for the
Gorbachev to renounce the Brezhnev
Reducing Military Confrontation
United States. Since 1984, when he ta-
doctrine-beyond any shadow of a
This is progress. But while the old era
bled a draft treaty to eliminate chemi-
doubt. Let the "new thinking" sweep
apparently recedes before the horizons
cal weapons from the face of the earth
away this vestige from the era of
of the new Europe, those horizons are
on an effectively verifiable basis, the
stagnation.
still too distant. The arms and the arm-
United States has exercised leadership
These four freedoms are insepar-
ies still face each other. An Iron Cur-
in the Geneva negotiations. We will
able. They are the principles for the
tain still divides this continent. Too
continue, to be at the forefront of these
new Europe; they are the keys that
many governments have followed their
efforts in the future as well. However,
open the door to the European house of
solemn signature on human rights
until we eliminate these weapons in a
the future. As the American President
pledges with violent suppression of
verifiable way, the United States will
Abraham Lincoln said, "A house divid-
dissent.
maintain a minimal chemical deterrent.
ed against itself cannot stand.' A con-
And so, as we eye the horizon, im-
Recently, we were gratified by the
tinent divided by a wall cannot be
portant questions remain unanswered.
response to President Reagan's call for
secure. A secure and prosperous Eu-
Will the new rhetoric be translated
a conference on the use of chemical
rope can never be built on the basis of
into new actions or will we see a repeti-
weapons-and the success of that con-
artificial barriers, fear, and the denial
tion of the past-of hopes disappointed
ference under the leadership of the
of independence.
once more?
Government of France. Clearly, some
I am happy to report that we have
Will East and West, together, be
nations are ready for action.
made some progress toward realizing
able to dismantle the barriers thrown
The United States is prepared to
the new Europe of the freedoms---
up by the old era of competing visions?
lead in dealing with this problem. And
progress upon which WE: all can build.
Will these barriers finally be removed;
S0 I am happy to announce that as one
The Conference on Security and Co-
will the Berlin Wall and the barbed
of his first acts, President Bush has di-
operation in Europe-through the
wire and the watch towers finally be
rected our new Administration to ex-
Helsinki, Madrid, Stockholm. and now
relegated to history? Will the Soviet
plore ways to accelerate the removal of
the Vienna documents-has defined
Union demilitarize its foreign policy in
our existing chemical weapons from
ever more precisely the obligations of
Europe; will it cease to threaten de-
Germany. The early removal of these
states. We have emphasized a new free-
mocracy's house with tens of thousands
weapons will require available safe
dom for individuals and the expanded
of tanks?
storage and the development of practi-
concept of openness and confidence-
I was encouraged by what [For-
cal plans to destroy them.
building measures in the field of secu-
eign] Minister Shevardnadze said ear-
But unilateral action is not enough.
rity. We support this process. The
lier today as he spoke of far-reaching
The Soviet Union has enormous stocks
Helsinki Final Act embodies our vision
reductions. In recent years, we have
of chemical weapons threatening Eu-
of Europe. And NATO's security di-
seen reasons to be hopeful about the
rope. We, therefore, call on the Soviets
mension has always had the prevention
new Soviet thinking. But both realism
to join us, to accelerate the destruction
of war as its only purpose.
and prudence require that we test the
of their enormous stockpile of these
frightening weapons.
2
04/06/90
14:22
202 647 1579
US STATE DEPT
1004
Finally, we must address the
other selected equipment from certain
working with reasonable men and WO-
threat of chemical weapons prolifera-
areas of Eastern Europe. Several East
men in all countries to achieve success.
tion. We can build on our recent suc-
European governments have also an-
We approach the negotiations, which
cess in Paris. We propose that we bring
nounced unilateral force reductions.
will begin a few days from now in these
together governments and representa-
That's a start, a very good start.
very halls, with a clear goal, solid prin-
tives of the international chemical in-
It's a very hopeful start, and, of
ciples, and well-defined objectives.
dustry. We have been discussing with
course. we are watching to see the
Our goal in these negotiations, as
Australia the general question of prolif-
words become deeds. And equally clear
in all arms control negotiations, will be
eration and the importance of holding
is the necessity to go further. Even af-
to prevent war-any War, nuclear or
such a conference. For a number of
ter these reductions, the Warsaw Pact
conventional-deter aggression, and
years, Australia has played a leading
would retain a 2-to-1 edge in tanks and
increase stability at lower levels of
role internationally in trying to pre-
artillery. The Warsaw Pact's conven-
armed forces. We shall judge every
vent the spread of chemical weapons,
tional military preponderance, espe-
proposal not simply by the numbers of
including as leader of the Australia
cially in the spearheads of attack, is, in
weapons reduced but by the impact on
group of Western chemical-producing
fact. what makes an invasion possible.
deterrence and stability.
states. I am pleased to tell you, there-
These are hard facts. These are
To achieve this goal, we reaffirm
fore, that the Government of Australia
the facts that have to be changed if our
the unity of purpose between the
has agreed to take the initiative in or-
negotiations are to be successful and if
United States and its European allies.
ganizing such a conference.
the foundations of a new Europe are to
We have long recognized, as NATO Sec-
Its purpose will be to discuss the
endure. The arms control process must
retary General Manfred Woerner said,
growing problem of the movement of
now be focused strongly on this East-
that "Europe needs America as Amer-
chemical weapons precursors and tech-
West imbalance.
ica
needs
Europe
Separate, we
nology in international commerce. We
The United States, together with
would become victims of world histori-
hope to establish better means of com-
the other Western participants in these
cal development; together we can deter-
munication about this deadly trade.
talks, has developed serious proposals
mine the course of world history for the
to end disparities in conventional
better."
Conventional Military Imbalances
ground forces and to introduce far-
Our negotiating objectives are well
reaching confidence-building and
defined.
Progress on nuclear arms control and
stabilizing measures.
chemical weapons, however, is not suffi-
Our approach focuses on the
First, as I mentioned earlier, the
cient. We shall never be able to set
achievement of significant reductions in
NATO allies have called for equal ceil-
East-West relations on an irreversible
key military capabilities that are de-
ings in key items of equipment at levels
below current NATO forces. This
course toward enduring improvement
signed for invasion. For example, we
unless we deal with the huge conven-
propose an overall limit on the total ar-
would be the best step toward a secure
tional military imbalances in Europe.
mament in Europe and that no more
Europe at lower levels of arms.
We can define the issue simply: a vast
than 40,000 tanks should be deployed
Second, no state should possess
force, spearheaded by heavily armored
by the 23 participating states in the
capabilities designed primarily for
invasion.
units and supported by massive fire-
CFE negotiations. In addition, Western
power, has been fielded by the Soviet
participants are prepared to introduce
Third, a regime of mutual open-
Union and its allies. That force points
new confidence-building measures in
ness and transparency about military
West.
the near future, aimed at increasing
matters should be expanded which can
We in the West have faced this
transparency and reducing the possi-
foster confidence, clarify intentions,
threat since the dawn of the cold war.
bility of surprise attack. Ultimately, of
and thereby strenghten stability.
Today, Soviet and Warsaw Pact mili-
course, stability will be achieved when
In addition, we hope that all states
tary forces go far beyond those conceiv-
no country is able to dominate by force
will adopt doctrines and force struc-
ably needed for defense. Warsaw Pact
of arms.
tures which faithfully reflect defensive
tanks outnumber NATO tanks by over
Let me emphasize once more. how-
intentions.
3 to 1, Warsaw Pact artillery exceeds
ever, that change in the military bal-
As these negotiations unfold, we
NATO's artillery by 3 to 1, and the
ance is only one part of the process.
and our allies will explore every oppor-
Warsaw Pact holds more than a 2-to-1
Only when the causes of the historic di-
tunity for progress. The current force
advantage over NATO's armored troop
vision of Europe have been removed,
levels and force structures in Europe
carriers.
when we have achieved the free flow of
are not engraved in stone. They are
These ratios speak for themselves.
people and information, when citizens
the product of history, the results of
And as NATO has pointed out, these
everywhere enjoy free expression, only
conflict. And they can he changed.
are forces best suited to an invasion of
then will it be possible to eliminate to.
If the past is any guide, however,
Western Europe.
tally the military confrontation. In
we can expect many proposals that
It is this array of Soviet armed
other words, we cannot remove the
promise the perfection of disarma-
might that divides Europe against its
symptoms, unless we deal fundamen-
ment if we would only abandon the
will and holds European hopes hostage
tally with the causes. I am encouraged
pragmatism of deterrence. To para-
to possibly hostile Soviet intentions.
that increasingly people from both
phrase Winston Churchill, the counsel
Lately, we have heard that Soviet
East and West understand that rela-
of perfection is admirable in a clergy-
military doctrine is changing to meet a
tionship. We must all work to bring
man but impractical in a statesman.
standard called "reasonable sufficien-
about far-reaching changes that end
The opportunities are too precious to
cy." And in December at the United
the division of this continent.
be squandered in sweeping but imprac-
Nations. General Secretary Gorbachev
The United States is committed to
tical proposals. Instead, let us do the
declared the Soviet intention to with-
work of peace carefully, progressing
draw 50,000 men, 5,000 tanks, and
step by step and verifying each step.
04/06/90
14:23
202 647 1579
US STATE DEPT
005
Conclusion
I have argued that a clearer under-
yet we can all imagine the world we
I have spoken today of the new Europe,
standing of the Europe of the future
would like to see. That is the summons
of the freedoms, of the new horizons
will ease the burden. Already, we can
of our undertaking. Let us, therefore,
beckoning to a continent divided 40
glimpse part of that horizon of a peace-
go forward together to build that Eu-
years ago because of a conflict of vi-
ful and prosperous Europe for which so
rope we would like to see-a free,
sions. As that conflict weakens, it may
many have sacrificed. Yet though it
open, secure, and prosperous Europe; a
be possible to remove the old obstacles
beckons, we know that nothing can be
taken for granted. It falls to us to take
whole Europe, ennobling by example
thrown up in Europe's path. That is our
all mankind.
task. We must remove at last the con-
the next step, if not the final one, on
ventional force imbalances and curtains
this journey.
of secrecy that have so long imperiled
Prophecy is God's gift to but a few,
Published by the United States Department
of State Rureau of Public Affairs
European security and, with it. world
yet imagination is the birthright of ev-
Office of Public Communication Editorial
peace.
ery human being. We can but dimly see
Division Washington, D.C. March 1989
This essential step will not be
the future through the mists of change,
Editor: Sharon R. Haynes This material is
easy. It will produce new challenges
in the public domain and may be reprinted
and perhaps some difficult moments.
without permission; citation of this source is
appreciated.
But we cannot desist from the task.
PA/OAP, Rm. 5815A
United States Department of State
Washington, D.C. 20520
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE $300
Address Correction Requested
06/90/60
14:23
T202 647 1579
US STATE DEPT
006
PRESS
DEPARTMENT OF STAT
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 taik.
believed to be impervious to our abuse. If
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:
04/06/90
14:24
202 647 1579
US STATE DEPT
007
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, I would like to make four
points.
The first is that we can probably not afford to wait until all
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
knowledge, we should focus immediately on prudent steps that
are already justified on grounds other than climate change.
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.
CONFERENCE "EVENTS" WHERE OUTCOMES CAN BE NURTURED.
There are sixteen focal events, listed in the order of their occurrence, during the
Conference where a potential exists for creating or nurturing a Conference outcome
or product. These are:
1. Sec. Mosbacher's Hosting of the Opening Reception
2. Sec. Brady's Conference Opening Remarks
3. The Stating of the Conf. Goals/Objectives by the Conf. Co-Chairmen
4. President Bush's Opening Welcome to the Delegates
5. The Theme I Presentation by D. Allan Bromley
6. Working Group Session I - Addressing Theme I
7. Lunch Speech by William K. Reilly
8. The Theme II Presentation by Michael J. Boskin
9. Working Group Session II - Addressing Theme II
10. Dinner Remarks - Vice President or the Co-Chairmen
11. Address by Bert Bolin
12. The Theme III Presentation by Michael R. Deland
13. Working Group Session III - Addressing Theme III
14. Lunch Speech by Adm. James D. Watkins (Ret)
15. Reports from Each Working Group, both oral and written
16. Summary Remarks by Conference Co-Chairmen
17. Closing Remarks by President Bush
2
CANDIDATE IDEAS FOR CONFERENCE OUTCOME/PRODUCTS
The overall outcome/products from the Conference should address the three tactical
objectives for the Conference, namely:
1. To provide an occasion for the President to demonstrate America's
-willingness to play a leadership role in organizing ongoing international
efforts to respond to potential risks and opportunities associated with
Global Change.
2. To provide a setting for the President to present America's overarching
vision of how environmental, economic, and related environmental needs
and interests might best be balanced in the future given the emergence
of worldwide concern about the potential of global environmental
change.
3. To address the Major Foci (as listed on page one of this document) of
the Conference, and in particular, to facilitate the development of a
strategy for integrating worldwide scientific and economic research on
global change issues and to establish and share research priorities for
action by and among the participating countries.
The candidates (note: these might be rank ordered eventually, however, they are not
SO listed here - these are not in priority order) for outcome/products are:
OVERARCHING THEME TO GUIDE ALL OUTCOME/PRODUCTS
1. Develop and integrate into various parts of the Conference the concept
of "Global Stewardship", as an integrating concept for world leaders. See
attached draft, Attachment A. The concept of Global Stewardship was
first articulated by President Bush at the Paris Economic Summit in July
1989 - see attached text of News Conference. The Global Stewardship
concept will be integrated into a variety of speeches and presentations
by the U.S., throughout the Conference. The Content Integration Team
will develop the strategy for doing this by COB March 30.
3
IMPORTANT OUTCOME/PRODUCTS
2. Focus on the central purpose of the Conference, to provide:
A substantially enhanced understanding of the scientific,
economic, and environmental research agenda central to the
needs of future global change policy development.
A substantive understanding of the uncertainties in both
scientific and economics knowledge of the central issues
associated with the changes in the global environment of the
planet,
Increased mutual understanding of and sensitivity to the
substances of scientific and economic research between both
of those research communities.
Increased sensitivity by the two research communities to the
policy needs evolving in such areas as environmental and
energy policy, and vis verse.
Foster the concept of the need for a solid and well
implemented scientific and economics research effort, as a
pre-requisite for and parallel complement to, the evolving
efforts by nations to address the international policy
questions of global environmental changes.
Enhance the evolving communication and network of among
national leaders, concerned with and responsible for, the
research and policy agenda related to global change. More
particularly, this Conference provides a "first-ever"
opportunity to forge a partnership between the scientific and
technical research communities and the policy-makers.
To provide a vehicle to focus on these vital issues, it is propose a
"Charter for Cooperation in the Science and Economics Research
Related to Global Change" be develop, a sort of "magna charta"
!to!
for Global Change Research that integrates the concepts outlined
above and demonstrates a commitment by the participating nations,
4
How bont
a "Declamation "Dec
of Inten dependence
to implement a world-wide program of global change research. A
draft for such a Charter will be produced by COB March 30.
3. Demonstrate and detail, through the US/GCRP, the commitment of the
U.S. to a comprehensive research program in the science and economics
of Global Change, that is linked to and supports the policy process, both
domestically and internationally. The US/GCRP FY91 Document and the
July 1989 US/GCRP Research Plan will be used for the text materials.
The Content Integration Team will draft an outline for do so by COB
March 30.
4. Thoughtfully outline and "Showcase" the efforts that the U.S. has
implemented that directly address the broad agenda of global change,
i.e., energy conservation initiatives, etc. The Content Integration Team
will draft an outline for meeting this objective by COB March 30.
5. Propose initiatives that demonstrate the U.S.'s willingness to foster and
provide leadership for the concept of an international partnership in
global change research, such as an International Institute for Research
in the Science and Economics of Global Change. A preliminary draft of
the concept is contained in Attachment B. A more detailed draft, with
an analysis of the policy and budgetary issues, will be developed by COB
March 30.
6. Propose initiatives that facilitate enhanced communications amongst the
partners in international global change research, both science and
economics, with such approaches as the "Global Change Communications
Network", that builds on the available technology for data and
information transfer, electronic mail and telecommunications
technologies. A draft of the concept is enclosed in Attachment C. A
more detailed draft will be completed by COB March 30.
7. It is proposed that the U.S. prepare and place before the Conference a
a "Statement of Principle" for a Strategy for Cooperation in Scientific and
Economic Research in Global Change, with the goal that the Conference
endorse it. The "Statement of Principles" would outline the strategy for
international cooperation to implement joint research efforts, including
5
sharing of scientific and appropriate economic data, methodologies for
the implemenation of a global observing system which builds upon the
"statemens on cooperation adopted by the G-7 at the Paris Summit, and
joint efforts to substantially enhance the capabilities of models to predict
controlling global environmental process that are key to policy process.
Hence, if adopted, the "Statement" would outline an agreement in
principle to cooperate internationally to join together the expertise,
experience, and data available of each participating country in a more
integrated and coherent fashion. Therefore, the plan for the Conference,
is to review, amend as appropriate, and then endorse the "Statement of
Principles" for developing during the 3-6 months following the
Conference, a strategy and plan for implementing cooperative research
programs. Thus a process would be established for further development
and "in-country" review so that by mid-summer 1990 a strategy document
would exist. Such a "Strategy Document", when completed, could be used
in other fora in which "global change" agenda is a central issue, e.g.
Summit meetings, the IPCC process, the Second World Climate
Conference, etc.. It is posed that the recognition by this Conference of
what might be called an "International Global Change Research
Program" is an essential next step in supporting the needs of many
nations to addressed key policy issues related to Global Change. A draft
of the "Statement of Principles" will be completed by COB March 30.
File = OUTCOME.325
6
PRum with
not always time Hut
it's beth to "tant
the Lemmings"
sooner rather than
baker."
Can lock-in
bad ways
freelose ones better
change
climate
Would be ironing if
the for enviro reasons
we credit a central
control system over
So many facts of on
life.
DELEGATE ATTENDANCE SUMMARY
5 April 1990 (Time:1700)
The following is a current status report of countries
II. TOTAL NUMBER OF COUNTRIES
IV. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS:
attending the White House Conference on Global
SUBMITTING:
Change as of 500 PM on 5 April 1990.
A. FRG: Position Paper. FRG has laid a
I. TOTAL COUNTRIES ATTENDING:
A. Tentative delegation list:
marker by formal letter to Dr. Bromley
by sending a formal position paper:
1. Australia*
o Total: 8
2. Brazil (2)
0 "necessary actions must not be deferred
3. Canada (4)
0 Partial: 5
or delayed, merely because it has been
4. FRG (10) new
possible to clarify conclusively all the
5. France (10)
0 None: 2
complicated scientific interrelationships
6. India (4)
associated with an environment threat"
7. Indonesia (10)
B. Confirmed delegation list:
8. Italy (10)
o "...the risks threatening the earth's atmo
9. Japan (10) new
o OECD
phere necessitates immediate and ex
10.Mexico (10)
0 FRG (new)
tensive action at national and interna-
11.Netherlands (10)
0 Indonesia
tional levels"
12.Nigeria*
0 Norway (new)
13.Norway (10) new
o USA (new)
0 "..the government is convinced that im
14.OECD (5)
mediate measures must be taken such
15. Poland (10) new
C. Total number of developing
as the limitations of CO2 emissions, the
16.U.K. (8)
countries:
conservation of forests and the reduc
17.USA (10)
tion of emissions from agriculture and
18.USSR (10) new
0 6 LDC's
waste management"
19.Zaire (1)
20.EC (6)
0 Poland
0 "...the federal government therefore pro
poses that WHC also deal with response
Total Countries Attending: 20
strategies and immediate measures in a ple
III. PERSONAL/CONTENT DATA:
- nary discussion it therefore requests that
Total of number of delegates to-date: 140
the conference agenda be adapted accord-
A. Personal: 0
ingly."
Bold type no data to date
B. Written Content:
- OECD
- U.K.
- Australia
- FRG Position Paper (new)
C. Oral: Norway
PRELIMINARY
DELEGATION LIST
CURRENT AS OF
APRIL 6, 1990; 12:00 NOON
Additions: Canada
BRAZIL
(tentative)
Name
Title
Jose Lutzenberger
Environment Secretary
Jose Goldemberg
Science Secretary
CANADA
(tentative)
Name
Title
Lucien Bouchard
Federal Environment
Minister
Jak Epp
Energy Minister
Dr. Geraldine Kenney Wallace
Chair, Science Council of
Canada
Dr. Arthur W. May
President, Natural
Sciences and Engineering
Research Council
Dr. Anne White
Chair, IGBP Committee
Liz Dowdswell
Administrator,
Environment of Canada for
Atmospheric Environmnet
Service
Judith Maxwell
Chair, Economic Council
of Canada
Mr. Olton
Administrator, Energy
Policy Department of
Energy Mines and
Resources
George Anderson
Administrator, Department
of Finance
Derek Burney
Ambassador to the United
States
EUROPEAN COMMUNITY
(tentative)
Name
Title
Laurens Jan Brinkhorst
Director-General for
Environment, Nuclear
Safety and Civil
Protection
Jurgen Henningsen
Director for
Environmental Quality and
Natural Resources
Michael Emerson
Director for Economic
Evaluation of Community
Policies, Directorate-
General for Economic and
Financial Affairs
Philippe Bourdeau
Director for Environment
and Non-Nuclear Energy
Sources, Directorate-
General for Science,
Research and Development
Stanley Johnson
Director for Energy
Policy, Directorate-
General for Energy
David Wright
Central Advisory Group,
Secretariat-General of
the Commission
FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY
(Confirmed)
Name
Title
Professor Dr. Klaus Topfer
Federal Minister for the
Environment, Nature Protection
and Nuclear Safety
Dr. Gebhard Ziller
State Secretary, Ministry for
Research and Technology
Dr. Wilhelm Knittel
State Secretary, Ministry of
Transportation
Baldur Wagner
Assistant Secretary, Federal
Chancellery
Dr. Mario Graf von Matuschka
Assistant Secretary, Foreign
Ministry
Dr. Horst Glatzel
Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Federal Chancellery
Walter Lotz
Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Ministry of Economics
Professor Dr. Ansgar Vogel
Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Ministry for Environment,
Nature Protection, and Nuclear
Safety
Dietrich Kupfer
Director, Office of
International Cooperation,
Ministry for Environment,
Nature Protection and Nuclear
Safety
Professor Dr. Hartmut Gross
Scientist, Max Planck Society,
Hamburg
FRANCE
(tentative)
Name
Title
Minister Hubert Curien
Minister of Research and
Technology
Minister Brice Lalonde
Secretary of State for the
Environment
Jean Audouze
Science Advisor to the
President
Claude Alegre
Special Advisor to the
Minister of Education
Ambassador Jean Ripert
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
(Environment)
Yves Martin
Chairman of the Interministry
Committee on Greenhouse
Madame Borione
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Andre LeBeau
General Director of the
Meteorological Center
M. Nasse
Ministry of Economy and Budget
Sylvie Faucheux
Professor of Economy at
Paris I
INDIA
(tentative)
Name
Title
Ms. Maneka Gandhi
Minister of State for
Environment and Forests
Vasant Gowarikar
Secretary of Department
of Science and Technology
Mahesh Prasad
Secretary of Ministry of
Environment and Forests
Dr. A.P. Mitra
Director General of
Council for Science and
Industrial Research
INDONESIA
(confirmed)
Name
Title
Prof. Dr. Ing. B.J. Habibie
Minister of State for
Research and Technology;
Chairman of the Agency
for the Assessment and
Application of Technology
Prof. Dr. Samaun Samadikun
Chairman of the
Indonesian Institute of
Science
Prof. Dr. John A. Katili
Deputy Chairman of the
National Research Council
Prof. Dr. Gunawan Satari
Permanent Secretary,
Ministry of State for
Research and Technology
Mr. Poedji Kuntarso, MA
Director General for
Foreign Economic
Relations; Ministry of
Foreign Affairs
Prof. Dr. Rustam Didong
Deputy Chairman
(Economics), National
Development Planning
Agency
Prof. Dr. Harsono Wiryosumarto
Deputy Chairman
(Technology Development) ;
Agency for the Assessment
and Application of
Technology
Prof. Dr. S.B. Joedono
Assistant Minister
(Industry, Energy and
Mining), Office of the
Coordinating Minister for
the Economy, Finance,
Industry and Development
Supervision
INDONESIA
(continued)
Name
Title
Dr. M. Alwi Dahlan
Assistant Minister
(Population), Office of
the Minister of State for
Population and the
Environment
His Excellency Abdulrachman Ramly
Ambassador of the
Republic of Indonesia to
the United States of
America
ITALY
(tentative)
Name
Title
Hon. Adolfo Battaglia
Minister of Industry,
Head of Delegation
Prof. Umberto Colombo
Director of the National
Agency for Nuclear and
Renewable Energies
Prof. Giuseppe Biorci
Vice President of the
National Research Council
Prof. Giuseppe Bianchi
Director General for
Energy Sources, Ministry
of Industry
Prof. Antonio Praturlon
President of the CNR
Committee on Geological
Sciences
Prof. Roberto Frassetto
CNR Institute of the
Dynamics of Great Masses
Prof. Emilio Gerelli
Economic Counselor to the
Minister of Environment
Dr. Corrado Clini
Director General for
Pollution Prevention,
Ministry of Environment
Prof. Guido Visconti
Department of Physics,
University of L'Aquila
Dr. Giovanni Sacco
Vice Director General of
Treasury, Ministry of
Treasury
JAPAN
(tentative)
Name
Title
Ishimatsu Kitagawa
Minister of Environment
Shigeto Nagano
Parliamentary Vice
Minister of Science and
Technology
Koji Watanabe
Deputy Minister, Ministry
of Foreign Affairs
Tadashi Yasuhara
Director General,
Planning and Coordination
Bureau, Environment
Agency
Dr. Michio Hashimoto
Advisor to the Minister
of Environment
Sousaburo Okamatsu
Director General,
Industrial Location and
Environmental Protection
Bureau, Ministry of
International Trade and
Industry
Keiichi Yokobori
Executive Director,
Research Institute of
International Trade and
Industry, Ministry of
International Trade and
Industry
Mr. Yoshikawa
Deputy Director General,
Planning Bureau, Economic
Planning Agency
Hiroto Ishida
Deputy Director General,
Office of Minister of
Science and Technology,
Science and Technology
Agency
Yuji Ikeda
Deputy Director General,
United Nations Bureau,
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs
MEXICO
(tentative)
Name
Title
Lic. Patricio Chirinos
Secretary of Urban
Development and Ecology
Dr. Jose Sarukhan
Rector, National
Autonomous University
Dr. Herminio Blanco
Undersecretary for
Foreign Commerce,
Secretariat of Commerce
and Industrial
Development
Ing. Alberto Escofet
Undersecretary for
Energy, Secretariat of
Energy, Mines and
Parastatal Industries
Lic. Jose Angel Gurria
Undersecretary for
International Financial
Affairs, Secretariat of
the Treasury
Fis. Sergio Reyes
Undersecretary for
Ecology
Amb. Alberto Szekely
Legal Counsel,
Secretariat of Foreign
Affairs
Dr. Julian Adem
Director, Center for
Atmospheric Studies,
National Autonomous
University
Dr. Manuel Ortega
Director General,
National Council for
Science and Technology
Hector Santana
Staff Aide to Secretary
Chirinos
THE NETHERLANDS
(tentative)
Name
Title
Hans Alders
Minister for Housing,
Physical Planning and
Environment
Dr. B.C.J. Zoeteman
Deputy Director-General
for Environment
Dr. Pier Vellinga
Coordinator for National
Climate Programs
N.D. Van Egmond
Director for Chemistry
and Physics, State
Institute for Public
Health and Environmental
Hygiene
I.G. Roos
Directorate-General for
European Cooperation,
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs
Dr. H.M. Fijnaut
Director of the Royal
Dutch Meteorological
Institute
Dr. A.P.M. Baede
Head of the Department
for Dynamical Meteorology
D.F.W.T. Pietermaat
Environmental Coordinator
in the Directorate-
General for Energy,
Ministry of Economic
Affairs
Prof. J.B. Opschoor
Professor of Ecology,
Free University,
Amsterdam
NORWAY
(tentative)
Name
Title
Kristin Hille Valla
Minister of Environment
Einar Steensnaes
Minister of Education and
Science
Ambassador Kjeld Vibe
Norwegian Ambassador to
the United States
Oddmund Graham
Secretary General,
Ministry of Environment
Kaare Bryn
Director General,
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs
Dr. Tore Olsen
Director General,
Ministry of Education and
Research
Per M. Bakken
Coordinator, Air
Pollution, Ministry of
Environment
Lorents Lorentsen
Director of Research,
Central Bureau of
Statistics
Professor Dr. Ivar Isaksen
University of Oslo
Leif Westegaard
Science Officer,
Norwegian Embassy in
Washington
THE OECD
(tentative)
Name
Title
Robert Cornell
Deputy Secretary-General
William L. Long
Director for Environment
John Ferriter
Deputy Executive
Director, International
Energy Agency
Andrew Dean
Administrator, Department
for Economic Affairs and
Statistics
George Kowalski
Head of the Division of
Economic Analysis,
International Energy
Agency
POLAND
(tentative)
Name
Title
Jan Janowski
Deputy Prime Minister;
Head of the Agency for
Science and Technological
Progress and Application
Andrezejewski
Deputy Minister of the
Environment
Tadeusz Diem
Deputy Minister of
Education
Mr. Rybicki
Central Planning Office
Kazimierz Duchowski
Director, Department of
Economic Cooperation,
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs
Mr. Wiackowski
Chairman, Parliamentary
Commission on
Environmental Protection
Professor Stakel
Polish Academy of
Sciences
Mr. Sadowski
Institute of Metallurgy
and Water Management
Wlodzimierz Bojarski
Member of the Senate
Jan Kinast
Polish Ambassador to the
United States
SOVIET UNION
(tentative)
Name
Title
Nikolay P. Laverov
Chairman, U.S.S.R. State
Committee on Science and
Technology
Yuriy Izrael
Chairman, State Committee
for Hydrometeorology
V. F. Kostin
Deputy Chairman, State
Committee for Nature
Protection
Aleksander P. Metalnikov
Deputy Chairman, State
Committee for
Hydrometeorology
A. A. Troitsky
Deputy Chairman, State
Planning Committee
V. M. Kotliakov
Director, Institute of
Geography, U.S.S.R.
Academy of Sciences
Yu. L. Golubev
Assistant to the
Chairman, State Committee
for Hydrometeorology
Yu. V. Vakaljuk
Chief, Division of Global
Geophysical Problems,
Climate Change and
Economic Consequences,
State Committee for
Hydrometeorology
B. V. Pikhanov
State Committee for
Hydrometeorology,
Department of
International Cooperation
Mrs. N. Yu. Vail
State Committee for
Hydrometeorology,
Department of
International Cooperation
UNITED KINGDOM
(tentative)
Name
Title
David Trippier RD, JP, MP
Minister for the
Environment and
Countryside
Sir John Fairclough
Chief Scientific Adviser,
the Cabinet Office
Sir Crispin C.C. Tickell, GCMG, KCVO
United Kingdom Permanent
Representative to the
United Nations
Dr. John T. Houghton CBE
Director-General,
Meteorological Office
J.G. Odling-Smee
Deputy Chief Economic
Adviser; HM Treasury
Dr. David J. Fisk
Chief Scientist,
Department of Environment
Dr. W. David Evans
Chief Scientist,
Department of Energy
Dr. Eileen Buttle
Secretary, Natural
Environment Research
Council
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
(confirmed)
Name
Title
Nicholas F. Brady
Secretary of the Treasury
Manuel Lujan, Jr.
Secretary of the Interior
Clayton Yeutter
Secretary of Agriculture
Robert A. Mosbacher
Secretary of Commerce
Admiral James D. Watkins (Ret)
Secretary of Energy
William K. Reilly
Administrator,
Environmental Protection
Agency
Richard H. Truly
Administrator, National
Aeronautics and Space
Administration
John A. Knauss
Under Secretary of
Commerce for Oceans and
Atmosphere; and Director,
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric
Administration
Erich Bloch
Director, National
Science Foundation
Richard Schmalensee
Member, Council of
Economic Advisers
ZAIRE
(tentative)
Name
Title
Citoyen Lobo Kanza Kanza
Secretary of State
(Deputy Minister) ;
Ministry of
Environment and
Conservation of Nature
FACT SHEET
for
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
on
SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH
RELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE
April 17-18, 1990
Washington, D.C.
On February 5, 1990, the President invited the Heads of State from seventeen
countries, the European Community (EC) and the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) to send 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. on April 17-18, 1990.
The President formalized his intention to host such a Conference on this subject
during his Summit meeting with President Gorbachev, on December 4, 1989, and
later on Monday, February 5, 1990, during his speech to the United Nations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
The Conference is designed to address important next steps for substantially
enhancing and broadening international understanding of science and economics
research related to global change. The Conference seeks to frame a strategy for
implementing joint international science and economics research efforts. It also
seeks for the first time to integrate and link science and economic research results
to both the domestic and international policy process.
The Conference focuses on "Global Change," a scope of research that has evolved
{
out of the science that concerns itself with understanding the natural processes
that govern the way the Earth functions as well as economics research related to
global change.
The conference is conceived as an integral part of the ongoing international
process of trying to understand changes in the global environment. The need for
substantially improved understanding of both the science and economics of
global change has been noted by virtually all world leaders. This Conference will
focus on science and economics research as a complementary effort to the on-
going Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The President
strongly supports the IPCC efforts and expects that the results of the Conference
will contribute to the on-going international debate on climate change issues. Dr.
Bert Bolin of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been invited to
take an active role in the Conference.
The Conference will convene a delegation of three ministerial-level officials from
a representative group of nations, each representing a relevant discipline, (i.e.,
science, economics, energy and the environment). Participants were invited on
the basis that the meeting should include countries or representatives of country
interests that have substantial populations, large land masses, industrialized
economies or heavy future energy needs, substantial research infrastructures, or
have provided international leadership on issues related to climate and global
changed. The President has asked the Heads of State of the following countries
and organizations to send a delegation:
1. Australia
2. Brazil
3. Canada
4. Federal Republic of Germany
5. France
6. India
7. Indonesia
8. Italy
9. Japan
10. Mexico
11. Netherlands
12. Nigeria
13. Norway
14. Poland
15. Soviet Union
16. United Kingdom
17. Zaire
18. European Community (EC)
19. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
It is expected that each country or organization will send a ministerial-level
official to represent their relevant agencies including science, economics, energy
and the environment. It is suggested that one delegate in each of the three areas
will be an individual who is currently active in science or economics research. It
is recognized that the delegations are likely to have one "at-large" member.
Thus, the total delegation size should not exceed ten per country. Once the
delegations are determined, it is planned to consult with these countries on
agenda details.
The U.S. delegation will be:
Secretary of the Treasury - Nicholas F. Brady
Secretary of Interior - Manuel Lujan, Jr.
Secretary of Agriculture - Clayton Yeutter
Secretary of Commerce - Robert A. Mosbacher
Secretary of Energy - Admiral James D. Watkins (Ret)
Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency - William K.
Reilly
Administrator, National Aeronautics and Space Administration
- Richard H. Truly
Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere; and
Director, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration -
John A. Knauss
Director, National Science Foundation - Erich Bloch
Member, Council of Economic Advisors - Richard Schmalensee
Conference Co-Chairmen:
Chairman, Council Economic Advisors - Michael J. Boskin
Assistant to the President for Science and Technology - D. Allan Bromley
Chairman, Council on Environmental Quality - Michael R. Deland
The Conference is designed. to be a forum to bring a number of ministerial-level
leaders together to enhance international cooperation and to build the basis for
joint efforts in these vital areas. It is hoped that the delegates, working together,
will agree upon those areas of opportunity for cooperative action in the areas of
science and economics research. The goal would be to address three major
themes:
- Uncertain Change: The Science and Economics Research Challenge
- Integrating Science and Economics Research in the Policy Process; and
- Building Partnerships for Science and Economics Research.
The Conference provides a forum for international leaders to consider and
discuss research questions that are critical to the policy process, such as:
*
How well can we predict temperature trends in the decades ahead?
*
How "good" are our global-scale models, such as models to predict
temperature changes?
*
How well can we predict the interconnections between global
environment change and the resulting social and economic impacts?
*
What are the economic consequences of adapting to or mitigating global
change?
* How "good" are the models used to assess these economic consequences
and their impact on the well-being of humanity?
By addressing such questions, it is hoped that the nations might agree to support
joint international research efforts related to global change that focus on rapid
improvement of both scientific and economic knowledge and developing the
necessary infrastructure, including:
- Establishing a more formal international mechanism to improve the
coordination of global change science and economic research programs, and
- Participating in cooperative research efforts, such as the World Ocean
Circulation Experiment and cooperative economic projects of the OECD.
The Conference is a White House Conference, initiated by the President. Hence,
the President has appointed three members of the Executive Office of the
President in the relevant areas to be the co-chairmen of the Conference. The
three co-chairmen are: The Chairman of the President's Council of Economic
Advisors, Dr. Michael J. Boskin; the President's Science Advisor and Director of
the Office of Science and Technology Policy, Dr. D. Allan Bromley; and the
Chairman of the President's Council on Environmental Quality, Mr. Michael R.
Deland.
The President stated, "this conference is a vital next step in a joint international
approach to address changes in the global environment."
As of 4/6; 9:00 p.m.
HEADS
OF DELEGATIONS
COUNTRY
NAME OF DELEGATE
TITLE
Australia
Brazil
Canada
Lucien Bouchard
Federal Environment Minister
Federal Republic of Germany
Klaus Toepfer
Federal Environment Minister
France
Hubert Curien
Minister of Research & Technology
India
Maneka Gandhi
Min. of State for Environment
Indonesia
B.J. Habibie
Min. of State for Res. & Tech.
Italy
Adolfo Battaglia
Minister of Industry
Japan
Ishimatsu Kitagawa
Minister of Environment
Mexico
Patricio Chirinos
Sec. of Urban Dev. & Ecology
Netherlands
Hans Alders
Minister of Environment
Nigeria
Norway
Kristin Hille Valla
Minister of Environment
Poland
(also Head of S&T Cooperation)
Jan Janowski
Deputy Prime Minister
Soviet Union
Nikolay Laverov
Chmn. St. Cmte. Sci. & Tech.
United Kingdom
David Trippier
Minister for Environment
United States
Nicholas Brady
Secretary of Treasury
Zaire
Citoyen Lobo Kanza Kanza
Depty. Minister of Environment
European Community (EC)
**Laurens Jan Brinkhorst
Director-General for Environment
OECD
Robert Cornell
Deputy Secretary-General
**Some confusion between EC and Irish. We now have 14 names;
also indications that delegation head might be Filippo Maria
Pandolfi, Commissioner (Vice President) in charge of Science,
Research and Development.
THE 4/6/90 WALL STREET JOURN/
Oil companies say this gasoline rede-
sign will raise prices from 15 to 25 cents a
gallon, even if the new formula works.
Supporters say the cost is only a penny a
Clean-Air Game:
gallon. Compromise and assume it's a
mere eight cents a gallon. That's still a
hefty gasoline tax, a direct transfer of
Green Machine
wealth from working-class, drivers to
Archer-Daniels-Midland Co., the principal
Routs Bush Team
maker of ethanol. Clean air has nothing to
do with it.
These and other stories have eliminated
John Sununu at least deserves credit for
any credibility from a White House veto
candor. The White House chief of staff was
threat. Sen. Steve Symms (R., Idaho)
talking to business lobbyists assembled for
hoped to kill the, bill by supporting an ex-
a clean-air pep talk last month, and it
pensive amendment (sponsored by Robert
wasn't going well.
Byrd of West Virginia) to compensate coal
The visitors were bewildered and an-
miners thrown out of work. Mr. Sununu
gry. They'd endorsed George Bush's origi-
called to twist his arm: He told the senator
nal clean-air bill. But now they felt be-
that even the Byrd amendment wouldn't
trayed by the White House embrace of a
prompt a the opposite of what the
Senate "compromise" far more expensive
administration was saying in public:
and regulatory. After a shouting match
White House officials say they Il do bet-
with lobbyist William Fay, Mr. Sununu re-
ter in the House, relying on their alliance
plied that sometimes you just have "to
with Democratic Rep. John Dingell of De-
troit. But their embrace of the Senate bill
punt."
has given Mr. Dingell less latitude. No pol-
The football metaphor perfectly cap-
itician now wants to be less "green" than
tures the White House performance on the
the White House, so the greens need to
politics of clean air. Drug czar William
make fewer concessions. "It's as if they
Bennett likes to say that politics, like foot-
played a game of chess without thinking
ball, comes down to "time of possession."
they had a second move," says Mr. Fay,
If you're not moving the ball on your oppo-
the business lobbyist.
nents, they re moving it on you. Despite all
It may be true, as many in the White
the self-congratulation, the Bush White
House argue, that by anteing on clean
House on clean air has resembled North-
air, Mr. Bush proves his green credentials
western containing Notre Dame.
and SO can resist green extremists in the
The official White House line is that this
future. Robert Teeter, the White House
week's Senate bill is a big victory, of
pollster, has numbers showing Mr. Bush
course. Privately, White House sources
with low credibility on the environment.
will concede that its January veto threat
But Karlyn Keene, who follows public
against a bill costing more than $19 million
opinion for the American Enterprise Insti-
has been breached, though they add they
tute, thinks that misreads the public mind.
A consensus clearly exists on preserving
Potomac Watch
the environment as an end, but the public
is far less clear about means. Ms. Keene
says George Bush has more leverage to ne-
By Paul A. Gigot
gotiate a better bill than his advisers un-
derstand.
More disappointing for the long run, no
had no political choice.
one in this administration has made a case
Even more privately, many White
for an alternative environmentalism-one
House officials agree that the business-lob-
that speaks of the ecological benefits of
bies have a right to be angry. The most in-
growth and new technologies, or of the di-
fluential environmental skeptics, budget
saster that befell Eastern Europe from the
director Richard Darman and chief econo-
same sort of command-and-control eco-
mist Michael Boskin, didn't wield. much
nomics many environmentalists now
clout on this one. The administration's
want.
greens and White House process-is-policy
Instead, Mr. Bush has implicitly em-
aide Roger Porter did the negotiating.
braced the apocalyptic assumptions of the
Anecdotes suggest the breadth of the
greens. This week, he was planting a tree
clean-air rout: Though the devil is always
for clean air and decrying "extremists" on
in the regulatory details, the White House
all sides-as if the owner of a polluting
left the drafting of its own bill to what Mr.
dry-cleaning business is somehow a radi-
Sununu would later call "unnamed bureau-
cal. His EPA director, William Reilly,
crats" at the Environmental Protection
raised the specter of 50,000 "premature
Agency. They obliged with an onerous reg-
deaths" from air pollution, just the sort of
ulation on. clean-air permits.
unproved scare statistic used by the
This early blunder led to the ludicrous
greens. The environmentalists are winning
scene this week of the White House lobby-
a political grand slam: a bill that has enor-
ing the Senate to pass an amendment repu-
mous economic costs but that the public
diating the White House's own proposal.
sees described as. too "weak."
Not surprisingly, the Senate hanged Mr.
Messrs. Reilly and Bush like to say they
Bush with his own rope, 51-49.
favor environmental "stewardship. It's a
The administration also blinked on a
good word, a Bush kind of word, suggest-
last minute amendment that dictates an
ing moderation and a check on democ-
entirely new gasoline (and, not coinciden-
racy's tendency toward extremism in the
tally, a new subsidy for the ethanol indus-
name of desirable goals like clean air. Yet
try) White House officials had once called
both men have embraced the green move-
such an amendment veto-bait. But after
ment's rhetoric. They've flunked the stew-
Senate minority leader Bob Dole joined the
ard's test.
cause, the same officials dropped out of
sight.
Photocopy-Preservation
REVIEW & OUTLOOK
Scientific Faddism
George Bush-went over to George-
of asbestos, including a recent one by
town University yesterday to address
Harvard's Energy and Environmental
a U.N.-sponsored group of environ-
Policy Center, which reached essen-
mentalists gathered to discuss the
tially the same conclusions.
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1990
subject of global warming. All he said
In their Science article, re-
was: "Wherever possible we believe
searchers from Johns Hopkins, Yale
that market mechanisms should be
and other institutions confronted the
applied and that our policies must be
asbestos issue head on: "Does air-
consistent with economic growth and
borne asbestos present a risk to the
free-market principles in all coun-
health of individuals in schools and
tries." Based on the reaction, you
other buildings? The available data do
would have thought the President had
not indicate that asbestos-associated
held up a mirror in front of a vampire
malignancies or functional impair-
convention.
ment will occur as a result of expo-
Market mechanisms? Economic
sure in most airborne concentrations
growth? "Aaaaaaahhhhh!" shrieked
of asbestos in buildings." The study
the environmental elite. Or, as David
pointed out that the incidence of as-
Becker of the Sierra Club so plainly
bestos-related lung cancer occurred
put it: "It was a gross disappoint-
mainly among asbestos workers and
ment. There was more talk in the
primarily those who also smoked.
speech about economics than about
This is a long way from Johnny sitting
the environment." What more does
in a classroom.
anyone need to know about the envi-
"Clearly, the asbestos panic in the
ronmentalist gestalt?
U.S. must be curtailed," the scientists
Congress and the administration
concluded, noting that the only time
are embarking on consideration of the
serious health risks are created is
Clean Air bill. If the past is prelude,
when asbestos is ripped out of the
science and economics are in for a
walls as part of the removal process
rough ride.
and thereby released into air. But re-
We've been round the track with
moval is what the regulations man-
many scientific fads recently, such as
date. The EPA estimates that it will
"nuclear winter" and the asbestos
cost $53 billion over 30 years to com-
panic. Early on, the system always
ply with federal asbestos removal
seems to promote the fads and sup-
mandates.
press the science.
The National School Boards Associ-
Photocopy-Preservation
Carl Sagan's nuclear winter postu-
ation has estimated the asbestos-re-
lations, much ballyhood when they
moval costs for elementary and sec-
first appeared, have now been dis-
missed by most of the scientific com-
ondary schools-to be about $6 billion.
munity. The idea was that a sudden
Put differently, instead of hiring new
teachers, upgrading their curricula,
release of smoke, caused by burning
cities in a nuclear war, would have a
initiating anti-drug programs or im-
drastic cooling effect on the atmos-
proving facilities, many schools have
been forced to squander their money
phere, and that the human race would
eventually be annihilated by the tem-
on a federally declared, nonexistent
health threat.
perature drop. It turns out that the as-
sumptions and estimates upon which
The man most responsible for the
the computer models were based were
law that led to this monumental waste
deeply flawed.
is former Congressman James Florio,
Today, estimates of post-nuclear
who was recently inaugurated as
war cooling have moderated. "It's
Governor of New Jersey, and was last
nice to see these guys acting like sci-
seen laying hands on the state's auto
entists again," one researcher told the
insurance system.
New York Times. In the nuclear win-
The global-warming issue suggests
ter delusion, only the credibility of a
that a similar process is under way
few arms control hysterics suffered.
again. The comments of skeptical sci-
But another false alarm-the asbestos
entists have received more attention
scare-shows that the costs of scien-
than in the past, but on balance the
tific faddism can be enormous.
debate still plays on the level of reli-
Congress passed a law banning as-
gious belief. Mr. Bush's chief of staff,
bestos, and schools have spent billions
John Sununu, is being roundly at-
removing it. Scientists are now calling
tacked in Washington for doubting the
this episode a "panic," and suggesting
global-warming models of various
that the money was wasted.
agency bureaucrats. We hope the
A major study, just published in
White House hangs tough on this one.
Science magazine, confirms the con-
The cost of the asbestos fad was sim-
of a half-dozen other studies
plv too high.
Services, of Mead Data Central
PAGE
2
1ST STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1990 News World Communications Inc.;
The Washington Times
March 30, 1990, Friday, Final Edition
SECTION: Part A; Pg. A1
LENGTH: 919 words
HEADLINE: NASA satellites find no sign of 'greenhouse' warming
BYLINE: Ronald A. Taylor; THE WASHINGTON TIMES
BODY:
Satellites taking the most precise global temperature measurements ever have
found no evidence of global warming from the "greenhouse effect" during the last
decade, according to a National Aeronautics and Space Administration analysis.
The data, collected from 1979 through 1988 by the TIROS-N series of weather
satellites, proved that the Earth's temperature can be measured accurately by
instruments probing the atmosphere from space, two scientists say in a paper to
be published today in Science.
The study also provides a qlimpse from space of global temperatures during
the period 1979-88 - one of the hottest decades, with six of the warmest years
on record.
"We found that the Earth's atmosphere goes through fairly large year-to-year
changes in temperature and over that 10-year period we saw no long-term warming
or cooling trend," said Roy W. Spencer of the Marshall Space Flight Center in
Huntsville, Ala, study co-author.
But co-author John Christy, a climate research scientist at the University
of Alabama in Huntsville, cautioned against misuse of the findings. "About the
long-term global warming it does not say anything," he said. "It says for this
particular snapshot you are not able to find it, but that does not mean that it
is not occurring or that within a few more years we might be able to actually
see it."
He added: This does not prove that there is not a qlobal warming. If these
data are used in any kind of anti-environment statement, then I will be
tremendously disappointed." He said other aspects of the environment are being
affected by an excess of greenhouse qases in the atmosphere.
Instead of measuring surface temperatures, the satellites read temperatures
in the troposphere, roughly 20,000 feet above the surface, as they spun around
the qlobe 14 times a day. Looking at chunks of the atmosphere 100 miles wide
and six miles deep, the satellites were able to collect usually unavailable data
from water surfaces.
Most other studies of temperature trends, some extending over more than a
century, have come from the records of ground-based thermometers. These
readings did not reflect the global temperature because they did not include the
huge area covered by oceans.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
3
(c) 1990 The Washington Times, March 30, 1990
The TIROS data also detected a cooling in the tropics from 1984 to 1986 and
a "warm event" in the northern hemisphere during 1987 and 1988. On a global
basis, the study found, the warmest years, in descending order, were 1987, 1988,
1983 and 1980. The coolest years were 1984, 1985 and 1986.
The findings quickly became part of growing skepticism over the need for an
immediate end to the burning of coal, oil and other fossil fuels.
"It merely confirms something that people who've examined the records have
known for a long time - that it did not warm up in the 1980s," said University
of Virginia climatologist Patrick Michaels. "When are we going to come down on
the side of reason and logic? That's what I want to know.
The policy cart
is way ahead of the science horse on this."
Emissions from burning fossil fuels are linked to what scientists describe
as the greenhouse effect. If the planet's atmosphere is overloaded by those
gases, scientists and environmentalists worry, global warming could disrupt life
on Earth.
While opponents of quick action to control the greenhouse effect insisted
that the study buttresses their case, climate scientists questioned the length
of the study. "Ten years is not long enough," said NASA climate program chief
John Theon.
Mr. Christy said he does not expect conclusive statistical evidence of
global warming until the turn of the century.
"The climate may never be affected by the greenhouse effect," he said.
"However, there are enough other things that are part of our own biological
system that we must pay attention to what we are doing to the environment.
"The atmospheric composition is changing. Carbon dioxide is increasing,
chlorofluorocarbons are increasing, other pollutants are increasing. We are
losing our forests around the world. The environmental concerns are
tremendous."
Global temperature is not the sole indicator of global warming, said World
Resources Institute climate expert James McKenzie. "It's not that any year is
going to be totally different, it's just that more and more often you're going
to get hotter summers, more drought on average, more storms," he said. "It's a
matter of You bet your climate.' Which way do you want to bet?'
The climate changes may occur far more quickly, some atmospheric
scientists say. Analysis of air trapped inside glaciers shows that past ice
ages occurred very quickly, said Walter Broecker, climatology professor at
Columbia University.
There is evidence from past glaciation that strongly suggests the climate
change came "in large jumps," he said, adding: "We think that these are due to
reorganizations of the ocean-atmospheric system. One of the things we have to
think about for the future is that this kind of thing might occur."
CHART
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
4
(c) 1990 The Washington Times, March 30, 1990
NO PROOF OF GLOBAL WARMING
Both ground temperatures and readings from the government's TIROS-N
satellite from the 1979-1988 period show no conclusive global warming trend.
The satellite study confirmed wide variations in average temperatures during
that period. Adding to the confusion, wide variations in temperature extremes
occurred during the decade with record years for heat occuring in 1987, 1988,
1983 and 1980. The coolest years were 1984, 1985 and 1986.
GRAPHIC: Chart, NO PROOF OF GLOBAL WARMING, By Henry Christopher/The Washington
Times
LEXIS® NEXIS® ® LEXIS® NEXIS ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
6
5TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1990 The Washington Post
March 10, 1990, Saturday, Final Edition
SECTION: FIRST SECTION; PAGE A1
LENGTH: 1473 words
HEADLINE: Carbon Dioxide Curbs May Not Halt Warming
SERIES: Occasional
BYLINE: William Booth, Washington Post Staff Writer
BODY:
Efforts to save the world from global warming by reducing greenhouse gases
will not stop temperatures from rising but instead may only delay warming by a
decade or two, according to energy experts and atmospheric scientists.
To slow the worldwide warming that many climate experts fear will accelerate
during the next century, environmentalists, several European governments and
some U.S. legislators are calling for a 20 percent reduction by the year 2000 in
emissions of carbon dioxide, which collects in the atmosphere and traps heat,
causing the 50 called greenhouse effect. The supreme byproduct of the industrial
world, carbon dioxide is produced by burning almost anything, especially fossil
fuels such as coal and gasoline.
Yet a 20 percent reduction may have a barely noticeable effect on climate
change in the short term, according to John Firor of the National Center for
Atmospheric Research in Colorado, whose 1988 editorial in a scientific journal
became the foundation for calls to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.
"What do WE get for all this effort? The answer is going to be a little weak.
We'll be ahead a few tenths of a degree. My instinct is that this is not going
to impress a congressman very much, Firor said.
Firor's rough calculations indicate that if carbon dioxide were reduced by 20
percent, the Earth would still warm by about one-third of a degree Fahrenheit
per decade. If nothing were done and carbon dioxide levels continued to climb,
the world would warm by about one-half of a degree Fahrenheit each decade,
according to a computer simulation.
Many climate researchers agree that the world will grow warmer, but they
disagree on the amount of warming and when the change will be detectable.
"We're not talking about stopping the warming by any means, but we're talking
about slowing the warming down. We're going to need all the time we can get,"
Firor said. "To sell the idea, you have to convince them that stabilizing the
atmosphere is important and that if you can slow down the rate of change,
that's very important, too."
Firor and other scientists say that slowing down the warming by a decade or
two may give plants and animals, as well as agriculture, more time to adjust to
new conditions, which could include rising sea levels and changes in rainfall
and temperature patterns.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
7
(c) 1990 The Washington Post, March 10, 1990
Firor said the world might eventually have to cut its carbon dioxide
production by half in order to stabilize the gas in the atmosphere but that this
might not happen until the world had already warmed an average of 4 or 5 degrees
Fahrenheit, an increase that still could have significant and perhaps
catastrophic effects. In fact, scientists say it might even be necessary to
reduce emissions by as much as 90 percent to reverse warming and to restore the
climate to that of pre industrial times before man-made carbon dioxide began
accumulating in the atmosphere.
Yet because carbon dioxide emissions are so fundamental to industrial society
as it is currently constituted, it is far from certain that emissions could be
reduced by even 20 percent in the current decade, let alone cut in half by early
in the next century. Many experts say reducing carbon dioxide would mean nothing
less than a profound change in the way the world produces and uses energy.
"It's like going to war, except there's no enemy," said one researcher.
To investigate the technical feasibility of such dramatic cuts, at least a
dozen studies are underway by federal agencies and private environmental and
energy groups.
While they are still extremely preliminary, the studies offer a kind of first
draft for a new and more efficient world, where people would drive gas-stingy
cars or pay hefty "carbon dioxide taxes" to operate gas-guzzlers; where
coal-fired electricity-generating stations would be shut down and replaced by a
combination of solar energy collection farms, huge biomass burners and nuclear
plants; where such everyday appliances as refrigerators and lightbulbs would be
tens to hundreds of times more efficient.
Environmentalists have argued that increasing efficiency and switching away
from dirty sources of energy such as coal is economically sound and ecologically
important regardless of whether global warming scenarios prove correct.
"Can it be done? Yes it can, because it is both trivial and lucrative," said
Arthur Rosenfeld, an energy expert and physicist at the University of California
at Berkeley.
But there is tremendous disagreement about the cost and disruption to society
of such reductions. Recent calculations by a Stanford economist and colleagues
put the price tag at more than $ 3 trillion. Other economists project the cost
to be far less. Indeed, a National Academy of Sciences panel is meeting next
week to investigate whether it is possible to estimate costs of reducing carbon
dioxide and the other greenhouse gases.
"Is change affordable? That is the big issue," said Barry McNutt of the
Energy Department's Office of Policy, Planning and Analysis. "I don't think a
single study has good cost estimates."
On a recent television news talk show, White House chief of staff John H.
Sununu, in explaining his alteration of a speech President Bush delivered to the
International Panel on Climate Change -- a wording change that
environmentalists criticized - said, "There's a little tendency by some of the
faceless bureaucrats on the environmental side to try and create a policy in
this country that cuts off our use of coal, oil and natural gas. I don't think
America wants not to be able to use their automobiles."
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
8
(c) 1990 The Washington Post, March 10, 1990
In fact, few energy experts are talking about Americans giving up their cars.
Rather, they're talking about Americans giving up big cars.
Because there is not enough time to develop exotic new fuels such as nuclear
fusion or perhaps even to gain wide public and economic acceptance for atomic
energy and solar cells, the centerpiece of most studies is conservation of
energy through increased efficiency.
In the residential sector, analysts say there would have to be vigorous
campaigns to get people to buy more efficient water heaters, lights, freezers,
refrigerators, space heaters and air conditioners. But even if everyone changed
their appliances and lightbulbs tomorrow, Dick Rowberg of the Congressional
Research Service said, this would reduce carbon dioxide emissions at best by
only a few percent.
In the commerical sectors, builders would be required to use energy-saving
windows, super-efficient air-conditioning systems and new types of lighting.
Marc Ross of the University of Michigan believes that a substanial reduction is
possible in the industrial sector if manufacturing plants were forced or
encouraged to switch from coal to natural gas, and to increase overall
efficiency by redesigning production systems so as to recycle more materials and
waste less.
Like the other researchers, Ross targets coal for severe reductions. A large
part of U.S. electricity is generated by burning coal, which emits large amounts
of carbon dioxide.
Curiously, however, in a speech last month spoke before the World Coal
Conference in New Orleans, Deputy Energy Secretary W. Henson Moore gave a
endorsement of the future of coal in the United States, even after acknowledging
the threat of greenhouse warming.
Some analysts have also suggested that a massive effort to reforest the
planet be undertaken. But Gregg Marland of Oak Ridge National Laboratory, who
with physicist Freeman Dyson first suggested planting trees, calculated that
quite a few trees would have to be planted to take up the excess carbon dioxide
being pumped into the atmosphere.
For example, to soak up all the excess carbon dioxide the world produces each
year, it would be necessary to plant a tree farm the size of Australia. Once the
trees matured, and stopped taking up more carbon dioxide, another forest would
have to be planted.
Even Bush's modest proposal to plant a billion trees, Marland calculated,
would have no more effect than if each American turned off a 100-watt bulb for
90 minutes a day.
"My overall view is that it [reducing carbon dioxide] will be very difficult
and very expensive," said William Fulkerson of the Energy Department's Oak Ridge
National Laboratory in Tennesse. "It's not any accident that the world depends
on fossil fuel. We're still hooked on fossil fuel because it is marvelous."
And yet, even the pessimists agree that something must be done. If not, they
note, carbon dioxide levels will keep growing beyond the doubling that is
forecast for the middle of the next century. That doubling point has been
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
9
(c) 1990 The Washington Post, March 10, 1990
taken as a convenient measure to factor into the predictions, but it is
arbitrary and, in the absence of controls, both carbon dioxide and global
warming would continue to increase as long as energy use grows.
GRAPHIC: CHART, GLOBAL BARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS. (DATA FROM CHART NOT SHOWN.),
TWP
TYPE: NATIONAL NEWS
SUBJECT: OZONE LAYER DETERIORATION; AIR POLLUTION; POLLUTION CONTROL AND
ABATEMENT; GREENHOUSE EFFECT; ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
NAMED-PERSONS: JOHN FIROR
ENHANCEMENT: CARBON-DIOXIDE
LEXIS® ® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS ®
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
2
1ST DOCUMENT of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Public Papers of the Presidents
Remarks to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
25 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 176
February 5, 1990
LENGTH: 1951 words
Thank you, Dr. Bolin, and thank you for all you're doing in leading this very
important effort here. To Professor Obasi and Dr. Tolba and all the delegates
of the World Meteorological Organization and the UNEP, the United Nations
Environment Programme, let me commend all of you for cominq together to examine
an issue of such qreat importance.
I also want to salute Bill Reilly, our able EPA [Environmental Protection
AgencylAdministrator. He will become the next Cabinet official in the U.S.
Government. I want to thank Assistant Secretary [of State]Bernthal for his
leadership from the U.S. side of things and also salute my able Science Advisor,
who is with us today, Dr. Bromley, who many of you know.
The recommendations that this distinguished organization makes can have a
profound effect on the world's environmental and economic policy. By being here
today, I hope to underscore my country's and my own personal concern about your
work, about environmental stewardship, and to reaffirm our commitment to finding
responsible solutions. It's both an honor and a pleasure to be the first
American President to speak to this organization, as its work takes shape.
You're called upon to deliver recommendations which strike a difficult and
yet critical international bargain: a convergence between global environmental
policy and global economic policy, a bargain where both perspectives benefit and
neither is compromised. As experts, you understand that economic growth and
environmental integrity need not be contradictory priorities. One reinforces
and complements the other; each, a partner. Both are crucial. A sound
environment is the basis for the continuity and quality of human life and
enterprise. Clearly, strong economies allow nations to fulfill the obligations
of environmental stewardship. Where there is economic strength, such protection
is possible. But where there is poverty, the competition for resources gets
much tougher; stewardship suffers.
For all of these reasons, I sincerely believe we must do everything in our
power to promote global cooperation: for environmental protection and economic
growth, for intelligent management of our natural resources and efficient use of
our industrial capacity, and for sustainable and environmentally sensitive
development around the world.
The United States is strongly committed to the IPCC process of international
cooperation on global climate change. We consider it vital that the community
of nations be drawn together in an orderly, disciplined, rational way to review
the history of our global environment, to assess thepotential for future climate
change. and to develop effective programs. The state of the science, the social
and economic impacts, and the appropriate strateqies all are crucial components
to a global resolution. The stakes here are very high; the consequences, very
significant.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
3
25 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 176
The United States remains committed to aggressive and thoughtful action on
environmental issues. Last week, in my State of the Union Address, I spoke of
stewardship because I believe it's something we owe ourselves, our children, and
their children. So, we are renewing the ethic of stewardship in our domestic
programs; in our work to forge international agreements; inour assistance to
developing and East-bloc nations; and here, by chairing the Response Strategies
Working Group.
I have just submitted a budget to our Congress for fiscal 1991. It includes
over $2billion in new spending to protect the vironment. And underscoring our
commitment to your efforts, I am pleased to note that funding for the U.S.
Global Change Research Program will increase by nearly 60 percent, to over $1
billion. That commitment, by far the largest ever made by any nation, reflects
our determination to improve our understanding of the science of climate change.
We are working with our neighbors around the world to enhance global monitoring
and data manaqaement, improve analysis, reduce the uncertainty of predictive
models, and conduct regular reassessments of the state of science.
Our program allows NASA [National Aeronautics and Space Administration] and
her sister agencies and all our international partners to move forward with the
Mission to Planet Earth. That will initiate the U.S. Earth Observing System, in
cooperation with Europe and Japan, to advance the state of knowledge about the
planet we share. Furthermore, even as we wait for the benefits of this
research, the United States has already taken many steps in our country that
bring both economic and environmental benefits, steps that make sense on their
own merits in terms of responsibility and efficiency, which help reduce
emissions of CFC's [chlorofluorocarbons] and carbon dioxide and other pollutants
now entering the atmosphere. Let me outline them very briefly:
We are pursuing new technology development that will increase the efficiency
of our energy use and thus reduce total emissions.
We're crafting a revised Clean Air Act with incentives for our private sector
to find creative, market-driven solutions to enhance air quality.
We've launched a major reforestation initiative to plant a billion trees a
year on the private land across America.
And we're working out a comprehensive review and revision of our national
energy strategy, with initiatives to increase energy efficiency and the use of
renewable sources.
These efforts, already underway, are the heart of a $336 million Department
of Energy program and are expected to produce energy savings through the year
2000 of over $30 billion while achieving significant pollution reduction. Quite
a return on investment.
We're also working, through diplomatic channels with our colleagues in other
countries and through innovative measures like debt-for-nature swaps, to do more
than simply reduce global deforestation. We hope to reverse it, turn it around,
not unilaterally but by working with our international neighbors.
The economics of our response strategies to climate change are getting
intensive study here in our country, in the United States. We're developing
real data on the costs of various strategies, assessing new measures, and
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
4
25 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 176
encouraging other nations to follow suit. And we look forward to sharing this
knowledge and technical support with our international colleagues. As we work
to create policy and agreements on action, we want to encourage the most
creative, effective approaches. Wherever possible, we believe that market
mechanisms should be applied and that our policies must be consistent with
economic growth and free-market principles in all countries. Our development
efforts and our dialog can help us reach effective and acceptable solutions.
Last December at Malta, in my meeting with President Gorbachev, I proposed
that the United States offer a venue for the first negotiating session for a
framework convention, once the IPCC completes its work. I reiterate that
invitation here and look forward to your cooperation in that agenda.
We all know that human activities are changing the atmosphere in unexpected
and in unprecedented ways. Much remains to be done. Many questions remain to
be answered. Together, we have a responsibility to ourselves and the
generations to come to fulfill our stewardship obligations. But that
responsibility demands that we do it right. We acknowledge a broad spectrum of
views on these issues, but our respect for a diversity of perspective does not
diminish our recognition of our obligation or soften our will to produce
policies that work. Some may be tempted to exploit legitimate concerns for
political positioning. Our responsibility is to maintain the quality of our
approach, our commitment to sound science, and an open mind to policy options
So, the United States will continue its efforts to improve our understanding
of climate change - to seek hard data, accurate models, and new ways to improve
the science --- and determine how best to meet these tremendous challenges.
Where politics and opinion have outpaced the science, we are accelerating our
support of the technology to bridge that gap. And we are committed to coming
together periodically for international assessments of where we stand.
Therefore, this spring the United States will host a White House conference on
science and economic research on the environment, convening top officials from a
representative group of nations, to bring together the three essential
disciplines: science, economics, and ecology. They will share their knowledge,
assumptions, and state-of-the-art research models to outline our understanding
and help focus our efforts. I look forward, personally, to participating in
this seminar and to learning from its deliberations.
Our goal continues to be matching policy commitments to emerging scientific
knowledge and a reconciling of environmental protection to the continued
benefits of economic development. And as Secretary [of State] Baker observed a
year ago, whatever global solutions to climate change are considered, they
should be as specific and as cost-effective as they can possiblybe. If we hope
to promote environmental protection and economic growth around the world, it
will be important not to work in conflict but with our industrial sectors. That
will mean moving beyond the practice of command, control, and compliance toward
a new kind of environmental cooperation and toward an emphasis on pollution
prevention rather than mere mitigation and litigation. Many of our industries,
in fact, are already providing crucial research and solutions.
One corporation, for example - and there are others, but I'll single out one
of them --- 3M started an in-house program called Pollution Prevention Pays --
one company. And that has saved the company well over a half a billion dollars
since 1975, prevented 112,000 tons of air pollutants, 15,000 tons of water
pollutants, and almost 400,000 tons of sludge and solid waste from being
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® ® NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central
PAGE
5
25 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 176
released into the environment. They've done it by rewarding employees for
coming up with ideas, and they have clearly demonstrated the benefits of doing
it right.
Where developing nations are concerned, I know some argue that we'll have to
abandon the free-market principles of prosperous economies. In fact, we think
it's all the more crucial in the developing countries to harness incentives of
the free enterprise system in the service of the environment. I believe we
should make use of what WE know. We know that the future of the Earth must not
be compromised. We bear a sacred trust in our tenancy here and a covenant with
those most precious to us: our children and theirs. We also understand the
efficiency of incentives and that well-informed free markets yield the most
creative solutions. We must now apply the wisdom of that system, the power of
those forces, in defense of the environment we cherish.
Working together, with good faith and earnest dialog, I believe we can
reconcile vitality with environmental protection. And so, let me commend you on
your outstanding work and wish you all deliberate speed in your efforts to
address a very difficult, but very important, human concern.
Thank you all very much. It is a great pleasure to be the first President to
address this distinguished group. Thank you very much.
Note: The President spoke at 10:20 a.m. at Georgetown University's Leavey
Center. In his remarks, he referred to Bert Bolin, Chairman of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; G.O.P. Obasi, Secretary-General
of the World Meteorlogical Organizations; and K. Tolba, Executive Director of
the United Nations Environment Programme.
LEXIS® NEXIS® LEXIS® NEXIS® ®
2
38A9 Econ. Rept- 851 .000 on .2979 Global Climate Chage,
101 299V010mg 076W97 VA JI BROD insmnotivas 901 09269197
galob 70 27179090 grij Vissio 9VEN V9dd DM6 26901 dilw qu primoo
of OVEN > 9W Baher 9MO2 world I 916 anoiden sharlw
.JApin 11
AMINJ 9W JOB MI 2007992019 70 esigioning 19N75M-9977 grit nobrieds
to esvido 111 2290760 DJ oniqoIgvsb grit MI Isibuno 9'10m grit [Is 2'JI
SW 9v9ll9d I gdj to grit MI mgjaya 9977 grit
ton Jawm righ63 grit to studut grit JENJ WONN SW working JENW to 9211 985m bluode
1) NJIW TO Jeom 79W0Q grit INSNEYOO >enviro. grit 5 bns 0216 900 9W 997 70 .27190J qual hobatw TWO grit Jaway viggs 9W 09706872 ec won NO Jewn 3116 1690 agvidnsoni 9W 9W 0921monqmoo to 320m vonsioitte 9V1J6970 920MJ 9d
.Nalisho SW ingmnomivns grit to 9209796 MI 290707 92003
no NOV brigmm NED 9W ec gygiled grouth I pollib 1290169 means bas After 0000 [sjiy pnixhow
of 2770719 TWOY MI b99q2 9367901196 11/5 WOY naiw DOB XTOW TWOY
nemunt VISY Jud 297bbs
, instroqmi unmet aspirations VISV need
of 32717 grit 3d of 36370 5 21 II .Noum V19V 116 WOY XnsdT
.Nowm V19Y WOY XMENT .quore ains aagnbbs
V9V69J 4pts 9d inU nw J6 .M.6 05:01 16 edoxe insbie999 gdT :9000
15m11603 intiod 1798 of 09779797 90 airl MI
,12500 .9.0.a 9j6mi[0 NO 19069
to 10009110 ,5dICT bns blnow grit 70
.9mm610019 гло bgjinU grit
Viluman coursey. of global change.
ENERGY:
PRODUCTION, CONSUMPTION,
AND CONSEQUENCES,
John L. Helm
Editor
National Academy of Engineering
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C. 1990
NSF Library File Copy
Energy: Production, Consumption,
and Consequences. 1990.
Pp. 75-84. Washington, D.C.:
National Academy Press.
Global Environmental Forces
THOMAS C. SCHELLING
Greenhouse warming is global in at least two respects. First, carbon
dioxide (CO₂) and the other gases released or withheld anywhere on earth
disperse rapidly into the global inventory. The location of origin makes
no difference. Second, the effect will be a change in global circulation
of air and water. Although the mean rise in atmospheric temperature is
commonly used as an index of climate change, the change in temperature
differential between equatorial and polar regions may be a better measure
of global environmental forces.
The standard point estimate of global warming for a doubling of the
concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is 3°C (National Research Council,
1982). But it is usually estimated that the warming in the polar regions
associated with this 3-degree average change might be 8 or 10 degrees,
whereas the change in atmospheric temperature near the equator might be
closer to 1 degree (National Research Council, 1982). Offhand this sounds
like a welcome dispersion of temperature change: it will mainly get warmer
where it is already very cold and warm up the least where it is already
hot. But more significant is that it is the temperature gradients between
equatorial and polar regions that drive the winds, which in turn drive the
oceans, and a change of 7 or 8 degrees in the mean temperature difference
will change the atmospheric and oceanic circulation much more than would
a uniform global rise in atmospheric temperature. Most climates may get
warmer, some will undoubtedly become cooler. But the observed changes
will include not only temperature and temperature variation from season to
season and year to year but also, probably more importantly, the amounts,
75
76
THOMAS C. SCHELLING
GLOBAL EN
the seasonal distribution, and the year-to-year variation in rainfall, snow,
discontinui
wind, fog, sunlight, humidity, and storms.
reflect an i
For the purpose of comparing forthcoming changes in climate with
discover su
changes experienced in the past, the mean global atmospheric tempera-
Aside
ture is probably not only a reliable index but something of a measure of
the most p¹
magnitude. Using the commonly accepted 3-degree rise from a doubling
will be in a
of the atmospheric concentration as an approximation to what may be
can be pr
forthcoming, the ensuing temperature will not only be well outside the
be changes
range of atmospheric temperatures experienced in the past 10,000 years
irrigation,
but may be several times the range of temperature variation experienced
comfort of
in that time. This observation is frequently expressed, and correctly, as
There
a change in climate greater than any that mankind has experienced since
agricultura
the dawn of history. It is expressed more accurately as changes in cli-
in many ca
mates-plural not singular-because different climates around the globe
may contir
will change differently.
production
Without belittling the unprecedented nature of such climate changes
people wil
or the prospect of some change that is not gradual but catastrophic, it is
An increa:
fair to point out that most people will not undergo in the next 100 years
percent, W
changes in their local climates more drastic than the changes in climate that
offset man
people have undergone during the past 100 years. No climate changes are
productivi
forecast that compare with moving from Boston to Irvine, California, or
There
even perhaps from Irvine to Los Angeles. The Goths and the Vandals, the
intractably
Romans and the Vikings, the Tartars and the Huns migrated through more
of food or
drastic changes than any currently anticipated; Europeans who migrated to
little of th
North and South America similarly underwent drastic climate changes. In
So even il
this country in 1860 barely 2 percent of the population lived outside the
a global S
humid continental or subtropical climates; in 1980 the percentages outside
may be pa
these zones had increased from 2 percent to 22 percent.
populatior
Furthermore the microclimates of urbanized Tokyo, Mexico City, and
be the mo
Los Angeles have not deterred their population growth; the microclimates
countries.
of London and Pittsburgh changed dramatically during the century before
related to
1950 and have changed again almost as dramatically since then. Even
poorest.
urbanization itself, without the associated air pollution, changes the condi-
What
tions created by climate. Most Americans, Europeans, and Japanese never
alarmist.
experience muddy roads anymore.
which I sh
The expectation is that climates will change gradually, both over time
that seriou
and over space (National Research Council, 1983:Ch. 1-3). The climate
the emissi
of Nebraska may gradually change into the current climate of Kansas, not
alarmist a
into the climate of Massachusetts or Oregon. Climates will "migrate." This
not believ
expectation is on the whole reassuring, but it could be mistaken. The models
But t
used in the computer simulation of climate may be incapable of producing
mild. As ]
discontinuities because the current state of meteorological knowledge is
and it may
confined to continuous processes. There may be no reason to expect
enough to
CHELLING
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL FORCES
77
all, snow,
discontinuities, but the fact that the models produce no discontinuities may
reflect an inability to design models based on the state of the art that can
mate with
discover such phenomena.
tempera-
Aside from a possible rise in ocean level, which I shall discuss presently,
easure of
the most predictable physical and economic consequences of climate change
doubling
will be in agriculture. By "predictable" I mean not that the actual changes
it may be
can be predicted but that it can be reliably predicted that there will
utside the
be changes. These will be changes in rainfall, winter snow for summer
,000 years
irrigation, humidity, daylight and cloud cover, and perhaps the health and
perienced
comfort of livestock.
rrectly, as
There is no reason to believe that the revolutionary improvements in
nced since
agricultural productivity that have developed over the past 75 years and that
ges in cli-
in many cases have spread worldwide will not continue. Depletion of soils
the globe
may continue, but control over plant and animal genetics and the possible
production of new proteins may drastically change for the better what crops
e changes
people will grow and what foods they will eat 50 or 100 years from now.
phic, it is
An increase in the cost of food production by 5 or 10 percent, even 20
100 years
percent, which would be a somewhat extravagant estimate, may easily be
imate that
offset many times over by another century's improvements in agricultural
langes are
productivity.
ifornia, or
There will undoubtedly continue to be parts of the world that are
indals, the
intractably poor and dependent for a livelihood largely on local production
ugh more
of food or other climatically dependent crops. These countries may have
igrated to
little of the capacity to adapt that the more advanced countries can afford.
anges. In
So even if the damage to food production may not average enough on
utside the
a global scale to be cause for alarm-may not even be noticeable-there
es outside
may be particular areas in which the damage to agriculture coupled with
population growth could severely retard progress. (Population growth may
City, and
be the more serious.) This situation may demand foreign aid to the poorest
roclimates
countries. I would neither expect nor recommend foreign aid directly
ury before
related to hardships induced by climate change, but rather aid to the
en. Even
poorest.
the condi-
What I have said so far will sound to many readers as insufficiently
ese never
alarmist. "Optimistic" it may appear. One reason for the unexcited tone,
which I shall elaborate shortly, is pessimism, not optimism. I do not believe
over time
that serious measures will be taken over the next quarter century to curtail
e climate
the emissions of carbon into the atmosphere. I do not believe that even an
ansas, not
alarmist appraisal will lead to a substantial policy response. I therefore do
ate." This
not believe that exaggerating the dangers will serve a useful purpose.
he models
But there is, I acknowledge, another reason why my assessment is so
producing
mild. As I mentioned earlier, I am attempting to assess predicted changes,
wledge is
and it may be that our climate models predict only what we understand well
to expect
enough to include in the models. Maybe we are also good at adapting to
78
THOMAS C. SCHELLING
GLOBAL EN
phenomena we understand, as well as good at predicting them; and the ones
fuel emissi
we do not understand well enough to predict will cause difficulty because we
through a
do not understand them well enough to adapt. In other words, there is bias
(or expensi
in our assessment of dangers: those we understand well enough to perceive
internation
we understand well enough to overcome, those that we have no hints of
its program
may be the dangers we would least know how to meet and overcome.
the Federa
Reduced rainfall in Kansas 25 or 50 years from now we may adapt to
world's ene
with moisture-conserving agricultural techniques, genetically altered crops
fossil fuels
that require less moisture, or the acquisition and transport of water. The
step of red
phenomenon is familiar, the adaptations are familiar, and the predictions
lost produ
are based on familiar principles of meteorology. The "collapse" of the West
over a per
Antarctic Ice Sheet would be an altogether different phenomenon.
gross natio
As recently as 15 or 20 years ago, the accepted estimates were that
would be 1
changes
the grounded ice-ice resting on the sea bottom and rising a kilometer
largest ene
01 more above sea level-might, with a warming of the oceans attendant
consumptic
upon a warming of the atmosphere, slide or glaciate into the ocean within
billion or
w
75 years, causing a 20-foot rise in sea level. Like seismology in response
reduce emi
to the test-ban controversy of the 1950s, glaciology has advanced in the
of CO2 in
past decade or two, assisted by satellite sensing, and the currently accepted
to 80 years
estimates are that if that grounded ice should be added to the ocean level
the arguab
it is likely to be gradual and to take several hundred years. The urgency
emissions
of that particular danger is thus reduced by an order of magnitude (unless
Any S
further rapid advances in the relevant glaciology bring comparable changes
national Γ:
in estimates back in the opposite direction). What is worrisome is that
consumpti
there may be other phenomena, perhaps, like the ocean level, not being
fossil fuels
perceived as "climatic," that could be as devastating as a 20-foot rise in
fidently be
sea level and that will not, upon further inspection, yield to more benign
years or m
estimates.
include the
When asked for an example, I can of course protect myself by pointing
Organizati
out that predicting the unpredictable, foreseeing the unforeseen, especially
mandating
as an amateur, cannot be demanded of me. But when I am in a mood to
prefer to
worry I think about possible changes in the Gulf Stream and the Japanese
trading ur
current. The current global circulation models, as I understand it, do not
efits of a r
include changes in the direction and velocity of ocean currents, and I am
than even
not sure that enough is known about the response of ocean currents to
coal resou
changes in wind patterns to predict whether there may be catastrophes, that
scheme W
is, flipflops from one equilibrium to another, rather than gradual change.
indefinitel
Thus, there may be a missing feedback loop from warming to winds to
The P
currents to climate that, when added to the current models, will produce
of that kir
something more worrisome than the migration of the climate of Kansas to
commodit
South Dakota.
scheme th
As I said at the outset, the problem is global; and that is why it is
several de
exceedingly unlikely that anything substantial will be done to curtail fossil
growth its
CHELLING
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL FORCES
79
1 the ones
fuel emissions. Any nation that attempts to mitigate changes in climate
ecause we
through a unilateral program of energy conservation or fuel switching
ere is bias
(or expensively scrubbing CO₂ from smokestacks) in the absence of some
) perceive
international rationing or compensation arrangement, pays alone the cost of
) hints of
its program while sharing the benefits with the rest of the world. Consider
overcome.
the Federal Republic of Germany, which accounts for about 4 percent of
adapt to
world's energy consumption and just about 4 percent of each of the three
red crops
fossil fuels, coal, oil, and natural gas. If that country took the drastic
vater. The
step of reducing by one-third its consumption of fossil fuels, the cost in
redictions
lost productivity and consumer welfare, even if it were done gradually
f the West
over a period of two decades, could be equivalent to 3-4 percent of its
n.
gross national product while the concentration of CO₂ in the atmosphere
were that
would be reduced by barely 1 percent. Even for the United States, the
kilometer
largest energy consumer of all, phasing in a one-third cutback in fossil fuel
attendant
consumption over the next 20 years at a cost perhaps equivalent to $150
can within
billion or $200 billion per year at today's prices and income levels, would
response
reduce emissions worldwide by less than 10 percent. The time to a doubling
ed in the
of CO2 in the atmosphere might be reduced from something like 85 years
accepted
to 80 years. I think it is a fair estimate that for no individual country, with
cean level
the arguable exception of the United States, is it economical to curtail CO₂
e urgency
emissions unilaterally in the interest of retarding climate change.
de (unless
Any significant effort to curtail emissions would require an inter-
e changes
national rationing regime, covering the larger fraction of world energy
ne is that
consumption, to ration the consumption of energy, or the consumption of
not being
fossil fuels, or the consumption of carbon, in some manner that could con-
ot rise in
fidently be expected to remain in force long enough to be effective, say 50
re benign
years or more. It would have to include the Soviet Union, it would have to
include the People's Republic of China, and it may well have to include the
y pointing
Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). It would require
especially
mandating compliance on the part of scores of nations that would greatly
mood to
prefer to be outside the regime. And it would require for many nations
Japanese
trading urgently needed economic growth now for the dubious future ben-
it, do not
efits of a rationing scheme that depended on a more disparate membership
and I am
than even that of OPEC. Eventually, because most of the world's known
urrents to
coal resources are in the Soviet Union, China, and the United States, the
phes, that
scheme would require those three nations to collaborate effectively and
11 change.
indefinitely as a cartel.
winds to
The political likelihood of solid and confidently expected collaboration
1 produce
of that kind would be approximately zero if energy were a homogeneous
Kansas to
commodity consumed uniformly worldwide. But to put in effect a rationing
scheme the impact of which will begin to hurt and be effective only after
why it is
several decades of energy growth would require dealing with economic
rtail fossil
growth itself, and that in turn requires attention to things like population
80
THOMAS C. SCHELLING
GLOBAL EN
growth (Ausubel and Nordhaus, 1983; Nordhaus and Yohe, 1983). Do the
the accider
Chinese claim that a policy of zero population growth is more than sufficient
have to be
as a curtailment of energy use and that their country should therefore be
from 2 per
exempt? Do the countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation
the future
and Development participate as a unit, negotiating long-term shares in
Energ
energy growth? Is there any chance they could be more successful than
ments in C
they have been with defense budgets, oil imports, or agricultural trade?
finds econo
My pessimistic conclusion is that nothing of the sort is going to hap-
to researcl
pen. I do not believe the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete
Energy-effi
the Ozone Layer, signed in September 1987, is any harbinger for sup-
more of th
pression of CO2. Economically what is at stake is two or three orders of
for.
magnitude greater for fossil fuels than for chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and
What
the prospects for technological replacement of CFCs are much brighter.
can be rei
(The Ozone Protocol does illustrate the need for worldwide collaboration
vegetation
to make restrictions worthwhile: the treaty takes effect only when ratified
ocean or C
by nations representing two-thirds of world consumption.)
smokestaci
If world politics change as much in the next 75 years as in the past 75,
some atter
a global fuel regime of some kind may become possible, but none is now
the carbon
foreseeable. If I am wrong, and world rationing of fossil fuels becomes
CO2 in the
economically and politically feasible, we shall still face the prospects for
increase, a
climate change. There is absolutely no possibility that fossil fuel emissions
be rescued
can cease altogether in the foreseeable future, and even the most optimistic
The I
could hardly hope that fuel emissions would stop growing within the fore-
people an
seeable future. A most ambitious goal might be to reduce by half the growth
local and
rate in fossil fuel emissions. (As the fraction of fossil fuels represented
will be ch
by petroleum and natural gas declines over the coming century, fossil fuel
population
consumption will have to increase at less than half the unrestricted growth
the ways
rate in order that carbon emissions be only half what they might otherwise
significant
be.) A not unreasonable estimate, for purposes of illustration only, of
generally
growth in fossil fuel consumption over the next half century might be 2 per-
of course.
cent per year, a rate at which the atmospheric concentration of CO₂ might
changing:
double in about 85 years, reaching 50 percent elevation in about 50 years.
ourselves
Holding emissions to 1 percent growth would carry us beyond the middle
storms an
of the next century before we reached concentrations half again as great as
of change
today's. The implied curtailment in emissions, at 1 percent compared with
rather tha
2 percent, would be 10 percent at the end of the first decade, 25 percent
of better
at the end of three decades, and 40 percent by the end of five decades.
with perh
That seems to me to be the outside limit to what might be economically
locations.
acceptable worldwide. (How that 40 percent aggregate curtailment would
Ther
be shared among consuming nations I hesitate even to conjecture.)
ceives so
in weath
National programs to phase in nuclear power to replace fossil fuels for
electricity, even for the production of hydrogen fuels, may again become
Committe
popular. But it is still hard to measure the half-life of anxiety resulting from
wrote, 20
HELLING
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL FORCES
81
Do the
the accidents at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. Any new reactors will
sufficient
have to be economical as well as clean. Cutting the growth of emissions
refore be
from 2 percent to 1 percent may well require all electric power capacity in
operation
the future to be nuclear.
shares in
Energy conservation measures deserve emphatic attention, but invest-
sful than
ments in conservation will mainly be limited to what the private economy
trade?
finds economical. National or international policy will probably be limited
g to hap-
to research, development, demonstration, and technology transmission.
Deplete
Energy-efficient investments may yet get a boost from another doubling or
for sup-
more of the price of crude oil, but that is probably not a boost to be hoped
orders of
for.
FCs) and
What else may be done to cope with the greenhouse problem? CO₂
brighter.
can be removed from the atmosphere by increasing the mass of living
boration
vegetation or by "refossilizing" timber, burying it underground or in the
a ratified
ocean or coating it so that it cannot oxidize. And CO₂ can be scrubbed from
smokestacks at very substantial expense. Probably at enormous expense,
: past 75,
some attenuation could be achieved in this fashion. (Some small increase in
te is now
the carbon density of forests may result naturally from the enhancement of
becomes
CO₂ in the atmosphere.) The concentration of CO₂ will therefore certainly
pects for
increase, and at an increasing rate, and I consider it unlikely that we shall
emissions
be rescued much before the concentration has nearly doubled.
optimistic
The main response will be adaptation, and most of that by ordinary
the fore-
people and businesses. Some of the adaptation will be by governments, but
e growth
local and regional governments as much as national governments. There
resented
will be changing climates to cope with, changing urbanization, changing
ossil fuel
population densities, and in most countries probably drastic changes in
d growth
the ways that people live and work and transport themselves, perhaps
otherwise
significant changes in what they eat. Much of the adaptation will seem
only, of
generally "environmental" rather than specifically climate oriented. And,
be 2 per-
of course, there is continuous adaptation to climate even when it is not
O₂ might
changing: we change the technology and the efficacy with which we heat
50 years.
ourselves and cool ourselves and clean our air and protect ourselves from
e middle
storms and cope with droughts and floods and dispose of snow. The pace
great as
of change may be such that people will find themselves adapting to climate
ared with
rather than to changing climate. Just as businesses shift to take advantage
; percent
of better productive climates, they will keep shifting to better climates
decades.
with perhaps small regard for the prospects of changing climates in given
locations.
nomically
nt would
There remains to be discussed a response to climate change that re-
.)
ceives so little attention that it deserves emphasis here-direct intervention
fuels for
in weather and climate. When Thomas F. Malone was chairman of the
become
Committee on Atmospheric Sciences of the National Research Council, he
ting from
wrote, 20 years ago, "The possibility that large effects may be produced
82
THOMAS C. SCHELLING
GLOBAL EN
from relatively modest but highly selective human interventions opens up
for the
the possibility that weather and climate modification may some day be
For exa
in a m:
operationally feasible" (Malone, 1968:1136). And of the modification of
"killer"
hurricanes he said, "If five years are allowed for the development of an ad-
to a vig
equate mathematical model, five more years for assessing the consequences
opened
highly S
of interventions of various kinds, and then ten years of field experimenta-
tion for validation, it seems unreasonable to expect much before 1990, with
If somebo
the probabilities fair to good that a proven technology will exist by the year
distribution
2000." He added, "The probability of success in broad climate modification
manipulab
is likely to exceed 50 percent by the year 2018" (1968:1138), that being the
organizatic
50-year mark from the time he wrote.
perhaps ge
Most experiments with weather modification or with changing geo-
It is (
graphical features that may lead to climate change have been local and
ommend i
regional. That has been true of cloud seeding and would be true of the
attention f
manipulation of hurricanes. In a discussion of greenhouse warming, the
ommendir
possibility of global intervention has to be considered. An important kind
that weath
of human intervention in global climate may be efforts to change the ra-
time no lo
diation balance itself. We know it can be done: we are doing it. That is
and nucle:
what the greenhouse discussion is all about. The fact that we are doing it
erate an ii
unintentionally, and the fact that the consequences may not be welcome, do
balance, a
not contradict that we know how, at some expense if necessary, to change
than to ot
the world's climate more than it has changed in the last 10,000 years.
it. And if
Warming the atmosphere currently is more economical than cooling
uniform 0
it because it happens as a by-product of energy consumption that would
how to sh
be costly to reduce or terminate. If we were faced with a "little Ice Age"
the reduct
over the next century, we might be glad to get some of that CO2 in the
If int
atmosphere at no cost and without having to negotiate climate change
in its dist
diplomatically.
Mexico ar
But we know that, in principle, cooling could be arranged. Volcanic
source of
eruptions have done it. Discussions of "nuclear winter" took seriously the
residents
possibility that human activity might lower global temperatures cataclysmi-
In cl
cally. Considering the development of nuclear energy in both its explosive
wisdom i
and its controlled uses and the feat of landing a team on the moon and
order of a
returning it safely, and that we now know how to warm the earth's atmo-
upwards
sphere and possibly to cool it (though through unacceptable means), we
to the CC
should not rule out that technologies for global cooling, perhaps by inject-
correspor
ing the right particulates into the stratosphere, perhaps by subtler means,
the White
will become economical during coming decades.
an island,
A more benign example, compared with nuclear winter or induced
third disa
volcanic eruptions, may be the manipulation of cloud cover. Let me again
A CO
quote Thomas Malone (1968:1135).
doing, per
A characteristic of the atmosphere that frustrates the weather forecaster while
dikes). N
providing a basis for optimism on the part of the weather modifier is a tendency
which is (
CHELLING
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL FORCES
83
opens up
for the processes in the atmosphere to demonstrate certain traits of instability.
e day be
For example, a small puffy-type cloud may grow to a towering thunderstorm
in a matter of hours; a gentle zephyr in tropical latitudes may develop into a
ication of
"killer" hurricane in a matter of days; and a small low-pressure center may grow
of an ad-
to a vigorous extratropical cyclone within a single day.
An avenue may be
sequences
opened up by which great effects may be produced from relatively modest but
erimenta-
highly selective human interventions.
990, with
If somebody learned in the next 50 years how to affect the extent and global
the year
distribution of certain kinds of cloud cover, incoming radiation may become
dification
manipulable by nations, international agencies, or even interested private
being the
organizations, depending on the nature of the technology, its expense, and
perhaps geographical considerations.
ging geo-
It is difficult to mention such a possibility without appearing to rec-
local and
ommend it, or to use it as a "technological fix" in the future to divert
ue of the
attention from some need for immediate policy intervention. I am not rec-
ming, the
ommending, I am predicting. Independently of CO₂, we have to consider
tant kind
that weather and climate modification may become feasible in a period of
e the ra-
time no longer than the elapsed time since electronics, genetics, antibiotics,
That is
and nuclear fission were unimagined. The greenhouse warming may gen-
: doing it
erate an interest among most nations in moderating the changed radiation
come, do
balance, and if it proves more expensive to facilitate outgoing radiation
o change
than to obstruct incoming, there may be powerful motives for considering
ars.
it. And if the technique for moderating incoming radiation were globally
1 cooling
uniform or nearly so, an international agreement would have only to decide
at would
how to share the costs, a unidimensional problem compared with sharing
Ice Age"
the reduction of emissions.
D₂ in the
If intervention is more regional than global, or global but not uniform
e change
in its distribution, intervention could become exceedingly controversial.
Mexico and China are counting on those hurricanes-they are an essential
Volcanic
source of rainfall for crops-whereas the Cubans, Filipinos, Japanese, and
ously the
residents of the Texas coast would suppress them if they knew how.
taclysmi-
In closing I must say a word about sea level. I believe the current
explosive
wisdom is that we may be in for rising sea level that could be on the
toon and
order of a meter per century for several centuries (Robin, 1986). Anything
i's atmo-
upwards of a meter, perhaps even half a meter, would primarily be due
ans), we
to the collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. The full 20-foot rise
y inject-
corresponding to the complete disappearance of that body of ice would put
r means,
the White House rose garden under water, make Beacon Hill in Boston
an island, and isolate the southern third of Florida by making the middle
induced
third disappear under water.
me again
A country like the United States should be able to adapt (eventually by
doing, perhaps, what the Dutch have been doing for centuries-constructing
while
dikes). No such "easy" solution is available to a country like Bangladesh,
lency
which is densely populated in large areas that would be inundated by the
84
THOMAS C. SCHELLING
full sea level rise, and which could not be protected with dikes. (If dikes
were erected along the coastline to protect against seawater flooding, the
area would simply be flooded with fresh water that could not flow out to
sea.)
If current estimates hold up, the potential devastation of rising sea
]
level will mainly be 100 years away, and the government of Bangladesh
should worry much more about population and productivity than climate
change. If the more prosperous nations were prepared to help Bangladesh
at great expense to themselves, aid now would probably appeal more to
Bangladesh than heroic efforts to forestall floods a century hence. (That
country already has floods to cope with in this century!)
Estimates of rising sea levels depend not only on thermal warming of
the oceans, melting of glaciers, and what happens to the West Antarctic
Ice Sheet; they can also depend on what happens to the Antarctic climate.
There has been some conjecture that a warming of the South Polar air may
lead to greater snowfall on Antarctica. The area of Antarctica is about
one-fortieth the area of the oceans; a 1-centimeter rise in ocean level would
be offset by a 40-centimeter rise in the water content of the snowfall on
Antarctica, or an average snowfall of 4 meters per year. Storing water as
ice on Antarctica might be the ideal solution to the water-level problem.
The
Even the people most offended at the thought of deliberately tampering
fact of lil
with our climate to offset the greenhouse gases may agree that learning to
housing,
make it snow on Antarctica is a worthwhile project for the next century.
directed
developm
REFERENCES
only if i
accompli
Ausubel, J. H., and W. D. Nordhaus. 1983. A review of estimates of future carbon
that they
dioxide emissions. Pp. 153-185 in Changing Climate: Report of the Carbon Dioxide
Amc
Assessment Committee. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Malone, T. F. 1968. New dimensions of international cooperation in weather analysis and
the gene
prediction. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 49:1134-1140.
involves
National Research Council. 1982. Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Second Assessment.
vegetatic
Carbon Dioxide Review Panel. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Research Council. 1983. Changing Climate: Report of the Carbon Dioxide
as well,
Assessment Committee. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
and in th
Nordhaus, W. D., and G. W. Yohe. 1983. Future carbon dioxide emissions from fossil
or simpl
fuels. Pp. 87-152 in Changing Climate: Report of the Carbon Dioxide Assessment
Committee. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
plans to
Robin, G. deQ. 1986. Changing the sea level: Projecting the rise in sea level caused by
Thr
warming of the atmosphere. Pp. 323-359 in SCOPE 29: The Greenhouse Effect,
opment
Climatic Change, and Ecosystems, B. Bolin, B. R. Döös, J. Jäger, and R. A. Warrick,
eds. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
recently,
awarene
consider
future.
cannot t
one imp
ECONOMICS AND POLICY
OF CLIMATE CHANGE
Survey of the
State of the Art
The White House
April 6, 1990
WARNING LABEL
ON GLOBAL WARMING:
THIS TOPIC CONTAINS
ENORMOUS UNCERTAINTY.
WE KNOW ALMOST NOTHING.
EXHIBIT 1
GLOBAL WARMING ECONOMICS
Growing Concerns on Climate Change
Key questions:
1. Science and Economic Outlook
2. Damages from Climate Change
3. Costs of Slowing Climate Change
Policy Cart in front of Science Horse
wh3
EXHIBIT 2
SCIENTIFIC ASSUMPTIONS
STIPULATE THE USUAL IMPACT OF
GASES ON CLIMATE CHANGE:
- 30 C warming from 2 X CO2
- Likely to occur in 2075-2100
MAJOR GREENHOUSE GASES
- Proliferation of GHGs
- But CO2 the Major Warmer
ENORMOUS UNCERTAINTY IN ALL
PROJECTIONS
vh4
EXHIBIT 3
Estimated Atmospheric Concentrations of Important
Greenhouse Gases
Level
Growth
(parts per billion)
(percent per year)
Greenhouse gas
: ; 1850
1986
2100
1850-1986
1986-2100
Carbon dioxide
(thousands)
290
348
630
0.16
0.52
Methane
880
1675
3100
0.56
0.54
Nitrogen oxides
285
340
:
380
0.15
0.10
Chlorofluorocarbons
0
0.62
2.90
1.37
EXHIBIT 4
TOTAL WARMING POTENTIAL
Greenhouse Gases Emissions
CFCs 15%
CO2 95%
N2O 8%
Others 5%
CH4 2%
CO2 75%
1985
1985-2100
wh5b
EXHIBIT 5
Estimated Contribution of Different Greenhouse Gases
to Global Warming for Concentration Changes, 1985-2100
Relative contribution
(percent)
Greenhouse
Instan-
gas
taneous
Total
Source of emission
Sources by chemical compound
CO2
76.1
94.7
Largcly from combustion of fossil fucls
Methane
9.6
0.8
Poorly understood; from a wide variety
of biological and agricultural activities
CFCs
11.6
3.3
Wholly industrial, including solvents and
refrigerants
Nitrous oxides
2.7
1.2
From fertilizers and energy usc
Sources by economic activity
Energy
62.8
76.2
CO2 emissions, nitrous oxides, methane
Agriculture
20.6
19.8
CO2, methane, nitrous oxides
Industry
0.7
0.1
Methane
Natural
4.3
0.7
Methane, nitrous oxides
Other
11.6
3.3
Chlorofluorocarbons
EXHIBIT 6
Calculated Change in Temperature, 1800-2100
Degrees centigrade (1800 = 0)
5
I
95th percentile
---
25th percentile
75th percentile
...
5th percentile
4
50th percentile
3
2
1
0
1800 1825 1850 1875. 1900 1925 1950 1975 2000 2025 2050 2075 2100
Year
EXHIBIT 7
Actual Global Mean Surface Temperature
and Estimated Distribution of Greenhouse Warming, 1850-2000a
Degrees centigrade (1880-90 = 0)
1.25
- 95th percentile
---
75th percentile
1.00
50th percentile
25th percentile
Actual temperature
5th percentile
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
-0.25
1860
1880
1900
1920
1940
1960
1980
2000
EXHIBIT 8
GNP BY CLIMATE SENSITIVITY
Estimates for United States, 1981
Sector
Percent of GNP
Potential Severe Impact
3 %
(Farms, Forestry,...)
Potential Moderate Impact
10 %
(Energy, Water, Real
Estate )
Negligible Direct Effect
87 %
(Manufacturing, Finance,
Trade, Insurance,...)
wh12
EXHIBIT 9
Breakdown of Economic Activity by Vulnerability
to Climatic Change, 1981
National income
Value
(billions of
Percentage
Sector
dollars)
of total
Total national income
2,414.1
100.0
Potentially severe effect
74.8
3.1
Farms
67.1
2.8
Forestry, fisheries, other
7.7
0.3
Moderate potential effect
243.6
10.1
Construction
109.1
4.5
Water transportation
6.3
0.3
Energy and utilities
Energy (electric, gas, oil)
45.9
1.9
Water and sanitary
5.7
0.2
Real estate
Land-rent componentb
51.2
2.1
Hotels, lodging, recreation
25.4
1.1
Negligible effect
2,095.7
86.8
Mining
45.1
1.9
Manufacturing
581.3
24.1
Other transportation and
communication
132.6
5.5
Finance, insurance, and balance
real estate
274.8
11.4
Trade
349.4
14.5
Other services
325.2
13.5
Government services
337.0
14.0
Rest of world
50.3
2.1
EXHIBIT 10
Impact Estimates for Different Sectors, for Doubling of CO2
SECTORS
Billions (1981 $)
Severely impacted Sectors
Farms
Impact of Greenhouse Warming
and CO2 Fertilization
+12 to -12
Forestry, fisheries, other
small
Moderately Impacted Sectors
Construction
positive
Water transportation
?
Energy and Utilities
Energy (electric, gas, oil)
Electricity demand
1.65
Non-electric space heat
-1.16
Water and sanitary
negative
Real Estate
Land-rent component
Estimate of damage from
sealevel rise
Loss of land
0.48
Protection of sheltered areas
0.90
Protection of open coasts
4.80
Hotels, lodging, recreation
?
TOTAL
Central Estimate
Billions, 1981 level of national income
6.67
Percent of national income
0.28
EXHIBIT 11
VULNERABILITY TO CLIMATE CHANGE
Measured By Share of Agriculture in GDP
60
50
Share of Agriculture (percent)
40
30
20
10
0
Chi
Ind
Nig Mex Bra Kor Germ Jap USA
COUNTRY
1965
1987
2050(p)
EXHIBIT 12
ALTERNATIVE RESPONSES
To Threat of Greenhouse Warming
PREVENTIVE MEASURES
- Reduce Emissions of CFC and CO2
- Forestry Options
OFFSET CLIMATIC EFFECTS
- Climate Engineering
ADAPT TO WARMER CLIMATE
- Market Adaptations
- Government Policies
MAJOR TIMING DIFFERENCES
wh14
EXHIBIT 13
OPTIONS FOR EMISSIONS
Three Major Strategies
REDUCE CFCs:
-Substitute new materials
REDUCING CO2 FROM ENERGY:
- Conservation, fuel switching,
new technologies
FORESTRY OPTIONS
- Slow deforestation
-
"Pickle trees"
wh13
EXHIBIT 14
ESTIMATES OF COST OF CO2 REDUCTION
100
X
X
90
*
80
X
*
+
PERCENTAGE REDUCTION OF CO2
70
+
60
X
X
50
X
X
40
И
30
+
X
20
X
X
am
X
X
10
X
X
O
*
O
100
200
300
400
500
INCREMENTAL COST ($ PER TON CO2)
X
N-Y (behavioral)
+
N-Wm (new tech)
E-R (behavioral)
*
M-R (linear prog)
X
N-Arg (linear prog)
AVERAGE
EXHIBIT 15
Total Global Cost of Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Billions of U.S. dollars
1,400
1,000
600
200
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Percentage reduction of total GHGs
EXHIBIT 16
GROWTH VS CLIMATE CHANGE
Speed of Phase-in & Policy Efficiency
2.5
*
+
2.4
*
+
Economic Growth Rate (% per annum)
2.3
*
+
2.2
2.1
2.0
*
1.9
O
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Percent Reduction GHGs
GRADUAL/TAX
RAPID/TAX
RAPID/REGULATE
Phrtse in Read is
EXHIBIT 17
POLICY FRAMEWORK
To Slow Greenhouse Warming
.
1. GATHER INFORMATION
.
2. NEW TECHNOLOGIES
.
3. "ALL WEATHER" POLICIES
.
4. CARBON TAXES OR FEES?
wh2
EXHIBIT 18
POLICY INITIATIVES
.
1. GATHER INFORMATION
- Earth Systems
- Impact Studies
I
2. NEW TECHNOLOGIES
-Energy R&D: Non-fossil, nuclear
I
3. "ALL WEATHER" POLICIES
- Energy Conservation
- Draconian CFC Restraints
- Market Mechanisms in Environment
wh1
EXHIBIT 19
4. FISCAL STRATEGIES
GRADUAL CRASH
CARBON TAX ("Climate
$5
$100
Insurance Premium")
EMISSIONS REDUCTION 14%
45%
CFCs
12%
13%
CO2
2%
27%
Trees
0%
5%
US COST (1989 Econ)
$2B/yr
$40B/yr
wh7
EXHIBIT 20
Measures of Effects of Different Carbon Taxes
Dollars unless otherwise specified
Level of stringency
of GHG reductions
Sector of effect
Low
High
Tax effect
Tax on CO2 equivalent (per metric ton carbon)
5.00
100
Effect on fossil-fuel prices (1989 prices)
Coal price
Per metric ton
3.50
70
Percentage increase
10
205
Oil price
Per barrel
0.58
11.65
2.8
55
Percentage increase
Gasoline price
0.014
0.28
Per gallon
Percentage increase
1.2
23.3
Overall effects
Estimated reduction of GHG emissions
(CO2 equivalent)
13
45
Total tax revenues, U.S. (billions)
10
196
Estimated global net economic benefits
(+) or costs (-), billions of dollars
per year, 1989 global economy
12
- 96
EXHIBIT 2]
RESEARCH OPTIONS FOR CLIMATE CONFERENCE
I. GATHER INFORMATION
- Natural sciences: monitoring
- Behavioral sciences
Impact and adaptation studies:
collaborative study on impact
in developing countries
Preventive studies: continue to
investigate costs of GHG reductions
II. NEW TECHNOLOGIES
- CFC: critical need for R&D on substitutes
- Forestation:
Alternatives to tropical deforestation;
measures to induce countries to behave
- Energy:
Crucial need for perestroika in federal
energy R&D
Promising new technologies: biomass,
renewables, solar, conservation
International collaborative effort to
revive the nuclear option
-
III. "ALL WEATHER" MEASURES
- Extreme urgency to tighten CFC accords
- Quasi-market mechanisms in "commons"
sectors: pollution, water, coastal regions
- Strengthen energy conservation on fossil
fuels (gasoline or fuel taxes and appliance
or automobile fuel standards)
[whpol403]
EXHIBIT 22
CONCLUSIONS
MAJOR FINDINGS:
- "Very Cheap Lunch"
for Modest Reduction
- Major and Rapid Reduction
Extremely Costly
CURRENT POLICY REASONABLE
ABOVE ALL:
- Remember uncertainties
about science and
society
wh8
EXHIBIT 23
PRE THE of Has OF THE UNITED
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
ON SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH
RELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE
April 17-18, 1990
Washington, D.C.
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
0% SCIENCE . ECUNOMICS RESEARCH
RELATED TO
GLOBALCHANGE
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 5, 1990
Dear Colleague:
On behalf of President Bush, we are honored that you will be coming to the United
States April 16-18 to serve as a delegate to the White House Conference on Science
and Economics Research Related to Global Change.
By contributing your country's expertise in identifying the critical needs in the fields
of science and economics research, you will advance international cooperation and
understanding in dealing with the uncertainties of global change.
The United States welcomes a free and open discussion of the science and economics
research issues related to global change. As co-chairmen of the Conference, we look
forward to joining you in that effort.
Yours Sincerely,
Daman Fremley
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for Science and Technology
Mahal Boston
Michael J. Boskin
Chairman
Council of Economic Advisers
Michael R. Deland
Chairman
Council on Environmental
Quality
PRE-CONFERENCEMATERIAL
FOR DELEGATES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Overview of the Conference
Preliminary Delegation List
Conference Co-Chairmen Biographies
U.S. Delegation Biographies
Hotel/Transportation/Logistics
OVERVIEW OF THE CONFERENCE
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE CONFERENCE:
President George Bush invited the Heads of State from seventeen nations and the leadership of the
E.C. and the OECD to send ministerial-level delegations to the White House Conference on Science
and Economics Research Related to Global Change. The Conference is designed to bring together
government leaders in science, economics, energy, and the environment concerned with the central
research issues of Global Change. The Conference is designed to advance understanding of Global
Change phenomena, to enhance international cooperation, and to build the basis for future efforts
among nations to integrate more fully science and economics research into the policy process. The
Conference adds a new dimension to the international dialogue on Global Change - - the proposition
that economics, both analysis and research on economic policy and economic consequences, is an
essential link between the science of Global Change and policy alternatives. Science and economics
research can also serve to identify and develop technologies and policy instruments that relax the
tension between growth and Global Change, allowing for greater progress on both fronts. To address
these broad goals, the Conference will:
Focus on science and economics research issues relevant to policy on Global Change,
Address important next steps to substantially enhance and broaden international
understanding of science and economics research issues that relate to Global Change,
Highlight the special role that economics plays in integrating the science of Global Change
with the policy process,
Demonstrate linkages between science and economics research and domestic and
international policy processes, and
Seek to take the initial steps to implement joint international science and economics
research efforts.
The Conference is conceived as an integral part of the ongoing international process to understand
the science of and policy options relating to global environmental issues. The need to improve
substantially understanding of both the science and economics of Global Change has been noted by
many world leaders. The Conference, therefore, focuses on science and economics research issues as
a complement to the ongoing Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other interna-
tional forums that seek to address the issue of Global Change. It is hoped that the results of the Con-
ference will contribute to the IPCC process and other ongoing international debates and actions.
The Conference focuses on "Global Change," an area of research concerned with understanding the
fundamental processes that govern the Earth system functions. Global Change encompasses such
diverse and interrelated issues as ozone depletion, greenhouse gases, climate change, food security,
water supply, sea level changes, wetlands, deforestation, biodiversity, population change, and energy
demand
OVERVIEW
1
Pre-Conference Material
for Delegates
The Conference will provide a forum for international leaders to address the complex science and
economics research issues central to the policy process, including:
How well can we predict temperature trends in the decades ahead?
How "good" are our global scale models, such as models to predict temperature changes?
How well can we predict the interconnections between global environmental change and the
resulting social and economic impacts?
What are the economic consequences of adapting to or mitigatinGlobal Change?
How "good" are the models used to assess these economic consequences and their impact on
the well-being of humanity?
By addressing such questions, it is hoped that the nations might pledge to enhance joint international
research efforts that focus on rapid improvement of both scientific and economic knowledge and de-
velopment of the necessary infrastructure to implement such efforts.
To address these complex and interrelated issues, President Bush invited heads of state from a small
group of nations to send delegations led by ministerial-level officials. The Conference was conceived
with the idea that a representative group of countries would be invited to participate. Their selection
was based on the simple criteria that the meeting should include countries or organizations of
countries that have substantial populations, large land masses, industrialized economies, heavy
future energy needs, major research infrastructures, or have provided international leadership on
issues related to climate and Global Change. These countries and organizations were selected:
1.
Australia
2.
Brazil
3.
Canada
4.
Federal Republic of Germany
5.
France
6.
India
7.
Indonesia
8.
Italy
9.
Japan
10.
Mexico
11.
Netherlands
12.
Nigeria
13.
Norway
14.
Poland
15.
Soviet Union
16.
United Kingdom
17.
Zaire
18.
European Community
19.
OECD
2
The White House Conference
on Science and Economics Research
Related to Global Change
THE EXPECTED RESULTS OF THE CONFERENCE
The Conference will provide an opportunity to address the science and economics research issues
related to Global Change in the context of the policy process. To accomplish these goals, the Confer-
ence will focus on and seek to promote:
A substantially enhanced understanding of science, economics, and environmental research
agenda central to the needs of future Global Change policy development.
A substantive understanding of the uncertainties in both science and economics knowledge of
changes in the global environment of the planet.
Increased mutual understanding of and sensitivity to the substance of science and economics
research between both of those research communities.
Increased sensitivity by the two research communities to the policy needs evolving in such
areas as environmental and energy policy, and vice versa.
A solid and well implemented science and economics research effort as a prerequisite for a
complement to evolving efforts by nations to address the international policy questions of
global environmental changes.
A communication network among national leaders concerned with, and responsible for, the
research and policy agenda related to Global Change. More particularly, this Conference
provides a "first-ever" opportunity to forge a partnership between the science and economics
research communities and the policy-makers.
To provide a vehicle to focus on these vital issues, the Conference will include two Plenary Sessions
and several concurrent Working Groups, which will address the three major themes of the Confer-
ence:
The Science and Economics Research Challenge
Integrating Science and Economics Research in the Policy Process
Building a Partnership for Science and Economics Research
The Conference is expected to produce a Co-Chairmen's Report, which will outline the deliberations
of the Conference and set forth common actions designed to expand research and cooperation among
nations.
As President Bush stated in his invitation letter, "It is my hope that the expertise, experience, and
data available in our respective countries can be brought together in a more integrated and coherent
fashion. By working together, our nations can enhance international cooperation in these vital areas
and contribute to the success of the ongoing IPCC process."
OVERVIEW
3
Pre-Conference Material
for Delegates
PRELIMINARY DELEGATION LIST
Current as of April 4, 1990; 12:00 Noon
BRAZIL
(tentative)
Name
Title
Jose Lutzenberger
Environment Secretary
Jose Goldemberg
Science Secretary
CANADA
(tentative)
Name
Title
Lucien Bouchard
Federal Environment Minister
Derek Burney
Ambassador to the U.S.
Dr. Ann White
Director, Canadian Global Change Program
Dr. Arthur W. May
President, the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council
FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY
(confirmed)
Name
Title
Professor Dr. Klaus Töpfer
Federal Minister for Environment, Nature Protection and Nuclear
Safety
Dr. Gebhard Ziller
State Secretary, Ministry for Research and Technology
Dr. Wilhelm Knittel
State Secretary, Ministry for Transportation
Baldur Wagner
Assistant Secretary, Federal Chancellery
Dr. Mario Graf von Matuschka
Assistant Secretary, Foreign Ministry
Dr. Horst Glatzel
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Federal Chancellery
Walter Lötz
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Ministry of Economics
Professor Dr. Ansgar Vogel
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Ministry for Environment, Nature
Protection, and Nuclear Safety
Dietrich Kupfer
Director, Office of International Cooperation, Ministry for
Environment, Nature Protection and Nuclear Safety
Professor Dr. Hartmut Grossl
Scientist, Max Planck Society, Hamburg
1
PRELIMINARY DELEGATION LIST
Pre-Conference Material
for Delegates
FRANCE
(tentative)
Name
Title
Minister Hubert Curien
Minister of Research and Technology
Minister Brice Lalonde
Secretary of State for the Environment
Jean Audouze
Science Advisor to the President
Claude Alegre
Special Advisor to the Minister of Education
Ambassador Jean Ripert
Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Environment)
Yves Martin
Chairman of the Interministry Committee on Greenhouse
Madame Borione
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Andre LeBeau
General Director of the Meteorological Center
M. Nasse
Ministry of Economy and Budget
Sylvie Faucheux
Professor of Economy at Paris I
INDIA
(tentative)
Name
Title
Ms. Maneka Gandhi
Minister of State for Environment and Forests
Vasant Gowarikar
Secretary of Department of Science and Technology
Mahesh Prasad
Secretary of Ministry of Environment and Forests
Dr. A.P. Mitra
Director General of Council for Science and Industrial Research
2
The White House Conference
on Science and Economics Research
Related to Global Change
INDONESIA
(confirmed)
Name
Title
Prof. Dr. Ing. B.J. Habibie
Minister of State for Research and Technology; Chairman of the
Agency for the Assessment and Application of Technology
Prof. Dr. Samaun Samadikun
Chairman of the Indonesian Institute of Science
Prof. Dr. John A. Katili
Deputy Chairman of the National Research Council
Prof. Dr. Gunawan Satari
Permanent Secretary, Ministry of State for Research and Technology
Mr. Poedji Kuntarso, MA
Director General for Foreign Economic Relations; Ministry of Foreign
Affairs
Prof. Dr. Rustam Didong
Deputy Chairman (Economics), National Development Planning
Agency
Prof. Dr. Harsono Wiryosumarto
Deputy Chairman (Technology Development); Agency for the
Assessment and Application of Technology
Prof. Dr. S.B. Joedono
Assistant Minister (Industry, Energy and Mining), Office of the
Coordinating Minister for the Economy, Finance, Industry and
Development Supervision
Dr. M. Alwi Dahlan
Assistant Ministery (Population), Office of the Minister of State for
Population and the Environment
His Excellency Abdulrachman Ramly
Ambassador of the Republic of Indonesia to the United States of
America
ITALY
(tentative)
Name
Title
Hon. Adolfo Battaglia
Minister of Industry, Head of Delegation
Prof. Umberto Colombo
Director of the National Agency for Nuclear and Renewable Energies
Prof. Giuseppe Biorci
Vice President of the National Research Council
Prof. Giuseppe Bianchi
Director General for Energy Sources, Ministry of Industry
Prof. Antonio Praturion
President of the CNR Committee on Geological Sciences
Prof. Roberto Frassetto
CNR Institute of the Dynamics of Great Masses
Prof. Emilio Gerelli
Economic Counselor to the Minister of Environment
Dr. Corrado Clini
Director General for Pollution Prevention, Ministry of Environment
Prof. Guido Visconti
Department of Physics, University of L'Aquila
Dr. Giovanni Sacco
Vice Director General of Treasury, Ministry of Treasury
PRELIMINARY DELEGATION LIST
3
Pre-Conference Material
for Delegates
MEXICO
(tentative)
Name
Title
Lic. Patricio Chirinos
Secretary of Urban Development and Ecology
Dr. Jose Sarukhan
Rector, National Autonomous University
Dr. Herminio Blanco
Undersecretary for Foreign Commerce, Secretariat of Commerce and
Industrial Development
Ing. Alberto Escofet
Undersecretary for Energy, Secretariat of Energy, Mines and Parastatal
Industries
Lic. Jose Angel Gurria
Undersecretary for International Financial Affairs, Secretariat of the
Treasury
Fis. Sergio Reyes
Undersecretary for Ecology
Amb. Alberto Szekely
Legal Counsel, Secretariat of Foreign Affairs
Dr. Julian Adem
Director, Center for Atmospheric Studies, National Autonomous
University
Dr. Manuel Ortega
Director General, National Council for Science and Technology
Hector Santana
Staff Aide to Secretary Chirinos
THE NETHERLANDS
(tentative)
Name
Title
Hans Alders
Minister for Housing, Physical Planning and Environment
Dr. B.C.J. Zoeteman
Deputy Director-General for Environment
Dr. Pier Vellinga
Coordinator for National Climate Programs
N.D. Van Egmond
Director for Chemistry and Physics, State Institute for Public Health
and Environmental Hygiene
I.G. Roos
Directorate-General for European Cooperation, Ministry of Foreign
Affairs
Dr. H.M. Fijnaut
Director of the Royal Dutch Meteorological Institute
Dr. A.P.M. Baede
Head of the Department for Dynamical Meteorology
D.F.W.T. Pietermaat
Environmental Coordinator in the Directorate-General for Energy,
Ministry of Economic Affairs
Prof. J.B. Opschoor
Professor of Ecology, Free University, Amsterdam
4
The White House Conference
on Science and Economics Research
Related to Global Change
NORWAY
(confirmed)
Name
Title
Kristin Hille Valla
Minister of Environment
Einar Steensnaes
Minister of Education and Research
Ambassador Kjeld Vibe
Norwegian Ambassador to the United States
Oddmund Graham
Secretary General, Ministry of Environment
Kaare Bryn
Director General, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Dr. Tore Olsen
Director General, Ministry of Education and Research
Per M. Bakken
Coordinator, Air Pollution, Ministry of Environment
Lorents Lorentsen
Director of Research, Central Bureau of Statistics
Professor Dr. Ivar Isaksen
University of Oslo
Leif Westegaard
Science Officer, Norwegian Embassy in Washington
THE OECD
(tentative)
Name
Title
Robert Cornell
Deputy Secretary-General
William L. Long
Director for Environment
John Ferriter
Deputy Executive Director, International Energy Agency
Andrew Dean
Administrator, Department for Economic Affairs and Statistics
George Kowalski
Head of the Division of Economic Analysis, International Energy
Agency
PRELIMINARY DELEGATION LIST
5
Pre-Conference Material
for Delegates
POLAND
(tentative)
Name
Title
Jan Janowski
Deputy Prime Minister; Head of the Office of Scientific and
Technological Progress
Andreyewski
Deputy Minister of the Environment
Tadeusz Diem
Deputy Minister of Education
Rybicki
Central Planning Office
Kazimierz Duchowski
Department of Economic Cooperation, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Wiackowski
Chairman, Parliamentary Commission on Environmental Protection
Stakel
Professor, Polish Academy of Sciences
Sadowski
Institute of Metallurgy and Water Management
Wlodzimierz Bojarski
Senator
Jan Kinast
Polish Ambassador to the United States
SOVIET UNION
(tentative)
Name
Title
Nikolay P. Laverov
Chairman of the USSR State Committee on Science and Technology
Yuriy A. Izrael
Chairman of the State Committee on Hydrometeorology
V.F. Kostin
Deputy Chairman, State Committee for Nature Protection
Aleksander A. Metalnikov
Deputy Chairman, State Committee for Hydrometeorology
A.A. Troitsky
Deputy Chairman, State Planning Committee
V.M. Kotliakov
Director, Institute of Geography, USSR Academy of Sciences
Yu. L. Golubev
Assistant to Chairman, State Committee for Hydrometeorology
Yu. V. Vakajuk
Chief, Division of Global Geophysical Problems, Climate Change
and Economic Consequences, State Committee for Hydrometeorology
Yu. V. Pikhanov
State Committee for Hydrometeorology, Department of International
Cooperation
Mrs. N. Yu. Vail
State Department Committee for Hydrometeorology, Department of
International Cooperation
6
The White House Conference
on Science and Economics Research
Related to Global Change
UNITED KINGDOM
(tentative)
Name
Title
David Trippier RD, JP, MP
Minister for the Environment and Countryside
Sir John Fairclough
Chief Scientific Adviser, the Cabinet Office
Sir Crispin C.C. Tickell, GCMG, KCVO
United Kingdom Permanent Representative to the United Nations
Dr. John T. Houghton CBE
Director-General, Meteorological Office
J.G. Odling-Smee
Deputy Chief Economic Adviser; HM Treasury
Dr. David J. Fisk
Chief Scientist, Department of Environment
Dr. W. David Evans
Chief Scientist, Department of Energy
Dr. Eileen Buttle
Secretary, Natural Environment Research Council
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
(confirmed)
Name
Title
Nicholas F. Brady
Secretary of the Treasury
Manuel Lujan, Jr.
Secretary of the Interior
Clayton Yeutter
Secretary of Agriculture
Robert A. Mosbacher
Secretary of Commerce
Admiral James D. Watkins (Ret)
Secretary of Energy
William K. Reilly
Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency
Richard H. Truly
Administrator, National Aeronautics and Space Administration
John A. Knauss
Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere; and
Director, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Erich Bloch
Director, National Science Foundation
Richard Schmalensee
Member, Council of Economic Advisers
ZAIRE
(tentative)
Name
Title
Citoyen Lobo Kanza Kanza
Secretary of State (Deputy Minister); Ministry of Environment and
Conservation of Nature
PRELIMINARY DELEGATION LIST
7
Pre-Conference Material
for Delegates
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
0% SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH
NNI ADDR
GLOBAL CHANGE
CONFERENCE CO-CHAIRMEN BIOGRAPHIES
MICHAEL J. BOSKIN
D. ALLAN BROMLEY
MICHAEL R. DELAND
Michael J. Boskin
Chairman
President's Council of
Economic Advisers
Michael J. Boskin is the Chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers. He was appointed
to this post by the President on February 2, 1989, following unanimous confirmation by the Senate. As
Chairman, he provides economic analysis and advice directly to the President and assists in formulating
national economic policies. Dr. Boskin is on leave from Stanford University, where he is the Burnet C.
and Mildred Finley Wohlford Professor of Economics, and was the founder and Director of the Center
for Economic Policy Research. He is also on leave as a Research Associate of the National Bureau of
Economic Research.
Dr. Boskin is the recipient of numerous professional awards and citations, ranging from the
Chancellor's Award and the Department Citation as outstanding undergraduate at the University of
California in 1967 and the first National Tax Association Outstanding Doctoral Dissertation Award in
1971 to the Abramson Award for Outstanding Research from the National Association of Business
Economists in 1987 and Stanford University's Distinguished Teaching Award in 1988. He is the author
of more than 80 books and articles in the areas of government spending, tax theory and policy, public
debt, Social Security, retirement patterns and behavior, U.S. saving behavior, capital formation, U.S.
economic growth, and the economic status of the elderly.
Dr. Boskin received his B.A. degree with highest honors in 1967 from the University of California at
Berkeley, where he received his M.A. in 1968 and his Ph.D. in 1971.
Previously, Dr. Boskin had served as a consultant and adviser to the White House, Department of
Health and Human Services, Treasury Department, National Science Foundation, and other govern-
ment agencies, and various congressional committees.
Dr. Boskin is a member of the Economic Education Committee of the American Economic Association.
He and his wife Chris moved to Washington, D.C. from California. They both enjoy skiing and tennis.
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
Science and Technology
D. Allan Bromley is Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and Director of the Office of
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) in the Executive Office of the President. He is on leave from his
former position as Henry Ford II Professor of Physics at Yale University, where he was founder and
Director of the A.W. Wright Nuclear Structure Laboratory.
One of the world's leading nuclear physicists, he has carried out pioneering studies on both the struc-
ture and dynamics of nuclei and is considered the father of modern heavy ion science, one of the major
areas of nuclear science. He has also played major roles in the development of accelerators, of detection
systems, and in computer-based data acquisition and analysis systems. An outstanding teacher, over
the past two decades his laboratory at Yale graduated more Ph.D.'s in experimental nuclear physics
than any other institution worldwide. He has published over 450 papers in science and technology as
well as edited eighteen books and has received numerous honors and awards, including the National
Medal of Science.
For more than two decades, Dr. Bromley has been a leader in the national and international science and
science policy communities. As Chairman of the National Academy's Physics Survey in the early 1970s,
he contributed in a central way to charting the future of that science in the subsequent decade. As
President of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the world's largest scientific
society, and the International Union of Pure and Applied Physics, the world coordinating body for that
science, he has been one of the leading spokesmen for U.S. science and for international scientific
cooperation.
Prior to his present appointment, Dr. Bromley served as a member of the White House Science Council
throughout the Reagan Administration and as a member of the National Science Board in 1988-1989. As
the U.S. chairman for both the Gandhi-Reagan, Indo/U.S. and the Sarney-Reagan, Brazil/U.S. Science
and Technology Initiatives, he led four Presidential missions to conduct negotiations for bilateral
cooperation in science and technology.
Born in Westmeath, Ontario, Canada, he received the B.Sc. degree with highest honors in 1948 in the
Faculty of Engineering at Queen's University, Ontario, Canada. He received the M.Sc. degree from
Queen's University in 1950 and the Ph.D. degree from the University of Rochester in 1952, both degrees
in nuclear physics. He subsequently has been awarded ten honorary degrees from universities in
Canada, France, Germany, Italy, South Africa, and the United States.
Dr. Bromley is married to the Former Patricia J. Brassor, and they have two children, David John and
Karen Lynn.
Michael R. Deland
Chairman
White House Council
on Environmental Quality
Michael R. Deland was appointed by President Bush to be Chairman of the White House Council on
Environmental Quality on August 1, 1989, following unanimous confirmation by the United States
Senate. In this capacity he serves as environmental adviser to the President as well as Director of the
Office of Environmental Quality which oversees the development of environmental policy, interagency
coordination of environmental quality programs and environmental data acquisition and assessment.
In addition, Mr. Deland is responsible for overseeing implementation of the National Environmental
Policy Act.
Prior to Mr. Deland's appointment as CEQ Chairman, he was the New England Regional Administrator
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In that capacity, from 1983 to 1989, he admini-
stered the federal government's programs dealing with air and water pollution control, hazardous
waste management, drinking water, toxic substances, radiation, and pesticides.
Mr. Deland was counsel at Environmental Research and Technology, Inc., a national firm headquar-
tered in Concord, Massachusetts from 1976 to 1983. While in the private sector, Mr. Deland published
numerous papers and articles, including the Regulatory Focus monthly column in Environment, Science
and Technology. Between 1971 and 1976, Mr. Deland served in EPA's Office of Regional Counsel in New
England (Region I) in several capacities, including Chief of the Agency's Legal Review Section and
Chief of the Enforcement Branch.
Mr. Deland received his Bachelor of Arts degree from Harvard College in 1963 and served as an officer
in the U.S. Navy before obtaining his law degree from Boston College in 1969. He is a member of the
Massachusetts Bar and the American Bar Association and its Natural Resources Committee. Mr.
Deland was President of the Business Associates Club (Boston) from 1981 to 1982 and is a former
Director of the Environmental Lobby of Massachusetts and the Center for Environmental Intern
Programs, a national non-profit organization headquartered in Boston.
Mr. Deland has received numerous awards and citations, including the Massachusetts Audubon Society
Award for his leadership in cleaning up Boston Harbor and the New England Environment Leadership
Award for the New England Environmental Network. In 1987, he was honored as "Environmentalist of
the Year" by the Massachusetts Association of Conservation Commissions. In March of 1989, he was
awarded the National Wildlife Federation's Special Achievement Award for his role in prompting the
cleanup of Boston Harbor, for his efforts at protecting valuable fishing areas from off-shore oil drilling,
and for his early endorsement of environmentally-based growth controls on Cape Cod. Mr. Deland
resides in Washington with his wife Jane and three children.
U.S. Delegation Biographies
As part of the Conference handout materials, we are
preparing an information/reference booklet which will
include:
one-page narrative biography of each delegate
an 8" X 10" photograph of each delegate
the delegate's organization's logo/seal
The biographies, logos and photographs of the U.S.
delegation included in this section are representative of the
materials we are seeking from each foreign delegation
member.
Please provide this information to the White House
Conference as soon as possible.
DEPARTMENT THE OF THL 01 1 THE TREASURY
1789
Nicholas F. Brady
Secretary
Department of the Treasury
Nicholas F. Brady became the 68th Secretary of the Treasury on September 15, 1988.
Secretary Brady served in the United States Senate from April 20, 1982 through December 27, 1982.
During that time he was a member of The Armed Services Committee and the Banking, Housing and
Urban Affairs Committee.
In 1984 President Reagan appointed Secretary Brady Chairman of the President's Commission on
Executive, Legislative and Judicial Salaries. He has also served on the President's Commission on
Strategic Forces (1983), the National Bipartisan Commission on Central America (1983), the Commis-
sion on Security and Economic Assistance (1983), and the Blue Ribbon Commission on Defense
Management (1985). Most recently, Secretary Brady chaired the Presidential Task Force on Market
Mechanisms (1987).
Secretary Brady's career in the banking industry spans 34 years. He joined Dillon, Read & Co., Inc. in
New York in 1954, rising to Chairman of the Board. He has been a Director of the NCR Corporation, the
MITRE Corporation, and the H.J. Heinz Company, among others.
He has also served as a trustee of Rockefeller University and a member of the Board of the Economic
Club of New York. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, Inc. He is a former trustee of
the Boys' Club of Newark.
Mr. Brady was born April 11, 1930 in New York City. He was educated at Yale University (B.A., 1952)
and Harvard University (M.B.A., 1954). He and his wife, Katherine, have four children.
OF
THE
S.
INTERIOR
March
3.
1849
Manuel Lujan, Jr.
Secretary
Department of the Interior
POLITICAL
President George Bush selected Manuel Lujan, Jr., who had just completed a 20-year career in the House of Repre-
sentatives, to be his Secretary of the Interior. He was sworn in on February 3, 1989.
The 46th Secretary of the Interior, Lujan was first elected to the House of Representatives from New Mexico in 1968.
When he left the Congress on January 3. 1989, he ranked 15th in seniority among all Republicans and 52nd in senior-
ity among all House members.
A member of the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee since 1969, Lujan was its second ranking Republican
The Committee has jurisdiction over all activity in the U.S. Department of the Interior as well as the Nuclear Regu-
latory Commission. Lujan was also the senior Republican on the Energy and Environment Subcommittee.
Lujan was the Vice-Chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. As senior Republican,
Lujan was a member of all subcommittees, including Space Science and Applications which has oversight over
NASA.
PERSONAL
Born May 12, 1928 in San Ildefonso, New Mexico. Raised in Santa Fe where Lujan's father, Manuel Lujan, Sr.,
served three elected terms as Mayor.
A graduate of the College of Santa Fe with a B.A. degree, Lujan also attended St. Mary's College in California.
Prior to entering Congress, the Secretary was a partner in a family insurance and real estate business with three
offices in New Mexico. His brother, Edward Lujan, IS the managing partner of the business.
Married to the former Jean Couchman of Santa Fe, the Lujans have four children; Terra Everett, Jay, Barbara and jeff.
Secretary and Mrs. Lujan maintain residences in both Washington, D.C. and Albuquerque.
LEGISLATIVE
Economy in Government: Lujan was a Congressional leader in the battle against wasteful government spending.
"The effort to stop inflation boils down to a fight against needless government intervention and spending," stated Lujan.
Environmental Protection: Lujan has co-sponsored seven major environmental protection bills including the Clean
Air Act of 1970 and the Clean Water Act. More recently, Lujan successfully sponsored legislation setting aside
more than 600,000 acres of New Mexico land as wilderness areas, ensuring its beauty and enjoyment for future
generations.
Education: Lujan strongly supported student loan programs in the public and private sectors. His work led to New
Mexico adopting a student loan program that is a model for other states.
Technology: Lujan believes strongly that scientific research is the key to our future. "Science and technology can help
us meet the challenges of the 21st century," said Lujan.
SUNITED STATES DEPARTMENTOR - OF GROULTURE
Clayton Yeutter
Secretary
Department of Agriculture
Clayton Yeutter was sworn in as the 23rd United States Secretary of Agriculture on February 8, 1989.
Yeutter's career includes distinguished public and private-sector service in agricultural policy develop-
ment, law, economics, marketing and trade.
From July 1985 until shortly before his new cabinet appointment, Yeutter served as U.S. Trade Repre-
sentative. His previous USDA posts include Assistant Secretary for International Affairs and Commod-
ity Programs from March 1974 to June 1975, Assistant Secretary for Marketing and Consumer Service
from January 1973 to March 1974 and Administrator of the Consumer and Marketing Service from
October 1970 to December 1971.
Yeutter's other career highlights: President and Chief Executive officer, Chicago Mercantile Exchange,
July 1978 to June 1985; senior partner, law firm of Nelson, Harding, Yeutter & Leonard, Lincoln,
Nebraska, April 1977 to June 1978; Deputy U.S. Special Trade Representative, June 1975 to February
1977; Director, University of Nebraska Mission in Colombia (a large agricultural technical assistance
program), September 1968 to October 1970; executive assistant to the governor of Nebraska, January
1966 to September 1968; faculty member, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Ne-
braska, January 1960 to January 1966; operator of a 2,500 acre farming-ranching-cattle feeding enterprise
in central Nebraska, 1957-1975; and enlistee, later commissioned officer, U.S. Air Force, 1952-1957.
Yeutter was graduated with high distinction from the University of Nebraska in 1952 with a Bachelor of
Science degree in animal husbandry. In 1963, he obtained his law degree from the same university,
graduating cum laude and ranked first in his class. In 1966, he received his Ph.D. in agricultural
economics, again from the University of Nebraska, and was named outstanding graduate student in the
program.
Yeutter is a former member or chairman of many private and public-sector boards of directors, councils
and trusteeships, including: the President's Export Council; the Chicago Association of Commerce and
Industry; the Chicago-Tokyo Bank; the U.S. Meat Export Federation; the Chicago Council on Foreign
Relations; the Farm Foundation, Oak Brook, Illinois; Tri-Valley Growers, San Francisco, California; and
ConAgra, Inc., Omaha, Nebraska.
Yeutter was born in Eustis, Nebraska, December 10, 1931. He and his wife, Jeanne Vierk Yeutter, have
four children. He retains ownership of his Nebraska farm, which is currently operated by a tenant.
Yeutter's permanent home is in Lincoln, Nebraska, but he currently resides in McLean, Virginia.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Robert A. Mosbacher
Secretary
Department of Commerce
Nominated Secretary of Commerce bv President-Elect George Bush on December 6, 1988. He was
confirmed 100-0 by the United States Senate on January 31, 1989.
Formerly:
Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of Mosbacher Energy Company
Director of Texas Commerce Bancshares, Houston, Texas
Director, Enron Corporation, Houston, Texas
Director, New York Life Insurance Company, New York
Past Chairman of the National Petroleum Council
Charter member and past Chairman of the All American Wildcatters Association
Member of the Executive Committee and Board of Directors of the American Petroleum Institute
Past Chairman of the Mid-Continent Oil and Cas Association
Twice Past Chairman of the Board of Visitors of the Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Institute
Former member of Board of Trustees of the Texas Heart Institute
Former National Trustee, Boys Clubs of America Southwest Region
Past Active Trustee of the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies
Member of Washington Roundtable and Co-Chair of Houston Roundtable of the Center for Strategic
and International Studies
National Finance Chairman for George Bush for President
National Finance Chairman of the Fund for America's Future
Chairman of Victory 88'
Co-Chairman of the Republican National Finance Committee
Member of the Executive Committee for Reagan-Bush
National Finance Chairman for the President Ford Committee in 1976
Won both the North American and World Sailing Championships in the Olympic classes (Dragon
and Soling)
Won the Southern Ocean Racing Circuit
Won the Gold Cup twice
Born in White Plains, New York, Mosbacher has lived in Houston, Texas since 1948. He graduated from
Washington and Lee University in Lexington, Virginia in 1947.
Mosbacher is married to the former Georgette Paulsin and is the father of four (Diane, Robert Jr.,
Kathryn and Lisa) and grandfather of five. The Mosbachers reside in Washington, D.C.
OF STATES UNITED AMERICA DEPA OF RIMENT
James D. Watkins
Secretary
Department of Energy
James David Watkins was nominated by the President to be the sixth Secretary of Energy on January 20,
1989. Admiral Watkins was confirmed by the United States Senate and sworn into office on March 1,
1989.
Admiral Watkins was born in California on March 7, 1927, and claims the city of Pasadena as his home.
A 1949 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, his tours as flag officer included Chief of Naval Personnel;
Commander of the Sixth Fleet; Vice Chief of Naval Operations; and Commander-in-Chief of the Pacific
Fleet. Admiral Watkins was selected by President Reagan to become the 22nd Chief of Naval Opera-
tions on June 30, 1982. His military decorations include several Distinguished Service and Legion of
Merit medals, the Bronze Star with combat "V" and other medals, campaign and service ribbons, and
decorations from many foreign nations.
Following his retirement on June 30, 1986, Admiral Watkins devoted his time to issues regarding
America's youth, and worked with a number of philanthropic organizations to establish a national
program for personal excellence. He also served as a member of advisory boards in both the education
and energy fields and has received several honorary doctorates and public service awards.
In October 1987, Admiral Watkins was appointed Chairman of the Presidential Commission on the
Human Immunodeficiency Virus (AIDS) Epidemic, submitting the Commission's final report to the
President on June 24, 1988.
Admiral Watkins received his master's degree in mechanical engineering in 1958, and is a graduate of
the reactor engineering course at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. He was selected by Admiral
Hyman G. Rickover to enter the Navy's nuclear-powered submarine program in 1959, and was quali-
fied as an Engineering Officer of the Watch at one of the Navy's land-based reactor plants. He served
for three years in the Atomic Energy Commission as Admiral Rickover's assistant for Naval Nuclear
Propulsion and later, in a variety of assignments associated with the management of the nuclear navy.
These assignments included Commanding Officer of a nuclear-powered submarine and Executive
Officer of the world's first nuclear-powered cruiser.
Admiral Watkins married Sheila Jo McKinney of San Diego, California, in 1950. They have six children:
Katherine Watkins Coopersmith, Laura jo Watkins Kauffmann, Susan, Charles, James Jr., and Edward.
Admiral and Mrs. Watkins have eight grandchildren.
UNITED
STATES.
AGENCY
PROTECTION
William K. Reilly
Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency
William Kane Reilly was sworn in as Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by
President Bush on February 8, 1989. The President announced his appointment on December 22. 1988,
and officially nominated him on January 20, 1989. The U.S. Senate unanimously confirmed his nomina-
tion on February 2, 1989.
Prior to becoming EPA Administrator, Reilly held five environment-related positions during the
previous two decades. He was President of World Wildlife Fund-U.S. (1985-1989) and President of the
Conservation Foundation (1973-1989). Those two organizations joined in a formal affiliation in 1985
and Reilly became President of both organizations. He was Executive Director of the Task Force on
Land Use and Urban Growth from 1972-1973. From 1970 to 1972, he was on the staff of the President's
Council on Environmental Quality and, from 1968 to 1970, was Associate Director, Urban Policy Center
and the National Urban Coalition. He also served as Chairman of the Natural Resources Council of
America, an association of all major conservation groups, from 1981-1983.
During his presidency of World Wildlife Fund-U.S., Reilly intensified his mission, the protection of the
diversity of life on earth. Between 1961 and 1989, the organization supported 1,371 wildlife and
endangered habitat projects in 103 countries. At the Conservation Foundation, he continued its long-
standing interest in land programs and initiated new programs in environmental dispute resolution,
water toxic substances control, and urban conservation and energy. In 1976, Reilly began a program
advocating direct cooperation between business leaders and conservationists in resolving polarizing
issues in resources and environmental policy, which resulted in several major consensus-building
policy dialogues, including the National Groundwater Policy Forum and the National Wetlands Policy
Forum.
Reilly has written and lectured extensively on environmental issues, has served on the boards of various
private and public sector organizations and received the Horace Albright Medal for his contributions to
national parks and the Alfred B. LaGasse Medal for his contributions to environmental progress.
An alumnus of Yale University, Reilly holds a law degree from Harvard University and a master's
degree in urban planning from Columbia University. He was born in Decatur, Illinois on January 26,
1940, grew up in Fall River, Massachusetts, and served as a U.S. Army captain (1966 to 1967).
He is married to Elizabeth "Libbie" Bennet Buxton Reilly. They have two daughters, Katherine Buxton
Reilly, age 19, and Margaret Mahalah Reilly, age 14. The family resides in Alexandria, Virginia.
NASA
Richard H. Truly
Administrator
National Aeronautics and
Space Administration
Richard H. Truly became the eighth Administrator of NASA on July 1, 1989. One day earlier, he
concluded his naval career of more than 30 years, retiring as a Vice Admiral, United States Navy. He is
the first astronaut to head the nation's civilian space agency.
Truly became NASA's associate administrator for space flight on February 20, 1986. In this position, he
led the painstaking rebuilding of the Space Shuttle program. This was highlighted by NASA's cele-
brated "return to flight" on September 29, 1988, when Discovery lifted off from Kennedy Space Center,
Florida, on the first Shuttle mission in almost three years.
Before returning to NASA, the former Shuttle astronaut served as the first commander of the Naval
Space Command, Dahlgren, Virginia, established October 1, 1983. His career in the U.S. Navy began in
1959, when he was commissioned an ensign. This coincided with his graduation from Georgia Institute
of Technology, which he attended as a Naval R.O.T.C. midshipman and earned a bachelor's degree in
aeronautical engineering.
Following flight school, he was designated a naval aviator in 1960. His initial tour of duty, Fighter
Squadron 33, was aboard USS Intrepid and USS Enterprise, and he made more than 300 carrier land-
ings. From 1963 to 1965, he was a student and then instructor at the U.S. Air Force Aerospace Research
Pilot School, Edwards Air Force Base, California.
In 1965, Truly became one of the first military astronauts selected to the Air Force's Manned Orbiting
Laboratory program in Los Angeles, California, and transferred to NASA as an astronaut in August
1969. He served as capsule communicator for all three of the manned Skylab missions in 1973 and the
Apollo-Soyuz mission in 1975. As a naval aviator, test pilot, and astronaut, Truly has logged over 7,500
hours in numerous military and civilian jet aircraft.
He was pilot for one of the two-man crews that flew the 747/Space Shuttle Enterprise approach and
landing test flights during 1977. He then served as backup pilot for STS-1, the first orbital test of the
Shuttle. His first flight in space was November 12-14, 1981, as pilot of Space Shuttle Columbia (STS-2),
significant as the first manned spacecraft to be reflown in space. His second flight (STS-9, August
30-September 5, 1983) was as commander of Space Shuttle Challenger, the first night launch and
landing in the Shuttle program.
On January 18, 1989, Truly was awarded the Presidential Citizen's Medal by President Reagan. His
NASA awards include two NASA Distinguished Service Medals, the NASA Outstanding Leadership
Medal, two NASA Exceptional Service Medals, and NASA Space Distinguished Service Medal, the
Defense Superior Service Medal, two Legions of Merit, the Navy Distinguished Flying Cross, and the
Meritorious Service Medal.
Truly was born in Fayette, Mississippi, on November 12. 1937 and attended school in Fayette and
Meridian, Mississippi. He is married to the former Colleen (Cody) Hanner of Milledgeville, Georgia.
They have three children: Mike, Dan and Lee, and three grandchildren: Ashley, Courtney and Peter.
DIPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
John A. Knauss
Under Secretary
Department of Commerce
John A. Knauss, Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere and Administrator of the Department's
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), took office August 7, 1989.
A noted oceanographer and educator, Knauss was a professor of oceanography at the Graduate School
of Oceanography at the University of Rhode Island (URI). He also served as dean of the URI Gradu-
ate School of Oceanography from 1962 to 1987, and as the university's provost for marine affairs from
1969 to 1982.
Knauss has been a member of two presidential commissions on marine affairs: the Commission on
Marine Science, Resources, and Engineering (the Stratton Commission) in 1967 to 1968 and the National
Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere (NACOA), 1978 to 1985. He served as Chairman of
NACOA from 1981 to 1985. He has been President of the Association of Sea Grant Program Instititions,
Chairman of the Ocean Science Committee of the National Academy of Sciences/National Research
Council, and Chairman of the Marine Division of the National Association of State Universities and
Land-Grant Colleges.
He has served as President of the oceanographic section of the American Geophysical Union (AGU),
Vice President of the Marine Technology Society (MTS), Vice Chairman of the American Association for
the Advancement of Science's (AAAS) Atmospheric and Hydrospheric Sciences Section, and a council
member of the American Meteorological Society. He was a co-founder of the Law of the Sea Institute
and served on its governing board from 1965 to 1976 and 1981 to 1987. He has been elected a fellow of
the AAAS, the AGU, and the MTS.
Knauss graduated from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (B.S., 1946), the University of Michigan
(M.S., 1949), and the University of California, Scripps Institution of Oceanography (Ph.D., 1959).
nsf
Erich Bloch
Director
National Science Foundation
Erich Bloch was confirmed by the Senate to be Director of the National Science Foundation on August 6,
1984. As Director, he IS responsible for an agency charged with strengthening the national scientific and
engineering research potential and with improving science and engineering education at all levels. The
Foundation has an annual budget exceeding S1.7 billion and the annual award of 12,000 to 14,000 grants
for research in all fields of natural, social sciences, and engineering.
Before joining NSF, Mr. Bloch was a corporate Vice President for Technical Personnel Development at
IBM Corporation, which he joined in 1952 as an electrical engineer. During his career at IBM, Mr. Bloch
was the engineering manager of IBM's STRETCH supercomputer system in the late 1950's and early
1960's. In 1962, he headed development of the Solid Logic Technology program, which provided IBM
with microelectronic technology for its System computer. Subsequently, Mr. Bloch was appointed
a vice president of the company's Data Systems Division and general manager of the East Fishkill
facility, which is responsible for the development and manufacture of semiconductor components used
in IBM's product line. He was elected an IBM vice president in 1981.
From 1981 to 1984, Mr. Bloch served as Chairman of the Semi-conductor Research Cooperative, a group
of leading computer and electronics firms that fund advanced research in universities and shares in the
results, and was the IBM representative on the board of the Semiconductor Industry Association.
In February 1985, Mr. Bloch was awarded the National Medal of Technology by President Reagan. The
award was made for his part in pioneering developments related to the IBM/360 computer that
revolutionized the computer industry. In 1989, Mr. Bloch was the recipient of the IEEE United States
Activities Board Award for Distinguished Public Service and the IEEE 1990 Founders Medal. He also
received honorary Doctorate of Engineering degrees from the Colorado School of Mines. the University
of Notre Dame, and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; honorary Doctorate of Science degrees from the
University of Massachusetts at Amherst, George Washington University, State University of New York
at Buffalo, the University of Rochester, Oberlin College, and Washington College; and an honorary
Doctorate of Science and Engineering degree from the Ohio State University.
He is a member of the National Academy of Engineering and is a Fellow of the American Association
for the Advancement of Science and of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and a
member of its Computer Society. He received his education in electrical engineering at the Federal
Polytechnic Institute of Zurich, Switzerland, and a Bachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering
from the University of Buffalo in 1952.
Richard Schmalensee
Council of Economic Advisers
Office of the President
Richard Schmalensee is a Member of the Council of Economic Advisers. He has primary responsibility
for the analysis of microeconomic and regulatory policy. Dr. Schmalensee is on leave from the Massa-
chusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he is the Gordon Y. Billard Professor of Economics and
Management.
Dr. Schmalensee's research and teaching have focused on industrial organization and on anti-trust and
regulatory policy. He has written numerous articles in professional journals and is the author of three
books and co-author of three others. He has extensive consulting experience on anti-trust and regula-
tory matters. He has served on the editorial boards of several economics journals, is co-editor of the
Handbook of Industrial Organization, and is founding editor of the MIT Press Regulation of Economic
Activity monograph series. Dr. Schmalensee has also served on various committees of the American
Economic Association and the Econometric Society, of which he is a Fellow.
Dr. Schmalensee attended the public schools of Belleville, Illinois and received his B.S. (Economics,
Politics and Science; 1965) and Ph.D. ( Economics; 1970) degrees from MIT. Prior to joining the MIT
faculty in 1977, he taught at the University of California, San Diego. He is married to the former Diane
Hawk; they have two sons.
THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE
ON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH
RELATED TO
GLOBAL CHANGE
HOTEL/TRANSPORTATION/LOGISTICS
Dr. Franmarie Keel
White House Conference on Global Change
Suite 615
1019 19th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
Phone: (202) 653-5980
Fax: (202) 653-2034
Telex: 249118SDAVISUR
Telemail (OMNET): GLOBAL.CHANGE
HOTEL
The White House Conference is being held at:
The J.W. Marriott Hotel
1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20004
Telephone: 202-393-2000
The White House Conference has reserved rooms for each official delegation member.
Charges for the hotel room April 16th and 17th, 1990 and for Conference meals served
April 17 and 18, 1990, will be paid for by the White House Conference.
Hotel room check-in is 3:00 p.m. Conference registration begins at 12:00 noon, Sunday, April
15, for delegates arriving in Washington early. Registration will continue Monday all day
and until 12:00 noon on Tuesday, April 17. Special arrangements should be made with White
House Conference coordinators for early or late arrivals/departures and check-in.
To cover any personal incidental expenditures (such as telephone calls, charges at the hotel
restaurants and gift shops, and additional room service), each delegation member must
present one of the following upon registration at the hotel to guarantee incidentals:
credit card (American Express, VISA, Master Card, Diners Club, JCV)
a letter received by April 14th, 1990 from the delegation's embassy
stating embassy will cover its delegation's incidentals prior to
delegation's departure from the hotel
TRANSPORTATION
Delegations will be met by White House Conference personnel at Washington National
Airport, Washington Dulles Airport, Baltimore-Washington International Airport, and
Andrews Air Force Base and will be escorted to the hotel beginning Sunday, April 15.
White House Conference personnel meeting flights can be identified by a White House
Conference sign. Delegations arriving in Washington domestically will be met at the gate.
International arrivals will be met at the exit of the mobil lounge at the entrance to U.S.
Immigration and Customs.
Procedures have been established by the Conference to assist in the facilitation of U.S.
Customs.
HOTEL/TRANSPORTATION/LOGISTICS
1
Pre-Conference Material
for Delegates
Transportation will be provided for delegations' return to those designated airports after the
close of the Conference Wednesday, April 18, through Thursday evening, April 19.
All transportation for official Conference events held outside of the J.W. Marriott Hotel will
be provided by the White House Conference.
All airline arrival and departure times must be confirmed as soon as possible with the
White House Conference at 202/653-5980.
Please inform the White House Conference immediately if flight plans change at
departure (i.e. cancelled flight, family emergency, etc.)
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
Any special room, bed, dietary, or medical requirements should be forwarded to White
House Conference coordinators as soon as possible.
MISCELLANEOUS
Simultaneous interpretation in Russian, Spanish, and French will be provided during the
Conference meetings.
Please note the dinner at the State Department, on Tuesday, April 17, is business attire.
2
The White House Conference
on Science and Economics Research
Related to Global Change
WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS
RESEARCH RELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE
Delegate Travel Accommodation Registration
PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE
Name:
Title:
Country Delegation:
HOTEL ACCOMMODATIONS:
In order to facilitate your registration upon arrival at the Conference site at the J.W. Marri-
ott Hotel, it will be necessary to provide the information requested in this form. The White
House Conference provides each delegate with a hotel room from check-in April 16th to
check-out on April 18th. The J.W. Marriott Hotel requires guarantee of payment for inci-
dentals, such as telephone, room service, gift shop, laundry, restaurants, etc., with cash, a
credit card or a Letter of Guarantee from your Embassy. A Letter of Guarantee should in-
clude delegate's name, check-in date, Embassy Financial Officer, and any stipulations, and
must be received by April 14, 1990.
Credit Card #
Expiration Date:
Type (American Express, Visa, Master Card, Diners Club, JCV):
Name as it appears on card:
Signature:
Date:
This should be completed and sent by fax (202-653-2034) to Susan Thoren at the White
House Conference in Washington, D.C., or delivered by April 12th to 1019 19th Street NW,
Suite 615, Washington D.C. 20036