本
周晚些时候，包括美国总统奥巴马在内的全球政要将飞赴丹麦首都哥本哈根出席联合国气候峰会，宣告人类开启全球环境合作的新时代。实际上，此次峰会将成为中美经济较量的一次大摊牌。国际能源署(IEA)估计，在未来20年中，几乎所有温室气体的排放增长都将来自发展中国家，其中一半来自中国。眼下在哥本哈根争论的焦点就是经济实力大增的中国是否应该从美国和欧洲每年获得数十亿美元的援助来帮助它转型为更清洁的经济增长模式。
Getty Images
中国外交部副部长何亚非在2009年联合国气候峰会期间举行新闻发布会。
何亚非说，这不公平，谁造成了这一问题谁就该负责。不过，他说欧盟大体遵守了自己的减排承诺，他几次点名批评美国没有尽到应尽的义务。
简而言之，何亚非认为情况较上世纪90年代末、即当前用以应对全球变暖的京都议定书(Kyoto Protocol)商讨之时并没有发生太多变化。京都议定书要求工业化国家削减自身排放，并资助发展中国家推广节能汽车及太阳能板等清洁能源技术。
不过美国方面认为中国已经不再有资格获得优待了。美国首席谈判代表斯特恩(Todd Stern)在上周三的一个新闻发布会上说，虽然更贫困的发展中国家仍需要西方的帮助来获得清洁能源技术，但中国与它们不一样。他说，我没有想过公共资金、特别是来自美国的资金将流向中国，不能通过给发展中大国通行证的方式解决这个问题。
就环境问题而言，温室气体排放量占全球排放总量约40%的中美两国是此次联合国气候峰会上两股最重要的力量。截至目前，此次哥本哈根会议主要凸现出了中美在气候政策上的深刻分歧。两国对政策细节的争论是未来数十年两国广泛经济实力较量的一个缩影。眼见中国将提高能源使用效率，而不是限制碳燃料使用增长，许多美国商界领袖担心大幅削减化石燃料使用将提高生产成本并使得他们在和中国的竞争中处于不利地位。
上个月，中美在先后两天时间里宣布了自己的减排目标。美国宣布在2020年之前将把碳排放较2005年的水平减少17%，与有待美国国会通过的气候立法基本相符。而中国提出在2020年前将碳强度（即每单位国内生产总值能耗）较2005年削减40%至45%。
不过，研究显示，即便中国实现了这一目标，它在2020年时的碳排放量仍将比2005年时激增逾75%。外交关系协会(Council on Foreign Relations)专攻能源及气候变化问题的高级研究员列维(Michael Levi)说，国际能源署、美国能源部以及中国政府部门的研究都表明，早在中国近期发表减排声明之前，中国削减约45%碳强度的目标就是很有希望实现的。
欧盟和奥巴马提议欧盟和美国应该在2050年之前将碳排放总量削减80%。但是何亚非说，许下这样的远期诺言是容易的，他怀疑发达国家承诺的诚意。
何亚非说中国的环境承诺虽然可能不那么堂皇，但是更为实际。他说，我很高兴与任何人进行辩论，看看中国的承诺是比其他国家多还是少；毕竟事实胜于雄辩。
Jeffrey Ball
The political script for a big climate-change conference in this Danish city has U.S. President Barack Obama and other world leaders flying in later this week to christen a new era of global environmental cooperation. In reality, the summit is shaping up as a pivotal economic showdown between the U.S. and China.
The International Energy Agency projects that nearly all the growth in global greenhouse-gas emissions over the next two decades will come from developing countries -- and that fully half of that total will come from China alone. A central point of contention here is whether China, amid all its newfound economic might, still deserves billions of dollars in annual aid from the U.S. and Europe to help it shift to a cleaner pattern of growth.
China says the answer is yes. He Yafei, China's vice foreign minister, said on Friday that rich nations, which built their prosperity on fossil fuels, are like people who go out for a fancy dinner and then, when a poor guest arrives late for dessert, demand that he pay the same bill for his meal as everyone else.
'It's not fair,' Mr. He said. 'Whoever created this problem, they're responsible,' he said. Although he said the European Union had largely lived up to its emission-reduction promises, he singled out the U.S. several times by name as a country that hadn't done its share.
In short, Mr. He is arguing that not much has changed since the late 1990s, when the basis for the current international framework designed to combat global warming -- a treaty called the Kyoto Protocol -- was negotiated. Kyoto called on industrialized countries to cut their own emissions and help developing countries with subsidies to promote cleaner technologies like energy-efficient cars and solar panels.
But the U.S. argues China no longer deserves special treatment. Though poorer developing countries still need Western help to nurture clean-energy technologies, China is different, Todd Stern, the chief U.S. climate negotiator, told a news conference here last Wednesday. 'I don't envision public funds -- certainly not from the United States -- going to China,' he said. 'There is no way to solve this problem by giving the major developing countries a pass.'
Environmentally speaking, the U.S. and China, which together account for some 40% of global greenhouse-gas emissions, are the nations that matter most in the U.N. climate debate. So far, the Copenhagen summit has served mainly to illuminate their profound disagreements over climate policy. The arguments over the details of climate policy reflect the broader contest between the U.S. and China for economic power in the decades ahead. Many business leaders in the U.S. worry that efforts to dramatically cut fossil-fuel consumption could raise their production costs and put them at a disadvantage to rivals in a China that is becoming more efficient, but not limiting its carbon-fueled growth.
On two consecutive days last month, both the U.S. and China announced specific emission-reduction targets. The U.S. said it would reduce emissions 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, a number broadly in line with climate-change legislation pending on Capitol Hill. China said it would cut its 'carbon intensity' -- the amount of greenhouse-gas emissions produced per unit of economic output -- 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2020.
But even if China achieved that carbon-intensity cut, the country's total emissions still would surge more than 75% above the 2005 level by 2020, studies project. Michael Levi, a senior fellow specializing in energy and climate change at the Council on Foreign Relations, says studies by the IEA, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the Chinese government all suggest that China was on track to achieve a roughly 45% reduction in carbon intensity even before its recent announcement.
The European Union and Mr. Obama have proposed that the EU and the U.S. will aim to slash their total emissions on the order of 80% by 2050. But Mr. He said it is easy to make such long-term promises. 'I doubt the sincerity of developed countries in their commitment,' he said.
Mr. He said China's environmental pledge, while perhaps less grandiose, is more real. 'I would happily go to debate with any person to see whether what China has committed is less or more than another country,' he said. 'Facts speak louder than words.'
Jeffrey Ball
The International Energy Agency projects that nearly all the growth in global greenhouse-gas emissions over the next two decades will come from developing countries -- and that fully half of that total will come from China alone. A central point of contention here is whether China, amid all its newfound economic might, still deserves billions of dollars in annual aid from the U.S. and Europe to help it shift to a cleaner pattern of growth.
China says the answer is yes. He Yafei, China's vice foreign minister, said on Friday that rich nations, which built their prosperity on fossil fuels, are like people who go out for a fancy dinner and then, when a poor guest arrives late for dessert, demand that he pay the same bill for his meal as everyone else.
'It's not fair,' Mr. He said. 'Whoever created this problem, they're responsible,' he said. Although he said the European Union had largely lived up to its emission-reduction promises, he singled out the U.S. several times by name as a country that hadn't done its share.
In short, Mr. He is arguing that not much has changed since the late 1990s, when the basis for the current international framework designed to combat global warming -- a treaty called the Kyoto Protocol -- was negotiated. Kyoto called on industrialized countries to cut their own emissions and help developing countries with subsidies to promote cleaner technologies like energy-efficient cars and solar panels.
But the U.S. argues China no longer deserves special treatment. Though poorer developing countries still need Western help to nurture clean-energy technologies, China is different, Todd Stern, the chief U.S. climate negotiator, told a news conference here last Wednesday. 'I don't envision public funds -- certainly not from the United States -- going to China,' he said. 'There is no way to solve this problem by giving the major developing countries a pass.'
Environmentally speaking, the U.S. and China, which together account for some 40% of global greenhouse-gas emissions, are the nations that matter most in the U.N. climate debate. So far, the Copenhagen summit has served mainly to illuminate their profound disagreements over climate policy. The arguments over the details of climate policy reflect the broader contest between the U.S. and China for economic power in the decades ahead. Many business leaders in the U.S. worry that efforts to dramatically cut fossil-fuel consumption could raise their production costs and put them at a disadvantage to rivals in a China that is becoming more efficient, but not limiting its carbon-fueled growth.
On two consecutive days last month, both the U.S. and China announced specific emission-reduction targets. The U.S. said it would reduce emissions 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, a number broadly in line with climate-change legislation pending on Capitol Hill. China said it would cut its 'carbon intensity' -- the amount of greenhouse-gas emissions produced per unit of economic output -- 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2020.
But even if China achieved that carbon-intensity cut, the country's total emissions still would surge more than 75% above the 2005 level by 2020, studies project. Michael Levi, a senior fellow specializing in energy and climate change at the Council on Foreign Relations, says studies by the IEA, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the Chinese government all suggest that China was on track to achieve a roughly 45% reduction in carbon intensity even before its recent announcement.
The European Union and Mr. Obama have proposed that the EU and the U.S. will aim to slash their total emissions on the order of 80% by 2050. But Mr. He said it is easy to make such long-term promises. 'I doubt the sincerity of developed countries in their commitment,' he said.
Mr. He said China's environmental pledge, while perhaps less grandiose, is more real. 'I would happily go to debate with any person to see whether what China has committed is less or more than another country,' he said. 'Facts speak louder than words.'
Jeffrey Ball
没有评论:
发表评论