Report on The State Department ClimateAction: Introduction and Overview/>International Activities
No single country can resolve the problem of globalclimate change. Recognizing this, the United States is engaged in manyactivities to facilitate closer international cooperation. To this end, theU.S. government has actively participated in international research andassessment efforts (e.g., through the IPCC), in efforts to develop andimplement a global climate change strategy (through the FCCC Conference of theParties and its varied subsidiary bodies and through the Climate TechnologyInitiative), and by providing financial and technical assistance to developingcountries to facilitate development of mitigation and sequestration strategies(e.g., through the Global Environment Facility (GEF)). Bilateral andmultilateral opportunities are currently being implemented, with some designedto capitalize on the technological capabilities of the private sector, andothers to work on a government-to-government basis.
In the existing Convention framework, the UnitedStates has seconded technical experts to the FCCC secretariat to help implementmethodological, technical, and technological activities. U.S. experts reviewnational communications of other Parties and are helping to advance thedevelopment of methodologies for inventorying national emissions.
The United States has been active in promoting nextsteps under the Convention. It has encouraged all countries to take appropriateanalyses of their own circumstances before taking action--and then act on theseanalyses. It has suggested--and, where possible, has demonstrated--flexible androbust institutional systems through which actions can be taken, such asprograms to implement emission-reduction activities jointly between Parties,and emission-trading programs. The United States has also sought to use itsbest diplomatic efforts to prod those in the international community reluctantto act, seeking to provide assurances that the issue is critical and warrantsglobal attention. Through these efforts, the ongoing negotiations are expectedto successfully conclude in late 1997. The successful implementation of theConvention and a new legal instrument will ensure that the potential hazards ofclimate change will never be realized.
As a major donor to the GEF, the United States hascontributed approximately $190 million to help developing countries meet theincremental costs of protecting the global environment. Although the UnitedStates is behind in the voluntary payment schedule agreed upon during the GEFreplenishment adopted in 1994, plans have been made to pay off these arrears.
The principles of the U.S. development assistancestrategy lie at the heart of U.S. bilateral mitigation projects. These principlesinclude the concepts of conservation and cultural respect, as well asempowerment of local citizenry. The U.S. government works primarily through theU.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). In fact, mitigation ofglobal climate change is one of USAID's two global environmental priorities.Other agencies working in the climate change field, including the EnvironmentalProtection Agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and theDepartments of Agriculture and Energy, are also active internationally.Projects fit into various general categories, such as increasing the efficiencyof power operation and use, adopting renewable-energy technologies, reducingair pollution, improving agricultural and livestock practices, and decreasingdeforestation and improving land use.
Perhapsnone of the U.S. programs is as well known as the U.S. Country Studies Program.The program is currently assisting fifty-five developing countries andcountries with economies in transition to market economies with climate changestudies intended to build human and institutional capacity to address climatechange. Through its Support for National Action Plans, the program issupporting the preparation of national climate action plans for eighteendeveloping countries, which will lay the foundation for their nationalcommunication, as required by the FCCC. More than twenty-five additionalcountries have requested similar assistance from the Country Studies Program.
The United States is also committed to facilitating thecommercial transfer of energy-efficient and renewable-energy technologies thatcan help developing countries achieve sustainable development. Under theauspices of the Climate Technology Initiative, the U.S. has taken a lead rolein a task force on Energy Technology Networking and Capacity Building, theefforts of which focus on increasing the availability of reliable climatechange technologies, developing options for improving access to data indeveloping countries, and supporting experts in the field around the world. TheUnited States is also engaged in various other projects intended to helpcountries with mitigation and adaptation issues. The International Activitieschapter focuses on the most important of these U.S. efforts. Introduction and Overview
Since the historic gathering of representatives from172 countries at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992, issues ofenvironmental protection have remained high on national and internationalpriorities. Climate change is one of the most visible of these issues--and onein which some of the most significant progress has been made since the 1992session. Perhaps the crowning achievement in Rio was the adoption of the UnitedNations Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC). This Conventionrepresented a shared commitment by nations around the world to reduce thepotential risks of a major global environmental problem. Its ultimate objectiveis to:
Achieve ¼ stabilization of greenhouse gasconcentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerousanthropogenic human interference with the climate system. Such a level shouldbe achieved within a time frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adaptnaturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened,and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.
However, since the 1992 Earth Summit, the globalcommunity has found that actions to mitigate climate change will need to bemore aggressive than anticipated. At the same time, the rationale for actionhas proven more compelling. Few «Annex I» countries (the ClimateConvention's term for developed countries, including Organization for EconomicCooperation and Development (OECD) member countries and countries with economiesin transition to market economies) have demonstrated an ability to meet thelaudable, albeit nonbinding, goal of the Convention--«to return emissionsof greenhouse gases to their 1990 levels by the end of the decade.» Whilevoluntary programs have demonstrated that substantial reductions are achievableat economic savings or low costs, the success of these programs has beenovershadowed by lower-than-expected energy prices as well ashigher-than-expected economic growth and electricity demand, among other factors.
Recognizing that even the most draconian measureswould likely be insufficient to reverse the growth in greenhouse gases andreturn U.S. emissions to their 1990 levels by the year 2000, new U.S. effortsare focusing most intensively on the post-2000 period. Thus, while some newvoluntary actions have already been proposed (and are included in this report),an effort to develop a comprehensive program to address rising U.S. greenhousegas emissions is being developed in the context of the ongoing treaty negotiationsand will be reported in the next U.S. communication.
In spite of difficulties in meeting a domestic goal toreturn emissions to their 1990 levels, the U.S. commitment to addressing theclimate change problem remains a high priority. President Clinton, in remarksmade in November 1996, both underlined U.S. concerns and exhorted the nationsof the world to act:
“We mustwork to reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions. These gases released by carsand power plants and burning forests affect our health and our climate. Theyare literally warming our planet. If they continue unabated, the consequenceswill be nothing short of devastating ¼. We must stand together againstthe threat of global warming. A greenhouse may be a good place to raise plants;it is no place to nurture our children. And we can avoid dangerous globalwarming if we begin today and if we begin together.”
Difficulties in meeting the «aim» of theClimate Convention prompted the international community, gathered at the firstmeeting of the Conference of the Parties to the FCCC (held in Berlin, Germany,in March 1995), to agree on a new approach to addressing the climate changeproblem. At their first session, the Parties decided to negotiate a new legalinstrument containing appropriate next steps under the Convention. At theSecond Conference of the Parties (COP-2), the United States expressed its viewthat the new agreement should include three main elements:
· a realistic and achievable bindingtarget (instead of the hortatory goals and nonbinding aims of the existingConvention),
· flexibility in implementation, and
· the participation of developingcountries.
Each of these elements was included in a MinisterialDeclaration agreed to at COP-2, and the United States expects that a legalinstrument containing these elements will be one of the outcomes from the ThirdConference of the Parties, to be held in Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997.
As international negotiations continue on a new legalcommitment, the United States is assessing options for a domestic program. Theresults of this analytical effort are being used to inform the U.S. negotiatingpositions, and will subsequently be used to develop compliance strategies tomeet any commitments established under the new regime.
While the Parties involved in the negotiations aredetermining next steps for collective action, all countries are still activelypursuing the programs adopted earlier in the decade to control emissions. Thisdocument describes the current U.S. program. It represents the second formalU.S. communication under the FCCC, as required under Articles 4.2 and 12. Aswith the Climate Action Report published by the United States in 1994, it is a«freeze frame»--a look at the current moment in time in the U.S. program.This report does not predict additional future activities. Nor is it intendedto be a substitute for existing or future decision-making processes--whetheradministrative or legislative--or for additional measures developed by or withthe private sector.
This document has been developed using themethodologies and format agreed to at the first meeting of the Conference ofthe Parties to the FCCC, and modified by the second meeting of the Conferenceof the Parties and by sessions of the Convention's Subsidiary Body onScientific and Technological Advice and the Subsidiary Body on Implementation.The United States assumes that this communication, like those of othercountries--and like the preceding U.S. communication--will be subject to athorough review, and discussed in the evaluation process for the Parties of theConvention. Even though the measures listed in this report are not expected toreduce U.S. emissions below 1990 levels by the year 2000, the United Statesbelieves that many of the climate change actions being implemented have beensuccessful at reducing emissions, send valuable signals to the private sector,and may be appropriate models for other countries. The U.S. experience shouldalso ensure that future efforts are more effective in reversing the risingtrend of emissions and returning U.S. emissions to more environmentallysustainable levels. The Science
The 1992 Convention effort waslargely predicated on the scientific and technical information produced by theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its 1990 report. The IPCCconsists of more than two thousand of the world's best scientists withexpertise in the physical, social, and economic sciences relevant to theclimate issue. The United States stands firmly behind the IPCC's conclusions.As the actions being taken by the United States ultimately depend on thenation's understanding of the science, it is important to at least brieflyreview this information here.
The Earth absorbs energy from the sun in the form ofsolar radiation. About one-third is reflected, and the rest is absorbed bydifferent components of the climate system, including the atmosphere, theoceans, the land surface, and the biota. The incoming energy is balanced overthe long term by outgoing radiation from the Earth-atmosphere system, withoutgoing radiation taking the form of long-wave, invisible infrared energy. Themagnitude of this outgoing radiation is affected in part by the temperature ofthe Earth-atmosphere system.
Several human and natural activities can change thebalance between the energy absorbed by the Earth and that emitted in the formof long-wave infrared radiation. On the natural side, these include changes insolar radiation (the sun's energy varies by small amounts--approximately 0.1 percentover an eleven-year cycle--and variations over longer periods also occur). Theyalso include volcanic eruptions, injecting huge clouds of sulfur-containinggases, which tend to cool the Earth's surface and atmosphere over a few years.On the human-induced side, the balance can be changed by emissions fromland-use changes and industrial practices that add or remove«heat-trapping» or «greenhouse» gases, thus changingatmospheric absorption of radiation.
Greenhouse gases of policy significance include carbondioxide (CO2); methane (CH4); nitrous oxide (N2O);the chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and their substitutes, includinghydrofluorocarbons (HFCs); the long-lived fully fluorinated hydrocarbons, suchas perfluorocarbons (PFCs); and ozone (O3). Although most of thesegases occur naturally (the exceptions are the CFCs, their substitutes, and thelong-lived PFCs), the concentrations of all of these gases are changing as aresult of human activities.
For example, the atmospheric concentration of carbondioxide has risen about 30 percent since the 1700s--an increase responsible formore than half of the enhancement of the trapping of the infrared radiation dueto human activities. In addition to their steady rise, many of these greenhousegases have long atmospheric residence times (several decades to centuries),which means that atmospheric levels of these gases will return to preindustriallevels only if emissions are sharply reduced, and even then only after a longtime. Internationally accepted science indicates that increasing concentrationsof greenhouse gases will raise atmospheric and oceanic temperatures and couldalter associated weather and circulation patterns.
In a report synthesizing its second assessment andfocusing on the relevance of its scientific analyses to the ultimate objectiveof the Convention, the IPCC concluded:
· Human activities--including theburning of fossil fuels, land use, and agriculture--are changing theatmospheric composition. Taken together, they are projected to lead to changesin global and regional climate and climate-related parameters, such astemperature, precipitation, and soil moisture.
· Some humancommunities--particularly those with limited access to mitigatingtechnologies--are becoming more vulnerable to natural hazards and can beexpected to suffer significantly from the impacts of climate-related changes,such as high-temperature events, floods, and droughts, potentially resulting infires, pest outbreaks, ecosystem loss, and an overall reduction in the level ofprimary productivity.
The IPCC also concluded that, given thecurrent trends in emissions, global concentrations of greenhouse gases arelikely to grow significantly through the next century and beyond, and theadverse impacts from these changes will become greater. The remainder of thisreport seeks to elucidate the programs, policies, and measures being taken inthe United States to begin moving away from this trend of increasing emissions,and to help move the world away from the trend of globally increasingconcentrations of greenhouse gases.
Principal Conclusions of the IPCC's Second Assessment Report
While the basic facts about the science of climate have been understood and broadly accepted for years, new information is steadily emerging--and influencing the policy process. In 1995, the IPCC released its Second Assessment Report, which not only validated most of the IPCC's earlier findings, but because of the considerable new work that had been undertaken during the five years since its previous full-scale assessment, broke new ground. The report is divided into three sections: physical sciences related to climate impacts; adaptation and mitigation responses; and cross-cutting issues, including economics and social sciences.
The Climate Science
· Human activities are changing the atmospheric concentrations and distributions of greenhouse gases and aerosols.
· Global average temperatures have increased about 0.3-0.6°C (about 0.5-1.0°F) over the last century.
· The ability of climate models to simulate observed trends has improved--although there is still considerable regional uncertainty with regard to changes.
· The balance of evidence suggests there is a discernible human influence on global climate.
· Aerosol sulfates (a component of acid rain) offset some of the warming by greenhouse gases.
· The IPCC mid-range scenario projects an increase of 2.0°C (3.7°F) by 2100 (with a range of 1.0-3.5°C (about 1.8-6.3°F).
· The average global warming projected in the IPCC mid-range scenario is greater than any seen in the last ten thousand years.
· Sea level is projected to rise (due to thermal expansion of the oceans, and melting of glaciers and ice sheets) by about 50 centimeters (20 inches) by 2100, with a range of 15-95 centimeters (about 6-38 inches).
· Even after a stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations, temperatures would continue to increase for several decades, and sea level would continue to rise for centuries.
Vulnerability, Likely Impacts, and Possible Responses
· Climate change is likely to have wide-ranging and mostly adverse effects on human health. Direct and indirect effects can be expected to lead to increased mortality.
· Coastal infrastructure is likely to be extremely vulnerable. A 50-centimeter (20-inch) rise in sea level would place approximately 120 million people at risk.
· Natural and managed ecosystems are also at risk: forests, agricultural areas, and aquatic and marine life are all susceptible.
· However, adaptation and mitigation options are numerous. Significant reductions in net greenhouse gas emissions are technically possible and can be economically feasible, using an extensive array of technologies and policy measures that accelerate technology development, diffusion, and transfer.
Socioeconomic Issues
· Early mitigation may increase flexibility in moving toward a stabilization of atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases. Economic risks of rapid abatement must be balanced against risks of delay.
· Significant «no regrets» opportunities are available in most countries. Next steps must recognize equity considerations.
· Costs of stabilization of emissions at 1990 levels in OECD countries could range considerably (from a gain of $60 billion to a loss of about $240 billion) over the next several decades. National Circumstances
In responding to the threat of global climate change,U.S. policymakers must consider the special circumstances created by a uniqueblend of challenges and opportunities. The National Circumstances chapter ofthis report attempts to explain the particular situation in the UnitedStates--including its climate, natural resources, population trends, economy,energy mix, and political system--as a backdrop for understanding the U.S.perspective on global climate change.
The United States is unusual in that it encompasses awide variety of climate conditions within its borders, from subtropical totundra. This diversity complicates the discussion of impacts of global climatechange within the United States because those impacts would vary widely. Thisdiversity also adds to U.S. emission levels, as heating and cooling demandsdrive up emissions. Recent record levels of precipitation--both in snowfall andrain--consistent with what could be expected under a changed climate, haveraised the awareness of climate impacts at the local and regional levels, andmay make it somewhat easier to predict the effects of increased precipitation.
The United States also is uncommonly rich in landresources, both in extent and diversity. U.S. land area totals about 931 millionhectares (2.3 billion acres), including grassland pasture and range, forest,and cropland. Forested land has been increasing, while grasslands and croplandsare slowly declining and being converted to other uses. The decline in wetlandshas slowed significantly as a result of the «no net loss» policybeing implemented.
With just over 265 million people, the United Statesis the third most populous country in the world, although population densityvaries widely throughout the country, and is generally very low. Althoughpopulation increase is moderate from a global perspective, it is high relativeto the average for all industrialized countries. Moreover, the number ofhouseholds is growing rapidly. These and other factors drive U.S. emissions tohigher per capita rates than those in most other countries with higherpopulation densities, smaller land areas, or more concentrated distribution ofresources to population centers.
The U.S. market economy is based on property rightsand a reliance on the efficiency of the market as a means of allocatingresources. The government plays a key role in addressing market failures andpromoting social welfare, including through the imposition of regulations onpollutants and the protection of property rights, but is cautious in itsinterventions. Thus, the infrastructure exists to limit emissions of greenhousegases--although the strong political and economic preference is to undertakesuch controls through flexible and cost-effective programs, including voluntaryprograms and market instruments, where appropriate.
U.S. economic growth averaged 3 percent annually from1960 to 1993, and employment nearly tripled as the overall labor forceparticipation rate rose to 66 percent. The service sector--which includescommunications, utilities, finance, insurance, and real estate--has grownrapidly, and now accounts for more than 36 percent of the economy. Theincreasing role of trade in the U.S. economy heightens concerns about thecompetitiveness effects of climate policies.
During the 1980s, the U.S. budget deficit grewrapidly, as did the ratio of debt to gross domestic product, and a politicalconsensus emerged on the goal of a balanced budget. The result is a tighterfederal budget with many competing priorities.
The United States is the world's largest energyproducer and consumer. Abundant resources of all fossil fuels have contributedto low prices and specialization in relatively energy-intensive activities.Energy consumption has nearly doubled since 1960, and would have grown farmore, because of growth in the economy, population, and transportation needs,had it not been for impressive reductions in U.S. energy intensity. Industrialenergy intensity has declined most markedly, due to structural shifts andefficiency improvements. In the residential and commercial sectors, efficiencyimprovements largely offset the growth in the number and size of bothresidential and commercial buildings. Likewise, in the transportation sector,efficiency moderated the rise in total fuel consumption from 1973 to 1995 toonly 26 percent, despite dramatic increases in both the number of vehicles andthe distances they are driven. Fossil fuel prices below levels assumed in the1993 Climate Change Action Plan, however, have contributed to the unexpectedlylarge growth in U.S. emissions.
While unique national circumstances point to thereasons for the current levels (and increases) in U.S. emissions, they alsosuggest the potential for emission reductions. Successful government and private-sectorprograms are beginning to exploit some of the inefficiencies in themanufacturing sector. The development of new, climate-friendly technologies isa rapidly growing industry, with significant long-term potential for domesticand international emission reductions.
GreenhouseGas Inventory
Inventorying the national emissions of greenhousegases is a task shared by several departments within the executive branch ofthe federal government, including the Environmental Protection Agency, theDepartment of Energy and the Department of Agriculture. The Greenhouse GasInventory chapter summarizes the most current information on U.S. greenhousegas emission trends--and represents the 1997 submission from the United Statesin fulfillment of its annual inventory reporting obligation. The estimatespresented in this chapter were compiled using methods consistent with thoserecommended by the IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories;therefore, the U.S. emissions inventory should be comparable to those submittedby others under the FCCC.
Table 1-1 summarizes the recent trends in U.S.greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 to 1995. The three most importantanthropogenic greenhouse gases are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4),and nitrous oxide (N2O). Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are alsoinventoried. Consistent with the requirements in the Climate Convention only toaddress emissions of gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol onSubstances That Deplete the Ozone Layer, chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) emissions arenot inventoried, nor are mitigation measures for these compounds described.
Table 1-1
Recent Trends in U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 1990-1995
(MMTs of Carbon Equivalent)
Gases and Sources Emissions--Direct and Indirect Effects 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 1,228 1,213 1,235 1,268 1,291 1,305 Fossil Fuel Combustion 1,336 1,320 1,340 1,370 1,391 1,403 Industrial Processes and Other 17 16 17 18 19 19 Total 1,353 1,336 1,357 1,388 1,410 1,422 Forests (sink)* (125) (123) (122) (120) (119) (117)
Methane (CH4) 170 172 173 171 176 177 Landfills 56 58 58 60 62 64 Agriculture 50 51 52 52 54 55 Coal Mining 24 23 22 20 21 20 Oil and Natural Gas Systems 33 33 34 33 33 33 Other 6 7 7 6 6 6
Nitrous Oxide (N2O) 36 37 37 38 39 40 Agriculture 17 17 17 18 18 18 Fossil Fuel Consumption 11 11 12 12 12 12 Industrial Processes 8 8 8 8 9 9 HFCs 12 12 13 14 17 21 PFCs 5 5 5 5 7 8
SF6 7 7 8 8 8 8 U.S. Emissions 1,583 1,570 1,592 1,624 1,657 1,676 Net U.S. Emissions 1,458 1,447 1,470 1,504 1,538 1,559
Note: The totals presented in the summary tables in this chapter may not equal the sum of the individual source categories due to rounding.
* These estimates for the conterminous United States for 1990-91 and 1993-95 are interpolated from forest inventories in 1987 and 1992 and from projections through 2040. The calculation method reflects long-term averages, rather than specific events in any given year. /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> />
Overall, U.S. greenhouse gas emissions have increasedannually by just over one percent. The trend of U.S. emissions--which decreasedfrom 1990 to 1991, and then increased again in 1992--is a consequence ofchanges in total energy consumption resulting from the U.S. economic slowdownin the beginning of this decade and its subsequent recovery.
Carbon dioxide accounts for the largest share of U.S.greenhouse gases--approximately 85 percent--although the carbon sinks inforested lands offset CO2 emissions by about 8 percent. During1990-95, greenhouse gas emissions continued to rise in the United States, withCO2 increasing approximately 6 percent, methane approximately 4percent, N2O nearly 10 percent, and HFCs approximately 7 percent.Fossil fuel combustion accounts for 99 percent of total U.S. CO2emissions. (Chapter 3 of this report explains the use of MMTCE in converting emissionsof greenhouse gases to carbon equivalents.)
Although methane emissions are lower than CO2emissions, methane's footprint is large: in a 100-year time span it isconsidered to be twenty-one times more effective than CO2 attrapping heat in the atmosphere and is responsible for about 10 percent of thewarming caused by U.S. emissions. In addition, in the last two centuries alone,methane concentrations in the atmosphere have more than doubled. Emissions ofmethane are largely generated by landfills, agriculture, oil and natural gassystems, and coal mining, with landfills comprising the single largest sourceof the gas. In 1995, methane emissions from U.S. landfills were 63.5 MMTCE,equaling approximately 36 percent of total U.S. methane emissions. Agriculturesupplied about 30 percent of U.S. methane emissions in that same year.
Nitrous oxide is also emitted in much smaller amountsthan carbon dioxide in the United States and is responsible for approximately2.4 percent of the U.S. share of the greenhouse effect. However, like methane,it is a more powerful heat trap--310 times more powerful than carbon dioxide attrapping heat in the atmosphere over a 100-year period. The main anthropogenicactivities producing nitrous oxide are agriculture, fossil fuel combustion, andthe production of adipic and nitric acids. Figures from 1995 show theagricultural sector emitting 46 percent of the total (18.4 MMTCE), with fossilfuel combustion generating 31 percent.
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are among the compoundsintroduced to replace ozone-depleting substances, which are being phased out asa result of the Vienna Convention and its Montreal Protocol on Substances ThatDeplete the Ozone Layer, and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. Because HFCshave significant potential to alter the Earth's radiative balance, they areincluded in this inventory. Many of the compounds of this nature are extremelystable and remain in the atmosphere for extended periods of time, which resultsin a significant atmospheric accumulation over time. U.S. emissions of thesegases have risen nearly 60 percent as they are phased in as substitutes forgases that are no longer allowed under the Montreal Protocol--a rate of growththat is not anticipated to continue. Currently, HFCs account for less than 2percent of U.S. radiative forcing.
Mitigating Climate Change
In October 1993, in response to the threat of global climate change,President Clinton and Vice President Gore announced the Climate Change ActionPlan (CCAP). The Plan was designed to reduce U.S. emissions of greenhousegases, while guiding the U.S. economy toward environmentally sound economicgrowth into the next century. This report updates the programs in the CCAP(including an appendix providing one-page descriptions of each program),describes several additional initiatives developed to further reduce emissiongrowth rates, and estimates future emissions based on the current set ofpractices and programs.
CCAP programs represent an effort to stimulate actions that are bothprofitable for individual private-sector participants as well as beneficial tothe environment. Currently, more than forty programs are in effect, combiningefforts of the government at the federal, state, and local levels with those ofthe private sector. The CCAP has five goals: preserving the environment,enhancing sustainable growth environmentally and economically, buildingpartnerships, involving the public, and encouraging international emissionreductions.
Carbon dioxide emissions constitute the bulk of U.S. greenhouse gasemissions. CCAP recognizes that investing in energy efficiency is the mostcost-effective way to reduce these emissions. The largest proportion of CCAPprograms contains measures that reduce carbon dioxide emissions while simultaneouslyenhancing domestic productivity and competitiveness. Other programs seek toreduce carbon dioxide emissions by investing in renewable-energy and otherlow-carbon, energy-supply technologies, which will also provide longer-termbenefits, such as increased efficiency and related cost-savings and pollutionprevention. A smaller number of programs are targeted at methane, nitrousoxide, and other greenhouse gases (Table 1-2).
A review and update of the CCAP was initiated in 1995, involving afederal government interagency review process and a public hearing and commentperiod. Revisions to the CCAP (and to the calculation of the effects of itsmeasures) were initiated in light of comments received during this process andare reflected in this document. In addition, as called for under FCCC reportingguidelines, the projections of the effects of measures taken are extended tothe year 2020, with the understanding that uncertainties become greater in moredistant years.
One of the principal products of the review was an assessment of theeffectiveness of the CCAP programs, which were rated to be successful atreducing emissions. Currently, more than 5,000 organizations are participatingin programs around the United States. The pollution-prevention benefits ofthese innovative programs are beginning to multiply rapidly in response to thegroundwork laid and the partnerships made. In all, the programs are expected toachieve a large portion of the reductions projected in the CCAP. In fact, it isestimated that these programs will result in energy cost savings of $10 billionannually in 2000.
However, the review has also made clear the significantly reducedimpact to be expected from the programs as a result of the nearly 40 percentreduction of CCAP funding by Congress from the amount requested by thePresident, higher-than-expected electricity demand, and lower-than-expectedenergy prices. In addition, before the programs' implementation, CCAP programmanagers could not always anticipate the impacts of projected climate changeemission reductions. Information available from the first tranche of activitywas considered in developing the current projections.
A second product of the review was the identification of severalmeasures that have since been added to the CCAP portfolio. The most significantof these is the Environmental Stewardship Initiative, which greatly expandsactivities already included in the CCAP, and focuses on reducing the emissionsof extremely potent greenhouse gases from three industrialapplications--semiconductor production, electrical transmission anddistribution systems, and magnesium casting. The expanded initiative isanticipated to reduce emissions by an additional 6.5 MMTCE by 2000, and 10.0MMTCE by 2010. Other programs include improving energy efficiency in theconstruction of and supply of energy to commercial and industrial buildings,expanding residential markets for energy-efficient lighting products, andproviding information on renewable energy to reduce barriers to the adoption ofclean technologies.
The analysis of individual actions is integrated with revised forecastsof economic growth, energy prices, program funding, and regulatory developmentsto provide an updated comprehensive perspective on current and projectedgreenhouse gas emission levels. This analysis involved an updating of thebaseline calculation in light of new economic assumptions regarding energyprices, economic growth, and technology improvements, among other factors. In1993, the first U.S. submission projected year 2000 baseline emissions to be106 MMTCE above their 1990 levels; with current program funding, emissions arenow projected to exceed 1990 levels by 188 MMTCE. Two principal factors areresponsible:
· The analysis used to develop CCAPsignificantly underestimated the reductions that would be needed by programs toreturn emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. This was due to severalfactors, including lower-than-expected fuel prices, strong economic growth,regulatory limitations within and outside of CCAP, and improved information onemissions of some potent greenhouse gases.
· In addition, diminished levels offunding by Congress have affected both CCAP programs and other federal programsthat reduce emissions, limiting their effectiveness.
While neither the measures initiated in 1993 nor the additional actionsdeveloped since then and included in this report will be adequate to meet theemissions goal enunciated by the President, they have significantly reducedemissions below growth rates that otherwise would have occurred. Based oncurrent funding levels, the revised action plan is expected to reduce emissionsby 76 MMTCE in the year 2000--or 70 percent of the reductions projected in theCCAP. Annual energy cost savings to businesses and consumers from CCAP actionsare anticipated to be $10 billion (1995 dollars) by the year 2000. Even greaterreductions are estimated from these measures in the post-2000 period:reductions of 169 MMTCE are projected for 2010, and 230 MMTCE for 2020. Annualenergy savings are projected to grow to $50 billion (1995 dollars) in the year2010.
A separate component of this chapter addresses the U.S. Initiative onJoint Implementation. Projects undertaken through this initiative allowprivate-sector partners to offset emissions from domestic activities throughreductions achieved in other countries. The Climate Convention established apilot program for joint implementation at the first meeting of the Conferenceof the Parties. Guidelines for reporting under the pilot program wereestablished by the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice atits fifth session in February 1997. This report uses those guidelines to reporton project activity.
Table 1-2
Summary of Actions to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions
(Million Metric Tons of Carbon Equivalent)
Action
Number
Action Title
1993 Action
Plan Estimate Revised Estimate*
2000
2000
2005
2010
2020 />
Residential & Commercial Sector Actions
26.9
10.3
29.4
53.0
78.4 1 Rebuild America 2.0 1.6 3.0 6.3 7.1 1 & 2 Expanded Green Lights and Energy Star Buildings 3.6 3.4 8.5 16.3 30.2 3 State Revolving Fund for Public Buildings 1.1 Terminated 4 Cost-Shared Demonstrations of Emerging Technologies 5
Operation and Maintenance Training for Commercial Building Facility
Managers and Operators 3.8 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.0 6
Energy Star® Products 5.0 4.3 12.9 19.4 24.9 7 Residential Appliance Standards 6.8 0.2 1.8 3.7 3.8 8 and 11 Energy Partnerships for Affordable Housing 9 Cool Communities 4.4 0.6 1.9 4.3 7.7 10 Update State Building Codes New Construction of EnergyEfficient Commercial and Industrial Buildings Not included 0.1 0.4 1.1 2.6 New Superwindow Collaborative Not included 0.0 0.1 0.4 1.3 New Expand Markets for NextGeneration Lighting Products Not included 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.9 New Fuel Cells Initiative Not included 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4
Industrial Sector Actions
19.0
4.8
8.2
11.5
16.7 12 Motor Challenge 8.8 1.8 3.9 5.8 7.5 13 Industrial Golden Carrot Programs 2.9 Merged into Motor Challenge (#12) 14 Accelerate the Adoption of EnergyEfficient Process Technologies Terminated 15 Industrial Assessment Centers 0.5 CCAP Component Terminated 16 Waste Minimization** 4.2 2.1 3.6 5.0 8.4 17 Improve Efficiency of Fertilizer Nitrogen Use*** 2.7 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.1 18 Reduce the Use of Pesticides Terminated
Transportation Sector Actions
8.1
5.3
11.5
15.5
22.1 19 Cash Value of Parking 20 Innovative Transportation Strategies 6.6 4.6 8.4 10.9 17.0 21 Telecommuting Program 22 Fuel Economy Labels for Tires 1.5 0.7 3.2 4.8 5.3
Energy Supply Actions
10.8
1.3
3.7
7.0
18.9 23 Increase Natural Gas Share of Energy Use Through Federal Regulatory Reform 2.2 Terminated 24 Promote Seasonal Gas Use for Control of Nitrogen Oxides 2.8 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 25 HighEfficiency Gas Technologies 0.6 Terminated 26 RenewableEnergy Commercialization 0.8 0.3 2.9 5.6 16.4 27 Expand Utility Integrated Resource Planning 1.4 Terminated 28 Profitable Hydroelectric Efficiency Upgrades 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29 EnergyEfficient Distribution Transformer Standards 30 Energy Star Distribution Transformers 0.8 0.5 0.8 1.4 2.8 31 Transmission Pricing Reform 0.8 Terminated New Green Power Network Not Included 0.0 Not quantified
Land-Use Change & Forestry Actions+
10.0
2.4
3.3
4.2
5.1 43 Reduce Depletion of Nonindustrial 4.0 Terminated Private Forests 44 Accelerate Tree Planting in 0.5 0.4 1.3 2.2 3.1 Nonindustrial Private Forests 16 Waste Minimization** 4.2 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 9 Expand Cool Communities 0.5 Not quantified
Methane Actions
16.3
15.5
19.0
23.4
24.2 32 Expand Natural Gas STAR 3.0 3.4 3.8 4.2 4.3 33 Increase Stringency of Landfill Rule 4.2 6.3 7.7 9.1 5.9 34 Landfill Methane Outreach Program 1.1 1.9 2.2 2.9 4.3 35 Coalbed Methane Outreach Program 2.2 2.6 2.9 3.2 4.0 36 RD&D for Coal Mine Methane 1.5 Terminated 37 RD&D for Landfill Methane 1.0 Terminated 38 AgSTAR Program 1.5 0.3 0.8 1.8 3.2 39 Ruminant Livestock Efficiency Program 1.8 1.0 1.6 2.2 2.5
Actions to Address Other Greenhouse Gases
16.3
25.4
40.4
45.8
54.5 17 Improve Efficiency of Fertilizer Nitrogen Use*** 4.5 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 40 Significant New Alternatives Program 5.0 6.4 19.6 23.1 29.8 41 HFC23 Partnerships 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 42 Voluntary Aluminum Industrial Partnership 1.8 2.2 2.4 2.4 2.4 New Environmental Stewardship Initiative Not included 6.5 8.1 10.0 12.0
Foundation Actions++
11.3
10.7
9.5
12.3 Climate Wise Not estimated 1.8 2.7 3.7 4.5 Climate Challenge+++ Not estimated 7.6 5.0 1.6 1.5 State and Local Outreach Programs Not estimated 1.9 3.0 4.2 6.3 Total GHG Emission Reductions 108.6 76.0 128.3 169.3 229.5
From CCAP Programs
Notes: Several of the Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) programs are part of larger federal efforts. These programs include Actions 2, 4, 6, 7, 15, 16, 27, 32, and 33. Only the CCAP portions of these programs are included in this table. Also, numbers may not add precisely due to interactive effects and rounding.
* There is uncertainty in any attempt to project future emission levels and program impacts, and this uncertainty becomes greater with longer forecast periods. The results of this evaluation of CCAP represent a best estimate. They are also based on the assumption that programs will continue to be funded at current funding levels.
** Includes Waste Wise, NICE3, and USDA's Expansion of Recycling Technology. Energy savings and sequestration are scored separately.
*** Energy savings and N2O savings are scored separately.
+ Additional forestry initiatives by electric utilities are included in Climate Challenge, a Foundation Program.
++ Foundation action partners provide additional reductions in almost all sectors and gases. These values only represent incremental savings not accounted for in other actions or baseline activities.
+++ For the Climate Challenge program, there is considerable uncertainty at this time in quantifying impacts beyond the year 2000, largely because partners' Climate Challenge plans do not currently extend beyond 2000.Given that participation levels are growing and that most utilities appear to be meeting or expanding upon their commitments to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it is reasonable to expect that the Climate Challenge program will deliver more significant reductions.
/> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> /> Research and Systematic Observation
The U.S. government has dedicated significantresources to research on global climate change. U.S. research efforts (some ofwhich include the private sector) are divided into several general categories,including prediction of climate change, impacts and adaptation, mitigation andnew technologies, and socioeconomic analysis and assessment. In addition, U.S.scientists actively coordinate with research and capacity-building efforts inother countries.
The principal vehicle for undertaking climate changeresearch at the federal level is the United States Global Change ResearchProgram. The multiagency program was funded in fiscal year 1997 atapproximately $1.8 billion. A significant portion of the Research Program'sactivities is targeted at improving capabilities to predict climate change,including the human-induced contribution to climate change, and itsimplications for society and the environment. The United States also iscommitted to continuing programs in research and observation, with the aim ofdeveloping the information base required to improve predictions of climatechange and its repercussions, as well as the ability to reduce emissions whilesustaining food production, ecosystems, and economic development.
Extensive efforts also are being made to understandthe consequences of climate change, regional impacts, and the potential foradaptation. Another area being explored by researchers is the development oftechnologies that would enable the United States to supply energy, food, water,ecosystem services, and a healthy environment to U.S. citizens, whilesimultaneously reducing greenhouse gas emissions. These efforts have beendivided into short- and longer-term projects involving the private sector, aswell as government-sponsored research.
Perhaps most notable in the international component ofthe research effort is U.S. participation in IPCC work. U.S. scientistsparticipated in the preparation and review of nearly all of the more than 100chapters of the over 2,000-page report. Researchers also participated in thecollection and analysis of the underlying data through programs as varied asthe World Climate Research Program, the Human Dimensions of GlobalEnvironmental Change Program, the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programmeand an impressive array of bilateral scientific and technical work. The Future
Overall, the conclusions to be drawn from this reportcan be summarized in three parts:
· Climate change is a clearlydefined problem and is well recognized at the highest levels in the U.S.government. Senior officials (from the President to heads of cabinet agenciesand departments) have taken a strong stand in favor of seeking to reduce emissions.
· The combined effort to addressclimate change (described in this report, and including the Research Program,the total costs of U.S. mitigation actions, and the international effort) arein excess of $2 billion--a significant step by any standard.
· Notwithstanding this effort,emissions continue to grow. More aggressive actions must be taken to combat thethreat of climate change.
The United States is developing a long-term, post-2000strategy to address the climate change problem. This effort, which has both amultilateral, international focus and a domestic focus, is expected to be madepublic in the next few months. It will be based on an extensive analytic effortto assess the effects of an array of additional policy choices, including settinglegally binding, internationally agreed caps on emissions. It will consider theadvantages of market-based instruments for both domestic and internationalemissions trading, as well as joint implementation for credit with developingcountries. It will consider approaches to be taken for gases for whichmonitoring and measurement are relatively simple (e.g., for carbon dioxideemissions from stationary energy sources), as well as those gases for whichemissions are more difficult to measure (such as nitrous oxides fromagriculture).
Currently underway, the effort is intensive andtime-consuming. It involves more than twenty agencies within the federalgovernment, as well as several offices in the Executive Office of thePresident. Congress will be consulted in the development of policies and willmost likely need to enact legislation to implement any agreed program. Asignificant stakeholder outreach program will be undertaken over the nextseveral months to engage the best thinking on alternative approaches, andfollowing adoption of a program to ensure maximum compliance with the course ofaction chosen.
Öwww.state.gov
Öwww.epa.gov/globalwarming/climate/index.html
ÖGlobal Warming International Center