Many environmental advocates had their eyes focused this week on the Supreme Court, where the justices slammed an Environmental Protection Agency clean air rule. But, in part because the practical effects of the ruling don’t appear dire, the more consequential
Many environmental advocates had their eyes focused this week on the Supreme Court, where the justices slammed an Environmental Protection Agency clean air rule. But, in part because the practical effects of the ruling don’t appear dire, the more consequential event may have taken place at the White House, where President Barack Obama and Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff exchanged commitments on climate change. There the news was good — but not good enough.
The outlines of the U.S. pledge, which will be codified at a United Nations conference later this year, have been known for months. Brazil’s intentions have been more mysterious, though it too has a big role to play in stemming climate change given its massive forest stocks and growing economy.
At the White House, Rousseff previewed what her nation is likely to offer.
Brazil, she said, will double the share of its electricity derived from non-hydro renewables (wind and solar) by 2030, which, combined with the large amount of electricity it gets from hydropower, would make its electricity sector extremely clean. Signing onto a cause Obama has championed, Brazil also will push to phase out hydrofluorocarbons, which are potent greenhouse agents, through a treaty known as the Montreal Protocol. Most important, Brazil is promising to halt illegal deforestation within its borders. Brazil’s vast forests are sometimes called “the world’s lungs,” sequestering huge amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Ending deforestation is one of the most cost-effective ways of reducing greenhouse emissions. Rousseff also committed to reforesting an area the size of England.
This is all fine news, except that the country already had promised much of this — perhaps even more. Brazil has done better fighting illegal deforestation over the past several years, and its 2012 Forest Code contained novel mechanisms that promised to lower deforestation rates and increase reforestation.
Sorely missing from the country’s commitment is a date or level at which its emissions will peak. Rousseff offered only that Brazil would promise “its highest possible effort beyond its current actions” before the upcoming U.N. meeting. We hope that presages more ambitious signals from Rousseff in the coming weeks.
The positive significance of Rousseff’s commitments is the momentum they fuel toward an international expectation that contributing to the climate effort is not optional — it must be a priority for developed and developing countries.
Governments are building a norm that will work like a one-way ratchet, pressuring them to regularly increase their ambition and not to backslide on earlier promises. To that end, Obama and Rousseff agreed that any U.N. agreement struck this year must feature “regular updating” of national commitments, as well as “strong and credible transparency, including reporting and review,” to ensure countries are sticking to their commitments.
Any hope to rein in global greenhouse emissions will require this sort of patient and sustained diplomacy.
— Washington Post
