地球温暖化の国際交渉をフォローしたいところです


by togura04

オバマ政権の交渉方針か?

 Climate Progressより、こんな記事がありました。

The Great Transformation: Climate change as cultural change
June 18th, 2009
http://climateprogress.org/2009/06/18/john-podesta-climate-change-as-cultural-change/

 民主党ご用達のシンクタンク、CAP(アメリカ進歩センター)の創設者であり、オバマ政権の移行チームのトップであるジョン・ポデスタ氏が、ドイツ・エッセン訪問で講演で語った内容を全文紹介しています。(同氏の以前の講演記事はこちら。)

 おそらくは国際交渉の裏ルートでの外交ででもあるのでしょう。
 CAPが提唱しているCarbon Cap Equivalentsというのはどういう概念でしょうね。
”At the end, he puts forward an innovative approach to cutting the Gordian knot of international climate negotiations.”ブログの筆者ジョセフ・ロムはこう書いています。
 CCEについて、また調べてみます。

f0203461_19583063.jpg
 ポデスタ氏の写真があります。

 講演でポデスタ氏は、オバマ政権下の革命的な各種温暖化対策の進展という政治状況を紹介した後、以下の3点を主張しました。

---
”First, I believe the United States can pass comprehensive climate legislation by the end of the current Congressional session.”米国は議会会期のうちに包括的な気候法制を通過させられる、と信じているそうです。とはいえ来年にずれ込むのでしょうが。

”(Second,) the United States is ready, willing, and able to negotiate an aggressive international climate treaty at Copenhagen, in 2009.米国はコペンハーゲンの交渉に前向きに参加する。
(Those that try to pin a successful outcome in Copenhagen to the U.S. legislative process are mistaken, and should focus on ways to move forward and find solutions rather than focus on ways to hang up the debate.)”(米国内の法案の進捗が交渉を左右するというのはデマだ。)

”(At last,) It is important to keep our broader goals in mind and avoid getting lost in the weeds, so to speak.especially at this crucial juncture in the negotiating process.”広い目標を念頭において、とくに交渉プロセスのこの時点で細部で我を忘れてしまわないようにすることが大事だ。

 そして一つの提案をしています。
”I support the idea of “Carbon Cap Equivalents”which builds on a similar approach to one put forward by the Australian government.
I think this idea could hold the key to unlocking the standoff between developing and developed countries as we all move towards an increasingly carbon constrained world.”

 そしてMEFを初めとする二国間、多国間のフォーラムの重要性と、そこに賭ける米国のリーダーシップを述べています。



”I believe we could take this one step further and craft bilateral and multilateral agreements with China and other major emitters in the developing world. As you all are well aware, one of the longstanding problems in reaching a comprehensive international agreement is the sequencing dilemma between developing and developed countries, especially when it comes to the two largest emitters: China and the United States.”特に米中間で、二国間多国間の合意を取り付けるための試みが重要だ。

”These attempts to make progress on our relationship with China must not be seen as antagonistic to the framework convention process, but complimentary to it, and this dialogue with China should include Europe as well. If we arrive in Copenhagen with a handful of in-principle agreements with other major emitters then we may be able to achieve a better outcome in Copenhagen than could be achieved otherwise.
米中に欧州を含めた交渉は、協定のための重要な意見交換の場であり基本的な枠組みをもってコペンハーゲンに臨むための下準備だ。

”Part of the success of the next international treaty will depend on enacting an accounting practice to verify that countries are actively reducing their emissions below their Business As Usual scenarios. At the Center for American Progress, we have long argued that in addition to a carbon cap and trading scheme, a complimentary suite of policies is necessary to achieve adequate levels, particularly in the near and midterm of emissions reductions.
Complementary policies are not merely complementary, as the term suggests.they are central to reducing emissions to adequate levels.”キャップ&トレード排出権取引と、補完的な政策のともに重要である。

”Although the cap will bring U.S. emissions down to 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, if we include all the complementary requirements in the legislation, and strong implementation, the World Resources Institute estimates that we can get to 28 percent below 2005 by 2020.
If we take 1990 levels as our base, as the EU suggests, the cap plus other Waxman-Markey provisions bring emissions down to 17 percent below the 1990 rate.”キャップ&トレード以外の政策上積みがあるので、削減幅は90年比17%減もあり得る。


”The U.S. profile at Copenhagen should not simply be assessed only from cap and trade-related reductions, but should include all complimentary requirements, from renewable energy standards to building and appliance efficiency improvements, and if Congress fails to enact comprehensive cap and trade legislation, from the direct regulation of CO2 emissions by the EPA that would result, particularly from coal fired power plants.”米国は仮にワックスマン・マーキー法案が葬り去られたら、EPAによる火力発電所規制を含む補完的な政策で、コペンハーゲンに臨むだろう。

”At the Center for American Progress, we propose the idea of “Carbon Cap Equivalents”as a way of profiling a country’s commitment to meeting emissions reductions. This would entail adding up the full range of supplemental and complimentary proposals to each country’s carbon cap, and converting this into one comparable figure of what these emissions reductions would effectively amount to if they had been the result of a carbon cap alone.”

”I’d like to conclude by underscoring that the challenge we face, as an international community, is unprecedented in size and scope. Global cooperation and commitment are the only paths to creating a safer, more sustainable future.
That said, we also face an enormous opportunity. one that has the potential to revive our global economy, improve the lives of millions of the world’s inhabitants, and save our fragile ecosystems from climate-related disasters. Inaction at this juncture would be the worst possible solution.
Rather, we must come to the table with bold, innovative ideas and a cooperative spirit to address this challenge. We need a revolution of technological innovation in the energy sector, and we need a profound change in our culture and ethics that emphasizes our connectivity and global common good.
We must reevaluate our old assumptions about what is possible, and I appreciate that conferences like these assist with that process.
And I'm pleased to say that, once again, the United States is prepared to be a leading voice in the discussion.”米国はリーダーシップを取る準備が出来ている。

---
 
●CAPのHPで用語を検索してみると以下の記事がありました。
Counting the Real Progress on Climate Action
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/05/counting_progress.html
”What we essentially need is a different accounting measure which will show the full potential of the legislation to make reductions in emissions below business-as-usual, or BAU scenarios by the energy provisions of the bill plus a flexible architecture in the legislation which can get more cuts down the road. We suggest measuring such progress using “carbon cap equivalents” as a way of profiling a country’s commitment to meeting emissions reductions.

With this carbon cap equivalents approach the better measure of what each country is doing is derived by adding up the full range of supplemental and complementary proposals to each country’s carbon cap and converting this into one comparable figure of what these emissions reductions would effectively amount to if they had been the result of a carbon cap alone. The modeling will be complex, but we should open up the language of the hoped-for Copenhagen treaty so that signatory nations can demonstrate their acceptance of the treaty goals through such equivalents—representing the full range of their policy profile to reduce greenhouse gas emissions—above and beyond their formal cap.”

 この概念をパッと受け取った印象は、あり得る限りのPAMs(政策と措置)のメニューの中から全体の採択率のようなもので、削減の可能性を評価しようというもののように見えます。
工場を止める、石炭火力発電所を止める、といった政策はその中にどう含まれるんでしょうねえ。

・Worldcahnging:China Begins Transition To A Clean-Energy Economy(中国はクリーンエネルギー経済への転換を始めている)
http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/009979.html
 にもチラッと書かれています。
[PR]
by togura04 | 2009-06-20 19:58 | 米国の動向