The Group of Eight (G8) summit brought the planet’s most powerful economies together last week to discuss issues like foreign policy, trade, and climate change. Buzz and speculation abounded before the meeting even began when the Bush Administration came out against host country Germany’s proposal to limit global temperature rise this century to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius) and to cut emissions to 50 percent below 1990 levels. Instead, President Bush proposed his own plan for a series of meetings from which nations would agree on an emissions goal and then figure out how to achieve that goal on their own. But German Chancellor Angela Merkel was quoted as saying that her proposal was “non-negotiable as far as I am concerned.”

Well, turns out her proposal was quite negotiable. Rather than agreeing on concrete cuts, the G8 agreed to “seriously consider” cutting emissions 50 percent by 2050. They plan to develop a global framework on emissions by the end of 2008, and they affirmed the importance of developing nations to limit emissions.

What happened? Where’s the hard talk, the aggressive goals, the accountability? They’re just going to “seriously consider” it?

It seems that most world leaders were so happy that the United States was even in on the talks that the rest was second fiddle. British Prime Minister Tony Blair called the agreement "a major, major step forward." Yvo de Boer, head of the United Nations Climate Change Secretariat said it was "a very positive outcome." The Financial Times editorialized that "the G8 summit marks a turning point on tackling climate change." Even Chancellor Merkel said she was "very satisfied" with the meetings.

Others were less satisfied. Daniel Mittler, climate policy advisor of Greenpeace International said of the meetings, “The U.S. isolation in refusing to accept binding emission cuts has become blindingly obvious…” Likewise, Philip Clapp of the U.S. National Environmental Trust said that although Chancellor Merkel and Prime Minister Blair were portraying the agreement positively, "President Bush didn't give them an inch. The best they could get from him was a statement that their 50 percent-by-2050 emissions reduction proposal would be `seriously considered.` That's a pretty tiny landmark."

Did the G8 leaders fall to the lowest common denominator? Would it not have been better for them to move forward without the United States and commit to Merkel’s targets?

Financial Times
G-8 Summit 2007
Guardian
Taipei Times

I saw it for myself: President Bush directed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), along with the departments of energy, transportation, and agriculture to come up with a plan to cut global warming emissions by the year 2008. As for the details…well, they get pretty vague.

Bush spoke a lot about fuel consumption, again alluding to our nation’s addiction to oil, but never called for a specific increase in vehicle efficiency standards. He repeated his State of the Union proposal to replace 20 percent of the nation’s gasoline with alternative fuels in the next 10 years. He summed up his plan:

“When it comes to the environment and energy, the American people expect common sense, and they expect action.”

But apparently not too much action: The Washington Post reports that U.S. negotiators are attempting to weaken a climate change declaration set to be unveiled at next month’s G-8 summit of the world’s top industrial nations. Specifically, U.S. officials want to strike a sentence about energy efficiency,

“Therefore we will increase the energy efficiency of our economies so that energy consumption by 2020 will be at least 30 percent lower compared to a business-as-usual scenario”

and language to cut carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions to 50 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Furthermore, the U.S. proposed striking an opening line that declares

“…tackling climate change is an imperative, not a choice. We firmly agree that resolute and concerted international action is urgently needed in order to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions and sustain our common basis of living.”

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, outgoing British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and newly elected French President Nicolas Sarkozy are all pushing for a strong statement on global warming solutions.

The heads of the U.S. departments called on by President Bush to come up with a plan said a draft should be available by this fall. But will it be real action? While the President is calling for change, his representatives at the UN are doing everything they can to stall it. We know political rhetoric when we see it, Mr. Bush. Fool us once…

CNNMoney.com
Washington Post