The Warm-Up Round

In advance of the momentous UN Climate Change Conference, world leaders gather in Italy to discuss global warming and what they're willing to do about it.

The United Nations Climate Change Conference, held in Copenhagen this December, is the Stanley Cup final of climate change meetings. This week's meetings in Italy – of the heads of the G-8 and the Major Economies Forum countries – are, therefore, the mid-season All-Star Game.

Global leaders face the challenge of reconciling their respective negotiating positions on global warming with scientific evidence from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The growing consensus is that global temperature increases should be limited to 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. To achieve this goal, global atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases must be limited at 445 parts per million. This emissions target means that global emissions would have to peak by 2020, and drop by 80 per cent by 2050.

Frankly, we can't do what the scientists say we need to do with the commitments that the politicians are so far willing to make.

Here's what I think is going to happen in Italy: a few of the global players will show off their speed. President Obama, for example, will claim a modest victory with the American Clean Energy and Security Act, passed by the House of Representatives at the end of last month. Also known as the Waxman-Markey Bill, and still awaiting the approval of the Senate, it sets a target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 17 per cent by 2020, 42 per cent by 2030, and 83 per cent by 2050. Estimates from the Congressional Budget Office claim that the net annual cost would be $175 per household or $22 billion, although 40 per cent of households would face almost no cost. Also, the estimated benefits are 1.7 million jobs by 2020 and savings of 240 million barrels of oil in 2020. That said, it remains to be seen if the bill's provisions for border adjustments or green tariffs are another sign of U.S. protectionism, and if the U.S. can afford the investments proposed in the bill if emissions allowances are not sold in a cap and trade system, providing economic incentives for emissions reductions.

Gordon Brown, for his part, in an effort to re-boot his government agenda, will profile his call for a global commitment of $100 billion per year to help developing countries mitigate and adapt to climate change. He will also highlight his government's release of the world's first carbon budgets, and his role in pushing the European Union to commit to a 30 per cent emissions reduction by 2020 if the international community reaches a meaningful long-term climate change agreement.

Others will play defence, deflecting shots from non-governmental organizations or business groups. A few countries will sit on the sidelines, claiming the injurious effects of the global recession. Australia is the world's largest exporter of coal. This fuel supplies more than 80 per cent of the country's electricity, drives significant economic growth, and employs thousands of people. Although the Australian government renewed its commitment to the United Nations climate change process, it is now facing obstacles to reduce greenhouse gases. The Australian Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme passed easily through the Labor-controlled House of Representatives this month, but the Senate, which is controlled by conservatives and minor parties, has vowed to defeat the bill. As a result, like in the U.S., energy and climate change could be an election wedge issue.

Given the recent report from the World Wildlife Fund, Canada could continue to find itself sidelined by its lacklustre performance on the Kyoto targets and perceived lack of ambition when it comes to a new long-term climate change agreement. Although it is accepted in many circles that environment minister Jim Prentice is diligent, credible, and knowledgeable, it remains to be seen how the government he represents will position itself in the international negotiations.

Interestingly, governments in the U.S., UK, Australia, and Canada could face national or mid-term elections in the near future, and domestic politics could play a huge role in determining how these countries negotiate internationally on climate change.

All of this builds on the drama that began to emerge at the recent United Nations climate change meeting that took place in Bonn, Germany. Before the meeting, a draft negotiating text based on the Bali Action Plan (the culmination of the 2007 conference) was released to build momentum around the principles of equity, respective capabilities, and common but differentiated responsibilities. But it didn't begin to provide clarity about targets, technology, or financing. The revised draft text that emerged from Bonn is 200 pages long, and is littered with brackets and place-holders.

This text shows that the climate change negotiations are about money – who pays for what – and how the balance of power will be redefined. When it comes down to it, the make-or-break issues are emission reduction targets for developed countries and technology and funding transfers to developing countries. These are largely about what needs to happen, and who needs to do it. Observers are keeping their expectations in check, because there is some heavy negotiating to do before a deal can be reached.

What is fascinating is that, although climate change treaties and negotiations are the responsibility of federal governments, sub-national and regional governments are increasingly involving themselves in the matter. Premiers and governors are pushing the agenda where presidents and prime ministers often will not. Recent headlines have shown Premier Charest, in Europe, pushing for the federal government to engage provinces and territories; Premier Doer in the U.S., promoting free trade and cooperation on climate change; and Premiers Wall and Stelmach selling the benefits of the oil sands and carbon capture and storage investments.

The next six months are bound to see political leaders of all stripes jockeying for position on climate change. With the growing prospect of a federal election in the fall of 2009, and the plan to host the G-8 in 2010, Canada's federal and provincial leaders will be at the centre of the debate on energy and climate change, both at home and abroad.