Then future generations will view him bitterly as the man who, more than anyone else on the planet, ruined their health and well-being. That might save the climate and leave Bush's administration as a small historical footnote - an utterly irrelevant anti-science president.Īlternately, the US and the world might fail to overcome Bush's lost decade. First, the next president of the United States, together with Congress and the American people and the rest of the world, could sharply reject and reverse Bush's energy and climate policies.

Judging Bush on the basis of what he has done for our children, their children and the next 50 generations, he has solidified his record of helping ensure that billions and billions of people suffer the grim consequences of catastrophic climate change.īush will have one of two historical legacies. Judging Bush on his seven years of global warming denial and obstructionism, he has made a major step forward at the G8. And, of course, Bush famously reneged on his 2000 campaign pledge to regulate utility greenhouse gas. The world knows that Bush has been feverishly working behind the scenes for years to block any new international emissions accord. If the state of California can make such commitments, the G8 can. At a minimum, the G8 needs to establish firm targets and timetables that return to 1990 levels by 2020 and 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. Third, who really cares if the G8 pledges to share their vision and to consider and adopt a global 'goal' of a 50% cut in emissions by 2050? What we need to know is not what the G8 thinks the world must do but rather what the G8 itself is prepared to do by 2050 - and by 2020. In fact, we probably need a 50% cut from 1990 levels. Second, what is the baseline for this 50% reduction? Today's level of emissions? The text doesn't say. The language couldn't be any more watered down than if it had been in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina. We seek to share with all Parties to the UNFCCC the vision of, and together with them to consider and adopt in the UNFCCC negotiations, the goal of achieving at least 50% reduction of global emissions by 2050, recognising that this global challenge can only be met by a global response, in particular, by the contributions from all major economies, consistent with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities.' But here are three reasons this won't keep any insomniacs awake.įirst, the G8's statement on the matter was:

Some people seem excited by the fact that Bush signed a G8 deal to halve greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Now compare his alarm call to the nonchalant language of the Declaration on Environment and Climate Change from the G8: 'We recognise the importance of setting mid-term, aspirational goals for energy efficiency.' Translation: hit the snooze button.

Climate change by joseph romm