Troubled economy overshadows climate in G-20 talks

The G-20 summit in Pittsburgh was supposed to cast climate change action in a leading role but it ended up out of the spotlight, overshadowed by world economic recovery initiatives and warnings about Iran's construction of a second nuclear power plant.

Although the finance ministers failed to pledge specific new financial assistance for adaptation, mitigation and technology-sharing with developing nations, they did commit to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies, a significant move that could shift as much as $300 billion worldwide to investments in clean energy, health, food security and environmental protection.

"All nations have a responsibility to meet this challenge and we've taken a substantial step forward here," President Barack Obama said in a post-summit news conference Friday at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center, Downtown.

Eliminating fossil fuel subsidies such as price supports, tax breaks and equipment depreciation allowances to coal and oil and other fossil fuel companies, strengthens incentives for investment in energy-efficient technologies and non-fossil fuel energy supplies. It also would reduce global greenhouse gas emissions by 10 percent, according to the International Energy Agency.

The G-20 leaders also made commitments to share clean energy technologies, underscored their resolve to address the threat of dangerous climate change and called on their finance ministers to report back at their next meeting in Scotland Nov. 6-7, with options for climate change financing. Many environmental groups were quick to point out that the finance ministers were supposed to do that in Pittsburgh in preparation for the December climate change conference in Copenhagen but did not.

"We commend the G20 for its agreement to end government subsidies for fossil fuels, but feel that industrialized country leaders missed an opportunity to make real commitments to fund international climate finance," said Erich Pica, Friends of the Earth president. "While this is an important step forward in weaning the globe off of dirty fossil fuels, the lack of financial commitments jeopardizes an international agreement on global warming."

Annie Petsonk, international counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund, said eliminating fossil fuel subsidies is only one part of a bigger package to get public and private financing flowing to developing nations.

"We also need to cap emissions because that's what shifts private finance to clean energy," said Ms. Petsonk, one of many environmental group leaders who discussed the G-20's accomplishments during a series of news conferences and interviews at the August Wilson Center Friday afternoon. "G-20 leaders, and especially President Obama, must show they have the political will to drive this deal home."

Michael Froman, deputy assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser, said climate change issues, including the importance of "green jobs" and a "green recovery," dominated the leaders' lunch on Friday and he was upbeat about the G-20 accomplishments. He said the finance ministers also were asked to report back at their next meeting with timetables for the phase-out on subsidies.

Developing nations account for about $200 billion of the fossil fuel subsidies, while industrialized nations supply another $67 billion to $100 billion, a quarter to one-half of that in the United States.

"We'll be looking at our own [subsidy] programs in the U.S.," Mr. Froman said, although he didn't reveal the total subsidy amount.

Andrew Light, senior fellow and coordinator for American International Climate Policy at the Center for American Progress, was one of the few speakers to praise the accomplishments of the G-20 and the Obama administration without glass-half-empty reservations.

"Pushing for elimination of fossil fuel subsidies is politically gutsy in the U.S. and also at the G-20, where Saudi Arabia is a member," Mr. Light said, noting that the administration also is on the cusp of steering a greenhouse gas emissions reduction bill through Congress.

But most environmental groups were less enthusiastic.

"We're not going to get quite as much out of the G-20 as we would have liked," said Keya Chatterjee, the World Wildlife Fund's international climate change negotiations director. "Obama's speech to the United Nations sent a positive message, but this is a little bit of lost momentum. We can make up for what's happened here in Pittsburgh but we've got to see some progress in Scotland. We've only got 10 weeks until Copenhagen and the ball is in the industrialized nations' court."

Patricia Lerner, senior political adviser for Greenpeace International, which made a big splash in Pittsburgh when it hung a "Climate Damage Ahead" banner from the West End Bridge on Wednesday, was critical of Mr. Obama for not making bigger ripples of his own.

"Where's the leadership? Britain's Gordon Brown calls for a $100 billion a year commitment yet we don't hear anything from President Obama on that," Ms. Lerner said. "For the economic bailout the administration pushed a $1 trillion bailout, but isn't the planet too big to fail, too?"

Source: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09271/1001330-482.stm