Search results

The Paris Agreement would not have come into being had China, the United States (US), and the European Union (EU), which together contribute more than half of all global greenhouse gas emissions, not signaled their intent to take major steps to reduce their domestic emissions. The EU has been at the forefront of global climate change measures for years having issued binding domestic emission reduction targets for 2020 and 2030. For many years, China refused to announce a target date for when it might begin reducing its greenhouse gas emissions, and the US Congress blocked action on climate change. In the lead up to the Paris climate negotiations, however, there were major shifts in China's and the US's climate positions. This commentary examines the climate policies of the three largest emitters and the factors motivating the positions they took in the Paris negotiations. Given that the commitments made in Paris are most likely insufficient to keep global temperature from rising 2 °C above pre-industrial levels, the commentary also considers what the likelihood is that these three major economies will strengthen their emission reduction targets in the near future.

The Germans have been early adopters of green standards, and the state has set ambitious renewable-energy targets. But industrial lobbies can still thwart regulations, as the Volkswagen scandal revealed.

The Paris Agreement would not have come into being had China, the United States (US), and the European Union (EU), which together contribute more than half of all global greenhouse gas emissions, not signaled their intent to take major steps to reduce their domestic emissions. The EU has been at the forefront of global climate change measures for years having issued binding domestic emission reduction targets for 2020 and 2030. For many years, China refused to announce a target date for when it might begin reducing its greenhouse gas emissions, and the US Congress blocked action on climate change. In the lead up to the Paris climate negotiations, however, there were major shifts in China's and the US's climate positions. This commentary examines the climate policies of the three largest emitters and the factors motivating the positions they took in the Paris negotiations. Given that the commitments made in Paris are most likely insufficient to keep global temperature from rising 2 °C above pre-industrial levels, the commentary also considers what the likelihood is that these three major economies will strengthen their emission reduction targets in the near future.

In the twenty years since the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, our scientific understanding of climate change, biodiversity loss, and desertification have improved, but international political efforts to stem the rise in greenhouse gas emissions, slow the rates of biodiversity loss and desertification, and promote sustainable development have met with only limited success. Given the snails pace at which the international negotiations are moving forward (especially in the case of climate change), what other potentials are available? Parallel to international diplomatic efforts, other steps must be taken to meet these pressing global needs.

"Welche Verbindungen bestehen zwischen Klimapolitik und Energiesicherheit in den USA? Die Vereinigten Staaten sind zunehmend von Energieimporten abhängig, um ihre Wirtschaft am Laufen zu halten. Gleichzeitig können die USA auf keine Tradition der langfristigen Planung in der Energiewirtschaft zurückblicken; vielmehr werden die Preise für fossile Brennstoffe angesichts alternder Atomkraftwerke zusehends instabil, die generelle Abhängigkeit von Energie steigt und die Regierung beschäftigt sich verstärkt mit Fragen der Energieplanung." (Autorenreferat)