World's Largest Emitter Research Articles

A European Perspective on recent trends in US climate policy

AbstractWithout the participation of the United States, for many years the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases, mitigation of global climate change seems hardly conceivable. Despite the US rejection of the Kyoto Protocol and the reluctance of the Bush administration to engage in post‐Kyoto negotiations, recent developments suggest that the US position towards climate policy might change in the medium run. This study provides an overview on current trends in US climate policy. We outline the main elements of national climate policy proposals and state‐level initiatives. Based on this overview, recent trends in US climate policy are related to the European approach to combat climate change. Furthermore, we elaborate on the aspects that may be important for Europe to design its own domestic and international climate policy in order to achieve the long‐term global goal of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations. While it seems likely that the US will take a leading role in international climate policy, it can also be expected to challenge the European position in many respects rather than to simply support any Kyoto‐type process. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

The contribution of Chinese exports to climate change

Within 5 years, China's CO 2 emissions have nearly doubled, and China may already be the world's largest emitter of CO 2. Evidence suggests that exports could be a main cause for the rise in Chinese CO 2 emissions; however, no systematic study has analyzed this issue, especially over time. We find that in 2005, around one-third of Chinese emissions (1700 Mt CO 2) were due to production of exports, and this proportion has risen from 12% (230 Mt) in 1987 and only 21% (760 Mt) as recently as 2002. It is likely that consumption in the developed world is driving this trend. A majority of these emissions have largely escaped the scrutiny of arguments over “carbon leakage” due to the current, narrow definition of leakage. Climate policies which would make the developed world responsible for China's export emissions have both benefits and costs, and must be carefully designed to achieve political consensus and equity. Whoever is responsible for these emissions, China's rapidly expanding infrastructure and inefficient coal-powered electricity system need urgent attention.

China's carbon emissions and international trade: implications for post-2012 policy

Growing international trade has been one of the most important drivers for China's recent economic growth. This growth has fed rapid increases in energy demand and carbon emissions since 2000. China is now the world's largest emitter of carbon dioxide. There is mounting pressure from some in the international community for China to take specific actions to mitigate its emissions as part of a post-2012 climate regime. However, emissions embodied in internationally traded goods have not been given enough attention in this debate. This article discusses the results of research to quantify the emissions stemming from goods that are exported from China to other countries. It finds that these emissions accounted for 23% of China's national total in 2004. The article sets out how this result has been obtained and compares it to the results of several other pieces of research to demonstrate the importance of this issue. Some pointers for international climate policy are then discussed, including the advantages and difficulties of moving to consumption-based emissions accounting, and implications for international trade rules.

A European Perspective on Recent Trends in U.S. Climate Policy

Without participation of the United States, the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases, mitigation of global climate change seems hardly conceivable. Despite the U.S. rejection of the Kyoto Protocol and the reluctance of the Bush administration to engage in Post-Kyoto negotiations, recent developments suggest that the U.S. position towards climate policy might change in the medium run. This study provides an overview on current trends in U.S. climate policy. Besides the main elements of national climate policy proposals and state-level initiatives the climate contents in the U.S. presidential candidates' agendas are outlined. Based on this overview recent trends in U.S. climate policy are related to the European approach to combat climate change. Furthermore, we elaborate on the aspects which may be important for Europe to design its own domestic and international climate policy in order to achieve the long-term goal of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations.

Embodied Environmental Emissions in U.S. International Trade, 1997−2004

Significant recent attention has been given to quantifying the environmental impacts of international trade. However, the United States, despite being the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases and having large recent growth in international trade, has seen little analysis. This work uses a multi-country input-output model of the U.S. and its seven largest trading partners (Canada, China, Mexico, Japan, Germany, the UK, and Korea) to analyze the environmental effects of changes to U.S. trade structure and volume from 1997 to 2004. It is shown that increased import volume and shifting trade patterns during this time period led to a large increase in the U.S.' embodied emissions in trade (EET) for CO2, SO2, and NO(x). Methodological uncertainties, especially related to uncertainties of international currency conversion, lead to large differences in estimation of the total EET, but we estimate that the overall embodied CO2 in U.S. imports has grown from between 0.5 and 0.8 Gt of CO2 in 1997 to between 0.8 and 1.8 Gt of CO2 in 2004, representing between 9-14% and 13-30% of U.S. (2-4% to 3-7% of global) CO2 emissions in 1997 and 2004, respectively.

Don't Grandfather Coal Plants

![Figure][1] The United States, the world's largest emitter of carbon dioxide (CO2), generates about half of its electricity by burning coal. In terms of capacity, the average coal plant is just over 30 years old. Although most have been renovated and upgraded, there is no escaping the fact that these plants are aging, and sooner or later many will have to be replaced. Since 2002, the U.S. Department of Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) has tracked the plans of U.S. electricity generators to build new coal-fired power plants. They report plans to build 154 gigawatts (GW) of new coal plants over the next 24 years, and 50 GW in just the next 5 years, a big jump from the 6 GW built during the past 5 years. Age is only one reason for this expected boom in new coal plant construction. In recent years, natural gas has been the fuel of choice for new power plants. High and volatile gas prices are now contributing to what NETL calls “the resurgence of coal.” However, for each kilowatt-hour generated, coal plants emit roughly twice as much CO2 as gas plants. If the United States builds a large number of new very long-lived coal plants, reducing future emissions of CO2 will become vastly more expensive than it needs to be. ![Figure][1] CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES Why should the United States limit emissions, given that other major CO2 emitters, including China, are not doing so? Although other nations are adding coal power too, unless the United States takes action, other nations, especially industrializing nations, cannot be expected to follow. Most U.S. utility executives believe it likely that CO2 emission constraints will be imposed in the United States within a decade. No one knows exactly what form they will take, although economists argue for a gradually escalating tax on every ton of CO2 emitted. But in U.S. politics, “tax” is a dirty word, so a more likely strategy is a cap-and-trade system with emission permits. Those permits will have to be allocated to start the process, and some planners of new plants may hope that their allocations will be proportional to their generators' emissions when regulation begins. Because permits will become more valuable as their numbers gradually shrink over time, that allocation scheme could hand a future windfall to firms that built substantial new capacity now. Of course, another possible approach to emission constraints would be to mandate controls only on new plants, while exempting existing plants for some extended period on the grounds that firms would otherwise face large “stranded costs.” Some investors may be counting on this or on the hope that such costs could be passed on to electricity rate-payers. Although a number of U.S. states are moving to control CO2 emissions from power plants, federal regulation is probably unlikely for the duration of the Bush presidency. However, with the changed political complexion of the Congress, federal legislation might be possible, stipulating that when CO2 controls are imposed, no plant built after 2006 will be exempted from coverage (that is, grandfathered), no matter what form future controls on emissions may take. Such a law would not prevent the construction of new coal plants but would strongly encourage builders of conventional coal plants to design them so as to permit amine-based CO2 “scrubbers” to be added later. It would also provide an incentive for those building new plants to adopt advanced “clean coal” technology such as integrated gasification combined-cycle or oxyfuel plants that can capture and sequester CO2 in deep geological formations. Federal legislation would clearly be best. But if that is impossible, a number of state legislatures might adopt such laws. A state-by-state approach is not optimal but could clearly place future liability on investors, not rate-payers, and thus send a clear message to those planning new plants and help to create political momentum for subsequent action at the federal level. [1]: pending:yes

The Persistence of the Kyoto Protocol: Why Other Annex I Countries Move on Without the United States

The United States, the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases, is not going to ratify the Kyoto Protocol in the foreseeable future. Yet, a number of countries have decided to stay on the Kyoto track. Four main explanations for this apparent puzzle are considered. The first is that remaining Annex I countries still expect the Kyoto Protocol to reduce global warming sufficiently to outweigh the economic costs of implementation. The second is that the parties, by implementing the treaty, hope to induce non-parties to follow suit at some later stage. A third hypothesis is that EU climate institutions have generated a momentum that has made a change of course difficult. Finally, Kyoto's persistence may be linked to the European Union's desire to stand forth as an international leader in the field of climate politics. We conclude that the first two explanations have little explanatory power, but find the latter two more promising.

China's greenhouse gas emissions

China is already the world's second largest producer of greenhouse gases, and its emissions will increase substantially during the coming generation. Rapid economic expansion will need much higher inputs of primary energy, and the continuing heavy reliance on coal will more than double the recent CO 2 emissions. Providing enough food for a population which is still growing at high absolute rates will require further intensification of farming resulting in higher releases of CH 4 and N 2O. Consequently, China will become the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases perhaps even during the 2010s, but almost inevitably before the year 2025.