Copenhagen Could Change the Global Warming Debate
Kent Garber

Climate Change Carbon Footprint (c) M. Ryder
Climate Change: Global Carbon Footprint
(c) M. Ryder

Though many Senate Democrats were inWashington for the healthcare debate,Massachusetts Senator John Kerry was inCopenhagen with U.S. negotiators for the final daysof the international climate talks. Kerry, who chairs the SenateForeign Relations Committee, has emerged as one of the biggestchampions for action on climate change in the Senate, andhas joined with South Carolina RepublicanSenator Lindsey Graham andConnecticut independent Senator JoeLieberman to unveil a bipartisan plan for curbing emissions.

Kent Garber spoke with Kerry about hisexpectations for Copenhagen and the state ofclimate legislation in the U.S. Excerpts:

We've heard a lot aboutthe need for U.S. leadership in Copenhagen,especially from developing countries that say the UnitedStates isn't doing enough. What does that actually mean? Howdo you define whether the United States is, infact, leading?

I think the United States is leading now,through the president and the House and the Senate. TheEnvironment and Public Works Committee had a 20 percent [emissions]target reduction [in its climate bill]. Senator Lieberman and SenatorGraham and I put out a 17 percent target as a guideline within ourframework. So the House, the president, and our guidelines are all insync. We are saying the United States is going tostep up with real reduction, and we also need to contribute to some ofthe finance mechanisms in the short term for adaptation and technologytransfer. That's leadership. We also are pushing the verification andtransparency necessary to help the Senate and the House beable to look their constituents in the eye and say that we're joiningother countries in this, that others are also doing this. I think thatis going to be a very important component of what happens inCopenhagen.

You've been involved this yearin a number of high-stakes negotiations. What role do you hope to playin Copenhagen, and what do you think you can do,personally, to bridge the differences between countries that are so farapart?

I'm going to be in bilateral meetings in the course of the days I'mthere and will encourage a number of people with whom I've built arelationship over the last years to try to move on this. I think thereis going to have to be a lot of personal persuasion and a lot ofdemonstrated initiative by our country itself, all of which can helpbring people to the table, to an agreement. Everybody's got to dosomething, and everybody is going to have to do a little bit ofsomething that they don't necessarily like very much. That's the onlyway to get a good agreement where you satisfy the interests, which iswhat negotiating is about.

Most of the focus is on two bigissues: emission targets and money for the developing world. Which istougher to negotiate?

I think the financing can be morecomplicated. Once you've decided what you can do with your target,you're there. You've got a target. The president has already put thatout there. The target issue, I think, is reasonably defined. The financepiece is still in flux and yet to be defined, as is the verificationcomponent. And I think those are really central to getting anagreement.

You've recently come out with a bipartisan proposal onglobal warming. Was there a point this fall when you decided that youreally needed to try to get Republicans onboard?

Well, there'snever been a belief that we could do this without reaching across theaisle. There's always been a sense that we need to try to get as manyvotes as possible. We don't want to do this with a minimal number ofvotes. We want to do it with a maximum number of votes. We'd like tohave more and more people recognize the dangers of not doing anythingand embrace what we think is a very, very reasonable proposal.Ultimately, I would hope people would come to see that, as this getsbetter defined. Right now, with the healthcare debate, with other issueson the table, a lot of folks haven't really stopped to look at thisthoroughly. I think as more people take the time to do that, ifCopenhagen is successful, that will have an impacton what happens here.

How might the outcome of Copenhagen impact whatCongress does in the next few months?

It can be veryinfluential. If Copenhagen comes up with anagreement in which the less-developed, major-emittercountries--India, China,Brazil, Mexico--join up, ifyou have the major developing countries as part of this agreement, sothat you've covered the vast majority of the countries contributing toglobal climate change, then you really have an ability to change thedynamics of this debate. As long as what they do is verifiable andmeasurable and reportable, we will have an ability to know what theother person is doing, and they will have an ability to know what we'redoing. That way you can really measure where you are heading in aneffective way and hold people accountable for their actions. I think itcan be very helpful if they step up there.

The Environmental Protection Agency announced last weekthat greenhouse gases are a danger to human health. That means theEPA could begin regulating them. How does theEPA's finding affect the climate debate?

It does twothings: It sends a message to the folks inCopenhagen that the Obama administration is seriousabout continuing to proceed on this, and they have the administrativepower to do it. No. 2, it sends a message to members ofCongress that if they want assistance for their companies,for their consumers, for the transition costs, all these other things,they are better off sitting at the table and working it out withCongress than they are with the regulators telling them,here's what you have to do, because they won't have any of that otherassistance to help them, if that's the case.

Are you optimistic that Copenhagen will actuallyproduce a real agreement?

I am hopeful. I am very hopeful thatCopenhagen is going to seize this moment and thatthere will be a political agreement that is binding to the countries whosign it, and it is going to have real targets and real reductions thatpeople are signing up to. I am very hopeful. That to me is a very bigsuccess, if they come out of Copenhagen with that,in the form I've described, with the adequate verification and reportingand so forth.