The Environmental Protection Agency upstaged the opening of the Copenhagen climate conference by formalizing on Dec. 7 its finding that carbon dioxide—the fifth most common gas in the Earth's atmosphere—is a "pollutant" that threatens life on this planet through global warming.
EPA's decision was generally expected following its preliminary finding against the gas in April as the result of a study it undertook after the 2007 US Supreme Court ruling that greenhouse gases (GHG)—including CO2—are within the federal Clean Air Act's definition of pollutants. That opens the way for the EPA to regulate CO2 emissions under the Clean Air Act. "In practical terms, though, the EPA isn't about to start regulating carbon. And if it tries to do that without Congressional backing, expect a flood of litigation," said analysts in the Houston office of Raymond James & Associates Inc.
Like many skeptics, Raymond James analysts suspect the timing of the EPA's announcement was "designed as a way for President [Barrack] Obama to claim credit for something when he goes to Copenhagen" to speak at the climate conference. "Since the Waxman-Markey bill is not going anywhere in the Senate, the EPA ruling is probably the only source of leverage he can bring with him to the negotiating table," they said.
Obama originally was scheduled to deliver a tone-setting speech at the conference in a quick stopover Dec. 9 on his way to Oslo to pick up his Nobel Prize. However, his appearance at the conference was pushed back to the Dec. 18 closing when 65 other heads of state and government are expected to attend. The White House said the visit was rescheduled after recent pledges by China and India to reduce GHG emissions.
Proponents hope it will give Obama the opportunity to charm other heads of state into some climate agreement. But several energy analysts remained skeptical that any major agreement will result from the meeting.
'Back-stabbing' reported
Summit "security is apparently so tight that it took 2 full days before the member states stabbed each other in the back," Raymond James analysts reported Dec. 9. "That, at least, is how developing countries perceive the draft text of the agreement, leaked yesterday by a group of key negotiators," they said. "In a nutshell, the draft is more favorable to industrialized countries in several respects. It would require developing countries to agree to binding emissions cuts, which they adamantly reject. Also, it would give more power over climate-related development aid to the World Bank (which is dominated by the West) as opposed to the UN."
They claimed there is "no way" China and India will sign such an agreement, "which means the final text—assuming there will even be one—will have to look very different."
Analysts at FBR Capital Markets & Co. in Arlington, Va., said, "US-China competitiveness will continue to be the defining factor. One key to moving legislation in the Senate is the extent to which China and India appear ready to take on binding, absolute emissions caps in coordination with US reductions (rather than intensity reductions)."
Obama earlier proposed a 17% US reduction in GHG and $7-10 billion in mitigation funding for developing nations. But any agreement reached at Copenhagen "will be contingent on Congress passing climate legislation," FBR analysts said. Congress also controls funding mechanisms. "Thus, we caution investors against over-interpreting positive signals coming from the Copenhagen conference. The fundamental barriers to passing climate change in the Senate will remain unaltered by international diplomacy," said FBR analysts.
According to the Fundamentals of Physical Geography, 2nd Edition, CO2 increased more than 35% in the last 300 years, yet is still classed as a trace gas, comprising only 0.036% of our atmosphere. By comparison, methane—another GHG—increased more than 150% since 1750. At 0.00017%, it is the eighth most common gas; its primary sources include in order of importance, rice cultivation, domestic grazing animals, termites, landfills, coal mining, and oil and gas extraction. It's hard to say how much methane is produced from rice paddies since 60% are in India and China where scientific data on emission rates are unavailable.
The biggest GHG component, of course, is water vapor, which is 4% of the earth's atmosphere up to an altitude of 25 km. The only thing coming out the tailpipes of some of the new alternative-fuel cars is more water vapor.
More Oil & Gas Journal Current Issue Articles
More Oil & Gas Journal Archives Issue Articles
View Oil and Gas Articles on PennEnergy.com
