As climate scientists descended on Bali last week to discuss emissions targets and climate change mitigation strategies for the coming decades, the consulting firm McKinsey released a report titled “U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much At What Cost?”
The document gives a solid play-by-play of what the U.S. will have to do to achieve a low-carbon economy by 2030 (a summary is here). If we keep to our current program, by 2030 our greenhouse gas emissions will rise 35 percent over 2005 levels. By adopting a few new technologies and approaches – including increasing fuel efficiency in vehicles, improving energy efficiency in buildings, expanding carbon sinks, and switching to renewable energy – the report says we can actually reduce emissions by 7 to 28 percent in the same period. That’s a total reduction of 3.0 to 4.5 gigatons. (It might be worth noting that the European Union has already committed to cuts of 20 percent below 1990 emissions levels.)
The price tag? While initial up-front costs could be high, McKinsey says “a concerted, nationwide effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would almost certainly stimulate economic forces and create business opportunities that we cannot see today.”
There’s one caveat: “Achieving these reductions at the lowest cost to the economy, however, will require strong, coordinated, economy-wide action that begins in the near future.” That’s consultant-speak for act now.
It’s a very thorough -- and needed -- report. It also gets at one of the principles behind Worldchanging: that many of the solutions we need to fix the world are out there already. But I come to it from the perspective of a journalist based in China, which suffers from its own set of problems -- many of which might be remedied with similar technologies.
China and the U.S. are battling it out for greatest greenhouse gas emitter. Depending on whom you ask, China has already overtaken the U.S. in emissions – and as the country develops, it’s only up from here. Unlike the U.S., however, China lacks much of the technology it would need to implement the McKinsey recommendations.
On the sidelines of the Bali negotiations -- which could set the stage for climate policy for years to come -- the China delegates are saying they’d like to see discussion of a fund for technology transfer. Here’s Reuters:
"We want to see a substantial fund for technology transfers and development," said Zou Ji of the People's University of China in Beijing, a member of his country's delegation to Bali.
"There's been a lot of talk about developing and spreading clean coal-power and other emissions-cutting technology, but the results have been puny, and we want the new negotiations to show that developed countries are now serious about it."
That fund could come under a "new body to promote technology transfers," he said, adding that it would take some time for negotiations to settle on specifics.
The technology transfer issue shouldn’t become an excuse for inaction in China. The country clearly has to implement other measures as its emissions rise. But as Americans discuss the McKinsey report, it would be great to see this idea get on the table as well.
