How the United States’ climate response has been lacking

But far from taking leadership, United States has been one of the biggest laggards on climate action. Not only has it not cut down on its emissions so far, it has done little to meet its financial and technological obligations. It never ratified the Kyoto Protocol, and therefore never abided by the emissions reduction targets assigned therein. The Paris Agreement was negotiated largely on terms dictated by it, but it still walked out. It has rejoined the Paris Agreement now but its contributions to the climate cause have been extremely modest. The lack of enthusiasm from the United States is one of the biggest reasons why the world is not on track to meet the 2030 targets.

Historical Responsibility

Despite China emitting much more in the last 15 years, the United States continues to have the largest share of historical emissions, accounting for more than 20 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions since 1850. Around the early 1990s, when the first international rules on climate change were emerging, US accounted for more than 30 per cent of historical emissions till that time.

Broadly in line with the polluters’ pay principle, developed and industrialised countries with the maximum share of historical emissions at that time were asked to take the lead in reducing emissions. That group of about 40 countries came be known as Annex-I countries because they were listed in Annexure-I of UNFCCC. The 1997 Kyoto Protocol, the precursor to the Paris Agreement, had assigned specific emission reduction targets to each of these countries.

But since the US never ratified the Kyoto Protocol, it was not bound by those targets. And it did nothing to reduce its emissions voluntarily.

A recent assessment by UNFCCC shows that by 2020, when the Kyoto Protocol came to an end, the Annex-I countries, as a group, had reduced their net greenhouse gas emissions by about 25 per cent from 1990 levels. The contribution of the United States in this was next to nothing. Its emissions came down by just 0.4 per cent during this period, that too after including the effect of Covid pandemic. In 2019, US emissions were about 6 per cent higher than in 1990.

Of course, there are other Annex-I countries which have fared worse — eight of them — including Canada and Turkiye. But the United States alone emits about four times the combined emissions of all eight.

The US still maintains that it has met its 2020 emission targets. That is because it had pegged its target — 17 per cent reduction by 2020 — to a 2005 baseline, unlike most other Annex-I countries that use a 1990 baseline. So, the United States let its emissions grow by about 15 per cent between 1994 and 2004, and then made some reductions from that peak to claim victory. Had it not been for the Covid-induced drop in 2020, the annual emissions of the United States in 2021, the last year for which official data is available, would have been well over 1990 levels, as it indeed was in 2019.

Source: UNFCCC Data

This year’s Emissions Gap Report, an annual publication of the UN Environment Programme, showed that the US emissions were estimated to be about 1.6 per cent higher in 2022 than the previous year.

Modest Targets

The targets for future are not very ambitious either. The United States has promised to reduce its emissions by 50-52 per cent by 2030 on 2005 levels. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says global emissions have to drop by at least 43 per cent by 2030 from 2019 levels to retain any hopes of keeping the 1.5 degree Celsius alive.

The upper limit of US emission reduction target, 52 per cent, on 2005 levels translates to less than 46 per cent from 2019 baseline. That is just about doing the bare minimum and nowhere close to the leadership role that it is expected to play.

And even that is not certain to be achieved. According to the same UNFCCC assessment, mentioned earlier, current policies and measures by the United States could result in just about 20 per cent reduction from 2005 baseline by 2030. The United States is banking heavily on the Inflation Reduction Act which it passed recently to enable the emissions reductions that would help it to achieve the 50-52 per cent target.

Against Equity, Justice

Even if it does, the bare minimum act of the United States means that the global target for 2030 is almost certain to be missed. Meeting the global target from hereon would mean every country, even developing countries, would have to match the effort made by the United States. It is violative of the principles of equity and justice enshrined in the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement.

The United States, indeed, has been working actively in the negotiating rooms to do away with the differentiation between developed and developing countries that is at the heart of the international climate change framework. Even in its public utterances sometimes, the US has suggested that every country must be held equally responsible, at least for certain aspects of climate actions, and subjected to the same standards. That is the reason why, at every climate change conference, a lot of energies of the developing countries is consumed in fighting to prevent further dilution of the differentiation principle.

Fossil Fuel Guzzler

While Saudi Arabia took most of the blame for attempting to prevent a mention of fossil fuel phase-out in the final outcome from Dubai meeting, the United States has largely got away with its record on fossil fuels. It continues to be the largest producer of fossil fuels — oil, natural gas and coal taken together – and more than 80 per cent of its energy needs are still met by these sources. This has remained like this for the last three decades.

Yet, the United States has never faced the kind of pressure that India faces for its use of coal. In fact, till 2015, the US was using as much coal as India, and it is only in recent years that it has reduced its reliance on coal a little. But the shift away from coal has been compensated largely by natural gas and oil, and only partly by renewable energy.

Despite constant criticism, India has a far better record on fossil fuels than the United States. Data from International Energy Agency shows that about 27 per cent of India’s energy needs were being met by non-fossil sources compared to less than 20 per cent in the case of United States.

No Money

As the world’s leading economy, home to some of the largest global corporate houses, and the biggest influence on international financial institutions, the United States is uniquely positioned to mobilise financial resources for climate actions. But just like on emission reductions, it has not delivered on its climate finance obligations as well. A day after facing criticism for its paltry contribution to the Loss and Damage fund in Dubai, the US announced a US$ 3 billion commitment to the Green Climate Fund (GCF) for the next four years, by far the largest sum from any single country.

GCF is the main financial instrument of the Paris Agreement geared towards raising funds to help developing countries carry out their climate actions. It had raised about US$ 10 billion for its first four-year cycle of funding climate projects. In Dubai, it was raising money for the next four-year cycle. The US had promised US$ 3 billion for the first round of capitalisation as well but delivered only US$ 2 billion.

But GCF handles a very small fraction of the money that is required for climate actions, estimated to be a few trillions of dollars every year. It was the United States that, way back in 2009, had come up with a US$ 100 billion per year figure to be mobilised by the developed countries from 2020 onwards. That target has never been achieved though developed countries claim that it was reached in 2022. Developing countries complain of double-counting, repurposing and greenwashing.

A major concern has been the lack of money for adaptation activities. In Glasgow, countries had decided to double the financial flows to adaptation, but a recent Adaptation Gap Report showed that far from doubling, the money meant for adaptation had seen a year-on-year decline. The United States was among the countries that ensured that no separate financial provisions were included in the decision on Global Goal on Adaptation that was reached in Dubai this year.