These days China has clearly shown the teeth

After having watched for months the positioning of each and to be certain of not "drop" too many concessions, China and the United States, responsible for 40 of the global greenhouse gas release, alone unveiled last month a few hours apart control strategies against climate change that they will defend from this morning in Copenhagen.

On 25 November, the White House was the first to unveil its set. After announcing the quick visit of President Barack Obama December 9 on the eve of the prize Nobel in Oslo, the US Government said its offer. The United States proposes to reduce their emissions of gases greenhouse of about 17 by 2020 compared to 2005. Beyond that, Washington said forecast a decline of 18 in 2025 and 32 in 2030. The day after this statement, the Chinese authorities always anxious to not appear as the "bad student" of the international community, have changed their calendar and improvised a press conference to reveal that Prime Minister Wen Jiabao participate, him, at the side of the other heads of States, in the final negotiation on December 17 and 18. China proposes, it reduced 40 to 45 by 2020 from 2005 its "carbon intensity", i.e. the amount of energy consumed, and therefore the amount of CO2 emitted per unit of GDP.

Positive sign

If all of the world have seen in these two ads "a positive sign" for the crystallization of a possible agreement in Copenhagen, they also noted that by choosing as the reference year 2005, Chinese and Americans sat on the rules of international negotiations, which the year 1990 is the base of calculation. The unilateral amendment of this constraint allows the two capitals to hide the fact that CO2 emissions had exploded at the end of the last century. Compared to 1990, the American objective corresponds to a decrease in the emissions of only 3 to 4.

By opting for a reduction in its "energy intensity" or "carbon intensity", China has, it excluded any idea of a net reduction in CO2 emissions. The nation, ranked in 1997 under the banner of the developing countries, is forced to no reduction by 2012 under the Kyoto Protocol. She therefore promises only to waste less energy to fuel its economy. In 2006, it issued, according to calculations by the international agency of energy, 2.85 tonnes of CO2 for each 1,000 dollars of GDP generated when, for the same sum, the United States recrachaient that 0.54 per tonne of CO2. Even if the China succeeds in his promise, the increase of GDP, announced on the next two decades more than 7.5 per year, should, according to projections of McKinsey, lead to a doubling of its emissions between 2005 and the beginning of the 2020s. "We believe now that Chinese emissions can CAP after 2030 or 2040", blew last week a European negotiator who tried unsuccessfully to Nanjing to push the Chinese to more ambitions. The same experts recall that China had already programmed a reduction of 20 of its "carbon intensity" between 2005 and 2010, a target that it is respected.

Annoyed by these doubtful comments, the Chinese Government is constantly remind launched great incentive programs for renewable energy, ordered a modernization of its coal-fired plants, which produce nearly 80 of the electricity in the country, and continued support to low-emission cars campaigns. "Unreasonable" efforts, and in particular an immediate objective of reducing CO2 emissions, would allow the country to hold its first objective of increasing the standard of living of its population, argued Beijing. The authorities hammer that it is to the developed countries, which have both polluted since the industrial revolution, to reduce their emissions 25 to 40 as the claim scientists by 2020. An inaudible message to American voters obsessed by their country with China's trade deficit. And if the American President does not deny the need for commitments differentiated between rich and poor countries, it must also take account of the American public. Negotiators for Barack Obama team, who had participated alongside Bill Clinton talks of the Kyoto Protocol, is obsessed with the failure of their previous commitment. A goal of 7 between 2008 and 2012 was approved by the Clinton administration, could not be ratified by Parliament before be thrown into oblivion by the new President George w. Bush. "In the United States, an international Protocol has a force superior to national law, once it has been ratified by the Congress." Without the possibility of return back. Also, we cannot sign anything as long as we do not act on climate. "Alone ensures us that elected officials will be in a position to vote the future international treaty", explain democratic position in Washington. For the moment, the climate bill was adopted by the House of representatives, but to the virulence of the debates, the discussion in the Senate was postponed to the spring, after Copenhagen. It looks already complex both a commitment to reduce U.S. emissions may disrupt the American way of thinking. Accustomed to a model of urban planning built on gigantic suburbs, the use of the car as early as 16 years old and cheap energy, each citizen contributes to produce annually more than 23.5 tons of CO2, against 8 on average for a European.

Evolution of mentalities

In the "think tanks" of Washington, the experts dare hope that attitudes still began to evolve in the United States and China. They are symbolic proof of the difficulties of the Hummer brand, known for the greed of the engines of its huge 4 x 4. Being troubled by the collapse of its sales in the US, the American manufacturer, controlled by GM, has promised in a Chinese industrial. But the ambitious automotive group Tengzhong seems struggling to approve its investment by the Chinese central authorities, who do not want to see called into question, full Copenhagen, their oaths of green revolution. Beyond official speeches, the friction are still high between the two countries. These days, China has clearly shown the teeth. She has satisfied the India and the Brazil sign a parallel negotiating text stating that developing countries will tolerate never total control a priori or a posteriori of their policy climate, they refuse to commit to a reduction in absolute sales and oppose any idea of creating a tax at the borders, which is yet listed in the Bill American. While American companies of the equality of competition with the Chinese a casus belli, the President of the China replied that 15 of its emissions were attributable to the products sold to the Americans. And to any tax, it will require a change in the rules for this part is assigned to the Americans. The battle on the diplomatic front looks fierce in Copenhagen.