[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 89 (Monday, June 23, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Page S6084]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  CLIMATE ISSUES AT THE DENVER SUMMIT

  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, press reports today from the annual economic 
summit of the world's major industrial powers in Denver indicate that 
there was pressure on the United States from some of our allies to make 
new commitments to deep cutbacks on greenhouse gas emissions, 
specifically, carbon dioxide emissions. It is unfortunate that some of 
our allies, including the French in particular, chose this forum to 
change the terms of international dialogue on this issue. I commend 
President Clinton for resisting these surprising, new pressure tactics 
to shortcut the progress towards a reasonable solution at Kyoto and to 
try to force the United States to endorse an immediate commitment to 
unworkable new goals, thereby, shredding the negotiating process. We 
and the French are both part of negotiations intended as a follow-up to 
the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the so-
called Rio Pact, signed in 1992, and approved by the Senate. The Rio 
Pact called upon the industrialized nations to aim to reduce their 
greenhouse gas emissions to their 1990 levels by the year 2000, a goal 
which will not be achieved by the U.S. or by most of the industrialized 
nations.
  As a result of the failure of most of the industrialized world to 
meet this voluntary commitment to reduce Carbon dioxide emissions, the 
parties met in Berlin in 1995 to discuss the future direction of the 
treaty. In Berlin, the United States agreed that new commitments should 
be binding upon the signatories, but the developing world was excluded 
from any new commitments. Unfortunately, excluding the developing 
world, which will be the most important emitter of carbon dioxide 
emissions by the year 2015, exceeding the emissions of the OECD 
nations, was a mistake. The solution, if it is to be effective, must 
include all major emitting nations or it will fail to really get the 
problem under control. More than that, the perceived unfairness of 
forcing limits on the economies of only some nations, but not others, 
will cause political pressure to frustrate the approval and 
implementation of any treaty that is signed in Kyoto this December. The 
temptations of industries to flee from the U.S. for example, behind the 
safe non-binding walls of Mexico, for instance, or other developing 
nations, will both frustrate the goals of a treaty and unfairly 
penalize the developed economies.
  Therefore, Mr. President, the distinguished Senator from Nebraska, 
Mr. Hagel, and I authored a Sense of the Senate Resolution indicating 
that it is imperative for the developing world to be parties to any 
binding commitments made in Kyoto, that those so-called commitments 
should demonstrate unequivocally an action program to approach this 
problem in a realistic way, and that everyone should start with 
aggressive efforts to act on those commitments immediately and not 
settle for vague promises to return to future negotiations to get 
serious. While some countries have different levels of development, 
each must make unique and binding contributions of a kind consistent 
with their industrialization. The developing world must agree in Kyoto 
to some manner of binding commitments which would begin at the same 
time as the developed world with as aggressive and effective a schedule 
as possible given the gravity of the problem and the need for a fair 
sharing of the burden.
  Mr. President, in Denver during the last two days, some nations put 
pressure on the United States to agree to a whole new set of 
commitments beyond those agreed to in Rio, beyond the target of 
stabilizing at 1990 levels by the year 2010. Those nations sought to 
get the U.S. to agree to a 15 percent reduction by 2010, a level of 
reduction which would have very serious impacts on major sectors of the 
U.S. economy. There were no discussions of bringing the developing 
world into the play. I highly commend President Clinton for resisting 
these surprising new pressures to deviate from the Kyoto track, and set 
targets for very sharp new levels of reductions. Those nations should 
know that the United States Senate stands strongly behind the President 
in resisting these pressures. Reductions must be fair, well-managed, 
well-planned, and spread across the globe--spread across the globe. In 
addition, Mr. President, a wide-ranging new set of initiatives is 
needed to harness technology, to engage in new crash research and 
development technologies to mitigate the carbon dioxide emissions from 
fossil fuel combustion, as well as new energy efficiency programs, and 
cooperative programs between the developed and developing world. We 
have only begun to match the targets of carbon dioxide reductions and 
limitations with our technological genius and to engage in pioneering a 
new energy frontier type program aimed at using man's genius to tackle 
this global problem from every conceivable angle.
  I reiterate, Mr. President, that President Clinton is to be commended 
for resisting the pressure for these sudden draconian commitments.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________