Global warming fight is affordable, says new report

Aggressively cutting carbon emissions would cost only 3 percent of world economic growth between now and 2030, says a UN-sponsored study endorsed by 105 countries.

posted May 4, 2007 at 3:00 p.m. EDT

Page 3 of 3

Page 1 | Page 2 | 3

The report is expected to add impetus to efforts in the US Congress to take more aggressive action against global warming. "The warnings could not be more alarming," said Rep. Edward Markey (D) of Massachusetts, who chairs the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. "But this report also gives much reason for hope. We know what we need to do to protect the planet.... With scientists, business, and the American people all supporting action, Congress needs to get on board with real solutions today."

The IPCC's smorgasbord of solutions also includes some that have the potential to set environmental groups at odds with each other. Already, several have criticized the report's inclusion of nuclear energy as a helpful technology in cutting carbon emissions, citing issues of safety and waste disposal.

Others see a significant role for it. "Countries that have the capacity to use nuclear power have an obligation to do so," says James Connaughton, who heads the White House Council on Environmental Quality.

Biofuels present another flash point, even among environmental groups. Several see strong climate and energy-security reasons for shifting from oil-based gasoline and diesel fuels to plant-based ethanol or biodiesel. But a statement from one coalition of largely environmental groups largely based in Europe, including the Global Forest Coalition, Biofuel Watch, and the Gaia Foundation, roundly condemns the IPCC's biofuels option as "a climate disaster in the making." Expanding the use of biofuels, they argue, could threaten rain forests as countries replace large tracts with plantations of biofuel crops, such as palms and soybeans.

 

1 | 2 | Page 3