Climate at the G20: White House briefs bloggers on climate discussions

Above: G20 Voice bloggers at a briefing by Michael Froman, Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor, at the end of the G20 Summit on Friday, Sept. 25. (Photo by Julie C. Roth; Courtesy G20 Voice.)

Climate activists were underwhelmed by what came out of this week's Group of 20 summit in Pittsburgh in the way of formal climate change commitments.

True, the heads of state of the 20 leading developed and developing economies agreed to phase out fossil fuel subsidies "in the medium term." But they couldn't come to a consensus on climate finance -- aid from richer nations to poorer, directed at adapting to and mitigating the impacts of global warming.-- which is what it takes for something to make it onto the summit's final statement.

Stronger pledges on climate had been part of a leaked draft of the summit communique earlier in the week, and climate activists from Oxfam, Greenpeace, US Climate Action Network and other groups were aggravated that they vanished from the final version.

The G20 are asking their finance czars to keep digging into the issue when they meet in Scotland, in November, according Michael Froman, Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor.  Froman met with bloggers covering the G20 for a briefing, soon after President Obama's press conference late Friday afternoon.

The G20 "felt it is important that climate financing stays primarily in the UN context," said Froman -- the context of the UN's international climate treaty negotiations in Copenhagen in December -- where all developing as well as poorer nations will also be at the table to help forge the agreement. Although the G20 nations represent about 85% of the globe's economic output, there are over 160 additional countries involved in the Kyoto Protocol climate treaty.

According to Froman, there has been no decision made on whether President Obama will attend December's international climate treaty talks in Copenhagen.

The definition and the timeline of the fossil fuel subsidy phase-out are only vaguely defined at this point. Still, as single steps toward stopping global warming go, it will be a powerful one -- if the G20 make good on their pledge within the next 10-15 years. According to estimates from the International Energy Agency and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, nixing the subsidies would reduce global greenhouse gas pollution by 10-12% by 2050.

Removing these artificial price supports, supposedly worth around $300 billion across the G20, would help cool demand for dirty fuels while simultaneously making cleaner energy more competitive.  And it would free up massive public monies toward other (hopefully beneficial) ends.

In the formal G20 communique released at the end of the day's talks, the heads of state directed their finance czars to begin developing a more detailed phase-out plan at their November meeting in Scotland.  The G20 leaders will take the issue back up at their next meeting, in Toronto in June 2010.

Above: Michael Froman, Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor, answers G20 Voice bloggers’ questions. ((Photo by Julie C. Roth; Courtesy G20 Voice.)

Asked if the phase-out would apply to direct subsidies (more common in poorer nations), tax loopholes (typical in wealthier countries like the US), or what, Froman said the conversation hadn't advanced to those details.  But there will be a "key focus on both consumption and production subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption of fossil fuels," he said.

"In many countries, energy subsidies are a key part of social policy," to help the poor meet their energy needs, said Froman.  "So they want to be sure to careful" to avoid riots in the streets as energy costs change.

One strategy would be to provide the subsidy directly to the poor as cash income supplement, said Froman, who mentioned Indonesia as an example of a developing country working to implement such a policy.

The beauty of a cash subsidy policy, from an economic as well as economic justice point of view, is that it would aim the help right where it's needed most: at a nation's poorest citizens.  Governments generally frame fuel price supports as benefits for the poor; but since these are the people who can least afford fuel to begin with, middle- and upper-income citizens often end up benefitting a lot more.

Froman would not elaborate on whether the subsidies envisioned by the G20 include the kinds of tax loopholes that fossil energy companies enjoy in the United States. "We are looking through various programs to see which would fall into this category," he told the bloggers."

Under questioning, he acknowledged that the Obama administration "did do some consultation with areas [of the United States] that have strong fossil fuels industries," but didn't elaborate.

A lot seemed not to emerge from this week's many meetings -- no firm climate finance commitments, no outward progress toward the final terms of the next international climate treaty.  The world's nations are still playing high-stakes poker with climate policy, with the US in particular keeping its hand close to the vest, publicly.

According to Froman, the G20 leaders talked quite intensely about global warming during their afternoon together in Pittsburgh. The US, Europe, and Japan may continue to be in touch in coming weeks on greenhouse gas emissions, climate finance, and other facets of the global climate treaty talks, he said:  "Clearly there's a lot to do...we want Copenhagen to be a success."

But it's still unclear, despite all the speeches and meetins at this week's UN Climate and G20 summits -- what "success" in the climate agreement means to the Obama administration.