Distr.
LIMITED
FCCC/IDR.1/USA
26 February 1996
ENGLISH ONLY
GE.96-
Under Articles 4 and 12 of the Convention. Parties are requested to prepare national communications on their implementation of the Convention. Guidelines for the preparation of national communications and the process for the review were agreed on by the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change, by its decisions 9/2 and 10/1, and 3/CP.1 (see FCCC/CP/1995/7/Add.1) In accordance with these decisions, a compilation and synthesis of the 15 national communications from Annex I Parties was prepared (A/AC.237/81).
When reviewing the implementation of the Convention of the Parties, the subsidiary bodies and the Conference of the Parties will have this report available to them in English as well as the summary of the report in the six official languages of the United Nations. (These bodies will also have before them the executive summary of the first national communication of the United States of America and country-specific information drawn from a compilation and synthesis report covering all countries that have submitted national communications.)
1. The in-depth review was carried out between April and August
1995 and included a visit by the team from 22 to 26 May 1995. The
team included experts from the Philippines, the Russian Federation,
Sweden and the International Energy Agency.
2. The team found the national communication of the United States
of America to be generally transparent, well-documented and presented
in accordance with the reporting guidelines established for Annex I
Parties and recognized that the author country had put major
resources into the preparation of the background material for the
various sections.
3. The United States of America, having the world's largest
economy, is responsible for slightly less than one fourth of global
carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions (4520 000 Gg in 1990) and
has the highest emissions of CO2 per capita (20 tons
compared to an average of 12 tons in countries of the Organisation
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), among the Parties
that have submitted their communications. Another key factor
identified by the team was the fact that low energy prices in the
United States are likely to have created limited incentives for
energy efficiency improvements and greenhouse gas emission
reductions.
4. The team noted that greenhouse gas emission and removal
estimates are highly uncertain in several sectors where the United
States hopes to achieve significant reductions in net emissions (a
problem common to such estimates for all countries), but acknowledged
that the United States is putting a great deal of effort into
reducing these uncertainties. In particular, the team noted the
uncertainty surrounding United States estimates of removals of carbon
resulting from anthropogenic activity and believes there is a need to
develop common international definitions of "forest land" and
"managed forest".
5. The United States Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) builds and expands upon existing legislation and is primarily made up of a variety of mechanisms to promote and facilitate voluntary actions to deal with emissions of CO2, methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFC) and perfluorocarbons (PFC) as well as CO2 removals by sinks. Efforts to mitigate climate change in the United States have been hampered by the fact that the United States Congress approved less than 50 per cent of the funding required to implement the CCAP in its first year and that it appears likely that the second year of the CCAP will receive an even lower share. Moreover, funding to implement important pre-CCAP programmes, for example under the 1992 Energy Policy Act, has also been cut back by more than 40 per cent and the methane landfill regulation is yet to be issued. The
United States is now undertaking, with the participation of
industry and environmental stakeholders, an official review on the
status of implementation of the CCAP that will be made public in
early 1996.
6. The team concluded that the innovative nature of a number of
these measures warrant their consideration by other countries as one
element of a climate change response strategy. In particular, other
countries can benefit from the work the United States has done to
create milestones for each CCAP initiative and to develop systems to
monitor their implementation and effectiveness. Even so, the team
noted that the government is aware of the potential for
double-counting the emission reductions associated with different
voluntary programmes and the difficulty of separating emission
reductions achieved through voluntary initiatives from the baseline
emissions projection and that it has addressed this in its
assessment.
7. While most of the United States voluntary programmes have met
or exceeded their initial implementation milestones, it seems
unlikely that more ambitious future milestones will be met unless
these programmes are fully funded or modified to account for reduced
levels of funding. Major budget cuts for the institutions operating
them, notably the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), also represent challenges for the continuing
of the programmes.
8. While the industry response to call for voluntary actions has
been positive, many of the measures outlined in the CCAP are still at
an early stage of development. This means that industry has, at this
time, often made only very general commitments to take action to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
9. The team also noted the importance of state and local
governments in the implementation of the UNFCCC. In particular,
deregulation of utilities and electricity markets envisaged to take
place over the next decades, may have several effects on emissions,
although the total effect is not clear. Furthermore, these
governments also have responsibilities for, inter alia, building
standards, highway planning and speed limits.
10. While the team noted that the projections contained in the
national communication were methodologically sound and based on
reasonable assumptions at the time the CCAP was prepared, key
assumptions pertaining to economic growth, energy prices, and funding
for CCAP programmes need to be revised. As a result, the team
concluded that net greenhouse gas emissions are now less likely to
return to 1990 levels than was the case when the CCAP was released.
The CCAP had anticipated that energy-related carbon emissions would
increase by about 3 per cent between 1990 and 2000 under full plan
implementation, with this increase offset by reductions in other
greeenhouse gases. When the review was carried out, it appeared that
CO2 and HFC emissions had higher growth potentials. In the
course of the review, it was noted that energy-related CO2
emissions had likely increased in 1994, because energy demand in that
year was 1.5 per cent above the 1993 level. CO2 emissions
in 1993 were 4.1 per cent above 1990 levels.
11. The team noted that state and local governments are
responsible for most formal education programmes in the United
States, and that United States legislation restricts the role of the
federal Government in public education on the climate change issue.
Despite these limitations, several government agencies undertake
public outreach efforts on climate change. The team recognized the
crucial contribution of the United States to the scientific
understanding of climate change and noted that this work forms the
factual basis for many public education initiatives.
12. While the United States has worked hard to ensure that
multilateral institutions incorporate climate change concerns into
their financial assistance programmes, it remains unclear if the
United States Congress will authorize the funding required for the
United States to maintain its current level of official development
assistance (0.15 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP), according
to OECD/Development Assistance Committee statistics) and to meet its
financial commitments to multilateral institutions. The review team
was impressed by a number of United States bilateral assistance
programmes related to climate change, particularly the United States
Country Studies Program. Finally, the team noted that the first
projects have been approved under the United States Initiative on
Joint Implementation.
Comments offered by the United States of
America(1):
"The United States is pleased with the careful scrutiny and
useful review provided by the Secretariat and its review team. It is
clear to us that this report could not have been developed in the
same comprehensive and thorough manner without the advantage of a
country visit, nor would we have been able sufficiently to explain
solely through written materials how and why we made various
decisions in the course of preparing the U.S. Climate Action Report.
We also note that our own domestic preparation for the country visit
caused us to reexamine many of the underlying materials that were
used in the preparation of the communication. In short, the review
process, while still only in its formative stages, clearly serves a
valuable purpose.
The United States urges that the review teams be careful to
remain within the scope of their mandate: the review should focus on
the rigor with which countries have followed the agreed reporting
guidelines, and the validity of the analyses countries performed to
determine their present and future emissions of greenhouse gases. In
our view, it would not be appropriate for the teams to make policy
recommendations about the relative merits of one or another policy
choice by individual countries.
The United States appreciated the opportunity to make
editorial changes to the text of the report prior to its publication.
We believe that with such changes, the final product more accurately
reflects up-to-date circumstances in our country."
13. The United States of America ratified the Convention on 15 October 1992. The secretariat received its first national communication on 21 September 1994. The in-depth review of the national communication was carried out between April and August 1995, including a visit from 22 to 26 May 1995. The review team consisted of Mr. Rodito Buan (Philippines), Mr. Alexey O. Kokorin (Russian Federation), Mr. Ebbe Kvist (Sweden),
Mr. Trevor Morgan (International Energy Agency), Mr. Robert
Hornung (Consultant) and Mr. Peer Stiansen (UNFCCC secretariat,
Coordinator).
14. Since the United States submitted its national
communication to the UNFCCC interim secretariat, there have been two
political developments that are likely to limit the effectiveness of
United States efforts to mitigate climate change.
15. First, the United States Congress provided less than half
the amount requested by the President for the first year of
activities under the United States Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP).
Moreover, funding for several pre-CCAP initiatives included in the
baseline emissions projection, for example under the 1992 Energy
Policy Act, has also been cut by Congress. In particular, the
implementation of greenhouse gas emission reduction activities under
the aegis of the Department of Energy (DOE) has been hampered by
these initial funding shortfalls.
16. Second, Congressional elections in November 1994 produced
a new Congress that is likely to be even more concerned with deficit
reduction, deregulation, and cutting taxes. Although the President's
funding request for the second year of CCAP activities does not
attempt to make up for the funding cuts experienced in the first year
of the CCAP, it is still unlikely to be fully funded. Indeed, some of
the budget proposals prepared by the House of Representatives and the
Senate envision a 40 per cent reduction in the DOE's energy
efficiency and renewable energy programmes, while other proposals
seek to abolish the DOE altogether. The priorities identified by the
new Congress also appear likely to place significant limits on the
range of additional policy measures the President could successfully
implement to further reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
17. United States political and institutional systems can make climate change
policy-making more complex and difficult than in many other
countries. Although the CCAP was developed under the authority of the
President, funding for its implementation must be approved by
Congress. New regulatory initiatives or economic instruments that are
designed to combat climate change also may require Congressional
approval, which is often a time-consuming process.
18. Moreover, the federal Government does not control some
important climate change policy levers. For example, decisions on how
to allocate federal highway funds, set building standards and speed
limits are made at the state level and the electric utility industry
is significantly regulated by state governments. This means that
decisions taken at the state level can have a significant impact on
greenhouse gas emissions.
19. The review team noted that, despite these political and institutional realities, the United States had made a significant effort to involve as many interests as possible in the development of the CCAP. The CCAP was developed through an interdepartmental process coordinated by the White House that actively sought input from industry and environmental
stakeholders. It is expected that all of these stakeholders
will also provide imput into the first official review of the
implementation of the CCAP, to be completed by early 1996.
20. The United States has very low energy prices in
comparison to other OECD countries. For example, gasoline prices in
the United States are the lowest among OECD countries and electricity
prices are the second lowest -- primarily because of low taxes. These
low prices, coupled with climatic conditions and the fact that the
United States has one of the lowest population densities among
countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD) (both inside and outside urban areas), help
explain why the United States is much more energy and greenhouse
gas-intensive on a per capita basis than almost all other OECD
countries. As a result, there is likely to be significant untapped
potential for cost-effective energy efficiency improvements, if
energy prices rise.
21. Other factors, such as a population growth rate that is much higher than in most OECD countries (up to 1.1 per cent per year), will put significant upward pressure on
United States greenhouse gas emissions in the future.
Economic growth is currently more robust than assumed in the action
plan.
22. After examining the national communication and extensive
background documentation provided by the United States, the team
concluded that the United States greenhouse gas inventory is
transparent, well-documented and in accordance with the reporting
guidelines. Data are presented in the reporting format established by
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and are widely
available in both printed and electronic form. The presentation in
the CCAP made use of available global warming potentials (GWPs) that
have since been revised by the IPCC.
23. The inventory was compiled by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) using data gathered from
several federal agencies and departments, most significantly the
Energy Information Administration. Mandatory reporting of some
greenhouse gas emissions by industry also contributed to the
inventory in the industrial sector.
24. Carbon dioxide (CO2) accounted for 85 per cent
of net United States greenhouse gas emissions in 1990, and the vast
majority of these emissions were produced through the combustion of
fossil fuels. Activity data and emission factors for CO2
emissions from the energy sector are in general solid and reliable.
While the United States used a bottom-up methodology to calculate
CO2 emissions from the energy sector, it also presented
these emissions as calculated using the IPCC default top-down
methodology. The United States believes that this exercise provides a
useful check on inventory results and found that the difference in
results obtained through the two methodologies was about 1 per cent.
25. Almost 40 per cent of the greenhouse gas emission
reductions projected to occur as a result of the CCAP, however, take
place in non-energy sectors. The review team noted that greenhouse
gas emission inventory estimates in many of these sectors are, as in
other countries, much more uncertain than is the case with
energy-related CO2 emissions. There are significant
uncertainties surrounding emission factors in the agriculture, waste,
and non-energy industrial sectors that result in the creation of
large uncertainty ranges around specific inventory estimates. For
example, the United States has indicated that nitrous oxide
(N2O) emissions from the use of fertilizers was equivalent
to 14 000 Gg carbon (200 Gg N2O) in 1990, with an
uncertainty range equivalent to 3 000 to 60 000 Gg CO2
carbon equivalents, using a GWP value of 270. The United States is
making significant efforts to reduce such uncertainties through
improved data gathering and estimation methodologies. It has played
and continues to play an important role in the development of
methodologies in the area of emission inventories.
26. The team noted the problems of commercial confidentiality
that arise when there are only a small number of emitters of gases
such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFC) and perfluorocarbons (PFC). While
commercial confidentiality must be protected, transparency requires
that reviewers should have access to non-aggregated data. The United
States was very helpful to the review team in this
regard.
27. With regard to CO2 removals, the team noted
that the United States inventory of greenhouse gas sinks presented in
the national communication is based on detailed data on the wood
stock contained in managed forests in the year 1992 (excluding
forests in Alaska and Hawaii).(2) The
existence of these data allows the United States to calculate
CO2 fluxes directly by monitoring changes in the total
wood stock. The United States simply assumes that any changes in this
wood stock are the result of anthropogenic activity because these
forests are considered to be managed. The review team noted a need to
develop common international definitions as to what constitutes
"forest land" and a "managed forest".
28. The team also noted that the numbers obtained are uncertain,
as in most countries, because of differences between inventory of
full forest carbon pool (including below ground wood, soil carbon,
forest floor, green biomass, young trees, etc.) and inventory of
time-dependent emissions from the product pool. This uncertainty does
not change the fact that anthropogenic activity in United States
forests is creating a carbon sink, but it does have implications for
the size of the sink. Indeed, the estimate of the carbon sink
generated by anthropogenic activity in 1990 was revised downward in
1994. These forest sink estimates, as in most countries, do not yet
account for changes in the carbon content of forest soils or the
release of greenhouse gases other than CO2 from forest
fires.
29. The United States has not adjusted its inventory estimates to account for climate or the import and export of energy. Warmer-than-average temperatures in the United States, as in 1990, can lead to either greenhouse gas emission reductions (reduced heating loads in winter) or greenhouse gas emission increases (increased cooling loads in summer). Taking both heating and cooling into account, the Department of Energy has estimated that the
United States carbon dioxide emissions in 1990 would have been
approximately 25 million metric tons (measured as carbon content
only, equivalent to 73 MMT CO2) higher if evaluated under
the average climate conditions of the previous thirty years rather
than the 1990 conditions.
30. The United States revised its greenhouse gas emission
inventory in 1995. The revised emissions inventory
includes:
- greenhouse gas emission estimates for 1994;
- revised 1990 greenhouse gas inventory estimates based on the most recent global warming potentials (GWP) developed by the IPCC;
- revised estimates of 1990 carbon removal numbers;
- revised estimates of 1990 HFC and PFC numbers;
- emission estimates for sulphur hexafluoride (SF6);
- removal estimates associated with carbon storage in wood
products.
31. CO2 emissions in the United States increased in
1994 according to preliminary data, largely because energy demand in
1994 was 1.5 per cent higher than in 1993. CO2 emissions
in 1993 were 4.1 per cent above 1990 levels.
32. The team examined the United States national communication and
background documentation and concluded that the United States has
generally followed the reporting guidelines with respect to policies
and measures. Although the national communication did not contain
extensive information on the status of implementation of CCAP actions
and the milestones that will be used to assess their progress, this
information was provided in detail to the team in the course of its
visit. Some of this additional information is presented below. The
team believes that an examination of the milestones developed by the
United States to monitor the implementation of CCAP actions could be
a source of ideas and methods for other countries.
33. The CCAP was developed in consultation with industry and
environmental groups and outlines a comprehensive set of measures to
deal with emissions of CO2, methane (CH4),
nitrous oxide (N2O), HFCs and PFCs, as well as
CO2 removals. Many of these measures build on, or expand
upon, existing programmes implemented under the 1990 Clean Air Act,
the 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, and the
1992 Energy Policy Act.
34. The vast majority of the measures included in the CCAP are
voluntary and represent a creative response to the political climate
that existed at the time of their development and the uncertainties
associated with greenhouse gas emission levels and possible
mitigation options. They also reflect the President's view that there
is a wide range of cost-effective opportunities to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions that are not being implemented because of market
barriers such as a lack of information. The review team concluded
that the innovative nature of a number of these measures warrant
their consideration by other countries as one element of their
climate change response strategies.
35. The voluntary approach in the United States includes a variety
of different mechanisms to promote and encourage voluntary action.
Foundation programmes, such as "Climate Challenge" and "Climate
Wise", encourage industries to independently develop comprehensive
plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to report on the results
of those actions. By the end of 1995, 104 utilities (representing
nearly 60 per cent of utility carbon emissions) had submitted action
plans under the "Climate Challenge" programme, and 13 industrial
energy users (representing approximately 4 per cent of total
energy-use) had submitted plans under the "Climate Wise"
programme.
36. The "Star" programmes of the EPA are targeted at specific
industries or specific end-users of energy. These programmes commit
industry to examining actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and
implement all actions that are found to be cost-effective. Other
targeted programmes, such as the DOE "Motor Challenge" and "NICE 3",
provide financial assistance to industry to design and develop
demonstration projects that can illustrate to others the economic
benefits of taking action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The
important global role of the United States in technology development
and dissemination ensures that these initiatives will also have an
important influence beyond the United States borders.
37. Implementation of the "voluntary approach" in the United
States has been strongly affected by Congressional decisions on
funding for these programmes. While CCAP programmes implemented by
the EPA received full funding for their implementation in the first
year, most DOE programmes received only partial funding. It appears
quite likely that both the DOE and the EPA will only receive partial
funding for the second year of implementation. Although many
voluntary programmes met or exceeded their modest initial first-year
milestones for implementation, it is unlikely that these programmes
will be able to meet their more ambitious future milestones and
greenhouse gas emission reduction targets unless full funding is
provided, or if the measures are modified to account for reduced
funding levels.
38. While the industry response to voluntary actions has been
positive, many of the measures outlined in the CCAP are still at an
early stage of development. This means that industry has, at this
time, often made only very general commitments to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions. More specific commitments, and their implementation,
are expected in the years ahead.
39. The United States is rightly putting a great deal of effort into the development and operation of monitoring systems to assess the progress of voluntary programmes in meeting the milestones established for them. Detailed reporting requirements have been established within some voluntary programmes and third-party verification of actions taken is required by others. In many programmes, economic benefits and reductions in other air pollutants are also being monitored. Efforts are now under way in the United States to create a comprehensive monitoring system that will facilitate the assessment of progress of all CCAP programmes and be publicly accessible through electronic media. The team believes that other countries can benefit from an examination of the United States monitoring system.
However, that there are many methodological difficulties
associated with monitoring the effectiveness of voluntary
programmes.
40. The CCAP included two measures that required action by the
Congress: approval of a new landfill rule and new legislation
removing the tax subsidy for employer-provided parking. The team
noted that neither of these measures has been put into effect, and
that the latter is unlikely to reappear before Congress until
1996.
41. The United States has always been very clear that the CCAP is
an evolving document that will have to be regularly reviewed and
updated. The first review occur red in 1995 (after the team had
carried out its review of the national communication), with input
industry and environmental groups, and the results will be made
public in early 1996. This document will provide a clear status
report on existing measures under the CCAP and is expected to include
possible further measures that the United States could take to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions in the short and longer term.
42. If commitments for further measures are made in the document,
the current political context in the United States means they are
unlikely to involve regulation, new taxes, or significant new
government expenditures. Accordingly, the United States is likely to
continue to rely predominantly on the voluntary approach for the time
being.
43. During its visit, the team was informed of a variety of
perspectives on the potential for additional voluntary actions to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions before the year 2000. While there do
seem to be some possibilities for cost-effective greenhouse gas
emission reduction not targeted by the CCAP, there is significant
uncertainty about the incentives for stakeholders to take such
actions and the potential for government to fund additional voluntary
programmes.
44. There is no space in this report for a comprehensive review of
the CCAP. Accordingly, this section simply highlights some of the
team's key findings with respect to the policies and measures
included in the CCAP.
45. Transportation accounts for 31 per cent of United States
carbon dioxide emissions and is one of the fastest
growing emissions source in the United States. The team noted that
the CCAP contains only four measures aimed at emissions from this
sector and that these measures are expected to contribute less than
10 per cent to greenhouse gas emission reductions under the CCAP.
Only one of these measures, a programme stimulating use of
telecommunications instead of travel, has been fully implemented, and
two of them still remain in the planning stage.
46. The national communication indicated that a multi-stakeholder
advisory committee would be established to explore other ways of
reducing greenhouse gas emissions from transportation. The advisory
committee, known as "Car Talk", was directed to produce consensus
recommendations by September 1995. While consensus was not reached,
the process did generate extensive discussion and analysis and its
result is expected to assist the United States in taking decisions
about further actions in this sector. It is unclear, however, whether
any commitments to implement specific "Car Talk" recommendations will
be included in the current update of the CCAP.
47. The United States has imposed fuel economy standards for
automobiles; these, specified under the Corporate Average Fuel
Economy (CAFE) programme have been revised several times since they
were adopted, most recently in 1985. While the CCAP contains no
commitment to revise these standards, the Government is working in
cooperation with United States automobile makers to develop a
prototype automobile within a decade that would be 300 per cent more
fuel efficient than conventional cars while continuing to provide the
performance characteristics and affordability of conventional
cars.
48. Reducing electricity use in all non-transport end-use sectors
is a major element of both the CCAP and the 1992 Energy Policy Act.
Moreover, a number of United States electric utilities have
voluntarily developed comprehensive action plans for greenhouse gas
emission reduction under the Climate Challenge programme. Fundamental
restructuring of the electricity supply industry in the United States
that could take place over the next decade may however pose a risk to
the future implementation of actions by electric utilities to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions.
49. Throughout the United States, changes are being contemplated
in the regulation of electric utilities that will increase
competition in the provision of electricity services to end-users. If
these reforms are implemented, they may have significant effects on
greenhouse gas emissions. Changes in price and cost structures within
a more competitive environment may change the demand for electricity,
shift investment patterns in research and development and new
generation capacity, and affect demand-side management activity. Some
of these developments could reduce emissions through increase use of
natural gas. It is also possible that these changes could, result in
increased greenhouse gas emissions by expanding total electricity
use.
50. While there is considerable uncertainty about the extent of
electricity industry restructuring and the speed of regulatory
reform, it is unlikely that the move to increased competition in the
provision of electricity services will have much of an impact on
greenhouse gas emissions before the year 2000. The review team
believes, however, that these changes could have significant effects
in the post-2000 period.
51. The CCAP outlines measures to control emissions of
methane from all major anthropogenic sources. While
landfills are the most important source of projected methane
reductions, the CCAP also contains measures that aimed at reducing
methane emissions from natural gas production and distribution,
ruminants and coal mines.
52. The single most important measure to reduce methane emissions,
increasing the stringency of rules for the recovery and destruction
of organic compounds in landfills, was actually implemented to reduce
emissions of volatile organic compounds. This demonstrates the
multiple benefits that may derived from such action. Although the
United States national communication indicated that the CCAP action
of promulgating a more stringent landfill rule would occur in 1994,
this was not the case.
53. The single most important measure to reduce nitrous
oxide (N2O) emissions by the year 2000 is not
part of the CCAP, but is instead a provision under the Clean Water
Act that limits agricultural runoff into freshwater sources. This
provision should help reduce the use of nitrogenous fertilizers and
pesticides if successfully implemented.
54. There is only one measure within the CCAP itself, namely
improving the efficiency of nitrogenous fertilizer use, that is
specifically targeted at reducing anthropogenic N2O
emissions. Although measures that reduce CO2 emissions
from fossil fuel combustion will also reduce N2O
emissions, these emission reductions have not been estimated in the
CCAP. While many countries have included measures to reduce
N2O emissions from adipic acid production in their
national communications, these measures are not included in the CCAP
because they have already been accounted for in the baseline
projection of future emissions. The United States has no actions in
place, however, to reduce N2O emissions from nitric acid
production.
55. The United States has outlined a number of voluntary and
regulatory actions to deal with emissions of HFCs and
PFCs.
56. On the enhancement of sinks, the review team
noted, that unlike some other countries, the United States does not
rely on afforestation or reforestation to increase removals of
CO2 by forests. Instead, the United States is focusing on
efforts to enhance the health of private forests by better species
composition, age, growth rate and volume of trees. This is being done
through measures that seek to improve the management of
non-industrial private forests as well as measures to encourage the
recycling of paper and other wood products. Efforts to enhance carbon
removals account for less than 10 per cent of the total net emissions
reduction projected as a result of the CCAP.
57. The team believes that the United States has respected the
reporting guidelines with regard to projections and estimates of the
effects of measures. Other countries could benefit from the United
States experience, but the team noted that United States efforts in
this area were very resource-intensive and involved the collaboration
of numerous government departments and agencies.
58. The United States presented two projections
in its national communication. The first was a baseline scenario that
is defined as expected net greenhouse gas emission levels based on
the implementation of all legislation already in effect and all
federal programmes funded or expected to be funded at the time the
CCAP was announced. The second projection was a combined policy
scenario that adds to the baseline the estimated effects of the
emission reduction and sink enhancement actions included in the CCAP.
On the basis of the background material provided by the United
States, the team judges these projections to be methodologically
sound and believes that their underlying assumptions are
reasonable.
59. As the United States indicated in its national communication,
however, energy-related CO2 emissions have increased more
rapidly than projected in the CCAP. In particular, the United States
has experienced higher economic growth and lower energy prices than
had been projected and some programmes referred to in either the CCAP
or the baseline scenario have been implemented more slowly than
projected as a result of funding shortfalls.
60. It is possible that changes in economic growth rate, energy
prices and other factors over the next few years could help bring net
greenhouse gas emissions back down to the levels projected in the
CCAP. The team notes, however, that there is a real risk that net
greenhouse gas emission levels may turn out to be significantly
higher than projected in the CCAP. Indeed, it is reasonable to
conclude that net greenhouse gas emissions are now less likely to
return to 1990 levels by the year 2000 than was the case when the
plan was released.
61. The October 1993 CCAP had anticipated that energy-related
carbon emissions would increase by approximately 3 per cent between
1900 and 2000 under full plan implementation, with this small
increase offset by absolute reductions in emissions of other
greenouse gases. From today's perspective, it appears that there is a
higher growth potential for energy-related carbon dioxide emissions
and chlorofluorocarbon replacements than had been anticipated in the
original plan. These factors, together with only partial funding of
CCAP programmes by the Congress, would seem to indicate that the
United States would have to take additional steps to return net
greenhouse gas emissions to their 1990 level by the year
2000.
62. The national communication indicates that, regardless of
whether the CCAP is successful in meeting the year 2000 target, and
despite the fact that the CCAP will affect net greenhouse gas
emissions well beyond that date, emissions are expected to be at
least 10 per cent above 2000 levels in the year 2010. The team notes
that the review of the CCAP will likely provide some initial guidance
as to the approach the United States plans to take to control net
greenhouse gas emissions in the post-2000 period.
63. The review team noted that greenhouse gas sink capacity in the United States is likely to remain constant or to increase for the foreseeable future. While total forest area is not expected to change significantly, the varying age distribution and productivity of forests across the United States should continue to create an anthropogenic forest sink. After declining significantly over the last 100 years, soil carbon in agricultural soils is also expected to remain stable or increase in the future.
64. The United States will produce new baseline and combined
policy scenarios, extending to the year 2010, for the CCAP review.
CCAP measures are expected to be included in the combined policy
scenario, not the baseline. Indeed, it is likely that two combined
policy scenarios will be prepared to reflect what would happen under
fullfunding and partialfunding for CCAP measures.
65. The United States has provided estimates of the
effects of most CCAP measures on an
individual basis, as well as the effects of the measures outlined in
the CCAP taken as a package. The United States has provided great
detail of the estimated effects of the measures in the CCAP in a
transparent manner that closely follows the reporting guidelines. A
genuine effort appears to have been made to generate realistic and
sober estimates of the effects of measures and the experience of the
United States in this area could be a source of ideas for other
countries.
66. Accurately estimating the effects of measures is a challenging exercise and the team recognized that greenhouse gas emission reductions can easily be double-counted. The fact that the CCAP is largely composed of voluntary measures makes the situation even more challenging for the United States. For example, there is a possibility that emission reductions under foundation programmes such as "Climate Wise" may already be accounted for in the emission reductions credited to specific voluntary programmes such as "Green Lights". The United States, well aware of this possibility, chose not to attribute any emission reductions to their "foundation" voluntary programmes. The United States has indicated however that it will make a cautious attempt to calculate the emission reductions associated with these programmes in the review of the CCAP.
67. There is also a possibility that emission reductions claimed
under voluntary programmes may already be reflected in the baseline
scenario. In other words, it is often difficult to determine if a
greenhouse gas emission reduction action would have occurred with or
without a voluntary CCAP programme. Industry representatives
indicated that CCAP voluntary programmes accelerate the
implementation of voluntary actions to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions but are not the factor determining whether or not the
actions would be taken in the longer term. In their view, the key
deciding factor is cost-effectiveness, which implies that most of
these actions would eventually be taken with or without a CCAP. The
review team notes that the United States is clearly aware of these
difficulties and is investing significant resources to ensure that
the estimated effects of measures outlined in the CCAP are as
reasonable as possible.
68. The team noted that substantial work has been done to assess
the potential impacts of climate change in the United States and that
responsibilities for such issues are well reflected in the steering
committees on science programmes. Most of this work concludes that
the United States is for the most part sensitive, but not vulnerable,
to the impacts of climate change. This implies that adaptation is a
concern in the United States climate change strategy. In an
assessment of 11 sectors with regard to the sensitivity and
adaptability of both human activities and natural resources, two
(industry and health) were identified as less sensitive (even though
health was reconsidered recently), seven sensitive and two
problematic.
69. While the United States is a world leader in adaptation
research, few studies have attempted to compare the costs of
adaptation strategies with the cost of greenhouse gas mitigation
strategies because it is difficult to assess adaptation costs
accurately when the regional impacts of climate change are highly
uncertain. Consequently, priorities have been given to shorter term
strategies.
70. At this time, the United States Coastal Zone Management Act is
the only piece of federal legislation that specifically includes
provisions to facilitate climate change adaptation. Nonetheless, the
potential impacts of climate change are being considered in a number
of other areas. For example, hydroelectric planners must now take
into account the potential impact of climate change on future water
levels. There are proposals for changes in the Clean Water Act to
improve water use efficiency, and initiatives to accommodate
environmental changes in the agricultural sector.
71. The United States did not directly fund the pilot phase of the
Global Environment Facility (GEF) but it did provide parallel
financing. After the restructuring of the GEF, the United States
pledged $430 million to its first official phase. United States
official development assistance represented 0.15 per cent of its GDP
in 1993 according to OECD statistics, approximately US$10
billion.
72. The team considers that the national communication went well
beyond the reporting guidelines in this area and found the detailed
description of bilateral United States programmes that are helping to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions in developing countries particularly
informative and useful.
73. The team was particularly impressed with the United States
Country Studies Program. This bilateral initiative assists developing
countries and countries with economies in transition in the
development of greenhouse gas inventories, the preparation of
greenhouse gas emission projections, and the identification of
actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or enhance sinks.
Fifty-six countries are now involved in the Program and the earliest
initiatives will reach completion in 1996.
74. The United States has clearly made climate change
considerations an important component of its international assistance
programmes and funding for initiatives related to climate change
mitigation has increased in recent years. For 1995, the United States
Agency for International Development is seeking $660 million for its
energy and environment programmes, $280 million of which is related
to climate change. The United States is also encouraging multilateral
lending institutions to incorporate the same concerns into their
lending practices.
75. The team noted, however, that it is not at all clear whether
the United States Congress will provide the funding required to allow
the United States to maintain its current level of official
development assistance and meet its financial commitments to
multilateral institutions associated with the climate change
issue.
Joint implementation
76. Since the national communication was released, the United
States Initiative on Joint Implementation selected its first seven
private sector joint implementation projects from 30 applications. A
second round of project applications closed in July 1995, with more
projects being approved in December 1995.
77. The United States has established a mechanism to monitor and
record the greenhouse gas emission reductions achieved through joint
implementation. The team noted that the time required to implement
these projects means that it is likely that most projects will not
reduce greenhouse gas emissions until 1997 or 1998 and will not have
anywhere near their full impact on such emissions before the year
2000.
78. The United States provided a detailed overview of its support
for basic and applied research on climate change in its national
communication and the team considers that the United States respected
the reporting guidelines in this area.
79. The United States is clearly a major contributor to international efforts on basic climate change science and applied technological research and development. Significant resources are being put into these efforts. The United States government is providing
$1.8 billion a year for basic climate research and $2 billion a
year for applied research. It should be noted that while the United
States Government accounts for 80 per cent of basic research on the
climate change issue, 75 per cent of the applied research is done in
the private sector.
80. The United States overnment's role in short-term applied
research is likely to decline in the future as there is a growing
sentiment within the United States Congress that such research should
be left to private industry. Funding for more basic research related
to climate change may also be cut.
81. State and local governments are responsible for most formal
education programmes in the United States. Nonetheless, the national
communication describes several programmes that the federal
Government is implementing to increase public awareness and provide
education about the climate change issue and the team felt that the
national communication did respect the reporting guidelines in this
area.
82. Many of the educational programmes described in the national
communication are closely linked with scientific research programmes
on climate change. The United States Government produces and
distributes scientific and technical information that can be used in
the public sector, although it is prohibited by law for acting as an
advocate for a particular goal. United States law does not permit the
Government to be a public advocate on the climate change issue. The
team noted that this situation does not prevail in all OECD
countries.
83. During its visit the team was told that one of the major
educational initiatives described in the national communication, the
GLOBE programme (Global Learning and Observations to Benefit the
Environment), was likely to have its funding significantly cut back
by the United States Congress.
1. This comment is included in accordance with decision 2/CP.1 (see FCCC/CP/1995/7/Add.1).
2. 2 This is different from the CCAP, where CO2 removal numbers are based on a 1987 inventory of the
forest stock.