Wang Yanjia, William Chandler
{
"authors": [
"William Chandler"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "AP",
"programs": [
"Asia",
"Sustainability, Climate, and Geopolitics"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"China",
"East Asia"
],
"topics": [
"Economy",
"Climate Change",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}REQUIRED IMAGE
Breaking the Suicide Pact: U.S.–China Cooperation on Climate Change
U.S.–China climate cooperation is the crucial step toward a global climate agreement. Together both nations produce 40 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, yet they remain locked in a “suicide pact” -- each demanding that the other take responsibility.
Source: Carnegie Endowment
IMGXYZ1248IMGZYX The United States and China must make accommodations to curb greenhouse gas emissions if both countries are to break their “suicide pact” of self-destructive, energy-using behavior. Together they produce 40 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, yet both countries demand that the other take responsibility for climate change, meanwhile the threat of environmental disaster grows. For the first time, China is considering an emissions target while half of U.S. states have set their own targets—the time for a deal is now.
In Breaking the Suicide Pact: U.S.-China Cooperation on Climate Change, William Chandler, director of the Carnegie Energy and Climate Program, identifies practical, non treaty-based approaches both countries could take to cut their carbon dioxide emissions across economic sectors—with little financial impact. He argues that China and the United States should work together to set individual, national goals and achieve them through domestically enforceable measures and international agreements that prevent either nation from taking advantage of steps taken by the other.
Key Recommendations for U.S.-China Cooperation:
- Eliminate subsidies that discourage energy efficiency.
- Provide tax breaks for investment in efficiency and low-carbon energy and impose tax penalties on high-carbon energy.
- Make climate cooperation integral to trade policy, such as jointly setting production standards to limit the energy used to manufacture exports.
- Create partnerships between Chinese provincial officials and leaders in U.S. states on the forefront of climate change prevention to improve implementation of innovative energy policies.
- Promote market penetration of existing carbon emission reduction technologies and encourage development of new technologies by linking American laboratories more closely to Chinese markets to share research and development costs.
- Encourage banks in China to remove the regulatory cap on interest rates for energy-efficiency investments.
“U.S.–China collaboration poses no threat to the climate leadership of any region or nation or to global cooperation. It is a complement, not a challenge, to existing and planned emissions cap and trade systems. This act of mutual self-preservation would help the United States and China to avert climate disaster and the eventual sanctions of other nations if they do not act, and lay the groundwork for successful global action,” concludes Chandler.
About the Author
William Chandler is the director of the Carnegie Energy and Climate Program and has spent over 35 years working in energy and environmental policy.
About the Author
Former Adjunct Senior Associate, Energy and Climate Program
Chandler is a leading expert on energy and climate. As an adjunct senior associate in the Energy and Climate Program he supports Carnegie’s work in these fields, collaborating closely on projects with Carnegie’s offices in Moscow, Beijing, Brussels, and Beirut.
- Understanding Energy Intensity Data in ChinaOther
- President Obama's Chances of Success in CopenhagenQ&A
William Chandler, Taiya M. Smith
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- The Xi Doctrine Zeros in on “High-Quality Development” for China’s Economic FutureCommentary
In the latest Five-Year Plan, the Chinese president cements the shift to an innovation-driven economy over a consumption-driven one.
Damien Ma
- Japan’s Security Policy Is Still Caught Between the Alliance and Domestic RealityArticle
Japan’s response to U.S. pressure over Hormuz highlights a broader dilemma: How to preserve the alliance while remaining bound by legal limits, public opinion, and an Asia-centered security agenda. Tokyo gained diplomatic space through an alliance-embracing strategy, but only under conditions that may not endure.
Ryo Sahashi
- Kenya’s Health Deal Is a Stress Test for the America First Global Health StrategyArticle
U.S. agreements must contend with national data protection laws to make durable foreign policy instruments.
Jane Munga, Rose Mosero
- Trump’s Plan for Gaza Is Not Irrelevant. It’s Worse.Commentary
The simple conclusion is that the scheme will bring neither peace nor prosperity, but will institutionalize devastation.
Nathan J. Brown
- The Iran War Is Making America Less SafeCommentary
A conflict launched in the name of American security is producing the opposite effect.
Sarah Yerkes