Donald Trump has become the pantomime villain of the climate change story. At the World Economic Forum in Davos last week, the US president played the role to perfection, denouncing climate activists as “prophets of doom”, while Greta Thunberg, the teenage campaigner, watched on from the audience.
However, if you look at the numbers — as opposed to the theatre — it becomes clear that the battle to control climate change now depends much more on what happens in China than in America. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, China now accounts for 29 per cent of global carbon dioxide emissions generation — compared with 16 per cent for the US, about 10 per cent for the EU and 7 per cent for India. Even on a per-capita basis, the Chinese now emit more greenhouse gases than Europeans and have done so since 2014.
As the Trump administration likes to point out, America’s greenhouse gas emissions actually fell last year — albeit only by 2.1 per cent. This is largely because coal-fired power generation in the US has dropped sharply and is now back to the level that it was in 1975. China, by contrast, continues to open new coal-fired power plants.
Nonetheless, the Trump administration’s climate scepticism (denialism, if you prefer) still matters. The US has led in the construction of most of the important international institutions and agreements that have shaped the current world order. If it opts out of the global effort to combat climate change, others will have to provide the leadership to achieve an international deal.
China’s coal addiction and authoritarian system mean that it will struggle to provide a global lead on the climate. The Europeans are passionate on the subject but probably lack the organisation and the international heft to take charge. The EU’s discussion of imposing a “carbon border tax” — essentially taxing imports from heavily-polluting countries — could also lead to bitter trade disputes that will make it even harder to achieve an international agreement.
But somebody is going to have to provide leadership quickly, because the coming year will be vital to international efforts on climate. In November, the UK will host COP26, the latest UN summit on climate change. This will be a particularly important meeting because the participating countries are expected to recognise that the pledges they made under the Paris climate accord of 2015 are insufficient to meet the goal of containing global warming. At November’s Glasgow summit, they are meant to commit to more ambitious and detailed goals for the reduction of greenhouse-gases.
But COP26 will open just six days after the US presidential election. If Mr Trump is re-elected, it will confirm that the US has essentially opted out of global efforts to combat climate change. On November 4, the day after the election, the US is also scheduled formally to withdraw from the Paris accord. That, in turn, will ratchet up the pressure on the EU, China, India and the UK (as hosts) to keep alive the effort to combat climate change through co-ordinated global action. Adam Tooze, a Columbia University professor who is writing a history of international climate politics, says that November 2020 will be a “key moment in global history”.
One of the striking things about the climate debate in Davos was the way in which the topic seemed to hover over every session — even those that were ostensibly devoted to other subjects. Particularly striking was Ashraf Ghani, the president of Afghanistan, saying that his biggest fear is environmental degradation — even more than the long-running conflict that still has the country in its grip: “We used to have a drought every 100 years, now it is more like every five years”.
African politicians in Davos made similar points about the increase in droughts in the Sahel region and the way in which the changing climate is driving conflicts over land and water, and displacing populations.
After a day of conversations like that, I needed a drink. So I headed to a wine-tasting, only to meet a German winemaker who told me that climate change had prompted him to start planting vines in Norway.
The bad news for the planet is that the continued growth of the Chinese and Indian middle classes will increase demands for cars, electricity, meat and foreign travel, all of which will generate more greenhouse gases. The good news is that the Chinese government has said repeatedly that it understands that climate change and pollution are direct threats to China’s future, causing droughts, water shortages and rises in sea levels that threaten major cities, such as Shanghai. President Xi Jinping has also demonstrated some commitment to environmental action, through his efforts to improve the air quality in major cities such as Beijing. The Chinese government has also poured money and expertise into the development of renewable sources of energy.
In the months ahead, the Chinese and the Europeans are going to try to work together to develop new international goals for the reduction of greenhouse gases. If they succeed, the next UN conference on climate change may preserve the hope that an international community can still come together to tackle a common threat to humanity — whatever happens in the US election.
Weekly podcast
Sign up here to the new podcast from Gideon Rachman, the FT’s chief foreign affairs columnist, and listen in on his conversations with the decision-makers and thinkers from all over the globe who are shaping world affairs
Follow Gideon Rachman with myFT and on Twitter
Copyright The Financial Times Limited . All rights reserved. Please don't copy articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.