Future U.S. climate change plans likely will hinge on the embattled Export-Import Bank and other programs that have faced increased congressional scrutiny in recent years, say environmental consultants.
A report issued Monday by consulting firm Climate Advisers discusses the role of the bank in any future climate change strategy for Obama or his successor.
Obama’s real challenge will come after the Paris talks in December, not before, the report says. It stresses the benefits of existing programs, such as the Ex-Im Bank, in helping to spur exports of clean energy, because they rely less on congressional appropriations. The environmental consultants say exporting clean energy to developing countries through such programs is the best route for increasing cuts in emissions that they say will be needed after the Paris talks.
Programs such as the Ex-Im Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation “create American jobs by exporting clean energy technologies to emerging economies,” the study says. And because “they are self-funded, they can theoretically be ramped up significantly without new funding from Congress.”
The study comes just days after the United Nations climate chief said any Paris agreement will not be enough to slow the rate of global warming to avoid irreversible damages by the middle of the century.
Many climate scientists say man-made greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide from burning coal and oil are causing the Earth’s temperature to rise, resulting in catastrophic sea-level rise, droughts and flooding. Reaching a deal among all nations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is a central goal of Obama’s remaining year in office.
The Ex-Im Bank has been in Republican crosshairs, and the reauthorization for the bank has been blocked for months. However, the bank’s reauthorization finally passed the House late last week. A similar bill is awaiting passage in the Senate.
Nigel Purvis, founder and president of Climate Advisers, said Monday that the study’s recommendations are not based on whether a program is popular but what would be “politically expedient” in a Republican White House.
In light of other alternatives to limit greenhouse gas emissions, Purvis said, Ex-Im Bank and OPIC would allow the next administration to act while not feeling obligated to fund more controversial measures such as funding climate change programs in other nations.
The study says the current U.S. political environment has made it difficult to secure funding for overseas climate-related programs, such as a $100 billion fund that all nations would contribute to under the U.N. to help poorer nations deal with climate change.
President Obama has relied almost solely on executive action to drive home his climate agenda, directing the Environmental Protection Agency to develop a suite of climate rules to limit greenhouse gases across a number of sectors.
Those moves are part of the commitment Obama made to limit emissions to secure a deal in Paris. But the United Nations said Friday that those commitments won’t be enough to keep the Earth’s temperature from rising above 2 degrees Celsius by the middle of the century to avoid the catastrophic effects of climate change.
“There is a gap,” Purvis said, and therefore a “huge amount of work that has to be done” during the climate talks to gain more commitments from nations. There has been talk of a system to cut more emissions over time, but it is clear from the new U.N. assessment that won’t be enough.
The next step has to be focused on finding new commitments to gain further emission reductions, which is where the Ex-Im Bank comes into play. The bank would help large emitters in the developing world such as India to build more solar and wind energy to reduce their electricity systems’ reliance on fossil fuels, Purvis said.
