Breakthrough

Russia is backing out of a revised Kyoto that would put binding caps on its greenhouse gas emissions, according to a recent report from Reuters.

Under the current protocol, Russia is well within its emissions targets. Kyoto mandates reductions from 1990 emissions levels, and due to economic collapse of most former Soviet Union economies, growth and energy use have remained relatively low.

But Russia brusquely rejected any change in the framework that would put a check on its economic growth:

Asked if Russia would resist capping the use of fossil fuels, which emit the planet-warming gas carbon dioxide when burned, under a new climate deal after 2012, [Russian official Vsevolod Gavrilov] said:"In the foreseeable future, this will not be our model, no."

Supporting the rise of Russia's middle class is a more pressing concern for the country than staving off global climate change. Said Gavrilov,

Energy must not be a barrier to our comfort. Our emerging middle class... demands lots of energy and it is our job to ensure comfortable supply.

Sound familiar? It should. A Chinese official recently reminded us, "You cannot tell people who struggling to earn enough to eat that they need to reduce their emissions." Russia's people may not be starving, but for both the developing and the developed world, the economy is the bottom line.

The Russians may not be struggling in the same way as the Chinese, but the two countries' statements speak to an obvious truth about politics: governments are under a lot more pressure to grow their economies than to be green and reduce emissions. Ignoring this basic political truth is akin to banging your head against a brick wall. If the Kyoto framework insists on reducing emissions by pure muscle, throwing desire for growth and prosperity to the wind, than it is doomed. Gavrilov gives us a much more sensible way to think about it:

We see (Kyoto) as a means, not as an end in itself... It is a way to get new technology for our industries.

It's not that these countries want to pollute -- but it must make economic sense for them to avoid doing so. That's why Russia has called for other industrialized nations to invest in innovation, as China recently did. We'd be wise to heed that call. Developed nations can reduce their own emissions all they want, and they certainly should -- but if the choice continues to be between reduced emissions and economic growth, then we're fighting an uphill battle. The United States has the resources to invest in cheap energy solutions, and doing so would be the biggest possible impact we could have on the climate challenge.