In a year America has yet not so changed

7. The international community should keep in mind this figure in the numerous meetings that will come and go from here to the Summit on climate in Copenhagen in December. Including in G8 that opens July 8. President Obama won his battle to America to a greater energy sobriety by 7 votes in the House of representatives. Not less than 44 Democrats voted against the Bill entitled: "the american Clean energy and security Act of 2009", and not more than 8 Republicans crossed the line from their camp to approve it. It is far from obtained unanimous, France, to the Assembly, the Grenelle of the environment.

In an America that ceased to doubt the truth of global warming, which refuses any new tax, is suspicious of intergovernmental agreements and intensive civilization is based on coal and cheap oil, this vote marks but a turning unhoped-for. "It is the most important law ever passed to future generations," said Nobel laureate Al Gore.

In a year, America has yet not so changed. It is enough to hear opponents denounce "the highest increase of tax in American history" to understand that the gap between coastal and rural States has not disappeared. It took all the charisma of the President to take on the knife's edge the victory. July 1, the chance again tipped on its side, with the confirmation of the election of Democrat Senator of Minnesota. The arrival of Al Franken, firm defender of renewable energy, helps his camp to have a majority of 60 seats in the Senate, the minimum to prevent the Republicans to block the new laws. But the arithmetic will not suffice: as in the House, some Democrats elected in coal producing States are more than reluctant and the White House began to campaign to convince them that it is both ecological security, both to reduce the dependence of the countries oil to limit international instability that will inevitably result in the proliferation of natural disasters announced by climate change. Finally, even if the Senate votes the new law, it does sign nothing of his stance on a possible international agreement whose ratification requires no longer 60 but 67 out of 100!

In the meantime, the United States has no chance to cause large emerging economies in an international show, without agreement, a desire to make efforts internally. And the Senate would never approve of agreement on the fight against global warming without a commitment on the part of China and the India form. The "Clean Energy and Security Act" and international negotiations are inseparable. Between what the world expects the United States and that it is politically possible to obtain in the Senate, the path is very narrow.

Also, at the G8 Summit, the European Union, rather than denounce the weakness of the US involvement, should seek to help the President Obama. His Bill promises a reduction of U.S. emissions by 17 by 2020 from 2005, when Europe is committed to a reduction of 20 from 1990. In fact, back to 1990, the year of the Kyoto Protocol, 17 American becomes a lean 4 . The new US administration replied that the European Union, which will reach in 2012 8 promised compared to 1990, largely through the collapse of the emissions in the countries of the East, is more than to effort of 12 by 2020. If well between 2012 and 2020, she engages in economic upheaval still more ambitious than that promise the Europeans and that there is therefore no distortions of competition to fear.

What they are, the objectives will never meet the requirements of those who became major emitters. China calls for industrialized countries to reduce their emissions by 40 by 2020 and to devote 1 of their GDP to the transfer of technology to the countries of the South in 2020. The India continues to refuse any form of commitment. And each market its percentage. Would it not be time to abandon the fight of the percentages to evoke the only folder that will be really decisive in Copenhagen, namely the support promised to developing countries to help them take the path of a clean development Which is to draw the part of the future carbon finance which will revert to international aid. For the first time, last week, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown made a step in this direction, referring to funding of 100 billion by 2020. In truth, since 1997, year of the signing of the Kyoto Protocol, there is not much on the table. We are in 2009. Scientists are warning that the clock is ticking. The cost of new technologies began to be known. It is possible to discuss ways and means than the percentages of promised efforts. However, only Barack Obama can result in dance nation, now is the most endangered the lives of future generations: China, global greenhouse gas emitter. Which form of percentages, but not transfers of technologies or aid.

Anne Bauer is great reporter to "Echoes"