U.N. climate talks in Bonn, Germany, are expected to go into full swing next month as nations gather for a conference to explore the possibility of a binding global climate accord.
But there’s a catch.
Oil and gas is one of only two large fields on the planet with no proven energy, and that’s why the U.K. has so far been one of the most vociferous critics of any nation participating in the talks.
“We are very, very concerned about the Arctic,” Prime Minister Theresa May said in a speech last week.
“The only way we can get the oil and natural gas out of there is if we get the technology out of it.
It is a key part of the development of our future energy system.”
May also said the U:lln’t support a binding agreement until it can see the technology of how it works, something that hasn’t been done since 1990.
That technology, she added, “is essential for getting the oil out.”
The British government is leading the negotiations for the Paris climate conference, which will take place this summer in a final effort to secure the backing of nations that have not yet signed up.
But other countries, including the U., are pressing to hold off.
U.C.I. estimates that the U, British, and French governments spent about $3 billion each on the talks, which are taking place in Bonneville, Wash., between March 8 and April 11.
Uptake in the U.-led talks has been slow.
While some countries have announced they will take part, the vast majority have made no concrete pledges, and the U hasn’t yet indicated its willingness to do so.
“I think it’s really important for everybody to see the progress we’ve made so far,” said Richard Burt, a climate expert at the University of Edinburgh.
“And the fact that we have made a huge step forward is a sign of confidence in the scientific community and the scientific process.”
The U.F.O. has said that it expects to reach a deal by April.
But for now, the talks are focusing on a number of issues.
They include: what to do about carbon dioxide emissions; what to make of the methane leaks from Arctic offshore fields; how to manage and manage Arctic warming; how much carbon can be burned without affecting climate; and what can be done to protect marine ecosystems and sea ice.
and its allies have argued that the Arctic has a unique vulnerability, including its proximity to the North Pole, which could contribute to the rapid melting of sea ice that has contributed to global warming in the past century.
A number of countries, especially the U.’s allies, are pressing the Obama administration to limit greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.
The administration, in turn, has been pushing the U-s to increase the amount of carbon dioxide emitted from power production, a goal it has long wanted to achieve.
That includes a carbon tax that would have a $15 a tonne levy on companies that burn fossil fuels.
The White House says it is open to discussing a carbon-pricing system, but not to the imposition of a cap-and-trade system that would require carbon emissions to be reduced by the U and other nations to help curb climate change.
The European Union, meanwhile, has said it will not sign up to the U’s “binding” Paris accord, a move that could make the U a non-signatory to the deal.
The group of nations is also seeking a new agreement on Arctic drilling, which would allow it to extract oil and other resources in the region.