Is climate change a zero-sum game?

Environmental Leader featured a story this week about how, overall, global greenhouse gas emissions increased more than three percent last year. China contributed two-thirds of that increase, boasting an eight-percent increase nationally in 2007 over 2006. What's more, according to the report's authors at the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, China has surpassed the United States in GHG emissions, churning out 25 percent of all emissions worldwide, compared with the U.S.' 21 percent.

Clearly, this little blog post can't tackle the mammoth topic of China's economic development nor its role and position in the international political-economic order. But it can ask a simple question: Does China's trajectory negate all the efforts underway? And more important in the long run, will China's path of increased emissions dissuade nations, NGO's and companies from reaching for newer and cleaner technologies and fuels, if all their efforts are balanced out by China's growing hunger for cheap energy?

All this China handwringing doesn't exempt the United States from its own responsibilities--the report referenced here also identifies the United States as the world leader in emissions per capita, ahead of the E.U, Russia, China and India. And there are some steps we in the U.S. can take: 1) Walk the talk -- we can only demand performance once we've established ourselves as real leaders in climate change solutions; and, 2) Win back friends -- we can't stage an intervention alone, we need old friends by our side and new friends to join the club.

But maybe the bigger issue is, is this study fair? Should total emissions matter more than per capita emissions? Do China's 1.2 billion residents need to be held to a higher standard than the 300 million Americans who have enjoyed as much energy and product consumption as they could afford for decades? Maybe the issue isn't about zero-sum, but about equitable standards. What do you think?