CSU is looking at a possible parallel with the U.S. in environmental policy.
The U.S. snubbed 175 countries in 1997 when the Clinton administration refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, which would have required the U.S. government to implement policy that would have reduced carbon emissions by a certain percentage established by the U.N.
The reason the U.S. demanded an exemption: because China and India didn’t have to comply.
Promises were made to establish legislation out from under the umbrella of the agreement to reduce emissions to acceptable levels by 2012, but with exemption from the pact, there is no binding clause that requires the U.S. to do that.
A similar pact, called the President’s Climate Commitment that 492 university presidents from across the country have signed since it conception in 2006, requires universities to comply with emission caps and waste minimization standards.
CSU has not entered the agreement.
The University Environment and Sustainability Committee is in the process of reviewing the agreement and evaluating CSU’s capability of complying with it.
The university claims to already be in compliance with many requirements in the agreement, saying that there may be no need for CSU to ratify the pact.
But if the university is already in compliance with much of the agreement, why debate becoming a part pact?
We at the Collegian believe CSU should agree to join other schools in achieving what the PCC calls carbon neutrality.
Don’t follow in the footsteps of the U.S. Sign the agreement.