



The target Biden chooses “is setting the tone for the level of ambition and the pace of emission reductions over the next decade,? said Kate Larsen, a former White House adviser who helped develop President Barack Obama's climate action plan.



The 50% target, which most experts consider a likely outcome of intense deliberations underway at the White House, would nearly double the nation's previous commitment and require dramatic changes in the power and transportation sectors, including significant increases in renewable energy such as wind and solar power and steep cuts in emissions from fossil fuels such as coal and oil.

Anything short of that goal could undermine Biden's promise to prevent temperatures from rising more than 1.5 degrees Celsius, experts say, while likely stirring up sharp criticism from international allies and Biden's own supporters


The 2030 goal, known as a Nationally Determined Contribution, or NDC, is a key part of the Paris climate agreement, which Biden rejoined on his first day in office. It's also an important marker as Biden moves toward his ultimate goal of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.

“Clearly the science demands at least 50%” in reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, said Jake Schmidt, a climate expert at the Natural Resources Defence Council, a leading environmental group.

The 50% target “is ambitious, but it is achievable,” he said in an interview. It's also a good climate message, he said: “People know what 50% means - it's half.”

Whatever target Biden picks, the climate summit itself “proves the U.S. is back in rejoining the international effort? to address climate change, said Larsen, now a director at the Rhodium Group, an independent research firm.

The summit is “the starting gun for climate diplomacy” after a four-year “hiatus” under Trump, she said. John Kerry, Biden's climate envoy, has been pressing global leaders, including his counterpart in China, for commitments and alliances on climate efforts.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken, in a speech Monday, said the U.S. is falling behind China, the largest producer and exporter of solar panels, wind turbines, batteries and electric vehicles.

“If we don't catch up, America will miss the chance to shape the world's climate future in a way that reflects our interests and values, and we'll lose out on countless jobs for the American people,” Blinken said in prepared remarks for a speech in Annapolis, Maryland.

Nathaniel Keohane, another former Obama White House adviser and now a vice-president at the Environmental Defence Fund, said experts have coalesced around the need for the U.S. to reduce emissions by at least 50% by 2030.

“The number has to start with 5,” he said, adding, “We've done the math. We need at least 50%.”




Bloomberg, 79, was even more blunt: 2050 “is a good number for people who give speeches, but I don't know anyone giving those speeches who's going to be alive in 2050.”

Some Republican lawmakers call the focus on reducing U.S. emissions counterproductive, saying Biden's plan would raise energy costs and kill American jobs while allowing Russia, China and other countries to increase greenhouse gas emissions.


Some on the left think Biden is not going far enough.




Much of the proposed spending to address climate change is included in Biden's $2.3 trillion infrastructure bill.

If Republicans think less money should be spent on clean energy and infrastructure, McCarthy added, “then we'll have those conversations.”

Marcella Burke, a former Trump administration official who now is an energy lawyer in Houston, gives Biden an “A-plus for enthusiasm” on climate, but an incomplete on details. “We've had a lot of goals, but not a lot of strategy announced to get there,” she said. “So the jury is still out.”


AP Science Writer Seth Borenstein contributed to this report