Greenhouse Gas Emissions Up Sharply in U.S. Last Year

Emissions of greenhouse gases from cars, factories and power plants in the United States rose sharply last year, according to a new Energy Department analysis that aides said further complicates administration efforts to devise a strategy for dealing with pollutants blamed for global warming.

The 3.4 percent increase found in heat-trapping gases could put pressure on the Clinton administration to propose even more stringent steps to limit emissions. But many Clinton advisers are concerned that tough action to limit pollutants could have serious adverse economic consequences, and they might use the Energy Department study to bolster their arguments for setting less ambitious goals for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases.

The Energy Department report, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Post, is to be released today as the White House is completing its strategy for combating global warming. White House sources said they expect details of that strategy to be announced this week in Bonn, Germany, where delegates are meeting to negotiate an international treaty on greenhouse gas reductions that is to be signed in December in Kyoto, Japan.

While the White House proposal will reportedly include specific, legally binding targets for reducing emissions of gases such as carbon dioxide, the new Energy Department figures suggest that achieving those goals could be even harder than anticipated. Despite substantial improvements in energy efficiency in recent years, U.S. economic growth and new consumption patterns have triggered a sharp rise in pollution, according to the annual assessment by the department's Energy Information Administration.

"Although U.S. emissions have been growing since 1991, their growth accelerated in 1996," the report said. It described last year's 3.4 percent rise from 1995 levels as "the highest rate of increase in years." The total increase was just over 8 percent for the previous six-year period.

Pollution levels grew even faster than the nation's energy consumption, which rose 3.2 percent, and much faster than U.S. economic output, which grew 2.4 percent.

The report attributed the rise in part to a robust economy and higher prices for natural gas. The price increase has slowed the switch from dirtier energy forms such as coal, which is still the fuel of choice for many of the nation's electric utilities.

Another temporary factor was unusually severe weather in some parts of the country, reflected in a 6.3 percent increase in residential heating and cooling bills, the report said.

The recent increases in greenhouse gas pollution overshadow many of the gains achieved through energy efficiency in the past two decades, the report suggests. During the 1980s and early 1990s, the energy intensity of the U.S. economy -- as measured in tons of emissions per unit of the gross domestic product -- declined steadily. But total carbon dioxide emissions from industry, which plummeted in the 1980s as businesses switched to cleaner fuels, now exceed pre-1980s levels.

The growth in pollution runs counter to commitments by both the Bush and Clinton administrations to reduce emissions through voluntary measures. A 1993 pledge by President Clinton -- repeated by Vice President Gore two years later -- committed the nation to reducing its output of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by the year 2000.

Environmental groups and some Western governments are pushing for even more ambitious reductions in pollution as part of the proposed Kyoto treaty. The European Union, in a proposal rejected by the Clinton administration, wants to set emissions at 15 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2010.

Two months before the Kyoto conference, the U.S. position on targets had not been decided, and fundamental disagreements over the possible options caused a near deadlock among senior White House advisers.

White House officials prepared a memo for the president a week ago that outlined a broad range of options. That memo was refined over the weekend, administration sources said, to reflect the issues that had been decided and those still up in the air.

One senior official said the president has given "some direction" to his staff on key points, but the official dismissed speculation about the ultimate direction of the administration's policy as premature. "At the moment there is no policy," the official said.