There's a long list of things George Bush hates about Kyoto. It would, he argues, have cost too many American jobs, been ruinous for the US economy, driven up energy prices, and stopped the country burning its vast stocks of coal.
But one thing really seems to sticks in his craw: China.
[quote]This is a challenge that requires a 100 percent effort; ours, and the rest of the world's. The world's second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases is China. Yet, China was entirely exempted from the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol.[/quote]
If China was not going to commit to reducing its emissions, then neither would America. It's a position he's stuck throughout his administration.
Until recently, China has taken a similarly strong line, arguing that ‘no new commitment' of any kind should be accepted by any developing country under a the post-Kyoto agreement.
Recently, however, China's position has been softening. In June, it published its first national climate change strategy, a document that signals growing concern about the potential impact of unchecked climate change.
According to the strategy, China has already experienced ‘noticeable' climactic change. Future impacts look worse.
Chinese scientists project that average temperatures in the country will be up by as much as 3.3 degrees by 2050, if climate change is unchecked. Much of the country will be wetter and sea levels will rise. But dry areas will get drier and glaciers will shrink or disappear.
Most worrying of all, the Chinese government believes that:
[quote]The possibility of more frequent occurrence of extreme weather/climate events would increase in China, which will have immense impacts on the socio-economic development and people's living.[/quote]
The strategy sets out a package of measures to control emissions. Together, they aim to reduce energy intensity by 20% by 2010, raise the use of renewables to 10% of total energy supply, control emissions from agriculture, and increase forest coverage by 20%.
These targets stack up quite well against America's. A pledge to reduce greenhouse gas intensity by 18% by 2012 has long been at the heart of George Bush's environmental policy, for example.
China is also eager to point out that it has only recently become a big emitter. According to the Pew Center: ‘In cumulative terms...China's contribution to global emissions is about one-fourth of the United States.'
But China's economy is notably inefficientin its energy use, well below world average. It needs five times more energy than the US to produce a dollar of GDP.
According to New York University's Alex Evans, meanwhile, China is soon to cross a critical threshold. Based on information from the International Energy Agency, he believes that its per capita emissions will surpass the world average sometime around 2008.
That could prove to be a big deal. Think of the long-term goal that is being floated at Bali - a reduction of emissions to ‘well below half of levels in 2000 by the middle of the twenty-first century'.
If the world is to meet that target, then it is certain that China will have commit to its fair share of cuts. It would be logical to expect to see Chinese emissions down by about as much as global emissions need to fall.
The contentious issue is when these cuts should kick in.
No-one seriously expects cuts to start immediately. Indeed, emissions will continue to grow fast in China for the next few years. Despite growing wealth, China is still far from being a rich country. It's home to 450 million people living on less than a dollar a day. That's nearly one in five of the world's poor.
The question for China is two fold. When is it realistic to expect Chinese emissions to peak? And what exactly should it agree to as part of post-2012 climate framework?
Here in Bali, the signs are that China is thinking hard about the answers. The delegation is adamant that it won't accept immediate binding targets, but has made conciliatory noises about making some kind of policy commitment.
That offer comes with a rider, though. It's only on the table if developed countries agree cuts of 25-40% in their overall emissions by 2020. (That's from a 1990 baseline that the US has already exceeded by 16%, by the way.)
When I asked the UN's Yvo de Boer about China's role, he was quick to praise its ‘constructive approach'. It had supported the development of a group to explore the future agenda, he said. It is has also prepared suggestions on what a Bali roadmap could look like.
If there is a blow up, though, it's a fair bet that China will be in the thick of the action. After all, rich country deal-breakersface a perverse incentive.
They can easily rile China by asking it to take on precisely those binding commitments they themselves are keen to avoid.