BBC reported that when the US initially signed the Kyoto agreement it pledged to reduce emmissions to 6% below the 1990 level. But since dropping out it increased the emissions to 15% above the 1990 level.
Bush's argument is that China is not requested to do anything about the reduction of emissions and that developing countries are not bound to it either.
But he neglects to mention that
a) the US is responsible for the more emissions than any other country (ca 36%), and that 1 place includes absolute and per capita emissions.
b) In China, for example, which admittedly is rapidly developing,an avarage person consumese only 10-15% of an avarage US citizen.
China has a much larger population too.
Still as BBC reports:
China's leaders recognise that climate change could devastate their society and ratified the Kyoto Protocol in 2002. In 2004 Beijing announced plans to generate 10% of its power from renewable sources by 2010.
Europe in the meantime reduced their emissions by 2.9% -- well below the pledged 8% but reduced nonetheless.
As the situation of GM and Ford vs. the Japanese car makers suggest, Bush's argument that energy efficiency is not profitable is false.