AIDG Blog [Appropriate Technology, Development, Environment]

While reading up on the goings-on at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Nairobi, Kenya, I realized something really embarrassing. I’d never actually read the Kyoto Protocol.

Here are five things you might not know if you haven’t read it either.

• There is also a Montreal Protocol. You may not know its full and formal name (The Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer), but you know all about its effects. This landmark international treaty, designed to protect the ozone layer, called for the substances believed to be responsible for ozone depletion, namely chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), halons, carbon tetrachloride, and methyl chloroform, to be phased out by 2000 (2005 for methyl chloroform). What I think is most noteworthy is that the ozone hole over Antarctica wasn’t widely known until 1985 and the much of the science regarding its causes was still speculative when the treaty went into negotiations in 1986. It just goes to show that when the political will is there things can go at warp speed at the UN. It is truly one of the most impressive moments of international cooperation. I get all verklempt just thinking about it.
• The protocol also calls for the “[l]imitation and/or reduction of methane emissions through recovery and use in waste management, as well as in the production, transport and distribution of energy”. FYI: Methane is 20+ times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than CO2. Check out my post about methane emissions from livestock.
• There is a Clean Development Mechanism which allows industrialized countries to generate emission credits by investing in emissions reduction projects in developing countries (Article 12). Even though the U.S. is not a signatory to Kyoto, we do have a few projects like that lying about. Check out the v. cool Methane to Markets program from the EPA.
• One critique of Kyoto made by the Bush administration isn’t totally crazy talk. The protocol does not require developing countries to meet specific greenhouse gas emissions targets. The argument was that the emissions of developing nations were low compared to industrialized nations and that they weren’t the cause of the global warming malarkey anyway. At first glance this makes sense, but then comes the “hang on a tick” moment. “Developing countries” includes huge emerging economies like China and India which are growing fast and will soon be amongst the top contributors to worldwide greenhouse gas emissions. I’ll spare you the “It’ll be a race to the bottom” part of the critique.
• The consequences of non-compliance are steep. “For instance, where the enforcement branch has determined that the emissions of a Party have exceeded its assigned amount, it must declare that that Party is in non-compliance and require the Party to make up the difference between its emissions and its assigned amount during the second commitment period, plus an additional deduction of 30%.”

* Cartoon credit: Drew Sheneman, New Jersey — The Newark Star Ledger

Bookmark blog post on:
Del.icio.us    digg    FURL    reddit    Stumble Upon