Trevor Acy's List: Kyoto Protocol

• Kyoto could equally be the harbinger of an international model that rewards pollution-cutting innovation and pushes countries and companies to pursue cleaner forms of growth.
• Bush administration officials said the treaty would hurt the economy and is ineffective

  • Simply not true. Reducing emissions doesn't hurt jobs but in fact creates new ones.
• This is Australia and the United States against the rest of the world.

  • And why?

1 more annotation...

• it became increasingly evident that only a firm and binding  commitment by developed countries to reduce emissions could send a signal strong enough to convince  businesses, communities and individuals to act on climate change

  • I thought that was what the UNFCCC was suppose to do. Obviously it was either not strict enough or not enforceable enough. Check background on UNFCCC
• The major distinction between  the two, however, is that while the Convention encouraged developed countries to  stabilize GHG emissions, the Protocol commits them to do so.
• Because it will affect virtually all major sectors of the economy, the Kyoto Protocol is considered  to be the most far-reaching agreement on environment and sustainable development ever adopted.
• These targets must be met within a five-year time frame between 2008 and  2012, and add up to a total cut in GHG emissions of at least 5% against the baseline of 1990

  • The disctinction between current emission levels and the baseline of 1990 is a big one. Today's emissions are so high that lowering them by the same % would leave us with emissions still above that 1990 amount.

• The  Protocol places a heavier burden on developed nations under the principle of “common but  differentiated responsibilities.” This has two main reasons. Firstly, those countries can more  easily pay the cost of cutting emissions. Secondly, developed countries have historically contributed  more to the problem by emitting larger amounts of GHGs per person than in developing countries. 

   

  • One of G.W. Bush's main complaints. And a stupid one.
• These mechanisms help identify lowest-cost opportunities for reducing  emissions and attract private sector participation in emission reduction efforts.

  • Market participation, definitely a PRO we should mention.
• Some scientists have doubted the scientific basis of the Kyoto Protocol, claiming that there is  not a clear connection between increases in GHG emissions and climate change. The Fourth Assessment  Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), launched in the course of 2007, put  an end to that discussion. Prepared by scientists from all over the world, it placed the reality of  human-induced climate change beyond any doubt.

  • No longer hanging doubt whether or not we contribute to climate change, or if we can stave it off. Ratification of the Protocol would obviously be only positive.
• As a result of the Protocol, governments have already put, and are continuing to put  legislation and policies in place to meet their commitments; a carbon market has been created; and  more and more businesses are making the investment decisions needed for a climate-friendly future.

  • More market involvment. Reducing climate change and becoming a better GREEN country (business, individual).

6 more annotations...

• The Kyoto Protocol is an amendment to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), an international treaty intended to bring countries together to reduce global warming and to cope with the effects of temperature increases that are unavoidable after 150 years of industrialization.

  • Good introduction explaining what the Kyoto Protocol is.
• The countries are allowed to use emissions trading to meet their obligations if they maintain or increase their greenhouse gas emissions. Emissions trading allows nations that can easily meet their targets to sell credits to those that cannot.

  • We've talked about trading licenses in class. Make sure to address that.
• One notable exception is the United States, which releases more greenhouse gases than any other nation and accounts for more than 25 percent of those generated by humans worldwide

  • How about that, the US opting out to save the world. Typical.

• President Bush withdrew U.S. support for the Kyoto Protocol and refused to submit it to Congress for ratification.

    

  • Worst President Ever.

2 more annotations...

• The Kyoto Protocol involves moving away from fossil fuel energy sources - oil, gas, and coal - to renewable sources of energy - hydro, wind and solar power - and to less environmentally harmful ways of burning fossil fuels.
• . Higher levels of greenhouse gas emissions cause global warming and climate change

  • Whether or not one believes greenhouse gases directly cause climate change, or that global warming is happening at all, moving toward renewable and clean sources of energy is still a positive.
    *Last point in Pros list
• Targets for greenhouse gas emissions reduction were established for each industrialized country

  • The U.S.'s being one of the highest because we are the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases. One of the arguments the current adminstration has against the protocol because of the amount of money and supposed job loss the reductions would cost.
• The United States did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol, and in February 2002 introduced the Clean Skies and Global Climate Change initiatives, in which targets for reduction in greenhouse gas emissions are linked directly to GDP and the size of the U.S. economy.

2 more annotations...

• This website is about Canada but still offers some good history and Pros & Cons on the protocol. - Trevor Acy on 2008-04-15