1 / 35

The Climate Treaties: UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol

The Climate Treaties: UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol. UNFCCC. UNFCCC. Most important aspects Objective = overall goal for the treaty Divides parties into different categories Establishes moderate commitments Applies to 6 greenhouse gases

brigid
Télécharger la présentation

The Climate Treaties: UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Climate Treaties: UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol

  2. UNFCCC

  3. UNFCCC • Most important aspects • Objective = overall goal for the treaty • Divides parties into different categories • Establishes moderate commitments • Applies to 6 greenhouse gases • Requires parties to meet every year to assess whether the existing commitments will meet the objective

  4. Art. 2 - Objectives Stabilization of GHG concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. within a time-frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner

  5. Art. 4 - Commitments • All Parties, Annex I Parties, Annex II Parties • All = developed, developing, economies in transition • Annex I = developed • Annex II = developed - economies in transition

  6. All Parties: Inventory Develop programmes Cooperate in tech transfer Manage sinks and reservoirs Subject to “common but Differentiated responsibilities” Annex I: “take the lead” Develop national programs And take actions to mitigate Annex II: Fund emissions inventory Transfer technology Fund adaptation

  7. UNFCCC • Structural importance • Developed countries must take the lead to reduce emissions • Developing countries do not have strong obligations to reduce emissions – but should inventory and report • Parties will meet to determine if they need to do more

  8. Kyoto Protocol

  9. The Politics = Same as Before • Developed countries • EU • U.S. • Canada, Australia, Japan, New Zealand, etc. • Former Soviet Union • Developing countries • Association of Small Island States (AOSIS) • OPEC • Brazil, Indonesia, other major forested areas • China • India • Least Developed Countries

  10. The Politics = Same as Before • Increased differences: • Developing countries argue: developed countries promised to “take the lead” – until they do this, no new commitments for developing countries • Berlin Mandate: affirms no new commitments for developing countries • U.S. argues: • if developing countries (i.e., China) do not have commitments, then United States should not sign or ratify any treaty

  11. Kyoto Protocol Key Elements • QELROs = targets and timetables • collectively, 5.2 percent reduction below 1990 levels during 5 year reporting period, 2008-2012 • Individually – calculated in AAUs • flexibility mechanisms • emissions trading - AAUs • Joint implementation - ERUs • EU bubble - AAUs • CDM - CERs

  12. Kyoto Protocol: Targets and Timetables • Art 3(1) - Annex I Parties • individually or jointly • CO2Eq emissions of GHGs in Annex A • “basket of gases” • do not exceed assigned amounts • QELROs in Annex B • overall goal = at least 5 percent below 1990 levels in commitment period 2008-2012

  13. Kyoto Protocol: Targets and Timetables • Art 3(1) - Annex I Parties • CO2Eq emissions of GHGs in Annex A • “basket of gases” = CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, SF6

  14. Kyoto Protocol: Targets and Timetables • Art 3(1) - Annex I Parties • do not exceed assigned amounts = QELROs in Annex B

  15. Kyoto Protocol: Targets and Timetables • Art 3(1) - Annex I Parties • do not exceed assigned amounts = QELROs in Annex B • Australia 108 Austria 92 Belgium 92 Bulgaria* 92 • Canada 94Croatia* 95Czech Republic* 92 Denmark 92 • Estonia* 92 European Community  92 Finland 92 France 92 • Germany 92 Greece 92 Hungary* 94 Iceland 110 • Ireland 92 Italy 92 Japan 94 Latvia*  92 • Liechtenstein 92Lithuania* 92 Luxembourg 92 Monaco  92 • Netherlands 92 New Zealand 100Norway 101 Poland*  94 • Portugal 92 Romania* 92 Russian Federation*100 Slovakia* 92 • Slovenia* 92 Spain 92 Sweden 92 Switzerland  92 • Ukraine* 100 United Kingdom 92 United States of America  93 • * Countries that are undergoing the process of transition to a market economy.

  16. Kyoto Protocol: Targets and Timetables • Art. 3(7) - Annex I Parties • 1st commitment period - 2008-2012 • assigned amount • percentage reduction times baseline times 5 • = Annex B percentage of 1990 baseline emissions of GHGs • alternate baseline for human-made GHGs (see Art. 3(8)) • alternative baseline for Economies in Transition (EITs) • example • Japan baseline emissions in 1990 = 100 • What is its assigned amount?

  17. Kyoto Protocol: Targets and Timetables • example • Japan baseline emissions in 1990 = 100 MtCO2eq • What is its assigned amount? • 100Mt * .94 (percentage reduction) * 5 (commitment period) = 470 MtCO2eq

  18. Kyoto Protocol: Targets and Timetables • example • Japan’s assigned amount = 470 MtCO2eq • What does this mean? • Japan may emit, on average, 92 Mt/year, but can have varying emissions levels during that 5-year period • It just needs to achieve the overall goal

  19. Kyoto Protocol: Targets and Timetables • Baselines • 1990 baseline in most cases • alternate baseline for human-made GHGs • alternative baseline for Economies in Transition (EITs)

  20. Kyoto Protocol: Targets and Timetables • Why have different baselines? • 1990 baseline • alternate baseline for human-made GHGs • Montreal Protocol phase out – wanted to give time for companies to use alternative products and create new ones • alternative baseline for Economies in Transition (EITs) • “hot air”

  21. Kyoto Protocol: Targets and Timetables • What is “hot air”? • Economies in transition = large emissions in early/mid 1980s • Soviet Union collapsed, so did their economies, so did their emissions • But countries want to allow EITs to pretend their emissions were higher – why?

  22. Economies in Transition – Hot Air

  23. Hot Air and Assigned Amounts • If use 1989 as baseline: • Emissions = 100 MtCO2eq • QELRO = 100% • Assigned Amount = 100 MtCO2eq * 100% * 5 = 500 MtCO2eq • If use 1990 as a baseline: • Emissions = 70 MtCO2eq • QELRO = 100% • Assigned Amount = 70 MtCO2eq * 100% * 5 = 350 MtCO2eq

  24. Kyoto Protocol: Flexibility Mechanisms Emissions Trading Joint Fulfillment Joint Implementation Clean Development Mechanism

  25. Kyoto Protocol: Flexibility Mechanisms • Joint Fulfillment - Art. 4 • “EU Bubble” • Annex I parties may jointly fulfill commitments • enter into agreement • total combined aggregate GHGs cannot exceed total assigned amounts • revised emissions allocations must be set out in the agreement • if revise regional economic integration organization, does not change commitments • if Parties fail to meet combined level of emissions reductions, each Party is responsible for its emissions in the agreement

  26. Joint Fulfillment - Art. 4 • “EU Bubble” • Annex I parties may jointly fulfill commitments • enter into agreement • total combined aggregate GHGs cannot exceed total assigned amounts • revised emissions allocations must be set out in the agreement • if revise regional economic integration organization, does not change commitments • if Parties fail to meet combined level of emissions reductions, each Party is responsible for its emissions in the agreement • See page 66

  27. Joint Fulfillment - Art. 4 “EU Bubble” – every EU country agreed under Annex B to reduce emissions by 8% (or to emit .92 of baseline)

  28. Emissions Trading • Simplest form • Regulators set an overall cap on allowable emissions from covered sources • Regulators allocate emissions credits/allowances to covered sources – each credit = amount of pollution (e.g., 1 credit = 1 ton CO2eq) • Sources may: • Emit same amount of pollution as they have credits • Emit more pollution, so buy credits • Emit less pollution, and sell credits

  29. Emissions Trading

  30. Emissions Trading Emissions cap: year 1-5 = 12, year 6-10 = 9, year 11-15 = 6, year 16-20 = 3

  31. Emission Trading Emissions cap: year 1-5 = 12; emissions trading allows facilities to buy/sell credits, but cap stays the same

  32. Emissions Trading • Arguments in Favor?

  33. Emissions Trading • Arguments in Favor? • Cost-effective • Flexible • Administratively easier (money v. expertise to set emissions limits) • Spurs Innovation • Absolute cap on emissions

  34. Emissions Trading • Arguments in Favor? Some responses. • Cost-effective • For some facilities, but not all. • Flexible • Subject to gaming • Administratively easier • Not always • Spurs Innovation • Not always

  35. Emissions Trading • Arguments in Favor? Some responses (cont.) • Absolute cap on emissions • Overallocation problem • What if the cap doesn’t achieve environmental goals? • Caps may not be more effective than command-and-control • But they are more directive than taxes

More Related