What is this
Kyoto thing all about anyway?
The protocol comes into
force on Wednesday, but how much do you really know about climate change and
carbon trading? We answer the big questions
On February 16, one of the most controversial treaties in decades becomes part
of international law. It has been heralded as a breakthrough in the fight
against dangerous climate change and a triumph for international diplomacy -
despite the fact that the US, the world's greatest emitter of greenhouse gases,
refuses to take part.
The protocol, an addition to the Climate Change Convention negotiated at the
Earth Summit in 1992, is the first legally binding international treaty on the
environment. The convention placed an obligation on every country that signed it
to reduce man-made greenhouse gas emissions but did not give any targets - so
everyone agreed another agreement was needed.
Kyoto gives each of the industrialised countries of the world an individual
limit to the greenhouse gas emissions they can make. The reductions overall are
tiny compared with the cuts that scientists say are necessary to stabilise the
climate. So will Kyoto really make a difference to whether global warming is
contained; can it save the planet from the potential of runaway global warming
that was being debated last week at the Hadley Centre for Climate Change in
Exeter, UK? Here we explain the nuts and bolts of Kyoto, how it works, and what
it does.
What is Kyoto designed to reduce?
Six gases. Carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels is the biggest factor
in climate change but methane from agriculture and landfill, nitrous oxide from
vehicles, and hydofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride from
other industrial processes are included.
Why do different countries have different targets?
In 1997, in Kyoto, a protocol or addition to the original treaty was negotiated
after many tortuous sessions in which the industrialised countries each agreed a
target to control emissions of six gases. It was tortuous because each country
saw itself as a special case, and so the idea of differential responsibilities
was born.
The first major difference in responsibilities was between industrial countries
and developing countries. It was felt that industrial countries, which had
gained most from the industrial revolution were also most to blame for the
greenhouse effect. It was therefore agreed that the first round of reductions
should be from them and the countries, such as the US and Japan, which are now
burning most fossil fuels.
There were 34 industrial countries which agreed to targets, most of them in
Europe. Some, such as Spain and Portugal, which were still developing, were
allowed large increases in emissions and others, such as Germany, agreed to
large cuts, partly because its heavy industry was shutting down but mainly
because the government felt that it had to give a lead. Each country can
discover how much CO2 it emits by calculating the volume of fossil fuels it
burns, usually through imports and the tax system.
How do the targets work?
In the intervening years countries have been working to reduce emissions. The
measurements are generally taken from a starting date of 1990, and the targets
for each country must be reached by the period 2008-12. Some former communist
countries, known in the jargon as "countries in transition", were allowed to
chose a different date because after the collapse of communism many closed heavy
industries. Unlike the rest of the world, the former eastern bloc countries had
a slump in emissions. This has become important to the workings of the treaty.
The targets, and the latest known emissions of each country, are reported here.
Under the treaty, each country has to report to the secretariat of the United
National Climate Change Convention each year what its emissions are and how it
is progressing to its target.
Each country also has to show what it is doing to reduce emissions and, if it is
not reaching the target, what further measures are proposed.
What does Kyoto encourage countries to do?
There are three other ways that countries can reduce emissions, apart from
measures at home. The first two involve working with other countries to reduce
their emissions. The reasoning behind this is that the atmosphere does not care
in which country the reductions are made - what it needs is a reduction in
greenhouse gases.
There are two categories in which two countries can jointly reduce emissions,
depending on the type of country. If they are both developed countries and both
have to make reductions it is called a joint implementation scheme, and if one
is a developing country then a clean development mechanism.
The second method involves installing a clean method of producing electricity
such as solar power in a developing country as an alternative to a CO2-producing
method like coal. In this case, the developed country claims all the carbon
credit.
The third method is carbon trading. This greatly benefits the former communist
countries which, because of the closure of their heavy industries since 1990,
have saved thousands of tonnes of emissions. Under the trading scheme, countries
such as Ireland, Portugal and Spain that are exceeding their targets can "buy"
this surplus carbon and so reduce their own emissions. This was a big incentive
for Russia to ratify the protocol. There is also trading within countries
between companies.
Is the Kyoto protocol enforceable?
Since Kyoto is a legal agreement, there are penalties. Governments that fail to
reach their targets will have to appear at a conference of the parties and
account for their failure. They will have to suffer the indignity of being told
how to solve the problem. If they are seen to have been cavalier with their
responsibilities they can be excluded from the three forms of trading agreements
with other countries in the protocol.
A further punishment is that in the next period of the reductions after 2012,
any shortfall in the first period target is added to any new one and multiplied
by 1.3.
But will it really work?
The first big question, the second being what is the future without America? The
fact is that, even if all the planned reductions are achieved, the amount that
CO2 emissions will be reduced will be tiny compared with that needed.
But Kyoto was only ever expected to be a first step. It does provide a blueprint
and method for further reductions. Ultimately, the US will have to be persuaded
back into the process, along with rapidly developing countries such as China and
India, if sufficient reductions are to be made to save the climate. Without
actions by them the world's temperature will escalate out of control anyway.
There is still a long way to go.