The UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol

1
The UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol

• GV 518
• week 20

2
The global climate

• Greenhouse Gases (GHG) allow high energy
  radiation to get through to the earths surface,
  but block longer wave heat radiation coming back
  from the earths surface.
• Allows for climatic conditions enabling life
  on earth
• Recent centuries increase in GHGs.

3
The Problem

• We observe
• Increase in temperature of 0.6 degrees Celcius
  over the last century.
• Snow and ice covers have decreased by 10 since
  1960s
• Sea level rises by 0.1-0.2 m over last century
• Climatic changes precipitation El Nino

4
Explanation GHG

• Climate models that assume that GHG such as
  Carbon Dioxide lead to global warming explain
  variation in temperature well when they take
  natural variation (e.g. sun, volcanoes ) into
  account.

5
Future consequences

• By 2100 based on BAU assumption
• Temperature increase 1.4-5.8 degrees Celcius
• Sea level increases 0.09-0.88 m
• Persisting changes Ice will be melting for 1000s
  of years sea level rises for 100s of years

6
The possible impacts

• Negative impact on food production in tropical
  subtropical regions
• Bigger parts of population exposed to extreme
  weather events increased loss of human life
• Water scarcity in Middle East and North Africa
• Property insurance
• Migration
• In longer run for upper temperature predictions
  Malaria and Yellow Fever spread to more temperate
  climates
• Economic costs could be 1 or more of GDP per
  year

7
Greenhouse Gases

• Carbon Dioxide
• Increase in concentration since 1750 by 31
• 75 of antropogenic emissions come from fossil
  fuel burning in the last 70 years, the rest from
  land-use change (e.g. deforestation).
• Remains in the atmosphere for 100 years
• Methane
• Increase of over 150 since 1750
• 50 of emissions antropogenic (fossil fuels,
  rice, cattle, land fills) natural emissions 20
  of all methane from wetlands
• Much shorter life time than carbon dioxide
• Nitrous oxide
• 17 increase since 1750
• 1/3 rd of emissions antropogenic (chemical
  industry, catle feed, agricultural use)
• 100 years life time
• Halocarbons and substitutes
• Many controlled under the Montreal Protocol and
  amendments
• However, substitutes such as PFCs and Sulphur
  hexaflouride are rising these are GHGs.

8
Scientific advice

• IPCC is set up to provide authoritative
  assessments 3 working groups
• 1990 1st IPCC Report
• Increase in Carbon dioxide due to human activity
• Temperatures expected to rise /climate change
  will occur
• Unclear where the major impact will be located
• recommends negotiations of Convention
• 1995 2nd IPCC Report feeding into Kyoto Protocol
  negotiations
• balance of evidence suggests discernible human
  influence on global climate
• Identification of no-regret policies
• Action beyond no-regret policies justified
• 2001 3rd IPCC report indicating that 2nd report
  had underestimated the problem.
• Stronger evidence to support SAR conclusions
  problem even more serious
• Overall the third scientific assessment report
  suggests that natural factors have played a small
  role in radiative forcing over the 20th century.
• Natural changes actually lead to negative forcing
  and can therefore not explain the observed
  warming
• In the light of all this most observed warming
  over the last 50 years is likely to have been due
  to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations
  (IPCC 3rd assessment report, p.6)
• 2007 4th assessment report
• Increasing confidence global warming is
  happening and human activity is responsible

9
UNFCCC

• UNFCCC was negotiated a Rio in 1992
• Article 2 Aim of convention is to stabilise GHG
  at a level that will prevent dangerous
  antropocentric interference in the climate and
  manage the rate of climate change to allow
  natural adaptability.
• Article 3
• 3.1 suggests equitable solution (inter and intra
  generational) and demands developed countries to
  take the lead
• 3.2 raises the issue of compensation / burden
  sharing
• 3.3 calls for the application of the
  precautionary principle
• 3.4 re-affirms the right to (sustainable)
  development
• 3.5 demands that concerns about GW are not to be
  used to limit trade etc.

10

• Article 4 commitments
• 4.1 Applies to all parties and calls for
  communication of emissions programmes to
  mitigate climate change development and transfer
  of technology promote sustainable management /
  conservation of sinks prepare programmes for
  adaptation generally cooperate and promote in
  areas related to information, education and
  science.
• 4.2 Applies to Annex I countries, i.e. developed
  and ex-socialist
• calls for implementation of policies and
  measures that demonstrate that the developed
  countries are taking the lead in reducing
  emissions.
• Reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2000
• Review of commitments at COP
• 4.3-4.5 Annex II countries (OECD) should make
  available funds to implement 4.1, technology
  transfer and cover the costs of national
  communications assist with costs for adaptation
  of most vulnerable countries
• 4.7 explicitly states that fulfilment of any
  commitments by LDCs depends on developed
  countries fulfilling their financial obligations.
  It also establishes that the overriding concern
  of LDCs is development.

11
Berlin Mandate

• Existing commitments were deemed to be inadequate
• Projections showed that signatories had not taken
  sufficient action to achieve target
• No target for after 2000
• Stabilisation of emissions at 1990 levels not
  sufficient to achieve aim of convention
• Decision to negotiate legal instrument by COP3
• No commitments for non-Annex I parties

12
The Kyoto Protocol

• Regulates emissions of basket of six gasesCarbon
  dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, HFCs, PFCs,
  sulphur hexaflouride (in carbondioxid equivalent)
• Overall reduction targets of Annex I countries
  ca. 5 below 1990 levels EU 8 (US 7) Japan
  6
• Commitment Period 2008-2012
• Target includes emissions and absorption by sinks
• Other Flexibility measures
• Emissions Trading as supplement to domestic
  action (cap?)
• Joint Implementation (additionality?)
• Clean Development Mechanism or CDM (fund
  forests additionality?)
• EU bubble
• Technology transfer
• Many details left to COP4-12

13
Costs of Kyoto to Annex II countries
14
Ratification

• 55 countries accounting for at least 55 of Annex
  I emissions (see unfccc.int)
• Kyoto Protocol entered into force on Wednesday
  (16/2/05)

15
The Aftermath of Kyoto COP 4 COP 12

• COP4 in Buenos Aires Buenos Aires Plan of Action
• COP6 in The Hague Breakdown of negotiations (USA
  drops out of negotiations in the aftermath)
• financial issues, compliance, sinks and cap on
  emissions trading as major problems
• COP6bis in Bonn produces the Bonn Agreements
  watering down of commitments by about 2 will
  finally be adopted at Marrakech.
• COP7 in Marrakech ends with the Marrakech
  Accords, including unique but also weak (compared
  to Montreal Protocol) implementation provisions.
• COP9 Agreement on CDM/sinks G77/China opposes
  any discussion that could lead to future
  commitments for LDCs US reiterates its position.

16

• COP11 Montreal
• Adoption of Marrakech accords by COP /MOP
  decision thus the Protocol is now up and
  running.
• Adaptation work programme (discussions started at
  COP10)
• CDM decisions more projects, more money for
  incremental costs (add. 8 Mio pledged).
• Proposal to consider post 2012 progress under
  both KP and UNFCCC linked to review of Protocol
  under Article 9 (review relevant to all parties
  not only Annex I). All three processes will run
  in parallel.
• COP 12
• Adaptation fund responsible to COP/MOP, one
  country one vote majority with LDCs. Still to be
  resolved eligibility criteria, priority areas,
  institutional arrangements.
• Emergence of negotiation tracks.

17
Possible negotiation tracks

• Ad hoc working group (AWG) on future commitments
  of Annex I countries
• No indications yet what Annex I countries are
  prepared to do
• Agreement that there should be no gap in
  commitments.
• Dialogue on long-trem cooperative action
• Priority for LDCs development and poverty
• Technology
• Non-binding and should not lead to negotiations
  of future commitments
• Review of the Protocol under Article 9 (all
  parties)
• Views invited
• Russian proposal AWG voluntary commitments by
  non-Annex I parties.

18
Basic disagreements in the past

• Who should take on targets?
• Annex I / LDCs
• consequences of no commitments for LDCs
• North-South / developmental issues
• responsibility for GW
• Cost-benefit of action
• US regards is as extremely costly to its economy
  without LDC participation limited benefit
• But without US participation Kyoto is almost
  pointless (and expensive)
• Vulnerable countries rely on action for their
  survival
• Abatement versus adaptation
• Domestic action versus efficiency
• Implementation / compliance