ADVERTISEMENTS:
At the Rio Earth Summit, Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) agreed to stabilize emissions of greenhouse gases at 1990 levels by the year 2000, in an attempt to mitigate the threat of global warming. Following this an historic agreement to actually cut emissions was agreed in December 1997 in Kyoto, Japan, at the third Conference of Parties to the FCCC. Industrial nations agreed to reduce their collective emissions of greenhouse gases by 5.2 percent from 1990 levels by the period 2008-2012.
Crucially, the Kyoto Protocol committed developed countries to make legally binding reductions in their greenhouse gas emissions. The six gases that were considered are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and replacements to the HCFCs, which are to be gradually phased over the next 30 years. These include the hydro-fluorocarbons or HFCs, the per-fluorocarbons or PFCs and sulphur hexafluoride.
The Kyoto Protocol was endorsed by 160 countries. It will become legally binding provided at least 55 countries sign up to it, including developed nations responsible for at least 55 percent of greenhouse gas emissions from the industrialised world. The global cut in emissions of 5.2 percent is to be achieved by differential reductions for individual countries.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The European Union, Switzerland and the majority of Central and Eastern European nations will deliver reductions of 8 percent; the US will cut emissions by 7 percent; and Japan, Hungary, Canada and Poland by 6 percent. New Zealand, Russia and the Ukraine are required to stabilise their emissions, whilst Australia, Iceland and Norway are permitted to increase slightly, although at a reduced rate to current trends.
Within the European Union, further differential reduction rates apply. The UK has committed itself to a 12.5 percent reduction, although it has also set its own domestic target of a 20 percent reduction in carbon dioxide by 2010.
The agreement specifies that both developed and developing countries must follow a number of steps including: designing and implementing climate change mitigation and adaptation measures; preparing national inventories of emissions removals by “carbon sinks”; implementation and cooperation in development and transfer of climate friendly technologies; and partnerships in research and observation of climate science, impacts and response strategies.
Developing countries are not legally bound to emissions reductions targets yet because, historically, they have been responsible for only a small portion of the global greenhouse gas emissions.
Commitment Periods:
Once adopted, the agreement will call for each country to remain within their assigned emissions quota over a five-year period, from 2008 to 2012, the first commitment period. Under the Kyoto Protocol, the overall emissions from industrialized countries would be reduced five percent below 1990 levels during this period, and negotiations on reduction commitments for subsequent periods must begin no later than 2005.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Emissions Reduction Targets:
The target amounts for each country are listed as a percentage of their base-year emissions (1990 for most countries), ranging from a reduction of 8 percent for most European countries to a 10 percent increase for Iceland.
A provision in the agreement allows for a nation to meet its reduction quota by reducing emissions from power plants and automobiles; however, developed countries can also achieve their commitments by deducting the greenhouse gas emissions absorbed by carbon sinks (like forests) from their gross emissions in the commitment period. This provision includes emissions absorbed or emitted by certain land-use changes and forestry activities, such as reforestation.
Ratification:
The treaty becomes effective 90 days after ratification. The ratification procedure requires the signatures of 55 industrialized nations accounting for at least 55 percent of the global greenhouse gas emissions from industrialized countries in 1990. Although the United States signed the agreement on Nov. 12, 1998, approval by a two-thirds majority in the Senate was not achieved. Even without U.S. approval, the Kyoto Protocol seems to be nearing its 55 percent ratification quota.
Scientific Timeline on Climate Change:
ADVERTISEMENTS:
January, 1998:
A University of Rhode Island study of ice cores from Greenland shows that when the last ice age ended, the change was sudden. In Greenland, a 9 to 18°F increase in temperatures probably took place in less than a decade. The finding challenges the widespread assumption that climate changes are in all cases gradual, and suggests that human-induced climate change could occur rapidly rather than slowly.
April, 1998:
Based on annual growth rings in trees and chemical evidence contained in marine fossils, corals and ancient ice, scientists at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst find that the 20th century was the warmest in 600 years, and that 1990, 1995 and 1997 were the warmest years in all of the 600-year period. Scientist conclude that the warming “appears to be closely tied to emission of greenhouse gases by humans and not any of the natural factors,” such as solar radiation and volcanic haze.
April, 1999:
Drew Shindell, a climate researcher at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, publishes research showing that changing levels of energy from the sun are not a major cause of global warming. The study leads Shindell to conclude that greenhouse gases are playing the dominant role in warming the planet.
June, 1999:
A two-mile-long ice core drilled out of an Antarctic ice sheet shows that levels of heat-trapping greenhouse gases are higher now than at any time in the past 420,000 years. Scientists with the National Center for Scientific Research in Grenoble, France, find that carbon dioxide levels rose from about 180 parts per million during ice ages to 280-300 parts per million in warm periods—far below the current CO2 concentration of 360 parts per million. Methane levels, meanwhile, rose from 320-350 parts per billion during ice ages to 650-770 parts per billion during the warm spells. The current methane concentration is about 1,700 parts per billion.
A team of researchers—part of a group convened by the World Health Organization—publishes a study in the British Medical Journal on health implications of climate change for Europeans. Heat waves will increase. Deaths from cold will decline. An increase in flooding is likely and floods could disrupt water purification and sewage disposal systems, cause waste sites to overflow, dislodge chemicals stored in the ground and encourage the spread of such diseases as malaria, visceral leishmaniasis, tick borne encephalitis and Lyme disease.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Scientists with the Smithsonian Institution report that plant fossils from a warming interval that took place 53 to 60 million years ago show that damage caused by insect populations was much more severe than usual during the warming interval. The study validates concerns that global warming will invigorate agricultural pest populations.
October, 1999:
A study by the Climatic Research Unit at Britain’s University of East Anglia projects that sea levels will rise between three-quarters of an inch to four inches per decade, threatening cities like New York and Tokyo with flooding.
A three-year study by the Hadley Centre of Britain’s Meteorological Office in Bracknell finds that “with unmitigated emissions, substantial dieback of tropical forests and tropical grasslands is predicted to occur by the 2080s, especially in northern South America and central southern Africa. Considerable growth of forests is predicted to occur in North America, northern Asia and china …. Sea level will be about 40 cm higher than today by the 2080s, and this is estimated to increase the annual number of people flooded from 13 million to 94 million. 60 percent of this increase will occur in southern Asia.”
November, 1999:
Separate studies conducted by the Ocean Climate Group at the Scottish Executive’s Marine Laboratory in Aberdeen, the Fisheries Laboratory of the Faroes and the University of Bergen in Norway all suggest that global warming is disrupting the North Atlantic Drift, which brings warm water northward from the Gulf Stream and moderates temperatures in western Europe.
Studies of ocean flows and/or salinity levels by these teams lend credence to a prior computer- based study by the Potsdam Institute (Germany) suggesting that global warming could turn off the North Atlantic Drift. If melting ice, increased rainfall and shifting winds caused by global warming were to shut down the North Atlantic Drift, temperatures in Western Europe could drop by 5°C.
December, 1999:
A computer-based study by the University of Maryland and NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center finds less than a 2 percent chance that observed melting of arctic sea ice is the result of normal climatic variations—and less than a 0.1 percent chance that melting over the last 46 years is the result of normal variations.
Arctic sea ice is melting at a rate of 14,000 square miles per year, an area larger than Maryland and Delaware combined. Melting of arctic ice accelerates global warming, since ice reflects 80 percent of solar energy back into space and water absorbs solar energy. Meanwhile, the melting of arctic ice could disrupt ocean currents and salinity levels.
Note:
Melting of floating arctic sea ice—as distinct from the land ice of Greenland, Antarctica and the world’s mountain glaciers—does not directly cause sea levels to rise, since the ice already displaces water. However, water absorbs solar radiation where ice would have reflected it (80 percent) back into space, and the resultant increase in water temperature causes the water to expand. This “thermal expansion” is a major reason why sea levels are rising.
January, 2000:
A study by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences concludes that the warming of the Earth’s surface is “undoubtedly real” and that surface temperatures in the last two decades have raised at a rate substantially greater than the average for the past 100 years.
March, 2000:
Scientists at the National Oceanographic Data Center find that the world’s oceans have soaked up much of the warming of the last four decades, delaying its full effect on air temperatures. Scientists speculate that perhaps half of human-caused climate change is not yet in evidence in the form of higher air temperatures, because of the delay caused by oceans.
July, 2000:
A study by Texas A&M geologist Thomas J. Crowley finds that natural factors like fluctuations in solar intensity and volcanic activity have indeed influenced global temperatures in past centuries, but these factors explain only 25 percent of global warming since 1900. A separate study published in Geophysical Research Letters echoes Crowley’s conclusion that humans are responsible for most of the global warming observed in the 20th century.
August, 2000:
James Hansen and colleagues at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies suggest an optimistic “alternative scenario” in which (1) the annual rise in global carbon dioxide emissions flattens out (currently the annual rise in emissions is about 1 percent) and (2) cuts in emissions of pollutants such as methane and black soot are aggressive enough that by 2050, non-CO2 greenhouse gases cause no more warming than they do now.
Hansen’s scenario is not a business-as-usual scenario; it depends on significant changes in technology, policy and human behavior. If the scenario came true, it would be possible to slow down the effects of global warming and buy time for more study of mitigating technologies. Some media outlets characterized Hansen’s study as a statement that emphasis on cutting carbon dioxide emissions is misplaced.
In response, Hansen crafted an open letter insisting that:
(1) His scenario was just that, and not a prediction;
(2) Attention to CO2 is equally as important as attention to other gases;
(3) Increased energy efficiency and greater reliance on renewable energy are necessary to make the scenario a reality;
(4) The scenario was intended for use as a tool to show how it might be possible to significantly slow global warming and at the same time stimulate the economy, create jobs and reduce the negative health impacts of air pollution.
Addressing the International the Coral Reef Symposium on the island of Bali, researchers warn that more than a quarter of the world’s coral reefs have been destroyed and remaining reefs could be dead in 20 years. The most serious threat to the reefs is global warming. Coral reefs are crucial anchors for marine ecosystems, and more than a half billion people depend on reefs for their livelihood, researchers at the conference say.
The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Draft Third Assessment Report goes further than ever in affirming the theory that human beings have caused and are causing global warming.
The 1995 Second Assessment Report said “the balance of evidence suggests a discernable human influence;” an April 2000 draft of the Third Assessment Report said, “there has been discernable human influence on global climate;” in the October draft, the IPCC adds new language stating that it is likely that humans have “contributed substantially to the observed warming over the last 50 years.”
The October draft also increases the warming forecast. The worst-case scenario in the IPCC’s 1995 report was a 6.3°F increase; the new worst-case scenario is an 11 °F increase. By comparison, temperatures today are 9°F warmer than they were at the end of the last ice age.
Ironically, the increased warming forecast results from anticipated reductions in emissions of sulfates from coal-burning plants. Scientists are learning that sulfates emitted from coal plants have had the effect of masking some of the warming caused by CO2 emissions.
January, 2001:
A U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Third Assessment Report finds that the earth’s atmosphere is warming faster than expected and the warming is caused by human beings. See October 2000 entry above regarding the release of the draft report.
February, 2001:
A U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Third Assessment Report details catastrophic changes that could take place as a result of global warming, including rising sea levels, increased precipitation, glacial melting, extreme weather, flooding, drought and loss of plant and animal species.
March, 2001:
A U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Third Assessment Report finds that existing technologies could stabilize atmospheric carbon dioxide levels over the next 100 years or more. But success will depend on overcoming technical, economic, political, cultural, social and institutional barriers.
Researchers from Imperial College in London release a study that compares atmospheric data collected from satellites in 1970 and 1997, revealing a buildup of greenhouse gases that could cause global warming. The changes the scientists see correlate with increases in carbon dioxide, methane, ozone and several trace gases accumulating in the planet’s thin blanket of air.
April, 2001:
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Scripps Institute of Oceanography release two independent studies showing how human activities, not natural climate fluctuations, are responsible for global warming. The studies each use computer models and temperature readings from across the world’s seas to test if natural climate swings could be responsible for the 0.11 degree warming seen in the upper two miles of the oceans since 1955.
The studies find that computer simulations of the Earth’s climate could not produce the extensive warming seen today without factoring in the presence of man- made pollutants such as greenhouse gases and sulfate aerosol, which act to warm the Earth by trapping heat near the surface.
May, 2001:
A seven-year study by researchers at the University of Michigan and Duke University finds that soil fertility limits the ability of trees to respond to elevated levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide. The study casts doubt on the argument that trees can be counted on to absorb excess atmospheric carbon dioxide emitted when fossil fuels are burned.
June, 2001:
A National Academy of Sciences study requested by the White House calls global warming “real and particularly strong within the past 20 years.” The report’s lead author, Ralph Cicerone, says scientists “really do know that CO2 is the main driver” behind global warming.
July, 2001:
Researchers at the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research say there’s a 90 percent chance that the global average temperature will raise by 3 to 9°F over the next century. By comparison, global mean temperature rose 1 degree in the 20th century.
Timeline of Negotiations on Climate Change:
October, 1988:
The Toranto Conference on the Changing Atmosphere establishes the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) by the U.N. Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization.
August, 1990:
The IPCC releases its First Assessment Report. The reported findings lead to general agreement among countries that an international treaty or convention is needed.
December, 1990:
The U.N. General Assembly begins negotiations for an international climate treaty to be signed at the 1992 Earth Summit.
1991:
The first session of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) meets just outside Washington.
May, 1992:
Final negotiations of the UNFCCC conclude, with the Annex I countries agreeing to strive to return their individual CO2 emissions back to 1990 levels by the year 2000; however, the U.S. refuses to make the terms of the agreement legally binding. The Convention establishes the Conference of the Parties (COP.)
The UNFCCC is adopted on May, 9 and opened for signing at the Rio Earth Summit in June.
March 21, 1994:
The Convention enters into force 90 days after receipt of the 50th ratification.
March, 28-April 7, 1995:
The First Conference of the Parties (COP-1) takes place in Berlin. During this session, delegates agree that the UNFCC’s proposed greenhouse gas reduction commitments for the Annex I countries are inadequate, but no agreement is reached over new emissions targets. Instead, delegates create the Berlin Mandate.
December, 1995:
IPCC Climate scientists release the Second Assessment report. These findings become a major force for action during the negotiations that culminated in the Kyoto Protocol.
July, 1996:
COP-2 is held in Geneva. Little progress is made to reach an agreement on CO2 reduction targets for a new treaty, but the United States agrees to legally binding emission commitments and announces the possibility of inclusion of flexibility mechanisms such as emissions trading in the new agreement. The conference issues the Geneva Declaration.
March, July, and August, 1997:
Negotiating sessions focus on discussions about the European Union (EU) environment ministers’ proposal for a 15 percent greenhouse gas emissions cut for three gases by the year 2010, (compared to 1990 levels.)
October, 1997:
At these sessions in Bonn, Germany, the U.S. announces its position for COP-3 negotiations: a stabilization of greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels by 2010 and a 5 percent reduction by 2015. Japan calls for a nonbinding target of 5 percent emissions reduction by 2010 of three greenhouse gases. The Group of 77 and China, representing developing countries in the negotiations, fiercely resists attempts to draw developing countries into agreeing to anything that could be interpreted as new commitments.
December, 1997:
The COP-3 is held in Kyoto, Japan, and after week of negotiations, delegates from the convention agree to adopt the Kyoto Protocol on December, 11.
November, 1998:
COP-4 is hosted by Buenos Aires, Argentina, from November 2-13. Delegates hammer out the Buenos Aires plan of Action for implementation of the Kyoto treaty.
October-November, 1999:
Delegates from 165 countries meet for COP-5 in Bonn, Germany between Oct. 25 and Nov. Oct. 5. Negotiations include the development of rules for emissions trading and the division of criteria for project eligibility under the Clean Development Mechanism and joint implementation. Delegates also discuss legally binding consequences for non-compliance by countries and a system to inventory greenhouse gas emissions.
At this meeting, most Annex I countries (though not the United States) call for ratification of the treaty in time for its entry into force by the June, 2002, the 10th anniversary of the Rio Earth Summit.
November 13-24, 2000:
Delegates meet for COP-6 in The Hague, Netherlands, but talks collapse after the U.S. and Europe fail to reach an agreement on the amount of credits toward meeting emissions targets they could claim from emissions trading and carbon sinks. The Europeans want most of the targets to be met through actual reductions, while Americans push for more credits from carbon sinks and emissions trading.
Ministers agree to resume COP-6 in mid-July of 2001 in Bonn to finish the details of the Protocol.
March, 2001:
President Bush declares that “Kyoto is dead” and announces that the United States will not move to ratify the Treaty, even though only a few days earlier, Bush’s top environmental official, Christine Todd Whitman, had endorsed a G8 environment ministers’ communiqué expressing support for the Protocol.
Ministers begin negotiations again in mid-July in Bonn, Germany. Despite opposition from the Bush Administration, countries reach an agreement on rules and all countries agree to pursue ratification by 2002, except for the United States. The final document contains substantial concessions by the European Union to Japan, Canada and Australia pertaining to forests sinks and compliance.
Status of Signatories & Ratification of the Convention:
The text of the Convention was adopted at the United Nations Headquarters, New York on the 9 May, 1992; it was open for signature at the Rio de Janeiro from 4 to 14 June, 1992, and thereafter at the United Nations Headquarters, New York, from 20 June, 1992 to 19 June, 1993. By that date the Convention had received 166 signatures.
The Convention entered into force on 21 March, 1994. Those States that have not signed the Convention may accede to it at any time. For those States that ratify, accept or approve the Convention or accede thereto after the date of entry into force, the Convention shall enter into force on the ninetieth day after the date of the deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession.
Status of the Kyoto Protocol:
The text of the Protocol to the UNFCCC was adopted at the third session of the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC in Kyoto, Japan, on 11 December, 1997; it was open for signature from 16 March, 1998 to 15 March, 1999 at United Nations Headquarters, New York. By that date the Protocol had received 84 signatures. Those Parties that have not yet signed the Kyoto Protocol may accede to it at any time.
The Protocol is subject to ratification, acceptance, approval or accession by Parties to the Convention. It shall enter into force on the ninetieth day after the date on which not less than 55 Parties to the Convention, Parties which accounted in total for at least 55 percent of the total carbon dioxide emissions for 1990 from that group, have deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession.
The list below contains the latest information concerning dates of signature and ratification received from the Secretary-General of the United Nations, as Depository of the Kyoto Protocol. The dates in the column entitled “date of ratification” are those of the receipt of the instrument of ratification (R), acceptance (At), approval (Ap) or accession (Ac).
