Non classé

What Happened to Kyoto Protocol

When George W. Bush was elected president in 2000, U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel asked him what his administration`s position was on climate change. Bush responded that he took climate change « very seriously,[101] but opposed the Kyoto Treaty because it would « exempt 80 percent of the world, including major population centers such as China and India, from compliance and cause serious damage to the U.S. economy. » [102] The Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research reported in 2001: Gupta et al. (2007)[69] also examined which scenarios of 450 ppm were projected for non-Annex I Parties. Projections suggest that by 2020, non-Schedule I emissions in several regions (Latin America, the Middle East, East Asia and Centrally Planned Asia) will need to be reduced well below the « status quo ». [69] « Status quo » means projected non-Schedule I emissions, unless new emission control strategies are in place. Emissions in all non-Annex I regions are projected to be significantly reduced below the status quo by 2050. [69] November 18, 2004 – The Russian Federation ratifies the Protocol. The first kyoto emission limit period can be seen as a first step towards the atmospheric stabilization of greenhouse gases. [23] In this sense, the Kyoto commitments of the first period can influence the future levels of atmospheric stabilization that can be achieved.

[65] Andorra, Palestine, South Sudan, the United States and, following their withdrawal on December 15, 2012, Canada are the only Parties to the UNFCCC that are not Parties to the Protocol. In addition, the Protocol is not applied to observers of the Holy See of the UNFCCC. Although the Kingdom of the Netherlands has approved the Protocol for the whole Kingdom, it has not deposited an instrument of ratification for Aruba, Curaçao, Sint Maarten or the Caribbean Netherlands. [110] COP7 was held in Marrakesh from October 29, 2001 to November 9, 2001 to determine the final details of the Protocol. November 10, 2001 – Representatives from 160 countries meet in Marrakech, Morocco, to prepare the details of the protocol. The protocol defines a « compliance » mechanism as « the monitoring of compliance with obligations and sanctions in the event of non-compliance ». [91] According to Grubb (2003)[92], the explicit consequences of non-compliance with the Treaty are small compared to national law. [92] Nevertheless, the section on compliance with the treaty in the Marrakesh Accords was highly controversial. [92] 2. November 1998 – 160 nations meet in Buenos Aires to elaborate the details of the protocol and develop the « Buenos Aires Plan of Action ». In 2001, a follow-up to the previous meeting (COP6-bis) took place in Bonn[88], where the necessary decisions were taken.

After some concessions, the proponents of the protocol (led by the European Union) managed to get the approval of Japan and Russia by allowing greater use of carbon sinks. The agreement is a protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which was adopted at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro and did not establish legally binding emission limits or enforcement mechanisms. Only Parties to the UNFCCC may become Parties to the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol was adopted at the third meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC (COP 3) in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997. World leaders and delegates must decide what to do on four major sensitive and interconnected issues: under GIS, a party to the Protocol that expects the development of its economy not to exhaust its Kyoto quota can sell the surplus of its Kyoto quota units (AAUs) to another party. The proceeds of the AAU sales must be « green », i.e. for the development and implementation of projects, either the acquisition of greenhouse gas emission reductions (hard greening) or the establishment of the necessary framework for this process (soft greening) will be used. [50]:25 As Milton Friedman said, economic and political freedom can be achieved by capitalism; Nevertheless, it is never guaranteed that we will have the equality of wealth of those who are at the top of the « food chain » of this capitalist world. All these changes come to make citizen leaders choose to improve their lifestyles. .