However, the Kyoto Protocol`s targets are being challenged by climate change deniers who condemn the strong scientific evidence of human influence on climate change. A prominent scientist argues that these climate change deniers «arguably» break Rousseau`s notion of social contract, which is an implicit agreement between members of a society to coordinate efforts in the name of overall social benefit. The climate change denial movement hinders efforts to reach agreements on climate change as a collective global society. [139] The main objective of the Kyoto Protocol is to control emissions of key anthropogenic (man-made) greenhouse gases in a way that reflects underlying national differences in greenhouse gas emissions, prosperity and ability to make reductions. [22] The Treaty follows the main principles agreed in the 1992 UN Framework Convention. [22] Under the Treaty, Annex I Parties that have ratified the Treaty must have fulfilled by 2012 their greenhouse gas emission limiting commitments set for the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol (2008-2012). These emission control obligations are set out in annex B to the Protocol. This political about-face received a massive wave of criticism, which was quickly picked up by the international media. Environmental groups blew up the White House, while Europeans and Japanese expressed deep concern and regret.
[…] Almost all world leaders (para. B example, China, Japan, South Africa, Pacific Islands, etc.) expressed disappointment with Bush`s decision. Now, that future could be in jeopardy as President Donald Trump prepares to withdraw the U.S. from the deal — a decision he can only legally make after the next presidential election — as part of a broader effort to dismantle decades of U.S. environmental policy. Fortunately, municipal, state, economic and civic leaders across the country and around the world are stepping up their efforts to advance the clean energy advances needed to achieve the agreement`s goals and curb dangerous climate change – with or without the Trump administration. The World Bank (2010)[120] noted that the Kyoto Protocol had had little impact on reducing global emissions growth. The treaty was negotiated in 1997, but by 2006 energy-related carbon dioxide emissions had increased by 24%. [121] The World Bank (2010) also stated that the Treaty provided limited financial support to developing countries to help them reduce their emissions and adapt to climate change. [120] All binding decisions under the Convention are taken at the COP. With 195 parties, this means that decision-making can take years.
Some COPs are more important than others as important decisions evolve and a COP in which important decisions need to be taken becomes a turning point. This was the case at COP15, held in Copenhagen in 2009. At this COP, decisions were expected on what emission reduction commitments would look like after the end of the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol in 2020. In the end, only timid progress was made at this COP. Each Annex I country is required to submit an annual report on inventories of all anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions from anthropogenic sources and removals of sinks under the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol. These countries designate a person (called a «designated national authority») to create and manage their greenhouse gas inventory. Virtually all non-Annex I countries have also established a designated national authority to implement their Kyoto commitments, in particular the «CDM process». This determines which GHG projects they wish to propose to the CDM Board for accreditation. The choice of the pre-industrial reference period, as well as the method of calculating the global average temperature, may change scientists` estimates of historical warming by a few tenths of a degree Celsius. Such differences become important in the context of a global temperature limit that is only half a degree above the current level. But assuming consistent definitions are used, they have no bearing on our understanding of how human activities affect climate.
Nevertheless, even if the Kyoto Protocol becomes the dominant institution in international climate policy. The holidays can walk freely. In accordance with Article 27, that Party may withdraw from the Protocol by written notification at any time after 3 years from the date of entry into force of the Protocol. Ultimately, any sovereign state can always choose to build its own climate policy (or refrain from doing everything together) and choose to trade emissions with other nations if it finds it beneficial. Given that many countries have already chosen to build tradable pollution systems, we would still see an emerging, albeit more fragmented, emissions trading market. RTTLs are salts with a melting point of less than 100 °C, consisting of a large organic cation and an inorganic anion. RTTL research has flourished in recent years and is considered by the EPA to be an area that needs to be prioritized in the 21st century. RTTLs are generally expected to be the solvents of the future [31, 32]. They dissolve most organic and inorganic compounds, whether polar or non-polar; are thermally stable and non-flammable; and their negligible vapour pressure means reduced evaporative losses and less risk for those who use them. In addition, they are very flexible, as the physical and chemical properties of an ionic solvent can often be individually designed by modifying its anion and/or cation. Under the Kyoto Protocol on air pollution, the European Union has set a maximum sulphur content of 50 ppm for fossil fuels, to be reduced to 10 ppm by 2009 (Figure 8). The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set limits of 30 ppm for gasoline and 15 ppm for diesel fuel. With current catalytic hydrodesulfurization technology, it is very difficult to meet these limits. One of the most promising alternatives is the use of ionic liquids (RTTL) at room temperature. Although these substances were once prohibitively expensive, their prices have already begun to fall and should continue to do so. When IPCC scientists confirmed the threat of man-made climate change, caused, for example, by the burning of fossil fuels in the industrial and transport sectors, governments began negotiations in the early 1990s to conclude an international climate agreement. This led to the adoption of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (CCW) in 1992 with the aim of enabling industrialized countries (as developed in subsequent negotiations) to stabilize their emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) at 1990 levels by the year 2000. Developing countries have been exempted from emission targets because they have recognized that most historical and current global greenhouse gas emissions come from developed countries and that developing countries need to achieve sustainable economic growth and eradicate poverty. The countries most affected by the effects of climate change will be low-lying countries that are particularly vulnerable to sea-level rise and developing countries that do not have the resources to adapt to changes in temperature and precipitation. But rich countries like the United States are also increasingly vulnerable. In fact, several million Americans — especially children, the elderly, and the poor — are already suffering from the wrath of climate change. With the intercountry adoption of the Kyoto mechanisms in 1997, the political process moved to the implementation phase.
At this stage, the details of their design need to be worked out and decided to make these flexible instruments functional. However, various institutional obstacles impede the implementation of the Kyoto mechanisms, including legal ambiguities and cultural objections. Examples of such problems, to name a few, are the acceptable level of use of wells and banks, the desirability and methodology of standardising project baselines, the compatibility of the allocation of national permits with international and European law on state subsidies, the potential and complexity of including households in the trading system, the impact of international transferability of emissions on the environment and equity. and the corresponding question of whether and how the use of the Kyoto mechanisms should be restricted. It will become clear that some of these obstacles have been negotiated and others have not (yet) or only partially negotiated, while governments sometimes create additional obstacles by making new demands and trying to reopen or reinterpret previous international political agreements (. B e.g. Boyd et al., 2001). The IPCC considers the analysis of institutional barriers to the implementation of market-based climate policy as a line of research (Banuri et al., 2001: 71). Since the introduction of the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change (1997) and the third meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP3) under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), some countries have agreed to limit their greenhouse gas emissions. .