Globle Warming

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 STRUCTURE OF THE ATMOSPHERE

1

The atmosphere is made up of several layers: the troposphere, stratosphere, mesosphere,

ionosphere, and exosphere. Closest to Earth is the troposphere. Most of the clouds we see

in the sky are found in the troposphere, and this is the layer of the atmosphere we

associate with weather. Extending up to 10 miles above Earth's surface, the troposphere

contains a variety of gases: water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and

others. These gases help retain heat, a portion of which is then radiated back to warm the

surface of Earth.

Above the troposphere is the stratosphere, which includes the ozone layer. The

stratosphere extends from about 10 to 30 miles above the surface of Earth. Ozone

molecules, which are concentrated in this layer, absorb ultraviolet radiation from the Sun

and protect us from its harmful effects.

Thirty to 50 miles above the surface is the mesosphere, the coldest part of the

atmosphere. Above the mesosphere, in a layer called the ionosphere (also called the

thermosphere), things start to heat up. Temperatures in the ionosphere, which extends

about 50 to 180 miles from the surface of Earth, can reach up to several thousand degrees

Fahrenheit. Beyond the ionosphere is the exosphere, which extends to roughly 500 miles

above the surface of Earth. This is the outermost layer of the atmosphere, the transition

zone into space.

The gases in the atmosphere that help retain heat are called greenhouse gases. These

gases, primarily carbon dioxide (CO2), absorb heat instead of allowing it to escape into

space. This “greenhouse effect" makes the planet a hospitable place

2

1.2 GREEN HOUSE GASES

Greenhouse gases (GHG) are gaseous components of the atmosphere that contribute to

the greenhouse effect. They absorb infrared light. Without the effect of these naturally

occurring gases, the average temperature on the Earth would be -18° C, instead of the

current average of 15°. Life as we know it would be impossible.

The greenhouse effect describes the role of the atmosphere in insulating the planet from

heat loss. The small concentrations of greenhouse gases within the atmosphere that cause

this effect allow most of the sunlight to pass through the atmosphere to heat the planet.

However, these gases absorb much of the outgoing heat energy radiated by the earth

itself, and return much of this energy back towards the surface. This keeps the surface

much warmer than if they were absent. This is called the greenhouse effect because it

resembles the role of glass in a greenhouse. Over the past 10,000 years, the amount of

these greenhouse gases in our atmosphere has been relatively stable. But a few centuries

ago, concentrations began to increase due to the demand for

(i) Energy caused by industrialization and rising populations, and

(ii) To changing land use and human settlement patterns.

3

Thus major natural greenhouse gases are: water vapor, which causes about 36-70% of

the greenhouse effect on Earth (not including clouds); carbon dioxide, which causes

between 9-26%; and ozone, which causes between 3-7% .Other greenhouse gases

include, but are not limited to: methane, nitrous oxide, sulfur hexafluoride, and

chlorofluorocarbons. Increased concentrations of CO2 and other greenhouse gases lead to

a warming of the Earth's surface and the lower atmosphere. The resulting changes in

climate and their impacts (e.g. on sea level, agriculture and forestry) can be estimated

without associating the origin of the warming to anyone of these gases specifically.

Top: Increasing atmospheric CO2 levels as measured in the

atmosphere and ice cores.

Bottom: The amount of net carbon increase in the atmosphere, compared

to carbon emissions from burning

4

1.3 MAJOR GREEN HOUSE GASES

Greenhouse Gases are found in the earth’s atmosphere and trap in heat by preventing

reflected sunlight escaping back into space. Many of these gases are produced by human

activities, and although they make up only a small proportion of the overall atmosphere,

they have a very large effect on our climate. The Greenhouse Gases are:

Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is the most important Greenhouse Gas as it causes around 60%

of the Enhanced Greenhouse Effect. Once it was present in very high concentrations, but

as life evolved on earth, most was removed by photosynthesis in plants and by dissolving

in the oceans. As the plants died, much of this extra CO2 became “stored away” in oil,

natural gas and coal within the Earth’s crust, but it is now being released back into the

atmosphere as we use up these Fossil Fuels in vehicles heating systems and to generate

electricity.

The naturally occurring Carbon Dioxide which is produced by plant decay, animal

respiration and volcanoes is almost exactly balanced out by plant photosynthesis,

however as humans begin to reduce the available numbers of plants (e.g. by

deforestation) and burn Fossil Fuels, the level of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing. A

molecule of Carbon Dioxide can stay in the atmosphere for as long as 100 years.

Methane There is less methane in the atmosphere than CO2, but it causes 21 times as

much warming and is responsible for around 20% of the overall Enhanced Greenhouse

Effect. Methane is produced when bacteria break down organic matter, and is removed in

a natural process which creates water. It is also found in Natural Gas, which is a Fossil

Fuel. A molecule of Methane can remain in the atmosphere for up to 12 years. Human

activity has increased Methane levels through intense livestock farming, rice plantations

and landfill sites, as well as burning Fossil Fuels.

Nitrous Oxide is only present in the atmosphere in very small amounts, but causes 20300

times as much warming as the same amount of CO2. It occurs naturally when tiny

creatures called micro-organisms remove nitrogen from soil and release it into

5

atmosphere as Nitrous Oxide. It is also released from the oceans. This natural Nitrous

Oxide is used up by plants to produce the ammonia, which they need to live.

Unfortunately humans have unbalanced this cycle by extensive use of nitrate fertilizers,

burning wood and Fossil Fuels and even sewage treatment plants, so the amount of

Nitrous Oxide in the atmosphere is increasing. Nitrous Oxide can remain in the

atmosphere for as long as 150 years.

Ozone is created and destroyed quite rapidly in the atmosphere by radiation from the sun.

Sunlight converts Oxygen into Ozone in the upper atmosphere and ultraviolet rays break

it down again. The importance of Ozone in climate change is not fully understood, but

the Ozone Layer is known to shield animals and plants from the harmful effects of the

sun’s ultraviolet rays. As well as causing serious health problems, such as skin cancer,

these rays can also have a destructive effect on crops and important creatures called

Phytoplankton, which live, in the sea, so the reduction in the Ozone layer may indirectly

affect our climate. Ozone is being destroyed by humans releasing Halocarbons, such as

CFCs, into the atmosphere.

Halocarbons are gases which do not usually occur naturally. The most well-known

Halocarbons are the CFCs, although there are others such as HFCs and HCFCs. These

gases were used as coolants, spray-can propellants and solvents until we realized that

they can remain in the atmosphere for up to 400 years, and that some have a warming

effect of up to 13,000 times that of CO2! CFCs are also thought to be the main cause of

the destruction of the Ozone Layer. The use of Halocarbons is now greatly restricted, but

their levels are still slowly increasing and they will remain in the atmosphere for a very

long time to come.

Water Vapour is the gas, which naturally produces the greatest Greenhouse Effect. Its

concentration in the atmosphere varies – over the cold, dry, polar regions, the air holds

less Water Vapour than over the hot, humid Tropical regions. Consequently, if the

general air temperature increases due to the Enhanced Greenhouse Effect, the amount of

Water Vapour in the atmosphere increases, which produces even more warming!

6

CHAPTER -2

GREEN HOUSE EFFECT

7

GREENHOUSE EFFECT

The Earth has a natural temperature control system. Certain atmospheric gases are critical

to this system and are known as greenhouse gases. On average, about one third of the

solar radiation that hits the earth is reflected back to space. Of the remainder, the

atmosphere absorbs some but the land and oceans absorb most. The Earth's surface

becomes warm and as a result emits infrared radiation. The greenhouse gases trap the

infrared radiation, thus warming the atmosphere. Naturally occurring greenhouse gases

include water vapour, carbon dioxide, ozone, methane and nitrous oxide, and together

create a natural greenhouse effect. However, human activities are causing greenhouse gas

levels in the atmosphere to increase. Note: Greenhouse gases are mixed throughout in the

atmosphere. For pedagogical reasons they are depicted here as a layer

8

2.1 WHAT IS THE "GREENHOUSE EFFECT" ALL ABOUT?

The "Greenhouse Earth" is surrounded by a shield of atmospheric gases, rather than a

glass or a plastic cover. The air that makes up our atmosphere consists primarily of

nitrogen and oxygen molecules (N2 at 78% and O2 at 21%). A large number of "trace

gases" make up the remainder of air's composition. Many of these, including carbon

dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) are the so-called "greenhouse" gases. If you have ever

felt the piercing cold of the clear winter night sky and wondered why you feel warmer on

a cloudy winter night, you have experienced the atmospheric greenhouse effect firsthand.

Physics tell us that any object warmer than absolute zero will radiate energy. Cooler

objects emit longer waves (in the infrared region) while hotter ones radiate shorter

wavelengths. Our sun, powered by its hot, nuclear fusion reaction, produces radiant

energy in the visible and ultraviolet regions with relatively short wavelengths. Of the

sunlight that strikes the earth, about 70% is absorbed by the planet and its atmosphere,

while the other 30% is immediately reflected. If the earth did not re-radiate most of this

newly absorbed energy back into space the world would continue to get warmer. Instead,

an energy balance is maintained.

The earth is about 60 degrees Fahrenheit (33 degrees Celsius) warmer than it would be if

it did not have the atmospheric blanket of greenhouse gases and clouds around it. Clouds

and greenhouse gases keep the earth warm. Once warmed, their molecules then radiate a

portion of this heat energy back to earth, creating more warming on the surface of our

planet. It is this radiation that causes atmospheric gases to move back to earth that

scientists call the "greenhouse effect".

Carbon dioxide (CO2) gas generated by man's burning of fossil fuels and the forests is

responsible for about half the greenhouse gas warming. Other gases (CFCs, methane,

nitrous oxide, tropospheric ozone) are responsible for the rest. Increases in all these gases

are due to mankind's explosive population growth over the last century, and increased

industrial expansion. Approximately 80% of atmospheric CO2 increases are due to man's

use of fossil fuels: oil, coal, and gas. These petroleum-based energy sources first came

into use with the burning of coal during Since 1945 petroleum consumption has increased

9

dramatically, due in large part to increased usage of automobiles worldwide, and the

substitution of mechanized farm machinery for animal power. "Mankind is in the process

of conducting a major, unintentional experiment, that of feeding back into the atmosphere

in a short space of geological time the fossils fuels that have slowly accumulated over the

past 500 million years.

2.2 Effect Of Human Activities in the Level of greenhouse gases In the Atmosphere

Human activity raises levels of greenhouse gases primarily by releasing carbon dioxide,

but other gases, e.g. methane, are not negligible. The concentrations of several

greenhouse gases have increased over time due to human activities, such as:

burning of fossil fuels and deforestation leading to higher carbon dioxide

concentrations, Carbon dioxide is the main culprit here as far as human activities

are concerned. Fossil fuel use and consumption currently accounts for between 70

and 90% of all human emissions of carbon dioxide. Fossil fuels are used for

transportation, manufacturing, heating, cooling, electricity generation, as well as

many other applications

livestock and paddy rice farming, land use and wetland changes, pipeline losses,

and covered vented landfill emissions leading to higher methane atmospheric

concentrations, many of the newer style fully vented septic systems that enhance

and target the fermentation process also are major sources of atmospheric

methane.

Nitrous oxide comes from both natural sources and human activities. Fossil fuel

combustion, industrial practices, and agricultural practices including the use of

chemical fertilizers all increase atmospheric nitrous oxide.

The industrial production of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and other halocarbons -

used in refrigeration, air conditioning, and as solvents - have added other

greenhouse gas.

10

Ozone in the troposphere (the lower part of the atmosphere) result from industrial

activities. It is created naturally, but is also produced by atmospheric reactions

caused by smog precursors such as nitrogen oxide from motor vehicles and power

plants.

2.3 INCREASE OF GREEN HOUSE GASES

Based on measurements from Antarctic ice cores, it is widely accepted that just before

industrial emissions began, atmospheric CO2 levels were about 280 µL/L. From the same

ice cores it appears that CO2 concentrations have stayed between 260 and 280 µL/L

during the entire preceding 10,000 years.

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the concentrations of many of the

greenhouse gases have increased. Most of the increase in carbon dioxide occurred after

1945. Those with the largest radiative forcing are:

11

Global carbon dioxide emissions 1751–2000.Relevant to both radiative forcing and ozone depletion; all of the following have no natural sources and hence zero amounts pre-industrial

GasCurrent (1998)Amount by volume

Radiative forcing(W/m2)

CFC-11 268 ppt 0.07

CFC-12 533 ppt 0.17

CFC-113 84 ppt 0.03

Carbon tetrachloride 102 ppt 0.01

HCFC-22 69 ppt 0.03

(Source: IPCC radiative forcing report 1994 updated (to 1998) by IPCC TAR table 6.1)

2.4 Removal from the atmosphere and global warming potential

12

Major Green House Gas Trends:

The greenhouse gases, once in the atmosphere, do not remain there eternally. They can be

removed from the atmosphere:

as a consequence of a physical change (condensation and precipitation remove

water vapor from the atmosphere).

as a consequence of chemical reactions within the atmosphere. This is the case for

methane. It is oxidized by reaction with naturally occurring hydroxyl radical, OH·

and degraded to CO2 and water vapor at the end of a chain of reactions. This also

includes solution and solid phase chemistry occurring in atmospheric aerosols.

as a consequence of a physical interchange at the interface between the

atmosphere and the other compartments of the planet. An example is the mixing

of atmospheric gases into the oceans at the boundary layer.

as a consequence of a chemical change at the interface between the atmosphere

and the other compartments of the planet. This is the case for CO2, which is

reduced by photosynthesis of plants, and which, after dissolving in the oceans,

reacts to form carbonic acid and bicarbonate and carbonate ions

as a consequence of a photochemical change driven by sun light. Halocarbons are

dissociated by UV light releasing Cl· and F· as free radicals in the stratosphere

with harmful effects on ozone

as a consequence of dissociative ionization caused by high energy cosmic rays or

lightning discharges, which break molecular bonds. For example, lightning forms

N atoms from N2 which then react with O2 to form NO2.

13

2.5 COUNTRIES BY CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS

Countries by carbon dioxide emissions

2.6 CHANGES IN CLIMATE

The Earth’s climate has constantly changed throughout history, and in the past it was

assumed this was a natural process, unaffected by humans. These changes are seen in

weather, temperature, rainfall, humidity and various other ecological features of our

biosphere and are caused by both natural and human factors.

Now, scientists are concerned that the Earth is warming up, and there is evidence that

most of the change that has taken place in the last 50 years or so has been caused by

human activities.

This warming is affecting the Earth’s climate and the rate at which the warming is taking

place is increasing, making the risk to life and our environment even greater.

14

Some of the climate changes we are likely to see because of this are: Average temperatures could rise by 5°C or more 

Natural processes like volcanic eruptions, changes in the sun’s intensity, or very

slow changes in ocean circulation or land surfaces that occur on time scales of

decades, centuries or longer are factors in influencing climate change.

Key natural factors include changes in the intensity of sunlight reaching the earth

and in the concentration of volcanic dust.

Humans can also cause climates to change by releasing greenhouse gases and

aerosols into the atmosphere, by changing land surfaces, and by depleting the

stratospheric ozone layer. An increase in greenhouse gases enhances the natural

Greenhouse effect which in turn can lead to an increase in the earth’s average

surface temperature

The cooler regions will warm up more than the tropics

Hurricanes will become more intense

Monsoons will become more intense

There will be more frequent heavy rains and floods

The high sea levels which accompany storms will become higher and occur more

frequently, increasing costal flooding

The break up of Antarctic ice could raise overall sea levels

Wintertime precipitation in the colder regions will increase

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which brings together 2,500 of

the world’s climate experts, projected in its Third Assessment Report in 2001 that the

globally averaged surface temperature would increase by between 1.4 and 5.8 degrees

Celsius from 1990 to 2100, under a business-as-usual scenario.

As global temperatures rise, sea levels also will rise by between nine and 88 centimeters

over the same period, the IPCC projects.

The IPCC’s findings were reinforced by a report by the European Environment Agency

issued in August 2004, which concluded that Europe is warming faster than the global

average. The temperature in Europe is projected to climb by a further 2.0 to 6.3 degrees

Celsius this century as emissions of greenhouse gases continue building up. Roughly two

15

out of every three catastrophic events since 1980 have been directly attributable to floods,

storms, droughts or heat waves.

2.7 SCIENCE BEHIND CLIMATE CHANGE

The Earth's atmosphere acts as a filter for solar rays; approximately half of the visible

light and ultraviolet radiation given off by the sun is either absorbed by the various layers

or reflected back into space. Most of the 50% that does get through heats the Earth's

surface and is eventually reflected back into space as infrared radiation. This 'greenhouse

effect' is the atmospheric trapping of that infrared radiation; a natural phenomenon

without which the Earth would be uninhabitably cold for humans

When carbon-based fossil fuels are burned, greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide,

methane and nitrous oxide are emitted. These gases add to that atmospheric layer that is

permeable to ultraviolet, but not infrared radiation. As more fossil fuels are burned, the

layer of greenhouse gases thickens; solar radiation continues to pass through unimpeded,

while heat reflected from the Earth finds it harder and harder to escape into space. In the

medium to long term, this results in the gradual increase in the Earth's temperature known

classically as 'global warming'.

Global climate dynamics, however, are unpredictable. Climactic models show that the

short to medium impacts of an increase in the atmosphere's concentration of greenhouse

gases will likely lead to increased warming in some areas with deep cooling in others For

example, consider the impact of the disruption of the gulf stream, the oceanic system that

keeps the British Isles a comfortable temperature at the same latitude as Moscow and

increased storms and rainfall in some areas with prolonged drought in others. The

unpredictability of the global climate system’s response to an increase in carbon dioxide

has recast the term “global warming” into its now accepted' global climate change'.

16

Certain gases, such as chlorofluorocarbons, contribute twofold to climate change by

simultaneously trapping reflected heat and thinning the protective ozone layer. This

ozone depletion reduces the atmosphere’s ability to absorb and reflect solar radiation. As

a result more solar radiation is able to reach the Earth's surface and potentially accelerate

the process of climate change.

17

CHAPTER 3

GLOBAL WARMING

18

3.1Global warming

Global warming is the increase in the average temperature of the Earth's near-surface air

and oceans in recent decades and its projected continuation.

Global average air temperature near the Earth's surface rose 0.74 ± 0.18 °C (1.33 ±

0.32 °F) during the twentieth century. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

(IPCC) concludes, "most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures

since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic

greenhouse gas concentrations," which leads to warming of the surface and lower

atmosphere by increasing the greenhouse effect. Natural phenomena such as solar

variation combined with volcanoes have probably had a small warming effect from pre-

industrial times to 1950, but a small cooling effect since 1950. These basic conclusions

have been endorsed by at least 30 scientific societies and academies of science, including

all of the national academies of science of the major industrialized countries.

19

Climate models referenced by the IPCC project that global surface temperatures are

likely to increase by 1.1 to 6.4 °C (2.0 to 11.5 °F) between 1990 and 2100. The range of

values results from the use of differing scenarios of future greenhouse gas emissions as

well as models with differing climate sensitivity. Although most studies focus on the

period up to 2100, warming and sea level rise are expected to continue for more than a

millennium even if greenhouse gas levels are stabilized. This reflects the large heat

capacity of the oceans.

An increase in global temperatures is expected to cause other changes, including sea level

rise, increased intensity of extreme weather events, and changes in the amount and

pattern of precipitation. Other effects include changes in agricultural yields, glacier

retreat, species extinctions and increases in the ranges of disease vectors.

Remaining scientific uncertainties include the exact degree of climate change expected in

the future, and how changes will vary from region to region around the globe. There is

ongoing political and public debate on a world scale regarding what, if any, action should

be taken to reduce or reverse future warming or to adapt to its expected consequences.

Most national governments have signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol, aimed at

reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Terminology

The term "global warming" is a specific example of the broader term climate change,

which can also refer to global cooling. In common usage the term refers to recent

warming and implies a human influence. The United Nations Framework Convention on

Climate Change (UNFCCC) uses the term "climate change" for human-caused change,

and "climate variability" for other changes. The term "anthropogenic climate change" is

sometimes used when focusing on human-induced changes.

20

Global mean surface temperature anomaly 1850 to 2006 relative to 1961–1990

Mean surface temperature anomalies during the period 1995 to 2004 with respect to the average temperatures from 1940 to 1980

3.2 Causes of Global Warming

“As human-caused biodiversity loss and climate disruption gain ground, we need

to keep our sights clear and understand that the measure of a threat is not a

matter of whether it is made on purpose, but of how much loss it may cause. It's

an ancient habit to go after those we perceive to be evil because they intended to

do harm. It's harder, but more effective, to "go after," meaning to more effectively

educate and socialize, those vastly larger numbers of our fellow humans who are

not evil, but whose behavior may in fact be far more destructive in the long run."

21

Carbon dioxide during the last 400,000 years and (inset above) the rapid rise since the

Industrial Revolution; changes in the Earth's orbit around the Sun, known as

Milankovitch cycles, are believed to be the pacemaker of the 100,000 year ice age cycle.

Carbon Dioxide from Power Plants

In 2002 about 40% of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions stem from the burning of fossil

fuels for the purpose of electricity generation. Coal accounts for 93 percent of the

emissions from the electric utility industry.

Coal emits around 1.7 times as much carbon per unit of energy when burned as does

natural gas and 1.25 times as much as oil. Natural gas gives off 50% of the carbon

dioxide, the principal greenhouse gas, released by coal and 25% less carbon dioxide than

oil, for the same amount of energy produced. Coal contains about 80 percent more carbon

per unit of energy than gas does, and oil contains about 40 percent more. For the typical

U.S. household, a metric ton of carbon equals about 10,000 miles of driving at 25 miles

per gallon of gasoline or about one year of home heating using a natural gas-fired furnace

or about four months of electricity from coal-fired generation.

Carbon Dioxide Emitted from Cars

About 20% of U.S carbon dioxide emissions comes from the burning of gasoline in

internal-combustion engines of cars and light trucks (minivans, sport utility vehicles,

pick-up trucks, and jeeps). Vehicles with poor gas mileage contribute the most to global

22

warming. For example, according to the E.P.A's 2000 Fuel Economy Guide, a new

Dodge Durango sports utility vehicle (with a 5.9 liter engine) that gets 12 miles per

gallon in the city will emit an estimated 800 pounds of carbon dioxide over a distance of

500 city miles. In other words for each gallon of gas a vehicle consumes, 19.6 pounds of

carbon dioxide are emitted into the air.  A new Honda Insight that gets 61 miles to the

gallon will only emit about 161 pounds of carbon dioxide over the same distance of 500

city miles. Sports utility vehicles were built for rough terrain, off road driving in

mountains and deserts. When they are used for city driving, they are so much overkill to

the environment. If one has to have a large vehicle for their family, station wagons are an

intelligent choice for city driving, especially since their price is about half that of a sports

utility. Inasmuch as SUV's have a narrow wheel base in respect to their higher silhouette,

they are four times as likely as cars to rollover in an accident.

The United States is the largest consumer of oil, using 20.4 million barrels per day. In his

debate with former Defense Secretary Dick Cheney, during the 2000 Presidential

campaign, Senator Joseph Lieberman said, "If we can get 3 miles more per gallon from

our cars, we'll save 1 million barrels of oil a day, which is exactly what the (Arctic

National Wildlife) Refuge at its best in Alaska would produce."

If car manufacturers were to increase their fleets' average gas mileage about 3 miles per

gallon, this country could save a million barrels of oil every day, while US drivers would

save $25 billion in fuel costs annually.

Carbon Dioxide from Airplanes

The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates that aviation causes 3.5

percent of global warming, and that the figure could rise to 15 percent by 2050.

Carbon Dioxide from Buildings

Buildings structure account for about 12% of carbon dioxide emissions.

23

Methane

While carbon dioxide is the principal greenhouse gas, methane is second most important.

According to the IPCC, Methane is more than 20 times as

effective as CO2 at trapping heat in the atmosphere Levels of atmospheric methane have

risen 145% in the last 100 years. Methane is derived from sources such as rice paddies,

bovine flatulence, bacteria in bogs and fossil fuel production. Most of the world’s rice,

and all of the rice in the United States, is grown on flooded fields. When fields are

flooded, anaerobic conditions develop and the organic matter in the soil decomposes,

releasing CH4 to the atmosphere, primarily through the rice plants. 

Nitrous oxide

Another greenhouse gas is Nitrous oxide (N2O), a colourless, non-flammable gas with a

sweetish odour, commonly known as "laughing gas", and sometimes used as an

anaesthetic. Nitrous oxide is naturally produced by oceans and rainforests. Man-made

sources of nitrous oxide include nylon and nitric acid production, the use of fertilizers in

agriculture, cars with catalytic converters and the burning of organic matter. Nitrous

oxide is broken down in the atmosphere by chemical reactions that involve sunlight.

Deforestation

After carbon emissions caused by humans, deforestation is the second principle cause of

atmospheric carbon dioxide. Deforestation is responsible for 25% of all carbon emissions

entering the atmosphere, by the burning and cutting of about 34 million acres of trees

each year. We are losing millions of acres of rainforests each year, the equivalent in area

to the size of Italy. The destroying of tropical forests alone is throwing hundreds of

millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year. We are also losing

temperate forests. The temperate forests of the world account for an absorption rate of 2

billion tons of carbon annually. In the temperate forests of Siberia alone, the earth is

losing 10 million acres per year.

24

Carbon in Atmosphere and Ocean

The atmosphere contains about 750 billion tons of carbon, while 800 billion tons are

dissolved in the surface layers of the world's oceans.

3.3 Feedbacks

The effects of forcing agents on the climate are complicated by various feedback

processes. One of the most pronounced feedback effects relates to the evaporation of

water. In the case of warming by the addition of long-lived greenhouse gases such as

CO2, the initial warming will cause more water to be evaporated into the atmosphere.

Since water vapor itself acts as a greenhouse gas, this causes still more warming; the

warming causes more water vapor to be evaporated, and so forth until a new dynamic

equilibrium concentration of water vapor is reached with a much larger greenhouse effect

than that due to CO2 alone. (Although this feedback process involves an increase in the

absolute moisture content of the air, the relative humidity stays nearly constant or even

decreases slightly because the air is warmer.) This feedback effect can only be reversed

slowly as CO2 has a long average atmospheric lifetime.

Feedback effects due to clouds are an area of ongoing research. Seen from below, clouds

emit infrared radiation back to the surface, and so exert a warming effect. Seen from

above, the same clouds reflect sunlight and emit infrared radiation to space, and so exert

a cooling effect. Whether the net effect is warming or cooling depends on details such as

the type and altitude of the cloud. These details are difficult to represent in climate

models, in part because clouds are much smaller than the spacing between points on the

computational grids of climate models (about 125 to 500 km for models used in the IPCC

Fourth Assessment Report). Nevertheless, cloud feedback is second only to water vapor

feedback and is positive in all the models that were used in the IPCC Fourth Assessment

Report.

Another important feedback process is ice-albedo feedback. When global temperatures

increase, ice near the poles melts at an increasing rate. As the ice melts, land or open

water takes its place. Both land and open water are on average less reflective than ice,

25

and thus absorb more solar radiation. This causes more warming, which in turn causes

more melting, and this cycle continues.

Positive feedback due to release of CO2 and CH4 from thawing permafrost is an

additional mechanism contributing to warming. Possible positive feedback due to CH4

release from melting seabed ices is a further mechanism to be considered.

The ocean's ability to sequester carbon is expected to decline as it warms, because the

resulting low nutrient levels of the mesopelagic zone limits the growth of diatoms in

favour of smaller phytoplankton that are poorer biological pumps of carbon.

Solar variation

Solar variation over the last 30 years.

Variations in solar output, possibly amplified by cloud feedbacks, may have contributed

to recent warming. A difference between this mechanism and greenhouse warming is that

an increase in solar activity should produce a warming of the stratosphere while

greenhouse warming should produce a cooling of the stratosphere. Cooling in the lower

stratosphere has been observed since at least 1960, which would not be expected if solar

activity were the main contributor to recent warming. (Reduction of stratospheric ozone

also has a cooling influence but substantial ozone depletion did not occur until the late

1970s.) Phenomena such as solar variation combined with volcanoes have probably had a

warming effect from pre-industrial times to 1950, but a cooling effect since 1950.

26

A few recent papers have suggested that the Sun's contribution may have been

underestimated. Two researchers at Duke University have estimated that the Sun may

have contributed about 40–50% of the global surface temperature warming over the

period 1900–2000, and about 25–35% between 1980 and 2000. Stott and coauthors

suggest that climate models overestimate the relative effect of greenhouse gases

compared to solar forcing; they also suggest that the cooling effects of volcanic dust and

sulfate aerosols have been underestimated. Nevertheless, they conclude that even with an

enhanced climate sensitivity to solar forcing, most of the warming during the latest

decades is attributable to the increases in greenhouse gases.

In 2006, a team of scientists from the United States, Germany, and Switzerland found no

net increase of solar brightness over the last thousand years. Solar cycles lead to a small

increase of 0.07% in brightness over the last 30 years. This effect is far too minute to

contribute significantly to global warming. A 2007 paper by Lockwood and Fröhlich

further confirms the lack of a correlation between solar output and global warming for the

time since 1985.

Temperature changes

Two millennia of mean surface temperatures according to different reconstructions, each

smoothed on a decadal scale. The unsmoothed, annual value for 2004 is also plotted for

reference.

27

Recent

Global temperatures on both land and sea have increased by 0.75 °C (1.35 °F) relative to

the period 1860–1900, according to the instrumental temperature record. This

measured temperature increase is not significantly affected by the urban heat island.

Since 1979, land temperatures have increased about twice as fast as ocean temperatures

(0.25 °C per decade against 0.13 °C per decade). Temperatures in the lower troposphere

have increased between 0.12 and 0.22 °C (0.22 and 0.4 °F) per decade since 1979,

according to satellite temperature measurements. Temperature is believed to have

been relatively stable over the one or two thousand years before 1850, with possibly

regional fluctuations such as the Medieval Warm Period or the Little Ice Age.

Sea temperatures increase more slowly than those on land both because of the larger

effective heat capacity of the oceans and because the ocean can lose heat by evaporation

more readily than the land . Since the northern hemisphere has more land mass than the

southern it warms faster; also there are extensive areas of seasonal snow cover subject to

the snow-albedo feedback. Although more greenhouse gases are emitted in the northern

than southern hemisphere this does not contribute to the asymmetry of warming as the

major gases are essentially well-mixed between hemispheres.

Based on estimates by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, 2005 was the

warmest year since reliable, widespread instrumental measurements became available in

the late 1800s, exceeding the previous record set in 1998 by a few hundredths of a

degree. Estimates prepared by the World Meteorological Organization and the Climatic

Research Unit concluded that 2005 was the second warmest year, behind 1998.

28

3.4 Attributed and expected effects

Sparse records indicate that glaciers have been retreating since the early 1800s. In the

1950s measurements began that allow the monitoring of glacial mass balance, reported to

the WGMS and the NSIDC.

Though it is difficult to connect specific weather events to global warming, an increase in

global temperatures may in turn cause other changes, including glacial retreat and

worldwide sea level rise. Changes in the amount and pattern of precipitation may result in

flooding and drought. There may also be changes in the frequency and intensity of

extreme weather events. Other effects may include changes in agricultural yields, reduced

summer streamflows, species extinctions and increases in the range of disease vectors.

Some effects on both the natural environment and human life are, at least in part, already

being attributed to global warming. A 2001 report by the IPCC suggests that glacier

retreat, ice shelf disruption such as the Larsen Ice Shelf, sea level rise, changes in rainfall

patterns, increased intensity and frequency of extreme weather events, are being

attributed in part to global warming. While changes are expected for overall patterns,

intensity, and frequencies, it is difficult to attribute specific events to global warming.

Other expected effects include water scarcity in some regions and increased precipitation

in others, changes in mountain snowpack, and adverse health effects from warmer

temperatures.

29

Increasing deaths, displacements, and economic losses projected due to extreme weather

attributed to global warming may be exacerbated by growing population densities in

affected areas, although temperate regions are projected to experience some minor

benefits, such as fewer deaths due to cold exposure. A summary of probable effects and

recent understanding can be found in the report made for the IPCC Third Assessment

Report by Working Group II.The newer IPCC Fourth Assessment Report summary

reports that there is observational evidence for an increase in intense tropical cyclone

activity in the North Atlantic Ocean since about 1970, in correlation with the increase in

sea surface temperature, but that the detection of long-term trends is complicated by the

quality of records prior to routine satellite observations. The summary also states that

there is no clear trend in the annual worldwide number of tropical cyclones.

Additional anticipated effects include sea level rise of 110 to 770 millimeters (0.36 to

2.5 ft) between 1990 and 2100, repercussions to agriculture, possible slowing of the

thermohaline circulation, reductions in the ozone layer, increased intensity and frequency

of hurricanes and extreme weather events, lowering of ocean pH, and the spread of

diseases such as malaria and dengue fever. One study predicts 18% to 35% of a sample of

1,103 animal and plant species would be extinct by 2050, based on future climate

projections. Two populations of Bay checkerspot butterfly are being threatened by

changes in precipitation, though few mechanistic studies have documented extinctions

due to recent climate change.

3.5 Consequences of climate change

Some of the likely consequences of climate change - shifts in temperature and rainfall

that may create dustbowls and famine, and more frequent and violent and hurricanes –

have been given considerable publicity. While these represent grave problems, it has been

argued that it would benefit society more to carry on with economic business as usual,

and simply adapt to the new climatic circumstances. We focus here on sea level change,

the impact of which is likely to be on such a scale that adaptation cannot be presented as

a preferred option.

30

Ice Age climate

Ice Age climate change has been rapid, pervasive and frequent. For instance, during the

last 2.6 million years, the duration of the current Ice Age, there have been 104 major

fluctuations between global cold and global warmth. Each of the major fluctuations was

itself complex, encompassing ‘minor’ changes of up to 5 degrees centigrade in average

annual temperature. As temperature rose and fell, so did global sea level, by up to 130

metres. These changes did not lead to catastrophic global extinctions of the earth’s biota.

The extensive animal and plant communities of the past, undisrupted by human

development, could adapt to the changes by migrating, or by shrinking or expanding

populations. In shrinking animal populations, of course, there is an excess of deaths over

births, by starvation or predation. Our current human population, faced with comparable

climate change, will have a similar choice, and there is now little room for migration.

Our current interglacial

Human development has coincided with one of the relatively infrequent episodes of

prolonged climate stability, of a little over 10 000 years since the end of the last

glaciation. This episode is the latest of a series of interglacial phases which, in the last

half million years, have occurred at intervals of roughly 100 000 years. It has been

commonly thought that we are at the tail end of this warm climate phase, and that feeling

sharpened in the late 1990’s when new data from Antarctic ice cores showed that the

previous three warm phases each lasted between 6000 and 9000 years. Thus, given a

similar trend, the ice-sheets would have returned to cover Europe during the ancient

Egyptian or Greek civilizations, and the trend of human history would have been

immeasurably different.

This year, though, the longest Antarctic ice-core record yet obtained shows that the warm

phase before that, a little less than half a million years ago, lasted some 30 000 years.

That long interglacial episode is thought to be the best model for our current warm phase,

This recently observed behaviour has shown clearly that ice-sheets are not relatively inert

masses responding sluggishly to temperature change. Rather they are now perceived in

much more dynamic terms, showing strong – and potentially dangerous – responses to

31

small changes in external conditions. This would accord with geological evidence

indicating past ice-sheet collapses, releasing ‘iceberg armadas’ and causing sea level rises

of several meters in a decade.

Sea level change

Sea level has constantly fluctuated in the geological past: its highest recorded level was in

the Cretaceous Period, some 80 million years ago, when CO2 levels were considerably

higher than at present, and ice-caps were virtually absent from the earth. Then, sea level

stood at least 200 metres higher than today, with most of the UK being submerged. The

sea level fluctuations of the Ice Age, as continental ice caps waxed and waned, are well

known. Thus, 20 000 years ago, at the peak of the last glaciation, so much water had been

extracted from the oceans that sea level stood some 120 metres below its present level,

and Stone Age people walked across the floor of the North Sea.

The most recent analogue?

Less well known are the variable sea levels recorded in previous warm phases of the Ice

Ages. For instance, in the most recent of these, some 125 000 years ago, sea level reached

some 6 m higher than at present. Such a difference is geologically modest, and reflects

relatively minor differences in the extent of melting of land ice. We emphasize that it

occurred in a world where levels of greenhouse gases, unaffected by humans, were lower

than at present.

Ice sheets today

Even at today’s slightly elevated temperatures, with a rise of around half a degree

centigrade, mountain glaciers are receding significantly, as also seem to be, locally, the

margins of the ice in Greenland and Antarctica. The Greenland icecap is vulnerable, and

its loss would mean a sea level rise of some 7 meters. As it creates its own regional

climate, its loss may be effectively permanent. In Antarctica, the recent break-up of ice

shelves has precipitated increased streaming of ice from much farther inland, which

potentially represents the initiation of a phase of much more serious ice-sheet collapse.

32

3.6 Economics

Some economists have tried to estimate the aggregate net economic costs of damages

from climate change across the globe. Such estimates have so far failed to reach

conclusive findings; in a survey of 100 estimates, the values ran from US$-10 per tonne

of carbon (tC) (US$-3 per tonne of carbon dioxide) up to US$350/tC (US$95 per tonne of

carbon dioxide), with a mean of US$43 per tonne of carbon (US$12 per tonne of carbon

dioxide). One widely-publicized report on potential economic impact is the Stern

Review; it suggests that extreme weather might reduce global gross domestic product by

up to 1%, and that in a worst case scenario global per capita consumption could fall

20%.The report's methodology, advocacy and conclusions have been criticized by many

economists, primarily around the Review's assumptions of discounting and its choices of

scenarios, while others have supported the general attempt to quantify economic risk,

even if not the specific numbers. In a summary of economic cost associated with climate

change, the United Nations Environment Programme emphasizes the risks to insurers,

reinsurers, and banks of increasingly traumatic and costly weather events. Other

economic sectors likely to face difficulties related to climate change include agriculture

and transport. Developing countries, rather than the developed world, are at greatest

economic risk.

33

CHAPTER 4

KYOTO PROTOCOL

34

4.1 INTRODUCTION

The greenhouse effect is very simple. We are increasing emissions of greenhouse gases

and thus their concentrations in the atmosphere are going up. As these concentrations

increase, the temperature of the Earth rises. This, in turn, leads to changes in the patterns

of precipitation and to sea level rise. And as temperatures, precipitation and sea level

change, there is reason to worry about adverse effects on ecological and socio-economic

systems, and on human health.

There is now a discernible human influence on the Earth's climate system. If there is no

global agreement to try and limit greenhouse-gas emissions, the temperature of the Earth

is expected to increase between 1.0 and 3.5oC over the next century. Such a rate of

change has not been experienced at any time during the past 10,000 years. Therefore,

since last more than 60 years efforts are being made to reach an agreement, involving all

countries of the world, so as to control the level of green house gases in the atmosphere at

an acceptable level.

Thus , Kyoto Protocol ,an international treaty has designed to limit global

greenhouse gas emissions.

AMIDST growing concern & increasing awareness on the need for pollution control, the

concept of carbon credit came into vogue as part of an international agreement popularly

known as KYOTO PROTOCOL . Carbon credits are certificates issued to countries that

35

reduce their emissions of green house gaseswhich causes global warming. Some GHG

gases like hydro fluoro carbons , methane & nitrous oxide are released as by-products of

certain industrial process , which adversely affect the ozone layer , leading to global

warming.

The Kyoto accord, which aims to curb the air pollution blamed for global warming, has

come into force seven years after it was agreed.

The accord requires countries to cut emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse

gases.

Some 141 countries, accounting for 55% of greenhouse gas emissions, have ratified the

treaty, which pledges to cut these emissions by 5.2% by 2012. However, the U.S, which

accounts for one-third of the total GHG emission, is yet to sign this treaty. The

preliminary phase of the Kyoto Protocol is to start in ’07 while the second phase starts

from ’08.

Industrial pollutants are blamed for global warming

36

4.2 HISTORY OF THE KYOTO PROTOCOL

The Kyoto protocol is the first step in halting climate change

1972-1st Earth Summit in Stockholm, Sweden

Here, the world leaders announced their intention to hold a gathering every ten years to

determine the health of the planet.

1982-Failed Earth Summit in Nairobi, Kenya

At the height of the Cold War, this summit failed to reach any significant agreements. It

is not considered an official Earth Summit.

1988-The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was created

Started by the United Nations, the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) brought

together scientists from the world's governments. During the 1980s, discussion about

climate change focused on whether the world was warming or cooling and the formation

of the IPCC marked an important step towards finding scientific answers.

1988-Toronto Conference on the Changing Atmosphere

Former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and former Norwegian prime minister Gro

Harlem Bruntland hosted one of the world's first major scientific conferences on climate

change. It called for a 20% cut to 1988 greenhouse gas emissions by 2005 and called the

effect of climate change, "second only to global nuclear war."

37

1990 - The first report of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

Two years after its formation, the IPCC released its first report. It said it had reason to

believe two things. One that the planet was warming. Two that human activity was

causing it. It also said given existing models and science, it would need more time to be

certain.

1992 - 2nd Earth Summit, Riode Janeiro, Brazil

The largest gathering of world leaders ever, the Earth Summit created the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change, also known as the Rio Convention. This

convention called on the world to stabilize 1990 greenhouse gas emissions by 2000.

Both Canada and the United States signed and ratified this convention. Importantly,

former U.S. president George Bush negotiated an agreement to allow developing nations

to increase emissions, the reason they are not included in the Kyoto Protocol. The treaty

is legally binding on countries that ratified it.

1995-Conference of Parties I in Berlin, Germany

Each year, the countries that ratified the Rio Convention held a Conference of Parties

(COP). The first of these happened in 1995 and reviewed the adequacy of the Rio

Convention's goal of stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions.

1995 –The second report of the International Panel on Climate Change

Five years after saying it needed more science to be certain, the IPCC released its second

report saying "the balance of evidence" pointed to a "discernable human influence on the

global climate system".

1996-Conference of Parties II (COP II) in Geneva, Switzerland

In the first meeting after the IPCC's second report, the countries belonging to the Rio

Convention said, "climate change represented a danger to humanity."

38

1997-Conference of Parties III in Kyoto, Japan

After reviewing the original targets of the Rio Convention and finding them to be too

weak, the countries came up with new targets. Now, 1990 greenhouse gas emissions

would be cut by 5% between 2008 and 2012.

Though 5% is a global target, different countries have different targets. The European

Union's target is 8% cut (Germany committed to a 25% cut and the U.K. to 15%). The

United States had a target of 7%, while Canada has a target of 6%.

Both Canada and the United States signed the Kyoto Protocol, thereby promising to cut

their greenhouse gas emissions.

1998-Conference of the Parties IV, Bueno Aires,Argentina

Here, the Buenos Aires Plan of Action was developed to decide how the Kyoto

mechanism (emissions trading, carbon sinks, clean development in the developing world,

etc.) would be implemented. The countries agreed the mechanism through which targets

would be achieved would be finalized by COP VI, or by 2000.

1999 - COP V in Bonn, Germany

2000-COPVI in The Hague, Netherlands

This meeting was the deadline the countries gave themselves in Buenos Aries to develop

a way to cut emission as outlined in the Kyoto Protocol. The meeting failed, largely

due to an inability to agree on "carbon sinks," a key demand of both Canada and the

United States. In the aftermath of the failure, a subsequent meeting was held in Ottawa in

the hopes the failure was due to misunderstanding, rather than a deep policy gap. The

Ottawa meeting also failed.

2001 - COP VII in Bonn, Germany: Just before dawn on July 29 2001, the world

reached the agreement that had eluded them in The Hague. 180 countries (that is, the

whole world except for the United States and Australia) agreed to the rules for

implementing the Kyoto Protocol.

39

2002-December:Canada ratifies the Kyoto Protocol

Canada ratified the Kyoto protocol, committing to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to

6 percent below 1990 levels by 2008-2012.

2004-November: Russia Ratifies the Kyoto Protocol

For the protocol to go into effect; it must be ratified by the countries that together are

responsible for at least 55% of 1990 global greenhouse gas emissions. This milestone was

reached once Russia ratified the agreement on November 18.

2005 - February: the Kyoto Protocol goes into effect

The Kyoto Protocol automatically goes into effect 90 days after enough countries have

signed, making February 16, 2005 the first day the agreement comes into effect.

40

4.3 DETAILS OF THE AGREEMENT

Kyoto Protocol is an agreement made

under the United Nations Framework

Convention on Climate Change

(UNFCCC). Countries that ratify this

protocol commit to reduce their

emissions of carbon dioxide and five

other greenhouse gases, or engage in

emissions trading if they maintain or

increase emissions of these gases.

According to a press release from the

United Nations Environment

Programme:

"The Kyoto Protocol is an agreement under which industrialized countries will reduce

their collective emissions of greenhouse gases by 5.2% compared to the year 1990 (but

note that, compared to the emissions levels that would be expected by 2010 without the

Protocol, this target represents a 29% cut). The goal is to lower overall emissions of six

greenhouse gases - carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, sulfur hexafluoride, HFCs,

and PFCs - calculated as an average over the five-year period of 2008-12. National

targets range from 8% reductions for the European Union and some others to 7% for the

US, 6% for Japan, 0% for Russia, and permitted increases of 8% for Australia and 10%

for Iceland."

It is an agreement negotiated as an amendment to the United Nations Framework

Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC, which was adopted at the Earth Summit in

Rio de Janeiro in 1992). All parties to the UNFCCC can sign or ratify the Kyoto Protocol,

while non-parties to the UNFCCC cannot. The Kyoto Protocol was adopted at the third

session of the Conference of Parties (COP) to the UNFCCC in 1997 in Kyoto, Japan.

The Kyoto Protocol is an amendment to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Kyoto Protocol

Opened for signature

December 11, 1997 in Kyoto, Japan

Entered into force

February 16, 2005.

Conditions for entry into force

55 parties and at least 55% CO2 1990 emissions by UNFCCC Annex I parties.

Parties163 countries (as of April 2006)

41

This agreement is (supposed to be) legally binding. This means that states that have

agreed to its terms and then fail to live up to their commitments will be sanctioned –

including by having to reduce their emissions even more in a subsequent period. But

states that withdraw from the entire agreement cannot be sanctioned.

The 5% reduction in emissions required by the Protocol is an average: some countries are

required to reduce more, and others less. The quotas and targets assigned to each country

were arrived at through many rounds of tough negotiations. This figure shows how

different countries must reduce their emissions compared with 1990.

TARGETS: In the Kyoto Protocol, the developed countries agreed to limit their emissions of greenhouse gases. The graphic above shows how many percent each country’s emissions must be reduced (or is allowed to increase) in the years 2008-2012 compared to 1990. Source: IEA, illustration: CICERO 

Most provisions of the Kyoto Protocol apply to developed countries, listed in Annex I to

the UNFCCC.

4.4 FINANCIAL COMMITMENTS

The Protocol also reaffirms the principle that developed countries have to pay, and supply

technology to, other countries for climate-related studies and projects. This was originally

agreed in the UNFCCC.

42

4.5 EMISSIONS TRADING

Each ratifying Annex I country has agreed to limit emissions to the levels described in

the protocol, but many countries have limits that are set above their current production.

These "extra amounts" can be purchased by other countries on the open market. So, for

instance, Russia currently easily meets its targets, and can sell off its credits for millions

of dollars to countries that don't yet meet their targets, to Canada for instance. This

rewards countries that meet their targets, and provides financial incentives to others to do

so as soon as possible:

Countries also receive credits through various shared "clean energy" programs and

"carbon dioxide sinks" in the form of forests and other systems that remove carbon

dioxide from the atmosphere.

A Washington D.C.-based NGO, in the report pdf.wri.org "Getting It Right: Emerging

Markets for Storing Carbon in Forests", assumes values of $30-40/ton in the US and $70-

80/ton in Europe. On 18 April 2001, The Netherlands purchased credits for 4 megatons of

carbon dioxide emissions from Poland, Romania, and the Czech Republic; this was part

of the ERUPT procurement procedure. These purchase agreements however contained

conditions precedent, e.g. referring to the financing of the underlying projects. Since

several of these conditions have not been met, the amount of purchased credits has since

then decreased.

4.6 REVISIONS

The protocol left several issues open to be decided later by the Conference of Parties

(COP). COP6 attempted to resolve these issues at its meeting in the Hague in late 2000,

but was unable to reach an agreement due to disputes between the European Union on the

one hand (which favoured a tougher agreement) and the United States, Canada, Japan and

Australia on the other (which wanted the agreement to be less demanding and more

flexible).

In 2001, a continuation of the previous meeting (COP6bis) was held in Bonn where the

required decisions were adopted. After some concessions, the supporters of the protocol

43

(led by the European Union) managed to get Japan and Russia in as well by allowing

more use of carbon dioxide sinks.

COP7 was held from 29 October 2001 – 9 November 2001 in Marrakech to establish the

final details of the protocol.

The first Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (MOP1) was held in Montreal from

November 28 to December 9, 2005, along with the 11th conference of the Parties to the

UNFCCC (COP11).

4.7 OBJECTIVES

The objective of the Kyoto Protocol is to stabilize and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG)

emissions, mitigate climate change, and promote sustainable development. The Protocol

is historic in that it is the first attempt to achieve international agreements to mitigate

global climate change through reduction in Green House Gases, and the first to employ

the flexibility of the global market place for global environmental management. The

Protocol emerged first as a framework agreement, but through international negotiations

it is progressing into sets of legal articles. These impose obligations on all signatories, but

they also identify opportunities for improved environmental land management at local,

national and international levels.

The Kyoto Protocol recognizes the overwhelming importance of controlling and reducing

GHG emissions (sources) which currently come primarily from industrial and

transportation sources, but it also recognizes the corresponding opportunities to be gained

through better management of carbon (C) reservoirs and enhancement of C sinks

(sequestration) in forestry and agriculture. These latter aspects are achieved through

better management of land use change (conversions) and improved local land

management. Thus, the Protocol is an excellent opportunity to promote local, national

and global soil conservation, and develop networks and partnerships for global

environmental management. It is a classic “win-win” situation.

44

CHAPTER 5

IMPLEMENTION OF KYOTO PROTOCOL

45

5.1 STATUS OF THE AGREEMENT

Participation in the Kyoto Protocol, where dark green indicates countries that have signed

and ratified the treaty and yellow indicates states that have signed and hope to ratify the

treaty. Notably, Australia and the United States have signed but, currently, decline to

ratify it.

The treaty was negotiated in Kyoto, Japan in December 1997, opened for signature on

March 16, 1998, and closed on March 15, 1999. The agreement came into force on

February 16, 2005 following ratification by Russia on November 18, 2004. As of April

2006, a total of 163 countries have ratified the agreement (representing over 61.6% of

emissions from Annex I countries) UNFCCC.int Duwe, Matthias. Notable exceptions

include the United States and Australia. Other countries, like India and China, which

have ratified the protocol, are not required to reduce carbon emissions under the present

agreement.

According to terms of the protocol, it enters into force "on the ninetieth day after the date

on which not less than 55 Parties to the Convention, incorporating Parties included in

Annex I which accounted in total for at least 55 per cent of the total carbon dioxide

46

emissions for 1990 of the Parties included in Annex I, have deposited their instruments of

ratification, acceptance, approval or accession." Of the two conditions, the "55 parties"

clause was reached on May 23, 2002 when Iceland ratified. The ratification by Russia on

18 November 2004 satisfied the "55 percent" clause and brought the treaty into force,

effective February 16, 2005.

5.2 Responsibility For Controlling Green House Gas Emissions Under The Kyoto Protocol

According to principles of International Law, all signatories of the Kyoto Protocol are

responsible for containing their greenhouse gas emissions within the assigned amounts,

once the Kyoto Protocol ratified. As with all international treaties, responsibility will be

transmitted nationally through domestic legislation, as indicated in the ratification of the

Kyoto Protocol’s responsibilities into national.

While the Kyoto Protocol contains provisions for assessing performance, a fundamental

issue is what sanctions, if any, might be taken if a country was found not to be in

compliance with its ratification commitment. As with most forms of international law, the

protocol itself contains no sanctions in the event of noncompliance, and relies on

cooperation between parties. While the idea of sanctions for Kyoto Protocol non-

compliance has been suggested, there is no agreement of what those sanctions might be,

or how they might be implemented.

47

5.3 How Do The Responsibilities Of Developed And Developing Countries Differ Under The Kyoto Protocol?

Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC or the

Convention), all countries, both developed and developing, agree to take measures to

address emissions and adapt to future climate change impacts. This includes: the

submission of information on their national climate change programs and emissions

levels; facilitation of technology transfer; cooperation on scientific and technical

research; and the promotion of public awareness, education, and training.

The Kyoto Protocol goes further and highlights the importance effective domestic

policies and measures for reducing emissions, such as ending counter-productive

subsidies on carbon-intensive activities. The Kyoto Protocol specifies binding emission

reduction targets for developed countries according to firm timetables. However,

developed countries do not have emission targets under the Kyoto Protocol.

The issue of emissions targets for developing countries has generated a great deal of

intense debate. A proposal in Kyoto that the Protocol should establish a procedure

whereby developing countries could take on voluntary commitments to limit their

emissions was not accepted. However, several developing countries are now actively

pushing for such a mechanism to be developed and adopted, mainly for the purpose of

facilitating international trade in emissions rights.

While developing countries are not currently subject to timetables and targets, they are

expected to take measures to limit the growth rate of their emissions and to report on

actions being taken to address climate change. There are also further specific incentives

for developing countries via technology transfer and the Clean Development Mechanism

48

CHAPTER 6

ACCEPTABILITY OF PROTOCOL

49

CURRENT POSITIONS OF GOVERNMENTS

Carbon emissions from various global regionsduring the period 1800-2000 AD

6.1 POSITION OF RUSSIA

Vladimir Putin approved the treaty on November 4, 2004 and Russia officially notified

the United Nations of its ratification on November 18, 2004. With that, the Russian

ratification is complete. The issue of Russian ratification was particularly closely watched

in the international community, as the accord was brought into force 90 days after

Russian ratification (February 16, 2005).

President Putin had earlier decided in favour of the protocol in September 2004, along

with the Russian cabinet Mosnews.com. As anticipated after this, ratification by the

lower (22 October 2004) and upper house of parliament did not encounter any obstacles.

The Kyoto Protocol limits emissions to a percentage increase or decrease from their 1990

levels. Since 1990 the economies of most countries in the former Soviet Union have

collapsed, as have their greenhouse gas emissions. Because of this, Russia should have no

problem meeting its commitments under Kyoto, as its current emission levels are

substantially below its targets

50

It is debatable whether Russia will benefit from selling emissions credits to other

countries in the Kyoto Protocol

6.2 POSITION OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

On May 31, 2002, all fifteen then-members of the European Union deposited the relevant

ratification paperwork at the UN. The EU produces around 22% of global greenhouse gas

emissions, and has agreed to a cut, on average, by 8% from 1990 emission levels. The EU

has consistently been one of the major supporters of the Kyoto Protocol, negotiating hard

to get wavering countries on board.

In December, 2002, the EU created a system of emissions trading in an effort to meet

these tough targets. Quotas were introduced in six key industries: energy, steel, cement,

glass, brick making, and paper/cardboard. There are also fines for member nations that

fail to meet their obligations, starting at €40/ton of carbon dioxide in 2005, and rising to

€100/ton in 2008. Current EU projections suggest that by 2008 the EU will be at 4.7%

below 1990 levels.

The EU countries agreed to a common target for the whole of EU. In between themselves,

they agreed to splitting up the target as shown above. Source: IEA, illustration: CICERO 

The position of the EU is not without controversy in Protocol negotiations, however.

Emission levels of former Warsaw Pact countries who now are members of the EU have

51

already been reduced as a result of their economic restructuring. This may mean that the

region's 1990 baseline level is inflated compared to that of other developed countries,

thus giving European economies a potential competitive advantage over the U.S.

6.3 POSITION OF THE UNITED STATES

The United States of America (USA), although a signatory to the protocol, has neither

ratified nor withdrawn from the protocol. The signature alone is mostly symbolic, as the

protocol is non-binding over the United States unless ratified.

On July 25, 1997, before the Kyoto Protocol was to be negotiated, the U.S. Senate

unanimously passed by a 95–0 vote the Byrd-Hagel Resolution (S. Res. 98), which stated

the sense of the Senate was that the United States should not be a signatory to any

protocol that did not include binding targets and timetables for developing as well as

industrialized nations or "would result in serious harm to the economy of the United

States". On November 12, 1998, Vice President Al Gore symbolically signed the

protocol. Both Gore and Senator Joseph Lieberman indicated that the protocol would not

be acted upon in the Senate until there was participation by the developing nations CNN.

The Clinton Administration never submitted the protocol to the Senate for ratification.

The Clinton Administration released an economic analysis in July 1998, prepared by the

Council of Economic Advisors, which concluded that with emissions trading among the

Annex B/Annex I countries, and participation of key developing countries in the "Clean

Development Mechanism" — which grants the latter business-as-usual emissions rates

through 2012 — the costs of implementing the Kyoto Protocol could be reduced as much

as 60% from many estimates. Other economic analyses, however, prepared by the

Congressional Budget Office and the Department of Energy Information Administration

(EIA), and others, demonstrated a potentially large decline in GDP from implementing

the Protocol.

The current President, George W. Bush, has indicated that he does not intend to submit

the treaty for ratification, not because he does not support the general idea, but because of

the strain he believes the treaty would put on the economy; he emphasizes the

uncertainties he asserts are present in the climate change issue Corn, David (2001).

52

Furthermore, he is not happy with the details of the treaty. For example, he does not

support the split between Annex I countries and others. Bush said of the treaty:

This is a challenge that requires a 100 percent effort; ours, and the rest of the world's.

The world's second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases is China. Yet, China was entirely

exempted from the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol. India and Germany are among

the top emitters. Yet, India was also exempt from Kyoto. . . . America's unwillingness to

embrace a flawed treaty should not be read by our friends and allies as any abdication of

responsibility. To the contrary, my administration is committed to a leadership role on

the issue of climate change. . . . . Our approach must be consistent with the long-term

goal of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. Whitehouse.gov

President Bush Discusses Global Climate Change.

In June 2002, the American Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released the

"Climate Action Report 2002". Some observers have interpreted this report as being

supportive of the protocol, although the report itself does not explicitly endorse the

protocol. Later that year, Congressional researchers who examined the legal status of the

Protocol advised that signature of the UNFCCC imposes an obligation to refrain from

undermining the Protocol's object and purpose, and that while the President probably

cannot implement the Protocol alone, Congress can create compatible laws on its own

initiative.Opencrs.com

The White House has come under criticism for downplaying reports that link human

activity and greenhouse gas emissions to climate change and that a White House official

and former oil industry advocate, Philip Cooney, adjusted descriptions of climate

research that had already been approved by government scientists. The White House has

denied that Philip Cooney watered down reports. BBC (2005) In June 2005, State

Department papers showed the administration thanking Exxon executives for the

company's "active involvement" in helping to determine climate change policy, including

the US stance on Kyoto. Input from the business lobby group Global Climate Coalition

was also a factor. Guardian

At the G-8 meeting in June 2005 administration officials expressed a desire for "practical

commitments industrialized countries can meet without damaging their economies".

According to those same officials, the United States is on track to fulfill its pledge to

53

reduce its carbon intensity 18 percent by 2012. Washington Post Paul Krugman notes that

the use of "carbon intensity" means the target reduction of 18 percent is still actually an

increase in overall emissions.NY Times. The position Bush has taken on climate change

has shifted with a gradual increasing acceptance that global warming is a problem, and

that it is partly caused by human activity. The United States has signed the Asia Pacific

Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, a pact that allows those countries to set

their goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions individually, but with no enforcement

mechanism. Supporters of the pact see it as complementing the Kyoto Protocol whilst

being more flexible whilst critics have said the pact will be ineffective without any

enforcement measures. Nine north-eastern states and in California, Republican Governor

Arnold Schwarzenegger, along with 187 mayors from US towns and cities, have pledged

to adopt Kyoto style legal limits on greenhouse gas emissions. Steve Hounslow, Roger

Harrabin (2005)

6.4 POSITION OF CANADA

On December 17, 2002, Canada ratified the treaty. While numerous polls have shown

support for the Kyoto protocol around 70% IPSOS-NA Graves, Boucher (2002) , there is

still some opposition, particularly by some business groups, non-governmental climate

scientists and energy concerns, using arguments similar to those being used in the US.

There is also a fear that since US companies will not be affected by the Kyoto Protocol

that Canadian companies will be at a disadvantage in terms of trade.

In 2005, the result was limited to an ongoing "war of words", primarily between the

government of Alberta (Canada's primary oil and gas producer) and the federal

government. There are even fears that Kyoto could threaten national unity, especially in

Alberta.

After January 2006, the Liberal Party government was replaced by a Conservative Party

minority govenment under Stephen Harper, who previously has expressed opposition to

Kyoto. During the election campaign, Harper stated he wanted to move beyond the Kyoto

debate by establishing different environmental controls. Rona Ambrose, who considers

the emission trading concept to be flawed, replaced Stephane Dion as the environment

minister and the chief overseer of the protocol in the United Nations.

54

On April 25th, 2006, Ambrose announced that Canada would have no chance of meeting

its targets under Kyoto, and would instead look to participate in U.S. sponsored Asia

Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. "We've been looking at the Asia

Pacific Partnership for a number of months now because the key principles around are

very much in line with where our government wants to go," Ambrose told reporters.

6.5 POSITION OF AUSTRALIA

Australia has refused to sign the Agreement due to issues with the protocol. The

Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, has argued that the protocol would cost

Australians jobs, and that Australia is already doing enough to cut emissions. The Federal

Opposition, the Australian Labor Party, is in full support of the protocol and it is

currently a heavily debated issue within the political establishment. The opposition

claims signing the protocol is a "risk free" prospect as they claim Australia would already

be meeting the obligations the protocol would impose. As of 2005, Australia was the

world's largest emitter per capita of greenhouse gases.

The Australian government, along with the United States, agreed to sign the Asia Pacific

Partnership on Clean Development and Climate at the ASEAN regional forum on 28 July

2005.

6.6 POSITION OF INDIA

India signed and ratified the Protocol in August, 2002. Since India is exempted from the

framework of the treaty, it is expected to gain from the protocol in terms of transfer of

technology and related foreign investments. At the G-8 meeting in June 2005, Indian

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh pointed out that the per-capita emission rates of the

developing countries are a tiny fraction of those in the developed world. Following the

principle of common but differentiated responsibility, India maintains that the major

responsibility of curbing emission rests with the developed countries, which have

accumulated emissions over a long period of time.

55

6.7 SUPPORT FOR KYOTO PROTOCOL

Advocates of the Kyoto Protocol claim that reducing these emissions is crucially

important; carbon dioxide, they believe, is causing the earth's atmosphere to heat up. This

is supported by attribution analysis. The governments of all of the countries whose

parliaments have ratified the Protocol are supporting it. Most prominent among advocates

of Kyoto have been the European Union

and many environmentalist organizations. The United Nations and some individual

nations' scientific advisory bodies (including the G8 national science academies) have

also issued reports favoring the Kyoto Protocol.

An international day of action was planned for 3 December 2005, to coincide with the

Meeting of the Parties in Montreal. The planned demonstrations were endorsed by the

Assembly of Movements of the World Social Forum.

A group of major Canadian corporations also called for urgent action regarding climate

change, and have suggested that Kyoto is only a first step.

On 3 January 2006, after the Montreal accords a group of people assembled a petition

with the goal to reach 50 million signatures supporting Kyoto Protocol and its goal by

January 2008 - the starting date set by the Kyoto Protocol to show average 5% reduction

in emissions. This petition was set out to give civil support and ratification to the

international fight against Global Warming on a base of world wide active cooperation.

Many US and Australian citizens are signing the petition and thus criticise their leaders'

choices on this matter.

6.8 OPPOSITION TO KYOTO PROTOCOL

The two major countries currently opposed to the treaty are the United States and

Australia. Some public policy experts who are skeptical of global warming see Kyoto as

a scheme to either retard the growth of the world's industrial democracies or to transfer

wealth to the third world in what they claim is a global socialism initiative. Others argue

the protocol does not go far enough to curb greenhouse emissions

56

Many environmental economists have been critical of the Kyoto Protocol. Many see the

costs of the Kyoto Protocol as outweighing the benefits, some believing the standards

which Kyoto sets to be too optimistic, others seeing a highly inequitable and inefficient

agreement which would do little to curb greenhouse gas emissions. It should be noted,

however, that this opposition is not unanimous, and that the inclusion of emissions

trading has led some environmental economists to embrace the treaty.

6.9 KEY AREAS OF DISAGREEMENT UNDER THE KYOTO PROTOCOL

The Kyoto Protocol is a work in progress and there is a consistent shifting of key

concerns and positions among countries. However, a few touch points have emerged. The

chief issue for disagreement under Kyoto Protocol regards the conditions under which

developing countries should be subject to emissions caps in the future. This is because

atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations may continue to rise due to rapidly increasing

emissions from non-Annex I nations, even with Annex I compliance.

The sensitivity to this issue was illustrated at the Third Conference of Parties (COP3) in

Kyoto when China blocked a proposal to allow developing countries to voluntarily take

on emission caps. With the expressed desire of several developing countries to make that

move (Argentina, Kazakhstan and Bolivia), this is an area that will require resolution.

However, the more important debate concerns the conditions and types of caps that

developing countries may be pressured to implement in the future, as the climate change

hypothesis gains further credence.

A second major area of debate is the role of carbon sinks. Here, the United States, Brazil

and other nations with large forests and substantial land mass support credits for carbon

sinks, while China and nations with small forests and land mass oppose this proposal.

A third major area of disagreement regards the amount of emissions trading that should

be permitted under the Kyoto Protocol. The European Union and many developing

countries advocate a limit on the percentage of emissions reductions that are permitted to

be achieved though the flexibility mechanisms, preferring domestic reductions. The

United States lead Umbrella Group insists on no restrictions.This debate over such

57

restrictions is often referred to as the question over supplementarity, in that the Kyoto

Protocol states that emissions trading is supposed to be only supplemental to domestic

emission reduction activities. However, the Protocol makes no mention of whether such

restrictions are to be qualitative (in terms of ensuring that there countries do adopt

domestic emission policies) or quantitative (in terms that those domestic policies must

achieve a certain portion of the target).

6.10 POLITICAL BLOCKS EVOLVED SINCE THE KYOTO PROTOCOL NEGOTIATIONS

The key political blocs that formed during the Fifth Conference of Parties (COP5)

negotiation in Bonn were the Umbrella Group, G-77 plus China, and the European Union

+11groups.

The Umbrella Group, comprising Australia, Canada, Iceland, Japan, New Zealand,

Russia, Ukraine and the United States, continues to favor unlimited emissions trading and

the use of the widest range of options for emission reductions, including forestry and

land-use change.

The European Union (plus eleven East European countries) continues to be cautious

about emissions trading and the use of forestry sequestration. It seeks quantitative

restriction on the amount of emissions trading along the strict interpretation of

supplementarity.

The G-77 plus China, representing developing nations, is no longer a coherent bloc,

particularly in regards to the issues revolving around the Clean Development Mechanism

(CDM). Certain G-77 countries have now concluded that their best chance of gaining

benefit from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC

or the Convention) is through joining Annex I. Argentina, Bolivia and Kazakhstan (all

considered developing countries under the Kyoto Protocol) announced that they would

adopt voluntary limits on their greenhouse gas emission growth. Latin American nations

have participated actively in emissions reduction efforts and have generally become

ardent supporters of the Clean Development Mechanism. There are now also substantial

splits in this bloc in regards to forestry and supplementarity.

58

6.11 COMPLIANCE/PENALTY REGIME UNDER THE PROTOCOL

Specific mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol compliance regime are still under

development and no clearly defined penalty regime exists. Under the Kyoto Protocol,

each individual signatory nation is liable for implementation of its responsibilities. On the

domestic level, liability for non-compliance with Kyoto will generally be transferred to

non-complying firms and institutions. Penalties will remain the function of national

institutions.

Parties to the Kyoto Protocol may form regional blocs under the aegis of Joint Fulfillment

(JI, Article 4 of the Protocol) within which they may redistribute their emissions

reduction commitments. The European Union has chosen this approach. However, in the

event of regional non-compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, each signatory of the Protocol

will be held responsible separately. One approach proposes the establishment of an

international “compliance fund” to ensure that every country is able to meet its reduction

levels by the end of the first commitment period. Given the uncertainty of economic

forecasting and the potential unwillingness of countries to engage in last-minute credit

sales, the compliance fund would act as a seller of last resort, guaranteeing the

availability of accredited tonnes for purchase through 2012. Money raised by the sale of

these tons would then be invested in carbon abatement projects worldwide. Another

recent proposal suggested at the end of the first commitment period there should be a

short period (3 months) to allow for a final tally of emissions and last minute attempts to

reach emissions targets.

6.12 COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS

Economists have been trying to analyse the overall net benefit of Kyoto Protocol through

cost-benefit analysis. Just as in the case of climatology, there is disagreement due to large

uncertainties in economic variables. Still, the estimates so far generally indicate either

that observing the Kyoto Protocol is more expensive than the not observing the Kyoto

Protocol or that the Kyoto Protocol has a marginal net benefit which exceeds the cost of

simply adjusting to global warming. The recent Copenhagen consensus project found that

59

the Kyoto Protocol would slow down the process of global warming, but have a

superficial overall benefit.

A study in Nature found that accounting only for local external costs, together with

production costs, to identify energy strategies, compliance with the Kyoto Protocol would

imply lower, not higher, overall costs.

Most current economic analysis indicates that the Kyoto protocol is more costly than

potential alternative policies. Many environmental economists advocate use of carbon tax

or emission trading because most analyses suggest that they are considerably more

economically efficient methods of emissions abatement. For this reason, some

economists advocate the Kyoto protocol as proxy policy for achieving such an aim.

Defenders of the Kyoto Protocol argue, however, that while the initial greenhouse gas

cuts may have little effect, they set the political precedent for bigger (and more effective)

cuts in the future,. They also advocate commitment to the precautionary principle. Critics

point out that additional higher curb on carbon emission is likely to cause significantly

higher increase in cost, making such defence moot. Moreover, the precautionary principle

could apply to any political, social, economic or environmental consequence, which

might have equally devastating effect in terms of poverty and environment, making the

precautionary argument irrelevant. One problem in attempting to measure the "absolute"

costs and benefits of different policies to global warming is choosing a proper discount

rate. Over a long time horizon such as that in which benefits accrue under Kyoto, small

changes in the discount rate create very large discrepancies between net benefits in

various studies. However, this difficulty is generally not applicable to "relative"

comparison of alternative policies under a long time horizon. This is because changes in

discount rate tend to equally adjust the net cost/benefit of different policies unless there

are significant discrepancies of cost and benefit over time horizon.

While it has been difficult to arrive at a scenario under which the net benefits of Kyoto

are positive using traditional discounting methods such as the Shadow Price of Capital

approach, some have argued that a much lower discount rate should be utilized; arguing

60

that high rates are biased toward the current generation. In part this is philosophical value

judgement which is outside the realm of economics.

Below is a list of the change in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 to 2004 for some

countries that are part of the Climate Change Convention as reported by the United

Nations.

CountryChange in greenhouse gasEmissions (1990-2004)

EU Assigned Objectivefor 2012

Treaty Obligation 2008-2012

Germany -17% -21% -8%

Canada +27% N/A -6%

Australia +25% N/A N/A

Spain +49% +15% -8%

United States +16% N/A N/A

Norway +10% N/A +1%

New Zealand +21% N/A 0%

France -0.8% 0% -8%

Greece +27% +25% -8%

Ireland +23% +13% -8%

Japan +6.5% N/A -6%

United Kingdom

-14% -12.5% -8%

Portugal +41% +27% -8%

EU-15 -0.8% N/A -8%

61

Below is a table of the changes in CO2 emission of some other countries which are large

contributors, but are not required to meet numerical limitations.

CountryChange in greenhouse gasEmissions (1990-2004)

China +47%India +55%

Comparing total greenhouse gas emissions in 2004 to 1990 levels, the US emissions were

up by 16%, with irregular fluctuations from one year to another but a general trend to

increase. At the same time, the EU group of 23 (EU-23) Nations had reduced their

emissions by 5%. In addition, the EU-15 group of nations (a large subset of EU-23)

reduced their emissions by 0.8% between 1990 and 2004, while emission rose 2.5% from

1999 to 2004. Part of the increases for some of the European Union countries are still

inline with the treaty, being part of the cluster of countries implementation (see objectives

in the list above).

Further complicating the debate over the Kyoto Protocol is the fact that CO2 emissions

growth in the US was far ahead of that of the EU-15 from 1990-2000, but from 2000-

2004, America's rate of growth in CO2 emissions was eight percentage points lower than

from 1995-2000, while the EU-15 saw an increase of 2.3 points. From 2000-2004, the

United States' CO2 emissions growth rate was 2.1%, compared to the EU-15's 4.5%. That

happened while the US economy was expanding 38% faster than the economies of the

EU-15 while experiencing population growth at twice the rate of the EU-15. This

naturally has led to questions and debate about the merits of a mandatory emissions cap

approach (as currently adopted under Kyoto) versus a voluntary approach to emissions

reduction (as adopted by the United States.

As of year-end 2006, the United Kingdom and Sweden were the only EU countries on

pace to meet their Kyoto emissions commitments by 2010. While UN statistics indicate

that, as a group, the 36 Kyoto signatory countries can meet the 5% reduction target by

2012, most of the progress in greenhouse gas reduction has come from the stark decline

in Eastern European countries' emissions after the fall of communism in the 1990s.

62

6.13 ASIA PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP ON CLEAN DEVELOPMENT AND CLIMATE

The Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate is an agreement

between six Asia-Pacific nations: Australia, China, India, Japan, South Korea, and the

United States. The partnership had its official launch in January 2006 at a ceremony in

Sydney, Australia. Within the past year, the six nations have initiated nearly 100 projects

aimed at clean energy capacity building and market formation. Building on these

activities, long-term projects are schedule to deploy clean energy and environment

technologies and services. The pact allows those countries to set their goals for reducing

greenhouse gas emissions individually, but with no enforcement mechanism. Supporters

of the pact see it as complementing the Kyoto Protocol whilst being more flexible while

critics have said the pact will be ineffective without any enforcement measures and

ultimately aims to void the negotiations leading to the Protocol called to replace the

current Kyoto Protocol (negotiations started in Montreal in December 2005).

6.14 KYOTO MECHANISMS

The Kyoto Protocol broke new ground by defining three innovative “flexibility

mechanisms” to lower the overall costs of achieving its emissions targets. These

mechanisms enable Parties to access cost-effective opportunities to reduce emissions, or

to remove carbon from the atmosphere, in other countries. While the cost of limiting

emissions varies considerably from region to region, the effect for the atmosphere of

limiting emissions is the same, irrespective of where the action is taken.

Much of the negotiations on the mechanisms has been concerned with ensuring their

integrity.  There was concern that the mechanisms do not confer a “right to emit” on

Annex I Parties or lead to exchanges of fictitious credits which would undermine the

Protocol’s environmental goals. The negotiators of the Protocol and the Marrakesh

Accords therefore sought to design a system that fulfilled the cost-effectiveness promise

of the mechanisms, while addressing concerns about environmental integrity and equity.

63

All three mechanisms under the Kyoto Protocol are based on the Protocol’s system for

the accounting of targets.  Under this system, the amount to which an Annex I Party must

reduce its emissions over the five year commitment period (known as its “assigned

amount”) is divided into units each equal to one tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent.

These assigned amount units (AAUs), and other units defined by the Protocol, contribute

the basis for the Kyoto mechanisms by providing for a Party to gain credit from action

taken in other Parties that may be counted towards it own emissions target.

6.15 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ANNEX B & ANNEX I NATIONS

Annex I countries are the 36 industrialized countries and economies in transition listed in

Annex I of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC or

the Convention). Their responsibilities under the Convention are various, and include a

non-binding commitment to reducing their greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by

the year 2000. Annex B countries are the 39 emissions-capped industrialized countries

and economies in transition listed in Annex B of the Kyoto Protocol. Legally-binding

emission reduction obligations for Annex B countries range from an 8% decrease (e.g.,

various European nations) to a 10% increase (Iceland) in relation to 1990 levels during

the first commitment period from 2008 to 2012.

The three Kyoto mechanisms are:

1. JOINT IMPLEMENTATION: In simple terms, it implies that an industrialized

country pay for measures to reduce emissions in another industrialized country.

This will give the buyer the right to emit more domestically, while the seller will

be required to emit correspondingly less. The basic principles of the mechanism

commonly referred to as “Joint Implementation” is defined in Article 6 of the

Kyoto Protocol.

“For the purpose of meeting its commitments, any Party included in Annex I may transfer

to, or acquire from, any other such Party emission reduction units resulting from projects

64

aimed at reducing anthropogenic emissions by sources or enhancing anthropogenic

removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in any sector of the economy”, provided that

certain (participation) requirements are fulfilled.

In other words, under Joint Implementation (JI), an Annex I Party (with a commitment

inscribed in Annex B of the Kyoto Protocol) may implement an emission-reducing

project or a project that enhances removals by sinks in the territory of another Annex I

Party (with a commitment inscribed in Annex B of the Kyoto Protocol) and count the

resulting emission reduction units (ERUs) towards meeting its own Kyoto target. An

Annex I Party may also authorize legal entities to participate in JI projects.

Any JI project shall have the approval of the Parties involved and provide a reduction in

emissions by sources, or an enhancement of removals by sinks, that is additional to any

that would otherwise occur

If a host Party meets all the eligibility requirements to transfer and/or acquire Emission

reduction units (ERUs), it may verify reductions in anthropogenic emissions by sources

or enhancements of anthropogenic removals by sinks from a JI project as being additional

to any that would otherwise occur. Upon such verification, the host Party may issue the

appropriate quantity of ERUs. This “simplified” procedure is commonly referred to as the

“Track 1 procedure”.

If a host Party does not meet all, but the minimum eligibility requirements, the

verification of reductions in emissions by sources or enhancements of removals by sinks

as being additional has to occur through the verification procedure under the Joint

Implementation Supervisory Committee (JISC). Under this so-called “Track 2

procedure” ERUs may only be transferred if an independent entity accredited by the

JISC determines that the relevant requirements are met.

A host Party which meets all the eligibility requireements may at any time choose to use

the Track 2 procedure.The transfer of ERUs verified in accordance with the Track 2

procedure is not subject to any provisions relating to the commitment period reserve or

other limitations to transfers under Article 17.

65

2. EMISSIONS TRADING: In Simple words, it allows industrialized countries to buy

or sell parts of the national emissions quota allocated by the Kyoto Protocol. Trade is

limited to industrialized countries. The government of each country may allow companies

to buy and sell emissions permits.

Emissions trading, as set out in Article 17 of the Kyoto Protocol, provides for Annex I

Parties to acquire units from other Annex I Parties and use them towards meeting their

emissions targets under the Kyoto Protocol. This enables Parties to make use of lower

cost opportunities to reduce emissions, irrespective of the Party in which Party those

opportunities exist, in order to lower the overall cost of reducing emissions.

Only Annex I Parties to the Kyoto Protocol with emission limitation and reduction

commitments inscribed in Annex B to the Protocol may participate in such trading. Such

Parties may therefore be prepared to transfer units when they do not require them for

compliance with their own emission targets.

3. THE CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM: The Clean Development

Mechanism (CDM) allows industrialized countries to finance projects in developing

countries and receive credit for emission reduction

6.16 CARBON DIOXIDE EQUIVALENTS (CO2e)

Carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) provide a universal standard of measurement against

which the impacts of releasing (or avoiding the release of) different greenhouse gases can

be evaluated. Every greenhouse gas has a Global Warming Potential (GWP), a

measurement of the impact that particular gas has on “radiative forcing;” that is, the

additional heat/energy which is retained in the Earth’s ecosystem through the addition of

this gas to the atmosphere. The GWP of a given gas describes its effect on climate change

relative to a similar amount of carbon dioxide and is divided into a three-part “time

horizon” of twenty, one hundred, and five hundred years. As the base unit, carbon

dioxide numeric is 1.0 across each time horizon. This allows the greenhouse gases

regulated under the Kyoto Protocol to be converted to the common unit of CO2e

Global Warming potentials for the greenhouse gases regulated under the Kyoto Protocol

66

under a 100 year timeframe are as follows (Source - IPCC Climate Change 2001: The

Scientific Basis):

Carbondioxide has a GWP of 1

Methane has a GWP of 23

Nitrous oxide has a GWP of 296

Halocarbons (HFC) has a GWP of 120 to 12,000

Sulphur Hexafluoride has a GWP of 22,200

This means that in 100 years, one tonne of methane will have an effect on global

warming that is 23 times greater than one tonne of carbon dioxide, and so forth. No single

number can accurately represent the GWP of a given gas, as certain gases remain in the

atmosphere much longer than others. The uncertainty ranges for the fluorocarbon

derivative indicates the continued uncertainty regarding their long term decomposition in

the atmosphere as these are fairly newly “designed” gases.

Short-lived gases are less harmful in the long-term than they are in the short-term, which

means that the carbon dioxide equivalency of a given gas can vary dramatically over

time.

The units which may be transferred under Article 17 emissions trading, each equal to one

metric tonne of emissions (in CO2-equivalent terms), may be in the form of:

An assigned amount unit (AAU) issued by an Annex I Party on the basis of its

assigned amount pursuant to Articles 3.7 and 3.8 of the Protocol.

A removal unit (RMU) issued by an Annex I Party on the basis of land use, land-

use change and forestry (LULUCF) activities under Articles 3.3 and 3.4 of the

Kyoto Protocol.

An emission reduction unit (ERU) generated by a joint implementation project

underArticle 6 of the Kyoto Protocol.

A certified emission reduction (CER) generated from a clean development

mechanism project activity under Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol.

67

Transfers and acquisitions of these units are to be tracked and recorded through the

registry systems under the Kyoto Protocol. These include a national registry to be

established and maintained by each Annex I Party. Parties may also authorize legal

entities (e.g. businesses, non-governmental organizations and other entities) to

participate, under their responsibility, in Article 17 emissions trading. Accounts may be

created in national registries to provide for such participation by legal entities.

68

CHAPTER 7

CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM(CDM)

69

7.1 INTRODUCTION

The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) allows industrialized countries to finance

projects in developing countries and receive credit for emission reduction.In a CDM/JI

project both the buyer and seller of CO2 allowances are interested in attaining the highest

level of CO2 reductions to be pulled out of a project. The certifying company which will

verify the amount of the quota will also be very interested in signing contracts with the

buyer and seller, and in practice, all of these three parties are on the same side of the table

in carbon trading. An independent managing body or court must therefore be given the

authority to decide if a CDM project does what it promises. The CDM has been defined

under Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol. It performs a three-fold function

to assist non-Annex 1 countries in achieving sustainable development

to contribute

to the ultimate goal of the convention i.e., stabilization of GHG

concentrations in the atmosphere

to help Annex 1 countries comply with their emission reduction commitments

The CDM has been designed to be innovative, and market-based so that developed

countries may invest in bankable projects in the developing ones. Emissions resulting

from the project should be lower than what would have occurred had the prevalent

technology been used. Emission reductions are expected to be real, measurable, and long

term.

Establishment of emissions additionality (reduction in emissions) is a prerequisite under

the CDM. However, in order to establish additionality of projects it becomes necessary to

define a baseline against which the additionalities can be assessed and carbon credits for

the project determined. Baselines can be project-specific or standardized

Consistent with the objective of the Convention, the CDM has to contribute to sustainable

development in developing countries. The Bonn Agreement states that the governments

of developing countries have the prerogative to judge how the projects will meet their

sustainable development goals

70

7.2 HOW CAN CDM BENEFIT THE PROJECT?

As a result of the Kyoto Protocol, carbon has become a tradable commodity with an

associated value. One tonne of CO2 (carbon dioxide) reduced through a CDM project,

when certified by a designated operational entity, is known as a CER (certified emission

reduction), which can be traded. Revenue from CERs can form part of the project's

annual cash inflow, equity, or debt.

WHAT TYPES OF PROJECTS CAN BENEFIT FROM CDM FINANACE?

All CDM projects must result in a net GHG reduction, as in the case of energy efficiency

improvement, renewable energy generation, or carbon sequestration through afforestation

and reforestation. Typical CDM projects fall into the following categories.

Renewable energy

Fuel switching (in industry, transport, residential sector, etc.)

Solid waste management

Advanced coal-based power generation technologies

Renovation and modernization

Demand-side management

Industrial energy efficiency improvement

Small-scale CDM projects are eligible for fast-track clearance procedures.

71

7.3 PROCESS INVOLVED IN UNDERTAKING CDM PROJECTS

Source: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Secretariat

7.4 BUYERS OF CDM CREDITS

The buyers of CDM credits are mainly governments of developed countries, multilateral

agencies, and private entities.

7.5 POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR INDIA

There are varying estimates of the potential opportunities under the CDM. Earlier studies

expected annual flows of as much as 1 billion dollars into India. However, the United

States’ refusal to ratify the Kyoto Protocol has reduced the demand for CDM

considerably. If India can capture a 10% share of the global CDM market, annual CER

revenues to the country could range from 10 million to 300 million dollars (assuming that

CDM is used to meet 10%–50% of the global demand for GHG emission reduction of

roughly 1 billion tonnes of CO2, and prices range from 1–6 dollars per tonne of CO2). As

the deadline for meeting the Kyoto Protocol targets draws nearer, prices can be expected

to rise, as countries/companies save carbon credits to meet stricter targets in the future.

72

7.6 ACTIVITIES THAT TERI UNDERTAKE ON CDM

TERI is an independent, not-for-profit research organization, focusing on energy,

environment, and sustainable development. It has the distinction of being one of the first

developing country institutions to launch research activities in the area of climate change,

as early as in 1988. TERI has been involved with CDM since the inception of the idea,

and has been undertaking research related to the economic, political, and quantitative

aspects of the mechanism, along with information dissemination and project development

activities. TERI is represented on the MoEF’s (Ministry of Environment and Forests,

Government of India) Working Group on the Kyoto Protocol, the Climate Change

Advisory Group on Renewable Energy of the MNES (Ministry of Non-conventional

Energy Sources, Government of India), and the CDM Core Group of the Planning

Commission. The UNFCCC CDM Executive Board’s Roster of Experts also includes a

senior research professional from TERI.

A multidisciplinary team at TERI undertakes the following activities related to CDM. :

- Policy analysis and sectoral studies

TERI has analyzed a range of CDM projects in the Indian power sector for the Ministry

of Power, Government of India, and formulated baselines for key renewable energy

projects in India for the MNES. It has also developed case studies of potential CDM

projects in India and Asia relating to renewable energy, conventional power, and

industrial energy efficiency under studies funded by the Canadian International

Development Agency and the UK Foreign Commonwealth Office

-National Strategy Study on CDM in India

TERI has been assigned to carry out the World Bank National Strategy Study on CDM in

India. This major initiative, launched in May 2003, focuses on the following. :

Strategic overview of CDM opportunities for India and international demand for

GHG offsets

Identification of pipelines of CDM projects in key sectors

73

Development of the CDM project cycle, sectoral methodologies, and

guidelines.Key institutional, legal, financial, and regulatory prerequisites to

facilitate CDM project development and implementation.

Human and institutional capacity building to identify, develop, implement, and

process CDM projects in India, and to exploit global opportunities.

- Capacity building

TERI has organized training programmes and workshops for officials of MNES, Indian

Forest Service, National Thermal Power Corporation, various corporate, and non-

governmental organizations.

- Project development

Many companies seek TERI's advice to identify projects for CDM finance, estimate GHG

offsets and abatement costs, and develop projects that meet the mandatory requirements

of the CDM. TERI's activities include developing baseline studies, project idea notes, and

project design documents for renewable energy, fuel switching, and energy efficiency

projects.

74

CHAPTER 8

PROGRESS OF KYOTO PROTOCOL

75

8.1 Progress in Implementation of Kyoto Protocol Treaty after one year of Existence

On the first anniversary of the Kyoto Protocol, backers of the UN’s landmark climate

change treaty have renewed their pleas to the United States to do more to fight global

warming, even though their own results in cutting down greenhouse gas emissions since

the pact came into force have been patchy.

The United Nations, the European Commission and many environmental groups all urged

tougher action beyond Kyoto, which came into force on February 16, 2005, and runs to

2012. “We need the full participation of all major emitting countries such as the United

States, the world’s leading economy, but also the world’s leading polluter,” European

Commissioner Stavros Dimas said while marking the anniversary. He warned that the

world needed to strengthen action to contain global warming or would “run out of time to

contain climate change”.

Most scientists say global warming will bring with it more chaotic climates, with more

heat waves, droughts and floods. A recent report released by the British Environmental

Agency (BEA) said the historically chilly nation could resemble the tropics by the year

3000, with rising seas from melting ice swamping coasts. Seas could be 11.4 metres

higher due to melting polar ice, swamping cities like London, the report warns.

The BEA said decisions made in the next 25 years would be critical. “We are running out

of road on decision-making -- unless we dramatically change the use of fossil fuels we

will be committing future generations to the most severe impacts of climate change,” said

Barbara Young, head of the agency.

The US’ National Aeronautics and Space Agency has said that 2005 was the warmest

year on the earth’s surface since records were kept in the 1860s. Another recent study

shows that concentrations of greenhouse gases were at their highest in 650,000 years.

“Countries are not on track to reach even their modest Kyoto targets, despite growing

recognition that we are already facing dramatic consequences as a result of climate

change,” said Catherine Pearce of the UK-based environmental group Friends of the

Earth.

76

Washington agreed at UN talks in Montreal, Canada, in December 2005 to take part in a

non-binding world dialogue about new ways to combat climate change. And Kyoto’s

backers agreed to talks about further action after the first phase of the treaty ends in 2012.

Meanwhile, the UN Climate Change Secretariat in Bonn, Germany, has said that the 34

industrialised countries and the European Union governed by the protocol could reach the

targeted cut in greenhouse gas emissions by at least 5% below 1990 levels. This target

must be met between 2008 and 2012, the protocol’s first phase.

Many of these countries are “on their way to lowering their emission levels by at least

3.5% below 1990 levels during the first commitment period,” Richard Kinley, head of the

secretariat said. By using additional measures and Kyoto market-based mechanisms, he

said they would reach their reduction targets as a group.

Reports submitted by industrialised countries to the UN Climate Change Secretariat at the

beginning of 2006 show the progress being made in setting policies and enacting

legislation and regulatory frameworks to accomplish the Kyoto emissions reduction

targets.

New policies put in place by the 15 countries that were European Union members when

the Kyoto treaty was adopted in 1997 have cut emissions by 1.7% compared to 1990

levels. This amount is equal to the annual greenhouse gas emissions of Denmark or

Bulgaria, the Secretariat said.

77

CHAPTER 9

LIMITATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

78

Kyoto Protocol i.e. a roadmap to bring-back the level of Greenhouse gases to the level of

1990s or even to reduce that level has its own limitations. Full participation of all major

emitting countries is required. However, countries such as the United States, the world’s

leading economy, but also the world’s leading polluter,” is not a signatory to the

Protocol. The British Environmental Agency (BEA) said decisions made in the next 25

years would be critical. “We are running out of road on decision-making -- unless we

dramatically change the use of fossil fuels we will be committing future generations to

the most severe impacts of climate change,” said Barbara Young, head of the agency.

The US pulled out of Kyoto in 2001 saying it was too costly to implement and wrongly

excluded developing countries from the first round of targets. Large developing nations

such as India and China are exempt from the treaty’s emission targets because they said

their economies would take a serious hit if they were to change their energy policies.

The United States has also questioned scientific opinion that mankind is responsible for

global warming, saying there was not enough evidence to warrant Kyoto-style curbs.

It is questionable whether carbon emissions trading will bring a certifiable reduction. As

now embodied in the EU emissions trading scheme, fossil-fuel-burning companies such

as power utilities, steelworks or cement factories are granted substantial carbon credits

that they can sell - on the basis that they have emitted less than expected. That may

provide some incentive to look to more efficient technologies, but the assumption is that

someone elsewhere, even in another country, is going to buy that credit in order to

pollute.

In addition, the use of tradeable carbon units combined with the Clean Development

Mechanism (CDM) - whereby the Kyoto signatories from industrialised nations can

invest in emission-reduction projects in developing countries - has huge potential for

environmental damage and fraud.

The US’ National Aeronautics and Space Agency has said that 2005 was the warmest

year on the earth’s surface since records were kept in the 1860s. Another recent study

shows that concentrations of greenhouse gases were at their highest in 650,000 years.

79

Emissions of greenhouse gases in the United States, which is not a Kyoto signatory, were

about 16% above 1990 levels in 2004. But Kyoto signatories Spain, Portugal, Greece,

Ireland and Canada are all doing even worse.

“Countries are not on track to reach even their modest Kyoto targets, despite growing

recognition that we are already facing dramatic consequences as a result of climate

change,” said Catherine Pearce of the UK-based environmental group Friends of the

Earth. Meanwhile, the UN Climate Change Secretariat in Bonn, Germany, has said that

the 34 industrialized countries and the European Union governed by the protocol could

reach the targeted cut in greenhouse gas emissions by at least 5% below 1990 levels. This

target must be met between 2008 and 2012, the protocol’s first phase.

Reports submitted by industrialized countries to the UN Climate Change Secretariat at

the beginning of 2006 show the progress being made in setting policies and enacting

legislation and regulatory frameworks to accomplish the Kyoto emissions reduction

targets.

We can only wish that all countries including USA and Australia should join the Protocol

and sincerely make efforts to lower the level of GHGs in the atmosphere. Besides,

regularly monitoring of the efforts made by all the countries in implementing the treaty is

required, so that our future generations should not blame us for irrational climatic and

other conditions on the earth.

80

CHAPTER 10

CONCLUSION

81

The gases in the atmosphere that help retain heat are called greenhouse gases(GHGs).

Major green House Gases are CO2, Methane, Nitrous Oxide, Ozone, Halocarbons, Water

vapours etc. These gases, absorb heat instead of allowing it to escape into space. This

"greenhouse effect" makes the planet a hospitable place. Over the past 10,000 years, the

amount of these greenhouse gases in our atmosphere has been relatively stable. But since

last 150 years , concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere began to increase. The level of

Green house gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere impact human life and the environment

in a number of ways. Climatic changes in weather, temperature, rainfall, humidity and

various other ecological features of our biosphere are caused by level of GHGs in the

atmosphere.

The main cause of increase in the level of GHGs in the atmosphere are following

factors.

(i)Energy caused by industrialization and rising populations, and

(ii) To changing land use and human settlement patterns.

Some of the climate changes we are likely to see if such trend continues are:

Average temperatures could rise by 5°C or more 

 Natural processes like volcanic eruptions, changes in the sun’s intensity etc.

The cooler regions will warm up more than the tropics.

Hurricanes will become more intense.

Monsoons will become more intense causing more floods.

The high sea levels which accompany storms will become higher and occur more

frequently, increasing coastal flooding

The break up of Antarctic ice could raise overall sea levels.

Wintertime precipitation in the colder regions will increase.

The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

adopted by consensus at the third session of the Conference of the Parties n December

1997strengthens the international response to climate change. It contains legally binding

82

emissions targets for stated developed countries for the post-2000 period. The concept of

carbon credit came into vogue as part of an international agreement.

The objective of the Kyoto Protocol is to stabilize and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG)

emissions, mitigate climate change, and promote sustainable development. The Protocol

is historic in that it is the first attempt to achieve international agreements to mitigate

global climate change through reduction in Green House Gases, and the first to employ

the flexibility of the global market place for global environmental management. It is a

classic “win-win” situation. In Simple words, it allows industrialized countries to buy or

sell parts of the national emissions quota allocated by the Kyoto Protocol. Trade is

limited to industrialized countries. The government of each country may allow companies

to buy and sell emissions permits. . Carbon credits are certificates issued to countries that

reduce their emissions of green house gases, which causes global warming.

The EU and its Member States ratified the Kyoto Protocol in late May 2002, The

agreement came into force on February 16, 2005 following ratification by Russia on

November 18, 2004. As of April 2006, a total of 163 countries have ratified the

agreement (representing over 61.6% of emissions). Notable exceptions include the United

States and Australia. Other countries, like India and China, which have ratified the

protocol, are not required to reduce carbon emissions under the present agreement.

Specific mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol compliance regime are still under

development and no clearly defined penalty regime exists

The preliminary phase of the Kyoto Protocol is to start in ’07 while the second phase

starts from ’08.

WE hope that in due course of time, the earlier level of GHGs in the atmosphere will be

restored and maintained, making the earth a good habitat.

83

ANNEXURE

List of countries by emissions

Rank Country

CO2

emissionsin thousands of metric tons

Percentage of total emissions

- World total 24,126,416 100 %

1United States 5,844,042

24.3 %

2. European Union 3,682,755 15.3 %

3.People's Republic of China

3,513,103 14.5 %

4.  Russia 1,432,513 5.9 %5.  India 1,220,926 5.1 %6.  Japan 1,203,535 5.0 %7.  Germany 804,701 3.3 %

8. United Kingdom 543,633

2.3 %

9.  Canada 517,157 2.1 %10.  South Korea 446,190 1.8 %11.  Italy 433,018 1.8 %12.  Mexico 383,671 1.6 %

13. France 368,315

1.6 %

14.  Iran 360,223 1.5 %15.  Australia 356,342 1.5 %16.  South Africa 345,382 1.4 %17.  Saudi Arabia 340,555 1.4 %18.  Brazil 313,757 1.3 %19. Malaysia 150,630 < 1 %

20.Netherlands 150,877

< 1 %

21.  North Korea 143,216 < 1 %22.  Czech Republic 114,563 < 1 %23.  Pakistan 108,677 < 1 %

24. United Arab Emirates

94,163 < 1 %

84

25.  Greece 94,117 < 1 %26.  Iraq 79,471 < 1 %27.  Belgium 70,592 < 1 %28.  Israel 69,607 < 1 %29. Kuwait 59,879 < 1 %30. Singapore 57,471 < 1 %

31.Denmark 47,620

< 1 %

32. Switzerland 40,854 < 1 %33. Bangladesh 34,540 < 1 %

34.New Zealand 33,964

< 1 %

35. Oman 30,118 < 1 %36. Zimbabwe 12,452 < 1 %37. Sri Lanka 10,361 < 1 %38. Myanmar 7,628 < 1 %39. Kenya 7,212 < 1 %40.  Nepal 3,847 < 1 %41. Mauritius 3,114 < 1 %42. Uganda 1,654 < 1 %43.  Afghanistan 618 < 1 %

BIBLIOGRAPHY

NEWSPAPERS

The Times Of India

85

Economic Times

LINKS

www.unfcc.int

www.ipcc.ch

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol

www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/kyoto/kyotorpt.html

ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/kyoto

www.ec.gc.ca/climate/kyoto

www.environment.about.com/

www.co2e.com

www.pewclimate.org

www.news.bbc.co.uk

www.eia.doe.gov/

SEARCH ENGINES

Google

Alta Vista

86