|
|
|
|
|
UNFCCC - United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change |
|
Kyoto Protocol is amendment of UNFCCC |
|
Signed December 11, 1997 at Kyoto,
Japan |
|
Opened for signature on March 16, 1998 |
|
Need 55 countries representing 55% of
1990 CO2 emissions to ratify for entry-into-force |
|
GHG reduction targets for 2008-2012 |
|
6 GHGs include CO2, CH4,
N20, CFC-12,CFC-10, |
|
2001 Bush says U.S. will not ratify |
|
44.2% of 1990 global GHC emissions
without US, Russia, Australia |
|
Russia 17.4% of 1990 CO2
emissions |
|
US and Australia ~40% of GHG emissions |
|
Talks stall in Hague post-2000 election |
|
2001 Bonn COP revisions - allows CO2
sink |
|
|
|
Baseline and credit
A type of
emissions trading scheme where firms are encouraged to reduce their
greenhouse gas emissions below a projected Òbusiness as usualÓ path of
increasing emissions. Any reductions below that future path earns credits for
the difference which can be sold to other emitters struggling to contain
increases to baseline levels. |
|
Cap and trade
The most popular
type of emissions trading scheme where emissions are subject to a cap,
permits are issued up to that cap, and a market allows those emitting less
than their quota of the cap to sell their excess permits to emitters needing
to buy extra to meet their quota. |
|
Carbon dioxide equivalent, CO2e,
See
MtCO2e |
|
Carbon neutral
An individual,
family or organization that is responsible for no net emissions of greenhouse
gases from all its activities is considered "carbon neutral".
Emissions must be cut to a minimum and any necessary emissions then offset by
emission reducing activities elsewhere. Buying accredited clean electricity
helps cut household or office greenhouse emissions, while investing in
sustainable energy projects or afforestation schemes are examples of offsets. |
|
Carbon positive
An individual,
family or organization that is responsible for taking more greenhouse gases
out of the atmosphere than it emits is said to be "carbon
positive". This requires paying for activities such as forest planting
or investing in renewable energy.
|
|
|
|
ETS
Emissions Trading Scheme. |
|
EUA
European Union Allowances. Tradable
emission credits from the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme. Each
allowance carries the right to emit one ton of carbon dioxide. |
|
|
|
ÒHot airÓ
Also called Òpaper
creditsÓ, this refers to carbon credits for emission reductions that occurred
without any deliberate action. The prime example being the carbon credits
arising under Kyoto in Russia and the Ukraine where the collapse of
Soviet-era industry in the 1990s has seen emissions fall well below 1990
levels, the base year for reduction calculations, without the implementation
of any climate-related measures. |
|
LULUCF
Land use, land use change
and forestry. The term given to tree-planting projects, reforestation and
afforestation, designed to remove carbon from the atmosphere.
|
|
NAPs
National Allocation Plans. These
set out the overall emissions cap for countries in the EU Emissions Trading
Scheme, and the allowances that each sector and individual installation
within each country receives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PDD
Project Design Document. The
official application drawn up by an entity applying for project approval
under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). PDDs must be validated by an
independent third party, then approved and registered by the CDM Executive
Board before a project qualifies as a CER carbon credit earner. |
|
|
|
tCO2e, MtCO2e
Tons
of carbon dioxide equivalent, and millions of tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent. This is the metric measurement unit for greenhouse emissions. The
global warming impact of all greenhouse gases is measured in terms of
equivalency to the impact of carbon dioxide (CO2). For example,
one million tons of emitted methane, a far more potent greenhouse gas than
carbon dioxide, is measured as 23 million tons of CO2 equivalent,
or 23 MtCO2e.
|
|
VERs
Verified Emission Reductions.
Tradable credits for greenhouse emission reduction activities generated to
meet voluntary demand for carbon credits by organizations and individuals
wanting to offset their own emissions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Jointly
agreed project investments by Annex 1 countries in non-Annex (developing)
countries. Resulting emissions
savings classified as certified emission reductions (CERs) , investing
country can use to offset against Kyoto commitments. |
|
Joint Implementation (JI) Jointly
agreed project investments by one Annex 1 country in another, leading to
emission reductions. Emissions
savings (in ERUs) credited to investing country, debited against host country |
|
Marrakech Accords 2001 |
|
Track 1 projects - host country
approves |
|
Track 2 projects - evaluated by
independent organization |
|
International Emissions Trading (IET) |
|
Trading of assigned amount units (AAUs) amount |
|
Annex B countries |
|
|
|
|
Oppose |
|
Quantitative restrictions on
Kyoto mechanisms |
|
Taxes on the implementation of Kyoto
mechanisms |
|
Special status of CDM as it
discriminates against emissions trading and JI |
|
Treating RussiaÕs emission surplus as Òhot
airÓ |
|
ÒSupplementarity owing to negative
effects on development of market |
|
Support |
|
Early start of JI & emissions
trading |
|
Flexible approach to compliance |
|
Forests as carbon sinks |
|
International support for
capacity-building in EITs |
|
Regulatory role for state &
government involvement |
|
Reinvestment of emission trading
revenues into climate change mitigation projects |
|
Banking of carbon credits and forward
contracts |
|
|
|
|
For |
|
Climate change impacts: permafrost, sea
level rise |
|
Enhanced FDI from JI |
|
Revenue from likely sales of RussiaÕs
emission surplus |
|
Investments via Kyoto mechanisms could
support modernization & innovation in energy sector |
|
Improvements in energy efficiency
crucial for future economic growth |
|
GHGs reductions could improve domestic
physical-ecological environment |
|
Russian ratification of Kyoto could
improve RussiaÕs image as a supporter of global multilateralism |
|
Ratification and implementation may
smooth the way for RussiaÕs entry into the WTO |
|
|
|
|
Against |
|
Climate change impacts may be positive
for high Latitude Russia |
|
Extent of anthropogenic climate change
is (very) uncertain |
|
Revenues from ratification and
compliance are likely to be low |
|
Costs would be too high for domestic
compliance |
|
Kyoto Protocol unfair because not all
countries have taken on emission (reduction) commitments |
|
Second phase or post-2012 GHG limits
could conflict with RussiaÕs ambitious economic growth goals |
|
US withdrawal, makes Kyoto Protocol
nearly pointless |
|
Kyoto Protocol is at best ineffective
and more radical approaches are necessary |