Download Kyoto Protocol

Asia Pacific Energy
Research Centre
Climate Change:
History and Negotiation
Lecture Series at Stanford University
24 January, 2005
Yonghun JUNG Ph.D
Vice President
Asia Pacific Energy Research Centre
Contents
Global warming
Climate change
Pros and cons of global warming
History of negotiation
Prospect for Kyoto Protocol
What is Global Warming?
Green House Effect
Some solar radiation
is reflected by the
earth and the
atmosphere.
Solar
radiation
passes
through the
clear
atmosphere.
Most radiation is absorbed
by the earth’s surface and
warms it.
Some of the infrared radiation passes
through the atmosphere, and some is
absorbed and re-emitted in all
directions by greenhouse gas
molecules. The effect of this is to
warm the earth’s surface and the
lower atmosphere.
Infrared radiation is emitted from
the earth’s surface.
What is Climate Change?
Physical science


Radiative forcing
Global warming and greenhouse gases
 Rising global mean temperature
 Ecological damage
 Sea level rise
 Increase in ocean temperature
 Melting of arctic glaciers
 Change in coral reef
 Extreme weather condition
Radiative Forcing
Global Mean Temperature
New
internationalist
Period
Temperature
Natural
Resources
Forum
New
Scientist
(IPCC)
NASA,
MIT, and
UVA
1996 - 2050
1996 - 2050 1997 - 2100 1997 - 2100
3.0 – 5.0  C
1.5 – 4.5  C 1.5 – 4.5  C 1.0 – 1.5  C
Change in Global Temperature
Change in temperature
（0C）
Late 1970’s: National Academy of Science Panel warned the significance of
Global Warming
1985: the first scientific
conference in Villach,
Austria
1957: Roger Revelle and Hans Seuss published a thesis repudiating
the conventional belief ; CO2 is concentrating on the atmosphere.
By 1950, scientists believed that most human
induced CO2 was absorbed in the ocean.
1896: An article warned
of global warming.
1970: Clean Air Act in the
Unite
d States-the starting point of Mod
ern Environmentalism
1987: the first joint communication of scientists and p
olicy makers in the Bellagio Conference
On Climate Change science
Some negative views on climate change science
There is no credible scientific evidence that
the earth is warming.
The temperature record from weather stations is
misleading because the record is influenced by local
conditions rather than global.
 Sea level measurements are biased. Stations for
measuring sea levels are located close to ports, for which
local factors give a greater impact.
 IPCC’s future projections are “scenarios”, which is
based on experts’ judgment and knowledge, rather than
scientific evidence.
 Gray (2002) says that no model has ever predicted future
climate sequence.
 IPCC reports have not assessed increased GHG emissions a
nd their effects on climate.

Origin of the problem
 Economic development/growth


Derived demand for energy consumption
Changes in lifestyle – political and social issues
“Tragedy of Commons”
If property rights are well defined there will be no
problem with production externalities, but otherwise
the outcome of economic interaction will undoubtedly
involve inefficiency

History of International
Negotiations
History
1987: Toronto conference (The World Commission on Environment and
Development) - Reduce CO2 emission 20% below the 1988 level in 2005
1988: Worst drought and record high temperature in the US
1988: Establishment of IPCC (WMO and UNEP)
1989: Norwijk Conference: No regret policy, soft target, CO2 equivalent concept.
1990: IPCC First Assessment Report - the global mean temperature would rise by 0.3C
every 10 years.
Bergen Declaration: Stablization at 2000
UN resolution 45/212 - Establishment of INC (Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee)
1992:
1995:
1997:
1998:
1999:
2000:
2001:
2001:
2002:
2003:
2004:
Rio Summit: UN Framework Convention on Climate Change adopted
COP 1 at Berlin, Germany - Berlin Mandate - strictly for the North
COP 3 at Kyoto - Kyoto Protocol
COP 4 at Buenos Aires - Buenos Aires Plan of Action adopted
COP 5 at Bonn
COP 6 at the Hague – No agreement was made
COP 6 bis at Bonn – Bonn Agreement
COP 7 at Marrakech – Marrakech Accord
COP 8 at New Delhi – Dehli Declaration adopted
COP 9 at Milan
COP 10 at Buenos Aires
UNFCCC
Rio Summit in 1992



Objective: “Stabilization of GHG concentration”
Principles
 1)“Common but differentiated responsibility with respective
capabilities”
 2)”Precautionary measures”
 3)”sustainable development”
Commitment:
 “aim of returning ,….., to 1990 levels”, ”by the end of the
present decade” - soft target for Annex 1 parties
 Inventory and reporting: National communication for All
parties
Country Positions at AGBM8
Issue
Aust.
Canada
EU
Japan
New Z.
Norway
Switz.
USA
G77&
China
Common policies and
measures (P&M's)
P&M's to suit national
circumstances
Include all GHG
no
no
yes
no
no
-
yes
no
no
yes
yes
no
yes
yes
-
no
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
yes
no
no
yes
no
Flat rate QELROS
no
no
yes
no
no
no
no
no
yes
Differentiated targets
(QELROS)
Net emissions (sources
minus sinks)
Single year budget
period
Demonstrable progress
by 2005
EU bubble
yes
yes
no
yes
no
yes
yes
no
no
yes
yes
no
yes
no
yes
no
yes
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
yes
no
yes
no
no
yes
no
no
no
no
no
yes
no
no
yes
no
no
no
no
no
-
-
yes
-
yes
yes
yes
no
yes
no
AIJ/Joint
Implementation
Limitations on trading
and AIJ/JI
Evolution into Annex 1
yes
yes
no
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
yes
yes
-
-
yes
no
yes
yes
yes
no
-
yes
-
-
yes
no
Legally binding
commitments
Developing country
compensation
Consensus decision
making
no
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
yes
yes
yes
-
-
yes
yes
yes
-
yes
Emissions trading
COP3: Kyoto Meeting
 Emission reduction targets for Annex B Parties
 Annex B Parties agreed to commitments to reduce
overall remissions of 6 GHG gasses by at least 5 percent
below 1990 levels during the first commitment period
(2008-2012)
 Kyoto Protocol
 Commitment on emissions
 Rules governing compliance
 Procedural rules
Marrakech Accord: Major Outcomes from COP 7
 Kyoto Mechanisms: Decisions were made on the
operational details of the Mechanisms.
Eligibility on the use of the use of the Mechanisms
 Fungibility
 Details of banking
 Conditions for issuing ERU under Joint Implementation
 Operational details of CDM project implementation such as CER,
Operational Entities, Additionality

 Compliance: Members of COP agreed that legal
form relating to compliance will be decided at
the COP/MOP.
 Capacity Building: Decisions were made on the
funding scheme for assisting the countries
vulnerable to the impacts from climate change.
World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in
Johannesburg
 The Summit produced a declaration reaffirming the principles of the
Rio Declaration and action oriented plan of implementation.
Over 220 partnerships (with $235 million in resources) were identified in advance of the Summit and around
60 partnerships were announced during the Summit by a variety of countries.

 On energy, following items were identified as important areas to be i
mproved.
Renewable energy
Diversify energy supply and substantially increase the global share of renewable energy sources in order to
increase its contribution to total energy supply.

Access to Energy
Improve access to reliable, affordable, economically viable, socially acceptable and environmentally sound
energy services and resources, sufficient to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, including the goal of
halving the proportion of people in poverty by 2015.

Energy Markets
Remove market distortions including the restructuring of taxes and the phasing out of harmful subsidies.

Support efforts to improve the functioning, transparency and information about energy markets with respect
to both supply and demand, with the aim of achieving greater stability and to ensure consumer access to energy
services.

Energy efficiency
Establish domestic programs for energy efficiency with the support of the international community.
Accelerate the development and dissemination of energy efficiency and energy conservation technologies,
including the promotion of research and development.

Outcomes of COP10
 Adaptation

SBSTA (Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice) agrees to
exchange information and share experience, and requested the Secretariat to
organise an workshop at SBSTA-22 to share information .
 Kyoto Mechanisms

Parties confirmed the importance of Kyoto Mechanisms for meeting the
emissions reduction target, and discussed the operational details of CDM,
methodological issues relating to LULUCF and format for registering emissions
credit.
 Support for Developing Countries

Parties discussed about development and transfer of technologies, capacity
building and financial mechanism and agreed on priorities, and programs.
 Non-Annex I National Communication

SBI (Subsidiary Body for Implementation) discussed about the maintaining
capacity in national teams, assuring updating by non-Annex I parties of
greenhouse gas inventories, and timing of completion. They agreed to hold
workshops for capacity building and sharing information.
Prospect for Kyoto Protocol
Kyoto Protocol
Kyoto in 1997



Objective:Ultimate objective of convention
Commitment:
 On average -5.2% GHG emission reduction in
terms of 1990 level between 2008 - 2012 among
Annex B parties
New features
 A basket of 6 gases
 Inclusion of sinks
 Flexibility Mechanism:Bubble, JI, CDM, ET :
Introduction of economic instruments
Required Reduction to meet the target
Region and
Country
CO2
Projected
Emission as CO2 Emission
of 1990 (Million in 2010 (Million
Metric ton)
The United
States
Western
Europe
Japan
Kyoto
Target
Ratio of CO2
Emission in
2010 w.r.t
Kyoto (%)
Metric ton)
1,346
1,790
1,252
-30
936
1,021
862
-16
274
322
258
-20
FSU
991
666
990
49
Eastern Europe
299
270
320
40
90
113
97
-14
Australia
Source: International Energy Outlook, ‘1999, EIA/DOE
Flexibility Mechanism
Why do we need these?





Assign economic value to GHG emission reduction
internationally
Market principle : Cost reduction
Private sector participation
Participation by developing countries
Enhance cooperation in technology development and
diffusion
Where are we?
Unresolved issues in the Negotiation

Equity issue





Developing country compensation (Article 4.8 and 4.9
of the convention): Historical responsibility and emissions
entitlement
Developing country participation
Transparency: monitoring, reporting and review
Flexible mechanism: rules, modalities and guidelines
Enforcement - compliance and non-compliance
Prospect for Kyoto Protocol
 Negotiation is not easy: there is no “rule of procedure”
Only consensus is available
 Too many issues are at stake - Long list of work plan with
conflicting issues


Bleak Future of Meeting the Target
Flexibility Mechanisms

“Nothing happens unless the issue becomes institutionalized”
Joseph F. Coates

Developing Country Issues



Evolution
Voluntary Commitment
Absence of US
 Trading partner
CO2 Emissions from Energy Consumption: Selected Annex B
countries
Australia
Canada
Japan
NZ
Russia
USA
France
Germany
UK
EU
CO2 emissions: CO2 Mt
1990
2010
2020
260
397
485
421
604
696
1049
1246
1343
23
33
40
2326
2043
2514
4846
6715
7773
374
390
400
995
851
943
600
608
665
3111
3422
3689
% change since 1990
2010/1990 2020/1990
52.7%
86.5%
43.5%
65.3%
18.8%
28.0%
43.5%
73.9%
-12.2%
8.1%
38.6%
60.4%
4.3%
7.0%
-14.5%
-5.2%
1.3%
10.8%
10.0%
18.6%
(Source) APEC data is from APERC (2002), “APEC Energy Demand and Supply Outlook 2002”, France, Germany and UK
data is from EIA (2004), “International Energy Outlook 2004” and EU data is from IEA (2003), “World Energy Outlook”.
Bleak Future of Meeting the Target
EU
1990-2010 (Reduction Target)
1990-2010 (Outlook)
UK
Germany
France
USA
Russia
NZ
Japan
Canada
Australia
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
% change since 1990
(Source) APEC data is from APERC (2002), “APEC Energy Demand and Supply Outlook 2002”, France, Germany and UK data is from EIA (2004),
“International Energy Outlook 2004” and EU data is from IEA (2003), “World Energy Outlook”.
Will “Hot Air” be Available?
3,000
CO2 Mt
Kyoto
Target
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
1990
2000
2005
2010
2015
Russia Energy Ministry: Upper Target
Russia Energy Ministry: Lower Target
Russia IEA 2000 (Reference Case)
Russia APERC 2002
Japan APERC 2002 (JPN)
(Source) Russian Energy Ministry, IEA, APERC
2020
Implementation CDM Project in Developing Countries
(A Summary from Dr. Sathye’s Paper)
 Impact of climate change can be mitigated through cost
effective options such as energy efficiency and fossil fuel
substitution options in the energy sector.
Greater potential for GHG emissions reduction for improving energy efficiency
project for coal-fired power plants.

 However, many market barriers prevent adoption of cost
effective options.
Project Level: High first cost of equipment, lack of capability to monitor project.

Sector Level: Presence of subsidies.

Macro Level: Barrier for foreign investment in energy sector, High tariffs on
import of energy technology.

 Removal of barriers will improve developing countries’
access to financing and advanced technology.
Impact of Kyoto Protocol: Japan
 APERC’s projection on CO2 emissions from Japan’s
energy sector in 2010
Difference from
1990 (Million Ct) 2010 (Million Ct) Target (Million Ct)
the Target
(Million Ct)
Japan
286
340
269
71
 Assuming that price of carbon will be USD 20/ton

APERC estimates that Japan would have to pay 1.4 billion USD (or
3.8 million USD/day) in 2010 for their carbon emissions reduction.
 Due to the rise in oil price, Japan pays roughly
extra 90 million USD/day for their crude oil imports.

Price of crude oil: 30$/bbl → 48$/bbl: difference 18$/bbl
 A question is raised.

Carbon price vs Fuel Price Differential
US Perspective
 Multilateral Negotiation vs Bilateral Negotiation
US prefers bilateral negotiation
 US has not ratified some international environmental
conventions that had entered into force.

Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes
and Their Disposal
 Convention on Biological Diversity
 Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change

 US initiatives on environment

Alternative to the Kyoto Protocol
 US is not “one country”.

Coordination among the states would be impossible.
US Initiatives: Alternative to the Kyoto Protocol
 Climate Change Research Initiative in 2001
Promotes a vision focused on the effective use of scientific knowledge in
policy and management decisions and evaluation of management strategies
and choices.

 National Climate Change Technology Initiative
in 2001
Develops a science based climate change policy and fund research on
“breakthrough technologies” that would help meet the long-run climate
change challenges

 Clear Skies Initiative in February 2002
The Initiative calls for significant reductions in emissions of various
pollutants (mercury, nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide) and the reduction of the
greenhouse gas intensity of the US economy by 18 percent between 2002
and 2012.

Contact information
[email protected]
www.ieej.or.jp/aperc