* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download The Greenhouse Effect
General circulation model wikipedia , lookup
Emissions trading wikipedia , lookup
Global warming controversy wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Climate-friendly gardening wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup
Fred Singer wikipedia , lookup
Climate engineering wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
German Climate Action Plan 2050 wikipedia , lookup
Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Attribution of recent climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate governance wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
Kyoto Protocol and government action wikipedia , lookup
Climate change mitigation wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in New Zealand wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
Low-carbon economy wikipedia , lookup
Economics of climate change mitigation wikipedia , lookup
Global warming wikipedia , lookup
Kyoto Protocol wikipedia , lookup
Paris Agreement wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
Years of Living Dangerously wikipedia , lookup
Climate change feedback wikipedia , lookup
2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference wikipedia , lookup
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme wikipedia , lookup
Mitigation of global warming in Australia wikipedia , lookup
Biosequestration wikipedia , lookup
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup
BENTLEY COLLEGE Bentley Model United Nations Program 16th Annual BMUN High School Conference 28-31 May 2004 La Cava Campus Center BACKGROUND PAPER AND TOPIC SUMMARY The Greenhouse Effect As the sun shines down on earth, solar energy arrives in the form of shortwavelength radiation. Some of this radiation is reflected away by the earth’s surface and atmosphere, however most of it passes through to warm the earth’s surface. The earth gets rid of the excess energy by transmitting it in the form of long wavelengths, which we know as infra-red. Most of the infra-red energy is absorbed by the atmosphere in water vapor, carbon dioxide, and other greenhouse gasses. These gasses prevent the energy from passing off the surface of the earth, into space. Many interacting processes transport the energy high into the atmosphere. Once it reaches this point, it can slowly radiate into space. By increasing the atmospheres’ capacity to absorb infra-red energy, greenhouse gas emissions are affecting the way the climate maintains its’ balance between incoming (short wave radiation) and outgoing (infra-red) energies. When we burn coal, oil, and natural gasses we increase the amount of carbon dioxide into the air. When we engage in deforestation, the carbon trapped in the trees escapes into the air, and other basic activities such as raising cattle and planting rice release methane and nitrous oxide into the atmosphere. If emissions continue to grow at the current rate, atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide will double from pre-industrial levels during the 21st century. The result: global warming of 1.4 to 5.8ºC over the next 100 years. That is in addition to the .6ºC over the 20th century, at least some of which can be contributed to greenhouse gasses. There are many implications that can arise from global warming. Just how this would affect us is hard to predict because the global climate is a very complicated system. If one key aspect - such as the average global temperature - is altered, the ramifications ripple outward. And an uncertain event can cause more uncertain events. For example, wind and rainfall patterns that have prevailed for hundreds or thousands of years, and on which millions of people depend may change. Sea-levels may rise and threaten islands and low-lying coastal areas. In a world that is increasingly crowded and under stress these extra pressures could lead directly to more famines and other catastrophes. At the global level, the evaporation cycle is expected to speed up which will cause rain patterns to change and evaporation to happen faster. This would affect the moisture levels in the soil which can be very destructive to farmers. Droughts would also become more severe or occur more frequently which could be devastating in poorer countries which relies heavily on clean water, which is a major threat to public health. Climate and agricultural zones may shift towards the poles which would reduce mid-latitude crop fields and today’s leading grain-producing areas would experience more frequent droughts and heat waves. This would devastate food producing industries and could cause a shortage of the world’s food supply which would raise prices and hunger rates. Melting glaciers and the thermal expansion of sea water may raise sea levels, threatening low-lying coastal areas and small islands. The global mean sea level has already risen by around 10 to 20 centimeters during the past century, and global warming is expected to cause a further rise of 9 to 88 cm by the year 2100. The most vulnerable land would be the unprotected, densely populated coastal regions of some of the world's poorest countries. The Kyoto Protocol Negotiations on the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) were completed December 11, 1997, committing the industrialized nations to specified, legally binding reductions in emissions of six "greenhouse gases"(carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydro-fluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulphur-hexafluorides). The treaty was opened for signature on March 16, 1998 through March 16, 1999 at the United Nations Headquarters in New York. By that date the Protocol had received 84 signatures. Those Parties that have not yet signed the Kyoto Protocol may accede to it at any time. It does not require developing nations to sign the treaty, but it does call on all Parties--developed and developing--to take a number of steps to formulate national and regional programs to improve "local emission factors," activity data, models, and national inventories of greenhouse gas emissions and sinks that remove these gases from the atmosphere. All Parties are also committed to formulate, publish, and update climate change mitigation and adaptation measures, and to cooperate in promotion and transfer of environmentally sound technologies and in scientific and technical research on the climate system. The Convention first recognized there is a problem. It then sets an “ultimate objective” of stabilizing “greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic (human-induced) interference with the climate system.” It then directed that “such a level should be achieved within a time frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate changes, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.” The Convention also put a huge onus on developed nations. The reason for this is because the largest share of historical and current emission originates in these developed nations. They also felt that these countries should take the lead in combating climate changes and its adverse impacts. They also recognized that poorer nations have a right to economic development. They noted that the share of global emissions of greenhouse gases originating in developing countries will grow as these countries expand their industries to improve social and economic conditions for their citizens. The Convention also noted the vulnerability of poorer countries to the effects of climate change. One of the Convention's basic principles is that the specific needs and circumstances of developing countries should be given "full consideration" in any actions taken. This applies in particular to those whose fragile ecosystems are highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. The Convention also recognizes that states which depend on income from coal and oil would face difficulties if energy demand changes. After many meetings and debates, the Convention then produced the Kyoto Protocol. It first sets legally binding targets and timetables for cutting developed country emissions. Second, The Protocol addresses the six main greenhouse gases, which are: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6 ). Third, the Protocol recognizes that emissions cuts must be credible and verifiable. Ensuring that governments comply with their targets will be essential to the Protocol's success. Each country will need an effective national system for estimating emissions and confirming reductions. Standardized guidelines must be crafted to make figures comparable from one country to the next and the whole process transparent. The Protocol then addresses the importance of policy making in trying to reduce greenhouse gases. It highlights effective domestic policies and measures for reducing emissions. National governments can build a fiscal and policy framework that discourages emissions. They can phase out counter-productive subsidies on carbonintensive activities, and they can introduce energy-efficiency and other regulatory standards that promote the best current and future technologies. Taxes, tradable emissions permits, information programs, and voluntary programs can all contribute. The Protocol also encourages governments to work together in reducing greenhouse gases. One of the largest problems many countries such as the US have with the Protocol, is that it places almost all the burden on developed nations. Many of the steps to share the burden, such as assigning a national target to each country, and by offering additional flexibility to the countries with economies in transition, don’t seem to be relieving any of the burden. An example of opposition to the Protocol can be seen by looking at the US. The United States, while under the Clinton Administration signed the treaty but never sent it to the Senate because the Senate had already voted 95-0, objecting to any treaty that would incur new commitments by US without participation by developing countries. In late March of 2001, the Bush Administration made a determination to consider the Kyoto Protocol "dead" in terms of U.S. policy, and instead announced a cabinet-level review of climate policy. Bush complained that "No one can say with any certainty what constitutes a dangerous level of warming and therefore what level must be avoided." Referring to "developing" countries, which include some of the world's largest economies, such as those in China and India, the president said "We recognize the responsibility to reduce our emissions. We also recognize the other part of the story, that the rest of the world emits 80 percent of all greenhouse gases, and many of those emissions come from developing countries." The United States has made 3 arguments why they will not be a part of the Kyoto Protocol. First, developing countries are exempted from the protocol, and it is the role of the developed nations to take care of the global warming problem. Second, they feel there is no scientific evidence for the claims made by the Convention and the Protocol. Third, they feel the Protocol will hurt the United States’ economy. Many other nations share the views of the United States. However, the European Union is now taking steps to get the United States involved in the Protocol. There has been a high-level effort by the European nations to re-engage the United States in the Kyoto process. This effort was reported as having been "rebuffed" by the United States, in favor of an effort to find new approaches, centered on market-based incentives, to international cooperation to address climate change concerns. In response, the United States pledged in Feb. 2002 to cut “green house gas intensity” by 18% over 10 years (the US will cut GWG from 183 metric tons per $1 million of GDP to 151 metric tons per $1m GDP by 2012). The most important reason why many nations are not complying with the Kyoto Protocol is because they feel it will interfere and hinder economic development. For example, many developing nations who are trying to become world players are investing great deals of money into human capital and increasing the labor force. By doing so, more people are looking for work in factories, so due to Labor Market supply and demand, more firms will be hiring these workers. This increases the number of greenhouse producing factories being built and as a result increase the amount of gases being released into the atmosphere. Also, with in increase in per capita GDP, the result of developing nations expanding their economies, more cars and other greenhouse gas produces are being bought and used within the countries. This also increases the amount of gas being released into the atmosphere. Countries believe that if they must comply to the Protocol, they won’t be able grow economically, and therefore continue to be reliant on developed nations. Links http://unfccc.int/resource/convkp.html http://www.csa.com/hottopics/ern/01jul/1-kyoto.html http://www.public.iastate.edu/~pol_s.358/14feb.htm http://www.energyonline.com/news/articles/f12-2warm.asp http://www.public.iastate.edu/~pol_s.358/14feb.htm http://www.csa.com/hottopics/ern/01jul/1-kyoto.html