Letter from US environmental groups to World
environmental ministers
Date: 20th April 2001
Dear Ministers of the Environment and Members of Delegations to the UN Commission on Sustainable Development:
We are writing, on behalf of major American environmental organizations, to express our strong objection to President Bush’s recent announcement that the United States is abandoning the Kyoto Protocol negotiating process. This irresponsible decision should not deter other countries from completing these negotiations so that enough countries ratify the protocol for it to enter into force by the Rio+10 Summit in June 2002. We assure you that we wholeheartedly support efforts by other countries to ratify the Kyoto Protocol without the United States, and that we will continue to do all we can domestically to reverse President Bush’s decision.
President Bush’s recent statements are not only factually erroneous and contrary to the Rio Treaty principles -- see the attached factsheet -- but also do not reflect public sentiment on this issue. We therefore believe it would be a tragic mistake if these statements by a new administration led the international community to abandon or weaken the Kyoto Protocol.
There is every indication that President Bush is at odds with domestic public opinion on global warming. Opinion polls consistently show that a significant majority of U.S. citizens believe global warming is a serious problem, and think the United States should reduce its own emissions. The U.S. Senate recently voted unanimously to increase funding for domestic and international efforts to combat global warming by 4.5 billion dollars over 10 years, and members from both political parties have questioned President Bush’s decision not to regulate carbon dioxide from power plants and to reject the Kyoto Protocol. Editorial opinion in the U.S. press has been overwhelmingly critical of the Bush administration’s position. Leading religious organizations expressed serious concern and called upon President Bush to enter into a “credible, binding program to honor international commitments.”
The Kyoto Protocol represents the only credible course for the development of an international climate regime. At the international climate negotiations in 1999, more than 60 countries called for entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol by 2002 at Rio+10. This remains an essential objective. Nations need to accept the commitments in the Kyoto agreement in order to preserve options to stabilize greenhouse gases at safe levels and to lay a foundation for later action by all countries to take further steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
While it would be preferable to have all countries -- including the
United States -- ratify and implement the Kyoto Protocol, it is vital that
other industrialized countries move forward with or without the United
States. We strongly encourage all responsible countries to:
· Demonstrate to developing countries that industrialized countries
are serious about acting on this critical threat to the global environment;
· Give impetus to companies that are ready to reduce their emissions
and support those companies already taking actions; and
· Answer the calls of millions of people demanding action to
fight global warming.
We strongly oppose the Bush administration’s rejection of the Kyoto
Protocol and meaningful domestic action, and we urge countries to move
ahead without the United States, if need be. The world cannot afford
to wait for the United States. The costs of inaction against the
threats of global warming are too great.
Global Warming and the United States Position on the Kyoto Protocol
Fact: Since the climate conference in The Hague last November, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has issued its Third Assessment Report, which outlines the potentially devastating consequences of inaction on global warming and states that “most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.” Yet President Bush claims that a meaningful response to climate change is unwarranted because the science is “incomplete.”
Fact: In rejecting the Kyoto Protocol, President Bush claimed that the costs of implementing it would harm the U.S. economy. But the sole study the President cited is a fundamentally flawed analysis performed at the behest of a former Congressman who has long opposed the Kyoto process. This analysis grossly underestimates the cost-effective greenhouse gas reductions that can be achieved through energy efficiency and renewable energy use. Moreover, it ignores the many flexible mechanisms that will lower compliance costs and which were included in the Protocol at the specific behest of the U.S. Numerous other studies show that we can reduce greenhouse gas pollution to levels called for in the Kyoto agreement without harming the U.S. economy, and that the modest costs of implementing Kyoto will pale in comparison to the impacts and costs caused by unabated climate change.
Fact: President Bush asserts that the Kyoto Protocol is “unfair” because it exempts 80 percent of the world’s population from binding emissions targets. Yet 80 percent of the global warming problem has been caused by just 20 percent of the world, with the U.S. being the biggest source by far of global warming pollution. Despite their many other pressing problems, many developing countries—including China, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, and India—are reining in their greenhouse gas emissions by reforming their energy, transport and other policies. For example, while U.S. CO2 emissions are now about 13 percent above 1990 levels, emissions in China have dropped more than 17 percent since 1997.
Press Statement by the EU Troika on the high-level consultations on Climate Change in New York 21st April 2001
Date: 22/04/2001
Policy area: Environment
News item: Press release
Represented by Mr Kjell Larsson, Swedish Environment Minister and current President of the EU Council, Ms Margot Wallström, EU Environment Commissioner and Mr Olivier Deleuze, Belgian State Secretary for Energy and Sustainable Development.
1. The European Union considers that climate change is a central issue in international politics today. We have a responsibility towards future generations; science is indisputably convincing; and global issues require a global response.
2. To summarise the EU position:
· The Kyoto Protocol is well alive;
· We expect CoP 6 bis to lead to results which will make the
Protocol ratifiable;
· We stick to the target of EU ratification by Rio+10 2002 and
call upon other parties to do the same;
· To this end, we intensify preparations for ratification and
speed up work on European Union's internal policies and measures, i.a.
through the European Climate Change Programme ECCP.
3. The Kyoto Protocol provides the only international instrument and political basis for combating climate change. The European Union sees no alternative. We recognise that the present negotiations, designed to clarify and complete the Protocol, are difficult. However the EU will do its utmost to help achieve agreement in Bonn in July.
4. We have noted the US position with great concern. We express the firm hope and expectation that the US would reconsider its opposition to the Kyoto Protocol and rejoin the negotiations. Meanwhile, the EU calls on others to join it in pressing forward in these negotiations so as to enable us to ratify the Protocol by 2002.
5. The Presidency of the EU has had extensive consultations with our partners in the rest of the world over the last few weeks. In these consultations we have found a lot of common ground for finalising the negotiations and for securing entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol by 2002.
6. We are now working on the new proposal by President Pronk. From the EU point of view it contains parts which are fully acceptable, others which will require changes in order to make agreement in Bonn possible.
7. We call on all parties to be flexible in working out agreements over the coming months. Among EU positions we wish to stress the following:
· The implementation of the Convention and the Protocol requires
substantial resources to be provided to developing countries.
· We recall our well-known concerns about scale, uncertainty
and risks regarding sinks, in particular for the First Commitment Period.
The EU however welcomes the structure suggested by the President for the
section on sinks, which seems to provide more certainty regarding potential
volumes. However, some further work is needed in order to improve the robustness
of the rules.
· The EU maintains that the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol
must lead to significant, real domestic reduction in Annex I countries.
Nevertheless, in the context of an overall package the EU is willing to
discuss supplementarity with other parties and to show flexibility about
how to tackle this issue.
· On compliance we can generally support the suggestions made
concerning consequences of non-compliance.
8. We will continue our contacts bilaterally and multilaterally over the coming weeks and months and look forward to co-operate with all countries in the preparation for CoP6 bis.
9. We support President Pronk in his role as a leader of the negotiations and support his suggestion to hold another high-level consultation before CoP6 bis. Sweden has been asked to host such a meeting and is looking into the possibilities to do so.
10. In conclusion we also wish to underline the significance of the European Council meeting in Göteborg in June and the US-EU summit that will take place in connection with that meeting.
Contact information:
Anette Törnqvist
Press Officer
Phone: +46-8-405 20 27
mobil: +46-70-548 76 80
e-mail: anette.tornqvist@environment.ministry.se
-------------------------
EU climate gas emissions down in 1999
ENDS Daily - 20/04/01
-------------------------
EU emissions of the six greenhouse gases controlled under
the UN Kyoto protocol were 4% lower in 1999 than in the
treaty's base year of 1990, the European Environment Agency
(EEA) reported today. While welcoming this "positive trend,"
the agency warned that the free lunch offered to most EU
countries by strong Anglo-German performance in cutting
carbon dioxide (CO2) could be about to end.
1999 was a good year for greenhouse gas emissions cuts, with
total EU output down two percentage points on 1998 (ENDS
Daily 28 November 2000). The result is that the bloc is just
in advance of a linear trend needed to reach its committed
target of an 8% cut from 1990 levels by the period 2008-12, a
situation enjoyed by no other industrialised countries.
Despite this progress, however, the EEA warns that the
prospects for hitting the 2008-12 target remain uncertain
because the large emission cuts achieved so far by Germany
and the UK could be at an end. According to preliminary
estimates, British CO2 emissions rose by 2% in 2000, it
notes, while Germany's energy-related CO2 emissions rose by
0.2% (ENDS Daily 27 February). Meanwhile over half of EU
countries are far from on track to meet their emission
commitments (see table below).
-----------------------------------------
1999 greenhouse gas emissions and targets
98-99 90-99 targets
-----------------------------------------
Austria 0.0%
+2.6% -13%
Belgium -3.4%
+2.8% -7.5%
Denmark -4.6%
-4.6% -21%
Finland -0.8%
-1.1% 0%
France -2.2%
-0.2% 0%
Germany -3.7%
-18.7% -21%
Greece -0.7%
+16.9% +25%
Ireland +2.5%
+22.1% +13%
Italy +0.9%
+4.4% -6.5%
Luxembourg +4.6% -43.3%
-28%
Netherlands -2.9% +6.1%
-6%
Portugal +2.9%
+22.4% +27%
Spain +6.1%
+23.2% +15%
Sweden -2.6%
+1.5% +4%
UK
-6.5% -14.0% -12.5%
EU TOTAL -2.0%
-4.0% -8%
-----------------------------------------
Source: EEA
-----------------------------------------
Follow-up: EEA (http://www.eea.eu.int),
press release
(http://org.eea.eu.int/documents/pressreleases/newsrelease20010324).
80% of Australians support ratifying Kyoto Protocol
Sydney, Friday 20th April, 2001: A Newspoll survey has found that 80% of Australians believe that the Australian Government should ratify the Kyoto Protocol - the international treaty to reduce greenhouse gas pollution - without the USA if necessary.
Market research company Newspoll conducted the national representative survey of 1200 adult Australians on the weekend of 6- 8 April. The survey found 80% in favour of Australia ratifying the protocol, without the US if necessary. Ten per cent said they did not support ratification and 10% were uncommitted.
"The poll shows how much Australians care about the impacts of climate change. Australians know temperatures and sea levels are rising," said Greenpeace climate campaigner, Gareth Walton. "They know that extreme weather events like floods, droughts and storms are putting food crops and health at stake.
"The Howard government is out of touch with voters. Just this week the
government reaffirmed that it would not ratify the Kyoto Protocol
unless the US did first.
"The government should join the European Union, Japan and New Zealand
in committing to ratify the Kyoto Protocol without the US if
necessary."
Recently the United States, which is the world's largest greenhouse
polluter, withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto agreement can
go ahead if enough countries ratify it. So far, the European Union, Japan
and New Zealand have all agreed to ratify it without the US.
"This poll sends a strong signal to the Labor Party ahead of this
year's Federal election. The ALP can clearly differentiate itself from
the Government with a commitment to ratify the Kyoto Protocol," said
Walton. "We have seen the importance of the green vote in the Western Australian
and Queensland elections. The federal ALP cannot afford to ignore public
demand for action on climate change."
Editors note: The question asked of the survey respondents was:
"Recently the United States withdrew from the international
environmental agreement called the Kyoto Protocol, which is an
agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions around the world. The
United States is recognised as the largest producer of greenhouse gases.
The Kyoto agreement can still go ahead if enough other countries ratify
it, that is by making it law in their own countries. So far the European
Union, Japan and New Zealand have all agreed to ratify it or make it law,
without the US if necessary. However the Australian Government has not
yet made this commitment. Do you personally think the Australian Government
should or should not ratify the Kyoto Protocol, without the US if necessary?"
===============================================
Media release
Senator Nick Minchin
Minister for Industry, Science & Resources
20 April 2001
(provisional translation)
RESOLUTION
OF THE HOUSE OF COUNCILORS
JAPAN
April 18, 2001
RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE REALIZATION OF INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT TOWARD
THE
ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE KYOTO PROTOCOL
While the global warming has been becoming the most serious problem
for the
twenty-first century, over the last ten years, the international community
has achieved agreements to prevent the global warming by realizing
the entry
into force of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change(UNFCCC)
and,
succeedingly, the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol. It is greatly
regrettable
that the Bush Administration of the United States of America has recently
expressed its position that it leaves the Kyoto Protocol, and it would
be
backtracking from what the international community has achieved for
protection of the global environment. The House of Councilors
strongly
urges the United States of America, which is the world largest emitter
of
greenhouse gases, to continue to participate in negotiations related
to the
Kyoto Protocol.
Being in the Presidency of the third session of the Conference of
Parties(COP3) to the UNFCCC, which was held in Kyoto, Japan played
a special
role to complete the Kyoto Protocol. The government of Japan,
therefore,
should take an initiative in ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, develop
domestic
systems to prevent the global warming and, internationally, take a
leadership for the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol in the year
of
2002.
The House of the Councilors strongly calls for all countries, including
the
United States of America, to achieve an agreement at the resumed sixth
session of the Conference of Parties(COP6) in July to lead the Kyoto
Protocol to entry into force.
So we resolve.
(provisional translation)
RESOLUTION
OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
JAPAN
April 19, 2001
RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE REALIZATION OF INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT TOWARD
THE
ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE KYOTO PROTOCOL
While the global warming has been becoming the most serious problem
for the
twenty-first century, over the last ten years, the international community
has achieved agreements to prevent the global warming by realizing
the entry
into force of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change(UNFCCC)
and,
succeedingly, the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol. It is greatly
regrettable
that the Bush Administration of the United States of America has recently
expressed its position that it leaves the Kyoto Protocol, and it would
be
backtracking from what the international community has achieved for
protection of the global environment. The House of Representatives
strongly
urges the United States of America, which is the world largest emitter
of
greenhouse gases, to continue to participate in negotiations related
to the
Kyoto Protocol.
Being in the Presidency of the third session of the Conference of
Parties(COP3) to the UNFCCC, which was held in Kyoto, Japan played
a special
role to complete the Kyoto Protocol. The Diet, as the legislative
body, as
well as the government, and all other parts of society of Japan as
one
should develop domestic systems to prevent the global warming. Japan
should
ratify the Kyoto Protocol early and, internationally, take a leadership
for
the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol in the year of 2002.
The House of the Representatives strongly calls for all countries, including
the United States of America, to achieve an agreement at the resumed
sixth
session of the Conference of Parties(COP6) in July to lead the Kyoto
Protocol to entry into force.
So we resolve.
EU rejects Australia's call for new greenhouse pact
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
AUSTRALIA: April 19, 2001
CANBERRA - European Commissioner Chris Patten criticised yesterday
Australia's decision to seek a new process to control greenhouse gas
emissions after the United States abandoned the Kyoto protocol.
"I don't see how it helps simply to say, well, because America isn't
going
to go along with it ... the rest of us can tear it up and go back to
base,"
Patten, EU commissioner for external affairs, told reporters and diplomats
in Canberra.
Australian Environment Minister Robert Hill said on Sunday the international
community needed to start a new process for cutting global greenhouse
gases
following last month's decision by Washington to reject the 1997 Kyoto
treaty on global warming.
Hill said the pact was a "good starting point" but it was better to
start a
new process because the Kyoto deal would sink without U.S. participation.
But Patten, who is scheduled to meet Foreign Minister Alexander Downer
and
Trade Minister Mark Vaile on Thursday to discuss security, trade and
environmental issues, said the 15-nation European bloc did not accept
Australia's argument.
"Certainly in Europe, I don't think that would be acceptable to our
electorates. I think our electorates would much prefer us to say, well,
we'll do what we can to ensure that at least on our part the protocol
is
ratified by the time of the conference on sustainable development in
2002,"
Patten said.
He said the global community should continue to negotiate with the United
States in an effort to find an agreement to "bind them in" to emissions
reductions.
The United States, the world's biggest producer of carbon dioxide and
other
greenhouse gases, said last month it would abandon the Kyoto protocol.
The pact agreed by world leaders in Japan in 1997, called on industrial
countries to cut carbon dioxide and other gas emissions by an average
5.2
percent below 1990 levels by 2012.
U.S. President George Bush said cuts would harm the domestic economy
and
were unfair since developing nations like China did not have to make
the
same sacrifices.
Australia's conservative prime minister, John Howard, has said he shares
the
U.S. views on Kyoto's shortcomings but has written to Bush to stress
the
importance of a global solution.
EU leaders have pledged to work intensely from now until the resumption
of
United Nations-sponsored talks in Bonn at the end of July to get the
United
States to recommit to the protocol.
The Upper House of Japan's parliament yesterday urged the implementation
of
the pact as the Environment Minister pledged to do her best to get
Washington to rethink its opposition.
"It is extremely regrettable that the U.S. Bush administration has announced
its abandonment of the Kyoto Protocol," the chamber said in a resolution,
adopted unanimously.
"We strongly urge the United States, which is the world's largest emitter
of
greenhouse gases, to continue to take part in negotiations on the Kyoto
Protocol."
The resolution urged Japan's government to show international leadership
in
achieving the goal of implementing the accord.
Environment Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi has promised to drive home to
the
American public the need for the United States to reconsider its decision
to
abandon the Kyoto climate change treaty when she flies to New York
this
week.
REUTERS NEWS SERVICE
WETTER UPPER ATMOSPHERE MAY DELAY GLOBAL OZONE
RECOVERY
http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/gsfc/earth/atmos/ozone.htm
NASA research has shown that increasing water-vapor in the stratosphere,
which results partially from greenhouse gases, may delay ozone recovery
and increase the rate of climate change.
Drew Shindell, an atmospheric scientist from NASA's Goddard Institute
for Space Studies (GISS) and Columbia University, NY, used the NASA/GISS
global climate model with satellite and other remote sensing data to investigate
long-term stratospheric cooling and ozone depletion. This study is the
first to link greenhouse gases to increased ozone depletion over populated
areas.
Shindell found that he was able to best simulate the behavior of temperature
and ozone in the upper atmosphere when he added water vapor data into the
climate model.
"Climate models show cooler stratospheric temperatures happen when
there is more water vapor present, and water vapor also leads to the breakdown
of ozone molecules," Shindell said. According to satellite data, upper
atmospheric temperatures around the world (20-35 miles high) have cooled
between 5.4-10.8 degrees Fahrenheit over recent decades. The stratosphere
is the typically dry layer of the atmosphere above the troposphere, where
temperatures increase with height.
According to Shindell there are two driving forces behind the change
in stratospheric moisture. "Increased emissions of the greenhouse gas,
methane, are transformed into water in the stratosphere," Shindell said,
"accounting for about a third of the observed increase in moisture there."
The second cause of change in the upper atmosphere is a greater transport
of water from the lower atmosphere, which happens for several reasons.
Warmer air holds more water vapor than colder air, so the amount of water
vapor in the lower atmosphere increases as it is warmed by the greenhouse
effect. Climate models also indicate that greenhouse gases such as carbon
dioxide and methane may enhance the transport of water into the stratosphere.
Though not fully understood, the increased transport of water vapor to
the stratosphere seems likely to have been induced by human activities.
"Rising greenhouse gas emissions account for all or part of the water
vapor increase," said Shindell, "which causes stratospheric ozone destruction."
When more water vapor works its way into the stratosphere, the water
molecules can be broken down, releasing reactive molecules that can destroy
ozone. Shindell noted that his global climate model agrees with satellite
observations of the world's stratospheric ozone levels when the water vapor
factor is increased in the stratosphere over time. Shindell said, "If the
trend of increasing stratospheric water vapor continues, it could increase
future global warming and impede ozone stratospheric recovery."
The impact on global warming comes about because both water vapor and
ozone are greenhouse gases, which trap heat leaving the Earth. "When they
change, the Earth's energy balance changes too, altering the surface climate,"
said Shindell. Increased water vapor in the stratosphere makes it warmer
on the ground by trapping heat, while the ozone loss makes it colder on
the ground. Water vapor has a much larger effect, so that overall the changes
increase global warming. Shindell stressed that although ozone depletion
cools the Earth's surface, repairing stratospheric ozone is very important
to block harmful ultraviolet radiation, and other greenhouse gas emissions
need to be reduced.
Shindell used seven years of data from the Upper Atmosphere Research
Satellite's (UARS) Halogen Occultation Experiment (HALOE) with ground based
data to paint a complete picture of the upper atmosphere. He also used
14 years of lower stratospheric measurements that show large increases
in water vapor. Though some studies conflict with lower stratospheric observations
of water vapor trends, studies released since Shindell's paper was written,
agree with the increases he used, and indicate that they have been taking
place for more than four decades already.
Shindell's paper, "Climate and Ozone Response to Increased Stratospheric
Water Vapor," appears in the April 15th issue of Geophysical Research Letters.
NASA's HALOE was launched on the UARS spacecraft September 12, 1991
as part of the Earth Science Enterprise Program. Its mission includes improvement
of understanding stratospheric ozone depletion by analyzing vertical profiles
of ozone, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen fluoride, methane, water vapor, nitric
oxide, nitrogen dioxide, and aerosols.
Jorritsma buys Kyoto reductions in Central and Eastern
Europe
Press release: April 17, 2001 http://www.senter.nl/erupt/news170401.htm
Economic Affairs Minister Annemarie Jorritsma signed the first contracts relating to Joint Implementation on 17 April 2001. With these contracts, the Netherlands buys reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases (including CO2) realised by investors in Eastern Europe, together with local partners. The reductions are included for the purpose of the Dutch commitments under the Kyoto Protocol. These are the first transactions agreed on this scale in relation to the Protocol. With the procurement of emission reductions, the Netherlands provides an important stimulus for the development of an international market (price) for reductions in CO2 emissions.
The contracts result from the Emission Reduction Unit Procurement Tender
(ERUPT). The purchases involve a sum of NLG 79 million, including the procurement
of more than 4 M-tonnes of reductions in CO2 emissions in 5 years. (This
is 0.8 M-ton per year.)
The reductions will be realised at:
A 60 Megawatt wind-power park in Poland
A hydro-power plant in Romania
A series of biomass-fuelled boilers in the Czech Republic and
Two urban heating projects in Romania.
Via the ERUPT projects in Central and Eastern Europe, the Netherlands
has come a step closer to compliance with the Kyoto commitments at a lower
cost than through reductions in domestic emissions. For the governments
in Poland, Romania and the Czech Republic, the contracts lead to investments
that stimulate sustainable economic growth. The investors benefit from
higher returns on their investments in renewable energy or energy conservation.
Gases Blamed for Earth's Warming
April 13, 2001
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Computer models developed independently by two teams
of
researchers give new evidence that global warming is
influenced by man-made gases.
In a study appearing Friday in the journal Science, researchers report
that
the two models, using slightly different techniques, linked rising
global
temperatures to an increase in atmospheric greenhouse gases, principally
carbon dioxide from the burning of oil, gas and coal.
``We think this is some of the strongest evidence to date that human-induced
effects are changing our climate,'' said Sydney Levitus, a researcher
at
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and co-author of
one of
the studies.
President Bush decided last month to reject the Kyoto climate treaty,
a 1997
international plan to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases as a
way to curb global warming. Bush said the plan, which specifies a sharp
reduction of carbon dioxide emissions, was too expensive and unwise
during a time that the United States faces energy and economic problems.
Levitus said the model produced by his group is in close agreement with
another computer model that was produced independently and analyzed
by Tim Barnett and two co-authors at the Scripps Institute of Oceanography
at the University of California, San Diego. Their work also appears
in
Science.
Barnett said the ``fingerprint'' of human influence on the warming climate
is ``so bold and big that you don't have to do any fancy statistics
to beat
it
out of the data. It's just there.''
The results, he said, ``are certainly compatible'' with the idea that
the
warming of the Earth ``has been caused by anthropogenic (human) sources.''
George Boer, a researcher at the Meteorological Service of Canada in
Victoria, British Columbia, said the climate modeling work ``is a good
study.''
``This is collaborative evidence'' that human activity is causing the
global
climate to warm, he said.
Global temperatures are thought to have risen by about 1.1 degrees over
the
last century. The top few thousand feet of the ocean waters have
increased in temperature by about one-tenth of a degree.
The new studies tie in the observed effects on the ocean temperatures
with
those of the land and the atmosphere.
The computer models mathematically express the effects of various elements
of the climate. The researchers found that the computer models
precisely matched the observed temperature rises only when factoring
in the
greenhouse gases added to the atmosphere by man-made activities,
said Levitus.
``The fact that the model ocean warms by approximately as much as our
observed estimate indicates that the models are very robust in simulating
the observed changes in the Earth's climate system during the past
100
years,'' said Levitus.
Levitus said the new models are more accurate than earlier studies because
they include effects of the oceans.
Oceans tend to absorb some of the heat from the atmosphere. A study
last
year by Levitus, based on hundreds of water temperature
measurements, showed that the ocean has warmed since 1955.
Global warming has been blamed for a number of climate effects, including
the melting of mountain glaciers, shrinkage of polar ice caps, increases
in storms and seasonal changes in flowers and plants.
Critics contend, however, that these effects are part of the natural
climate
variation of the planet and are not caused by human influences.
Compromise bid to save climate treaty
Wednesday, 11 April, 2001, 16:55 GMT 17:55 UK
By BBC News Online's environment correspondent Alex Kirby
Link to text of Pronk paper
(pdf)
See also Reuters report
The Dutch environment minister, Jan Pronk, is putting forward a plan
designed to save the Kyoto Protocol on climate change. Last month President
Bush said the US, the world's most polluting nation, would not ratify the
protocol. Mr Pronk, who chairs the stalled negotiations on Kyoto, is offering
the Americans significant concessions. But it is far from certain that
either the US or Europe will accept his ideas. Mr Bush said the protocol
would impose unacceptable burdens on the US economy, and criticised it
as well because it does not yet require developing states to act.
Growing emissions
It requires 38 industrialised countries to reduce their emissions of
six of the gases thought to be intensifying the natural greenhouse effect.
Together, they are committed to cut emissions by an average of 5.2% on
their 1990 levels by 2012. Developing countries, some of which are set
to become major emitters in their own right, will have to accept reductions
later in the process. Mr Pronk was chairman of the conference held in The
Hague last November to try to finalise the workings of the protocol. The
talks collapsed over a basic disagreement between the US and the European
Union over where the emission cuts could be made. The Americans and their
supporters wanted to be able to pay for pollution reduction schemes in
other countries, and then count the emissions saved against their own targets.
They also wanted to be allowed wide use of what the protocol calls "sinks"
- forests and farmland which soak up carbon dioxide as the trees and plants
grow. Their critics said this could mean the Americans reached their Kyoto
targets without making any actual cuts at all in their domestic emissions.
The Pronk plan suggests allowing countries to meet their targets by counting
their own forests as sinks, and letting them pay for sinks in foreign countries
as well. It also offers a framework to let signatories to the protocol
buy and sell emission credits from each other. This would mean, for instance,
that the US could buy unused emission rights from a country like Russia
or Ukraine, which cannot afford to burn the fuel that would cause the pollution
the protocol allows it to emit.
Likely sceptics
The EU argued at The Hague that countries should have to achieve at
least 50% of their emission reductions through action at home.
Mr Pronk's plan is understood to place no limit on the extent to which
protocol signatories could reach their targets through financing projects
abroad and by buying emission credits. For this reason alone, many EU governments
are likely to be highly sceptical. And it seems doubtful that Jan Pronk
will manage to change George Bush's mind. Kalee Kreider works for a Washington
DC-based campaign group, the National Environmental Trust.
No plan
She told BBC News Online: "The Pronk plan gives each side a little
of what they're looking for. And the good news is that he's got this out
early, which improves the prospects of agreement when the Hague talks resume
in Bonn in July. "But given the lack of sophistication of the Bush team,
I doubt that the plan will cause them to shift towards suddenly embracing
Kyoto. "The new administration has no coherent plan on the climate. It
doesn't know what it wants, it just knows what it doesn't want. "People
in the White House aren't all that busy on climate change, you know."
UN climate talks chief offers new global warming
plan
Reuters, Netherlands: April 15, 2001
AMSTERDAM - The head of the U.N. forum on global warming
will
on Thursday release a new compromise plan in a bid to jumpstart
talks on
cutting greenhouse gases.
The United States triggered a world outcry last month by
rejecting a treaty to curb global warming, forcing Jan Pronk,
current head of the U.N.
body and Dutch environment minister, to seek a compromise
policy.
The new proposals, made available to Reuters ahead of public
release set for Thursday, would permit industrialised countries
to use forests and
farmlands as so-called "sinks" absorbing carbon dioxide
(CO2)
emissions produced by human activity.
Counting forests as sinks would help countries to meet
targets
on reducing greenhouse gases.
The proposals would also allow those countries to pay for
carbon sinks in other states and claim credits toward their own
targets laid out in the
1997 Kyoto Protocol.
In addition, they set out a framework that would permit
states
to buy and sell emission credits from each other.
INITIATIVE WELCOMED
The European Commission welcomed Pronk's initiative and
said
in a statement that the Kyoto agreement had the "overwhelming
support" of
the countries it visited in the last few days during a
diplomatic tour of Russia, Asia and the Middle East.
"The EU sees a chance for initiating a new momentum on
the
basis of the new proposals by Jan Pronk at the New York meeting
in April," it said.
In March, President George W. Bush caused a storm by ditching
the Kyoto pact, saying it stood to harm the U.S. economy during
its current
energy problems. He also said it was unfair because since
it
did not require emissions cuts by developing nations, such as
China, which are the
fastest-growing emitters of greenhouse gases.
Under the Kyoto Protocol, industrialised states would be
required to cut carbon dioxide output by an average of 5.2
percent of 1990 levels by
2012.
But even with the shift, the United States would still
face
serious challenges in meeting its Kyoto targets, since under
"business as usual"
forecasts, its carbon dioxide output in 2012 would be
about 30
percent higher than in 1990.
Green groups vowed to keep the pressure on European
governments so they did not buckle under U.S. opposition.
"We welcome Jan Pronk's commitment to the Kyoto Protocol,
but
European governments have got to stand firm," said Roger Higman,
senior
climate campaigner for Friends of the Earth.
Bill Hare, climate policy director at Greenpeace, was critical
of new proposals on sinks that appeared to move toward the
earlier negotiating
stances of the United States and Canada.
"In trying to appease the U.S. and Canada, it seems like
a
losing game...if you take the view that neither plans to ratify
(the Kyoto Protocol),"
said Hare.
But Hare did praise proposals that would call on
industrialised countries to contribute to an annual $1 billion
fund to help developing nations
deal with climate change.
TARGETS UNCHANGED
In an interview with Reuters, Pronk declined to specify
how
the sinks' plan would impact on the U.S. specifically, but said
there could be no
compromise on the Kyoto targets even with the expected
output
growth.
"It they don't meet that condition it would be a change
(in
output) from minus to plus...and that's not (environmentally)
credible in my view. So it
must remain a minus from 1990, that's the important thing,"
Pronk said.
Also included in the new proposals were firm penalties
for
countries that fail to meet their targets, and a reshuffling of
the monitoring bodies to
include non-industrialised states.
Pronk floated the plan after consulting with some 50 states.
Though the proposals leaned more towards the U.S. positions
expressed at
November's failed climate change conference in The Hague,
it
was not clear if the European Union would be willing to accept
them.
He said despite Bush's rejection of the Kyoto Protocol,
the
plan remained the best framework for fighting global warming.
"Kyoto is not a straitjacket but a support mechanism for
any
country to address an energy crisis at home," Pronk said.
Informal talks will resume at the U.N. headquarters in
New
York later this month, and the official negotiating session is
set for July in Bonn.
(additional reporting by Robin Pomeroy in Brussels).
by Matt Daily
ENB report from IPCC
The seventeenth session of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) was held from 4-6 April 2001, at the headquarters of the United
Nations Environment Programme in Nairobi, Kenya. Over 200 delegates,
experts and representatives of international and non-governmental
organizations attended the session.
Participants met in plenary sessions throughout the three-day meeting.
They accepted the actions of the three IPCC Working Groups with regard
to adopting the three sections of the Third Assessment Report (TAR).
They considered progress on the TAR Synthesis Report, and discussed
the
future of the IPCC in depth, focusing on key decisions, including:
* whether the IPCC should be continued;
* whether the IPCC should continue to prepare comprehensive assessments;
* whether the comprehensive reports should be supplemented by shorter,
more focused special reports on specific issues that integrate science,
impacts, economics and policy options, as in the Synthesis Report;
* whether the IPCC should continue to be responsive to the needs of
the
UNFCCC, or other environmental conventions (such as the Convention
on
Biological Diversity and the Convention to Combat Desertification)
through the preparation of technical papers, special reports, or reports
on methodological issues;
* what the appropriate working group structure should be; and
* what the appropriate size, structure and geographic representation
of
the IPCC Bureau might be.
Delegates also considered: activities related to land use, land-use
change and forestry (LULUCF); the budget; the future role of the Task
Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories; a report by the Task
Force
on Climate Scenarios for Impact Assessment; and the IPCC Communication
Strategy.
On the final day of the meeting, participants agreed on a strategy for
further review of the key decisions relating to the future of the IPCC,
and accepted proposals for "scoping" activities for a technical report
on the links between biological diversity and climate change, and for
a
report on sustainable development and climate change. The next IPCC
plenary session will be held from 24-29 September 2001 in London, UK.
For a full Earth Negotiations Bulletin report of the meeting, please
go
to:
English PDF: http://www.iisd.ca/linkages/download/pdf/enb12165e.pdf
French PDF: http://www.iisd.ca/linkages/download/pdf/enb12165f.pdf
English HTML: http://www.iisd.ca/linkages/vol12/enb12165e.html
French HTML: http://www.iisd.ca/linkages/vol12/enb12165f.html
"The EU intends to stick to its commitment and make the Kyoto Agreement work.” Article by Göran Persson and Roman Prodi, 7 April 2001
Date: 10/04/2001
Policy area: Environment
News item: Articles
Earlier this week the United States confirmed that it has changed its
position regarding the Kyoto Agreement on global warming. The US no longer
considers the Kyoto Protocol, which constitutes the basis of international
climate negotiations, worth discussing. This is both regrettable and serious.
The climate is already changing.
The poorest countries have already been hardest hit by the effects of climate change – and they are most vulnerable in the face of further changes. More rain will fall in areas already affected by flooding. Less rain will fall in regions already stricken by drought. Food and water supply will be jeopardised. An increase in the sea level of half a metre would affect hundreds of millions of people in low-lying coastal areas, mostly in poor countries.
An overwhelming majority of the world’s scientists believe global warming to be a major problem. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has recently established that the effects of it will be even worse than previously feared.
The onus is clearly on industrialised countries to take the lead in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The richest 20 per cent of the world’s population accounts for nearly 60 per cent of carbon dioxide emissions. The American population – a mere five per cent of humanity – is responsible for a quarter of all carbon dioxide emissions.
The longer we wait, the more difficult and expensive it will be. All talk of sustainable development and a transition to an ecologically sustainable society is just hot air unless we are also prepared to take our responsibility without further delay.
The EU delegation, spearheaded by the Environment Commissioner, Margot Wallström, and the Swedish Environment Minister, Kjell Larsson, has therefore made it clear that the EU intends to stick to its commitment to make the Kyoto Agreement work. Their message is unequivocal – efforts will continue with or without the United States. Quite simply, we cannot afford to let this new American stance lead us into deadlock because there is one party in the climate talks with which we cannot negotiate – namely the climate itself. Last week, the Bush Administration assured the visiting EU delegation that it was aware of the problem and of the need for a solution. This is encouraging. But many Americans are as worried as us Europeans by the fact that the new American Administration is seemingly shrinking back from what is the only practical way of getting to grips with climate change – namely by transferring our words into actions; going from signing agreements to achieving concrete results. This requires a sense of responsibility and resolute political leadership.
Some claim that the Kyoto Agreement is too expensive for American industry to implement. But the Agreement leaves room for manoeuvre which the United States can make use of to reduce the costs. If the Bush Administration feels the American targets are far too high, this is not an argument for rejecting the whole agreement. And it is not just about costs; the agreement also paves the way for companies to develop new technology and promotes more modern economies.
Others claim the Kyoto Agreement “is unfair” since it does not include the developing countries. But since the industrialised world makes by far the biggest contribution to the climate problem, it must therefore bear the brunt of the responsibility for solving it. It is a fact that the United States emits ten times as much per person as the developing world. The news that the United States intends not to make any effort to combat climate change unless other countries with much fewer resources do so is shocking to European ears.
Combating global warming naturally requires the participation of all countries. Nobody is denying that we need to broach the issue of the commitments of developing countries but here, it is a question of choosing the right time. Here, it is a question of showing leadership, leading the way, in order to achieve results. The Kyoto Protocol is the first step towards a solution to the problem. Just throwing the agreement overboard hardly helps us make progress.
Is the Kyoto Protocol our only option? We believe it’s the best option we have. The EU has undertaken to ensure it enters into force in 2002. The Kyoto Agreement was the product of several years’ intensive international negotiations.
It is a compromise that balances different conditions and viewpoints in different parts of the world. It is a success not to be jettisoned so casually. In our opinion, tearing up the agreement and starting afresh would be a tragic mistake. We would lose time and become losers, all of us. If certain parts of the agreement prevent the United States from ratifying it, we should negotiate instead of burying the whole agreement. Let us not miss out on a very important agreement, which still has the backing of the majority of countries.
The EU delegation is currently visiting Russia, Japan and China – all major contributors to greenhouse gas emissions, and to Iran, president of the large delegation of developing countries in the climate talks.
The door will remain open for the United States, should it wish to sit down at the negotiating table again, but our message is: We Europeans see no other solution to the climate problem than through the Kyoto Protocol and the EU is sticking to its undertaking - with or without the United States.
Göran Persson
Swedish Prime Minister and President of the European Council
Romano Prodi
President of the European Commission
EU world trip results in firm support for the Kyoto process
Date: 10/04/2001
Policy area: Environment
News item: Press release
EU Troika – represented by the Swedish Environment Minister Mr. Kjell
Larsson, the Belgian State Secretary of Energy and Sustainable development
Mr. Olivier Deleuze and Mr. Jos Delbeke from the European Commission –
states the following after its world trip on climate change talks with
Canada, Russia, Iran, China and Japan
All countries visited expressed serious concerns about the recent scientific
results on the present climate change, expressed in the Third Assessment
Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and on the US
position related to the Kyoto Protocol. They all argued that climate change
is a global environmental problem that requires a global policy reply.
They all confirmed the necessity of having good results at the resumed
COP6 at Bonn in July, so as to allow for ratification of the Kyoto Protocol
by 2002.
“It must be in all our interest that the years of work and the efforts that have been put into the Kyoto Protocol are not abandoned. We will lose a lot of time if we start from scratch”, says Mr. Larsson.
In this respect the meeting of April 21 in New York should represent an opportunity for constructive discussions on the basis of the new proposals by the President of COP6, Jan Pronk. All countries recognized the importance of the US to come back to the Kyoto process and of finalizing in a timely manner the policy review currently undertaken. All countries were very motivated to encourage them to do so.
“The Kyoto Protocol provides a solid framework for action in a cost-effective way. Climate action also provides substantial economic opportunities and advantages for early movers”, says Mr. Deleuze.
The assessment of the likelihood of the US returning to the Kyoto process varied between the countries visited. It seems that Japan, whose delegation visited the US after the EU Troika, received somewhat more encouraging signals in this respect.
The EU agreed to intensify its cooperation with all countries visited. It repeated its preparedness to continue its ratification process, with or without the US. Having heard the overwhelming support for the Kyoto process in those countries (Canada, Russia, Iran, China and Japan), the EU sees a chance for initiating a new momentum on the basis of the new proposals by Jan Pronk at the New York meeting in April.
“Reducing greenhouse gases is really a credibility issue for the developed countries. The EU believes that it is not realistic to ask the developing countries to reduce or limit their emissions if we cannot show that we, as the biggest emitters, have done something ourselves”, says Mr. Delbeke.
Contact information:
Anette Törnqvist
+81 90 74 10 43 65 (10-11 april)
+46 70 548 76 80
AOSIS Statement 6th April 2001
The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) is profoundly concerned and disappointed by the announced rejection by the United States of the Kyoto Protocol as the instrument to tackle the international threat of climate change.
Only weeks ago the international scientific community reaffirmed more clearly than ever the real threat that climate change poses to our planet. While all regions are likely to suffer, the scientific evidence has singled out small island communities as being the most vulnerable to climate change. Small island States contribute minutely to global greenhouse gas emissions. Yet they are the most vulnerable, and the first to face the destructive forces of climate change.
The Climate Change Convention, ratified by the United States in 1994, requires the global reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in order to prevent dangerous human interference with the earth’s climate system. As the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases, with only 5% of the world’s population, the United States is responsible for 25% of the global greenhouse gas emissions. Given these circumstances, AOSIS believes the United States has a solemn responsibility, indeed a moral duty at the very least, to lead the world community in the struggle against global warming.
In the past several years, the international community has been engaged in serious and concerted effort to develop strategies now embodied in the Kyoto Protocol. While only a modest first step, the Kyoto Protocol is a vital tool in the international effort to confront so global a threat. It is essential that the Protocol enters into force as soon as possible, in order to move forward the process commenced under the Climate Change Convention.
More than 80 countries, including the United States, have signed the Kyoto Protocol; and a number, including many small island developing States, have already ratified. All are under a good faith obligation to refrain from defeating the Protocol’s objective and purpose. In July 2001, representatives of governments will meet in Bonn in an effort to finalise decisions on the details to give effect to the Protocol. AOSIS is concerned that the recently announced position of the United States will severely jeopardise the successful outcome of that meeting, and the international momentum to deal with global climate change.
Strong and credible international action is needed more than ever. AOSIS therefore calls on all Parties to the Convention, and the United States in particular, to demonstrate leadership and commitment to ratifying the Kyoto Protocol and to act in accordance with their legal and moral responsibility to present and future generations.
New York
6 April 2001
For further information:
Permanent Mission of Samoa to the United Nations,
Telephone (212) 599 6196; Fax (212) 599 0797;
E-mail: samoa@un.int
http://www.sidsnet.org/aosis
. Urges the European Union negotiators to plan a quick ratification
of the Protocol even without the USA, before the Rio+10
conference in 2002
Highlights of resolution
- Strongly condemns the decision taken by President George
W.Bush not to implement the Kyoto Protocol [...] [and] Shares
the view of the Swedish Presidency which described the U.S
move as "appalling and provocative"
. Considers that the Kyoto Protocol remains the cornerstone of a
world strategy against global warming and that any alternative
plan would postpone the whole process for years with incalculable
consequences and stresses that the new American approach will
confine the USA to an environmental isolationism
. Reiterates its determination that the EU and its Member States
should implement without delay a balanced set of policies and
measures so that the EU can meet its Kyoto target, irrespective
of any setbacks in the negotiations."
European Parliament Texts Adopted by Parliament
Provisional Edition : 05/04/2001
Kyoto Conference objectives
B5-0267, 0270, 0278, 0287 and 0295/2001
European Parliament resolution on the Kyoto Conference objectives
The European Parliament,
- having regard to Articles 2 and 6 of the EC Treaty, according to which environmental protection requirements must be integrated into Community sectoral policies with the aim of environmentally sustainable economic development,
- having regard to the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) adopted at the Rio Earth Summit,
- having regard to the December 1997 Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC,
- having regard to the conclusions of the Environment Council held on 22 June 2000,
- having regard to the 6th Conference of Parties held in The Hague in November 2000,
- having regard to its resolutions relating to climate change of 9 February 1999(1), 7 October 1999(2) and 26 October 2000(3),
- having regard to Rule 50 of its Rules of Procedure,
A. whereas climate change is manifestly one of the most alarming challenges facing the world at the dawn of the 21st century; whereas a recent report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (a joint project of the United States' Environmental Panel and the World Meteorological Organisation) indicated that the earth's temperature would increase by between 1.4 and 5.8ºC over this century unless action is taken to tackle this phenomenon, which is mostly due to human activity; whereas the same report stressed the catastrophic consequences of such a phenomenon, with a growing probability of typhoons and cyclones, while ice and snow cover is dramatically decreasing and sea levels rising; whereas the situation is already appalling in some regions of the world, due to global warming; whereas, in this context, it has now become of the utmost importance to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which are a major cause of global warming,
B. whereas the Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC is a key political instrument for any sustainable development strategy in general and for a world strategy against global warming in particular; whereas its ratification and implementation are priority issues; whereas it has to be ratified by 55 signatories whose emissions account for at least 55% of total carbon dioxide emissions (out of 84 signatories) to enter into force,
C. whereas 38 industrialised countries, including the US, agreed in Kyoto to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by an average of 5.2% by 2012 compared with the 1990 level; whereas the EU countries are committed to an 8% reduction and the United States to a 7% reduction; whereas legally-binding commitments should be assumed in all countries to this end; whereas Mr Prodi and Prime Minister Göran Persson have called on President Bush to engage in a "high-level dialogue" between the EU and US in order to resolve differences over the protocol,
D. whereas the 6th Conference of Parties in The Hague revealed many difficulties in the follow-up and implementation of the Kyoto Protocol,
E. whereas the new US administration has rejected the Kyoto Protocol; whereas the President of the United States, George W. Bush, has argued that the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol would cost jobs and harm the US economy while developing countries would be exempted and excluded from cleaning up the environment,
F. whereas the United States is responsible for about 25% of total emissions of carbon dioxide, the main pollutant covered by the Kyoto Protocol; whereas there are big differences in the per capita CO2 production of different countries: the average European produces 10 tons of CO2 per year, the average American 24 tons of CO2 per year, and developing countries are below the average; whereas a world-wide per capita production of 1.7 tons would be the maximum allowable to stop global warming,
G. whereas the UN climate control protocol is a transparent mechanism
for showing newly industrialising countries that industrialisation and
environmental protection can, and indeed must, go hand in hand,
1. Strongly condemns the decision taken by President George W. Bush not to implement the Kyoto Protocol on global warming; emphasises that this unilateral decision endangers the whole Kyoto process and threatens climate disaster; considers that this decision is a very bad political signal for EU/USA relations and dialogue; welcomes the European Council declaration in Stockholm on climate change and in particular the recognition of "climate change as a global threat to future well-being and economic progress";
2. Shares the view of the Swedish Presidency, which described the US move as "appalling and provocative"; associates itself with the protests of numerous governments and environmental NGOs in the world;
3. Is appalled that the long-term interests of the majority of the world's population are being sacrificed for the sake of short-term corporate greed in the US;
4. Recalls that President Clinton signed the treaty in 1998 and calls therefore on the present US administration to engage in constructive dialogue with the EU so that the 2002 implementation date can be respected;
5. Considers that the Kyoto Protocol remains the cornerstone of a world strategy against global warming and that any alternative plan would postpone the whole process for years, with incalculable consequences, and stresses that the new American approach will condemn the USA to environmental isolationism;
6. Contests the US administration's arguments and stresses that the Kyoto Protocol must be perceived as part of a global sustainable development strategy, which in no way contradicts economic development and employment; considers that sustainable development strategies and the rational use of natural resources enhance economic growth in the medium and long term;
7. Emphasises that the struggle against global warming is a matter of solidarity between developed and developing countries; therefore welcomes the unanimous condemnation of the US by the EU, China and Japan; the recent Inter-Governmental Experts Group on Climate Change pointed out that those countries which have access to the most limited resources are also those whose capacity to adapt is weakest and are therefore the most vulnerable to global warming and its adverse effects; therefore, developed countries, including the United States of America, have an important responsibility and must play a leading role in the effective reduction of greenhouse gas emissions; in its resolution of 26 October 2000, the European Parliament called "on the contracting parties to adopt further ambitious reduction targets as quickly as possible, particularly for the industrialised countries";
8. Stresses furthermore that sustainable development is a matter of solidarity between generations; it would be socially and humanly irresponsible to squander the heritage of energy resources and a sound environment to which our descendants will rightfully lay claim;
9. Considers that, regarding the aim of preventing global warming, it is essential during the COP6A to achieve a successful outcome in time to ratify and implement the Kyoto Protocol by 2002 and therefore supports all initiatives taken by the Council and the Commission to this end;
10. Fully supports the declaration of the Stockholm Council which confirms a real European commitment to the Kyoto process and the ratification and implementation of the Protocol;
11. Reiterates its determination that the EU and its Member States should implement without delay a balanced set of policies and measures so that the EU can meet its Kyoto target, irrespective of any setbacks in the negotiations;
12. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to maintain a leading role in the Kyoto process and to make the ratification process a success;
13. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to take all necessary political and diplomatic initiatives to put pressure on the US administration and urge it to reconsider its position on the Kyoto Protocol; therefore welcomes and fully supports the efforts of the Commission and the Council to this end;
14. Urges the European Union negotiators to plan a quick ratification of the Protocol even without the USA, in the run-up to the COP6A before the Rio+10 conference in 2002;
15. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the
Council, the Commission, the United Nations and the Government of the United
States of America.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) OJ C 15, 28.5.1999, p. 18.
(2) OJ C 107, 13.4.2000, p. 91.
(3) Texts Adopted, Item 13
Russia eyes windfall from greenhouse gas quotas
RUSSIA: April 6, 2001
MOSCOW - Russia, whose carbon dioxide emissions fell by a third over
the
last decade, could make big money from selling unused pollution quotas
if
such a market is established, a government official said yesterday.
"Once the market is established, Russia's share will be some 50 percent
of
demand," Vsevolod Gavrilov, a Ministry of Trade and Economic
Development expert, told Reuters on the sidelines of a conference on
market mechanisms of a global climate treaty.
"Russia may receive from a few hundred dollars to $5-6 billion per year,
depending on market conditions," he said.
The 1997 Kyoto Protocol calls on industrial nations to cut greenhouse
gas
emissions by an average 5.2 percent from 1990 levels by 2012 to avoid
disastrous global warming.
It would also allow countries which meet emission targets to sell their
quotas
to those countries which do not.
However, much anticipated demand would come from the United States and
the creation of a market is uncertain after President George W. Bush
last
month rejected the Kyoto treaty, saying it harmed the U.S. economy
and its
workers.
Russia, following the European Union, criticised Washington last week
for
rejecting the treaty.
Russia is among the world's biggest polluters, but officials say its
greenhouse
gas emissions fell by some 30 percent in the last 10 years due to a
sharp
decline in industrial production after the introduction of market reforms.
Deputy Energy Minister Valentin Shelepov told the conference that Russian
carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions could hit 80 percent of 1990 levels
by 2010
and 95 percent by 2020.
According to the Trade and Economic Development Ministry's forecasts,
there could be a market for as much as three billion tonnes of CO2
equivalent per year in the period of 2008-2012.
"The United States would account for about two thirds of demand, whereas
Russia would provide for over half of the potential supply. We will
be able to
form market policy...and take a leading role in the growing market,"
Gavrilov
said.
MARKET UNCERTAIN
To become legally binding, the Kyoto Protocol must be ratified by the
parliaments of 55 signatory countries and this should cover at least
55
percent of developed countries' 1990 carbon dioxide emissions.
Russia, which needs cash to repay foreign debts or upgrade enterprises
to
reduce pollution, signed the treaty in March 1999 but has not yet ratified
it.
The United States, the biggest producer of man-made CO2 emissions, also
signed it, but it has not been ratified by the U.S. Senate.
"We have many potential sellers here in Russia, but the question is
who is
going to be the buyer," said Brian Fisher, Executive Director of the
Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
"It is absolutely crucial for the United States to be involved...otherwise
there
will be no market for Russian quotas."
Story by Svetlana Kovalyova
Canada poised to reject Kyoto pact Much depends
on U.S.,
Anderson admits
Kate Jaimet The Ottawa Citizen
84 countries sign deal; almost none ratify
Canada's trade relationship with the United States may stop the
government from ratifying the Kyoto accord -- even if Canada
gets
everything it has been asking for, Environment Minister David
Anderson said yesterday.
The Kyoto accord, an international agreement aimed at reducing
greenhouse gases, has been in trouble since last week, when
U.S.
President George W. Bush announced his country's withdrawal
from
the pact.
Although 84 countries have signed the agreement, negotiated in
Kyoto, Japan in 1997, almost none have ratified it. Negotiations
broke off last fall over the contentious issue of emissions trading
--
which allows developed countries to buy pollution credits from the
less- developed world where emissions are lower. Europe has
argued
for strict limits on trading, while the United States and Canada
have
insisted on maximum flexibility. Canada has also argued it should
get
maximum credit for maintaining forests that absorb carbon
dioxide.
Mr. Bush announced last week that the U.S. will not implement the
accord, which calls for countries to cut heat-trapping emissions
by
an
average 5.2 per cent below 1990 levels by 2012, because the
compulsory reductions would be too harmful to the U.S. economy.
In an interview with the Citizen yesterday, Mr. Anderson said that,
given the U.S. withdrawal, Canada might not ratify the accord,
even
if it could reach an agreement with the Europeans.
"You can't answer that categorically because we have trade
relations
with the United States and we might, after, decide we want to
vary
some of the approaches depending on what they do," Mr.
Anderson
said.
"We'll certainly achieve our (greenhouse gas reduction) targets.
But
we might do it in a different way so that we're more co-ordinated
to
the Americans because our economies are co-ordinated."
Mr. Anderson said the purpose of Kyoto isn't merely to sign the
deal,
but to achieve greenhouse gas reduction goals.
"So it might be, and this is hypothetical, that the Americans are
indicating it might be better for us to use some different
technology to
meet the goals," he said.
Governments have been wary of clamping down on greenhouse gas
emissions, which are caused by burning fossil fuels, because of
the
impact on industry. Every government is trying to shape an accord
that will allow it to reduce greenhouse gases without losing
its
competitive edge in the international marketplace.
Currently, Canada is far from meeting its target for greenhouse gas
reductions. Instead of decreasing, Canada's greenhouse gas
emissions
have risen from 601 megatonnes in 1990 to 682 megatonnes in
2000. Although Canada is supposed to reduce its annual
emissions to
565 megatonnes under the Kyoto agreement, the current
government
projections show that emissions will continue at about 700
megatonnes annually, even if the government's action plan on
climate
change is implemented.
Nevertheless, Mr. Anderson said he remained confident that
greenhouse gases will be reduced. He said he believes the Bush
administration takes the problem of climate change seriously,
and
will
come up with its own proposals for reducing greenhouse gases.
A
high-level committee has already been set up to study the
problem.
Margot Wallstrom, environment commissioner for the European
Union, was not as optimistic as Mr. Anderson when she visited
Ottawa yesterday in a bid to secure Canada's ongoing support.
She visited high-level U.S. officials earlier in the week, an
experience
she said was "disappointing" and "saddening."
"The message was very clear: The United States wants to turn
their
back to the Kyoto protocol. For the EU, this is unacceptable,
of
course," she said. "We will continue with or without the United
States."
She said she hoped Canada would continue to play a "constructive
role," although she said she understood the "close bonds"
between
Canada and the U.S.
Mr. Anderson said Canada will continue working on the Kyoto
protocol with other nations. In the end, Mr. Anderson said, Canada
will try to bring together the new American policy and the Kyoto
accord.
"Then we have some sort of reconciliation," he said. "You might be
able to achieve the American objectives within Kyoto. Or we have
Kyoto plus (the American policy). Or we have to have a completely
new, revised agreement."
Saudis empathise with Bush on Kyoto protocol
By David Buchan, Energy Correspondent, Financial Times
Published: April 3 2001 16:49GMT | Last Updated: April 4 2001
07:34GMT
Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil exporter, has singled itself
out by
proclaiming its "understanding" of President George W. Bush's
decision to
abandon the Kyoto protocol on climate change.
Mohammad al-Sabban, senior economic adviser to the Oil Ministry
and head
of
the Saudi delegation to the United Nations, said in an interview
with the
Middle East Economic Survey that his country understood why Mr
Bush
baulked
at the economic consequences for the US of implementing Kyoto.
"Such measures would be justified if the science of global warming
were
sound", Dr al-Sabban said, but there were "huge remaining scientific
uncertainties". However, Saudi Arabia disagreed with the US contention
that
developing countries must do their share in any cutting of greenhouse
gases.
Dr al-Sabban claimed the priority for developing countries was
building up
their economies, arguing that the industrialised world should
take the
lead
in any carbon emission cuts.
The Saudi adviser also attacked the European Union for criticising
the US
position on global warming. He accused the Europeans of trying
to saddle
all
its industrialised competitors with the same Kyoto handicap.
Saudi Arabia and other oil exporting countries have long complained
about
the high taxes which EU governments levy on oil, and the subsidies
which
they pay to their own coal producers and nuclear generators.
If the EU and other industrialised countries, such as Japan,
were to
implement Kyoto without the US, the Saudi officials said, they
should only
do so by taking measures to minimise the protocol's damaging
effect on oil
producers. These measures would involve lowering taxes on oil
and
subsidies
for coal and nuclear power.
With such tax adjustments, the effect of Kyoto could reduce the
national
output of Saudi Arabia by 3.16 per cent, and oil exporting countries
in
general by 1.38 per cent, by the year 2010, Dr al-Sabban calculated.
Without
such measures, Saudi Arabia would see a 7.14 per cent drop in
its national
output, and a 3.25 per cent fall in the income of oil exporting
states.
-END-
Brussels, 3. April 2001
EU troika to visit Russia, Iran, China and Japan to discuss climate change
Between Friday 6 April and Tuesday 10 April the EU troika The European Commission, the Swedish EU Presidency and the incoming Belgium Presidency - will visit Russia, Iran, China and Japan to discuss climate change. Environment Commissioner Margot Wallström will take part in the meetings in China and Japan on 8th and 11th April.
The visit includes the following meetings:
On Friday 6 April the troika goes to Moscow to meet Mr Muchamed Tsikanov, Deputy Minister, Ministry of Economic Development and Trade. There are also meetings with Mr Aleksandr Berditskij, Head of Russian Hydro Met Centre (Rosgidromet) and representatives from the Ministry for Foreign Affairs.
On Saturday 7 April meetings are scheduled in Teheran with Dr. M. Ebtekar, Vice President and Head of Department of Environment.
On 8 April to 9 April the troika, including Commissioner Margot Wallström arrives in Beijing. There they will meet Mr Wang Guangya, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs in China, Mr. Xie Zhenhua and Minister for the State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA).
On Tuesday 10 April meetings are planned in Tokyo with Ms Yoriko Kawaguchi, Minister for the Environment, Mr. Kiyohiro Araki, Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Yohei Kono, Minister for Foreign Affairs. The troika will also participate in a discussion with the Japanese Parliament.
Canada calls on US to stick with Kyoto accord
CANADA: April 4, 2001
OTTAWA - Prime Minister Jean Chretien called on the United States yesterday
to stick with the Kyoto accord to combat global warming, and reiterated
Canada's intention to honor its commitment to cut greenhouse gases.
"We think we have to continue with Kyoto and we think the Americans
should
do the same," Chretien told reporters after a weekly cabinet meeting.
The White House last week announced an end to U.S. support for the
1997
Kyoto pact, which calls for the reduction of carbon dioxide and other
greenhouse gas emissions to try to lessen further warming of the world's
climate.
"I'm disappointed by it (the U.S. decision). We intend to respect our
commitment," Chretien said, speaking in French.
He noted Canada's position that any international agreement needed
to give
industrialized countries credit for carbon dioxide absorbed by forests
and
farmland. He said Canada also wants credits for selling to other countries
energy or energy projects such as nuclear power or natural gas, which
produce fewer emissions than fuels like coal or oil.
But his stance on the United States appeared to go further than that
of his
environment minister, David Anderson, who last week blamed the Kyoto
treaty's troubles largely on the European Union, which strongly resists
allowing the sort of emissions credits that Canada and the United States
seek.
Canada agreed at Kyoto to cut its greenhouse gas emissions to 6 percent
below 1990 levels. But as of 1998 its emissions were 13 percent above
the
1990 figures.
REUTERS NEWS SERVICE
US rebuffs Europe on climate
See also Washington Post
And Commission press release
Wallstroem - 'If they [US] want to be out they will
also have to stay out of the decision-making'
Julian Borger in Washington and Ian Black in Brussels
Wednesday April 4, 2001
The Guardian
An EU delegation hurriedly dispatched to Washington after the Bush administration
disowned the Kyoto treaty on global warming last week expressed disappointment
yesterday that US negotiators ruled out any role in implementing the agreements
and offered no alternatives.
Kjell Larsson, the Swedish environment minister who led the delegation,
said he was happy that the Bush environment team accepted the existence
of global warming - a conclusion widely challenged in the US - and that
a US delegation would be sent to Bonn in July for talks on climate change.
However, the Europeans failed to win an undertaking from Christine Todd Whitman, the head of the US environmental protection agency (EPA), to attend the meeting in person. "She has not committed to that," an EPA spokesman said yesterday.
The Europeans also made no progress in persuading the administration to soften its outright rejection of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol and its targets for greenhouse gas emissions.
"We had hoped for a small opening," Mr Larsson said, "and we didn't get that."
The delegation was snubbed by the head of the Senate environment committee, Bob Smith, a rightwing Republican from New Hampshire who cancelled a meeting on Monday and refused to reschedule it. In fact, the Europeans did not meet any of the administration's real power-brokers.
Instead, they held talks with Gary Edson, a mid-level White House official with environmental responsibilities, and Ms Whitman, whose own ad vice to support the Kyoto deal was ignored by Mr Bush.
After the meeting, Ms Whitman restated the president's objections to Kyoto, saying it was "unfair to the United States and to other industrialised nations" because it exempted developing nations.
"Today I emphasised to members of the European community that I continue to be as optimistic as the president that, working constructively with our friends and allies through international processes, we can develop technologies, market-based incentives, and other innovative approaches to global climate change," she said in a written statement.
However, Margot Wallstrom, the EU commissioner for the environment, said there appeared to be little substance behind Ms Whitman's expressions of good will.
She said: "We tried to interpret in a positive way what was being said here - that they are interested in continuing international relations, but they do not for today have any answers on how to do that."
On Friday Ms Wallstrom and the environment ministers of Sweden and Belgium will begin a tour taking them to Russia, Iran, China and Japan.
Brussels is making clear that even if the final message from Washington is that the US is pulling out of the agreement, the EU is sticking with it - and looking for allies who will follow suit.
Further pressure on the US came last night from the German environment
minister, Jürgen Trittin. "If they don't want to participate, we expect
that the United States will tolerate the process and not block it," said
Mr Trittin, a Green.
U.S. Rebuffs Europeans Urging Change of Mind on
Kyoto Treaty
Whitman Suggests 'Innovative Approach' to Global Warming
By Eric Pianin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, April 4, 2001; Page A06
The Bush administration yesterday turned aside pleas from European Union officials to reconsider its decision to abandon a global warming agreement and said it would move ahead to develop alternative proposals far less costly to the U.S. economy.
Kjell Larsson, Sweden's environment minister, who took part in meetings with administration officials, said that the EU representatives had come to Washington looking for "a small opening" or sign that talks on the global warming treaty could be revived but that "we didn't get that."
The EU delegation met for more than an hour with Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Christine Todd Whitman and White House and State Department officials, who repeated President Bush's complaints that the global warming treaty negotiated in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997 would adversely affect the U.S. economy while exempting developing countries, including India and China, from tough emissions targets.
"If one of the biggest countries withdraws or says we do not accept to stay in the [negotiation] process, that is a big backlash for the whole process and that is very disappointing," said Margot Wallstroem, the EU's environment commissioner.
Whitman said later that she emphasized to the European officials that "I continue to be as optimistic as the president that, working constructively with our friends and allies through international processes, we can develop technologies, market-based incentives and other innovative approaches to global climate change."
Bush has ordered a Cabinet-level review of U.S. climate change policy that will look into what to do about concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere that scientists say are driving up the Earth's temperature.
Whitman played a central role early in the administration's deliberations over global warming and predicted -- wrongly, as it turned out -- that the president would keep a campaign pledge to seek reductions in carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. Many scientists believe carbon dioxide emissions are contributing to the warming of the planet.
Whitman also hinted broadly to her EU counterparts that the administration might continue to participate in negotiations over the Kyoto protocol, despite Bush's criticism of the agreement during last year's campaign.
Last week, however, the White House announced that the global warming agreement was dead and that Bush would develop a new approach. The decision enraged the Europeans, who elevated global warming to the top of their political agenda, and angered environmentalists, who said that the White House had undercut Whitman.
Yesterday, Friends of the Earth, a prominent environmental group, called on Whitman to resign as EPA administrator, saying that her credibility had been compromised "beyond repair" in the United States and abroad.
A spokesman for Whitman declined to comment.
The United States and its allies have spent nearly a decade trying to negotiate an agreement on combating global warming. Efforts at negotiating the final rules for implementing the Kyoto accord collapsed in November, and the Europeans and Japanese are trying to pump life back into the talks, scheduled to resume in Bonn in July.
European leaders have said they will chart their own course if they cannot gain the United States' cooperation.
However, some U.S. industry and labor groups and independent experts say it may be impossible for the United States and many European countries to implement the Kyoto protocol without causing serious harm to their economies. A June 2000 study by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change concluded that while Britain and Germany likely could meet the Kyoto targets, the Netherlands, Austria and Spain would fall far short.
"The grandstanding the European Union is doing is preposterous," said Glenn F. Kelly of the Global Climate Coalition, an industry group that contends the agreement cannot be realistically implemented. "The fact is they're quietly relieved" that the Bush administration has pulled out.
However, Jennifer L. Morgan of the World Wildlife Fund said: "The Europeans
are doing a pretty good-faith effort of assessing where they are and what
they have to do to meet their targets. . . . If you compare that with the
U.S., which hasn't had any debate on how to implement Kyoto targets, they
are miles apart."
MEMO/01/121
Brussels, 4 April 2001
EU will fight to save Kyoto agreement
The European Union troika represented by Environment Commissioner Margot Wallström, Swedish Environment Minister Kjell Larsson and Marc Pallemaerts from the Belgian State Secretary's Office for Energy and Sustainable Development expressed concern and disappointment over the US Administration's withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol following talks 3 April in Washington. The troika underlined that the Kyoto Protocol remains the framework for international efforts to combat climate change and that the EU remains committed to ratifying the Kyoto protocol by 2002. The EU representatives warned that climate change is already happening and that it is a serious threat to the future of mankind. The troika also underlined that one country cannot declare dead an international process that deals with a major global issue. The EU still hopes to have the US involved in the Kyoto Protocol as soon as possible but is prepared to go forward without the US if necessary.
Commissioner Margot Wallström said: "In all countries, climate change will be on top of the political agenda for a long time to come. By choosing not to be part of the process the United States will miss this opportunity. It will not only lose influence over the process, it will not be able to participate in international emissions trading".
"The evidence of climate change is based on a broad consensus among the world scientific community. We were happy to note that nobody on the US side questioned the science about climate change. All countries have a responsibility to mitigate the effects of climate change. This is particularly true for the industrialised countries, which must take the lead. Per capita the United States CO2 emissions are more than 20 tons, while the average emissions for developed countries is 12 tons, and for developing countries, about 2 tons," said Swedish Environment Minister Kjell Larsson.
"Combating climate change is not only about cost; it provides an opportunity for new technology and for modernising our economies. We also know that companies on both sides of the Atlantic want certainty about the rules", Commissioner Wallström said.
Mission to Russia, Iran, China and Japan
The troika will on Friday 6 April continue to Russia, Iran, China and Japan to meet with some of the major stakeholders in the Kyoto process. Iran is the chairman of the "G77" group of the developing countries and Japan is a member of the Umbrella group. The troika will discuss the US position and how the negotiations should go forward. The objective of the visit is to see where they stand and to find allies in the fight against global warming.
Background
The EU troika represented by the Swedish EU Presidency, the European Commission and the incoming Belgium Presidency visited the United States between 2 and 3 April and held meetings on climate change with members of US Administration, Congress and Non-Governmental Organizations in Washington.
Wednesday 4 April the troika will be in Canada to meet with the Canadian Environment Minister David Anderson and other Government Ministers.
Between Friday April 6 and Tuesday April 10, the EU troika will visit
Russia, Iran, China and Japan. Environment Commissioner Margot Wallström
will take part in the meetings in Japan on 9 to 10 April (see Memo/01/118).
EU: U.S. Now Spectator on Environment Decisions
Reuters 4th April 2001
By David Ljunggren
OTTAWA (Reuters) - The United States should be reduced to the role of a spectator at future environmental meetings because of its decision to abandon the Kyoto climate change treaty, a top European Union official said on Wednesday.
Margot Wallstrom, environmental commissioner at the EU's executive commission, also dismissed Canadian criticism of the 15-nation bloc over the collapse of talks last year on how to cut greenhouse gas emissions as ``simplistic'' and ``unfounded.''
Wallstrom was speaking a day after she held talks in Washington in a failed bid to persuade the new U.S. administration to reverse its decision on Kyoto, which was taken on the grounds that it would harm the U.S. economy.
``It was a rather disappointing visit, I have to say, and a saddening experience, because the message was very clear,'' Wallstrom told reporters, making it quite clear that Washington should pay a price for its decision.
``The United States indicated it will still be participating in international meetings (on climate change) that are scheduled,'' she said.
``But, of course, for us it must be clear from the outset that we will not accept that the United States dictates the process from now on. If they want to be out they will also have to stay out of the decision-making and rule-making process.''
Wallstrom said the 15-nation EU would now lead the process to finalize the terms of the Kyoto treaty, which is due to take effect next year.
The United States, the world's biggest producer of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, has been harshly criticized by many nations for its decision over Kyoto. Scientists widely believe that burning coal and oil produces emissions that trap heat in the earth's atmosphere.
``It's important that the United States not be allowed to dictate the process nor be let off the hook too easily. That is the balance we've tried to reach,'' Wallstrom said.
Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien on Tuesday called on Washington to stick to Kyoto.
But David Anderson, his environment minister, blames what he calls the European Union's ``rigid position'' on global warming for the new U.S. stance. He is still simmering after the collapse of talks in The Hague (news - web sites) late last year on how best to put the Kyoto emission cuts into action.
Wallstrom, welcoming Chretien's comments, said after a meeting with Anderson that the two sides had agreed to stop mutual recriminations.
``I said we have to leave The Hague behind. There's no use in trying to blame each other and I don't accept that either. It's not fair to say to one party in a negotiation that 'It's all your fault','' she told a news conference.
Anderson, however, chose to interpret her comments as a victory for the Canadian position.
``If Ms Wallstrom has said that I'm very pleased because it's clear she now recognizes they (the EU) cannot just stick where they were at The Hague,'' he told reporters, saying the EU would have to change some of its ideas.
At The Hague, Canada sided with the United States, Japan, Australia and New Zealand in seeking to allow carbon dioxide absorbed by farmlands and forests to be credited toward targeted cuts, a concept that disturbs the EU.
Wallstrom encouraged as many countries as possible to speak out against Washington's move on the Kyoto protocol.
``It is not something that can be ignored or that they (the Americans)
can look at as a domestic issue. It is about international relations and
that is what we have to make very clear to the United States,'' she said.
Japan - Supporters of Kyoto Protocol should urge
U.S. to reconsider
(And even later - 4th April) ''This is an issue
that we can proceed in without the U.S. if we want to.
But that would not be a solution,'' Mori said
(Later Japanese reaction)
(Earlier
Japanese reaction)
The Asahi Shimbun
April 2, 2001
To persuade the United States, however, Japan must firm up its own
domestic
stance on this issue.
The U.S. government has said it does not support the Kyoto Protocol,
the
international effort to establish targets for reducing emissions of
greenhouse gasses.
Although the Kyoto Protocol was adopted in 1997, no rules have been
established to bring it into effect. The American position of effectively
abandoning it comes as nations involved in the protocol are working
toward
establishing procedures for its implementation in a meeting this summer.
The U.S. move is a clear threat to bringing the protocol into practice.
It
is also expected to thwart the development of energy-conservation
technology, now an emerging global trend.
The administration of President George W. Bush cites among its reasons
for
opposing the accord the view that sharp cuts in greenhouse gas emissions
counter U.S. economic interests, and that there is inequity in failing
to
require developing countries to cut emissions. These are positions
held by
the United States since the Kyoto conference was held.
In actual negotiations, however, there has been debate on how
industrializing nations would participate and other procedures associated
with U.S. demands. We are therefore surprised at the new U.S. position,
which reverses its original pledge and disregards the efforts of other
nations.
It is not surprising, however, that European nations have presented
a
unified backlash. Yoriko Kawaguchi, Japan's state minister for the
environment, has also made comments critical of the U.S. stance. We
hope the
government will work closely with European nations and other partners
in an
effort to persuade the United States to return to the negotaiting table.
It is unforgivable that the United States, the world's largest source
of
greenhouse gas emissions, would choose to get off the bus of international
cooperation that has been driven by the Kyoto Protocol.
To persuade the United States, however, Japan must firm up its own domestic
stance on this issue.
To prevail in international competition, the industrial community has
supported the Kyoto Protocol, working to develop energy-efficient
technologies. To be sure, some industries object to the accord, saying
it
would have an adverse impact on the economy. Some sectors even favor
a
wait-and-see approach, anticipating a U.S. stand that puts the Kyoto
Protocol back on the drawing board.
In this scenario, it would be impossible to put up a strong front against
the U.S. position.
If the Bush administration refuses to alter its position, would there
be an
effort to bring the protocol into practice without American participation
and with an emissions-reduction policy advanced domestically within
Japan?
Or would Japan surrender, arguing that it cannot be part of a protocol
the
United States has not ratified? Japan's resolve will be tested.
Negotiation began in 1991 on the draft Framework Convention on Climate
Change. Well over 100 nations have participated in countless meetings
intended to establish a framework within which North and South would
share
both prosperity and obligations in pursuit of the common goal of preventing
global warming.
The Kyoto Protocol has somehow struggled along to its present situation.
While certainly not perfect, it should not be shattered by a single
nation's
selfishness.
We do not believe the American people are united on this stand either.
It
was reported that Christine Todd Whitman, who heads the Environmental
Protection Agency, opposes this regressive stance, having stated, ``The
response to global warming is an issue of U.S. credibility in the eyes
of
the international community.'' Indeed, U.S. researchers have been the
focus
of encouraging study of global warming and warning of its dangers.
In the past decade of negotiations on climate change, there has been
a
definite increase in concern over the global environment. We hope the
weight
of public opinion in each nation will provide incentive for the governments
involved to pursue efforts to change the U.S. position. (The Asahi
Shimbun,
April 1)
Mainichi Daily News
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tuesday, April 3, 2001
Tokyo turns up Kyoto treaty pressure
Mainichi Shimbun
The government has decided to send a mission asking Washington to rethink
its stance on ditching a landmark treaty against global warming, officials
announced Tuesday.
Japan and Europe have pressured the U.S. to stick with the Kyoto Protocol,
which requires developed countries to cut emissions of heat-trapping
gases.
But the U.S. Energy Department has concluded that cutting carbon dioxide
emissions would accelerate a shift from coal to natural gas for electric
power, significantly boosting power prices.
"The mission will urge the United States to examine the issue within
the
framework of the Kyoto Protocol," a government official said.
The mission includes officials from the foreign and environment ministries
in charge of the nations' policy toward global warming.
Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori has already sent a letter to U.S. President
George W. Bush, apparently asking him to reconsider withdrawing from
the
Kyoto treaty.
LEAD: Mori vows to continue urging U.S. on Kyoto
Protocol
TOKYO April 4 Kyodo - Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori said Wednesday Japan
will
continue urging the United States to remain committed to the Kyoto
Protocol
aimed at preventing global warming because U.S. cooperation is essential
in
making the agreement work.
''I believe it is Japan's important role to continue efforts to gain
the
understanding of the U.S.,'' Mori said during a one-on-one debate session
with opposition leaders in the Diet.
Mori refuted a call from Yukio Hatoyama, leader of the main opposition
Democratic Party of Japan, that Japan should take the initiative and
ratify
the treaty regardless of Washington's plans.
''This is an issue that we can proceed in without the U.S. if we want
to.
But that would not be a solution,'' Mori said.
U.S. President George W. Bush said last week Washington is ready to
ditch
the treaty, which requires the world's industrialized countries to
impose
binding limits on emissions of heat-trapping gases.
Under the pact, the U.S. would have to reduce its emissions of carbon
dioxide, methane and certain other pollutants by 7% from 1990 levels
by
2012.
Mori also rejected Hatoyama's demand that the government immediately
present
its plan for fiscal consolidation, saying the government's top priority
is
to put the economy on a path toward stable growth.
''We are not being lazy (about fiscal consolidation) either,'' Mori
added.
''We have started working (on preparations), and will be able to present
a
plan in the future,'' he said, referring to projects which are underway
at
the Council on Economic and Fiscal Policy at the Cabinet Office.
Japan's combined long-term debt of the central and local governments
is
expected to reach about 666 trillion yen at the end of fiscal 2001,
equivalent to 128.5% of the nation's gross domestic product.
Also during the session, Social Democratic Party leader Takako Doi said
it
is irresponsible of Mori to continue serving as premier, despite his
planned
resignation in the near future, and called for his immediate exit.
Mori did not directly respond to Doi's call, however, and questioned
the
opposition's ability to form a successful allegiance to take power
in the
Diet, as opposition parties are widely divided on key issues such as
defense.
Japanese Communist Party leader Kazuo Shii also accused Mori of mishandling
economic policy as the government has failed to boost household consumption
levels.
Liberal Party leader Ichiro Ozawa did not pose any questions during
the
debate session, saying it is meaningless for him to hear the opinions
of a
prime minister who is scheduled to quit.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2001 Kyodo News (c) Established 1945.
Australian Senate Condemns Bush
Monday, 2 April 2001
The Senate this afternoon passed a motion moved by Greens
Senator Bob Brown
condemning both the Bush Administration and the Howard
Government for their
failure on the Climate Change Convention.
Senator Brown's motion passed with the support of the ALP and
Democrats. It reads:
That the Senate:
(a) Notes the comments of US EPA chief that the "we
have no interest in implementing that [Kyoto Protocol] treaty"
(b) Notes the Australian Foreign Minister Downer's
endorsement of the US policy on greenhouse
(c) Condemns the US Bush administration and the
Howard Government for their efforts to derail the Kyoto Climate
Change Convention
"It is the most powerful message that can be sent to a foreign
Government from the Australia other than from the Australian
Government itself", Senator Brown said.
Senator Brown gave notice of a further motion in the Senate this
afternoon which will be voted on tomorrow. It reads:
That the Senate calls on the Government to Ratify the Kyoto
Protocol on Climate Change.
More information: Ben Oquist 02 6277 3170 or 0419 704 095
Statement on Climate Change by Mr Kjell Larsson, Minister for the Environment in Sweden
Date: 31/03/2001
Policy area: Environment
News item: Press release
Mr Kjell Larsson, Minister for the Environment, made the following statement
on Climate Change in conjunction
with the Informal Meeting of Ministers for the Environment in
Kiruna 30 March - 1 April 2001:
1. The Kyoto Protocol is still alive.
2. No individual country has the right to declare a multilateral agreement
as dead.
3. All governments have a special responsibility in seeking an agreement
on the basis of the Kyoto Protocol, not least
those countries with a high level of per capita emissions of
CO2, such as USA.
4. EU is actively participating in the negotiations leading to the
resumed session of COP 6 in Bonn in July 2001.
5. The EU Troika (the Swedish Presidency, the Commission and Belgium
as incoming Presidency) will during the coming week visit USA, Russia,
Iran (as President of G-77), Japan and China.