Tag: Kyoto Protocol
Views regarding mitigation under the LCA Submission of the Climate Action Network International 30 September, 2008
While the Kyoto Protocol is not yet in force (due to the unilateral declaration by the George W. Bush Administration of the United States that it would not follow the Kyoto Protocol, as well as delay in Russiaís ratification of it) already many difficulties have been overcome, with deailed operational rules for the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol having been agreed upon at the Seventh Conference of the Parties (COP7), and more than 120 countries having ratified it. This indicates that the large majority of the countries and people of the world are strongly in support of the Kyoto Protocol as the only international system of rules that could allow us to confront global warming.
Your government signed up to the Bali Action Plan. By doing so, it agreed that developed countries would make commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the 25-40% range by 2020 (even though science showed the need for cuts to be above 40%).
That should be your benchmark for ambition, not developing country actions. Your government also agreed that developing country actions were to be enabled and supported by finance provided by developed countries.
If your instructions here say something different, you are at the wrong negotiations. Please check that you have been given the right instructions and that you are indeed in the right building in the right city. The last time we checked, the World Trade Organisation was still headquartered in Geneva.
It is high time that certain rules and issues under the Kyoto Protocol get resolved if countries are to complete them by Copenhagen. Some of these have been discussed for two years or more and Bangkok needs to bring these to a close. After all, the more time spent talking about base year, for example, the less progress there is on discussing level of ambition.
ECO urges parties to tick these boxes in the three remaining days of Bangkok:
Aggregate target of at least -40% from 1990 by 2020
Developing countries are stepping up with their action and industrialised countries need to do the same. You made a pledge to limit warming to 2oC, remember?
Five-year commitment period
Shorter commitment periods mean matching targets to the latest science. Parties backing an eight-year commitment period will have to wait six years between the IPCC’s fifth assessment report and the start of commitment period three.
A mid-term review ending no later than 2015
To ensure that the best science is reflected as soon as possible, a review of commitments in the second commitment period would make sense, immediately following the IPCC’s report.
1990 base year
Come on Canada. Are you really going to hold up 191 countries on this issue just to try to “hide” your embarrassing emission increases since 1990?
Expressing quantified emission targets in percentages
Here again, Canada is holding up progress. Japan is the only other country to not know whether targets should be in percentage decreases or tonnage decreases. Japan’s government is barely a month old. What is Canada’s excuse?
As some Parties have commented, using existing Kyoto guidelines just make things easier. Resolving these here will make the road to Copenhagen not quite so steep.
CAN submission on the Bali Action Plan, under the AWG-LCA