Carbon Reduction and Kyoto

Carbon reduction is still a live issue in 2011 and beyond. This page takes a look at the Kyoto Protocol and how it may help us to reduce emissions worldwide.

In 1992 at Rio de Janeiro, the first Earth Summit took place. The United Nations created the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). One of the main aims was to promote carbon reduction, along with the reduction of other greenhouse gases.

The counties participating agreed to meet yearly at a conference. The third conference took place in Kyoto, Japan in 1997.

The countries present at this conference undertook to reduce world emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to about 5% below the level of emissions for 1990. (This would represent an overall reduction of 29% as global emissions had already risen from the 1990 level by 1997.)

The Kyoto Protocol, as the agreement was called, came into effect in February 2005 after Russia ratified the agreement. When Russia ratified the agreement the pre-agreed number of complying counties (55%) was reached, and the Kyoto Protocol rolled into action.

Carbon reduction under the rules of the Kyoto Protocol

Under the Kyoto Protocol, countries are able to either reduce their carbon emissions by the agreed amount, or trade emissions with other countries which have already reduced emissions to below the agreed levels.

Their spare emissions can be bought by countries which are finding it difficult to reduce emissions enough. This enables individual countries to buy time while, overall the emission rates are falling as agreed.

For example, the UK has signed the Kyoto agreement and ratified it. It is attempting to work with the EU to reduce emissions but in fact, after Tony Blair took office in 1997 emissions increased by 2%.

Since 2008 some real decreases have been seen (9.8 per cent lower CO2 emissions for 2009, according to UK government sources), partly owing to the economic downturn which has resulted from the banking crisis. Energy use from nuclear power has increased, so reducing CO2 outputs - but this is one type of energy production which is widely mistrusted by many environmentalists.

Now environmentalists are pushing for a Carbon Emissions Act to force industry to comply with the Kyoto Agreement carbon reduction targets.

Decreases in carbon emissions have been noted in the EU, a 7.2 percent fall in 2009 - but this was largely as a result of the economic downturn. More sustainable decreases are needed which are not dependent upon economic woes.

What about countries which haven't signed the Kyoto Agreement?

As things stand there is still one large industrialised nation which has not signed the Kyoto agreement. The United States of America and Australia were both represented at the Kyoto conference but the USA has not yet ratified the agreement. The Australian government ratified it in 2007.

The US government has stated that it believes that ratifying Kyoto would be economically damaging. Things are starting to change now that the Obama administration is addressing the issue - but in 2011, they still have not signed.

The US also disagrees with the policy of allowing emerging economies such as China off the hook: China has the greatest carbon emissions - they overtook the US in 2007 - but because it is classed as a developing economy it is not expected to comply with Kyoto at this stage. India and other developing nations are also exempt.

So what is the US doing?

The US government has gathered together a partnership of nations and started its own programme to develop low carbon and no carbon industry.

It remains to be seen how effective these programmes will be. From 1990 to 2000 the US economy has become more carbon efficient (more GDP or wealth generation from each unit of carbon) but their actual emissions have risen by 14%.

Within the US there are individual states and which are creating carbon initiatives, some working with industry to achieve reductions.

Nine states and 194 mayors from US towns and cities, have pledged to put legal limits on greenhouse gas emissions.

California passed The Global Warming Solutions Act (September 2006) which should bring California (the 12th largest carbon emissions source) into line with Kyoto.

Congress is also able to pursue a programme of legislation which, in theory, could enable similar reductions to the Kyoto Protocol.

What is Australia doing?

The Australian government believed that ratifying the Kyoto agreement would hurt their countries employment prospects because of fiercer competition from developing nations who do not (yet) have to rein in their carbon emissions.

However, the Kyoto Agreement was signed in 2007 by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. Australia's emissions have been rising faster than most countries; almost twice the global average, according to the Sydney Morning Herald, in the 25 years up to 2007. Now emissions are more under control but real declines are not yet happening. The Australian government is setting some reasonably ambitious targets and has help available for people and industries which are trying to reduce their emissions.

What about the governments that signed the Kyoto agreement? How are they doing?

The European Union members states all ratified the Kyoto Protocol in 2002. The EU agreed to exceed the Kyoto agreement by reducing emissions to levels 8% below those of 1990. Many EU countries are expected to deliver more than that. Germany, Luxembourg and Denmark have all substantial reductions to their carbon emissions to achieve – by 21%, 28% and 21% respectively (figures for 2010). However, other EU nations are struggling to meet their lesser targets. Some increases were allowed for in smaller countries and countries which had only recently joined the European Union.

The EU has also established an emissions trading system for six major industries, including energy, cement and steel. There is also a system of fines for countries which fail to meet the Kyoto standards.

Things are not perfect however: in summer 2006 Germany, a leading EU member, exempted its coal industry from complying with Kyoto.

The Canadian government had been keen to comply with Kyoto, despite protests from some business and industry leaders. Now Canada has rejected the extended Kyoto Protocol deal (along with Japan and Russia).

China as one of the world's heaviest carbon polluters, believes that targets should reflect population. China has relatively low emissions when the counting is done on a per capita basis. As a developing country they are not expected to comply with Kyoto yet.

Russia has had no problem in meeting the Kyoto targets: this was largely because the economy had taken a downturn since the disbanding of the Soviet Union. Now (2011) the Russian government does not want to be tied to the extension of the Kyoto agreement, because of the economic costs. President Dmitry Medvedev has highlighted the lack of the environmental funding that was promised to Kyoto signatories. Russia will still try to meet their targets but without the legally binding agreement that the Kyoto protocol entails.

Russia and other former members of the Soviet Union may also be in a position to offer carbon trades with other industrialised nations.

Most African nations produce less than 0.1% of the world's carbon emissions. South Africa, however, has a level of emissions like that of a small European state.

Switzerland, followed by Sweden has the world's most carbon efficient economy. I.e. the Swiss generate the most wealth for each unit of carbon used.

There are also schemes to promote "Convergence and Contraction" in the pipeline. This should mean that Kyoto is not seen as make or break; countries which have had unresolved issues with the Kyoto Protocol will be encouraged to participate in their own ways and eventually dove-tail their activities with those of the Kyoto countries.

As the world reels from economic woes, the focus on reducing carbon emissions seems to have slipped from the public agenda. Global emissions are rising faster than ever.

The Kyoto Protocol ends its first period in 2012 when a new international framework is supposed to be agreed. Emission reductions are still urgently needed to combat climate change, as identified by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).