Current Affairs news for the well informed woman

After years of debate between leaders, politicians and scientists, on 16th February 2005, the Kyoto Protocol finally became international law, but is it too little too late?

British Labour ministers
pledged to reduce carbon
dioxide pollution beyond the
levels imposed by our
international agreement,
saying that the country would
produce 20% less carbon
dioxide in the year 2010
than in 1990

The protocol was drawn up in Japan in 1997, and is an international agreement that sets targets for industrialised countries to cut their greenhouse gas emissions. These gases are partly responsible for global warming and we are using a lot of them, both directly, for example petrol in cars, and indirectly, such as electricity generated by power plants that use oil or coal.

The protocol took some time to come into force as the pact needed to be ratified by 55 countries and ratified by countries accounting for at least 55% of the carbon dioxide emissions recorded in 1990. Problems came when the U.S, responsible for about quarter of the world’s emissions, pulled out of signing the treaty with George Bush claiming that implementing it could gravely damage the U.S economy. Other countries that have also declined signing include Australia. Prime minister John Howard refused to sign the agreement arguing that the protocol could cost Australians jobs.

As of April 2006, a total of 163 countries have ratified the agreement and each country that has signed agreed to its own specific target. British Labour ministers pledged to reduce carbon dioxide pollution beyond the levels imposed by our international agreement, saying that the country would produce 20% less carbon dioxide in the year 2010 than in 1990.

For several years there were significant reductions, but recently the trend has reversed and in April data suggested that Britain could miss its target set down by the protocol.

''In March

Tony Blair

called for China,

India and the U.S

to be involved

in a new

international

agreement to

replace the

Kyoto protocol

when it expires''

As the country that hosted the Kyoto protocol, Japan’s performance has also been embarrassingly weak. Japan has always been one of the protocols strongest advocates but they have seen carbon emissions increase nearly 8% as opposed to reducing by 6%.

Other countries to have ratified the protocol such as India and China are not required to reduce emissions under present agreement. For some other countries emissions trading is allowed. So, for instance, Russia currently easily meets its targets so can sell off its “credits” for millions of dollars to countries that don’t yet meet their target, such as Canada. This rewards countries that meet their targets, and provides financial incentives to others.

In March Tony Blair called for China, India and the U.S to be involved in a new international agreement to replace the Kyoto protocol when it expires. This seems advisable as most climate scientists say that the targets set in the Kyoto protocol merely scratch the surface. The agreement aims to reduce emissions from industrialised nations by around 5%, when they believe that emission cuts of 60% are needed to avoid the worst consequences of global warming.

Greenpeace campaigners say that in order to meet targets we need to look right across the economy, including the way we travel, the houses we live in and the way we generate electricity. Only then will we be in control of the rise in global temperature, which may have catastrophic consequences for life on earth.