Paul Kay
Science, Technology, Environment and Resources Group
9 March 1998
Contents
Key Terms Agreed in the Kyoto Protocol
Introduction
International Commitments
Australia's Commitments
Endnotes
The Third Session of the Conference of the Parties to the
Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP3) was held in Kyoto,
Japan from 1-10 December 1997. Completion of the Berlin Mandate
(COP2) with strengthened commitments for developed countries was a
core purpose of the negotiations. Signatory nations adopted the
Protocol on 10 December 1997. COP3 represented the culmination of
more than two years of negotiations under the Berlin Mandate,
including the final ten days in Kyoto. The Conference had 2 500
participants, 3 000 Non Government Organisation (NGO) officials and
4 000 press representatives in attendance.(1) While the resolution
of details remains, the agreement reached at Kyoto means that
climate change mitigation is now placed firmly on the international
political agenda. The next conference in the series, COP4, is
scheduled for Buenos Aires in November 1998.
The conference was a difficult one for Australia and the drama
of the negotiations was widely reported in the media. Australia's
circumstances required it to take a different position to the
majority of other developed countries. The outcome for Australia
was generally regarded as a good one in the circumstances.
The collective agreement of the Kyoto Protocol was to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions by 5.2 per cent below 1990 levels by
between 2008 to 2012, for Annex 1 Parties (Developed Countries).
Individual countries or country aggregates were allocated different
targets, as outlined in the Berlin Mandate agreement of 1995. Most
countries were dealt with individually, except those in the
European Union (EU), which obtained a collective target, known as a
'bubble'. In the event of the EU collective exceeding the agreed
target, each country within the EU will be individually
responsible. The Protocol allows for the establishment of
collective targets other than those already prescribed for the EU,
but transparency in the operation of these collectives is
required.
Figure 1. Greenhouse gas emission commitments within the Kyoto
Protocol. The average commitment for all Annex 1 countries is an
emission reduction of 5.2 per cent by 2008 to 2012 based on 1990
levels.

Individual targets for signatory countries as a percentage of
emissions in the base year of 1990 are presented in Figure 1, with
the EU given as the agreed collective target. Nuclear power by
definition has zero greenhouse gas emissions, although minor
emissions result from transport and construction. Unlike most other
developed countries, Australia does not produce any electricity
from nuclear power. A high proportion of those countries with more
stringent emission targets than Australia use nuclear power in
their energy mix (see Figure 1). Furthermore, a number of countries
without nuclear power import electricity from nuclear countries. An
example of the linkage between nuclear power and carbon dioxide
emissions is Sweden, part of the EU bubble. Sweden faces increased
electricity prices from the phase out of nuclear power while
simultaneously being required to restrict carbon dioxide
emissions.(2)
Allowance for emission reductions from land use changes was
permitted in the base year in the Kyoto Protocol. Thus, reductions
in greenhouse gas emissions from declining rates of land clearing
or forestry can be used to meet target commitments.(3) Similarly,
removals of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by absorption into
biological systems can be used. These removals of carbon dioxide,
for example the planting of forests, are referred to as 'sinks'.
Limitations exist on the use of sinks and agreement is not yet
complete on methodologies for rules and calculations of land use
impacts on greenhouse gas emissions. Further resources will need to
be directed at this issue, as land use emission calculations are
characterised by high levels of uncertainty.
The practicality of dealing with cases of non-compliance, that
is, dealing with those countries that exceed their emissions
targets remains undecided. Approval of the procedures and
mechanisms to determine and address cases of non-compliance is to
be negotiated at COP4 in Buenos Aires in November 1998. The
adoption of binding measures for non-compliance requires an
amendment to the protocol subject to the checks and balances
associated with adopting and ratifying an amendment.
Greenhouse gas emission targets proposed prior to Kyoto varied
greatly between the parties involved. Australia's negotiating
position prior to Kyoto was for an 18 per cent increase in
emissions of all greenhouse gases between 1990 and 2010. The
outcome of the conference was an agreed 8 per cent increase in
emissions of six gases by 2008 to 2012 based on 1990 emissions.
Australia's case supported 'full expression to all components of
the Berlin Mandate', specifically, individual targets dependent
upon what countries were willing to agree to.(4) Agreement on this
point was a key outcome of the conference, and thus a range of
targets was agreed upon. Furthermore, Australia wanted the
inclusion of increases or reductions in greenhouse gas emissions
due to land use changes in the agreement. This point was agreed to
in the final stages of the Kyoto conference.
Australia's negotiating position prior to Kyoto was at one end
of the spectrum of proposed targets, while the EU's proposals were
at the other end. The EU's negotiating position prior to Kyoto was
for a 15 per cent emission reduction based on 3 gases. The EU's
final agreed target of an 8 per cent reduction based on six gases
is equivalent to a 13 per cent reduction based on the 3
gases.(5)
Table 1. Greenhouse gases covered in the Kyoto
Protocol.
Greenhouse
Gas |
Chemical
Abbreviation |
Carbon Dioxide |
CO2
|
Methane |
CH4
|
Nitrous Oxide |
N2O
|
Hydrofluorocarbons |
HFCs
|
Perfluorocarbons |
PFCs
|
Sulphur Hexafluoride |
SF6
|
Emissions of greenhouse gases are generally referred to as
carbon dioxide equivalents. While the single most important
greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide, some other gases are more
significant on a molecular basis. Methane, for example, has 24.5
times the climate change impact that carbon dioxide does, molecule
for molecule. Six greenhouse gases are covered in the Kyoto
Protocol and shown in Table 1.
Non-Annex 1 Parties (Developing
Countries)
No emission reduction targets were agreed to for Non-Annex 1
Parties (developing countries). A proposal was put forward by the
US and Japan for voluntary non-binding targets, but this was vetoed
by developing countries. The possibility of binding targets on
developing countries was not addressed nor was a process initiated
to consider such involvement. The developing countries' position
was that responsibility for greenhouse gas emission reduction falls
directly on developed countries and that emissions growth from
developing countries should not be restricted.
Outcomes Affecting Annex 1 and
Non-Annex 1 Parties
Despite no emission reduction targets being agreed to for
Non-Annex 1 Parties at Kyoto, these countries are of great
importance to climate change policy. Economic growth in these
countries means that by 2016 they will account for more than 50 per
cent of global greenhouse gas emissions.(6) Measures to enable
Annex 1 countries to assist developing countries to reduce
emissions are referred to as 'Joint Implementation' in the
Protocol. Joint implementation may include technology development,
energy efficiency improvements, the planting of forests to create
carbon sinks (net removals of carbon from the atmosphere) or other
assistance. The aim of these measures is to reduce emissions in
developing countries, requiring no commitment from them, while
allowing Annex 1 countries some credit for reductions achieved.
Emissions trading provides a measure where Parties with
emissions below targets can 'sell' these carbon dioxide equivalents
to Parties requiring further emissions reductions. Emissions
banking is intended to operate in similar way, where emission
reductions in excess of targets can be used to reduce excess
emissions at some other time.
Joint implementation, emissions trading and emissions banking
were settled as measures that can be used by Parties to meet their
obligations.(7) The Kyoto Protocol contains a Clean Development
Mechanism (CDM) that will facilitate joint implementation between
Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 Parties. Private and public sector
participation is allowed for in the CDM. Funds paid to the CDM will
bear an administrative cost, but the bulk of funding will be used
to finance certified joint implementation activities.
Provision for emissions trading to assist countries in meeting
their emissions targets is contained in the Kyoto Protocol, but no
agreement was reached on principles and guidelines for trading.
Banking of traded emissions to provide credit transfer between
periods was allowed for, but emissions from future periods may not
be borrowed to meet commitments in prior periods.
The implementation of policies on a country by country basis
depending on national circumstances was recognised by the Protocol,
which lists a range of policies and measures. No agreement was
reached on whether specific policies and measures should be
coordinated across countries.
Signing of the agreement at Kyoto in December 1997 does not bind
Party countries to it. A binding commitment will be created once
the Protocol is ratified. Signing of the agreement in Kyoto does
however, create an obligation to refrain from action which would
defeat the object and purpose of the treaty. Two conditions must be
met before the Protocol can enter into force. Only when 55 parties
to the Framework Convention on Climate Change representing at least
55 per cent of Annex 1 emissions have ratified the Protocol will it
come into force. This formulation prevents the US and one other
significant emitter from having a veto over the entry into force.
The Kyoto Protocol ratification will be open for signing on 16
March 1998, in New York.(8)
Australia's agreed target of limiting itself to an 8 per cent
increase in greenhouse gas emissions from the 1990 level by between
2008 to 2012 represents an estimated 30 per cent decrease in
business as usual emissions by 2008 to 2012. Emissions from the
energy sector alone are expected to grow by 40 per cent by 2010
under a business as usual scenario.
Australia's population is expected to grow by 30 per cent from
1990 to 2020, compared to 3 per cent in Europe.(9) Relatively
greater per capita emission reductions will be required in
Australia due to this growth. The achievement of Australia's Kyoto
target will be a significant challenge, requiring the full
implementation of existing and planned greenhouse mitigation
measures.
The Prime Minister announced a $180 million greenhouse package
for Australia on 20 November 1997. The package outlines reforms and
ongoing commitment to the Greenhouse Challenge program, the energy
market including support of renewable energy, the creation of sinks
and the reduction of emission standards in industry. The Greenhouse
Challenge is a program of cooperative agreements between government
and industry under which companies undertake to reduce or abate
their greenhouse gas emissions.
Calculating the effects of land use change and the
implementation of carbon sinks is characterised by low levels of
certainty. The statistical uncertainty may be plus or minus 80 per
cent and this is one reason why land use change was taken out of
the 1995 Australian inventory released in September 1997.
(10)Uncertainty in land use calculations is
intrinsic; estimates must be made on the amount of cleared material
burned immediately and impacts of new land usage patterns on
emissions well into the future. In contrast, the use of estimating
emissions from energy usage confers high levels of certainty
through stoichiometric calculations, that is, the numerical
relationships between elements in chemical reactions.
The 3 per cent decline in total emissions between 1990 and 1995
shown in Table 2 was mainly due to land use change; over the period
energy related emissions increased by 6 per cent. Table 2 includes
forecast emissions in 2012, assuming that no change in the rate of
land clearing occurs. The forecast shows that, in order to meet the
Kyoto target of an 8 per cent increase, energy and other emissions
must only increase by 21 per cent or less. This represents a
significant reduction on current projections of a 40 per cent
increase in energy emissions by 2010, based on 1990 emissions.
The decline in land clearing from 1990 to 1995 was through
changes in policy in most states except Western Australia and
Queensland. Land clearing rates declined in Western Australia in
1995 due to the introduction of more rigid policy. The policy was
further tightened in April 1997, and since that time little land
has been cleared in Western Australia.(11) The main state that
could be affected in terms of land clearing as a consequence of the
Kyoto Protocol is Queensland, which is clearing land at an
estimated rate of 262,000 hectares per annum. However, the Minister
for Primary Industries and Energy (Mr John Anderson) stated after
the Kyoto Conference that farmers would not be forced to slow the
rate of land clearing to help Australia meet the Kyoto
Protocol.(12)
Table 2. Australia's Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 1990 (the
Kyoto Protocol base year), 1995, and 2012 the Kyoto Protocol's
final target year (forecast).(13)
Year |
Energy and Other Emissions Mt
(CO2-e)*
|
Land Clearing Emissions Mt
(CO2-e)*
|
Total Emissions Mt
(CO2-e) *
|
% of emissions due to Energy and Other
Sources
|
% of Emissions due to Land Clearing
|
1990 Base Year |
379.6
|
122.6
|
502.2
|
75.6
|
24.4
|
1995
% Increase on Base Year
|
402.4
6 %
|
84.6
-31 %
|
487.0
-3 %
|
82.6
|
17.4
|
2012 (Forecast) Target Year
% Increase on Base Year
|
457.8
21 %
|
84.6
-31 %
|
542.4
8 % Kyoto Protocol
|
84.4
|
15.6
|
* Million tonnes carbon dioxide
equivalent
Endnotes
- Bradley R., US Department of Energy, Speaking at the
Outlook 98 Conference held by ABARE 5 February 1998,
Canberra Convention Centre.
- Andersson and Haden, Power production and the price of
electricity: an analysis of a phase out of Swedish nuclear power,
Energy Policy, Vol 25, 1997.
- This was agreed to in Clause 7 of Article 3 of the
convention.
- Kay P., Australia and Greenhouse Policy - A Chronology,
Information and Research Services, Parliamentary Library,
September 1997.
- Climate Change: the Kyoto outcome, European Union
News, January/February 1998.
- Fisher B. Executive Director of ABARE, Speaking at a meeting of
the Australian Institute Of Energy, Canberra, 2 February
1998.
- Beil S., The Kyoto Protocol: key elements and outcomes,
Climate Change Newsletter, December 1997.
- Fisher B. Executive Director of ABARE, Speaking at a meeting of
the Australian Institute Of Energy, Canberra, 2 February
1998.
- Statement by the Prime Minister, Safeguarding the Future:
Australia's Response to Climate Change, 20 November 1997.
- National Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1995 Australia, Environment
Australia September 1997.
- Capp G., Kyoto laws 'already here', West Australian,
16 December 1997.
- Bita N., No clamp on land clearing: Anderson, The
Australian, 16 December 1997.
- National Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1995 Australia, Environment
Australia September 1997 and Wilkenfeld G., Kyoto's no carbon
copy agreement, AFR 18 December 1997.