kyoto

Cold sweat: ice penguins melt in the sun as they await a result from the climate conference hall. Credit: IISD

Prospects for a legally binding treaty to reduce greenhouse gas emissions edged a step closer at the beginning of this week as the 10-day United Nations climate conference in Kyoto moved towards its climax on Wednesday (10 December).

But the final outcome remained uncertain, depending on how far the United States was prepared to take a promise to be “flexible” made on Monday by Vice-President Al Gore.

Following eight days of tense discussions, the chairman of the conference, Raul Estrada Ouyela, Argentina's ambassador to China, set out a final consensus proposal, which he described as a “take it or leave it document”. The document proposed a treaty in which developed countries would reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by an average 5 per cent from 1990 levels between 2006 and 2010.

This proposal mirrored that of Japan. It was lower than the European Union's proposed 15 per cent reduction from 1990 levels by 2010, but higher than the US proposal to stabilize emissions at 1990 levels before 2012.

Estrada proposed that the treaty should apply to three gases: carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. A separate protocol, to be negotiated at the next conference of the climate convention, would apply to other greenhouse gases.

The 5 per cent reduction figure is an average for all 39 developed countries that are parties to the convention. It was calculated by a process known as ‘differentiation’ — the idea that different countries can reduce or increase their emissions according to their circumstances. Most developed countries would have to reduce emissions by 8 per cent, except the United States, Canada and Russia, which are allowed a 5 per cent reduction, and Japan, which is allowed a 4.5 per cent reduction.

In contrast, Australia — which continues to oppose legally binding emissions reduction targets — would be allowed to increase its emissions by 5 per cent. Norway would be permitted to increase emissions by the same amount, and Iceland by 10 per cent.

In a concession to countries such as Canada and New Zealand with large forestry resources, a country's emissions inventory would include both carbon dioxide from fossil-fuel sources and carbon released into the atmosphere from deforestation. This carbon ‘subtotal’ would then be reduced by the amount of carbon removed from the atmosphere through planting new trees. But a target date for the inclusion of carbon from forests has been deferred until scientists find a more accurate way of measuring the release and uptake of this carbon.