Kyoto is not enough.
But it's a start.
16/02/2005 — Greenpeace activists, supporters,
and volunteers around the world celebrated
the coming into force of the Kyoto Protocol
with banners, windmills, actions against
dirty power, and a shutdown of trading on
the International Petroleum Exchange in
London. After more than ten years of protracted
- sometimes exhausting, often frustrating
- negotiations, thirty-five industrialised
countries along with the European Community
are now legally bound to reduce or limit
their greenhouse gas emissions.
As anyone involved in any international
negotiating process will tell you, it wasn't
easy.
Vested interests like the fossil fuel industry
and heavy energy users interfered and obstructed
at every turn. Oil producing nations such
as Saudi Arabia kept up a constant whine
for compensation for loss of oil revenue
and politicians of all persuasions ducked
and dived and tried to avoid any decisions
they thought would make them unpopular at
home.
Add to that the interminable 'diplo-speak'
that participants tend to favour and the
propensity to spend hours discussing whether
to replace the word 'should' with 'may.'
You begin to get a picture of how slow-moving
and cumbersome these talks can sometimes
be and what an achievement the entry into
force of the Kyoto Protocol is.
Then of course there was the biggest obstacle
of all to an agreement - the United States.
The Bush administration withdrew from the
Kyoto Protocol in early 2001 but it didn't
wash its hands of the negotiations. With
the active support (some would say under
the instruction) of the American fossil
fuel industry and its well-funded front
groups, the US government worked tirelessly
to derail the treaty.
It is a testament to the commitment and
tenacity of the many countries that acted
in good faith and steered the agreement
through these stormy seas, that we now have
a legal framework for protecting the climate.
But Kyoto itself, if implemented to the
letter, will only have a minimal effect
on the changing climate so where do we go
from here?
'Dangerous climate change' is already with
us and the greenhouse gases we have pumped
into the atmosphere since industrialization
in the late 19th century mean a rise of
1.2C to 1.3C (2.2F - 4.1F) above pre-industrial
levels is now unavoidable.
But scientists are warning that warming
could increase by up to 5.8C (10.4F).
Avoiding catastrophic climate change means
keeping temperature increase to below 2C.
There will still be significant impacts
on ecosystems and many millions of people
will be threatened with increased risk of
hunger, malaria and flooding and billions
with increased risk of water shortage. While
this is certainly dangerous to the millions
of people who will be affected, it is probably
the best we can do.
But time is not on our side. We are within
a decade or two of closing off our options.
Dragging our feet now will force us into
a choice between climate catastrophe and
economic catastrophe in the next couple
of decades.
Kyoto now needs to develop and expand rapidly,
extending the international emissions trading
system and providing more help for developing
countries to leapfrog dirty technology.
There is clearly much to be done and little
time to do it. The choice is clear - there
is none
