3.2 Attempts to Solve the Climate Change Problem by Regulation of Emissions
Attempts to reduce GHG emissions to prevent future climate change damage through international treaties have been attempted, but so far with little success (25, 26). The most recent effort, a treaty known as the Kyoto Protocol, adopted in 1997 by more than 160 nations, originally called for an overall 5.2% reduction in emissions for six of the GHGs (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, HFCs, PFCs, sulfur hexafluoride) relative to a 1990 baseline between 2008-2012 (the First Commitment Period) for 38 developed nations and the European Union (27).
To become effective, the treaty must be ratified by 55% of the 38 developed countries responsible for 55% of the 1990 emissions. The treaty allows for emissions trading among the 38 countries as well as provides mechanisms to encourage transfer of technologies to other developing nations to help reduce their emissions (28).
The U.S. target of 7% would have required a reduction of about 30% from its projected 2012 level on an annual basis (29, 30). The U.S. is presently responsible for nearly 25% of worldwide GHG emissions. Disagreements with other countries over how much the carbon dioxide “sinks” due to existing forests and agricultural lands in the U.S. should be counted (29, 31) led the U.S. to withdraw from the process in 2001, with President Bush citing the cost to jobs and the economy of implementing the treaty as prohibitively expensive.
Later, to salvage the treaty, concessions were made to Russia and Japan by the remaining countries participating on the same carbon sink issue and treaty legality issues (32). As a result, by 2012, emissions will at most be reduced by 1.8% from the 1990 levels and only then in the 37 countries still covered by the treaty (33). Per the concessions, decisions on enforcement of penalties for non-compliance will be postponed until 2012 (30, 34-38). The treaty still lacks Russia’s ratification to become “effective.”
In 2002, the Bush Administration set a voluntary goal for the U.S. based on reducing emission intensity (GHG emissions/$ of GDP) by 18% by 2012 (39). This is to be partly accomplished by providing incentives for industry to reduce emissions (40). However, most experts agree this would result in the same emissions that would occur if no specific actions were taken by government or industry, since energy use has tended to become more efficient by about this same annual percentage in past decades (41, 42). Since the Administration’s announcement, there are reports that large U.S. corporations are being informally “encouraged” by the U.S. government to voluntarily reduce emissions even more and even sooner than the 18% target would require (43). This is known, for lack of a better word, as trying to have it both ways.
A better approach would be for all nations, including those that are signatories to Kyoto, to rethink their timetables and develop realistic long-term emission reduction targets that don’t rely so much on hypothetical emissions trading, existing carbon sinks, unofficial agreements and misleading projections (44).
There have been a few additional efforts begun to regulate GHG emissions by law or other agreements. The European Commission and automakers have agreed to reduce new car carbon dioxide emission levels to 25% below 2000 levels by 2018. The automakers are allowed to choose the method by which this target is met (45). The state of California, the source of 13% of U.S. domestic auto sales, enacted a law in 2002 requiring its Air Resources Board to adopt regulations to reduce the emissions of GHGs from motor vehicles to whatever level is feasible, no later than January 1, 2005 and to become effective on 2009 or later models (46-50).
