Page images
PDF
EPUB

The Kyoto Protocol and the Rate of Increase of the Build-Up of Greenhouse Gases in the Atmosphere and the Corresponding Temperature Changes

Q4. On page 2 of your written testimony, you also state:

“Although the agreement reached in Kyoto will not reverse the build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, it will begin slowing the rate of increase.”

Q4.1 How much will the Kyoto Protocol slow the rate of increase of the build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere?

A4.1 We estimate that the Kyoto protocol will offset a total of roughly 4,500 million metric tons of carbon for the United States, Canada, and Western Europe and Asian OECD countries during the five year period 2008 - 2012. Including the Former Soviet Union countries lower the total savings to about 4,250 million metric tons. In comparison, total global annual emissions are expected to increase from 6000 million metric tons in 1990 to about 7000 million metric tons in 2000, or a cumulative increase in emissions over this 10-year period of a little less than 5000 million metric tons (taking into account the geometric rather than linear increase in emissions rates). Thus, the Kyoto Protocol will offset about as much carbon as the increase in emissions since 1990 will have cumulatively introduced by 2000. While this is an important step towards meeting the challenge posed by climate change, it is important to remember that it is just the initial step, and as such is the beginning of a long process. To achieve the goal of the Framework Convention on Climate Change stabilization of atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide -- will require subsequent steps by all nations of the world, and specifically will require actions by developing countries.

-

Q4.2 What is the estimate of the atmospheric concentrations of each of the six greenhouse gases in each of the years 2050 and 2100, and what is the estimate of the corresponding warming due to those increased concentrations in the absence of the Kyoto Protocol?

A4.2 The most widely reviewed and accepted scenarios of future greenhouse gas emissions are those generated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC scenario for "business as usual" over the next 100 years indicates that CO2 concentrations would reach about 510 parts per million (ppm) in 2050 and 710 ppm in 2100. The mid-range estimates for temperature increases associated with these concentration levels would be about 1 degree C in 2050 and 2 degrees C in 2100. The IPCC scenarios are for CO2 emissions only. The added effect of the other greenhouse gases could be equivalent to adding another 25 to 35 percent to the total CO2 concentrations, and would increase temperatures by a

For further information on this subject, see the IPCC Second Assessment Report and IPCC Technical Paper III, Stabilization of Atmospheric Greenhouse Gases: Physical, Biological, and Socio-Economic Implications.

Q4.3 What is the estimate of the atmospheric concentrations of each of the six greenhouse gases in each of the years 2050 and 2100, and what is the estimate of the corresponding warming due to those increased concentrations if the terms of the Kyoto Protocol are met?

A4.3 First, it must be noted that the Kyoto protocol is only a first step in the process of confronting climate change, and in and of itself will not stabilize concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. So this first step, while significant and important, should not be confused with the ultimate long-term goal of stabilization. It is not possible at this time to give a precise estimate of the future atmospheric concentrations of each greenhouse gas included in the Kyoto protocol. The goal of the protocol is to achieve an overall reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Nations have not signed up to definitive targets for each gas, and, in fact, reductions in emissions of the different greenhouse gases are likely to vary by nation. For example, it may be cheaper for some nations to reduce methane emissions as opposed to CO2, or vice versa. The Kyoto protocol allows nations the flexibility to pursue the most cost-effective reductions, as long as they meet their overall target.

We must also remember that Kyoto emissions goals are limited to a five-year period. Concentrations and temperatures in 2050 and 2100 depend on future actions by both developed and developing countries, which the U.S. will play a role in defining Hypothetically, if Kyoto Protocol obligations were met and Annex 1 nations then froze emissions at those levels, but developing nations did not take action which is clearly not the U.S. position we estimate that CO2 concentration would be kept to about 20 ppm below "business as usual” in 2050 and about 50 ppm below "business as usual" in 2100. The rate of temperature increase would be slowed from a “business as usual" scenario by one to two decades, allowing ecosystems more time to adapt to changing conditions.

-

It is important to note that the most important effect of the Kyoto Protocol is to change our path from the business as usual emissions trajectories that are likely to result in unacceptable consequences for humanity and the environment.

Submission of_the_Kyoto Protocol to the Senate for Ratification and “Meaningful Participation by Key Developing Countries"

[blocks in formation]

"The President has made it clear that he does not intend to send the Kyoto Protocol to the Senate for ratification until we have achieved meaningful participation by key developing countries."

Q5.1. Which developing nations are “key?”

A5.1. The Administration does not have a specific list of key developing countries. The term "developing countries" covers a wide range of nations with differing levels of emissions and differing stages of economic development. These factors must be taken into consideration as we move forward in our efforts to expand developing country participation.

Q5.2. What does “meaningful participation” mean and what will the United States seek from developing countries? Please be specific about the kinds of limitations, reductions, or other obligations that the United States will be seeking in negotiations and discussions.

A5.2. We do not believe that a "one size fits all" approach to developing country participation would be appropriate given the wide range of circumstances experienced across developing countries. The Kyoto Protocol allows developing countries to opt in to controls through an amendment to the controls annex and also provides for developing countries to participate through the Clean Development Mechanism. We will seek to build on these initial steps in obtaining a greater degree of participation by developing countries.

Q5.3. Please explain all of the considerations that bear on the issue of when the
President will submit the Kyoto Protocol to the Senate for ratification.

A5.3. We have referred to the Kyoto Protocol as a work in progress and will continue to assess the issue of the timing ratification after the next meeting of parties scheduled for November 1998.

Q5.4. Before the President submits the Kyoto Protocol to the Senate for ratification, do “key” developing countries have to make legally binding, quantitative commitments to limit the growth of their greenhouse gas emissions, and if so, which countries would have to make such commitments?

A5.4. We have not established any bright line for exactly what would be required of which countries in order to achieve meaningful participation. As Senator Byrd

Q5.5. Whatever it is that "key" developing countries have to do before the President submits the Kyoto Protocol to the Senate for ratification, will it satisfy the Administration's requirement if it is done by means of a bilateral or multilateral agreement with the United States that is not in the form of a new protocol or an amendment to the Convention or to the Kyoto Protocol?

A5.5. We have not taken a position on the specific form that actions by developing

countries must take.

Signing of the Kyoto Protocol

Q6.

A6.

Q7.

A7.

Will the President, or the Vice President, or another person with the authority to do so sign the Kyoto Protocol as it currently exists and if so, when the signing take place?

As Undersecretary of State Stuart Eizenstat testified recently before a number of Congressional committees, the Kyoto Protocol is open for signature from March 15, 1998 through March 15, 1999. The President expects to sign the agreement sometime during this period. However, the President will not seek the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate on the Kyoto Protocol until there is meaningful participation from key developing

countries.

If your answer to question 6 above is not definitive, please explain all of the
considerations that bear on the issue of whether or when the President, or the Vice
President, or another person with the authority to do so will sign the Kyoto
Protocol.

As stated above, the President intends to sign sometime during the year the Protocol is open for signature.

U.S. Reductions of Greenhouse Gas Emission Required by the Kyoto Protocol/Emissions Trading

[blocks in formation]

"Ultimately, the U.S. agreed to a target of a 7% reduction from baseline levels. Given the changes in the definition of the baseline for the three long-lived chemical compounds (HFCs, PFCs and SF6) from 1990 to 1995 combined with a change in the way sinks are accounted for in the baseline, the actual reduction required in the U.S. is no more than 2-3% more than the President originally proposed as the U.S. negotiating position."

A8.

Please provide a detailed calculation, including a listing of all assumptions that verifies your statement that “the actual reduction required in the U.S. is no more than 2-3% more than the President originally proposed as the U.S. negotiating position."

Data on the estimated emissions of the three long-lived chemicals in both 1990 and 1995 is
available in the Climate Change Action Report (attached) which the U.S. submitted to the
Convention's Secretariat in 1997. Data is also available in that report that deals with the
issue of sinks, but new information based on changes in definitions called for under the
reporting requirements is being prepared. This information will be available over the next
2-3 months when we submit our revised inventory to the Secretariat. Please also see
paragraph two of the answer to question 28 for additional information.

Projections and Effects
of Policies and Measures

This section integrates the impact of US climate change policies with revised and extended projections of greenhouse gas emissions and sequestration estimates. It serves as a starting point for a reevaluation of the effectiveness of the CCAP in meeting the goal of returning net U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases to their 1990 levels by 2000. Analyses of the individual actions (described earlier in this chapter) are inte grated with revised forecasts of economic growth, energy prices, program funding. and regulatory developments to provide an updated comprehensive perspective on cur. rent and projected greenhouse gas emission levels. For convenience, the revised projec. tions contained here will be referred to as the 1997 Climate Action Report (1997 CAR).

Any projection of future emissions, even for a period as short as four years, is subject to considerable uncertainty. Key factors that can increase emissions include more rapid growth in electricity demand, flat rather than slightly rising real energy prices, more rapid economic growth, and further cuts in CCAP funding or effectiveness. Key factors that can reduce emissions include slower growth, increased CCAP program efficacy. greater penetration of baseline energyefficiency measures, higher energy prices, increased program funding levels, and rela tively mild weather in 2000. A qualitative

analysis of key uncertainties suggests that net greenhouse emissions in 2000 could exceed their 1990 level by 150-230 MMTCE

Continued support for research and development efforts in the areas of energy. efficiency and renewable-energy technolo gies is another key element of the Administration's strategy to implement the CCAP's vision. These technologies can serve both U.S. economic and environmental interests by reducing costs and emissions, while also providing important export mar. kets for U.S. firms and workers.

The first part of this section describes the current projections of greenhouse gas emis sions for the years 2000, 2010, and 2020. It also compares the 1993 CCAP with 1997 CAR projections, the latter of which includes reductions from planned actions. The second part updates the "no action" baseline emission projections data and compares the data to the 1993 CCAP baseline. The last part provides new estimates of the overall impact of the 1993 CCAP that reflect initial implementa tion experience, changes in the market conditions under which actions operate, and the impact of the shortfall in action funding during recent fiscal years, as well as examines the effect of key uncertainties affecting projected emission levels.

« PreviousContinue »