Kyoto Protocol First Commitment Period Results

The protocol defines a "compliance" mechanism as "monitoring compliance with obligations and penalties for non-compliance." [91] According to Grubb (2003)[92], the explicit consequences of non-compliance with the Treaty are small compared to national law. [92] Nevertheless, the section on compliance with the treaty in the Marrakesh Accords was highly controversial. [92] There are several institutional differences between the Kyoto mechanisms. lET uses a top-down approach by calculating emission reductions based on national commitments. It is clear from the legislative text of Article 17 that the Governments listed in Annex B were able to exchange part of the amounts allocated to them. A sovereign government could decide to divide the amounts allocated by allocating allowances to private entities (such as companies or sectors) that allow them to trade emissions at the national level. However, it has not yet been decided under what conditions companies can trade directly with each other on an international scale. The OMC and the CDM differ from the EIT in that they are flexible project-based instruments in which an investor receives credits for host-based emission reductions. In principle, emission reductions in such projects are not measured from top to bottom from the national commitment, but from bottom to top from a baseline that estimates future emissions at the project site if the project had not taken place. The 36 countries that committed to reducing their emissions accounted for only 24% of global greenhouse gas emissions in 2010. [7] Although these countries significantly reduced their emissions during the Kyoto commitment period, other countries increased their emissions to such an extent that global emissions increased by 32% between 1990 and 2010. [8] COP7 took place on 29 September.

October 2001 to 9 November 2001 in Marrakesh to finalize the details of the Protocol. The Protocol left open several issues that would later be decided by the Sixth Cop6 Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC, which sought to resolve these issues at its meeting in The Hague in late 2000, but was unable to reach an agreement due to disputes between the European Union (which advocated stricter implementation) and the United States. Canada, Japan and Australia (who wanted the agreement to be less demanding and more flexible). Thermal efficiency: In a more efficient coal-fired power plant, less coal is burned per kilowatt-hour (kWh) of electricity produced. As a result, this leads to a reduction in CO2 and GHG emissions. The Berlin mandate was recognized in the Kyoto Protocol by the fact that developing countries were not subject to emission reduction commitments during the first Kyoto commitment period. [76] However, the high growth potential of developing countries` emissions has made negotiations on this issue tense. [80] In the final agreement, the Clean Development Mechanism was designed to limit emissions in developing countries, but in such a way that developing countries would not bear the costs of limiting emissions. [80] The general assumption was that developing countries would make quantitative commitments in subsequent commitment periods while developed countries would meet their first-round commitments. [80] Since the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, climate change has become a priority for the European Union.

The key role attributed to climate issues has triggered a long process characterized by a first phase, mainly devoted to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions through appropriate mitigation strategies; a second phase to offset the impacts of climate-related events through adaptation strategies; and a third phase, still ongoing, dedicated to more effective integration between mitigation and adaptation strategies. This chapter examines how climate change has been addressed in Europe so far, identifies the phases, turning points and reasons that led to the transition from one phase to another, and highlights the potential of existing policies and the obstacles to their implementation. It is a fact that the success of climate strategies depends largely on cooperation between different actors, from the local to the global scale. Therefore, despite its strong commitment to climate change, Europe finds itself in a deadlock between local and global decisions that inevitably affect the results of the proposed strategies. The Kyoto emission limits of the first period can be seen as a first step towards the atmospheric stabilization of greenhouse gases. [23] In this sense, the first period of the Kyoto commitments can influence the future levels of atmospheric stabilisation that can be achieved. [65] Properties other than liquid-liquid equilibria that should be considered when selecting a TGLN as a desulfurization extract include thermal stability, toxicity (virtually no ecotoxicological data are yet available for ILTns), corrosivity, and immediate process-related variables such as density, viscosity and surface tension – the extremely high viscosity of some halogenated ILTs makes them very difficult. to manage. Then the question arises as to how the extractor can be recovered: the negligible vapour pressure of the RTIL indicates their recovery by distillation, but the sulfur compounds from which they must be separated also have high boiling points; one solution might be to work under vacuum.

Other options include extraction with water (for water-soluble ILTs) or extraction with supercritical CO2, although early results with the latter technique are not particularly encouraging [48]. The ultimate goal of the UNFCCC is to "stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would put an end to dangerous anthropogenic disturbances of the climate system." [25] Even if Annex I Parties succeed in meeting their first-cycle commitments, much greater emission reductions will be required in the future to stabilize atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases. [24] [26] The Protocol establishes three "flexibility mechanisms" that can be used by Annex I Parties to meet their emission control obligations. [41]:402 The flexibility mechanisms are the International Emissions Trading System (EET), the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JHA). .