1/01 mechanical engineering: washington window

washington window

What's Next for the Kyoto Protocol?

By Francis Dietz

While some critics of the Kyoto Protocol on gas emissions might consider its demands to be pie-in-the-sky, what Under Secretary of State Frank Loy got at a recent climate change summit in the Netherlands was a pie in the face. A radical environmental group famous for its pie-throwing managed to hit Loy, both literally and symbolically, for his attempt, as lead U.S. negotiator at the Netherlands meeting, to ease the burden of the United States if it were to implement the Kyoto protocol.

The United States has signed the Kyoto protocol, but has not submitted the treaty to the Senate for ratification. The administration has made it clear that it will not submit the treaty for ratification unless and until it achieves "meaningful" participation of developing nations and it negotiates a mechanism for implementation that does not harm the American economy. The Senate, in a 95-0 vote in 1997, set forth those conditions for ratification of any international climate change agreement.

The most recent climate change summit was held last November at The Hague, Netherlands. Known formally as the Sixth Conference of Parties (COP-6), the summit was held to complete the rules for implementation of the treaty, even though the required number of countries have not yet ratified it. In fact, only 30 countries have done so, and none of the major industrialized nations—such as the United States—have committed to the carbon dioxide and other "greenhouse" gas reductions called for by the treaty. Fifty-five countries representing at least 55 percent of the world's output of suspected greenhouse gases must ratify the treaty in order for it to take effect.

The conference ended—was "suspended," according to Dutch Environment Minister Jan Pronk, the conference chair—without agreement by the 180 nations represented. The main issue was "flexible mechanisms" for implementation of the treaty. The U.S. delegation put forth a proposal to let nations count "carbon sinks" (for example, forests and farmland) toward their total carbon reduction targets under the protocol. As the United States possesses vast carbon sinks, an agreement to allow their use would ease this country's economic burden if it were to implement the treaty. The U.S. delegation initially proposed carbon sink credits of 300 million to 310 million metric tons of carbon per year, later reducing that demand to 175, then 125, and finally 75 million metric tons. Even that lower number was not enough for the European Union, most notably Germany, to agree to, leading some critics to reissue a previous accusation that one of the European Union's aims in the whole climate change debate is to damage the U.S. economy economically.

The European Union accused the United States of seeking "free gifts" to avoid making difficult decisions on emission reductions in its energy, transportation, and buildings sectors.

French President Jacques Chirac directly accused the United States of ducking its responsibility to cut greenhouse gas emissions. "Each American emits three times more greenhouse gases than a Frenchman," Chirac declared. U.S. Senators attending the conference as observers dismissed Chirac's remarks as "very unproductive." Sen. Larry E. Craig (R-Idaho) admitted that Americans waste energy, but claimed that U.S. energy consumption has brought worldwide benefits in farming, science, technology, and medicine.

The conference was complicated by the U.S. election controversy. With no President-elect, the United States was in a difficult negotiating position. Vice President Al Gore personally represented the United States at the Kyoto conference in 1997 and was instrumental in forging the final protocol. Texas Gov. George W. Bush made it clear during the campaign that he casts a wary eye on the Kyoto Protocol, remaining concerned about possible negative effects of the treaty on the U.S. economy.

Failure to reach agreement at The Hague was a setback for the treaty and its proponents, but additional meetings will be held next year to discuss implementation, first in Bonn, Germany, in May, and then in Morocco in October. The Morocco meeting will be the seventh official meeting of the Conference of Parties, while the Bonn meeting could end up being the continuation of COP-6, which was "suspended" rather than ended.

Regardless of the fate of the treaty itself, climate change will remain an issue for a long time to come. Two major pieces of the legislation were introduced last session, one by Sen. Frank Murkowski (R-Alaska), and the other by Sen. Craig. Both would establish U.S. policy on the issue in a fashion much more to the liking of U.S. industry, and both would consolidate government-wide climate change policy under the Department of Energy. While both bills would authorize energy research programs designed to reduce suspect gas emissions, the Murkowski bill is more specific, authorizing a $2 billion, 10-year program. The Craig bill would authorize "such sums as are necessary" for research into, among other things, the "actuality of climate change."

Francis Dietz works in ASME Government Relations in Washington, D.C.