Printable version        Email to a friend        Add Comment

Australia Resists Last-Ditch Calls to Ratify Kyoto

Posted: Tuesday February 15, 2005 1:40 PM EST

By Patrick Goodenough CNSNews.com International Editor

With the Kyoto Protocol about to come into force, the Australian government has parried a last-ditch attempt to get the country to sign onto the treaty, whose stated aim is to counter climate change.

The opposition Labor Party introduced a bill that would require Australia to ratify the protocol within 60 days, but Prime Minister John Howard’s government dismissed it as a stunt that was “no substitute for a policy.”

Australia and the United States are the only industrialized countries to have rejected the agreement, which takes effect on Wednesday.

The 1997 protocol commits developed nations to reduce by specified amounts their emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other pollutants which most environmentalists hold responsible for “global warming.”

The reductions are meant to take place by the 2008-2012 period, and reduction targets differ from country to country, depending on how much each was polluting in 2000.

Kyoto also envisages an international carbon-trading scheme, in which firms polluting below their quota can sell carbon rights to bigger polluters elsewhere—supposedly an incentive for industries to invest in cleaner technology.

Washington and Canberra have called the agreement flawed, arguing that it would harm American and Australian workers by forcing industries to move offshore.

Howard’s government says it has invested one billion Australian dollars in programs to reduce emissions of the pollutants, known as “greenhouse gases.” It says the country already is on track to meet the emission reduction targets set by Kyoto for Australia.

The Labor Party argued that, as Australia was in line to meet its Kyoto target, there was “no downside” for the country in ratifying the treaty.

The Labor bill has little chance of succeeding without the support of the governing coalition, which enjoys an outright majority in parliament since Howard’s re-election last October.

A major sticking-point for both the U.S. and Australia was the fact Kyoto does not require rapidly-developing nations like China and India to cut their emissions - although China is the second-largest CO2 polluter, after the U.S., and India is also already a big polluter.

Australian Environment Minister Ian Campbell raised the issue again in comments to reporters.

“The Kyoto Protocol is ineffective in that during its period [of operation] the scientists expect that greenhouse gases will actually increase in the world because it doesn’t have a pathway for developing countries. It basically says; ‘Let’s just ignore them for the time being,’ “ he said.

“Unless you have a comprehensive agreement that includes all of the emitters, that includes China and India and America, then you won’t have an effective emissions trading scheme.”

Campbell also said Kyoto would penalize Australia—and be counterproductive to the stated aims of curtailing climate change—by preventing the country from exporting energy-efficient products.

In Washington, the free market group Competitive Enterprise Institute congratulated the U.S. and Australia “for their leadership in refusing to ratify the fatally flawed and potentially disastrous Kyoto Protocol climate treaty.”

“The costs of the policies required by Kyoto will far outweigh any potential benefits,” CEI’s Myron Ebell said in a statement.

Instead, President Bush and Howard were “leading the way to a brighter future based on technological innovation.”

“In the European Union, Japan, and Canada, the reality that Kyoto is a dead end and cannot possibly work is already beginning to set in,” Ebell said. “We can only hope that they will be able to jump off the Kyoto bandwagon before too much economic damage has been done.”

‘Kyoto only a first step’

The debate about climate change and mankind’s ability to affect it through initiatives like Kyoto has divided scientists between those who support the environmentalists’ claims—if not always their more alarming predictions—and those who argue that they are based on questionable scientific hypotheses.

“Skeptics” like William Kininmonth, the former head of Australia’s National Climate Center, argues that climate change is natural, not man-made.

“Natural processes have caused the climate to change and it is unlikely that human influences will dominate the natural processes,” Kininmonth wrote in a report on the subject.

“Any suggestion that implementation of the Kyoto Protocol will avoid future infrastructure damage, environmental degradation and loss of life from weather and climate extremes is a grand delusion.”

One of the only things that those of either side of the debate agree upon is that Kyoto is not likely to be effective.

Green campaigns across the board are stressing that the Kyoto targets are only a very limited beginning.

Kyoto requires industrialized countries to reduce emissions by an average of five percent by 2012, but campaigners say the emissions actually need to fall by 60 percent by around 2050.

Nonetheless, they argue, the Kyoto targets are a crucial first step.

“It is important because it is the international community working collaboratively to stop dangerous climate change,” Greenpeace argues on its website.

The World Wildlife Fund said in a statement that an average global temperature rise of two degrees cesium above pre-industrial levels would be dangerous. (Pre-industrial levels are defined as those existing around the middle of the 18th century.)

To prevent this from happening, it said, industrialized countries must cut CO2 emissions by 80 percent by 2050.

“While it is a big step forward, the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol is just the first step,” said the fund’s Jennifer Morgan.

“During the next commitment period beginning in 2012 the Kyoto Club must be the driving force and set even more ambitious targets. The Kyoto Protocol must mark the beginning of the transformation needed to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, building upon its momentum and not the irresponsible approaches of the Bush administration.”

Hero, villains

Green activists have long depicted Bush and Howard as villains for their refusal to go along with the European Union, Japan and other Kyoto backers.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, on the other hand, has drawn applause for ratifying the protocol late last year. Moscow’s action was crucial to the treaty coming into force, as it pushed Kyoto over a threshold required for its entry into force.

“As the earth is battered by increasing storms, floods and droughts, President Putin has brought us to a pivotal point in human history,” declared Greenpeace New Zealand campaign manager Cindy Baxter.

“The Bush and Australian administrations are out in the cold and the rest of the world can move forward as one to start tackling climate change, the greatest threat to civilization the world has ever seen,” she said.

Among green celebrations around the world this week, Australia’s Climate Change Action Network hosted a party incorporation the screening of an old James Bond movie, “From Russia With Love.”

A poster advertising the event features pictures of Putin, Bush and Howard. “Cheer as the world takes its first steps to tackle climate change,” it reads. “Jeer as the outlaws, Australia and the U.S., hatch their evil plans.”

  Printable version        Email to a friend        Add Comment

Africa

Asia

Asia-Pacific

Europe

Middle East

North America

South America

About Us  |  Advertise  |  Donation  |  Help  |  Resources
Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service  |  Copyright Policy

Copyright © 2003-2005 SpiritHit.com, All Rights Reserved

Powered by ExpressionEngine | Hosted by Dyntex