More than 2200 delegates from 161 nations assembled 1-11 December 1997 to produce the Kyoto Protocol, which mandates by 2012 emission reductions for six greenhouse gases to 5.2% below their 1990 level (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluorinde). This agreement almost didn't happen and still has a long way to go. Both aspects reflect the role of the United States. With conversions from coal and high dependence on nuclear energy, Europe was already in a good position to meet its goal to reduce emissions. The break came when Vice President Al Gore offered a U.S. reduction of 3% below 1990 levels (which translates to 7% in terms of the Kyoto Protocol, according to the 22 December 1997 issue of TIME) instead of the previous position of 0%. Gore also persuaded Japan to agree to a 6% reduction (as opposed to their previous position of 5%). These reductions are less than the 8% target Europe agreed to and much less than the 15% the European Union originally argued for. The Kyoto Protocol: progress toward sustainability but not attainment of it
But even a 15% reduction would be far less than the 60% needed to make a dent in global greenhouse warming. And developing nations, many of which stand to lose coastal areas from rising sea levels as global warming expands the volume of the world's oceans, are not committed to reducing their greenhouse gas emissions at all. This provision of the Kyoto Protocol runs counter to a U.S. Senate resolution rejecting any treaty that does not commit developing nations to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases. This issue will rank high on the agenda at the next global warming conference, scheduled for November 1998 in Buenos Aires. A successful outcome of that conference or election of senators more favorably disposed to the Kyoto Protocol in November 1998 is needed if Vice President Gore is to persuade the Senate to ratify it.
Home Winter 98 Full Screen
The TEACHERS CLEARINGHOUSE FOR SCIENCE AND SOCIETY EDUCATION