Coming back from a near certain death, the Kyoto Protocol
““ an international agreement aimed at reducing greenhouse gas
emissions ““ was officially ratified by Russia last week,
paving the way for the treaty to take effect in February.
The protocol calls on 55 industrialized nations to limit
greenhouse gas emissions to 5.2 percent below the 1990 level, a
move expected to decrease global warming.
Russia was needed to ratify the treaty because the Bush
administration pulled the United States, the world’s largest
emitter of greenhouse gases, out of the protocol in 2001.
The protocol required 55 signatories that accounted for at least
55 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. Russia accounts for 17
percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.
Without the United States’ or Russia’s signatures,
the Kyoto Protocol would not have been ratified.
Suzanne Paulson, UCLA associate professor of atmospheric and
oceanic sciences, said the protocol is a step in the right
direction because actions taken now to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions will have a greater effect on global warming in the
future.
“It is absolutely not too late to affect climate change.
The climate hasn’t changed a lot yet, but its getting set to
change a whole lot more,” Paulson said.
Developing nations such as China and India are exempt from many
of the greenhouse gas emission restrictions.
President Bush decided to withdraw the United States from the
protocol in 2001, saying it would hamper U.S. economic growth and
that it was unfair because developing nations were largely
exempt.
Todd Sandler, a USC professor of economics and international
relations, said, “I don’t think in the near term, Kyoto
is going to have much of an effect because the major players such
as the United States and many of the developing countries have not
signed on or have no requirement to cut back at all.”
Bush’s energy policy is not expected to change after his
reelection and the strengthening of the Republican majority in
Congress.
Recently, the administration has expressed interest in again
trying to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling,
a policy defeated by the Senate in his last term.
The Bush administration’s stance on global warming and
other environmental issues has led many states, including
California, to adopt more stringent environmental policies than the
federal government requires.
Earlier this year, California passed a bill requiring auto
makers to reduce greenhouse gas emission from cars by 30 percent in
the next 10 years.
Because California represents about 10 percent of the
nation’s auto market, environmental policies in the state can
have an enormous effect on the auto industry. Other states are
considering adopting California’s tighter auto emission
controls.
Auto emissions not only add to greenhouse gasses but also
increase pollution related to smog, a particularly important issue
in Southern California.
California Air Resources Board Chairman Alan Lloyd said in a
statement that the state’s landmark legislation is likely to
be copied throughout the United States and the world.
“Because of its forward-thinking approach, the ARB has
established itself as the world leader in setting motor vehicle
pollution control standards,” Lloyd said.
According to officials at the Air Resources Board, costs for the
added technology needed to meet the requirements are expected to
average about $325 per vehicle in 2012 and about $1,050 per vehicle
to comply in 2016.