3092 of 62452 members online
Coffee Machines 720 GetFrank GymJunkie Menu Mania Snow Surf Varsity

Forgot Your Password? Create Account
[quote]
Or anyone that can answer this question (haven't found anyone who can).

Come 2012, when it looks like most developed nations will have to purchase FCCC standard units to offset their excess emissions, what happens if there's not enough to go around (which seems pretty likely to me at the moment)?
[quote]
Not entirely sure actually, but it will come down to how the enforcement branch manages this dilemma.

Try this manual:

http://unfccc.int/files/national_reports/accounting_reporting_and_review_under_the_kyoto_protocol/application/pdf/rm_final.pdf


quote:
The enforcement branch has three important roles with respect to the accounting of emissions and assigned amount.

a) It can apply adjustments to a Party’s inventory and corrections to the Party’s holdings of Kyoto Protocol units. The adjusted inventory estimates or corrected assigned amount holdings will be recorded in
the CAD and become the official data for compliance purposes.

b) It can suspend and reinstate a Party’s eligibility to participate in the Kyoto mechanisms. The branch will suspend eligibility whenever it determines that a Party is in non-compliance with a commitment related to eligibility; it can reinstate the Party’s eligibility once the Party has demonstrated that it is no longer in non-compliance with the particular commitment that led to the loss of its eligibility.

c) It has the authority to determine non-compliance with a Party’s emissions commitment at the end of the commitment period. If the branch determines that the Party’s emissions have exceeded its available assigned amount, it will apply the following consequences:

i. Deduct tonnes from the assigned amount of the subsequent commitment period, equal to 1.3 times the amount of excess emissions;

ii. Require the Party to develop a compliance action plan;

iii. Suspend the Party’s eligibility to transfer units.
[quote]
Yeah it's Section C there that is the concern for me. Have just read that if you don't meet your targets, it may be penalised on you for the second round at 1.3times the tonnage. Could be some nasty spillage over then.

Although maybe it's not quite as bad as I'd thought - apparently the FCCC believes that as a group we will meet it, largely because of the huge falls in the post-communist Eastern bloc...
[quote]
I don't think it will come down to not being enough credits to go around.

Let me explain: while the total amount of FCCC standard units will be squeezed downwards, I suspect any penalties will simply be registered within the nation in questions, inventory.

For instance NZ = 100 FCCC Credits - Penalties carried over from the last commitment period.

This is an assumption.
[quote]
Rival said:
I suspect any penalties will simply be registered within the nation in questions, inventory.

Yeah but that's dangerous - it just encourages countries to carry it over in their inventory. You need enforcement and penalty otherwise it's just accounting...
[quote]
garethw said:
Rival said:
I suspect any penalties will simply be registered within the nation in questions, inventory.


Yeah but that's dangerous - it just encourages countries to carry it over in their inventory. You need enforcement and penalty otherwise it's just accounting...


Once you move into the negatives, I would say the country in question is in a serious predicament anyway; but it will depend on the compliance action plan drawn up by the enforcement branch.

Given the mechanisms can become suspended and the ability to transfer units frozen, it all becomes quite a mess really, a monument to institutional overreach.

I suspect there will be emergency meetings and other countries will invest into say? red countries like New Zealand, to meet their commitments (be rewarded credits) and help us with getting back into the clear again?

Bonus round. + 20 points for each kill.
[quote]
I guess the whole thing could be carried forward for X years, reflecting the long-term nature of such an effort and in hope that you'll eventually catchup. Moral hazard but.

Anywa, sweet to be Latvia in 2012 - they're already at 160% below commitment level. Of course that's largely due to the gutting of their economy Laughing
[quote]
I don't know what to say

I know the Kyoto Protocol has some good mechanisms, but I grow more skeptical every year of its cost / benefit and overall efficiency....

Am not about to try and offer an alternative at this stage though.....
[quote]
garethw said:
otherwise it's just accounting...


interesting phrase to use in relation to this whole thing :>
[quote]
In other news it's just been confirmed most of New Zealand's glaciers are at their smallest point on record and are continuing to shrink.

Ye Kyoto better work! It has too...
[quote]
kris_b said:
garethw said:
otherwise it's just accounting...


interesting phrase to use in relation to this whole thing :>

True - the whole thing runs the risk of just being an expensive recording of our climate sins. Hence why I think it requires action to go with it...
[quote]
Rips said:
In other news it's just been confirmed most of New Zealand's glaciers are at their smallest point on record and are continuing to shrink.


I understand the general theory behind infrared absorption by greenhouse gases, but I am still amazed by the warming prowess of C02. A tiny portion of the atmosphere but with a large proportional consequence.

It's kind of scary how this isn't just some sensationalist news item anymore, the actual effects of this problem are observable and being simultaneously detected in multiple locations around the globe.

This is really happening and faster than initially expected.

Meanwhile - see counter: http://peabodyenergy.com/default-netscape.asp