It's All Over: Kyoto Protocol Loses Four Big Nations

Image: Sierra Club Compass
Saturday, 28 May 2011 16:58 Agence France-Presse

DEAUVILLE, France: Russia, Japan and Canada told the G8 they would not join a second round of carbon cuts under the Kyoto Protocol at United Nations talks this year and the US reiterated it would remain outside the treaty, European diplomats have said.

The future of the Kyoto Protocol has become central to efforts to negotiate reductions of carbon emissions under the UN’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, whose annual meeting will take place in Durban, South Africa, from November 28 to December 9.

Developed countries signed the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. They agreed to legally binding commitments on curbing greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming.

Those pledges expire at the end of next year. Developing countries say a second round is essential to secure global agreements.

But the leaders of Russian, Japan and Canada confirmed they would not join a new Kyoto agreement, the diplomats said.

They argued that the Kyoto format did not require developing countries, including China, the world’s No. 1 carbon emitter, to make targeted emission cuts.

At last Thursday’s G8 dinner the US President, Barack Obama, confirmed Washington would not join an updated Kyoto Protocol, the diplomats said.

The US, the second-largest carbon emitter, signed the protocol in 1997 but in 2001 the then president, George W. Bush, said he would not put it to the Senate for ratification.

Agence France-Press, 29 May 2011

h/t to Dr. Benny Peiser

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

193 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
May 29, 2011 9:32 am

I am proud to be a Canadian.

chris y
May 29, 2011 9:32 am

“The US, the second-largest carbon emitter, signed the protocol in 1997 but in 2001 the then president, George W. Bush, said he would not put it to the Senate for ratification.”
I didn’t realize George W. Bush was president in 1997, 1998, 1999 and 2000…

May 29, 2011 9:36 am

There’s that threatened polar bear again. Doing double duty in front of the Peace Tower in cold, cold Ottawa. And you can bet the Chinese are not on board with very much of anything.

Peter
May 29, 2011 9:36 am

I see this year they’re being very careful to have their meeting in a place where there’s little or no possibility of cold weather

Luther Wu
May 29, 2011 9:39 am

I await ‘their’ next move…

May 29, 2011 9:40 am

chris y,
Among the CAGW true believers, everything is George W Bush’s fault.

Simon
May 29, 2011 9:40 am

Meanwhile, UK politicians reaffirm their commitment to pursue “moral leadership” on the issue, systematically ruining the landscape with wind farms, eroding civil liberties, and hamstringing industry. Good one boys.

DJ
May 29, 2011 9:42 am

“…UN’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, whose annual meeting will take place in Durban, South Africa, from November 28 to December 9….”
Someone is going to make a fortune there selling parkas and mukluks, because for the first time in history, snow will fall in November in South Africa.

bubbagyro
May 29, 2011 9:43 am

Chris, please read the article again.
Another accomplishment of the W. He had to undo quite a few clownish moves of Slick Willie. Unfortunately, Fannie and Freddie were not among those that needed urgent remediation.

tallbloke
May 29, 2011 9:44 am

Peter says:
May 29, 2011 at 9:36 am
I see this year they’re being very careful to have their meeting in a place where there’s little or no possibility of cold weather

Lol. Yes, South Africa near mid-summer should be ok .

May 29, 2011 9:45 am

Good news.

Simon
May 29, 2011 9:45 am

Meanwhile, UK politicians reaffirm their commitment to pursue “moral leadership” on the issue, systematically ruining the landscape with innefective wind farms, eroding civil liberties, artificially raising the cost of energy, and hamstringing industry. Good one boys.

May 29, 2011 9:47 am

y: May 29, 2011 at 9:32 am
@Smokey: May 29, 2011 at 9:40 am
No more calls, we have a winner!
Isn’t it amazing how William Jefferson Blythe Clinton just disappeared?

Sam Hall
May 29, 2011 9:49 am

The US, the second-largest carbon emitter, signed the protocol in 1997 but in 2001 the then president, George W. Bush, said he would not put it to the Senate for ratification.

Now that is just too much. President Clinton authorized VP Gore to sign the Kyoto Protocol. Then the US Senate passed the Byrd-Hagel resolution 95-0 in July 1997 saying no way. Clinton is the one that didn’t send it to the Senate.

Byrd-Hagel resolution
Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the conditions for the United States becoming a signatory to any international agreement on greenhouse gas emissions under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
. (sniped a bunch of Whereas clauses)
.
.
Whereas greenhouse gas emissions of Developing Country Parties are rapidly increasing and are expected to surpass emissions of the United States and other OECD countries as early as 2015;
Whereas the Department of State has declared that it is critical for the Parties to the Convention to include Developing Country Parties in the next steps for global action and, therefore, has proposed that consideration of additional steps to include limitations on Developing Country Parties’ greenhouse gas emissions would not begin until after a protocol or other legal instrument is adopted in Kyoto, Japan in December 1997;
Whereas the exemption for Developing Country Parties is inconsistent with the need for global action on climate change and is environmentally flawed;
Whereas the Senate strongly believes that the proposals under negotiation, because of the disparity of treatment between Annex I Parties and Developing Countries and the level of required emission reductions, could result in serious harm to the United States economy, including significant job loss, trade disadvantages, increased energy and consumer costs, or any combination thereof; and
Whereas it is desirable that a bipartisan group of Senators be appointed by the Majority and Minority Leaders of the Senate for the purpose of monitoring the status of negotiations on Global Climate Change and reporting periodically to the Senate on those negotiations: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that–
(1) the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol to, or other agreement regarding, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change of 1992, at negotiations in Kyoto in December 1997, or thereafter, which would–
(A) mandate new commitments to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions for the Annex I Parties, unless the protocol or other agreement also mandates new specific scheduled commitments to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions for Developing Country Parties within the same compliance period, or
(B) would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States; and
(2) any such protocol or other agreement which would require the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification should be accompanied by a detailed explanation of any legislation or regulatory actions that may be required to implement the protocol or other agreement and should also be accompanied by an analysis of the detailed financial costs and other impacts on the economy of the United States which would be incurred by the implementation of the protocol or other agreement.

Byrd-Hagel Resolution

grayman
May 29, 2011 9:53 am

Tallbloke, Hopefully Gore will be thier and bring his goreffect with him to put a damper on things!

May 29, 2011 9:59 am

Looks like the UK is still part of this lunatic scheme
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol#Successor

Nuke
May 29, 2011 10:00 am

Once again, it was William J. “It depends upon what the meaning of ‘is’ is” who signed the Kyoto Treaty but didn’t submit it to the Senate for ratification.
BTW: Obama didn’t sign Kyoto, either, a fact that is equally true and just as irrelevant.

MattN
May 29, 2011 10:01 am

Is that a Fat Lady I hear warming up?

Tom Gray
May 29, 2011 10:17 am

In actuality, the Canadian government (i.e theruling Liberal Party) signed and ratified the Kyoto treaty only for show. They did absolutely nothing to impelment it. It was designed to show how morally superior Canada was over the US. This would play well in the Liberal Party bastion of Toronto.
In the recent election, the Liberals lost most of their support. The speculation about them now is about whether they will simply fade away or merge with the social democratic NDP. Theyeven chose a former NDP prime minster of the province of Ontario as their intrim leader. He is remembered as one of the worst prime minsters that Ontario ever had.

DirkH
May 29, 2011 10:22 am

Dang! They noticed the ruse! How can we now bring forward the Great Transformation, Herr Schellnhuber? SCHELLNHUBER!
http://www.wbgu.de/fileadmin/templates/dateien/veroeffentlichungen/hauptgutachten/jg2011/wbgu_jg2011_kurz_en.pdf

Peter
May 29, 2011 10:26 am

DJ, it’s actually not that uncommon to have snow falling in South Africa in midsummer – but in the mountains. That’s about 100 miles from Durban and 12,000 feet up.

Latitude
May 29, 2011 10:31 am

Well, that just hung the UK, New Zealand, and Australia out to dry………..

pat
May 29, 2011 10:38 am

This leaves NZ, Australia, and the UK as the last of the true believers of any consequence
And what is the point about lying about Bush’s role?

May 29, 2011 10:43 am

They argued that the Kyoto format did not require developing countries, including China, the world’s No. 1 carbon emitter, to make targeted emission cuts.
A good way to avoid discussions about the real reasons (the reality) …

John David Galt
May 29, 2011 10:45 am

The European Union may as well replace their flag with a tombstone, and engrave the Precautionary Principle on it. Either that or start listening to Vaclav Havel.

1 2 3 8