Issues and opportunities for Australia under the Kyoto Protocol

Environmental and Planning Law Journal

Volumn 20, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 459-475

  Power, Trevor M ^a  

^a MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77951713581     PISSN: 0813300X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (120)

1. COP 8 was held in New Delhi, India from 23 October to 1 November 2002. With most of the issues relating to the implementation rules of the Protocol resolved at COP 7, the COP 8 meeting dealt with mainly second order and technical issues.
2. 1A Adopted on 9 May 1992 at the Rio Earth Summit and entered into force on 21 March 1994 following ratification by 50 parties.
3. Adopted on 11 December 1997 at the third conference of the parties (COP 3) in Kyoto, Japan and is yet to enter into force.
4. As at 24 September 2002. For an up-to-date report on signature and ratification status of the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol, see the Convention's official website at http://www.unfccc.org viewed November 2003.
5. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 109.
6. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 109.
7. UNFCCC, Article 2.
8. UNFCCC, Article 4(2)(b).
9. For the purposes of the Protocol, "Annex I nations" may be defined as those parties listed in Annex I to the UNFCCC. In more pragmatic terms, Annex I lists the industrialised nations of the first world and those nations undergoing the transition to a market economy, eg the Russian Federation and Ukraine to name but two.
10. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 110.
11. A listing of the world's largest emitters can be found on the ABC's website at: http://www.abc.net.au/science/earth/climate/cfossil.htm viewed November 2003.
12. Protocol, Annex B-Party Quantified Emission Limitation or Reduction Commitment.
13. Norway at 101% of 1990 levels makes up the trio.
14. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 109.
15. Protocol, Article 25(1).
16. Kyotometer as at 31 July 2002, http://unfccc.int/resource/kpthermo.html.
17. By extrapolating current growth rates and assuming tightening emission constraints, targets are expected to become binding on the Russian Federation by 2020. Manne AS and Richels RG, US Rejection of the Kyoto Protocol: The Impact on Compliance Costs and CO2 Emissions (Paper presented to the Stanford University Energy Modelling Forum (EMF) Meeting on Burden Sharing and the Costs of Mitigation, Snowmass, Colorado, September 2001) p 6.
18. Protocol, Article 3(13)
19. Manne AS and Richels RG, US Rejection of the Kyoto Protocol: The Impact on Compliance Costs and CO2 Emissions (Paper presented to the Stanford University Energy Modelling Forum (EMF) Meeting on Burden Sharing and the Costs of Mitigation, Snowmass, Colorado, September 2001) p 1.
20. Manne AS and Richels RG, US Rejection of the Kyoto Protocol: The Impact on Compliance Costs and CO2 Emissions (Paper presented to the Stanford University Energy Modelling Forum (EMF) Meeting on Burden Sharing and the Costs of Mitigation, Snowmass, Colorado, September 2001) p 6.
21. Manne AS and Richels RG, US Rejection of the Kyoto Protocol: The Impact on Compliance Costs and CO2 Emissions (Paper presented to the Stanford University Energy Modelling Forum (EMF) Meeting on Burden Sharing and the Costs of Mitigation, Snowmass, Colorado, September 2001) p 8.
22. Jakeman G, Hester S, Woffenden K, Fisher B, Kyoto Protocol: The First Commitment Period and Beyond (2002) 9(1) (March) Australian Commodities 185.
23. Coutts D, The Resource Industries Perspective (Presentation given at Greenhouse Beyond Kyoto Conference, Canberra, 31 March to 1 April 1998) Day 1: Issues, Opportunities and Challenges.
24. McKibbin W, An Early Action Proposal with Known Costs: A Sensible and Realistic Option for Emissions Trading in Australia (Paper presented at the AIC 2nd Annual Emissions Trading Forum, Sydney 30-31 August 1999) p 3.
25. McKibbin W, An Early Action Proposal with Known Costs: A Sensible and Realistic Option for Emissions Trading in Australia (Paper presented at the AIC 2nd Annual Emissions Trading Forum, Sydney 30-31 August 1999) p 3.
26. McKibbin W, An Early Action Proposal with Known Costs: A Sensible and Realistic Option for Emissions Trading in Australia (Paper presented at the AIC 2nd Annual Emissions Trading Forum, Sydney 30-31 August 1999) p 3.
27. McKibbin W, An Early Action Proposal with Known Costs: A Sensible and Realistic Option for Emissions Trading in Australia (Paper presented at the AIC 2nd Annual Emissions Trading Forum, Sydney 30-31 August 1999) p 3.
28. Manne AS and Richels RG, US Rejection of the Kyoto Protocol: The Impact on Compliance Costs and CO2 Emissions (Paper presented to the Stanford University Energy Modelling Forum (EMF) Meeting on Burden Sharing and the Costs of Mitigation, Snowmass, Colorado, September 2001) p 1.
29. Manne AS and Richels RG, US Rejection of the Kyoto Protocol: The Impact on Compliance Costs and CO2 Emissions (Paper presented to the Stanford University Energy Modelling Forum (EMF) Meeting on Burden Sharing and the Costs of Mitigation, Snowmass, Colorado, September 2001) p 6.
30. Protocol, Article 6(1).
31. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 114.
32. Protocol, Article 12(5)(c).
33. International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), Comments on the CDM Project Design Document Version 01 (Draft 3 July 2002) p 1.
34. International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), Comments on the CDM Project Design Document Version 01 (Draft 3 July 2002) p 2.
35. International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), Comments on the CDM Project Design Document Version 01 (Draft 3 July 2002) p 1.
36. International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), Comments on the CDM Project Design Document Version 01 (Draft 3 July 2002) p 1.
37. International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), Comments on the CDM Project Design Document Version 01 (Draft 3 July 2002) p 2.
38. Jakeman G, Hester S, Woffenden K, Fisher B, Kyoto Protocol: The First Commitment Period and Beyond (2002) 9(1) (March) Australian Commodities 178.
39. Jakeman G, Hester S, Woffenden K, Fisher B, Kyoto Protocol: The First Commitment Period and Beyond (2002) 9(1) (March) Australian Commodities 178.
40. Jakeman G, Hester S, Woffenden K, Fisher B, Kyoto Protocol: The First Commitment Period and Beyond (2002) 9(1) (March) Australian Commodities 178.
41. Protocol, Article 3(4).
42. Jakeman G, Hester S, Woffenden K, Fisher B, Kyoto Protocol: The First Commitment Period and Beyond (2002) 9(1) (March) Australian Commodities 178.
43. COP 7, Annex (FCCC/CO/2001/13/Add.1) para 7.
44. Jakeman G, Hester S, Woffenden K, Fisher B, Kyoto Protocol: The First Commitment Period and Beyond (2002) 9(1) (March) Australian Commodities 178.
45. UNFCCC, Review of the Implementation of Commitments and of other Provisions of the Convention: Decision 5/CP.6 Implementation of the Buenos Aires Plan of Action (FCCC/CP/2001/L.7, 24 July 2001) Annex Part VI, Item 1(5).
46. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 115.
47. Jakeman G, Hester S, Woffenden K, Fisher B, Kyoto Protocol: The First Commitment Period and Beyond (2002) 9(1) (March) Australian Commodities 178.
48. AGO, National Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1999 (Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 2001).
49. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 110.
50. Hon Dr David Kemp, Federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage, and Alexander Downer, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Joint Media Release, 15 August 2002.
51. For the purposes of the Protocol, there are actually six gases listed in Annex A which are to be included in each party's reportable emissions. Those gases are: Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), Nitrous Oxide (N2O), Hydroflurocarbons (HFCs), Perflurocarbons (PFCs) and Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6). While some gases are worse than others (eg CH4 has around 21 times the greenhouse potential of CO2), for the sake of reporting requirements the Protocol requires all emissions to be converted into CO2 equivalent amounts as CO2 is by far the most prevalent greenhouse gas.
52. See Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 112.
53. Jakeman G, Hester S, Woffenden K, Fisher B, Kyoto Protocol: The First Commitment Period and Beyond (2002) 9(1) (March) Australian Commodities 181.
54. Jakeman G, Hester S, Woffenden K, Fisher B, Kyoto Protocol: The First Commitment Period and Beyond (2002) 9(1) (March) Australian Commodities 181.
55. Dr David Kemp
56. Dr David Kemp
57. Climate Action Network Australia (CANA), Developing Nations and the Kyoto Protocol-The Key Issues (Briefing Paper, May 2001) http://www.climateaustralia.org viewed November 2003.
58. Climate Action Network Australia (CANA), Developing Nations and the Kyoto Protocol-The Key Issues (Briefing Paper, May 2001) http://www.climateaustralia.org viewed November 2003.
59. The G77 is actually a coalition of 127 UN Member third world countries which aims to provide the means for the developing world to articulate and provide for its collective economic interest, see http://www.g77.org viewed November 2003.
60. Hunter D, Salzman J, Zaelke D, International Environmental Law and Policy (Foundation Press, New York, 1998) p 636.
61. Climate Action Network Australia (CANA), Developing Nations and the Kyoto Protocol-The Key Issues (Briefing Paper, May 2001) http://www.climateaustralia.org viewed November 2003.
62. Climate Action Network Australia (CANA), Developing Nations and the Kyoto Protocol-The Key Issues (Briefing Paper, May 2001) http://www.climateaustralia.org viewed November 2003.
63. Turton H and Hamilton C, Updating Per Capita Emissions for Industrialised Countries (The Australia Institute, August 2002) p 2.
64. Climate Action Network Australia (CANA), Developing Nations and the Kyoto Protocol-The Key Issues (Briefing Paper, May 2001) http://www.climateaustralia.org viewed November 2003.
65. Protocol, Article 3(9).
66. Jakeman G, Hester S, Woffenden K, Fisher B, Kyoto Protocol: The First Commitment Period and Beyond (2002) 9(1) (March) Australian Commodities 177.
67. Interview with Dr David Kemp, live from the WSSD, Johannesburg, South Africa, on Lateline (ABC, 20 Sept 2002).
68. Coutts D, The Resource Industries Perspective (Presentation given at Greenhouse Beyond Kyoto Conference, Canberra, 31 March to 1 April 1998) Day 1: Issues, Opportunities and Challenges.
69. Coutts D, The Resource Industries Perspective (Presentation given at Greenhouse Beyond Kyoto Conference, Canberra, 31 March to 1 April 1998) Day 1: Issues, Opportunities and Challenges.
70. Hunter D, Salzman J, Zaelke D, International Environmental Law and Policy (Foundation Press, New York, 1998) p 665.
71. Dr David Kemp
72. Dr David Kemp
73. Hon Dr David Kemp, Federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage, and Alexander Downer, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Joint Media Release, 15 August 2002.
74. Hon Dr David Kemp, Federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage, and Alexander Downer, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Joint Media Release, 15 August 2002.
75. Hon Dr David Kemp, Federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage, and Alexander Downer, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Joint Media Release, 15 August 2002.
76. Hon Dr David Kemp, Federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage, and Alexander Downer, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Joint Media Release, 15 August 2002.
77. Climate Action Network Australia (CANA), Developing Nations and the Kyoto Protocol-The Key Issues (Briefing Paper, May 2001) http://www.climateaustralia.org viewed November 2003.
78. Climate Action Network Australia (CANA), Developing Nations and the Kyoto Protocol-The Key Issues (Briefing Paper, May 2001) http://www.climateaustralia.org viewed November 2003.
79. Climate Action Network Australia (CANA), Developing Nations and the Kyoto Protocol-The Key Issues (Briefing Paper, May 2001) http://www.climateaustralia.org viewed November 2003.
80. Australian Coal Association, http://www.australiancoal.com.au viewed November 2003.
81. Climate Action Network Australia (CANA), Developing Nations and the Kyoto Protocol-The Key Issues (Briefing Paper, May 2001) http://www.climateaustralia.org viewed November 2003.
82. White M, Faking it-Australia Playing a Cheat's Game with Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Joint publication of Greenpeace, Australian Conservation Foundation and Friends of the Earth, 2000) p 9.
83. For a comprehensive analysis of the proposed European emissions trading system see, Smith M and Chaumeil T, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading within the European Union: An Overview of the Proposed European Directive (2002) 13 Fordham Environmental Law Journal 207.
84. McKibbin W, An Early Action Proposal with Known Costs: A Sensible and Realistic Option for Emissions Trading in Australia (Paper presented at the AIC 2nd Annual Emissions Trading Forum, Sydney 30-31 August 1999) p 1.
85. McKibbin W, An Early Action Proposal with Known Costs: A Sensible and Realistic Option for Emissions Trading in Australia (Paper presented at the AIC 2nd Annual Emissions Trading Forum, Sydney 30-31 August 1999) p 1.
86. McKibbin W, An Early Action Proposal with Known Costs: A Sensible and Realistic Option for Emissions Trading in Australia (Paper presented at the AIC 2nd Annual Emissions Trading Forum, Sydney 30-31 August 1999) p 1.
87. McKibbin W, An Early Action Proposal with Known Costs: A Sensible and Realistic Option for Emissions Trading in Australia (Paper presented at the AIC 2nd Annual Emissions Trading Forum, Sydney 30-31 August 1999) p 2.
88. McKibbin W, An Early Action Proposal with Known Costs: A Sensible and Realistic Option for Emissions Trading in Australia (Paper presented at the AIC 2nd Annual Emissions Trading Forum, Sydney 30-31 August 1999) p 2.
89. McKibbin W, An Early Action Proposal with Known Costs: A Sensible and Realistic Option for Emissions Trading in Australia (Paper presented at the AIC 2nd Annual Emissions Trading Forum, Sydney 30-31 August 1999) p 2.
90. Warwick J McKibbin of the Australian National University and the Brookings Institution.
91. McKibbin W, Shackleton R and Wilcoxen P, The Potential Effects of International Carbon Emissions Permit Trading Under the Kyoto Protocol (1998) in Economic Modelling of Climate Change (OECD Workshop Report, OECD Paris) pp 49-80.
92. McKibbin W, Shackleton R and Wilcoxen P, The Potential Effects of International Carbon Emissions Permit Trading Under the Kyoto Protocol (1998) in Economic Modelling of Climate Change (OECD Workshop Report, OECD Paris) pp 49-80.
93. McKibbin W, An Early Action Proposal with Known Costs: A Sensible and Realistic Option for Emissions Trading in Australia (Paper presented at the AIC 2nd Annual Emissions Trading Forum, Sydney 30-31 August 1999) p 4.
94. McKibbin W, An Early Action Proposal with Known Costs: A Sensible and Realistic Option for Emissions Trading in Australia (Paper presented at the AIC 2nd Annual Emissions Trading Forum, Sydney 30-31 August 1999) p 5.
95. McKibbin W, An Early Action Proposal with Known Costs: A Sensible and Realistic Option for Emissions Trading in Australia (Paper presented at the AIC 2nd Annual Emissions Trading Forum, Sydney 30-31 August 1999) p 5.
96. McKibbin W, An Early Action Proposal with Known Costs: A Sensible and Realistic Option for Emissions Trading in Australia (Paper presented at the AIC 2nd Annual Emissions Trading Forum, Sydney 30-31 August 1999) p 8.
97. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 116.
98. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 116.
99. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 116.
100. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 116.
101. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 117.
102. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 117.
103. Suzuki D and Dressel H, Good News for a Change: Hope for a Troubled Planet (Allen & Unwin, 2002) pp 176-77.
104. See the Forestry Rights Registration Act 1990 (Tas), Conveyancing (Forestry Rights) Amendment Act 1987 (NSW), Carbon Rights Legislation Act 1998 (NSW), Forestry Act 1959 (Qld), Forest Property Act 2000 (SA), Forest Rights Act 1996 (Vic) and Conservation and Land Management Act 1984 (WA). At present, the ACT and the Northern Territory do not have in place any legislation dealing with carbon sequestration rights.
105. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 123.
106. Butt P, " Carbon Sequestration Rights-A New Interest in Land?" (1999) 72 ALJ 235.
107. Forestry Act 1959 (Qld), ss 97E-97L.
108. Forestry Act 1959 (Qld), s 61J(7). While lacking any specific legislation, it is likely that Tasmania would also endorse carbon sequestration rights as "profits" under the Forestry Rights Registration Act 1990 (Tas), s 3.
109. Consider also the Victorian scheme where an interest in land is created which cannot be traded separately from the land itself, and Western Australia where a system is being developed to recognise the registration of carbon interests in land.
110. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 124.
111. Millett M, "Plant Now and Pollute Later Deal with Japan", The Sydney Morning Herald (14 February 2000).
112. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 125.
113. UNFCCC, Decision 5/CP.6-Implementation of the Buenos Aires Plan of Action (FCCC/CP/2001/L.7, 24 July 2001 (COP 6 Part 2), Bonn, 16-27 July 2001) Annex Pt VII, Item 1(e).
114. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 126.
115. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 126.
116. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 126.
117. Jones D, The Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Sinks and Integrated Environmental Regulation: An Australian Perspective (2002) 19 EPLJ 127.
118. The US target is 93% of 1990 level emissions. See Annex B of the Protocol for a full list of Annex I targets.
119. Ryan JC, On Climate, States Lead (Christian Science Monitor, 25 July 2002) http://www.csmonitor.com/.
120. White M, Faking it-Australia Playing a Cheat's Game with Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Joint publication of Greenpeace, Australian Conservation Foundation and Friends of the Earth, 2000) p 10.