Press releases
05.August 2005 - 05:28
Kyoto got a tough competitor, which could save the treaty, however
Kyoto got a tough competitor, which, however, could save the system.
– The treaty between six countries can cause a crisis in EU climate policy
”The six-country climate agreement poses tough competition to the Kyoto Protocol, but it should not be dismissed immediately”, says MEP Eija-Riitta Korhola about the energy and climate agreement reached by the US and five other countries, announced in Laos last week. The agreement between the six countries is not a modest project even next to the Kyoto Protocol, which has been ratified by 140 countries: its signatories cover around half of the world’s GDP, population, energy consumption and emissions. ”Even though the new undertaking is a blow to the authority of the UN climate treaty, Kyoto, it can even save the worst deficiencies of Kyoto. Therefore, environmental organisations should think this over before a total rejection.”
”In theory, Kyoto can be a good approach, but in practice, it is a catastrophe, as it does not put limits on the increase in emissions of developing countries – and it is exactly there that two thirds of the increase is taking place. In this way, the protocol causes carbon leakage in the global economy, i.e. the emigration of production to places, where emission caps and high environmental norms do not exist. Kyoto is also inefficient: reducing emissions at the speed that Kyoto suggests is a road far too slow to tackle the problem of climate warming. It is essential to also take direct technological leaps”, Korhola states.
”Therefore, the new treaty can truly support the climate goals. China’s and India’s participation in this new technology partnership is an indisputably good piece of news to the world: it will prevent irresponsible investments from an environmental point of view, and in this way, it will patch exactly those loopholes that Kyoto has created. Thus, it also rectifies the conditions for competition as well as reduces the cost of environmentally-friendly technology.”
I would not be surprised if Russia joined the treaty in the future, after first having enjoyed the financing provided by Kyoto. Also Finland should quickly investigate the possibility of close cooperation with the band of six. In Finland, we have top-level know-how in the field of environmental technology, and this could provide a big market opportunity for us, too.
Korhola estimates, however, that the novel situation derails EU climate policy into a crisis of some extent. ”This underlines the stiffness of our climate policy. The concept does not reduce emissions, but increases bureaucracy. Emissions trading was criticised, when its impact on rising electricity and fuel prices and the weakening of the competitiveness of European, environmentally conscious industries was noticed. Now, the latest, that is has become clear that emissions trading will not become a global system, we have to ask ourselves, if the unilateral road the EU has taken is smart”.
Published: August 5, 2005
Kyoto got a tough competitor, which, however, could save the system.
– The treaty between six countries can cause a crisis in EU climate policy
”The six-country climate agreement poses tough competition to the Kyoto Protocol, but it should not be dismissed immediately”, says MEP Eija-Riitta Korhola about the energy and climate agreement reached by the US and five other countries, announced in Laos last week. The agreement between the six countries is not a modest project even next to the Kyoto Protocol, which has been ratified by 140 countries: its signatories cover around half of the world’s GDP, population, energy consumption and emissions. ”Even though the new undertaking is a blow to the authority of the UN climate treaty, Kyoto, it can even save the worst deficiencies of Kyoto. Therefore, environmental organisations should think this over before a total rejection.”
”In theory, Kyoto can be a good approach, but in practice, it is a catastrophe, as it does not put limits on the increase in emissions of developing countries – and it is exactly there that two thirds of the increase is taking place. In this way, the protocol causes carbon leakage in the global economy, i.e. the emigration of production to places, where emission caps and high environmental norms do not exist. Kyoto is also inefficient: reducing emissions at the speed that Kyoto suggests is a road far too slow to tackle the problem of climate warming. It is essential to also take direct technological leaps”, Korhola states.
”Therefore, the new treaty can truly support the climate goals. China’s and India’s participation in this new technology partnership is an indisputably good piece of news to the world: it will prevent irresponsible investments from an environmental point of view, and in this way, it will patch exactly those loopholes that Kyoto has created. Thus, it also rectifies the conditions for competition as well as reduces the cost of environmentally-friendly technology.”
I would not be surprised if Russia joined the treaty in the future, after first having enjoyed the financing provided by Kyoto. Also Finland should quickly investigate the possibility of close cooperation with the band of six. In Finland, we have top-level know-how in the field of environmental technology, and this could provide a big market opportunity for us, too.
Korhola estimates, however, that the novel situation derails EU climate policy into a crisis of some extent. ”This underlines the stiffness of our climate policy. The concept does not reduce emissions, but increases bureaucracy. Emissions trading was criticised, when its impact on rising electricity and fuel prices and the weakening of the competitiveness of European, environmentally conscious industries was noticed. Now, the latest, that is has become clear that emissions trading will not become a global system, we have to ask ourselves, if the unilateral road the EU has taken is smart”.
Published: August 5, 2005