Weather Project: What steps have countries taken
to curb carbon emissions?
Information: Marina Ratnasingham
Poster: Angelie Kennedy
Teacher: Mr.Alphonso
Class: 2NC 2D
Gas Emissions
There are several countries that are willing to curb gas emissions. The United States had a
meeting with 7 other countries and they agreed that the temperature of the planet should not
go up by more than 2 degrees over the pre-industrial levels. As well all the countries agreed to
take meaningful steps between now and the midterm maybe 2020, 2025 but to take steps in
the midterm to lessen their carbon emissions. Russia, Germany, Italy and Iran are an export
driven economy having to do with oil and gases. So for these two countries, especially in the
midst of a global economic downturn, to agree to restrict those commercial ties would be a
sacrifice. Singapore is a wealthy a global refining and manufacturing country had said that they
will do more to lessen its carbon emissions but they say additional steps depend on the shape
of a broader pact to fight climate change.
Singapore has become a focus for environmentalists who point to the nation's wealth and
energy-intensive economy and say the government should adopt emissions targets. Small
countries like Singapore or the Bahamas are alternative energy disadvantaged but there was
still much the country has done, and could do, to tackle greenhouse gas emissions. Singapore,
with power generation capacity of more than 10,000 megawatts, has switched to less polluting
natural gas as the main fuel source for electricity, although some larger power stations still use
a proportion of dirtier fuel oil. The present annual growth rate in the number of cars on
Singapore's congested roads is 3 percent. "We're going to cut that down to 1.5 percent." Top
climate change negotiator Chew Tai Soo "We will have a plan to put on the table if there's a
global agreement. When there's agreement, Singapore will be part of that agreement," he said.
China, the world’s biggest polluter made an elusive deal to fight climate control and invest in
clean energy. The proposals, delivered by Hu Jintao, the Chinese president included the
promise of a decrease in the carbon intensity of China's economy, the amount of emissions for
each unit of economic output, by 2020. Hu said that his country would plant forests across an
area the size of Norway, and generate 15% of its energy needs from renewables within a
decade. China’s existing Environmental Protection Law, last amended in 1989, sets a maximum
penalty of 100,000 yuan ($15,600) on companies that violate regulations, a fee often below the
cost of corrective action. China is not the only battleground for the debate on a carbon tax.
Expert opinions on whether a cap-and-trade or carbon tax mechanism is the most effective way
to reduce carbon diverge widely. While a cap-and-trade policy is effective at limiting the
quantity of emissions allowed, a carbon tax is comparatively easier to enforce. A carbon tax
“depends on command-and-control regulation,” which, given often weak monitoring capacity in
China, would invite polluters “to rig data about carbon emissions when it comes to fee and tax
collections.” Among carbon tax advocates, there is little consensus on the optimal tax rate or
the price on carbon that can balance the cost of mitigation with the benefits from reducing
climate-damaging CO2 emissions. The 2007 UK-published Stern Review, the most
comprehensive effort to assign climate change an economic cost, called for a harmonized
carbon tax of $350 per ton of carbon (which is equal to $95 per ton of carbon dioxide) in 2015.
Many economists have taken issue with this rate, suggesting that one-tenth of that – $35 per
ton of carbon or $9.50 per ton of carbon dioxide – is a more appropriate rate. That would
translate to roughly $1 tax on each gallon of gas versus 10 cents a gallon.
India is ready to calculate the amount of planet-warming gas emissions it could cut with
domestic actions to fight climate change, the environment minister said, but will not accept
internationally binding targets. India, where about half a billion people do not have access to
electricity, said its greenhouse gas emissions could double or more than triple to 7.3 billion
tonnes by 2031. But its per-capita emissions would still be below the global average.
Deforestation causes between 15% and 20% of the world’s carbon emissions- as much as the
whole world wide transport sector. The technology needed to stop this is present- as one
panelist put it “we already know how not to cut down a tree” and with satellite imaging, such
as that provided by Google Earth Engine, it is now possible to monitor and track deforestation
with great accuracy. Therefore stopping deforestation is one of the best tools available to fight
climate change. If not worded properly, REDD[ Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and
Forest Degradation in Developing Countries] could carry bad encouragement that could actually
support deforestation. Without safeguards, companies could receive payments for the
adaptation of natural forests into plantations. Forest plantations are not only bad for climate
change (they sequester only a fraction of the carbon of a natural forest) but can also carry
devastating side effects to the environment.
Bibliography:
http://www.takepart.com/news/2009/12/17/redd-letter-days-us-announces-1bn-in-funding-to-curbemissions-from-deforestation
http://energy.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2009/05/12/china-floats-carbon-tax-plan-as-a-means-to-curbemissions/
http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/article189317.ece
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/sep/22/climate-change-china-us-united-nations
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5871NV20090908
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/europe/july-dec09/g8_07-09.html