David beat me to the punch on this one, and probably with a far more
coherent rendition of the politics. For those interested in some good
readings on these matters, see:

.       http://www.igsd.org/documents/Science-2012-Velders-922-3.pdf
.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/21/world/asia/global-demand-for-air-condition
ing-forces-tough-environmental-choices.html?pagewanted=all

Two startling figures that always leap out the most at me on this issue:

* "Total avoided net annual ODS emissions [from the Montreal Protocol] are
estimated to be equivalent to about 10 Gt CO2/year in 2010, which is about
five times the annual reduction target of the Kyoto Protocol for 2008-2012;
* Projected increases in the use of HFCs, if unabated, could means that HFCs
could account for an astounding 27% of warming by 2030

wil 


Dr. Wil Burns, Associate Director
Master of Science - Energy Policy & Climate Program 
Johns Hopkins University
1717 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Room 104J
Washington, DC  20036
650.281.9126 (Mobile)
202.452.8713 (Fax)
[email protected]
http://energy.jhu.edu
SSRN site (selected publications): http://ssrn.com/author=240348

 
Skype ID: Wil.Burns

Teaching Climate/Energy Law & Policy Blog: http://www.teachingclimatelaw.org
EPC Facebook page: facebook.com/JHUEPC



-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Downie, David
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2012 8:57 AM
To: [email protected]; GEP-ED
Subject: RE: [gep-ed] Regime complexes on ozone and climate change

Peter:



HCFCs are regulated under the Montreal Protocol amendments and have
phase-out dates.  HFCs are not ozone-depleting substances.  Micronesia, USA,
Mexico and Canada have proposed amending the Protocol to include them under
the argument that they likely would not exist if not for the CFC and HCFC
phase-outs and thus even thought they are GHG, it is still the Protocol's
responsibility.  They also note that since the Protocol works, it would be
more effective to address them in the ozone regime than in the climate
regime.  The EU states and other countries support the proposed amendment.
China, India, Saudi Arabia and others oppose it, saying that the Montreal
Protocol cannot address non-ODS, addressing HFCs would take multilateral
fund money away from finishing the HCFC and methyl bromide phase-outs and
addressing ODS banks, and that putting HFCs under the ozone regime could
upset the climate negotiations.  This stalemate has gone on for several
years in the ozone negotiations (i.e. - annual amendment proposals and
debate but no consensus).



Addressing the HFC loophole in climate funding would help reduce objections
to addressing HFCs in one of the regimes, and proponents of addressing HFCs,
including those that want to do so under Montreal, have been moving in this
direction for several years.  This is the discussion referred to in the
article.  The HFC credits discussed in the article represent a `huge moral
hazard' and create a large and somewhat perverse economc incentive to oppose
addressing HFCs.  Those that want to deal with HFCs asap have also proposed
an agreement or statement of some type under the UNFCCC umbrella giving the
go ahead to the ozone regime to address but this has also been blocked.



David



---------------------------------------------------------
David Downie
Director, Program on the Environment
Associate Professor of Politics
Fairfield University

217 Donnarumma Hall
1073 North Benson Road, Fairfield, CT  06824 [email protected];
203-254-4000, ext 3504
http://www.amazon.com/David-L.-Downie/e/B004APYFPC/ref=ntt_athr_dp_pel_2
________________________________
From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Peter
Haas [[email protected]]
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2012 11:31 AM
To: GEP-ED
Subject: [gep-ed] Regime complexes on ozone and climate change

can anybody please explain the details of this issue to me?  I thought that
HFCs were regulated under the Montreal Protocol amendments?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/31/us-un-climate-idUSBRE87U0RQ2012083
1
Peter M. Haas
Professor
Department of Political Science
216 Thompson Hall
UMASS - Amherst


Reply via email to