On May 23

On this day in ...
... 2002, Iceland ratified the Kyoto Protocol, thus satisfying a key prerequisite to entry into force of that 1998 pact; that is, ratification by at least 55 states party to the 1992 U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change. A 2d step would be met with Russia's ratification 2 years later, so that the Protocol would enter into force on February 16, 2005. As detailed in posts available here, Kyoto's since ceded ground to the Copenhagen process.

(Prior May 23 posts are here, here, and here.)

Post-Copenhagen

To the disappointment of many, but the surprise of few, the Fifteenth Conference of the Parties (COP-15) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, held in December 2009 in Copenhagen, failed to produce an agreement with binding carbon emissions reductions targets.
The original plan had been to complete negotiations for a new international legal agreement on climate change that would cover the post-Kyoto period. (The Kyoto Protocol’s commitment period comes to an end in 2012.) As the meeting approached, it became clear that this was unlikely to occur. But nobody expected what did happen . . . .
From all reports, the Copenhagen negotiations were completely deadlocked until December 18th, when U.S. President Barak Obama arrived for the last scheduled day of the conference. Through his meetings with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, and South African President Jacob Zuma, a political agreement for the Copenhagen Accord emerged. After world leaders drew on their inner college student and pulled a raucous all-nighter of negotiations, COP-15 agreed to "take note" of this Accord.
This Copenhagen Accord is clearly a political rather than legal agreement. It many flaws (they are well catalogued here and here.) But the agreement did set a January 31 deadline for developed states to declare their own emissions reductions targets and developing countries to declare "nationally appropriate" voluntary mitigation measures. That deadline is fast approaching.
The Copenhagen Accord got something of a boost yesterday when China, Brazil and India announced that they would submit their voluntary mitigation measures by the deadline. No amount of voluntary measures, or self-declared emissions reductions can ensure that we actually reduce our global carbon footprint to a sustainable level, but at least this movement may bode well for the Mexico City meeting this December.
At the same time, countries most threatened by climate change are not waiting around for an international agreement. For example, the Federated State of Micronesia requested that the Czech Environment Ministry to conduct a transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)before authorizing modifications to the Czech Republic's biggest industrial carbon emitter. Micronesia asserted that it:

has reasonable grounds to believe that its territory will be affected by the significant environmental impacts [from the facility.]

As low-lying nations become increasingly desperate, we can probably expect more of them to take this tack.

On December 11, ...

... 1997 (10 years ago today), at an international conference in Japan, the Kyoto Protocol to the 1992 U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change was opened for signature. Earlier this month Australia's new Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, "ratified the Kyoto Protocol as the first formal act of his Government," "sparking a sustained burst of applause on the floor" at the 13th Convention conference in Bali, Indonesia, and leaving "the United States isolated as the only industrialized country to refuse to sign Kyoto." In the developing world, the resistance of China further poses obstacles to the Protocol. Yesterday former U.S. Vice President Albert Gore took both countries to task in his Nobel Peace Prize speech.
... 1981, more than 200 children, women, and men in the village of El Mozote, El Salvador, were "were deliberately and systematically executed in groups" after having spent "the night locked in their homes" by units of the government's Atlacatl Battalion. Accounts of the grim details may be found here and here.

Climate change conference opens in Bali

To your right, the Rainbow Warrior arriving in Bali (photo credit, Reuters), where over 10,000 state and non-state participants from close to 190 countries are meeting to discuss post-2012 efforts to avoid the disastrous effects of climate change awaiting the world. Post 2012, that is, post-Kyoto. Hearing a playback of GW Bush on the radio this morning after “unsigning” the Kyoto Protocol, saying that American economic interests came first, one would think Kyoto and the Bali conference are of no consequence to the US. Though the tenor of administration comments have changed somewhat, the US says it is still "not ready” for mandatory emissions caps. Instead, the Bush administration began talks in September with other “major economies” to discuss voluntary caps. While some might say he’s at least doing something, and, according to some reports, the Lieberman-Warner climate change bill seems likely to pass in the Senate at least, many argue that Bush’s alternative negotiations work to undercut Kyoto and long-term UN-led efforts to address global warming. Indeed, the US, which is the world’s greatest producer of greenhouse gases, is the only major industrialized nation not to accept the Kyoto Protocol’s binding emissions cuts. US refusal is ostensibly based on the fact that less developed major polluters like China and India are not bound to make the same cuts as developed nations, but it does little to encourage them to limit emissions, even voluntarily.
For the second time since GWB took office, I’ve been proud of Jacques Chirac, despite my dislike of his domestic politics: Chirac said “non” to Iraq, “oui” to Kyoto, and “you’re intolerably irresponsible on this issue” to Bush.
(Tip: see 1 of the furriest Bali demonstrations below)

Climate Change and Urban Growth

In a very interesting intersection of the international with the local, California and San Bernardino County reached settlement yesterday in a suit challenging the county’s growth plan on climate change grounds. Under the settlement, the disputed general plan will remain in effect, but “[t]he County agrees to use best efforts to prepare and adopt the General Plan amendment, the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan, and the environmental review of those documents… within 30 months” of the settlement’s execution. A parallel suit by environmental groups was not part of the settlement, and so may continue to put pressure on the county.
This suit and its resolution reflect the complexities of law structured around fixed levels of governance attempting to address a problem like climate change. Localities are often at the front-end of forwarding more progressive climate policy, such as in their joining international coalitions of cities, developing greenhouse gas emissions plans, and pledging to meet Kyoto standards. But this dispute serves as an important reminder that localities also are important sites in the dialogue about whether economic development and emissions reductions can be reconciled. For example, Warming Law Blog has reported on the massive political tensions surrounding this suit. As our carbon economy faces up to the crisis of climate change, these kinds of conversations will only become more critical.