Should these coolant gases be discussed under Montreal Protocol?
Outcome of Bangkok meet may influence climate talks later this year
The
Montreal Protocol is meant to address the problem of ozone-depleting
gases. The US wants discussions on emissions of HFCs to be shifted to
the Montreal Protocol from UNFCCC (image courtesy NASA)Hydrofluorocarbons
(HFCs), coolant gases, are a hotly debated matter now and have climbed
to the top of political agenda of leading premiers in the world in
recent months. Whether these gases should be discussed under the
Montreal Protocol that addresses ozone-depleting gases is a key agenda
item for the week-long 25th Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal
Protocol (MOP 25) that opens Monday in Bangkok, Thailand.
At present, HFCs are handled under the UN Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC) since they are greenhouse gases (GHGs) with high
global warming potential. Their emissions are on the rise as they have
started replacing ozone-depleting substances called
hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which
are handled under the Montreal Protocol. Claiming that the rise in their
emissions is the direct fallout of the transition from HCFCs that is presently under way, the US has been proposing these refrigerant gases be moved to the Montreal Protocol from UNFCCC.
Furthermore, HFCs feature in the non-CO2 basket of gases that the US
has placed its focus on under its climate change mitigation strategy.
Where India stands
But some developing countries, emerging economies such as India, Brazil
and China, where use of HFCs is expected to grow without any controls,
have been opposing such a transition for long; they would rather discuss
HFCs under UNFCCC. They have two reasons for it: one is that HFCs are
not ozone-depleting substances and the other is that they already belong
under the UNFCCC where a differentiation between developed and
developing countries is made under the “common but differentiated
responsibility” principle that mandates developed countries to take the
lead in reducing emissions in view of their much higher contribution to
atmospheric carbon in the past.
Role of contact group
The US along with Canada and Mexico has submitted an amendment for
addressing HFCs under the Montreal Protocol and so have the island
states of Micronesia and Mauritius. In order for an official decision to
emerge from the Protocol, an issue first needs to be formally discussed
under a contact group. Following several years of stalemate on setting
up such a contact group, the preparatory meeting for MOP 25 that took
place in Bangkok earlier in the year saw some movement. A discussion
group, which does not enjoy the same legal authority as a contact group,
was set up to discuss “management of HFCs”. Parties then discussed the
larger concerns of phasing down HFCs and the financial and technological
implications for this, instead of restricting the discussions to the
amendments proposed by the US and Micronesia. A note of the discussion
was made in the official minutes of the meeting. But in order for
parties to move decisively on the issue, a contact group will still need
to be set up.
The meeting in Bangkok is expected to serve as a litmus test on
several fronts. The meeting takes place just ahead of the UNFCCC
meeting in Warsaw where developed countries, particularly the EU, is
asking parties to agree to a decision on moving HFCs from UNFCCC to the
Montreal Protocol. The decision of the contact group will influence what
happens at Warsaw. Failing to set up one also means another year will
be lost. With some developed countries betting on a deal on HFCs in the
run up to a deal on climate change in 2015 at Paris, what transpires at
Bangkok will hold the answers to more than just the fate of the
coolants.
