UNDP Study Guide by Pranav Kondala

TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.No 1)

Content

Letter from the Secretary-General

Letter from the Executive Board

United Nations Development Programme 2012

Agenda-1 Reduction of Carbon Emissions i) ii) iii) iv) v) vi)

vii) viii)

What are Carbon Emissions? Carbon Footprint Emissions Nuclear Power Local and global pollutants from Road Transport Solutions a) Kyoto Protocol b) Nuclear Power c) Carbon Trading d) Certified Emission Reduction e) Nuclear Decommissioning Conclusion Questions a resolution must answer

Agenda-2 Environmentally Sound Management and Prevention of illegal International Traffic in Toxic Waste i) ii)

Page No

Preventing illegal International traffic in hazardous wastes Questions a resolution must answer

References

4 4 5 7 8 10 11 12 13 15 16 16

17 19 19

1) Letter from the Secretary-General

CBIT Model UN 2012 SREEKAR REDDY Secretary-General SURAJ PERI Deputy Secretary-General YASWANT ADIRAJU Under Secretary-General SHRUTI HARI Head of International Press THANMAY KRISHNA Charge d’affairs SHARAT CHANDAR Charge d’affairs PRANAV KONDALA Head of Designing NIRJHAR BHTTACHARYA Chairperson of UNDP CHANDRAYI SAHA Director of UNDP

Dear Delegates, It gives me immense pleasure to welcome you all to the second edition of CBITMUN. I am a third year mechanical engineering student but debate is something I enjoy the most. As student of engineering it tool a tremendous effort for the team of the 2011 conference to ensure that it was such a success. The number of MUNs is growing at a rapid rate in India with the whole nation embracing this concept with open arms and with more and more students involving themselves in MUNs, we could initiate a revolution that would lead to young minds assuming greater responsibility. CBITMUN returns with 7 councils this year which shall ensure high quality debate and a very satisfactory council experience. I take great pride in taking over as the Secretary-General of CBITMUN and my team and I shall ensure that August-September 2012 is an experience each and every one of you will cherish. Last year we promised an experience, This year we promise a phenomenon

Sreekar Reddy Secretary-General CBIT Model UN 2012 sreekar.reddy@cbitmun.com

Letter from the Executive Board It is our utmost pleasure to welcome you to the CBIT-‐ MODEL UNITED NATIONS 2012! I expect your cooperation to form a good teamwork so that we will be the best committee in this MUN. We have researched extensively to provide you with the best possible overview of the committee’s topic area.

In regards to the committee, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), UNDP is a network which works cohesively towards a sustainable future for the mankind. UNDP provides expert advice, training, and grant support to developing countries, with increasing emphasis on assistance to the least developed countries. UNDP operates in 177 countries currently and is helps them in achieving them the Millennium Development Goals. In CBIT 2012, UNDP will be discussing ‘’Need for a Global strategy to reduce Carbon Emissions”. Carbon Dioxide being let out in the atmosphere prompts a great threat to the development of various nations. The second agenda is “Environmentally Sound Management of Toxic Chemicals, Including Prevention of Illegal International Traffic in Toxic & Dangerous Products”. Toxic waste is waste material often in chemical form that can cause death or injury to living creatures, the disposal of this waste is a topic of international concern. Thus, CBIT 2012 UNDP shall look forward to a debate in that direction. As the Executive Board of the United Nations Development Programme, we promise you that we will give you intellectually stimulating discussion on the agendas on hand as well as fun in the committee. Good luck with your preparation, and we hope you enjoy reading this Study Guide! We look forward to welcoming you to the UNDP! Regards,

Nirjhar Bhattacharya Geetika Budhiraja Chandrayi Saha Chairperson Vice-‐Chairperson Director

United Nations Development Programme CBIT MUN 2012 undp@cbitmun.com

UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Climate change is potentially one of the most serious environmental threats facing the world today. Over the last few years, extreme weather conditions have shown how vulnerable society is to changes in the earth’s climate, and how disastrous the impacts can be. The possibility that human activities are releasing gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), at rates that could affect global climate has resulted in proposals for national programs to curtail emissions. Concern about costs has encouraged consideration of CO2 reduction proposals that employ market-‐based mechanisms. The passage in 1990 of a tradable allowance system for sulfur dioxide (SO2) control in the United States to reduce acid rain provides a precedent for such mechanisms. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), advocates for change and connects countries to knowledge, experience and resources to help people build a better life. UNDP provides expert advice, training, and grant support to developing countries, with increasing emphasis on assistance to the least developed countries. To accomplish the MDGs and encourage global development, UNDP focuses on poverty reduction, HIV/AIDS, democratic governance, energy and environment, social development, and crisis prevention and recovery. UNDP also encourages the protection of human rights and the empowerment of women in all of its programs. As the poor are disproportionately affected by environmental degradation and lack of access to clean, affordable water, sanitation and energy services, UNDP seeks to address environmental issues in order to improve developing countries’ abilities to develop sustainably, increase human development and reduce poverty. UNDP works with countries to strengthen their capacity to address global environmental issues by providing innovative policy advice and linking partners through environmentally sensitive development projects that help poor people build sustainable livelihoods. UNDP’s environmental strategy focuses on effective water governance including access to water supply and sanitation, access to sustainable energy services, sustainable land management to combat desertification and land degradation, conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, and policies to control emissions of harmful pollutants and ozone-‐ depleting substances. Atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) have increased steadily since the beginning of the industrial revolution and these levels are projected to increase even more rapidly as the global economy grows. Significant climate changes are very likely associated with increased atmospheric concentrations of certain gases, most significantly CO2. The human and ecological cost of climate changes forecast in the absence of mitigation measures is sufficiently large, and the time scales of both intervention and resultant climate change response are sufficiently long, that prudent action is warranted now.

AGENDA-‐ 1 NEED FOR A GLOBAL STRATEGY TO REDUCE CARBON EMISSIONS WHAT ARE CARBON EMISSIONS? CARBON-‐DIOXIDE AND CLIMATE CHANGE Every time we burn fossil fuels such as gas, coal or oil, carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere. In a natural carbon cycle, carbon dioxide is re-‐absorbed by plants and trees. However, fuels are burnt where the carbon dioxide has been trapped under the earth's surface for millions of years, and it is being done so quickly that plants and trees that are alive now have no chance of soaking it up (and it doesn't help that rainforests are cut down as well). The effect of all this extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is that the overall temperature of the planet is increasing (global warming). Whilst the average global temperature is increasing, on a day-‐to-‐day level the climate is changing in unpredictable ways (from floods and hurricanes to heat waves and droughts). To try and reduce the risk of ever more extreme weather, there is a need to reduce the amount of fossil fuel being burnt. This isn't easy. USING ENERGY Fossil fuels are burnt to create energy. From keeping warm in our house, to fuelling our cars, to growing our food, to manufacturing our MP3 players, energy is used. It is either burned directly (gas is burnt in the boiler for example, and petrol is burnt in car) or it is burnt in a power station to drive turbines which generate electricity. Fossil fuels are also burnt at various stages in the process of creating food, products and services for our consumption. The total carbon which we as individuals are responsible for is called our carbon footprint. WHAT IS CARBON FOOTPRINT? A ‘carbon footprint’ is a measure of the greenhouse gas emissions associated with an activity, group of activities or a product. Nearly everything that is done daily produces greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions either directly or indirectly; whether it is getting to work, watching TV or buying our lunch. The most important greenhouse gas produced by human activities is carbon dioxide. Direct GHG emissions sources are often easy to identify – for example burning fossil fuels for electricity generation, heating and transport. It is sometimes less obvious that products and services also cause indirect emissions throughout their life-‐cycles. Energy is required for production and transport of products, and greenhouse gases are also released when products are disposed of at the end of their useful lives.

COMPARISONS OF DEFINITION Although it has become a very popular term, there is currently no universal definition of a carbon footprint. Definitions vary in terms of which activities and greenhouse gases should be included within the scope of a carbon footprint assessment, and the level of detail. Carbon footprint methodologies range from simple online calculators to complex life-‐cycle analysis. Automated web-‐based calculators (for example the BP and BSkyB household calculators) tend to only cover carbon dioxide emissions. Other definitions and methods include all Kyoto greenhouse gases and measure emissions in terms of ‘carbon dioxide equivalents’. WHY WORK OUT A CARBON FOOTPRINT? The increasing interest in ‘carbon foot prints’ comes as a result of growing public awareness of global warming. The global community now recognizes the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate climate change. Countries, organizations and individuals alike are starting to take responsibility. Businesses and services that are not currently regulated under the Kyoto protocol may wish to pre-‐empt future regulations, and may find marketing advantages in being ‘green’. Calculating a carbon footprint can be a valuable first step towards making quantifiable emissions reductions. EMISSIONS: CARBON EMISSIONS FROM TRANSPORT: Climate change is potentially one of the most serious environmental threats facing the world today. Over the last few years, extreme weather conditions have shown how vulnerable society is to changes in the earth’s climate, and how disastrous the impacts can be. While it is difficult to determine whether individual events are the direct result of man-‐ made changes to the climate, at the global level, temperatures rose by approximately 0.6° centigrade during the last century. The 1990s included seven of the ten warmest years on record and 1998 was the warmest year during a 140-‐year period. Scientists warn that the earth is about to enter a global warming phase during which the Earth’s temperature is expected to rise significantly. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has forecast that global temperatures will rise between 1° and 2° by 2020 and between 2° and 5° by 2070.Scientific evidence is mounting to show that man-‐made greenhouse gas emissions have a noticeable effect on the Earth’s climate through the “Greenhouse Effect”. Awareness of the global scale of emissions of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide CO 2, methane CH4, chlorofluorocarbons CFC and nitrous oxide N2O) has increased over recent years. Scientists have noted that the average carbon dioxide content of the Earth’s atmosphere is steadily increasing. Some climate change is now inevitable – the greenhouse gases that have already accumulated in the atmosphere make it impossible to avoid some rise in temperature. However, the worst effects of climate change can be avoided if the international community acts now to reduce emissions and, in time, to stabilize the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

International efforts such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol target that goal. Naturally occurring greenhouse gases include water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH 4),nitrous oxide (N 2O), and ozone (O 3 ). Emissions from transport, and especially motor vehicles, add considerably to the levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Transport accounts for approximately 27% of total CO 2 emissions in OECD countries. Road transport generally accounts for approximately 55-‐ 99% of greenhouse gases from transport. Of this, two-‐thirds are attributable to the private car – primarily in the form of CO2.This report focuses on the contributions of road-‐based transport by looking at the some of the actions being taken by countries to contain and reduce emissions increases, including an assessment of how the effects of such policies and measures are modeled. A further reason to support the year 2010 horizon is that it would be very challenging to drastically modify people’s preference for the use of cars prior to this date, particularly in and around cities and other urban areas. Travel patterns depend on the existing spatial layout of urban and suburban development (e.g. the relative location of homes, jobs, commercial centers, etc.). Also, transport administrations have established plans and, in many cases, expenditure programmes covering current and future development of urban and rural highway networks for much of the next ten-‐year period, to meet those needs. AVIATION EMISSIONS: The environmental impact of aviation occurs because aircraft engines emit noise, particulates, and gases which contribute to climate change and dimming. Despite emission reductions from automobiles and more fuel-‐efficient and less polluting turbofan and turboprop engines, the rapid growth of air travel in recent years contributes to an increase in total pollution attributable to aviation. Like all human activities involving combustion, most forms of aviation release carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases into the Earth's atmosphere, contributing to the acceleration of global warming and (in the case of CO2) acidification. In addition to the CO2 released by most aircraft in flight through the burning of fuels such as Jet-‐A (turbine aircraft) or Avgas (piston aircraft), the aviation industry also contributes greenhouse gas emissions from ground airport vehicles and those used by passengers and staff to access airports, as well as through emissions generated by the production of energy used in airport buildings, the manufacture of aircraft and the construction of airport infrastructure. While the principal greenhouse gas emission from powered aircraft in flight is CO2, other emissions may include nitric oxide and nitrogen, (together termed oxides of nitrogen or NOx), water vapour and particulates (soot and sulfate particles), sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide (which bonds with oxygen to become CO2 immediately upon release), incompletely burned hydrocarbons, tetra-‐ethyl lead (piston aircraft only), and radicals such as hydroxyl, depending on the type of aircraft in use. The contribution of civil aircraft-‐in-‐flight to global CO2 emissions has been estimated at around 2%.However, in the case of high-‐altitude airliners which frequently fly near or in the stratosphere, non-‐CO2 altitude-‐sensitive effects may increase the total impact on anthropogenic (human-‐made) climate change significantly.

OIL SHALE INDUSTRY: Environmental impact of the oil shale industry includes the consideration of issues such as land use, waste management, and water and air pollution caused by the extraction and processing of oil shale. Surface mining of oil shale deposits causes the usual environmental impacts of open-‐pit mining. In addition, the combustion and thermal processing generate waste material, which must be disposed of, and harmful atmospheric emissions, including carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas. Experimental in-‐situ conversion processes and carbon capture and storage technologies may reduce some of these concerns in future, but may raise others, such as the pollution of groundwater. Carbon dioxide emissions from the production of shale oil and shale gas are higher than conventional oil production and a report for the European Union warns that increasing public concern about the adverse consequences of global warming may lead to opposition to oil shale development. Emissions arise from several sources. These include CO2 released by the decomposition of the kerosene and carbonate minerals in the extraction process, the generation of the energy needed to heat the shale and in the other oil and gas processing operations, and fuel used in the mining of the rock and the disposal of waste. As the varying mineral composition and calorific value of oil shale deposits varies widely, the actual values vary considerably. At best, the direct combustion of oil shale produces carbon emissions similar to those from the lowest form of coal, lignite, at 2.15 moles CO2/MJ, an energy source which is also politically contentious due to its high emission levels. For both power generation and oil extraction, the CO2 emissions can be reduced by better utilization of waste heat from the product streams. NUCLEAR POWER: The environmental impact of nuclear power results from the nuclear fuel cycle, operation, and the effects of accidents. The routine health risks and greenhouse gas emissions from nuclear fission power are small relative to those associated with coal, but there are "catastrophic risks"[1] such as the possibility of over-‐heated fuel releasing massive quantities of fission products to the environment. The public is sensitive to these risks and there has been considerable public opposition to nuclear power. The 1979 Three Mile Island accident and 1986 Chernobyl disaster, along with high construction costs, ended the rapid growth of global nuclear power capacity. Nuclear power has at least four waste streams that may harm the environment: (1) they create spent nuclear fuel at the reactor site (including plutonium waste): (2) they produce tailings at uranium mines and mills (3) during operation they routinely release small amounts of radioactive isotopes (4) during accidents they can release large quantities of dangerous radioactive materials. The nuclear fuel cycle involves some of the most dangerous elements and isotopes known to humankind, including more than 100 dangerous radio nuclides and carcinogens such as strontium-‐90, iodine 131 and cesium -‐137, which are the same toxins found in the fallout of nuclear weapons". 7

CHERNOBYL DISASTER: The 1986 Chernobyl disaster in the Ukraine was the world's worst nuclear power plant accident. Estimates of its death toll are controversial and range from 4,056 to 985,000. Large amounts of radioactive contamination were spread across Europe, and cesium and strontium contaminated many agricultural products, livestock and soil. The accident necessitated the evacuation of 300,000 people from Kiev, rendering an area of land unusable to humans for an indeterminate period. As radioactive materials decay, they release particles that can damage the body and lead to cancer, particularly cesium-‐137 and iodine-‐131. In the Chernobyl disaster, releases of cesium-‐137 contaminated land. Some communities were abandoned permanently. Thousands of people who drank milk contaminated with radioactive iodine developed thyroid cancer. Due to the bioaccumulation of Caesium-‐137, some mushrooms as well as wild animals which eat them, e.g. wild boars hunted in Germany and deer in Austria, may have levels which are not considered safe for human consumption. LOCAL AND GLOBAL POLLUTANTS FROM ROAD TRANSPORT: Naturally occurring greenhouse gases include water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and ozone (O3). Emissions from motor vehicles add considerably to the levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. CARBON-‐DIOXIDE CO2 and water vapor are the major exhaust components emitted by engines, after combustion of petroleum-‐based fuels (gasoline, diesel fuel, natural gas, etc.). CO 2 represents more than 99% by mass of all the gaseous components of exhaust (CO2, CO, HC, NOx, etc.). With catalytic and other exhaust systems, a large part of the carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbons (HC) is oxidized to CO 2 and H2O.This explains why CO 2 is considered the predominant form of pollution emitted from internal combustion engines. METHANE Some buses, trucks (both light-‐duty and heavy-‐duty) and passenger cars use compressed natural gas for fuel. Natural gas from fossil-‐bearing deposits is largely comprised of methane (82-‐95%); it also results from plant fermentation. It can be stocked in gaseous or liquid forms. Usage is likely to increase in the future for various reasons, the main one being that the use of compressed natural gas (CNG) by motor vehicles could contribute to a reduction in CO 2 emissions from such vehicles by 10-‐25% compared to vehicles powered with gasoline engines. CNG also produces less CO, HC, and NO x – a particularly important consideration in urban areas. However, even with catalytic exhaust systems, methane (CH4) emissions in exhaust gases remain significant. A distinguishing characteristic of methane is that 1 gram of CH4 has a greenhouse effect which is nearly 21 times greater than that of 1 gram of CO2.

NOXIOUS EMISSIONS There are a number of concerns with vehicle emissions in addition to their global warming greenhouse effect. In areas of high concentration, particularly in cities, motor vehicle emissions pose direct risks to human health. Consideration also needs to be given to the importance of not increasing – and if possible reducing – the levels of noxious motor vehicle emissions at the same time as reducing greenhouse gas emissions. NITROGEN OXIDES Nitrogen oxide emissions from vehicles produce a variety of adverse health and environmental effects. Once in the atmosphere, NO x emissions react chemically with other pollutants to form troposphere ozone (the primary component of photochemical smog) and other toxic pollutants. Nitrogen dioxide can irritate the lungs and lower resistance to respiratory infection (such as influenza).NO x emissions are an important precursor to acid rain that may affect both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Nitrogen dioxide and airborne nitrate also contribute to pollutant haze, which impairs visibility. The most important contributors to worldwide emissions of NO x are heavy-‐duty vehicles and buses, responsible for half the world’s emissions of motor vehicle-‐related NO x in spite of a comparatively small share (around 5%) of the world vehicle population. DIESEL PARTICLES Particulate matter is the general term for the mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air. Particulate matter includes dust, dirt, soot, smoke and liquid droplets. It can be emitted into the air from natural or man-‐made sources, such as windblown dust, motor vehicles, construction sites, factories and fires. Particles are also formed in the atmosphere by condensation or through the transformation of emitted gases such as sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic compounds. Scientific studies show a link between particulate matter (alone or in combination with other air pollutants) and a series of health effects. Motor vehicle particle emissions and the particles formed by the transformation of motor vehicle gaseous emissions tend to be in the fine particle range. Fine particles (those less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter) pose particular health concerns. In-‐service diesel vehicles emit up to 50-‐80% more particulate matter than gasoline vehicles. CONTAINING NOXIOUS EMISSIONS There are differences between the measures required to reduce the levels of nitrogen oxides and diesel particulate emissions from combustion engines and those required to achieve the high-‐priority objective, in the context of greenhouse gas emissions, of reducing motor vehicle fuel consumption. For example, the use of diesel engines with direct fuel injection can reduce fuel consumption by at least 20-‐30% (compared to normal diesel engines) – and sometimes close to 40% – without detracting from vehicle performance.

However, direct injection diesel engines produce more NOx (from 50-‐100% more), but less particulates than classical diesel engines. Regulations which set more stringent standards for NOx and particulate emissions have been agreed by the European Commission and will come into force by 2005-‐08. It is expected that the measures introduced by vehicle manufacturers to meet these standards will include: controlled exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) to reduce NO x emissions; and particulate filters to trap and oxidize close to 95% of all of the particulates from diesel combustion. SOLUTIONS KYOTO PROTOCOL The Kyoto Protocol was an agreement negotiated by many countries in December 1997 and came into force with Russia's ratification on February 16, 2005. The reason for the lengthy time span between the terms of agreement being settled upon and the protocol being engaged was due to terms of Kyoto requiring at least 55 parties to ratify the agreement and for the total of those parties’ emissions to be at least 55% of global production of greenhouse gases. The protocol was developed under the UNFCCC -‐ the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Participating countries that have ratified the Kyoto Protocol have committed to cut emissions of not only carbon dioxide, but of also other greenhouse gases, being: Ø Ø Ø Ø

Methane (CH4) Nitrous oxide (N2O) Hydro fluorocarbons (HFCs) per fluorocarbons (PFCs) Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6)

If participant countries continue with emissions above the targets, then they are required to engage in emissions trading; i.e. buying "credits" from other participant countries that are able to exceed their reduction targets in order to offset. The goals of Kyoto were to see participants collectively reducing emissions of greenhouse gases by 5.2% below the emission levels of 1990 by 2012. While the 5.2% figure is a collective one, individual countries were assigned higher or lower targets and some countries were permitted increases. For example, the USA was expected to reduce emissions by 7%. India and China, which have ratified the Kyoto protocol, are not obligated to reduce greenhouse gas production at the moment as they are developing countries; i.e. they weren't seen as the main culprits for emissions during the period of industrialization thought to be the cause for the global warming of today. This phenomenon, whether intended or coincidental is a major hole in the Kyoto Protocol. 70

KYOTO -‐ SUCCESS OR FAILURE The Kyoto Protocol, while well intentioned, would appear to be doomed to failing its objectives even before the 2008-‐2012 averaging period commences. Carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere are rising at a frightening rate with no sign of slowing. Global temperatures are continuing to rise. The science behind Kyoto was shaky due to the limited availability of crucial data and knowledge at the time; particularly in regard to positive feedback loops in nature being revealed that amplify warming and prevent carbon dioxide from being absorbed. Scientists studying global warming are finding Nature fighting back in ways they never contemplated daily. Even the "permissible" degree of global warming generated by target levels (if reached) will have far greater environmental impact that was originally envisioned. Kyoto should be viewed as a stepping stone to more drastic action. And that action is required now. BEYOND KYOTO Politicians and diplomats will continue to argue finger point and delay massive action due to a silo mentality. Many elected officials are concerned only with the careers, their political parties, the term of office or winning the next election. The patriots are concerned only with their countries. They have not been trained to think globally in terms of the environment. The scientific community has made it abundantly clear. We are in deep trouble. This is a global issue that does not care about race, color or creed, or political affiliation, although ironically the people who produce the least emissions will be the ones to suffer the most. That's always been the way of humanity. It's down to us as individuals to not only do what we can to reduce our own carbon emissions, but to raise the awareness of others until collectively our shouts are such a mighty voice that no politician can ignore it. Better they hear the shouts of protest now than the screams of agony from wars over natural resources or the wailing of starvation in the future, and it may well be their own voices amongst the anguish; that's how little time we have left. NUCLEAR POWER: THE LEADING STRATEGY FOR REDUCING CARBON EMISSIONS One of the most effective ways to reduce global carbon-‐dioxide emissions in the future is by making increasing use of nuclear energy to replace fossil fuels. This technology is the only one with near-‐zero carbon-‐dioxide emissions that has been proven capable of delivering, reliably and sustainably, the large quantities of energy needed by an industrial society. Also, the energy from nuclear fission is essentially inexhaustible, just as is the energy from sources traditionally considered "renewable."Other energy technologies with low carbon-‐ dioxide emissions, such as wind, solar, and hydro, should be used where appropriate.

However, they have a limited capability and, with the exception of hydro, produce energy intermittently, requiring backup power generators or storage facilities. Their land-‐use requirements are high, and they have non-‐negligible external costs, such as degradation of the environment, displacement of populations, destruction of natural habitats, and diversion of natural resources from other socially useful applications. Nuclear power plants produce about 7% of the world's overall energy and 16% of the electricity. Without the nuclear contribution, the increase in carbon-‐dioxide emissions over the past few decades would have been much greater. However, carbon-‐dioxide emissions are still increasing as our economies grow, and urgent action is required if carbon-‐dioxide emissions are to be reduced. Countries with a vigorous program of nuclear energy production have greatly reduced their carbon-‐dioxide emissions. France, for instance, with about 42% of its overall energy and about 78% of its electricity produced by nuclear plants, emits the lowest tonnage of carbon dioxide per unit of gross domestic product (GDP) among the world’s major industrial nations. Globally, most of the carbon-‐dioxide emissions are due to using energy for purposes other than generation of electricity (space heating, process heat, transportation, etc.). For that reason, it is essential that the application of nuclear energy be expanded to other areas, if necessary, by means of special-‐purpose reactors. Electric transportation, synthetic transportation fuels, extraction of oil from tar sands, and desalination are especially promising areas of opportunity. Therefore, to minimize future carbon-‐dioxide emissions, there have been strong recommendations for the following course of action: >Assure the continued safe operation of the existing nuclear power plants and facilitate the extension of their operating life; >Develop and deploy advanced nuclear power plants, including fast-‐neutron reactors; >Increase the contribution of nuclear energy as part of a balanced energy mix and expand its use beyond electricity generation; >Promote electrically driven public transportation systems and encourage the continued development and increased use of electrical energy in all forms of transportation. CARBON TRADING: The basic principles of carbon trading are rather straightforward: An emission cap is set, and under that cap, allowances are distributed amongst participating companies, industries, stake-‐holders, etc. In this system, every metric tonne of carbon dioxide (tCO2) emitted requires an emissions permit, which is either grandfathered (i.e. distributed at no cost) or sold at auction. There is thus no limit on emissions from any single installation, but there is a limit on the total emissions allowed within the system as a whole, with allowances capped in accordance with the defined emissions target. If permit-‐ holders emit less than they’re allowed, they can sell their surplus allowances and make a profit. If emission levels are high, permits become scarcer, driving up their price. Entities whose emissions exceed their allowances can either buy permits from others, as long as there is available supply, or purchase reductions from an offsetting programme.

For example, the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) was linked to an offsetting programme under the Kyoto Protocol, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), in 2004, creating demand for CDM project development in developing countries.1 Non-‐emitting stakeholders are also allowed to participate in the EU ETS voluntarily, further reducing the number of allowances in circulation for emitting entities to purchase at any point in time. A carbon trading system requires several elements to function smoothly, especially in terms of administrative and monitoring capacity. In general, the construction of a carbon trading system involves five main components: 1) setting the total emission limit (or cap); 2) allocating the quota (or permit, credit, allowance); 3) prudent greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting and verification rules; 4) trading infrastructure, such as registries and exchanges; and 5) an accountability system in case of non-‐compliance. Each of these components is indispensable, and together they require not only creditable carbon emission measurement and statistics, but also a fair allocation mechanism, free market conditions and reliable oversight, as well as strict monitoring. Any one of those aspects has the potential for misuse and rent-‐seeking, thus corrupting the system as a whole and rendering it ineffective. The performance of carbon emission trading markets is normally measured by the resulted emission reduction (effectiveness), the emission reduction cost (cost-‐effectiveness or efficiency), innovation and investment in clean technology, and any resulting carbon leakage (i.e., whether it has led to shifting of production thus emission spatially).Since the emergence of the European Union Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS) in 2005, the world has seen a rapid growth in carbon markets. In 2011, the global carbon market reached US$142 billion2. Despite the recent bad patch due to a range of reasons from Europe’s economic downturn to the uncertainty of the future of CDM, which remains uncertain until a new climate agreement has been reached, many believe that carbon markets remain one of the most trusted and attractive instruments we have to combat climate change. The Clean Development Mechanism trading as its known today, the Kyoto Protocol introduced three market-‐based mechanisms, of which the only one relevant to developing countries is the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). The CDM is an offset market in which investors from developed countries obtain “carbon credits “by implementing a project in a developing country that reduces emissions relative to an agreed and verified baseline. CERTIFIED EMISSION REDUCTION Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) are a type of emissions unit (or carbon credits) issued by the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Executive Board for emission reductions achieved by CDM projects and verified by a DOE under the rules of the Kyoto Protocol. CERs can be used by Annex 1 countries in order to comply with their emission limitation targets or by operators of installations covered by the European Union Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS) in order to comply with their obligations to surrender EU Allowances, CERs or Emission Reduction Units (ERUs) for the CO2 emissions of their installations. CERs can be held by governmental and private entities on electronic accounts with the UN.CERs can be purchased from the primary market (purchased from original party that makes the reduction) or secondary market (resold from a marketplace).

103

At present, most of the approved CERs are recorded in CDM Registry accounts only. It is only when the CER is actually sitting in an operator's trading account that its value can be monetized through being traded. The UNFCCC's International Transaction Log has already validated and transferred CERs into the accounts of some national climate registries, although European operators are waiting for the European to facilitate the transfer of their units into the registries of their Member States. Temporary CERs and Long CERs are special types of CERs issued for forestry projects. They are two ways of accounting for non-‐ permanence in forestry CDM project activities. Temporary CER or tCER is a CER issued for an afforestation or reforestation project activity under the CDM which expires at the end of the commitment period following the one during which it was issued. Long-‐term CER or lCER is a CER issued for an afforestation or reforestation project activity which expires at the end of its crediting period.

CARBON MITIGATION BY BIOFUELS OR SAVING AND RESTORING FORESTS: Choosing from among the host of strategies for mitigation of anthropogenic carbon emissions is not easy. There are competing environmental priorities, social and economic factors, and commercial and political interests. One strategy that has received extensive attention is the use of bio-‐fuels for transport, particularly ethanol from fermentation of carbohydrate crops as a substitute for petrol and vegetable oils in place of diesel fuel. Such an approach would require very large areas of land in order to make a significant contribution to mitigation of fossil fuel emissions and would, directly or indirectly, put further pressure on natural forests and grasslands. There are numerous assessments of the relative merits of different liquid bio-‐fuel strategies, but few compare these with other uses of land.

114

Two issues need to be addressed before the efficacy of bio-‐fuels can be assessed: the net reduction in fossil carbon emissions (avoided emissions) arising from use of agriculturally derived bio-‐fuels and the effect of alternative land-‐use strategies on carbon stores in the biosphere. As land is the limiting resource, the appropriate basis for comparison is a function of land area (Mg C ha-‐1 year-‐1). We use a period of 30 years as a basis for comparing strategies because it is likely to take that much time for carbon-‐free fuel technologies to be developed and introduced. Estimates of avoided emissions vary widely depending on crop, fuel type, and conversion technology used; some typical examples derived from lifecycle analyses are shown in the figure (right). In these analyses, no allowance has been made for emissions arising from change in land use to produce the fuel crop. In all cases, forestation of an equivalent area of land would sequester two to nine times more carbon over a 30-‐year period than the emissions avoided by the use of the bio-‐ fuel. Taking this opportunity cost into account, the emissions cost of liquid biofuel exceeds that of fossil fuels. Moreover, large areas of land would be needed to make significant quantities of fuel, as even this low substitution level cannot be met from existing arable land, forests and grasslands would need to be cleared to enable production of the energy crops. Clearance results in the rapid oxidation of carbon stores in the vegetation and soil, creating a large up-‐ front emissions cost that would, in all cases examined here, outweigh the avoided emissions. Of the biofuel sources, only conversion of woody biomass may be compatible with retention of forest carbon stocks. Woody biomass can be used directly for fuel or converted to liquid fuels. Although still in a development stage, avoided emissions in temperate zones appear similar to assimilation by forest restoration. If the prime object of policy on biofuel is mitigation of carbon dioxide-‐driven global warming, policy-‐makers may be better advised in the short term (30 years or so) to focus on increasing the efficiency of fossil fuel use, to conserve the existing forests and savannahs, and to restore natural forest and grassland habitats on cropland that is not needed for food. In addition to reducing net carbon dioxide flux to the atmosphere, conversion of large areas of land back to secondary forest provides other environmental services (such as prevention of desertification, provision of forest products, maintenance of biological diversity, and regional climate regulation), whereas conversion of large areas of land to biofuel crops may place additional strains on the environment. For the longer term, carbon-‐ free transport fuel technologies are needed to replace fossil hydrocarbons. NUCLEAR DECOMMISSIONING Nuclear decommissioning is the dismantling of a nuclear power plant and decontamination of the site to a state no longer requiring protection from radiation for the general public. The main difference from the dismantling of other power plants is the presence of radioactive material that requires special precautions. Decommissioning involves many administrative and technical actions. It includes all clean-‐up of radioactivity and progressive demolition of the plant.

125

Once a facility is decommissioned, there should no longer be any danger of a radioactive accident or to any persons visiting it. After a facility has been completely decommissioned it is released from regulatory control, and the licensee of the plant no longer has responsibility for its nuclear safety. DECOMMISSIONING OPTIONS: The International Atomic Energy Agency has defined three options for decommissioning, the definitions of which have been internationally adopted: Immediate Dismantling: This option allows for the facility to be removed from regulatory control relatively soon after shutdown or termination of regulated activities. Usually, the final dismantling or decontamination activities begin within a few months or years, depending on the facility. Following removal from regulatory control, the site is then available for re-‐use. Safe Enclosure (or Safest or (e) SAFSTOR): This option postpones the final removal of controls for a longer period, usually in the order of 40 to 60 years. The facility is placed into a safe storage configuration until the eventual dismantling and decontamination activities occur. Entombment: This option entails placing the facility into a condition that will allow the remaining on-‐site radioactive material to remain on-‐site without the requirement of ever removing it totally. This option usually involves reducing the size of the area where the radioactive material is located and then encasing the facility in a long-‐lived structure such as concrete, that will last for a period of time to ensure the remaining radioactivity is no longer of concern. CONCLUSION Thus these measures are some of the tools nations have now to combat climate change Compared to investment in renewable energies, in which research & development will take years, taxes and emissions change can begin to reduce emissions in the short term. For the long term, nations of the world must also invest in renewable energy sources, develop more environmentally friendly agricultural and land use practices, and aid developing countries who are too poor to combat climate change. Questions a resolution must answer • How to reduce CO2 emissions? • What are the various alternative resources that can be used instead of the fossil fuels? • What are some of the political, economic, and social obstacles that must be overcome to link up various national, regional, and international markets to create a global carbon market? 136

AGENDA 2 ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND MANAGEMENT AND PREVENTION OF ILLEGAL INTERNATIONAL TRAFFIC IN TOXIC WASTE Chemicals bring many benefits to societies and represent a vital element of human development. However, without good management and disposal practices, chemical substances as well as wastes have the potential to pose significant risks to human health and the environment, with the poorest members of the global community, particularly women and children, most vulnerable to their negative effects. A substantial use of chemicals is essential to meet the social and economic goals of the world community and today’s best practice demonstrates that they can be used widely in a cost-‐effective manner and with a high degree of safety. However, a great deal remains to be done to ensure the environmentally sound management of toxic chemicals within the principles of sustainable development. But major problems at hand nowadays include the following: • Lack of sufficient scientific information for the assessment of risks entailed by the use of a great number of chemicals; and • Lack of resources for the assessment of chemicals for which data are at hand. However, a significant strengthening of both national and international efforts is needed to achieve an environmentally sound management of chemicals. To tackle the problem, countries around the world have introduced a variety of measures. Six main program areas proposed are as given below: a) b) c) d) e) f)

Expanding and accelerating international assessment of chemical risks. Harmonization of classification and labeling of chemicals. Information exchange on toxic chemicals and chemical risks. Establishment of risk reduction program. Strengthening of national capabilities and capacities for management of chemicals. Prevention of illegal international traffic in toxic and dangerous products

The six program areas involve hazard assessment (based on the intrinsic properties of chemicals), risk assessment (including assessment of exposure), risk acceptability and risk management. Collaboration on chemical safety between the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), the International Labour Organization (ILO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) in the International Program on Chemical Safety (IPCS) should be the nucleus for international cooperation on environmentally sound management of toxic chemicals. All efforts should be made to strengthen this programme. Cooperation with other programmes, such as those of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the European Communities (EC) and other regional and governmental chemical programmes should be promoted.

147

How to manage waste inside the country? • Waste Generators • Waste Collectors and Transporters • Waste Disposers • Waste Traders UNDP’s targets UN sustainable management approaches, as well as unsustainable consumption and production patterns, including poor design and material choices. These issues are the root causes for resource depletion, waste generation and pollution, impeding sustainable human development. Within the framework of the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM), UNDP advocates for the integration of sound chemicals management priorities into national environmental and poverty reduction planning frameworks and helps countries access resources to improve their chemical and waste regimes. UNDP assists developing countries and countries with economies in transition to: • Integrate the sound management of chemicals into national development plans and policies • Manage chemicals of particular concern for pro-‐poor policies (POPs, ODS, heavy metals and others) • Strengthen national capacities on integrated waste management, including waste prevention, reuse and recycling, and disposing a range of waste streams. • Supporting national and local efforts towards a “Green economy” and sustainable materials management. In addition UNDP assists developing countries and countries with economies in transition to set-‐up national financial mechanisms to access, integrate and sequence different sources of environmental financing. The broadest possible awareness of chemical risks is a prerequisite for achieving chemical safety. The principle of the right of the community and of workers to know those risks should be recognized. However, the right to know the identity of hazardous ingredients should be balanced with industry's right to protect confidential business information. (Industry, as referred to in this chapter, shall be taken to include large industrial enterprises and transnational corporations as well as domestic industries.) There is international concern that part of the international movement of toxic and dangerous products is being carried out in contravention of existing national legislation and international instruments, to the detriment of the environment and public health of all countries, particularly developing countries. In resolution 44/226 of 22 December 1989, the General Assembly requested each regional commission, within existing resources, to contribute to the prevention of the illegal traffic in toxic and dangerous products and wastes by monitoring and making regional assessments of that illegal traffic and its environmental and health implications. The Assembly also requested the regional commissions to interact among themselves and to cooperate with the United Nations Environment Programme, with a view to maintaining efficient and coordinated monitoring and assessment of the illegal traffic in toxic and dangerous products and wastes.

158

PREVENTING ILLEGAL INTERNATIONAL TRAFFIC IN TOXIC WASTE: The prevention of illegal traffic in hazardous wastes will benefit the environment and public health in all countries, particularly developing countries. It will also help to make the Basel Convention and regional international instruments, such as the Bamako Convention and the fourth Lom Convention, more effective by promoting compliance with the controls established in those agreements. Article IX of the Basel Convention specifically addresses the issue of illegal shipments of hazardous wastes. Illegal traffic of hazardous wastes may cause serious threats to human health and the environment and impose a special and abnormal burden on the countries that receive such shipments. Effective prevention requires action through effective monitoring and the enforcement and imposition of appropriate penalties. Article 4 of the Basel Convention calls for an overall reduction of waste generation. By encouraging countries to keep wastes within their boundaries and as close as possible to its source of generation, the internal pressures should provide incentives for waste reduction and pollution prevention. The convention states that illegal hazardous waste traffic is criminal but contains no enforcement provisions. According to Article 12, parties are directed to adopt a protocol that establishes liability rules and procedures that are appropriate for damage that comes from the movement of hazardous waste across borders.

Questions a resolution must answer • • • •

What is the definition of waste? The Basel Convention and its uses. What are the various problems to waste management? What are the impacts of waste generation 169

REFERENCES • www.undp.org • www.unfccc.int • http://www.epa.gov/airmarkt/resource/docs/US%20Acid%20Rain%20Program_Elec %20Journal%20Aug%202007.pdf • http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/mechanisms/clean_development_mechanism/items/27 18.php • http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/res_agenda21_19.shtml