Despite the hopeful prediction in the New York Times story, we are very far from being able to use satellites to verify compliance with the Kyoto Protocol’s caps on greenhouse gas emissions of Annex I states. The problem is not only one of insufficiently developed or installed technology. “Satellite verification” would also mean changing the current system of reporting-and-review of state emissions, opening it up to independent scrutiny, and making it less forgiving of state evasiveness and ambiguity about emissions than it is now. Some states will be interested in this proposal and others will not. In any event, the current MRV system, built on bottom-up state reporting, will remain the dominant framework of international GHG emissions knowledge for the foreseeable future. To safeguard its own credibility, it must progressively be strengthened. In this article I outline the existing verification regime’s main shortcomings and argue that the most efficient way around them is to incorporate into the current MRV system top-down (satellite and surface) measurements, resolved by modeling software at the state level, and produced by independent scientific experts in cooperation with the UNFCCC.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 240 | 45 | 4 |
Full Text Views | 27 | 0 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 51 | 1 | 0 |
Despite the hopeful prediction in the New York Times story, we are very far from being able to use satellites to verify compliance with the Kyoto Protocol’s caps on greenhouse gas emissions of Annex I states. The problem is not only one of insufficiently developed or installed technology. “Satellite verification” would also mean changing the current system of reporting-and-review of state emissions, opening it up to independent scrutiny, and making it less forgiving of state evasiveness and ambiguity about emissions than it is now. Some states will be interested in this proposal and others will not. In any event, the current MRV system, built on bottom-up state reporting, will remain the dominant framework of international GHG emissions knowledge for the foreseeable future. To safeguard its own credibility, it must progressively be strengthened. In this article I outline the existing verification regime’s main shortcomings and argue that the most efficient way around them is to incorporate into the current MRV system top-down (satellite and surface) measurements, resolved by modeling software at the state level, and produced by independent scientific experts in cooperation with the UNFCCC.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 240 | 45 | 4 |
Full Text Views | 27 | 0 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 51 | 1 | 0 |