Earlier this year, we witnessed a few zesty exchanges between US and China delegations as the latter continues its unswerving resistance to any possibility of
binding emissions caps, peddling its «common but differentiated responsibilities» (hereinafter «CBDR») refrain.
Not exact matches
CO2
emissions from coal - fired generation were up both in the RGGI region and nationally in the first half of 2013, compared with 2012 levels, which indicates that the new RGGI
cap could become more
binding in the future.
Yet RGGI hasn't induced a robust enough carbon price to drive down
emissions, primarily because the initial
emissions «
cap» was set 45 % higher than actual
emissions by the covered power plants and wasn't tightened enough to actually «
bind» until four years later.
Observing that Kyoto hasn't come close to its goal of «an internationally harmonized
binding system of
emissions caps,» Weitzman shows why: the Kyoto framework induces each nation to game the system by attempting to maximize the efforts required of others while minimizing its own.
When it was pointed out how radical it was to advocate
binding caps on
emissions given the history of the international climate negotiations, Hu responded philosophically, in reference to his own experience in policy advocacy on various issues over the years:
Instead, they demanded an unworkable framework of legally
binding international
emissions targets, influenced and supported by climate hawks who demanded a laser focus on increasing renewable deployment and energy efficiency, mainly through market mechanisms such as
cap - and - trade and carbon taxes.
«California's current
emissions cap is very unlikely to be
binding,» Borenstein told me, «so losing Diablo Canyon would raise
emissions.»
«California's current
emissions cap is very unlikely to be
binding,» said UC - Berkeley energy economist Severin Borenstein, «so losing Diablo Canyon would raise
emissions.»
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has submitted its long - term low -
emissions strategy, presenting a pathway for
emissions reductions of the UK by at least 80 % by 2050 compared to 1990 levels through a process of legally
binding five - year
caps on
emissions.