Sentences with phrase «period under the protocol»

Not exact matches

With the enhancement of the dignity of the bishop and the extension of his judicial authority under the patronage of the Empire, the old cathedra upon which the ante-Nicene bishop had sat in his capacity as teacher, was gradually converted into a veritable throne, imitative of that of the emperor.25 It is quite possible that the courtly protocol and the sartorial details of the so - called Donation of Constantine are a reasonably accurate description of the dress, insignia, and prerogatives of the chief bishop of the West in the late imperial period, that even the account of the bestowal of these privileges primarily errs in fictionally ascribing to one emperor what was probably done by several in the course of the fourth and fifth centuries, and that once the fictional monopolization of these prerogatives by one bishop is removed, the Donation is recognized as supplying us with a picture of a late imperial prelate.26

Countries that are party to the 1997 Kyoto protocol will continue to discuss a post-2012 commitment period; negotiators on a second track that includes the United States, which is not party to Kyoto, will continue under the main UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Here I'll give you specific recommendations for the set / rep schemes, rest periods and time under tension protocols you'll want to use to make sure you're getting the training effect you want.

Filed Under: Fertility, PCOS, Period Tagged With: FLO Protocol, hormonal health, hormones, self care, women's health

The 146 plans include all developed nations and three quarters of developing countries under the UNFCCC, covering 86 % of global greenhouse gas emissions — almost four times the level of the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, the world's first international emission reduction treaty that required emissions cuts from industrialized countries.

These include a 2nd commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol (KP), and comparable mitigation actions by developed countries for non-KP parties under the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long Term Cooperative Action (AWG - LCA) and Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) from developing countries with support from means of implementation, these are finance and technology transfer.

And given that when Canada broke its internationally legally binding commitment to meet its QELRC under the Kyoto Protocol, or when Russia and Japan walked away from the commitment to negotiate a second and subsequent commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol they suffered no consequence I can see why the South might be worried — because it's easier to punish them.

UNFCCC: Countries have successfully launched a new commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol, agreed a firm timetable to adopt a universal climate agreement by 2015 and agreed a path to raise necessary ambition to respond to climate change.

The AAUs, handed out to 38 developed nations under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, represent a cap on those countries» emissions in the five years through 2012, known as the first Kyoto commitment period.

Under this protocol the industrialized nations have made legally binding undertakings with regard to their emissions of greenhouse gases for the period 1990 to 2008 - 2012 (average for the five years).

In December 2012, the members of the protocol agreed upon a second commitment period under the Kyoto Pprotocol agreed upon a second commitment period under the Kyoto ProtocolProtocol.

ClimateCare will therefore not fund projects in countries that have binding targets under the Kyoto Protocol (i.e. developed countries that have ratified the Protocol) during the period when they have legally binding targets unless it can be assured that the emission reductions can be «retired» from the national account.

Under this road map, the developed countries in the Kyoto Protocol would take on their second - period commitments that in aggregate would reach the science - based requirement of 25 - 40 per cent emissions cut (or more than 40 % as demanded by developing countries) by 2020 compared to 1990.

At climate negotiations at COP - 13 in Bali, Indonesia in 2007, parties to the UNFCCC agreed to replace the Kyoto Protocol with an agreement that would create a second commitment period under the UNFCCC and would include binding emissions reductions for developed countries and new programs on adaptation for developing countries, deforestation, finance, technology transfer, and capacity building.

This technical document provides supplementary methods and good practice guidance for estimating anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions by sources and removals by sinks resulting from land use, land - use change and forestry (LULUCF) activities under Article 3, paragraphs 3 and 4, of the Kyoto Protocol for the second commitment period.

These documents also show a credit of 22 million tonnes for the same period resulting from obligations under the Kyoto Protocol.

Depending of the reported commitment period, reporting of LULUCF activities under the Kyoto Protocol shall apply guidelines as explained below.

The information to be reported under the Kyoto Protocol (Articles 3.3 and 3.4) during a commitment period is supplementary to the information reported under the Convention (Article 4.1 (a)-RRB-.

More information on accounting of LULUCF activities under the Kyoto Protocol in the first commitment period is contained in the Kyoto Protocol Reference Manual.

Guidance on reporting and accounting of LULUCF activities under the Kyoto Protocol applicable in the first commitment period differs from the one applicable in the second commitment period.

Modalities, rules and guidelines for accounting of LULUCF activities under Articles 3.3 and 3.4 of the Kyoto Protocol in the first commitment period

Depending of the reported commitment period, accounting of the LULUCF activities under the Kyoto Protocol shall apply guidelines contained in the following decisions: The annex to decision 16 / CMP.1: Land use, land - use change and forestry provides rules for accounting of LULUCF activities under KP in the first commitment period.

For the first commitment period decision 15 / CMP.1 Guidelines for the preparation of the information required under Article 7 of the Kyoto Protocol stipulates that each Party included in Annex I shall include in its annual greenhouse gas inventory information on anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions by sources and removals by sinks from land use, land - use change and forestry activities under Article 3, paragraph 3, and, if any, elected activities under Article 3, paragraph 4, in accordance with Article 5, paragraph 2, as elaborated by any good practice guidance in accordance with relevant decisions of the COP / MOP on land use, land - use change and forestry.

In the same commitment period information on wetland drainage and rewetting activity under Article 3, paragraph 4, of the Kyoto Protocol (if elected) shall be provided according to regulations contained in the 2013 Supplement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Wetlands.

We now have the Kyoto protocol going into its second commitment period, whereby 10 to 12 percent of global emissions would be under a legally binding instrument that regulates those emissions.

Moreover, data reported by Annex B Parties under the Kyoto Protocol for the first commitment period as of 17 February 2015 are accessible through the links below:

His message came a day after Germany, Belgium, Spain and Sweden became the last countries to ratify the Doha Amendment, which established the second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol.

At the COP - 13 negotiations in Bali, Indonesia in 2007, parties to the UNFCCC agreed to replace the Kyoto Protocol with an agreement that would create a second commitment period under the UNFCCC and would include binding emissions reductions for developed countries and new programs on adaptation for developing countries, deforestation, finance, technology transfer, and capacity building.

This sudden change caused electricity prices to rise and raised concerns about Japan's ability to meet its emissions reduction target under the Kyoto Protocol first commitment period (Jan. 1, 2008 — Dec. 31, 2012).

The CMP decided in Lima (December 2014) that the expert review process under Article 8 of the Kyoto Protocol for the last year of the first commitment period (CP1) shall be completed by 10 August 2015.

For the purpose of fulfilling commitments under Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Kyoto Protocol, a Party may, until the 100th day after the date set by the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP) for the completion of the expert review process under Article 8 of the Protocol for the last year of the commitment period, continue to acquire, and other Parties may transfer to such Party, emission reduction units, certified emission reductions, assigned amount units and removal units under Articles 6, 12 and 17 of the Protocol, from the preceding commitment period, provided the eligibility of any such Party has not been suspended in accordance with decision 27 / CMP.1, annex, section XV, paragraph 4.

The timely submission of the «true - up period reports» under the first commitment period is an essential step for initializing the assessment of the compliance of a Party with its commitment under Article 3, paragraph 1 of the Kyoto Protocol.

After a lengthy and hard - fought negotiation process, 35 countries signed on to a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol — the only legally binding agreement under which developed countries have committed to cut their greenhouse gases.

Created under Article 3.9 of the Kyoto Protocol, the AWG was set up in order to discuss further commitments by Annex I parties (industrialized nations) for the post-2012 second commitment period — Since the Kyoto Protocol is to be effective from 2008 - 2012 (first commitment period), the AWG's role at this point is to create a framework and timetable capable of guiding such discussion and ensuring that there is no gap year (s) between the first and second commitment period.

* Covers the period when Parties included in Annex I submitted annual submissions on a voluntary basis earlier than required under Article 7, paragraph 3, of the Kyoto Protocol (see decision 22 / CMP.1, paragraph 5).

Ukraine associates with Copenhagen Accord under the following conditions: - To have the agreed position of the developed countries on quantified emissions reduction targets of the Annex I countries; - To keep the status of Ukraine as a country with economy in transition and relevant preferences arising from such status; - To keep the existing flexible mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol; - To keep 1990 as the single base year for calculating Parties commitments; - To use provisions of Article 3.13 of the Kyoto Protocol for calculation of the quantified emissions reduction of the Annex I countries of the Kyoto Protocol for the relevant commitment period.

They are deemed valid only when the removals have been verified by expert review teams under the Protocol's reporting and review procedures, and they can not be banked (i. e. credits can not be carried over to future commitment periods).

For example, we know that we want to see a second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol and a firm agreement by the developed countries to deliver on finance in order to help the developing world strengthen their mitigation efforts.

Takes note also of the quantified economy - wide emission reduction targets communicated by Parties included in Annex I and presented in Annex 1 to this decision and of the intention of these Parties to convert them to quantified emission limitation or reduction objectives for the second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol;

The Doha Climate Gateway, described by some as a «major milestone» but by others as a «ritual farce», includes (i) a second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol (Kyoto II).

Under the negotiated Kyoto Protocol (signed on March 11th, 1999, but not yet ratified), Russia has agreed to stabilize greenhouse gases at 1990 levels by the 2008 - 2012 commitment period.

Invites Parties included in Annex I and listed in Annex 1 to this decision to submit information on their quantified emission limitation or reduction objectives for the second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol by 1 May 2012 for consideration by the Subsidiary Body on Implementation at its thirty - sixth session and requests the Subsidiary Body for Implementation to deliver the results of its work to the Conference of the Parties title of decision on AWG - LCA serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol with a view to the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol adopting them as amendments to Annex B of the Kyoto Protocol at its eighth session, while ensuring coherence with the implementation of decision -LCB--RCB-;

EU Burden - sharing agreement A political agreement that was reached to help the EU reach its emission reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol (a reduction of 8 % during the period 2008 - 2012, on average, compared with 1990 levels).

These words ring so hollow and dubious especially as developed countries are abandoning their mitigation obligations under the Kyoto Protocol or the ad - hoc working group on Long Term Cooperative Action (LCA) and or are offering no meaningful and ambitious emissions reductions in the elusive second committment period of Kyoto.

Peter Wittoeck, a spokesperson for the European Union, made it clear that while the E.U. was resolutely undecided on extending the protocol for a second commitment period with a new set of emission reduction targets, the Japanese calculations were correct: «If it is only the E.U. that is under such a commitment without the rest of the world... [then] that would not be a solution for the global climate problem.»

Patients in the intervention group were treated under the collaborative practice protocol for the 6 - month period post protocol initiation.