The Kyoto Protocol Clause Samples

The Kyoto Protocol. Project Design Means a detailed description of the Project to be submitted for Validation Document (PDD): prepared in accordance with the Kyoto Rules, the UFG and the Directive and attached as Annex III. The Purchaser will be responsible for providing PDD development for Registration of the Project.
View SourceView Similar (5)
The Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol was adopted in December 1997 at the Third Conference of the Parties held in Kyoto. The Kyoto Protocol requires stronger commitments from parties to achieve quantified emission reductions within a specific timeframe. These commitments cover the six greenhouse gases listed in Annex A of the Kyoto Protocol (Carbon dioxide, Methane, Nitrous oxide, Hydrochlorocarbons, Perfluorocarbons and Sulphur hexafluoride). Athi Water Services Board and the contractor will be required to carry out regular inspection and maintenance of construction equipment in order to reduce the levels of green house gas emissions into the atmosphere, the design of the sewer ponds should ensure that the anaerobic ponds are covered to trap the methane gas which should be cleaned and used appropriately as renewable energy.
View SourceView Similar (3)
The Kyoto Protocol. Interna- tional climate change policy for the 21st century. Berlin and New York: Springer. ▇’▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. (1994). On the misadventures of capitalist nature. In
View SourceView Similar (2)
The Kyoto Protocol. The UNFCCC, specifically, the first and second COPs paved the way for the negotiation of a precise protocol with requisite commitments, the Kyoto Protocol. Through the eight meetings by the ad hoc group on the Berlin Mandate, which were to discuss and develop the overall framework and precise provisions of the new instrument, a draft text to begin the negotiation process at COP3 was created (Breidenich et al., 1998:319). Following ten days of intense negotiation with this draft text provided by the group, Parties at the third COP at Kyoto, Japan, on December 11, 1997 adopted the Kyoto Protocol (Bodansky, 2001; Boyd, Corbera, & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2008; Breidenich et al., 1998; ▇▇▇▇▇, 2004; ▇▇▇▇▇ & Yamin, 2001). The Protocol was “hailed as the greatest achievement of modern environmental diplomacy” by some observers (▇▇▇▇▇ and Yamin 2001: 262). At the heart of this Protocol are differentiated commitments (legally binding targets) by industrialized (Annex 1) countries to decrease their GHG emissions by 5.2 per cent with 1990 as the base year (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al., 2010; ▇▇▇▇▇ & Yamin, 2001; ▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2007). This was premised on principles of equity and social justice related to both their disproportionally large historical and current contributions to atmospheric GHG concentrations as well as the fact that the enormous wealth and technological capacity they possess place them in a better position to take on GHG mitigation goals (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2008). These quantitative emission targets did not include developing countries, in other words, developing countries were not assigned quantifiable emission targets under the protocol; it only slightly builds upon the existing commitments of these countries that existed under the UNFCCC (▇▇▇▇▇ & Yamin, 2001). This is congruent with the decision in the Berlin Mandate at COP-1 that “no new commitments would be negotiated for developing countries as part of the process” (Breidenich et al 1998:319). Although the divide between developing and developed counties epitomized the principle of common but differentiated responsibility (CBDR), which is at the core of UNFCCC, the sharp divide failed to address significant future mitigation issues by emerging emitters who at the time were still classified as developing countries (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al., 2010). This issue partly caused US non-ratification of the protocol and would even come back to bite the regime in COP 15 at Copenhagen (Ibid). The negotiations of the Kyoto Protocol, both among the part...
View Source
The Kyoto Protocol results Table 3. Primary energy Consumption and Carbon Dioxide emission from the combustion of anthropogenic fuel by the largest world emitters in 2012 [11, 12] Table 4. Table 5. Primary energy Consumption and Carbon Dioxide emission from the combustion of anthropogenic fuel by the largest world emitters in 2018 [11, 12]
View Source
The Kyoto Protocol. An Assessment
View Source

Related to The Kyoto Protocol

  • Protocol The attached Protocol shall be an integral part of this Agreement.

  • Research Use Reporting To assure adherence to NIH GDS Policy, the PI agrees to provide annual Progress Updates as part of the annual Project Renewal or Project Close-out processes, prior to the expiration of the one (1) year data access period. The PI who is seeking Renewal or Close-out of a project agree to complete the appropriate online forms and provide specific information such as how the data have been used, including publications or presentations that resulted from the use of the requested dataset(s), a summary of any plans for future research use (if the PI is seeking renewal), any violations of the terms of access described within this Agreement and the implemented remediation, and information on any downstream intellectual property generated from the data. The PI also may include general comments regarding suggestions for improving the data access process in general. Information provided in the progress updates helps NIH evaluate program activities and may be considered by the NIH GDS governance committees as part of NIH’s effort to provide ongoing stewardship of data sharing activities subject to the NIH GDS Policy.

  • Signaling protocol 4.1.3.1 SS7 Signaling is AT&T-21STATE’s preferred method for signaling. Where MF signaling is currently used, the Parties agree to use their best efforts to convert to SS7. If SS7 services are provided by AT&T-21STATE, they will be provided in accordance with the provisions of the applicable access tariffs. 4.1.3.2 Where MF signaling is currently used, the Parties agree to interconnect their networks using MF or dual tone MF (DTMF) signaling, subject to availability at the End Office Switch or Tandem Switch at which Interconnection occurs. The Parties acknowledge that the use of MF signaling may not be optimal. AT&T-21STATE will not be responsible for correcting any undesirable characteristics, service problems or performance problems that are associated with MF/SS7 inter-working or the signaling protocol required for Interconnection with CLEC employing MF signaling.

  • Telemedicine Services This plan covers clinically appropriate telemedicine services when the service is provided via remote access through an on-line service or other interactive audio and video telecommunications system in accordance with R.I. General Law § 27-81-1. Clinically appropriate telemedicine services may be obtained from a network provider, and from our designated telemedicine service provider. When you seek telemedicine services from our designated telemedicine service provider, the amount you pay is listed in the Summary of Medical Benefits. When you receive a covered healthcare service from a network provider via remote access, the amount you pay depends on the covered healthcare service you receive, as indicated in the Summary of Medical Benefits. For information about telemedicine services, our designated telemedicine service provider, and how to access telemedicine services, please visit our website or contact our Customer Service Department.

  • Information Technology Accessibility Standards Any information technology related products or services purchased, used or maintained through this Grant must be compatible with the principles and goals contained in the Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards adopted by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board under Section 508 of the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. §794d), as amended. The federal Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards can be found at: ▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇/508.htm.