The 1987 Montreal Protocol, considered the most successful environmental treaty in history, turns 20 on September 16, and its achievements will be duly celebrated by over 190 nations at a conference of parties in Montreal. In 1988, President Reagan hailed the protocol as "a monumental achievement of science and diplomacy" and the US senate ratified it unanimously. Later, the heads of the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme declared that "the action to defend the ozone layer will rank as one of the great international achievements of the century." Given the implications of ozone layer destruction for health, environment and the economy, few would challenge their assessment as hyperbole.
And the treaty has more than lived up to its promise. The protocol has done a remarkable job in protecting the fragile stratospheric ozone layer from manmade chemicals and thereby preventing harmful solar radiation from reaching planet Earth. Millions of deaths from skin cancer will be averted and billions of dollars in health benefits will be secured. Because of the treaty, production and consumption of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and other ozone-depleting substances have dramatically declined, and the ozone layer is well on the road to recovery.
A little-known element of this success story is that the ozone treaty also played an unanticipated crucial role in mitigating climate change, because the ozone-depleting chemicals are also potent global warming gases. Research reveals that if CFCs had continued to grow at rates prevailing prior to the Montreal Protocol, they would by 1990 have surpassed carbon dioxide in global warming impact. By phasing out these substances, the ozone treaty actually generated five to six times more climate mitigation than the 1997 Kyoto Protocol on climate change. This unexpected bonus delayed prospective climate forcing by approximately 12 years, thereby postponing the feared "tipping point" in the climate system for rapid and irreversible climate change.
Before the negotiators enjoy their birthday cake in Montreal, however, they need to confront another unexpected, and considerably less benevolent, consequence of the ozone treaty. CFCs were an extremely important family of chemicals, finding uses in hundreds of industries and thousands of products. They could not simply be eliminated; they had to be replaced. And it turns out that some of the substitutes, including hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), themselves have enormous global warming potential.
Under the Montreal Protocol, HCFCs were intended as transitional chemicals. For many - but not all - uses, effective substitutes have been found, and the industrialized countries have by now substantially replaced HCFCs with less threatening chemicals and processes. But in many developing countries, in particular such rapidly industrialising giants as China and India, HCFC use is rising to such an extent that it begins to threaten both the ozone layer and the revived global efforts to address climate change.
This problem has been recognised by numerous governments, including the Group of Eight (G8) - Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, United Kingdom, and United States - in its 2007 summit declaration. Resuming its traditional leadership role, the US, along with such nations as Argentina, Brazil, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and several low-lying island and coastal states, have submitted proposals to the September meeting to accelerate HCFC phase-out. The 27-nation European Union will likely also support these efforts.
Strengthening the Montreal Protocol offers one of the most efficient short-term opportunities to address climate change. Success at Montreal-plus-20 would demonstrate that the parties can also work together to address climate change. For industrialised nations, it represents a chance to relieve their other industries of at least some of the burden of mitigating climate change. For developing countries, it is an opportunity to speed transition into new, more energy efficient technologies.
However, the United Nations operates on consensus, and ways must be found to bring hesitant new HCFC producers into the fold - much as we did in 1987, when few gamblers would have wagered that a strong ozone treaty could be achieved. Major efforts by the US delegation now, as then, could make a real difference. Success on this issue could also bring new significance for US leadership on climate change when President Bush convenes nations representing the world's largest emitters of greenhouse gases in Washington less than a week after the Montreal birthday party. That would be worth a celebration.
View all comments >