Environment Committee

Honorable delegates of the Environmental Committee,

It gives us great pleasure to chair this committee at the first edition of the IASIMUN Conference. It is our belief that IASIMUN is a much needed activity for young people who are bright, open minded and want, if not to change the world we live in little by little, at least to keep in touch with the pressing problems of the world. We are an integrated part of this planet and we can make a difference. Our experience in MUN has shown us that it is mostly about expressing yourself, about managing to understand and empathize with the beliefs of the different cultures you represent. Above all, it is about making friends, interacting in a way that opens your eyes to the wondrous ways in which we communicate, and discovering your hidden capabilities. It all seems frightening when you don’t have much experience. However, when you get into it and are swept by the tides of debate, you will see that you not only float, but swim fast against the current and reach land.

Our experiences in MUN include the SPIMUN conference in St. Petersburg, which Catalin attended, and the GALMUN conference in Galati, which we both attended.

We are sure you will find this experience thrilling, or at least captivating, and a good way to make friends. We hope you are looking forward to all this, because we know we are. For more information feel free to send us an email.

All the best and see you soon,

Catalin Toma and Maria Astefanoaie
Chairs of the Environment Committee
environment@iasimun.org

Environment Committee Topics

1. Ensuring ecological sustainability in times of economic crisis

If humans suffer why should the whole planet? Sustainability (the maintenance of human well-being, which in turn depends on the well-being of the environment and the responsible use of natural resources) relates to economics through the social and ecological consequences of economic activity. Sustainability economics represents: “… a broad interpretation of ecological economics where environmental and ecological variables and issues are basic but part of a multidimensional perspective. Social, cultural, health-related and monetary/financial aspects have to be integrated into the analysis.” With less money, it is harder to cope with all of this. The question is “how”? Delegates will propose ways for managing sustainability having less money on hand?

2. Promotion of new and renewable sources of energy

More than a decade ago, most countries joined an international treaty — the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) — to begin to consider what can be done to reduce global warming and to cope with whatever temperature increases are inevitable. With technology advancing so fast, aren’t the solutions to reduce pollution proposed years ago obsolete? Should we change? And if so, how? Since then, technology has advanced a great deal and already change is being made in some areas. In the USA there are active programs regarding renovating houses in a green way with appliances such as solar panels being highly advertised, especially now that they are more affordable than in the past. But are these the best ways to change? What other ways can we find that are better and cheaper than those implemented in the past?

3. Reviewing the emissions trading procedure, as set out in Article 17 of the Kyoto Protocol

If countries buy the right to pollute more, does it still make a difference to the planet? The Kyoto Protocol, an international and legally binding agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, entered into force on 16 February 2005. The major distinction between the Protocol and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is that while the Convention encouraged industrialised countries to stabilize GHG emissions, the Protocol commits them to do so. Parties with commitments under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Parties) have accepted targets for limiting or reducing emissions. These targets are expressed as levels of allowed emissions, or “assigned amounts,” over the 2008-2012 commitment period. The allowed emissions are divided into “assigned amount units” (AAUs). Emissions trading, as set out in Article 17 of the Kyoto Protocol, allows countries that have emission units to spare – emissions permitted them but not “used” – to sell this excess capacity to countries that are over their targets. Thus, a new commodity was created in the form of emission reductions or removals. Since carbon dioxide is the principal greenhouse gas, people speak simply of trading in carbon. Carbon is now tracked and traded like any other commodity. This is known as the “carbon market.” But isn’t this a somewhat uninspired idea, since it allows the whole point of the treaty to be sidestepped? Should it be changed, and if so, how?