1

UNEP – STUDY GUIDE

MOPMUN 2013, January 4, 5&6

2

CONTENTS

Letter from the board 3

Acknowledgement 5

Committee information 5

UNEP Mandate 7

Reference 8

Bibliography 8

Agenda - 1 9

Bibliography 14

Agenda – 2 15

3

LETTER FROM BOARD

Respected delegates of the United Nations Environment Programme,

The United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) is a quintessential organ of the United

Nations. The theme of environmental sustainability that is covered by the UNEP is in all aspects

is as essential as international peace and security. Environmental Sustainability is the 7th

Millennium Development Goal set by the United Nations and hence, dealt with that much more

zeal.

Unfortunately, from a simulation perspective in the Indian MUN circuit this council is relatively

frowned upon and is given lesser significance when compared to the UNSC or UNGA.

Nonetheless, cognizant of the respect and distinctive exclusivity entrusted to the UNEP in the

international scenario, we will be discussing agendas that have seldom been discussed in recent

past as they were side-lined due to other burning issues facing the world.

Carbon credit is a concept that was initiated by the Kyoto Protocol. Since then, it has faced its

share of skepticism and cynicism. So, in this session of the UNEP at MOPMUN‘13 we expect

delegates to discuss this system of carbon trading with special reference to the current EU-ETS

decision to livid tax on the aviation industry for excessive emissions by flights.

Furthermore, in an attempt to discuss an idea that has been lingering around, we have chosen the

second agenda to be related to the use of nuclear energy in the Civil Aviation and other related

industries as a plausible fuel. This agenda will deal with the necessity and plausibility of the

same.

Please do note a few things, the study is merely to facilitate your research on the agendas and

should be the basis of your research, but not the whole. Also, if any query arises with regards to

the committee (substantive or otherwise), please, feel free to contact either one of us. We are

more than happy to help.

Bibliography 18

4

We look forward to seeing an intense discussion at the UNEP, MOPMUN‘13. Signing off for

now, we wish you the best of luck with your research and conference ahead.

Warm regards,

Vinayak Rajesekhar Yash Agarwala Amrutha Kalyanasunder

Chair Vice Chair Director

9971001181 9589877862 9600128512 vinayak.anand@hotmail.com yash.agarwala@gmail.com amrutha2258@gmail.com

5

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We, the Executive Board of the United Nations Environmental Programme of

MOP MUN 2013 would like to thank the Organizing Committee of MOP MUN

2013, for giving us this splendid opportunity to be a part of MOP MUN and wish them the best of

luck for MOP MUN 2013

COMMITTEE INFORMATION

-Extracted from the UNEP Organization Profile PDF.

BREIF HISTORY

The UNEP (United Nations Environmental Programme) was established after the 1972 UN

Conference on the Human Environment, held in Stockholm, Sweden, proposed the creation of a

global body to act as the environmental conscience of the UN system. In response, the UN

General Assembly adopted Resolution 2997 on 15 December, 1972 creating:

• The UNEP Governing Council, composed of 58 nations elected for four-year terms by

the UN General Assembly, responsible for assessing the state of the global environment,

establishing UNEP's programme priorities, and approving the budget;

• The UNEP Secretariat, with its headquarters in Nairobi, Kenya, to provide a focal point

for environmental action and co-ordination within the UN system, headed by an

Executive Director, with the rank of UN Under-Secretary-General; and

• A voluntary Environment Fund to finance UNEP‘s environmental initiatives, to be

supplemented by trust funds and funds allocated by the UN regular budget.

In the subsequent two decades, a proliferation of environmental conferences and conventions

addressed various environmental issues. The most successful and well-known convention from

this period was the 1987 Montreal Protocol of the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the

Ozone layer.

6

In the same year that the Montreal Protocol was signed, the World Commission on Environment

and Development published its report ‗Our Common Future’. It was in this report that the

concept of sustainable development was clearly defined. The report also went further than any

before in linking environment and development.

In 1992, the UN Conference on Environment and Development—the Earth Summit—was

convened in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. It gave birth to two major conventions—the UNFCCC—and

the UNCSD. The Rio Declaration reaffirmed the principles first elaborated in Stockholm twenty

years earlier, while Agenda 21 gave the world an action programme for building sustainable

development into the 21st century. With its groundbreaking synthesis of socio-economic and

environmental elements into a single policy framework, Agenda 21 gave new impetus and

importance to the work of UNEP.

But as the new millennium approached, that commitment made in 1972, and 1992 came under

increasing scrutiny. In May 2000, UNEP convened the first Global Ministerial Environment

Forum (Pursuant to GA resolution 53/242 (Report of the Secretary-General on environment and

human settlements) of 28 July 1999), in Malmö, Sweden. One of the Forum‘s functions was to

send a strong message to the UN General Assembly, which was due to revisit the sustainable

development debate at the Millennium Summit in September 2000.

The principal outcome of the Millennium Summit was the Millennium Declaration, which gave

birth to the well-known Millennium Development Goals (MDG), in which environmental

sustainability is highlighted and is widely recognized as a major factor underlying the

attainability of all the other goals.

In the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development Plan of Implementation emphasized the

centrality of the environment to humankind‘s development and the integral role that UNEP has

to play. Then, in February 2005, UNEP‘s role was further reinforced when the UNEP Governing

Council approved the Bali Strategic Plan.

Finally, in September 2005, governments at the 2005 World Summit reaffirmed their

commitment to the MDG, Agenda 21 and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation.

Furthermore, they recognized the need for enhancing coordination, improving policy advice and

guidance, and strengthening scientific knowledge, assessment and cooperation in the UN system.

7

UNEP MANDATE

Mission Statement: To provide leadership and encourage partnership in caring for the

environment by inspiring, informing, and enabling nations and peoples to improve their

quality of life without compromising that of future generations.

The above being mentioned, there continues to be enormous skepticism regarding the efficacy of

the current UNEP at dealing with the scope of global environmental issues. One of the primary

reasons for that is its entitlement as a ‘programme’ as opposed to a specialized agency/

organization under the UN. This, coupled with a few more reasons has led to a widespread call

for UNEP reforms. But, till then, the UNEP still remains as the United Nations system‘s

designated entity for addressing environmental issues at the global and regional level.

The mandate and objectives of UNEP emanate from:

• UN General Assembly resolution 2997 (XXVII) of 15 December 1972;

• Agenda 21, adopted at the UN Conference on Environment and Development (the Earth

Summit) in 1992;

• the Nairobi Declaration on the Role and Mandate of UNEP, adopted by the UNEP

Governing Council in 1997;

• The Malmö Ministerial Declaration and the UN Millennium Declaration, adopted in

2000; and

• Recommendations related to international environmental governance approved by the

2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development and the 2005 World Summit. [1]

8

REFERENCE

[1] UNEP‘s Organizational Profile

http://www.unep.org/PDF/UNEPOrganizationProfile.pdf

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. For more links relating to UNEP‘s Organization Profile:

http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=43

2. For a short introduction about the UNEP

http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=43&ArticleID=

3301&l=en

3. Nairobi Declaration

http://www.unep.org/Documents.multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=287&ArticleID

=1728&l=en

4. Responsibilities of the UNEP

http://www.unep.org/resources/gov/mandate.asp

9

AGENDA – 1

Establishing a globally accepted system for Carbon-Trading with reference to

the ongoing IATA/ICAO – EU-ETS issue

INTRODUCTION

EU-ETS

The EU-ETS is a ―cap and trade‖ system that imposes an emissions cap on industries covered by

the scheme. Emission allowances (―EUAs‖) are allocated to each ―operator‖ within a regulated

industry for each reporting year. At the end of each reporting year, the operator must surrender

allowances equal to its total emissions for the reporting year or face a penalty. Operators that

emit more than their allocated emissions must procure additional allowances for surrender. This

can be achieved by purchasing allowances at auction, purchasing allowances from other EU ETS

participants or purchasing carbon offset credits such as CERs (certified emissions reductions)

and ERUs (emissions reductions units).

CERs are credits issued by the United Nations for reductions in emissions generated by

emissions abatement projects in developing countries. ERUs are also emission reduction credits

issued by the UN but they represent reductions from projects in industrialised countries. One

CER or ERU represents a reduction of 1 tonne of CO2 and can thus be surrendered by an aircraft

operator to offset 1 tonne of its emissions. However, operators can only use CERs and ERUs for

up to 15% of their compliance obligations in 2012 and up to 1.5% from 2013.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The EU‘s extension of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (the ―EU ETS‖ or the ―Scheme‖) to

include the aviation industry took effect on 1 January 2012. The vast majority of airlines with

operations to, from and within the EU are now required to monitor and report their emissions and

to surrender emission allowances for any flights to and from EU airports. There are a few limited

exemptions, such as operators with fewer than 243 flights to or from the EU for 3 consecutive 4-

month periods and those operators with less than 10,000 tonnes of emissions per reporting year.

Although 2012 is the first year for which airlines are officially required to surrender allowances,

10

the compliance process has been underway since 2009. The inclusion of aviation in the EU

Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) continues to concern the IATA Board.

The European Court of Justice will hear a legal challenge against the EU ETS mounted by

ATA with American Airlines, Continental and United Airlines. The Chinese Air Transport

Association has also threatened legal action against the UK, France, Germany and the

Netherlands.

ADMINISTRATION

Within each Member State, a designated ―competent authority‖ is responsible for administering

the EU ETS with respect to airlines. The competent authority in the UK is the Environment

Agency.

Airlines are allocated to the Member State to and from which most of their flights operate. Given

the role of London‘s Heathrow Airport as a significant hub for flights into and out of Europe, a

large number of airlines have been assigned to the UK. Germany, France, Spain and the

Netherlands also act as administering States for a large number of carriers.

PHASING

The EU ETS is divided into two trading periods for airlines: 2012-2013 and 2013-2020. For the

2012-2013 trading period, the total amount of aviation allowances (―EUAAs‖) available to the

airline industry is capped at 97% of the average annual aviation emissions for the years 2004-

2006 (known as the ―historical aviation emissions‖), or 212,892,053 aviation allowances. During

the 2012-2013 trading period, 85% of the total available allowances will be allocated to airlines

free of charge and the remaining 15% will be auctioned by Member States.

11

For the 2013-2020 trading period (Phase III of EU ETS as a whole), the total amount of available

allowances will decrease to 95% of historical aviation emissions, or 208,502,526 aviation

allowances. 82% of the total available allowances will be allocated free of charge, 15% will be

auctioned and 3% will be set aside in a special reserve for new entrants and fast-growing airlines.

The Directive provides for a penalty of €100 per tonne of CO2 emitted for which an allowance is

not surrendered. The shortfall will also be added to the operator‘s total emissions for the

following year. Ultimately, Member States can also request that an operating ban is placed on

persistent offenders.

CURRENT SITUATION

COUNTRIES CURRENTLY IMPLEMENTING THE EU-ETS SYSTEM

The ETS operates in 30 countries: the 27 EU Member States plus Iceland, Liechtenstein and

Norway.

RECENT TALKS AND DISCUSSIONS

June, 2011

Speaking to the Arab Air Carriers Organization (AACO) AGM in Algiers, IATA CEO Tony

Tyler said the EU ―continuing to pursue its unilateral and extra-territorial scheme is dividing the

world and recklessly risking a trade war.‖ He added that, regardless of their views on the impact

of aircraft CO2 emissions on the global climate, a wide-array of non-EU nations have united

against aviation‘s inclusion in the ETS.

―The crux of the issue is sovereignty,‖ he said. ―States outside of Europe view Europe‘s plans to

tax non-European airlines flying in non-European airspace as an attack on their sovereignty.

Saudi Arabia is the latest state to forbid its carriers from participating. China, India and Russia

have done the same. The US is moving in that direction.‖

Tyler said the EU needs to identify an off-ramp before the issue boils over. ―Europe needs to find

a way of relieving the pressure that it has created,‖ he told AACO attendees. ―There is no time to

lose.‖

6 November, 2012

European attempts to enforce its emissions trading scheme on airlines may undermine a global

12

solution to curb aviation's environmental damage and risk a trade war, IATA claims.

The International Air Transport Association, which represents 240 airlines worldwide, reiterated

its call for the EU to drop its "unilateral and extra-territorial" scheme, which is opposed by

several major powers, some of whom have hinted at retaliatory measures.

Tony Tyler, the chief executive of IATA, said the emissions trading scheme (ETS) was "not a

stepping stone" to meeting global environmental targets. "It's a polarising obstacle that is

preventing real progress."

He said a global solution, negotiated through the International Civil Aviation Organisation,

needed to be agreed, and that there were now "concrete proposals" that could be agreed in 2013.

The planned EU levy on airlines will be calculated based on carbon emissions for entire flights,

not just the travel over Europe, something its opponents regard as an infringement of

sovereignty.

China, which is hosting IATA's general meeting in Beijing, has already forbidden its carriers to

participate in the scheme.

Tyler added: "Sustainability should unite the world with a common purpose, not divide it with

affronts to sovereignty."

He said the EU seemed "more committed to implementing its ETS unilaterally than sincerely

negotiating" and that for China and others, "it's like being asked to negotiate with a gun to their

head".

The EU has said it wishes to meet international targets to reduce pollution, and has pointed to the

lack of progress on any global deal. Its director general for climate action, Jos Delbeke, told a US

Senate hearing last week that the ETS was "a cornerstone of the EU's climate policy" and pointed

out that by 2020, global international aviation emissions are projected to be around 70% higher

than 2005 levels.

Peter Hartman, the chairman IATA and chief executive of KLM, said: "We call upon European

institutions to act quickly to avoid an unnecessary trade war."

12 November 2012

Geneva – The International Air Transport Association (IATA) welcomed the announcement by

the European Commissioner for Climate Action suspending the inclusion of international

aviation in the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS).

13

―Commissioner Connie Hedegaard‘s announcement that she has ‗stopped the clock‘ on the

imposition of the EU ETS on flights to and from non-EU countries represents a significant step

in the right direction and creates an opportunity for the international community. The

Commission‘s pragmatic decision clearly recognizes the progress that has been made towards a

global solution for managing aviation‘s carbon emissions by the International Civil Aviation

Organization (ICAO),‖ said Tony Tyler, IATA‘s Director General and CEO.

The details of how the pause in the application of the EU ETS will be administered at a technical

level remain to be clarified, and the proposal still needs to go through the co-decision process

with the EU States and Parliament. Nonetheless, Commissioner Hedegaard has made it clear that

the EU wishes to ―create the space‖ for the ICAO process to succeed.

―The flexibility shown by the European Commission demonstrates that the ICAO process is

working, and we look forward to seeing all parties working together to present positive proposals

to the ICAO Assembly in September 2013,‖ said Tyler.

.

14

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. http://www.ab.gov.tr/files/ardb/evt/1_avrupa_birligi/1_6_raporlar/1_3_diger/environment

/eu_emmissions_trading_scheme.pdf

2. http://www.hfw.com/publications/client-briefings/eu-emissions-trading-scheme-

becomes-reality-for-airlines

3. http://www.verifavia.com/en/news/industry.php

4. http://www.greenaironline.com/news.php?viewStory=1616

5. http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/transportation-logistics/emissions-trading-aviation-

frequently-asked-questions.jhtml

15

AGENDA -2

THE FEASIBILITY OF USING NUCLEAR ENERGY AS PLAUSIBLE

FUEL IN CIVIL AVIATION AND OTHER RELATED INDUSTRIES

INTRODUCTION

Prospective Use of Nuclear Fuel

Nuclear-powered aircraft may sound like a concept from Thunderbirds, but they will be

transporting millions of passengers around the world later this century. Nuclear fuel will be

beneficial as the aircraft will no longer need to land to refuel.

The flights will not produce carbon emissions and therefore make no contribution to global

warming.

The United States and the Soviet Union both began developing nuclear-powered bombers in the

1950s. The United States tested a nuclear-powered jet engine on the ground and also carried out

flight tests with a nuclear reactor on board a B-36 jet with a lead-lined cockpit over West Texas

and Southern New Mexico. The reactor ―ran hot‖ during the flights but the engines were

powered by kerosene.

The aim is to look for a solution to aviation emissions which will allow flying to continue in

perpetuity with zero impact on the environment. There is a need for a design which is not

kerosene-powered, and many scientists believe that nuclear-powered aeroplanes are the answer

beyond 2050.

The nuclear reactors would be installed on unmanned air vehicles, used for reconnaissance or in

combat, because there would be less need for heavy shielding than on a passenger plane. They

are also likely to have open-rotor engines, which would use 20 per cent less fuel but could be

much noisier than existing jet engines

16

Industrial Use: Navy

Work on nuclear marine propulsion started in the 1940s, and the first test reactor started up in

USA in 1953. The first nuclear-powered submarine, USS Nautilus, put to sea in 1955. This

marked the transition of submarines from slow underwater vessels to warships capable of

sustaining 20-25 knots submerged for weeks on end. The submarine had come into its own.

Nautilus led to the parallel development of further submarines, powered by single pressurised

water reactors, and an aircraft carrier, USS Enterprise, powered by eight reactor units in 1960.

The technology was shared with Britain, while French, Russian and Chinese developments

proceeded separately. Russia developed both PWR and lead-bismuth cooled reactor designs, the

latter not persisting.

Nuclear propulsion has proven technically and economically essential in the Russian Arctic

where operating conditions are beyond the capability of conventional icebreakers. The power

levels required for breaking ice up to 3 metres thick, coupled with refuelling difficulties for other

types of vessels, are significant factors. The nuclear fleet, with six nuclear icebreakers and a

nuclear freighter, has increased Arctic navigation from 2 to 10 months per year, and in the

Western Arctic, to year-round.

Development of nuclear merchant ships began in the 1950s but on the whole has not been

commercially successful. Naval reactors have been pressurised water types, which differ from

commercial reactors producing electricity in that: they deliver a lot of power from a very small

volume and therefore run on highly-enriched uranium. The fuel is not UO2 but a uranium-

zirconium or uranium-aluminium alloy or a metal-ceramic alloy. They have long core lives, so

that refuelling is needed only after 10 or more years, and new cores are designed to last 50 years

in carriers and 30-40 years (over 1.5 million kilometres) in most submarines. The design enables

a compact pressure vessel while maintaining safety. Thermal efficiency is less than in civil

nuclear power plants due to the need for flexible power output, and space constraints for the

steam system.

FEASIBILITY AND PROFIT – THE ANP (USA)

Nuclear energy offers the possibility of an aircraft that could fly anywhere on the surface of the

earth or remain aloft for weeks at a time without refueling. The major obstacle to this

accomplishment has been that aircraft have not been large enough to carry the heavy nuclear

power plant required. This, and the fact that it was desired to have supersonic dash capability,

was the basic reason that the nation's aircraft nuclear propulsion (ANP) program, a joint project

of the Atomic Energy Commission and the Air Force from 1946 to 1961.

17

A practical nuclear aircraft would have shielding so that neither the flight and ground crew nor

the passengers receive radiation doses significantly greater than that normally received from

natural sources. It also would have safety provisions that are designed to prevent the release of

radioactive material in the worst aircraft accidents. Other features are required to make a nuclear

aircraft practical.

The program which saw potential in nuclear aviation died in March 1953 due to various

criticisms and political interference. At a time when nuclear energy was wholly associated with

nuclear war, the scientific viewpoint was pushed aside.

The possibility of the revival of the ANP and other projects in the 21st century seems more

promising than the past. It will however face many milestones like funding, R&D and

profitablity. Political and civil concerns will have to be addressed. Unmanned nuclear aircrafts

and rockets into space are a current topic of interest in space organizations such as NASA.

RISKS

The big challenge in civil aviation would be to demonstrate that passengers and crew could be

safely shielded from the reactors. It's done on nuclear submarines and could be achieved on

aircraft by locating the reactors with the engines out on the wing. The risk of reactors cracking

open in a crash could be reduced by jettisoning them before impact and bringing them down with

parachutes.

In the worst-case scenario, if the armour plating around the reactor was pierced there would be a

risk of radioactive contamination over a few square miles. If we want to continue to enjoy the

benefits of air travel without hindrance from environmental concerns, we need to explore nuclear

power. If aviation remains wedded to fossil fuels, it will run into serious trouble. Unfortunately,

nuclear power has been demonised but it has the potential to be very beneficial to mankind.

A special international agreement, the Brussels Convention on the Liability of Operators of

Nuclear Ships, developed in 1962, would have made signatory national governments liable for

accidents caused by nuclear vessels under their flag but was never ratified owing to disagreement

on the inclusion of warships under the convention. Nuclear reactors under United States

jurisdiction are insured by the provisions of the Price Anderson Act.

The usage of nuclear fuel when compared to bio-aviation fuels seems farfetched. A group of

interested airlines has formed the Sustainable Aviation Fuel Users Group (SAFUG). The group

was formed in 2008 in cooperation with support from NGOs such as Natural Resources Defense

Council and The Roundtable For Sustainable Biofuels (RSB). Member airlines represent more

than 15% of the industry, and all member CEOs have signed a pledge to work on the

18

development and use of sustainable biofuels for aviation. The IATA has invested capital and

time to work more on biofuels with low carbon emmission rather than focus on nuclear

options.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. http://www.theenvironmentalist.com/old/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id

=173&Itemid=59

2. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf34.html

3. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/anp.htm

4. http://www.astm.org/SNEWS/SO_2011/enright_so11.html

5. http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19640019868_1964019868.pdf