Representatives of the 191 member-countries of the Montreal protocol, currently assembled in the Canadian city to observe the treaty's 20th anniversary, have reasons to be satisfied. The production and consumption of over 95 per cent of chemicals that deplete the earth's protective ozone layer have already been phased out. Significantly, the use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) in refrigerators, aerosols, building insulations and as solvents is now virtually over. Similarly, halons, used earlier in fire fighting systems, have been replaced by carbon dioxide, hydro fluorocarbons (HFCs), inert gas and the like. The net result of all this has been a giant step towards environment protection. There is clear evidence now that the recovery of the ozone layer that protects earth-dwellers from the sun's harmful radiation can begin in the next decade. If all goes well, one can hope for a complete revival of the ozone layer between 2050 and 2075. | |
| Encouraged by the initial success, the member-countries are now discussing a further tightening of the Montreal pact's goals. The US has already submitted a proposal to advance the deadline for a total disuse of the harmful substances by a decade "" from 2030 to 2020 for the industrialised nations, and from 2040 to 2030 for the developing countries. Though this proposal may meet with resistance from some countries, especially China, there is no doubt that the US suggestion merits a positive response. For, environmentally safer and technologically superior alternatives to the ozone-damaging substances are now available and, going by the progress achieved in the past 20 years, it should not be difficult to advance the deadline. |
| |
| There are several key features in the Montreal pact which set it apart from other such global conventions. First, the treaty focuses on controlling the production and trade of harmful chemicals rather than their emissions. Secondly, the floating of a multilateral fund for facilitating the phase-out of harmful chemicals led to mutual dependence between the developed and developing countries and encouraged the principle of shared, but differentiated, responsibilities. Thirdly, the Montreal accord has put in place well-conceived institutional arrangements which help in a satisfactory resolution of even complex issues. |
| |
| In view of all this, the signatories to the Montreal convention would do well to accelerate the process of disbanding the production and use of all environment-unfriendly substances, including hydro chlorofluorocarbons, which were allowed to be used as less harmful alternatives to the CFCs in the transitional phase. It needs to be realised that the discontinuation of the use of such substances would help combat climate change, supplementing the efforts being made through the Kyoto protocol. Most of these substances produce greenhouse effect that is far more potent than that of the known greenhouse gases. Moreover, scientific studies have indicated that the climate benefits from the Montreal protocol might ultimately exceed those anticipated from the Kyoto pact in its present phase lasting till 2012. |
| |
|
| |
