page 1
page 2
page 3
page 4
page 5
page 6
page 7
page 8
page 9
page 10
page 11
page 12
page 13
page 14
page 15
page 16
page 17
page 18
page 19
page 20
page 21
page 22
page 23
page 24
page 25
page 26
page 27
page 28
page 29
page 30
page 31
page 32
page 33
page 34
page 35
page 36
page 37
page 38
page 39
page 40
page 41
page 42
page 43
page 44
page 45
page 46
page 47
page 48
page 49
page 50
page 51
page 52
page 53
page 54
page 55
page 56
page 57
page 58
page 59
page 60
page 61
page 62
page 63
page 64
page 65
page 66
page 67
page 68
page 69
page 70
page 71
page 72
page 73
page 74
page 75
page 76
page 77
page 78
page 79
page 80
page 81
page 82
page 83
page 84
page 85
page 86
page 87
page 88
page 89
page 90
page 91
page 92
page 93
page 94
page 95
page 96
page 97
page 98
page 99
page 100
page 101
page 102
page 103
page 104
page 105
page 106
page 107
page 108
page 109
page 110
page 111
page 112
page 113
page 114
page 115
page 116
page 117
page 118
page 119
page 120
page 121
page 122
page 123
page 124

" "f we are to achieve a truly coordinatedaction on reducing greenhouse gasemissions, we must look to innovativeschemes, companies and countries totest the waters, sometimes suffering the setbacks andultimately taking us all forward.The turn of the last year has been a difficult time in thefight against climate change. The outcome of the highprofile UN meeting in Copenhagen in December wasdisappointing. In the months following we thenregressed to dealing with the frustrating and overblownresults of some sloppily expressed emails at theUniversity of East Anglia and a blithe assumption by theIPCC that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035. We always knew that we would not emerge fromCopenhagen with a full signed-and-sealed treaty withfirm commitments for specific emissions reductionsfrom everyone around the world. But I did hope that wemight emerge with rather more than we did, with atleast a set of in-principle commitments and sometarget dates and a map charting where we were goingto go from here. Instead, we have the CopenhagenAccord, drawn up by the United States, China, India,Brazil and South Africa, with some aspirations andagreements, and an earnest of intent to build on thisduring the coming year. And build on it we must.The worst response to Copenhagen would be to throwup our hands in horror and say nothing was achievedand therefore we should give up on the search forinternational commitments and agreement. Althoughthere has been what seems like a set-back recently, Iam still positive. We need to continue the drive for an internationaltreaty. And do so with renewed urgency. There aresome useful fundamentals in the Copenhagen Accord- the aim of a 2°C limit to temperature increase; theprinciple of north-south flows of aid and support inorder to ensure that the developing world can growmore sustainably than those of us who have largelycaused the problem up to now; and commitments tohelp combat deforestation. Should world leaders emerge from the UN ClimateChange Summit in Mexico in December with a signedinternational treaty to reduce greenhouse gasemissions, environmental regulators around the world will have an important role to play in ensuringwe start to implement any agreement with vigour andwith precision.The success of a global treaty hinges on the trust thatwe build and hold in the monitoring and regulation ofwhatever emissions reduction schemes emerge. Thecall to arms for the world's environmental protectionagencies is to ensure that legal requirements of theinternational community to cut their carbon output canbe backed up with an effective regime of regulationthat is measurable, reportable and verifiable.In a time of economic hardship, countries across theglobe will only deliver on their carbon reduction pledgeif they are confident that the system will not be open tomalpractice or poor administration. You only have tolook at the outcomes of weak regulation within thefinancial world to understand the impact it can have.Europe is already ahead of the curve in this regard withthe European Union's Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) having been introduced in 2005. While the scheme suffered some early teething problems due to the price of carbon diving sharply during thefirst three-year phase, the price has now stabilised,Main Picture:Environment Agencychairman Lord SmithDELIVERING ROBUST ANDTRANSPARENT REGULATIONOF CARBON REDUCTIONTHE UNITEDKINGDOMLAUNCHED THEWORLD'S FIRSTDOMESTIC EMISSIONS TRADING SCHEMEIN APRIL THIS YEAR042SUSTAINABLE BUSINESSIRT HON LORD CHRIS SMITH, CHAIRMAN, ENVIRONMENT AGENCY?