A potential new Kyoto-like Protocol

Genghis Khan

Ancient Mariner
Here is a recent development from G8 countries on emissions and damage done to the environment.

Judging by the story, Bush may commit USA to an actual global climate change policy.  The biggest problem America had with the Kyoto Protocol is the special allowances permitted for large nations like India and China.  If USA, China and India, (the latter two are the largest countries populaton-wise), agree and abide by a new agreement, maybe we can get something done about global warming.  I have a concern (call it cynicism, if you will) that a new protocol will be passed, but some nations will not abide by it.  The current Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, tried to back out of the Kyoto Protocol by stating it would be impossible for Canada to meet its agreements.  Let's hope no nation backs out, and if they do, let that nation hear international criticism.  Canada has to get its act together, too.

Let me hear your thoughts, ladies and gents.


http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/g8_summit_climate_warming


HEILIGENDAMM, Germany (AFP) - Leaders of the Group of Eight club of wealthy nations agreed Thursday on the goal of halving dangerous greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 in a landmark pact against global warming.


The summit host, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, said she was "very, very satisfied" with the agreement but acknowledged that the accord was a compromise that fell short of her hopes for a binding deal.


"Many countries moved on this issue," Merkel said, adding that the accord gave impetus to negotiations beginning in Bali in December to find a successor to the UN-backed Kyoto Protocol on capping greenhouse gases that expires in 2012.


"The very best we could achieve has been achieved," Merkel said.


The chancellor, who holds the G8 presidency, had piled the pressure on President George W. Bush to bring the United States, as the world's biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, on board a process to keep the planet from overheating.


As member states wrangled over the final text Thursday, Bush took a conciliatory stance, saying the United States was ready to take the leading role in a global bid to fight climate change but that China and India must join in.


"The US will be actively involved, if not taking the lead, in a post-Kyoto framework, a post-Kyoto deal," Bush said after talks with British Prime Minister Tony Blair on the sidelines of the summit.


Blair had said he was holding out hope for a pact on significant emission cuts at the summit that would pave the road to a strong deal at a UN meeting Bali, Indonesia in December as the successor to Kyoto.


"I think there is a very substantial coming together around the need to make sure that we have a substantial reduction in emissions and find the right process and right way to achieve that," he said.


Merkel's aim had been for the world's most industrialised nations to take the lead in setting key benchmarks in the run-up to the UN meeting in Bali.


China, India and other developing countries, which have been invited to participate in the summit, are not required to make targeted emissions cuts under Kyoto -- a weakness Washington has frequently criticised.


The United States, the only G8 country that has not ratified the Kyoto Protocol, has flatly rejected any mandatory targets in a new pact.


Bush surprised many last week by offering a counter-proposal in which the United States and up to 14 other big emitters would agree by the end of next year "a long-term global goal" for reducing greenhouse gases.


Merkel has insisted that any agreement come within a UN-framework, a condition Bush warmed to at the summit.


Bush sharply rejected accusations that Washington was doing nothing to tackle climate change, telling reporters that US greenhouse gas emissions had declined in the last year despite the fact that the economy had grown.


"We are taking steps necessary to be good stewards of the environment and at the same time advance technologies," he said.


The meeting of the Group of Eight -- Britain, German, France, Italy, the United States, Russia, Canada and Japan -- taking place in the German resort of Heiligendamm ends Friday.
 
Wow. The ecosystem of the planet must really be in shambles if the country that emits the most greenhouse gases is willing to do something to minimize its exhaust. Frankly, I am surprised that the US is taking the lead role in this, since it isn't beneficial to them (in the short run, the long run is of course a whole different story). However, this new Kyoto protocol will not work if one country backs out of it (especially if that country is India or China) because otherwise everyone else will start yelling that its unfair if this one country gets to produce as many greenhouse gases as they please. Hence, this has to be a synchronized worldwide effort. Overall, I'm glad that countries like the US are realizing that we are destroying the planet and its better that action taken to prevent Earth from overheating is taken sooner rather than later.
 
:) That's an excellent deduction Forostar.  (I do not think you're being a cynic, by the way).  Bush and the auto industry are realizing that Japanese hybrids are the wave of the future.
 
Genghis Khan said:
:) That's an excellent deduction Forostar.  (I do not think you're being a cynic, by the way).  Bush and the auto industry are realizing that Japanese hybrids are the wave of the future.

Somehow I doubt it. I think its more likely that they've realized that a situation like that in the movie The Day after Tomorrow is not so unrealistic anymore.
 
I have to disagree with some statements about the US here.  Yes,  the Bush administration hasn't done much to protect the environment,  but a lot of states in the US have taken a considerable amount of pro environment measures.  The Americans use far more hybrid cars than the Europeans.  There's a much bigger variety of hybrid models in the US than Europe!  I live in Germany,  which I believe is considered a rather "green" country.  Here they do have some really good measures for recycling etc,  but there aren't a lot of hybrid autos hitting the streets.  Not to mention that there are only two models available (Toyota Prius,  and Honda Civic).  I know this because my parents wanted to buy an hybrid car,  but it seemed that not a lot of motives are given to buy one.  They are rather expensive for their characteristics and it seems that the owner doesn't get any special benefits.  Even in Greece,  a country that is in nowhere near to being called a "green" country,  relieves hybrid car owners from car taxes.  So yes,  Bush may not have signed the Kyoto protocol and the media may keep saying that the US doesn't do much for the environment,  but that only applies to the government.  Each US state alone has a lot of green measures taken (this of course means that some states may have very few and poor measures too).
 
Part of it is the political landscape.  Someone seems to have finally gotten through to Bush and told him that the Republicans are going to lose another election if they don't wizen up.  They have to pay attention to the environment and all that good stuff in order to try and get back some of that alienated 72%
 
LooseCannon said:
Part of it is the political landscape.  Someone seems to have finally gotten through to Bush and told him that the Republicans are going to lose another election if they don't wizen up.  They have to pay attention to the environment and all that good stuff in order to try and get back some of that alienated 72%

See, I knew there was a reason like this for such a move. Does any country actually care about the environment? In other words: would they care if votes were not influenced by environmental issues? Thought not.
 
No, but because votes are influenced by environmental issues, they do care.  I know it seems a hint shallow, but that's how democracies work - the government makes changes to gain the approval of the voters.  As people become more environmentally conscious, so will governments.
 
LooseCannon said:
No, but because votes are influenced by environmental issues, they do care.  I know it seems a hint shallow, but that's how democracies work - the government makes changes to gain the approval of the voters.  As people become more environmentally conscious, so will governments.

Exactly.  It doesn't matter for what motives any environmental/health/educational policies are implemented...it's the effects that count.  Take WWII.  Believing that any of the Allies joined the war to 'save the world' from Nazism is shallow...the fact is their actions changed history (for the better?), and that's all that matter.  Not quite ends justifying the means, but something along those lines...perhaps... :S
 
There is no doubt that the global warming is real. New data prove this clearly  :smartarse:

globalwarmingproofxv5.jpg
 
Back
Top