Domestic Policy
Is The Kyoto Protocol Really Fair For Americans?
If environmentalists really want to talk tough why don’t they go after the biggest dogs instead of the easiest target, Bush and his Administration? Anyone with half a brain understands the real issue with the Kyoto Protocol so lets just put it out on the table. What is the real deal with emissions?
How much longer can America compete against a stacked deck? The Bush administration is getting railed on by environmentalist groups around the world, these groups want America to sign on to the Kyoto Protocol, thus binding them to emissions standards established during the creation of the protocol document.
However, a better question for these conservation groups would be to ask them why China and India emit all of the carbon emissions they like because of a technical classification of their status. Since China and India are the two boomingest ecomomies, let’s have them reclassified under the terms of the agreement, and then let’s see how supportive they are of the protocol.
Right now China and India benefit the most from the treaty because they are not bound by its rules and regulations. If environmentalists, and India, and China, are really so concerned about the environment, why don’t they get these two major manufacturing countries status under the protocol redesignated to the same as America, Europe, and Australia, then we will see how much these countries support the protocol.
The Kyoto Protocol is an international treaty on climate change. Any country that ratifies this protocol commits to reducing their emissions of carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases. The protocol was designed to stabilize the world’s emissions of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere; the protocol seeks to maintain a level that would prevent dangerous interference with the current global climate system.
Two of the major countries currently not signed onto the treaty are the United States of America and Australia. The two countries have abstained for two reasons, the first is that many respected scientists have advised that the greenhouse effect is not as dangerous as it is being made out to be, these scientists claim that the world has changed climates throughout its history and we are just witnessing another normal part of its history. The second reason is that these two countries feel the Kyoto Protocol is unfair to already industrialized nations, signing the protocol would force companies in these countries into spending large amounts of money just to be compliant with the protocols’ standards.
China has signed the treaty, India has signed the treaty, so what is going on with the United States? The United States of America has not ratified nor withdrawn from the protocol. You are probably asking yourself, if India and China signed why haven’t we?
India signed and ratified the Protocol in August, 2002. However, India is exempted from the framework of the treaty, because they are exempt many companies have transferred technology and manufacturing into India. They can technically emit all of the dangerous toxins they want in this country without actually being in violation of the protocol. India still maintains that the major responsibility of curbing emission rests with the already developed countries that have accumulated emissions over a longer period of time.
Pages: 1 2
Related Posts
» Protestors Feel They Are Protecting The Environment» Globalization Is Destroying Mother Earth
» Greenpeace Is Accused Of Using Dirty Politics To Get The Job Done
» Happy New Years, May 2007 Be The Best For You
» Is Asia Destroying The World As We Know It?
Discussion
5 comments for “Is The Kyoto Protocol Really Fair For Americans?”
Post a comment
Categories
Recent Comments
Most Emailed
- Bush Policy with Asia - 16 emails
- Retired Soldier: Iraq Troops Deserve Media Fairness - 8 emails
- Murtha Explains Method To His Perceived Madness - 8 emails
- Revisiting Immigration Reform…from 1907 - 8 emails
- Barack Obama Announces Run For President - 6 emails
Wowsers, I can’t believe you really think the United States shouldn’t agree to the Kyoto when they are the LARGEST polluter in the world BY FAR!!!!
You say they should put more restrictions on India and China. Do you know that the United States emits 10 times more pollutants per capita than China and 22 times more than India? http://www.geocities.com/combusem/WENCO2.HTM
Did you know that the United States is responsible for almost 20% of total pollutants in the world? China and India certainly put out pollutants too, and they should be restricted, but this is no excuse for the United States to say that they won’t agree. The U.S. emits more than twice as much as China in total pollutants and more than 6 TIMES more than India in total pollutants. And besides, just because someone else does something wrong, is that any excuse for us? These are pretty basic moral values.
You might look into the real reasons why the U.S. doesn’t want to agree to the Kyoto. It has nothing to do with China or India. It has everything to do with the fact that environmental controls cut into corporate profits. Those who control American policy would never do something to hurt their precious bottom line.
You offer very insightful discussion to this issue Don and I appreciate it. There are other underlying issues involved, you are correct in that statement. You are also correct in your statement about the concerns of American businesses.
Many feel the protocol puts the American businesses on an unfair playing field because of the addiditional costs of compliance. The Administration also recants scientific evidence that states the Kyoto Protocol won’t have a very big impact on the environment, this is debatable but it is part of their stance. However here is another reference to an environmental disaster in China.
China just had the terrible Benzen spill last month now this. Why are they not called out as much by environmentalists as America is? Thanks for you opinion, if more people cared as much as you the world would be a better, and cleaner, place.
Thanks.
While I do not agree with the Bush Administration’s decision to not participate in the Kyoto Protocol (see Letter from President), I do think this would have harmful effect on corporations.
Obviously, if the U.S. participated in the Kyoto Protocol it would cost corporations money to ensure they met protocol guidelines. This would give corporations one more reason on why they must eliminate jobs or move their business to another country.
I just wish there was a way to participate in the Kyoto Protocol without the negative impact it would have on American jobs and the economy…
Yeah, well somehow I think worrying about “jobs” and “economy” is a little bit meaningless when we are talking about the health of our planet. How many jobs will be left when the oceans flood all coastal areas? How much will we worry about the economy when the planet can no longer sustain human life? Do you think “jobs” and the “economy” will really matter then?
The truth is the American system is disatrous for the world and MUST be changed. There’s no way that 5% of the population can be consuming 45% of the world’s resources. That’s just NOT sustainable. So sorry about “jobs” and economy, but something must change if we want to have a world that is inhabitable in the near future. Kyoto was one step, but the American government showed that they aren’t even willing to take that SMALL step that only required very slight cutbacks in emissions.
Don, you make very good points, i agree, something needsto be done. However, I think President Bush wants to call light to the fact that India and China are just as pollutant as any other country, two rights don’t make a wrong but he is tryingto enlighten people to the situation. If all things were equal I think bush would sign the protocol. However, if signing the protocol does not force China and India to actuallt really comply then why should he risk his countries economic future. Remember, there are many world renonwned scientists who say the Kyoto Protocol will actually have little or no real effect on the environement. Are they right? I don’t know, I am not as knowledgable in this area as I should be but I do understand the Presidents position.