Global Warming Treaty Takes Effect

[Cal]

GLOBAL WARMING TREATY TAKES EFFECT

Neal Boortz

Today the much-ballyhooed Kyoto global warming treaty takes effect. Thankfully, this job-killing affront to national sovereignty will not be taking effect here in the United States. Australia has said no to the pact as well. So what exactly does it do?

The treaty was signed by 140 countries, including, among others, Great Britain, Canada and Russia. Two countries that are exempt from the treaty are India and China, both considered "developing countries." More on that in a minute. The purpose of the treaty is to limit the emission of greenhouse gases, thought by certain "scientists" to be responsible for global warming.

That is the state purpose, but that's not the real goal. The purpose of the Kyoto protocol is to destroy wealth in developed nations and turn over the reigns of freedom, prosperity and capitalism to the enviro-nazis. This is about those with an anti-business and anti-American agenda taking control of our economy. It has nothing to do with cleaning up the environment at all whatsoever.

But even if you grant that point, the Kyoto agreement won't work. Why? Well, because China and India are exempt. So naturally, countries who attempt to comply with this treaty will just shift their polluting industries to those countries, meaning the net effect on global emissions will probably increase. So what about the countries where Kyoto rules? They're going to have to comply. Already, ideas are being thrown around to give some world body such as the UN power to enforce the treaty, or levy a tax for violating it. There goes national sovereignty, right out the window.

Canada signed on to this disaster. Canadians like their SUVs and it gets mighty cold up there, meaning they pollute just as much as we do. So what are they going to do when they feel the squeeze? Probably come here.

Next to the war on terrorism, the second most important accomplishment of the Bush administration is ignoring international pressure and not signing on to the Kyoto treaty.

 

[Anonymous]

"That is the state purpose, but that's not the real goal. The purpose of the Kyoto protocol is to destroy wealth in developed nations and turn over the reigns of freedom, prosperity and capitalism to the enviro-nazis. This is about those with an anti-business and anti-American agenda taking control of our economy. It has nothing to do with cleaning up the environment at all whatsoever."

A definitely biased article written in the country that is the largest polluter on the planet. Once again somewhere inbetween is the actual truth.

 

[Cal]

"That is the state purpose, but that's not the real goal. The purpose of the Kyoto protocol is to destroy wealth in developed nations and turn over the reigns of freedom, prosperity and capitalism to the enviro-nazis. This is about those with an anti-business and anti-American agenda taking control of our economy. It has nothing to do with cleaning up the environment at all whatsoever."

A definitely biased article written in the country that is the largest polluter on the planet. Once again somewhere inbetween is the actual truth.

I'd like to see the figures to back up your claim that this country "is the largest polluter on the planet". You might want to register while you're at it.

 

[Anonymous]

It was on various news broadcats last night. As you weren't here to watch them with me, how about CNN as a source. I am sure there are more examples as it is common knowledge to most but obviously not to Americans themselves.

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/NATURE/11/20/climate.conference.reut/

 

[TimH]

The Kyoto Protocol is nothing more than a poorly disguised "carbon tax/wealth redistribution/foreign aid scheme"...PERIOD!!!!
My hat is off to the USA and Australia for showing enough smarts to have no part of it!!!

 

[Anonymous]

Here is another source Cal.

"Letting Polluters off the Hook

Two months after taking office, President Bush reneged on his campaign pledge to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. Soon thereafter, the Bush administration withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol - the global treaty to cut carbon pollution - even though the United States is the world's largest polluter (responsible for one quarter of the world's global warming pollution).

The Bush alternative is a global warming plan that calls for total reliance on voluntary industry measures and long term technology research. The administration not only does not require carbon emissions controls, it has opposed a number of reasonable, cost-effective measures to move America toward a cleaner, more energy-independent path."

http://www.environment2004.org/global_warming.php

 

[Anonymous]

How do we do it?

Carbon emissions from automobiles are increasing because of the failure to improve the fuel economy of all vehicles, cars and trucks alike. How much does the United States contribute to CO2emissions?The United States has the highest rate of carbon emissions in the world, with close to 1,600 million metric tons of carbon released annually (or about 25 percent of the world's total). Our country's total output is double that of the next largest polluter, China. U.S. carbon emissions are linked to our uncontrolled consumption of fossil fuels, especially oil. The United States is the world's largest "oil burner," with petroleum products accounting for 42% of U.S. global warming pollution. How much do automobiles contribute to global warming?Automobiles are America's biggest reason for oil dependence, and therefore represent the single biggest piece of our global warming problem. A gallon of gasoline weighs 6 pounds but when burned and combined with oxygen in the air, the resulting compound weighs nearly 20 pounds. Chrysler's Jeep Grand Cherokee, which weighs just under two tons, emits over three times its body weight in CO2per year. Environmental Defense July 2002
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 2
Carbon Emissions Fact Sheet One-third of the United States' carbon emissions are transportation-related. If American cars and light trucks were a nation, they would be the world's fifth-largest carbon emitter. Technology implemented in the late 1970s and early '80s was able to dramatically improve fuel economy over 1970 figures. By 1986, improved vehicle efficiency was yielding savings of 1.7 million barrels per day(the equivalent of Iraq's total oil production that year). That fuel savings translates to avoiding 63 million tons of carbon in the air. SUV fuel efficiency has remained virtually unchanged.

 

[Anonymous]

This weeks Drover's also verifies it:

News and Notes:
Kyoto treaty goes into effect
The United States and Australia won't participate, but the Kyoto global-warming treaty went into force Wednesday. Negotiated seven years ago in Japan's ancient capital of Kyoto, the treaty was ratified by 140 nations to target carbon dioxide and five other gases that can trap heat in the atmosphere and are believed to be behind rising global temperatures. The United States, which scientists claim is responsible for nearly a quarter of greenhouse-gas emissions, has refused to ratify the agreement. Bush Administration officials say the treaty would harm the economy and is flawed by the lack of restrictions on emissions by emerging economies such as China and India.
The Bush Administration says that the long-term benefit from the Kyoto treaty will not be worth the immediate economic cost. They say millions of jobs will be lost, many of them in Third World countries. However, the State Department said the United States was devoting nearly $5.8 billion this year to scientific research, new technology, foreign aid and tax incentives for non-polluting energy development. The Kyoto agreement was delayed for years because of a requirement that countries accounting for 55 percent of the world's emissions must ratify it. That goal was reached last year with Russia's approval. — G.H.

25% of the pollution and the US has around 5% of the world's population.

 

[Liberty Belle]

Do you think we should allow the rest of the world to regulate the US? For what? Kyoto was designed to punish the US for our freedom and prosperity. If we need things cleaned up in the country, that is our business and we can take care of it ourselves without bowing in submission to a bunch of third world polluters.
This is an interesting article on China, which incidentally, is NOT regulated by the Kyoto treaty although they have signed it, because they are a "developing" country and backward countries are not required to do anything about their pollution, no matter how bad they pollute the atmosphere.
Do you see anything wrong with this? I certainly do!

China facing increasing pressure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
Space Daily
11/12/2004 | AFP
China's share of greenhouse gas emissions is expected to exceed the world's biggest polluter, the United States, by around 2020 and pressure is mounting for Beijing to do more to limit global warming, analysts say. [note: I wish that they would refer to the U.S. as the world's largest producer of greenhouse gases, not the world's biggest polluter. There's a BIG difference.]
With Russia's ratification this month of the Kyoto Protocol, the UN pact on climate change will finally come into force and attention will turn towards China, the second biggest emitter in the world, they said.
The United States has refused to ratify the protocol but China, having made a commitment, will be held accountable, environmentalists said.
"They have to do their best and step up development of renewable energy," said Lo Sze Ping, campaign director for Greenpeace in China.
"The Chinese government is not ambitious enough. It can do better."
China is a Kyoto member but as a developing country does not have to meet specific targets for cutting emissions.
In negotiations to begin in 2005 on the next phase of commitments for Kyoto Protocol signatories, developing countries will likely be asked to commit to clear anti-pollution targets, even if the requirement will not be as high as that of industrialized countries, experts said.
"China is the second biggest energy consumer in the world, accounting for 10 percent of global consumption ... China's active participation in combating climate change is of crucial importance," said Khalid Malik, the United Nations resident coordinator in Beijing.
China's emissions now account for 13 percent of the global total, compared with 26 percent for the United States, according to estimates.
With a population of 1.3 billion people, China's per capita emission rate is much lower than that of the United States, Europe or other developed countries.
China argues industrialized nations should take the lead as they generate more greenhouse gas per capita.
"China doesn't want its emission volume to be higher than the United States, but you have to look at our population size. You must look at how much per person," said Gao Guangsheng, a deputy director-general of the National Development and Reform Commission.
China is experiencing nearly double-digit annual economic growth. Its goal is to quadruple its gross domestic product (GDP) by 2020. As the country industrializes, its energy consumption is expected to rise significantly, and with it, pollution.
"The priority is to satisfy our basic demand. The economy must develop. China has 1.3 billion people and we have to live," Gao said.
Experts and activists said China's argument was legitimate, but there was still much more the country could do.
China still relies on coal for about 75 percent of its energy. Coal-fired power plants account for a majority of the pollution China emits.
The amount of renewable energy it generates, meanwhile, is less than one percent of the total.
The government has pledged that by 2010, 10 percent of energy capacity will be provided by renewable energy.
Greenpeace believes China can make better use of renewable energy sources such as small hydroelectric plants; methods that use agricultural waste to generate energy and wind power.
But instead of moving towards those energy sources, China is building hundreds more polluting coal-fired power plants and has plans to build nuclear power plants.
"Many people want to invest in wind farms, but they can't get loans," Lo said, blaming the problem on "bureaucratic inertia."
"Government officials are not confident in new technology, unwilling to change policies."
To reduce greenhouse gas emissions, China must also increase energy efficiency, said Dan Millison, an environment and energy specialist at the Asian Development Bank's Manila office.
"China uses at least three times as much energy per unit of GDP than OECD (the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries," Millison said.
"As of 2000-2001, China's economy was eight times more energy intensive than Japan and three times more energy intensive than the US; also three to four times more than Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, and South Korea."
China is also aggressively expanding the automobile market, mimicking the United States.
"This will account for substantial growth in emissions, unless there is some radical shift to hybrids or other energy efficient transport system," Millison said.

 

[Liberty Belle]

An interesting article complete with pictures from space:

Satellite Images of Dust, Possibly China's Biggest Export to U.S.
By Robert Roy Britt
Senior Science Writer

One of the world's biggest exports is invisible, generates absolutely no economic gain and is moved around the globe, continent to continent, by the tons. It's a commodity that's tiny and foreign -- in fact you might be breathing some right now.

Go to this link to see what China and Africa are doing to the rest of the world while they remain exempt from Koyoto. Fair? I don't think so!
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/planetearth/dust_storm_010514.html

 

[Cal]

It was on various news broadcats last night. As you weren't here to watch them with me, how about CNN as a source. I am sure there are more examples as it is common knowledge to most but obviously not to Americans themselves.

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/NATURE/11/20/climate.conference.reut/

This article mostly quotes Jacques Chirac. When you stated that the US was the worlds biggest polluter, I honestly expected a discertation on actual harmful pollutants, not levels of carbon dioxide. CO2 is a naturally occurring gas, that is not proven that levels produced by man actually have a bearing on global temps. For every scare article you produce, I've likely already posted one debunking it in the old board's archives. Thank god that W isn't putting our economic future in jeopardy over junk science. How quickly some forget the ozone debacle of a few years back.

 

[PPRM]

As Cheney put it so well, "We aren't going to ask for permission slips."

 

[servicesoon]

Please remember there is one earth and no amount of money is worth destroying it. No, Im not a tree-hugger, I am thinking logically.

 

[Cal]

Please remember there is one earth and no amount of money is worth destroying it. No, Im not a tree-hugger, I am thinking logically.

If you're going to take time to post, at least make it worthwhile and give some fer'instances, esp. relevant to those of us (ranchers) on the board. That shouldn't be too much to ask from a "logical non-tree hugger".

 

[Steve]

Please remember there is one earth and no amount of money is worth destroying it.

if the very thought of "economic cost" comes into the conversation why is it that we are "destroying the earth" ?

and why is it okey for poor countries to destroy the world for pennies, yet bad for the rich to destroy it for Billions of dollars?

seems if the rules are good for one they should be applied to all....