Kyoto the Way to Go?

[A_Wanderer]

President Bush said in a Danish TV interview aired Thursday that adhering to the Kyoto treaty on climate change would have “wrecked” the U.S. economy, and he called U.S. dependence on Gulf oil a “national security problem.”

“I couldn’t in good faith have signed Kyoto,” Bush told the Danish Broadcasting Corp., noting that the treaty did not include other nations _ including India and China _ that he called “big polluters.”

In Bush’s view, the Kyoto treaty’s mandatory limits also would not ensure that climate risks would be addressed unless countries like China also make emission cuts. He also says more study is needed to determine whether human activity is primarily to blame for rising temperatures.

The interview was recorded Wednesday at the White House. Bush will visit Denmark next week before going to a G-8 summit in Scotland.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair plans to make cutting greenhouse gas emissions a key theme at the G-8 meeting. On Wednesday, Blair told The Associated Press it was not possible to persuade the United States to implement the Kyoto Protocol.

“There is no point in setting a task that is not achievable,” Blair said in an exclusive interview with the AP. “Obviously, there is a disagreement over the Kyoto treaty and you are not going to resolve that disagreement.”

On Thursday, Blair told an MTV audience there would be no solution for global warming without U.S. involvement. The United States is the world’s biggest producer of greenhouse gases, which have been blamed for contributing to global warming.

Later in the Danish interview, Bush said the United States was looking for ways to “diversify away from fossil fuels” to reduce its dependence on Middle East oil.

“We’re hooked on oil from the Middle East, which is a national security problem and an economic security problem,” Bush said.

link

Now seeing how Bush is so dumb and he didn't listen to the more enlightened ones of the world why is it that the NZ government is in a bit of a bind over it's Kyoto commitments.

Taxpayers will be at least $1 billion worse off under revised Government estimates of the costs of the Kyoto treaty to combat global warming.

National’s environment spokesman, Nick Smith, says the party, if elected, will consider pulling out of the Kyoto Protocol, despite the cost to New Zealand’s international reputation, given the “hammering” the economy will take under the latest numbers.

link

By their estimations before signing on the NZ government figured that they would be able to make a 500 million dollar windfall from selling carbon credits to the big bad polluting nations of the world.

The other major change is on the credit side of the ledger, where Kyoto's rules allow credits for the carbon dioxide taken out of the atmosphere by forests planted on land not previously forested.

The benefit from these forest sink credits has been revised down by 24 million tonnes or 25 per cent.

Most of that, 15 million tonnes, is because pine trees planted on land previously covered with scrub are not now to be counted as eligible for credits.

So they jump in head first leading the world showing the unrefined nations who is worthy of praise before having to revise their figures and get buggered by the system, how might one justify such a system?

Prime Minister Helen Clark scotched any suggestion that the Government might be having a rethink, saying she would have ratified it regardless of whether it was a financial liability "so that we do not freeload on other countries' efforts".

See, that is the system in action, wealthy and predominantly western countries spending their money to subsidise minimal reductions by the big polluting rising industrial powers (not the US though which does give off the most greenhouse gases). Free ride for the polluters and big costs for the rest, man Bush and Howard are bloody stupid for not signing onto that one, they are irresponsible international citizens, the people are surely willing to sacrifice their own economic wellbeing for the world, arent they?

 

[financeguy]

Mother Nature is biting back.

We can either change our ways, or face the consequences.

In regards to China, check this article from the Taipei Times regarding pollution there:-

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2005/07/01/2003261706

 

[anitram]

Kyoto has some serious problems, surely.

But we also have people in denial about the levels of pollution and I think Bush is part of that.

Today, for example, I drove in to work (downtown Toronto) and could not see the top of the CN Tower because of the smog. It is estimated that 50-60% of the smog in Toronto comes from coal plants in Ohio. Even if we ratified Kyoto and even if it was perfect, the complete unwillingness down south to do anything at the federal level to curb pollution would mean that any effort we make up here would only, in the best case scenario, rid ourselves of less than half of the air pollution. Now you tell me if that makes any sense or if it is in any way fair. It is filthy and disgusting and we have people gasping for air. I have not been jogging all week since we are under smog watch and my lungs can't take it.

Take a good gander at the filth over LA, if you want an even better example.

Something must be done, and I think a lot of people are sticking their head in the sand thinking it doesn't affect them, and it's no big deal.

 

[trevster2k]

At least Bush was straightforward for once. Of course the Kyoto agreement will have economic ramifications on countries who have signed on. Eliminating pollution requires high tech adjustments and altering our lifestyles, of course it's a pain in the ass. But it's something instead of watching humans accelerate the destruction of our planet.

And pollution isn't just about climate change, it also about health. People in many cities get smog reports, and some days people are told to stay inside if they have a respiratory illness. We are already seeing the effects in our everyday lives.

This wasn't his argument when he wouldn't ratify Kyoto, the Bush administration argued that climate change was a myth but now he is saying it was bad for the economy. But since then they have admitted that there is a problem with the climate.

The US is afraid and rightfully so of the emerging giants in Asia, namely India and China. Why allow these countries to have a competitive edge by not participating in Kyoto? Bush analysts probably argued against the signing based on this reasoning. It is still a cop out though because we will all pay the price in the long run anyway. (maybe a bit earlier then we have to)