Kyoto Treaty

overanalyzer

Active Member
Hey I know this seems funny but one of the things I am really pretty passionate about is the environment. I am no tree hugger freak but the Kyoto treaty has been ratified now but just about everybody but the US. I think my desire to see a clean environment stems partly has to do with going to Lake Erie and not being allowed to swim because of pollutants in the water and also because one major result of global warming is that Coral reefs will be damaged .... but whatever the cause I am pushing people to drop a note to their representatives to force the Kyoto treaty to be discussed ....
The US has held out because Russia (the other large country holding out) had not ratified it .... well now they have:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe....ap/index.html
Here is an interesting quote:
" The United States alone accounted for 36 percent of carbon dioxide emissions in 1990, while Russia accounted for 17 percent.
Once the deal takes effect, industrialized countries will have until 2012 to cut their collective emissions of six key greenhouse gases to 5.2 percent below the 1990 level. "
Go to: http://www.senate.gov/general/contac...nators_cfm.cfm
find your state senators and ask them to at least get the treaty discussed. For those of us in Middle America there is very little that will change in our lifetimes with global warming - heck who doesn't want a little warmer spring time .... but the long term effects will be devastating. From CNN.com here are some of the impacts over the next few years of Global Warming ....
Africa
Grain yields are expected to decrease, and there will be less water available. Desertification will be worsened by reductions in average annual rainfall, especially in southern, north and west Africa. Coastal settlements in Nigeria, Senegal, Gambia, Egypt and along the southeast African coast will be hit by rising sea levels and coastal erosion.
Asia
High temperatures, drought, floods and soil degradation will probably diminish food production in arid and tropical parts of Asia. Northern areas may see an increase in productivity. Rises in the sea level and more intense tropical cyclones will likely displace tens of millions of people in low-lying coastal areas of temperate and tropical Asia.
Europe
Southern Europe will become more prone to drought. In other areas, flood hazards will increase. Half of Alpine glaciers could disappear by the end of the 21st century. Heat waves may change traditional summer tourist destinations and less reliable snow conditions may hurt winter tourism. Agricultural productivity may increase in northern Europe, but decrease in southern Europe.
Latin America
Floods and droughts will become more frequent. Yields of important crops will probably decrease in many parts of Latin America. Subsistence farming in northeastern Brazil could be threatened. Exposure to diseases such as malaria and cholera likely will increase.
North America
Food production could benefit from modest warming, but there will be strong regional effects such as a decline in Canada's Prairies and the U.S. Great Plains. Sea level rises could increase coastal erosion, flooding and lead to more storm surges, particularly in Florida and the Atlantic coast.
Diseases like malaria, dengue fever and lyme disease may spread in North America and there could be more heat-related deaths.
Polar
Climate change in polar regions is expected to be among the largest anywhere on Earth. Already the extent and thickness of Arctic sea ice have decreased, permafrost has thawed and the distribution and abundance of species has been effected. The trends may continue even long after greenhouse gases are stabilised and cause irreversible impact on ice sheets, global ocean circulation and sea levels.
Small island states
A projected sea level rise of 5 millimetres per year for the next 100 years will increase coastal erosion, damage to ecosystems, loss of land and dislocation of people. Coral reefs will be damaged
and fisheries harmed. Tourism -- an important source of income -- will probably face severe disruption from climate change and rising sea levels.
Australia and New Zealand
A more mixed picture. Impact on some temperate crops may initially be positive, but this will likely alter with further climate change. Much of the region may dry out, but there will also be more, intense heavy rains and cyclones resulting in flooding, storm and wind damage.
 

cathbad

Member
I think the biggest problem with the treaty is that it allows developing countries to add pollutants at our expense. Just because a nation is developing they should not be required to control their emissions? We are always telling people in the hobby not to cut corners, to save and research and do things right the first time, even if it costs more in the beginning it will save more in the end. In the case of pollution it will not only save money in the long run but it will reduce total emissions even more. And at what point would developing nations be required to reduce their emissions? This is my understanding of why the US has not signed on, perhaps I am wrong, but I have no problem with cutting pollution as long as all participants share the burden equally.
 

bang guy

Moderator
If we stop sending our money to other countries (your money and my money) and take care of your kids and my kids first, then I'm all for Kyoto.
 

reefraff

Active Member
In an non election year a huge majority in the Senate voted against this sham. China and India can already kick out butts by paying their help 50 cents an hour or whatever. You really want to outsource US jobs? Go ahead and require US companies to comply with very expensive and overly strict emission standards while allowing china and India to use cheap technology and labor.
There are some pretty asinine laws that could be changed in this country that would be good for business as well as the environment. One law basically gives companies an incentive to keep fixing old equipment because if they make any upgrades they must upgrade the entire plant. So rather than having one old boiler and one new one a company will continue to run the two old boilers.
Where I live there is a project to tap coal bed methane, a very clean energy source and much less harmful on the environment than mining coal. There are nut cases fighting the project, kind of explains why we have some of the lowest salaries in the nation here.
 
Top