China and India are currently the world's number 2 and 3 largest producers of CO2. If present trends continue by the year 2015 they will be numbers 1 and 2, surpassing the U.S., yet they both have a total free ride under the Kyoto treaty. Canada, Ireland, Portugal, and Greece, among others, are all signatories to the treaty, yet have failed to accomplish the intermediate goals they agreed to and have taken no action meet the targets. Little noted in the rest of the media, but earlier this year (Feb?) the WSJ reported the EU voted to not impose any sanctions on member countries that failed to reach their targets.

Even the most ardent Kyoto supporters concede the treaty would not stop global warming. At best, it would imperceptibly slow the rate of change, and whether it would even slow the warming is in dispute. So, if the treaty does little or nothing, and would cost billions to trillions to implement, why sign on? The U.S. Senate was right in rejecting the treaty. For all practical purposes the Kyoto treaty is dead. R.I.P. It was a bad treaty, and the U.S. delegation, led by Al Gore, was snookered (didn't Al admit that in a 2002 interview?).

Russia is allowed to INCREASE their CO2 emissions under the terms of the treaty. They would be fools to reject it.