It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US: thanks for destroying our world!

page: 1
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+8 more 
posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:04 PM
link   


The United States is the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases and the only major industrial country to have rejected Kyoto, which expires in 2012. It has been on the defensive since the conference began Dec. 3.

The Kyoto Protocol requires 37 industrial nations to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by a relatively modest average 5 percent below 1990 levels by 2012.


That the American people have always been too stubborn to change their polluting habits is not a new fact. They are deeply in love with their SUVs and don't see why a smaller less fuel consuming car should be an option to consider when buying a new car.

After all, it's totally unimaginable that a two person family would buy a fuel efficient Ford Focus or a Toyota Camry. That's so not done, imagine what your neighbor would think of you when you would show up with such a small car.

The prime reason among some of the small group of people considering buying a more fuel efficient car is because of the oil price. I am not being hypocritical as this is the prime motive for buying fuel efficient cars in Europe and other continents as well.

However the fact that the US is blocking European proposals to reduce CO² emissions by 25 to 40 percent by 2020, greatly bothers me.

The scientifical debate has taken place and scientists generally agree that we , human beings, are responsible for speeding up global warming.

Reason to act you would think. In accordance to US logic we can wait a little bit longer. After all, owning these big fat Hummers is of greater importance than trying to solve the problems ourselves. After all, it's much easier to put the burden, we are responsible for, on our sons and daughters. The fact that thousands of people will die because of (sea) floods is not of such a relevance to act today.

If it would be a US problem only, I would say screw them, if they don't feel like changing then let them feel the consequences of their stupidity. However, it is not as simple as that. Everyone will experience the consequences that have been caused by the US in specific.


The Chinese team has been applauded by other delegations and activists for its cooperative attitude, but says its proposals to do more in return for help with clean technology have foundered amid squabbling over who is responsible for rising temperatures.


Countries all over the world are sincerely trying to solve the problem we face. Fortunately, Australia joined this club recently. Even China is actively trying to change the state of their polluted country. They cannot do this by themselves, which is why we, rich Westerners, should help them with innovative and dynamic solutions. Personally, I have heard many stories of German and Dutch companies working in co-operation with the Chinese government to improve the state of their environment.


The United States delegation said while it continues to reject inclusion of specific emission cut targets, it hopes eventually to reach an agreement that is "environmentally effective" and "economically sustainable."

Bush has argued that the pact would harm the U.S. economy and cutbacks should have been imposed on poorer but fast-developing nations such as China and India.


... Says Mr Polluter Supersize himself. That's the easy way out, right? Putting responsibilities on others while you are the biggest polluter yourself.

As China states: developing countries heavily depend on Western advanced technology, such as fuel efficient cars. We have the responsibility to help them. Instead of meddling with other countries, Bush should propose a clear policy, in accordance, with European suggestions to cut back emissions by 25-40% by 2020, rather than ''hoping of reaching an agreement''.

It's good to see the EU threatening to boycott US lead climate talks, which will take place next month, as the US obviously does not want to act, they just want to hope it's gonna work some day.

Let me state clearly: we are responsible for this mess, we should solve it. Not our children or theirs.

The lazy and careless attitude of the US and its people greatly bothers me and should be changed. Hopefully, the next president will, I lost my hope in this one a long time ago.

Disclaimer: I do not try to insult the American people, but the fact that there's such a big group of American people wasting huge amounts of energy and are not pro-active in trying to change these bad habits should be changed. Not tomorrow, but today! It's ridiculous that the EU is now considering to make agreements with individual US states because it's simply impossible to work it out with the US as a whole.


[edit on 13-12-2007 by Mdv2]



+18 more 
posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:16 PM
link   
That is quite the generalization. I do agree that the love affair with the SUV is a gluttonous phenomenon, but it is not indicative of the American population as a whole. If you really care about the exploitation of the environment you should ride a bicycle, grow as much of your own food as possible, generate your own electricity, boycott all corporations, and stop eating meat. To do anything less and have such a fervent opinion about pollution is hypocritical.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:23 PM
link   
I basically agree with what you are saying, but the title of the thread is a bit harse...

We are all responsible for the polution of this planet, but yes, it is truly sad that the one of the biggest player wont participate on a global plan to change things.

This whole "Global Warming" issue is not just about the heating of our planet. It is also about polution of our planet and other things.

1. burning of any kind of fossil fuels polutes the air
2. Oil being spilled over and over again into the seas are killing sealife

When the Oil industry wants to get rich, by affecting us all with polution, they have a responsability, to protect us aswell, when we need protection.

There is no such thing as "we only make a mess at home, and therefor only clean up at home".

This is a Global issue! And we must all be a part of the solution! May it fit in our pockets or not!



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bluess

I basically agree with what you are saying, but the title of the thread is a bit harse...


The title is purely to stimulate people to start a debate on ATS, but you are right perhaps a bit (too) harsh.

As for wingman, I will get back to you later on as I have to go now.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:31 PM
link   
The United States is not the chief pollutor, it has been surpassed by China in 2007, and yet they do not have to reduce pollution.

And China is not hurting for money at the moment; it can afford its own innovations. The beg and plea for Western governments to just give them money is nothing but an effort at wealth-distribution. If you want your government do give the Chinese money, which will be an absolute waste, go right ahead.

These treaties are worth only the paper they are printed on. Everyone signs them, and feels very good about signing them, but then do nothing. But hey, they signed them, right, and that's all that matters. The United States is not alone in polluting the world, we've had a lot of help. Blaming the United States is just an excuse not to act, and a scape-goat for other nations inability to reduce their emissions to their stated goals.

[edit on 13-12-2007 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mdv2
That the American people have always been too stubborn to change their polluting habits is not a new fact. They are deeply in love with their SUVs and don't see why a smaller less fuel consuming car should be an option to consider when buying a new car.


give me a break! It's not the american people, it's the car companies. Stop pushing this blame-game agenda, it doesn't help anyone.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by scientist
give me a break! It's not the american people, it's the car companies. Stop pushing this blame-game agenda, it doesn't help anyone.


And the car-companies will only continue this behavior as long as the market allows them to. When there is a market shift, the car companies will shift as well, if they want to survive.

But the blame-game is how the politics of global warming is played. Our friend is upset that the US is blocking a EU proposal to cut back emissions by 25-40%; however, he ignores the fact that nothing is stopping the Europeans from making those reductions on their own. Instead, they won't take make that effort and blame the United States for their inaction.

[edit on 13-12-2007 by SaviorComplex]

[edit on 13-12-2007 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Oh Christ, you need a breather. I'll keep it succinct and to the point.

The theory that the emission of carbon dioxide by humans significantly warms the planet is far from certain.

These CO2 capping proposals have two problems, especially in light of the previous point. One, they have a far smaller effect than is necessary to do much to stop the warming of the planet. Two, they do a lot of economic damage - meaning that more people starve. There is absolutely no point in doing so, especially in light of the fact that humans may actually have very little to do with the planet's temperature cycles.

This is nothing but an attempt to blame the United States for everything, as usual. Maybe it's an attempt to weaken it by forcing it to damage its own economy for nothing. Or maybe you've bought into the bull#, too.

Mdv2: Thanks for spreading ignorance.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by scientist
give me a break! It's not the american people, it's the car companies. Stop pushing this blame-game agenda, it doesn't help anyone.


And the car-companies will only continue this behavior as long as the market allows them to. When there is a market shift, the car companies will shift as well, if they want to survive.


what? so you are saying, that if car companies made an SUV that ran off a hydrogen cell/plugin hybrid, people wouldn't want it, because they are too addicted to using oil? Please. People buy these horrible cars, because it's what they can afford, and it's all that's being offered. For example, the emission standards in the US are more lenient than in Europe. They could easily make cars that are more efficient, but they don't. It has NOTHING to do with market demand, it has to do with big oil and car companies working hand in hand.

and if that's not what you are saying, then take this as an agreement, and adding on to your statement.

[edit on 13-12-2007 by scientist]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnmike
 


Originally posted by Johnmike
The theory that the emission of carbon dioxide by humans significantly warms the planet is far from certain.

These CO2 capping proposals have two problems, especially in light of the previous point. One, they have a far smaller effect than is necessary to do much to stop the warming of the planet.


But i thought you just said "The theory that the emission of carbon dioxide by humans significantly warms the planet is far from certain." And yet you claim that it will have a far smaller effect then neaded?


Two, they do a lot of economic damage - meaning that more people starve.


Economic damage.... no no no economic redistribution is more likely, and to starve are we talking small children in africa or Mcdonald eating Americans and europeans like myself?


There is absolutely no point in doing so, especially in light of the fact that humans may actually have very little to do with the planet's temperature cycles.


The keyword here is "may"...


This is nothing but an attempt to blame the United States for everything, as usual. Maybe it's an attempt to weaken it by forcing it to damage its own economy for nothing. Or maybe you've bought into the bull#, too.


There we have the true reason..."damage its own economy"...but you see as this is a global issue, we cannot go all "our own"...



[edit on 13-12-2007 by Bluess]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
The United States is not the chief pollutor, it has been surpassed by China in 2007, and yet they do not have to reduce pollution.


Per capita the US still trumps China in CO2 emissions. Australia, Luxembourg and Canada trails closely behind (in that order). China isn't in the top 29.

Source

Per capita municipal waste, the US still tops China. Australia, Iceland and New Zealand follows behind closely (in that order). Again, China isn't in the top 29.

Source

So the OP's assertion that the American people have a responsibility to bear still stands.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 03:14 PM
link   
Yes And Ofcourse The USA is like the "Peace Keepers" of the world yes _>



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bluess
But i thought you just said "The theory that the emission of carbon dioxide by humans significantly warms the planet is far from certain." And yet you claim that it will have a far smaller effect then neaded?

Yup. It's idiotic on both counts.


Originally posted by Bluess
Economic damage.... no no no economic redistribution is more likely, and to starve are we talking small children in africa or Mcdonald eating Americans and europeans like myself?

I appreciate the fact that you're completely oblivious to matters regarding economics, but no, you can't just redistribute wealth. Harming the economy directly causes people to starve.


Originally posted by Bluess
The keyword here is "may"...

Nice work! Your English teacher would smile.


Originally posted by Bluess
There we have the true reason..."damage its own economy"...but you see as this is a global issue, we cannot go all "our own"...

A global issue which may not even BE a problem, and which every solution for which does far more harm than good!



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnmike
 


I take it you think I was trying to insult you, wich I weren't. If you had read my first post in this topic i think you would understand.

However as i already stated this whole "Global warming" issue have another aspect called polution wich also affects us all. So when you say: "A global issue which may not even BE a problem" I say it is a problem allready.

And by the way I'm Danish and havent had English teaching in many years, but thanks for bringing that up aswell...

edit: by the way i have a degree in economics, so I am not totally oblivious

[edit on 13-12-2007 by Bluess]


JSR

posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beachcoma
Per capita the US still trumps China in CO2 emissions. Australia, Luxembourg and Canada trails closely behind (in that order). China isn't in the top 29.


maybe per capita....but in total china tops the list.



China now no. 1 in CO2 emissions; USA in second position

In 2006 global CO2 emissions from fossil fuel use increased by about 2.6%, which is less than the 3.3% increase in 2005. The 2.6% increase is mainly due to a 4.5% increase in global coal consumption, of which China contributed more than two-third. China’s 2006 CO2 emissions surpassed those of the USA by 8%. This includes CO2 emissions from industrial processes (cement production). With this, China tops the list of CO2 emitting countries for the first time. In 2005, CO2 emissions of China were still 2% below those of the USA. These figures are based on a preliminary estimate by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (MNP), using recently published BP (British Petroleum) energy data and cement production data. In the 1990-2006 period global fossil-fuel related CO2 emissions increased over 35%.

source: ( www.mnp.nl... )


[edit on 13-12-2007 by JSR]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by JSR
 


You're going in circles. My response was to a response very similar to yours. Perhaps the point is not clear.

Take the total amount of pollution emitted by China and divide it by their population (about 1.3 billion). Now do the same for the US (population est. 300 million). Whichever way you cut it, per person, the US pollutes more. Definition of per capita is per person (literally each head).

Now who has a bigger responsibility? Who supposedly has better education levels and technology? Who is supposedly 'leader of the free world'?

One last question -- what is the OP talking about? Hint --


That the American people have always been too stubborn to change their polluting habits is not a new fact.


Proving the OP's point by passing the buck?

[edit on 13-12-2007 by Beachcoma]


JSR

posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Beachcoma
 


who cares about per capita. are we trying to reduce c02 per person or in total.

i know what per capita means. that was my point.

----------edit---------

maybe i misunderstand. is the kyoto prot. a promiss to reduce c02 per capita per country, or, per country in total?



[edit on 13-12-2007 by JSR]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 04:24 PM
link   
I am not sure by any ways or means that there is or is not a "real" man made green house problem,and i dont care how many times you say it is so it must be true , or how many times that high preistess of the global warming crazy Al says the debate is over so it is real.either way blaming one country while playing holier than tho becuse you signed a peice of paper and we didnt,paper that envoled cutting trees to make so you can feel happy with your self,does not help in anyway.It is just more america bashing becuse we have become so powerful and so strong that it scares the rest of the world.bash away i say, we are on the decline and have been for years not becuse of our suv love but becuse we as americans just dont care enough about the country anymore to be bothered to do our jobs as citizens.so bash away and when we are no longer the big bad boogie man of the world maybe than the U.S can relax and focus inward to save our country.


JSR

posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 04:28 PM
link   


Common but differentiated responsibility
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change agreed to a set of a "common but differentiated responsibilities." The parties agreed that

The largest share of historical and current global emissions of greenhouse gases has originated in developed countries;
Per capita emissions in developing countries are still relatively low;
The share of global emissions originating in developing countries will grow to meet their social and development needs.[15]
In other words, China, India, and other developing countries were not included in any numerical limitation of the Kyoto Protocol because they were not the main contributors to the greenhouse gas emissions during the pre-treaty industrialization period. However, even without the commitment to reduce according to the Kyoto target, developing countries do share the common responsibility that all countries have in reducing emissions.

source: ( en.wikipedia.org... )


well isn't that nice. seeing as how they are the largest "total" emitters of c02.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 04:28 PM
link   
its so easy to talk about it as a armchair commander, but wheres your youtube videos or your myspace page dedicated to this cause? we all as humans have fubared things up. not just usa, and for the record, americans are devided into

A, Mogols ( elite of the rich )
B, The Rich upper class
C, The middle class
D, The just making it by middle middle class
E, The Poor low income
F, The Non voiced various

ABand C buy most of the SUVs and your slap happy oil machines, and they are the minority. While DE and F buy your economy cars, Used, and high intrest sucker cars ( you know what kind I mean, you see the ads )

Yes we have some from each class that defy this, but for the most part the people with money are the ones who care what others think of them and thus resort to buying the " it " car. Normaly being SUVs.

The NUMBER ONE problem causer to the USA being CO2 central is simply Our major industries, its our way of economical living, Money is the KEY reason we havent changed Squat for sometiime now. And who knows untill they see a green result instead of a red one from this stuff they wont budge.

its the same everywhere else too. People will change as long as its economicly safe for them to do so. its still too expensive to go green.


MONEY will be the downfall of humans. Always has always will. untill we get rid of it.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join