US and Australia wont sign Kyoto protocol

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 22 2004 @ 03:44 PM
link   

From NEWS.com.au: US defiant on Kyoto

October 23, 2004

THE United States said today it had no intention of following Russia's lead and signing the protocol to the Kyoto climate accord.

"We have no intention of signing or ratifying it. We have not changed our views," said deputy State Department spokesman Adam Ereli.

The European Union had earlier called on the United States to follow Russia's ratification of the accord, aimed at lessening the impact of climate change.

The United States helped negotiate the protocol under former president Bill Clinton's administration. But President George W. Bush refused to join the accord when he took office in 2001 because of the cost to US industry.


Seems like they dont see the warning signals, or wont or dont care.
122 nations will go on with the agreement to help stop global warming, US wont...
BIG mistake!
What will Kerry do if he gets in The office?

EDIT: Added Australia in headline. See last post...

[edit on 2004/10/22 by Hellmutt]



E_T

posted on Oct, 22 2004 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hellmutt
Seems like they dont see the warning signals, or wont or dont care.
Until there's enough powerful storm to make places look like Hiroshima/Nagasaki ground zero.

And I wouldn't bet that everyone would learn even then.



posted on Oct, 22 2004 @ 04:01 PM
link   
Just strictly and ONLY the US, Hellmutt?
Really?
How many nations are there in this world?
Whats Russia (since the article you prsent says they ratified it, BUT are talking about canning it also) and China's position on this since they are pumping out just as much pollution, etc. as the US, if not more....


seekerof

[edit on 22-10-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Oct, 22 2004 @ 04:18 PM
link   
As for Kerry, he voted against ratification and to kill it in 1997:
On the Resolution (s.res.98 )

Mr. "Environmental Champion" Kerry has flip-flopped since.
Kerry's Strategic Ambiguity on Kyoto


seekerof



posted on Oct, 22 2004 @ 04:43 PM
link   
Seekerof

Ok, first of all. Im not into american politics, Im norwegian. Im not a Kerry-fan, but Im definately not a Bush-fan.

China signed the pact on May 29, 1998


From Russian OK clears way for Kyoto Protocol
01 October 2004

The Russian government has approved the Kyoto Protocol, giving decisive support to the long-delayed climate change treaty that should allow it to come into force worldwide.

The pact, so far ratified by 122 nations
But they account for only 44 per cent of emissions.



posted on Oct, 22 2004 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Kerry said during one of the debates that the Kyto protocol was flawed as is and he wouldnt have signed it how it is now. Then he said he would have done something to try to change how the protocol was flawed.



posted on Oct, 22 2004 @ 05:07 PM
link   
Thanks for the further information Hellmutt.

I found this interesting tidbit in an article addressing Russia's ratification of the Kyoto Accords:


Moscow signed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol in 1999. But it signalled it would ratify it only this year in exchange for EU agreement on the terms of Moscow's admission to the World Trade Organization.


Then this:


But opponents insist new emission limits could constrain Russia's economic growth and undermine Putin's plan to double gross domestic product in 10 years.

Russian debates reflect worldwide arguments over the pact, which could cost trillions of dollars to implement.

"There are far more important problems to address like HIV, malaria, malnutrition and ways to improve free trade," said Bjorn Lomborg, the Danish author of "The Skeptical Environmentalist" who reckons Kyoto is money badly spent.

Russia ratifies Kyoto environment pact

As such, you are aware that the Accords are NOT in the best interest of Russia, including China and the US, as well as others, and that the Accords bases all emissions on 1990 levels, which was about the same time Russian industry imploded...? The Accords were probably worded in a way to make sure that the Russian's came on board, wouldn't you think?

China is semi-shielded by the Accords and in truth, the Accords are MAINLY directed towards the US....interesting, isn't it?

And of course, the European nations won;t have a big deal with the Accords, because if limits are set at 1990 limits, they can virtually pollute till their hearts are content.

Maybe when Bill Clinton gets nominated to replace Kofi at the UN, he can "champion" the Accords around the world, but it certainly won't be accepted in the US as long as the US maintains the right of 'self-determination'.

As for US industry and companies, they can care less which way this roles for the US. Further justifies their out-sourcing tendencies....to their way of thinking anyhow.



seekerof



posted on Oct, 22 2004 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Kerry said during one of the debates that the Kyto protocol was flawed as is and he wouldnt have signed it how it is now. Then he said he would have done something to try to change how the protocol was flawed.


You bringing a good point for what I have seen US has stop signing on a lot of things because they either don't "agree" or is "flawed"

How convienient.

Well guess what? I find bush "flawed" and I don't "agree" with his policies so I am voting him out.



posted on Oct, 22 2004 @ 07:21 PM
link   
Any politician that pushes for that piece of work that I believe was intentionally designed to further hobble the U.S. I will vote against. Period. I don't care who it is.



posted on Oct, 22 2004 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Let see the why will US will not agree with it hummm.................

US is the worlds's biggest polluter, which spews out 25 percent of all greehouse gases.

Now bush don't want the treaty even before he took office, saying itsreqirements would cripple "America industry" I guess he means his buddies in the refinery business in texas. Right?

He tried to get Putin to follow his lead in rejecting it. He failed.

Now Russia is on board, the treaty has enough members to go into effect, and a new , multibillion-dollar trade in global emissions credits will spring up, with the US standing on the sidelines.

(Now "emissions trading" will be a huge business opportunity) said the financial times in an editorial.

Now as the whole world get together on this new enterprise, the bu# administration might begin to feel the isolation of his government has impose to the country see people our all for one president keep getting more and more away from the rest of the international comunity.

Way to go king George.


[edit on 073131p://555 by marg6043]



posted on Oct, 22 2004 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Just strictly and ONLY the US, Hellmutt?
Really?
How many nations are there in this world?


The reason I put the spotlight specifically on US regarding this issue :

The U.S. share of emissions is 36 percent of the total worldwide emissions.


EDIT: Where did I get this number (36%)?
The link you provided for us, actually : Russia ratifies Kyoto environment pact
Near the bottom of the page you will find this:
"With Russia, Kyoto will represent 61 percent of developed nations' emissions against a current 44 percent. The U.S. share is 36 percent."
Thank you!


[edit on 2004/10/22 by Hellmutt]



posted on Oct, 22 2004 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hellmutt

The U.S. share of emissions is 36 percent of the total worldwide emissions.


You are bringing a very good topic that needs awareness,

The US in a report that the goverment released conceding that human activity is contributing to global warming. Scientists from the Commerce Department, the State Department, the Eviromental Protection Agency, and other agencies approved data that showed temperatures rising alarmingly in the artic just over the past three decades.

The state of california is taking this seriously when they just getting stricter auto emissions, and several states have begun systems of emissions permit trading among power plants to help them meet lower state pollution limits.

But occurs our children and grand children will get to enjoy the devastation and damage of doing to littler to late.



posted on Oct, 22 2004 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Scientists from the Commerce Department, the State Department, the Eviromental Protection Agency, and other agencies approved data that showed temperatures rising alarmingly in the artic just over the past three decades.


Youre right. Heres an example:


From Asian glaciers shrinking at alarming rate

Glaciers around the Qinghai-Tibet plateau are shrinking at an alarming rate.

Chinese and American scientists announced this on the basis of long term studies in the region, China Radio International reported Monday.

They point out that the glaciers have shrunk by an average of seven percent a year over the past 40 years.

Scientists warn that ever smaller glaciers will mean less and less water in the rivers they feed, seriously threatening the hundreds of millions of people who depend on them and accelerating the already very serious problem of desertification.

Glaciers all around the world, as well as the polar ice sheets, are shrinking faster and faster. The reason is generally agreed to be global warming.



posted on Oct, 22 2004 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Latest from Australia:


From Greenpeace slams PM on Kyoto

GREENPEACE has labelled Australian Prime Minister John Howard's refusal to sign the Kyoto Protocol as embarrassing following the Russian Government's move to join the global climate protection agreement last night.

Mr Howard has said Australia will achieve its Kyoto benchmarks without signing the treaty.

Greenpeace campaign manager Danny Kennedy said Australia's rejection of the protocol will hurt the nation in the eyes of the global community and economically.

"It's shameful the prime minister refuses to ratify this while the world is proceeding with this important step," he said.

"Kyoto is just a small step in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
As an Australian citizen I'm embarrassed."

Australia and the US are now the only developed Western nations who have not ratified Kyoto.

"We are flying in the face of the warning signs and we are doing it at our own peril"


E_T

posted on Oct, 23 2004 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
And of course, the European nations won;t have a big deal with the Accords, because if limits are set at 1990 limits, they can virtually pollute till their hearts are content.
Maybe in ex East bloc countries which had very ineffective and polluting industry.
At least here in Finland slack was taken out already before 1990.


BTW, How is your "top modern and efficient" steel industry going today?





posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 08:05 PM
link   

From Queen urges US global warming rethink

QUEEN Elizabeth has made a rare tiptoe into the world of politics by warning Prime Minister Tony Blair of her grave concerns over the policy of the US towards global warming, a British newspaper said yesterday.

The Observer reported that the Queen was understood to have asked Mr Blair's office to lobby the US after observing the alarming impact of Britain's changing weather on her estates at Balmoral Castle in Scotland, and Sandringham House in east England.

"There has been dialogue between Downing Street and Buckingham Palace on all issues relating to climate change including the US position and the latest science," said one of Britain's leading expert's on climate change.

The US, flying in the face of snowballing world opinion, said earlier this month it would not follow Russia's lead and ratify the Kyoto protocol on global warming.

Click the link for the full article...

This is serious folks...
The Queen is now talking politics. She would only do so if there was a VERY good reason for it.

ATSNN: SCI/TECH: Queen Elizabeth Urges US Global Warming Rethink

[edit on 2004/11/1 by Hellmutt]



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 09:01 PM
link   
Hmmmm, it seems that the data analysis supporting global warming wasn't quite correct...

www.technologyreview.com...


Ooops, I should have searched a little more before posting that link: www.abovetopsecret.com...



[edit on 31-10-2004 by ICGerms]



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 09:15 PM
link   
from what ive heard that agreement would give china 25 years before they would be held to the same standards as everyone else. if that is true, then i would reject it.



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 09:31 PM
link   
I am embarassed to be Australian as we stupidly follow the American's in not ratifying kyoto. It's not perfect but it's a uniformed, global step in the right direction and that's waht we need.

thanks,
drfunk



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by drfunk
a uniformed, global step in the right direction


Youve got my full support.


And if anyone wonder why Queen Elizabeth is more concerned about US and not Australia... : Kyoto represents 61 percent of all developed nations' emissions. When the US share is 36 percent, I guess it means Australias share represents the remaining 3 percent only.



  exclusive video


top topics
 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join