Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gases takes Effect

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

lobbolt

Contributor
Messages
114
Reaction score
0
Location
Taipei, Taiwan, Taiwan
# of dives
50 - 99
From http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Science/2005/02/16/933005-cp.html

KYOTO, Japan (CP) - Amid fanfare marking the enactment of the Kyoto global warming pact, leading proponents laid out their next goals Wednesday: persuading the United States to join the world crackdown on emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases and planning further steps when the current agreement runs out in 2012.

The Kyoto Protocol, adopted in Japan's ancient capital in 1997, imposes legally binding requirements on 35 industrialized states to cut emissions of "greenhouse gases" blamed for rising world temperatures to an average of five per cent below 1990 levels. The treaty has been ratified by 140 countries, including Canada, officially went into force at midnight eastern standard time.

But the largest emitter of such gases, the United States, has refused to go along with the restrictions, saying they are flawed and could hurt its economy. Washington's absence loomed large over celebrations Wednesday in Kyoto, where environment ministers from member countries said progress would be limited without American participation.

"Climate change is a global problem and it can only be dealt with with a global approach," said Joke Waller-Hunter, the Dutch chief of the secretariat to the 1992 UN climate change treaty, to which the protocol is an adjunct.

Prime Minister Paul Martin said Wednesday that Canada would host an international conference on climate change in December.

The meeting will mark the beginning of discussions between countries to determine a longer term global approach on climate change after 2012, Martin said in Montreal, hours after the protocol went into effect.

"Taking on a leadership role by hosting this meeting is profoundly in Canada's best interest," said Martin.


The United States signed the protocol in 1997 under then-president Bill Clinton, but the Senate refused to ratify it. President George W. Bush renounced the agreement in 2001, and his government has expressed strong doubts about the link between gases believed to trap heat in the Earth's atmosphere and climate change.

No clear strategy has emerged on how to enlist U.S. participation. Several environmental officials voiced hopes that the increasing profitability of technologies and businesses targeted at reducing gas emissions would demonstrate that battling climate change could lead to new industries and jobs.

Thomas Becker, of Denmark's Environment Ministry, likened Washington's reluctance to join Kyoto to American automakers' failure to produce fuel-efficient cars in the 1970s. But he said the best advertisement for the pact would be its success.

"There is a market for climate-friendly technologies - it's a market rather than a burden," he said.

The United States argued that it was being environmentally responsible despite its opposition to Kyoto, with White House spokesman Scott McClellan saying Tuesday "we are still learning" about the science of climate change.

In the meantime, McClellan said, "We have made an unprecedented commitment to reduce the growth of greenhouse gas emissions in a way that continues to grow our economy."

Supporters of the pact say urgent action is needed. Average global temperatures rose about half a degree Celsius in the 20th century, and scientists say that has contributed to the thawing of the permafrost, rising ocean levels and extreme weather. Experts say further increases could seriously disrupt ecosystems, agriculture and human lifestyles.

In London, protesters with foghorns and whistles burst into the International Petroleum Exchange, disrupting oil trading in the world's second-largest energy futures market. Police said they arrested 10 people for public order offences.

Greenpeace spokesman Ben Stewart said the group was trying to highlight shortcomings of the Kyoto agreement, particularly what he called its "modest targets" for cuts.

"We need huge cuts if we are going to divert dangerous climate change," he said.

Much of the focus Wednesday was on what would follow Kyoto. The protocol, while praised as a landmark, is expected to have only a small effect on gas emissions, and many are urging even bigger steps - such as limits on pollution from airlines and other transport - once Kyoto expires in 2012.

Canada has no plan in place to meet its commitments under Kyoto. Environment Minister Stephane Dion said Tuesday the plan won't be spelled out in the Feb. 23 budget as had been widely expected, but "in the weeks after the budget."

He gave no deadline. Canada has agreed to a six per cent cut in greenhouse emissions from 1990 levels by 2008-2012.

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said climate change was one of the biggest challenges facing mankind, and there was "no time to lose" in formulating post-Kyoto strategies.

"If this challenge is not addressed, sustainable development will be out of reach," he said in a message broadcast from UN headquarters.

But some speakers at Wednesday's celebration, held in the building where the pact was adopted, said U.S. opposition was hampering a vital effort to save the world from environmental danger.

Others said the absence of such a major polluter would make it more difficult to entice quickly developing states - such as China - to agree to eventual limits on their emissions.

The Europeans, the main proponents of the protocol, were hoping to make their case directly to Bush when he visits Brussels, Belgium, on Feb. 22.

The Kyoto agreement was delayed by the requirement that countries accounting for 55 per cent of the world's emissions must ratify it. That goal was reached last year, nearly seven years after the pact was negotiated, with Russia's approval.

Kyoto's targets vary by region. The European Union is committed to cutting emissions to eight per cent below 1990 levels by 2012. Japan is committed to a six per cent reduction.
 
This is a good thing but unfortunately, according to the majority of scientist, it is by far not enough.
Obviously if all countries were part of it that would help. It's not enough though to point fingers at countries like America and Australia for not being a part of it without also removing the exemptions of countries like China and India.
Sadly the real problem here is that there is no real will to solve the problem. In fact, some people are in a state of complete denial and claim that global warming is a natural ecological cycle that has nothing to do with emissions at all!
I wouldn't rush out and buy real estate in the Maldives or much of the Pacific though!
 
[font=바탕]Actually, it doesn[/font]’[font=바탕]t matter where you live. It is just matter of time. You will eventually face with it. So, you have better invest on the real estate underwater [/font]J

[font=바탕] [/font]

[font=바탕] [/font]

[font=바탕] [/font]


Kim:
I wouldn't rush out and buy real estate in the Maldives or much of the Pacific though!
 
hoosier:
[font=바탕]Actually, it doesn[/font]’[font=바탕]t matter where you live. It is just matter of time. You will eventually face with it. So, you have better invest on the real estate underwater [/font]J

[font=바탕] [/font]

[font=바탕] [/font]

[font=바탕] [/font]

Well, gentlepeople, with respect, I propose that you are wrong and sadly misinformed.

Are you aware that the "hockey stick theory" surrounding global temperature increases has been proven to be grossly mathematically flawed? The proof of this has been published by the same scientific journal which published Michael Mann's original hyphothesis.

Or that the worst-case estimates considering melted ice flows and global water levels DIDN'T take into account the fact that ice expands as it freezes?

The Kyoto protocol is a farce. But even if it weren't, I respectfully challenge anyone here to give me any scientific proof global warming exists, period. Don't just quote rhetoric like "don't buy oceanfront property." Heck - Greenpeace tried to claim 18 months ago that the entire island of Manhattan would be underwater in 100 years unless Kyoto were implemented. That doesn't reek of alarmism, does it?

The Mount Pinatubo eruption in 1990 released more greenhouse gas emissions than 100 YEARS worth of manmade emissions. Manmade greenhouse gasses form such a small percentage of the greenhouse gas content of the atmosphere as to be essentially worthless.

Furthermore, the protocol as it exists in current form exempts some of the largest polluters, such as China, India and Brazil. Yet, the cost to implement it worldwide is estimated to be approximately $500 billion per year. Or- enough to provide clean drinking water to every single citizen on earth - in the first year alone. Imagine - what could we do in year two?

Global warming is destined to go the way of the Alar in apples scare, the "hole in the ozone layer is going to kill us" scare, the "acid rain is going to kill us" scare, or any one of a number of ongoing environmental doomsday stories.
 
Boogie711:
Well, gentlepeople, with respect, I propose that you are wrong and sadly misinformed........................Global warming is destined to go the way of the Alar in apples scare, the "hole in the ozone layer is going to kill us" scare, the "acid rain is going to kill us" scare, or any one of a number of ongoing environmental doomsday stories.

Yes, wait to see what the cost is. There are much better ways to spend resources. Great response, however it will be unpopular I suspect.........
 
It's all about money and power, they that had it during the creation of the problem still have it today during the solution, and of course still make the money off of it.
 
Boogie711:
Well, gentlepeople, with respect, I propose that you are wrong and sadly misinformed.

Are you aware that the "hockey stick theory" surrounding global temperature increases has been proven to be grossly mathematically flawed? The proof of this has been published by the same scientific journal which published Michael Mann's original hyphothesis.

Or that the worst-case estimates considering melted ice flows and global water levels DIDN'T take into account the fact that ice expands as it freezes?

The Kyoto protocol is a farce. But even if it weren't, I respectfully challenge anyone here to give me any scientific proof global warming exists, period.

Global warming is destined to go the way of the Alar in apples scare, the "hole in the ozone layer is going to kill us" scare, the "acid rain is going to kill us" scare, or any one of a number of ongoing environmental doomsday stories.

You want scientific fact that global warming is occuring due to greenhouse gases?

The warmest decade on record have all occurred in the 1990's. AND the 20th century is the WARMEST century recorded in the last MILLENIUM (prehistoric climate is measured in ancient Arctic ice cores, which trap atmospheric gases and can then be analysed to find climate of that time period). http://www.wmo.ch/web/Press/Press644.html
Is this happening by pure chance? Or is the warming world a result of rapid industrialization that is occuring after the industrial revolution of the 1800's?

The potential risk of rising global temperature to biodiversity, existing biomes, and aquatic environments, and others are harrowing. 1998 was the warmest year on record, which coincided with the worst year of coral bleachings. It is proven that warming water temperatures are threatening corals, which live at the upper tolerance of their temperature range. Warming temperatures disrupt exisiting climate patters, as a result desertification, severe droughts and storms could kill a great amount of people in developing countries. In one of my AP Environmental Science class videos, one scientist predicted the Amazon Basin to turn into a desert if climate change continues at it's current rate.

Acid rain probably isn't going to kill anyone, directly. Lakes and forests have already been destroyed by the low pH rains. The lakes are completely void of any life, save some bacteria.
http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/acidrain/effects/surfacewater.html
You're right. Acid rain probably didn't kill anybody. By the time it has taken it's full effect, you might wish it did.

I'll have more facts and figures to come. Bottom line you guys, you may not feel the effects now or may not believe, but is it more sensible and are we more responsible to preserve the world for future generations, who will have to live on this same earth we are on? Cancunmark is a member of this board and has a degree in environmental science. I think he could contribute to this discussion.
 
lobbolt:
You want scientific fact that global warming is occuring due to greenhouse gases?

The warmest decade on record have all occurred in the 1990's. AND the 20th century is the WARMEST century recorded in the last MILLENIUM (prehistoric climate is measured in ancient Arctic ice cores, which trap atmospheric gases and can then be analysed to find climate of that time period). http://www.wmo.ch/web/Press/Press644.html
Is this happening by pure chance? Or is the warming world a result of rapid industrialization that is occuring after the industrial revolution of the 1800's?

The potential risk of rising global temperature to biodiversity, existing biomes, and aquatic environments, and others are harrowing. 1998 was the warmest year on record, which coincided with the worst year of coral bleachings. It is proven that warming water temperatures are threatening corals, which live at the upper tolerance of their temperature range. Warming temperatures disrupt exisiting climate patters, as a result desertification, severe droughts and storms could kill a great amount of people in developing countries. In one of my AP Environmental Science class videos, one scientist predicted the Amazon Basin to turn into a desert if climate change continues at it's current rate.

Acid rain probably isn't going to kill anyone, directly. Lakes and forests have already been destroyed by the low pH rains. The lakes are completely void of any life, save some bacteria.
http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/acidrain/effects/surfacewater.html
You're right. Acid rain probably didn't kill anybody. By the time it has taken it's full effect, you might wish it did.

I'll have more facts and figures to come. Bottom line you guys, you may not feel the effects now or may not believe, but is it more sensible and are we more responsible to preserve the world for future generations, who will have to live on this same earth we are on? Cancunmark is a member of this board and has a degree in environmental science. I think he could contribute to this discussion.


Then could you enlighten me as to why the core sample operation in the Greenland Icecap has painted a much different picture of warming and cooling of the planet that seem to have occurred LONG before the evil western industrialization supposed heating of the atmosphere...

Paul in VT
 
I've experienced so much back-and-forthing from scientists on global warming, I refuse to comment on it.

However, I believe Kyoto does have one important contribution for the world. It internationally sensationalizes the Topic. Such attention has and is motivating politicians/legislators to sponsor a massive outpouring of critical scientific studies. The end result (for us scientists anyway) will be a greater understanding of climate, it's biotic and abiotic interactions, and our role in it.

Later editions of oceanography texts will replace the guesstimates found in many global-scale process diagrams with hard numbers. And the weather folks will no doubt be able to model existing climate patterns far more accurately. Weather prediction should scale up significantly. A 10 day forecast will actually mean something in east Texas!
 

Back
Top Bottom