[lit-ideas] Re: If Not the US, Who?
- From: Eric <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 22:32:09 -0500
There are good Wikipedia background articles on
the Kyoto Protocol, Carbon (Emissions) Trading,
and the European Union's Greenhouse Gas Emission
Trading Scheme. The EU has already established CO2
trading among its member states.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol
[excerpt on US policy]
The United States of America (USA), although a
signatory to the protocol, has neither ratified
nor withdrawn from the protocol. The signature
alone is mostly symbolic, as the protocol is
non-binding over the United States unless ratified.
On July 25, 1997, before the Kyoto Protocol was to
be negotiated, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed
by a 95–0 vote the Byrd-Hagel Resolution (S. Res.
98), which stated the sense of the Senate was that
the United States should not be a signatory to any
protocol that did not include binding targets and
timetables for developing as well as
industrialized nations or "would result in serious
harm to the economy of the United States". On
November 12, 1998, Vice President Al Gore
symbolically signed the protocol. Both Gore and
Senator Joseph Lieberman indicated that the
protocol would not be acted upon in the Senate
until there was participation by the developing
nations. The Clinton Administration never
submitted the protocol to the Senate for ratification.
<snip>
George W. Bush, has indicated that he does not
intend to submit the treaty for ratification, not
because he does not support the general idea, but
because of the strain he believes the treaty would
put on the economy; he emphasizes the
uncertainties he asserts are present in the
climate change issue. Furthermore, he is not happy
with the details of the treaty. For example, he
does not support the split between Annex I
countries and others. Bush said of the treaty:
This is a challenge that requires a 100
percent effort; ours, and the rest of the world's.
The world's second-largest emitter of greenhouse
gases is China. Yet, China was entirely exempted
from the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol. India
and Germany are among the top emitters. Yet, India
was also exempt from Kyoto. . . . America's
unwillingness to embrace a flawed treaty should
not be read by our friends and allies as any
abdication of responsibility. To the contrary, my
administration is committed to a leadership role
on the issue of climate change. . . . . Our
approach must be consistent with the long-term
goal of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations
in the atmosphere.
According to the information from EIA, USA,
recently China energy-related usage produced 3,541
million metric tons of CO2, while the U.S.
produced 5,796 million metric tons.
In June 2002, the American Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) released the "Climate
Action Report 2002". Some observers have
interpreted this report as being supportive of the
protocol, although the report itself does not
explicitly endorse the protocol. Later that year,
Congressional researchers who examined the legal
status of the Protocol advised that signature of
the UNFCCC imposes an obligation to refrain from
undermining the Protocol's object and purpose, and
that while the President probably cannot implement
the Protocol alone, Congress can create compatible
laws on its own initiative.
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] If Not the US, Who?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: If Not the US, Who?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: If Not the US, Who?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: If Not the US, Who?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: If Not the US, Who?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: If Not the US, Who?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: If Not the US, Who?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: If Not the US, Who?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: If Not the US, Who?
- » [lit-ideas] Re: If Not the US, Who?