Kyoto Treaty comes into force

[Said1]

Ireland isn't cosidered a rich country in europe...they have economic problems...although in better shape than say 20 years ago

And yet they signed on anyway, knowing any increases in outputs as a result of increases in production (which is what happened) could put them over their limits. They are facing pentalites in the billions of dollars.

 

[freeandfun1]

And yet they signed on anyway, knowing any increases in outputs as a result of increases in production (which is what happened) could put them over their limits. They are facing pentalites in the billions of dollars.

When I heard China was going to be exempted, I decided myself there is NO WAY IN HELL the USA should sign up. Have you ever been to China? The air and the ground and eveywhere is filthy as hell. There was no reason why they should be exempted from the treaty for even one day.

 

[manu1959]

Stiffling economic development will always ensure that they do nothing to protect their environments. Not that they're doing much now mind you.

the problem is that the non-developing nations will build or continue to run factories in the developing nations that wreck the environment

 

[Said1]

When I heard China was going to be exempted, I decided myself there is NO WAY IN HELL the USA should sign up. Have you ever been to China? The air and the ground and eveywhere is filthy as hell. There was no reason why they should be exempted from the treaty for even one day.

With current rates of production in China as it is now, they'd never be able meet output limits, never mind 10 yrs from now.

 

[Said1]

the problem is that the non-developing nations will build or continue to run factories in the developing nations that wreck the environment

Unless developing nations enforce or toughen up environmental standards within the nation they govern this will probably continue to happen. Excluding them from world markets is not the answer either.

 

[Bonnie]

the problem is that the non-developing nations will build or continue to run factories in the developing nations that wreck the environment

I agree
The two biggest offenders being China and India with coal emmissions. Right now China and India together make up about 90% of greenhouse gas emissions, so how is it the U.S and other more developed nations have to foot the bill and assume responsibility???

 

[freeandfun1]

I agree
The two biggest offenders being China and India with coal emmissions. Right now China and India together make up about 90% of greenhouse gas emissions, so how is it the U.S and other more developed nations have to foot the bill and assume responsibility???

Everybody keeps talk'n about how China is kick'n our ass economically, stealing our jobs, etc., etc., yet then the libs want to turn around and enable them to do so by putting restrictions on us that do not apply to them. How in the hell do the liberals think this stuff up?

 

[onedomino]

Kyoto and Lunatic Fringe Protests:

Kyoto Protest Beaten Back by Inflamed Petrol Traders
By Laura Peek and Liz Chong

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1487741,00.html

WHEN 35 Greenpeace protesters stormed the International Petroleum Exchange (IPE) yesterday they had planned the operation in great detail.
What they were not prepared for was the post-prandial aggression of oil traders who kicked and punched them back on to the pavement.

“We bit off more than we could chew. They were just Cockney barrow boy spivs. Total thugs,” one protester said, rubbing his bruised skull. “I’ve never seen anyone less amenable to listening to our point of view.”

Another said: “I took on a Texan Swat team at Esso last year and they were angels compared with this lot.” Behind him, on the balcony of the pub opposite the IPE, a bleary-eyed trader, pint in hand, yelled: “Sod off, Swampy.”

Greenpeace had hoped to paralyse oil trading at the exchange in the City near Tower Bridge on the day that the Kyoto Protocol came into force. “The Kyoto Protocol has modest aims to improve the climate and we need huge aims,” a spokesman said.

Protesters conceded that mounting the operation after lunch may not have been the best plan. “The violence was instant,” Jon Beresford, 39, an electrical engineer from Nottingham, said.

“They grabbed us and started kicking and punching. Then when we were on the floor they tried to push huge filing cabinets on top of us to crush us.” When a trader left the building shortly before 2pm, using a security swipe card, a protester dropped some coins on the floor and, as he bent down to pick them up, put his boot in the door to keep it open.

Two minutes later, three Greenpeace vans pulled up and another 30 protesters leapt out and were let in by the others.

They made their way to the trading floor, blowing whistles and sounding fog horns, encountering little resistance from security guards. Rape alarms were tied to helium balloons to float to the ceiling and create noise out of reach. The IPE conducts “open outcry” trading where deals are shouted across the pit. By making so much noise, the protesters hoped to paralyse trading.

But they were set upon by traders, most of whom were under the age of 25. “They were kicking and punching men and women indiscriminately,” a photographer said. “It was really ugly, but Greenpeace did not fight back.”

Mr Beresford said: “They followed the guys into the lobby and kept kicking and punching them there. They literally kicked them on to the pavement.”

Last night Greenpeace said two protesters were in hospital, one with a suspected broken jaw, the other with concussion.

A spokeswoman from IPE said the trading floor reopened at 3.10pm. “The floor was invaded by a small group of protesters,” she said. “Open outcry trading was suspended but electronic trading carried on.”

Eighteen police vans and six police cars surrounded the exchange and at least 27 protesters were arrested. A small band blocked the entrance to the building for the rest of the evening.

Richard Ward, IPE’s chief executive, said that the exchange would review security but denied that protesters had reached the trading floor. However, traders, protesters and press photographers confirmed to The Times that the trading floor had been breached.

Mr Ward would not discuss whether he would press charges, and said he would not know until this morning if there had been any financial loss.

Greenpeace later started a second protest at the annual dinner of the Institute of Petroleum at the Grosvenor House Hotel on Park Lane, in Central London. Greenpeace claimed that five campaigners had got into the Great Hall. About 30 protesters were outside the hotel, some blocking the front entrance by sitting down and locking themselves together, while others sounded klaxons and alarms. Climbers scaled scaffolding to unfurl a banner reading, “Climate change kills, oil industry parties”.

 

[manu1959]

I agree
The two biggest offenders being China and India with coal emmissions. Right now China and India together make up about 90% of greenhouse gas emissions, so how is it the U.S and other more developed nations have to foot the bill and assume responsibility???

bingo! (i hate this spred the rep rule)

 

[Annie]

What is? Pressure...like that hasn't been done for other issues?

You are probably NOT going to get what you are saying.

"Well it's NOT proven, but let's do it anyways. We'll all feel better because we tried..."

 

[taff]

Kyoto and Lunatic Fringe Protests:

I saw this on sky news.Even when they were surrendering, curled in balls on the floor they were still having the boot put into them.They should stick to hugging tree's on the weekend.

 

[Huckleburry]

The economic assesment of the Kyoto Protocol are wrong. I posted on this earlier in this thread so I will not repeat the argument. Moreover, the science behind it is good, that it is only energy company scientists discrediting it should raise some alarm.

 

[CSM]

The economic assesment of the Kyoto Protocol are wrong. I posted on this earlier in this thread so I will not repeat the argument. Moreover, the science behind it is good, that it is only energy company scientists discrediting it should raise some alarm.

Here is what you posted:

Contrary to popular belief, the Kyoto Protocol would probably benefit the American economy more than any other nations. Let us examine why this is true. First, America already has environmental controls. These controls internalize the cost of environmental damage so that the equilibrium condition accurately reflects the MSC and MSB. Naturally, this increases the cost of production (and thus the cost of American manufactures). This increase in cost is an oft cited reason for trade protection (just give workingman’s post's a search) from the export sector for trade protection. The Kyoto protocol would internalize these costs for all countries and therefore negate the need for trade protection. American exports benefit from a truly level playing field and the world benefits from both free trade and a cleaner environment. Second, the majority of environmental controls belong are high tech. Carbon scrubbers, living machines, and hydrogen fuel cells all require a high level of technical know-how and capital equipment. Ironically, the high tech sector is one of the few in which the US still maintains a comparative advantage over NICs. In addition, the majority of the R & D required to produce new devices happens in the United States. Thus the Kyoto Protocol enhances our trade position by requiring nations to use controls primarily developed and produced within the United States. Lastly taking leadership in regards to the Kyoto protocol gives the United States ample leverage in negotiating trade agreements with other countries (think China). Rather than resort to overt protectionism we can link access to our markets to compliance with the Kyoto Protocol. Better still, those countries found in noncompliance will not solely be punished by the US but by all member nations, including a sizeable portion of the EU bringing to bear an enormous amount of economic pressure on the delinquent state. To resist the Kyoto Protocol is to deny American business the opportunity to do what they do best namely innovate and invent. I say cry havoc and let slip the dogs of American ingenuity.
Cheers
Huck

The red is my highlight.

The problem with Kyoto as I see it is first that it raises costs for US manufacurers thus making the cost for US goods overseas higher...not good in my book.

Second, your premise is that ALL nations would be a willing participant. It ignores the fact that many nations would be exempt by the terms of the treaty. Their manufactured goods would cost less to produce and be more attractive to consumers as well as investors.

Until ALL nations are under the Kyoto protocol; it is simply a mechanism to denigrate the US. The fact that nations can "sell" their quotas is a load of crap too.

 

[Said1]

The problem with Kyoto as I see it is first that it raises costs for US manufacurers thus making the cost for US goods overseas higher...not good in my book.

Also puts limits on production, as would have been the case in Ireland, had they complied with the protocol.

Until ALL nations are under the Kyoto protocol; it is simply a mechanism to denigrate the US. The fact that nations can "sell" their quotas is a load of crap too.

If you're refering to GATT, it needs to be updated, or scrapped altogether.

 

[CSM]

If you're refering to GATT, it needs to be updated, or scrapped altogether.

It is my understanding from reading the Kyoto documents that countries who meet their "quota" or less can sell their excess tonnage of allowable pollution (specifically carbon dioxide for example) can sell the excess to other countries. Also, by terms outlined in the documents, certain countries (particularly "poor and emerging" industrial nations) can be exempted for a certain period of time from the conditions of the treaty.

 

[Said1]

It is my understanding from reading the Kyoto documents that countries who meet their "quota" or less can sell their excess tonnage of allowable pollution (specifically carbon dioxide for example) can sell the excess to other countries. Also, by terms outlined in the documents, certain countries (particularly "poor and emerging" industrial nations) can be exempted for a certain period of time from the conditions of the treaty.

Oops, my bad.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Everybody keeps talk'n about how China is kick'n our ass economically, stealing our jobs, etc., etc., yet then the libs want to turn around and enable them to do so by putting restrictions on us that do not apply to them. How in the hell do the liberals think this stuff up?

Because they're pro-Communist.

 

[Bonnie]

Until ALL nations are under the Kyoto protocol; it is simply a mechanism to denigrate the US. The fact that nations can "sell" their quotas is a load of crap too.

Absolutely!! Other nations love to dump on the U.S. for environmental damage while it is the U.S and Japan that are staying ahead of the curve in technology to clean things up. And it is U.S. companies that have been spending the most money, some to the point of going bankrupt to keep up with restrictions. Since the 80's our contribution to global warming has gone way down, and yet nations like the Netherlands that are the size of postage stamps continually criticize us not the countries that are actually causing most of the problem and doing nothing about it.

 

[Huckleburry]

while it is the U.S and Japan that are staying ahead of the curve in technology to clean things up.

Exactly it is to our advantage to bring the Kyoto protocol into being because it demands usage of items in which we have a comparative advantage (more sales). Also if the United States signs the treaty they can use it as a trade barrier giving MFN status to the countries that have also signed it. By applying this rule blindly we will be defended infront of the WTO as a nation concerned about enviormental damage. Lastly externalized costs are not free. Rather they are paid for by society at large rather than the producers responsible for the externalities. Kyoto protects our interests rather than endagers them. Also....suppose the world went off oil, who do you think has the best chance of developing an alternative system? Hint: it's not China

 

[Huckleburry]

GATT has been scraped it's called the WTO now and it is a damn fine orginization. One of the better institutions created by the USA