Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

kyoto

Posted By: gt on 2005-09-01
In Reply to: Kyoto. SM - MT

Once again, written from a radical right wing perspective.  Well, I will go with what I know and what I have read and researched a bit about Kyoto.  But, keep defending the fool in the WH.  He needs all the defending he can get, he is such a dire failure.


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Kyoto. SM

Kyoto, from my favorite blogger. You might want to keep track of what Kyoto is really about gt, and not just accept it because the greenies say it is a good thing:   


The USA has been the villain of the environmentalists for shunning the do nothing Kyoto agreement. An agreement designed to punish developed countries so that third world puss holes could more easily institutionalize corruption. Now it seems the rest of the developed world has figured it out.

John Howard claims he has been vindicated over his opposition to the Kyoto Protocol after business groups in New Zealand and Germany demanded their countries quit the agreement as soon as possible and join the Asia-Pacific climate pact.

A coalition of 22,000 New Zealand businesses, under the auspices of the New Zealand Chambers of Commerce and Industry, called on both parties in the New Zealand election to start talks on pulling out of the Kyoto Protocol by 2008 - the earliest possible date to do so.
The chief executive of the Employers and Manufacturers Association of New Zealand, Alasdair Thompson, said compliance had cost companies much more than the Government predicted. It has been estimated that New Zealand may have to spend between $600 million and $1.2 billion to meet its Kyoto commitments on greenhouse gas emissions instead of gaining carbon credits.


Kyoto was never anything more then feel good posturing designed to punish those who do well. Kind of like Democratic tax policy.


kyoto
what they were talking about is Bush's refusal to sign the Kyoto pact, which was created to help combat global warming.  Some scientists say global warming and making the oceans warmer contribute to increased hurricanes.  But, of course, you all twist the words around and alter the truth to fit your narrow way of thinking.
kyoto, one of many articles
INDEPTH: KYOTO
Kyoto Protocol FAQs
 April 13, 2005

Depending on who you talk to, the Kyoto Protocol is either a) an expensive, bureaucratic solution to fix a problem that may not even exist; or b) the last, best chance to save the world from the time bomb of global warming.

Those are the extremes in what has become a polarizing debate that has engaged governments, consumers, environmental groups and industry all over the world for more than 20 years.

The problem the Kyoto Protocol is trying to address is climate change, and more specifically, the speed at which the earth is warming up. Whether Kyoto can accomplish this is very much a matter of debate.

For the record, the Kyoto Protocol went into effect Feb. 16, 2005, with 141 countries signing on, including every major industrialized country – except the United States, Australia and Monaco. The U.S. is responsible for about a quarter of the emissions that have been blamed for global warming.

Two of the world's biggest – and growing – polluters also have not signed on. India and China don't have to – they're considered developing countries and are outside the protocol's framework.

First, the science behind Kyoto.


Is the climate changing?

The United Nations certainly thinks so. And so do most (but not all) scientists who study climate. The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) summarizes the work of 2,000 of the world's top climate experts. Its latest report (2001) makes for some sobering reading.

Yes, the world is getting warmer, the report concludes. The IPCC says the average global surface temperature has risen by about 0.6 degrees Celsius since 1900, with much of that rise coming in the 1990s – likely the warmest decade in 1,000 years.

The IPCC also found that snow cover since the late 1960s has decreased by about 10 per cent and lakes and rivers in the Northern Hemisphere are frozen over about two weeks less each year than they were in the late 1960s. Mountain glaciers in non-polar regions have also been in noticeable retreat in the 20th century, and the average global sea level has risen between 0.1 and 0.2 metres since 1900.

Simply put, the world is getting warmer and the temperature is rising faster than ever.

What are the very long-term climate predictions?

The IPCC predicts more floods, intense storms, heat waves and droughts. Its study forecasts a rise of 1.4 to 5.8 degrees Celsius in the global mean surface temperature over the next 100 years, with developing countries most vulnerable.

Other studies are even more apocalyptic. A report commissioned by the World Wildlife Fund predicts dangerous warming of the earth's surface in as little as 20 years, with the Arctic warming so much that its polar ice could melt in the summer by the year 2100, pushing polar bears close to extinction.

The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment predicts that caribou, musk ox and reindeer would find their habitats severely reduced. Northern aboriginal peoples around the world would find their way of life changed forever, the study said.

What is causing the world to warm up?







The 6 greenhouse gases Kyoto targets
Carbon dioxide.

Methane.

Nitrous oxide

Sulphur hexafluoride.

Hydrofluorocarbons.

Perfluorocarbons.

Most scientists blame industrialization. Since the 19th century, the richer countries of the Northern Hemisphere have been pumping out ever-increasing volumes of heat-trapping greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide. Industrial societies burn fossil fuels in their power plants, homes, factories and cars. They clear forests (trees absorb carbon dioxide) and they build big cities.

Greenhouse gases allow solar radiation to pass through the earth's atmosphere. But after the earth absorbs part of that radiation, it reflects the rest back. That's where the problem lies. Particles of greenhouse gas absorb the radiation, heating up, and warming the atmosphere. The increasing levels of greenhouse gases are causing too much energy to be trapped – the so-called greenhouse effect.







Greenhouse gas emissions targets apply to 38 industrialized countries and economies in transition
For a list of these countries and their emissions targets, click here:

UNFCCC

Isn't there a lot of debate over the whole issue of climate change?

While scientists tend to agree that the earth is warming, not all agree that rising greenhouse gas emissions are the culprits. A vocal minority say the earth's climate warms and cools in long cycles that have nothing to do with greenhouse gases.

Some dispute the data concerning rising sea levels and rising temperatures. Others dispute the projections, which are based on computer models. But again, those views are those of a minority. Most climatologists agree that global warming is causing unprecedented climate change…and that things will get worse unless something is done.

What does the Kyoto Protocol require?

The Kyoto Protocol was adopted in late 1997 to address the problem of global warming by reducing the world's greenhouse gas emissions. It is considered a first step and is not expected to solve the world's climate change problems by the time its first commitment period ends in 2012.

Kyoto sets out an agenda for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 5.2 per cent from 1990 levels (although economies in transition, like Russia, can pick different base years). Some reports say the lower target is to be met by 2010. But that's shorthand for the actual target date, which is to achieve those emission cuts over a five-year average (2008 to 2012).

All countries are not treated equally by Kyoto. Canada, for instance, has committed to chopping its greenhouse gas emissions by six per cent. The U.S. target was a seven per cent reduction. But in 2001, one of the first acts of newly-elected President George W. Bush was to formally withdraw the U.S. from Kyoto. Bush said the U.S. would not ratify the treaty because it would damage the U.S. economy and major developing nations like China and India were not covered by its provisions.

Kyoto also allows some industrialized countries to make no cuts, or even to emit more greenhouse gases that they did in 1990. Russia's and New Zealand's emission levels are capped at their 1990 levels. Iceland can emit up to 10 per cent more greenhouse gases, Australia eight per cent more. (Like the U.S., Australia has announced it won't ratify Kyoto). Developing nations are not subject to any emissions reduction caps under Kyoto.

Much of the criticism around the Kyoto Protocol is over political realities and the limitations of the treaty. Critics say a five per cent cut will accomplish little, especially with the United States not on board. Some Canadian critics say our economy will pay a heavy price for meeting our Kyoto commitments because we'll have to compete with an American economy that faces no such restrictions. Many doubt that Canada's target cuts can be reached in Kyoto's first phase that ends in 2012.

Others say the money to implement Kyoto would be much better spent on improving land usage and infrastructure in poor countries.

How are emission targets met?

Emission targets can be met several ways. The most obvious way is to actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions – more fuel-efficient cars, fewer coal-fired power plants. But Kyoto also allows for three other mechanisms.

Countries can buy emissions credits from countries that don't need them to stay below their emissions quotas. A country can also earn emissions credits through something called joint implementation, which allows a country to benefit by carrying out something like a reforestation project in another industrialized country or economy in transition. There's also what's called a clean development mechanism that encourages investment in developing countries by promoting the transfer of environmentally-friendly technologies.

Each developed country must develop its own strategy to meet its Kyoto commitments. Industrial countries that ratify Kyoto are legally bound to see that their emissions do not exceed their 2008/2012 targets.

What happens if a country fails to reach its Kyoto emissions target?

The Kyoto Protocol contains measures to assess performance and progress. It also contains some penalties. Countries that fail to meet their emissions targets by the end of the first commitment period (2012) must make up the difference plus a penalty of 30 per cent in the second commitment period. Their ability to sell credits under emissions trading will also be suspended.

support of Kyoto

The European Union and Canada have signed.  There are northeastern states that have created an initiative which would cap emissions and put pressure on the federal govt to support Kyoto.  New York is one of them, Maine is another.  There are also cities and other states that support Kyoto.  Los Angeles is one of them, so is Utah, Texas, Seattle.  I think altogether there is about 160 cities and states supporting the Kyoto protocol.


kyoto is a good thing
Posted like a true republican who only cares about profit and corporations and not the environment and leaving the world a better place to our children and childrens children.  Its okay, with the emissions, gases, companies being allowed to pollute once again, why we can all just wear oxygen masks..and get a good SPF sun blocker..heck, like Bush said when asked about what he thought his legacy would be..he said he didnt know or care, as he would be dead anyway..Yup, that is real deep thinking and quite frightening..but he does not have anything to worry about.  When he leaves office (cant happen fast enough), he will go back to his *ranch* or Kennebunkport or wherever he wants to spend his millions.  He wont be in a world of hurt but the rest of us will, by his actions and inactions over a very very long eight years..No, I know much about global warming and Kyoto.  I have followed the situation since Clinton's administration.  I wont make absolute statements as I am not a scientist but from what I see and read, global warming is having a major effect on the world. .