Kyoto Protocal a failure in the EU
- Thread starter Gonz
- Start date
Jeslek
Banned
tsk tsk tsk tsk, I don't know what is worse (if you're in love the Kyoto Protocol)... not signing it or signing it and actually increasing pollution.
Tsk tsk tsk tsk. Better double the taxes now! Or send a few more billions to Africa to buy their pollution credits! Hurry! Before the deadline!
Tsk tsk tsk tsk. Better double the taxes now! Or send a few more billions to Africa to buy their pollution credits! Hurry! Before the deadline!
outside looking in
<b>Registered Member</b>
Kyoto is a flawed proposal. Always was, always will be. It's not surprising to see that it isn't working out so well. Oh well... politicians are certainly not the smartest creatures on the planet.
ris
New Member
within individual countries of the eu the is mixed progress, finland and austria have both exceeded targets by a way [attributed to environmental conditions of lower rainfall and a harsher winter], while the uk, germany, sweden and luxemburg all appear to be making their targets and france may fail by a narrow margin. bbc
outside looking in
<b>Registered Member</b>
Doesn't really matter if targets are met or not. If they are, it was a tremendous waste of money. If they are not, it was a tremendous waste of money.
ris
New Member
i think we are considering it an opportunity to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and reduce local pollution levels than some altruisitc higher goals of saving the entire global ecology.
whether or not that disengaging of industry from fossil fuels will be a tremendous waste of money i guess will be seen in the longer run. at the moment the harbingers of economic doom are being confounded - the uk is one of the few countries not feeling the hard effects of global slowdown.
whether or not that disengaging of industry from fossil fuels will be a tremendous waste of money i guess will be seen in the longer run. at the moment the harbingers of economic doom are being confounded - the uk is one of the few countries not feeling the hard effects of global slowdown.
outside looking in
<b>Registered Member</b>
Money spent to develop alternative fuel sources is certainly not wasted... but setting pollution level goals as a means of motivating such change is a wasteful and confounded way of going about things. We (globally) should be spending 100% of the money being used for Kyoto on such science and technology efforts, instead of dumping it into cleanup and prevention efforts (that have a very negligible immediate and/or long term impact on the environment), with a mere trickle of money into technology development as a side effect.
In other words, supposing you had $10 billion that would be required to implement the Kyoto measures, it would be more beneficial to the environment (and the economy, both in the near and long term) just a decade or two out for all $10 billion to be spent on technology development, instead of $9 billion on band-aid efforts to curb immediate pollution and $1 billion spent on actual solutions to the problem.
It's not the spending money or the desire to affect change that will improve the global environment that I have a problem with, but merely the assinine way in which the Kyoto protocol attempts to accomplish it.
In other words, supposing you had $10 billion that would be required to implement the Kyoto measures, it would be more beneficial to the environment (and the economy, both in the near and long term) just a decade or two out for all $10 billion to be spent on technology development, instead of $9 billion on band-aid efforts to curb immediate pollution and $1 billion spent on actual solutions to the problem.
It's not the spending money or the desire to affect change that will improve the global environment that I have a problem with, but merely the assinine way in which the Kyoto protocol attempts to accomplish it.
ris
New Member
many of the measures that kyoto lead to our doing are common sense energy saving systems that also halp save money as well. there are big drives here to improve the insulation properties of buildings, reduce energy wastage in businesses and homes through information.
the focus is all too frequently on emission reduction as a be all and end all, the approach that i am seeing in the uk sectors that i am involved in show a more holistic approach that takes the emission reduction as a single part of a wider goal.
the focus is all too frequently on emission reduction as a be all and end all, the approach that i am seeing in the uk sectors that i am involved in show a more holistic approach that takes the emission reduction as a single part of a wider goal.
Aunty Em
Well-Known Member
[sarcasm]Aww, come on ris, you really know we should all be out there buy, buy, buying every bit of "must have" junk going don't you? Big business needs you! (Well our money helps them run the world governments doesn't it, so they can continue doing what they like, so we should spend to keep them in power shouldn't we?)
Who cares if it's production damages the environment, so long as it's not our environment or the junk we throw out to make room for it is dumped at appropriate and dangerous sites... after all it's not our problem is it... let our grandchildren sort it out... if they can... after all by the time they prove it one way or the other it'll probably be too late, so why bother? It just spoils our short-sighted, hedonistic fun![/sarcasm]
Who cares if it's production damages the environment, so long as it's not our environment or the junk we throw out to make room for it is dumped at appropriate and dangerous sites... after all it's not our problem is it... let our grandchildren sort it out... if they can... after all by the time they prove it one way or the other it'll probably be too late, so why bother? It just spoils our short-sighted, hedonistic fun![/sarcasm]
outside looking in
<b>Registered Member</b>
Though veiled in a sarcastic tone, the above post is precisely the kind of knee-jerk reaction to environmental issues that led to the Kyoto protocol being adopted by many countries.
Again, it isn't that I believe we don't need to do anything about environmental problems, but rather that I recognize that Kyoto is hardly the best way to go about it. Not only that, but in some ways it is worse than doing nothing.
Again, it isn't that I believe we don't need to do anything about environmental problems, but rather that I recognize that Kyoto is hardly the best way to go about it. Not only that, but in some ways it is worse than doing nothing.
Aunty Em
Well-Known Member
Frankly I believe that the money governments waste on various junkets trying to reach agreements that they don't intend to keep is better spent on localised projects which improve the lives and environment of their own people, and hopefully will have a knock-on effect up the chain. Too much centralisation and not enough groundwork...