Will GW sign up for the Kyoto Protocol now?

#1
We all agree that the news from New Orleans is dreadful and our thought are with those trying to survive, but my question is will GW now consider that his refusal to sign up for Kyoto may result in more of these events?
 
#2
i dout it the yanks will never sign it, look what happened a good few years ago when i think it was L.A was covered in smog just ignored it and carried on as usual
 
C

cloudbuster

Guest
#3
The Band of Blameshifters will deny that the increase in frequency of such weather events has anything to do with them - the French are probably as likely a target as anyone.

I wonder if Haliburton are up for some reconstruction work?
 
#4
Bush has a strong instinct not to lose face, be embarrassed, or accept that a long-term policy was wrong - see Iraq. The growing number of dead people left in his wake seems not to have a stabilising effect. So, without wanting to be too pessimistic, we're in for more of the same or until this term comes to an end. Hopefully sooner, rather than later
 
#5
thing is even clinton refussed to sign the kyoto agreement, pluss theyed would have to get rid of alot of there industrial business' as this is where the main problem with them signing it well ands the fact that they would have to get rid of alot of there oversized cars
 
#6
Bush can not enter in to treaties and Kyoto is such an instrument.

Just so it is clear; only Congress has the power to ratify treaties and in 1997 (Clinton administration) the Senate voted on the Byrd-Hagel Resolution (S. Res. 98) which passed by a vote of 95-0. Sen. Byrd, Democrat from WV, was a driving force of this resolution, therefore his name on it. The resolution made clear that the Senate would not ratify Kyoto, and as such Clinton never submitted it to the Senate for ratification.

Bush has not submitted Kyoto to the Senate for ratification either, for the same reason. Even if he did it is likely not to pass the Senate, and he still couldn't sign it.

Al Gore did symbolically sign Kyoto in 1998, but even with his good will and signature, it remains a non-binding document with respect to the US.

Worldwide ignorrance of the structure and responsibility of the various branches of the US Federal Government has people making bonehead comments about Bush's not signing Kyoto. He can't Article 1, Section 10 of the Constitution gives the power to enter into treaties.

So would it not be wise in light of this to ask why the 100 Senators refuse to ratify Kyoto and not why Bush doesn't sign it?
 
#7
I bet if GW put a bit of effort into it he could get the Senate to change their minds, and get public opinion to support it. A few ads with pictures of N'Awlins would be a sure winner!
 
#8
kyoto karma huh?

I'm sure 'Pvt. Katrina' would argue "Just following odors"...

Did ya hear about the Missionary at a beach front Mission...when
the cops drove by last weekend and told him to evacuate?

Missionary says "I have faith God will save me"...go on Officers.

Next day storm surge has all land routes cutoff...the Fire Department's rescue boat came by to save the Missionary...now surrounded by the sea water.

"Go on fellows...says the Missionary...I have faith God will save me."

Then as the storm raged...a heroic attempt by the Coast Guard heliocopter crew to convince the Missionary it was the last hope of survival.

"Fly on aircrew...my God will save me."

The rising waters swollow up the Clergyman and he drowns.

At the Golden Gates...the Missionary asks Saint Peter..."I had faith God would save me...so why did he allow me to die?"

Saint Peter told him "God sent you a squad car...a motor Boat and a Heliocopter...WHAT MORE DID YOU WANT?"
 
#9
Kyoto is a non-starter here. Second there is no such thing as global warning. Forty years ago scientists were claiming we were heading into another ice age. The planet has warm periods and cool periods.
 
#10
There is such thing as global warming, and the US is the biggest contributor to emissions on the planet. The planet has had several ice ages in the past, followed by thousands of years of gradual temperature rise, which we are experiencing. Another ice age will follow.

However, because the global temperature is rising, this does not mean that global warming doesnt exist. The effects of C02 and methane do contribute to the greenhouse effect. Coombined with deferestation, mass industry, desertification and the increasing population of the human race, global warming is bound to happen, but the effects can be limited. (after 9/11 the temperature dropped by 2degrees because planes were grounded, for example).

However, I doubt that global warming played any contribution to Katrina. And considering that the US economy is number 1 priority, I doubt the US would sign anythink like the Kyoto protocol. But it should.
 
#11
There is such thing as global warming, and the US is the biggest contributor to emissions on the planet. The planet has had several ice ages in the past, followed by thousands of years of gradual temperature rise, which we are experiencing. Another ice age will follow.

However, because the global temperature is rising, this does not mean that global warming doesnt exist. The effects of C02 and methane do contribute to the greenhouse effect. Coombined with deferestation, mass industry, desertification and the increasing population of the human race, global warming is bound to happen, but the effects can be limited. (after 9/11 the temperature dropped by 2degrees because planes were grounded, for example).

However, I doubt that global warming played any contribution to Katrina. And considering that the US economy is number 1 priority, I doubt the US would sign anythink like the Kyoto protocol. But it should. Even if it did it would probably just buy the credits from other nations.
 
#12
[rant]
Why is it that everyone suddenly panics every time weather happens? Oh it's the hottest third Tuesday of the month since a decade ago - must be global warming. Oh it's the coldest March for twenty years - must be climate change. Oh look, a hurricane happened where hurricanes have been happening for hundreds of years but this time there are people there - must be us wrecking the environment. Climate changes, you know it does, at all scales from minute to minute (freezing rain while you're sitting still in a trench, hot sunshine on a BFT) to eons and all levels in between.

And anyhow the "Kyoto agreement" is unlikely to significantly reduce any greenhouse gas emmissions. Especially since the largest contribution is water vapour, and it says nothing about putting in a giant dehumidifier.

We'd be far better off spending money and effort coping with the weather - New Orleans included - instead of wasting it on 'gestures' like Kyoto.
[/rant]

Sorry but this topic gets my goat. There's so much misinformation floating about, and the press seem to think that any comment on weather should be followed by how it's all our fault, yet when it comes down to it we haven't a clue. There's a vast amount of noise in the measurements, and the feedback loops in the weather systems are far more complicated than anyone's figured out yet. The press may talk about climate models but lets face it, these models can't even predict tomorrow's weather. For all climatologists know we could be staving off the next ice age.

[More hot air available from this poster]
 
#13
ScouseJon said:
...The planet has had several ice ages in the past, followed by thousands of years of gradual temperature rise, which we are experiencing. Another ice age will follow.
See that's misleading. There's never been anything 'gradual' about temperature changes in the history of the planet. You can talk about trends over time - so for example we can be reasonably confident that there's been an *overall* increase of 1C over the last few hundred years, because we've been able to measure it. But it's not gradual, ie it's not a step by step increase each year. It's a chaotic system, you expect it to change - why would anyone expect the weather to stay the same? It never has in the past.

http://www.brighton73.freeserve.co.uk/gw/temperature.htm#surfacetemperatures

(after 9/11 the temperature dropped by 2degrees because planes were grounded, for example).
That's not true!

I do find this US-bashing a bit unfair though, just because they're a conveniently large group of people. Europe isn't much better, Kyoto agreement or not.
 
#14
Signing ‘Kyoto’ is not the same as making a contribution to reducing harmful emissions. So what if India and China have signed Kyoto. I’m prepared to believe that that neither country gives a rat’s arrse about harmful emissions. Many countries as members of the UN are up for the 'International Declaration of Human Rights' but give it a good ignoring to. Ditto Kyoto. Libya hasn’t signed it. No-one is giving them a hard time. Why not?


As for the big American cars, Europe isn’t far behind in the big car stakes. We used to be more modest, then our cocks became smaller. Engines are getting bigger (more powerful which means more fuel) which is completely unnecessary unless you have a hard-on for Clarksonesque posturing. Yes there are improvements in engine efficiency but if we were serious about reducing harmful emissions we’d put a ceiling on the power to weight ratios of cars and airline travel wouldn’t be so cheap. When we see the Prime Minister in the ministerial Micra and salad dodger Prescott is nicknamed ‘one bike’ we’ll be getting serious.

China, India and Africa have rampant population growth that may be a larger threat to the resources of the planet and its atmosphere’s well being than the US and its industry. But criticising Africa, India and China is ‘racist’ and off limits.

ScouseJon wrote
after 9/11 the temperature dropped by 2degrees because planes were grounded, for example).
My BS detector just went off. Two degrees what? Celsius or Fahrenheit? Your source please.
 
#15
The whole Kyoto treaty is based on the so-called "hockey stick" trend. Two problems with this - 1: the origin is conveniently situated well after the Medieval Warm Period (when Cantebury was almost on the coast) at the Little Ice Age, and 2: feed the model random data and it still manages to give a hockey stick.

Since coming into effect February 16, 2005, the Kyoto Protocol has cost about $82,000,000,000
while the potential temperature saving by the year 2050 so far achieved by Kyoto is 0.000851107 °C

There is so much junk science floating around about anthropogenic global warming - there is no solid scientific basis for it. It has become the new religion - people need to believe, countries need to pledge allegience to the orthdoxy, and most of all, people need to spend lots of money.

Worthwhile reads on the subject include:

www.junkscience.com
www.numberwatch.co.uk
http://www.greenspin.blogspot.com/
 
#18
PartTimePongo said:
Is there a need to reduce emissions or not? Simple enough question really. Is there a need to reduce air pollution or not?
Absolutely there is a need, but Kyoto has no affect on that. New technologies need to be found, funded and implemented. Right now and for the foreseeable future fossil fuel is the way forward.

Bush's energy plan, if anyone cares, has both long term and short term impact. Short term, remove reliance on ME oil and drill for oil in ANWR, long term fund research in alternative sources. Solar power on a large scale, not feasible. Wind power on a larger scale, not feasible. Hydroelectric on larger then existing scale not feasible. Hydrogen just building the infrastructure is a huge investment and you need electricity to generate the hydrogen. Nuke is great, but noone wants the waste in their backyards.

So in the short term fossil fuel it is, and we can use existing and newer filters to reduce polution, cleaner burning fuels in the cars and more fuel efficient cars.

Oh forgot to mention the democrats are blocking Bush's enegry policy over drilling in less then 1% of ANWR.
 
#20
This is one of the subjects that really gets my goat, because there are an awful lot of extremely selective, heavily biased, wildy inaccurate facts and propaganda myths bandied about, interspersed with a few out and out lies tossed in for good measure. Most of it seems to be driven by tree huggers, anti-globalist/anti-capitalist loonies and trendy left leaning scientists. The scientists who try to object are often not reported in the media, because they are effectively scotching a good sensationalist story that sells newspapers and advertising space.
There is no way that the global temperature of this planet could drop by 2 degrees, celsius, farenheit or any other measurement over a couple of days just because some planes were grounded. That sort of drop - or rise - in temperature would only happen over a period of hundreds of years. Think about it logically, if the planetary temperature dropped by 2 degrees over the course of a few days, then logically it would rise by the same amount once the planes were flying again, and the cumulative effect over a couple of months would soon make this planet too hot for human habitation. The secret is to bang the rocks together, guys.
Accepted that CO2 content in the atmosphere has risen more quickly since the start of the industrial revolution, however, plenty of sensible scientists will tell you that CO2 is NOT the main cause of global warming, if they were ever allowed the chance in the media. It is one of the causes, but there are plenty of other ones too.
Accepted that global warming is taking place and ice sheets are melting, however, there is no conclusive proof (as opposed to wild panicky speculation based on unreliable figues) that this is a result of industrialisation, let alone CO2 emissions. Global warming and cooling has occurred frequently during the history of this planet, and ice caps have come and gone. What do you think caused the mass migration of homo sapiens from the African to the European continent thousands of years ago? Cheap Easyjet tickets?
Final point for all the tree huggers: I drive a 4WD Landrover, and I always make sure to give it loads of revs, especially when I'm driving over squirrels. What's more, when my gratuity comes through in 2 years time, I'm going to get myself a 5.3 litre Jag as well, so go screw yourselves, you lentil eating, sandal wearing poofs.
 

Latest Threads