Our token effort is not going to make the slightest difference if the big boys dont get their houses in order. Apart from filling the governments coffers that is!
2006-10-29 11:21:35 · 15 answers · asked by Bobo 2 in Environment
Because we're going to have to pay them not to ( effectively ).
China, India, Russia etc. can't afford not to use fossil fuels yet.
If the more developed countries start trying to lay the law down they'll get nowhere fast unless there's some sort of incentive.
These underdeveloped countires are going to be the real problem. Aircraft emissions can be paid for by heaping tax on the fuel. Vehicle emissions can be paid for by the same method.
Although I can't recall the exact figures, aircraft, vehicle and power generation emissions are small beer compared to the above named countries' emissions, which will keep increasing as they aspire to the same standards of living that we in developed countires already enjoy.
It's going to end up as a very stark choice.
We pay them not to use fossil fuels, and stop using them ourselves.
Or we just accept whatever consequences arise, whether the ones assumed / predicted or not.
If the latest report is anything approaching the truth, we're all going to be a lot poorer very quickly no matter which flavour of government we have.
Or have to stop using the car / heating the house / fly off on holiday etc. etc. due to not being able to afford it!
2006-10-29 11:37:41 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The government are using it all as an excuse to make money. They surely know (being the intelligent people that they supposedly are) that Britain makes up about 2% of the worlds harmful emissions. You're right- we wouldnt make the slightest bit of difference. But the government has decided that it can make them more rich so they can waste yet more money on stupid ideas which the british taxpayers are expected to pay for. Everything will be taxed so that we cant afford it. Whats worse, is that the government wont make it easy for us to adapt to new regulations etc. For example- energy saving lightbulbs etc- they are gna make normal ones more expensive, rather than making energy saving cheaper so that we will all be forced to buy them- not only removing the consumers right to choose, but forcing the country into a recession. Thats not a good idea and will benefit no one- unless you're planning on buying a house shortly- but it could last years and will be bad for the British population in general. The government have gone mad with making money and are taking every opportunity. If they really had the planets welfare at heart, they would make it easier to save energy- not harder. The poorest people will also be hit the hardest forcing people into poverty which Labour are supposedly trying to eradicate. This is not the labour government I voted for who were going to lift people out of poverty, cut taxes and numerous other things that they have done the opposite to! Instead they will force us into a recession, make people poorer and are even planning on doing away with the pension. How then, will we all afford to pay into a private pension? The government need to think about the long term effects of their plans that dont just involve looking at the money they will make.
I apologise for ranting but this makes me soooo mad!!!!
2006-10-29 20:01:21 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
With 5 percent of the world population the US produces 25 percent of the worlds carbon emissions. Putting it in another way on average, each US citizen has more than twice the energy consumption of a western European, according to statistics for 2003, and almost ten times that of a Chinese!
Whilst China as a developing nation, not signed up to Kyoto, and suffering from old machinery and heavy use of coal it is, as it develops, bringing in new and far less polluting machinery. A redeeming feature discovered by US scientists is that the mean density of carbon in the top metre of rice paddy soil is greater than expected. As a result, the total amount of carbon stored in rice paddy soil in China is 66 to 75 per cent higher than previously estimates and gives great potential for use as a carbon sink.
The US will inevitably suffer if it does not join in the the process of modernising plant to reduce greenhouse emissions. Whilst other countries will be using newer, much cleaner and cheaper to run machinery to generate their power and manufacturing the US will be left with outdated, inefficient and heavily polluting machinery.
2006-10-30 12:39:58 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is going to the top of the political agenda why?
A fifth of global GDP that's the conservative estimate of how much climate change could cost!
upwards of 100 million people could start an exodus out of Afected areas.
The world economy could go into free fall!
Basically the situation has turned to poo pie and were all going to have eat some weather we like it or not!
If all else fails buy a big boat.
2006-10-29 19:53:06 · answer #4 · answered by Andrew J 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Quite simply MONEY!
Unfortunately two of the main countries as you say will not do anything to stop global warming. This is purely down to the fact that they only see it as how much it will cost them. They seem to miss the fact about weighing up the two.
In one hand you have lots and lots of money, gold and riches, in the other you have the planet, the only one. The only place human beings are capable of living. Whats the point of having all the money and wealth if you have no planet to live on as you have destroyed it by pure ignorance and greed. Don't be put off by what others are doing, set yourself up to lead by example, do what you can to reduce your energy usage and carbon waste. We can ALL make a difference, its not too late but people need to act now!
2006-10-29 19:38:20 · answer #5 · answered by Evilcowstare 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We are one of the worst offenders per person. Now that there is a good economic argument we might be in a position to try and convince countries like the US; if we have changed our ways. We cannot expect the US to take the initiative on this one we need to all think medium term.
There is a short film on youtube narrated by Clive Anderson about decentralising power generation with an good look at the way we ard some of our European neighbours generate heat and electricity. It's actually a very good watch, suitable for kids too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klooRS-Jjyo
I hope this link works, if not search "What are we waiting for?" on YouTube.
2006-10-30 03:06:51 · answer #6 · answered by saz 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
to make them look good and make us pay more tax. we are total FD as far as the planet goes, damage done. we little people can bust an artery or 2, go with out heat and walk everywhere, but if the main culprits don't stop and change then there is not even a glimmer of hope for anyone or thing.
2006-11-03 06:35:41 · answer #7 · answered by one who has no name 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You have a lot to learn, my Friend.
Global warming is a political issue, if you say this or say that, it might make some voter believe in the politician and maybe vote for him/her.
It's like Osama BenLadden, he could have been caught in the early weeks of the war, but the politicians decided that as long as he were free, it would give them something to politic about.
Darryl S.
2006-10-29 19:27:05 · answer #8 · answered by Stingray 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You are right. Whatever we did, we wouldn't have any effect. It is up to America and China as the world's biggest polluters, to put their houses in order.
2006-10-29 19:24:49 · answer #9 · answered by Tracker 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Stealth tax, nothing more, Blair mouths platitudes but it's just a scam.
2006-10-31 11:25:21 · answer #10 · answered by bo nidle 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋