China is expanding rapidly and they are not the only ones. They are burning hundreds of thousands of tonnes of coal a year to help supply the power they need to advance like the West. So why should we reduce our CO2 emissions, when its not going to make any difference whatsoever?
2006-12-13 03:12:19 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment
The small amount that we save will not have any positive impact on the enviironment while China and others are pumping it out at the levels they are.
Don't misunderstand. I'm not saying that we shoudn't bother. I'm interested in people's views on it.
2006-12-13 03:28:31 · update #1
Yes we should start reducing our emissions as if we don't start now we will never be able to. And reducing emissions is not that hard the biggest and best way is conservation. Now yeah china and india are starting to use more fossil fuels but within Kyoto they are still under signifcant levels. What needs to be done is sharing of energy technology so that a reduction in fossil fuel use occurs. This is a global problem so everyone has to work together. IF this means lead by example and give technology at a reduce price so be it Isn't our planet worth a few billion bucks to us???
2006-12-13 03:32:45 · answer #1 · answered by Dan 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
:) funny let's take this in a two way prespective:
1) the optimistic one: we still have time - CO2 emissions can be yet stoped and so one can not control china India or any other country being so one can always control our selfs and so one reduces CO2 emissions doing so is implementing a system a technology that china india ... will see work and consequently china will adopt this in time not for us to be in a no return point great, in this vision if one do not adopt any measures china won't see it and the world will be dead.
Optimistic point number two, some other country, maybe china, gets there first it will sell the technology at a fortunes price and concentrates in it self the normal production in a efficient and clean way getting ahead in all the things and overthrowing the US has the leading country in the world, the world however gets safe.
Pessimistic point of view: We are already dead- we do not do nothing and the no return point passes. We try to do but the systems inertia is to great and we can't get there. the no return point is already behind us no change no hope.
Remark: china and all the intellectualized countries are conscientious to global warming some more then in the states.
Take your own conclusions.
2006-12-13 03:58:15 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wouldn't worry to much about the Chinese for the moment but direct you invective at the Americans. They make up just 8% of the worlds population but consume 25% of all energy produced. Then Bush tries to claim that Global warming does not exist. I suppose that as he comes from Texas which is an oil producing state that he may have a different agenda to everyone else.
2006-12-13 03:40:04 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
China's per capita carbon emissions are about one third of ours. If the whole world were emitting at that rate we simply wouldn't have a problem. Isn't it a bit unreasonable for those contributing to the problem to demand those who are not to cut back?
2016-03-29 05:45:46 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because the world globally can only afford our current regimen for 15 or 20 years before suffering major economic (not speaking about environmental and human) damages.
2006-12-13 08:36:27 · answer #5 · answered by Ingrid M 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your question implies failure to reduce carbon emissions. The only way to succeed is to continue to work toward it on ALL fronts: by example, by bringing economic pressure and political pressure, and by education. Stay optimistic!
2006-12-13 03:20:21 · answer #6 · answered by lottyjoy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Perhaps we should lead by example by reducing our emissions. maybe political pressure from other nations will make china re-think how they supply power.
2006-12-13 03:16:15 · answer #7 · answered by Sianny 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, China, India and others do have a huge problem, but adding more to the problem isnt going to help. Even if its not much more, its still more.
2006-12-13 03:17:26 · answer #8 · answered by sngcanary 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
actually, it would make a difference. sometimes you cant help to reduce CO2, but if we all thought like that then there would be consequences. every little helps.
2006-12-13 03:15:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It will make a difference.
If each country had that opinion we wouldn't get anywhere, would we?
We have to set an example.
2006-12-13 03:20:39 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋