About the Kyoto treaty and reducing pollution?

Question

Do the developed countries that sign the treaty just end up outsourcing their factories to developing countries?

If you have some facts on whether or not countries that have signed this are or are not doing that I would love to know because I'm concerned that is what's happening which means the earth ends up poluted just the same, and cheap labor is exploited, and the working classes of the developed countries end up hurting.

If this is what's happening, isn't there any better way to work towards clean air and clean water? (I at least know people on all sides of the political spectrum enjoy clean air and water). What could be more effective?

Answer 1

Koyoto is good in theory, but hypocritical.

For it to work, ALL the nations must work together. Koyoto would of excluded China and India....major CO2 producers.

Answer 2

I read the treaty several years ago. I thought we should sign it, until I read the darn thing.

It would only be effective if ALL countries were bound by hte same rules. China and India are actually writen into it as EXEMPT. They would be exempt forever, it would impossible to turn the treaty once signed.

Requiring clean air over just limited parts of the world will nt have much impact world wide. The US may have the highest ommissions total, but not by land mass. If you calulate how much polution is added based on percentage of world land mass we are far cleaner then many countries (mainly India and China).

America will not be able top solve this problem by herself, which seems to be what is expected by Americans and non-Americans alike.

Answer 3

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change agreed to a set of a "common but differentiated responsibilities." The parties agreed that

1. The largest share of historical and current global emissions of greenhouse gases has originated in developed countries;
2. Per capita emissions in developing countries are still relatively low;
3. The share of global emissions originating in developing countries will grow to meet their social and development needs.

In other words, China, India, and other developing countries were exempt from the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol because they were not the main contributors to the greenhouse gas emissions during the industrialization period that is believed to be causing today's climate change.

However, critics of Kyoto argue that China, India, and other developing countries will soon be the top contributors to greenhouse gases. Also, without Kyoto restrictions on these countries, industries in developed countries would be driven towards these non-restricted countries, thus there would be no net reduction in carbon.

In response to the one answer, 169 countries have signed the Kyoto agreement and ratified it, except for the US and Australia who have signed it but refuse to ratify it.

Answer 4

Kyoto is NOT about cleaning up the earth. It's NOT about reducing emissions. If it were, we'd see grants given to the inventors of green cars, green furnaces, green this, green that.

Kyoto is a form of New World Order. It is a MONETARY system, a way that countries can control other countries. It is evil, bad, sick, wrong and ultimately, the Church, (yours and mine) is going to be against it.

Answer 5

You assume that the Kyoto treaty is about the environment. That's your first mistake. The environmentalist movement is like a religion that others seek to impose on the rest of us.

Answer 6

China never signed on and they are the second largest polluter in the world behind the U.S. I have read that some scientists estimate that within 6 years, China will surpass us. So, unless that and several others sign on, what good will any of it do?

Answer 7

Even if other nations cheat we can help by doing something. Profit can not be the cause of an earlier end to the earth.

Answer 8

Maybe we should all go back to the good ol' days. No more electricity so no more central heating and air conditioning. A fireplace in every room.