Beside developed countries, how far is underdeveloped countries responsible for global warming?

Answer 1

Developing countries are also trying their best to reduce the global warming effects. Yes, they do emit carbon dioxide but their level of emission is far lesser than those developed countries.

Bare in mind that most of the rainforest or forest areas are in the developing countries. Global warming effect will be far greater if it wasn't for the developing countries and their forest.

Even though developing countries have limited technologies to counter global warming effect like those of the developed nations, they are doing it in their own way. Developing countries such as China and India have already signed the Kyoto Protocol in the agreement to reduce carbon dioxide emission but countries like the United States and Australia have not.

It is no longer the matter of responsibility. It is more important for action and to actually stop global warming than blaming who is wrong and who is right. Global warming have no boundaries don't let political boundaries dammed the movement to combat global warming.

Answer 2

Assuming global warming is caused by carbon dioxide emitted by engines, then the more engines operating, the more the contribution to global warming.

What this means is that undeveloped countries do not contribute much at all. But it also means then the only way to prevent those countries from increasing their contribution is to prevent them from developing, which is really unfair. The idea that we can make underdeveloped countries use only alternative energy sources instead of traditional engines is not realistic. Alternative energy is expensive and those countries are too poor to afford it.

Answer 3

Not so much now. But the danger is, as they develop, they might increase their emissions of greenhouse gases enough to counteract the progress made by developed countries. The world needs to be working together on this, as they did to protect the ozone layer.

By the way, proof of global warming. Solid, extensively verified, and peer reviewed data.


http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png

http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf

Which is why:

"There's a better scientific consensus on this [climate change] than on any issue I know - except maybe Newton's second law of dynamics. Global warming is almost a no-brainer at this point,You really can't find intelligent, quantitative arguments to make it go away."

Dr. Jerry Mahlman, NOAA

Answer 4

Neither, climate substitute is more often than not organic. also, maximum better countries were dealing with their forests for hundreds of years interior of america or maybe longer in Europe. What i locate humorous is how the arising countries choose a loose pass even as the better countries have had a stagnant boom in eco-friendly abode gas emissions for the time of the last 15 years. also, in case you should maintain on with the golf eco-friendly circulate, you need to understand that Brazil and a variety of of alternative the different countries with rain forests were transferring to holding the rain forests. so a ideas, it type of feels that it really is in hassle-free words India and China that are doing no longer some thing to shrink their carbon foot print. From what I understand, by the best of this decade China is going to have more effective automobiles on the line then the different united states and India is surely no longer a ideas behind.

Answer 5

How about proving global warming actually exists first?