exactly why won't the us or australia sign the Kyoto protocol?

Question

please give me actual reasons, not your opinions or tirades for or against the debate on global warming.

edit: why did china sign it and it is exempt from fulfilling the agreement? is that also true with india? if so, why?

isn't it true that in about 20 years, we shall reach peak production of oil? please elaborate on the effects of big business, trade, and the treaty.

given that the usa has so many environmental laws in place already, why not quit outsourcing our industry? why not keep it here to rebuild our infrastructure?

all elaboration of vagueness will be most appreciated. only you know where you are being vague. i know, but there are too many answers for me to itemize who is vague and why their answers do not truly answer this question.

Answer 1

Because it gives foreign governments say over how we do business, ultimately, if we are deemed to flunk targets. We like doing it our way. We did, however, go down in carbon footprint despite our growth, unlike many countries that did sign the treaty.

However, if we had unlimited need to reduce, our companies would bear even more cost while competing companies in emerging nations (like China and India) would be exempt. We already have higher costs than other countries, in part from environmental laws. We want to do it our own way, and if some ways hurt too much be able to say, well, we won't do that.

Answer 2

Initially, the reason is cost vs benefits. To comply with Kyoto would cost the US trillions, and even then the effect would only be tiny. Even the Kyoto backers acknowledge the benefits of total compliance would be a fraction of 1 degree worldwide.

However I think the tide is turning on this whole man made global warming thing. I think as the debate goes on, the science is not as strong as we were told.

Did China and India sign the Kyoto Treaty? Since they were exempted, it doesn't seem necessary, but I guess since they are exempted, why not? It can only benefit them by decreasing western competition.

As for peak oil, we've been hearing this crap since the 1800s. First we were supposed to run out of oil by the 20's, then the 40's, etc. The problem is, they keep finding more of the stuff, plus technology improves so we can extract more from sites then we could in the past. Oh sure, one day we'll run out of oil, but don't look for it any time soon. If oil demand exceeds production capability, prices will go up and demand will fall naturally according to market forces. It would force everyone to be more efficient.

Answer 3

The Kyoto protocols cover the US and Australia but not nations like China and India who put more C02 into the air as of 2006 and it's only bound to get worse. Stifling industry unilaterally does nothing to ease environmental concerns

Answer 4

Because it would hurt our larger corporations and in turn hurt the economy.big corporations with financial interests at stake have had a lot of influence in the outcome and on the media. A lot of primarily industry arguments against the Kyoto conference and Global Warming in general, claim that it will hurt the global (or USA's) economy and affect people's jobs.

Economic fears were also cited. Business interests, as mentioned above have constantly resulted in strong lobbying in Washington, as well.

Answer 5

Because if we did everything it took to change industry tomeet the protocol, we would be breaking it again in 2020. There are just to many cars, trucks, buses, and other vehicles to ever really live up to the treaty. We would have to completely change the way the country is.

Answer 6

In us Bush is tied to enery interests such as big oil that would be hurt by laws that limit their ability to pollute. That stated reason is that it would damage the economy and violate our sovreignty. I would assume Austrailia is similar since Howard is one of the few remaining Bushites on the world stage

Answer 7

The reason is that George Bush has a lot of ties to big oil. I know that sounds too simple to be true but really, look into it.

Answer 8

It would force all heavily industrialized nations into a global depression.

Answer 9

For Australia's part, our Prime Minister (a pompous, arrogant little man) and his Liberal (conservative) Party don't think that global warming is real and that signing would damage their big business friends.

Answer 10

cause the us is a dumb and they don't want to be crontoled by some stupid treaty. but seriously, it would destroy our economy and ruin our system of government. we don't depend on gold or silver anymore because of the "OIL REVOLUTION." That is basically all we have to our name and to our dollar is, OIL.