A total of 141 countries have signed up to the treaty, promising to slash greenhouse gas emissions. However, even if we can get America to sign up, it may be impossible to stop CO2 emissions increasing as the world population increases. What are the ultimate possible eventualities? Restrictions on child birth and war against countries not complying? It may sound like sci fi but how will world leaders react when the climate is bringing food production to a halt and people are dropping like flies in the heat?
Kyoto treaty - if it fails where will it end up?
by ballistic 13 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
czarofmischief
I'm still not convinced about the whole thing.
CZAR
-
zen nudist
an encyclopedia brittanica addendum volume from 1967 stated that with certainty we were headed towards the next
ice age.... did I miss it?
-
ballistic
The last ice age began one and a half millions years ago, and literally only just ended, so you'll have a long time to wait!
-
ColdRedRain
I would be for the Kyoto treaty except that the treaty cracks down too unfairly on western industrialized countries and not on the new big time polluters like China and India and their lax pollution laws.
-
Simon
China and India are developing
The USA is developed and is the worlds biggest polluter. You should be ashamed. The world expects better. To claim that it is "not in America's interests" is laughable and infantile.
Although not signed up for Kyoto, China is making moves to curb it's emmisions.
Even if everyone signed up for Kyoto it likely will still be too little too late ...
-
Double Edge
China and India are developing
And that's an excuse?
-
El blanko
Where will it end up? In tears.
I'm still of the doom and gloom brigade myself. I can't see this agreement making a jot of difference. People are people, and people want cars/gadgets and easy lives through technology.
I know, I'm one of them and am currently stuck in a lifestyle that is collectively hurting the environment.
-
ballistic
Here in the UK, 28% of pollution is generated by you and me in our homes. I don't know what the figure is worldwide, but I guess between a quarter and a third.
People who are sceptical about the environmental issues only have to look at how world population is still rapidly increasing (ironically one of America's reasons for saying they can't cut emissions!) and look at what the situation will be in say 100 years time.
Unfortunately, I have found that most people who say they don't believe the hype about the environment are the same people who say they don't give a toss what happens in 100 years time after they are dead.
-
TD
It may sound like sci fi but how will world leaders react when the climate is bringing food production to a halt and people are dropping like flies in the heat?
Don't misunderstand. I think any change to the Earth's climate should be taken seriously. For example, I'm certainly not happy about the spread of West Nile here where I live.
At the same time though, I have a hard time when a gas (CO2) vital to life on earth as we know it is classified as a "pollutant." One of the easiest ways to make plant life grow faster is to increase both temperature and CO2 levels. Like everyone else who has ever kept a green house, I know first hand that a natural gas heater is "cheap fertilizer" because it does both.