Staff Contributors
Guest Contributors

Arm wrestlers
How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic

'Why should the U.S. join Kyoto when China and India haven't?'


Posted by Coby Beck (Guest Contributor) at 9:46 AM on 11 Jan 2007

(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide)

Objection: Why should the U.S. join Kyoto while India and China haven't?

Answer: The U.S. puts out more CO2 than any other nation on earth, including China and India, by a large margin. Considering the relative populations (a billion-plus each for China and India versus 300 million in the U.S.), per capita emissions in the U.S. are many times larger. This has been true for the past 100-plus years of CO2 pollution.

For the U.S. to refuse to take any steps until India and China do the same is like the fattest man at the table, upon realizing the food is running out, demanding that the hungry people who just sat down cut back just as much as him, at the same time.

There is no morally sane assessment of the global warming problem that does not place a greater burden on the U.S., the worst polluter. Perhaps we should divide global emissions by global population and allocate carbon credits according to census data. Or, using a Kyoto 1990-levels approach, perhaps we should demand that all nations target the per-capita levels of the U.S. in the 1990s. If you live anywhere but inside U.S. borders, these proposals do not sound preposterous.

All that aside, it is simply untrue that China and India have not joined the Kyoto treaty. They have. They were simply not required to return to the third-world level of emissions they produced in 1990. What comes next for them has yet to be negotiated. Further, this framework of differing responsibilities and the acknowledgement of differing social needs was explicitly accepted in the UNFCCC treaty -- which was ratified by the U.S.

The U.S. has already agreed that China and India should be held to different standards!

Paragraph 3:

Noting that the largest share of historical and current global emissions of greenhouse gases has originated in developed countries, that per capita emissions in developing countries are still relatively low and that the share of global emissions originating in developing countries will grow to meet their social and development needs ...

Paragraph 6:

Acknowledging that the global nature of climate change calls for the widest possible cooperation by all countries and their participation in an effective and appropriate international response, in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities and their social and economic conditions ...

Clearly, the notion that it's unfair to expect the largest historical polluters to make the greatest reductions is not only wrong, but it is a violation of an already signed and ratified treaty on the issue of global warming.

But now that the world's biggest polluter has refused to make any sacrifices, what do you think China will have to say when renegotiations come around in 2012?

kyotto schmotto

In all honesty Kyotto is an extremely bad idea.  It's very complex, and so it is easily abused.  You are giving money to other countries, so it's extremely tough to sell.  It's just a horrible plan IMO.  Watch this video:

http://logicalscience.blogspot.com/2006/12/google-talks-s...

Then watch watch smalley's vid.  In all honesty I think the way the ivory tower is currently approaching this problem is absolutely horrible.  

emissions per capita

Emissions per capita don't tell the whole story. What are the emissions per productivity?

 Just as we (USA) use more oil and emit more greenhouse gas, do we also produce more per btu?

If we do why shut down the most efficient producers?

Thanks.

Re: Emissions per capita

A bit late on this, but the original blog version of this article contains a couple of responses on the emission per GDP point. See here.

America is in a position to further reduce waste and develop technologies that can help the entire world cut emissions. And as pointed out elsewhere in the blog, Kyoto is still subject to negotiation and refinement in later phases. How motivated will other countries be when it sees the U.S. barely lifting a finger?


You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.
sign in
Search Gristmill
Subscribe
  • subscribe via RSSStay updated with the Gristmill RSS feed.
  • Add to My Yahoo!
  • Subscribe with Bloglines
  • Subscribe in NewsGator Online
  • Subscribe in Netvibes
  • Subscribe in Google
Using Gristmill
  • What is Gristmill?
  • Posting rules
The comments of Gristmill users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?

Gristmill is powered by Scoop.

ADVERTISING POLICY


About Grist | Support Grist | Job Board | Archives | Grist by Email | RSS | Podcast
Gristmill Blog | In the News | Ask Umbra | Muckraker | Victual Reality | 'Tis the Season | The Grist List | The Bottom Line



Grist: Environmental News and Commentary
a beacon in the smog (tm) ©2008. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with a sense of humor®.
Webmaster | Sitemap | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Trademarks