The Kyoto Protocol Essay

The argument about man’s role in climate change and the role of government, the role of industry and the role of citizens is a significant challenge that crosses all levels of government, crosses all geopolitical boundaries and crosses all sectors of business. National governments across the globe are dealing with the issue in different ways, but one overarching aspect of control and mitigation can be seen in the oversight and regulation of the electric energy industry. One significant challenge facing each nation is the cost to lower carbon emissions and the question of who will pay the additional cost for compliance. Though the cost issue is significant, a much more difficult question is whether any decision on lowering emissions can make

The issue of carbon emissions is an important one not only from an environmental perspective but also an economic one. While reducing carbon emissions is an important one for the health of human beings as well as that of the environment, the larger question is what type of policy strategy is best for both reducing such emissions which might have an impact on efforts to mitigate the effects of pollution on climate change. While ther are options to consider which does not rely on economics-- technological or output standards achieved by command and control regulations--they are often fraught with political resistance by industry because they do not allow industry to make any choices or play a role in solving the problem of

As we can see, the sense of urgency of this policy has kindled some sort of energy revolution in the world's developing nations. The Kyoto Protocol cannot perhaps be attributed with all the credit for this revolution, however it must have at the least given these nations a workable justification behind any changes that previously would have been unacceptable.

It's about advancing a political scheme of global government and punishing the US for its economic success. If we sign the Protocol the Kyoto inspectors, will be crawling all over America inspecting our emission levels in our factories and homes in violation of our Constitution. So the US should stay out of entangling alliances and should not endorse such Protocols that deteriorate our justifiable right of sovereignty. Global Warming is Hot Air Jon PerdueNo. 111, 15-21 March 1999 =

The Kyoto Protocol does not benefit Canada because it is unfair and too costly. The countries involved are not treated fairly, especially Canada. Some of the world’s largest polluters, such as China and India, are exempt from the first half of the Protocol and large polluters such as the US didn't choose to ratify the agreement. Secondly, Kyoto allows some industrialized countries, such as Russia and New Zealand, to make no cuts, and even permits some places, like Iceland, to emit more greenhouse gasses (Torrie and Parfett et al.). Finally, Canada will need to provide developing countries with funding to help them reach their reduction goals ("Canada's Kyoto Protocol Targets and Obligations"). Canada has more to lose with the Protocol than other countries and many other countries are not giving any funding at all. Every country that is signed on to the Kyoto agreement should be treated equally, and there should be no exceptions. For these reasons, the Kyoto Protocol will have little effect on the earth’s

Its adoption in 1997 and ratification in 2002 furthered the fight against anthropogenic interference with earth’s climate system. Canada’s commitment began with a goal to reduce GHGs by 6% reduction from 1990 levels by 2012, or 461 megatons (Canada and the Kyoto Protocol 2016). In order to achieve these goals, legal requirements expected policies and measures prepared by the participating countries to reduce GHGs, by utilizing all available mechanisms, including joint implementation to earn emissions reduction units (ERU) to be counted towards the target, the clean development mechanism and emissions trading (Kyoto Protocol 1997). Every year, on the date set forth, every participating country was expected to keep track of emissions limits and performance standards, develop spending or fiscal measures, as well their expectation for the next year and results from the previous (E. Canada 2013). When the first reduction timeline was up in 2008, instead of a decrease in emissions, Canada recorded an increase 24.1 percent higher than 1990 levels. The lack of commitment was superseded by the new government’s ‘Made in Canada” effort to push country-unified laws, though no significant changes were

In 1997, The Kyoto Protocol was adopted to address climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions (EPA, n.d.). In spite of the international treaty, half of participating nations, including Canada failed to reducing its Co2 emissions (Clark, D., 2012, November 26).

The Paris Agreement is made up of 195 nations who plan to cut their greenhouse-gas emissions in an attempt to slow down the increase in the global temperature. President Obama’s decision to sign this agreement does not only promote his personal climate change legacy but the climate change legacy of the United States of America. Since this environmental pact is only legally binding when “at least 55 countries representing 55 percent of global emissions sign on,” a United States signature could very well be the difference between a revolutionary global climate change policy and

As, arguably, the only global power at the time, the United States spearheaded the dialogue on climate change. At some points the United States has trouble convincing other nations to come on board. This can be seen in documents three and four, where Japan is having some trepidations over industrialized nations involvement in climate change versus developing nations. It can especially be seen in document three where they clearly have different perspectives on where they see climate change in the long term. Japan is also skeptical of many of the emission trading 's the United States takes part in because they are not quite sure how it would work and what position they would play. The Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs was particularly worried about China 's role in this agreement also, they did not want to carry out strict reductions while China continued to pollute the air around them. In comparison, document nine also centers around the United States as it tries to get the most out of the present climate change agreement, by working with Ambassador Raul A Estrada-Oyuela. Documents three and four are more focused on the beginning of various climate change treaties the United States was trying to conceive. While document 4 focuses on a climate agreement after Kyoto that would be in the United States ' best interest.

The climate change impacts of greenhouse gases threaten the economic development and environmental quality. These threats indicate that all nations regardless their economic growth should work collaboratively to reduce the emission to a certain level. Hare et al. (2011) argued that “climate change is a collective action problem” thus requires a global coordination from all countries. This indicates that actions from several countries would never be sufficient to address the climate change problem. If a global target to limit warming to 2°C or below is about to achieve (UNFCCC 2010, p.4) a broad range of participation is required (Hare et al., 2011). However, the increasing complexity of negotiation processes is inevitable. Each country will pursue its own interests during the

“The Kyoto Protocol is an international treaty which extends the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) that commits State Parties to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, based on the premise that (a)

The concurrent development of United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 1992 and the Kyoto Protocol 1997, as well as the World Trade Organization, and the North American Free Trade Agreement 1994 has proven to be incompatible. The green business energy projects are diminished under the international trade rules. According to Klein, “after the US disapproved other countries’ local renewable energy development, some other countries now considered Ontario’s local content requirement as the violation of World Trade Organization” (66). Climate actions and the development of green energy are frequently challenged under the free trade policy. With the rise of such system which gives us the power of overproduction and overconsumption, with no doubt, government interventions on climate action have to be

Global warming is such a concern to so many because it is predicted to cause major global changes, which will lead to a change in the world as we know it. Some coastal cities and countries will no longer be, other countries will be partly swallowed by a swelling sea, productive lands will become desserts, frozen lands will become lush producers, weather will wreak havoc on third

The Kyoto Protocol, negotiated in December 1997, is the first major step toward implementation of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The Protocol sets targets for industrialized nations to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases over the next 10 years. It offers four means to achieve those targets: domestic action and three international market-based instruments. These mechanisms work through emissions reductions or through enhancements in the ability of terrestrial ecosystems to absorb carbon. This Dialogue focuses on the Protocol's provisions to enhance the ability of terrestrial ecosystems to absorb carbon. These provisions may create incentives and financial mechanisms for more effective and

Annex I countries are industrialized nations with large carbon emissions, such as the US, Australia, EU, and Russia. The agreement has four implementation mechanisms designed to achieve the desired reductions in emissions, but only asks that countries comply with the reductions rather than suggesting a methodology. The primary method for countries to reduce emissions is through domestic policies, traditionally taking the form of governmental controls, which each nation would be responsible for creating and enforcing. Domestic policy is “…likely to become a ‘hook’ to ensure that the industrialized countries implement the policies necessary to spur real changes towards less carbon-intensive production and consumption patterns (Depledge 11).” The domestic policy article in the Kyoto Protocol is intended to provide governments, not an international body, with direct control over domestic emissions.