Posted on 02/15/2005 11:31:28 PM PST by ProtectOurFreedom
With the Kyoto Protocol set to take effect tomorrow, a disturbing realization is hitting many of the world's biggest global-warming suspects: Trying to meet their obligations to limit global-warming emissions under the treaty is proving a political and economic nightmare.
What is confronting many of the industrialized participants is the fact that turning their abstract environmental promise into tangible economic policy is extremely unpopular with politically powerful interests. Joining the Kyoto club was the easy part; now governments have to figure out how to divvy up responsibility for the cuts among companies and consumers that produce the emissions. Particularly since economies -- and emissions -- in many of these countries have grown significantly since the pact was negotiated in 1997, the process is producing a nasty political backlash.
Few nations among the roughly 130 participants are having as tough a time figuring out how to clean up their acts as Canada, a country whose European-style environmental pledge is crashing into the reality of its American-size energy appetite. Canada has pledged under Kyoto to cut its global-warming emissions to 6% below the 1990 level by 2012. But its emissions actually are rising, at an average rate of 1.5% a year.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
The chickens are coming home to roost. Turns out nobody can figure out how to meet the Kyoto requirements without destroying their economy (except China which is exempt).
A couple of other quotes from the article: "Canadian Environment Minister Stephan Dion said that, of all the countries bound by Kyoto, Canada has the toughest emissions target, but that he is confident his nation can meet it in a way that strengthens the economy. " Yeah, right. Doubling your energy prices is really going to strengthen the economy.
"But Finance Minister Ralph Goodale, testifying before a parliamentary environment committee last week, said Canada needs a "more robust plan" if it is to meet its targets. Calling the current blueprint "a work in progress," he said the government needs to reorganize a significant amount of already-booked expenditures to get "more bang for the buck."" What a bunch of bureaucratic gobbledygook. Not a meaningful word in that gas. "Reorganize a significant amount of already-booked expenditures" -- in other words, cook the books so it looks like you are meeting the goals without doing anything substantive: i.e., a socialist solution.
"European nations have faced industry pressure against cracking down too much on fossil-fuel-powered economic output." Meet Kyoto and watch structural unemployment in France and Germany head toward 15% or maybe 20%.
"Ottawa, meanwhile, has spent C$3.7 billion pushing a plan that was supposed to yield 180 million tons of voluntary greenhouse-emissions cuts by now. The plan included a nationwide advertising campaign issuing a challenge to consumers: reduce by about 20% the roughly five tons of carbon dioxide an average Canadian household emits. By most informed estimates, however, the plan has yielded only about half the hoped-for emissions cuts." Everybody please put on a sweater and turn your thermostat down to 60. And sell one of your two cars.
"The [Canadian] government is scrambling for a way out. One tactic could involve expanded tax incentives and subsidies to companies and consumers, though the Finance Ministry is likely to resist too many tax breaks as it seeks to keep the federal budget in the black. Another likely strategy: using taxpayer money to invest in emissions-reductions projects elsewhere in the world." Another wealth-transfer boondoggle. Send money to other countries to pay for their emissions control projects.
Arrgh...this S**T drives me crazy.
Great information ... but if anybody had been listening, America tried to tell them this would happen. I've always believed the goal of Kyoto wasn't to cut emissions but to transfer tax dollars from "wealthy" nations to "poor" nations. Clearly that was the real reason the international pressure was on America to join.
LMAO!!!
Without a doubt, and France will be leading the charge.
Of course. Socialism on a worldwide scale. Unfortunately for most of the socialist elites, the big bad evil America pulled out of the treaty. Now THEIR nations have to pay to all the poor nations. Watch as their economies crash, while we prosper.
And I'm sure nations like China and India are going to have a fabulous time picking up the slack being exempt and all.
Time to buy more popcorn.
Please freepmail me the rest of article. Thanks.
Can someone tell me why any of the oil rich countries would sign on to Kyoto? Kyoto in theory would cause their customers to look for oil alternatives. They're going to lose out of money too.
It's going to be fun watching this stupid money transfer scheme collapse.
To be perfectly correct about it, we were never IN the treaty because the Senate had the smarts not to approve it even though Klinton and his minions tried to get them to do so.
Advise and Consent is one of the big dangers of our constitution that should be rectified one of these days. Advise and Consent should only apply to a one or two year treaty, that must be ratified by a vote if the People at the time of the next Congressional Elections. Its far too easy to lose our rights to an ill advised treaty which has the same force of law as the constitution. We've been sold down the river by the Senate in the past. Its amazing they had the sense to veto Kyoto.
No one has ever agreed with me. Can any one explain why this is a bad idea?
To them? That takes power from them and vests it in the people. Can't have that...
It is exactly the right thing to do. If a treaty can supercede the Constitution, then it should be as difficult to authorize as an amendment to the Constitution. The same level of approvals should be required.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.