Kyoto Protocol Goes Into Effect [Archive]

View Full Version : Kyoto Protocol Goes Into Effect

HBox

02-15-2005, 08:30 PM

Kyoto takes effect Wednesday, without the U.S. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6933936/)

Two centuries after the dawn of the industrial age, the world on Wednesday took its first concerted step to roll back the emission of "greenhouse gases" believed linked to climate change with the enactment of the Kyoto global warming pact.

The agreement, negotiated in Japan's ancient capital of Kyoto in 1997 and ratified by 140 nations, calls on 35 industrialized countries to rein in the release of carbon dioxide and five other gases from the burning of oil and coal and other processes.

Its impact, however, will be limited by the absence of the United States, the world's leader in greenhouse gas emissions.

This is going to be a friendly thread. I can just feel it.

Let Us Trim Our Hair In Accordance with Socialist Lifestyle!

This message was edited by HBox on 2-16-05 @ 12:30 AM

FMJeff

02-15-2005, 08:41 PM

Fantastic. My faith in humanity is restored, and further reinforces my plans to live abroad.

<center><img src="http://www.ronfez.net/imagestorage/fmjeff.gif">
 
It made my heart sing.

Yerdaddy

02-16-2005, 04:23 AM

and further reinforces my plans to live abroad.

Tit implants are cheap these days, but you'll have to get alot more shoes.

Ohhhhh! "Live abroad" I thought you meant live as a broad. Sorry.

Well, it's 80 degrees in Yemen right now. Perfect weather for sundresses.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

Bulldogcakes

02-16-2005, 05:24 PM

Global warming exists. But linking Global warming and carbon dioxide emissions is an area that is still strongly debated among scientists. To do this, before the science is in, is absurd. Its like taking medicine before you find out whats wrong with you.

Friendly so far. . . .. .

http://pic5.picturetrail.com/VOL77/857148/1548180/76422236.jpg

Ow! Hey! Get that net offa me! Ouch! Help!! Somebody HELP!!!!

FUNKMAN

02-16-2005, 05:32 PM

i heard on the radio that the US is not participating because we need proof

how ironic it is that we can go to war without proof and ask Japan to support us and get them involved but yet we need proof to go ahead and help the enviornment and place some faith in Japan

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/SatCam/sig_funkmanstill.jpg">

HBox

02-16-2005, 05:38 PM

Getting us away from oil dependence carries benefits even if carbon emissions have nothing to do with global warming. With India and China rapidly consuming more and more oil, and with less discoveris of new sources of oil, it would benefit us to move to new energy sources as soon as possible. We don't need to run out of oil to run into major economic problems; if world oil production peaks, which is could be relatively soon, and demand strips that production capacity, oil prices will spike dramatically, and seeing how current prices are killing airlines, the effects on our economy will be drastic.

Peak oil production will inevitably come, and the less oil dependent we are at that time, the less we will be affected.

And moving to hydrogen powered cars won't help since the hydrogen itself doesn't power the cars; the hydrogn only carries energy, which has to be produced by other means, much of which would currently be powered by oil.

We just have a lot of work to do, and the longer we wait, the more trouble we will be in in the future, and that's assuming carbon emissions have no effect on global warming.

Let Us Trim Our Hair In Accordance with Socialist Lifestyle!

Bulldogcakes

02-16-2005, 05:39 PM

Funk, I'd prefer to stick to the science, not the politics on this one.

If you really believe that global warming is linked to CO2, then someone will have to explain to the NASA scientists why surface temps on Mars are rising at a similar rate to Earths.
No SUV's on Mars.
"Occams Razor" suggests that the most obvious answer is usually the correct one. Do you think that if temps are rising, it might be connected to the Heat source? We know the sun goes through cycles.

http://pic5.picturetrail.com/VOL77/857148/1548180/76422236.jpg

Ow! Hey! Get that net offa me! Ouch! Help!! Somebody HELP!!!!

This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 2-16-05 @ 9:47 PM

Bulldogcakes

02-16-2005, 05:47 PM

Getting us away from oil dependence carries benefits even if carbon emissions have nothing to do with global warming. With India and China rapidly consuming more and more oil, and with less discoveris of new sources of oil, it would benefit us to move to new energy sources as soon as possible. We don't need to run out of oil to run into major economic problems; if world oil production peaks, which is could be relatively soon, and demand strips that production capacity, oil prices will spike dramatically, and seeing how current prices are killing airlines, the effects on our economy will be drastic.

Peak oil production will inevitably come, and the less oil dependent we are at that time, the less we will be affected.

And moving to hydrogen powered cars won't help since the hydrogen itself doesn't power the cars; the hydrogn only carries energy, which has to be produced by other means, much of which would currently be powered by oil.

We just have a lot of work to do, and the longer we wait, the more trouble we will be in in the future, and that's assuming carbon emissions have no effect on global warming.

Were not waiting, those technologies are out there. They just dont make sense economically, not yet. When oil prices rise, Solar/Hydrogen/Electric will make more sense.
I'd support reducing oil use if it was linked to serious health problems (cancer, etc). But the global warming stuff just doesn't wash with me.

http://pic5.picturetrail.com/VOL77/857148/1548180/76422236.jpg

Ow! Hey! Get that net offa me! Ouch! Help!! Somebody HELP!!!!

FUNKMAN

02-16-2005, 05:48 PM

Funk, I'd prefer to stick to the science, not the politics on this one.

bulldog

fyi

i couldn't give a rats balls about how you would like to express your opinion on this one

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/SatCam/sig_funkmanstill.jpg">

Recyclerz

02-16-2005, 06:00 PM

Carbon dioxide doesn't have to be the cause of global warming for the build-up to be problematic. It is very possible that the biggest influence on the current rise in global temperatures (which isn't much in doubt) is a natural fluctuation in climatic cycles. But when you add in the CO2 as a multiplier you've got a lot of human tragedy to deal with. Bottom line - if the glaciers melt it won't matter whose fault it was.

<IMG SRC="http://www.hometown.aol.com/recyclerz/myhomepage/sigpic1.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US">
[b]And I think everybody understands what the 'next steps' mean(s).[b]

42nd-delay

02-16-2005, 09:00 PM

If it turns out that global warming isn't occurring, which I find unlikely, the worst that will happen is that business will be dampened a bit. That's easy to fix. If global warming is real, it' much harder to fix the whole earth, and eventually there won't be any business, any politics, any anything.

------------------------------

<img src="http://www.thewalkons.com/bluestates_sig.jpg">

"42nd-delay is the only person who's making sense." - Ron, 3-12-02

mdr55

02-16-2005, 09:08 PM

FINALLY something the US doesn't want to lead the world in. Can you believe it?

Ndugu

02-16-2005, 10:00 PM

i couldn't give a rats balls about how you would like to express your opinion on this one

gotta love the blue state attitude!

"my comments dont speak well of my ability to debate, or my overall intellectual curiosity"

Ndugu

02-16-2005, 10:04 PM

how ironic it is that we can go to war without proof

eh, i think every country with any kind intelligence agency had proof sweety

"my comments dont speak well of my ability to debate, or my overall intellectual curiosity"

GodsFavoriteMan

02-17-2005, 12:10 AM

how ironic it is that we can go to war without proof

eh, i think every country with any kind intelligence agency had proof sweety

Well, pookie pie, we went to war over WMDs. There weren't any. We had no proof. So what the hell are you talking about?

<img src="http://home.comcast.net/~stan_ferguson/GFMSIGPIC_copy.jpg">
"Story goes these great big rats come scuttling off the slave ships and raped all the little tree monkies."

Ndugu

02-17-2005, 01:52 AM

the case to go to war was compelling and reinforced by other countries intelligence agencies
that was the proof to go to war, not finding the wmds, cuz they were moved to syria in huge truck convoys, was after the fact

"my comments dont speak well of my ability to debate, or my overall intellectual curiosity"

TheMojoPin

02-17-2005, 02:07 AM

Hey, Ndugu's Porter Goss!

I blame cow farts.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 <> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

GodsFavoriteMan

02-17-2005, 02:28 AM

Hey, Ndugu's Porter Goss!

I blame cow farts. . .

Of course, it all makes sense now.

<img src="http://home.comcast.net/~stan_ferguson/GFMSIGPIC_copy.jpg">
"Story goes these great big rats come scuttling off the slave ships and raped all the little tree monkies."

LordJezo

02-17-2005, 04:06 AM

Australia said no to this BS policy too.

I wonder if everyone there is blaming Bush about it.

------------------------------------------
I KISS YOU!

<a href="http://www.78west.com">Come on over to The Message Whore.. you know you want to.<a>

Recyclerz

02-18-2005, 11:52 AM

New studies claim to show that ocean warming is real, significant and most likely caused by human activity.

Financial Times (http://news.ft.com/cms/s/4c7db6de-81b7-11d9-9e19-00000e2511c8.html)

Reuters (if you can't get the one above) (http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=scienceNews&storyID=7667385)

Tell your little brother to stop peeing in the ocean.

<IMG SRC="http://www.hometown.aol.com/recyclerz/myhomepage/sigpic1.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US">
[b]And I think everybody understands what the 'next steps' mean(s).[b]

FUNKMAN

02-18-2005, 12:01 PM

gotta love the blue state attitude!

blue me!

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/SatCam/sig_funkmanstill.jpg">

LiquidCourage

02-18-2005, 12:43 PM

After reading some of the specifics of the Kyoto protocol, I don't understand what the big deal is. I mean, it plans to cut emissions by 5% over the next 8 years. That's totally pathetic.

Yerdaddy

04-16-2005, 04:21 AM

<a href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=624&ncid=624&e=1&u=/ap/20050415/ap_on_sc/greenhouse_gases" target="_blank">Study: Greenhouse Gas Limits Affordable </a>quote: Mandatory limits on all U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide and other "greenhouse" gases would not significantly affect average economic growth rates across the country through 2025, the government says.  That finding by the Energy Information Administration, an independent arm of the Energy Department, runs counter to President Bush's repeated pronouncements that limits on carbon dioxide and other gases that warm the atmosphere like a greenhouse would seriously harm the U.S. economy.quote:  William K. Reilly, the commission co-chairman who headed the Environmental Protection Agency under the first President Bush, said it was an old argument that the economy could not withstand greenhouse gas reductions. He said both his commission and the EIA have now shown otherwise. "This is a reassuring set of conclusions," he said. quote:  <table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" border="0"><tr><td><a href="http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/apr2001/nf2001049_182.htm" target="_blank">Global-Warming: Bush's Double Blunder</a> By Peter Coy*--/AUTHOR-* - Businessweek Magazine*--/HEADLINE-*</td></tr><tr><td>*--DECK-*By rejecting the Kyoto Accord, he may have hurt the world's chances for limiting greenhouse gases -- and the interests of U.S. companies George W. Bush probably expected to get slammed by environmentalists last month when he reneged on his campaign pledge to set mandatory reduction targets for emissions of the greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. But his Administration clearly was caught off guard by the negative reaction he has been receiving from corporate groups -- usually a Republican's best friends. Take the Pew Center for Global Climate Change, whose 33 corporate members include industrial stalwarts such as American Electric Power, DuPont, Alcoa, and United Technologies -- all major generators of greenhouse gases. Eileen Claussen, its president, recently told BusinessWeek that Bush "is not doing business a favor." Seems strange, doesn't it, that big companies emitting greenhouse gases would be disappointed when the President opposes mandatory reductions? But look at the reasoning, and you begin to see their point. And you can't help concluding that President Bush may have made a big mistake by coming out so strongly against curbing carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases that are warming the planet.*--/DECK-*</td></tr></table><img height="200" src="http://presenttruth.org/alcc/hidden_manna/Images/left%20behind%20movie.jpg" width="110" align="middle" border="0" /><img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5" border="0" /> Fuck it from behind.

This message was edited by Yerdaddy on 4-16-05 @ 8:22 AM

Yerdaddy

04-29-2005, 08:18 AM

<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/28/AR2005042801586.html" target="_blank">Data From Space, Oceans Validate Global Warming Timeline</a>Hansen's team, reporting Thursday in the journal Science, said they also determined that global temperatures will rise 1 degree Fahrenheit this century even if greenhouse gases are capped tomorrow.If carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping emissions instead continue to grow, as expected, things could spin "out of our control," especially as ocean levels rise from melting Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, the researchers said. International experts predict a 10-degree leap in such a worst-case scenario."There can no longer be genuine doubt that human-made gases are the dominant cause of observed warming," said Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies at Columbia University's Earth Institute. "This energy imbalance is the 'smoking gun' that we have been looking for."Fourteen other specialists from NASA, Columbia and the Energy Department co-authored the study. <blockquote /> <img border="0" src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5" /> Fuck it from behind.

This message was edited by Yerdaddy on 4-29-05 @ 12:19 PM

Bulldogcakes

04-30-2005, 03:55 AM

I like warm weather. 
 <img border="0" src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/bulldaogcopy.jpg" />

Does it bug you that your local pharmacy sells cigarettes and emphysema medicine?



This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 4-30-05 @ 8:47 AM