Control of Global Warming: U.S. Retreat Weakens International Agreement
Published in Yomiuri Shimbun
(Japan) on 5 August 2010
by (link to original)
(Japan) on 5 August 2010
by (link to original)
Translated from
by Lynn Allmon.
Edited by Patricia Simoni.
Inevitably, the very construction of international agreements regarding greenhouse gases, such as CO2, will influence greenhouse gas reduction.
Democrats have given up on Senate debate toward a comprehensive law to control greenhouse gases, because the goals that have been set lack support from the opposition, the Republican Party. Thus, plans by the United States to control greenhouse gases are diminishing — on a large scale.
Therefore, in the “Post-Kyoto Protocol” era after 2013, the time frame for emissions reduction, it has become less clear that the U.S. will accept its responsibility for reducing emissions. America’s declining attendance at negotiations should also be noted. I can safely say that in November, at the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP16), designing the road map to a fair framework became much more difficult.
In May, a bill was announced in the Senate — identical to a bill passed by Congress — adding the target amount of internal greenhouse gas emissions: “Before the year 2020, there will be a 17 percent cut in emissions, when compared to 1995.” In addition, the greenhouse credit system was introduced; however, the Republicans, preoccupied with issues such as an increase in burdensome costs in business and rising energy prices, did not join in the making of this nonpartisan law.
Even within the Democratic Party, with the approach of interim elections in 2011, opposing voices in Congress are gaining strength among members supported by companies that will be affected by these restrictions, such as electric companies.
After interim elections, the plan is for President Obama to move toward formal legalization of the targeted reductions. The reality is that national concern for business and employment has dramatically shifted focus from global warming counter-measures.
An essential condition of the "Post-Kyoto Protocol" is that the two biggest greenhouse gas emitters, America and China, participate; however, neither country is subject to the Kyoto Protocol's precepts. Although China has been encouraged to participate, American involvement remains essential; thus, America’s retreat weakens the hope that China will participate.
It is a prerequisite for execution of greenhouse gas reduction that all principal countries contribute to the construction of a fair framework and agree on ambitious goals in order to meet the overall goal touted by Japan: "a reduction of emissions by 25 percent compared to 1990." This prerequisite must be firmly embraced, so that Japan doesn’t become the only country observing the disadvantageous responsibility of emission reduction.
The government's plan is to, once again, present the global warming counter-measure bill — rejected by the last Congress — in the next session. In addition, they will incorporate the plan for a "25 percent reduction in emissions compared to 1990."
This objective has strong opposition in the business world; thus, it is essential that the government discuss the bill now, carefully and without haste. Taking into account the trend in international negotiations, the proposition for a 25 percent cut in emissions ought to be re-examined.
Editor's Note: Efforts to verify quotations have been unsuccessful.
Democrats have given up on Senate debate toward a comprehensive law to control greenhouse gases, because the goals that have been set lack support from the opposition, the Republican Party. Thus, plans by the United States to control greenhouse gases are diminishing — on a large scale.
Therefore, in the “Post-Kyoto Protocol” era after 2013, the time frame for emissions reduction, it has become less clear that the U.S. will accept its responsibility for reducing emissions. America’s declining attendance at negotiations should also be noted. I can safely say that in November, at the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP16), designing the road map to a fair framework became much more difficult.
In May, a bill was announced in the Senate — identical to a bill passed by Congress — adding the target amount of internal greenhouse gas emissions: “Before the year 2020, there will be a 17 percent cut in emissions, when compared to 1995.” In addition, the greenhouse credit system was introduced; however, the Republicans, preoccupied with issues such as an increase in burdensome costs in business and rising energy prices, did not join in the making of this nonpartisan law.
Even within the Democratic Party, with the approach of interim elections in 2011, opposing voices in Congress are gaining strength among members supported by companies that will be affected by these restrictions, such as electric companies.
After interim elections, the plan is for President Obama to move toward formal legalization of the targeted reductions. The reality is that national concern for business and employment has dramatically shifted focus from global warming counter-measures.
An essential condition of the "Post-Kyoto Protocol" is that the two biggest greenhouse gas emitters, America and China, participate; however, neither country is subject to the Kyoto Protocol's precepts. Although China has been encouraged to participate, American involvement remains essential; thus, America’s retreat weakens the hope that China will participate.
It is a prerequisite for execution of greenhouse gas reduction that all principal countries contribute to the construction of a fair framework and agree on ambitious goals in order to meet the overall goal touted by Japan: "a reduction of emissions by 25 percent compared to 1990." This prerequisite must be firmly embraced, so that Japan doesn’t become the only country observing the disadvantageous responsibility of emission reduction.
The government's plan is to, once again, present the global warming counter-measure bill — rejected by the last Congress — in the next session. In addition, they will incorporate the plan for a "25 percent reduction in emissions compared to 1990."
This objective has strong opposition in the business world; thus, it is essential that the government discuss the bill now, carefully and without haste. Taking into account the trend in international negotiations, the proposition for a 25 percent cut in emissions ought to be re-examined.
Editor's Note: Efforts to verify quotations have been unsuccessful.
This is absurd. While the Kyoto protocol was in effect, the US reduced emissions while the Kyoto nations increased theirs. Your entire premise is the flawed logic of the one world order. The American people will never accept it. In fact, we are already urging our government to withdraw from the U.N. and evict it. The U.N. belongs in Dubai or somewhere else.
Best regards,
Gail S
http://www.backyardfence.wordpress.com