Thelovetrain
11-12-2006, 00:22
Hello all,
I am new to the UN and to this game, but i have decided to take it upon myself to attempt to repeal all resolutions that i believe should not have been passed, whether because of technicalities in the arguements put forward or because of the affect it has on nations, etc. I hope to eventually create a region dedicated soly to doing this (if there is not one already).
My first attempt will be to repeal Resolution #126 Fossil Fuel Reduction Act.
First of all, there are many major problems with the act itself. The act is an attempt to force ALL UN nations to Significantly reduce their usage of Fossil Fuels and punish those who don't comply.
- This Resolution has one obvious flaw that has huge implications.
Clean, renewable energy sources: energy derived from sources that do not completely use up natural resources or do significant harm the environment in the long-term.
The resolutions goal is to eventually have every nation aquiring its energy from Renewable Resources, the most apparent being Wind, Water, and the Sun. This resolution forces sanctions on those who do not comply. What about the nations with little water/rainfall and even less wind. It forces nations, where aquiring such renewable energy would be impractible, to find ways to do this. In effect, this resolution is very well currently hurting nations by forcing them to spend significant money to set up energy infrastructures which are extremely impractible.
Section B: Each nation must increase funding for research, development, and implementation of clean, renewable energy sources and increased energy efficiency and conservation programs by a minimum of 1% per year, until Section A has been satisfied.
This is also a very disturbing section. There are many ways to have a nation comply to a resolution. It can range from economic sanctions to removal from the U.N. Forcing a nation to divert crucial money from their budgets is Grossly Wrong. This also does not take into consideration how long certain projects can and will take (especially for nations with less available money to spend on these projects) to change economies that TOTALLY rely on Energy. Accurate estimates could amount to 10-14 years before any significant change can be seen. What does this mean? 10-14% of budgets (which can easily go into trillions and trillons of dollars) could be spent on this. Forcing a nation to spend 10-14% of its budget on this is wrong, especially when it can be use for better means.
This resolution also does not take into consideration, in any way, that many nations rely on its private sector to provide energy, fuel, gasoline, and the dispersal of them. This resolution forces Governments to spend their crucial budget to research and develop new energy methods when they are not even in control of it. IT is a huge waste of money for a government to spend crucial budget money on research when the private sector can turn a blind eye.
This resolution also does not consider that many nations import their energy from other nations, meaning that they do not need to spend crucial budget on its research and development. But this resolution does not provide any exclusions for these parties, meaning in order to avoid sanctions they must reduce consumption and increase budget funding when they are not in control of changing the energy, rather it is in the hands of their supplier.
Although there are many more problems with Resolution #126 I will leave it at here, with a few strong points. I do believe that the REduction of Fossil Fuels is crucial, but i do not believe that this Resolution took into consideration what implications it could have on certain nations. Therefore i will draft a formal REpeal after recieving feedback, in the hope that a more fair resolution in regards to reducing the use of fossil fuels is passed.
I am new to the UN and to this game, but i have decided to take it upon myself to attempt to repeal all resolutions that i believe should not have been passed, whether because of technicalities in the arguements put forward or because of the affect it has on nations, etc. I hope to eventually create a region dedicated soly to doing this (if there is not one already).
My first attempt will be to repeal Resolution #126 Fossil Fuel Reduction Act.
First of all, there are many major problems with the act itself. The act is an attempt to force ALL UN nations to Significantly reduce their usage of Fossil Fuels and punish those who don't comply.
- This Resolution has one obvious flaw that has huge implications.
Clean, renewable energy sources: energy derived from sources that do not completely use up natural resources or do significant harm the environment in the long-term.
The resolutions goal is to eventually have every nation aquiring its energy from Renewable Resources, the most apparent being Wind, Water, and the Sun. This resolution forces sanctions on those who do not comply. What about the nations with little water/rainfall and even less wind. It forces nations, where aquiring such renewable energy would be impractible, to find ways to do this. In effect, this resolution is very well currently hurting nations by forcing them to spend significant money to set up energy infrastructures which are extremely impractible.
Section B: Each nation must increase funding for research, development, and implementation of clean, renewable energy sources and increased energy efficiency and conservation programs by a minimum of 1% per year, until Section A has been satisfied.
This is also a very disturbing section. There are many ways to have a nation comply to a resolution. It can range from economic sanctions to removal from the U.N. Forcing a nation to divert crucial money from their budgets is Grossly Wrong. This also does not take into consideration how long certain projects can and will take (especially for nations with less available money to spend on these projects) to change economies that TOTALLY rely on Energy. Accurate estimates could amount to 10-14 years before any significant change can be seen. What does this mean? 10-14% of budgets (which can easily go into trillions and trillons of dollars) could be spent on this. Forcing a nation to spend 10-14% of its budget on this is wrong, especially when it can be use for better means.
This resolution also does not take into consideration, in any way, that many nations rely on its private sector to provide energy, fuel, gasoline, and the dispersal of them. This resolution forces Governments to spend their crucial budget to research and develop new energy methods when they are not even in control of it. IT is a huge waste of money for a government to spend crucial budget money on research when the private sector can turn a blind eye.
This resolution also does not consider that many nations import their energy from other nations, meaning that they do not need to spend crucial budget on its research and development. But this resolution does not provide any exclusions for these parties, meaning in order to avoid sanctions they must reduce consumption and increase budget funding when they are not in control of changing the energy, rather it is in the hands of their supplier.
Although there are many more problems with Resolution #126 I will leave it at here, with a few strong points. I do believe that the REduction of Fossil Fuels is crucial, but i do not believe that this Resolution took into consideration what implications it could have on certain nations. Therefore i will draft a formal REpeal after recieving feedback, in the hope that a more fair resolution in regards to reducing the use of fossil fuels is passed.