NationStates Jolt Archive

Next week sees the coming into force of the Kyoto Protocal on green house gas emissions. This is a start to addressing the problems of climate change. As we know, the USA signed this, but after his election George Bush Jnr refused to ratify this. The USA is therefore outside of the protocal on the grounds that it might harm its economy to comply.

On this grounds, as the EU members will make the hard efforts to comply with its duties under Kyoto, effectively US goods are benefiting from a de facto subsidy (they won't incur any of the costs involved in complying). Therefore, it's been suggested by some that the European Commision should put an environmental import tax on goods from USA to allow fair competition. Sounds a good idea to me... any thoughts?

I also agree. As we know Americans love free trade almost as much as they love freedom so a 'green tax' will ensure that the European and American competators are on an equal footing all other things aside. I hope they also extend this to Australian goods because money talks and i hope it will foster the urgent need to ratify Kyoto.

I also agree. As we know Americans love free trade almost as much as they love freedom so a 'green tax' will ensure that the European and American competators are on an equal footing all other things aside. I hope they also extend this to Australian goods because money talks and i hope it will foster the urgent need to ratify Kyoto.

I completely agree. I am surprised that Australia has not ratified it.

With regard to the USA, it would seem many people deny that climate change is even occuring. Although, many of the reports that deny climate change have been funded largely by companies such as Exxon, so it's not surprising they make these conclusions.

I completely agree. I am surprised that Australia has not ratified it.

With regard to the USA, it would seem many people deny that climate change is even occuring. Although, many of the reports that deny climate change have been funded largely by companies such as Exxon, so it's not surprising they make these conclusions.

Hey, I didn't vote for Johnny Coward ... :confused:

An excellent idea, but why only for the USA? Why not for China and Korea, neither of which have even signed Kyoto, and which between them have made nearly everything I own!

I completely agree. I am surprised that Australia has not ratified it.


Howard likes pretending he's bush. He likes throwing his weight around small pacific islands taking advantage of them.

An excellent idea, but why only for the USA? Why not for China and Korea, neither of which have even signed Kyoto, and which between them have made nearly everything I own!

I'm not sure about other countries, but in New Zealand we export way more $$ worth of shit (wool, dairy, meat, timber, wood pulp etc) than we import (clothes, pre-made products) from china. Since they like buying our stuff, its probably not worth pissing them off by taxing.

I completely agree. I am surprised that Australia has not ratified it.

With regard to the USA, it would seem many people deny that climate change is even occuring. Although, many of the reports that deny climate change have been funded largely by companies such as Exxon, so it's not surprising they make these conclusions.


Can you prove that climate change is occuring through mankinds actions?

BTW who funds the scientists' who say global warming is occuring?

Can you prove that climate change is occuring through mankinds actions?

BTW who funds the scientists' who say global warming is occuring?

You're funny.

Anywho. It is most often government funded scientists who find in favour of global warming. But I see how they would want to bugger their economies by promoting something so fictitious as global warming. That is the problem with arguments against it, there is no incentive or benefit to global warming Unless you live in Canada. *Shifty eyes*

Can you prove that climate change is occuring through mankinds actions?

BTW who funds the scientists' who say global warming is occuring?

NASA scientists say that. They are funded by the US goverment.

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/02/11/warming.planet.nasa.reut/index.html

An excellent idea, but why only for the USA? Why not for China and Korea, neither of which have even signed Kyoto, and which between them have made nearly everything I own!


China HAS ractified the protocol. I'm not shure about SK, though, but had the idea that they had ractified it too (gonna research)


edit: South Korea indeed ractified the protocol

Sounds like a good idea. The EU may actually have enough economic weight to throw around. The US gets its way not just because of it's military superiority, but it's economic power. Maybe the EU can manage to give us a taste of our own medicine.

I agree completely with the thread starter. Global warming cannot be ignored any longer.

As we know, the USA signed this, but after his election George Bush Jnr refused to ratify this.
As we know, the US Senate voted against ratifying (95-0 I believe) before Bush could even get to office. Not everything the US does that you disagree with is George W. Bush's fault.

Please do. We would put a similar tax on European products, and create more jobs here in the US. More factories too. That means more fossil fuels being burned.

Actually, the Senate refused to ratify it in the first place. Bush just gave up attempting to get the Senate to ratify...

Next week sees the coming into force of the Kyoto Protocal on green house gas emissions. This is a start to addressing the problems of climate change. As we know, the USA signed this, but after his election George Bush Jnr refused to ratify this. The USA is therefore outside of the protocal on the grounds that it might harm its economy to comply.

As we know, you know nothing about what happens in the USA.

The President dosen't ratify things, the Senate does. Every senator who voted, Republican or Democrat, essentially voted against it in 1997, although it wasn't the official "ratification" vote. Clinton never submitted it for ratification due to that fact. It was dead for years before GWB even came to office.

Please do. We would put a similar tax on European products, and create more jobs here in the US. More factories too. That means more fossil fuels being burned.

I am of a different opinion, the tax would not benefit any economy. Any tax would simply pass cash on to the governments, which would go mostly to cover administrative costs (this is, of course variable as we are speaking in generalities).

Consumers would feel the brunt as the costs of the interested goods rise and competition is stifled for domestic products.

For instance, the iPOD would increase in price for the EU as the tarrif tacks on a percentage. If the tarrif is enough to spur an EU company to make a similar product, one must ask, what prevented them from doing it now? Perhaps the quality, or price could not be matched. The consumer would then be considering the purchase of either a more expensive product or inferiro product.

edit: let me add one caveat. The small number of people that are hired to push the papers around would benefit as new jobs would be created to handle this new administrative function.

Next week sees the coming into force of the Kyoto Protocal on green house gas emissions. This is a start to addressing the problems of climate change. As we know, the USA signed this, but after his election George Bush Jnr refused to ratify this. The USA is therefore outside of the protocal on the grounds that it might harm its economy to comply.

On this grounds, as the EU members will make the hard efforts to comply with its duties under Kyoto, effectively US goods are benefiting from a de facto subsidy (they won't incur any of the costs involved in complying). Therefore, it's been suggested by some that the European Commision should put an environmental import tax on goods from USA to allow fair competition. Sounds a good idea to me... any thoughts?
I agree 1000%.

An excellent idea, but why only for the USA? Why not for China and Korea, neither of which have even signed Kyoto, and which between them have made nearly everything I own!
Both China and the Republic of Korea have ratified the Kyoto Protocol:

http://unfccc.int/resource/conv/ratlist.pdf

Both China and the Republic of Korea have ratified the Kyoto Protocol:

http://unfccc.int/resource/conv/ratlist.pdf


Yes but, the developing countries, of which, for this treaty anyway, these 2 countries are defined, have incredibly lax rules by which they follow, as compared to other countries. The treaty rules are not evenly applied.

Also, the measurement of the carbon emissions is measured through means that mean, oil and coal burning. It does not measure the inefficiencies of wood burning. Wood is still one of the worlds most heavily used sources of fuel. It is also one of the most inefficient. This ignores the production of greenhouse gases prevalent in less affluent countries.

The Kyoto treaty May setup the absurd situation where, in the places it could be adapted, the inefficient wood source could be inserted. Thus doing no good

For example, in heating homes, if the tax on fuel oil or natural gas, used to heat homes, is high enough, it would not take much to tip Americans over to using the very large amount of wood available in most parts of the country(basically everywhere except the megalopolis from DC-NY. and the desert states of the American Southwest). Thus making the situation worse.

Ok, I have now expended all I really know on this topic, it's been too long since I have read through it.

Both China and the Republic of Korea have ratified the Kyoto Protocol:

http://unfccc.int/resource/conv/ratlist.pdf
I hate to be annoying, but for some reason I don't really trust that list...as it lists the US as having ratified it, which the US did not do...

Well, The global change may or may not be an effect of man. There is really no way to prove it. I have studied this matter to death. It appears to be a normal cycle of earth. Yes it is happening btw.
Now if the Europeans on there high horse decide to "Punish" the US. Then get ready for the biggest trade war you ever seen. You actually think we would take that from the Europeans? Our trade is not dependant on Europe. With that said, it would be in neither European interest or American to try and pull a stunt like that. So quit trying to impose your idealistic non scientific agenda on America. There is a reason we are not ratifying that joke of a treaty. Cause its BS... Plain and simple...

I hate to be annoying, but for some reason I don't really trust that list...as it lists the US as having ratified it, which the US did not do...
The US ratified the Conventions but not the Protocol:

http://unfccc.int/parties_and_observers/parties/items/2228.php

Well, The global change may or may not be an effect of man. There is really no way to prove it. I have studied this matter to death. It appears to be a normal cycle of earth. Yes it is happening btw.
Now if the Europeans on there high horse decide to "Punish" the US. Then get ready for the biggest trade war you ever seen. You actually think we would take that from the Europeans? Our trade is not dependant on Europe. With that said, it would be in neither European interest or American to try and pull a stunt like that. So quit trying to impose your idealistic non scientific agenda on America. There is a reason we are not ratifying that joke of a treaty. Cause its BS... Plain and simple...

Haha, someone ready to close his eyes, put his fingers in his ears and go "lalalala - humans aren't contributing to global warmin" is accusing others of being non-scientific.

If man is causing the global warming and the shrinking of the Ice caps, how do you explain that Mars icecap is shrinking at the same rate as the Earth's/

maybe because it is a natural occurance that man has no control over?

As we know, the US Senate voted against ratifying (95-0 I believe) before Bush could even get to office. Not everything the US does that you disagree with is George W. Bush's fault.

Correct. That 95-0 vote was done in 1997 I believe the year was which makes puts it on the Clinton Administration.

BTW: He signed it but do to the 95-0 vote, DID NOT send it to the floor of the US Senate for ratification.

Please do. We would put a similar tax on European products, and create more jobs here in the US. More factories too. That means more fossil fuels being burned.

Yep! Turn about is fair *ahem* trade!

"EU should impose environmental surcharge on US imports?"

Sure. If you want to start a trade war! :rolleyes:

Actually, the Senate refused to ratify it in the first place. Bush just gave up attempting to get the Senate to ratify...

How idiotic. Bush didn't like Kyoto anyway and I didn't blame him for not sending it to the floor. I applauded his decision to withdraw our name from it. Kyoto was worthless to begin with.

As we know, you know nothing about what happens in the USA.

The President dosen't ratify things, the Senate does. Every senator who voted, Republican or Democrat, essentially voted against it in 1997, although it wasn't the official "ratification" vote. Clinton never submitted it for ratification due to that fact. It was dead for years before GWB even came to office.

You tell'em Kwangistar.

Both China and the Republic of Korea have ratified the Kyoto Protocol:

http://unfccc.int/resource/conv/ratlist.pdf

They are not bound by the standards it puts forth to the industrialized nations.

Well, The global change may or may not be an effect of man. There is really no way to prove it. I have studied this matter to death. It appears to be a normal cycle of earth. Yes it is happening btw.
Now if the Europeans on there high horse decide to "Punish" the US. Then get ready for the biggest trade war you ever seen. You actually think we would take that from the Europeans? Our trade is not dependant on Europe. With that said, it would be in neither European interest or American to try and pull a stunt like that. So quit trying to impose your idealistic non scientific agenda on America. There is a reason we are not ratifying that joke of a treaty. Cause its BS... Plain and simple...

I agree 100%

The US ratified the Conventions but not the Protocol:

http://unfccc.int/parties_and_observers/parties/items/2228.php

And we're talking about Kyoto and that is what the US did NOT ratify.

If man is causing the global warming and the shrinking of the Ice caps, how do you explain that Mars icecap is shrinking at the same rate as the Earth's/

maybe because it is a natural occurance that man has no control over?

Mar's Icecaps are melting? Oh no! I guess so Ploor.