Kyoto and Beyond

Despite being over the other side of the ponf, I always make sure that i check in with the latest goings on back there in the UK - usually via the BBC news website. Today, I noticed that the government had finally admitted that there target of cutting carbon dioxide emissions to 20% of 1990 levels by 2010 was probably not going to be met - with the actual figure likely to be between 15-18% - something that I think is nothing to be sneezed at - although the opposition parties seem to think otherwise. The fact is that that is a good way over the 12.5% target established by the Kyoto accord and is definitely a step in the right direction. On the global scale, however, this may not have the desired effect - indeed, even if a number of countries match their targets, this may not have much impact. Some of this is due to the USA - as largest emitter of carbon dioxide in the world, it would be good for them to set an example. However, whilst the USA signed the treaty they are not bound by it as it hasn't been ratified by the Senate (and won't be for the near future - as President Bush will not submit the treaty for ratification). However, the blame isn't squarely laid at the US' door as, for example, China - 2nd largest emitter - was exempt from Kyoto. Similarly, India - another major emitter - was also exempt from Kyoto.

Over here, though, what is perhaps more alarming is the lack of any real environmental concern by the current administration. For example, there were (and possibly are, i believe) plans in foot to disrupt the natural beauty of Alaska by drilling for oil. There are also a number of so-called global warming sceptics associated with the current administration - who believe that climate change is all imaginary (despite the fact that the average global temperature has steadily been on the rise - and, last time i heard, there were a couple of gaping holse in the ozone layer). Is it any real surprise to find that these same people also hold high up positions in oil companies or the like? Whilst it sounds like this is a USA-bashing post, this was not my intent. However, i do think that as the world's only super-power, a major economy and a major polluter, the US government (and, indeed, China and others) should maybe consider long term consequences instead of leaving it till its too late. Over here, the self-imposed target of '18% reduction in carbon intensity' over here (although likely to be met) equates as a decrease in the 'increase of carbon emissions' - seems to me to be not good enough.