Post-Kyoto Global Warming Solutions
Post-Kyoto Global Warming Solutions
I propose we accept these statements as fact in this thread:
1) Global warming is being cause by anthropogenic increases in greenhouse gases, most notably CO2.
2) Best estimates of global temperature increases are generally unwanted, with effects differing spatially.
If we can all accept this, can we move on to possible multi-lateral solutions? I suppose we will see soon whether this will denigrate into believing in global warming or not, lets hope not.
Kyoto has been largely ineffective in countries that ratified it. Japan, Canada, England, etc., the vast majority of countries are missing their mark. Voluntary solutions do not appear to be working.
Therefore, what can we do as an individual country (US, UK, China, India) and as a global entity to combat global warming?
1) Global warming is being cause by anthropogenic increases in greenhouse gases, most notably CO2.
2) Best estimates of global temperature increases are generally unwanted, with effects differing spatially.
If we can all accept this, can we move on to possible multi-lateral solutions? I suppose we will see soon whether this will denigrate into believing in global warming or not, lets hope not.
Kyoto has been largely ineffective in countries that ratified it. Japan, Canada, England, etc., the vast majority of countries are missing their mark. Voluntary solutions do not appear to be working.
Therefore, what can we do as an individual country (US, UK, China, India) and as a global entity to combat global warming?
- Phil14312
- Posts: 1815
- Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 9:57 pm GMT
- Location: Living the FL Dream
Re: Post-Kyoto Global Warming Solutions
Phil14312 wrote:Kyoto has been largely ineffective in countries that ratified it. Japan, Canada, England, etc., the vast majority of countries are missing their mark. Voluntary solutions do not appear to be working.
I think the UK are doing a shite site more than the US and China despite contributing a much smaller percentage of emissions.
You will NEVER get China to conform because they are basically going through their industrial revolution now just like we did 200 years ago. To stifle emissions would be to stifle their economy which they will never agree to.
As for the US - until monkey boy leaves the chair nothing will change.
Either way, global warming is still an unproven theory and falling over ourselves to prevent something which is just part of the natural cycle of the Earth seems a bit dumb. 'Green taxes' really boil my piss since they are levied for money and vote-winning while being based in potential myth!
-

HalfSugar - King Moderator
- Posts: 6228
- Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:20 pm GMT
- Location: UK
Re: Post-Kyoto Global Warming Solutions
Phil14312 wrote:I suppose we will see soon whether this will denigrate into believing in global warming or not, lets hope not.
Geno wrote:Either way, global warming is still an unproven theory and falling over ourselves to prevent something which is just part of the natural cycle of the Earth seems a bit dumb.
One post.
-

Sean_in_NJ - Posts: 3340
- Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2004 5:57 pm GMT
- Location: New jersey
The planet is warming, if it wasnt I would be under 100' of ice. Any human that believes that we are a significant cause of it is arrogant.
Global warming will have very few negative outcomes compared to global cooling.
According to the US Dept of Energy, US CO2 emissions were at recent lows (last 10 years?). I just read the story this week at work, I dont have it at my fingertips.
Right on for China AND India, they will accept nothing to slow down their economies when they are already challenged w/ growing jobs by 10-50 million each year just to keep up w/ the population growth. Those numbers are staggering.
Global warming will have very few negative outcomes compared to global cooling.
According to the US Dept of Energy, US CO2 emissions were at recent lows (last 10 years?). I just read the story this week at work, I dont have it at my fingertips.
Right on for China AND India, they will accept nothing to slow down their economies when they are already challenged w/ growing jobs by 10-50 million each year just to keep up w/ the population growth. Those numbers are staggering.
-

Dave B - Tournament Champion
- Posts: 5010
- Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 10:49 am GMT
- Location: Minnesota
Dave B wrote:The planet is warming, if it wasnt I would be under 100' of ice. Any human that believes that we are a significant cause of it is arrogant.
Global warming will have very few negative outcomes compared to global cooling.
According to the US Dept of Energy, US CO2 emissions were at recent lows (last 10 years?). I just read the story this week at work, I dont have it at my fingertips.
Right on for China AND India, they will accept nothing to slow down their economies when they are already challenged w/ growing jobs by 10-50 million each year just to keep up w/ the population growth. Those numbers are staggering.
Sigh. I guess it wasn't meant to be. Dave, did the US Dept of Energy study show normalized CO2 emissions or just pure emissions, because pure emissions are at all time highs according to my sources.
Do you really believe:
Global warming will have very few negative outcomes compared to global cooling.
And, is this just your hunch or do you have something to back it up with?
- Phil14312
- Posts: 1815
- Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 9:57 pm GMT
- Location: Living the FL Dream
Look at recent history, millions starved during the little ice ago several hundred years ago. Most farmland is in cooler climates (look at the landmass in Canada and Russia). If things cool, this area will be covered w/ ice.
Ice caps melting and oceans rising a few inches will be nothing compared to ice caps pushing south from the north pole and wiping out cities and millions of people. If you think that the immigration problems are bad now, wait until Canada is all here....eh?
What will the hippies do if the planet cools significantly and we need to clear the rain forrests and jungles to eat?
Why are you more concerned about warming? What do you fear? I havent seen temps over 30 degrees farhenheit for over a week now and it isnt even December yet. Humans can survive easier at 85 degrees than at zero. And that is coming from someone w/ scandanavian blood who doesnt wear a jacket until we are sub zero or outside for an extended period of time (my 7 year old girl was playing until dark w/ a t-shirt and shorts last night, it was in the 20s-she is even more tolerant than I).
Ice caps melting and oceans rising a few inches will be nothing compared to ice caps pushing south from the north pole and wiping out cities and millions of people. If you think that the immigration problems are bad now, wait until Canada is all here....eh?
What will the hippies do if the planet cools significantly and we need to clear the rain forrests and jungles to eat?
Why are you more concerned about warming? What do you fear? I havent seen temps over 30 degrees farhenheit for over a week now and it isnt even December yet. Humans can survive easier at 85 degrees than at zero. And that is coming from someone w/ scandanavian blood who doesnt wear a jacket until we are sub zero or outside for an extended period of time (my 7 year old girl was playing until dark w/ a t-shirt and shorts last night, it was in the 20s-she is even more tolerant than I).
-

Dave B - Tournament Champion
- Posts: 5010
- Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 10:49 am GMT
- Location: Minnesota
MTClip wrote:No matter which side of the debate you're on, I think you should read Michael Crichton's "State of Fear". IMO, he does an excellent job of presenting facts in a story that is excellent.
Please don't use Crichton as a source. Its like using Michael Moore as a source of information.
- Phil14312
- Posts: 1815
- Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 9:57 pm GMT
- Location: Living the FL Dream
Dave B wrote:Look at recent history, millions starved during the little ice ago several hundred years ago. Most farmland is in cooler climates (look at the landmass in Canada and Russia). If things cool, this area will be covered w/ ice.
Ice caps melting and oceans rising a few inches will be nothing compared to ice caps pushing south from the north pole and wiping out cities and millions of people. If you think that the immigration problems are bad now, wait until Canada is all here....eh?
What will the hippies do if the planet cools significantly and we need to clear the rain forrests and jungles to eat?
Why are you more concerned about warming? What do you fear? I havent seen temps over 30 degrees farhenheit for over a week now and it isnt even December yet. Humans can survive easier at 85 degrees than at zero. And that is coming from someone w/ scandanavian blood who doesnt wear a jacket until we are sub zero or outside for an extended period of time (my 7 year old girl was playing until dark w/ a t-shirt and shorts last night, it was in the 20s-she is even more tolerant than I).
Dave, I like you. But what are you arguing about, global cooling? No one is talking about that. Frankly, I don't care if you are cold in Minnesota, its irrelevant
Do you have any idea about regional changes in global precipitation, runoff, or ocean currents? Have you considered that global weather patterns have far more to do with how cold your Scandinavian blood is than Minnesota?
Get outside your box and read a little of the literature on potential changes. I'll give you a hint: they aren't worried about people sweating more, its on far greater scales.
- Phil14312
- Posts: 1815
- Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 9:57 pm GMT
- Location: Living the FL Dream
Can't we just agree on:
We have to focus on alternate energy sources and remove our dependancy on fossil fuels.
And we don't even need to discuss global warming to figure that out.
The obvious answer on where to look is nuclear power ofcourse. Too bad environmentalists have held back nuclear power since the 70s, and that some still persist on holding it back. Indirect CO2 influence right there. Silly oofs.
We have to focus on alternate energy sources and remove our dependancy on fossil fuels.
And we don't even need to discuss global warming to figure that out.
The obvious answer on where to look is nuclear power ofcourse. Too bad environmentalists have held back nuclear power since the 70s, and that some still persist on holding it back. Indirect CO2 influence right there. Silly oofs.
- tame_deuces
- Posts: 3045
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 6:24 am GMT
- Location: Bergen, Norway
I wasnt making an argument for global cooling, I was just saying that the risk of global warming isnt significant (besides believing that humans arent doing it).
Alternative fuels are great, but they cant be chased blindly either. If you want to do some reading, research how much destruction is done to the environment from hybrid cars (nickle strip mining, battery disposal, shipping raw materials, lifespan, etc). The net economic impact is EV-1.
Alternative fuels are great, but they cant be chased blindly either. If you want to do some reading, research how much destruction is done to the environment from hybrid cars (nickle strip mining, battery disposal, shipping raw materials, lifespan, etc). The net economic impact is EV-1.
-

Dave B - Tournament Champion
- Posts: 5010
- Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 10:49 am GMT
- Location: Minnesota
18% of the greenhouse effect is caused by methane, making it second only to carbon dioxide. An adult cow emits 80-110 kgs of methane per day. I saw we all do our part and eat more beef.
-

BeerWench13 - Resident Alcoholic
- Posts: 3358
- Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2004 4:06 pm GMT
- Location: The Pub
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

