News China, you're just a developing country, so you don't have to sign kyoto

  • Thread starter phatmonky
  • Start date
55
2
But you make the second most pollution on earth....

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/120966/1/.html
China is now the world's second biggest polluter of carbon dioxide

he IEA report, timed to coincide with a UN conference on climate change in Buenos Aires, confirmed the growing role of China and other developing countries in the worsening greenhouse-gas problem.

Eighty percent of carbon dioxide (CO2) pollution in 2002 was emitted by 22 countries, the IEA said.

The biggest polluter by far was the United States, with 23.5 percent of the total, followed by China, with 13.6 percent.

Afterwards came Russia (6.2 percent), Japan (five percent), India (4.2 percent), Germany (3.5 percent), Britain and Canada (2.2 percent each), South Korea (1.9 percent), Italy (1.8 percent) and France (1.6 percent).

The United States walked away from Kyoto in 2001, arguing it would be too expensive to meet the treaty's commitments and branding the deal as unfair because countries like China and India, which have big populations and fast-growing economies, are not required to make targeted reductions.
But of course, we Americans are just big fat greedy devils! Or could it have to do with the fact that the 'holy grail' of climate control pragmatically targets the US economy, instead of pollution??
:rolleyes:

Someone want to explain why this is a fair document that we should support?
 

Gokul43201

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
6,987
14
Do you insist that it is unreasonable to hold developed nations to a higher standard than developing or under-developed countries ?

And you haven't explained why Kyoto targets the US in particular, rather than all of the developed, industrialized world.
 
310
2
"They're worse so we're ok".. err.. "They're almost as bad, so we're OK" rather.
 
310
2
phatmonky said:
But you make the second most pollution on earth....
But of course, we Americans are just big fat greedy devils! Or could it have to do with the fact that the 'holy grail' of climate control pragmatically targets the US economy, instead of pollution??
:rolleyes:
China:
-1,298,847,624 People
-Developing Nation
-13.5%
-Considerably far behind the west science and technology-wise

United States:
-293,027,571 People
-Developed Nation
-Most Powerfull Nation in the World
-Most Advanced Nation in the World
-Largest Economy in the World
-23.5%

http://www.zhb.gov.cn/english/treaty.php3 [Broken]


Someone want to explain why this is a fair document that we should support?
I don't know why you care if it's "Fair". I don't know what makes you think it's "Fair", but you should support it because it's what's going to give your grand children the chance to run the in the forests, swim in the rivers, see the sun without getting caner and breath air without a filter.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
464
1
Phatmonkey, why is it that you never seem to want to hold America up to a higher standard than the rest of the world?
 
84
0
Phatmonky, there are still tens of millions of us in China who make about US$130 A YEAR. And it was just about 40 years ago when some of us in poverty stricken villages had to eat fine grain clay with shredded and squeezed weeds (make a ball and steamed). The "food" was able to fill the belly for a while, but many many died from it. Have a heart.
 
55
2
Smurf said:
"They're worse so we're ok".. err.. "They're almost as bad, so we're OK" rather.
Nope, not my words at all. Don't start that.
 
1,798
167
Old news. This was one of many reasons Kyoto was never going to do anything good at all.
 
55
2
Gokul43201 said:
Do you insist that it is unreasonable to hold developed nations to a higher standard than developing or under-developed countries ?

And you haven't explained why Kyoto targets the US in particular, rather than all of the developed, industrialized world.
I insist that the second largest producer of green house gases should be required to join the supposed holy grail. It is unreasonable to give them a pass.
I am fine with us cleaning up more, for we produce more pollution. However, to say well "#2 producer of emissions, you don't count because we go by 1990 levels"


If nothing else , for the fact that none of the signatories that chastise us have any pragmatic action that shows they have a real goal of acting (There's also the argument that we are monopoly market). There's massive pressure for us to join, yet no one else is doing anything about their own problems. The only thing us joining and acting does is remove our economic competiveness further against China, India...and a Europe that speaks without acting themselves (spain's emissions have risen 33% percent since 1990, and portugal 36%).

China falsely holds their currency low, and that is a major problem for a document that uses numbers based on pollution per capita earning. China should float their currency and be subject to join Kyoto (I'm also for a slight rewriting of the document, but that's another thread). All of the same goes for India.
 
55
2
Locrian said:
Old news. This was one of many reasons Kyoto was never going to do anything good at all.
Not old news. China just became #2 polluter recently. This is even more evidence or what IS old news...that Kyoto is unfair.
 
55
2
Smurf said:
I don't know why you care if it's "Fair". I don't know what makes you think it's "Fair", but you should support it because it's what's going to give your grand children the chance to run the in the forests, swim in the rivers, see the sun without getting caner and breath air without a filter.
The Kyoto agreement will do nothing (assuming we all believe acting will fix crisis level climate change) if you've got the second and third largest producers of greenhouse gases (China, and eventually India will take these places,and eventually first place, but still be considered developing because of their population sizes) doing NOTHING. As is often the argument, pollution doesn't end at a country's borders.
So where is that mentality now? Suddenly it's gone and replaced with "ohhh, but we should hold ourselves to a higher standard"
 
Last edited:

jcsd

Science Advisor
Gold Member
2,085
11
Phatmonkey:

1) Chnia HAS ratfied the Kyoto protocol so your point is moot.

2) Chnia is a much larger country than the US in terms of popualtion yet it produces signifcantly less pollutoin. Infact given that it has the laregst population even in a world where pollution is minimized one would still epxect it to be the largest polluter!

If the US could bring it's level of pollution per capitia down to the level of Chnia's then that would be a signifcant step towards solving the problem.
 
Last edited:
55
2
Polly said:
Phatmonky, there are still tens of millions of us in China who make about US$130 A YEAR. And it was just about 40 years ago when some of us in poverty stricken villages had to eat fine grain clay with shredded and squeezed weeds (make a ball and steamed). The "food" was able to fill the belly for a while, but many many died from it. Have a heart.
If your country floated it's currency, then there'd be far less people making 130 bucks a day as the Yuan would be properly valued, instead of slave driving levels it is at.

My heart is here. Stop the BS of making me into the bad guy for holding a stance that a document on attacking a global problem should have global implementation.
 
55
2
jcsd said:
Phatmonkey:

1) Chnia HAS ratfied the Kyoto protocol so your point is moot.

2) Chnia is a much larger country than the US in terms of popualtion yet it produces signifcantly less pollutoin. Infact given that it has the laregst population even in a world where pollution is minimized one would still epxect it to be the largest polluter!

If the US could bring it's level of pollution per capitia down to the level of Chnia's then that would be a signifcant step towards solving the problem.
1> It's not moot unless there is the same pressure applied to them as us. If it is so moot, China/India should just be required to join. I've got a thread of people explaining why they shouldn't be held to it. At this time, if we all jumped in and gave a good word, China's clean air policies can be disregarded anytime in order to be more competive against our economy (this brings the economy issue, but also the issue that nothing is being done to curb emissions). Hey, actual signatories in Europe have abandoned the whole treaty in reality (maybe spain will prove me wrong in the next few years, but at their rate of increase HA, I doubt it).

2>And is on track to become the number one polluter due to this. How good is a policy that allows the number one polluter to go unchecked, until their economy takes over it's hindered competitors???
Come on guys, you would rip me a new one for forgetting pollution doesn't end at a countries borders. Somehow you've all forgotten it.
 
55
2
wasteofo2 said:
Phatmonkey, why is it that you never seem to want to hold America up to a higher standard than the rest of the world?
'Never seems' being your operative mistake, and thus making any response to this a fallacy.
I often do with to hold us to a higher standard.
 

jcsd

Science Advisor
Gold Member
2,085
11
1) Chnia and India have both ratifed the Kyoto protocls and therefore why would there be any pressure for them to join soemthing they've already joined!!!!!!!

2) Countries that are relatively low polluters per capita and deveolping countries under the terms of the protocols, do not have to reduce their polltuion immedautelty though I believe there is a cap on the incerase. China per capita is relatively a low polluter and it is also a devloping country. The amount of pollution produced by the USA is huge in itself, but it is also vatly disproportinate to it's population and it is one of the few contries that is in a postion to reduce it.
 
55
2
jcsd said:
1) Chnia and India have both ratifed the Kyoto protocls and therefore why would there be any pressure for them to join soemthing they've already joined!!!!!!!

2) Countries that are relatively low polluters per capita and deveolping countries under the terms of the protocols, do not have to reduce their polltuion immedautelty though I believe there is a cap on the incerase. China per capita is relatively a low polluter and it is also a devloping country. The amount of pollution produced by the USA is huge in itself, but it is also vatly disproportinate to it's population and it is one of the few contries that is in a postion to reduce it.

1>Considering it's our main objection to joining, and has been for a while, you would think that such a move to make them actual signatories, rather than excusable "good tries" would be in effect. Rewrite the document, bring on the USA, forces russia to sign(who wasn't ratifying until recently). Instant power behind the protocol.

2>I'm aware of all of this.
 

jcsd

Science Advisor
Gold Member
2,085
11
How many times do I have to tell you, they've signed the bloody document!!!!!!!! :rofl:
 

jcsd

Science Advisor
Gold Member
2,085
11
Just in case you don't realize you sign a document first THEN you ratify it (even the US have signed it, but they haven't ratified it).
 
55
2
jcsd said:
How many times do I have to tell you, they've signed the bloody document!!!!!!!! :rofl:

Again, it doesn't matter, as there is no pressure to meet ANY level of compliance. What don't you understand about that?
They have entered a "we will pay you credits if you do a certain amount of cleanup".They are not obligated AT ALL to meet ANY certain level of requirement.

You are now starting the typical overusage of punctuation and laugh smilies. Try not to hop on the next downgrade of internet debate by calling me names.
 

jcsd

Science Advisor
Gold Member
2,085
11
The first stage of the Kyoto protocol is reducing the greenhouse emissions of devolped countries, this first stage was never meant to apply to Chnia so why are you whining? But just last week they announced measures to curb emmisions anyway (as a note they have actually announced

The problem is your moaning about a relatively low polluter like China with a developing economy, who I'd guess probably wouldn't even have even have to reduce emisisons even if they were a devolped country under the protocols comparing to a completly disproptinate polluter with a devolped economy, CLEARLY the requirements are going to be different!
 
464
1
phatmonky said:
'Never seems' being your operative mistake, and thus making any response to this a fallacy.
I often do with to hold us to a higher standard.
Well, why in THIS CASE do you not see it proper to hold America to a higher standard than countries like China?
 
55
2
wasteofo2 said:
Well, why in THIS CASE do you not see it proper to hold America to a higher standard than countries like China?
I'd compromise to a sliding scale even, but an absolute cut off is not in the playbooks IMO.
I feel like this conversation could just as easily be a flat-tax vs. sliding scale conversation sometimes haha :wink
 
55
2
jcsd said:
The first stage of the Kyoto protocol is reducing the greenhouse emissions of devolped countries, this first stage was never meant to apply to Chnia so why are you whining? But just last week they announced measures to curb emmisions anyway (as a note they have actually announced

The problem is your moaning about a relatively low polluter like China with a developing economy, who I'd guess probably wouldn't even have even have to reduce emisisons even if they were a devolped country under the protocols comparing to a completly disproptinate polluter with a devolped economy, CLEARLY the requirements are going to be different!

'moaning', 'whining'...drop the deragatory choice of words and I'll continue with you.
 
84
0
phatmonky said:
If your country floated it's currency, then there'd be far less people making 130 bucks a day as the Yuan would be properly valued, instead of slave driving levels it is at.

My heart is here. Stop the BS of making me into the bad guy for holding a stance that a document on attacking a global problem should have global implementation.
*fails to duck RPG and is killed in action" :biggrin:
 

Related Threads for: China, you're just a developing country, so you don't have to sign kyoto

Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
58
Views
21K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Poll
  • Last Post
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Top