Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   European countries don't have a snowflake in hell's chance of meeting their own Kyoto Treaty targets   (news.bbc.co.uk) divider line 324
    More: Ironic  
•       •       •

9504 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 May 2003 at 11:07 AM (12 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



324 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2003-05-06 10:27:16 AM  
"While lecturing everybody else, especially America, on the morality of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it has been abundantly clear from the start that most European countries didn't have a snowflake in hell's chance of meeting their own Kyoto targets."

Sums it up rather well, don't you think?

".... little glass houses for you and me...."
 
2003-05-06 10:33:07 AM  
There are now doubts about the willingness of Russia to do so, because some of its prominent scientists apparently believe climate change could be beneficial to the country.

It took prominent scientists to figure out global warming might not be a bad thing for Russia? No wonder they lost the Cold War.
 
2003-05-06 10:49:40 AM  
Someone cue Nelson Muntz
 
2003-05-06 11:07:09 AM  
Non of the other countries European countries ever intended to live up to their agreements. That is why State Department Diplomacy is so difficult. There are lies and lies built on top of lies..The Great Madamn Allbright could sit and sip green tea for days while swapping lies with the likes of Yasser Airfat. Which is why she is considered on of the top diplomats of the century. The Diplomatic Core has been shaken to the core by the Bush administration. These dummies have been cutting through the lies and actually doing some things. They actually follow the truth (as they see it) . The Smart Clinton dudes stayed up all night smokin dope and tried to decide which lie to use, and actually did almost nothing. Dumb means doing things Smart means staying up all night smoking dope, which sounds like more fun but buildings tend to fall down that way.
 
2003-05-06 11:10:11 AM  
why are people complaining about emissions - the main source comes from deoderant. Do you hippies want everyone to stink as bad as you?

cman
 
2003-05-06 11:11:05 AM  
It's still bull that Bush pulled us out of that treaty. AS cliche hippy as it sounds, more flowers and less guns would suit me just fine
 
2003-05-06 11:12:06 AM  
This is so freaking obvious it makes me want to scream.

Kyoto is just a way for the leaders of the western countries (Can, USA mostly) to look good to the greenies.

I'm all for 'saving the planet' but lets try to be a little bit sensible about it.
 
2003-05-06 11:13:44 AM  
what a joke
 
2003-05-06 11:14:17 AM  
Beer. Warming the planet since 1362.
 
2003-05-06 11:15:03 AM  
in commmunist Russia: Earth warms YOU!
 
2003-05-06 11:15:04 AM  
Cue "I hate those granola-crunching commie freaks and I'll die before giving up my SUV" in 3......
2....
1......
 
2003-05-06 11:16:06 AM  
mmm... schadenfreude...

Not that lowering emissions wouldn't be good, but...
 
2003-05-06 11:18:03 AM  
TheMarq Kyoto is just a way for the leaders of the western countries (Can, USA mostly) to look good to the greenies.

How so, since the US declined to participate?
 
Cis
2003-05-06 11:19:07 AM  
the article makes a point to show that pollution has risen in europe, but carefully avoids to give the real numbers.

While USA is the number one polluter of the world, the important thing to notice is that countries that pollutes 1000th less have risen of 1%.
Sure.
 
2003-05-06 11:19:18 AM  
Penrod, not sure I follow you, are siding with Dumb, or Smart?
 
2003-05-06 11:20:56 AM  
So, European leaders are writing social and industrial checks their countries can't cash?

I'm shocked!
 
2003-05-06 11:21:03 AM  
So the Kyoto treaty has been exposed as commie bullshiat? say it aint so!! ;)
 
2003-05-06 11:21:17 AM  
wait, didn't the EU get all snitty when the US backs out of these sort of things? Sounds like payback time - bring on the pain!
 
2003-05-06 11:21:42 AM  
Well we talked a lot of game about supporting it before we trashed it, so there was some temporary looking good to the greenies there...

I'm sure no one here thinks we (US) had the foresight to know that no one would be able to meet the guidelines, and just pulled out early rather than spend a bunch of money only to have to pull out later...

Right?

Of course, we only pulled out because we're capitalist planet-ruining greedy bastards. Lest we forget..
 
2003-05-06 11:22:51 AM  
More proof that the U.S. is living in reality and Europe is not! When are they going to wise up and realize that we are smarter than they are?

/troll
 
2003-05-06 11:23:06 AM  
See, we were smart about it...

We didn't even sign the damn thing, so we don't have to feel bad about breaking it. Screw the planet!!!!
 
2003-05-06 11:23:58 AM  
Luxembourg showed the biggest reduction of all, cutting emissions by 44% between 1990 and 2001.

So the two residents of Luxembourg decided to carpool
 
2003-05-06 11:24:27 AM  
Midigod

Oops, ya got me there.
 
2003-05-06 11:24:54 AM  
We account for 50% of the worlds emissions and fuel comsumption, but we account for 50%+ of the world's industrial output, and far more of it's technology innovation and production.

It's not our SUVs ruining the earth (assuming, of course), it's our productivity. We need to return to the stone ages.
 
2003-05-06 11:25:13 AM  
Clinton: "We will stay in the treaty but ignore its stipulations completely"

GWB: "We are out of here"

Which is better?
 
2003-05-06 11:25:20 AM  
Why should european countries feel they should commit to a protocol that the world's only remaining superpower ignores? With some American technology and political muscle behind it, Kyoto had a chance, but without us supporting it even this relatively minor (compared to what actually would have to be done to reverse the current trend) environmental treaty looks doomed to failure.

Maybe the next president will show more initiative by joining the Kyoto treaty or proposing and forming a similar coalition on his own.
 
2003-05-06 11:26:40 AM  
Gotta love Russia's position. "What? Reduce emissions? Have you been to Russia? We love the idea of global warming!"
 
2003-05-06 11:26:44 AM  
Maybe the Russians have a point. It was cold as hell in Michigan this winter.
 
2003-05-06 11:29:11 AM  
It's not our SUVs ruining the earth (assuming, of course), it's our productivity. We need to return to the stone ages.

No! The stone ages aren't good enough because of the potential for herding pollution emitters like cattle and pigs. We should return to the trees and eat bark and grubs.
 
2003-05-06 11:29:40 AM  
Kyoto was a scam from the word "go".

The rest of the world feels America is too economically powerful. They don't work harder to close the gap, so instead they tried to trick us into working less.

Fortunately for us, Bush was too smart to fall into their trap and refused to sign the treaty. (That's more than I can say for Al Gore.)

Europe will never meet Kyoto's standards for the same reasons America wouldn't even try: complying with Kyoto would cripple their economies.

All you greenies: apologize to President Bush for calling him "stupid" and admit Bush was smarter than you were about Kyoto.
 
2003-05-06 11:29:45 AM  
Energy is power. Kyoto is just another scheme by France and the Axis of Weasels to cut our nuts off. Don't be fooled.
 
2003-05-06 11:29:53 AM  
Nice headline... and the US would not have had a chance either. GW Bush did the right thing, again. Now lets all jump all over the countries that signed it for not living up to their end. Come on Greens! Force them to lead by example!

This treaty was really only meant to hamper the USA so some of the European countries could catch up. Thank God we have a president who isnt swayed by which direction the current poll wind is blowing.
 
2003-05-06 11:30:10 AM  
ConteKyoto had a chance, but without us supporting it even this relatively minor (compared to what actually would have to be done to reverse the current trend) environmental treaty looks doomed to failure.

Lots of greenies were under the assumption that not signing an ineffective, unrealistic, and highly biased treaty was tantamount to driving a wooden stake through the heart of Mother Earth. Instead of coming up with a more reasonable treaty, they just protested and called it a black mark on the administration.
 
2003-05-06 11:30:41 AM  
As an ardent Bush-basher (not kidding), it pains me to admit Bush made a good call. Someone please tell me I'm missing something here.

The only thing I can think of, is since they're competing with countries that don't follow the accords (us), it would put them at a disadvantage to implement Kyoto. Sounds weak though.
 
2003-05-06 11:30:44 AM  
"Luxembourg showed the biggest reduction of all, cutting emissions by 44% between 1990 and 2001.

It is on course to keep its Kyoto promise, as are Germany, Sweden and the UK. France looks at present likely to fail by a very narrow margin."

Looks like the 3 biggest economies/polluters in the EU, Germany, France and the UK, will make it or nearly make it in the case of France. Well, France at least tried, which you can't say of the US.

Btw, it's interesting to see that many Americans here are happy to see that countries trying to keep this planet a place there you can still live in the future are having their problems...
 
2003-05-06 11:31:19 AM  
Carbon Emissions in 1998:

USA (alone): 24%
Western Europe AND Australia AND Canada AND Japan: 25%

Like them failing to hit targets somehow gives us some sort of moral superiority?

So let me get this straight, we're giving them a hard time because they set the bar high? At least they're freakin' trying...
 
2003-05-06 11:31:44 AM  
In other news, patchouli has been discovered to be a type of fossil fuel
 
2003-05-06 11:32:47 AM  
Riiiiight

So this justifies the whole Bush dogma now does it?

Hardly
 
2003-05-06 11:32:55 AM  
"Force them to lead by example!"

Too late, they're already crying "the treaty had no hope once the US backed out! WAA WAA, the Euros would have been able to live up to it if only the US had signed."

That statement is such bullshiat its hard for me to even type it..
 
2003-05-06 11:32:59 AM  
Themarq Oops, ya got me there.

:-D

TheEngineer Clinton: "We will stay in the treaty but ignore its stipulations completely"

GWB: "We are out of here"

Which is better?


Gore?

/troll
 
2003-05-06 11:34:13 AM  
300lbs_Gorilla:
The only thing I can think of, is since they're competing with countries that don't follow the accords (us), it would put them at a disadvantage to implement Kyoto. Sounds weak though.


The only thing wrong with that theory is the assumption that the playing field is just as level under the treaty or not under it. The thing was highly biased against industrial countries, and specifically the US. It was an economic deal breaker. We would have had to cut down seriously on our production, or develop some magical technology to meet it.
 
2003-05-06 11:34:42 AM  
Kyoto was a way for other countries to Mau-Mau the US into slowing down our economy. They can't compete, so they want us to be less productive.

solution? more economic freedom and liberty for all. capitalism will create more wealth, and wealthy people have fewer babies, live longer lives, burn less dried cow dung and brown coal, and get educations so they can develop more fuel efficient cars and pollution control devices.

don't believe me? take a deep breath anywhere in the US, then go and try to breath the the haze in china.
 
2003-05-06 11:34:42 AM  
I find it interesting that many of these decisions made by the Bush administration that were denounced as selfish and irresponsible when they were made are now coming to light as more or less on target. The United States removes itself from the Kyoto protocol for the express purpose that it is directly unfair to US businesses, the rationale being that they would be unfairly penalized financially and competitively, while others who were left out of the treaty (like third world countries) or given special considerations wouldn't have to deal with such restrictions. Now we find out that even the countries who were REQUIRED to comply can't even do that. Certainly food for thought.

/ is sure this comment will invite flame, even though it shouldn't
 
2003-05-06 11:35:52 AM  
If we were never a signatory to that treaty how can Bush pull us out.Besides isn't it congress' job to ratify treaties? As I recall this first came before congress when Clinton was president.
 
2003-05-06 11:37:29 AM  
Damn, this article kills about half of the Anti-American comments ive seen in threads lately. Quick everybody, reload!
 
2003-05-06 11:38:14 AM  
Kyoto is bullshiat through and through. Somehow, someone got the idea that CO2 emissions are the primary cause of global warming, when in reality this is a natural planetary cycle that has been going on since the Earth first formed. These brilliant anti-industry luddite scientists run a linear regression on the last few decades of average planetary temperature and somehow correlate it to industrial development. Correlation does not necessarily imply causation. But of course, you're evil if you're against Kyoto, because you have to pander to those who would make you feel guilty.

Here in Alberta, Canada, the Kyoto changes are creating major problems. Entire chemical plants will end up shutting down because the ridiculous Kyoto constraints will make all these plants uneconomical to run. Let's put tens of thousands of folks out of work here for nothing. Good job.

farking asshats.
 
2003-05-06 11:39:47 AM  
Mvfreeman
Yes according the Constitution it is the Senate's job to ratify treaties. If I remember the U.S. signed the treaty but the Senate never approved the ratification.
 
2003-05-06 11:39:55 AM  
Hmmm. I am not sure exactly waht specific role the President has in entering treaties, whether there is any part procedural or simply just suggestive. Either way, I think it only fair that if President Bush is to take the criticism and credit for NOT ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, then he should duly be given credit and criticism for the results of doing/not doing so.
 
2003-05-06 11:41:01 AM  
Thank goodness we didn't get railroaded into this messed up "treaty". There are better ways to help the environment. Clinton would have signed it though, because it sounds noble; style over substance.
 
2003-05-06 11:42:08 AM  
[image from coastal.edu too old to be available]

I'm familiar with the fact that you are going to ignore
this particular problem until it swims up and bites you in the ass!
 
Displayed 50 of 324 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report