“Canada is up there with Spain, Ireland, Greece and five other nations as havingthe biggest increases in gas emissions. According to the United Nations, Spain is the worst, with a nearly 42 percent increase in emissions between 1990 and 2003; Canada stands at 24 percent and the United States experienced an increase of 13 percent.“ Comments Steyn:
“As you'll recall, in a typically "pig-headed and blinkered" (The Independent) act that could lead to the entire planet becoming "uninhabitable" (Michael Meacher), "Polluter Bush" (Daily Express), "this ignorant, short-sighted and blinkered politician" (Friends of the Earth), rejected the Kyoto treaty. Yet somehow the "Toxic Texan" (everybody) has managed to outperform Canada on almost every measure of eco-virtue.
How did that happen? Actually, it's not difficult. Signing Kyoto is nothing to do with reducing "global warming" so much as advertising one's transnational moral virtue. America could reduce its greenhouse-gas emissions by 87 per cent and Canada could increase them by 673 per cent and the latter would still be a "good citizen of the world" (in the Prime Minister's phrase) while "Polluter Bush" would still be in the dog house, albeit a solar-powered one.”
2 comments:
Isn't the key to understanding greenhouse gasses "per capita" production? There are interesting charts at this website:
http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/emissionsindividual.html
But this neglects an important point. Since industry is the biggist cause, and since Americans now outsource much of their industry, American per capita emissions based on consumption is actually on the increase. That's why the solution must be a global one requiring US cooperation.
If global warming exists beyond historical (and pre-historic) norms, if it could be tacked (two big ifs that by no means are proven) then I would agree a global solution would have to be found, and that would include the US but cannot exclude India and China.
Post a Comment