MUENCHHAUSEN
AN ELECTRONIC NEWSLETTER ABOUT ENVIRONMENT,
RENEWABLE RESOURCE TECHNOLOGY,
AND RELATED TOPICS
By BOOTSTRAP PRESS, INC.
BETHESDA, MD
GREENBARON@CSI.COM
=================================================================
DECEMBER 21, 2004
=================================================================
WELCOME!
The Green Baron welcomes one and all who take the time to read Muenchhausen. He aims to “tell it like it is” as much as possible, and avoid advocacy and ideological positions. There are enough of those to go around in other publications.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The Green Baron again thanks all those who may take the time and trouble to read this “Blog” publication. He also acknowledges with gratitude the help of anyone who contributed material that constitutes this issue of Muenchhausen. Also, to all of our readers, Greetings of the Season and Best Wishes for a Happy, Prosperous, and Green New Year 2005!
KYOTO BRIEFLY REVISITED
Muenchhausen readers who have been following the progress of adoption of the Kyoto Protocol of December 1997 will have learned that the Russian Federation’s State Duma (Parliament) ratified the Protocol in November 2004. Thus, it goes into effect as a legally binding treaty in February 2005. Although the United States is a signatory—Vice President Al Gore signed in America’s name—the U.S. Senate has not, to date ratified the Kyoto Protocol. In fact, it was fated for a crushing defeat in that legislative body.
Just a moment! What is the Kyoto Protocol? In a nutshell, it is an agreement among signatory nations to legislate and implement procedures to lower concentration levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Earth’s atmosphere to perhaps 5% below those that existed before 1990, and even below. CO2 is blamed as the principal culprit in the “greenhouse effect” that traps heat in the atmosphere and is said to lead to warming of the global climate. The hoped-for year to achieve this goal was to have been somewhere between 2005 and 2010, but that will surely not be met. This endeavor could entail much expense and economic displacement. Accordingly, industrialized and technologically “advanced” nations are required to implement Kyoto beginning in February, whereas developing countries plus China and India are exempt until their technology has caught up—perhaps as late as 2020, or even thereafter.
Query: If the U.S. Senate did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol, is the United States actually legally bound by its provisions? Well, no and yes; in the more practical sense, probably yes. Here are a couple of examples of why this is so:
Some large and not-so-large U.S. companies have become multinational in scope. As such, they may operate in countries that have ratified the Kyoto Protocol. In that case, being subject to the laws of those countries, these firms must do their part to ensure that their host countries comply with Kyoto. This would be especially true in nations that comprise the European Union.
Perhaps industries in the United States itself need not comply with Kyoto, absent Senate ratification? Uh, not so fast! First of all, individual states, or the federal government could adopt legislation and regulations that would be equivalent to mandating Kyoto requirements. In addition, even if such regulation were not soon forthcoming—it seems to be in California, however—U.S. industries could still be forced to comply: The United States is a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO). The WTO could have the power to impose trade sanctions on the United States if its businesses and industries do not comply, on the grounds that the United States is in violation of international fair trade rules.
To some, Kyoto may appear hollow. The Green Baron reads in the press that all manner of air pollutants are pouring from newly established industrial plants in Southeast Asia. It stands to reason that given these plants’ consumption of fossil fuels—a factor in the current high price of oil and gas—for a good number of years to come, European, Japanese, and any American reductions of CO2 and other emissions would be far more than offset by emissions from Southeast Asia and other countries developing their industries. Muenchhausen may have more to say about Kyoto and its successor protocols in future issues. “Stay tuned!”
The Green Baron recalls a meeting held at North Carolina State University (Raleigh, NC), in which CO2 emission reduction was much discussed. One of the presenters at the February 1990 symposium (more than seven years before Kyoto) was Carl Sagan (obit. 1994), who addressed the argument that we should wait until science proves or disproves that CO2 emissions of human origin affect world climate. His view was that we should not wait; if climatic changes are scientifically proved, it may be too late to reverse the trend, but if they are scientifically disproved, emissions of other pollutants will have been substantially reduced, “so we win, anyway.”
FROM KYOTO TO BUENOS AIRES
There have been follow-up international meetings concerning Kyoto. The latest one, concluded Dec. 18, took place in Buenos Aires, Argentina (nice time to hold such a meeting there, as the Austral summer was approaching!). About 6,000 participants from nearly 200 countries attended. According to reports in the popular press (1), little was accomplished toward agreeing on how to curb “greenhouse gas” emissions. For example, the United States and oil-producing countries—Saudi Arabia, a member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), especially—essentially thwarted the European Union’s agenda to achieve the goal of cutting greenhouse gas emissions to the 5%-below-1990 goal by 2012. Many developing countries continue to plan to harvest timber from their forests and build fossil fuel-intensive industries to try to catch up economically with industrialized nations of the West. As the head of Brazil’s delegation tersely put it, “We are not prepared to discuss reductions in emissions.” So perhaps, even if Kyoto is legally binding, truly implementing its provisions is quite another matter.
Reference:
1. Milliken, M. (Reuters News Service). “U.S., OPEC resist emissions cuts.” Washington Times, Dec. 19, 2004, p. A7
WHAT IS BOOTSTRAP PRESS?
Bootstrap Press is a nonprofit organization founded in Bethesda, Maryland, U.S.A., to promote the development and management of technology and businesses based on renewable resources. We also encourage the preservation of our Earth's natural habitats and its plant and animal species. So do a lot of other organizations, and more power to them for doing so!
Bootstrap Press is different because its members believe that the development of renewable resources and the preservation of habitats and species are receiving far more lip service than the financial and technical support needed to achieve these goals. We also think they will continue to be subjects of more talk than action until someone can show how renewable resources and the diversity of biological species can be the basis for potentially profitable businesses as well as a matter of ethics. Bootstrap Press intends to provide a forum for the discussion of how to build up such business, and of related topics.
There's one more thing we should mention about Muenchhausen and Bootstrap Press. We try to present only the scientific and technical facts that are correct to the best of our knowledge, belief, and good faith. It is up to Muenchhausen's readers to draw their own conclusions and make their own judgments.
NOTE: The mention of a product or service in Muenchhausen is in no way to be regarded as an endorsement of that product or service by Muenchhausen, Bootstrap Press, the Green Baron, or any other contributor to Muenchhausen.
AN ELECTRONIC NEWSLETTER ABOUT ENVIRONMENT,
RENEWABLE RESOURCE TECHNOLOGY,
AND RELATED TOPICS
By BOOTSTRAP PRESS, INC.
BETHESDA, MD
GREENBARON@CSI.COM
=================================================================
DECEMBER 21, 2004
=================================================================
WELCOME!
The Green Baron welcomes one and all who take the time to read Muenchhausen. He aims to “tell it like it is” as much as possible, and avoid advocacy and ideological positions. There are enough of those to go around in other publications.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The Green Baron again thanks all those who may take the time and trouble to read this “Blog” publication. He also acknowledges with gratitude the help of anyone who contributed material that constitutes this issue of Muenchhausen. Also, to all of our readers, Greetings of the Season and Best Wishes for a Happy, Prosperous, and Green New Year 2005!
KYOTO BRIEFLY REVISITED
Muenchhausen readers who have been following the progress of adoption of the Kyoto Protocol of December 1997 will have learned that the Russian Federation’s State Duma (Parliament) ratified the Protocol in November 2004. Thus, it goes into effect as a legally binding treaty in February 2005. Although the United States is a signatory—Vice President Al Gore signed in America’s name—the U.S. Senate has not, to date ratified the Kyoto Protocol. In fact, it was fated for a crushing defeat in that legislative body.
Just a moment! What is the Kyoto Protocol? In a nutshell, it is an agreement among signatory nations to legislate and implement procedures to lower concentration levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Earth’s atmosphere to perhaps 5% below those that existed before 1990, and even below. CO2 is blamed as the principal culprit in the “greenhouse effect” that traps heat in the atmosphere and is said to lead to warming of the global climate. The hoped-for year to achieve this goal was to have been somewhere between 2005 and 2010, but that will surely not be met. This endeavor could entail much expense and economic displacement. Accordingly, industrialized and technologically “advanced” nations are required to implement Kyoto beginning in February, whereas developing countries plus China and India are exempt until their technology has caught up—perhaps as late as 2020, or even thereafter.
Query: If the U.S. Senate did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol, is the United States actually legally bound by its provisions? Well, no and yes; in the more practical sense, probably yes. Here are a couple of examples of why this is so:
Some large and not-so-large U.S. companies have become multinational in scope. As such, they may operate in countries that have ratified the Kyoto Protocol. In that case, being subject to the laws of those countries, these firms must do their part to ensure that their host countries comply with Kyoto. This would be especially true in nations that comprise the European Union.
Perhaps industries in the United States itself need not comply with Kyoto, absent Senate ratification? Uh, not so fast! First of all, individual states, or the federal government could adopt legislation and regulations that would be equivalent to mandating Kyoto requirements. In addition, even if such regulation were not soon forthcoming—it seems to be in California, however—U.S. industries could still be forced to comply: The United States is a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO). The WTO could have the power to impose trade sanctions on the United States if its businesses and industries do not comply, on the grounds that the United States is in violation of international fair trade rules.
To some, Kyoto may appear hollow. The Green Baron reads in the press that all manner of air pollutants are pouring from newly established industrial plants in Southeast Asia. It stands to reason that given these plants’ consumption of fossil fuels—a factor in the current high price of oil and gas—for a good number of years to come, European, Japanese, and any American reductions of CO2 and other emissions would be far more than offset by emissions from Southeast Asia and other countries developing their industries. Muenchhausen may have more to say about Kyoto and its successor protocols in future issues. “Stay tuned!”
The Green Baron recalls a meeting held at North Carolina State University (Raleigh, NC), in which CO2 emission reduction was much discussed. One of the presenters at the February 1990 symposium (more than seven years before Kyoto) was Carl Sagan (obit. 1994), who addressed the argument that we should wait until science proves or disproves that CO2 emissions of human origin affect world climate. His view was that we should not wait; if climatic changes are scientifically proved, it may be too late to reverse the trend, but if they are scientifically disproved, emissions of other pollutants will have been substantially reduced, “so we win, anyway.”
FROM KYOTO TO BUENOS AIRES
There have been follow-up international meetings concerning Kyoto. The latest one, concluded Dec. 18, took place in Buenos Aires, Argentina (nice time to hold such a meeting there, as the Austral summer was approaching!). About 6,000 participants from nearly 200 countries attended. According to reports in the popular press (1), little was accomplished toward agreeing on how to curb “greenhouse gas” emissions. For example, the United States and oil-producing countries—Saudi Arabia, a member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), especially—essentially thwarted the European Union’s agenda to achieve the goal of cutting greenhouse gas emissions to the 5%-below-1990 goal by 2012. Many developing countries continue to plan to harvest timber from their forests and build fossil fuel-intensive industries to try to catch up economically with industrialized nations of the West. As the head of Brazil’s delegation tersely put it, “We are not prepared to discuss reductions in emissions.” So perhaps, even if Kyoto is legally binding, truly implementing its provisions is quite another matter.
Reference:
1. Milliken, M. (Reuters News Service). “U.S., OPEC resist emissions cuts.” Washington Times, Dec. 19, 2004, p. A7
WHAT IS BOOTSTRAP PRESS?
Bootstrap Press is a nonprofit organization founded in Bethesda, Maryland, U.S.A., to promote the development and management of technology and businesses based on renewable resources. We also encourage the preservation of our Earth's natural habitats and its plant and animal species. So do a lot of other organizations, and more power to them for doing so!
Bootstrap Press is different because its members believe that the development of renewable resources and the preservation of habitats and species are receiving far more lip service than the financial and technical support needed to achieve these goals. We also think they will continue to be subjects of more talk than action until someone can show how renewable resources and the diversity of biological species can be the basis for potentially profitable businesses as well as a matter of ethics. Bootstrap Press intends to provide a forum for the discussion of how to build up such business, and of related topics.
There's one more thing we should mention about Muenchhausen and Bootstrap Press. We try to present only the scientific and technical facts that are correct to the best of our knowledge, belief, and good faith. It is up to Muenchhausen's readers to draw their own conclusions and make their own judgments.
NOTE: The mention of a product or service in Muenchhausen is in no way to be regarded as an endorsement of that product or service by Muenchhausen, Bootstrap Press, the Green Baron, or any other contributor to Muenchhausen.
posted by Green_Baron00 @ 7:52 PM
0 Comments
Links to this post
