Environmentalists say government documents show Canada's role in international climate-change negotiations includes bullying developing countries, backpedalling on commitments and attempting to exploit divisions in Europe.
What a crock of shit Kyoto was. It's like scooping a bucket of water out of one end of the pool while you pour in a barrel of sewage(those Third World polluters exempt from Kyoto) at the other end, and expecting to drain the pool.
"ShepherdsDog" said What a crock of shit Kyoto was. It's like scooping a bucket of water out of one end of the pool while you pour in a barrel of sewage(those Third World polluters exempt from Kyoto) at the other end, and expecting to drain the pool.
Why are we still talking about Kyoto? At this point, it's so out of date that it's unrealistic to expect any country, even its ratified signatories, to live up to it. If we want to set realistic global environmental standards, perhaps a new accord should be drawn up that reflects modern reality, and not the reality of thirteen years ago.
"romanP" said Why are we still talking about Kyoto? At this point, it's so out of date that it's unrealistic to expect any country, even its ratified signatories, to live up to it. If we want to set realistic global environmental standards, perhaps a new accord should be drawn up that reflects modern reality, and not the reality of thirteen years ago.
I have a reply to that, but first I'd like to know, what would be in the new accord which would reflect "modern reality, and not the reality of thirteen years ago".
So far when you hear these guys talk it sounds like the same old, same old. So what specific changes should be in this new accord to be drawn up in Copenhagen in December? The one that's supposed to replace Kyoto.
If you tell me that, I think I can tell you why learning from the mistakes made in Kyoto matters.
This is just another example of european hot air, it is unfortunate that we can't use that hot air as a renewable resourse. It will never run out and the supply keeps getting larger.
What a crock of shit Kyoto was. It's like scooping a bucket of water out of one end of the pool while you pour in a barrel of sewage(those Third World polluters exempt from Kyoto) at the other end, and expecting to drain the pool.
Couldn't have said it better.
Why are we still talking about Kyoto? At this point, it's so out of date that it's unrealistic to expect any country, even its ratified signatories, to live up to it. If we want to set realistic global environmental standards, perhaps a new accord should be drawn up that reflects modern reality, and not the reality of thirteen years ago.
I have a reply to that, but first I'd like to know, what would be in the new accord which would reflect "modern reality, and not the reality of thirteen years ago".
So far when you hear these guys talk it sounds like the same old, same old. So what specific changes should be in this new accord to be drawn up in Copenhagen in December? The one that's supposed to replace Kyoto.
If you tell me that, I think I can tell you why learning from the mistakes made in Kyoto matters.